2015 Election season ..........stuff it in here.

[SMX11]

While economic growth has returned the coalition have failed to deal with the deficit and have left the hard work for whoever is in charge this time around. There needs to be some serious cuts in state spending and unfortunately I haven't seen labour or tories detail anything of significance yet.

I am deeply concerned about another credit crunch in the next few years. We have doubled our national debt under this coalition and have nearly 0% interest rates. Not sure the same tricks will work again if things did turn for the worst.

[Guest MattP]

While economic growth has returned the coalition have failed to deal with the deficit and have left the hard work for whoever is in charge this time around. There needs to be some serious cuts in state spending and unfortunately I haven't seen labour or tories detail anything of significance yet.

I am deeply concerned about another credit crunch in the next few years. We have doubled our national debt under this coalition and have nearly 0% interest rates. Not sure the same tricks will work again if things did turn for the worst.

 

It's his biggest failure no doubt.

 

I'm glad he hasn't though in a way, we should he face years of being called 'nasty' etc just so the next government can waltz in and start spending money like it grows on trees again.

 

If ever a Government deserves to come into office needing to face cuts and facing a demand to reduce the debt and deficit it's one where Ed Balls would be the chancellor. Let's see what a Labour (or even a Labour-SNP) administration can do when they are up against it financially rather than taking over from a strong position with money to spend.

 

I hope George kept the note he got when he arrived at number 11.

[l444ry]

Not being Miliband's greatest fan by any stretch, I thought he hit a few bullseyes with his Budget response.  

[Guest MattP]

Not being Miliband's greatest fan by any stretch, I thought he hit a few bullseyes with his Budget response.  

 

Yeah I thought it was the best I'd seen him actually, far more impressive than he was an hour earlier.

 

Think the continued 'two kitchens' jibes had fired him up.

[cityfanlee23]

I thought his budget response was flawed and weak to be honest, he made a few valid points, and it's clear on some of his projections and targets Osborne overshot the mark,

But having inherited the UK in the absolute mess labour got us Into, he's done a fantastic job and has delivered on the majority of his targets, excelling in a lot more.

All milliband done was pulled apart the ones he didn't achieve, no credit given that although he didn't acheive all of his targets he significantly improved the situation that labour left us in.

Using his own parties flaws against the opposition is a poor tactic.

To put it simple he's saying

"Don't believe anything they say, they have not achieved on 5 targets they have set out, they succeeded in the other 38 but we won't mention that... It's all lies, he can't achieve any of that even though he's improved the country as a nation by an extroadinary amount"

Then proceeded to claim that he would achieve even more than the coalition, even though it was them who Ballard it up in the first place!

[leicsmac]

Conservative.

 

I'm a strong believer in running the country like a well tuned business, this is Long term.

It's clear labour supporters are using their own parties flaws against the tories.

13 years of mess, Let's give the tories 5 years to fix it. 

 

I'm not a fan of the whole "Lets get out the national credit card to make everyone happy" policy under labour, Things had to get worse before they got better, and under the current government the rate of improvement to the country financially and on many other grounds are incomparable.

 

I'm fully confident a 13 year period under the current government would put us in a hugely stronger position than that under labour, when arguably, labour had a much stronger global market. 

 

Hoping people see sense. Consistency is key here, we need to keep progressing under the current system to be able to flourish and once again start increasing national spending, If we change government now with labour being in power again, we will 100% go backwards as a nation.

 

Saying that, maybe i've been a bit hard on pearson....

 

I'm no fan of Labour (Milibland is just pure beige), but the idea of running a country like a 'business' makes me shudder. Speaks far too much of most humans being considered expendable resources, as they are to most of big business. There's other countries that are run that way - none of them are nice.

[Guest MattP]

Not being Miliband's greatest fan by any stretch, I thought he hit a few bullseyes with his Budget response.

Balls is on Sky now - just as atrocious as always.

How this man is still in a job is ten times more baffling than how Beaker in.

[cityfanlee23]

I'm no fan of Labour (Milibland is just pure beige), but the idea of running a country like a 'business' makes me shudder. Speaks far too much of most humans being considered expendable resources, as they are to most of big business. There's other countries that are run that way - none of them are nice.

 

 

Sorry, I mean "Run it like a business" In the sense that we can't give away money if we are running at a loss,

 

People seem to forget the deficit is secured by the tax payer, Which is why taxes have and cuts need to be made to pay for it,

Once we are running a surplus we can easily start spending more on the NHS and Public services, welfare and more, but people dont seem to grasp the fact that YES Labour gave more money to those services, but they were doing it at the expense of turning the entire nation into a crises.

 

Which is why the global downturn hit us harder than ever.

 

When the cuts were made to public service, the opinion polls swung dramatically, and public opinion on the tories changed overnight almost, (except the ones who could see it had to be done)

 

The first step in this tenure was to make cuts and get the deficit down, and we are achieving that, its hard on us all, but as a nation we can now grow stronger together (atleast thats how i'd like it to go)

 

 

To put it into footballing terms, Labour ran the country how Sven ran our club.

 

Nigel Pearson (The tories) came in and had to sort us out... at the expense of alot of players leaving, wage cuts, and spending less on improvements, improving things behind the scenes like infrastructure. We all accepted this had to happen, and it worked (bar this season)

 

this is what the coalition inherited, a Sven... A crumbling nation with fantastic emphasis on the people, but a disgraceful financial system.

 

The finances are being restored, and so are our quality of public services individually (just less people doing it) 

 

As a nation we need to go in this together, which we have, and we will prosper together, the current government have been a bit ruthless in their approach i'll admit, and alot of people have been drastically hurt by this, but the majority have actually been given a better infrastructure to prosper should they choose too. 

Once the books are balanced then we can invest into our services, But we simply cannot afford to keep the amount of money invested as labour did.

 

We are a small Island nation, and the funding from taxing families does not cover the bills, we need to keep this country very appealing to the huge businesses who produce more in taxes than the people do, (Hopefully they crack down on taxes as promised) 

 

Sven or Pearson.. Which approach would you prefer?

That's what I mean with regard to running it like a business, Build a decent size company, then reward the staff when financially viable! 

[l444ry]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WuO2IBFGf0&feature=youtu.be

[Guest MattP]

Do people actually think it's literally supposed to mean you get 1p off a pint in the pub?

[leicsmac]

Sorry, I mean "Run it like a business" In the sense that we can't give away money if we are running at a loss,

 

People seem to forget the deficit is secured by the tax payer, Which is why taxes have and cuts need to be made to pay for it,

Once we are running a surplus we can easily start spending more on the NHS and Public services, welfare and more, but people dont seem to grasp the fact that YES Labour gave more money to those services, but they were doing it at the expense of turning the entire nation into a crises.

 

Which is why the global downturn hit us harder than ever.

 

When the cuts were made to public service, the opinion polls swung dramatically, and public opinion on the tories changed overnight almost, (except the ones who could see it had to be done)

 

The first step in this tenure was to make cuts and get the deficit down, and we are achieving that, its hard on us all, but as a nation we can now grow stronger together (atleast thats how i'd like it to go)

 

 

To put it into footballing terms, Labour ran the country how Sven ran our club.

 

Nigel Pearson (The tories) came in and had to sort us out... at the expense of alot of players leaving, wage cuts, and spending less on improvements, improving things behind the scenes like infrastructure. We all accepted this had to happen, and it worked (bar this season)

 

this is what the coalition inherited, a Sven... A crumbling nation with fantastic emphasis on the people, but a disgraceful financial system.

 

The finances are being restored, and so are our quality of public services individually (just less people doing it) 

 

As a nation we need to go in this together, which we have, and we will prosper together, the current government have been a bit ruthless in their approach i'll admit, and alot of people have been drastically hurt by this, but the majority have actually been given a better infrastructure to prosper should they choose too. 

Once the books are balanced then we can invest into our services, But we simply cannot afford to keep the amount of money invested as labour did.

 

We are a small Island nation, and the funding from taxing families does not cover the bills, we need to keep this country very appealing to the huge businesses who produce more in taxes than the people do, (Hopefully they crack down on taxes as promised) 

 

Sven or Pearson.. Which approach would you prefer?

That's what I mean with regard to running it like a business, Build a decent size company, then reward the staff when financially viable! 

 

You make a good pragmatic comparison, and one I've heard a couple of times.

 

My counterargument is (as it has been to those that have said this to me in the past) is while I don't doubt the necessity of needing to reduce the national deficit, is that the huge businesses and rich individuals you mention as paying far more tax than those beneath them actually share far less of the tax burden than they officially 'should' in the paperwork through creative accounting, and closing some of these loopholes would yield enough to not have to go through with big cuts to public services. 

