We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

If not now, then when?

David Cameron seems determined to not miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity

The Conservative leader also gave an interview to the Spectator magazine in which he said he would use the conference to show his party had “the grit and determination to turn the whole country around”.

But in terms of the deficit, he added: “I want to be realistic – both for what a government can achieve, but also realistic in terms of taking the country with me.” Labour has said it plans to introduce a 50p rate of tax for the highest earners – a policy Mr Cameron said he would honour.

Nevertheless, he told the Spectator he thought high marginal tax rates were “a fantastically bad idea” and if the 50p policy ultimately drove Britain’s rich to move overseas, “clearly it would be painless and advantageous to get rid of it at an early stage”.

If it is “a fantastically bad idea” then with Labour reeling around like a punch drunk boxer, why oh why not just say “Britain… are you fucked enough to be paying attention now? We are going in the WRONG DIRECTION… we will immediately repeal this tax and simply tear up every single page the fantastically bad socially and economically toxic legislation enacted over the past decade, and try to restart civil society before it completely flatlines”…

…but no…

Instead we get the usual timid drivel about being “realistic”. Why? Well it is obvious. When it comes down to it, it is really only the details that Cameron disagrees with, the basic notion of a vast profligate regulatory state is only bad when it does not have Cameron’s “safe pair of hands” (or some such similar nauseating Tory form of words) on the wheel of state.

8 comments to If not now, then when?

  • Verity

    Agreed. There could be a Great Repeal Act which repealed every bit of inept and malign legislation put on the books by Blair and later Brown. Would Cameron even contemplate it? I should cocoa.

  • the other rob

    Sadly, this is no surprise. They all see themselves as the new barons and earls, with party labels mere flags of convenience.

    Or worse – I have a sneaking suspicion that Michael Moore and Rush Limbaugh get together regularly, to laugh at us all, over cocktails.

  • RayD

    @Other Rob,

    indeed, and town clerks are now sheriffs (in the Nottingham sense) lording it over their Saxon serfs. Quarter of a mil ‘chief executive’ my arse.

    I think Cameron has made his position crystal clear. He intends to spend no more than can be squeezed from the tax base. This is in sharp contrast to Labour, who spend more than can be squeezed from the tax base.

  • Chris H

    This is why I am unlikely to vote for a mainstream party at the GE. If opinion polls were showing that masses of other people felt the same, then he would have to get his finger out and come up with something new. As it stands Cameron sees himself as a shoo-in and he is probably right so why rock the boat? Having said that, saying something is a really bad idea and then doing it anyway to avoid rocking said boat shows an appalling lack of backbone.

  • Verity

    Chris H – You write, “If opinion polls were showing that masses of other people felt the same …”.

    Actually, they do.

    According to this morning’s Spectator (‘Tories Try to Hold The Line on Europe’) their notional majority, under Dave, has dropped from 146 seats to 70.

    Why cannot the Tory high command acknowledge that there is no appetite among Conservatives for the Heir to Blair?

  • Chris H

    That certainly is encouraging news. At least the next election is likely to prove to be the most interesting one for years.

    Politicians who wish to sound out public opinion could certainly do worse than trawling through comment threads such as this one. Some of them can actually be entertaining, the one that followed the piece by Hazel Blears on Comment is Free a few months back was sublime.

  • Paul Marks

    The depressing thing is that Cameron will not even do things that would politically benefit him.

    For example …….

    For all there (supposdly) good relations now the BBC will undermine a Conservative party government from day one (they will because they see it as their duty to that).

    The way of preventlng this is obvious – defund the BBC by abolishing the television tax.

    So Mr Cameron could both cut a tax (in fact a “regressuve” tax that hits the poorest people the hardest) whilst, as the same time, getting rid of the BBC which has been the sworn enemy of the Conservative party for decades.

    But will he abolish the “lincense fee” as the first act of an incomming Conservative party government (a simple one Act of Paliament would do it).

    Of course he will not – he will tell himself that he has good relations with the BBC (and then be astonished when they go for his throat).

  • Regional

    It’s just like ‘straya, the conservatives are will have to dragged kicking and screaming to the government benches. Who’d want a job where you’re vilified 24/7 while trying to clean up Labor/Labour’s mess by the meeja.