<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Horsell&#039;s Mouth &#187; Francis Maude</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thehorsellsmouth.com/tag/francis-maude/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thehorsellsmouth.com</link>
	<description>Politics, pedantry and personal interests</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 24 Jul 2010 22:14:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
		<item>
		<title>We&#8217;re going to the chapel</title>
		<link>http://www.thehorsellsmouth.com/2010/01/were-going-to-the-chapel/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thehorsellsmouth.com/2010/01/were-going-to-the-chapel/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Jan 2010 21:15:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Community]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Conservatives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[David Cameron]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Conservative Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[credibility gap]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[election 2010]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Francis Maude]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[John Major]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Labour]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[marriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tax]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thehorsellsmouth.com/?p=832</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Back in the spring of 2007, I watched Francis Maude give one of the most unimpressive performances on Question Time that I&#8217;ve ever seen. The background for this was the announcement that the Conservative Party intended to commit to the idea of rewarding married couples through the taxation system. His answers were defensive and and [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
<div class="topsy_widget_data topsy_theme_blue" style="float: right;margin-left: 0.75em; background: url(data:,%7B%20%22url%22%3A%20%22http%253A%252F%252Fwww.thehorsellsmouth.com%252F2010%252F01%252Fwere-going-to-the-chapel%252F%22%2C%20%22style%22%3A%20%22big%22%2C%20%22title%22%3A%20%22We%27re%20going%20to%20the%20chapel%22%20%7D);"></div>
<p><a href="http://www.thehorsellsmouth.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/davesamcam.jpg"><img class="size-medium wp-image-834 alignright" title="davesamcam" src="http://www.thehorsellsmouth.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/davesamcam-300x189.jpg" alt="" width="300" height="189" /></a>Back in the <strong>spring of 2007</strong>, I watched <strong>Francis Maude</strong> give one of the most <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/question_time/6410713.stm">unimpressive performances on <em>Question Time</em> </a>that I&#8217;ve ever seen. The background for this was the announcement that the <strong>Conservative Party</strong> intended to commit to the idea of rewarding married couples through the taxation system. His answers were <strong>defensive</strong> and and a little <strong>condescending</strong> and I held my head in my hands as the Conservative Party once again went <strong><em>back to basics</em></strong>.</p>
<p>Even back then, I knew that just as the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Back_to_Basics_(campaign)">original <em>back to basics</em> </a>had started the decline of <strong>John Major&#8217;s</strong> government, so the new version &#8211; despite its different presentation &#8211; could <strong>seriously damage</strong> a future Conservative challenge; <strong>people don&#8217;t want to be told how to live</strong>. And now the issue is <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8463907.stm">back in the news </a>- not because it&#8217;s new but because given everything that has happened since St David&#8217;s Day 2007, <strong>Labour</strong> feels that the Conservatives are vulnerable on this issue &#8211; and they are <strong>dead right</strong>.</p>
<p><strong>I&#8217;m not against marriage &#8211; heck, I&#8217;m getting married in June</strong>. I&#8217;m not even going to argue with the fact that marriage is a preferable institution from which to create a stable family unit. I&#8217;m not arguing that kids from married families statiscally don&#8217;t do better at school and stay out of trouble. Marriage is the most important building block of our society and we disregard it at our peril.</p>
<p>But marriage is not a <strong>magic wand</strong> &#8211; it is a <strong>means to an end</strong>. Marriages create <strong>stability</strong>, <strong>continuity</strong> and an <strong>environment of care</strong>, which is why it is so good at <strong>nurture</strong> and creating <strong>stable</strong> and <strong>balanced</strong> households. <em>But it doesn&#8217;t have a monopoly on love, stability and care</em>. There are plenty of<strong> co-habitees</strong>, <strong>single parents</strong> and <strong>same-sex relationships</strong> that provide exactly the same environment. Equally, there are plenty of marriages that provide very little in the way of any of these positive things.</p>
<p>My problem with the Conservative policy of rewarding marriage in the tax system is that it <strong>alienates people</strong> who don&#8217;t fall into this category, many through <strong>no fault of their own</strong>. The break-up of any marriage is always a tragic and deeply traumatic event, particularly when there are children involved. But it happens &#8211; sometimes people who fell in love with all good faith simply fall out of love, or fall more in love with someone else. <strong>It&#8217;s one of the most difficult things about being human &#8211; but being human is all that it is</strong>.</p>
<p>I feel <strong>very uncomfortable</strong> about levvying a financial penalty against those involved in such a sad chapter of their lives &#8211; even though to them it would no doubt pale into insignficance compared to everything else. To me, it smacks of <strong>kicking people while they are down</strong>, of <strong>turning our backs </strong>on them when they need support most and of keeping a whole lot of other people, many of whom will be relatively vulnerable, off a list of &#8220;the favoured&#8221; because they &#8211; for whatever reason &#8211; <strong>cannot</strong> or <strong>don&#8217;t wish to</strong> embrace a formal marriage arrangement.</p>
<p>I understand what the Conservative Party is trying to do here &#8211; <strong>but it&#8217;s all wrong</strong>. It allows our opponents to paint us as an <strong>exclusive party</strong> &#8211; as if we didn&#8217;t have enough trouble with that already. I seriously don&#8217;t want the Tory Party to be the party of the rich &#8211; I want it to be the party that leaves the rich alone, looks after the poor and increases mobility from poor to rich. <strong>But it&#8217;s difficult to get that inclusive idea across when you illustrate it with policies like this one</strong>.</p>
<p>And the party only has itself to blame. By trying, in the spring of 2007, to impose its <strong>grass roots&#8217; preferred way of living</strong>, we have been <strong>overtaken by circumstances</strong> to a point where we are left with a policy that <strong>DC</strong> would probably reverse in an instant if he could &#8211; <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2010/jan/04/election-campaign-cameron-gaffe-marriage">he&#8217;s already tried and then had to go back on himself </a>- but can&#8217;t. Despite the <strong>recession</strong>, despite the sensitive issue that <strong>taxation policy</strong> has now become, he cannot go back on the marriage promise for fear of losing <strong>grass roots votes</strong> and another <strong>Lisbon-like U-turn</strong>. On one side his <strong>better judgement</strong>, on the other <strong>ConservativeHome</strong> and the <em>Daily Mail</em>. <strong>Rather him than me</strong>.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s what happens when you announce things three years ahead of an election. Okay, there&#8217;s nothing wrong with supporting marriage but I&#8217;ll bet that if DC could choose something now that he&#8217;d announced in 2007, <strong>it wouldn&#8217;t be this.</strong></p>
<p><em>The Conservative Party must support <strong>people</strong>, not <strong>institutions</strong> if we wish to remain on the centre ground.</em></p>

]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thehorsellsmouth.com/2010/01/were-going-to-the-chapel/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
