Cameron's gamble

Notting Hillbilly

What's Cameron meant do turn back the flood waters himself?

Richard Jenkins

Crisis? What crisis? Dave was twelve in early 1979, you'd think he would remember, but perhaps he wasn't interested in politics then. The question is,is he interested in politics now?

James T Kirk

If the floods are going to become a political issue, it won't be until Cameron is back in Britain on Wednesday. The bulldog spirit seems to be prevalent at the moment, and no one seems to be criticizing Brown or the Government. So if Cameron does lose political capital over this, it will only be because those critics have it in for him whatever he does. When will we again see a time that a Tory leader doesn't have to walk on eggshells?

Curly

I was predicting the same precarious outcome at 10.23 this morning, I hope the exercise doesn't turn sour. Brown seems to be gaining esteem at the moment.

TomTom

Cameron should read some political biography - say Helmut Schmidt, Golda Meir, Harry Truman, Alexander Kerensky......and should learn what crises are to a politician. Then he might see that he has abandoned his constituency in a crisis - he has lived up to that criticism of Blair - that he was everywhere but HERE. We now look very clearly at Labour Post-Blair and Conservatives besotted with Blair. The student political theoreticians around Cameron should start pounding the streets to learn what people think and I should not imagine Witney will be as safe a Conservative seat in future. Bromley was different from Ealing and Sedgfield but in all three cases Non-Voters increased substantially...I should think recent events might make Witney another Bromley. This petulant behaviour by Cameron looks like a personality flaw for which his Party will pay dearly.

Craig Masson

Another example of people looking at the wrong side of things. What is David supposed to do there? What is Brown actually doing? Is he putting down sandbags, pumping water and helping to carry sofas upstairs? Does Brown ACTUALLY care about the damage and that's why he's there, or is it because he wants to be seen to be caring about the people of Britain? What does he normally do during the day that is so unimportant that he can spend his time in a helicopter looking at the floods? I think David has it right - let the emergency services do what they do best without having to help a politician get around. When it comes to the aftermath, that's when they should get involved helping to stop it happen again.

RK

You are missing the point Craig. No political photo-call or fact finding visit ever achieves much in itself. Brown won’t be filling sandbags in Gloucester but neither will Cameron be building any orphanages in Rwanda. However that is irrelevant. What these visits reveal is where their political priorities lie. Even though it is in some ways an empty gesture a political leaders place in times of crisis say a lot about what they believe in. Cameron is making a political statement by carrying on with his visit. He would present it as showing how much he cares about international aid and the alleviation of world poverty. A poor choice of topic if he is looking for a vote winner but a policy that does fit in very nicely with the new (not nasty) Tory party image he wants to build. It will be present by his opponents as just how little he cares about the ordinary voter, how out of touch he is and perhaps how bad he’d be in a crisis as PM. Yes it’s all smoke and mirrors but that is politics in the age of the 24hr media. Cameron has gambled here and I for one think he has made another error.

Mike

The political issue will arrive during the reckoning, not during the crisis. The reckoning will begin at PMQs on Wednesday when Cameron will ask why Brown cut funding for flood defences and intends to build new homes on flood plains. It's brave of DC to fly to Rwanda but in the big scheme of things pretty inconsequential

DB

"he was everywhere but HERE" He was also in his constituency talking to flood stricken residents for three days.

Lee Jakeman

Well, the new Tony Blair has to be seen gallivanting around the world solving everyone else's problems except our own. Oh for an ENGLISH leader...

Minnie Ovens

Bad strategy, bad timing and bad execution. In other words a continuation of more of the same. The British have a great sympathy for impoverished people as has been shown again and again. But lately they are becoming hardened against more celebrities doing a flashdance and disappearing with their money There is also the growing opinion that money for overseas aid seems to go straight to private bank accounts in Zurich. Half a Trillion Dollars for Africa? What do we see for it? It is prabable that there is little Cameron could do to alleviate the Witney suffering but to wander off to Rwanda at the actual period of a flood surge appears to everyone to another brick in the "all concept, no substance" image. Whacky Dave run the country? is the question asked. Lastly it is all very well speechifying on the need for stronger third world economies to prevent immigration but that is so far out , in left field and in time, that it is mind numbing and will be a source of growing anger as he continues to evade any real showdown with Brown on many near term critical issues. Eight more percentage points of GDP to government in ten years? European constitution without referendum? Bloated and interfering government in its inexorable advance? Not important.