91Èȱ¬

Spineless and without integrity.

To be fair, election pledges are made on the assumption the party wins a majority. It's childish in the extreme for the media to pretend like they expect parties to stick to their manifesto promises in a coalition.

2. Of course you're quite right, any intelligent person would be able to see that electoral pledges are only applicable if your party wins outright. The last government had an overall majority but even so, reneged on manifesto commitments. But of course in the eyes of the likes of our host, Labour can do no wrong, only the other parties are hypocrites even if they are being forced to make decisions they would normally not even consider by the terrible state of our economy, for which Labour must accept their share of responsibility.

What a stupid piece - I know you bbc egos have space to fill but five lines!

INTEGRITY DICTATES AN ELECTION.

Let's have and end to this farce. If not, Clegg should renounce the prefix 'HONOURABLE' and sit in a specially installed 'SEAT OF IGNOMINY'.

I hope we can ask the question of Mr Cable and his Lib-Dem turn coat brethren, why the change of principle on tuition fees???

It is not good enough to blame the last Labour Government (how ever bad), the coalition is only tickling the deficit problem and hitting the middle income tax paying voters of England with child allowance, tax rates, service curs, and now tuition fees in England only. Whilst Scotland and Wales have no tuition fees- why is it ok to charge English students but not the rest of our British students???

Do the Lib-Dems have any morals or any credibility left???

Are the Tories – the same old nasty party???

Are Labour as incompetent with the economy as it seems??? (Yes)

As previous comments note, all of the 3 old failed parties have lied to us and deliberately so, its is time for another election.

If the Government, of any colour, was serious about the deficit and saving money, why will no-one discuss the elephant in the room – The EU payments c.£21Bn p.a. and EU budget and the MASSIVE costs inflicted on Britain by the EU, c.£120Bn per annum and rising (UK taxpayers Alliance) which would wipe out the budget deficit almost over night.

Might it not also be worth putting the question to Mr Cable and Mr Osborn (Clegg and Cameron) why Britain is paying more to the EU central bank to bail out Greece than we are actually forecasting to save from our own cuts on our own budget deficit reduction plan?????????

This coalition, of the 3 failed old parties (including several ex-Labour Ministers now with the Lib-Dems and Tories)is prepared to make British tax payers pay for the EU and do so with duplicity, deceit and lies, and is prepared and happy to force a generation of English students in to serious debt before they have begun their adult life……. WHY

The Government says a degree student earns on average £100k more throughout their working life than a non-degree worker. To put that in perspective, over a 45 year working life that is an average of £2,222 before tax p.a. – or approx £1700 after tax, about enough to pay the annual interest on the predicted £35-60k debt.

How can this;
a. Be right
b. Benefit the economy
c. Be justifiable in a developed economy – these are not all Harvard or Oxford degree, most are mediocre Universities with mediocre degrees, which many students will struggle to achieve the so called wages-degree dividend.

Think about it and ask Cable this. If you are going to incur c.£50k of debt for a mediocre degree in an average University in Britain, why would you do it? You can get a better degree from Harvard for half as much, c.$50-70K, or at the current exchange rate 1.52:1 approx £32-£46k.

I am sure he will have some inane and disingenuous answers but put him on the spot anyway……………………………..

Its time for a second election now that the Lib-Con Government and the Labour incompetents know the financial situation they can make REAL PROMISES to break. Vote UKIP the only party with any integrity

DOES IT WORK BOTH WAYS? (#2)

No senior LibDem would address the 'hung parliament question' on the hustings. I suggest that THAT was where the right to make changes should have been negotiated with the electorate.

Only one way Nick'll fix it - fix it with honour and FOR US, that is. Often honour demands personal sacrifice.

IS 'SCHOOLING TO EDUCATE' AS 'SO LAST CENTURY' 'AS TRIDENT TO DEFEND'?

This is just a tiny part of the overall question WHAT ARE WE, ULTIMATELY, TRYING TO ACHIEVE?

To spell it out: recent revolutionary advance in means-of-presentation/communication, OFFER opportunity for a fundamental re-work of 'competence-acquisition' across the entire spectrum of disciplines. However, such is the hold of tradition (gowns, mortar boards, rag-days et al) that academia - the ones who (half) grow up to make the rules, hangs on to the old ways.

None so blind . . .

Last year I suggested that Labour should dump Brown and form a National Government to sort out the mess we remain in.

It was a great pity they bottled it.

It was also a great pity that at the election no political party told the electorate the full story. But then, when in September 2009 Osborne warned the public of an austere future, support for the Tories waned.

Would the public have elected a party that had told the truth at the last election? I doubt it very much.

This is not a case of broken promises, it is a case of nobody wanting to know the truth. The truth will shortly be appearing at a place near you before month-end. It won't be nice.

WHERE LIES RESPONSIBILITY? (#9)

With the party that refuses to tell the truth, or one that comes clean then looks less appealing by comparison?

SPOILPARTYGAMES.

I think all of the above have a point.

Cameron however is not a two-faced careerist like the rest. Let's take the forthcoming ENGLISH tuition fees vote, in which Scottish, Welsh, and Northern Irish MPs who clearly should have no right to vote on an issue affecting only the English, will join forces with Labour to defeat the coalition. I think, rather than hang on like some he will immediately call a general election.

At that point we will find out if Labour has managed to succeed in its project to make a high enough percentage of the population dependent on the benevolence of the state through benefits and government jobs to, in perpetuity, defeat any electoral challenge from the poor suckers in the private sector who pay for them, or at least reduce the sum of money the government needs to continue, as they did before, to print or borrow.

With millions of jobs lost in the UK since the end of World War Two and our population set to rapidly rise to 80 million from the 33 million post-WW2 population of this country, I firmly believe this country is finished. It just makes me balk that the 91Èȱ¬ is so biased in favour of the Labour party with their TUC masters who did so much to make us so uncompetitive in global labour markets, while at the same time massively increasing the burden of government expenditure the ever more costly welfare state creates.

This is the current battle of Britain. Whether we can finally see through the moronic naivety of the concept of the welfare state where people can opt out of work and obtain a better deal from the state, including free university education for their kids, or finally bring our economy into the real, highly competitive global reality in which we have to live within our means. As I said I think we're finished.

Once we had had Crick and Watson. Now we have Crick and Paxman! Tragic really.

Message 6.

Sorry to come in again but remember we used to get a massive rebate from the EU which was negotiated by the Thatcher government. Guess who surrendered it. During the last election I tried to get this act of treason in as a question in the Prime Ministerial debates and of course got nowhere. I wonder, and I'm not the only one, if the giving up of our rebate might have been something to do with getting Blair to be the first president of the EU. I think it was worth iro 30 billion a year!

'FROM FIRST PRINCIPLES'?

SECOND principles, surely, Mr Cable?

CAMERON DOESN'T NEED A CAREER BUT THE POSTER WAS 'ANOTHER FACE' (#11)

Cameron was fork-tongued when he waved aside the photoshopped poster.
So: two-faced and fork-tongued - off to a good start. But then he is a WESTMINSTER CREATURE.

We keep hearing "I came into politics to . . ." but none of them say "achieve overpaid failure". Westminster has no integrity, and those who find that atmosphere conducive, are as close to Icke's lizards as a nominal human can get. What is more

NICK CAN'T FIX IT.

'2. At 6:43pm on 12 Oct 2010, slother wrote:
It's childish in the extreme for the media to pretend..

If, sadly, inevitable. As the reality of office curses pols faced with the responsibilities of getting what they sought so hard for (shades of 'careful what you wish'), so our new media remoras dust off the templates that suit no matter what the realities to those not as blessed with good looks and opportunity as a Crick. M or Marr. A.

12. At 11:00pm on 12 Oct 2010, Trout Mask Replica

It's a genetic thing. Just ask Helen.

/blogs/theeditors/2010/09/impartiality_is_in_our_genes.html

Entry now, sadly, and with some irony, closed. Hope it wasn't something folk said.

Welcome to the Liberal Democrats "new clothes": this is truly scandalous. For more policy analysis of this u-turn, see my political blog The Brooks Blog here:

As one door closes...

/blogs/aboutthebbc/2010/10/new-bbc-editorial-guidelines-l.shtml

Hope the new guidelines have a bit on stealth retroactive editing.

Especially around accusations of cover ups.

The bottom line here is THEY - Lib-Lab-Con are all liars and traitors.
What is happening may seem like a crisis to be dealt with or a series of events out of the Governments control - But we should also consider that what is happening is by design, and with willful and deliberate intent.

The New-Labour Government followed Tory policy, the new Coalition Government is following largely Labour policy (and the same policy on cuts that Labour would have followed had they retained power) We have a Lib-Con coalition with several 'New-Labour' ex-ministers in it or advising it...

Britain is today, effectively a one-party state, The Pro-EU party of GB....!!!!
This is just another step down the road to EUSSR super-state, and our own leaders (who swore an oath when they entered Parliament, to 'Uphold the authority of the Crown above all other') to run this country down and to make us subservient to Brussels. They know we will never vote for it or accept it, so they continue to run the country down, squander our wealth and 'share' our military with France (too create an EU armed forces) until enough people think the only way to survive is to become a vassal of the EU.

Its time we all started to look and listen and actually hear and understand what is being said and done to us.

One concern is the sea change in higher education funding with the expected major cuts in teaching grants. But as if this wasn't bad enough, the Brown Report appears to also raise taxes on students (albeit indirectly) via the higher tariffs imposed on fees above £7,000.

We were told the reforms would be fair and progressive. What is "progressive" about raising taxes on students? More on this:

Mr - I was everybody darlin' - Cable has also said that he ' .... welcomes foreign investment in the UK'.


Kraft -y!

What is the point of being in coalition if all pledges are off? Where do those who voted LibDem now stand? On what basis are Lib Dem ministers and MPs now representing those who voted LibDem?

20.
Call me cynical but there really are major savings to be made in withdrawing educational services from those in school who show no willingness to learn. I might be cheaper just to put them in a room where they can play computer games and look at soft-core porn pop videos all day till it's time to go home and do the same.

Look at it this way the teachers would then have more chance to advance the prospects of those kids who are intelligent enough to want to learn, not that we'll be able to afford to do even that soon,

/news/uk-11536829