Poor Gordon. Today was his big relaunch but what does the main evening BBC news bulletin lead with? Mervyn King's warning that the road ahead - on economic growth, inflation and house prices - is going to be rocky. Mervyn is right, of course.
« Boris Johnson resumes his Telegraph column | Main | Liam Fox is leader of the Right within shadow cabinet »
The comments to this entry are closed.
You almost sound pleased.
Posted by: Oberon Houston | May 14, 2008 at 20:45
That was his relaunch?!
Posted by: Tom FD | May 14, 2008 at 20:45
Where are we launching him to?
Posted by: SG | May 14, 2008 at 21:26
I agree, I think the 'nice decade' is indeed over and Britain up to its eyes in debt is in a poor position to deal with it. I'm quite worried, George Osborne, quite effective when attacking Labour,has been far less convincing when revealing Tory policy or lack of it. I'm hoping that George is keeping schtum for tactical reasons and not because he has as few ideas on how to deal with our economic plight as Darling and Brown.
Posted by: Malcolm Dunn | May 14, 2008 at 21:39
"You almost sound pleased."
For any Conservative, it is a good thing if the lesson is driven home that prosperity is not handed to us on a plate, but has to be worked at.
Posted by: Sean Fear | May 14, 2008 at 22:01
Sean, I'm very pleased to see that a decade of 'political lying' (as Perer Oborne would correctly put it) is dying, but let's not be accused of dancing while rome burns (bit OTT, but you know what I mean). I've been claiming Brown was an economic disaster for years now, but I'm still sensitive that people (possibly righteous) but indifferent to politics, don't give a sh1t for us or Labour.
Posted by: Oberon Houston | May 14, 2008 at 22:17
We have to start worrying about how much of this hornets nest economy is going to be inherited by a Conservative government. It may well be that there is little room for manoeuvre in the early days. This being the case George Osborne has to start looking at whether we can afford such an expensive state sector. The prospect of high-levels of inflation and public sector workers demanding pay inceases to keep pace with rising prices is very worrying. Currently I believe Mervyn King is on the right track in being cautious about rate-cuts. The more emphasis we put on maintaining price stability today the fewer problems we will have to face tomorrow.
Posted by: Tony Makara | May 14, 2008 at 22:30
Oberon, you 'fiddle' while Rome burns, rather than dance.
As in play the violin.
Posted by: comstock | May 14, 2008 at 22:32
"You almost sound pleased."
All conservatives should be glad that this is happening despite what it may mean for any of us individually, its good for the country. I only fear that it wont be bad enough. We need a severe economic downturn. Only that will shake theses liberal bourgeois bohemians out of their complacency. They are being sheltered by their affluence from the effects of the sadistic left-wing social policies they vote for. I only hope they experience some of the misery they've imposed on those less fortunate than themselves.
Posted by: Chris Wyremski | May 14, 2008 at 22:51
So the Nasty party is coming back?
Posted by: Captain Spock | May 14, 2008 at 22:57
Clearly this is not a good thing; but it DOES nevertheless confirm what Cons have been saying for years, i.e. 'Prudence Brown' is the least accurate nickname since Robin's companion Little John.
Moreover, Brown's political clumsiness is once again made clear by this indecently hasty relaunch. Fast enough to 'get in' pre-Crewe, yet still only days after the local elections... no wonder he's had to steal Con policies, he could barely have had time to draft his own.
Let this wholesale policy-theft be a satisfactory answer to the more zealous posters on this site who keep demanding to hear more policies... they'll just be nicked and lose all electoral impact.
Posted by: StevenAdams | May 14, 2008 at 23:32
'Sharing the proceeds of growth' was a slogan for the pollyannish world we are kissing goodbye to. And how are the 'proceeds of recession' to be shared.
Somehow I dont think MPs allowances and the bloated public sector reinforced with Cameron green taxes will be affected
Posted by: anthony scholefield | May 14, 2008 at 23:48
Making the BoE "independent" and then giving it responsibility for inflation will one day be seen for the error it is. You can’t steer the economy with a single lever.
Posted by: Saltmaker | May 14, 2008 at 23:50
"I'm hoping that George is keeping schtum for tactical reasons and not because he has as few ideas on how to deal with our economic plight as Darling and Brown."
I quite agree. It is slightly worrying that so far the Tories haven't put forward any economic policies.
Posted by: Andrew S | May 15, 2008 at 00:59
"I quite agree. It is slightly worrying that so far the Tories haven't put forward any economic policies"
After Gordon nicked so many other Conservative policies today, it sounds like good political sense.
There is a real sense that this government is tired and its run out of ideas, its lurching from one crisis management exercise to another at the moment. Seriously we have a situation where the Labour backbenchers are directing economic policy because Brown and Darling have lost control. You don't take the shovels out of their hands and start filling in the economic black hole they have dug themselves, especially when they are shooting all the foxes that skewered previous Conservative opposition economic policy in the last 10 years.
Posted by: ChrisD | May 15, 2008 at 01:09
Nero fiddled, but I can't play, so dancing is the only 'indifferent' option (reading or going to the gym doesn'y quite cut it). No it was a rather provocative statement, and rather unfair, but we do need to remember that political gain is only relevant to those who are in the bubble. Those outside want options.
Posted by: Oberon Houston | May 15, 2008 at 06:23
It's sickening to see the glee in this post. You are happy to wish a recession on the country just to get into power.
Let's see how the Labour government handles any recession in comparison with the last one in 1991. You may remember interest rates at 15%, repossessions the highest we've ever had, and massive negative equity. The unprecented ten years of excellent growth couldn't last forever - global variations prevent it. The educational comparison will be between us and other countries in the EU.
Posted by: passing leftie | May 15, 2008 at 10:39
@passing leftie
We are quite possibly about to enter an extremely difficult economic time and the Labour goverment and supporters are about to reap what they have sown. However, sadly so is everyone else, including those who do not want, and have never wanted, a Labour government.
So can you really blame us for seeing and being pleased with the one silver lining to this cloud - that we shall hopefully see a Conservative government in power again.
Posted by: SophieW | May 15, 2008 at 11:15
Passing leftie, your "EU educational comparison". Yes indeed, just look at the problems in Spain, Itlay and the ROI as a result of Euro membership.
Incidentally weren't the issues people hammer/praise Brown over,i.e. gold sales, independence of the Bank of England and pension tax treatment were all agreed consensus policies at European Finance Ministers level associated with the launch of the Euro, rather than Brown initiatives? The only policy that Brown have took any initiative himself was blocking our Euro membership. Right policy but sadly probably driven by his fight with Blair rather than principle or understanding of economics?
Posted by: Mark Edinburgh | May 15, 2008 at 12:22
@Captain Spock
The Nasty Party has been in power for the past 11 years - not sure what you mean by "coming back" :)
Posted by: John Wilkin | May 15, 2008 at 12:43
In answer to Chris Wyremski's question: The nasty party never left in the first place!
"The left" no longer exists in an ideological sense in Britain. Formerly marxist politicians have now totally accepted an american inspired neo liberal programme, as have the entire media establishment (yes, including the now toothless and boring Guardian), and the population at large. It is not uncommon to hear people talking about themselves belonging to "markets" in today's Britain.
The conservatives, the party that used to take pride in combatting ideology, have now become the only ideological party. Their ideology is one of "free markets", a burning faith in the need to dismantle the British state, mixed, paradoxically with a nationalist statist approach to security and control of the individual:
So while on the one hand they could put forward a radical but coherent argument to "liberate" the poor from state dependency, their incoherent "big brother" "let us erradicate dirty elements from society" side, as a throwback to England's puritan past, makes the conservatives look like they merely wish to use the state to punish the poor. Hence the "nasty party" tag.
While their radical side makes them enthusiastic cheerleaders for globalisation, their reactionary side turns instinctive mistrust of continental europe into opposition to globalisation's driving force and most sophisticated product: the EU. Start a debate about the EU and watch a conservative writhe as their arguments shift between the radical and reactionary sides of their mind in a herculean feat of mental gymnastics.
But above all the ideological "faith" of todays conservatives is difficult for those of us who are either "floating voters" or lib/lab voters to stomach. Leave aside that this ideology is not coherent, it forces conservatives to set out completely unrealisable utopian targets- such as dismantling the state, erradicating crime and leaving the EU- essencially proposing to abolish most of the social structures created by "left" and "right" wing governments since industrialisation, leaving Britain with a neo-medieval social order- and to actually have the fervent intention to dedicate the nation's resources to achieving these impossible targets. This is the danger of utopia.
This ideological "faith" has in the past made political parties unelectable in Britain- look at Trotskyite labour in the 1980s- and it has taken "the Cameron factor" to soften some of the edges in order to once again make the Tories electable. But will the inept Brown be able to exploit the conflictual inner workings of Boris Johnson's ideological mind (not to mention his "carte blanche" unknown political programme for London) to prevent formerly ideology-immune Britain embarking on an interesting experiment between reality and fiction in 2 years time? And what role will the media play?
Posted by: James G | May 15, 2008 at 13:08
The Thieving, nasty, corrupt, snout-in-trough, cash-for-policy, cash-for-planning party is on the way out.
Fortunately for the Tories, but not for the country, Trousers is not going to give up until the last moment possible in the hope that political luck will play his way.
The political realities are that his endless creation and funding of a client voter class, in massive expansion of the state and para statal entities are completely unaffordable.
He cannot raise taxes to get more cash in, and the regulation of industry means that it is actually cheaper to produce cars in France than here, so industry is contracting.
The only ray of light is that the back benchers will get so fed up with him implementing Conservative policy, and his polls disappearing towards single figures that the will use a vote of confidence to get him out, to contain their losses before they get worse.
I think the result of C&N is going to be very critical for him
Posted by: Bexie | May 15, 2008 at 13:23
Posted by: Mark Edinburgh | May 15, 2008 at 12:22:
Incidentally weren't the issues people hammer/praise Brown over,i.e. gold sales, independence of the Bank of England and pension tax treatment were all agreed consensus policies at European Finance Ministers level associated with the launch of the Euro, rather than Brown initiatives? The only policy that Brown have took any initiative himself was blocking our Euro membership. Right policy but sadly probably driven by his fight with Blair rather than principle or understanding of economics?
My example was nothing to do with EU membership, merely to suggest a way of measuring the relative success of the UK economy. If we do better the EU zone average in a time of economic crisis, that will demonstrate the government's strengths, if not, their weakness. It's hardly surprising that you'd manage to bring it around to EU membership though. However, in response:
No, I think Brown didn't want to join the EU because he didn't think it was a good idea, economically. I've no idea if that was the right decision or not.
I think he decided to make the Bank of England indpendent for a lot of reasons unrelated to EU membership. I have no doubt he raised it with his fellow EU finance ministers.
Posted by: passing leftie | May 15, 2008 at 13:35
No, I think Brown didn't want to join the EU because he didn't... Should be "join the Euro" - perhaps a Freudian slip?
Posted by: passing leftie | May 15, 2008 at 13:49
Bank of England independence was a requirement of euro Membership, and had to be in place in advance. It was without question a factor in the decision. And indeed this was the main reason the Conservatives opposed it at the time - they believed it was a preliminary to euro membership.
John Redwood opposed for slightly different reasons. He believed that it was impossible to have an independent central bank in a democracy.
I opposed (and persuaded a few MPs - e.g. Bercow - to agree with me) on a different basis, which I set out at the time in the European Journal. I have always been an opponent of independent central banks because (a) they do not do what they "say on the tin" - that is to say, they do not secure lower inflation with less sacrifice in output or employment; (b) they undermine the coordination of monetary policy, and tend naturally to be associated with large public expenditure; (c) they place central banking behind the theoretical curve, because new monetary policy concepts are often politically contentious and thus impossible for independent central banks to assume until seen in the data.
Posted by: Andrew Lilico | May 15, 2008 at 17:35
We think Bank of England governor Mervyn King has got it wrong; the NICE decade is just beginning, at least for all-electric cars . Even in the midst of a credit crunch, NICE car owners are laughing. No congestion charge, no road tax, parking concessions and 2p per mile motoring. It doesn't get much nicer than that.
Evert Geurtsen, co-founder, NICE Car Company
Posted by: Evert Geurtsen | May 15, 2008 at 21:29