Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Oh I hope not..that's the really frightening prospect of 4-5 years of nothing being done...:(

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

I second that for exactly the same reasons. NHS spend looks likely to be cut massively under either of the other two.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

I think of it differently. It will prevent a government from passing through all sorts of legislation that no-one voted for. I don't think the erosion of civil liberties would have occurred quite as easily if it had required negotiations between two parties. Frankly, I find the prospect of a one party majority scarier.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

He may come back at you with a question :D


I dont normally bother with politics, it would have been labour before but Im that fed up of the way things are now that Im torn between lib dem and conservative. Im not sure I can bring myself to vote conservative and I was impressed by Vince Cable on TV last week, not very good grounds for a vote but I haven't looked at any of the policies and dont see the point, they end up as false promises IMO. For me its picking the best of a bad bunch

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Yeah but why vote back in a Government met with such serious failings? Don't get me wrong - You vote for who you like - but I don't get how people can vote for these same muppets - They are a complete and utter failure for the people of Britain.

Just getting back to your point though - I would presume such cuts would be aimed at the Pen pushers and the people in the back offices making up these bizarre and unachievable targets - The Target system launched under a Labour Government. Basically cuts in the Bureaucracy, those cuts are needed. :cool:

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

:erm:SB, If they want to cut NHS spending, they should look to the managers first mate. A complete waste of money. Do you really need so many managers to run just one ward?:erm:
How about getting in bank staff at an inflated rate when they refuse to pay the regular members of staff overtime.:erm:
Total mismanagement.
I know this because my wife works as a grade 3 HCA at a mental hospital.;)

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Ah you see that would be the sensible thing to do, but more likely it would be services like mine which are having a huge impact in severely deprived areas which have staff cut ;)

---------- Post added at 20:51 ---------- Previous post was at 20:45 ----------

I wish I was as optimistic as you are about who's jobs will be on the line, but like most people I have a mortgage to pay so i'm looking out for No. 1 :rolleyes:

Having spent time reading the policies of all the major parties regarding health care, my vote is as it was. Thats not to say I agree with all policies, and we'll see what the forthcoming weeks hold.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

And our governing bodies don`t do sensible do they.:)
Where does the money come from for their " Little jollies" ?:erm:
They`re all a waste of space SB.:mad:

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

So in essence - you're voting for the same party back in which those deprived areas would still be deprived under a Labour Government?

Just out of interest - are you front line staff? :)

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

So they wouldn't be deprived under the Tories? I don't believe much of what any politician says tbh, but the policy around healthcare is what is currently swinging it.

I manage a stop smoking service and practice as front line also.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Just found this from the Conservative Party website on Health and the NHS...

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Funny, I was just reading that on the Tory site before my PC crashed :dozey:

Tory policy for NHS is definitely more favourable than Lib Dem. My concern with Tory policy is regarding the NHS IT Contracts situation, OH is employed as a result of this. I'm only hoping should they get in, they don't make too drastic a cut in IT as some areas have move the NHS into the future :) (obviously there have been major c0ck ups as well!)

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Is he involved in support or government announced projects?
If it's the former, then he's likely to be ok, there's enough saving to be made by cancelling the projects.
It's not a bad idea to make sure his CV and qualifications are up to date, better to be safe than sorry though.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

I think he's safe enough as his role is needed all over the world, and his company is international but it would mean a move away.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

This is quite amusing.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

The best post so far :tu:

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Let me clear one thing, l WON'T be voting Labour, I have voted Lib Dem, as a protest vote against our Labour MP, who is crap and she is from Hounslow. I am a strong Labout Voter and always have been, BUT won't vote for our MP.

I just think Labour is the best party to run this country, Cameron has as much brains as me, and that ain't much.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Awww, Bless :)

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

You've got 12 O levels, 3 A levels, and a 1st degree too?

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

No even 11 plus.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Is that due to lack of "brains" or lack of inspiration from the education you were given?
Afterall, many intelligent people do not have qualifications.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Hounslow? How could she, the evil witch!

