Gordon Brown on the brink?

Jaggy Bunnet said:
Conservative %age of vote in 79 - 43.87% (percentage of electorate - 33.33%)
Labour %age of vote in 97 - 43.21% (percentage of electorate - 30.806%)
Click to expand...

You learn a new thing every day. I was letting the size of the majority dominate my view in that case.
 
Undesired Walrus said:
For those who consider voting Tory in protest, consider what you are voting in. How many of those on the Tory side preparing to form a new Government voted for the minimum wage? How many supported civil partnerships?

It's worth remembering what Cameron tried to get elected in on in 1997. It was trademark Thatcheresc policy, with little to no relationship to his current positions.
Click to expand...

I have. Cameron isn't Thatcher, and has now declared support for both Civil Partnerships and the Minimum Wage. (You'll have to search for the term Minimum Wage in the second link, as it's a wide ranging interview.) There's also George Osborne's speech where he said that 'Modern Conservatives acknowledge the fairness of a minimum wage.' Source
 
Uzzy said:
I have. Cameron isn't Thatcher, and has now declared support for both Civil Partnerships and the Minimum Wage. (You'll have to search for the term Minimum Wage in the second link, as it's a wide ranging interview.) There's also George Osborne's speech where he said that 'Modern Conservatives acknowledge the fairness of a minimum wage.' Source
Click to expand...

Quite a flip-flop from the Cameron post-leadership:

Minimum wage:
"Labour’s plans for minimum wages, the Social Chapter and large increases in spending and taxes would send unemployment straight back up.’

The Chronicle (Stafford), 21 February 1996


‘The Labour Party opposed each and every one of our reforms. Even today they would burden business with the minimum wage, the Social Chapter, and trade union privileges.’

Stafford Post, 24 April 1997


‘Labour would spend and tax, restore union privileges and burden business with the minimum wage and the Social Chapter. Mortgage rates, prices and unemployment would rise – as they have under every previous Labour Government.’

Staffordshire Newsletter, 25 April 1997"

Gay Rights:

"‘The Blair government continues to be obsessed with their ‘fringe’ agenda, including deeply unpopular moves like repealing Section 28 and allowing the promotion of homosexuality in schools.’

Oxford Journal, 5 May 2000


‘Labour has ripped the last recognition of marriage from the tax system by abolishing the married couples’ allowance and spend an inordinate amoutn[sic] of time trying to allow the promotion of homosexuality in schools by repealing Section 28. Blair apparently thinks that because he is lucky enough to have a loving wife, three kids and a new baby, he is automatically ‘pro-family’.’

Oxford Journal, 28 July 2000


‘The most staggering sentence in the Blair memo is: ‘it is bizarre that any Government I lead should be seen as anti-family’. Why? Blair has moved heaven and earth to allow the promotion of homosexuality in schools and has abolished the married couples’ allowance, taking away the last recognition of marriage in the tax system.’

Witney Gazette, 2 August 2000"

Plus, why didn't David Cameron come out in opposition to the recent Employment Opportunities Bill which attempted to undermine the minimum wage?
 
Uzzy said:
I have. Cameron isn't Thatcher, and has now declared support for both Civil Partnerships and the Minimum Wage. (You'll have to search for the term Minimum Wage in the second link, as it's a wide ranging interview.) There's also George Osborne's speech where he said that 'Modern Conservatives acknowledge the fairness of a minimum wage.' Source
Click to expand...

And the BNP really are not Nazis nowadays eh?
 
There was quite a brisk turnout (three people at once) at 5pm at my local polling station, which is someone's front room.
 
Jaggy Bunnet said:
Of course a certain leader of another party does not exactly have a great voting record in supporting equal rights for gays.

14 "absents" out of 15 votes. (Apparently enough under the scoring system used to make him "strongly for"????)

http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/mp.php?mpid=1997&dmp=826
Click to expand...

Interesting. On that site we also have the motion:

MPs' expenses — outer-London MPs can no longer claim second home said:
With effect from 1 April 2010, no distinction shall be made for the purposes of the rules governing Members' allowances between an hon. Member who represents an inner-London constituency and an hon. Member who represents any other constituency the whole of which falls within 20 miles of the Palace of Westminster.
Click to expand...

Labour:
Aye: 231 (+2 tell)
Nay: 12
Turnout: 70%


Con:
Aye: 55
Nay: 22 (+2 tell)
Turnout: 40.9%

The Tories still claim to be the party of change with that turnout?
 
Surprisingly enough, UW, parties change. The Labour of today is nothing like the Labour of 1983, for instance. Surprisingly enough, the Tories of today are nothing like the Tories of 1983 either.

If Conservative Social Policy was the same as it was back in 2000, then I wouldn't be voting for them. But it's changed. Don't know about you, but I vote on what a party is now, not what it was years ago under different leaders.

As an aside, I can pick out plenty of bills Labour and Brown has tried to push through which worry me a whole lot, such as 90 day detention.
 
That is more serious for Brown and at least Purnell had the guts to be clear about his reasons and didn't try to screw the party as well as Brown, unlike Blears.
 
The BBC News was all over this like a rash. They think this is quite serious for Brown.

Rolfe.
 
Uzzy said:
Of interest is the fact that James Purnell, the Work and Pensions Secretary has resigned, in order to trigger a debate. Seems that he resigned minutes after the close of the polls too.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8083585.stm
Click to expand...

This is quite a significant development, in particular the contents of his letter where he outlines how he believes that Labour is adversely affected by Gordon Brown's leadership. There are also reports that John Reid has made the same argument verbally to Gordon Brown's face. When the likes of the ultra-ambitious James Purnell are fleeing the Cabinet, not because their job is under immediate threat (like Jackie and Hazel) but because he has calculated he is better served long-term distancing himself from the Prime Minister, then this could be the beginning of the end. We shall see! :)
 
Uzzy said:
Surprisingly enough, UW, parties change. The Labour of today is nothing like the Labour of 1983, for instance. Surprisingly enough, the Tories of today are nothing like the Tories of 1983 either.

If Conservative Social Policy was the same as it was back in 2000, then I wouldn't be voting for them. But it's changed. Don't know about you, but I vote on what a party is now, not what it was years ago under different leaders.

As an aside, I can pick out plenty of bills Labour and Brown has tried to push through which worry me a whole lot, such as 90 day detention.
Click to expand...

So why didn't Cameron protest the Employement Oppurtunities act? What exactly are you voting for them for? What do you like about them?
 
Last edited:
mummymonkey said:
Mrs mummymonkey is back from her polling station and reports a turnout of 26%.
Click to expand...

I went in about 9 this morning and only a dozen or so names appeared to have been scored off the list before me; there were a few more folk around when I passed later, but nothing like a Scottish national or a Westminster election.
 
andyandy said:
This is quite a significant development...
Click to expand...

Indeed it is. The stalking-horse is out of the stable :).

... in particular the contents of his letter where he outlines how he believes that Labour is adversely affected by Gordon Brown's leadership. There are also reports that John Reid has made the same argument verbally to Gordon Brown's face. When the likes of the ultra-ambitious James Purnell are fleeing the Cabinet, not because their job is under immediate threat (like Jackie and Hazel) but because he has calculated he is better served long-term distancing himself from the Prime Minister, then this could be the beginning of the end. We shall see! :)
Click to expand...

Not quite the Geoffrey Howe moment, but close. Blears one day, Purnell the next - is this co-ordinated? Brown's reshuffle was hard enough without these constant disruptions. It's becoming a farce.

By end-of-business on Monday I think we'll know how things will go. I'm tending towards the opinion that it's Brown who'll be going.
 
Osbourne on BBC, clearly worried about a Prime Minister Johnson. Hypocritical in the extreme by complaining about an unelected PM, considering Major from 1990-2.
 
When I get home, I will have to turn on one of the C Span Channels, sinceone usually pipe in the BBC coverage of British elections.
 
It's all going down here dudalb, the Blairites are fighting back!

Just in: Miliband says he won't resign, it gives Brown some breathing space.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom