End of term report - Conservatives

As previously stated, David Cameron has done a good job of holding things together in government since the election. It is to his great credit that the Conservatives, previously so bolshie in opposition, have been able to keep any disquiet largely under wraps, despite a disappointing election result and having to make room at the Cabinet Table for several players who before May 5th were ‘enemies!’

The government has hit the ground running, forced in part through the Emergency Budget and (the government claims) the necessity to find massive savings right away. Consultations have been thrown out left, right and centre and all have contributed to the feeling, no doubt, that we finally have a government who are doing things! In any case, recent polling data would suggest that the public are responding, offering the tantalising prospect that, should Cameron wish, he could easily throw off the need for his coalition partners if the polls are replicated across the country.

There have been, however, a number of gaffes and headaches that have meant it has not all been plain sailing for Cameron. Michael Gove is developing quite a nice reputation for being an able and quick-witted lieutenant in opposition, but something of a liability in government. The haste with which the fast-track academy bill went through the Commons has been shown up to have been unnecessary and the fiasco surrounding the Building Schools for the Future announcement is something Gove and Cameron would sooner forget.

Liam Fox and his handling of the Defence portfolio is also proving to be something of a landmine that risks blowing up in Cameron’s face. Having criticised the previous government mercilessly for undermining the military covenant, it now seems Cameron and George Osborne are happy for them to force the MoD to find the cost of Trident replacement out of its existing budget. What will Dr Fox have to cut to find the cash for that boondoggle?! And finally, there is Cameron’s junior partner in government, Nick Clegg, who cannot even answer a few simple questions at the Dispatch Box without forcing Number 10 to issues unbelievable statements claiming he was not speaking for the government. It begs the question, what was he doing at the Dispatch Box if he does not?!

Still, none of this is making much impact with the electorate who, as stated above, have been getting happier with the Tories since the election. Still, Labour have been growing in popularity too, suggesting that much of the growth in support for both parties has come at the expense of the Lib Dems and other parties. Labour have done it all without a permanent leader, however as well as the distraction of a leadership contest. Food for thought for Cameron indeed!

P

Tax and Marriage? Do they go together like a horse and carriage?

I hadn’t thought I was going to post anything this side of Christmas now, but the story on the BBC website (here) detailing a new Conservative green paper on encouraging marriage has roused me from my stupor!

My first question is this: is this not the kind of government interference usually eschewed by those of a Conservative bent? Government has no business compiling huge databases, should not interfere in the markets and definitely ought to steer clear of child-raising, they usually cry. So why do they care what my or anyone else’s domestic arrangements are, and why are they planning on offering a tax break to encourage marriage?

The answer is obvious; children raised in stable households turn out as better human beings. This is very difficult to argue with and frankly, I am not going to, as I happen to agree with it. What I don’t agree with is the assertion that you have to be married to provide a stable environment for kids. And I certainly don’t agree that people should be incentivised to remain married, when sometimes the best for all parties is divorce!

Numerous reports have shown stability is vital to a child’s development but a recent report from Cornell University showed that one group of kids performed worse than those from ‘broken, unstable homes.’ This group consisted of children from families who had remained together for the monetary benefits, but probably would have been served by separating.

The Tory proposals lead onto to further, obvious questions; what about children raised by same-sex couples? Will they get the tax break? And what about widows and widowers? They are not single out of choice, nor are they any less ‘stable’ environments just for their misfortune.

It is not government’s job to encourage marriage or any other domestic arrangement. A stable environment for children can be provided for in any number of ways, it is just a question of finding the right option for the individuals in question. No matter what David Cameron might say, these proposals do create a system whereby some family set-ups are deemed second-class. For once, I agree with Ed Balls!

P