UK Election Thread

[Krispy Kreme]

I wonder if this will go 90 pages like the U.S. election thread did?? ?

I doubt it because Tony is not as polarizing a leader as is George. Plus, Tony tries to court the political center whereas George is mainly interested in placating the extreme right of the Republican party.

[Sakib]

I think Labour are guaranteed to win to be honest.

Tony Blair and Labour are the biggest bunch of left wing pussies and are setting about destroying this country!

I disagree with their stance on:
Crime
the way the NHS is run
Immigration
Taxes

and hate the way he has turned himself into a dictator. We don't get to vote on any of the things that matter, such as when the country goes to war or how our taxes are spent. It is beyond me why people that have never lived in the real world and not gained real world life experience are the ones that get into power and set the laws for us normal people.

yeh totally. Blair is an cok suka. I think Charles Kennedy deservs a chance

[2NaFish]

left wing pussys? he may be a pussy, but left wing he is not.

[GNR-Chris]

Giving this thread a bump up to the top.

Anyone watching Leaders Question Time right now?

Both Howard and Blair got booed?

Its only a week to go and I don't really know who to vote for to be honest. It would be easier if most politicians were not arseholes, but that will never happen.

GNR-Chris

[2NaFish]

just finished watching question time. as big an asshole as bliar is, i've got admit he's a fantastic politician. there were some very difficult and thorny questions put to him and to most people it will appear that he came out quite well.

i've no respect for the man as my country's prime minister, but he's an incredibly intelligent man and a masterful public speaker. far better in front of a crowd than howard.

i still won't vote for him tho - either the SSP or SNP,

[GnRNightrain]

I wonder if this will go 90 pages like the U.S. election thread did?? ?

I doubt it because Tony is not as polarizing a leader as is George. Plus, Tony tries to court the political center whereas George is mainly interested in placating the extreme right of the Republican party.

Really?? I dont remember when the last bone was that Bush gave to his right wing base.? He seems to be acting against them if you ask me. 

As to the question, I think it is because the US has such a dramatic effect on the rest of the world that everyone follows it.  Not that the UK doesnt, but I think everyone really convinces themselves that there is a lot to lose one way or the other with the difference in American presidents.  In reality, a change power in the UK might have more of an effect than that of the US because of all of the checks and balances in the US system.  I also think that in general most people from smaller countries tend to know a lot more about other countries than those from larger countries such as the US.  I recently talked about this subject with one of my professors who is from Australia.  He knows everything about every country, and I was asking why there is such a difference.  He thought it had a lot to do with the size of one's country.  Makes sense.

[Is he struggling?]

For those of you who aren't voting for Labour, or just hate Blair, what's the worst thing about them/him?

/jarmo

For me, it all comes down to the way he runs the government.

The British PM is supposed to be 'Primus Inter Pares' (first among equals), but Mr Blair has operated like an absolute monarch at times. A lot of commentators have noted that crucial decisions are taken by Blair and a small group of 'courtiers' (Alistair Campbell, Alan Milburn and various pollsters (amongst others) and sometimes Gordon Brown and whoever the appropriate cabinet minister is). And this all takes place while sitting on the sofas at number 10 (see the Butler report). Executive decisions in UK government ought to taken by the cabinet as a whole during cabinet meetings, (where discussion has been replaced by a string of 'presentations' by ministers). Indeed, ministers have often found themselves shut out of the decision making process altogether. (I suspect this was the case for the Iraq war. Apparently, Blair did not share the Attorney General's legal advice with the cabinet).

Blair's courtiers have also totally dominated the civil service, which has been reduced to a vast machine for carrying out Blair & co's wishes, rather than the neutral, expert and anonymous body for policy advice and implementation that it ought to be. Their job now is to hit whatever new targets the PM and his court have handed down form on high on Whitehall this week, regardless of conditions on the ground. See the ludicrous deluge of home office 'initiatives' on crime for evidence. Or the NHS target culture that means politically unfashionable medical work gets neglected and forces doctors into bizarre practises like taking wheels off stretchers in order to hit the 'hospital bed target' or GP surgeries not booking appointments more than 48 hours in advance to hit the 'waiting times' target. And don't get me started on MRSA All this so the little men in Whitehall can report that their masters bidding has been done. On top of it all, the concept of the ?anonymous? civil servant died with the sad tale of Dr David Kelly.


As for Parliament, well, it always has trouble holding a party with a large majority to account. But Blair has really shown open contempt for procedure on occasion (his poor attendance record, announcing policy in the media first, using emergency legislation to override the House of Lords on fox hunting, eviscerating legal advice and intelligence on Iraq before presenting to the House etc etc etc... the list goes on).

Let?s also not forget Blair and the New Labour machines strange relationship with the ?truth?. Calling them ?liars? as the Tories have been reduced to (more on them later), is too crude. But they are very adept at creating versions of events, or ?narratives? just happen to be politically useful, through leaving out unpleasant facts, distorting all opposing viewpoints and diluting complex issues into easy to digest messages, which is then distributed in a neat little, slickly presented package by the Labour spin machine, with a little help form the bastions of the left-liberal media, especially the Grauniad and the BBC. And when help is not forthcoming, they go and try to tear down the ?guilty parties?. I refer to the BBC and number 10?s row over the ?sexed up? Iraq dossier.

Speaking of which the ?Saddam can launch unleash apocalypse on British targets in 45 minute claim? is a prime example of this governments tendency to be driven by spin. Governments trying to present themselves in the best possible light is one thing, and to use slick presentation is perhaps necessary to get across to millions of voters. But to sacrifice integrity and openness for this is appalling and will only do them harm in the long run. I for one supported the invasion of Iraq and believe there were many sound realpolitik and human rights reasons for doing so. But this government picked up on the contentious WMD argument, as this was the most palatable to voters. Subsequent events heave now them looking like fools and destroyed many peoples faith in them. Other crocks of shit form the New Labour ?narrative? include their outrageous claims about Tory policy in this campaign (nowhere have the Conservatives said they will introduce NHS charges, abolish the minimum wage and cut public spending absolutely) and their claims that they did not preclude introducing top up fees in their last manifesto.

Because I think this Britain and its democracy is heading for trouble if this style of government continues, I will be voting Conservative. Labour will no doubt emerge victorious come next week, but if their majority in parliament can be cut significantly, then Blair will need to conduct his leadership in a more consensual, less arrogant fashion. He will need to compromise more with his colleagues in cabinet, party and parliament just to be able to function, and to stave off the inevitable Labour Party Coup to install Gordon Brown as new leader.

I?m also concerned that the ?Credit Card? economy will soon have its bubble burst, as Taxes will have to go up to fill the big old public finance deficit. Brown and Blair deserve a pat on the back for keeping the economy growing nicely, but the conditions for that came about thanks to the last Tory government?s legacy (killing the Trade Union dinosaurs and creating flexible free markets, for one) and favourable global conditions. But this situation is at risk if the Chancellor keeps pumping up the public sector with billions of taxpayer and creditors pounds. (To digress for a moment, a lot of this money has gone on creating a New Labour ?client state? of Civil servants, whose actual usefulness is sometimes in doubt, who will vote Labour as their jobs depend on it). I predict a widening trade gap and higher inflation and interest rates.

Having said all of this, I?m not too crazy about the Conservatives at the moment, despite being a man of the centre-right and a lifelong Tory voter. Their manifesto is sketchy and too focussed on rubbishing New Labour?s record rather than outline their own vision for Britain. The policy proposals themselves range from the half baked (pupil passports, off-shore immigration centres) to the rather good (elected police commissioners, taking certain powers back from Europe, topping up private pension savings etc). And it?s a shame that they?ve allowed the immigration thing to overshadow everything, which has also led many voters to see Mr Howard as nothing but a grumpy old man.

I think the Conservatives problem is that they have not modernised their policies and, crucially, their image. Voters still associate them with all the bad goings on of the Major and the later Thatcher years, and I?ve heard a lot of people saying that hey cannot bear to see ?that lot? in power again.

Okay, that is my two cents. I?m going for a long lie down now. Wake me up when the court of King Tony has been overthrown.

[*Izzy*]

For those of you who aren't voting for Labour, or just hate Blair, what's the worst thing about them/him?

/jarmo

For me, it all comes down to the way he runs the government.

The British PM is supposed to be 'Primus Inter Pares' (first among equals), but Mr Blair has operated like an absolute monarch at times. A lot of commentators have noted that crucial decisions are taken by Blair and a small group of 'courtiers' (Alistair Campbell, Alan Milburn and various pollsters (amongst others) and sometimes Gordon Brown and whoever the appropriate cabinet minister is). And this all takes place while sitting on the sofas at number 10 (see the Butler report). Executive decisions in UK government ought to taken by the cabinet as a whole during cabinet meetings, (where discussion has been replaced by a string of 'presentations' by ministers). Indeed, ministers have often found themselves shut out of the decision making process altogether. (I suspect this was the case for the Iraq war. Apparently, Blair did not share the Attorney General's legal advice with the cabinet).

Blair's courtiers have also totally dominated the civil service, which has been reduced to a vast machine for carrying out Blair & co's wishes, rather than the neutral, expert and anonymous body for policy advice and implementation that it ought to be. Their job now is to hit whatever new targets the PM and his court have handed down form on high on Whitehall this week, regardless of conditions on the ground. See the ludicrous deluge of home office 'initiatives' on crime for evidence. Or the NHS target culture that means politically unfashionable medical work gets neglected and forces doctors into bizarre practises like taking wheels off stretchers in order to hit the 'hospital bed target' or GP surgeries not booking appointments more than 48 hours in advance to hit the 'waiting times' target. And don't get me started on MRSA All this so the little men in Whitehall can report that their masters bidding has been done. On top of it all, the concept of the ?anonymous? civil servant died with the sad tale of Dr David Kelly.


As for Parliament, well, it always has trouble holding a party with a large majority to account. But Blair has really shown open contempt for procedure on occasion (his poor attendance record, announcing policy in the media first, using emergency legislation to override the House of Lords on fox hunting, eviscerating legal advice and intelligence on Iraq before presenting to the House etc etc etc... the list goes on).

Let?s also not forget Blair and the New Labour machines strange relationship with the ?truth?. Calling them ?liars? as the Tories have been reduced to (more on them later), is too crude. But they are very adept at creating versions of events, or ?narratives? just happen to be politically useful, through leaving out unpleasant facts, distorting all opposing viewpoints and diluting complex issues into easy to digest messages, which is then distributed in a neat little, slickly presented package by the Labour spin machine, with a little help form the bastions of the left-liberal media, especially the Grauniad and the BBC. And when help is not forthcoming, they go and try to tear down the ?guilty parties?. I refer to the BBC and number 10?s row over the ?sexed up? Iraq dossier.

Speaking of which the ?Saddam can launch unleash apocalypse on British targets in 45 minute claim? is a prime example of this governments tendency to be driven by spin. Governments trying to present themselves in the best possible light is one thing, and to use slick presentation is perhaps necessary to get across to millions of voters. But to sacrifice integrity and openness for this is appalling and will only do them harm in the long run. I for one supported the invasion of Iraq and believe there were many sound realpolitik and human rights reasons for doing so. But this government picked up on the contentious WMD argument, as this was the most palatable to voters. Subsequent events heave now them looking like fools and destroyed many peoples faith in them. Other crocks of shit form the New Labour ?narrative? include their outrageous claims about Tory policy in this campaign (nowhere have the Conservatives said they will introduce NHS charges, abolish the minimum wage and cut public spending absolutely) and their claims that they did not preclude introducing top up fees in their last manifesto.

Because I think this Britain and its democracy is heading for trouble if this style of government continues, I will be voting Conservative. Labour will no doubt emerge victorious come next week, but if their majority in parliament can be cut significantly, then Blair will need to conduct his leadership in a more consensual, less arrogant fashion. He will need to compromise more with his colleagues in cabinet, party and parliament just to be able to function, and to stave off the inevitable Labour Party Coup to install Gordon Brown as new leader.

I?m also concerned that the ?Credit Card? economy will soon have its bubble burst, as Taxes will have to go up to fill the big old public finance deficit. Brown and Blair deserve a pat on the back for keeping the economy growing nicely, but the conditions for that came about thanks to the last Tory government?s legacy (killing the Trade Union dinosaurs and creating flexible free markets, for one) and favourable global conditions. But this situation is at risk if the Chancellor keeps pumping up the public sector with billions of taxpayer and creditors pounds. (To digress for a moment, a lot of this money has gone on creating a New Labour ?client state? of Civil servants, whose actual usefulness is sometimes in doubt, who will vote Labour as their jobs depend on it). I predict a widening trade gap and higher inflation and interest rates.

Having said all of this, I?m not too crazy about the Conservatives at the moment, despite being a man of the centre-right and a lifelong Tory voter. Their manifesto is sketchy and too focussed on rubbishing New Labour?s record rather than outline their own vision for Britain. The policy proposals themselves range from the half baked (pupil passports, off-shore immigration centres) to the rather good (elected police commissioners, taking certain powers back from Europe, topping up private pension savings etc). And it?s a shame that they?ve allowed the immigration thing to overshadow everything, which has also led many voters to see Mr Howard as nothing but a grumpy old man.

I think the Conservatives problem is that they have not modernised their policies and, crucially, their image. Voters still associate them with all the bad goings on of the Major and the later Thatcher years, and I?ve heard a lot of people saying that hey cannot bear to see ?that lot? in power again.

Okay, that is my two cents. I?m going for a long lie down now. Wake me up when the court of King Tony has been overthrown.

All good points but you have to give him credit he was on The Simpsons afterall, or was that Mr. Bean

?sexed up? Iraq dossier

What do you mean by that?

  Izzy?

[2NaFish]

bump.

we can't get beat by the canadian election thread.

[Axls Locomotive]

alex salmond of the snp wants blair impeached...i say, go for it...all we need is a padded jail cell that he cant lie his way out of

[axl_rose_700]

just finished watching question time. as big an asshole as bliar is, i've got admit he's a fantastic politician. there were some very difficult and thorny questions put to him and to most people it will appear that he came out quite well.

i've no respect for the man as my country's prime minister, but he's an incredibly intelligent man and a masterful public speaker. far better in front of a crowd than howard.

i still won't vote for him tho - either the SSP or SNP,

I know what you mean, although most of the time he doesn't answer the question, he either sort of answers it or just starts banging on about the economy.

I'm considering voting English Democrats because the Scots are run so much better with their own parliament, it's unfair really, the difference ina childs school meal budget for example is double in Scot what it is in Eng, but I dunno whether it will be a waste of a vote.

[Axls Locomotive]

I'm considering voting English Democrats because the Scots are run so much better with their own parliament, it's unfair really, the difference ina childs school meal budget for example is double in Scot what it is in Eng, but I dunno whether it will be a waste of a vote.

actually i wouldnt say the parliament has been a major success...maybe a partial success with laws that pertain to scotland as scotland has completely different legal and education system and the economy is quite different from england...im not really sure if you would call a larger subsidy a good thing...the reason its there is that we have lots of bad habits when it comes to eating...glasgows health is quite awful but despite that we enjoy what we eat lol...bear in mind that scotland only has control of some elements of government and not others

im not sure what you would be gaining by voting for english democrats because laws and everything else for england is passed by the current parliament in london...do you really think anything will change if you voted for them?

[Danny Top Hat]

The British people really do baffle me at times.  Most people agree that the Tories being back in would be a very bad idea, but everybody seems sick and tired of Labour as well.  People say they don't like our system, because all we've got to choose from are these two sleazy parties who aren't honest and don't represent everyday people.

Why doesn't anyone want to give Lib Dems a chance??

Is it because their leader is a stuttering, uncharismatic fool with ginger hair?...probably.  It's such a shame though, because they stand for some really important things, and Britain really would be a different kind of place with them in power.  They want to reduce pollution and help the environment, they want rid of GM crops, they want to reduce classroom sizes and improve school discipline, they are open about raising taxes and say exactly what they would spend the extra money on (as opposed to the alternatives, who claim to be willing to splash out on everything while lowering taxes at the same time).  They were against the Iraq war from the start (I hate the Tories so damn much, criticising Labour now when they were dead for it at the time).

People say Lib Dems don't have the experience to run a country but, in all fairness, neither did Labour until they were voted in.  If people gave them a chance, you never know, we might actually have a party that people can trust and respect.  It's a shame they have such a sad excuse for a leader at the front line though.

[axl_rose_700]

I'm considering voting English Democrats because the Scots are run so much better with their own parliament, it's unfair really, the difference ina childs school meal budget for example is double in Scot what it is in Eng, but I dunno whether it will be a waste of a vote.

actually i wouldnt say the parliament has been a major success...maybe a partial success with laws that pertain to scotland as scotland has completely different legal and education system and the economy is quite different from england...im not really sure if you would call a larger subsidy a good thing...the reason its there is that we have lots of bad habits when it comes to eating...glasgows health is quite awful but despite that we enjoy what we eat lol...bear in mind that scotland only has control of some elements of government and not others

im not sure what you would be gaining by voting for english democrats because laws and everything else for england is passed by the current parliament in london...do you really think anything will change if you voted for them?

No, it wouldn't change but it's a protest vote, it's why people vote Green and BNP, not to get a government but as a protest vote, I probably won't vote for them but I thought about it.

[wadey]

No, it wouldn't change but it's a protest vote, it's why people vote Green and BNP, not to get a government but as a protest vote, I probably won't vote for them but I thought about it.

im voting BNP and NO....its not a protest vote. Something needs to change........if you live where i live then you would see what i mean!!   

[2NaFish]

whilst i truelly dislike the BNP and what they stand for, i'm still happy you're not voting for kilroy's party. fucking tosser.

And who ever was saying the scottish parliament has been a success has been getting some pretty bogus info. It's a front. There's nothing to it. The scottish parliament has such a small amount of power it's ludicrous. On the same day the parliament discussed the war in iraq (obviously no vote could take place) a law on dog's shitting in public parks was passed. It's a mock parliament to keep the moderate nationalists happy. I can't imagine any english parliament being any different - not that it will happen anyways.

[Narcissa]

the only reason I don't want Blair to win is that he's had more than enough time to do the things he keeps blabbing on about doing. What will another 4 years change? Nothing. The NHS will still be shit 4 years from now, the immigration problem will definitely be worse, and student fees will go even higher.
But still he's the best candidate.

[axl_rose_700]

No, it wouldn't change but it's a protest vote, it's why people vote Green and BNP, not to get a government but as a protest vote, I probably won't vote for them but I thought about it.

im voting BNP and NO....its not a protest vote. Something needs to change........if you live where i live then you would see what i mean!!? ?

Fair enough, I have no problem with that, all I mean is that you're not going to  bring about a new government voting BNP, and the people that scare me are not the BNP but the real fascists are the people trying to ban them from running as a party.

[axl_rose_700]

The British people really do baffle me at times.? Most people agree that the Tories being back in would be a very bad idea, but everybody seems sick and tired of Labour as well.? People say they don't like our system, because all we've got to choose from are these two sleazy parties who aren't honest and don't represent everyday people.

Why doesn't anyone want to give Lib Dems a chance??

Is it because their leader is a stuttering, uncharismatic fool with ginger hair?...probably.? It's such a shame though, because they stand for some really important things, and Britain really would be a different kind of place with them in power.? They want to reduce pollution and help the environment, they want rid of GM crops, they want to reduce classroom sizes and improve school discipline, they are open about raising taxes and say exactly what they would spend the extra money on (as opposed to the alternatives, who claim to be willing to splash out on everything while lowering taxes at the same time).? They were against the Iraq war from the start (I hate the Tories so damn much, criticising Labour now when they were dead for it at the time).

People say Lib Dems don't have the experience to run a country but, in all fairness, neither did Labour until they were voted in.? If people gave them a chance, you never know, we might actually have a party that people can trust and respect.? It's a shame they have such a sad excuse for a leader at the front line though.

People don't want to give the Lib Dems a chance because most people realise their policies are absolute wank.

Bring the drinking age to 16.
Scrap mandatory life sentences for murders
Give pedophiles and rapists the vote.
Imposing a new local council tax which will hit middle income homes hard
Scrapping council tax and replacing it with a local income tax which will lead to retired millionares paying less tax than a student nurse on ?18,000 a year!

[Axls Locomotive]

Fair enough, I have no problem with that, all I mean is that you're not going to  bring about a new government voting BNP, and the people that scare me are not the BNP but the real fascists are the people trying to ban them from running as a party.

you think its ok for there to be a party that exists which actively encourages racial and religious hatred? i expect people to be jailed for that

and you think there are parties out there that are more fascist than the BNP?...you make no sense