Ed Miliband's leadership comes under heavy fire from his own party

[arista]

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2015/1/31/367411/default/v2/mos-1-720x960.jpg

[Ed Miliband's leadership comes
under heavy fire from his own party]




http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/01/31/2539681500000578-0-image-a-16_1422740032518.jpg
[Millionaire donor John Mills says
Labour is wrong to decry privatisation
Miliband looks 'haunted' as he
knows his party is set
to lose the Election
His aides are already discussing
how to keep him as leader
if he loses vote]

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2934698/Labour-knives-loser-Red-Ed-Election-panic-grips-party-big-guns-turn-haunted-Miliband.html#ixzz3QX9Nuhrr

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/01/31/25396C8300000578-0-image-a-20_1422740081254.jpg


http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/02/01/2525369D00000578-0-image-a-51_1422806887155.jpg

[joeysteele]

Oh lord not this old chestnut again from the mail, for goodness sake, innocent people are being beheaded in the World, this vile rag however can only concentrate on its endless efforts to discredit more Ed Miliband.

What about David Cameron, their star, he looks like he will lose another election,he hasn't even got the support he got in 2010,there are plenty like Theresa Maylikely secretly hoping for Cameron to lose and then have to go, for them to try to take his place.

I wish to stress, we don't elect a PM,we elect party governments,I for one among probably 99.8% of other voters cannot directly vote for Ed Miliband,I will be voting for a Labour govt.
Were Labour to get over 325 seats but Ed Miliband lose his seat, there would still be a Labour govt and the Labour aprty would have to elect a leader who would then become PM.

Just as if the Conservatives got an overall majority but Cameron lost his seat, they would have to do the same, in fact Conservative govts ahave often changed leaders between elections.

Thankfully, I think most voters realise the Mail hates Ed Miliband so will ake little notice of such a headline.
Also there are always some MPs in all parties who want a different leader when the going gets a bit tough.

This paper is just really pathetic now and it would astound me that any Labour MP would even talk to anyone from the Mail,if I was a Labour MP, I for sure wouldn't.

[arista]

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2015/2/1/367516/default/v1/mail-1-720x960.jpg

[Kizzy]

As Joey says who cares what the mail says?...

[joeysteele]

As Joey says who cares what the mail says?...

And Boots:joker:,they should be made to cut their prices,they are at least 10% dearer across near all things that you can get elsewhere.
Address that rather than force your view on the electorate.

Typical of the daft Mail, it is only one eprson connected with Boots not the whole Boots chain.

[arista]

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2015/2/1/367519/default/v2/times-1-720x960.jpg

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2015/2/1/367521/default/v2/i-1-720x960.jpg

[joeysteele]

I agree with the University chiefs as to tuition fees, however Labour is planning to bring down tuition fees, no way will that be done by the Conservatives, UKIP or now even the Lib Dems.

So grumble all they like, if they want them probably reduced, vote Labour or get nothing off at all,simple as that.

[joeysteele]

SNP now expected to win 45 of 59 seats, I would actually welcome that,the SNP would make sure Labour addressed the neglect of Scotland from the past 2 govts,despite devolution.

The SNP would be even more determined than other parties to ensure David Cameron was no PM and the Conservatives were not in power in any shape or form.

They could work well with a Labour govt. Nicola Sturgeon has said she could do a
deal with Ed Miliband's Labour.
She could even help him with some of the trickier policies.
I am not at all worried about the rise of the SNP for Westminster, in fact I think it would make for a better and stable govt.

[Kizzy]

And Boots:joker:,they should be made to cut their prices,they are at least 10% dearer across near all things that you can get elsewhere.
Address that rather than force your view on the electorate.

How much tax relief does boots get? almost as much as they 'donate' is my guess :joker:

[joeysteele]

The University hierarchy criticising the Labour party's possible plan to reduce tuition fees is out of touch with Students, who the great majority of will want them reduced.

They should have never been trebled in the first place.

[Nedusa]

Ed Miliband is in trouble but as we have seen the Party won't ditch him now with less than a 100 days to go to the General Election. So Labour are in trouble, what should have been a realistic assumption that Labour would get back into power throwing out the awful Cameron and the BBP (Tories - Big Banks Party) is now in doubt due in part to the glaring shortcomings in Ed Milibands prime Ministerial appeal.

Labour in my opinion will struggle to take seats from anyone and may indeed lose seats to UKIP in England/Wales and to the SNP in Scotland.

They will still probably have the 2nd highest number of seats in the new Parliament behind the Tories but both Lab & Cons will have far too few seats to form a Govt.

So bring on the Horse trading with the Lib Dems/UKIP & SNP all likely to have more than a few seats, Coalition will be the name of the game.

But what will be the nature of that Coalition ?

Lab/Lib, Cons/Lib (Not likely), Lab/SNP/UKIP or Cons/UKIP/Greens ?

Should make for an interesting post Election thats for sure.





.

[Crimson Dynamo]

As Joey says who cares what the mail says?...

Its website is the largest in the world and the print newspaper is read also by millions

so the answer to your question is millions and millions of people

[Kizzy]

Its website is the largest in the world and the print newspaper is read also by millions

so the answer to your question is millions and millions of people

Yes it has a lot of traffic, that's not to say that everyone who visits agrees with their skewed take.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Yes it has a lot of traffic, that's not to say that everyone who visits agrees with their skewed take.

but they do read it

[Kizzy]

but they do read it

So... I said who cares what they think. I read it sometimes, doesn't mean I believe what's written.

[arista]

Its website is the largest in the world and the print newspaper is read also by millions

so the answer to your question is millions and millions of people


Yes so many more
now Hate Ed


Bliss

[joeysteele]

I don't see much enthusiasm for David Cameron either as PM and he has been doing the job for the last almost 5 years now.
The fact is all 3 main party leaders are really not liked.

[arista]

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2015/2/2/367879/default/v1/telegraph-1-720x960.jpg

But Joey front pages are against Labour
like this one today
as Labour are not trusted in Business


Profit is a word they hide?
That is fecking crazy

[joeysteele]

Businesses have in the end done well under Labour govts. Often it is the Unions who moan more at Labour govts.

We have had a govt for near 5 years who have neglected to protect people who needed protecting while those more affluent have gained considerably even under austerity measures.
Anyone wanting to even begin to address that imbalance,will inevitably get hostility from business and those who have gained considerably,these last 5 years.

Not all business is against Labour, we only hear about the ones that are and I think they don't fully grasp how more inclusive and fair Labours policies may turn out to be.
I agree with one comment that Labour needs to take this govt. on as to the economy, not let that ride.
This govt has failed miserably overall as to the economy and its original targets,they have had to change how the defficit is calculated from how it was calculated in 2010 to be able to say they have reduced it by half.

In other words still barely half way to success after 5 years on a policy that should have had no deficit.
This govt removed the recovery and growth that was in place when it took over,for over 3 years at least, we had no real growth to mention and peoples living standards fell.
That we have growth now and a firmer recovery,comes after all that so we are still in effect playing catch up from the loss of the growth there was in 2010.

Labour should be hammering that point, not be afraid to take it on.That is the only thing I would agree as to them not doing enough at present in this seemingly endless campaign.

However, business overall, from the opinions taken, seem to not want to leave the EU,if they really are worried about what a Labout govt will do, they should be terrified at this govts EU policy.
David Cameron has created more suspicion with the EU for over 2 years now.
He intends to take a further 2+ years to do some reforming but even he doesn't seem to have any idea of what he wants to change yet.

Then he may hold a referendum,the anti EU movement is gaining strength from what we get told in the media, the UK could never, with this media,get a balanced,impartial and fair reporting of same to make a sound decision as to the EU.

Business should be very worried about that and that too is something Labour should not be afraid of and spell out strongly.

I am sure they will come the election campaign when the campaign should have officially begun,rather than this daft 100 day campaign that has been allowed to start now.

In the end, while I support business and the right to make profits,there are a great many things that have been done wrong to the weaker and poorer in society,a cruel almost vendetta by this govt against those at the lowest end of the scale.
It really is time that business realised that too, and stopped always just thinking of themselves and their own pockets as to how much profit they can make.

I think business miss a lot of points, they like how it is at present, where they are largely untouched,unless you are a small business,and avoid the realities of the suffering at the lower end of things.
Business may be unsure of Labour and Labour needs to allay as many fears they have,however staff emplued by those businesses, see things differently probably overall.

I myself don't see what business have to worry about as to Labour, they really need to look at the whole picture of the UK and those right down the list for the future and not just look at the snapshots of themselves where things look more 'rosy' at present.

We were told the austerity measures done from 2010 were necessary to protect the growth and recovery that was in place in 2010.
In a short time this govt, lost that recovery and the growth that was happening in 2010,it took them over 3 years at least to start to pull things around.
Business may do well to ponder, could this govt after May 2015,if it won again, with its continuance of severe austerity measures,take the growth away again.

I am thinking that could well come about,maybe business leaders should stop being so selfish and shortsighted and accept for those suffering under this govt. things need to change and that means the govt. needs to change,since no change is offered by this govt. at all for them.

Finally, that sensational nonsense that Labour are wooing SinnFein,oh come on, what a stupid paper, SF only get around 5 seats, they don't even come to take their seats at Westminster.
What utter scaremongering and total nonsense to even say that.

The SNP are a different matter, the SNP have done really good in Scoptland as a whole, I myself see nothign wrong with a Labour govt supported by the SNP in most things and confidence issues.
Scotland until devolution, had for decade after decade in the main, English MPs piling rules, laws and conditions on them.
I see no reason where the SNP to win a greta number or most seats in Scotland why they should not be given more status at Westminster if that happened.

Had David Cameron been say 3 seats of an overall majority in 2010, he would have more than liekly done a deal with the DUP to be in govt. thereby avoiding the Lib Dems, he would have in fact I would say.
I see no difference as to Labour and the SNP doing so either.
In fact that is what I hope for, a Labour position of around 295 to 305 seats and the SNP with 35+ seats.

Wipe away the Lib Dems from govt too and a govt. supported that way could make for a very good, solid, just and far more compassionate govt. than we have had for a good while.

I believe were Ed Miliband to get the chance,he would do well, he would do what he says,he would because we elect a party to govt. and for me the Labour party has the better and fairer policies.
Business leaders would do well to look at them and realise they cannot and should not always have things their way.

[Kizzy]

Thank you Joey, informed and interesting as always this is going to get really brutal and the further toward the election the more strange and shocking the slurs will be.
The ace in Eds sleeve is the NHS...Whatever else is said he can counter with that it trumps everything.

[Nedusa]

But look at the absolute mess the NHS has become, it takes in Billions and Billions of Taxpayers money every year and what does it have to show for it.

You have elderly people sleeping in makeshift beds in corridors.

You have elderly and infirm people sent home after surgery/procedures in the middle of the night to look after themselves alone, because there are no beds in the hospitals.

You have people working supposedly as nurses who cannot speak English and have no understanding at all what it means to give good quality nursing care.

Most caring services are subcontracted out to save money and we are left with people who provide a minimal service at best.

We have filthy hospitals full of infections incl MRSA

There are no beds left, Doctors and specialists are in short supply.

Hospitals are closing down left ,right and centre especially A&E units.

You can't get to see a Doctor when you are ill, rather having to book in advance.

you can't get certain drugs because the NHS can't or won't pay for them.

These are only a few items I have touched on, but this does not sound to me like a World Class Health service. Where do all these billions of pounds go every year.

We can't all be sick, perhaps health tourism is partly to blame, but you really have to wonder how much longer the middle classes are going to pay into this rubbish service.

Perhaps it's time to break up the NHS after all it was set up at a time when the nation needed free healthcare after the 2nd WW (1948)

Now maybe it's time to privatise and save this money by allowing private medical companies to run the Hospitals and Doctors surgeries properly giving a modern 21st Century service instead of the current outdated, unworkable , endless money pit that masquerades as a Health service.





.

[joeysteele]

The NHS will always be a strain on resources but a necessary and vital strain it will have to remain.
That is really the only way it can remain,protected and secured as free at the point of need, cradle to grave.
Any breaking up,any more messing with it will likely have devastating consequences for that basis.

The costly and unnecessary waste of the top down re-organisation by this govt. has hindered greatly any more progress.

What is needed is for a govt.to talk to and actually listen to the Consultants, Doctors, Nurses and other carers who work in the NHS and then mould policy around that.
Not dive in with ignorance like this govt.

Also, I agree with all those who say the management teams of hospitals are a good part of the problem,they are.
Often trust managers only ever see wards when a celebrity or some filming is taking place.
I went to a hospital 3 weeks ago to collect a prescription that can only be issued by the Consultant at the hospital for someone else,I asked this on of the many, secretaries of the trust manager,which floor did I need to go to for this Consultants secretary's office.

She looked puzzled, then said, there is no Doctor of that name at this hospital.
In the end the receptionist returned and gave me the info, the Consultant had only been there for 11 years !!!.
For crying out loud, these people are a drain on the NHS too, walking around looking official with files or clipboards but with no knowledge of much at all, far better to have far less of these and more hands on care staff.

I think I would be looking at shifting out a lot of the managers too.

However,this is where Labour have the key card for me, bringing health and social care together,I really now have the belief that that the Conservatives have little or even no idea as to what social care really is.
With modern and advancing treatments, stays in hospital should be far shorter, however the elderly and really infirm often find themselves cured of what they went in with, however then they cannot go home until a care package and the necessary carers are in place.
So they remain in hospital until going all around the houses, those things are planned and set up.

This means, NHS resources as to residence in a hospital, the feeding, the hands on care, the special needs, are all being used to keep them there,that takes away staffing in other areas of the hospital and holds back admissions and therefore treatments for others waiting.

Andy Burnham, will in my view, be a brilliant Health Minister,he is passionate on sorting out this social care element that could, as a knock on effect, really help clear a lot of unnecessary holding back as to admissions and ops and treatments.
While making sure when someone is released from hospital to home, they are safe,they have any ongoing care needed in place too.

Yes money is important,the NHS will need more and more as technology advances and treatments get better.
Things will go wrong too at times,no govt.can get it all right, however this govt at present and over the last 4+ years has sadly got little right as to the NHS, and that is why they should not be allowed to bring it down further and not have any more time to plan for it.

That needs a better,more consultative and understanding way of planning policy, that at present comes from the Labour party and the SNP in my view.
The Greens have some good ideas as to the NHS but all is still vague there.

I hope the NHS is the major issue in May, no matter what else happens if it is, the one thing that must result then is that this smug, arrogant govt. is wiped out of power and deservedly so.
Deservedly so for even taking any risks at all with the NHS and also doing a top down re-organisation, not in any party's manifesto, and that not a single voter voted for or even got the chance to vote for either.

Never forget, David Cameron pledged no top down re-organisation fo the NHS under his govt.
He then blatantly lied and did one, he should never be believed on it, or trusted with the NHS, ever again in my opinion.

[Kizzy]

Is any of what you mention any reason to rid the UK of the NHS Nedusa... Not as I see it, and I disagree with your very unfair view of this great service.
Can you imagine for a minute if there was no NHS, what would be the fate of those with no insurance to access private services, how ethical is that potential death sentence?
Who is to say that private enterprise is better, in fact we have more evidence especially when it comes to care of the elderly.

If anyone wishes to pay for private healthcare that is their prerogative, but remember that the advent of the NHS was part of the bigger picture as maintaining a civilised society by ridding us of the 5 giants.... who wants those to return?

It's also not fair to blame the NHS for how much big pharma charge for their medications, there has to be a line drawn as there is of course even if you have insurances there are some things for which you are not covered unless you have specific premiums.

I think in all seriousness the fact of the matter is we take the service we have for granted, why are we not angry that it has been allowed to be run into the ground? that there are those who are benefiting...

'75 MPs have recent or present financial links to companies or individuals involved in private healthcare; 81% of these are Conservative.

4 Key members of the Associate Parliamentary Health Group have parliamentarians with financial connections to companies or individuals involved in healthcare.

Nearly 40% of the most powerful individuals in healthcare are from companies with links to Lords and MPs.

4 MPs and 1 Lord have worked for Huntsworth Health, run by a Peer who gave money to Cameron’s leadership campaign.

All were able to vote on the Health and Social Care Bill (now Act), despite having a prejudicial interest, which would not have been allowed at local council level. Why are parliamentarians exempt from standards applied to others?'

https://nursebloginternational.wordpress.com/2014/05/17/how-many-politicians-have-their-finfers-in-the-nhs-pie/

[Nedusa]

Is any of what you mention any reason to rid the UK of the NHS Nedusa... Not as I see it, and I disagree with your very unfair view of this great service.
Can you imagine for a minute if there was no NHS, what would be the fate of those with no insurance to access private services, how ethical is that potential death sentence?
Who is to say that private enterprise is better, in fact we have more evidence especially when it comes to care of the elderly.

If anyone wishes to pay for private healthcare that is their prerogative, but remember that the advent of the NHS was part of the bigger picture as maintaining a civilised society by ridding us of the 5 giants.... who wants those to return?

It's also not fair to blame the NHS for how much big pharma charge for their medications, there has to be a line drawn as there is of course even if you have insurances there are some things for which you are not covered unless you have specific premiums.

I think in all seriousness the fact of the matter is we take the service we have for granted, why are we not angry that it has been allowed to be run into the ground? that there are those who are benefiting...

'75 MPs have recent or present financial links to companies or individuals involved in private healthcare; 81% of these are Conservative.

4 Key members of the Associate Parliamentary Health Group have parliamentarians with financial connections to companies or individuals involved in healthcare.

Nearly 40% of the most powerful individuals in healthcare are from companies with links to Lords and MPs.

4 MPs and 1 Lord have worked for Huntsworth Health, run by a Peer who gave money to Cameron’s leadership campaign.

All were able to vote on the Health and Social Care Bill (now Act), despite having a prejudicial interest, which would not have been allowed at local council level. Why are parliamentarians exempt from standards applied to others?'

https://nursebloginternational.wordpress.com/2014/05/17/how-many-politicians-have-their-finfers-in-the-nhs-pie/

I agree with a lot of the points you raise , really I do but I still have to ask why is the NHS being run into the ground, who is running it into the ground ?

With billions being spent on it every year, if it really is as you say "running into the ground" then we have a serious problem.

No amount of money is going to fix this, perhaps it's finally time to admit that this wonderful, lovable envy of the world healthcare system is on its last legs unable to cope due to years of mis-management with vast areas under funded whilst some areas are over funded and over mangaged.

It is too big, too old and needs to be put out of its misery. If it were a dog we could take it round to the back of the shed and give it both barrels.

But sadly we are stuck with this behemoth that literally sucks our taxes into a black hole.

We need to think now of ways to spread the burden of healthcare across all sectors, encourage people to take out personal private health cover like in many Countries. Our livestyles can then count towards our premiums as can our amount of usage.

Hospitals can be sold off or demolished and private enterprise brought in to help with a new massive building program of new Hospitals and Medical centres, A&E centres.

Free Healthcare for all sounds great and was needed 60 years ago, but the World has moved on since then and trying to cling onto an aging decrepid giant like this does no one any favours.

The NHS needs to go and it needs to go sooner rather than later.






.

[joeysteele]

I agree with a lot of the points you raise , really I do but I still have to ask why is the NHS being run into the ground, who is running it into the ground ?

With billions being spent on it every year, if it really is as you say "running into the ground" then we have a serious problem.

