The New Labour candidate may be "too busy" to attend hustings. The very name of the quite longstanding Tory candidate may be unknown to her own activists. The BNP may be on record that it will only put up if I do, and may be getting cold feet even over that. But here are some questions for those seeking election here at North West Durham.
Will you give a voice to:
- the alliance of the traditional Right and the traditional Left against the neoconservative war agenda and its assaults on liberty at home, including against any new Cold War with Russia?
- the socially and culturally conservative, strongly patriotic tendencies within the British Left’s traditional electoral base?
- those who recognise that we cannot deliver the welfare provisions and the other public services that our people have rightly come to expect unless we know how many people there are in this country, unless we control immigration properly, and unless we insist that everyone use spoken and written English to the necessary level?
- those who refuse to allow climate change to be used as an excuse to destroy or prevent secure employment, to drive down wages or working conditions, to arrest economic development around the world, to forbid the working classes and non-white people from having children, to inflate the fuel prices that always hit the poor hardest, or to restrict either travel opportunities or a full diet to the rich?
Are you:
- pro-life, pro-family, pro-worker and anti-war?
- an economically social democratic, morally and socially conservative British and Commonwealth patriot?
- a One Nation politician, with an equal emphasis on the One and on the Nation?
- a conservationist, not an environmentalist?
- far too left-wing to be a liberal, far too conservative to be a capitalist?
Do you advocate and will you deliver:
- no one’s tax-free income to fall below half national median earnings?
- abolition of prescription charges, and restoration free eye and dental treatment?
- making employment rights begin on day one of employment and apply regardless of the number of hours worked, as promised by John Smith?
- saving council housing, and bringing all council services back in house?
- renationalising the utilities and the railways?
- building a national network of public transport free at the point of use?
- removal of all nuclear, radiological, chemical and biological weapons from British soil and waters?
Do you advocate and will you deliver:
- restoration of the supremacy of British over EU law?
- returning to preventative policing based on foot patrols?
- making each offence carry a minimum sentence of one third of its maximum sentence, or 15 years for life?
- restoration of the grammar schools, restoration of O-levels, restoration of excellent Secondary Modern schools, and defence and restoration of Special Needs Education?
- a legal presumption of equal parenting, restoration of the tax allowance for fathers, and allowing paternity leave to be taken at any time in the first 18 years of the child’s life?
- helping farmers and small businesses through a windfall tax on the supermarkets?
- defending village services, saving shooting and fishing, repealing the hunting ban, and making Gypsies and Travellers obey the same planning laws as the rest of us?
- preserving the historic regimental system, rebuilding the Royal Navy, and saving the Royal Air Force?
Do you advocate and will you deliver:
- nuclear power and clean coal technology?
- restoration of British overall control of our defence capability?
- docking of Ministers’ pay if either spending or outcomes are lower in the North East than in Scotland or the South East?
- immediate and unconditional withdrawal from Afghanistan and Iraq, and no war against Iran?
- total opposition to lap-dancing clubs?
- an MP’s office in Consett as well as in Crook?
Yes, that does say "deliver". Amendments, Private Members’ Bills, deals in the coming hung Parliament, you know the sort of thing.
So, what say you?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Not only can I answer yes to all these questions, I can also promise a 40% reduction in the price of beer, and free fish and chips for all.
ReplyDeleteCheck and mate!
I was once told that abolishing the duty on beer would increase economic growth by one per cent on its own.
ReplyDeleteIt must be said that almost all beer consumed here is brewed here, even if the brand names are foreign. Almost all wine, for example, is made abroad.
Don't go stealing my policies Lindsay.
ReplyDeleteMine is a specific policy. Yours was just an aspiration.
ReplyDeleteOK, if that's the way you want to play it:
ReplyDeleteYes to all your questions, 50% reduction in the price of beer, free fish and chips for all AND the relocation of both Houses of Parliament to Consett.
Bet that solitary MPs office is looking pretty shabby now, eh Dave? Seen and raised my friend, seen and raised.
These are important questions, and I for one will be voting for whoever answers "No" most often.
ReplyDeleteWinner, you must want riots on the streets of Consett.
ReplyDeleteNot necessarily David, I don't think MPs are that poorly behaved.
ReplyDeleteI admit that some of your policies are a bit sketchy, David, so it's impossible to be certain - but it looks as if your spending commitments and tax cuts enormously outweigh your spending cuts and tax rises.
ReplyDeleteGiven the current state of the public finances, am I right in saying that you are in favour of a massive expansion in public borrowing? What do you think are the likely consequences of that?
Winner, but they are.
ReplyDeleteBeancounter, not necessarily at all. And haven't people like you done enough damage? How dare you still exist.
Beancounter needs that money for wars and City bailouts. That's why he doesn't see removing WMD from our territory and waters as a spending cut.
ReplyDeleteOh no, removing WMD from our territory and waters is certainly a spending cut (and one I support, incidentally). So is withdrawal of our armed forces from Afghanistan and Iraq (happy with that one too). Nevertheless, the net effect of all of David's policies is a substantial rise in public spending. Which ones are the immediate priorities, and which do you think are realistic only in the long term?
ReplyDelete(To be fair, I think putting an MP's office in Consett is probably affordable and achievable quite quickly.)
Because we are not in debt now are we?
ReplyDeleteAll these seem like year one priorities, easy to do by just shifting around existing money and not bailing out those counting our beans for themselves any more. Which of them would be expensive? Police foot patrols are cheaper than what they do now and a million times more effective.
Anyhow these are David's questions to the other candidates because they won't do hustings or nobody knows who they are or they might be too frightened to stand anyway. Let's hear them answer.
Well given they are questions for all the candidates, it seems reasonable to ask how David would pay for these. I'm not convinced that anonymous' touching faith that "easy to do by just shifting around existing money and not bailing out those counting our beans for themselves any more" is quite right...
ReplyDelete"which of these would be expensive?"
ReplyDeleteWell, just looking at the first section:
- renationalising the utilities and the railways
- building a national network of public transport free at the point of use
together would be a multi, multi million pound commitment, if not billions. David has a strange belief that this wouldn't be. I have to say I see absolutely no evidence that this would be the case, and a heck of a lot to the contrary
I'd like to take this opportunity to ensure Beancounter that my policies will lower debt, lower taxes and increase public spending.
ReplyDeleteAlso, as a special one-time offer, I will make the following promise - anyone who moves their support from David to me will be founder members of my new BBC steering group.
Anonymous - yes, we are in debt now. Well spotted. That's why additional spending is very difficult to achieve without setting out equivalent or greater cuts, or tax increases - it's not a reason why we can spend more. Picking out particular policies David advocates on the grounds that they might make savings is all very well, but they certainly won't save enough to cover:
ReplyDelete- raising the tax threshold to around £11,000
- free prescriptions, eye and dental treatment
- bringing all council services back in house
- free public transport
- increased prison sentencing
- nuclear power and clean coal
- "rebuilding the Royal Navy"
etc etc etc
Do the candidates know David's asking these questions? They might not check his blog daily, after all.
ReplyDeleteVerity and Beancounter, all cheaper that what already happens instead.
ReplyDeleteYou are, for example, probably the sort of people who think that the road network is "just there". It isn't, it is kept going at enormous central and local government expense. As, more to the present point, internal flying is heavily subsidised at the expense of the railways.
I could go on. Everything listed by Beancounter is cheaper than what happens at the moment. But you'll never convince Thtacherites/neocons of that, any more than of the facts about Thatcher, or about the Trotskyist origins of neoconservatism, or about how totally unconservative their capitalism and their wars both are, or about how their preferred economic system cannot function without unrestricted migration, or about how Tories and Republicans used to understand these thing perfectly and act accordingly. They are a cult.
A cult, moreover, based on a self-satisfaction which itself has no factual basis, but rather is grounded in the opposite of the facts about which parts of the economy are or are not productive or efficient, about who does or des not pay tax, and so on.
