Replacing Cameron

Sooooo if David Cameron is engulfed by the Murdocalypse and forced to quit (which is unlikely but I think a regular cabinet minister would have already quit by now) who is likely to replace him? The way I see it, the race would be very different to the last few contests because of the coalition. 

In a purely Conservative government William Hague and Liam Fox would be best placed, but it would be difficult for the Liberal Democrats to remain in a coalition headed by either man, because they are seen as too right wing. On the other hand Cameron loyalists like Osbourne will be tainted if Cameron had been forced out in controversy.


So the likely successor has to be seen as being- not too conservative, not tainted by Cameron and not responsible for any major screw ups in government.

Whilst that leaves some decent candidates- David Davis, Phil Hammond- I have a horrible feeling that this means the most likely next PM is either Ken Clarke or Theresa May.

Think Of The Children

No I am Pornacus.

Actually I'm not and want to keep the site work safe for now but I approve of the idea.

The government's proposal to ban porn from ISPs is probably the worst idea they've come up with yet. Whilst I can appreciate why they want to keep pornography out of the reach of schoolchildren- after all teaching kids about felching in sex education classes is much less fun when the element of surprise is lost it is a very slippery slope to be on. If the government can ban ISPs from delivering porn it isn't much of a stretch to suppose that they will soon be banning other stuff.

Moreover it isn't just bad because of what it may lead to, but bad in itself- like most adults on the internet, including I am 100% sure the minister behind this idea, ED Vaizey- I sometimes look at websites that might be classified as pornographic (and cruel to penguins but that's an issue for the RSPB). I don't want to have to write to a government agency to ask for permission to continue my viewing habits. There is zero evidence that pornography is harmful despite numerous attempts to find such a link.

The presence of Ed Vaizey at the heart of this is interesting, he was for a long time one on of the Conservatives' self proclaimed social liberals. He probably still is. Yet it is clear that he doesn't have socially liberal principles from his actions here, instead socially liberal is a euphemism for socially fashionable- a means for ingratiating themselves with younger urban voters rather than a principled stand.

Joined Up Government

Two of today's headlines which were juxtaposed on google news earlier today:

No more nanny state on health: Andrew Lansley

And also this:

Minister to set minimum prices in war on cheap drinks and force tobacco firms to sell cigarettes in plain packets

The minister in question is Andrew Lansley.

It's for your own good..

Worst Answer Ever?

Student politicians aren't easy to like and this one certainly isn't doing himself any favours:

It wasn't until a cheeky grenade was lobbed in that there was the night's only shocking incident. Candidates were asked "Which politician do you most relate to and respect... in Northern Ireland?"

Given that he was speaking in a room of Thatcherite right-wingers, Ben Howlett's attempt at getting the Fenian vote look spectacularly inappropriate. He cited Gerry Adams as "a conviction politician". Some were left speechless that Howlett, who had used a photo opportunity just 48 hours previously with Lady Thatcher to promote his campaign, endorsed the man who chaired the IRA Army Council that sanctioned the assassination attempt on her at the 1984 Conservative Party Conference in Brighton that left senior Tories dead and disabled for life.

Oh well there's a future political career down the drain.

We're Scum- Vote For Us.

Hey it turns out that the secret to electoral success isn't trashing your own supporters, your own legacy and pandering to people who will never vote for you.

Who knew?

The Conservative Party in the UK never did learn that lesson, during 13 years of opposition they kept electing leaders who apologised for being Tories and agreed with all the premises of the Labour Party (the terrible 1980s*, aren't Tories evil racist homophobes etc) before having to abrupt U-Turns before the general election and appeal to the core vote on immigration and crime after having already implied that doing that is reactionary and nasty.

* Historically Labour have been quite good at retroactively painting periods of Tory rule as being oppressive, impoverished and shameful even when the figures and contemporary feelings showed the opposite was true. Not many people seem to realise that the 1950s were a an era of growth and prosperity or that in the 1930s the Baldwin government largely avoided the extreme economic decline that hit the USA and continental Europe.

The Big Society

I have almost no idea what it is or whether it is a good thing, so if you do know what it's about do let me know.

'Craven, Complacent, Conceited & Catastrophic'

The coalition's commitment to reducing prison numbers has been presented as being something surprising and out of character for a Tory dominated government. However this is only because people make the mistake of believing what the Tory's say rather than traditionally do (with the notable exception of Michael Howard). Stephen Pollard reminds Telegraph readers of one of Margaret Thatcher's Home Secretaries:

One only needs to turn the clock back a few years to the tenure as home secretary of one of the most craven, complacent, conceited and catastrophic public figures of recent years: Douglas Hurd. As home secretary he presided over record crime increases, allowing more criminals to roam the streets than any of his predecessors and ruling out any notion of reducing crime. Lord Hurd's philosophy was Conservative penal tradition at its worst: that the purpose of policy was to stem the increase in crime. The thought of reducing it was laughed out of court.

No liberal penal idea was too much; any idea of punishment didn't bear contemplation. As home secretary, from 1985 to October 1989, Lord Hurd set out to reduce the prison population. The consequence was a rapid increase in crime. In 1985 there were 46,800 prisoners, rising to 50,000 in 1988 as judges responded to the consequent crime wave. But rather than back the judges, he cut the prison population so that it fell to 45,600 soon after he left. Police-recorded crime increased from 3.6 million in 1985 to 4.5 million in 1990. Yet even today he still bangs the drum for reducing prison numbers as chairman of the Prison Reform Trust.

When Labour claimed that a Tory government would take us back to the 1980s I was delighted, unfortunately the one aspect of the Thatcher government that the coalition seem to want to emulate is their strategy on crime, where the brilliant idea of not locking up convicted criminals led to a surge in offending.

Ken Clarke attributes the fall in crime from the early 1990s to his success as Chancellor rather than Howard's tenure as Home Secretary. However it is noticeable that the recent recession saw a drastic fall in the homicide rate to its lowest point for almost 20 years so it isn't really clear cut that economic growth reduces crime.

Stay Classy

The last parliament was collectively disgraced because of how various members exploited their position for personal advantage. Thankfully a new intake of MPs ensures that this is a thing of the past.

Louise Bagshawe, Tory MP, A-list candidate and 'chick-lit' author sets the tone for the new parliament:

For the MPs gathered in the Commons to debate the possibly rather dry subject of the Energy Bill, it was an unexpected interruption.

One minute Louise Bagshawe, a newly-elected Tory and 'Cameron cutie', was discussing solar batteries.

The next she was happily plugging her new novel Passion, written as part of her other career as a successful author of 'chick-lit' fiction.

The 39-year-old mother of three told MPs to buy her book, which, she reminded them, had just won a literary award for romantic fiction.

Oh well.

A Senior Moment

When newspapers refer to a "Senior Liberal Democrat" who is concerned at the direction of the coalition, wouldn't it be more convincing if it were someone anybody had heard of. I think the Guardian knows that the person in question isn't that senior as they don't mention his name until the 2nd paragraph.

Reflecting some unease in the ranks, Richard Grayson, vice-chair of the Lib Dems' federal policy committee, also appeared to suggest.....

This is one of the perils of going into government with the Tories for the Lib Dems, any disgruntled figure is elevated in the press to the status of senior figure. They'll have Lib Dem "Grandees" next.

Of course it is true that there are real elements in the party who are hostile to the coalition. Charles Kennedy for instance.

Centrism Is Overrated.

As anyone who has read this blog for a while will know, I am not averse to the argument that it is often necessary to nominate moderate candidates who can win rather than more ideologically rigourous candidates. However arguing for centrist candidates by using the example of a centrist candidate who has very recently had an extremely disappointing election result shows a certain lack of interest in the real world. David Frum criticises the US Tea Party movement by invoking David Cameron:

David Cameron's Conservatism responds to local British conditions. It's not an export product. But there is at least one big lesson that Americans could learn from him when the Tea Party finally ends: yes, a party must champion the values of the voters it already has. But it must also speak to the voters it still needs to win

Why would Republicans want to learn how to blow a 20%+ poll lead? Whilst speaking to the voters concerns is one thing, surrendering the ideological argument to them is foolish. It is one thing to appeal to moderates, it is quite another to throw mud at your base in order to suck up to people who will never vote for you.

In Australia recently, the Liberal Party (the main centre-right party) deposed its moderate and media friendly leader, Malcolm Turnbull, last year and replaced him with the "extremist" and less compromising Tony Abbott. The result hasn't been what the pundits had predicted, as the Liberals have rebounded strongly in the polls.

This doesn't mean that it always right to select less centrist candidates but that it isn't always a mistake.

Alcohol Puritans

Any hopes that this government might be less puritanical than the last one seems unfounded:

Officials are looking at changing the wording on licence applications so that pubs and clubs wanting to extend their hours will have to prove after-hours drinking offers a tangible "benefit" to the local community.

If they didn't provide a tangible benefit then presumably people wouldn't be willing to spend money in return for goods and services from them. This is just a way of empowering busybodies to shut down pubs, if certain establishments have a problems with alcohol related violence then deal with them individually.

Even The Butler Was Poor

There was once a pupil at Eton who had to write a short story about being poor, the opening lines of the essay were something like, "They were a poor family, the father was poor, the mother was poor, even the butler was poor.....". It's probably apocryphal but I suspect Mark Field MP would concur with the sentiment:

Many people who buy a second home outside the capital as an addition to a small London base do so not because they are enormously wealthy but precisely because they are not.

It is virtually impossible even for many of those earning multiples of the average national wage to trade up the property ladder in the capital. For those with growing families, the only option is often to buy a [second] house with garden outside London

Via Mark Wadsworth.

This Might Not End Well

Whilst I understand fully why a deal with the Liberal Democrats was necessary, and there are many areas where the party is the most impressive of the main ones, and I also understand that it is important to keep the Liberal Democratic left on board- is it really necessary to appoint complete lunatics to the cabinet?

I am referring to the appointment of Norman Baker as a minister for Transport. This is someone who wrote a book dedicated to proving that Dr David Kelly was murdered and has strongly implied that Robin Cook was also murdered by the British state.

I'm no fan of the last government, but these sort of wild accusations are not the work of a mind that should be entrusted with great responsibility.

I For One Welcome Our New Liberal Democratic Overlords

Least worst alternative I guess.

Quote Of The Day

Many of those on the right won't be voting Conservative because they think that Cameron is a sell out and a liberal in Tory clothing. Let Polly Toynbee reassure you otherwise:

A Financial Times survey of Tory candidates this week pointed to the scale of climate change denial in the party. Most resist a cap on bankers' bonuses and want less financial regulation: many come from the financial sector, others from PR and marketing, and they want the 50p top tax scrapped. Conservativehome.com finds them rabidly Eurosceptic. All that is radical, a fundamentalist return to Conservative roots. No change there, then.

Doesn't that reassure you doubters?

Alastair Darling Is Right- Sign Of The End Times?

He certainly seems more right than either the Obama administration or George Osborne:

“It is always difficult to say ex ante that you would never intervene to save a particular sort of bank,” he said. “In Lehman, for example, there wasn’t a single retail deposit, but the then American administration allowed it to go down and that brought the rest of the system down on the back of it.

“You could end up dividing institutions and making them separate legal entities but that isn’t the point. The point is the connectivity between them in relation to their financial transactions.

“Equally, the large-small thing doesn’t run. Northern Rock was very small in global terms but systemically it was quite important when it got into trouble.”

Breaking up banks into smaller entities isn't going to prevent one bank collapse destabilising the rest. If small banks were the solution to economic stability then the Great Depression with it's unit banking laws and a separation of commercial and investment banking ought to have been a golden age, which as the term "Great Depression" it really was not.

Can We Sack Him Now?

Isn't it time for Alan Duncan to be sacked now? Alright maybe wait until after the election just to maximise his disappointment.

In a series of highly controversial remarks, Mr Duncan reportedly told a prisons conference:

• It is ‘repulsively simplistic’ to say that prison works.
• ‘Lock ’em up’ is ‘Key Stage 1 politics’.
• Prisoners should be ‘met at the gate’ on release from jail.

It isn't so much that I think he's wrong, although he is, it is the fact that he goes around in private not only sucking up to extreme left wing figures like Frances Crook and feels the need not only to express his policy disagreement with his party but to denounce those who disagree with him as being mentally subnormal (Key Stage 1 politics) or morally bankrupt (repulsively simplistic).

Naturally his criticisms, as reported at least, don't actually contain any actual arguments about what the likely effects of prison policy will be, but are primarily about ingratiaitng himself with the people who despise the voters who actually vote for him. This also applies to his numerous appearances on panel shows.

Coming Soon To A Newspaper Near You.

Conservatism in action:

"As you know, as part of our economic action plan, one of the things we’ve of course done is to step up government advertising. One of the purposes of that has been to support media outlets during the recession that have been particularly hard-hit."

The government in question is the Canadian Tory government. I doubt that our Tories will be much better after the election.

First They Came For The Idiots....

.... and I did not speak out because I was not an idiot.

Meet The New Boss.

According to Political Betting the Tory lead with ICM is bigger than Labour's at this stage prior to the 1997 election. Hooray we will soon be able to kick out the authoritarian, nepotistic Labour government with an ,authoritarian nepotistic Conservative government.

It's moments like this that make me just happy to be alive at this hour.