Cons Increase Deficit & National Debt Targets Missed

BertieUK

wotsthat wrote: »

It's not just Gordon Brown. There are no qualification requirements for the position of Chancellor - they just need to be a politician.

To my mind it would be better for MP's in ministerial positions to have some sort of background in their department titles but that would leave Government rather lacking in choice. Being a politician seems to be a career choice of it's own and it's no surprise that politicians aren't putting up barriers to office based on aptitude for the job.

To the average man in the street, like myself, there is no substitute for experience in any position of employment, George Osborne is getting the stick because, quite frankly his only work experience if folding towels in a Department Store before joining the Conservative Party, so he has to be guided by Civil Servants or the like, maybe he should change some of his advisors.

Most of us have to strive and work relentlessly through our careers to attain such positions in life, here is someone who literally just maybe because of his background denies someone else with experience this title of Chancellor.


He will always remain as Chancellor as long as his class mate Cameron is there.

As said before name someone in the past who has been Chancellor that had work experience, almost impossible, I wonder why?

I just wonder whether George Osborne wishes that he came from an average family background so that he could then appretiate many of the problems that they go through? I dont think so.

chewmylegoff

this is true - however, saying that growth was running at 4% per annum when labour left power is the equivalent of someone sitting here claiming that there was no recession in 2012 and in fact the economy grew by +2% between Q3 2011 and Q3 2012; it's fundamentally misleading.

i should point out that i misread the graph and growth in the 4 quarters ending June 2010 was actually 2.1%, which is still not 4%.

GeorgeHowell

BertieUK wrote: »

To the average man in the street, like myself, there is no substitute for experience in any position of employment, George Osborne is getting the stick because, quite frankly his only work experience if folding towels in a Department Store before joining the Conservative Party, so he has to be guided by Civil Servants or the like, maybe he should change some of his advisors.

Most of us have to strive and work relentlessly through our careers to attain such positions in life, here is someone who literally just maybe because of his background denies someone else with experience this title of Chancellor.


He will always remain as Chancellor as long as his class mate Cameron is there.

As said before name someone in the past who has been Chancellor that had work experience, almost impossible, I wonder why?

All that's required now is being perceived as a good politician. That's why the civil service runs everything, which has perpetrated a failure of democracy, and goes a long way to explaining why we are so far in the s**t.

wotsthat

Thrugelmir wrote: »

You also tell when people are losing the rational argument. When it becomes about people, i.e. name calling. Not the policies. Debt reduction medicine is going to be painful. More than likely slow to take effect. So any real impact is going to take time to show significantly.

Of course. However, that was a given and the Government should have considered in advance of giving their targets. There's no getting around it - latest forecasts are that they'll miss their own and Labour's targets.

Politically they dismissed Labour's targets as too soft. It's clear to most that recovery is going to be grinding and we all know there will be shrill objections from those on the end of cuts and so, in context, the Government haven't, arguably, done a bad job.

However, by missing targets they've handed a political gift to Labour because they got the politics wrong even if the economics were right.

Thrugelmir

BertieUK wrote: »

He will always remain as Chancellor as long as his class mate Cameron is there.

Wasn't that same as Blair/Brown..........

Remind me who became PM without being elected either?

BertieUK

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Wasn't that same as Blair/Brown..........

Remind me who became PM without being elected either?

I have to say David Cameron to that one...

Thrugelmir

BertieUK wrote: »

I have to say David Cameron to that one...

Your answer explains why many of us have become disillusioned with politics........

chewmylegoff

cameron was elected as PM - the rules are that the person who is the leader of the largest parliamentary party after the election is asked by the queen to form a government. he was therefore elected PM, although it's right to say that the government he has formed does not really have an electoral mandate in the sense that the tories did not get an overall majority. that said, the last time any government truly had an electoral mandate was the national government elected in 1935. the last time any party won more than 50% of the vote was in 1931.

BertieUK

chewmylegoff wrote: »

cameron was elected as PM - the rules are that the person who is the leader of the largest parliamentary party after the election is asked by the queen to form a government. he was therefore elected PM, although it's right to say that the government he has formed does not really have an electoral mandate in the sense that the tories did not get an overall majority. that said, the last time any government truly had an electoral mandate was the national government elected in 1935. the last time any party won more than 50% of the vote was in 1931.

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?

lvader

Cuts are obviously too fast and too deep.