Camerons First Term


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Politics : Camerons First Term

1 · 2 · 3 · 4 . . . 23 · Next
Author Message
Profile Chris S
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 29548
Credit: 8,984,384
RAC: 27,523
United Kingdom
Message 1207173 - Posted: 17 Mar 2012, 20:39:42 UTC
Last modified: 17 Mar 2012, 20:39:52 UTC

More broadly Cameron is accepted in enough of the country as being the best of the current options available. English voters are not confronted with a long menu of potential prime ministers. The choice is binary. Right now that means choosing between David Cameron and Ed Miliband.

The Labour leader already has severe difficulty persuading voters to take him seriously. Cameron has weaknesses, but he looks confident and comfortable being PM. The trip to visit the Obamas should be seen in those terms. Existing perceptions have been reinforced and Ed Miliband's problems exacerbated.

AndyJ
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 17 Aug 02
Posts: 248
Credit: 27,380,797
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 1207596 - Posted: 18 Mar 2012, 19:51:27 UTC - in response to Message 1207173.

More broadly Cameron is accepted in enough of the country as being the best of the current options available.
English voters
are not confronted with a long menu of potential prime ministers. The choice is binary. Right now that means choosing between David Cameron and Ed Miliband.

The Labour leader already has severe difficulty persuading voters to take him seriously. Cameron has weaknesses, but he looks confident and comfortable being PM. The trip to visit the Obamas should be seen in those terms. Existing perceptions have been reinforced and Ed Miliband's problems exacerbated.


Cameron is a bland nothingness, but that is just my opinion. Going to the States is usually an attempt to raise profiles. I have totally had it with UK politicians.
US politics is so much more fun.

A lot of people around here will take issue with the red highlighted text.
Bless the Telegraph.

Regards,

Andy

____________

Profile Chris S
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 29548
Credit: 8,984,384
RAC: 27,523
United Kingdom
Message 1207606 - Posted: 18 Mar 2012, 20:10:05 UTC

It is also traditional in UK politics for Governments to get rubbished and bashed mid-term, as we are now. It will polarise in the run up to 2015.

AndyJ
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 17 Aug 02
Posts: 248
Credit: 27,380,797
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 1207616 - Posted: 18 Mar 2012, 20:40:50 UTC - in response to Message 1207606.

It is also traditional in UK politics for Governments to get rubbished and bashed mid-term, as we are now. It will polarise in the run up to 2015.


Ok, fair enough. To me, here right now, it is getting increasingly difficult to tell one from the other. Don't get me wrong, I do not wish for radical politics, God forbid.
The present lot, and I mean all of 'em, are hardly inspiring. Dull as dishwater, in fact. And then you have the Welsh Assembly. Useless, powerless, gravy-train riding, with all the hangers on, that do absolutely nothing but supply hot air to Cardiff. The Last Thing Wales Needs is MORE politicians.

Just to fire it up a bit, how about a fantasy election between Margaret Thatcher and Aneurin Bevan.

By the way, no reply on the "red text?"

Kind Regards,

A

____________

Profile Chris S
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 29548
Credit: 8,984,384
RAC: 27,523
United Kingdom
Message 1207632 - Posted: 18 Mar 2012, 21:31:56 UTC

The present lot, and I mean all of 'em, are hardly inspiring. Dull as dishwater, in fact. And then you have the Welsh Assembly. Useless, powerless, gravy-train riding, with all the hangers on, that do absolutely nothing but supply hot air to Cardiff. The Last Thing Wales Needs is MORE politicians.

I have no reason to knock the Welsh so I won't do so.

At the last general election in 2010, people had had enough of Tony
Blair, Brown, and "New Labour". No way did they want another Labour
government. At the same time, they also remembered why they kicked the
Conservatives out the previous time, amidst lurid tales of Tory sleaze.

What the country has now got was the best compromise available.
Basically a Conservative government, but with the Lib Dems acting as a
parliamentary policeman to curb the worst Tory excesses. So far it is
working about as well as it could do given the circumstances.

Conservatives are complaining that the Lib Dems have too much power and
are wagging the dogs tail. Well they would do wouldn't they? They ought
to remember that they were not given a majority government by the people
in the election, Therefore they should be grateful that they are
"basically" in power, and at least they have a Tory Prime Minister.

And it has to be said that on both sides of the House, and in both
Houses, Lib Dem Ministers are seen across the board, as doing a pretty
good job in their various briefs and roles. In times of world economic
crisis you want safe pairs of hands running the country, not flamboyant
MP's which are the darlings of the press.

Just to fire it up a bit, how about a fantasy election between
Margaret Thatcher and Aneurin Bevan.

Given the current brouhaha over the Governments proposed Health Bill, I
presume you have chosen Aneurin Bevan because as Labour Minister of
Health in the Atlee government, he created the NHS in 1948.

The NHS is top heavy in bureaucracy with far to many Hospital Managers
and not enough doctors, surgeons, and nurses. But I'm not convinced that
giving the purse strings to the GP's is the way to combat that. For
that reason I oppose the Bill.

By the way, no reply on the "red text?"

England is just one of the Countries that votes in a UK election, so that clearly is a misleading statement.

Kind Regards returned.

Nick
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 11 Oct 11
Posts: 3726
Credit: 1,837,899
RAC: 293
United Kingdom
Message 1207652 - Posted: 18 Mar 2012, 22:27:03 UTC
Last modified: 18 Mar 2012, 22:49:46 UTC

I think what we are seeing here is that the political system as we know it
has had it's day. I really don't think this system works well for the UK now so
time for a different way of doing things. I'd rather see the UK put under a
managed system where those who manage are actually fully qualified to do so.
i.e. he who manages the health system has actually got medical experience. The
same for he who manages the economy...he has actually had hands on experience
in the industry itself. The benefits of the latter would be that the person
managing the economy does so for the benefit of the UK and not for the benefit
for a minor proportion of the electorate that normally gets done so to buy votes.
Added to this a back-up political system to over-see that the managers are doing
the job correctly. This should mean that politicians will need to be qualified
to a certain degree themselves in ability to understand that which they are
over-seeing. This system would ultimately remove, what I consider to be criminal,
the lobbyist sect. Also this system would remove career politicians who seem to
know nothing other than politics itself. So in other words we can remove
politics out from running the UK and put people in who know and can do the job
correctly. Added to this we could also put time constraints on politicians by
limiting their term of duty to a maximum of about 15 years, this may work or it
might not.

As you can guess, I absolutely detest politicians in their role of running
the UK, THEY JUST DO NOT HAVE THE NOUNCE FOR IT.
Prime example, introduce the 50% tax threshold. Told time and time again that
it would not work. It did not work, it did not work because it was politically
motivated to buy votes from the lesser mortals of the UK. So now it's going
to be dropped and most probably going to be replaced by some form of
wealth tax. Well I've heard of "born again Christians" but never of
"born again idiots". These are the kind of stupid policies that only politicians
and possibly " Communists" too could ever dream up. When you start to legislate
away a persons wealth then you know your countries on a downwards spiral. It
just tells you that the politicians have run out of useful ideas on how to
manage the economy. That because the modern economies need new ways to run
them and unqualified politicians are just not up to the job. Unfortunately
the USA is following in our footsteps too.

Solution:- You have to start to vote outside the box...as they say.
____________
The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.

Profile Sirius B
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 26 Dec 00
Posts: 9297
Credit: 1,368,533
RAC: 1,926
United Kingdom
Message 1207654 - Posted: 18 Mar 2012, 22:35:24 UTC - in response to Message 1207596.


Cameron is a bland nothingness.....


Quite agree. Bring back "Spitting Image" Great program & today's bunch of muppets would make the lot referred to on that show look like "proper" politicians!
____________

Profile Chris S
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 29548
Credit: 8,984,384
RAC: 27,523
United Kingdom
Message 1207662 - Posted: 18 Mar 2012, 23:06:30 UTC

I think what we are seeing here is that the political system as we know it has had it's day. I really don't think this system works well for the UK now so time for a different way of doing things.


The AV vote in 2011 gave us the chance to change how MP's are elected, so that the person voted in represented at least 50% of the electorate. In the event it was defeated because the two main political parties would have lost votes in future elections, and fought against it.

I'd rather see the UK put under a managed system where those who manage are actually fully qualified to do so. i.e. he who manages the health system has actually got medical experience. The same for he who manages the economy...he has actually had hands on experience in the industry itself.

It needs to be understood how Government works. Political parties come and go from power, but what they do is determine the Government policy of the day. Behind all that are the various Government Departments with Permanent Secretarys and Civil Servants. They have the expertise. They continue to run the country on a day to day basis, whoever is in power. Local Government via Councils, Mayors, and Councillors, implement Government policy at a local level.

Added to this a back-up political system to over-see that the managers are doing the job correctly. This should mean that politicians will need to be qualified to a certain degree themselves in ability to understand that which they are over-seeing.

Every MP sits on at least a couple of Parliament Select Committees in addition to his job as a local MP. It is their job to scrutinise what goes on and make sure that Government is called to account. There are also numerous Quangos that are in existence, some influential some not. There are also Parliamentary Commissions of Inquiry in more serious matters.

This system would ultimately remove, what I consider to be criminal, the lobbyist sect.

Lobbying of parliament by interested parties is a long standing affair. But in recent years it has fallen into disrepute due to the reported large sums of money "donated" to political parties to influence Government legislation. The press are not backwards in reporting such occurrences.

Added to this we could also put time constraints on politicians by limiting their term of duty to a maximum of about 15 years, this may work or it might not.

I think that we have that system anyway. There are regular elections in this country, and if people are unhappy with their local MP they can vote them out. It is basically self regulating.

Profile Sirius B
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 26 Dec 00
Posts: 9297
Credit: 1,368,533
RAC: 1,926
United Kingdom
Message 1207679 - Posted: 19 Mar 2012, 0:16:25 UTC
Last modified: 19 Mar 2012, 0:16:45 UTC

Think that Cameron should practice what he preaches & do the honourable thing in returning the benefits he received....that is if he really believes in his "Welfare Reform" policy......

Scroll down to 5th story
____________

Profile John Clark
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Sep 99
Posts: 16515
Credit: 4,418,829
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 1207712 - Posted: 19 Mar 2012, 1:50:42 UTC

I recon that Cameron's election policy to give each Parliamentary session a fixed 5 year term, and Prime Ministers 2 terms then push off is right. That way the Government will be less manipulative of the economy when they can choose when to call a General Election.
____________
It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues



Profile Orgil
Send message
Joined: 3 Aug 05
Posts: 963
Credit: 102,423
RAC: 1
Mongolia
Message 1207746 - Posted: 19 Mar 2012, 5:23:17 UTC
Last modified: 19 Mar 2012, 5:27:38 UTC

Just wondering which party or which prime minister was responsible for that 400% debt explosion?! Although my prime suspicion is it is dual parties job that spanning a decade or two.
____________
Mandtugai!

Profile John Clark
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Sep 99
Posts: 16515
Credit: 4,418,829
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 1207780 - Posted: 19 Mar 2012, 10:16:04 UTC - in response to Message 1207746.
Last modified: 19 Mar 2012, 10:18:04 UTC

Just wondering which party or which prime minister was responsible for that 400% debt explosion?! Although my prime suspicion is it is dual parties job that spanning a decade or two.


The Labour Party, under Gordon Brown, was in power until 2010 and were responsible for the UK's public debt explosion. It was Gordon Brown's responsibility for the debt explosion in the public sector, despite the ameliorating effect of his relatively good Chancellor of the Exchequer Alistair Darling.

They did some good things with other peoples money, but this is the second time Labour has nearly bankrupted the country (back in 1976 to 1979).

The Cameron lead coalition Government is the one sorting out the Fiscal mess Labour left, and it will take the best part of 10 years to sort - over 4 years of that has already passed.
____________
It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues



Profile Chris S
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 29548
Credit: 8,984,384
RAC: 27,523
United Kingdom
Message 1207782 - Posted: 19 Mar 2012, 10:45:28 UTC

I needs to be realised that traditionally the Mail has always been anti Lib Dem, in the same way that the Telegraph is pro Tory and the Mirror is pro Labour. You expect them to bash the Coalition it's what they do.

It has been a long standing joke around many boards and forums about me being a self confessed Mail reader, but I am now willing to say that I am stopping regularly reading the Mail. It used to be a good newspaper, but over the last 3 years or so, due to circulation wars it has become just another red top tabloid like the Sun or the Mirror. Time and time again I see lurid headlines and stories, some of which are just not true and some which are simply misleading. You have to wonder at times of the validity of their sources of information.

The front page headline today Monday 19th March is no exception. "NEW AGE OF PAY-TO-DRIVE Audacious plans to put Britains road network in the hands of private companies" OMG shock horror, they're flogging off the family silver! But when you read on you find motorista wont pay to use existing roads, but firms could widen them and introduce pay-as-you-go lanes to beat congestion.
Totally misleading headline. and I bet people who wouldn't normally read the Mail bought it because of it. It's tacky journalism nothing less.

I reckon that Cameron's election policy to give each Parliamentary session a fixed 5 year term, and Prime Ministers 2 terms then push off is right. That way the Government will be less manipulative of the economy when they can choose when to call a General Election.

I partly agree John because I can see both sides of the coin. With a bad or unpopular government 5 years is a long time to watch them get it wrong. However a good and popular government might need more than 5 years to get it right. The Coalition inherited the worse peacetime debt since WWII, and the truth is Labour would also have to be making these cuts if they were in power.

But on Wednesday, Chancellor Osborne will deliver the budget, and as is traditional, Shadow Chancellor Balls will totally rubbish it and say he's out of touch, even though he probably agrees with a lot of it. The Opposition are meant to challenge the government policies for the benefit of the Nation, not as it is, for party political purposes. That is what is wrong.



Profile Chris S
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 29548
Credit: 8,984,384
RAC: 27,523
United Kingdom
Message 1207789 - Posted: 19 Mar 2012, 11:43:07 UTC

Think that Cameron should practice what he preaches & do the honourable thing in returning the benefits he received....that is if he really believes in his "Welfare Reform" policy...... Scroll down to 5th story


The fact that Our Leader claimed disability payments was revealed by him, in an answer to a Labour MP, Joan Ruddock, during Prime Minister’s Questions in the Commons on Wednesday, March 7.

Just for the record, I was present in the Public gallery in the House of Commons during prime Ministers Question time of 7th March, and I witnessed first hand the exchange between Cameron and Ruddock. She asked him

"Can he look me in the eye and say he is truly proud of removing benefits from a 10 year old child with cerebral palsy."

Cameron replied

"We are not cutting the Disability Living Allowance, we are introducing the Personal Independence Payment. As someone who had a child with cerebral palsy I know how long it takes to fill in the forms. We are introducing proper medical tests so that people who need that help, can get it more quickly."

You can view the exchange in the archives on parliament TV. What the cameras didn't show but I saw, was Ruddock sitting down, suitably chastened. It was a shabby Labour attempt to discredit the PM which backfired. Of course Cameron didn't need to claim benefits for finacial reasons, but he put himself in the same place as others who did need them, so he could fully understand the problems.

Ivan died at 6 years old in February 2009, and it is utterly disgraceful that the press and others try to make political capital out of it.

Profile Orgil
Send message
Joined: 3 Aug 05
Posts: 963
Credit: 102,423
RAC: 1
Mongolia
Message 1207820 - Posted: 19 Mar 2012, 14:01:09 UTC - in response to Message 1207780.
Last modified: 19 Mar 2012, 14:13:20 UTC

Just wondering which party or which prime minister was responsible for that 400% debt explosion?! Although my prime suspicion is it is dual parties job that spanning a decade or two.


