The logic of Dave and his friends

Oh God. Oh, God, Oh God, Oh God. When will this living nightmare of a government end?

I sometimes pinch myself, just to check that I am in fact experiencing this for real, and the last two years since the last election haven't been some awful day-dream.

But no: this is really happening.

I had the pleasure of seeing Jeremy Hunt (once mis-spoken as a vulgar term for the female organ) at the Leveson inquiry today. The general gist of the story is that he had been in regular touch with NewsCorp officials, and was personally supportive of a corporate bid by NewsCorp. This was before he was given the role to adjudicate on the bid as a minister, as well as during the process. But he hadn't shown any bias during the process. So he says. And he seems a nice chap, so I'm sure he's telling the truth.

So that's sorted, then. Nothing wrong there.
Except that Hunt was given the adjudicating role because Vince Cable had shown clear bias during his tenure of looking at the bid. David Cameron appointed Jeremy Hunt, knowing that he was in favour of the bid, but because he showed no clear bias during the process, then that was OK. Hunt's advisor (who was a thoroughly upright and good guy, according to Hunt) had to be forced out, but not Hunt himself. Hunt did nothing wrong The minister who is also famous for hiding behind trees (to avoid journalists) has nothing to fear. Obviously.

What about those confusing (misleading) statements given to Parliament? Ah, that was for Cameron to decide on if a separate inquiry should be set up; once Hunt had given his evidence at the Leveson inquiry, Cameron assured us that an inquiry would be set up. Now that Hunt has completed his evidence at the Leveson inquiry, Cameron assures us that a separate inquiry does not need to be set up. It's quite obvious, really!

You see, when Cameron realised that Cable had made those biased statements, it was clear that they made his judgement biased. When Hunt made those biased statements, it was clear that they would not make his judgement biased. It's quite obvious, really!

When the government declares a new policy, like those in the Budget, they're not really "policies"; they're more like "ideas". If enough people don't like them, the government changes its mind. To those critics who talk about "U-turns", and not thinking things through enough, well this is just silly: there are plenty of other policies which are clearly in the public interest that the government has no intention of listening to the public's view about. For example, tuition fees; cutting the deficit; heath and education reform: these are the things that the government really cares about, and no amount of whining or facts from people who think they know better will make the government change its mind.

People say that the Conservative ministers don't take their jobs seriously. They take strikes very seriously: so seriously that they take particular pleasure in talking up a strike, and doing what they can to aggravate public sector staff into calling one. This is the best way to defeat the power of the unions; by creating as many strikes as possible!