Conservative government

chewmylegoff

the real problem with this govt is that they just seem to be completely inept at executing any of their policies, without bringing down a complete shytestorm on themselves. it's embarassing to watch at times; when that cretin milliband is actually getting some traction you know that whoever is opposite him is doing something calamatous.

what i really don't understand about tory policy is their complete failure to do anything material about the benefits system. if i was running tory HQ (which i am not, and don't want to be), my strategy would be to hammer long-term benefits claimants (who will never vote tory) and pass the savings on to working people earning up to about £50/60k (who sometimes vote tory).

this would seem to me to be the best chance that the tories have of actually getting enough people to vote for them that they stand a chance of winning the next election. instead they seem to messing so much stuff up it almost looks deliberate.

maybe the tactic is "look so awful in midterm, so when we start being not quite so awful near the election, people will think we have improved".

chucky

kabayiri wrote: »

Labour policy 1,2 & 3 : borrow money and bribe the electorate. Working Tax Credits to keep the masses dependent. Free laptops? Yeah, why not. Child Trust Fund. Hey, good soundbite, and more money to give away. PFI - let's put the local hospital on tick for the next 30 years. At least it will look all new and shiny for the photo opp when it's opened.

It really is typical of this forum that you can post something completely inaccurate that contains sound bites and people think it's the truth.

How many people got lap tops... Approximately a huge 0.0045% of the UK population.

Also a small thing it was that great Labour politician John Major that started PFI, never mind though at least you got a couple of Thanks for it despite being completely wrong.

It's quite scary that people even thank these types of post, despite the huge inaccuracies.

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to kabayiri For This Useful Post: Show me >>
Graham_Devon!(Today), Jennifer_Jane!(Today), Out, Vile Jelly!(Today)

You've just described these posters and yourself very well.

kabayiri wrote: »

There are none so blind as those who cannot see.

pqrdef

chucky wrote: »

Also a small thing it was that great Labour politician John Major that started PFI, never mind though at least you got a couple of Thanks for it despite being completely wrong.

PFI was supposed to be a way of temporarily fiddling the official borrowing figures so that we could pretend to meet the criteria to join the euro. But we were never supposed to believe that we really weren't borrowing.

Graham_Devon

chucky wrote: »

It really is typical of this forum that you can post something completely inaccurate that contains sound bites and people think it's the truth.

How many people got lap tops... Approximately a huge 0.0045% of the UK population.

Also a small thing it was that great Labour politician John Major that started PFI, never mind though at least you got a couple of Thanks for it despite being completely wrong.

It's quite scary that people even thank these types of post, despite the huge inaccuracies.

You've just described these posters and yourself very well.

Do love how you pretend not to be a labour supporter.

Anyway, what did labour do when John Major announced PFI? They didn't attack it, did they? They didn't warn it was the first step to privatisation, did they?

What happened just 2 months after labour got in in 1997? They didn't state "It's PFI or Bust", and expand it's use, did they?

It's the same for the coalition. They were critical of labour for using PFI to fund projects. As soon as George got in, 61 new projects were started with PFI.

SecondLegDownIsTheBigOne

jhnwrmn wrote: »

I've just seen the Labour party political broadcast on the BBC. It was sickening and infuriating, and focused upon attacking the Conservatives for the Granny Tax, Privatisation of the NHS, and various other heinous crimes!

I'm behind the Granny Tax. Over 65s should be taxed at the same rate as everyone else.
,
As for the privatisation of the NHS, wasn't the blue print for this created by Andrew Lansley, a Labour MP!. What a bunch of liars!

He's the Conservative Secretary of State for Health, you numpty.

The problem with democracy is that the clueless get to vote.

coastline

All a game ..ones as bad as the other....most of the people interviewed in the street on breakfast TV today said the same..
It doesn't matter whos in power they would be attacked by their opponents...its handy for the media..
The present government are having difficulty getting their cuts through...maybe there isn't many genuine cuts they can make despite them saying Labour were wastefull...
There wasn't exactly a list prepared of realistic cuts...ID cards is one of course....but it was never going to be easy...its just cuts across the board some more than others..
Considering all parties were committed to cuts of £80bn there was always going to be problems....and now we have no growth making it worse..
On the subject of PFI....Camerons latest idea of road tolls...isnt that similar to adding to the PFI total liabilities....just sounds like another form of renting...why cant we just build roads ourselves...then we own them...

RJP33

IronWolf wrote: »

The problem with Labours opposition to EVERYTHING is that everyone (with half a brain cell) knows they would be doing mostly the same things if they were in power anyway, its not that the Tories enjoy making cuts and being unpopular with the electorate.

By opposing everything they are simply trying to win votes in what is a blatant mis-representation of what they would be doing in office. You only have to watch them squirm when an interviewer asks them "So if you oppose this does it mean you will reverse this policy if you win the next election" to which the answer is always "....errrrrmmmm....well we have to see what the situation is at the time..." which means "no, we are just opposing it to win votes and dont have the balls to actually say what we would actually be doing"

Absolutely, it's infuriating. It'd be exactly the same, and I was really disappointed they didn't cut spending before the 2010 election because they thought it would cost them politically.

They're putting political points above what clearly needs to be done, it's spineless. They've also spent that bankers bonus tax about 10 times already.

StevieJ

coastline wrote: »

All a game ..ones as bad as the other....most of the people interviewed in the street on breakfast TV today said the same..

.

You could interchange most politicians between parties and you wouldn't notice any difference, just look how Cleggy, Beaker and ' I am a govt minister, don't ya now' Teather have assumed their governmental roles Reminds me very much of the climax of Animal Farm.

Twelve voices were shouting in anger, and they were all alike. No question, now, what had happened to the faces of the pigs. The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.

TDPIX

The Govt have been a bit rubbish recently IMO.

But the BBC are hostile - they are a left-leaning organisation, which would explain it.

chewmylegoff wrote: »

it's embarassing to watch at times; when that cretin milliband is actually getting some traction you know that whoever is opposite him is doing something calamatous.

Thankfully he's not really gaining traction. Recent polls have shown Tory support falling, but none of this support going to Labour. Most of it has been to undecided or UKIP.

I do sometimes wonder though whether the Tory mess-ups of late have been to keep Miliband in a job. In late Jan/early Feb, there was talk of Miliband doing (relatively) badly in the polls. Even some rumours about Labour MPs turning against him. A month-and-a-bit later the Tories start making mistakes en masse and the Tory support drops. Stories about Miliband doing badly and needing to be replaced disappear.

chewmylegoff wrote: »

what i really don't understand about tory policy is their complete failure to do anything material about the benefits system. if i was running tory HQ (which i am not, and don't want to be), my strategy would be to hammer long-term benefits claimants (who will never vote tory) and pass the savings on to working people earning up to about £50/60k (who sometimes vote tory).

I think this is with an eye on the 2015 election.

In 2014 they'll start sending our 'individual' tax returns showing where taxpayer's money is going, and people will (IMO rightly) be amazed at how much goes on welfare.

Then the Tories will really ramp up the rhetoric. "We put a cap on benefits, but the weak Labour and Lib Dems opposed us doing anything more. We want to bring the cap down £x,000 and reassess all benefits every y months" etc.

In short I think that whilst some of the Tory mess-ups have been genuine, some of them have also been with two-eyes fixed on 2015.

chucky

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Do love how you pretend not to be a labour supporter.

Anyway, what did labour do when John Major announced PFI? They didn't attack it, did they? They didn't warn it was the first step to privatisation, did they?

What happened just 2 months after labour got in in 1997? They didn't state "It's PFI or Bust", and expand it's use, did they?

It's the same for the coalition. They were critical of labour for using PFI to fund projects. As soon as George got in, 61 new projects were started with PFI.

Behave yourself, stop trying to cloud the issue by claiming I support or another party. You speak against your beloved Tories and that makes you a labour supported now. That's desperate.

The fact is trying to claim that PFI is a labour policy is a lie and that's why you're trying to defend it by accusing me of being a labour supporter and trying to confuse the point made that PFI wasn't a labour policy.

Just to educate you, I voted once in the last three elections and it wasn't for Labour or the Tories.