Budget Preview: Chancellor Philip Hammond"s Impossible Task To "Square The UK"s Circle"

At lunchtime today, Philip Hammond will give the weakened Conservative government’s first budget in the new parliament.

Against a likely backdrop of downgrades for the economy from the OBR, the Chancellor will be under immense pressure to provide a sound plan going forward on many issues. As Statista"s Martin Armstrong notes, the NHS has already had its call for an emergency boost of £4 billion rejected, but there will need to be at least some answers to the problems surrounding health and public services funding.

As a new survey by ComRes shows, this topic is one of particular importance to the public, with 67 percent saying that there should be more investment in these services, with a slight majority even saying they would personally be prepared to pay more taxes to enable it.

Clearly, this is a highly significant budget and we would be greatly surprised if it’s considered a success. As we noted yesterday, Reuters columnist and former European economics editor of The Economist, Paul Wallace, believes:

Few British budgets have mattered as much as the one that Philip Hammond will deliver to the House of Commons on Nov. 22. The chancellor of the exchequer must shore up Theresa May’s perilously shaky government ahead of a vital Brexit summit of European leaders in mid-December. At the same time Hammond has to keep a grip on the public finances.

However, it’s worse than that, as the Chancellor is also under pressure from senior members of the Conservative party, never mind UK citizens, to increase spending amid widespread fatigue with austerity. Here is the Financial Times on the stiff challenge Hammond is facing.

UK Chancellor Philip Hammond is under pressure from all sides as he prepares to deliver his second Budget on Wednesday. The first Budget of a new parliament is traditionally the time for chancellors to take bold decisions about taxes and spending. But the economic forecasts are likely to be difficult, public services are under strain, and pro-Brexit MPs are increasingly turning on the chancellor over his support for a “soft Brexit”. If Mr Hammond produces a safety-first Budget, he squanders his opportunity to decisively shape Britain’s future. But boldness risks backfiring, and steering a middle course threatens to satisfy nobody.

The FT notes that the Chancellor’s statement will “serve a cold dish of downgrades for the UK economy” from the independent “Office for Budget Responsibility” (OBR). This year’s growth forecast is expected to be cut from 2.0% to 1.6% and for 2018 from 1.6% to 1.4%. The medium-term forecasts depend on the OBR’s assumptions on productivity growth, which it has already flagged will be cut “significantly”. The FT expects that.

That means growth figures for 2020 and beyond will be closer to 1.5 per cent a year, compared with the 2 per cent that the fiscal watchdog had previously forecast.

Paul Wallace highlighted productivity as Hammond’s biggest problem.

But the gravest challenge he faces is economic: Britain’s persistent productivity blight…

 

Other advanced economies have also experienced setbacks to productivity growth following the financial crisis. Where Britain stands out is in the severity of its reverse. The shortfall in productivity is the main reason real wages are now 4 percent lower than 10 years ago, a potent reason why the leave campaign prevailed in the Brexit referendum.

While public finances look slightly more robust in the near-term, the outlook is deteriorating 3-4 years out, as the  FT explains"

Tax revenues have been stronger than expected this year, alongside lower-than-expected public spending. As a result, this year’s expected public borrowing will fall by about £8bn. The debt burden will begin to fall next year, giving Mr Hammond the opportunity to boast that he has turned the corner on public finances. But good news in the short term disappears towards the end of the forecast horizon, as weaker economic forecasts bear down on projected tax revenues. Before any accounting or tax changes, the deficit forecast in 2020-21 is likely to rise by more than £10bn compared with the March forecast. The government has already said it wants to reduce borrowing to under 2 per cent of national income by 2020-21, but Mr Hammond’s headroom is likely to roughly halve, from £26bn to about £13bn, in that year.

However, he does have one thing up his sleeve…an off-balance sheet accounting gimmick.

The chancellor wants to signal that after a difficult year, things are looking up, with debt falling and Brexit-related uncertainties lifting. To offset bad news in the medium-term public finances, he will use a £5bn-a-year accounting change — by taking housing associations’ borrowing off the government’s books — to free up more money for housing, wages and healthcare.

Affordable housing is a major problem for Hammond and Prime Minister Theresa May. According to the FT:

Fixing the “broken housing market” is the government’s biggest domestic priority. The chancellor wants to make rents more affordable and ease the path to home ownership for younger adults who have deserted the Conservative party in recent elections. Mr Hammond has already set a target of 300,000 new homes per year, but has also insisted there is no “single magic bullet” to solving housing problems.

He will announce a housing package on Wednesday that is likely to include commissioning of new building on public land and funding for local authorities to construct homes. He will also reaffirm the Tories’ promise from last month’s party conference to commit £10bn more of Help to Buy equity loans, and set out plans to lower stamp duty for some first-time buyers. There will be no big reform of planning laws for the “greenbelt” of protected area outside of London, but local authorities could be given more powers for compulsory purchase of land.

In its budget preview, the left-leaning Guardian newspaper highlights the deteriorating outlook for public finances due to the productivity problem.

Lower expectations for the output per worker will have an impact on the gross domestic product, cutting the amount of economic output available for taxation. The Institute for Fiscal Studies reckons the downgrade will contribute to a £20bn black hole in the public finances, limiting Hammond’s spending power if he wants to stick to his pledge to remove the deficit by the mid-2020s. John McDonnell, the Labour shadow chancellor, seized on the October data to argue that seven years of spending cuts had “caused pain and misery for millions with little to show for it”.

