Tory - The caring conservatives

[Stato]

You must hate living in a democratic country. Soon even the unions will have to be run in a democratic way.

How is it democratic for a government to make one rule for union mandates, but a different rule for its own mandate? The rules they are introducing are not designed to increase democracy, they are designed to reduce strike action. Some may think this an acceptable aim, but admit the truth of its intent. It is insulting to limit freedom whilst wrapping it up in Newspeak and calling it an increase in democracy.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32870930

If the same mandate requirements were made for the general election, this government would not be in power and I don't believe that any previous UK government would has been elected with 80% of the vote.

 

[Hampster Gull]

If seeking to make the economy work and create jobs then yes they are caring. If its about boosting the benefits system to catch more people, then they are not

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

If seeking to make the economy work and create jobs then yes they are caring. If its about boosting the benefits system to catch more people, then they are not

The economy does work. But only for Dave's wealthy chums. It doesn't work for the swathes of people on zero hours contracts. It doesn't work for the swathes of people forced to work insecurely and week-to-week via employment agencies. It doesn't work for the swathes of people on minimum wage. And it doesn't work for the swathes of people in work but having to use food-banks.

 

[Soulman]

The economy does work. But only for Dave's wealthy chums. It doesn't work for the swathes of people on zero hours contracts. It doesn't work for the swathes of people forced to work insecurely and week-to-week via employment agencies. It doesn't work for the swathes of people on minimum wage. And it doesn't work for the swathes of people in work but having to use food-banks.

Agree with you on Agencies, mind you they have been in operation for many years, in fact right through the 13 Labour years....they did nothing also.

 

[Hastings gull]

The economy does work. But only for Dave's wealthy chums. It doesn't work for the swathes of people on zero hours contracts. It doesn't work for the swathes of people forced to work insecurely and week-to-week via employment agencies. It doesn't work for the swathes of people on minimum wage. And it doesn't work for the swathes of people in work but having to use food-banks.

With all these swathes, how on earth did they win the election outright? You just can't beat a spot of incisive political judgement.

 

[Hampster Gull]

The economy does work. But only for Dave's wealthy chums. It doesn't work for the swathes of people on zero hours contracts. It doesn't work for the swathes of people forced to work insecurely and week-to-week via employment agencies. It doesn't work for the swathes of people on minimum wage. And it doesn't work for the swathes of people in work but having to use food-banks.

Its not perfect, of course, could be miles better. But unemployment rate at 5.6%, wages growing by 3.2% and GPD one of the highest in the OECD things could be much much worse. We are on the right journey

 

[beorhthelm]

The economy does work. But only for Dave's wealthy chums. It doesn't work for the swathes of people on zero hours contracts. It doesn't work for the swathes of people forced to work insecurely and week-to-week via employment agencies. It doesn't work for the swathes of people on minimum wage. And it doesn't work for the swathes of people in work but having to use food-banks.

there's a large cohort inbetween those you list for whom the economy does work (and no doubt some it doesnt quite). why in an attempt to highlight those in need, does anyone have to polarise with stark contrasts? create a them and us attitude, forgetting most of the population along the way.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

there's a large cohort inbetween those you list for whom the economy does work (and no doubt some it doesnt quite). why in an attempt to highlight those in need, does anyone have to polarise with stark contrasts? create a them and us attitude, forgetting most of the population along the way.

Really? Financial inequality is soaring. Is there really that much in between?

 

[Buzzer]

So, if this comment by the Taxpayer's Alliance makes the Tories the nasty party then what words are we allowed to use to describe the actions of the Labour Party with their repeated cover-ups of the systematic and repeated rape of children, so as not to upset their voters in those areas?

 

[glasfryn]

The economy does work. But only for Dave's wealthy chums. It doesn't work for the swathes of people on zero hours contracts. It doesn't work for the swathes of people forced to work insecurely and week-to-week via employment agencies. It doesn't work for the swathes of people on minimum wage. And it doesn't work for the swathes of people in work but having to use food-banks.

oh god you have mentioned "food banks" now you will have Mr Bridger on here moaning

 

[glasfryn]

So, if this comment by the Taxpayer's Alliance makes the Tories the nasty party then what words are we allowed to use to describe the actions of the Labour Party with their repeated cover-ups of the systematic and repeated rape of children, so as not to upset their voters in those areas?

along with the police,social workers and royalty oh and also the tory party

 

[Buzzer]

along with the police,social workers and royalty oh and also the tory party

Wrong. Individuals from all parties appear to have been involved in child abuse and I'm certainly not excusing anyone there but I'm pretty sure that only one party in the likes of Oxford and Rotherham have repeatedly tried to suppress the child abuse scandal purely for maintaining electoral advantage.

 

[glasfryn]

Wrong. Individuals from all parties appear to have been involved in child abuse and I'm certainly not excusing anyone there but I'm pretty sure that only one party in the likes of Oxford and Rotherham have repeatedly tried to suppress the child abuse scandal purely for maintaining electoral advantage.

thin ice if you do not have any proof
all the things you mention are crimes most reported to the police who are firstly meant to uphold the law

 

[Buzzer]

thin ice if you do not have any proof
all the things you mention are crimes most reported to the police who are firstly meant to uphold the law

Thin ice? Ed Miliband even apologised for his party's role in it.

 

[beorhthelm]

Really? Financial inequality is soaring. Is there really that much in between?

no off course not, there is no one inbetween those on minimum wage and the top 1%. i must be in the latter, along with everyone on the commute.

 

[LamieRobertson]

there's a large cohort inbetween those you list for whom the economy does work (and no doubt some it doesnt quite). why in an attempt to highlight those in need, does anyone have to polarise with stark contrasts? create a them and us attitude, forgetting most of the population along the way.

 

[lawros left foot]

As opposed to conferring Knighthoodson those directly involved in child abuse. No mainstream political party gain claim the moral high ground at the moment, they all were involved at some level, or have turned a blind eye

 

[Mellor 3 Ward 4]

Really? Financial inequality is soaring. Is there really that much in between?

Of course there is.

What a strange comment.

 

[BHAFC_Pandapops]

And they hate British people too, along with some of their gang smashing up shops and spitting at people.

Hope you're joking. If you're not you're a bloody fool. The tw@s spitting at journalists, who were conveniently covered up, were there in the name of anarchy, not Labour. The TUC & the PA marched peacefully through Manchester. I was there at the beginning, and at the end.

Every demo gets knobheads rocking up uninvited.

 

[BHAFC_Pandapops]

Also, don't believe a word of what the papers say about JC being the most unpopular. All of the polls they ran returned 80+% favour for JC. So they were repeatedly closed down and replaced by other ones. The process was rinsed and repeated three to four times, each time favouring JC. Until the papers finally declared him "most unpopular".