Is it too much nowadays to assume political crises can be resolved calmly and without conflict? In the Catalan crisis we have the extraordinary situation in a modern European democracy of Spain’s attorney-general calling for charges of rebellion and sedition to be brought against the deposed Catalan leader, Carles Puigdemont, and his cabinet. This could lead to trials and jail. He, in return, has ‘fled’ to Belgium which may potentially offer him asylum!

Politics seems to be getting crazier. The situation could so easily have been resolved by sitting round the table to discuss further autonomy for the region with possibly a referendum on independence. It particularly makes sense from Madrid’s perspective when regional opinion polls suggest Puigdemont would have lost.

In this sense lessons could be taken from how London dealt with a call for Scottish independence. No threats to jail Nicola Sturgeon (umm…tempting) but a boil lanced at least for the time being. Of course, her call was not illegal but such demands should never be in a functioning democracy. Rajoy’s thin-skinned authoritarianism is embarrassing for the whole of Spain.

But where has the EU been in all this? Rather than riding to the rescue with a stance of maintaining democratic principles in its member states, it has been depressingly quiet. Quite different from its approach to authoritarianism in Eastern Europe.

Much has been said about the EU’s over-arching powers, but it has abdicated its responsibilities with Spain. Hypocrisy is everywhere, (not least amongst Brexit supporting commentators who support Catalan yet hated the thought of Scottish independence), but the EU should intervene to stop the Madrid government pursuing the ambitions of its excitable public prosecutor. We know why – it does not want its members splintering – but principles are not a luxury to be applied only when self-interest doesn’t get in the way. It undermines moral authority, so important when dealing with Putin, Xi and the Trumps of this world.

To be clear, Puigdemont has been being entirely self-indulgent in his behaviour. There is no logic in Catalan going independent. Spain is not a dictatorship; Catalan is a prosperous region and better for being part of Spain. He held a provocative, illegal referendum and his government’s subsequent vote for succession has caused a wholly unnecessary crisis. Sadly, however, Rajoy has made the situation worse and his government’s threatening legal tactics are unacceptable. The EU should speak firmly of the need to compromise and help broker an agreement. After all, if it can’t do this, what does it exist for?

An alarming report published by the Financial Conduct Authority this week paints a grim picture of the financial future for many in the UK. An astonishing 26 million people are described as ‘financially vulnerable’ with a growing gap between the wealth of young and old. A reliance on expensive credit products and reckless borrowing generally means there is a financial time bomb ticking.

The report based on a survey of 13,000 adults revealed that over 4 million 25-34 year olds are already in serious financial difficulty. The overall number will rise sharply if, as expected, interest rates start to rise with a staggering 17% of households saying they would struggle if mortgage repayments or rent rose by less than £50 per month.

There may be some unnecessary fear in these results with individuals too ready to plead imminent poverty but the scale of those under threat is too great to ignore. The fact is people are simply too ignorant about managing their financial futures responsibly with little understanding of the need or level of savings required for retirement being a prime example. With pressures on housing costs, inflationary rises in the price of utilities and travel, restrictions on welfare budgets and a well-documented transfer of wealth to older voters (rises in house prices, winter fuel allowances, triple locks on pensions, student loans etc.) taking their toll, perhaps the report is hardly surprising.

One statistic which is nearly always alarming is the household savings ratio. At an almost all time low compared to other developed countries, second only to the US, it needs to rise in the UK. Building an economy on credit and rampant consumerism is hardly a path to financial success in the long run. It is a moot point whether it reflects a generational change in values or record low interest rates; probably a combination of both. But with regard to the latter, it is worth remembering that inflation is never dead and rising interest rates are now not far away.

The need for comprehensive financial education from school age upwards with increased support from the private sector has never been more needed.

Lastly, specifically for those reliant on benefits, an immediate threat to their financial future is the roll out of Universal Credit. Whilst it is widely supported in principle, of the 8% of claimants so far effected, there are, it seems, too many horror stories developing of delayed payments creating real hardship. With Conservative MPs this week instructed not to vote in parliament on a Labour proposal to ‘pause’ the roll-out and the Government forced to make a U-turn so that the Universal Credit hotline is free (why wasn’t this the case from the start?) it is rapidly becoming a symbol of Conservative heartlessness. It would be ironic if initiatives such as this rather than the disarray over Brexit was the catalyst that ended this current administration.

Why are we where we are with Trump, Brexit and a move to the far right across Europe to name just a few exciting political developments…?

Quite simply because complacency and arrogance all too often builds up in a cliquey governing liberal elite whose hypocrisy has been regularly exposed. If it wasn’t so serious, with potentially tragic consequences, it would almost be comical.

Where to start. Well let’s begin with Harvey Weinstein. The same liberals who rightly condemned Trump’s behaviour stayed silent for years whilst Weinstein abused women. The same Clinton’s, Obama’s and liberal media who must have known the back story or at least strong rumours of it took Weinstein’s donations and advertising revenue whilst ignoring or suppressing stories about him. Now it is safe to do so they are falling over themselves to condemn him but a little late one feels….

Then you have Blair, Brown, Cameron et al embracing Europe to the extent of ignoring the pressures of immigration until it is also too late, all exacerbated by the awful European Commission. Now the worst sentiments of a xenophobic society are rising to the surface in the UK as well as elsewhere (witness the results from the Austrian and French elections) as we leave the EU.

