like so many things, this comes back to the need for a fundamental change of the system of governance.
all main parties have a system of central selection which is intended to ensure that only candidates supporting the 'central committee' agenda are selected, and can be deselected at central direction with or without the agreement of their constituency organisation.
the main parties are, for all practical purposes, indistinguishable in their main policies. The means of approaching them vary, but all parties are constrained by the need to produce a workable result from the electoral arithmetic without recognising or embracing the significant section of the electorate who do not support the 'Westminster consensus'
I effect, this means that none of the main parties can be expected to do anything genuinely controversial. There will much huffing and puffing, as they jockey for electoral advantage, but little real change.
the great sacred cows are political correctness, immigration and the EU. The immediate driving imperative is the financial deficit. The Coalition claim that their intention is to reduce the deficit by making cuts beyond anything demonstrably achievable, Labour's policies on this were unclear but could only have been based on inflating the debt away.
the actual result of this is to produce a period of posturing and bluster as trivial sums are saved by the attacking of peripheral, 'soft' targets while the real process rolls on unabated.
various quasi-private sector targets, such as the effective abandonment of capital investment and consequent collapse of the construction industry, are already under full attack. Front-line services have been under attack for some time - since so much of the actual service is contracted out at some level, it can be scaled back with no actual identifiable policy for doing so.
it's interesting that the police seem to be leading the counter-attack, by making plans for reduction of actual officers whilst preserving the politicised beaurocracies of which they now so largely consist. This is significant, because it provides a proxy arena for the trial of strength which is, to a point, a reflection of the 1984 miners' strike; the differences being that the employment sectors being defended are completely unproductive and essentially political and anti-democratic in character, and the government have already effectively signalled that they have no stomach for the fight.
the Conservatives have now broadened the arena by poaching a figure from the Labour right, so that sector of the contest is defined; the signal has been given that the contest for electoral dominance will be fought out within existing policies, that the consensus remains intact, electoral exclusion of elements with insufficient 'political consciousness' will remain, that it is fundamental that whichever party emerges successful will be 'on message'.
quite where this will lead, is hard to say, but the conclusion has to be that inflation will remain high and probably continue to increase ( fuelled by QE, or 'printing money' in plain English ); a complete economic collapse will probably be averted or avoided, and the client state so assiduously erected by Labour will effectively survive.
organisations like the NCM have no role in this, and will simply be squeezed to death or at best completely marginalised
''the stopes soared beyond the range of our caplamps' - David Bick...... How times change .... oh, I don't know, I've still got a lamp like that.