In my more ludicrous moments I wonder if the real crisis of accountability in modern British political life lies not in parliament, or in boardrooms, but inthe Opinion columns of our major national newspapers, where a tiny, self-selecting elite (which I hunger to be a part of, obviously..) are able to get away with the most terrible crimes against research, reason, and basic consistency of world-view.
So it is with Peter Oborne, who, if he were a politician, would be a laughable figure, a man whose endles failures of foresight, schoolboy pash's, lifelong grudges and frequent errors would mark out as a man not to be trusted with even the minutest of responsibilities. Alternatively, he might be mayor of London.
Instead, he is a gadfly, and since gadflies gotta gad, perfectly sensible people quote him approvingly whenever his internal oscillator means he is vibrating with rage at their general frequency
So it is today. Oborne writes of Cameron and Osborne that they are in danger of becoming a one term government. After a tour-de-horizon of right-wing bogeymen, the blame for this oncoming failure is assigned. It is all the fault of the Liberal Democrats, stopping vital reforms.
"But the Liberal Democrats cannot stomach this. In private, Danny Alexander, Chief Secretary to the Treasury, has been trashing Tory proposals for employment reform. Meanwhile, Vince Cable, the Business Secretary, remains a champion of extra government spending. To sum up: the Tories want less regulation and less spending. The Liberal Democrats want more regulation, and more spending"
Yet what has Oborne said of Cameron and Osborne and their coalition before?
Why, that Mr Cameron had the makings of a "Truly Great" pime minister and that "the Prime Minister has risen to the level of events, and confronted head-on the terrifying crisis that he inherited from Gordon Brown." George Osborne's emergency budget was nothing less than a "neccessity". On joblessness, "the Coalition has been nothing short of magnificent." On Schools and Welfare "there is no limit to the lives that will be enhanced and the talent liberated if his reforms succeed". Oborne's verdict on Cameron's government? "If it achieves half of what it has set out to do, it will come to be seen as one of the great reforming governments of all time".
and what had enabled this wonderful government? What was absolutely essential to it's continued success? Why, the brave, the few… the Lib-Dems.
"The Prime Minister's alliance with Nick Clegg, a brave and honorable politician, has been key to his success. Indeed, its importance is poorly understood. Contrary to the myth, the Lib Dems have not been a drag on radical aspiration. In fact, many of the boldest policies the Coalition is pursuing – above all, deficit reduction – would not have been possible without their support.
…If David Cameron is truly to become a great Prime Minister, he urgently needs to keep the Coalition intact."
When the facts change, change your mind. fine. But at least acknowledge it has changed*. This will be the first rule of the "Accountability in Editorial Articles Act, 2017, intruduced as the second act of my not-so benevolent Dictatorship. Oborne and Toynbee, the passionaras of self-contradiction, wil be the first up before the beak.
(The first law I introduce will naturally be the Pratchett Act, banning all mime artists, and hanging a sign round their necks which reads "learn the words")
*Oborne's defence attorneys will claim that this last line "The Coalition, which only last year seemed to offer an answer to all our problems, is now paralysed" does this. Weasel words, I shall thunder from the bench. A lack of personal responsibility for your views. Dreadful slipperyness, worthy of only the meanest hack. Off with his quill!
Alas it seems that democracy and free media aren't really compatible. Free media inevitably ends up being run by and on behalf of Very Rich People who deliberately or accidentally have reduced elections to beauty contests or not-very-much-talent shows. The VRP are also good at hounding anyone vaguely interesting out of politics.
A system that allegedly rewards the likes of Alan Hansen with sums around the likes of £40,000 for sitting on a sofa and opining about association football can't be considered entirely rational or, indeed, free.
why can a free society not decide to pay Alan Hansen £40,000 i am happy to contribute my 1 p via licence fee to hear him.
the media is run by people who view adverts and pay licence fees
i have to disagree with Hopi i think Oborne is uniquley bad and hypocrticial ( aside from obscure lefties no one reads ) many commmentators especially in broadshhets like Times and Telegraph are sane and moderate.
Opinion writers like Oborne tend mainly to form the opinions of the politicians and their advisers. They're the bits in the paper that the majority skim over. That their online versions (see also Toynbee and Milne at CiF) get lots of hits doesn't really refute this. They know this and that's why they are happy to say whatever they seem to think at the time without worrying about whether they are being consistent. So, just as Toynbee et al were able to herald Gordon Brown's coronation as long overdue and at last a change to a great PM yet stick the boot in a couple of years later, why not Oborne?
You need to stop being so reasonable and open to ideas if you want to join them! That would be a public shame even if a personal triumph.
Oborne approved of Liberalising Public Sector supply, in Education, for exampl , and welfare reform. The Laws / Clegg /Orange Liberals were intitially keen to reclaim Liberalism for their Party. They were also,initially ,converted to fiscal conservatism, a process you competed after the General Election.
Perhaps Oborne was overly effusive , but then he is a collumnist. Polly Toynbee flip flopped far far more about Brown, but she said she reflected the way she and other people felt, which was her job. True, an entertainer and scribbler. Oborne is not a figure on the right in the way a Toynbee is ,supposedly ,a serious voice. He has more latitude and vastly less inconsistency
Like all Parties, as time has gone on, the raw facts of Lib Dem support (Public Sector Pinky and Skittish) have predominated . The same thing happened to New Labour, whose first three years I supported ,and voted for. That good start was followed by the the house arrest of Blair, and the disastorous period of overspending, in an over heated boom on unreformed public services. The Liberals have wobbled quicker, but the times are worse and their support is less steadfast. The Polls are killing them.
It was inevitable that a process of distancing would begin even in the best of circumstances, as it is, we approach a crisis point . Those old "Siren-voices…." are cooing "Spend spend spend " , the markets are dangerous and the Libs are shirking .
Osborne has to be bold and take the actions necessarry to reassurre the markets whilst increasing competitiveness. It could be that the country will prove ungovernable, with the help of the public sector union backed left, and its Greek sectional irreponsibility . I do not believe it .I think the country knows what we have to do .We will roll up olur sleeves and back a strong Chancellor willing to take the flak form the usual suspects.
You've only just noticed?!!
Hopi , off topic but I notice the Polls have the Lib Dems on 7%, even allowing for mid term sulking with the new Lewes boundaries they have no chance which make Labour the only left wing alternative. Labour could win the seat , in fact I think they are probably the most likely Party to win.
I mention it in case you were still trying to be an MP, a good chance for someone .