Beancounter does not understand deterrence, or defence, which is fundamentally the same thing. But he probably thinks he is a conservative.
ReplyDeletea) How much will it cost to create a national network of public transport free at the point of use?
ReplyDeleteb) How much will having such a network reduce the cost of having roads?
"Everything listed by Beancounter is cheaper than what happens at the moment. But you'll never convince Thtacherites/neocons of that..."
ReplyDeleteYou could try, you know, providing some arguments. That might convince them.
Loser, at least one of them is definitely a daily reader.
ReplyDeleteHow will you compensate the rail franchise holders?
ReplyDeleteHey, hey, hey. Go easy on David. He's already said that he will deliver these things. Because as an Indpendent MP in a hung parliament, he will effectively rule the country. So if he's said he can get a majority of MPs to agree with all of these within a year, it stands to reason that he's got literally unanswerable arguements for all of them. Otherwise how could he be so sure he can make them all happen?
ReplyDelete"restoration of the supremacy of British over EU law" - Was I asleep when we voted to make EU law paramount?
ReplyDeleteAnyways, I think I can answer 100% yes on your suggestions.
Anonymous 15:43, the railways were only ever privatised on the monstrous understanding that the profitability of the private rail companies would be guaranteed for ever by means of public subsidies. So the shareholders have already been more than compensated enough: in this unique circumstance, renationalisation should be without (further) compensation.
ReplyDeletegondito, at present, only an Independent can introduce such Bills, amendments or motions. The party machines would never allow “their” MPs to do so.
But how could any Labour or Liberal Democrat MP, at least, fail to support the ones on incomes, health, employment rights, council housing, council services, public ownership, public transport, weapons of mass destruction, energy, defence, Afghanistan, Iraq or lap-dancing? How could they then answer to their local parties?
How could any Tory MP, at least, fail to support the ones on Europe, education, policing, sentencing, fathers’ rights, the countryside, the Armed Forces, energy, defence, Afghanistan, Iraq or lap-dancing? How could they then answer to their local parties?
Or how could any MP from the English regions oppose docking Ministers’ pay if either spending or outcomes were lower in their respective areas than in Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland or the South East? How could they then answer to their local parties?
All they need is someone Independent enough to make them; to shame them into it if necessary. The more of us, the merrier. And from the consequent falling apart of the bankrupt old parties, proper parties will re-emerge.
In 2005, this constituency’s Independent vote, one third of the Tory vote, half the Liberal Democrat vote, and one third of the Labour vote added up to more than the remaining two thirds of Labour support. The sitting MP is retiring. Her would-be Labour successor will not even attend hustings. The Liberal Democrats are hardly going to fight this seat. The Tories are not going to fight this seat at all. In short, this seat can be taken.
We need a captain in each community, who will know where our vote is and who will get out that vote. We need to start organising now. Anyone interested, please contact davidaslindsay@hotmail.com. Remember, we only need to be the first past the post. But we need to get our act together without delay. As much as anything else, see the PayPal button on this blog.
Chris H, the supremacy of EU law is the first clause of the legislation taking us in, as subsequently approved in the 1975 referendum. People who claim that they only voted for a free trade area had not done even the most basic of research into what they were voting for. Welcome aboard. And do get in touch.
He's tried, Dish, he's tried.
ReplyDeleteDavid's command of basic economics is less than a brain damaged donkey.
ReplyDeleteI know totally discredited cranks when I see them. And I know when I am paying for them.
ReplyDeleteWell said, Mr L. Like the AGW lot, the pro-drugs lot and the foreign policy hawks, the free market zealots are cranks and frauds at our expense either in universities or by means of the bailouts that they get but they deny to everyone else.
ReplyDeleteYou don't need to be a free market zealot to think that David's policies carry large upfront costs which would be difficult to meet without significant additional public borrowing, when we already have a substantial deficit. This remains true even if they are all desirable policies.
ReplyDeleteAn awareness of this is the reason why Labour and Conservative MPs would not, in fact, back such amendments from a hypothetical independent MP. Labour and Conservative MPs regularly refuse, in fact, to back amendments which carry significant spending implications.
Stonver inhabits a parallel universe in which ending wars is more expensive than continuing them, owning the railways is more expensive having "private" companies on the public teat, digging our own coal and generating our own nuclear energy are more expensive that importing oil and gas from unsavoury regimes, etc.
ReplyDeleteHow are grammar schools and good secondary moderns (I went to one) more expensive than comps? How come they can afford free prescriptions, dentists and eye tests in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland but not in England? How is council housing more expensive than the housing benefit to private landlords racket? How are police on the streets more expensive than thousands and thousands in desk jobs?
Nothing proposed here requires a penny of spending over and above what already goes on and several of them are to save money, in some cases huge amounts of money to be saved.
ReplyDeleteEven something like restoring the tax allowance for fathers is just giving them back the allowance now paid to mothers instead even though they still get child benefit as well.
13 years into a Labour government and things like making employment rights begin on day one and apply regardless of hours, abolishing prescription charges, abolishing eye and dental charges, bringing back council housing, bringing all council services back in house and putting the police back out onto the beat have still not happened.
What is the Labour Party for, if it can't even deliver things like that?
Anonymous 17.15, taking your questions in turn:
ReplyDeleteHow are grammar schools and good secondary moderns (I went to one) more expensive than comps?
They aren't necessarily in the long run, but wholesale reorganisation of the secondary school system is expensive in the short term.
How come they can afford free prescriptions, dentists and eye tests in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland but not in England?
They have made different decisions on spending. As the Nuffield Trust showed recently, waiting times are much longer in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland - there is a trade-off between some good things and other good things. Personally I prefer the short waits.
How is council housing more expensive than the housing benefit to private landlords racket?
Again, it might save in the long term, but for councils to own houses they don't currently own requires either a) building houses; or b) buying houses. Both are much more expensive than renting. (This is also why many private individuals rent rather than building or buying their own home.)
How are police on the streets more expensive than thousands and thousands in desk jobs?
Depends on the numbers, but they will either need to spend some time on paperwork themselves (it's inevitable - they're part of the criminal justice system and need to record things properly to secure convictions) or employ other administrators to do much of this for them, but spend some time telling them what to record.
"wholesale reorganisation of the secondary school system is expensive in the short term"
ReplyDeleteNot necessarily at all.
"there is a trade-off between some good things and other good things"
Not necessarily at all.
"Both are much more expensive than renting."
Not necessarily at all.
"but they will either need to ... blah, blah, blah"
Not necessarily at all.
You have touched the rawest of nerves on both sides, David. Questioning Labour's beloved comprehensive schools and questioning the Tories' beloved council house sales. Keep it up.
ReplyDeleteDepend on it, Jeff. Depend on it.
ReplyDeleteIf comprehensivising secondary education was such a great social democratic measure, then how come Margaret Thatcher, no more a social democrat than she was a conservative (i.e., not at all), did nothing to bring back the grammar schools?
And if selling off the council housing stock was such a great conservative measure, then how come Tony Blair, no more a conservative than he was a social democrat (i.e., not at all), did nothing to bring back council housing?
If comprehensivising secondary education was such a great social democratic measure, then how come Margaret Thatcher, no more a social democrat than she was a conservative (i.e., not at all), did nothing to bring back the grammar schools?
ReplyDeleteTo win three general elections.
And if selling off the council housing stock was such a great conservative measure, then how come Tony Blair, no more a conservative than he was a social democrat (i.e., not at all), did nothing to bring back council housing?
To win three general elections.
I do like David's policies, but I also like free fish and chips. Plus, if I support Winner I get to be on the BBC steering board. So Winner, I'm with you!
ReplyDeleteA "BBC steering board"? Now, there's a thought...
ReplyDeleteBlede, neither of these policies was ever terribly popular. Comps have never been remotely popular at all, but, in a foretaste of so many things to come, there was no way of voting against them.
For everyone who liked council houses sales, there was, in particular, someone who felt aggrieved that the State was gifting considerable capital assets to already subsidised tenants ahead of those who had saved for their deposits while paying market rent. Those aggrieved were correct.
"A "BBC steering board"? Now, there's a thought..."
ReplyDeleteStealing policies again, eh?
We appear to be veering off track, which is - popular or not, these are multi million pound spending commitments at a time of national debt. How would David, or any other candidate espousing these, pay for them?
ReplyDeleteI would imagine this would be the number 1 question at any hustings. And forgive me, but I don't see some blather about "this is much cheaper than the current system" and "you [the questioner] are a discredited neoconservative, how dare you still exist" as a very convincing response, and I suspect none of the other voters would either.
Reggie, ... oh, what's the point? You obviously can't read, or more probably can but won't. Thatcher and Blair spring to mind.
ReplyDeleteAnd there aren't going to be any hustings. Everyone except me will refuse to attend them with the BNP, although everyone except me will be White British on census forms. And the New Labour candidate refuses to attend them at all.
Oh nice. So in response to a reasonable question from a voter, the wannabe MP for NW Durham replies "oh, what's the point? You obviously can't read, or more probably can but won't"
ReplyDeletePuts scum sucking pigs into some perspective, eh?
reggie how many hard line Thatcherites do you think there are in NW Durham? Such Tory voters as we have are mostly farmers and other One Nation types but as David would say equally One and Nation.
ReplyDeleteThere is already quite a lot of public spending you know. David is calling for more in cuts and cancellations than increases. But you'd rather spend money on death than life. Do you have shares in the arms companies?
Reggie isn't a voter here, as Anonymous 16:57 points out. Nor are you, Shary, in similar vein.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 16:57, that's a very good question. Read my opponents and ask yourself: shareholders in arms companies, shareholders in companies that depend on charging the council pretty much anything they like to do the services that councils used to do in house, shareholders in companies that charge whatever Housing Benefit will pay from people who would once have been council tenants, shareholders in rail companies guaranteed profitability by means of subsidies without accountability, bailout beneficiaries, war profiteers, gangmasters and those who use them, and on, and on, and on?
I think so. Oh, yes, I really do think so.
How do you know where Reggie and Shary are resident?
ReplyDeletePlease do not put up any more comments from the New Labour and other Tory Boys on half term, David. What do they know about North West Durham, anyway? At their age, what do they know about anywhere, anything or anyone?
ReplyDeleteConnie, it's not hard to guess. Between my comment at 17:04 and that of You Know Who I Am (yes, I do), we have the measure of those now engaged in a bombarding exercise for which there is doubtless some tiresome adolescent word.
ReplyDeleteThey have already reached "how dare you not put up my comment". Because you don't pay me, boy. And nor does your daddy. In fact, although he would furiously deny it, I pay him. See my comment at 17:04.
They don't pay tax at their age any more than we did. But neither do their daddies, whose tax loopholes are just as big subsidies from us to them as the rip off service contracts, the housing benefit landlordism, the bailouts, the highly lucrative wars and the unlimited immigrant labour.
ReplyDeleteYet their daddies think they pay for us, and the spotty, greasy youths parrot that same old bollocks. At their schools, commercial concerns exempt from VAT at our expense, they have never read or heard anyone remotely like you. Their spoon-fed little brains cannot compute it. So they explode in the form of anger on here.
Please do not swear on my blog, Jim. But, of course, you are spot on (no offence, acne boys). If you had seen the thirty-odd comments that I had to trawl through before finding only yours worth putting up, then you would know, even more than you obviously do already, just how right you are.
ReplyDeleteLife is too short for any more of them. I am closing this thread, and if they think of that as some sort of victory, also doubtless with a tiresome adolescent name, then I hope they see the world different once they have ... no, now I am just being silly.
When do the schools go back? Not a moment too soon.