The David Camwrong defence of the government's u – turns is interesting. Sort of
I quote from the BBC website: 'Mr Cameron said it took courage for an administration to admit it was "ploughing into the brick wall" and change course.'
I must say that I am a little suspicious of any person or organisation that calls itself courageous; and the idea that it is brave not to plough into a brick wall is novel.
I also question how courageous it is to admit you have to change course if you do not, in public, discuss how it was that you were able to go wrong. That's the important point.
That might be difficult in the case of this week's u-turns because, in lieu of his explanation, I rather think it was the strength of opposition which persuaded them to change rather than the force of argument.
The only mistake they seem to have acknowledged to themselves is that they misjudged the degree of public resistance.
What interests me most is that 'Mr Cameron also insisted the government had "resolve, strength and grit"'
This is a subset of the “we're taking difficult decisions” nonsense. It's partly a consequence of most organised religion and, more, a consequence of the sadistic / masochistic undercurrent of the public school system which shaped him and his cronies: if it hurts, it's good.
Resolve, strength and grit may be ok in some situations; but too often it expresses itself as one of Douglas Adams' yellow robots yelling “Resistance is useless”
There is no indication in what the buffoon said that he has any concept of why the decisions they've abandoned despite their resolve, strength and grit were wrong beyond their own self-interest.
It's just that, in this case, more people than expected expressed a belief that they are fools or villains or both; and said they'd fight.
For instance, while everyone is congratulating themselves on resisting VAT on Cornish pasties, it seems that the ConDems plan to impose a parliamentary constituency across the border between England and Cornwall will go ahead. It may not hit the pocket immediately but it is rather serious. It is, however, harder to rally opposition even though its purpose is clearly gerrymandering.