General Election 2015

[spring hall convert]

**** right to buy.

Same Tories, same 35 year old bribe. I'm assuming their manifesto will be a series of bribes, in the absence of any progressive policies.

 

[Titanic]

**** right to buy.

Same Tories, same 35 year old bribe. I'm assuming their manifesto will be a series of bribes, in the absence of any progressive policies.

400,000 new houses over 5 years seems like quite a good idea to me.

 

[spring hall convert]

400,000 new houses over 5 years seems like quite a good idea to me.

Except it won't happen. Read the small print - the HAT's won't be obligated to do it. They've had plenty of time to build some houses, if it was actually a priority.

I'm not normally one for 'politics of envy' but please explain to me how right to buy is fair? Would it not be a better idea to do something about the ridiculous pricing in the private lettings market? Oh..... that would be the turkeys voting for Christmas wouldn't it?

Utter *****.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Well today ought to be entertaining with the publication of the Green manifesto - yet more crack pot ideas like banning horse racing.

 

[yxee]

Yes, vote Tory.

Because 915,000 dependent on food banks isn't enough. [emoji106]

You think that number will go up or down when Labour abolish zero-hour contracts?

 

[cunning fergus]

Two separate schools but just founded from the same financial legacy. Two separate sites, different board of governors etc etc. I believe it is you that is splitting hairs. Osborne clearly didn't go to the Girls school!

As for the rest of your comments re Harman, I don't disagree apart from the fact that probably not all of her constituents went to local schools as well (but then that probably is just splitting hairs).

There is two separate schools in London one for boys and one for girls, they share the same name, historical connections, values, coordinate activities together and have similar selection criteria for entry.........they are both for POSH kids.

Harriet calls George and David posh boys, and George responds you went to the same school as me.

Harriet did albeit the one for girls, however the key bit is she is posh too...........and therefore she is as tory as George hence she shipped her own kids off to a nice posh school in Kent as oppose to somewhere in her constituency..........Diane Abbot did the same as unashamedly.

Harman is right with her accusation, George and David are posh.

George is right in his retort, Harman is as posh as him and David.

They are all posh..........George is posh and stands for a posh party, Harman is posh and stands for a party that represents the interests of the powerless.

One is being more honest with the electorate.........

 

[Simster]

Nice to see Red Eds promising to sort out the countries finances. Trouble is this is the man who didnt even mention the deficit in his party speech, from a party that left a message when they left government saying that there was no money left and after they led the country into the worst financial crisis in 100 years. Hmz

As has been said repeatedly, this deficit that Labour left was never the issue that you and your one eyed right wing chums constantly want to make out. Let's put some numbers to this. This is the best article I can find on the subject:

http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/7568/debt/government-debt-under-labour-1997-2010/


The key points are:
a) yes, the public sector debt rose sharply between 2008 and 201, from £500bn to "902bn (from 36% to 60% as a % of GDP). Before then, Labour had kept it running between 40% and 36%, which was never considered anything other than perfectly manageable.
b) From that article:
"Even public sector debt of 60% of GDP is quite low compared to the historical average of public sector debt in the UK during the twentieth century. The very high period of debt in the 1950s was not a barrier to economic expansion."

All this talk of Labour leaving the country in a mess is utter drivel. They didn't leave the country in any more of a mess than the Tories did in 1997. In both cases, the government of the day were driven out of office for reasons other than economic. People don't like complacency in office.

 

[spring hall convert]

You think that number will go up or down when Labour abolish zero-hour contracts?

1. Labour aren't abolishing zero hour contracts. They are aiming to stop the abuse of them by employers by giving workers rights in a scenario where a worker has been on a zero hours contract for some time. I'm no fan of the current Labour party but that seems a humane, progressive thing to do. I have a strong suspicion that you don't know anyone impacted by this issue.

2. You seem to be legitimising people not being able to feed themselves, much like this Government. Shame on you. The fact that food banks have gone mainstream is a damning indictment on the last 5 years - it was perfectly possible to be austere without ****ing people over.

 

[Simster]

You think that number will go up or down when Labour abolish zero-hour contracts?

I think food bank dependency will go down on Labour's watch. If it doesn't, personally I will be appalled.

As for zero-hour contracts, it's a judgement call. On the one hand, they help create a flexible job market. On the other, the country is effectively subsidising big business. This is because there are cases where businesses CAN afford to take on people with proper contracts in place but choose instead to give them zero hour contracts as a profit maximising exercise. So effectively, the state ends up subsiding those businesses because we end up paying benefits to those on zero hour contracts who don't make enough money to live on.

On balance, I'd ban them.

 

[Bold Seagull]

There is two separate schools in London one for boys and one for girls, they share the same name, historical connections, values, coordinate activities together and have similar selection criteria for entry.........they are both for POSH kids.

Harriet calls George and David posh boys, and George responds you went to the same school as me.

Harriet did albeit the one for girls, however the key bit is she is posh too...........and therefore she is as tory as George hence she shipped her own kids off to a nice posh school in Kent as oppose to somewhere in her constituency..........Diane Abbot did the same as unashamedly.

Harman is right with her accusation, George and David are posh.

George is right in his retort, Harman is as posh as him and David.

They are all posh..........George is posh and stands for a posh party, Harman is posh and stands for a party that represents the interests of the powerless.

One is being more honest with the electorate.........

Massive coincidence though don't you think?

That they all support Peterborough...

 

[beorhthelm]

That's not true at all. Labour supported the provisions of the bill and voted for it; what Labour voted against was the guillotining of the debate - the coalition tried to push through the bill using emergency procedures and Labour wanted proper scrutiny. What killed the bill was the strength of feeling in the Tory party - nearly a hundred Conservative MPs voted against it and Cameron withdrew the bill before civil war broke out.

It was a bill that could easily have been redrawn and pushed through parliament but Cameron chose not to. I maintain that it was a completely bone-headed decision that could cost him up to 20 seats

i dont believe it was a "guillotine" motion as debate had only just started, it was a strict programme to prevent Tory rebels talking the bill to death. such was the technicalities and procedures that mired the whole issue. Cameron couldnt get enough Tory votes for the bill as presented but was supporting it. bottom line is Labour block progress of the bill which they supported, presumably to create trouble for the coalition. why insist on more debating time when in agreement?

 

[Man of Harveys]

There is two separate schools...

And somewhere there are a third even worse one that you probably attended?

 

[beorhthelm]

1. Labour aren't abolishing zero hour contracts. They are aiming to stop the abuse of them by employers by giving workers rights in a scenario where a worker has been on a zero hours contract for some time. I'm no fan of the current Labour party but that seems a humane, progressive thing to do. I have a strong suspicion that you don't know anyone impacted by this issue.

quite right, they aren't abolishing them. they are proposing a clusterfudge where they are OK for upto 12 weeks, then you have to be put on some other contract basis. i wonder what the consequences of this is going to be in practice? its an awfully constructed policy that doesn't appear to address "exploitative" practice at all, and leaves loopholes wide open to abuse.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

And somewhere there are a third even worse one that you probably attended?

 

[beorhthelm]

Except it won't happen. Read the small print - the HAT's won't be obligated to do it. They've had plenty of time to build some houses, if it was actually a priority.

and this is another mess of policy too. haven't read the detail but the headline policy seems to once again ignore why houses aren't built: its not a lack of funds or land, its planning permission. one good thing is they are proposing a fund to cover infrastructure to support development - progress. dont like the Housing association right to buy though, its not even logical. they are private landlords, why should they be obliged to to sell their housing stock? are other private landlords going to be exposed to right to buy too?

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

quite right, they aren't abolishing them. they are proposing a clusterfudge where they are OK for upto 12 weeks, then you have to be put on some other contract basis. i wonder what the consequences of this is going to be in practice? its an awfully constructed policy that doesn't appear to address "exploitative" practice at all, and leaves loopholes wide open to abuse.

True. I'd ban them outright.

 

[Ernest]

Another unfunded policy with selling off HA properties, I thought they were meant to be financially competent ?

 

[Triggaaar]

There is two separate schools in London one for boys and one for girl

And somewhere there are a third even worse one that you probably attended?

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Another unfunded policy with selling off HA properties, I thought they were meant to be financially competent ?

It's a ****ing ridiculous idea. We need more HA, not less. And all this will do is move a lot of social housing stock into the private rental market as the last round of right-to-buy did. Crazy.

 

[spring hall convert]

quite right, they aren't abolishing them. they are proposing a clusterfudge where they are OK for upto 12 weeks, then you have to be put on some other contract basis. i wonder what the consequences of this is going to be in practice? its an awfully constructed policy that doesn't appear to address "exploitative" practice at all, and leaves loopholes wide open to abuse.

I'm loving "clusterfudge" I'm stealing that for my own use.

The truth is people are currently being exploited, a party that at least recognises this and is seeking to address it is better than one that refuses to acknowledge the issue. IMO, like.