Another gaffe

I'd say that you "did a Grayling" Nick. Easily done. Was Emily nearby?

Nick,

Just goes to show that even the best can make mistakes.

Mr Robinson, this is nonsense and you know it. We can tell you are doing this deliberately to wind up Ben Bradshaw MP... Serves him jolly well right. No doubt he will realise that there will be much more of this if he doesn't keep his trap shut.

Oh those long hot summer days in August, it seems such a long time ago.

I Nick made another gaffe in the same news item he referred to the Tories portraying doom and gloom and suggesting they need to give reasons for optimism. This could be right but I do not think so. Are you reporting the news or trying to make it?

The interesting point is the tactic of telling the electorate that we are in for stern measures to cope with twelve years of New Labour meddling, huge waste and a deficit that is hard to believe possible even for them. The big question is whether people are going to be swayed by hearing the bad news or go back to Labour who ask us to bury our heads in the sand.

In spite of what a few say, "They've lost my vote already" for example, I think people will eventually wake up to reality and like in the war with Churchill show us Brits in our true colours in times of adversity. The reactions during 7/7 suggested that we have not lost that quality.

How well we fare during the recovery from the recession and twelve years of New Labour will depend upon that as much as the economics. In fact, maybe this shock treatment will enable us to return to being a saner society than we have become in this bubble of absurd liberalism, political correctness and breakdown which ever way you look.

And that is the real question. For if we can do that, may be we can turn this into a success rather than the present nadir and feel good about ourselves even when it hurts.

So I say to David Cameron et al, let's have more of this as long as it is reasoned. Keep it up remorselessly until the General Election. Let people get used to the idea and they will realise the Conservatives are not promising sack cloth and ashes just for the fun of it.

Without facing reality, we are all doomed anyway.

Lol Nick. Was pretty funny - though let's face it, Cameron is the de facto PM anyway. This will rile the likes of Ben "who is Roman Polanski" Bradshaw, and Phil "yikes! here somes Purdy from the New Avengers!" Woollas.

"Oh well. It's proof at least that I don't use an autocue, that it has been a long few weeks and that I really should go to bed earlier at these conferences."

Nick,

Will you publish your expenses from the Conference on this blog, in the name of transparency & fairness to the taxpayer?

I think it is long overdue that the BBC talent voluntarily publishes their expenses in this era of austerity in public finances - afterall, we are your employers & you are funded by us - the taxpayer.

How about it Nick?

Thanks

The problem for GB is that he has been undermining the Armed Forces since becoming Chancellor. He find that the Royals (allegdely) are also up in arms about his government's poor support for our troops.

Something else he has inherited from Bliar, it is like watching a performance of MacBeth. Lord Peter as Lady MacBeth?

The last thing our current Prime Minister wants to talk about or at times even acknowledge is "his" deficit...
At least someone prepared to face up to it and look at the hard choices needed to resolve the problem is showing a degree of the aptitude required to be Prime Minister.

In order to deal with a problem you need to recognise it, so Cameron is at least one step ahead of Brown who seems to be in constant denial.

Or was your "gaffe" some kind of Freudian slip, expressing the hope most of us have that someone other than Gordon Brown be Prime Minister?"

Perhaps in the interests of balance next time you refer to Mandelson you could call him Prime Minister as well, given his ever increasing influence you wouldn't be far off the mark (and no sign of another resignation in disgrace in sight).

Not really sure I expect this blog to be about Mr Robinson. Fine fellow he may be, but only a journalist - not a politician.

At least Grayling misheard/misperceived a question and gave a credible answer.

Nick presumably heard the question, but said the wrong thing!

No other political action, then?

Talking of 'gaffs' and whether one is or one isn't, perhaps someone can help me?

When Eric Pickles defended the actions of the Latvian Waffen-SS (Lettish Legion)by saying that they were only conscripts fighting for their country, and to say otherwise was a Soviet smear.

Is that a gaff or isn't it? You see, a substantial minority (roughly one third) of the Latvian Waffen-SS were eager volunteers and swore and oath to Hitler. This more than significant group included veterans of pro-Nazi death squads (they had been part of Einsatzgruppen A) who had already taken part in the first brutal phase of the Holocaust.

I think it's definitely a 'gaff' especially as he was trying to defend one of the Torie's good friends in Europe who celebrate this unit by laying on a march every year in Latvia even though celebrations of the Lettish Legion are banned in Latvia for this very reason.

Are the Tories trying to revise history?

#7 Operation_Overlord

Hmmmmmm, yes, and I don't think he should bother.

Mr Justice Irwin ruled on Friday that the BBC did not have to disclose information about expenditure and I have a feeling that he might just have a good enough grasp of the law to trust his ruling.

Anyway, who wants to see Nick Robinson's expenses?

No! I am not a BBC troll!

On tonight's 6 o'clock TV news I accidently referred to David Cameron as the prime minister.

Accidently, or subconsciously starting to think about which side your bread is buttered?

At least we get a glimpse of the politicians logic.

Nick reports that PM Brown thinks that support for the war in Afghanistan has, in his view, been undermined by an alliance of critics in the military, like General Sir Richard Dannatt ...

So, how do we interpret this?

That PM Brown thinks that his unwillingness to loosen the Treasury purse strings for essential military spending to (ultimately) achieve political objectives, should not become public knowledge, especially via military people like Dannant and undermines the (Afghan) mission more than the lack of men and materials.

Can anybody out there plumb the murky depths of a politicians logic and provide another explanation?

#12

extremesense

I believe operation_Overlord clearly used the term "voluntarily disclose" in his original post - making reference to legal rulings somewhat redundant (unless they prohibit such disclosure).

"Anyway, who wants to see Nick Robinson's expenses?"

Well it depends what's on there... the paparazzi go through dustbins to get gossip on celebrities, perhaps we can get some clues to Nick's psyche and more of an insight into the underlying motivations behind his blogs.

[and yes I am joking]

Nick,

Freudian slip.......... so easy when Gordon acts as if he is in opposition and Cameron takes on the role of honest, hard nosed Statesman.

Don't beat yourself up.

Nick

"To err is human..."

We forgive you. You are probably are the first of many over the next few months.

Sleep well!

#10 fairlyopenmind

"At least Grayling misheard/misperceived a question and gave a credible answer."

That's about as greasy as it get fairly-sinister.

Gag! of the week.

A little advance rehabilitation, perhaps?

#15

And the Grim Reaper strikes again............Ouch!

Sneaky little ploy! going through ones dustbin....Honestly! the depths.

Not quite sure it is worthy of a blog entry

How about an apology on the 10 o'clock news

Nick -- interesting what history shows:
Block on promotion to head of British armed forces
In June 2008 the Sunday Times reported that Dannatt's expected routine promotion to Chief of the Defence Staff had been personally blocked by Prime Minister Gordon Brown "because of his repeated calls for better pay and conditions for servicemen".
Source : Wikipepedia
Just shows how insecure Brown really is !

Nick,

the very fact that an error by you is front page news just shows how rare an occurence it is - the effect is to make you seem more human - makes us all feel a little closer to you - I certainly do anyway

Nick, addressing DC as "Prime Minister" showed great personal courage. You have admitted publicly that the Conservatives will form the next administration. It's probably the most honest statement you have made for the last 12 years. Well done.

Nicholas - it isn't the bloggers that you should be apologising to it is Chris Grayling.

But thanks for showing, just like Chris, that you are only human.

If only Gorgon Brown would take a leaf out of your book.

Nick Robinson seems as mifed as Gordon Brown at George Osbourne's and David Camerons succesful Party Conference.

He did however pre-empt the election calling Dave Cameron the Prime Minister!

Does Nick at last acknowledge we dont have a Prime Minister in Downing Street but some demented clown masqurading as one?

15. At 8:52pm on 07 Oct 2009, Reaper_of_Souls

Maybe you should check the tag on his underpants

#18, derekbarker wrote:
"#10 fairlyopenmind

"At least Grayling misheard/misperceived a question and gave a credible answer."
That's about as greasy as it get fairly-sinister.
Gag! of the week."

Derek,

I listened to the Grayling interview. He was asked whether it seemed likely that Dannatt would be offered a role as a junior defence minister...

At that point I guess he'd have had a bit of a mental shake... What? With all the public disagreements, Brown could possibly... And missed the word "Tory" before "future government".

Recall Grayling also saying that with his qualities and experience, Dannatt should work alongside government.

From what I understand (Nick Robinson always tells us what other people are going to tell us, before he comes to tell us what they actually told us), Dannatt may be a special advisor of some sort.

I actually thought it was quite funny. "MP/PM doesn't answer a question", or "MP doesn't listen" isn't exactly news, but "MP hears something that wasn't said" is the stuff of comedy.

(And I doubt Dannatt would be any "kinder" to Tories or other parties who don't pay enough attention to the needs of warriors they send to fight.)

By the way. If you think I'm Fairly-sinister, you wouldn't want to meet some of the other guys from the rural town where I grew up. Especially when there's a new moon!

Possibly Robinson has really begun to show his Tory leanings here again I am very worried at the distorted coverage we get from highly paid reporters...What with Robinson, Marr, Humphry,Davies,and the lady on Today what on earth chance does Brown stand

18. At 9:15pm on 07 Oct 2009, derekbarker wrote:
#10 fairlyopenmind

"At least Grayling misheard/misperceived a question and gave a credible answer."

That's about as greasy as it get fairly-sinister.

******

Honestly, Derek. Can you come up with nothing better? Have you never misheard something said to you? Have you never misinterpreted anything? (I know you have, because you hear all this New Labour nonsense and think it's the truth).

Read what Grayling said. "I HOPE that this isn't a political gimmick." Which means that whichever party were trying to bring in a knowledgable, experienced military person into their team, he hoped it was for the right reason (gaining insight and knowledge so that the job of managing the conflicts and the ministry can be properly handled) and not just to 'be seen to do the right thing'.

When he realised his mistake in mishearing / misinterpreting the question, he stressed his error, apologised for the confusion, and put it right.

I trust that now you realise your mistake in being a paid / unpaid (delete as applicable) New Labour apologist, you'll also tell us you have been wrong, say sorry, and put it right.

We are waiting (but not holding our breath...)

Nick,

It's always worthwile to make a good first impression!

I guess he'll always remember who addressed him as 'Primeminister' first.

Maybe not such a big gaffe!

The perspective minister in waiting may now be removed and the continued Grayling over the grey area about what he knew or didn't know will divide the tories.Now! what about Ken Clarke, what did he know about Dannatt and his new role.It's a real howler of a conference.

I fully expect Cameron to sound the retreat tomorrow.

Battered and bruised and exposed as the young pretender.

Not to worry Mr Robinson; no harm done. Sleep tight, don't let the bed bigs bite ...

#30 Londons-Willy

Are you and fairlyopenmind from the same rural town.

Howl..Howl..Howl.....moonshine.

32 derek

Huh? You been hitting the sauce?

Compared to last week's Labour love-fest, the Conservative Conference has been one of hard truths about the fiscal disaster they will be inheriting, the appaling support given - or in most cases not given - to the armed forces, the need to reduce the cost of Government from the past 12 years of bloating and bottom-feeding, the need to clamp down on those whose only desire in life is to screw the benefit system for as much as they can, and the need to actually LISTEN to what the public need and want, and make sure that we can actually AFFORD to provide the best public services, not simply promise and then never deliver, a trait seen so often from Blair, Brown and co.

No retreat needed. For your phrase "young pretender", read "PM in waiting"

Call an election if you reckon it's all Tory Hot Air. We dare you!

derekbarker 32

I think your political judgement has been found wanting, quite a few times over the last couple of days. It's interesting, therefore, that you should choose to stake your last reputational shilling (and let's face it, it is your last shilling, is it not?) on

"I fully expect Cameron to sound the retreat tomorrow."

Well, we shall see. But I think it will turn out that you have got it wrong, yet again.

@ oldsitkaspruce. Dear Sir. Over the last 12 years, I have infrequently been reduced to flight-testing clock radios while listening to BBC political coverage. Indeed, the Ruler of All She Surveys has in the past banned me from listening/watching it. I honestly thought that the BBC was institutionally biased towards the socialists. Now, after reading your post I reaise I was mistaken. The besetting sin of the BBC is in fact institutionalised deference towards whoever controls the purse-strings.

BTW, may the increased CO2 emissions beloved of GW literalists continue to increase your growth and prolong your life and health.

34. At 10:37pm on 07 Oct 2009, derekbarker wrote:
#30 Londons-Willy

Are you and fairlyopenmind from the same rural town.

Howl..Howl..Howl.....moonshine.

*****

Thought so - you're barking.

Nick,

Glass houses anyone ????

May 7th 2010 we can all say we heard the news of the new PM from Nick in 2009! The real question is, how many more BBC employees, if any, will let the cat out of the bag before the election confirming that Cameron will be the next PM?

The general has disgraced the army and his post!! He seems to be a tory propoganda tool in the army undermining The Labour Party pretending to care about the soldiers, what a joke!!!

On tonight's 6 o'clock TV news I accidently referred to David Cameron as the prime minister.

===============

Nick don't worry, I think there are several plausible reasons for your slip.

Firstly there is gordon and mandys insistence that they are the underdogs - the insurgents - hardly the words of a party in power.

Secondly if you remember Gordons performance at the labour conference where he seemed to assume that labour were not and had not been in power for the last 12 years with all that talk about new initiatives and solving all those problems that some naughty people haven't solved in the last 12 years.

Basically, labour have got what they wanted, and embedded their 'changed history' into your unconscious, so its no wonder you think a tory must be in power!

#35
In all seriousness Willy do want to give your vote to Cameron and Osborne.Come on Wills they cant even organise a conference properly.

" Compared to last week's Labour love-fest, the Conservative Conference has been one of hard truths about the fiscal disaster they will be inheriting, the appaling support given - or in most cases not given - to the armed forces, the need to reduce the cost of Government from the past 12 years of bloating and bottom-feeding, the need to clamp down on those whose only desire in life is to screw the benefit system for as much as they can, and the need to actually LISTEN to what the public need and want, and make sure that we can actually AFFORD to provide the best public services, not simply promise and then never deliver, a trait seen so often from Blair, Brown and co"

Look, at what you type, carelessly you accuse people of screwing the BENEFIT system, where is your evidence to such a dramatic claim.

You make another claim about listening to what the public need and want.
Didn't you listen too Osborne's speech, he is giving nothing away but cuts....cuts....cuts.

#36

Mr Perry, we cant go on together with suspicious minds.

So how can Cameron brighten up, what Osborne clearly darkened?.

Tell Perry oldchap, do think Britain is better in Europe than out?.

If George Osbourne has his way we are going to have %million unemployed...this is scary!!!

41. At 10:55pm on 07 Oct 2009, davidou1234 wrote:
The general has disgraced the army and his post!! He seems to be a tory propoganda tool in the army undermining The Labour Party pretending to care about the soldiers, what a joke!!!

****

This career soldier has distinguished himself in the face of more personal danger than you will ever face. Would you dare say this to his face?

Of course not.

He is serving this country and the best interests of the soldiers under his command,and he obviously realises that the best way to do this is to ensure that the next Government handles the issues surrounding defense and the military better than the current shower.

8#

Nah, it'd be Ed Balls as Lady Macbeth... the real power behind the throne, pushing him into it.

"Out, out damn SpAd, I say! Who would have thought the old man would have had so much blood in him?"

37#

"I have infrequently been reduced to flight-testing clock radios while listening to BBC political coverage. Indeed, the Ruler of All She Surveys has in the past banned me from listening/watching it."

Excellent... L0L

41#

Pretty poor performance for a "teacher". You only got one bit right - "The Labour Party pretending to care about the soldiers, what a joke!!!"

3 out of 10. See me after class.

43 Derek:

Yes - I will be voting Conservative - because whichever party wins in the Spring will need to make cuts after the past 12 years, but so far only the Tories are being honest about it. Nobody WANTS cuts, but the fact is that Labour have near bankrupted this nation with profligate spending of money we simply didn't have, and we NEED cuts if we are to get out of this mess. And getting out of this fiscal disaster is what the people of this country want - not another four of five years of Gordon Brown's fiscal ham-fistedness.

And as for targetting benefit cheats - are you saying that the Labour line is that this is a BAD idea? Real vote-grabber, that train of thought. It wqasn't a careless remark - but a serious, honest one. Something missing from your posts.

Maybe I just had a Grayling moment and was not sure what I was hearing.

I just listened to Phil Woolas talking about the "Dannatt affair".

I was struck that he suggested that somehow a General, Chief of the Army, was making a party-politically motivated point while challenging the sitting government to provide (& fund) more troops and equipment.

Woolas actually said that "to find there was a political motive was disappointing".

Was Woolas (like the despicable Foulkes) seriously saying that Dannatt had asked for more troops and equipment than the Treasury decided they couldn't afford, simply to make a planned PARTY point?

If true, Dannatt should be stripped of his pension and broken down to Major (the guy won an MC, so you have to respect him a bit don't you?).

It was certainly politically embarassing for the government to reveal they had told the army to go to Iraq and Afghanistan with too few, under-equipped troops. With little in the way of a strategic political framework. Or even saying "OK. This is the budget, what can you do for us?" Or "Well, we know you can't be expected to walk around after dark", as some of the EU "contributor nations" seem to say.

But a General, responsible for the troops - and with a broader responsibility for their families - has a right to demand support for the lives he manages. Quite frankly, I'm sure he'd be a pain in the posterior for a government of any party that didn't provide for his people. I doubt he has any idea how his troops vote - nor would he be interested. When you're having a leg blown off, it doesn't really matter which party you support, does it? Or when the body armour has to be shared and - bad luck - it wasn't your turn.

For goodness sake, Woolas couldn't even stand up to Joanna Lumley. How would he and Ainsworth tackle the Taliban? Without even a single special advisor in support...

goog prog on D. Cam this evening covering his formative years at Eton and Oxford - came over as quite a decent bloke - very into Phil Collins, apparently - also clearly rather embarassed about the whole Bullingdon thing - the "Bullers" they were (are?) called, did you know that? - no, me neither

any case it was all stuff I pretty much knew already, apart from one thing - when he left Oxford, Cameron was fast tracked into Conservative Party Head Office (helped by a mysterious phone call from Buckingham Palace, no less!) even though ... and this is the really fascinating part

... even though he'd shown "no interest whatsoever in politics"

how about that?

#46 Londons-Willy

For crying out loud Willy, stop trying to paint Dannatt as some type of RAMBO, he has clearly chosen to bring the Armed forces into politics, bad move Cameron.

I also suspect that it has further damaged our security.

44 derekbarker

"Brightening up" has nothing to do with it. You said Cameron tomorrow will "retreat", "battered and bruised". I think you are wrong. We shall see whether it is you or me who is right.

On Europe, I don't know why you ask, but with some caveats, better off in.

Now, when will you own up for calling my post last night a "fabrication", and answer my question on the so-called "stimulus"?

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

WLW @ 50

whichever Party wins in the Spring will need to make cuts

don't forget income tax rises Willy (for all but the poorest) - the more we raise tax the less we have to cut

that's going to be key

45. At 11:03pm on 07 Oct 2009, davidou1234 wrote:
If George Osbourne has his way we are going to have %million unemployed...this is scary!!!

==================================================

I guess it would be scary it if were true.

Unlike the fact that you are allowed near electrically powered computer equipment, which is both true and scary.

fairly @ 51

Dannatt asked for more troops and equipment than the Treasury decided they couldn't afford, simply to make a planned PARTY point?

it's possible I'm afraid - maybe he's a man on the make and maybe he isn't but the suspicion is now raised

that's the trouble with this sort of thing, isn't it?

#54

Perry, I thought we agreed you were to sloshed to remember the stimulus
that you agreed with in an earlier posts.

So you wont vote conservative because they oppose Britain in Europe.

#34, derekbarker wrote:
"#30 Londons-Willy

Are you and fairlyopenmind from the same rural town.

Howl..Howl..Howl.....moonshine."

Come on Derek,

Don't take it out on West-London-W because you think I'm a slinker in the darkness.

Odd thing is, I don't like the man, but I think Mandelson is the best political operator in the UK. Wouldn't trust him in the house, but he knows how to find the strings to pull. (Maybe that explains the dark side you obviously find in my posts.)

And I think Darling is a good trier. Benn is sincere. Adonis has some good ideas. Knight does a better job than most. Drayson understands about commercial stuff.

(And I have to say Harriet is at least consistent - even if only to stop Sagamix getting on my case!)

You could take the rest, shake them about, mix and match with shadow counterparts and not change a lot.

But the present government has been in power for 12 years.

Always doing "the right thing at the right time". Howl, howl, moonshine!

@ 54

you up for an "in yer face" rise in personal income tax, JR?

for all but the poorest

#55 BankslickerminustheR

Whey Hey! Theresa parked here purple porsche and gave the whole audience a view. LoL. the vicar of Dibley will be pleased.

55 Bankslickerminusther

You rude fellow! Anyway, if your f-s looks like that then you need to see a doctor.

It looked more like a space suit minus the helmet, I thought.

56 sagamix

If you mean personal taxes, then I think you are wrong. If you look at comparative figures between now and, say, three years ago, you will see that the way the credit crunch accelerated the recession we were going to have anyway (just thought I would slip that in!) was, aside from steadily rising departmental expenditure and interest payments, through the rapid collapse in corporation tax revenues.

Recovering the CT revenues from income tax is a huge problem. Even your grotesque change to the tax bands from yesterday only raises about 30bn (I think your figure of 50bn was overmuch, by the way, having really run the old Casio over what you wrote). [On the same subject, I'm surprised you haven't thought of consumption taxes - as accidentally demonstrated by Brown with the current VAT cut, it is very easy to protect the genuinely poor from the impact of a VAT rise. Putting VAT up to 23% might raise 50bn, provided consumption remained flat.]

