Skip to main content

Labour hypocrisy part 94.

Labour hypocrisy continues to become their standard policy stance.

At the 2010 general election they supported immediate legislation to change the electoral system to AV. A few weeks later they now oppose it- on the grounds that the Lib Dems and the coalition are for it.

At the 2010 general election they supported the creation of a 111 number to replace the failed NHS direct project. Now they oppose it- on the grounds that the Lib Dems and the coalition are for it.

So- since Labour sold their principles for the snake oil promises of Blair and Brown, I suppose we can not expect them to be principled.

On the other hand, they could at least be consistent.

Every day that passes I see a Labour Party so politically bankrupt that that they will not accept any responsibility for anything they say or do.

This probably explains why they inherited a prosperous economy and bequeathed a bankrupt economy.

No matter which of the bloodless politicians that Labour chooses as their temporary leader, it is hard to believe that they have anything to offer the British people at all. Labour's Socialist ideology went broke decades ago- and each time Labour has entered government, the country has come close to following it.

Personally I think there is a case for Mr. Blair to face investigation for his conduct as Prime Minister- especially since we are now told that his greedy cashing in on the status that we allowed him has subsequently made him a multi millionaire. A property portfolio of £15 million Pounds suggests that he could well afford to hand over the estimated £4 million royalties he may expect from his book to the Royal British Legion.

Despite the vicissitudes of government, I think that it may yet be the Labour Party that faces a public backlash against their hypocritical, short sighted and short term leadership. They certainly deserve profound contempt for their failure both in government and in opposition.
Labels:

Comments

Anonymous said…
"At the 2010 general election they supported immediate legislation to change the electoral system to AV. A few weeks later they now oppose it- on the grounds that the Lib Dems and the coalition are for it."

They oppose the related bill, which also calls for a reduction in the number of MPs, and equally sized constituencies (both of which will coincidentally redraw the electoral map in the Conservative's favour). Not quite the same as is presented here.
3:11 pm
Anonymous said…
"They oppose the related bill, which also calls for a reduction in the number of MPs, and equally sized constituencies (both of which will coincidentally redraw the electoral map in the Conservative's favour). Not quite the same as is presented here."

Hmmm, is that the same electoral map that Labour had rigged in its own favour? Labour hypocracy part 95.
8:32 pm
Anonymous said…
The independent Electoral Commision ruled on boundary changes (most, but not all of which favoured Labour) during the Labour government, a body which stands to have it's funding reduced by the coalition.
9:09 pm
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Waiting for the Barbarians

What are we waiting for, assembled in the forum? The barbarians are due here today. Why isn’t anything going on in the senate? Why are the senators sitting there without legislating? Because the barbarians are coming today. What’s the point of senators making laws now? Once the barbarians are here, they’ll do the legislating. Why did our emperor get up so early, and why is he sitting enthroned at the city’s main gate, in state, wearing the crown? Because the barbarians are coming today and the emperor’s waiting to receive their leader. He’s even got a scroll to give him, loaded with titles, with imposing names. Why have our two consuls and praetors come out today wearing their embroidered, their scarlet togas? Why have they put on bracelets with so many amethysts, rings sparkling with magnificent emeralds? Why are they carrying elegant canes beautifully worked in silver and gold? Because the barbarians are coming today and things like that dazzle the barbarians. Why don’t our distingui...
Post a Comment
Read more

Liberal Democrats v Conservatives: the battle in the blogosphere

It is probably fair to say that the advent of Nick Clegg, the new leader of the Liberal Democrats, has not been greeted with unalloyed joy by our Conservative opponents. Indeed, it would hardly be wrong to say that the past few weeks has seen some "pretty robust" debate between Conservative and Liberal Democrat bloggers. Even the Queen Mum of blogging, the generally genial Iain Dale seems to have been featuring as many stories as he can to try to show Liberal Democrats in as poor a light as possible. Neither, to be fair, has the traffic been all one way: I have "fisked' Mr. Cameron's rather half-baked proposals on health, and attacked several of the Conservative positions that have emerged from the fog of their policy making process. Most Liberal Democrats have attacked the Conservatives probably with more vigour even than the distrusted, discredited Labour government. So what lies behind this sharper debate, this emerging war in the blogosphere? Partly- in my ...
20 comments
Read more

Lib Dem v. Tory (Round 2)

The Liberal Democrats stand for a distinct political ideology. It is an ideology built around both socially and economically liberal precepts. In as far as our ruling Labour government can be said to have an ideology at all, it coincides with Liberalism only incidentally. Labour stands for pragmatism, and where it does not there is still a core of values that are collectivist and not individual. Sometimes people are prepared to claim the moral high ground for policies of social solidarity and redistribution of wealth. Liberals may argue in favour of equality of opportunity, we can not argue in favour- as Socialists do- of "and equal society". The reason is simple: Socialism does not work. If one places equality above freedom, then eventually we get tyranny. This is why, while we may argue in favour of a more equal society as being a stronger society, the tools that we may use to gain -in our view- socially desirable outcomes must rest upon freedom above all else. As PJ O'...
14 comments
Read more