Re: Would John Smith Have Made A Good PM?
 

Just entirely predictable...!

Re: Would John Smith Have Made A Good PM?
 

Steady on chaps! :( ;)



NFFC, you're just trying to score cheap points..... mind you, second from bottom, 23 points adrift from 5th placed Derby, I guess you need to :D :D

Re: Would John Smith Have Made A Good PM?
 

Unfortunately, I was at the time living elsewhere overseas and I can't really comment on John Smith's s skills, so I'll take your word for it.


I have already commented on this earlier but for your sake here we ago again;

Here is a sample list:

Assemblies for Scotland and Wales - Not Tory policy
a Greater London Assembly - Not Tory policy
Massive cash injections and more on the way into health, education and policiing - Not tory policy
a national minimum wage - Not tory policy
schemes to get the unemployed and unemployable back into work,unemployment is down - Not Tory policy

Where on earth you have got the idea that Labour "out Tories the Tories" one can't imagine, it's just nonsense, the evidence is quite the reverse. Even now the Tory's plot to cut billions from public services has been made public.



New Labour has achieved the centre ground and there is no room for old fashioned dogma, New Labour in revising the old clause four, the rejection of dogma this was the right thing to do, there is no room in the Labour Party for the dinosaurs of the militancy tendency and other screaming Trotskyites. I reject accusations of Labour as a right wing party, there is no evidence for that at all.


Statistics vary, some constituencies held up their poll others fell. Looking at the statistics in general the voting electorate has fallen, everyone who believes in democracy should encourage people to use their vote, hopefully the next general election will see a better turnout.

Semantics: renewed = changed. The Labour Party has to adapt policies according to changing situations if it remains stuck in old dogmas it would be unelectable.



Well it does happen and my campaigning experience is sufficient that sometimes people vote or don't vote for all sorts of reasons, sometimes bizaare! That the Labour Party had the sufficient strength and experience to form an alternative government, don't underestimate that there are in fact millions and millions of Labour voters.

Actually, I do have a lot of respect for Michael Howard, he is an able political leader, he's too nice a guy to lead the Conservatives.

Yes, they do have a rather inept and babbling leader, probably Vincent Cable would be a problem for Labour, I'm sure the knives will be out following Liberal defeat in the general election.

Nothing in politics is inevitable, there is a real prospect of a Tory victory as they begin to scrape popular prejudices for their programme they hit the lowest common denominator anything to get votes.




It's a matter of opinion, the war is over, it's out of date now, we should move on and let the Iraq people resolve their issues as they are doing and the terrorists can now be seen as enemies of the people.

I think the NHS is generally doing fine there will always be issues and problems but I think you are underestimating the hard work the the staff and employees of the NHS do. As a teacher in FE and a school governor I can't say I've noticed education in a mess! What's a mess? Everything seems to tick over nicely, staff and students work hard at most schools & colleges. I would agree though there is a need for modernisation, new qualifications, new institutions with new ideas and old ways need to revised.

I don't deny there are problems these are more likely to be sorted under Labour.

Well as for asylum, immigration as I say I don't support everything I think the government should try to be more cautious over these issues. As for ID cards, oh dear, not again, seems things are on the shelf at the moment and one doesn't know what the new government's priorities will be.


William Hague is a tough nut I wouldn't describe him as incompetant! Fact is the Conservatives themselves have been openly split and divided as it seems they still are!


Yes, well it is a matter of opinion but I think History will judge him kindly.

G_d this took ages, I really must shut down and enjoy the sun with the family!

Re: Would John Smith Have Made A Good PM?
 

People suffered the Conservatives for too long for them to vote them back in any time soon. That's the only reason, that and voter apathy, that Tony is in power. Give it a few years, as memories fade, and the Conservatives will start to regain power.

I remember John Smith. I liked him - seemed decent. If I remember rightly, he died suddenly of a heart attack and was buried on Iona.

Re: Would John Smith Have Made A Good PM?
 

"Move on"? You're not Tony Blair in disguise are you? ;)

It is not over, & not out of date. It is still very relevant, whether you think it was right or wrong for us to invade Iraq.

Stuff I mentioned in another thread, which could go here:




Yes, New Labour has done a lot of good. But it's also had a lot of bad ideas.

Still better than the Tories though. But as others have said, there are areas where they try to out-Tory the Tories. e.g. whenever there's a mention of asylum, immigration, Law & Order, terrorism, etc.

Plus, what about the rail network? The Tories privatised it, but New Labour is quite happy to continue to leave it as it is, even though re-nationalising it would make sense, would be cheaper, & would actually be a vote winner.

Connex was stripped from its South Eastern franchise, & that part of the network was brought back into public hands as "South Eastern Trains". Since SET took over, punctuality & reliability have increased, customer satisfaction has increased, & the amount of tax-payer money SET takes in in subsidies has decreased compared to what Connex took, & is less than what the other franchises take. So what does Labour do? Does it think "Hang on, maybe this would work nationwide!" Nope, they actually want to dump it back into private hands asap.

PFI - as Andy said earlier, it seems to be a disaster. And you do not have to be a screaming leftist or a "Trot" to think that.

Also, the Tube & PPP - That's quite a Tory policy, for "New Labour". Took the Tube, & did to it pretty much what the Tories did to BR. Is it working? Not really. Now we just have these companies running it for profit, instead of for the customer, with all the emphasis for them seemingly being on money (which they make a LOT of) rather than safety & reliability.

Re: Would John Smith Have Made A Good PM?
 

And others have pointed out that there are at least an equal number of policies that Labour have introduced that *are* effectively identical to Tory ones.

You can prove anything by selectively picking the evidence.

If your party was left wing and now it "has achieved the centre ground" there is only *one* direction it can have moved in!!

However very few, if any *rose*. Therefore overall it's a drop.

But why? IMO it's because (to quote Rory Bremner) if you have two parties who regularly call the others liars, people are going to believe *both* of them!

Hopefully it will, but I really don't think so.

If they move away their core beliefs to make themselves electable and just go for what's popular (or populist) what is the difference between that and what they are accusing the Tories of doing?!

Whilst I don't think Charles Kennedy is a great leader, I also don't think that the Lib Dems will be "defeated" in the election. I wouldn't be surprised if they pick up a lot of disaffected Tory and Labour voters.

Let's see: the Tories "scrape popular prejudices for their programme they hit the lowest common denominator anything to get votes." but "The Labour Party has to adapt policies according to changing situations".

Do I detect the slightest trace of personal political bias here?!

Oh, my mistake, it wasn't a *slight* trace of personal political bias, it's more like a case of "my party right or wrong"!

The phrases "it's out of date now" and "we should move on" could have come directly from Tony's hymn book.

The war is by *no* means over, people are still dying in Iraq *every day*. The possible lies or fabrications that were told to get us into the war and the truth behind factors such as the Attorney General's changing advice are not something that we can just "move on" from, to try to dismiss them as unimportant is to ignore the good of the country for the sake of party politics.

As for "the terrorists can now be seen as enemies of the people" yes, that's a convenient expression, isn't it? We keep being told of the "terrorist threat" but there seems precious little evidence of what the threat actually *IS*.

As has been discussed in other threads (repeatedly, so let's not get into those again, but the points need to be made) how many people have actually been *convicted* of terrorist acts or even planning such acts? We read stories that there are "up to 200" suspected Al Qaeda terrorists, but if so, why haven't they *done* anything? etc etc

Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt are wonderful political tools.

I don't underestimate their work, but I think it would be better if they were left to *get on* with that work instead of having to faff around with "targets" that seem to be more designed to make the government look good than to actually treat patients.

Sorry, are you *really* saying that basic standards of literacy and numeracy have *not* fallen??

"1 in 5 independent schools fails to meet basic standards

"Many of Britain's independent schools are among the worst in the country, according to the Office for Standards in Education. Figures collected by Ofsted show that up to one in five of independent schools fails to meet basic standards.

"Those giving inspectors cause for concern are the 1,120 independent schools in the country that do not belong to the Independent Schools Council, the body that represents top public schools such as Eton and Harrow, which requires its members to meet specified educational standards before they become members.

"(Independent, 29 April 2003)"


"Ofsted's first overview of LEAs not good news

"The Office for Standards in Education first ever overview of the performance of local education authorities, published in September 2002, is not good news for town halls. Even ignoring the fact that more LEAs (41) were classified as being unsatisfactory or poor than good or very good (29), the starkest fact to emerge from the report is that even well-run authorities are failing to deliver tangible improvement in school standards.

"(Independent, 19 September 2002)"

I think this is another area where the government needs to leave well alone and let those who actually *do* the work get on with their jobs instead of having to meet targets.

Once again it seems "my party right or wrong".

That's something, at least.

I think the only reason those ID card plans are on the shelf is that Labour doesn't want to see them brought up as an election issue because they know that when people find out the truth of what's involved, they're going to change their minds drastically about the value of them.

My indendent political opinion on that differs somewhat.

Re: Would John Smith Have Made A Good PM?
 

On the out-Torying the Tories, have a read of Nick Cohen's book which looks at how New Labour imported 'triangulation' from the States. The basic tenet is that you neutralise the opposition by pre-empting and matching or exceeding their political initiatives. An interesting read - but can't remember what it's called.

Re: Would John Smith Have Made A Good PM?
 

Graham, I don't have the time for any detailed responses:


1. The Labour Party has always fought for the middle ground, except when T. Benn & M. Foot were involved in the 80s and we had the worst election result since WW2, generally centre left but not extreme left.

2. Yes, I admit I am politically biased. Who grassed?

3. You accuse me of selecting evidence - guilty. It was only a shortlist of important policies to demonstrate that the Labour Party is not "out Torying the Tories" what an ugly phrase!


4. Election statistics no argument. My point is that it is the duty of all who active in politics to stress the importance of voting and the election process, rather than being negative let's be positive.

5. Why on earth do you worry about who calls the other liars, it's all part of the fun of political life. We have noticed the Liberals are just the same, spend their time negatively criticising the other parties and avoiding debates on the real issues.

6. Charles K a great leader - pull the other one! Are you trying to convince yourself?

7. Party right or wrong, never said or implied, fact is the war is hardly ever mentioned on the doorstep or during 'phone canvassing. Most voters are concerned about bread & butter issues.

8. On public services generally: nothing is perfect nothing or can ever be perfect, of course there are going to be problems, organisations as large as the NHS or on a smaller scale schools are going to have problems. Your references to the independent school sector, I'm sure those schools involved will be or have addressed issues mentioned. You quote a report two years old, please try harder.


9. Actually, bold new iniatives are needed. One example, I'm willing to let city academies perform let's wait and see the results.


You are as a citizen free to believe what you wish, I like to be positive about life and the universe, I have nothing further to add: too busy.

Re: Would John Smith Have Made A Good PM?
 

City Academies? Noooooooooooooo!!

Re: Would John Smith Have Made A Good PM?
 

That's a matter of (political) opinion, but I'll pass on that.

"Fun"??? It's that "fun" and the farce that is PMQs etc which is what IMO is turning people *off* politics. When you see the leaders and major figures of the main parties squabbling like children in the playground, it doesn't exactly inspire confidence!

Except that the "real issues" are the ones that the other two parties want to talk about, which aren't necessarily what people are interested in!

To me it looks like the Lib Dems are the only ones making an effort to have a reasonable discussion instead of just saying "This is the party line, deal with it".

Err, what? Try reading it again: "Whilst I don't think Charles Kennedy is a great leader..."

But is that because people don't care, or because the government is trying to bury it and the Tories (who went along with it) are complicit in this?

This sounds like more "government speak". These aren't *minor* problems, they're *major* failings. Try asking staff in the medical professions whether they'd prefer to treat patients or worry about waiting list figures.

When patients are treated according to how quickly they can be got off the lists rather than medical need, something has gone very wrong. And it's *not* the staff's fault because they're being forced into it by ill thought out policies designed to make the government look good.

Oh, I see, because it's two years old, it's no longer valid? Get real! Education is something that happens for at least *SIXTEEN* years of a child's life. Our governments have raised a *generation* whose skills are nothing like what they should be.

And petty sniping comments like "please try harder" don't make your arguments any more credible.

"A teachers' leader says his union has hardened its opposition to government plans for 200 city academies"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/4348931.stm

This is a *union* (you know, the people who the Labour Party was formed to represent!) disagreeing with government policy. These are *teachers* who don't think these "city academies" are a good idea.

"Bold new initiatives" like this are great for getting headlines, but they allow any problems to be shunted years into the future when someone else will have to deal with them.

Oh, and *I* don't like to be positive about life and the universe? Nope, I think you're wrong there.

However I also don't wear rose tinted spectacles or think that the sun shines out of a certain political leader's fundamental orifice. I look at *all* the evidence, not just that which agrees with what I think.

Re: Would John Smith Have Made A Good PM?
 

Rather too busy for all this.

But if you do look at all the evidence you might consider that your reference to the NUT annual conference begs the question whether you have considered the well known fact that the NUT annual conference tends to be well oil by the SWP and their allies. Therefore one finds it difficult to take the confernece seriously. In addition the NUT is not affiliated to the Labour Party.

I do not wear rose tinted spectacles and neither do I think the sunshines out of whatever. You obviously don't read what I write.

Re: Would John Smith Have Made A Good PM?
 

Red rose tinted spectacles? :D

Re: Would John Smith Have Made A Good PM?
 

Whilst I'm finding this whole discussion immensely enjoyable, I can't help noticing we have drifted rather quickly from the key question, 'would John Smith have made a good PM?'

;)

Re: Would John Smith Have Made A Good PM?
 

A very fair point.... but of course the left and centre left always put a good internal scrap before the wider issues! I include myself in that, of course. Personally I find it interesting that as the election campaign progresses I'm becoming more and more supportive of the Government, but that that has more to do with the Opposition than the current administration. That, to me at least, is a telling indictment of the Govt and - ta-ra, sound of fanfare - from my limited memory of John Smith I can't have seen that having happened under his leadership. Of course I probably have my rose tinted spex on now!

Re: Would John Smith Have Made A Good PM?
 

Regarding PFI. It's a good idea (in theory). However, it has one major flaw (the same one shared by privatisation). It relies too heavily on the companies doing the work being fair and honest.

I am not on some anti-corporate rant, but in my experience, the companies that provide services will make a profit out of them any way they can. Some companies WILL overcharge if they have the opportunity to, and this DOES happen. For instance, when I worked for our local hospital, we were paying £500 a day for fruit and vegatables (from a large trade greengrocer). I could have got the same selection fruit and veg (but better quality) for less than £300 a day at Sainsbury's. As any greengrocer will tell you, Sainsbury's do not provide the best quality fruit and veg either).

The point I am making is with privatisation (and with PFI according to friends I know who still work there) is that the contracts granted are often too open to abuse. A lot of companies do not abuse their contract. However, enough do that it is causing major financial problems.

Anyway, back on topic. Would John Smith have made a good Prime Minister? I don't know. He did create the whole "New Labour" thing, but is Tony Blair just carrying on with his policies, or creating new ones of his own?

One thing is for sure. He would have made a better PM than either John Major or Tony Blair.