Tory economic policy (or lack of?)

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by hatedbythemail

i think the tories now have a far better chance of winning. hes clever and personable.

heres what i think is going on. cameron is looking at the tory brand and reinventing it so it has market appeal (the old tory brand having failed to keep up with market trends). so hes using marketing practice and first determining what the brand's values are upon which he will base the product range - policies. he has three years to finalise that product range but he wants to establish what the brand stands for and should mean to people first.

i say this as someone who is definitely not a tory supporter.

The tories will win I can see it a mile off, its governments that lose elections not opossitions winning them.

I would like to see our elections modernised so its not a first past the post system so we get a mixture of policies brought into play, no one party is perfect and its putting young voters off due to the nature of how it works.

[TheNorm]

Originally Posted by hatedbythemail

i went to poly. would never get near a position of power in either party ;-)

I don't know - John Major was no scholar:

Major left school at sixteen in 1959, with three O-levels: History, English Language, and English Literature. He would later gain three more by correspondence course in British Constitution, Mathematics and Economics. ... Major applied to become a bus conductor after leaving school but his application was rejected due to his height, although early media reports claimed wrongly this was due to poor arithmetic. His first job was as a clerk in an insurance brokerage firm in 1959 after leaving school. Disliking this, he quit and for a time, he helped with his father's garden ornaments business with his brother, Terry Major-Ball...

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Major)

If you ask me we could do with more "men of the people" like John Major, and fewer of the "ivory tower" brigade that seem to rule Westminster.

Originally Posted by Hatedbythemail

i think the tories now have a far better chance of winning. hes clever and personable.

He [Cameron] is definitely clever and personable, but you wouldn't vote for him, I wouldn't vote for him. I can't see that the millions who didn't vote for Michael Howard would see anything in him to vote for either. He was credited with a huge influence over the last Tory manifesto. But we will see.

Originally Posted by Pierre

Turkey is moderate muslim country. I've been there many times and had a great time every time. I think the inclusion of Turkey in the EU is essential to help our relations with other muslim countrys. An islamic country included in the European Union I think is a good thing and it would show that the EU is not a christians only club.

Turkey is one of the more moderate muslim countries. But not all Turks are moderates and terrorism is on the rise there. Turkey also shares its borders with several unstable Arab states. Borders which on accession would be the EU's borders, putting British forces in possible conflict as part of EU forces. IMO we are better off with Turkey as a buffer state.

Originally Posted by Foreverwar

Sort of misses the point about the Moorish influences on "European" culture, doesn't it? So basically if your not Judeo-Christian, or Humanist, you can b*gger off? Nice!

Yes it does, fair point, and Muslim scholars whose ideas were not popular in their own countries also played a large part in bringing about European reformation, but Voice for Europe also raises valid points, like this:

"Despite the fact that the Republic of Turkey was authoritatively built upon the principle of laicism after the end of World War One, the secularisation process has not been successfully completed. On the contrary, since the 1960's, when the article forbidding Islamists parties was abolished, Islam has been gaining an ever more significant place in public life. Progressive Islamisation is especially evident on the political scene, in the influence of Islamic orders and organisations, the rise of Islamic educational system and certain elements of lifestyle. Turkish government supports thousands of mosques and around 90,000 of imams whereas the Christian religious foundations in Turkey still cannot collect donations. Furthermore, existing churches are condemned by the state through a law which enables local authorities to decline new people entering Christian foundations. These foundations are required by law to carry the churches. As soon as all remaining foundation members have passed away, the church automatically becomes state property. Moreover, municipal authorities still torment new Christian church building projects. Through this constant suppression and the rise of Muslims, Christian population has fallen from 25% to 0.3% within the last century. "

As Turkey has been trying to enter the "Europe" since the 1960s, can we really be confident that it would remain secular once entry has been gained? Turkey's human rights record is not up to scratch either.

Originally Posted by Foreverwar

Doing a lot better than the Eurobashing, let's bring back Maggie & Tebbit, fiscally unsound (let's cut taxes and work out how we can afford it later) crowd.

I don't want Thatcher or Tebbit back, though Tebbit's fringe speech was met with a lot more enthusiasm than any of the Tories in the main conference hall (and nor do I want a squeeze the workers until the pips squeak attitude either). But at least they knew how to win elections, unlike modern Tories. The Tories don't do euro bashing very well at all, and never have done. Our political elite's refusal to be honest about the EU and its intentions is as deceitful today as it has ever been. Any politician who thinks "Europe" isn't worth political debate is either an outright liar or a naive fool.

[hatedbythemail]

Originally Posted by TheNorm

If you ask me we could do with more "men of the people" like John Major, and fewer of the "ivory tower" brigade that seem to rule Westminster.

well as long as they're not tories, yes :-)

i agree that the biggest problem with modern politics is how out of touch politicians are with us plebs. once they climb the political ladder they gain wealth and prestige that all too often divorces them from everyday reality. its like with bands. oasis come out with a cracking debut from burnage poverty, earn a few bob, buy a tudor mansion, snort some coke and churn out some over-produced tosh ;-)

[SlackDad]

The look on the faces of some of the delegates at the Tory conference during Cameron's speech when he was talking about civil partnerships is for me one of the television highlights of the year.

If you ask me we could do with more "men of the people" like John Major, and fewer of the "ivory tower" brigade that seem to rule Westminster.

John Major might have been brought up with the common folk, but he wasn't a man of the people at all!

Originally Posted by freezin

John Major might have been brought up with the common folk, but he wasn't a man of the people at all!

Would you like to clarify, please?

I am confused how a man, brought up in Brixton, left school at 16, worked as a clerk at the LEB, took correspondence courses and worked his way up the ladder at a bank, became a Lambeth councillor at 21, is not "a man of the people".

I met him quite a few times, and he was one of the most decent and honourable (low baseline, to be fair) politicians I ever met - he actually was trying to make things better for all, not just a section of society. His government was torn apart by "my way or no way" Eurosceptics.

[TheDaddy]

Come on he was a yes man, in that respect you could say he brown nosed his way to the top and was then lost. He showed zero leadership skills and little initiative tbh imo it's a sad lookout for Britain if he is held up as an example to emulate. You should succeed through talent, if you manage to through anything else you will be found out.

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Come on he was a yes man, in that respect you could say he brown nosed his way to the top and was then lost. He showed zero leadership skills and little initiative tbh imo it's a sad lookout for Britain if he is held up as an example to emulate. You should succeed through talent, if you manage to through anything else you will be found out.

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Major

"Paddy Ashdown, the leader of the Liberal Democrats during Major's term of office, once described him in the House of Commons as a "decent and honourable man". Few observers doubted that he was an honest man, or that he made sincere and sometimes successful attempts to improve life in Britain and to unite his deeply divided party."

"Since leaving office Major has, unlike Margaret Thatcher, tended to take a low profile and has stayed out of front-line politics"

"Major has so far declined the customary peerage offered to former Prime Ministers on standing down from Parliament"

http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page125.asp
"Early into his term, he announced the abolition of the poll tax which had caused so much controversy during Thatcher's final years in office.
A particular personal initiative was the Citizens Charter, a code designed to introduce greater accountability to public services and to drive up standards of service. The Charter has been built on by the present Labour Government and copied around the world.
Major's style was radically different from his predecessor. His unassuming and down-to-earth manner was considered a breath of fresh air, and a contrast to Margaret Thatcher's forcefulness.
He established the Northern Ireland Peace Process in the early 1990s and agreed the 'Downing Street Declaration' and 'Joint Frameworks Document' with successive Irish Premiers. These formed the necessary building blocks for the Good Friday Agreement in 1998.
John Major also established the National Lottery as a personal initiative which has provided billions of pounds for good causes."

[TheDaddy]

Whether or not he was decent and honourable shouldn't be in question, those that seek public office should have integrity and whilst I don't think you should be publicaly judged on one incident, I wonder if his wife believes him to be decent and honourable.

Originally Posted by Foreverwar

Would you like to clarify, please?
I am confused how a man, brought up in Brixton, left school at 16, worked as a clerk at the LEB, took correspondence courses and worked his way up the ladder at a bank, became a Lambeth councillor at 21, is not "a man of the people".

I met him quite a few times, and he was one of the most decent and honourable (low baseline, to be fair) politicians I ever met - he actually was trying to make things better for all, not just a section of society. His government was torn apart by "my way or no way" Eurosceptics.

John Major ... decent and honourable, you have to be joking! His government consisted of only about half a dozen true eurosceptics, who he called the "*******s" who objected to the party's dealings with the EU. The Maastricht treaty handed over great swathes of power in addition to what Thatcher had conceded without ever explaining what that meant, never mind asking for the people's opinions. And for what? And that's without even talking about all his moralising at the same time as he was carrying on an affair with Edwina Currie. As a man of the people, he sucks! The "people" might not have been aware of his European dealings, but they did the right thing in rejecting him. Shame the alternative was Blair.

http://www.eurotreaties.com/maastrichtext.html

If you are still confused, I can provide more details later, or you can tell me why I am wrong in my thinking.

The swearing filter in action . Major referred to the sceptics as being fatherless.

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Whether or not he was decent and honourable shouldn't be in question, those that seek public office should have integrity and whilst I don't think you should be publicaly judged on one incident, I wonder if his wife believes him to be decent and honourable.

No need to wonder - she is still with him.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by foreverwar

No need to wonder - she is still with him.

Or she could be a door mat either way we don't know what goes on behind closed doors

Originally Posted by freezin

John Major ... decent and honourable, you have to be joking! His government consisted of only about half a dozen true eurosceptics, who he called the "*******s" who objected to the party's dealings with the EU. The Maastricht treaty handed over great swathes of power in addition to what Thatcher had conceded without ever explaining what that meant, never mind asking for the people's opinions. And for what? And that's without even talking about all his moralising at the same time as he was carrying on an affair with Edwina Currie. As a man of the people, he sucks! The "people" might not have been aware of his European dealings, but they did the right thing in rejecting him. Shame the alternative was Blair.

http://www.eurotreaties.com/maastrichtext.html

If you are still confused, I can provide more details later, or you can tell me why I am wrong in my thinking.

The swearing filter in action . Major referred to the sceptics as being fatherless.

half a dozen true Eurosceptics??? errr, try again.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maastricht_Rebels
"In the politics of the United Kingdom, the Maastricht Rebels were MPs of the then governing Conservative Party who refused to support the government of John Major in a House of Commons vote to secure ratification by the United Kingdom of the Maastricht treaty (Treaty on European Union). This was particularly devastating, as there were 22 rebels as of the second reading of the European Communities (Amendment) Bill in May 1992, and the government's majority was only 18."

The Maastritch bill was passed by the House of Commons - or do you only believe in Democracy when it coincides with your beliefs and views?

As for the affair with Edwina Currie, I think that was inappropriate (as is all infidelity).

And yes, thanks for providing a link to a Eurosceptic's site to back up your argument
http://www.europeanfoundation.org/docs/April%202005.pdf page 25
"The choice of material in the foreword alerts the reader to the author’s fundamentally British Eurosceptic view of the Constitution, whilst the legal and constitutional analysis reflects the thinking of Bill Cash and the European Foundation"

As I said earlier, I can only go on personal experiences of meeting with the man, and discussions with others who had also met him - not just on reports from the newspapers, and Spitting Image/Steve Bell parodies of him - can you say the same?

---------- Post added at 13:40 ---------- Previous post was at 13:39 ----------

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Or she could be a door mat either way we don't know what goes on behind closed doors

No we don't, so wondering what she thinks can never be answered

[TheNorm]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Whether or not he was decent and honourable shouldn't be in question, those that seek public office should have integrity and whilst I don't think you should be publicaly judged on one incident, I wonder if his wife believes him to be decent and honourable.

This statement says it all. What chance do we have of getting good people into government if they know that details of their private lives might well make front page news, and be gossiped about by busybodies in internet forums?

Get a life!