Iain Dale asks where Vince Cable was in 1997. One would have hoped Iain would know this but Vince was only newly elected that year.
Secondly, for the second time this week he is trying to claim that the Tories were first to predict the economic crisis. Oddly his justification for this last time was a quote from Robert Peston (the BBC economic guru) that stated the Tories were asking questions about the economy before Labour. What the Peston quote didn't say was that the Tories were first to say it. But this didn't stop Iain from taking the quote and claiming it showed the Tories were first and said it before the Lib Dems.
But now he is saying that Peter Lilley, back in 1997, was saying that there were problems ahead. This is odd in itself as it seems to be that Peter Lilley, a Tory, was saying just as the Tories were leaving office, that the Tories policies were wrong. And given that Labour pretty much adopted Tories spending for the first two years of their government, clearly Peter Lilley must have been saying that the Tories own policies were to blame ?
It might make Iain feel better to make spurious claims that the Tories were right, but the country and the press know the truth, and a few postings like Iain's are not going to persuade people otherwise.
Update : As Iain points out to me in the comments, Peter Lilley was explicitly referring to the government decision (Labour) to set up the FSA. I accept that this is not a direct criticism of Tory policies up to 1997 but does beg the more important question as to why it is that Peter Lilley has been sidelined by the Tories since the late 1990s. It seems his criticisms were not welcome in the Tory party, a party reliant on hedge funds managers and city types making large donations from their bonuses. So let's be kind and accept that one Tory might have made a good point. Out of all the Tories in parliament you might bless at least one of them with a brain. You can say he spoke for the Tory Party at this point but when the Tory Shadow cabinet hasn't exactly been repeating Lilley's line since 1997, it tells you where the Tories stand on the issue.
Compare this to Vince Cable who speaks for the Lib Dems officially and remains a key member of the Lib Dem team and there is your difference Iain.
10 comments:
I thought Robert Peston's quote was something like the Tories were first to call for tighter regulation of the banks.
Labour and the Lib Dems are a long way behind the likes of Iain Dale in the blogging stakes.
Jesus Nich, where do I start? Perhaps it might help if you had used the Peter Lilley quote...
"With the removal of banking control to the Financial Services Authority...it is difficult to see how and whether the Bank remains, as it surely must, responsible for ensuring the liquidity of the banking system and preventing systemic collapse.
The coverage of the FSA will be huge; its objectives will be many, and potentially in conflict with one another. The range of its activities will be so diverse that no one person in it will understand them all.
The Government may, almost casually, have bitten off more than they can chew. The process of setting up the FSA may cause regulators to take their eye off the ball, while spivs and crooks have a field day."
Need I say more? it rather renders your whole post pointless.
And what about Peston's quote ?
He made clear that the Tories were ahewad ofthe government but made no reference to the Tories being ahead of the Lib Dems.
As for Lilley, if he was so correct, why has he been sidelined and effectively demoted since 1997 ?
Nich, you say "But to say he spoke for the Tory Party at this point when he was not part of the Shadow cabinet and still isn't is pushing things a bit."
Er, he was Shadow Chancellor!!!
Lilley was not sidelined after 1997.
He was shadow chancellor until 1998.
He was it seems deputy leader to 1999.
In 2001 he called for cannabis to be legalised. I think this and maybe a few other episodes caused his star to wane. Cameron appointed him to review Globalisation and poverty in 2005.
None of which takes away the fact that the Conservative party called the flaws in the FSA tripartite shambles from the very first day.
It is interesting to note that you appear to be under the misapprehension that spending is the only government decision that affects the economy. You also seem to have no idea that Peter Lilley might given other reasons than to make a single point to parliament to warrant his demotion, or that others might shine and deserve promotion over Lilley, however competent he might be.
Surely if you have no room in your ponderings on an issue to consider more than one idea you are nearly always going to be wrong in your conclusions, and you will always be wrong in the way you arrive at the conclusion, even when it happens by pure chance to be reasonable. Why then blog, and broadcast these invariably incorrect arguments to a mass audience?
Nich - when you're in a hole, best to stop digging?
Perhaps this blog is testament to the reason for you being a "former LibDem Councillor"?
Perhaps your comment is a testament to your miroring what I might be guilty of here, which is not checking al my facts.
I had won with a massive majority (from 4th place), stood down after I moved the Lib Dem comfortably held my old seat.
Oh, and you use a hidden ID. That says it all, you spineless coward.
Post a Comment