View From The Top Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 Okay they are as left as they have been in my lifetime..... Does that suffice? They're not even close to being "left". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torres Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 Greased up for the proverbial barrel, aren't ya, love? Wat r these commets mean lol Zero hours contracts which stipulate that the employee cannot work for anyone else even if they currently have zero hours offered should be outlawed. Zero hours contracts have a place but only an utter fool thinks that they're not being abused by some employers. Even our local tory MP is flagging it up up around here when some of the large distribution firms have effectively got rid of all contracted staff and had them back on zero hours contracts. Then you stop the abuse, you don't gum up the labour market by outlawing zero hour contracts entirely. Some unscrupulous employers will use anything they can to exploit their workers and have done since the beginning of time - if they're not doing it by sharp practices in relation to zero hour contracts, they'll do it in another way.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solentstars Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 If an ex socialist labour supporter like Martin Freeman has gone to them, then they have steered themselves far left. Not to mention that, they are once again completely beholden to the unions.i think you lost the plot in la la land...your not dunne are you by any chance making a come back on this board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 Inheritance tax threshold has been frozen for a number of years dragging more and more people into it. When labour left office the richest 2.6%of estates paid it . If its not reformed it is estimated by the obr that 11.6% of estates will be liable by 2019. If Labour think its morally right that the richest 11% of estates attract IHT, why did they leave the rate it kicks in at such a high level? Under labour a lot of these rich barstards got away without paying any death duty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 Okay they are as left as they have been in my lifetime..... Does that suffice? Ed isnt as left as Kinnock and arguably not as left as Brown - so unless you are five years old, or certainly less than 22, no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Special K Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 If an ex socialist labour supporter like Martin Freeman has gone to them, then they have steered themselves far left. Not to mention that, they are once again completely beholden to the unions. They are so middle ground, they can't quite make up their mind if they are "small c" Conservatives or Liberal Democrats. Whether or not anyone thinks they are "large C's", depends on your point of view i guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 (edited) Wat r these commets mean lol Then you stop the abuse, you don't gum up the labour market by outlawing zero hour contracts entirely. Some unscrupulous employers will use anything they can to exploit their workers and have done since the beginning of time - if they're not doing it by sharp practices in relation to zero hour contracts, they'll do it in another way.... I wouldn't outlaw them entirely but the pendulum has swung too far the other way & the current government has done nothing to solve it. Like most things the solution lays somewhere in the middle. &, BTW, it isn't Labour policy to ban all zero hours contracts. Edited 13 April, 2015 by View From The Top Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 your not dunne are you by any chance making a come back on this board. Just what I was thinking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Bognor Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 Ed isnt as left as Kinnock and arguably not as inept as Brown - so unless you are five years old, or certainly less than 22, no. I am sure he said left and not inept, although that is a valid point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 If an ex socialist labour supporter like Martin Freeman has gone to them,... . Eric Pickles used to be a communist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solentstars Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 You think the Labour Party is any different? http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/generalelection/labour-open-to-the-charge-of-hypocrisy-after-failing-to-divulge-hedge-fund-managers-donation-10124387.html Considering how long it's been since the Labour Party actually represented the working class in this country I think there's a very small chance of that.agree that all died when blair and brown and his cronies followed thatchers policy's on the free market,hence why i supported cameron last election has he was more to the left of them,which says it all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solentstars Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 Inheritance tax threshold has been frozen for a number of years dragging more and more people into it. When labour left office the richest 2.6%of estates paid it . If its not reformed it is estimated by the obr that 11.6% of estates will be liable by 2019. If Labour think its morally right that the richest 11% of estates attract IHT, why did they leave the rate it kicks in at such a high level? Under labour a lot of these rich barstards got away without paying any death duty. i agree i think it need reforming and needs looking at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hutch Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 I am sure he said left and not inept, although that is a valid point I'm also sure he was referring to the Party, not just it's leader. But let's not get in the way of a good bit of internet bullying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 If an ex socialist labour supporter like Martin Freeman has gone to them, then they have steered themselves far left. Not to mention that, they are once again completely beholden to the unions. I'm all for bashing the reds, but no way you could call Labour 'Socialist'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Bognor Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 But let's not get in the way of a good bit of internet bullying. And there's me thinking that lefties were supposed to be caring sharing types... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nolan Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 Thankfully the Tories are 6 points ahead in the latest ICM poll so I hopefully won't have to worry anyway. And also watching the TUSC on the Daily politics, I get the point now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 Thankfully the Tories are 6 points ahead in the latest ICM poll so I hopefully won't have to worry anyway. And also watching the TUSC on the Daily politics, I get the point now. Although, of course, the YouGov poll gives Labour a lead of 3 points and the BBC Poll of Polls has them dead even http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/poll-tracker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Bognor Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 Although, of course, the YouGov poll gives Labour a lead of 3 points and the BBC Poll of Polls has them dead even http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/poll-tracker Don't forget, there is usually a swing to the incumbant as an election approches. However, what I find fascinating about this election is many of the local battles, with national consequences. Take Nick Clegg's seat, which is looking very vulnerable to Labour. If he loses his seat, then it could scupper a libdem tory coalition (as I think Nick was the main driver in this). So we have Labour going hell for leather to try to unseat Nick, making a tory-lib colation more difficult to achieve. Meanwhile the tories are going soft on Sheffield in the hope that Nick can hang on, should they need to form a coalition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 &, BTW, it isn't Labour policy to ban all zero hours contracts. Really? Have I read this wrong? Labour has pledged to increase the minimum wage to over £8 an hour and to ban zero-hours contracts in its election manifesto. In its election manifesto unveiled today the party says it wants to “build an economy that works for working people”. The manifesto says: “Over five million people are in low-paid jobs, earning less than the Living Wage. There are 1.8 million zero-hours contracts. 1.3 million are working part-time because they cannot get a full-time job. Half of all those in poverty live in working households. 900,000 people, many of them in work, used food banks last year.” One way Labour hopes to improve the economy for workers is by raising the minimum wage to more than £8 an hour by October 2019. It also promised to ban zero-hours contracts and promote the Living Wage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nolan Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 The labour manifesto pledges to ban "exploitative zero hours contracts". They've got enough wriggle room to find non exploitative ones and not ban then all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 Really? Have I read this wrong? All exploitive zero hours contracts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintbletch Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 All I know is that Nolan is a helmet. Anyway, I don't know if I'm in a particularly charitable mood towards Labour, but I'm sensing a turning of the tide in the last several days. I'm not sure that it will make that much of a difference to the result, but the sense I get is that Labour is being perceived more credibly. This is both in terms of leadership and fiscal responsibility. The more the public sees of Milliband, the less negatively he is perceived would be my guess. Given where he was starting from, that isn't too difficult. I do recognise however that this might be confirmation bias, and I expect others to put me right. I should immediately say that I trust none of the suits that want our votes, and that I understand that whatever any of them says right now, it will likely change once they get into power/coalition. So my comments are more about the election strategy, than they are idealogical. I watched Miliband's launch of the Labour manifesto this morning. I actually found myself warm to him - enough to put out of my mind his geekiness, his voice and the fact that as his lips were moving, he was likely lying. The more I see of him outside of PMQs, the more I get a sense that he's got something about him. Given that he isn't really speaking to me, or Tory voters, but rather a small swathe of marginal / floating voters in Scotland as well as down south, I think the tone was about right. Against the context of the Conservative pledge to somehow find the money to meet the £8B/year NHS shortfall, he actually seemed to appear to be credibly talking about fiscal prudence. Putting the potentially inflammatory idealogical content to one side, I felt that the way it was communicated was very well thought through. The idea that he claimed that everything was costed was positive, and contrasts against the conservative tactics of seemingly matching other parties' spending commitments on the promise of a growing economy. The idea of this "Budget Responsibility Lock" is clever as a communication device. If he draws the Tories into talking about this, he will point out that they have no such commitment. It's also something that can be made to appear tangible to voters. A lock, monitored by an 'independent' third party, is a uniquely clever way to address their credibility issues. In questioning him, the press pushed him on the fact that he had not set a timescale for the deficit to be cleared, his response again was 'clever'. He said that putting artificial time limits on these things is counter-productive. He suggested that Osborne had lost a lot of credibility after continuing to fail to meet his targets. From another angle, I could quite easily see that as weak, but with my new-found charity, it seemed smart. Overall, it was pretty low-key, but had the whiff of credibility about it. I guess things could change tomorrow, given a good launch from the Conservatives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 Eric Pickles used to be a communist. Didn't like the equality of food rationing policy, apparently. The rest is history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nolan Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 The thing with Labour budget lock is that it refers to the "current budget". Which is a whole lot different from the overall budget. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 Tony Livesey v Chris Leslie on 5live. Great radio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 Cameron gets serenaded by a busker. "F**k off back to Eton, with all your Eton chums" http://www.itv.com/news/2015-04-13/busker-playing-ukulele-tells-david-cameron-f-off-back-to-eton-with-all-your-eton-chums/ Check out Cameron's little attack pooch. Lovely stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 Rereading outlooks for 2015 and the clear impression is that the 'markets' have far less to fear from a Labour victory than the uncertainty caused by UKIP doing well. Today's announcements by Miliband are right on cue. To quote Morgan Stanley from the turn of the year: We see the outcome of the May 7 general election as less predictable than usual, given the main parties running neck and neck, the collapse in LibDem support and the surge in support for non-traditional parties (UKIP, SNP, Greens). In the end, despite the surge in support for non-traditional parties, we think the first-past-the-post system will deliver a working majority for the established parties. These parties (Con/Lab/Lib) have a commitment to tackling the still wide deficit, albeit to different endpoints and using a different mix of measures. Given growing impatience with austerity, we think that any incoming government would stick to the tough consolidation (over 2% of GDP by end-FY16) currently baked into the baseline, and front-load the fiscal adjustment somewhat more, with a view to completing more of the adjustment in the first half of the parliament. So much for the bedwetting on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 Robert Peston's article explains thing well http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32291251 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintbletch Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 Good move by the Conservatives on inheritance tax. Save people planning ahead and signing property etc over 7 years before they die. As others have said, and for many of the reasons already given, I don't have a massive problem per se with changing this. I do have a problem with the timing, and the apparent inequity of exactly who makes up the "we" in the phrase "we're all in it together". With an as-yet unspecified £12B of cuts still to found come from the welfare bill, and with a budget deficit of ~£90B and a national debt approaching £1.5T, cutting a tax that benefits ~4% of the population (a figure grabbed from Twitter that may or may not be accurate) seems to be at best fiscally imprudent, and at worst plainly unfair. When we're running a budget surplus, or we've got the national debt under control, or at the very least we've significantly reduced our interest payments, then there is a time to discuss something like this. Putting this forward now as cheap political theatre, doesn't suggest the Conservatives are being fiscally prudent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperMikey Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 Cameron gets serenaded by a busker. "F**k off back to Eton, with all your Eton chums" http://www.itv.com/news/2015-04-13/busker-playing-ukulele-tells-david-cameron-f-off-back-to-eton-with-all-your-eton-chums/ Check out Cameron's little attack pooch. Lovely stuff. Nothing like intimidating the electorate, eh? No need for him to be right up in that guy's face, he's a middle-aged man in a windbreaker playing the ukukele ffs... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintbletch Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 (edited) The thing with Labour budget lock is that it refers to the "current budget". Which is a whole lot different from the overall budget. I don't understand the significance Nolan, and I guess that was the point I was making. It gets people discussing the fact that Labour is trying to be prudent - even if you might have a different view of what prudent is, we all still end up saying that Labour is demonstrating its determination to be seen as prudent. It's a smart communication device. Edited 13 April, 2015 by saintbletch terrible typo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nolan Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 It's widely accepted that the Lib Dems vetoed any inheritance tax change in the last parliament. In fact Danny Alexander said he did just that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hockey_saint Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 I don't understand why being "left" is a bad thing anyway? Certainly, if you think Labour are currently left. You are VERY VERY wrong. Don't forget, the left created the NHS, fought for basic working rights, standards of living and the right not to be walked over by some rich oink who feels the need to sack a couple of "civilians" or "plebs" or whatever the aristocracy calls the man on the street. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nolan Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 I don't understand the significance Nolan, and I guess that was the point I was making. It gets people discussing the fact that Labour is trying to be prudent - even if you might have a different view of what prudent is, we all still end up saying that Labour is demonstrating its determination to be seen as prudent. It's a smart communication device. The current budget is the overall budget excluding capital spending on investment. Ie they can spend lots and still pretend they are balancing the books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 The current budget is the overall budget excluding capital spending on investment. Ie they can spend lots and still pretend they are balancing the books. Labour has a very strange definition of investment. According to them almost all government spending is 'investment'. Health, education... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 All exploitive zero hours contracts. Ah! The missing word in both of those statements. How are they going to define that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 13 April, 2015 Author Share Posted 13 April, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 Labour has a very strange definition of investment. According to them almost all government spending is 'investment'. Health, education... You mean the well-established definitions and distinctions found in the National Accounts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 Nothing like intimidating the electorate, eh? No need for him to be right up in that guy's face, he's a middle-aged man in a windbreaker playing the ukukele ffs... You seem to have overlooked the foul and abusive language. Pap just loves that in public places, provided that it is aimed at the Tories. Intimidating the electorate? It wasn't as if the minder threw a punch at the bloke like Prescott did, is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 Ah! The missing word in both of those statements. How are they going to define that? They set it out in broad terms I believe. Try google. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wade Garrett Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 That screws the employers though because then you get numerous people trying it on as well as wasting the employers time. Just two cases from lawyers we have had in the last four years but they strung us along for months asking for numerous little pieces of information before deciding it wasn't worth pursuing (and then another case they pursued it and lost.) how is that fair? That's the price of a free society. You can't have it both ways. Anyway, if they dropped 1 case and lost the other I don't see the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nolan Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 They set it out in broad terms I believe. Try google. " Labour will ban exploitative zero-hours contracts. Those who work regular hours for more than 12 weeks will have a right to a regular contract." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 " Labour will ban exploitative zero-hours contracts. Those who work regular hours for more than 12 weeks will have a right to a regular contract." Seems fair enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torres Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 " Labour will ban exploitative zero-hours contracts. Those who work regular hours for more than 12 weeks will have a right to a regular contract." Cue employers making sure that none of their employees on zero hour contracts get "regular hours for more than 12 weeks", thus making things worse, not better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 That's the price of a free society. You can't have it both ways. Anyway, if they dropped 1 case and lost the other I don't see the problem. Apart from the numerous hours of mine and my employees time wasted replying to these things which I could have spent running my business. I'm not alone with this either, loads of small companies must have lost thousands of hours because of dodgy lawyers trying it on. That's not to say I'm against tribunals, just that's it's transparent and obvious when they are trying it on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hutch Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 I don't understand why being "left" is a bad thing anyway? Certainly, if you think Labour are currently left. You are VERY VERY wrong. Don't forget, the left created the NHS, fought for basic working rights, standards of living and the right not to be walked over by some rich oink who feels the need to sack a couple of "civilians" or "plebs" or whatever the aristocracy calls the man on the street. Can I just make sure I've got this right. It's only the 1970's history that doesn't exist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Saint Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 " Labour will ban exploitative zero-hours contracts. Those who work regular hours for more than 12 weeks will have a right to a regular contract." They will be like the agency workers regs which gave temps certain rights after 12 wks. They thought this would help the people at the unskilled end of the jobs market. What happened in reality was no temp ever got to keep their job longer than twelve weeks. this will be the same. great sound bite, but it will an adverse affect on the jobs of those that the government are trying to help. if they are going to do it, do it from day one otherwise companies will find a way around it usually at the workers expense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hockey_saint Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 Can I just make sure I've got this right. It's only the 1970's history that doesn't exist? The 1970's exist. But you think we should wipe out all the good work because of an over-zealous bunch. Or would you prefer the friendly societies, the tolpuddle martyrs and all those who fought to give us the freedoms we enjoy now were so easily forgotten because a few people think the '70's were their ultimate conclusion? No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nolan Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 http://www.kingsfund.org.uk/press/press-releases/our-response-labour-party-election-manifesto Responding to the publication of the Labour Party’s election manifesto, Chris Ham, Chief Executive of The King’s Fund, said: ‘Labour’s manifesto outlines a positive vision for a 21st century health and care system based on much closer integration of health and social care. It also marks a decisive break with the policies of the recent past in its rejection of markets and competition. ‘It is hard to see how Labour’s plans to dismantle the Health and Social Care Act could be achieved without disruptive structural changes to the NHS. Proposals to bring services and budgets together at a local level are welcome, although we question whether health and wellbeing boards could play the leadership role envisaged. ‘The big question is about funding, with Labour now the only one of the three main parties not to have pledged to find the £8 billion a year in additional funding called for in the NHS five year forward view. Given this is the minimum requirement if the NHS is to continue to meet patient needs and maintain standards of care, this leaves a significant gap at the heart of its plans. Labour is also the only one of the main parties not to have endorsed the programme for change outlined in the Forward View. ‘Pledges to improve the quality of home care and implement the cap on the costs of social care first proposed by the Dilnot Commission are welcome. However, although a growing social care crisis is identified as one of the biggest challenges facing the next government, there is no commitment to increase social care funding.’ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 13 April, 2015 Share Posted 13 April, 2015 Labour has a very strange definition of investment. According to them almost all government spending is 'investment'. Health, education... They have a very strange definition of reducing the deficit as well . Mind you so do the other two establishment parties as well. They all " reduce" it as a % of GDP rather than as a cash amount . In effect they are relying on growth to " shrink" the deficit, but won't admit it. I'm thinking of trying it with Mrs Duck to stop her moaning about the amount I spend down the pub. 5 years ago I spent about £200 quid a month on ale, now I spend about £220. However I've had a few pay rises since, so I'm actually spending a smaller % of our household income on drink. Now anybody can see that my drinks bill has gone up £20 and if I tried to claim that I was spending less, everybody would call me a liar. Yet politicians keep telling this lie and everybody seems to just accept it. Frasier Nelson pointed out in the Spectator that had a company advertised its goods is such a misleading way they'd be prosecuted . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now