For a neat summation of why New Labour has been such an unmitigated disaster for this country, read Spencer Livermore’s article in today’s Guardian. The man who was Brown’s senior strategy advisor from 1997 to 2008 perfectly encapsulates the Government’s primarily failing; they are, and always have been, focused on gaining and retaining power ahead of driving our country forward.
Livermore’s panacea for the Government’s ills is to “make the case that the Conservatives remain unreformed, that they remain a threat to Britain's families, their future prosperity and their public services.” One would have thought that Downing Street should be focusing on helping homeowners, fighting the surge in serious crime, curbing inflation and addressing the widening poverty gap. But apparently all they need do is “ensure that the issue at the next election is whether the Tories have changed enough to be trusted.”
Unfortunately for Labour, and Mr. Livermore, it is the Government that is perceived to be the threat, and with good reason. They have wasted billions on pet projects, quangos and unreformed public services, funded by a raid on our pensions and pockets, and a level of debt we shall be servicing long after this Government has stopped twitching. Their state-first approach has failed miserably, and no amount of spinning or triangulation can save them.
Wednesday, 17 September 2008
Wednesday, 3 September 2008
Mr 1%
Excuse my lack of optimism in the state of the UK residential property market, but who actually thinks that Gordon Brown's much trailed Stamp Duty “holiday” is going to make the slightest bit of difference?
The message they want us to swallow is that we should all rush out in the next 12 months and buy a house valued at between £125k and £175k, because we will then be the lucky beneficiaries of a 1% discount. Of course, the fact that we could all instead do nothing and pick up a likely 10% discount in a year’s time seems to have passed the Government by. Waiving a 1% tax will not have even the remotest impact on transaction levels when the mortgage market is so prohibitive, and confidence in the economy so low.
One might be tempted to suggest that the Government knows something we don’t, and believes that GDP growth is due to pick up, inflation to fall, and the credit markets to flow once again. But then Darling rather let the cat out of the bag on that one over the weekend…
The message they want us to swallow is that we should all rush out in the next 12 months and buy a house valued at between £125k and £175k, because we will then be the lucky beneficiaries of a 1% discount. Of course, the fact that we could all instead do nothing and pick up a likely 10% discount in a year’s time seems to have passed the Government by. Waiving a 1% tax will not have even the remotest impact on transaction levels when the mortgage market is so prohibitive, and confidence in the economy so low.
One might be tempted to suggest that the Government knows something we don’t, and believes that GDP growth is due to pick up, inflation to fall, and the credit markets to flow once again. But then Darling rather let the cat out of the bag on that one over the weekend…
Tuesday, 2 September 2008
Palin Smacks of Opportunism
A lot has been made in this country, largely in the wake of the Blair era, about the ascendancy of personality in politics. Countless bemoan the overt focus on teeth, hair and which songs are on our politician’s iPods, when what we should really be focusing on are the issues at hand such as Education, the Economy, etc. This, of course, has been brought into sharp relief by the public’s resounding disapproval of Westminster’s number foremost personality black-hole; one G. Brown.
Yet, look across the pond and you will find reassurance that British politics, by contrast, is not as shallow as we first thought. Nowhere in Britain today has a politician been selected almost exclusively on the basis of their background and religious beliefs. Nowhere has anyone been chosen for high office because they went to an average university and achieved a mediocre degree. Nowhere has a politician been plucked from obscurity purely to mirror the personal characteristics of potential swing voters.
All the above, of course, apply to Sarah Palin. McCain’s pick for running-mate has been chosen because she looks and sounds like the blue-collar workers he needs in order to occupy the White House. She has next to no experience, only recently acquired a passport, and, it seems, is embroiled in a number of potential pitfalls (namely Troopergate and the Alaskan Independence Party, to date). Does McCain really think this is a sensible choice for the person who will hold the “Football” should he come to an untimely end? It smacks of cynical opportunism, short-termism and, above all, personality politics.
The last decade of British politics was dominated by one of the most charismatic politicians of recent history. But it was not Blair’s “pretty straight kind of guy” act that one him three elections, but his ability to communicate with the public. The same is equally true for the appeal of Cameron and the floundering of Brown. Britain doesn’t demand personalities, but communicators, which is why everybody should relax a little about the state of politics in this country. Everybody except Gordon, that is.
Yet, look across the pond and you will find reassurance that British politics, by contrast, is not as shallow as we first thought. Nowhere in Britain today has a politician been selected almost exclusively on the basis of their background and religious beliefs. Nowhere has anyone been chosen for high office because they went to an average university and achieved a mediocre degree. Nowhere has a politician been plucked from obscurity purely to mirror the personal characteristics of potential swing voters.
All the above, of course, apply to Sarah Palin. McCain’s pick for running-mate has been chosen because she looks and sounds like the blue-collar workers he needs in order to occupy the White House. She has next to no experience, only recently acquired a passport, and, it seems, is embroiled in a number of potential pitfalls (namely Troopergate and the Alaskan Independence Party, to date). Does McCain really think this is a sensible choice for the person who will hold the “Football” should he come to an untimely end? It smacks of cynical opportunism, short-termism and, above all, personality politics.
The last decade of British politics was dominated by one of the most charismatic politicians of recent history. But it was not Blair’s “pretty straight kind of guy” act that one him three elections, but his ability to communicate with the public. The same is equally true for the appeal of Cameron and the floundering of Brown. Britain doesn’t demand personalities, but communicators, which is why everybody should relax a little about the state of politics in this country. Everybody except Gordon, that is.