Is anyone else starting to think that Cameron may not see out the full term of this parlament?
IIRC the Tory rank and file forced Thatcher out and she wasn't forcing liberal ideals down their gullets due to the other party in the coalition.
I can only see the annoyed voices from the back getting louder and louder.

The one thing that will stop them is the voters don't trust them now, they will trust them even less with a jerk to the right. Turkeys won't vote for Christmas and those MP's doing the whinging will keep quiet, see out their term and collect the gold plated handout at the end of it, not to mention the handsome pension for many.

The Tories are at risk of imploding again, like they did in the late 1990s, when the right wing loonies in the party take over and push their agendas of opposing the EU and offering tax cuts for high earners, which will squeeze them electorally as these are not priorities for the majority of the electorate.

However what will probably save them at the moment is a weak opposition because Ed Miliband and Ed Balls do not look credible. If David Miliband was leader of the Labour party he would be have Cameron on the run and slapping him at every opportunity, like Blair did to Major. In fact I actually think if Alastair Darling was leader of the Labour party he would have Cameron in trouble as he had an element of trustworthy gravitas to him that Ed Miliband doesn't.

Fair points.

The trouble with HM Opposition is that they were bereft of ideas at the end of their time in power and they haven't found any new blood to give them an edge. There is still an air (rightly or wrongly) that they didn't do very much to get us out of the mess.

I don't think that is strictly true. I think there are plenty of bosses who realise the state has a role in the economy. What some of them want to be is the provider of services and goods on behalf of the state. So with the NHS they want the state to pay i.e. use our taxes to pay them to provide the service. It is the same in things like education, transport - you name it.

Now if the government stops spending on these things then the private sector overall will contract and won't create any jobs.

So where Hauge is talking rubbish is that the implication of what he says is the private sector that is not involved in any government funded work is the part of the private sector that can and should be working harder to fill the gap. There is not necessarily any demand out there for them to increase their output. It can't be the private sector that supplies the government that works harder because the government is cutting back on expenditure.

Or put another way our resident Tory, Robinson, is being expected by Hague to sell more houses so he needs to take on more staff to do so but like a lot of private enterprises I doubt he is in a position to do this to any great degree if at all given the state of the economy.

Hague can tell the banks to lend and he can cut corporation tax and then sit back and say "There I have created the conditions for growth" but given the economic uncertainties at the moment it is hardly surprising companies are protecting their shareholders wealth by being completely risk averse and are so doing basically nothing.

Oh OK.

Did he say that?

Maybe not, but he's fooking little oik! Ever since he pre-pubescently stood on that stage at the Tory party conference and you and the blue-rinsers lapped it up. Are you a little fooking oik? I can imagine so!

No need to get personal.

So basically, because he made a speech when he was 17, that directly effects what he said yesterday?

Very strange.

I want bum-sex with his Mrs, I know that much. Would you slot her Robbo?

Okay, okay: let's try to keep it within the 'watershed' approach.

blimey WZ, who rattled you cage ?

bit tetchy today mate ?