Canada - Britain's Greatest North Atlantic Ally II

Although Canada was entirely independent of Britain by September 1939, when the Second World War erupted, the Canadian government declared war against Nazi Germany on 10th September nonetheless and the following day issued a similar declaration against Mussolini’s Italy. As was the case elsewhere with many of the western allies, during the inter-war years Canada was thought to have put little investment into its armed forces and in common with its pre-First World War status had a relatively small full-time army of several thousand which was supplemented by a part-time militia, both of which were poorly trained and ill-equipped.

In common with most democratic countries of the time, Canada, along with its former allies, Britain, France, Belgium, Australia, New Zealand, etc. had believed that the losses of the Great War would prevent such an event ever happening again, but as with all of the other allied nations, they were wrong. Fortunately for the allied cause, in common with the United States, Canada was reported to have had the capacity to become one of the world’s greatest industrial producers and like its southern neighbour was able to mobilise these vast manufacturing facilities to produce materials for the war, including ships, aircraft and wheeled vehicles. However, according to some sources, the most important products supplied by Canada during the Second World War were the vast amounts of both aluminium and nickel, both of which were necessary components of the allied war effort. The first military supply convoy reportedly left Canada just days after war had been officially declared and by June 1940, the first Canadian troops were said to have been landed in Europe, in an attempt to reinforce the British and French forces that were being forced back to Dunkirk by the advancing German army. Unfortunately, the Canadian troops were thought to have reached France far too late to prevent the large scale evacuation of the allied expeditionary force and were subsequently forced to withdraw from Europe, back to the isolated British mainland.

Rather frustratingly perhaps, for the Canadian troops, with Britain generally besieged and few foreign theatres in which to operate effectively against Germany and her Axis allies, most of these Canadian forces were thought to have been largely restricted to defending Britain’s mainland from the threat of an impending German invasion, which never actually happened. Thanks largely to a British Air Force which contained numerous Commonwealth pilots from around the world, including many from Canada itself; the German Luftwaffe was prevented from gaining air superiority, which was a prerequisite for the planned military invasion of Britain. With the Battle of Britain won by the RAF and its limited numbers of pilots and planes, Germany subsequently turned its attention to Russia, fatally wounding its own long term military ambitions by fighting on two separate fronts, one to the east and one to the west.

Apart from the ill-fated and largely unsuccessful raid on the French port of Dieppe in August 1942, most Canadian troops had to wait until 1943 before they could become formerly engaged on the European continent, when they were fully employed in both the invasion of Sicily and later the Italian mainland. However, elements of the Canadian army were said to have been involved with one of the conflicts most notable Special Forces units, the Devil’s Brigade, a mixed force made up of both American and Canadian troops. Although they were reportedly tasked for a number of extremely difficult missions, the unit’s first high profile operation was reportedly against Monte La Defensa in Italy, during December 1943, where they were reported to have scaled a seemingly impenetrable cliff face to overcome German positions that were stationed there. Having overcome their initial target, the Brigade were then said to have been used to attack a number of similarly difficult mountain targets, as a result of which some 70% of the unit was thought to have been either killed or wounded.

By January of the following year the Brigade was said to have been reinforced and put back into the frontline at Anzio, where they were first referred to as the “Devils Brigade”, having terrified the life out of the German forces that were opposing them. With the approach of the allied invasion of mainland Europe planned for June 1944, the Canadian forces were said to have allocated their own section of the Normandy coastline, codenamed “Juno” beach, where they suffered heavy casualties as they hurled themselves ashore to begin the long awaited liberation of Europe. Despite incurring heavier losses than any other allied force on the day, with the exception of the American troops on “Omaha” beach, the Canadian troops were reported to have still managed to penetrate deeper into occupied France than any other allied soldiers, save for those paratroopers who had been deliberately dropped inland in order to disable German communication systems, thereby preventing them from reinforcing their coastal defences, which were being attacked and overrun by the allies.

Canadian forces were later instrumental in helping to secure the port of Antwerp, leading a mixed British, Polish Belgian and Dutch force to secure the Scheldt estuary, which was still held by the Germans, thereby preventing the allies from using Antwerp as a supply point for their military operations in Europe. Suffering extremely heavy losses, of which some six thousand were reportedly Canadians, this force was said to have spent several weeks helping to secure the area around Antwerp, before turning their attention to the liberation of the Netherlands. Throughout the entire course of the Second World War, the Canadian people were reported to have contributed hundreds of thousands of their young men and women to the allied cause, who subsequently served in virtually every service, from the Army and Navy, to the Air Force and the auxiliary services, including Nursing and the Merchant Marine. Some one hundred thousand Canadian’s were thought to have been killed or wounded during the conflict, amongst which a significant number of gallantry awards were said to have been earned by Canada’s fighting forces, including several Victoria Crosses, the highest award that could be issued by the British military authorities.

Canada - Britain's Greatest North Atlantic Ally

Watching a TV programme about the last heroes of World War II, I was struck by the numbers of former US and to a lesser extent British soldiers who fought in the final battles leading to the defeat of Nazi Germany and its wartime allies. Speaking personally, I have always believed that if Britain has one true ally across the Atlantic, then it is Canada, rather than the USA, who are our truest friends across the ocean, a fact that they have proved when our country has faced its darkest moments, but which has been largely overlooked by many commentators and historians. The following is an extract from my book “Mariners, Merchants and the Military Too – A History of the British Empire” relating Canada’s contribution to the British Empire during World War I alone…….

“As with many of Great Britain’s self governing colonies and dominions, the outbreak of the First World War proved to be a pivotal moment in the history of these former Imperial territories, marking their change from being an historic dependency of the British Crown, to becoming a recognisable international state in its own right. Through its political decision making, but more importantly through the valour and commitment of its armed forces, Canada was reported to have finally emerged upon the world stage as an independent democratic nation which willingly submitted itself to upholding the ideals of freedom and democracy. As in the other great British colonies and dominions throughout the globe, including India, Africa, Australia and New Zealand, tens of thousands of young Canadian’s, both men and women, were reported to have rallied to Britain’s cause, willingly committing themselves to her defence. Despite only having a relatively small standing army of some several thousand men, within a matter of months, some thirty thousand Canadians were said to have volunteered to serve in Western Europe and were making their way across the Atlantic to take their place on the Western front. The first Canadian troops were thought to have arrived in France by the beginning of 1915 and elements of their 1st Division were reportedly some of the first allied troops to have been attacked with the poison chlorine gas which was commonly used by the German army. While large numbers of British and French troops were said to have fled the threat of this new weapon, the Canadians were thought to have quickly realised that the effects of the gas could be neutralised by the use of urine soaked rags being placed over their nose and mouths, helping them to hold their positions and preventing the enemy forces from advancing. However, even with their homemade defence against the poisonous clouds that were unleashed on their lines, it was still reported that some six thousand Canadian troops were affected by the gas, of which, a full third were thought to have died as a direct result of it being deployed against them.

Canadian forces were also an intrinsic part of the allied force that was marshalled in 1916 in preparation for the Battle of the Somme, which ultimately resulted in the largest number of allied casualties ever suffered by British and Dominion forces, nearly fifty eight thousand men killed or wounded in a single day. As much the result of poor planning, communications and inadequate leadership, as it was of complete incompetence, such enormous human losses were thought to have become a common feature of the First World War overall, although for the Canadian’s specifically, the Somme campaign alone was thought to have accounted for some twenty five thousand casualties, either killed or wounded. Despite such losses however, Canada’s frontline troops, continued to enhance their military reputation, reportedly being prepared to take on any military assignment, seemingly regardless of the cost and earning the everlasting esteem of their civilian contemporaries, as well as their political masters in equal measure. Vimy Ridge was said to be just one of the many battles which saw the Canadian military divisions take their place in the vanguard of various allied operations, designed to capture the German army’s well established defensive lines. Beginning on the morning of the 9th April 1917, a “creeping artillery barrage” was said to have cleared the way for the following Canadian troops, who then cleared the trenches of their German defenders, slowly, but surely moving the allied lines forward of their previous positions. By the afternoon of the following day the Canadian troops had not only taken a great deal of ground, but also captured several thousand German prisoners and killed many hundreds more. However, the victory had not come without a high price for Canada’s own young troops, who were reported to have suffered some eleven thousand casualties, either dead or wounded, a figure which underpinned their utter determination to achieve the objectives that they had been given.

Seven months later and largely because of their tenacious reputation, Canadian troops were reported to have been redeployed to the Ypres area, in readiness for yet another allied offensive that later became known as the Second Battle of Passchendaele, which was fought between October and November 1917. In conjunction with British and Anzac troops, Canadian soldiers were tasked with pushing the German’s front line back, allowing the allied positions to be advanced, so that the town of Passchendaele could be recovered by the allies. Although there were several instances of allied reversals and occasional failures to reach individual objectives, the operation itself proved to be successful, although the entire campaign was said to have cost some sixteen thousand Canadian casualties, with at least a quarter of that number being killed. Despite these losses though, Canadian troops were thought to have been so vital to the allied offensive strategy that they were intensively employed throughout much of 1918, most notably during the famous One Hundred Days Offensive, which saw Canadian troops and others, participate in the Battle of Amiens, Cambrai and the vital breaking of the Hindenburg Line which ultimately forced Germany to agree an Armistice on 11th November 1918. As with a number of other former British colonies, including Australia and New Zealand, by the end of the First World War, Canada’s international reputation as one of the principal victorious allied nations, had been assured and the military worth of its fighting forces had likewise been enhanced. Back in Canada itself, its own people began to see themselves as an integral part of the international community, a country with its own culture, traditions and now with a reputation and standing that was equal to its previously more dominant American and British counterparts. Although Canada was thought to have been largely independent of Britain, since the beginning of the 20th century, its emergence after World War I, was thought to mark the period when most Canadians began to see themselves as Canadians, rather than being historically tied to or associated with Britain or indeed the United States”

(Extract from: Mariners, Merchants and the Military Too by Phillip E Jones)

I'm Not European - I'm British And Proud Of It!!

Don’t you just love it, when the foreign press attack us for being “British”, as if that’s something that we should all be ashamed of! What most foreigners fail to understand is the very characteristics that annoy them so much, are the very traits that make our country so unique and previously helped our tiny little island nation become one of the greatest trading and military empires that the world has ever witnessed; and will probably never see again.

The British people are also unique because they share no single common origin, but are largely the result of an amalgam of peoples, from England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland, as well as those regular waves of invaders and refugees from continental Europe, who have settled on our shores and subsequently been absorbed into our general population. The Anglo Saxons, Normans, Danes, Dutch and Norwegians have all played a part in helping to create Britain’s national identity, bringing with them the very best and worst of their own cultural heritage; thus helping to create a mongrel race who are unlike any other national population in Europe. It is little wonder therefore that other modern European’s fail to fully understand the British people, when we have so little in common with them.

Although the idea of being “British” has tended to wane in the past few decades, mainly because there is no unifying purpose to tie the English, Irish, Scottish and Welsh populations together, one suspects that most people living in England, would typically describe themselves as British, rather than English. With Scotland, Ireland and Wales all having achieved some degree of political and regional independence in recent years, with the establishment of their own national assemblies, so their citizens have increasingly begun to see themselves as Scottish, Irish or Welsh, rather than British, thus undermining the historic links to the Union that once tied all four nations together.

It’s difficult to try and identify specific British characteristics, other than the stereotypical whiners, who incessantly talk about the weather, which is the way most foreigners seem to regard the British people. Of course, the British people that they choose to forget are those many millions who have died in order to preserve other countries democratic rights, or the British public who have welcomed millions of refugees over the centuries; and who have made them welcome on our shores. They also forget the tens of thousands of British people who regularly donate to various charities every year, to feed and clothe those less fortunate in Africa and Asia, not because they have to, but because they choose to do so.

It’s perhaps worth remembering that although we might be painted as a nation of beer swilling, telly watching, wannabe celebrities, the vast majority of the British public are not only generous of spirit, but are also prepared to sacrifice themselves, their sons and daughters, in order that international law and basic human rights are observed by less compliant states. It’s a mistake to judge the British people by the standards of their political leaders, many of whom are completely unlike the citizens that they purport to represent. As seems to be the case throughout the world, for the past four or five decades Britain has been unfortunate enough to be led by a succession of low grade politicians who have somehow managed to attain the highest office in the land, without having the slightest clue of what to do once they get there. As a result, the entire country has fallen into an economic, political and social malaise that seems to get worse with each succeeding government; and that requires financial trickery and deliberately invented property bubbles to keep the country from erupting into civil disorder. Is it any wonder that the British public eye all politicians, foreign or domestic with such unbridled cynicism. As somebody commented on a newspaper thread “Cameron, Clegg and Miliband may be idiots, but at least they’re our idiots and we can choose to elect them or not”, unlike those unelected politicians across the English Channel, who want us to simply dispense with our hard won independence; and then threaten us with all sort of economic reprisals if we continue to refuse their offer.

Speaking for myself, such overtures simply help to confirm my personal view that I am not European, never was, never have been and never will be! I’m British and proud to be just that. We may have our problems and a pretty poor set of politicians, most of whom lack the credibility, principles and leadership qualities of previous generations,, but they’re ours nonetheless and we’ll have to make do with them, till something better comes along. We may lack the discipline of the Germans, the flair of the French, the passion of the Italians, Spanish and Greeks, but give me the independently determined and slightly impoverished character of the British any day of the week.

Books, Blogs and Publishing too - Part Three

So, having uploaded my books onto the Amazon servers, you then have to deal with the thorny issue of what price to put on your work. There are obviously a number of schools of thought regarding price, including giving them away for free, in the hope that people will like the author’s work so much that they’ll be prepared to buy their other chargeable books. Alternatively, authors might charge a minimal price, say around 99 cents, in the hope that so many Kindle owners will buy the bargain book that it will all mount up to a tidy sum, after all, isn’t success sometimes based on the strategy of “little and often”? If a writer can sell 10,000 copies of their book at 99 cents each, then it’s still a tidy profit. The third option for author’, is to try and calculate a fair price for their book based on what other comparable books and similarly unknown writers are selling for. I mention that simply because unless you have a massively undeserved ego, few writers are going to compare themselves to the likes of Stephen King, J K Rowling, etc. who have been there, done that and bought the T-shirt.

Considering the possible options for pricing my own books, there was no way I was going to give them away for free, at least not immediately. Quite apart from the time and effort I’ve put into producing them, only the market can really dictate whether or not they’re worth a single red cent and as such it would be foolish to give something away for free, when someone might actually choose to pay you for it. The same argument can equally apply in making the decision to sell your books for a nominal fee, which is typically around 99 cents. Even though some writers and book marketing experts take the view that such a low price can encourage buyers to purchase books they might normally avoid, it’s worth remembering that you’ll have to sell a significantly more to end up with a decent return. In a relatively straightforward equation you’re selling your book for $1 and a rival author is selling theirs for $5, meaning that you have to sell five times as many just to earn the same financial return. Although we’ve all become accustomed to the idea of a bargain, fundamentally it could still be argued that a low price reflects low quality, so if you’re getting a book for nothing or for $1 then should you expect it to be brilliant in every respect. Likewise, the idea that low prices or freebies actually guarantee large numbers of “sales” doesn’t always apply, as why would someone download a book that they don’t want, don’t need or possibly won’t even read?

For me, it made far more sense to calculate a price based on what other similar books were selling for, as at least that way and assuming you’re not competing against a known author, you’re competing on a fairly level playing field. Having previously had a similar pricing problem with a dog magazine that I used to produce, in an ideal world you should be able to equate the selling price to the level of content. In that particular case I tried to work on the basis of around 10p per printed page, which for a forty or fifty page magazine would work out at about £5 per copy, a price that most readers were more than happy to pay at the time. Clearly, such a pricing mechanism isn’t the same for printed books, or indeed for e-books, but it doesn’t hurt for an author to have a vague idea of how much their work is worth to them personally, thereby allowing them to fix a price and to stick to it. Although my own books are not the cheapest, neither are they the more expensive; and the fact that they entirely fit into the non-fiction history category has undoubtedly played a part in the number of buyers that they have attracted thus far. A couple of my books have had rubbish sales, whilst others have done okay, but then again I never had any real expectations of them becoming best sellers, just so long as they earn me regular money, which seems to be the case up to now. That’s where the numbers part of the process comes in though, a sufficient number of books, each earning a sufficient amount of revenue, equates to a sufficient personal income; and if you hoping to be a full-time writer then that’s what you’re looking for, right?

Books, Blogs and Publishing too - Part Two

Having made the decision to go down the self-publishing route rather than try and navigate the numerous submission processes of the traditional publishing houses, my first point of call was Lulu, the self publishing website that offers both electronic and hard copy versions of your books, which can be sold through their site, or your own if you have one. Although it took quite a while to figure the uploading process, especially when creating the front cover file for each book, Lulu’s system was relatively easy to use and effortlessly converted my computers MS Word files to PDF, along with the cover files I managed to create in a very basic format. The electronic version of the books looked quite good initially, although largely due to my own fault, when I ordered hard copies of each one and had them delivered to me, they didn’t look quite so hot, although most of the unsightly errors were quickly undone and revised copies ordered from the printer.

To be fair, I was quite happy with the finished result, so much so, that in order to make marketing my books a little bit easier I even decided to purchase a block of ISBN numbers, so that I could get them recorded on the official ISBN listing sheets that the likes of Amazon, Waterstones, etc use to order books from suppliers. However, having worked out the actual costs of ordering printed copies from Lulu and then realised the sorts of discounts demanded by the high street stores, it quickly became apparent that the figures didn’t add up and either the selling price would need to be so extortionate that nobody in their right mind would buy them, or perhaps more seriously I would end up making little or nothing from each sale. As it turned out I made a few sales to local outlets where I was able to dictate the selling and purchase prices for each book, so that the retailers made a decent margin and so did I, but eventually realised that unless I was going to retrain as some sort of super salesman, then this particular route to self publishing was gong to end in complete and utter failure. Since then, although I have continued to utilise Lulu’s online services and created books in both print and electronic versions, I haven’t ordered any more printed copies, preferring instead for any potential customers to buy direct off Lulu and save me the headache of having to stock, transfer and post items to each individual customer. As it’s turned out I still get occasional book sales through Lulu’s website and all without having to worry about cost, discounts or trying to get paid.

With that particular scheme being both troublesome and unprofitable, bearing in mind I want to be writing, not “dicking” about with administration and marketing all day long, I turned my attention to trying to get my books onto Amazon’s Kindle device. However, as with most things on the internet, this wasn’t a straightforward process, as Amazon would only accept certain file types for the Kindle; and I’d never even heard of a PRC file, let alone created one. Fortunately, having posed the question on Google, I was easily able to find a cracking little program called Mobipocket Creator, which convert HTML files into suitable files for the kindle, even though it meant that I had to rearrange my MS Word files into Frontpage HTML files, along with all the relevant image files that my book manuscripts contained. Although it had its limitations in respect to page layout, etc. Mobipocket turned out to be a fantastic little package, which ultimately allowed me to format all six books into Kindle files and put them up for sale throughout the Amazon network. I have to say that I have been more than impressed with the results from this particular exercise; and where sales have been less than brilliany, this is entirely the result of subject matter rather than anything else, after all not everyone is interested in the history of my home city, though I can’t imagine why?

Tango's Tale - A Story About A Blue Irish Staffie

When I bought "Tango" from KK Kennels in the early 1990's, there was no way that I would have expected to still have him with me nearly 17 years later, especially when you consider that most Bull Terrier breeds only have an average life span of maybe ten or twelve years. Okay, so he's not as fast or as lively as he was a few years ago, his hearing and his eyesight aren't 100%, but then, that's what growing older does to us all, isn't it. It is remarkable though, that he still looks forward to his three walks a day, feeds well and doesn't require any expensive or intrusive veterinary care to keep him going.

It really is a testament to the genetics and breeding of these dogs that they appear to be so incredibly robust and so difficult to "knock over", either through illness or injury. Whether or not KK bitches are equally rugged I wouldn't know, having never owned one, but seem to recall that KK's "Sky" was still around at a reasonably decent age, which suggests that the breeds longevity can equally apply to either sex. Personally, I can count on one hand the number of times "Tango" has been unwell during his life and none have been so serious as to require a visit to the vets. Even when he choked on some paper a few months ago and stopped breathing for a short time, we still managed to get him going again and he was back to his usual self within a few hours.

I've often tried to calculate the total mileage that "Tango" must have walked during his lifetime, based on the 4 walks a day he used to get in his younger days and the 3 walks that he still gets now. If you assume a daily average of around 4 or 5 miles a day, multiplied by 365 days a year and multiply that by the 16 years he's been around, that gives a total of something around 30,000 miles. And that figure doesn't include all the extra miles he will have covered with additional walks or just simply running around, being a dog.

Whether or not I've just been incredibly lucky with "Tango" and have been fortunate enough to own a dog that doesn't succumb too easily to common illness or injury, I couldn't really say. I do know however, that both "Tango's" sire and dam, KK's "Blue" & "Sky" lived to good ages, so maybe the breeds genetics have played a major part in my own dogs longevity? I also know, that throughout his life "Tango" has always had a regular diet, regular exercise and an absence of unnecessary veterinarian intervention. I believe that dogs are creatures of habit and if you can offer them a safe and secure environment which is governed by routine, then the dog will be far happier and contented.

This article is continued at: http://chesterwriter.webs.com/

Bull Terrier Seizures, The Myths Continue

Although the recent death of the 5 year old toddler Ellie Lawrenson in Merseyside is a tragedy for her family, it still remains a mystery as to how a young child found herself alone with an unsupervised dog and what happened to make the animal turn on the girl. Neither do we know the history of the Bull Terrier itself and the sort of treatment it had received at the hands of its owner. The very fact that this individual had been warned about the behaviour of his dog by the local authorities is perhaps significant and suggests a problem with him as an owner, as much as it does about the dog itself.

The introduction and implementation of the Dangerous Dogs Act by the Tories in 1991 did little more than to create a demand for what later became highly illegal and much sought after dogs. The media’s description of a highly combative and athletic canine simply fed a latent demand for these supposedly exotic and rare Pit Bull Terriers, a demand which was quickly met by any number of unscrupulous breeders, who were keen to make a fast buck out of the situation.

The much fanfared and highly publicized Bull Terrier seizures undertaken by the Merseyside Police force appear to represent a clear over-reaction to recent events, rather than an informed and balanced proactive approach to any illegal activities which may or may not be taking place within their force area. The very fact that the Police themselves have video-taped these recent raids and then made the pictures available to both regional and national news services, suggests that the real purpose of their actions is to try and convince the public of a growing menace to their safety and of the Police’s ability to deal with it.

These raids were reported to be as a result of information received from members of the general public who were concerned about the presence of the dogs in their neighbourhood. It obviously did not occur to the Police that the information might have been provided by a malicious individual whose prime motivation was driven by a neighbourhood dispute, rather than any sort of public spirited altruism.

Had the fate of the seized dogs not been fairly inevitable, with their facing a possible death sentence, the whole scene might have been laughable. Here we have a number of highly dangerous dogs that are supposedly used for dog fighting, being handled by unprotected officers and sitting side by side in the back of a van. There were no obvious signs of the dogs being aggressive, either to the people bundling them into the vehicle, or to the other dogs and for the large part they appeared to be extremely passive animals, which would be strange behaviour for a fighting dog.

What was equally alarming about these raids was the unquestioning acceptance of the facts by the media who accepted the assertion that the animals seized were Pit Bull Terriers and did not take the opportunity to question or test these allegations. The BBC, along with the other news providers should be duty bound to test any such statements and offer the viewer an alternative argument to the case being presented, something that they singularly failed to do in this particular instance.

It was also apparent, that a number of these so-called American Pit Bulls appeared to be nothing more than Blue Irish Staffordshire Bull Terriers, a canine hybrid which is unique to the UK. These dogs are a mixture of two other breeds, the Staffordshire Bull Terrier and the English Bull Terrier, both of which are native to this country and both legally recognised and legitimately owned.

These Blue Irish Stafford’s are renowned for their athleticism and more importantly for their reliability towards people. Thought to have first appeared in the UK more than 20 years ago, the breed has been extensively refined and developed to produce one of the healthiest and psychologically sound dogs in the country.

Within the dog fighting fraternity, these Blue Bull Terriers are regarded as a joke, simply because they lack both the physical ability and the combative temperament to compete within such an arduous environment. There are no serious dog men within mainland Britain that would use such dogs for any illegal activities, as they would represent a complete waste of time and money for them.

This article continued at http://chesterwriter.webs.com/

Reaping The Rewards Of Political Failure

Boy! What a fair old country we have become in 21st Century Britain. It must be deeply gratifying for all of the UK’s former and present political leaders to finally realise their ambitions of fundamentally changing a country’s national character, from public tolerance to simmering intolerance, from mutual moderation to personalised greed, from social concern to individual indifference and from widespread consensus to factional disagreement. What a legacy they have been able to leave current and future generations? The blindingly obvious reasons for these highly negative changes in British society can easily be summed up in one word, FAILURE!

It was a failure by the government of Edward Heath to anticipate the adverse effects that membership of the then European Community would have on our own economy, including the loss of tens of thousands of British jobs. There was then a second failure to anticipate and to fully address the almost guaranteed reaction of Britain’s Trade Union Movement who were outraged by the loss of employment in the country.

It was a failure by the government of James Callaghan to purposely confront the politically motivated Trades Union Congress who had effectively brought the country to its ‘financial knees’ during the mid 1970’s, which resulted in the dead not being buried, rubbish in the streets, the 3-day week and intermittent power supplies. It was Callaghan’s utterance of “Crisis! What Crisis” that finally killed the national Labour Party as a credible political alternative for the next 18 years and was possibly the greatest social and political failure that Britain has ever suffered in the 20th Century.

Not only did Jim Callaghan’s failure to accept that the country was in crisis end his own government as well as consigning the national Labour Party to the political wilderness, his party’s blatant refusal to identify and adapt to changes in British society generally, effectively reflected a failure on their part to both modernise their party and to constructively amend their largely socialist agenda.

Additionally, the deliberate failure and refusal by union leaders like Arthur Scargill to recognise the dissatisfaction and anger felt by large sections of the British electorate at being held hostage to the unrealistic demands of the TUC ultimately led to potential voters turning away from the political parties which were themselves seen to be supporting the wholly unrepresentative Trades Union lobby which was thought to be imposing its political will and control on Britain.

Having been voted out of office by the British electorate, it was then a failure by Callaghan’s successor, Michael Foot, to modernise the party apparatus and to fully engage with the electorate with a modern socialist agenda. Publicly slighted by the British press for his generally unkempt appearance, including his attending the Armistice Day celebrations dressed in a Donkey Jacket, it was his wretched and unsuccessful attempts to free the Labour Party from the influences of the militant socialist groups who had infiltrated the party, that would help to keep Labour virtually unelectable long after he had stepped down as party leader.

Aided by Labour’s seemingly unswerving ability to continuously ‘shoot itself in the foot’ (excuse the pun), the Conservative party led by Margaret Thatcher continued to dominate the mainstream of British politics. Her suppression of the powers of the previously almost untouchable Trade Unions and the patriotic fervour generated by the Falklands conflict combined to make her one of the most popular and respected British political figures of all time. Somewhat ironically though, it would be her tough, uncompromising and autocratic style of leadership which would ultimately prove to be her political undoing. Her failure to listen to the British electorate or to anticipate the highly negative effect that her party’s policies would have on voters lives eventually proved to be too much for the Conservatives and Thatcher was effectively deposed by the very people she had showed so much personal contempt for, her Parliamentary colleagues.

Although responsible for introducing some of the very best legislation into English Law, including those pertaining to Industrial Relations and Homeowners, these too have continued to have an immensely negative effect of modern Britain. The failure of the Thatcher government to reinvest the monies raised by her Right to Buy legislation in new large scale replacement social housing projects has brought misery to hundreds of thousands of vulnerable citizens, who continue to struggle to keep a roof over their head on a day by day basis.

Where at one time a significant number of British workers were represented by a Trades Union, who guaranteed their terms of employment, pay scales, etc. the early high profile disputes of the early 1980’s, which matched Union manpower and their financial muscle against the political will of Margaret Thatcher proved to be a turning point in British labour relations. By enacting new legislation which could sequester Union funds and by employing Britain’s Police forces as a ‘strike breaking’ implement, the Conservatives effectively neutralised the power of the TUC and essentially handed a ‘big legal stick’ to the private employer, with which they might beat an uncooperative workforce.

Now led by the ‘Grey Man’ of British politics, John Major, the Conservatives continued to hold national office, largely as a result of the opposition’s failure to provide a credible and effective alternative to the Tory party. Neil Kinnock, the new Labour Party leader found himself constantly battling the militant forces which continued to operate within the organisation and which effectively made his shadow government an unthinkable choice for the British electorate.

Unfortunately for Kinnock and for Britain generally, the main opposition parties had failed to realise that the basic character of the country was already beginning to change, as a direct result of the Thatcher era. Driven almost entirely by central government, Thatcher’s wholesale ‘sell-off’ of Britain’s publicly owned housing stocks, transport systems, utility services and fossil fuel resources was carefully contrived to appeal to one of people’s basest instincts, GREED.

Millions of British citizens rushed to benefit from this modern day ‘Klondike’, eagerly grabbing at their slice of the privatisation cake, but ultimately only gaining a short-term gain from their investments, as most chose to sell on their shares for a quick profit, often to the major investment banks who were always likely to be the final recipients anyway. The social cost of Thatcher’s privatisation project was far more costly and far more damaging though, as it fundamentally altered and undermined the native culture of a country, from a sharing and cohesive nation to one that was dominated by selfishness and division. It is little wonder perhaps that some 30 years later our modern politicians struggle to fully understand the reasons for widespread social breakdown, public disorder, large scale anti-social behaviour and people’s general indifference to the plight of their fellow citizens. Thatcherism ultimately taught the British people that being part of her stakeholder economy was a good thing, provided of course that you could afford to be part of it in the first place. Millions could, but just as many couldn’t and we are all continuing to live with the social consequences of this particular Conservative experiment right through to the present day.