General Election 2010

[NJS 4411]

Restore discipline and order to the classroom . We will give teachers the tools and powers they need to keep order in the classroom. We will abolish the legal requirement of 24 hours’ notice for detentions; reform the exclusion process; and give headteachers the power to ban, search for, and confiscate any items they think may cause violence or disruption.

 

Don't know what they mean by tools to maintain discipline but there will be challanges to any and all of those in 2 minutes flat.

[Christmas Tree 4851]

Increase spending on health every year, while cutting waste in the NHS, so that more goes to nurses and doctors on the frontline, and make sure you get access to the cancer drugs you need.

 

From a professional viewpoint I'd absolutely love to chat with him about this pledge.

 

 

http://www.conservatives.com/Information/Contact_Us.aspx

[Renton 22014]

Agree like, 'improving standards in schools' etc. hardly count as policies, do they?

 

 

These are just the Policy headlines behind detail such as

 

Restore discipline and order to the classroom . We will give teachers the tools and powers they need to keep order in the classroom. We will abolish the legal requirement of 24 hours’ notice for detentions; reform the exclusion process; and give headteachers the power to ban, search for, and confiscate any items they think may cause violence or disruption.

 

Raise the status of the teaching profession. Move to a high quality system of teacher recruitment and training by raising entry requirements, expanding Teach First and incentivising top maths and science graduates.

 

Raise standards. We will take urgent action to reverse the decline in standards. We will reform the National Curriculum, remove political interference from GCSEs and A-levels, and allow state schools to do the same high quality exams as private schools. We will replace Key Stage 1 Sats with a simple reading test, reform Key Stage 2 Sats, and make Ofsted report on schools’ setting policies and reading schemes.

 

Bottom line is education will not be improved for normal kids because he is going to cut funding. For instance, it's easy to say you're going to get better teachers in - and it's a good idea in science in particular - but how are you going to do it if you don't pay for them? As for giving teachers the power' and 'tools' to detain kids etc - good luck with that Dave.

 

Meaningless rhetoric to appease the gullible.

[Renton 22014]

Increase spending on health every year, while cutting waste in the NHS, so that more goes to nurses and doctors on the frontline, and make sure you get access to the cancer drugs you need.

 

From a professional viewpoint I'd absolutely love to chat with him about this pledge.

 

 

http://www.conservatives.com/Information/Contact_Us.aspx

 

I meant chat, face to face. But cheers, I might give that go anyway, I'll let you know. *Must resist calling him a cunt*

[Craig 6700]

Increase spending on health every year, while cutting waste in the NHS, so that more goes to nurses and doctors on the frontline, and make sure you get access to the cancer drugs you need.

 

From a professional viewpoint I'd absolutely love to chat with him about this pledge.

 

 

http://www.conservatives.com/Information/Contact_Us.aspx

 

I meant chat, face to face. But cheers, I might give that go anyway, I'll let you know. *Must resist calling him a cunt*

 

CT will take that one for the team apparently...

[Meenzer 15739]

An interesting read, if you can get beyond the innuendo-tastic headline.

 

Johann Hari: Cameron is concealing his inner Bush

 

If he can’t keep the single best policy for reducing inequality – one that costs less than nothing – what shreds of progress can possibly survive his rule?

 

A leader describing himself as a "compassionate Conservative" is on the brink of victory.

 

He has shown his party has changed. He puts his black and Asian supporters out front. He promises to "unleash" the potential "of volunteers to ... change our country". This time, he says, his party "will be different". It is the year 2000, and his name is George W Bush. It's no surprise to discover that George Osborne said in 2002 that "we have much to learn from Bush's compassionate conservatism". They are following the Bush script to the mis-spelled letter.

 

Most parties offer only scattered clues to the electorate about what they will do when they get power, buried in baskets filled with cotton wool and fluffy bunnies to distract us. Read Thatcher or Bush's pre-election speeches and they're pleasingly fuzzy. You have to infer the big, swooping changes they will make from the small tilts in direction offered in policy documents – and Cameron's small policies are surprisingly revealing.

 

Revealing Policy One: Today, 1,600 British people are killed every year just doing their job, putting us behind many poorer countries for workplace safety. They are people like Michael Adamson, a 26-year-old electrician who went to his job one day and was given a massive electric shock because his employer hadn't bought a £12 piece of safety equipment.

 

Yet David Cameron is promising to dismantle the very weak protections currently in place, and replace them with a system where corporations will be able to "organise their own inspections", carried out by a team of their choice. Cameron's people justify this by pointing to made-up stories in the right-wing press claiming health and safety inspectors spend their time stopping children playing conkers. UCATT, the astonished construction workers' union, has been protesting outside Tory HQ, with members dressed as the Grim Reaper. Michael Adamson's sister, Louise, who is a lawyer, says: "Cameron's proposals are outrageously dangerous. They will end with a lot more people dying. It takes the very light touch regulation that gave us Lehman Brothers and Enron, and applies it to workplace safety. This time it's not money you lose, it's lives. This isn't about conkers, it's about people like my brother, who could have been saved for £12." This policy suggests Cameron instinctively puts corporate profits ahead of the the safety of ordinary people – a dangerous habit to act out in Downing Street.

 

Revealing Policy Two: Today, most serious crime in Britain comes from cross-border criminal gangs – whether it's jihadism, human trafficking, or paedophile rings. Until recently, the police had to rely on a slow, confusing tangle of different agreements with each individual country in Europe when trying to track these criminals – and many hardcore criminals escaped as the police waded through bureaucratic treacle. So Europe's police forces, including Britain's, proposed a single, simple procedure called the European Arrest Warrant: one swift standard for serious crime. It has been a superb success story. It meant we busted some of the worst paedophile rings and jihadi cells in the world, and are now shutting down the Costa Del Crime, where British gangsters fled for decades to Spain beyond the reach of our extradition agreements.

 

But David Cameron's Conservatives oppose the warrant, calling it "over-reach by Brussels". Of course he wants to catch jihadis and paedophiles; but his hostility to European co-operation trumps that desire. He chooses dogmatic Europhobia over pragmatic British needs – and we should assume he will continue to.

 

Revealing Policy Three: Most British people now acknowledge that heroin addiction is an illness. Yes, it begins with a bad choice by an individual, but it can rapidly become a ravaging sickness beyond their control. Sadly, even the very best rehab in the world fails for 80 per cent of addicts, who soon relapse. So what do we do with the 250,000 people who can't stop? Over the past two decades Britain has followed Europe in giving these people steady, clean medical prescriptions of the substitute drug methadone. Wherever this policy is introduced, burglary and robbery rates fall dramatically, as addicts stop stealing to feed their addiction. As the former deputy drugs tsar Mike Trace told me: "These prescriptions are the secret reason why crime has fallen so much under the current government."

 

Iain Duncan Smith has been put in charge of Tory drugs policy by Cameron, and has dismissed this approach as "methadone madness". He says that addicts live an immoral "half-life" and government policy should be to force addicts off substitutes and direct them towards voluntary abstinence groups like Narcotics Anonymous. Doctors and charities who work with addicts are incredulous. Danny Kushlick, of the drug charity Transform, says: "If the Tories acted on their current rhetoric, what would actually happen is clear. If they can't get the drug from the doctor, you'll have hundreds of thousands of addicts getting it on the street. You would see a huge increase in street heroin use, and everything that goes with that – burglary, shoplifting, prostitution, homelessness, and far more HIV and Hepatitis C infections as the level of injecting went up. It would be a public health and crime disaster, in place of sensibly reducing harm." Cameron's policy suggests he prefers finger-wagging moralism to a calm study of consequences.

 

Revealing Policy Four: Cameron says he is demanding spending cuts not because he has a theological belief in a small state, but because they are necessary to pay off the deficit – but this claim is undermined by the fact that he wants to strip funding from state programmes that actually save us money. Look for example at SureStart, the network of 3,000 children's centres across Britain built under the current government. They are based on a fascinating series of discoveries. It has been proven that most poor children fall behind in language skills and stimulation long before they ever walk through the school gates – and they never catch up. The first few years of life are crucial for the formation of a child's mental abilities. Get them early and give them intensive encouragement, with expert advice for their parents, and you can change their life.

 

This isn't speculation. In 1964, they launched the first SureStart-style project in Michigan – and Dr Lawrence Schweinhart and a team of academics has been monitoring the kids ever since. Did it work? Well, they were 50 per cent less likely to become teenage mothers than their siblings who weren't put in the programme, and by the time they were 40, they were 46 per cent less likely to have been to prison and 26 per cent less likely to be on welfare. Their incomes were 42 per cent higher. So for every £1 you spend on it, you save the state £7 further down the line. Yet Cameron, on becoming Tory leader, dismissed SureStart as "a microcosm of government failure". Now he says he will keep it in some form, but already he says huge chunks of its budget will go to other things, and few expect it to survive long. If he can't keep the single best policy for reducing inequality – one that costs less than nothing in the medium term – what shreds of progress can survive his rule?

 

You don't have to scrape off much of the glitter and gloss to get to Cameron's less-than-fluffy Bush. Who really wants this cocktail of market fundamentalism, Europhobia, and haranguing of the vulnerable for the next five years?

[Problem Child 0]

Restore discipline and order to the classroom . We will give teachers the tools and powers they need to keep order in the classroom. We will abolish the legal requirement of 24 hours’ notice for detentions; reform the exclusion process; and give headteachers the power to ban, search for, and confiscate any items they think may cause violence or disruption.

 

Don't know what they mean by tools to maintain discipline but there will be challanges to any and all of those in 2 minutes flat.

The cane and the strap?

 

It's all bollock. The conservative policies at this election are based on the same principles they’re always based on - help the wealthy, shit on the poor. The North East will take a right kicking if they form the next government.

Edited April 30, 2010 by Problem Child

[NJS 4411]

It's all bollock. The conservative policies at this election are based on the same principles they’re always based on - help the wealthy, shit on the poor. The North East will take a right kicking if they form the next government.

 

Funny thing is I was just saying to someone the other week how I didn't know what their plan was going to be as there were no major industries in the NE left they could destroy - then he came out with his "too much public sector" and I thought "Ah".

[acrossthepond 878]

I admit I don't follow British politics perhaps as closely as I should, but 'Just Call Me Dave' makes me feel queasy. He's just another family-values small-state man of the people, is that it? A neocon in a decent suit with a good speechwriter. Another xenophobe who'll tear up anything that's been working just because it isn't his idea and who'll promise the world on things that aren't working and fail to deliver.

 

Broken Britain, my foot. I'd like to break his thousand-dollar smile.

[Problem Child 0]

It's all bollock. The conservative policies at this election are based on the same principles they’re always based on - help the wealthy, shit on the poor. The North East will take a right kicking if they form the next government.

 

Funny thing is I was just saying to someone the other week how I didn't know what their plan was going to be as there were no major industries in the NE left they could destroy - then he came out with his "too much public sector" and I thought "Ah".

In some ways we’ve only got ourselves to blame for being a relentlessly staunch labour area. Wannabe prime ministers would never publically say I’m going to take a sledge hammer to public services in a number of key marginal constituencies.

 

The labour party aren’t much better; they just take us for granted.

 

PR has its drawbacks but at least every vote counts. Unlike FPTP, where a party can end up with a huge majority even though 70% of the electorate thought they were full of shit.

[Meenzer 15739]

For the record, what are considered the political allegiences of the papers this time round? Evidently The Sun and The Telegraph are pro-Tory and I suspect from glancing over someone's copy of it this morning, the Express is the same way.

 

Mirror no doubt backing Labour but what about the rest?

 

Independent were Lib Dem last time round, so I don't see why that would change now. Interestingly, the Guardian have come out for the Lib Dems too, albeit with a tactical voting caveat (and they give Labour a decent kicking along the way):

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/20...moment-has-come

[Ketsbaia 0]

For the record, what are considered the political allegiences of the papers this time round? Evidently The Sun and The Telegraph are pro-Tory and I suspect from glancing over someone's copy of it this morning, the Express is the same way.

 

Mirror no doubt backing Labour but what about the rest?

 

Independent were Lib Dem last time round, so I don't see why that would change now. Interestingly, the Guardian have come out for the Lib Dems too, albeit with a tactical voting caveat (and they give Labour a decent kicking along the way):

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/20...moment-has-come

 

They have Cameron nailed there - a supposedly liberal Conservative who blames liberalism for the problems with this country.

[Craig 6700]

For the record, what are considered the political allegiences of the papers this time round? Evidently The Sun and The Telegraph are pro-Tory and I suspect from glancing over someone's copy of it this morning, the Express is the same way.

 

Mirror no doubt backing Labour but what about the rest?

 

Independent were Lib Dem last time round, so I don't see why that would change now. Interestingly, the Guardian have come out for the Lib Dems too, albeit with a tactical voting caveat (and they give Labour a decent kicking along the way):

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/20...moment-has-come

 

They have Cameron nailed there - a supposedly liberal Conservative who blames liberalism for the problems with this country.

 

The true 'liberal' Tory leader would have been David Davis who I think would have been a far better option for them when they had their election. The 'Blair-like PR' factor clouded their judgement IMO.

[Craig 6700]

Listened to the News Quiz on Radio 4 on the way home tonight and one of them suggested that if George Osbourne spent time canvassing on a council estate, he'd demand a tentanus jab afterwards....

 

Probably right actually!

[Ketsbaia 0]

For the record, what are considered the political allegiences of the papers this time round? Evidently The Sun and The Telegraph are pro-Tory and I suspect from glancing over someone's copy of it this morning, the Express is the same way.

 

Mirror no doubt backing Labour but what about the rest?

 

Independent were Lib Dem last time round, so I don't see why that would change now. Interestingly, the Guardian have come out for the Lib Dems too, albeit with a tactical voting caveat (and they give Labour a decent kicking along the way):

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/20...moment-has-come

 

They have Cameron nailed there - a supposedly liberal Conservative who blames liberalism for the problems with this country.

 

The true 'liberal' Tory leader would have been David Davis who I think would have been a far better option for them when they had their election. The 'Blair-like PR' factor clouded their judgement IMO.

 

The Tories are notorious for managing to dodge the right men. Portillo & Clarke in 2001 and Davis in 2005 would be much better options than IDS & CMD.

[Craig 6700]

Fucking hell, how old is Blair looking?

 

[Tom 14013]

Sin can eat away at a man!

 

but yes he looks about 70!

[JawD 99]

Fucking hell, how old is Blair looking?

 

 

I seen that on the BBC site, he's aged 20 years in 5.

[Craig 6700]

Fucking hell, how old is Blair looking?

 

 

I seen that on the BBC site, he's aged 20 years in 5.

 

I thought it was George W on first glance...

[Ketsbaia 0]

Fucking hell, how old is Blair looking?

 

 

He almost makes Alex Higgins look healthy

 

http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/sport/7934...ll-himself.html

[Meenzer 15739]

He almost makes Alex Higgins look healthy

 

http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/sport/7934...ll-himself.html

 

Blurdy hell. I know he's only got himself to blame for squandering what he had, but still.

[Christmas Tree 4851]

Two national UK newspapers have announced their political allegiances in an attempt to sway their readership ahead of the General Election.

 

The traditionally Labour-supporting Guardian switched to back the Liberal Democrats after a third poorly-received leaders' debate performance from Gordon Brown.

 

In an editorial entitled The Liberal Moment Has Come, The Guardian said if it had a vote it would be cast "enthusiastically" for Nick Clegg's party.

 

The most damning passage reads: "A year ago, the Guardian argued that Labour should persuade its leader to step down.

 

"Shortly afterwards, in spite of polling an abject 15.7% in the European elections, and with four cabinet ministers departing, Labour chose to hug Mr Brown close.

 

"It was the wrong decision then, and it is clear, not least after his humiliation in Rochdale this week, that it is the wrong decision now."

 

But the newspaper conceded that "under our discredited electoral system" readers in marginal constituencies should consider voting tactically for Labour if they wished to keep the Conservatives out.

 

The Tories also gained a boost with an endorsement from The Times.

 

It is the first time since 1992 that the newspaper has backed the Conservatives in a General Election.

 

Under the headline "Vote of Confidence", an editorial said: "The Conservatives offer an optimistic vision for the renewal of Britain.

 

"The electorate has made a call for change and they deserve the chance to answer

it."

 

The paper said Tony Blair had offered "the promise of modernity" but Gordon Brown had "squandered the boom".

 

It warned: "The economy is in peril. Mr Brown is the danger."

[Dr Kenneth Noisewater 0]

The Times coming out tory is no surprise as they are Murdoch owned. The traditionally socialist Guardian coming down on the lib dems side is more of a shock.

[Christmas Tree 4851]

The Times coming out tory is no surprise as they are Murdoch owned. The traditionally socialist Guardian coming down on the lib dems side is more of a shock.

 

 

Considering its the first time they have backed the Tories in nearly 20 years makes it a suprise, shirley

[Renton 22014]

The Times coming out tory is no surprise as they are Murdoch owned. The traditionally socialist Guardian coming down on the lib dems side is more of a shock.

 

 

Considering its the first time they have backed the Tories in nearly 20 years makes it a suprise, shirley

 

Have you read it recently? It's been pro-tory and Labour bashing for months now, if not years. My only surprise is that they hadn't already anounced it. Still my favourite paper though if I skip the politics and Matthew Parris's column.