[Archived] Ordinary Dave

[bellamy11]

Can't remember. Can't even rem whether I bothered or not but if you give me a list of the candidates other than Jack Straw of course it might jog my memory.

Jack Straw - Labour

Sangheeta Kaur Sidhu - Conservative

Stephen Fenn - Liberal Democrat

David Bradshaw - Referendum Party

Tina Wingfield - National Democrats

Helen Drummond - Socialist Labour

Robin Field - Green

Margo Carmichael-Grimshaw - Keep Britain Free and Independent Party

William Batchelor - Common Sense Sick of Politicians

[jim mk2]

Jack Straw - Labour

Sangheeta Kaur Sidhu - Conservative

Stephen Fenn - Liberal Democrat

David Bradshaw - Referendum Party

Tina Wingfield - National Democrats

Helen Drummond - Socialist Labour

Robin Field - Green

Margo Carmichael-Grimshaw - Keep Britain Free and Independent Party

William Batchelor - Common Sense Sick of Politicians

Thank you for that bellamy.

Imagine poor old thenodrog's miserable, hateful, contorted face as he put his X against an Asian Tory.

I dislike these emoticons but in this case

[adopted scouser]

The Conservative party has said that it will cut Disability Living Allowance." This is paid to some of the poorest people in the country who are unable to hold down employment due to disabilities.

Come on Colin, it's also paid to thousands who feign back injury, problems with walking or general mobility, breathing problems etc. It's a shame for the genuine claimants that many of the above are found working on building sites, or breakdancing on 'Britain's Got Talent'. I know people who will limp to the quack for the monthly medical, people who register their car in their claimant father's name to get free road tax and so on. Cameron wants more vigorous testing to determine who the real deserving cases are, rather than lazy b***ards who laugh at the rest of us working for a living.

And the war criminal Blair.

Now that we agree on.

[OscarRaven]

That's why I'll never vote Tory

I'll probably never vote Labour ever again, not because of the global downturn, which they had no control over

Good old Mr Galloway? Scargill?

Don't waste your vote. It will only make you worse.

[Bazzanotsogreat]

Apologies Flopsy,

Incapacity benefit. Paid to those who are unable to work due to disabilities. Many of whom were moved into this in years gone by to get then off the unemployment list to keep those figures down.

I would just love to live in your world Colin- it is just so wonderful, utopian even, everyone seems so genuine- with all those legitimate incapacity benefit claimants.

[thenodrog]

Jack Straw - Labour

Sangheeta Kaur Sidhu - Conservative

Stephen Fenn - Liberal Democrat

David Bradshaw - Referendum Party

Tina Wingfield - National Democrats

Helen Drummond - Socialist Labour

Robin Field - Green

Margo Carmichael-Grimshaw - Keep Britain Free and Independent Party

William Batchelor - Common Sense Sick of Politicians

Thanks Bellamy. Now that I have seen that list I think that must be one of the two or three General Elections that I have 'passed' on. Having said that I think with hindsight Mr Batchelor should have been most peoples choice.

Oh btw Jim...... Try all you like to convince yourself and others that your opinions are infallible but in reallity everybody knows that you are simply an aggravation [removed]. Turns out now Bellamy has reminded me that I didn't bloody well vote at all! ........... It seems the joke's on you [removed].

[jim mk2]

Now that I have seen that list I think that must be one of the two or three General Elections that I have 'passed' on.

(these things are useful sometimes).

Some folks should stop stop digging when they're in a hole.

[thenodrog]

(these things are useful sometimes).

Some folks should stop stop digging when they're in a hole.

Stop making yourself look more idiotic than normal. My astention from voting has been discussed on here many times in the past. In fact I can't really win cos most (and Dave Birch in particular I seem to rem) have criticised me for not doing.

[colin]

Come on Colin, it's also paid to thousands who feign back injury, problems with walking or general mobility, breathing problems etc. It's a shame for the genuine claimants that many of the above are found working on building sites, or breakdancing on 'Britain's Got Talent'. I know people who will limp to the quack for the monthly medical, people who register their car in their claimant father's name to get free road tax and so on. Cameron wants more vigorous testing to determine who the real deserving cases are, rather than lazy b***ards who laugh at the rest of us working for a living.

I'd probably agree that: there are some thousands cheating the system with fake ailments. But whatever a system there will be cheats and liars and cons. But there are many many more genuine claimants. How many tax evasion/avoidance cases do we know about that cost the country millions in income? But at least the Incapacity Benefit has to be ticked by a doctor.

And I realise that this comment is not really helpful.

My original comment was to compare The Conservative Party's approach to those on "Employment and Support Allowance" (thanks CN174) to its approach to Inheritance Tax. "Threshold for 2009-10 is £325,000. And with careful planning it is possible for couples to increase the nil rate band so their combined estate can be worth up to £650,000 before they owe inheritance tax. Think about it - £650,000 to pass on free of tax." Thanks Jim.

The Conservative party wants to cut Employment & Support Allowance" which is paid to a few cheats and lots of poor disabled people who cannot get jobs & cut inheritance tax for the rich

That's while I'll never vote Tory.

[bellamy11]

Thanks Bellamy. Now that I have seen that list I think that must be one of the two or three General Elections that I have 'passed' on. Having said that I think with hindsight Mr Batchelor should have been most peoples choice.

Oh btw Jim...... Try all you like to convince yourself and others that your opinions are infallible but in reallity everybody knows that you are simply an aggravation removed. Turns out now Bellamy has reminded me that I didn't bloody well vote at all! ........... It seems the joke's on you removed.

I was mates with Mr Batchelor's son at school before he moved to Southampton. A quick look at wikipedia shows that he only got about 300 votes, which was a shame considering how astute his sentiments were/are.

[colin]

I would just love to live in your world Colin- it is just so wonderful, utopian even, everyone seems so genuine- with all those legitimate incapacity benefit claimants.

Thanks for that Bazza.

Would you actually like to comment on my suggestion that The Conservative party is not worthy of my vote because of its policy of cutting "Employment and Support Allowance" (paid generally to some of the poorest and most disabled people in the country)compared to its policy of abolishing Inheritance Tax which will benefit the richer."

Ad Hominem comments don't really help. They don't shed any light at all.

[Bazzanotsogreat]

Thanks for that Bazza.

Would you actually like to comment on my suggestion that The Conservative party is not worthy of my vote because of its policy of cutting "Employment and Support Allowance" (paid generally to some of the poorest and most disabled people in the country)compared to its policy of abolishing Inheritance Tax which will benefit the richer."

Ad Hominem comments don't really help. They don't shed any light at all.

The Conservative party’s policy is actually pretty much in line with the Labour party’s policy on employment benefit. The difference is that labour dare not announce it; as benefit claimants tend to vote Labour (if they vote at all)

In my opinion, these proposed cuts don’t go anywhere far enough. Independent Research shows that 1 in 5 incapacity claims are made fraudulently

Are you in favour of fraud? Why are some people so people affronted by cutting down people committing fraud? Why do protect those that are too inherently idle to work.

Those who are genuinely ill or incapable of work will not have anything to worry about.

[stuwilky]

I am not in favour of fraud, and fraud plays a limited part in this discussion.

They are simply talking about cutting the amount paid - now whilst this may have a minimal impact on fraud as it starts to less beneficial to sit on ones arse it will have a far more harmful impact on the genuine claimants (those of whom I am sure none of us object to a small weekly allowance).

Talking fraud and cutting a payment amount do not go hand in hand, and none of the parties are strong enough on cutting fraud - just think cutting fraud would enable the genuine claimants to receive a small amount more, whilst the dollopers will receive nothing.

[grizfoot]

In my opinion it's time for a new party to take over the reins of the country. The Tories failed and caused all sorts of tension in the 80's and the current Labour government have well and truely left the economy in a mess. I see nothing to suggest that this current Labour government is capable of leading the country to better times nor do I think the Tories fronted by Cameron are the answer.

Based on that I really think people should be looking elsewhere at other political parties. I do think Vince Cable is one of the best politicians around, he talks a lot of sense and raises many a good point. But I fail to see a situation were the Lib Dems would ever get into power, but currently they'd be my party of favour.

[American]

I am not in favour of fraud, and fraud plays a limited part in this discussion.

They are simply talking about cutting the amount paid - now whilst this may have a minimal impact on fraud as it starts to less beneficial to sit on ones arse it will have a far more harmful impact on the genuine claimants (those of whom I am sure none of us object to a small weekly allowance).

Talking fraud and cutting a payment amount do not go hand in hand, and none of the parties are strong enough on cutting fraud - just think cutting fraud would enable the genuine claimants to receive a small amount more, whilst the dollopers will receive nothing.

I'm shocked.

An actual opinion and not just a question!

It is tough to weed out the good from the bad. I've always favored job training. You'd think in today's day and age of less manual labor jobs, it would be easier to re-train someone to work around any disabilities and find a job that fits their skills.

[stuwilky]

I'm shocked.

An actual opinion and not just a question!

It is tough to weed out the good from the bad. I've always favored job training. You'd think in today's day and age of less manual labor jobs, it would be easier to re-train someone to work around any disabilities and find a job that fits their skills.

Im shocked American , Althought to be fair, at least I answer the questions put to me more often than not - unlike some other posters (who presumably miss reading them!)

[colin]

The Conservative partys policy is actually pretty much in line with the Labour partys policy on employment benefit. The difference is that labour dare not announce it; as benefit claimants tend to vote Labour (if they vote at all)

In my opinion, these proposed cuts dont go anywhere far enough. Independent Research shows that 1 in 5 incapacity claims are made fraudulently

Are you in favour of fraud? Why are some people so people affronted by cutting down people committing fraud? Why do protect those that are too inherently idle to work.

Those who are genuinely ill or incapable of work will not have anything to worry about.

Bazza, you are addressing an issue that I didn't raise. I'm not talking about the "one in five" that you mention.

I was commenting that on the fact that The Conservative party wants to target them to reduce their benefits and that they also want to abolish Inheritance Tax for the rich.

My point was the broader issue of their proposal to save money by hitting poorer people and and letting the richer people run away with their money

[Paul]

Oh, I don't think Northern Rock was unavoidable, anything but.

You seem firmly entrenched Paul in your pro-Labour views and anti-Tory bias. When you say that the Tories will tax the poorest and give the wealthiest an easy ride, I can't square this with you having said previously that you don't know anything about what the Tories stand for. Presumably you see the Tories as far-right Thatcherites, and New Labour as compassionate socialists? Sorry if I've misrepresented your views, but I can't see anywhere where you've actually backed this up.

The days when you could caricature the parties as Labour being the party of the working man, advocating state control and tax and spend; and Conservatives being the party of big business, low tax and minimal state control are long gone. That went out of the window when Labour abolished Clause 4 and jumped into bed with the City.

I think the parties are closer together in ideaology than perhaps you'd like to admit.

I haven't been ignoring your implied question but have been rather busy and also been thinking about what you ask. I've had to give the reply some thought because as someone who generally, but not always, votes Labour I fall into one of three categories as far as some of our more short-sighted posters are concerned; sponging benefit claimant, fast-breeding slag who should be sterilised or bearded, sandle-wearing, Guardian reading lefty liberal. Strangely I'm none of these as those who have met me might confirm, sadly I'm just predictably middle-class. The Tory voters I know don't fall into recognisable stereotypes, neither do the Labour supporters I meet. The great problem with threads such as this is contributors can't help but characterise those whose views they disagree with. I'm neither rabidly pro-Labour nor anti-Tory, however I do have an inherent distrust of the Conservative party and people such as Cameron and Osborne have a great deal to prove.

Previously I said I was unsure of the Tory policies; well I listened and read quite closely during the conference. I think my next vote, and I will use it giving me a more valid view than some who don't, is going to be crucial. If I believe the Tories can offer a better future I'd vote for it. The big question is can they? History tells us they will offer some people a better future, I want to live in a country which offers everyone a better chance. As you say the parties are now very close in their actions, hopefully not in their ideologies.

Osborne has made the following statements:

4 or 5 million public sector workers (15% of the country's workforce) will have their pay frozen, anyone above £18k per annum. Average UK earnings, dependent on the statistics one uses, are between £20k and £31k. Some of the 4 million about to enjoy a pay freeze are hardly among the wealthy and will include nurses, teachers, hospital workers, local authority staff etc all people who provide services the nation needs. On Question Time he refused to rule out the possibility this freeze would be for more than one year. Aside from the effect on individuals, consider the effect on the general economy which needs consumers to consume.

Increasing the retirement age means a man in his early 50s will have to save, from taxed income, £30 / week to replace the lost year's pension should he wish to retire at 65. I would suggest the majority who rely on the state pension are likely to already be in a lower income bracket? The economy needs stimulating yet Osborne is encouraging me, and every other man over 50, to not to spend £1500 in the next twelve months. Lunatic.

A 25% cut in defence spending to be paid for from procurement. Lets not beat about the bush this means paying less for things, i.e putting manufacturer's under pressure to cut cost. What is the fastest way for a manufacturer to cut costs? Jobs, simple.

The above and other bits and pieces will save £7 billion per year, by the end of the next parliament but budget deficit this year is heading towards £200 billion, so it's a racing certainty Osborne has a lot more cutting to do. These headline savings are a long, long way off. History has repeatedly show in times of recession government must spend. If the Tories come to power and start cutting things will get worse but of course they will have Labour to blame rather than their own policy and most will accept it for that.

The closing point of Cameron's speech was to suggest we need less government, not more which is, of course, a Labour view. It isn't the government that got us in this unholy mess, it was "big business" and not just in the last ten years, more like the past 30. Both parties have been guilty of failing to regulate business sufficiently. Labour should be chastised for not doing enough to curb our burdgeoning debt. In the last year the government has pumped £1.3 trilion into the banking sector. Without this injection we would be in a depression to make the 1930s look a blip on the graph. To say this is the government's fault is illogical. The Conservatives would have walked away and let the economy collapse? I don't think so. It's easy to criticise when it isn't your problem to solve. When I listen to the radio I hear the public furious at the likes of Fred Goodwin, I don't hear the same venom directed at the government. The Conservatives are whipping a national hysteria over debt but the economists don't have the same view. We all borrow to live.

Too much of what Cameron and Osborne said in Manchester has its' roots in the 1980s when my mortgage alone was crippling the family financially. We are all in this together yes we are but not the way Osborne suggested! There are plenty of people in this country who can afford to pay more taxes to help get us out of this mess yet Osborne is already targeting the lower paid and older population.

The parties are very, very similar and not much will change. The problem Labour have is failing to highlight the positives: new schools, new colleges, free bus passes, child tax credits, vastly improved NHS, more local policing, crime reduction, more prisons, educational maintenance allowance, tackling immigration, greater financail support for those who need it, inclusive education, an inclusive society. All Brown and his party have done is whinge over the Tories pinching Labour ideas, which is what Blair did more than ten years ago in reverse. Labour will lose the election by failing to trumpet its successes which is a real shame

[colin]

The Conservative party’s policy is actually pretty much in line with the Labour party’s policy on employment benefit. The difference is that.........

I'm not disagreeing with your comment at all, sure benefits cheats should be stopped. But the main point of my original comment was that the Conservative party that wants to reduce benefits to the disabled (who are most likely to the poorest in our nation) whilst abolishing inheritance tax (for the benefit of some of the richest in our nation) is unfair.

Please don't drag into the discussion benefit cheats. They are not really relevant.

Give us your opinion on benefits to the disabled being reduced v the abolition of Inheritance Tax as a policy.

Keep it simple, keep it straight and to the point. And please don't tell me I live in some kind of utopia.

TTFN

Colin

[Tris]

... quoting a great but long post, just up there ----^^

Paul there is much sense in what you write, and many will agree with every sentiment.

But I'm afraid that the phrase "we all borrow to live" in defence of this Labour government says it all.

Brown and Blair inherited an economy on the up, and untold wealth in this country. It has all gone. North Sea oil and gas - gone. The gold reserves - gone. 175 billion of public debt - on the way. By squeezing until the pips squeek, Brown is going to flog the Tote, the Dartford Crossing and High Speed 1 (rail line) for an optimistic 16 billion (if the wind is blowing north at the time). There is nowt left to unload after that lot.

That is why Cameron and Osborne (and via different routes, Clegg and Cable) are being honest about what needs to happen to claw back the wasted cash. The huge debt. If Brown and Darling admitted their mistakes and admitted there is pain for EVERYONE ahead - they might actually win more votes than they are due. Let's also remember that this hopeless government wasted 30 billion quid on an NHS computer **** up that never looked like working.

The 50% rate for high earners appears at first glance to be the way to nail the problem, but in fact it doesn't tickle the surface. There simply aren't enough high earners. Those that do exist on these shores are leaving in their droves, as our beloved EU freedom of movement allows them to do.

Even artists and musicians are leaving for France and Spain, where culture is more important than 50% tax on the well paid. PL footballers wages are already inflated to cover the higher rate of tax - but only because the PL can afford it. Orchestras, Operas and Art Foundations cannot.

The only way that this country gets out of this mess is through pain. Anyone who ever ran up a credit card bill beyond their means knows exactly what is ahead. This goverment tries to pretend it's thrown money at the problem to solve it - and they have - but there's no solution, just more problems.

As a small but hugely significant example, take the Glasgow Airport Rail Link. A key element for the development of that city, scheduled to be built in time for the Commonwealth Games in 2014. All the studies done, most of the enabling work done, new signalling system installed, even space has been cleared at Glasgow Central station to allow two new platforms for the trains to the airport.

Total projected cost of this project - 400 million. They have now ditched the vital bit - the actual rail tracks from the existing lines to the airport and the new platforms. The money simply isn't there. Saving??? 170 million quid. So they spent 230 million to enable the project to happen, but the cash isn't there to finish the job. What a shambles.

This will be the first of many, whoever gets into Westminster. Labour have allowed the Glasgow Airport shambles to happen in such a blaze of publicity because they think the blame will fall on the SNP - which in itself is a deceitful tactic from the very bottom drawer.

At the last voting opportunity (locals) I didn't cast a single vote for the Conservatives. I had three votes. I voted for the best people for my local area, and that included Lib Dems and For Darwen. I won't be the only person to switch, to ensure my vote at the general election gets rid of Brown and "new labour" - for good.

[Paul]

I can't disagree with much of your post Tris though I'd argue the selling off the North Sea reserves started long before Labour returned to power, but that's nit-picking really. I think your credit card analogy is very good, been there, got the T-shirt and our household saves first, spends later!! I am prepared, this time, to vote for a party showing real intention to solve the problems in a fair manner. For example initially I was impressed by Osborne's plan to move the retirement age, then I began to read some of the analysis. Headlines are great, save £13 bn per year, £175 bn of debt will be removed pretty quickly but the actuality is rather different. This is my fundamental problem with Cameron et al, they make these speeches but there is always a nagging doubt at the back of my mind, is he being truthful or is it more of the same. So far it's more of the same, the lower paid are being asked to pay while the better off carry on as usual. If a party wants my vote it's available for real savings at that level and beyond.

I want to see we really are "all in it together." On the basis of the Conservative conference this is untrue, it's a catchphrase which should bite the Tories on the arse. Currently nothing announced by the Conservatives will touch our household financially yet the people who provide the services everyone enjoys are expected to take the hit - I can't square this one. I can afford to pay more, why should the bloke who empties my bin suffer when I don't? I'm sure I'll get plenty of "you can pay as much tax as you want" for this but if we truely are all in this together this is what must happen.

The entire country has enjoyed cheap credit, borrowing to fund life-styles millions can't afford or should have saved for first. When it goes wrong it's always someone else's fault. I had a Northern Rock mortgage, thanks guys cheap as chips. It wasn't sustainable, the lack of financial regulation for 30 years created the problem, but we all enjoyed the good times, we all have to contribute to the national credit card bill.

[stuwilky]

Mr Osborne suggested we are all in this together.

He, along with many politicians appear to know bugger all about being "in it together".

How much did Mr Osborne claim in expenses last year? Well more than the average public sector workers salary, including some claims where he mortgage interest alone topped £3500. He is a multi millionaire who also tried claiming £400 for a chauffeur to take him from Cheshire to London.

[broadsword]

Paul there is much sense in what you write, and many will agree with every sentiment.

But I'm afraid that the phrase "we all borrow to live" in defence of this Labour government says it all.

Brown and Blair inherited an economy on the up, and untold wealth in this country. It has all gone. North Sea oil and gas - gone. The gold reserves - gone. 175 billion of public debt - on the way. By squeezing until the pips squeek, Brown is going to flog the Tote, the Dartford Crossing and High Speed 1 (rail line) for an optimistic 16 billion (if the wind is blowing north at the time). There is nowt left to unload after that lot.

I've never understood how flogging the family silver is a viable long-term policy, after all, there's only so much silver to flog. Whatever happened to Gordon's golden rule by the way? Apparently these assets (as well as Met Office) have been put up for sale before - no-one wanted them.

What Labour just cannot understand is that it's not how much you spend that matters alone, it's how effectivelky it's spent and they've frittered mega-money.

The country is most definitely up the creek.

EDIT - but at least we have the Olympics in 2012.

[philipl]

I don't have any problem with the current Keynesian policies being pursued by the Government. Without them we would be in a far greater mess.

I do have a problem that public finances had slipped into a mess during the good times and that the concept of efficiency in delivering public services seemed to have disappeared.

Above all, I have enormous problems with Labour's all out attack on civil liberties and individual rights. This deliberate attempt to completely destroy volunteering in society simply underlines that whilst Labour were happy to sup with the big banks in neo-conservatism economics they remained always at heart statists who are anti-individuals and deeply suspicious of communities and voluntary organisations.

[Paul]

This deliberate attempt to completely destroy volunteering in society simply underlines that whilst Labour were happy to sup with the big banks in neo-conservatism economics they remained always at heart statists who are anti-individuals and deeply suspicious of communities and voluntary organisations.

Very much agree with you here Philip. This was a subject of much "discussion" in our house recently after I made some remarks during the late night news!!! I almost wish the kids were 10-12 years younger and I was still ferrying a car full of other people's children to somewhere or other just to stick two fingers up at the idiot who came up with this idea. My other half doesn't have a problem with it and I'm surprised she finds it acceptable that a parent has to have a CRB to take someone else's kids out. I took young boys to the Rovers for years along with my lot, presumably that would require a CRB today?