i found it cute how Hasan blogged afterward w some clarifying remarks about how Hezza was his fave Tory after Clarke (where's Gove to argue against when you need him, as he said) and he likes Hughes in general (well given Hughes is a Beveridge liberal, he's got to be more in tune w Hasan than, say, David Laws, as i noted elsewhere), so perhaps he had some second thoughts.
Hasan seems to join J Hari AFAICT in regret that some form of lib-lab-others 'progressive' coalition wasn't brought through. i mean aside from dropping ID cards i don't know what else the lab negotiatiors offered the libs but we knew well before the election that Clegg was off-the-record but known to be favouring working w Cameron as he read the runes, and i'm sure that Gordon 'electoral liability' Brown telling him to fuck off down the phone can't have helped matters.
(don't get me wrong, i'd have preferred lab to pick up more votes and so try to carry on w some counter-cyclical policies for a while, as Blanchflower pointed out on Ch4 News when Snow interviewed him, delaying some of the cuts that before the election the Tories promised they would undertake quicker than lab etc, who had the most redistributive proposed budget etc; but clearly i'm a realist too.)
if i understand what Grizzleb is saying correctly about over-idealistic criticisms, i agree w G.
lib-tory coalition was always on the cards, and it's not a surprise, and that's all there is to it. plus obviously the Tories are the most popular party, so that is that. i understated earlier on the thread how many lib-tory coalitions there are in councils across the country (even when lab have been the largest party and you might have thought the liberals would join w lab instead, rather than choosing to marry up w the tories), apparently it's 18 i believe, i said 12 or 15, which was wrong of me i'm told.
as for lab rubbing their hands w glee in terms of their narrow partisan interest, i'm afraid to say that is politics for you. it's not like the coalition govt isn't good for tory and liberal high command (as distinct from say, right wing Tory moonbats and the most precious Liberal activists) in their own partisan right too, tbf (though obv it's great they are both - as we knew they would be - far superior to New Lab on civil libs: if the Lab of the 80s who were outraged at police brutality during the miners' strike etc could've seen what Blair got up to, i am sure they would be turning in proverbial graves).
Cameron gets a nice liberal gloss and some modernisation off the LD effect, whilst the Liberals get a chance to further their own interests in electoral reform etc.
four_five_one's sterling work on the new Thailand thread reminded me that in a very small way, Thaksin is a bit like New Labour. no problems w wealth and the wealthy etc, but did a little bit for the poor, certainly far more than any alternatives available (granted Thaksin's 30 baht health visit scheme should not be undersold as that is a major plus, among other things; not going into Thaksin's many crimes and excesses here, some of which were incredibly grave, i am just making a very rough analogy).
sorry rather OT there!
it's interesting Hezza is now the urban regeneration adviser. when he was Docklands point man for Maggie he complained that local people had too much power and had to be bypassed for Canary Wharf to progress. i wonder what he's got up his sleeves today?
)
