All The Talents?

No, but James Purnell at Work and Pensions, and Andrew Adonis at Education, under Cameron. The public offers have not been publicly rebuffed. Neither Minister has been sacked, whereas at least one Assistant Whip has been sacked merely for requesting a piece of paper which should have been sent out anyway.

Grand coalition Cabinets such as that of Sarkozy, or as promised (although believe in it when you see it) by Obama or McCain, belong to presidential systems. In parliamentary systems, unless compelled by a hung Parliament (and I am a staunch electoral reformer - I want the voters to choose the coalition), they amount in peacetime to a contempt of the electorate. But, of course, we are now governed by people who think that Britain has a presidential system. One even reads occasional musings about the order of succession if the Prime Minister died, as if neither the monarch nor Parliament existed.

These are people, moreover, who either became Tories because they felt even less affinity with miners than with farmers (although that is saying quite something), or else joined Labour because they felt even less affinity with farmers than with miners (although that is saying quite something). There is no economic, social, cultural or political difference between them. They have been friends at least since university. Sometimes, they are related, and this will become increasingly common in successive generations. They have an allegiance to each other, and to nobody else.

And they constitute this country's de facto governing party, on a permanent basis. To them, it is the most natural thing in the world that the House of Commons should hardly ever divide over anything any more, thereby conveniently obscuring from the electorate the pronounced absence of difference between the nominal parties. And to them, it is the most natural thing in the world that at least two of their number currently serving as Ministers are on course for Cabinet seats under the One Party's Leader, Cameron (in succession to Blair), one in his current job, the other in that of his current boss. They regard such arrangements as positively healthy, and they don't know anyone who doesn't.

I laughed out loud when I read spluttering comments from Old Labour loyalists about how whips would be withdrawn and such like. Of course they wouldn't. Come on, what do you think this is? The Eighties? Yes, you probably do. Why else would you still be loyal to Labour? It sure as hell hasn't been loyal to you. I mean, it might even have abolished your council seat.

And deselection? Now you really are just being silly. The remaining constituency bodies of all parties are now tiny, overwhelmingly retired, mostly full of people receiving or closely related (usually married) to the recipients of councillors' allowances, and there to do as they are told by HQ. Which they do. It is scandalous that these nominally, and thus the HQs actually, choose most of our MPs, since most seats are more or less safe for one party or another.

The likelihood of their deselecting anyone, never mind a Cabinet Minister, is as good as nil. HQ would just suspend any that tried, certainly any CLP that tried. The last Labour deselection was that of Bob Wareing, replaced on central instruction with Stephen Twigg. Nuff said.