Cameron keeps schtum on Lisbon
So what does the self-proclaimed "straight talking" guy say about one of the biggest foreign policy dilemma he's likely to face if he becomes prime minister?
Nothing. Nowt. Nix. Zippo. Zilch.
David Cameron's official explanation for not telling us what he'll do if the EU's Lisbon Treaty is law by the time he reaches office is that "you can only have one policy at a time". He adds that he doesn't want to do anything to "undermine or prejudice" the ratification proceedings in Poland and the Czech Republic.
The real explanation is that he is determined that his last conference before the election will not, to use his phrase, "obsess about Europe".
This is, however, a crucial test of how Cameron will weigh up principle and pragmatism.
A principled Euro-sceptic approach might argue that the British people deserve their say on Europe whatever has been decided elsewhere.
That is what Boris Johnson appeared to back yesterday before hastily getting his spokesman to brief that he was only calling for "an urgent opportunity for the British people to have a say on this treaty before it takes force".
A more pragmatic approach might reply that unpicking a law ratified by
27 nations would not only be nigh on impossible but also a serious distraction from what needs to be done to sort the economy out.
The signs are that Cameron is veering to the latter but would prefer to unveil what some in his party will see as a betrayal when they are not all gathered in one place.
Intriguingly, there are signs that some of the biggest Euro-sceptic cheerleaders in the Tory press may be coming round to this pragmatic position.
Yesterday, my colleagues at the BBC reported that Cameron's referendum pledge remained unchanged.
I joked with one senior Tory that the headline should have read "Betrayal postponed". He smiled before chastising me for my cynicism.
13:20GMT: Is the Czech in the post?
The Tory Chairman Eric Pickles has told the BBC that he is "confident" that the Czechs won't have ratified the Lisbon Treaty by the time of the next election and, therefore, that he's confident that his party will still be promising a referendum on the EU.
What does he know that we don't? Up until now it has been assumed that the Czechs will finish their ratification process in three to six months.
We do know that David Cameron has written a letter to his Euros-ceptic friend, the Czech President Vaclav Klaus, but we don't know what that letter said or what reply - formal or informal - he received. Perhaps Mr Pickles should tell us.
I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~25~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
You don't honestly think he's going to give aid and comfort to the BBC and other lefties, do you?
Complain about this comment
I've been spasmodically posting on this site for about 3 years, How long does it take to lose "new member" status?
Complain about this comment
Thanks for letting us know, Nick.
It's not just Gordon Brown hero-worship.
But anti David Cameron as well.
If I weren't too old I'd refuse to pay my licence fee.
Complain about this comment
There are a number of issues coming to a head about the Tories - Europe, Hunting, Bullingdon Club, Latvians, and the Tories' Leader and Chairman being unable to give a straight answer to a simple question on the Andrew Marr and Politics show that I expect Osborne's mates in Sky news and the Sun would prefer were not issues around the party's conference. However, this is all shallow stuff - What will the Tories do to sort out the economy and unemployment ? - We are still lacking real policies. Unfortunately, Osborne prefers the shallow stuff in the news because it takes the pressure off his incompetence.
Complain about this comment
There is no point being a good communicator if you do not communicate.
If he is not unsure, muddled or plain dishonest then he should state his position. What is the point of voting for a person like this who demands answers from others but refuses to give them himself?
Complain about this comment
Yes, but what can he say. He cannot pre-empt with a hypothetical answer to a hypothetical question. How does he know now the situation after an election next year which he might not even win. Andrew Marr, instead of pretending to not understand the answer, should have concentrated on Cameron's beliefs and where he stood on other issues, Afghanistan, education, health,green. He preferred, like with the PM last week and the "eyes" question, to ask trivia and irrelevancies like how much money he has: rather rich coming from an organisation which is spending my money to stop me knowing what you people earn.
Complain about this comment
Ah, Nick, Nick, Nick.... you were doing sooooo well... This is one of the first blogs of yours I've read since the year dot where in my very humble opinion, you've called it exactly right and fair.
And then you just had to throw this in... "I joked with one senior Tory that the headline should have read "Betrayal postponed". He smiled before chastising me for my cynicisim." Why did you think that was necessary? Correct me if I'm wrong, isnt the betrayal of an election pledge by New Labour on the EU Referendum a more significant betrayal compared to Cameron and his Eurosceptics, which (for as long as they are not in Government) has no impact on anyone? I'm happy to stand corrected if I'm wrong, but I dont recall you bloggin anything to that effect.
Oh well. Small steps, eh?
Complain about this comment
I don't see it as a big issue - having a retrospective vote that is. In one regard, having a vote after everything is sealed would be a waste of money and turnouts would be very low ('cos their vote will change nothing) and thus un-representative. However, there is so much anti feeling that it may help vent people's frustrations and would give the Conservatives a mandate for being tougher with the EU.
However, were Blair to become EU president then I suspect the movement to pull out of the EU would gain massive momentum to the point of becoming a possibility.
Complain about this comment
The real Cameron was clearly visible during the Andrew Marr interview.
No straight answer to the biggest questions. He did not answer the key question concerning a referendum once the Lisbon Treaty has been ratified. No answer to the the other crucial question how he plans to make public spending cuts without increasing unemployment. The public relations man Cameron came clearly through, not a straight talking political leader. Spin and little substance was the overwhelming impression from Cameron, sadly. He could do better, but then would have to leave the ruthless side of Tory party behind, in which case he would face a serious challenge to his party leadership. Lord Ashcroft would make sure of that.
Complain about this comment
I’ve just been reading about Dave’s plans for the Welfare State & think they are hilarious.
Firstly, the unemployment rate is rising steadily & we don’t have the jobs for those who genuinely want them let alone those who don’t.
The unemployment rate is a fiddle anyway since it doesn’t include those millions more who now make up the Incapacity benefit numbers.
It also excludes all those young people who are now in full time education when, a few years ago they would have been in apprenticeships or other paid training schemes.
There are also those who have savings who are not allowed to be counted as unemployed, but never the less have lost their jobs.
Nearly forgot to mention about the many people who are classed as economically inactive IE they have given up looking for work at all.
I hope that Dave has very deep pockets, because he will have to provide millions of places for training at this rate, & why bother to waste our cash if the work isn’t there to be had anyway.
Ahh, but hang on a minute.
This means that Dave will have to create (sic) thousands of jobs in private training & probably fiddle the unemployment figures by excluding those on training from the list.
Maybe that will go a small way in replacing the many public service jobs that will go with cuts.
Yes, I think Cameron will fill Brown’s shoes perfectly.
Nice dodge over the personal wealth issue as well as the Lisbon Treaty issue on the Andrew Marr Show.
Come to think of it; nice dodge over the extra unemployment due to cuts in services as well.
If this is going to be the standard of reply we are going to get come the series of great debates, heaven help us.
Now who’s dodging the issues?
Complain about this comment
Cameron can never again accuse Brown of dithering, he himself is doing exactly the same on this issue.
Forget your party Cameron, it's the British public that will decide your fate. If Cameron does not spell out referendum yes or no before the election then as a life long Tory voter my vote will go elsewhere, (UKIP).
Complain about this comment
Nick,
If the treaty is already law when they get in, what can they do about it under EU and UK law?
Will our only option be to have a vote on staying in the EU or will we be able to opt out of the treaty or will we have to live with it?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
To quote Ed Balls "So What?"
I challenge you Nick to stand on any street corner and ask every person that walks past, whether it be in Leicester square or a square in Leicester, "Could you give a damn about Europe?", and I can cast iron you will get the response to the tune of either no or whatever.
Especially if you where to then ask if this is even in the top ten of their concerns or priorities for any government be it tory or Labour.
Still, you sit there Nick in the Westminster Village bubble trying to drum up a more than quarter of a century old story of divisions within the tories on the eve of their conference, when nobody on earth outside westminster could give a stuff on this issue if you like, it is only our money you are being paid to do so hey, trebles all round.
Complain about this comment
Agree up to a point Nick but I feel you are taking the New Labour line too close to heart, painting the Tories as a Party in disarray, divided once again on Europe.
Sure, it's the first real test of the new PM-in waiting's leadership keeping a lid on a Eurosceptic backlash after the Irish were duped and blackmailed into a 'yes' vote . But it ain't over 'til the Czech Republic sings.
Hague hasn't been exactly vague about his distaste for Blair as president of a new all powerful superstate.
Cameron may be doing the referendum shuffle but at this stage he's not going to fall into the trap of lying and reneging over a referendum promise, like the other lot did.
The sham of the 'politics of hope' evident in the Irish 'yes' vote, will take time to unravel into reality.
Cameron has begun the process of telling voters what he stands for and where he stands. Hasn't he everything to gain by being realistic - and that includes Europe?
http://theorangepartyblog.blogspot.com/2009/10/reality-or-hyped-up-hope.html
Complain about this comment
Cameron knows he has to work with Europe, the treaty WILL be ratified and he won't try to change it ... in refusing to pretend he would, he's putting rationality and commonsense above playing to his soft head reactionary gallery, and that's fair enough
Complain about this comment
Coming to something when our policies based on 'race against time' wether we are in Europe or not and the Conservatives get in we should have that referendum whether Brussels likes it or not and that we abide by our decision.
If a no Vote were cast what exactly would Brussels do about it... and I can't understand why Blair for the presedency whays he been doing behind our backs?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Now lets see now, for the reason I thought that we were am equal Member of the EEC was to allow everybody the same Rights across Europe to have a say, including Voting - Rights.
But alas, we are forgetting here that we are British, and by being British we somehow always have to make up some excuses in Political circles as to just why it is that any Political Party either inside or outside Government again somehow always knows best what is good for its People without having to actually let the People decide for themselves in a Referendem.
In this Case it is going to be the same Political-Fix Up as per-usual whereby the British People regardless of equality of Membership within an enlarged Europe will once again be denied any Rights to vote on the Lisbon Treaty.
Or, put another way, the Rights of the British People too have a clear mandate to Vote one way or another on the Lisbon Treaty is NOT going to be given under any assurance by either the Labour, or Conservative Parties.
We are therefore without question once again being treated as Second - Class Citizens, in a Second - Class Britain, at the hands of both the Labour and Conservative Parties.
Complain about this comment
#16 - They haven't even published your comment yet but let me guess...
"Toffs...Mortimax...Eton...only Brown can save the world...Tories eat babies...hidden evil plans to shut schools and make children build nuclear subs" etc etc etc
Complain about this comment
So what does the self proclaimed "straight talking" guy say about one of the biggest foreign policy dilemma he's likely to face if he becomes prime minister?
Nothing. Nowt. Nix. Zippo. Zilch.
Nick
as the new Labour spin slogan goes 'DROOLING'
The relish that you show here after being AWOL for the last week speaks volumes.
You obviously feel that this should be his priority when he comes to power (or you are pushing the agenda drawn up by Mandy) to start unpicking the whole of the EU constitution.
For me as a father of 3 I want him to do all he can to stop our economy following the path of Iceland and Ireland due to Browns destruction via lies an uncontrolled spending.
It also appears that Brown fell out with most of the media last week due to their hard questioning of him.
I note with some amusement that you were not one of them.
Remember nick the Labour Party have after every term in power left the country with a cancerous rot in its economy we need the Tories to start and administer chemo so we can have some hope.
If he gets the chance to give us the Labour and Lib Dem promised referendum he will. If it is ratified before he get the opportunity then he will cross that bridge when he comes to it.
We had a PM telling us lies at the dispatch box of which there is now proof out in the public domain but you have been less strident on that than a hypothetical about what might happen if a treaty is ratified or not.
Actually I find this quite encouraging if this is the only thing that you can come up with then there is very little to pick at.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
"So what does the self proclaimed "straight talking" guy say about one of the biggest foreign policy dilemma he's likely to face if he becomes prime minister?
Nothing. Nowt. Nix. Zippo. Zilch."
Well, when Brown became PM, (the guy who says he's always honest), and he decided to skulk off to sign up to the Lisbon Treaty after all the other leaders had left, he said "It's not the same document, so we didn't promise a referendum about it".
Different name, for sure. 98% the same content according to many big-country EU leaders.
So change the name of a body of law. Then say we didn't promise a referendum about something with a different name.
I don't remember such a scathing posting from you at the time.
(And, I'm sure we all remember that Brown "couldn't attend the Treaty signing ceremony because he agreed to meet a House of Commons Committee on the same day". Yeah. Did he ask whether the committee would have agreed to put back that session by 24 hours? Any proof? Don't think so. I bet he'd wished that nobody would have been allowed to film him signing the darned thing... And if the Commons is so important, why can't he honestly answer a question in the House at PMQs?)
Not sure I much like young Dave. Just really fed up with the present incumbent and the legislating spouting consorts.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
Now who was it that promised a vote on the Constitution in his last manifesto? Your mate Gordon Brown.
The Lisbon Treaty is the same thing in a different wrapper.
Why is it that democracy is being denied in the United Kingdom and the rest of Europe and you seem in favour of it. Remember what happened to the last Union of European states the other side of the Iron Curtain.
Complain about this comment
6. wadealong wrote:
Yes, but what can he say. He cannot pre-empt with a hypothetical answer to a hypothetical question.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
He can answer it in a hypothetical way instead of dodging it.
Cameron: Obviously I can’t guarantee I’ll be your next Prime Minister, but if I am, & the Czechs have not ratified the Treaty, then we will have a referendum in the UK.
I’m sure you understand that my options are somewhat limited if the Czechs ratify the treaty while the incumbent UK Government are in power.
As Bob Hoskins always used to say "It's good to talk".
Complain about this comment
Having seen Cameron wriggle with Marr you can understand why Brown wants televised debates with him. Brown may often appear tongue-tied and the opposite of a smooth-talker, but he obviously thinks that a long debate would give him the chance to expose Cameron's lack of depth
Complain about this comment
The country is GBP 200 billion in the red, there are 5 million unemployed and all the apparat can talk about is the Lisbon Treaty. Where are your priorities?
The Tories can do absolutely nothing about the Lisbon Treaty as the Labour government under Gordon Brown has already ratified the treaty and Royal Consent as also been given. There is a faint possibility that the treaty might not be ratified by the EU until after the next election in the UK. In such an instance then the Tories have promised the British a referendum. Don't you think that between now and next summer the EU are going to be putting pressure on all governments to ratify before then? You are a political correspondent so be sensible, PERlease!
The big issue in British politics is going to be the essential and necessary cuts in public expenditure: the first in sixty-two years. This is the story, this should be the focus as we are all going to have to live with the consequences of both the cuts if they happen or even the failure to cut and cut deep enough in a timely fashion.
The need for these cuts is not because the Tories are mad axemen with an ideological wish to trample the poor, the halt and the lame under-foot, but a direct consequence of the complete and utter failure of New Labour as a rational and truthful political organisation.
So kindly stop wittering about Europe, it is not the issue. The massive fiscal debt is the issue. We might even end up unable to afford the BBC, so focus please Nick.
Complain about this comment
Am I the only person appalled at Andrew Marr's questioning of David Cameron on his show today.... I have always been a fan of this show but it looks increasingly as though AM is just trying to get 'soundbites' for the next news bulletin. He wouldn't give Cameron time to answer questions properly and as for asking him how much he's worth... what's that got to do with anything? What happened to having a mature debate, this was just aggressive and badgering. I'm disappointed at the way this show is now being handled and sadly won't bother watching again. I don't know if this is the right place for this comment but I can't find anywhere more suitable at the moment!
Complain about this comment
Did Marr actually ask DC how much he is paid? Hmmm. Is Marr going to ask that twerp Blair if he becomes EU President? Is Marr going to ask the ghastly hypocrits the Lords Kinnock how much they earn?
Marr is trying to redress the balance because of criticism thrown at him at his personal questioning of Brown about his health last week.
Tit for tat, ping pong. Many a tear has to fall but it's all in the fame game.
Good luck DC for the Conference. The country is routing for you.
Complain about this comment
Surely it is not Cameron the media should be pursuing over a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty( EU constitution ), if the media had any modicum of impartiality and desire to further the cause of the democratic process they espouse,the question of referendum would be aimed at the Labour government of this country which is denying the people the right to a say on their future. Ireland, which has long portrayed itself as the great freedom fighters, and have throughout the twentieth century proclaimed their independence have now sold out for the promise of a few extra euros and accepted rule from Brussels and a British politician as possibly their overlord. Labour, meanwhile in it's pursuit of a European socialist super state promises a referendum, then tells blatant lies about the content of the treaty to deny the country any say in the process. Why does the media turn a blind eye to this? Is it because they fear the consequences of alienating Brown and his party of incompetence ?
Complain about this comment
I have to say that were I Mr Cameron about to go to conference and singularly aware that the BBBC have an anti agenda ,I would tell the BBBC as little of my plans as possible.
I cannot think of a good reason to trust the BBBC.
I would be more than a little unwilling to display my hand to either Marr or Robinson and certainly distinctly unwilling to commit to any economic definites prior to seeing the state of UK PLCs books.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
If it's OK to ask Brown about his health then it's OK to ask Cameron about his wealth. Caledonian Comment
Complain about this comment
Come on Cameron where are all the jobs these people are going to fill? I really will despair if this country votes in these morons. I am no means a Brown lover but, mark my words, the country will go down the tubes if this lot get in
Complain about this comment
That was a devious and slippery performance by Cameron
on the AM show.
Answers to difficult questions were met with,
"George will tell you on Tuesday"
Bring back wee Willie Hague and Ken Clarke !!!
Complain about this comment
25
"Having seen Cameron wriggle with Marr you can understand why Brown wants televised debates with him. Brown may often appear tongue-tied and the opposite of a smooth-talker, but he obviously thinks that a long debate would give him the chance to expose Cameron's lack of depth"
And on this particular issue, perhaps Gordon Brown should show his "depth" by explaining why the Labour Party has failed to honour its election manifesto commitment on a referendum.
Complain about this comment
The Sun have jumped ship too soon and have only contributed to heap the pressure onto David Cameron who can now only throw it away.
Arguably Europe is the biggest political story our country faces over the next decade as the consequences of integration/isolation from the EU could be more catastrophic than any current economic crisis.
Nick has obviously touched a nerve with the Conservatives on the blog and Labour should take note. The major weakness of the Tories is Europe and it is where they are most vulnerable.
Any PM has to come up with the answers to solutions and the pressure is on our new "PM" to deliver the goods on the big issues. Thanks Nick for ensuring silence is not golden.
Complain about this comment
28. At 3:16pm on 04 Oct 2009, flamepatricia wrote: "Good luck DC for the Conference. The country is routing for you."
Objection; we're definitely not rooting for him up here.
Complain about this comment
The Afghan war has taken a turn for the worse. Not only 8 US soldiers were killed by the Taleban, but a further two were killed and three injured when an Afghan policeman working with the soldiers turned round and statrted shooting.
Yet, training up Afghans as soldiers and policemen is a major plank of the future as laid out by Brown and Obama. At the moment NATO troops view the Afghan forces with scepticism; after this I think it will be total distrust. The west of the country has been relatively peaceful, but Taleban infiltration has seen a surge in bombings and vioolence.
If the west and NATO is to win there will have have to be a huge troop surge in numbers. That means Germany, France, Italy and the rest of the EU getting their collective finger out, and Canada to reverse its decision to pull their troops out.
I see that General McChrystal is the first to articulate the fear of the Taleban acquiring some of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal. Previously these fears have been dampened down as scare stories. Perhaps NATO forces should move east to shore up Pakistan and give Afghanistan to the Talebs and Al Quaeda. I have no confidence in our political leaders in the US or the EU doing the right thing for our safety and or world peace.
Complain about this comment
andy c555 @ 20
They haven't even published your comment (@ 16) yet but let me guess ... Toffs ... Mortimax ... Eton ...
feeling a bit silly now, are we Andrew?
Complain about this comment
I am a floating voter and it really irritates me how 'point scoring' Nick Robinson, Jeremy Paxman and Andrew Marr's journalism has become.
In the past, the BBC used to ask questions to politics that people wanted answers to and then let them provide answers so the public could actually hear them. Not any more:
Take Andrew Marr this morning, he kept asking how many jobs would be lost by the Conservatives cutting front line services (fair question) but then when Cameron was responding, Andrew Marr kept jumping in and not letting him finish. It just gave me the impression that Andrew Marr is more bothered about being seen as a "hard" interviewer than actually assisting the public. He didn't allow him to respond properly as he kept butting in. (For what it's worth, the point I think Cameron was trying to make, and that Marr wouldn't let him make, was that if you don't cut the deficit you may save some jobs in the short run but the economy will be heading for implosion and you'll lose loads more in the long run so some short term pain is worth some long term gain. He didn't phrase it like that but that's what he was getting at. Terrible that Andrew Marr didn't let him.)
Paxman has just turned into a caricature of himself. He pulls these ridiculous faces designed to put politicians off their answers and again, asks stupid questions that get off the point. I remember in the last election he harangued Charles Kenedy about the party's policy on goldfish not being sold at fairgrounds. Now anyone who follows politics realises that the Lib Dems used to vote on individual policies at conference and the Lib Dem leadership had a manifesto where the most important of these policies were included. Goldfish wasn't actually in their manifesto but Paxman saw a way to make himself look good scoring a point over a politician. How did that help the electorate. Of course it didn't. Utterly pathetic
And now this article: Does Nick Robinson seriously think the Lisbon treaty is the most serious foreign policy Dilemma Cameron would face. We're fighting wars Nick!? Isn't that rather more important? Again, Nick tries to score a point as evidenced by the childish "Nothing. Nowt. Nix. Zippo. Zilch". Oh please. Are you a grown man? Is this an attempt to seem like a 'hard ocmmentator' Pathetic
The BBC should try and hire people with smaller egos
Complain about this comment
The questioning of politicians, notably the government has been robust to say the least; but that is the nature of things.
Questioning of opposition parties near to a general election must be the same. People must know what they are voting for and not just what they are voting against. Cameron does not look so good when sincere answers are asked.
Complain about this comment
Re:26 stanilic wrote;
The country is GBP 200 billion in the red, there are 5 million unemployed and all the apparat can talk about is the Lisbon Treaty. Where are your priorities?
----------------------------------------------------
Bread and Butter Issues !:- What, Bread and Butter Issues???
Let remember that the "Only" thing that is really on the minds of all of those in both the Labour and Conservative Parties Camps in this now the Run-Up period to the next General Election in Priority Terms is: Whom has the overall ability to deliver the best Brain - Washing speeches, and the false charm to fool the British Public the best and most, too gain Political Power and Control over everybodies lifes in the First-Place which will be from now onwards right up to Polling - Day itself which is going to count first and foremost in how the timing and delivery of what appears to be any priorities unfolds.
For look at the useless answers given by Eric Pickles on todays BBC's Politics Show where not only could he not answer any Questions relating to giving the British Public a Vote on the Lisbon Treaty, but neither did have any ideas as to what currently is Conservative Party Policy on this issue, other than suggesting that a Policy would be bought forward prior to the next General Election, or in other Words, we will think or have something to say about this issue once we can devise a Policy that no one can understand.
Even, Call me "Dave" Cameron after all his running about doe's not have a clue in the World as to just how to reduce Unemployment, other than to suggest that they will Cut Public spending as well as State Benefits,[ Which is the easy option ], while at the same time "Privatising" Welfare to Work Programmes so as not to be responsible for the disaster that will follow in their wake, for lets face fact here because Politician simply won't admit it for just where on Earth doe's David Cameron or anybody else think for one moment that we will be able to find employment places either in the Public Sectors [ with their reduced Expenditures ], or the Private Sector with their Years of under investment, with Years of further Investment needed before they will be able to crank -up into full productivity, once they accustom themselves into knowing what Skills will be needed, and at what Industral level to produce Exports at a top level upon the World-Stage once again.
This will take from now onwards Years and Years of Investment, and Training/Re-training before Britain as a Country will ever find itself in the Top-League of Nations once more with Incomes to match, for in the meantime, and for at lease the next 6 to 10 Years we simply don't have enought Employment places for everyone, and this can and will only get much more worse once we reduce Public Expenditure to pay off our National Debt's.
Therefore, ordinary People today whom are just managing to get by, will find that if they pick either Labour or Conservatives at the next General Election, then they will be well and truly on the Road to Ruin, along with rising Unemployment, and any lack of REAL Job's for many in future Years to come.
Complain about this comment
Cameron has to carry on riding two horses within the Conservative Party, i.e. the pro-EU (Ken Clark) wing and the anti-EU wing (the rest of them).
So far, he is doing it very badly, as the Latvian SS episode gruesomely illustrates.
Why associate the Euro MEP's of your party with the Euro equivalent of the BNP?
That does not seem very sensible.
Hopefully, another one of the biggest foreign policy dilemma's Cameron is likely to face if he becomes Prime Minister, will be the exit of Scotland from the so-called United Kingdom after November 2010.
Which should really shake things up, such that we English hopefully end up with a majority political grouping in an English Government that has a rational and pragmatic relationship with our partners in the EU.
IMHO, we English cannot continue to be semi-detached members of the EU and must participate fully or face a relatively unstable future.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
The real test will be whether the Press want to give him an easy ride or not.
Our fickle, selfish press in this country are not about to treat each party equally if they can get away with being as one sided as possible.
If they want to make his week difficult they will make sure Europe overshadows the conference.
If they want him to have an easy week, they will leave it alone.
The fact that this is REALLY important will have nothing to do with the decision making process.
Complain about this comment
We do know that David Cameron has written a letter to his Eurosceptic friend the Czech President Vaclav Klaus but we don't know what that letter said or what reply - formal or informal - he received. Perhaps Mr Pickles should tell us.
If that letter says "delay as long possible so we can trash this treaty," when all the other EU states have ratified and WANT this treaty, then that is pretty underhanded
"Look at my face - I am as honest as you want
Look behind my face - I am as devious as the rest"
Complain about this comment
After the result of the Irish referendum, one in the UK is in some ways pointless. Except ....
We have never been given the opportunity, because 'you know who' decided that it was a different issue than the one on which he had promised said referendum.
OK - lets have a referendum. Simple question - do you/don't you agree with the federalist agenda that the EU is following (OK - you might have to put that in words of one syllable for the likes of some contributors to this site). Such a referendum would have no legal force, but at least it would show what people in the UK actually THINK about the issues.We have been denied a voice on that for too long.
Complain about this comment
***** So Nick Robinson why didn't you bother to ask Gordon Brown about HIS promise to hold a referendum then?******
Please don't waffle that the Lisbon treaty isn't the same thing that a referendum was promised on, we're all far more intelligent than the BBC Newsroom or the Labour party fodder.
Complain about this comment
Someone needs to tell the Labour lot that their conference ended last week. Seems they just can't keep off the telly shouting rubbish rubbish every time they can get near a Tory.
It is such childish behaviour or desperation but we really aren't interested in what they have to say. We've already heard it.
As far as the Lisbon Treaty is concerned it should be kicked into touch for the moment. I'm sure the Eurozone are having massive problems trying to keep the whole thing afloat anyway. Thank goodness we're still in control of our own currency.
This country is priority and we would all like to hear what David Cameron and his team are thinking without the comic buttings in of the lost cause party.
Complain about this comment
This Tory supporting reactionary whinger does agree that the Tories should expand upon their plans for the economy but I am not sure that the Andrew Marr show or the Politics Show are the proper platform for any announcements. The conference should look to provide the top down vision of a country under a Conservative government and the general election campaign (whenever the spineless incumbents of Government can find the bottle to call an election)is the time to expand upon the bottom up detail.
By the way Mr Cameron did answer the question as to his wealth (with quite good grace I thought.) It is mainly his London home and I think that his salary is already in the public domain. So what.
On Europe I think that he indicated that irrespective of the Lisbon Treaty ratification the Tories would work towards the EU that we did vote for back in 1976, which was pretty much a free trade area only.
Complain about this comment
This getting 'Britain back to work' thing is just diverting public money into private hands in my view. A public sector organisation dealing with the unemployed you would expect to want to lose business, where as a private sector profit driven organisation wouldn't want to. Its just alleged 'small government' rhetoric. Where bits of the government are hacked off and privatised so there's a profit in it. In my view of course. Don't want to upset any tories. They seem to be a little sensitive today. Something to do with Europe I think and having to depend on 2 countries they didn't want in Europe because of the immigrants back in the bad old days.
Complain about this comment
A bit of a non story really
If the treaty is ratified by the time of the election, what can be done legally? That must be out there, and so many lawyers queueing up to soak up money from the BBC
What I'd like to know is why Brown didn't give the referendum in the first place as his manifesto promised. Not many questions from the BBC about that. In fact, if Brown had done that you wouldn't be able to ask Cameron what he would do now
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
All I want someone to do, is to carry through what they have been promising to do about our benefit culture. Tony Blair told Frank Field to think the unthinkable, when he did Tony got rid of him. Successive ministers and Gordon have been promising to do something about it now for nearly 13 years. Yet all they have done is to make things worse by giving even more away in state benefits so we now have a significant number of people whose main / sole income is derived from state benefits and who have never worked a day in their lives. If DC is actually going to do something about it then lets give him a chance. One things for certain is that we cannot carry on like this. Gordon won`t be saying too much about the subject between now and the general election, except to rubbish the Tories on the subject as he knows full well that turkeys ie his core labour voters don`t vote for xmas. I fully expect a budget full of clumsy bribes as a damage limitation exercise. Its easy to do that because you know that you are not going to be in power after the election. All I want are some fresh faces with new ideas in parliament instead of the same tired all has beens on the labour benches who have promised great things; but in actual fact have cocked things up big time and it is us the tax payer, not those on benefits, who are going to have to pick up the bill for their mistakes for years to come. The labour party say there are no jobs for these people on benefits - all councils will be cutting back left right and centre. Many council jobs, and in other parts of the public sector, pay less than that what you can get on benefits. So why not put these "claimants" to good use, working for our councils and public secotr bodies rather than having our services cut and continuing to allow these workshy individuals to remain at home sitting on their backsides all day long.
Complain about this comment
34. At 3:44pm on 04 Oct 2009, spinspamspun wrote:
That was a devious and slippery performance by Cameron
on the AM show.
Bring back wee Willie Hague and Ken Clarke !!!
I can never get past Hague's attempt to connect with the people by wearing a baseball cap. The memory still makes me shudder. And a shared liking for real ale and Stan Tracey is not enough to tempt me to vote for Kenneth Clarke.
I can't stand rude, aggressive BBC interviewers such as Andrew Marr and so, unfortunately, was obliged to miss the Cameron interview. Had he bothered to wear a tie for the occasion? It would make a change.
What a third-rate shower they all are. Surely we don't deserve this.
Complain about this comment
"The Tory Chairman Eric Pickles has told the BBC that he is "confident" that the Czechs won't have ratified the Lisbon Treaty by the time of the next election and, therefore, that he's confident that his party will still be promising a referendum on the EU.
What does he know that we don't? Up until now it has been assumed that the Czechs will finish their ratification process in 3 to 6 months."
===
17 Czech senators lodged a fresh appeal against the Lisbon Treaty with the country’s Constitutional Court last Tuesday. An appeal lodged last November, on a series of particular points, failed even though Mr Klaus himself vigorously supported it.
This second legal suit is broader. The court has been asked to say exactly what powers can and cannot be transferred to Brussels. Logically, the court should need more time to give its ruling than last time, when it took five months.
A similar appeal was lodged in January in Germany. Opponents of Lisbon there argued that the treaty undermined Germany’s self-government and democracy.
The German Constitutional Court partly agreed, saying that Lisbon could be ratified only on condition that the German Parliament passed a special law reaffirming its rights to veto EU law. This has now happened and Germany finally ratified Lisbon last month.
But Euro-sceptics in the Czech Republic hope that their Constitutional Court might do something similar and that a new law would have to be passed in Prague, too. All this will take time – which is exactly what Mr Klaus wants.
For the Czech President is playing a political game while claiming that he is only following legal procedures. And the reason why he wants time lies in Britain.
Last week, David Cameron wrote to Mr Klaus confirming his party’s promise to hold a referendum in Britain on Lisbon if the treaty is still unratified in at least one member state if – or most likely when – the Tories come to power.
There was intense interest in this letter in the Czech Press, but Mr Klaus has refused to publish it. He hopes that he can spin out the legal and political review process until there is a change of government in Britain and a referendum here.
He is supported in this by the Czech people, over 50 per cent of whom are also against Lisbon.
Some people say the court could take six months to rule. Others point out that the judges will be lobbied hard to deliver a quick verdict to prevent Mr Klaus’s game from working.
Complain about this comment
laughable BBC is this really the best you can do?
how many times was miliband and/or brown quizzed on why they never gave us a referendum, even though they promised one in their last election manifesto and were elected to government on the back of that promise?
nil, nowt, zilch, zero.
how much money does gordon brown have? how much has mandy made whilst in office? does the BBC consider brown and his cronies as being "toffs"?
what about all the labour lords who have profited from labour policies? the supermarket lord... hes done pretty well out of labour, wasnt this a conflict of interest? isnt a labour person with pots of money a bit hypocritical?
was anything like this asked? not a chance
the final joke, has been the constant reporting of a perceived "split" in the conservative party over "europe"
what about the labour splits on europe? did they not have a view about the referendum that was promised then not delivered? i dont recall any questioning of this during last weeks labour conference interviews... why not?
labour splits exist in all other policy areas, post office closures was a good one, labour MPs telling their constituants that they supported them in keeping open upto 5000 post office counters, appearing in local newspapers etc, "fighting for people" - then walking into westminster and voting for the motion to close post office counters!
we dont hear a single word or question about the sheer hypocrisy of labour MPs and the prime minister, instead we get full aired coverage of them peddling lies and bias opinions of what "the tories will do..."
does the BBC need ordinary people to comment and correct them, regarding what game labour are playing?
it is obvious to every man and his dog, that labour's sole interest is to extract policy ideas and plans from the conservatives, so they themselves can offer a dumbed-down version of the same policy in their manifesto!
please remember BBC, you do not represent the labour party, you are supposed to provide unbiased and professional reporting on events that happen, not engineer events to provide some material for your news bulletins to report on.
the public pay your wages, dont you forget it!
Complain about this comment
comment No 2 referred to the moderators.
Guys, your a disgrace, simple as that, you should be working in Russia.
Come on Cameron, can't wait for him to take No 10 and sort out the pro Labour BBC News team.
Complain about this comment
Yes! That is a question that I have posed. My local M.P. stated that he was unequivocally Anti-E.U. and would oppose any attempt to ratify the Treaty. I have yet to get a reply to my question, posed on line 2 months ago from the Conservative Party. I am assuming that I was a little premature in asking about post-ratification U.K., with a Tory Administration.
What is it about 'NO' to the E.U. question that is so difficult. I am not interested in the legal problems that removing G.B. from the E.U. would present. That is a political/legal situation for the Government to deal with.
Unfortunately I am old enough to remember the post-W.W.II era. I still go cold when I hear the sirens; I recall the deprivation in England that war brings. I am not afaid to "talk about the Germans", twice in one centuary is a powerful reminder. Possibly most modern Germans are as anti-war as I am. Maye that is why they want a united Europe, to try to prevent another world war, I do not know.
What I do know is that we have been denied a say on entering Europe by this Government and I do want another denial by the next.
Complain about this comment
46 You accuse the Tories of being devious.
How many counties other than Ireland have asked their electorates if they agree with the Lisbon Treaty, a document that will materially alter their sovereignty and written in a way that nobody understands except the EU mandarins. How many Governments have promised a referendum, but reneged on their promise. So who is being devious?
