Gordon Brown?

Yes

Regards

Jim

Why? George

When Brown came to power I thought we would come to appreciate more 'serious' and statesmanlike leader. I also imagined that having been in the wings for so long he would have a coherent philosophy and set of consistent policies ready for implementation. Whilst I appreciate all politicians are prey to 'events' it is hard to escape the impression that he has been sluggish and overall extremely unimpressive. He has failed to energise a ruling party that has got lazy and unfocussed, and has failed to convince the country of his leadership.

It feels to me that the government have run out of steam, and backbench restiveness is surely a marker of that. Not great when we have a somewhat testing time ahead (for which Brown cannot really be blaimed of course). It typifies Teflon Tony that he managed to ooze off the stage just as the economic tide started to turn, something I'm sure Brown has not failed to realise!

Bruce

The problem is of course that there is no opposition with

quote:

a coherent philosophy and set of consistent policies ready for implementation

quote:

Originally posted by bob mccluckie:
The problem is of course that there is no opposition with

quote:

a coherent philosophy and set of consistent policies ready for implementation

.

...well perhaps but that is not an excuse for GB. Since his accession to the premiership was long awaited, planned/plotted and actually scheduled should we not have expected him to arrive bursting with energy and ideas? The opposition have the 'luxury' of not actually knowing if they will ever be in a position to implement any of their policies. Brown assumed the post knowing he had the political power and electoral mandate to deliver his plans.

Bruce

I agree with your every word Bruce.

On the run-up I would have heated debates with a friend of mine who is a Tory supporter, insisting that we should wait & see what GB was going to bring. I was thinking of the resignation speeches of Geoffrey Howe & Nigel Lawson from the Thatcher mob and imagining that we had only seen GB performing under the instructions of Blair so far.

Needless to say I am utterly disappointed and am now eating humble pie down at the pub.

More importantly, who the hell are we going to vote for now? My worst fear is that we are in for a series of Tory & Liberal type leadership backstabbing that will leave the country with nobody at the wheel.

I agree with Bruce.
What concerns me is that (1) even if one thought abolishing the 10% rate was a good thing, the way he has handled it has been politically inept, a characteristic we do not need in a prime minister.
(2) In fact, the 10% rate was introduced only a few years ago by the very same Gordon Brown, as chancellor, so abolishing it now speaks of no long term planning, let alone strategy.
And (3) Brown's need to be right and to be seen to be right is very damaging. He appears to be willing to see any amount of damage to people's lives, the government, his party, and his reputation rather than accept that he was wrong on this occasion.
As John Prescott has found, the more open you are, the more you invite respect...
cheers

quote:

Originally posted by Bruce Woodhouse:

Brown assumed the post knowing he had the political power and electoral mandate to deliver his plans.

Bruce

Oh no he did not. He took the post after Tony B won the election for him.

I think we are now seeing the reason why he was kept out of the leadership position.

Jono

With regards to the 10p rate I understand entirely why he wishes to abolish it, it is costly to administer and IMHO complicates further an already tortuously complicated tax system. I suspect that the reasons for introducing it in the first place were political rather than rational. The more straightforward thing to do would have been to raise the tax free threshold, which would have had the same effect on revenue without the additional complication and would have benefited the very lowest earners the most. The new arrangement makes significantly more sense to me, but I am surprised that he hasn’t chosen to raise the threshold rather than or in addition to lowering the basic rate. In fairness what he has done will benefit middle income families, who have been hit quite hard by some Labour policies. However, if one was very cynical one would point out that the people who it helps most are “New Labour” voters who the polls tell us are starting to migrate back to the Tories!

quote:

Originally posted by Jono 13:

quote:

Originally posted by Bruce Woodhouse:

Brown assumed the post knowing he had the political power and electoral mandate to deliver his plans.

Bruce

Oh no he did not. He took the post after Tony B won the election for him.

I think we are now seeing the reason why he was kept out of the leadership position.

Jono

Wether he won the election or not he assumed power with a large commons majority and several years to run before the next election-surely he has had the opportunity to make his mark therefore? Or are you suggesting he came with ambitous and progressive plans but has been stymied by the parliamentary labour party?

Bruce

For me Paul Merton provided the best political observation re: GB on HIGNFY ...

We are witnessing a Greek tragedy;
GB has been waiting to be PM for so long, & now he's finally in No.10.
But he finds himself useless at the job, & seems paralysed by indecision & fear.

PMs "Never a frown with Gordon Brown" line is also a cracker!

Seems to me that the advantages of our constitution are showing themselves. Mr Brown has budged.

George

quote:

is he (Gordon Brown) worthy of the support of any working person

Dear George

I think the word working is spurious - the man is a politician.

Good guys in the houses of parliament have always been few and far between; only one that comes to mind is young Guy Fawkes - treated very badly IMHO.

ATB Rotf

I wanna be the leader
I wanna be the leader
Can I be the leader?
Can I? I can?
Promise? Promise?
Yippee I'm the leader
I'm the leader

OK what shall we do?

