PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Jet Blast (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast-16/)
-   -   UK politics - Hamsterwheel (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/411282-uk-politics-hamsterwheel.html)

S78 15th Apr 2010 22:44

TV debate
 
I think Clegg won that round, but he had nothing to lose anyway.

Brown did his best to get Clegg to team up against Cameron and spent the rest of the debate looking for his 'dividing lines' and cocking things up: 'no unskilled worker can come here from outside Britain' - if you don't include the rest of the EU:ugh: and repeated the 'Immigration has gone down' mantra which was discredited months ago.

Cameron? must try harder, IMHO.


S78

sea oxen 15th Apr 2010 23:24


I think Clegg won that round, but he had nothing to lose anyway.
Quite. Who amongst us will pipe up and and say 'I remember those Whigs, things were awful under them'? And he's such a nice young man, and not at all posh like iDave.

To be fair, if the DimLibs had stuck to the mantra of no tax on the first 10K and abandoned the rest of their Monster Raving Loony Party manifesto, they'd have stood a fair chance.

I despair that politics has become here some sort of vapid popularity contest, and look forward to Jordan becoming PM soon.

Thinking carefully about it, things could only get better. She wouldn't be stupid enough to sell gold when it's bottoming out. :)

SO

parabellum 15th Apr 2010 23:25

If Cameron won it will be announced as, "Too close to call" and if it was too close to call it will be described as, "A Labour landslide!".

(Had similar here recently in Oz, Rudd v. Abbott).

S78 15th Apr 2010 23:32

Brown was to one side because he's blind in one eye - personally I'd have put him on the other side:E

sea oxen 15th Apr 2010 23:49

parabellum

The mass media in Australia are run out of Pyongyang.

When I was growing up, my mother warned me off the Sydney Telegraph and the Sun - 'people like us read the Herald'.

Thanks, Mum. Now I'm a gay metrosexual public servant. [0]

It used to really p!ss me off that there wasn't an alternative, although The Australian had the most fantastic bumper sticker in the 1970s - 'Taxation is theft'. O tempores O mores.

SO
[0] pig's arse!

Blacksheep 16th Apr 2010 07:55

For me, the most interesting part of the debate was when it was over. The three candidates shook hands then Brown descended from the podium to shake hands with the audience. Clegg was about to follow when Cameron called him back and the two of them stood on the podium side by side, chatting, while Brown was alone on the floor. If we get a hung parliament, who will Clegg be standing alongside?

Bruce Wayne 16th Apr 2010 08:08

Didnt watch it. Would rather read the transcript.

There is absolutely nothing New Labour/Old Labour can promise with a clear history of lies, deceit, perveted statistics, whitewash inquiries and u-turns on pre-election pledges.

Every promise, pledge and manifesto has been deceit so is there any historical basis to actually believe anything from NL?

They may as well just answer 'blah, blah, blah' to everything for all its worth.

Besides, it not worh watching if Cameron and Clegg didnt have the opportunity to set on Brown with a flick knife and can of petrol.

now that would have been a debate

G-AWZK 16th Apr 2010 09:59

Cameron had an open goal - and he missed.

Clegg was the only one that seemed to come across as reasonable but when put next to the other two, that was not a difficult task. I really can't see any of the three main parties being worthwhile.

Revolution next Tuesday anyone?

Andy_S 16th Apr 2010 11:15

I think a lot of the reaction has to be seen in the context of expectations. Cameron was expected to do well, but only did OK. Hence he didn't do very well (if you follow my logic). Brown wasn't expected to do well, and didn't do particularly well. Hence he performed OK.

In a way, without taking anything away from Nick Clegg, he had the easiest job. He didn't have a record to defend, like Brown, or an opinion poll lead to defend like Cameron. He didn't need to be defensive, and could credibly put the Lib Dems forward as a fresh and exciting alternative. He was very much helped, I think, by Brown and Cameron locking horns with eachother which left him unscathed while helping to re-inforce his message of being genuinely different. What was the remark? The more those two disagree with eachother, the more they sound the same?

At the end of the day, no one landed a knockout blow.

phnuff 16th Apr 2010 12:24

I saw a few bits of the debate repeated on TV. I am not being partisan, but I cant help thinking Cameron looked like a Thunderbird puppet. Who ever did his make up really messed up



Who was pulling his strings?

Bruce Wayne 16th Apr 2010 12:33


In a way, without taking anything away from Nick Clegg, he had the easiest job. He didn't have a record to defend, like Brown, or an opinion poll lead to defend like Cameron. He didn't need to be defensive, and could credibly put the Lib Dems forward as a fresh and exciting alternative. He was very much helped, I think, by Brown and Cameron locking horns with eachother which left him unscathed while helping to re-inforce his message of being genuinely different. What was the remark? The more those two disagree with eachother, the more they sound the same?

At the end of the day, no one landed a knockout blow.
That's a vaery fair considerations Andy S..

.. If Cameron or Clegg had chinned Brown and knocked him out that would have been a bonus :ok:..

... if they had shivved him and gave him a good kicking when he was down even better. :E

Ancient Observer 16th Apr 2010 12:38

What will be the lasting memory of this Labour Government?
 
What will be the lasting memory of this Labour Government?

All I can think of is that the name "Mandy" which used to be a female name, has now become a male name.

Anything else memorable?

Bruce Wayne 16th Apr 2010 12:54


What will be the lasting memory of this Labour Government?
- Debt
- Un-sustainable population levels
- Debt
- Sub class that sees welfare as an alternative lifestyle rather than a safety net
- Debt
- Un-Economic PFI deals, with decades left to run
- Debt
- A Future population with poor education levels
- Debt
- A weakened and underfunded armed services
- Debt
- Top heavy management in public employment sectors
- Debt
- Future professional staffing problems in the NHS
- Debt
- Loss of decomcratic self governance to the EU (No Referendum)
- Debt

anything else ?

frostbite 16th Apr 2010 13:03

Didn't watch it, but from sundry comment it seems the response might well be the old saying

'Fine words don't butter no parsnips'.

Whatever the hell that means.

ORAC 16th Apr 2010 13:08


At the end of the day, no one landed a knockout blow.
Depends what result you were looking for...

Torygraph: General Election 2010: Liberal Democrats surge after Nick Clegg's TV debate performance

The Liberal Democrats have overtaken Labour in a new poll after enjoying a 14 per cent surge on the back of Nick Clegg's performance in last night's TV election debate.

bnt 16th Apr 2010 15:22

Sky News is doing something I haven't seen before - not that I watch a lot of politics on the telly. They have Gordon Brown miked up as he works the Tesco in Hastings, so they're catching everything said by him and those he speaks to. It takes a bit of patience to be a politician, I suppose - I'd soon get really tired of saying "isn't this a big store?" and "how old are you, then?" ..

So, who's placing bets on Cleggy for PM? :}

G-CPTN 16th Apr 2010 17:27


who's placing bets on Cleggy for PM?
Statistically impossible, I believe . . .

Sprogget 16th Apr 2010 18:15

That the news is reporting people became aware of Clegg last night, implying they didn't know who he was before tells us two things:

We have the politicians we deserve & if the electorate is this thick, we're f****ed.

G-CPTN 16th Apr 2010 18:25

Interesting to hear senior Labour people 'praising' Nick Clegg . . .

If they can divert would-be Tory voters to Lib-Dem then the chances of a Lib-Lab coalition increase (IMO).

Lib-Lab pact - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

good spark 16th Apr 2010 22:41

what will be the lasting memory of this labour government?
its got to be the spin and deciet
the iraq affair
the strange death of dr david kelly
that mandlecreep thing
blair
his hideous wife
the one eyed scottish wonder
the albino chancellor




and the enormous crippleing debt



gs

parabellum 16th Apr 2010 23:36

If nothing else one can hope that the televised debates raise public awareness to the General Election and thereby increase the previously pathetic turnout of an apathetic public to such elections, possibly, even giving us a representative result.

One thing the first debate has shown is that Labour are out of the race for the top spot which rather flies in the face of the pundits who keep saying, "too close to call".

It will be good, (but nigh on impossible), if the Lib Dems can push Labour to third spot but for successful government and a recovery, a majority government is a must, minority parties holding the balance of power just screws things up most of the time, as history shows us.

