I was excited when I heard about
Dave Cameron's speech this weeek. You know those times when the media, the atmosphere and the general ambient of an event create an anticipation of its own accord - a presumptive mirth in going with the flow. It was the same when the Obama bandwagon started: his reputation preceeded him. And also with the launch of the iPhone. Presumably the same can be said about Jesus walking into Jerusalem and the release of
Diana Vicker's new album. Maybe it was The Sun's adamant front page promulgation:
``CAMERON CAN HAVE A GO BECAUSE WE THINK HE'S HARD ENOUGH!``
that sparked my pre-emptively excited hope. Well it's certainly hard to argue with that sentiment - knowing how level headed and unbias The Sun can be. Indeed, when reading the article, one would find it difficult not to be swept up in the soundbites they take from Cameron's speech; his
``yeah, I've been saying that for ages`` style digs at the Government, his shameless trowelling on of `blue sky thinking` in word and in stage colour scheme, his imperial personification of the UK ``We can put her back on her feet``, The Sun reports teary eyed.
However, coming home to youTube (a much faithfuler portrayal of the speech) I can't help but feel more than a bit sceptical. I suppose speeches are like Easter eggs really. You deliberate carefully on where to put your choco-trust in line with your rights as a tax-paying citizen. Which offers the best promises? Do you vote solely on the one that claims to be friendly to the environment but will cost you more in the long run? Do you pick the egg that will swell the choco-conglomerates even more? Or do you pick the one with a fair price, down to earth promises, brightly coloured packaging and the hints of `well do you want to improve your life or not?` Probably the latter sounds like the right choice until you get home and find out it not actually a solid creme egg the size of your head. It's hollow, brittle, and makes you wonder how the Mars egg would have made you feel.
This is how Cameron's speech made me feel anyway. Looking at it with less carried away eyes - it's plain to see that behind phrases like `the one person who sustained me this year is sitting in the front row [in a strategic £55 M&S dress]` and `Family, community and country ... lay at the heart of my beliefs. `, oh and `Don’t you [the Labour party] dare lecture us about poverty. You have failed and it falls to us, the modern Conservative Party, to fight for the poorest who you have let down.`. I could go on. No really, I could go on for a long time as these subjective, flimsy soundbites (and let's clear that these
are phrases that go better as one line highlights in a column than in a congurent speech of the opposition leader) are all the speech is made of.
His spin doesn't seem a world apart from Obama's arresting oratorical skills in election '08. It's not a speech of disgust and dissent of the Government like most opposition leaders, it's a speech of unity. It's an alpha male's cry for cohesion, the calling to a common cause, the bestowal of an identity. In short, it's Cameron's revolution. And how right his advisors are for this. Brown's demise doesn't need Cameron's vilifications - he's more than dug his own grave by his sheer incompetence, and in trying to salvage the country has just etched his own epitaph. Cameron is by happy chance, in the position where doesn't need to convince the electorate of Brown's unsuiability.
For Cameron to gain his much sought after Commons Majority all he needs to do is be everything Brown isn't. The natural leader; the great unificater; the visionary; the pragmatist; the popular; the attractive; the young; the English; the relaxed; the effortless. In his own words, `It’s your character, your temperament and your judgment that in the end count so much more than your policies and your manifesto,`.
The problem is that though - it's his manifesto that doesn't flow on from his carefully strategised speech. Why? Because there bloody isn't one! `We pledge to cut public spending` isn't a policy. `We believe there are many reasons to be cheerful` isn't a policy. `[we would] lead Britain in a completely different direction`, isn't a policy. Cameron's speech was little more than a pep talk. A crowd pleaser that buys time for the general election for him to establish some actual policies, which begs the question: Can you really vote for a man who's priorities really put policy and manifesto second place to spin?
Labels: Cameron, Farms and Farming, Obama, Would you beleive they put a man on the moon?
