Is imperialism a new passion for the left?

It was the Labour Party which led the domestic vanguard of the post World War 11 campaign in the UK to dismantle the British Empire as they, and their allies, argued that the then colonial subjects around the world had the right to govern themselves. The old Empire crumbled and, as it did, the British Labour Party rejoiced in the liberation of its former subjects. No longer, they said, should a British Government tell people outside of the UK what they could and could not do.

Even the Conservatives joined in the applause for this noble principle which became a guiding principle for everybody in the new enlightened era. To argue against it was to commit an unforgivable political, racist and moral sin.

There is precious little left of the old Empire nowadays and the widely scattered remnants are called British Overseas Territories. The largest of these is Bermuda in the Caribbean and which has a population of about 65,000.

In early February, the democratically elected government of Bermuda became the first jurisdiction in the world to reverse its law permitting same sex marriage and the UK Labour Party went wild demanding that the government instruct the Governor John Rankin to refuse to countenance much less approve the decision by Bermuda's Parliament.

Suddenly, the British Labour Party and The UK Greens starting sounding like a bunch of crusty old cavalry colonels huddled together in far-right 1950s outfits like the League of Empire Loyalists and tut-tutting into their gin and tonics about the breakdown of civilisation.

Under Bermuda's 1968 Constitution, the governor, appointed by Her Majesty the Queen on the advice of the British Government retains control over external affairs, defence and internal security but can only act on the advice of the ruling Premier and Cabinet.

In May 2017, Bermuda's Supreme Court legalised same-sex marriage and by February 2018 the Territory's Parliament passed a government Bill overturning that decision. In 2016, a non-binding referendum proposing same-sex marriage or same-sex civil unions in Bermuda was rejected by voters.

One irony is that Bermuda is governed by the Progressive Labour Party which won 24 of the 36 House of Assembly seats and 58.89% of the popular vote in the July, 2017 election after the Supreme Court's decision. It is described as being of the centre-left and, in other circumstances, would be considered an international ally of the British Labour Party. And their election manifesto promised to introduce the legislation that it did so nobody could accuse them of being sneaky.

Bermuda's Home Affairs Minister Walton Brown said the legislation signed by the governor sought to balance opposition to same-sex marriage in the socially conservative country while complying with European court rulings that ensured recognition of and protection for same-sex couples.

The Minister was quoted as saying, "The Act is intended to strike a fair balance between two currently irreconcilable groups in Bermuda, by restating that marriage must be between a male and a female while at the same time recognising and protecting the rights of same sex couples."

The reported eight same-sex couples who were married during the window of opportunity when it was legal will continue to be recognised under the new law. The rights of gay couples remain the same as straight married couples and only the verbiage applied to each type of relationship is different.

The British Prime Minister Theresa May was quoted in British media as saying that she was "disappointed" by the decision. She conceded, "That Bill has been democratically passed by the Parliament of Bermuda, and our relationship with the overseas territories is based on partnership and respect for their right to democratic self-government."

Foreign Office Minister Harriett Baldwin told Parliament that the legislation was "something that was put into the manifesto of the party that was successful at the last election and, while we may disagree with the direction of travel here in the United Kingdom, we decided in these circumstances not to intervene."

British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson has the power to order the governor with withhold his assent but he decided the matter was one for the Bermudians to decide.

And it was this decision by the UK government to respect a decision by the Bermuda government that sent the Opposition Labour Party and The Greens into their neo-imperialist frenzy.

Labour shadow Foreign Office minister Helen Goodman said the Bermuda decision "turns same sex couples into second class citizens".

She said, "For that to happen anywhere in the world would be shameful. For it to happen in a British territory, for the legislation signed by a British governor and permitted by a British foreign secretary make us complicit in something which this House (of Commons) has repeatedly voted against."

Labour MP Davis Lammy who has Guyanese (African) parents announced, "The first slaves were brought to Bermuda in 1620, oppressed, segregated, discriminated against ... and that is why leaders like Nelson Mandela, Desmond Tutu and Barack Obama have not just fought for race rights, but they have fought for rights of lesbian, gay and bisexual people."

Mr Lammy's argument that the British government should block, via the governor's veto, the decision of the Bermuda government might have been somewhat stronger if the population of Bermuda was majority Caucasian but at least three-fifths are wholly or partially descended from African slaves who were forcibly brought to the islands prior to the abolition of slavery in the British Empire in 1833. And the governing Progressive Labor Party there draws its strongest support from these descendents of slaves.

Was Mr Lammy suggesting that a mainly black population of Bermuda was not capable or qualified to make their own decisions? The apartheid regime in South Africa and the white regime in Rhodesia didn't get anywhere in the world by trying to argue that position.

Mr Lammy continued, "This country (the UK) has been one of the world leaders on this subject – so if this is not the issue on which to refuse assent I don't know what is."

Even more predictably, the Green Party spokesperson Carline Lucas called it an "absolute scandal" that Britain was not willing to enforce LGBT ideals on another nation.

One perhaps unintended consequence of the new law is the possible effect that it has on cruise companies such as Cunard and P&O which register their ships in Bermuda – no longer will they be allowed to offer same-sex marriages on board. Cruise ships operating out of Bermuda heavily advertise gay only cruises especially for American gays although the cruise lines have said that only three same-sex marriages were performed at sea during the window of opportunity.

In a statement, P&O said that they had been "wholly supportive" of the Bermuda's Supreme Court's decision to allow same-sex marriage but were "disappointed" by the government's move. A joint statement from P&O and Cunard said, "We would still love to welcome couples aboard as planned. While we are unable to hold the legal ceremony we can still offer a commitment ceremony to celebrate their partnership or a renewal of vows ceremony."

According to P&O an on-board same-sex marriage cost about $AU2,120 on top of the normal tickets.

But the cruise lines are only concerned about Bermuda's new laws because of their principled human rights commitment, aren't they? Possible loss of business has nothing to do with it and perish the thought.

I wonder if Bermuda's Governor John Rankin has one of those splendid colonial tall white pith helmets festooned with feathers with an accompanying crisp white uniform of the type that were last seen in 1997 when the British handed over Hong Kong to the Chinese government? It would be wonderfully nostalgic especially if he wore a sword as well when he brought the rebellious natives to heel with a few courageous manly words.

But I somehow doubt that the British Labour Party and the British Greens would actually approve of his being kitted out in such colonial uniform because it wouldn't be politically correct anymore, would it? Mind you, they still want him to act like some 19^th century colonial autocrat and put the natives in their place. For their own good, of course.