SE23.com - The Official Forum for Forest Hill & Honor Oak, London SE23
Online since 2002  -  10,000+ members

Home | SE23 Topics | Shops & Services | Wider Topics | Offered/Wanted/Lost/Found | Advertising | Contact
Geddes Hairdressing & Barbering Studio One Armstrong & Co Solicitors Adult Learning Lewisham


Post Reply  Post Topic 
Pages (2): « First [1] 2 Next > Last »
If you voted LibDem, do you sleep at night?
Author Message
thenutfield


Posts: 235
Joined: Nov 2007
Post: #1
09-12-2010 09:37 PM

Since the General Election, I have watched the Lib Dems with a mixture of shock, amusement (that's long gone now), shame and disgust.

- unquestioning slavery to the savage Tory cuts agenda
- cuts to welfare benefits, that hit the most vulnerable in society
- the end of new social housing...well done Lib Dems, you've managed to achieve what the Blitz couldn't!
- and now the bare faced betrayal of a pledge on tuition fees

I have to admit, I almost voted Lib Dem. I was disillusioned with Labour (my normal choice) and was quite impressed with Alex Feakes the LibDem candidate, when he knocked on my door. Thankfully for my conscience (and for my sleep), I didn't vote for them in the end.

Amongst all the cynicism there is about British politics, there did at least used to be a slightly warm feeling that the Lib Dems may be a bit hopeless, but at least they were a nice bunch. Not anymore!! What a bunch of lying, two-faced power grabbing b******s.

Find all posts by this user Reply
brian


Posts: 2,002
Joined: Apr 2005
Post: #2
09-12-2010 10:00 PM

What a load of rubbish if you do not mind me saying. The Lib Dems acted honourably so we could have a government at a time of national emergency.

Find all posts by this user Reply
thenutfield


Posts: 235
Joined: Nov 2007
Post: #3
09-12-2010 10:06 PM

I don't mind you saying, Brian.
But what is honorable about making a firm pledge, then breaking it simply to keep a place at the top table? And raising tuition fees will do nothing for the 'national emergency'.

Find all posts by this user Reply
michael


Posts: 3,199
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #4
09-12-2010 11:04 PM

nutfield,
You are absolutely right that the minority of LibDem MPs who voted for the tuition fee changes should be ashamed of themselves for breaking their pledge and for voting for a policy that is detrimental to university education in England.
Had the 28 Lib Dems who voted in favour kept their pledge, or even the abstention they were allowed in the coalition agreement, the government proposal would have been defeated.

I felt very similar when the Labour Party brought in the tuition fees in the first place, and then (contrary to a manifesto commitment) introduced top up fees on the day of the Hutton report grabbing all the headlines (see http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2004...s.students for details of the Labour history on tuition fees).

There is also the odd situation where the Lib Dem election policy of a graduation tax (a stupid idea that leaves graduates paying a higher rate of tax for the rest of their lives) is suddenly the policy of the Labour Party. My suspicion is that had we had a LibLab coalition the Lib Dems would have found themselves in exactly the same position, only with both Labour and Conservatives supporting higher tuition fees recommended by the Browne report.

But everybody in Lewisham West can sleep easy knowing that the did not elect somebody who voted for fees. Labour won here, votes for other parties have no impact under FPTP or AV, and we will never know how Alex Feakes would have voted if elected.

Find all posts by this user Reply
brian


Posts: 2,002
Joined: Apr 2005
Post: #5
09-12-2010 11:07 PM

It is called coalition . You have to give and take , each party having to make sacrifices.
We cannot support paying for a student population made up of 40% plus of the age group.

When I was of an age when some of my friends were going to University, 1968 , only about 5% went.
I do however support the call for people who had a free university education and done well to make a contribution. They could be taxed now, makes sense.
There is no excuse for mindless violence. I hope , but doubt , if many will be prosecuted and imprisoned. Why also were they not at lectures today.

Find all posts by this user Reply
thenutfield


Posts: 235
Joined: Nov 2007
Post: #6
09-12-2010 11:47 PM

michael
i agree with a lot of what you say, and i am not defending Labour's record over tuition fees. However, I don't think that Labour have campaigned in University towns on a particular policy - opposition to tuition fees - then done a complete about face once in 'power'.

Who can ever believe anything the LIbDems ever say again?

Find all posts by this user Reply
brian


Posts: 2,002
Joined: Apr 2005
Post: #7
10-12-2010 09:34 AM

Michael
I 100% agree with you re graduation tax. Foreign students would , assuming they return home , not pay a penny.

Did your friend Mr Dowd not vote for the introduction of fees in the first place.

Surely the main issue now is anarchy . The Police and if required Army need to get tough with these criminals.

Find all posts by this user Reply
michael


Posts: 3,199
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #8
10-12-2010 10:22 AM

Brian,
I didn't realise I could count Mr Dowd as one of my friends, or was that addressed to nutfield?

Looking round the peaceful streets of central London this morning I do not think anarchy is the main issue. The main issue is providing a fair system that encourages young people to gain an education that will benefit themselves and the whole country. Despite the rhetoric from the Lib Dem ministers I do not believe that yesterday's bill was progressive.

Find all posts by this user Reply
ForestHillier


Posts: 490
Joined: Jul 2010
Post: #9
10-12-2010 10:23 AM

Clegg is a lying 2 faced b*****d

Find all posts by this user Reply
jon14


Posts: 145
Joined: Sep 2007
Post: #10
10-12-2010 10:43 AM

I'm not convinced that Lib Dems should be ashamed at breaking their pledge - their manifesto was costed and developed on the basis of sole power. Let's not forgot, they are the minority party by a long way in this coalition - they had an absolutely horrendus general election.

