Can Labour actually win the next election and make a difference?

[Lenny Rider]

Or is it more political lies, to fool the electorate once again?

 

[BensGrandad]

No it will be a Tory win with a clear majority unless Labour get shot of Milliband , Balls and Harriet Harman who are all so easy for their opponents to discredit with policies that are made with no thought of cost etc.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

A week is a long time in politics.

The next election will be on 7th May, 2015.

Without sitting down with a calendar and working it out, that is about 80 weeks. A lot could happen between now and then.

 

[mikeyjh]

Of course they can - But as already mentioned, it's a long time until the election. Right now favourite for me would be another coalition, the a Labour outright win, but I think the 'right' is too far split now and the Tories cannot win an outright majority.

 

[yxee]

A week is a long time in politics.

The next election will be on 7th May, 2015.

Without sitting down with a calendar and working it out, that is about 80 weeks. A lot could happen between now and then.

We might even hear one of their policies!

 

[Leighgull]

Right...here goes.

I don't personally blame Labour for the financial ruin in 2008, I actually remember Alastair Darling and Brown taking huge steps to halt the economic meltdown by pulling together world leaders in London to agree the bank bailouts and other sandbag measures that stopped it going completely nuclear.

I also don't remember the Tories warning that the collapse was coming and disagreeing with Labours spending plans, similarly the Libs. So it is really rich of them to keep going on about the "financial mess" left by Labour as if Britain were the only one affected by the collapse.

BUT. Labour had spent too heavily on welfare and sweeteners for the masses. Add to that the farce of PPI, the ridiculous immigration policy they adopted and general nastiness of the Brown administration and labour have a problem.

Miliband is just not the right man to lead Labour into the new economy. He's clever and decent but is too much of a nerd. He's doing things about union reform that will steady the ship for the next leader but he's a dead man walking.

Labour will need to spend a bit more time in the wilderness and we need the Tiries to manage the economy a little while longer before Britain gets truly sick of the public schoolboys and snobs that really do see us as the "little people" and kick them out. 2020 should be Labor realistic target.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

What are Labour going to for the average person, the ones not effected by the bedroom tax and can't claim benefits. How about a reduction in VAT, or an increase on the minimum wage. Are Labour going to reduce the living costs for people, is our council tax going to go down. Are they going to force energy companies to lower their bills. These are the things that effect people the most, because it dictates how much money we have left in our pockets and how much we can spend. What about that touchy issue around migration? Actually better not mention that because that doesn't even register on their radar. Nothing that Labour says fills me with any confidence, I feel it will just be the same.

 

[drew]

We might even hear one of their policies!

Unfortunately, neither party when in opposition are great at tell us about their policies until we get into an election run in. In some cases, they openly distort their plans to deceive the electorate, eq, no top down re-organisation of the NHS!!!

 

[Eksman]

There's only one thing for it UKIP

 

[strings]

Right...here goes.

I don't personally blame Labour for the financial ruin in 2008, I actually remember Alastair Darling and Brown taking huge steps to halt the economic meltdown by pulling together world leaders in London to agree the bank bailouts and other sandbag measures that stopped it going completely nuclear.

I also don't remember the Tories warning that the collapse was coming and disagreeing with Labours spending plans, similarly the Libs. So it is really rich of them to keep going on about the "financial mess" left by Labour as if Britain were the only one affected by the collapse.

BUT. Labour had spent too heavily on welfare and sweeteners for the masses. Add to that the farce of PPI, the ridiculous immigration policy they adopted and general nastiness of the Brown administration and labour have a problem.

Miliband is just not the right man to lead Labour into the new economy. He's clever and decent but is too much of a nerd. He's doing things about union reform that will steady the ship for the next leader but he's a dead man walking.

Labour will need to spend a bit more time in the wilderness and we need the Tiries to manage the economy a little while longer before Britain gets truly sick of the public schoolboys and snobs that really do see us as the "little people" and kick them out. 2020 should be Labor realistic target.

I think that is pretty spot on. I do, however have a suspicion that the next Government will also be either a minority government or a coalition. I'm not saying Labour will be the biggest party, but I do think that both of the major parties should be aiming for 2020 for their next majority Government.

 

[drew]

What are Labour going to for the average person, the ones not effected by the bedroom tax and can't claim benefits. How about a reduction in VAT, or an increase on the minimum wage. Are Labour going to reduce the living costs for people, is our council tax going to go down. Are they going to force energy companies to lower their bills. These are the things that effect people the most, because it dictates how much money we have left in our pockets, and what about that touchy issue around migration? Actually better not mention that. Nothing that Labour says fills me with any confidence, I feel it will just be the same.

That all needs to be funded and if Labour borrowed to do that, you slate them for it. Assuming the recovery gathers pace then that will hopefully fund higher tax allowances. Reducing council tax will reduce council services even further at a time when I believe the funding from central government has been considerably reduced under the coalition (proposed in June to be cut by 10% for 2015/16). I think Labour suggested yesterday they would be cutting business rates for small businesses so that could stem the tide of high street closures! With regard to migration, how much better are we under the coalition?

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Will Labour win the next election - possibly ( although a hung parliament is on the cards IMHO ) - can they make a difference ? Well they did bugger all last time so I fail to see how they will do so next time ( if they win ).

 

[BLOCK F]

Or is it more political lies, to fool the electorate once again?

They can win the next election but I hope they don't,because whatever they 'promise' they will inevitably nick more more off the taxpayers to spend on whatever their latest wheezes turn out to be.
As always,it will end in tears and financial overspending.They just can't help themselves.
Whatever party took office in 2010 was always going to be faced with a tough and unpopular time,but at least it does look like the worst may be over and better times are ahead.
I have to say though,that as a Tory voter,I don't go along with all their ideas either.I believe HS2 is madness as is the Help to Buy scheme.Let house prices find their correct level so the younger people in this country will be able to afford to buy houses based on a sensible cost to earnings ratio and not at some ludicrous artificially high price kept afloat by a daft scheme.Seem to remember that over borrowing got us into the mess in the first place.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

That all needs to be funded and if Labour borrowed to do that, you slate them for it. Assuming the recovery gathers pace then that will hopefully fund higher tax allowances. Reducing council tax will reduce council services even further at a time when I believe the funding from central government has been considerably reduced under the coalition (proposed in June to be cut by 10% for 2015/16). I think Labour suggested yesterday they would be cutting business rates for small businesses so that could stem the tide of high street closures! With regard to migration, how much better are we under the coalition?

I can see your point here. Cutting business rates is also a good idea, but will it actually benefit the people who work for these small businesses. The facts are they can still continue paying minimum wage, because they now have a pick of workers from the EU and Non EU countries who are prepared to work. Therefore there will always be a business case for migration regardless of how lots of us feel about it. Your also right about spending, people would slate Labour for that. I don't how large our debt is, but I have a feeling it is a lot more than they really tell us. Whatever anyone does it want change that debt. So how can we raise more revenue without taking stuff away? You guessed it we let more people in.

 

[Scampi]

Of course they can win the next election. Can they make a difference, perhaps not, and if they do will it be an improvement , I'm not so sure.

 

[strings]

I have to say though,that as a Tory voter,I don't go along with all their ideas either.I believe HS2 is madness as is the Help to Buy scheme.Let house prices find their correct level so the younger people in this country will be able to afford to buy houses based on a sensible cost to earnings ratio and not at some ludicrous artificially high price kept afloat by a daft scheme.Seem to remember that over borrowing got us into the mess in the first place.

I absolutely agree. The help to buy scheme seems to actually be setting a 5 year timebomb. Basically the home buyer puts down a 5% deposit, the government put in 20% (which is repayable in 5 years) and the home buyer then takes out a mortgage for the remaining 75%.

Problem is, in 5 years time many will not have the cash to pay off the 20% that the Government put in, nor will they have enough equity to add the 20% loan to their mortgage (especially given new homes tend to initially lose value, and then recover after a few years).

I genuinely think that the help to buy scheme is a short term financial fix that will lead to increased repossessions in 5 years time.

 

[portslade seagull]

Hopefully not and definitely no they wouldn't. They got us in this mess to start with

 

[Leighgull]

I absolutely agree. The help to buy scheme seems to actually be setting a 5 year timebomb. Basically the home buyer puts down a 5% deposit, the government put in 20% (which is repayable in 5 years) and the home buyer then takes out a mortgage for the remaining 75%.

Problem is, in 5 years time many will not have the cash to pay off the 20% that the Government put in, nor will they have enough equity to add the 20% loan to their mortgage (especially given new homes tend to initially lose value, and then recover after a few years).

I genuinely think that the help to buy scheme is a short term financial fix that will lead to increased repossessions in 5 years time.

This is something overlooked by many. The Tories will always point to Labour as the "tax and spend" party which, clearly, is true but will conveniently forget that it is they who tend to forget the huge contribution they make to economic chaos they cause by fuelling these ludicrous housing bubbles and greed incentives in the city which, over time, tend to lead to much greater financial collapses.

There is a grain of decency in Cameron, he is unpopular with his own MPs which MUST mean he is a heart rather than head Politician but Osbourne is definitely one of Satans little wizards and, mark my words, will hurt more than heal given time.

Would the economy have recovered quicker if the Tories had borrowed to help industry and the public sector? No, was it right to slash spending? Yes..will the Conservatives stop the money grabbing bankers and hedge fund managers or the Estate agents dragging us into more misery...? Not on your nelly.

You makes your choice, you take your chance in politics but, in the end, no one is prepared to make the radical measures needed to keep us safe and equitable.

 

[Titanic]

If Scotland vote for independence, losing 41 MPs would kill Labour's chance of a majority in Westminster for decades to come. Two birds with one stone?

 

[drew]

I can see your point here. Cutting business rates is also a good idea, but will it actually benefit the people who work for these small businesses. The facts are they can still continue paying minimum wage, because they now have a pick of workers from the EU and Non EU countries who are prepared to work. Therefore there will always be a business case for migration regardless of how lots of us feel about it. Your also right about spending, people would slate Labour for that. I don't how large our debt is, but I have a feeling it is a lot more than they really tell us. Whatever anyone does it want change that debt. So how can we raise more revenue without taking stuff away? You guessed it we let more people in.

Cutting business rates (or, I believe more correctly, not increasing them as currently planned) will keep businesses open and also may attract more businesses to start. You only have to look at most high streets to see the number of shops closing. This helps save and create jobs and that means less on the dole queue and more people paying tax.

http://www.retail-week.com/in-business/policy/retailers-costs-squeezed-as-business-rates-increase-comes-into-force/5047788.article

As for National Debt, when Labour came in in 1997, it was about 42% of GDP. Labour brought that down to 36% of GDP upto 2008 when of course the global crisis saw it go up. In 2010 it had risen to 52% of GDP and in 2012 was up to 71% and by 2015 is expected to be almost 82% of GDP.

http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/spending_chart_1997_2015UKp_13c1li111mcn_G0t

Finally, I would be interested to know why you think letting more people in raises revenue?