It`s probably not often that the Labour party receives a favour from the leader of the country`s chief constables. However, the dire warnings from Sir Hugh Orde about inadequate protection of the public from "criminals and the growing threat of homegrown terrorists" which would ensue with another five years of the Tories` "long-term economic plan", should rejuvenate its propaganda machine. The electorate, judging by the opinion polls, appear ignorant of the real implications of "public spending falling to just 35% of GDP", and Labour should not be relying on leaders in the front-line of the cuts to be doing their electioneering for them. Even when Ed Balls makes a speech on the subject, a luke-warm reception from the press is guaranteed, so one solution might be to plan an all-out assault by the party as a whole.
How can the "grooming" epidemic be stopped, or the increased pressure on the NHS and education services be eased, when less experts are employed to do their jobs? Increasing NHS efficiency or social mobility are definitely not Tory targets. Reducing further the staff at HMRC and the Food Standards Agency inevitably will lead to no reduction to either the tax avoidance "industry", or the health risks caused by food contamination, whilst yet more cuts in the social care budget will intensify pressure at A and E departments. The list is endless, and the dangers cannot be emphasised too much; arguments against shrinking the state are not "bashing-business" as the likes of the CBI predictably suggest, but in favour of ensuring safety and fairness for all.
What the Tories are promising is a government based on laissez-faire principles, where, with so little regulation, the gap between rich and poor continues to rise exponentially. Hopefully, the 15% of the media which is not committed to aiding a Tory election victory will play its role in warning voters of the consequences of another Tory-dominated government, and the real reasons why Cameron is unwilling to defend his policies in TV debates will be realised.