Does it matter what the government is called?

Rhoda Klapp

No, it doesn't matter what it's called, and it doesn't seem to matter what party it is either, or what was in its manifesto.

Still in the comfort zone, Speccy.

Donna

Not only is it important, it's one of the most crucial lessons the right has still to learn. For decades now we have allowed the left to dominate in the 'war of words', and so doing, so, set the political agenda.
Taxpayer funded spending becomes 'investment', which makes it all the more difficult to make the case for cuts. Suggesting that immigration is not a universally good this is 'racism' and the people who suggest such a thing 'bigots'. People who criticise Islam extremism and 'Islamophobes'. And so society becomes splintered, for which the right are blamed as 'opressors'.
When we start using language to our own advantage in the same way, the tide will start to turn against the socialism that has gripped this country for too long.

Victor Southern

As always the spin merchants of the Left are much cleverer than ours. There are a great many governing coalitions in the world today. Offhand I cannot think of one which is a coalition of equals. It seems that the basic requirement is a party which is dominant but not predominant in that parliament.

However, with a BBC controlled by socialists of various flavours that is how the Coalition will be described in future.

Vulture

'Does it matter what the Govt is called'?

Nah- 'Sponge-spined bunch of Liberal wimps' will do just fine.

David

It is a Conservative-led coalition, so call it that if you want to.

It is a 'coalition', so you can call it that too.

This is not 'clever', it's annoying Westminster bubble nonsense.

raymond jones

king president emporor politician, or general. maakes no diffs.If they are anygood.

Adam

Yes it does matter. I would much prefer that it was known as the 'consensus omnium bonorum'. Which is a bit sexist by default but..y'know [stuff] happens.

It doesn't add up...

You have the wrong answer. They're cuts forced by Labour's profligate spending. The message is:

Cuts? Labour's Lost

strapworld

Fairer descriptions could be either 'EU led', 'Conservative Lite','Liberal R Us',
'They break promises'.

But to moan about this latest Labour wheeze is pathetic. They must wait and return the favour.

tomdaylight

What does matter is that the media does not simply do the bidding of the Labour party. Fortunately this letter seems to have gone down with them like a cup of cold sick.

Alex Gallagher

I call them "the ToryDems".

yank

‘Coalition cuts’ sound better to voters than ‘Tory cuts’ or ’Tory-led cuts’.

.

You're sure of that, are you? Is that the common wisdom within the bubble?

I don't know which is more pathetic about this statement, that it exhibits the kneejerk fear of the unprincipled wets, or that it promulgates the unprincipled wets' spin that there are actually "cuts".

It's sort of a tossup.

yank

This does sorta remind me of the Left over here though, currently whimpering that the decline of their fortunes is a result of "language", and that conservatives are just tricking people with their "language" (because obviously anybody un-tricked would be a lefty, presumably).

So now the Left have been off tricking up their own language. There's some lefty professor out in California that's got a cottage industry going, dressing out lefty positions with the proper code words.

And there's some other lefty who's written a book entitled "What's The Matter With Kansas?" wherein he whimpers along these same lines, that the Left needs to find some way to trick the rubes in Kansas to support leftism, as it's obviously the best course, even as the Kansans foolishly disagree with their leftist betters.

Kansas is to be spun. That's the answer.

I got news for all the tricksters, spinners and political hustlers... and the leftist Spectator that believes similarly: The people in Kansas and on that pile of rocks know spin. Best get off this bit of foolishness.

Dimoto

Baldwin and clever, in the same sentence is, well, not clever.

Only a few lefties watch the Jon Snow (he dines with Gordon, you know) channel, so, no, it doesn't matter.

Hysteria

I wish it didn't - what Rhoda said..

But it does

so what Donna said....

Publius

What about the Balls-led Opposition? Because that is the reality of it now.

ollie

So this spin doctor has the media dancing to the tune of the Labour party. Hhhmmm. Should any of us be surprised?

David Ossitt

James Forsyth.

“Of course, this whole spat has been set off by a clever letter from Ed Miliband’s communications director Tom Baldwin to broadcasters objecting to their use of the word ‘coalition’ to describe the government on the grounds that it implies that the government is a collaborative enterprise.”

James are you being deliberately naive?

This all started weeks back, during Ed Miliband’s, was it his second, third or fourth re-launch when he, in public called the coalition the ‘conservative led government’ when this was followed within the hour by another labour spokesperson using precisely the same words it was clear, that from now on we would be hearing this phrase ad nauseam, each and every time a labour apparatchik was on air or else on camera.

It is straight out of the works of Joseph Goebbels, “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually..." etcetera

GDS

How about "Union led Opposition" in reply?

Paddy

Yes it does matter.

Labour need to be strung-up....and no mercy shown....until they admit to the deficit.

The champagne socialists of today's Labour party are very good at getting their message across....dirty street fighters.