No amount of money is going to fix this, perhaps it's finally time to admit that this wonderful, lovable envy of the world healthcare system is on its last legs unable to cope due to years of mis-management with vast areas under funded whilst some areas are over funded and over mangaged.

It is too big, too old and needs to be put out of its misery. If it were a dog we could take it round to the back of the shed and give it both barrels.

But sadly we are stuck with this behemoth that literally sucks our taxes into a black hole.

We need to think now of ways to spread the burden of healthcare across all sectors, encourage people to take out personal private health cover like in many Countries. Our livestyles can then count towards our premiums as can our amount of usage.

Hospitals can be sold off or demolished and private enterprise brought in to help with a new massive building program of new Hospitals and Medical centres, A&E centres.

Free Healthcare for all sounds great and was needed 60 years ago, but the World has moved on since then and trying to cling onto an aging decrepid giant like this does no one any favours.

The NHS needs to go and it needs to go sooner rather than later.






.

I love your posts Nedusa but the day that happens will be one of the really worst days ever to lose the NHS.

It could likely never be replaced with anything like what it was originally meant to be and which ibn fact it still is in the main.

There is only one thing that can be done as to the NHS and that would be the disastrous road for a amss of citizens in the UK and that is for it to be private.

No way for sure would the lieks of UKIP,The Conservatives or in fact I would say now the Lib Dems ever be able to bring about anyhting that in anyway resembled the hopes and plans of the first NHS for all.

I am only 22,well just, I however hope that day you describe in your post never ever comes for me to see and witness in my lifetime.
It needs the investment and what is really needed is tax rises to pay for it if necessary, rather than to dismantle it.

I would not mind paying more tax for it to go into the NHS,oddly enough,I think possibly a majority of the taxpayers wouldn't mind that either.
never however to set out to dismantle it, that would be absolute chaos for ages.
Even greater a waste of money and the lieklihood of a far inferior system of health care too.

[Kizzy]

I agree with a lot of the points you raise , really I do but I still have to ask why is the NHS being run into the ground, who is running it into the ground ?

With billions being spent on it every year, if it really is as you say "running into the ground" then we have a serious problem.

No amount of money is going to fix this, perhaps it's finally time to admit that this wonderful, lovable envy of the world healthcare system is on its last legs unable to cope due to years of mis-management with vast areas under funded whilst some areas are over funded and over mangaged.

It is too big, too old and needs to be put out of its misery. If it were a dog we could take it round to the back of the shed and give it both barrels.

But sadly we are stuck with this behemoth that literally sucks our taxes into a black hole.

We need to think now of ways to spread the burden of healthcare across all sectors, encourage people to take out personal private health cover like in many Countries. Our livestyles can then count towards our premiums as can our amount of usage.

Hospitals can be sold off or demolished and private enterprise brought in to help with a new massive building program of new Hospitals and Medical centres, A&E centres.

Free Healthcare for all sounds great and was needed 60 years ago, but the World has moved on since then and trying to cling onto an aging decrepid giant like this does no one any favours.

The NHS needs to go and it needs to go sooner rather than later.






.

The government are running it into the ground because they hate anything nationalised and they have their fat fingers poised over the pie.
I hope you realise the ramification of the demise of the NHS, I think it would be a return to Victorian England.

[joeysteele]

The government are running it into the ground because they hate anything nationalised and they have their fat fingers poised over the pie.
I hope you realise the ramification of the demise of the NHS, I think it would be a return to Victorian England.

It would,the loss of the NHS would be a massive disaster for the UK.

However,I do wish it was not a political football.
Although it needs to be this election because yet again after a period of Conservative govt. it needs rescuing,building up and protecting properly.
It needs to be armed with all it needs to deal with and cope as to any crisis and other things thrown at it.

Then when secure,afterwards it needs to be not constantly messed with by govts of whatever party is in power.
A continuity of security and funding for it, with no more unnecessary reorganisations.

[Kizzy]

Yes there does appear to be a conflict of interest from both sides, I'm not sure how it will play out but I'm putting my faith in Labour to at least attempt to save it :(

[Nedusa]

Why would you vote for a Party that borrows money with impunity spend spend spends even though it is broke, then plunders the hard earned Pension fund money of Millions of people.

Borrows huge amounts to pay for public spending, christ we are struggling to pay off the interest , let alone the Capital of our National Debt.

We borrow money year in year out to balance the books yet we spend billions on a failing Health service and throw away billions in benefits to keep a proportion of the population in their free accommodation so they can go out and earn a tax free living on the black economy whilst the rest of us poor sods pay up 40% in Income tax.

why would you want a party back that sold off our Gold reserves when the price of Gold was at its lowest in decades ?

Labour are well meaning and are socially just and moral BUT they are fiscally inept borrowing today and hoping someone else will pay it back later.

Oh and the Conservatives are no better but for different reasons.

They are in bed with big Business and the banks and let billions of pounds in corporation Tax remain unpaid.

They sell off our National Companies at a loss and they always find a way to make the rich richer whilst keeping the middle classes convinced they are but one step away from a wealthy lifestyle.

So who do one vote for ? I don't think it really matters as truth is we have no power , no say in how things really work. Good times are always just round the corner, it's a con a scam always has been always will be.

We get enough basically to keep us from taking to the streets (the only place where REAL change will ever happen).






.

[kirklancaster]

Why would you vote for a Party that borrows money with impunity spend spend spends even though it is broke, then plunders the hard earned Pension fund money of Millions of people.

Borrows huge amounts to pay for public spending, christ we are struggling to pay off the interest , let alone the Capital of our National Debt.

We borrow money year in year out to balance the books yet we spend billions on a failing Health service and throw away billions in benefits to keep a proportion of the population in their free accommodation so they can go out and earn a tax free living on the black economy whilst the rest of us poor sods pay up 40% in Income tax.

why would you want a party back that sold off our Gold reserves when the price of Gold was at its lowest in decades ?

Labour are well meaning and are socially just and moral BUT they are fiscally inept borrowing today and hoping someone else will pay it back later.

Oh and the Conservatives are no better but for different reasons.

They are in bed with big Business and the banks and let billions of pounds in corporation Tax remain unpaid.

They sell off our National Companies at a loss and they always find a way to make the rich richer whilst keeping the middle classes convinced they are but one step away from a wealthy lifestyle.

So who do one vote for ? I don't think it really matters as truth is we have no power , no say in how things really work. Good times are always just round the corner, it's a con a scam always has been always will be.

We get enough basically to keep us from taking to the streets (the only place where REAL change will ever happen).

.

:worship::worship::worship:

[joeysteele]

Yes there does appear to be a conflict of interest from both sides, I'm not sure how it will play out but I'm putting my faith in Labour to at least attempt to save it :(

I think they will this time, they know a lot of them, that Labour could have done much more as to the NHS in 13 years in power,after bringing it back from the brink in 1997.

The media pull him down but Andy Burnham would be a superb Health Minister, he was in the dying months of the last Labout govt.,he tried to have all party inclusion as to talking about the NHS and the social care aspect of it.
The Lib Dems were in those talks, Andrew Lansley and the Conservatives chose not to be.

Jeremy Hunt is just largely and sadly, carrying on Lansley's plans,he is failing the NHS badly in my view.

Really for me the choice is clear,do the voters want this failed govt. to be given 5 more years of more massive cuts,more misery for the weakest and poorest.
A likely,in my view, lowering or even loss of growth again, which happened last time in 2011 when they started their too severe cuts programme with no back up policy for wehn it was failing.

Or do the voters want to try another way, one that will see the deficit planned to be cut but more slowly, meaning you can regulate and amend any austerity cuts that are to be made.
There is nothing wrong with borrowing, if you borroe for the right reasons, were Labour to borrow for construction purposes as to building houses, that would be a good thing.

This govt is still borrowing to cope with the failures of its policies,becasue it is in fact getting less in revenue overall and has not been able to get the savings needed despite the severe cuts.

Then the NHS, it is chaos almost,it is again being brought down and the staff demoralised,that needs uregent help and a more understanding policy across the board, that will never come from the Conservatives.

Finally, will most voters think it right, that the weakest poorest, most vulnerable,sick and disabled,despite a minority probably playing the sytem,overall being demonised and facing cuts and more cuts to their small incomes from benefits, as done by this govt with things like the bedroom charge.
Or, is it right to look for those who maybe are playing the system and getting benefits wrongly while ensuring sensitivity and compassion is kept evident for those whose claims are all genuine.
According to all research that is around 99% of all claimants.

Those are the choices, and Labour is the better party for the changes needed now in my opinion,thats why they get my vote.
One thing is sure, we either get that change or we get the same with this Conservative led govt.no matter who they may have to be in coalition with.

I actually think now, despite the recession and crisis there was in 2008/9 with the Banking chaos across the world really.
I think even in 2010, Labour it seems had the better option.
To nurture the growth and recovery in place in 2010, to make 20% less cuts overall, to strive to halve the deficit over 4 years and make no severe cuts in the first year of power.

Maybe had that been done, the growth in place in 2010, would not have been lost for over 3 years as was the case with this govt.
Also just maybe the suffering to the weakest and poorest could have been minimised and some public services saved too.

It is a simple choice, more of the same of the last disastrous 5 years of failure overall, or a chance to go for a 2nd option that at least has justice,fairness and compassion as to policy included.

[arista]

"Or do the voters want to try another way, "


No they do not want Ed


http://img.thesun.co.uk/aidemitlum/archive/01814/Ed_Miliband__1814822a.jpg

[user104658]

Sadly Joey, from talking to the "Man on the street", it seems that the tories have been pretty effective in convincing average voters that they have "fixed" the economy and that everything is now running smoothly. They've even had Obama banging on about our marvellous recovery and "leading the world". It's all absolute nonsense of course, fiddled figures and trickery, their policies have been abysmal and the country is still firmly on a downward spiral, but I've talked to loads of people who just look baffled and say "but the economy is doing well now isn't it?". It's worrying.

[joeysteele]

Sadly Joey, from talking to the "Man on the street", it seems that the tories have been pretty effective in convincing average voters that they have "fixed" the economy and that everything is now running smoothly. They've even had Obama banging on about our marvellous recovery and "leading the world". It's all absolute nonsense of course, fiddled figures and trickery, their policies have been abysmal and the country is still firmly on a downward spiral, but I've talked to loads of people who just look baffled and say "but the economy is doing well now isn't it?". It's worrying.

It is fiddled TS, from how the deficit was measured as to the economy in 2010, the fact is as Andrew O Neill pointed out on the Daily Politics 2 or 3 weeks ago, the reduction of the deficit is still only a third from how it was measured in 2010.

This means this govt has not taken a thing off the original setting of the deficit in the last 2 and a half years.

However, they have changed the way the deficit is measured and calculated as to the economy, which 'can' make them say on the 'new' altered format,that they have taken half off the deficit.

I cannot believe people still don't get however, that still amounts to massive failure.
Despite doing all the planned severe austerity cuts,this govt. has still only managed to get at best on massaged figures,half off a deficit they said they would have, and that had to be, cleared completely by 2015.

I am frustrated that Labour figures and other parties too, are not shouting that from the roof tops endlessly.
It amounts to economic failure on that one part of it,on a grand scale.

Whoever said it was right, ''there are lies, damned lies and statistics''.

I still think however the NHS will play the major part in the election, The Lib Dems will want to distance themselves from their part in the disastrous re-organisation that no one voted for,Labour have to keep going on as to it,then there are the Greens, SNP too who will be all pointing out the wrongs of this govt as to the NHS.

In the debates, David Cameron, (if he actually does them), will not be able to fudge his answers and he will have limited time to get his answers done too.
I still hope as they did for Gordon Brown, that he comes out badly from such debates and I expect him too as well.

[arista]

A Guest is Reading this thread
Please Join this Fair Site
I would love to have a Researcher
Live on this thread

Feel The Force