Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 2)

First topic message reminder :

Just to prove what a liar I am, always “making things up as I go along”, I’ll add three more sources to the discussion, but no doubt that won’t convince the pig-headed amongst us:-
 
“The Beveridge Report proposed an allowance of eight shillings per week for all children (apart from for a family's first child if one parent was working), which graduated according to age. It was to be non-contributory and funded by general taxation. After some debate, the Family Allowances Bill was enacted in June 1945. The act provided for a flat rate payment funded directly from taxation. The recommended nine shillings a week was reduced to five shillings, and family allowance became a subsidy, rather than a subsistence payment as Beveridge had envisaged.”
 
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/cabinetpapers/themes/beveridge-report-child-benefit.htm
 
“Known as the Family Allowance, the 5 shillings a week payment was given to parents only for their second AND subsequent children, thus helping shore up the depleted population by encouraging more births. It continued through the post-war boom but was restructured when the economy turned down again, being reinvented as Child Benefit in the second half of the 1970s. The new payments were tax free and first-time mothers also became eligible.”
 
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/8041636/Child-Benefit-history.html
 
“In the UK, child benefit is administered by Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (HMRC). The system was first implemented in August 1946 as ‘family allowances’ under the Family Allowances Act 1945, at a rate of 5s (= £0.25) per week per child in a family, except for the eldest. This was raised from September 1952, by the Family Allowances and National Insurance Act 1952, to 8s (= £0.40), and from October 1956, by the Family Allowances Act and National Insurance Act 1956, to 8s for the second child with 10s (= £0.50) for the third and subsequent children.

It was modified in 1977, with the payments being termed ‘child benefit’ and given for the eldest child as well as the younger ones; by 1979 it was worth £4 per child per week. In 1991, the system was further altered, with a higher payment now given for the first child than for their younger siblings.”
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_benefit

Ed Miliband has came out with a few messages freezing energy prices getting rid of the Bedroom tax and repealing the 2012 NHS bill, after the Scottish referendum that is when the Labour party will start to lay out  its program for the general election in 2015.

Mostly, though, the simple messages are dishonest

...but they are believed , which is the problem for Miliband...

That may be the nature of politics - myself, I'd rather we lost, on the back of an honest message than won on the basis of a pack of lies.

I think the Labour doorstepping strategy gives a reasonable chance that enough people can be alerted to the cognitive dissonance between Tory rhetoric and the reality of life in Tory Britain.

I expect, when you talk to your mates down the Pease Pottage club you gently debunk a lot of the rhetoric and point out some basic facts - enough people doing that, there may be a real chance for a properly compassionate and accountable government. They work for us - we just need to understand that and hold them to account.

I am with you boatlady I would rather Labour won the 2015 general election on TRUTH rather than the Tory way on LIES & SPIN, although I am not to keen on Labour losing and another FIVE YEARS of a Tory gov't because I believe if that happens the last person out of the room do not to forget to turn out the lights because the UK would be DEAD except for the burial.

I hope you can understand my itching to get out there and campaign for a Labour gov't boatlady, I want a FAIR & HONEST gov't for ALL of the UK not just the Tory voting areas of the UK (there is none here in Scotland)   If the Tories get back into power in 2015 there will be NO NHS or any Welfare Service left because the Tories hate both of them always have and always will,but the thing the Tories will get rid of is the MINIMUM WAGE another thing the Tories did not agree with when the Labour gov't brought it into being, because its there friends and donors that are having to pay it and they do not like it one little bit more than likely that is the reason that Workfare was brought in on the excuse it would be giving people Work Experience LIARS

How can restocking shelves be work experience or humping heavy furniture in a charity shop (Heart Foundation six days) be work experience, or Lord Beecroft ( Tory Donor) idea "Hire & Fire at Will".   This is the things that Labour activists should be telling the people out there being just as honest to the people of the UK as Ed Miliband is doing.  

I was watching the debate in the HOC yesterday on the Finance Bill (No2) I saw and heard something I thought I would never hear from the Labour party, some tit-for-tat from Sheila Gilmore Labour MP for NE Edinburough she reminded the Tories of there 18 years in office and all of the mistakes they made.   Which the Labour party of 1997 had to clean up people waiting for one year to see a consultant then another year wait for there operation some people died waiting for there operation, this is when Tony Blair brought in the private health sector to get people there operations BEFORE they died.

The rate of Unemployment was also brought up at its worst under the Tory gov't it was around 3 Million, yesterday was also anniversary time 25 years since the Poll Tax riots one year since the bedroom tax was brought in and 16 years since the minimum wage was brought in something the Tories and there donors  would love to get rid of.  

were you cheering? - really good to hear it said out loud in parliament

I would hang on Bobby there is going to be a meeting between Ed Miliband and Len McClusky this week, and there has been threats of Unite Union backing another party if the Labour party do not find some of there core values and there original rootes.

But agreee with you the Labour party needs to get its finger out otherwise we will have another 5 years of a Tory/Ukip coalition "HEAVEN HELP US" if it does happen because the message would be th last person out switch off the LIGHTS.

If the European elections don't go well for Miliband, I suspect that the knives will be drawn. However, it is now almost certainly too late for there to be a new leader contemplated before May 2015 - it would smack of panic.

I can't see a Miliband -led government, so it may be another dose of Tory poison until May 2020.  Pass the hemlock, please...     

PH I hope we both have this one very wrong, or that Len McClusky gives Ed a really good talking too reminding him about his Parentage. At this time he would get a majority gov't and when Davy boy casts up where Labour money comes from Ed will just have to do the same adding those that made a EFFING FORTUNE who he sold OUR ROYAL MAIL too at a knock down price.

Cameron has not been reluctant to exploit perceived divisions in the Labour Party, but that's a logical smokescreen designed to conceal the large number of anti-Europe Tories who are still there even 25 years after John Major's "Bastards" experience. Every day brings confirmation in the media that the main group enjoying an improving economy is still comprised of those who contribute most to Conservative coffers. Gideon's "help" to home buyers has mainly resulted in a 9.5% average increase in house prices.

The next election is still Labour's to lose.

Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of The Party.

(Typing exercise)

Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of The Party.


Good typing exercise - and even better sentiment

boatlady wrote:Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of The Party.


Good typing exercise - and even better sentiment

It may have been a good typing exercise boatlady one that I have done many times, "NOW IS THE TIME FOR ALL GOOD MEN TO COME TO THE AID OF THE PARTY" but in todays poltics this is ringing very true, not unless the people of the UK want another 5 years of a majority Tory gov't.  

I thought you liked dogs?

I love my dogs - but I'd never allow a fox to jump over them - would make the poor little things feel put upon

  

I sense it may not be long before the quick-witted Ivan jumps upon the recalcitrant posters to get them back on topic.

( How's that for the pot calling the kettle black...?  )    

Wednesday:  Royal Mail sell-off costs taxpayer Millions.
Thursday:  Tory Minister apologises for swindling expenses.

I'd suggest the Labour Party is perfectly positioned to form the next government.

Response to my message to Ed Miliband.

"Robert,

Thank you for getting in touch with me about the gagging law. I'm sorry it's taken me a while to get back to you.

To hear from thousands of you was inspiring. It galvanised my belief that when people can stand up like you did and hold politicians to account our democracy is alive and well. And I have no intention of allowing the Tories and Lib Dems to silence you.

So I want you to be the first to know: a Labour government will repeal David Cameron's gagging law.
Ed Miliband."
Power to the People.

I had notification of this in my e-mail from Angela Eagle bobby, thank you for sharing your letter from Ed could you give me the address you used just in case I feel the urge to point out a few home truths to the Labour party. 

Hiya bobby I will have to catch him the next time he tweets on twitter, I hope you will agree that it is not only Ed the Labour MPs can do so much more than what they are doing at the moment with the exception of a few Caroline Flint John Mann & the MP for Blaydon they are always standing up for Labour voters.

But as you have said Bobby its good that he is listening to people, I wonder if he seen or heard the poll on the number of people that want to see the gas & electric back in public hands it was 68%

I don’t think there is any doubt that it’s now Labour policy to scrap the gagging law:-
 
http://labourlist.org/2014/04/confirmed-labour-promise-to-scrap-the-gagging-law/
 
This is the email which I (and presumably Redflag) received from Angela Eagle:-
 
Earlier this year, the Tories passed the so-called gagging law: an act that limits your right to campaign on the issues you care about, and curbs charities' and campaigners' ability to speak out against government policy. I believe strongly that this law is bad for our democracy, and restricts freedom of speech in our country. So I want you to be the first to know this: a Labour government will repeal David Cameron's gagging law.

We have been clear from the start that we oppose this gag on charities and campaigners, which was introduced with little consultation. If Labour wins the next election, we will remove it from the statute book. In its place we will legislate for real reform of lobbying, and we will consult with charities and campaigners on the reforms we need to both ensure transparency and protect freedom of speech. Our right to campaign on issues we care about must be protected, and this gagging law needs to be repealed.

Best wishes,
Angela

And we know that politicians never mislead us, don't we...?     

We know that Labour politicians are a lot more likely to keep their promises than Tories like Cameron:-

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/1961522.stm

Interesting - wonder if anyone has carried out a similar study on the current government's promises - although as I recall mostly they were couched in deliberately vague terms so it would be hard to quantify.

I guess we might want to compare the number of policy u-turns - I think the Tories definitely win there - Blair had a convincing majority and was usually able to stick to his guns

Like IVAN I would believe the Labour prty are more likely to keep there promises to the voters than the Tories or Fib-Dems, if you just think about the promises they made just before the 2010 general election and then work out just how many they kept I think the figure would be around NOUGHT.

I just hope the voters in the UK take a good hard look at all the Tory & Fib-Dem broken promises before they put there X on there ballot paper in May 2015.  

boatlady wrote:-
mostly they were couched in deliberately vague terms so it would be hard to quantify

Hmm.... "no top-down reorganisation of the NHS" and "no cuts to front line services" sound fairly specific. So do "no plans to increase VAT", "no cuts to Sure Start", "we will deliver the greenest government ever", "3,000 more midwives" and "we will raise inheritance tax threshold to £1 million".
 
And then there was "we will clean up politics"......

 

Another one bites the dust
Another one bites the dust
And another one gone, and another one gone
Another one bites the dust
Hey, I'm gonna get you too
Another one bites the dust

Queen

I have a personal message for Ms Miller should she ever be brave enough to cast her eyes over this board :

Good riddance you greedy and shameless woman - please don't ever darken our doorsteps again.

She's only a symptom, though - the cause remains unaffected.
There needs to be a root and branch review of how parliament is organised and how MP's are reimbursed

I wouldn't disagree with that. There seems far too much scope for MPs to suck huge quantities of cash out of the public purse- and too many excuses available to those who get caught with their fingers too deeply in the till.

In times of austerity for so many, there can be no justification for wantonly ladling money into the pockets of elected representatives who are only too keen to tell us all about the need for 'restraint' and savings.

Miller is the tip of an ugly iceberg. Take them all to Tyburn...!

Both yourself PH and boatlady have hit the nail on the head, but it not just expenses that need cleaned up the entire political scene needs to be scrubbed with CARBOLIC SOAP and disinfectant to make sure there is no more SCROUNGING off the taxpayers by the greedy politicians  

Candid commentary

http://ind.pn/1qo6zsi pic.twitter.com/NsVcZzKxKy

One supposes that the 'plastic bag' was taken into the tree by a large gust of unwelcome wind - which, coincidentally, also usefully describes Mr Bailey...