Help protect children from gaming harms.

Take our survey

Please or to access all these features

Politics

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

An open letter to everyone who voted Conservative

557 replies

blacksunday · 10/05/2015 07:19

To everyone who voted conservative yesterday,

I hope you’re happy. Actually that’s a lie, I really don’t. But before you sit smugly down and give yourself a big pat on the back I’d like to ask you a few questions.

Do you think you haven’t benefitted from the system you are currently trying to break down? As a child, did you ever go to hospital? Have you had an education? Did you ever use a library? Have you ever been on a bus? If so, you have benefited from a system which subsidises facilities with taxes. And now you have, you are willing to take it away from everyone after you. Correct me if I’m wrong but that doesn’t seem very fair. You cannot have socialism and a support system when you need it but then be unwilling to support it for other people.

Now if you are someone who has used the private sector more than public services then I also want to know a few things. If you went to private school, or used private medical care as a child, did you pay for it yourself? Now I’m not asking if your parents paid for it, but you personally. I’m guessing the answer is no. So can you genuinely say you worked hard to get these privileges? No baby earns the right to an education. No child works hard to be born into a particular family who can afford healthcare. So why do you think one person is more deserving than another? If you value working hard and getting on how can you see this as fair? Do you really want to live in a world where children are deemed more worthy of education and healthcare based on what family they come from?

If you are someone who uses a lot of private, who are you? Are you one of the 1% who are currently getting richer? If so, are you ok with the fact that your benefit is someone else’s misery, someone’s poverty, someone’s lack of care? Are you ok with the fact that while you got a pay rise 900,000 people had to go to food banks because they literally didn’t have enough money to feed themselves to survive? Do you really believe that you work harder than these people?

If you aren’t one of these few people benefitting from this system then why have you voted for it? Conservatives use rhetoric of working hard and fairness but this is simply not the reality. If you start life without a lot, to get out of that is hard. “Success” stories are pinned up to show that if you work hard you get somewhere. But they are stories because they are anomalies. To come from a background of little education or money and to get a career you want is not the common way, and you can’t do it without a benefit system. We do not live in a system where if you work hard you get somewhere, the system the conservatives are creating means that if you start off well off you stay that way. Because someone who goes to a private school with tiny class sizes and one on one help does not have to work as hard as someone at an underachieving state school with over worked underpaid staff and huge classes. They just don’t.

Now if you are either one of these types of people you have to question whether you really do believe in what you have voted for. Because in voting conservative you are saying you are happy with the last 5 years. You are endorsing food banks. You are endorsing cutting care for the elderly and the mentally ill. You are endorsing a party where over half the MPs voted against gay marriage. You are saying yes to the NHS being privatised. You are saying you are happy with people being put off education based not on ability or passion but by money. You are saying yes to victimising the poor and disabled and scapegoating people based on where they come from. You are saying that you are ok with the incredible inequality in our country today and you are saying you want more of it.

I do not wish poverty on anyone. It is a cruel and harsh life. But what I do wish for you is that you at least experience it. If not first hand, that you witness the harsh trapping reality that is poverty. The gruelling cycle that doesn’t allow a parent to feed their children. That doesn’t allow for parents to feed themselves. And that you see that this is people who are working. People with jobs. And if they aren’t I hope you see that a life on benefits is not the picnic people make it out to be. Nobody wants to be on benefits. Maybe if you see this you will see what you have voted for.

And if you are ok with all of this then you make me sick. I can’t put it any other way. I am so ashamed to come from a country where this is apparently what the majority think. That the majority of people are too selfish to accept any form of tax rise to support those in our society who need help makes me so incredibly sad. Truly you should be ashamed of yourself that you can so heartlessly put yourself first and not see the consequences. I hope that in the next 5 years you fully appreciate what you did yesterday. I hope you know what you have supported and I hope one day you feel guilty. Because I am scared of what the next 5 years will bring and you should be too.

OP posts:
weeburrower1 · 15/05/2015 15:12

I have no knowledge or interest in current commercial law, I'm only really interested in protecting public services. There's a very clear potential for a clash between government/local authority policies and corporate interests.

You're right about the limiting of profits (or projected profits) being vague- that's one of the problems. That very issue has been raised in Canada where all too often the finding goes in favour of the 'investor' on that basis.

An example I've saw used is that if it is a government public health policy to change the packaging on cigarettes, they're then open to be sued because it can be considered to limit the 'investors' future profits. There is a fancy word for it but I can't remember it, ex-something.

I'm sure there are both many advantages and disadvantages in TTIP, but ISDS is a big problem, and that's before you even consider the impact on the regulatory process.

Isitmebut · 15/05/2015 14:57

weeburrower1 .... "limiting their profits" sounds a tad vague, so will the 'profits' be set before hand, otherwise how will anyone know, never mind prove, they are being "limited" or indeed exceeded?

So far, looking at the real world and probably how commercial contracts work, I suspect my version is closer to the truth - and numb-nut politicians without a collective business brain between them, or those whose membership don't want competition in public services (possibly the same) are using some formalising of contracts to promote their own agenda.

A company can not get half way through a project and say I'm not going on as my profit isn't enough, and walk away without penalty, costing taxpayers £billions.

So why should politicians/governments have that 'walk away' protection if either make incompetent initial decisions, or change their mind later?

So I reiterate, what is the main difference to the commercial contract law that exists today?

Isitmebut · 15/05/2015 14:41

TwartFaceBeetj .... "the origin of the articles" rather than the specifics within, still hiding behind that one, from those who think everything in the Daily Mirror is gospel? lol

Yup everyone like the OECD and Tristram HUnt, a possible future PM of this country (lol), is wrong - and those within the teaching establishment telling a Conservative coalition that they know best, above government and no changes are needed - will always be right. Got it.
www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/labour-admits-great-crime-on-education-tristram-hunt-says-his-party-encouraged-schools-to-aim-too-low--and-pupils-paid-the-price-9053693.html

You mentioned 16-24 year olds, during the Brown boom when we found jobs for 2-3 million new citizens and record UK employment, WHY did we have 580,000 unemployed in early 2004 and 710,000 before the financial crash - as they were OVER qualified???

Add it all up and there is a message there, the system 'was not working' and in a real crisis, rather than the ones Mr Miliband was making up for his manifesto.

weeburrower1 · 15/05/2015 14:39

To keep it short and sweet, any corporation can sue the government (at any level) for anything that they consider to be limiting their profits. In other words, the private sector has the public sector over a barrel as any investors' (corporations, really) profits will basically have to be the deciding factor. Not only can this limit the government (at any level) in implementing their own policies, but it could end up costing the public purse in payouts.

I'll have a look for some links tonight but the best example to look for is the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the impact that ISDS within this has had in Canada.

Isitmebut · 15/05/2015 14:27

Thank you *weeburrower18 ... hopefully a starter for 10;, "damaging" how, please explain.

The last time I looked, the private sector wanted shareholder protection against, say, politicians of one party,committing to long term or expensive projects i.e. an NHS computer system or a brace of overly large aircraft carriers, and then those politicians, or those replacing them, coming in and trying to cancel those projects - causing financial losses to the companies involved.

Even if the private sector should not have any protection against political numb-nuts spending taxpayers money badly under a TTIP, how does that DIFFER from any legal protection/litigation rights they, the private sector, has now?

TwartFaceBeetj · 15/05/2015 14:18

Isitme

Again you have quoted the 'shock' soundbites and not anything from further on in the article where it concludes that actually the 16-24 year olds have better skills then people people in there 50-60 or even how the removing the northern island results, significantly changes the results in favour of a much higher overall ability.

Also any article were the results have been through research done by the Taxpayers alliance Is not a neutral independent result because it is linked to the tory party
powerbase.info/index.php/Taxpayers%27_Alliance

Would you believe anything a labour/leftwing think tank published?

The nationwide survey was conducted by researchbods, and they only used 2000 12-14 year olds overs 11 days, we don't know from what part of the country, or even what sets these pupils were in, they could of gone round so many schools, only interviewing the lowest sets in each year.
So only 2000 children from the whole of Britains pupils, are taken for a cross section of all pupils.

shelly if you want evidence of how newspaper media does have an effect on SOME voters. You only have to look at isitme and the origin of articles linked.

weeburrower1 · 15/05/2015 14:17

Four words to explain how TTIP puts public services at risk - Investor State Dispute Settlement. That's the damaging part of TTIP.

Isitmebut · 15/05/2015 13:58

betseyfly ... Russell Brand or any other self deluded duffus not knowing what they are talking about, especially when issuing warnings, nay scoffing, that OTHERS don't know what they are talking about.

TTIP clearly on parr with I.S. in some peoples minds is not being aired why, its not the great threat to our public services some want us to believe, no one knows the full terms yet, what.

Please, gis 2-3 salient features why TTIP is a direct threat to our public services and why they are powerless to resist, as when I last looked several months ago I couldn't see it. GO.

betseyfly · 15/05/2015 13:49

Oh dear Isitme is rather taking over now it seems...Poor you, Russell Brand upsets you too?

Shelly Re; TTIP the point I was making was : how virtually no air time has been given to this by the Beeb, (among most other mainstream media outlets) yet we all know exactly what I.S are doing.. Or how many immigrants have entered the country since ---- ! All info on TTIP has come from leaked documents and Freedom of Information requests available on the web. Worryingly, the covert nature of the talks on TTIP may well be the least of our problems.

Isitmebut · 15/05/2015 12:13

LumpySpacedPrincess ..... Again, I mentioned teaching assistants in reference to the fall in the numbers of public sector workers since 2010 in a numbers guess, as Labour had increased the employment by over 1 million, there were so many teacher assistants - and I read the policy had not worked.

FYI, these are the people I sincerely hope have now gone.;
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1214001/The-cost-quango-Britain-hits-170bn--seven-fold-rise-Labour-came-power.html

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1358144/Labours-3m-town-hall-jobs-bonanza-employed-deliver-frontline-services.html

However if you are looking at childrens progress under the policies of a Labour government, my children have long left school so I don't follow education day-to-day - but the domestic and international evidence appears to show that the hugely increased budget/staff numbers was not "successful".

“A study by Nationwide finds that more than half of secondary school pupils struggle to work out change in their heads, prompting claims that maths lessons are leaving them "unequipped for everyday situations"
www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/10631728/Pupils-cannot-count-out-change-due-to-poor-maths-skills.html

"“One question involved asking them to calculate the correct change from £100 if they had bought shopping totalling £64.23, but more than half – 52 per cent – gave the wrong answer. It emerged that more than a quarter were more than £1 out.”

“England’s young adults trail the world in literacy and maths”.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-24433320

”Young adults in England have scored among the lowest results in the industrialised world in international literacy and numeracy tests.”

”A major study by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) shows how England's 16 to 24-year-olds are falling behind their Asian and European counterparts.”

”England is 22nd for literacy and 21st for numeracy out of 24 countries.”

And if you want further BIG PICTURE reading, this article a while back by the respected Max Hastings on a report by Miriam Gross, published by the Centre for Policy Studies, makes interesting reading.
www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1296126/Ideologues-illiteracy-MAX-HASTINGS-terrible-damage-wrought-schools-Left-wing-educationalists.html

Anyhoo...I am not getting further sucked into an education debate as I don't know the answers.

LumpySpacedPrincess · 15/05/2015 06:47

Pupils who receive intensive help from teaching assistants make less progress than their classmates, damning research into a key Labour education policy has concluded. intervention is a tiny part of a ta's role. Surely you cannot sack a load of people and call them the fat on the top because one part of their job is deemed to be unsuccessful? Plus, these children would probably make even less progress without intervention. You cannot just stamp your foot and demand higher standards, children do not work that way.

LumpySpacedPrincess · 15/05/2015 06:41

Several women voted to reduce the limit too - are they woman haters?

Yep, it's perfectly possible for a woman to be a misogynist.

NRomanoff · 15/05/2015 05:39

isit well I disagree conclusion about them. Maybe this is the problem, the left think people have one lever and either are right are wrong. Not everything is black and white and there certainly more than 50 shades of grey.

