Why I'm voting Conservative
I am not a loyal voter, I don't have a single party who I always voted for.
I voted for Labour in 97 and still believe this was the right thing to do. There was no alternative at the time; Major's government was weak.
I believe Blair's record is a good one, he did a lot of good (including the Iraq war) - I blogged a couple of years ago about his record when he resigned listing why I thought his legacy was a good one.
However, Blair and Brown did have a distinct advantage. The strong financial policies put in place by Brown's predecessor Ken Clarke meant the economy was about to boom - that would have happened anyway. It meant that tax revenues were increasing so the government could afford to put massive investment in health, schools and create a massively bloated civil service. They rode the good times; they didn't create them.
Brown's poor management of the economy meant that even in boom times they started to struggle, so he had to steal money out of public service pension funds. He was a weak chancellor, never forget that. How anyone who works in the public sector can support him astounds me.
After becoming disillusioned with Labour, and with the Conservatives still not able to mount an effective opposition (Remember Iain Duncan Smith? Didn't think so) I shifted to the Liberal Democrats for a while.
I think this was more out of ideological human rights reasons than anything else, they were leading the way in equality rights and that appealed to me at the time.
So now, here we are in 2010 in the middle of an economic crisis. This crisis is not yet over, not by a long shot, so we need a government who is best placed to deal with the immediate pressing issues of public finance, and lead a sustained recovery.
Having studied in great depth all the manifestos, having been fortunate enough to speak with and hear from some major players from the worlds of politics and business I have firmly decided that only one party has the policies, appetite and priorities to lead us through this. David Cameron's Conservative Party.
Now, don't get me wrong, they are not perfect. The lowering of top rate inheritance tax is an odd move for starters but they have one major, fundamental thing right. The way to lead an effective recovery and deal with the public debt is not to increase taxation and increase public spending. That doesn't work any more.
The recovery will be led by the businesses of this country, not the government. The government's role is to help those businesses grow, thrive, prosper - not to hinder them with higher corporation tax, higher National Insurance and increased regulation.
This country's businesses will lead us out of this crisis, but only with the support of a government who understand this.
Oddly, the one person I have been most impressed with recently isn't a Tory, it's Lord Mandelson . He seems to really understand the role of business in this country, and he seems to understand that it's business who will get us out of this.
I even get the impression he is not 100% behind the NI rise, but has to tow the party line.
Seeing someone speak in the flesh is far more insightful than any TV or newspaper interview.
Labour want to increase taxation to maintain public spending levels and to chip away at the hideous national debt. This will not work. Starve business of money and they go (close, or move abroad) or they stay still with no growth. Businesses need finance to grow and expand, they need certainty of what is around the corner, they need security.
You cannot plan expansion and growth effectively without knowing what new tax is around the corner to hammer your profits.
I believe the Conservatives understand this which is why they plan to lower corporation tax and scrap the ludicrously timed NI rise.
Now, on to the Liberal Democrats - we are all aware that Nick Clegg gained a lot of support after the 1st debate. He slipped away in the 2nd and was virtually a spectator in the 3rd - he had nothing to say apart from again reminding us that his constituency is in Sheffield, and insisting on making a point of using audience members names.
Liberal Democrat financial policies would drive businesses away. Increase capital gains tax to income tax levels? Ridiculous proposal. A bad, bad idea. It would reduce the overall tax revenue as more people would decide to locate overseas to avoid it.
As for their policies on immigration and Europe - don't get me started. We should never, never adopt the Euro. We'd be in a much much worse position now if we had of done.
So, that's some of my reasons. There is no getting away from the parts of the Conservative Party I do not approve of (Daily Mail readers) but overall for me they are the only party capable, willing and able to lead this country to a sustained and effective recovery.
posted by Gareth @ 3:50 pm
7 Comments:
Although I disagree with your choice of party, you've made some interesting and valid points.
Some difficult decisions will have to be made in the coming months thanks to greedy bankers and property owners.
A change will do all the parties good.
I couldn't fail to disagree more!
Ken Clarke was no more responsible for the boom in the early labour years than Gordon Brown is responsible for this global financial crisis.
Finance ministers can do relatively little to influence the overall economic cycle what they can do is try to limit its worse effects on the economy of their home countries. In this respect compared to many Western countries the UK has done a lot better than most.
The Tories policy of starting cuts now could cause a double dip recession.
If you think the Major government was weak well there will be plenty of old tory faces in any new cabinet including Ken Clarke & the boy Hague.
Do equality rights no longer appeal? That battle isn't over and you won't find the tories on the front line leading the charge.
These are the same old tories they haven't changed.
I shall finish with a song :o)
The People's flag is slightly pink
It's not as red as people think
The working class can kiss my arse
I've got the director's job at last
Thanks Rob.
Simon - I thought you might!
I like Ken Clarke and Hague, I think they both can do good things for the country.
Equality rights are still important to me, but the most pressing issue at the moment is the economy so my support is based on who I believe has the best chance of delivering stable growth.
I do believe that Lib Dem's economic policies would be a disaster, but who knows what will happen.
I would hesitantly agree with the Tories recovery plans, like most of their manifesto it's a very 'DIY' approach, you can't solely rely on the private sector, there has to be input from the Public sector as well. The Tories will cut huge chunks out of the key frontline services and package them as 'efficiency savings', this money will be extracted from the economy to detrimental effect of the recovery.
I do worry for the state of society under a Tory government...Tax will have to rise at some point in one way or another, can you see the Tories taxing the rich? No it will be the same old Tories with the same old tax increases for the poor. I am truly worried.
I once heard a great orator warn that if you don’t spot the false premise in the first five seconds of a Tory argument then you are lost. The false premise(s) in this one are that Ken Clarke created the boom and that Brown was a weak Chancellor. Hey but does this history matter? Who cares if ‘things could only get better’ in 1997 because things had been so bad? Who remembers now 1989 when inflation was running at 15%+ and interest rates 22% (that was the year I took out a new mortgage, which is why I know, but it could have been any year in the 1980s. ) And 3 million unemployed? Who remembers that now? No doubt Ken Clarke did a lot to repair the Lawson/Lamont years (not to mention Howe) when the massive oil revenues from the North Sea were squandered on paying benefits to the unemployed rather than building a new infrastructure for the 21st century to assist business and the whole of society. No doubt also that Brown inherited the legacy of his predecessor. But few commentators believe that everything (good and bad) which happened from 1997 was the result of Clarke’s policies. Brown did come in for a lot of criticism in the early years from the Left for sticking to Tory spending plans but that is not to suggest he was weak, just prudent perhaps? With manufacturing still generating £109 for every £100 generated 30 years ago (taking account of inflation), and the UK still fifth in the world for manufacturing output, it’s not all been bad for business, has it?
Anyway the reason we are in this hole now is precisely because Brown/Blair et al were seduced by the idea that the third way was to give business its head. The balance between regulation and support is one which is tricky to achieve but I think I go with Obama on this one and believe the bank shad it too easy when it came to regulation. We all colluded in that, of course, with our mortgages, loans etc. The problem for the Tories is that they colluded too and only Vince Cable predicted the end was nigh.
So less regulation,then? More Piper Alphas and Buncefields? More disasters like the ecological catastrophe currently happening in the Gulf of Mexico? More Paddingtons and Potters Bars? Or let’s have no regulation at all and drown some cockle pickers in Morecombe Bay.
But even if the Tory plans for less regulation is good for business, what about the two anti-business measures—Europe and immigration? In the EU a Conservative Party should be part of the land of Sarkosy and Merkl. Instead it has joined a neo-Nazi grouping which believes homosexuality is a sin. If business needs anything it’s strong links with our biggest market, the rest of Europe. This links with immigration where the Tories are deliberately confusing matters. Those from other EU nations who choose to settle here are part of the mobility of labour- not economic migrants. Where would the business sectors in hospitality, agriculture and construction be without them? Whatever steps are required to sort asylum issue, it is completely different from EU migration.
But maybe your choice comes down to not liking Brown. Fair dos. If I thought Ken Clarke was taking over as Chancellor, however, I would be a little more sanguine. The idea of playboy George Osborne inheriting this financial crisis is disturbing to put it mildly.
Hi C, you raise some good points, perhaps we can discuss over a glass of wine?
To answer a few of your question directly;
You are correct in assuming I don't like Brown. I think he's a liar and a thief and, if accusations are to be believed, a bully.
I think there's no doubt that Ken Clarke will have major influence in Osborne's policies (as I'm sure Brown does with Darling)
You raise a good point about the neo-Nazi group - the tories are far from the ideal solution, it's just my belief right now they are the best of an indifferent bunch.
EU migration is a completely different matter as you say, I haven't seen any proposal in the tory manifesto to change any aspect of it?
And regulation... banks aside, we have plenty now in business for the very reasons you stated. The Combined Code along with the Companies Act (the largest piece of legislation ever passed) to name but 2.
The key, for me, is that the country needs strong business to be strong - the question is how do you achieve that?
I don't believe that increased business taxes and regulation is the best way.
If extra revenue is needed, and if rumour is true, then I believe the tory proposal of raising VAT to 19.5% is a fairer way of raising tax revenue than on NI, Corporation tax or income tax - provided no extra VAT is levied on "essentials" like gas, electricity etc.
A glass of wine I will agree on!
I did not make it clear re immigration. The Tory manifesto talks about restricting the movement of labour from any new accession states which I think runs counter to EU membership-- so could lead to problems for business. However, it is the impression Cameron leaves when talking about the rise in net migration to the UK since 2005 which worries me. This rise is almost all accounted for by the influx of Eastern Europeans post the recent expansion. Cameron's line on a 'cap on immigration' is disingenuous to put it mildly.
I think we are all in this together so all have to make a contribution. Perhaps NI is a bad idea-- it is regressive, after all and is capped for the well-off. I prefer an increase in income tax. Raising VAT is deeply regressive since it affects the poor as much as the rich and therefore hits them harder. It is not, in the mantra, a fair way to run Britain.
I am sure there are lots of regulations for business, and some not helpful, but I don't see a flight to other parts of Europe or the world from any regulated sector. In fact, I see global UK flagship companies behaving like the rules do not apply to them-- BP ('beyond principle') and BA (let's put profit before safety).
Sadly I do not see Clarke anywhere near the front bench-- wrong school, wrong age, wrong image. On GB, I would suggest that calling the man a thief is going a bit far! But let's ahve that wine.
Post a Comment
<< Home