Perhaps it is just me, but I am beginning to believe that our MP’s are on another planet, not that they were born on another planet, just that once they become elected they appear to move to another planet.

We, the electorate, are almost always referred to as the “people” whenever our members of parliament or, more accurately, our ministers talk about us. Almost as if we are something different to them, of a different class, a different sub-species and, perhaps we are. Because MP’s simply remove themselves from the real world within months, sometimes days of being elected, or re-elected. They are quite happy to communicate with the “people” when they want something, such as your vote, but don’t expect them to talk to you again, at you, but not to you. Instead they will use any medium capable of delivering a one way message such as newspapers. Or perhaps, the internet savvy will use a blog, albeit many do not allow comments or moderate them to avoid anyone expressing an opinion that may differ from their own.

My point is, do any of the MP’s out there sound like us, talk like us or act like us. If we are being honest with ourselves, the majority don’t. For example, we make mistakes, but our MP’s in general and our minsters in particular, they never do. No, it is always a contractor, world events, the previous government, a civil servant, in fact anyone but themselves at fault. It is akin to driving a bus and claiming the accident was caused by weather conditions, the state of the tyres, the passengers, the previous owner etc., not because of anything the bus driver did. After all, it can’t be the bus driver’s job to check the tyres, the weather conditions or keep the passengers under control.

To err is human and believe it or not, most people can relate to that and the honesty that goes with being able to admit responsibility or culpability. Perhaps if more members of parliament were to admit the failures or weaknesses, we could repeat the entire saying, “to err is human, to forgive is divine”. In other words if they acted like the “people” they claim to represent, and admitted their mistakes, we would probably forgive them, because we can relate to something that happens to us all. In fact, at least making mistakes means we are doing something and it is better to do something and get it wrong occasionally, than it is to do nothing. Making a mistake and being able to admit to it can demonstrate our depth; provide a tangible example of our honesty and our integrity, not to mention our skills at objectivity and self-analysis. All the things, in fact, that we would expect of an elected member of parliament.

As soon as an MP is elected, they lose their ability to communicate with us, why, because they are then expected to toe the party line, they have to become part of a machine? So they must think about each and everything they say. They are no longer real people; they just spout the same party line, too scared of their own shadows to say anything else. This is a generalisation, but then, if we are honest with ourselves, this type of behaviour is a familiar trait with the vast majority of MP’s.

In the past, we have had real ‘characters’ amongst our MP’s most were not flamboyant, just outspoken. You may not have agreed with their politics, but at least they were prepared to step forward and say what they think, not the party hierarchy. Today, the number of characters amongst our 650 or so MP’s can be counted on one hand, simply because they are required to leave their opinions, beliefs and personalities behind if they want to get on or not be labelled a maverick. We would probably consider someone labelled by the party machine as a maverick as a person of principals, gravitas or of independent mind.

Once in parliament, our MP’s become robots, part of the machine where every line has to be rehearsed, every comment considered to ensure that is doesn’t offend anyone, difficult questions must be evaded and if you are fortunate enough to be a minister, then you determine what questions can, or cannot be asked. It is so far removed from the real world, that it is alien to us; therefore it is impossible for the electorate to relate to these elected officials. So, we have around 650 members of parliament ruling 65m people, but in such fear, that in truth, we are probably ruled by less people than in the Politburo of the Communist Party of China.

Take Prime Ministers Question Time, the PM always knows well in advance what questions will be asked, they also have a few stooges who are ready to raise an issue where the PM can preen his feathers and claim all of the credit. If the PM is rounded on by the opposition, he simply blames the previous government, in spite of the fact that Labour has been in government for 11 years, or refers to the voting patters of the other parties. Everything is staged, yes the PM or some of his ministers may be lampooned, but we are given carefully rehearsed and research answers that are delivered in such a way as to ensure that the government record or minister is cleared of any wrongdoing, responsibility or culpability. This is not real life, it is alien to us.

