Vince Cable seems to take two steps forwards and then one step back (that is what the title is meant to say: I'm still hoping for a translation of what it actually does say and in what language, and for advice on ho to stop it.)
Last month I wrote a post praising an article in the Guardian in which Vince painted an excellent broad brush survey of the real problems facing the British economy (admitting they are nothing much to do with the alleged "mess left by Labour.") Then, in an interview in the New Statesman (I can see another financial bomb going off, 30th May 2011) he is quite clear that the deficit "was the consequence of the bank collapse" (again, nothing about Labour's alleged profligacy) and then, bless him, advocates "a Danish type model , which relates tax to property values." What joy to the hearts of we Liberals who have spent a lifetime advocating land taxes and site-value rating with almost as much enthusiasm as proportional representation by single transferable vote in multi-member constituencies.
Now Vince has blotted his copy-book by telling trade unions that, although he concedes their right to strike, if they use it the right will be further curtailed. For the strong to threaten further bullying of the weak is absurd for a government which claims "we are all in this together." This aspiration will move closer to reality when we introduce traditional Liberal policies to incorporate the interests of employees into management via employee representation, works councils, and, in the private sector, profit sharing. Liberals believe in the politics of co-operation, not confrontation and, if Liberal Democrats in government are to flex their muscles, this is the language we should be hearing. If Vince wants to do some bullying let it be with the bankers:after all that is within his remit.