With a shambles of an election result resting on his shoulders and former Blair loyalists now after his blood, how long before Blair has to go?

He seems to be implying that he will stay to see further reforms through but how can he when the PLP wants him out, the majority of the electorate want him out and many of his own party membership would like to see the back of him?

It has all the makings of a take two, of the undignified image of a tearful Maggie departing from Downing Street.

A Judge in A recent trial stated that the 'widespread' and 'systematic' vote fraud carried out by Labour Councillors was worse than a 'banana republic'.

http://www.britainabananarepublic.com/

Now

The same Judge says, that their may be as 120,000 + Dodgy votes in the General Election by Labour Voters.



.............When are we going to have a Coup.. forget about Blair moving over for the Scottish Lock ness monster

Tony Blair needs to stay on as both leader of the Labour Party and Prime Minister for a decent period of time. There are always members of the Parliamentary Labour Party who have never accepted the reforms undertaken by Blair, but they are in a minority.

Tony Blair has now seen off no less than 4 leaders of the Conservative Party (Major, Hague, Duncan-Smith and now Howard) - which is a pretty impressive record, as well as winning three consecutive general elections - another record for Labour!

He has indicated that he will retire from the premiership during the life-time of this parliament. Although I for one will be sad to see him go, Tony Blair recognised that, unlike Maggie Thatcher's claim when she was PM, you cannot continue going on and on.

During this period of reflection, as the results of the general election become clearer, there will be competing claims for Tony Blair to go now, or go later. I for one will trust his judgement to determine when he thinks it is in the best interests of the Party, and the country at large, to step down.

A shambles for whom exactly? The lib dems who are condemned to 3rd place for the forseeable future? The tories who won fewer seats than Labour did in 1983 in what was deemed to be a meltdown? Surely not a shambles for Labour who won an historic 3rd term?

Perhaps you're thinking of David Trimble's defeat?

As to the plp wanting him out, they haven't met yet. Or the electorate wanting him out, he increased his majority in Sedgefield, the only electorate who are in the position of being able to vote him out. Party membership wanting him out? Is this another of those Daily Mail headlines like:

Most Labour MPs want Tony to go.

In a recent poll of 25 Labour MPs 6 indicated that they think he should go for the good of the party.

Originally posted by max
A shambles for whom exactly? The lib dems who are condemned to 3rd place for the forseeable future? The tories who won fewer seats than Labour did in 1983 in what was deemed to be a meltdown? Surely not a shambles for Labour who won an historic 3rd term?

Perhaps you're thinking of David Trimble's defeat?

As to the plp wanting him out, they haven't met yet. Or the electorate wanting him out, he increased his majority in Sedgefield, the only electorate who are in the position of being able to vote him out. Party membership wanting him out? Is this another of those Daily Mail headlines like:

Most Labour MPs want Tony to go.

In a recent poll of 25 Labour MPs 6 indicated that they think he should go for the good of the party.

First of all ,this government has been elected on the smallest percentage at 35.2% of the vote in the last 50 odd years. Hardly a resounding ensorsement I'd say.

Blair has been plagued by backbench revolts throughout the lifetime of the last Parliament

Here are just some;

l40 Labour MP's voted against in the membership of select committee debate

22 revolted during Anti Terrorism Bill

26 revolted NHS Reform Bill - abolition of CHC's

46 rebelled Education Bill re faith schools

43 labour MP's rebelled against Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Bill

24 rebelled against Enterprise Bill

139 rebelled against Invasion of Iraq

33 rebelled against Fire Services Bill

33 voted against Blair in Criminal Justices Bill

65 rebelled in Foundation Hospital legislation

Source - Political Studies Association 2004


With a majority of less than 70 I'd say that on the above record this government is in for a very rough ride.

ps Tony Blair's share of the total vote in Sedgefield was actually down 6%

Former "Blair babe" Helen Clark has confirmed she is quitting Labour and applying to join the Conservatives in protest at Tony Blair's style of government.

Mrs Clark, who lost her Peterborough seat to Tory candidate Stewart Jackson on Thursday, said she believed that Conservatives, under a new leader, would be a more inclusive and effective party.

I must admit I am curious about Des Browne been reshuffled from Immigration to Treasury Chief Secretary. I wondered if this could be to pave the way for Brown to replace Blair.

Blair *promised* Paxman he was making this his final term but he would serve the full term. I think we safely conclude that means we'll be seeing PM Brown sooner rather than later. :hihi:

Originally posted by Mo


ps Tony Blair's share of the total vote in Sedgefield was actually down 6%

I think the bulk of that percentage was down to Reg Keys but who knows what would have happened if there were less candidates.

Originally posted by max
Party membership wanting him out? Is this another of those Daily Mail headlines like:

Most Labour MPs want Tony to go.

In a recent poll of 25 Labour MPs 6 indicated that they think he should go for the good of the party.

If Labour MP’s have so much faith in their dear Leader, then why did I not see his face on one single piece of Labour publicity in my area?

He owes Brown a big time, he should stay long enough to absorb the anti-G8 protests and to loose the EU referendum, then bugger off with his wife to rip off some charities with speaking tours.

Preferably in Australia but America is far enough away for me. I’ll happily pay his air fare, one way of course.

Labour MPs call on Blair to quit
Tony Blair has been urged to quit as prime minister early into his third term, days after Labour's election win.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/vote_2005/frontpage/4526435.stm

Its easy to knock Tony Blair but he has done a fair job for Labour and our country while he has been in office. The minimum wage for instance, still not enough, but better than anything the Torys would have given us. Our stong economic position and system of justice is proof enough. Thousands of assylum seekers cant be wrong.

I have to say that I am shocked at dico cats comments on Blair,I always had you down as a labourite??
As to Blair going if I was a labour voter I would want him to stay on,after all he has won 3 elections so maybe you labour voters ought to show some gratitude to him.
I as you know dont want his goverment but you have to give him the credit for fooling the voters yet again.
And no matter who is the labour leader you still get the same policies by and large.

Well personally I'd like to see Robin Cook as PM next.

Why?

1) He's ginger, and he should start a special club in parliament with Charles Kennedy and other ginger MPs
2)Noone can understand what he's saying so we couldn't get into any terrible international conflicts.
3)He did a really funny article about cars recently in the Guardian G2 with Boris Johnson
4)He resembles a hamster.

Originally posted by t020
Former "Blair babe" Helen Clark has confirmed she is quitting Labour and applying to join the Conservatives in protest at Tony Blair's style of government.

Mrs Clark, who lost her Peterborough seat to Tory candidate Stewart Jackson on Thursday, said she believed that Conservatives, under a new leader, would be a more inclusive and effective party.

One wonders if Helen Clark, who has caused no end of consternation with her former constituency party, would have remained a Labour MP had she been elected last Thursday? Odd that she waited until she was defeated before quitting Labour.

Originally posted by Nimrod
Its easy to knock Tony Blair but he has done a fair job for Labour and our country while he has been in office. The minimum wage for instance, still not enough, but better than anything the Torys would have given us. Our stong economic position and system of justice is proof enough. Thousands of assylum seekers cant be wrong.


The "strong economic position" is a result of the Tory legacy. Remember the Tories inherited the economy as the 17th largest in the world after a disasterous socialist 74 - 79 Labour term in office, and over 18 years they transformed it into the 4th largest in the world. New Labour inherited the economy in a good state and take all the credit. I wonder if they'll also take all the blame when the economy starts falling to pieces (as many economists are predicting within the next year or so)? The results of borrow now, pay later economic policy could be disasterous. No doubt, like with everything, Labour will blame it on the 18 years of Conservative rule (despite them now being in office for 8 years and the Tory government being so "bad" that it got elected 4 times and transformed the economy as mentioned).

It's easy to see where this is going:

Despite winning an unprecedented historic third term for Labour and trouncing the other parties comprehensively, there are those who would like to get rid of Blair, then bring in a leader who would take the party back so far to the left that many "average" voters would be scared off.

This would then let the Tories in through the back door at the next election and voila! we're back to 1979 with a couple of decades of Conservative rule.

Some people have very short memories.

Originally posted by mojoworking
It's easy to see where this is going:

Despite winning an unprecedented historic third term for Labour and trouncing the other parties comprehensively, there are those who would like to get rid of Blair, then bring in a leader who would take the party back so far to the left that many "average" voters would be scared off.

This would then let the Tories in through the back door at the next election and voila! we're back to 1979 with a couple of decades of Conservative rule.

Some people have very short memories.

Yes, it will be great when Blair steps aside. The Tories are sure to regain power while Labour make themselves unelectable with policies such as 90% top tax rates. :hihi:

Hmmm The Labour Party won the election - with Tony Blair as their leader. If so many people dislike him, I doubt they would have won. And as for Helen Clark going from Labour to Conservative??? Had she gone to the Lib Dem's I could have understood but how can someone go from one end of the political spectrum to the other? I personally would not trust a word she says in future.

I think it is a great shame that the Lib Dem's did not gain more votes, but I think on this occasion their 'Leader' had other things on his mind (the birth of his child) and did not lead as effectively as he could have.

The fundamental decline of 'society' in this country can be laid at Thatchers door - she famously said 'there is no such thing as sociey' however, the problems have perpetuated under the Labour Government. Blair ought to stay in place for around another 12 months, give some stability and then let a new leader get his/her feet under the table well before another election.

Michael Howard has at least given his party good time to select a new leader and give them time to influence the party before another election.

An excerpt from the Paxman interview on the BBC before the election (transcripted at http://politics.guardian.co.uk/labour/story/0,9061,1465141,00.html )

Paxman: Prime Minister, if you are returned to Downing Street on May 6, can you at least give us a guarantee that within, say, 12 months of your handing in your cards as prime minister, there would be a general election?

Blair: Well, I've said I'll service a full term, and you know ... Again, I mean, I've been over this.

Paxman: But people are entitled to know what they're voting for, aren't they?

Blair: Yeah, absolutely. That's why I've said ...

Paxman: Or what they're going to get.

Blair: I'll serve the full term. Yes, exactly. And they'll get New Labour.


So, if Blair does stand down when he loses the European Constitution referendum next year, or any other time before serving a full term, we will know 100% for sure that Michael Howard was correct in his description of Mr Blair as a "liar".

Originally posted by t020
Yes, it will be great when Blair steps aside. The Tories are sure to regain power while Labour make themselves unelectable with policies such as 90% top tax rates. :hihi:

Well, one thing Labour are really good at is shooting themselves in the foot. Personally, I'd like nothing more than to see someone like Tony Benn as leader, but you've got to be realistic - that would make the Labour party virtually unelectable.

Better a middle of the road Labour government with mass appeal than any kind of Tory alternative.

Remember, Blair is still young and (for a politician) extremely charismatic. That's a major vote winner in itself. The Tories have got no one in sight who could challenge him on that score.

Would you Labour voters really rather see a boring career politician like Gordon Brown at the helm?

If Blair is kicked out before he wants to leave, it will be the biggest mistake the Labour party has made in decades.

Originally posted by mojoworking

If Blair is kicked out before he wants to leave, it will be the biggest mistake the Labour party has make in decades.

I agree, and the fact that he is DEFINITELY going at some point before the next election is why I'm so convinced the Tories will win it.

Incidentally, here is an article of interest: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2005/05/09/dl0902.xml

The Tory Party are only just beginning to get their act together after nearly 15 years of angst, recrimination and seperation brought about by their mutiny against Thatcher.

She won them 3 elections in a row, and was (no matter what else you think about her), a strong leader both here and abroad. She was removed because of her increasingly unpopular policies; she seemed to have become an electoral liability for the party...

Her then Chancellor of the Exchequer eventually replaced her. Over time, the Tory torch grew dim.

Would you say "history repeats itself"? Let's wait and see...

Originally posted by Deavon
The Tory Party are only just beginning to get their act together after nearly 15 years of angst, recrimination and seperation brought about by their mutiny against Thatcher.

She won them 3 elections in a row, and was (no matter what else you think about her), a strong leader both here and abroad. She was removed because of her increasingly unpopular policies; she seemed to have become an electoral liability for the party...

Her then Chancellor of the Exchequer eventually replaced her. Over time, the Tory torch grew dim.

Would you say "history repeats itself"? Let's wait and see...

...and the Tories have been unable to find a leader anywhere near as popular with the (Conservative) voters since they kicked her out. Now they are unelectable.

There's a very clear lesson there for Labour, although I doubt they'll learn from it.

It seems the hard core lefties can't wait to ditch Blair and take Labour back to the bad old days of the 70s.

Originally posted by redrobbo
One wonders if Helen Clark, who has caused no end of consternation with her former constituency party, would have remained a Labour MP had she been elected last Thursday? Odd that she waited until she was defeated before quitting Labour.

Seems like there is no good time to go...........

Brian Sedgemore went before the election and he was vilified.

Helen Clark went after the election and she was villified.

Brian Sedgemore forecast tens of rebels would surface after the election and he is being proved correct. The only difference being instead of tearing their party cards up they are calling for Blair to go.

Originally posted by Lickszz
I must admit I am curious about Des Browne been reshuffled from Immigration to Treasury Chief Secretary. I wondered if this could be to pave the way for Brown to replace Blair.

Since when has the rules of the Labour Party allowed for the Leader to choose his successor?

If I was a member of the Labour Party I would not want Blair telling me who was going to be my party's leader. What happened to one member one vote? Or was that ditched along with all the other Socialist ideals?

Originally posted by Monroe
Hmmm The Labour Party won the election - with Tony Blair as their leader. If so many people dislike him, I doubt they would have won.

There has been a lot said on TV and in the press about people voting Labour because:

a) They'll get Brown or an alternative
b) They're the least detestable of all the major parties.

more to the point, how quickly can we get rid of him?

Originally posted by t020
Former "Blair babe" Helen Clark has confirmed she is quitting Labour and applying to join the Conservatives in protest at Tony Blair's style of government.

Hopefully a few more of her ilk (the ilk of the careerist intellectual lightweight) will do likewise.

I know nothing of her, which leads me to ask whether an innefectual person like this actually belives in any political ethos at all, or just sees politics as a way to get her name in the newspaper? Pathetic.

Originally posted by t020
The "strong economic position" is a result of the Tory legacy.

Did you miss a meeting when the 80s took place? The words "boom" and "bust" spring to mind.

Originally posted by Greenback
Did you miss a meeting when the 80s took place? The words "boom" and "bust" spring to mind.

Not forgetting of course the 70's when bodies weren't buried and litter was piled high in the streets. :mad:

Originally posted by Mo
Not forgetting of course the 70's when bodies weren't buried and litter was piled high in the streets. :mad:

We're not all that old, Mo. ;)

But the original claim that Labour's economic success is entirely down to the policies of the Conservatives is a little lacking.

Originally posted by t020
The "strong economic position" is a result of the Tory legacy.
And almost all down to Kenneth Clarke, who I think we can be certain is the one person the Tories won't be choosing as their next leader.

It's interesting that, when he was Health Minister under Thatcher, Clarke appeared to be something of a hard-line right winger. After eight years of New Labour, he seems positively liberal.

Originally posted by DanSumption
It's interesting that, when he was Health Minister under Thatcher, Clarke appeared to be something of a hard-line right winger. After eight years of New Labour, he seems positively liberal.

Reminds me of something Roy Hattersley said about a couple of years ago.

Along the lines of when he was deputy leader of the Labour Party in the days of Neil Kinnock, he was regarded as a strong right-winger of the Party; more recently he's seen as a dangerously left-wing dinosaur!

His politics haven't changed over the years - the Labour Party has changed out of all recognition around him!

StarSparkle

From a purely domestic outlook, and if you can ignore for a moment the utter devastation of Iraq and the regional instabilities that have fanned out from it, then it is hard to begrudge Tony Blair and the Labour Party their 'historic' third victory.

I think the last thing we need in parliament are strong leaders. I would favour a competent administration - something that is sorely lacking from all previous incumbent regimes.

If Labour can get it right, Blair's exit could play very well, if he is seemingly forced from office in a putsch of some kind it could prove fatal.

But this highlights what is most disappointing about the current atmosphere of British Politics:

The gradual separation between the electors and the elected.

As pure party politics dominates, and the targetting of marginal constituencies and even individual swing voters becomes ever more ruthless and scientific, the more we become like lab rats being tested for our reponses, and the less we exercise our rights of self-determination and democratic choice.

Until we can all develop our critical skills to actively deconstruct everything the larger political parties feed us through the media, we are at the mercy of the sophisticated 'social profiling and data cross referencing' method of electioneering.

Game theory has made it big in politics, and it's not a zero sum affair.

It does seem like the parliamentary party members expend more energy in the pursuit of power for their group than they do actively representing the beliefs and interests of their constituents. The pursuit of this power also seems to be at any cost - including truth and honesty.

Rather than a proscriptive reform of the parliamentary system, I think it needs to be done by slow metamorphosis of culture - away from the westminster club elite, and into a more businesslike, directly representative, non-hierarchical plebiscite.

I'll get my coat.

Originally posted by t020
The "strong economic position" is a result of the Tory legacy. Remember the Tories inherited the economy as the 17th largest in the world after a disasterous socialist 74 - 79 Labour term in office, and over 18 years they transformed it into the 4th largest in the world. New Labour inherited the economy in a good state and take all the credit. I wonder if they'll also take all the blame when the economy starts falling to pieces (as many economists are predicting within the next year or so)? The results of borrow now, pay later economic policy could be disasterous. No doubt, like with everything, Labour will blame it on the 18 years of Conservative rule (despite them now being in office for 8 years and the Tory government being so "bad" that it got elected 4 times and transformed the economy as mentioned).

Absolute and utter crap!! I have never read such a complete and utter pile of pigs garbage.

Originally posted by t020
Yes, it will be great when Blair steps aside. The Tories are sure to regain power while Labour make themselves unelectable with policies such as 90% top tax rates. :hihi:

There's only one unelectable party at the moment son!!! Them with the blue noses and spotty kites!!!

:D :D :hihi: :thumbsup:

I wasn't aware he was hanging by his fingernails from Beachy Head. Have Air Sea Rescue been informed?

Originally posted by Agent Smith
Absolute and utter crap!! I have never read such a complete and utter pile of pigs garbage.

In what respect? Any specific areas or can you not back up your statement?

Originally posted by Greenback
We're not all that old, Mo. ;)

But the original claim that Labour's economic success is entirely down to the policies of the Conservatives is a little lacking.

Greenback,

It is a provan fact that gordon brown has stuck to the Tory spending plans ....

Oh and he also sold all the UK's gold to bolster the economy!

half was sold in 1999,
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/htmlContent.jhtml?html=/archive/1999/05/08/ngol08.html

The other half, im not sure when.

Originally posted by Agent Smith
There's only one unelectable party at the moment son!!! Them with the blue noses and spotty kites!!!

:D :D :hihi: :thumbsup:

Hmm, it took the tory's 18 years to bring the Uk out of the hole the labour government had dug us into, now the labour government that inherited the strongest economy in Europe has started digging us right back down!

Forward not Back .... hmmm who said that?

Well, if we're going to go back to the 70's.........

Anybody remember that it was almost taken as read that whoever won the '79 election would be in power for 20 years because of North Sea Oil.

Of course, at the time most people thought that it would be invested in capital infrastructure - hospitals, schools, roads - not tax cuts or "dole" for the massive unemployment the Tories soon generated.

When have the Tories ever invested substantial capital into GB plc?

Most of our motorways date from the 60's (Labour).

New Universities in the 60's (Labour)

The biggest hospital building programme - think Hallamshire, Rotherham DGH, Barnsley DGH - 1970's (Labour).

Lot's of new schools seem to be have been built in this city in the last few years..........

When have the Tories ever invested anything of any lasting substance???

Easy, they don't....they just cop out of any long term investment and leave Labour to take the **** so they can offer short term tax cuts.

Originally posted by serapis
Hmm, it took the tory's 18 years to bring the Uk out of the hole the labour government had dug us into

Hmm, yes. Forget 1979, anyone else here remember 1992? 13 years in power, and the Tories managed to dig right back to where they'd started from.

BTW, congratulations Phanerothyme on the most rational, well-argued post on this subject so far. I agree with you totally.

Originally posted by Longcol
Well, if we're going to go back to the 70's.........

Most of our motorways date from the 60's (Labour).
The greens wont let anyone build anymore!!

New Universities in the 60's (Labour)
You show me a town/city that doesn't already have more one or more universities. It was the Tory's who helped upgrade the polytechnics to universities giving them a bigger slice of higher education investment. Also over 40% of school leavers are going to university these days, hmm a legacy of the Tory party I think? Plus do you really want MORE people at university?

Lot's of new schools seem to be have been built in this city in the last few years..........
There isn’t lots of new schools being built. Well no vast increase in MORE schools. Schools are simply building new sites on their existing playing fields, bulldozing their old buildings and them selling off the land to property development companies, honestly this is the case I work in the industry! I see the plans for these sites on a regular basis!

How about...
Try this little experiment, go to Google and type in Labour Lies, see how many results you get, I got 793,000.

"How many times do you need to be booted out of the labour front bench, for doing something contrary to the Labour Party's guidelines before you are no longer welcome?" answer, "Never, you are always welcome just as long as you are best pals with Tony"

Originally posted by DanSumption
Hmm, yes. Forget 1979, anyone else here remember 1992? 13 years in power, and the Tories managed to dig right back to where they'd started from.

BTW, congratulations Phanerothyme on the most rational, well-argued post on this subject so far. I agree with you totally.

Are you talking about the World Recession, DanSumption? If so, you must think we are a much bigger force in the world than we actually are. The UK did not create the down would trend, but we where one of the first countries to officially move out of it with the strongest economy in the EU at the time, and that part of this was all down to the Tories!

Serapis, I think Dan is referring to Black Wednesday, when your fabulous Tories managed to derail the economy as the pound crashed out of the ERM and interest rates reached 15%.

Ah, the wonderful economic legacy Labour inherited...

Originally posted by serapis
Are you talking about the World Recession, DanSumption? If so, you must think we are a much bigger force in the world than we actually are. The UK did not create the down would trend, but we where one of the first countries to officially move out of it with the strongest economy in the EU at the time, and that part of this was all down to the Tory's!

Please, no more: It's not Tory's - it's TORIES

(unless you're referring to something belonging to one Tory, that is) :)

What a strange situation in that we have a party elected in to govern the country where the leader is being pushed out while the party that lost the election is urging their leader to stay :loopy:

Blair's despair is apparent now as he does his best to surround himself with allies who unfortunately were either

a) deemed at one time to be 'unfit' to carry out their duties ie Blunkett and Beverley Hughes, who were both forced to resign

and

b) a non-elected buddy ie Lord Drayson who in return for his peerage donated £500,000 to Labour Party funds.

The clock is ticking TB, get your bags packed.

Originally posted by mojoworking
Please, no more: It's not Tory's - it's TORIES

(unless you're referring to something belonging to one Tory, that is) :)

Edited,

I bet you're a blast at party's ... whoops! I mean parties!

Originally posted by Greenback
Serapis, I think Dan is referring to Black Wednesday, when your fabulous Tories managed to derail the economy as the pound crashed out of the ERM and interest rates reached 15%.

Ah, the wonderful economic legacy Labour inherited...

If that’s the case Greenback then we are still giving too much credit to the government at the time. This was caused by the London Money traders trying to force the hand of the government. I remember watching a documentary all about it, very interesting.

All in all, by pulling out of the ERM we indivertibly gained the upper hand compared to our European neighbours.

I think Blair should stay for the present and then a few months before the next general election step down for a new leader to be in for a honeymoon period before the big test.

To leave the Labour Party for the Conservatives is so repugnant an idea I wonder why the woman joined the Labour Party all.

By the way don't forget that through Conservative policies of choice and contracting out services in councils and hospitals it allowed cheap contracts and such severe costcutting methods to come in that our hospitals became dirtier as a result.

Are you thinking what I'm thinking?

MRSA !!!!!!!!!

By the way my husband has just had a triple heart bypass and the Northern General was brilliant. Staff wonderful. Wards clean. Toilets and bathrooms spotless. No infection.

Are you thinking what I'm thinking?

Labour policies.
:clap:

Originally posted by serapis
Edited,

I bet you're a blast at party's ... whoops! I mean parties!

Thank you. I bet you used to be a blast at spelling and grammar tests ;)

Originally posted by mojoworking
Thank you. I bet you used to be a blast at spelling and grammar tests ;)

touche :P

Originally posted by dilwise

By the way don't forget that through Conservative policies of choice and contracting out services in councils and hospitals it allowed cheap contracts and such severe costcutting methods to come in that our hospitals became dirtier as a result.



Just a minute, the Labour party have been in control for the last 8 years. They have continued the Conservatives policies. How you can blame anybody other than the government is beyond me. :loopy:

Originally posted by serapis
Most of our motorways date from the 60's (Labour).
The greens wont let anyone build anymore!!
Since when have the greens been in power? I must have missed something on election night.

Originally posted by serapis
You show me a town/city that doesn't already have more one or more universities. It was the Tory's who helped upgrade the polytechnics to universities giving them a bigger slice of higher education investment. Also over 40% of school leavers are going to university these days, hmm a legacy of the Tory party I think? Plus do you really want MORE people at university?
<sigh> damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Originally posted by serapis
Try this little experiment, go to Google and type in Labour Lies, see how many results you get, I got 793,000.
Ah, well, I never knew you were going to bring scientific evidence into this debate.

Originally posted by serapis
"How many times do you need to be booted out of the labour front bench, for doing something contrary to the Labour Party's guidelines before you are no longer welcome?" answer, "Never, you are always welcome just as long as you are best pals with Tony"
Another example of the Labour party continuing Tory policies then.

Originally posted by serapis
Are you talking about the World Recession, DanSumption? If so, you must think we are a much bigger force in the world than we actually are. The UK did not create the down would trend, but we where one of the first countries to officially move out of it with the strongest economy in the EU at the time, and that part of this was all down to the Tories!

No, I'm talking about Black Wednesday, When Underpants Major & Nomates Lamont managed to trash the UK economy overnight, doubling peoples' mortgage repayments in the process and doing damage which would take years to undo.

Ahem, I thought it was you who was criticising the current state of the UK economy which, despite a massive slowdown in all the world's economies since 2000, is still holding its own.

Originally posted by Greenback
Serapis, I think Dan is referring to Black Wednesday, when your fabulous Tories managed to derail the economy as the pound crashed out of the ERM and interest rates reached 15%.

Ah, the wonderful economic legacy Labour inherited...

I think we can safely blame George Soros for exposing an overvalued currency on Black Wednesday.

George Soros for chancellor!

Since when have the greens been in power? I must have missed something on election night.
I fail to see where I ever mentioned the Green Party. All you need to do is mention you are thinking of building a new road somewhere and swampy and hits mates come a running

<sigh> damned if you do, damned if you don't.
So, no real answer to this then?

Ah, well, I never knew you were going to bring scientific evidence into this debate.
Google, widely renowned as the best and most accurate search engine on the internet to date. By performing the search you get to see how many more pages are dedicated to discuss this very subject! Someone must have heard me as it’s gone down now its now only 623,000+ pages!!

Another example of the Labour party continuing Tory policies then.
Name a Conservative cabinet minister who was thrown out due to his or her actions which were deemed unfit for public office that was subsequently reappointed only a few months later?

No, I'm talking about Black Wednesday, When Underpants Major & Nomates Lamont managed to trash the UK economy overnight, doubling peoples' mortgage repayments in the process and doing damage which would take years to undo.
I’ve answered this already. Oh and “Nomates Lamont” how petty!

Ahem, I thought it was you who was criticising the current state of the UK economy which, despite a massive slowdown in all the world's economies since 2000, is still holding its own.
I am criticising the road we are being lead down. It is widely accepted our economy is heading for a fall with over inflated house prices and spiralling personal debt! Have you even spoken to any Financial Advisers on anything like house buying etc? I suspect, now the election is over interest rates will start to rise!

Originally posted by serapis
[B]Google, widely renowned as the best and most accurate search engine on the internet to date. By performing the search you get to see how many more pages are dedicated to discuss this very subject! Someone must have heard me as it’s gone down now its now only 623,000+ pages!!

The only point you're proving here is how little you understand about Google. Incidentally (and I know this is more than a little silly) try searching for 'conservative lies' and you end up with a lot more than 623,000 pages... :)

Your whole argument is muddled and difficult to comprehend. What exactly are your views on school-building and the numbers of people going to university?

Do you really believe that the Conservatives were in no way culpable during the Black Wednesday debacle?

And in what way, exactly, has Labour mis-managed the economy? [Apart from introducing the minimum wage of course, because as we all know (thanks to the IOD), this has proved to be a disastrous move, causing mass unemployment amongst lower-paid workers...]

Originally posted by Greenback

And in what way, exactly, has Labour mis-managed the economy? [Apart from introducing the minimum wage of course, because as we all know (thanks to the IOD), this has proved to be a disastrous move, causing mass unemployment amongst lower-paid workers...]

Just wait and see. Consumer spending is already slowing, first time buyers are becoming increasingly priced out of the housing market, consumer borrowing is ridiculously high and a lot of public service investment has been funded on credit, increasing the country's borrowing.

I shan't bother with too many sensible answers to Serapis's points, because Greenback's just done a very good job of that, but I did just Google Tory Lies, which gave me 536,000 hits, and Conservative Lies, which gave 4,150,000, so on this basis the Tories lie almost six times as much as the Labour party.

Figures for other parties:
Liberal Democrat/Lib-dem 798,700
BNP 59,000
Green 7,760,000
UKIP 16,000
Veritas 96,100

So on this basis, we should all vote for UKIP as the most honest party out there. And steer well clear of those well-known dissemblers the Green Party.

Conservative ministers welcomed back into the fold: Cecil Parkinson springs to mind. I'm sure there were others.

Finally:
Originally posted by serapis
I am criticising the road we are being lead down. It is widely accepted our economy is heading for a fall with over inflated house prices and spiralling personal debt! Have you even spoken to any Financial Advisers on anything like house buying etc? I suspect, now the election is over interest rates will start to rise!
I don't dispute that the economy is in trouble, and things are likely (though not certain) to get worse, my point is that this is the result of a massive world economic downturn, and it is through Gordon Brown's good management (coupled with the fact that he made the Bank of England independant, something which the Tories never dared to do during their 18-year rule) that this downturn did not hit us several years earlier.

BTW I should probably state at this point that I did not vote Labour, and am not a big supporter of theirs (although I think they have things broadly right on the economy and on many aspects of social policy). But having grown up under a Tory government, and having watched Michael Howard's current bunch lying and pandering to the basest of tabloid fears over the last few months, my greatest fear is that they should ever be elected back in.

Originally posted by t020
Just wait and see. Consumer spending is already slowing, first time buyers are becoming increasingly priced out of the housing market, consumer borrowing is ridiculously high and a lot of public service investment has been funded on credit, increasing the country's borrowing.

I'm no economist, but I would have thought that with the economies of China and India growing exponentially, a slowdown across the west is both inevitable and unavoidable.

It seems the global economy is no longer the pet of the west to do with what it will, and that could have a big effect on our way of life.

Originally posted by Greenback
The only point you're proving here is how little you understand about Google. Incidentally (and I know this is more than a little silly) try searching for 'conservative lies' and you end up with a lot more than 623,000 pages... :)
I know Google is a fair indicator of how many available pages there are out there on the subject. Oh and I have no idea where you got the 623,000 pages from? I assume you forgot to click the little "Pages from the UK" option! Otherwise you get all the pages on the planet about "Conservative Lies", most of which are aimed at the American Republican Party!

Originally posted by Greenback
Your whole argument is muddled and difficult to comprehend. What exactly are your views on school-building and the numbers of people going to university?
This isn't my argument, just the response to peoples views, I’m simply answering them.

Originally posted by Greenback
Do you really believe that the Conservatives were in no way culpable during the Black Wednesday debacle?
I don’t believe the government at the time had no choice. After looking into the subject and watching interviews with people involved at the time plus watching a few documentaries, they all stated at differing levels the blame should be laid at the feet of the companies who swamp the UK money Markets, it was they who kept selling the £ to force a devaluation in order to make massive profits! Billions was made by these companies and the UK lost out in the short term.

Originally posted by Greenback
And in what way, exactly, has Labour miss-managed the economy? [Apart from introducing the minimum wage of course, because as we all know (thanks to the IOD), this has proved to be a disastrous move, causing mass unemployment amongst lower-paid workers...] [/B]
Someone else has already answered this one ...

Originally posted by DanSumption
... Tory Lies, which gave me 536,000 hits, and Conservative Lies, which gave 4,150,000, so on this basis the Tories lie almost six times as much as the Labour party.

Figures for other parties:
Liberal Democrat/Lib-dem 798,700
BNP 59,000
Green 7,760,000
UKIP 16,000
Veritas 96,100


If you use Google and filter out so you are only getting UK sites results and all other pages, usually about the American Conservative (Republican) Party you get the numbers I was talking about.

Conservative Lies - 232,000
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&cr=countryUK|countryGB&safe=off&q=Conservative+Lies&spell=1

Labour Lies - 623,000
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=Labour+Lies&meta=cr%3DcountryUK%7CcountryGB

Or if you use Speech Marks, (the way it should be done) ie exactly as they are written you get the following:

Conservative Lies - 41
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=%22Conservative+Lies%22&btnG=Search&meta=cr%3DcountryUK%7CcountryGB

Labour Lies - 1,080
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=%22Labour+Lies%22&meta=cr%3DcountryUK%7CcountryGB

The rest don’t matter.

Originally posted by Greenback
I'm no economist, but I would have thought that with the economies of China and India growing exponentially, a slowdown across the west is both inevitable and unavoidable.

It seems the global economy is no longer the pet of the west to do with what it will, and that could have a big effect on our way of life.

So the worldwide recession in the early 1990s had nothing to do with the Tories prevailing over the UK recession - the Tories were entirely to blame. Conversely, the global economy *does*, now that Labour are in government, have a big effect on our own economy. Make your mind up.

Originally posted by t020
So the worldwide recession in the early 1990s had nothing to do with the Tories prevailing over the UK recession - the Tories were entirely to blame. Conversely, the global economy *does*, now that Labour are in government, have a big effect on our own economy. Make your mind up.

Who mentioned recession?

From Wikipaedia:

"John Major and Douglas Hurd, the then Foreign Secretary, pressured Margaret Thatcher to sign Britain up to the ERM in October 1990, effectively guaranteeing that the British Government would follow an economic and monetary policy that would prevent the exchange rate between the pound and other member currencies from fluctuating by more than 6%. The pound entered the mechanism at 2.95 Deutschmarks to the pound. Hence, if the exchange rate ever neared the bottom of its permitted range, 2.778 marks, the government would be obliged to intervene. With UK inflation at three times the rate of Germany's, interest rates at 15% and the "Lawson Boom" about to bust, the conditions were not favourable. At least two of Gordon Brown's "five economic tests" were being failed spectacularly"

Good economic policy? I think not. Add this to Lament and Major's dithering, and you have disaster on your hands.

I'm no Labour voter, but I'm pretty confident in Brown's abilities as chancellor to deal with the presence of the emerging economies (that weren't so emerging back in the 90s). But it will need some adaption on the part of the west.

Originally posted by Greenback
Who mentioned recession?

From Wikipaedia:

"John Major and Douglas Hurd, the then Foreign Secretary, pressured Margaret Thatcher to sign Britain up to the ERM in October 1990, effectively guaranteeing that the British Government would follow an economic and monetary policy that would prevent the exchange rate between the pound and other member currencies from fluctuating by more than 6%. The pound entered the mechanism at 2.95 Deutschmarks to the pound. Hence, if the exchange rate ever neared the bottom of its permitted range, 2.778 marks, the government would be obliged to intervene. With UK inflation at three times the rate of Germany's, interest rates at 15% and the "Lawson Boom" about to bust, the conditions were not favourable. At least two of Gordon Brown's "five economic tests" were being failed spectacularly"

Good economic policy? I think not. Add this to Lament and Major's dithering, and you have disaster on your hands.

I'm no Labour voter, but I'm pretty confident in Brown's abilities as chancellor to deal with the presence of the emerging economies (that weren't so emerging back in the 90s). But it will need some adaption on the part of the west.

They still turned it around and left Labour with a healthy economy to inherit by 1997. As for economics under Labour - as mentioned previously, let's wait and see.

Originally posted by serapis
If you use Google and filter out so you are only getting UK sites results and all other pages, usually about the American Conservative (Republican) Party you get the numbers I was talking about.

Conservative Lies - 232,000
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&cr=countryUK|countryGB&safe=off&q=Conservative+Lies&spell=1

Labour Lies - 623,000
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=Labour+Lies&meta=cr%3DcountryUK%7CcountryGB

Or if you use Speech Marks, (the way it should be done) ie exactly as they are written you get the following:

Conservative Lies - 41
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=%22Conservative+Lies%22&btnG=Search&meta=cr%3DcountryUK%7CcountryGB

Labour Lies - 1,080
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=%22Labour+Lies%22&meta=cr%3DcountryUK%7CcountryGB

The rest don’t matter.

No, none of it matters, unless you're going to go through each and every result to remove duplication and test the veracity of the claims being made. Unless you believe Google to be some sort of magical program that does all this for you when you click on that button marked 'Google Search'.

I can't believe I've just had to write that, in all honesty.

Originally posted by serapis
Or if you use Speech Marks, (the way it should be done) ie exactly as they are written you get the following:

Conservative Lies - 41
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=%22Conservative+Lies%22&btnG=Search&meta=cr%3DcountryUK%7CcountryGB

Labour Lies - 1,080
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=%22Labour+Lies%22&meta=cr%3DcountryUK%7CcountryGB

The rest don’t matter.
Hmm, some interesting results there. Here's a few examples from the pages those search results lead to:

"The essence of this critique of the division of labour lies in Marx’s distinction, noted above"

"The dignity of labour lies not in the work but in the worker"

"At the basis of that concept of 'abstract human labour' lies a social condition"

"The key to ending child labour lies in. eradicating poverty and providing education."

Now let's try putting those in a slightly different context:

"The essence of this critique of the division of conservative lies in Marx’s distinction, noted above"

"The dignity of conservative lies not in the work but in the worker"

"At the basis of that concept of 'abstract human conservative' lies a social condition"

"The key to ending child conservative lies in. eradicating poverty and providing education."

How about we try another experiment: how many UK web-pages mention Labour, how many Conservative? 9,380,000 to 2,820,000. So on that basis, Labour are over three times as popular as the Conservatives.

The number of hits you can generate using Google to look up a word or phrase tells you nothing other than the number of web-pages mentioning that word or phrase. The fact that the Conservatives have been running a campaign explicitly using the term "Labour lies" means that the phrase will be rampant on the World Wide Web. The fact that Labour didn't run a corresponding campaign with the strapline "Conservative lies" means that this phrase will be less common. So what?

Originally posted by t020
So the worldwide recession in the early 1990s had nothing to do with the Tories prevailing over the UK recession - the Tories were entirely to blame. Conversely, the global economy *does*, now that Labour are in government, have a big effect on our own economy. Make your mind up.
Of course the worldwide recession in the 1990s had an effect, just as worldwide factors now have an effect. The difference is that inflation and mortgage rates then were several times what they are now, largely due to the government's political mismanagement.

Originally posted by DanSumption
Of course the worldwide recession in the 1990s had an effect, just as worldwide factors now have an effect. The difference is that inflation and mortgage rates then were several times what they are now, largely due to the government's political mismanagement.

But house prices are so high anyway that the low mortgage rates are irrelevant. Infact, you could say that the low interest rates have caused the unsustainable increase in house prices and have encouraged the mounting and unsustainable debt currently held by the UK consumer. Is that good financial management? Answer in a few years time after the economy has collapsed and the Tories are elected to clean up the mess again.

Originally posted by t020
But house prices are so high anyway that the low mortgage rates are irrelevant. Infact, you could say that the low interest rates have caused the unsustainable increase in house prices and have encouraged the mounting and unsustainable debt currently held by the UK consumer. Is that good financial management? Answer in a few years time after the economy has collapsed and the Tories are elected to clean up the mess again.
I agree with you up to a point but... now that we have a Labour government, one of the holy grails of the Thatcher years becomes a bad thing? Once again, a case of damned if you do, damned if you don't.

It's 6 - 1/2 doz Dosen't make much difference, interest rates go down, real estate goes up, visa versa, you just luck out if your buying or selling at the right time.

How much longer can Tony Blair go on? He will go on and on and...... Oops, sorry, now seem to think that was Margaret Thatcher - and look what happened to her all of a sudden.

At least Tony Blair announced he would not go beyond a third term in office. So, the maximum he will continue as Labour leader and Prime Minister is until around 2009.

Blair, just like Thatcher, is so sure that he is right about everything that he will only go when kicked out.

He will not compromise at all, he has already decided he is quitting at some ppoint in the next few years so there is no need for him to compromise his principles to desperately cling onto power.

One thing's certain, the collected speculative postings of the SF tories will make no difference whatsoever to when Blair goes.

Originally posted by Longcol
One thing's certain, the collected speculative postings of the SF tories will make no difference whatsoever to when Blair goes.

Likewise, the specultive postings of the SF Labourites will make no difference either. I don't really see the purpose of making such a point though. :confused:

People discuss all sorts of things on here - making a difference to the actual issue isn't a prerequisite of discussing it.

Just tending to think that many people are doing most of their political discussion / arguing here on SF where it doesn't make a blind bit of difference given that most users appear to be pretty opinionated or have pretty entrenched political views.

Most of mine is done in the real world where I hope it might make a difference.

Hmm,

We have gone a little off topic here, in a roundabout kind of way.

Obviously this is a topic that will go on and on and the simple fact is the old policies of both parties are no longer relevant. If we where to judge both of them on their past records neither party would win anything!

Originally posted by Longcol
Just tending to think that many people are doing most of their political discussion / arguing here on SF where it doesn't make a blind bit of difference given that most users appear to be pretty opinionated or have pretty entrenched political views.

Most of mine is done in the real world where I hope it might make a difference.

If you don't think it makes any difference the question begs why do you bother reading or participating in such threads?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_yorkshire/4536101.stm
http://society.guardian.co.uk/localgovt/news/0,8368,1476282,00.html
http://theinsider.org/mailing/article.asp?id=1157

Yes what a shambles.