Lest we forget, the deregulation of the banking system was initiated with great fanfare by Thatcher in the late 80s. New Labour did sod all about it, of course, but the Tories were in full and enthusiastic support right up to the crash. As for the country being all hunkydory in 1997, well let's talk about the then 18-month waiting lists for new hips, etc. That's the trouble with the economist types - they measure human happiness in terms of money and nothing else. After 18 years of Toryism unemployment was at 6.8%. By 2008 it stood at 5%. Then came the crash, which the Tories never fail to blame entirely on New Labour, which is entirely a big lie. Now we have the Tories concealing unemployment and under-employment by encouraging zero-hour contracts, part-time work with no job security, bogus apprenticeships and forcing jobseekers to declare themselves "self-employed". Thatcher managed it by sticking millions of people she' d thrown out of work on to the scrap heap known as incapacity benefit. Anything to conceal the true level of unemployment, eh? But the productivity and growth figures are a somewhat inconvenient giveaway, eh? Not looking too good in this morning's news....

As for my predilections, Billyboy, my dislike of the major parties is almost evenly spread. Like most other people I have to weigh up what the least worst option is. I know what the worst option is: more of this, that's what. If I lived in America I'd have to vote democrat even though they are somewhere on the spectrum with Genghis Khan, simply because they seem ever so slightly less inclined to get us into wars. Voting is all about realising that some bugger has to do it, then holding your nose.