Rishon Rishon

UK Votes

The UK votes tomorrow:

Labour leader Tony Blair is continuing his warnings about the Conservatives by claiming they would risk the economy and investment in public services.

Tory leader Michael Howard has used a campaign rally to promise that his party could deliver hope to a Britain saddled with a "failing" government.

Charles Kennedy predicted the Lib Dems would take a "massive step forward".

That's from the front page of the BBC news at the moment. The rest of the article, typically, concerns itself with the election tactics and says almost nothing about the issues. This monologue by David Frum pretty much sums up my feelings:

“You’ve been dreading this. Tony Blair has called an election. Now you are finally going to have to make up your mind: Do you hope he wins or loses?”

“Why do I have to answer that? I am not a British voter. Why can’t I just say that I’m glad that both Blair and Conservative leader Michael Howard are such strong friends of America – and that the special relationship will remain special no matter which of them wins?”

“What? Are you telling me that you, a right-wing Republican – that you can’t instantly choose between a socialist and a fellow conservative?”

“Well it’s complicated isn’t it? I mean Tony Blair has been as staunch an ally as America has in the world. From the beginning of the war on terror, he has been magnificent: brave, eloquent, thoughtful, and incredibly helpful. Don’t all Americans, right and left, owe him equal support in return? And it’s not as if his domestic record has been so very bad from a conservative point of view. UK taxes remain low by European standards. Unemployment is down, home ownership up.”

“Have you gone soft in the head? True, Blair may not be a socialist fanatic like some of his predecessors. But he’s more than bad enough. He has abolished the deduction for mortgage interest. He has raised fuel taxes. He has increased contributions to Britain’s national insurance system. And worse is definitely ahead: Blair has relaxed his grip on public spending – it’s risen from 38% of the national income to 42% over the past three years. He wants to spend even more in the years to come. That’s why it is so important to replace him now.”

“Replace him? With what? Michael Howard’s new model Conservative party is not exactly boiling with free-market zeal. They have offered a derisory tax cut – and promise almost as much new spending as Labor. And they have actually attacked some of Tony Blair’s most rational reforms, such as his proposals to charge university students more of the cost of their own education.”

“There’s no comparison. Howard and Blair are both pragmatists. They both recognize limits on how far and fast they can go. But Howard wants to go in the right direction and Blair in the wrong one. Besides, there are other issues: crime, social order, the abuse of the immigration system, welfare, family cohesion. On all of those issues, Blair’s record has been just dreadful.”

“I’ll concede that many of the Conservatives’ proposals on these issues are excellent: more police, longer prison sentences, more authority for teachers to remove disruptive students, and so on. But will the Conservatives ever do more than propose? There is a dreadful whiff of opportunism over today’s Conservative party – summed up by their disturbing past vacillation (and current silence) over Iraq."

“That’s not fair! Individual Conservative M.P.s may have gone wobbly, but the party’s leaders have been rock solid on Iraq. Michael Howard personally founded a new organization, the Atlantic Partnership, that seeks to reinvigorate personal ties across the Atlantic. You even accepted his invitation to join. You can’t blame Howard for holding Blair to account for inaccurate statements about Iraq. Didn’t Disraeli say that it was the duty of an opposition to oppose?”

“Disraeli said a lot of cynical and foolish things. The duty of an opposition is to prepare itself to form an effective alternative government . The Conservatives’ willingness to score cheap points off the Blair government on Iraq will greatly compromise their own effectiveness should they win on May 5.”

“Maybe so. That’s nothing though compared to the harm Blair is doing to his future effectiveness by his support for the European Constitution. If Blair gets his way, the next prime minister of Britain won’t be able to help the United States no matter how strongly he wants to: Those decisions will be taken in Brussels, not London.”

“Why can’t British voters re-elect Blair now and then reject the Constitution later?”

“It doesn’t work like that. A victory for Blair will be interpreted as a victory for EU integration.”

“And a defeat for Blair will be interpreted as a defeat for the pro-war coalition.”

“So, hmmm, as the British say.”

“Yes. Hmmm.”