Editorial Comment:
ur serialisation of Nigel Farage’s memoirs is a reminder of why many people like him. He may well be an unconventional public figure, and is most certainly a controversial one, but he is authentic. The story of his struggle with cancer, and his varying experiences as an NHS patient, will strike a chord with many. The revelation that the first thing he did after crawling from the wreckage of a plane crash was light up a cigarette will probably horrify and amuse in equal measure.
Today we have published extracts that reflect his ambitions as a practical politician. Mr Farage says that in the event of a hung Parliament, he would be willing to support the Tories in an alliance with the Democratic Unionist Party on a vote-by-vote basis. In return, he demands a referendum on EU membership to be held in 2015 – up to two years earlier than Mr Cameron has planned for.
It is clear that for Ukip, Europe remains the key battleground. Of course, it does have policies on immigration and the NHS, but this focus on a referendum suggests that Mr Farage continues to regard his main priority as being to withdraw the UK from the EU. He is not interested in Mr Cameron’s careful attempts to renegotiate the terms of membership, but only in a speedy in/out vote that he hopes will end in exit. Ukip’s popularity may be motivated by various complicated and understandable frustrations with the slow pace of change, but his party does not offer a programme for government beyond maximising the UK’s sovereignty. And, like the SNP and the Greens, its political strategy is not to try to form a government of its own but to exploit the failures of others to do so. Ukip is counting on chaos.
Britain could ill-afford such a situation. While the economy has improved dramatically and now boasts a strong growth rate, the deficit is still running far too high. The next government is going to have to choose between borrowing more or making more savings, and the plan has to be clear and pursued with determination. Choices will also have to be made about health care, education and national security that also require an effective long-term plan unblemished by internal politics. Although the Coalition has overcome many potential weaknesses to produce significant reforms, the next government needs greater unity of purpose.
For an example of the pitfalls of minorities and coalitions, consider our report on the spat between Tories and Lib Dems over terror law reforms. We have previously exposed the troubling influence of Islamist extremists on the young and the inability of the security agencies or civil servants to deal with it effectively. We have also consistently recognised the importance of protecting civil liberties. But when Theresa May presented a plan to stop radical preachers stirring up trouble on campus, Nick Clegg apparently blocked her on free speech grounds.
Mr Clegg repeatedly boasts of the things that he has stopped the Tories doing – and he may well see that as one of the key jobs of a junior partner supporting a parliamentary alliance, while trying to retain its identity. But if this means blocking things that really do need to be done, it is not in the interests of the nation. As we also report today, next week’s Budget will give a sense of the Tory party’s economic ambitions. These include action to encourage home building and home ownership, on top of the Conservative commitment to giving pensioners the freedom to spend their money as they choose, and shaping a low-tax, pro-business environment that generates opportunities for the young.
There are other areas of policy that desperately need addressing by a government unencumbered by factional politics. We believe passionately that more has to be done to guarantee dignity in people’s final years. MPs warn that many people are dying in hospital because they cannot afford care elsewhere. Some make their wish to die at home clear but are let down by lengthy and bureaucratic assessments. In other cases, they remain in hospital simply out of financial concerns.
As the population grows older, dealing with issues related to end-of-life care becomes an epochal challenge. Britain needs a government with the full political authority to tackle it. It also, of course, requires continued economic growth to pay for it. Labour’s pledge of new, higher taxes and regulations would drive away business – while more spending and borrowing would undermine the country’s financial position. Voters may have a wider choice of parties to put in government than ever before, but the choice of Prime Minister is still between Ed Miliband and Mr Cameron. And Mr Cameron remains by far the better option.
After five years of governing with one hand tied behind his back, Mr Cameron has proved that he deserves a chance to govern according to his own instincts, implementing an unambiguously Tory manifesto. Moreover, Britain cannot afford the political chaos that would necessitate a parliamentary alliance. What would be good for Mr Farage would not necessarily be good for the country – and voters would be well advised to put the needs of the country first.