Tory Right Rallies Around Faith...

[Filuwaúrdjan]

They won't get very far trying to get religious voters; most of us are in Labour's back pocket and have been for a while.







It suddenly occurs to me that seeing as this is the Tory party we're talking about, they're talking about traditionalist Anglicans. Not that many of those are especially religious in a conventional sense... and if the Tories are worried about winning them back they're in deeper sh*t than I'd ever assumed...

[Filuwaúrdjan]

It is noteworthy that, among the practicing Anglicans left, they are a great deal more conservative, in the American sense, than their vicars and bishops.

True

You must be logged in to read this quote.

IIRC the CofE is either third or fourth in terms of attendence nowadays (depends whether you treat the Free Churches as a block or not) and that while overall Church Attendence isn't greatly different to the most of the 18th Century for the CofE it's much, much worse.

Not that that means a great deal as the social pressure of going to church has collapsed... but oddly enough most of the country is still religious:

[Filuwaúrdjan]

If this keeps up, then in a couple of decades Labour will be the right wing party, the LibDems the left-wing party and the Tories will be struggling to keep from losing status as an parlimentary party.

If social/wedge issues become a larger factor over here that's certainly possible.
I've made this point before, but it's interesting to note that the marginals Labour did best in were generally fairly to very socially conservative and with more religious populations.
Labour did appalling in marginals with largely white collar, socially liberal and more secular populations.
There were a few exceptions, but the generally pattern seems pretty clear.
There was a report a while ago (by Sheffield Uni IIRC) that divided the country into two nations (a familer theme from the '80's although the boundary was slightly different) and it made the point that the "London" area (basically southern england) was "liberal" but largely Conservative voting, while the rest of the country was "conservative" but largely Labour voting. They were overgeneralising quite a bit IMO (East London isn't exactly "liberal" while the South Manchester suburbs aren't exactly socially conservative) but the overall point is pretty sound.
Next few years are probably very important in deciding the political landscape for the next few decades; Labour seem likely to head in an increasingly populist direction (something that's always been possible since the Littleborough & Saddleworth by-election IMO), but exactly what the Tories or LibDems choose to do is kind of uncertain. Both parties seem to be having a lot of internal fighting right now...

[Filuwaúrdjan]

If those nuts take over the Tory party we can all repeat a choice quote of Gerald Kaufman after the next election.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It could result in health spending rising by something like a third (I'd say that's the highest probable figure, but the one that'd be used by parties opposed to the idea) Either that or a big drop in the quality of services provided to ordinary patients.
Electorally it's a suicidal policy as most of the electorate do not like the private sector being involved in the health service as much as it is already and no one likes paying more taxes or getting worse services. It'd be a bit of a wet dream for Labour strategists actually; "The Tories want to privatise the NHS and put your taxes up!"

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Well... the basic problem with run-away inflation (caused by the late Ted Heath) was pretty much solved by 1979. The Callaghan government was brought down by a wave of public sector strikes (thanks guys ) not the overall economic situation.

The mass unemployment of the early '80's (the first time it had been seen since the '30's) was a deliberate policy though; the idea was to collapse the manufacturing industries, cause a collapse in Union membership (as high as 50% in the late '70's) and thus a collapse in funding for the Labour Party (over 2/3rds of it's money comes from Unions. Was an even higher % back then) and support too; unemployed people are much, much, much more likely to vote that someone with a stable job.
And all within a few years. Worked too.
If you draw a line from the mouth of the River Severn to the Wash you get roughly the same amount of people on either side. The northern half has yet to recover from the '80's and won't for a very long time.