WHEN David Cameron could not come up with any policies for tackling the economic crisis, he hid behind patriotism – the last refuge of the scoundrel – and cited national interest for his party’s silence. When Shadow Chancellor George Osborne could not contain himself and cack-handedly appeared to be talking down the pound, both the Conservative Party and the country grimaced.

And while the Tories bickered in the sidelines over whether Mr Osborne should be sacked and the Government pressed on with its neo-Keynesian plan for a “fiscal stimulus”, the Tories’ opinion poll ratings plummeted. Mr Cameron’s reaction was to break with the pledge to carry on Labour spending targets should the Tories win the next general election.

In the process, he exposed Tory policy on the economy for what it is: a mixture of emptiness, incoherent muddle and panic-driven thinking on the hoof. In shrugging off his self-denying ordinance, he merely served to underline why it had been necessary in the first place. But in revealing the Tory strategy, such as it is, as a plan for deep public spending cuts and job losses, Mr Cameron has done the nation a service in at least showing that it has a choice.

While the Government has shown a determination to give real help to families and to employers to help keep people in work, the Tories offer inaction and isolation as the only major party in the most economically developed countries in the world to oppose the need for spending to fight the recession. He has appeased the right-wingers in his party who are baying for “supply-side reforms” while at the same time managing to disappoint them by failing to hold out the prospect of tax cuts.

The fact that the choice now rests in a topsy-turvy politics where Labour is pledged to cut taxes and the Tories are opposed to such a “reckless giveaway” speaks of the extraordinary economic and political turmoil that we are in. Tax cuts for the poorest are a necessary means to alleviate the harshest effects on the most vulnerable, but more could and should be done to boost unemployment benefits, too. But these are short-term solutions to a crisis which offers opportunities for a new economic order.

When Chancellor Alistair Darling delivers his pre-Budget report next week he must reach beyond the present crisis as both he and his predecessor bear in mind that while the Government was not responsible for much of what led here, its policies fuelled the credit explosion and reckless gambling in the global casino, without which we would not be here.

It is time to start repairing the long-term damage with long-term solutions: a new form of governance and regulation for the banks with defined responsibilities toward industry and employment; a more equitable tax regime under which the wealthy pay a fair share; a tougher regime on transnationals and offshore banking and a national house-building programme. To hope that the beginnings of a decoupling of the private-public finance schemes might glimmer through the proceedings is probably a wish too far, economically and socially imperative though it is. And to think, all this might just be popular, too.

* * *

AN UNEXPECTED rush to the head of political common sense has caused the Government to do the right thing by the post offices. The artificial bidding war for the Post Office Card Account was never more than a device to privatise another part of the service and so weaken the sustainability of tens of thousands of post offices around the country.

Business Secretary Peter Mandelson’s influential championing of this cause was surprising not only because it signalled a handbrake turn in the direction the Government appeared to be heading but because it came from him of all people. Either Gordon Brown realised what a disaster taking the account away from the post offices would be and realised that, perhaps, Mr Mandelson, was just the figure to effect such a dramatic about-face or Mr Mandelson’s vaunted ability to spot an electoral disaster when he sees one has, for once, been turned to the good.