Leadership Debate

Observing this from what I suppose would be a relatively objective point of view (as I obviously wont be voting come May), one thing struck me in particular: that being the extraordinary revelation that a Liberal Democrat was the ONLY candidate who seemed to be willing to produce any hard, factual economic COSTING with respect to the policies his party was trying to implement. As I said, a surprising turn of events when one considers the “pie in the sky” ethics or “handwringing” commonly associated with liberalism.
Mr. Clegg directly challenged the veracity of every single promise put forth by his “larger party” counterparts with the simple, candid statement – “There are no figures in either of your manifestos”.

Granted, Mr. Brown’s divisive National Insurance scheme is not everyone’s cup of tea, but nonetheless it can at least be construed as some form of concrete collateral for costing the changes needed to springboard momentum back into the sluggish British economy.
Mr. Cameron’s notion of “cutting waste” to bring about a six billion pound dividend for economic recovery on the other hand is complete folly. Although no one denies a total clean up of politics is essential, the sheer immediacy of the economic challenge requires instant treatment and application. Cutting waste and bureaucracy is a correct and noble enterprise, but it takes time, and as Mr. Brown correctly pointed out, tough fiscal decisions need to be taken right now to effect real change next year. Mr. Cameron’s notable silence when it came to Mr. Brown directly questioning Conservative educational funding was ominous.
He just isn’t ready yet.

I’ve no doubt all three leaders are essentially good men, and truly believe they could shape a better UK.
Will Mr. Clegg’s good show finally energize the Liberal Democrat’s towards challenging the top two? Will the media boost translate to votes?
Yes, but not with any major change to the political landscape unless Britain faces the real prospect of a hung parliament and a potential coalition arrangement.
Personally, I think this would be a wonderful opportunity. After the almost imperial reigns of the two main parties in recent decades (lorded over by Mrs. Thatcher and Mr. Blair), a coming together of seemingly disparate political philosophies in a dynamic, challenging coalition government where not only your own party, but your partner party must bear up to scrutiny would be a new and vital component for democratic representation in the UK.
But could it happen? Will the myopic loyalty of party political voting be finally punctured? Will the frightening inertia of an “always will” vote for whoever based on a misguided “always did” be done away with or perhaps challenged at least?