Blair vs Maggy

Who did the worse job for GREAT BRITAIN?

 

We don't know the cost of Blairs tenure yet, but I suspect in the next 2 years we'll have a clue.

 

Why only 2 years?

Maggy is still being blamed for all the shitty things with this country.

 

To even think of comparing these two shows you're ........

either too young to remember the bitch Thatcher, or, you've had a drink, you putz.

 

numpty alert

witkilton

 

Britain became that good after Twatcher........

he now lives in Norway.

Could you not have taken the others who promised to piss off following the election of a Labour Government? e.g. Paul Daniels, Lenny Henry and others

 

Got to agree

I loathe politics and politicians tbh, they're all exactly the same and I try not to get involved.

But even to this day I can't stand that Barsteward woman. The mere mention of her name makes my skin crawl.

Families were torn apart and people took their own lives down here as a direct result of her actions.

The sooner she meets her maker in Hades the better as far as I'm concerned - and I hope she endures excruciating suffering in the meantime.

 

No

It means he pissed off out of the country!

 

I wasn't referring to how long people will remember the Blair years, more that people will find out at what cost to the UK in the longer term.

And this isn't just about world economics, it about all the cutbacks to various public services, the pension raids and how he's had to pay for increased spending.

 

RE: Got to agree

you never said a truer word

 

I'm talking about the country

Not your little world!

 

Shhhhhh

(wicked)

 

ooh handbags

My point was and still is and will remain so indefinitely regardless of whether you regard me as a drunk, too young or to thick to agree with your wisdom, is that you can only really judge how good a leader of a Country is over the long term. The long term impact of the decisions made. We have a lot to learn about Blairs years.

If you have a quicker way of forecasting the economic stability of this Country for 2010 and beyond and where the taxes might be. I'd love to hear it.

 

I am in no way a fun of 'new' labour and can't forgive Blair for Iraq but one thing you can't criticise Blair and Brown for is public spending. They have spent more money than any other administration on public services and education especially has enjoyed a marked improvement. The legacy of Blair's tenure has been that the welfare state is now a cross party issue where in the the past it has only been a concern of Labour. Blair changed the political landscape to one in which the public sector will be treated with the repsect it deserves from all parties

 

and where pray tell has that money come from? Reduced gold reserves, private pension funds, hidden taxes, larger debt, reduced defenced costs, selling off assets?

Unless there have been dramatic improvements, which personally I haven't seen? I think the fact they have spent more money measures nothing at all, apart from incompetence or inflation (everything costs more, so naturally you spend more) They've stripped public spending but increased taxes as far I'm aware, to throw money at problems that they haven't sorted. People haven't been better off, they've only thought they were thanks to credit and the natural global economy telling them so.

 

Without getting in to a political debate which is never winnable on grounds of ideology, public spending has increased and all areas have improved. the issue is its so long since the Tories were in power that people can't remember who bad it was. Education has been a huge success, the NHS less so BUT it is still considerably better than under Thatcher/Major who provided no funding (remember waiting times pre-1997??). Admittedly I don't agree with where lots of this money has come from because it HASN'T come from increased taxation as it should have done under a Labour government. What they have done though is protect our economy in the short term from a global recession and unfortunately politics is all about expediency - short term success to ensure you retain power at the next election

 

Education has been a huge success... opinion not a fact evidence please. Lists about lists about performance targets and league tables. Not teaching</p>

Taxes not increased .... you are kidding right ?</p>

Protect our economy... cheap credit, increasing house prices allowing people to max up on credit cards and then use the equity in their property to pay off and then max up the cards again. Built on foundations of straw</p>

Students.... fees and then top up fees </p>

Human rights act... need i say any more</p>

Tax credit fiasco</p>

Spin spin spin.... tax payers are now 'customers' collector of taxes ' income receivables managers' </p>

BTW I'm not a tory</p>

 

Agree with a lot of those points, especially the attack on civil liberties that they presided over and tuition fees. But education is in a different league to when they took over - average class sizes have reduced, nearly all classrooms have interactive white boards, teachers get supported time out of the classroom (PPA) to better plan lessons and grades consequently have gone up (which is nothing to do with exams getting easier).

Taxation has largely stayed the same as it was pre-Labour. My main issue is that taxation has been targeted at all instead of the wealthy. It is indicative of New Labour that they were unprepared to stand up for inheritance tax and a sad indictment of waht the party have become. AND you can't have more spending on public services without higher taxes. New Labour annoy me for so many reasons but as a society across all economic cross-sections and demographics are far better off today than in 1996

 

I have to say at least you can debate without calling people a lovely person and the like. Class sizes have had to be reduced because they made them huge to start with, by ruling out 'special schools and expulsion', they were only reacting to a problem they created. There is less control in the classroom whether or not it has fewer kids in it, which has an obvious affect on teaching. The people you need to ask as to whether education is improving is those that are hiring them and sadly I think you'll find it's a resounding no.

They're extending compulsory education to 18, because people are practically unemployable at 16 and it will hide unemployment figures dramatically. Another ill conceived idea taken from the states.

 

Although it was before my time admittedly my understanding was that inclusion was introduced under the Tories?

in education in general both my parents, brother-in-law, sister and girlfriend are teachers and represent a variety of political views and in my parents case have taught through a variety of administrations. Their view is generally that the government controlled factors of education are better now than they ever have been. They have more resources, smaller classes then ever and more time to plan and prepare. MPs still meddle too much but my dad put it to me like this - The Tories put no money in and meddled, Labour have put the money in and meddled and the dream is a government that put money in and don't meddle