The Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, we are told, considers himself a political strategist. Why then announce a cut to universal child benefit at your own party conference, which will bear most heavily on the income group which provides your party's core support yet will only come into effect some three years into the future?
The first assumption I make is that Osborne believes that the Coalition will (note; not 'can' but 'will') survive the full five years in power. Interestingly Parliament will almost certainly at some stage need to have its powers further neutered if such is to be guaranteed. A General Election in May 2013, a probable date in my earlier calculations of likliehoods would now appear totally out of the question coming one month after the money is actually cut at the start of the financial year.
A rational and consistent approach to reducing universality by cutting heating allowances and free bus passes for the over 65s would have been consistent and logical, dispelling the impression that there is some form of political process in play.
The greatest mystery arise from the deferment of the cut to 2013. Surely any unpopular move such as this is best brought in as far from the next election as possible, therefore as soon as possible. As austerity and the huge government borrowings of one pound in every four being spent today is the ostensible reason then logically the cut should be effective at the latest at the start of the next tax year or lumped in with any other necessary fiscal changes coming from the spending cuts to be announced later this month.
There is no discernible logic behind the change or the timing of its announcement.
What I believe we have seen is a drawing of the line at a level of income where a future combined political party will look for support at the next general election when the coalition will plan to run only joint candidates. Cameron and Osborne will thus have achieved that of which Blair could only dream in his long gone Labour Party Conference speech, the destruction of Conservatism.
Cameron and Osborne are now betting that their Tory supportes are too dense to perceive this reality, a calculation in which they are probably correct.
This post will also appear on the blog Teetering Tories.
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Saturday, July 10, 2010
Cameron/Clegg and the EU
There is an interesting, if rather flatteringly effusive review of the Coalition Government two months from its formation by Peter Oborne in the Daily Mail this morning which is linked here.
Absent from this review is the area most crucial to the future of Britain, namely the crisis within the EU and its common currency.
I commented in depth on Ironies Too this morning, link here, on the Telegraph's schizophrenia over the EU. Unhappily the Mail itself seems to prefer to join the Coalition co-leaders themselves in ignoring this most important of all issues for the country they now govern.
Could the EU crisis, the main difference that divides the two parties which form the coalition, perhaps not be used both to resolve the crisis within the EU itself, but also perhaps prevent an early destruction of the coalition concept by disaffected MPs from both parties on the Government's backbenches?
Britain has a driving interest in maintaining a prosperous Continent of Europe freely trading in a partnership that above all values the wealth brought by its diversities of backgrounds, languages and cultures.
A joint party political coalition committee, meeting in public and drawn from leading Conservative MP Eurosceptics and MP Liberal Democrat EU enthusiasts, charged to suggest means of resolving the single currency crisis and future for the pound for presentation to the Cabinet, may well aid the Coalition in resolving how it might in future proceed on this thorny issue and even perhaps prevent the EU crisis becoming the reason for its own demise.
Somewhere, some politicians in the EU should be solely concerned with this issue. It is not a matter for resolution by either Germany and France battling out their disagreements, nor by a dark manipulation by the EU Commission and the ECB working in tandem.
Absent from this review is the area most crucial to the future of Britain, namely the crisis within the EU and its common currency.
I commented in depth on Ironies Too this morning, link here, on the Telegraph's schizophrenia over the EU. Unhappily the Mail itself seems to prefer to join the Coalition co-leaders themselves in ignoring this most important of all issues for the country they now govern.
Could the EU crisis, the main difference that divides the two parties which form the coalition, perhaps not be used both to resolve the crisis within the EU itself, but also perhaps prevent an early destruction of the coalition concept by disaffected MPs from both parties on the Government's backbenches?
Britain has a driving interest in maintaining a prosperous Continent of Europe freely trading in a partnership that above all values the wealth brought by its diversities of backgrounds, languages and cultures.
A joint party political coalition committee, meeting in public and drawn from leading Conservative MP Eurosceptics and MP Liberal Democrat EU enthusiasts, charged to suggest means of resolving the single currency crisis and future for the pound for presentation to the Cabinet, may well aid the Coalition in resolving how it might in future proceed on this thorny issue and even perhaps prevent the EU crisis becoming the reason for its own demise.
Somewhere, some politicians in the EU should be solely concerned with this issue. It is not a matter for resolution by either Germany and France battling out their disagreements, nor by a dark manipulation by the EU Commission and the ECB working in tandem.
Monday, June 14, 2010
Countering the EU grab for the City of London
Federalist thinking on the takeover by the EU of the City of London may be read in detail from this link to a PDF Document issued by The Federal Trust last March.
The frightening detail of the exact proposals whereby National Financial Regulators will be over ruled by EU technocrats are detailed in the appendix which is reproduced below:
Financial regulation: Britain’s next European challenge?
APPENDIX
EUROPEAN FINANCIAL REGULATION:
THE PROPOSED INSTITUTIONS
The European Systemic Risk Council (ESRC) will monitor andassess potential threats to financial stability that arise from macroeconomic developments and from developments within the financial system as a whole (“macro-prudential supervision.”) The creation of the
ESRC is designed to limit the vulnerability of the European financial system to interconnected, sectoral and cross-sectoral systemic risks.
The members of the ESRC will be the President of the ECB, national central bank governors, the chairmen of the European Supervisory Authorities and a representative of the Commission. Each central bank governor will be accompanied by one senior representative of the national supervisory authorities as observer. Decisions of the ESRC will be taken by a simple majority. The de Larosière report recommends that the chairperson of the ESRC should be the ECB President. A small steering committee will prepare and administer ESRC meetings. The ECB will provide the Secretariat to the ESRC, as well as analytical, administrative and logistic support.
The ESRC will issue warnings and recommendations, whether of a general nature or to individual Member States, with a specified timeline for the relevant policy response. These warnings and/or recommendations will be channelled through the ECOFIN Council and/or the new European Supervisory Authorities. The ESRC will also be responsible for monitoring compliance with its recommendations, based on reports from the addressees.
The ESRC will not have any legally binding powers. However, the ESRC may be expected to exert major influence on the addressees of warnings/recommendations through the high quality of its analysis. The ESRC will decide in each case whether a recommendation should be kept
confidential.
The European System of Financial Supervisors (ESFS) will consist of three new European Supervisory Authorities, i.e., a European Banking Authority (EBA), a European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA), and a European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA.) These new European Supervisory Authorities will take on all the missions of the current Committees of Supervisors, but in addition exercise increased responsibilities, defined legal powers and greater authority. They will also contribute to the development of a single set of harmonised rules, improve the supervision of cross-border institutions by developing common supervisory requirements and approaches and help settle possible disputes between nationalsupervisors.
The focal point for day to day supervision will remain at the national level, with national supervisors remaining responsible for the supervision of individual entities, for example with respect to capital adequacy. This reflects the contemporary reality that the financial means for rescuing financial institutions remains at the Member State level and with nationaltax payers, as the current crisis has demonstrated. The chairpersons and secretary generals of the European Supervisory Authorities are expected to be full-time independent professionals. The chairpersons will be nominated after an open competition. The appointments will be confirmed by the European Parliament and will be valid for five years.
The European Supervisory Authorities’ decisions on technical rules will be taken, through the board structure, by qualified majority based on the Treaty weighting for Member States. The European Supervisory Authorities will be accountable to the Council, the European Parliament and the European Commission.
The main tasks of the Authorities will be the following:
1. To ensure a single set of harmonised rules throughout the Union, by developing binding technical standards in specific areas and on the basis of criteria which will be specified in Community legislation; and drawing up interpretative guidelines.
2. To ensure the consistent application of EU rules.
3. To ensure a common supervisory culture and consistent supervisory
practice.
4. To exercise full supervisory powers for some specific entities, such as
credit rating agencies and EU central counterparty clearing houses.
5. To ensure a co-ordinated response in crisis situations.
6. To collect micro-prudential information.
7. To undertake an international role on behalf of the European Union.
8. To ensure that decisions taken under the above mechanisms do not directly impinge on the fiscal responsibilities of the Member States
(Emphasis added by blog editor!)
++++
Cameron and Clegg will therefore soon have to decide whether or not they will vote against the takeover of the City of London by the EU, given that the body of the linked document makes clear the EU will be prepared under 'enhanced cooperation' to proceed against a UK NO vote, as described in the body of the report on page 18 as follows:
If Mr. Cameron did decide to please his party, already uneasy at his refusal to hold a referendum on the now-ratified Lisbon Treaty, by refusing to endorse the institutional proposals of Mr. de Larosière, the consequences could be dramatic. The political momentum behind the proposals is such that the great majority of Member States favourable to institutional reform would almost certainly be prepared to vote down the United Kingdom in the Council on this issue. Nor can it be excluded that France and Germany in particular, whose co-ordination of policy on these matters was reaffirmed at the recent France-German Summit, might be willing to use the Lisbon Treaty’s provisions for ‘enhanced cooperation’ in order to set up the desired new institutional structure. This would be both a destabilizing setback for the Conservative Party at the beginning of its period in office, and damaging to the position of the City of London, where substantial continental European representation has come over recent years to be a constituent feature of the City’s functioning. It is difficult to believe that British self-isolation from central European financial regulatory bodies would be compatible in the long term with a continuing major European presence in the City.
The frightening detail of the exact proposals whereby National Financial Regulators will be over ruled by EU technocrats are detailed in the appendix which is reproduced below:
Financial regulation: Britain’s next European challenge?
APPENDIX
EUROPEAN FINANCIAL REGULATION:
THE PROPOSED INSTITUTIONS
The European Systemic Risk Council (ESRC) will monitor andassess potential threats to financial stability that arise from macroeconomic developments and from developments within the financial system as a whole (“macro-prudential supervision.”) The creation of the
ESRC is designed to limit the vulnerability of the European financial system to interconnected, sectoral and cross-sectoral systemic risks.
The members of the ESRC will be the President of the ECB, national central bank governors, the chairmen of the European Supervisory Authorities and a representative of the Commission. Each central bank governor will be accompanied by one senior representative of the national supervisory authorities as observer. Decisions of the ESRC will be taken by a simple majority. The de Larosière report recommends that the chairperson of the ESRC should be the ECB President. A small steering committee will prepare and administer ESRC meetings. The ECB will provide the Secretariat to the ESRC, as well as analytical, administrative and logistic support.
The ESRC will issue warnings and recommendations, whether of a general nature or to individual Member States, with a specified timeline for the relevant policy response. These warnings and/or recommendations will be channelled through the ECOFIN Council and/or the new European Supervisory Authorities. The ESRC will also be responsible for monitoring compliance with its recommendations, based on reports from the addressees.
The ESRC will not have any legally binding powers. However, the ESRC may be expected to exert major influence on the addressees of warnings/recommendations through the high quality of its analysis. The ESRC will decide in each case whether a recommendation should be kept
confidential.
The European System of Financial Supervisors (ESFS) will consist of three new European Supervisory Authorities, i.e., a European Banking Authority (EBA), a European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA), and a European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA.) These new European Supervisory Authorities will take on all the missions of the current Committees of Supervisors, but in addition exercise increased responsibilities, defined legal powers and greater authority. They will also contribute to the development of a single set of harmonised rules, improve the supervision of cross-border institutions by developing common supervisory requirements and approaches and help settle possible disputes between nationalsupervisors.
The focal point for day to day supervision will remain at the national level, with national supervisors remaining responsible for the supervision of individual entities, for example with respect to capital adequacy. This reflects the contemporary reality that the financial means for rescuing financial institutions remains at the Member State level and with nationaltax payers, as the current crisis has demonstrated. The chairpersons and secretary generals of the European Supervisory Authorities are expected to be full-time independent professionals. The chairpersons will be nominated after an open competition. The appointments will be confirmed by the European Parliament and will be valid for five years.
The European Supervisory Authorities’ decisions on technical rules will be taken, through the board structure, by qualified majority based on the Treaty weighting for Member States. The European Supervisory Authorities will be accountable to the Council, the European Parliament and the European Commission.
The main tasks of the Authorities will be the following:
1. To ensure a single set of harmonised rules throughout the Union, by developing binding technical standards in specific areas and on the basis of criteria which will be specified in Community legislation; and drawing up interpretative guidelines.
2. To ensure the consistent application of EU rules.
3. To ensure a common supervisory culture and consistent supervisory
practice.
4. To exercise full supervisory powers for some specific entities, such as
credit rating agencies and EU central counterparty clearing houses.
5. To ensure a co-ordinated response in crisis situations.
6. To collect micro-prudential information.
7. To undertake an international role on behalf of the European Union.
8. To ensure that decisions taken under the above mechanisms do not directly impinge on the fiscal responsibilities of the Member States
(Emphasis added by blog editor!)
++++
Cameron and Clegg will therefore soon have to decide whether or not they will vote against the takeover of the City of London by the EU, given that the body of the linked document makes clear the EU will be prepared under 'enhanced cooperation' to proceed against a UK NO vote, as described in the body of the report on page 18 as follows:
If Mr. Cameron did decide to please his party, already uneasy at his refusal to hold a referendum on the now-ratified Lisbon Treaty, by refusing to endorse the institutional proposals of Mr. de Larosière, the consequences could be dramatic. The political momentum behind the proposals is such that the great majority of Member States favourable to institutional reform would almost certainly be prepared to vote down the United Kingdom in the Council on this issue. Nor can it be excluded that France and Germany in particular, whose co-ordination of policy on these matters was reaffirmed at the recent France-German Summit, might be willing to use the Lisbon Treaty’s provisions for ‘enhanced cooperation’ in order to set up the desired new institutional structure. This would be both a destabilizing setback for the Conservative Party at the beginning of its period in office, and damaging to the position of the City of London, where substantial continental European representation has come over recent years to be a constituent feature of the City’s functioning. It is difficult to believe that British self-isolation from central European financial regulatory bodies would be compatible in the long term with a continuing major European presence in the City.
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
Independent's Hamish Mcrae wrong again!
The article defending civil service salaries is here. My response, which the new comment facility of that newspaper refuses to accept, would have been posted as follows:
I regret that with the present debt crisis this attitude is unsustainable. The deficit and near bankrupt condition of the nation with the State failing at almost every interface with the general public and a grossly overstaffed civil service those at its head should necessarily be the first to bear the brunt of the earliest cuts.
To carry the country along with all the other austerity to come, the pensions of the retired mandarins and ex-MPs would ideally be single out to receive the first and deepest cuts. Unhappily this will of course never occur, thus the nation will be condemned to continuing and ever growing impoverishment.
I regret that with the present debt crisis this attitude is unsustainable. The deficit and near bankrupt condition of the nation with the State failing at almost every interface with the general public and a grossly overstaffed civil service those at its head should necessarily be the first to bear the brunt of the earliest cuts.
To carry the country along with all the other austerity to come, the pensions of the retired mandarins and ex-MPs would ideally be single out to receive the first and deepest cuts. Unhappily this will of course never occur, thus the nation will be condemned to continuing and ever growing impoverishment.
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Re-instate David Laws NOW!
A remarkable article in the Daily Mail today, here, reveals the disgusting travel scam run by Danny 'boy' Alexander and his wife at the cost to taxpayers of thirteen thousand pounds.
Meantime in The Independent, linked here, it is reported that David Laws, who appears to have been the most sensitive towards public expenses of all MPs who have hit the headlines in the expenses scandal, is quite typically and understandably considering quitting politics.
Cameron and Clegg, Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister titularly should now show some leadership! Cajole Mr Laws, by whatever means to return to his post and re-summon Parliament today to make an emergency announcement pledging their full backing for Mr Laws in his awesome task of cutting the national deficit and DEBT.
Danny Alexander will not do!
Meantime in The Independent, linked here, it is reported that David Laws, who appears to have been the most sensitive towards public expenses of all MPs who have hit the headlines in the expenses scandal, is quite typically and understandably considering quitting politics.
Cameron and Clegg, Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister titularly should now show some leadership! Cajole Mr Laws, by whatever means to return to his post and re-summon Parliament today to make an emergency announcement pledging their full backing for Mr Laws in his awesome task of cutting the national deficit and DEBT.
Danny Alexander will not do!
Listing the fat cats set to be shaved.
If the new politics is to mean anything an essential first step was made this morning with the release of some of the details of the pay of those in the Civil Sevice which over recent years has permitted the nation to be brought to its knees.
We anxiously await news of where the axe will fall and trust it will descend most heavily on the index-linked pensions of the retired mandarins presently luxuriating on the spoils of their ill-gotten gains!
We anxiously await news of where the axe will fall and trust it will descend most heavily on the index-linked pensions of the retired mandarins presently luxuriating on the spoils of their ill-gotten gains!
Sunday, May 30, 2010
Laws resignation and EU crisis bode ill for Coalition Government
The resignation of Chief Secretary to the Treasury, David Laws, read here, and his replacement by the obviously inadequate Danny Alexander, as reported by the Daily Mail, read here, will surely remove the rock upon which the Concordat between Cameron and Clegg was based. Reviewing the available talent from both parties for the most important portfolio in the present crisis following the departure of Mr Laws, only one candidate immediately came to mind and that was John Redwood. If a senior post was needed to balance matters within the coalition then moving Philip Hammond to the position he had shadowed might have made some sense allowing Clegg's buddy, Danny to takeover at Transport, where with spending constraints the order of the day, the margin for error could not be so potentially and disastrously costly!
The ongoing silence from the Coalition on the growing crisis within the EU, commented upon in my posting of yesterday on Ironies Too regarding the seventieth anniversary Dunkirk evacuation commemorations, linked here, is even more ominous for Britain.
The ongoing silence from the Coalition on the growing crisis within the EU, commented upon in my posting of yesterday on Ironies Too regarding the seventieth anniversary Dunkirk evacuation commemorations, linked here, is even more ominous for Britain.
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
A Parliamentary programme for Ostriches
The Queen's appearance in Parliament yesterday not only looked like pantomime, but revealed a speech worthy only of farce.
Albeit recognizing the prime necessity of eradicating the structural deficit it otherwise avoided the horrifying real debt levels and relied on wishful thinking rather than real actions to salvage the nation's finances.
Take a pie chart showing UK expenditure, include contributions to the EU (if factual figures can be found) black out this amount and all the other areas the Coalition Government is committed to exempt from cuts and you will be left with a sector so tiny it will leave the structural deficit virtually unscathed.
The EU is the first urgent area where giant savings can immediately be made.... the NHS is next!
Albeit recognizing the prime necessity of eradicating the structural deficit it otherwise avoided the horrifying real debt levels and relied on wishful thinking rather than real actions to salvage the nation's finances.
Take a pie chart showing UK expenditure, include contributions to the EU (if factual figures can be found) black out this amount and all the other areas the Coalition Government is committed to exempt from cuts and you will be left with a sector so tiny it will leave the structural deficit virtually unscathed.
The EU is the first urgent area where giant savings can immediately be made.... the NHS is next!
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Full Coalition Agreement
The document is available on a pdf file linked from here.
The crucial issue is of course the EU, particularly in view of the duplicity and deviousness of both the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister over the referendum and ratification of the Lisbon Treaty AND the moves already underway to extend economic governance across the entire EU based upon the German model.
I reproduce the section of the document covering Europe herewith:
13. EUROPE
The Government believes that Britain should play a leading role in an enlarged European Union, but that no further powers should be transferred to Brussels without a referendum. This approach strikes the right balance between constructive engagement with the EU to deal with the issues that affect us all, and protecting our national sovereignty.
•
We will ensure that the British Government is a positive participant in the European Union, playing a strong and positive role with our partners, with the goal of ensuring that all the nations of Europe are equipped to face the challenges of the 21st century: global competitiveness, global warming and global poverty.
•
We will ensure that there is no further transfer of sovereignty or powers over the course of the next Parliament. We will examine the balance of the EU’s existing competences and will, in particular, work to limit the application of the Working Time Directive in the United Kingdom.
•
We will amend the 1972 European Communities Act so that any proposed future treaty that transferred areas of power, or competences, would be subject to a referendum on that treaty – a ‘referendum lock’. We will amend the 1972 European Communities Act so that the use of any passerelle would require primary legislation.
•
We will examine the case for a United Kingdom Sovereignty Bill to make it clear that ultimate authority remains with Parliament.
•
We will ensure that Britain does not join or prepare to join the Euro in this Parliament.
•
We will strongly defend the UK’s national interests in the forthcoming EU budget negotiations and agree that the EU budget should only focus on those areas where the EU can add value.
•
We will press for the European Parliament to have only one seat, in Brussels.
•
We will approach forthcoming legislation in the area of criminal justice on a case-by-case basis, with a view to maximising our country’s security, protecting Britain’s civil liberties and preserving the integrity of our criminal justice system. Britain will not participate in the establishment of any European Public Prosecutor.
•
We support the further enlargement of the EU
The crucial issue is of course the EU, particularly in view of the duplicity and deviousness of both the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister over the referendum and ratification of the Lisbon Treaty AND the moves already underway to extend economic governance across the entire EU based upon the German model.
I reproduce the section of the document covering Europe herewith:
13. EUROPE
The Government believes that Britain should play a leading role in an enlarged European Union, but that no further powers should be transferred to Brussels without a referendum. This approach strikes the right balance between constructive engagement with the EU to deal with the issues that affect us all, and protecting our national sovereignty.
•
We will ensure that the British Government is a positive participant in the European Union, playing a strong and positive role with our partners, with the goal of ensuring that all the nations of Europe are equipped to face the challenges of the 21st century: global competitiveness, global warming and global poverty.
•
We will ensure that there is no further transfer of sovereignty or powers over the course of the next Parliament. We will examine the balance of the EU’s existing competences and will, in particular, work to limit the application of the Working Time Directive in the United Kingdom.
•
We will amend the 1972 European Communities Act so that any proposed future treaty that transferred areas of power, or competences, would be subject to a referendum on that treaty – a ‘referendum lock’. We will amend the 1972 European Communities Act so that the use of any passerelle would require primary legislation.
•
We will examine the case for a United Kingdom Sovereignty Bill to make it clear that ultimate authority remains with Parliament.
•
We will ensure that Britain does not join or prepare to join the Euro in this Parliament.
•
We will strongly defend the UK’s national interests in the forthcoming EU budget negotiations and agree that the EU budget should only focus on those areas where the EU can add value.
•
We will press for the European Parliament to have only one seat, in Brussels.
•
We will approach forthcoming legislation in the area of criminal justice on a case-by-case basis, with a view to maximising our country’s security, protecting Britain’s civil liberties and preserving the integrity of our criminal justice system. Britain will not participate in the establishment of any European Public Prosecutor.
•
We support the further enlargement of the EU
Coalition's anti-democratic leanings again displayed in attack on 1922Committee
The Daily Mail carries one report on this worrying further trend by Cameron to bulldoze his party in a direction which appears to be what many would view as the opposite of Conservatism.
The earlier concern was of course the stated wish to require a no-confidence Commons vote to in future require a 55% majority and fix the Coalition's own lifetime to an arbitrary five years!
None of this of course should come as any surprise to readers of my blog Teetering Tories which chronicled the manner in which Cameron's supporters rigged the party leadership election and regularly followed the small group and their cavortations around the party leader.
Given that the loss of the election by Cameron can fairly and squarely be laid at the door of this arrogant man, how long will rank and file Conservative MPs be prepared to allow this situation to continue.
Unfolding details of the Coalition's plans are linked here; a separate post will be added to this blog with a link to the full document and comment when it is available.
The earlier concern was of course the stated wish to require a no-confidence Commons vote to in future require a 55% majority and fix the Coalition's own lifetime to an arbitrary five years!
None of this of course should come as any surprise to readers of my blog Teetering Tories which chronicled the manner in which Cameron's supporters rigged the party leadership election and regularly followed the small group and their cavortations around the party leader.
Given that the loss of the election by Cameron can fairly and squarely be laid at the door of this arrogant man, how long will rank and file Conservative MPs be prepared to allow this situation to continue.
Unfolding details of the Coalition's plans are linked here; a separate post will be added to this blog with a link to the full document and comment when it is available.
Saturday, May 15, 2010
PR and the Alternative Vote
The above video appears in this explanation of the Alternative Vote system which appeared in the blog of the New York Times, linked here.
Cameron's sudden dash to Scotland and the reported concessions he has made to that already over-coddled portion of the UK and the abandonment of tried and tested Conservative principles by the Cameron Faux Tory Party during the campaign is beginning to dash earlier expectations that the Coalition Government will best solve the deficit problems and deserve some longevity by holding the centre ground.
How can other smaller parties that have previously also suffered under the First Past the Post voting system now maximize their votes assuming a shift to the Alternative Vote system and the now almost certain ongoing disgust across the country with all three of the established main parties.
Thursday, May 13, 2010
Understanding the philosophy of the Coalition.
He who holds the purse strings will now set the priorities. My observations of the Cameron/Osborne partnership, (as detailed on my blog, Teetering Tories, over many years since the days when the new Works and Pensions Cabinet Member, Iain Duncan-Smith led the Conservative Party) lead me to conclude that, other than the burning desire to be in power, the Cameron Conservative party is an almost completely ideologically free zone.
At the Treasury, therefore, where the new Chancellor of the Exchequer will be probably anyway distracted by juggling the financial figures in the Herculean task of "accelerating the rate at which the deficit will be reduced" his new Chief Secretary to the Treasury, David Laws, will thus be free to impose the Departmental spending contraints directed in accordance with his own background and priorities all as carefully described in "The Orange Book: Reclaiming Liberalism". This book was reviewed in Liberator September 2004 edition (pdf file linked here). Required reading for all senior Civil Servants and political commentators I would suggest.
In so far as the Downing Street Duo are concerned, I find it fascinating that if David Cameron, has any guiding political principle at all it is that he seems almost obsessive in his protection for the inefficient, administratively rotten and creaking Marxist inspired National Health Service while Nick Clegg is reportedly on the record as agreeing with my view that the elevation of the NHS to the level of something akin to a religion across the UK is more than a little odd. One interesting quote from the new Deputy Prime Minister comes from a Telegraph article written dated 20th January 2008, linked here, from which comes this:
Decisions should no longer be taken in Whitehall, shrouded in secrecy. Instead, directly elected local Health Boards would put people in charge. Via the ballot box, communities could choose to focus resources where they're needed - based on their own understanding of local needs. They could choose to have the council commissioning services, too, if they preferred. In time, I envisage us going further and raising some of our NHS money locally.
Details of the referenced book as detailed on Wikipedia are as follows:
At the Treasury, therefore, where the new Chancellor of the Exchequer will be probably anyway distracted by juggling the financial figures in the Herculean task of "accelerating the rate at which the deficit will be reduced" his new Chief Secretary to the Treasury, David Laws, will thus be free to impose the Departmental spending contraints directed in accordance with his own background and priorities all as carefully described in "The Orange Book: Reclaiming Liberalism". This book was reviewed in Liberator September 2004 edition (pdf file linked here). Required reading for all senior Civil Servants and political commentators I would suggest.
In so far as the Downing Street Duo are concerned, I find it fascinating that if David Cameron, has any guiding political principle at all it is that he seems almost obsessive in his protection for the inefficient, administratively rotten and creaking Marxist inspired National Health Service while Nick Clegg is reportedly on the record as agreeing with my view that the elevation of the NHS to the level of something akin to a religion across the UK is more than a little odd. One interesting quote from the new Deputy Prime Minister comes from a Telegraph article written dated 20th January 2008, linked here, from which comes this:
Decisions should no longer be taken in Whitehall, shrouded in secrecy. Instead, directly elected local Health Boards would put people in charge. Via the ballot box, communities could choose to focus resources where they're needed - based on their own understanding of local needs. They could choose to have the council commissioning services, too, if they preferred. In time, I envisage us going further and raising some of our NHS money locally.
Details of the referenced book as detailed on Wikipedia are as follows:
| The Orange Book: Reclaiming Liberalism | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Author | Paul Marshall and David Laws (editors) |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Language | English |
| Subject(s) | Politics, Liberalism |
| Publisher | Profile Books |
| Publication date | 2004 |
| Media type | Print (paperback) |
| Pages | 302 |
| ISBN | 1-86197-797-2 |
| OCLC Number | 59265240 |
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
And so it begins!
The Coalition Agreement is linked from here.
This blog offers the new Coalition Government Good Luck and Strong Following Winds!
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Clegg and his party show their worth
Well, well well!
My blog Ironies and Ironies Too has proof enough of the true natures of Cabinet members, past and present of the New Labour Governments.
To witness Nick Clegg and his LibDem colleagues being sucked into their disgusting and depraved fantasy world is so depressing it just further deepens my despair for my Country!
Perhaps this blog must be abandoned, if so let it stand as a statement of that which might have been were there the slightest scrap of decency or common sense remaining in our political class!
My blog Ironies and Ironies Too has proof enough of the true natures of Cabinet members, past and present of the New Labour Governments.
To witness Nick Clegg and his LibDem colleagues being sucked into their disgusting and depraved fantasy world is so depressing it just further deepens my despair for my Country!
Perhaps this blog must be abandoned, if so let it stand as a statement of that which might have been were there the slightest scrap of decency or common sense remaining in our political class!
Monday, May 10, 2010
Birth complications!
If a live birth remains possible some more experienced midwives would seem to be required. The insane package of measures agreed over the weekend to try to spare the euro currency, read here, may distract the financial markets for a while but the threat to sterling remains very real.
Losses sustained during a short but sustained speculative attack could take months or even years to reverse. Clegg and Cameron must TODAY privately agree on the main issues, announce the fact of their electoral pact, request Brown's resignation, send Cameron to the Queen then retire to Downing Street to form a crisis cabinet to secure the economy.
Among the members of such an economic team I believe the following are essential (in alphabetical order):
Vince Cable, Kenneth Clarke, David Laws, Oliver Letwin, George Osborne and John Redwood
Stop boiling water and send for the forceps!
Losses sustained during a short but sustained speculative attack could take months or even years to reverse. Clegg and Cameron must TODAY privately agree on the main issues, announce the fact of their electoral pact, request Brown's resignation, send Cameron to the Queen then retire to Downing Street to form a crisis cabinet to secure the economy.
Among the members of such an economic team I believe the following are essential (in alphabetical order):
Vince Cable, Kenneth Clarke, David Laws, Oliver Letwin, George Osborne and John Redwood
Stop boiling water and send for the forceps!
Sunday, May 9, 2010
Watch this space!
65 years this weekend since Victory in Europe Day.
Time to pension off the Post-War consensus?
Britain lies leaderless, broken, divided and penniless. Bound inside an EU where democracy is as absent as corruption is rife. Eurogroup EU Council leaders meet this afternoon to take the first steps towards non-democratic totalitarianism in support of a common currency that otherwise cannot survive. A new approach to the EU is required from Britain so it cannot now remain as a stumbling block to a CamCleggalition!
Conservative and Liberal Democrats will meet at 11 oclock am to try to forge an agreement that will forestall the hurricane due to hit sterling when world financial markets open for business tomorrow.
Can Cameron and Clegg forge a Concordat that will permit Dr Cable and Kenneth Clarke (the only team likely to salvage the nation's economy) to begin the work of imposing the age of austerity now required? How long can the stupidity of your typical Westminster MP allow such a Concordat to survive? Can it even be constructed?
Watch this blog as events unfold!
Time to pension off the Post-War consensus?
Britain lies leaderless, broken, divided and penniless. Bound inside an EU where democracy is as absent as corruption is rife. Eurogroup EU Council leaders meet this afternoon to take the first steps towards non-democratic totalitarianism in support of a common currency that otherwise cannot survive. A new approach to the EU is required from Britain so it cannot now remain as a stumbling block to a CamCleggalition!
Conservative and Liberal Democrats will meet at 11 oclock am to try to forge an agreement that will forestall the hurricane due to hit sterling when world financial markets open for business tomorrow.
Can Cameron and Clegg forge a Concordat that will permit Dr Cable and Kenneth Clarke (the only team likely to salvage the nation's economy) to begin the work of imposing the age of austerity now required? How long can the stupidity of your typical Westminster MP allow such a Concordat to survive? Can it even be constructed?
Watch this blog as events unfold!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)