Quite agree. But don’t forget us mathematicians.

David Gale
I hope some one sits up and takes notice of your words. I believe that Whitehall and the rest has a comfortable cosy zone . The administrative mindset is incapable of doing things with out a manual!

We won’t have many scientists left to even act as advisors , unless politics economics and philosophy is banned completely and proper sciences take precedence again!

The Nuclear industry is a prime example, especially with the decommisioning of elderly power stations, and the promise of new ones, and the unpopularity of nuclear physics with youngsters. (Scientist shortages looming again))

Reply

We won’t have many scientists left to even act as advisors , unless politics economics and philosophy is banned completely and proper sciences take precedence again!

The Nuclear industry is a prime example, especially with the decommisioning of elderly power stations, and the promise of new ones, and the unpopularity of nuclear physics with youngsters. (Scientist shortages looming again))

When Murdoch & Co and the popularity statisticians are allowed to call the tune, all we get is short-term manipulation of the same tired old ‘policies’, measured by accountants as ‘performance indicators’. Just as was proved in the Seventies, these bean-counters know how to dress a balance sheet to make a finance director’s bonus but they are utterly clueless when it comes to long-term vision.

Yet we see Whitehall mandarins still in protectionist mode of their empires and budgets. What the country needs is revolution in Whitehall, not Sir Humphrey’s convenient and comfortable evolution. To enable that kind of transformational change, we need a flexible technology framework that starts with a vision of the citizen at the centre of information management, not trifling tweaks of already moribund systems and processes. The good news is that this CAN be done. The bad news is that I see little difference between either of the main parties and their professional politicians…

You have indeed always stood up for a sound fiscal position as you say and a smaller state involvment.

I am not sure where grass roots Tories fit in with DCs idea of new Tory ism.

Some of us feel there is a wishy washy element to the party, and that it is one huge PR exercise.

I think that DC has ignored the vast majority of would be voters who are now at retirement age, and has failed to engage with them. Don’t forget we have been through boom and bust many times before, in particular remembering the early seventies when interest rates were so high that they damaged everyone. Mortgages and fuel inflation and power outages.

Many will probably vote UKIP, but who knows. Many preferred David Davis as a sound pair of hands, but ideas change don’t they.

Many bods in county towns are not at all easy with Tory thoughts on pruning back local government etc, and all the partnerships associated with them, they are the higher income earners and potential Tory voters!

The Lib Dems are a quirky bunch. Pensioners are drawn to Vince Cable and his ideas, rather like a flock of sheep. The Libs say they have something pleasant in store for retired people.

The Tory leadership will fall back on their own tribal allegiances , but the remainder of us back in our constituencies will not be heard.

I am more concerned about when we had the good years of financial growth, what were fund managers playing around at/ when now we are all seeing our life savings ruined.

The fat cats got fatter.

There is indeed no point in having principles without power but this does not justify having power without principles. That would be to tread the same road as Blair.

I would cautiously agree that we must get rid of the wrecker Brown at all costs but someone then has to carry on with the job of governing.

In my lifetime people have said on many occasions that right wing economics is dead; it never is. Sound money and free market disciplines has saved Britain every time the socialists have had the opportunity to test out statist economics.

reply: When have I ever failed to stand up for more freedom and a sound fiscal position based on a smaller state? Remember I was the only MP who denounced the bank naitonalisations in public at the moment of nationalisation.

Your last paragraph has some very, very, true aspects.

The story lines of many of these soaps are so influential to so many, that a large number of the population think it represents true life.

Have you noticed that hardly anyone actually spends time working for a living in these programmes, they just accumulate money to spend, interesting that no one is portrayed as being on benefits either.