Will Cameron get a chance?

[Beefster]

In Scotland.

I'm not asking 'will you vote for him in 4 years time?' or even "will you like him in 4 years"?

I'm asking, if he proves that he is a Tory with a social conscience and a genuine desire to sort out inequality, will he get any sort of credit/acknowledgement whatsoever or will the ghost of Maggie hang over him and he'll continue to be slaughtered irrespective because (as one poster implied) "he's a Tory so must be a racist bigot"?

[bighairyfaeleith]

In Scotland.

I'm not asking 'will you vote for him in 4 years time?' or even "will you like him in 4 years"?

I'm asking, if he proves that he is a Tory with a social conscience and a genuine desire to sort out inequality, will he get any sort of credit/acknowledgement whatsoever or will the ghost of Maggie hang over him and he'll continue to be slaughtered irrespective because (as one poster implied) "he's a Tory so must be a racist bigot"?

I'm biased, so I'll let other people answer :greengrin

[SloopJB]

In Scotland.

I'm not asking 'will you vote for him in 4 years time?' or even "will you like him in 4 years"?

I'm asking, if he proves that he is a Tory with a social conscience and a genuine desire to sort out inequality, will he get any sort of credit/acknowledgement whatsoever or will the ghost of Maggie hang over him and he'll continue to be slaughtered irrespective because (as one poster implied) "he's a Tory so must be a racist bigot"?

If that is all he proves he will have failed Scotland massivley.
He will cut into Scotland as no other has done in the past, quicker and deeper.
A resounding NO

[LiverpoolHibs]

In Scotland.

I'm not asking 'will you vote for him in 4 years time?' or even "will you like him in 4 years"?

I'm asking, if he proves that he is a Tory with a social conscience and a genuine desire to sort out inequality, will he get any sort of credit/acknowledgement whatsoever or will the ghost of Maggie hang over him and he'll continue to be slaughtered irrespective because (as one poster implied) "he's a Tory so must be a racist bigot"?

Contradictio in terminis...

[lyonhibs]

In Scotland.

I'm not asking 'will you vote for him in 4 years time?' or even "will you like him in 4 years"?

I'm asking, if he proves that he is a Tory with a social conscience and a genuine desire to sort out inequality, will he get any sort of credit/acknowledgement whatsoever or will the ghost of Maggie hang over him and he'll continue to be slaughtered irrespective because (as one poster implied) "he's a Tory so must be a racist bigot"?

:confused:

Will he also ditch the bike and take a flying pig to meetings??

What you're saying that if he proves that - shock, horror - he isn't a total Tory **** will he get "credit" for this "massive" step in the right direction??

Eh, naw.

[One Day Soon]

Contradictio in terminis...

Ok, getting concerned now because thats two posts in which I find us in agreement.

[Beefster]

To be fair, this was the response that I was expecting. Discussing the Tories on here is like a bunch of wee lassies who have seen a mouse. Mass hysteria and lots of high pitched screaming about what the mouse did the last time it got out of its cage.

[bighairyfaeleith]

To be fair, this was the response that I was expecting. Discussing the Tories on here is like a bunch of wee lassies who have seen a mouse. Mass hysteria and lots of high pitched screaming about what the mouse did the last time it got out of its cage.

Why because people disagree with you?

[Beefster]

Why because people disagree with you?

Nope, because it's impossible to even discuss the Tories without some diatribe about the 80's, poshos, Eton, Maggie, council houses, the miners or the poll tax.

[Leicester Fan]

Why because people disagree with you?
Perhaps because Cameron has been in the job less than an hour and you are all judging him already.

[SloopJB]

To be fair, this was the response that I was expecting. Discussing the Tories on here is like a bunch of wee lassies who have seen a mouse. Mass hysteria and lots of high pitched screaming about what the mouse did the last time it got out of its cage.

Sadly that mirrors much of the political debate on the lead up to the election.
A chance to put a point accross after an opening gambit to stimulate debate but you resort to a contrived scenario which carries no facts.

[lyonhibs]

Nope, because it's impossible to even discuss the Tories without some diatribe about the 80's, poshos, Eton, Maggie, council houses, the miners or the poll tax.

Like it or not, the above, and especially the last 3 are the permanent memories of the Tories in Scotland. Call it "short memories", "chip on the shoulder mentality" etc etc, but them's the facts.

Maybe if the Tories had left something more tangible and permanently positive by the way of policies (for the many) in Scotland, we - as a nation - would be able to look past those 3??

:dunno:

[bighairyfaeleith]

Nope, because it's impossible to even discuss the Tories without some diatribe about the 80's, poshos, Eton, Maggie, council houses, the miners or the poll tax.

But if that is what is important in peoples minds then that's what the tories have to contend with, I watched that show on the tv the other night about why scotland won't vote for the tories.

The candidate in east renfrew typified the tories for me when he tried to argue that we don't vote for the due to ideology.

We don't vote for them because they shafted our country big time and we don't believe them when they say they won't do it again. It's not difficult.

[One Day Soon]

In Scotland.

I'm not asking 'will you vote for him in 4 years time?' or even "will you like him in 4 years"?

I'm asking, if he proves that he is a Tory with a social conscience and a genuine desire to sort out inequality, will he get any sort of credit/acknowledgement whatsoever or will the ghost of Maggie hang over him and he'll continue to be slaughtered irrespective because (as one poster implied) "he's a Tory so must be a racist bigot"?

Earlier today I watched in horror as Malcolm Rifkind - a politician I had previously regarded as an able and relatively balanced man - described the discussions between Labour and the Liberal Democrats as the sort of activity that would be undertaken by Robert Mugabe. Bear in mind that these discussions were taking place at the request of the Lib Dems. I found that language and attitude utterly disgusting and hugely irresponsible. A direct throwback to the kind of slash and burn tactics we saw under Thatcher.

I respect the SNP. They are a party focussed around a commitment to independence. I dont agree with it but it is clear.

I respect the Tories. A party focussed around a relatively coherent right wing agenda which is pro-privilege and largely open in its intent. I dont agree with it but it is clear.

The Lib Dems are a campaign vainly in search of a purpose. That is why they crash and burn in office. I have nothing but contempt for them.

But be clear about this, there is a reason why the Tories are historically the party of elitism and privilege and that is because it is in their blood. Literally actually in the case of many of them. If you think that has gone away with the Notting Hill set then you are in for a rude awakening. Unless you think the playing fields of Eton are a breeding ground for secret socialists?

[weecounty hibby]

Earlier today I watched in horror as Malcolm Rifkind - a politician I had previously regarded as an able and relatively balanced man - described the discussions between Labour and the Liberal Democrats as the sort of activity that would be undertaken by Robert Mugabe. Bear in mind that these discussions were taking place at the request of the Lib Dems. I found that language and attitude utterly disgusting and hugely irresponsible. A direct throwback to the kind of slash and burn tactics we saw under Thatcher.

I respect the SNP. They are a party focussed around a commitment to independence. I dont agree with it but it is clear.

I respect the Tories. A party focussed around a relatively coherent right wing agenda which is pro-privilege and largely open in its intent. I dont agree with it but it is clear.

The Lib Dems are a campaign vainly in search of a purpose. That is why they crash and burn in office. I have nothing but contempt for them.

But be clear about this, there is a reason why the Tories are historically the party of elitism and privilege and that is because it is in their blood. Literally actually in the case of many of them. If you think that has gone away with the Notting Hill set then you are in for a rude awakening. Unless you think the playing fields of Eton are a breeding ground for secret socialists?
Just like the playing fields of Fettes then. Hypocrytical in the extreme!

[bighairyfaeleith]

Just like the playing fields of Fettes then. Hypocrytical in the extreme!

Not sure I understand that:confused:

[weecounty hibby]

Not sure I understand that:confused:
The poster above was saying that you don't get socialists at Eton. Well one of his past heroes a Certain Tony Blair attended the Scottish version of Eton, which is Fettes. If you don't find them at Eton you wont find them at Fettes. A point proved by Tony Blair and his New Labour/Tory party IMO.

[bighairyfaeleith]

The poster above was saying that you don't get socialists at Eton. Well one of his past heroes a Certain Tony Blair attended the Scottish version of Eton, which is Fettes. If you don't find them at Eton you wont find them at Fettes. A point proved by Tony Blair and his New Labour/Tory party IMO.

Ok understand your point now

[One Day Soon]

Just like the playing fields of Fettes then. Hypocrytical in the extreme!

Don't be such an idiot. Blair went to Fettes - what about Brown, Smith, Kinnock, Foot, Callaghan etc? The Tories are a production line of the privileged elite and if you are seriously claiming that the Labour leadership over generations has mirrored this then you are either ignorant of history or grinding a deliberately misleading political axe.

How's that local income tax coming along by the way?

[weecounty hibby]

Don't be such an idiot. Blair went to Fettes - what about Brown, Smith, Kinnock, Foot, Callaghan etc? The Tories are a production line of the privileged elite and if you are seriously claiming that the Labour leadership over generations has mirrored this then you are either ignorant of history or grinding a deliberately misleading political axe.

How's that local income tax coming along by the way?
All of these guys are from Labours past. The Labour party are now so close to the Tories that they actually made the Tories electable again. I personally hate the Tories after the way Scotland was treated by them last time around, but TBs Labour runs them a pretty close second. I mentioned this on another thread that Geoffrey Robinson when he was the unelected paymaster general actually paid less in tax one year than I did due to his banking being done in tax havens. He is a multi billionaire. Not many of them you could honestly paint as socialists?

[Jonnyboy]

In Scotland.

I'm not asking 'will you vote for him in 4 years time?' or even "will you like him in 4 years"?

I'm asking, if he proves that he is a Tory with a social conscience and a genuine desire to sort out inequality, will he get any sort of credit/acknowledgement whatsoever or will the ghost of Maggie hang over him and he'll continue to be slaughtered irrespective because (as one poster implied) "he's a Tory so must be a racist bigot"?

I'm kinda apolitical Beefy so I've no real axe to grind. It is pretty certain IMO that Cameron will get a hard time and the signs are there already to support that fact.

I said on another thread 'God help us' and did so because I don't see the Tory/Lib Dem pact in Westminster and the SNP Government in Scotland producing a match made in heaven. I'd even go so far as to say that there may well be a fair number of middle England Tory MP's who would like to make Scotland suffer for 'inflicting' Brown and Darling on them.

It will be interesting to see what happens to Scotland although I suspect that even if Labour had been re-elected times will be tough ahead

[One Day Soon]

All of these guys are from Labours past. The Labour party are now so close to the Tories that they actually made the Tories electable again. I personally hate the Tories after the way Scotland was treated by them last time around, but TBs Labour runs them a pretty close second. I mentioned this on another thread that Geoffrey Robinson when he was the unelected paymaster general actually paid less in tax one year than I did due to his banking being done in tax havens. He is a multi billionaire. Not many of them you could honestly paint as socialists?

Oh I see now. Your tactic is to completely ignore my argument and dismiss 100 years of Labour Party history.

At no stage did I claim that the Labour Party was stuffed full of socialists. I pointed out that "the Tories are historically the party of elitism and privilege and that is because it is in their blood. Literally actually in the case of many of them. If you think that has gone away with the Notting Hill set then you are in for a rude awakening. Unless you think the playing fields of Eton are a breeding ground for secret socialists?" If you genuinely think that there is little or no difference between Labour and the Tories then there isn't much more to discuss. You would not however have seen a national minimum wage, the Scottish Parliament or the windfall tax on the privatised utilities to pay for the modern apprenticeships scheme from the Tories. And there is a much, much longer list than that one if you need many more examples.

[MountcastleHibs]

I'm willing to give David Cameron a chance. He sounds impressive, was speaking of protecting the frontline services. Obviously what he says and what he does are two different things but I think he'll surprise everyone.

With the Lib Dems onside, we'll get electoral reform and a fairer tax system. They'll also be able to reign him in on the severity of his spending cuts.

Cameron will know he has no mandate in Scotland, and having already spoken of trying to get better relations with Scotland, it would be a complete disaster for him to hit Scotland very hard. Even if Labour remained in power, we would've had cuts up here, so I think the severity will be along Labour lines. Whether that's acceptable to folk I don't know.

As for looking at the past, I don't see the point in scaring yourself based on what happened nearly 20 years ago. If those cuts hadn't been made what position would we have been in? Heading towards a third world state without a doubt. I'm not saying Thatcher was right, but what she done was required and would've been done under a Labour government too.

I'm not suggesting we forgive or forget the Tories for what happened, perhaps just give them a chance and reserve judgement for 4 or 5 years. That's what i'm doing anyway.

[heretoday]

If Cameron does a good job I'll vote for him.

[anon1]

He has my support. He sounds like he cares, and he definitely does not have a pot of gold to play with (and throw down the drain!) like Bliar and Bigot-gate did.

This Budget Deficit is serious stuff huh?? I know this article is from Fox News.. but its quite enlightening

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/05/11/theodore-bromund-britain-david-cameron-winston-churchill-gordon-brown-elections/

Good luck PM Cameron & please work to patch up the Tories' reputation in Scotland!

[Beefster]

Don't be such an idiot. Blair went to Fettes - what about Brown, Smith, Kinnock, Foot, Callaghan etc? The Tories are a production line of the privileged elite and if you are seriously claiming that the Labour leadership over generations has mirrored this then you are either ignorant of history or grinding a deliberately misleading political axe.

How's that local income tax coming along by the way?

As far as I know, Cameron is the first Tory leader since before Thatcher to have had private education so I'm not sure of your point.

Darling went to Loretto. Does that make him unsuitable for public office?

[Beefster]

I'm willing to give David Cameron a chance. He sounds impressive, was speaking of protecting the frontline services. Obviously what he says and what he does are two different things but I think he'll surprise everyone.

With the Lib Dems onside, we'll get electoral reform and a fairer tax system. They'll also be able to reign him in on the severity of his spending cuts.

Cameron will know he has no mandate in Scotland, and having already spoken of trying to get better relations with Scotland, it would be a complete disaster for him to hit Scotland very hard. Even if Labour remained in power, we would've had cuts up here, so I think the severity will be along Labour lines. Whether that's acceptable to folk I don't know.

As for looking at the past, I don't see the point in scaring yourself based on what happened nearly 20 years ago. If those cuts hadn't been made what position would we have been in? Heading towards a third world state without a doubt. I'm not saying Thatcher was right, but what she done was required and would've been done under a Labour government too.

I'm not suggesting we forgive or forget the Tories for what happened, perhaps just give them a chance and reserve judgement for 4 or 5 years. That's what i'm doing anyway.

I think and hope that this is the attitude that most 'normal' folk will take. If he ****s up, punish him. If not, at least acknowledge it.

The problem is that the SNP and Labour are going to be relentless in their criticism of him up here (which is their right) and they've got a lot of sympathetic ears who won't need much persuading.

Unfortunately for him, he's inheriting an utter shambles of an economy so it's going to be tough no matter what.

[Hibbyradge]

[QUOTE=Beefster;2465216] if he proves that he is a Tory with a social conscience and a genuine desire to sort out inequality/QUOTE]

If he does, he will. But he won't.

Remember, he's not really in charge. I don't know the real agenda of an ex Eton schoolboy, although I have my suspicions, but even if it's entirely altruistic, the people who pull the strings in his party have the same agenda as they always have had.

And the word "equality" doesn't feature.

First up, let's relax that pesky inheritance tax for the very wealthy.

That will certainly ease Dave's social concience!

PS On another note, I wonder if the Express and the Mail will stop printing their scary immigration stories now their boy is in Number 10...

[PeeJay]

I'm asking, if he proves that he is a Tory with a social conscience and a genuine desire to sort out inequality, will he get any sort of credit/acknowledgement whatsoever or will the ghost of Maggie hang over him and he'll continue to be slaughtered irrespective because (as one poster implied) "he's a Tory so must be a racist bigot"?

I think Cameron has to prove himself, but I think Scotland and its electorate will be low on his priorities. He has to prove himself to his own Conservative Party, which is mighty miffed that Cameron almost blew the election and is now reduced to having to enter a formal coalition with the LiBDems - I wonder how long Cameron will actually last as party leader, if the coalition starts to wobble off course at any stage? He will also need to prove himself to England, if he wins England (for the next election) he doesn't need Scotland - and all this will be done by advancing Tory policies where possible (initially held in check by the LibDem coalition partner).

As to "social conscience" - LiverpoolHibs got it spot on! The scepticism that many of the Scottish electorate feel is surely not as you put it down to a "... bunch of wee lassies who have seen a mouse. Mass hysteria and lots of high pitched screaming..." but rather experience - - leopards don't change their spots and all that!

[Beefster]

If he does, he will. But he won't.

Remember, he's not really in charge. I don't know the real agenda of an ex Eton schoolboy, although I have my suspicions, but even if it's entirely altruistic, the people who pull the strings in his party have the same agenda as they always have had.

And the word "equality" doesn't feature.

First up, let's relax that pesky inheritance tax for the very wealthy.

That will certainly ease Dave's social concience!

PS On another note, I wonder if the Express and the Mail will stop printing their scary immigration stories now their boy is in Number 10...

No hypocrisy there. Not if you ignore the old Fettes/Lorretto/Westminster etc schoolboys who have run the country for the last 13 years.

Or do poshos only go to Eton?


I think Cameron has to prove himself, but I think Scotland and its electorate will be low on his priorities. He has to prove himself to his own Conservative Party, which is mighty miffed that Cameron almost blew the election and is now reduced to having to enter a formal coalition with the LiBDems - I wonder how long Cameron will actually last as party leader, if the coalition starts to wobble off course at any stage? He will also need to prove himself to England, if he wins England (for the next election) he doesn't need Scotland - and all this will be done by advancing Tory policies where possible (initially held in check by the LibDem coalition partner).

As to "social conscience" - LiverpoolHibs got it spot on! The scepticism that many of the Scottish electorate feel is surely not as you put it down to a "... bunch of wee lassies who have seen a mouse. Mass hysteria and lots of high pitched screaming..." but rather experience - - leopards don't change their spots and all that!

That's a lazy argument and suits the Tory haters. Unless anyone seriously thinks Blair was elected because he was the same as previous Labour leaders.

Of course though, you're right, he has got a lot to prove to the country. As things stand, he has a majority of around 40 so any old Tories wishing to stir things up won't get far.

[PeeJay]

That's a lazy argument and suits the Tory haters. Unless anyone seriously thinks Blair was elected because he was the same as previous Labour leaders.


It's a tired cliche - I'll give you that, but then it's "reasonably" early in the day!:greengrin

Listening to Lord Heseltine et al yesterday and, in particular, his vitriolic ire directed at Labour didn't convince me that we can expect anything other from the Tories. I don't "hate" Tories - don't like their policies one bit, but "hate" is not a word to be used lightly. For the UK's sake I hope things don't turn out as bad as some fear - I was almost about to say "lucky me" I live in Euroland, but then we have our problems too ...

[Hibbyradge]

Read what I wrote. It doesn't matter what Cameron believes in or wants because it's the party behind him which will pull the strings. If you want hypocrisy, have a read at the Daily Mail this morning (I got a free copy on my flight Which is sitting on the runway). That will give you a good idea nd the direction the country will be going now. Equality? Who offer it.

[GlesgaeHibby]

I'll give him a chance, I think that is only fair. I just do not believe for one second that he will do us good as you believe beefster.

This is the guy that wanted the inheritance tax cut and strongly opposed the minimum wage.

Sadly I believe it's only a matter of time before Scotland/ordinary UK people start getting shafted by them again, I'd love to be proved wrong.

[Danderhall Hibs]

To be fair, this was the response that I was expecting. Discussing the Tories on here is like a bunch of wee lassies who have seen a mouse. Mass hysteria and lots of high pitched screaming about what the mouse did the last time it got out of its cage.


Heard on Radio 5 this morning that he’s already ditched cutting the NI increase for employees. So much for stopping the “jobs tax” that his whole campaign was based on. Way to go David. ½ a day in charge and you’ve already lied.

[lyonhibs]

Heard on Radio 5 this morning that he’s already ditched cutting the NI increase for employees. So much for stopping the “jobs tax” that his whole campaign was based on. Way to go David. ½ a day in charge and you’ve already lied.

As much as I'm anti-Cameron, was his line throughout the campaign not that he wouldn't be RAISING the NI as Labour were proposing, but to keep it the same??

Did he promise an actual NI cut??

Oh, and while we're at it, who can spot the GLARING error in the following reputable media article??

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8676607.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8676607.stm)

I refer of course to the line "a deal was reached on Tuesday that resulted in Labour Prime Minister Gordon Brown resigning", whilst only last night the very same news corporation had been making a big deal of the fact that Brown HAD NOT waitied for a deal to be confirmed before resigning :bitchy:

Leave that sort of *****e to Sky News please!!!

[Danderhall Hibs]

As much as I'm anti-Cameron, was his line throughout the campaign not that he wouldn't be RAISING the NI as Labour were proposing, but to keep it the same??



I’ve no doubt he’ll talk his way round it but as far as I knew Labour were going to increase NI and the Tories (and Lib Dems) were going to stop the increase. They’re not going to now and are allowing the increase to go ahead.

[lyonhibs]

I’ve no doubt he’ll talk his way round it but as far as I knew Labour were going to increase NI and the Tories (and Lib Dems) were going to stop the increase. They’re not going to now and are allowing the increase to go ahead.

Presumably, unless the increase has already been put into law by Labour before they left office, then a NI rise or otherwise was just all talk throughout the election debates etc??

So now the Tories/Liberals are in "power", any rise in NI will have nowt to do with Labour, and will just be the Tories bare-faced lying???

I hasten to add, only IF what you heard on Radio 5 is correct.

[bighairyfaeleith]

The way I read it this morning they had dumped the NI increase and instead are going to raise income tax for some people.

Not sure about the thresholds yet for the income tax rise but as the lib dems want no one under 10k to pay income tax then you've got to imagine that the people earning from 25k upwards are going to get hit for it to have any impact on the deficit.

[lapsedhibee]

The way I read it this morning they had dumped the NI increase and instead are going to raise income tax for some people.

Not sure about the thresholds yet for the income tax rise but as the lib dems want no one under 10k to pay income tax then you've got to imagine that the people earning from 25k upwards are going to get hit for it to have any impact on the deficit.

Since Cameron was banging on about strong, stable families the other night, perhaps the Lib Cons'll reintroduce taxing husband & wife together, and every household bringing in 25k upwards will get hit. So long as the new tax and NI regime is strong and stable, everything'll be fine. :agree:

[Danderhall Hibs]

Presumably, unless the increase has already been put into law by Labour before they left office, then a NI rise or otherwise was just all talk throughout the election debates etc??

So now the Tories/Liberals are in "power", any rise in NI will have nowt to do with Labour, and will just be the Tories bare-faced lying???

I hasten to add, only IF what you heard on Radio 5 is correct.

I think Labour said it in their Budget. The Tory’s were going to have an emergency budget and this would be scrapped before it started. They campaigned on this ditching of the “jobs tax”.

Now they’re not scrapping it like they said they would.

[Betty Boop]

Presumably, unless the increase has already been put into law by Labour before they left office, then a NI rise or otherwise was just all talk throughout the election debates etc??

So now the Tories/Liberals are in "power", any rise in NI will have nowt to do with Labour, and will just be the Tories bare-faced lying???

I hasten to add, only IF what you heard on Radio 5 is correct.

The Tories/Lib Dems are scrapping the NI increase, but are planning to raise capital gains tax.

[PeeJay]

The Tories/Lib Dems are scrapping the NI increase, but are planning to raise capital gains tax.

"The Lib Dems have agreed to back the Tories plan for £6bn in public spending cuts this year and support the scrapping of part of next year's 1% National Insurance tax rise." (BBC News)

Wonder what they mean by part?:confused:

[Danderhall Hibs]

"The Lib Dems have agreed to back the Tories plan for £6bn in public spending cuts this year and support the scrapping of part of next year's 1% National Insurance tax rise." (BBC News)

Wonder what they mean by part?:confused:

The Employer part. The employees will still get hit with the increase they promised to stop.

---------- Post added at 11:20 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:19 AM ----------


The Tories/Lib Dems are scrapping the NI increase, but are planning to raise capital gains tax.

They're only scrapping it for Companies not for workers - the folk that voted for them!

[bighairyfaeleith]

The Employer part. The employees will still get hit with the increase they promised to stop.

---------- Post added at 11:20 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:19 AM ----------



They're only scrapping it for Companies not for workers - the folk that voted for them!

Do you have a source for this, not doubting you just want to read more on it?

[Danderhall Hibs]

Do you have a source for this, not doubting you just want to read more on it?

Radio 5. It was on the Nicky Campbell show.

[bighairyfaeleith]

Radio 5. It was on the Nicky Campbell show.

Cheers

[Woody1985]

Can someone clear something up for me...

I hear and read a lot that the tories are new labour. In what context are they new labour?

My assumptions would lead me to suggest that it is either:

a) That their policies are pretty damn close and not much in it.

b) That their leadership is now full of upper class twats with no perspective on the real world.

Now, if it is a, then why does anyone give a **** who wins?

[Beefster]

Heard on Radio 5 this morning that he’s already ditched cutting the NI increase for employees. So much for stopping the “jobs tax” that his whole campaign was based on. Way to go David. ½ a day in charge and you’ve already lied.

You're not really getting how coalition government works, are you?

[Danderhall Hibs]

You're not really getting how coalition government works, are you?

I get it, do you?

Lib Dems and Tory said they'd scrap the job tax prior to the election now they're not. Where was the compromise?!

[bighairyfaeleith]

You're not really getting how coalition government works, are you?

I don't see much wrong in what he has said either:confused:

[Removed]

I get it, do you?

Lib Dems and Tory said they'd scrap the job tax prior to the election now they're not. Where was the compromise?!

Exactly. I'm confused as well now.

You can't trust a tory and add a lib dem to that list as well now.

[Dashing Bob S]

i think you only have to look at the electoral map and see where the bulk of Tory seats are, to realise that, rhetoric aside. Scotland will not be a priority for Cameron. He'll want to look after the south-east of England first. Why wouldn't he?

[Hibbie0762]

i think you only have to look at the electoral map and see where the bulk of Tory seats are, to realise that, rhetoric aside. Scotland will not be a priority for Cameron. He'll want to look after the south-east of England first. Why wouldn't he?Ah, but don't forget that the Tories now have 12 seats in Scotland. :greengrin

[Phil D. Rolls]

Can someone clear something up for me...

I hear and read a lot that the tories are new labour. In what context are they new labour?

My assumptions would lead me to suggest that it is either:

a) That their policies are pretty damn close and not much in it.

b) That their leadership is now full of upper class twats with no perspective on the real world.

Now, if it is a, then why does anyone give a **** who wins?

The main thing for me is the way that the Tories want to make big cuts sooner than Labour did. I think that is typical, they seem to think that the surgery will be a lot more sucessful without anaestethic.

They are also making a big play on people supporting themselves and organising their society. For that read "***** off and get on with it". Of course that's a great theory when you're expecting middle class people to organise their communities, it's different when you are dealing with a scheme full of third generation benefits claimants, pensioners, the mad, and criminals.

[lyonhibs]

The main thing for me is the way that the Tories want to make big cuts sooner than Labour did. I think that is typical, they seem to think that the surgery will be a lot more sucessful without anaestethic.

They are also making a big play on people supporting themselves and organising their society. For that read "***** off and get on with it". Of course that's a great theory when you're expecting middle class people to organise their communities, it's different when you are dealing with a scheme full of third generation benefits claimants, pensioners, the mad, and criminals.

:agree: :agree:

This is the big one for me - this proposed transfer of "power" - aka "responsibility" and - if it turns out that people aren't capable of doing what was previously Government's job - "blame" from state to the private individual sounds like a great idea in principle, but is likely to be a complete mess in practice.

[Beefster]

I get it, do you?

Lib Dems and Tory said they'd scrap the job tax prior to the election now they're not. Where was the compromise?!

You're either oversimplifying what was said because you weren't listening or as an opportunity to have a pop at the Tories / Lib Dems.

The Tories pledged to stop the rise for employees and employers.

The Lib Dems said that they'd like to do the same but were unable to do so in the current economic conditions. As such, they'd look at removing it at some point in the future, when the conditions were right.

So, they've both compromised on their starting positions. No lies - just the reality of coalitions.

[Beefster]

They are also making a big play on people supporting themselves and organising their society. For that read "***** off and get on with it". Of course that's a great theory when you're expecting middle class people to organise their communities, it's different when you are dealing with a scheme full of third generation benefits claimants, pensioners, the mad, and criminals.


:agree: :agree:

This is the big one for me - this proposed transfer of "power" - aka "responsibility"

I'm trying not to come across like a tit and probably failing miserably so apologies if any frustration is seeping though into my posts.

There seems to be a utter misunderstanding of what the policies in the manifestos were / are. It might be me that's wrong, it might be the parties' fault, it might be the media's fault or it might be others not really paying attention and just going with what they thought they heard.

There's no compulsion for folk to start running whatever. It's an opportunity for folk to get involved if they want. No pensioners, criminals, benefit claimants etc are going to be told that they have to start running services that the government previously provided.

Anyway, I had to stop myself from being the unofficial Tory spokesman on here before the election and I'm going to start leaving the new government to defend themselves after the election too!

[Greentinted]

The main thing for me is the way that the Tories want to make big cuts sooner than Labour did. I think that is typical, they seem to think that the surgery will be a lot more sucessful without anaestethic.

They are also making a big play on people supporting themselves and organising their society. For that read "***** off and get on with it". Of course that's a great theory when you're expecting middle class people to organise their communities, it's different when you are dealing with a scheme full of third generation benefits claimants, pensioners, the mad, and criminals.

Living in the lawless enclave that is Gorgie as I do, I am grateful for your dystopian discourse; fair cheered me up that did! :bitchy: :boo hoo:......:greengrin

[Phil D. Rolls]

I'm trying not to come across like a tit and probably failing miserably so apologies if any frustration is seeping though into my posts.

There seems to be a utter misunderstanding of what the policies in the manifestos were / are. It might be me that's wrong, it might be the parties' fault, it might be the media's fault or it might be others not really paying attention and just going with what they thought they heard.

There's no compulsion for folk to start running whatever. It's an opportunity for folk to get involved if they want. No pensioners, criminals, benefit claimants etc are going to be told that they have to start running services that the government previously provided.

Anyway, I had to stop myself from being the unofficial Tory spokesman on here before the election and I'm going to start leaving the new government to defend themselves after the election too!

I'm reading between the lines, but the whole concept of government withdrawing from running the country and leaving it to communities (what happened to Neighbourhoods?) is simply a way for government to withdraw funding.

[bighairyfaeleith]

I'm reading between the lines, but the whole concept of government withdrawing from running the country and leaving it to communities (what happened to Neighbourhoods?) is simply a way for government to withdraw funding.

Thats my reading of it. Looks like the wife will need to get nurses uniform on again :slipper:

[Beefster]

I'm reading between the lines, but the whole concept of government withdrawing from running the country and leaving it to communities (what happened to Neighbourhoods?) is simply a way for government to withdraw funding.

Possibly but I saw at least one Labour minster before the election denouncing the idea as 'unaffordable'.

[Danderhall Hibs]

You're either oversimplifying what was said because you weren't listening or as an opportunity to have a pop at the Tories / Lib Dems.

The Tories pledged to stop the rise for employees and employers.

The Lib Dems said that they'd like to do the same but were unable to do so in the current economic conditions. As such, they'd look at removing it at some point in the future, when the conditions were right.

So, they've both compromised on their starting positions. No lies - just the reality of coalitions.

Oversimplifying? I prefer to call it repeating what they said. Maybe I'm just not intelligent enough to read between the li(n)es and shoud leave it to bright folk like yourself. If someone makes such a big fuss about something in their campaign I expect them to go with it, no compromise - like they done over Europe.

Basically they both said they'd do it, in fact it was so important to the Tory's that Cameron had to say "job tax" in every sentence, yet when it comes to the crunch they don't do it?

Lies fits IMO. Some "change" they're making - they're doing half of what Labour said, the half that actually affects my pay packet!

And they're not giving me the tax break they promised for married couples either? I wonder how the big society will turn out?

[bawheid]

Oversimplifying? I prefer to call it repeating what they said. Maybe I'm just not intelligent enough to read between the li(n)es and shoud leave it to bright folk like yourself. If someone makes such a big fuss about something in their campaign I expect them to go with it, no compromise - like they done over Europe.

Basically they both said they'd do it, in fact it was so important to the Tory's that Cameron had to say "job tax" in every sentence, yet when it comes to the crunch they don't do it?

Lies fits IMO. Some "change" they're making - they're doing half of what Labour said, the half that actually affects my pay packet!

And they're not giving me the tax break they promised for married couples either? I wonder how the big society will turn out?

Spot on. This has really ****ed me off.

Every time Cameron opened his gob he was prattling on about Gordon Brown's job tax and how every business in the land agreed with him that it needed to be stopped.

One day in and he drops the pledge. A liar.

Fine compromise on certain things, but this was THE main ingredient of the Tory party campaign. Everywhere you looked, jobs tax this, jobs tax that. There's little doubt folk will have voted on it.

Are you stopping the jobs tax Cameron? Are you ****. Same old Tories.

[Beefster]

Oversimplifying? I prefer to call it repeating what they said. Maybe I'm just not intelligent enough to read between the li(n)es and shoud leave it to bright folk like yourself. If someone makes such a big fuss about something in their campaign I expect them to go with it, no compromise - like they done over Europe.

Basically they both said they'd do it, in fact it was so important to the Tory's that Cameron had to say "job tax" in every sentence, yet when it comes to the crunch they don't do it?

Lies fits IMO. Some "change" they're making - they're doing half of what Labour said, the half that actually affects my pay packet!

And they're not giving me the tax break they promised for married couples either? I wonder how the big society will turn out?

I've already told you what the Lib Dems said and what is in their manifesto. You're wrong.

But you obviously expected a coalition without any compromise on their respective manifestos. Disappointment on your part was inevitable.


Spot on. This has really ****ed me off.

Every time Cameron opened his gob he was prattling on about Gordon Brown's job tax and how every business in the land agreed with him that it needed to be stopped.

One day in and he drops the pledge. A liar.

Fine compromise on certain things, but this was THE main ingredient of the Tory party campaign. Everywhere you looked, jobs tax this, jobs tax that. There's little doubt folk will have voted on it.

Are you stopping the jobs tax Cameron? Are you ****. Same old Tories.

The part of the NI rise that would have affected jobs isn't going ahead.

[brydekirk]

In Scotland.

I'm not asking 'will you vote for him in 4 years time?' or even "will you like him in 4 years"?

I'm asking, if he proves that he is a Tory with a social conscience and a genuine desire to sort out inequality, will he get any sort of credit/acknowledgement whatsoever or will the ghost of Maggie hang over him and he'll continue to be slaughtered irrespective because (as one poster implied) "he's a Tory so must be a racist bigot"?
will he give us a chance. ? the working class.

[bighairyfaeleith]

I've already told you what the Lib Dems said and what is in their manifesto. You're wrong.

But you obviously expected a coalition without any compromise on their respective manifestos. Disappointment on your part was inevitable.



The part of the NI rise that would have affected jobs isn't going ahead.

I think thats a little unfair, he states they should compromise but as this was the the most talked about policy by the tories, it's a bit of a sham for them to have changed there monds on it. Don't you agree?

[Danderhall Hibs]

I've already told you what the Lib Dems said and what is in their manifesto. You're wrong.

But you obviously expected a coalition without any compromise on their respective manifestos. Disappointment on your part was inevitable.

The part of the NI rise that would have affected jobs isn't going ahead.

No I expected compromise just not on the bits they based their campaign on - if it was so crucial to them I'm not sure how it was so easy for them to drop it. The Europe and immigration issues were never on the table but the one they based their campaign on was? Even though "business leaders said raising NI would destroy the economy" they're going ahead with it.

Liars, same old Tory's - just like Gordon Brown told us.

[Beefster]

No I expected compromise just not on the bits they based their campaign on - if it was so crucial to them I'm not sure how it was so easy for them to drop it. The Europe and immigration issues were never on the table but the one they based their campaign on was? Even though "business leaders said raising NI would destroy the economy" they're going ahead with it.

Liars, same old Tory's - just like Gordon Brown told us.

Fair dos. The 'red lines' from a Tory point of view were pure ideology. They'd never have gotten any softening on Europe, Immigration or Defence past the membership.

[Brando7]

Coming from someone that doesn't know bugger all about politics can some tell me how had it had to be either a tory/lib goverment or a labour/lib goverment?

Why was there never the option of a tory/labour goverment?

[lapsedhibee]

Coming from someone that doesn't know bugger all about politics can some tell me how had it had to be either a tory/lib goverment or a labour/lib goverment?

Why was there never the option of a tory/labour goverment?

Indeed. It might be better if Con Lab and Lib all merged and the UK became a one-party state. That way we'd be guaranteed strong, stable government which is good for the nation.

[Removed]

Coming from someone that doesn't know bugger all about politics can some tell me how had it had to be either a tory/lib goverment or a labour/lib goverment?

Why was there never the option of a tory/labour goverment?

It would be a bit like us and the yams trying to share a stadium :bitchy:

[ArabHibee]

:greengrin

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash1/hs291.ash1/21878_451327440047_837630047_10697842_5686120_n.jp g (http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=10697849&id=837630047)


http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc3/hs401.snc3/24328_410357094433_674719433_5032634_226681_n.jpg

[ArabHibee]

:cool2:

[GlesgaeHibby]

The part of the NI rise that would have affected jobs isn't going ahead.

Thats what makes it even more stupid. Why not then just put up income tax since it is now only on the employee contribution?

[Dinkydoo]

In Scotland.

I'm not asking 'will you vote for him in 4 years time?' or even "will you like him in 4 years"?

I'm asking, if he proves that he is a Tory with a social conscience and a genuine desire to sort out inequality, will he get any sort of credit/acknowledgement whatsoever or will the ghost of Maggie hang over him and he'll continue to be slaughtered irrespective because (as one poster implied) "he's a Tory so must be a racist bigot"?

If he does a gid job then I'll give him my vote in the next election; if not, I won't.

I think the last bit is what the majority of Scotland will think/do tbh - maybe because of the scars of the Thatcher years....... I don't know. I don't agree with it and believe that just because the past was bad doesn't mean that the future can't be good.

[BEEJ]

The Tory’s were going to have an emergency budget and this would be scrapped before it started. They campaigned on this ditching of the “jobs tax”.

Now they’re not scrapping it like they said they would.


The Employer part. The employees will still get hit with the increase they promised to stop.

They're only scrapping it for Companies not for workers - the folk that voted for them!
As you say, the Tory manifesto was hot on stopping both parts of Labour's proposed NI rise to come in from April 2011 - the employee's NI and the employer's NI. However, it's only the employer's NI that is in effect the 'tax on jobs' as it's a potential disincentive to an employer to recruit new staff. The employer takes the decision on job creation.

As a result of the discussions with the Lib Dems, the LD principle to raise the income tax threshold was more of a priority for them.

Therefore in order to accommodate that tax giveaway it was agreed only to dispense with the employer's NI increase next year. Meantime the increase in employees' NI will be more than offset by the increase in the personal income tax threshold to be introduced next year.


You're not really getting how coalition government works, are you?


I get it, do you?

Lib Dems and Tory said they'd scrap the job tax prior to the election now they're not. Where was the compromise?!
See above.


If someone makes such a big fuss about something in their campaign I expect them to go with it, no compromise - like they done over Europe.
Like the Inheritance Tax give-aways they also banged on about, which have now been set to one side for this parliament? :greengrin


Basically they both said they'd do it, in fact it was so important to the Tory's that Cameron had to say "job tax" in every sentence, yet when it comes to the crunch they don't do it?

Lies fits IMO. Some "change" they're making - they're doing half of what Labour said, the half that actually affects my pay packet!
Other proposed income tax changes next year will compensate.


And they're not giving me the tax break they promised for married couples either? I wonder how the big society will turn out?
The Married Couples change has not been ruled out as far as I understand but the LDs have a free vote on it and may choose to oppose it. Certainly unlikely to appear in the first budget statement.


Spot on. This has really ****ed me off.

Every time Cameron opened his gob he was prattling on about Gordon Brown's job tax and how every business in the land agreed with him that it needed to be stopped.

One day in and he drops the pledge. A liar.

Fine compromise on certain things, but this was THE main ingredient of the Tory party campaign. Everywhere you looked, jobs tax this, jobs tax that. There's little doubt folk will have voted on it.

Are you stopping the jobs tax Cameron? Are you ****. Same old Tories.
Yes, he (and Clegg) are. See above.

[Twa Cairpets]

Going back to the original post. Will I give him a chance?

Yes, because the alternative is to pre-judge failure (or even worse, secretly hope for failure because it fits with political dogma).

I have no idea if the coalition will work - nor does anyone else, but the opportunity for something to be genuinely different offers intriguing possibiities.

If its success is judged after a few weeks or months, it will be a knee jerk reaction, nothing else. There are bound to be conflicts, but surely they will just be inter-party rather intra-party as they are at the minute: Political parties hardly offer a united, homogenous front on all major policy do they?

I am instinctively wary of the Tories, and they do go against my natural liberalism (with a small "l"). But I hope they succeed, because the alternative is to hope that they royally f*** it up, and that doesnt help anyone.

[bawheid]

Yes, he (and Clegg) are. See above.

There is no way Cameron and the Tories were dressing this up only to be aimed at business.

His bleating on and on and on about the jobs tax was designed to get people to vote for him based on the fact he would stop the NI rise. He hasn't.

[Leicester Fan]

There is no way Cameron and the Tories were dressing this up only to be aimed at business.

His bleating on and on and on about the jobs tax was designed to get people to vote for him based on the fact he would stop the NI rise. He hasn't.
If Labour had got in it would have been introduced anyway. Unless you voted Tory on the basis that they would not impose that tax I don't know what you're moaning about.

[bawheid]

Unless you voted Tory on the basis that they would not impose that tax I don't know what you're moaning about.

I'm sure people did vote Tory on that basis. Cameron was banging on enough about it. I'm annoyed that we're being told this is the "modern" Conservative party, but it seems lies have been exposed one day into office.

[bighairyfaeleith]

If Labour had got in it would have been introduced anyway. Unless you voted Tory on the basis that they would not impose that tax I don't know what you're moaning about.

I think the point is David has already lied to the voters, not even a week in the job!!!

Usual tories supporting big business at murdochs request and sod the people on the street. Rant over

[Leicester Fan]

I think the point is David has already lied to the voters, not even a week in the job!!!

Usual tories supporting big business at murdochs request and sod the people on the street. Rant over

He also didn't say he was going to implement the Liberals no tax for people earning less than £10k p/a, something had to change to pay for that. The reduction in tax should cover the increase in NI. This artificial outrage at the scrapping of a change that you didn't vote for anyway is a bit pathetic.

[Beefster]

I'm sure people did vote Tory on that basis. Cameron was banging on enough about it. I'm annoyed that we're being told this is the "modern" Conservative party, but it seems lies have been exposed one day into office.

I suspect that you know the realities of why the policy was changed and the difference between that and a lie but if calling it 'lies' makes it easier to see the Tories in power again, good luck with that.


I think the point is David has already lied to the voters, not even a week in the job!!!

Usual tories supporting big business at murdochs request and sod the people on the street. Rant over

You, my friend, just plain crack me up and have made me laugh out loud about 5 times in the last 2 days. Good work!

[bighairyfaeleith]

I suspect that you know the realities of why the policy was changed and the difference between that and a lie but if calling it 'lies' makes it easier to see the Tories in power again, good luck with that.



You, my friend, just plain crack me up and have made me laugh out loud about 5 times in the last 2 days. Good work!

Anytime:greengrin

---------- Post added at 03:44 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:43 PM ----------


He also didn't say he was going to implement the Liberals no tax for people earning less than £10k p/a, something had to change to pay for that. The reduction in tax should cover the increase in NI. This artificial outrage at the scrapping of a change that you didn't vote for anyway is a bit pathetic.

Do you honestly believe he ever planned to scrap it for employees?

[Leicester Fan]

Do you honestly believe he ever planned to scrap it for employees?
Yes, and as I've already said the reduction in tax will cover the difference anyway.

[bighairyfaeleith]

Yes, and as I've already said the reduction in tax will cover the difference anyway.

Reduction in which tax, sorry just being lazy now and not reading back

[Beefster]

Reduction in which tax, sorry just being lazy now and not reading back

Income tax threshold is rising to £10k. It's currently £6.5k.

[lapsedhibee]

Income tax threshold is rising to £10k. It's currently £6.5k.

(Personal allowance not rising to £10k straightaway though - that's a gradual, eventual, target.)

[bighairyfaeleith]

Income tax threshold is rising to £10k. It's currently £6.5k.

So why not keep that the same and not increase NI then? Are they increasing NI and then perhaps going to work towards the tax threshold increase?

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Like it or not, the above, and especially the last 3 are the permanent memories of the Tories in Scotland. Call it "short memories", "chip on the shoulder mentality" etc etc, but them's the facts.

Maybe if the Tories had left something more tangible and permanently positive by the way of policies (for the many) in Scotland, we - as a nation - would be able to look past those 3??

:dunno:

I think they did. I know My Gran, who i think has voted labour all her life, lives in comfort in a bought for council house rather than having to fork out for rent every week. It wasnt the labour party that allowed her that right.

The OP is right, people are totally irrational about the tories, especially guys is their early twenties, who must have been about 6 when Thatcher left office - total herd mentality hysteria.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I think the point is David has already lied to the voters, not even a week in the job!!!

Usual tories supporting big business at murdochs request and sod the people on the street. Rant over

Would that be the Rupert Murdoch who was all chummy with Mr Blair and whose most popular publication supported new Labour for 12 years?

[bighairyfaeleith]

I think they did. I know My Gran, who i think has voted labour all her life, lives in comfort in a bought for council house rather than having to fork out for rent every week. It wasnt the labour party that allowed her that right.

The OP is right, people are totally irrational about the tories, especially guys is their early twenties, who must have been about 6 when Thatcher left office - total herd mentality hysteria.

Two sides to that argument, lots of people now need affordable housing but there are no council houses left because the tories sold them all for a pittance.

You could argue that the tories started the property boom which has now left so many people in trouble.

[bighairyfaeleith]

Would that be the Rupert Murdoch who was all chummy with Mr Blair and whose most popular publication supported new Labour for 12 years?

yes exactly him, like I said earlier there all *****. It wasn't new labour at all, just like this isn't big britain.

[Danderhall Hibs]

If Labour had got in it would have been introduced anyway. Unless you voted Tory on the basis that they would not impose that tax I don't know what you're moaning about.

If they can lie on such a big issue what else are they lying about?


He also didn't say he was going to implement the Liberals no tax for people earning less than £10k p/a, something had to change to pay for that. The reduction in tax should cover the increase in NI. This artificial outrage at the scrapping of a change that you didn't vote for anyway is a bit pathetic.

It's not artificial outrage - it's pointing out what they are.


I suspect that you know the realities of why the policy was changed and the difference between that and a lie but if calling it 'lies' makes it easier to see the Tories in power again, good luck with that.


If it's not a lie it's deliberately misleading the public.

[--------]

In Scotland.

I'm not asking 'will you vote for him in 4 years time?' or even "will you like him in 4 years"?

I'm asking, if he proves that he is a Tory with a social conscience and a genuine desire to sort out inequality, will he get any sort of credit/acknowledgement whatsoever or will the ghost of Maggie hang over him and he'll continue to be slaughtered irrespective because (as one poster implied) "he's a Tory so must be a racist bigot"?


No such animal exists. :bitchy:

[Hibs90]

America thought they were being clever with the first black president, Well we've outdone them with the first gay couple.

Sorry, had to post this somewhere.

[Beefster]

If it's not a lie it's deliberately misleading the public.

Do you view any SNP manifesto policies from 2007 that are not going to be carried out as lies?

What about Labour manifesto policies from 1997, 2001, 2005? I presume that Labour promises not implemented will actually be worse as they had an overall majority?

[Danderhall Hibs]

Do you view any SNP manifesto policies from 2007 that are not going to be carried out as lies?

What about Labour manifesto policies from 1997, 2001, 2005? I presume that Labour promises not implemented will actually be worse as they had an overall majority?

What ones?

Did any of the examples you'll give me fall by the wayside 1/2 a day after moving into Downing Street?

[Beefster]

What ones?

Did any of the examples you'll give me fall by the wayside 1/2 a day after moving into Downing Street?

A referendum on the voting system.
A referendum on regional government for the English regions.
Not to increase income tax.
Lower youth unemployment.
End child poverty.
Increase the supply of social housing.

No, you're right, Labour didn't have to compromise with another political party to create a government in 1997, 2001 or 2005.

[Danderhall Hibs]

No, you're right, Labour didn't have to compromise with another political party to create a government in 1997, 2001 or 2005.

I wouldn't vote on a party that would compromise their number 1 issue.

[Removed]

A referendum on the voting system.
A referendum on regional government for the English regions.
Not to increase income tax.
Lower youth unemployment.
End child poverty.
Increase the supply of social housing.

No, you're right, Labour didn't have to compromise with another political party to create a government in 1997, 2001 or 2005.


I wouldn't vote on a party that would compromise their number 1 issue.

You are both right. They are ALL lying bassas :agree:

[BEEJ]

There is no way Cameron and the Tories were dressing this up only to be aimed at business.

His bleating on and on and on about the jobs tax was designed to get people to vote for him based on the fact he would stop the NI rise. He hasn't.
The Tories wanted to get rid of all the NI rises. The Lib Dems wanted to push ahead with benefiting tax payers through the raising of the income tax threshold. The country cannot afford all of those tax give-aways. We're up to our necks in debt. Something had to give if the coalition was to be formed - it was the employee NI rise next April, which now stays.

People seem to be struggling to grasp the difference between an election result which gains a clear majority for one party and the reality the UK found itself in last Friday morning.

If Labour had reached an agreement with the Lib Dems this week they too would have had to set aside aspects of their election manifesto which, of course, had been drawn up on the assumption of them being the sole governing party.

[One Day Soon]

Would that be the Rupert Murdoch who was all chummy with Mr Blair and whose most popular publication supported new Labour for 12 years?

You mean when it wasn't cozying up to the SNP in Scotland?

[One Day Soon]

The Tories wanted to get rid of all the NI rises. The Lib Dems wanted to push ahead with benefiting tax payers through the raising of the income tax threshold. The country cannot afford all of those tax give-aways. We're up to our necks in debt. Something had to give if the coalition was to be formed - it was the employee NI rise next April, which now stays.

People seem to be struggling to grasp the difference between an election result which gains a clear majority for one party and the reality the UK found itself in last Friday morning.

If Labour had reached an agreement with the Lib Dems this week they too would have had to set aside aspects of their election manifesto which, of course, had been drawn up on the assumption of them being the sole governing party.

If, if, if. There is no Labour/Lib Dem coalition. But there is a big, juicy Tory/Lib Dem one to discuss as a dripping roast from here onward.

Day one, item one of 'Dave's' government has been to abandon the pledge which was their most prominent in all three Prime Ministerial debates. It was Labour's 'job tax'. I don't recall honest Dave making a careful distinction in those debates between the part to be paid by employers and the part to be paid by employees.

One more thing, the notion that a 1% rise in NI would be a disincentive to creating new jobs is ludicrous. In weighing up the decision on whether to commit to wages costs the additional NI element is an entirely marginal part of the equation.

Maggie Cameron is making employees pay the increase. It never was a tax on jobs, instead he has turned it into a tax on working. Same old Tories.

[BEEJ]

If, if, if. There is no Labour/Lib Dem coalition. But there is a big, juicy Tory/Lib Dem one to discuss as a dripping roast from here onward.
No there isn't a Labour/ Lib Dem coalition; but presumably you would have been happier if one had materialised in the last week as it would have kept the Tories out.

Yet to achieve such an end large chunks of the Labour manifesto would have had to have been sacrificed to bring the Lib Dems on board.

[bighairyfaeleith]

No there isn't a Labour/ Lib Dem coalition; but presumably you would have been happier if one had materialised in the last week as it would have kept the Tories out.

Yet to achieve such an end large chunks of the Labour manifesto would have had to have been sacrificed to bring the Lib Dems on board.

Yes but only because the tories had already dropped there pants, thats why labour couldn't seriously look at doing a deal because they couldn't give up on so many policies. Thankfully Cameron has no such problem betraying his followers

[PiemanP]

1% NI increase.....that works out about a £4 a month for me? even on a high wage this wont amount to that much.

Surely the benefit of raising the tax threshhold by 3.5 thousand p.a far outweigs this 'minimal' increase in NI?

I earn under 20K a year, so this will make a massive difference in my net pay each month, surely a positive seeing as i am in the low to moderate income band that they are targeting.

Are the income tax bands being completly revised, or will it still be 20% tax from 10K to 38K(ish) then 40% on anything over that till 150k?

[bighairyfaeleith]

1% NI increase.....that works out about a £4 a month for me? even on a high wage this wont amount to that much.

Surely the benefit of raising the tax threshhold by 3.5 thousand p.a far outweigs this 'minimal' increase in NI?

I earn under 20K a year, so this will make a massive difference in my net pay each month, surely a positive seeing as i am in the low to moderate income band that they are targeting.

Are the income tax bands being completly revised, or will it still be 20% tax from 10K to 38K(ish) then 40% on anything over that till 150k?

Yes you are right, but what I am annoyed is that the tories promised to drop the NI tax, then apparently had to go back on it, but rather than go back on it against companies they go back on it against employees. Now I'm not an employee, so I should be the happiest here but the simple fact is that this is the tories as always favouring business before people.

Not sure of the sums either but not sure how a 1% tax increase pays for the increase in tax bands? Thats if it actually happens as it's just a goal at present.

---------- Post added at 07:48 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:48 AM ----------


1% NI increase.....that works out about a £4 a month for me? even on a high wage this wont amount to that much.

Surely the benefit of raising the tax threshhold by 3.5 thousand p.a far outweigs this 'minimal' increase in NI?

I earn under 20K a year, so this will make a massive difference in my net pay each month, surely a positive seeing as i am in the low to moderate income band that they are targeting.

Are the income tax bands being completly revised, or will it still be 20% tax from 10K to 38K(ish) then 40% on anything over that till 150k?

Not sure about this bit mate, would be interested to know though

[Beefster]

Are the income tax bands being completly revised, or will it still be 20% tax from 10K to 38K(ish) then 40% on anything over that till 150k?

I'm not 100% sure but I'd imagine that the 40% and 50% bands would stay as they are. The objective is to get the lower-paid out of the tax system so they'd have a case trying to sell a change that saw someone on £50k save on the personal allowance and in the raising of the 20% band.

[hibsbollah]

America thought they were being clever with the first black president, Well we've outdone them with the first gay couple.

Sorry, had to post this somewhere.

Someone was watching Have I Got News For You last night I see:cool2:

In marketing terms, the Conservatives in Scotland are still a toxic brand. Personally I can't see that changing, unless they appoint some kind of Schumpeterian genius to repackage them, give them the right economic conditions and about 20 years.

[lapsedhibee]

1% NI increase.....that works out about a £4 a month for me? even on a high wage this wont amount to that much.

Surely the benefit of raising the tax threshhold by 3.5 thousand p.a far outweigs this 'minimal' increase in NI?

Raising the personal allowance to £10k is not something that's going to happen overnight. It's an eventual target - the plan is to raise it year by year until it reaches £10k.

Inflation would make this promise cheaper to keep.

[bighairyfaeleith]

Just been reading that the Lib/cons want to raise the bar for a vote of no confidence to 55%.

So to out this government would effectively be impossible unless the tories voted for it themselves. Apparently this is in return for fixed term parliaments. Now this seriously concerns me because if even the majority say no to them they can still stick two fingers up and do it anyway.

It's basically saying, we don't have a majority, so we'll change what a majority actually means and then we have one. I'm stunned by this!!

[Beefster]

Just been reading that the Lib/cons want to raise the bar for a vote of no confidence to 55%.

So to out this government would effectively be impossible unless the tories voted for it themselves. Apparently this is in return for fixed term parliaments. Now this seriously concerns me because if even the majority say no to them they can still stick two fingers up and do it anyway.

It's basically saying, we don't have a majority, so we'll change what a majority actually means and then we have one. I'm stunned by this!!

It's designed to stop the Lib Dems pulling out and bringing down the government.

The Tories and Lib Dems have got this one wrong though. Considering that there's already Tory MPs speaking out about it, I'd be disappointed if they went ahead with it and, even if they did, surprised if they got it through Parliament.

Edit: While I still don't agree with the 55% rule, this is interesting.....(from BBC)

Downing Street says Labour put through fixed-term laws in Scotland requiring 66% of MSPs to dissolve Parliament.

[bighairyfaeleith]

It's designed to stop the Lib Dems pulling out and bringing down the government.

The Tories and Lib Dems have got this one wrong though. Considering that there's already Tory MPs speaking out about it, I'd be disappointed if they went ahead with it and, even if they did, surprised if they got it through Parliament.

:grr: I'm not going to f'ing agree with you :wink:

[JimBHibees]

You mean when it wasn't cozying up to the SNP in Scotland?

The Sun supporting SNP what parallel universe do you live in. They were supporting Labour until this election.

[Hainan Hibs]

The Sun supporting SNP what parallel universe do you live in. They were supporting Labour until this election.

I'm still waiting to lose the 5 grand the Sun told us the SNP would cost us if they won the 2007 election.

[One Day Soon]

The Sun supporting SNP what parallel universe do you live in. They were supporting Labour until this election.

This parallel universe: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2010/may/11/gordon-brown-scottish-sun (http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2010/may/11/gordon-brown-scottish-sun)

In particular this comment: "While it would be tempting to conclude the Sun's ability to support the Conservatives, Labour, SNP and now no party (http://www.journal-online.co.uk/article/5912-scottish-sun-refuses-to-endorse-tories) across editions and the decades...."

So do you now accept that The Sun has cozied up to the SNP in the past? Or are you so blinkered that you just refuse to admit it?

[Danderhall Hibs]

This parallel universe: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2010/may/11/gordon-brown-scottish-sun (http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2010/may/11/gordon-brown-scottish-sun)

In particular this comment: "While it would be tempting to conclude the Sun's ability to support the Conservatives, Labour, SNP and now no party (http://www.journal-online.co.uk/article/5912-scottish-sun-refuses-to-endorse-tories) across editions and the decades...."

So do you now accept that The Sun has cozied up to the SNP in the past? Or are you so blinkered that you just refuse to admit it?

Before they switched to Labour in 1997, did they not support the SNP in Scotland and the Tories in England?

[degenerated]

I'm still waiting to lose the 5 grand the Sun told us the SNP would cost us if they won the 2007 election.

i'm still waiting on Jim Davidson and Paul Daniels leaving these shores like they said in the sun that they would if the Labour Party ever got in power. so i wouldnt old yer breath :greengrin

[Leicester Fan]

i'm still waiting on Jim Davidson and Paul Daniels leaving these shores like they said in the sun that they would if the Labour Party ever got in power. so i wouldnt old yer breath :greengrin
Jim Davidson lives in Dubai now.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Davidson_%28comedian%29 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Davidson_%28comedian%29)

[degenerated]

Jim Davidson lives in Dubai now.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Davidson_%28comedian%29 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Davidson_%28comedian%29)

Good stuff. Never realised that odious cretin had kept his word. Still it took him 7 years though so I'm glad I never held my breath.
Tony Bliar doesn't have many redeeming characteristics but if he was in any way responsible for that tosspot leaving then he's gone up ever so slightly in my opinion :greengrin

Is Paul daniels still hanging about?

[hibsbollah]

Jim Davidson lives in Dubai now.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Davidson_%28comedian%29 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Davidson_%28comedian%29)

While staying in a hotel somewhere in the Midlands in the early 1990s, Mr Davidson grabbed the bottom of a waitress and made some sort of 'fancy a bit of that' type comment. This waitress became Mrs Hibsbollah many years later. I fully intend to remind Mr Davidson of this if I ever meet him:cool2:

[One Day Soon]

While staying in a hotel somewhere in the Midlands in the early 1990s, Mr Davidson grabbed the bottom of a waitress and made some sort of 'fancy a bit of that' type comment. This waitress became Mrs Hibsbollah many years later. I fully intend to remind Mr Davidson of this if I ever meet him:cool2:

I think we all find it pretty shocking that there's a Mrs Hisbollah. :devil:

[khib70]

I think we all find it pretty shocking that there's a Mrs Hisbollah. :devil:
:agree:True - at least regarding Mrs Hibsbollah

Mrs Hisbollah - is that some kind of Islamic beauty pageant??:greengrin

[bighairyfaeleith]

:agree:True - at least regarding Mrs Hibsbollah

Mrs Hisbollah - is that some kind of Islamic beauty pageant??:greengrin

you better start checking underneath your car my friend:wink: