I've very carefully tried not to blog during this election campaign. Firstly this is primarily a music blog, and I don't think music and politics mix *that* well [take note U2... leave it to the pros]
Also this is the first election where the televised debates have animated a whole lot more people, this is good and bad [good because it gets people talking, bad 'cos it becomes presidential and less about the candidate representing your borough in parliament] - now I don't want to seem bandwagon jumping. I've been interested in politics long before the ITV debate ;-).
Finally there's 4 people in this band and I in NO-WAY represent the views of all of us [in-fact, I don't think we've discussed what we think] so these are the views of me and not J-Treole in full.
In-short, this is my summary of the parties
Conservative
The years leading up to this, I was shitting myself that smug git David 'call me Dave'Cameron would get into power and I'd experience my first proper Tory government [John Major didn't count as I was too young, and I was living out of the country for Maggie Thatcher].
I disliked their policy on people starting their own schools, money will have to be withdrawn from the state system, and it further segregates people.
I think their £27billion efficiency saving plans is unrealistic. Average public sector wage is £25,000/year. So that's just over 1 million job losses. At a time when unemployment is on the rise this is something we could do without.
They want to cap immigration which is a load of crap IMO [especially when you give no figures]
Cameron is a Eurosceptic, not what we need when IMF will downgrade our economy, making British debt more expensive to insure. Who will we turn to then to borrow money?
Tax breaks for married couples is retrogressive and patronizing for about 20,000 reasons. I means about £3 a week and it costs £12million. How will this be funded please? It also encourages one couple to stay at home [bit of an old Tory ideal there?]
This whole national service at 16 is a load of crap, even if you get Michael Cain to back it. For the many consciences objectors this is movement against free-will, and for the 'obedient' majority [who this is not targeted at] this is tarring everybody with the same brush.
I'd love to see 'The Sun' and all the Murdoch press loose too :-)
Good points - Cameron attempts his Obama angle, digging change. This of curse would be a change from 13 years of Labour [most people my age have grown up with New Labour] Tories are now Centre Right so at least that isolated a whole load of core-vote; who have buggered off to UKIP.
Kenneth Clarke is heavy weight good Tory [even if you hated MT's cabinet] - he knows the numbers.
Bad Points - Both DC and George Osbourne [along with half of their party] are all ex-Etonian Oxford Grads. I think this is a marginal representation of the country. GO is not an experienced chancellor. Some of his MEPs are aligned with far-right European parties, not good. Dc also took a bit of convincing on the section 28 bill [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_28] - c'mon it's 2010!
Lib Dems
Yes, they may only be involved in this discussion because of the TV debates, but perhaps this is the way forward? Maybe this should have happened 5 years ago, and perhaps we'd be moving towards a press-free vote? Maybe we should include Green, Respect, UKIP and BNP [and all the Scotish/Irish/Welsh ones too].
Clegg has caught the Zeitgeist of a lot of disenchanted Labor voters, classic liberals, students, Tory-haters and spanners who knows fuck-all about anything. But as Tesco say - every little helps?
Traditionally the Lib Dem vote has always been laughed at as 'wasted'. Well, perhaps now, in the first election where not only do you vote who you'd like Govern, but you can vote for who you'd like to loose - the Lib Dems actually hold the Key.
One thing against the Lib Dems is their lack of press representation. Murdoch press [especially 'The Sun'] have been ordered not to report on their affairs. More liberal centre right papers [The Times] have given them column inches, and The Independent [although technically not aligned] has reported on them. But does anybody take the Indie seriously? 'The Guardian' has also come out in support for them, shifting from Labour. This is a big deal in centre-left press - however this is a recent development.
They often get branded with a stigma of liberal drug policies, Europhiles, blah blah blah... but with staunch Labour and Tory support waning [I mean traditional Left/Right politics] perhaps Lib Dems are only representation of change?
Good Points - Clegg is obviously charismatic, and not quite as Blair-ite as Cameron. He comes across a genuine. Vince Cable [heralded as perhaps the best Chancellor this country has to offer] famously predicted the financial meltdown and has even won the support of Private Eye editor Ian Hislop.
Their support is impressive for a 'marginal' party - Charles Kennedy, Ming Campbell, Paddy Ashdown, Shirly Williams [of the gang-of-four Labour defectors] all reasonable people with good experience. They also came out of the expenses scandal a lot better than the two older parties.
Bad Points - coming under this level of scrutiny at such a late stage has perhaps made clear some gaps in their budget [un-accounted for something like 75% of their savings and cuts] but this is still a great deal more than the other two parties. Their pro-Euro dreams are perhaps a thorn in their side. Clegg also looks to be back-peddeling on some core liberal issues, like Trident.
Labour
Labor, Labour, Labour. Where to start? I always thought the last chance they had was the coo around Winter last year to try and oust David Milliband. When that failed I knew they'd lost it.
A party whose 'New' Labour alignment died when Tony Balir stepped down. A vision so poorly executed by Gordon Brown it's laughable. I mean, the guy isn't so bad. He knows his numbers, and was a good chancellor.
The guy is tired though. I know we shouldn't be promoting game-playing, but he's not the one for it. He's had it tough, and made too many silly mistakes. Do I trust him? Yes, but I don't think he is the guy to lead us our of recession.
With Labour too, there's a lot of voters they've let down. Traditional socialists were ditched in 1997 and have never been won back. Some white working classes have moved towards BNP, for this I think Labour is to blame. Unionists although grind the organ have been marginalized. Iraq and Afghanistan were a BIG deal to a lot of people [proved by Oona King loosing Bethnal Green and Bow to George Galloway] and I think their line has become more and more diluted.
Good points - Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling are good with the economy, and I think they've proved we need not go the route of Greece. Our credit rating is better and we still have a private sector making us plenty of money. They certainly have a lot of experience too. Mandelson and the likes have been in this game for a long time, and they know how to operate it.
Bad points - with a cabinet full of smug idiots like Ed Balls, Tessa Jowell and formally Stephen Byers - people associate this party with the levels of sleaze Major's 97 government. This they cannot shake off. Labour don't represent anyone really. I think people are really wanting something different.
One thing about all three parties is no-one seems to be clean about VAT rises, where the public sector cuts will come and likely-hood of coalition governments if parliament is indeed hung.
Lib-Lab? This would be a win for Centre Left but I think it would annoy anyone who voted Lib Dem because of Iraq et al. Lib-Con again would annoy people who hate David Cameron and would out-right [no-pun-intended] never vote Tory.
Only way out is a super cabinet, like a dream team...
No comments:
Post a Comment