Complain about this comment
So did NuLabour feel upset by Mr Marr asking if Mr Brown was on prescription drug's ?
Did the BBC feel the need to throw the kitchen sink at Mr Cameron this morning to show their impartiality ?
I thought Mr Cameron did rather well, considering.
On the question of the Lisbon Treaty, it is still true that two nation states have not yet ratified it , so until that situation changes why should the Tory policy change ?
As for the Tories conference in general, I am looking forward to hearing new ideas from them, one thing is blatantly obvious to me is that this country needs a change in direction before we have to call in the IMF again.
Complain about this comment
After all this EU business is finally implemented, I have no doubt that Tony Blair and Peter Mandelson will all find highly paid positions in this new European super structure. Followed no doubt, by Gordon Brown when he is looking for a new job - he will have his fur-lined escape tunnel from the bunker already in place.
No wonder they are so keen to wrap this treaty up so quickly.
Complain about this comment
I think we need to start reading between the lines here.
After finding the glaring holes in the LIB LAB conferences.
The media had to turn to the Tories and agree what their angle would be to portray the Tories as divided and not ready for power.
So then the Irish finally surrender and get the vote right after being forced to vote again.
So this is the laziest way of doing it.
You know that you will be able drag up some old Self destruct Tories like Tebbit but Cameron has a perfectly reasonable stance that if the treaty is still in play when he gets the chance he will then hold a referendum and ask the British people if they want to accept the EU constitution or renegotiate our relationship with the EU.
So what angle can we use Ahh! the hypothetical. Yes that will do it.
"What will you do if it is ratified?"
"Ask me when it has been until then we are working on the basis that it won't be"
AHH that’s it we have weakness.
Meanwhile back on planet earth the credit rating agencies have said that if Brown does not come up with a clear plan of reducing the disastrous debt situation in the next PBR then they will reduce our credit rating.
After that Iceland here we come.
So what this show to me is the complete lack of substantive point to trip up the Tories.
And the complete desperation of the Labour party to land a blow on Cameron. Any blow.
Marr
How much are you worth?
Are you embarrassed about this picture?
Innuendo
And trying to play to peoples prejudice.
It’s not been a great day for the journo's but you can only be relaxed if this is what they have to resort to.
Complain about this comment
What will you be looking for from the Tories party conference?
As we English appear, due to our rotten democracy, to be stuck with a Tory Government in about six months time, then it is a serious question.
I would be looking for the one thing that you can almost guarantee will not be on show, namely - political honesty.
You would think, especially after the expenses scandal, that these professional politicians would come out with some policies that are intrinsically honest rather than the usual deceptive plays-on-words.
For example, the personal tax system is a mess that even accountants complain about, made worse by having another system, tax credits, layered on top.
If the Tories stated that they were proposing to scrap NI contributions completely and merge those 'contributions' into Income Tax, then that would constitute a mighty leap forward in political honesty.
But that is unlikely to happen because of 'presentational issues' i.e. the eye-watering rates of personal taxation would be bought into stark relief.
No, I am not expecting much political honesty to emanate from the Tory Party Conference as isn't has not been much in evidence from (nearly dead) Labour or the Lib-Dems conferences either.
Complain about this comment
Sagaminx,
I can't help but have noticed todays story about you political favourite Harriet Harman - Deputy Labour Leader, Equalities Minister and neice of Countess Longford.
Given that the police are investigating a number of alleged incidents, including using a mobile phone whilst driving then hitting another car. Apparently this incident took place on 3 July, which is 3 months ago now. I'd be interested to know if this 3 month delay in the police questioning of the person allegedly responsible is normal procedure. Perhaps the police didn't know where to find her after all !!!!!
Perhaps, the equalities minister could investigate the apparent inequalities in this incident, as she clearly seems to think that the law does not apply to her like it does to everyone else.
Complain about this comment
Nice to see Andrew Marr finally putting Cameron on the spot and not just listening to him criticise the government.
Poor "Dave" he really did look pathetic.....obviously had it too easy too long.
Complain about this comment
I am afraid that David Cameron's interview this morning was truly dreadful.
Firstly Europe. Yes state the current policy but also tell us what you are going to do about us being sucked into a political union we don't want! Even if it takes a few years to do let's try to renegotiate our terms with the continent and then put the new terms to a vote!
Secondly jobs and debt. Good ideas explained through a fog of wool! Tell it like it is please! We are in debt up to our eye-watering eyeballs and cannot borrow any more money to prop up the nanny state! It will be slashed and burned until it's affordable once again! And where was the policy for free enterpise? Without people to take risks there will be no new businesses nor any growth to get the people off Labour dole queue! Maggie would have championed the self-employed and entrepreneurs! Get with the programme Dave!
Thirdly. After last weeks nauseating painkiller question Marr was always going to hit you with a personal question. What your asset worth is nothing to do with whether you have the right policies. I would have told him to get stuffed on national TV.
Dave, drop the softly softly approach to policy. Now is the time for hard conviction.
This country is crying out for a LEADER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Pull you socks up mate!
Complain about this comment
Cameron says he doesn't want to do anything to "undermine or prejudice" the ratification proceedings in Poland and the Czech Republic, yet he has written to the Czech president and Tory chair man Pickles is confident they will not ratify it. Something smells of some sort of underhand dealing. On the Marr show he could not or would not give a straight answer to a straight question.
As to people keeping on about a referendum none was held under Thatcher or Major.
Complain about this comment
I do not understand this is a lie by all three parties the treated has been ratified by the united kingdom it was given royal assent 19th june 2008 it is uk law we signed up a refferendum after the fact will not change what our government have already signed us up to.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Lisbon
Complain about this comment
Today for the Tories has been a taste of what its like to be in Government. Proper scrutiny of "policy" (if you can call it that) detailed and repeated questions as to intentions and demands for straight answers.
Who feels they passed this tiny test???
I am biassed on this issue I must admit but the Tories exceeded my expectations of just how evasive and frankly downright duplicitous they can be.... Cameron, Osborne and "whispering" Eric Pickles...all equally dodging the questions.
What really amuses but scares in equal measure is the Tory play on unemployment!!! talk about echoes of 1979 with the "Labour isn't working" scam and we all know what happened after that.
Prepare for history repeating itself (but with added fox hunting, tax relief for inherited millionaires and not forgetting the really big idea of increased prices in the House of Commons Bar!!)
It could be worse I suppose...at least Daniel Hannan has no position of power (yet) now that really would scare me.
Complain about this comment
65#
Perfectly normal for a minister of the crown.
There'll probably be a bigger police prescence from the SPG kicking in the door of who ever leaked it to give them a thorough going over.
Laws are only for little people, not Government ministers.
Complain about this comment
#7 Fubar
Yes, Labour reneged on an election pledge, however, we're talking about the Conservatives, probably our future rulers, NOT about Labour.
Yes, I too would love certain people to face the consequences of actions they've taken in ruling our country but the fact is there aren't any consequences.... that's the whole point of most 'democratic' political systems in the English speaking world, they're loaded to suit those who run them and the large vested interests that support them, not voters.
Now we've cleared that up, are you interested in the future? If so, stop harking back to irretrievable pasts and take a look at what the British public have got to look forward to.
Why not try asking a few questions or scratching the surface?
Complain about this comment
Nick, why arent the media outraged that Cameron made a statement on the Andrew Marr show saying he would not disclose his European policy because it may prejudice the outcomes of the Polish and Czech ratification of the Lisbon Treaty; when we now know he has written to these Member States trying to do just that. The media have to press for answers not just wait and see.
Don't we get to see these 'letters' so we can determine for ourselves what their policy is. Afterall, the Poles and Czech's know the Conservative policy; but we have to wait and find out.
Complain about this comment
#43 JohnConstable
It's not just Europe, too many in the Conservative party seem to prefer their ties with far right-wing death belt Republicans in the US and totally ignore the moderate Democratic Party.
Why, why, why will they not be honest and say that they haven't become progressive or compassionate but probably just embittered from being so far from government for twelve years?
Complain about this comment
I feel I should enlighten a few people as to why "Call me Dave" wouldn't answer the question on Tory Policy in a "post ratification" scenario and that is because he hasn't got a clue.
As a reasonably intelligent bloke as I firmly believe he is, he knows it would be crass stupidity to try to unpick the treaty and almost certainly put us on a path to exit the EU, after all if you were one of the other 26 countries would you put up with 1 country undermining the whole parliamentary democratic processes of the whole of Europe just to panda to the domestic whims of Tory Europhobes in the UK. I doubt it.
However Dave was largely put in power by Ashcroft's scheming and is in hock to the very Europhobes he will have to betray in this scenario if he uses both his brain cells at the same time and accepts the Lisbon Treaty as ratified.
Dave if you sell your soul for power then sooner or later you heave to pay back those who pay the piper and call the tune.
Complain about this comment
#16 sagamix wrote:
"Cameron knows he has to work with Europe, the treaty WILL be ratified and he won't try to change it ... in refusing to pretend he would, he's putting rationality and commonsense above playing to his soft head reactionary gallery, and that's fair enough"
For once, I agree with your comment.
Once Lisbon is ratified it is logically impossible to have a referendum on Lisbon. We could have referendum that said: "if you had been given a vote on the Lisbon Treaty before it was ratified what would your vote have been?" but this is clearly nonsense. We could have a referendum on EU membership, but that is another question.
Possibly referenda for constitutional change could become mandatory under a written constitution, but that again is a post-Lisbon debate.
Complain about this comment
Interesting that today, no doubt because of media coverage of the Tories, there's a few more than usual bloggers that are a little more "anti" Tory.
So watch out for someone pedaling the usual "Labour Troll" accusation... it must happen sooner or later.
Complain about this comment
For goodness sake can we leave Europe alone ...we are in the EU and we will stay there all this rubbish about will we renegotiate is only diminishing our influence in the organisation and in the end no one will take any heed of us...our trade will suffer and we will just become a country compatible with our geograhic size eg a small addition to europe...let us get stuck in take the lead and show leadership ...keep the tories out or they will mess up the whole thing...they try to pretend that the majority do not like europe ...total nonsense ...we the less well off know that much of the wealth of the country comes through europe the rich may think differently
Complain about this comment
72#
Why keep on about the past?
Pardon me for using your post Eaton, but if I may:
"talk about echoes of 1979 with the "Labour isn't working" scam and we all know what happened after that."
The spectre of Thatcher, big bang, the miners, destruction of industry, high interest rates, black wednesday, Cameron being a SpAd to Lamont, the past is invoked all the time to induce a climate of fear.
You cant have it both ways and Lisbon being signed despite there being an election pledge by the PM who had an elected mandate is a lot closer in recent memory than the 1980's.
Forget what we've done wrong and screwed up, but we wont forget yours and reserve the right to use it against you whenever we please? Do me a favour.
You equally lament that the current political system allows those who have made these decisions to walk away scot free saying "oh well, thats the way it is". So, why dont we change it? Why dont we demand change?
Am I interested in the future? Only that of my wife and I. Ask a few questions? Who of? In my constituency the tories are utterly safe. They wont go out doorstepping. Labour wont bother for the same reason, its a guaranteed lost deposit. The only candidate I can ask questions of is the UKIP one and for that reason, he will probably get my vote, if I'm in the country to vote, that is.
I'm on record as saying we need an inspirational leader and that none of the three main parties are providing one. Thats one of the reasons for my emigration, that I would rather not be around when whoever comes in to pick up the pieces of Brown's legacy has to get down to business. Or, God help you all if he gets a proper mandate this time.
If the tories dont outline their plans when the election comes along, they're sunk and they deserve to be. In the meantime, with an election still at least six months away, I dont think it really matters. And, as I referred to above, if you choose to remember, Blair kept his powder dry until a shorter time than six months before the 97 election.
Complain about this comment
Nick, I am getting worried that the media in general will spend the next week chasing this non-story over David Cameron and his stance on what is still a hypothetical future situation on Europe. If so, I do hope this will not be at the expense of giving proper and thorough examination of the Conservative party's proposed policies in important areas such as the economy, employment, social care, defence, law and order, etc.
I have no doubt that David Cameron will be able to skip away from these rather heavy-handed attempts to expose an imagined crisis/split within his party over European policy. If, by the end of the week, this turns out to be the main issue you have focused on, I will feel very badly served by the BBC's political Editor and will conclude that a major and important opportunity will have been lost to let the public see a proper examination of the full range of policies of the party that, at present, looks most likely to form the next Government.
Complain about this comment
46. At 4:53pm on 04 Oct 2009, Gurubear wrote:
We do know that David Cameron has written a letter to his Eurosceptic friend the Czech President Vaclav Klaus but we don't know what that letter said or what reply - formal or informal - he received. Perhaps Mr Pickles should tell us.
If that letter says "delay as long possible so we can trash this treaty," when all the other EU states have ratified and WANT this treaty, then that is pretty underhanded
**********************************************
If Gordon Brown hadn't been underhanded and dishonest by breaking the promise to give us a referendum on the Constitution (let's call it what it really is), this wouldn't even be an issue. The referendum would have been held, we'd have voted NO and the treaty would now be a dead duck.
Complain about this comment
#74 #75 extremesense / eatonrifle / and others
Is it true that Conservative supporters suffer from the various phobias you identified?
Many Conservatives supported Obama in the last Presidential election (I could have nothing to do with Republican religious and cultural attitudes, though I do think Democrats tend to flirt with protectionism).
Many Conservatives do not wish to leave the EU (the phobic types join UKIP). There are quite sensible concerns about both subsidiarity and democratic legitimacy in the EU, and by no means is this confined to voters in the UK. The latter has not been addressed by the Lib/Lab refusal to grant a referendum despite their manifesto commitments (what was the point of the manifesto by the way?).
The Conservative Party has changed, but alas the insults are enduring.
Complain about this comment
#75 Eatonrifle
Dave if you sell your soul for power then sooner or later you heave to pay back those who pay the piper and call the tune.
You meant much like NuLabour and their trade union paymasters.
It would be great if we could actually get a figure on the amount of dosh laundered through these trade unions under the guise of modernising them.
By the way did the TUC not tell you that Brendan Barber will be attending the Tory conference this week?
Apparently some unions are hacked of with this NuLabour government.
Bit of a bummer that one e10.
Roll On 2010
Complain about this comment
Nick, It is obvious that the story you are trying to create is one about the Tories being split over Europe. If that's the way you want to play it fine. But please be honest with us, your readers and listeners, and state your vested interest is in being a generator of news, not a reporter of it.
Complain about this comment
#82 johnharris
I know there are moderates in the Conservative party - Ken Clarke, for example.
However, I believe that several things make a political party and one are the people who are behind the party - the vested interests, the people whose money is invested either directly or otherwise.
With the Conservatives, I think of Michael Ashcroft and now Rupert Murdoch of course.
What's more, if the Conservative party has really changed then why can't we here about it? Why are the most prominent in the party either those who are flimsy on detail (its leaders) or those who just love to talk the Hannans, the Carswells, Hammersmith Council, Barnet Council, local Conservatives where I live, Boris Johnson, etc, etc, etc?
I want to here all about the change not just nicely presented public events.
Complain about this comment
47. At 4:55pm on 04 Oct 2009, Andy-in-France wrote:
.....OK - lets have a referendum. Simple question - do you/don't you agree with the federalist agenda that the EU is following (OK - you might have to put that in words of one syllable for the likes of some contributors to this site). Such a referendum would have no legal force, but at least it would show what people in the UK actually THINK about the issues.We have been denied a voice on that for too long.
*****************************************************8
I believe that given the opportunity several other Countries would also have given a resounding NO to this Treaty.
BTW, somewhere among the various articles/blogs/reports on this site I am sure I noticed an item that says any further Treaties introduced by the EU will no longer need to be ratified, but would be introduced under the majority voting rule.
Has anyone else seen this and can they point me to it if so?
Complain about this comment
Eatonrifle wrote:
"he knows it would be crass stupidity to try to unpick the treaty and almost certainly put us on a path to exit the EU, after all if you were one of the other 26 countries would you put up with 1 country undermining the whole parliamentary democratic processes of the whole of Europe just to panda to the domestic whims of Tory Europhobes in the UK. I doubt it."
This analysis is wrong. Many of other EU countries have populations that have a large proportion (possibly a majority) who are strongly anti the increasing centralization and continuing dilution of national political accountability (for want of a better phrase). The populations of 26 of these countries have not been allowed any say on the matter.
The people of Holland and France voted against the Constitution. The Constitution was re-arranged and re-named and then unilaterally ratified by their political elite, without further referenda (why not?).
I can imagine that large swathes of Europe are hoping that the UK will do just what you say they won't do.
Complain about this comment
"delay as long possible so we can trash this treaty,"
Has the letter been published? Nick; do you have a copy of the letter?
Complain about this comment
roll on 83
said
"You meant much like NuLabour and their trade union paymasters."
Actually no Roll On. no comparison because all the Union payments to Labour comes from PAYE employees paying UK income tax.
Whereas Ashcroft??......... Well I think we all know.
But if you think that's ok that's your choice.
Complain about this comment
Why should the Tories reveal their policies at this time. There is no election under way and Gordon still has several months to do lots more damage, so there are going to be crises that will need to be dealt with that we aren't even aware of yet.
Be fair. The Labour Party has run out of ideas, they've even nicked BNP policies for Gods sake! So why should the Tories give them ideas for their manifesto. Let them make their own one up. If it's anything like the last one it will only be good for lining the cat litter tray anyway.
Complain about this comment
54. briangare
A man after my own heart I’ll be bound.
The trouble is that all these job dodgers seem to have a vote as well you see.
With our glorious first past the post system, it is very easy for a relatively small number of people to tip the scales & evict a Government.
Over the next few years, there are going to be an increasing number of unemployed people (in addition to the millions I have previously mentioned about that don’t appear on the official unemployment statistics).
