Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh
Re the LibDems pledge.....
How is this different from the Labour promises in 1997 (T. Blair, 14th April, Evening Standard "Labour has no plans to introduce tuition fees for higher education") and 2001 (Manifesto - We will not introduce top-up fees and have legislated to prevent them) to not introduce tuition fees, and not to increase them?
Or is there a major difference between a promise, a pledge, and a Manifesto commitment?
|
I suspect, so far as Flyboy is concerned, that the difference is entirely subjective, selective and heavily biased in one direction. I may be wrong of course....
---------- Post added at 09:48 ---------- Previous post was at 09:30 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyboy
Aah yes, the facts. When did Clegg say that he would only honour the pledge if they won?
|
Well manifestos and pre election promises are issued on the basis that they're what the party intends to do if they win the election NOT if they only form part of a coalition which by definition necessitates compromise on the part of both parties which has to be thrashed out on the hoof.
You do seem rather fixated on the moral highground when it comes to the delivery of promises by Lib Dems operating in coalition don't you. Oddly, I don't ever recall you applying the same high moral standards to the myriad of cynical pre-election promises issued by Bliar and Brown over the years which, despite having huge parliamentary majorities for most of their tenure they either didn't deliver or simply reneged on. Unlike our current government, they couldn't even argue, in mitigation, that they'd been forced to compromise on policy and were so deep in the economic mire that their their hands were tied. Remind me, what was their excuse for misleading the electorate so cynically again?