Robert Eve

As long as the government is not Labour - who cares?

Paddy

It's taken you journos long enough to go with this story.

It's a whole week since this story broke.

And how about writing a piece on the two top civil servants who gave evidence at the select committee last week.....into how the last socialist leading labour party....took this country to the brink of bankruptcy by out of control spending.

P Reynolds

What do you expect from a UNION FUNDED OPPOSITION. They take my breath away with their arrogance.

Senor Frizby

I quite like "Labour induced cuts"

Londonerr

It matters only that Labour have sought to request journalists to follow their line.

It's another attempt of the left shaping the language we use and we should resists.

Journalists should throw those letters in the bin and say "we'll call the coalition what we damn well please, and when you, Labour, are in the editor's chair of your own news outlet, only then can you decide what you call things".

But James, what is so 'clever' about such a letter. It could be seen as a shame for any opposition to have to spend time on this minutia rather than on promoting ideas.

On such trifles is politics now made. Shame, shame, shame.

normanc

If it's not Conservative led what is it? A coalition of equals, where one side has 305 MP's and the other 75?

Surely it also suits both governing parties - the Lib Dems can try and distance themselves in private (and meetings with constituents if they want) from the reality of governing and right of centre conservatives can still squint through half closed eyes and pretend we don't really have a continuation of Darling's economic plan with one or two minor tweaks.

Nicholas

I like what Donna observed. The Labour Conspiracy connives at some cunning words and then gets every one on message (including the BBC) to repeat, repeat, repeat until they are drummed into every thick skull. Cameron either just doesn't get it or has some naive belief that sure and steady will prevail.

Here we have the same old Brown Gang, sans The Monster but now led by Igor, laughably calling themselves the "New Generation", successfully airbrushing out their 13 years of serial waste and multitude of other crimes against the English, calling the coalition the bad guys and getting away with it. You couldn't make it up.

Wake up Tories, for goodness sake.

TrevorsDen

Channel 4 - well there is a surprise.

Well said Publius and GDS and Mr Reynolds ...

If Channel 4 are reporting at the behest of the Labour Party then that is serious and worthy of comment.

How do Channel 4 refer to the German government? How does it refer to the Belgian government - oh sorry there isn't one.

It seems clear to me that the government IS a collaborative effort and Baldwin is wrong (well he is lying really).
When Laws resigned he was replaced by another LD - so that is evidence of collaboration to me.

strapworld

I am truly amazed that you are not following up Guido's story on Roberts!
:-
What Did Bob Roberts Know?

As the attention surrounding phone hacking widens beyond the News of the World, Guido thought he would be the first person to ask what former employees of other tabloid newspapers knew about the widespread practice.

Take former Mirror man Bob Roberts for example. Can he hand on heart suggest he had no idea phone hacking was taking place, when his newspaper was proven to be by far the worst “blaggers” by the Information Commissioner with nearly 2,000 cases of their journalists pretending to be someone they were not in order to gain information they were not entitled to, or worse still bribing phone company, HMRC or DVLC employees:

Richard

David Ossett: 'It is straight out of the works of Joseph Goebbels, “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually..." etcetera'

Just like the lie that the bankers' crisis is all Labour's fault, then? No Tory or Lib Dem ever gives an interview about anything without repeating that claim.

toco

Seems like Tom Baldwin is becoming the story which can be quite dangerous for him given Labour's Smeargate team of Damian McBride,Dolly Draper and Charlie Whelan plus last but not least Alistair Campbell all of whom were obliged to seek alternative employment.Not sure what happened with Baldwin at The Times but Guido has information that certain people are checking out his credentials to see whether he has any previous.Beware the Ides of March is probably appropriate for Red Ed's new mate.

David Ossitt

Richard

David Ossett:[sic] 'It is straight out of the works of Joseph Goebbels, “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually..." etcetera'

If you wish to make comment here Richard, it would be best if you should first learn how to copy without silly errors.

Hexhamgeezer

Surrender Monkeys?

2trueblue

Liebore can call it what they like, they just lie. Our very own public funded media machine does a great job for Liebore. Baldwin is now running it? The BBC ought to have the b...s to tell them to get lost.

Verity

It doesn't matter what the government is called as long as there are no lawyers around taking notes and names.

Richard

David Ossitt,

Apologies for the mistake with your name.

laverda

This article is way out of date. Even I wrote complaining to the bbc Daily Politics early lat week, and noticed today that brillo reverted to coalition.
Same old labour spin, smear, every trick in the book to 'brainwash' the public. Typical socialist ploy like never answering 'what about Woolas being appointed AFTER being found guilty by a court of judges as a shadow minister', not a hired help communications man found guilty of nothing.
Harman challenged weakly on the bbc politics show and couldn't/didn't answer.

Ian Walker

To my mind, the best label would be "T.F.I. Not A Labour Government"

Donald Fraser

Stunted Plans before Elections now tangle up Government in a Deadly Embrace

One start in any quest for an appropriate definition of the “Conservative-led coalition” is to first define the term “free market”. While it is a largely rhetorical term, “free market” is an essential component of Conservatism calling for a “rolling back” of state influence. The term “free” is rhetorical because every market must be policed in some manner or other, else it would be robbed. As such successful “self-policing” is a major key.

Policing is done by the few. So on the opposite end of the self-policing ideology, sits a “free market” distaste of “crowding out”. A self-policed market does not imply “mob justice”, but something akin to small-scale, mafia “big shots” who apply market pressures as the state turns a blind eye. If Mrs T liked “Only Fools and Horses” it was probably because of her eye on Boycie than Dell Boy.

The vilified “crowd” in “crowding out” is any quantity of superfluous state servants involved in providing service or goods, flooding the market and ruining incentives for private traders. However, the making of cuts while simultaneously celebrating “big society” is a risky business. It hints at certain capriciousness, a directionless lack of ideology, which pose as “meaningful cuts” but maybe cannot deliver the “rolling back” of state needed. So “Coalition cuts” not only sounds better, but they are precisely that. They are not “Tory cuts.”

This potentially ruinous direction of Conservative government for the UK is incited by entering into power with a stunted ideological model and needing to share it with a political group nursing a preference for state interference in the common good, the Lib Dems. Not only would Mrs T not subsidise ridiculous “green initiatives” to the tune of billions but she could not have been forced into a coalition because her stunted plans failed to capture a winning vote. The 1980s privatisation plans were clear before her election win. The leading edge of successful change is where “self-policing” works because “people get it”.

So what type of coalition is this? It is one which understands “crowding out” but does not understand “free market”. If “free market” for “renewables” means “no profitable investment”, that is why it should be so. Simply rolling back the state to reduce “crowding out”, without any simultaneous rhetoric in favour of “free markets”, fails as a “call to arms”. The critical mass of new people expecting to enjoy future economic gains will not be enough to support the vital self-policing element. Instead it will still leave the state charged with policing a market and with a terrible legacy of a premature “bonfire of Quangos” to impede it. One example was the announcement by Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government Eric Pickles in June 2010 to scrap National Indicators (NIs). NI11 "Engagement in the arts" was a sensible effort to create a rational set of self-policing standards.

Under such government a wave of new entrepreneurs is unlikely to arise, except for within those subsidised and ultimately unprofitable renewables. It is a tangle from which great good may unwittingly come, or great disaster. As the history of “Tanglefoot” brew says “on rising they experienced a sudden loss of steering and so unwittingly fell on the perfect name.” The “Conservative-led coalition” is a demolition “tangolition”. Who’ll drink to that?

PayDirt

I nominate Donald Fraser to replace Coulson as Cameron's Communications Director.

Alexander Pelling

Still, a useful straw has been cast into the wind. They will stop saying that the Coalition is "Conservative-led" if it appears to be a success.

David Ossitt

Richard

"David Ossitt,
Apologies for the mistake with your name."

Thank you Richard.

Corinium

Of course words matter. Labour have been very clever to push the 'Conservative-led' label. Remember how Michael Hesletine more or less put an end to CND and the Greenham Common protestors by calling them 'one sided disarmers'?

toni

David Ossett:[sic] 'It is straight out of the works of Joseph Goebbels, “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually..." etcetera'

Shouldn't be surprised at that hypocritical comment I suppose, but remind me, who began and is still attempting to perpetuate the lie that the financial melt-down was entirely Brown's fault?
Suggest you check out the Tory websites and comment boards where many have been economical with the actualité.

As for a new communications director, it has to be TrevorsDen; surely he’s earned it patrolling the internet for years defending Cameron, the Tory party and the coalition.
Come on, let’s be having you TD, out into the daylight!

Donald Fraser

A Quick and Efficient Muse

Thank you for your nomination PayDirt. I assume it satirical? Nevertheless, I would be proud to be available should any of Her Majesty’s government country call upon me to serve the country by bringing my intelligence to bear. It is a family tradition. However while I occasionally enjoy a chance to debate political matters, my practice in recent years is chiefly in the Spanish language. I am prepared to migrate abroad to pursue a political career elsewhere if necessary. Although I am Tory because of birth, the dissolute lifestyle I led in my youth is a significant barrier to entering political life. If I ever do so, it might well be for any party “that will have me”. In the meantime I would urge any serious publisher or government post-holder to approach me to discuss the grand sum of new economic theories I could make available to them at a most reasonable price. In the meantime I apologise to readers of my posts who find them lengthy as the “Coffee House” serves as a quick and efficient muse for me.

Nicholas Storey

What about Rugger (Tories)- Buggers (Lib Dems)?

Tarka the Rotter

I rather favour 'The Continuum'...