Bollitics: VT General Election Poll #2

[Reality]

Maggie Thatcher supporters forget to mention that her "much needed" plans also tripled child poverty under her reign.

Child poverty grew very rapidly in the 1980s but there hadn't ever been recorded figures for it pre 1979 .. however it started to decline in the 90's having reached a peak in 92 , 5 years before Labour came to power

but like all stats they can be manipulated as one sees fit ... If you look at London ‘after housing costs’ – Inner London is deemed to be running with Child poverty at 52%

for the record UNICEF’s ‘Child Poverty in Rich Countries 2005’ League placed the UK 20th out of 26 countries. in 2007 we "improved" to 21st managing to fall behind power house nations like Turkey and Poland

so having boasted to remove it , what have 13 years of Labour government achieved .. the answer can be found in this rather telling headline from Tuesday 27th March 2007 “Disastrous rise in Child Poverty” .. Barnardos said that ministers were a long way from honouring that pledge to halve child poverty by 2010 and described it as a “moral disgrace”

For a start I am no supporter of Labour. Secondly, Labour pledged to eradicate child poverty by 2020, with targets set.

By the mid 1990s Britain had one of the worst rates of child poverty in the industrialised world, according to a report carried out by UNICEF. They ranked the UK third bottom out of 17 countries, ahead only of Italy and America.

Granted they missed the target last year, they have lifted more children out of poverty than the Tories ever did, who quite frankly put the majority in poverty.

They will need to change to fulfil the pledge by 2020, they have still made a good effort at it. There is more that needs to be, but there always is more that needs to be done in politics and unfortunately poverty will always be there.

JRF foundation states Labour lifted 600,000 children out of poverty between 1998 and 2006...it is disappointing because the target set for 2004 was over 800,000.

They also estimate that child poverty will drop from 2.9m to 2.3m sometime this year..this study was carried out in 2009..it will be interesting to see how much the recession plays a part in the actual figure.

http://www.jrf.org.uk/publications/ending-child-poverty-changing-economy

[snowychap]

Seems as though the cider tax may only last until the end of June (or July).

[rjw63]

Seems as though the cider tax may only last until the end of June (or July).

Where d'ya hear that?

[bickster]

Seems as though the cider tax may only last until the end of June (or July).

Fookin nora thats a sign of desperation, appealing to the tramp vote ;-)

[tonyh29]

Labour pledged to eradicate child poverty by 2020, with targets set.

But in 1999 they pledged to end it by 2010 ..then it got revised to 2020 ... probably seemed easy when things were going well with the economy but recently for example the government failed to provide the £3 billion promised in the 2009 budget

the link you posted to talks about an unexpected rise in child poverty between 2004 and 2007 ..way way before the recession kicked in so it can't even be used as a valid excuse either ..somewhere along the way they've taken their eye off of it ..as a result there has been an increase of 0.1 million children living below this threshold in the Uk this past year

tonyh29 wrote:

however i reckon if you applied standard VAT rate to zero rated goods that would generate around 24 bn .. so a FTW solution would be to pledge to keep VAT at 17.5% and not break any promises by bringing in the new VAT ... simples

After recovering from that initial shock, I'm just glad that you're not responsible for any future government policy.

didn't say it was my policy just merely showing how a future government could make promises on VAT in it's manifesto and still rake in 24bn .. it's no more a lie than promising a referendum on a treaty and then saying ah but that was a different treaty this one has 7 words changed on it thus is different ..

I believe the NI cuts are going to be found by reducing government waste , guess that means driving a V8 Daimler from number 10 to Buck Palace and back will be off the agenda in 5 years time

[snowychap]

Seems as though the cider tax may only last until the end of June (or July).

Where d'ya hear that?

Newsnight tonight. Michael Crick said that in the wash up (where they do a bit of horsetraading regarding what bills will be got through before Parliament is dissolved on Monday), there were three tax measures announced in the budget which were likely to be dropped or amended.

I think what is happening is that there is due to be a sunset clause on the cider duty rise which would lapse at the end of June or July unless the new parliament voted to keep them in place.

Not wishing to get your hopes up too much as they might end up voting to keep it but...

[tonyh29]

Not wishing to get your hopes up too much as they might end up voting to keep it

i'm going to write to my MP and insist they keep it in

[rjw63]

Not wishing to get your hopes up too much as they might end up voting to keep it

i'm going to write to my MP and insist they keep it in

Shut it you shandy swilling southern poofter!

[snowychap]

Not wishing to get your hopes up too much as they might end up voting to keep it

i'm going to write to my MP and insist they keep it in

I think they ignore the ones in crayon. :winkold:

[rjw63]

Bahahahaaaaaaaaaaa :-)

[tonyh29]

anyway ignoring the would be comedian and his sidekick :winkold:

Brown got off to a bad start today when he insulted all the Alzheimer's suffers in the UK when he stated

“I’ve never forgotten where I come from"

not sure that starting a speech with the words " or the values — hard work, duty, fairness, telling the truth " was that good either taking into account he's been caught lying to the public twice in a matter of weeks

to me the most interesting part of the campaigning will be how Gordons successors line up .. they won't want to be seen to knife him in public but nor will they want to go down on the ship with him ... should be fun

[Reality]

But in 1999 they pledged to end it by 2010 ..then it got revised to 2020 ... probably seemed easy when things were going well with the economy but recently for example the government failed to provide the £3 billion promised in the 2009 budget

I have never ever heard that they promised to eradicate child poverty by 2010. I have heard they pledged to halve it by 2010, but never eradicate it.

Considering Blair himself even said in the Beveridge Lecture in March 1999 that it would be 2020, which was when he announced the policy of ending child poverty for the first time. I don't know where you got the idea they promised to end it completely by 2010.

Whilst they haven't ended it, they have still done a lot for poorer people - the minimum wage, child care, tax credits for young families, for families with disabilities, for single-parents.

EMA for poorer students, grants for poorer students looking to go back into education.

The whole core to their philosophy is that workfare is the best form of welfare. There can no longer be a dependency on welfare and handouts, they have been committed to getting people in work. Funny that now it has all gone tits up, with young people unemployed for a disgraceful amount of time.

People struggling to make ends meet now under Labour. It will be an interesting election though..

Brown got off to a bad start today when he insulted all the Alzheimer's suffers in the UK when he stated

“I’ve never forgotten where I come from"

I'm pretty sure he didn't mean it. I'm glad he didn't run out from 10 Downing Street though to suck up to the press and make them cups of tea, like a certain Tory leader did this morning. That was laughable arselicking.

[leviramsey]

It was Brown who took away the BoE's power to regulate the banks, and gave it to the utterly inept FSA. His hands are exceedingly dirty.

tbf, though, the Fed didn't exactly make a strong case that central banks actually do a good job of regulating banks...

[snowychap]

The whole core to their philosophy is that workfare is the best form of welfare.

For whom, how and why?

I mean really - not just what they would tell us.

[Reality]

The whole core to their philosophy is that workfare is the best form of welfare.

For whom, how and why?

I mean really - not just what they would tell us.

New Labour.

Old Labour used to believe in the cradle to grave philosophy of welfare. New Labour stopped that and put an emphasis on getting people off welfare and into work. Work was viewed as the best way of removing people from poverty, by giving them an acceptable wage to live on...simply depending on benefits, when someone could work leads the chance of falling into the poverty cycle which has implications for the rest of ones life - education, employment opportunities, pensions etc.

People should only receive welfare if they absolutely need it. Those who can work should, is pretty much New Labour's thinking.

Which in a way is right, as I don't believe in giving handouts to everyone, it creates laziness and dependency. People who can work should work.

But New Labour are a bunch of cronies they were right there though imo.

[snowychap]

The whole core to their philosophy is that workfare is the best form of welfare.

For whom, how and why?

I mean really - not just what they would tell us.

New Labour.

...

No, no, no. You misunderstood my question.

Not 'for whom, how and why' is workfare the 'core to their philosophy' (I'd very much argue that it isn't really - it's pretty much something which they have turned to through the likes of Purnell and Freud) but 'for whom, how and why' is workfare the best form of welfare?

The point of my subsequent line (I mean really, &c.) was not to get the regurgitation of policy statements such as you posted but an actual answer to the question (which really requires some thought about the practicalities of workfare, the nature of employment, regional unemployment, the flexible labour market, the possibility of near full employment in a modern (globalized) mixed economy, workers as the tools of corporations and so on).

[Reality]

Ok, what is the core to New Labour philosophy then if it isn't welfare to workfare. Expand on this Purnell and Freud business please.

Are you referring to David Freud? How can you possibly say New Labour turned to him, when New Labour started the welfare-to-workfare shift in the very early 1990s? That was way before Freud became as interested in the welfare system..?

They may have appointed him to review the welfare system years after they came to power, but Labour had already put an emphasis on workfare as the best form of welfare long before he became an advisor, and that was partly down to the role Thatcher played in embracing the neo-Liberal economic stance.

Why did they change to this belief? I would say that after years of Tory rule and the shift the country took, it was impossible to revert back to the old left ways of resource redistribution. They founded the third way, based on pragmatism, which is obviously a Conservative concept, ie they accepted the changes Thatcher brought to Britain...and embraced populism.

I would also argue that there had been a culture of dependency in Britain, where people expected this and that. This could not continue if Britain was to be successful economically around the world in a market that was moving towards globalization. You need a high employment rate to be as productive as you possible can be.

[bickster]

Ok, what is the core to New Labour philosophy then

They don't have one, unless its, be Tory with extra spin. To which the Blue Tories have become, be Labour with extra spin

Sure theres a few differences of policy, as they each pander to their own "market" but essentially deep down, they are the same wolves in sheeps clothing as each other. Its all about getting elected, getting into power and..........well quite frankly abusing it for their own ends. Everyone wants their train to be the fastest on the gravy.

[wiganvillain]

Bravo Bicks.

Summed up to a T

[Wainy316]

The General Election.

Our chance to choose between a Giant Douche and a Turd Sandwich.