Monday, 5 April 2010

Indecision 2010 - The Party for Change?

Photobucket

Since David Cameron became Conservative leader in 2005, he sought to move the party in a new direction after the party suffered electoral defeats since 1997. After the success of Barack Obama's presidential campaign in 2008, which focused on the idea of hope and change, the Conservatives have adopted the change mantra as the their own and constantly bleat it out in interviews or at any given opportunity. The decision to adopt progressiveness is as laughable as it is oxymornic, seeing as this is being done by the Conservative Party (its also something I have poked fun at in the past).

If the Conservatives are the party for change, and despite claiming they are "the party of socail mobility", then why is it that the current Shadow Cabinet are dominated by former members of the Bullingdon Club and the richest politicians in Britain?

If the Conservatives are the party for change, then for what reason did they protest against the so-called "death tax" other than to protect the interests of the rich? If Cameron claims that he isn't a Thatcherite and has promised to impose tough regulations on the financial sector, then why is he wooing the City for donations (which account for a third of party funding) and stated in a recent speech to Goldman Sachs, Barclays and other leaders of the world's most powerful banks that the City was in his blood?

If the Conservatives are the party for change, then why is it that many members of the party retain the homophobic attitudes that are typical of the Tories? Although he claims to regret supporting Section 28, why did David Cameron pussy-foot around this and other gay issues in the recent interview with the Gay Times, and is silent over Shadow Home Secretary Chris Grayling's recent comments on supporting B&Bs banning gay couples?

If the Conservatives are the party for change because they have moved away from the days where they endorsed bigotry and discrimination, then why is it that in the European Parliament, they not long ago aligned themselves with far-right parties? Why did many members of the party recently try to prevent a black candidate from standing in the Tory safe seat of East Surrey?

Despite David Cameron trying (and failing) to give the impression that him and the party are moving towards a more eco-friendly direction and that this was evidence that the party has changed, why is it that the majority of Tory MPs think otherwise? Have environmental issues become the "New Europe"?

The reformed and progressive facade which the Tories have adopted since Cameron came to power has slowly crumbled away these past few weeks. Labour recently released a poster which depicts David Cameron as Gene Hunt, to remind voters of the perils of Tory governance during the 1980s. Although the poster could potentially backfire, and is an insult to Gene Hunt (something which I will draw/write about later in the week), how true is it that the Conservative Party of 2010 really is the same as the Conservative Party of the 1980s?

5 comments:

  1. I know, the cartoon is unoriginal, but I felt like drawing Thatcher for some strange reason.

    ReplyDelete
  2. On what issues has Cameron actually professed change?

    I think that pointing to these things doesn't necessarily mean that the Conservatives are lying. The Conservatives can change without transforming into exactly the opposite of what it was before. It can change whilst remaining rich and it can change whilst retaining more conservative principles than Labour.

    We know it's definitely changed in some ways. Less than a decade ago, Cameron could vote against acknowledging that gays exist in school. Now, Grayling's relatively tame comments about having choice over whether to let a gay couple stay in your B&B have caused a bit of a furore. Maybe that's just society's opinions that have changed.

    This is a bit of a confused comment, but I guess I'm saying that the Conservatives do not have to turn into Labour to prove that they have changed. We should listen more to the things about which they propose to have changed.

    ReplyDelete
  3. On what issues has Cameron actually professed change?

    I think that pointing to these things doesn't necessarily mean that the Conservatives are lying. The Conservatives can change without transforming into exactly the opposite of what it was before. It can change whilst remaining rich and it can change whilst retaining more conservative principles than Labour.

    We know it's definitely changed in some ways. Less than a decade ago, Cameron could vote against acknowledging that gays exist in school. Now, Grayling's relatively tame comments about having choice over whether to let a gay couple stay in your B&B have caused a bit of a furore. Maybe that's just society's opinions that have changed.

    This is a bit of a confused comment, but I guess I'm saying that the Conservatives do not have to turn into Labour to prove that they have changed. We should listen more to the things about which they propose to have changed

    ReplyDelete
  4. None of those links work :P

    ReplyDelete
  5. you are a racist bigot thank god the lib dems went with the tories :)

    ReplyDelete