Cameron knows this & if he upsets things too quickly, he may find his passage to number 10 a little more difficult than he first thought.
Not sure I can buy into your idea of effectively laying public sector workers off & then taking them back on again on lower wages though.
Important point to remember – You don’t need to be a Labour voter to be out of work & unemployed.
Now, what ever happened to the Tory idea of employing private agencies to find people work?
So far Cameron's Welfare ideas appear to be a bit of a joke.
Complain about this comment
87 Fat cat.
I said:
"undermining the whole parliamentary democratic processes of the whole of Europe"
emphasis on the "parliamentary democratic processes"
Are you saying their parliaments aren't democratic or haven't ratified?
Complain about this comment
My my Nick, this time you don't even try to hide your labour bias and dislike of the tories! If I were a tory I would be offended. truth is Nick, I am an undecided voter. You choose to attack the Tories, yet my great fear is just exactly what terrors a Europena superstate is going to bring to these shores. You would be seen as more of a political commentator and less of a labour voice if you addressed what matters instead of just alternating between tory bashing and labour worship.
Now, what of the EU Nick, do you actually approve of this unconstitutional adventure, this very treaty which has been given birth by totally ignoring democracy, do you think its a GOOD thing Nick?
Because its potential power really worries me Nick, it worries me deeply, it also worries me that people such as yourself don't see the dangers.
Complain about this comment
Nick, you forgot to mention that the results are now tied at one all.
No extra time, no penalties but whoever scores the last goal wins?
Fair?
Where's the tie breaker and if there isn't one, will Ireland be allowed another vote in a years time?
I don't remember you haranguing our un-elected Prime Minister so much when he canceled our referendum - Cameron is not running the country.
Complain about this comment
77#
There wont be any trolls Eaton, they only work a 5 day week. The party cant afford to give them overtime.
No, in fairness, Cameron today had a chance to nail it and show his leadeship credentials, which he spectacularly failed to do. The man is a manager, not a leader, I'm afraid.
Its a bit rich for some of the other posters to be sneering as much as they are doing, but... there you go I guess, such is the nature of the beast these days. Such is life.
Complain about this comment
What electors want to know is if the treaty is ratified what options do we have for opting out?
David Cameron is naturally being reluctant because if the treaty is ratified it may well be that there is no opt-out option.It may well be that a promised referendum would actually be pointless because the outcome could not be implemented.
New Labour have committed the UK undemocratically to EU membership without having the guts to ask the electorate because they know that the people's decision would be a massive "NO".
Cameron has offered a referendum if the Czechs and the Poles delay the ratification process and give the UK time to have one after the Conservatives are elected.We can only hope that will be the case.
Complain about this comment
Nick, above you say
A more pragmatic approach might reply that unpicking "a law ratified by
27 nations"
And that sir, is a straight, unblemished, calculated and blatant lie.
Many Nations "parliaments" may have ratified it, but in the case of France and Denmark for example, this was clearly against the wishes of their own people. The Irish, may I remind you, voted no, in an unheard of and unprecedented twist in the rules, they were made to vote again. At the last Irish vote, you remember Nick, the "NO" one, the Lisbon treaty should have been dead, and you jolly well know it. So, attack the tories if you must (I am no tory)but at least base your attack on the truth.
Complain about this comment
89#
Careful Eaton before you start banging that Ashcroft drum too loud. Labour have non-domiciled donators too and fine well you know it too.
Complain about this comment
75. At 6:46pm on 04 Oct 2009, Eatonrifle wrote:
...Dave if you sell your soul for power then sooner or later you heave to pay back those who pay the piper and call the tune.
===
As indeed Gordon Brown has been finding out these last few months.
Complain about this comment
In order that we keep the reporting on EU balanced, can one of the BBC reporters please nip round to No10 and ask Gordon what Labour policy is if Poland and the Czech Republic don't ratify the Treaty.
While seekling this information can Andrew Marr take a couple of minutes to ask Gordon about his wealth too.
Complain about this comment
Z @ 84
it is obvious that the story you are trying to create is one about the Cs being split over Europe
odd way to put it - the story he's trying to report, I'm guessing you mean
no need for any Creationism on this one, is there?
Complain about this comment
#89 Eatonrifle
The other wonderful thing about Trade Unions is that they're run for the benefit of their members - not big corporate interests.
Most of those members are the first people to really suffer in a recession or when economic policy goes wrong.
Let's say the vested interests who support political parties don't because they're extremely wealthy, or as you say, may not even pay tax here.
Good to see another 'NULABOUR CONSPIRATOR' fighting the cause.
Complain about this comment
#88 loquitir
Why a letter when an email will do.
Cameron: We Want a Referendum.
Complain about this comment
98 fubar
said
"Labour have non-domiciled donators too and fine well you know it too."
Really? Do they have any with a peerage given on the back of a promise to become domiciled and pay UK tax??
Do tell.
Complain about this comment
You do talk nonsense Nick. Cameron is not saying we'll have a referendum come what may because there would then be no need for Vaclav Klaus and associates to hold out against signing the treaty asap. They are dragging things on, and that's evidently been the plan fo a long time, in order to allow for a UK referendum. The Tories leaving the EPP to join up with the Czech ODS is evidence of this. I am almost certain that Klaus, whatever feints he makes in the direction of compromise, will hold out for Cameron.
Complain about this comment
100#
Not to mention asking Marr about his childcare arrangements.
Complain about this comment
#100 Zydeco
Andrew Marr ask Gordon Brown about his wealth? That's a good one, it's just obvious the man is not from money.
Shame Andrew Marr didn't ask Cameron about:
- Drugs
- Bullingdon Club antics
- enormous taxpayer funded mortgage
- oh yes, and policy rather than just a few jolly good ideas
I'll tell you why he didn't and that's because Cameron's refused to answer so everyone's given up asking.
On the subject of policies, come on what's his Boris and the bendy bus manifesto pledge?
Don't know what's happened about bendy buses although I think someone got seriously hurt by one the other day.
Oh yeh, and there was Boris's promise following a poll to reduce the size of the congestion charge zone - hmmmmmm, they were going to do it in Spring but now won't commit to a date. I think they're waiting for the 300 million pound fine from the EU for the state of London's air quality (it results in 5000 deaths per year).
Good bloke Boris, pretty straight up, just like Dave.
Complain about this comment
101#
Its the only way you'll be able to kick the ar$e out of it Saga and chances are by next Thursday, your foot might be getting a bit tired.
Complain about this comment
102 extreme
Tut tut extreme you need to learn to spell...on here it's
"Za nu Lie bour"
Try to keep up.
Complain about this comment
104#
Not that I know of. Those circumstances are specific to Ashcroft.
Complain about this comment
101. At 8:09pm on 04 Oct 2009, sagamix wrote:
Z @ 84
it is obvious that the story you are trying to create is one about the Cs being split over Europe
odd way to put it - the story he's trying to report, I'm guessing you mean
no need for any Creationism on this one, is there?
*******************************************************
The point I am trying to make is that Nick and his colleagues are chasing a non-story at present. Cameron has clearly stated what his policy is relevant to the current status quo with the Lisbon Treaty.
No other situation exists at present so why is a policy needed? There are sufficient, real, important problems that do need policy statements, so why spend time on hypothetical maybes.
DCs policy is clearly stated and is not challenged by other Tory MPs - There is no split in the Conservative Party. Nick and some others would like there to be, so by asking questions and making statements about a state of play that doesn't exist, strikes me as trying to fabricate something that isn't there.
If we reach the situation where the Poland and the Czech Republic have ratified then we need to hear DCs policy and yes, that may be the time that a split in the Tory ranks shows up. That's when it should be reported as news.
Complain about this comment
107#
Did you not say in your 72#:
"are you interested in the future? If so, stop harking back to irretrievable pasts and take a look at what the British public have got to look forward to."
And your 107 says what exactly? And so far as mortgages are concerned, there are just as many sinners on the labour benches are concerned, not to mention in the Lords.
Glass Houses And Stones, extreme... Glass Houses and Stones.
Complain about this comment
Nick and company
Interesting a number of pro-Europe Labour people manufacturing an issue where none exists. I watched the Cameron interview and it was very clear the position he and the conservatives hold. Nick as an intelligent guy I am surprised that you have not been able see what is as plain as St Stephens Tower at Westminster.
The art of good decision making is that when making decisions you decide when you need to decide and not before.
The Conservatives have promised a referendum and if the Lisbon Treaty has not been finally ratified by the time they come to office, DC has said clearly today and on LBC radio earlier this week, that the conservatives will announce the day of the referendum during the campaign and be one of the first acts that is enabled when they come to power. That is very clear even to the most labour Pro-Europe person.
However, If the Lisbon Treaty has been fully ratified that is a different situation to the one we are currently in. Also, it is possible that the two countries left may not ratify. So DC is saying that until the situation changes the Conservatives will offer a referendum. If the situation changes the Conservatives will then offer a different option.
What is so difficult about that?
Also, as I am sure other people have stated it is Labour who have broken a promise to give the Country a referendum. Labour broke a promise (again).
I hope that is clear Nick. If you are unsure ask LBC 97.3 in London to listen to the David Cameron interview.
Complain about this comment
*107 extremesense
I am really not going to get into the game of what is in whose background. It adds nothing to the debate. When and if a person is in power and their background has a serious effect on their ability to do their job, then it becomes a point of debate.
For example, would you trust a man who constantly tells you he is the son of the Manse but then goes on to tell a load of porkies.
Complain about this comment
I keep reading that our Younger Generation upon leaving School go onto State Benefits by choice as if this is some kind of exceptable Life-Style choice in the face of all others with lack of choices, for I don't hear anywhere that should any Conservative Voters become Un-employed they will all be the exceptence rather then the Rule by not needing to Claim State Benefits, for how Secure is Your Job? And if so today will it be secure tomorrow?, and futher still what makes all Conservatives Voters think that even should they lose their Jobs then it will be a Cake-Walk to find further renewed Employment???
While many Torys are screaming from the Rafters that everyone on State Benefits are Lazy, then perhap somone from the Conservative Party should assound us all and tell us just where all the missing over 5 Million of Job places and rising can be found in todays Jobs Market, with many more expected to join the Dole Queue in the future due to the expected reduction in Public Expenditure.
While I have no room for the lost 12 Years of failure with the Labour Government, by contrast the last lost 18 Years in the Conservative Administration was a total disaster in terms of creating Employment, for the so-called problem with the shortage of Employment, and the current culture of Unemployment was started under the last Thatcher Government in which many of the current crop on Con M.P.'s such a Cameron served.
To somehow say that Boy David will be the Answer to Britains problem is to turn facts upon their Head, for in reality it will become increasingly noticeable as we approach the time of the next General Election that in Labour as bad as this Party is, [and believe me it has let alot of People down, such as Pensioners & Carers etc:],and as badly as they have let down a good many of their natural supporters it will become increasingly a choice of going along with the Devils you know, against going along with the false impressions being marketed by Dave and Co: in the Con Party, whom once in Government will hand ALL manners of Public Services Rights including State Benefits over to the highest bidders for the Rights to running these Bodies, by making a total mess of them like the previous Conservative Government did with the Railways, and with the sell off of Council Housing stock without replacing them.
So therefore turning Public Bodies into un-accountable Quangos as was done under Thatcher so that Conervative Ministers can sit upon the Boards of these Quangos as Non-Excutive Members with the back - handers that go along with this approach is not the answer for this brand of repeated mistake to occur over again, for there has never been, and there will be anything called a compssionate Conservative Government or Party.
Vote for Boy Dave at your peril.
Complain about this comment
Which idiot arranged the Irish vote just before the Tory Conference? Mandelson, Campbell? I bet Blair had something to do with it. And now these BBC chaps are expecting David 'Just keep quiet & the keys to No 10 are ours' Cameron, to give a decisive response. What fools the BBC are, you don`t get 15% leads by spellimg things out Nick. This is great entertainment, can he really last all week mumbling something about the Czech Republic, if anyone can Dave can.
Complain about this comment
115. At 9:20pm on 04 Oct 2009, LondonHarris wrote:
.......While I have no room for the lost 12 Years of failure with the Labour .
To somehow say that Boy David will be the Answer to Britains problem is to turn facts upon their Head........
****************************************************
I am not sure that DC is the complete answer to Britain's problems, in fact I don't think any one man or one party is going to be able to do much in the immediate future.
What is needed is someone - anyone - who can put a brake on the downhill spiral set in motion by the current Government.
Complain about this comment
Z @ 114
when and if a person is in power and their background has a serious effect on their ability to do their job, then it becomes a point of debate
too late by then
Complain about this comment
The libertarian side of the Tory party deeply resents that they were the party that took Little England into Europe - they are not Euro-Sceptics they are Anti-European xenophobes, but for some reason they are afraid to admit it. Why? Why do they feel compelled to lie to the country? This is the open wound in the Tory party that dare not speak its name. Basically they hate foreigners and think that only they are the people to rule the World - a perfect description of megalomania!
Dave Cameron is perfectly correct to be scared of these Anti-British elements in his party. These anti-foreigner elements represent more than half of his grass roots and many of his MPs and MEPs. They delude themselves that they are fighting for the good of the country, but they are wrong! Just like the push for minimal/self regulation of the Banks (from this same wing of the Tory Party) the libertarian wing of the Tory party will, if unchecked, destroy the Nation, but at the same time enrich itself - that is what it is all about - personal greed by the Tory libertarian wing - slave labour rates, exporting jobs, cheap imports, financial fiddles and duck houses for their friends, paid for by the rest of us, just like the Banks!. David Cameron has to stamp on this to ensure he is elected, then.....
Complain about this comment
#104 Eatonrifle
Shown your interest in Lord Ashcroft I think the following link will be of interest to you:
Tory strategists widen campaign to target 'safe' Labour seats.
But aint the Straw man supposed to bring out legislation to prevent this.
Jack Straw reverses stance on political donations by non-residents.
e10. Just one question WHY?
Complain about this comment
It is not a non-story. Mr Cameron deliberately mislead Andrew Marr when was in possesion of the knowledge that he had written to to the Czechs attempting to prejudice their decision on the treaty. He stated the opposite.
There is widespread media hypocracy here.
Why does showing an obvious deliberate attempt to conceal a policy be regarded as bias. The BBC reported heavily last week on the failing of labour policy and strategy.
Why has Nick gone silent?
Complain about this comment
118. At 9:39pm on 04 Oct 2009, sagamix wrote:
Z @ 114
when and if a person is in power and their background has a serious effect on their ability to do their job, then it becomes a point of debate
too late by then
**************************************
But, as demonstrated by the appointment of the Noble Lord Mandelson, ones background is no barrier to ones elevation to unwarranted position in high office.
Complain about this comment
121. At 9:59pm on 04 Oct 2009, loquitir wrote:
It is not a non-story. Mr Cameron deliberately mislead Andrew Marr when was in possesion of the knowledge that he had written to to the Czechs attempting to prejudice their decision on the treaty. He stated the opposite.
************************
..and Gordon Brown didn't try to influence the ratification of the Treaty by denying us the promised referendum?
Yeah right!!
Complain about this comment
You know I am kind of sad I used to think that Marr did a good prog...but now I find he is as biased as Humphrey and Davies...its ok to press Brown on his legal medication but not a mention to Cameron about illegal medication or at least to find out if there was any of it about..but its ok he tackled him about his wealth and was told by Cameron that his wealth was in his house !!!!well how did he get to prep school and Eton ? He may not have the wealth now but it is on its way...not of course that wealth should make any difference to ones ability to be PM...I just happen to think that this potentially wealthy man is not up to the job of running our country so my vote goes to Mr Brown who may not be so wealthy but is far more able to understand the ramifications of national and international politics
Complain about this comment
124.
I noted the questions about wealth were neither probing or conclusive.
He wasn't being straight on that either. So that was Lisbon and wealth: anyone else spot anything else he wasn't being straight about?
Complain about this comment
The sillyness in the Conservative Party is still marching - on, for Boy David is set to reduce Incapacity Benefit by 25 Pounds a Week to force People to go back into Work.
What Work ???, and Where ???
Conservative Policy = Sound - Bites.
Is the Conservative Message fooling you??????and if so why are you being taken in??????
Complain about this comment
It appears to be a conference for the media to pick up sound bites.
Still no clarity on the Europe question. Are we not allowed to know but it is ok to write to European neighbours; the czech and pollish people deserve and explanation and don't have to vote for you????
No substance or detail to critique - vague and deliberately used to catch headlines.
How will they creates these millions of new jobs, cut a defict, ring fence spending on health, cut crime, improve schools.
Privitisation.
Was that not the Thatcher approach in the 80's. We are moving backward David not forward.
Complain about this comment
it always raises a chuckle or two, when the labour party or their supporters come out with the line "...the tories want to leave the EU"
talk about straight from the mouth of the spin machine that they put in power and destroyed so much of the good that was done previously.
at what point do those who support the "talking shop" world of left wing politics realise that the conservatives do not want to leave the EU?
there is a big difference between being a trading partner with EU countries and being governed by what is in essence, an unelected group that for the most part, merely duplicate the policies and laws that the UK already had in place, and charges us billions each year for the privilege!
perhaps labour supporters here could enlighten me?
- we have had 12 years of being "at the heart of europe"
- all it seems to have done is impose legislation upon the UK (most of which was laws we already had) and the price we taxpayers have to pay has rocketed.
- everytime something would benefit the UK individuals, it becomes "a grey area" and takes years to sort out, in the meantime, the individual cannot benefit from it
we have lost vast amounts of inward investment in manufacturing (ie, jobs) because of labour's policy of making us the same as france/germany, etc.
where have all our vetos gone?
i have never come across a person/business who in everyday normal life would pay more to get the exact same things as they already have with no benefit what so ever. why have labour left the UK in this position?
what is the point of having westminster anymore?
its been turned into yet another talking shop, inline with all our local councillors, who now only have the power to ask questions of what civil servants are doing and cannot make things happen.
and still labour supporters continue to support labour's stance in europe, even when they have no idea what their stance actually is and why they are giving all our powers away!
Complain about this comment
@ 124
he tackled him about his wealth and was told by Cameron that his wealth was in his house!
mmm very bashful he was, wasn't he? ... almost as if he himself realises (deep down) that his super privileged background pretty much disqualifies him from the Top Job
Complain about this comment
126
I understand that Baroness Scotland may have a position open for a housekeeper - rate of pay not too good though.
Complain about this comment
Yes there should be a referendum.
The question should be 'Do you wish to withdraw from the EU ?'
If we vote to stay in then we ratify the Lisbon treaty, if we vote to leave then the treaty has nothing to do with us.
Complain about this comment
#126. LondonHarris wrote:
"...force People to go back into Work. What Work ???"
Come on, you know what 'work'. 'Work' provided though 'charities and private sectors companies' that will have to bid for the contract to put people back to 'work'. That is, taxpayer subsidised/paid-for 'jobs'.
The private sector companies will, in general, be owned through foreign based tax haven registered companies, but ultimately by friends of the Tory party - it is just a way to pay money to their friends! (Anyone for a duck mansion!) Just like many of the Labour employment schemes. (Also a bit like the Labour scheme of selling off the offices of HMRC to a foreign tax haven registered property company!) That is how it works, and it has always worked! Legal, but highly tax efficient and always at a huge cost to the taxpayer, but with little benefit, except to the private companies concerned - a bit like PFI and PPP contracts!
Complain about this comment
#129
mmm very bashful he was, wasn't he? ... almost as if he himself realises (deep down) that his super privileged background pretty much disqualifies him from the Top Job
---------
Why does coming from a priviledged background disqualify someone? I really don't understand this when you and others here say this. I grew up on a council estate and went to state funded schools. Does this mean I'm more qualified? -- what is this fascination with wealth? I really don't understand at all. I want the person running the country to of had all the chances of a world class education that I did not. I don't equate wealth with intelligence, but education yes. You seem to define people based on their wealth and background. Which is somewhat ludicrious. Plenty of wealthy and upper class people have been decent and plenty of poor working class people have been evil. You can't define someone based on those two variables. It makes no sense.
I didn't like Andrew Marr asking the Prime Minister about his health, I found it somewhat redundant. But it had more relevance than wealth. I can see the argument for asking someone about their health, although I disagree with it. Wealth I really can't. It's just class war nonsense.
Complain about this comment
So much effort from Mr Robinson and friends to get Mr Cameron to reveal his tactics for Europe. I think this is a smokescreen to hide the real issue: time is running out. We will soon have no time left to stop the ratchet falling, and we will be in a Federated State of Europe, ruled by an unelected President. Time will run out unless there is an early election that replaces Europhile Labour with another government.
The British people have been denied the right to choose their future. Ratification of a treaty that changes the British constitution to this extent should have been the subject of either a referendum or an election. The newspapers this week have been full of stories that suggest Tony Blair might become president of Europe. President!
I'm disgusted that Mr Mandelson has already become the unelected most powerful man in Britain, but also his friend Tony will be the unelected most powerful man in Europe! What next? Alistair Campbell for Pope?
Now is the time for Her Majesty the Queen to take action: dissolve parliament and decree that there should be both a general election AND a referendum - BEFORE a bunch of people in Europe change this for us forever. Poll after poll in this country has shown that the people oppose ratification. Poll after poll now shows that the majority of the population want rid of Labour. Her Majesty would be fully justified in taking the step toward dissolution, so that we can decide whether to live in her realm or that of "King Tony."
Maybe we should all March on London? Anyone like to choose a date?
Complain about this comment
Rr:127 loquitir. Wrote.
Privitisation.
Was that not the Thatcher approach in the 80's. We are moving backward David not forward.
-------------------------------------------------------
Of course, for this Conference is the beginning of the Conservative version of: Back to The Future, whereby Davy Boy, and His Cons have borrowed Norman Tebbits Dad's Old Bike and instead of Running around like mad Call - Me Davy is instead peddling out Sound - Bite Policies like mad.
For what Davy does not understand is that it is one thing while out of Government to pick holes during the Punch & Judy Show at PMQ's at Westminster to find wholes in the current incumbent Government Policies without realising that at the same time it is quite another thing in having to make any Real beliveable Policies yourself that will stack-up, and sound sensible and progressive.
Will the Sun Newspaper also desert The Conservatives at the end of their Conference, or has this Rag-Sheet like the Cons, The Sun also "Lost - It" along with the Timeless - Plot themselves also?
Complain about this comment
Re:132 John_from_Hendon: Wrote.
Come on, you know what 'work'. 'Work' provided though 'charities and private sectors companies' that will have to bid for the contract to put people back to 'work'. That is, taxpayer subsidised/paid-for 'jobs'.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
You mean, no one will need the stack of Certificates that they have as a Mountain in the Cupboard, including the Supermarket Manual on how too stack Shelves?
Or, will the latter be needed if Working in Oxfams?
Complain about this comment
127. At 10:44pm on 04 Oct 2009, loquitir wrote:
It appears to be a conference for the media to pick up sound bites....
....How will they creates these millions of new jobs, cut a defict, ring fence spending on health, cut crime, improve schools.
**************************************
I'm sorry but we discussed the Labour Party conference last week.
You know, the one with the speech where Gordon promised all those extra jobs, increased spending on the NHS, to cut Britains debt by 50% in four years, reduced crime, more spending on schools, increased levels of Foreign Aid etc etc.
Complain about this comment
I have just had an afterthought about the idea too my piece at: 136 for forcing and getting the Unemployed to take up Work in Charity Shops.
Will, for at this moment in time whereby there are only Voluntees working for nothing in many Charity - Shops where these positions are over subscribed, for in almost every one of these Establishments you will find that they are Staffed by people whom have reached Retirement.
Now, correct me if I am wrong, for by introducing a Salary for Working in any Charity - Shop will "ONLY" lead to the Voluntees receiving a Wage for the same Work that they are currently doing for Nothing, so how doe's this idea create Employment, or reduce Unemployment???
Also, with the Government expecting to raise the Retirement Age, this will only lead to anyone who has already reached their Retirement Age with a Legal Right under Equality Laws to apply for any opening to go back into Employment, which again will INCREASE the level of current Unemployment Levels???
So all you will end up doing is to convert, and transfer current Free Labour Job's into Paid Labour Work keeping our current Unemployed, members of Society Unemployed for longer periods of time.
Complain about this comment
#129, sagamix wrote:
"mmm very bashful he was, wasn't he? ... almost as if he himself realises (deep down) that his super privileged background pretty much disqualifies him from the Top Job"
Saga,
I really don't understand you.
I thought you were a big fan of Harriet H. as a potential leader. Same gal who was "privileged" to go to the same school as George Osborne (whose own father made money out of wallpaper, for goodness sake!).
I'd have put you down as the sort of person who'd have supported JFK, all those years ago. Guy from a "privileged" background based on possibly dubious wealth. Bunch of brothers with the moral perspective of of a rather unpleasant polecat, but tried to change some things for a people while relaxing on daddy's wealth cushion...
How is that supposed to cut through the "class" garbage that still lays a dead hand on UK thinking? Tony Benn was a warrior of the "left" after he renounced a peerage. Don't think he ever renounced any inheritance.
I still can't work out why people from poor, middle-income or rich backgrounds should be more "suitable" for political or any other jobs.
How does it relate to competence?
You must have worked with or for people from all sorts of backgrounds who had a blinkered view of life - and their own ability to do "the right thing at the right time" - even when the facts slapped themselves in their faces like a struggling salmon?
I find it extraordinary that, after 15 years of leaked information, innuendo and back-biting, the New Labour Project team object to material appearing in the press.
I have no idea whether Cameron (with a richer background) could make a better fist of it than Blair (with the legislative attention span of a gnat, but a determined desire to get rich quick once he left office), or Brown (who apparently has never been wrong).
I'm sure there are plenty like me who don't really give one whether you are a grocer's daughter, a son of the manse, or a billionaire as long as you are fairly straightforward and totally accountable.
Gordon has made the tax and benefit regime so complicated that it's really hard to work through it. I've tried on behalf of others and it's a struggle. A tiny bit of practical thought could make it so much easier for people.
I truly don't care who does it. But, whoever does, a lot of advisory, supervisory and management jobs will simply melt away, suggesting they weren't necessary in the first place. Lots of stuff could be ammalgamated. But we've had years of over-complication and obfuscation. The worst criticism of a management regime you could ever imagine.
KISS. Keep It Simple, Stupid! Works pretty well in most organisations. Why not in government?
Complain about this comment
What was wrong with the cameraman on Sunday's Cameron/Marr interview?
He kept zooming in and out on the Conservative leader in a way that made me feel quite queasy… not some BBC master plan to make watching Mr. Cameron unwatchable was it? Or maybe it was just nerves induced by filming the next Prime Minister of the UK.
Complain about this comment
personally if the treaty has been ratified then there is nothing we can do.........
we will now see the euro machine at work to make sure it is signed before our election,the way the irish were badgered was appalling and nothing to do with democracy.
We were promised a referendum and the back door day late signing by our PM was laughable,it has personally made me rethink what the hell are we actually paying into europe for and just what do all these politicians actually do......i look forward to part 2 of the expenses scandal where they are exposed .
Complain about this comment
#139fairlyopenmind
Did Cameron bring Ken Clark back into the fold just to keep his European wish in schtum.Only a true schmuck could have got it so wrong on the EU treaty.
Where is Cameron going to find all these new jobs for the people he wants to force back to work?I think Cameron has national service on his mind, lets force young kids who cant get jobs into the Army, then pack them off to Afghan and try and squeeze some more funds out of America ans nato.
Simplicity is the order of the day, yet Cameron hasn't an ounce of pragmatism within him.Lets not forget, the tories are quite happy to be called the austerity party, the party that will cut and cut again, until the public services is reduced to zilch and in the mean time use the poor and infirm to get there by forcing them to work for their benefits.
Well fairlyopenmind, I guess my children wont be able to grace society with music, they will be forced by a reckless tory government into employment they didn't choose.
The sad thing is! the ghetto's will rebel and I predict a very dangerous decade ahead with countless riots and clashes.
Complain about this comment
Czechs dash hopes of delaying EU treaty.
The last hurdles for the Lisbon treaty seemed to fall away yesterday when the Poles pledged to sign and the Czech President warned David Cameron that it was “too late” for him to stop the document taking effect.
Vaclav Klaus signalled that he would pass the treaty once it had been reassessed by the Czech Constitutional Court, a process which could take some weeks but is unlikely to last until May or June, when Mr Cameron hopes to take power and then hold a referendum.
Complain about this comment
Well.... lets see what rubbish is dreamed up today. I can't wait to we get to the cut priced education policy and abolishing the causes of broken Britain through the wisdom of the Duncan-Smith free market theory.
Just remove poor people's benefits and let them work or starve.
Victorian era returns slightly backward past 1980's victorian Britain.
No jobs. But. Work or Starve. The Tory election slogan.
Anyone got anymore slogans?
Complain about this comment
#144
Anyone got anymore slogans?
------------------------------
We lie, We Cheat, We Spin, We Grin. -- Vote Labour 2010.
Erm.... duuuuurh. -- Vote Liberal Democrats 2010.
We ain't Cricket, old boys. -- Vote Conservative 2010.
Engerrrrland!!! -- Vote BNP 2010.
They Killed Mel Gibson. -- Vote SNP 2010.
We don't know who we are either. -- Vote English Democrats 2010.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Well we are all in for a hard time if DC gets to number 10 cuts in benefits by moving people from one benefit to another and that will lead to crime going up.
What gets me is that all incapacity benefit claimants are all ready assessed yearly to see if they are fit for work.
So this is another peace of spin in the hope those who have jobs will fall for it
Complain about this comment
Eatonrifle
wrote
Actually no Roll On. no comparison because all the Union payments to Labour comes from PAYE employees paying UK income tax.
Okay Eaton!!! Another case of this Government taking money from hard working wage earners, to support their profligate policies.
By the way!!! Are all contributions given willingly?
Complain about this comment
So, if polls are to be believed, over 80% of rank and file Conservative Party members want Britain to withdraw from the EU .. not a proverbial Rizla paper then between the Tories and UKIP.... and Cameron has written a letter to the Czech President, but he wont tell whats in it. Oh go on, Nick! have an informed guess .. bet you're right.
Complain about this comment
For all the comments on how Labour have saved education, the public services and the world. I have one huge problem.
We cannot afford it. It is a very simple equation. There is not enough cash in the piggy bank to keep the bloated ineffective public and welfare sector afloat. It all has to be paid for, and you cannot keep squeezing those that actually earn and create before they either give up a senseless slog and realise welfare pays better, or it becomes financially viable to get a better accountant and avoid tax (as most higher paid BBC staff do), or quit the UK altogether with the resulting loss of intellectual capital.
To get back on topic, DC may be dithering and should be pressed on the subject. But I would have been more convinced of the lack of BBC bias if the same question had been put to GB with the same veracity. Or even if he'd been simply asked "irrespective of whether we must have one constitutionally - why not give the electorate a chance to give a mandate to the Lisbon treaty?" The answer I suspect, is because he, like the rest of us, already has a good idea as to the answer.
In which case, knowing what the electorate clearly want, he has deliberately ignored it. Democracy indeed.
Complain about this comment
Excellent post Fairlyopenmind.
I do believe that major changes are required in the benefit system and that they should have been tackled a long time ago.
How do we compare with the French, German, Dutch in terms of those claiming?
Anyone know?
I think that we'll be treated to a great deal of scaremongering( lying) in relation to this prior to the GE.
Complain about this comment
The fact remains that Labour promised a referendum as part of their policy when voted in and then did not provide a referendum. That is the biggest lie to date and the one which should most concern the electorate. Cameron has said he will decide what to do if it is ratified before the next general election.
Completely ignoring the enormous trade deficit, the 5 million people currently on benefit, and the public sector that the country can not afford, Robinson delivers us this. Reams of blog posts and front page news articles will follow about it, all saying nothing, all trying to bad mouth the Conservative party. He knows he will not last long at the BBC if the Tories are in power because of his sycophantic support for Gordon Brown and Nu-Labour's destruction of the country's economy.
Complain about this comment
Cameron is in a NO win situation, if he says YES to referendum then the pro-euros will batter him (including the BBC) and if he says NO then his own party and labour will just say "he's no better than labour".
I firmly believe that if the EU and the Pro-EUROs think the EU is such a wonderful place then what have they to be scared of?
Go for it Dave...trust the BRITISH PEOPLE! and let them know you trust them...politicians have lost the trust of the people, don't make it worse by backing down.!
After the referendum on the EU, can we have one on the BBC please...can someone tell me if they ever watch or listen to BBC3, BBC4, Radio 1 Xtra, etc. etc. Make the bbc give away 75% of their revenue to ITV, C4 and C5. 25% for each terrestrial channel which is viewed on a TV using a TV license.
Complain about this comment
142. At 02:53am on 05 Oct 2009, derekbarker wrote:
The sad thing is! the ghetto's will rebel and I predict a very dangerous decade ahead with countless riots and clashes.
-------------
Its already a dangerous place, with ferrel youths/kids taunting mothers to kill themselves and kill their children, or kicking a mans head in for a bottle of wine to carry on all day drinking at taxpayers expense. Welcome to NuBRITAIN from NuLABOUR! is it 5million or 10million now who are not in work or education, therefore they are a drain on taxpayers money...and I bet all of them have new cars, plasma TV's and foreign holidays...
Complain about this comment
116. At 9:32pm on 04 Oct 2009, allafternoon wrote:
Which idiot arranged the Irish vote just before the Tory Conference? Mandelson, Campbell? I bet Blair had something to do with it.
I bet you didn't ask which idiot arranged for the Sun to back the Tories after the Labour bash. Cameron, Pickles??
Complain about this comment
32. At 3:41pm on 04 Oct 2009, CaledonianComment wrote:
If it's OK to ask Brown about his health then it's OK to ask Cameron about his wealth. Caledonian Comment
Sorry about responding to this comment a bit late, and a trivial item I know, but Cameron's wealth seems to have garnered quite a bit of discussion here. In answer to CaledonianComment's comment, there is quite a difference between the two. Brown's health (or lack of it) has a direct impact on how well this country is governed - in fact, if his health is failing, it might explain some of the bizarre decisions and U-turns that have happened recently.
OTH, Cameron's wealth (or lack of it) has absolutely no bearing on how he might govern this country. So, while it is OK to ask about Brown's health, it is not OK (other than as an anti-tory snide) to ask about Cameron's wealth.
Complain about this comment
Here Nick, I've got a suggested thread for you.
Has my political blog become a mockery of itself?
it seems to be increasingly full of non-stories, but I suppose that suits you in your role as cheer leader for El Gordo.
Complain about this comment
Not giving the public a referendum on the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty is the last straw that will keep Labour from power for generations. Those who used the Labour party for their private interests and ulterior motives would not care because they will just switch to using other parties.
As a floating voter who had voted for Labour once/twice, I will never vote for them again.
Complain about this comment
I wonder how many posters, who have suddenly crawled out of the woodwork for the first time in many months, actually work for the Labour party in one way or another? I ask because some of them seem to have detailed knowledge of facts (if thats the right word) and events that go way beyond what us poor voters have cognisance of.
Complain about this comment
How long before this thread gets closed down?
Complain about this comment
@ 156 ... Cameron's wealth (or lack of it) has absolutely no bearing on how he might govern this country
it's not really his wealth and it's not really that he comes from a super privileged background (which means he has no clue about the day to day concerns of the people he seeks to represent/govern) and it's not even that he's drawn most of his leadership team from the same narrow circle - it's all of those things taken together which make him ...
unfit for office
Complain about this comment
129#
Could say the same for Hattie then, couldnt we? What a load of old guff.
142#
Derek - you mean to say after 12 years of New Labour, after all the success you've had in lifting people out of poverty, that we've STILL got Ghettos??? Have we really???
Complain about this comment
I don't see how we can be in the EU without ratifying the Lisbon Treaty, it is part and parcel of the whole deal so there should be a referendum as to whether we want to remain in the EU or not.
My preference is to stay in the EU with all the implications of the Lisbon Treaty including majority voting and an EU president (but not Tony Blair) but I can appreciate that there are plenty of arguments against and we should be given the choice (is this a democracy or what ?)
As for David Cameron calling for a review of Incapacity Benefit claiments and moving those deemed fit to work onto Job Seekers Allowance, does he not know that it was a previous Tory government who started to hide the unemployment figures by putting the jobless onto Incapacity Benefit in the first place, it is to Labours shame that they did not put an end to the practice when unemployment started to drop.
All that David Camerons policy will achieve is a reduction in the income of some of the poorest members of society with the consequent reduction in fiscal stimulus (they spend all of their income) and increase the numbers of registered jobless at a time of increasing real jobseekers (those recently unemployed who actually would like a job if they could find one)
The difference between nett income for someone on benefits and someone on minimum wage is just too small, increasing the minimum wage so that there is a real difference would encourage far more of the longterm idle to actually seek work, it would also create more of a fiscal stimulus as people on minimum wage spend all of their income as well.
Complain about this comment
142#
Further to that Derek, you came up with a good idea...
"Where is Cameron going to find all these new jobs for the people he wants to force back to work?I think Cameron has national service on his mind, lets force young kids who cant get jobs into the Army, then pack them off to Afghan and try and squeeze some more funds out of America and NATO."
About time we brought back national service as well. It would teach some of these young irks some discipline and self reliance.
As a general question to all the handwringing scaremongers who seem to think that everyone is going to get tipped out of the door Lehman Bros style, on day 2 of a Cameron administration - I dont suppose many of you are in the public sector are you? Working for Quangos? Part of the bloated civil service?
Welcome to the real world that the rest of us have been living in for the last 12 years. Cant get a job where you are? Then go to where the work is like the rest of us do. Commute. Move house. Emigrate. Just do something about it, dont think the state owes you a living.
Its about time the country was shook out of the nanny state apathetic stupour its been in for the last decade. If this is what it takes, then so be it. Enough of the deception, the mendacity, the lying, time for drastic change.
I still dont think it'd happen, even under Cameron. All we're getting here on this board right now is Charlies Whelan's troops in full rebuttal scaremongering effect waving around effigies of Thatcher like sink estate witch doctors trying to scare the great unwashed. Where were they yesterday? No political leader of the main parties has got the guts to do what is really necessary. None of them.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Cameron hasn't said what he will do if the Treaty IS ratified.
Brown hasn't said what he will do if the Treaty ISN'T ratified.
The former has the BBC jumping all over the place.
The latter hasn't even been mentioned.
A question of balance?
Complain about this comment
fairly @ 139
I really don't understand you. I thought you were a big fan of HH as a potential leader. Same gal who was "privileged" to go to the same school as George Osborne
yes but I'd be a even bigger fan if she HADN'T gone to the same school as George Osborne - any case she's a girl and you can't be a vacuous posh boy if you're a girl, can you?
emily @ 133
pls see 161 where I explain why it isn't the nonsense you say it is - also this Wed on More4 at 9pm ... a TV programme I've made about this particular (and very important) issue ... clashes with "Farmer Wants A Wife" but perhaps you can record that
Complain about this comment
25. At 2:36pm on 04 Oct 2009, probablynogod wrote:
Having seen Cameron wriggle with Marr you can understand why Brown wants televised debates with him.
Guessing you missed the previous week?
57. At 5:30pm on 04 Oct 2009, denzil69:
how many times was miliband and/or brown quizzed on why they never gave us a referendum, even though they promised one in their last election manifesto and were elected to government on the back of that promise?
nil, nowt, zilch, zero.
Two ineptitudes do not make a competence, but... indeed.
66. At 6:07pm on 04 Oct 2009, Billmcfadden
If you are going to cut and paste the same para across the blogosphere in hope it will stick, eventually, somewhere, do try and actually watch what you have been given notes to post on.
77. At 6:51pm on 04 Oct 2009, Eatonrifle
Interesting that today, no doubt because of media coverage of the Tories, there's a few more than usual bloggers that are a little more "anti" Tory.
So watch out for someone pedaling the usual "Labour Troll" accusation... it must happen sooner or later.
In Guardian CiF 'they' usually try and get these in in the first few comments, to 'set the scene'. Doesn't seem to work very well, or in the manner desired, there either.
I'd really rather my national media, especially those I am required to co-fund, took our (prospective) leaders to task over the broad swathe of policies rather than obsessing about splits, etc to the exclusion of all else, though I see these are the fodder for headlines, soundbites and career enhancements.
I currently know near zero about the totality of the Conservative offering, but after Sian's Breakfast follow-up to Polly Toynbee/Andrew Marr's blatant agenda-fests could now really care less about differing opinions in the shadow cabinet, which I tend to expect folk of intelligence and conviction to demonstrate anyway.
Makes a welcome change to a series of Labour drones reciting the same brain-dead non-answers to the same questions the teleprompter readers have been issued beforehand.
Labour is toast, and in my county does not even bother to field a candidate. But I am damned if I am allowing their successors to claim my mandate simply by not being them.
So, BBC, get your act together and start reporting again and enough with the opinion-laced narratives from 'guests' and 'commentators'.
The more, and more obvious you are in trying to tell me how to think, the more I will kick back. And, from the look of it, not in the direction 'you' seem to favour.
Complain about this comment
The Czech constitutional court is unlikely to reject the Lisbon Treaty. The issue is when! The Poles will support it too! We could be in a situation where it is ratified by everyone except the UK. After years and years of negotiations Cameron will demand that its rewritten after everyone has agreed to it - an embarrassing situation.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Question: Even if the EU Constitution is still not ratified by the time of the election and we do get our referendum, can the the document be unsigned?
In spite of the sneaky way he did it, Gordon Brown has actually already agreed to rule by Europe has he not?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#161
"it's not really his wealth and it's not really that he comes from a super privileged background (which means he has no clue about the day to day concerns of the people he seeks to represent/govern) and it's not even that he's drawn most of his leadership team from the same narrow circle - it's all of those things taken together which make him ...unfit for office"
So what tight-rope thin background, upbringing and team are you advocating, if you think Cameron's is wrong? Are you advocating a 'Goldilocks' approach? Someone shouldn't be too rich or too poor, educated but at a mediocre university, surrounded by a rainbow cabinet to include working-class heroes (like Prescott perhaps?). Hopefully you'll allow at least one 'posh' person in?
I've noticed that people that criticise upbringings/backgrounds, nearly always seem to think that THEIRS was a perfect balance. Hmmmm.
Do, please, give us your photo-fit perfect leader.
Complain about this comment
Just had my morning chat with the postman. Lovely chap who keeps me up to date with what's going on in the village. He was pondering the following:- Should the Queen ever make a state visit to the United States of Europe, will she be expected to curtsey to Blair?
Complain about this comment
Labour proposing Tone for President? Their supporters must be proud. Don't see too much difference between him and the odious mob the Tories have cosied up to. Stinks.
Complain about this comment
Still can't work out what the fuss is about with the Lisbon Treaty. The idea that once an international treaty has been signed it can NEVER be altered or broken seems absurd. Anyone remember the Munich agreement in September 1938?
Complain about this comment
169. At 09:12am on 05 Oct 2009, dceilar wrote:
The Czech constitutional court is unlikely to reject the Lisbon Treaty. The issue is when! The Poles will support it too! We could be in a situation where it is ratified by everyone except the UK. After years and years of negotiations Cameron will demand that its rewritten after everyone has agreed to it - an embarrassing situation.
**************************************
Actually , the Treaty has been ratified by the UK. Gordon snuck in the back door and appended his thumbprint after the other leaders had left the signing ceremony.
Knowing he was signing against the will of the British electorate, he was hoping we wouldn't notice.
Complain about this comment
163 BobRocket
"The difference between nett income for someone on benefits and someone on minimum wage is just too small, increasing the minimum wage so that there is a real difference would encourage far more of the longterm idle to actually seek work, it would also create more of a fiscal stimulus as people on minimum wage spend all of their income as well."
Claptrap. Increasing minimum wages would lead to more unemployment.
You could always encourage the long term idle to work by stopping their benefits, that would help everybody.
Not everybody on minimum wages spend all their income either.
Complain about this comment
#171 Zydeco wrote:
'In spite of the sneaky way he did it, Gordon Brown has actually already agreed to rule by Europe has he not?'
Yes which is why the referendum has to be on 'Withdraw from EU' or 'Stay in EU'.
The Lisbon Treaty in itself is irrelevant, if we stay in then membership includes Lisbon, if we withdraw then Lisbon has nothing to do with us.
So the question should be, 'The EU. Do you want to be in it or out of it ? You choose'
Complain about this comment
To all those on here who are obsessed by Cameron's wealth.
What level of fortune should disbar you from Government?
Please check the bank balances of Sean Woodward and Geoff Hoon before answering.
Complain about this comment
andy @ 173
no, there IS no "Perfect Leader" template, that would be an arrogant thing to try and define, wouldn't it? - as I say, it's just the very particular combination of those 3 factors with Cameron (as per my 161) which makes him Unfit For Office - drop any one of the 3 and he'd be just about acceptable - look, it's not really a party political point ... if we found those same factors all present in a Labour leader, I'd be saying exactly the same thing
Complain about this comment
172#
Moderators, I have one phrase to describe that, if you wont allow my riposte but will quite happily allow a pro-labour standpoint (here we go again....)
"They dont like it up 'em"
Complain about this comment
@ 176
the idea that once an international treaty has been signed it can NEVER be altered or broken seems absurd. Anyone remember the Munich agreement in September 1938?
perhaps not a precedent we want to follow, however ... maybe not quite the right role model
Complain about this comment
Hi Nick
Since your colleague, Mr Marr, seems to think that people in the public eye are fair game for any of his penetrating personal questions, perhaps you could ask him whether he thinks it was appropriate for him to get the court to grant an injunction preventing the media revealing "private information" about himself.
Complain about this comment
#178 hodgeey wrote.
'Claptrap. Increasing minimum wages would lead to more unemployment.
You could always encourage the long term idle to work by stopping their benefits, that would help everybody.
Not everybody on minimum wages spend all their income either.'
All the employers wailed when the minimum wage was introduced, 'it will cost jobs' they said. The reality is that productivity increased and companies gained from it, if your business can't afford to pay its workers slightly more then it is not in business.
If benefits were stopped then your employer would cut your wages.
I take it that you are not nor have ever been on minimum wage then.
Complain about this comment
179. At 09:46am on 05 Oct 2009, BobRocket wrote:
#171 Zydeco wrote:
'In spite of the sneaky way he did it, Gordon Brown has actually already agreed to rule by Europe has he not?'
Yes which is why the referendum has to be on 'Withdraw from EU' or 'Stay in EU'.
The Lisbon Treaty in itself is irrelevant, if we stay in then membership includes Lisbon, if we withdraw then Lisbon has nothing to do with us.
So the question should be, 'The EU. Do you want to be in it or out of it ? You choose'
******************
Bang on the button Bob!
I am sure that many people believe rejecting Lisbon actually is a vote to leave Europe.
Sensible people know it isn't but, having said that, I still think that an 'IN or OUT' referendum would bring a majority for the OUT camp.
Complain about this comment
129. At 11:03pm on 04 Oct 2009, sagamix wrote:
mmm very bashful he was, wasn't he? ... almost as if he himself realises (deep down) that his super privileged background pretty much disqualifies him from the Top Job
-----
What a pity that John Prescott never made Prime Minister - he may be a buffoon, but not being privileged clearly would have made him perfect for the role.
Complain about this comment
#'182 Fubar
Very good fubar, advoate a gold rush syndrome for employment, hey! people walked hundreds of miles almost a century ago to demand work.
The super rich kick the hell out of the economy, swan off with golden hand shakes and rediculous pensions and you want a new government to strip those at the bottom end of society?.
Why dont we just pay politicians the minimum wage and send their kids to conflicts and warzones.
Wait a minute, why dont we just let them rip the hole nation off with expenses claims, appauld them when they cant quite overcome recessions and nod our heads when they decide to put the boot into the disposessed.
See fubar, I know how to look people like you in the eye, I know there's an element of people that dont pull their weight but the vast majority are victims of poor government.
This nation has wasted Bn's over the decades on a defence system they call a deterent, little Britain just cant accept it's small status and continues to waste Bn's trying to drop up it's muscles, while it's very people suffer in absolute poverty.
Complain about this comment
182#
Oh, I see.... we're going to have one of those days are we?
Complain about this comment
189. Fubar_Saunders
FS It's Nick's BBC fairground ride... Last week it was the Lab conference and all the Tories and ABLs were queuing up to buy tickets for a spot of Labour bashing. Now it's a new ride and some familiar looking passengers have taken their seats.
Nick and the Beeb will stop off at the Bullingdon club and whip up some class envy, take in a bit of Euroscepticism and doubtless dig up a few more delights for the punters. I don't think you're going to enjoy this week's ride as much as last week's. :-)
Complain about this comment
Nick may I suggest that Cameron also has another referendum headache as well:
Cameron could well be the last ever UK prime minister.
At the same time, Cameron is worrying about another referendum, one which may prove no less momentous for the future shape of Britain. He faces a two-sided constitutional struggle, looking south towards Europe - but also north towards the Scots.
The nightmare for Cameron is that, once George Osborne has revealed details of the cuts imposed by Tory Westminster on Scottish budgets, the SNP start to gain momentum for their proposed independence referendum. Alex Salmond, Scotland's first minister and nobody's fool, has been watching the Conservative agendas on cuts and on Europe with fascination.
I was especially drawn to one of the comments on this article:
Hasn't anyone noticed that the real reason for the popularity of the SNP in Scotland is that they are continuing with the Labour policies that New Labour abandoned?
Complain about this comment
188#
Welcome back Del, long time no see.
OK.... "The super rich kick the hell out of the economy, swan off with golden hand shakes and rediculous pensions and you want a new government to strip those at the bottom end of society?."
mate, this is happening already, today and despite their social justice mantra, NL have done absolutely nothing to stop it, despite being in for over a decade. Fred Goodwin being a prime example, let alone the amount of others who have had the combinations of golden handcuffs or golden handshakes, hence all the fuss about there being no reward for failure when there quite evidently always has been and probably always will be.
"Why dont we just pay politicians the minimum wage and send their kids to conflicts and warzones."
You'll get no disagreement from me there at all, it might make some of them think a bit harder about the decisions to commit troops if some of their own were involved. As for the minimum wage part, well, I know some of the labour community would see that as a hark-back to the old days when only those of independant means could afford to be MP's (ie the rich and the tories, rather than anyone interested in the ordinary working man).. might be a bit different these days, as theres plenty on the Labour benches who arent short of a few bob, so maybe that wouldnt apply so much. Might have a job on getting it past the unions.
Not a 100% sure about the putting the boot in on the dispossessed... with fond respect mate, I think you might be over-egging that a bit for emphasis. I'm not going to criticise you for it, because we all do it, but the vision it conjures is one that I'm very sceptical would ever happen.
"See fubar, I know how to look people like you in the eye, I know there's an element of people that dont pull their weight but the vast majority are victims of poor government."
I know you can. And as much as we differ on our politics Del, I can - and do - respect you for that. What you say in that sentence is absolutely correct.
With regard to Trident and accepting the small nation status... well, yep, I'm afraid so, I think we're coming to that point in history where that decision has to be made. Might be uncomfortable for some people, but its something that has to be faced up to. FWIW, I wouldnt replace it, certainly not like for like. And I would certainly accept the small nation status. Its long overdue. Rule Brittania and the Empire are long long gone in the past.
Complain about this comment
190#
LOL... I have a funny feeling you may just prove to be right! :-D
Complain about this comment
Is it not simply that Dave knows that the only way to implement a no vote on the Lisbon treaty, after its ratification, would be to pull out and lose the advantages of being in a single market?
Boris probably knows this to and that a pull out would be particularly bad for the City.
However, Dave being put in a tight corner, is probably beneficial to Boris's career plans.
Complain about this comment
I thought this was an interesting article in the DM yesterday http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1217973/Czech-leader-holding-door-open-UK-sink-Lisbon. It gave me a little hope that we may not be totally sandbagged.
Complain about this comment
#142, derekbarker wrote:
"...Simplicity is the order of the day, yet Cameron hasn't an ounce of pragmatism within him.Lets not forget, the tories are quite happy to be called the austerity party, the party that will cut and cut again, until the public services is reduced to zilch and in the mean time use the poor and infirm to get there by forcing them to work for their benefits."
Hi Derek, long time no hear.
Far as I can see, all major parties accept that government spending will be severely restricted in the years ahead. It's a question of how and where to cut. Can't see anybody advocating zilch public services. Blair & Co have introduced private health care into the NHS, private direction into Acadamies, trying to bring private training into the armed forces, so it's not just a Tory thing!
"Well fairlyopenmind, I guess my children wont be able to grace society with music, they will be forced by a reckless tory government into employment they didn't choose."
Hope the lads still progressing. If they can make it in music, can't see any party trying to stop them or force them into other jobs.
Complain about this comment
#193 Fubar_Saunders
Fubar did you not know that our Del has three handles:
Derek Barker, giggletheloneranger and spinspamspun. He was sussed on the Scottish blog.
Complain about this comment
#183
I was in a rush, it was the first Treaty I could think of!
It's the principle though. When has any treaty lasted forever? Why should the Lisbon Treaty be the first one that could never be broken, never be changed?
Complain about this comment
Hi,
It's quite simple really, to put an end to the European issue the next Government simply haas to ask the the British People if We want to " Remain " in Europe...Yes or No..?? and whatever the result We can all move on and get on with the vastly more important issue of rebuilding this Country from the mess this Pathetic, Corrupt, incapable, dithering, Lying Labour Government has got Us All in..!! and personally I would vote " No " to staying in Europe.
Complain about this comment
#181
Still makes no sense to dismiss someone because of their background, wealth and companions (especially as the first two are often iner-linked).
"drop any one of the 3 and he'd be just about acceptable"
So if Cameron added in a few people from different backgrounds as companions, you'd vote for him? If George Lee ends up in the cabinet, you'll be a Cameron supporter? Why don't I believe you?
Complain about this comment
So what are the up sides and down sides of being in the EU with the treaty ratified or leaving the EU altogether ?
Complain about this comment
#196fairlyopenmind
As far as I can see, perspective PM's are simply knee jerking to the call of the jungle, if you have got a few bob, we will help you get a few bob more but if you have nothing, then we will kick your back door in and ensure you continue to have nothing.
Where are the new thoughts in politics, if you want to create mass employment then fine, YES! GREAT! but how will you create it and what type of condition will apply?.
The kids are doing great, the family will go and see Deep Purple tonight in the usher hall a mixture of classical and rock, a freebie from the school.
Complain about this comment
#195 angrypolinerd
Appears that the DM has pulled the plug on that article.
The following is more up to date.
Czechs dash hopes of delaying EU treaty.
The last hurdles for the Lisbon treaty seemed to fall away yesterday when the Poles pledged to sign and the Czech President warned David Cameron that it was “too late” for him to stop the document taking effect.
Vaclav Klaus signalled that he would pass the treaty once it had been reassessed by the Czech Constitutional Court, a process which could take some weeks but is unlikely to last until May or June, when Mr Cameron hopes to take power and then hold a referendum.
Complain about this comment
andy @ 200
so if Cameron added in a few people from different backgrounds into his leadership circle, you wouldn't keep banging on about this issue?
correct - that would make all the difference
is he planning to do that?
Complain about this comment
#204 sagamix
Pity that Duff is a midas in reverse and that he has surrounded himself with numpties and believe it or not some of them have actually admitted it. Even some ex ministers to have even admitted they were only there as window dressing…for example.
Appears that an ‘Hard Left Extremist’ like yourself is really spoilt for choice.
Complain about this comment
Roll_On_2010 @ 191
Jackie Ashley (Guardian) writes that Cameron ... loathes the idea of being the last ever prime minister of the United Kingdom. He would see the loss of Scotland as a huge blow to Britain's status in the world, including inside the EU and Nato, and would fight very hard to stop it happening.
So, for the sake of politicians prestige, we, the English, Scottish and Welsh peoples should stay bound up in this zombie political entity, the so-called 'United Kingdom', which appears to be anything but.
Cameron will find out that, in the end, the people will not be denied by ultimately self-serving politicians.
PS. All credit to journalist Jackie Ashley for tackling this subject, I was beginning to think that there was a conspiracy of silence on this amongst the London-based political/media elite.
Complain about this comment
204. At 12:00pm on 05 Oct 2009, sagamix wrote:
andy @ 200
so if Cameron added in a few people from different backgrounds into his leadership circle, you wouldn't keep banging on about this issue?
correct - that would make all the difference
is he planning to do that?
-------
Already has, for example:
William Hague - Wath-upon-Dearne Comprehensive
Eric Pickles - Greenhead High School in Utley, North Keighley
Liam Fox - brought up in a council house in East Kilbride, state school education
Greg Clark - South Bank Comprehensive School, Middlesbrough
Is that enough to (humanely) shoot your fox?
Complain about this comment
#202, derekbarker wrote:
"#196fairlyopenmind
.... Where are the new thoughts in politics, if you want to create mass employment then fine, YES! GREAT! but how will you create it and what type of condition will apply?."
Derek,
We already have 2.5 mil "recognised" unemployed and the numbers sadly seem to be increasing. Most are losing jobs from the private sector - where people are also taking wage restrictions and sometimes reduction of working hours.
I'd start public saving at the QANGOs. Immediate pay cuts from the very top and for management. Some pay cuts in Civil Service management. Stop wasteful projects. That doesn't seem to put anybody out of work, so far!
Maybe they'd be sharing some of the pain with the private sector, but that's life.
Glad lads are OK. Sounds like a fun concert!
Complain about this comment
185 BobRocket
#178 hodgeey wrote.
"All the employers wailed when the minimum wage was introduced, 'it will cost jobs' they said. The reality is that productivity increased and companies gained from it, if your business can't afford to pay its workers slightly more then it is not in business."
It did cost jobs, British jobs. Minimum wage jobs are a boon to foreigners, as our own people are better off on the dole. Telling employers what they have to pay is ridiculous.
"If benefits were stopped then your employer would cut your wages."
Really? Evidence?
"I take it that you are not nor have ever been on minimum wage then."
You take it wrongly. I have been unemployed on occasion, but have always found some kind of work, even at less than minimum wage. I advise others to do likewise.
Complain about this comment
206#
Yes.... and who is her hubby??
Who does he work for?
Who did he interview the other day?
And you say there might not be a conspiracy?
Complain about this comment
roll @ 205
hi - speaking of "hard left" please see my 54 on the "benefits" thread - would like your take on that
Complain about this comment
#210 fubar
Hello Fubar, Yip! it does seem like a choice of who will cut the most, really tradgic stuff.
What good will it serve society to cut the number of people employed?
What good will it serve society if you chop the government pension?
Do you believe in society fubar, do you believe in the collective responsibility to further and better the common mans position.
Yes! Yes! I know there is a recession but it's not the first and probably not the last, Britain was in a worst state after the two world wars, yet, people wanted to get on and improve, what has gone wrong with the will to take the situation on and get around the obstacle? you dont improve things by giving in, holding up the white flag and cutting the most needed services.Where are the new Ideas?.
Complain about this comment
I'm not surprised David is being a bit quiet on the subject, the plotline is still running. It's like asking an actor how their movie/show/series will be before it's aired, they may give very vague and general comments but they always tell you nothing except to tune in and watch it.
Until the bell rings and it's game over, there's still another round to play. I could just imagine a football team at half-time asking their manager "What will happen if we lose?". Will the manager answer the question? I doubt it, more like he'll just tell them to get out there and up their game for the second half. I'm not actually a football fan but that's the quickest thing I could come up with.
There are other issues to focus on and quite frankly, currently there's nothing that can be done because living in a democracy in the UK seems to count for nothing these days. People want a referendum but until the game is over and the Tories are in government the game isn't over yet.
Although I notice a somewhat pro-Labour spin from your comments Nick. Let's not forget who orchestrated the idea of promising a referendum only to not involve the public in the process in any way before deciding for themselves that they were the only ones capable of making such a decision. Our government, New Labour.
I always remember the line from V for Vendetta, something along the lines of "It's not the people who should be afraid of their government, it is the government who should be afraid of its people". That is the essence of a democracy, it is the people who hold the power over the jobs of these politicians and I will make sure my vote is counted as a Non-Labour vote. Gordon, be afraid.
I feel that the British people do need a say, we should put it to a vote whether it's ratified or not. However, is it the most important thing on the political agenda? I would say it isn't, there are many problems to focus on thanks to this government and there will be many things needed clearing up and maybe this will not be a first priority. However, I will hold David to his promise of ensuring that the British people will have their say in the near, if not immediate, future upon taking government.
However, let's remember that where David has said he will do something Gordon did nothing and signed away powers to Europe without public consent. It was a Tory government that established our 3 billion pound rebate from the EU, it was Labour that got rid of it. It seems that wherever Labour walk, catastrophe arises.
Nick, you may have something against the Tories and be pro-Labour, or it seems that way at times but the BBC is a professional organisation that should remember its own professional rules of conduct, ethics, objectivity and impartiality. Don't just tell people that the Tories are a bunch of liars, it seems most MPs are, but remind your readers of New Labour's glorious years in power of which public support has gone downhill at a steady pace since 1997.
After all, our democracy isn't just based on the idea of voting for who you want but not voting for those you want to get rid of and given New Labour's record I will be choosing not to vote New Labour. Does it mean I'm pro-Tory? Most certainly not but considering the faults all MPs seem to suffer from, I'm prepared to give someone else a chance because I can't imagine anything worse than another term of New Labour.
Complain about this comment
So far all we’ve had from Cameron is spin & yet more spin. He claims to not know how much he is worth, being two faced about Europe - since when is writing to Head of State of another country not getting involved in their decisions – and his plans for "Getting Britain Back to Work", are completely a copy of Labour's.
We are only in the first morning of the conference and we have the putative Prime Minster supplying only spin & (not very good) sound bites – where is the real policy detal that we were promised?. Add to that the very real concerns we all have around the Sun’s endorsement. What has Cameron promised to Murdoch to get the Sun's endorsement?
I'd rather have the real thing - let's have Brown, a decent man doing the decent thing for the people that matter – the great British public.
Complain about this comment
214. At 1:42pm on 05 Oct 2009, manuinlondon wrote:
I'd rather have the real thing - let's have Brown, a decent man doing the decent thing for the people that matter – the great British public.
--------
Yes! I was really impressed by some of the revelations that came out of the labour conference: Sarah tells us that he gets up every morning and goes to bed every evening; Gordon adds that he "doesn't roll over".
He and his cronies have done such a fantastic job over the last 12 years, I am sure that Gordon is just itching to call an election tomorrow and finally get the mandate which he and the country know he deserves.
Complain about this comment
A couple of points:
1. Let us not forget how Brown the "good, decent man" as refered above, has betrayed the british people and robbed us of the vote on the the EU constitution, sorry 'treayy' he promised us? Why? Because he knows we would have said "No" - absolutely scandalous.
2. Let us take note how the Irish have had not one but two votes on this treaty, having effectively bullied the electorate into submission with 10 to 1 campaign spending in favour of the 'Yes' campaign.
3. Cameron spin? I think Labour supporters clearly don't understand the party they vote for. We have seen the the most cheating, lying, spin ridden government in history, trouble is now under Brown they are just no good at it anymore, have look at the 'Genuine' Mr Brown on his famous Youtube speech for a quick reminder.
4. For those 'Cameron Bashers' demanding a referendum even after the treaty is ratified, have any of you stopped to ask what that referendum would be on exactly on? The Lisbon Treaty? Having been ratified and made legal by all member states? No, of course not, the complexity of renegotiating our position and getting back those powers Labour has spent years wasting to the EU is massive, unfortunately that is not as simple as a 'Yes' or 'No' referendum. To do this now when the treaty has still not been ratified? Of course not. Cameron's position is absolutely clear and spot on. Some people need to take the blinkers off for a moment and consider the bigger picture.
Complain about this comment
#215 sterling-donefor
Brilliant post. Short but sweet and straight to the point.
They are the best ones.
Complain about this comment
I do enjoy Tory voters.
They spend all year drooling over consistent attacks on Brown, every time he makes an error, on every media outlet in the world.
Cameron has a dodgy few days, and you claim that not white washing the issue is in some way biased!?
What do you want Nick to do? Ignore it like the Daily Mail?
Cameron, categorically stated that he would give the people a vote on the EU, no matter what.
He did this in order to give himself a stronger position than Brown, with the right, and to appease the various party member's he'd been upsetting with his lefty views.
Now like many statements he's made, it's probably all smoke and mirrors.
He's totally sidestepped the question. Just like he sidesteps any major policy question.
The only policy he releases to the media fall into 2 catergories:
1: The same as Labour (benefits cut)
2: Something of next to no national importance.
You may find this hard to believe, but Cameron has next to endorsed Blair as Euro president.
It was a done deal last year, alledgedly. He'd keep his party quiet on Blair's appointment (as in, he wouldn't oppose it), if Blair stayed out of Labour campaigning for the election (no tony blair at conference).
Cameron's euro sceptic nature, is like most of his policy. Only half hearted
Complain about this comment
"So what does the self-proclaimed "straight-talking" guy say about one of the biggest foreign policy dilemma he's likely to face if he becomes prime minister? Nothing. Nowt.Nix.Zippo.Zilch".
I am sure this will be excluded, but to me this is about the worst stuff that I have read from you, and follows on from what I saw yesterday in Andrew Marr's awful interview with Cameron (for balance his interview with Brown was just as bad). I was at a lost to understand why you thought it appropriate to extend a word we all understand like "nothing" with such inanities as "Nix", "Zippo" and Zilch"(I leave out "Nowt" because I suppose that was meant to be a nod from you to Northerners)? You also chose to use inverted commas around straight-talking which came across to me as something other than the simple use of direct speech. apologise in advance.
I think from what I have read and heard there is a leaning in the BBC to stop the Tories, or at least to make life awkward for them. Why else would you concentrate on Europe when you know that Cameron is not going to rise to the bait of journalists who see it as an achilles heel? Forget Boris Johnson - he is just reverting to type. In any event, in case you have forgotten, the Government of the day is New Labour, and the Prime Minister is Gordon Brown, and they are the people who have deprived (some might say defrauded) the people of this country of a referendum promised in 2005. No doubt you would pray in aid the differences in the revised treaty but you are still using your rhetoric to try to stimulate a political story and in the process risk ruining their conference. For a non-story.
There is only one story and that is Mr Brown and his Government who have cheated us, and in the process forced upon us something the majority probably would vote against and which will eventually turn out bad for Britain. Write a blog now and demand that Brown give us our referendum before the whole thing is finally ratified. There is still time. Keep writing it every day until he either gives in and gives us the referendum or has to face the British public next May or June as the man who cannot be trusted to keep his word.
If you want oppose Cameron's policies then please do it because you disagree with them, then we can all agree or disagree with what you are saying. Other than that I usually enjoy your broadcasts and blogs. PS I am not a Conservative supporter nor am I totally anti-Europe, but I am anti aiming at the wrong target.
Complain about this comment
this is the thing - Cameron has no heart, but Brown does. Whatever anyone says, I know Gordon will do the right thing.
Cameron, hasn't really got going yet, but has already got so much wrong - made promises he can't keep, copied Labour policies and made policy calls at odds with the rest of the world.
@ 215, you're right Cameron doesn't need to "roll over" he just doesn't know where he is, what he's about and most importantly what he is doing.
Let's hope the next election is based on something more substantial than the rubbish sound bites of a spoilt toff!
Complain about this comment
Instead of the expense of holding a referendum. You may as well just as Murdoch & son directly. The first referendum would be a total waste of time just like in Ireland. The British are too Emotionally tied to our colonial past to be trusted with this kind of decision.
Complain about this comment
218. At 2:35pm on 05 Oct 2009, Mike_Naylor wrote:
I do enjoy Tory voters.
He's totally sidestepped the question. Just like he sidesteps any major policy question.
----------
It would be pretty pointless to hold a referendum on a treaty which had already been ratified by all countries by the time you get into power.
Your argument is hollow: Labour promised a referendum in their manifesto, and then reneged on it, Gordon skulking in through the backdoor to sign it when he hoped the cameras weren't looking (that was a moment of great statesmanship of which we could all be proud, wasn't it?). Had Gordon not sold us down the river, or had he not bottled the election (because he knew he would have been thrashed) then Cameron would have actually been able to give the country a proper opportunity to change things via a referendum. As it is, we are denied this because of Labour's lack of gumption - but, of course, they are a little distracted, being so busy lining up new EU roles for themselves and their cronies.
Complain about this comment
214#
You want to lay off the skunk, chum. It rots your brain. Brown, a decent man doing the decent thing? Are you certifiably insane?
Complain about this comment
212#
"What good will it serve society to cut the number of people employed?"
But Derek, we as a nation cant afford it. This position is unsustainable. You either realistically start preparing for it now, before it happens anyway in 5 years time or less on a much bigger scale.
"What good will it serve society if you chop the government pension?"
I'm not saying chop it, Del, I'm saying reform it. The private sector has had to undergo all this pain where pensions are concerned and the public sector pension bill, in its current form is unsustainable in the long term. Reform of public sector pensions is a guaranteed vote loser so no one will face up to what needs to be done, but that doesnt make the elephant in the room go away. It needs courageous leadership, to think the unthinkable, as Frank Field was asked to do. He did, and he got sidelined for it.
"Do you believe in society fubar, do you believe in the collective responsibility to further and better the common mans position."
In principle. I dont mind contributing my fair share (depending on what your view of fair is), although I have never taken anything out of the state myself since I was 18, but I do strongly object to giving some people a free ride who have had the same start in life that I had, but have chosen to make nothing of themselves.
"Yes! Yes! I know there is a recession but it's not the first and probably not the last, Britain was in a worst state after the two world wars, yet, people wanted to get on and improve, what has gone wrong with the will to take the situation on and get around the obstacle?"
There is probably where the difference lies. The attitudes of the general public. That make do and mend, get up and go can-do spirit. Largely gone. Maybe its a generation thing. I blame it all on the 1960's myself. As Johnny Rotten said before he sold out to a butter manufacturer: "Never trust a hippy"
Complain about this comment
Looks like the porofessional spin doctors are on the blog, so I'm off to watch CBeebies for a while. You get a more adult take on things there!
Complain about this comment
#218 Mike_Naylor
It was a done deal last year, alledgedly. He'd keep his party quiet on Blair's appointment (as in, he wouldn't oppose it), if Blair stayed out of Labour campaigning for the election (no tony blair at conference).
I reckon you should put up or shut Mike. Where is your proof?
I posted this on 30.09.09
Nick the SUN certainly is shining, I have just been granted my dearest wish:
Tony Blair ‘will end exile’ to campaign for Labour at general election.
