As I said in my posts on 20 December 2009 and again on 28 April 2010, the electorate will probably need to wake up to the gravity of the situation before we can address our problems. 

In the past 13 years, a Labour government has created 1 million new 'jobs' in the public sector (taking the total from 4 million to 5 million) to bribe its supporters. 

Take that muppet, Janet Watson, who suddenly popped up as Chair of the grossly incompetent, Blair-created Electoral Commission, or whatever.  She's in her mid-forties; has faffed around in various lefty causes for most of her adult life; and she now gets £100,000 a year for putting in a 3 day week.  You want to cut public spending by £100,000 a year?  I have a suggestion.

The Labour government has been spending £200 billion (i.e.£200,000,000,000) per year on welfare payments.  These are skewed towards Labour-held constituencies in which one in five, sometimes more than one in four, adults simply don't work.

Scotland - where the Conservatives have precisely one MP - sucks up public money like a vacuum cleaner. 

It is plain that much of the electorate has simply not grasped - or does not yet want to accept - that the country simply cannot afford this debilitating waste and corruption of economic effort.

So, there is much to be said for making a 'progressive' - i.e. high state-spending - Labour-Liberal Democrat coalition face up to this ghastly mess and tell us what they propose to do about it.

Gordon Brown has risen to the occasion by telling us that he intends to hang around as Prime Minister for a few months while the Labour Party, including the public sector trades unions, take their time in deciding who should be the next non-elected Prime Minister of this country.  It is difficult to see how any applicants who want to prune public spending - which is the country's key requirement - will get a fair hearing from that lot.   

The Lib Dems are giving serious consideration to this proposal.  HANG ON, MR. CLEGG!  You're now saying that Gordon Brown should continue as Prime Minister for several months until the trades unions have announced who will replace him.  And - even better - Mr. Brown will introduce a new voting system which is intended to make this sort of shenanigan normal practice in future.

As it happens, a new transferable voting system might actually prove to be a good idea.  The Conservative Party could then split advantageously between the Unionists (with Scotland and Europe) and the English Party (who want to split from Scotland and the European Union).

OFM would vote for THE ENGLISH PARTY.