However, the real medium term key, aside from control of expenditure, has to be to repair the corporate tax revenue. Unavoidable facts are that we have lost taxable company revenues through the sharp decline in company performance AND through the departure of many companies, with their taxable revenues, to other countries' tax regimes. In short the route to improvement is corporate tax incentives and recovery of the international competitiveness of our corporate tax regime.

#60
Fairlyopenmind, no free silver bullets you know.

Yes! no/one has the right to govern for ever and change can bring a new herald.The problem here is the scale of the recession and that unbelievable speech from a very naive shadow chancellor, that will go down in history as the worst shadow chancellors speech ever.

You may be right, this may just turn out to be a hung parliament, so what do we do. like you, I would also opt for bringing the best together from all sides and of course look very seriously at what people like sagamix are saying about taxation and reducing the effects.

Fairly-clearly your able to mix and match and talk over other people.It may have something too do with your employment but me! I dont underestimate anyone and everyone has a place in my book, it's an open ended book and I pray it never does close with a final chapter.

#63

Perry, oldchap, that was pretty funny, do you think she had the moon boots to match.

@ 60

and I have to say Harriet is consistent

... ly first class I think you were going to type (weren't you?) before you lost your thread

59 derekbarker

"Perry, I thought we agreed you were to sloshed to remember the stimulus
that you agreed with in an earlier posts."

You seem to be suffering from memory failure. I was, of course, stone cold sober, it being midweek. I listed the pathetic elements of the "stimulus" and, it seems, you could add no more to what I wrote. The stimulus is a myth, and Labour's real policy, rather than what they say it is, is to "let the recession run its course". Evidence - steadily increasing benefits expenditure and unemployment - all happening right now.

"So you wont vote conservative because they oppose Britain in Europe."

I will be voting Conservative for many reasons, one being that their policy is that, with caveats, we are better off in Europe. Remember, it is UKIP, not the Tories, who advocate getting out of Europe.

#68
Perry, you seem to be reading from the wrong manifesto.Mr Cameron wants to give Britain a referendum on the Lisbon treaty, he also advocates to favour a no vote to Europe.

The stimulus, the banking bail outs and loans to help companies, the additional help for those with mortgages, the extension to late payment and of course the car scrappage scheme, which has again been extended, the holding of interest rates and the very sensible policy of not allowing this recession to run it's course,The additional funds to and from Europe and the world wide linking of all banking, do I have to continue.

Excellent post, Nick.

"Most of my own posts are self-deprecating. But normally I'm too dumb to notice".

Nick let's face it, it was one minor gaffe that you quickly realised and owned up to...

with a reaction like that you obviously have no political ambitions..



Shame you made the gaffe on TV rather than here, where let's face it, its hard for any gaffe to stand out amongst barking derek's random rants.

So massive tax rises are now the solution from our socialist posters...

the rest of the country further subsidising the over expanded public sector which has grown beyond our means...

And you expect large tax rises to increase revenue in direct proportion to the increase?
Often significant tax rises reduce revenue, and to find a way to turn this recession into a depression, I think you may have found the ideal way to do it.

Think of the reduction in disposable income, the defaults on personal debt, so that in the end there would be the public sector and private companies servicing the public sector, which is perhaps a sort of socialist nirvana... unfortunately as with most socialist economic "plans" it would lead towards a bankrupt nation.

Remember Gordon Brown's favourite term when he was a credible custodian of the nations finances... "prudence".
How easily the word and its meaning are forgotten, except for those wanting to use it to ridicule the subsequent mismanagement of the economy.
The best way out of this mess, is just that "prudence", spending what we have wisely and therefore maximising value for money wherever possible.

If public sector pay restraint or even redundancies are required it isn't the fault of those who end up having to tidy up the mess, responsibility lies squarely with those who created the mess in the first place (and don't come out with the naive clap trap "yes, the bankers" - it wasn't them who put the underlying budget into deficit even at the top of the economic cycle, it was the dreadful labour government).

It is actually true that Osborne's speech wasn't a barnstormer, although it did suggest a degree of honesty; but let's face it, he was always going to be over shadowed by the real beacon of light in the economic crisis who had also recently mentioned the need for restraint at his party's conference, that's right, Vince Cable, by far the most credible economic spokesman throughout the entire mess.

All this and Nick is mocked for a gaffe, which is hopefully just a matter of him being premature, and yet our government can now hardly put a foot right and people are naive enough to praise them despite the mess they created and believe them with their cheap and snide insults; hoping the politics of the gutter will serve them better than the facts.

Never mind Nick what’s one cock-up when NuLabour have been continuously doing cock-ups for over 12 years.

#69 derek

The whole Europe issue reminds me of that quote by Joubert - "It is better to debate a question without settling it than to settle a question without debating it."

Regardless of their standpoint, the Tories are at least offering a referendum, whereas Labour just promised one and then refused because they didn't think people would vote the way they were told.

As for the gaffe, Nick, I wouldn't lose any sleep over it. After all, at least Cameron is acting like a prime minister, unlike some other Clown I could mention...

One of my favourite gaffs was Sir Trevor Macdonald, when he spoonerismed the phrase "... and in the Kent Countryside today", live on the ITV Ten O'clock News some years ago.

jrp @ 64

I think you are wrong

no, I wouldn't go that far - serious times need serious measures, don't they? - let's start with a couple of givens:

(1) we need to cut the D by a half in the next P
(2) we must avoid swingeing PS cuts
(3) we want to spread the pain

right, so we MUST have the personal IT rises (for all but the poorest) - they HAVE to be there as part of our package - let's say we go with my proposal of yesterday but we take your figs as to impact - so that's a quarter of the deficit sorted and thus it's half of our solution (since we're going to halve the deficit ... see my grasp of the numbers?)

VAT we don't raise (doh!) because it's a regressive tax

IHT we raise but that's more ideological than revenue raising so let's not discuss that any further

Corp Tax I was GOING to raise but based purely on your representations, we will shelve that - no rise in CT

CGT we raise to equal the top rate of tax - 50 pc - slam dunk

and a bit of Gordonesque fiddling around (maybe) with one or two other taxes/duties - or (better!) maybe not - leave well alone

now all we need on the expenditure side is a freeze - no "cuts" (horrid word) but a proper freeze - a hard money absolute terms freeze on public expenditure for the life of the next parliament - all new spend to be funded by reductions in old spend - no exceptions unless we start some more wars

and then, his work here done, the Clear Thinking Progressive sat back and prepared to let time work its magic

Mods, I skimmed through some of the posts here, and am amazed at how many are not on topic, which seems to be the reason you gave for rejecting some of my posts yesterday. You also cited repetition, but I notice certain people are allowed, by you, to repeat off topic comments time and time again.

waiting for the rejection, again.

Ben Bradshaw MP for Exeter has a 13.92% majority. He must be acting in desperation after all a swing of 7% to the Tories, in second place, he will be toast.

Wonder if he’s fretting about his visit to the Job Centre.

Never mind, Nick, we're all human.

At least your error was a fairly harmless (although perhaps interestingly Freudian) slip, and you are quick to admit you goofed.

A bit of a contrast from Grayling, whose slip clearly showed the worst kind of double standards that has led most of us to despise politicians.

I note that some posters here are keen on sharing things, like pain and money, but their plans always follow the same route, they give us bad things and take good things. God save us from the well meaning.

jrPerry 64

Actually perry, if it was not for the fact that it would take every bit of integrity I have in my body away, I would vote Labour. It would be such fun to watch Brown and co try to explain to the Country and Unions, why he cannot raise tax any higher and he has to cut the public sector severely in order to start cutting debt. It would be even more fun when Brown has to explain to the people of Britain, why during the closing year of his time in office he used it to ruin the economy even further, in order to make things much more difficult for the Conservatives. I would dearly like to see how these people feel, when all the chickens come home to roost, when all this debt propped up by Government begins to fall. All these little schemes that Labour have dreamt up to add to our debt which printed money is paying for.

With off book issues like public sector pensions for instance which although no one knows the true figure will cost well over 22 bilion a year if we are to honour committments already made.

You know you are right, so I do not know why you argue with them. If they do not understand the concept of the difference between a credit bubble caused exclusively by Brown and a world recession you have no hope. If they do not understand that you have to create money by encouraging business to Britain by low taxation to pay for the bloated public sector then you are lost.

If I were the Conservatives I would not want to win the next election, because they are being left with all the hard decisions.

You see this is always the way of Britain the class system has always stood in the way of progress. The politics of envy takes its place whenever there is a failing in our economy as an excuse to bring the Country down. No wonder other Countries are way ahead of us.

As to Nick Robinsons gaffe, I heard it and I thought live by the sword die by the sword. The media will only learn how important it is to put a proper representation of our situation in Britain before the people when it is too late.

76#

"We want to spread the pain"

Saga-speak for

"It can come out of anyone elses wallet so long as it isnt mine."

"VAT cant be raised because it is regressive"

Saga-speak for

"Thats the one tax I cant get away without paying when I go shopping in Hampstead, so kindly keep your grasping fingers out of my wallet".

The clear thinking progressive then ambles off into the sunset leaving someone else to pick up the tab....

The US budget deficit more than trebled to a record $1.4 trillion (£877bn) in the year to 30 September, according to US Congress estimates.

Ooh, have we got some way to go yet? Or have we?

Very amusing! Please do not use an autocue. The public will notice and it would not feel authentic.

Having tried to follow some of the arguments of the regular protagonists to your blogs Nick especially over the conference period I feel the need to put the same query to them as I have to Robert Peston’s regular brigade of blogers

When I try to rationalize some of the points of view expressed I would ask anyone and all who offer debate to these blogs to answer the following because we are often making reference, building argument and occasionally offering solutions based on entirely different concepts or interpretations of the same word.

So we can all better try to understand each other please tell me, when you have five minutes away from the heat of the debate how you define the following – thank you..

What is money
What is wealth

What is asset
What is credit

What is liability
What is debt

What is greed
What is ambition

What is contentment
What is lethargy

What is growth
What is inflation

What is balance
What is recession

What is conservativism
What is socialism

What is communism
What is capitalism

What is community
What is family

What is support
What is control

What is learning
What is training

what is circulation
What is hoarding

What is ethics
What is morality

What is opinion
What is reporting

What is statistical data
What is facts

What is truth
What is a lie

What is public spending
What is tax
What is government money

What is socio-economics
Who pays
Who takes

Who creates
Who dissipates



OK so you are not going to get the time but worth a thought when trying to decipher what on earth some of us are on about. That is of course depends on if you are truly interested in the others opinion or not. And in any case misinterpretation is always the other persons mistake.

Mind I bet one person has the time and more, the definitive answer to them all

#76:

Most of what you write is sensible, but I don't agree with your premise that VAT is a regressive tax.

Remember that poor people spend proportionately far more of their money on essentials, such as food and rent, than rich people. Those essentials are VAT-free. Does putting up VAT therefore not hurt the rich more than the poor?

Not that I'm necessarily arguing for swingeing VAT rises, mind you, as that's probably not a sensible thing to do when we want to get people spending money again to help get out of the recession. I just don't agree that VAT is a regressive tax.

