The Election - Decisions Decisions ...

[Maria]

I agree with Alex, Elric and Snow- the Tory party's legacy is still with us today, and it's not a pretty one

Lets not also forget they gave us mad cow disease (apart from Maggie) and the human version, CJD (due to the deregulation of animal feed which led to cows - normally vegetarians - being fed with diseased sheep remains), massive interest rates, negative equity and repossessions,(we too have friends still paying off their negative equity from the early 90's) the poll tax. There was also the mass con trick of privatisation, whereby public sector orgs which previously were only allowed to use cash accounting, were then allowed to use accruals accounting, so lo and behold, profit overnight And Jo Public fell for it The latter must surely go down as the biggest con trick by a government in history.......... Battery and puppy farming originated from Conservative rule where the 'market' rules, and sod the consequences so long as someone is making a profit

 

Vote for Tory boy and welcome in a new era where animal welfare is far less important and cruelty is welcomed.

[chickentikka]

I think that our whole political system needs a total overhaul but none of the two major parties would be prepared to do it for fear of losing out on some seats. Personally I don't think that 'call me Dave', 'dull Gordon' or 'Nick who' has the balls, personality or team behind them to really lead the country and get the public behind them as there are a lot of tough economic decisions which need to be made in the aftermath of the global credit crunch.

 

Snow, I'm old enough to remember the miners strike - what are your feelings towards Arthur Scargill and his part, as he certainly had a personal agenda, a wish for a place in history (in bringing the government down) and a blatant disregard for the democratic process for strike ballots if it didn't suit him. I'm not a Maggie fan either but think that both contributed to the strike and its aftermath and I'm sure that neither of them had to pay for the consequences of their actions for 20 years.

[merledogs]

Just watching the debate at the moment. Just a few observations:

 

David Cameron - very slick (groomed from the tips of his dyed hair to his toes), reminds me of the American style of politics. Started off quite well but soon showed his true colours. Slippery as an eel on some questions where he did a very good job of avoiding a direct anwer. Trying to promote himself as a man of the people "look at me, I went here and spoke to this person, then I went there and spoke to that person" (so what, that's what politicians do when they are electioneering). Scaremongering by using extreme examples of crime, etc. Scored an own goal when answering a question from a senior manager in the NHS by saying that the 7% pay rise that senior managers in the NHS had just been awarded shouldn't have happened. The low point came when he actually used the death of his son in a political debate, that really was a low blow (Gordon Brown has also lost a child, but didn't feel the need to mention it).

 

Nick Clegg - I could see his lips moving but all I heard was blah blah blah. Pretty ineffectual. Also dyed his hair

 

Gordon Brown - (didn't dye his hair, that enough got my vote ). I thought he was a bit of a buffoon before, but I warmed to him over the course of the debate. He isn't as slick as Cameron (which I see as a positive thing). He's steered us through the worst recession in recent times and he's right, if we have a change of course now, we risk a double dip, which would be disastrous. He's no Blair, but I see him as a steady hand at the helm.

 

I would love to see a referendum on proportional representation, which would mean we would have a truly representative government.

 

Be interesting to see the opinion poll shortly on who came out on top, and also the pundits comments.

Edited April 15, 2010 by merledogs

[merledogs]

I am a bit that 43% chose Nick Clegg as the overall winner.

[Lizzie]

Interesting reading!

 

I too will never vote Conservative, the harm caused to communities will remain for a hell of a long time. They also caused the "I'm alright jack" mentality thats endemic now.

 

As for the current economic crisis, caused by greed in the banking community, its going to take years to get out of this, Gordon Brown stepped in while the American government sat back and hummed and harred. He at least has admitted he made some mistakes dealing with it, but has the integrity to hold his hands up and say so.

 

Sorry folks, I don't trust David Cameron too slick for my liking and never really answers any important questions, I've watched recent interviews and each time I haven't heard any thing I can warm to.

 

Nick Clegg seems a decent sort of bloke, but recent dealings with Lib Dem candidates have left me wondering what the hell back up does he have?

 

UKIP & BNP, I should cocoa! Green Party, I'm worried to death how much more tax the average taxpayer will have to fork out.

 

 

I'm going to have to sleep on the question of how I will vote, but one thing for sure I will vote, otherwise I don't believe I would have the right to complain about anything any govenment implement. Too many people gave up their liberty to get us the right to vote, so please use yours.

[cycas]

I am a bit that 43% chose Nick Clegg as the overall winner.

 

Mark and I thought Nick Clegg did well and that Brown looked tired and seemed to have no new ideas. There was also one point where Brown said 'you will do ***' to Cameron - not you would do, or you want to do, you will do. I thought then: he's already decided that he's lost...

 

If I were buying a car off one of them I'd probably go for Clegg based on that performance though I'm still not convinced. Interesting how everyone feels it went differently.

 

 

Mark came up with a comment I liked: "There's a scruffy loser, a tall arrogant one and a boring one called Clegg. Prime Ministerial debate or 'Last of the Summer Wine'? "

[snow]

 

Snow, I'm old enough to remember the miners strike - what are your feelings towards Arthur Scargill and his part, as he certainly had a personal agenda, a wish for a place in history (in bringing the government down) and a blatant disregard for the democratic process for strike ballots if it didn't suit him. I'm not a Maggie fan either but think that both contributed to the strike and its aftermath and I'm sure that neither of them had to pay for the consequences of their actions for 20 years.

 

Ummm *laughs* I disagree that Scargill had a blatant disregard for democratic process - you'd have to look further back at Joe Gormley to see why ballots weren't held, in fact Yorkshire miners were out on strike long before the national strike was called because they believed that conference under Gormley had given a mandate that the very next attack on the mines warranted an all out strike - it was one of the things Maggie used in the smear campaigns and there was a lot of confusion surrounding whether or not there had been a mandate. At the time I was (and still am) very pro union, I was myself a Trades Union Branch Secretary and at one point was a representative to the Welsh TUC (gawdddd I feel awfully old now ) so the ballot issue was something that I was very interested in and felt and still do that they had the mandate and no ballot was needed.

 

Now as a Welshwoman I am not particularily in the Scargill was totally right camp as he'd ignored the views of Welsh miners for some time and had not backed calls from the Welsh Unions to support other strikes yet when he needed them..... but overall I supported the NUM and the strikes. I sorta agree he had an agenda to bring down the government - but then again a lot of people did at that time not just Arthur Scargill, it wasn't so much that we had wanted the government "brought down" it was more that we could see what the government was doing to the working mans rights etc and it was those we wanted to protect if the goverment came down because of it - sobeit, but I think we all hoped for some form of compramise. Maggie made it all or nothing and in doing so the unions responded in kind.

 

"History" has revealed that Maggie had been planning the confrontation for years before it happened - thats what the unions didn't realise and why they lost.

 

I do think Arthur has suffered as a result of the strike, the smear campaigns that happened at the time and since certainly have left people with a poor opinion of him, as is so often the case with a good smear campaign it's got some elements of truth amongst the lies and exaggerations those who lived through it like me still fell for some of it, it's only because I did live through it and knew some of the spin for utter lies because "I was there" that I even now find myself having to say hmmmm hold on I don't think thats right.... for the younger generations who know this only as "history" it's very difficult indeed to know whats truth and whats spin. Generally I'm not a Scargill "fan" but not because of any concerns about his motives more because of the way he ignored the Welsh miners until he needed them.

[merledogs]

It's very easy, when you've been in power, for opposition leaders to stand there and attack what you've done, when you've been the one making difficult and unpopular decisions for the greater good. It's easy for them to say that it shouldn't have been done, but had they been in power, would they really have done it any differently (and if they did, would the outcome have been better or worse)?

 

They can stand there and say "we'll do this" and "we'll do that" but then that's easy for them to say, isn't it? If they got into power and actually started to implement those policies, how would they go about it and would it be the way they go about it and the cuts they have actually made, which would come back to bite them on the bum at the next election?

Edited April 16, 2010 by merledogs

[Ian]

Lets not forget why there were 3 days weeks shall we?

 

 

Snow, I'm old enough to remember the miners strike - what are your feelings towards Arthur Scargill and his part, as he certainly had a personal agenda, a wish for a place in history (in bringing the government down) and a blatant disregard for the democratic process for strike ballots if it didn't suit him. I'm not a Maggie fan either but think that both contributed to the strike and its aftermath and I'm sure that neither of them had to pay for the consequences of their actions for 20 years.

 

 

Ummm *laughs* I disagree that Scargill had a blatant disregard for democratic process - you'd have to look further back at Joe Gormley to see why ballots weren't held ............

 

 

 

 

I’m a little bit too young to remember much prior to Margaret Thatcher’s Government personally. However, whilst not living in Wales (or any mining town, though I grew up and lived in a staunchly Labour area for 28 years) I do remember "watching" the miners strike happen. I would perhaps be inclined to agree on the background to (or excuses for) his decision on the ballots, though perhaps not Arthur Scargill and whether he made the right decisions for the miners and indeed all unions generally.

 

As I read various Political biography, opinion of the period leading upto the (later) miners strike and of the 3 day week etc, Ted Heath's (somebody who I would personally never have voted for judging on his "appearances" later) Conservative Government introduced the three day week. He did so in an effort to conserve electricity, the production of which was being limited by the miners industrial action, including in 1972 and 1974, and again influenced by a certain Arthur Scargill, who became Yorkshire NUM President in 1973.

 

Ted Heath led a Government with High inflation, though whether his fault or an ongoing legacy of the Wilson Governments high inflation and unemployment is again perhaps a matter of opinion, and of course it was also Heath who took us into the "European Community". Margaret Thatcher was a new and therefore relatively junior member of his Government at that time.

 

Having arguably ended the Heath Governments reign and then seen the miners immediately obtain upto a 35% settlement from Wilson’s Labour Government, the Unions then ultimately also saw off his / successor James Callaghan’s (who earlier, as Chancellor, devalued the £ in 1967, despite days before saying he wouldn’t) Labour Government by refusing to accept a 5% restraint for a fifth year and instigating "the winter of discontent". James Callaghan was taken from having been expected to win the election to a place of far greater unpopularity and on March 28^th 1979 he lost a motion of no confidence by just one vote, thus he was forced to call a General Election. Enter one Margaret Hilder Thatcher, Prime Minister! When the elected Governments Authority was once again challenged by the miners, now led by Arthur Scargill (who had been a Young Communist League member, and his father a member of the Communist Party,) in 1984 – 85 she became determined that the answer to Heath’s earlier question, "Who Governs Britain?", had to be determined once and for all.

 

Arthur Scargill did decide not to hold a National ballot of members, favouring rule 41, which would allow sanction to be given to strikes declared by constituent parts of the Union (such as his Yorkshire homeland) Some believe it was thus merely his intention to avoid the need for a ballot which he may not necessarily win. Flying pickets descended on those areas who had chosen to work but, in the absence of a National Ballot, the miners split with the formation of the UDM (whichever side you blame for that). 73% of Nottinghamshire miners in a ballot they determined to hold voted against a strike, 50,000 of 70,000 Miners in the Midlands, the North West and North East.

 

To be fair however, as Snow says above, Joe Gormley had disregarded two ballots previously on wage reform, only to have his decisions upheld after appeals to the Courts. It’s therefore debatable whether it is fair to blame Scargill alone for the lack of a ballot.

 

This was not a "simple strike", as Snow said earlier communities and even families were massively and possibly eternally divided between strikers and "scabs", police and pickets clashed repeatedly and at times violenty. Ten men, 6 pickets, three teenagers searching for coal and a taxi driver, simply earning his own living, and taking a none striking miner to work died during the strike. Again whether the Police, The Government or the Miners and militant flying pickets were to blame for such scenes has always been a controversial topic.

 

 

 

Scargill wrote in The Morning Star 'the NUM is engaged in a social and industrial battle of Britain..... what is urgently needed is the rapid and total mobilization of the Trade Union and Labour movement' (I can only suggest that those same Labour people had an I'm alright jack attitude back then as he didn't get that kind of support, though he would probably have won if he had!)

