Just a few questions on the Manifesto for the BBC to ponder. Miliband says of the Manifesto that…
It does not do what most manifestos do.
It doesn’t offer a list of promises.
A shopping list of proposals.
Just look below to see if that is true…a huge list of proposals…hardly any of them saying how they will be funded….Labour is going for a large measure of state control over industry….with price caps, caps on the size of businesses, controls on how businesses work and run themselves, even a control over a company’s objectives, state control of the railways and transport networks, nationalisation by the back door of nearly every business big or small in effect.
Also on the agenda…breaking up the Uk whilst handing us over to Europe, votes for 16-17 year olds, state control of the Media, a massive reorganisation of the NHS (unfunded), mass immigration to continue, no borrowing, or is it massive borrowing, and they won’t tell us what cuts or taxes they intend to implement, no non-doms and no ZHC…exept, em, they will still exist, just much more cuddly under Labour, welfare caps (bedroom tax like?), guaranteed jobs, 200,000 houses a year, paternity pay up, classroom sizes down, free childcare extended…..and oh yes…..the NHS, the whole education budget and international aid budget will all be ringfenced.
Just some of the eyecatching, massively expensive proposals from Labour..and all done without borrowing a dime.
One of the biggest cheers of the day came when Miliband said in his speech that he would commit to another massive reorganisation of the NHS with …
The abolition of their terrible Health and Social Care Act.
Andy Burnham last year said that the reorganisation process of the NHS was…
The biggest bombshell ever to land on the NHS.
We need to look at what has happened to the NHS in the four years since the reorganisation began.
I said it then – and I say it again today: this was the wrong policy at the wrong time.
We said the reorganisation would drag down the NHS – and so it has proved.
The King’s Find ponders about the disruption that would engender…..
‘It is hard to see how Labour’s plans to dismantle the Health and Social Care Act could be achieved without disruptive structural changes to the NHS.
Not a peep from the BBC about this stunning, hypocritical and contentious proposal.
Then of course we get to the funding of the NHS, Miliband said this in his speech…
Nothing is more dangerous to our NHS than pretending you will protect it without being able to say where the money is coming from.
You can’t fund the NHS with an IOU.
Hang on though…the King’s Fund has spotted that Labour hasn’t actually committed to funding the NHS at all…
Here’s the King’s Fund asking where’s the money from Labour?
The big question is about funding, with Labour now the only one of the three main parties not to have pledged to find the £8 billion a year in additional funding called for in the NHS five year forward view. Given this is the minimum requirement if the NHS is to continue to meet patient needs and maintain standards of care, this leaves a significant gap at the heart of its plans.
Miliband, Balls and Liz Kendall, Labour’s Shadow Health Minister all promised that Labour would ‘Do whatever it takes to fund the NHS’.…and yet they refuse to commit to spending, what they have already agreed is the necessary amount of £8bn, to defend the NHS.
Then we get to Miliband’s ‘Mission’ as Prime Minister….as reported by Nick Robinson…
Ed Miliband’s “mission” as your prime minister would, he said, be simply summed up: “I will always stand up for you.”
It was one of the most powerful speeches I’ve seen him make.
So what did Miliband actually say?….
For too long, you have been told something that simply isn’t true.
That’s what’s good for the richest and most powerful is always good for the whole of our country.
Who do you think will stand up to those powerful interests?Whoever is making their case, I will always stand up for you.
With me as Prime Minister, no powerful interest, will outweigh the interests of working people.
Giving power back to those to whom it really belongs:
The British people.
So Miliband will stand up to those powerful vested interests, he will fight against the lie that ‘what’s good for the richest and most powerful is always good for the whole of our country.‘ He will be ‘Giving power back to those to whom it really belongs: The British people.’
Except of course he won’t…only two weeks ago he sold out the British people to Big Business and Europe and denied the British People their voice by denying them the referendum on Europe….
Ed Miliband will attempt to win over a reluctant business community on Monday by warning that an EU referendum proposed by David Cameron would trigger a bitter two-year campaign.
Labour gives more power to Europe and Big Business gets the last say…Miliband ‘Giving power back to those to whom it really belongs: The British people.’? Hardly think so.
Here’s what the manifesto also says about decentralising power…
People who live in this country know that too much power is concentrated in too few hands. Those who make decisions on behalf of others, whether they are in Westminster, the European Union, in business, the media, or the public sector, are too often unaccountable. Our over-centralised system of government has prevented our nations, cities, county regions and towns from being able to take control and change things for themselves. We will end a century of centralisation.
But Labour will deny you a referendum on Europe.. Labour makes that decision for you….
“It’s simply the wrong direction for our country”
Then there’s Labour’s big idea…its rebirth as a party to be trusted on the economy….
It is a manifesto which shows Labour is not only the party of change but the party of responsibility too.
So page 1, line 1, sets out Labour’s Budget Responsibility Commitment.
A clear vow to protect our nation’s finances.
A triple lock of responsibility.
First, we are the only party at this election which can show how every policy in our manifesto will be paid for.
No commitments requiring additional borrowing.
Not a single one.
That is the first lock.
Second, our manifesto writes the first line of Labour’s first Budget:
“This Budget cuts the deficit every year.”
And that Budget will only be presented when that has been verified by the Office of Budget Responsibility.
That is the second lock.
Third, the next Labour government will meet our fiscal rules: with the national debt falling and a surplus on the current budget.
A triple lock.
We have no proposals for any new spending paid for by additional borrowing. All of our commitments will be paid for by reducing spending elsewhere or by raising extra revenue.
So no borrowing? Cuts and tax rises instead? But definitely no borrowing….On the current account at least….they allow themselves up to £32 billion or so for ‘infrastrucutre investment’….but can we even trust them on the current account….not likely as they won’t say when or how they will end the deficit…if we have a deficit we have borrowing…and interest to pay.
What of that cutting the deficit every year? Really? By how much? It could be £1. The Manifesto tells us nothing.
And that last… the national debt falling and a surplus on the current budget? Again when? And national debt falling that too could just be £1…unless they put numbers to these promises they are meaningless and makes Labour unaccountable for future failure to meet such promises…which is the idea of course.
What else is on offer…oh yes..control of the Media…just not the BBC…
No one media owner should be able to exert undue influence on public opinion and policy makers. No media company should have so much power that those who run it believe themselves above the rule of law.
Yet the current system for protecting against these threats is inadequate. Labour will take steps to protect the principle of media plurality, so that no media outlet can get too big, including updating our rules for the 21st century media environment.
Our system of public service broadcasting is one of Britain’s great strengths. The BBC makes a vital contribution to the richness of our cultural life, and we will ensure that it continues to do so while delivering value for money.
And climate change…Miliband’s favourite subject…
We will put climate change at the heart of our foreign policy.
[ We will have] a legal target to remove the carbon from our electricity supply by 2030.
What else?
We will continue the fight against ISIS, in partnership with our allies in the region and the world.
Because they are an evil organisation that must be defeated.
The same ISIS that Miliband helped create when he ducked the Syria vote.
How about getting personal? Doesn’t that just discredit politics? Only when you are called a back-stabber, however when you are peddling your immigration open door policy it pays to play to your roots….
I am the son of immigrants.
I stand here today, with deep gratitude and love for my parents and what they gave me.
And deep gratitude and love for what our country gave us.
I know immigration can benefit our country
What other titbits are there?
An £8 minimum wage.
Exploitative zero hours contracts banned….or will they be?…
The next Labour government will call a halt to the abuse of zero-hours contracts.
Instead, we will have a new principle: Those who work regular hours for more than
12 weeks will have a right to a regular contract.
We will build at least 200,000 homes a year by the end of the next parliament.
Devolution to Wales and Scotland has worked…..And we will extend it further.
We’ll reverse David Cameron’s tax cut for millionaires to help pay down the deficit.
Abolish the “non-dom” rule.
End the Conservatives’ Marriage Tax Allowance.
A legal target to remove the carbon from our electricity supply by 2030.
Labour will ensure that all parts of the country benefit from affordable, high speed broadband by the end of the Parliament.
We will reform corporate governance to protect our leading firms from the pressure to put tomorrow’s share price before long-term growth potential.
Institutional investors will have a duty to act in the best interests of ordinary savers. They will have to prioritise long-term growth over short-term profits for the companies in which they are investing.
We will improve the link between executive pay and performance by simplifying pay packages, and requiring investment and pension fund managers to disclose how they vote on top pay.
Labour will establish a British Investment Bank with the mission to help businesses grow and to create wealth and jobs.
We will support employers to pay more by using government procurement to promote the Living Wage, alongside wider social impact considerations.
Labour will cut tuition fees from £9,000 to £6,000 a year, funded by restricting tax relief on pension contributions for the highest earners and clamping down on tax avoidance.
We will introduce a Compulsory Jobs Guarantee, paid for by a bank bonus tax.
We will guarantee every school leaver that gets the grades an apprenticeship. We will create thousands more apprenticeships in the public sector, including the civil service. Every firm getting a major government contract, and every large employer hiring skilled workers from outside the EU, will be required to offer apprenticeships.
Labour will freeze energy bills until 2017, ensuring that bills can fall but not rise, and we will give the regulator the power to cut bills this winter.
The generation and supply businesses of the ‘Big Six’ energy companies will be separated.
We will bring down energy bills by making homes more energy efficient, delivering a million interest free loans for energy home improvements in the next Parliament.
A new National Rail body will oversee and plan for the railways and give rail users a greater say in how trains operate. We will legislate so that a public sector operator is allowed to take on lines and challenge the private train operating companies on a level playing field.
Rail fares will be frozen next year to help commuters while we implement reforms. A strict fare rise cap will be introduced on every route for any future fare rises,
City and county regions will be given more power over the way buses are operated in their area. They will be able to decide routes, bear down on fares, drive improvements in services, and bring together trains, buses and trams into a single network with smart ticketing.
Where private companies are involved in providing clinical services, we will impose a cap on any profits they can make from the NHS.
We will protect the entire education budget, including the early years, schools and post-16 education, so that it rises in line with inflation.
We will end the wasteful and poorly performing Free Schools programme, and switch resources to where they are needed, allowing us to cap class sizes for five, six and seven-year-olds at 30 pupils or under.
We will help families by expanding free childcare from 15 to 25 hours per week for working parents of three and four-year-olds, paid for with an increase in the bank levy.
We will double the current two weeks of paternity leave to four weeks, and increase the amount of paternity pay from £140 to more than £260 a week.
We will unlock a Future Homes Fund by requiring that the billions of pounds saved in Help to Buy ISAs be invested in increasing housing supply.
We will cap structural social security spending as part of each spending review, so that it is properly planned and controlled.
There will be a guaranteed, paid job for all young people who have been out of work for one year, and for all those over 25 years old and out of work for two years. It will be a job that they have to take, or lose their benefits.
Half a million families have been hit by the Bedroom Tax, and two thirds of those affected are disabled, or have a disabled family member. It is cruel, and we will abolish it.
The system needs to be controlled and managed so that it is fair. Low-skilled migration has been too high and needs to come down. We need much stronger action to stop illegal immigration.
Most immediately we will work with our allies to counter and confront terrorism. ISIL’s barbarism and expansionist ideology, alongside terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda and Al-Shabaab, represent a particular threat to global security
Anyone who votes for that lot is deranged.
They’d make the Greek Syriza lot’s policies seem sensible.
‘Not a peep from the BBC about this stunning, hypocritical and contentious proposal’
Sausage rolls and they will be all over it.
“And here is the Not News, read by A. Newsroom Tealady, brought to you for ever thanks to a commitment kindly made in the new Government manifesto”
Comparison between the launch of the Labour Manifesto, and those launched this morning make a stark contrast. It’s clear that the BBC hugely prefer the Labour Manifesto, just by the tone of voice and the type of comments made. Even the Green party Manifesto gets the same treatment. The BBC seems to have stopped its flirtation with the Greens, it’s Labour all the way for them, Red Ed needs all the help he can get !
‘It’s clear that the BBC hugely prefer the Labour Manifesto’
And not really an impartial state media monopoly’s place to trash those of others, push those who have bought their support, and especially forget to mention anything ‘awkward’.
http://order-order.com/2015/04/14/labour-manifesto-author-backs-tory-right-to-buy-policy/
He may have his gutter moments, but I get more quality factual analysis and relevant back story comparisons from Gudio for free in a day than the £4Bpa uniquely funded, interest-conflicted national media disgrace in a year.
The BBC is unfit for purpose in a free-speaking democracy.
Beeboids will now re-double their efforts for an Election victory for Labour and themselves in view of this:-
“George Osborne backs Ofcom to take over from BBC Trust as regulator.
“The chancellor signals that he favours handing BBC oversight to independent watchdog as well as reforming corporation further after election.”
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/apr/14/george-osborne-backs-ofcom-to-take-over-from-bbc-trust-as-regulator
Not arguing self-interest will add to the energy the BBC is throwing in on top already being conflicted, but a small caution on George’s favoured options…
From a post yesterday ago, from the same paper, about the same quango:
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/nov/14/bbc-hd-drm
****
’The consultation received 459 responses. Of these, 432 of those came from individual licence payers, and 426 opposed the BBC’s proposal.
Clearly though, the BBC listened… and then went with corporate belief. Backed by a certain confidence in outcomes…
’In this universe, Ofcom accepted the self-serving arguments of the companies they’re meant to be regulating, ignored the public whose interests they were meant to be safeguarding, and gave the BBC what it asked for.
Why did it do this? It’s a secret.’
OFCOM? Isn’t that the outfit once run by James Purnell’s office buddy at Labour? The one still in the running to ‘oversee’ the BBC on behalf of the licence fee payer, and editorial integrity.
That OFCOM?
’Ofcom rejected the FOI request, saying that the law prohibited it from releasing “commercially sensitive” material.’
Now, where did they learn that trick from?
’So, this is weird. Fundamentally, the BBC and Ofcom were claiming that it was in the public’s interest to deny the public’s wishes, but it wasn’t in the public interest to know why this was so.’
Actually… not too weird at all to any who ‘do business’ with them.
’At last, the BBC names some names. Unfortunately, these aren’t very convincing names.’
This is the BBC we are supposed to trust on all things, on top of its commitment to transparency? I don’t think so.
’The BBC refused to answer my emails until I sent copies of the unredacted text to the executives responsible for the memo. Then, a BBC spokesperson again refused to let me speak to anyone responsible’
Welcome to our world, chum.
’In other words, “Auntie knows best, so shut up and run along and let us get on with breaking your TV’
Happens a lot.
Shouldn’t.
No time to read the comments, but well done that man. And the Graun.
This is not a corporation I trust on any measure, yet it holds the keys to vast social engineering, policy-making and election shaping.
By compulsion.
***
‘“It’s not as if ITV is poorly regulated. Ofcom has proved itself to be a robust regulator.”
Looking at the above example, George, I have my doubts. It may be ‘better’, and hence the BBC fighting even this tooth and nail, but it looks like serving the licence fee payer and public interest still way down the totem.
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/press-could-face-threat-statutory-regulation-ofcom-under-labour-government?
Whether it is the comically named Trust or OFCOM makes not one whit of difference as long as the bien pensants run the show. Until ‘real’ people with interests outside of the ‘elite’ run those bodies expect more of the same.
Having worked my way down that exhausting list, can anyone on here honestly tell me that the approaches of the two parties from which the leadership of the next government will come are the same and you cannot tell the difference?
We have just had 5 years of “quiet”, small government where people have got on with their lives with the government basically not interfering and/ or trying to control everything and business has responded well and lots more people have jobs. (Latest figures due this week)
If Labour get to bring about what is listed above virtually every sector of the nation will be in a state of flux, the government will become big government, attempting again to micro manage virtually every aspect of daily life.
With that level of uncertainty international “money” will depart and the goose of business, which lays the golden egg for government spending, will become rather less fecund, reducing tax income while spending seems set to rise.
Could that inevitably to another situation where Labour runs out of other people’s money to spend even sooner, as somehow they are not going to borrow!
Clegg’s comment yesterday about Labour being like alcoholics seems quite pertinent!
Your idea of small government is somewhat strange, if you apply it to the size of the UK state over the past five years. And increasing the national debt to £1.5Trillion?
Godfrey Bloom isn’t everybody’s cup of tea, but he’s ‘on the money’ in this article:
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/04/14/why-godfrey-bloom-would-like-to-put-his-foot-through-the-tv-screen/
The Conservatives are now social democrats with blue rosettes. But, if that’s your cup of tea…
“Your idea of small government is somewhat strange”
Really?
My memory of the last Labour administration was of a continual series of nanny knows best announcements of policies, usually involving throwing money at whatever it was.
From reading the list of policies atop this strand it would appear that there is virtually no aspect of life in the U.K. that the over active schoolboy and his pals are not going to sort out for us, whether we like it or not, which is “big” government to me.
Big or small government also revolves around how much of GDP the government spending is. In wonderful France it is about 60%, which of course involves getting lots of money in from you so they decide how to spend it on your behalf on their pet projects, but usually far less efficiently than you would spend it if you kept it yourself.
What has the increase in national debt got to do with it?
If you inherit spending £200m more than income, extra borrowing will be required until net borrowing is eliminated.
GB borrowed £225bn between 2001 and 8 when he could quite easily have run a balanced budget if not pay down some debt, but that is Labour for you. Even in the most benign economic times they wanted to spend more.
I was suggesting that the Tories give you big government and with Labour, as you quite rightly describe, you get bigger incoherent and more wasteful government. Neither Labour nor Tory appear to aim at ‘small government’.
I will just pick up on one claim:
A legal target to remove the carbon from our electricity supply by 2030.
How? Solar that doesn’t work at night, Wind that doesn’t work all the time?
Bear in mind that the EU-inspired ‘plan’ is that we will stop using gas for heating and oil for transport and that ‘broadband’ is code for yet more electricity (10% and rising).
Perhaps we could construct huge wooden wheels powered by latent ‘New Britons’ currently housed in Calais? ( A migrant is a Briton who doesn’t live here yet).
So, no more carbon brushes in generators, then, or any other carbon products, presumably.
And as regards migrants – there’ll be no shortage of them, soon – there are another five thousand odd, off Sicily, just waiting for the opportunity to populate your treadmills.
That would mean five outages every Friday, and a serious loss of efficiency for about one month in every year.
But hey! Look on the bright side. No electricity means no BBC!
Time to stock up on candles …
Even if there was zero leccy, there would still be a BBC and funding demand for the licence fee.
‘Unique’ can cover anything.
You only need a licence if you watch TV as broadcast. No electricity means no programmes broadcast or watchable.
Almost worth voting Green for … 😉
James Purnell strategising on this with Ed Miliband as we speak! With integrity, natch.
Blimey – so much “jam tomorrow” they must have enlisted Robertsons to make it. Viva la revolucion!
Robertsons would have been too unPC, given their trademark mascot until fairly recently.
I keep telling you kippers , this is what you are going to get with Millipeed/SNP . If the Conservatives , in Kippers eyes are not ,Conservative enough , I hope Millipeed/SNP, is Socialist enough forI you , because ,as it says on the tin ,that`s what you are going to get , by letting the Evil Millipeed in, through the back door . If you think he may be out in 5 years , think again, Blair /Brown , lasted 13 , if the economy holds up , this could be England`s fate.
And then you’ll be wishing you’d voted UKIP!
So you keep saying, but it’s not really relevant to BBC bias.
You can say that again.
And no doubt you will.
Miliband and Balls in charge of a whelk stall is just about conceivable , but those two in charge of the economy is so frightening that I simply can’t bear to think about it.( Even BBC folks must have their doubts but they will be keeping these under strict control) After all the best indicator of future performance is past performance and we all know how disastrous the two Eds were with their buddy Brown.
Only public sector employees and those heavily dependent on government handouts can contemplate voting Labour. The rest of us, who depend on the private sector to generate our income, know a) that Labour will wreck the private sector, b) they will increase the tax take one way or another c) they will borrow more, and that all we will have to show for this, is a bigger public sector full of pointless jobs, with ever more people dependent on the state.
If every Labour government there has EVER been has wrecked our economy, why will this one be any different , especially with those two in charge?
Would that were true!
Alas so many people vote Labour because back in the day their Grandparents did (and we’re talking turn of the century) !
They don’t seem to have got it into their heads that Labour betrayed the white working class back in the 1970s!
Or the man I know whose answer to every question about Labour is “yes but I got a pay rise every year” The fact that Labour borrowed so much to give him his pay rise, and now the bill has to be paid seems to go right over his head.
In Mr T`s eyes, voting Labour is the only alternative , because everyone will starve to death under ,the Consevatives . Yeah right , I am looking forward to loosing a few pounds .
This Labour manifesto is giving me feelings of déjà vu from the 1970s.Everything was turmoil,the nationalised industries were basket cases.High taxes ,massive inflation. Im getting too old to go through all that again.
“With me as Prime Minister, no powerful interest, will outweigh the interests of working people.”
Well I am sure Leonard David McCluskey might have a view on that!!
I’m surprised that Labour’s opponents haven’t made more of a meal of the union strings attached to Labour policy.
I keep telling you kippers , this is what you are going to get with Millipeed/SNP . If the Conservatives , in Kippers eyes are not ,Conservative enough , I hope Millipeed/SNP, is Socialist enough forI you , because ,as it says on the tin ,that`s what you are going to get , by letting the Evil Millipeed in, through the back door . If you think he may be out in 5 years , think again, Blair /Brown , lasted 13 , if the economy holds up , this could be England`s fate.
Zzzzzzzzzzz….
I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again (as you seem to keep repeating yourself) If the electorate have the IQ of a gnat and unable to see what is going on around them not to vote UKIP, then they deserve all the crap they get.
Don’t blame the ‘kippers’ Toryboy, blame Cameron, he has worked hard over the last 5 years to lose this election. He could have and still could see off UKIP with an offer of a referendum this year, but he doesn’t want to, and neither will he in 2017.
The improving economy is a fairytale, unfelt by the majority.
Your constant protestations ain’t going to change my mind UKIP it is….
An EX Tory Voter
The Tories had a private members bill for a referendum , but the Libs & Labour voted it out , because the Conservative`s did not have a Common`s majority . When Millipeed/SNP take power , they will never hold a referendum , so what are you going to then , go a on a demo, with have a half a dozen Kippers. The EU does not really feature in the election , its mainly domestic matters like ,who can run the economy , are you really looking forward to being governed by Millipeed /SNP ,for the next 5 ,10, 15 years or so .The kippers won`t have any influence on anything. Yeah ZZ , but , all the kippers come up & say, do this & that , ain`t going to happen .
You want out of the EU? If you do:
Vote UKIP, Get UKIP.
Essex lad. Have you ever heard of the law of diminishing returns ? Well you ought to because whenever you pop up crying ” woe, woe and thrice woe” more people on this website seem to bite back at your dislike of their voting intentions. Give it a rest old son, you vote for whoever you like, so will we all, all you are doing is pissing people off. Try and spot some bbc bias instead, there’s plenty around.
Essex Man I have said already that I would vote for the Conservative Party if it was a conservative party again. There are four things that are a must for me to voye for them:
1. A real “cast-iron” guarantee on an In/Out referendum only open to UK nationals to vote in, and ones that have lived here for at least 6 years. The BBC must be made to be neutral in this and present both sides equally.
2. Sort out the BBC by either scrapping it completely or some other way of making it fulfill its charter obligations.
3. An English Parliament with the same powers as the Scottish one. Restricting which MPs can vote on which bills would only be a start – an English Parliament is a must and needs to be in place and working before the next election. Regional Assemblies or this devolution of power to cities, that Labour etc. are pushing, is the worst option as that will break up this country so we can never be free of the EU tyranny.
4. The equalising of Parliamentary boundaries so that all constituencies have roughly the same size of electorate. The Lib-Dems scuppered this as they hate fair votes but I don’t think Cameron was too cut up about losing this one to them.
Lo and behold, I scroll down the page and there you are saying it again. I know we can all go off topic from time to time but as a matter of interest, when did you last comment on BBC bias rather than railing against those who decide LibLabCon isn’t for them?
Its all , the same , BBC /Guardian/Labour, all together , if Millipeed /SNP get in , they will give the BBC extra cash , & hammer Murdoch , (TV & Papers) , Mail , Telegraph & Express . The Evil bastards will also , censor , stuff ,like this on the internet . Might also ,abolish elections. Good satire on ITV now , a sort of New Spitting Image , called New Zuiods , very good I think.
http://order-order.com/2015/04/10/labour-candidate-attacks-simpletons-and-racists-who-fly-england-flags/#_@/bBUXavno-u2UxA