General Election 2010

[Mr Scruff]

I'd actually like this too, if there was a proper centre-right party for Scotland. The problem for me is that Scotland is too centre-left. Out of every ten workers in Scotland, six work in the public sector. That's ridiculous for a capitalist country (to be fair it's better than Northern Ireland where it's 7) and far too much of our taxation is to employ civil servants on generous pay and (especially) benefits to do jobs that our government thinks it can do more efficiently and effectively than the private sector. Public sector employees believe they are entitled to these jobs and benefits while too many people are on long-term unemployment, again believing that they are entitled to their benefits. I don't believe they are. I believe the government of this country has a responsibility to shrink the state, free up finance for small business, and get this country creating value again. Sadly any Scottish government to do this would be unelectable for the foreseeable future due to the scale of "creative destruction" (Turkeys don't vote for Christmas) so it will never happen unless it is conducted from London. So I vote Tory.

Couldn't agree with this more. We've lost a lot of that entrepreneurial spirit we once had and when there's 50% more employment in the public sector than there is in the private sector, you just have to say that it's unsustainable. Any independent Scottish government would have to have a radical approach to address this, but we seem to have a tendancy to want to increase the size of the state.

 

This is a massive structural problem, for which there seems to be little political will to fix. The parties that support independence are kidding themselves on if they think we could painlessly join the EU with these numbers.

Edited May 4, 2010 by Mr Scruff

[Mr Scruff]

Find it quite hard to believe that 5% of Jags vote BNP.

So do I. But maybe 5% of people responding to this poll indicating 'BNP' aren't actually Jags fans. Hope so anyway...

[Chris near Oxford]

The destruction of British manufacturing under Margaret Thatcher was really so unnecessary. Yes reform was needed and yes we were falling behind the rest of Europe.

 

But it was Thatcher's blind dogmatism that made the destruction so much worse. She believed in unfettered markets with no state intervention whatsoever. So our manufacturers were picked off and destroyed. It really didn't have to be that way, nor was the alternative propping up lame ducks.

 

A bit of targeted support and economic stimulation could have saved a lot of British industry and given it the breathing space to regroup. However out of a drive for ideological purity this was not forthcoming.

 

Compare with this crisis where the current government has made the politically difficult decision to stop banks collapsing in order to preserve a key part of our economy (financial services are 25% of the UK's economy).

[The Devil's Point]

The destruction of British manufacturing under Margaret Thatcher was really so unnecessary. Yes reform was needed and yes we were falling behind the rest of Europe.

 

But it was Thatcher's blind dogmatism that made the destruction so much worse. She believed in unfettered markets with no state intervention whatsoever. So our manufacturers were picked off and destroyed. It really didn't have to be that way, nor was the alternative propping up lame ducks.

 

A bit of targeted support and economic stimulation could have saved a lot of British industry and given it the breathing space to regroup. However out of a drive for ideological purity this was not forthcoming.

 

Compare with this crisis where the current government has made the politically difficult decision to stop banks collapsing in order to preserve a key part of our economy (financial services are 25% of the UK's economy).

 

Yes, but where, exactly, near Oxford?........go on, answer the question............

Edited May 4, 2010 by The Devil's Point

[Mr Scruff]

The destruction of British manufacturing under Margaret Thatcher was really so unnecessary. Yes reform was needed and yes we were falling behind the rest of Europe.

 

But it was Thatcher's blind dogmatism that made the destruction so much worse. She believed in unfettered markets with no state intervention whatsoever. So our manufacturers were picked off and destroyed. It really didn't have to be that way, nor was the alternative propping up lame ducks.

 

A bit of targeted support and economic stimulation could have saved a lot of British industry and given it the breathing space to regroup. However out of a drive for ideological purity this was not forthcoming.

 

Compare with this crisis where the current government has made the politically difficult decision to stop banks collapsing in order to preserve a key part of our economy (financial services are 25% of the UK's economy).

At the time, though, there was just no 'middle ground' available. The country was in such a bad shape that to prop up failing industries without modernisation would have been the definition of throwing good money after bad. A case in point would be the mining industry. When you look at the original offer made to the miners, there was every possibility of maintaining a supported, modernised and profitable coal industry. But, for political reasons alone, this was rejected by the union leadership which helped destroy large parts of the industry.

 

It would be interesting to see, statistically, if more manufacturing jobs have been lost under 13 years of Labour than under the Conservative government of the 1980s.

[Chris near Oxford]

At the time, though, there was just no 'middle ground' available. The country was in such a bad shape that to prop up failing industries without modernisation would have been the definition of throwing good money after bad. A case in point would be the mining industry. When you look at the original offer made to the miners, there was every possibility of maintaining a supported, modernised and profitable coal industry. But, for political reasons alone, this was rejected by the union leadership which helped destroy large parts of the industry.

 

It would be interesting to see, statistically, if more manufacturing jobs have been lost under 13 years of Labour than under the Conservative government of the 1980s.

 

Qu.1 - Cropredy at the moment. (Just north of Banbury). And I am going to Wem-be-ley, Wem-be-ley in a fortnight. She wore a yellow ribbon in the Merry Month of May. And if, you ask, why she wore a yellow ribbon, it's for the famous Oxford United who are going to Wem-be-ley. Sorry I diverge

 

Qu.2 Again the false choice! It wasn't just the nationalised industries that collapsed, it was all manufacturing. Removing subsidies to the nationalised sector was one thing, allowing one-tenth of British manufacturing to fall with no support at all was unforgiveable.

[The Devil's Point]

Qu.1 - Cropredy at the moment. (Just north of Banbury). And I am going to Wem-be-ley, Wem-be-ley in a fortnight. She wore a yellow ribbon in the Merry Month of May. And if, you ask, why she wore a yellow ribbon, it's for the famous Oxford United who are going to Wem-be-ley. Sorry I diverge

 

Nice places, remember enjoying a delicious pint of cider in, I think, "The Trout" Inn, by the Thamnes many, many years ago.

 

I've walked on the Banbury Road a few times, and Oxford Utd have a wee place in my heart

 

Even been to Churchill's grave, and drunk from his cellar at a wedding at the Palace.

 

Mon the Oxford

[jaggybunnet]

The destruction of British manufacturing under Margaret Thatcher was really so unnecessary. Yes reform was needed and yes we were falling behind the rest of Europe.

But it was Thatcher's blind dogmatism that made the destruction so much worse. She believed in unfettered markets with no state intervention whatsoever. So our manufacturers were picked off and destroyed. It really didn't have to be that way, nor was the alternative propping up lame ducks.

 

A bit of targeted support and economic stimulation could have saved a lot of British industry and given it the breathing space to regroup. However out of a drive for ideological purity this was not forthcoming.

 

Compare with this crisis where the current government has made the politically difficult decision to stop banks collapsing in order to preserve a key part of our economy (financial services are 25% of the UK's economy).

 

 

i think the power hungry unions made things worse, which agrivated an already explosive situation.

 

if they had been willing to conceed that major reforms were needed and didnt fight everything then it could have been so different.

 

dont get me wrong maggie made mistakes but dont just blame maggie and tories when the unions need to take there fair share of the blame

[The Devil's Point]

i think the power hungry unions made things worse, which agrivated an already explosive situation.

 

if they had been willing to conceed that major reforms were needed and didnt fight everything then it could have been so different.

 

dont get me wrong maggie made mistakes but dont just blame maggie and tories when the unions need to take there fair share of the blame

 

Thatcher came in with an agenda to change all that stuff and smash union power.

 

Whatever the rights and wrongs of that it wasn't the unions wot done it.

[jaggybunnet]

Thatcher came in with an agenda to change all that stuff and smash union power.

 

Whatever the rights and wrongs of that it wasn't the unions wot done it.

 

 

sorry but you are wrong, the unions could have brought it to a far better end than they did purely due to them wanting more power and labour ( oh thats right the one that the unions give all the money to) let them have too much power.

 

to deny that the unions didnt play there part in the carnage is deluded and very blinkered

Edited May 4, 2010 by jaggybunnet

[crazy davie]

If you want to see how shi'ite and mad the Tories are (and this also works for the Republicans in the U.S) just take a look at their "celebrity" supporters. Tells you all you need to know...

[The Devil's Point]

sorry but you are wrong, the unions could have brought it to a far better end than they did purely due to them wanting more power and labour ( oh thats right the one that the unions give all the money to) let them have too much power.

 

to deny that the unions didnt play there part in the carnage is deluded and very blinkered

 

Why did the Thatcher Government stockpile so much coal then?

 

Never mind that time though, its over and gone.

 

Only the lessons remain............

[jaggybunnet]

If you want to see how shi'ite and mad the Tories are (and this also works for the Republicans in the U.S) just take a look at their "celebrity" supporters. Tells you all you need to know...

 

 

i was very disapointed in ross kemp pandering to the very person he ripped apart for not doing enough.. brown

[jaggybunnet]

Why did the Thatcher Government stockpile so much coal then?

 

Never mind that time though, its over and gone.

 

Only the lessons remain............

 

 

because she Knew the over bloated unions were not going to see sense.

 

the unions are being passafied by labour at the moment with the likes of Ainsworth being give jobs to ensure the cash and votes keep coming and it helps to be married to the mob

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harriet_Harman

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Dromey

[The Devil's Point]

because she Knew the over bloated unions were not going to see sense.

 

the unions are being passafied by labour at the moment with the likes of Ainsworth being give jobs to ensure the cash and votes keep coming and it helps to be married to the mob

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harriet_Harman

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Dromey

 

This is all ancient history.

 

You'll feel much better under the Liberal Democrats

[jaggybunnet]

This is all ancient history.

 

You'll feel much better under the Liberal Democrats

 

 

 

no thanks i will just use the libs for what they were intended.... as a tactical vote

[The Devil's Point]

no thanks i will just use the libs for what they were intended.... as a tactical vote

 

Suit yourself, everyone else will feel much better under the Liberal Democrats

[Mediocre Pundit]

[P-R]

The SNP are not Scotland. They don't represent Scotland either. They polled under 1/3 of the vote in the Holyrood elections, form a minority administration (not a majority as you said) and less than 18% of the vote in the last General Election. Despite the myth they peddle, they cannot claim to be the unanimous, majority or unique voice of the Scottish people.

 

I just hope we have some form of Proportional Representation for future Westminster elections. Even with Labour polling just over a 1/3 of the votes in the last general election they ended up with the majority of seats. In Scotland it's even worse with over 2/3 of the seats when they polled only around 40% of the vote. It's probably been a similar voting pattern when Tories have been in power.

 

Neither of these parties speak for the majority of people.

[The Devil's Point]

I just hope we have some form of Proportional Representation for future Westminster elections. Even with Labour polling just over a 1/3 of the votes in the last general election they ended up with the majority of seats. In Scotland it's even worse with over 2/3 of the seats when they polled only around 40% of the vote. It's probably been a similar voting pattern when Tories have been in power.

 

Neither of these parties speak for the majority of people.

 

Magnificent post

[Mediocre Pundit]

Watching Campaign 2010, with Osbourne, Cable and Darling. The only one that gives blunt opinion is Osbourne. The other two are fudging and remaining non-committal. I may not agree with everything Osbourne has said but I respect the fact that he's at least saying something...

[Mediocre Pundit]

Magnificent post

Why? Because PR would allow the Lib Dems to decide pretty much every government, no matter who anyone votes for?

[The Devil's Point]

Why? Because PR would allow the Lib Dems to decide pretty much every government, no matter who anyone votes for?

 

Precisely.

[Mediocre Pundit]

Precisely.

So you would agree that it wouldn't actually be a fair reform?

[The Devil's Point]

So you would agree that it wouldn't actually be a fair reform?

 

Very fair IMO

 

We are, after all, the party of fairness, and someone has to decide

Edited May 4, 2010 by The Devil's Point