Wednesday 6 May 2015


24 hours to go and both Cleggy and Cameron seem to think they're going to lose. How else can one explain Clegg's claim that no government without the diminished band of Libs can be legitimate and even more amazingly Cameron claiming that if Labour come second in seats taking power with the backing of the SNP would not be a legitimate government.

Balls.Whether the Tories are first or second they will have more difficulties in forming a government than Labour because they've got fewer friends.They might get the Ulster Unionists (that they say would be legitimate however much the have to be given to reverse the settlement) and no doubt the Libs would be keen to carry on their affair however few their numbers and however loudly the Tory bank benchers object but if that doesn't give them some guarantee of the 323 they need to survive a motion of confidence they've had it

Then it's Labour's turn  and if it's numbers are enough with SNP support and possibly Liberals desperate for office with anyone, then they govern and that government is legitimate however loudly the Tories and their press supporters howl and attempt to undermine it. The assumption that only a Tory minority government is legitimate is typical Tory arrogance.The belief that they alone are born to rule. In 1911 Balfour defended the House of Lords on the ground that it had the duty "to ensure that whether in power or in opposition the Tory party shall control the destinies of this empire" Now it's the job of English electors to anyone elected by the Scots.

Put simply: whoever can come to an arrangement to secure 323 votes on confidence and supply is the government. If that's Labour, as it should be then whoever denies its elegantly is treasonous. That may not be Cam. If he can't get a majority he'll be thrown out by a party which has never liked him, but that's not for me to say. 


One issue has not been discussed in this awful election even though it's the basic one and perhaps the only essential issue. Can we rebuild an economy strong enough to support the standard of living ,the quality of life and the public services an advanced educated society has a right to expect, and to pay the nation's way in the world? 

At present the British economy does neither with the result that everything is being cut or taxes will have to be increased, we're having to sell of every available asset from ccompanies to houses to sustain our credit overseas and everyone is in debt up to the hilt to sustain their standard of living.

Yet not a word is said by our leaders about this horrendous problem in case it frightens people  Instead the argue about paying off national debt, balancing the budget neither of which matters because governments have to borrow in recession and should borrow more to stimulate growth and put people back to work. It's daft to take a simplistic moralistic view of government borrowing as if it was the same as household borrowing. It isn't because government borrowing has a multiplier effect. It puts people back to work building houses. It boosts demand. It means there's more money about to stimulate the economy.  Yet all parties cackle on about borrowing as it if was a sin not a virtue and in so doing pledge themselves to depress the economy even more .

What have the parties to offer. The Tories speak of the March of the Makers but industrial production is now falling the pound is too high for exports and productivity is down. Labour will do more borrowing  for investment but shows no realisation that the pound is too high and that too many companies are  foreign owned to serve the national interest. But will either party tell the electorate the truth?

No comments:

Post a Comment