 

There are better ways to go about reducing spending or increasing the income of the nation than giving cuts to the area that this Government has applied them to.

 

And as an aside, I dislike the idea (again) that the creation and maintenance of wealth should be at the forefront of the UK's activity at all times. Money isn't much use to a sick man, and is no use at all to a dead one.

[Strokes]

You make a good pragmatic comparison, and one I've heard a couple of times.

My counterargument is (as it has been to those that have said this to me in the past) is while I don't doubt the necessity of needing to reduce the national deficit, is that the huge businesses and rich individuals you mention as paying far more tax than those beneath them actually share far less of the tax burden than they officially 'should' in the paperwork through creative accounting, and closing some of these loopholes would yield enough to not have to go through with big cuts to public services.

There are better ways to go about reducing spending or increasing the income of the nation than giving cuts to the area that this Government has applied them to.

And as an aside, I dislike the idea (again) that the creation and maintenance of wealth should be at the forefront of the UK's activity at all times. Money isn't much use to a sick man, and is no use at all to a dead one.

I keep telling that to the bitch that keeps trying to flog me life insurance.

[leicsmac]

I keep telling that to the bitch that keeps trying to flog me life insurance.

 

 

[The Railway Man]

Shit election. Tories rich boys as always, no one votes Labour anymore except teachers, immigrants and spongers. Gonna end up a right mess and probably with is paying a load more money to the Scots.

[Webbo]

You make a good pragmatic comparison, and one I've heard a couple of times.

 

My counterargument is (as it has been to those that have said this to me in the past) is while I don't doubt the necessity of needing to reduce the national deficit, is that the huge businesses and rich individuals you mention as paying far more tax than those beneath them actually share far less of the tax burden than they officially 'should' in the paperwork through creative accounting, and closing some of these loopholes would yield enough to not have to go through with big cuts to public services. 

 

There are better ways to go about reducing spending or increasing the income of the nation than giving cuts to the area that this Government has applied them to.

 

And as an aside, I dislike the idea (again) that the creation and maintenance of wealth should be at the forefront of the UK's activity at all times. Money isn't much use to a sick man, and is no use at all to a dead one.

You need money to pay the doctors and nurses and to buy the necessary drugs for that sickman.

[Mark_w]

A Labour - Liberal coalition just can't happen in my eyes.

The Dems are campaigning on the economic success of the last couple of years and telling us not to allow it to be destroyed by voting Labour - no way could they do that then prop up Balls and Miliband in a government.

 

Totally, Nick Clegg wouldn't want people to think he'd go back on his word.

[cityfanlee23]

You make a good pragmatic comparison, and one I've heard a couple of times.

 

My counterargument is (as it has been to those that have said this to me in the past) is while I don't doubt the necessity of needing to reduce the national deficit, is that the huge businesses and rich individuals you mention as paying far more tax than those beneath them actually share far less of the tax burden than they officially 'should' in the paperwork through creative accounting, and closing some of these loopholes would yield enough to not have to go through with big cuts to public services. 

 

There are better ways to go about reducing spending or increasing the income of the nation than giving cuts to the area that this Government has applied them to.

 

And as an aside, I dislike the idea (again) that the creation and maintenance of wealth should be at the forefront of the UK's activity at all times. Money isn't much use to a sick man, and is no use at all to a dead one.

 

 

And I support that completely, I'm hoping the "Google Tax" when unveiled is around the 25% mark, This will be a tax on companies moving funds to other countries to avoid taxation, Your googles, Starbucks etc... This will bring in tens of billions a year extra. 

 

To put it simply, The tories are the only ones who know how to effectively run a country stabilising finances and increasing growth and opportunity , by making the cuts to ensure we can be financially stable so we can give money to those who need it, However there are certainly some areas they've got the cuts wrong on.

[Guest MattP]

Totally, Nick Clegg wouldn't want people to think he'd go back on his word.

 

It's one thing going back on an pre election promise to a few students - this would be reneging on the last bit of credibility he has left, his role in a government that has overseen record employment and turned a country into the best economy in Western Europe.

 

He simply couldn't go into coalition with them unless it saw the removal of Ed Balls and a complete U-turn from EdMK2 regarding economic policy.

[leicsmac]

You need money to pay the doctors and nurses and to buy the necessary drugs for that sickman.

 

Hence why I said it shouldn't be at the forefront at all times, rather than any times.

 

Pragmatic economy is a good thing, but sometimes money should be spent simply because it's the right thing to do, rather than because there's going to be a better return somewhere down the line. Health being one of the big areas for that. Education could be too, but that's more of an investment in your future taxpayers (provided they don't get really rich, then they can hire a good accountant to make sure they don't pay any  )

 

And I support that completely, I'm hoping the "Google Tax" when unveiled is around the 25% mark, This will be a tax on companies moving funds to other countries to avoid taxation, Your googles, Starbucks etc... This will bring in tens of billions a year extra. 

 

To put it simply, The tories are the only ones who know how to effectively run a country stabilising finances and increasing growth and opportunity , by making the cuts to ensure we can be financially stable so we can give money to those who need it, However there are certainly some areas they've got the cuts wrong on.

 

No disagreement regarding the Google Tax - I hope it can be implemented, and more importantly, enforced strictly. 

 

However the whole 'Labour spends, and then Conservatives come in and clean up the mess' argument is one I've heard a dozen times before, and it's too cliche for my liking. Both the main parties spend money or restrict areas of spending flow - just on different ideological principles. Major had a recession on his watch in the early 90's for instance - was Labour really responsible for that?

 

Personally I have no love for either of the big parties, and their social policies are of more interest to me than their economic ones.

[The God Emperor]

While economic growth has returned the coalition have failed to deal with the deficit and have left the hard work for whoever is in charge this time around. There needs to be some serious cuts in state spending and unfortunately I haven't seen labour or tories detail anything of significance yet.

I am deeply concerned about another credit crunch in the next few years. We have doubled our national debt under this coalition and have nearly 0% interest rates. Not sure the same tricks will work again if things did turn for the worst.

I have suspicions that the recovery has had more to do with cheap credit from the BoE rather than any other action of the Conservatives. Like you say in this post, the boom will be followed by an inevitable bust when the credit cycle reaches it's conclusion.

[Alf Bentley]

We could have a situation where both the main parties need the Lib Dems and the SNP. Something that won't happen.

It could be an absolute shambles come May 8th.

 

Certainly could be an absolute shambles. Can you imagine if both main parties need the Lib Dems and the SNP - and Clegg has lost his seat in parliament? Polls suggest the former at the moment and Ashcroft's constituency poll suggested that Clegg was set to lose his Sheffield Hallam seat to Labour (though I still find that hard to believe - it's the posh(er) part of Sheffield and has never been Labour).

 

Could be that the arithmetic of seat numbers isn't known till the Friday afternoon (rural seats, N. Ireland & recounts declaring late) - and that it could take weeks to resolve what government we're going to have (multiple inter-party negotiations, cloak-and-dagger stuff etc.). If the result is close (likely), Cameron will probably hang on trying to do a deal first, but for how long if he's unsuccessful in that - and at what point would he be forced to allow Miliband to try? Could easily end up with a controversy over the role of the Queen.....or a situation where the Tories have more votes and more seats, but only Labour can cobble together a majority (probably confidence & supply, not coalition).

 

I wouldn't rule out a Lab/LD/SNP deal confidence & supply deal, though - particularly if Clegg loses his seat, resigns or gets ousted for leading his party into a massacre. It's all going to depend on small differences in seat numbers, though, isn't it?

 

Problem is I think people will still oppose electoral reform as they'll see this chaos and know that's what they'll get with PR. Only UKIP and the Greens seem to campaign for it now anyway as the Lib Dems don't seem interested now their vote has collapsed and with it probably resulting in a TORY - UKIP coalition at the minute most lefties won't entertain it.

 

 

I'm not so sure about that. Although there are divisions on the left, in recent years the shift has been in favour of electoral reform. Miliband supports it and some of its strongest opponents (Straw, Blunkett & co) are on their way out. I've supported it for decades and see it as a massively important issue.....but then I'm a weirdo! 

 

The left probably isn't mentioning it because of the AV-referendum fiasco and the awareness that there are much bigger issues for most voters (economy, tax, public services etc.). If extended chaos - or gross unfairness - resulted from this election, it could move up the agenda again. In a way, such issues are already on the agenda: there'll need to be some sort of settlement on Scottish devolution, and even Osborne is promoting English devolution through his initiatives to devolve funds to Manchester & Yorkshire. It's not something that should be rushed, though. I'd like to see some sort of cross-party constitutional consultation to address reform across the board: devolution, electoral reform, powers/budgets of councils etc. 

 

A Labour - Liberal coalition just can't happen in my eyes.

The Dems are campaigning on the economic success of the last couple of years and telling us not to allow it to be destroyed by voting Labour - no way could they do that then prop up Balls and Miliband in a government.

The only possible coalitions or CAS arrangements are Tory-Lib Dem or Labour - SNP

 

I disagree. A Lab/LD coalition probably isn't an option (nor another Con/LD or Lab/SNP coalition, for different reasons), but a Lab/LD or LAB/LD/SNP confidence & supply deal might happen, I think. The Lib Dems could easily sell it as them "being responsible in the interests of the nation", as they did with the Tory coalition. They already proclaim themselves the party that wants to "cut less than the Tories and spend less than Labour" and could sell such a deal on that basis. The devil really is going to be in the detail of the seat numbers, though....

 

 

The trouble is that, on current polling, neither will have enough for a majority.

 

Con-Lib: 310 seats

Lab-SNP: 317 seats

 

 

These seat calculations are pretty accurate as the polls stand - and suggest that no 2 parties will be able to sustain a government. But your own figures show how just a few seats could change things a lot.

 

Because Sinn Fein (5 MPs last time; probably 4-7 next time) don't take their seats, only 323 seats or thereabouts will be needed to sustain a government. A small shift in the polls (e.g. swing to Tories, decline in SNP support) could be enough to change that calculation, so that 2 parties COULD form a government. Likewise, what happens in marginal constituencies or with tactical voting could shift the figures: e.g. if the Tories take more or fewer Lib Dem seats than expected, if UKIP or Greens take votes off the main parties, thereby handing marginals to the other party. I also think that, unless it implodes during the campaign, UKIP will get at least 5-6 seats. Those seats could yet come into the equation, as could the seats of the DUP in N. Ireland (9 seats?). You'd think that the DUP would have more in common with the Tories, but the Tories stood in alliance with the Official Unionists, the DUP's main rivals, in 2010, so maybe not....or maybe neither big party would want to risk the peace process by doing a deal with them (same might apply to Labour & the SDLP (3 seats and a natural ally); even Plaid Cymru could come into the equation if one side or other had almost 323 seats....

 

Maybe there'll be a significant shift during the campaign. I thought that the budget might be the moment, but it didn't seem like a game-changer for better or worse. I presume that Osborne is hoping that a combination of the "responsible government" image and a bit of "feel-good factor" will be enough to swing it for the Tories. I was pleasantly surprised that he didn't hand out a few more pre-electoral bribes....time will tell whether or not that was the right political calculation.

 

Back to where we started....every chance of a massive, if fascinating shambles! 

[Guest MattP]

Bloody good read that Alf. You really should do some sort of political blog.

 

Agree on Clegg, think he'll hang onto that seat by the skin of his teeth, when he starts walking around Sheffield Hallam he'll pick up local support and media and with that added to a weak Labour party with a decreasing vote and a lot of the students having left the area I think he'll have enough, his friend Danny Alexander up north isn't going to be so

 

I still find it impossible to see anyone from Labour or the Tories supporting full PR, it's effectively kissing goodbye to a overall majority ever again, they might support 'reform' ' a different way' whatever but when it comes down to it from both sides it will always come down to trying to implement a system that suits themselves and their party better. I really have found the Lib Dem change from obsession with PR to pretending it now doesn't exist as an electoral format

 

Maybe it's my own mind but I just can't see how a Labour-Lib deal could work, it would leave them with less credibility than they have now. The bookmakers have it as a long price as well with a Con/Lib Dem coalition being the only one at reasonable odds - they would easily be able to point out employment figures and economic growth and justify another 5 years.

 

I'd expect a small boost in the polls for the Tories today, the Daily Mirror the only exception from the media to what is widely been viewed as a pretty decent budget.

 

Now in the words of yourself....Must Work!

[Buce]

UKIP - a breath of fresh air?

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-31976343

Nah, same trough, just different snouts..

[GaelicFox]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31983197

DEATH BY A THOUSAND CUTs .......... LOL LOL

[Rincewind]

http://www.liberal.org.uk/

 

These are the true Liberal party if anyone is interested.They would not get into bed with a Tory or Labour come to think of it.