Bill Carmichael: Maggie’s fault? That’s rubbish

IT’S all Maggie Thatcher’s fault, apparently.

That’s right – please don’t laugh – but before the embers of the flames sparked by rioters across the country even had a chance to cool, Baroness Thatcher was firmly put in the frame as one of the main people responsible, as far as our Leftie friends are concerned.

Try to forget for a moment, if you can, that the teenage yobboes strolling down the high street with 52 inch 3D televisions tucked under their arms weren’t even born the last time Maggie held power almost 21 years ago, and that we have had 13 years of socialist rule in the intervening years.

The “Maggie’s fault” excuse was dutifully trotted out alongside a whole litany of lame and familiar justifications by Left-wing apologists for simple thuggery.

You probably know the script by now – we can’t blame the poor, downtrodden youths because social inequalities simply force them to steal televisions and trainers and laptop computers. I mean, what other choice do these poor darlings possibly have? It’s not their fault – it’s all because of racism, poverty, unemployment etc.

Hilariously, I even heard the cost of long-term smart phone contracts cited as one reason for “the youth” rioting.

Let’s nail “the savage cuts” lie first of all. No matter what the BBC and the Guardian may tell you, “the cuts” can’t be blamed for the riots, quite simply because there haven’t been any cuts – savage or otherwise.

What we are seeing is an extremely modest – about one per cent a year – reduction in the growth of public spending – and what savings there are have not even been imposed yet. So “the cuts” excuse falls at the first hurdle.

How about “poverty” then? The big problem with this excuse is that the rioters aren’t poor – certainly not in the material sense anyway – thanks to our lavish system of benefits. If they were poor, they’d be looting grocers and bakers, not luxury goods shops. If they weren’t smashing their way into Comet and Footlocker to steal, they’d be shopping there.

Neither is unemployment an excuse. There are thousands of vacancies in London and elsewhere, usually filled by Poles, Lithuanians and other foreigners. Our crazy benefits system actually penalises the unemployed if they decide to take a job.

So what are the reasons for the disorder? Number one must be family breakdown. If over recent days you’ve watched television pictures of 11-year-olds smashing their way into wrecked jewellery shops and asked yourself “where are the parents?”, the answer in many cases is there aren’t any – not in the plural anyway.

More than 80 per cent of homes on the notorious Broadwater Farm estate are fatherless. In some ways, this is no surprise, because for 30 years we’ve had a benefits system that encourages fecklessness and punishes traditional two parent families.

Perhaps if we recognised marriage in our tax and benefits system and rewarded couples who take responsibility for their offspring, we could at least start to reverse this destructive trend. The other much-needed reform of benefits is simple, radical and has been proven to work. Work must be become an obligation before the unemployed receive benefits. No work means no money – it’s that simple.

One of the many depressing interviews over recent days was with a couple of 17-year-old girls, drinking a bottle of stolen wine at 9.30 in the morning, who had just taken part in the Croydon riot.

One said: “It’s the Government’s fault. I don’t know. Conservatives, whoever it is. It’s the rich people who’ve got businesses and that’s why all this happened.”

The sad thing is that, given a slight change of language and a posher accent, this is indistinguishable from the guff that has been trotted out on our television screens and newspapers by Left-wing analysts every day. Proof that the Left not only left us economically bankrupt, they are morally bankrupt, too.