Quote:
Originally Posted by tweedle
The conservatives were elected by the people and they listened to the people. Are you saying Osbourne doing what the electorate wants is a bad thing? Would you of preferred him to ignore what people want?
|
Osbourne was voted in on a mandate of cutting public services and welfare. The people who voted for him were clear about this. This is what the "electorate" wanted .. or at least the minority that voted the Government into power.
When George tried to implement the policies Conservative voters mandated him to carry out, there was a realisation in Westminister that (belatedly) this was not the right thing to do hence the attempts to stop him. Attempts that proved succesfull.
Don't forget that cuts are still planned, together with welfare cuts phased in over a longer timeframe via Universal Credits. A lot of these, ironically, will hit the typical Tory voter:
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2...tumn-statement
Quote:
A 56% cut in local authority grants from central government, alongside new powers for councils to raise their own money from business rates and a special 2% precept to pay for social care.
Raising an extra £1bn a year by 2020 from a new 3 percentage-point stamp duty charge on buy-to-let properties and second homes.
Higher student loan repayments for people who have graduated since 2012 and will have to pay about £300 a year more.
An end to grants for student nurses, who must now pay for their own training with the help of loans. The cap on recruitment of student nurses will be lifted.
An overhaul of schools funding to even out regional variations and cuts to the further education budget that will mean funding per student for 16- to 19-year-olds in sixth forms and colleges is cut by 9.4% by 2020.
|
It it good that he "listened" because he went too far with his cuts. Pity he doesn't "listen" more. I am sure that the electorate who voted for the Tories didn't really take it all in at the time, they didn't think about the cuts promised in this parliament. They were just numbers .. only when the consequences were spelt out, did the reality hit home. Well, there is more reality coming to a Tory voter near you: higher council tax bills, less local council funded services, etc. etc.
George also saw this as a politically expedient opportunity to cement the Tories position as the party most likely to win the next election. Look at me he says: 'I was going to do a really bad thing, something I told you I was going to .. but hey, I am a nice guy really and I am been doing some soul searching and I have changed my mind". The U turn has no risk given where we are in the electoral cycle and given that there is no credible opposition to constrain what he does.
George will learn from this: even he could not push through policies which, when looked at in detail were so patentedly unfair. Even he could not cut Police budgets by upto 20% when we have just had the Paris incident. George will just be more cunning next time
---------- Post added at 21:49 ---------- Previous post was at 21:44 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osem
Yes because then he could call Osborne an out of touch Tory toff who couldn't care less about ordinary working people, blah, blah, blah. You just can't please some folks evidently... |
Osem is stuck in the past (with his beloved Labour party). You just don't call people "Toffs" anymore ..
Interesting etymology
Quote:
The word "toff" is thought to come from the word "tuft", which was a gold tassel worn by titled undergraduates at the University of Oxford or the University of Cambridge.[1][2][3][4][5] The Anglo-Saxon word "toforan" has a meaning of "superiority".[6] It is possible the derivation of "toff" is earlier than is generally supposed.
Other origins include the abbreviation of "toffee-nosed".[citation needed] This originates from the 19th century, where it was common for men of a higher class to use snuff.[citation needed] The use of snuff often caused the man's nose to leak a toffee-like nasal mucus. The men are thought to have tilted their heads slightly upwards to counteract this. However, elevating the chin by looking down the nose at someone else is an instinctive human body-language signal of dominance, whereas ducking the chin (covering the neck) is an instinctive human signal of submission.[citation needed]
|