Ed Miliband - Brassneck?

[KneeOn]

I am a Tory voter,but I don't know what some of the Libdem M.P.'s and their supporters want....with a coalition they have a chance to get some of their policies through,compromise on some and having to give way on others..... . It is that or another 90 years in the political wilderness.
On reflection,they have probably got so used to spouting forth policies knowing that they will never have to face the responsibility of actually putting them into practice,that now they have some power they can't cope with the reality of Government.
Back to growing beards and wearing sandals for some of them I think!

The core voters of the Lib Dems (students) want to not have years of support to be shat on because Clegg gets the chance to be tea bagged by David Cameron! 90 years of political wilderness vs shitting on the support of your loyal voters who put you there in the first place.

As it is, they've got 90 years more political wilderness anyway.

Also: this give up on some... it wasn't a policy they gave up. It was also a personally signed pledge!

 

[Superphil]

Lib Dems have been a breath of fresh air in the government, for once the Tory/Labour boat is having to actually do things that the people want, rather than just what they want as it seems to have been the case since Margaret Thatcher came into power. Coalition it may be, but I think it will be to the benefit of everyone, no more is an elected party riding roughshod over everyone for their own advantage, to satisfy their every selfish whim. Compromise is tough, but it should be us, the people, who benefit from it.

Of course, it's the students who got them voted into the coalition, no-one else votes for them of course.

 

[Gwylan]

Labour are embarrasingly weak at the moment and should be taking the tories to town over the unjust, unfair and unnecessary cuts (in tuition fees at least)

I don't think you meant to say that; there are no cuts in tuition fees - they've been increased!!

Labour is staying schtum on this because it was Labour who introduced fees in the first place and it was Labour who asked Browne to look at university funding. Further education is not exactly a strong area for Labour.

I'm no Labour voter but I think Ed M is doing nothing wrong at the moment. He's doing what CMD did and is lying doggo, letting the other parties hang themselves. If he starts committing to policy, that's when the trouble starts.

 

[Biscuit]

Yes Labour bought the fee's in but that's no arguement. No one is saying there shouldn't be fee's, only that they shouldn't go up.

 

[KneeOn]

Yes Labour bought the fee's in but that's no arguement. No one is saying there shouldn't be fee's, only that they shouldn't go up.

or go up as much as they are.

 

[larus]

I think you hold the LibDems in the same contempt most tories do (inc Cameron et al). As for me I actually quite liked them before they turned their back on their principals at the sniff of some power. I don't think Politics is all about winning elections (although it helps ) I think trying to change the world for the better and working towards instilling the principals you and your supporters stand for is more important than bequiving all important values just for office. So in that respect they've totally lost all my respect, for the same reason you think they did the right thing. Funny world politics.

Therein lies the problem. If you're in opposition and not having to deal with the reality of government (not likely to do so either), it's very easy to criticise any government for the decisions they make.

For example, if the Lib-Dems were in opposition, would any of them be supporting the policy on tuition fees? No.
If Labour were in power again, would they be putting through unpopular cuts in spending? Yes.

This confrontational political system we have is pathetic. Left/Right, Labour/Tory. There's 651 MP's and they SHOULD be doing the best for the country; not just trying to score points off each other.

 

[Biscuit]

This confrontational political system we have is pathetic. Left/Right, Labour/Tory. There's 651 MP's and they SHOULD be doing the best for the country; not just trying to score points off each other.

I agree.

 

[West Hoathly Seagull]

Well saying there supporters should go "Back to growing beards and wearing sandals" I took as you not having a great deal of respect for them. And in all fairness, why should you? They're like the tories sex slave, allowing them to enact all their fantasies and not complaining.

I get your point about you having to be in power to change things but that isn't always the case. Some political parties are nothing more than pressure groups and they can make real changes in policy that concerns them. I'm not suggesting that's what the LibDems are, not at all, but they should stick to their principals and not bend over backwards to agree to policies that would have given them nightmares pre-election. This is only short term gain and in years to come I think it'll cost them dear. Sure, they had a little bit of power (on paper if not reality), but I think they've surrendered the opportunity of being seen as a credible alternative now, and they're just the coalition party should the two horse race get a bit tight. Which hopefully it won't again now that people have seen that tactical voting has allowed the tories back in office.

The only bonus for me is seeing a certain type of voter (the killer combo of being a very very low earner coupled with being as thick as a plank) get f***ed over. Turkeys voting for Christmas if you ask me.

The Lib Dems are a split party like the other two; the difference is that they are a much smaller party, so the differences show far more. Clegg, David Laws, Vince Cable to a certain extent are Orange Bookers, so far closer to the Tories on economic policy (actually I may be wrong on Cable there - Foreign Office Minister Jeremy Browne would be a better example). Others, such as Charles Kennedy and Simon Hughes, are far closer to Labour. Like it or not, that's politics. I have been a lifelong Conservative, except for in the late 1980s, when I flirted with the Liberal-SDP Alliance. I am on the moderate wing; NHS, education, etc (I am a school governor), much more right wing on Law and Order. I am not, however, on the John Redwood/Daniel Hannan wing. Likewise, you had the New Labour lot in your party as well as lefties. A split that would rip the Lib Dems apart would do nothing like for either of our parties.

 

[Pavilionaire]

Alright, Labour are flirting with the disaffected Lib Dems in the coalition, and it's all fairly cynical and ultimately pointless, but I'd hardly say that was reason to call them a shambles.

Booted out of government with a seriously small share of the vote, a distinct lack of alternative policies so now casting around for inspiration from the Lib Dems AND - most serious of all - the realisation dawning that they chose the wrong brother. That's a shambles in my book.

David Miliband turned down the top EU job of High Representative For Foreign Policy in the hope of getting the Labour gig. Now everyone's a loser.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

BBC News - Independent Living Fund to be shut down by 2015

More changes on the way...

 

[ROSM]

Lib Dems have been a breath of fresh air in the government, for once the Tory/Labour boat is having to actually do things that the people want, rather than just what they want as it seems to have been the case since Margaret Thatcher came into power. Coalition it may be, but I think it will be to the benefit of everyone, no more is an elected party riding roughshod over everyone for their own advantage, to satisfy their every selfish whim. Compromise is tough, but it should be us, the people, who benefit from it.

Of course, it's the students who got them voted into the coalition, no-one else votes for them of course.

Phil did you write that with a straight face? The Lib Dems are so out of touch of how to govern that they are truly c*** struck (the feeling normally seen by some young men who are so desperate for sex that they will overlook any pain or trouble caused by their girlfriend in case it causes them to lose out on the one thing they want).

They see the conservatives as a key to their aspirations - so much so that Clegg will overlook how badly his team are being treated in order to not miss out on power.

 

[ROSM]

Booted out of government with a seriously small share of the vote, a distinct lack of alternative policies so now casting around for inspiration from the Lib Dems AND - most serious of all - the realisation dawning that they chose the wrong brother. That's a shambles in my book.

David Miliband turned down the top EU job of High Representative For Foreign Policy in the hope of getting the Labour gig. Now everyone's a loser.

I'm not happy with the choice of Ed M but he is not the red he has been painted as by the Sun. he may not be leader by the next election but he will put the party on a more sound policy footing for the man who does. As Simster says, he doesn't have to say much as Cameron didn't for 3 years (indeed Cameron actually supported many of the labour spending plans), but a root and branch review of what the party needs to do to represent both the middle ground and it's core vote is needed. The Tories have asked Hutton and Field to help them so why should Labour ask the Lib Dems what they think?

 

[Cian]

Labour were NEVER going to get in any kind of power after that election result. The ONLY way was a colalition with the Tories and that was never going to happen.

If all the parties with MP got together to form a governeent they still would have been in a minortiy against the Tories.

I think.

From memory, Lab + Lib Dem + SDLP and Alliance (who are under Labour and LibDem whip anyway) and taking in to account the figure needed for a majority being reduced by Sinn Fein not sitting would have JUST given them 50%. I may be slightly out on the figures though.

 

[Stoo82]

Lib Dems have been a breath of fresh air in the government, for once the Tory/Labour boat is having to actually do things that the people want, rather than just what they want as it seems to have been the case since Margaret Thatcher came into power. Coalition it may be, but I think it will be to the benefit of everyone, no more is an elected party riding roughshod over everyone for their own advantage, to satisfy their every selfish whim. Compromise is tough, but it should be us, the people, who benefit from it.

Of course, it's the students who got them voted into the coalition, no-one else votes for them of course.

In a way I agree with this.

The last budget saw a cut in income tax for under 10k or something, cant be botherd to look it up. Something the Lib Dems wanted which was a bloody good idea. So they are getting some things in as part of the coaltion.

And yes, only students voted for the lib dems.

 

[Stoo82]

From memory, Lab + Lib Dem + SDLP and Alliance (who are under Labour and LibDem whip anyway) and taking in to account the figure needed for a majority being reduced by Sinn Fein not sitting would have JUST given them 50%. I may be slightly out on the figures though.

I did my own little maths things and, yes it was a minor majority. But there waas no way Labour could have stayed in power. No way.

 

[Superphil]

Phil did you write that with a straight face? .

Yeah, a bit, what I mean is this, if the Tories had been in there on their own, or if Labour had managed to get re-elected, then they would simply be crucifying this country right now, and there would be nothing to stop them having it their way, and to hell with anyone else’s opinion.

With the coalition, Clegg and the LDs are able to have influence, and right now, with the state the country is in, that is a good thing IMO. If we ever get out of this mess, then the next government probably needs to go back to a single party, hopefully having learnt from the coalition, and perhaps being a bit more 'of the people, for the people', rather than 'me me me me'.

Plenty of people are saying Clegg is a lapdog to Cameron, but I think that is nonsense, 5 cabinet ministerial positions are occupied by LDs, they have important jobs to do, they cannot be lapdogs to Cameron, they are part of the government, the group responsible for the running of our country.

There will never be 100% acceptance of any party in power, there is a bit of a left wing bias on here, but by no means is it total, just like there are those who support the Tories, and those who support the LDs.

What I find difficult to get my head around with the commentary I read on here is the apparent belief by some that this country can only be run be the person they think should be in power. This is still a democracy, right? Then the people vote for whom they want in government, like it or not, sometimes they are not the party you voted for.

 

[KneeOn]

Yeah, a bit, what I mean is this, if the Tories had been in there on their own, or if Labour had managed to get re-elected, then they would simply be crucifying this country right now, and there would be nothing to stop them having it their way, and to hell with anyone else’s opinion.

With the coalition, Clegg and the LDs are able to have influence, and right now, with the state the country is in, that is a good thing IMO. If we ever get out of this mess, then the next government probably needs to go back to a single party, hopefully having learnt from the coalition, and perhaps being a bit more 'of the people, for the people', rather than 'me me me me'.

Plenty of people are saying Clegg is a lapdog to Cameron, but I think that is nonsense, 5 cabinet ministerial positions are occupied by LDs, they have important jobs to do, they cannot be lapdogs to Cameron, they are part of the government, the group responsible for the running of our country.

There will never be 100% acceptance of any party in power, there is a bit of a left wing bias on here, but by no means is it total, just like there are those who support the Tories, and those who support the LDs.

What I find difficult to get my head around with the commentary I read on here is the apparent belief by some that this country can only be run be the person they think should be in power. This is still a democracy, right? Then the people vote for whom they want in government, like it or not, sometimes they are not the party you voted for.

Because if you tink some one should be in power then you think they are the only ones who can run it well. I accept the Conservatives as the biggest party, I accept they ahve entered a Coalition with the Libs. I cannot take the breaking of a personally signed pledge that gave the individual MP's a mandate to vote No.

I'm hoping now the Sailisbury Convention is remembered and disregarded in Lords.

 

[Barnham Seagull]

If Liberal Democrats have been put off, I would assume they would rather turn back to the original Liberal party which is still going rather than Labour?

 

[Hatterlovesbrighton]

I'm not happy with the choice of Ed M but he is not the red he has been painted as by the Sun. he may not be leader by the next election but he will put the party on a more sound policy footing for the man who does. As Simster says, he doesn't have to say much as Cameron didn't for 3 years (indeed Cameron actually supported many of the labour spending plans), but a root and branch review of what the party needs to do to represent both the middle ground and it's core vote is needed. The Tories have asked Hutton and Field to help them so why should Labour ask the Lib Dems what they think?

So you think Ed see himself as a Michael Howard stabiliser and will want to give it up before the next election? Also if they are being so inclusive why don't they let the Conservatives have a voice in their policy discussions.

 

[clapham_gull]

Is it just me or have the coalition taken the approach of getting other party's MPs to introduce their respective Policy carve up.

Not only has Vince Cable been lecturing us on the effective privatisation of Higher Education, I thought Liam Fox was going to roll up a spliff when questioning the effectiveness of Prison on Question Time the other night.