|
NuLabor Scorched Earth policy has begun.
NuLabor are preparing to take us all down with them.... :(
"Fraser Nelson has a chilling insight into Gordon Brown's decision to "reformulate" (which is to say to break) his own rules on borrowing - a decision that, on the face of it, represents the humiliating collapse of his own economic credibility. Fraser sees this apparently suicidal judgment as nothing other than an attempt to saddle an incoming Conservative government with debts so enormous as to effectively render its first term an exercise in futility. This is almost certainly right." Whoops! Browser Settings Incompatible Brown is not playing by the rules any more | Coffee House We're all in the sh*t now... :eek: |
Scary stuff. By the way can you see this advert banner on the thread that is offering loans with an APR of 183.2%?????????
|
Yes 183.2% APR - that is a bargain then.
|
Wonder how much we are already saddled with with all the building that has been done under PFI which means those debts will go on for years to come at very high interest rates. They of course have taken the praise for the building work. How many years will the Olympic debt go on for too?
Les :( |
Worth bearing in mind that France has borrowing of 55%, and we have lower borrowing than Japan, Germany, France and the US. We also have lower borrowing than we did in the 80's/90's.
Not saying that changing thier own rules is a good thing, but, what other option is there? Other than raising taxes, and it doesn't necessarily mean disaster for the Tories when they get in. Undoubtably though it does damage the credibility of the Labour party that has built a reputation on econimic stability. |
Lets hope for a motion of no confidence.
|
Originally Posted by GC8
(Post 8013749)
Lets hope for a motion of no confidence.
|
You are kidding? The most unpopular prime minister in living memory: Flash is one serious error of judgement / f*ck up away from a general election.
|
Originally Posted by PeteBrant
(Post 8013726)
Undoubtably though it does damage the credibility of the Labour party that has built a reputation on econimic stability. that, my friend, is a genius piece of understatement. |
:D
|
Originally Posted by GC8
(Post 8013807)
You are kidding? The most unpopular prime minister in living memory: Flash is one serious error of judgement / f*ck up away from a general election.
He can **** up all he likes and the GE still won't be called until 2010. No one can force it. The likelyhood of it being called any earlier is remote in the extreme because he knows he will lose it. A vote of no confidence would lose in the commons because Labour would vote against it - Hence the reason why we don't have a vote of no confidence against the incumbent party every week. |
Originally Posted by PeteBrant
(Post 8017645)
How so?
He can **** up all he likes and the GE still won't be called until 2010. No one can force it. The likelyhood of it being called any earlier is remote in the extreme because he knows he will lose it. A vote of no confidence would lose in the commons because Labour would vote against it - Hence the reason why we don't have a vote of no confidence against the incumbent party every week. |
Originally Posted by PeteBrant
(Post 8013726)
Worth bearing in mind that France has borrowing of 55%, and we have lower borrowing than Japan, Germany, France and the US. We also have lower borrowing than we did in the 80's/90's.
Not saying that changing thier own rules is a good thing, but, what other option is there? Other than raising taxes, and it doesn't necessarily mean disaster for the Tories when they get in. Undoubtably though it does damage the credibility of the Labour party that has built a reputation on econimic stability. |
Originally Posted by GC8
(Post 8017723)
Pete, Im just going to leave this naive and ignorant rubbish here for people to read.
Basically they know they will lose the next GE so will continue to line their own pockets at our expense until the last possible minute after which Cameron will take his turn at the trough. Oh and if any of you seriosuly think Cameron's mob will be any different to the current lot then naive isn't the word, more like stupid. :( |
Originally Posted by f1_fan
(Post 8017811)
What is naive an ignorant about what Pete said. Sadly he is spot on and if you seriosuly think a no confidence vote woul be anything but defeated in the Commons then it is you who are naive.
Basically they know they will lose the next GE so will continue to line their own pockets at our expense until the last possible minute after which Cameron will take his turn at the trough. Oh and if any of you seriosuly think Cameron's mob will be any different to the current lot then naive isn't the word, more like stupid. :( People have to hope that the next lot will be different and learn from previous mistakes, not stupid really, more human nature and a more positive outlook. You have to give them a chance - if not just slit your wrists now... |
Originally Posted by Paul Habgood
(Post 8017908)
Wow, fantastic soundbite, and you get to call people who want change stupid, cool!
People have to hope that the next lot will be different and learn from previous mistakes, not stupid really, more human nature and a more positive outlook. You have to give them a chance - if not just slit your wrists now... BBC NEWS | Politics | Cameron not rejecting tax rises As soon as the one thing keeping me here is gone I will be off. :D |
Originally Posted by GC8
(Post 8017723)
Pete, Im just going to leave this naive and ignorant rubbish here for people to read.
I mean, how, just to educate me, do you think a General Election can be forced? |
Originally Posted by f1_fan
(Post 8018058)
That's my point, there won't be any change. You give them a chance if you want, doesn't matter to me they won't be any worse or better than this lot.
BBC NEWS | Politics | Cameron not rejecting tax rises As soon as the one thing keeping me here is gone I will be off. :D Tax rises come after massive spending and unfortunately Labour's spending has been not only massive but unwise. From someone who doesn't follow things that closely it appears to me that labour lucked out over the last 10 years having quite a lot of cash to spend whilst people were racking up debt and now that things are getting difficult they have no idea what to do. That and keep changing their mind about policy makes them look incompetent. Steve |
Originally Posted by boxst
(Post 8018747)
Tax rises come after massive spending and unfortunately Labour's spending has been not only massive but unwise.
From someone who doesn't follow things that closely it appears to me that labour lucked out over the last 10 years having quite a lot of cash to spend whilst people were racking up debt and now that things are getting difficult they have no idea what to do. That and keep changing their mind about policy makes them look incompetent. Steve The Tories spent 18 years raping public services (or selling them off) and Labour has spent 11 year throwing ridiculous sums of money at them. What you actually want is a long term commitment from all parties for investment to be somewhere in the middle |
Originally Posted by PeteBrant
(Post 8018755)
Labours over spend was as a result of Tory underspend. For example, we had the lowest investment in Health services in Europe in 1997. We are now about average. To get that average up, you obviously have to spend much more than the average.
The Tories spent 18 years raping public services (or selling them off) and Labour has spent 11 year throwing ridiculous sums of money at them. What you actually want is a long term commitment from all parties for investment to be somewhere in the middle Staring out of the cold delapidated Victorian wards of the local hospital at a brand new admin block with leather seats for all does not make me happy about a government's spending. Doing things like that is a s bad as them not spending at all like the previous lot. |
Originally Posted by f1_fan
(Post 8018780)
Yes agree with most of that but also you want a party that doesn't just chuck money at things like education and the health service, but instead looks at the best way to spend that money for the good of the people.
Staring out of the cold delapidated Victorian wards of the local hospital at a brand new admin block with leather seats for all does not make me happy about a government's spending. Doing things like that is a s bad as them not spending at all like the previous lot. Still waiting to hear how a Gerneral Election can be forced by Brown making a mistake :D |
Originally Posted by PeteBrant
(Post 8018787)
Still waiting to hear how a Gerneral Election can be forced by Brown making a mistake :D
|
Originally Posted by PeteBrant
(Post 8018787)
Yup I would go along with that - You need to spend money, but you also need to spend it in the right places.
Still waiting to hear how a Gerneral Election can be forced by Brown making a mistake :D My understanding is that if the PM (whoever that may be) is not fit for purpose - makes mistake after mistake for example then his party, or members of can hold a vote of no confidence in the leader/pm. If that happens and the pm looses the vote then a general election can be called. F1 fan points out that this is not likley to happen, fat cat (cnuts) lining their pockets hoever thetre must be some real Labout supporters in positions or influence and power able to change things. or am i completely off the mark? |
Originally Posted by Paul Habgood
(Post 8018830)
My understanding is that if the PM (whoever that may be) is not fit for purpose - makes mistake after mistake for example then his party, or members of can hold a vote of no confidence in the leader/pm. If that happens and the pm looses the vote then a general election can be called.
F1 fan points out that this is not likley to happen, fat cat (cnuts) lining their pockets hoever thetre must be some real Labout supporters in positions or influence and power able to change things. or am i completely off the mark? A motion of no confidence in the government can be called by anyone in the commons. But there is no way on earth that Labour MPs will support it. Why? Because they will effectively be throwing themselves out of power. Since Labour MPs out number all other party MPs in the commons put together (hence Labour are in government) The likelyhood of any such vote even being called is absolutely zero. It would be a waste of time. Cameron knows this, hence the reason why he doesn't call one all the time. The only time such an event takes place, is when the PM absolutely wants a measure to go through the commons that is unpopular with his own party, he calls a vote of confidence in tandem with the measure he is trying to get through to ensure the entire party backs him on the issue. John Major did exactly this towards the end of his premiership. The best you can hope for, if Brown is not your favourite person, is that his own party throws him out and he is replaced. But this will not trigger a General Election. It will trigger a leadership election. The Labour party have a mandate until 2010, and there is nothing that will force them to call it early, short of a sudden reveral in the polls. |
Gordon Brown is clearly mad
|
Consider this: More people voted for Mugabe than did for Gordon Clown :wonder:
|
Originally Posted by PeteBrant
(Post 8018841)
A motion of no confidence in the government can be called by anyone in the commons. But there is no way on earth that Labour MPs will support it. Why? Because they will effectively be throwing themselves out of power.
Since Labour MPs out number all other party MPs in the commons put together (hence Labour are in government) The likelyhood of any such vote even being called is absolutely zero. It would be a waste of time. Cameron knows this, hence the reason why he doesn't call one all the time. The only time such an event takes place, is when the PM absolutely wants a measure to go through the commons that is unpopular with his own party, he calls a vote of confidence in tandem with the measure he is trying to get through to ensure the entire party backs him on the issue. John Major did exactly this towards the end of his premiership. The best you can hope for, if Brown is not your favourite person, is that his own party throws him out and he is replaced. But this will not trigger a General Election. It will trigger a leadership election. The Labour party have a mandate until 2010, and there is nothing that will force them to call it early, short of a sudden reveral in the polls. Les |
Originally Posted by SJ_Skyline
(Post 8018926)
Consider this: More people voted for Mugabe than did for Gordon Clown :wonder:
|
Originally Posted by Leslie
(Post 8018966)
Except the Queen of course!
Les Only the PM can ask for Parliament to be dissolved earlier. The Monarchy Today > Queen and State > Queen and Government > Queen in Parliament |
Originally Posted by PeteBrant
(Post 8019027)
Not true.
Only the PM can ask for Parliament to be dissolved earlier. The Monarchy Today > Queen and State > Queen and Government > Queen in Parliament In addition to opening Parliament, only The Queen can summon Parliament, and prorogue (discontinue without dissolving it) or dissolve it. When a Prime Minister wishes to dissolve Parliament and call a general election, he or she is obliged to seek the permission of the Sovereign to do so. For this purpose, the Prime Minister usually travels to Buckingham Palace before announcing a general election. Looks as though she has the major say in it all to me. Les |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:43 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands