Gringo Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 As each day goes by another myth is busted in terms of these people changing.I'm not sure any myth has being busted here. Conservatives in favour of companies making profits? How bizarre. After all it was only with the support of call me dave and his tory pals that allowed tony to get the second stage academy legislation past parliament. We had a coallition back in 2006 and it was between the red and blue parties, so if you supported bliar in 2005 you can't really complain about the blue tories implementing his policies in 2010. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 What has Blair got to do with this? - answer - nowt! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 What has Blair got to do with this? - answer - nowt! He was the one who championed the academy schools, which the tories are exploiting. Same policy, different guidelines. Just like the conitnued privatisation of the NHS which no doubt some will argue against after inviting the private companies into the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 What has Blair got to do with this? - answer - nowt! well the Guardians headline on it is " Michael Gove takes Blair's big idea full circle" so in true Eurovision song contest style "Drat , Nill point" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 What has Blair got to do with this? - answer - nowt! Blair set the moral tone for the last government. I appreciate that you're not a Labour Party member, but I can assure you that some who were, were taking their MPs to task very early on in the 97 administration for the Ecclestone saga, and the messages it conveyed about what the government stood for. Sadly, it proved a very good indicator of what would be happening, and things like the recurrent Mandelson scandals hardly rebuilt moral leadership. Labour abandoned a lot of territory in those years, largely due to Blair, his pathetic hero worship of rich people and "celebrities", and the craven obedience of his careerist acolytes. It will take a generation to undo the damage, if indeed it can be done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 No it isn't - shame on you Tony p.s the the headline is in the link! p.p.s - just in case you missed it - " Michael Gove has no 'ideological objection' to firms making profits by running academy schools Education secretary tells teachers of academy plan and says that if schools want profit option, he will discuss it" - where is Blair mentioned? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 What has Blair got to do with this? - answer - nowt! Blair set the moral tone for the last government. I appreciate that you're not a Labour Party member, but I can assure you that some who were, were taking their MPs to task very early on in the 97 administration for the Ecclestone saga, and the messages it conveyed about what the government stood for. Sadly, it proved a very good indicator of what would be happening, and things like the recurrent Mandelson scandals hardly rebuilt moral leadership. Labour abandoned a lot of territory in those years, largely due to Blair, his pathetic hero worship of rich people and "celebrities", and the craven obedience of his careerist acolytes. It will take a generation to undo the damage, if indeed it can be done. This is ridiculous - Just because the Labour party at the time had a view then does not make it right - just because Labour started a scheme and now it's potentially exploited massively by the Tory party in order that profits can be made at the expense of what? the Tory party said they were no longer the party of the Thatcher years - a simple lie on their part If you are happy about profits being made in this way - and no not you Peter - then it says a lot about you the person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 What has Blair got to do with this? - answer - nowt! Blair set the moral tone for the last government.It wasn't just the moral tone.... from Drat's original post Companies could profit from running schools using existing legislation which allows governing bodies to contract out the running of their school to a company that can charge a management fee. A handful of schools already operate under this model but in the last years of the Labour government it was not encouraged. Several international school operators have invested in England in anticipation that the academy programme, particularly under the Tories, would open up a new market for them. He ran the legislation through parliament against the wishes of his own party and only with the support of call me dave and the tory mps. He introduced tory legislation and shock horror the tories are exploiting it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 No it isn't oh yes it is .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 So if Blair has been involved in any policy then we cannot condemn it or we have to condemn it? What a flawed logic. The simple matter of fact here is Gove is now letting teh cat out of the bag re the flagship scheme that the ConDem put forward and especially what the motivation is. Shame that your pre-occupation with Blair means that deflection from the policy occurs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 No it isn't oh yes it is .. A link? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 So if Blair has been involved in any policy then we cannot condemn it or we have to condemn it? What a flawed logic.Many people condemned it at the time, mainly labour back benchers. They knew where it would lead. And so did the tories, that's why they supported it. Shoddy legislation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 So what am I missing here then Gringo? Is this a customary rant at Blair or is it an agreement that the Tory part of the new party are pushing this way forward further into such a bad policy? I appreciate you dislike, even hate Blair, but that is not the issue at all. The issue is this policy and the apparent disclosure by Gove of the thinking behind this flagship - new - policy from the ConDem's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 A link? those bits in bigger text at the top ..would they be headlines ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 What has Blair got to do with this? - answer - nowt! Blair set the moral tone for the last government. I appreciate that you're not a Labour Party member, but I can assure you that some who were, were taking their MPs to task very early on in the 97 administration for the Ecclestone saga, and the messages it conveyed about what the government stood for. Sadly, it proved a very good indicator of what would be happening, and things like the recurrent Mandelson scandals hardly rebuilt moral leadership. Labour abandoned a lot of territory in those years, largely due to Blair, his pathetic hero worship of rich people and "celebrities", and the craven obedience of his careerist acolytes. It will take a generation to undo the damage, if indeed it can be done. This is ridiculous - Just because the Labour party at the time had a view then does not make it right - just because Labour started a scheme and now it's potentially exploited massively by the Tory party in order that profits can be made at the expense of what? the Tory party said they were no longer the party of the Thatcher years - a simple lie on their part If you are happy about profits being made in this way - and no not you Peter - then it says a lot about you the person. Well, I'm not sure if you meant to quote my post and address it, or quote another, because you seem to do neither. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted June 1, 2010 Share Posted June 1, 2010 So what am I missing here then Gringo? Is this a customary rant at Blair or is it an agreement that the Tory part of the new party are pushing this way forward further into such a bad policy? I appreciate you dislike, even hate Blair, but that is not the issue at all. The issue is this policy and the apparent disclosure by Gove of the thinking behind this flagship - new - policy from the ConDem'sStrange some people used to say I was obsessed with / hated murdoch. It's the policy, it's a bad one, instigated by a rogue govt, and that those that supported that govt and it's policies now turn against it........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thetrees Posted June 1, 2010 Share Posted June 1, 2010 The papers will continue to intermittently bring up new 'evidence' on individuals, in an attempt to keep stringing the story along and destabilise the country. The country is in the crap and needs stable government, with the best available talent, to get us on the right road.It is time for 'truth and reconciliation' on MP's expenses. If we can give people who have (allegedly) ordered murders power in Ulster, I am sure that we can accept the regrets and financial payback from some errant MPs, put all of this behind us, and ensure that the claiming of expenses is not so easy in the future.I don't remember you saying that when labour where in power and people who have (not allegedly) been responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths in foreign countries; nor the people now in power who continue to support the US action of drones (not allegedly) killing innocent civilians. To not be able to distinguish the aftermath of northern ireland, south africa and other nation states and the ensuing reconciliation processes with the requirement for political leaders to uphold the promises they made before they were elected makes your argument rather mute. Honesty amongs the chattering political classes is required, not subservience from the masses. Stability was as important two years ago as it is now. To compare politicians expenses to wars is facile, but you started it. You are normally fair, so I think that you will find that at no time did I condemn the Labour government over the expenses scandal. I suppose that after 13 years of their stewardship perhaps they should have simplified the expenses process, but the guilt has always been on all sides. At no point did I compare expenses to war. I think that you will find that history does not record the terrorist campaign in Ulster as a war, nor should it do so. I think that you will find that bombs in bins in busy shopping centres and under the tables in busy pubs could in no way be explained as aimed towards military targets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted June 1, 2010 Share Posted June 1, 2010 Laws was wrong to do what he did and had to resign. Pity as he is a very talented person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted June 3, 2010 Share Posted June 3, 2010 who remembers this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaG2dimIMzY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avfc89 Posted June 3, 2010 Share Posted June 3, 2010 Laws was wrong to do what he did and had to resign. Pity as he is a very talented person....talented? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts