It is difficult to exaggerate the shallowness of David Cameron. The man undoubtedly has a brain, even in these days of debased educational qualifications a first from Oxford is indicative of something. The unfortunate thing about Cameron, the self proclaimed “heir to Blair”, is that, like so many politicians, he lacks ideology and only seeks power for the possession of power.

David CameronIn Search Of An Ideology
David Cameron
In Search Of An Ideology

Anointed in large part by the slanted reporting of the BBC and other media during the Conservative Party leadership debates with David Davis, Cameron’s leadership has been shambolic. You only realise how incompetent Cameron is when you watch him stumble along and suddenly think, “Hey, this chap is a dead ringer for Jim Hacker in Yes Prime Minister”.

In a general election facing a demoralised party led by one of the most unpopular prime ministers in recent memory, the man who helped create the economic debacle we endure today, David Cameron failed to win. Instead the only way he could see to power was to enter a coalition with those limp wristed loons the Lib Dems. In comparison Alex Salmond was able to parlay a minority government into a strong parliamentary majority in a system specifically designed to keep his party out of power. Salmond may be obnoxious but at least he has political cojones and nous, attributes lacking in David Cameron.

As someone whose only real job outside politics was as a PR man for a television company one would expect Cameron to be reliable on the presentation front. Even here he displays the sure-footed precision of a drunken docker.

Labour are resurrecting the mansion tax this week, it will interesting to hear Cameron’s defence of the wealthy. A couple of years ago his wussy coalition partners proposed what was termed a “mansion tax” on all dwellings valued at £1 million or more, quickly altered to £2 million plus when it was realised that Nick Clegg, Vince Cable and many Lib Dem backers lived in houses valued at £1 million.

At the time Cameron’s Conservative Party opposed this attack on the wealthy pointing to all the widows in staightened circumstances living in family homes who, whilst they might be property rich were cash poor. A mansion tax according to Cameron and his chums would victimise the vulnerable.

Move on a year or so and we have the announcement of a few measures of welfare reform. Cameron was on to a sure fire winner here, everyone knows in their heart of hearts that our welfare provisions need reform. That is apart from die-hard progressives who have no hearts.

No-one wants welfare reform more than the poor, much to the chagrin of the Guardian. But then middle class progressives know the poor intimately in the same way that in the 70’s and 80’s they would claim that “Some of my best friends are Black”.

Any rational person would think that on this issue the Conservative Party would be on a sure-fire winner. That would be to over-estimate the sure-footedness of our drunken dockers.

The Conservative Party have proposed what has come to be known as the “bedroom tax”. In an attempt to cut the £23 billion housing benefits bill welfare recipients living in accommodation larger than their bare needs will have their welfare provision cut. Under the proposals, social housing tenants in homes with one extra bedroom would lose £12 a week, while those with two or more extra bedrooms would lose £22 a week.

It would be difficult to dream up a proposal more likely to repulse fair minded people. And most Brits are fair minded; apart that is from fans of the Old Firm, supporters of both teams tending to paranoia and persecution mania.

The government itself admits that because of a shortage of housing 85% of those affected will not be able to move elsewhere to downsize. This means that the government will require people to downsize and then, knowing that the housing stock is not there, they expect or even hope that people will be unable to do what the government are telling them to do and thus find their benefits cut. Unless this happens there will be no savings on the housing benefits bill.

It is not just the photogenic disabled, and severely ill trotted out by the media who will be hit. Kate, a regular reader of A Grain of Sand (perhaps I should call you beachcombers), writes of an unemployed friend in a 2 bedroom house in an area where there are only 2 bedroom houses readily available. If, as is likely, he is unable to move he will have his benefit cut and be forced further into poverty and the government will save roughly £12 per week.

Cameron’s reaction to the outcry against the inept attempted reform is to say that the government is trying to end a “spare room subsidy”. A PR man to the end, and a not very good one at that. Having alienated much of the core support of his party with his attempts to appease the politically correct Cameron has now alienated a great swathe of the British population.


Make Them Work for Our Votes

At a recent public meeting concerning homosexual marriage I was puzzled. One of the speakers said that he was surprised that the Conservative Party was so indifferent to the concerns of Christians. I was surprised at his surprise. Why should anyone expect the Conservative Party to have any concern for Christians and their values?

Benjamin Disraeli, Creator of the Modern Conservative Party

Probably the greatest of Conservative Prime Ministers and a creator of the modern Conservative Party, Benjamin Disraeli, described his party in power thus: “A Conservative government is an organised hypocrisy.”

