Labour Has Failed (Part 3)

Labour Has Failed

Labour has failed! They have failed to improve or make more efficient; our schools, our National Health Service, our police force, the civil service, the welfare state or our prisons. They have failed our heroic troops and service personal that this government sent to foreign fields under a false mandate. Labour has failed Britain’s nurses, her doctors, her policemen and women, her students, her businessmen, her workers, and her soldiers. They have failed Britain’s teachers, wardens, professors and researchers. They have failed our builders, our plumbers, our electricians and our architects.

Finally, they have failed Britain’s voters. They promised positive change in 1997, 2001 and 2005, and they have not provided. They promised better services and we have not received them. They promised a safer Britain, and instead the Home Secretary now has to walk with protection. This is failure on a grand and appalling scale.

This failure has not only cost us socially…

The Economy: We know the situation is dire. We have seen and heard about the economy’s morose condition. In fact, almost every day, we receive yet more bad news about our national debt, the rising level of unemployment and rising prices.

If we are to believe Gordon Brown, Labour is not to blame. If we are to listen to Brown, we might assume that he has “saved the world.” If we are to believe Alistair Darling; the whole world is suffering, and in fact, Britain was and is one of the best prepared countries to ride out this depression. They are wrong.

Britain is in trouble and Labour under Gordon Brown is worsening not helping the situation. As George Osborne said in his conference speech, in Britain today:

  • One in five young people cannot find work
  • One pound in every four the state spends goes straight on the national debt
  • More of our taxes go on paying the interest on that debt than on educating our children or defending our country.

Our level of national debt is enormous! As of earlier this year, our dept level rests at a figure of around £800.8 billion! UK national dept is now expected to hit 75% of British GDP by 2013! This is awful!

It now costs the UK economy £75 billion to deal with the extra red tape and bureaucracy that this government has created. That is 1/15 of the money (£5 billion) that Brown lost us through his thoughtless sale of our gold reserves. That is many times more than the quickly rising unemployment levels that this country is facing due to Labour’s inadequacies (2.4 million) and this is much MUCH more than the government spends on our armed services. (£32 billion)

Brown said the times of boom and bust were over and yet now we are in one of the deepest ‘busts’ in our history. Where have the ideals of Prime Ministerial responsibility gone? You have failed us Labour and Gordon Brown. Call the election that you dithered on two years ago, and allow the British people to show you how they feel about Labour’s failure!

Part 1 –

Part 2 –

Daniel Cole


8 thoughts on “Labour Has Failed (Part 3)

  1. “Call the election that you dithered on two years ago, and allow the British people to show you how they feel about Labour’s failure!”

    So basically you’re admitting to what many are saying across the country? That people aren’t looking to vote the Tories in, they just want to vote Labour out? Not exactly a glowing endorsement is it?

  2. Not what I am saying at all. And let me say, how typical of you mark to attempt to convince others so. The voters have not had a chance to vote for Brown as Prime Minister at any time. Next year they will get that chance. Finally. They will then be able to show their anger at the inepitude of this Labour government, by voting for a stronger choice, the Conservatives. If we win, it will be because we are seen to be the better choice. If it were a case of voters “just want(ing) to vote Labour out” then we would see a huge rise in the percentage of people voting for the smaller parties. Funny to see Mark, that you read the whole article, and all you could try and debate with was the wording of the last line.

  3. Dan,

    While I agree that Mark’s comment is something of a twisting of your article, one must admit there is something of a truth to what he says. There are many who would find it very difficult to countenance a Conservative government (based predominantly – and somewhat errantly – on the sins of their forefathers.) These same voters are, however, concerned that a Labour government might garner sufficient votes in the polls to remain in power – something they will not allow.

    Despite their recent agitations, neither the Liberal Democrats nor the multitude of smaller parties would capture a sufficient proportion of the vote even to form a coalition. This is a two horse race, and all know that.

    To return more explicitly to your article, one cannot help but feel the same sentiment pervades: this is an article that crows over Labour’s defeat, but offers no redress.

    Were you a Parliamentary Candidate, or indeed a politician, this would be rubbished as fiery rhetoric with very little real content. Furthermore, I take issue with the dispersion of unattributed figures indicating such large scale failure. The UK defence budget, for instance, fails to take into account the Treasury Reserve used for Operations – I believe it currently stands at £9.5 billion.

    Might I ask that you write an article detailing the Conservative government’s answer to these problems?

  4. The Conservatives have come out with plenty of sensible, and practical, solutions to help solve this debt crisis. On Monday of the party conference they spoke at length about getting people off benefits and back in to work, which saves expenditure and increases tax revenue, as well as being better for society.

    George Osborne spoke of his desire to cut the cost of Whitehall by up to a third, but it is unreasonable to expect him to provide a breakdown of precisely how this will be done when he doesn’t have access to the information required. But the intent is there, and when examining an opposition party that is what is important.

    Furthermore, they have spoken about maintaining the 50 pence tax rate if it proves itself to be beneficial until we have driven down the debt. Punishing your own base of supporters is hardly the smartest of moves, but the Conservatives are acknowledging what a mess we are in, and that tough times calls for tough measures.

    You talk about having very little content, but as I said, you can hardly expect this, especially when the general election is potentially 8 months away. Anything could happen in that time, and making hundreds of pledges that may well not be able to be met would account to nothing more than treating the electorate with discontent, and there’s been enough of that lately.

  5. James,

    Your comment is inherently contradictory, you talk of “plenty of sensible, and practical, solutions” but then defend a LACK of content from the Conservatives.

    Here there is, I think, a misunderstanding. I referred to the attributable content in Dan Cole’s article. Nonetheless, while I can understand an unwillingness to promise the world and not deliver, the Conservative Party remains unable to propose coherent and viable policies in a number of extremely important areas. Having spoken at length about getting people off benefits, how will they actually do it? If you are going to be a real runner in an election, you need to give the people policies, policies that work, policies that address the nation’s problems, of which there are many, in a cogent and manageable way.

    I remain extremely skeptical of the catch-all “this will be funded by cuts in wasteful government spending.” I’d be particularly interested to know how exactly he plans to cut the civil service at the MoD among other departments.

    I think the excuse that it is eight months before the General Election is lacking and I’d like to see real policy rather than more “whipped cream” – all air and sugar, no substance.

  6. I love the fact that the Tories are adamant that this recession was entirely due to the “failings” of Brown, Blair and 12 years of Labour. Nearly all though seem to forget to delve outside Britain’s borders. Italy, France, Germany, Spain, Greece, USA (and I could go on) all suffered a recession also.

    Now, I’ll admit that I’m not the finest tuned economist, but if the recession WAS caused by Labour, how did effect all these other major western economic countries? Or did every single country equally have a leader like Brown in charge? I think it is easy enough to say, no.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s