Gordon Brown

[sonicyouth]

What are you wearing

A towel. What are you wearing?

[RobertT]

The EU Superstate was born with the Rome Treaty, way before our public voted to join in based on some words without checking the writing.  This is why votes are rubbish, a fair chunk of people are too thick to understand and a similar amount don't bother to understand.

I get Talk Talk's posts, I just can't be bothered to be too worried about the whole thing (and that includes Europe).  I suppose if my life was ever in threat I might reconsider, but until then I'll continue to avoid politics - and no, I don't complain about the Govt because I didn't bother to vote for anyone in the first place.  It's not that I am apathetic, more that I think they mean jack shit and it's the multi national companies that run the place now.  Sure, they let someone take the flak of running the country publicly, but let's not underestimate their power and influence (over the MP's, Commisioners and even us)

[leefer]

The EU Superstate was born with the Rome Treaty, way before our public voted to join in based on some words without checking the writing.  This is why votes are rubbish, a fair chunk of people are too thick to understand and a similar amount don't bother to understand.

I get Talk Talk's posts, I just can't be bothered to be too worried about the whole thing (and that includes Europe).  I suppose if my life was ever in threat I might reconsider, but until then I'll continue to avoid politics - and no, I don't complain about the Govt because I didn't bother to vote for anyone in the first place.  It's not that I am apathetic, more that I think they mean jack shit and it's the multi national companies that run the place now.  Sure, they let someone take the flak of running the country publicly, but let's not underestimate their power and influence (over the MP's, Commisioners and even us)

Couldnt have said it better myself.
Funny though talking about politics etc....my sis was getting heavies,bailiffs around her house about an unpaid council tax bill.....she had paid it but the council had messed the records up...i got in touch with the Freshbrook councillor who took it up with the leader of the council....hey presto job done...

[Crozzer]

The EU Superstate was born with the Rome Treaty, way before our public voted to join in based on some words without checking the writing.  This is why votes are rubbish, a fair chunk of people are too thick to understand and a similar amount don't bother to understand.

I get Talk Talk's posts, I just can't be bothered to be too worried about the whole thing (and that includes Europe).  I suppose if my life was ever in threat I might reconsider, but until then I'll continue to avoid politics - and no, I don't complain about the Govt because I didn't bother to vote for anyone in the first place.  It's not that I am apathetic, more that I think they mean jack shit and it's the multi national companies that run the place now.  Sure, they let someone take the flak of running the country publicly, but let's not underestimate their power and influence (over the MP's, Commisioners and even us)

I voted against staying in at the 1973 referendum.  The argument was that our European neighbours would aid us in time of economic need.  I didn't see pigs flying over the poll station in Stratton.         

In politics the first victim is the truth, the next victim is the person stating the truth. When Cynthia Payne ran in the 1988 Kensington by-election, she said on election night to the BBC that politics was a lot dirtier than the business that she had been in.  Gawd bless her candor.       

[Nemo]

I'm watching the Glasgow East by election coverage on the Beeb and the turnout is 30% ish. That's a bit worrying. Also, the candidates include Mikey from (I'm told) Big Brother and John Smeaton, the guy who duffed up the Glasgow Airport Terrorists whilst they were on fire.

[Highland Robin]

Well....these pages are a lot more fascinating than the average debate on STFC!  Who said interest in politics was dead??? Just to go back, for a moment, to the Gordon Brown letter, which is in so many ways symptomatic of the state of the nation.....
1) GB is a decent man.  I can say that from personal experience.  He believes in justice, and without his determination over 12 years, we would not have addressed even half-heartedly some of the major world issues that we have.
2)  He is a control freak.  His views (which are actually a lot nearer old Labour than he is credited for) are strongly held and with integrity, and because they are not necessarily 'populist' (as the Blair regime always tried to be) he has developed that iron determination to pursue them come what may - but it does make him appear impervious either to good advice, or to public opinion, or to media pressure (which for most politicians today is the number one priority!)
3)  He inherited a government that had actually been very successful in many respects, but which in key areas - Iraq, terrorism, relations with President Bush being the most obvious ones - had lost the respect of the people.  Yes, it was a gross mistake not to call an election, and he has held his hands up to that, but in those key policy areas, he was left an appalling mess - Iraq has more or less been dealt with, Afghanistan is a much more difficult situation from which to exit successfully. 
4)  He will have decided for himself to write those letters, probably against advice, from a genuine compassion for  bereaved families.  As someone who has worked in a ministerial private office, I can tell you that there will be an adviser who has got it in the neck for providing him (twice - he made the same mistake in PMs questions soon after the soldier's death) with the wrong name.
5)  If you think GB is bad, and that Blair was bad before him, just wait till Cameron arrives....Vacuous?  You ain't seen nothing yet!

[Fred Elliot]

Hi Gordon !

[pauld]

5)  If you think GB is bad, and that Blair was bad before him, just wait till Cameron arrives....Vacuous?  You ain't seen nothing yet!

Interesting. A friend/relation of mine who works in the City and is slightly to the right of Attila the Hun was invited to one of these Tories in the City fundraising dinners. At which he spent some time with George Osborne and also met Cameron (although didn't spend so much time with him). He went to the dinner an ardent enthusiast of the next Tory government, he came away horrified, especially at the prospect of Osborne as Chancellor. "I wouldn't leave these people in charge of their own bowels, much less the nation's economy" was his considered opinion.

[Phil_S]

On the subject of the letter, he was right to write them. Hand written too was the way to go. The mistake was in allowing the letters to either go out unchecked for spelling etc, or if it was checked employing someone who hasn't done their job properly.

For me I can't blame the woman. She has lost her son, in part due to his mistakes (In her view) & GB can't even get her name right. I also hesitate to be critical of the paper because she provided the letter free  & thats what they do. It also matches up with their campaign & editorila stance that the Government aren't really taking the war in Afganistan seriously.

The problem is that for a long time now the government have continually cut defence spending. Sure it was the same before the Falklands & before the second world war too, but what really grates is the fact that they do this & lie about it.
They also give the appearance that they don't care, by appointing idiot ministers to run it & general mismanagement. It's my view that the MoD is like the home office "Not fit for purpose".
A goverments first duty is to protect the nation ie Defence. Any one can make a mistake but to continually do so is incompetent.

[Phil_S]

On the subject of the letter, he was right to write them. Hand written too was the way to go. The mistake was in allowing the letters to either go out unchecked for spelling etc, or if it was checked employing someone who hasn't done their job properly.

For me I can't blame the woman. She has lost her son, in part due to his mistakes (In her view) & GB can't even get her name right. I also hesitate to be critical of the paper because she provided the letter free  & thats what they do. It also matches up with their campaign & editorial stance that the Government aren't really taking the war in Afganistan seriously.

The problem is that for a long time now the government have continually cut defence spending. Sure it was the same before the Falklands & before the second world war too, but what really grates is the fact that they do this & lie about it.
They also give the appearance that they don't care, by appointing idiot ministers to run it & general mismanagement. It's my view that the MoD is like the home office "Not fit for purpose".
When so many ex military of high seniority say so, I believe them rather than proven liars.
A goverments first duty is to protect the nation ie Defence. Any one can make a mistake but to continually do so is incompetent.
But it's not just defence though is it. Labour have got it wrong on virually every front.
Would the Torys be any better. I don't know. But Labour have proved to me that they are not fit to run the Country, over 12 years. The Tories are the only credible alternative so will get my vote come the day. They could hardly do any worse.

[iffy]

The problem with defence is not the total amount of spending, but what we spend it on.

Our defence setup is still fundamentally based on Cold War principles. We don't need Trident, we don't need bloody great big aircraft carriers and we don't need Eurofighter. Turn that spending onto what we need and you're playing with a much bigger budget. 

Billions of pounds of spending on defence are basically about posturing and keeping up with the Jones', rather than a realistic assessment of threat.

If what we need is force projection and the ability to fight "three block wars", then we need small numbers of highly trained, brilliantly supported infantry. Relative to Trident and Eurofighter, that costs nearly nothing.

[nevillew]

The problem with defence is not the total amount of spending, but what we spend it on.

Our defence setup is still fundamentally based on Cold War principles. We don't need Trident, we don't need bloody great big aircraft carriers and we don't need Eurofighter. Turn that spending onto what we need and you're playing with a much bigger budget. 

Billions of pounds of spending on defence are basically about posturing and keeping up with the Jones', rather than a realistic assessment of threat.

If what we need is force projection and the ability to fight "three block wars", then we need small numbers of highly trained, brilliantly supported infantry. Relative to Trident and Eurofighter, that costs nearly nothing.

Too much defence industry at stake to cancel Eurofighter and the carriers, and why would we give up a nuclear deterrent ?

[pauld]

You can't go basing defence spending on what we actually need - that would run counter to 50+ years of well-established defence procurement principles. It's all about big shiny expensive (and of course obsolete on delivery) not about what the troops need. Honestly, it's like Yes Minister never happened

[Phil_S]

I agree Trident is not needed, but we DO need the carriers to have defence capability & the ability to "project force".

Procurement is also a joke. Takes too long & because of constant changes of mind costs way too much. (Bit like the new Wembley), & half the time won't do what it is supposed to do.

Back to a fundamental though. Why is a soldier paid less than a civil servant, traffic warden etc etc. ?

[flammableBen]

Do they? Even when you take into account benefits and stuff?

Or when you say "a civil servant" are you just picking out one civil servant in particular and haven't a go that he's earning too much?

On a related note, why do Bin Men and Sewage Workers get paid less than Fire Fighters? I reckon it's a fairly safe argument that a break down in refuse collection/sanitation systems would cause more deaths than if we got rid of the fire service.