Clegg has managed to surface again!

First topic message reminder :

Today, after what seems like a couple of months in hiding, Clegg has crawled out from his bunker and made a 'bold' announcement on youth unemployment.....

He has 'promised' places on what could be called YTS v2011 but is being called 'Youth Contract', in which £1 Billion will be spent (Given to employers) over the next 3 years to provide upto 6 months work experience to the 16 to 24 year old's.........

Clegg said that the youth contract scheme would create work experience opportunities for 410,000 young people, as well as wage subsidies of £2,275 for employers to hire 160,000 young people. The subsidy, which lasts for six months, are equivalent to half the youth minimum wage.

The Confederation of British Industries (CBI) has been lobbying for the creation of a £1,500 credit for firms that take on 16-24-year old. CBI director-general John Cridland said on Friday that the youth contract "will encourage firms to take a gamble on a young inexperienced person and help tackle the scourge of youth unemployment."
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2011/11/25/youth-contract-how-is-it-funded_n_1112727.html?ref=uk

Lord Sugar has already said he can see some employers take the young on for six months then get rid of them and take on new ones.........as happened in the 1980's Torys Youth Training Scheme.....the only difference between then and now is it was for only 3 month then........and 6 month now........

The other thing about this is that Clegg has not said where the money is going to come from???????

bobby wrote:What, do you think their joint motto's should be "how low can you go?"

Bobby that is the only Motto the both of them could have LOL

bobby wrote:What, do you think their joint motto's should be "how low can you go?"

'So wide, you can't get round him, so low you can't get under him...'

Clegg's relevance lay in showing the British elector how dangerous it can be to "not bother".

oftenwrong wrote:Clegg's relevance lay in showing the British elector how dangerous it can be to "not bother".

I hope the pledge his party gave him as leader is as safe as the one he gave the Uni students.

tlttf wrote:So if the government sets up a scheme to help kids, they've become irresponsible, if they don't they're wankers. Can't imagine where your twisted politics come from.

Well, the point, obviously, is that the current regime doesn't give a twopenny whatsit for anyone but the very rich and are merely posturing. Surely you must have noticed?

tlttf wrote:So if the government sets up a scheme to help kids, they've become irresponsible, if they don't they're wankers. Can't imagine where your twisted politics come from.

 
No tittf you at one wrong they set something up which leaves it OPEN to abuse by employers just like Thatchers YOP scheme did in the 1980s, if they they really meant to do something for the young unemployed, they would make sure the young could not be exploited by unscrupulous employers.

Clegg not the only unpleasant thing to surface recently:

Testicle-eating fish, the Pacu, found in Paris with fears it could be coming to the UK

bobby wrote:That's all well and good OW, but this fish will miss out on 1 target group,  as members of the Tory led Coalition don't have any Balls not even an Ed.

Thanks for that bobby the truth at last, I knew Cameron had no Balls and Clegg has No Backbone do you think we could find a fish that eats backbones just so Cleggy would be safe  

Nick Clegg's scapegoating of immigrants is his most unforgiveable Tory collaboration yet
 
Extracts from an article by Owen Jones:-
 
"What a miserable charlatan Nick Clegg is. There was the whole thing of inspiring hundreds of thousands of young people who were alienated from politics – and then going on to treble the tuition fees that the Lib Dems pledged to abolish. Many of those young people will never trust a politician again, leaving bitterness as their first taste of democracy. Then there was campaigning against Tory proposals for harsh first-year cuts – before making biting austerity a condition of a coalition with Labour in the post-election stitch-up. There was a Lib Dem-led poster campaign against a Tory VAT 'tax bombshell' – which the party then voted for.

But it is the Lib Dem capitulation on immigration that really sums up what a wretched waste of political space this party is. In the 2010 election campaign, Clegg spoke of an amnesty for illegal immigrants, a suggestion endorsed by Boris Johnson. Given they are unlikely to be deported, why not get them to pay tax and fully integrate instead?

But Clegg has now swung to indulge the Tories’ ever-more hysterical campaign on immigration, backing a crusade devised by the Australian spinmeister Lynton Crosby. The Tories know they are unable to win the next election on the basis of hope, of actually lifting the living standards of an ever-poorer electorate. So, instead, they will fight on the basis of fear and despair. Blame the immigrant, rather than the bankers, the tax-dodgers, the low-paying bosses and the politicians who have plunged this country into this mess. It is clever, it is cynical and it is grim."
 
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/nick-cleggs-scapegoating-of-immigrants-is-his-most-unforgiveable-tory-collaboration-yet-8967617.html

I'm constantly impressed when Members of Parliament manage to refer to each other as "The Honourable Gentleman" without either vomiting or rolling on the floor with laughter.

Clearly, they inhabit a parallel universe.

oftenwrong wrote:I'm constantly impressed when Members of Parliament manage to refer to each other as "The Honourable Gentleman" without either vomiting or rolling on the floor with laughter.

