« PMQs: Stephen Crabb steals the show | Main | David Cameron's Budget response... »

Comments

"Brown's answer to the difficulties ordinary families face always seems to be more complicated tax credits. What people really want is lower taxes..."

Here! Here!

Hearing Brown talking about the cricket win in India... this Scot really is trying to boost his UK-wide credentials. Shameless.

"13:17 Brown admits he could cut taxes, but prefers to expand expenditure."

No mention of spending wisely then

Hearing Brown talking about the cricket win in India

Oh No - Brown's going to ruin the World Cup and bang on about how he's supporting England - is there no end to the amount of things this man can destroy and proclaim as great successes?

Camerons looking sprightly.

It is shocking how rude and discourteous this labour party is.

I'm watching it right now, and I see frontbenchers walking out in the middle of Cameron's response.

In fact the speaker has just had to chastise them for shouting so much we can't even hear Cameron and threatened to throw one Labour MP out for his behaviour!

"Hearing Brown talking about the cricket win in India... this Scot really is trying to boost his UK-wide credentials. Shameless."

Like Emperor Ming's "at Murrayfield, I support Scotland, at the Oval, I support England, in the Ryder Cup, I support Europe" rubbish.

Who will Gordon and Ming support at the next Cricket World Cup?

Cameron was on top form I thought and he even used the words "tax and spend chancellor" - I thought his gag about running for treasurer of the Labour party struck home nicely

'Hearing Brown talking about the cricket win in India'

A cricket analogy ? Remember Mrs Thatcher at the Mansion House. Brown's end must be nigh.

"Brown's answer to the difficulties ordinary families face always seems to be more complicated tax credits. What people really want is lower taxes..."

If you heard the speech, you will know he considered this, but decided the money would be better spent targetting those with children who need the money most.

View from the other side? I thought it was a bit boring, but sound enough. Good to see our economy is growing faster than most other G7 nations, glad that investment in public services will continue.

Why change a winning formula?

Because the so-called winning formula consists of paying more and more for less and less...

"Gordon Brown" has just emailed this to me....

"I wanted to email you straight away to highlight some of the key points in my Budget where I took action to help Britain's families.

The British economy is entering its tenth year of growth under a Labour Government. There are now two million more people in work right across Britain and because of the decisions we have made, inflation and mortgage rates remain low.

So today I announced how we would lock in this progress and stability which the country has worked so hard to achieve.

This economic strength also enabled me to do more to help families, the older generation and to continue improving our public services.

It's not easy raising a family. So I increased the child tax credit and child benefit to help parents with the costs of bringing up their families.

Education is my top priority. Today I announced £585 million more to be paid direct to schools to be spent on what they think is best for their pupils.

There was good news, too, for pensioners. From next month, they will enjoy free local bus travel outside peak hours.

But I know many pensioners want the chance to travel outside their communities.

So I announced that we'll introduce free national bus travel off peak for pensioners and the disabled from April 2008.

There's £100 million extra, as well, to speed up the recruitment of thousands more Community Support Officers so they can back up the record number of police. Making our communities safer for old and young alike.

But we all know none of this would be possible if we took risks with our economy, or if we cut investment in our public services.

It took action not words to build today's strong economy - and in today's Budget I have taken action to achieve my most important goal: fairness for Britain's hard working families.

Yours

Gordon Brown MP"

THE EMAIL IS DRESSED WITH CHILDREN'S DRAWINGS OF A SHINING SUN, A HAPPY FAMILY AND A HOME.

"The British economy is entering its tenth year of growth under a Labour Government. There are now two million more people in work right across Britain and because of the decisions we have made, inflation and mortgage rates remain low."

- Decisions? I only recall one decision which was Bank of England independence. What were the others?

"This economic strength also enabled me to do more to help families, the older generation and to continue improving our public services."

- Funny how none of those improving public services were mentioned in the budget speech.

"There was good news, too, for pensioners. From next month, they will enjoy free local bus travel outside peak hours."

- Funded no doubt by their enormous hike in Council Tax.

"There's £100 million extra, as well, to speed up the recruitment of thousands more Community Support Officers so they can back up the record number of police. Making our communities safer for old and young alike."

Where from exactly? Were we not just hearing about the NHS being £1bn short? and do these Community Support Officers have any real powers? I applaud the CSO's I really do but we want POLICE OFFICERS.

"It took action not words to build today's strong economy - and in today's Budget I have taken action to achieve my most important goal: fairness for Britain's hard working families."

- wasn't it Ken Clarke's action to build today's strong economy?

All in all, not a bad budget. I was expecting a lot worse, what with some papers mentioning a 20% VAT rate amongst other things.

"Because the so-called winning formula consists of paying more and more for less and less...
"

Well nobody has yet told be how we can pay less and less and get more and more!!

The Conservative party needs to do so, or else return to the post war consenus( higher taxes for the rich, public services over private, one nation over market forces)

We could then have a proper debate about exactly those services are run, and many people disagree with the government on that.

Dear Mr. Editor, the English language is such a beautiful, expressive and comprehensive tool, that it is pleasure enough just to read the words of the e-mail addressed to you.!

Comstock 19:02 Well nobody has yet told be how we can pay less and less and get more and more!!

Well you could ask Tesco or WalMart (ASDA) how they manage it.

You could stop the checker uppers and trust the service providers to do their jobs and if they don't do the job properly you introduce some competition for the customers to chose an alternative service provider.

a-tracy, you forgot to mention the checker-up-checkers, and their checker too. Why have two tiers when four will employ more?

"Well you could ask Tesco or WalMart (ASDA) how they manage it."

But they are in the business of making the maximum profit, and govt is in the business of running public services.

Two very different things IMHO.

"you introduce some competition for the customers to chose an alternative service provider"

Great idea, lets for example replace dialing 999 for an ambulance with multiple service providers in the model of the 192-118 change.

Of course while you are shopping around for the best deal your loved one has just died of a heart attack, but it's a great idea!

OK an extreme example, but do you get the point I'm trying to make about govt services being inheritely different in nature from anything the commercial sector can supply

Comstock: But they [ASDA] are in the business of making the maximum profit, and govt is in the business of running public services. Two very different things IMHO.

ASDA will be very interested to know you think they make money by providing a crap service.

Comstock: you get the point I'm trying to make about govt services being inheritely different in nature from anything the commercial sector can supply

No, I don't get your idea. What you say reminds me of a theory I used to hear a lot of round about 1980-85, that certain services couldn't be provided by a market. The Labour Party used to say it about telephones. I doubt we'd have had anything like the advances we've seen if the Post Office were still running BT - the nearest any of us would get to a mobile phone under a nationalised service would be a tin can on a string.

To adapt your (rather tasteless) example: letting the state run the ambulances means it's alright if you die waiting so long as we all die waiting.

"What you say reminds me of a theory I used to hear a lot of round about 1980-85, that certain services couldn't be provided by a market. The Labour Party used to say it about telephones"

I've already conceded telephones on another page. Largely because of new technology which came along *after* privatisation. Which still leaves water, electric, gas and railways as examples of the market failing to provide good service. One out of five ain't a good record to extend somthing on really!

"To adapt your (acute sense of humour failure removed) example: letting the state run the ambulances means it's alright if you die waiting so long as we all die waiting."

OK we are already a mile off topic, so we might as well stay there. Your alternative would be, exactly?


I'm happy with the service the Gas and Electricy Company I use provide, no black outs, continuity of supply, quick fixes to boiler/plumbing/and efficient with my enquiries. As for cost do you really think if it was nationalised it would cost less?

I’ve heard on radio reports recently that the Staffordshire ambulance service was one of the best in the Country so the government want to merge it with other less efficient areas. The Head and Second in Command were so furious they left and want to set up an alternative in the local area. I wonder if you put this to the vote of the Staffordshire residents how they would prefer their taxes directed? and if they would be bothered if it was the government in control or a couple of people who really passionately care about the service they're offering. When my local ambulance service was merged with Merseyside we're now zero stars (or are these star ratings only important when they are showing a good service).

As the Opticians proved private operators can and do provide a good efficient service to their clients and their check up is now £4.50 less than an NHS dental check up so we’re getting a more convenient service at lower cost and without tax subsidy.

The Labour government has got away with virtually privatising the dental service, no Tory government would have got away with the same service reduction and high individual cost in my opinion. More of us are forced to pay for dental insurance policies with no corresponding reduction in our National Insurance contribution – very clever. Give it another couple of years and Dentists will be the same as the Opticians (outside the Health Service).

Thursday lunchtime. Listening to Radio 4. Zero road tax will only actually apply to a couple of "obscure cars that you cannot even buy in UK!!!" VERY CLEVER GORDON!! And torally representative of his attitude to the british public.. he thinks we are all suckers.

Just thinking. Some posters have been decrying DC for not revealing party donors names. It seems to me that he may be being bullied by Mr Marsland, as he seems to be doing all the running in keeping these names secret, not DC. The pressure should be on Marsland equally. Are the donors worried that their loot may be seen as garnered in a murky fashion, as some of nulabs donors are? Are they lottery winners who dont want barrow loads of begging letters piling up on their doorsteps? I feel as onother poster, we have to disclose the lot. If all the parties did this, it could bring the vexed question of party funding to a head, and not before time.

When is Gordon Brown going to Address the stealing of our pensions and repay back all the pension money's he has stolen, it was not borrowed as I was not asked and my pension was money I had accrued myself and had nothing to do with govement borrowing

Once again, Brown has punished the lower paid and rewarded the rich
Typical new labour
Roll on the next general election when we can boot this bunch out once and for all

The comments to this entry are closed.

#####here####

ConHome on Twitter

    follow me on Twitter

    Conservative blogs

    Today's public spending saving

    New on other blogs

    • Receive our daily email
      Enter your details below:
      Name:
      Email:
      Subscribe    
      Unsubscribe 

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker