| Archive Index | Main Site |   

No. 10 - An Assessment of the Parties

***The leader of the (New) Labour Party informed all and sundry that a vote for the Liberal Democrats is a vote for the Conservatives.  During the lead-up to the Iraq War there were demonstrations throughout the entire world against the war and full support for the continuance of weapons inspections by the United Nations.

***120 Labour MP’s voted against the war in Iraq.   The party had a majority in parliament of more than 160.   If the New Labour majority had been 100 and the other 40+ seats had been held by the LibDems we would not have circumvented the United Nations Security Council and many innocent Iraqis would still be alive.  The ongoing insurgency in that theatre is irrelevant to the present election, but, the question must surely be asked “Would the United States have gone ahead without our support ?”

***The conclusion has to be that Tony Blair has misused his large majority during the last 8 years.  During the John Major premiership the majority was miniscule compared to that of the present government, and therefore was totally dependent upon the Unionist vote in order to pass government legislation.   The Blair government with their massive majority were not dependent upon the Unionists, yet the Prime Minister has continuously bowed to the wishes of that lobby in Northern Ireland.   This seems slightly strange in the sense that he is a Catholic and one would have thought that a more balanced approach to the Northern Ireland problems would have resulted.   Since his premiership the N.I. Labour Party (SDLP) have sunk to their lowest numbers and Stormont has been suspended on six occasions in order to satisfy the Unionists.  Mr Trimble has since been voted out of office.

***Northern Ireland, although normally referred to as Ulster (with the exception of the county of Donegal) became separated from the remainder of the country in 1921.  The Prime Minister has been shuttling to-and-fro between the Taoiseach (Bertie Ahern) and Mr Trimble from the Unionist camp.   Ian Paisley (MEP) has regained prominence in the politics of N.I., and continues to oppose the Good Friday Agreement.   There is absolutely no way that the Unionists would be willing to join the Republic and therefore begs the question as to the involvement of the Taoiseach in our governments policies for N.I.

***The “Scottish Question” has raised it’s head on a least two occasions with the passing of the “Foundation Hospitals” bill and the “Trebling of Tuition Fees” bill in the house, where the Foundation bill was passed by 17 votes and the Tuition Fee bill by 5 votes thanks to the Scottish Labour vote.  Scotland doesn’t have Foundations Hospitals or Tuition Fees !

***The Conservative Party were promising 50% subsidies for those that wish to have treatment in the Private Sector during the election.   This would be using British Tax Payers money to enable those that can afford Private Health Care to jump the waiting lists.   This surely cannot be reasonable, funding the Private Sector from the Public Purse.
***The Party has campaigned on the Immigration issue and this is a reasonable argument since illegal immigration or uncontrolled immigration from any direction including the New European Union members can have a detrimental effect on many sectors within our society.   Some try to use this campaign as a “racial” issue.   Personal contacts convince me that this is simply not true.   Many second or third generation descendents of immigrants are just as much affected by uncontrolled immigration as the so-called native population.
***The leader of the party, Michael Howard has a reputation for being hard on crime.  Presumably this would have meant a continuing expansion of prison accommodation.  There must surely be another way to control the growth in the prison population.  The present government have been using “tagging” in order to save money on prison building !   Neither party appears to have an alternative strategy for redirecting the pursuits of the miscreants.    Re-offending is the norm (recidivists) yet no party appears to be willing or able to find an alternative approach to tackle the problems of drug addiction which is the main cause of crime in today’s world.   Not only do we have repeat offenders, but also the follow-up for drug users is totally inadequate which effectively exacerbates the problem rather than finding solutions.

***The Liberal Democrats have a vital role to play in today’s politics.  Many of their policies don’t bear too much scrutiny yet, without their contribution New Labour would be able to foist much legislation upon the country which is not necessarily in our interest.   The examples have already been mentioned previously.   The LibDem party can and will act as the “Checks & Balances” in our legislative assembly.
***The policy to abolish Tuition Fees is not really practical since education is a burden on the Exchequer.  They could well move for a reduction in fees to the original level or to halve the present fees.    This would help the students without presenting too bigger burden upon the Treasury.   The present fees are far too high and put the student in an unenviable position on leaving university.   Coupled to this is the astronomical increase in house prices which doesn’t bode too well for “first time buyers”.
***The party has the “Local Income Tax” scheme as part of it’s  policy.   This is not really feasible and will only muddy the waters even further.    What is required is a modification of the present Council Tax system in order to reflect ability to pay.  If the household consists of OAP’s or a family without a wage earner, i.e. unemployed, then there should be an automatic discount rate for that household.   To extend this using the LibDem system would be unnecessarily complicated and difficult to administer.  The present “means test” system is also unreasonable and unnecessary.   A simple declaration that there is no wage earner supported by standard documents will obviate the need for payment of Council Tax at the full rate until their situation changes.  The reduced rate would apply for the period of unemployment and not repayable if and when the individual regains employment.

 Continued over/