• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • Entertainment
  • Radio
LBC 97.3 Politics Thread
<<
<
91 of 127
>>
>
clitheroe1
03-05-2015
Originally Posted by Superwomble:
“The facts regarding the deficit were that Gordon Brown kept two of the biggest factors - PFI and the public sector pension requirement - completely off the books to make the figures look way better than they really were. Along with that, the Labour party employed almost a million people in public sector 'non jobs' to disguise the fact that they were haemorrhaging private sector jobs abroad, paying for it by borrowing one pound in 4.

Thats why the debt grew - and also why it was always going to continue to rise massively whichever party got in in 2010. They called that borrowing 'growth' and 'investment' whereas in reality it was neither, and was completely unsustainable without the rebalancing of jobs to the private sector which is what generates export revenues, and proper taxation revenue for the country.

A little reminder of the importance of genuine economic principles has already been felt by the markets in the form of a mild drop in the value of Sterling over the past 2 weeks or so, as any holidaymaker will tell you. Foreign investors are already beginning to be spooked by the possibility of a return to the kind of Fisher Price economics espoused by Ed Balls and those to the left of him, but this mild run could easily develop into a full scale gallop to leave Sterling if we get a minority government which is both weak and also paralysed by the ideology of the Scots Nationalists.”

PFI wasn't public debt it was private financing, mechanism to get public investment without adding to public debt. It wasn't a good idea but it wasn't public debt.

There were no million of "public sector non jobs". The jobs I think you mean were those that Cameron cut when he came into power, in some cases closing down essential and vital services such as The Forensic Science Service which has damaged the criminal justice system in this country.
thewilson
03-05-2015
Originally Posted by Lone Drinker:
“The 'bedroom tax' was introduced by Labour (did you oppose it ? ) and I've already answered the question on spending plans in an above post.”

Originally Posted by clitheroe1:
“Again you are believing Tory lies. Labour did not introduce the bedroom tax. If you are trying to make out that the Labour legislation relating to the Local Housing Allowance was a form of bedroom tax you would be wrong. The level of housing benefit was based on several factor not the number of bedrooms and besides the criteria were not set in 2008, the legislation was introduced in 1989 by John Major's government.”

Another major difference between the Local Housing Allowance and the Bedroom Tax which might have slipped past LD is that the LHA was not retrospective.
Lone Drinker
04-05-2015
Even worse then. They had 13 years to remove it, but didn't.

They had 13 years to build more social housing, but failed. If only they'd built as many were built under Margaret Thatcher.
thewilson
04-05-2015
Originally Posted by Lone Drinker:
“Even worse then. They had 13 years to remove it, but didn't.

They had 13 years to build more social housing, but failed. If only they'd built as many were built under Margaret Thatcher.”

13 years to remove the bedroom tax I do agree that Labour should have built more social housing . They should also have kicked Right to Buy firmly into touch. But there again, they would have fallen foul of the house price scam that seems to rule all of our governments.
Superwomble
04-05-2015
Originally Posted by clitheroe1:
“PFI wasn't public debt it was private financing, mechanism to get public investment without adding to public debt. It wasn't a good idea but it wasn't public debt.

There were no million of "public sector non jobs". The jobs I think you mean were those that Cameron cut when he came into power, in some cases closing down essential and vital services such as The Forensic Science Service which has damaged the criminal justice system in this country.”

Quote:
“From Wikipedia
By October 2007 the total capital value of PFI contracts signed throughout the UK was £68bn,[17] committing the British taxpayer to future spending of £215bn[17] over the life of the contracts.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_finance_initiative


1999 there were 5,221,000 public sector employees. In 2009, there were 6,070,000 – an increase of 849,000.
clitheroe1
04-05-2015
Originally Posted by Superwomble:
“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_finance_initiative


1999 there were 5,221,000 public sector employees. In 2009, there were 6,070,000 – an increase of 849,000.”

PFI was a flawed scheme but it is misleading to suggest that it added £215bn to the national debt because the debt was held by the private sector. The government paid private companies over the period of the contract so it's share of the debt was only what it's annual payment was, similar to buying something by hire purchase.

The last Labour government should not apologise for hiring more teachers, doctors, nurses, police officers and other public sector employees. More pupils left school with better qualifications, satisfaction with the NHS was at an all time high and crime fell significantly after year on year increases in the crime rate in the Thatcher-Major era. The Cameron cuts (after he lied about not cutting front line services) have reversed all that progress.
gurney-slade
04-05-2015
While we're trotting out stats and figures - 1,400 - the number of children abused in Labour-run Rotherham 1997-2013.
Lone Drinker
04-05-2015
Originally Posted by clitheroe1:
“PFI was a flawed scheme but it is misleading to suggest that it added £215bn to the national debt because the debt was held by the private sector. The government paid private companies over the period of the contract so it's share of the debt was only what it's annual payment was, similar to buying something by hire purchase.

The last Labour government should not apologise for hiring more teachers, doctors, nurses, police officers and other public sector employees. More pupils left school with better qualifications, satisfaction with the NHS was at an all time high and crime fell significantly after year on year increases in the crime rate in the Thatcher-Major era. The Cameron cuts (after he lied about not cutting front line services) have reversed all that progress.”

From your beloved Guardian

http://www.theguardian.com/education...world-rankings

Labour's generation of school leavers

http://www.theguardian.com/education...ic-skills-oecd


and those crime figures

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30931732
clitheroe1
04-05-2015
Originally Posted by gurney-slade:
“While we're trotting out stats and figures - 1,400 - the number of children abused in Labour-run Rotherham 1997-2013.”

That wasn't the Labour Government, it was a local council. That abuse was appalling as was the failing of the local Labour council.

The failings of the Thatcher government regarding the child sex abuse that has come to light recently and it's alleged cover up is also shameful. I doubt Tories will still be able to talk gleefully about the tragedy of Rotherham to criticise Labour when the child sex abuse inquiry eventually reports.
clitheroe1
04-05-2015
Originally Posted by Lone Drinker:
“From your beloved Guardian

http://www.theguardian.com/education...world-rankings

Labour's generation of school leavers

http://www.theguardian.com/education...ic-skills-oecd


and those crime figures

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30931732”

And as the Tory cuts to the police begin to bite, "crime shows biggest rise for a decade" as reported by your beloved Daily Mail:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...se-decade.html

And Labour did improve education standards, as findings in an independent study by the LSE reported

http://sticerd.lse.ac.uk/dps/case/spcc/rr01.pdf
Lone Drinker
04-05-2015
Originally Posted by clitheroe1:
“And as the Tory cuts to the police begin to bite, "crime shows biggest rise for a decade" as reported by your beloved Daily Mail:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...se-decade.html”

Errrrrrr, that's 2002, under a Labour government
gurney-slade
04-05-2015
Originally Posted by clitheroe1:
“That wasn't the Labour Government, it was a local council. That abuse was appalling as was the failing of the local Labour council.

The failings of the Thatcher government regarding the child sex abuse that has come to light recently and it's alleged cover up is also shameful. I doubt Tories will still be able to talk gleefully about the tragedy of Rotherham to criticise Labour when the child sex abuse inquiry eventually reports.”

I don't think anybody's being gleeful about such a tragedy. It happened because those who could have stopped it - police, council, social services - were paralysed with fear of being accused of racism. Just imagine how much worse situations like this will if a Labour government makes 'Islamaphobia' a crime.
Lone Drinker
04-05-2015
Off to work now, I refuse to recognise Michael Foot's bank holiday. There's one bank holiday between May and Christmas. Wouldn't anyone with an ounce of common sense have placed it sometime there ? Common sense and Labour have always been strange bedfellows.
clitheroe1
04-05-2015
Originally Posted by Lone Drinker:
“Errrrrrr, that's 2002, under a Labour government ”

No, figures are for year ending December 2014, as also reported in your beloved Telegraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...s-by-21pc.html
clitheroe1
04-05-2015
Originally Posted by gurney-slade:
“I don't think anybody's being gleeful about such a tragedy. It happened because those who could have stopped it - police, council, social services - were paralysed with fear of being accused of racism. Just imagine how much worse situations like this will if a Labour government makes 'Islamaphobia' a crime.”

What happen in Rotherham had nothing to do with Islam or Islamophobia and the implication that it was is frankly distasteful.
gurney-slade
04-05-2015
Originally Posted by clitheroe1:
“What happen in Rotherham had nothing to do with Islam or Islamophobia and the implication that it was is frankly distasteful.”

I'm astonished by your blind refusal to acknowledge the playing of the race/religious card when it suits some individuals, and the paralysing effect it has on those who should be upholding the law.

End of.
clitheroe1
04-05-2015
Originally Posted by gurney-slade:
“I'm astonished by your blind refusal to acknowledge the playing of the race/religious card when it suits some individuals, and the paralysing effect it has on those who should be upholding the law.

End of.”

It does happen however in Rotherham none of the men convicted in the child sex abuse scandal claimed they were victims of Islamaphobia and the police denied that the ethnic origin of those convicted was a factor in how they pursued the case.

I'm more inclined to believe the police than right wingers trying to spin this tragedy into a stick to beat Labour with.
tahiti
04-05-2015
Originally Posted by gurney-slade:
“ if a Labour government makes 'Islamaphobia' a crime.”

And so it should be. People should be free to practise their faith in the knowledge that they are protected by the law. Just like synagogs should be protected from swastika daubers.
Lone Drinker
04-05-2015
Originally Posted by clitheroe1:
“No, figures are for year ending December 2014, as also reported in your beloved Telegraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...s-by-21pc.html”

Are you incapable of reading your first link or are we just supposed to pretend you didn't make it ?
clitheroe1
04-05-2015
Originally Posted by Lone Drinker:
“Are you incapable of reading your first link or are we just supposed to pretend you didn't make it ?”

My comments were correct but I posted the wrong link to illustrate my point.
chinchin
05-05-2015
Despite LBC constantly pumping out Tory propaganda, including touring with their battle bus promoting the Tories (see examples I quoted earlier) I shall be voting Labour for these reasons:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CELydouVAAAzfTw.png:large

I am also shocked by the number of homeless, back on the streets of London since the Tories and Boris. Sickening!
MartinRosen
05-05-2015
Originally Posted by chinchin:
“Despite LBC constantly pumping out Tory propaganda, including touring with their battle bus promoting the Tories (see examples I quoted earlier) I shall be voting Labour for these reasons:”

Firstly, lucky none of the items grew under the Labour Government, eg Tution fees, energy prices, rail prices (just from a quick look). If everything was so 'wonderful' with the previous Government why were they voted out? Missed out something that has also increased under this Government is tax thresholds, the rate before you have to start paying income tax. It doesn't mention things that are going down, eg unemployment, inflation.

I thought NF was being fair by criticising and challenging members of all the political parties, but again it maybe what you want to hear, rather than what is actually said.

Quote:
“I am also shocked by the number of homeless, back on the streets of London since the Tories and Boris. Sickening! ”

Have you actually checked how many people are homeless on the streets now compared with the time the Conservatives took office?

This wouldn't be Labour party propaganda would it?
sandstone
05-05-2015
This is what kills me about politics how grown adults will overlook obvious failings in their own favoured party.
many things that have happened would have happened which ever party was in power, they all just tinker around the edges of policies.
Nosedive
05-05-2015
Originally Posted by clitheroe1:
“PFI wasn't public debt it was private financing, mechanism to get public investment without adding to public debt. It wasn't a good idea but it wasn't public debt.

There were no million of "public sector non jobs". The jobs I think you mean were those that Cameron cut when he came into power, in some cases closing down essential and vital services such as The Forensic Science Service which has damaged the criminal justice system in this country.”

Just by means of correction I used to work there before my redundancy in 2010.

The company went through a privatisation process from 2005 onwards by the then government. I remember various politicians from the time (including Blair) coming to look around the DNA labs all the while we were fighting the privatisation.

Our department, e-forensics, was run down from late 2009 until finally closing a year later, though an element of the company did lumber on for a year or two after that at a £2 million a year loss. The coalition gave it a while but by the time they came in it was too far gone.

I would agree with your last statement - the bit in blue though.
chinchin
05-05-2015
One long party political broadcast for the Tory Party. *Clicky off*

Just switched back on for James O'B.
<<
<
91 of 127
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map