Is this a young David Cameron? Should we care?

The Conservative Party have denied it officially (though that used to be a clear sign it was true) but the web is buzzing with the question whether this is the first film appearance of the Conservative leader and possibly the next prime minister 'performing' in public.

The question is really does it matter? Twenty years ago Cameron was not asking for the public vote, he was a very different, probably fairly immature, young man. Why should we expect him to have never enjoyed himself and done all the things that a young person does? A bigger question! Given that now there are pictures of so many of us, and in particular young people, on Facebook, in various states if my students are anything to go by, will this be a big problem in 20 years time? Will be expect our prime ministers and ministers to be found in a ton of pictures drunk etc, in fairly revealing clothing, with probably what may be seen as dodgy fashions in the future, but it will be normal. Perhaps also more politicians will say yes to questions about whether they have drunk, smoked dope etc and it will not be used as a way of undermining them. Who knows what the future will hold.

is 'DULL' good politics?

Norman Smith looks forward to the Budget and predicts it is to be "deliberately dull", his reason is that "people want is steady-as-you-go, sober common sense. Or, put another way, dull, dull, dull." Or perhaps actually what the people want is honesty. Brown's last budget was described by opponents as a con-trick; no-one wants that do they? One former chancellor presented a fascinating argument at an academic conference, it involved building blocks. He produced three stacks and said "right, here is the budget for the health service, this is defence, this is for the police; you want more money for the health service that's fine, which budget shall I take a million from?" He went on to explain that is the job of the Chancellor, but would it not be refreshing if a Chancellor actually stood up and explained his or her thinking in simple layman's terms? Too many budgets give with one hand while picking the public pockets with the other; the reason is to openly state a requirement to increase income tax is a vote loser. Are people really that unsophisticated (well, perhaps), but if someone did step forward and state their arguments for increasing tax and why it is going to benefit the people would it be better than obfuscating and spinning? It perhaps would not be dull, but it might be better politics.