Roger McGough

Dear ROTF,

I am sure, after reading your post the the word "working" was indeed spare! "Any" might well be substituted, ... perhaps ... perhaps not ...

The main point about politicians is that they should not be in high office for too long. It only encourages them! I am not a natural socialist, but would vote that way if it helped remove a [different] governement I might have supported at an election four or five years earlier. In my view New Labour has had long enough in office. In five or eight years after the election I may well think their replacement would be better gone as well!

George

quote:

I am sure, after reading your post the the word "working" was indeed spare! "Any" might well be substituted, ... perhaps ... perhaps not ...

George,
The hardest hit by the abolition of the 10% band are not necessarily "working", but those pensioners under the age of 65 who have not seen the increased allowances now enjoyed by their older fellow-pensioners.
For example, my wife's low income meant that it did not qualify for standard rate taxation so her tax bill has now doubled. Though Brown has said that "compensation" will be offered, she will have to wait for an unspecified time. Thanks, Gordon.
Ken

Our staff will be compensated by the minum wage changes-out of my pocket as an employer.

Cheers Gordon

Dear Ken,

I am aware that though not much publiced pensioners are hit.

Dear Bruce,

When I saw the announcement that the minumum wage would be hiked, I simple thought that at this point in the economic cycle this looks bloody lunatic. Not thought through at all.

_______

Brown is not my idea of what either a Socialist leader should be or even economically literate leader, let alone "Prudent!" Where did that come from?

George

quote:

Originally posted by GFFJ:
Brown is not my idea of what either a Socialist leader should be or even economically literate leader, let alone "Prudent!" Where did that come from?

George

George,

I think what you may be trying to say is that Brown isn't a leader, of any sort.

A leader must be able to abstract themselves from the detail and deal with the concepts. Brown never came across to me as capable of that. Too enamoured of the detail.

Willy.

Poor old Gordon. So long dreaming of Nr.10 and when he finally gets there he just cannot cut the mustard.

He should leave and save the country and his party further embarrassment.

The end.

Peter

[And that's me taking a charitable line]

OK.

I am f*cking fed up of this whole non-story now.

A very small percentage of the population is going to have a slightly higher income tax bill for a year or so. So what? I and countless others have been hit, hit and hit again so many times over the last ten years by increasing direct and 'indirect' taxation under this Government already. Every single year since 1998, my wife and I have both handed over an increased percentage of our direct earnings as tax. Every year. So, if you happen to be one of the few earning between £5,000 and £7,000 p.a. and under 65, with no kids you will be hit with, at most, an extra £16 a month, and for most people under £10 once other benefits like fuel allowance are handed back. Welcome to the club. Get over it or vote the sods out. The rest of the population have been stung more and more and more for ten years now - if I felt I was getting value for money I'd have little truck with it but somehow HMRC are getting better and better at generating income and the Government is getting worse (or better I guess) at spending it in ever more bizarre ways. Though has a Labour Government been any different since their one biggy, the NHS, was created? They should of course either be Socialist and tax us and generate strength for all, or be outright capitalist, tax us less and tell those that can to fend for themselves. The balance is completely screwed.

The same budget introduced a higher earnings limit on NI (£100 pw) - that's costing a lot of folks £40 pm extra(- and please don't come back with 'they can afford it' - most people spend whatever their earnings are already on their families) and an extra £40 a month for many, many more people than those affected by 10pgate, at a time when the cost of everything is going up at ever higher rates is an ever bigger p*ss take. Is that reported to the same extent? No. Of course not. Tax thresholds have been lagging even the Governments' ridiculous CPI index for years now. Any news stories? MPs standing in the house? Nope. Any there any 'Angry political stand off' news points to be garnered by doing so? Probably not. Just more tax to fund more sh*tty, crappy, useless, bureaucratic t*ssers. That's all. Up against the wall with the lot of 'em.

Labour, Tory, LD or f*ckin' aliens from Mars. Can we please just get some people in who want to run things for the best with common sense and true purpose rather than constantly aiming for political gain?

Rant done.

quote:

Originally posted by JamieWednesday:
Labour, Tory, LD or f*ckin' aliens from Mars. Can we please just get some people in who want to run things for the best with common sense and true purpose rather than constantly aiming for political gain?

Unfortunately, James, 'politics' is more about personal glory (with a very few exceptions) than a real desire to do good for the general populus.

Right, so can we get some people in who aren't politicians then? After all, who says politicians have to run the country?

quote:

Originally posted by JamieWednesday:

Labour, Tory, LD or f*ckin' aliens from Mars. Can we please just get some people in who want to run things for the best with common sense and true purpose rather than constantly aiming for political gain?

Rant done.

Probably not. Unfortunately.

Willy.

WE are now seeing another of Gordon's timebombs exploding with the refinery strike in Scotland not a little associated with the raid on pension schemes when Gordo became chancellor and started/ assisted in the demise of the Defined Benefit Pension Schemes.

I wonder how much tax revenue will be lost this year due to non delivery of oil and gas from the North Sea fields.