The Three Chancellors

I’m a little late writing about the debate between ‘The Three Chancellors.’ It was hard at the time thinking about something constructive to write, and five days on, time has not made it any easier.

Those of you who watched it will know what I’m talking about. I found it one of the most unedifying pieces of political theatre I have seen in Britain. I didn’t learn anything new. George Osborne looked and sounded like a boy in a man’s world. Vince Cable and Alistair Darling never – from memory – referred to their party leaders. Not so with Osborne. He uses David Cameron as his crutch. Darling and Cable looked at him with distain, but this wasn’t surprising. Both of them are left-wing politicians and it is fair to say Cable is vastly more left-wing than Darling. Cable couldn’t disguise his distain for wealthy people. Why else would he come up with a mansion tax? Playing the politics of envy is something that should be confined to the dustbin of politics, and although Vince is economically qualified to be Chancellor, politically I wouldn’t touch him with a bargepole.

Now to the current incumbent of 11 Downing Street. One could be forgiven for thinking the last 13 years saw an economic miracle in Britain and none of the fallout of the last couple of years had anything to do with the government. Darling was given an easy ride.

So who would I want as Chancellor of the Exchequer? None of them. One is economically illiterate. One is entrenched in the politics of envy and one is in a state of denial. I think you can put the names to the descriptions.