El Grifo 17th Apr 2010 00:57


the iraq affair
The straw that broke the camels back.

How good could that Bush bum have tasted.

Shame on you Bliar !

Never visit that on Gordy though. Different man, different time.

sea oxen 17th Apr 2010 01:29

parabellum, you usually come across as a reasonable sort of chap.

Do you really think that our governance will be improved by persuading the feckless (and I do not mean virgins) and disinterested to vote? You immediately hand Labour (in your case, Labor <- lazy idiots cannot speel) a 5% boost.

There are too many loony elements in the LDs. It's not Labour the Tories are fighting - the battle's already been won or lost. DC will have to draw blood not only from Clegg, but from Cable. Osborne might be a sound man for all I know, but he lacks the gravitas to anchor his leader and his party.

There are sometimes good reasons for not voting. For example, I was in a blue-ribbon seat in Sydney for my entire life there. I abstained quite a few times because the candidate was abhorrent to me, and it made a difference of the square root of bugger all.

Mandatory voting - such as in Australia - is, to me, appalling. What's seen as apathy in turnout cannot be apathy alone. People who are lazy, people who do not care, people who don't want to and those with only a tangential interest in politics which is aroused when it's seen on the idiot lantern.

It's good to keep people like that out of democracy.

SO

S78 17th Apr 2010 07:41

Brown doesn't get away with it that easily....
 
El Grifo:

During the 2005 election campaign when Bliar was being given a hard time on Iraq Brown stepped in and stated that he would have done exactly the same thing if he had been PM. This sticks in the mind because Brown had a habit of hiding when the tough questions were asked......

mr whoppit 17th Apr 2010 12:38

Is this elecetion turning into an x factor type contest.If so then we could well end up with a John Sergent type result.Gets the vote for reasons not related to the job in hand.

parabellum 17th Apr 2010 12:54

sea oxen - I am a very reasonable chap! Although a dyed in the wool cynic I have some faith in my fellow man and hope that by making them conscious of the election and reminding them of the last thirteen years of disaster they may be encouraged to go and vote for DC.

Voting in Australia isn't so much compulsory as turning up is. Many a ballot paper has been deliberately spoiled. It would be easier to put a "None of the above" box at the bottom!;)

Bruce Wayne 17th Apr 2010 13:17


I have some faith in my fellow man and hope that by making them conscious of the election and reminding them of the last thirteen years of disaster
Isn't the second part of that a Non Sequitur to the first !

Bruce Wayne 17th Apr 2010 13:52

Mysterious Giant Cloud of Debt Hangs Over U.K.
 
Mysterious Giant Cloud of Debt Hangs Over U.K. - Iain Martin - WSJ


The Icelanders are having their revenge on the British over their being asked to pay back $5.2 billion after the collapse of Icesave. They have sent a cloud of volcanic ash in Britain’s direction. It has halted flights in the U.K. and elsewhere in Europe.

It’s certainly providing a talking point. People are standing around — TV crews from rolling news channels anyway — pointing at the sky and asking why the cloud of ash is not visible from the ground.

Getting much less attention in this election campaign is the giant cloud of debt hanging over Britain. It is barely being mentioned.

Saint Vince Cable says that only he is confronting the “elephant in the room.” (One of the most annoying phrases of the age.) But that’s not true. He’s not really proposing to deal properly with the national debt. None of the parties are, as far as one can tell.

All three talk a bit of deficit reduction. Labour says it will cut it in half over the course of the next parliament. The Tories say they will go further and eliminate the bulk of the structural deficit. But all their extra cuts for the next year — which are very limited — are already on the table and they are wary. The Lib Dems? They have made an effort to spell out cuts in detail, and Clegg has spoken of the government having to spend about 10% less than it does now. But beyond that it remains unclear precisely how much of the deficit the Lib Dems think needs to be cut, and how they would do it.

But the deficit, the gap between income and government expenditure, is only the half of it. On the government’s projections, predicated on heroic assumptions of growth, the debt is going to be an astonishing £1.4 trillion in four years time. (It’s currently approaching £784 billion.) Just servicing that £1.4 trillion debt — paying the interest on it — is going to be expensive, even at the current low interest rates. If they were to rise significantly it really doesn’t bear thinking about.

It is as if a consumer who has spent much more than he earned for years notices that his credit card bill has doubled in recent years. He pledges to deal with this crisis in his finances by almost doubling it again.
Of course, the deficit and national debt are directly connected. If the deficit is cut a bit more quickly it slows the rapid rate of increase in the national debt, a bit. But by much? Not enough to put a serious dent in it, no.

Putting a serious dent would require not a bit of trimming, rather a complete and rapid rethink of many basic state functions. This has been done elsewhere, by the Canadians and the Irish for example. But the thought seems to terrify many voters. So the political class proposes to do a bit but not all that much in the scheme of things, and to wait for something to turn up. Like a rocketing growth rate, appearing as if by magic. Or inflation taking off and eroding the real value of the debt.
"paying the interest on it — is going to be expensive, even at the current low interest rates. If they were to rise significantly it really doesn’t bear thinking about."

To some, it looks like there will be an interest rate rise following the election..

good spark 17th Apr 2010 15:43

i`m surprised gormless gorden hasnt come up with a plan to pay off the national debt by just printing a whole bunch of cash

or has that been suggested?


gs

TURIN 17th Apr 2010 16:21

So, the upshot of all this debate is the same old, above-average-income Daily Mail/Express reading little Englanders chucking insults around?

Bravo. :):rolleyes:

For what it's worth, the NHS and local schools in my area are a world away from the sorry state of affairs back in 1996.

Do I vote Labour this time? No.
Why?
Iraq, ID cards, and helluva lot more besides.

Calling people names, just because you can, adds nothing to debate.

And, if one more tory pops up and blames a world wide recession on Gordon Brown's policy!! Please, be sensible, this little island of ours and it's economy cannot and did not cause Lehman Brothers and all the rest to collapse. We do not rule the world anymore, the empire has gone, get over it and move on.

Storminnorm 17th Apr 2010 17:10

As a life-long Socialist, I'm only glad that I live in GB.
Although I don't class the present Noo Labour lot as Socialists.
As someone else remarked elsewhere, You now have a choice
between Red Tories, or Blue Tories.
But, at least, we still have the NHS and free education for those
that want it or need it.
I just hope that carries on for the next few years at least.

frostbite 17th Apr 2010 17:57


i`m surprised gormless gorden hasnt come up with a plan to pay off the national debt by just printing a whole bunch of cash

Perhaps there's a rule that says it has to be backed up by gold in the vaults.

(He's probably sub-let the vaults too)

tony draper 17th Apr 2010 19:43

Think he has already done that but they dont call it printing money, I believe it's called Quantative Easing or summat posh like that.:rolleyes:

ORAC 18th Apr 2010 07:40

I am voting for anyone willing to get us out of the asylum for the insane that's the EU. Which until a major party is willing to do so means UKIP. :suspect:

Get packing: Brussels decrees holidays are a human right

AN overseas holiday used to be thought of as a reward for a year’s hard work. Now Brussels has declared that tourism is a human right and pensioners, youths and those too poor to afford it should have their travel subsidised by the taxpayer......

good spark 18th Apr 2010 08:53

well said that man



gs

sisemen 18th Apr 2010 15:53

A little off topic but I heard on the radio today about a UK local government that issued an infringement to one of its own vehicles; challenged it in court; spent thousands on the court case, and then asked for costs to be awarded when it won.

Surely to God you haven't descended that far into the mad house have you?

Blacksheep 18th Apr 2010 22:25

Further than that actually. :(

Bruce Wayne 19th Apr 2010 09:24


And, if one more tory pops up and blames a world wide recession on Gordon Brown's policy!! Please, be sensible, this little island of ours and it's economy cannot and did not cause Lehman Brothers and all the rest to collapse. We do not rule the world anymore, the empire has gone, get over it and move on.


One of the largest sectors of GDP in this country is the banking and finance sector. Brown and Blair relaxed the regulation of the banking and finance industry in favour of 'self regulation' and 'light touch regulation' which enabled finance of toxic debts, which otherwise would have not been achievable.


On the Marr show Gordon raged against the moral bankruptcy of Goldman Sachs; “I want a special investigation done into what has happened at Goldman Sachs.”

Perhaps he could ask Gavyn Davies to investigate? For many years he has been advised by Gavyn Davies, who made some £150 million during his period as a Goldman Sachs partner.

It was Davies who last year urged Gordon to implement Mugabenomics, turn on the printing presses and call it quantitative easing. Davies has been a big donor to the Labour Party and a long-term supporter. Davies’ wife Sue Nye was Gordon’s private secretary in Downing Street and they are known to be good friends.

[...]

These are not matters of little import, Gordon’s gold sales debacle cost the Treasury £6 billion, the amount that Gordon claims will devastate the economy if the Tories cut it from public spending. The bank is known at rival firms as ‘Government Sachs’ because senior partners keep so close to governments and in particular finance ministries…
Brown Attacks “Moral Bankruptcy” of Goldman Sachs - Guy Fawkes' blog



[...]
Meanwhile, back in fiscal reality, Britain is the most indebted nation in the industrialised world. McKinsey released research yesterday which puts the “billion here, a billion there” political squabbling in perspective.

Have the politicians grasped the magnitude of the deep hole Britain is in? The Tories have publicly identified spending cuts equivalent to less than ¼ of a percent of GDP. The government is overspending by some hundred times that amount.

Through the Looking Glass Economics - Guy Fawkes' blog



[...] was more than sceptical when politicians and Labour luvvie economists like Gavyn Davies started talking up the bogeyman of deflation at the same time as the government was running up massive fiscal deficits. It seemed too handy a coincidence that they would print money on a scale never seen before at the same time as issuing debt on a scale never seen before. They subsequently, coincidentally, bought the debt using the money they had just printed.

This we were told was to stave off deflation which it was emphasised was very bad. Goods becoming less expensive was somehow worse than goods becoming more expensive. If we got deflation it would be the end of the good times for ever according to even monetarist economists. Guido was sceptical that deflation was necessarily bad, history shows that there have been times of increasing prosperity that coincided with deflation. Deflation happened several times in the nineteenth century. During that era of rapid economic development there were no central banks and money was calculated as a certain quantity of gold or silver.


Deflation was not necessarily a threat to our prosperity, in a situation where the money supply is stable it is the manifestation of prosperity and pensioners know that their standard of living would have improved. With inflation now upticking this experiment in Mugabenomics* has to be reversed without setting off hyper-inflation or collapsing the government debt market. The policy authorities have figured out how to prop up the gilt market – they are changing the regulations to force banks to buy government debt to the tune of hundreds of billions. It remains to be seen if they can avoid an inflationary catastrophe, surging record gold prices suggest the markets suspect not…

*©Vince Cable, who was against QE before he was in favour of it.


Yo Dude, Where’s the Deflation? - Guy Fawkes' blog


Mervyn King’s testimony yesterday was shocking, he made public that the Bank of England was not consulted on Alistair Darling’s plans for the reform of banking regulation. Call Guido old fashioned, but he somehow thinks that it might be a tad useful if the former student Trotskyite turned Chancellor, Alastair Darling, consulted the professor of economics turned career central banker, Mervyn King. This is not mere student politics, this is the trillion dollar question of the moment. Mervyn confirmed that the current tri-partite regulatory regime designed by Balls and Brown “was a mess”.

As if that wasn’t bad enough figures released yesterday showed that Britain has the biggest budget deficit in the world. The best placed economy to weather the global crisis (© G. Brown) had government borrowing hit £20 billion in May, which means the government is overspending by nearly £30 million an hour. Gordon is spending way beyond our means and putting our children into debt at an unheard of rate. He actually boasts that he is going to spend, spend, spend…

Mervyn basically testified yesterday that the government needed to cut spending much more dramatically than it is planning to do or else we will be ruined. If Gordon is hoping for a recovery (as Alastair officially predicts) to save him in time for a general election the news from the OECD will not be encouraging. The OECD said yesterday that Britain is in “severe recession” and that it was downgrading it’s expectations for the UK economy, predicting it will shrink by 4.3% this year…
Mervyn on the Economic Shambles - Guy Fawkes' blog


Here is the futures price chart for the generic Gilt. All that is stopping that chart going further south faster is that the Bank of England is printing money (though printing isn’t the way it done nowadays, the Bank just changes amounts in the electronic ledger). Some of that money is recycled into mopping up gilts. It won’t work for ever.

Gordon has convinced fellow members of the IMF to sell the fund’s gold reserves, this visibly holds down the gold price as the relative value of paper money is destroyed. There will be an awful day of reckoning.

The gilt market will revolt sooner or later. Darling’s fantasy forecasts will be rejected by those of us in the reality-based financial markets. The numbers are horrific. Bloomberg’s Andrew MacAskill has totted up the cost of the bailout as £1.4 trillion. That is over 100% of GDP.
Bailout : Gordon’s £1.4 Trillion Fail - Guy Fawkes' blog

etc etc etc..


Gordon was like a puppy on heat in the Oval office, clearly relieved that Obama managed to squeeze in his photo-op in between lunch and seeing the Boy Scouts of America. Here is what Gordon told the squashed in Lobby


“This is a global problem. It needs global solutions. There is a global banking collapse that we are dealing with. If we could have the same standards and the same rules that we are about to apply in the USA and in Britain to apply to other countries around the world, the same standards of disclosure and accountability and remuneration, I think the confidence in the banking system will be restored.”
Say that Again, Where Did the Problem Start? - Guy Fawkes' blog

Say again ... If we could have the same standards and the same rules that we are about to apply in the USA and in Britain...

Who was it that went in favour of light touch and self regulation Gormless ?

Gate.. Horse.. Bolted...

Effluent Man 19th Apr 2010 12:25

I can understand the two main parties feeling peeved.I'm not knocking young Cleggy but the person who equated this election with the X factor really has hit the nail squarely on the bonce.

Cameron thought that it was a great victory when he got this debate.SKY threatened to stage one between him and Clegg with an empty chair where Brown would have been if Labour refused.It's turned round and bit Cameron.In my opinion he was the poorest performer of the two,Brown had gravitas and Alistair Campbell's prepacked one liners and Clegg hijacked the "change" idea,leaving Dave high and dry.

Now the polls have changed and we have Dave struggling to keep his head above the 30% mark.It's a disaster for the Tories.Who will they blame this time?

In reality it's a media beauty orchestrated beauty contest.We have the dramatis personae already lined up.

Gordon : Susan Boyle

Dave : Jedward

Nick : Will Young

And the winner is....................................................

Andy_S 19th Apr 2010 15:05


Originally Posted by Effluent Man (Post 5644831)
It's turned round and bit Cameron.In my opinion he was the poorest performer.

Not that you're biased!!

Personally I think Brown was the poorest performer. He was dull, repeated the same things over and over again, and his soundbites sounded manufactured rather than spontaneous. There again, no one expected anything else, so he probably didn't end up any worse off.

I would agree that Cameron was nowhere near his best. For someone who is supposed to be a good media performer, he looked wooden and lacked assertiveness. I heard someone suggest that he was just too polite – compared to Brown’s aggressiveness and Clegg’s shameless seizing of the limelight he came across as subdued.

I agree that the first leaders debate was disastrous for the Tories - not because Cameron was bad, but because he saw it as a straight Conservative v Labour debate and failed to recognise the Lib Dem threat. For some while now, Cameron has tried to brand the Tories as the party of change. All of a sudden Clegg has stolen his clothes in a smash 'n' grab raid.

I was never entirely convinced by the idea of debates, and I'm less so now. It just seems to me that what is effectively a beauty competition has assumed far too great a significance in shaping peoples voting intentions.


Originally Posted by baggersup (Post 5644912)
Can't stop myself from asking (as a lifelong UK/politics obsessive):

How is the air travel crisis playing out as a political situation for Brown et al?

I'm not sure it is at the moment. However, a cynic might suggest that calling emergency ministerial meetings in the middle of a general election campaign smacks of turning the situation to his advantage by playing up his image of a heavyweight leader - a good man to have in charge at a time of crisis, competent, calm, experienced and in control.


All times are GMT. The time now is 17:04.


Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.