Gordon Brown so far
Posted by: Rasher on 31 July 2007
Looks as though GB has maintained a respectable space between himself & GWB, and then thrown himself wholeheartedly into proposals for the UN to aid Darfur.
I still insist that the guy is not Tony Blair all over again and that he has something to offer, and so far I'm reasonably cautiously pleased with what I've seen, although I acknowledge this is a honeymoon period still. He's certainly put the Tories into a bit of a panic.
If GB's foreign policy is far more respectable than Blair's, then there may be hope for the world, but interference by sending in troops to yet another region, whatever the human circumstances, is a tough act to get right, as we know only too well.
Aid is needed in Darfur without doubt, but is this GB's Iraq or is it his path to greatness?
I still insist that the guy is not Tony Blair all over again and that he has something to offer, and so far I'm reasonably cautiously pleased with what I've seen, although I acknowledge this is a honeymoon period still. He's certainly put the Tories into a bit of a panic.
If GB's foreign policy is far more respectable than Blair's, then there may be hope for the world, but interference by sending in troops to yet another region, whatever the human circumstances, is a tough act to get right, as we know only too well.
Aid is needed in Darfur without doubt, but is this GB's Iraq or is it his path to greatness?
Posted on: 31 July 2007 by JonR
That GB is very different to TB is, I would say, not that difficult to see and the change has come almost as a relief from 10 years of Blair-style presidential "government".
It will be interesting to see whether the so-called "Brown bounce" lasts all the way up to the next General Election. Unfortunately for Cameron, he seems to be too busy trying to out-Blair Blair and as a result now has to contend with an increasingly restless, fractious Tory party, thus severely denting his challenge to Brown (outside PMQs that is).
I would be particularly interested to see whether Brown fulfils on his commitment to change the style of government to a more traditional one of collective cabinet responsibility. The jury's still out on that one, I reckon.
It will be interesting to see whether the so-called "Brown bounce" lasts all the way up to the next General Election. Unfortunately for Cameron, he seems to be too busy trying to out-Blair Blair and as a result now has to contend with an increasingly restless, fractious Tory party, thus severely denting his challenge to Brown (outside PMQs that is).
I would be particularly interested to see whether Brown fulfils on his commitment to change the style of government to a more traditional one of collective cabinet responsibility. The jury's still out on that one, I reckon.
Posted on: 01 August 2007 by Guido Fawkes
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss
I get down on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again
I don't know why that song all ways goes through my head when there is a change{?} in the government.
I get down on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again
I don't know why that song all ways goes through my head when there is a change{?} in the government.
Posted on: 01 August 2007 by Chris Kelly
Rasher
As I understand it, GB has got the UN to agree to send troops into Darfur but there will not be a British contingent. Our army is already over-stretched with its existing engagements.
As for the overall picture, any poll bounce is yet further evidence of the gullibility of the British electorate.
Rock on ROTF!
As I understand it, GB has got the UN to agree to send troops into Darfur but there will not be a British contingent. Our army is already over-stretched with its existing engagements.
As for the overall picture, any poll bounce is yet further evidence of the gullibility of the British electorate.
Rock on ROTF!
Posted on: 01 August 2007 by Derek Wright
UN resolutions are not completed solutions.
Will the required number of troops be supplied in time to assist in Dafur? Brave words in NY do not not always translate into resolution of a problem the other side of the world
Will the required number of troops be supplied in time to assist in Dafur? Brave words in NY do not not always translate into resolution of a problem the other side of the world
Posted on: 01 August 2007 by Chris Kelly
True enough Derek. But it is better than just pretending that the disaster isn't happening. The Ethiopian government seems to have at least accepted the idea in principle (a big change in attitude) but insists that the UN force is primarily made up of African troops, which seems like a fair plan.
Posted on: 01 August 2007 by Rasher
It's okay to be cynical up to a point, but negativity hasn't ever achieved anything. Surely if there was less cynicism on the part of the voting public we would have a healthier opposition, and therefore a government more on its toes?
Brown, Bush & Camp David (doesn't sound right does it!) was a good illustration that we've stopped being the USA's lapdog. I think this will be an interesting year, and a positive one too. Let’s see.
quote:Brave words in NY do not always translate into resolution of a problem the other side of the world
Brown, Bush & Camp David (doesn't sound right does it!) was a good illustration that we've stopped being the USA's lapdog. I think this will be an interesting year, and a positive one too. Let’s see.
Posted on: 01 August 2007 by Staedtler
The new Stranglers version of the classic "Golden Brown"
Gordon Brown, taxes for fun,
weighs me down, with my cash he spends
throughout the night,
on things that aren't right,
always a frown with Gordon Brown.....
Gordon Brown, taxes for fun,
weighs me down, with my cash he spends
throughout the night,
on things that aren't right,
always a frown with Gordon Brown.....
Posted on: 01 August 2007 by JamieWednesday
Huh. If he runs the country in the same way as the economy, we could well be in the sh*t. His legacy to his chum Alistair 'don't call me' Darling is a super size me, bloated state sector that now accounts for 45% of GDP(!) a bit like Cuba really, a budget deficit at 3% of GDP at the top of the cycle, worse than the US (which everyone knows has problems) and Italy which is hardly the bastion of economic prudence, run policies which has given the highest level of inflation in years which also helps lead the Bank to give us interest rates the highest in G7, half as much again as our nearest Geographical rivals in the Eurozone, sold billions of pounds of our gold reserves at a historically low price when he ran out of cash and credit and don't forget that he and Alistair are died in the wool give take 'til it hurts merchants who should perhaps be concentrating more on the issues at home than Darfur (IMHO).
Posted on: 01 August 2007 by Roy T
He has an outstanding record running the economy over the last ten or so years; he is not as close to the US as Maggie or Tony; he has let the BofE do their own thing; he has had his opinions and outlook shaped by a Church of Scotland minister rather than Mandelson. So what is not to like?
Posted on: 01 August 2007 by rupert bear
quote:Originally posted by JamieWednesday:
the highest level of inflation in years which also helps lead the Bank to give us interest rates the highest in G7.
??? Inflation rate generally within the very tight targets set some years ago, and interest rates on average half what they were under Maggie and Johnnie Major. What exactly are you saying??!
More generally, if he carries on like this, gets on with the job and avoids the narcissism of Blair and the arrogance of the Tories, it will be a delightful change.
Posted on: 01 August 2007 by MichaelC
Brown has hardly managed the economy well - he inherited a strong economy and has systematically raped it with his tax and spend policies. Pensions are a time bomb ticking away. Interest rates are up. Debt is back up. How many are signed off as unable to work - I find that hard to believe. Of the available work force all bar two people would appear to be non-productive ie work for the government. It's not rocket science - just look at the French economy. Brown's model. And anyone dumb enough to announce in advance of selling gold reserves is just plain stupid.
Do you really believe, given his previous position of power (the power?) within government, that he did not believe in "Blair's" policies?
Prisons anyone?
And what about that constitution, oops, treay I meant. Why no referendum?
The sooner Brown goes, the better. Having said that, Cameron does not inspire confidence. This country is in trouble.
Do you really believe, given his previous position of power (the power?) within government, that he did not believe in "Blair's" policies?
Prisons anyone?
And what about that constitution, oops, treay I meant. Why no referendum?
The sooner Brown goes, the better. Having said that, Cameron does not inspire confidence. This country is in trouble.
Posted on: 01 August 2007 by u5227470736789439
Give the man a mandate and he can govern with authority. He has made mistakes, but point me to a politician who has not and I will show you a saint!
I am all for an early election. I am no Socialist, but I do reckon that a bit of Socialist government every now and again is a very good thing. The last ended in 1979, so after nearly thirty years of a Tory or Tory-style government a bit of true Labour government can do no harm for the working man who seems to have been left out the equation increasingly, when it comes to sharing the prosperity these long years of Tory rule have brought.
The reason I would almost certainly vote for a Brown-led government now is that we have seen all too clearly what happens when you vote for government that is a triumph of style over policy. I don't fancy Mr Cameron's style at all - certainly not more than Mr Blair's. I believe Mr Cameron's background is in PR, which tells me all I need to know about the qualities he has to offer.
As a lifelong Tory supporter I wanted the Party to appoint Mr Davis as leader at the time Mr Cameron was elected. They show very little judgement choosing leaders, and will reap the reward for this I would wager. Mr Haigh would have been good if appointed today, Mr Howard was already yesterday's man when chosen, Mr Duncan Smith was a non-entity, and Mr Cameron is less use in my view than a chocolate colander.
Kindest regards from Fredrik
I am all for an early election. I am no Socialist, but I do reckon that a bit of Socialist government every now and again is a very good thing. The last ended in 1979, so after nearly thirty years of a Tory or Tory-style government a bit of true Labour government can do no harm for the working man who seems to have been left out the equation increasingly, when it comes to sharing the prosperity these long years of Tory rule have brought.
The reason I would almost certainly vote for a Brown-led government now is that we have seen all too clearly what happens when you vote for government that is a triumph of style over policy. I don't fancy Mr Cameron's style at all - certainly not more than Mr Blair's. I believe Mr Cameron's background is in PR, which tells me all I need to know about the qualities he has to offer.
As a lifelong Tory supporter I wanted the Party to appoint Mr Davis as leader at the time Mr Cameron was elected. They show very little judgement choosing leaders, and will reap the reward for this I would wager. Mr Haigh would have been good if appointed today, Mr Howard was already yesterday's man when chosen, Mr Duncan Smith was a non-entity, and Mr Cameron is less use in my view than a chocolate colander.
Kindest regards from Fredrik
Posted on: 01 August 2007 by jayd
quote:Originally posted by Rasher:
...negativity hasn't ever achieved anything.
That's a very negative thing to say.

Posted on: 01 August 2007 by fidelio
i can just tell you that i think more of brown than blair based on his failure (so far) to get into w's lap.
Posted on: 02 August 2007 by JamieWednesday
quote:??? Inflation rate generally within the very tight targets set some years ago, and interest rates on average half what they were under Maggie and Johnnie Major. What exactly are you saying??!
Wasn't just those two, inflation and interest rates were kept artificially high for close on fifty years while trying to pay off our debts from the second world war )and other overseas activities from Korea, through Malaya to Suez, NI, the Gulf etc.) By the nineties, most of these WW2 bonds were gone and we could return to a more sensible, Euro style low inflation/low interest rate cycle.
Unfortunately Brown did not let the BofE do its own thing, the BofE were asked to set interest rates in line with Brown's economic policies. Those policies involved the state, business and individuals borrowing more pro rata than ever before in the presence of our new 'low' interest rate environment. Government, institutional and private spending on credit thereby helped keep the economy moving pro tem but it was somewhat artificial as the wealth wasn't really being generated by the economy, rather borrowing from the financial sector. If the state, business and individuals can't pay that money back, then the technical term is bankruptcy...or you sell your house. Or your business. Or your Gold. If you can get a buyer. And most of those buyers are now from the Middle East and Asia where the economies are being built on real substance whether it's a raw commodity (oil) or service (tourism) or employment of it's labour force in a productive mode as opposed to job creation in local and central Government.