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

I agree, and many qualified people don't seem to have much intelligence.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

There's a difference between knowledge, intelligence and wisdom, having just one tends to leave you lacking.

Although you do need "brains" to get 12 O levels, 3 A levels (grade A) and a 1st degree (unless it's in sociology ;) )

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/Home...dead-certs.htm

I'm not surprised that many people don't bother voting in a general election. Perhaps it is time to change the Victorian election system?

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Agree - The current system whilst giving everyone a specific representative also results in unbalanced party majority government without a majority of the electorate. Both Tory & Labour have been the beneficiaries of this system. Worst thing is they then claim to have a mandate to ride roughshod over the majority of the population who didn't vote for them.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Isn't FPTP the system in every area?
If so, and the ERS (who's purpose one supposes is to object to the FPTP system) are correct, then how do MP's ever get voted in/out?

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

A snippet from the BBC's Election 2010 Live Coverage page:

Looks like the civil service is expecting to be implementing the Tory manifesto on 7th May. :D

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

That's great, except those £6bn of savings in the next few years will lead to MASSIVE costs in years to come.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Costs where though? Cameron just pointed out in their morning press conference that he's not envisaging one-off savings, he believes in smaller, more efficient government. It's not a case of not spending 6 billion this year, and therefore having to spend 12 billion next year.

To all those who claim that the parties are all the same, there is now a genuine ideological gap opening up between Labour and Conservative. The Tory proposal is for smaller, leaner Government. Frankly, after experiencing Gordon Brown's stealth taxes for more than a decade and then watching him chuck my money at bloated, un-reformed public services, I am more than ready to watch the State shrink.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

I refer to my post here. The government is the economy don't you know?

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Quite. I was in the car when Gord was making this point on the news and I found myself seething at my radio. I found it quite a chilling window into his psyche, that he thinks money can only be in the economy when its being spent by Government. That is utterly wrong-headed.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

The only MP's who get voted out are those in marginal seats where the electors swap sides to last time. Or those who for whatever sleazy reason the electorate have got thoroughly fed up with (Martin Bell won for this reason). Oh and those who are not standing for re-election this time but if they are in a safe seat will be followed up by a fellow party member.

The rest will be re-elected.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

I don't see why this is a problem?
If an MP hasn't got the support, he won't get elected.
If an MP isnt good enough to get the support needed to be elected, then they don't deserve to be elected.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

areed i will be Vot Labour but i think tory will win

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Was that a QFT or did you forget to type something? ;)

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Tory or Labour or coalition will tax me to death...so there is no hope...

The Tories will not abolish the +1% NI increase for people that make more 45K....

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Hmm - The Lib Dems policy on Taxation looks interesting...

Earn the first £10,000 and pay no TAX. Current thresholds are £6,470. So anyone earning less than £10,000 a year pays no income TAX at all.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Sounds good, and a lot cheaper than claiming the tax and then giving it back, however they're going to want their £3,530 from everyone earning over £10K so taxes will go up to pay for it.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Just the tax on that £3,530. Still, it sounds like a good idea. Many people on low income will be better off, and I don't mind paying a bit more tax for it.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Well, if it's done properly, then people earning over £10K shouldn't actually have to pay more tax, they just won't be any better off.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

According to media coverage, it has already been leaked that Cameron is going to make cutbacks, BUT he hasn't said where yet.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

How is 'doing it properly' not going to incur a net cost that needs to be offset elsewhere?

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Had a brain fart. :erm:

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

good,hopefully he'll cuts loads of the hopelessly bloated public sector.
:rolleyes:

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Fingers crossed!

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Excellent. This is a very good piece of news. Bye bye, bloated Labour nanny state.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

We will only know if it's good news dependent on what he decides to cut back. I again expresses concern they will cut services which do not garner a lot of public attention or sympathy but are none the less important. Social Services and services for people with neurological conditions for example.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Labour have always bought votes from Teachers and NHS staff by promising them money and normally crap on the Forces and Police, which is why they traditionally tend to vote Conservative.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Well there's a Press Release from the Department of the Bleeding Obvious if ever I saw one. ;)

May I also take this opportunity to applaud Cameron and Osborne for not making firm statements about what they will cut, and where, when they have not yet had access to the detailed information that only the Government can possess.

The well-worn complaint that their plans lack detail are a complete and utter red herring.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Social services which have been prominent in the public eye over recent years (for awful reasons), and neurological conditions like his late son had?

---------- Post added at 15:15 ---------- Previous post was at 15:12 ----------

That's a very good point Chris, many people have complained about the lack of publicity or the lack of details of Tory policies in the past, while forgetting that most policies they've come out with are nabbed by Labour and then implemented badly (the cynic in me says that's because Labour want them to vote against their own ideas as the reasons behind opposing a bill are rarely dwelled upon) or they simply cannot have access to the information while in opposition.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Can the mods please add this new party to the vote list :D

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

They have been there for awful reasons but those examples do not justify cutbacks, if anything they are an example of how important they are and the consequences of what happens if they are not there though either incompetence or cutbacks. Also they cannot be used as a barometer of the entire service.

---------- Post added at 15:26 ---------- Previous post was at 15:25 ----------

I don't use those services but would gladly pay 1% more NI as opposed to cutting back on them. I understand that this is not necessary the choice in front of us but if the choice was smaller government, less tax, but no one to provides services for the disabled, people with learning difficulties, and such or bigger government, more tax, but the services remain then I will go the latter.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Damien, I don't know whose idle guff you've been inhaling this morning but you really ought to stop. You are far more intelligent than this.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

I mentioned them and their prominance to suggest that they are unlikely to be cut.
Under Labour, Social Services have been stretched and overworked so much that they're making mistakes every day, failing to tackle that (ie allowing more children to die by restricting SS' ability to function) would be a huge black eye for the next government.
As someone who lost a child suffeing from a neurological condition, he is unlikely to support cutting services there. From a cynical point of view it would also be a personal black eye for Cameron if the media is able to portray him as using those services for his son, then denying them for other people's children.
He's also made a huge point about government support and cooperation with charities which provide such services.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

I understand that the 1% NI insurance rise is not linked to funding social services, I guess that was a bad example. My point is the idea that services need to be cut back and there is too much spending. I would like to know what services can be cut, because there will be hard cuts, and everyone admits they are needed until it affects a invaluable service to them. Which is why I worry that a minority will have their services cut even though they may be of extreme importance to them.

---------- Post added at 15:38 ---------- Previous post was at 15:33 ----------

Fair enough. However there are different types of care and different types of condition. Most of his son's care was direct from the NHS and not council services wasn't it? There are centres for people, adults, with long term conditions such as autism. Expensive. Not Well Known. Not lots of people use them.

I have absolutely no evidence the Tories will cut this at all by the way, but it is a concern when they talk about cuts because like all politicians they will probably go for the least politically denting ones. It may be the case, as Chris said, that they won't have a clue until after the election. Still I would lean towards tax increases than cutting any real services that people need.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

There's plenty of back office bloat to offload before even considering front line cuts.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

The thing is Damien, if you go and look for any of the independent analysis out there (i.e. avoid any of the national Press because it's all partisan as hell right now), the one thing it seems to agree on is that £6 billion isn't very much. In fact it is within the margin of error for a treasury forecast. It is an amount small enough that in certain contexts it may not even exist after all.

Furthermore, it's not even about cuts to services. There are going to be cuts, deep ones, regardless of who wins this election. Gordon Brown raked in billions during the boom times and simply peed it up the wall, so when the hard times came he had no choice but to mortgage all our futures for decades to come. My children will still be servicing that debt when they start earning and paying tax. That makes me angry.

The important issue here is the ideological difference that has been exposed between Gordon Brown and David Cameron. Brown has let it slip that he doesn't consider that money to even be in the economy unless it's the Government that's spending it. That is a dangerously Statist view of an economy. Governments are slow and inefficient. They do not create wealth. All they can hope to do is legislate for the conditions that will allow private citizens to get on and create wealth.

A Labour Government will not, cannot, create those conditions because it is hard-wired to believe that only it can spend money in a way that will get the economy moving, despite the evidence of the last decade, which is that a Labour Government can at best only preside over a booming economy when it is handed to them on a plate and only for as long as the wind remains fair.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Leaked by Tory announcements. Months ago. In case you hadn't noticed they have been campaigning on the necessity to reduce the deficit earlier and have even gone as far as saying this would come from an 80:20 ratio of cuts:tax increases. Labour and the Lib Dems have both also noted the necessity to make cuts - basically an admission by Labour that they have been writing public sector cheques with private sector funds that they don't have.

You are beginning to weird me out with this. Do you actually look at any news sources? You seem so horribly misinformed I'm interested in what your source is for this misinformation so that I can make a point of reading it, I could use a good laugh.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

The reason this is a problem is so many MPs get elected by only 30% of those who can vote. With the remaining votes actually cast split between the other candidates & 30% who don't vote at all. Hardly a ringing endorsement of them or their respective parties. Also shows why people are so disconnected from politics.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

I do not disagree with that sentiment, but unfortunately not enough agree with paying more taxes. They are quite happy to tell everyone how the tax system should work, as long as they don't have to pay for it.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Nothing wrong with that, if another candidate was more acceptable to the electorate then they'd win.
That's one of the advantages of the system.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

in this poll, I've chosen to vote for the BNP, whether I'll actually vote for them on the day of the elections is another matter. I know one thing for certain, it's going to be a choice between the BNP or "none of the above".

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

I'm surprised no one has posted to mention that the Digital Economy Bill has been passed...

After a mere two hours of debate last night during the "wash-up" period before the dissolution of Parliament, and thanks to (Whipped) Labour & Tory support, the Digital Economy Bill passed its final vote in the Commons, and then today passed through the Lords, received Royal Assent, and became the Digital Economy Act 2010.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology...-bill-internet

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology...-third-reading

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politi...10/8608478.stm

There were a few Labour/Tory rebels who joined the Lib Dems & other opponents, but it wasn't anywhere nearly enough to block it.

Special mention to Labour's Tom Watson, a former Minister who defied the Party Whip for the first time to vote against the Government on the DEB.

Here is what Stephen Timms MP from the Department for Business, Innovation, and Skills thinks an IP address is.


Oh, and...They Work For The BPI :D


I already know of some people who have changed their voting intentions due to the rushed passage of the DE Act.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

I was voting Lib Dem anyway because of stuff like this. Also credit to David Davies, another principled stand from him, really wish he was leading the Tories :(

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Ditto for the Lib Dems.

I do actually quite like David Davis, despite his support for the death penalty... and despite him being a Tory! My estimation of him shot right up due to his stand on civil liberties, e.g. opposition to ID cards, and especially due to his resignation & re-election a couple of years ago after the detention without charge vote. I've never voted Tory before, & don't plan on doing so in the future, but if I'd lived in his constituency in 2008 I would have voted for him.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

How rude of them to want to keep more of their money in their pockets.

I would be happy to suggest how it could be paid for.

Tax credits need tightening up so that people with well above average incomes aren't getting them.

Reform of the welfare state, get shot of Jobseeker's Allowance and replace with Employment Insurance based on contributions and previous income which after a set period wanes to zero. EI to be funded as a flat % of income in a similar manner to an insurance premium.

Cease funding of the NHS from general taxation and instead allocate a compulsory insurance contribution to be deducted directly from salary. Each home nation funds their own health expenditure in a similar manner to the provincial schemes in Canada. Should focus the regions when they are having to directly explain to their voters why they are paying what they are - there must be total transparency in terms of expenditure with each and every NHS trust having to report income and expenditure in a similar manner to a business. Minimum standards of care, based on pre-insurance levels of service, to be set to avoid management preserving themselves at the expense of front line services.

