Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

getdownmonkeyman

Labour's last chance gone?

59 posts in this topic

Neither party has an answer or is the answer.

That's the way I think. This government as well as previous ones have messed up, resulting in a lack of confidence going forward. They just bleat on and on blaming other factors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neither party has an answer or is the answer.

Sadly, this is my conclusion. There seems to be a line that says the last Labour government's 'mistake' was in maintaining the Tory policies. But they didn't: they expanded them and, combined with ludicrous levels of financial mismanagement, set the platform for what the Coalition has done in the name of austerity. Now, in opposition, Labour have made absolutely no commitment to reversing any of the controversial policies of this government. We have a situation where all of the main parties stand further to the right economically and in a social welfare sense than the majority of the electorate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Labour doesn't have to do a thing to win the next election. Dave and Gideon are doing it all for them. The Tories know what they they to do to win the next election, but they don't have the courage to do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless of how badly the coalition are doing, it is difficult to imagine the current shadow cabinet being in power. It is depressing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless of how badly the coalition are doing, it is difficult to imagine the current shadow cabinet being in power. It is depressing.

No real big hitters stand out. Most shadow teams have a couple of terms to get rid of a bit of dead wood and allow new people to shine. Can't think of many stand out performers (including Ed).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In voting for Ed Milliband the Labour party proved themselves to be out of touch with the modern voter. Regardless of which of the two is the better politician, there has been a change to the extent where style as well as substance is important. David has the balance, he looks the part which lets face it Ed doesn't. It might sound shallow but the British public are shallow, Ed Milliband looks and talks weird and that's what many will base their opinions on.

I still think Labour will narrowly win next time but not by as much as they should do with the failure of the Tory policies and ridiculous number of U-turns that they seem to make.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly, this is my conclusion. There seems to be a line that says the last Labour government's 'mistake' was in maintaining the Tory policies. But they didn't: they expanded them and, combined with ludicrous levels of financial mismanagement, set the platform for what the Coalition has done in the name of austerity. Now, in opposition, Labour have made absolutely no commitment to reversing any of the controversial policies of this government. We have a situation where all of the main parties stand further to the right economically and in a social welfare sense than the majority of the electorate.

For example, the policy of aligning housing benefit and housing need in public sector housing, designed to motivate councils and housing associations to cut under occupation is in fact a continuation of Labour policy.

Announced as far back as 2003 the Labour Govt introduced exactly this in 2008,when it brought in Local Housing Allowance for private tenants receiving housing benefit. LHA is paid direct to tenants not landlords, and is based on the number of bedrooms you are assessed as needing. This was done to reduce the huge cost of housing benefit.

By the way, construction of social housing fell to just 375 in 2008

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

......ridiculous number of U-turns that they seem to make.

Quite so. Its as if they just don't think things through and are unable to explain themselves properly, either, or are unable to persuade the Humphreys of this world to do as they are told. I thought we would see and end to all that when 10% tax and boom-and-bust abolitionist Brown was booted out by a British public that had proved themselves far from shallow.

Cameron does his best but has signally failed to push sufficient of his party's Little Englanders into Farage's maw so they could be replaced by a few good men and true from the Lib Dems...not that there are that many.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TBH I think the fact that David has cut and run rather than stay, support his brother and try to get his party re-elected speaks volumes for his (lack of) character. He didn't have the bottle to stand against Brown, before the 2010 election and he hasn't the good grace to support his brother, accept a Shadow Cabinet post and try to etablish his view of how our country should be run.

It's true that Labour left a huge deficit. It's also true that up to the crisis Cameron & Co saw nothing wrong with Labour's economic policies,indeed they promised to match Labour's spending plans. They also called for less not more regulation of the banks. This government has reduced the deficit, largely by cutting capital spending, which has crippled the construction industry. The prospects of what Osborne's first budget would do eliminated the 2% growth that was present in the economy and no matter what the next figures say, the coalition's growth record can only be described as a disaster.

Whether the Eds have better policies than this lot remains to be seen. Hopefully they do, but one can only assume they are keeping their powder dry. Any policies announced now will either be shot down in flames by the Tories if they are the least bit suspect or nicked if they are any good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Labour have a substantial lead that's been holding up pretty well. For all that Ed Milliband is meant to be constantly under threat his party seems pretty unified and they don't have to do much beyond point out the failure of austerity politics to win.

Ed Miliband has never been under threat as leader of the Labour Party. Anyone in the press who has claimed otherwise does not know how the Labour Party works and is probably guilty of mischief or wishful thinking.

As I have said before on this board, it is nearly impossible to unseat a Labour Party leader if he doesn't want to go. The Party constitution doesn't work like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TBH I think the fact that David has cut and run rather than stay, support his brother and try to get his party re-elected speaks volumes for his (lack of) character.

It also speaks volumes for the fact that Ed's as safe as houses. It's a backhanded compliment really!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly, this is my conclusion. There seems to be a line that says the last Labour government's 'mistake' was in maintaining the Tory policies. But they didn't: they expanded them and, combined with ludicrous levels of financial mismanagement, set the platform for what the Coalition has done in the name of austerity. Now, in opposition, Labour have made absolutely no commitment to reversing any of the controversial policies of this government. We have a situation where all of the main parties stand further to the right economically and in a social welfare sense than the majority of the electorate.

Not really true.

Reality is to the right of the British electorate.

Labour won't make a commitment because they would get the same advice as the Tories get now and be forced to accept the same conclusions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really true.

Reality is to the right of the British electorate.

Labour won't make a commitment because they would get the same advice as the Tories get now and be forced to accept the same conclusions.

Labour won't make a commitment now because we are 2 years from a General Election - how firm policies had Cameron announced in March 2008? Some of them (like NHS privatisation) weren't even in the manifesto when the election came.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Labour won't make a commitment now because we are 2 years from a General Election - how firm policies had Cameron announced in March 2008? Some of them (like NHS privatisation) weren't even in the manifesto when the election came.

You might not agree with it but the Conservatives put out (and promoted) a mini manifesto specifically on the NHS reforms - building entirely on the platform laid by Labour which continued the work of the Thatcher/Major government - before the last election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You might not agree with it but the Conservatives put out (and promoted) a mini manifesto specifically on the NHS reforms - building entirely on the platform laid by Labour which continued the work of the Thatcher/Major government - before the last election.

When Andrew Lansley announced his plans for the destruction of the NHS after the election the point was raised that they hadn't been included in the Tory manifesto. Cameron insisted that he'd never seen them before and that Lansley had only unveiled them to him after the election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Destruction of the NHS? There is absolutely no basis for such an outlandish and scaremongering claim. If the Coalition announced that the Pope was a Catholic, there are those who would have disagree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Destruction of the NHS? There is absolutely no basis for such an outlandish and scaremongering claim. If the Coalition announced that the Pope was a Catholic, there are those who would have disagree.

The general consensus is that these "reforms" set up the framework for privatisation. The Tories can't be trusted with the NHS, they opposed it from the start and during the Thatcher years allowed it to whither, why should Cameron be any different? Before the last election they pledged that there would be no more top down "reforms" of the NHS. One of the very first measures they introduced was a top down "reform" of the NHS. Cameron was a known liar - the Tories' entire election strategy in 1992 devised by him was admitted by Ken Clark afterwards to be based on a lie. IMO with a very unpopular Labour government and a PM who was even more unpopular than his party, Cameron should have walked the last election. He didn't because basically people don't trust him. If the Tories get rid of him maybe they'll have a chance in 2015.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't agree with any of that, as you might expect. Cameron's main failures seem to me to be his failure to kick out the UKIP wanabees and to avoid pot holes like the "pasty tax". He has managed to set the whole of Fleet Street against him (the BBC already being against him) . The left press because that are the only effective opposition, the Centre press because they will never forgive the Lib Dems for actually having to face the realities of being at least partially in government and the right because of his promotion of gay marriage and a commitment to foreign aid.

I can see no outcome at the next election other than an outright Labour victory, even if they resuscitated Balls and Brown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Destruction of the NHS? There is absolutely no basis for such an outlandish and scaremongering claim. If the Coalition announced that the Pope was a Catholic, there are those who would have disagree.

Within the last six months two doctors and a physiotherapist, all working within the NHS and all vastly experienced, have used the word 'destruction' to describe to me what's going on. I'll take their experience of it over yours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are 1.4 million people in the NHS. It is inevitable that some of them will object to change. It is inevitable that some of them will oppose change and it is inevitable in the absence of any credible and effective opposition in Parliament that someone else will try to play that role. However, the NHS is far too important to be left in the hands of a few naysayers. Far better that the Govt does as it is doing in continuing the reforms and improvements made by the last Labour govt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When Andrew Lansley announced his plans for the destruction of the NHS after the election the point was raised that they hadn't been included in the Tory manifesto. Cameron insisted that he'd never seen them before and that Lansley had only unveiled them to him after the election.

I find that quite odd then given that the Tories published it and put their name on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone had any experience of the 111 service yet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't agree with any of that, as you might expect. Cameron's main failures seem to me to be his failure to kick out the UKIP wanabees and to avoid pot holes like the "pasty tax". He has managed to set the whole of Fleet Street against him (the BBC already being against him) . The left press because that are the only effective opposition, the Centre press because they will never forgive the Lib Dems for actually having to face the realities of being at least partially in government and the right because of his promotion of gay marriage and a commitment to foreign aid.

I can see no outcome at the next election other than an outright Labour victory, even if they resuscitated Balls and Brown.

We don't agree on politics always, but I alwayys respect your analysis. This is an example of that.

Also I'd like to know where this 'general concensus' is. The Health service can't be and shouldn't bethe kind of organisation that wass instituted in 1948. We have an ageing population, advances in care, medicine and techniques, and so on have changed its identity and the demnds on it out of all recognition. government of any political persuasion has to address tis. the labour party when it was in government addresed this as contentiously as any Tory government with privte/ public finance initiatives, targets an so on.

The labour party if the ever were whenever they were in power, apart from the immediate post war years-and even then tat can be questioned, were never a party of the left, and that has become less so, resulting in Blair's throing away te opportunity to bring about major social change in this country in 1997. It seems that although what yo say will probably come to pass, it's hard not to the so ##### what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't agree with any of that, as you might expect. Cameron's main failures seem to me to be his failure to kick out the UKIP wanabees and to avoid pot holes like the "pasty tax". He has managed to set the whole of Fleet Street against him (the BBC already being against him) . The left press because that are the only effective opposition, the Centre press because they will never forgive the Lib Dems for actually having to face the realities of being at least partially in government and the right because of his promotion of gay marriage and a commitment to foreign aid.

I can see no outcome at the next election other than an outright Labour victory, even if they resuscitated Balls and Brown.

Have to agree. Cameron tried to get the party to move, and a good portion have stayed where they were with no self awareness that it is they that will lose them the next election. Even the things he has thrown them (which have given Labour free hits, 50% tax, etc) they have seemingly taken and still shafted him on other issues (europe, etc).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



Rugby League World - April 2017

League Express - Mon 10th April 2017