The Tories really earned their "Nasty Party" nickname this week. Firstly it would seem they're neither loyal nor fair when the chips are down. I expect Stephen Hester and Fred Goodwin will have been swapping notes over the last few days. It must be galling for Dave that Ed Milliband keeps banging on about a scalp and a bonus not being enough to make public anger subside.
The true face of compassionate conservatism was seen on Wednesday evening with the government's use of rare parliamentary procedure allowing them not only to overturn the Lords amendments to the Welfare reform Bill, but also preventing further challenges from Peers. It must be sickening for the Liberal Democrat party members that Tories were supported by their own MPs in the picking on the sick, poor and vulnerable. Hope Nick knows what he's doing...
PMQs was interesting today but spoiled once more by the Punch and Judy show. it was great to see the Speaker so vocal. It's reassuring that under the circumstances he understands insult and arrogance do not sit well with the public,even if it pleases the backbenchers. If only he were abele to do something about the hectoring and get opposition questions answered directly too...
But I digress...
I wasn't involved in the decisions of the last government. I didn't even vote for them, but Ed Milliband has been asking some really important questions of late and many of us would really like to hear proper answers to the following:
Why not implement the Walker Report so that all bankers salaries over £1 million are published?
Why not put an ordinary employee on the re-numeration committees? Reasonable enough.
Without Ed Milliband, Hester would not have passed on this year's bonus. And let's face it, scapegoating Fred Goodwin by removing the knighthood doesn't go nearly far enough. It won't make banks safer, get them lending to SMEs, or make people less angry about the bonus culture. REGULATION will.
Welfare reform is also in the news and many poor and disabled people are extremely worried. How interesting it is, that your party feels, to incentivise the rich, you throw money at them; yet to incentivise the poor, you take it away. Care to explain the double standard?