5 Months Later . . .

Perhaps thanks to the televised political debates David Cameron has been the prime minister for the United Kingdom for the past 5 months. In the televised political debates he won over the majority of the public with his well groomed facade which made Gordon Brown’s shabby one eyed appearance look even more in tatters and despite only being a year older, his slightly more technical terminology and passionate speeches showed up Nick Clegg’s youth. It can’t be denied that in the 5 months that his party has been in power that they have achieved a lot. They have managed to create 200 new academies, met the police targets, brought down ministers pay and have already saved £6 billion of spending for this year alone. But does it look like letting David Cameron lead the Tories back into power after 13 years, even with the coalition with the Lib Dems, will have been a successful choice for the public?
In his recent party conference in Birmingham his speech was smothered by clear-cut confidence and arrogance. David seemed to be a little too enthusiastic on his policies especially when it came to the whole “big society” part. He told us he desires us all too abruptly become best buddies and put every exertion into reforming the country as a whole (a job which he is paid to do?) It pretty much seemed that David doesn’t really know to cope with the changing society we live in today nor how to deal with creating jobs. He urged us all in his speech that if we want something we should go out there and get it, e.g. “Go demand the new school you want?” But let’s think, who would we ask that from? He went on to say “We will make work pay?” Well what work would that be? Has he promised to create new jobs for us then? But with the increase on VAT up to 20%, won’t that also mean we need a raise on the minimum wage too?

On top of this, there are of course the child benefit cuts. David Cameron wishes to stop anyone who earns over £45,000 from receiving child benefits, something which was universal throughout the country. He claims that those who earn more need to “bare their fair share of the burden” when it comes to helping our country get out of its apparent bankruptcy. It might be argued that it seems wise here to stop the benefits to those who can live without it. However it brings up a few implications. For example, two parents living together who both earn just under the £45,000 can still receive child tax credits unlike perhaps a single parent who earns £45,000. It could even be suggested that the Tories are implying here that families which only have one worker in the family are better off than those that perhaps have two. Even the Children’s Minister, Tim Lawton, implied in an interview that perhaps this policy should be revisited saying “If the thresholds need to be adjusted there is plenty of time to look at that”. Is this a sign of a weak and indecisive party with perhaps lacking in a strong leader and well thought out chancellor?

It look like the Conservatives may have to start paying a little more attention to details and David may have to stop spending so much time on flouncy speeches and a little more time proving that he actually does know what he is talking about. Maybe Nick Clegg will be able to help out soon? That’s if the Tories actually listen to him.

B.Deacon