Conservative Home's debate blogs

Advertising

  • DVD rental
  • Conservative Books
My Photo

Conservative blogs

Blog powered by Typepad

  • Tracker 2
  • Extreme Tracker

« Sky TV Debate | Main | Davis and Cameron promise to be friends of Israel »

Comments

John Coulson

Malcolm - please don't patronise me. It seems that only a few members of this blog can see beyond the end of their own noses. Cameron is not a Conservative. He is a manager, a talker but not a political leader. He was motivated to come into politics because he felt that he should be Prime Minister. This is different from others who came into politics because they wanted to change the country for the better.

Peter

I must be in dream world to hear someone like Mark saying that David Davis fails on policy. Where is the beef from Cameron on this subject or again do people feel that giving the rich a tax cut and allowing people lesser sentences on taking e's is going to allow us a wider audience than the one know?

Mark Fulford

Peter - where do you get the bits about singling out the rich for a tax cuts? And lesser sentences on taking e's? What sentence do people currently get and how is Cameron suggesting that be reduced?

Examples of Davis's failure on policy are that he shows no interest in the environment or working mums. His rhetoric is still too bound up in law and order. How is he going to pay for abolishing top up fees, etc?

John Coulson

Mark - DC's campaign manager is a well known advocate of a flat tax. He is also Shadow Chancellor! The flat tax does lower the tax burden for the rich and lower income families. However, if it is revenue neutral the cost of these tax cuts at each end of the spectrum fall to the middle income individuals. A perfect way to cut the riches tax and lose elections at the same time! Who do the Conservatives need to attract next time? Middle income swing voters. Who will pay for this tax change? Middle income swing voters!

Jack Stone

I suspect that Mr Coulson woulndn`t know what a Conservative was if it came along and hit him flat in the face.
We do not all have to be right-wing nutters to count ourselves Conservative.
Its this sort of self-hatred that as made this party look unelectable

Umpire

I've been enjoying this tremendously. All completely irrelevant but good knockabout stuff.

It's really very simple. DD got in first with an anti-binge drinking comment (presumably trying to cash in on a widespread fear among Tory members). Having missed that boat, DC retaliates by misprepresenting DD's position (presumably trying to cash in on his own image as the cool dude accusing DD of being out of touch with the hip trendy bright young things). Hardly principled opposition, but when were election candidates ever on oath at a hustings?

Barbara Villiers

I think your attacks on John Coulson are reprehensible. While I could never vote Lib Dem (selling my first born would be easier-something that often tempted me in his early teenage years!)I can understand and totally agree with his feelings about a Cameron led Party.

And to whoever it was who posted about the environment - David Davis has spoken about it. What did Cameron say about working mums - just that we need to help them - well duh! Did he say what we needed to do?

One little nasty trick that the Party played during the Election (and I believe it was one David Cameron who was the policy co-ordinator)where it said a Conservative Government would pay grandparents to look after their grandchildren. So far so good. However when you read the small print it said that the grandparents would have to train as childminders AND take on other children like childminders. How I hated having to promote this disraceful policy to desperate working mothers during the Election. Having been a working mother myself I identified with their dilemmas. In the first part of my children's lives I had a business I could run from home so it wasn't too bad. However, later, as I went outside the home to work (because we could not surivive without two incomes)my children both effectively became latchkey kids and both admitted to me later how they missed me being there. So, if anyone knows about it, it's me. However our Party's last little gift was shameful and no doubt with Cameron it would be more of the same.

What I would have liked was a tax break on a nanny or childminder or proper after school clubs that you don't have to pay for. We instead offered working mothers a placebo. The point of this story? That if Cameron at the time was so concerned about the policy he would have protested vehemently - well he didn't (and I know he didn't) and I fear his policies for working mothers would be more of the same.

Rick

How is he going to pay for abolishing top up fees, etc?

I see from today's newspapers that the Student Loan Company already has a loan book of £16.000.000.000 even before top-up fees arrive, and 59.000 in arrears. Now if lending money to 300.000 students bloats this loan book out to say £30bn that is up-front financing from the taxpayer - so in fact public spending is increasing to forward finance comprehensive universities.

The obvious thing is to restrict University entry to say 20% each cohort and reinstitute SandwicH courses, Block Release, Day Release and proper On The Job Training - there is no need for Accountants or Solicitors to attend University, nor Nurses, nor Physios - and certainly not to pile them up with £20-60k of debt.

Rick

I suspect that Mr Coulson woulndn`t know what a Conservative was if it came along and hit him flat in the face.
We do not all have to be right-wing nutters to count ourselves Conservative.
Its this sort of self-hatred that as made this party look unelectable

Posted by: Jack Stone | 26 November 2005 at 11:57

Your line in ad hominem remarks is what makes your political stance so disgusting Jack Stone. The Conservative Party is unelectable because of people like you who smear those you disagree with. We got tired of Tony Marlow, David Evans, Bill Cash, Teresa Gorman, Edwina Currie, Keith Best, Theresa May, Neil Hamilton, and now you start on the same lines attacking John Coulson.

You come over as a cheerleader groupie and clearly despite your coming along and hitting John Coulson in the face, he does not recognise you as a Conservative - I doubt anyone does. You lack credibility Jack Stone, your support undermines Cameron's attempt to find some.

Rick

However when you read the small print it said that the grandparents would have to train as childminders AND take on other children like childminders.

and childminders are subject to (and must pay for) OFSTED inspection

Rick

Just to add detail to the Student Loan fiasco

More than 59,000 students are understood to be in arrears, with bad debts standing at £162.5 million.

Another 58,000 are in danger of being considered a credit risk if they fall further behind with their repayments.

Last year the SLC lent £2.78 billion to students in higher education.

Chris Palmer

Interesting John Coulson. You say that the Liberal Democrats uphold moral values and the Conservatives of today including David Cameron do not? Do you really believe that the Liberal Democrats uphold values of any sort? One or two of the older "Liberals" within the party may, but the newer young generation certainly do not. The Liberal Democrat party stands for absolutely nothing in terms of policy.

They claim to be a fair tax party since they wish to have the top income earners pay higher tax, and yet as their manifesto clearly stated - they have no ambition to lower taxes for the lower income earners since they would stick to the Labour tax system. Labour are a high (and unfair tax party) and therefore it stands to reason that so would the Liberal Democrats.

The Liberal Democrats claim to be honest and fair, yet really they're not. In my constituency they claimed "don't vote Labour, they can't win. Vote Lib Dem to keep the Tories out." They merely work on prejudices just as all political parties do. They are not exempt from this - though they have obviously managed to brainwash some people into thinking they are. Many people of my age and slightly older (I'm 19 by the way,) vote for the Liberal Democrats not because of their policies but because they're not Labour or Conservative. That is incredibly dangerous - voting for something you don't believe in.

How can the Liberal Democrats be perceived to be fair? Someone pointed out above the Tony Blair and the Conservatives are dropping policies because they're unpopular. Again the Liberal Democrats are not exempt from this as some of you seem to obviously think. At the moment they are looking at dropping their high tax on high incomes... because it's unpopular. Funny that.

I read something in the Telegraph opinions section yesterday saying that the Lib Dems and Conservatives were natural allies - and the evidence given was that they had both voted against the terror bill amongst other things. This is completely wrong. The two parties are highly different. The Conservatives in a normal situation would have been for the terror bill (despite what they may say in public now.) The reason they voted against it was because they saw an easy way to give Tony Blair his first commons victory - not because they sided with the Liberal Democrat viewpoint.

Conservatives generally believe in less European integration (unless economic) while Lib Dems believe in increased Economic integration. A huge difference of opinion. How can you make a switch from a party that believe in one, too the other?

The Conservatives continue to believe in the First Past The Post election system while the Lib Dems want Proportional Representation. The Lib Dems want PR - not because they really believe in it, but really because they know they'd gain seats in Parliament. FPTP creates strong Governments to create real changes. One side is happy while others are not - but at least things are done. PR on the other hand creates coalitions and all that comes out of those is compromise and no true policies. Look at the problems Germany is facing now. Unworkable.

Many people seem to not vote for the Conservatives because of past performances and the media often claim that the Conservatives are always looking to the past. Maybe sometimes the Conservatives do so, but far less these days than the media and voters obviously. The Conservative party has actually changed since 1990 and there are different MPs within its fold, yet voters I think are the ones who look back to far to the supposed mess Thatcher made of the economy. Yet they can’t seem to remember quite far enough back to the Winter of Discontent and the complete fuck up the Labour Government of that period made, yet voted for a “New” Labour Government in 1997 (which claimed it would carry on Tory economic polices so as to not scare off potential voters!)

I find it incredibly strange that voters think that a Labour Government could run the economy better than a Conservative economy. Gordon Brown has as done a few good things – independence of the Bank of England and the MPC for example. However, the economy Labour and he have created is wholly artificial. Unemployment is only low because Gordon employs over 5 million people in State run services. 5 million is a huge amount especially when you regard that many people in the NHS are not actually doctors or nurses but pure bureaucracy – receptionists and managers who manage more managers. Unemployment is artificially low and that is why Government spending is so high – to keep so many worthless people in jobs that aren’t needed. Further, the Government employs thousands of temporary staff from agencies. These staff don’t come up on the Government books, but make it seem as though they are employed elsewhere… a complete façade that is becoming to come crashing down around Gordon Brown, which is probably why he’s desperate to get into No 10.

Lib Dems represent completely different ideas to the Conservatives in many ways and it amazes me and saddens me that some people could even consider defecting. If you think the Labour party are appalling over political correctness, then what will the Lib Dems be like?!! The Liberal Democrats are in many ways socialists. They seem to wrongly believe that everyone is equal whereas it is highly obvious that they’re not. The Lib Dems pander to the minorities and not the majorities within our society, whereas the Conservatives represent the individual and the majority. The problem with society today is “communities.” There is the Asian community in Bradford, the Black Community in St Pauls Bristol, and the Bangladesh community in London. This is madness. These people like to keep their cultural identity when they arrive in this country and seem to be proud of it, and make a big thing of it (this is an example) when Bengal FC get into the FA cup (on the news awhile back.) However, when someone points out they’re different then they claim racism or discrimination. People like this need to be integrated into our society and not stay within “communities” of their own. The Lib Dems seem to want to keep these communities and give them increasing rights – further aggravating the problem. It is amazing to think that there are 3rd generation Indian immigrants in this country who still cannot speak English. This is not the way to go. Some people have argued that this country has always had immigration, and that is true, it has. But in the past those immigrants have (while adding to our own culture) integrated themselves. The immigrants of today that cause the problems need to be encouraged (if not forced) to integrate rather than be encouraged (as Lib Dems would) to remain secular and be given extra rights in the process.

Ok, that was quite long. A bit of rant, but take heed. The Liberal Democrats are not like the old Liberals. They are the new socialists. They are nothing like the Conservative party and are believe nothing in conservatism, since they wish to abolish many institutions of the past, wiping away our identity. Think long and hard over what you might be voting for if you vote Liberal Democrat, because even if you believe in their policies, you will be voting along side a whole load of young people who know nothing about politics and have no idea what the Lib Dems really stand for. Dangerous.

Bruce

David Cameron's great-grandfather and gr-great-grandfather were Tory MPs. His cousin is Ferdy Mount, Thatcher's policy advisor. There hasn't been a Tory leader with a more Tory heritage and background since Arthur Balfour. Whatever one thinks about his policies (and I have some reservations about them), he bleeds Tory blue and from an early age has labored in the Conservative Party vineyards. He also has the support of the majority of Conservative MPs and (if one believes the polls) rank-and-file Conservative voters. In sum, he has as much or more claim to be a representative of the Conservative Party as Winston Churchill (the ex-Liberal, also thought at the time to be too ambitious and out for himself), Harold MacMillan or any other leader one can name.

Rick

Yet they can’t seem to remember quite far enough back to the Winter of Discontent and the complete fuck up the Labour Government of that period made,

Some of us recall the disaster Edward Heath left in 1974 with a 3-day week and a State of Emergency for an incoming Labour Government. If we want to get really accurate we can discuss the mess Selwyn Lloyd left in 1964 and the devaluation that should have taken place under Macmillan but was delayed until 1967.

The Conservatives do not have an unalloyed economic record as Winston Churchill's disastrous policies 1925-29 made clear, and which Neville Chamberlain had to clean up 1931-37.

Basically, people are just grateful Labour has not completely botched it, but none of the parties know much about Economics and are bunglers all. It is just nice when the economy survives in spite of children meddling.

BTW Chris what are these "asians" in Bradford ? I know there are a lot of Kashmiris from Mirpur and a lot of Bangladeshis, and they hate each other's guts. I don't think there are a lot of Chinese or Vietnamese, but quite an influx from Congo and Iraq............not sure about "Asians" though, don't actually know what they are, and nor do most Kashmiris.

Rick

The immigrants of today that cause the problems need to be encouraged (if not forced) to integrate rather than be encouraged (as Lib Dems would) to remain secular...........


Do you know what "secular" means ? It is the very reason that Islam in Western Europe is becoming increasing fundamentalist, because they don't want Islam rubbished as Christianity is denigrated in the "secular" society that Muslims see as "godless"

Chris Palmer

Asians is a general label I use and seemingly many others use for those originating from the area around the Indian subcontinent - ie. not Chinese or Russian for example. If you want to get into infinite detail then we can but I had already written a substantial ammount at that point.

If they "hate each others guts" as you say, then it just goes to prove that they have not integrated as otherwise they would consider themselves British. Not British Muslims or British Asians or something like that (which again just proves. Just British.

Yes I do know what secular is thank you. However I was typing quickly and I wrote a lot so obviously missed that mistake. What I meant was "separate".

Rick

Gordon employs over 5 million people in State run services. 5 million is a huge amount especially when you regard that many people in the NHS are not actually doctors or nurses but pure bureaucracy – receptionists and managers who manage more managers. Unemployment is artificially low and that is why Government spending is so high – to keep so many worthless people in jobs that aren’t needed

Well Chris I suggest you do some research:
http://www.tuc.org.uk/publicsector/tuc-9650-f0.cfm

You consider public sector employees "worthless" and their jobs aren't needed. Fascinating that you are so ignorant. There are close to 300.000 "worthless" people in Britain's Armed Forces.

There are 1,3 million "worthless" people employed in the NHS of whom 390.000 are Nurses whom you regard as "worthless"; and 109.000 doctors whom you regard as "worthless", plus 122.000 scientific lab staff plus therapists - again "worthless" according to Chris.

Then we have to think of NHS Logistics delivering supplies, janitorial services, hospital porters, mortuary staff, cooks, cleaners, typists, receptionists - noted for their completely worthless status by Chris.

We are forgetting Police and Fire Service, Courts, 450.000 teachers plus 227.000 support staff.

Some 60% Public Sector Employment is in Health and Education - two areas the Conservatives pledged in May 2005 to fund - yet according to Chris these are "worthless people"

So these 6 million "worthless people" should perhaps not vote Conservative, clearly people like Chris think they should all be redundant. He will no doubt welcome the idea of 250.000 Community Nurses being pushed into the private sector and applaud the privatisation of Dentistry.

It is good to know that Chris considers all these people "worthless".

John Coulson

Quite frankly Chris Palmer, with the verging on rascist comments you just made I am certain that you are not a Conservative. I would never, never make such accusations that you just did. I hope that the Conservative party can show maturity. David Cameron is not a Conservative, just becuase he has a Tory heritage means nothing. In fact it rather repels me to assume that because his ancestors were Tories he is a Tory by association. We need to grow up. Is Tony Benn a Tory because his ancestors were of high breeding?

Cameron has said he believes in a low tax economy. Yet he will not actually reduce taxes. To reduce taxes a leader will have to go back to the 1997 level and then bring down tax. This means reversing the national insurance increase, the tax on pensions, fuel and every other of Browns tax increases. They do not have to reverse them exactly, but reverse them to the equivalent monetary value. A Cameron lead party (it won't be Conservative if he leads it) will actually increase the share of the economy spent by the state. We should be making liberalising, small state noises - not trying to ape Brown. I really do despair.

Midnight Blue

Heh John C!

Couldn't resist replying to you again mon ami!

"(it won't be Conservative if he leads it)"

Now - call me mr silly but I have noticed two things!

1) He hasn't won yet - some of us are overexcited!
and
2) None of us however psychic we may be can predict what the situation with either candidate as leader will be 2-3 years away, you may hate it, but then again you may like it, throwing your toys out of the pram now seems a little premature!

The party is clealy in a hole, and has been rejected 3 times because people do not like us or trust us enough, shouting the same things louder simply won't work!

(Although John and I disagree here, I'd like to point out that he is NOT a right wing nutter as some others seem to have suggested, he's a damn nice person - I'll say it again, personal insults do none of us any favours at all.)

John Coulson

Hey Matt, thanks for the comments. You may wish to tone it down a bit or people will think we are sleeping together!

Midnight Blue

I'll leave that one hanging eh John!.....*ahem*

Rick

If you too continue in that vein you'll even get Peter Tatchell endorsing the Tories

Rick

If you two continue in that vein you'll even get Peter Tatchell endorsing the Tories

Correction

John Coulson

I thought we were an inclusive party. Peter Tatchell would surely be welcomed? The gay vote is not inconsiderable - and we are often very politically aware.

Chris Palmer

Rick, the link you provided is hardly conclusive and highly biased since it is research conducted by a Trade Union - who, strangely, would rather like to present an argument that helped justify the existence of a number of their members.

Further Rick, you seem to be a bit of a fool if you believe that I think all people who work for the state are "worthless." I was in fact referring to the some of the needless management and other "support staff" which plague the state sector. I myself actually work in the state sector and see this for myself. Do you?

Rick, the very vast majority of your comments seem to be highly reactionary in nature. You seem to have no desire to debate, but merely bleat and put other comments down without real justification. Provide an argument with constructive reasoning and then maybe myself and others reading this will take you seriously.

As for you John Coulson, how exactly were my above comments racist? If I had said, oooh, I hate Asians or I hate Black people for example then that could be considered racist. However I did not. I stated that I think that some immigrants who enter this country do not integrate into society (which some don’t) and that those people are in fact the racists themselves by failing to at least try to follow some of our customs, or refer to themselves as British Asian or British Muslims for example. My comments were not racist in any way, and if you thought they were, then you are no better than sections of the media who jump straight to these false conclusions.

Next time, try not to immediately squawk "racist" when confronted by statements that involve integration and culture. I think what you really mean is that I am not a Conservative like you… and as you don’t really seem to be a Conservative anyway – then that says a great deal about you and your comments.

The comments to this entry are closed.

About Conservative Home

Subscribe

  • Conservative Home's
    free eMailing List
    Enter your name and email address below:
    Name:
    Email:
    Subscribe    
    Unsubscribe