There is no questioning the Conservative Party’s commitment to the NHS.
The government will not take on the vested interests of the healthcare industry, nurses and doctors unions etc. The NHS has no incentive to keep costs down at the moment. The NHS’s current one size fits all approach is dehumanising, wasteful and rather misses the point-surely even the most trenchant statist can see that?
Surely they can see that an increase of £59billion over the past 12 years hasn’t been worth it?
Healthcare should be managed and funded locally or co-operatively. Which was the advice that Nurses for Reform gave David Cameron when he went to visit them a few days ago. The NHS was very good at dealing with the health problems that exist in a poor country. Its brilliant at things like vaccinations and good maternity care, giving out false teeth and the like. We need a new model to deal with today’s challenges, to deal with age related illnesses and degenerative conditions; something which Cameron himself will be passionate about considering the impact the close relationship he has had with the NHS alongside his son Ivan over the last few years - as well as deal problems like stress, obesity and back-pain which will be important in the near future. The NHS certainly does need to become more customer focused. They should respect their patents more. why does the state have to own all hospitals from the centre?
There has been progress made on that front over the last twelve years, with the Labour party realising that creating market based structures, and decentralisation were key to improving the health service with foundation trusts being passed through despite opposition causing problems in it’s implementation, and weak will from ministers with one eye on the next election. Alan Milburn, at least has got the right ideas.
“In outlining the government’s ideas for genuinely independent
‘Foundation Hospitals’, Milburn continued:
The middle ground between state-run public and
shareholder-led private structures is where there has been
growing interest in recent years. Both the Right – through
organisations like the Institute of Directors – and the Left –
through the Co-operative Movement – have been examining
the case for new forms of organisation such as mutuals or
public interest companies . . . ”
The NHS is crying out for reform as it is, nevermind letting it rot in the future. We can either trust a party that promised to ringfence the NHS budget in order to protect the service where there has been calls for cuts while it goes through a period of change to allow it to stand strong in the future, or we can place our faith in a party so focussed on winning the next election they resort to smearing their opponents, and deny the NHS must change.Cameron said that we as the Conservative party, are one of the NHS, and we should all be encouraged to see him consulting a variety of opinions, it’s vital that the next PM has a cogent plan for the NHS. Something which a tired and intellectually bankrupt Labour Party don’t have.
Who will be the next Leader of the Labour Party?
Personally I think that Gordon Brown will probably lead Labour into the General Election. However, looking ahead, if he loses, (which he almost certainly will) then convention, internal party opinion and the lure of the international speaking circuit/World Bank will see he quits not long after.
So who will be the next leader of the Labour Party?
*The next leader will have to rebuild the party as a “credible left-wing force”, thereby seeing off the challenge of the LibDems from the right, the Greens from the left and the BNP in their heartlands.
*They will have to fix the party’s finances and stop it haemorrhaging members.
*They will have to keep Labour’s foot in the door of local government and the EU Parliament.
*Keep the unions and socialist societies sweet, whilst courting the media.
In short its a near impossible task and one which I think the potential candidates really aren’t up for.
Potential leaders:
Harriet Harman: Married to a union leader (unionists hold a third of the votes in the electoral college). Powerful within the party-has backbench support. Popular with some activists. Broadly centrist in terms of Labour politics. Unfortunately she is also a poor leader, unpopular amongst the wider electorate, not much of a debater, an intellectual lightweight, nearly sixty etc. Still stands a fair chance of winning though.
Alan Johnson: Very popular within the party. Moderate, likeable, charming, good life story, some have described him as “cool”. However, he has little intellectual calibre and would be made mince meat of by the likes of Cameron, Clegg, Lucas and Griffin. It is hard to see how he would bring new direction to the party or make it stand out (he to is also quite old, by today’s standards-59). As the leader of the Communication Worker’s Union, he was the most pro New-Labour and management unionist there was. This isn’t going to cut much ice with the neo-Trotskists like Bob Crow, who now dominate British unionism.
Jack Straw: Well known amongst the electorate, has some kudos with the unions and has built up something of a personal machine within the PLP and party bureaucracy. Has been an MP for thirty years, this year. On the other hand he isn’t far of state pension age and has been compromised by years in power. His draconian legislation and propensity for scandal has harmed his standing amongst the party membership at large and its hard to see how he would beat Cameron.
David Miliband: A man who’s moment may have passed. Lacks the union base, and gets much of his PLP support from the Blarite MPs who are likely to be out of office by the time the contest takes place. The years spent in cabinet have taken some shine off his “new boy” image, so he can hardly position himself against old timers like Straw and Harman as a “change candidate”. His standing amongst Labour party members is hard to gauge. If he can get through to a second round then he might stand a chance, especially if he’s up against someone many find unappealing like Harman.
Ed Miliband: Starting to step out of his brother’s shadow. Has impressed many with his calm the last few months-although his record as Energy Secretary is more mixed. Has several clear advantages he’s young, slightly left leaning (but not mentally so) and is largely unknown outside political circles-so is less tainted than the old guard by prior adventures. On the other hand it is arguable that having just turned forty; he is to young and to inexperienced to lead the party. Likely to popular amongst activists. But possibly lacks the union and PLP support the others have.
John McDonnell: Leader of Labour’s Socialist Campaign Group. Will probably run as the candidate of the far-left of the PLP. Could potentially pick up a fair bit of backing from the more extreme unions and sections of the PLP. As well as from some activists. A potential spoiler candidate, although unlikely to be a leader.
Peter Mandelson: I think he would be quite a good leader, he could probably hold his own against Cameron and keep the party on an even keel. However, he is unlikely to win a general election and the chances of the Labour Party electing a Lord or a Peter Mandelson are, I feel, slim.
Yvette Cooper: Ed Ball’s wife and like her husband a close ally of Gordon Brown. Is not that well known outside of the party, so might have the “new” factor. On the other hand she is a bit of a nonentity, and is possibly a bit to young to lead. Might have Gordon Brown’s backing if she stood and would be an alternative female candidate to Harriet Harman.
Alistair Darling: For some strange reason I’ve never heard him mentioned as a possible leader. There might be a good reason for this in that he is basically Gordon Brown’s thin double.
Ed Balls: Silly name, silly voice, silly man. No chance, but might run.
Putting those reasons aside, presuming Labour lose the next election they’re going to be in the wilderness for quite the while. Chances are, one of the Millibands will pick up the leadership assuming like Hague did they could win the next election, and just like Hague was pressured by some quarters of the party into quite severe Eurosceptisism there will be a resurgence of the left of the Labour party (Likely to be led by Jon Cruddas, and cheered on by the heavy hitters in the left wing blogosphere) to be a thorn in the side of the leadership and ruin their chances of being electable. Alan Johnson, of course even though probably the best candidate knows he can’t win the next election, and therefore not naive enough to follow in Hagues footsteps.
BNP give us free comedy for Christmas.
I like the way he tells it. He’s talking like it’s something that happened to him in a pub the other night, and he finally sets the record straight on what an Inn is, among other blunders.
Best comment though:
“What a lovely story. A persecuted family flee their home country under fear of death and seek refuge in another land.
Nice to see some continuity in Nick Griffin’s attitude to asylum seekers!”
Ho ho ho.
The Benefits of Cutting Class
It looks as if they’ve actually managed to find a sensible place to make cuts for once, and one which has even more scope for the future considering how the budget for HE has become so bloated over the last 12 years. We have something like 50% going to university, of course we can attack the Labour party for backtracking on their commitment to get that number into University, but we laughed it out the room at the time it was proposed, and there’s some that still have a chuckle at it now. It’s neither sustainable or desirable to try to meet this, or increase it. – there is no point keeping non-academic people in an academic education until they are 21/22.
The Russell Group, have however raised concerns about the impact of the move on the future of education within the UK with funding on the decline, and indeed the quality of our universities. You know, we might even see this government following it’s own advice for once.
If you look around Europe and even our Scottish brethren, you’ll see our universities are much better than theirs because we charge fees. This means our universities are much better funded than theirs which are dependent upon the whims of the state-which can be very stingy. There are two government funding/grant committees for universities – one related to research and the other to students. The government currently covers around 90% of university funding (last time I checked), which allows for minister like Mandelson to make such knee jerk decisions.
What we need, at the very least is a moderate increase of fees, which would be covered by the student loan system if we’re not going to lift the cap completely as suggested in the report by John Denham. At the very least a system whereby those high earners – such as you will be if you become a doctor – pay the full cost of their degrees back once they are raking it in. Everyone could still afford it, even from a background with no money, because of the student loan system, but of course there’s going to be those (Especially from LibDumb quarters) wailing about the seemingly big number that has to be paid back.
If big numbers put you off going to university, you probably shouldn’t be going. With the current governmental student loans repayment system, the actual amount of debt you’re in at the end is damn-near irrelevant, because you only have to start paying it back when you’re actually capable of doing so. Admittedly if you’re reading a Mickey Mouse subject then you’re screwed, but then again we’re not supposed to be paying you to muck around, are we?
The Conservative Party and Energy Policy
Some Tories aren’t willing to admit that climate change is a man-made problem, and the debate has been raging between Conservative Home, and other blogs like Left Foot Forward. While AGW is debatable (And I’m not going to wade into it, neither having any serious level of qualification in Science, or the stomach to wade through masses of reports published by either side) it shouldn’t be an excuse for a lack of a coherent energy policy. Water shortage and energy security are some of the highest priorities for both the private sector, and governments and cannot afford to be ignored especially with the supply of oil in such delicate balance, within the Middle East , and the security of Nuclear Power in Eastern Europe (Where operational risks are high) nevermind future relations with powers like Russia where the escalation of the conflicts with Iran are starting to stir. It is unwise to leave such an important matter to the shifting nature of international relations.
The Conservative policy paper calls for a decentalised energy revolution, and rightly so. Grid reform — localising or privatising control of sections of the grid to ensure that entrepreneurs and community CHP schemes can compete with the big players are to play a key role in developing energy in the future while avoiding the sort of pork barrel politics that everyone on the right should wish to see gone.
What next however? With Copehagen looking on the verge of collapse those that believe in AGW that want to call for targets on emissions, and taxes to go with that have been dealt a blow, and haven’t been able to offer a solution that doesn’t involve international caps. (Even the most ardent campaigner would most likely admit that it would be foolish for Britain, or even the EU as a whole to put caps on emissions unilaterally). What can we do? The Conservative party should be responsible and put forward solutions for energy supply in the future. Not get caught up in a foolish debate on the Science of climate change, whether it is true or not there are still problems which must be addressed. The Conservative party are one of environmentalists, and it’s time to prove that.
Conservatives and the EU.
David Cameron has managed created a real opposition within the European Parliament before even before becoming PM, quite the amazing feat, and one of the promises he has been able to deliver on. An anti federalist solution that the Eurosceptics and the few Europhiles within the party (Yes, Daniel Hannan we still exist.) can rally around and fly the flag for – localism and free trade within the European Union, we don’t need Nationalist claptrap to achieve that, we need to put our opposition into action so that we can achieve the change we want
I am firmly of the belief that many with the party are not true Eurosceptics, just anti-Brussels, by that I mean against the policies of the EU rather than the idea of a European union itself. The EUSSR meme is in full flow, I’m not even sure if the people who use it actually do wear timn foil hats or whether they actually people it’s an effective way to make people anti EU. Cameron and his team are not Euro-secessionists, and will never cave into pressure from that fringe of the party.
What we should be doing is working constructively with the EU, not giving into pressure from other member states like the current Government have done for the past 12 years. It’s funny that we have jibes from the Labour benches that our so called ‘isolation’ within Europe will hinder us from having any influence, considering that the only thing that springs to my mind about what they have done in the EU is to release Britains rebate, and for what exactly? That’s where that sort of ‘influence’ gets us.A conservative government must stand up for the interests of Britain, as well as the EU as a whole.
But to have that the party must engage. We already have hard working MEP’s like Charles Tannock that attempt to follow the party policy of a European Union that devolves as much power as possible, but when they go to the grassroots to draw from them they’re met with this sort of drivel.
“Charles let me direct. You are a hardline europhile. You are advocating, indeed exhorting submission to the undemocratic EU.
You must know as well as the rest of us that our ability to ‘influence the Union’s policy in our national interest as much as possible’ is minimal. Minimal.
You write ‘in recent months William Hague has put more flesh on the bones of Conservative foreign policy’ and then admit that there are 26 other countries contributing to the EU’s foreign policy.
We all admire your stamina in returning time after time to ConHome and taking these brickbats but …and it is a big but…when will reality hit?”
I could ask (If I were to be so rude): When will the reality hit that you’re talking out of your arse?
If we’re going to win the election, the Conservative party need to stop whining about Lisbon,(When it comes down to the nitty gritty, I usually find there’s few things they would object to and the EU seccessionalists must admit to themselves it is never going to happe.n I don’t much like how many Eurosceptics use the referendum campaign just to try and stuff the EU altogether, and frankly neither does the electorate.