BBC BLOGS - Nick Robinson's Newslog
« Previous | Main | Next »

Will you accept?

Nick Robinson | 08:08 UK time, Tuesday, 13 April 2010

The invitation's in the post, but will you accept? David Cameron is inviting you "to join the government of Britain".

David CameronBefore you get too excited, I should point out that there's no peerage, no ministerial Jag and no salary involved. No, the Tory leader wants you to join him in return for absolutely nothing - other, that is, than because you understand that Britain will only be revived "if people stop asking 'Who will fix this?' and start asking 'What can I do?'"

The Tory manifesto he unveils today invites people to be their own boss - setting up co-operatives to run public services, to run their own school, to vote for their police chief, to vote to veto excessive council tax rises alongside much more familiar promises. It is an attempt to capture what the Cameroons see as their big idea - what they call the "Big Society" - a rather more sellable concept than the previous "post-bureaucratic age".

The idea is that power will be given to the users of public services and to voters to exercise more direct control over how services are run. The Tories' "big brain", Oliver Letwin, sees it as powerful an idea as privatisation once was. Just as we now regard as odd the idea of questions being asked in Parliament about why someone's phone line hadn't been installed (this actually happened), he believes we will soon regard it as bizarre that Whitehall runs or heavily controls all schools, hospitals, councils and police forces.

The big question about the "Big Society" is whether people will welcome this invitation and its Kennedy-esque call to arms?

Or will they prefer the idea that ran through Labour's manifesto yesterday that government is there to help you?

Of course, underneath the stark difference in rhetoric, both main parties are both offering a mixture of central government control and public engagement. There is, though, now a real ideological difference in this election - in other words, a real choice.

Comments

Page 1 of 8

  • Comment number 1.

    This comment has been referred for further consideration. Explain.

  • Comment number 2.

    1 - Konnolsky - the first such post wasn't funny. None of the others have been. Please stop. Please.

  • Comment number 3.

    A modern version of Kennedy's "ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country."

    Might go for that .....

  • Comment number 4.

    "Britain will only be revived "if people stop asking "who will fix this" and start asking "what can I do?""

    Nick, yes it is Kennedy-esque but it's true. Brown's answer to everything is "give me more of your money and let me sort it out for you" and he has patently failed to deliver.

  • Comment number 5.

    Join the government? Why because if one is a citizen there is no need to join?

  • Comment number 6.

    3- Bonzodog

    That is the funniest thing I have ever read - David Cameron the natural successor to Kennedy.

    Hilarious keep it up....

  • Comment number 7.

    Thank you Dave, I'm in charge of my life,
    Is this the end of ideological strife?
    One of many getting my way,
    But won't I get lost in what others say?

  • Comment number 8.

    I'd go for that. We are in desperate need to get back on track after years of ruin.

  • Comment number 9.

    Over the past 35 years I have lived and worked under both Tory and Labour Governments. And have noted the following:
     Promises made at election time are rarely kept
     Fraud and corruption is endemic in their MPs
     Taxation goes up
     Services decline
     Crime goes up
     Boom and bust continues
     The politicians blame everything but themselves for just about anything

    I have reached the point, where I can see little difference between the Conservatives and Labour.

    In fact I would go so far as to say that from a working Joe’s perspective, based on the last 35 years, Labour are father right than Tories. Which beggars even my belief, but still there you are.

    And as regards the current ‘lot’ Labour.

    They showed their true colour in 1997 (Bernie Ecclestone donation and tobacco advertising), and it hasn’t changed in 13 years (Byers, Hoon & Hewitt offering to influence policy for money).

  • Comment number 10.

    Real choice, Nick! Do us a favour.

    Years ago just after having been canvassed by Labour and Tory candidates in quick succession I analysed the differences in their approach.

    Tory candidate approach: `vote for me and make me rich'.

    Labour candidate approach: `vote for me and I'll make you rich'.

    The former I can take or leave, the latter is just dishonest.

    I should be a natural Labour supporter but have held the party in contempt for most of my life because they never mean what they say; a view I continue to hold. This does not mean that I am a Tory supporter but at least you can understand a Tory even though you don't agree with them.

  • Comment number 11.

    To the public in Britain that have felt the heavy hand of big state over 13 years, this should be a breath of fresh air. To allow freedom of the individual again to pursue and achieve personal goals within a much more open society is surely a human right.

    This is a revolution of the right kind and is much more radical than I had hoped the Conservatives would come up with. To blow away all the old dogma Britain has had to live with from the left-wing of the present Government, would probably be the single most important issue to see Britain on the road to recovery.

    The yoke of big state has over time held Britain in a stranglehold of unproductiveness. It has sucked the life out of enterprise and robbed Britain of its freedom of the individual.

    There is however a cautionary note in this for the Conservatives. Over 13 years the arms of Labours big state have infiltrated every part of peoples lives. Command and control have been used to keep the ordinary public in check. On the other hand those minorities that seek to undermine Britains way of life have been allowed more freedom to do so. These people will not go away and will continue their activities and seek to have as loud a voice even if a new approach by Government is taken. Furthermore the Unions will continue their activities to stop any Government progressing in an effort to change their left-wing agenda.

    There is also the problem of the public which has grown used to state control over 13 years and therefore apathy has set in. Will they have the appietite to pick up the gauntlet that the conservatives have thrown down.

    I can only hope so.

  • Comment number 12.

    Why are people getting dewy-eyed about Kennedy? Cameron is no Kennedy and we are not Americans, so we don't need an elected sheriff. If the Conservatives were serious about returning power to the people, they would campaign to return the powers they stripped from local councils in the 1980s.

  • Comment number 13.

    "Tories pledge to empower voters"

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8616777.stm

    What a load of manipulative BullCam!

    Give us the referendum we were promised!

    Cameron! Stop being an "EU"-Mole!

    Stop being part of the Brown-Clegg-Cameron Charade-Conspiracy on behalf of the "EU"-Dictatorship!

  • Comment number 14.

    I'm with Cameron on this one, the decisions that effect a area should be dealt with by that area with input from the central government to make sure everyones singing from basically the same sheet. I've got a feeling it will go down quite well with most of the voters apart from the fact that a lot of people have so much apathy about the whole system they just plain won't believe anything any of the politicians say.

  • Comment number 15.

    No, the real choice is not between Labour and the Conservatives, it is between the Labour/Conservative duopoly and the smaller parties.

    What is going to be really interesting in this election is the turnout. Millions of voters are fed up to the back teeth with the Labour/Tory party (largely, but not exclusively, because of the expenses scandal).

    What are they going to do about it?

    If they just stay at home on 6 May, then no doubt the results of this election will be much as they usually are, with Labour and the Tories winning the vast majority of seats between them, and most of the crumbs going to the LibDems.

    However, if everyone who is fed up with the Labour/Tory party actually gets out and votes for smaller parties or independent candidates, then the results of the election could be very interesting indeed.

    Labour and the Tories believe that they have a divine right to take it in turns between them to govern this country. I do hope the voters show them that they don't.

  • Comment number 16.

    So, manifesto from the Tories today. Looking forward to it. Like the idea of a “Big Society”, I must say, like it very much. So much better than a small society. And so very much better than there being “no such thing” as society. Who said that? Can’t quite remember, must have been some Labour politician, I suppose.

  • Comment number 17.

    After the Tory support for the idiotic Digital Economy Bill, where some 'people of the UK; tried to be help the government - and were just ignored, I can say with confidence that this Tory document will be a meaningless smokescreen for the continued governance by vested interests.

    Perhaps slightly different vested interests.

  • Comment number 18.

    #11, Susan-Croft:

    "On the other hand those minorities that seek to undermine Britains way of life have been allowed more freedom to do so."

    Do you mean MPs?

  • Comment number 19.

    THE PARTY OF CHAOS PROMOTES ITSELF

    The Labour party says 'how they would not increase taxes' and 'where they would spend public monies'- but virtually nothing is said by Labour regarding strategies that they would action in order to maintain and enhance the competitiveness of existing UK and UK-based industries and to create new, profitable UK economic sectors and wealth generating companies...

    Even less was said- if that's possible- regarding what Labour would do in order to create jobs and to enable existing UK and UK-based firms to produce goods and provide services that can be successfully marketed overseas
    - in order to pay for the public services that are at risk: due to the UK's Labour-govt caused budget deficit...

    Through their half-baked, incompetent devolution programme, Labour has wrecked the UK's constitution...

    To suggest that they would be a party capable of facilitating workable UK constitutional reform is laughable...
    -------------
    -------------

    It ought to be remembered that in 2006- under heavy pressure from a UK govt wanting to generate a few quick pounds for application to public services- and against its Board of directors and Senior Management's recommendations- British Nuclear Fuels was forced to sell its Westinghouse nuclear power unit to Toshiba of Japan...

    http://www.bnfl.com/content.php?pageID=69&newsID=248

    Westinghouse was and still is one of the world's biggest, most technologically capable and successful nuclear power and energy companies... set to reap many billions of pounds in profits over the next 2 decades from burgeoning nuclear power contracts in China, India, the United States, Continental Europe and elsewhere...

    Several years later, the UK's British Energy is sold to France's part state owned EDF, which promptly gains approval from the UK Labour govt for rights to facilitate the building of and operating many nuclear power plants across the UK...

    Plants that Toshiba's Westinghouse will play a lead role in building...


    http://www.westinghousenuclear.com/news_room/EnergyDaily.pdf
    -----------------
    -----------------

    The Labour party's claims that they would facilitate open, transparent govt are absurd when contrasted against their unsavory and hugely improper efforts during the last Parliament to block the release of MP's expense claims details:

    Even the (Labour party) Speaker of the Commons worked against the release of MP's expense claims details- despite his position demanding strict impartiality...
    --------------------

    The Labour party have sold the UK out for petty short term interests:

    wrecked the country's economy and its military; trashed its impeccable reputation by under-resourcing & bungling the Iraq & Afghanistan operations; devastated its Defence high-tech warship-building industries AND destroyed its constitution...

    For complete chaos- vote Labour...



    __________________
    Roderick V. Louis,
    Vancouver, BC, Canada

  • Comment number 20.

    Apparently, the Tories are publishing their vague and vacuous manifesto promising to protect some Labour programmes? That sounds hypocritical to me after all it is the Tories that's been attacking labour saying they have done nothing and haven't built a fairer society at all.

    Tories have finally found something good about Labour programmes they once vigorously opposed and actually indirectly still attacking, programmes like Sure Start, Winter Fuel Allowance, Bus pass for elderly, etc.

    Gordon Brown might not be the best Prime Minister but is worth much more than stylish and vague David Cameron.

    And the manifesto title "Invitation" to join government you voted for? How hilarious!

  • Comment number 21.

    Power to the People?
    How far does this go? Could we ban hunting or bring back the death penalty?

  • Comment number 22.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 23.

    DoM, I do agree that millions in this country are disgusted with the state of politics today. The majority of this is due to the poor record on integrity etc shown over the last 13 years. How can someone being paid over six figures, living rent free happily claim £400 a month for food from the tax payers and say he is sedrving the people. Serving himself more like.

    So we need a change, less big government and more incentive to the individual, a Ted Heath type of one nation conservatism. But I doubt we will get that; that being the case we need a root and branch reform of the system, not tinkering at the edges. So maybe the smaller parties are the way to go.

    One thing is certain we do not need another 5 years of this self serving Labour Government.

  • Comment number 24.

    It's odd isn't it - the pitch is so very far removed from what most Conservative people I know, including a fair few elected politicians, actually believe. Although not a Tory myself I would not dismiss all of them out of hand, but one thing they do generally have in common is an unerring feeling that they know what's best for people, and it's very rare for a Tory politician's first reaction to an issue to be to ask for people's views, seek greater involvement or consultation, devolve power, etc.

    If Cameron does get elected there are so many contradictions and potential internal conflicts he's going to need to resolve

  • Comment number 25.

    The idea of voluntarism has a lot to commend it,Burke`s "small platoons" in a modern setting.It`s best example is the family where the socialization of the next generation depends on quanta of unpaid labour.

    There are arguments in favour of small economic units,cooperatives and the like where skills and energy can be pooled and innovation fostered.

    My proviso is that voluntarism isn`t cheap,there is an opportunity cost for unpaid labour which has to be met in other ways.A stay at home mum needs a working husband,if he is unskilled she faces a life of poverty.
    A voluntary school requires financial and administrative skill of a high order with the opportunity cost these skills could bring in the open market.To forego these rewards requires a renunciation of material reward and ethical qualities of a high order.


    I am mindful that capitalism itself had religious foundations in the puritan sects which sprung up around the idea of religious voluntarism with a lay clergy and literate congregation.The Labour movement also grew from methodism,cooperatives and the voluntary association of working men.


    Is voluntarism compatible with a value system which emphasizes personal mobility and material success?How high up the social scale does the utopian message reach? and what sacrifices,direct or indirect,can be expected from the corporate rich to fuel these ideals?


    Utopia is expensive,barter is cumbersome,peasant smocks from Liberty`s have uncomfortable resonances of Marie Antoinette.I am not without regard for this piece of late romanticism and may try it myself.But I warn you,I`m high maintenance.

  • Comment number 26.

    It's rather idicative of how far the democratic ideal has slipped.

    Why is Cameron inviting me to join the government when I thought he was pitching his job application to ask me to hire him to perform government functions on my behalf?

    Mind you, I do want greater involvement and control, so whereas I don't think it's his place to offer it I do like the concept.

  • Comment number 27.

    15. At 09:12am on 13 Apr 2010, DisgustedOfMitcham2 wrote:

    Good post, I agree.

  • Comment number 28.

    2. At 08:41am on 13 Apr 2010, AndyC555 wrote:

    1 - Konnolsky - the first such post wasn't funny. None of the others have been. Please stop. Please.

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

    With respect, I beg to differ. Konnolsky is ilarious, has a wide following here and elsewhere and is, imo, a satirist of genius. If you have no sense of humour of course, you may struggle with that concept.

  • Comment number 29.

    I like the idea of having some say and control over local services, after all who knows best how services are performing than the people who actually use them?

    I have never been a fan of central government control - it's too detached to be useful and never fully understands the issues at local level. That being said you do need central government, you can't just delegate everything to local level. I think it's quite a good idea but the devil (as ever) will be in the detail

    If it can be achieved then it will be a good thing for the UK as a whole. People will feel more in charge of what's going on, which will encourage them to take a more active role in local service provision and could ultimately lead to the biggest reform of politics we have seen for generations as decision making on local services is moved away from central government

    However - I will be curious as to how this will be achieved. The cooperative format can be and is successful on a lot of levels but i'm not convinced that it would work well as a service provision

    Will need to look a the details on this one but all in all I think it's a step in the right direction....

  • Comment number 30.

    By virtue of the fact that we all like to have our 2 cents on blogs like this, I'd say Dave has pretty much hit the nail on the head. We all have much better access to information and methods by which we can express our views than we have ever had. Thus the inclusion of citizen opinion will make for a more open government. It needs to go further, this inclusion thing.

    Vox populus, vox Dave.

  • Comment number 31.

    The choice between Labour and the Conservatives is in just what way either party will screw us. And screw us they will!

  • Comment number 32.

    As I said when I was 16, I like the Big Brother Society, but let’s see about the detail. Although one shouldn’t get too exercised over the small print; it’s the idea which counts, the theme ... the B.B. Society in this case ... is the thing. Same as with Labour, their M yesterday, heaps of detail (735 pages?) but all we really need to know is they’re engaged on a Future Fair For All. The more I mull that over – let it percolate; gather taste & texture – the more I like it. Like it more than this one of the Tories, to be honest (even though I like that too). I’d rather have a Future Fair For All than a Big Bonzer Society. I do want a BBS, though. Can’t we have both?

  • Comment number 33.

    I think he has a point about its up to us. I like this approach rather than the Labour "We know best" approach. Give me your money and I know what to do with it.

    I'm feed up of hearing about scandals and expenses. If we were actually (I use the term loosely) given the power to end someone's term in office prematurely because they just weren't up to the job or because they were "proved" to be part of a scandal then that would be great. But its a shame I can no longer believe a word any of them say.

    Also 15* you might as well stay at home if you are going to vote for Lib Dem or a smaller token party - Paxman said it last night "Your not going to sit there and claim your going to be the next Prime Minister are you?"

    Its not a case of who I support the most, its who I dislike the least. Labour have had 13 years to try and improve the country. Can anyone really tell me that has gone well ?

  • Comment number 34.

    We are asked by our local authority via our school to fill out a form each term stating which sporting/fitness activities our primary aged children take part in outside of school, where and what awards they have achieved. In other words, they want to monitor how our kids spend their free time. Apparently this is because of a Government initiative that all children must get one hours' sport provided for them by the local authority. (Actually, kids need one hours' physical activity, not sport - half hour for lunch plus fifteeen minutes at morning break only leaves fifteen minutes' to find elsewhere, but then the Govt. would be missing out on ths marvellous opportunity to interfere with our perfectly normal lives.)

    If Cameron's Big Society means that we can be free of this rather worrying meddling then great, bring it on.

  • Comment number 35.

    18. At 09:17am on 13 Apr 2010, DisgustedOfMitcham2 wrote:
    #11, Susan-Croft:

    "On the other hand those minorities that seek to undermine Britains way of life have been allowed more freedom to do so."

    Do you mean MPs?
    ---------------------------

    or MP3's

    Seriously though the lat 13 years have been some vast social experiment where people with particular vested interests have changed the social structure and cohesion of the nation in the name of equality.

    The only p[roblem is that equality has not been achieved as rather than make one group equal they have promoted minority groups while denigrating mjority groups. An example is rather than Muslims and Christians being treated equally Christians are heavily discriminated against which has had the result of generating resentment to Muslims in teh general populace. The same has applied to gender and sex equality to teh point that if people in minority groups are successful the question is asked are they there on merit or because someone was given an unfair advantage because they are a minority.

    Its counter-productive so stop it

  • Comment number 36.

    The Labour party have sold the UK out for petty short term interests:

    wrecked the country's economy and its military; trashed its impeccable reputation by under-resourcing & bungling the Iraq & Afghanistan operations; devastated its Defence high-tech warship-building industries AND destroyed its constitution...

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

    Job Done from their point of view. Objectives achieved.

    I shudder to think what else thay could ruin if given another 5 years

  • Comment number 37.

    This will just put power in the hands of a small group of local activists. These will inevitably been drawn from the gereat and the good and more often than not will be the local power brokers.
    Who will benefit?
    Those who think that they know better and are willing to shout loudest to get themselves heard.
    Can we assume that when the head of local services like the police are locally accountable by being 'democratically elected'that they will effectively become paralysed by the fear that they may do something to offend the powers that be or those who have vested interests and lose the next election.
    Would we end like Rome where the mob dictate policy?

  • Comment number 38.

    Surely sagamix will be 'fizzing' with excitement at the idea of an invitation to join the government?

    Finally a UNITE member could do something positive.

    Also, one presumes Sarah Brown must be 'fizzing' with excitement to join the government otherwise why should she be seen constantly at Gordon Brown's side? At the moment she looks like his care worker. Give her a proper job.

    Taxi for Brown!

  • Comment number 39.

    Andy CS555

    I rather like Konnolsky,he is laughing at us, otherwise we would laugh at ourselves.Gulag humour is appropriate for this election,the dullest since Bonar Law spent the campaign in a nursing home.Well if he didn`t he should have!

    Viva Konnolsky,more please, with Stalin`s bedtimes stories for small Spartacists and tales from the Lubyanka

  • Comment number 40.

    I think as many of your contributions have already said the biggest danger we have here next to the unthinkable is that we end up with a hung parliament. There is no chance that this would bring about the changes that are currently required along with the decisive management of our Finances. God help us if we are beholding to any or all of the minority parties to get through legislation - You will then see this country being held to ransom like never before.

    SNP will ensure that public spending cuts will not effect Scotland the same for Plaid Cymru and what about Northern Ireland. This sounds so much like the Parliament in Athens it is not funny. Yes cuts but not in my back yard. Yes austerity but not for my voters.

    Yes and there could only be one thing worse than this for Britain and that being Labour being reelected. Apart from the obvious there would civil war in the party within a year. Would Brown survive another challenge, then what will Mandy force upon us or will he be ousted as well by the unions. There are so many options it must be a journalists heaven.

  • Comment number 41.

    This comment has been referred for further consideration. Explain.

  • Comment number 42.

    Cameron's talk is the sort of approach that has a nice ring to it and has an appeal in the way that socialism has a certain idealistic appeal. The problem is socialism doesn't work and I don't think this will.

    For example, my children are now at school age and as parents we received a letter asking for volunteers to fill two vacancies as parent governors. I was the only volunteer in a school of 270 pupils in a very middle class area. If people can't get involved in their own children's education I struggle to see the reality of people getting involved in other areas. Voting turnout in general elections is poor what will it be in police authority elections?

  • Comment number 43.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 44.

    This confirms the fundamental choice we are faced with. Do we want a Labour government that spends our money as fast as it can to pay for an ever-growing number of public employees who can then micro-manage every detail of our lives? Or do we want to trust the Tories whose instincts are to impose lower levels of taxation if possible, to give power back to the people and to try to change our lives in other ways than just by throwing our money at every problem?

  • Comment number 45.

    Onwards, upwards and over to Battersea. Yesterday the Tory wagons were circulating outside the 'nearly' hospital with theur bill boards. What little gem have the New Labour activists thought up for us or has Boris arranged for all these to be moved along?

    Missed it first time round but the DC interview yesterday was very very weepy I only hope he manages to get through the day.

    GO was apparently spotted in the Medway Towns (very marginal) yesterday for those worried about his non show thus far.


    Still worried that no news from the JP battle bus but Diane Abbott out and about earlt this morning all smiles or was it Garth Crooks - still get these two confused.

    So we start the day at Election Call +C16. Oh the excitement of it all.

    Please does anyone have news on Jacqui Smith constituancy?

  • Comment number 46.

    My 32 notwithstanding, I think the BBS is a good slogan for the Tories. Big government comes over all oppressive and “put that fag out!” but a big “society”, this is something quite different. The Big Bonzer Society sounds expansive and inclusive, and extremely warm hearted and generous. Guess Lord Ashcroft wrote it. Yes, it’s good. Not sure about the decision to add the word bonzer, since a simple “Big Society” would have done the trick for me – a bid to get the Australian vote out perhaps. Dunno. Still that’s why they’re running for office and I’m not. It’s good.

  • Comment number 47.

    32. At 09:32am on 13 Apr 2010, sagamix wrote:
    As I said when I was 16, I like the Big Brother Society, but let’s see about the detail. Although one shouldn’t get too exercised over the small print; it’s the idea which counts, the theme ... the B.B. Society in this case ... is the thing. Same as with Labour, their M yesterday, heaps of detail (735 pages?) but all we really need to know is they’re engaged on a Future Fair For All. The more I mull that over – let it percolate; gather taste & texture – the more I like it. Like it more than this one of the Tories, to be honest (even though I like that too). I’d rather have a Future Fair For All than a Big Bonzer Society. I do want a BBS, though. Can’t we have both?
    -----------------------------------------

    If you want a Big Brother Society go to China or North Korea and see if you like it then when all your freedom of expression and movement and association is removed (hang on its just like that in the UK already after all we are the 3rd most surveilled nation on earth after China and NK and have a Stalinist dictator in place although in 3 weeks we can actually vote to get rid of him at least)

  • Comment number 48.

    Having see the public hysteria and tabloid feeding frenzy that surrounds things like access to cancer drugs, criminalising legal drugs, and the hounding of released prisoners I am deeply worried about some of these proposals. We've already seen Boris policising the police force and it is a very unpleasant spectacle.

    And Tory decentralisation always only lasts as long as people follow the Tory line. It was the same with Thatcher, whom Cameron is resembling more and more (note his approach to Europe!).

  • Comment number 49.

    I only logged on to support Konnolsky, the oppressed Butcher of Smolensk (never convicted) but since Im here, Cameron is no Kennedy. And Browns no churchill, but at least he's not pretending to be. This is socialism for the rich.

    I see this as positioning the brand towards the centre; suggesting that the Tories are in some way communitarian - the idea of youth community work - good idea which has similarly massive and probably crippling cost and logistical implications also similarly uses the dog-whislte language of "national service". Neither will make much/any difference to the way a local community operates, but it will have the effect of re-directing resources away from the people who need it back to the middle classes.

    I think there is a real problem of dependency culture in tis country but this certinly isnt the answer. Cameron is suggesting a quite unrealistic model of local democracy; it will chime with the middle-classes who imagine they can run schools hospitals, emergency services etc like you can run a small business. Theyre wrong of course.

    Socialism for the rich.

  • Comment number 50.

    @28 Blog, it is nice you are defend me, but there is no need. As this is site on BBC, great bastion freedoms of speak, Andy is as entitle dislike what I am post as I am to post it. And he is worthy much respect. See his insightful post @4. I is learn much from this and not think it waste of time, banal, shallow or ideologically slavish at all.

    And I am not try make laugh, just say it as I am see it, with perspective perhaps unusual. But, even if I am try, it is no accountant for tastes. As I wiser man than me is say, you can please some of the people none of the time, none of the people all of the time, and all of the people, erm, I is lost again.

  • Comment number 51.

    I'm really excited by these proposals. Finally we have a chance to be governed by a party that doesn't want to micro-manage our lives! Getting rid of big government is music to my ears. Bye Bye Brown!

  • Comment number 52.

    32. At 09:32am on 13 Apr 2010, sagamix wrote:

    The answer is NO.

    In this country we have a pendulum government rather than a steady pointer. First it swings to the left then to the right never to stay in the middle. Even the Liberals jumped one way when they created the Lib Dems as for most of the life of this Parliament they have been left of Labour.

    In utopia we could have the best of all worlds but not in Britain.

    So the cycle will continue Labour have made a complete mess of our economy so the Tories will get in. They will bring the finances back into line but will probably lean too much to bug business. Then Labour will get in and lean too much on the state. If only we could have the best of both. But as with all things we always want more. So it would be fare to say that we got what we voted for and we now have to live with it.

  • Comment number 53.

    One of the problems of New Labours big government, is that some public servants don't do their jobs properly, for example the police not bothering to take action against incredible cases of anti social behaviour, despite a massive increase of new laws over the last 10 years. I would certainly welcome the opportunity to vote for/against the local police chief as I feel it would make a difference in local performance. Perhaps that particular idea could be extended to Judges, who seem to make controversial decisions (to keep money sloshing around within the legal profession?), which then have to go to appeal (see MOD decision today). Yes I would like a say on council tax rises and the variety of services that are offered by local government. This should be quite easily achievable for members of the public to vote on in a digital economy. We are in the 21st Century after all, but no doubt people who are not online will feel excluded.

  • Comment number 54.

    DisgustedOfMitchim2 18

    #11, Susan-Croft:

    On the other hand those minorities that seek to undermine Britains way of life have been allowed more freedom to do so."

    Do you mean MPs?

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


    If that is what you want to take from my post that is your right. However I think my intentions of what I meant were pretty clear.

    Much as I read yours at 15 and thought, this is a person who wants to see a Hung Parliament, which will be a disaster for Britain. It will merely hand more power to MPs in devolved Governments, such as Salmond. Which then in turn goes against your reactionary post to me which was against MPs.

    It all depends on perception of what is being said, or mere point scoring depending on the thought behind the post.

  • Comment number 55.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 56.

    Hey, I can actually understand this. I think I will vote Tory now.

  • Comment number 57.

    My biggest regret was letting the euphoria of Blair get the better of me in 1997 and I know I, like many others, will struggle to get that same euphoric, optimistic outlook on Britain and it's politicians again.

    But this is the first time I've had a glimmer of it back.

    Britain is in a massive hole, not only financially but socially, and getting out of that hole is going to require huge effort from everyone. It does sound like a fantastic cliche, but I don't think theres a better way of putting it.

    I just hope that my trust and hope isn't again misplaced because in the strangest sort of way I think there is an opportunity here for all of us. Adversity does and always has brought out the best sides in humanity and comfort causes complacency, and the opportunity is setting straight all those injustices which we have come to accept as 'life'.

  • Comment number 58.

    Sounds very similar to John F Kennedy's "Ask not.." speech, I've also noticed large chunks of Barack Obamas successful campaign slogans mingled in their too. There is nothing original about David Cameron what-so-ever. He's just a hair-do spouting used slogans. Sort of like a parrot after a makeover.

  • Comment number 59.

    #35, adampsb:

    "An example is rather than Muslims and Christians being treated equally Christians are heavily discriminated against"

    Really? I must have missed that particular bit of legislation. Which bit of the law discriminates against Christians?

    In fact there was a recent example where the very opposite applies. Do you remember all the fuss about Catholic adoption agencies, and that being Christian actually gives you a special exemption to discriminate against gays and get away with it?

  • Comment number 60.

    I make it clear (at 46) how much I like the Tories’ new Big Society slogan. But is it quite as good as Labour’s Future Fair For All? No it isn’t, not quite. A FFFA just edges it. Why? Because of its perfection as a phrase. “Future” first of all – we all want one. Progressives like me are ONLY interested in the future of course (both past and present are irrelevant), but even Reactionaries want a future. They want a future that looks like the past, true, but technically it’s still a future. Fair For All ... well absolutely. This bit has the lot. Fair as in wise and just – we all believe in that – and Fair as in “set fair”; the more dynamic sense of the word. The ship – or any vessel – set fair for better climes. The winds are forecast, the course is charted, the Captain has seen it all before. His hands are tough and calloused. They’re a safe pair of hands. They’ll get us there. So yes, the BBS is fantastic but a FFFA is a little bit more so. I’d like both – who wouldn’t? – but when push comes to shove (on May 6th) and I have to choose between the two, I think I’d rather have a future fair for all than a big bonzer society. And this is what General Elections are all about, aren’t they? ... choices.

  • Comment number 61.

    sagamix - I wouldn't want a BB society - Let us be controlled by a collective group who have failed to make a brighter future for all over the last 13 years. In terms of what they have done is make the future look rather dull, full of debt and pretty pathetic.

    42 - englandcricketfan -

    Its a sad thing that you are the only one who volunteered. But that is the main problem at the moment we (the whole country) generally wont do anything unless we see a direct benefit. Its short sighted and very lazy, I dont know who to blame for this but unless we (the whole country) do something about it then it will only get worse.

    Its the same with people and jobs and benefits. Why go to work when you are better off not going to work. Yes labours M yesterday pointed out they will make everyone better off if they go off to work. Really fail how they can do this. Only way is to lower the benefit or raise the money they get from work. But they have said that if you don't accept the job then you lose your benefits, great way to make a lot of people even poorer. Either way its just another hidden cost that we will have to pay back.

    Maybe its about time we starting paying back the debt and rather than borrowing more to sustain the short term. Would this work? Well borrowing hasn't over the last 13 years so why not giving it a try.

  • Comment number 62.

    #37 Shillo
    "This will just put power in the hands of a small group of local activists. These will inevitably been drawn from the gereat and the good and more often than not will be the local power brokers."

    And that's different to the current situation because....????

  • Comment number 63.

    Adampsk

    " The only p[roblem is that equality has not been achieved as rather than make one group equal they have promoted minority groups while denigrating mjority groups. An example is rather than Muslims and Christians being treated equally Christians are heavily discriminated against which has had the result of generating resentment to Muslims in teh general populace. The same has applied to gender and sex equality to teh point that if people in minority groups are successful the question is asked are they there on merit or because someone was given an unfair advantage because they are a minority."

    Difficult isn`t it,religious equality and how to achieve it? My God is bigger than yours,or do you shop around to decide if you prefer pews to carpets.

    Beatrice White once told me a suffragette joke which wasn`t very good but illustrates the difficulty.An imprisoned suffragist heard the sounds of uncontrolled sobbing from the cell next door."What shall I do?" the suffragen wailed. "Pray to God dear" he rcompanion called out. "She will help you."



  • Comment number 64.

    Comments 15 and 23 echo my sentiments.

  • Comment number 65.

    The comparisons with Kennedy. Is that something Cameron said, or just Robinson trying to make him look foolish? Bit like the use of "the Cameroons" - not so subtle use of schoolboy wordplay to belittle others.

    Not worthy of a BBC reporter.

  • Comment number 66.

    OK, I believe in democracy and am outvoted. Konnolsky, please continue.

    I am reminded of the East German joke about the Stasi officer who stops a citzen on the street and asks him what he thinks of the Government. In a panic, the citizen says "I think the same of them as you", to which the Stasi officer replies "In that case I must arrest you for treason".

    I guess you had to be in East Germany to find it funny.

  • Comment number 67.

    John Lloyd 21 - That's the whole point of this Manifesto. Your part of the Government you can decide.

    If you want to bring back the death penalty presumably you can. Me well I'm not so extreame I will pass a law for a fixed term parliment of 6 weeks followed by six weeks of campaigning. I would introduce a fixed term employment contract of 6 weeks for everyone then you can be guaranteed a job after six weeks thus reducing long term unemployed.

    Even I could bear DC or GB or NC for six weeks knowing that there was going to be end to it.

  • Comment number 68.

    36 Adam - i know for a fact you live in the UK but your version of it is completely unrecogniseable to me.

    schools - results and infrastructure improved out of all recognisiotn

    NHS - well resourced and acceptable waiting lists and very efficient in international terms

    even the military - we've been fighting two futile wars. how anyone can sy we're not spending enough on it is in dreamland.

    Lets not allow the narrow self-interests of the well-oof middle classes and their self-deluded ideology wreck the country like the last lot nearly managed to do. Dont forget the national euphoria when they were voted out. Cameron is cut from the same cloth.

    Go Chelsea!

  • Comment number 69.

    Having been involved, albeit in a small way, with the failed Battersea Wharf Project in the late nineties it is good to see it having such focus and meaning.

    Yes, onward and upward for the Conservatives - I accept willingly!

    (Incidentally how on earth is Jimmy Brown going to implement those Labour mp's paying back legal aid? If they are acquitted will their barristers pay the money back - hmmmm. Also, the encouraging trade export figures just announced - could this be the corrupt government massaging the figures just to take attention off the brilliant Tory Manifesto?).

  • Comment number 70.

    I personally would like the right to decide the next Government first, but unfortunately due to the undemocratic electoral system we have my vote doesn't really matter. I also have not the opportunity to vote for some of the fringe parties.
    In over two thirds of consitutencies the winning party is already predictable. In the other third the only votes that really matter are the votes of about 500k floating voters. Not really a democracy when only the votes of 2-3% of the voters decide the result.
    Additionally because of the constitutency system, you can only vote for a party that is standing. If for example you wanted to support the Green party you can only do so in one of the 300 constitutencies where they have a candidate.

  • Comment number 71.

    There has been considerable discussion about the political model being proposed by the conservatives, with all the news headlines leading with the "Big Society".
    I am, however, surprised that ther has been less reaction to "The Tories will promise to eliminate the bulk of the structural deficit over the parliament" which is significantly different to the current government's plans. Could we please have some impact assessment of what this means and some questions about how it would be done?

  • Comment number 72.

    Giving that old hag 'Nanny State' and that interfering twit 'Big Brother' a kick in the shins gets my vote every time.

    Of course, you can't reduce public spending without reducing the size of the State - so the messages from Cameron and Co are consistent.

    However, if you like the State to poke into every aspect of your lives then this manifesto is not for you.

  • Comment number 73.

    Bring it on! First against the wall will be the RDAs, exercising government control of local development, costing a fortune while adding no contribution.

  • Comment number 74.

    Tories whose instincts are to impose lower levels of taxation if possible, to give power back to the people and to try to change our lives in other ways than just by throwing our money at every problem
    --------------------------

    theyre the tory insticnts are they? silly me, i thought they were to promote the interests of their own children in order to dominate the prfessions, in order to concentrte the nations wealth into a smaller and smaller group of select, privately educated people living in excluive areas away from the contamination of all things proltarian in order to recast reality in their own image - bland, uncreative, mediocre, white, middle class.

    in fact why stop there? Ancient Sparta had a society based on exclusive rights of citizen privilege which made the 3rd Reich look like a registered charity. militarily they dominated the ancient world, so youre right it can work. pity they could barely read or write .

  • Comment number 75.

    This comment has been referred for further consideration. Explain.

  • Comment number 76.

    The only way Cameron can involve me more in government is by direct democracy - more referenda. What passes for democracy now, simply isn't. Electing the party to rule in Westminster is democratic but there it ends. You have no further say in what they do, when, why, etc. Passing the Digital Economy Bill is just the most recent antidemocratic antic.

    But I think that even limited direct democracy would terrify any government enough for them to make sure it would never work. Of course, government isn't obliged to accept the result of a referendum. It doesn't have to listen to the people just as it doesn't its advisory councils. I mean, what would a government do if faced with an 80% "yes" for reinstating capital punishment or castrating rapists?

    But I've had enough of Labour trying increasingly poorly to organise and regulate society under the guise of "we want to help people".

    The prospect of Brown forcing his brand of normality onto us is dire.

  • Comment number 77.

    Not only have politicians and political parties made a pigs ear of parliament , now we have the Tory leader proposing that we should elect them and do the work they are being paid for ?
    the fact is what we need is a very slimmed down central government who Deal with strategic matters and empowers the local community [ Councils elected by the residents} to put the strategy into practice. centralised taxes should be reduced to the minimum and Local councils empowered to raise taxes needed to implement the stratagy. The local electorate will ensure that they do a good job and economically.
    Since Local affairs and taxes became centralised with hand backs controlled by the Treasury after creaming off their share and detailed interference from Ministers and their Quango's form so they could hide behind them, we have seen a marked detirioration in the quality of services. We have the majority of our roads deteriorate due to lack of maintenance. Schools whose activities are governed by central government targets like those of a sales rep.with little bearing on actual education.
    Moves towards the American Idea of local elected paid politicians directly involved in the management of services. the dis-empowerment of local elected representatives in favour of a small group making the decisions to be rubber stamped by the rest. Now Cameron wants elected political Police commissioner's. What a nerve, after the disgraceful behaviour shown by our elected representatives in Whitehall ! a final recipe for graft and corruption as is seen world wide where this system already exists.
    Well here is another voter who will vote "not any of these" given half a chance.

  • Comment number 78.

    adam @ 47

    "If you want a Big Brother Society go to China or North Korea"

    No, not my point. Was just interested in the Tory lurch from "no such thing as" to "all that counts is" ... Society. A lurch that I rather approve of. Then again I am partial to lurches, so maybe it's just that.

  • Comment number 79.

    Pft! I don't know about ideologies Nick. All I know is, there is something wrong and there must be some way of blaming Thatcher for it or Lord Ashton. They are responsible!

  • Comment number 80.

    Occasionally, when I've got nothin better to do, I ponder a world where the people could be consulted, via a referendum, on important issues before the government finally commits us to whatever it is.

    Personally I like the idea. We get involved. We can't say we weren't consulted. The majority will win. lots of bureaucracy involved, mening jobs. We'll hav to pay, but we're paying for them to be unemployed anyway.

    We might, just might, get some sensible policies which the majority of us want, rather than what the elite policy makers think we want, and enact in our names.

    Bring it on.

  • Comment number 81.

    So just because I was able to do my bit to conceive a couple of children means I can run a school does it. What next holiday makers flying their own planes

  • Comment number 82.

    susan @ 54

    "If that is what you want to take from my post that is your right. However I think my intentions of what I meant were pretty clear."

    They were. Crystal clear. Wild eyed, right wing extremism; the sort of thing which trashes the lives of millions in the name of "freedom". Freedom for a select few to make untold riches, freedom for everyone else to work their butts off to get by, freedom for majorities to oppress minorities. It's all great stuff ... on a blog.

  • Comment number 83.

    Surely the role of the govt is to consider ALL the people...
    it must be ingrained in their ethos and be established at t he core.

    The conservatives have repeatedly proved they are the party of the few whereas the labour party (less so New Lbour, admittedly) exist for the workers/people.

    If self-centred me-me-me attitudes is what we want then the conservatives are already showing their true colours in this regard.

    If Labour aren't the party to deliver this anymore then we must find someone who can...(big oleg?)

  • Comment number 84.

    I am still waiting for somthing new from the Conservatives-other than dressed up Thatcherism for the new century. I lived through the terrible years of Thatcher and dread the fact that the media have put their weight behind the Tory poilicies-basicall free advertising and slanting of discussion. I truly believe that you will reap what you sow-see you in the dark years to come!

  • Comment number 85.

    Vague promises of more power to the people but no real substance.

    I also question the wisdom of suggesting that schools will be better if they have been set up by parents.

    They might 'belong' to the parents but that doesn't mean that educational standards will be better.

    A lot of woolly thinking with little substance.

    The Tories manifesto should just read 'We want to look like reformers and pretend we care about society'.

  • Comment number 86.

    I take it the " Kennedy " allusion is your idea Mr Robinson, isn't your brief to report the news, not to invent it ? The only thing lacking in the Tory manifesto is the need to get rid of the Labour government and local government thought police and psuedo gestapo with the right to impose fines on taxpayers at their discretion for what they see as civil misdemeanours. Meanwhile criminals are mollycoddled, treated as victims and given more rights than the actual victim. Police are underfunded, subjected to a lack of support and run by a politically correct Chief Constabulary which prevents them from doing the job the taxpayers expect of them.

  • Comment number 87.

    I have to hand it to Labour they have managed to keep the talk off the economy and the dire state of our Finances. What deficit and debt. Must just be me... but I would like a public sector fit for purpose, however if we continue with our current spending plans not only will we not maintain our public services we will see the devastated as cuts will be forced upon us if not by the market then by the IMF who we will have to turn to, to bail us out.

  • Comment number 88.

    Blimey, I'm not sure I can stand another 3 weeks of "he said, she said."

    However for me the choice is a pretty easy one and it comes down to a couple of questions.

    Would David Cameron have EVER brought in a National minimum wage? NO!
    Would David Cameron have EVER given "us" guaranteed holiday entitlement? NO!
    Would David Cameron have EVER given "us" extended maternity and paternity leave? NO!

    Indeed David Cameron wants to take us out of the Social Chapter that brought us some of those things – what will the “working men and women of Britain” that he bangs on about so frequently end up with then?

    People easily forget the benign economy we’ve had over the past 13 years, how schools and hospitals were falling down round our ears before PPI and government investment and think, just think how in the 1980’s we had 3 million unemployed! And now think in today’s bigger population how much that would have been! Yet in this recession it’s been kept at 2.5 million a lot less than Conservatives said it would be.

    Oh and on NI rise that the Tories said would cost jobs?! Well, they said that about the minimum wage and that didn’t happen either.

    Forget your invitation, Mr Cameron. I don’t want to come to your party.

  • Comment number 89.

    sagamix -

    "Progressives like me are ONLY interested in the future of course (both past and present are irrelevant)"

    The past and present and very relevant - If we dont learn from the past we have no future. The mistakes are already made so we have to learn from them not ignore them. Or let the people who made them keep making them!

    If you ignore the present and just concentrate on the future - then you are actually walking around day dreaming.


  • Comment number 90.

    #49 blogdognag: "Socialism for the rich."

    Of course socialism is for the rich - they are the only ones left who can afford it!

  • Comment number 91.

    And finally we have it form newlabour apologists and their cheerleader, one sagamix...

    "Progressives like me are ONLY interested in the future of course (both past and present are irrelevant)"

    It is precisely this attitude that is the reason newlabour should be kicked out for ever; it is their arrogance baout having ended boom and bust, the fairer society; they learn nothing form history adn so can contribute nothing to the debate about our future. For them the whole world is a giant socio-political experiment with no accountability and no judgement on failure.

    We have tried this for thirteen years; newlabour claimed they had mastered the art of the economic cycle, could borrow cheap money from China forever, create multiple public sector jons with the proceeds of their temporary rises in taxation and steer clear of any bust.

    History itself has proved them one hundred percent wrong; a recession came along and the UK went down further and faster than any other G7 economy.

    This is the danger of sagamix and the newlabour 'Blair-Plus' agenda; we are being asked to ignore history again - their own history - and give it another go.

    No way.

    Taxi for Brown!

  • Comment number 92.

    "68. At 10:15am on 13 Apr 2010, blogdignag wrote:

    36 Adam - i know for a fact you live in the UK but your version of it is completely unrecogniseable to me.

    schools - results and infrastructure improved out of all recognisiotn"

    Now, if just that opening salvo isnt a sign of a Labour education, I dont know what is....

    "NHS - well resourced and acceptable waiting lists and very efficient in international terms"

    Indeed. Thats why we have so many people going abroad for treatment, such as dentistry...

    "even the military - we've been fighting two futile wars. how anyone can sy we're not spending enough on it is in dreamland."

    You're talking through your hat, chum. Dont even go there.

    "Lets not allow the narrow self-interests of the well-oof middle classes and their self-deluded ideology wreck the country like the last lot nearly managed to do."

    Well oof?? LMAO.

    And you expect people to listen to you?

    Chump...

  • Comment number 93.

    Gordon Brown spoke the truth and we should heed his advice...

    ... and ALL vote Liberal (not that I want do), at least that way we will be sure to rid these useless lot once and for all. Imagine another few years of this non coherent rubbish!

    He left his manifesto opened as wide as a barn door, they will promise nothing, give nothing and do 'nowt' except borrow - a leopard doesn't change his spots overnight - or should I say in thirteen years!

  • Comment number 94.

    68. At 10:15am on 13 Apr 2010, blogdignag wrote:
    36 Adam - i know for a fact you live in the UK but your version of it is completely unrecogniseable to me.

    schools - results and infrastructure improved out of all recognisiotn

    NHS - well resourced and acceptable waiting lists and very efficient in international terms

    even the military - we've been fighting two futile wars. how anyone can sy we're not spending enough on it is in dreamland.

    _____________________________________________________________________

    Ok so your deluded -

    how have school results got better? they way they mark them has changed. The amount of A's and A*'s has gone up only because the requirements for them have gone down!

    The NHS is a total mess - People are lying on beds in halls! people are rushed out when they are not ready to leave. just so the statistics look good. Why is is quicker and cheaper to go abroad for some operations?

    The military are un-prepared and the kit is out of date and hence we have so many wounded or dead soldiers coming back.

    Statistics are easy to change if you change the rules on how they are collected and the definitions.

  • Comment number 95.

    When will peolpe realise that Central govenrment is your framework for living, it should ensure certain standards and equality to ensure the population at large recieves an equitable proportional of the states funds. Local government is for solutions and innovation and progress, not being told 'how to' or killed with red tape.

    Cameron is right, let local goverment provide the solutions to problems and get the community involved it will better relfect the area and prevailing attitudes people have voted for

    Under this type of goverment it would allow for local politcal differences and if the local areas are run by the oppoisition then have just as much chance to run the things the way the voters want

    The British population are infact frauds......they act together as a liberal tolerant bunch yet privately and individually are selfish and want to look after themsleves, hence they have in effect got the politicains they deserve; middle of the road, centralist and lightweight.

    People vote for themselves not for each other, shame we have no real choice

  • Comment number 96.

    pffft! You are having a laugh!!! Ha ha ha

    Let's read between the lines: YOU pay us all your taxes, but if something's not right it's YOUR fault for not sorting it out.

    Frankly, it's an absolutely genius abdication of responsibility

    To whom do I make the cheque out?

  • Comment number 97.

    The trouble is that the Tories are the same now as they have always been. They believe that their class was born to govern and govern they will. They are not interested in empowering ordinary people who are the "great unheard" they are about reinforcing their own political elite.

    Those who rely on council services are not the ones who will vote against a rise in the Council Tax that pays for the services on which they rely. People who are struggling to make ends meet; who want to work but cannot afford childcare and who need the support of SureStart and other initiatives; are they the ones who will be inspired to take over local public services and turn them into cooperatives.

    This is the philosophy of the madhouse and surely the British public are not going to be fooled by the Tories into voting for them because of what they say when behind their words is more of the same that was overwhelmingly rejected in 1997!

  • Comment number 98.

    48. At 09:51am on 13 Apr 2010, Adrian wrote:

    Having see the public hysteria and tabloid feeding frenzy that surrounds things like access to cancer drugs, criminalising legal drugs, and the hounding of released prisoners I am deeply worried about some of these proposals. We've already seen Boris policising the police force and it is a very unpleasant spectacle.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Are you serious??? Boris politicising the police force???

    Do the names Ian Blair, Cressida Dick and Bob Quick mean anything to you?
    The arrest of Damian Green? The way the G20 was handled? Not to mention 21/7 and the death of JC De Menezes??

    And you reckon Boris has politicised the police force???

    What precisely have you been smoking???

  • Comment number 99.

    #57 U14350905
    'I just hope that my trust and hope isn't again misplaced...'
    Well, there's one born every minute!

  • Comment number 100.

    '47. At 09:51am on 13 Apr 2010, adampsb wrote:
    32. At 09:32am on 13 Apr 2010, sagamix wrote:
    As I said when I was 16, I like the Big Brother Society, but let’s see about the detail. Although one shouldn’t get too exercised over the small print; it’s the idea which counts, the theme ... the B.B. Society in this case ... is the thing. Same as with Labour, their M yesterday, heaps of detail (735 pages)? But all we really need to know is they’re engaged on a Future Fair For All. The more I mull that over — let it percolate; gather taste & texture — the more I like it. Like it more than this one of the Tories, to be honest (even though I like that too). I’d rather have a Future Fair For All than a Big Bonzer Society. I do want a BBS, though. Can’t we have both?
    -----------------------------------------

    If you want a Big Brother Society go to China or North Korea and see if you like it then when all your freedom of expression and movement and association is removed (hang on its just like that in the UK already after all we are the 3rd most surveilled nation on earth after China and NK and have a Stalinist dictator in place although in 3 weeks we can actually vote to get rid of him at least)'

    Maybe you should tell that to Mr Murdoch and all the other right wing media fascists (also add the Bankers and big Business leaders who are seeking to influence the voting intentions of the British Public) that have been brainwashing the people of this here Great Britain since time and immemorial.

 

Page 1 of 8

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

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