"For too long here, we have believed that the money should come only from the poor put-upon taxpayer. As should be painfully clear, that is insufficient. As is starting to happen, universities need to diversify their sources of income to provide the investment that turns an adequate university into a great one. That means making greater use of alumni contacts, and aggressively looking for philanthropy and endowments."

"Since 1969, it has been a public limited company owned by the government. But as mail volumes have fallen, the debate about whether it should be public or private has forced it to live in uncertainty about its future. Some see it as an essential public service which the government should run. But last year's Hooper Report says it is 40 per cent less efficient than its European counterparts...."

"Coalitions are held together by leaders 'buying off' the smaller parties to prevent them splitting and triggering new elections. That inevitably result in leaders kowtowing to factional whims and offering concessions to the preoccupations of small parties, however arcane. That would be a very real risk here, where small party support has grown from 3 per cent to 14 per cent in the last thirteen years. In many countries this results in money for the pet projects of small parties or individuals. This is an awful idea at a time when there is such an urgent need to restrict spending."

All too often, we are governed by politicians who either do not have the experience to match their responsibility or the abilities to match their power....Over the past 20 years, MPs have got younger and younger. Of course, it is important for MPs to be in touch with the electorate, but this needs balance. Less experience of life and work outside politics means less experience of the society they represent. That has not led to better governance."

"The choice facing the next Prime Minister and government is clear. On the one hand, he can continue the policy of the present Government. This will result in a slow slide down the second division of nations, an inability to defend the sea passages on which our global trade and standard of living depend (ninety per cent of our trade still comes by sea), an inability to secure our growing imported energy supplies and the vital food supplies which we in this country take for granted.

Or, the next Government can resist this decline, hold firm against the pressure to reduce defence funding, and provide an adequate defence provision with contingency reserve capability for all three Services. If this decision is made, it should be done as a deliberate and well researched policy."

"Because of rising incomes and falling travel costs, education is internationalising. And universities themselves are now competing globally. Whereas, for example, St Andrews would have once worried about its standing compared to Oxford or Manchester, it must now worry about its standing compared to Yale or the University of Tokyo."

"...[W]e cannot make defence decisions only on those threats which are foreseeable. History shows that the biggest threats are actually those we do not foresee. It is no good making defence policy decisions based on the news cycles of 2009, and then complaining that we cannot adequately defend ourselves and our interests in 2020."

"...[H]ealthcare reform would open up health insurance companies to more effective competition, and they fear it. Many are lobbying hard and trying to muddy the argument with scaremongering stories. In fact, many of the angry people at the town hall meetings were actually members of organised groups, paid for by vested interests."

"...[P]icture things from the suppliers' point of view. They have every incentive to get as much money from the project as possible. Unlike their dealings with companies, they have detailed public knowledge about the politicians' stated intention to procure the service. They will know the market better than the minister, so they will know what options they have. And unlike their dealings in the private sector, they may even know how much taxpayers' money is available for the project. All of this makes bargaining harder for the minister and easier for the private-sector supplier."

"[T]o stay as close to America as possible, Britain signed a new extradition treaty with the US which gave more protection to Americans than to Brits. Passing into law as the Extradition Act 2003, it made it easier for America to extradite British suspects than it was for Britain to extradite American ones. As things stand today, if Britain accuses an American of plotting a terrorist attack against London, the US government will only allow him on a plane to face justice if Britain shows that it has enough evidence to mount a good case against him. But if America accuses a Brit of plotting an identical attack against New York, Britain must put him on a plane to the States without so much as asking America to show that it has a good case at all. It is a lopsided legally-sanctioned double standard, and previous ministers have admitted as much."