Klaatu

Therein lies your problem Martiin. It's not the party, never has been. "Democracy", has been a "smoke screen" since inception (Well not in Greece where it was once true "democracy"), democracy today not at alll. It's the ruling elite behind the politics. There have been revolutions before....and we are close again.

Enforce higher taxes on energy in a cooling world, expect a fight!

Trouble is, all Europenas have passed on the "right" to defend themselves, to the state! Scary!

Martin2005

The only reason for politicians not telling whole truth (or even lying) is because of the ridiculous expectations we have for them. If they just told us the truth, warts and all we wouldn't vote for them.

Sometimes we get what we deserve

Klaatu

First part bollox, No2's yes (But not sometimes, it's an illusion, and has been for sometime. Have you not realised that yet Martin?)!

Martin2005

How is it bollox?

We've just had a 4 week election campaign during which none of the party's would tell us the truth about what really needed doing to fix the deficit.

warrenm2

This is what liebor are really like...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...note-successor

scud8

iTrader: (1)

Interpretation of legislation is not up to the government - it is up to the courts. That is one of the key strengths of our (unwritten) constitition. If the way the courts are interpreting the legislation is giving rise to unexpected consequences, then the law is badly drafted and needs amending. Unfortunately Labour were so hyperactive generating new legislation a lot of it has been badly drafted and is either not serving its intended purpose, or in many cases is not even enforceable.

Leslie

You must be joking Martin, do you really think that they would have thrown our cash away in the same way as your heroes did? Do you think they would have instituted a massive bureaucracy which spends most of its time monitoring useless targets because it does not have the first idea how to run a work force and also how convenient it was to buy all those votes as well? Do you think they would have invented more and more advisors and quango's when Flash said some years ago that when he achieved power he would cancel all quango's? They increased public service workers by over 1 million! Do you think they would have flogged half our gold reserves at the lowest possible price? Why did they do that Martin? Is it sensible to keep overborrowing when you have to borrow money to pay off the interest. How about the spending initiative which was actually down to PFI which is a very expensive way to build and will have to be paid back with interest for years to come. The conservatives would never have done that and you are demonstrating your lack of understanding of the real situation.

Tell us you are not trolling Martin!

Les

RJMS

iTrader: (2)

Much as I would like to agree I fear PFI is a bit of a sticky wicket see the attached bit from Wikipedia - makes very interesting reading

In 1992 PFI was implemented for the first time in the UK by the Conservative government of John Major. It immediately proved controversial, and was attacked by the Labour Party while in opposition. Labour critics such as the future Secretary of State for Health, Patricia Hewitt considered that PFI was really a back-door form of privatisationChancellor of the Exchequer, Alistair Darling warned that "apparent savings now could be countered by the formidable commitment on revenue expenditure in years to come".[2] Nonetheless, the Treasury considered the scheme advantageous and pushed Labour to adopt it after the 1997 General Election. Two months after the party took office, the Health Secretary, Alan Milburn, announced that "when there is a limited amount of public-sector capital available, as there is, it's PFI or bust".[2] Since then PFI has continued and, indeed, expanded under Labour, resulting in criticism from many trade unions, elements of the Labour Party, the Scottish National Party (SNP), and the Green Party[3], as well as independent commentators such as George Monbiot and academics such as Prof. Allyson Pollock, Prof. Jean Shaoul and Dr Adrian Bell.

Martin2005

Not trolling asking a probing question, a question you seem to have no answer to except the usual speculative (politically biased) rant.

You appear to forget that much of what you accuse the last government of was actually a continuation of the previous governments initiatives.

And you completely fail to mention the state the public services would of been in.

Why can't you just for once demonstrate your self proclaimed 'apolitical' point of view and add some balance in your responses to me?

GC8

I dont disagree with that.

hodgy0_2

most if not all the above was initially put into place by the Conservatives

ps there are more Management Comsultants in this parliament than ever before so I would not bank on much change any time soon

Leslie

Nothing to do with Apolitical Martin, and you are not in a position to order me to give you the replies you prefer to hear. Not my fault it it is all too difficult for you. Accusations like that reveal you r inability to find a reply yourself.

Yes the Conservatives did use PFI, but it is a matter of degree. NL jumped on it as a way of getting kudos for building at the time but putting off the repayments for our descendants just like the National Debt.

The vast increase in employment of public workers and the general target driven labour organisation was instituted by NL and all for their own selfish reasons.

The economy was so strong when NL took power that is was 4 years before they were able to run it down so that they had to overborrow for the next 9 years to finance their grossly inefficient and expensive public spending which did so little good for the country.

Tell me what the National debt is now Martin, how do you propose we can even think of being able to repay it let alone the interest. How long would we have lasted if NL had been re-elected?

Is it really not Apolitical to criticise one of the political parties? Or should we rely on blind faith? Why have NL set up hugely expensive initiatives just before they lost power?

Can you be Apolitical yourself Martin or you do rely on blind faith on your own behalf of course!

Les

Bram

Jury is still out on what Labour spent on until we see it in black and white.

As for Civil Service questioning the purchase, they do on everything and must get two signatures to make the requisition and then others to place order. From a pencil to a warship that is how it is done. No one person can order without counter signatures. The Civil Service will be in it as much as the Labour government that ordered it. Will they be held to account, your having a laff, be promoted more like. I would not bet on the purchases are on outstanding orders supported by the commons when the papers are shown, if they will be shown. This will spin out of the news as quick as it comes in.

I would also question the source of this info, why was it not raised at election or when it happened. All very spin, some things never change. I see it was raised by the BBC journalist, the wee black bloke given a story when all the usual reporters on holiday.

Wait for Clegg speech today see what size 9's he has for the Tory promises made in their manifesto and how many committees he adds. The Home Sec just added another. Will there be enough MP's to go round with all these meetings have they enough rooms to meet. The buffet bill will increase wonder who has the supply contract!

Martin2005

Same rhetoric, same lack of reason and understanding, same balme game, same lack of context....at least you're consistent I suppose

Leslie

It is all fact Martin, and I can hear the scraping noises from the bottom of your barrel from here!

Les

Martin2005

Les I hate to break it to you, but it's your slanted opinion, not fact!

Leslie

Just remain in denial Martin, it seems to suit you!

Les