Go back further and the same traits were found in the Tory Left in the 1960s/1970s (although I don’t think those active at the time and still alive today recognise it). Why is this relevant? It led to the radicalism of Thatcher. She was a force for good for a while but left an ideological, anti-European legacy behind her which is the foundation of today’s Conservative Party and where we are on Brexit.

There are other, numerous examples of hubris. Political correctness gone mad and an assumption that building an alliance across minorities is enough in itself (Clinton).

Democracy means you have to listen to the concerns of all voters, knowing when to lead and when to follow, to ensure your priorities never fall too far out of sync with their concerns (if only the European Commission understood this). It also means applying forward looking, liberal values evenly across people’s behaviour. So much progress has been made by this approach in so many areas both economically and socially. It is put at risk by the traits highlighted above which are too often on display, making liberal democracy an easier target that it should be from populism.

How did Catalonia’s desire for separatism reach such a crisis point in what is now a relatively mature democracy? It all seemed sorted back in 2006 when a Statute of Autonomy agreed by the Catalan and Spanish Governments seemed to solve the tensions. Unfortunately, the People’s Party (now led by Mariano Rajoy, the current Spanish Prime Minister) challenged the Statute in Madrid’s Constitutional Court and it was largely over-turned leading to the current crisis.

In recent weeks it has all gone downhill, culminating in an illegal referendum on 1 October. 90% of only 43% of voters who turned out supported independence; but this was less an issue than the heavy handed response of the national police who on the instructions of Madrid tried to head off the vote, closing ballot booths, dragging voters by their hair along the streets and generally inciting violence. These were shocking scenes which are wholly unacceptable in a western democracy.

The EU was uncommonly quiet on the issue and hypocritical in comparison to their response to anti-democratic events in Eastern Europe but the reason for this is obvious. They don’t want momentum to build in favour of a fragmented Europe where there are other regions wanting self-determination. The EU was hardly sympathetic to Scottish independence. But this is not the point. Principles of democracy and criticism of unacceptable behaviour by authorities should be applied with equal vigour across all of the EU, not selectively.

So what is the solution? First, it is unclear whether there is even a majority of support for full independence in Catalonia. Opinion polls across all voters in the region seem to suggest not. Second, in an uncertain, volatile world where larger power blocs dominate and economies of scale from globalisation (whatever Trump says) count, this is not a time for regional fragmentation (the same of course applies to Scotland and even the UK…).

Carles Puigdemont, the Catalan President, calls the referendum a sufficient mandate for succession but shows signs of compromise in part probably driven by the reaction of businesses who are moving/threatening to move activities out of the region. Rajoy has not reciprocated. He is an unpleasant Prime Minister who has taken a constantly aggressive, provocative approach to this issue.

There is a need to compromise, however unfashionable this concept is nowadays. In such a troubled world this issue should not have been allowed to escalate so far. Rajoy should stop bullying from his Madrid pulpit and re-visit the 2006 Statute and the EU should put pressure where it is needed. Catalonia and the rest of Spain should move on. It is the least of the region’s problems, let alone what is happening in other continents.

With a collective sigh of relief, the Conservative Party conference is over. The Tories are depressed and Manchester, which never really welcomes them, felt a strange venue for a lost tribe.

There was a vacuum at the heart of proceedings with ideas and leadership thin on the ground. In this gloom, any charisma disproportionally attracted attention, hence the spotlight on Ruth, Boris and Jacob. Only one of these merits serious consideration as a future leader but more of that later.

Fringe meetings, where the real action takes place, on the whole appeared dull, with repetitive topics only occasionally offering useful ideas. Advance policy announcements were also incredibly weak on student debt and housing policies which seem unintentionally designed to boost demand not supply. Despite protestations, this is a government so overwhelmed by Brexit, there isn’t the bandwidth for anything else.

And yet there were grounds for optimism, a silver lining in a dark Manchester sky. There was a growing recognition that the case needs to be re-made for free markets, competition and the benefits they bring to the long term enhancement of standards of living for all. Supporters have been negligent in doing this since winning the battles of the 1970s/80s and the new threat of a hard left Labour Party brings urgency to making up lost ground. Philip Hammond and Theresa May in their conference speeches both referenced this but, in fringe meetings, it was Ruth Davidson who articulated the case for centre right politics in modern, refreshing terms.

She wasn’t afraid to use the word ‘centre’ either and represents the future of the Conservative Party. But not yet. She needs time to grow into a leadership role with expectations carefully managed but the combination of insight, humour and authenticity is irreplaceable. The Tories will be reinvigorated by a new intellectual debate on the merits of compassionate, free market capitalism. This is the ground on which they will eventually see off Labour and it would be great if Ruth was eventually the one to lead it.

Lastly, to Theresa’s speech. She soldiered on through a prankster and coughing fits to deliver a solid case for her premiership. In what is surely the most depressing job in politics, she showed some humour and hopefully elicited sympathy in dealing with the trials of her speech. She deserves the respect of her colleagues and the electorate (after all, it was they who voted for Brexit) in managing the almost impossible demands of her role, not least the rampant and often unfounded speculation from the media. It is in everyone’s interest that she should be left alone to get on with that role for now.