Industrial action by doctors shows just how many the government is pissing off

The last time doctors took industrial action was during the mid-seventies. Well paid, well respected generally, they're not exactly the most militant group, but have voted overwhelmingly to strike for all but emergency activity on June 21st, with possible further action to follow.

Given how well paid they are, and the comfort in which most of them can expect to retire, and given the people who are likely to suffer as a result of their action, they can expect little sympathy from Joe Public. On that, my personal feeling is that they work hard, carry a heavy burden not to make mistakes because of the possible consequences of them, and are merely paid what all members of our health services are actually worth. I'd far rather bump the pay of nurses, junior doctors etc up at the expense of hugely paid businessmen, but that's another story.

Anyway, this is mainly noteworthy because, as white collar, middle-class, high-earning people, these are the last sort of voters the Tories should be looking to piss off. Lately, when there's been a Conservative government (which is how I view this one, regardless of the fact it's supposed to be a coalition), there have been more strikes among those sectors of work which are run by the more left-wing unions than there are when Labour are in power. What you might call traditionally working-class sectors are those who usually come into conflict with Tory ideology.

But here we have a disaffected group who come from what may reasonably be expected to be drawn from the Tory vote. In attacking pensions so broadly, and so deeply, they're infuriating people well outside the usual gamut of the disaffected. So we can now, to a list which already includes public sector workers, miners, nurses, fire fighters, transport workers and even the police (who, let's not forget, openly booed Theresa May at their conference), add doctors to this growing list of those they've angered.

At this rate, you've got to wonder who's going to be left supporting them when the next election comes round. There will, of course, be the usual tax cuts in the last pre-election budget, but is that going to be enough this time round to carry their sorry arses back in? In cutting everything so dogmatically, are they busy cutting their own electoral throats at the same time?

Praise be

It's not often you'll read praise for the Church in these pages, or for individual members within it, but one member of it I do have a bit of time for is the Archbishop of Canterbury, and his comments, shortly to be published in the New Statesman, are an indication as to why. As a supposed moral guardian, or whatever you want to call him, for our society, I of course have a fundamental problem with him being strongly guided by his faith. But that doesn't, of course, make him always wrong. Some issues are plain to anybody with a functioning moral compass, regardless of the source of the 'magnetism' to which it points.

He's never been afraid to speak out, which is important for a man in his position, but never before has he made such a scathing and wide-ranging attack on government, at least never that I can remember. He's pointed particularly to the coalition's peculiar notion of what constitutes a democracy, given that the government is introducing sweeping changes which, in his words, people did not vote for. I've already, in this blog, had a pop at the government's plans for NHS reform, a direct contravention of a Conservative manifesto promise, and this is one of the plans attracting his ire. But he's also had a pop at plans for education, at the cuts, at their seeming lack of empathy with the public, pretty much everything.

Though I don't expect them to, they would do well to listen to him, or at least pay heed to the fact that he's felt the need to speak out. He may not be my idea of a moral compass, but he is a decent barometer (sorry about all the meteorological devices) of society's thinking insofar as, if he's pointing at 'stormy', they would do well to pay attention. The next general election is already only four years away maximum, and could be sooner if they're not careful. They may not like what he's saying, but they should in fact be very grateful that he's said it. Check out the New Statesman website for the whole thing - they're already on there.

Can't see the wood?

That's because the Government are happy to see all the trees cut down. Or, more typically for the Tories, offloading them so other people can save them the bother of having to do it themselves:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12314781

The comment from their so-called Environment Secretary is particularly laughable. Exactly how taking something that belongs to the nation, if nature can belong to anybody, selling it off and just assuming the new owners will have the best interests of the environment at heart (or, worse, simply not caring if they do or not) constitutes an environmental protection brief is completely lost on me.

But this is, again, a move driven by dogma. There is no resource, no asset, nothing that the Tories can't see as an opportunity to flog off to make money. Their idealogical zeal cares for the pounds first and absolutely everything else some distant second. I genuinely think this one has shocked some people, as at time of writing this almost 300,000 had signed a petition against the plans here: http://www.38degrees.org.uk/save-our-forests

But, though it shouldn't shock people because it's what the Tories always do, I think that voters have simply forgotten what it is they put in power when they vote for this lot. The very best possible scenario that can come out of this is that, assuming the new owners do not want to actually level the bloody forests, they protect their 'property' and fence it off, restricting access to everybody else. The worst case scenario doesn't bear thinking about. Remember that the Government are also 'giving local planning back to the people' (ie divesting themselves of that responsibility as well) so the protection afforded forestry by planning decisions made at a national level could disappear if a community sees an application to 'develop' a forest as essential for the local economy, regardless of how short-sighted it may be.

Where the hell are the Lib-Dems in this? I haven't heard a single dissenting voice from them. Is the outward unity of the coalition really more imporant to them than safeguarding our national forests? They really have sold their souls if it is.

Tuition fees debate could define this Government

Most interesting to see the goings-on in Westminster today. With anarchy on our streets, mass hysteria, dogs and cats living together, Cameron sat behind Vince Cable as he delivered his speech, mugging furiously for the cameras as all MPs seem to do nowadays when they're sitting down. The moment, the very moment Cable sat down, he patted him on the shoulder... (Why do they always do that? Even when the Chancellor had to stand up and deliver a bitterly divisive austerity budget, he got congratulated by his front bench like he'd just won an Oxbridge debating competition. They should have been sitting there grim-faced.)

...anyway, he patted him on the shoulder and left the Chamber. He didn't even remain to listen to Cable's Shadow's response. Not only is this faintly discourteous, it also shows a lamentable complacency on his part, I think. With rumours of up to 20 Lib-Dems prepared to vote against the Motion (at least before Cable's latest amendments) and who knows how many abstaining, he could have been walking away from the first defeat the coalition faces since its formation.

I recognise that, as PM, he's probably got one or two other things to be getting on with this afternoon (that laundry won't do itself, and then there's the groceries to be collected...), but this could be a defining (and divisive) debate for the coalition. The debate still goes on as I type, some hours after the initial statement, but would it have killed him to show willing and sit there at least long enough to hear the Shadow's response?

A very, very interesting division bell will be rung this afternoon, I think.