Quizzing Cameron

Will the Conservative Party be paying Dave's fine for not wearing a seat-belt?

As the financial world is currently devouring itself, what Dave and his chums do or think seems pretty irrelevant right now.

This comment has been referred for further consideration. Explain.

I though DC came across OK.

A bit too Blair-like for my tastes, but miles better than anything on the government benches (including that banana-weilding simian).

Dear All,

It has just been reported that Ulster is to get free prescriptions, leaving us in jolly old' England the only ones picking up the bill..!

Ah, what it is to be the odd one out amongst equals.

The second video reminds me of a comment Brown made early on in speech last week that no one really picked up on:

"...when people share with me stories about the hard time they're having with bills, I want to help, because I was brought up seeing my parents having to juggle their budget like the rest of us." (https://www.labour.org.uk/gordon_brown_conference%29

Which was I think another shot at Cameron, someone who comes from a family that has never really had to worry about money, not like the rest of us.

As it is I'm not too worried about one or two senior members of a party being from very rich backgrounds - my concern really is when a majority of them grew up without really understanding how life is for the majority in the country.

Really, if the tories were more representative in this way they would make a much better opposition.

Also, can someone moderate #3 'Why not phone your local branch of the nu Labour Gestapo...', not because it breaks the rules, just because it's a bit rubbish.

(ya, new Labour, murdering all the trade unionists, gays and Jews, isn't that just what's happened over the last 11 years).

Hates the use of "our people". His people are the rich. Who sponsors wee George Osborne's private office?
It's in the political DNA of the Conservative Party of today. The old one nation tories of Ted Heath, Ian Gilmour, Jim Prior etc... were all driven out by Lady Thatcher.
I see no evidence that has changed.

@ 3 and 4

... "nu Labour Gestapo" ??

... "banana-wielding simian" ??

er ... dunno what you're about with this sort of stuff, Maxie

not that great really, is it, if we're honest.

FairnessFighter @7,

Just a bit of political hyperbole - like "No more boom and bust" or "I am the right man for the job", etc.

Do these highly inaccurate statements sound familiar?

sagamix @9,

No not 'great' - or even true in a literal sense.

But as Chuck might say: "like art, my words describe a higher truth...." ;-)

Ive tried to watch the videos a few times this afternoon.


Keep getting error message: reads The content doesnt seem to be working, try again later




You sure these arent about Brown?

9. sagamix


Really, then click here

peteholly @ 8 asks:

"Who sponsors wee George Osborne's private office?"

Dunno....

Bernie Ecclestone?
Lord Sainsbury?
Lord Levy?
The Hinduja brothers?
Lord Hamlyn?


Oooh please sir, do tell.

Just to show that the Tories are still on the wrong track, they propose freezing Council Tax for the next two years.

All taxes must (ultimately) be based upon ability to pay.

In that sense, Council Tax is inherently flawed and need to be scrapped, not frozen.

I favour local income taxes as a more equitable solution.

Excellent - considered political debate !

Tony Blair was elected on his ability to stand up in programmes like this one and seem fair and reasonable to the majority of viewers.

Even when he was caught out in areas like tobacco sponsorship and the Dome fiasco, his little boy grin seemed to persuade the voters that this was the type of man who should be Primeminister.

What a mistake that was !

Unfortunately the other political parties have learnt the lesson, and being 'media friendly' is now the prime requirement of a party leader.

Fortunately, I think David Cameron offers a lot more than that, because it will take some astounding thinking to rescue the country from the black hole that Blair and Brown have dumped it in.

"banana-wielding simian

Nick just saw you on 6 o'clock news and you told a bare faced lie. The protests in Aberdeen have nothing to with freezing council tax. It has to do with years and years of bad management of Aberdeen City's finances that have come to head. The independent auditors sent to sort the city out recommended £50million in cuts. That is what people are complaining about. Then again it also doesn't help that Aberdeen gets one of the lowest block grants per person in Scotland.

Max @ 11

But who is the BWS? ... it's just a peculiar sort of thing to say and so I'm curious.

Carrots @ 13

Sorry, I'm not much of a clicker, always end up buying something! ... you'll have to tell me.

Cameron will always "sound good", he is plausable until you scratch the surface and find there's very little there of actual sound policy. On Marr yesterday,like all politicians hs couldn't or wouldn't answer straight questions. Many will say just like Brown at PMQs BUT Cameron always makes a big play of Brown not answering Questions and od course he's no different.

The big issue should be policy and at the moment economic policy. The Tories stand in isolation in the economic world at the moment. Every Government sees that Nationalisation must play a part in supporting key financial intituations to maintain stabillity in their financial system.

