So.. from where I sit this went like:
1. Party has no clue to policies
2. Party has no who or how to get to a position of policies
3. Someone decided F-that, I'm going todo it myself - creates random set of policies that sound good in soundbites.
4. General fall out of policy making infrastructure that no have the additional problem of not have a concise voting (yes or no) but instead have to defend their gravy train jobs by voting tactically..
Now this is how I expect it to go down...
5. Vote occurs - F-it ideological monkey gets voted in although there's lots of disbelief and a majority so small it's because someone didn't make it back from lunch at a posh restaurant fast enough due to traffic.
6. Monkey gets helm, makes lots of press comments about new policies.
7. Gravy train then see their jobs at risk, big plotting..
Now depending on severity one of the following options could occur:
8a. Monkey finds all policies blocked by gravy train. Labour lose heavily and a confidence vote removes monkey with all the blame. By this time gravy train has found new champion of the cause. Posh lunches all around, champers on the House and everyone happy in a job well done.
8b.Monkey implements all policies, the gravy train repositions themselves out of the lime light, labour lose, mass cuss of monkeys, mass rethink committee chaired by gravy train and a couple of favourite options (all gravy friendly) appear.. one gets elected the other makes the more profitable book deal.
9. Business as usual as everyone realises nothing changes, there is no additional money to make any new policies on the first election term, so blame opposition.
So from this you can probably ascertain that I don't think there's any practical leader that is making both sense and a passioned vision statement.
