David Miliband
David Miliband has described David Cameron as a loudmouth because he disagrees with the Prime Minister’s directness over Gaza and Pakistan. Not only is this a truly absurd description of the smoothest talker in British politics, but it says a great deal about Miliband’s rotten judgement. It also tells us why he was such a lousy foreign secretary and why his brother in garnering a surprising amount of support in the Leadership ballot.
Melting Pot
There is a lot going on with this new government and we are beginning to see a major shift of emphasis right across the spectrum. Not all of it is yet in effect, but it is quite a list.
There is an edgier approach to foreign policy as discussed recently in this Blog, which recognises the differences between policy which can be clear, candid and critical, and the more emollient diplomacy which follows in its wake. On the financial front we see sound money and a secure and responsive financial structure taking precedence over government initiatives and vested interests. From the Home Office we see a review of round the clock drinking and ineffective ASBO’s; the latter too often regarded as a trophy rather than a restraint. Police Commissioners are to be elected and Special Constables restored. In defence there are some signs that waste will be reined in and incompetence rooted out. The discovery of tens of thousands of idle civil servants too expensive to make redundant is shocking and proposed legislation to make their pay offs affordable is welcome. Placing GPs at the heart of the health service is the best idea since the whole thing was set up by Bevan after WWII.
There is another list where itentions and application appear unmatched. First in line for criticism comes Education. It is very good to signal a more rational approach to exams with fewer of them and more emphasis on learning rather than memorising. The learn and churn culture has had its day. So has the idea that powerless teachers can keep good discipline and directing how they teach from Whitehall will improve standards. What is not clear is that home made schools or a needless rush to Academies will be good in the long term. Neither is it clear what is to happen to leaking and crumbling schools whose rebuilding has been stopped. On th Constitutional Reform front, the new bill is a mess and the author of its own political difficulties. There is a Tory Lib Dem majority for fewer constituencies of even size; there is a Lab Lib Dem majority for AV voting. Two bills were needed. Neither measure requires endorsement by referendum and both could pass into law on simple parliamentary majorities. Last but by no means least, there has been a failure to come up with anything new for Afghanistan which faces reality.
Nevertheless when all is said and done there are more positives than negatives which will change our country for the better. The Coalition can feel confident. So can Labour. If it elects a new leader with whom voters can identify and recognises where it went wrong (and where it went right) it can provide refreshing and powerful opposition with the prospect of returning to power before its present senior ranks are pensioned off. This tension between the camps will be good. We do not need just an edgier foregn policy. We need edgier home politics too.