Gordon Brown has many, many problems to deal with, but the people, as we are patronisingly referred to, are quite forgiving, because we are normal. Imagine if you will, Gordon Brown standing up and admitting, that he should have put a little money away in the good times, to ensure that we could survive the difficult times, which were bound to come. He could admit for example, that there would be fewer pensioners in fuel poverty had he not raided their pension schemes. We can relate to these admissions because they demonstrate that to err is human. He could also admit that he made a mistake by allowing the Labour party to renege on its commitment to allow the people the opportunity to vote of the ratification of the EU Constitution. He could even offer to put that right, by allowing us the vote and saying sorry. He won’t because that would make him look like us.

Our leaders and our members of parliament need to start talking like us, speaking like us and acting like us if they are to re-engage with the public. We don’t all speak with one voice like the political parties, the vast majority of us are willing to accept our share of responsibility when things go wrong, we don’t disparagingly refer to a group of people like they are some underclass, we don’t rehearse our answers or have speeches written for us.

Members of Parliament have to re-engage with the public and to do so is quite simple, they don’t have to spend hundreds of millions on consultants to work out how. They just need to act like normal people with a big job to do. They need to talk to us as equals. They need to keep their promises and maintain their values, not sell them for a cushy junior minister’s post. They need to talk to the people that put them in parliament for the entire period of their term in office, not talk at them, but to them. Above all, they need to be humble, admit their mistakes, tell us what they are going to do to put them right and move on.

It is not difficult for our members of parliament to demonstrate that they are not aliens or resident on another planet.

Once again, labour party MP’s are looking to raid the coffers of big business. This time, it is to counteract the economic and social impact of the increase in fuel prices, through the imposition of a so-called “windfall tax”. This is so typical of new labour, if they can’t employ a stealth tax or borrow it, they simply steal it. Yes, how else can you describe a direct raid on the profits of the energy companies?

Now don’t get me wrong, I am not advocating that we take no action, but simply applying a one-off windfall tax is not the answer. This would act as a massive dis-incentive for other international companies considering a move to the UK, assuming there are any left. That notwithstanding, this country faces another potential energy crisis in the next 10 years, or more accurately, an energy shortage and that is because many of our existing power stations are due to be replaced. With a build process of 10 years or so and the delay in the decision to utilise nuclear stations, if the existing companies refuse to invest, we could be in a lot of trouble.

It is possible to make the energy companies pay their fair share, by reducing the substantial windfall they received, as a consequence of the free carbon credits. Energy companies would find it more difficult to argue against this particular aspect of their business that a blatant raid on their profits. It may amount to the same thing, but arguably it is all in the presentation.

Using any money gained simply to reduce people’s bills is also not the answer; it is a short-term fix and would have to be repeated year on year, most likely rising year on year to take account of further rises. This is a massive burden on the taxpayer that would have to fund future shortfalls; after all, the government couldn’t simply turn to the energy company’s year on year.

What is needed is a joined up approach to the problem. Existing government and energy company initiatives need to be extended to put in place a programme designed to reduce the energy usage of those in fuel poverty, rather than simply subsidising energy costs. The introduction of low energy bulbs would make a significant difference to energy costs and if purchased in bulk, would cost the government pennies. This could be completed as a project, much the same as smoke alarms were some years ago. Similarly, looking at more efficient energy use, for example, a modern boiler will often use 35% or more, less fuel than an old one. I know the government already has a programme in place, but why not expand it, put more money into this initiative, rather than subsidise bills every year.

We all know of the various, well publicised methods of reducing home energy usage, most experts have suggested that there could be a saving of as much as 35% on annual bills, with a the adoption of commonsense approach to usage and a relatively small, targeted investment. Given the exponential savings in so called greenhouse gases, perhaps the government could consider transferring some of the revenues’ gained from ‘green taxes’ directly into this project.

I don’t have all the answers and I am neither an expert on energy nor the carbon trading scheme, but I know this, we cannot afford to introduce an ongoing form of fuel subsidy for those in fuel poverty and not expect it to hurt the majority. Surely it is better to invest a larger amount of money now, in fuel saving measures, rather than fuel subsidies? The government does not need to employ expensive consultants to come up with a commonsense approach to this problem. I don’t have all the answers and my suggestions may be over simplistic, but then I won’t cost the government hundreds of millions of pounds of taxpayer’s money in consulting fees either.

Am I the only one that is tired of the conservative party telling us what is wrong, then claiming they will fix, but offering no substance to the claim. George Osborne is the latest windbag telling us that the tax credit system isn’t working, but he will strengthen it. Great, so just how are you going to do that, let the people judge whether it makes sense or not.

 He also said that the conservative party will concentrate on giving people the chance of a better education, by improving schools in the poorest areas, tackling welfare dependency and supporting families who are trying to do right thing. This is an excellent goal, but just how are you going to do, tell us and let the people decide.

 From what I can see, the conservative party has plenty of ideas, but few policies. They need to prove they are a party of substance that they have both ideas and solutions and then they must share those with the electorate. Whilst I appreciate that they don’t want to lose their poll lead, the reality is they need to tell us now, so that if they are not in tune with the public, they have time to vary their course. Anyone that is advising them differently should be fired!

It would appear that only the Labour party believes it can win the next election. The latest ICM poll in The Guardian suggests that even if they changed their leader to David Miliband, they would still lose. Yet Gordon Brown was recently quoted as saying he would win the next election. Clearly he is not on the same planet as everyone else, but that does not come as a particular surprise to many of us, although whatever planet he is on must have an immigration problem with so many other MP’s from all parties there as well.

Apparently voters of all ages and classes believe that David Cameron would make a better Prime Minister.  Now before Cameron gets carried away, I should point out that virtually anyone, aged from 18 to 80 years of age would make a better prime minister. Until Cameron tells us what he and his party stands for, he can only expect to gain the top job because the Labour party are going to lose the next election, not based on merit. Of course, Cameron may be happy to gain the top spot in that way, but realistically, no self-respecting politician, if there is such a thing, should want to win by default.

Gordon Brown would be well advised to forget a relaunch, he lost the confidence of the public when he decided to follow Blair’s lead and deny the public the promised vote on the EU Constitution. We will never forgive his party or their leadership for that. On top of that, the man that lectured us on prudence, never put anything away for a rainy day in the good times, meaning there is nothing left in the kitty for the bad times. Worst still, the man that says we all borrow too much has done the same thing, taking us into a position where we have third world type debt. If that wasn’t enough, he has been writing off third world debt, a true master? I think not.

If we had a world class health service, a first class public transport network or even a world leading education system, then we could say it was worthwhile. But for all the money this government has squandered and wasted, we can see very little benefit. The only legacy this government and it ministers will leave is the one our children have to pay for. They should be ashamed.

There is nothing worse than a desperate man trying to be something he isn’t. Gordon Brown may have the title Prime Minister, but he will never be a prime minister. The top job should be based on merit, not something that is gained through a cosy fish supper. Do us all a favour Gordon and call an election now and Cameron, it is time you told us what you and your party stand for, before we all consider the relative merits of cutting the big party’s down to size by voting independent.

The Labour Party and the Conservative party agree on the need for a ‘Bill of Rights’ in the UK to protect the rights of the individual. Hooray! However, it would appear that they cannot agree on what areas it should cover…that is no excuse for a delay, the two parties need to get together and sort it out, leave party politics behind and remember that they are supposed to represent and serve the public of this country. It is what we elect them to do and what they get paid for.

This Labour government and the European laws they have introduced into this country has slowly eroded our rights, diluted our ability to hold ministers to account and moved us towards a Police state. If ever there was a need to protect the public it is now. A Bill of Rights should be drawn up, it must them be put to the people of this country through a referendum and once accepted by the public, introduced immediately. Moreover, once introduced, it must take precedence over any other legislation intended to be brought into law, European or otherwise. Once these laws have been introduced, a Law Lord should be placed ‘in charge’ who’s duty should be to ensure that the Bill of Rights is upheld, that is to say, no new laws are introduced by successive governments or European ministers which would dilute the rights entrenched in our Bill of Rights, without a further referendum.

