What would Tories cut?
The Tories boast that they're being honest about the need for spending cuts but are they being honest about what they'll cut and what the impact will be?
That's a question I've been pursuing in an interview with the shadow chancellor George Osborne.
He claims that the prime minister is denying him the information he needs to decide where the axe should fall. A request for access to the detailed spending information available to ministers has been turned down.
In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit BBC Webwise for full instructions. If you're reading via RSS, you'll need to visit the blog to access this content.
The Tories wanted to see the COINS database - that stands for Combined Online Information System - which contains information about what's been spent in over 12,000 category headings.
Mr Osborne tells me that:
"Gordon Brown is denying to the opposition the information on individual spending items in the government Budget that would help us plan for government, help us plan for dealing with the debt crisis. He has denied us access to that information. That makes our life as an opposition more difficult, but more to the point for the country, it means the country doesn't know the truth about where their money is going."
Neverthless he promises that the Tories will in future "provide more and more details and examples of specific schemes" they'll cut.
The shadow chancellor also makes clear that the Tories are not committed to protecting spending on schools or the Sure Start programme. Earlier, the shadow schools secretary, Michael Gove, insisted that the Tories would protect what he called "front line spending" on schools.
Pressed on why the country should trust him - a young and privileged man - with this task, the shadow chancellor replies:
"We're going to protect the poorest, we're going to protect the vulnerable, but we're going to deal with the debt crisis because, let me say this, I've got young children, many people watching this programme have got young children, and it is not fair to leave them with our debt. We have to deal with the situation now and not leave the problem to another generation."
PS. For those who want the full quote on spending priorities:
Osborne: "We've taken a tough decision, which is to protect health spending - I could have put health spending into the pot - I'm also protecting international development spending because we've made some moral commitments to the rest of the world. That means..."
Robinson: Are you protecting schools?
Osborne: "I'm not protecting other areas at this stage."
Robinson: Are you protecting Sure Start?
Osborne: "I'm not protecting other areas. I'm not going to go into specific details of individual programs but I've made a positive decision and this is part of the choice that David Cameron and the modern Conservatives have made to protect health spending, to protect international development spending because we think those are important commitments for the kind of society we want (interruption)."
Update, 18:35: The Cabinet Office insist that the decision not to give the Tories the spending information they requested was taken by the cabinet secretary and not ministers after normal pre-election contacts between civil servants and opposition leaders.
I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~56~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Nick, another u turn today from the government this time on ID cards.
Is this just a softening up for the announcement that we can't afford ID cards like the Liberals and Conservatives have said all along?
If we knew how much the government have allocated to ID cards then maybe George Osborne could give you an informed answer to your questions.
Complain about this comment
Well, I expect we are going to see a lot of trolls write down, in a predictable mantra, nurses, doctors, teachers, firemen, policemen. To those trolls I say, go on, get it out of your system and post what you have been told to as soon as possible. Then we can have a sensible debate afterwards.
Complain about this comment
You seem to expect Osborne to make half-cock commitments when he hasn't been given the information with which to work out the details. Why is your post more adversely judgemental against Osborne for not giving details than it is about Brown/Labour for denying him the information?
Have you asked the government to comment about the denial of the information? And have you got your supplementary lined up to deal with the answer "we are only following normal procedure"?
Complain about this comment
Interesting headline, anyone would think it was trying to distract from the very disturbing news that G Brown is denying Her Majesty's Opposition the information to which they are entitled.
Alongside the news that:
- In breach of protocol, G Brown and his Balls turned up for a photocall at a school without informing either the local MP or Council and attempted to prevent them being there once they did find out. http://conservativehome.blogs.com/centreright/2009/06/how-not-to-be-prime-ministerial-on-a-pm-visit.html
- Ed Balls ringing up a journalist and demanding that he remove a piece that accurately describes his falseheads in presenting the growth in UK debt. http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/3725688/talking-balls.thtml
It does make you wonder exactly what country Brown and co think they live in. I don't use the word govern deliberately as that would imply some sense of competence which is totally unwarranted.
Complain about this comment
Seeing as the mendacious Brown refuses to let the Opposition look at the books, and seeing as how Darling's budget forecast of a 1.6% fall in GDP for the first quarter was totally inaccurate, when in reality it fell by 2.4%, thus making even Darling's pie in the sky predictions for growth coming out of recession totally irrelevant, how can anybody expect details from any opposition party at this time?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Come on Nick. Why focus on the Tories? Even if the electorate are daft enough to re-elect Labour, cuts are coming anyway. The difference between the parties is that Labour refuse to tell the truth about this.
Thanks to Brown's utter fiscal recklessness since 2001, we are facing a huge, economically-threatening deficit. Spending will HAVE TO BE cut, by ANY party, not just the Tories, after the next election.
Or maybe you think that Labour, if re-elected, would carry on spending at current levels? If so, please tell us, because, unless we cut public spending, the UK is heading for bankruptcy.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Rather rediculous to ask what the Tories would cut. They still have almost a year to try and work out what the reality of government finances are before being obliged to make sensible suggestions.
Brown and Co say that the various "new spends" announced to Build Britain's Future are actually monies to be switched from existing unused or uncommitted budgets across the departments.
It suggests that there is a lot of cash allocated, but never really ear-marked for a specific purpose. Far as I can see, that would mean many Billions could be cut from government spend without making any real impact. Add that to some quite wasteful initiatives and before you know it, you could reduce taxes - or borrowing by 5 percent without really noticing...
Complain about this comment
I really hope this is the start of some sense.
We are spending way more than we earn, we can't borrow indefinitely and even if we could borrowing itself costs money. Therefore we have to make some hard cuts. Yes these will have negative impacts on lots of people, but until we can pay off our debt and increase our productivity that is the way it has to be.
Brown is saying "There is no impending debt disaster and we can keep spending."
The Tories might finally be saying "We've spent too much and now we have to cut back."
Roll on the general election, because like most people I know it is time to take the bitter pill...
Complain about this comment
Hopefully Osbourne will have a rethink on this. I for one dont want to see a single penny spent on international development, we are on the way to becoming a 3rd world country and the idiot is worrying about moral commitments made by the government who are bankrupting the country.
Complain about this comment
So there we have it.
Labour knows where the skeletons are hidden and won't tell the Conservatives which allows Brown to lie to the public.
The Conservatives don't have the information, want to make it public, and are pilloried by Mr Robinson.
Really balanced I would say Nick. Why not make it balanced piece by asking Labour why they won't give the information.
This stinks. Things are much worse than we think and Labour are to blame.
Complain about this comment
The Tories could start by cutting out 'waste' in government and there is plenty of that with the present administration.
International development would be a good one to cut - otherwise known as 'empire building' by sending/gifting millions of pounds overseas to people who hate 'us'.
Subsidising Scotland, Wales and Ireland should be cut - let them sort themselves out.
The Tories need to start talking about Labour's 'double whammy' - tax and spend - if labour are not going to effect comprehensive cuts in public expenditure to balance the books then there is a tax bombshell looming for 2011 and thereafter. This sent Kinnock and the loonies packing in the 1990's and the labour urge to PAYE tax ordinary people until they bleed, is still there, as a psychological defect.
The government needs to delay population growth and cut costs - Gordon Brown said in Parliament that each resettled Gurkha would cost the UK taxpayer around £50,000 if you can make any sense of what he said and the total bill would be £1.5 Billion. So cutting out mass immigration on four or five million 'immigrants' would eliminate the national debt according to Gordon Brown's own figures.
Complain about this comment
1. At 5:36pm on 30 Jun 2009, Economicallyliterate wrote:
Nick, another u turn today from the government this time on ID cards.
Is this just a softening up for the announcement that we can't afford ID cards like the Liberals and Conservatives have said all along?
If we knew how much the government have allocated to ID cards then maybe George Osborne could give you an informed answer to your questions
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually if you read the story, it is only a uturn on making it compulsory for airport staff... there is no indication that the whole thing has been scrapped. Infact one of the comments in the article is that ID cards are still being pushed ahead by Labour
Complain about this comment
Sounds honest to me. Health and international development are protected, everything else is fair game. What else can you ask for this far ahead of an election? Better than Brown who flatly denies any government cuts.
Complain about this comment
The point is how can the Tories say what they will do if their requests for information is being blocked by the current government
Complain about this comment
"Pressed on why the country should trust him - a young and privileged man - with this task, the shadow chancellor replies"
Nick most of the Labour government are what can be only described as privileged in backroundw and education... Where did Harriet Harmen go to school nick and what family backround does she have
Complain about this comment
Still doing your damnedest to get that word "cuts" next to the word "Tories" aren't you Nick ;)
It's hardly as if it's news to anyone who reads these blogs that it's impossible to develop specific details of economic policy without knowledge of the full facts concerning the nation's finances first.
The first priority should always be that we hold the people who do have this knowledge to account, to ensure that they do their job properly. More of this instead, please Nick.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
It seems ridiculous to ask anyone to project any figures at all if the government continue to hide or camouflage the facts.
Can anyone know apart from the treasury the shortfall in payments to HM Customs & Excise and the Revenue. The tax refunds having to be paid out to loss making companies certainly won't help. After all if there is not sufficient coming in to pay existing commitments how many departments will the government raid before we all get the message. It won't be just 10% cuts it will be a case of what can we afford to keep.
The 2007 spending review certainly didn't project billions of pounds to be paid in interest for the massive borrowing this government has committed the taxpayer to.
There seems to be no reliable figures coming out of anywhere judging by the constant revisions from one month to the next which have all been worryingly downward.
Conservatives or any other party for that matter can only project on figures made available to them.
The real pressure should be put on Brown to produce the real figures before an emergency budget is forced upon him.
Complain about this comment
"Pressed on why the country should trust him..."
Nick it seems you like to press the opposition but prefer to fondle the government.....
The poor guy can't commit to anything because the powers that be are denying him information. Will you please massage them vigorously for a reply?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Nick
Please could you interview Gordon Brown or Alistair Darling and ask them whether they will make cuts in public spending in real terms. Simple question needing a simple answer. The Tories have said they will. I need to know so that I know who to vote for at the next election.
Put simply, who will manage the economy effectively? Who will make tough decisions needed to restore public finances? Will the NHS be a priority?
If I am in debt or have a reduced income I must take action to ensure my personal solvency. I need a government who will do the same for the sake of my family.
PS - Have a word with Stephanie Flanders - she might be able to explain about the economy etc if you are struggling.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Oddly, up till now, I had never really agreed with those who accused Nick of blatant NuLab bias- it seemed more as if they wished him to join in with a bit of Brown-lambasting, and he was being more cautious.
But this contribution is, I'm afraid something of a disgrace.
We have a Government who are so ready to use any underhand tactics to misrepresent the Opposition's plans that the Tories are wisely being coy about what they will inevitably have to do; and even then, they cannot plan properly until their horrified gaze falls upon the true state of the Great Chancellor's economic legacy.
Complain about this comment
Frankly, it's impossible for the Tories to say which government expenditure is going under the knife and which is protected in anything but the most general terms, simply because it could be anything up to 11 months before the next election and the government finances could be totally different (i.e. worse) than now.
No politician in his right mind ties his hands a year before the electorate are expected to vote. Mr Osborne is doing very well to ring fence Health and Foreign Aid at this point. Health, especially, is comforting because it puts to bed any notion that Labour historically tried to use, that the Tories are anti-NHS. As we all know, Mr Cameron is a big fan.
Expect from Labour, though, plenty more Tory cuts jibes and plenty more outright lies from people such as Balls who pretend that everything in the economic garden is all roses and who hope that the electorate won't see through Labour's sham.
http://cogitodexter.wordpress.com/2009/06/30/breathtaking-lies-from-balls/
The Tories are doing excellently in making cautious and sober promises. Labour are spinning every which-way and promising the earth knowing they won't be around to either deliver or be held to task.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Such Paranoia! I see many non-Labourites here are concentrating more on Nick Robinson rather than the matter in hand. Then again, that's what the conservatives do best- not bothering about the details but worrying about personality.
Anyway, back onto the subject. Osbourne's being a bit vague. Labour's practically released their manifesto, so why can't the Tories do the same? Do they have a full plan, or are they just trying to kick up a fuss again?
Complain about this comment
Nick,
On reflection, do you really feel your latest blog is fair ? Given that Labour is in governemnt, Labour has access to all the books and Labour has just published it's policy "visions", shouldn't you be pressing the government about what they would cut from their stated plans ?
Complain about this comment
"Update, 18:35:
The Cabinet Office insist that the decision not to give the Tories the spending information they requested was taken by the Cabinet Secretary and not ministers after normal pre-election contacts between civil servants and opposition leaders.
Right. So now ask the government for a comment on the Cabinet Secretary's decision, and for confirmation that no member of the government has communicated with him about it at any time before it was announced. And ask Osborne whether he has any more information to give about who notified the decision to him, and what reasoning, if any, was given for it.
You might also ask a Labour spokesman if his party thinks it reasonable to keep bombarding the Conservatives with requests for details of their spending plans, when the information needed to make these plans has been denied to them by the civil service, apparently.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
One might speculate that the Cabinet Secretary will not hold that position once the Tories sweep into power. His recent decision on COINS neatly illustrates how remote from reality the mechanics of central government are, especially the 'mandarins' of Whitehall.
While I can appreciate that an Opposition must be tested to see if they have the goods to run the country, with few exceptions the quality of questioning on future economic recovery, especially on taxes and public spending, seems to be much more laissez faire when interviewing ministers and more combative when demanding the impossible from shadow ministers.
Taxes, public spending, and the future for our next generations are weighty matters. In trying to get to the truth of how each political party will tackle these difficult matters it does seem that the BBC, our public broadcaster, should demand the very best from its political journalists at all times, on air and blogging.
Cameron and Osborne are being scrupulous in not putting forward policy that they cannot know if it can be implemented. The scale of government borrowing is so serious that we deserve to have the COINS information available to all. What is there to hide? Can it possibly be worse than MPs expenses?
If the BBC focussed on what could possibly be in COINS that would have to be redacted before it could be made public then the voters could see for themselves which political party offered the best way forward in dealing with economic recovery.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
"Subsidising Scotland, Wales and Ireland should be cut - let them sort themselves out."
Except Scotland isnt subsidised
http://www.theherald.co.uk/politics/news/display.var.2515217.0.North_Sea_oil_revenue_would_see_Scotland_in_the_black.php
While Scotland gets more from London that it would if there was no Oil it gets less than it would if it got to keep all the Oil revenues in its boundries.
Also London does better than anywhere else in the UK and its taxed raised were mainly from the banks and finacial sector - you can guarentee the rest of us are propely subsidising the Captial now the bank revenue isnt coming in!!
As a Scot im happy in the Union but want big changes to the whole setup - what im less than happy with is this continual peddaling of these complete myths.
Something I will say is we are wasting the extra money we do get - we have a large public sector that is bloated and inefficient - but for some reason politicians of any party dont want to tackle it.
Complain about this comment
oh nick you are blaming the tories for not telling you what they would cut when the headline should be "government refuses to give information to opposition"..... Of course they want to keep it a secret, they know the figures are even worse than we think...... i see GDP was adjusted to the worst decline in fifty years...luckily Alistair Darling said the recovery will start in the second half of 2009..well Alistair that is tomorrow, seen any green shoots to write about Nick...?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Mr Ten Percent is going to make huge and massive cuts and they dont care about the people of this country...onlt about the few familes on inhertance tax....which teacher, policeman, doctor and mmemeber of the military are they going to sack...im tired of the same old toy rubbish...I don't trust no tory on public spending...they have'nt changed
Complain about this comment
Nick dearest
Why not pursue the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families with a line of questioning based on this article?
http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/3725688/talking-balls.thtml
Complain about this comment
Nick,
the questions you should be asking is-
A) Why are the Goverment not allowing access to their spending details?
B)How are the present Goverment going to pay for all these massive spending plans?
Believe it or not there are some people who actually want to see public spending bought under control, we pay nearly the highest in taxes in europe as it is. With your lavish BBC pension and expenses you do not have to worry so much about the tax bomb heading this way, but the ordinary working man like myself, earning less than 20K a year would like to decide how I spend my money, rather than handing over more and more in tax to be squandered on the irresponsible.
I am sorry Nick but like Brown you also seem detatched from reality. Start asking Brown some serious queations please!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Ed Balls has just said on C4 news "we're able to allocate extra funds as the economy has turned out better than expected".
Yet again, a blatant lie to add to Brown's lies on spending. Nick, there is a year to the election - no opposition party would have finalised their plans this far out. Instead of questioning the honesty of George Osbourne to deliver yet unannounced policies a year from now, why are you not challenging the PM and the cabinet on the ever increasing misinformation and lies they are feeding to the public.
Complain about this comment
oh dear Nick , your cover is well and truely blown
Complain about this comment
Maybe Mr Robinson , you could get our , or your esteemed leader to tell everyone just exactly how much cash will have to be cut from public spending to keep the country from begging for help from the IMF, then you can ask the Tories how they would solve the problem. In the meantime perhaps you could refrain from taking government propaganda and spin as bearing any semblence of truth. If as an unbiased political correspondent you were to ask the government which services they are going to cut (which they are ) then a bit of integrity might return to your reports. Sadly this seems to be a forlorn hope, I fear that the once proud tradition of BBC impartiallity has sadly been lost somewhere along the way, or perhaps like the old Soviet Union so beloved of the Labour party the media (in the BBC's case ) is no longer free.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Nick,
You can't have it both ways you cad you!
If the government won't release the figures or give a clear picture of the dreadful state of the books how can he possibly tell you what you are asking him to give you commitments to?
This is Punch and Judy journalism and a sign of how rotten the Labour spin machine has made this country. Even you Nick - and frankly I did think higher of you - are claiming inpropriety when to fair to Osbourne he is unable to answer.
How about you pop and see Gordon and ask about the U turn on the ID cards? Or the review of our economy that we are going to have to wait to find out on?
Oh poor Britain - how Great they once called us!
Complain about this comment
41. At 7:19pm on 30 Jun 2009, davidou1234 wrote:
Mr Ten Percent is going to make huge and massive cuts and they dont care about the people of this country...onlt about the few familes on inhertance tax....which teacher, policeman, doctor and mmemeber of the military are they going to sack...
===
None. Is that clear enough for you?
===
im tired of the same old toy rubbish...I don't trust no tory on public spending...they have'nt changed
===
Don't trust no tory, a double negative there David, I really hope you don't teach English!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Cuts need to be made - without that or huge tax increases driving the economy into further decline, the county will go bankrupt.
Of course information is being kept hidden as long as possible; it means other people can't prove the detail of how big a mess the economy is in and how hopelessly the economy has been managed, living beyond our means and financing excessive promises on the never never.
We certainly need an end to generous public sector pensions, a debt that is continually hidden and means with wages now being comparable, in general, the total package received by staff in the public sector exceeds the going rate.
We've been engaged in a sustained period of short-termist economic lunacy for a considerable time, borrowing in the good times to keep interest groups happy rather than to invest in projects with an economic payback encouraging real growth.
Window dressing, spending money we don't have and relying on debt, encouraging a superficial consumer culture where everybody believes they deserve luxuries and few believe they have to earn them first.
A social and economic mess that will take much longer than the next parliament to resolve, that is the legacy of Nu Labour.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
I agree with some of the sentiments already made. At least the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats have stated the bleeding obvious -that the next government will have to raise taxes and severely cut expenditure.
The searching questions should be directed to the Government. Until they tell us where they will reign in spending or increase taxes I don't think that the opposition need to say too much. It is quite clear from recent comments by individuals that the Cabinet is in a real mess on this matter.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
The usual cyber-tory bile response to Nick's Blog. Everyone knows that Cameron and his sidekick Osborne have simply no intention of coming clean over the scale and scope of their cuts. Both don't want to frighten the voting public into running away.
Cameron will revert to type and follow the fiscal policy of his heroine Margaret Thatcher (He of the "Thank God for Margaret Thatcher!" quote a few months ago) Education, training and local services will be the obvious targets- so woe betide anyone with children aged 4-18 and/ or elderly relatives needing social care.
The data Osborne bleats about not having access to is not routinely given to the opposition- and this was the same scenario under the last Tory regime. Neither he or his boss have a political scruple in their bodies and won't make a comittment to what they stand for (does anyone know this?)
I have never been a supporter of Tony Blair and GB isn't a very good PM, but the alternative snake oil salesmen make me feel distinctly nauseous.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Dear Mr Robinson
What exactly was the point of using the ad hominem "a young and privileged man" when referring to wee George? I don't recall you dropping Brown or Balls or Darling into the British class structure in any of your previous blogs (please correct me if I'm wrong). Perhaps you should use "Brown, an old and presbyterian man", or "Balls, a middle-aged bloke with a chip on his shoulder", or "Darling, an old and privileged man"?
Right now, it is indisputable that Gordon Brown, Ed Balls and others are lying to the British public; just lying; there's no other word for it. I fail to understand why you should focus on Conservative requests for information and their, perhaps, understandable lack of detailed budgeting plans at the moment whilst the public finances are in unmitigated chaos?
See you down the pub
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#14 nautonier
"Subsidising Scotland, Wales and Ireland should be cut - let them sort themselves out."
Translating that into meaningful language, you are advocating fiscal autonomy for England, Scotland, Wales, and (I presume you mean Northern) Ireland - sloppy language is seldom productive.
According to the recent BBC poll more than 60% of Scots would agree with you, and I am one of them.
Complain about this comment
"They might be right if Robinson's General Election performance is anything to go by. The tenacious journalist grilled the Prime Minister over a Labour poster on Conservative tax policy and even had the pleasure of being called a "-ing pillock" by John Prescott.
Robinson has already ruffled a few feathers in Downing Street, a legacy that is likely to continue at the BBC."
Daily Mail July 2005
=
Was this another Nick Robinson? Or the same bloke who writes these blogs?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Comment 48 : Sagamix
"hi Nick,
Personally, I have no problem with you describing the Shadow Chance as a "young privileged man" ... he is each of those 3 things, after all ... but maybe you should pick your words a little more carefully in future, given the level of Clownly upset that sort of language seems to stir up - doesn't help subsequent debate - so less of it from now on, if you don't mind - let's try and stick to the tried and tested ... and I think now (pretty much) generally accepted term ... VACUOUS POSHBOY!"
You and your fellow Labour troll General Fondue don't seem to agree about how relevant ad hominem attacks are to political discussion. The good General sems to think that there are too many people attacking Nick Robinson personally instead of addressing the issues he has raised, yet here are you failing to address any of the issues George Osborne has raised and launching an ad hominem attack on him.
You'll have to excuse me, but my education only goes as far as to say that if you express disagreement with something, that is the position you have taken. And if you subsequently decide to change your opinion then this change of opinion also applies to the first case when you took the alternate view.
So what do you Labourites think about ad hominem attacks? Do they add to political debate? Are you happy for your opponents to use them if you decide to?
In fact, do you believe in single standards at all?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
As usual you are very keen to hold the Tories to account for their spending plans, yet you will accept the Government announcements of "no cuts" without question?
The BBC's attitude to political "balance" is an odd one.
Without access to the books and no honest estimate of our final total borrowing, how can anyone say what the extent or areas of reduced expenditure will need to be?
Good luck with your attempts to spread the blame for the mismanagement and spin of the last 12 years.
Complain about this comment
"Are the Tories being honest about cuts?"
Dare I presume you're only asking that question about the Tories because the only response to asking it about Labour would be a loud snort and disbelieving laughter?
(Oh, and Nick, try and get On Message. Governments don't "cut" these days, they merely "reprioritise" them...)
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
The conservatives have stated that spending cuts will be needed, but it's only Brown's government that will not tell the truth. In fact we all know that cuts are needed urgently. Why does the government persist with their lies.
The conservatives have every right, as do the electorate, to know the financial state of the country. How else can a full assessment be made.
We now see labour ministers begin to jockey for Brown's job. Ed Balls is trying to look good by this sudden £400,000,000 spend while Alan Johnson is scrapping compulsary i.d. cards. Balls has made himself look ridiculous, would you spend that amount at this time with the countries finances in such a state. NO YOU WOULD NOT!!
What an utter farce this labour government has made of running the country.
What price the integrity of labour MPs who back Brown.Shame on you all.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Trouble is it's like saying Nick has ten grand in his piggy bank, bills need to be paid essential items to be had, now then how are we going to tell him what to pay and what to spend it on, along cometh the gasman with a whopping bill for two grand, now to make ends meet we need to know the incoming and out going pennies if he doesn't tell us what they are how are we to judge, for all we know some of it could be frittered awayt at the bookies and bingo halls - get the drift?
One thing that you can be sure off is this big black hole the money flows through is a darn sight bigger than they are letting on, you really think they are going to be honest about that when they can't be honest about themselves!
And with Labour being spend now pay later party when have they ever saved for this or that - they will have to sell Blackpool Tower to make ends meet soon and one day they will have to stop Robbing Peter to pay Paul, all they are doing is shifting debt around as it grows playing 'make believe'.
What prudence the entire lot should be booted out now, let you into a little secret MPs... any MPs will never be honest Tory, Labour or Liberal they will ALWAYS tow the party line instead of speaking out that IS the problem and may be why we are in this mess!
Complain about this comment
sagamix 48
Most amusing, as ever. One of the more interesting numbers in the current Labour song book is the concentration on undermining Osborne. Clearly the idea you are collectively trying to spread is that either Osborne remains as the Shadow Chancellor through Cameron's unlimited loyalty to an old but dumb friend, or that there is some sort of a bet on about how long Osborne will stay in place and Cameron has bought the high field.
I think we all know, however, that the truth lies elsewhere. Brown hates Osborne for a past perceived misdemenour (well reported elsewhere so I won't repeat here), and would rather eat his own face than speak constructively of or with him. Meanwhile, elsewhere in The Bunker, notwithstanding Osborne's frequently weak media performances, Labour fear and loath him as a good Commons performer, smart political operator, strong team man and the possessor and efficient user of a considerable intellect.
Osborne, of course, doesn't need me to defend him. I just thought I would make the point that the fire behind Labour's smoke is, yet again, of an unusual hue.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
64. At 8:12pm on 30 Jun 2009, MacTheLife wrote:
...The data Osborne bleats about not having access to is not routinely given to the opposition- and this was the same scenario under the last Tory regime. Neither he or his boss have a political scruple in their bodies and won't make a comittment to what they stand for (does anyone know this?)...
===
Yes it is. John Major let Blair & Brown have access to the Civil Service before the 1997 election, even though he was expected to lose.
Complain about this comment
This seems a rather partisan blog entry. Where are the tough questions on why Brown won't even hold the regular spending review? Why give in to the ludicrous soft response of "because we haven't reached the end of the recession, so we can't make predictions"? What a load of utter nonsense. Did the Budget get cancelled because it was suddenly too difficult to make predictions about the future? Is the current government's inability to control its own members or even think about passing legislation due to the same problem? The whole affair would be laughable if it weren't so damaging for our country.
It's ridiculous to hold the party that's not in power more accountable for explaining what it would do than the party in power accountable for what it is doing! What is this? Brown's about a millimetre from the line of "the Opposition isn't in charge of government at all; we are; we are the party of doing something, they are the party of doing nothing!" - he might as well play that one and make it clear as clear could be that he thinks the electorate are moronic beyond belief. Spin, substance, actions, doing nothing? Is the irony of this line of attack not agonisingly obvious to Brown and co?
I pity the opposition parties, all of them, and can only think of the following: Never fight an idiot. He'll take you down to his level, and beat you with experience.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
31 general fondue
"that's what the conservatives do best- not bothering about the details but worrying about personality."
================
And using phrases such as "young and privileged" as a phrase implying untrustworthyness isn't bothering about the details either.
Complain about this comment
Comment 66 : General Fondue
"And I don't think there'd be quite the same number of complaints if Nick Robinson was taking a conservative slant to the stories, hmm?"
I can't speak for the others, but what I'm after is balanced, objective reporting. No slant, no prejudice, no double-standards.
What we get throughout the media, at the best of times, is an almost total bias in favour of mainstream opinion, so that anyone advocating anything outside the incredibly narrow range of "acceptable" ideas is portrayed as either an "extremist" or a crank. To anyone with an independently functioning brain, Spiked and Private Eye provide a welcome opportunity for reassurance that one hasn't gone completely doolally - otherwise it's blogs.
Labour, with its huge parliamentary majority, has had it so easy for all but the last few months, despite the fact that its majority in the Commons greatly exaggerates its support in the country at large. Its beliefs and its behaviour have been normalised in the press as being unquestionably correct, with the result that for opposition to make any progress at all they've had to join the club, and accede to this normalised behaviour.
How long it will take the next non-Labour government to unravel this assault on reason and democracy heaven only knows. It'll be a monumental task, because most of those who have benefitted from their sycophancy will be deep-seated in their positions of power by now, and will take a hell of a lot of uprooting. But uprooted they must be, if we are to get out of this shambles.
Complain about this comment
41 davisou1234
"I don't trust no tory on public spending"
----------
Did you say you were a teacher in any earlier post ?
Complain about this comment
Plenty of accusations about the BBC being the propaganda arm of the government. Does the Iranian government read this? also stop trying to rig this blog by calling anyone who disagrees with you a troll! Take a look around you.
Thanks to the Bankers! and thatcherite policies they will both have to cut services. One will care less than the other though.
Complain about this comment
Thanks to #76 lukeireland for that link.
The fact that I have seen less than five posts that havent called into question the integrity of this blog CLEARLY shows how many people are deeply unsatisfied with this dismal brand of journalism.
How can the author call into question the details of proposed Tory cuts when Labour are DENYING the need to cut spending? Surely that should be the topic of discussion when the country is in so much debt and the government intend to make it worse!
In regard to the comments about the millions being wasted on ID cards and various databases, have you thought about how much they will cost to maintain? The cost to improve the security when the system is compromised? That will add up over years and instead of talking relatively, the more ill devised schemes we get like this, the more money will have to be clawed back from other areas.
Anybody with any sense should be able to tell you not to spend what you dont have. The government seem to have forgotten this and sent the country spiralling into further debt by consistently living beyond their means for over a decade now. When will it stop? I doubt it will until we oust these clowns from politics
Complain about this comment
31 general fondue
"that's what the conservatives do best- not bothering about the details .... Labour's practically released their manifesto"
=========================
And the details in yesterday deeply dull and uninspiring "Vision" are ??? Lots of bland comments but no actual detail, and dog whistle rehashed ideas that will never be implemented.
"Local homes for local people" - care to give us any details behid this one for example ???
Complain about this comment
Nick, as a public sector employee (I know everyone, sorry) I can tell you two facts that seem to have escaped you:
(1) the Government has already started making significant cuts whatever ministers might say; and, (2) public servants (of which you are one) have a duty to do what is best for the country and that does not include giving one party (Labour) an inordinately easy ride and another (Conservative) a hard time when both equally deserve to be challenged on one hand and allowed air time to express their views on the other.
Thankfully, the civil service is in my experience a lot less partisan than the BBC seems to have become and will serve whichever party is elected by the country next year. There are no illusions though that spending cuts will be the order of the day whoever wins. At such a time, I don't imagine that the once so highly respected news services of the BBC will be immune....
Complain about this comment
The educashun secretary was talking pure Balls on channel 4 news tonight about tory cuts and NooLaburr's contrasting mantra to spend more every year for ever.
No Balls there all right - he buckled under Snow's paxo-style repeated "just give a yes or no". In the end he stopped saying NooLabuur would be increasing budgets after 2011 - except if his mysterious "five ifs" were satisfied.
Iffy Balls - not a pleasant prospect to woo the voters.
Great fun, especially as he seems to have all the budget figures already that poor old eyebrows is patiently waiting for. By the way has there been another cabinet reshuffle this week? Slipped out as bad news under cover of heatwave/wimbledon/pop star's death/yemeni plane crash?
We should be told...
Complain about this comment
Sagamix
"Personally, I have no problem with you describing the Shadow Chance as a "young privileged man" ... he is each of those 3 things"
==========================================
The same could almost be said of the the niece of the Countess Longford, who's also the daughter of a Harley Street physician. But then your dream girl Harriet isn't that young I suppose.
Now there's someone truley worthy of Nick's question "why should we trust you ???"
Complain about this comment
96. StrictlyPickled
Yes, I will. It means that if you come from an area, you will have more priority when getting a house.
And, of course, your suggestion that the Vision was dull is your opinion- I happen to think that it's a good set of plans. But that's just my opinion.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
'Young and privileged!' Aren't you supposed to have a semblence of objectivity? Apart from that, I find this piece interesting. Now ask Lord Mandleson or anyone else in government for the detail of their spending plans after the next election.
Complain about this comment
76 lukeireland provided a link to make a complaint....
Don't bother if the complaint is about biased reporting, the complaints team are cut from the same cloth as Nick Robinson and Robert Peston.
I said at comment #67 that Nick Robinson is anti-Tory and it seems that most commentators on this blog agree. It will be interesting to see if Nick makes the same comments on the BBC News tonight! However, I suspect he doesn't read any of these comments and will continue setting himself up as Gordon's next spin doctor!
Complain about this comment
What is it about this cuts thing.
The Tories have made it plain that cuts would come if elected, Brown was screaming at Cameron last week during PMQ's about the 10% cuts.
Labour however, want to continually lie and deny cuts are coming.
If they admit to cuts then it's admission of policy failure.
If they don't then it's obvious it's a lie because anyone with common sense knows cuts have to be made.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
It is easy to be a critic of spending but in this situation you have to bring something to the table. The Republicans in the U.S. Congress are the same, just talking about the spending and not offering any alternatives. The Tories, like the Republicans, were sitting there while the banks and financial services were playing their one for you and two for me game and did nothing to prevent the collapse. It is interesting how every elected official has made distance between themselves and the decisions or non-decisions that lead to the financial collapse. It is like they were not around. This was a governmental failure as well as a banking failure and is not about party, they are all to blame. It appears the Tories and Republicans would have wanted a complete financial collapse, but they should just say that, and maybe anarchy would have happened and in the end there would be a new form of government to replace the corrupt pompous breed that currently want to be thought of as statesmen. With a little luck the Romans will invade and put things right again, because this crowd can't be left with serious decisions that require honesty and concern for national well-being.
Complain about this comment
Oh dear Mr Robinson - You seem to have stirred up a real hornets nest on this one. It looks as if you may have some tricky questions to answer when the number of real complaints hit your boss's desk.
I have never felt it necessary to accuse you of bias before - I am of the opinion that in some ways you should be perhaps a little contentious in a blog to generate the debate. This is different of course when reporting on the TV news as there you should obviously be neutral. In this case however I do feel that you should be chided for the "young privileged man" comment as it has no relevance as to why he should be trusted or not. It does however display something of a class bias on your part.
Complain about this comment
48. At 7:36pm on 30 Jun 2009, sagamix wrote:
hi Nick,
Personally, I have no problem with you describing the Shadow Chance as a "young privileged man" ... he is each of those 3 things, after all ...
===
So equally, you would have no problem with the description of Gordon Brown as "a one-eyed Scottish idiot" then?
Complain about this comment
100. At 9:16pm on 30 Jun 2009, General_Fondue wrote:
96. StrictlyPickled
Yes, I will. It means that if you come from an area, you will have more priority when getting a house.
===
But the Government has denied for years that housing allocation favoured immigrants over locals, so how can they now change a policy that they deny existed?
Complain about this comment
Nick I have re read your blog and like many of the posters before me I have to take you to task in respect of the spin that you put on the article.
It seems to me that Mr Osborne has been as open as he possibly could be given the information that he has to hand. He has said that Health and International Development will be protected but at this stage he is not able to commit to any other areas. You are obviously closer to the action than me and many others on this blog, do you think that you could help us out a little by letting us know what you think that you know in respect of the Tory Education plans but are too afraid to tell us. Or are you punting around in the dark (like Mr Brown and his pals) hoping for a slip of the tongue.
Complain about this comment
"General_Fondue wrote:
Anyway, back onto the subject. Osbourne's being a bit vague. Labour's practically released their manifesto, so why can't the Tories do the same? Do they have a full plan, or are they just trying to kick up a fuss again?"
I guess that the reason the Tories haven't made any firm promises is because they don't have access to the same details as Labour - how can they make costed promises if they have no idea how much cuts they are going to have to make?
Of course they can always claim that Manifesto promises are not binding like Labour did.
Complain about this comment
Is the Cabinet Secretary allowed to open the books to the HM Official Opposition? Nick, you have not explained if this is his decision alone or whether he is duty bound not to give the access George Osborne requests. Should we not know why he has made the decision to refuse access to this COINS database.
If he is under direction from another body, we should be told who is ultimately responible for access to this database.
This is the central argument. George Osborne says he can't explain what would be cut because he can't see the books. Mr Balls just pulled £400 million out of nowhere to fund new education and housing initiatives. If there are more of these 'little' hidden stashes in the government books then I think we all have a right to know, including the opposition.
Cut the crass class comments, Nick, the country has moved on.
Complain about this comment
I think a lot of people are misinterpreting/misquoting Nick Robinson here. He was merely pointing out that Osbourne is young, privileged and male. Had Nick mentioned he was Conservative, would you still be complaining? Besides, if someone's going to be in a position of power, I'd want to trust him, and Nick was asking him why we should trust him- a reasonable question.
And yellowbelly1959: Your Description of Brown only actually has one fact in it: He's Scottish, but he has two eyes and he's not an idiot.
Complain about this comment
Hmm.. you do know Gordon Brown is an old and privileged man, don't you, Nick? Never mind, perhaps you haven't done your research into our Great Leader's background.
However, following the extreme and misjudged bias in your post, do you think it is possible the BBC will sack you when the Tories win the next election? After all, the Beeb do have form, folding under pressure when threatened by the Government of the day. They have thrown their journalists to the wolves before. Or maybe you don't remember. WMD, anyone?
Complain about this comment
109. At 9:44pm on 30 Jun 2009, yellowbelly1959 wrote:
Yes, I will. It means that if you come from an area, you will have more priority when getting a house.
===
But the Government has denied for years that housing allocation favoured immigrants over locals, so how can they now change a policy that they deny existed?
===
And, don't forget Gordon's great quote: "British jobs for British people"......
Complain about this comment
@63 bluematter
Agreed that in relative terms it would be peanuts, probably only a tiny proportion of the interest payments on our national debt - but it's the principle.
If you personally were up to your eyeballs in debt would you still continue to support charitable causes?
I've no doubt the bleeding hearts would have plenty to say, but we are in for very tough times ahead, there is going to be a great deal of pain for many, many people. That is inevitable now and in order to get the country back on track the Tory cuts will have to be very deep and ruthlessness will be required.
The problem is going to be somehow making Labour voters understand why it's necessary, a tricky proposition if limited to words of 1 syllable...
Complain about this comment
Your statement that George Osborne - young and privileged man, is typical of the so called hypocritical champagne socialists who try to pretend that they are not from privileged backgrounds, like Harriet Harman who speaks out against Grammar Schools but sends her sons there! Like amongst many other Labour MPs.
Nick, I look forward so much to see the Tories win the next election, and hopefully you will be out on your ear, but I am sure then that your friends in NuLab will look after you for services rendered.
Complain about this comment
109.yellowbelly1959
"But the Government has denied for years that housing allocation favoured immigrants over locals, so how can they now change a policy that they deny existed?"
================
This may come as a surprise, but the hosuing allocation is- wait for it- Balanced. The idea that immigrants were favoured was scepticism and paranoia.
No, you cannot change a policy that never existed, but you can create one to change what will happen in the future.
Complain about this comment
Oh dear Nick it looks like you really are piddling into the wind as far as the latest ComRes poll indicates.
Voters trust the Tories to make spending cuts
The poll indicates that the Tories are trusted by more people than Labour to make the public spending cuts widely expected after the general election, according to a ComRes survey for The Independent.
31 Tories
21 Labour
14 LibDems
Complain about this comment
103. At 9:31pm on 30 Jun 2009, rockBigPhil wrote:
76 lukeireland provided a link to make a complaint....
Don't bother if the complaint is about biased reporting, the complaints team are cut from the same cloth as Nick Robinson and Robert Peston.
I said at comment #67 that Nick Robinson is anti-Tory and it seems that most commentators on this blog agree. It will be interesting to see if Nick makes the same comments on the BBC News tonight! However, I suspect he doesn't read any of these comments and will continue setting himself up as Gordon's next spin doctor!
===
Tonight in the House of Parliament Grand Committee room Guido Fawkes will be re-united with Nick Robinson and Michael White discussing the subject of the internet: saviour or corruptor of democracy?
I wonder which side of the argument nick will come down on, bearing in mind the kicking he is getting on his own blog, and his description of the MPs' expenses scandal as "small beer".
"Neverthless, what's been revealed so far looks unlilkely to force anyone from office and compared with allegations of fraud that politicians have faced in many other countries this would be regarded as small beer."
Questions that MPs dread
Nick Robinson | 23:55 PM, Thursday, 7 May 2009
Complain about this comment
#113 General_Fondue
GB might disagree with you on "He's Scottish". He is from Scotland, but sees himself as British. They are a different nation from Scots, English, Welsh and Irish.
Complain about this comment
The Tories should cut ALL Gov't expenditure by 20% day 1 then issue the cry..........Deal with it!
It will be a far better outcome for this country's future than the massive crippling tax rises Labour will impose on us all to support a fat cat protected and priviledged public sector!
Give the wealth creators a chance PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!
Complain about this comment
@ saga
Your lefty humour never fails to tickle me, for balance we'd better come up with an agreed term for the vacuous poshboys opposite number, how about "spineless socialist simpleton"?
Complain about this comment
Nic I must say that was a very one-sided interview, and was not upto your normal standard.
I hope when you can get Darling in front of you that you ask him some of the questions that posters have put on here, plus ask him after his problems with flipping, why should the country trust you.
Complain about this comment
113. At 9:51pm on 30 Jun 2009, General_Fondue wrote:
I think a lot of people are misinterpreting/misquoting Nick Robinson here. He was merely pointing out that Osbourne is young, privileged and male. Had Nick mentioned he was Conservative, would you still be complaining? Besides, if someone's going to be in a position of power, I'd want to trust him, and Nick was asking him why we should trust him- a reasonable question.
And yellowbelly1959: Your Description of Brown only actually has one fact in it: He's Scottish, but he has two eyes and he's not an idiot.
===
I really thought you were going to say the only fact was that he is an idiot.
"Detached retina
At the age of 16, he had joined his older brother John at Edinburgh University, the youngest fresher there since 1945.
But disaster struck in his first week of term when he was diagnosed with a detached retina - thought to be the result of being kicked in the head during an end of term rugby match at Kirkcaldy High.
He missed the entire first term while doctors battled to save his sight. He would be in and out of hospital for the next five years, often spending weeks lying on his back in a darkened room. He eventually lost the sight in one eye and retained just 30% of his vision in the other."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6743875.stm
So, Scottish - Fact.
One-eyed - Fact.
Idiot - I leave that to others to decide!
Complain about this comment
I think Nick must be an agent provocateur for the Tories - this is a gift. I could have predicted the first eighty posts. What I didn't predict was that they would all say the same thing. I think you must be on piece rates, otherwise why keep repeating the same as the previous posts? Does it make you feel like you belong?
Complain about this comment
118. At 9:57pm on 30 Jun 2009, General_Fondue wrote:
109.yellowbelly1959
"But the Government has denied for years that housing allocation favoured immigrants over locals, so how can they now change a policy that they deny existed?"
================
This may come as a surprise, but the hosuing allocation is- wait for it- Balanced. The idea that immigrants were favoured was scepticism and paranoia.
No, you cannot change a policy that never existed, but you can create one to change what will happen in the future.
===
If the housing policy is balanced, then why does Gordon need to change the existing policy?
Complain about this comment
yellow @ 108
the OESI? ... only one problem with that and (with nod to Marshall McLuhan) it's with the medium not the message ... see how intellectual us clear thinking progressives are! ... i.e. nothing said by Jezzer Clarkson should EVER be given too warm a reception
hey, and what's with the downer on double negatives? - nothing wrong with "I don't trust no Tory" - bit of vernacular - fact, even triple negatives are okay - you know, like when you were leaving that dodgy club last week (remember?) and you were yelling to all and sundry "ain't gonna bump no more with no big fat woman"
Complain about this comment
117
This old cliche 'champagne socialists' gets used a lot on here. What does it mean? A Socialist who has wealth - why not? What's the Tory equivalent, a 'brown ale reactionary'? The Council house dweller who votes Tory - nothing wrong with that, of course, so why is it somehow wrong the other way round?
Could it be hypocrisy I wonder? Surely not.
Complain about this comment
pickled @ 99
But then your dream girl Harriet isn't that young I suppose
don't be like that! ... she still looks pretty young
Complain about this comment
I find all these comments hilarious. Nobody seems to want an unbiased debate. All I have heard in the past 6 months is criticsm against this government and rightly so. But isn't it about time we started to know a bit more about the opposition's policies, be they Conservative or Liberal. All I hear on the BBC's and Murdoch's news is about Gordon Brown. Quite frankly, it has become boring! If we are going to elect a new party to govern us,isn't about time we start asking some serious questions on their policy proposals.
Also, I understand that as a nation, we are massively in debt but, wasn't the majority of this debt used to prop up the Banks? If so, will this not be paid back?
Complain about this comment
I've just watched Nick's report on the BBC News at 10 and he ended with the line: "the Tories know what cuts they are going to make, but they're not going to tell us" (or words to that effect).
Nick, they don't know because Mandelson won't let them see the books! Oops! Gordon Brown is PM isn't he?
Complain about this comment
#94 DHwilkinson
" Thanks to the Bankers! and thatcherite policies they will both have to cut services. One will care less than the other though."
Still blaming Thatcher, after 12 years of Labour, the labour apologists still can not look at their own failings.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
@108 yellowbelly, rofl!!
Complain about this comment
megapoliticajunkie wrote:
"A young and privileged man". no hint of bias there is there? I wonder where you got that line from? Its not too difficult to guess. In fact its a political smear plain and simple.
To most people in the street it would be simply stating a fact, no bias or politics needed. Your comment though seems to suggest bias.
Complain about this comment
109. yellowbelly1959
But the Government has denied for years that housing allocation favoured immigrants over locals, so how can they now change a policy that they deny existed?
=
Whooa careful yellow, that kind of logic may cause a malfunction with G_F.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
sagamix @72
Keep on kidding yourself pal.......
Complain about this comment
@general_dim 113
So you want to be able to trust people who are in a position of power? How do you reconcile that statement with your fawning support for the government of zero talents, exclusively made up of proven pathological compulsive liars?
I take it that final salary pension schemes are still open for trolls...
Complain about this comment
125. yellowbelly1959
Well, I would argue that he's got two eyes, he just can't see out of one of them.
Complain about this comment
Update, 18:35: The Cabinet Office insist that the decision not to give the Tories the spending information they requested was taken by the cabinet secretary and not ministers after normal pre-election contacts between civil servants and opposition leaders.
=
Nick dearest
Is this standard procedure? Is the cabinet secretary the final arbiter on this? Can Osborne appeal to anyone?
Complain about this comment
Nick,
A bit of a giveaway when you describe Osborne as " - a young and privileged man - ", isn't it? This immediately suggests bias on your part, and dare I say, Labour sympathies. I am a Labour supporter, but I utterly believe that the BBC, AS THE STATE MEDIA, should be completely impartial in politics, and especially in the run-up to a General Election - arguably the most important Election for 40 years. Anything to say in your defence?
Complain about this comment
41 davidou wrote:
Mr Ten Percent is going to make huge and massive cuts and they dont care about the people of this country...onlt about the few familes on inhertance tax....which teacher, policeman, doctor and mmemeber of the military are they going to sack...im tired of the same old toy rubbish...I don't trust no tory on public spending...they have'nt changed
Seriously you cannot expect us to believe that you are a teacher based on this post. Even the apostrophes are in the wrong place and to say that you don't believe no tory means that you actually believe every Tory. Not even I would admit to that!
Complain about this comment
Nic, you also say that " The Tories boast that they're being honest about the need for spending cuts but are they being honest about what they'll cut and what the impact will be?" and yet in the same sentence you admit that they do have access the figures! [the COINS database]. Forgive my logic here Nic, but how on earth are they, or anyone else, supposed to put forward a credible budget when they are prevented from access to the New Labour pre- and post-spending plan? Are are you suggesting thay carry out some kind of UK version of Watergate?
Complain about this comment
G_F
Anyway, back onto the subject. Osbourne's being a bit vague. Labour's practically released their manifesto, so why can't the Tories do the same?
=
A Labour manifesto has as much meaning as Susan Sangster's marriage vows.
Complain about this comment
Nick your arguments are, as usual, spurious. Brown is running government financed by extreme levels of debt. Worse still he has failed to control, and even ramped up, unfunded state pensions which in effect, is an even larger debt. The spending cuts that must come to fund this debt are LABOUR CUTS IN SERVICES. That these CUTS forced on us by LABOUR incompetence is a fact. The only difference in politics is that Labour pretend there are no cuts and hope people like you will pin them on the opposition.
Complain about this comment
The tories know all about cuts and recessions. Remember the 80s and 90s ? Three and a half million unemployed for 15 years.
The only problem is they have to persuade people to vote for them. They keep telling us that cuts are inevitable and that we can't afford schools and state pensions and everything else that the state provides ( at least they've changed their tune on the NHS ), but the real choice at the next election will be between monetarism, cuts and unemployment on one side and a government protecting peoples jobs and public services on the other.
Complain about this comment
Laugh 129
I thought 117 caught Harman's hypocrisy perfectly.
I thought socialism was meant to be about sharing wealth, rather than possessing and exploiting it.
Complain about this comment
"yellowbelly1959 wrote:
41. At 7:19pm on 30 Jun 2009, davidou1234 wrote:
Don't trust no tory, a double negative there David, I really hope you don't teach English!"
I think that with the new Labour proposals of five year reviews for teachers that David would actually be switching his alliance away from Labour. What with him being a teacher who seems to have trouble constructing solid arguments or even valid sentences!
Complain about this comment
Not convinced Nick that you are not actually returning to your student roots. It's easy to look as if you are supporting Labour to let everyone else come up with the criticism. However as far as George Osborne is concerned the greater distance between his financial illiteracy regarding mortgages the better. Nice news story but why no concentration on the fact that Cameron, Wiggin and Osbourne, all old Etonions don't understand how mortgages work other than as a financial instrument available to exploit.
If you were a Labour supporter you would have dealt with this. How can I vote for any party where the chancellor/shadow chancellor has no integrity on their on fiscal responsbilities
Complain about this comment
I'd like to know, are the BBC being honest, because they are biased and this is very relevant to the subject. So please don't censor it again.
Complain about this comment
I think you got out of sinc Nick. What does being a 'young privilaged young man' have to do with anything? He is up to the job and that is surely the most important thing. Are you up to being an imparitial journalist?
H Harman came form an very privilaged background, attended St Pauls Girls School, and has only addopted the estuary accent to pretend she has got credibility. Perhaps you could do some research on a few other of your Labour chums. In essence your grilling of the Tories is not even handed as you have over the years to get any value for us from our current gavernment. Get a grip and ask the questions of those who have the figures but are determined to conduct a scorched earth policy for the next government to pick up. I have yet to see you make a real fist of interviewing any of the government so far, so I am not impressed at all.
Complain about this comment
66. At 8:13pm on 30 Jun 2009, General_Fondue wrote:
50. ghostworld
The reason I say that they're non-Labourites is because there are almost no Labourites commenting on this blog. And I don't think there'd be quite the same number of complaints if Nick Robinson was taking a conservative slant to the stories, hmm?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
there are in fact plenty General ..... just need to read the posts more closely
Complain about this comment
gary @ 117
champagne socialists
ah but all that seems to mean is someone who's both left wing AND successful - don't see its point as an insult - after all, both being successful and being left wing are strongly (and positively) correlated to intelligence ... so called mutual correlation ... and hence there's bound to be tons of these CSs around the place
Complain about this comment
"Still blaming Thatcher, after 12 years of Labour, the labour apologists still can not look at their own failings."
Yeh why not its fun. Still banging on about New Labour appologists? You seem to think that anyone who comments here has some influence.
" ...the labour apologists still can not look at their own failings."
We don't.
I'll have to be carefull not to catch the 'rant' virus again. there are a few quite serious cases here.
Complain about this comment
131 justtheitcket
Wrong, actually. The debt figures relating to the banks are offset by the asset values of the shares that the government now owns.
The overall government debt is massive because they have maintained expenditure in the face of a substantial collapse in tax revenues, and because that expenditure now includes vast amounts of loan interest. The debt is the result of chronic and sustained excess of expenditure over income, in other words.
Complain about this comment
Nick, why should we trust you?
I don't know you well enough to know whether you simply have a pro-government bias or whether you have a pro-labour bias. But you are very obviously biased. It will be interesting to see who's side you are on after the next election.
Complain about this comment
Never mind Nick on 23 July we will be given an insight into the way people view the way Britain will be rebuilt, albeit only by the voters of Norwich North.
Bye election triggered by the resignation of Labour MP Ian Gibson
The Tories only need a 5.8% swing to take the seat.
Complain about this comment
Say goodbye to healthcare, education, care for seniors and so much more unless you can pay (and pay through the nose). This right wing opposition will take whatever remains of the UK back to the 1950s and by the look of lots of your posts you deserve it. I hope that you all have the cash to replace your hips, knees (or - and here's a fervent hope for some - to cure your newly found cancers), educate your kids, and/or pay for Grandma to stay in respite care for a fortnight (and her private meds too).
I'm out of this place as soon as Cameron is elected by the moronic inferno - hurrah you say, well that's one less but think about that when you get chest pains at night or on the weekend, or your kid has a broken arm)
Here's to you Mr Robinson - enjoy the country you helped create.
Complain about this comment
Again I don't quite get why you spend so much time and effort on questioning George Osborne on Tory plans for cuts while the government is getting away with absolute murder. They're the ones who refuse to even accept the state of the economy and outlook- are you just giving in to their total lack of honesty while trying to cross question the Opposition. Don't you think there's something a bit perverse in this approach??
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
147.TheBlameGame
"A Labour manifesto has as much meaning as Susan Sangster's marriage vows."
Who (is Susan Sangster)?
Complain about this comment
Yellowbelly & General Fondue
Can we please cease with the rather personal comments and get back to the debate. The fact that Mr Osborne is male, young and from a privileged background has little to do with anything. The fact that Mr Brown is Scottish and has lost the sight of one eye similarly has little relevance. If it were to be proved that he was an idiot however this is a different matter and certainly some of his recent actions and statements do give some evidence to all but the most biased.
Complain about this comment
Any politician that cuts anything before an election is cutting two things - the thing that he talks about and his own throat. It is entirely ingenuous of all parties and the press to ask such questions, and even more so in the present circumstances.
Better to ask them two questions:
1 - Who they consider are their natural constituency?
And,
2- Who are their donors?
You will not get straight answers but at least the answers you do get will be more illuminating than a sterile debate on cuts.
And by the way one of the reasons we are in the economic mess we are in today is that Labour carried on being Tories when they got elected. Indeed the press railroaded them into agreeing to be so before the election. All the press wanted was different bunch of Tories because the old lot had become stale, jaded and corrupt.
I confidently expect the same to happen again Cameron's Tories will be railroaded by the press into agreeing to carry on being Labour which of course was in fact Tory.....
Hasn't it dawned on us yet that a red top in East London chooses who the government will be, as directed by its American/Australian boss. (see Neil Kinnock and the light bulb front page etc...) All party leaders are scared of him. (and I am not referring to Neil Kinnock!) We must I think at some time reclaim our votes and our democracy from the press.
Complain about this comment
"...the decision not to give the Tories the spending information they requested was taken by the cabinet secretary and not ministers..."
It hardly matters which of the self-serving cover-up merchants is subverting democracy and denying us the ability to hold government to account. This government and the civil service that serves it care not for the country and are not worthy of their respective names.
The problem with our current system is that it relies on honourable men, like John Major it would appear, to operate it fairly and openly. If we ever get a new government that is serious about reform, its first task must be to enshrine in law that the metrics of governance are the property of the people and a reformed civil service be required to gather, maintain and share said information equally with the people's elected representatives for the primary purpose of accountable governance. It should be a criminal offence to knowingly withhold or misrepresent such information.
The economy is in dire straits and yet the BBC prefers to speculate whether a future government MIGHT be untrustworthy when evidence of the untrustworthiness of the current government is all around. The BBC should be the champions of openness and transparency and not the instrument of obfuscation of NuLabour. Shame on you Nick.
Complain about this comment
"Update, 18:35: The Cabinet Office insist that the decision not to give the Tories the spending information they requested was taken by the cabinet secretary and not ministers after normal pre-election contacts between civil servants and opposition leaders".
No suprise there then. Ministers must be far too busy dealing with the fertilizer to decide who is or is not a mushroom. In the meantime, the Tories remain in the dark - a bit like the rest of us.
So 'What would Tories cut?' - without the necessary information, the most likely answer is their noses to spite their faces - which is no doubt exactly what the said ministers want.
Complain about this comment
Now we know what has happened to Damian MacBride. He shaved his hair off, donned a pair of oversize glasses and became the BBC's political smear agent. This commentary by Nick is really so childishly biased against the Conservatives that it loses any pretence to being carefully thought out.
Complain about this comment
Update, 18:35:
"The Cabinet Office insist that the decision not to give the Tories the spending information they requested was taken by the Cabinet Secretary and not ministers after normal pre-election contacts between civil servants and opposition leaders".
============================
As a number of posts have hinted (e.g. 33, 35 ...), this must to be looked into. Is the cabinet secretary acting properly, independently, and in the interest of the country he serves, or is he (the head of the Civil Service!) now acting politically on behalf of a particular party and/or trying to do anything to keep his job (nb he knows all about the poor leadership/management practice within the Government/Civil Service, but he's done precious little about it!) ...
... e.g. take a look at http://poweromics.blogspot.com/2009/06/targets-era-is-over.html for example.
David Clift, a Future 500 Leader
Complain about this comment
Dear Nick
Please follow this link so you know what one is ready for June Next year.
The Taxpayer
Complain about this comment
130. At 10:12pm on 30 Jun 2009, sagamix wrote:
pickled @ 99
But then your dream girl Harriet isn't that young I suppose
don't be like that! ... she still looks pretty young
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Blimey Saga ... get yourself down to specsavers dear boy
Complain about this comment
"164. At 10:55pm on 30 Jun 2009, General_Fondue wrote:
147.TheBlameGame
"A Labour manifesto has as much meaning as Susan Sangster's marriage vows."
Who (is Susan Sangster)?"
Google is our friend:
£18m Susan Sangster is a career divorcée says husband No4 (Daily Mail)
I hadn't heard of her either, but I would have thought that woman bigamist who was in the news a couple of days ago would be a better example!
Complain about this comment
Nick,
I'm assuming you haven't been told, but the BBC is not suppose to be used as the media wing of the Labour Party and its lickspittles.
Complain about this comment
If you want biased then I suggest listening to the new Speaker.
A definite labour patsy, firmly in Mandleson's inner circle.
Complain about this comment
#167 - thomasak001
"It should be a criminal offence to knowingly withhold or misrepresent such information."
It is interesting, however, that if the information was revealed 'off the record' and in defiance of the Cabinet Secretary's wishes, not only would the officer concerned have a public interest defence if charged criminally but would have an action for wrongful dismissal if he was sacked.
Such is the degree of hypocracy now prevalent in government circles that freedom of information has become selective and government accountability a joke.
Complain about this comment
Well Nick you must be very proud of yourself today.
A government that wont release figures, to show how it is spending our money, to the opposition.
A government that wont produce a Spending Review to show us the public how they are spending our money.
Gee I am soooo glad I live in a democratic country, with such a transparent and open government at the helm.
Complain about this comment
guildford @ 152
old Etonions don't understand how mortgages work other than as a financial instrument available to exploit
that's a excellent point as it happens ...
Complain about this comment
156. sagamix
"someone who's both left wing AND successful - don't see its point as an insult - after all, both being successful and being left wing are strongly (and positively) correlated to intelligence"
=
Being successful by taking advantage of a system they oppose, i.e. more about hypocrisy than intelligence or wealth.
Nice try, though.
It seems to work as an insult, on a par with toffs perhaps.
Complain about this comment
Just when are we going to get rid of the dishonesty which seems endemic in our government.The conservatives wriggle to avoid giving Labour an opportunity to get off the hook by concentrating on calling the Tory toffs (how juvenile)and Labour seem totally incapable of answering any question honestly. It is the duty of interviewers such as yourself to put the public point of view and this will require strength of character in the face of intimidation and deceit.Good luck Nick,you will need it this year ! I just wish we could organise a march like the French did for July 14th on Downing Street with placards saying JUST GO ! before they do any more damage by delayng what we all know is inevitable.
Complain about this comment
Right to buy
Was supposed to give every one the the right to buy there home
The effect was to give a green light to the private sector to move in to the housing market and building and to rent houses at a inflated profit
Stop councils from building new houses to replace the house they have sold off the government of the day took that money to fund other things
therefore taking all price control out of the cost of housing
making it impossible that in some towns and villages local people
can not afford to live there as it forced up the prices of housing beyond there means
The other effect was that once council owned house were now on the open market where those wanting second homes could buy them in nice villages and towns
Complain about this comment
Do you need any answers ? Cameron will not cut anything. Too much of a coward. There must be opportunity to cut 40% from Government expenditure (read WASTE) without even noticing any effect. We need to SLASH the waste on all manner of quangos,lawyers, badge carriers, snoops. and useless Government officials. For every £1 we spend you can guess that 40% is creamed off in fancy salaries, fees and new inititives which will never reach fruition and are simply spin spin spin and giant gobblers of taxpayers hard earned wages. Brown has squandered taxpayers money in epic proportions and there seems NO party willing to grasp the nettle and slash this obscene waste.
Complain about this comment
It's quite simple really. Nick is worried about any spending "cuts" as he could lose his job!
Complain about this comment
blame @ 179
sorry, don't follow ... how can you be successful in a system other than the one we have?
Complain about this comment
We are NOW in the full swing of things with Pre-Election Fever amongst ALL the Political Parties right now up until when an actual General Election is FINALLY called, within the next 12 Months period.
So, until then we will ALL have to put up with, and get completely bored out of ALL our Skulls by getting further use to hearing and reading more about Labours further re-launghings of past Micky Mouse re-launghes in what now is a frenzie of One-upmanship in the Westminster School Yard of political behaviour where its ALL now endlessly about "My Party is NOT going to CUT Public - Expenditure as much as YOURS" after the upcoming Election, as being told in true Punch and Judy style.
Therefore, Gordon and David along with your Cast of 600 Plus "Extras", are you coming out to Play, and whos a Pretty-Boy then, and don't forget to keep kissing Babies and Old Ladies while surrounding yourselves with each your Brain-Washed Party faithfuls, for the Photo Shoot.
Complain about this comment
Pressed on why the country should trust him - a young and privileged man - with this task, the shadow chancellor replies:
"We're going to protect the poorest, we're going to protect the vulnerable, but we're going to deal with the debt crisis because, let me say this, I've got young children, many people watching this programme have got young children, and it is not fair to leave them with our debt. We have to deal with the situation now and not leave the problem to another generation."
Well Tories want to scrap minimum wages how is this going to protect the poorest
when it opens the door to employers to employ people on wages that require you to work 7 days a week just to pay bills and good businesses to go out of business because they can not compete and pay decent wages
This is what we will be in fore with the Tories
We have all ready see it with big business out sourcing jobs abroad where they can employ university graduates for less than they can employ UK staff
Complain about this comment
Labour spending plans, to COIN a phrase, shrouded in mystery.
From the Tories, deviously concealed, much to their misery.
Limitless depths, Labour sink, while struggling to survive.
Sacrificial truth and morals, desperately keep Labour alive.
To the devil, Brownite souls consigned, damned in afterlife.
In god we trust, the Tories win, bring an end to Britians strife.
Complain about this comment
Wow Nick, one of the most biased pieces I have seen on the BBC for a long time. The Labour line in the next election is to try to scare people about Tory cuts, and what do we get from Nick.....Tory juxtaposed with cuts. It's almost as if Nick is being fed his strategy from Labour HQ.
The poster was right above when they said Nick, and the rest of the BBC, are getting worried. When Labour won the election in 1997 Jane Garvey on
BBC Five Live said (May 10th, 2007) "I do remember... the corridors of Broadcasting House were strewn with empty champagne bottles. I'll always remember that". Do you think champagne bottles will be lying around after the next election? Not on your life.
The BBC will rightly be ducking for cover. We can only hope that the cuts that Nick is so keen to flag up fall a bit nearer to home. Any broadcaster that can send nearly 400 people to cover Glastonbury is deserving of cuts.
Expect more 'stories' like this one as we near the election as the BBC go into full-on 'Save Labour' mode.
Complain about this comment
nick, are you in the running for a safe labour seat at the next election?
wait.... there will be no safe labour seats!
ill treat your blog post with the contempt it deserves, it would be funny if the license payers were paying your wages... and expenses... and pension...
Complain about this comment
Strange Nick that you didn't think fit to tell us that yet another Labour MP is standing down saying "I have done nothing wrong" after being reported to the Parliamentry "sleaze watchdog"
The Leyton & Wanstead voters will no doubt be pleased to hear it though.
As to your comment (obviously intended as a slur)that George Osborne is "a young and privileged man" perhaps less bigoted voters would rather have someone of intelligence & good education running the country than some of the ignoramuses in charge at the moment.
Complain about this comment
sagamix how can people believe anything you say. Only a few months ago you claimed you were writing the next NuLabour manifesto.
When in fact Duff is writing it.
Complain about this comment
129. At 10:12pm on 30 Jun 2009, Laughatthetories wrote:
117
This old cliche 'champagne socialists' gets used a lot on here. What does it mean? A Socialist who has wealth - why not? What's the Tory equivalent, a 'brown ale reactionary'? The Council house dweller who votes Tory - nothing wrong with that, of course, so why is it somehow wrong the other way round?
Could it be hypocrisy I wonder? Surely not.
===
It could be the equivalent of "old Etonian toff" perhaps?
Complain about this comment
Election fever is upon us.
As is the custom, Brown will be kissing all and sundry in a feeble attempt to appear human.
Dont forget though, the chancellor is no longer Browns Darling.
This said, we may catch Brown kissing Balls.
If were lucky therell be leadership contest, with Balls as the front runner.
However, Labour is fickle and the Brownites may remain faithful.
Brown may give Balls a good licking in the contest.
Ultimately the electorate will decide, regardless of their leader.
Both Brown and Brownite will be swept away down the political sewer.
Complain about this comment
sagamix wrote @ 156:
" after all, both being successful and being left wing are strongly (and positively) correlated to intelligence ... so called mutual correlation ... and hence there's bound to be tons of these CSs around the place"
-------------------------------------
How can you possibly argue that being left-wing is correlated to intelligence!
Complain about this comment
152. At 10:41pm on 30 Jun 2009, guildfordjoepublic wrote:
Not convinced Nick that you are not actually returning to your student roots. It's easy to look as if you are supporting Labour to let everyone else come up with the criticism. However as far as George Osborne is concerned the greater distance between his financial illiteracy regarding mortgages the better. Nice news story but why no concentration on the fact that Cameron, Wiggin and Osbourne, all old Etonions don't understand how mortgages work other than as a financial instrument available to exploit.
If you were a Labour supporter you would have dealt with this. How can I vote for any party where the chancellor/shadow chancellor has no integrity on their on fiscal responsbilities
===
Absolutely agree. So you wont be voting Labour then, with serial flipper Darling as Chancellor, who gets us to pay his stamp duty and his accountancy fees used to avoid other taxes, and who doesn't pay CGT on his second homes.
Complain about this comment
186. At 00:01am on 01 Jul 2009, york1900
I hear that Labour plan to drown all first-born babies born after the next election, so how can we possibly vote for them?
Complain about this comment
The tories will cut the growth of our debt; labour will increase the growth of our debt - the rest is just detail.
UK PLC's credit cards were maxed out long ago, brown is now relying on the loan shark known as 'quantitative easing' - just long enough that we might be fooled into letting him back in the house.
'Blinkey' Balls said he had money to transfer from 'PFI contingency' to other purposes - but also said he had made 'hard choices'. Come on Nick -- where is the 'HARD' choice in that??
Was balls unneeded PFI contingency included in last years 'increased spending'? if so then it was a lie! it wasn't spent, because it is available to go else where!
Nick... Please, please do your job. It may mean a tory government, and the end of the BBC, but surely you can see that this country is more important that that...
Complain about this comment
A little while ago I lamented the way these posts had gone. The expenses saga united everyone.
Now its back to my gang is beter than your gand , yah boo sucks.
I was at first dismayed by this but now I am amused by the outrageous claims for each political party.
The acrimony between posters adds spice to the blog.
So long as you all remember that whichever colour it is you nail to you mast they are all as bad as each other "we" will be ok, maybe.
Nick, well done, as a former editor I can say you have fulfilled one of the primary functions of journalism and provoked debate. Oh how you have with this one.
Complain about this comment
L is for Losers of the coming election.
A is for Asinine leftwing collection
B is for Brownite, droppings on the bench.
O is for Opposition to cleaning the stench.
U is for Unholy, its the Mandlesons Smile.
R is for repugnant, thats Gordon Browns Style
Complain about this comment
#186 york1900
Well Tories want to scrap minimum wages how is this going to protect the poorest.
yorky please can you tell me how doubling the tax rate of 10p on our lowest earners protected the poorest.
And what do you think about the unfulfilled promise by NuLabour to pay it back.
Complain about this comment
Balls - the most fun you can have with a politician while keeping your clothes on.
I find it amazing what you can get away with when refering to Balls.
To ensure loyalty, does Gordon handle Balls with kid gloves?
Maybe that's why Gordon put Balls in the cabinet?
Or was it purely a comfort thing?
Westminster never fails to amaze me.
Complain about this comment
Well I can not balance what the Tories are saying in public about what they are going to do if elected and the early day motions and amendments they are supporting in parliament now as the two are completely opposite
They are either trying tell us what we want to hear to get elected or they are playing us for idiots again
I for one is getting more and more sceptical of what any of them are saying Labour, Conservative or Lib Dems Parliamentary Business
Complain about this comment
A selection of possible headlines in the event of a Labour leadership election.
Brown beaten by Balls in leadership election.
Brown beats Balls to remain Prime Minister.
Mandleson favours Brown over Balls.
It's fun, try some headlines of your own.
Complain about this comment
More pro Nu-Labour propaganda from Robinson and the BBC. How can Osborne tell you what he will cut when he doesn't know what is being spent where? The story should be about why will Nu-Labour not provide spending details to the opposition. As usual Robinson and the BBC show no concern for the taxpayer, or the country, and try protect their own interests by spinning it as a negative for the Tories.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#mikekpo
Would you like to tell me when a Conservative government ever gave an incoming Labour government access to COINS before an election? No, of course you can't; it just does not happen. If GO asked for this info in February, during the usual pre-election meetings between officials and Opposition, why did he wait until 30 June to announce that he has been refused access by Gordon Brown (totally untrue) to info which has never been made available to the Opposition before by any party. The blustering performance by Michael Gove on Newsnight, when he accused Jeremy P of being obtuse and inaccurate on several occasions with regard to Andrew Lansley's statements about 10% cuts across the board, was illuminating to say the least. It wasn't until JP produced the transcript and quoted AL's statement that Gove lamely said, 'Well, that is wrong'. It was only a week ago the Conservatives announced there would be a 2-day budget/public spending summit to decide on these matters immediately they were elected. Why the change of plan? They are all over the place. The cuts will come whoever is in government. You don't need a copy of COINS to make a decision on where to cut. You know the size of each departmental budget and that should be the starting point. The decision about what budgets should be ringfenced are a matter for the Tories to decide. They appear to have chosen just 2, Health and ID. It seems to me that Lansley (Health), is happy about the prospective ringfencing, and Gove (Education, C&F) had been told his prospective budget was safe, but is in a quandary now GO has told the BBC that is no longer the case. Big time fallings out are on the cards. Is GO even remotely capable of managing the UKs budget, especially in these torrid times, I very much doubt it. He reminds me of one of those nasty little schoolboys, who nobody likes, whineing to the teacher, 'Miss, they wont play with me'.
Complain about this comment
Nick. It's not a question of boasting about making cuts. Nobody would wish for such a scenario. It's a question of being realistic and accepting that we have to live within our means. What's wrong with that?
Complain about this comment
This is, without doubt, the most disgraceful article by the Political Editor of the purported unbiased BBC I have ever read.
There is absolutely no balance in this article, neither is there any balanced other blog. To suggest that Osborne's status makes him untrustworthy beggars belief - by that statement, it can only be assumed that Nick believes Brown and co to be totally trustworthy.
We have read many NuLab biased articles from Nick, but this really does take the biscuit - not that Nick takes any notice of comments to his blogs!!
There is no doubt in my mind that an official complaint to the BBC trust is in order here. If this was a blog for one of the tabloids, understandable - but this is supposed to be the BBC.
Nick, why don't you go and work with Maguire at the mirror as that seems more suited to your personal opinion.
Completely disgraceful. I really don't know what other comments yu expect to get because it is clear this blog entry does not stimulate debate - just ridicule.
Disgusting!
Complain about this comment
valdan @ 206:
Exactly as you say the cuts will come whoever is in Government. It's just that Gordon Brown is not admitting this is he?
Complain about this comment
Why is it that Labour is making it so easy for the Tories to attack them? Everyone knows there are going to be spending cuts. So why not announce them and give the Tories all the information they need?
The Tories can go on saying it is all Gordon's fault - but reports from around the world show that what we are experiencing is a global phenomenon. So blaming it 'all' on Gordon is going to be a high risk strategy. Partial blame rather dilutes the message and seems like finding excuses for name calling.
So if Labour announce their projected spending and the figures they are based on, the Tories will have to do the same. If they think the figures are wrong, they will have to say why and can give spending plans based on their new figures. They can say that we need to be paying the money back quicker so make deeper cuts. They can talk about efficiency savings, but can be challenged on what that actually means. They can explain their different choices if they agree on the figures .... and so on.
I'm no fan of Labour, but am unconvinced by the Tories. I don't want to hear the PMs opinion of the Tories, I want to form my own opinion. To be able to do that I need clarity from both parties. The point is that Labour are in a position to force the Tories to say what they mean and perhaps the country will not like what they hear - giving Labour an outside chance of winning the election. If Labour dos not say what it means, the Tories don't have to say what they mean and will win the election easily.
All I want is that whoever wins the election they have had to fight for it. That way we might get a better government. More importantly we will have voted a party in, not simply voted a party out.
Complain about this comment
184. sagamix wrote:
blame @ 179
sorry, don't follow ... how can you be successful in a system other than the one we have?
=
If the system is working for you then why would you knock it? i.e. a socialist who decries free market capitalism makes a very successful living from it, but continues to oppose it. That's hypocritical.
You're saying it's because they're intelligent... from that I could argue that socialism is for thick people and free market capitalism is for intelligent people. Otherwise why would the intelligent leftie not recommend the system from which he profits, to the wider public?
Complain about this comment
Complain about this comment
At least Osborne is being honest in saying that he will not protect the enormous waste in education spending. When it can cost seven hundred pounds to change fluorescent light tube in a school, due to wholly inappropriate levels of health and safety red-tape? I would hope that the tories would slash education spending, whilst maintaining standards, through the common-sense and admirable philosophy of "more for less".
When will Nick and the other labour apologists get it through their heads, it's not how much you spend that matters, but how INTELLIGENTLY you spend what you have hat matters. How else could Renault F1 have beaten Ferrari twice in the F1 championship despite spending a fraction of Ferrari's budget?
Labour are not only being entirely disingenuous in their public spending declarations, they are utterly in cloud cuckoo land. They are actually achieving getting less for more! Kick out these incompetent wastrels at once!
Complain about this comment
194. At 00:26am on 01 Jul 2009, notsosilentmajority wrote:
sagamix wrote @ 156:
" after all, both being successful and being left wing are strongly (and positively) correlated to intelligence ... so called mutual correlation ... and hence there's bound to be tons of these CSs around the place"
-------------------------------------
How can you possibly argue that being left-wing is correlated to intelligence!
That argument sounds fair to me - if the correlation is negative!!
Complain about this comment
Your bias towards Labour is shining out. Osbourne couldn't answer the question because Labour will not release the figures he can work from. Yous eem to have adig at everything he said, whilst not long ago you were talikg to someone from Labour and you practically hung on every word. Brown and Darling have lied about the state of the countries finances, why aren't you giving them the same rigerous questioning. I think we know the naswer to that one. Now your moderators will jump in and reject this comment, have a good one.
Complain about this comment
What a joke - rebuilding Labour's Future. After 12 years of what can only be considered as one massive economic failure they are trying the 'Big Con' again. This party has operated in my view the greatest ever 'Ponsi scam'. However unlike Madoff after running out of money they are able to carry on trying to paper over their abject failure and total deception.
They (and we) are now governed by an unelected twice disgraced for financial irregularities 'Lord' and a complete pack of spineless nonentities.
Future - what future, like Madoff we are now condemned to 150 years of debt ridden penury thanks to their deceit, incompetence and arrogance.
Complain about this comment
How can the Tories be expected to give details of spending cuts, when the Government won't let them see the books? But it beats me why they want to protect International Development Aid - that would be one of the first areas which should be cut in my view. Brown is being completely dishonest with the electorate though - he is in denial about the need for cuts, when it is a plain as your nose that we are in for a future of spending cuts and tax rises whichever party is in Government. The public finances are a disaster area, we are borrowing 20 billion per calendar month and that cannot be allowed to continue!
Complain about this comment
As an irregular reader and contributor here, I'm quite ...well...shocked at this line Mr Robinson. I am politically neutral, and will vote for whichever candidate/party I believe will improve the lot of me and my family. My good lady wife however is Labour through and through - one of the millions who would normally vote for Labour even if it said in their manifesto that they were intending to cull the population by employing a Canadian seal-pup management system.
But, now even she, having read your piece above and watched your cringingly embarrassing piece on the news yesterday (how you kept a straight face I just don't know)has decided that a)the BBC and you personally are utterly biased towards Labour and b)with everything else that happened yesterday, (what with the U-turn on ID cards, the worse than expected economic stats, Ed Balls personally trying to sensor the Spectator, the refusal by the Cabinet Secretary/Treasury to open the books to the opposition, etc, etc,) she will never vote for Labour again.
This once great country deserves better than a bunch of liars in government (and incompetent ones at that - they can't even lie well)and a state funded propoganda machine in the BBC.
I hope at PMQ's today that Cameron, yet again, makes Brown look like the fool he is. I did have hopes that Labour MP's were generally an honest and principled bunch who saw the bigger picture and would do whatever is necessary for the good of the country by ditching Brown in favour of, well, anyone else really. By bottling it they have signed their own political death warrants for a very long time.
I'm almost as disappointed and disillusioned in the Labour Party as Mrs Tim.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Frankly I think people need to realise that Governments before this one have always been more open about their spending plans and the debt figures. This is a very closed Government and figures are very hard to come by. I believe John Major gave Brown all the information he needed when he realised some time before the election that Labour would be in Government next. I remember reading it, but of course Major was leaving an economy in very good order. If there is to be no spending review then it is only right that any decent opposition demand to see the figures on which to base their spending in future years should they come to office, it would be very negligent if they did not. How can any opposition make a plan for Government without knowing what they are likely to be dealing with, let alone decide on cuts.
I have no idea what is happening in this Country with the media and those who are meant to inform us but they are doing a pretty poor job. It is irresponsible to talk about a persons background as a reason of why they are not fit to hold down a certain job. Rather they should be talking about why an opposition has to go to such lengths to get information out of what should be open Government. Are we in fact moving towards a police state where the Government decides what information the public is allowed to know through every outlet available. Where, opposition is thwarted in its efforts to seek knowledge of our Countries circumstances. It is starting to feel like that to me.
Common sense tells us that when we receive figures like yesterday, where we are in the biggest decline since the 1930s and the Chancellors figures have been completely wrong that there is no more scope for spending. There is no point in pressing opposition for what they will cut when they have no idea of the debt levels. It is for responsible political journalists to press the Government on where their cuts will fall and exactly what the debt levels are.
Unless people in this Country including the media get their heads round the fact we are in serious trouble and no Government from now on will be able to spend, no matter what Labour say, this decline will continue.
The biggest downturn is in manufacturing and in the areas in which we make things which produce wealth for the Country, this is of great concern. In the meantime the public sector is still increasing. The Government is merely subsidising banks and propping up the public sector the private sector is shrinking everyday. Unless there is a move soon to bring money from the public sector into the private we are in really deep trouble with our economy if not already.
It is time for the public to demand to know exactly what is going on in our economy and at the heart of this Government. This Government is far too secretive.
I also understand Labours new housing project is not funded, even though they said they had made cuts to provide for it. Is this another cost they will add to our debt or is it just another project that will never see the light of day.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#213 purpledogzzz you are absolutely correct, once again we must challenge the "wisdom" that money spent(sorry "invested")is in direct proportion to service provided.
Yesterday the government announced that a 200 million pound scheme to prevent people being evicted through mortgage arrears which began at the beginning of this year had benefited exactly 6 families. That's right, 6.
Amazingly this was presented as an "acceleration" by the government as previously it had benefitted only 2 families. I loathe this type of attempt to make totally unacceptable and useless service provision look good. If they had said "It's not good enough and we are taking steps to redesign the systems to ensure help is given swiftly to those that need it" I might, just might, start to regain some faith.
Why do I get the perception that to get this help you have to fill in 50 page forms with all sorts of irrelevant information (such as ethnic background)and the department concerned employs more people to find ways of rejecting your application that accepting it?
Unbelievable.
200 million. 6 families.
Complain about this comment
Hey moderators, refer all you like, the complaint has been made.
Perhaps if the tone of the blog was balanced and unbiased concerning spending cuts, then you wouldn't have need to refer. Perhaps also if the need to refer to the shadow chancellors status is what determines his credibility wasn't made, then you also wouldn't have need to refer.
This is on topic, and for others wondering, I have made an official complaint to the BBC trust regarding the tone of this article in particular.
Complain about this comment
208. At 07:18am on 01 Jul 2009, squirestrat wrote:
"This is, without doubt, the most disgraceful article by the Political Editor of the purported unbiased BBC I have ever read."
218. At 09:00am on 01 Jul 2009, middleenglandtim wrote:
"the BBC and you personally are utterly biased towards Labour"
Actually, in my view, what is really happening is that most political journalists are 'anti-' whoever they are interviewing at the time. That is not to say they are 'pro-' the interviewee's political opponents.
To some degree, this is seen as driving, cutting edge, radical journalism. Often people are critical of journalists for not giving the politicians they interview a 'tougher' time.
You also have to factor in to the mix that currently the credibility of all MPs is at, very probably, an all time low. MPs, quite simply, have lost their "street-cred". (And, given their reluctance to have a code of practice, seem to not be doing very much to regain the electorate's faith in them)
Finally, there are checks and balances. In the final analysis, some politicians like the thrust and parry of incisive interviewing as, in their opinion, it gives them a chance to show off that they can stand up to tough questioning. Others would just walk out.
In the final analysis, if political journalists 'miff off' enough politicians badly enough, then they will have very few people who will agree to be interviewed by them.
Complain about this comment
Yesterday, a bald, bespectacled, ex-chairman of the Oxford University Conservative Association noted for naked blogging and supporting Manchester United, described George Osbourne as being "a young and privileged young man".
Sometimes additional details don't really help.
I mean Man U...
Complain about this comment
'Pressed on why the country should trust him - a young and privileged man - with this task'
What has Osbourne's age and social status got to do with the public's ability to trust him? Is Osbourne's young and posh the next Labour attack line you've been given?
Complain about this comment
Again the bbc is like a dog with a bone.
On yesterday's World at One the new (5th?) Home Secretary was given a very easy and biased interview in view of the fact that UK first quarter figures were revealed as the worst for 50 years (bbc later stated since the 50's and later in 30 years)
If I was Cameron I would start pruning the bbc so that it would be less biased and more professional.
Complain about this comment
Re 220
Very well put, Susan-Croft! I think you've actually said it all (though no doubt your usual detractors will not let it rest there!).
Personally, I wonder if the reason that the government won't let the opposition have the figures is simple - they don't actually have any that even they can trust. After all, they can't even get their growth/recession figures to match the OECD. Why publish false data and then be accused of lying?!
We all know there will have to be cuts. We all know there will have to be tax rises as well. The Tories know it, the Lib Dems know it, Joe Public knows it - even Labour knows it. But the latter won't (or can't) admit it publicly. I feel a touch of sympathy for those members of the Labour Party whose realism is being squashed by a hierarchy that is living in financial cloud-cuckoo land and praying for a miracle to rescue them from their profligacy.
Complain about this comment
224 Sutara:
I think there's a difference between journalists/interviewers simply being aggressive and getting an answer to a question. For sure, there's no point in having an ego battle with the interviewee and seeing who can be the ruder. Interviews should be moderate and respectful in tone and balanced in questioning. But if a serious question is put, and a meaningful answer is not provided, the interviewer should press for an answer. He or she is acting on behalf of the viewers, who want to know the answer. If Brown is asked about his government's plans for cutting spending and answers by criticising the Tories (or Hague asked about Ancram's tax-avoidance and squirming; it's not a party political issue), it's not an answer to the question, and not acceptable to the viewers. In this sort of case, the interviewer should insist on a proper answer. Remember it's a two-way process as well - politicians can use the interviews for their own purposes just as much as interviewers can. If they're not prepared to answer reasonable questions, they should simply be left out of the media altogether, and losing the oxygen of publicity should act as a warning that, while we the public don't want to attack and grill and humiliate our representatives, we do want them to treat us with respect enough to submit to our questions.
220 - Susan. Good post.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Hello, Mr Robinson, are you there? It would be nice to have some comment from you regarding the very many posts on this site relating to your hostile reference to the "young and privileged" Mr Osborne. Whether you like it or not, many visitors to this site see this as evidence of pronounced bias on your part.
Complain about this comment
224 - Sutara
So nice to see you taking what I wrote out of context. Are you a journo?
What I actually said was....referring to my dyed-in-the-wool Labour supporting wife
"But, now even she, .........has decided that a)the BBC and you personally are utterly biased towards Labour"
If you must quote me, don't take the p*** just to make a point.
And, btw, having frequently watched the way Messrs Robinson, Marr and Co interview the PM and his cohorts in an embarrassingly hand-wringing, forelock-tugging way....as opposed the disdain they show opposition politicains of all parties....I think you're talking absolute tosh.
Complain about this comment
Hi Nick,
Increasingly, the comments to your posts question your integrity and bias toward Labour.
Rightly or wrongly is not the point. The point is that YOU are rapidly becoming the story, which threatens the entire newsroom and not just your reputation.
See you in the pub.
Complain about this comment
I see we now have Mr Mandelson-very well heeled with excellent EU pension, unelected ,not so young man, demanding George Osborne retracts his " deliberate untruths"
I consider this country to be in a financial mess of such profundity that no one actually knows just how bad it is.
We have already seen the OECD report of doom.
We have already heard a note of utter panic in the voice of Mervyn King.
We can all see a slightly dishevelled looking Chancellor sitting in the HoC, who has already given the " public will be truly pi$$ed off with us when they see the worst recession for 50 years " speech.
I applauded his candour then, now he joins the ranks of the dissemblers.
And the media , which has taken the cowardly and sycophantic path owes the public big time.
You have the audacity to promote yourselves as journalists with a certain expertise in politics when in fact you have deceived , spun and hidden from view that to which this Government should be held to account.
FOR SHAME.
Complain about this comment
Hi Nick
Are you going to comment on last nights "bun fight" discussion on internet and democracy between Michael White, Guido Fawkes and yourself? Guido reports it as quite lively but that you bemoan some of the comments on your blog. What do you mean?
I also learned that the political journalists at Westminster have their own offices paid for by the taxpayer! Plus use of the taxpayer subsidised facilities, which doubtless you claim with BBC expenses. All within the rules of course, now where did come across that phrase before...hmmm
Complain about this comment
#220 Susan-Croft
You have hit the nail on the head.
What no one seems to realise is the public sector spends the private sectors 'wealth'. I was on a chat room yesterday and one contributor had calculated that, when taking into account the increase in public sector over the last 12 months (6% or so), the fact that national GDP has fallen 4.9% in the same time, the private sector must be contracting at a rate of over 25%.
To cut this short, the end product of current Government policy is that the private sector will be crushed by the ever-increasing public sector spending. My fear is that it already has been crushed and will never re-appear.
No private sector, no taxes. It's as simple as that.
Complain about this comment
Nick
So you would commit to buy a business without seeing the books?
If not why do expect the Tory's and the British electorate to do so?
As for 'a young and privileged man' I'm still trying to scrape that one off the bottom of my shoe.
Did you describe Muss Dunwoody at the Crewe By-Election as 'An unemployed single mother of 5' you would not have dared.
It seems judging people by their backgrounds only applies when theyre a young and privileged man.
This is from a man from a working class background who thinks envy and bile or the worst reason for judging aptitude.
Complain about this comment
valdan70 @ 206
"Is GO (george osbourne) even remotely capable of managing the UKs budget, especially in these torrid times, I very much doubt it. He reminds me of one of those nasty little schoolboys, who nobody likes, whineing to the teacher, 'Miss, they wont play with me'"
id bet a years wages that george osbourne wouldn't saddle the UK with £170 Billion pounds worth of debt, id go even further in estimating that george osbourne would not:
- pay out taxpayers money to the banking system, the equivilent of more than 18000 pounds per voter in the UK, and not give a single penny piece to any one of us.
- follow labour's absolutely negligent policy of taxing pension fund profits to the tune of more than £50 BILLION over the past 12 years, which have destroyed the nations pensions and left people working years longer than they otherwise would have had to, and he certainly wouldnt then put out statements via pressure groups telling us the nation was living longer, without addressing the problems of the black hole that LABOUR policies have created!
- tell us all he was "helping the poorest in society" then remove the 10p tax rate, hitting those on low incomes the hardest
- fund a national ID card scheme which would serve absolutely no purpose in fighting crime whatsoever, and is only designed to phish yet more personal information to sell on to other businesses, raising more revenue.
the list is endless!
if you want to take potshots at others who may or may not do a better job than the current bunch we have in power, that is your perogative, but to not even mention the damage thats been done by those who have been in charge for more than a decade, is a joke!
Complain about this comment
anyone see mandelson on bbc news this morning, being asked questions on what hes been saying about this?
he had the cheek to tell the news people at the BBC, what the outline and criteria of her job was, then still didnt give an answer to the question she put to him!
walk down the street mandleson, brown, balls, darling, et al, speak to normal people who live in the real world, answer their questions, try a town centre on a saturday afternoon, see the response you get then!
Complain about this comment
Good god, just seen Mandelson haviong the gall to accuse osbourne of lying!! Does the hypocrisy of labour know no bounds, seems there are no depths the scum wont sink to.
Complain about this comment
Surely now the media should stop asking the Tories about cuts and simply focus on the Government.Quite frankly Nick you asking them without access to the detail is a bit like asking me to comment on your finances.Bet if I did the mods would be down on me!
Complain about this comment
I think asking George Osborne why the people of the UK should trust someone who has had such a comfortable upbringing is a reasonable question actually.
At the end of the day, my expectation of someone who has no personal experience of struggling with money is that they will tend to make more hard-nosed decisions on finance (not suggesting that is always a bad thing) and I would also be mildly concerned that they might find it too easy to leave a job unfinished when the going gets tough.
What is true though, is that not one journalist at the BBC has the balls to ask the same kinds of questions of the Prime Minister or the rest of the cabinet. Which is where the real bias lies, especially when there seem to be so many questions unanswered, generally revolving around the theme of - how exactly is all this going to be paid for? Something you would expect journalists to be able to get some kind of answers to from the government, rather than just the opposition.
Complain about this comment
So the pot calling the ketle black now - Mandy tells Osborne he is lying - welll he would be the very person to be a judge of that would he not!!!!!!!!!!! Still nothing from Nick about Mandy - Deripaska - quotas etc etc - wonder why not??? maybe the Telegraph will enlighten us about that nearer election time along with the BBC staff use of taxpayers monies at Westminster and their own expenses claims.
Complain about this comment
What a double act Nick and Mandy make.
Mandy making allegations about a tory making, "deliberate untruths." Mandy has made his career out of doing exactly that! Mandy`s defence of the government for the sake of Gordon Brown`s pathetic career knows no bounds.
This country must be the joke of the world at the moment.
Complain about this comment
Nick:
If you are going to make snide comments about the background of members of the Shadow Cabinet, you should balance it with comments about the background of members of the Cabinet.
For example, have the Trotskyist/Marxist and sundry hard left views that the likes of Mandelson, Clark, Reid, Blunkett and Darling once held impacted on the way in which we have been governed for the past 12 years?
Complain about this comment
So let me get this straight. You want the shadow chancellor to tell you what savings he will make if elected when he's just told you that the government won't let him see the current spending detail so he can properly understand where those savings can be made.
Why don't you interview Gordon Brown and press him on his lie that he will increase spending? If you're not sure which questions to ask there's a handy graph on the Spectator website.
And as for "young and privileged man", will you be providing a small bit of social commentary on all your interviewees from now on?
Complain about this comment
As a rational liberal who doesn't have much time for New Labour or the Tories (or the Liberals), I have to say that I can't see any evidence of Nick Robinson's purported political bias. I see a journalist who seems to be, sometimes, bending over backwards to appear to be unbiased. And that is so unusual, such a breath of fresh air, that I really have read some of the blogs twice just to make sure. I think that many of the contributors here are so unused to somebody taking a completely balanced position that they misinterpret what he says as bias purely because his view doesn't agree with theirs. As an ex national chairman of the Young Conservatives, perhaps NR feels that he has to be particularly careful, and I guess he's right about that. I suggest that people here are far too quick to clutch at any straw that might indicate bias when all he's doing is not supporting their argument, or even (gasp!) disagreeing with them.
Complain about this comment
# 232. At 10:22am on 01 Jul 2009, middleenglandtim wrote:
"And, btw, having frequently watched the way Messrs Robinson, Marr and Co interview the PM and his cohorts in an embarrassingly hand-wringing, forelock-tugging way..."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a good point - sometimes when I am watching McDoom or Balls being interviewed on television, I shout at the interviewer - why don't you ask the lying so and so that? There have been so many lost opportunities to hold Brown to account, especially where Andrew Marr is concerned.
For instance, ask Brown how a future Labour Government would balance the books and keep asking through the waffle, spurious statistics, blaming the Tories and evasion until you get the correct answer: "tax rises and spending cuts". There will be no "investment" since you cannot borrow billions to invest - that is squandering, since future tax payers will have to service that debt at huge cost, reducing the funds available for public services!
Complain about this comment
"young and privileged"--class warfare rubbish--Lance Price's old job must be available for you Mr Robinson--Tom Bradby runs rings round you--the BBC is so liberal and left-leaning its pathetic--Alistair Darling is just as priveleged as you know---not young now!!!!!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
So who runs the Government - The Prime Minister or 'Sir Humphrey'? Maybe I am being naive but I always thought that Civil Servants were responsible to Ministers and not the other way round!
Complain about this comment
Pressed on why the country should trust him - 'a young and privileged man'
This confirms Nick's bias.
Complain about this comment
Put Mandelson on television, with a Bible in his hand and ask him to say:-
The political fortunes of the Labour party played no part whatsoever in the decision to refuse access to the COINS data to the Conservatives. No influence was brought to bear on the Cabinet Secretary by anyone connected with the present government, nor would the government be content if Sir Gus had made this decision after allowing into his thoughts any consideration of its potential effect on the Labour Party's electoral interests
Complain about this comment
#86 General Fondue "And to those who will try to say "But he's being paid to be impartial", I'm sure there aren't many people who are Perfect at their jobs."
So you are clearly agreeing that he is not up to the job and should be replaced?
There's still a job going at CBeebies Nick
Complain about this comment
Whats all this I keep reading about BALLS, for could it be that Brown is still walking around in a day-dream thinking that "Everything IS Balls to me".
As for David, well he still has CASH for Questions in his Party that fits with the BILL.
Complain about this comment
#239 "walk down the street mandleson, brown, balls, darling, et al, speak to normal people who live in the real world, answer their questions, try a town centre on a saturday afternoon, see the response you get then!"
I would strongly advise against this. Violence is not the answer to the utter bankruptcy - moral & financial - of this country.
Removing the BBC licence fee would be a start, perhaps sycophants like Robinson might appreciate the real nature of the country's economy then, when they have to get a real job.
Complain about this comment
I'm going to stick my neck out here and defend Nick's right to say "..why the country should trust him - a young and privileged man - with this task,"
If you read through the comments on this and other blogs across the internet it is clear there are still many who suffer from class envy. So it makes sense to address the issue in the way Nick has; why should these people, the likes of Laugh, saga, dh, davidou, etc., who are not by any stretch a small minority, trust Osborne, whose background may be repulsive to them? It's not those who are onside who need to be persuaded but those who are against you.
The issue of Nick's consistency in interviews is another matter, but I think he is within his rights to use phrases like these.
Complain about this comment
Riding the gravy train.
You couldnt make this up even if you tried.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
When Peter Mandelson accuses George Osborne of telling a 'deliberate untruth' is that the same as a lie? I think we should be told!
Complain about this comment
I think it's unlikely the former "President of the Oxford University Conservative Association and national chairman of the Young Conservatives" (Wikipedia)is quite the Labour zealot some people seem to think he is
Complain about this comment
#258
And would you take the same position if Nick was referring to a "young and black man"?
You say it makes sense to address the issue because Osborne's background "may be repulsive to them". And that seems reasonable to you? Someone should be judged by their background, not what they say or what they stand for?
Nick Robinson certainly needs to put up a defence for his choice of words, but I'd like to think he could come up with something better than that.
Complain about this comment
Nick, nice try, but you journalists still don't get it. We just don't like or want Gordon. We gave him a chance when he became PM, but he blew it. He's been in charge for over 12 years, and we know him well. He only really seems to know how to raise taxes and lie to our faces about doing it. He has nothing else going for him. We just don't trust him any more. We don't care about the opposition actually, or what cuts they're planning. Frankly, there's plenty of fat in the public sector (and the BBC), & we can clearly see that: it needs trimming down.
But Gordon won't do that, because he's tired, weak, and has run out of ideas. Now if only he would give us a general election...
Complain about this comment
It really is a bit thick of Mandy to accuse a fellow MP of untruths. Surely he, along with Campbell, was the master of spin during President Blair's reign. Oh!, by the way, I define spin as being economical with the truth to enure that the spinner's party might be shown in a the best light possible.
Complain about this comment
37. At 7:11pm on 30 Jun 2009, Trimmtrab wrote:
"Subsidising Scotland, Wales and Ireland should be cut - let them sort themselves out."
Except Scotland isnt subsidised
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Over any time horizon - Scotland is subsidised - always has been and always will - and it is subsidised by the English PAYE taxpayers. The oil revenues came and will go - whether its postal services, defence or any other service you care to name - Scotland is subsidised.
Complain about this comment
So we're not even allowed to discuss Deripaska and Mandelson.
I think that shows the bias of this blog for all to see.
Complain about this comment
"There have been so many lost opportunities to hold Brown to account, especially where Andrew Marr is concerned. "
I think if you read Andrew Marr's wife's column in the Guardian, you will understand that you won't be getting any impartiality out of him anytime soon.
Complain about this comment
Re:239.
Picture the Scene.
Saturday: In a Working-Class High Street somewhere in the U.K., the Labour front-bench team are standing on their cabinets asking the PEOPLE what they want the Government to do for them, while at this very same moment in time ALL the Local Shops are quickly running out of Floor and Eggs.
While back in the REAL World the only way ANY Darlings,and Brown, Mandi, Balls can safely be transported through this High Street is in a Political version of a Pope Mobile.
Complain about this comment
Why, oh why, was it nescessary for Mr. Robinson to use the phrase, "a young and privileged man". This smacks to me of just one more example of BBC front liners using left wing tactics in an attempt to influence the electorate.
Complain about this comment
Well done Moderators...keep on censoring comments you dont like just like our Government !!!!
Complain about this comment
Nick,
Perhaps you should be asking the cabinet secretary, why, as head of the Civil Service, he sees fit to deny Her Majesties opposition access to the COINS database. His role is to ensure the smooth functioning of government, especially as it is likely that there will be a change of government within the next 12 months. I would suggest that he has been directed not to allow access.
Complain about this comment
So what happened to free speech then as if we did not know...why dont you start giving this Government a hard time rather than the Opposition. Its not their fault we are in this mess...referring all comments to the Moderator illustrates the bias
Complain about this comment
263. obangobang
And would you take the same position if Nick was referring to a "young and black man"?
=
Firstly, "young" is relevant as it is the Chancellorship we're referring to, probably the most important position in government.
Secondly, in the eyes of many, like it or not, his background is relevant to his position, just as Darling's socialist/Marxist past is relevant to his role, as it's about wealth creation and distribution. Being black has nothing to do with anything being discussed here. I get wound up by Nick's lack of even-handedness when interviewing Labour and Tory MPs, that's my perception, but I think he has a right to use these terms in this context.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
What always baffles me is, if you're so concerned about the tone and content of messages on your blog then why don't you come on and answer them, Surely you have the ability to comment? What are you scared of? The majority of the posts on this Blog are accusing you of 'NuLabour bias','class politics' and unbalanced journalism, and all you do is trot out your next blog without even a whimper....
Complain about this comment
#224
"Actually, in my view, what is really happening is that most political journalists are 'anti-' whoever they are interviewing at the time. That is not to say they are 'pro-' the interviewee's political opponents."
You obviously have not been watching when Nick does one of his interviews with Gordon Brown or best-mate Lord Twice-Disgraced Aluminium-Tariff Mandelson then.
Complain about this comment
Nick, your interview sounds like the usual left wing bull. Trying to make people feel guilty, about possible cuts when the turth is we live in a prosperous country where no-one starves or goes without and where there is PLENTY of room to reduce benefits.
Sorry to be blunt but if you do not have a job you should be grateful to be fed, clothed, housed and have access to health and education services for you and your family. Anything else you want, why not get a job?
When people who are out of work and have been so for years can afford holidays, cars, mobile phones and Sky TV there is something wrong with our system.
I am fed up with paying for other people's lack of ambition, and even more so am fed up with being made to feel like somehow it is 'right' and 'fair' that I should be asked to hand over even more in taxes than I currently am. After a while, I ask myself whant the point is of trying to better myself when Labour's stance is that people like me are just to be used as cash cows for their pet political projects.....?
Complain about this comment
Tories Labour no different since Thatcher we have had a Tory Govenment it is that so what the Tories would cut anything to kiss up to the all ready rich, as for ID cards they would bring them in but not for everyone just for those who do not vote for them and and those whose votes make no difference, the Royals, Govement across the board after all they stole more than the Labour tribe. We forget what Thatcher and Major did . The North will be a dull and a grime as it was before as everything is will be pulled to London as usual.The Tories are full of the rich and who says they got their money honestly like the BBC which is a Tory media. The world is changing and the old order has to prove that it is worth its role and this lot and that includes the three major parties are not.
Complain about this comment
Fascinating.
My comment at #260 still awaiting moderation, so I perform a little test and refer two posts, which are dealt with by the moderators (not moderated, quelle surprise) within minutes.
How exactly do you choose which posts to leave in moderation for hours on end?
Complain about this comment
#274
All you had to say was that you do believe that people should be judged by their background, which you have now confirmed.
I'm afraid I disagree. Completely.
Complain about this comment
Nick please forward to your friends to sign:
Dear Mr Brown,
Please find, below, my suggestions for fixing our economy instead of giving millions of pounds to Banks that will squander our money on lavish parties and un-earned bonus's having gambled our money away in the first place.
Use the following plan, you can call it the Patriotic Retirement Plan based on UK facts and figures :-
There are about 6 million people in the UK work force aged over 50 years - Pay them £1 million a piece, severance pay, for early retirement with the following stipulation :
1. They MUST retire............................................................ 6 million job openings - unemployment fixed.
2. They must buy a new British car ... e.g. Honda............ 6 million cars ordered - Auto industry fixed.
3.They MUST either buy a house or pay off their mortgage..... Housing crisis fixed.
4.They must send their kids to school, college and university... Crime rate fixed.
5.They MUST buy £100 of alcohol/tobacco a week for ten years.... Theres your money back in duty, tax etc.
6. They MUST take out private health insurance for 10 years. Theres your NHS problems solved.
It cannot get any easier than that and you will win the next election for being so clever!
Check with the P.M. ( Peter Mandelson) to see if he will allow you.
P.S. If more money is needed, make all members of parliament pay back their falsely claimed expenses and second home allowances, mortgages etc for the last 10 years you could also charge them interest like the rest of us for a bit extra.
Happy days.
Complain about this comment
Let me put it plainly and in words most of you will understand - the tories will not tell what they will cut because if they do they will not get elected (although judging by some of the off - so, so off - the mark comments here they probably would.) It might be instructive to look back at Thatcherism and to see what they cut or sold off and what remains of it.
Tory government = cuts in health care, education, pensions and so much more that they dare not tell you about. Though of course you all may be happy to be suckered by the bread and circuses expenses issue, your hatred of Dr Brown, and all the other white van driver portmanteau (look it up) prejudices - wake up post 2010 election, grin as Cameron enters No. 10 and wait to see what happens because the tories dare not tell you. I wish you well in what will become hell (but you've got savings and a pension not touched by the global downturn, haven't you?) Fools
Complain about this comment
Keep youtr tory hands of our public services Osborne...you a joker...and Mr en Percent too!!
Complain about this comment
obangbang and the blame game
Several comments whinging about predjudice against the young and privaleged Osborne. yet every criticism of the Toffs party is dismissed as class envy. Do have to be in certain class or to have an opinion? There is a tone of the Hunt follower about some comments. Lower middle classes who want to latch on to a bit of toff culture.Saga.. and laugh.. have no need to be envious of anyone I suspect.
Complain about this comment
"hnswst wrote:
I think it's unlikely the former "President of the Oxford University Conservative Association and national chairman of the Young Conservatives" (Wikipedia)is quite the Labour zealot some people seem to think he is"
Yes it is unlikely. However, I suspect it is more likely to happen than say the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (a Labour MP) being the previous holder of the safe Tory seat of Witney (now held by the Leader of the Opposition).
People do cross the political floor, and Labour has changed a lot since Nick's student days.
Complain about this comment
Still no moderation for post 260, and another two pro-government post complaints rejected.
Is there not even a pretence of a shred of impartiality here anymore?
Utterly disgraceful.
Complain about this comment
#283 "Keep youtr tory hands of our public services Osborne...you a joker...and Mr en Percent too!!" (sic)(sic)(sic)
At least he's honest about it.
Brown, by his own figures, will be shearing 13.5% off public services, whilst allowing "rises of 0%" to continue.
You can fool some of the people all of the time (that's you) ....
Complain about this comment
"Cameron will revert to type and follow the fiscal policy of his heroine Margaret Thatcher (He of the "Thank God for Margaret Thatcher!" quote a few months ago) Education, training and local services will be the obvious targets- so woe betide anyone with children aged 4-18 and/ or elderly relatives needing social care".
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Please can you clarify your comment. Do you believe that labour will not be forced to cut public spending if they win the next election. Do you really believe that the need for cuts is in no way linked to the collosal budget defecit that has been created under Gordon Browns period as chancellor / prime minister. Do you really think that holding the opposition parties who did not cause this massive budget defecit accountable for the cuts that will need to be made whilst not in any way challenging the party that caused the need for these cuts represents balanced reporting. I expect if Gordon Brown told you his cat could fly you would believe that too.
Complain about this comment
284. dhwilkinson
"yet every criticism of the Toffs party is dismissed as class envy"
=
Shot yourself in both feet there.
I'm not whinging about prejudice, I'm defending Nick's right to bring up Osborne's bg in the context of the interview. (see 274).
If indeed yourself, saga, Laugh etc. have no need to be envious of anyone why is class a recurring theme with you? If you have been served an injustice by class discrimination then fair enough, but it does follow the same pattern as people who moan about overpaid footballers, who if given the same salary would quickly change their tune.
"Do have to be in certain class or to have an opinion?"
If you mean 'do you have to be in certain class to have an opinion', my answer is no.
Do you have to be in certain class to govern?
Clutching at straws with the "latch on' bit.
Complain about this comment
131 justtheitcket wrote
Wrong, actually. The debt figures relating to the banks are offset by the asset values of the shares that the government now owns.
____________________________________________________________________
Dont disagree with this.
The scary bit is that if the government tried to realise the asset value of those shares, they would probably depress the current paper value. Doesnt negative equity work the same way? - the debt is real and absolute, the paper value of the house is only what you can get for it at the point of sale which will vary depending on market conditions - this is why banks currently seem to be built on what looks suspiciously like brown stuff, as potentially is this country's financial credibility.
Complain about this comment
"If indeed yourself, saga, Laugh etc. have no need to be envious of anyone why is class a recurring theme with you?"
Class or the class they perceive themselves to be in, is a recurring theme with everyone here. It was quite funny to read some peoples comments when having discussions with people like Derek Barker. You might say we shouldn't judge osborne and cameron on their background, but on his performance. Are you people sure that's a good idea? Strip away the 'Mrs Bucket' factor and they have nothing. Perhaps someone could explain why they should be running the country without refering to them being in the ruling classes or refering to Gordon Brown.
Complain about this comment
284. At 12:54pm on 01 Jul 2009, dhwilkinson wrote:
obangbang and the blame game
Several comments whinging about predjudice against the young and privaleged Osborne. yet every criticism of the Toffs party is dismissed as class envy. Do have to be in certain class or to have an opinion? There is a tone of the Hunt follower about some comments. Lower middle classes who want to latch on to a bit of toff culture.Saga.. and laugh.. have no need to be envious of anyone I suspect.
-------------
Red handed.
Toff is a derogatory word for a person of a certain "class". How, when you are openly pedalling your class hatred, can you deny you suffer from envy?
You do not have to be of a certain class to have an opinion, so why on earth would you think it is okay to dismiss Osbourne's opinion because he is well off.
Complain about this comment
This post is not off-topic as the topic is about public spending, so I'll repost it.
"In days gone by, when we had honourable politicians, and a media that weren't bullied and sycophantic, any government that refused to lay out its spending plans in the middle of one of the deepest recessions in history would have to call a general election on the spot.
It says a lot about New Labour, the BBC and Nick Robinson that we are continuing to tumble down the hill into mediocrity and bankruptcy.
It also says a lot about Robinson's credentials that he doesn't even care about how partial his postings are. Perhaps he knows his job is finished when the Tories are elected."
Complain about this comment
"...why on earth would you think it is okay to dismiss Osbourne's opinion because he is well off.
It seems to me that we are suppossed to think his opinion is more acceptable purely because he is part of the ruling class. If he voiced an opinion that didn't involve Gordon Brown, explained to us why he would be a good chancellor and why Dave and his bullingdon chums would be so great for the country. Then you would be right. What kind of a job interview would it be if all the interviewee did is slag off all the other candidates?
excuse the errors as apparently i've shot myself in both feet and have blood all over my hands steming the flow of blood. Im off to clal an amblacne.
Complain about this comment
Yet more moderation failure. If you'd care to point out what is objectionable in my criticism of Nick Robinson I'd be grateful, otherwise I will post until banned and then complain officially.
"provoke, attack or offend others; are racist, sexist, homophobic, sexually explicit, abusive or otherwise objectionable; are considered to have been posted with an intention to disrupt; contain swear words (including abbreviations or alternative spellings) or other language likely to offend."
Oh dear Nick.
Almost universal condemnation of a piece of journalism that deserves no space on a publicly funded website.
Your lack of impartiality and fairness is laid bare for all to see.
Perhaps its time for a career move? CBeebies perhaps?
Complain about this comment
294. At 3:30pm on 01 Jul 2009, dhwilkinson wrote:
"...why on earth would you think it is okay to dismiss Osbourne's opinion because he is well off.
It seems to me that we are suppossed to think his opinion is more acceptable purely because he is part of the ruling class.
---------------
Dhw, if you think that, I am afraid it is entirely your failing and noone elses. It seems most unreasonable to push your preconceived discrimination onto someone making a valid point, and draw the illogical conclusion that it is less of a point as a result.
As for your views on politcal slagging off, I agree with you, and it is a tragic state of affairs that it is so prevalent. But it is prevalent in both sides, Gordon is every bit as rude and obnoxious as anyone else, so it scarcely seems like a reason to lambast Osbourne.
Complain about this comment
Nautonier, you believ this drivel which you wrote?
"Over any time horizon - Scotland is subsidised - always has been and always will - and it is subsidised by the English PAYE taxpayers. The oil revenues came and will go - whether its postal services, defence or any other service you care to name - Scotland is subsidised. "
Then answer this simple question , why ,if Scotland is such a subsidy junky, financial basket case , this Government, previous Governments and future Governments are trying so hard to hang on to us?
Surely, believing as you and many of our Southern friends in the truth and honesty you read /hear in the media, it would be better to cut us loose , have no truk with us whatsoever , watch us starve , watch us beg for aid?
Aye , right!
Complain about this comment
294. dhwilkinson
"excuse the errors as apparently i've shot myself in both feet and have blood all over my hands steming the flow of blood. Im off to clal an amblacne."
=
Just as well you get that attended to now because if the Tories get in they will cut all services and doctors and nurses will be rarer than hens' teeth. :-)
Complain about this comment
I would love to know the reasons for the comment below being removed...Off topic apparently ...Hope this blog isn't going to go the way of HYS and become pointless
You do make me laugh ( i mean that in a good way) so how would you describe Mz Harmen apparently a very very privileged backround ..Oh gosh and the deputy prime minister also .. Of the Labour party
Complain about this comment
greathey, blame
This conversation is getting to surreal. You using your preconceived misconception to accuse me of having a pre conceived misconception. Are either of you part of the mockney mafia of one?
Complain about this comment
i think every normal thinking person in the country will know by now that our present government has dug us into a financial hole that will require cuts for several years, so these parties are having a tizzy fit over who will cut what blah blah blah, there is no difference between both major parties just one caused the problem and the other knows it.
as this country is in trouble we need all parties to be forged into one and a unified government not busy bickering will resolve the countries problems faster and fairer. would we have survived the second world war if the parties we have today been incharge i think not.
what we have in westminster today is inept, too busy with their own party lines to be affective in running this country.
Complain about this comment
the blame game @ 211
a socialist who decries free market capitalism and makes a very successful living from it, but continues to oppose it - that's hypocritical
... but then what you're effectively saying is that for, say, someone like me, to retain my integrity, I have to condemn myself to a poverty stricken life on the margins of society - cheers and beers, TBG
Complain about this comment
206. At 06:55am on 01 Jul 2009, valdan70 wrote:
#mikekpo
Would you like to tell me when a Conservative government ever gave an incoming Labour government access to COINS before an election? No, of course you can't; it just does not happen.
===
I can, John Major, 1997. Glad to help!
Complain about this comment
206. At 06:55am on 01 Jul 2009, valdan70 wrote:
#mikekpo
... Is GO even remotely capable of managing the UKs budget, especially in these torrid times, I very much doubt it. He reminds me of one of those nasty little schoolboys, who nobody likes, whineing to the teacher, 'Miss, they wont play with me'.
===
Very similar then to Gordon Brown and his "a big boy did it and ran away" excuse for the state of the UK economy under his stewardship.
Complain about this comment
302. sagamix wrote:
the blame game @ 211
a socialist who decries free market capitalism and makes a very successful living from it, but continues to oppose it - that's hypocritical
... but then what you're effectively saying is that for, say, someone like me, to retain my integrity, I have to condemn myself to a poverty stricken life on the margins of society - cheers and beers, TBG
=
Take a protest singer/songwriter for example, who comes from a rough neighbourhood. Once he has enough money he leaves his humble beginnings and moves to a peaceful, affluent area, far removed from his home town. He gives his children the kind of education he once put down in his songs. He continues to write about the same issues even though he has done quite nicely out of the system he critisises. I wouldn't knock him for moving and wanting the best for his children, but now his songs have lost credibility. Has he lost his integrity? You tell me. Should he change his tune or continue to beat the drum? (how cheesy is that?)
This is all hypothetical btw.
Complain about this comment
#266 nautonier
"Over any time horizon - Scotland is subsidised - always has been and always will - and it is subsidised by the English PAYE taxpayers. The oil revenues came and will go - whether its postal services, defence or any other service you care to name - Scotland is subsidised."
I just LOVE your evidence based postings. Such erudition! Such knowledge! Such uncritical acceptance of Labour propaganda!
Complain about this comment
187 Invader-Zim wrote:
"In god we trust, the Tories win, bring an end to Britians strife."
slight alteration
To the devil, Brownite souls consigned, damned in afterlife.
In God the naive trust, the Tories win, misery is rife.
Complain about this comment
blame @ 305
singer or whatever, he hasn't lost his integrity by making money and living an affluent lifestyle but he HAS blown it if he send his kids to private school - that's a line which shouldn't be crossed
Complain about this comment
196. At 00:30am on 01 Jul 2009, yellowbelly1959 wrote:
186. At 00:01am on 01 Jul 2009, york1900
I hear that Labour plan to drown all first-born babies born after the next election, so how can we possibly vote for them?
_________________________________________________________________________
That would save a lot money at £20.00 per child
_________________________________________________________________________
200. At 00:43am on 01 Jul 2009, Roll_On_2010 wrote:
#186 york1900
yorky please can you tell me how doubling the tax rate of 10p on our lowest earners protected the poorest.
And what do you think about the unfulfilled promise by NuLabour to pay it back.
_________________________________________________________________________
Well to be honest I found the 10p rate a joke as if I worked over time I still wound up paying the next rate up and then get a tax rebate at end of the year
To find out what all the party's want to do can be found
http://edmi.parliament.uk/edmi/
Early Day Motions Home Page
And once you start looking though Early Day Motions and amendments that the party's try to get in to law you soon see that a lot of it is not for the benefit of the majority but for benefit of a few
same as if you look who on the board of UK Financial Investments,
the arm of the Treasury.
who agreed Royal Bank of Scotland's chief executive pay deal £9.6m with the bank
http://www.ukfi.gov.uk/about-us/
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS