No, but seriously . . .

Well, I've enjoyed my bit of knockabout electioneering fun but now I want to try and take a serious view of the outcome, not so much for your benefit, dear reader, because you will read much wiser summaries in the op-ed columns but because I want to try and clarify my mind on what is, after all, an intensely complicated situation.

First, let me make clear that although I accuse Cameron, Clegg and company of lacking much of a political philosophy, because it is so obviously true, that is not to say that the political "marriage of true minds" in this coalition is therefore wrong and unprincipled.  I am a tory (small 't') by inclination and and thus I do have a healthy suspicion of ideology and I recognise that the world being a confoundedly complex and always surprising place, a good dollop of pragmatism is essential.  Everyone was caught out by the election result and it needed practical men of affairs to set aside some (apparently!) cherished principles in order to cut a deal and get the government of Britain moving.  In that situation we could not have done better than Cameron and Clegg, neither of whom seem likely ever to weep over a lost point of principle!  However, it is at times of peril, not just war and peace but also internal strife and upheaval; times when the practice of laying down a steady course in one direction is impracticable and overthrown by new and hitherto unsuspected 'alarms and excursons' that leaders need a philosophical model to guide their re-actions.  Given the experimental nature of this joint venture, that will be the time when the bonds of the 'union' will be tested to breaking point.

Fortunately the most immediate peril facing us all has been apparent to everyone for the last two years - even if the politicians have been reluctant to speak to us about it - and that is the need to pay down our national debt.  There is no soft option here, it is either massive tax increases, or massive cuts in government spending, or, and most likely, a combination of the two.  It seems to me that a Treasury/Business team of Osborne, Cable and Laws is just about as sound a team as you will find anywhere.  They will need terrific skill in applying the medicine to the right areas and in the right dosage.  Too much or too little could prove highly dangerous to the patient - and to them!

Looking at the cabinet there are three appointments I can cheer to the rafters.  Michael Gove's ideas on reforming the school system, based on the Swedish system, was really the tipping point for me to vote, reluctantly, for the Conservatives.  He has had years to work out his plans and to prepare himself for the vicious backfighting he will get from the teaching unions and the local education authorities.  I am hoping that he and Cameron and Osborne are hand-in-hand on this because one way of dealing with recalcitrant education authorities is simply to disband them, thus saving us money in the long term on salaries and pensions, as well as removing an obvious obstacle and providing an example pour encourager les autres.  To allow and encourage private people and organsisations to start their own schools is, quite simply, a brilliant idea.

Another appointment to which I attach my hopes and prayers is Ian Duncan-Smith at Works & Pensions.  He, too, has spent years looking long and hard at the bloated and corrupt welfare system and must, therefore, be ready to leap into action.  There are some hefty financial savings to be made in that department which should gain him considerable support from the Treasury team.  Of course, the howling from Labour will be deafening so the propaganda tactics need to be thought out well ahead.

Finally, I am glad that Liam Fox retains the Defence portfolio.  He has shadowed it for many years and the armed services need an experienced politician at its head who understands the issues.  A defence review will start almost immediately but the replacement of Trident is a given even if the LibDems prevaricate.  From that firm base, everything to do with our armed services needs to be looked at with ferocious concentration, for example, in this day and age do we really need the RAF to be a seperate service?  It now has no strategic role and only ever acts in support of the army, so why not encompass it within the existing Army Air Corps and lay off all those surplus-to-requirements Air Marshals?  I hope that Fox will stay in post for a long time, unlike the constant chopping and changing at the MoD which took place under Labour and which indicated more than anything else with what contempt they viewed our services.

Of course, there are plenty of down-sides, for example, we will live to regret the LibDem insistence that no new nuclear power stations are to be built and that instead the entire country will be covered in semi-useless (in that they don't work in high or low wind conditions) wind turbines.  This will leave us increasingly under various foreign thumbs.  No doubt some of my more disgruntled readers will have other complaints concerning this shotgun marriage but I honestly do think that it is the best that could be done in the circs.  I admit my doubts concerning changes to the voting system but irrespective of that I hope Cameron presses on with equalising the size of the constituencies and cutting the number of MPs.  And if things do go wrong and the going gets increasingly tough, at least we can all sit back and enjoy the sideshow as we watch the possible disintegration of the Labour party as its three seperate wings go to war - with each other - such fun! 

 

Comments

[dearieme]

Enough of the high politics- it's time for low politics. When should discussion start about Milibean's father having been a Soviet agent? You may answer assuming either (i) that he was, or (ii) that he wasn't.

[David Duff]

Juicy, 'DM', but also very naughty. However, I gather that Dad and Grandad told a few 'porkies' after the war in order to beat the immigration rules so perhaps he would have been better employed at the Home Office!

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3690021.ece

Anyway, thanks for knocking me off my pontificating pedestal.

[dearieme]

How would an Alistair Campbell put it? "David Milibean hasn't denied that his father was a Soviet agent", I suspect. Then he'd point to Milibean's failure to claim a fascination with football and so suggest that there's something foreign - or, worse, posh - about him.

Whereas I, a kinder soul, would just point out that Milibean has been perfectly accepting of all the intrusive Labour policy and practice that - for instance - has made adoption so difficult, and then exploited his privilege as the husband of an American citizen to avoid all that and adopt from the USA.

[David Duff]

Let me get this straight, 'DM', are you suggesting that 'ur wee David is a lying, hypocritical sack of socialism? If so, spit it out, man!

[dearieme]

Well, if you want me to horribly blunt - he's an entirely fitting leader for the Labour Party.

[David Duff]

That's a terrible thing to say about a man - I'm shocked - shocked!

[JK]

So. You guys (and gals) in the UK think you got all the troubles in Politicaldom?

At least ya'll had "viable options." Here in the US, our Great American South usually heads up the list of loonyism when it comes to nullifying one of our only two viable options. Seems such is no longer the case:

http://www.mainegop.com/PlatformMission.aspx

Thanks alot Rush. Thank you very much Ms. Coulter.

[JK]

You know David, after some sleep I took to thinkin' (I know) anyway, I think I once commented on a similar line recently and your answer then was prob'ly a'fittin' fer this un too. You said (more or less):

"I think it's more an anti-incumbency thing..."

And, while the official voting day doesn't arrive for some few days, if'n a feller plans to be outter town (or durn't want to stand in them lines) voting in Arkansas actually came availer'ble on the 4th. I voted on the 5th. And guess what?

On the State and local levels I knew every single incumbent's name, but on the local level admittedly, I had to ask the clerk - is he or she an incumbent?

Don't reckon I actually need you to tax yore mind much a comin' up with a witty.

There is one, small thing though - if yer gonna spell "separate" - use Highwater Hillbilly. "Sep'ert" is much easier.

[JK]

It's early here. Make that, 'On the Federal and the State levels... but on the local levels...'

[David Duff]

I know, 'JK', I'm still struggling with the language - but ah'm tryin', I surely ah'm tryin'!

[JK]

David? I told you the other day I was "confused" about your electoral process. You gently explained, "Welcome to the club" more'r less. Now you know I'm a knowin' you enjoy American readership, 'n yer a knowin' 'bout how I tend to cavort through the Internets. I'm a gonna do fer yer American readership as best I ken by purvidin' a link to a feller you sometimes link to. 'Splained stuff I cudn't git my hear 'round.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YjhjNDI2MTNjZmFmNzhkYmEwMzBmZDg2ODY3N2I2M2U=

[David Duff]

Yes, good man that Mark Steyn, although events have now overtaken the prospect he wrote about.

[JK]

Well, that was 72 hours ago. Were I still in the Navy and asked for a report, I would say "Snafu Sir!"

That phrase being of American Navy origin I suppose it needs exfoliating.

"Situation normal, all fucked up - Sir!"

However flux being flux, the article does kinda clear the glass as to why.

[David Duff]

Indeed, 'JK', and I think 'snafu' is international in the English-speaking world these days - the British army runs on it!