JackFrost

Indeed it does. The job centre system haven't been fit for purpose for many many years. A friend of mine had to leave the building industry due to a serious back injury and got signed on. He then got sanctioned as he didn't apply for any of the jobs he got put forward for. All of them involved heavy lifting This is where a large part of the problem lies and successive governments have completely failed on this.

I haven't even made the point you are wanting me to concede. I know no promises were broken on that pledge. Whilst both Labour and the Tories have encouraged (to an extent) NHS treatment to be outsourced privately that's merely an inevitability due to increased demand. There's no way the NHS is sustainable long term without any private involvement. People bash the Tories for wanting to expand the role of private healthcare when it is going to happen regardless of who is in power. My point about that 'Labour ending the privatisation of the NHS' quote in 1992 is simple. That's how long their scare stories about "privatisation by the back door" have been going. They said it then (before 5 years of Conservative government) and their saying exactly the same thing now. Labour can shout those slogans and wave those banners as hard as they want but after a combined 10 years of Conservative led government since then (1992-1997 & 2010-2015) not only has total privatisation of the NHS not happened (It would be political suicide regardless) but Labour themselves have encouraged private involvement to cope with increased demand. Simply because they have no choice. No one has their fingers in their ears here.

Unfortunately I don't play cricket. The most significant part of what I quoted was the year. They've been saying it for decades now and we're supposed to be burying our heads in the sand over something that has never happened. Luciana Berger certainly scrubs up well

"If you elect a Labour government we'll end the privatisation of the National Health Service" Robin Cook, 1992

Person A buys Ferrari out of personal savings Person B buys Ferrari by taking out huge loan from Wonga without any hope of paying it back. Person B matches Person A's spending. Whether it is affordable for either of them is an entirely different matter, In other words that article is completely meaningless.

Oh there are quite a few Miliband examples, The "bedroom tax" not being a tax, it actually being a reduction in a subsidy. Labour first piloting the "bedroom tax" in 2001 and then voting it in as part of the 2007 Welfare Reform Act. Then suddenly fiercely opposing it when the coalition f"cked up it's implementation. Labour claiming the rise in food bank use is an accurate picture of increased poverty under this coalition, when they banned job centres from recommending people to job banks (IDS removed this ban in 2010 and food bank shot up after this). I'm sure btf or someone can come up with a few Tory examples but like myself and Batman have said, there isn't one party leader that doesn't do it.

Anyone watching this QT Leader's debate on BBC1 now?

Totally agree with this. I'm a Tory at heart and worked in and around the poorest of our society for 30 years. There's a reason why even the Labour Party aren't left wing anymore. Socialism doesn't work.

No, we have Ed Miliband. The guy that spent significant time and effort manoeveuring himself by cosying up to the unions to get the top Labour job, and then started distancing himself from the unions in his victory speech. Well let me put it this way. They warned Brown that without significantly reducing the deficit our economy would be up a creek without a paddle if disaster struck. Then our economy ended up a creek without a paddle when a financial crisis hit. I also don't get this notion that Labour would be any different. Some of their economic policies in the late 00's were Thatcherism at its finest, like scrapping the 10p tax band. Hansard documents will also tell you that Labour even piloted the bedroom tax back in 2001 (before Ed Miliband voted to introduce it as part of the 2007 Welfare Reform Act). People can bash the Tories treatment of the poor as much as they like (and by the way I do agree that they have implemented some of their welfare policies very badly) but those on the left who believe a Labour government will come along to save the day will be sadly disappointed. There's one simple reason. Those on opposing ends of the political spectrum can bash Tory/Labour ideology as much as they like but what people don't realise or forget, is that the two parties are exactly the same thing.

Gordon Brown was sticking two fingers up at the IMF when they pointed out the deficit was getting out of control. Years before the global financial crisis hit. http://www.theguardian.com/business/2005/apr/18/politics.ukgeneralelection20051

Winnings from gambling certainly should be. I believe it was until around 2001?

The problem is the modern Labour Party is the most elitist it has ever been. The party is more interested in winning votes by meaningless 'robin hood/steal from the rich, give to the poor' rhetoric than coming up with policies based on any political science. There is a reason why they continually have class jabs at the Tories (Ed Balls describing elements of Tory policy as "Eton Mess" is one of my favourites) and it's because they attempt to convince anyone that's gullible enough they still represent the working class in some way. "Mansion" Tax = ie. something associated with wealth/middle class with the word 'tax' on the end.

A couple of my favourite Scargill moments. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-25731328 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-20303797 The hypocrisy is breathtaking.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-wales-32384397 Jeez, no wonder Blair moved Labour towards the centre.

All completely subjective How would you actually achieve that?

Define "fairer"

Exactly. "The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money"

I once met a copper who had to assist in removing the bodies from this. He said to me he didn't know what got to him most. The people that died still sitting upright in their seats, or what one of the firemen said when they first got to the scene - "Can you imagine if they'd had perimeter fencing round the pitch".

Did he try and act tough again? Exactly. The modern Labour Party sums up everything that is wrong with British politics. It is a directionless, elitist clusterf**k so saturated with self-serving individuals it can barely come up with one policy that isn't based around empty class war gimmickry. All to fool the traditional Labour voter that they still somehow represent the working class in some way. Now all the parties contain elements of the above in some respects (the self-serving bit especially) but there was a time when I respected the Labour Party even if I've never agreed with what they stand for. The problem now is that they don't even stand for anything or have any definition whatsoever. Nothing beyond empty Robin Hood style rhetoric that won't even work in the real world. (See them proposing to freeze energy prices when they were at their highest, all to er protect the poorest in society) Their leader is someone who politicked his way in to the top job off his family name, cosied up to the unions to get elected and then set about distancing himself from the unions in his victory speech. Sums up the party to a tee. Blair & Brown left the Labour Party in political limbo. (Brown scrapping the 10p tax band was Thatcherism at it's finest) and Labour have never recovered. This is why they are unelectable.

**** me, I've been recommending people to food banks (or other similar projects) since the 1990s. The problem has always been there. Benefit sanctions I'll give you. As for the others (and by the way I've come across countless families that manage on a lot less than 26k) they haven't helped but there's a reason why those measures have been introduced. Just before the coalition came to power there was a massive financial crisis that hit already poor families hard. A crisis which no political party here caused. The welfare bill was unsustainable. As someone who spent 30 years regularly encountering the poorest in our society you are utterly wrong. The unprecedented rise in the use of foodbanks is because people now know about them. That massive increase is not because 1.5 million minus 41k people have suddenly become poor due to Tory or Coalition policy. It's because that amount of people have always been poor and until food banks became a political football, people simply haven't been aware of them. The Labour Party banning job centres referring unemployed people to food banks and Tories' removal of this policy has caused a bigger spike than any other policy. Life for poor people wasn't better under Labour just because they swept the problem under the carpet. Like I've said, the problem has always been there.

I once saw a Labour Party candidate say precisely that to a lady I know who's run a food bank. She tore his ******** off. In 2010 the 'nasty Tories'/Iain Duncan Smith lifted the Labour Party's ban on job centres referring unemployed people to food banks. There's one reason why food bank usage is higher than it used to be. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12023054 Several years ago the aforementioned lady and her colleagues were literally driving around the poorest areas putting leaflets through people's doors, having to advertise the food bank. Then after that ban was lifted it wasn't long until she was driving around the local area putting leaflets trying to recruit extra volunteers because they couldn't cope with the extra numbers. There was also a global financial crisis, that inevitably hit already poor families. Whilst Labour didn't cause this, the Tories didn't either. That 41k figure you mentioned is actually a significant number. That figure wasn't relatively small because the UK was THAT wealthy. Of course usage has gone up since the Coalition's austerity but that figure was at that level largely because people didn't even know they existed.

Going to do one for Miliband with the phrases "cost of living crisis", or any of the usual class war rhetoric that he has to resort to?

That's because Lewis is the best politicker out there. Hamilton did back Rosberg up, if you watched on Sky the commentators were stating it themselves. Plus the guy on the Mercedes team radio repeatedly warning Hamilton and eventually stating if he didn't speed up they'd hand the best pit stop strategy over to Rosberg. Hamilton can do public allegations himself, he stated at the Belgian GP last year that Rosberg told him he'd driven into him on purpose. If you watched the Russian GP build up the BBC team all but confirmed that Lewis was talking out of his arse. Hamilton knows how to play the press like a violin and knows every trick in the book when it comes winding his rivals up. There's a reason he's fallen out with nearly every teammate he's had in F1. A friend of mine worked at McLaren when Hamilton first came into F1. Said him and Ron Dennis ran the place like a Mafia cult.

You think the Labour Party is any different? http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/generalelection/labour-open-to-the-charge-of-hypocrisy-after-failing-to-divulge-hedge-fund-managers-donation-10124387.html Considering how long it's been since the Labour Party actually represented the working class in this country I think there's a very small chance of that.

You made about as much of an assumption as Wes did Anyway I'm just reading the summary of this Miliband speech http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32279977 The significant one for me is their proposing to ban zero hours contracts. I don't think they have any idea how many low-income people they'd screw over by doing that, myself included. Fortunately mine is merely a part-time post-retirement job to keep me busy but I bet that will worry a lot of people on low incomes. Just because a few employees abuse zero hours contracts doesn't mean they are a bad idea. WTF has happened to the Labour Party?