Skip to main content

The Ming Dynasty

We have a new leader of the British Liberal Democrats. As I had hoped, it is Sir Menzies Campbell QC MP. Congratulations to him and his team, and congratulations to us- we have a leader who looks for more like a Prime Minister than the shallow Mr. Cameron or the volcanic Mr. Brown (if it is to be him as the next Labour leader).

As for the Conservatives, faced with Ming, a bloke who has fought his whole political career based on principle and substance, they are shrilly screaming “too old”.

Oh really? It couldn’t be, could it, that they are a bit nervous? Cameron is straight out of the Blair school of shiny, shallow politics- and the game is moving on. When faced with Blair and Cameron, it is quite hard to spot the evil twin. Both like illegal war, authoritarian policies and the government telling you what to do.

Tories: you could have been principled too (although admittedly most people don’t like your principles either) but you have ended up with a guy from the pages of Tatler, when you really needed someone less shiny… and more honest.

Those of us who want the Liberal Democrats to fight for a muscular Liberalism, with Freedom as the definition of our policies, will be watching closely the new regime. We know that Ming will fight our corner on such issues as ID cards and civil liberties. We now need to define the economic priorities of Liberalism. For me, that means abandoning the myth that we can plan the future in detail and create a flexible political system that responds to change effectively and efficiently. This also means setting the limits of the state- not just in a social way, but an economic way too.

The state should not spend more than a set percentage of national income- what that limit is, we can debate, but it should not be more than at present, and arguably it should be quite a bit less.

Liberalism is "Trust in the People, tempered with prudence"- it is not "Trust in the State, tempered with greed".

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Post Truth and Justice

The past decade has seen the rise of so-called "post truth" politics.  Instead of mere misrepresentation of facts to serve an argument, political figures began to put forward arguments which denied easily provable facts, and then blustered and browbeat those who pointed out the lie.  The political class was able to get away with "post truth" positions because the infrastructure that reported their activity has been suborned directly into the process. In short, the media abandoned long-cherished traditions of objectivity and began a slow slide into undeclared bias and partisanship.  The "fourth estate" was always a key piece of how democratic societies worked, since the press, and later the broadcast media could shape opinion by the way they reported on the political process. As a result there has never been a golden age of objective media, but nevertheless individual reporters acquired better or worse reputations for the quality of their reporting and

We need to talk about UK corruption

After a long hiatus, mostly to do with indolence and partly to do with the general election campaign, I feel compelled to take up the metaphorical pen and make a few comments on where I see the situation of the UK in the aftermath of the "Brexit election". OK, so we lost.  We can blame many reasons, though fundamentally the Conservatives refused to make the mistakes of 2017 and Labour and especially the Liberal Democrats made every mistake that could be made.  Indeed the biggest mistake of all was allowing Johnson to hold the election at all, when another six months would probably have eaten the Conservative Party alive.  It was Jo Swinson's first, but perhaps most critical, mistake to make, and from it came all the others.  The flow of defectors and money persuaded the Liberal Democrat bunker that an election could only be better for the Lib Dems, and as far as votes were concerned, the party did indeed increase its vote by 1.3 million.   BUT, and it really is the bi

Media misdirection

In the small print of the UK budget we find that the Chancellor of the Exchequer (the British Finance Minister) has allocated a further 15 billion Pounds to the funding for the UK track and trace system. This means that the cost of the UK´s track and trace system is now 37 billion Pounds.  That is approximately €43 billion or US$51 billion, which is to say that it is amount of money greater than the national GDP of over 110 countries, or if you prefer, it is roughly the same number as the combined GDP of the 34 smallest economies of the planet.  As at December 2020, 70% of the contracts for the track and trace system were awarded by the Conservative government without a competitive tender being made . The program is overseen by Dido Harding , who is not only a Conservative Life Peer, but the wife of a Conservative MP, John Penrose, and a contemporary of David Cameron and Boris Johnson at Oxford. Many of these untendered contracts have been given to companies that seem to have no notewo