Cameron needs to up his game

Short the UK

The UK is an Undeveloping Nation, with no way back, due to:

~North Sea abating.
~City a busted flush.
~Holed balance sheet - private & public.
~Wealth creators (brain drain) leave to a lower tax jurisdiction.
~Immense global competition.
~Pathetic political leadership.

One could say that the Brits will get what they deserve. They voted in New Labour and watched it gradually socialise the economy. They loved rising house prices and thought they were righteous by frittering money into public spending. Now it's gone pear shaped they are happy that our wealth creators will be taxed at c.60%, with their pensions being castrated. We, as a country, are so deeply entrenched in the Socialistic mindset that as a country we don't understand how wealth is created. The country is fricking clueless.

Another reason why I think there is no way back is that culturally we don't understand the basics of capitalism. The country seems to think that the State creates wealth. That free public services are god given.

Without the wealth creators there are no developing public services.

How will Britain look in ten years:

~NHS heavily rationed.
~Taxes higher.
~Army cut to the bone.
~Crime through the roof.
~High unemployment.
~Education system in the toilet.
~Infrastructure crumbling.
~National mood posioned.
~Corruption seeping deep.

Just like Argentina.

=====

If the Tories do not get some steel in their soul they will be a one term government. Then we head into outright Socialism.

Obnoxio The Clown

The man and his whole team are chocolate teapots, Fraser. They are still '90s Blairites and they're still trying to live in that reality. They do not have the minerals to do what needs to be done, it's going to be more of the same.

TrevorsDen

Is Fraser Nelson living in the same fantasy land as Gordon Brown these days?

Was he not listening to Hammond the other night. Moreover did he not listen to Cooper on Newsnight the night before as she rehearsed Labours mantra? Did he hear Brown as well as he complained about Tory cuts in essential services.

I do not know what Nelson thinks his job is - me, I thought it was reporting POLITICS !

teledu

Fraser, I take your point, "...the City, the rich, sovereign wealth funds..." may want exact details about intentions, but do the masses?
Those who are modestly savvy have already turned against Brown, but for the rest - keep it simple. Hammer home the "Brown's bankrupt Britain", "Gordon is a moron", "Labour borrow and waste and tax on epic scale" "lying, cheating, sleazy incompetent, disingenious, arrogant unelected Scotch bastard" message and you may just get the message through to the 30% who still think of voting zaNuLabour.
I was speaking to a good friend yesterday who had always voted Labour but isn't going to for the current red crop. Not because of any percentages quoted, tax or policy details, but because she just "knows" now that Brown is dishonest and an economic incompetent. She's not interested in Tory policies as she says she can never bring herself to vote Conservative. But she's not going to vote for Labour anymore. That, in her constituency, is a win for DC. The simple mantra that Brown has screwed up BIG time is potent enough.
Billions, trillions, IMF. GDP, PSBR etc. etc. become meaningless to the average Daily Mirror reader. Just hammer home the fact that we're bankrupt because of that imprudent Scottish fraud.

Slim Jim

Quangos, regional assemblies, consultants, advertising and diversity co-ordinators. Go figure?

Mark

Fraser, you are falling into the Brown/BBC trap of asking for specific "cuts". Getting government expenditure down involves hard work in every spending department and agency. It is not about cutting 10 hospitals and 200 schools, but about running them far more efficiently and in dropping a fair amount of desirable but non-essential activity. Very little of this can be identified in terms of billions here or there, but it can be done.

It's pretty plain to me (and has been since Cameron's first speech at last year's Tory conference) that Cameron, Osborne & Co are well aware of the need to get public spending and borrowing down and down fast. But they are facing a deteriorating position and an irresponsible government. They have another to wait until they can actually do anything (sadly).
And of course the Tories do not believe in taxing the rich more. They have made that very clear. But to commit now to reversing the 50% increase would be irresponsible - they will have to see what the figure are like in a year's time.

Tiberius

The BBC website is reporting it differently, Fraser.

Apparently, "he will tell delegates: "Cutting out spending we can do without is not going to deliver the scale of change we need... and a proper finance director for every governmemnt department.""

It goes withoiut saying that anyone who has worked at having to make a payroll could cut swathes from wasteful civil service departments given the chance.

I'm not sure just how much you have been playing devil's advocate over the last year or more when you say Cameron should step it up. New Labour has been a policy cuckoo since William Hague was leader, so it is not just an excuse on Cameron's behalf to say he has to keep his powder dry if he doesn't want to be going into the election campaign with his policies in ruins after being stolen and publicly trashed by Brown. Even your fellow-traveller Purnell came to the welfare policy party after the Tories had declared their hand.

Left the UK twice already

"Short the UK" says:

How will Britain look in ten years:

~NHS heavily rationed.
~Taxes higher.
~Army cut to the bone.
~Crime through the roof.
~High unemployment.
~Education system in the toilet.
~Infrastructure crumbling.
~National mood posioned.
~Corruption seeping deep.

As one who first left under Callaghan, returned for Thatcher and left again when her end was assured - it appears to me all you mention has already come to pass!

The Cameron led Tories should be offering hope, but despair is the sole reaction!

Devonport Dave

Cameron might be "failing to keep up" but Brown appears to be living on a different planet to the rest of us,I know which I prefer.I'm another Labour supporter(and Union activist) who's saying "not this time".I feel let down by my local M.P. and would go as far as saying I feel betrayed by "New Labour".Listening to Brown's recent speeches is quite alarming,much of what he says is totally ludicrous,verging on the surreal at times.He shouldn't be Prime Minister,he's out of his depth,incompetent and a liar,unelected and unelectable,I've never voted Conservative in my life but my Labour M.P. neither deserves or will get my support.

Verity

Short the UK - I was with you every step of the way - except you omitted to mention the destructive wholesale importation of people who are governed by a primitive, fascist "religion" - until you got to "just like Argentina".

The Argentines I know are a pretty classy bunch of people who speak beautiful Spanish, have a capital city which apparently (I've not yet been) which rivals any other city in the world, and whose people are dressy, dressy, dressy. London should look so good. (And hoi polloi in London should speak English with the beautiful accents that Argentinians speak Spanish.)

Publius

Mr Nelson. Mark and others are right. You are falling into the Brown/BBC trap. Everyone who needs to know already knows that the Tories are for a smaller state and for lower tax. That is enough.

RayD

We have two busted leaders.

One, in power, has spent his entire life, to the exclusion of all else, scheming and plotting to become PM only to discover he has zero ability for the job.

The other had the bright idea of copying Labour's plans because they worked so brilliantly for Tony, only to find they don't work anymore and he hasn't got anything else.

donald fraser

If he hasn’t already read it, Cameron needs to buy Graeme Browning’s “Electronic Democracy” (2000/2001) and track down the out-of-print “Can Information Technology Result in Benevolent Bureaucracy” (1985 ISBN 0444878734). From that he can learn about “Greek Sands” and after a quick word with Boris Johnson about ancient Greece ask the Canadians for progress reports on “cyber-democracy”. If he sets up his “Knowledge Assembly” KA framework correctly (see “Digital Literacy” by Paul Gilster, 1997) his team should be able to load up more ideas than you could shake a stick at. What would be the purpose?

His KA should filter out non Web 2.0 ideas in whatever area (health, education etc) and work on a 10:1 ratio. For every cut proposed, spend a full 10th of the savings on new Web 2.0 policy proposals. It would be a virtuous circle. As the blogosphere starts to rock with technically detailed proposals there will be a genuine movement to help him identify more non-benevolent areas to cut spending in. He just needs to maintain openness on how the 10:1 multiplier is being appraised by the “Greek Sands” principle. Allow proposals to be voted on by anyone online and allocate real spending proposals on them governed strictly by the cuts ratio being made in other areas. He should judge the final “spend and cut” himself, but rely solely on the “Greek Sands” principle to propose all future spending on Web 2.0 under his government.

ChrisD

"Cameron needs to up his game"

Just seen Cameron's speech, and based on that performance, he doesn't need to up his game at all. He was on cracking form.

Publius

Donald Fraser. I'm sorry, but I'm sick and tired of goddamn "experts" with their magic systems. I will never trust an expert again after the financial bullshit of the past years, which any old-fashioned housewife would have spotted for the nonsense it was.

James C

Will Cameron give Brown a standing ovation, like he did with Blair?
But never mind, windmills all round and hug-a-husky should sort out the economy.
Perhaps charging for supermarket parking can bring in much-needed revenue.
We will just have to stop banging on about Europe and being delusional about grammar schools.
Dave knows best.
Doesn't he?

mark

The big problem Cameron and Co have is the speed at which things are spiralling out of control.

Tax revenues are falling at 11% annualised, unemployment is rising at a previously unseen speed and no-one knows how big the hole in the banking system is and what it may cost (the IMF's estimate of 200billion being the best we have to go on).

Realistically it's not any UK politician who will be setting public spending - with a fiscal deficit in the high teens it's the IMF who will be deciding how much money the UK can spend and the scale of the cutbacks needed.

The UK has basically surrendered it's sovereignty via the route of national bankruptcy.

Cameron will simply be implementing the IMF's austerity programme.

This may make the cuts politically easier to implement.

mac

Devonport Dave:

That'd be the archetypal party gofer, Ms Seabeck, rewarded for years of faithful service making Mr Raynsford's coffee, would it?

I remember Ms Seabeck's post-election interview when she demonstrated her familiarity with her constituency and its major employer, explaining that she understood the importance of "Devon Dockyard".

Given that this government seemingly plans to relocate Guzz's remaining operational frigates and submarines to Portsmouth, her loyalty to her constituency appears to have been less than wholehearted. Still, when the great leader himself has political self-interest in 'helping' more northerly naval bases, who is she to demur?

Susan Hill

A friend asked DC about specific policies. DC said 'just let us get in first.' Trouble is, you have to present policy alternatives for people to vote on, you can`t say, trust us, vote for us, then when we`re in you`ll see what our policies are. It`s worrying

Dirty Euro

Here are my plans.
1. Fire half the civil service.
2. Get rid of the HR department, of the civil service, which is a duplication system.
3. Increase income tax for the rich to 55%.
4. Legalize hard and soft drugs for over 21 year olds, but charge them at 200% tax rates, and ration the drugs. Also have strong laws against home production of drugs, and smuggling of drugs, to ensure legalization does not increase the problem.
5. Start a major hydro electric scheme. This will create jobs and sustainable energy. 98% of Norway's energy is from Hydro. why can we no do the same.

Victor, NW Kent

I will ask you,Mr Fraser, the same question I have asked other members of the commentariat. Please tell David Cameron exactly what the state of UK plc's finances will be on the date he succeeds to office.

If you would be so kind as to divulge that information, on which you base your rather frequent articles of this nature, then I am sure that Cameron & Osborne will be able to say precisely where they will make savings.

Meanwhile, mindful of the fact that battle plans are valid until the first shot is fired, they need to keep their powder dry and keep careful track of all developments.

They are obviously determined to restore the meaning of the word Budget. No sanely run business or household will make budgets based on ever-increasing borrowings, nor should our government.

It is too easy for you, Sam Coates, Heffer and others to act the Doubting Thomas as you are paid for cynicism. The man in the street needs something to believe in otherwise the country will sink deeper into despair.

Now, you are a pretty smart man. You should be able to figure out that your comments are destructive and aid no person, no party, no voter.

TGF UKIP

Splendid NoW piece, Fraser. The reason why Dave now has the problem he has, is simply because he continued to play the Blue Labour card long past any possible justification for it.

By failing to start attacking Brown for the scale of his spending and borrowing eighteen months ago, he has denied himself not only the priceless politcal advantage of being able to say "told you so" but also of having a strikingly credible alternative political enonomic standpoint to put to the electorate.

Once borrowing was predicated to be over £800bn in 2012, that was the time Blue Labour could and should have been buried.

But this is where we disagree, Fraser. You don't believe Cameron ever believed in the Blue Labour thing whereas I do and all the evidence he's provided so far points to him really being nothing other than a good old paternalistic Tory One Nation SocDem.

JohnAnt

Never mind selling cuts in government to an anxious nation, Dave will have his work cut out selling them to his fellow MPs. Turkeys, Christmas.

Verity

It's tedious to keep agreeing with TGI UKIP, but I believe he/she is right again.

I would go further and say that the Blue Labour pose (as we then assumed it was; I now think it is for real) was only called for in the mind of a pr man who makes his living by manipulation of expectations.

There is a place in the world for PR men and women. In the marketplace.

Politicians are people who understand values because they are wooing electorates with values that they understand.

Tories speak to a certain mindset, or a certain set of expectations and values, shall we say; the socialists to another.

Dave should never have donned a mask, if mask it was, and presented himself under false colours - if, indeed, false colours they were. I believe they were not. He is, at heart, a Bertrand Russell, Mitfords etc aristocratic pinko who knows what's best for the little people.

Us.

Not him and his family, because they'll be in Brussels.

One of the things that he thinks best, is our final submersion in the EUSSR. If David Cameron ever made it to PM, we would go under for the third time, the oxygen of freedom sucked out of our freeborn lungs, and die as a nation.

When he was first presented as Leader, I would have preferred Davis, but Cameron got voted in and I was ready to give him a chance. He has failed at absolutely everything he has essayed.

Name one success.

His first big, embarrassingly over-engineered (even judged by its own terms) photo op was the failed, already-passé global warming scam.

Then he thought he could relate to the feral, illiterate hoodie class with the 'hug a hoodie' (or similar) mantra. And thought that would resonate with Tory voters of all classes, including the ones most threatened by hoodies. Why he thought non-judgementalism of hoodlums would appeal to their victims is a mystery.

Then he tackled grafitti by holding up a paintbrush, newly out of its polythene jacket, against a wall disfigured by grafitti. And smiled sternly at the camera.

His over-dependence on PR gimmicks tells me that everything this individual essays tells us he does not understand his constituency, but rather views us from a-high.

He can't relate to the grind of day after day, getting up in the middle of the night to stack shelves in a supermarket. Not a challenging job, but one that contributes to the economy and to the holders of shares in the supermarket by way of pleasing customers.

Has he ever called a call-centre/helpline in his life and intuited what pressure these people work under? No. He goes for cheap photo ops and vapid soundbites.

This is not the promise of governance.

Cameron does not resonate as a Leader. The clever and compelling John Redwood, who carries no baggage other than his ill-judged attempt to pretend he knew the words of Welsh national anthem, is a true Tory. And has a whole bank of sound ideas. And Davis. And others.

Cameron is a million miles away from most Tory voters. I've said before that this surprises me, because I've always been a fan of OEs given their strange empathy and their ability to relate to most people without posturing about.

Heironymous Bosch

So,TGF UKIP, perhaps you would care to set out a manifesto that would get your approval for the rest of us to consider?

Do bear in mind the very sensible comments made by Victor, NW Kent, when you do.

Susan Hill, you say; 'DC said 'just let us get in first.' Trouble is, you have to present policy alternatives for people to vote on, you can`t say, trust us, vote for us, then when we`re in you`ll see what our policies are. It`s worrying.'

Yup. But Blair did just that and the sheople voted for his smile... Perhaps if you would be patient and await the announcement of a GE date, then all parties will tell us about how they would set about government. 'Til then, we are in the situation where DC & co. really don't know what state the countries finances will be in when they pick up the reins. Very much more worryingly, the present bunch of loons have no idea either, despite their being in control(?).

Verity

TGI UKIP - Yes.

David

"a good old paternalistic Tory One Nation "

Like most of the Tory party throughout history until 1979, you mean?

geoff

Surely he also needs to think about getting a mandate for difficult cuts and painful tax rises?

Sure, he could win the election by staying quiet, but doesnt he need to be thinking now about how the country will react if he avoids talking about the tough issues and then immediatley sets about raising taxes and cutting spending?

johnny come lately

The Tony Blair Tribute Act is still on the road!

www.torybear.com/2009/04/hannans-speech.html

Now THAT was a LEADERS speech. Not the waffle acted out by Tony Cameron.

TGF UKIP

Verity, it's not even as though Dave and the Mekon are any good at PR either.

Good PR is subtle not clumsy like daft photo ops on a sled or getting caught on another photo op on a bike with your car in tow.

They are good con men, though, which is why Dave is now "Leader" of the poor old Tory Party.

Poor, poor Britannia!

Archie

But, Donald Fraser, what would be the point of all that? Cameron has shown that he is perfectly capable of completely ignoring suggestions from his deeply frustrated and erstwhile constituents on forums (fora?) such as this without all that high-tech legerdemain!

Archie

Verity: further to that, why is Cameron keeping on - and banishing to - the back benches, such obvious and popular talents as John Redwood, David Davis, Patrick Mercer and possibly countless others? Inferiority complex, perhaps?

Jack

Cameron, knows who he can rely on and I’m afraid Patrick Mercer and his friend Davis are not on that list.

Davis wants Cameron’s job and Patrick Mercer is a hypocrite and lacks moral courage and principle with his "you have to be loyal to your boss"

I honestly believe Mr Mercer’s trustworthiness to his boss, political party and to his constituents is not what it ought to be.