Cons Increase Deficit & National Debt Targets Missed

chewmylegoff

BobQ wrote: »

I agree in this world of professionl politicians its rather difficult.

Even when they have some relevant experience its ignored. Liam Fox a former GP became Defence Sec. Gillian Sheppard was an ex teacher and became Education Secretary as did Estelle Morris (who could not hack the job of SoS).

As to Chancellors, Norman Lamont studied economics at university, John Major (at O-level) and before that Oxbridge PPE graduates Norman Lamont (great success story!) and Roy Jenkins.

Of course its possible that the next Chancellor will be qualified in economics (William Hague, Philip Hammond, Yvette Cooper, Raechel Reeves , David Miliband or even Ed). Not sure if that is reason to hope!

Personally I can't see that doing an economics degree for three or four years makes you qualified to be chancellor. It's probably better than nothing, but not as valuable as relevant work experience.

chewmylegoff

BertieUK wrote: »

I agree fully with your answer, my complaint is with the system, if a party who does win with a majority, they are then considered by the present system not strong enough to lead the country and have call upon another, quite different party to achieve the required numbers of seats, then on many policies there will be conflicting views with some of them impossible to impliment as we have seen with this Coalition.

Would it not be better if we went down the road of 'The party with the most votes should be the one who forms a Government' then it may bring more voters to the Ballot Boxes, with the present day proceedures in politics, would this not be possible.

Do other countries have this undesired problem with their politics?

You seem to be suggesting that proportional representation would be better - that system is used widely throughout Europe and almost always results in hung parliaments and coalition governments.

A._Badger

chewmylegoff wrote: »

Personally I can't see that doing an economics degree for three or four years makes you qualified to be chancellor. It's probably better than nothing, but not as valuable as relevant work experience.

I cannot believe having had your head stuffed with economic theory by academics would be of any help at all. Economists are employed by all the biug banks, too. And look how they ended-up!

Economists really don't have a very good track record.

DecentLivingWage

Not sure banks like lending under coalitions - they are usually seen as flaky - so 'The Recovery' can't happen while Cameron/Osborne/Clegg trio (well, not as powerfully as we want it to) are still bobbing about on the scene - we need someone to get a decisive win! Otherwise this rise in deficit will continue...

'official statistics showed Britain ran up the largest current account deficit on record in the second quarter of 2012.

The Office for National Statistics said the £20.8bn deficit – which includes the UK's trade balance, as well as the shortfall on overseas investments by UK plc – was the biggest ever for a quarter.' (Guardian 27th September)

grizzly1911

chewmylegoff wrote: »

It's probably better than nothing, but not as valuable as relevant work experience.

Yes it would be nice if they had some of this.;)

BertieUK

chewmylegoff wrote: »

You seem to be suggesting that proportional representation would be better - that system is used widely throughout Europe and almost always results in hung parliaments and coalition governments.

I am not sure what I mean to be honest with all the different names that are given, All I can say is that this present Coalition did not seem to me to be a very good idea in the first place, and in my opinion is not looking too successful at the moment.

I do think that maybe a Coalition could work better during wartime where we call upon the best MPs to run the country.

Politics are where decisions are never easy to make for so many numerous reasons that sometimes a normal Government find they have hard choices to make and never get full agreements.

Whatever decision is made is never the correct one for some.

Would it have been a better idea to run another election?

chewmylegoff

BertieUK wrote: »

I am not sure what I mean to be honest with all the different names that are given, All I can say is that this present Coalition did not seem to me to be a very good idea in the first place, and in my opinion is not looking too successful at the moment.

I do think that maybe a Coalition could work better during wartime where we call upon the best MPs to run the country.

Politics are where decisions are never easy to make for so many numerous reasons that sometimes a normal Government find they have hard choices to make and never get full agreements.

Whatever decision is made is never the correct one for some.

Would it have been a better idea to run another election?

Quite. For instance, it's difficult to imagine you being happy with any government that isn't a Labour one. If the Tories had won an overall majority you'd just be complaining about something else. We currently have the government that the electorate elected - no single party gained a majority, thus coalition government is the result. I don't agree that there should have been another election - we got what we voted for - a hung parliament. Continually holding elections until you get the result you want is just about the most undemocratic thing I can think of.

lvader

chewmylegoff wrote: »

Continually holding elections until you get the result you want is just about the most undemocratic thing I can think of.

Sounds like the election process for the party leadership of labour.

A._Badger

lvader wrote: »

Sounds like the election process for the party leadership of labour.

Or what the EU did to Ireland.

DecentLivingWage

Cameron is misleading public over deficiit says former Con Cabinet member today - its rising!

'David Cameron is ‘misleading’ the public by bragging about having slashed the nation’s budget deficit, a former Conservative Cabinet minister said yesterday.
John Redwood said the boast – repeated in the PM’s New Year message – risked fooling people into thinking that the nation’s debt was coming under control at a time when borrowing is still running at more than £100billion a year, because many voters did not know the difference between the debt and the deficit.'

contd

(Mail Online Jan 1st 2013)


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2255518/Camerons-deficit-boast-misleading-says-senior-Tory-John-Redwood-calls-new-cuts-boost-economy.html#ixzz2GlpNPkRn
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook