Ed's new tactic

[Wij]

BBC - Nick Robinson's Newslog: Ed clear on Gordon's record

Deny the last government ever had a debt problem.

Not that surprising when you think about it given that he was part of Brown's clique.

Nothing learnt then.

 

[throdgrain]

Words fail me

 

[Trem]

Theres a prick at work, a stupid fucking prick who gives me shit everyday about what the Torys are doing with the VAT rise and the petrol duty rise, if I explain to him that the petrol duty rises were put in place by Labour he ignores me, if I explain that the VAT rise is to conteract what Labour did when they lowered the VAT he ignores me.

I called him a fucking spanner on Friday and he would be best to stay out of my fucking face tomorrow. Not his argument that riles me its his stupid fucking face that winds me up, his fucking face and his stupid hair.

 

[rynnor]

Labour and the Unions are attempting to create a fictitious history in which it was bailing out the banks rather than spending more than was coming in that lead to the defecit.

Every union leader who is interviewed about the cuts says something about his members paying for bailing out the banks.

Sadly many people are so stupid that it may well work on them - so much for democracy

 

[old.Tohtori]

then again, democracy in itself is one of the most powerful lies around

 

[Will]

Now, I hate getting involved in these topics, but...

Petrol duty under Labour was a continuation of previous Tory policy, was it not? As for the VAT rise, it was the way that the current government chose to raise income. For the Tories, it was a pretty good option, because it can be argued it is progressive as lower income families spend more on VAT-exempt goods or as regressive since higher income families spend a lower percentage of their total income on purchases.

The article you linked to, Wij, Ed comes across as a lot more level-headed than you make him out to be. I've not seen the interview so I can't really comment on the substance of his speech.

 

[Trem]

The stress put upon the motorist by the previous Tory government was a lot less than under Labour. Labour pretty much sucked the motorist dry, using the green argument to justify their constant price hikes on fuel duty, VAT and road fund licence.

Lets face it Labour couldn't give a flying fuck about (so called) global warming, neither do the Tories but it gives a good argument for getting blood out of stones.

 

[ford prefect]

I'm with Will on this one I'm afraid. All in all I think this coalition is doing far more harm with proposed policies than labour ever did. The proposed benefit reforms are terrible - especially in terms of disability. The proposed Personal Independence Payment benefit, which will replace Disability Living Allowance is so Machiavellian in terms of the way that it uses the new Equality Act to remove benefits, words actually fail me.

The way the Liberal Democrats seem to have thrown more or less every promise made in the general election out of the window for a taste of power is sickening and although public spending reviews are necessary, Cameron’s views on the subject are short sighted and again, in typical Tory fashion, allow the wealthy to get off very lightly.

I am not defending Browns Government, and certainly not Blairs’. Brown, although not directly responsible for the current financial crisis, did talk a lot of BS and certainly had blinkers on during his Premiership and made some unforgiveable mistakes. But all in all I think by the time this government has finished its tenure, the UK is going to be a much worse place, with more and more people struggling to make ends meet.

Ed seems quite level headed, but sadly I doubt he has enough substance and party commitment to give people the confidence to put their faith in labour Labour as things stand.

 

[Will]

The fuel duty escalator was 5% over inflation under the Tories, and raised to 6% over inflation under Labour until it was stopped in 2000, I thought. So not that different but still very high. And then VAT is added afterwards. Ouchies.

Any tax like this is just greenwash anyway (and I'm a raging hippie in the grand scheme of things) since it goes into general taxation. Fuel was picked for these rises since you can't do without it, similar to fags and alcohol.

 

[ford prefect]

With regard to VAT, it was generally understood at the time that when labour took it down to 15%, it would have to go up to 20% at some point to make up for the shortfall. It was simply a case of trying to kick start spending. The big difference I suppose, is that under labour, there was always the chance that it would go back down to 17.5% at some point. That simply won't happen now.

 

[Will]

The way the Liberal Democrats seem to have thrown more or less every promise made in the general election out of the window for a taste of power is sickening and although public spending reviews are necessary, Cameron’s views on the subject are short sighted and again, in typical Tory fashion, allow the wealthy to get off very lightly.

The LibDem's stance is politically astute long term but a disaster for them in the short term. They will quite happily sell their souls for PR. The Tories were always more likely to support them in this than Labour as PR would affect Labour to a greater degree than the Tories.

 

[throdgrain]

Theres a prick at work, a stupid fucking prick who gives me shit everyday about what the Torys are doing with the VAT rise and the petrol duty rise, if I explain to him that the petrol duty rises were put in place by Labour he ignores me, if I explain that the VAT rise is to conteract what Labour did when they lowered the VAT he ignores me.

I called him a fucking spanner on Friday and he would be best to stay out of my fucking face tomorrow. Not his argument that riles me its his stupid fucking face that winds me up, his fucking face and his stupid hair.

Classic mate

 

[Raven]

You can't trust people who have a head/face that looks like a slightly concerned peanut. Ed Milliband is not to be trusted.

 

[JingleBells]

You can't trust people who have a head/face that looks like a slightly concerned peanut. Ed Milliband is not to be trusted.

Awkward Ed Miliband Moments

 

[Tom]

We're spending more than we collect in taxes. Generally, we've been doing this for decades. It needs to stop, and welfare is just a small part of this.

I hope Milliband remains Labour leader for ages. He's a clueless fuckwit without any backbone.

 

[rynnor]

I'm with Will on this one I'm afraid. All in all I think this coalition is doing far more harm with proposed policies than labour ever did.

I read the above but am still amazed anyone could even think it!

Labour ran the country into the ground spending more than they had coming in even in the good years and pretended the bad years were gone for good.

If people had been stupid enough to vote them back in do you really think the cuts would have been any different?

 

[ford prefect]

I read the above but am still amazed anyone could even think it!

Labour ran the country into the ground spending more than they had coming in even in the good years and pretended the bad years were gone for good.

If people had been stupid enough to vote them back in do you really think the cuts would have been any different?

I agree, Labour did spend more than they had coming in, which is why I said I wasn't defending them. What exactly makes you think the coalition are going to change anything though?

I make a good living, and my tax increase this year will be barely neglegable - my father-in-law who barely makes a living wage will barely be able to pay his.

We are increasing foreign aid, dismantaling the welfare state - something which I am proud to contribute towards, and we are HUGE cuts to the NHS, which ultimately will cause the tax payer a fortune to repair again after the conservatives have finshed messing it up (history repeating itself).

If you had actually studied the benefit proposals, especially the disability benefits reform, there is no way you can possibly think them fair or just - personally I think they are close to criminal, but thats just me.

Should labour have got back in? NO, but honestly this coalition is going to be worse.

 

[Tom]

The benefits system is a very small part of the overall debt. Pension liabilities is much scarier. One thing the government could do is stop pussy-footing around with the age at which people receive their pensions. It should be 75, no less.

 

[rynnor]

I agree, Labour did spend more than they had coming in, which is why I said I wasn't defending them. What exactly makes you think the coalition are going to change anything though?

Huh - you think they will continue to spend more than they have coming in?

I make a good living, and my tax increase this year will be barely neglegable - my father-in-law who barely makes a living wage will barely be able to pay his.

I think inflation is the bigger bugbear than taxes for low wage earners - their tax has barely risen but inflation will really hurt.

We are increasing foreign aid, dismantaling the welfare state - something which I am proud to contribute towards, and we are HUGE cuts to the NHS, which ultimately will cause the tax payer a fortune to repair again after the conservatives have finshed messing it up (history repeating itself).

How does increased funding for the NHS = massive cuts to the NHS, is this some form of special socialist mathematics

I also cannot see the dismantling of the welfare state - people still seem to be drawing benefits by the millions.

If you had actually studied the benefit proposals, especially the disability benefits reform, there is no way you can possibly think them fair or just - personally I think they are close to criminal, but thats just me.

Should labour have got back in? NO, but honestly this coalition is going to be worse.

The benefits system got too lavish and ended up being a dis-incentive to seeking employment. Too many people saw getting disability benefit as a free lunch and many GP's just let em - that has to stop.

The welfare state was designed as a support system not a lifestyle choice and that needs to change - doubt it will though since its probably political suicide.

 

[ford prefect]

Huh - you think they will continue to spend more than they have coming in?

No, I think at first they will make unrealistic cuts - Oh wait!

I think inflation is the bigger bugbear than taxes for low wage earners - their tax has barely risen but inflation will really hurt.

Perhaps, but that doesn't change the fact that taxes are unfairly distributed - the poor are always going to be hardest hit under this coalition.

How does increased funding for the NHS = massive cuts to the NHS, is this some form of special socialist mathematics

Part of my working life involves sitting on a panel and over seeing budgetary control for an NHS department. In real terms the increases you may have read about are actually cost cutting exercises’. I absolutely guarantee increased patient waiting times, a poorer over all service, and increased travelling for patients within the next two years. Frankly it is very worrying.

I also cannot see the dismantling of the welfare state - people still seem to be drawing benefits by the millions.

The benefits system got too lavish and ended up being a dis-incentive to seeking employment. Too many people saw getting disability benefit as a free lunch and many GP's just let em - that has to stop.

The welfare state was designed as a support system not a lifestyle choice and that needs to change - doubt it will though since its probably political suicide.

Perhaps dismantling is a little strong, but frankly the proposed reforms will see between a 20 to 25% cut in the number of claimants of disability benefits by 2015, and a complete withdrawal of lower rate care. Not to mention Millions spent every year on making people with life long disabilities taking time out from work to see medically unqualified people like occupational therapists, who will decide whether they still qualify for benefits. Incidentally - that 20 - 25% cut, sure it may take care of the 5 to 6% of fraudulant claimants that three indpendent reports agreed on, it may not.

Oh and another interesting decision, wheelchair users will loose at least some mobility benefit - if they can push themselves, because we have accessible transport! We do yeah - one in 20 buses is accessible, and if they book 24 hours in advance they can use a train - assuming staff are available. Don't worry about spending half hour sat in your wheelchair in the rain, you won't develop a pressure sore sat in a wet wheelchair all day, you won't be able to afford to. If you have high rate mobility and you happen to spend 28 days in hospital, the benefit will be suspended. Not a problem? It is when you default on the motobility scheme, loose your only means of accessible transport and end up in debt. Live in a home? You won't get a mobility allowance at all. So no accessible vehicle for you and your carers, no help with taxi fares.

On low rate DLA because of a severe mental health problem? Perhaps you need to pay for a carer to accompany you for shopping or medical appointments? Not any more.

Those are just the highlights - there is a lot more. Warms your heart doesn't it?

As Tom says, they benefits system is actually an extremely low priority when it comes to cost cutting. The truth is that disability and helping those in need is a very low priority for this government. Say what you want about labour, but in the fifteen years they were in power, we made large advances in disability equality - an area that this government is cutting back almost completely on.

 

[cHodAX]

The benefits system is a very small part of the overall debt. Pension liabilities is much scarier. One thing the government could do is stop pussy-footing around with the age at which people receive their pensions. It should be 75, no less.

Indeed, the pension liabilties are plain staggering and getting worse by the day.

 

[Furr]

Just so everyone knows "foreign aid", if you haven't worked it out yet, isn't really aid, its bribe money or foreign direct investment dressed up as aid, lots of poor countries have lots of problems, they also have lots of minerals and resources, now we can't be as blatant as China, India, Russia and et all (damn bleeding heart liberals would moan about ethics and shit like that) in our "purchasing" of these resources or securing them for our domestic companies but a "little" aid money can go a long way.

Oh and the UK finances are so fuggeredly fuggered it's really quite astounding, we're just not as bad as the PIGS... but seriously not only are the colonies wide eyed with anticipation of western governments slamming the financial sector, they are actively pursuing their relocations over a medium to long term strategy, from NASDAQ OMX to UBS, Barcap and Standard Charter all are getting closer and closer to wondering, what's the deal?

So on the cuts? Why are we cutting?? Mainly it's because of japanitis, if we get japanitis, well pretty much we've had it and will be relegated to the nations with nice stagnant economic ponds, minimal growth and all sorts of sticky gummed up financial machinery, that would be bad, very bad...

 

[rynnor]

Part of my working life involves sitting on a panel and over seeing budgetary control for an NHS department. In real terms the increases you may have read about are actually cost cutting exercises’. I absolutely guarantee increased patient waiting times, a poorer over all service, and increased travelling for patients within the next two years. Frankly it is very worrying.

Labour tried massively increasing NHS spending and it just disappeared into the system with no palpable benefits for anyone apart from the GP's who got a massive payrise and gave up doing nightwork.

The NHS needs systemic change which I rather hope it may now get - theres no point throwing money into the blackhole that is the current NHS.

 

[ford prefect]

Labour tried massively increasing NHS spending and it just disappeared into the system with no palpable benefits for anyone apart from the GP's who got a massive payrise and gave up doing nightwork.

The NHS needs systemic change which I rather hope it may now get - theres no point throwing money into the blackhole that is the current NHS.

That depends entirely on your view point. I readily admit that an awful lot of money was wasted on unecessary middle management, especially in the late 90's. However, during the labour term, waiting lists dropped by over 70%, and for the most part patient care improved remarkably. The last conservative government left the NHS is a complete shambles - in fact dangerously close to collapse and lead to the unfortunate position whereby the training of British medical staff almost stalled completely. The NHS does need a reform, in fact it is and should be a constant state of reform and to a certain extent it has been. However, the changes the coalition is pushing through is going to directly affect patient care for the worse.

 

[Tom]

Here's the question Ford: there's no money left, so what would you do?

 

[rynnor]

However, during the labour term, waiting lists dropped by over 70%, and for the most part patient care improved remarkably.

Speaking as a customer I pay for decent private care now because 90% of my contact with the NHS has been dire. From bungled deliveries, botched hernia ops, botched post-delivery stitch ups, missed cancers on Mammograms, mis-diagnosed cancers, GP's who said we could refer you to a specialist but we dont want to pay, appointments sent whilst the person was already in hospital under that department, poor hygiene despite a million reminders and handwash in every room, awful nurses who treat elderly patients like they arent there, paediatricians who didnt seem to know anything about children etc. etc.

There is no concept of customer care in the NHS - the prevailing attitude is that you should feel jolly lucky to get this 3rd world standard care.

 

[Wij]

That depends entirely on your view point. I readily admit that an awful lot of money was wasted on unecessary middle management, especially in the late 90's. However, during the labour term, waiting lists dropped by over 70%, and for the most part patient care improved remarkably. The last conservative government left the NHS is a complete shambles - in fact dangerously close to collapse and lead to the unfortunate position whereby the training of British medical staff almost stalled completely. The NHS does need a reform, in fact it is and should be a constant state of reform and to a certain extent it has been. However, the changes the coalition is pushing through is going to directly affect patient care for the worse.

I know enough people in the NHS to know that most targets on the NHS like waiting lists and time until first consultation are fudged beyond belief

"Hello - Your Name ? Your Postcode ? Great, Bye now. What, you want to describe your symptoms ? Come back when we call you, that's our target met thanks."

I'm not just spouting The Express. I have been told it happens

 

[Raven]

I could spend a million pounds on a vehicle that could get me to work in 5 minutes. It would be a lot like spending more money than we have on cutting waiting lists.

I don't have a million pounds btw but according to Labour that shouldn't be a problem.

We cannot continue to spend what we do not have. Its really as simple as that.

 

[ford prefect]

I agree, the NHS is far from perfect, but we no longer have 90% of people waiting 18 months for simple and often life saving operations, like we did at the end of the last conservative government. Yes, perhaps some figures have been skewed slightly and given a bit of spin, but we are infinitely better off than we were when Major left office. Due to training and university policies, they also left us with a dependence on foreign medical staff, which has been impossible to recover from ever since. Those are the simple facts.

Bottom line though, the NHS is in need of a reform, but those reforms need to be carried out in a way that focuses solely on patient care, but the measures put forth will have the opposite effect. Like it or not, the NHS does save lives, and it needs more funding and more investment in British medical training, not less. We need to look at better models like the Canadian and Australian health services, but frankly - we should consider ourselves lucky to live in a country where medical care is a phone call away and prescriptions are cheap (or free).

Under the current proposals, the frontline nursing staff in real terms will have a 3% wage reduction in the next three years, with a34% reduction in training budgets. Recruitment will be reduced and staff will be expected to make up for the shortfall by working longer hours, and possibly by loosing a certain amount of annual leave.

As a very eminent colleague and good friend of mine said recently, "If you invest in people, and make support more appropriate and efficient, you would find it would save money.” Sadly, this coalition is doing exactly the opposite.

Tom asked where money should come from and to be honest I don’t know. I don’t work for the treasury. It does strike me as odd however that the government is happy to waste billions on MoD for projects like Nimrod and upgrading Trident, or spending hundreds of millions on aircraft carriers with no aircraft to go on them, but I suppose that emphasises skewed priorities. I honestly don't begin to pretend to understand it.

 

[Chilly]

I dont think upgrading trident is a waste of money.

How else do you plan to keep the raving hordes away in 30 years when most of the world is totally and UTTERLY fucked because we've no oil and no food? Personally I'm fucking glad to have a few nuke subs prowling the oceans ready to kick the shit into anyone stupid enough to have a go properly.

It's not nice, it's not politically correct, but it's the reality of the situation and failing to invest now in SERIOUS weaponry is going to end in tears for us and our kids. The current crop of 50+ couldnt give a shit. They'll be fat, dead and happy by the time anything goes seriously wrong.