The Tories however think differently and that's what was meant by the "novice" comment.

I don't like Cameron but the real danger is the one that will get the keys to number 11. Anyone, even me can govern after the event. real decisions have to be taken in the present. Osbourne and Cameron IMO will be minnows in a shark pool.

PS Dispatches tonight will be enlightening!!

No doubt more cries to Pro Labour bias

He knows people from all different backgrounds he even works with someone from the North.

That's William Hague the original Tory boy. Hardly a different background.

Phew he's not bringing back the cane. Those interviews look phoney.

Why on earth should you expect somebody who will run the country should be the same as and experience a life like a single mother on a council estate? Could any single mother on a council estate run the country? Would they have the trained mind, expertise, education and confidence to do so?

Why on earth do people who feel insecure and disadvantaged think everybody should be like them? Everybody is different. We are all authors of our own lives. Sometimes people's circumstances are due to their own behaviour or irresponsibility. We all have to live within our income whatever that may be. People on low income can learn to cook, sew and grow vegetables instead of thinking they MUST have a holiday or designer clothes.

I know, it was pretty hard bringing up four children myself when my husband was the only one working but I actually learned to make nutritious meals and sew and knit and we were actually BETTER off in that way than those who have a lot of money and eat out and get takeaways.

It's amazing what you can do when you HAVE to and it can actually be quite satisfying having achieved something.

NEEDS MUST WHEN THE DEVIL DRIVES.

Poor old David Cameron, damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. Good job he is tough enough to take it.

There is sometimes a smack of jealousy when people criticise him and his background.

Instead of hankering for more and more (greed again) we should be grateful for what we have and that we are healthy and alive.

Sorry Nick I will have to give this one a miss. The Dispatches program `Camerons Money Men` which unfortunatly is on at the same time will be much more interesting than watching Cameron pretending he`s on the the same wavelength as ordinary people.
It seems that when he gets home after a hard day being that nice bloke Dave, he dons his dinner jacket to play host to the leaders club, very cozy. Already theres smatterings of sleaze, and they arn`t even in power yet

20. sagamix




They are just links to web pages that back up the points Max makes.

Dont worry nothing harmful, the mods check em first

JohnConstable @15 wrote:

"All taxes must (ultimately) be based upon ability to pay."

On that basis (aka 'socialism') people (like me) who work for a living are condemned for ever more to pay taxes for all those too ill, disabled, old, unfortunate or feckless to have a productive job.

The first four categories are understandable - we will all, at one time or another, belong to one of these groups, and providing a safety net is part and parcel of civillised society.

It is subsidising the last group: the ever growing underclass of unemployed - and frankly unemployable - that rankles with people who work hard for their highly-taxed take home pay.

The only reason this group are 'unable to pay' is because the state allows them not to - because you and I pick up the tab.

21. Eatonrifle



Did you see Marr interview Brown and then Cameron on the couch?

Did you notice any difference in interview technique?

Carrotts can't wait to hear your take on the "office of Budget Responsibility" Just what we need another QUANGO!

You couldn;t make it up

18. lab-rat

Gosh must be tough, funding must almost be on a par with an english authority.



Dont stand for it, no wonder your rioting.

Eatonrifle @21 wrote:

"PS Dispatches tonight will be enlightening!!"

Perhaps. But Nu Labour wont want to raise this issue. They have some very 'nasty' donors of their own.

Some examples (courtesy of Guido Fawkes):

Paul Myners is a director of the hedge fund manager GLG, which with $25 billion under management is one of europe's biggest hedge fund managers. It was until recently 10% owned by Lehmans. Paul Myners gave money to Gordon Brown's leadership campaign and he also gave money to Gordon Brown's think-tank the Smith Institute. Gordon rewarded him with appointments to the Treasury's pension review.

Derek Tullet has also given huge amounts of money to the Labour Party. Tullet's broking firm specialises in servicing hedge funds who want to go short stocks and derivatives.

Gilad Hayeem of the Lehman Brothers backed $2 billion hedge fund, Marble Bar Asset Management (Cayman), contributed to Hilary Benn's deputy leadership campaign.

There are plenty more "evil speculators" who have backed the Labour Party. Just in case you are wondering why Labour is silent...

Wow! the republican party turn on Bush and the proposed bailout scheme.............

It all kicking off.........where will it end.......

27# Carrots

Can't you see that anyones view of how the mediaconduct an interview is coloured by their own party bias? I shout at the box when the Tories are being interviewed because I wan't them pressed harder but at least I realise what I'm doing. There is no great conspiracy and Kennedy really was shot by Oswald.

When did it become a crime to come from a privileged background? Tony Blair ? Harold Wilson, Michael Foot, Wedgewood Benn, Clement Attlee and of course Gordon Brown son of a poor Scottish minister , I dont think ; well paid in a rent free house etc. for pontificating on a Sunday, but never had to work.

#29

To be fair to Carrots, I think he said this is a 'good' quango it an earlier post when we were discussing ways of making public finance statistics believable.

I think with the new watchdog proposed whether it is good or not will depend on its statutory powers. Will it be an MPC-like body (which Gideon was suggesting), with executive powers over fiscal policy? Another would be what will its remit be (Gideon suggested it would partly be to act to lower and simplify) taxes and pay back the national debt?

The current proposal seems to take a bit too much fiscal policy out of democratic control than would suit my tastes. But it does have some good ideas (i.e. independent monitor of the public finances)

Cameron obviously knows how to deal and be straight with people...........

...............otherwise these clips were a little too short to draw many other conclusions - other than this is a plug for Nick's show ;-)

34Balhamu

My take on what Cameron said meant it will have virtually no power other than to "embarrass" the government.

Seems a strange message from the Tories. We can't be trusted or even trust ourselves without a Quango Fiscal wathdog, probably employing likeminded economic D listers like Gideon.

#12 - CarrotsneedaQUANGO2

Now auntie has decided to restrict access to Nick's video clips to the UK. Not allowed to view them in the third world (Europe) any more. So - much as I would like to - no comment.

#36

I think it's very clever from the Conservatives.

People don't trust the Government as arbiter of their own fiscal rules, or trust their projections. Set-up right this would solve that problem. I would support a council with these limited powers, as it would prevent those with limited understanding of economics from claiming ridiculous things such as inflation or income does not matter in determining the affordability of debt. The new institution would hopefully be trusted.

The clever politics of it are that, aside from hammering home the message that this Government have been irresponsible, it will institutionalise Conservative policy and tie the hands of a future non-Conservative government.

It will have a remit to decrease debt, simplify taxes and reduce taxes and government spending as a % of GDP. They're a bit unclear about its statutory powers (I don't know if the parallels drawn with the MPC are rhetoric or what they're actually proposing).

But this institution pushing for low tax, low spending, paying back the public debt instead of investing in public services, simplifying taxes and shifting taxes from an income and wealth basis onto an expenditure basis, implementing the reforms proposed by the tax review the Conservatives will implement on obtaining power would tie future Government hands, by getting an institution saying that not doing these things is irresponsible or having statutory powers to frustrate them doing so.

In the context of child poverty, this is exactly the type of thing that Labour are thinking of when they talk about introducing legislation to commit the Government to reducing poverty.

Very clever politics.

32. Eatonrifle

I can see your point to a degree, but Marr was nothing short of a pathetic, I assume you didnt see the interviews. so here are the links.



Marr with Brown, check out the enormously helpful opening questions, talk about letting the most unpopular since records began off the hook..



Marr with Cameron, funny how he seems to have developed a more robust technique.



A proffessional interviewer should always play devils advocate and test the metal of the man and the arguement to the limit.





Ref: office of Budget Responsibility, I think taking the monitoring and result analysis away from the players is a good idea.

Id like to see a good set of management accounts every qtr.

All politicians will always spin the results to their own ends so it has to be independent.

So Prima facie Im on board. I even gave balhamu the job as CEO and told him to name his salary. Seems to be the way of things with Quangos.

So, what did boy Dave actually say?

One couldn’t quite get it.

Did he say he would turn the clock back to Socialism and start to regulate our Financial Institutions again?

Did he say that there is no dosh, but like Houdini he would find the dosh with the help of Saint Osborne?

Did he say it would take his party 150 years to build a rail line from London to Leeds?

Did he say that if in power, he would let any Financial Institution go to the wall even though there is a GLOBAL financial problem?

Did he say that he would make sure that Councils would have to collect our rubbish once a month to save money?

Did he say that thanks to his savings he would add another 1.3 million on the dole?

Did he say he would close 20% of our Hospitals to save money?

Tell us Nick, cause some are confused!!!

So, what does Cameron say tonight

1st scene - Personality is what matters, not policies in your manifesto

Our inheritance tax changes will help you (unsaid - so long as you die with more than £1.2 million in assets)

I don't believe social class exists in today's society

#21 Eatonrifle
"Cameron will always "sound good", he is plausable until you scratch the surface and find there's very little there of actual sound policy."

You're right that he's almost a carbon copy of Bliar. Let's hope that he's not quite such a devious liar.

Interesting - defending PFI.

Take note Mr U.

#37 threnodio

Afraid us expats will have to get used to it. The switch to iPlayer and Flash is making less and less news material available to us.

It's obviously fair enough with entertainment material where copyright issues apply, but to start restricting news seems oddly sinister, especially as BBC World News and the World Service give less and less space to UK news.

The verdict from the panel:

The good: He's a charming man, he's got a presence about him, he's polished, he obviously believes in what he says, he's got a lot of good ideas so long as he's telling the truth

The bad: You can't pin him down, he wants to increase spending and cut taxes at the same time, he doesn't understand the majority of the UK

Likeable, but doubts about delivery and ability to make tough decisions.

Seems to have gone down well with people in Birmingham.

I think events will mean this isn't paid much attention to. Brown managed to get Congress to vote down the US bank rescue to upstage the Conservative conference.

The Office for Budget Responsibility is "smoke and mirrors" stuff. The government of the day is already held to account on this via Parliament, the Press and ultimately the electorate. To a great extent the markets assess responsibility in this regard as well.
Unless of course "holding to account" means statutory power to overturn the policies/budget of the government of the day?
This would be a level of power being given to unelected officials that most of us would feel uncomfortable with.
It sounds like spin and soundbite that chimes with the current climate. Again though, there is precious little substance upon which to make an evaluation.

Not worth asking him about the Barnett Formula or the English question of course.

Free prescriptions for the Northern Irish dropped off the BBC politics page pretty damned quick too.

BBC policy "don't mention the English".

This week on 'The Day Today' we have a party political broadcast on behalf of the Conservative party.

48# peteholly

Can it be any worse than the cack-handed failure that Crash Gordon introduced?

BoE, FSA and the Treasury! After all they have served us well - haven't they!

Wasn't as polished as I was expecting - has the look of a man who is 10 yrds in front in the Olympic 100m final only to find he is about to choke and trip up....Two gaffes:1. No seatbelt 2. President Obama - won't go down well.I think Boris is going to be the next great Tory leader - Dave is only going to last one term, if that...

Haven't watched your prog yet Nick, in spite of your plugging it heavily on this site.

More importantly, and in the throes of capitalist meltdown, your George is proposing, if elected to power, to freeze Council Tax for 2 years.

Let's just think what the consequences of this will be for the millions of people who work for local authorities, delivering vital services:

1)millions of workers falling even further behind in pay and thus standard of living

2) falling standard of service to everyone in the land - that includes children's services, care homes for the elderly, neighbourhood wardens, recycling and carbon reduction initiatives, libraries, theatres, sports centres

Still who needs THEM, when you've got a few extra quid in your pocket? This chimes precisely with old Tory values - a shallow grasping society founded on greed and selfishness.

Back to Thatch anyone?

48. peteholly

The government of the day is already held to account on this via Parliament the press and ultimately the electorate



Oh dear......

Parliament:
Seeing as the government rather tends to have a majority there, its not that hard to wizz by that great arbiter is it?

The press?
They just want to push a story and sell papers, which means figures get twisted in all sorts of directions to back up a point, Usually Rupert Murdochs.

The electorate?
Most wouldnt have a clue as to what GDP is and how it was calculated, You think they could develop an understanding on debt affordability how much debt the government can safely carry.



Surely any independent institution that is charged with holding politicians to account is a good thing.



In fact let them can take control of the salaries and expenses system too.

Folks....we really are on the verge of economical disaster......what Cameron says will not mean a jot......when you compare it to todays news''''

This is a real emergency now! it would not surprise me...if parliament is convened early
and consesus and parliament now! work together..........

53. MinnieSouris

Your world sounds wonderfully warm and fluffy.

Wealth creation is down, the tax take is down.



So..... you have 3 options

A Raise taxes as a proportion of GDP

B Cut services to an affordable level

C Borrow more and pray it all turns out OK

In fact I think we should demand parliament to recovene as soon as..........

I think it would take a brave person to predict......a fast solution to this crisis.....


The whole world economy is under threat...

As a nation we must collectively come together at this time to ensure......

we set a proper recovery plan..........

we are all in this together.........it is the biggest major threat since WII.....

Five undecided voters all wanting bespoke treatment for themselves.
Ah! If only life was like that.
Put a little in and get a lot out.
Isn't that why the country is in such a mess.
Well perhaps a period of austerity is just what everyone needs. Not just the poorer section of society.
Then we may see where the real priorities are and make sure they are funded accordingly.
At the moment large sums of money are too well spread around to be effective.
I also think that anyone who goes into politics from a wealthy background is hardly doing it for the money. So give the guy a break. He is obviously genuine and has a lot of people to please and a lot of problems to solve.

#46 - Brownedov

News as well. I have noticed that, when a Newsnight item is made by a third party - Guardian Films especially - auntie blocks it "for copyright reasons". I suppose the usual suspects will have a pop about not being a license payer but actually, with BBC World in my cable package, I am probably giving auntie as much as they are every year.

Don't think much of any of them. I'd be happy to vote and help get the miserable bunch we have now out, but who is there? Osborne I'm afraid is just a pallid Flashman, whilst DC is still very wet behind the ears; although not as immature as the Milipede. Surely a country which has millions of citizens can do better than this? I haven't even bothered to include the Lib Dems. If a man like Vince Cable was leading them, they would stand a chance as he is a serious politican. The others in that party, according to my observations are worthless. That leads to various smaller parties, which by the methods we use here in the UK restricts a voter's choice. We can only vote if there is a local candidate willing to be an MP in one's area. Thus, the ballot is a very restricting exercise, and as usual we the long-suffering public will be stuck with one load of inferior goods or the other.

#55 - derekbarker

Recall parliament? And risk a motion of no confidence? Gordon has enough problems as it is without having to contend with democratic accountability.

Some of these responses sounds very much like the Draper Rapid Rebuttal Unit at work.

We must be told.

Bob

DB - is your period (...) key stuck, are you writing from a mobile or are you just trying a new version of political poetry?

The global down-turn inaction from the USA
has put more presure on any future deal now! being successful, less likely.

The global down-turn virus has went airborne....it really will be a global melt-down in every sense of the words.

The Asian markets will find it very difficult to recover.......that in turn will bring more bad news for Europe and of course us.......

#59 threnodio

Ditto

You'd think they could cut such stuff out of the streamed versions or a least put up a caption with the blocked length to be able to skip over it,

My cable package has BBC Prime as well as World - truly awful most of the time.

At least in Switzerland the locals are keen on watching movies in VO so all 3 language networks show most movies and even soaps in bi-canal.

I have just watched the second video - DC's conversation with the single mother. If there is one thing I hate more than snobbery, it is "inverted snobbery" (and I speak as someone who is most definitely NOT well off financially). There seems to be a vulgar assumption in our society that anyone with a "posh" accent and a privileged background must be arrogant and "out of touch". Has it ever occurred to the liberal intelligentsia and chatterati, who seem to think they run our culture, that it is actually possible for someone with "a local accent" living on a council estate also to be arrogant and "out of touch"? Arrogance and ignorance is not a matter of accent, background or money, but a problem of human nature, which crosses all "classes" (dare I use the forbidden word).

IMO, this single mother is a typical example of inverted snobbery, and whether she was a Labour voter or not, this attitude is quite typical of our government - remember the nasty Labour campaign in Crewe and Nantwich!! But I suspect that there are not many Labour MPs who were brought up in the sort of environment this single mother apparently lives in. And isn't it utterly ridiculous that for years we heard Mr Blair (who, by the way, came from a privileged public school background) talking about Education, Education, Education, and yet when someone (such as David Cameron) has the sheer nerve to actually benefit from a good education, he is then condemned as "not understanding how ordinary people live"! It really is so puerile.

Frankly I am tired of all the psychological manipulation that goes on in our so-called democracy. For goodness sake, can't we just look at the issues and policies, instead of obsessing about people's backgrounds? In fact, isn't this judgmentalism about people's backgrounds just another form of intolerance and discrimination, no different from racism and sexism?

Just watched Dispatches, just goes to prove that the Tory party from Cameron down is rotten to the core.

63. Bradshad


..... is him thinking.

One . equals 1 minute of intense, piercing thought.






You should read his posts without the ...

Totally sick and tired of the BBC political bias to Nu labour. Just watching a tory Minister again getting a savaging on a political interview on Newsnight and being utterly ridiculed for no reason at all when Labour ministers never ever get the same and did not last week. I am sick and tired of this political bias shown. Apparently the Tories are only 10 points ahead according to the femail BBC interviewer (who constantly inturrupted) so that speaks volumes to me when we all know that was one isolated and not very good poll but is repeated as if it was the best ever.
Totally Disgusted.

Weve been rumbled

why can't I post???

@21 etonrifle

- Cameron will always "sound good", he is plausable until you scratch the surface and find there's very little there of actual sound policy -

posted at teatime tonight - striking in its lacking of a single policy from the labour conference last week.

in two days, policy announcements from the tories that ive heard so far:

* private room access for every patient in hospital
* an end to mixed sex wards
* council tax freeze for londoners
* veterans free travel for london
* free travel all over london for older people to be brought in for trains, buses, etc
* council tax freeze option for everyone in england who has a council who keeps a tight reign on spending
* taxpayers wont be bailing out failed banks
* bank of england would be in charge of restructuring failed banks
* pro active work from the FSA to prevent banks failing in the first place (ie, doing its job!)

i watched all the labour conference on tv, id struggle to list 5 policy announcements

personal jibes and coded digs at the opposition just wont cut it, the biggest crisis the world has faced in donkeys years, and brown simply told us about "who he is" and quoted ideal scenarios that everyone wants to see, listening to him, he sounded like alistair campbell was back working for them again.... he has been popping up at recent events tho, so maybe he is?

brown has a personal advisor to stop unsightly photographs of him appearing in the media... how much more superficial can you get?

try scratching browns vision and you dont find policies, youll be sucked into a vacuum, as your soundbite shows... straight out of the mouth of labour spin doctors!

#68

Your naivety astounds me, the idea that you behold the flowery prose is laughable from your quick short responses.

Why are you so concerned with a couple of DC, takes? when there is clearly a mjor financial situation staring you right in the FACE.

Can I ask you! do you think your adding any weight to the conservative march for power,with your disadvantaged political knowledge?.

......................................................................

you've just been quangoed....slap slap slap

I am sure I heard Nick Robinson say this morning on the Today Programme, that unlike Vince Cable the Tories did not complain in the past about government debt. Perhaps Nick, you might like to remember that the Conservative Party fought the 2005 election on the level of government debt. In fact an apology might be a good thing, old boy, though I know you are too conceited to go that far..

I find th bias of the BBC in favour of the present government astonishing. The Newsnight programme tonight was so biased as to be disgraceful. Michael Crick was so much on side when it came to Labour, that I, for one, decided that the BBC should be privatised and the licence fee abolished and the Company should fight its way on the open media market. And, I was 100% in favour of the BBC until the dreadful sell out over the Dr David Kelly affair.

I am tired of complaining about political bias, but will still go on complaining until the BBC returns to its original 100% unbiased position.

Carrots@56

Warm and fluffy? No, I'm just a council employee who's already witnessed colleague redundancies, budget cuts and squeezes under a Tory leadership which put its councillors' allowances up but kept workers' pay down (heard of Gershon anyone?) - Council workers are lagging behind in pay already. Freezing Council tax means more of the same, and service reductions.

Cutting public spending and services means putting people out of work (remember the good old days of high unemployment - yes of course you do) and reducing everyone's standard of living.
On balance, I would say keeping tax levels around the current level, with some redistribution, would be reasonable. I'm reliably told that total taxation under Thatcher was higher than it is at the moment. Interesting, isn't it?

Trouble with the blog rebuttal thingie, it will make it easy for politicians and the media to dismiss the very interesting comments which appear here - some of which I hope, like mine, are genuine.

As for Nick's thinly disguised sycophancy (hoping to stay in a job if the Tories get in) on Panorama, if Cameron couldn't charm 5 people face to face, then he wouldn't be much of a politician. Did I hear him say he'd scrap regional government? Whoops.

MinnieSouris #53

Did you actually listen to the proposal, or are you just deliberately spreading misinformation.

What was ACTUALLY said, was that the Tories in power would dramatically slash spending on government advertising and use of management consultatants (something which the National Audit Office has said is out of control under Gordon Brown).

They would then use that money in the following way. Any council that agrees to limit its council tax increase to 2.5% will then be given enough extra money in funding so that they receive the extra 2.5%, but don't actually have to charge the taxpayer any more.

So, funding increases, bills don't.

It might also interest you to know that current bank of England forecasts expect inflation to be back down to around 2% by mid 2010, so this would be an ABOVE inflation increase in funding.

Now then, complain about that if you can.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

39 carrots..

You clearly have an obsession with Andrew Marr and media bias. So I have watched these videos.

As far as Andrew Marr was concerned there was NO difference. In both cases he allowed the PM and Cameron to present their cases and allow the viewer to make a judgement. Proof of this is that you have made a judgement of Brown in your comment and I have made a judgement of Cameron who was defensive, aggressive all negativity and no answers. He lost the arguements put to him. So Marrs style works. Andrew Neil and Jeremy Paxman make judgements for us based on what they think their audience feels. They may be right in your case but not in others. Marrs style I think works for everyone. Don't watch if you don't like it.

It's a sad fact that if he does become P.M. in 2010 David Cameron will have such an unholy mess to clear up in terms of both the World Credit Crisis and the present Government's massive borrowing and spending spree that his hands will be totally tied in terms of any electoral goodies. There is a case for keeping Gordon Brown in office for another 4 years so that people can understand how really useless he is with finances. They still don't seem to get it according to the polls. A good dose of reality might just do the trick!

I thought The BBC's brief synopsis of The Conservative Party Conference on The main news last night was totally biased against The Opposition party. They dismissed George Osborne as having no solutions to the country's problems and ended by saying that The World Credit Crisis had swallowed up news of the Conference and that that was perhaps a good thing. In addition I thought the questioning of Emily was downright rude. It's high time that a bit of balance was brought into these reports. I tend to agree that any economic action taken after Gordon Brown has departed will be an exercise in steadying the ship rather than immediately setting it on a new course. George Osborne is not a magician and he isn't privy to the real underlying problems we have. They are well masked by the deliberate confusing and distortion of figures.

I've just been watching the BBC news.......... now I don't normally ever write posts on this subject - but..........

..... I like to see interviewers go hard on the subject 'what are you going to do Mr Cameron'.

....but I would also like to see them hit Gordon equally hard on the subject of 'what have Labour been doing for 11 years'.


P.S. When pushed hard, Cameron comes out fighting and you can tell he is genuine. Thats makes him come across well. No wonder GB still comes across like a cyborg-drone. He has lots of cuddly New Labour interviews from the media which do him no favours.

Osborne, in his conference speech, stressed that the main cause of the banking crisis was the bankers themselves ... hats off to him for that, he's gone up a teeny bit in my estimation.

"Carrotts can't wait to hear your take on the "office of Budget Responsibility" Just what we need another QUANGO!

You couldn;t make it up"

I agree, do we really need another quango? And if you are so against quangos, how come you support a labour party that revels in wasting vast quantities of money on them?

At least this appears to be a quango who's objective is to hold the Government accountable, and work on the tax-payer's behalf, instead of the other way around under labour. So this quango should be aiming to get the government to cut back on other needless quangos. An anti-quango so to speak.

It is so annoying when this web-site 'crashes' and your comment spirits away into thin air when you name Labour spin doctors.

Why is that - are the BBC still scared stiff after the Gilligan / Kelly affair and need to wait for a 'spin-doctor-authorised' moderators?

I have tried 7 times to mention 'Derek Draper'........ this is the 8th attempt.

On the Today programme this morning you set out the details of your latest vision when you told us about what the Conservatives would be doing and thinking in a year's time.
Please will you tell us what numbers will win the lottery this week and whether we can expect snow at Christmas.

I watched the speech by Osborne yesterday. I was very pleasantly surprised by how much there was in it. I was pleasantly surprised that it is the Tories that are telling the banks, if you make a mess, YOU clear it up, don't come crying to the tax-payer for a hand-out.

Which party is the party of progressive taxation?

Which party is spending billions propping up billionaire bankers because they ignored the fundamentals for years and proudly, yet stupidly, claimed credit for an economy that was growing entirely on debt inflation?

Which party is offering real solutions based on sound money?

Labour currently has a "grind the workers into the ground" attitude to bail out those wreckless, greedy, incompetent and undeserving billionaires, and it is the Tories, who actually understand business, who have the experience of turning a recession (caused by the ERM, which labour supported) round and building a strong, dynamic economy based on productivity, that has the solutions.

They should not use one penny from the tax-payer to bail out those greedy billionaires. But then, labour IS the party of the undeserving rich elite, and the work-shy and the illegal immigrant.

People use your votes. Kill off this parasitic labour party.

Attempt 11 to reply to Carrots at 70 just failed - but my comments keep disappearing into thin air when I press post.

There is something the software is programmed not to like........

"Council workers are lagging behind in pay already. Freezing Council tax means more of the same, and service reductions. "

You have got to be kidding me. With the perks and earlier retirement into a protected pension?

A freeze in council tax needn't mean ANY cuts in services. All it means is that the existing services should be provided more efficiently. Something labour has never understood.

I would like to see large cuts in un-necessary services actually.

Carrots 70

14 attempts to reply to you now. My comments vanish into thin air.

The rebuttal unit are more advanced than I thought.

I'll post a word search with the relevant phrases!

There is a well known Labour spin doctor called [censored] - who has an on-line user name on this blog called [censored].

Morning I know you are watching New Labour 'blog [censored] unit'!

Has [censored] spin doctor got a job as a moderator, or is it more like when the Sun newspaper smuggles reporters into Heathrow - has New Labour employee infiltrated the moderators?

53 MinnieSouris wrote:

"Let's just think what the consequences of this will be for the millions of people who work for local authorities, delivering vital services"

Firstly, let's get back to first principles: Local councils exist to provide services (vital and otherwise) not to provide employment.

There are many fine people working in local services and many work hard a difficult jobs.

There is also, however, a large amount of waste.

Among the 'vital' services you list are "recycling and carbon reduction initiatives". One can argue that most of the green/environmental agenda is an expensive nonsense.

We can then go on to tackle the profusion of 'compliance officers' and all manner of PC jobs and jobsworths.

55. derekbarker wrote:

"Folks....we really are on the verge of economical disaster.....".

Why not add: The sky's falling! The sky's falling!

It's pretty bad, but let's not get carried away.

(Besides, Brown might try to use any excuse to delay a general election...)

#91

I had a similar experience yesterday.

It's quite obvious from the delight on radio four that George Osbourne's comments on the economy were 'buried' by the news form the financial crisis exactly which side the BBC is batting for.

This was followed by a further five minustes of high fiving that the Brown 'story' was now beginning to resonate with voters...difficult times, man of experience, blah.

Littel attempt to conceal the whooping in the background that the great Ditherer has finally got through to his public. Might be different after eighteen more months of having their living standards trashed and the national debt soaring to IMF phone call inducing levels.

67. redonthebed wrote:
"Just watched Dispatches, just goes to prove that the Tory party from Cameron down is rotten to the core."

Yeah? Well they're not alone!

Read comment @30 above.

91. jonathan_cook




Do you mean this

75. MinnieSouris wrote:



Dont worry. still plenty of public sector NON jobs going.



Non job of the week



And taxation is lower now than under Thatcher is it? Is your source Derek Draper by any chance.

Ill leave that one to Balhamu.

"i watched all the labour conference on tv, id struggle to list 5 policy announcements"

After reviewing the BBC coverage of the labour conference, this is all I could find:

1) Free broadband (over 10 years) for chavs to arrange which house party to trash next on facebook. For this the Government retains the right to spy on all internet traffic and control access to any and all websites, blocking any that they deem inappropriate.

2) ID cards for kids as young as 14

3) Government indoctrination of infants AKA free nursery places for all 2 year olds (implemented over 10 years)

4) free prescriptions for people who have terminal cancer. (many of whom are too ill to work, are on benefits and get them free anyway)

Um, yup that is all. After 11 years of abject failure, raising hundreds of billions in extra taxes, this is the pathetic total of their new policy initiatives.

78 dhwilkinson wrote:

"Marrs style I think works for everyone. Don't watch if you don't like it."

It wouldn't matter if the BBC wasn't funded by a tax (aka 'licence fee') that one is forced to pay just for the privilege of owning a television.

Furthermore, it would matter less if this was an isolated incident. But as the BBC themselves have admitted it is institutionally biased.

As one famous BBC person* said:

"The BBC is not impartial or neutral. It's a publicly-funded, urban organisation with an abnormally large number of young people, ethnic minorities and gay people. It has a liberal bias not so much a party-political bias. It is better expressed as a cultural liberal bias."

*Andrew Marr, actually.

Purple @ 87

Well I don't usually agree with you about much but, on this banking bailout, you are dead right.

The size of the root problem, bad mortgages on overvalued real estate in the US, is no way near big enough to justify the panic. In my view, the bailout itself is an ill thought out panic measure and it's a very good thing that it's been rejected. I mean, c'mon ... the idea of the government buying assets off the banks, just because nobody else will, is absolutely ludicrous!

It's obvious that these troublesome "toxic" assets do have value ... that value being the future cash flow from mortgages being paid off or (where they default) from properties being seized and sold. Most banks have them written down already to around 20 cents in the dollar and that sounds on the prudent side. Even if it isn't, you can analyse and take a reasoned view of what the ultimate value might be. Half of the exposure is, in any case, with Freddie and Fannie.

So, there is no reason why the banks themselves can't step up and start behaving sensibly. They should be able to drop the paranoia, drop this laughable "we're too scared to lend to each other" business ... in due course, a liquid market should evolve for the distressed assets (there are loads of precedents for that) and, in the meantime, they can just hold them and take whatever coupon income comes their way. We have capital ratios that banks have to stick to and, if they're in compliance with all that, even after a writedown to 20 cents, what's the big problem?

There are potentially large profits to be made by people who buy this stuff very low ... that's the essence of risk / reward banking and that's what should be happening, yes?

The whole point of bankers is to manage risk, move money about and provide credit. That's what they're there for, right? It's very important and they get paid silly money for doing it. If it now proves that they are not up to the job, merely because one sector has gone nasty, then one of two things should happen ... either let things run their course (if you're a free marketeer) or, if you're a believer in government solutions, nationalise them.

At the present time, they are being ... cue Californian valley girl dripping with contempt type accent ... "Patheddic" ... and I find it hard to imagine a less deserving case for state support.