we hated margaret thatcher when she told us that the ‘lady is not for turning’. for some her conviction politics was a sign of strength to the rest of us it was a sign of dogmatic certainty in the face of the suffering she was causing.
there are times when you expect politicians to stick to their guns, even if you don’t agree with them. blair and the iraq war springs to mind; even the coalition and their deficit reduction schemes. it might be something we don’t like but we can see what it is they are doing and we can even understand why they are doing.
we elected politicians to make laws and make the big decisions – no one ever agrees 100& of the time with everything the party they voted for says (often the members of parliament do not fully agree with their parties). that is part and parcel of politics.
we also expect politicians, and the government, to listen to us. we moan when they don’t heed what we say (think of the anti war marches). yet when they do listen and change their stance they are quickly accused of u-turns and weakness. david cameron is suffering that today with the announcement that the prison term discount plan had been dropped because it was ‘too lenient’. to most people the plan had some advantages but it quickly became obvious that in order to make sure that ‘bad’ criminals didn’t get the discount that it would have too many caveats as to be workable; that plus public (well media) opinion meant it was dead in the water.
the coalition withdrew the plan. they responded to the public. they did their job. yay them. or so you would think.
nope the labour party is quick to call it a u-turn when really it is part of government: they come up with ideas; we let them know how we feel.
i don’t see them changing their minds as one of weakness but of good government.
i do see the labour parties approach to calling it a u-turn as short sighted, they should be pointing out how they helped persuade the government to review and change their plans: except that isn’t an interesting sound bite. so you have ed miliband saying: "the prime minister has to ask how did he get himself into the position of making a proposal which wasn't thought through. it is yet another example of this government not being in touch with people and making proposals which they then have to abandon."
cameron and co. would argue that the fact they had changed their view demonstrates that they are indeed in touch with the people. where miliband is right is that this is another example of a half-thought through idea launched into the public domain without much consideration to the outcry it would cause. miliband’s attack shouldn’t have been on the fact that the government has changed its stance but that it had changed its stance once again, that this is a government that doesn’t know what it is trying to do, that it doesn’t think things through and just shoots from the political strategy hip.
ed, just for you, i give you this suggestion: don’t bother telling us about the u-turns as such, we don’t really care as often we have to do such things each day. instead keep reminding us that it is yet another half-baked idea and that the changes have come because you, the labour party, have convinced the government of the error of their ways. otherwise the constant sniping from the sidelines just comes across as ‘told you so’ but without you having offered something in return. because if all you have to offer is letting us know where cameron has slipped up you are not getting back into power.
there are times when you expect politicians to stick to their guns, even if you don’t agree with them. blair and the iraq war springs to mind; even the coalition and their deficit reduction schemes. it might be something we don’t like but we can see what it is they are doing and we can even understand why they are doing.
we elected politicians to make laws and make the big decisions – no one ever agrees 100& of the time with everything the party they voted for says (often the members of parliament do not fully agree with their parties). that is part and parcel of politics.
we also expect politicians, and the government, to listen to us. we moan when they don’t heed what we say (think of the anti war marches). yet when they do listen and change their stance they are quickly accused of u-turns and weakness. david cameron is suffering that today with the announcement that the prison term discount plan had been dropped because it was ‘too lenient’. to most people the plan had some advantages but it quickly became obvious that in order to make sure that ‘bad’ criminals didn’t get the discount that it would have too many caveats as to be workable; that plus public (well media) opinion meant it was dead in the water.
the coalition withdrew the plan. they responded to the public. they did their job. yay them. or so you would think.
nope the labour party is quick to call it a u-turn when really it is part of government: they come up with ideas; we let them know how we feel.
i don’t see them changing their minds as one of weakness but of good government.
i do see the labour parties approach to calling it a u-turn as short sighted, they should be pointing out how they helped persuade the government to review and change their plans: except that isn’t an interesting sound bite. so you have ed miliband saying: "the prime minister has to ask how did he get himself into the position of making a proposal which wasn't thought through. it is yet another example of this government not being in touch with people and making proposals which they then have to abandon."
cameron and co. would argue that the fact they had changed their view demonstrates that they are indeed in touch with the people. where miliband is right is that this is another example of a half-thought through idea launched into the public domain without much consideration to the outcry it would cause. miliband’s attack shouldn’t have been on the fact that the government has changed its stance but that it had changed its stance once again, that this is a government that doesn’t know what it is trying to do, that it doesn’t think things through and just shoots from the political strategy hip.
ed, just for you, i give you this suggestion: don’t bother telling us about the u-turns as such, we don’t really care as often we have to do such things each day. instead keep reminding us that it is yet another half-baked idea and that the changes have come because you, the labour party, have convinced the government of the error of their ways. otherwise the constant sniping from the sidelines just comes across as ‘told you so’ but without you having offered something in return. because if all you have to offer is letting us know where cameron has slipped up you are not getting back into power.
No comments:
Post a Comment