 

Arthur Scargill was himself the son and Grandson of miners and I would imagine he genuinely believed what he said. Like Margaret Thatcher however, opinions of him will no doubt always be heavily polarised. He claimed in 1983 the Thatcher Government wanted to destroy the mining industry. They of course, as Capitalists, denied any such thing.

 

To some he was, and perhaps will always be, a working mans hero, and had he won the strike he would probably have been called a great Leader himself. Others, myself included, however will always think of him as far from that and possibly the down fall of the Trade Union movements strength.

 

You must decide for yourselves whether the mining industry went into decline because he was in fact right all along, or, whether the truth is that it had more to do with the simple fact that most people chose alternatives to coal and you cannot continue to run an industry on the same scale, or sustain 35% pay rises in any industry if people don’t want to buy it’s product than that there was ever any Government desire to destroy what was once a major industry and employer. Also, whether it was in fact he who had held a plan for a confrontation with the Government for some years before the Miner strike happened.

 

He later founded the Socialist Labour Party, when "New Labour" abandoned clause 4, he has defended Stalin and criticised Poland’s Solidarity movement for destabilising Socialism but never got anywhere himself on either occasion in terms of being elected – losing to a Tory to Labour defector, Alan Howarth and "The Prince of Darkness", Peter Mandelson.

 

 

 

For those who like the idea of a coalition Government this time I can only observe that neither the "Lib Lab pact" in the late 70’s or Ted Heath’s talks with Jeremy Thorpe ever proved to provide a successful method of Government.

 

[Ian]

I thought they all came across better than I expected really.

 

I think Gordon Brown always seems better (warmer?) on the "one to one" basis than he does in "general politics" but I think Cycas is right he probably already knows that he's beaten (but please don't let that mean Harman gets his job, I'd rather he won )

 

 

David Cameron speaks well, it's just his failure to outline clear policies until he has too that means I'm not sure that I trust him. Add his inexperience at Government level & even as someone who has most commonly voted Tory I can't think of any strong reason to do so at the moment.

 

 

Nick Clegg has always been a man who, unlike the other two, I don't think I would necessarily have recognised if I wandered past him in the street. He's another with little experience and yet I thought he came across well / as strongly as the other two.

 

I'm still therefore a not decided........

[kats n greys]

Will never ever in a month of Sunday's vote Tory, MT was a obnoxious piece of work and I'll never forgive Blair for his "worship" of her.

 

To vote conservative is to vote for animal cruelty to me

http://www.farmersguardian.com/home/latest-news/conservative-manifesto-tackles-badgers-and-foxes/31372.article

 

http://www.tom-watson.co.uk/2010/04/david-cameron-on-fox-hunting/

[owl]

Labour does not have a good record re animals either. Blair made promises about animal experimentation as I remember and then backtracked on them, and the government's handling of the F&M epidemic was incompetent and draconian, the culls were inhumanely carried out and country people in some areas were threatened and terrorized by the military police. And now we have the badger cull starting in West Wales as an experiment to see if it stops the spread of TB in cattle, which it won't.

 

I'd never vote Conservative, I detest NuLabour as a whole although have a certain respect for Brown and some of the things he has done, I have just received a leaflet from the local Plaid which contained only a virulent attack on the present MP and didn't even say who their own candidate is let alone mention any of their own aims, and the only positive thing I can say about the Lib Dems is that I don't hate them. Which is a rather feeble reason for voting for them but I feel I ought to vote for someone.

[merledogs]

A new poll puts LibDems in the lead for the first time. Not sure whether this is a bounce or not, but makes for interesting reading (especially the graph down the bottom).

 

 

[murtle]

Not sure how useful it is, but if you enter your details into this it will tell you what answers they have had from your local people.

 

http://www.keepcrueltyhistory.com/home/

 

OH said Don't look at the video.

 

Mxxx

[elricc]

I found this very interesting

http://www.vote4animals.org.uk/news.htm