In today's Telegraph General Richards is quoted as saying:

'While Afghanistan is not the template on which to base the future, it is most certainly a signpost for much of what that future might contain.'

That may well be true but it could just as likely be a red herring. Before the first world war, and to an extent between the wars, the British army was reorganised to fight small conflicts in the corners of empire. This left them wanting when the real challenge came.

Czech elections - a vote for the future

For a country that has had democracy for only 20 years, the Czech Republic's election result showed a real sense of sophistication.

The Social Democrats, promising big government and all the hand outs that go with a client state had been widely expected to achieve a dominant position in the elections, especially since the main right wing part, the Civic Democrats, have been in meltdown. However, two other new right wing parties entered the fray and rather than votes being won by the left they simply were transferred to other similar, yet fresher alternatives. The result was a clear mandate for a right of centre government focused on public spending cuts and a smaller state.

It may come as a surprise to those in the UK that in Czech young people our predominately supporters of the right. This makes perfect sense. And it is not simply a reaction to generations of authoritarian socialist rule. Rather it is because, if you believe in the future success of your own endeavours there is no need to believe in big government.

It shows a tragic lack of national and individual optimism that so many in Britain have chosen the welfare state model as their idea of the future, even though years of Labour have proved it can only be delivered by stealing from future generations.

Constitution not strong enough to contain loons like brown

There is a real problem with the British constitution if it is down to the PM when he goes.

This must change.

Labour: the totalitarian party

Labour have no respect for the electorate we can see that as clear as anything today. How can a party with less than 30% of the popular vote lay any claim to leading the next government?

Labour were quite happy to govern with 36% of the vote and the incidental large tally of seats it gave them up until now but when the conservatives get 36% which yield a hung parliament they use it to justify their grasp on power.

Any chance of a dignified death of this labour government is now finished.

One thing this has shown is that the British 'constitution' does not work well when those within it do not behave decently and with dignity.

A coup de grace must be administered swiftly but the fact that little can be done shows that too much rests with the prime-minister. There are too many grey areas and the current situation is the stuff of failed states.

Perhaps labour's behaviour will show the conservatives that reform IS necessary after all.

Final leaders debate and what will happen post election

So the polls are in and suggest Cameron came out of the debate ahead.
But will the conservatives be able to get that overall majority? At best it will be a small one so my guess is this:

Even if Cameron does get an overall majority, the scale of the economic problem is so huge and the measures required so painful that they will want to share the responsibility. Therefore regardless of a majority it's my guess that the conservatives will make some sort of offer to the Libdems; not a full blown coalition, rather an economic war cabinet.

Education

Education (education, education): This one goes to 11... Remember Spinal Tap and the amplifier that went to 11? The ever increasing numbers of A grades has led to the need for an A*; the 11 of the education system. Grade inflation, as with all inflation, might give the illusion that you are better off but, to all but the most dim-witted the truth is perfectly clear.

Employers and universities can’t differentiate on the basis of school qualifications any more and many even with supposedly good grades are woefully under educated. This author even heard a teacher once say that it was good thing A-levels are easier now as it means they are more accessible. I would rather say meaningless.

Clegg: Britain's most sanctimonious and irritating politician

I find most politicians nauseating. Therefore it is no mean achievement that Clegg has become the politician I find the most sickening.

Here's why..... He talks of 'real change' and of 'doing things different' but this very choice of attack proves he is the same -what fresh face didn't opt for this approach?

Clegg is just a typical politician to his very rotten core. No amount of looking into the camera and pretending to be Mr 'I'm on your side' will get round this. From the European college, to Brussels Eurocrat, to MEP, to Westminter MP, Clegg is a career politician whose international background merely reinforces his pompous delusion that his own insight is uniquely correct.

The Libdems are the most sanctimonious and purely political of all three major parties. If you are fed up with politicians having too much power and influence then waking up with the Libdems holding the keys of government on 7 May will be the worst possible outcome.

The only problem is that Nick Clegg has now shown he has that skill that all politicians envy; an ability to be liked, sound reasonable and express commonality with people whilst the opposite is really true.

Labour's economy

'For their today they gave your tomorrow.' 

With record national debt Labour have stolen borrowed from future generations to fund their electoral success and increase the power and reach of government in the process. That they have built a few new schools and hospitals is all well and good but that our children and grandchildren will not be able to have them as a consequence is downright theft (why is there no mechanism to stop this happening?). They have encouraged personal debt on an unprecedented scale and when the house of cards collapsed they blamed the very bankers they had previously praised and who only. In terms of financial responsibility they have failed even the criteria they set themselves  in 97.

Debate: Clegg wins Britain loses

That the lesser known Clegg came across best in the TV leaders debates is hardly surprising. At a time when people are utterly sick of politicians it's obvious that the fresh faced, under exposed Clegg and his talk of 'real change' would hit a soft spot with the electorate. But if Clegg were to achieve real power he would compound the mistakes of labour - as with most politicians their talk of change just means electing someone different. LibDems have established themselves as anti-business and if the Euro-sceptic British public votes LibDem they will be voting against their very convictions. We need real change on these issues and the LibDems certainly won't give it to us.

Let us pray there is still time left to expose the damage the LibDems would do but the conservatives are now at war on two fronts and it will not be an easy task.

*** it must be said that Cameron's debate performance was poor. He was presented with an open goal when they discussed youth crime and Clegg said that the LibDems would do things differently and yet failed to say what. Cameron should have jumped at the chance to mention 'National Civilian Service' but he failed to say it even once. He also failed to mention the other conservative big policy of returning power to the people. Cameron seemed to suffer a mental block and his numerous mentions of 'the tax on jobs' seemed to be a mental walking stick as his thought process broke down. Sadly though the NI rise is indeed a tax on jobs his constant use of the slogan did not go down well.

13 years of Labour 'achievement'

Over the next few days I will start posting a little of my own reflection regarding labour's government policy and achievement in different areas (economy, education, defence etc...). I must say  running through what they have done is pretty heartbreaking.

Tax cuts are not cuts in the economy you dimbo

Why are so few commentators and even conservatives pointing out that contrary to what Gordon spouts it's tax rises that take money out of the economy, not tax cuts?

The genious that is our General Secretary prime minister seems to use the word economy when he means 'state sector' or perhaps in his totalitarian mind it should all be one and the same.

Labour gave your tomorrow for their today

For 13 years labour have used all the machinery of government and sympathetic media to indoctrinate and bribe the electorate that big government is good because it can provide everything. They have flooded the public sector with money and by adding nearly one million to its payroll added to those whose future employment depends on labour's electoral success.

What they haven't admitted is this; they have paid for it all by mortgaging our future and in providing these apparently 'first class' services they have jeopardised our children's chances of having any decent services at all.

I would be pretty pissed off if I found out my parents had paid for all my toys by taking out loans in my name that I would forever be paying off.  Shouldn't we be just as angry with Brown and his cronies for doing exactly this on a grand scale.