Trust in political leaders has been so damaged in the last ten Labour years that the temptation to turn away from all who represent us in our social and political lives has to be resisted. Some politicians have earned and continue to deserve our attention.
William Hague, Conservative shadow Foreign Secretary, stands in that long line of Conservative politicians who can articulate the political will that transcends Party allegiance, except among the most bigotted and self-serving party crawlers.
David Cameron's speech today addresses the moribund and ugly socialist authoritarian collectivism embodied in the Labour government Executive and much of the constituent factions that make up Labour support. It does not address what most people in England are concerned about, (insofar as their concerns are political for we all have lives), the European Union Treaty for a Constitution for Europe, and England's involvement.
Quite rightly so, for the Conservatives regard relations with the European Union as the field of responsibility and competence of the Foreign Secretary; there is no 'one Party, one Leader' smack to Conservative governance, as Cameron underlines today. Nor is the Conservative Foreign Office portfolio assigned to a washed-up, conformist hack seeking to please the narrow focus of an even narrower Labour party faction that is definedly disloyal both to Party and to the electorate.
To hear Mr Hague in a considered and at length setting-out of Conservative understanding of past relations between the United Kingdom and the European Union , the current position and Conservative policy on it and, more than anything, a clear exposition of Conservative intentions and determinations towards the union of the United Kingdom and its relationship with the federal European state that is to be constituted this year, would be a contribution to our polity above Party, and beyond price.
Monday, 18 June 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
You really must read up on the Labour Party structures before making the "Labour Executive" to be so Stalinist; it is actually toothless under Blair.
To enhance your educational experience you should recall that the Labour Party structure was democratic and designed to be so.
Annual Conference discussed issues, voted on them and they became policy. Guardian of Conference Decisions was the National Executive Committee of the Labour Party which tracked policy issues between Conferences.
It was a bottom-up party.
Blair turned it around and made the Conference moribund like a Conservative Rally and turned the National Executive into a Ministers' Committee. He thus cut off the grass-roots from the parliamentary party.
The lunacy in Labour is not coming from the National executive but from Downing Street. It is lunatics from the 1980s like Livingstone and Banks and Hodge and Sawyer and Primarolo and Harman and Hewitt that produce the stupid policies.
What you are seeing is a Labour Government unconstrained. You must be too young to remember Ian Mikardo and Eric Heffer, or John Mackintosh, or Brian Walden, or others who would have fought Blair over his wilder excesses......but now it is a soporific party run by drones without a libertarian fibre in its feminised and submissive being
V, when I write Executive I mean those who operate the executive powers of the state,not the executive of the Labour party. So what you say is true but it isn't the same Executive. I agree the Labour party is as you describe it now, though would add, it is the Labour party, in all its parts, that supports the government Executive in their authoritarianism.
The Holborn and St Pancras CLP were quite unable to budge the refusal of their MP to nominate any challenger to Brown; it would be impossible for me to know other CLPs so well, but it's hard to think the same thing wasn't going on across the Party.
The government Executive, so echoic in its behaviour, is clearly not the executive of the Labour party but is supported in its horridness by the Labour party.
What the Labour party is now is not what many of its tribal supporters think; and the last 10 years has not been an anomaly that will be corrected with changes in personnel.
And the Rule Book is not unread among the Angels.
I put in Labour government Executive, V to make clear which Executive was referred to.
Maybe simply putting "current Executive" would do the job ?
You should read Michels Iron Law of Oligarchy about the SPD in 1900s Germany, and then Anthony Downs Economic Model of Democracy......but really i think you should read Robert Nozick "Anarchy, State & Utopia"
Post a Comment