How are the Tories doing?

[Perry Vale]

Clever use of semantics by The Cable Guy....

Anyway, apparently we've never had it so good!

[Captain Tancredi]

The trouble is, the Lib Dems' last election campaign wasn't really fought with the idea of them going into coalition with the Tories in mind. They were setting out to try and break the mould of British politics and create a genuine three-party system and probably working in conjunction with Labour if anybody.

[WhiteCrowNZ]

Although I'm usually quite left wing, I do think ending life-term tenancies for council houses is an overall fair idea.

Currently there's huge shortages, which aren't helped if people are allowed them "for life". Where I used to live it was part council and part owned. We used to say that "three is a magic number" as there were a couple of families with 3-4 kids to allow them to qualify for a council house. Fair enough, although surely when those kids fly the coop, it means your house (within a few years) should be made available to another needy family surely?

Anyway alas the Tory measure seems to penalise people currently applying whilst doing nothing to address the long term problem of those already on life-term residencies.

[Captain Tancredi]

I think we need to be clear about what council houses are for. When the big estates were built after both wars, at least part of the idea was to free working class people from cramped and unsanitary living conditions and predatory landlords by providing modern houses at an affordable rent. That side of things seems to have gone by the wayside now and part of the problem is that people towards the bottom of the list have no hope of getting anything because they're difficult to move on once they're in. If somebody further down the list can be moved in for six months and then given notice to move on, then that property is heated and occupied for six months rather than left empty because there's nobody in the right group prepared to move in.

On the subject of people getting council houses once they had three children, I used to know a couple who lived in a two-bedroom council house with two boys and were trying to get a bigger house; if their third child had been a girl rather than a boy they could have gone on the list for a three-bedroom house because three boys could be expected to share a bedroom but two boys and a girl couldn't. The other problem with lifelong tenancies is that at the end of the day you can be left with an elderly couple occupying a two or three-bedroom house they don't need.

[Jon Masters]

Huzzah - the good old fashioned Tories are back !!

David Cameron has called for an "urgent" increase in private investment to improve England's road network.

He said tolls for new roads were one option, alongside attracting more money from pension funds and other investors.

Work was also needed to relieve gridlock by widening "pinch points" and allowing traffic to use motorway hard shoulders, the prime minister said.

But Labour said it would be "wrong" to "load extra costs on ordinary families" to pay for improvements to roads.

In a speech on infrastructure, the prime minister said there was an urgent need to repair its "decades-long degradation" and to "build for the future with as much confidence and ambition as the Victorians once did".

It's like being back in the 80's - Tories selling off national infrastructures to private companies to raise some dosh, and then probably whining about being tied into contracts, and 'best bidders' etc when it all goes tits up.

They seem overly keen to try to compare it to the Water privatisations (hardly a positive model) , whereas surely the obvious comparison should be with the Railways - and look at what a rousing success that was.

How can they think that a scheme of 'public pay road tax - government pay private company - private company employ other companies to repair and maintain roads' be more efficient than just cutting out the middle man.

Or maybe I should buy up a contract for , say, the roundabout between the A27 and A24 near me and charge people a £10 every time they use it ?

[WhiteCrowNZ]

Yes - it's a bizarre model. They'll support this then in one sweep say "there's too much middle management" in another model.

[SiHart]

Sell it off! Sell everything until there's nothing left to sell.

As I've said elsewhere, this government know the price of everything and the value of nothing. And we're probably screwed.

[Anthony Williams]

I get the feeling that this government have done their best to alienate absolutely everyone possible.

Their determination to force through gay marriage will alienate the more traditional Conservative voters, their NHS reforms and privatisation techniques (like this one) will alienate the more liberal and working class voters...

And the Lib Dems have just managed to alienate their core base with just about everyone over the last two years.

Looks like it'll be Ed Moribund, PM in three years. Ugh.

[Si Hunt]

I'd just like to say I think what's come out about the Government's personal links to the Murdoch media empire is shocking and corrupt.

When we were being asked to choose who to vote for to run our country, by rights we should KNOW if the politicians standing were in the pockets of the media giving us their opinion every day via the front pages. Acting like they were moral guardians and giving us their oh so earnest verdicts on the candidates alone was bad enough, now it comes out that David Cameron lives in a cosy little rich man's row with the then-editor of the Sun. And today I read that Tony Blair is Godfather to one of Rupert Murdoch's children!!

I mean, what?! Why weren't we told about the links between the people we were choosing to run our country and the media supposedly telling us who was in the best position to do so?

Si.

