Blair urged to go by loyal Labour MPs

[Ally 0]

They have  a greater loylaty than to a failing Prime Minister - a loyalty to the country, the world and their party

194410[/snapback]

I'd go along with that. Blind loyalty is just that, i.e. blind. See Leazes re: Shepherd

194416[/snapback]

 

Aye, but what are they gaining with such a public show? Its playing straight into Cameron's hands for the next election, nothing is being gained.

Edited September 7, 2006 by Ally

[Craig 6302]

They have  a greater loylaty than to a failing Prime Minister - a loyalty to the country, the world and their party

194410[/snapback]

I'd go along with that. Blind loyalty is just that, i.e. blind. See Leazes re: Shepherd

194416[/snapback]

 

Aye, but what are they gaining with such a public show? Its playing straight into Cameron's hands for the next election, nothing is being gained.

194423[/snapback]

 

Making their feelings heard. They feel the party is needing to move on from Blair and they're using the only platform to their disposal.

 

Playing more into Cameron's hands is if Blair stubbornly digs his heels in and refuses to shift.

[Guest alex]

They have  a greater loylaty than to a failing Prime Minister - a loyalty to the country, the world and their party

194410[/snapback]

I'd go along with that. Blind loyalty is just that, i.e. blind. See Leazes re: Shepherd

194416[/snapback]

 

Aye, but what are they gaining with such a public show? Its playing straight into Cameron's hands for the next election, nothing is being gained.

194423[/snapback]

Well, Blair's off within the year it would seem. They've got exactly what they wanted. Remains to be seen if that will turn out to be an error of judgement.

[Ally 0]

They have  a greater loylaty than to a failing Prime Minister - a loyalty to the country, the world and their party

194410[/snapback]

I'd go along with that. Blind loyalty is just that, i.e. blind. See Leazes re: Shepherd

194416[/snapback]

 

Aye, but what are they gaining with such a public show? Its playing straight into Cameron's hands for the next election, nothing is being gained.

194423[/snapback]

 

Making their feelings heard. They feel the party is needing to move on from Blair and they're using the only platform to their disposal.

 

Playing more into Cameron's hands is if Blair stubbornly digs his heels in and refuses to shift.

194425[/snapback]

 

Its played into Cameron's hands both ways, he can just sit there while the Labour Party fragment and argue like in '83. The party probably does need to move on from Blair, but for the sake of their party and the future of the party I think they've made a bad move and they'll realise the magnitude of their error when in 2009/10 they don't have a job anymore.

[Craig 6302]

As I said earlier in the thread, politics is all swings and roundabouts and whatever happens after a period of one party in power, the opposition becomes more favourable to more and more of the electorate.

 

I'd actually suggest that they've probably done more good than harm. Again look back at when Thatcher was ousted - there's no way in god's green earth she'd have won the election in '92 had she still been in power yet the country re-elected the Tories under the new leadership of Major.

 

History could repeat itself but the longer this whole thing gets drawn out, the less likely it will be.

[Rob W 0]

"Aye, but what are they gaining with such a public show? Its playing straight into Cameron's hands for the next election, nothing is being gained."

 

because he isn't listening - like Thatcher they get in the bunker, they get rid of people who cause them pain by saying things that upset them (like "Tony - you have to think about going") and they punish the "disloyal"

 

Eventually it just gets so bad its "Aux barricades!"

 

Wilson did it best - he had a date set for years in his own head and then just quit ..................................

[Guest alex]

I bet Jim Callaghan disagreed like, Wilson left the sinking ship to him.

[Happy Face 29]

Wilson did it best - he had a date set for years in his own head and then just quit ..................................

194457[/snapback]

 

.......to pursue a career as a TV personality.

 

Shame he was shit at it.

[Rob W 0]

much the same as PM TBH

 

Apparently his family had a long history of what we now call Alzeheimers and he was on the lookout for the symptoms in himself - he'd been in politics for bloodyyears 'n aal and was just getting knackered so he bailed out

[Guest alex]

Wilson is Rob's hero - all the while pretending to be a socialist while secretly adopting an 'I'm alright Jack' attitude and leaving when things went tits up

[Rob W 0]

It's the mac he had.......

 

plus his ability to put down hecklers, stay out of Vietnam and found the Open University

[Renton 17746]

I'd love Brown to get a chance at PM. He is highly intelligent (even more so than Blair) and is the main reason for our successful economy, which is the single most important aspect of governing a country. Unfortunately, I fear most people won't see beyond the fact he is a dour scotsman, and will vote for that smarmy prick Cameron.

[AgentFox 0]

Politicians piss me off they are always frigging moaning about the other party, I suppose in general politics Piss me off.

 

Its seems it dosnt matter which party is in every one wants the other other side in

[Renton 17746]

Politicians piss me off they are always frigging moaning about the other party, I suppose in general politics Piss me off.

 

Its seems it dosnt matter which party is in every one wants the other other side in

194492[/snapback]

 

I don't follow. How do you explain Labour have had 3 successive terms if erveryone wanted the opposition in?

[Guest alex]

I'd love Brown to get a chance at PM. He is highly intelligent (even more so than Blair) and is the main reason for our successful economy, which is the single most important aspect of governing a country. Unfortunately, I fear most people won't see beyond the fact he is a dour scotsman, and will vote for that smarmy prick Cameron.

194486[/snapback]

I agree and fear the same re: Cameron.

[bobbyshinton 59]

I'd love Brown to get a chance at PM. He is highly intelligent (even more so than Blair) and is the main reason for our successful economy, which is the single most important aspect of governing a country. Unfortunately, I fear most people won't see beyond the fact he is a dour scotsman, and will vote for that smarmy prick Cameron.

194486[/snapback]

I agree and fear the same re: Cameron.

194498[/snapback]

 

 

Statement from Blair 14.00 today

[Happy Face 29]

Isn't there a case to be made for Brown knacking the economy?

 

I'm not clued up, but seem to remeber him selling half our gold reserves for a quarter of their value, and there was some documentary about his dodgy figures misleading everyone on the state of the economy.

[Guest alex]

Isn't there a case to be made for Brown knacking the economy?

 

I'm not clued up, but seem to remeber him selling half our gold reserves for a quarter of their value, and there was some documentary about his dodgy figures misleading everyone on the state of the economy.

194504[/snapback]

I think that, generally it's how people feel personally, i.e. how much money is in your own pocket etc. You can't hoodwink people about that.

[Happy Face 29]

Isn't there a case to be made for Brown knacking the economy?

 

I'm not clued up, but seem to remeber him selling half our gold reserves for a quarter of their value, and there was some documentary about his dodgy figures misleading everyone on the state of the economy.

194504[/snapback]

I think that, generally it's how people feel personally, i.e. how much money is in your own pocket etc. You can't hoodwink people about that.

194505[/snapback]

 

 

But credit debt has never been higher and bankrupcies have never been so popular, with the average age of a bankrupt dropping to the low 20's iirc.

[AgentFox 0]

Politicians piss me off they are always frigging moaning about the other party, I suppose in general politics Piss me off.

 

Its seems it dosnt matter which party is in every one wants the other other side in

194492[/snapback]

 

I don't follow. How do you explain Labour have had 3 successive terms if erveryone wanted the opposition in?

194495[/snapback]

 

 

News, media, pub talk all saying get the conservatives in Labor cant do the job switch back to the 80's/90's that exact opposite was being said, get Labor in as the conservatives cant do the job

[Renton 17746]

Isn't there a case to be made for Brown knacking the economy?

 

I'm not clued up, but seem to remeber him selling half our gold reserves for a quarter of their value, and there was some documentary about his dodgy figures misleading everyone on the state of the economy.

194504[/snapback]

I think that, generally it's how people feel personally, i.e. how much money is in your own pocket etc. You can't hoodwink people about that.

194505[/snapback]

 

 

But credit debt has never been higher and bankrupcies have never been so popular, with the average age of a bankrupt dropping to the low 20's iirc.

194507[/snapback]

 

Well I don't know about those aspects but it's like Alex says - most people have never had it so good. I can remember house repossessions and businesses going bust were horrendous under the tories.

 

Also, if you measure our success by how well other countries are doing, I believe we are doing OK. Then there's stable inflation etc....

 

Anyway, it's not so much that I think Labour or Brown are wonderful, they're just infinitely superior to the alternative.

[Renton 17746]

Politicians piss me off they are always frigging moaning about the other party, I suppose in general politics Piss me off.

 

Its seems it dosnt matter which party is in every one wants the other other side in

194492[/snapback]

 

I don't follow. How do you explain Labour have had 3 successive terms if erveryone wanted the opposition in?

194495[/snapback]

 

 

News, media, pub talk all saying get the conservatives in Labor cant do the job switch back to the 80's/90's that exact opposite was being said, get Labor in as the conservatives cant do the job

194510[/snapback]

 

 

Where do you live? I don't know a single person who wants the tories in.

 

As for the media, well, who cares, but in fact I don't agree anyway. As far as I am aware, Murdoch is still behind Labour, and the BBC cartainly seem to have a left wing slant.

 

Incidentally, the support of Murdoch (Sky, the Sun) etc is one reason I think Labour will probably be re-elected. That and the fact that the economy is doing OK.

 

Edit: contradicting my earlier post!

Edited September 7, 2006 by Renton

[Happy Face 29]

I'd love Brown to get a chance at PM. He is highly intelligent (even more so than Blair) and is the main reason for our successful economy, which is the single most important aspect of governing a country. Unfortunately, I fear most people won't see beyond the fact he is a dour scotsman, and will vote for that smarmy prick Cameron.

194486[/snapback]

 

 

This is the stuff I was thinking of....

 

The ability to forecast the performance of the economy is central to Gordon Brown's reputation as a competent financial manager.

 

He claims to have a good record on out-forecasting independent experts.

 

This is of especial political significance in the run up to this election, because the Conservatives, quoting an impressive platoon of independent experts, from the Ernst and Young ITEM Club, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) and the International Monetary Fund claim to have found a flaw in his forecasting skills.

 

They claim to have identified a gap between Gordon Brown's spending plans and expected revenues from the economy. The IFS reckoned it would be worth around £11bn a year.

 

This black hole, critics argue, means that Gordon Brown will face an awkward choice: raise taxes, cut spending or increase borrowing and risk breaking his self-imposed "golden rule" to balance the Government's books over the economic cycle.

 

The Labour Party's answer is that its forecasts are right, and the party should be trusted because it has always been right in the past.

 

Gordon Brown himself put it this way at the manifesto launch: "There is a group of people who have doubted our forecasts because they think we will not achieve the growth that we have in fact achieved.

 

"I would defy people to look at what has actually happened over the last eight years."

 

So that's what FactCheck did - and the results weren't altogether reassuring.

 

Economic with the truth?

 

Mr Brown has always got his numbers right about the growth of the economy, often in defiance of the independent pundits - and the opposition.

 

They questioned his forecast for overall growth at or above three per cent for 2004, and it came in at 3.1 per cent. In 2003, he forecast growth between 2 and 2 and a half per cent, and it came in a 2.3 per cent.

 

Over the past five years, it has been the same story - growth has been in line with budget forecasts.

 

But the figures to which the debate is really referring aren't economic growth, but net borrowing and it is this that the experts predict may have to rise. Here, Mr Brown's forecasts are much less reliable.

 

In the first few years of his chancellorship Mr Brown consistently overestimated public borrowing. As the table below shows, the borrowing figures for 2000-01 were negative, indicating a surplus.

 

The error was also negative, showing that the surplus was bigger than expected.

 

But since 2001-02, he has had to borrow, and borrow more than he expected. In those years, the figures have been:

 

See the table

 

As the table shows, £11bn is well within the range of Gordon Brown's previous forecasting errors.

 

As Carl Emmerson, deputy director of the IFS puts it: "The treasury, like other forecasters, has been wrong about borrowing in the future. Unfortunately for Gordon Brown recent years have seen him consistently underestimating the amount of borrowing that has occurred."

 

So for anyone concerned about tax rises, borrowing, or spending cuts, the appeal to "trust me" might merit closer scrutiny.

 

[Happy Face 29]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/5322094.stm

 

 

He probably won't last that long, but I can't see why the rush to get rid of him tbh.