When you come into coalition, you prioritise what's most important to you - and for the Lib dems that was the £10,000 tax rate. But something so expensive has to be paid for somehow.

The only other alternative would've been a minority Tory government, which probably would've meant another general election in six months.

Find all posts by this user Reply
ForestHillier


Posts: 490
Joined: Jul 2010
Post: #11
10-12-2010 10:47 AM

When you come into coalition, you prioritise what's most important to you - and for the Lib dems that was the £10,000 tax rate. But something so expensive has to be paid for somehow.

So when is this £10k tax rate coming in ??? - unlikely to be in the lifetime of this parliment is it

The libs manifesto to the students and the whole of the uk was WE WILL NOT INCREASE STUDENT FEES, then as soon as they get a bit of power, they do a complete u turn

Find all posts by this user Reply
jon14


Posts: 145
Joined: Sep 2007
Post: #12
10-12-2010 11:02 AM

Quote:
So when is this £10k tax rate coming in ??? - unlikely to be in the lifetime of this parliment is it


If they did it all at once, it would cost £17 billion. So it's happening in stages between now and 2015.

Find all posts by this user Reply
michael


Posts: 3,199
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #13
10-12-2010 11:13 AM

Guardian Wrote:
June 7 2001
Labour is re-elected with a manifesto pledge stating that it "will not introduce top-up fees and has legislated against them"

January 22 2003
Less than two years after pledging not to introduce top-up fees, Labour publishes a white paper setting out proposals allowing universities to set their own tuition fees up to a cap of £3,000 a year.

May 12 2003
Conservative party leader, Iain Duncan Smith, pledges that all university tuition fees would be abolished under a future Conservative government, condemning tuition fees as "a tax on learning".


All three main parties have pledged not to increase student tuition fees and have done a complete u-turn.

The reason why there was not anarchy on the streets with previous legislation on tuition fees is that the NUS leadership did not stand up to their party leadership (Labour) for fear of the impact on their future political careers. With the Labour Party now in opposition students appear to have regained their voices (and spray cans).

Find all posts by this user Reply
DerbyHillTop


Posts: 120
Joined: Aug 2008
Post: #14
10-12-2010 11:41 AM

My disappointment is at all of us. We proclaim that country needs to regain their budgets under control by paying off the deficit (or even reducing it) for the sake of future generations. Well increasing tuition fees seems like passing the countryís debt onto future young generations. Letís face it; the government will issue the loans and some of them will be written off after 30 years if not repaid. I see little difference how this will reduce the deficit in the short to medium term. The government will still need to borrow in order to lend to students. Please correct me if this is not how the loan system will work because it makes no sense to me.

Find all posts by this user Reply
brian


Posts: 2,002
Joined: Apr 2005
Post: #15
10-12-2010 12:40 PM

But why should University be free . I agres should be for those who are very poor but not for the majority.
I think the lucky ones who profited from free education in the past should now be back taxed.Surely no one could object to that.

Tearing flag down from The Centotaph is a disgrace to the millions who sacrificed their lives to enable these thugs to go on the rampage. The Police need to get a grip on these riots.

Find all posts by this user Reply
DerbyHillTop


Posts: 120
Joined: Aug 2008
Post: #16
10-12-2010 12:48 PM

Brian,

those who got free education are being taxed more already. On average they earn more and therefore they pay more tax. Some even pay a bigger percentage of their income.

Don't be bitter that you never went to University. Times have moved on and we should be proud as a country that people are more educated now than in the past. Surely country benefits as well as the individuals.

Find all posts by this user Reply
brian


Posts: 2,002
Joined: Apr 2005
Post: #17
10-12-2010 01:04 PM

Derby Top
I am not remotely bitter I did not attend Uni. I am glad I started work at 16 and did not end up doing too bad.
We cannot as a nation subsidise so many students. Many of whom take mickey mouse courses.
In Switzerland only about 25% go to Uni. Who has the better economy.

Under new scheme the poorer will do better. Only those earning a good wage will pay back the costs.

Find all posts by this user Reply
DerbyHillTop


Posts: 120
Joined: Aug 2008
Post: #18
10-12-2010 01:51 PM

If the poorer donít pay the full cost of their ĎMickey Mouseí degree, you and I will. So how is that fair according to you. They got a worthless degree and we are picking up the cost.

The smarter ones pay for it twice, by paying more tax and by paying more on the loan. What a great message to encourage you to do well for yourself. It also means that someone on 25k with a degree will pay more in tax tan a colleague who hasnít got one.

Donít you think that in tough times when unemployment is rising (even more so for under 25s) it is better to have more of them in further education than on the dole/out of work?

Find all posts by this user Reply
Andy


Posts: 57
Joined: Feb 2005
Post: #19
10-12-2010 04:07 PM

DerbyHillTop,
I fear that you are banging your head against a very thick wall continuing this.

Find all posts by this user Reply
brian


Posts: 2,002
Joined: Apr 2005
Post: #20
10-12-2010 04:23 PM

Dear Andrew
Thanks for your positive comment.
Just to say , as I have before , I am sure the demographics of this site are not the same as the demographics for SE23 as a whole. I speak to many who not only agree with me but some who think I am too left wing.
I am not ashamed to be patriotic in support of HMG and Her Majesty.
There are a number of policies I do not agree with especially eminating from Justice Dept , but have to accept The Coalition is a compromise on both sides.This despite there superior education seems to have bypassed many.
Anarchy should be unacceptable to all I would have thought, except the anarchist. Certainly the cost of policing these events should come of the Higher Education Budget and not The Met.
God Bless you All.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Pages (2): « First [1] 2 Next > Last »

Friends of Blythe Hill Fields