BBC BLOGS - Have Your Say
« Previous | Main | Next »

What's your reaction to the coalition policy deal?

11:25 UK time, Thursday, 20 May 2010

The full deal between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats has been published, offering in the words of Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg: "Changes that will make your life better." What do you think?

Prime Minister David Cameron said policies had been ditched by both sides - but that the resulting deal was "greater than the sum of both manifestos" and had the potential to provide "a great reforming government." The agreement includes freezing council tax in England for a year, a new "Freedom Bill," a banking levy, "free schools" with greater independence over the curriculum and more choice for patients over which GP they see.

What do you think of the coalition's policies? Does it have the potential to "make your life better?" Or have too many compromises been made?

Policy by policy: the coalition government's plans

Link to the full agreement

This debate is now closed. Thank you for your comments.

Comments

Page 1 of 5

  • Comment number 1.

    Very disappointed that the pro-terrorist/criminal charter a.k.a the 'Human rights act' foisted on us by the extremist left wing, isn't going to be repealed. I guess that's the LibDem influence in the coalition that prevented the Conservatives from going ahead and scrapping the monstrosity.

    We cannot continue like this with Islamists using our democracy and the lunatic left wing laws against us. We cannot allow a situation whereby people who come to the UK with the intention of killing as many people as possible, are winning their cases using our tax money to stay here.


    Other than that, the rest of the policies look reasonable enough, especially undoing the damage to civil liberties by the previous totalitarian socialist nutters.

  • Comment number 2.

    Worrying:

    Longer rail franchises - why are we encouraging inept private operaters to take even longer to fix our poor performing rail system?

    Stop central government funding for new fixed speed cameras - surely road saftey is a central government responsibility?

    Cancel the third runway at Heathrow and refuse permission for additional runways at Gatwick and Stansted - goodbye British business and tourism industry, hello Schipol and Frankfurt airports

    Specific agreement that a Liberal Democrat spokesperson will speak against the Planning Statement, but that Liberal Democrat MPs will abstain and clarity that this will not be regarded as an issue of confidence. - Are you a cohesive government or not? This is a slippery way of maintaining this coalition, and again questionable democracy

    Encourage councils to pay people to recycle - a carrot rather than a stick? Can the country afford this?

  • Comment number 3.

    A deal made between supplicants (Lib-Dems) and the school prefects. Most Lib Dem policies have been watered or scrapped while all the Daily Mail style prejudices have received genuflection! Free schools in this perverse language means schools run by sectarian groups, probably creationists and those who regret the demise of the Grammar school (remember, schools which used to get the top 5% of schoolchildren through exams written for them). Again, language is the first victim of Cameronism!

  • Comment number 4.

    The Lib-Dems have completely capitulated to the Tories. There's barely a shred of Lib-Dem policy left in this. I hope they enjoy their puppet's share of power while it lasts, because I reckon their grass-roots members will disappear in droves at the next election.

  • Comment number 5.

    The prospect of five years of a Tory government (in all but name) does not fill me with hope that my life will get better. Quite the reverse.

  • Comment number 6.

    I'm still liking the coalition.

    Like anyone with half a brain I realised when i voted Lib Dem that being in a coalition was the best result the lib dems could hope for, and i always preferred the 'coalition with the Tories' outcome to forming a coalition with labour.

    This Government can hopefully give us the pragmatic & non-populist policies of Thatcher era conservatism, tempered by the social concience and reforming agenda of the Lib Dems.

    If there was a single party which embodied those values they'd probably have had my vote years ago

  • Comment number 7.

    Not much in the policies, some tinkering and populist changes but no really in-depth changes.

    Couple caught my eye; as a health & safety officer:

    First:
    ----- ------ ------
    Amend health and safety laws to ensure "common sense policing".
    ----- ------ ------
    ALL HEALTH & SAFETY LAWS ARE BASED ON COMMON SENSE.

    WITH HEALTH & SAFETY ITS ALWAYS THE LAWYERS WHO DO THE STUPID THINGS.

    You have to stop people being able to go to court and claim injury, however remote. It is these claims, that cost so much money to fight, that cause things to be banned, and police not to do something. It is not the fault of Health & Safety Legislation. (Look on the HSE website at hse.gov.uk/mythofthemonth)

    Second:
    ----- ------ ------
    Re-assess all claimants of Incapacity Benefit for readiness to work - those deemed capable of work to be moved on to Jobseeker's Allowance
    ----- ------ ------
    Six years ago whilst working for a charity helping the long-term unemloyed back into work I had to deal with two people, both registered disabled, who were deemed 'fit for work'. Both only had one arm, and were told to look for work. Can anyone tell me how society is improved by people who shouldn't be made to work haveing to go to extreem lengths to prove this?

    These policies are straight from the front page of the daily mail/sun.

    So there you have it government by right-wing tabloids.

  • Comment number 8.

    There seem to be a lot of commitments to 'make law' in this manifesto.

    I for one still contend that the party that came third, and lost seats should not be allowed to dictate policy. The Tories won the most seats and should therefore have formed a minority government, if the Lib Dems were happy to get into bed, then they would equally have been happy to support the gov't from opposition benches.

    I'm fairly sure that the millions of people who voted either blue or yellow will be disjointed with the merge in policies, some for the better, some not so good.

    I suppose it is a case of 'wait and see', although I'm not holding out much hope for any positive move forward in the next 6 months.

    And please please please - can Mr Cameron, get a back bone and stop doing everything with Mr Clegg. It is clearly obvious to me now that Mr Clegg is a power mad individual who does not care for the Public Interest, but rather his own.

  • Comment number 9.

    Disappointed at the implication that we will be joining the Euro at a later date. Pleased it isn't in this governmental sitting.

    Alsodisappointedat the support for an expanding EU.

  • Comment number 10.

    So the government intends to increase the number of faith indoctrination schools. Disgusting.

  • Comment number 11.

    1. At 11:58am on 20 May 2010, SystemF wrote:
    Very disappointed that the pro-terrorist/criminal charter a.k.a the 'Human rights act' foisted on us by the extremist left wing,

    ----

    You consistantly refer to the previous Labour govern as being 'extreeme left wing'.

    Just wondering how you'd describe Stalin, Mao or Polpott?

    Or even Hugo Chavez? he's a alot more left wing than anybody in the last government, without, to my knowledge, indulging in mass murder.

    Or has your hyperbole left you with nowhere to go.

  • Comment number 12.

    Too many daily mail readers are throwing their ratle out of the pram over the human rights act.

    The fault line in the act is quite clear. If a person flees their homeland because they are threatened with torture or death, then even if they break our laws we cannot return them.

    This should have been spelt out clearly when the act was introduced.

    I, honestly do not know how to resolve it, I do not believe we can return people to their own country to recieve torture or death.

    Think about the young British man who is being forced back to the USA because he hacked into the CIA/military computors. Do you think his human rights are being served?

  • Comment number 13.

    I'm really optimistic about this government. There's a refreshing attitude and a willingness to actually do things for the country, rather than for political points scoring.

    The Tory right whingers need to shut up though. There wasn't a Conservative majority, compromises needed to be made in order to get a deal that would a) work and b) last. This could have meant a watering down of policies across the board, but instead we have the strongest combinations of ideas from both parties in the coalition and, as a "liberal Conservative", I'm delighted with the outcome.

    Let's just hope the government can get cracking and other world events (and tribalist fools) don't throw a spanner in the works.

  • Comment number 14.

    System f you seem to think that the human rights don't protect you either. If you were arrested for a crime but never found guilty of it (or innocent according to our laws) would you expect to be deported for said offence? There is nothing extremist left wing about defining and protecting the basic rights of a human being. It would be extremely right wing to deport people with no conviction on the basis of suspicion. You might be called a fascist.

  • Comment number 15.

    20 May 2010, SystemF wrote:
    "Very disappointed that the pro-terrorist/criminal charter a.k.a the 'Human rights act' foisted on us by the extremist left wing, isn't going to be repealed. I guess that's the LibDem influence in the coalition that prevented the Conservatives from going ahead and scrapping the monstrosity.

    We cannot continue like this with Islamists using our democracy and the lunatic left wing laws against us. We cannot allow a situation whereby people who come to the UK with the intention of killing as many people as possible, are winning their cases using our tax money to stay here."




    Good to see the person who's afraid to use his/her real name is top of the list. Pro-Israeli and willing to reveal some extremist views to the right of Attila, he is short on logic and facts. The Human rights Act was signed in 1950 to make sure we no longer have to tolerate, for example, an Adolf Hitler or Mussolini.
    Check out Thailand on your TV mate. That's what you get without hunam rights.
    For normal people, here's the actual wording on civil liberties from the coalition:

    "Introduce a Freedom Bill. Scrap ID cards, the National Identity register and the ContactPoint database, and halt the next generation of biometric passports. Outlaw finger-printing of children at school without parental permission. Extend scope of Freedom of Information Act. More protections for DNA database. Protect trial by jury and restore rights to non-violent protest. Review libel laws to protect freedom of speech. Safeguards against misuse of anti-terrorism legislation. Regulate CCTV. Mechanism to prevent the proliferation of "unnecessary" new criminal offences. Establish commission to look at creating British Bill of Rights, incorporating and building on obligations under European Convention on Human Rights."



    Where is the pro-terrorist/ criminal bit in there systemF?

  • Comment number 16.

    The Tory manifesto pledge to "protect" benefits for disabled pensioners, Attendance Allowance and Disability Allowance, are gone - instead they simply say they will protect "key" benefits like winter fuel payment, bus passes etc. In other words, they are going to protect those benefits that are paid to the highest number of pensioner voters rather than the ones that are paid to the ones most in actual need. They talk about extending direct payments and personal budgets - both of which are savagely means tested and with Social Services constantly looking over you shoulder to check you're spending the money as they see fit.

    Both the LibDems and Tories made a huge fuss over Labour's social care Green Paper which suggested the removal of AA and DLA to means tested social services budgets. Now they propose to do exactly the same thing - they won't admit it, except by omission.

    If AA and DLA are lost, then so is Carer Allowance. I hope the ConDems are prepared to meet the £87bn costs when unpaid carers lose their pittance and are forced into part-time work. Whilst still doing the caring, of course.

  • Comment number 17.

    Just remember that the cons are in the driving seat, expect the upper classes to be better off with more opportunities to increase there own wealth and standing. The middle class to be taxed high and some barriers put in place to prevent them breaking in to the upper class but generally not that badly effected.

    That leaves the poor who will find they to have to pay out more but will really notice the reduction in services which are most heavily used by the less well off. NHS dentists will be gone(not that there perfect), the nhs will not improve and this will be used as a reason to down size it with a view to its removal of free service.

    The class system will be reinforced with many barriers to moving up but likely a few safety nets for anyone moving down.

    our largest trading partner the EU will be pushed away causing us to become isolated reinforcing our downward spiral and being generally disastrous for our say in international matters.

    Hope the Liberals will be able to temper some of these actions but likely they will find they have no voice and will be heavily punished in the next election. This will of course leave us with two party's and much less democracy. If these two party's then join we end up with a one party system. even if they don't its still a revolving door dictatorship with no attempts to even appear democratic

  • Comment number 18.

    7. At 12:14pm on 20 May 2010, JohnH wrote:

    Six years ago whilst working for a charity helping the long-term unemloyed back into work I had to deal with two people, both registered disabled, who were deemed 'fit for work'. Both only had one arm, and were told to look for work. Can anyone tell me how society is improved by people who shouldn't be made to work haveing to go to extreem lengths to prove this?"

    So, are you saying that people with only one arm are useless?

    How does that attitude support the disabled?

  • Comment number 19.

    "Strong and stable government"

    It's very odd that Mr Cameron, with the benefit of the best education that money can buy, cannot spot the obvious contradiction in his claim to be leading a "strong government", given that he is being forced by the Liberal Democrats to give up on many of his manifesto commitments.

    The judgement of whether or not the coalition government is stable can only be made once it has endured for a long period of time. I'm sure that John Major felt his government would be stable immediately after the 1992 general election. We will see.

  • Comment number 20.

    More faith schools? There should be none!

  • Comment number 21.

    Groovy so far, could anybody go wrong repealing the worst of Labours efforts over the last 13 years?

  • Comment number 22.

    A stich up by the unknowing and the uncaring

  • Comment number 23.

    Big Deal! The only people who will benefit are those who want the freedom to terrorise neighbourhoods in towns, and wildlife in the countryside.

  • Comment number 24.

    The Flower Pot Men was a children’s tale of two little men made of flower pots who lived at the bottom of an English suburban garden. A narrator would say "Which if any of those two flower pot men do you trust, is it Bill or is it Ben?", but there was always a puppet master pulling the strings and we never saw who that was. The final punch-line was, "and I think the house needs to know something about this! Don't you?".

  • Comment number 25.

    2. At 12:04pm on 20 May 2010, RedandYellowandGreennotBlue wrote:

    Stop central government funding for new fixed speed cameras - surely road saftey is a central government responsibility?"

    No, road safety is the responsibility of drivers.

    Anyway, speed cameras have a very dubious history of improving road safety. Much data suggests they actually decrease safety.

    "Cancel the third runway at Heathrow and refuse permission for additional runways at Gatwick and Stansted - goodbye British business and tourism industry, hello Schipol and Frankfurt airports"

    Don't worry about it, no planes will be able to fly for the next 20 years anyway because of Eyjafjallajokull. Fuel prices are going up as well, so even if they can fly, there'll be less of them - 2 runways should be fine.

    "Specific agreement that a Liberal Democrat spokesperson will speak against the Planning Statement, but that Liberal Democrat MPs will abstain and clarity that this will not be regarded as an issue of confidence. - Are you a cohesive government or not?"

    They are a coalition, so there will naturally be things they disagree on. Agreeing to disagree is a mature step.

    "Encourage councils to pay people to recycle - a carrot rather than a stick? Can the country afford this?"

    Can any government please anyone?

  • Comment number 26.

    just reading through the coalition policy document - all sounds like a sales pitch to convince people they've done the right thing. What id doesnt say is how they are going to do all of this ?

  • Comment number 27.

    Am fuming at what is happening, when there was a hung parliament myself like many other’s expected other election within a year, then what happens they make back room deals and then get into power and change the law so they can stay in for 5 years, now the signs are there that they want to start to privatise the post office and give it to the private sector and one else seeing the same things what Maggie Thatcher started to do, I feel like going down to London to start a riot and march on parliament and kick them all out and then put normal people in the jobs, not corrupt politicians who only look out for their own parties and there slefs and then they say “it’s for the people” am fuming at what is happening with all this.

  • Comment number 28.

    Pleased to see the human rights charter is staying. The Tories spoke against it in opposition, but that was just because they identified votes in it. In reality they know that law abiding citizens are protected by the charter, and the headline cases of protected criminals and terrorists represent a tiny insignificant factor.

    I am upset to see HIPS being suspended. This saved buyers considerable conveyancing fees, and actually had the potential to raise the value of buyer's offers. Housing sales need regulation, just like banks. Too much abuse of the system is out there. The people who didn't like HIPS were estate agents and solicitors who made megabucks from failed sales.

    What some people gain in tax reform they will lose in VAT.

    I like the sound of education reforms, if they really give power back to educationalists instead of target setters. The 'nanny state' national curriculum set up by Thatcher was far too prescriptive, detailed and onerous. Labour attempted to refocus on the 3 Rs, but really they should have left it to the experts. ie teachers. Putting professionals back in charge of hospitals sounds good. The Tories removed matron and Labour restored her / him. This government needs to go further.

    The Big Society sounds just fine. This is relabelled Liberal policy from the 1960s and Labour policy too, but it will need state support and money to set up and sustain. I hope the Sure Start and extended schools initiatives are not reversed. These are essential for the Big Society.

    Freezing council tax for a year sounds great at first, until you realise that cuts will pay for it. Council workers, schools and police, watch out. By the way council tax rises this year were very low indeed, due to Labour's good management.

    Business initiatives sound good, except demand will slump as VAT rises. Bye Bye loads of businesses as recession number 2 hits us.

    Green initiatives sound promising. We must build our green technology and manufacture of green equipment. This is key to a green economy.

    Good to see more control of banks. Measures do not go far enough to undo Tory deregulation.

  • Comment number 29.

    There are lots of very welcome changes in this agreement. Let's hope that they are implemented.

    they are not scrapping Speed cameras where they are needed for road safety. They are stopping new speed cameras being introduced solely as cash cows.

    The roll-back of the framework of the totalitarian surveillance state is particularly welcome.

    Making it easier for SMEs to bid for government contracts is also well overdue.

  • Comment number 30.

    Which of these policies are different to Labour?

    Part privatisation of the Post Office - rejected by Mandelson because there was probably not enough investor capital around. Are the Conservatives hoping to start selling off state assets cheap again? Without the revenue stream of North Sea Oil, unemployment is not going to be a viable policy to manage the economy. Hence the draconian ramp up of criminalising the unemployed.

    End all existing welfare-to-work schemes, creating single new programme. The problem with this policy is existing welfare-to-work programs are undoubtably the most draconian they have been since the creation of the Welfare State. Arrive ten minutes late to sign on and suffer an administrative penalty: which means benefits stopped for two weeks. The Appeal process can take months and usually result in rejection. Administrative penalties result in other benefits - council tax, housing benefit - ending. The nett effect is to push people off benefits. A new welfare-to-work scheme could only be more draconian. Is this because the perception of the Unemployed is that they are a criminal underclass?

    All that appears to be happening is the extension of that process to other kinds of claimants: "Ensure Job Seeker's Allowance claimants aged under 25 referred to new programme within six months", nothing new there but it does allow the Government to make spending cuts in six months by simply kicking younger, more vulnerable, claimants out of the benefits system just at the time of the promised "spending review". "Re-assess all claimants of Incapacity Benefit for readiness to work - those deemed capable of work to be moved on to Jobseeker's Allowance." Another way of reducing the benefits bill in time for a round of cuts. Which will show the cuts work while, at the same time, targetting the hate figures of the Conservative Right.

    Many people on the full range of benefits are there as an outcome of previous employment. Employers not giving a damn about health and safety or simply "not requiring" employees. The "actively seeking work" clause needs to be extended to employers so that they are "actively creating employment". Criminalising people for things beyond their control just creates a criminal underclass. Labour have succeeded in making benefits unworkable and now the Conservatives are implementing a strategy of abolition.

    Hopefully, it will save enough money for the banks to be bailed out again.

    The "Work for Yourself scheme, to help start-up businesses with loans and advice from mentors" is a cynical attempt to lie to the electorate. Simply test the whole, existing process, by going into Jobcentreplus and asking for the service to be provided. Most staff have no idea about anything other than operating the open prison system that the Benefits System has become. Being treated like a criminal but told to start your own business is not the way to start up businesses. Unless the intention is to start criminally inept businesses. The role model being the banks.


  • Comment number 31.

    perhaps an idea in a way to measure a government so it doesnt sound like more waffle is to have performance targets as i'm sure many of us do in our jobs. i.e if they say they are going to do the things they suggest, when - its a very simple question that if cannot be answered is probably never.

  • Comment number 32.

    Some one please show these guys a picture clearly indicating what an elbow is and what a rear end is.

    Too many policies from both sides have become "set up a committee to look at"...when one policy is to remove quangos, committees and red tape.

    Along with Cleggs "I'm really important and going to improve democracy" speech we see they are making it harder to dissolve parliment.

    Not privatising the Royal Mail, but getting private investment (didn't they both say that was bad idea not just 6 months ago?)

    Not to mention the hidden knives.

    We will have a referendum on voting policy, but while the Cons won't campaign against openly it they will get their buddy mad Murdoch to print what they really think in the papers to turn voters. (Probably in exchange for a slice of the BBC in the end...well maybe)

    You could go on. Generally it seems a real hodge podge of anything and everything with a bit of seasoning. Still a few good plans like no ID cards in there so we will see.

  • Comment number 33.

    Not a surprise I suppose but the cracks are appearing in this coalition already. There is very little for Lib Dem supporters and activists to get excited about with some of the key areas of difference being parked with the setting up of 'commissions'. This is what happens when a coalition is formed after an election rather than before. The danger is that the longer the coalition survives, the more the two parties will start to look like each other and the Lib Dems will be completely neutered.

    This is why the Labour Party must now seize the initiative and seek to create a realignment of the centre-left. To ensure that we don't have a right of centre government for the next generation, it must be prepared to re-brand itself and reach out to the grandees and activists of other centre-left parties to bring about a new democratic partnership with a progressive policy programme. As long as the centre-left is divided, there will continue to be the prospect of hung parliaments and coalitions of convenience of the kind we have today. There would also be the advantage of returning to a two major party landscape which has tended to produce strong and decisive government whether from the right or the left.

  • Comment number 34.

    I agree with John H (Poster #7) regarding Health & Safety.

    I don't however agree regarding disbility benefit. In this country we have the Disability Discrimination Act, under which anyone (no matter their diability) employers have duties to accommodate those with any form of disability provided H&S of them and others is not jeopardised (narcoleptic bus-drivers would probably be a bad idea). So whilst people with only one arm (the example JohnH uses) may not be able to do some jobs safely (being a brick layer would be tricky), I'm sure their are plenty of other jobs they can do. I appreciate however that in cases of extreme disability (e.g deaf and blind) then there may be little or no scope for work.

    Surely it would be better for the general welfare of most disabled people if they were given a job and hope, rather than having to rely on the state.

  • Comment number 35.

    Overjoyed - the few LibDem policies which I didnt agree with (nuclear power for example) have been coalesced with the Conservative ones. This truly demonstrates the power of teamwork and compromise and ejects the political extremists into the dark corners in which they belong. None of us should expect to get everything we want but on balance this Coalition has to work for decades as Labour will only gain strength if the Coalition falters. I'm impressed by Cameron and Clegg in what they have achieved already - has British common sense returned? - lets hope so.

  • Comment number 36.

    Has to be said i disapprove of the plan to sell off the Royal Mail, first act of Conservative Privatisation in 13years. I love the idea of a freeze on Council Tax rises, here in Stoke-on-Trent we pay some of the highest increases year on year and yet the productivity goes down year on year.

    For the Consumer Protection, will existing Credit Cards rates be dropped? Currently i have a 16% Credit Card (i never use it mind) but will this be reduced by 1% or by a significant amount? I would also hope that unfair bank charges come into effect as at present i have an account that earns less than 1% per year and another that i pay 18% annually for being overdrawn, plus charges for being in the overdraft.

    Policing and Crime, i'm sad to see no mention of the Lib Dems pledge for 3,000 extra Police and additionally the seemingly scrapped 12month sentence guarantee for anyone found carrying a knife.

    Good to cut WTC and CTC for all but the lowest earners. If you are wealthy and earn £50,000+ childcare should not really be a problem area to afford. A concession idea may be something good that if you are not in receipt of WTC or CTC because of your earnings then a new Higher Rate of Child Benefit may be a sensible option i.e. £30 per week.

    Pity there can't be an extra runway at Heathrow, this would bring thousands of jobs and likewise tens/hundreds of millions to the economy. As i read a report fairly recently saying Heathrow is full to capacity and is bursting at the seams.

    Thank god we aren't joining the Euro... i also like the idea of India in a special relationship with ourselves. Part of me disagrees with any Public Sector worker being paid more than the Prime Minister, if you own your own business you can earn what you choose to pay yourself, but if you are accountable to the State, why earn more than someone who has overrall control of it?

    Disagree with the amount of Foreign Aid, i am a firm believer Charity starts at home, rather than give Foreign Aid a monthly drive should be encouraged for people to donate, or in the event of a Disaster, have a national fund raising drive.

    Was hoping for a harsher reform of benefits. Vouchers for Electricity and Gas, vouchers for food. If someone lives at home with parents, a reduced Energy Voucher redeemable at any Pay Point or to be attached to a Direct Debit. This would save the state hundreds of millions a year.

    Its a pity that any income to prisoners is given at all, this should be quashed or drastically reduced. Watching Wormwood Scrubs makes my blood boil, i suggest the softies watch it to see what they support!

    Like the idea to deport any foreign national who is a threat to security.. i wonder will we see the recent court case over turned?

    Thank God the NHS is continuing funding. Schools no mention of discipline in classrooms, a major reason why 1/3 teaching professionals leave their role.

  • Comment number 37.

    5. At 12:11pm on 20 May 2010, RadialSymmetry wrote:
    The prospect of five years of a Tory government (in all but name) does not fill me with hope that my life will get better. Quite the reverse


    I'm assuming that you are either unemployed or work for the public sector then as the last 13 years of Labour have hardly been a breeze for the people who pay the taxes...

  • Comment number 38.

    'No public sector worker paid more than the Prime Minister'. Looking forward to Vince Cable telling bankers in publicly-owned banks that includes them. Well surely it does, doesn't it?

  • Comment number 39.

    I'm very disappointed and angry at the prospect of all claimants of incapacity benefit being re-assessed to determine if they should continue to receive the benefit.

    My Father has not had any choice but to claim incapacity benefit since he suffered a very severe stroke in 2003. Since then he has been under the care of his Consultant at the local hospital as an outpatient.

    He now has to go through the ordeal of having his medical case scrutinised by an inferior quack, paid by the government, to assess his capability to work even though a hospital Consultant has advised my Father he will never be healthy enough to work again.

    Where is the logic or common sense in that decision? Just a waste of tax payers money.

    As a faithful carer to my Father over a number of years since his stroke, I and my family have saved the tax payer thousands of pounds because of our tireless efforts to look after him rather than placing him as a burden on the state and this is the thanks you get from a preening ignorant government that professes to care for the people of this country.

    I just wish to let Mr Cameron and his crony associates, better known as the Liberal Democrats, know that a life on benefits is not an easy option and many depend on the welfare state to protect them from illnesses and incapacity forced upon them.

    The welfare system exists to protect the most vunerable in society and it is a system that should be protected by any government. It sets the standard for our moral obligations to the most vunerable people in Britain and ensures we never return to those dark days when families were forced into poverty through no fault of their own.

    Shame on this government for attacking those weaker elements of our society in order to score cheap poltical points with portions of the electorate who have no understanding of the plight of many benefit claimants.

  • Comment number 40.

    The 'Human Rights' act or bill HAS to be reformed or replaced. This is a looney left charter which places the rights of the criminal before the victim and allows all sorts of degenerated humans to abuse OUR great country. Time the majority had their say and bring back democracy to OUR country, not the liberal elite few who have forced their false dogma on us for too long (19th / 20th century socialism)

  • Comment number 41.

    Scrapping HIBs, Heathrow extra runway, ID cards - absolutely brilliant stuff. I am really getting very enthusiastic about the potential this government is showing and looking forward to more of this decisive activity.
    I thought a hung parliament was going to produce a period of none effective dithering - but this lot have come out of the gate like a train.
    Perhaps this is where we turn the corner as a country and get back in the game.

  • Comment number 42.

    The anominity for rape defendents is a good idea, and but we know the some womens movement will scream and moan.

    They just assume you are guilty just for being a man.

  • Comment number 43.

    Its a bit of a mess really, neither side can be happy as "both" leaders have taken so many for the team that they have forgotten who they stand for. This is power at any price and hardly progressive politics in any area. I just hope we have a election soon so that we can bat this into touch and put in strong leadership to move us forward.I think we need a 2010 committee as the 1922 version is being sabotaged. We even have Bercow staying put, I am awaiting round two of the expenses scandal in 2 years.

  • Comment number 44.

    "So, are you saying that people with only one arm are useless?

    How does that attitude support the disabled?"

    You miss the point. Under the Work programme, those who are deemed "fit to work" will be treated in exactly the same way that the fully able are. No one is saying that people with only one arm are useless - only that they deserve extra consideration. Many people with disabilities are able to work and want to work but it's essential that recognition is given to the obvious fact that they have barriers to gaining employment and additional expenses which a fully able person does not.

  • Comment number 45.

    "Stop deportation of asylum seekers who had to leave home countries because of intimidation over sexual orientation"

    Everyone of them will claim to be gay so how do we get proof they arent just saying that to stay here?

    A bit like Cleggs genius stroke of "any illegal immigrants who have been here 10 year can stop if they provide proof they have been here ten year"

    What? Fabricated bills or pay slips? He got pulled to bits on that one. Would like to see how this one is explained away.

  • Comment number 46.

    It does make me laugh when ignoramuses say the Human Rights Act should be scrapped. It needs to be re-interpreted, sure, to avoid the abuse of it by criminals, illegal immigrants, etc. But that doesn't mean it should be scrapped. If it is, we'll just have another nightmare situation where people are constantly getting confessions beaten out of them by lazy and corrupt police forces. We all saw during those G20 protests how they can be when they have an agenda, now imagine what it would be like if they had free reign on 'suspects'.

  • Comment number 47.

    I'm seeing a pattern in the comments of the Cons voters blaming the Lib Dems for the bits they don't like, and vice versa - just a little taste of the political football we will experience for the next 5 years I suspect.

    Out of what I've read I'm pleased the 10,000 tax allowance is going ahead - it always seemed better sense to me that the tax wasn't paid in the first place rather than over complicating matters by paying it and then awarding Tax Credits to redress.

    I'm not so keen on - "We will give parents, teachers, charities and local communities the chance to set up new schools, as part of our plans to allow new providers to enter the state school system in response to parental demand". Having had experience of a parent run playgroup which ended up folding I think these matters are best left to the professionals. Good intentions count for nothing when people are not adequately experienced and pressures of their jobs/family commitments mean they are often unable to fulfill roles as well or as long as they hoped. Hope I'm wrong on that, but have the feeling it'll be an expensive mistake to put right.

  • Comment number 48.

    I still cannot see how a 'British Bill of Rights' would be different to the existing Human Rights Act, in any meaningful way.
    I can't see the Lib-Dems being happy at derogating our international obligations or allowing legislation which allows the government minister of the day picking and choosing who is or is not covered by the Act. Which seems to be the object of most of the opposition to the Human Rights Act.
    Cameron's call for a British Human Rights Act seemed motivated by a desire to keep the right-wing press and his own party reactionairies happy.
    The coalition's major fault line will be Europe, the Lib-Dems are pro, the Tory Party viscerally opposed. The Tory Party leadership know UK withdrawal is a non-starter ,they just don't have the moral courage to face down the Europhobes like Bill Cash and the Murdoch press.

  • Comment number 49.

    At long last - some common sense. Maybe we can dump the last catastrosphic 15 years in the bin and move on.

  • Comment number 50.

    Lots to like, lots not to like and some that looks simply irrelevant. I seem to recall during the debate on hunting that the 'unspeakables' were forever protesting that it simply wasn't important enough to be on the legislative agenda. Now, suddenly, at a time of what we are told is national crisis, it is! Hopefully there will be relatively few in parliament who will wish to be responsible for enabling a tiny minority to rampage across the countryside, terrorising innocent passers-by and residents, for the pleasure of watching animals tearing other animals apart. It remains an early blot on the 'new politics' that something that is so irrelevant to the national predicament, so potentially divisive, and so manifestly mediaeval, figures in its programme.

  • Comment number 51.

    Kevin Orr wrote:

    Where is the pro-terrorist/ criminal bit in there systemF?

    ===

    Having briefly looked through your post history, it appears that you're an ardent socialist. Some would say that having this affliction makes it difficult for you to make clear judgements.

    It does not matter what the HRA was intended for or what it states. What we KNOW is that it's being used by terrorists and criminals against the interests of the state and the security of the the British citizens.

    Tell me, how did Socialists get to the point of supporting such outrageous laws? I know you enjoy big government controlling everyone and creating an equally average society of robots - but surely even you can see that a convicted Islamic terrorist winning his right to stay here just because he has family in the UK, or a Muslim described as an "Al'qaeda agent" by a court winning his right to stay here because his home nation is a bit of a dump, is utterly ludicrous.

    Or is this all down to your lot having jumped into bed with Islamists in your 'battle' against "big satan and little satan".

    It's very difficult to work out the thought process of a left winger, because by its very nature its fragmented, irrational and often self-defeating.

  • Comment number 52.

    14. At 12:37pm on 20 May 2010, Ash Metcalfe wrote:
    System f you seem to think that the human rights don't protect you either. If you were arrested for a crime but never found guilty of it (or innocent according to our laws) would you expect to be deported for said offence? There is nothing extremist left wing about defining and protecting the basic rights of a human being. It would be extremely right wing to deport people with no conviction on the basis of suspicion. You might be called a fascist.

    Well, if it's not your country in the first place and you have no "Human Right" to be here, regardless of the fact that you were implicit in supposed terrorist activities, what right do you have to stay when asked to leave? If I have a guest in my house, I can ask him to leave and give no reason, my perogative. It's not my problem how that guest gets to his house or whether he falls down the stairs once he gets there. People who are guests in our country should be treated in the same way. Given the choice and looking at the risk, I would rather return a terrorist suspect to his home country than see a bomb rip through another bus. If that makes me fascist in your eyes, so be it. I would take some time to learn what the word means before throwing it around however.......

  • Comment number 53.

    Brian wrote
    " I'm assuming that you are either unemployed or work for the public sector then as the last 13 years of Labour have hardly been a breeze for the people who pay the taxes"


    The public sector pay taxes Brian. Only difference is most of them get rubbish pay

  • Comment number 54.

    Generally quite promising but wish they'd repeal the Human Rights Act, specially the bits which protect terrorsists.

    I'd thought that both Tories and Lib Dems were in favour of cutting down the number of MP's in the Commons as well, because we don't need 650 of them or anything like that amount. We all have to suffer and there'd be a substantial saving there.

    But...there is certainly more sense coming our way here than there would have been with only one party in charge....

    And hopefully an end to the "Labour Control Freak" stuff too.





  • Comment number 55.

    "Ban organisations espousing or inciting hatred."

    Can open, worms everywhere. I guess the likes of the BNP and EDL would be covered in this as well as the (presumably) intended targets of Islam4UK and other extremist organisations.

  • Comment number 56.

    Is it just me, or is it about time the government backed off from Banking? I do not work in the industry myself, but I can understand the pressure they must be under. To call their bonuses "unacceptable" is not a fair comment.

    If you want to look at something thats "unnaceptable" then look at a footballers salary. It's outrageous! You don't get footballers working 20 hours a day, 6 days a week under huge pressures do you?!

    If you are going to introduce a supertax, thats where you should start, on people who get paid obscene amounts of money for doing nothing. Not picking on those who work every hour under the sun in a stressful environment.

    I also find it to be too much of a coincidence that Bankers bonuses and salaries where never an issue until politicians where caught out with their expenses.. What a great way to shift the attention off of that it was to start picking on overpaid bankers.

  • Comment number 57.

    So they want a vote on AV voting which is worst than first past the post.Read this an make you own mind up http://www.ippr.org.uk/publicationsandreports/publication.asp?id=750

  • Comment number 58.

    A "National social action day"? Well. That'll come as a bitter disappointment to the gullible who thought that voting in a Conservative government would mean the end to Labour's social engineering.

    Also, I'm taking everything in the plan about civil liberties with a pinch of salt. It's easy to champion civil liberties a) when you're the opposition and b) when Labour gift you the opportunity with their abysmal handling of civil liberties. But I haven't forgotten that the previous Tory government supported ID cards, while Labour opposed them. I don't think the plan is as dead in the water as they make it out to be.

  • Comment number 59.

    I have severe epilepsy caused by a brain tumour ( non malignant ). I broke my pelvis falling down stairs during a fit and now I am in constant pain, can't walk very far or sit in the same position for long.
    I have at least 2 fits a day and come round usually with a terrible headaches and blurred vision and drowsiness which means I need to lay down. sometimes I'm wet and my mouth is bleeding. I also have the trance like fits and am supposed to be accompanied on journeys and supervised in other areas. The high level of medication I am on causes me to feel a bit lightheaded and drowsy.
    I went into hospital to try brain surgery to help as my life is a living hell. They did tests and I had 7 fits in 2 days and they said they couldn't help as too many areas of the brain were causing the fits.
    But according to the government I am fit to work.

    Will anyone give me a job?

  • Comment number 60.

    A British Bill of Rights? I would much rather see a British Bill of Responsibilities and Rights - with the emphasis on responsibilities first. How often do you hear "I know my rights"? How many know their responsibilities? If you do not accept your responsibilities you do not deserve your rights, it works two ways.

    Pleased to see a commitment to Crossrail and High Speed rail expansion, that should make internal travel greener and less likely to disruption by volcanic ash and the like.

    Like the idea of a Council Tax freeze - would like to see it for more than one year though.

    Improvements for pensioners look good too.

  • Comment number 61.

    42. At 1:15pm on 20 May 2010, stephen wrote:

    The anominity for rape defendents is a good idea, and but we know the some womens movement will scream and moan.

    They just assume you are guilty just for being a man.


    The anominity for rape defendents is a good idea, and but we know the some HYS reactionary will scream and moan.

    They just assume that rape is a crime only committed by men on women.

  • Comment number 62.

    I am really hoping that for the benefit of all the actual detail and implementation lives up to the expectations generated firstly, by a coalition in the national interest, and secondly the headline policies released today.
    It is good that both parties extremes have been tempered, but i am still concerned that nothing appears to have been mentioned regarding the West Lothian issue and the Barnett fomula.
    If Scotland wishes to have free Uni Ed and Prescriptions then that should be funded by them from their tax raising powers.

  • Comment number 63.

    Cameron: said it would provide "strong, stable government" for Britain.
    Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg said the deal was defined by three words: "Freedom, fairness and responsibility."
    Cameron and Clegg have done more of what they seem to be doing more and more: big ideas, little detail.
    e.g. Banking system to be reformed, with banking levy introduced. "Robust action" to tackle "unacceptable bonuses".
    In fact, what does all this mean? Will the bank levy correspond to the bank levy that will be applied by the EU after the G20?
    Plans to ensure flow of funds to small businesses. How? When all of Europe already knows that banks are extremely insecure, seriously affected by “toxic” debt, and uncertain re their capitalization level, how will the Coalition Government make lending flow?
    Separating retail and investment parts of banks. Does this mean the Coalition Government is prepared to take on the London Hedge Funds, or Morgan Stanley, or...?
    e.g. BUSINESS
    Creation of Local Enterprise Partnerships to replace Regional Development Agencies. Are we simply changing the name or the functions?
    What do I think of the coalition's policies?
    I think I’d like to have all the detail. I tried and tried and tried to get the full 36-page document. My computer froze. When I got it unfroze, I could only get page one. It may be my computer, or there is something wrong with your link or the set-up.
    In desperation I searched the Internet to see if I could locate this document on my own; all I could find were the same vague policy statements. But I did find several sites that referred to the 36-page document in the future tense as in “Mr. Cameron and Mr. Clegg will launch their 36-page final coalition agreement today before the prime minister embarks…”

  • Comment number 64.

    My reaction? I voted tory and I really regret it.

    The hike in capital gains tax really makes me mad. I own shares in the company I work for because I took a massive risk in joining them by accepting a salary well below the market rate in exchange for share options. They couldn't afford to pay the market rate as it was a fledgling company in the renewable energy industry where I work as an engineer in product development. The share options seemed like fair compensation to the risk to my career and the opportunity cost of a lower salary. I spent years riding the rollercoaster that start ups go through while I go more overdrawn each month trying to keep up with rent, student loans repayments, exorbitant train fares...

    Under the old rules I would have paid 10% tax on any gains with taper relief. This made share options fair compensation. Then Labour scrapped taper relief, and now the tories what to hike the rate up to 40% in line with income tax.

    Do they realised they've just priced start-up technology firms out of the labour market? Where's the reward for risk? How is this going to foster entrepreneurial spirit? Are we still going to pay tax on inflationary gains?

    Thank you very much indeed, all that sacrifice was for nothing. I'm not a banker in the city, we're not talking huge sums here, I'm just a squirrel trying to get a nut. It looks like I'll have to wait even longer to get on the property ladder and start a family.

    I wished I'd voted Labour now.

  • Comment number 65.

    1. Establish independant Office for Budget Resposibilty.
    2. Independent commission to look at separating retail and investment parts of banks.
    3. Creation of Local Enterprise Partnerships.
    4. Establish commission to look at creating British Bill of Rights.
    5. Set up annual "Olympics-style" school sports event.
    6. Work for Yourself scheme, to help start-up businesses with loans and advice from mentors.
    7. Committee to look at wholly or partially elected Lords .
    8. National Citizens Service for 16-year-olds.
    9. National "social action" day.
    10. Commission on long-term care.
    Ten new taxpayer funded quangos for starters.

  • Comment number 66.

    Lets give them a CHANCE they CANNOT make any more of a mess than the last govt of 13 years. For once people of Great Britian lets be POSITIVE and SUPPORT this. For once I am quite excited at what is happening in OUR PARLIAMENT it just HAS to be BETTER than WHAT WE HAVE HAD BEFORE

  • Comment number 67.

    This deal is a good deal for all concerned. Atleast we know what is on offer. Both leaders have already proved their capacity to deliver on their promises.

  • Comment number 68.

    #37. At 1:09pm on 20 May 2010, Brian wrote:
    5. At 12:11pm on 20 May 2010, RadialSymmetry wrote:
    The prospect of five years of a Tory government (in all but name) does not fill me with hope that my life will get better. Quite the reverse


    I'm assuming that you are either unemployed or work for the public sector then as the last 13 years of Labour have hardly been a breeze for the people who pay the taxes...

    -------------------------------------

    So Brian, are you saying that Public sector workers don't pay tax, NI contributions and contribute towards their pension? As if so, I think you ought to think again. People in the Private sector do not have a monopoly on paying these things.

    I have had a read through the coalitions policies, and I am not entirely impressed apart from the abolition of ID cards.

  • Comment number 69.

    My only concern is the 'human rights' issue. I honestly believed that with a Tory government we would be rid of this pro-terrorist agenda. I wonder if Mr. Cameron has realised the deeply held concerns of the people who voted for him. I would like to hear that the matter would at least be under review - perhaps we who voted for Cameron should let him know how we feel. Thousands of letters all pointing out our displeasure might make it easier for him to come to the correct decision.

    My question to the Lib/Dems is why is the human rights of a terrorist deemed more important than my right to live my life, in the country of my birth, free of persecution and threat.

    On every other matter I am happy to give the coalition the benefit of the doubt.

  • Comment number 70.

    AuntieLeft wrote:
    "The 'Human Rights' act or bill HAS to be reformed or replaced. This is a looney left charter which places the rights of the criminal before the victim and allows all sorts of degenerated humans to abuse OUR great country. Time the majority had their say and bring back democracy to OUR country, not the liberal elite few who have forced their false dogma on us for too long (19th / 20th century socialism)"




    Yeah. Human Rights! Who needs them? Bring back hanging for parking offenders, especially those muslim ones!

  • Comment number 71.

    It's a disgrace that a man who has worked hard and paid taxes for over thirty years should not be allowed to retire on a state pension until he is sixty six. This may have been the only income to look forward to or in some cases would have been added to by a small private pension. A classic example of doing the right thing, then being kicked in the teeth for it.

  • Comment number 72.

    29. At 12:57pm on 20 May 2010, purpleDogzzz wrote:
    "There are lots of very welcome changes in this agreement... They are stopping new speed cameras being introduced solely as cash cows."
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I am always puzzled by this argument. Local authorities have to collect revenue somehow. I cannot think of a better way, than fining lawbreakers. If it is a "cash cow" then it is the only tax all of us can opt out of, by simply driving within the speed limit. Would you rather the law abiding majority paid more council tax?

  • Comment number 73.

    Brian you might like to note that there is a difference in being proven to be complicit in terrorist offences and being suspected of being complicit in terrorist offences. Would you accept being imprisoned or sent someone where you may be tortured merely on the suspicion that you were a criminal? Perhaps it is different if these people are convicted of such offenses but then they should be imprisoned anyway shouldn't they? Yes you can ask someone to leave your house without reason but should you do so knowing that harm will befall them then you would have some responsibility for that harm.

    I would also say that system f's apparent opposition to socialism could make him a fascist in some peoples eyes. I'm no socialist though I am slightly liberal even so I believe the HRA is crucial. The recent uses of it highlighted in the press were justified in my eyes because the so called terrorists had no convictions for terrorism, it was merely suspected.

  • Comment number 74.

    SystemF wrote:
    Kevin Orr wrote:

    Where is the pro-terrorist/ criminal bit in there systemF?

    ===

    "Having briefly looked through your post history, it appears that you're an ardent socialist. Some would say that having this affliction makes it difficult for you to make clear judgements.

    It does not matter what the HRA was intended for or what it states. What we KNOW is that it's being used by terrorists and criminals against the interests of the state and the security of the the British citizens.

    Tell me, how did Socialists get to the point of supporting such outrageous laws? I know you enjoy big government controlling everyone and creating an equally average society of robots - but surely even you can see that a convicted Islamic terrorist winning his right to stay here just because he has family in the UK, or a Muslim described as an "Al'qaeda agent" by a court winning his right to stay here because his home nation is a bit of a dump, is utterly ludicrous.

    Or is this all down to your lot having jumped into bed with Islamists in your 'battle' against "big satan and little satan".

    It's very difficult to work out the thought process of a left winger, because by its very nature its fragmented, irrational and often self-defeating."





    An ardent socialist? Because I believe in Human rights? Hmm.
    The human rights act applies to you too Systemf. If you want to be Thailand or Korea or Saudi arabia, that's your prerogative. Personally, I don't. Your views are very ardently fascist, and as i posted previously there is nowhere, repeat NOWHERE, in the civil liberties clause just out, that is pro-terrorist or pro-criminal. Read it again dummy
    Your views belong in a BNP blog. Why not stick to them?
    "

  • Comment number 75.

    Irrespective of what the new policies are, at least now we know why it takes 13 years to fix Tory policy, so I guess now it's time for Labour to start thinking that 5 years from now, it'll take another 13 years to fix it all over again. Cameron's leadership is simply a dictatorship within his own party, especially with that suprise vote on the 1922 commitee that just happened. Now he can control everyone within the party and jump on any rumblings as they happen. Pray for an early vote of no confidence, and a decent Labour leader voted in as soon as possible. At least now we know how easily Clegg capitulates, and I'm sure the Lib-Dems have lost a lot of support.

  • Comment number 76.

    I am actually very impressed.

    I can see very little on the coalition deal policy by policy that any sensible person would disagree with and in my opinion,it certainly marks a positive change in direction from the previous administration. I think that this could prove to be something that both parties in retrospect could be proud of in the years to come. Compromise is not such a bad thing,and I hope that some of the more frothing rightwing Conservatives might remember that they did not actually win the election,and therefore have no unfettered right to do as they please,and similarily this applies to some of the more radical members of the Liberal Democrats.

    Politics is the art of the possible. Looks now like we might be able to get through this mess and even plan for a better future in Britain.

  • Comment number 77.

    I am upset to see HIPS being suspended. This saved buyers considerable conveyancing fees, and actually had the potential to raise the value of buyer's offers. Housing sales need regulation, just like banks. Too much abuse of the system is out there. The people who didn't like HIPS were estate agents and solicitors who made megabucks from failed sales.

    Err? What?
    HIPS were totally useless. They added cost, extended the selling period and all the searches made were totally ignored by the buyers solicitors who did their own anyway, and did not reduce conveyancing costs. HIPS were hated by sellers too - Ijust forked out £400 for a worthless bundle of documents which were read probably only by myself. Good riddance to them.

    Aside from that quite a bit of pleasing reading in the proposals and policies, e.g scrap ID cards, reduce MOD admin costs by 25%. Make no mistake this government has got a serious job now to get this country back on its feet following 13 years of reckless spending and social engineering by the 2 worst PM's this country has ever had. And just to make a point I used to vote Labour.

  • Comment number 78.

    I welcome most of this. One of the few things I agreed with labour about were ID cards and the DNA database - they help massively in maintaining law and order and catching illegal immigrants.
    As a law-abiding citizen I have no problem with my DNA being stored and I have changed my mind on ID cards - a minor inconvenience for a large gain.

    I am surprised by earlier comments re health and safety - it has gone far beyond common sense and needs to get back to the real issues.

    Also the negative comments on re-assessing disabled peoples' fitness for work. They are RE-ASSESSING, that does not mean that the result won't be the same in many cases.

    As step-father to a disabled daughter with Cystic Fibrosis in her mid twenties, I welcome the fact that she may have to reconsider her chosen career on benefits. I am certain that she is capable of contributing in some way to society, but the concern is that because she can become seriously ill by contact with other people that a work-from-home role is likely to be her lot in life and that means that she will need help to do that. The current management culture of "have to have them under scrutiny all the time" needs to be changed.
    She also has periods when her illness lays her low for a few weeks so her work times and days need to be flexible enough to allow for that.

    So yes, by all means re-assess and re-classify BUT it must go hand in hand with a parallel drive to help such people find work that is suitable to their particular situation and does not put them at risk.

    I'm sure my daughter could do something like a customer services role on the telephone at least as well as the next person if she could work from home.

    Also, as someone who is supporting her life far more than the government is... I am suspicious of no mention of getting rid of the IR35 tax fiasco that both Tories and Lib Dems said they would do in their manifesto.

    And the Human Rights Act? Surely the Lib Dems had a golden opportunity to re-assess their objections to replacing that act after yesterdays news that terrorists are to be allowed to stay in this country? Come on guys, you've just seen exactly why it doesn't work in it's current form.
    A Bill of Rights(and responsibilities) would surely be far better and allow us to deport those who cane here to kill us.
    Governments would normally react to a situation like this by passing statutory legislation to protect the people - don't let the coalition situation shackle you from making re-assessments in the light of new evidence!

  • Comment number 79.

    "NHS revamp to 'push up standards'."

    Can we please have legislation that enforces Wales to keep pace with England in these matters? Either that or get rid of the Welsh Assembly.

  • Comment number 80.

    We are seeing a back pedalling on original promises. The New Labour human rights act, instead of being scrapped is to be made even more restrictive both in actions and free speech. I am quickly losing confidence in this coalition.

  • Comment number 81.

    I see we have the standard set of complaints regarding this being too Liberal or too Tory and that it doesn't comply with Manifesto promises or the more rabid aspirations of the extra right wing ,neither does it make beards and sandals compulsory.

    Guess what people ,this is because NOBODY won the ELECTION and it's a COALITION GOVERNMENT!

    About what could be expected.

  • Comment number 82.

    I think, after reviewing the LIB DEM/Conservative agreement that the majority of the Clauses strike an excellent balance and appear very middle of the road...I can identify with trying to "Strike a balance" between an over controlling Central Government, big business excesses and returning some power and control to men and women on the street.

    In just the ten years that I have lived and worked back in England, I have become increasingly worried and concerned about the lack of accountabilty of the Central Government, which has expanded into creating many of our Public Agencies into psuedo "secret societies", that hide behind Data protection and confidentiality banners.

    I definetly agree with having a publicly accountable Police oversight body, other than a Police Authority, (which despite protestations to the contrary is already Politically influenced and corrupted by powerful people who have been in their positions for more than a decade, who have little grasp of reality or life on a street level.)

    I have experienced and worked in public systems in three other countries and find some of these proposals and agreements like a breath of fresh air....far more democratic too!

  • Comment number 83.

    I have severe epilepsy caused by a brain tumour ( non malignant ). I broke my pelvis falling down stairs during a fit and now I am in constant pain, can't walk very far or sit in the same position for long.
    I have at least 2 fits a day and come round usually with a terrible headaches and blurred vision and drowsiness which means I need to lay down. sometimes I'm wet and my mouth is bleeding. I also have the trance like fits and am supposed to be accompanied on journeys and supervised in other areas. The high level of medication I am on causes me to feel a bit lightheaded and drowsy.
    I went into hospital to try brain surgery to help as my life is a living hell. They did tests and I had 7 fits in 2 days and they said they couldn't help as too many areas of the brain were causing the fits.
    But according to the government I am fit to work.

    Will anyone give me a job?



    ---------
    I am very sorry to hear of your misfortunes but I think you must be referring to the last Government unless this all just happened in the last 10 days.

  • Comment number 84.

    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Enjoy the honeymoon, tear gas is coming :-)

  • Comment number 85.

    Free schools are a huge backards step, We will have schools teaching bigotry and every crackpot religion and special interest group will be setting up schools poluting childrens minds with their hatred.

  • Comment number 86.

    Brian wrote
    " I'm assuming that you are either unemployed or work for the public sector then as the last 13 years of Labour have hardly been a breeze for the people who pay the taxes"
    --------------
    This will be great news for my Wife, a very senior NHS nurse, to know that she will be having the £300,000+ in tax she has paid over the last 13 years back!

  • Comment number 87.

    62. At 1:52pm on 20 May 2010, skimpton wrote:

    It is good that both parties extremes have been tempered, but i am still concerned that nothing appears to have been mentioned regarding the West Lothian issue and the Barnett fomula.


    West Lothian question - see page 27:

    "We will establish a commission to consider the "West Lothian question""

  • Comment number 88.

    63. At 1:53pm on 20 May 2010, BluesBerry wrote:

    In desperation I searched the Internet to see if I could locate this document on my own; all I could find were the same vague policy statements. But I did find several sites that referred to the 36-page document in the future tense as in “Mr. Cameron and Mr. Clegg will launch their 36-page final coalition agreement today before the prime minister embarks…”


    Got it here and printed out all 36 pages, no problem...

  • Comment number 89.

    -no Broadband tax

    -no Bin tax

    -no NI raise

    -no HIPS

    -no ID Cards

    -no DNA database of innocents

    -no target driven policies for the police

    i like NO Labour!

  • Comment number 90.

    Yes, yes, and again yes!

    I admit, I didn't want a ConDem coalition to start with, but wow. On the basis of what they've said so far, and if they manage to actually carry it out, then I'd actively vote for this coalition every single election if it turned up on the ballot paper.

    (And, just because I'm fed up of seeing only the LD voters who don't support the current situation commenting on what it will do to their vote - Nick, you've pretty much guaranteed (if you do what you say) that you'll get my vote next time around too.)

  • Comment number 91.

    quote Der Spiegel 20/05/2010- The Return of the Radicals
    Crisis Fuels Rise in Left-Wing Extremist Violence

    .....Meanwhile, "Agenda 2010" social welfare reforms introduced under Chancellor Gerhard Schröder of the Social Democratic Party (SPD) sowed discord in German society because of their steep cuts in welfare payments to the longterm unemployed. Then came the financial and economic crisis. Critics of capitalism can now be seen everywhere, from the Left Party to the CDU. The ones who could be seen as radicals today, in fact, are those who still defend the present system -- and autonomists are eagerly fanning the flames of the conflict.

    The left-wing scene addresses issues "that are also of concern among the peace-loving population," in the words of an Interior Ministry analysis. "In light of economic and social problems, we should have already reckoned with greater extremist violence five years ago, a time when unemployment was at 5 million," says Manfred Murck, the deputy chief of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution in the city-state of Hamburg. He describes it as a "time-delayed phenomenon." Politically motivated violence, Murck adds, also mixes with riots whose motives are harder to read.

    "Everything is subject to economic law," says the autonomist in the Kreuzberg café, calling this the fundamental problem with the system. It's a statement that would surely gain him entry to any talk show. Criticism of capitalism is one of the biggest issues "relevant for mobilization," he says. But that list also includes issues like university protests, the struggle against gentification and the shift in urban neighborhoods toward more attractive buildings, higher rent prices and wealthier residents.

    "Agenda 2010" ... Interesting.

  • Comment number 92.

    65. At 1:56pm on 20 May 2010, billyhano wrote:
    1. Establish independant Office for Budget Resposibilty.
    2. Independent commission to look at separating retail and investment parts of banks.
    3. Creation of Local Enterprise Partnerships.
    4. Establish commission to look at creating British Bill of Rights.
    5. Set up annual "Olympics-style" school sports event.
    6. Work for Yourself scheme, to help start-up businesses with loans and advice from mentors.

    7. Committee to look at wholly or partially elected Lords .
    8. National Citizens Service for 16-year-olds.
    9. National "social action" day.

    10. Commission on long-term care.
    Ten new taxpayer funded quangos for starters.

    Funny Quangos these?

    Since when was an enterprise partnership a quango?
    Since when was an event a quango?
    Since when was a scheme a quango?
    Since when was a service a quango?
    As for an action day being a quango, well the mind boggles! ;o)

  • Comment number 93.

    Reminds me of a certain large wooden horse that was offered to Troy

  • Comment number 94.

    I notice from this agreement that they have agreed to....

    ....The UK's coalition government has pledged to ban the sale of alcohol below cost price in an effort to cut binge drinking in England and Wales.....

    I wonder if this will apply to all the MP's that get cheap booze at the House of Commons?

    Or is it one rule for them and one for us again?

  • Comment number 95.

    Some one who knows about mandates it seems that the C@G think that the people of the UK have given them a mandate, sorry the people of the UK has not let you have a mandate.
    That means doing your own thing to say as you will "But there is No mandate"
    The toey did not get a mandate.
    The lib-dems did not get a mandate.
    So - + - = 0 No mandate.
    The coalation BE care full for what you wish for because it it will come back and bite you up the rear end.

  • Comment number 96.

    1......SystemF.....Actually,the one who contributed most to the Human Rights Act from Britain,was none other than "The greatest Briton of all time" Sir Winston Spencer Churchill.Far from being"foisted" on us by the "extreme left",the entire nation agreed that,in the wake of the revelations about the holocaust,we needed an Act,a piece of legislation,which codified and made unalterable,the consensus on what human rights should consist of.Winston(for all his patrician style)was a great social reformer(breaking strikes with troops notwithstanding)and worked tirelessly to see the Act made law.Next time you make a comment about historical events,please ensure you are in possession of the salient facts,as it is tiresome to have to correct inaccurate assertions.

  • Comment number 97.

    All this user's posts have been removed.Why?

  • Comment number 98.

    • . At 14:47 pm on 20 May 2010, ELENAKL wrote:
    At 1:31pm on 20 May 2010, Kevin Orr wrote:

    Brian wrote

    " I'm assuming that you are either unemployed or work for the public sector then as the last 13 years of Labour have hardly been a breeze for the people who pay the taxes"

    The public sector pay taxes Brian. Only difference is most of them get rubbish pay

    I am a public sector worker, on rubbish pay as you say, but I don't think I have done 'well' under 13 years of Labour, in fact it is criminal what that have done to my organisation in the name of 'change', mostly change for the sake of change rather than improvement, the money wasted, rebranding etc. We are not a 'Brand!' The top civil servants being paid ridiculous salaries, yet junior management down having hardly moved. To save money they hit at any kind of staff allowances, which of course affect the lower paid more than the senior managers, rather than actually looking at the things they are really wasting money on.

    So there you go, I am a Tory civil servant!

    I am hoping that this coalition will work, for the good of the country, I am not looking for what it can do for me, I am responsible for me, no one else, and I do not need a nanny! Have never been in debt, never had what I could not afford. Never claimed any tax credits either, because I also believe I am responsible for my children too.

  • Comment number 99.

    It is a compromise and like all compromises there are issues. However I think that overall it does offer something that I can support.

  • Comment number 100.

    53. At 1:31pm on 20 May 2010, Kevin Orr wrote:

    Brian wrote
    " I'm assuming that you are either unemployed or work for the public sector then as the last 13 years of Labour have hardly been a breeze for the people who pay the taxes"

    The public sector pay taxes Brian. Only difference is most of them get rubbish pay
    -------------------------
    The public sector pay taxes, yes, but they're still a net drain on the system.

    If a private sector worker earns £20k and pays £5k taxes, that's an income to the public purse of £5k.

    If a public sector worker earns £20k and pays £5k taxes, that's a drain on the public purse of £15k.

 

Page 1 of 5

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.