CentreRight

It is not quite a year since the US Presidential election that brought Barack Obama into the White House.

Since then, the world has been treated to some spectacular rhetoric. My favourite (probably) was the Berlin speech of July last year, in which he talked of close US-European ties, a nuclear-free world and acknowledged man-made climate change. Lofty, Utopian stuff.

"As we speak, cars in Boston and factories in Beijing are melting the ice caps in the Arctic, shrinking coastlines in the Atlantic, and bringing drought to farms from Kansas to Kenya.... We must come together to save this planet..... This is the moment to give our children back their future.… This is the moment to stand as one.... This is our time.... Let us remember this history, and answer our destiny."

In April of this year, it was followed by another inspiring speech, where many of the same lofty aims were repeated, this time in Prague.

"So today, I state clearly and with conviction America's commitment to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons. I'm not naive. This goal will not be reached quickly -- perhaps not in my lifetime. It will take patience and persistence. But now we, too, must ignore the voices who tell us that the world cannot change. We have to insist, 'Yes, we can.'"

While the speeches have been spell-binding, the actions have not always delivered. The Berlin speech itself was targeted at an audience at home, rather than at the 200,000 that were present, as the German media wryly observed. 

President Obama launched yesterday, a strong attack on bankers and their role in the financial crisis and its aftermath. On both sides of the Atlantic, politicians should probably think, too, about their decisions and what they can learn.

There are few signs of that at the moment, though, and most are hoping that the recession may be over. Official statistics have yet to confirm this is the case and there are those that suspect it may get worse once again, but for now, sentiment is up and the outlook looks rosier than it has for many months.

If this turns out to be correct, then many will feel that it did not work out as badly as might have been expected. Anecdotally, many of my friends in business and finance read the runes, saw sales drying up and started preparing for a storm that never quite hit as hard as they had feared. So given the dire predications that were made twelve months or so ago, how has this come about?

There are two possible arguments. The first is that it was never going to be as bad as some feared and that the media over-blew things. There is probably some truth in that but it is not enough to explain the lack of short-term pain on its own. 

Yesterday's announcement from National Rail of the proposed new high-speed rail link along the West Coast route, is an apt prompt to think about transport policy. This may bore many people senseless, but those that know me well enough will tell you that I have a little propellor on my head that goes round when the subject of transport comes up for debate and have written elsewhere on this before. I should stress that I am not a Lord Adonis-type, train spotting my way around the country for fun. It is just that I believe that as an area of public policy, whether it is about investing in national infrastructure as a key part of being a competitive economy or just at the human level of getting to work and to see family, transport really, really matters.

Numerous surveys of the general public show this to be a general view. Transport regular ranks in the top-five most important issues for a large majority of voters, along with the NHS, the economy and education and generally ahead of immigration, Europe and seemingly more sexy topics, such as foreign affairs.

This matters more than it might, partly because politicians have surprisingly little to say on the subject that is really new or has the power to swing electoral votes. Calls for an "integrated transport policy" are common and fair enough, but it would be an idiot who didn't think that different modes of transport should be integrated if anyone is to make use of them. Rail stations and airports need car parks and roads to allow people to get there. Trying to get people to get people off over-crowded roads in urban centres means spending money on public transport. These examples of integration are from the school of the blindingly obvious but count for policy commitments in some quarters. Nor is it all about public transport; roads are a key part of any serious national transport strategy.

So why is it so hard for politicians to offer us anything genuinely radical in the transport department? 

OK, so I have not reached that point, yet, but it can't be far away. We are moving from a state of collective anger to one of pity - the final nail in the coffin of any political career.

Poor old "Crash" Gordon thinks he will regain the political initiative and bullish media coverage with a dramatic package of parliamentary and electoral reform proposals. He trailed this before the elections last week with an appearance on the Andrew Marr show where he hinted at a desire to bring in an AV-plus system. The details remain sketchy this evening, partly because the objective of reclaiming the media's attention failed.

Firstly, the BBC News at Ten led with a story about the NHS running out of cash as a result of all of the other demands on the government purse caused by Gordon's lack of prudence and cash management. His big story came second but just sounded confused.

Then, Newsnight, who had had another half an hour to pull the story together, thought about it enough to lead with point that a proposal designed to "reinvigorate" our democracy was a bit rich coming from a government that has just been decimated in two nation-wide polls and whose cabinet contains more unelected members than any since Churchill's, with seven Peers holding the right to attend.

There is nothing here that will win over the general public. They seem to have more sense than the remnants of the administration. They understand the danger of decisions made in haste and know that it is they, and their children, who will have to bear the brunt of this political suicide note just as they are the ones paying the cost for Gordon's financial hubris.

Crash Gordon has done it again. Can't you just hear that Queen soundtrack...? Crash - Ah! He'll save every one of us!

Poor Crash Gordon. Poorer us. 

Oliver Cromwell's Speech on the Dissolution of the Long Parliament
Given to the House of Commons
20 April 1653

It is high time for me to put an end to your sitting in this place, which you have dishonored by your contempt of all virtue, and defiled by your practice of every vice; ye are a factious crew, and enemies to all good government; ye are a pack of mercenary wretches, and would like Esau sell your country for a mess of pottage, and like Judas betray your God for a few pieces of money.

Is there a single virtue now remaining amongst you? Is there one vice you do not possess? Ye have no more religion than my horse; gold is your God; which of you have not barter'd your conscience for bribes? Is there a man amongst you that has the least care for the good of the Commonwealth? Ye sordid prostitutes have you not defil'd this sacred place, and turn'd the Lord's temple into a den of thieves, by your immoral principles and wicked practices? 

Ye are grown intolerably odious to the whole nation; you were deputed here by the people to get grievances redress'd, are yourselves gone!

So! Take away that shining bauble there, and lock up the doors. In the name of God, go!