[Dino]

I'm pleading the 1990's Gerry Adams defence. I refuse to see them as a legitimate government. NOBODY won the last election but... people seemed to have gone back to sleep over it and let them do what they want. Funny old world!

Looks like it'll be Ed Moribund, PM in three years. Ugh.

Someone else said he is the Iain Duncan-Smith of Labour. I see their point. I can't believe they are so ahead in the polls. Stop the world! I want off!
The final straw for me has been all three parties having a p****** contest as to who can be more brutal to the unemployed, despite the facts showing that there's nowhere near enough jobs to match the "will" of the Coalition.

No wonder my local MP (Angela Eagle, but she's on her own, I'm spoiling my ballot next time) didn't put up any sort of defence or fight for her seat.
The Doctor got it half right, people haven't united together out of fear of the Daleks, they've united behind anyone as long as they aren't the Lib Dems or Tories!

The field is wide open for a fourth party to be swept to power, but sadly, the only ones on the horizon are dodgy racists, friendly on the surface Greenies who would be bringing in eugenics if given a majority ("Well the population is growing too fast! We haven't got the resources!" Right, so you want to kill off more Africans, basically? Gee, thanks...) or incredibly well fed Socialists who claim to know the pain of modern Britain.

But don't get me wrong, this isn't a rant. It's been playing on my mind for a while and yes, I do feel better for writing it. They can only hurt you as long as you give them credibility and your consent. I'll start taking the tablets when people stop taking the tabloids!

[Nyder]

I think this coalition is worse than a Tories-only arrangement. At least we could have held their manifesto to account. But they always make the excuse that coalition = new arrangement, therefore no manifesto, therefore we can do what the **** we want, with Clegg not opposing Tory ideology because he loves his cosy little job too much.

Yep - we're screwed. I see the NHS bill has just passed the Lords.

I think you ought to know I'm feeling very depressed......

[SiHart]

Why is there is no opposition? What are Labour actually doing?

[Richard Brinck-Johnsen]

Is anyone else listening to the Budget at the moment? I'm getting so fed up of George continually referring to things the previous government did and didn't do. Just get on with it and tell us what you're actually doing without all the semantics and waffle man!!

[SiHart]

You can justify anything by blaming the previous people... however they've been in power for getting on for two years now, so they should be taking the blame for things by now!

[Anthony Williams]

You can justify anything by blaming the previous people... however they've been in power for getting on for two years now, so they should be taking the blame for things by now!

It's what Obama's STILL doing, after four years!

[Darren]

Bring back Labour.

[Anthony Williams]

Urgh, no thanks.

I'd rather see a new party rise up and take over at the next election... y'know, one that actually has the best interests of Britain at heart, rather than a desire to be in power without really knowing what to do with it once they've got it (see: all three major parties)

[SiHart]

What we need are some old-skool politicians who are in it because they have a desire to help people, rather than self-serving career politicians who studied politics at univerity and thought it'd be good to get a safe seat and enjoy the spoils. Lets get some principles back, take out the whips and let MPs vote for that they believe in, and more importantly, in case we forget about this... vote on what their constituents believe in.

[Anthony Williams]

What we need are some old-skool politicians who are in it because they have a desire to help people, rather than self-serving career politicians who studied politics at univerity and thought it'd be good to get a safe seat and enjoy the spoils. Lets get some principles back, take out the whips and let MPs vote for that they believe in, and more importantly, in case we forget about this... vote on what their constituents believe in.

I totally agree with that, Si - what both the UK and the US need are some good, old-fashioned conviction politicians - who are more interested in doing what they believe in, rather than focusing on staying in power for as long as possible. Sadly, this is something that both countries are lacking in this day and age.

In the UK, I honestly believe that the rot set in with Tony Blair, who was style-over-substance, more than anything else. It's telling that Cameron models himself on Blair, rather than on older politicians who did what they believed in, regardless of how unpopular it made them - such as Thatcher, Callaghan, Macmillan or even Wilson!

[Dino]

R.I.P. Housing Benefit.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...m-and-dad.html

The radical proposal is being worked on by Downing Street and the Department for Work and Pensions as part of a drive to make sure people are better off working than on benefits.
At the moment, people under the age of 25 can get housing benefit to help pay the rent for bed-sits or rooms in shared accommodation if their wages and savings are below a certain level.
However, they could be forced to live with parents or other relatives, like many other young people in their first jobs.
It comes ahead of a key speech by David Cameron defending his efforts to “get a grip” on Britain’s welfare bill.
The Prime Minister is expected to say he is prepared to “rub people up the wrong way” over his determination to push through radical reforms.

And this isn't necessarily from a established newspaper but...
http://victimsofatoscorruption.wordp...-will-stop-it/

More than a thousand *sickness benefit claimants died last year after being told to get a job, we can reveal.

We’ve highlighted worries about the controversial medical tests for people claiming Employment Support Allowance which are being used to slash the country’s welfare bill.

The Government has boasted that more than half of new *claimants are found “fit to work” – failing to mention that over 300,000 have appealed the decision and almost 40% have won.

Instead, employment minister Chris Grayling (below) says this *”emphasises what a complete waste of human lives the current system has been”.

Now, maybe I'm not sure it's really 32 a week. But it's not good. And the Coalition know exactly where they can stick their bread and circus Olympics!

[Dino]

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/20968

Stop and review the cuts to benefits and services which are falling disproportionately on disabled people, their carers and families

Responsible department: Department for Work and Pensions

The government were embarking on wholesale reform of the benefit system when the economic crisis struck. These welfare reforms had not been piloted and the plan was to monitor and assess the impact of the new untried approach as it was introduced in a buoyant economy. Unfortunately since then the economy has gone in to crisis and the government has simultaneously embarked on a massive programme of cuts. This has created a perfect storm and left disabled people/those with ill health, and their carers reeling, confused and afraid.

We ask the government to stop this massive programme of piecemeal change until they can review the impact of all these changes, taken together, on disabled people and their carers. We ask the government to stand by its duty of care to disabled people and their carers. At the moment the covenant seems to be broken and they do not feel safe.

Illness or disability could affect any one of us at any time, while many more of us are potential carers.

[Alex]

Both of those proposals make me sick to the stomach, as does the internet privacy one, and their changes to the NHS. Christ, Labour made some mistakes and did some things that I strongly disagreed with, but the Tories have been absolute ****s and I don't say that lightly, many of the bills they've passed, and have planned, are utterly disgusting ideas and concepts.

I'm very concerned about the direction this country is going in, and it's made even worse by Labour sticking with Milliband and not putting up a decent alternative. Though like Ant, I'd prefer a third, new party, but that just doesn't seem likely to happen. Even the Green Party, who many people feel have a decent manifesto, aren't really taken seriously by many, sadly.

I couldn't agree more with Si about what politicians should be, and I don't think it can be stressed enough how harrowing it is that so many are all but the complete opposite.

[Paul Clement]

The government were embarking on wholesale reform of the benefit system when the economic crisis struck.

Didn't this government come in to power during the recession rather than just before it?

[Paul Clement]

In regards to the welfare reforms, I think this government has made one major blunder and with the Housing Benefit reforms, could be on the verge of another.

The working tax credits change this weekend, with the standard number of hours at work to be eligible rising from 16 to 24 hours per week. There are some groups this won't effect, the disabled and lone parents, who will still be able to get the benefit at 16 hours per week. However, a couple with a child or an adult aged 25 or over will lose their working tax credit if they only work 16 hours a week. The government is convinced that rather than leave their jobs, these people will speak to their employers and get their hours increased to 24 hours per week. Now, I really can't see employers going for this wholesale, especially in sectors like retail where a lot of staff work part time hours. So, a lot of people will end up either £50 a week worse off because the working tax credits have gone or look to leave their jobs because they no longer feel it's worth it. The government thinks this won't happen because Jobseekers Allowance benefit can be suspended if you leave a job voluntarily. But if the member of the couple who hasn't been working makes the claim, there is no effect on the benefit whatsoever.

In regards to Housing Benefit changes, it's a given that it will go with the arrival of Universal Credit, but the idea of changing the rules around age makes no sense whatsoever. The idea that these people stay at home with mum and dad until they're older does not work. There are Foyers all across the country that house young people who would otherwise be homeless because they cannot live at home. They are funded partially by the government directly, but in the main, their money comes from the rent received through housing benefit. Besides, where is the independence that we want young people to gain? Living at home till your 25 unless you can find a job that pays well enough to afford a place of your own? Some people are working at national minimum wage at that age, and would struggle to pay the rent outright, so they'd be at home, learning none of the important lessons that having your a property of your own, whether mortgaged or rented provides. Under this system, a lot of people coming to 25 years old will have had no experience of budgeting their wage, understanding the financial implications of their actions because they always had their mum and dad to fall back on.

I find it rather ironic. My mother died when I was 27, but she was in her 70's by then. She could have just as easily died 4 years earlier, which under these new proposals would have left me unable to get Housing Benefit and no parents to live with. I'm sure that will happen to someone, so what would happen to them?

[Philipnet]

I keep wondering when the next election would be.

And I've found there's even a Wikipedia page on that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Next_Un...neral_election