Across the pond

The bully boys of the two parties who have been governing Britain since the Daily Novelist, now 76, reached voting age, today were beating their big drums to the same tune. We all know that Brown is a bully, because one of the stars of The Observer, one of the few newspapers that is not Tory dominated, told us in a much publicised book publishhed just before the election campaign started. Andrew Rawnsley made a convincing case. Not too difficult, because Brown has, like Blair before him, has moved Britain towards presidential style government.

But today’s attack on Clegg, was led by the gentleman Tory, David Cameron, who has eschewed the doctrinaire veries of the Thatcherite Tories, and, who claims, he wants, us, the electorate to govern the country. So long as we decide to appoint him to decide what it is we want.

Today Cameron blasted Clegg, for holding the country to ransom by demanding electoral reform, as the price for his co-operation with any other party. Brown jumped on the bandwagon, by attacking Clegg  for ‘arrogance’.

Both of them assume that the surge to the Liberal Democrots after the first television debate was due to the personality of Nick Clegg, rather than Lib Dem policies.

Which is a pretty contemptuous view of the electorate. It suggests that British people changed their voting intentions, because Clegg won some sort of popularity contest in the first TV debate.

Two issues dominate this debate. First the continuing anger of the electorate at abuse of public trust by MPs of all parties, revealed by the Daily Telegraph exposure. Second, and now much more important, the devastating worldwide recession, caused by the self-seeking arrogance of the world’s bankers and other big companies.

These same bankers, many of whom have been bailed out by Gordon Brown, are now awarding themselves huge bonuses yet again. While all three parties are warning that because of the cost to Britain’s debt in bailing them out, Government spending will have to be reduced, which means that lots of workers in the public sector will lose their jobs.

Cameron argues that only he will have the confidence of the business sector, which, he thinks, will create the jobs to rescue our economy. But he is singing to the tune of the wealthy private sector, so he goes into this election, with much more money than Labour, despite trade union donations, and far more than the Lib Dems, who have less money for election posters, than UKIP, a small party, which is supported by a few very rich men.

Three weeks ago, most polical journalists, and most politicians, were assuming, that the electorate would vote in a Cameron government. Now the polls are suggesting that the most likely outcome is a parliament in which no party has an overall majority.

But maybe, that is exactly what the electorate wants.

They don’t trust Gordon Brown, because he has colluded with big business leaders, most notably, Rupert Mucdoch, who helped New Labour to get into government. They don’t trust David Cameron, because his party is the party of big business, which has got us into the current international recession.

The subject of the last debate is the economy. The odds are heavily against Nick Clegg, who can be slammed as a man of no experience of these vital matters. Gordon Brown, who, despite his faults, is a former Chancellor of the Exchequer, who does understand the complexities. And who has mostly done the right things to minimise the adverse effects on the UK. David Cameron can come in as the architect of change.

His line is that the Conservatives will do it better. Cameron himself is not strong on econamics. His potential Chancelor of the Exchequer is so inadequate, that he has been silenced by the bully boys of Conservative Central Office. George Osborne is still alive and not ill. But Central Office has been bringing back that anti-Thatcherite Tory veteran, Kenneth Clarke, to push their economic case.

Cameron is not, by personality a bully boy. And bully boy tactics will not help him one iota in the last debate.

The subject is the economy. Gordon Brown should win this with a resounding majority. Because the plain fact he is the only one of the three leaders, who has a deep understanding of economics, and the practical experience of managing the UK economy, first as Tony Blair’s Chancellor of the Exchequer, and more recently as Prime Minister. Nick Clegg has no such expertise. He will have to rely on his shadow Chancellor, Vince Cable, who demonstrated that he would be a good Chancellor.

But he won’t be in the studio. Brown can run rings around him on economics.

But Cameron is on a very sticky wicket. He has no better economic understanding than Clegg, and he is suffering from the fact that his shadow chancellor, Osborne, is such a disaster, that Conservative Central Office, has shut him up.

The debates are only one influence on the election. Cameron wanted them. The complicated rules were drawn up after negotiation by all parites.

They were adhered to in the first debate, which, contrary to all expectation, Clegg won.

They were not adhered to in the second debate. When the Sky presenter, Adam Boulton, asked a question himself, about the ‘revelations’ is the Daily Telegraph about Nick Clegg. Boulton’s pay cheque comes from Sky Television, which is controlled by Rupert Murdoch. He is a decent honest journalist, but his heart is not only with his paymaster, Rupert Murdoch, it is also with his partner, Anji Hunter, who was one of the most trusted aides of  Tony Blair.

According to The Guardian,over a  hundred viewers protested about this. No word from the regulator. And still no word from the Press Complaints Commission, about the slurs the Tory press has printed about Clegg. 

The last debate is being conducted by the BBC, so it should be fair.

But it is being conducted by a human being, who may not be perfect, just as the BBC is not perfect.

Subject of next blog.