Friday 16 July 2010

Taking stock of the Conservative Party, or as I shall now call them "The Boring Old Men with Piles" Party

The Conservative/Lib Dem era is now upon us, and for the first time, I think I understood how their PR and media policy is going to work. Option One, when unveiling a sweeping new initiative, is to bring on a nervous, stuttering Lib Dem to announce that "No, no this is in no way the complete opposite of what the Liberal Democrats campaigned for in the election, and we wholeheartedly agree with our new Conservative partners".
Option Two, when the new government really means business, is to bring out a senior Tory, who will haughtily explain how the new reforms will work and will look at any interviewer who asks questions with an irritation you might show a difficult child. The main culprits this week have been Andrew Lansley, the Health Secretary, who appeared in front of a panel of GPs on Newsnight on Monday and Francis Maude, who was a speaker on last night's Question Time. Both very seriously explained how the most dramatic reforms to the National Health Service since its creation are necessary to cut waste and bureacracy, whilst shifting in their seats in the manner of one who has rather nasty piles and frowning at any questions that dissenters may ask.
That's the Tory weapon: the Labour one was to look flustered, or to use general obfuscation when asked about the contradictions in their shiny new policy initiatives. The coalition government will get round to this in due time, I'm sure, they've already got down perfectly the ability to completely contradict journalists.
It's the composition of the new Cameron government, I think. After the election, the point was made about how few women are in this new coalition cabinet. Not just that, but with the exception of Dave and George, the new government seems to comprise some real silver foxes, all of whom look at you like a stern uncle, should you feign to question the notion that what the new government is doing is in the country's best interest.
When undertaking such sweeping changes to the education and health systems of this country, as this government is doing, there's a certain need to make them sound attractive, necessary, even hopeful - especially in the wake of one of the worst recessions this country has seen in a long time.

The new government, though, just reminds me of a cabal of line managers: the ones you get at work in any office or department store, the ones who hand down new initiatives, new cost-cutting measures. The ones who check on your work, tell you to work harder and better and faster. The ones who, when you try to get them to smile, simply give you a blank look, because managers and their underlings can't possibly be on the same wavelength.
The massive cuts to public services and public sector jobs, have been justified by the argument that the private sector will jump in and create the jobs that will be lost. This is part of Cameron's election promise "to get Britain working again". To be fair, he can sometimes look as though he means it. The rest of his cabinet have these elderly patrician faces which stare back at you and remind you of the truth: that slightly humourless men in grey suits are part and parcel of every organisation, that the private sector is as much about bureaucracy as the public sector in our post-industrial country. For example, the fact that nPower and Eon are private electricity companies doesn't stop them mindlessly sending you letters about court summons if you happen to be behind on one payment. Nor does it prevent you being put through to a myriad number of call centres when you ring up your bank with a question.
The private sector is a place for new business ideas, enterprise. But the government should throw its weight behind these, looking at ways in which new and small businesses can be helped. Championing the private sector rings hollow in a Britain where most high streets look exactly the same and Tesco can drive a lot of local grocery shops out of business. The public sector costs money and areas of cost cutting can be found. However, in the case of the NHS reshuffle, the BBC has revealed that these measures will cost 1.7 billion to implement; the NHS personnel who will lose their jobs need a good explanation, because with these figures, the British public is left with no logic, and the reforms essentially amount to "private sector good, public sector bad". This is a tired and cruelly familiar neo-liberal refrain, which needs reconsideration.
The age of austerity has been championed as a political necessity by the coalition government. It may not be the government's role to make it's people happy all the time; but the face of the next decade is looking increasingly boring, uncaring, wrinkled when you have, well, bored, uncaring, wrinkled politicians on Newsnight telling you a primary care trust is a waste of money, that your school isn't going to get any money this year, that you can't have Thunderbird Island for Christmas.

No, wait, I just had a flashback to 1993.

No comments: