By Mathew Hulbert / @mathewhulbert
The 2010 General Election campaign began, in essence if not literally, with a bang today. Everyone, it seems, has an opinion about the Queen's Speech, most of them negative. But regardless of the content of the Royal Address itself, the Commons debate that followed it between the main party leaders shows us what we can expect much, much more of over the next six months or so.
If I were David Cameron tonight I'd be quite a bit more worried than I was at the start of the day. Why? Because Gordon Brown seemed to have found a renewed sense of fight.
In my former job as a Broadcast Journalist with a group of radio stations in the Midlands I had the honour of interviewing the Prime Minister when he came to Tamworth ahead of the local and European elections in June. And, truth be told, though it was exciting to do so, Mr Brown on that day looked really, really tired and almost as if the fight was a chore for him. But today's was his best parliamentary performance in a long time, possibly since he became Prime Minister and Labour Party Leader.
People wrongly say that the main political parties are too similar these days, that the only question really debated is who will manage things better. But, though there's certainly an element of that, there are fundamental differences between Labour and the Conservatives. The Tories, for example, talk a good game on poverty, but all too often don't back that up with concrete ideas about how they'd end it or vote against measures which would reduce it. Or their answer is to rely solely on the voluntary sector.
Now, the voluntary sector certainly has its place, but that is not to take over from what the State should be doing. The best line of Brown's today, which Cameron and George Osbourne tried to laugh along with but which you could tell had struck home, was one attacking a Tory tax plan which he said would only help a few people, all of whom live in swanky Kensington and Chelsea. The question remains: do the Conservatives really care about people in poverty or is it just lip service?
Nick Clegg had more justification in asking about poverty and is probably right to say that instead of this fairly sparse Queen's Speech we should have had an emergency programme with radical proposals to transform Parliament and help restore faith in our politicians.
So, is this Queen's Speech a saving grace for this Government? Not by a long chalk. But the debate it kicks off is an essential one and a general election victory remains up for the taking.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
StumbleUpon
as well as the Bank debt, we have monthly bills to pay for the 8 million people sitting at home and doing nothing,a bill for failure. The Private Sector is being raped so we now have the disgusting spectacle of Public Sector workers earning more than those in the Private Sector (and this does not include Pension entitlements)
If 8 million people need to be looked after, after 12 years of boom, how many more will need to live off the State when our Goverment is promising to slash the debt by 50% over the next 4 years and the Public Sector is decimated?
What about the small businesses like mine that have done everything they can to protect thier employees jobs but will now have to lay off more after Xmas as the market place is dead, and I am sure there are many others, so we can expect a big surge in unemployment again in the new year.
If by some miracle Mr Brown wins the next Election, then he will have to deal with the Public Sector and based on his utter incompetence will end up endebting us all further in a vain attempt to placate the Unions and his own Party, the result 98% tax rates such as the last Labour Goverment!!!
In your dreams Matt!
"Paid for by borrowing, how can you talk about figures whe theres old people needing help. If we can bail out banks to save your savings, we can borrow for the elderly, who are far more precious."
Borrowing? I thought there was a bill that would enshrine into law that the deficit be halved. Borrowning more will increase the deficit. The only way to pay for this is by cutting elsewhere.
The Cuts, cuts, cuts message is just inhuman. You can see Osborne slavering whenever the word "cuts" is mentioned.
So Labour are not going to contest 60 seats as they are all likely to fall to the Tories, and in the seats he wishes to defend hes allowing scum to stand. Will Labour even be able to come 2nd is the real question? 3rd place looks more likely, especially when you consider the following....
The next Pre Budget report, this will be truly horrifying
The possibility of Blair as President
More Quantitive easing, say another 100 billion
No prosecutions of the MPs that we want dealt with
100 more soldiers dying based on daily rates right now
80 more days for Brown and his chronies to continue treating us like idiots.
80 days for the EU to prove that all of Browns assurances were rubbish, if an EU Tax bill is put in place before the next election.
So much too look forward too!I despair!
Nothing about MP's expenses in the promised list of Bills - is this just a deliberate insult to the voters, or sheer bloody stupidity on behalf of the leadership who think the issue has been forgotten?
Sorry, this is making me really angry. It seems Brown is on a mission to deliberately lose the next election, and to ensure Labour is out of power for many years. The ineptitude is breathtaking.
Yes it's odd that, he's done it dozens of times. Big fanfare, big announcement, a bit of TORIEZEATKITTEHS thrown in for good measure and then all forgotten by bedtime.
I entirely agree with the rest of your post as well Sue, Labour are sleep walking to defeat under Gordon Brown and all because no-one has the guts to stand up and be counted.
My advice to you all is to get around the Internet, see what other people are saying. The word frightening comes to mind and that is not about what the Tories will do, that is terrifying.
.... Back to the frightening Guido leads with why Labour did not put the Kelly recommendations into practice and 6 Labour top brass who are in for it. Are there any Tories in similar positions and if so who are they?
http://order-order.com/2009/11/19/why-did-labour-want-to-avoid-expenses-issue
No?
ok.
Elliot Morley
David Chaytor
Jim Devine
Baroness Uddin
Lord Clarke of Hampstead
Lord Hanningfield.
"The criticisms of the care Bill were echoed by health economists. Niall Dickson, of the King’s Fund, said: “These latest proposals seem to have been hastily put together and appear to cut across the options set out in the Government’s own Green Paper.” "
Or how about:
"The Prime Minister’s plan to offer free care at home to the elderly, outlined yesterday in the last Queen’s Speech before the general election, was compared to “an admiral firing an Exocet into his own flagship”." Labour peer unatributed
Maybe Lord's Livsey and Warner can get Gordon Brown is Labour's saviour folk to see sense:
“I’m not looking forward to the night of the next general election but, if the result goes as I expect, one of the consolations will be that one of the most irresponsible acts to be put forward by a prime minister in the recent history of this country will be swept away with his government,” he added. (Livsey)
and Warner:
"...described the care Bill as totally misjudged. “There has been no proper impact assessment, and no data to show how this would work,” he said. “There’s a big question mark as to whether there’s even actually a Bill ready.” "
Gordon, Mandelson et al are leading Labour to the political equivalent of the Jamestown Mass Suicide.
Weird.
No I would like a leader of the Labour party that keeps its promises ( yes the lisbon treaty is the constituion) , As to your idea of Eu membership , Maybe every 5 years if the acounts are signed off , We can not go into the next election with tory policys (welfare) .
ricki
Under Blair there wasn't much in the manifesto but it was all delivered, including the first laws protecting strikers. I don't see the point of voting on Lisbon, which wasn't a Constitution for Europe although it may have included things that were in the constitutional Treaty, although a regular vote on staying in the EU (say every 20 years) might be a good idea.
The last one i remember was to vote for a vote on the treaty from europe , I am just feel if we carry on the way we are going ,making promises we cant keep the voters will /are seeing that , we need someone to lead the party not follow the headlines.
ricki
The reason i suggested Kate Hoey is because i have heard her in the house of commons and on politics programs , She comes across as a MP that cares and can work with others (Mayor Johnson) , and talks laugnage that voters understand .
ricki
The profits in the good years brought a lot of taxes in and Fred Goodwin was knighted for services to banking by "new" Labour
ricki
The reason i sugested Kate Hoey is because she would appeal to the wider voters ( I know she joined Mayor Johnson team ) And to be honest give a honest face to the party .
Your other post might be right , I lost faith With Mr Blair after Iraq , I gave Mr Brown a chance , But he turned out as bad , spin spin spin , He has spent to much time trying to out tory the torys and sucking upto the bankers .
ricki
It stinks of gutter politics , The type i hoped had gone with Mr blair , I wish all the MPS would grow up and treat us like adults , I hope the PLP persude mr brown to stand aside and let a Labour MP lead the party ( the first since Mr Smith ), My choice as i said before is Kate Hoey , She could reach out to voters and reinstall Labour values to the Labour party.
ricki
So why are the leadership bringing a bill to do it?
ricki
When will the Bill be enacted? Is it pie in the sky?
If they do it where will the money come from? The banks?
Otherwise I have no idea, but such a measure would be aweful if implimented. Not sure how they can.
We must all suffer now though, a price in blood for the banks the MP's love so much. It has cost so many their jobs and businesses and now we must pay even more, and more than just money...
The leadership have promised to halve the deficit in 4 years, thats 100 billion a year , How will we (labour) do it ?
ricki
The danger is that a Cameron government will slash public services as an excuse to pay off the debt, and then six months before the following election, they'll sell off the bank shares at not quite the best rate, but it will provide money for a big one-off tax cut.
Labour will not cut public spending as drastically as the Tories. But the bulk of the £100bn a year you quote will be from selling off the bank shares, again, not at the right time as far as the share price goes, but they will be able to meet the target.
We can't it is nonesense.
First of all one parliment cant bind another , If the torys put in there manifesto to get rid of the bill they could , Alas i know the "new Labour " leadership only care for bankers and power , The choice of the next goverment will be decided by the voters , If President Blair gets his post in Europe i think that will seal the deal with Mr Cameron , I wish we had adult politcs instead of what we see .
ricki
What we saw today was Mr Brown positioning his party for opposition. He knows he is going to lose so he is trying to bring in legislation to force the next Tory Gov't to reduce the debt he has put upon us by 50% over 4 years. Mr Brown and his Chancellor are the only two people in this country who actually know how much debt there really is. They know that to deliver a 50% cut in the defecit can only be achieved by the dismantling of Public services which will cause major strikes and damage to the country, but hopefully the Tories will get all the blame and Labour will regain power in 5 years.
The problem with this strategy is it shows that Mr Brown thinks its okay for the Country to be wrecked and brought to its knees, just to punish the Tories.
Now I am not going to stand up for Mr Cameron but its not his fault if Labour lose the next election, it is the failure of Blair, Brown, Mandleson and all the rest of the liars and spivs that have dragged Labour into the mire.
I Listened to the debate in the commons , How is the leadership going cut 100billion a year to meet the halve the deficit in 4 years? what will be cut ? We are already going to attack the disabled ( welfare reforms ) , Mr Brown is living in cloud cuokoo land , He has promised more pledges and says he will cut the deficit by halve in four years , Is he for real?
ricki