What is David Cameron for?

Posted on

Phillip Blond is one of those annoying people (like Maurice Glasman really, and I know them both). He can say some really interesting things sometimes and then go so way off on a tangent you wonder what planet he's on.

This from an article in the New Statesman yesterday is bang on:

David Cameron remains an enigmatic figure who, although personally popular, is unable to offer a credible account of what he and his government stand for. At different times, he has been a progressive Conservative, a compassionate one, a "muscular liberal", a liberal Conservative, or a purely pragmatic politician who can easily dispense with ideology.

Blond was meant to provide Cameron with his ideas. If he's confused as to what Cameron is for you can be sure the rest of us should be.

And you can also be sure that the Conservatives should be worried. As the Observer noted yesterday, Osborne's in the same boat - a politician who only wants power but without idea as to how to use it - which is why his policy is to stand back and watch disaster happen.

That wins you an election once.

But not twice.

And I have a feeling Ed Miliband really does have a big idea now - and one that resonates. For a party that relied on Dave as it's best bet - and lost the last election despite that fact - the current void he offers voters is a nightmare waiting to happen which if it wasn't so tragic as to its current consequences would be fun to watch.

As it is, the obvious fact that the UK has not got a government fit for purpose becomes more apparent day by day.