As if “Fiscal Phil” Hammond didn’t have enough on his plate, he’s also been lambasted for his gaffe that “there are no unemployed people” in Britain, in a television interview at the weekend. Disliked by the pro-Brexit side of his party, Hammond’s budget speech is being viewed by some as the “make or break” moment of his career. We concur.

Meanwhile, Bloomberg has been doing some sleuthing on budget preparations by government departments and think tanks. It identifies six things to look out for when Philip Hammond stand up in parliament to deliver his speech.

The U.K. budget is usually a mixture of measures that have been heavily trailed in the run-up by various government ministers, with a liberal sprinkling of surprises. In the past six months there have been myriad consultations and papers on everything from the offshore oil to air pollution that hint at possible measures in the works. Bloomberg trawled through that documentation, as well as recent announcements, to identify six areas that are likely to get a mention when Chancellor of the Exchequer Philip Hammond lays out his economic blueprint.

1. Stamp Duty and the Housing Crisis
Prime Minister Theresa May last week pledged that it’s her personal mission to “build more homes, more quickly.” To that end, the budget is likely to include a number of measures to encourage construction and enable younger people to get on the housing ladder. Asked on the BBC on Sunday about whether the home-buying tax known as stamp duty would be cut for younger buyers, Hammond declined to discuss tax matters, but didn’t deny he was looking at the measure.

“We recognize the challenge for young first-time buyers, that in many parts of the country deposits are now very large,” Hammond said. “Nobody is saying we’ve done enough. We must do more. We recognize there’s a challenge there and on Wednesday I shall set out how we intend to address it.”

2. North Sea Oil and Gas
Whilst remaining committed to its climate-change goals, the U.K. is also trying to extract as much value from its waning oil and gas fields in the North Sea. The industry is crucial to the economy in Scotland, which would be grateful for any assistance to a financial lifeline even as it remains angry at the Conservatives for taking it out of the European Union.

At the last budget in March, the government published a “discussion paper” that examined allowing transfers of tax history between buyers and sellers of oil and gas assets -- a measure designed to make it easier to buy and sell the fields, and keep them producing for longer. It would allow buyers to get a tax refund as a result of any costs incurred decommissioning the field at the end of its life.

Hammond told the Sunday Times he’s “looking at” a possible change in the tax rules, which is “the No. 1 ask of my Scottish colleagues.” Even so, he did issue a note of caution, adding that the Treasury needs to ensure the reform “is robust and that we don’t inadvertently create scope for gaming on a grand scale in the tax system."

3. Boosting Research & Development
May on Monday said the government aims to increase public and private research and development spending to 2.4 percent of economic output by 2027, and beyond that to 3 percent. “This could mean about 80 billion pounds ($106 billion) of additional investment in the next decade,” she said.

As part of an announcement the same day linked to her government’s Industrial Strategy -- due to be published next week -- she said that would begin with a commitment for an extra 2.3 billion pounds of investment in the 2021-2022 tax year, taking total public investment to 12.5 billion pounds that year. The government also signaled plans for a 1.7 billion-pound fund focused on improving regional transport links.

4. Shale Wealth Fund
In another measure aimed at boosting the fossil-fuel industry -- in this case by making it more palatable to local communities -- the government promised at the last election to overhaul a pledged fund worth as much as 1 billion pounds to distribute some of the profits from hydraulic fracturing.

The aim is to ensure “a greater percentage of the tax revenues from shale gas directly benefit the communities that host extraction sites.” The government last week responded to a consultation on the issue pledging the fund will initially consist of as much as 10 percent of tax revenues from shale-gas extraction, with proceeds to be spent on projects ranging from play parks for children to improved transport links and restoring historical sites.

5. Air Pollution Tax
Diesel vehicles have become a political football of late. For years, governments ignored evidence that diesel is worse for air quality and encouraged its use because the fuel is less damaging to the climate than gasoline. With air pollution now under the microscope in London in particular, the government published an air-quality plan over the summer and is likely to include measures in the budget designed to help clean up the air in Britain’s cities by encouraging cleaner vehicles.

Possible measures include raising the sales tax on diesel cars, known as vehicle excise duty, or raising taxation on diesel fuel itself, which is currently taxed at the same level as gasoline, at about 58 pence per liter. The government has also said it will consider programs to encourage motorists to trade in their older, more polluting cars, for newer, cleaner ones. Ministers also stepping up efforts to encourage the use of more electric vehicles by supporting the development of batteries and the deployment of charging points.

6. Fund for Start-Ups
In August, the government proposed a new National Investment Fund that would help start-ups access the “patient capital” funding they need to develop into so-called “unicorns” -- innovative companies valued at over $1 billion. A consultation on the proposal closed in September, and Hammond is likely to propose a confirmed plan of action in the budget.

The consultation suggested funding should come from the British Business Bank, replacing the backing currently received from the European Investment Fund. One of the reasons this could get a mention is that the the government is keen to demonstrate that London can attract Big Tech even when it’s no longer in the European Union.

Although the view is hardly unique to this government, a mere 22 percent said that they feel taxpayers" money is currently being spent wisely.

Whether this percentage will go up or down after the Chancellor"s statement today, remains to be seen.

UK Will Compromise On Divorce Bill To Accelerate Brexit Negotiations

At last, it seems like the deadlock in Brexit negotiations is over and, not surprisingly, it was the UK which blinked first.

According to Bloomberg, the U.K. signalled it is preparing to compromise in its stand-off with the European Union over the Brexit bill, with new talks scheduled next week in an effort to break the deadlock. The deal on the divorce terms will probably be better for the remaining 27 EU countries than for Britain on the financial settlement, Brexit Secretary David Davis said on Tuesday.

Speaking to the House of Lords European Select Committee, Davis stated:

“The withdrawal agreement, on balance, will probably favour the (European) Union in terms of things like money and so on,” Davis told lawmakers in London.

 

“Whereas the future relationship will favour both sides and will be important to both of us.”

We noted the almost casual referral to “money and so on” and, while Davis said that he was not going to put a “big offer” on the table, the Daily Express reported how Davis’s comments went down badly with Brexiteers...

His comments sparked uproar on social media, with users branding the Brexit Secretary’s negotiations a failure.

 

John Walters tweeted: “Why on earth would we pay more than legally required? Unless there is quid pro quo. If it favours EU then there should be no deal (& no money).” 

 

Nathan Oxley complained “David Davis couldn’t negotiate his way out of a cardboard box.”

Davis also told the House of Lords committee he would “listen carefully” to calls from MPs for the final deal to be approved by statute in Parliament. A UK compromise on the divorce settlement paves the way for progress in the Brexit negotiations to accelerate during the next round of talks. The U.K. government and the European Commission issued a statement that these will be held on 9-10 November 2017. As Bloomberg explains...

May’s team wants to start discussing the future trading relationship and a two-year transition phase before the end of the year but must first satisfy the EU that the U.K. will pay what the bloc thinks it owes when it leaves.

 

Davis’s comments are significant because negotiations have stalled in a disagreement over how much the U.K. should agree to pay. U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May’s government wanted to resume talks this week but the EU could not fit a new round of talks into its schedule, Davis said.

 

“We want to strategically accelerate the process,” he told the House of Lords EU committee. “We are not holding up the process.”

There are signs that both parties sense that progress has been made. Here is Bloomberg on the EU’s position. 

Davis’s comments to lawmakers on Tuesday came after the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, Michel Barnier, said he’s ready to step up the pace as the window of opportunity for trade talks this year closes...

“I’m ready to speed up negotiations,” Barnier told reporters in the Slovak capital Bratislava on Tuesday.

 

“We have proposed three dates, three weeks of new rounds of negotiations. In the next few hours or days, we’re working with the British delegation to find the right dates.”

Almost two weeks after German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s warm words at an October summit, concern was mounting that no date had been fixed for policy negotiations to resume, with confusion on both sides as to where the other stands and contingency planning well underway.

Relying on anonymous sources from both sides, there has been speculation that the UK was prepared to pay about 40 billion euros, while the EU was demanding about 60 billion euros. So, we have to assume the range has closed up into the 50-60 billion euros area.

Presumably, the odious John Claude Juncker will be happy.

Goodbye Royal Marines

Authored by Matthew Jamison via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

Over the course of the summer there was great fanfare and much to do from the British Secretary of State, Sir Michael Fallon MP, regarding the "completion" of two new British aircraft carriers called HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales.

Fallon, a thoroughly odious English Tory and old Cold War warrior, got punch drunk and completely giddy with the unveiling of the new aircraft carriers. Fallon got so excited he started spouting the most ridiculous anti-Russian nonsense such as this contrasting the Royal Navy’s new 65,000-ton carrier with what he called the “dilapidated” Russian carrier Admiral Kuznetsov. Fallon went on in wild Cold War terminology to invoke the spectre of what he erroneously and egregiously called "Russian aggression" and absurdly claimed that the mighty Russian Federation was some how "jealous" of Britain"s two new aircraft carriers. Quite frankly, there is not much to be jealous about when one scratches beneath the Tory English anti- Russian surface.

As is so often the case with the English, in particular their most offensive incarnation in the form of the Tory Party, what the English say and what the reality of the situation is, the hard cold truth, are two very different matters that rarely, if ever, gel together. Fallon quoted the former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher [who actually had tremendous respect and admiration for and a very good working relationship with the last General Secretary of the Soviet Union Mikhail Gorbachev] in trying to whip up stupid and offensive anti-Russian Cold War sentiment. Well, I am reminded of another one of Mrs Thatcher"s great quotations which I am fond of throwing back in ugly English Tory faces: "Such is presentation......how different from reality."

Fallon would not countenance any criticism of the new aircraft carriers, their cost, their Ministry of Defence project management, their sea readiness, their utility, and a whole host of other salient issues which deserved scrutiny by snapping that critics should "shut up." I"m sorry Fallon but the last time I checked the UK was supposedly a free liberal democracy with intellectual freedom and freedom of speech. Not some Gestapo State as your colleague Mrs May has attempted to create.

So let us examine closely how brilliant and what a great investment these two new British aircraft carriers are. Both HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales have roughly cost the hard pressed, almost bankrupt UK taxpayer a combined 6 Billion Pounds. At the official launch of HMS Queen Elizabeth back in the summer Fallon boasted: 

"But Queen Elizabeth, the biggest and the greatest warship this country has ever built, will go on now from these trials to defend our country, to safeguard our sea lanes, to work with our allies and partners to keep the peace, and to save lives across all seven seas."

When pressed on what he would say to the "armchair critics", Fallon beat his meagre chest and said

"They should come and see this wonderful flagship of the Royal Navy, which will help keep this country safe for 50 years to come."

Not to leave any hostages to fortune and most certainly not to be modest Fallon went on:

 "This is a great day for Britain. There are only three other countries in the world building aircraft carriers - and we are building two."

Let us blow away the Fallon/Tory/English spin and Rule Britannia hyperbole and examine the truth.

While on a tour of the Royal Navy’s mighty new aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth, an intrepid journalist noticed that it is fitted with the exact same software that was hit by a massive cyber-attack only a few months ago. HMS Queen Elizabeth is the most expensive aircraft carrier ever to be built for the Royal Navy at over 3 Billion Pounds but it is running on the same IT software system used by the NHS that were targeted by cyber hackers earlier this year. Also HMS Queen Elizabeth is designed to house 36 fast jets. None of which have yet been built. What is the point of an aircraft carrier if there are no aircraft to land on it? As Jeremy Clarkson writing in The Sun put it: "Apparently, three of the Anglo-American F-35s will be delivered to the Navy in 2020, then six more the following year. Quite what the crew is supposed to do to defend itself in the meantime is unclear. Use rude gestures, perhaps?"

And there is the small matter about the usual serial incompetence of the utterly corrupt and incompetent UK Ministry of Defence and its budget planning and project planning when it came to the building and budgeting for HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales. The Ministry of Defence as usual can not organise a tea party in China. Thanks to these two new aircraft carriers there is now a massive 30 Billion Pound black hole in the UK Ministry of Defence"s budget. Several senior Ministry of Defence officials linked to UK defence procurement have in recent weeks resigned while the Ministry of Defence has now had to engage in a behind the scenes, classic Whitehall cover up cost cutting exercise.

The sacrificial lamb for plugging this massive financial black hole so Britain can have two utterly useless, good for nothing, football stadium aircraft carriers without any aircraft will be the Royal Marines and their beach landing ships HMS Albion and HMS Bulwark. 

Churchill would be turning in his grave if he knew that Britain was sacrificing her ability to "fight them on the beaches" so Michael Fallon can swan around spouting rubbish about how Russia is "jealous" of these aircraft carriers and more anti-Russian garbage about how: "the resurgence of Russian aggression abroad...[is] undermining democracy wherever it can” and how these aircraft carriers represent "90% of it - British - 17 million parts. This ship is a floating showcase for British industry, British talent, British skills and British brainpower."

Fallon is not the only one spouting absolute lies and anti-Russian rubbish about these aircraft carriers. Sadly, a very weak naive former colleague of mine from the virulently anti-Russian Henry Jackson Society has been getting into Twitter spat after Twitter spat against RT defending these British aircraft carrier pieces of garbage. When will the anti-Russian propaganda of Fallon and James Rogers of the Henry Jackson Society stop. If it were not for the superior strength, grit, determination, continuous effort and heroic courage of the Russian people exemplified most vividly during the Battle of Stalingrad the simple fact is the UK would be the smallest province in the Nazi Third Reich now. But then Rogers is not an academically professionally trained historian. Perhaps some people need to go back to university and do a history degree.

Fatal Police Shootings In UK At 12-Year High

Fatal police shootings are on the rise in England and Wales. As Statista"s Isabel von Kessel explains, the latest figures released by the Independent Police Complaints Commission reveal that the 6 people were shot dead between April 2016 and March 2017, up from 3 in the previous period.

You will find more statistics at Statista

This is the highest figure since 2004/05. Among the recent fatalities recorded, one was terrorism-related, when officers shot an assailant after a stabbing attack in Westminster earlier this year.

The report further reveals that the number of apparent suicides following custody (if they occur within two days of someone’s release) has decreased sharply: Within the last year, 55 incidents were recorded compared to 60 in the year before and 71 in 2014/15.

In "Personal Blow" Theresa May's Two Closest Advisors Quit After Election Debacle

In the aftermath of the stunning loss by Theresa May"s Conservative party in the UK General Elections, bookmakers quickly made Labour"s Jeremy Corbin the odds-on favorite to become the UK"s next Prime Minister, implying May would resign shortly. That contingency, however, got a last minute reprieve when May announced on Friday she would seek to form a minority government with the help of a small Northern Irish party, the far-right Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), extending her political career if only for the immediate future. However, the turmoil within the Conservative Party re-emerged on Saturday when Theresa May was forced to part ways with her two closest advisors, after the PM was warned she faced a leadership challenge unless she sacked Nick Timothy and Fiona Hill.

While senior Tory party figures cautioned earlier against any immediate leadership challenge, saying it would only cause further disruption as Britain prepares to start Brexit negotiations as early as June 19, someone had to take the blame for the crushing electoral setback and according to both AFP and BBC they demanded the heads of May"s joint chiefs of staff, Nick Timothy and Fiona Hill, as the price for allowing the 60-year-old to stay in office.

May had relied on Timothy and Hill for advice and support since her previous job at the interior ministry, and their resignations will be a "personal blow."

Announcing his resignation on the Conservative Home website, Timothy urged Tory MPs to "get behind" Mrs May but said nothing should be allowed to get in the way of the process of forming a government and beginning Brexit talks. He said the Conservatives" failure to win was not due to a lack of support for Theresa May and the Conservatives but due to an "unexpected surge" of support for Labour.

He conceded his party had failed to communicate a sufficiently "positive" message to voters and address their concerns over years of austerity and inter-generational divisions, including over Brexit.

"We were not talking to the people who decided to vote for Labour," he said.

Meanwhile, Hill said it had been a pleasure to serve in government and she believed Mrs May would continue as prime minister.

* * *

The resignation of Hill - a combative character who one ex-colleague said had helped create a "toxic" atmosphere at the heart of government. - was confirmed on Saturday by a party spokesman. The news came as May prepared to name the rest of her cabinet, after revealing Friday that her five most senior ministers would remain in their posts.

Timothy said he took responsibility for the Conservative manifesto, including a plan for elderly social care that caused a backlash among many core voters. As AFP adds, prior to the election, she had been widely expected to sack finance minister Philip Hammond following a reported clash over her Brexit strategy.

The Labour party quickly responded with Labour"s deputy leader Tom Watson saying that the PM"s advisers had "taken the fall" for her but tweeted the PM was "responsible for her own defeat".

According to the BBC the pair"s departure bought the PM some "breathing space" following 24 hours of recriminations after the Conservatives lost their overall majority. It noted that the two were so close to the PM that critical MPs believed that, unless they made way, she would not be able to change her leadership style to adopt a more "outgoing, inclusive, responsive, empathetic approach". BBC adds that senior Conservatives had warned the PM they would instigate a leadership contest at a meeting of backbenchers early next week if the pair did not leave, and were confident they could get the required 48 signatures to trigger a contest.

One former minister, Anna Soubry, welcomed the clearout, saying it was the "right thing to do" and saying the PM must "build a consensus" on Brexit and other issues. But Labour"s deputy leader Tom Watson said the PM"s advisers had "taken the fall" for her but tweeted the PM was "responsible for her own defeat".

Who were the PM"s special advisers?

Fiona Hill: Fiercely loyal and seen as a formidable operator, Fiona Hill was at Mrs May"s side for four years at the Home Office, becoming a close confidante of the then home secretary. A former Sky News and Scotsman journalist in her 40s, she led work on the Modern Slavery Act and published her own report on the subject.

She was forced to resign as Mrs May"s special adviser in a 2014 dispute with Michael Gove over who was to blame for briefing newspapers about an increase in extremism in schools. But she was brought back into the fold when Mrs May became PM.

Nick Timothy: The bearded Brummie is the son of a steelworker, who went to grammar school and joined the Conservative Party at the age of 17. He is credited with influencing the PM"s views on social mobility and the need to put the Conservatives "at the service of working people".

His ambition to be a Conservative MP was reportedly thwarted by David Cameron, following a row over special advisers being asked to canvass in a by-election.

Operation Temperer - U.K. Will Likely Institute Martial Law Measures Within A Year

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.com,

After the Manchester suicide bombing only two weeks ago I warned my readers that the repetition of terror attacks is breeding complacency within the public, in Europe most acutely. It is not uncommon now for attacks killing dozens to be forgotten within a week of the event. The news feeds are awash in distraction, and of course, sometimes these events themselves act as distractions.

In a recent newscast of MSNBC"s “Morning Joe”, BBC anchor Katty Kay stated:

“Europe is getting used to attacks like this, Mika. They have to, because we are never going to be able to totally wipe this out...”

To me, this attitude is rather indicative of the European victim-culture mindset. Many in Europe (not all, but many) seem to enjoy a steady routine of self-flagellation. Countless centuries of the feudal serf system will do that to a society. The British still pay taxes to maintain a royal family, after all. I also think that the results of the Brexit vote in the UK might mislead those of us in America into thinking that the the British are turning over a new leaf in terms of liberty and conservative-like values. While I do think there is a fierce underlying drive to protect sovereignty of the British nation, the British individual has all but abandoned any hope of their own personal sovereignty and self determination.

In mainland Europe the self-loathing natural born citizen has become a bit of a mainstay and has been exploited quite successfully by the globalist establishment. In particular, the great fear among predominantly liberal Europeans is a return to the nationalist fervor that they believe spawned the rise of Nazism and the Third Reich (I have written numerous articles outlining the involvement of the corporate and banking elite in funding and supplying vital technology to the Nazis before and during WWII). It is this “guilt” of association with the Nazi legacy that has left Europe vulnerable to manipulation from the other end of the political spectrum – the socialist/Marxist end.

It is also this mindset that allowed globalists to forcefully inject millions of Muslim immigrants through open border policies and refugee policies into EU nations without proper vetting procedures. The majority of Europeans that saw the policy as irrational and dangerous were afraid to say anything for fear that they would be labeled “fascists”.

The greatest threat is not only the conditioning of the population to accept cultural invasion without assimilation. Nor is the greatest threat the pacification of the populace in the face of rampant terror attacks. No, the pinnacle threat is what will inevitably come next – the apathy of a nation in the wake of incremental martial law and the death of personal liberty.

This past week, a team of three Muslim men struck pedestrians with a white van, then emerged wielding hunting knives in a rampage through a crowded London night spot. This is only one attack in a steady stream that have plagued Europe ever since the Cloward-Piven program of Muslim relocation allowed millions of “refugees” into the EU"s borders. The vaporous ISIS terror group has since claimed responsibility.

In response, Prime Minister Theresa May has declared “enough is enough”, and demanded a review of the UK"s counter-terrorism strategy. London police have been asked to adjust to new tactical conditions, patrolling streets heavily armed and utilizing surveillance helicopters with the aid of special forces units.

NOTE - After finishing this article on Sunday, I find this quote from Theresa May on Tuesday:

“We should do even more to restrict the freedom and the movements of terrorist suspects when we have enough evidence to know they present a threat, but not enough evidence to prosecute them in full in court."

"And if human rights laws get in the way of doing these things, we will change those laws to make sure we can do them..."

The deployment of over 5000 British troops at strategic locations by Theresa May is all part of a plan established in 2015 called “Operation Temperer”. The plan calls for the deployment of troops within the UK border in response to “major terrorist threats”. Essentially, it is a martial law program that acts incrementally, rather than overtly. Once implemented, Temperer would be difficult to reverse. As UK military chiefs warned when the operation was publicly exposed, troops would likely not be pulled back after commitment unless the terror threat was “reduced”, leaving the definition of the “threat level” open for rather broad interpretation.

Operation Temperer is now in full swing as police departments ask for military aid. The prime minister has obliged, replacing officers in numerous locations with military units on patrol. So, is this “martial law”? Perhaps not quite, but it is damn close to the line, and this is how tyranny is commonly implemented; not all at once, but a stepping stone at a time.

First, I would point out that May introduced Temperer measures after the Manchester bombing, and they do not seem to have done much to disrupt the latest attack in London. Second, I would also point out that the UK general elections for parliament are only a today, and it is highly likely that the latest attacks will solidify Theresa May and her Brexit base.

The timing is rather interesting...

Many in the Liberty Movement would say that this is a good thing; that finally the British will be able to reverse the forced cultural invasion of an incompatible Muslim mass. I would say that this is all part of the plan.

As I have argued since before the Brexit vote last year, we are witnessing perhaps the largest 4^th Gen psy-op in history. The globalists have deliberately engineered conditions by which European nations in particular will either be enveloped by an alien ideology with no protection from their own governments, or, they will have to respond with overarching countermeasures. Meaning, Europeans have been given a false choice between the ideological cult of multiculturalism, or, martial law conditions.

In my view, the UK has been slated for the latter measure, and this makes perfect sense if you understand the game plan of the globalists.

Brexit and by extension the rise of Donald Trump in the US has been ALLOWED to happen. Despite the delusions of some in the liberty movement, the so-called “deep state” is perfectly positioned to take advantage of both events. They are not opposed in the slightest. Why? Because this is about destroying the name of sovereign nationalism and conservative principles. This is about the long game.

The UK appears to be first in the line-up. Terror attacks are mounting, May has already initiated Operation Temperer, and the attacks have continued anyway. The solution they will present will be MORE militarization, not less. It is my prediction that after a year of incrementalism and continued attacks, the entire UK will be in the midst of what many would define as full spectrum martial law. The UK government might not openly call it that, but that is what it will be.

While I personally find Muslim based societies to be abhorrent in their attitude towards individual liberty, I do see a disturbing trend developing on the other side of the coin. Western nations like the UK and the US have every right to defend their borders, to deny immigration from ANYWHERE for any reason, and to deport illegal immigrants and immigrants with provable ties to terror groups. However, the line that should not be crossed but probably will be crossed is the persecution or deportation of people merely for holding particular ideological views.

Even if the majority of citizens don"t necessarily support an outright broad brush response towards all people that hold Muslim views as potential terrorists, the temptation will be overwhelming, and our respective governments will oblige it. Once we step into the world of thought crime, there is no turning back.

And, what this does is paint conservative/nationalist movements as monstrous in the eyes of future generations. They will be taught that the globalists “warned the world” about the dangerous “racist” populists and alt-right groups, and look what happened when they came to power; they vaporized the economy (see my previous articles on the Trump scapegoat narrative) and rounded up innocent people because of their belief system even though they committed no specific crimes. My fear is that what is happening here is that conservative movements are going to be driven to such madness in the name of security that we will actually make the globalists look like “good guys” by comparison.

So, what is the solution? Well, look at the choices the British people have been given: Accept multicultural sublimation without question, or, initiate complete military oversight and sacrifice personal liberty. Are there no other options available?

What about this: The UK citizenry DEMANDS the return of their right to self defense and the legalization of firearms ownership for those without a criminal background? The real solution is for UK citizens to begin providing their own security, not handing over their country to militarization because they are all disarmed and afraid.

Will this happen? I seriously doubt it. But, I do want to point out that there is clearly another path far superior to the two being offered.

Again, I believe the UK will be under martial law in a year"s time. Unless the people of the UK do something NOW to assert their right to determine their own security, they will fall to a complete totalitarian framework. And, in the long run, they will only be helping the very globalists the Brexit movement in particular sought to fight against. They will do this by trampling the image of nationalism and sovereignty with the jackbooted philosophy of externalized security and government dependency, making globalism, the offered antithesis, look pleasant and tolerable in retrospect.

Theresa May Vows To Rip Up Human Rights Laws To "Restrict The Freedom Of Terrorist Suspects"

Following a series of devastating attacks in the U.K. and mounting criticism of her counter-terrorism record, Theresa May has vowed to do whatever necessary, if re-elected later this week, to "restrict the freedom and movements of terrorist suspects" even it means ripping up "human rights laws that get in the way."  Among other things, the Prime Minister has said she will make it easier to deport foreign terror suspects and will extend existing laws that restrict the freedom of British suspects on whom authorities "have enough evidence to know they present a threat, but not enough evidence to prosecute them in full in court." Per The Telegraph:

"When I stood on the steps of Downing Street after the London attack I said enough is enough and things have got to change."

"We need to take on the ideology that unites and motivates the perpetrators of these attacks."

“We should do even more to restrict the freedom and the movements of terrorist suspects when we have enough evidence to know they present a threat, but not enough evidence to prosecute them in full in court."

"And if human rights laws get in the way of doing these things, we will change those laws to make sure we can do them."

"If I am elected as Prime Minister on Thursday, I can tell you that this vital work begins on Friday."

As the Telegraph further notes, other contemplated actions would include efforts to force internet service providers to restrict access to extremist websites, tighter restrictions on mobile device usage by terror suspects and more aggressive curfews.

May had already announced plans for longer prison sentences for terrorists and a clamp down on internet firms that enable access to extremist material, but she now wants to go further.

She will extend the powers of police and the courts to restrict the movements of terrorist suspects using Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures (Tpims).

It will mean suspects can be kept under curfews for longer periods each day, tighter controls on suspects associating with each other and more people being banned from using mobile phones and the internet.

Human Rights laws also held up the deportation of the hate preacher Abu Qatada to his native Jordan, and Mrs May says she will find ways to prevent future deportations being delayed.

If not for the artful wording, one could almost confuse the comments above for Trump quotes.  Of course, if Trump dared to propose such aggressive measures to combat terrorism the accusations of racism would ring out far and wide and Maxine Waters would have impeachment proceedings scheduled by the end of the day.

Brexodus Builds - More EU Citizens Are Leaving The UK

After the Brexit referendum, more EU citizens are leaving Britain, while less Europeans are coming in. As the latest figures from the Office for National Statistics show, 2016 brought 84,000 less migrants, compared to the previous year. Statista"s Fabian Moebus points out that the net migration of 248,000 people is the lowest number of yearly newcomers in over three years. Immigration from EU countries decreased by 43,000 people while emigration increased by 31,000, which makes Europeans the main factor behind the trend with a net change of minus 74,000.

You will find more statistics at Statista

In the run-up to the elections, Theresa May declared to bring net migration below 100,000, a promise that dates back to the Conservative 2010 manifesto. The target has widely been criticized as insubstantial because it is highly dependent on the individual behavior of many different groups, like temporary students from abroad or British pensioners retiring elsewhere. Whether the numbers continue to wane hinges mainly on the outcome of the upcoming elections and the future development of Brexit negotiations between the UK and the EU.

Farage Rages "What's The UK Government Actually Gonna Do?"

Hours after the devastating terror attack in Manchester, England, and following UK PM Theresa May"s announcement of quasi-martial-law on the streets of Britain, Nigel Farage follows yesterday"s BBC anchor"s comments and asks "what is our government actually gonna do?"

"Get used to it"...

Farage reminds the world that Theresa May was British Home Secretary - in charge of "this stuff" for six years before becoming prime minister "and under her we did virtually nothing to deal with this problem... so I don"t see mass round-ups happening," citing the 500 terror suspects reportedly walking free in the UK.

Sparking painful memories of the 1930s rounding up citizens across Europe, Farage concludes "we have to stop the radicalization in our prisons and in our schools, and our immigration policy will vet absolutely everyone coming from middle-eastern and african countries."

And as the following poll from YouGov shows, up 14 percentage points on July 2010, an almost unanimous 90 percent said that they thought it was fairly or very likely.

Europeans Are 'Primed' To Protest

According to a new survey by Dalia Research, the Europeans most likely to hit the streets in protest and the Spanish...

You will find more statistics at Statista

As Statista"s Martin Armstrong details, 31 percent of Spaniards said there was a fair chance of them joining a protest or demonstration in the next twelve months - 12 percentage points above the EU average.

At the other end of the scale, those in the UK seem less than eager to get their placards out. With only 11 percent saying they were likely to protest, Prime Minister May probably doesn"t need to worry too much about a mass of angry people sweeping on Downing Street for the time being.

British Home Secretary Pushes "Barista Visa" To Keep Coffee Shop Staff After Brexit

While trade barriers, immigration control, and exit fees are top-of-mind for many as the Article 50 negotiations begin, it seems British Home Secretary Amber Rudd has other priorities. As The Sun reports, Rudd is looking at introducing new ‘barista visas’ to ensure coffee shops and pubs are still fully staffed after Brexit.

Under the plan, young European citizens will still be able to come to the UK and work in the hospitality industry when we leave the EU. But their time here will be strictly limited to two years and they won’t be able to claim benefits or free housing. The proposal has been suggested by Migration Watch UK chairman Lord Green and was dubbed “a good idea” by a senior Home Office source. It is based on the current Youth Mobility Scheme for travellers from Australia, New Zealand and Canada.

Explaining his plan, Lord Green told The Sun:

“We can kill two birds with one stone here... We can meet the needs of pubs and restaurants and maintain our links with young Europeans by allowing them to come for a strictly limited period of two years to work.”

The crossbench peer and former Foreign Office ambassador added:

“They could work at any level but would not become long term immigrants who would add to the pressure on public services... Nor should they qualify for benefits or housing.”

Raising pay to coax more Brits into the trades or improving production methods should be considered first before exceptions are granted to keep their access to migrants, but Lord Green added: “It is quite possible that an unlimited supply of cheap labour has been a disincentive to investment in machinery”.

So as long as the cheap labor can flow, everything will be fine... where have we seen that before? Or perhaps this is next?

Cable Tumbles As Scottish Parliament Votes For 2nd Independence Referendum

A day ahead of UK PM Theresa May"s timeline for submitting Article 50 and beginning formal Brexiut procedures, Scottish parliament just voted 69 to 59 in facor of a second Scottish independence referendum. While somewhat expected, cable is lagging on the news...

As AP reports, Scottish lawmakers have voted to seek a new referendum on independence, to be held within the next two years.

The Scottish parliament voted 69-59 to back First Minister Nicola Sturgeon"s call to ask the British government for an independence vote.

Sturgeon says Scots must be given the chance to vote on their future before Britain leaves the European Union. British Prime Minister Theresa May plans to launch the U.K"s two-year process to exit the EU on Wednesday by triggering Article 50 of the bloc"s key treaty.

"Scotland"s future should be in Scotland"s hands," Sturgeon told lawmakers in the Edinburgh-based parliament.

Scottish voters rejected independence in a 2014 referendum that Sturgeon"s Scottish National Party called a once-in-a-generation vote. But Sturgeon says Brexit has changed the situation dramatically.

She says there should be a new vote on independence between fall 2018 and spring 2019, when details of Britain"s divorce terms with the bloc are clear.

Notably, May, whose government must approve the referendum for it to be legally binding, says the time is not right. She says all parts of the U.K. — England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland — must pull together to get the best-possible deal with the EU.

Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson agreed, saying Tuesday that Scots do not want "the division and rancor of another referendum campaign." It"s unclear what could break the stalemate between Edinburgh and London.

Nicola Sturgeon"s full statement following the passage of the vote is below.

Full @NicolaSturgeon statement following Holyrood vote pic.twitter.com/nyNELIXWJb

— Nick Eardley (@nickeardleybbc) March 28, 2017

Pound Tumbles On Report Scotland May Hold Second Independence Referendum

As recently as two weeks ago, a repeat Scottish independent referendum seemed improbable.

As Reuters reported on February 10, according to a senior British minister, Britain saw no need for a second Scottish independence referendum and the devolved Scottish government should focus on improving the economy and tacking domestic issues rather than "flirting with secession."

Meanwhile, an opinion poll published in early February showed support for Scottish independence rose after PM Theresa May proposed making a clean break with the European Union, stoking speculation that Scotland could demand another secession vote. Such a move would present yet another major challenge for the ruling Conservative party as a demand for a second independence referendum from Scotland"s devolved government would throw the United Kingdom into a constitutional crisis just as PM May seeks to negotiate the terms of the Brexit divorce with the EU"s 27 other members.

May had repeatedly said she does not believe there is any need for a second independence vote in Scotland as 55.3% of Scots voted to stay in a 2014 referendum. In that vote, 44.7% of Scots voted for independence.

When asked whether she would allow a second referendum, May told reporters: "We had the independence referendum in 2014." "The Scottish people determined at that time that they wanted Scotland to remain a part of the United Kingdom. The SNP at the time said it was a ‘once in a generation vote’," May said.

But the pro-EU Scottish National Party (SNP), whose ultimate aim is independence for Scotland, said May"s drive for what they call a "hard Brexit" against the will of most Scots had put independence back on the agenda.

It now appears that the SNP has gotten its wishes, and despite her stern denials, Theresa May’s team is preparing for Scotland to potentially call independence referendum in March to coincide with triggering of Article 50, the Times of London reported late on Sunday, citing unidentified senior government sources. According to the UK publication, May could agree to new Scottish vote, but on condition it’s held after U.K. leaves EU.

From the Sunday Times:

Nicola Sturgeon and Theresa May are heading for a showdown over who has the right to call another independence referendum and when it should be held.

As the prime minister prepares to head north to speak at the Scottish Conservative conference this week, it has emerged that the SNP government raised the issue of a second referendum at a private meeting with her administration on Wednesday. 

The first minister looks set to call a vote by the Scottish parliament — following next month’s SNP conference and triggering of article 50 — to strengthen her mandate to stage a second referendum. At her party conference, Sturgeon is expected to call for Holyrood to have the right to call a referendum.

While there has been no official statement from UK officials in this late hour on Sunday, the prospect of even more politcal chaos, not to mention the sudden possibility of Scotland declaring independence has sent cable into a tailspin, with sterling plunging 70 pips in thin trade, sliding below 1.24 on the news.