Advanced search

David Cameron: A Progress report on your time in number 10 so far

(32 Posts)
ttosca Wed 27-Feb-13 13:10:00

Progress report on your time in number 10 so far.


Lord Freud, DWP and Atos, work capability assessment:

10,000 deaths before, during or after testing with nearly half of all appeals being upheld for the claimants. Cost of appeals: £25 million in the first half of 2012. Verdict: not fit for purpose. Failure.

Iain Duncan Smith, DWP and back-to-work-pogroms:

Court finds the regulations of enforced labour illegal. Providers, such as A4E, REED and Ingeus, actually reduced the number of ESAclaimants finding work by 80%, and the number of 18-24 year of JSA claimants finding work by 74%. Cost: £5 billion. Verdict: Worse than useless. Failure.

Poverty in the UK:

The Trussell Trust, which now operates more than 300 food banks in the UK. In 2011/12, 128,697 emergency food parcels were handed out - up from just 26,000 in 2008/9. Verdict: Poverty and hunger are increasing. Failure.

The NHS:

You promised to protect the NHS. Section 75 of the Health & Social Care Act 2012 dramatically extends competition and forces ‘compulsory competitive markets’ on the NHS. Verdict: You have broken every promise you made about the NHS. Nationwide the NHS is falling apart. Failure.

Emergency services:

Fire, Police and Ambulance services are being quietly sold off. In the West Midlands alone, 1,000 staff have already been lost to the cuts, more than 2,500 jobs - a third of them police officers, two thirds essential frontline staff - could be lost as part of an exercise that has already cost the taxpayer £3million. Companies like G4S cannot offer the same skills as those losing their jobs to cuts. Verdict: Failure.


Michael Gove forced to abandon English Baccalaureate. Gove selling off school playing fields, but lies about the numbers. Leaked documents of the minutes of a meeting of top Department for Education officials reveal all academies and free schools in England, which are the Education Secretary's personal obsession, would be free to become profit-making for the first time, and be entirely decoupled from Whitehallcontrol. Verdict: Betrayal and failure.

Bedroom tax:

Westminsterexpects 5,000 families to be evicted by housing benefit cuts - and it's happening almost everywhere. Councils have no choice as they frantically search for cheap housing, often hundreds of miles away. In Hullthe bedroom tax hits 4,700 families with a spare room, and only 73 small properties free. 660,000 households expected to be evicted. Verdict: Vicious attack on the poorest people in Britain. Verdict: Failure.


You are stripping away workers rights and what you call bureaucratic red tape and promoting a fire at will policy. High street companies are failing at epic proportions. Verdict: Failure.

The economy:

George Osborne: With the loss of Britain's AAA status, the economy is showing no signs of recovery. Osborne is presiding over the worst recovery in history. Verdict: Epic failure.

As the worst government in British history all that remains is that you are removed from office and your government thrown out on its ear as soon as possible.

Reference Material:...

kimorama Mon 04-Mar-13 11:20:07

No suprising Cameron and Osborne look after their own class. Was ever thus.

hoodoo12345 Sun 03-Mar-13 13:15:32

Our wonderful government are shafting the vulnerable in society whist the rich gain, everyone jumping on their "scrounging,"propaganda bandwagon.
It makes me sick how the poor, ill, SAHP's etc are treated like scum but the rich tax evaders, thieving bankers, 3 house owning MPs get away with it over and over again.
It makes me sick.

kimorama Sat 02-Mar-13 11:31:23

the original op seems to have got it about right

telsa Fri 01-Mar-13 14:36:34

This is so ridiculous, Ajandjjmum. There is tons of evidence out there. Why not spend your weekend reading this

Some highlights:

The richest tenth of the population have seen much bigger proportional rises in their incomes than any other group

The poorest tenth of the population now have, between them, 1.3% of the country's total income and the second poorest tenth have 4%. In contrast, the richest tenth have 31% and the second richest tenth have 15%. The income of the richest tenth is more than the income of all those on below-average incomes (i.e. the bottom five tenths) combined.

The proportion of total income going to the richest tenth is noticeably higher than a decade ago: 31% in 2008/09 compared with 28% in 1998/99. The rest of the income distribution changed little over the last decade.

The gini coefficient measure of overall income inequality in the United Kingdom is now higher than at any previous time in the last thirty years.

etc etc

ttosca Fri 01-Mar-13 14:10:59


> Your opinion is that ,the govt is vicious,, and that ,the wealthy have benefitted from wealth transfer, - what facts do you have that back this up?

I'm amazed that you're asking me this. I've only been posting facts about the government record on this forum for the past year or so. Are you new to the forum, or have you just started noticing my posts?

You can also easily find news reports to back up claims of wealth transfer from the poor to the rich and attacks on the poor. Here is one which came up today:

Government 'misrepresenting' the poor, say churches

The government is deliberately misusing evidence and statistics to misrepresent the plight of the poor, a report says


As for wealth transfer, well, come April, millionaires will receive a tax cut worth tens of thousands of pounds, whilst at the same time the poorest will have their housing benefits reduced, forcing many out of their home.

Meanwhile, there have been thousands of 'surplus' (statistically unexpected deaths) from disabled and sick people who have been re-assessed by the DWP as 'fit for work':

The average death toll seems to be that the govt. are killing 73 people per week in this way.

ttosca Fri 01-Mar-13 14:01:33


> So Ttosca. Which party do you support? Or which comes closest to your personal belief's. If you don't support Labour then it follows that both the lib dems is too right wing for you. And clearly you don't support the Tories.

I don't support any party.

> So I am curious, which party do you think "I agree with most of your views?"

Like many people, I find the lack of real choice frustrating. I believe, as people say on here constantly, that come election time they vote based on 'the least bad' party.

I don't think this is a solution to our problems, as people have been doing this for decades, and we'd have the same result; the definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing and expecting something different to occur.

Although participation in national elections in the West has been steadily declining since the post war period, participation in politics and activism has risen. So I believe the only way to real change - as history has shown - is not through the ballot box, but by people fighting for justice and their rights through protest and dissent.

ttosca Fri 01-Mar-13 13:56:47

It's funny how some govt. supporters complain I have no opinions and just copy and past articles whilst others say that I'm full of opinion and no facts.

yummymummy345 Fri 01-Mar-13 13:03:50

There are not enough houses to go around - (council) hence bedroom tax although it does seem too black and white with not taking individual cases into consideration.

The high street failing due to cultural change in how we purchase items ie online .

A lot of our problems are caused by the global situation- too many people in the world, food costing too much, oil prices increases due to various political situations.

Previously, in the last government we were told (we dont have access to the full extent of our borrowing and deficit) that as a country we were spending too much money. It stands to reason that the country needs to stop paying out so much. Personally it made me look at our finances and cut costs myself.

They (govnt) have increased the tax at the top end, if you do this too much the rich will invest elsewhere. Unfortunately, with the poorer people, any slight cut in finances are felt the hardest.

At least this government is trying different policies out - yes some rushed it seems but with the Labour I cant think of any positive policies perhaps just the minimum wage which they introduced.

ajandjjmum Fri 01-Mar-13 09:42:05

Oh dear grin

ajandjjmum Fri 01-Mar-13 09:38:30

Your opinion is that ,the govt is vicious,, and that ,the wealthy have benefitted from wealth transfer, - what facts do you have that back this up?

niceguy2 Fri 01-Mar-13 09:33:45

So Ttosca. Which party do you support? Or which comes closest to your personal belief's. If you don't support Labour then it follows that both the lib dems is too right wing for you. And clearly you don't support the Tories.

So I am curious, which party do you think "I agree with most of your views?"

From what I've read I don't think even Socialist Worker is left enough for your views.

telsa Fri 01-Mar-13 08:47:26

Ttosca is right and it is fact, not opinion. This govt is more vicious even than Thatcher's and the already wealthy have benefitted from this wealth transfer massively.

ttosca Fri 01-Mar-13 08:29:18


CogitoErgoSometimes Fri 01-Mar-13 07:56:36

"You know sometimes it's OK to have a strong opinion about something."

You never have an opinion Ttossa confused ... you just copy/paste other people's. Never a word about what you think or what you'd do that's different or better.

ajandjjmum Fri 01-Mar-13 07:49:01

You're being very emotional about this rather than factual ttosca. One of the reasons I hate politics! grin

What party is called the 'Nasty' party - it's like 5 year old name-calling?

How are they attempting to privatise the NHS?

How are they killing thousands of people?

ttosca Thu 28-Feb-13 22:50:10

> What do you understand the benefits of the previous govnt to be op?

I hated the last government, and I'm not a Labour supporter. I understand why people voted them out last time. They wanted a change, and the govt. in power had been in for too long and had become complacent. They had taken for granted that people wouldn't vote for the Nasty party.

Now the Nasty party is back in, and they're doing the best to attack the poor and middle-classes, public services, and the welfare state. They are killing (yes, literally killing) thousands of people in the process. They are attempting to privatize the NHS, and it looks like they made succeed.

Britain will become a much nasty and more brutish place when they are kicked out in 2015. There will most likely be riots before then.

ttosca Thu 28-Feb-13 22:46:34


> And tomorrow there will be another opinion, from another so-called expert. You can play with figures to make them say an awful lot of different things.

Well, then, what are you basing your previous statement about how 'this govt left a terrible mess' on?

When do believe the 'so-called' experts and when are you skeptical?

yummymummy345 Thu 28-Feb-13 22:10:09

What do you understand the benefits of the previous govnt to be op?

ajandjjmum Thu 28-Feb-13 21:47:43

And tomorrow there will be another opinion, from another so-called expert. You can play with figures to make them say an awful lot of different things.

ttosca Thu 28-Feb-13 15:00:40


> I'm not backing the govt. - I think they're all pretty well as bad as each other - but the last lot were around for years, and left the country in a hell of a mess.

Please read:

niceguy2 Thu 28-Feb-13 13:19:18

The truth of the matter is that the coalition have failed to cut anywhere near the amount they originally promised. In fact the cuts made have only been around what Labour were proposing at the election.

So on the one hand you can berate the coalition for not being able to keep their election pledge. But on the other hand can you imagine how much worse things would be had they stuck to their guns regardless of what was going on around them in the world?

I'd actually really like a credible opposition. It would keep the govt on their toes a lot more. But what I see is Labour is being led by Dumb & Dumber. They oppose all cuts whilst saying they wouldn't reverse any and refuse to name what cuts they'd have made instead.

The result of their nearly 3 year policy review so far has been about three populist 'policies' which are pure politics rather than any credible economic benefit.

ajandjjmum Thu 28-Feb-13 11:57:20

I was trying to be a 'niceguy'!! grin

Thing is Lady, we would be in a crap situation nomatter who had formed this government - clearing up 'a hell of a mess'.

Itsjustafleshwound Thu 28-Feb-13 09:33:45

And deathly silence on the other side of the commons. I would vote for the party that actually had some constructive plans and ideas to add to the debate rather than the knee jerk no.

It is rather easy being outside looking in ...

LadyWidmerpool Thu 28-Feb-13 09:30:22

'A hell of a mess'

Not by today's standards. Things are much worse now.

niceguy2 Thu 28-Feb-13 09:09:40

Slight bias.... win the prize of understatement of 2013! smile

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now »

Already registered? Log in with: