The Woolies moment is coming... and then the 'It hasn't worked' moment

The 76,000 increase in unemployment was huge.  Larger rises are likely over the coming months and we also face what Peter Riddell calls the 'Woolies moment' when up to 30,000 people lose their jobs across the country.  Soon after - in February, March, April - there'll be a realisation that Brown's activism hasn't prevented the worst recession in the developed world.  There'll be a lot of anxious families this Christmas.

Reacting to the unemployment data, Chris Grayling issued this statement:

“My fear is that the Government is being complacent about the nature of the challenge we face.   These figures are seriously alarming, and a sign that things are getting much worse even before Christmas.  Yet Gordon Brown seems to think that his actions have solved our problems already.  The reality is that’s just not true.  Britain needs an urgent programme to tackle rising unemployment – but as yet the Government has done virtually nothing to address the problem.”

Comments

[Mark Fulford]

Chris Grayling's comments are thoroughly unconvincing.

Although we disagree with what the government has done, we can hardly call the bank interventions and VAT and interest rate cuts “nothing”.

[Kevin Davis]

Okun's law

For every 2% decrease in GDP there is a 1% increase in unemployment - of total jobs.

U= ^u-h[100(y/yn)-100]

To coin a phrase - "You can't buck the markets"

[Peter Buss]

Whilst Chris Grayling is right in what he says, where for goodness sake is our programme. vast cuts in public spending is not a programme to keep as many people in wok as possible.

[David_at_Home]

The real problem is that Chris Grayling MP and most politicians of all three main parties either just do not understand the situation we are in or are too frightened of the electorate to tell the truth.

For seven years or so we have been on a debt fuelled consumer binge and this is just not sustainable. Consequently, a very large increase in unemployment, amongst those employed in the retail and service industries, is inevitable and cannot be avoided, except in the very short term, by ANY government.

In the long term we will have to rebalance our economy so we again can produce goods and services which foreigners want to buy (i.e. exports). This is going to be difficult and may take a decade or so, possibly a generation, to resolve and will only be possible, on a large scale, with a very much improved (not the same as more expensive) state education system, revised employment laws, reduced state “benefits”, a tax regime which encourages enterprise and different social attitudes.

I am not sure we can achieve this without civil strife but I hope we can and we would have a much better chance of doing so if Her Majesty’s Opposition would take their heads out of the sand and start “saying it as it is”.

[London Tory]

Never mind a 'Woolies moment' the Conservative front bench has had far too many 'Ratner moments' in recent weeks.

[m dowding]

Chris Grayling's comments are thoroughly unconvincing.

Although we disagree with what the government has done, we can hardly call the bank interventions and VAT and interest rate cuts “nothing”.

Posted by: Mark Fulford | December 17, 2008 at 11:18

Oh yes we can. The Government only know one course of action. Pour money down the drain and hope that it chokes and stops the loss of all the money, with a conviction that there is no limit to the borrowing that can be made.
Only a very big plug made of wasteful civil service none-jobs could possibly work. The pain of the 80s was necessary to save our economy. Now the pain is disproportionate. Bailing out their cunning friends at TATA and Mittal will be another example of terrible waste and billions thrown abroad as jobs migrate to Asia. Yet another motor/steel industry betrayal that inevitably will cost more jobs. We have to save SMEs and build from there a new industrial base. Tory policy by the way. As is a SME guarantee scheme likely to be peanuts, as the clever Indians walk off laughing, with billions.
The world is awash with cars no one wants. UK so called Government answer? More and more. Give the public discounts on their mortgages and a new car for £500.00. Beats the squandered billions going everywhere else.
Bank interventions failing, VAT cut a joke, interest rates not being matched by lenders. Wonderful stuff from fantasy land. Unless they make bank notes out of rice paper and coins of chocolate, YOU CANNOT eat them. This disaster is colossal and no one seems to understand! At least our guys are trying to be sensible against a tide of ignorance from the MSM and the ridiculous BBC-Pravda.
Stop helping the morons slavishly following the Moron over the cliff.

[The Bishop Swine]

To put some perspective on this, Brown in the UK and Bush in the US have succeeded only in stopping a total collapse of the western economic system. There is every possibility that the recession we are now beginning to enter will be very deep indeed.
It’s amazing that at this very moment Labours poll figures suggest that the public have also been fooled by Brown’s world saving rhetoric. However realities will all to soon reverse this simple-minded view of “business as usual”, and by March at the latest, I suspect the Tory party to be again basking in at least a double digit lead.
The TUC have realized that our benefit rates for those seeking work have been kept artificially low by this government. So those poor souls who have paid a lot of money in NI contributions will no doubt be extremely angry when they discover that rather than Welfare being a gravy train, their JSA will only provide the basics of life. This discontent is something that GO & DC must encourage whilst of course pointing to the empty cupboard and the villain of the piece. This very same Gordon Brown who have stolen our pensions, and who has encouraged co-dependency, has done nothing to help those who fall foul of the economic mess that he is responsible for. The more people who loose their jobs the more bitter those unemployed will become. Whilst it is true that this economic disaster started in the US it is now exposing just how poor we have become as a nation. This poverty is going to suck Millions more in, before we start to see a recovery.
Lets be certain to place the blame for our low benefit rates with the person responsible.

[David Cooper]

And just in time to pour oil on the troubled waters, the EU votes today to end our opt out from the maximum 48 hour week. Never mind, of course, the fact that an employee can already insist on the opt out either by declining to contract out of the Working Time Regulations or by ending an existing agreement to opt out. Just watch as the representatives of a despised institution bang another nail into the coffin of freedom of contract, oblivious to the symbolic poor timing of their wielding of this particular hammer.

[GB£.com]

m dowding,
George Osborne proposed the expensive and ineffective recap plan, and Cameron does not propose to cut public sector spending, so your criticism equally applies to the Tory Party.

[Omar Kader]

This is why Scotland needs independence now, we need to cut ourselves away from this disgusting bankrupt union.

If the conservatives have all the answers then when are they not polling well ahead of Labour ? David Cameron sounds good but lacks any substance, in fact the whole conservative movement is shallow and lack any credibility. You a mess.

[Omar Kader]

Why have the conservatives put William Hague as a stand in for David Cameron ? my understanding is that he is not deputy leader ?

[Mark Fulford]

This disaster is colossal and no one seems to understand!

M Dowding, you share a survivalist streak with Christina. The two of you should go off and create yourself a fortified enclave somewhere. The country has gone so to pot that you shouldn’t have any difficulty arming yourselves to the teeth.

[Hawkeye]

Omar Kader said: "This is why Scotland needs independence now, we need to cut ourselves away from this disgusting bankrupt union."

You want independence for Scotland? OK then - off you go. Be independent, but remember to take your share of the UK's debt with you and remember to compensate UK Plc for our share of all the infrastructure stuff - roads, rail, power grids, etc.

You can go off if you want to, but not before you pay your share. There's no "get out of jail free" in real life.

[Hawkeye]

Mark Fulford said: "The country has gone so to pot..."

Yes - and who put it there? Was it the tories? No! Was it the Lib Dems? No! Was it Labour? Err....

Which one has been in power for 12 years? Which one inherited an economy so strong it has taken 12 years of reckless abandon to destroy it? Which party is in charge with unemployment heading for the stratosphere?

Why should the tories present policies? So Gordon & Co. can steal the bits they like? No way. The tories job is to point out the failings of government and make sure the electorate is well aware of who got us in to than d*mn mess, who created it and who is mismanaging it.

[Omar Kader]

Hawkeye

Yes and don't forget the £200 billion Scotland has subsidised England with, its Scots old money that pays for your tube, roads and Schools.

Scotland has 9% of the UK population then we will take 9% of the debt thanks.

[Raj]

Pour money down the drain and hope that it chokes and stops the loss of all the money, with a conviction that there is no limit to the borrowing that can be made.

Rather than imply that money can only be wasted or not spent at all, surely it is possible to spend money wisely, yes?

[GB£.com]

All that Hawkeye and more from this shambles of a Government, and yet the British people still trust Labour *more* on the economy than the Tories.

So, objectively, it looks like the British people are more interested in who they believe will get the *out* of the mess, rather than blame the party who got them into it, and the Tories are trailing here.

In that context, your approach would mean certain defeat for the Tories.

Don't blame the British people. They are not stupid, they just don't believe the Tories will be better.

So the challenge is to change that perception pronto, but measly slight reductions in spending won't achieve the necessary traction.

[David_at_Home]

I had a Scottish father and an English mother. I am proud to be British/English/Scottish and I regard the SNP and their camp followers as equally obnoxious as the BNP.

Unfortunately, the economy north of the Tweed is equally a basket case, maybe more so more so, as that to the South. The problems of an over large state sector and “spend now pay later” are common throughout this island and will just have to be addressed.

[Hawkeye]

Omar Kader said: "Yes and don't forget the £200 billion Scotland has subsidised England with, its Scots old money that pays for your tube, roads and Schools."

What are you on? £200bn is peanuts - it is barely more than 10% of one years GDP and Scotland has been more than fairly subsidised over the years thanks to the Barnett formula. Since you're quick enough to take 25% extra in funding you can darn well 25% more debt to go with it so that is 11.25% not 9%. No cheques please and none of those funny scottish notes either.

Which bank will be issuing the dosh? I ask on that basis that the London Govt owns RBS and LLoyds owns BOS....

[Fernando]

If financial services are unlikely to provide the tax revenues and employment they have in the past, where is the new growth to come from. It will not be agriculture or tourism. It has to be manufacturing. If we want to rebalance the economy, quickly, we need something which kicks in immediately and also provides an incentive going forward. Why not cancel business rates for industrial premises or better still make all manufacturing an enterprise zone. The VAT cut will benefit manufacturers in China. Why not use the money to help rebuild our own manufacturing industry?

[Hawkeye]

Omar Kader said: "Yes and don't forget the £200 billion Scotland has subsidised England with, its Scots old money that pays for your tube, roads and Schools."

What are you on? £200bn is peanuts - it is barely more than 10% of one years GDP and Scotland has been more than fairly subsidised over the years thanks to the Barnett formula. Since you're quick enough to take 25% extra in funding you can darn well 25% more debt to go with it so that is 11.25% not 9%. No cheques please and none of those funny scottish notes either.

Which bank will be issuing the dosh? I ask on that basis that the London Govt owns RBS and LLoyds owns BOS....

[Fernando]

If financial services are unlikely to provide the tax revenues and employment they have in the past, where is the new growth to come from. It will not be agriculture or tourism. It has to be manufacturing. If we want to rebalance the economy, quickly, we need something which kicks in immediately and also provides an incentive going forward. Why not cancel business rates for industrial premises or better still make all manufacturing an enterprise zone. The VAT cut will benefit manufacturers in China. Why not use the money to help rebuild our own manufacturing industry?

[Hawkeye]

David_at_home said "I had a Scottish father and an English mother. I am proud to be British/English/Scottish and I regard the SNP and their camp followers as equally obnoxious as the BNP."

I agree, but the only way to deal with their like is to take them head on. I hope the Scots have enough sense to see through the spurious arguments and realise that we are all stronger together than apart.

[Hawkeye]

GB£.com said: "Don't blame the British people. They are not stupid, they just don't believe the Tories will be better."

I'm sorry, but how could the tories be any worse? How bad does it have to get before people realise that even doing absolutely nothing would be a better option than running round sticking half-baked "solutions" into the wheels of the economy?

[Omar Kader]

Hawkeye

The North Sea has almost as much oil left as has already been extracted, a BBC Scotland investigation confirms.

Experts believe between 25 and 30 billion barrels could still be recovered over the next 40 years.

The revelations come in a landmark BBC Scotland film which shows how the modern history of Scotland is intrinsically linked to the 'black gold' being pumped out of the North Sea.

Drawing on the personal testimony of the key players in the story of North Sea Oil in the last four decades, the film celebrates some of Scotland's great unsung achievements surrounding oil and examine some of the mistakes that have been made along the way.

Speaking ahead of the transmission tonight of 'Truth, Lies, Scotland and Oil', SNP MSP Alex Neil called on the UK government to ensure revenues from North Sea oil are invested for Scotland’s future.

Mr Neil warned that lessons must be learned from the 1970s, when the Treasury hid the true worth of the North Sea reserves to halt the progress of the SNP.

"Only if we learn those lessons can we secure the benefits of oil revenues for future generations," he said.

“The UK government clearly think Scotland can be fooled again. There is a real sense of déjà vu. Listening to the UK government’s response to high oil prices anyone would think the oil was running out next week. However, the evidence clearly shows that North Sea Oil will last for another 40 years.

“Scotland’s oil industry is going from strength to strength with new fields opening, an estimated 30 billion barrels of oil still to be extracted, new technology developing and a central role in the global oil industry.

“There is as much oil left in the North Sea as has been taken out of it – and much more than half of the revenues. Scotland’s oil industry has a positive future. With the UK making £250 billion of revenue from North Sea oil over the last 30 years in real terms, it is now time to ensure that future revenues are invested properly for Scotland’s future.

“While Alasdair Darling tries to deny the £4-5 billion tax windfall the Treasury is making from current high prices consumers, everyone knows that this multi-billion windfall has been flooding into the Treasury every day since the Budget.

“The lessons of 30 years ago must be learnt – and applied. Scotland’s First Minister has asked Westminster for Scotland’s share of the current oil windfall to form the beginnings of a fund for future generations.

“In the 1970’s requests for an oil fund were turned down – a repetition of this failure by Labour in the 21st century would be unforgivable.

“The UK Government must see the error of its ways and enable Scotland to invest our own oil revenues for our future.

“Oil has become the new taboo for Scottish Labour. It must not be another missed opportunity for Scotland.”

Scotland is the only country in the world to have discovered oil and not benefited from it directly.

The Norwegians prudently ploughed oil revenues into an oil fund which became part of a sovereign wealth fund now worth £186bn.

The US state of Alaska also has an oil fund so does the province of Alberta in Canada. The Alaskan fund is worth £19 billion and the Alberta fund £8.8 billion

[Omar Kader]

Some how i fail to see little old England is subsidising Scotland, with the case of the banks, most of RBS and BOS customers are English, if the banks went under then England would have lost far more than Scotland, plus over 120,000 English would have lost jobs compared to 20,000 in Scotland. tick tock.

[m dowding]

M Dowding, you share a survivalist streak with Christina. The two of you should go off and create yourself a fortified enclave somewhere. The country has gone so to pot that you shouldn’t have any difficulty arming yourselves to the teeth.

Posted by: Mark Fulford | December 17, 2008 at 12:05

Well, I'm not sure the fair Christina would agree. An appealing idea from my point of view but that would leave me with a harem of two lovely ladies! As for being armed to the teeth, our possesive Dobermann, hormonal bitch, (not Harriet Harman), has very large teeth!

[GB£.com]

"How bad does it have to get before people realise that even doing absolutely nothing would be a better option than running round sticking half-baked "solutions" into the wheels of the economy?"

Perhaps the British people see half-baked solutions better than quarter-baked Osborne alternatives?

Or maybe it is about consistency, as the Tories have changed their tune perhaps too many times since the crisis emerged.

Either way, that Cameron reshuffle could be his last chance to convince the British people that there is a better alternative.

[christina Speight]

Cuts or no cuts in expenditure is not a choice. We shall have them anyway . We'll either be forced into them with massively increased unemployment or we can take the initiative and cut NOW when we can still choose where to do it. Otherwise the whole economy will collapse.

[RichardJ]

"And just in time to pour oil on the troubled waters, the EU votes today to end our opt out from the maximum 48 hour week."

What will happen to City lawyers and bankers who have to work long hours?

This is a ridiculous idea.

[Hawkeye]

Omar - you tell me that we have only extracted 50% of the oil in the North Sea and then you quote an SNP chappie saying (in effect) it's all Scotland's oil - none for the English. It is known that the SNP's uncosted plans are dependent on making the scots believe that there is loads of oil in the North Sea, so no conflict of interest there then. What a pity most petroleum companies do not seem to buy that line.

Next you tell me that England is not subsidising Scotland because the majority of the formerly Scottish banks' customers are English so that the cashflow from England to Scotland is meaningless is it? Funny how you get upset when it goes the other way - then it is a big issue.

I notice you steered well clear of mentioning the Barnett formula and the overfunding it throws North. It's OK for you to receive 25% more than than me is it? That is fairness?

[Hawkeye]

GB£.com said "Perhaps the British people see half-baked solutions better than quarter-baked Osborne alternatives?"

Well then, vote Labour.

"Or maybe it is about consistency, as the Tories have changed their tune perhaps too many times since the crisis emerged."

I know - it is so unfair. Labour gets to perform massive U-turns like taxing the poor, privatising the mail, reneging on its referendum without anyone passing a comment, but when the tories ditch a policy no longer fit for use IT'S A U-TURN!!! TORY U-TURN!!!

Get a grip. If parties never changed policy we would still be colonising Africa, women would not get a vote, slavery would be legal and hanging would be the penalty for nicking a bread roll.

Times change - policies change. It is the way it is.

"Either way, that Cameron reshuffle could be his last chance to convince the British people that there is a better alternative."

Make your mind up - you criticise Cameron for changing policies and then you criticise him for not changing his cabinet.

[john broughton]

Given that the BBC is reporting a 5th jan Woolies closure - the moment is nigh.

[Angelo Basu]

"So Gordon & Co. can steal the bits they like? No way."

Let him. I want the country to be put on the right track as soon as possible. Ideally by Brown being booted out of office asap but if he's going to hang on I don't want him making any more crap decisions which will prolong and deepen the pain. If that means letting him take our good ideas and maybe even crookedly managing to win another election I'll live with it as long as he does the right things using better policies than the ones he can come up with himself.

[GB£.com]

Hawkeye,

In October John Redwood, amongst others said the recap plan would not work. Good judgement.

Cameron and Osborne were publicly stating that it was the right policy to get credit flowing again, making their judgement as bad as Labour.

The best people to run the country are clearly within the Tory Party, just not within its Front Bench team.

At conference Cameron made a huge point of saying that the key is judgement not experience. Osborne has shown that he has neither and this is reflected in a series of polls giving Labour a lead on the economy over the Tories.

So, as someone who wants the Tories to win, it hardly seems unreasonable to fight for change in the make-up of the shadow cabinet.

[Dan Hassett]

Omar - The amount of oil in the ground is pretty irrelevant - it's the amount that you can economically extract that matters. Even the currently available technology which can increase extraction rates to 55% costs around $80/barrel to produce from deep water wells, so getting 100% of the oil out of the North Sea would be astronomically expensive. Yes, more than half the revenues may be still available, but the costs are even higher! The kinds of prices required to make production of all that oil economic are so high that there will be a natural switch to alternate fuels instead.

You say that Scotland is the only country not to have benefitted from the discovery of oil. I'm intrigued as to the great benefits experienced in Somalia? How about DR Congo? Angola? The list of poverty-stricken countries with oil and gas goes on and on, but Scotland doesn't come close!

[Hawkeye]

GB£.com said "The best people to run the country are clearly within the Tory Party, just not within its Front Bench team."

Look, the job of the shadow cabinet is to get elected. I would expect the reshuffle after the election. That is when the people who will run the country will step up to the plate. However having said that I would prefer to see Pickles as Chairman as I think he would coordinate the election process better than Spelman. My worry about Spelman is that the report's timing will be coordinated to damage her if an early election is called. I think she should admit that and stand aside so that a publicly damaging "reshuffle" can be avoided.

Angelo said " If that means letting him take our good ideas "

I know what you mean, but Gordon seems to have a talent for screwing up any policy given to him or implementing it in the barmiest way possible.

[GB£.com]

"Look, the job of the shadow cabinet is to get elected."

Indeed. Which is why you need to respond to the public who are telling you they don't want to vote for what is currently being offered!

I don't know if it passed you by, but the ConHome poll of polls doesn't show a Tory election win.

[Hawkeye]

GB£.com said "I don't know if it passed you by, but the ConHome poll of polls doesn't show a Tory election win."

It may be worse than that. The ConHome "Poll of Polls" may be drastically overstating things as it may contain high poll ratings from several weeks ago which are no longer valid. It is a well known statistical effect and I hope they have accounted for it because the effect of "statistical drag" on a descending data set is to raise the overall average.

In any case you approaching this all wrong. Look at it from Brown's point of view. The polls are not showing a tory win, but they are not showing a labour win either. He would be going from a certain 60+ majority to a very small majority and if the tories and lib dems joined forces with Cameron as Prime Minister and big jobs for Cable and Clegg then it is all over for Labour.

Historically, in any country, minority governments are short lived - often for only a few months, perhaps a year.

If you where Brown sitting on 60+ majority would you throw it away on a chance of being a minority leader and having to face another election in 6 months with even worse economic conditions?

[The Bishop Swine]

GB£.com said "The best people to run the country are clearly within the Tory Party, just not within its Front Bench team."

I predict that Mark Harper will be a future superstar of the party. Mark has a background that makes him extremely credible with that all important group "the people".
This is nothing vaguely Eton about this guy, having being educated in Swindon initially before gaining entrance to Oxford. Currently Mark is tabling a large number of official questions ensuring that he will have all the figures firmly grasped. He is yet to appear regularly on the BBC but it can only be a matter of time before the charismatic Mr Harper is noticed.

[The Bishop Swine's spot the change game.]

I predict that Mark Harper will be a future superstar of the party. Mark has a background that makes him extremely credible with that all important group "the people".
There is nothing vaguely Eton about this guy, having being educated in Swindon initially before gaining entrance to Oxford. Currently Mark is tabling a large number of official questions ensuring that he will have all the figures firmly grasped. He is yet to appear regularly on the BBC but it can only be a matter of time before the charismatic Mr Harper is noticed

[Mark Fulford]

If you where Brown sitting on 60+ majority would you throw it away on a chance of being a minority leader and having to face another election in 6 months with even worse economic conditions?

With today's announcement to bring our troops out of Iraq, I'd say a snap election early next year is very likely.

[The Bishop Swine]

"Cameron and Osborne were publicly stating that it was the right policy to get credit flowing again, making their judgement as bad as Labour."

The fact is for a moment the world was on the very brink of a sustained and unstoppable economic disaster. A run on the banks was a real possibility as was the imminent collapse of a sizable chunk of the banking sector. Into the moment comes Brown with an answer, and what is more an answer backed by the Americans. Dave would have been utterly wrong to have rocked the boat. In retrospect other things might have been done, but the truth is something had to done and then. So lets stop whining about David’s seeming weakness. There are times when the National interest dictates action. Brown made the moves and all of the running because that was his job. So if anyone is to be blamed then it is Brown not Dave and not George.

[Hawkeye]

Mark Fulford said "With today's announcement to bring our troops out of Iraq, I'd say a snap election early next year is very likely."

Why?

How does announcing that stop Brown going from leader with a workable majority to very vulnerable leader of a minority government?

The answer is that it does not, therefore it is meaningless and has no bearing on an election. Until Labour has a sustained opinion poll lead an election would only put Brown in a worse position than he is in now.

[David Sergeant]

" So if anyone is to be blamed then it is Brown not Dave and not George."

Posted by: The Bishop Swine | December 17, 2008 at 19:19

One of the wonders of these sort of conversations is that it is OK for the government to not know what happens next or to do U turns and the same for every government or finance expert. But Cameron should know what happens next and not change policy with circumstances.

[Mark Fulford]

Why?

Momentum and new-found confidence. Simple.

[GB£.com]

"One of the wonders of these sort of conversations is that it is OK for the government.."

Um, no David. This government is crap. Period. They are a disaster. Nothing is OK with them.

So what many of us are looking for is not just an equally bad replacement but a better one as Britain needs more that a "slightly less worse manager" to get it out of the mess it is in. The task is huge. The task is way beyond tinkering.

Cameron scores for me as a better replacement PM, but Osborne fails dismally as a replacement Chancellor, and my view seems to reflect the view that the public is giving.

My fear is that the longer Cameron digs in his heels and keeps Osborne in place, it will stop being a question of Osborne's flaky judgement and become one of his own.

I can see and understand why Cameron would want to keep Osborne in place, but Cameron needs to ask himself if he is prepared to lose with his preferred team over winning with a troublesome but winnable one.

[John (Northumberland)]

Let's keep the key issue in focus - the unprecedented damage this Government has done to our economy and indeed our nation as a whole.
So let's save our bile for Brown, Darling, Balls, Harperson, Mandelson et al.

On the question of leadership, Cameron is a big asset. He is more visually appealling and comes across far better than Brown. No wonder Brown bottled it back in '07. The challenge is that he doesn't get much coverage on the TV/Radio (the New Labour machine dominates the news aided by their media wing the BBC). But when he does? His ratings soar.

As for Osborne? Well, I fear he lacks gravitas - crucial at this time; and as for his lack of judgement in getting snared by Mandelson on that yacht? Next...!

[Andrew S]

Mark Fulford - "Chris Grayling's comments are thoroughly unconvincing.

Although we disagree with what the government has done, we can hardly call the bank interventions and VAT and interest rate cuts “nothing”.

He is talking about unemployment...

[Andrew S]

As others have been saying above, I too think bringing troops home at the end of July could suggest he is planning an election in 2009, possibly in July.

But what do any of us know? We shall have to wait and see. If it is next year, bring it on! Lots of Labour losses even if we lose!

[rugfish]

DC should propose a cross party crisis meeting to look at stemming unemployment and he should make a challenge to the government to debate this seriously worsening situation before ordinary decent hardworking families lose their jobs and homes.

What is the government doing this Christmas when people are being thrown out of work ?

Will it be a do nothing right party of Scrooges or can it be a do something right by the people party like us ?