SC @ 81

if it was not for the fact that it would take every bit of integrity I have in my body away, I would vote Labour

you leave that body alone, Susan

hey and you're off the pace in any case - pls see the Plan @ 76

thoughts welcome (although it's signed off now)

"76. At 08:28am on 08 Oct 2009, sagamix wrote:
jrp @ 64

I think you are wrong

no, I wouldn't go that far - serious times need serious measures, don't they? - let's start with a couple of givens:

(1) we need to cut the D by a half in the next P
(2) we must avoid swingeing PS cuts"

Why NO PS cuts? Do you work in the public sector?

It took Ed Balls ONE week to identify 2bn of cuts to the education budget that would he claimed have NO effect on education. G.Brown last week identified 1bn of "Available cash" in the NHS budget, but in true Gordan style he imedatly respent it on his latest fad pledge.

Do we really need 7 levels of MP and counclers, do we reall need NHS news letters sent to all residents in a trusts area, do we need to rebrand NHS trusts and goverment departments every 18 months?

One simple way of freeing up 20-35% of an area of PS staffing budget is to sent up a goverment owned tempoary staff company. All departments can only use temps from that company, the temp staff are kept on the same sal, but because we are no longer paying 20-30% booking fees etc the cost to the department booking the staff falls! Is this a CUT or efficancy saving? All i know is it would be good sence!

fs @ 82

sorry Fubar you're too late, plan ratified and has support from all quarters

I wanted your input ... needed it actually ... but you weren't around

There are far more serious issues than a political journalist making an error during a live TV interview. Will the words, 'Doing a Dannatt' became synonomous with the word treachery in the minds of our brave soldiers, sailors and airmen.The next time a senior military officer addresses his mem, will they be entitled to ask themselves, is this guy really interested in our wellbeing, or is he smoothing his path into the House of Lords? I have no party political affiliations, and believe in the absolute right of every individual to hold whatever political views they wish.

"sagamix wrote:
WLW @ 50

whichever Party wins in the Spring will need to make cuts

don't forget income tax rises Willy (for all but the poorest) - the more we raise tax the less we have to cut

that's going to be key"

The more we cut the less we will have to tax - and lets face it robbing Peter to pay Paul (aka tax rises) never really works a Peter decides to hide most of his money.

derekbarker 69

"Mr Cameron wants to give Britain a referendum on the Lisbon treaty, he also advocates to favour a no vote to Europe."

Rejecting Lisbon is not the same as getting out of Europe. I know a lot of propagandists (like you) like to mix the two together, but that is just grossly misleading.

"The stimulus, the banking bail outs"

Again, its important not to be confused. The banking bail-out and the counter-recession stimulus are not the same things. The bail-out preceded the recession.

"and loans to help companies"

There have been no direct loans to companies by central government.

"the additional help for those with mortgages"

This scheme is 98% hot air because it hasn't been fully implemented - barely a few hundred people have been helped.

"the extension to late payment"

Not a stimulus measure, since it doesn't directly involve injecting public funds into the economy. Anyway, it's yet to be fully implemented.

"and of course the car scrappage scheme"

Ah yes, that is a stimulus, which I listed in my earlier post. Less than £1bn, so it's quite a small scheme. It subsidises the purchase of predominantly imported cars to a degree less than the rise in costs due to the fall of the pound across the recession. Yes, despite the scrappage scheme, the real cost of a new car is actually higher than a year ago!

"the holding of interest rates"

Not really a stimulus measure either, since the biggest borrower is UK Government itself.

"the additional funds to and from Europe"

What additional funds are these? Pure invention, I'm afraid.

"world wide linking of all banking"

Not a stimulus measure, since it doesn't involve injection of funds into the economy. Anyway, this is just a political ideal; it hasn't actually happened at all.


Derek, you have failed to list any significant measures that can be called economic stimulus, other than one that I had already listed in my post. The rest is just bluster, a measure of your own confusion between stimulus and the bail-out, and pure fantasy.

You have been deluded by your own party's propaganda, and in turn you now seek to delude the readers of this thread. That is wrong and you should stop it.

The fact is, other than the wasteful VAT reduction and the little scrappage scheme, there has been no economic stimulus to counter the recession, and to say otherwise is a fabrication.

so, Cam this afternoon! - everyone's (including my) favourite ex "Buller" - if we simply HAVE to regress 50 years and have one of those guys as our PM ... if it's a hard legal requirement now ... then I can't think of anybody better than DC

as to today, well apart from a dash of "let sunshine win the day" my source tells me that the centrepiece of his speech is going to be a long and heartfelt (and slightly uncomfortable to watch) mea culpa regarding his home loan machinations - l'affaire mortimax as it's known in CTP circles

now if it's true ... which it might NOT be because my source may well have made it up to earn an easy tenner ... but if it IS, then that (at a stroke) is going to secure the vote not just of me, but of every floating voting man, woman and child in the country

we will see

"sagamix wrote:
@ 60

and I have to say Harriet is consistent

... ly first class I think you were going to type (weren't you?) before you lost your thread"

She might travel first class (and with her personal wealth she certainly could afford to) however politically she isn't exactly Premier League - more like League Two.

She is sexist, hypocritical, consistently misuses figures in attempt to prove her points all in all a bit of a light weight really - oh and if the papers are to be believed she was recently involved in a "hit and run".

mitcham @ 86

I just don't agree that VAT is a regressive tax

I've always thought of it as such but (per your points) perhaps I'm being unfair in ruling it out - it would certainly help if we could increase VAT too - if we do that, perhaps we can actually look for some modest rises in public spending

let me analyse and revert

53. At 11:34pm on 07 Oct 2009, derekbarker wrote:
#46 Londons-Willy

"For crying out loud Willy, stop trying to paint Dannatt as some type of RAMBO, he has clearly chosen to bring the Armed forces into politics, bad move Cameron."

Derek, if you really think that Politics and the Armed Forces have been separate for the past 12 years, that explains a lot about how New Labour plainly don't understand how to manage the fiscal, collateral and political elements of conflict. Shame then that they decided to take us into two such conflicts, isn't it.

"I also suspect that it has further damaged our security."

Not sure how you can work this one into your warped ethos. are you saying an informed government, with an experienced, knowledgable person advising them so that they make informed decisions on what to do, where to invest and what is needed in the way of men and equipment on the ground, makes us LESS safe than not having that advice and determining from a padded room in 10 Downing Street that "we must have enough helicopters - after all, we have three!"

Is that SERIOUSLY what you are saying?

Please post your response alongside your service record (to go with your six-figure salary and masters degree you boasted of the other day). Then we can measure the credibility of your opinion.

@52

Another reason not to trust the PR boy Cameron if he's into phil collins.

sagamix 76

Far be it from me to intrude on your thought process but can I say this to you.

With the levels of debt we have you will see tax rises. As the rise in the 50p tax rate for those over 150,000, has been proved by most think tanks that it will cost the Country more than it will raise (raised more out of spite than anything else certainly not to help our economy) where do you think the rest of the tax raises will be? I would suggest, those of modest income who are struggling already with Labours stealth taxes over years.

It would be far better for the economy to cut the public sector beginning as early as possible. The reason is that the expanded and bloated public sector was built on the vast amounts of tax money earned from the City. These are assumed taxes, Brown thought he would always be able to raise from the City. The City is now not providing these taxes so unless something is done there will be a year on year deficit added to our spiralling debt. Taxes from what is left of the shrinking private sector will not fill this void.

VAT I believe will rise, but it will be a combination of tax rises, VAT rises and cuts in the public sector whoever comes to Government. However that will still not deal with our debt. We need new business in the private sector. With threats of strikes, as usual, and high taxation this will be no easy matter.

Our debt is holding back our recovery and outside markets are waiting to see a plan to cut it. The longer we take to produce this reduction the less confidence there will be in Britain and the slide continues.

I wish Nick Robinson would concentrate on this rather than expalining his gaffe.

#85 hack-round
I've had a hack round this lot:
So we can all better try to understand each other please tell me, when you have five minutes away from the heat of the debate how you define the following – thank you..

What is money – a medium of exchange for something you want or need
What is wealth – an accumulation of things that you cherish, depending on your personal definitions of what are worthy of being cherished

What is asset – something you own that has tangible worth
What is credit – something that is bestowed on you

What is liability – tempting, but I’m not going to say a Labour government. A liability is something that you may well need to give to someone else at some stage in the future. This something may well have intrinsic value, it may not.
What is debt – something you owe, possibly as a consequence of a liability becoming due

What is greed – one of the seven deadly sins, apparently, but can be described as wanting more than you have, or perhaps, are entitled to
What is ambition – wanting more than you have, or wanting to be better than you are, or wanting to be worth more to others than you are, however that might be measured. Perhaps it could be interpreted as being greedy….

What is contentment – what I will feel when I’ve finished this
What is lethargy – the urge to just

What is growth – a natural progression of all living organisms, unless subjected to socialist inclinations to share everything
What is inflation – an increase in size, sometimes artificially induced 9which is a bad thing), but sometimes a power for good, such as when trying to fill a hot air balloon

What is balance - equilibrium
What is recession – a set back or dip

What is conservativism – a really good thing, keeps a sense of the past, and holds on to traditional values
What is socialism – the desire to share equally with everyone, which is good on paper, but doesn’t work too well when humans get involved

What is communism – like socialism with guns
What is capitalism – a desire to improve things and allow wealth (value) to grow and be retained by the instigator who, inevitably, does a lot of good with the results

What is community – loosely it is a group of people living in the same area, and sharing some common ideas/ideals/services/values/benefits. Communes might be where communities are found, but they have connotations of communism, which is not necessarily beneficial
What is family – a collection of people with common ancestry, sometimes formed by marriage

What is support – something you need when trying to achieve something, specially for the first time
What is control – wanting to exert influence on other actions

What is learning – something that we need to be doing every day of our lives. You only stop when you die
What is training – being conditioned

what is circulation – going round
What is hoarding – not going round

What is ethics – the large body of land north of the Thames
What is morality – what the unethical try to teach us is right

What is opinion – a personal view
What is reporting – a personal view

What is statistical data – pure fiction in my experience
What is facts – a personal view, anyway should be what are facts

What is truth – something that nobody has found out is a lie
What is a lie – other people’s truth

What is public spending – a bad thing on the whole
What is tax – a very bad thing, used to justify public spending
What is government money – non-existent

What is socio-economics – a bad thing
Who pays – those who are not categorised as the leaders
Who takes – everybody else

Who creates – good question, maybe the great pumpkin in the sky
Who dissipates – politicians and so-called public servants

76. At 08:28am on 08 Oct 2009, sagamix wrote:
jrp @ 64

I think you are wrong

no, I wouldn't go that far - serious times need serious measures, don't they? - let's start with a couple of givens:

(1) we need to cut the D by a half in the next P
(2) we must avoid swingeing PS cuts
(3) we want to spread the pain
*****************************************

As (2) cancels out (3) your master plan falls at the first hurdle.