Friday, October 17, 2008

Change of tone.

Must admit that I'm relieved that David Cameron has launched into Gordon Brown's contribution to the financial turbulence that's swirling around our heads. In general, I believe that opposition parties should oppose. Its the British way of testing the strength of Government policy. Sometimes the threat to our country is such that normal British politics is suspended, as we all support efforts by the Government to deal with it. Most obvious is war. Recently, my party decided that the threat represented by the recent financial crisis justified supporting the Government in its efforts to stem the flow of blood. Today, David Cameron decided it was time to change tone, to point out to the British people that Gordon Brown carries a heavy responsibility for the problems we face. That he is the fireman, striving to put out the fire which he helped start. That he is the captain striving to keep the ship afloat, after he forgot to maintain its seaworthiness.

Every interview I've seen involving a Government Minister, the dominant 'spin' is that the crisis is wholly outside the Government's control. I've been surprised by how this bait has been so comprehensively swallowed by commentators and interviewers. I don't think they have been doing their job. Perhaps this is the inevitable consequence of an opposition suspending its traditional role. Perhaps its not the media's fault. Perhaps the media needs an opposition to create the environment for effective challenge to the Government. Whatever, I'm pleased that this artificial position is over. It was a relief to watch Justine Greening demolish Government Minister, Ian Pearson on Newsnight tonight. Pity we had to put up with the cringe-worthy Nick Clegg criticising David Cameron. I distinctly recall him saying there would come a time when opposition had to return to the causes of the crisis. Perhaps he was just miffed that Vince Cable has been a bit slow realising its time to return to 'holding the Government to account'. Just watch him change his tune tomorrow.

I've no idea whether today's speech, and today's different tone will be electorally beneficial. What matters is that its right.

4 comments:

Sandra Bach (Trallwng) said...

Glyn, do I sense a air of disappointment in the tone of your blog postings of late, about how your Party is doing?

Come on, you can confess to me :-)

Glyn Davies said...

Sandra Bach - Couldn't be further from the truth. You will not have noted any hubris in this blog about Conservatives winning the next election. I reckon David Cameron is playing a difficult hand very well at the moment. Must admit that I thought Browm would be gone by Xmas, and his successor would try to ride the bounce at an election next May/June or even earlier. It now looks as if Brown will stay, and wait until 2010. I also believe that his failings as Chancellor, and the dreadful consequences for the people of Britain will become more apparent within a few months, possibly weeks.

I do have a confession to make about my prospects in Montgomeryshire though. When I was selected I thought my winning was a very long shot. As I watch the Liberal Democrats at a national level almost unanimously turn against Montgomeryshire's current MP, I believe my chances to be much improved. People will ask what the point is of electing someone with no influence, even in his own party.

sandra bach (trallwng) said...

But Glyn your chances have not improved - that is the point. Personal votes in General Elections account for no more that 3% of votes cast. The brutal truth is, popular tides of personal support do not apply in a General Election - good people like you are left to ravages of your party's fortunes.
The brutal truth is, your party's fortunes are waining and your chances of winning have decreased considerably in recent weeks.
Sad, but true.

Glyn Davies said...

Sandra bach - thanks for your encouragement!. Whatever, I'll just carry on doing my best. Personally, I think that the 'local' factors are rather more significant than 3%. But even if they are not, I reckon that the 'revised swing' of 8.3% (rather than the 11.4% I need) at a national level is entirely possible.