Skip to main content

Boris is running on empty

After all the trailblazing, the Tory manifesto for the general election is devoid of substance. It contains little to indicate an end to the misery of nine years of needless austerity or to repair the damage done by endless cuts to critical services such as the NHS, social care and children's services.

So bland is the manifesto presented by Boris Johnson that one of the outstanding features is more funding to repair potholes!

The Tory manifesto offers no new vision of the future, Brexit or no Brexit. There is no real picture of the new horizon that Boris claims will come from leaving the European Union.

The manifesto he tells us is a "partial blueprint." Partial? Half a blueprint? A quarter? What, indeed, is an incomplete plan? Imagine building a house with only one-half of the architect's drawings.


Boris Johnson is playing it safe. It was at this time in the election of 2017 that things are thought to have unravelled for his predecessor, Mrs May. But the Tories are so worried about putting a foot wrong that they have now produced the blandest manifesto possible. No new horizon - all is pinned on Brexit.

The idea is that if they say very little, there will be less risk. But that in itself might be the moment when things go belly-up. Labour offers a vision for the future. It sets out its plans in a bold manifesto. The Tory manifesto is like walking in a drizzle without a raincoat.

Boris repeats his mantra of "getting Brexit done". He guesses that it will win over sufficient voters to give him victory at the polls. To beat him, Corbyn must now sweep up the substantial part of the remain vote. It is a tall order because they don't fall readily in place as Labour voters, and certainly not for a leader as radically left as they perceive Jeremy Corbyn.

In this, the opinion polls might come to Jeremy Corbyn's assistance. If the Tories extend their national lead, it might sufficiently concentrate the minds of those voters reluctant to put Corbyn in Downing Street.

Nobody knows how to interpret the opinion polls at this time. The national mood is difficult to gauge. Commentators remark on the mismatch between the kind of reception Corbyn gets and the state of the parties in the polls. Others in Labour's camp will worry that it will be a repeat of the 1983 election when enthusiastic crowds greeted the Labour leader, Michael Foot, wherever he went, but Labour crashed in the final poll.

The difference is the generational divide. Jeremy Corbyn's Labour is greeted enthusiastically by younger voters and indeed some older ones. But overall there is a generational divide between older voters backing the Tories and younger ones supporting Labour.

Geographical divide also makes difficult the interpretation of the national polling.

Boris has played safe, but it is too safe. There is little in the Tory manifesto that 'unleashes potential'. The only big idea is Brexit. He is selling what he knows to be mythology - a version of 'it will be alright on the night'. Boris, it seems, is running on empty.

With empty promises and a partial vision, Boris may bumble his way through. But then he may not. Labour offers a better vision for the future. Better on the environment; better on health; better on education; better on children; better for pensioners. Sadly, it might work for Boris, but Boris offers little to nothing for the future.





Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba

Prioritising people in nursing care.

There has been in recent years concern that care in the NHS has not been sufficiently 'patient centred', or responsive to the needs of the patient on a case basis. It has been felt in care that it as been the patient who has had to adapt to the regime of care, rather than the other way around. Putting patients at the centre of care means being responsive to their needs and supporting them through the process of health care delivery.  Patients should not become identikit sausages in a production line. The nurses body, the Nursing and Midwifery Council has responded to this challenge with a revised code of practice reflection get changes in health and social care since the previous code was published in 2008. The Code describes the professional standards of practice and behaviour for nurses and midwives. Four themes describe what nurses and midwives are expected to do: prioritise people practise effectively preserve safety, and promote professionalism and trust. The

When Finance Drives Destruction

Tackling climate change means stopping the funding of rainforest destruction, says a significant study commissioned by the World Wildlife Fund.  The UK's financial services have provided directly over £8.7 billion to 167 different traders, processors, and buyers of forest-risk commodities (cocoa, rubber, timber, soy, beef, palm oil, pulp & paper) from 2013 to 2021.   With direct and indirect investment,  the figure rises to a staggering £200 bn.  Whilst not all that investment is in destructive projects,  the study concludes there is little transparency on the risk.  Finance is the oil in the economic machine.  But it also drives decisions. We all know the importance of money. We borrow to invest. So much depends on it, such as company pensions.  Do we really know what our pension pots are doing? We invest for the future. But what kind of future? Is all investment good?  Much investment is bad. Investment drives the nature of our economy. It drives our decisions as individuals,