You are here:   Columns >  The Outsider's Diary >
 
July 2008

In a speech about making Britain more “family-friendly” Mr Cameron expanded on the idea recently: “We've got to ensure that every family has access to the emotional support and help they need - in the relationship and after separation, should it be necessary.” But what on earth is he going on about? Why is it the state’s job to support people if they split up with their partners? What will the help consist of? Counselling? Assistance with the shopping? A state-sponsored replacement? If the state can help you when your relationship splits up, why doesn’t it go the whole hog and step in beforehand? Or set suitable couples up at a central-government level? It is not in the distracting touchy-feeliness of such sentiments, but the reflex belief in the universal applicability of the state that the Left’s ideological victory is clearest. If people have a problem then the state must have an answer.

Many Conservative party members reject this carping. Most are simply happy that people are looking at them again. But perhaps they should consider more deeply the electorate’s current interest in them. Is it really love? Or are they just on the rebound?

Our armed forces face overstretch and even possible defeat in Afghanistan. Our tax payments to various arms of the state rise, year after year. Our sovereignty is eroded on a daily basis in practical ways by Brussels. And yet we continue with an alarming policy on immigration.

To slip for a moment into the language of Cameronism: if someone is in trouble and you care about them, you shouldn’t pretend that they’re doing just fine. You should try to help them understand where they are going wrong. And turn them around.

View Full Article
 
Share/Save
 
 
 
 
Richard
July 8th, 2008
5:07 PM
Thanks, Douglas, for a very interesting article from the other side of the political pond. I have been starting to advocate a smaller state approach for the Labour Party, but I doubt I'll get anything more than abuse. Too many sectional interests.

Charles Brickdale
July 4th, 2008
9:07 AM
On education the Conservatives have a policy which represents, potentially, the beginnings of a serious challenge to the hegemony (yes, very Gramscian) over their most powerful means of transmitting their ideology and obsessions to the young. Gove's approach is not radical enough, yet, but is a move in the right direction; for one thing, it implicitly threatens the statist consensus in education. Who else, who is edging towards power, has such a policy on which future governments could build? It ain't wonderful but, thanks to David Davis' defeat in the leadership election, it is the best we are going to get for the foreseeable future. Until the Right revives and produces a credible leader and strategy for disseminating its ideas what do we do - leave the field to Brown, Balls and the LibDems?

Hamish Carlisle
July 2nd, 2008
8:07 PM
It is a worry, but there are still swathes of supposedly educated people who seem incurably infected with various forms of political correctness. Perhaps after the victory of the ersatz conservatives we can have them all sent to North Korea for decontamination classes?

Anonymous
June 30th, 2008
2:06 AM
Honestly, what is the difference between the Tories and Labour?! Thanks for the laugh Mr Murray, as long as "Dave" is around you won't run out of material.

Post your comment

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.