The Tory leadership is hotting up (ie, it's no longer below freezing). David Davis has come out with some words to please the faithful, but which are still pretty vague. He wants decisions to be taken 'as close as practicable to local communities'. I agree wholeheartedly. But I'd like to see more details on how a Tory government, Tory ministers and Tory backbenchers would deal with complaints from constituents about the 'lunatic' behaviour of a far-left council, the undoubted strengthening of the 'postcode lottery' and squeals about unfairness in service provision. All these motivated Tory governments past (and Labour, for that matter) to centralise, centralise, centralise. Are we really to believe that Tory ministers will get up in Parliament and say 'It's nothing to do with me, guv, and I ain't going to do nowt about it'?
Come on, Mr Davis, tell us how you would make it work.
Far-left councils? Where is the Workers' Revolutionary Party poised to win?
Windsor?
Posted by: Ian | 14 September 2005 at 10:04 AM
Ian - I've no problem with far-left councils. Good luck to them. My problem is with the Tories' stated aim of letting local communities decide their own business and their clear record in government of wading in to stop the 'lunatic' (their word, not mine) actions of those councils they don't like.
Posted by: Third Avenue | 14 September 2005 at 10:55 AM
All Westminster governments have an instinct to centralise, it's in the nature of the beast.
Posted by: Phil Hunt | 15 September 2005 at 12:38 AM
Yes, but... The Thatcher Government was slightly different in hacking off some substantial bits of the public sector (i.e., nationalised industries) so that it could continue centralising the rest. Probably because the process of centralisation - started with WWI - had resulted in overload, and the process could only continue if it focused on a smaller public sector.
Posted by: Blimpish | 15 September 2005 at 06:02 AM
The Thatcher Government wasn't so different when it came to creating mass-unemployment.It is hard to see how the 'opportunity society' of David Davis will be any different from what has gone before.
Posted by: Ian | 15 September 2005 at 08:56 AM
Actually, the Thatcher Government was very different in creating mass-unemployment - first time since the 1930s a Government prioritised other economic objectives over reducing unemployment. But, luckily, that isn't a major problem these days. I would though - and I say this as a Davis supporting Tory - agree that there's a lot more bones than meat on the 'opportunity society' stuff... but that's politics, I guess.
Posted by: Blimpish | 15 September 2005 at 11:23 AM
The Tory government of the 1920s created high levels of unemployment,other than the exceptional years of the 1950s, the Tory party is the natural party of unemployment.There are no signs of change.The recent reduction in
unemployment is a result of creating jobs in the public sector.If we have a Tory government that starts cutting public spending then there will be a return to high levels of unemployment.
Posted by: Ian | 15 September 2005 at 10:35 PM
Ok... got a feeling you're mind's made up on this one, so there's no point debating the issue. Your understanding of labour market economics seems a bit, erm, 1970s, to say the least.
Posted by: Blimpish | 16 September 2005 at 09:09 AM
I'm under no illusions.The future, for Britain, is a 'knowledge economy' but that requires a great deal of investment in education, the levels of which the Tories are unwilling and unlikely to make.
Posted by: Ian | 16 September 2005 at 09:26 PM