The Labour Party, under Gordon Brown, was in power until 2010 and were responsible for the UK's public debt explosion. It was Gordon Brown's responsibility for the debt explosion in the public sector, despite the ameliorating effect of his relatively good Chancellor of the Exchequer Alistair Darling.

They did some good things with other peoples money, but this is the second time Labour has nearly bankrupted the country (back in 1976 to 1979).

The Cameron lead coalition Government is the one sorting out the Fiscal mess Labour left, and it will take the best part of 10 years to sort - over 4 years of that has already passed.



Before Gordon Brown the debt was around 300% which seemingly it is systematic joint parties negligenous effort of ballooning the debt to its whatever possible super limit which existing more than 1 or 2 decades.

The interesting thing is americans are crying, shouting, cursing, itching and showing all other side effects of their 100% debt pressures while britains are really peaceful about it although it is 400%.

But now japan has 230% of debt and seemingly eu's new money king germany has even 150% of debt too meaning the Elite debt club has many super members.
____________
Mandtugai!

Profile Sirius B
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 26 Dec 00
Posts: 9297
Credit: 1,368,533
RAC: 1,926
United Kingdom
Message 1207824 - Posted: 19 Mar 2012, 14:16:03 UTC - in response to Message 1207789.
Last modified: 19 Mar 2012, 14:16:32 UTC


Ivan died at 6 years old in February 2009, and it is utterly disgraceful that the press and others try to make political capital out of it.



I disagree! If he did that just to see how the "other half" lives, then he should also have stated that he returned the funds as they were not needed. This was not done so one can only assume that he kept the money, in which case, the press were correct in highlighting his duplicity!
____________

Nick
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 11 Oct 11
Posts: 3726
Credit: 1,837,899
RAC: 293
United Kingdom
Message 1208008 - Posted: 19 Mar 2012, 19:52:22 UTC
Last modified: 19 Mar 2012, 19:58:32 UTC

Every MP sits on at least a couple of Parliament Select Committees in addition to his job as a local MP. It is their job to scrutinise what goes on and make sure that Government is called to account.


To answer just one of your comments against my post, Chris.

The above does not work else the Labour party would not have been able to
get us into debt to the level that they did. No Select Committee called the
Government to account here at the time because none on these select committees
had any understanding as to what was happening.

The system we have does not
work anymore and only suits those who enjoy the cut and thrust involved around
politics. The system is dead on it's feet, it's out dated, it's had it's
good times where it worked. No system ever works for ever all eventually end
up dead on their feet. Those who recognise that the system needs to change
and react accordingly reap the benefits coming form this change earlier than
those who are blind to change and choose to labour along supporting a defunct
system. It took a virtual civil war in England to take away the Kings total
control over this country. Done so because having a monarchy in control stopped
working for the benefit to the country as a whole. Thank god they did wrestle
power away from the Monarchy because this eventually lead the UK as a whole
generating two industrial revolutionist, a feat not repeated by any other nation.
So it's now time for change again because as we all know our current
system is pretty disfunctional. It may hurt people occupied in politics to
have to accept that change is due and that politicians need to be relegated
to the second division somewhat. But I stand on the highest mountain and shout
to the four corners of this Earth, "The UK political system involved in running
this nation has stopped working so time for change and recognise that it is
time for change". America, you will be next to have to change so be brave and
and look for change and take it when it is offered to you...you will not be
disappointed if you do.
____________
The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.

Profile Chris S
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 29548
Credit: 8,984,384
RAC: 27,523
United Kingdom
Message 1208211 - Posted: 20 Mar 2012, 11:39:05 UTC

To answer just one of your comments against my post, Chris.


My comments were not so much against as in response to your post.

Select Committees scrutinise proposed Bills and legislation at what is known as the Committee stage, before they receive their readings in both Houses. That way all MP's discuss matters before they get debated in the open House.

Every Government Minister has a "Shadow Minister" equivalent in the Opposition party. It the Shadows job to monitor what the Minister does and call them to account from the Opposition Front bench. As to why the last Labour Government was "allowed" to run up this massive peacetime debt was because they never told the truth even when called out on it.

"New Chief Secretary to the Treasury David Laws has revealed his predecessor left him a note reading: "Dear Chief Secretary, I'm afraid there is no money. Kind regards - and good luck! Liam"

Mr Laws, speaking alongside Chancellor George Osborne, said he opened the note expecting some advice only to find it was "slightly less helpful".

Nick
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 11 Oct 11
Posts: 3726
Credit: 1,837,899
RAC: 293
United Kingdom
Message 1208272 - Posted: 20 Mar 2012, 22:42:45 UTC
Last modified: 20 Mar 2012, 23:22:24 UTC

"New Chief Secretary to the Treasury David Laws has revealed his predecessor left him a note reading: "Dear Chief Secretary, I'm afraid there is no money. Kind regards - and good luck! Liam"

Mr Laws, speaking alongside Chancellor George Osborne, said he opened the note expecting some advice only to find it was "slightly less helpful".


Yes, utter recklessness and total irresponsibility too. Yet they get away with it
and walk away without a shadow on their conscious. No wonder the bankers show
no regrets over their misdeeds that helped cause the banking crises. How can
you expect the bankers to accept regulations if your government ministers
show scant respect for any form of it. Had the Exchequer been run under a more
independent framework where ministers themselves don't actually hold the cheque
book then getting the state into debt through mismanagement can be avoided.
Ministers unfortunately will not accept this because at times they wish to
over-spend when it's time to curry favour with the electorate normally the
times when a general election is due. I suspect this is what the Labour party
was doing during their term of tenure. The problem some of the electorate would
find, with a more balanced and pragmatical approach to finance, is that the
state would have to cut down on the social budget. Here I would not include
the Health Service but more with the welfare handouts, far too much is given
away and we just can't afford it. Yet whilst politicians hold the purse strings
then this will go on because to change it would inevitably cost that incumbent
government's, who implement the cut's, party votes. So you can see why the
system is in dire need of fundamental and radical change. We can not hope to
go forwards plus be able to mix it with the new rising economies in Asia and
South America unless we match them on their terms. To do this then some in
the UK will have to suffer, namely those who do not produce in wave-shape or
form.
____________
The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.

Profile Chris S
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 29548
Credit: 8,984,384
RAC: 27,523
United Kingdom
Message 1208919 - Posted: 22 Mar 2012, 17:31:49 UTC

It isn't my job to defend UK politicians so I won't. But I do think that far too many people just do not understand how Government works at National or local level, or indeed how Parliament itself works. If they did they wouldn't have the blanket view that all politicians are useless. If that was the case the country would be in an even worse state than it is. Far too many people read downmarket tabloid newspapers and get indoctrinated by them.

For example, you would be amazed at how many people actually think their MP runs the local Council, and write to them complaining about street lamps not working!! And of course an irresponsible press trying to sell newspapers just exacerbates matters. So a couple more points.

but more with the welfare handouts, far too much is given away and we just can't afford it

For far too long it was often the case that someone working full time on low wages, was worse off than staying at home on benefits. That is being tackled by having a policy that it pays to work, not claim benefits, by introducing the Universal Credit system in 2013.

We can not hope to go forwards plus be able to mix it with the new rising economies in Asia and South America unless we match them on their terms.

If you want to live in a dictatorship or a Republic and have no choice how you are governed then fine.

At the end of the day, if anyone is that unhappy with residing in this country they are perfectly at liberty to up sticks and go and live somewhere else. And if they end up being happier then good luck to them.

1 · 2 · 3 · 4 . . . 23 · Next

Message boards : Politics : Camerons First Term

Copyright © 2014 University of California