Is Nick Clegg making enough of a mess of his political career? Can anyone believe how quickly the goodwill generated by the pre election debates has turned sour? Will he be an MP this time next year or, as I suspect, "spending more time with the family"?!
I'm quite surprised at the level and extent of the student protests. Personally I'm pleased that they give a sh*t though!
I wonder if we should expect similar unrest from other areas (and if so who and where?) or if the students will be the most vociferous opposition?
I think that there's potential for the public sector Unions to create chaos like we haven't seen since the late 1970s. And there are large numbers of angry students and unemployed to join them on demos, etc. We have a very weak Government (the Lib Dem bit) and people can scent blood, there's not the resignation that "they" can't be beaten like we had with Thatcher - this time they can be beaten. Every borough in London has an anti-cuts campaign set up; I haven't seen this sort of thing since the poll tax (and we beat that).Originally Posted by smudge
Very interesting points, Bob. And apart from students and the unemployed, there are people whose housing benefits are to be cut, and benefits to the disabled which I don't think have yet been presented in detail.
I feel the disaffection will increase, the LibDems will pull themselves apart, and I just don't see this government lasting more than a year or so.
I've always thought apathy was actually quite good, for all it's had a very bad press. I've considered lack of political interest to be indicative of things going really quite well, with people not concerned until things were going badly for them, and mobilising quickly enough when there's enough of an issue to mobilise over. I agree with Bob, I think there's real potential here, and my real concern is whether Labour will be in a position to take advantage of it.
And the result would be the same - massive reductions in the public sector.
I just can't see these anti-tuition-fee protests achieving anything at all. While various aspects of government policy are vigorously opposed by different groups - unemployed, disabled, students - there isn't a single cause which they can all get behind as there was with Thatchers poll tax. Why would the unemployed and disabled care a hoot about tuition fees, for example. So I can't see the protests getting worse and I reckon they'll fizzle out once the policy gets voted through the commons next Thursday as it inevitably will.
Although I don't like the increase in tuition fees - in fact I don't like the idea of tuition fees at all - I cannot see an alternative. Moreover the repayment terms seem very reasonable and fair - many will repay less than they do now, many won't repay a penny. As far as I'm concerned we either accept these increased fees or we go back to the situation in the 60s where the state pays almost everything but only 8% of 18 year-olds get to university. There's no way the state can pay for the planned 50% (or even the current 44%) of 18 year-olds to do so.
Exactly so, Brian. It always irritates me when students challenge people of my (ahem) more mature generation and ask if we paid for our university education. It doesn't seem to occur to them that if they could wind the clock back to when it was all free, that would mean closing down something like half of all university places (even allowing for the greater efficiency - much worse student/lecturer ratios - which apply now). I have a feeling they would protest about that...
I'm also exasperated by the common mantra that we wouldn't need these cuts if the government chose to tax the rich instead. Now I'm certainly not rich and get as irritated by overblown salaries and bonuses as much as anyone else, but taxing the wealthy at 90% would only make a small dent in the financial problem - even if they all hung around to pay it.
The fact is, we're in a deep financial hole which is actually getting worse even with the cuts, since government borrowing is adding to the national debt by over 150 billion a year. That will remain true whichever party or combination of parties is in power. So deep, across-the-board cuts in all government spending are inevitable. The student protests, while understandable, are misplaced and unrealistic IMO.
Yes I am concerned about that as well. We don't want the cause of all this mess back in power do we!
It certainly feels like there's a vacuum at the moment, without no-one really able to take power convincingly. That's a different worry, because if the protest really is widespread and effective, then there are others who would willingly step into any breach.
Not necessarily, but I certainly consider it to be undesirable for this to happen. Hopefully the Government will collapse first.
Although you say it is different to the poll tax, you are also saying what most of the "experts" and politicians said about the poll tax, that the protests would fizzle out once it was happening. In fact the objections got far more extreme once the reality hit home, people tend to react late to legislation. And the number of non-payers went up from 14 million to 18 million over the three years that the English and Welsh were expected to pay.
Uniting people who do not have a single cause has always been an issue for the unions and social progressives. I have only attended one anti-cuts meeting, but making an un-skeptical leap of assumption based on one meeting in Croydon, I think you could be wrong. Representatives of OAP groups, disabled, students, teachers, civil servants, local government employees and others agreed to form a Committee for sharing info, mutual support and joint campaigning.
Straw man. I haven't heard anyone suggest 90% tax for the wealthy. The main "mantra" is surely the demand that this Government chase the £120 billion in unpaid taxes rather than a mythical £3 billion in overpaid welfare. Instead they are going to cut the number of civil servants collecting tax and chasing unpaid tax while, yet again, increasing the number of welfare fraud officers. Of course a fairer tax system could easily collect far more money than all the proposed cuts will "save"; but this only needs to close loopholes and chase the tardy. A top rate of 60% for those earning more than £1 million would seem reasonable to me and would be a vote winner. Extra taxes and Government controls on banks would also be a popular vote winner. Can't see it happening though.
We're in a hole that will get worse because of the cuts. The UK loaned Ireland billions of quid so that they have enough money to spend their way out of recession. We were massively in debt at the end of WW2 but the Labour government set up the welfare state spending extra money and employing more people at tax payers expense. Massive cuts have failed in Ireland, failed in Spain, failed in Greece. In fact it has never worked anywhere, ever. But lets give it another go just in case? Madness.
The student protests are far from unrealistic. they have every chance of either forcing this Government into retreat or toppling it completely.
But now it is NEW New Labour, a completly different organisation...
How crazy is it that the party that said "no more boom and bust" and then gave us the massive bust, the party that actually introduced tuition fees in the first place, is now being looked to as the potential saviours of civilisation?
Actually it's Beyond New Labour
Red Ed derided as Buzz Lightweight as he relaunches Party with 'Beyond New Labour' slogan
Neither have I; the point I was making was that even if you levied the most punitive imaginable tax on the wealthy, and they all stayed around to pay it, this still would only put a small dent in the problem and certainly wouldn't magically remove the need for cost savings.
The level of cuts being proposed by the last government wasn't very different from the present lot. One of the key issues in recovering from the debt is the confidence of the international finance markets that we've got a grip on the situation and can deal with it. Greece and Ireland failed to do this - it wasn't the cuts which caused their problems, it was the flight of capital by investors who didn't believe that they could cope. So far, said markets appear pleased with the steps the government is taking: it's important to keep it that way.We're in a hole that will get worse because of the cuts. The UK loaned Ireland billions of quid so that they have enough money to spend their way out of recession. We were massively in debt at the end of WW2 but the Labour government set up the welfare state spending extra money and employing more people at tax payers expense. Massive cuts have failed in Ireland, failed in Spain, failed in Greece. In fact it has never worked anywhere, ever. But lets give it another go just in case? Madness.
I hope not - that could really start a run on the pound which could throw us back on the tender mercy of the IMF.The student protests are far from unrealistic. they have every chance of either forcing this Government into retreat or toppling it completely.
I don't quite see how that could work - who gives a damn if students occupy university buildings or make idiots of themselves outside party HQs. The students have no case, no political clout, and no hope of achieving a thing.
And as for union support - wouldn't that be illegal? Bob Crow and his far-left cronies behave like idiots at times, but even they aren't crazy enough to take action which could maybe see their assets seized and themselves in court.
Nothing like some internal dissent to encourage the protestors
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Pol...15848438?f=rss
Isn't the point that they won't be acting in isolation? that there are others affected in different ways but who are joining the opposition to various cuts in principle?
And I give a damn, as do my fellow lecturers, about the students' case, and yes, we do feel they have a case.
Do you honestly think that the country in its present economic mess can afford to pay for university education for 50% of 18 year-olds? What do we sacrifice instead?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks