The United Kingdom Elections 2010

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

You what! Public Order Act? Police and Criminal Evidence Act? Removal of right to silence?

ID cards, removal of Doble Jeaprody, Habeus Corpus, retention of the DNA of innocents, restriction of the right to public demonstration, massive crimal databases, massive survailence of the citizenry (and yes, I know the list is replete with spelling errors).

Still, the Conservatives have a better record, if only because they aren't prone to dicking about with our Constitution.

They let you near children!!!!?

I'm sorry, I should have been more clear, I work in University education.

[gaelic cowboy]

What constitution

[Furunculus]

Wow. I'm four pages behind.

Does anyone think the Liberal Democrats are the real winners in this election? How can a party in the minority loose seats yet have so much power?

we won't find out 'how' much power until we see which bits of the the various manifesto's have been torn up...............

Still, the Conservatives have a better record, if only because they aren't prone to dicking about with our Constitution.

amen!

[InsaneApache]

I know there hasn't been much discussion at all about how and when the deficit will be "managed" or "cut", do you have any idea how savage the cuts in public spending would have to be to redress the situation in less than 5 years?

If you think Thatcher is stigmatised now, it's bound to be worse for whoever enacts these cuts -especially if that's the only way they will reduce the deficit...

Brillo was on about the deficit last week. Talking to various heads he said this and it actually made my eyes water. All through Thatchers reign she took measures to reduce the deficit by 2% and that the next government will have to reduce it by more than 20% year on year.

Hang onto your hats kiddies, it's going to be a bumpy ride.

New Labour. New Britain.

[Banquo's Ghost]

Well, there we are. An extraordinary few days.

I'm rather pleased to be impressed with Prime Minister Cameron. The coalition with the Liberals is far-sighted, and the policy compromises on both sides are genuinely intelligent. The Liberals have given most ground, as they should, but the step towards an AV referendum is sensible. I'm a little sad that the rumour circulating that Osborne was to be replaced by Ken Clarke and Vince Cable as First Secretary proved unfounded, but I still think young Osborne will be Lamonted later this year.

A real coalition government, and for the first time since the war. I hope it proves stable, as I think it gives the best hope for the serious decisions to come.

I was particularly amused by the way Labour imploded and gave Mr Clegg every reason to abandon talks. Contrary to some views expressed above, I think his approach was well-timed, putting fear into the Tories just when he needed them to get serious about sealing the deal. Good negotiating, and he would never have been able to sell the Tory deal to his own party if he hadn't explored the "progressive" option. Then Labour gave him the perfect way out - they proved not to be serious. Boom, straight back to the Tory negotiators, who jumped with joy, and to his own party he could shrug and say it was never on with Labour. Deal done.

Far from being an opportunist, I thought he proved himself a shrewd politician. He and Cameron seem to get on (as opposed to Brown's bullying phone calls) which bodes well for a partnership.

I think the country is in good hands. Now for the pain.

[InsaneApache]

Oh dear. Polly Toynbee's upset. Good.

[Furunculus]

Contrary to some views expressed above, I think his approach was well-timed, putting fear into the Tories just when he needed them to get serious about sealing the deal. Good negotiating, and he would never have been able to sell the Tory deal to his own party if he hadn't explored the "progressive" option. Then Labour gave him the perfect way out - they proved not to be serious. Boom, straight back to the Tory negotiators, who jumped with joy, and to his own party he could shrug and say it was never on with Labour. Deal done.

Far from being an opportunist, I thought he proved himself a shrewd politician. He and Cameron seem to get on (as opposed to Brown's bullying phone calls) which bodes well for a partnership.

i agreed above that clegg probably had no option but to explore a progressive coalition before his rabid membership would accept a lib-con deal, and its not clegg acted improperly in doing so, but the cloak-and-dagger discussions with labour will give lie to the claim that clegg is all new politics, believe me, he is now firmly cemented in the political establishment in the eyes of the people.

Oh dear. Polly Toynbee's upset. Good.

few things can bring such instant and unvarnished joy to me, even in the absence of the details that cause this to be true, my thanks.

[Subotan]

Oh dear. Polly Toynbee's upset. Good.

few things can bring such instant and unvarnished joy to me, even in the absence of the details that cause this to be true, my thanks.

And yet I was criticised for saying the same thing about Furunuculus' attitude to the Lib Dems.

[Idaho]

ID cards, removal of Doble Jeaprody, Habeus Corpus, retention of the DNA of innocents, restriction of the right to public demonstration, massive crimal databases, massive survailence of the citizenry (and yes, I know the list is replete with spelling errors).

Labour have become as bad as the Tories, I agree. But that's only because they have tried so hard to adopt Tory policy in this regard.

ID cards were originally a Tory wheeze. Restriction of public demonstration was entirely a Tory creation (Public Order Act). Video surveillance society was an extension of a Tory policy.

Once again, let me be clear, I hate both of them. But my loathing for the Tories is something primal. They actually disgust me.

[Furunculus]

And yet I was criticised for saying the same thing about Furunuculus' attitude to the Lib Dems.

que?

Once again, let me be clear, I hate both of them. But my loathing for the Tories is something primal. They actually disgust me.

that is unhealthy, you need to sort that out. even i don't hate labour, i just have a mild and patronizing contempt for their philosophy.

[rory_20_uk]

I agree with Furunculus on this one. Parties change over time and should be judged on what they do primarily, not on what they say or heaven forbid what they said or did decades ago.

A primal loathing / hatred for a party is to me very odd, especially as has been pointed out, most fo the "loony Right" ideas have been implemented by a "Left" wing party (well, no one called Labour "liberal", did they). But then Tories have always been about local power and freedoms, whereas Labour is a Centralising Stalinist mindset verging on belief - when it doesn't work, legislate some more layers to help sort out the other twelve...

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Labour have become as bad as the Tories, I agree. But that's only because they have tried so hard to adopt Tory policy in this regard.

ID cards were originally a Tory wheeze. Restriction of public demonstration was entirely a Tory creation (Public Order Act). Video surveillance society was an extension of a Tory policy.

Once again, let me be clear, I hate both of them. But my loathing for the Tories is something primal. They actually disgust me.

That's just silly.

The Tories were in charge for most of the Troubles, including the most brutal times, but they never tried to remove historic rights, create thousands of new offences, or lock people up without a trial.

[Idaho]

That's just silly.

The Tories were in charge for most of the Troubles, including the most brutal times, but they never tried to remove historic rights, create thousands of new offences, or lock people up without a trial.

The erosion of civil liberties and the gradual march of the centralised police state has been unchecked by either party, and indeed hastened by both.

The Tories introduced the Public Order Act of 1986 which severly curtailed the right to demonstrate. Making it obligatory to notify and get approval from the police for both the timing, size and route of any march or protest. It also criminalised gypsies and travellers and broke up previously permitted convoys/gatherings of those people - mainly because the Tories didn't like them - being all scruffy and that.

And then later the Criminal Justic and Public Order Act of 1994 which allowed the police to break up a gathering of more than 20 people in the open, as well as curtailing the right to silence. It also criminalised a number or previously civil infractions - tresspass, protest, etc. It also gave police powers to stop gatherings where there was music consisting of 'repetitive beats' in a panicky reaction to tabloid headlines regarding raves and dance music. The act was used last year in this city to close down a family barbeque!

Family BBQ shut down by police

[al Roumi]

... whereas Labour is a Centralising Stalinist mindset verging on belief - when it doesn't work, legislate some more layers to help sort out the other twelve...

Yeah, we'll now find out about the state engineered famine and correctional work camps will we?

I think you might be right to call Labour Statist, in that they believe the state should have a larger and broader presence. Otherwise one might as well follow your example and lable the Tories Fascist and/or Nazi.

[Idaho]

I agree with Furunculus on this one. Parties change over time and should be judged on what they do primarily, not on what they say or heaven forbid what they said or did decades ago.

A primal loathing / hatred for a party is to me very odd, especially as has been pointed out, most fo the "loony Right" ideas have been implemented by a "Left" wing party (well, no one called Labour "liberal", did they). But then Tories have always been about local power and freedoms, whereas Labour is a Centralising Stalinist mindset verging on belief - when it doesn't work, legislate some more layers to help sort out the other twelve...

This post contains the biggest contradiction I have ever witnessed on this board. The Conservative party had as their mantra throughout the 80's that they would roll back the frontiers of the state. And yet Thatcher presided over an era which saw massive, yes massive increases in state spending, size, scope and power. Reagan in the US did the same bit of duplicity.

Local powers and freedoms? What on earth are you talking about? Thatcher abolished various Labour held local councils including the GLC entirely for political reasons.

[Furunculus]

mervyn king agrees that the deficit needs to be chopped now, so we can have an end to stupid labour statements about taking money out of the economy, the state does not create wealth:

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance...t-the-deficit/

[Idaho]

mervyn king agrees that the deficit needs to be chopped now, so we can have an end to stupid labour statements about taking money out of the economy, the state does not create wealth:

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance...t-the-deficit/

It does if you work in the public sector. Or do the families of teachers, police, nurses and soldiers live on thin air?

[rory_20_uk]

Increases in state spending that have been dwarfed by Labour. Thatcher managed to stop the increase in the Civil Service. Since then it's ballooned. Did she manage to do enough? No. But if she took one step in one direction, Labour have been sprinting in the other.

Breaking up Labour fiefdoms - especially the GLC was hardly taking the power from the populace. Red Ken returned to be London mayor and was known for his Monarchical style.

Nazis were just as big on a massive state as Stalin was. Merely as Nazis were extreme right and Stalin extreme left doesn't mean they don't share many traits.

[Idaho]

Nazis were just as big on a massive state as Stalin was. Merely as Nazis were extreme right and Stalin extreme left doesn't mean they don't share many traits.

Godwin

[rory_20_uk]

Yeah, we'll now find out about the state engineered famine and correctional work camps will we?

I think you might be right to call Labour Statist, in that they believe the state should have a larger and broader presence. Otherwise one might as well follow your example and lable the Tories Fascist and/or Nazi.

Idaho, I was replying to the above. Odd you chose to highlight me though...

[Furunculus]

It does if you work in the public sector. Or do the families of teachers, police, nurses and soldiers live on thin air?

hold on a minute, i forgot for a second that our problems are an economy stalled by excessive public spending and a financial market precariously unable to finance its own massive deficit.

if the public sector is too large then it must get chopped. you cannot magic money into existence to pay for more doctors and teachers than you can afford, much as labour has tried.

as usual labour bequeaths a train-wreck of an economy to their successors, and as usual the tory's will get the opprobrium of having to fix it. business as usual.

seeing as brown just left office it seems relevant to recall his words on entering the treasury in 1997 on being informed by a civil servant that the tory's had left him an economy in sterling condition; "what do you want me to do, send them a F$&%&$& thank you note?"

if only Osbourne could be so glib!

[al Roumi]

Idaho, I was replying to the above. Odd you chose to highlight me though...

True, I pulled the Godwin, but it was in response to you bandying "Stalinist" around with the same level of consideration as the usual lesser-spotted Godwin, often seen grazing in these forums.

[Idaho]

hold on a minute, i forgot for a second that our problems are an economy stalled by excessive public spending and a financial market precariously unable to finance its own massive deficit.

if the public sector is too large then it must get chopped. you cannot magic money into existence to pay for more doctors and teachers than you can afford, much as labour has tried.

But a large chunk of the money for teachers and doctors comes back as tax, and is less money to be paid in benefits. And those employed people then spend that wealth.

Compare that to the owners of big businesses who are non-dom so pay no tax.

[Furunculus]

hmmm, ten thousand non-doms running ten thousand successful companies that create tens of billions in tax revenue, vs hundreds of thousands of unaffordable public sector jobs who consume (and recycle a small proportion of) the tax revenue from the private sector.

easy choice, we live beyond our means, cut public spending.

the fixation on 'privilege' is beside the point, and utterly ignores reality.

[naut]

hmmm, ten thousand non-doms running ten thousand successful companies that create tens of billions in tax revenue, vs hundreds of thousands of unaffordable public sector jobs who consume (and recycle a small proportion of) the tax revenue from the private sector.

easy choice, we live beyond our means, cut public spending.

the fixation on 'privilege' is beside the point, and utterly ignores reality.

How about as Non-Doms pay no tax they renounce rights to anything tax pays for, it is only fair.

[Furunculus]

how about we reduce punitive top-level taxes that encourage top-earners in the private sector from becoming non-doms.

FACT: the top one percent of earners generated a greater tax income for the exchequer when the top-rate of taxation was abolished under thatcher.

[rory_20_uk]

But a large chunk of the money for teachers and doctors comes back as tax, and is less money to be paid in benefits. And those employed people then spend that wealth.

Compare that to the owners of big businesses who are non-dom so pay no tax.

There are jobs that doctors can do outside of the Public Sector! Teachers too!

You act like these are Endangered Species who need to be protected by handouts of money. No - they are trained professionals and can work elsewhere. For example, I now do the majority of my work for the Pharmaceutical Industry, and my wife works in a Private hospital. Our taxes still go to the government and little / no money comes from it.

I have friends who a Doctors who are Investment bankers, Hedge Fund Managers, Private Equity Anlysts and now many colleagues working in similar ways to what I do.

allah_p, I take your point. Statist would have been a more accurate and less emotive term to use

[Idaho]

I have friends who a Doctors who are Investment bankers, Hedge Fund Managers, Private Equity Anlysts

Yeah - they really do add wealth to.. er.. themselves

[Idaho]

as usual labour bequeaths a train-wreck of an economy to their successors, and as usual the tory's will get the opprobrium of having to fix it. business as usual

Except for the post-war Labour government. They turned the country round from being utterly bankrupt, to fuelling the 1950's boom in just 6 years.

[rory_20_uk]

Yeah - they really do add wealth to.. er.. themselves

So, Civil servants are fine and great - even when being paid over £100k (head of the BBC rakes in closer to £800k). Because let's not forget all the taxes they pay (and forget about the unfunded pensions...)

Leave for Industry / consulting / banking: Eeeeevil b*stards, only enriching themselves... Paying the same taxes, and often earning less than senior Civil servants...

Do you read before posting?

Managing to get a boom after a war is shooting fish in a barrel. Germany managed that, after being bombed flat, millions of refugees and partitioned!