Sunday, 15 November 2009

Not exactly a rush for the Tories

I have for the past 30 minutes been floating around the blogosphere in search for something interesting to read for my morning tea. I realise that at the time of this writing is 2.30PM and any tea drinking should have been done ages ago. Well, I say this; I am student, yesterday was Saturday, you do the maths. Alas, moving on one is desperately struggling to find something very interesting to read mostly because my fellow bloggers probably have not arisen yet from their rosy slumbers dreaming of a better future. I am sure that once they do wake the full wrath of their malcontent will spring forth like Labour in 1997.

Now, whilst there might not be any grand posts to read right now there surely will be by tonight. But on this note I wish to go quite on a different subject altogether. Most of you will have noticed how Labour won the Glasgow North by-election by 58% when only 30% bothered to vote, put in other terms that means that only 17% of people actually wanted Labour to be in power for another shitty term. Fair enough, it is their vote and their opinion and one cannot but criticise their judgement but not their conviction.

But why did the Tories not win? Why were they almost beaten to fourth place by a gang of non-politicians who barely have a penny to their name (BNP) and where the Tories have millions upon millions of pounds pouring in from gullible donors wishing to get their hands on the next piece of British social architecture waiting to be privatised during their incoming reign. What will it be this time you ask? The BBC, Royal Mint, Royal Mail, Met Office and maybe even the MoD?

Just because something is mismanaged due to another government's misgivings does not give you the right to sell of our ancient institutions. We know you want to and you know we do not want to, we have told you time and time again; we like our national institutions, they provide pride where our government consistently fails - well 'pride' may perhaps not be the best word but I for one would have lunch with the head of the Queen Elizabeth Conference centre any day, before any one of the ministers from this government or the incoming.

So why is that when Labour are universally despised and will most likely become the third party at next election, HM Opposition are not cashing in on it? Sure they are consistently ahead 10% points in the polls but that is nothing compared to Blair before the election in 1997. The BNP are cashing in like never before and even the Greens and UKIP are hopping on that bandwagon. The latest poll on this issue has the minor parties on 18% where they previously only attained around 9%. Why are they not cashing in then? Everything Labour touches turns to rust and eventually dust - they are wholly incapable and fully incompetent when it comes to running this country and even the French could probably do a better job. We have sold of our electricity grid to them (EDF) so might we not follow suite with our government as well?

On a more serious note though, the Tories are not being honest about what they are going to do and certainly, probably, do not know what they are going to do. But most importantly they are wholly oblivious to what we want them to do.

Recall this poll, posted a few days ago. According to it Defence and Armed Forces, Immigration, Relationship with Europe (I presume they intended for this to be the EU since we seem to have little problem with the 47 nation entity that entails 'Europe' but are in a world of trouble when it comes to the 27 nation conglomerate known collectively as the EU) and Unemployment.

If we look at two of these areas one-by-one I think we will get a very clear picture of how the Tories, by this time in 2013, will be as despised as Labour are now. Any Tory supporters feel free to oblige me on the erroneous points I am, perhaps, about to make.

Unemployment: They will roll out a massive programme of apprenticeships. That sounds good but quite where are all these apprenticeships going to come from? The manufacturing sector only accounts for 12% or Britain's Economy and if you think that lads of 15-18years are going to be content with working in a boutique as part of their educations you are sadly mistaken. Boys are boys, presumably they will be given a choice as where to get their apprenticeship then? What about girls then? Well, if we are to believe the government's demonising statistics the problem makers are the white middle class boys ergo there wont be any problem with the girls. That seems to be the current orthodoxy at least. Lord Mandelson said something, for a change, clever, he figured we ought to start building 'stuff' again. Quite right Mr. Mandelson. What is more there is enough coal supply left to supply the nation for another 600 years. Dig the damn thing up, process it, invest in clean technology and burn it. Mr. Cameron would never do such a thing of course because it would piss of the Greenies and interfere with the housing schemes being built where the old coal mines once stood (there are a 1 million empty homes in London alone, what is that figure nationwide, why must we destroy the Green Belt when there simply is no need?)

Of course there is the elephant in the room which no one ever discusses. I was speaking to a Polish friend the other day and he was saying that he could not believe how tolerant we are in this country upon which I went into a tirade of why this was, connecting it with relevant pieces of history showing why extremist parties have had such a hard time (until now) in the UK. He went 'aha' and only concluded that if 2 million Brits had flowed into his country the equivalent of the BNP there would have got a majority and formed a government. What this little analogy is to purport is that immigrants do take jobs and if the government has a back-up plan to find jobs for the domestic youth then that is fine, problem is of course that there are not nearly enough jobs to go around since there is no back-up plan. We get the regular government pundits telling us that immigrants are not stealing jobs and how they add lots to the economy. This is another one of those common sense areas where it simply is not worth the time and energy listening to what the government has to say on the issue. You must have balanced immigration or quacks like the BNP start to rise up and demand to be counted. This ties nicely in with the unemployment issue in that people will be unemployed if there are not enough jobs to go around and haranguing the leader of the BNP on the BBC is not going to help particularly if the entire show is patronising the person whom more and more people are, wrongly in my opinion, starting to associate with.

Immigration: As the above paragraph hopefully showed there is a problem with immigration in this country in that it is far far too high. The tories propose to put a cap on these numbers yet they refuse to tell us what that cap might be set at. 10,000 or 100,000 we just do not know why they are completely untrustworthy on this issue. What is more they have not said if they are going to end the practise whereby immigrants are allowed to bring their spouses and children into the country after having settled down - a practise banned in every single european country but which the Labour government lifted in the UK in 1997, presumably as part of their plan to create a "truly multicultural Britain". What of the illegal immigrants then? There are as many as 1,000,000 - 2,000,000 illegals who bring absolutely nothing to this country at all. Going by what Boris said they will all get an amnesty if he were in command. Then we have the asylum seekers who Baroness Warsi so haphazardly told us was a legal term. Quite. However whilst she might be content that it is a legal term having reminded a man with a Law degree (Nick Griffin, and I know we should not take him seriously but we will damn well have to start to unless we want BNP MPs in the HoC - get of your lazy arse PC buts and write something constructive to aid the debate against the BNP instead of ostracising me for having reminded you that while Nick Griffin may have some pretty dodgy views he is not a stupid man) that was so, she seems to have forgotten what the 1951 Geneva Convention has to say on the issue. It says that an asylum seeker must seek refuge in the first country he/she passes through on his/her escape. Well Britain is at the end of the world as far as they are concerned and there is a whole swathe of countries between us and wherever they are coming from. They are by that token illegal asylum seekers who are preventing the truly desperate ones from reaching the UK and getting help. Why are they coming here? Simple, we have a very cushy benefits system where asylum seekers get £40 a week for their abode - an astronomical sum in some countries. If you want a really good analysis on the judicial aspect of them system please go here.

If you think I am telling you all this because I am cold-hearted capitalist scum you are wrong. I am telling you this because we cannot help people anymore who really need British help. What will the Tories do about all this? Nothing, everything they have proposed so far smacks well below average for they might lose voters in their quest to make the UK a better place, why they refuse to make the tough choices. Which is why I will reiterate my diktat time and time again; the Tories will not win in 2013 but neither will Labour - the oligopoly on British politics has ended.

No comments: