I'm not a lip reader so I couldn't discern what words passed between David Cameron and Ed Milliband as they walked into the Lord's yesterday for the Queen's Speech.
But the body language suggested that it was amicable.
Later of course the posturing and squaring up took place as the debate between the parties was conducted across the House of Commons.
I couldn't help feeling however that whilst we witness a ritual it is formulaic:
This speech is radical and will bring down the debt burden and kick start the economy being argued by one side, whilst the other side argues that the speech brings no hope to the poorest and imposes further strains on the domestic budgets of the squeezed middle.
In reality, however, I suspect that as Mr Cameron and Mr Milliband walked into the Lord's what we were seeing was a clear statement that both men are constrained by realities that mean that their room for manoeuvre is pretty limited and that if he was in power, Mr Milliband would have to follow a much similar programme to the one Mr Cameron is pursuing.
In other countries across Europe austerity is being rejected, Greece, having elected a neo Nazi Party cannot form an administration and France has elected a socialist President whose platform was to reject and renegotiate the austerity programme adopted by his predecessor.
The evidence from the Queens Speech suggests that the message is, there's not a lot anyone can do.
As Liam Byrne stated in his famous note: There's no money left.
The Conservatives, aided and abetted by Mr Clegg, argue that a spendthrift, Labour administration spent it all on a welfare programme that sapped the moral strength of those caught in the welfare 'trap' making their dependency a national scandal.
Well, as was once famously stated, they would wouldn't they, because of course they don't want to expose their friends and supporters in financial services who over the years have seen bonuses increase exponentially and who have trousered the profits and shifted them to offshore tax havens.
This Queen's Speech reads a little like a note saying we only have one plan, Plan A, and we are sticking with it.
So before long, as the squeeze tightens, we will see more cuts in Welfare, pensioners benefits, means tested and more and more people on low incomes having to choose between heating and eating.
The headlines were economy and justice.
But neither of these words were used in their classical sense as one might have expected from a bunch of old Etonians.
The word economy derives from the Greek word Oikumene, which refers to the interaction of religion, philosophy and political administration as it shapes society.
It is about more than money.
It is about more than who banks the bonuses or who has their welfare payments reduced.
The economy of British society, linked as it is to both European Society and the wider global society, is a reflection of how human beings interact with, share in and contribute to the common good.
The classic dilemma is austerity versus spending.
If the economy is to be the major focus of the parliamentary year we need to be certain that continued austerity will not simply drive down demand and throttle growth.
In the speech, the word justice, simply refers to the criminal justice system, televised magistrates courts and speedier and more draconian sentencing.
There will be more constitutional change as individual rights are challenged.
But again, in its classical sense, justice, or the rule of law, should lie at the heart of rebuilding trust in politics and be the key mechanism for revitalising engagement in the democratic process.
It is wrong that Governments and Mayors can be elected by one in ten of the electorate because the other nine voters have lost all faith in the democratic process.
I don't imagine that these thoughts were being shared by the the PM and the Leader of the Opposition yesterday, according to the BBC News, they were talking about their children.
But the body language suggested that it was amicable.
Later of course the posturing and squaring up took place as the debate between the parties was conducted across the House of Commons.
I couldn't help feeling however that whilst we witness a ritual it is formulaic:
This speech is radical and will bring down the debt burden and kick start the economy being argued by one side, whilst the other side argues that the speech brings no hope to the poorest and imposes further strains on the domestic budgets of the squeezed middle.
In reality, however, I suspect that as Mr Cameron and Mr Milliband walked into the Lord's what we were seeing was a clear statement that both men are constrained by realities that mean that their room for manoeuvre is pretty limited and that if he was in power, Mr Milliband would have to follow a much similar programme to the one Mr Cameron is pursuing.
In other countries across Europe austerity is being rejected, Greece, having elected a neo Nazi Party cannot form an administration and France has elected a socialist President whose platform was to reject and renegotiate the austerity programme adopted by his predecessor.
The evidence from the Queens Speech suggests that the message is, there's not a lot anyone can do.
As Liam Byrne stated in his famous note: There's no money left.
The Conservatives, aided and abetted by Mr Clegg, argue that a spendthrift, Labour administration spent it all on a welfare programme that sapped the moral strength of those caught in the welfare 'trap' making their dependency a national scandal.
Well, as was once famously stated, they would wouldn't they, because of course they don't want to expose their friends and supporters in financial services who over the years have seen bonuses increase exponentially and who have trousered the profits and shifted them to offshore tax havens.
This Queen's Speech reads a little like a note saying we only have one plan, Plan A, and we are sticking with it.
So before long, as the squeeze tightens, we will see more cuts in Welfare, pensioners benefits, means tested and more and more people on low incomes having to choose between heating and eating.
The headlines were economy and justice.
But neither of these words were used in their classical sense as one might have expected from a bunch of old Etonians.
The word economy derives from the Greek word Oikumene, which refers to the interaction of religion, philosophy and political administration as it shapes society.
It is about more than money.
It is about more than who banks the bonuses or who has their welfare payments reduced.
The economy of British society, linked as it is to both European Society and the wider global society, is a reflection of how human beings interact with, share in and contribute to the common good.
The classic dilemma is austerity versus spending.
If the economy is to be the major focus of the parliamentary year we need to be certain that continued austerity will not simply drive down demand and throttle growth.
In the speech, the word justice, simply refers to the criminal justice system, televised magistrates courts and speedier and more draconian sentencing.
There will be more constitutional change as individual rights are challenged.
But again, in its classical sense, justice, or the rule of law, should lie at the heart of rebuilding trust in politics and be the key mechanism for revitalising engagement in the democratic process.
It is wrong that Governments and Mayors can be elected by one in ten of the electorate because the other nine voters have lost all faith in the democratic process.
I don't imagine that these thoughts were being shared by the the PM and the Leader of the Opposition yesterday, according to the BBC News, they were talking about their children.
No comments:
Post a Comment