http://www.fridgemagnet.org.uk/toys/dave-met.php
lol
Eh? What are you on, man?Quote:
Originally Posted by One Day Soon
The SNP set up the no confidence vote. Labour lost a no confidence vote then lost an election. The SNP didn't vote down or vote in anyone.
Labour lost to the Tories because they, like now, mismanaged the economy and almost ruined the country.
Have you decided who you'll blame if you lose this election? ITV for giving Clegg airtime? David Cameron? The electorate? The unions for the bad press those strikes are causing? Or an Icelandic volcano?
Attaboy, a hotch potch of 'look what we done' amounting to next to nothing that will count for anything with voters at the next election. You're a mainstream party now behaving just like the others do. That means your 'pumping' from the electorate will be along shortly. There is a single reason for the SNP to exist and that is independence - it will be quite some feat for the first SNP administration in history to reach the end of a four year term and, er, not even have taken a vote in the parliament on a referendum.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hainan Hibs
Say what you like, the SNP MPs voted down the Labour government in 1979 and Thatcher then won the election. You'll never live it down.
Oh and the only policy in the list above that's worth a dime is the extra police. The rest is window dressing. You would have been better listing the support for SMEs in business rate reduction.
Not sneering at the local income tax, sneering at the failure to even bring a proposal on it to parliament. Having said that I don't think it is a particularly fair tax either. Council Tax is busted but local income tax isn't the answer.Quote:
Originally Posted by GlesgaeHibby
If every government breaks manifesto promises and its about balancing the good they've done with broken promises, what would you say are the best bits of Labour in power?
More police is good, but free prescriptions is indiscriminate susbidy to those who don't need it at the expense of those who do, the same goes for 'free higher education'. Council tax freeze is actually anti-democratic but I can see the populism. However that will be screwed in April of next year right before the elections because the Council budget cuts will make it unsustainable. Schools refurbished/new schools built is just hilarious - the ending of PPP has brought that programme to a near halt and the Scottish Futures Trust is a quango with a name but still in search of a function. You can counter argue on that one all you like but parent councils and school boards all over the country can see week in and week out the work that isn't being done on buildings that need it. Fighting to oppose Trident isn't actually an act of government (exactly how ARE they fighting to oppose Trident?) but let's not be detained by that and investment in renewables you will find is overwhelmingly carried out by the UK government and the private sector.
Still, the possibility of renewing the nuclear power capacity has been totally ******d so that's good. One of the single most reliable medium term sources of stable baseload supply ruled out on a posturing political whim. And we still get a brand new nuclear power station right on the border at Sellafield which presumably means we get whatever risks there are supposed to be associated with nuclear but none of the jobs. Fantastic.
You're easily pleased.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hainan Hibs
Good old council tax freeze, eh?Quote:
Originally Posted by GlesgaeHibby
Local authorities having to cut nursery places and day care for older people. Having to increase charges for people with learning disabilities for the services they receive that try and give them a half-decent quality of life. All in order to balance their budgets.
In the face of substantial reductions in the public sector spend, the council tax freeze adds insult to injury.
If the SNP try and claim that as some sort of accomplishment it's a very cheap shot at the expense of the most vulnerable in our society who are getting less and less, as a consequence.
The graduate endowment scrapping is worth a dime for me. 2 grand in fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by One Day Soon
At least the SNP are trying something new. All Labour wanted to do in Holyrood was behave like they were Strathclyde Council.Quote:
Originally Posted by One Day Soon
A. Numpty: Aw Jack, they voter choobs is askin us tae reform health care.
Wee Jack: Jist tell thum no tae be sae buckin silly, an jist dae whit thir buckin telt. Is ma tea ready yet?
etc, etc, etc
Quote:
Originally Posted by Filled Rolls
Is that it Filled? Is that really your best shot? Because if it is then with respect its really 5h1t.
Aside from creating the Scottish Parliament itself:
* Scottish Drug Enforcement Agency
* Smoking Ban
* Land Reform Act
* Adults with Incapacity Act
* modern apprenticeships scheme
* Abolition of Feudal Tenure Act
* free personal care for the elderly
* 100 new or rebuilt schools
* record police numbers
* free central heating for the elderly
* free pensioner travel across Scotland
* the McCrone pay settlement for teachers
* trying to bring the European championships to Scotland
* bringing the Commonwealth games to Glasgow
* Abolition of Poindings and Warrant Sales
.....that's without even having to try too hard.
Plenty to attack Labour's record over in government at Holyrood and Westminster, but don't try this crap that Labour lacked ambition. In fact the scope of Labour's ambition in terms of both policy and legislation bears pretty favourable comparison with the SNP record - particularly in terms of the durable nature of the change effected.
Guess who works for The Party? Or are you Iain Gray? Did you have to tear out one or two pages so you could rip the SNP manifesto apart?Quote:
Originally Posted by One Day Soon
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hainan Hibs
Good for you buddy. That's 2 grand less available to educate someone else now.
Whereas if you were paying that back as a loan then the £2,000 loan you had could have been used to help educate someone else and the cost to you of repaying it after you get a job would be so minimal you'd barely notice. And if the the loans and grants were distributed on an income related basis then people who REALLY need grants instead of loans would get them while still allowing more people to be well educated. Maybe you would be one of the people who would qualify for a grant.
But what the hell, everyone gets their beer money now so that's a great investment.
You don't need to work for any party to be able to contrast and compare the legislation enacted by the different regimes.Quote:
Originally Posted by steakbake
Always thought the Land Reform Act was massively unheralded and the legislation around mental health and capacity offered a genuine step forward in the way we treat some of the most vulnerable and marginalised in our society.
There's a sincere thread of social justice running through those Acts which isn't there to any great degree with the SNP or the Tories.
I don't work for the Labour Party and I acknowledged that there is plenty to criticise on its record in both governments. What's your problem - can't handle the truth?:notworthy:Quote:
Originally Posted by steakbake
So you're just an average Joe who happens to be able to provide a list of the Labour Party's achievements, such as they are... And your not a member of the party nor have an active interest in the party at all?Quote:
Originally Posted by One Day Soon
I find that very hard to believe.
I have no problem at all because as I have stated elsewhere, I'm not a member of any particular party, nor a follower of any particular party. I'm probably going to vote LibDems in my own contribution to get rid of Gordon Brown and the Labour Party.
What I don't like, though, is the way politicians and people with interests in politics - like you - rewriting history. My issue with you and people like you is that somehow Thatcher was the SNP's "fault". It is as much the Liberal's fault as the SNP, given the Liberals abandoned the government the year before.
What you seem totally incapable of understanding, which is possibly understandable if you are as dyed in the wool Labour and as blind as you seem, is that Labour lost the election against Thatcher because like now, their time was up, they'd run out of idea and they do not have a divine right to govern.
Tackling the effects of the recession obviously informs everything, for all the parties.Quote:
Originally Posted by steakbake
I would nevertheless disagree that the present Government has run out of policy ideas. Whether you agree with them or not is another thing.
Electoral and constitutional reform
A national care service to address one of the biggest issues facing our society - how we care for a massively-increasing older population
Creating a people's bank to end the financial exclusion that the most disadvantaged in our society face.
Expanding council housebuilding, again helping those who probably need it the most
Targeting 18-24 year olds for employment, education or training through the Young Person's Guarantee in order to avoid what we went through with Thatcher where a whole generation were written off in many parts of the country, with their whole adult lives in front of them.
That's not running out of ideas. That's offering a response to the issues that are impacting most on our society.
And it's offering a response that includes those who need our support most rather than consigning them to their fate, disadvantaged and disempowered in difficult times.
Seems more like "Give us more time to sort out the stuff we promised you years ago" rather than "a response to the issues".Quote:
Originally Posted by Mibbes Aye
:faf: Students already run up a massive amount of debt purely from having to take out a student loan. Scrapping the graduate endownment was a great move. A lot of people who graduated before it was scrapped had refused to pay it anyway if you look at the figures, but Labour of course implemented it so they could tell us higher education was free in Scotland.Quote:
Originally Posted by One Day Soon
A better approach would have been reducing uni fees to say £500 per year to ensure they collected that money, but then they wouldn't be able to trot out their "free education" line.
£2000 is a lot less than is currently dished out to the workshy and girls that open their legs to pop out kids and get a free house. Graduates will repay their debt to society by earning more over their working lives (on average) and hence being taxed more than non graduates.
I think you're right in that progress hasn't been at the pace people would want or expect a lot of the time. The policy areas I highlighted illustrate that the response or the perceived solution is one that is far more inclusive, far more rooted in trying to effect social justice, than those of the other main parties, either side of the border.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beefster
I think expectations are far too high though (much like supporting Hibs :greengrin). To take care for the elderly, it's impossible to effect a solution even on a timescale of three Parliaments (unless someone's advocating a "Logan's Run"-style remedy).
The demographic rise and the accompanying increase in levels of need and the raft of structural and societal changes needed to deal with that, while dealing with already increasing demands in the face of static or diminishing resources, all accompanied by a massive increase in people's expectations?........
Managing it is going to be an ongoing affair, over decades. There's no magic bullet. But there are policy decisions to be made that can and will shape the outcome.
There's a point about targets and timescales. IIRC the government has consistently fallen short on their targets for reduction in child poverty. They've successfully moved hundreds of thousands out of child poverty but not to the levels they had targeted.
But surely it's far better that a major party were prepared to say child poverty is a social wrong, a social evil, and set public targets for reducing it, and reduce it considerably, even if ultimately they fall short of the target in the attempt?
Depends how you define poverty. Nobody in this country needs to starve or be homeless. Compared to half the countries in the world our levels of poverty are unrecognisable as such.Quote:
Originally Posted by [LEFT
If you are talking about the gap between rich and poor, that gap has grown bigger under this govt, which proves it's no good having your heart in the right place if your brains are in your **** ****.