Topic: Politics
I have just voted in my 5th general election and like every time before, I've voted Conservative. That won't come as a great surprise to most of you. But this has been different in that for the first time ever, I can think of one Labour policy that appeals to me and I'm annoyed at the Conservatives' opposition to it.
What has disappointed me most about the campaigns has been the clear focus on elderly voters at the expense of the young. I can understand why the parties all do it. They know that the retired are more likely to vote than the young, as they have the free time and have had longer to form opinions. But at the risk of sounding ageist, I have to say it sticks in my craw. Is it really right that the future direction of this country is determined by the votes of people who have less than a dozen years left to live? The decision we make today will have repurcussions for decades to come.
The Conservatives have come up with some good issues on which to fight the election, but left it too late to spell them out. I also happen to think that while Michael Howard would be a good prime minister, Portillo would have stood a better chance of winning the election and I was disappointed that he wasn't selected as leader. Perhaps he could be persuaded to run one more time? Please?
I expect that Labour win today. What is interesting is whether they win next time. I don't think they will. There are a lot of chickens coming home to roost and discontent will rise. I just hope they don't do too much damage to the economy before they are booted out.
The one policy where I find myself in agreement with Labour is on housing. The Conservatives vilify Prescott for wanting to build more housing on the Green Belt, but I think Prescott's got this right. There is an urgent need for more housing in the South East of England and I feel that he's facing facts, while others bury their heads in the sand. I do feel sickened listening to some middle-class southerners prattling on about defending the Green Belt. While they may think that they are speaking for the defence of rural tranquility, what they are actually saying is that people who live in overcrowded and overpriced towns and cities should be made to stay there. It sickens me. The Tories express their opposition to 'Prezza's digger' in terms of giving local communities a voice, but we all know what this means because nobody has any incentive to say 'yes'. Every community would say no to more housing, because the people consulted are those who don't benefit from greater supply. The poor and the homeless wouldn't have a voice in this process.
Before anyone leaps to the assumption that I'm wanting government interference in the market to suit my own needs, I should stress that I'm not. What I would like is for the market to be made more free. What we have at present is unrestricted demand, but highly restricted supply. The number of bodies who have the right to object to new housing construction has risen in recent decades and the result is a big anti-development bias. This must be reversed. The Tories are supposed to be the party of free enterprise and it disappoints me to see them being so protectionist on this matter.
On a sad note, it disgusts me to report that my award for the most interesting policy initiative of any manifesto that I've seen goes to the British National Party. I don't mean its race/immigration policies. I refer instead to its idea of gun ownership for anyone who has completed a period of national service. I have no desire to see the BNP win anywhere, but I have to say this is the sort of bold thinking that all parties should attempt. Gun ownership is a subject that I can't make up my mind own, but I can agree that we ought to accept that the police are failing in their duty to protect people and that if they don't improve soon then perhaps citizens should be entitled to defend themselves. Alas the fact that it's been presented by a bunch of racist thugs will probably mean that it's not taken seriously when it should be.
_ DY
at 3:43 PM BST
Updated: Thursday, 5 May 2005 3:52 PM BST