Devolution - each of the home nations to have their own budgets, legislature, etc, in a similar manner to the USA's states and Canada's provinces. They will pay taxes to their home nation and they will pay taxes to the UK as a whole in a similar manner to the USA and Canada's provincial / state and federal taxes.

Pay as you go - both health insurance and employment insurance are to be funded on a pay as you go basis and contributions ring fenced. If it's going to be spent it must be raised, some limited latitude for economic cycle at the beginning, removed once the funds go into surplus then pay as you go with outside assistance in exceptional circumstances and expressly authorised by UK Parliament only.

Minimum income guarantee, dependent upon circumstances such as dependants and cost of living. Some of this income where children are involved must be provided via an electronic card which can only be used to purchase food.

Housing benefit replaced with a scheme with a flat maximum payout - no-one living on welfare should be having the state pay a landlord thousands a month to live in a large Central London home, if they were there previously their Employment Insurance will cover up to 75% of their income and allow them to pay the rent / mortgage assuming their own insurance doesn't cover it.

The welfare state must never supply a better income than a person could previously reasonably expect given previous earning levels - if no earnings this would be minimum wage.

That should save a few quid straight off as well as divesting power closer to those who they are working for and encouraging individual responsibility. The fact is that smaller nations tend to be more efficient and have more wealth, the exception to this being the USA which is run in many ways like a series of smaller nations.

Of course this would be incredibly unpopular for many reasons. :)

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

You are wasting your time posting on here, maybe you should have a constituency, or have a go at running the country.

No I am not taking the P***

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

:tu:

If compulsory, good plan. If not, it will be unaffordable for people on low income, who have a higher risk of unemployment.

Is that the sound of marching boots I hear?

Yes, sounds good.

Interestingly, when I was last paying tax into a system as outlined above (Compulsory Health and Employment insurance) I was paying 50% tax (inc. health/employment insurance) on earnings over ~£20k (10 years ago with a strong pound). The top tax bracket was 60%, basic rate was ~35% IIRC*. I can see why this would be unpopular in the UK.

*I should add that interest on mortgages was tax-deductable, which is a major tax break for the wealthy.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Hey,

Just to address the above, the contributions would be absolutely compulsory, and part of the minimum income guarantee being in 'electronic food stamps' is, yes, somewhat authoritarian which I have a distaste for but ensures that people eat and will improve welfare in homes where the welfare state is misused. For cases where it would not be misused I would hope it would be viewed as a simple way to pay for groceries.

Potentially this method of payment would have a pitfall that would need addressing with software at the PoS - ensuring that it cannot be used to purchase age restricted goods would be necessary and would ensure that there's no use of it in supermarkets for tobacco or alcohol. Placing the claimants photograph on the card would ensure it is non-transferable. This card could replace the NI card though photograph, name and NI number would be the extent of the information contained on the card to avoid it becoming an 'ID card' of sorts with balance held online not on the card and transactions authorised via chip and pin, never to be handed to a cashier or leave card holder's sight.

The compulsory insurance schemes don't require high rates of taxation - Canadians and Americans pay less tax than we do and North America is where I plagiarised the ideas from - the popularity idea referred to the idea of having a time limit on employment insurance and paying a dedicated insurance premium for health card, with each home nation having to pay its' way. The other issue is that it would prevent the government from using healthcare or welfare as political footballs. If they both have to be paid for and are ring fenced the government can't hike spending up as a vote winner, as this would require them to increase premiums as well which would be up to the home nation, nor can they 'borrow' funds from any surplus - governments won't like it as it takes control away from them and requires them to be accountable directly to their electorates. 'We want to increase health spending by 20%, here's your insurance premium for next year.' has a rather sharper effect on the electorate than 'We have increased health spending by 20%, we'll sneak the paying for it into your income taxes some time in the next 10 years or so and in the interim we'll just borrow so we don't have to increase your taxes right now and lose votes and can blame the next government, have a nice day.'

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

That's fair enough and laudable, but I still don't like the authoritarian aspect of it .:)

Hang on. The USA (I don't know about Canada) has compulsory health and employment insurance? I don't think so. What was all the recent noise about universal US health care about then? IMO it was about the fact that providing these for low earners will cost the high earners disproportionately (which I think is fair). If you want to look at the cost of providing these things at decent levels (which I don't think the US provides), I think you're better off looking at Western European states like Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, Scandinavia etc.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

I don't like the authoritarian aspect either :(

Canada has compulsory health (here's one province) and employment insurance.

The USA does not as a whole have those but some states, such as Massachusetts, do have compulsory health care insurance.

I mentioned North America specifically due to the segmentation of health care plans. This is something that is I believe best devolved along with a number of other things. Allows both use of economies of scale through UK-wide purchasing power and efficiencies from smaller scale operational units.

Gemany's taxation is considerably higher than ours along with their having more reliance on private healthcare, Netherlands, Belgium and Scandinavia all have higher levels of personal taxation and considerably smaller populations. North America is a closer representation given personal taxation rates and populations.

---------- Post added at 00:21 ---------- Previous post was at 00:17 ----------

Haha, good God no. I'd be thrown out of Parliament for having some rather choice words for people in no time :D

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Cheers, I will (might) have a look if/when I have time. I very much doubt that any of those compulsary schemes in the US come even close to the schemes run in the countries I mentioned earlier in terms of % of last salary paid out, and length of payments.

And along with trains running on time, cities looking tidy, having great public services, and generally being very efficient and organised. That would never catch on here...

For taxation rates, maybe. For population, Germany, France, Italy and Spain seem more appropriate.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

funny how sith lord mandelscum spends sometime at david geffens villa and the comes up with this bill. how much of a back hander did mandelscum get.

he is a corrupt liar and a thief.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Well it's just unBritish isn't it? ;)


Listened to Cameron on the Today Program this morning, he seemed confident, didn't dodge questions like recent interviews I've heard with LibLab members (well ok, the newspaper question he admitted to having to dodge before saying the Star), admitted where he'd failed, even gave credit to some of Labours few good ideas, and expained why he couldn't give detailed answers on some of the questions.
He and his team have obviously got the message that peope are fed up with non-answers and "ya boo the others suck" responses from MPs.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Don't worry, I sure normal service will resume shortly. I doubt he can keep it up for the whole campaign. ;)

---------- Post added at 10:44 ---------- Previous post was at 10:41 ----------

I am sure one of his pals will find something to contradict him on, on The Daily Politics or on PM.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Both Cameron and Brown are avoiding Newsnight.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

I have to say, as with Ken Clarke, David Davies and Vince Cable, he does tend to come across as confident and sure of what he's talking about when interviewed.
Others such as Gordon Brown, most of his cabinet that I can think of, and even Nick Clegg (I think that's who he is) often sound as though they've been caught on the back foot.
Even Boris, bumbling as he can appear, doesn't come across like that.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

And as if she was actually reading this thread, Teresa May fulfills my predictions. Asked seven times if there will be any redundancies, she refuses to answer the question.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

How can she answer it at this point in opposition?
That's the point Cameron made this morning, they can't make decisions on redundancies without being in government.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Twitter claims its first victim of the campaign

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politi...nd/8610934.stm

Of course maybe he was just taking hints from two jags.

http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/61924,...dword-campaign

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

OMG Prescott to be a Lord??? What has the world come to!
Still, the Queen could dub him Lord Two Jags couldn't she?
Better yet, give him an OBE then make him an Earl.
That way he'll be an earlobe :D

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Flyboy ... Fanboy, more like. Is there any danger of intelligent debate breaking out around here? Such as acknowledging another point made during the same programme, that nobody sitting in opposition can ever make guarantees about anything? Or are you determined to simply parrot whatever the Labour press office tells you to?

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

If none of the politicians promised anything, what would be the point of campaigning?

The Tories have told us they have identified six billion pounds of savings. They therefore must be able to tell us where, when and how.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Try watching the BBC News. Osborne is giving Darling a kicking, live on air right now, on this very issue.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

:banghead::banghead:Jesus H. :dozey:
I despair of mankind.If you had the slightest inkling of how incredibly dumb your post is,you'd go :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

:rolleyes:

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Which they have.
For instance, they've stated 20-40,000 back office public sector jobs won't be re-filled after people have left saving approx £2billion a year.
Turnover in the public sector is approx 400,000 a year.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

The Tories are coming out with hype again, l bet you anything that that saving will be NHS, as that is where all the pen pushers are, a friend of mine works for our local hospital, and she had three secretaries, and there were more admin staff than there were nurses and doctors, that is where the savings will come from - NHS.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Which is surely a good thing?

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

This sounds like a great plan to me, getting rid of pencil pushers hired during Labour's years.

---------- Post added at 13:39 ---------- Previous post was at 13:32 ----------

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politi...10/8610560.stm

In other news what a complete and utter twunt Gordon Brown is. This story is astounding. Has it come to things like that to justify his authoritarianism? He is attacking the Tories for wanting to put a halt to the Government's illegal retention of DNA of those cleared of crimes.

EDIT: This is a great quote from the BBC story:

OK and how many of those 79 cases were solved by this match? I mean presumably the police must have had some way to catch these people prior to the DNA database being created, so how many of those 79 cases relied on the DNA. Probably wouldn't be such a pleasing statistic, and certainly not justification for such wholesale intrusion of our privacy. More CCTV cameras per head than anywhere else in the world including China, and more DNA profiles on record than China despite having less than 1/20th the population.

All perfectly acceptable to some apparently.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Yes and those lazy nurses should be doing even more of their share of the paperwork.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Or we get rid of the unnecessary paperwork.

That you have nothing better to say to this than a glib comment speaks volumes.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

25-30 years ago, if you'd said that the Tories would be campaining for people's privacy and freedoms while Labour would be acting like Big Brother, people would have said you were mad.
Then again, IngSoc and Labour...

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

And instead of attacking and insulting me, why don't you tell us all where these savings will come from?

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

That's the labour way, why give your own ideas or use logic to discredit someone else's when you can just say they were made up on the back of an envelope?

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

And where has all this paperwork come from?

Either the paperwork fairies have been at work or the government of the last 13 years have an absolute obsession with figures which they use to spin, manipulate and outright lie to cover up just how completely useless they are.

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

If you fancy seeing how our opinion poll would translate into an actual general election result, have a play with this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politi...10/8609989.stm

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

If that shows anything, it's how wrong the system is.

Con 33.7% 362 seats.
Lab 16.3% 178 seats.
Lib 20% 75 seats
Other 30% 35 seats.

Conservatives have 3 percentage points more of the popular vote than Other, and get 10 times the seats. Labour have 4 percentage points less than Lib Dem and over twice the number of seats. Smashing thing, Democracy... :rolleyes:

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

BBC This is exactly what I have had to do in my department - I have had my budgets frozen for three years, but still have to plan for 3% Pay OpEx increases year on year (as the government is not giving me an extra 1% to cover the NI increase, and the unions will surely strike if they don't get the inflation increase); so I won't be filling vacancies, and I will be asking people to take time of in lieu instead of overtime, and stuff like that.

But I do not know why you ask the question about the savings, because I am sure you will follow the party rebuttal line of "myth" and "fantasy" as soon as any answer appears - it would appear you don't want an answer, you just want to spread fear, uncertainty and doubt (are you sure you never used to work in sales for IBM? ;) ).

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 1
 

Exactly why the FPTP is so out of date. Worked well when there were just Whigs & Tories but has failed abysmally ever since.