Does the wisdom of Tory strategists have no ends (or is that beginnings).

A deal with the nats that will see them spared harsh cuts will inevitably lead to more severe cuts in England. Shouldn’t be a problem, after all, it’s not like every Tory you’re unlucky enough to get started on this subject thinks England already gets screwed on a regular basis as it is.

Blimey, they are getting desperate aren’t they. Unless this is yet another attempt to scare the electorate into voting their in with a majority, after all who in England wants the SNP, the DUP and PC insisting that the bulk of the cuts fall outside their borders.

I think that is crediting the Tories with more sense than they have though. Just like their pathetic election broadcast last night, (I was laughing out loud, my wife thought it was a spoof), they have no idea what they are doing any more.

Roll on PR.

So on Friday during the Paxman interview Cameron said that Northern Ireland was given far too much money and was one area where he would make savage cuts. Is he now intending to go back on that statement? If not, why would the Ulster Unionists want to support a government who would make huge cuts that will inevitably lead to increasing deprivation and civil unrest?

Cameron will come to regret the Paxman interview. Either he will not get UU support for cutting their budget, or he will piss off his English supporters for capitulation.

In-keeping with their palling up the far fight as per their European allies, have they considered joining force with the National Front, Combat 18 or the November 9th Society. Maybe look to the British People’s Party or something similar.

Surely this an opportune time for Conservatives to call out for an alliance with UKIP?

@5 Yup, they know that they want to, especially since in key marginals the Tories are haemorrhaging votes to UKIP.

Heh, and then what do they do once there’s an English only law to get through; pass it with the support of MPs from NI? What about EVOEL?

Silly fules.

Looks like UKIP are already trying some cosy alliance tactics… http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8648195.stm

Presumably, the likes of IDS will celebrate a UKIP-Conservative alliance but the historic credibility of the Conservative Party will take something of a dent since a Conservative government took us into the EU in the first place and a Conservative government signed us up for the Maastricht Treaty.

Heh, and then what do they do once there’s an English only law to get through; pass it with the support of MPs from NI? What about EVOEL?

Silly fules.

Here’s a prediction: the Tories will have a majority in England. Certainly if they do anywhere near well enough to think of an NI coalition, given that they’re going to get, what, two or three seats in Scotland (if they do well) and a bare handful in Wales, they’ll have a pretty comfortable England majority.

“they’ll have a pretty comfortable England majority.”

Which means English voters will feel especially betrayed when they have to bear a bigger incidence of public spending cuts than Scotland, Wales and NI. And in the nature of political interests, in England, the spending cuts will impact the more on urban rather than rural areas. I would expect this to be quickly reflected in local election results – perhaps particularly so in the light of what I’ve been reading about NHS cuts underway to community nursing and mental health care.

Which means English voters will feel especially betrayed when they have to bear a bigger incidence of public spending cuts than Scotland, Wales and NI.

Yup, probably. But it will be portrayed as a combination of two factors – the failure/lies of the Labour Government (expect almost all cuts and tax rises to be spun as ‘Brown’s cuts/taxes’), and the inherent problems of a minority Government.

Alternatively, after trying to get through a ‘fair’ cuts package, the Tories could engineer a defeat on the budget, and go to the country asking for a proper mandate like Wilson did in 74 – given the problems that the other two parties will be having, that might not be a bad strategy.

The last exercise by the IFS that I read some years back on the regional distributions of identifiable public spending in Britain turned up with estimates that per capita public spending in Scotland was then 22% higher than the per capita average for England, while Wales was 16% higher.

At the time that generated much froth online about Scotland’s acute health problems and shorter longevity so public spending needed to be higher for reasons of equity. Only later did this emerge:

“THE rate of alcohol-related deaths in Scotland is rising – and is more than double the rate for the UK as a whole, figures out yesterday showed. Figures from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) revealed that in 2006, there were 13.4 deaths per 100,000 people linked to alcohol in the UK – up from 12.9 the previous year.”
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/health/Scots-alcohol-death-rate-twice.3714009.jp

That set me thinking. In the light of how much of our banking crisis was due to the failings of the leading Scottish banks, I wondered whether there ought to be a new criminal offence along the lines of: Banking while intoxicated.

With dark rumours of the local delicacy of fried battered Mars bars in Fish ‘n’ Chip shops in Scotland some bright spark did a survey and learned that the rumours were not based on myth.

That set me thinking. In the light of how much of our banking crisis was due to the failings of the leading Scottish banks, I wondered whether there ought to be a new criminal offence along the lines of: Banking while intoxicated.

Jeepers, you’d shut down the whole City after lunchtime! Which might be no bad thing come to think of it…

@12 Tim J

“Alternatively, after trying to get through a ‘fair’ cuts package, the Tories could engineer a defeat on the budget, and go to the country asking for a proper mandate like Wilson did in 74 – given the problems that the other two parties will be having, that might not be a bad strategy.”

Or of course, you could stop taking the psychtropics you are obviously on? Both the Tories and Nu Labour are in denial about the drubbing that is coming next Thursday. You still don’t get it do you? As Andreas Whittam-Smith said in the Indie yesterday, the people are about to deliver one of their (long overdue) slaps to the politcal elite.

Anyone who seriously thinks the Tories are capable of winning the coming election (alone or with minor parties) is deluded.

Is it that Cameron and his party are unwilling, or incapable of dealing with people of different opinion? It really bodes well for his “Big Society” idea if he’s only prepared to govern if he doesn’t have to work with Labour or the LibDems.

If he’s put in the position of heading a minority government – which is at the very least quite likely – then by definition the majority of people won’t have voted for the Conservatives. But he’ll do whatever it takes to avoid representing their views.

@16: “Is it that Cameron and his party are unwilling, or incapable of dealing with people of different opinion?”

Have you ever tried posting any remotely critical comments to threads in the Conservative Home blog?

@16: “It really bodes well for his ‘Big Society’ idea if he’s only prepared to govern if he doesn’t have to work with Labour or the LibDems.”

C’mon.

“A series of anxious shadow ministers have warned the Tory leadership in private that David Cameron’s central general election message – devolving power to create a ‘big society’ – is crashing on the doorstep as candidates struggle to explain the idea to voters.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/apr/20/david-cameron-big-society-tories

A while back, Conservative Home had a thread starter quoting Cameron:

“There is such a thing as society, it’s just not the same thing as the state.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4504722.stm

If so, I asked, how many societies do we have in Britain and how can we tell?

They quickly closed down the thread.