The Conservative Party have always been frightened of ideology, which is why they promote so few conviction politicians. Margaret Thatcher was a conspicuous exception, and was hated by the Tory grandees for it. For Conservatives conviction politicians are dangerous. This is one of the reasons why at their last internal election the Conservative Party rejected David Davis and instead chose David Cameron, a conviction free zone, as their leader.

Between leaving Eton and Oxford and becoming a full time politician Cameron has had only one job in the real world outside of politics. Cameron took what one of his friends described as a “borderline respectable” job as a PR man with Carlton TV. He has sharpened his skills and continued in his trade since becoming firstly an MP and now PM.

A few days ago David Cameron spoke to Christian leaders gathered at Downing Street. His speech, ably dissected in his excellent blog by Cranmer, was one in which he used Easter as a time to try to reconnect with Christians.

A nominal Christian, Cameron clearly regards Christianity as an agnostics guide to holistic living, a small dose of Christianity will help you be a nicer person. Apparently Cameron has no appreciation that if you ignore Christianity any society built on it will eventually crumble. It appears, however, that Cameron thinks that Christians should be more up front about their faith, something with which it is hard to disagree. But how well do Cameron’s actions measure up to his own statements?

It is his government which is:

  • Pressing for homosexual ‘marriage’
  • Going to the European Court of Human Rights to oppose the right of Christians to wear a cross at work
  • Doing nothing to help promote marriage in taxation legislation
  • Doing nothing to protect Christian health workers who have no wish to participate in abortions
  • Set on repealing Sunday trading laws in England and Wales

The list goes on. It is clear that Cameron has lost none of his PR habits, saying one thing to cover up contrary actions.

Ben Bradshaw, Labour MP for Exeter and the first cabinet member to enter into a civil partnership, has attacked Cameron’s plans to legalise homosexual marriage as “pure politics” and insists that Britain’s homosexual community do not need such “marriages.” When he argues that Cameron is pushing this proposed legislation as a public relations exercise because he wishes to show that the Conservative Party has modernised it is hard to disagree with him.

As Bradshaw said, “This is not a priority for the gay community, which already won equal rights (within civil partnerships).”  It is, however, a “passionate” priority for David Cameron who appears more concerned about image than substance.

Christians should not be surprised when politicians of any party propose policies which are antithetical to a biblical position. They are in the power business, not the principles business. Neither should we be surprised when, like Cameron, they treat us like gullible idiots. At least not whilst we act like gullible idiots.

Neither of the two main parties now represent the views of their core vote. Even the Lib Dems have betrayed their supporters. All have abandoned their essential political ideologies and camped on the nebulous, meaningless middle ground which they think represents middle Britain. It doesn’t. And yet we allow ourselves to be treated by them as voting fodder. Gullability is not a particularly attractive characteristic. We should make politicians realise that if they want our votes they have to work for them.

The homosexual lobby have done this supremely well. Homosexuals make up a tiny minority of the population. According to the Office of National Statistics male homosexuals, lesbians, bi-sexuals,  the transgendered and all the variations, permutations and deviations thereof make up 1.5% of the population. A minority of that tiny minority wish the legalisation of homosexual marriage. Yet it is homosexual marriage which all the parties, including the Conservatives, are pushing and which the hugely influential media supports. All credit to the homosexual lobby, they know how to work the system.

Meanwhile Christians sit back and moan and for the most part let politicians do what they wish to do and not what we, their masters, wish them to do. If we accept this we deserve the contempt with which they treat us.

Nadia Eweida and Shirley Chaplin claim that they were discriminated against when their employers barred them from wearing crosses. They are taking their case to the European Court of Human Rights. The government document prepared by Equalities Minister Lynne Featherstone, and approved by Home Secretary Theresa May, for presentation to the European Court of Human Rights  basically says that Christians must be content to keep their faith for their own time. Yet another Tory privatisation.

We need not acquiesce. We can approach our friends, relations, people at work, fellow Christians, those who share interest groups with us and reason with them on all issues of concern to Christians. Christianity need not be a secret service, even MI6 and the CIA advertise today. Politicians, of all parties, should be continually presented with calm, reasoned arguments against their un-Christian plans.

Following a recent post I was told that reason would not work. The alternatives, however, are unattractive, civil unrest or apathetic surrender. One problem is that we have not, as a body, tried reason. A few lone voices can be safely ignored. A mass of voices presenting reasoned arguments from a biblical position cannot be ignored.

We will be rejected at first, but reason will prevail. All truth is God’s truth and will win through.