Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: Banjax on 02 May 2010, 03:42:54
-
after much deliberation, soul-searching and examining the pros and cons I've decided that this election boils down to one single issue that towers over all other concerns. It's the economy, stupid :y
To that end I truly believe that the Tories cannot be trusted to protect jobs, if they get in - I'd love to be proved wrong but they're plans may well be disastrous.
LibDems would sadly be a vote wasted (Ochil and South Perthshire is a 2-horse race between Labour and SNP - in fact it's the SNP's no.1 target with a wafer thin Labour majority).
Whatever everyone thinks of Gordon Brown (and everyone seems to have an opinion) he handles questions on the economy with ease, he knows what he's talking about and what's required and above all seems to make sense.
I don't think most people (me included) actually realise how fragile our economy is - I would be really nervous of Cameron and Osbourne wading in with public sector cuts to appeal to the Tory faithful in some mad experiment with peoples jobs :(
As a Labour majority looks increasingly unlikely (but not beyond the boundaries of reason) - perhaps the best I can hope for is a hung parliament with a Lib/Lab pact. If they then bring in proportional representation I can vote for who I want....until then I need to vote Labour :o
now...let me fetch my tin hat 8-)
-
I'd dig a foxhole as well ;D ;D cos there might be a bit off incoming with your opinion ::) ::) ::)
-
I think you'll need more than a tin hat! :o
You may need this...
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Abbots-Self-Propelled-Gun-military-tank-/170479757150?cmd=ViewItem&pt=LH_DefaultDomain_3&hash=item27b162a75e ;D ;D
You do talk some sense though, I have never been very keen on Cameron from the first time he raised his head in politics.
-
If I wanted to vote Labour I'd be voting for Maryam Kahn (http://www.labourlist.org/ppc-profile-maryam-khan)
A bit like the 27 yr old head of Anti-Personnel where I used to work .... clueless of life. :-?
-
Voting?? whats that ::)
-
voting/ politics the subject like religon has started just as many wars, and my feelinga are.
why bother ,they all rob the honset hard working christian tax payer.
:)
-
voting/ politics the subject like religon has started just as many wars, and my feelinga are.
why bother ,they all rob the honset hard working christian tax payer.
:)
but you must have a party which is your least worse choice? theres parties for socialists, reformers, capitilists, party goers, tree huggers, christians, muslims, communists, nazis and bigots - it pains me to say it, but even voting for nazis is better than not voting at all :o
-
If I wanted to vote Labour I'd be voting for Maryam Kahn (http://www.labourlist.org/ppc-profile-maryam-khan)
A bit like the 27 yr old head of Anti-Personnel where I used to work .... clueless of life. :-?
a) she's pretty hot
b) you think she'd actually have any say in what goes on in the government?
-
If I wanted to vote Labour I'd be voting for Maryam Kahn (http://www.labourlist.org/ppc-profile-maryam-khan)
A bit like the 27 yr old head of Anti-Personnel where I used to work .... clueless of life. :-?
this is the problem i'm facing too, if i vote for either of our local smiling liars (lib or con) then i'm not voting for PM just the local probability so i'm just not going to vote.
No vote doesn't equal a wasted vote to me but rather "not a wrong vote" ;)
-
I am not sure that what I want to give my vote to anybody.
It certainly wont be Labour, they are the most financialy insecure lot of all time and have ran the exconomy very poorly snce they day they arrived into power.
Jobs must go, particularly in the public sector.
-
The problem with labour and Brown in particular is that when he talks of jobs he is talking of public sector jobs and does not have any concept as to why this area has become so bloated under his superviison now that cuts have to be made.
I posted a couple of weeks ago that I had put in a freedom of information request abpout my Council.
Out of 4000 employees, 90 of them are earning £9 million between them. These are the employees earning over £50,000 but it is not clear about the amount included for pensions.
If Conservatives do get in then they have to push for these useless managerial positions to be abolished or downgraded as certainly in my area there is no justifcation for paying a CEO £150,000 plus benefits - he is the classic damp rag - totally typical of jobs worth public sector manager.
If we start with this type of job focus and not those cuts that hit services first then there may be a fairer way forward.
Brown does not take into account who has to pay for this lot and some how we have all got to earn more from private sector income generating jobs to divi up the taxes to pay for the public sector.
To do this the economy needs to be stimulated - if Brown pays our ever increasing taxes back to public sector workers this is absolutely no solution at all and will just serve to make us uncompetitve.
Brown is a total muppet and you could see from the debate when he could not understand the issue about the government and the economy.
-
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brown-has-got-it-right-on-deficit-say-economists-1957275.html
[size=10]"Only when the recovery is well under way, will it be safe to have extra cuts in government expenditure. The first step is to make sure that growth returns, and thus that tax receipts recover. Rash action now could imperil not only jobs but also the prospects for reducing the deficit."
The economists include Lord Layard, emeritus professor of economics at the London School of Economics; David Blanchflower, a former member of the Bank of England's monetary policy committee; Lord Skidelsky, emeritus professor of political economy, University of Warwick; Christopher Allsopp, director of the Oxford Institute for Energy; Philip Arestis, professor of economics, University of Cambridge, and David Bell, professor of economics, University of Stirling.[/size]
i feel like Nickbat with all this cutting, pasting and quoting ;D :y
-
Another five years of socialism will kill this country off completely.
“You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.”
(Adrian Rogers, 1931)
In 2009/10, the Treasury is expecting to take in £140.5 billion in gross income tax receipts. Social security benefits are projected to be £164.7 billion.
Micawber's equation.
Voting for Brown is voting for someone who has driven this country to the edge. Maybe, for some perverse reason, Labour voters want to push it over the edge.
:( >:(
-
after much deliberation, soul-searching and examining the pros and cons I've decided that this election boils down to one single issue that towers over all other concerns. It's the economy, stupid :y
To that end I truly believe that the Tories cannot be trusted to protect jobs, if they get in - I'd love to be proved wrong but they're plans may well be disastrous.
LibDems would sadly be a vote wasted (Ochil and South Perthshire is a 2-horse race between Labour and SNP - in fact it's the SNP's no.1 target with a wafer thin Labour majority).
Whatever everyone thinks of Gordon Brown (and everyone seems to have an opinion) he handles questions on the economy with ease, he knows what he's talking about and what's required and above all seems to make sense.
I don't think most people (me included) actually realise how fragile our economy is - I would be really nervous of Cameron and Osbourne wading in with public sector cuts to appeal to the Tory faithful in some mad experiment with peoples jobs :(
As a Labour majority looks increasingly unlikely (but not beyond the boundaries of reason) - perhaps the best I can hope for is a hung parliament with a Lib/Lab pact. If they then bring in proportional representation I can vote for who I want....until then I need to vote Labour :o
now...let me fetch my tin hat 8-)
Banjax is talking sense here - just read his ditty very carefully. ;)
Just ask any former miner or busman here about the Tories for confirmation. >:(
'Better the devil you know' etc; and I ain't wearing a tin hat! :)
-
See the aviation thread.
-
You say Mr Brown has a good head for the recovery shame it's labour that's put us in this state over the years and who was it that had there hands on the money for most of that time. I know the bankers had a hand in it but who gave them the hand out so they could have the big bonus pay outs. They should have let them go to the wall and then just pay out to the people that lost savings, I think the figure would have been smaller. We now have such a large amount to pay back plus the interest to pay and he wants to keep borrowing until next year before starting repayment. We all know there are going to be cuts I should Know I work in public sector and I have lost over 30% of manpower since last August and still have to do the same job. What you don't see wont hurt MUCH. Or am I just being bitter.
-
Banjax is talking sense here - just read his ditty very carefully. ;)
Just ask any former miner or busman here about the Tories for confirmation. >:(
'Better the devil you know' etc; and I ain't wearing a tin hat! :)
If you vote for the lesser of two evils, you're still voting for evil. ;)
-
Sorry I forgot to add all the voters that stay at home in protest on Thursday 6th May or just can't be botherd to vote need to think of one thing on the 7th May. You don't have a say on whats happened so just keep your head in the sand and hope nothing bites your backside. :y
-
I don't really do politics, but i've had my fill of these useless inept bunch of sressot that we have now & so i will be voting for the ones that i think will rid us of them.
Latin meaning of "Poli" is many & the meaning of "tics", well we all know what a Tic is, but just incase you're unsure "Blood Sucking Parasite". No need to say any more ;)
-
I think they are all pretty useless. However, my vote will go to whomever looks most likely to beat Labour...
Whoever gets in, there will have to be *MASSIVE* cuts in public spending, and large tax rises to even begin to fill the £175bn annual deficit. Those cuts need to happen right NOW. Even the complete closure of the NHS would not cover that.
Additionally, benefits need to be slashed - we all know people who are on benefits, purely because they don't want to work. Redirect some of those savings to help those who do.
So, my vote will be decided nearer the time. If I have to vote for useless Tories or LDs to stop another Labour term, so be it.
-
You say Mr Brown has a good head for the recovery shame it's labour that's put us in this state over the years and who was it that had there hands on the money for most of that time. I know the bankers had a hand in it but who gave them the hand out so they could have the big bonus pay outs. They should have let them go to the wall and then just pay out to the people that lost savings, I think the figure would have been smaller. We now have such a large amount to pay back plus the interest to pay and he wants to keep borrowing until next year before starting repayment. We all know there are going to be cuts I should Know I work in public sector and I have lost over 30% of manpower since last August and still have to do the same job. What you don't see wont hurt MUCH. Or am I just being bitter.
we've avoided a depression thanks to Brown's plan taken up by the G20 - a fact which seems forgotten.
GB and the labour government are rightly criticised for not having stuck to their own fiscal rules. On the other hand, before this recession we had low debt-to-GDP ratio – remember being prudent?
It's because of the earlier prudence that we haven't collapsed so obviously blame labour for being too soft on banks (against GB's better judgement) but please don't tell me they got us into this mess - that was US banks gambling on a housing bubble with poor credit rating mortgages.
And ask yourself would a tory government have been harder on banks? theres a first time for everything I suppose, maybe now they say they will but you're kidding yourself if you think we wouldn't have been in a worse mess under the tory party.
by your argument, go back in time and tell me which party and which policies at the time would have prevented the global collapse - there are none - the tories would have you believe its all gordons fault - easily stated, harder to back up.....still we're only electing the single most important leader in the last 50yrs - lets decide it on who has the best quips, most polished soundbites or the best suit :-? :o :o
there do need to be cuts - but lets wait until we're out of intensive care before we pull the plug eh? :y
-
I think they are all pretty useless. However, my vote will go to whomever looks most likely to beat Labour...
Whoever gets in, there will have to be *MASSIVE* cuts in public spending, and large tax rises to even begin to fill the £175bn annual deficit. Those cuts need to happen right NOW. Even the complete closure of the NHS would not cover that.
Additionally, benefits need to be slashed - we all know people who are on benefits, purely because they don't want to work. Redirect some of those savings to help those who do.
So, my vote will be decided nearer the time. If I have to vote for useless Tories or LDs to stop another Labour term, so be it.
dont put less petrol in the tank - it just means we have to walk further :)
-
I do understand your piont Banjax that's why it's so hard trying to know who to vote for on Thursday.
Can I just say this If there is to be a hung parliarment who do we hang first :-? :-/ :y
-
Just a few random thoughts to throw into the pot .....
Whoever gets in -- recovery is going to be painful. All colours ( and the populace in general) will target public servants for cuts. Unfortunately the ones that need to be cut ( fat cat "no jobs" at the top), the ones that cost the most per capita, will remain and the axe will fall on the front line workers, simply because they are easier and cheaper to dispose of!
Same goes for public sector pensions -- all this talk of gold plated pensions (BTW -- gold plated means a thin veneer of expensive metal over a lump of cheap stuff) --- the majority of the pension pot goes to the minority at the top. Again the rank and file get the rough end of the pineapple every time!
Can't depend on any of the manefesto promises -- they have all been made before and never followed through.
I agree that GB didn't get us into this mess, but all this talk of managing "waste" ---- why do we have all this "waste" to trim ?? Why hasn't it been trimmed already by a prudent government??
-
we've avoided a depression thanks to Brown's plan taken up by the G20 - a fact which seems forgotten.
GB and the labour government are rightly criticised for not having stuck to their own fiscal rules. On the other hand, before this recession we had low debt-to-GDP ratio – remember being prudent?
It's because of the earlier prudence that we haven't collapsed so obviously blame labour for being too soft on banks (against GB's better judgement) but please don't tell me they got us into this mess - that was US banks gambling on a housing bubble with poor credit rating mortgages.
And ask yourself would a tory government have been harder on banks? theres a first time for everything I suppose, maybe now they say they will but you're kidding yourself if you think we wouldn't have been in a worse mess under the tory party.
by your argument, go back in time and tell me which party and which policies at the time would have prevented the global collapse - there are none - the tories would have you believe its all gordons fault - easily stated, harder to back up.....still we're only electing the single most important leader in the last 50yrs - lets decide it on who has the best quips, most polished soundbites or the best suit :-? :o :o
there do need to be cuts - but lets wait until we're out of intensive care before we pull the plug eh? :y
Wrong again, I'm afraid.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/3078296/the-true-extent-of-britains-debt.thtml
-
You say Mr Brown has a good head for the recovery shame it's labour that's put us in this state over the years and who was it that had there hands on the money for most of that time. I know the bankers had a hand in it but who gave them the hand out so they could have the big bonus pay outs. They should have let them go to the wall and then just pay out to the people that lost savings, I think the figure would have been smaller. We now have such a large amount to pay back plus the interest to pay and he wants to keep borrowing until next year before starting repayment. We all know there are going to be cuts I should Know I work in public sector and I have lost over 30% of manpower since last August and still have to do the same job. What you don't see wont hurt MUCH. Or am I just being bitter.
we've avoided a depression thanks to Brown's plan taken up by the G20 - a fact which seems forgotten.
GB and the labour government are rightly criticised for not having stuck to their own fiscal rules. On the other hand, before this recession we had low debt-to-GDP ratio – remember being prudent?
It's because of the earlier prudence that we haven't collapsed so obviously blame labour for being too soft on banks (against GB's better judgement) but please don't tell me they got us into this mess - that was US banks gambling on a housing bubble with poor credit rating mortgages.
And ask yourself would a tory government have been harder on banks? theres a first time for everything I suppose, maybe now they say they will but you're kidding yourself if you think we wouldn't have been in a worse mess under the tory party.
by your argument, go back in time and tell me which party and which policies at the time would have prevented the global collapse - there are none - the tories would have you believe its all gordons fault - easily stated, harder to back up.....still we're only electing the single most important leader in the last 50yrs - lets decide it on who has the best quips, most polished soundbites or the best suit :-? :o :o
there do need to be cuts - but lets wait until we're out of intensive care before we pull the plug eh? :y
:y
as said:
"who come next will make you seek for the previous" .. :-/
-
I think New Labour have done an awful lot to get us in this mess. Prudence? Never happened.
I'm just the local thick kid from the local comprehensive. But even I know the basics of fiscal management - when the times are good, pay off debts, and maybe even try to save 'for a rainy day'. When the 'rainy day' comes, it gives you extra flexibility.
New Labour; we'll borrow even more in the good times, in the vain hope of paying it back in the even better times, because "this is the end of boom and bust economy".
Additionally, by discouraging manufacturing in the UK, in preference to a finacial services economy, New Labour left us severely exposed when that market sector hit problems.
But that aside, any ruling party becomes stale, ineffective and out of ideas by the end of the 2nd term. Then they come out with stupid ideas about giving our pets lots of mental stimulation or face a £20k fine.
Nope, Labour must go.
-
if labour had got rid of brown when blair went i dont think they would be in a position as bad as they are. its a 2 men party run by brown and mandy. blair quit knowing the recession was coming and basically brown has taken the flack for everything. blair does not give a shite about the country or his party now, hes earning too much money to care.
-
bah, Politics, its just like big brother for posh people ;D
-
bah, Politics, its just like big brother for posh people ;D
is harriet harmon jade goody ;D ;D
-
I think New Labour have done an awful lot to get us in this mess. Prudence? Never happened.
I'm just the local thick kid from the local comprehensive. But even I know the basics of fiscal management - when the times are good, pay off debts, and maybe even try to save 'for a rainy day'. When the 'rainy day' comes, it gives you extra flexibility.
New Labour; we'll borrow even more in the good times, in the vain hope of paying it back in the even better times, because "this is the end of boom and bust economy".
Additionally, by discouraging manufacturing in the UK, in preference to a finacial services economy, New Labour left us severely exposed when that market sector hit problems.
But that aside, any ruling party becomes stale, ineffective and out of ideas by the end of the 2nd term. Then they come out with stupid ideas about giving our pets lots of mental stimulation or face a £20k fine.
Nope, Labour must go.
Essentially correct, IMHO. :y :y
It is unarguable that the basic rules which govern personal finance apply equally to the economy of the state, i.e. if your outgoings exceed your income, you must reduce your outgoings and/or increase your income.
Given that the above is a fact of life, it follows that public spending must be cut. Much of this can be done painlessly, but given that there is a socially-acceptable limit to such cuts, attention must be paid to increasing income. In the case of the state, this means increasing tax income and it is here that ALL the main parties (and several economists) get it wrong. If personal tax/vat/duty, etc. is increased significantly, the effect will be to cause stagnation within the economy. Companies will see reduced demand and increased costs. Many will only be able to survive with wholesale cost-cutting - which normally means redundancies. Many will inevitably go to the wall - more redundancies.
Where employed people pay tax and spend a proportion of their net income (thus generating more income for the government). In contrast, those who are unemployed are a drain on the public purse - not only are they not paying tax, but they are obviously costing the government in terms of social security payments - so the government debt gets worse and the cycle continues.
What an incoming government should do (but won't) is to cut public spending AND taxation. That would provide a stimulus to the economy and thereby increase the overall tax income. The additional benefit of a stimulus to the economy would be an increase in new business start-ups, rather than closures, providing the prospect even better rates of fiscal income in the future. :y
But what do politicians know? Generally, the square root of bu**er all. ::) :(
-
Whatever everyone thinks of Gordon Brown (and everyone seems to have an opinion) he handles questions on the economy with ease, he knows what he's talking about and what's required and above all seems to make sense.
In 2000-1, three years into the Labour administration, government spending was £367.1bn. For 2010-11, the government is forecasting a figure of £704bn: nearly twice as much. If it had grown in line with inflation since 2000, public spending would now be £440.8bn – £263.2bn less than current estimates. That saving would be enough to wipe out the £163.8bn deficit, abolish all National Insurance contributions, and get rid of inheritance tax.
Yep, Gordon's record shows that he really understands economics. What a tw*t. >:( :( :(
-
Whatever everyone thinks of Gordon Brown (and everyone seems to have an opinion) he handles questions on the economy with ease, he knows what he's talking about and what's required and above all seems to make sense.
In 2000-1, three years into the Labour administration, government spending was £367.1bn. For 2010-11, the government is forecasting a figure of £704bn: nearly twice as much. If it had grown in line with inflation since 2000, public spending would now be £440.8bn – £263.2bn less than current estimates. That saving would be enough to wipe out the £163.8bn deficit, abolish all National Insurance contributions, and get rid of inheritance tax.
Yep, Gordon's record shows that he really understands economics. What a tw*t. >:( :( :(
give a kid money for sweets hes gonna spend it all at once
-
Interesting debate.
You are all missing the point which is quite simply that Britain is bankrupt and you are all going to have to pay very heavily not just heavily for the horrendous borrowing that has gone on. That means job cuts, pay cuts not just freezes and more tax. Lots of it.
People are saying that Britain isn't like Greece. I maintain that if the market confidence goes then Britain will go the same way. As I keep saying Spain next in July and then Britain in November(once the election honeymoon is over and reality sets in).
One final point about trimming the waste. I have a good friend who is paid good money to advise and promote healthy eating in schools. He would hate me for saying it but that is a raft of jobs that could surely go now all over the country. Of course he would be on the scrap heap and costing money rather than paying tax....................................... ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Interesting debate.
You are all missing the point which is quite simply that Britain is bankrupt and you are all going to have to pay very heavily not just heavily for the horrendous borrowing that has gone on. That means job cuts, pay cuts not just freezes and more tax. Lots of it.
People are saying that Britain isn't like Greece. I maintain that if the market confidence goes then Britain will go the same way. As I keep saying Spain next in July and then Britain in November(once the election honeymoon is over and reality sets in).
One final point about trimming the waste. I have a good friend who is paid good money to advise and promote healthy eating in schools. He would hate me for saying it but that is a raft of jobs that could surely go now all over the country. Of course he would be on the scrap heap and costing money rather than paying tax....................................... ;D ;D ;D ;D
Greece is our loving neighbour.. ;D
and I think I know Brits too.. I can confidently say that you have nothing in common ..
neither the working life, rules, personal attitude ,life style .. no..
and must add engineering, industrial production , trading are incomparable..
-
I think New Labour have done an awful lot to get us in this mess. Prudence? Never happened.
I'm just the local thick kid from the local comprehensive. But even I know the basics of fiscal management - when the times are good, pay off debts, and maybe even try to save 'for a rainy day'. When the 'rainy day' comes, it gives you extra flexibility.
New Labour; we'll borrow even more in the good times, in the vain hope of paying it back in the even better times, because "this is the end of boom and bust economy".
Additionally, by discouraging manufacturing in the UK, in preference to a finacial services economy, New Labour left us severely exposed when that market sector hit problems.
But that aside, any ruling party becomes stale, ineffective and out of ideas by the end of the 2nd term. Then they come out with stupid ideas about giving our pets lots of mental stimulation or face a £20k fine.
Nope, Labour must go.
Well said that man :y :y :y :y :y
-
Interesting debate.
You are all missing the point which is quite simply that Britain is bankrupt and you are all going to have to pay very heavily not just heavily for the horrendous borrowing that has gone on. That means job cuts, pay cuts not just freezes and more tax. Lots of it.
People are saying that Britain isn't like Greece. I maintain that if the market confidence goes then Britain will go the same way. As I keep saying Spain next in July and then Britain in November(once the election honeymoon is over and reality sets in).
One final point about trimming the waste. I have a good friend who is paid good money to advise and promote healthy eating in schools. He would hate me for saying it but that is a raft of jobs that could surely go now all over the country. Of course he would be on the scrap heap and costing money rather than paying tax....................................... ;D ;D ;D ;D
They get to put a logo on their headed paper that tells everyone that they are a subscriber to healthy eating at that school.
Then the teachers hand out rewards for good behaviour and merit points. rather haribo sweets...bags and bags of them. I told my son's teacher that if he needed to visit the dentist, she would be taking him.
-
we've avoided a depression thanks to Brown's plan taken up by the G20 - a fact which seems forgotten.
GB and the labour government are rightly criticised for not having stuck to their own fiscal rules. On the other hand, before this recession we had low debt-to-GDP ratio – remember being prudent?
It's because of the earlier prudence that we haven't collapsed so obviously blame labour for being too soft on banks (against GB's better judgement) but please don't tell me they got us into this mess - that was US banks gambling on a housing bubble with poor credit rating mortgages.
And ask yourself would a tory government have been harder on banks? theres a first time for everything I suppose, maybe now they say they will but you're kidding yourself if you think we wouldn't have been in a worse mess under the tory party.
by your argument, go back in time and tell me which party and which policies at the time would have prevented the global collapse - there are none - the tories would have you believe its all gordons fault - easily stated, harder to back up.....still we're only electing the single most important leader in the last 50yrs - lets decide it on who has the best quips, most polished soundbites or the best suit :-? :o :o
there do need to be cuts - but lets wait until we're out of intensive care before we pull the plug eh? :y
Wrong again, I'm afraid.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/3078296/the-true-extent-of-britains-debt.thtml
you're looking at external debt Nickbat, I'm looking at the public debt only, if you want to include
all the debt owed by private companies and consumers then fine, i'd fully expect it to be high - thats all the mortgages, credit cards, loans and financing - and you know what good little consumers we are. add to that all the debt owed in business (including..ahem..the banks) and its going to be high - but dont compare apples with oranges :y
-
Interesting debate.
You are all missing the point which is quite simply that Britain is bankrupt and you are all going to have to pay very heavily not just heavily for the horrendous borrowing that has gone on. That means job cuts, pay cuts not just freezes and more tax. Lots of it.
People are saying that Britain isn't like Greece. I maintain that if the market confidence goes then Britain will go the same way. As I keep saying Spain next in July and then Britain in November(once the election honeymoon is over and reality sets in).
One final point about trimming the waste. I have a good friend who is paid good money to advise and promote healthy eating in schools. He would hate me for saying it but that is a raft of jobs that could surely go now all over the country. Of course he would be on the scrap heap and costing money rather than paying tax....................................... ;D ;D ;D ;D
there won't be any honeymoon period if we all re elect Mr Brown ::)
-
Additionally, benefits need to be slashed
We really need to adopt the US attitude on that one.
-
I swear I read this after I'd written my post this morning:
In the end, the solution must be something along the lines of that enacted by the New Zealand government of 1984 (the post on which is recreated from the DK archives below): not only a massive cut in government spending and a consequent consciousness of how—not how much—money is spent, but also a massive cut in taxes (and regulatory burdens).
Actually, you should read the whole article. Unless something is done with our finances - and soon - "by 2040 the average family would be paying (in today's money) over £10 grand every year just to pay the government's debt interest bill."
http://www.devilskitchen.me.uk/2010/05/scale-of-crisis.html
with an update for emphasis here:
http://www.devilskitchen.me.uk/2010/05/just-for-emphasis.html
Makes for sobering reading. :( :(
PS DK has given up swearing so no NWS warning necessary! :y
-
Just a couple comments, prefaced by the oft repeated statement that I Don't Like Gordon Brown.
GB has had charge of the economy for 13 years, during which time he and the New Labour spin machine have assured us on a daily basis that GB has been the best Chancellor of the Exchequer there has ever been. A financial savant, a safe pair of hands, an international fiscal guru. Maynard Keynes eat your heart out, J K Galbraith run and hide, Milton Friedman weep bitter tears, for Gordon Brown is our saviour.
The only problem is that it just isn't completely obvious what it is that entitles him to this reputation.
Could it be the brilliant decision (made soon after he came to office) to raid the national pension pot to the tune of £5bn a year? Just look at the state of pensions now - many important businesses are showing pension fund deficits that are threatening their future.
Or perhaps the decision to sell the UK's entire gold reserve at a time when gold prices were at a historic low?
Or the "light touch" regulation strategy that allowed the UK banks to gamble themselves to the point of insolvency?
Or the defence budget restraints that allowed us to put inadequately equipped troops into battle in wars we should never have been in and for which (it now seems) our Gordon was not actually involved in making the decisions?
And of course we have him to thank for the creative accounting techniques which announce fiscal changes one or two years in advance, add them (when convenient) to this budget, then include them again they actually come into force. Magic - just like that!
As for saving the world, well our bit of it wasn't actually in that much trouble before he started tinkering with it.
And if you want to know why I'm unemployed and broke, just Google "IR35" and find out how he managed to destroy the business I built up over many years ofhard graft.
[size=12]Vote anyway you like, but remove Gordon Brown. [/size]
-
[size=12]Vote anyway you like, but remove Gordon Brown. [/size]
I'll go along with that! :y :y :y :y
-
Very well said Jereboam. :y :y :y...........Imo there are only two kinds of people who could contemplate voting this disgraceful specimen back into power.
1. Fools
2. Those with a vested interest (public sector employees / those who like living on benefits for example) and are happy to put their own interests above those of the future of their country.
I am no fan of the Tories, but out of the 3 main parties they are the only party who might put right some of the wrong which has been done under this hateful shower. I notice that George Osborne has been missing from the Tories election campaign, hopefully this is a sign that Cameron has realised that he is a liabilty and plans to replace him with Ken Clarke - the man who left Brown with an economy which was in a very healthy state.
If anyyone who is thinking of voting Labour would care to do a little research on the UK economy since the 2nd world war, they will find that every time Labour get in they take over a healthy economy from the Tories, they then proceed to wreck it and it stays wrecked until the Tories are voted back in to put it right. They have made a bigger mess this time than any government in history and if they are re-elected I predict that Darling (or Cable ?) will be going cap in hand to the IMF just like Healey did in the 70,s.
:( :'(
Personally, Im still voting UKIP. :)
-
Personally, Im still voting UKIP. :)
Good man! Me, too! :y :y
-
I would add that I dont believe a word any of the three main parties are saying in their campaigns. In fact I believe that they are all lying through their teeth. They cant possibly ring fence spending on anything , the country is far too skint for that. There must be savage cuts in public spending and there must be tax rises (on top of the 50+ tax rises already imposed by GB) they are all talking crap about education/health/defence etc.
The only difference will be that the Tories will lean more towards spending cuts while Liebore will lean more towards tax rises. As for the Libdems - who knows, not even they know imo. The only thing Clegg seems to be interested in is complete integration with the EU. He seems to think that the answer to all our problems lie there, despite the fact that what is happening in Greece tells us the complete opposite. ::)
-
I would add that I dont believe a word any of the three main parties are saying in their campaigns. In fact I believe that they are all lying through their teeth. They cant possibly ring fence spending on anything , the country is far too skint for that. There must be savage cuts in public spending and there must be tax rises (on top of the 50+ tax rises already imposed by GB) they are all talking crap about education/health/defence etc.
The only difference will be that the Tories will lean more towards spending cuts while Liebore will lean more towards tax rises. As for the Libdems - who knows, not even they know imo. The only thing Clegg seems to be interested in is complete integration with the EU. He seems to think that the answer to all our problems lie there, despite the fact that what is happening in Greece tells us the complete opposite. ::)
I'm almost (but not quite!) getting bored of agreeing with everything you say, Albs!! :y
However, as stated earlier in the thread, a wise politician would cut tax, not raise it. Mind you, we're a bit thin on the ground when it comes to wise politicians. ;) ;D ;D
-
As thin as the hair on my head Nick. :y :'( ::) :D ;D
-
As thin as the hair on my head Nick. :y :'( ::) :D ;D
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;)
-
Very well said Jereboam. :y :y :y...........Imo there are only two kinds of people who could contemplate voting this disgraceful specimen back into power.
1. Fools
2. Those with a vested interest (public sector employees / those who like living on benefits for example) and are happy to put their own interests above those of the future of their country.
I am no fan of the Tories, but out of the 3 main parties they are the only party who might put right some of the wrong which has been done under this hateful shower. I notice that George Osborne has been missing from the Tories election campaign, hopefully this is a sign that Cameron has realised that he is a liabilty and plans to replace him with Ken Clarke - the man who left Brown with an economy which was in a very healthy state.
If anyyone who is thinking of voting Labour would care to do a little research on the UK economy since the 2nd world war, they will find that every time Labour get in they take over a healthy economy from the Tories, they then proceed to wreck it and it stays wrecked until the Tories are voted back in to put it right. They have made a bigger mess this time than any government in history and if they are re-elected I predict that Darling (or Cable ?) will be going cap in hand to the IMF just like Healey did in the 70,s.
:( :'(
Personally, Im still voting UKIP. :)
We're so alike you and me Albs - we both agree George Osborne is a liability for the tories and I always try to end on a joke too, nice touch :y
-
Just another passing thought...
When Messrs. Brown & Darling are finally winkled out of the Treasury, are we going to find any nasty little secrets that they hadn't actually told us about?
I mean, I know that the senior civil servants are supposed to keep an eye on things, and I realise that current attitudes towards integrity and ethics mean that everything has been leaked anyway, but I can't help worrying that the next occupant of Number 11 may open his desk drawer and find a whole batch of unpaid bills that the Great British Public know nothing about. :( :( :(
-
Just another passing thought...
When Messrs. Brown & Darling are finally winkled out of the Treasury, are we going to find any nasty little secrets that they hadn't actually told us about?
I mean, I know that the senior civil servants are supposed to keep an eye on things, and I realise that current attitudes towards integrity and ethics mean that everything has been leaked anyway, but I can't help worrying that the next occupant of Number 11 may open his desk drawer and find a whole batch of unpaid bills that the Great British Public know nothing about. :( :( :(
All three main parties aren't really mentioning the elephant in the room £170 billion budget deficit - banging on about £6billion "efficiency savings" but failing to tell us idiots where these cuts will be - they're also all lying about raising income tax - that's guaranteed although every party says "we have no plans to raise income tax" gives them plausable deniability when the inevitable rise happens next year.
Accept no one is telling the truth - but who will do the least damage to the recovery? :o
-
Very well said Jereboam. :y :y :y...........Imo there are only two kinds of people who could contemplate voting this disgraceful specimen back into power.
1. Fools
2. Those with a vested interest (public sector employees / those who like living on benefits for example) and are happy to put their own interests above those of the future of their country.
I am no fan of the Tories, but out of the 3 main parties they are the only party who might put right some of the wrong which has been done under this hateful shower. I notice that George Osborne has been missing from the Tories election campaign, hopefully this is a sign that Cameron has realised that he is a liabilty and plans to replace him with Ken Clarke - the man who left Brown with an economy which was in a very healthy state.
If anyyone who is thinking of voting Labour would care to do a little research on the UK economy since the 2nd world war, they will find that every time Labour get in they take over a healthy economy from the Tories, they then proceed to wreck it and it stays wrecked until the Tories are voted back in to put it right. They have made a bigger mess this time than any government in history and if they are re-elected I predict that Darling (or Cable ?) will be going cap in hand to the IMF just like Healey did in the 70,s.
:( :'(
Personally, Im still voting UKIP. :)
Personally I feel that comment should be restricted to Higher ranking (non-job) public sector employees and benefit scroungers.
Rank and file public sector workers (except, for some mysterious reason, MOD) have been facing the axe for the last few years under Brown..... and it isn't going to get better. So any public servant (apart from the non-jobs) who votes GB thinking it will save their necks IS a fool !!!!!
-
after much deliberation, soul-searching and examining the pros and cons I've decided that this election boils down to one single issue that towers over all other concerns. It's the economy, stupid :y
To that end I truly believe that the Tories cannot be trusted to protect jobs, if they get in - I'd love to be proved wrong but they're plans may well be disastrous.
LibDems would sadly be a vote wasted (Ochil and South Perthshire is a 2-horse race between Labour and SNP - in fact it's the SNP's no.1 target with a wafer thin Labour majority).
Whatever everyone thinks of Gordon Brown (and everyone seems to have an opinion) he handles questions on the economy with ease, he knows what he's talking about and what's required and above all seems to make sense.
I don't think most people (me included) actually realise how fragile our economy is - I would be really nervous of Cameron and Osbourne wading in with public sector cuts to appeal to the Tory faithful in some mad experiment with peoples jobs :(
As a Labour majority looks increasingly unlikely (but not beyond the boundaries of reason) - perhaps the best I can hope for is a hung parliament with a Lib/Lab pact. If they then bring in proportional representation I can vote for who I want....until then I need to vote Labour :o
now...let me fetch my tin hat 8-)
You voting for Gordon Banks too then Banjax I had him on my door step 2 weeks ago
His seat is the number 1 target seat for the SNP he had a majority of only 700 at the last election so he may not get re-elected.
I will also be voting Labour but only to try and prevent these snp arseholes gaining another seat.
Doug
-
Question .... If GB looses his seat and therefore isn't an MP and Labour actually get re-elected .... Can he still be PM ? :-?
-
I'm voting Labour.....
Someone has to I suppose
-
after much deliberation, soul-searching and examining the pros and cons I've decided that this election boils down to one single issue that towers over all other concerns. It's the economy, stupid :y
To that end I truly believe that the Tories cannot be trusted to protect jobs, if they get in - I'd love to be proved wrong but they're plans may well be disastrous.
LibDems would sadly be a vote wasted (Ochil and South Perthshire is a 2-horse race between Labour and SNP - in fact it's the SNP's no.1 target with a wafer thin Labour majority).
Whatever everyone thinks of Gordon Brown (and everyone seems to have an opinion) he handles questions on the economy with ease, he knows what he's talking about and what's required and above all seems to make sense.
I don't think most people (me included) actually realise how fragile our economy is - I would be really nervous of Cameron and Osbourne wading in with public sector cuts to appeal to the Tory faithful in some mad experiment with peoples jobs :(
As a Labour majority looks increasingly unlikely (but not beyond the boundaries of reason) - perhaps the best I can hope for is a hung parliament with a Lib/Lab pact. If they then bring in proportional representation I can vote for who I want....until then I need to vote Labour :o
now...let me fetch my tin hat 8-)
You voting for Gordon Banks too then Banjax I had him on my door step 2 weeks ago
His seat is the number 1 target seat for the SNP he had a majority of only 700 at the last election so he may not get re-elected.
I will also be voting Labour but only to try and prevent these snp arseholes gaining another seat.
Doug
yep - Gordon Banks is our guy - at least he's a safe pair of hands! - i'll get my coat ;D ;D ;D
its wafer thin majority, but some areas in scotland Labour vote has remained steady or risen - we cant afford SNP's crazy "no cuts" policies :o much as i hate to see cuts, the snp are dreaming if they think people are buying that :o
-
..and if you thought voting for anyone other than UKIP will bring change, ponder this:
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmK-f88gcx8&feature=player_embedded[/media]
>:( >:( :(
-
..and if you thought voting for anyone other than UKIP will bring change, ponder this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmK-f88gcx8&feature=player_embedded
>:( >:( :(
So, despite your antipathy towards Gordon Brown, you would risk allowing him back in by voting for a minority party which stands no chance at all of becoming part of the next government?
Personally, I have no problem whatsoever with the dubious fact that the European Legislature is providing 75% of our laws. Given the makeup of the last House of Commons, they're probably somewhat better at it.
And given Mr. Farrage's immoderate behaviour when representing a British constituency in Europe, I think one would do better to avoid this shower altogether.
Look, we're geographically part of Europe, we're ethnically part of Europe, and since 1974, we've been economically part of Europe. Our national defences would not be viable outside of NATO. Withdrawal from the EU would achieve nothing positive. All our expats would have to come home, all 5m of them. A significant proportion of them would be pensioners who would struggle to get by with the higher cost of living in the UK and would therefore need to avail themselves of the benefit system without actually making any contribution to the economy. On the other hand, all the Eastern European tradesmen and unskilled workers doing all the nasty jobs we are too fastidious to do would have to go back to their countries of origin, leaving us in something of a mess.
So don't waste your vote on UKIP. Vote either Conservative or Lib Dem depending on whichever has the best chance of unseating a Labour candidate.
I live in a safe Conservative constituency. While I prefer the Lib Dem's policies (and leader, for that matter), I shall probably vote Conservative, just to make sure that there's not a surprise Lib Dem surge that allows a situation whereby Labour come back to power.
-
..and if you thought voting for anyone other than UKIP will bring change, ponder this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmK-f88gcx8&feature=player_embedded
>:( >:( :(
So, despite your antipathy towards Gordon Brown, you would risk allowing him back in by voting for a minority party which stands no chance at all of becoming part of the next government?
Personally, I have no problem whatsoever with the dubious fact that the European Legislature is providing 75% of our laws. Given the makeup of the last House of Commons, they're probably somewhat better at it.
And given Mr. Farrage's immoderate behaviour when representing a British constituency in Europe, I think one would do better to avoid this shower altogether.
Look, we're geographically part of Europe, we're ethnically part of Europe, and since 1974, we've been economically part of Europe. Our national defences would not be viable outside of NATO. Withdrawal from the EU would achieve nothing positive. All our expats would have to come home, all 5m of them. A significant proportion of them would be pensioners who would struggle to get by with the higher cost of living in the UK and would therefore need to avail themselves of the benefit system without actually making any contribution to the economy. On the other hand, all the Eastern European tradesmen and unskilled workers doing all the nasty jobs we are too fastidious to do would have to go back to their countries of origin, leaving us in something of a mess.
So don't waste your vote on UKIP. Vote either Conservative or Lib Dem depending on whichever has the best chance of unseating a Labour candidate.
I live in a safe Conservative constituency. While I prefer the Lib Dem's policies (and leader, for that matter), I shall probably vote Conservative, just to make sure that there's not a surprise Lib Dem surge that allows a situation whereby Labour come back to power.
Well I DO have a problem with the European Legislature making up 75% of our laws. The EU is undemocratic, despite pretensions to the contrary. If we vote for a certain administration here in the UK, it won't make one iota of difference if the majority of laws are passed elsewhere, thus making a mockery of our Parliament. Remember, this is an organisation that for the past 14 or 15 years (can't remember the exact number) has been unable to get off its accounts signed off. If it was a commercial company, it would have long since been subject to investigation.
Secondly, the ex-pats would not be sent home like persona non grata. The fact is that they provide their domiciled country with income. The same goes for trade, no EU company would suddenly stop trading with the UK if we were not in the EU. Besides which, UKIP is calling for a free-trade EU, not the political monstrosity that we now have.
Thirdly a vote for UKIP is NOT a wasted vote. If we all thought that way there would never ever be a change from the two/three party farce we have now. Each party must earn my vote; they do not get it by default. None of them have. I know UKIP won't form a government, but that's not the point. Rather, if they do well, it will send a clear signal to the political classes that the issue of the EU, amongst others, must be addressed.
I want to see the back of Brown as much as anyone else, but don't be fooled that either a Cameron or Clegg administration would be that much different, especially when we are at the beck-and-call of the bureaucrats in Brussels.
I will vote according to my conscience, anything less would be a betrayal.
PS
Nato has nothing to do with the EU. Nato was originally conceived in 1949 and has as much to do with the US as it does with Europe, so has nothing to do with the UKIP policy of leaving the political union of the EU.
-
..and if you thought voting for anyone other than UKIP will bring change, ponder this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmK-f88gcx8&feature=player_embedded
>:( >:( :(
So, despite your antipathy towards Gordon Brown, you would risk allowing him back in by voting for a minority party which stands no chance at all of becoming part of the next government?
Personally, I have no problem whatsoever with the dubious fact that the European Legislature is providing 75% of our laws. Given the makeup of the last House of Commons, they're probably somewhat better at it.
And given Mr. Farrage's immoderate behaviour when representing a British constituency in Europe, I think one would do better to avoid this shower altogether.
Look, we're geographically part of Europe, we're ethnically part of Europe, and since 1974, we've been economically part of Europe. Our national defences would not be viable outside of NATO. Withdrawal from the EU would achieve nothing positive. All our expats would have to come home, all 5m of them. A significant proportion of them would be pensioners who would struggle to get by with the higher cost of living in the UK and would therefore need to avail themselves of the benefit system without actually making any contribution to the economy. On the other hand, all the Eastern European tradesmen and unskilled workers doing all the nasty jobs we are too fastidious to do would have to go back to their countries of origin, leaving us in something of a mess.
So don't waste your vote on UKIP. Vote either Conservative or Lib Dem depending on whichever has the best chance of unseating a Labour candidate.
I live in a safe Conservative constituency. While I prefer the Lib Dem's policies (and leader, for that matter), I shall probably vote Conservative, just to make sure that there's not a surprise Lib Dem surge that allows a situation whereby Labour come back to power.
Well I DO have a problem with the European Legislature making up 75% of our laws. The EU is undemocratic, despite pretensions to the contrary. If we vote for a certain administration here in the UK, it won't make one iota of difference if the majority of laws are passed elsewhere, thus making a mockery of our Parliament. Remember, this is an organisation that for the past 14 or 15 years (can't remember the exact number) has been unable to get off its accounts signed off. If it was a commercial company, it would have long since been subject to investigation.
Secondly, the ex-pats would not be sent home like persona non grata. The fact is that they provide their domiciled country with income. The same goes for trade, no EU company would suddenly stop trading with the UK if we were not in the EU. Besides which, UKIP is calling for a free-trade EU, not the political monstrosity that we now have.
Thirdly a vote for UKIP is NOT a wasted vote. If we all thought that way there would never ever be a change from the two/three party farce we have now. Each party must earn my vote; they do not get it by default. None of them have. I know UKIP won't form a government, but that's not the point. Rather, if they do well, it will send a clear signal to the political classes that the issue of the EU, amongst others, must be addressed.
I want to see the back of Brown as much as anyone else, but don't be fooled that either a Cameron or Clegg administration would be that much different, especially when we are at the beck-and-call of the bureaucrats in Brussels.
I will vote according to my conscience, anything less would be a betrayal.
PS
Nato has nothing to do with the EU. Nato was originally conceived in 1949 and has as much to do with the US as it does with Europe, so has nothing to do with the UKIP policy of leaving the political union of the EU.
Please vote according to your conscience - I would not have it any other way. All I say is vote tactically according to your conscience.
Now, I was careful to use the word "dubious" about the 75% figure. According to The Times, there have been 4300 new laws introduced by the Labour administration since 1997.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7061148.ece
I don't believe that 75% of these originate from European legislation, although I will concede that a fair number of them are probably enacting European regulations. Incidentally, who is this chap Pottering who is banging on about the European laws and where does he get his information from? And, while I admit that my German is a bit rusty, I don't think he was saying exactly what the subtitles were saying.
Have a look at this: http://www.jcm.org.uk/blog/?p=2230
By the way, I agree with you completely about the administration of the European Union - it's a disgrace, and it leeches money away at a phenomenal rate. I once had the misfortune to take a job with the European Commission - I left after four weeks of watching a variety of buffoons on inflated salaries screw up straightforward tasks on a daily basis.
As for the expats, you may be right about the pensioners, but I'm fairly sure that if the UK left the EU, then UK citizens would need work permits to work in EU countries, and they would not necessarily get them. And as for what happens in the UK - well, we all know how big an issue immigration is, even if everyone is trying to ignore it in this election. For the record, as a descendant of 19th century immigrants to Britain, I'm all for an open-door imigration policy, but nobody seems to be advocating that.
Good grief - I've run out of space...
-
For the record, as a descendant of 19th century immigrants to Britain, I'm all for an open-door imigration policy, but nobody seems to be advocating that.
There's a vast difference between allowing immigration and having an open-door policy. I would not support the latter. The US, Australia, New Zealand and many others allow immigration, but on a points system. I don't see much criticism of their policies in the press.
-
An open-door immigration policy is tantamount to throwing a party at your house and advertsing it as
"Party at my place, free drink & food, stay as long as you like."
Guaranteed, at 2.00 am, you'd be on the phone to the local plod, pleading for help ;) ;D
-
For the record, as a descendant of 19th century immigrants to Britain, I'm all for an open-door imigration policy, but nobody seems to be advocating that.
There's a vast difference between allowing immigration and having an open-door policy. I would not support the latter. The US, Australia, New Zealand and many others allow immigration, but on a points system. I don't see much criticism of their policies in the press.
votes=fx(immigrants, govt control) ;D ;D
-
For the record, as a descendant of 19th century immigrants to Britain, I'm all for an open-door imigration policy, but nobody seems to be advocating that.
There's a vast difference between allowing immigration and having an open-door policy. I would not support the latter. The US, Australia, New Zealand and many others allow immigration, but on a points system. I don't see much criticism of their policies in the press.
votes=fx(immigrants, govt control) ;D ;D
votes=fx(immigrants, govt control)personality ::)
-
For the record, as a descendant of 19th century immigrants to Britain, I'm all for an open-door imigration policy, but nobody seems to be advocating that.
There's a vast difference between allowing immigration and having an open-door policy. I would not support the latter. The US, Australia, New Zealand and many others allow immigration, but on a points system. I don't see much criticism of their policies in the press.
votes=fx(immigrants, govt control) ;D ;D
votes=fx(immigrants, govt control)personality ::)
;D :y
-
Labour must be desperate! :o :o
The latest Party Political Broadcast today features Ross Kemp extolling the virtues of Labour! ::) ::) ::)
I thought when they wheeled in Tony Blair it was bad enough, but Ross Kemp! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;) ;)
-
The Liebore candidate for Norwich said today that GB is the worst PM in history and his policies are a complete disaster. ::) ;D ;D
-
The Liebore candidate for Norwich said today that GB is the worst PM in history and his policies are a complete disaster. ::) ;D ;D
Indeed Albs, and how right that man is!! 8-) 8-) :D :D :D :y
-
The really funny part is that his local party tried to deselect him last year, but the national council wouldnt allow Mr. Mianish Sood to be deselected.It would appear that their zealous pursuit of diversity/positive discrimination etc has bit them on the bum - hard. Love it. :) ;D
-
I wonder if Mr Sood would have the same view if Labour were 10 points ahead in the polls? ::)
-
Im sure he would have the same view, everyone else in the Labour party has held that view for years. I seriously doubt he would have expressed it in a newspaper interview though, ;)
-
The Liebore candidate for Norwich said today that GB is the worst PM in history and his policies are a complete disaster. ::) ;D ;D
I wouldn't bang on about any Norwich candidates remarks if you insist on voting UKIP, Albs ;)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/england/8660823.stm
almost statesmanlike in his grasp of foreign policy, quality :y
actually.........I'll take a wild stab in the dark here......I reckon most you kippers probably agree with him :o