General Election 2015

[pap]

Yet, despite all the mouth-frothing, what we've ended up with is a progressive 'graduate tax' whereby those who earn more pay more for their tuition, and the majority of graduates will never have to pay back anywhere near the full "debt". So, the Lib Dems inadvertently stuck to their pledge of introducing a fairer alternative (to what was in place before)....

 

And not forgetting that Labour's headline grabbing £3,000 reduction will only benefit the wealthiest graduates.

 

I pledge to vote against any increase in fees in the next Parliament and to pressure the government to introduce a fairer alternative.

 

Those words in full. Fees tripled.

 

27 liars right here:-

 

Danny Alexander (Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey)

Norman Baker (Lewes)

Sir Alan Beith (Berwick-upon-Tweed)

Gordon Birtwistle (Burnley)

Tom Brake (Carshalton & Wallington)

 

Jeremy Browne (Taunton Deane)

Malcolm Bruce (Gordon)

Paul Burstow (Sutton & Cheam)

Vincent Cable (Twickenham)

 

Alistair Carmichael (Orkney & Shetland)

 

Nick Clegg (Sheffield Hallam)

 

Edward Davey (Kingston & Surbiton)

 

Lynne Featherstone (Hornsey & Wood Green)

 

Don Foster (Bath)

 

Stephen Gilbert (St Austell and Newquay)

 

Duncan Hames (Chippenham)

 

Nick Harvey (Devon North)

 

David Heath (Somerton & Frome)

 

John Hemming (Birmingham Yardley)

 

Norman Lamb (Norfolk North)

 

David Laws (Yeovil)

 

Michael Moore (Berwickshire, Roxburgh & Selkirk)

 

Andrew Stunell (Hazel Grove)

 

Jo Swinson (Dunbartonshire East)

 

Sarah Teather (Brent Central)

 

David Ward (Bradford East)

 

Steve Webb (Thornbury and Yate)

[trousers]

Fees tripled.

 

They're not really 'fees' any more though - its a progressive graduate tax - so they sort of stuck to their word

[LGTL]

They're not really 'fees' any more though - its a progressive graduate tax - so they sort of stuck to their word

 

They've always been a graduate tax. Difference being I 'only' have to pay back £3k a year at a percentage of my earnings rather than the current £9k as a percentage of my earnings.

 

It is in no way better for graduates now.

[pap]

They're not really 'fees' any more though - its a progressive graduate tax - so they sort of stuck to their word

 

They did no such thing. They are called tuition fees and they tripled. The language on their pledge is unambiguous.

 

They're a pack of opportunist (lap|rob)dogs that I'll enjoy seeing get eviscerated in May.

[Batman]

I believe that uni should not be 'free' at all and should be fully paid for by those who wish to attend.

Any companies (private or public) who wish to fund uni places should be able to do so as they see fit.

 

We should have a culture a BIT like the US have. You (as a parent) start saving a fund for your cherub's uni fees before they can walk.

[trousers]

They're a pack of opportunist (lap|rob)dogs that I'll enjoy seeing get eviscerated in May.

 

They were certainly naive/stupid to make a pledge that they stood no chance of being able to keep in a Tory/Lib Dem coalition situation. Pre-election manifestos should be all about "aspirations" rather than "pledges" as no-one knows what's going to be achievable until they get into power, especially if they are sharing said power with another party.

Edited 7 April, 2015 by trousers

[pap]

I believe that uni should not be 'free' at all and should be fully paid for by those who wish to attend.

Any companies (private or public) who wish to fund uni places should be able to do so as they see fit.

 

We should have a culture a BIT like the US have. You (as a parent) start saving a fund for your cherub's uni fees before they can walk.

 

Also known as grounding your bombers.

 

I'm sure the scholarships cover some poor kids, but your policy would bar working class students from getting into elite institutions.

 

But hey, let's have those f**kers earning non-graduate money or keep them out of the top graduate jobs. There are plenty of jobs, no competition for unskilled work and it'll all be tickety-boo.

Edited 7 April, 2015 by pap

[pap]

They were certainly naive/stupid to make a pledge that they stood no chance of being able to keep in a Tory/Lib Dem coalition situation. Pre-election manifestos should be all about "aspirations" rather than "pledges" as no-one knows what's going to be achievable until they get into power, especially if they are sharing said power with another party.

 

They could have dug their heels in on any issue.

 

Isn't that the "problem" with coalition government?

[View From The Top]

I believe that uni should not be 'free' at all and should be fully paid for by those who wish to attend.

Any companies (private or public) who wish to fund uni places should be able to do so as they see fit.

 

We should have a culture a BIT like the US have. You (as a parent) start saving a fund for your cherub's uni fees before they can walk.

 

What an utterly f**king stupid suggestion.

[trousers]

They could have dug their heels in on any issue.

 

Isn't that the "problem" with coalition government?

 

I wasn't in the initial coalition-forming meetings so I've no idea how hard they tried to bargain re: tuition fees.

[View From The Top]

They were certainly naive/stupid to make a pledge that they stood no chance of being able to keep in a Tory/Lib Dem coalition situation. Pre-election manifestos should be all about "aspirations" rather than "pledges" as no-one knows what's going to be achievable until they get into power, especially if they are sharing said power with another party.

 

Simple and undeniable fact is that they pledged one thing and did the opposite.

 

Many, many 1st time LibDem voters were women and we all know that if you lie to them they will have your balls, at Clegg will find out in May.

[Saint George]

Also known as grounding your bombers.

 

I'm sure the scholarships cover some poor kids, but your policy would bar working class students from getting into elite institutions.

 

But hey, let's have those f**kers earning non-graduate money or keep them out of the top graduate jobs. There are plenty of jobs, no competition for unskilled work and it'll all be tickety-boo.

 

So tell me why you think those poor working class families should pay for 'your' kids to attend an elite institution?

[trousers]

Simple and undeniable fact is that they pledged one thing and did the opposite.

 

How would coalitions ever work if each party had to stick to their pledges? Surely that's the point of coalitions - you have to compromise on things you wanted to do?

[trousers]

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/students/student-loans-tuition-fees-changes#multiOne

[pap]

So tell me why you think those poor working class families should pay for 'your' kids to attend an elite institution?

 

Because it's a double win for those that get gainfully employed. It's worth investing money in working class kids if it means they become net contributors. No brainer, really.

[buctootim]

Simple and undeniable fact is that they pledged one thing and did the opposite.

 

Many, many 1st time LibDem voters were women and we all know that if you lie to them they will have your balls, at Clegg will find out in May.

 

The pledge was for a Lib Dem government. They didnt win a Lib Dem government and were instead the junior partner in a coalition so didn't have the power to deliver. Its a totally different situation - like promising to buy your partner two weeks in the Maldives if you get that great new job you were after - but give her a weekend in Butlins when you get a weekends overtime instead.

[hypochondriac]

The pledge was for a Lib Dem government. They didnt win a Lib Dem government and were instead the junior partner in a coalition so didn't have the power to deliver. Its a totally different situation - like promising to buy your partner two weeks in the Maldives if you get that great new job you were after - but give her a weekend in Butlins when you get a weekends overtime instead.

 

Pretty meaningless making any pledges in that case then since they knew they were never going to form a majority government.

[trousers]

The pledge was for a Lib Dem government. They didnt win a Lib Dem government and were instead the junior partner in a coalition so didn't have the power to deliver. Its a totally different situation - like promising to buy your partner two weeks in the Maldives if you get that great new job you were after - but give her a weekend in Butlins when you get a weekends overtime instead.

 

Analogy-tastic

 

[pap]

The pledge was for a Lib Dem government. They didnt win a Lib Dem government and were instead the junior partner in a coalition so didn't have the power to deliver. Its a totally different situation - like promising to buy your partner two weeks in the Maldives if you get that great new job you were after - but give her a weekend in Butlins when you get a weekends overtime instead.

Yeah. Doesn't say that on the signs. If anything, the language makes it sound as if they have no expectations of being in government.

[buctootim]

Pretty meaningless making any pledges in that case then since they knew they were never going to form a majority government.

 

They're called manifestos. All parties have them, even UKIP.

[trousers]

Pretty meaningless making any pledges in that case then since they knew they were never going to form a majority government.

 

And by extrapolation, also pretty meaningless (and equally naive) for their supporters to believe that a minority party can ever fulfill any of its pledges. And then moan about it when the obvious happens after the event....

Edited 7 April, 2015 by trousers

[trousers]

Yeah. Doesn't say that on the signs. If anything, the language makes it sound as if they have no expectations of being in government.

 

Which is sort of the point....?

[hypochondriac]

They're called manifestos. All parties have them, even UKIP.

 

What do ukip have to do with this?

[hypochondriac]

And by extrapolation, also pretty meaningless (and equally naive) for their supporters to believe that a minority party can ever fulfill any of its pledges. And then moan about it when the obvious happens after the event....

 

Indeed. You could argue though that the lib dems were misleading by pretending that there was a chance that their manifesto would be used to govern. There never was.

[buctootim]

What do ukip have to do with this?

 

Surely, being an even handed kind of chap, you should be berating them for promising things they wont be able to deliver as they wont get an outright win.

[View From The Top]

The pledge was for a Lib Dem government. They didnt win a Lib Dem government and were instead the junior partner in a coalition so didn't have the power to deliver. Its a totally different situation - like promising to buy your partner two weeks in the Maldives if you get that great new job you were after - but give her a weekend in Butlins when you get a weekends overtime instead.

 

They became part of the government and then ditched their number 1, headline, policy. That's all there is to it. It was the pledge they trotted out over and over again.

 

People believed Clegg and voted for him be then ripped up that pledge. He'll pay the price next month.

[trousers]

They became part of the government and then ditched their number 1, headline, policy. That's all there is to it. It was the pledge they trotted out over and over again.

 

People believed Clegg and voted for him be then ripped up that pledge. He'll pay the price next month.

So, if tuition fees was a Tory red-line in the coalition negotiations (which it undoubtably was), Lib Dem supporters' preference was to duck out of a chance to have their party in government for the first time in generations? I appreciate that sticking to one's principles is a noble thing, but surely the lib dems stood more chance of promoting their other policies in government than as a minority opposition party. Sounds like cutting off nose to spite face territory to me.

[Batman]

They became part of the government and then ditched their number 1, headline, policy. That's all there is to it. It was the pledge they trotted out over and over again.

 

People believed Clegg and voted for him be then ripped up that pledge. He'll pay the price next month.

 

does not appear to their No.1 Policy back in 2010. Granted I am not a libdem voter but...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8619630.stm

 

http://www.politicsresources.net/area/uk/ge10/man/parties/libdem_manifesto_2010.pdf

 

as for people punishing clegg. God knows how this country will cope with another coalition or if we have more representation in govt with other parties. they all cant win

[hypochondriac]

Surely, being an even handed kind of chap, you should be berating them for promising things they wont be able to deliver as they wont get an outright win.

 

I responded to a comment about the lib dems. I think the whole point of a manifesto where no one does anything from it makes the whole thing pretty pointless regardless of which party that comes from. If ukip gets in as a minority partner and then gets rid of the main thing that made most people vote for them in the first place (in the lib dems case that is tuition fees clearly) then of course I will criticise them. If ukip got in and then said that they don't support a referendum anymore and that was only if they got in as a majority government, then quite rightly they would be roundly criticised and lose much of their vote. I don't support ukip- or any political party- and it's odd that you think I do.

Edited 7 April, 2015 by hypochondriac

[hypochondriac]

They became part of the government and then ditched their number 1, headline, policy. That's all there is to it. It was the pledge they trotted out over and over again.

 

People believed Clegg and voted for him be then ripped up that pledge. He'll pay the price next month.

 

I agree. I'm not sure it was just the fact that he couldn't stop the tuition fees, it's the perception that he made no fuss to oppose it which will damage him imo. It's why it's going to be so tough if we get another coalition since any coalition partner will want to kick up a huge fuss to show that they are fighting for the people who voted for them.

[hypochondriac]

does not appear to their No.1 Policy back in 2010. Granted I am not a libdem voter but...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8619630.stm

 

http://www.politicsresources.net/area/uk/ge10/man/parties/libdem_manifesto_2010.pdf

 

as for people punishing clegg. God knows how this country will cope with another coalition or if we have more representation in govt with other parties. they all cant win

 

It was the policy that got them the student vote and rightly or wrongly the perception of the man on the street was that this was one of their main policies. Many many people voted for them solely on that basis.

[LGTL]

So, if tuition fees was a Tory red-line in the coalition negotiations (which it undoubtably was), Lib Dem supporters' preference was to duck out of a chance to have their party in government for the first time in generations? I appreciate that sticking to one's principles is a noble thing, but surely the lib dems stood more chance of promoting their other policies in government than as a minority opposition party. Sounds like cutting off nose to spite face territory to me.

 

Their thinking was incredibly short term. People would have had 100% more respect for them now if they had have stuck to their guns. They have sacrificed ever being a big player for just 5 years of shared government.

[hypochondriac]

So, if tuition fees was a Tory red-line in the coalition negotiations (which it undoubtably was), Lib Dem supporters' preference was to duck out of a chance to have their party in government for the first time in generations? I appreciate that sticking to one's principles is a noble thing, but surely the lib dems stood more chance of promoting their other policies in government than as a minority opposition party. Sounds like cutting off nose to spite face territory to me.

 

They should have made a lot more public noise about it. The policy may have gone through but the perception would then have been that the Tories had got it through despite lib dem opposition.

[Batman]

They should have made a lot more public noise about it. The policy may have gone through but the perception would then have been that the Tories had got it through despite lib dem opposition.

 

big lesson learned. Put some spin on it and save some face.

[pap]

Surely, being an even handed kind of chap, you should be berating them for promising things they wont be able to deliver as they wont get an outright win.

 

Not an applicable criticism.

 

The Lib Dems weren't pledging to do something outside their power. They were merely going to vote against any rise in tuition fees. Twenty seven of them didn't and will likely pay the price.

[trousers]

Their thinking was incredibly short term. People would have had 100% more respect for them now if they had have stuck to their guns. They have sacrificed ever being a big player for just 5 years of shared government.

One could argue that their supporters are being short sighted too in their clamour to punish a party that has admitted they made a mistake in making such an unconditional pledge. You'd have thought people would admire politicians that apologise and admit mistakes given how few do.

[buctootim]

They became part of the government and then ditched their number 1, headline, policy. That's all there is to it. It was the pledge they trotted out over and over again.

 

 

Not really, the biggest attention was given to raising the tax earnings threshold to £10,000. The tuition fees was just of many and they clearly weren't going to get them all through a coalition. Maybe you remember the fees more clearly because of your job, but as this link shows it was just part of a long list. What is striking is how much the LDs have delivered and got little credit for.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8619630.stm

[trousers]

The Lib Dems weren't pledging to do something outside their power.

Agree, not explicitly. They simply hadn't thought through the consequences of being able to keep an unconditional pledge in a coalition scenario. Naive? Yes. Stupid? Probably. Willfully misleading voters? Not convinced.

[buctootim]

One could argue that their supporters are being short sighted too in their clamour to punish a party that has admitted they made a mistake in making such an unconditional pledge. You'd have thought people would admire politicians that apologise and admit mistakes given how few do.

 

Quite - its arguably more admirable (though naive as it turns out) to make a pledge and then apologise if you don't achieve it than it is to construct deliberately vague aspirational language crafted by lawyers and to later profess amazement that anyone could have drawn any such an inference. All the Lib Dems fuss shows is that people dont want real world politics, they want warm words and spin.

[pap]

Quite - its arguably more admirable (though naive as it turns out) to make a pledge and then apologise if you don't achieve it than it is to construct deliberately vague aspirational language crafted by lawyers and to later profess amazement that anyone could have drawn any such an inference. All the Lib Dems fuss shows is that people dont want real world politics, they want warm words and spin.

 

Achieve it? This wasn't something they aspired to, aimed for and missed. Nor was it outside their power. Twenty seven of their MPs did something they pledged they wouldn't do.

 

Dress it up in as much contrarian apologism as you like. Thems the facts.

[solentstars]

Simple and undeniable fact is that they pledged one thing and did the opposite.

 

Many, many 1st time LibDem voters were women and we all know that if you lie to them they will have your balls, at Clegg will find out in May.

i personally think they have done a good job seeing they were the minority party and even thow i did not vote for them i,m glad they got the tories who i voted for to , raising the tax earnings threshold to £10,600,soon to be £11,000, otherwise the torys on their own would have reduced the top rate tax to 40 p and i expect the tax thresshold for ordinary people would have been about £7,500 .so i see the coalition has being a successs.

[pap]

i personally think they have done a good job seeing they were the minority party and even thow i did not vote for them i,m glad they got the tories who i voted for to , raising the tax earnings threshold to £10,600,soon to be £11,000, otherwise the torys on their own would have reduced the top rate tax to 40 p and i expect the tax thresshold for ordinary people would have been about £7,500 .so i see the coalition has being a successs.

 

Three times tuition fee rise. Huge rise in food banks. Poor being turfed out of London. UK wide riots. Millions of hours of free labour being given to corporations. More private industry brought into the NHS. Overtime hours disappearing for part time workers. Huge rise in punitive and exploitative "zero hours" contracts, tailor-made for would-be small scale tyrants. Electoral reform kicked into the long grass. Rise of parties like UKIP, and organisations even further to the right. 20 percent VAT. Poor blamed for everything.

 

No end in sight to the cuts, with more corporate pressies like TTIP on the way, which this government will do f**k all to curtail.

 

The coalition has been a f**king disaster.

[Gemmel]

Three times tuition fee rise. Huge rise in food banks. Poor being turfed out of London. UK wide riots. Millions of hours of free labour being given to corporations. More private industry brought into the NHS. Overtime hours disappearing for part time workers. Huge rise in punitive and exploitative "zero hours" contracts, tailor-made for would-be small scale tyrants. Electoral reform kicked into the long grass. Rise of parties like UKIP, and organisations even further to the right. 20 percent VAT. Poor blamed for everything.

 

No end in sight to the cuts, with more corporate pressies like TTIP on the way, which this government will do f**k all to curtail.

 

The coalition has been a f**king disaster.

 

There are none as blind as those that refuse to see.

[hypochondriac]

i personally think they have done a good job seeing they were the minority party and even thow i did not vote for them i,m glad they got the tories who i voted for to , raising the tax earnings threshold to £10,600,soon to be £11,000, otherwise the torys on their own would have reduced the top rate tax to 40 p and i expect the tax thresshold for ordinary people would have been about £7,500 .so i see the coalition has being a successs.

 

Agree. I think the coalition has been good for the country. Yes they haven't done everything right but anyone in power would have been in a bad situation with some difficult choices to make. I think they have done pretty well.

[pap]

There are none as blind as those that refuse to see.

 

Oh aye, although it's difficult to work out what you mean while you're in Arnie mode.

 

I'm going to assume you're talking about people shouting "pass the lube" instead of "we're being fúcked!".

[Gemmel]

Oh aye, although it's difficult to work out what you mean while you're in Arnie mode.

 

I'm going to assume you're talking about people shouting "pass the lube" instead of "we're being fúcked!".

 

Lol - Great analogy (And that is not taking the ****)

 

There is no point in trying to explain, or justify my position or thoughts. Your politics are entrenched (As are many) and I doubt whatever the Tories ever did, you could ever bring yourself to support or acknowledge.

[buctootim]

[Batman]

Three times tuition fee rise. Huge rise in food banks. Poor being turfed out of London. UK wide riots. Millions of hours of free labour being given to corporations. More private industry brought into the NHS. Overtime hours disappearing for part time workers. Huge rise in punitive and exploitative "zero hours" contracts, tailor-made for would-be small scale tyrants. Electoral reform kicked into the long grass. Rise of parties like UKIP, and organisations even further to the right. 20 percent VAT. Poor blamed for everything.

 

No end in sight to the cuts, with more corporate pressies like TTIP on the way, which this government will do f**k all to curtail.

 

The coalition has been a f**king disaster.

get off the fence!!

 

Tuition fees have enabled more people to get to uni?

Not seen a food bank in my life and I live in the area of the country with the lowest average wage. But I hear about food banks a lot

UK wide riots. not for a while

Poor being turfed out of london....even the fairly rich are being turfed out of london...!!!

more private industry brought to the NHS...fair point. Labour are more guilty of this than anyone else

Heard on peinaar's politics show the other day that a wide spread poll was taken of those on these zero hour contracts. 66% wanted to keep them and preferred them

electoral reform kicked in the grass, after the country voted for no change at all. Look how the libdems are getting a pasting now for backing down on a pledge. How on earth would people cope if we had more representation...more would have to give and more would be pee'd off with that

rise parties like UKiP? why not green, SNP, Peace parties included? isn't that what we want...more representation?

no end in sight for cuts. yep, that would b for who ever gets the job this time. and probably the one after that too

 

Reckon you will vote for Peace (if they are standing in your area), respect or Green

Edited 7 April, 2015 by Batman

[Verbal]

One could argue that their supporters are being short sighted too in their clamour to punish a party that has admitted they made a mistake in making such an unconditional pledge. You'd have thought people would admire politicians that apologise and admit mistakes given how few do.

 

Short-sighted, or rationally making an alternative choice? In London, which is in any case an overwhelmingly Labour town (BJ is an anomaly), people who voted for the Lib Dems in the 2010 general election are now split 35% each between the LDs and Labour. The Tories are the choice of only 15% of ex-LD voters, and the minor parties, including UKIP, are nowhere (YouGov/Evening Standard, 31 March).

 

I'm sure you'll agree that this is excellent news. Not only do we get to be rid of coalitionists like Simon Hughes, but a good few Tories as well. With the collapse of the Labour vote north of the border, London holds the keys to No 10 and they're jangling in Ed's pocket.

 

Thanks, Lib Dems!

[pap]

Lol - Great analogy (And that is not taking the ****)

 

There is no point in trying to explain, or justify my position or thoughts. Your politics are entrenched (As are many) and I doubt whatever the Tories ever did, you could ever bring yourself to support or acknowledge.

 

Well thanks, and I have no issue with the idea of getting behind a smaller government that spends less and is more hands-off, but that's really not what we've had for the last five years. For all the Tory bluster about economic competence, this government borrowed more dosh in five years than Labour did in thirteen, spending it on the likes of ATOS, specialists in telling people they're not really disabled. Throughout, we've had complete bastards like Iain Duncan Smith wage an insidious war on the poor, while doing worse than nothing to address problems with employment. They're giving hours away for free. So having already established a free-for-all where companies get free labour, and part-timers lose overtime, the latest talk is (get this, it's beautiful) about sanctioning people that don't work enough.

 

They set people against each other, promote myths to suit their agenda and I reckon they've miscalculated the appeal of trying to get the general public to hate each other. The cuts have been crude and universal enough so that many people will know someone that has been affected by the sanctions regime.

 

As I said, I can get behind smaller government, but that's not what this lot are. They've borrowed more, inflicted a great deal of misery on some thoroughly undeserving people, have made bad policy decisions at home and abroad, and I suspect won't rest until every little piece of this island is sold off to foreign speculators. These are not small c fiscally responsible Conservatives. They're a cabal of asset strippers getting away with it because their schtick appeals to the ignorant, who always suspected the poor were all c**ts anyway.