It is rare that the Labour Party and Conservatives agree on much, they have a duty and a responsibility to get this thing done, we will be watching and judging them by their deeds, not their words.

We used to be able to rely on the Magna Carta, but through the efforts of this government and European legislation, we have slowly become the ‘little people’ as self-serving ministers ignore the rights and wishes of the majority, in favour of a very, very tiny minority. This is not acceptable. If a Bill of Rights can entrench our values, what is sacred and what must be protected, then we should introduce it soon. The American have been able to rely on their Bill of Rights, which includes the first 10 amendments since 1791.

 Loading ...

 Loading ...

As part of the process to speed up big developments, the government is attempting to introduce a bill which will provide developers a “blanket exemption” from complaints about smoke, odour, noise and light. The bill has already passed its House of Commons stages and is now with the House of Lords.

Within the bill is a new amendment which states that criminal or civil proceedings cannot be brought for nuisance over works “authorised by an order granting development consent”. The net effect, if passed in its current form, is this amendment will prevent local authorities acting on behalf of residents with legitimate concerns and amounts to the government, once again, attempting to run roughshod over the public interest.

Light and noise polution is a very serious issue and can have a severe effect on local residents quality of life. Their rights should not be removed in this way and it demonstrates how big business has so much more influence over government policy that the voting public. It would appear that the only time any form of lip service is paid to the concerns of the publice is when they are rebranded the “electorate” and are effectively sold to for the election!

Anyone that has ever lived and worked overseas will have a much better idea of what Quality of Life actually means. Here in the UK, we are forced to travel conjested roads, or use dirty public transport to go to work. Then we will be obliged to work the longest hours in Europe, doubtless to fund the workshy, then after a long day, return to our small homes(by international standards), adjacent to some large development, 24 hour garage or supermarket. The vast majority of the public simply haven’t got a clue what quality of life is, only a very small minority of people have and they don’t have to worry about the affects of local planning laws. Plainly the government would like to keep it this way.

I am personally sick to the back teeth of this government stamping all over the legitimate rights and concerns of the public, simply in order to appease big business. Little wonder that so many ex-ministers and MP’s get such cushy little number when they are removed from office. We should all strive for a decent quality of life, standards that many people in other first world countries actually take for granted. Little by little, this Labour government is taking away our rights to complain, to raise our legitimate concerns and our entitlement to a reasonable quality of life. Yet we stand by and let it happen, we must fight back, we must remind these ministers that they are supposed to represent our interests, they are placed in a position of trust and they are abusing it. We should not be sending this message once every 5 years, but everyday, we should fill the post bag of our local MP’s, send letters to the minister in charge and write to the prime minister. No longer can we accept this draconian law setting by ministers ignoring the long held rights of the public.

 Loading ...

 Loading ...

Last week Alistair Darling, the UK government chancellor, refused a pre-arranged interview with a BBC business editor when it was confirmed that the presenter was going to ask uncomfortable questions about the rumour surrounding stamp duty.

Now James Plaskitt had to be rescued by a government press officer after being  asked by a radio presenter if “rising unemployment and inflation could further destabilise the prime minister”. The press officer was heard to tell Palaskitt “We are only talking about today’s unemployment figures”. When pressed, the work and pensions minister said: “The answer’s no.”

We expect those with access to ministers to ask the questions that we ourselves would like answered and we further expect our ministers to be candid in their answers, not to be a hand-puppet to some press officer. What is not clear is whether ministers are in fear of their own jobs given the rumours of a cabinet reshuffles, or they just want to santise publicly what they are often prepared to say in private. No-one wants to believe that when a minister is talking, that he is actually being told what to say by a junior official, event though this is often the case, we don’t want our noses rubbed in it.

It is right that this government should live in fear, the electorate will get their opportunity at the next election to demostrate what a tardy, pompous, self-interested government we have had to contend with. Unfortunately, that is still a long way off, no doubt even more damage will be done before that day arrives. But in the meantime we want our ministers to at least give the impression of being candid, in control and with an opinion of their own.

If we have a government of ‘yes men’ then we are not in a democracy, but a dictatorship, if MP’s or ministers are in fear of telling the prime minister what they truly believe then he is in danger of believing he can do no wrong. MP’s in general, and cabinet ministers in particular have a duty to act in the best interests of the electorate, not the party and not the prime minister, and they must do this, even if it means losing their jobs or cabinet posts..it is their duty and responsibility to look after the public interests.

Gordon Brown and his ministers need to get a grip, accept the criticsm that is being levelled at them instead of playing the blame game “its the world exonomy that is causing our problems”, which simply insults our inteligence. Not all of it is their fault, but a good proportion is, so they need to accept their mistakes, instead of expending all their efforts and time defending themselves and  then start to get on with the job of doing something. All we ever here from Gordon Brown is that he knows their are problems and he is putting in a plan to resolve the issues, enough talk, where is the plan?

Once again the news contains an interview with Gordon Brown declaring how he is going to give away taxpayers money dressed up as humanitarian aid. Now don’t get me wrong, I accept that we have a oral obligation to assist those in need, but in the case of Georgia, it is not a particularly poor country and lets face it, if the Russians are responsible, then the powers that be should put pressure on then to pay restitution.

At a time when the people of this country are facing rising unemployment, rising food bills, increased mortgages and huge hikes in fuel and utility bills, Gordon Brown needs to practice what he preaches. A few weeks ago, this arrogant little man sought to patronise the electorate about food waste, a subject he must know very little about having been cosseted for so long. Now in just his second sentence, he says that “we” will provide aid to Georgia.

This year it is likely that many of our old age pensioners will have to choose between whether they eat or heat their homes. They need our help, instead, Brown gives them a humiliating hand-out, he needs to address the real issues, if heating bills are set to remain high, then adjust the pensions, don’t make former taxpayers beg for the money. Gordon Brown is a control freak, whenever there are allowances to be had, he insists that people have to claim them, even though it costs billions to administer, requires an A level student to complete the forms and makes no sense at all, well except to him.

Charity begins at home, what this country needs is a prime minister that genuinely understands the pressures on its citizens, not one that wants to be on the world stage, viewed as a philanthropist, doling out taxpayers money. Just who the hell does Gordon Brown think he is, what gives him the right to write-off debts and issue aid as if the money knew no end? The country is borrowed to the hilt, its citizens are struggling to pay ever rising fuel costs and taxes are set to rise. Yet we still have a £5bn slush fund for aid, enough to build 20 hospitals!

It is high time Gordon Brown started to get out a bit, connect with the people he seems so keen to lecture and fleece. Instead he surrounds himself with yes men, or business people with little or no understanding of the real world. Bottom line is, many of these these so called experts have no mortgage, are not forced to find the extra money to fuel their cars so that they can get to work and are not having to watch every penny. What on earth does Gordon Brown believe they are going to add. When he said he would have a government of all the people, clearly he forgot about you and me, over 60m British subjects.

When was the last time Gordon Brown went shopping, drove a car, heated his own home? He is out of touch, he surrounds himself with people that are out of touch with the majority of people in this country and he listens to flunkies, to scared to tell him the truth. It is high time Gordon Brown brought in real people to advise him, people that will not cower if he has a temper tantrum and above all, people that are not seeking some reward such as an MBE, knighthood etc., for their efforts.

Gordon stop worrying what the press says, start worrying about the people that you are supposed to represent, stop giving our money away as if it is your won and stop spending money that that you don’t have. You govern by consent, there is a limit to what the public will accept in terms of taxation and you have reached it. You can no longer use sleight of hand to take our money, we are wise to it, no-one ever listens to your budget anymore, because we know that the real pain is in the detail, so we have to wait for the analysts and newspapers to tell us how you are going to extract our hard-earned money. We are wise to you, shape up or ship out and remember, charity begins at home, so start looking at the most needy in this country.

David Cameron has been quoted as saying he would not rule out tax increases because he could not be certain of the public finances in two years time. I accept this in part, but let’s face it; there has been a huge amount of information released in recent years outlining this government’s excesses and waste. Surely, David Cameron is not going to preside over a continued waste of taxpayer’s money.

If Cameron wants to be prime minister, he needs to get a grip, by accepting what any businessman will tell you, there is always money to be saved in terms of fat and excess, without necessarily reducing output, service or standards. This is prime example of what happens when we seek to put inexperienced people into office to run a ‘business’ with revenues in excess of £250bn per year. Cameron is supposed to be the leader of the Conservative party with ambitions to be the leader of this country, isn’t it time we witnessed some of his leadership skills?

Clearly Cameron needs some pointers, so here are a few samples of this government’s waste of taxpayer’s money.

 £20bn on an IT system for the NHS that has had questionable trials, and lacks the support of NHS staff, who have also indicated a limited confidence in the systems capabilities. Another £2bn has been lost in tax credit fraud or errors. Or perhaps Cameron could consider the £2.3bn refurbishing civilian offices of MOD?

£1.7bn of taxpayer’s money is being spent settling Metronet’s debts following the failed privatisation of London Underground and it worth reminding ourselves that it was Gordon Brown, who forced through the controversial Public Private Partnership of the Tube when he was Chancellor. A further £300m will go to Transport for London to cover its cost in taking on Metronet’s contracts.

Let’s take a look at the Department of Work and Pensions which has wasted £300m on two cancelled IT projects In 5 years the DWP managed to spend £2.14bn on IT projects, both ongoing and cancelled, with over £500m going to consultants alone. Will this type of mismanagement continue with a Cameron lead government?

A further £486m has been wasted on the computer project for the Child Support Agency and £140m on a system designed to streamline payment of benefits which was shelved because it never worked. Or perhaps £77m on an IT system meant to clear the backlog of immigration casework which was shelved because it missed deadlines.  Maybe he should consider the waste in respect of a system that was being introduced to manage the applications of adults applying for independent learning grants which was scrapped after millions was lost in fraudulent applications; the cost of this was another £97m of taxpayer’s money.

Maybe David Cameron could take a closer look at the Ministry of Defence (MOD)? Apart from the £2.3bn alluded to earlier, to make the civil servants comfortable, he could consider the following.

After failing to include a clause ensuring that Chinooks purchased from the USA would meet UK airworthy standards (responsibility of the previous Conservative government), the MOD has spent more than £300m, now forecast to be £500m to upgrade them. Ordered in 1995, after 20 years, the upgrade on these 8 Chinooks has still not been completed. Likely waste is in the region of £500m plus the cost of the Chinooks! The MOD also scrapped a computer inventory scheme before it was introduced at a cost of £118m and a further £77m on a radar system for the Harrier before it was decided to withdraw it from service.

Once again the MOD judgment must be called into question over a similar situation with the Nimrod AEW aircraft that was supposed to replace the RAF Shackletons. Despite the fact that a well proven replacement, The Boeing E3 was available, the Government decided it was better to spend £1.5billion on a radar system that didn’t work. Having wasted this £1.5bn, they went on to spend another £750 million buying the 7 aircraft that the RAF had wanted to begin with!

The MOD also wrote off £118m on a failed inventory IT project (DSMS). In fact, the MOD may end up writing of over £3bn for a programme to upgrade RAF Nimrods, a plane that is built on the 1950’s Comet airframe and almost certainly with a very limited lifespan. David Cameron does not have to look very far to find government departments where good judgment has been demonstrated to be highly questionable.

Maybe Cameron could review The Pathway project, which promised to introduce a benefits payment card in 2000 and was scrapped after four years of expensive development was scrapped at a cost of £1bn Another £400m was spent on a project aimed at ‘cost control’ for the 2012 Olympics. Something else that should be taken into account when considering the use of taxpayers money is the plan to share services for human resources, payroll and finance using a computer system which was originally forecast to cost £55m with savings of £112m. It is now forecasted that costs will reach £120m with savings of just £40m.

This government has presided over a situation where in spite of the fact that nearly £3bn per annum is spent on ‘consultants’, the decisions that have been reached, remain highly questionable. Has anyone taken any responsibility for this complete waste of public money, the expensive consultants, the lofty, highly rewarded civil servants or the inexperienced ministers? I don’t think so! In spite of proving that they are incapable of making the right decisions in respect of Information Technology projects, this government is forecasted to spend another £14bn of taxpayer’s money this year, this is roughly equivalent to a reduction in personal taxation of 7p in the pound, or if you prefer, a reduction in the top rate of tax from 40% to 33%. Has David Cameron provided any indication that this wanton waste of taxpayer’s money will be a priority of his government if he got into power, I don’t think so!

Now this government wants to spend another £5bn on a computer system to manage a new ID card system. Granted, David Cameron has indicated, in one the few policy decisions he has announced, that the Conservative party, in government will scrap the ID card system. If however, no matter how unlikely, the Conservative government do not get into power, how certain can we be that the Labour government have learnt the lessons of the past and that this, highly questionable project, would be brought in on budget. A recent report indicated that 82% of IT projects have either come in over budget or are expected to. That is an appalling record and for Gordon Brown, someone who is often held up as one of the best (and toughest) chancellors of all time, a very poor legacy indeed. In fact, in my personal opinion, I believe in years to come, this government and specifically this chancellor will be seen to have done more long term damage to this country than any previous government or chancellor in history and we shall be paying the price for decades to come.

.

 Loading ...

 Loading ...

According to William Hague, the Conservative leader, David Cameron is “ready to be PM”, perhaps someone should enlighten the Conservative party by informing them there is a world of difference between being ready and being capable.

Don’t get me wrong, I do believe that the Labour party will lose then next general elections, but this is simply not the same as the Conservative party winning the election based on merit and a clear mandate. Voters fed up with the lies and spin of the Labour party are desperately looking around for an alternative. The Liberal Democrats still seem intent on increasing taxes whether this is through local taxation or local taxes, probably both. The bottom line is no party can seriously expect to get voted in on a policy of increased taxation, although they will probably be able to rely on the votes of people who don’t contribute to the taxes they are proposing.

So we are left with the Conservative party and yet, apart from a few headlines, it is still difficult to determine what they actually stand for. Their reluctance to make clear their policies and then stand by them implies an uncertainty that does not bode well for a government in waiting. Better to fight for what they truly believe in and campaign on that agenda, than to take the Labour line and wait for the newspapers to tell the government what is best for 60 million people.

The Tories have indicated that they would abolish the discredited ID scheme, abolish stamp duty for first-time buyers and raise inheritance tax. That is the first week taken care of, then what; they have a potential 5 years in government? Try as I might I just cannot see Cameron being a good prime minister. He just doesn’t seem to believe in anything, I believe he is guilty of gesture politics, a cynical and manipulative sideshow. Yes he speaks eloquently, yes he is young and yes I am sure he will become prime minister, but I have yet to see anything that would indicate to me that he will make a good prime minister.

When Hague suggested that David Cameron was one of the best people he had worked with at a senior political level, I was left questioning his judgement, which is a real pity, because I have always admired and liked William Hague. If he has seen something that the rest of us haven’t, then tell us why he is one of the “best people”? I am happy to be corrected, I remember believing that Michael Portillo was of the most pompous, arrogant people I had ever heard, yet my opinion changed completely when I watched him on television after he had left politics. I guess we all get it wrong sometimes.

 Loading ...

 Loading ...