Quote:
Originally Posted by 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  |
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.