Monday, December 11, 2006

The Quiet Man roars again!


Ian Duncan Smith, former leader of the Conservative Party and head of David Cameron’s policy group on social inclusion, has published his findings on poverty today.

The break up of families has been singled out as the main cause of what’s wrong with post industrial Britain. Duncan Smith has offered an incisive piece of new thinking here.

It would seem the reason that divorce is on the increase because the state has been giving poor people money in recent decades. This has caused greedy parents to get a taste for it and then go to loan sharks to fund their crack habits and pay for plasma screen TVs.

The key points of Duncan Smith’s paper

Stop giving poor people money, it encourages indolence and ungodliness.

Give thugs a clip round the ear (up to and including the right to shoot people in the chest with a 12 bore shotgun if you catch them in your front room).

Re-introduce postal orders to buy tuck at school.

Ban homosexuality (but if a couple of chaps happen to be poofters and want to raise a family, good luck to ‘em).

Allow men in mufflers and flat caps to gather at street corners on frosty mornings in the hope of picking up a fair day’s wage in return for a fair day’s unskilled labour.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Yeah, very droll. Have you actually read IDS' report, though?

Madame Mao said...

No I haven't and at 300,000 words I'd be suprised if IDS had actually read it either.

Like the rest of us, however, I have absorbed the spin which probably more important in this day and age than the content.

The Tories say that marriage is the answer to our most pressing social problems. This is a bit rich.

Gay sex and infidelity scandals aside it is astonishing for the Tories to bang on about the same rubbish that they always have and claim it as the big idea. I'll bet Cameron's toes have been curling listening to IDS lumber about the studios.

And what about that idiot Dominic Grieve? Victorian values!!! Which particular ones - the ones that put children to work in the mills or the ones that involved corsets and weird social repression?

He said that "'You can argue that our Victorian forebears succeeded in achieving something very unusual between the 1850s and 1900".

Bloody right. You can argue that they introduced misery on a massive and industrial scale. Before the early 20th century if you were left behind by capitalism you were left behind to rot.

Let's face facts. Your average Joe is more likely to be pouring over the racing pages than he is studying family tax law before deciding whether or not to knock his bird up.

The reason we're in this mess is because, in the years following 1979, the state education system was not allowed to gear up to meet the economic challenges which stem from the laregly monetarist system of global finance i.e. the old third world getting their own back.

The answer isn't a legal contract between man and wife it is providing education, jobs and a sense of hope to bring up kids in some kind of security.

If the choice is between drinking cider, racing performance cars around the estate and impressing your mates or dressing up like a dick to serve fried chicken on minimum wage I know which one I'd choose.