It is not often that I agree with members of the clergy, so I just have to say how odd it is to find myself in complete agreement with the archbishop of Canterbury yesterday. As we probably all know by now, this week he guest edited the new statesman, and used his editorial to openly attack the government. While I haven’t read the article myself – I’d be interested to hear from anyone who has – he reportedly questioned the governments mandate, and called CaMoron’s big society idea ”stale”. As one of my friends on facebook put it ”Go, Rowan, Go!” It seems to me that he has said what everyone else knows to be true: this government has no mandate for such radical, ideologically-inspired cuts and the reforms to health and education it is pushing through. What surprises me, though, is that these comments came from the archbishop of Canterbury: I usually associate the church with the right, with supporting governments and so on. To be honest these comments came from the last person I expected to make them, apart from the queen. Although it does raise questions about the relationship between church and state – I usually prefer the clergy to keep out of politics, as, after all, they believe in great big invisible sky-fairies – it’s good to see the clergy can still stand up for the oppressed.

Mind you, less surprising, and far more irritating, was the way in which CaMoron simply dismissed the archbishop’s article. I found it quite patronising and arrogant, sort of brushing it aside as if to say ”You can say what you like, but I don’t care. You’re wrong and I’m right.” How much more evidence do you want that these cuts are ideological, and CaMoron will proceed with them no matter what anyone else thinks, clergy or otherwise?