For all the talk of revolution, upheaval and change, nothing much is going to happen in British politics this side of a general election, which still looks likely to happen a year from now.
Yes, Speaker Michael “Gorbals” Martin has gone and that was unprecedented, but nothing else has really changed. Listening to the feeble, glib Lib Dem leader Nick “Cleggover” Clegg talk about “change” at Prime Minister’s Questions today reminded me of President Barack Obama’s fatuous “Yes we can” mantra, where he talked endlessly about renewing or overturning status quos, but never said in what way things would be different. When LibDems talk of change, we can assume they mean switching the electoral system to proportional representation. (That isn’t going to happen, but if it did, I’d go for the French system, which means only a 50 per cent majority wins. If there is no such winner, the top two run off a week later).
Prime Minister Gordon Brown also told Parliament that a general election would cause “chaos”, and that sounded a bit Stalinist to me, as though he was about to say that he had appointed himself President for Life. Any other party leadership would cause “chaos”. That’s a bit rich coming from the most incompetent (cowardly, arrogant, bully) in our prime ministerial history.
Columnists like Simon Heffer of the Daily Telegraph have suggested that somehow the Queen might be induced to dig up one of her long lost prerogatives and dissolve Parliament, on the grounds that the Expenses scandal is somehow a national emergency. Let’s face it, if the Queen wouldn’t act when asked to sign the European Act, which conceded Britain’s centuries-old right of self-determination, there’s no chance she will imperil herself and her heirs over this relatively Mickey Mouse problem.
There is another glimmer of hope for those who feel, as I do, that the next 12 months loom as a hopeless desert of inaction where the country spirals into decline (as if that doesn’t describe the entire 12 wasted years of Labour hegemony over us). This scenario has the Labour party doing pitifully badly in the June 4 European elections, coming third to UKIP (where my vote is headed), and stirring up an irresistible tsunami of contempt for Brown in the Labour party.
The brothers will figure that if they dump Brown, there is a hope that Labour can avoid disaster a year from June 4, the last date Labour can legally hang on. We are led to believe that this scenario has Alan Johnson, Jack Straw or Harriet Harperson-Dromey replacing Brown. This has a fatal flaw though. Given that Gordon Brown hadn’t the courage to either face an election for his leadership of Labour, or the nation, this would mean that a second prime minister in a row would be taking office without a proper mandate. In this case, the Queen would feel free to dissolve parliament without fearing any kind of backlash.
But that likely fact is enough to ensure that Brown hangs on to the bitter end. Brown can argue that his retention of the limo is essential because something may turn up between now and June 4, 2010, the last day for an election, and save Labour.
The longer Labour puts off the day of reckoning, the worse will be the debacle. It will disappear from the political landscape, except for a few corrupt northern carzee rotten boroughs (note to readers: from this southern outpost, a northern carzee is any Labour stronghold north of Watford where class hatred is so ingrained they would elect a monkey with a red rosette -didn’t they do that in Hartlepool once in a mayoral election?).
So the prospect is for Labour to hang on to the bitter end, with more decay, more incompetence. If only the certain Tory landslide victory would bring us a leadership devoted to smaller government and (eventually) lower taxes. Instead we are going to get Blue Labour, with a Tory party without the courage to challenge the welfare state and the state sponsored health care cul de sac. The Tories have also fallen for the global warming boondoggle, where green fascists, using doctored science, have scared people who should know better into falling for state solutions right across the economy in the name of saving the planet.
That’s not a scenario that augurs well for our nation.