Sep
07
The battleground of British politics is changing.
As the economic news continues to get worse, and the Government has to borrow
ever more gigantic sums, the central issue for the electorate is no longer:
which party can best protect public services? It is: how can the size of the
state be reduced?
Or as some of my favourite bloggers have put
it, it's no longer a matter of right and left but a matter of libertarian or
authoritarian government. However, the Telegraph's concern seems to be more
about the cost of a huge state apparatus rather than whether it's good or bad in
principle.
it, it's no longer a matter of right and left but a matter of libertarian or
authoritarian government. However, the Telegraph's concern seems to be more
about the cost of a huge state apparatus rather than whether it's good or bad in
principle.
That has become a key matter of debate for many
reasons. The effects of the credit crunch mean that individuals and families
are increasingly concerned about their ability to pay their household bills,
never mind their ever-increasing taxes. The colossal sums that Labour has
spent on public services have failed to generate the kinds of improvements
that were expected. And Labour's failure to set aside money when times were
good in order to fund Government spending when times are bad means that, if
nothing is done to cut back on the size of the state, Government borrowing
will soon escalate to unsustainable levels.Gordon Brown insisted, as Chancellor, that his
watch-word was “prudence”, and that he would never spend more than the state's
income from tax-receipts generated. His actions have been revealed to be at
variance with his words. We are all paying the price of his
imprudence.
Well, yes, all true. But really it's just
having a dig at the inefficiencies of the state rather than the iniquities that
naturally come with it. The financial cost is certainly a relevant part of the
debate but let's not ignore forget the state's nasty authoritarian streak, the
we-know-better-than-you Nannyism and particularly IngSoc's NuLabGov's Orwellian
streak.
having a dig at the inefficiencies of the state rather than the iniquities that
naturally come with it. The financial cost is certainly a relevant part of the
debate but let's not ignore forget the state's nasty authoritarian streak, the
we-know-better-than-you Nannyism and particularly IngSoc's NuLabGov's Orwellian
streak.
But is there a glimpse of light at the end of the
tunnel?
tunnel?
In [the financial] context, David Cameron's
insistence, in his interview with The Sunday Telegraph, that – should the
Conservatives win the next election – “the state will be taking a lower share
of the national income in taxes”, is extremely significant. It demonstrates
his commitment, which at some points had seemed in doubt, to diminish the size
of the state and to cut the burden of taxation.Mr Cameron has signalled his intention to cut
state spending and taxes. His reluctance to tie himself to definite numbers,
or to a definite date when he will start wielding the axe, will disappoint
those who hope to see a return of the ideology of the “minimal state” that
played such a prominent role in the aspirations of the Conservative party
during the Thatcher years.Mr Cameron clearly understands the importance of
having an effective, credible plan for reducing the size of the state. He also
realises that the state cannot be reduced overnight: the struggle, not just to
diminish the annual growth of state spending but actually to reduce it, will
be every bit as protracted and difficult as it was when Margaret Thatcher
attempted it in the 1980s (and she managed only to reduce the rate of increase
in state spending).
Look, it's all very well saying Cameron saying
this and it's good to hear it, but does he really mean it?
this and it's good to hear it, but does he really mean it?
The guy tried to ditch the Tories' nasty party
reputation by jumping on the eco-bandwagon (drawn by huskies of course) and
making noises about keeping Labour's spending plans if elected, and now he seems
to think that Gordon has been pissing money up the wall and that the state is
costing way to much money.
reputation by jumping on the eco-bandwagon (drawn by huskies of course) and
making noises about keeping Labour's spending plans if elected, and now he seems
to think that Gordon has been pissing money up the wall and that the state is
costing way to much money.
Well, it is of course, but has Dave experienced a
Damascene conversion or has he just found a new bandwagon to jump on? I'd like
to give him the benefit of the doubt and think this is genuine, or at least
evidence that he's falling back on natural Tory instincts (which isn't
necessarily good news, but you have to wonder if this is just his latest fad.
Damascene conversion or has he just found a new bandwagon to jump on? I'd like
to give him the benefit of the doubt and think this is genuine, or at least
evidence that he's falling back on natural Tory instincts (which isn't
necessarily good news, but you have to wonder if this is just his latest fad.
I'm sure he and his advisors look at what's written
in the press and blogosphere and maybe they're sensing a mood of anger at the
cost of the state, the waste involved and the
abuse of the powers it's granted itself under NuLabGov. The fact that he's
only talking about the cost of the state just adds to my scepticism.
in the press and blogosphere and maybe they're sensing a mood of anger at the
cost of the state, the waste involved and the
abuse of the powers it's granted itself under NuLabGov. The fact that he's
only talking about the cost of the state just adds to my scepticism.
The Tories are paternalists, full stop.
There is not a Libertarian bone in their anatomy. Are they genuinely
concerned about the big state or do they just want injustice and government
interference in the lives of all citizens to be more cost efficient?
There is not a Libertarian bone in their anatomy. Are they genuinely
concerned about the big state or do they just want injustice and government
interference in the lives of all citizens to be more cost efficient?
No-one seems to have
figured it out yet, or if they have they choose to ignore it, but it is clear
that the Tories and Cameron are pro-EU, and given that virtually all the
legislation under which we now suffer comes ultimately from Brussels,
it is hard to see Cameron even contemplating repealing any of it, they helped to
vote it in after all.
figured it out yet, or if they have they choose to ignore it, but it is clear
that the Tories and Cameron are pro-EU, and given that virtually all the
legislation under which we now suffer comes ultimately from Brussels,
it is hard to see Cameron even contemplating repealing any of it, they helped to
vote it in after all.
No, what Cameron is
upto, newly armed with his 'Nudge' manual, is to suggest to you that by simply
reducing state spending and letting you have some of it back in minor tax cuts,
everything will be OK under their stewardship.
upto, newly armed with his 'Nudge' manual, is to suggest to you that by simply
reducing state spending and letting you have some of it back in minor tax cuts,
everything will be OK under their stewardship.
But it wont, what
will really happen is that the Tories will revert to type, having been guided
and funded by the business moguls, they will keep and enhance that authoritarian
streak so inherent within their bones, and farm out all the revenue making
enterprises to big business as payback.
will really happen is that the Tories will revert to type, having been guided
and funded by the business moguls, they will keep and enhance that authoritarian
streak so inherent within their bones, and farm out all the revenue making
enterprises to big business as payback.
We only need to look
at 3rd level policing, snooping by local councils and using children to spy on
us to understand that it is already predominately Tory councils that
are abusing the anti terror legislation in this way. Giving them the
reins in central government will only make it worse, much
worse.
at 3rd level policing, snooping by local councils and using children to spy on
us to understand that it is already predominately Tory councils that
are abusing the anti terror legislation in this way. Giving them the
reins in central government will only make it worse, much
worse.
There is only one
party that has promised to repeal this authoritarian legislation, the
Libertarian Party. Cameron won't, but we will.
party that has promised to repeal this authoritarian legislation, the
Libertarian Party. Cameron won't, but we will.
hat tip The
Angry Exile
Angry Exile