Do I like every tory mp? No. But I don't have to. I don't believe that anyone completely agrees with any party. I felt complete dread at the thought of the economy in the hands of cheque bouncing, home flipping Ed Balls. As I said before, I think that would have ruined the country for all of us. That bothers me more.

VanillaTwirl · 14/05/2015 23:36

Caroline Dinenage voted against gay marriage on the basis that it conflicted with people's religious beliefs and because it could force those with particular religious beliefs to have to compromise them in certain circumstances.
I am an atheist so do not support that, but some people are religious and do - such is life.
She has said since her appointment that she will endeavour to promote and protect LGBT rights and equality.
Time will tell if she is true to her word.

Jeremy Hunt advocated a 12 week abortion limit (I presume this is the 'woman hating' angle?).
Several women voted to reduce the limit too - are they woman haters?

As professional people, I have to believe that regardless of their thoughts or beliefs in the past, they can push that to one side and do the job they have been elected & selected to do, ie serve and represent the views and best interests of their electorate.

Isitmebut · 14/05/2015 23:27

Frankly I'm just glad the Conservatives have MP's with half a brain to both have their own opinions and get on with a job.

For 13-years, starting with a 166 majority how many Labour MPs (as a percentage) said boo to the Blair/Brown goose on major Labour policies we know were lemons in oh so many ways?

Prior to the last election, how many Labour MPs ACTUALLY said to Ed Miliband and his band of academic advisors their policies were shite BEFORE the General Election - as nearly every one is coming out now and saying they knew he was making a mistake his his narrow focus, even his own brother?

If we wanted MPs just to sit there, draw a salary and say nothing of their own opinions, it would be far cheaper to replace them with robot clones, or cheaper still, tubs of lard.

MoominKoalaAndMiniMoom · 14/05/2015 20:17

I haven't actually seen any Tory supporters react to the announcement of the cabinet.

Are you pleased we have an anti gay equalities minister and an anti women health minister? Is this what you wanted?

VanillaTwirl · 14/05/2015 19:30

Oh yes, and thank you for your thanks.

Star
TheTravellingLemon · 14/05/2015 19:28

I'm pretty sure if was ignorance and fear which gave the Tories enough votes to win a majority.

Funny, I'm pretty sure it was the electorate Hmm

NRomanoff · 14/05/2015 19:28

No, I'm pretty sure if was ignorance and fear which gave the Tories enough votes to win a majority.

I assure you that is incorrect. Your posts show you actually have no clue why people voted Conservative and your opinion is based on ignorance. I also think, since you didn't vote Labour (who are the only party with a real chance of beating Conservative) you can't moan that conservatives got in.

Roonerspism · 14/05/2015 19:27

Of course Labour didn't cause a global economic crisis. But their solution was to spend their way out of it. It didn't work and in this election, their complete lack of economic policy was all too obvious.

VanillaTwirl · 14/05/2015 19:26

Enjoy the protest against the democratic choice made by the majority vote in this country OP.

Be sure to thank your fellow protesters for the extra cost to the national purse as a result of the protest against the democratic choice of the country as to which government they wanted, the government who was voted into power.

Be sure to thank the police who will have to no doubt deal with the usual thugs and public order offences when I'm sure they'd rather be enjoying time doing something else off duty, or using their precious resources to do something other than pander to a load of huffy anti Tory folk.

Be sure to donate to the 'protest fund', as they are desperate for your cash, coz "these events cost a lot to stage".

ThroughThickAndThin01 · 14/05/2015 19:21

Well done, Tory voters

Thanks, OP.

ShellyBoobs · 14/05/2015 19:19

Well done, Tory voters.

Forgot to say thanks for the above.

I've awarded myself a star. Star

blacksunday · 14/05/2015 19:16

Oh are you a Tory voter, Vanilla?

That would explain why you think protests are anti-democratic.

Yes, I'll certainly be attending the anti-austerity demo.

OP posts:
VanillaTwirl · 14/05/2015 19:14

Ooh, ooh, OP is back - now the thread can go back to being mawkish shite! Yay for OP! Yay for a return to disgruntled student level politics!

Fucking Tory fucking scum etc etc etc.

OP, will you be attending the #protestagainstdemocracy in June? Y'know, coz democracy is wrong and stuff?