1. The FT.  Britain is not broken, it has been getting better. It does make you wonder about their Conservative endorsement, huh?

FT research shows that even the most deprived local authorities have shown signs of improvement over recent years when looking at figures ranging from crime and truancy to teenage pregnancies and children living in unemployed households.

2. David Aaronovitch: Voting Labour, here is why.  Some choice cuts:

the Shadow Schools Secretary castigated Labour for having created inequality and social division in their 13 years in power. What has actually happened (I have the figures) is that Labour has striven mightily to reverse the sudden and massive increase in division and inequality between 1979 and 1997 (when the youthful Gove was as brilliant a Thatcherite as he is now a brilliant Cameroonian) while trying not to lose the structural economic gains of the Conservative years …

So what, I wonder, will the new Conservatives do in practice to accelerate the reversing of their own historic legacy? I wonder it, but in truth, there isn’t an answer, beyond the vagaries of the “Big Society”. Now, one may characterise the BS as “optimistic”, but then so is the proposition that Cameroon will win the World Cup

Then, discussing a misleading Tory ad:

This ad was so unscrupulous and misleading that it made me feel that the Tories really do not, in the horrid vernacular, “get it” about the new politics at all. They think it’s their turn again, end of. I don’t agree with this paper’s rosy view of the dogmatically anti-European William Hague as Foreign Secretary, and I don’t agree that the Tory proposal for an immigration cap is “measured and intelligent”. Actually it is unmeasured and probably economically damaging.

And it turns out a leaflet from the LibDems put him off the LibDems.  This wounds:

When Tony Blair introduced tuition fees in 2004, against opposition from G. Brown and the Lib Dems, he didn’t do it because it was popular but because universities needed to be funded. In the 2005 election the Lib Dems won several university seats by frighting the air with predictions about how college applications would fall among the poorest students (who weren’t going to be affected by it anyway). So when this prediction turned out to be completely wrong, did they apologise? Did they now apply cuddly-stern Vince Cable realism? You must be kidding.

Ouch.

Advertisements

8 thoughts on “Two interesting reads for Election day

    1. I’m not wounded – I’m on the side of the critics of the policy. And I’m afraid I’ve always quite liked DA. Do people really set up blogs just to stalk a columnist? Woah

  1. As a periodic contributor to Aarowatch I would hate to think anyone there really ‘stalks’ him. Also we are as much fans as critics (Nick Cohen, the other journalist discussed, less so). But I think Bruschetta Boy makes a good riposte on there to Aaro’s higher education fees point.

    ——

    That exit poll looks duff, doesn’t it?

    1. Seriously duff. But my expectations are still rooted in the pre April era. Above 70 seats would be fine. THe bookies don’t believe those polls – 71/5 at sporting.

      That chap arguing with DA may have a point: but the LibDems never acknowledge the seriously important steps put in to make the system better for the poor – not when I argue with them….

  2. Wow, what a stupid reason not to vote for a party. Not because he disagrees with their policies, but because they didn’t apologize for something they got wrong (and 4 years ago to boot). Something that happens hourly in politics.

    And does Labour not get the same treatment? I mean, this is what Aaronovitch said about Iraq and WMD:

    If nothing is eventually found, I – as a supporter of the war – will never believe another thing that I am told by our government, or that of the US ever again. And, more to the point, neither will anyone else. Those weapons had better be there somewhere.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,945381,00.html

    Methinks he was just grasping for a reason to keep voting Labour.

    1. I should not be attacking LibDems on this. And I am not. But failing to acknowedge the effect of the measures used to prevent the very poor being put off studying – which have clearly worked – is quite ugly.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s