I think OW rolling on the floor laughing would suit that situatiuon to a tea.    

We all saw on Wednesday exactly what the Bastard Clegg gave up his principles, you know the principles we all thought he had up until he turned his back on his parties values and the Nation as a whole and became a Tory. His main regret was I'm sure is that he has only taken centre stage a couple of times at PMQ's in the three and a half years his soul has been in hock to Satan.
Also did you notice during the autumn statement how Clegg said his usual hear, hear to anything Gideon Osborne said and agreed to everything.
I must say that on the whole I was totally disgusted by the behaviour by those who are supposed to be leading us. When Osborne made his statement there was some mutterings of disapproval from the Labour benches, yet when the speaker Burkow asked for silence in the main he got it, yet when Ed Balls got up to give his response to Osborne the entire Coalition started to heckle him, the speaker of the house called for silence once then let Ed Balls continue with a continual stream of shouting from the Government benches and allowed this to continue till the end of his response. I thought the speaker of the house had to be impartial and to date on the whole Berkow has been just that, but on Thursday he surely nailed his flag to Herr Cameron's mast showing just where his loyalties really lie. The Tories must be really afraid if something.

bobby wrote: The Tories must be really afraid if something.

 
They have got something to be afraid of Bobby the electorate, because when the Labour party win the next general election in May 2015 they will be able to show us all the underhanded things they did on the excuse of getting the defecit down.  
 
As for that SPINELESS LYING BACKSTUD Clegg he will get his from the people of Hallam Sheffield and they deserve to have their day with him, after all he LIED through his back teeth to them so they would vote for him, Clegg thought he was safe telling all those porkies he knew his party would NOT get into power so he thought he could say what he wanted with no comeback on him he is about to find out differently when he goes back to the people of Sheffield looking for their vote in the 2015 general election.

For about 80 years, the Liberal Party enjoyed the luxury of never having a role in Parliament beyond criticising the current administration. Now they find themselves in Government, but in 17 months time they can go back to doing the only thing they've ever been any good at - kibitzing.

They will also go back to the HOC with a lot less seats than they have at the moment, they have 57 and I doubt if they will have enough to form even a Lib-Dem coalition OW.:yeahthat:

I thought people might like to see the following taken from a history of the liberal party
 
"The Liberal Party came close to extinction in the early 1950s. It could muster barely more than 100 candidates in the 1951 and 1955 elections and held four of its six seats only as a result of electoral pacts or informal local arrangements with the Conservatives. Even in rural west Wales, the party's last stronghold, the Liberals were in retreat and there were only a handful of seats held by other parties which the Liberals had any chance of winning. The party's local government base had been decimated and there were fewer than 300 Liberal councillors in the whole country. The party was hit by further defections in the early 1950s, including those of prominent figures such as Megan Lloyd George and Dingle Foot who went on to become Labour MPs. The party was rent with ideological disputes between doctrinal loyalty to free trade and supporters of assistance to British agriculture, and developed just one significant new policy after the war, that of co-ownership in industry. The outlook was bleak. "
 
IMHO, Nick Clegg could well end up with taking them back to the position of the early 50s and 60s again. I will never vote for them again and neither will my wife. It is a fact of life that we tend to mingle and talk to like minded people and I do not know one who would vote for Clegg.
 
 
 
[EDIT]
This piece came from www.liberalhistory.org.uk/ and the final part makes amusing reading.
"The recovery of the Liberal Party, and its successors, from the period after the Second World War, when it nearly disappeared altogether, is one of the most remarkable stories in British politics. The Liberal Democrats' next challenge is to cast off their third-party status and make a genuine bid for government. "
 
It was written in 2007... how prophetic

At least on this bellatori we can agree completely, in the eyes of Cleggs core voters he has already taken them back to the 50s and 60s and do not be so hard on yourself as Clegg fooled around 5 Million voters  so you and your wife where not the only ones he managed to pull the wool over their eyes even Labour voters voted L/D in May 2010. :yeahthat:

The Quisling Lib-Dems forming the current Coalition may have damaged their Party's electoral prospects forever.

In many traditionally Tory constituencies, resistors habitually voted Liberal as a safe protest, but may never again dare to do that.

I think it's cattled them for a long time anyway. It's a shame in a way as there is definitely a need for a 'mainstream' alternative to the two main parties in England.

Yes I've noticed that too. Ed Milliband will be not only fighting the Tories, but the likes of a biased media too.

LWS wrote:Yes I've noticed that too. Ed Milliband will be not only fighting the Tories, but the likes of a biased media too.

Labour activists and Labour members can help out here, I am on twitter with Ivan and we do our best to get the truth out onto the w.w.w which is a good form of media and goes a lot further than right wing crap that the BBC pumps out. :yeahthat: 

Nick Clegg should be advised not to go out when in freezing tempratures as it seems he has a massive set of Brass Balls.......

Ed Balls is no longer a sticking point in Lib-Lab coalition[size=12]

The Liberal Democrats would accept Ed Balls in a Lib-Lab coalition cabinet at the next election, despite deep misgivings inside Nick Clegg's party about the Shadow Chancellor's ability to win the economic argument, party sources have told The Independent on Sunday.

Mr Balls had been seen as a "deal-breaker" in coalition negotiations between Ed Miliband and Mr Clegg if the 2015 election were to result in a hung parliament, but the Lib Dem leader is understood to want "policies not personalities" to decide any second coalition deal.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ed-balls-is-no-longer-a-sticking-point-in-liblab-coalition-9028627.html

By letting it be known that, despite his chequered record on the economy, Mr Balls does not represent a "red line", it is clear that Mr Clegg does not want to risk banning him from a Lib-Lab coalition cabinet in case his own position is vetoed. Many Labour figures see Mr Clegg as too close to David Cameron and could urge Mr Miliband to demand fresh faces. But a senior Lib Dem source said: "It cannot be decided on personalities, we have to stick to policy."

Now I have to think hard about which policies the lib-dems have managed to get through during their time in the current government....Yet I can think of lots which they have tossed aside.....

"Yet I can think of lots which they have tossed aside....."

Not forgetting how many Evil Tory policies they signed off in favour of the Tory Parties ideology. Is the two faced bastard trying to tell us he is expecting to be a part of a Labour Coalition after the 2015 Election?
Watch your Back Cameron, you've taught the Boy too well

If Cleggy thinks that Ed Miliband will have anything to do with him in regard to a coalition gov't in 2015 he better dream on, because he is TAINTED GOODS after HELPING the Tories bring in their VILE NASTY cuts for the low paid sick & disabled while giving tax breaks to the rich & wealthy.   I even doubt if he will be leader of the Lib-Dems before 2015 general election or if he will have enough MPs to go into coalition with any party after the results of the 2015 general election. 

Examine Nick Clegg's pronouncements over the past several days and you will recognise some fine Socialist sentiment. He may just be getting ready to jump ship.

Could Cameron's Army of Occupation carry on as a minority government?

We do indeed live in interesting times.

oftenwrong wrote:Examine Nick Clegg's pronouncements over the past several days and you will recognise some fine Socialist sentiment.  He may just be getting ready to jump ship.

More likely he is trying to put distance between them as part of their recovery   strategy before the next election. Were they to abandon ship before the next election they would simply be admitting they were uselessly incompetent and their judgement was total shite for getting in to bed with the Tories in the first place. If anything could guarantee a worse performance at the next election then jumping ship should do it  

" they would simply be admitting they were uselessly incompetent and their judgement was total shite "

Well it's a start.

Apparently 'hard-man' Nick Clegg has taken up kick-boxing.

I would be only too pleased to introduce him to my impending son-in-law if he would like to test his mettle in his newly-found hobby...    

oftenwrong wrote:Examine Nick Clegg's pronouncements over the past several days and you will recognise some fine Socialist sentiment.  He may just be getting ready to jump ship.

Could Cameron's Army of Occupation carry on as a minority government?

We do indeed live in interesting times.

I think Clegg is too much of a SHIT-BAG to jump ship he will cling on until May 2015, what I have heard from him in the few days is he is desperate to be the King Maker again in 2015 so he better hope and keep his fingers crossed the people of Hallam Sheffield vote him back into the HOC. :yeahthat: 

Here we have Nick Clegg estimating how many people will vote for the Lib Dems in 2015:-


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BUSPmeeCYAAmZtQ.jpg

ow said: Could Cameron's Army of Occupation carry on as a minority government?

I believe he would try, the problems for him would arise when trying to pass anything through Parliament as he would not only have his permanent opposition Labour, but would find a new lot of enemy's the Lib-Dems in their attempt to distance themselves for all of the Tory policies they allowed the Tories to put through Parliament.

Wouldn't he have to try? By that I mean the legislation brought in by the coalition meant that Parliamentary terms are now fixed at 5 years.

Would the coalition agreement not come into disrepute Dan Fante ? If the Lib/Dems grew a backbone and walked out of the coalition but in the past that has always been the bigger side of the coalition party that has done the walking. 

Redflag wrote:Would the coalition agreement not come into disrepute Dan Fante ? If the Lib/Dems grew a backbone and walked out of the coalition but in the past that has always been the bigger side of the coalition party that has done the walking. 

I thought it was made law, rather than just being a coalition agreement. Although I'm not sure if there's some caveats regarding what happens if a government no longer has a workable majority.

The Fixed Term Parliaments Act of 2011 allows for an election before the end of the five-year term:-
- if a motion of no confidence is passed and no alternative government is found within fourteen days or,
- if a motion for an early general election is agreed either by at least two-thirds of the House of Commons or without division.

"The Fixed Term Parliaments Act of 2011 allows for an election before the end of the five-year term:- .... if a motion for an early general election is agreed .... without division."

I don't think I'll hold my breath for that one, Ivan. It's showing a red-flag to the gravy-train.