Teflon Tony, Meddlesome, Duff and Ali, the NuLabour Project architects all onboard the train when it crashes.
By the way Mike the moon is also made of green cheese. I feel sure if you repeated it often enough your NuLabour Numpties would believe it.
Complain about this comment
sterling @ 207
is that enough to (humanely) shoot your fox?
almost ... on top of that, I need to see the back of Osborne
Complain about this comment
220. At 3:02pm on 05 Oct 2009, manuinlondon wrote:
this is the thing - Cameron has no heart, but Brown does. Whatever anyone says, I know Gordon will do the right thing.
-----
The right thing would be for him to call an election now, and then see how many people share your unshakeable faith (perhaps you could offer to hold his fan club meetings in your front room?).
Complain about this comment
the funny thing is if the labour party had carried out their duty to hold a referendum when they said they would we wouldnt be having this conversation now anyway.
nick...what does it matter what cameron says why dont you ask mr. brown why he deceitfully got the treaty signed, he said it was only changes so didnt need signing...if this is the case why are we waiting for ireland to vote and others before ratifying it!
brown and his goverment have lied about the referendum and taken us for idiots...you nick by reporting this is the way you do clearly also want to take us for idiots by somehow blaming cameron!
Complain about this comment
#224 fubar
Johnny Rotten and his adverts. Great, that gave me a good chuckle.
Politicians,expoliting just for public image.
Complain about this comment
Fubar Saunders
Your argument re pensions is flawed in that the private sector should look to emulate the T's and C's of the public sector as the public sector should be seen as the model employer.
Bringing everyone down to the lowest, cheapest denominator isn't the way to go.
Also, it's just the private sector drones taking the hit. Boardroom pay has gone up 10% last year according to People Management magazine.
http://www.peoplemanagement.co.uk/pm/articles/2009/09/boardroom-pay-up-by-10-per-cent-in-2008-says-survey.htm
Complain about this comment
A referendum on the Lisbon treaty is a 'red herring' - the BBC should know this.
If DC does not become PM before the next general election then there are still massive and frequent opportunities for future referenda of all kinds - the question is not 'if and when' - but...What are the questions to be included in a referenda under these circumstances?
We will, I think, in all likelihood still be discussing Britain's relationship with the EU in the short medium and long terms going forward. The EU for Britain, is not a matter of having a single referenda and then waiting 35 years to see how things are going - Britain needs to be pro active and find a way of reviewing its relationship with Europe, without imploding on the issue.
The Labour party ignore Europe almost altogether regarding the 'national gaze' - instead Gordon Brown crept into an empty auditorium to sign the wretched treaty when everyone else had gone home - I don't see the BBC hounding Brown on that issue and on failing to deliver the referenda as promised.
So, there will be plenty of opportunity to discuss future referenda going forward - I think that an EU referendum inside of the UK is needed at least every two years, even if it has zero legal effect in the EU as to keep in line with UK public opinion.
Questions should be about joining the EU currency and Blair/Brown's failure to join the Euro currency - I do not remember the BBC pressing Blair on that decision notwithstanding that it was probably a much more significant decision than what D Cameron is proposing on any EU issues.
So please BBC - Can you please put your reporting of a Lisbon treaty into perspective and not be so biased on the matter - the Tories have inherited a great mess from Labour on this but I do not see a further round of questioning for Brown - this ought to be a resignation issue for Brown and a vote on it in the House of Commons.
Questions for the Labour party should be and include an immediate referenda now:-
1)Should Britain join the Euro and if not, why not?
2) Should Britain, in discussion with further EU members, put forward proposals for the decentralisation of EU powers AND propose a timetable for EU reform?
3) Should Britain insist on the restoration of the rebate negotiated by Baroness Thatcher?
4) Etc
These are questions for the Labour party ...NOW - the BBC's attitude assumes that we do not have a competent government in power!
Complain about this comment
#161
which means he has no clue about the day to day concerns of the people he seeks to represent/govern
---------
That argument went out of the window as soon as we filled parliament up with career politicians -- and you know it. The idea that Gordon Brown, or any of the major party leaders, has any idea of my day to day concerns is absurd. For once I am going to declare a side on an argument( shocking I know ). This is one of those Labour myths that hasn't been true in decades and their supporters cling to it like a sentimental blanky. It just hasn't been true in generations. Labour politicians, at the top end, have about as much of a clue as to my daily woes as any of the top end Conservative politicians -- which is none, they're clueless. They do not inhabit the same world as we mere mortals. We see this time and time again with each of the main political parties. It has nothing to do with background, it's to do with career politics.
#167
pls see 161 where I explain why it isn't the nonsense you say it is - also this Wed on More4 at 9pm ... a TV programme I've made about this particular (and very important) issue ... clashes with "Farmer Wants A Wife" but perhaps you can record that
---------
"Farmer Wants A Wife" ?
I sense I hit a nerve. I wouldn't want to work on a farm if this is what you're suggesting :P. I'm a geek girl, both in and outside of work, I doubt I could milk a cow or shear a sheep. For the record I don't really watch TV, I watch a few political programmes on iPlayer and 4od but that's about it.
I'd also like to point out that all you did in 161 was reiterate yourself, you didn't add anything or explain your apparent delusion. It was just more "He's got more money than me!!!!". So what if he's one of the old boys or whatever? -- there are far better and more *real* reasons to dislike the man and his ideas, infact there are many. My point was merely that you always go for the cheap shot. There are lots of things David Cameron can be attacked on, but Labour keep going for the trivial( because it's worked in the past ). This time they need to attack substance, or rather his lack thereof. His refusal to answer the question on a possible referendum is one such example and that's just from this one interview. Labour have a solid position on this so it's easy to press the issue. But instead the class war is back on. The only people that care about class are die hard Labour supporters. The argument only works on them and we already know who they're voting for; by definition.
Complain about this comment
Nick, your report on Radio 4's 6 o'clock news this evening focused largely on Europe.
The main problem seems to be that no-one at the Tory Party Conference is actually spending much time on this, so it was hard to see what substance lay behind the importance you were giving to the matter.
Wouldn't it be more helpful to concentrate on analysing the policies they actually are putting forward?
Complain about this comment
eq @ 233
I watch a few political programmes on iPlayer but that's about it
that's fine, Emily, because this IS a political programme - very much so - if you dig your heels in and refuse to watch it, I'll have to draw my own conclusions as to whether you're really interested in politics, or whether you're more in the way of a Sunday Driver
Complain about this comment
Shame on you Nick ! You and your BBC news team seem intent on mischief making.
Right from the outset today you have all been making the European referendum issue the focal point of the days proceedings - as in fact did Andrew Neil. Regardless of what else was happening in the hall of the Conference it was never going to get a serious mention.
I followed coverage of the Conference all day on BBC Parliament. True Europe got a mention but it was by no means the key theme of the day.
Your 6 o'clock news report was therefore a complete misrepresentation. I do think you owe your viewers a more balanced account of the days events...not one so completely distorted with bias. I hope your 10 o'clock news report will be more honest, factual and even handed.
Complain about this comment
231#
Whatever. I dont care anymore. I'm fast losing the ability to give a monkeys.
Complain about this comment
#235
Again, you haven't countered any of my points. I think you're referring to that *drama* programme that you've been talking about the last few days. I don't need to watch it, particularly. I already dislike David Cameron. This is rather my point. I'd prefer to attack him on his lack of policy and his refusal to answer even the most basic of questions. His background is rather irrelevant to me. It's also a weak attacking point. People can rant about his background as much as they like, it doesn't win any votes -- neither does grinning with glee at some More4 drama. Nobody watched that drama and changed their vote; it just made those who already dislike him jeer at the television. There are a few dramas out there that show Tony Blair and Gordon Brown in unfavourable light. I wouldn't base my opinions on those either. It's rather ironic that one day you decry the media and the next you use it to make a point. This is all rather fruitless though, we've drowned this down to petty semantics. Neither one of us is going to budge on the subject of class and background relevance in modern politics. You think it's relevant and I don't. We're both too stubborn to move from our positions. I'm not even saying he isn't an upper class prat, he probably is and he certainly comes across as one. However, I would argue that he'd still be a prat if he was poor and claiming JSA. His wealth has nothing to do with it.
Boris Johnson for example, entertaining though his dim-wittedness is on programmes like "Have I Got News For You", flies entirely in the face of your logic. He doesn't even attempt to hide his class. My point is simply that class doesn't matter and doesn't affect voting patterns. All it does is make the faithful cheer and feel like they're "on the attack" or "fighting back". In actuality, I suspect, they're just preaching to the choir. They should be pushing policy arguments and demonstrating to the public that the Conservatives are still a long way away from having substance. It's a delusion that Labour has tricked itself into. The rhetoric works in the conference hall but has little impact, if any, outside of it.
Complain about this comment
Manuinlondon 220
"this is the thing - Cameron has no heart, but Brown does. Whatever anyone says, I know Gordon will do the right thing.....lets hope the next election is based on something more substantial than rubbish soundbited of a spoilt toff"
You know Gordon will do the right thing so lets examine a few of the things that he has done so far to test your appreciation of the man:
. He robbed pensions in 1997
. He screwed up regulation of banks, although that took a few years to become apparent
. He courted the bankers and he and Blair had the "best" of them knighted for services to our economy. We know the names by heart
. He funded the war with Iraq
. He used stealth taxes cyncically while producing budgets which looked like a conjuring trick
. He introduced the golden rules, and then dropped them like a hot potato when the going got tough
. He boasted no boom and bust, and then gave us boom and bust.
. He didnt take us into the euro, but professed a love of Europe, although he often used the backdoor for ceremonials.
. He squandered our rebate
. He lost our records
. He made the 10p tax rate a legacy of his own.
. He promised a referendum but has still not given it to us
. He brought Lord Mandelson to the very heart of the government he had had to leave twice
. He gave us mass unemployment a thing he spent ten years blaming the Tories for
etc etc etc etc
And you know Gordon will do the right thing - as he has always done?
Complain about this comment
emily @ 238
okay, fair enough - the posh boy angle is only one of MANY reasons not to vote Tory - let's forget about it for now - but let's not go jumping into detailed policy stuff either - first of all one needs to decide what one's political values are
so:
2 very important things, both good ...
(a) social justice - fairness - equality of opportunity
(b) personal liberty - freedom from state interference
... but sometimes in conflict, yes?
when they are in conflict, you need to choose - you need to decide which of A or B is MORE important to you
you say A ... you CAN'T consider the Tories
you say B ... you HAVE to consider them, and we therefore need to continue
Complain about this comment
#240
I'm saying the posh boy angle isn't any reason unless you're already vehemently opposed to voting for them. In which case it's moot. Labour have tried this argument in bi-elections and it has completely backfired on them. All it does is rouse those who are already going to vote Labour. It gains them nothing and makes them look petty to the rest of us.
I don't consider social justice and personal liberty mutually exclusive. You're arguing that we require the nanny state in order to behave appropriately towards minorities? ( I may be misunderstanding your point. ). That sounds like we need mummy and daddy to ensure we behave ourselves.
I also find it a little amusing that you mention "equality of opportunity" and then say David Cameron can't have the top job because of his social background. Cheap shot, sure, but it did make me laugh. I know that's not actually what you meant, but you follow my giggle.
Complain about this comment
EmilyQuango
The posh angle is a bit like the Eton angle. They castigate Cameron for going to Eton, but the reality is he was probably put down for Eton before he was born. It is cheap, and shows a total lack of any attempt to understand the man and what he is like now. I know it is not relevant to how Cameron will perform as PM, but we did see the human side of the man and his wife under the most stressful and painful conditions, and they behaved exactly like any parent whether from an Eton background or Stanford Road, Brighton Primary like me.
If people want to play divisive politics then there are plenty of examples of what some would call toffs if wealth were the factor in all three parties. I know nothing about how Cameron would perform were we to elect him, but I didnt know much about Margaret Thatcher when I voted for her in 1979 and took her on trust. If the politicos would stop all the noise about Brown's referendum then we might be able to hear something which would help us to make up our minds.
Complain about this comment
sagamix 240
"the posh boy angle is only one of MANY reasons not to vote Tory - let's forget about it for now"
No, let's not. I saw this:
sagamix 129 "his [Cameron's] super privileged background pretty much disqualifies him from the Top Job"
Now, "disqualifies" is a word with a very specific meaning. "Egalitarian", which you frequently claim to be, is another word of very specific meaning. I would like you to tell me just how an egalitarian can declare someone to be disqualified from the PM's job through something that manifestly he had no control over.
Try replacing "super privileged background" in your sentence with a few alternatives, such as
"ginger hair"
"skin colour"
"broken family"
"only one working eye"
to reveal the utter hypocrisy of what you wrote. Or, in your world, is coming from a well-off background some sort of a special case? But if it is a special case, what other strange little special cases do you have?
In short, are you really an egalitarian, or are you simply using the word as a patch over something rather more sinister?
Complain about this comment
E @ 241
I may be misunderstanding your point
yes you are - I'm not saying that personal liberty and social justice are mutually exclusive (which would mean you can't have ANY of the one unless you dispense with ALL of the other) - no, the point is that sometimes ... sometimes ... these 2 great things will be in conflict, and WHEN that happens you have to choose which is the MORE important to you - and in that choice, EQ, lies the essence of your political orientation - you have to think about that and face up to it - it would be nice if you could have all of the good things all of the time - ... all winners, no losers ... and it would be nice if politics was about some sort of super sensible, ideology free, 100 pc objective sifting of the minutae of various competing policies - but it isn't - or rather it can be (the latter thing, at a push) but you STILL need to, first of all, think about your value system - and the best place to start is the question I put to you - come on Emily, we have to do this! ... which of the following is more important (to YOU) ...
(1) personal liberty and freedom from state interference?
or:
(2) equality and social justice?
Complain about this comment
#244
I don't buy your premise. #1 allows you to choose #2. Your argument is you can have both under Labour but only #1 under the Conservatives. Why do you think the parties clamour for the centre ground?. You're talking finite left and right, which doesn't exist in mainstream UK politics -- only on the fringes. If you're forcing me to choose one, which I believe is fundamentally redundant, I would choose #1. But having #1 doesn't mean a person has a lack of understanding or doesn't want #2. Which is kind of my point. You seem to think Labour want equality and social justice, I don't see this coming through. Their equality minister is quite clearly a sexist and the worst kind of feminist. Feminism isn't about getting one over on men, it's about gender equality. The idea that Labour are in any way more equally minded seems historically inaccurate if we look back over the past 12 years. Ideologically, then yes, but they rarely follow their ideology; indeed they had to drop most of it to even become electable.
Basically, I think you've over simplified in order to try to pin me down to some political wing. Being free from state interference in our personal lives does not mean being free from state interference when it comes to something like employment or legal rights. I'm not sure how telling the government that I don't want my wheelie bin electronically weighed infringes in any way on social justice. The same is true of giving local councils the power to use surveillance on citizens. It's not black and white saga. You seem very tribal which I assume is why you think it is.
Complain about this comment
JR @ 243
you seem to be confusing a moderate, mildly Left of Centre blogger with Pol Pot! - forget about Ms Quango, I think that's saying something interesting about your orientation, don't you? - as it happens I would have considered supporting, say, Robin Cook for LP Leader and so Bang goes your ginger hair theory, right there - and with Cameron, of course I don't mean he should literally be disqualified from being PM, it's just a manner of speaking, innit? - if he were (heaven forbid) to win next Spring, I would be the first to get behind him and say "all the best, David, and good luck in what we all know is a VERY tough job" - I'd cross my fingers and hope against hope that I've got it all terribly terribly wrong - and on the (very) off chance I have, I may well vote for him the next time
Complain about this comment
Emily Q @ 245
I would choose #1
right, thank you! - I wouldn't dream of pigeon holing you (not particularly pigeonholeable, are you?) but you're clearly a person who would step over a hobo to get to your third plate of caviar - joke - but that question IS a good litmus test, actually - it means you are more likely than certain other people (than me, say) to feel well disposed towards the Conservative Party - no crime, that, and it certainly doesn't follow that you have to VOTE for them
Complain about this comment
#247
Haha, if you say so. :)
It's always nice discussing things with you Saga, even if we disagree a lot of times.
Complain about this comment
If politicians are in favour of 'Europe' there has got to be something seriously wrong with 'Europe'. I don't trust 'em.
Complain about this comment
Regarding the closing line of your otherwise fine report Sunday night on the repercussions for the Tories of the Irish vote on Lisbon: If, as you said, the Czech Republic holds Britain's future in its hands as regards the treaty, it might behoove you to know that Czechs don't speak Russian. The word "nyet" does not exist in Czech; the Czech word for no is "ne" (pronounced "nay"). Sorry to be pedantic, but I lived in Prague for several years and can tell you that for obvious reasons Czechs generally don't appreciate being confused with Russians, linguistically or otherwise.
Complain about this comment
I am getting highly feed up with the political coverage from the BBC.
The BBC and some commentators claim the flagship of political programmes is the Andrew Marr show.(remember -it was originally Sunday AM run by David Frost and actually was pretty good).
I have to say though that Andrew Marr(and/or his political editor)are useless.
Marr is so politically biased toward Labour that he can no longer be considered neutral and is so full of self importance that he think that his trivial approach is appreciated by people outside his metropolitan clique.
Why does he believe that everybody around the country outside his Westminster village club are slightly interested in Gordon Browns' eye sight or how much money David Cameron has in the bank.
When it comes to the European issue-he kept on and on about a hypothetical scenario of the Treaty being ratified,with Blair as President and Cameron in Downing Street.
Frankly I dont think there is a soul outside the Metropolitan elite of London and the BBC who could give a toss of what will happen in this scenario.They are much more worried about what Cameron will do to avoid our country being flushed down the toilet.
So I think Cameron's position is right-wait and see what happens with the Poles and Czech then decide.
Complain about this comment
#251
When is a dither not a dither?
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS