WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT BLAIRS REIGN?

[lissielou]

i think hes done great things, the tories destroyed this country, privatised the health service and sold off all our manufacturing. yes he's made mistakes but he has had a positive influence on great britain imho.

Well our opiniosn will differ now, it was vertainly a shambles anyway when I was in it (project 2000 course I was on was a total disaster, less than 20% of those that began it bothered to qualify)

The boom and bust cycle of the Tory Government ruined many lives, thank goodness we have avoided recession for so long! As a youngish person in the early 90's there semed no hope for us- University was a dream we didnt even think of, school was terrible and jobs insecure. Those students at Uni with me now who have come through the labour system seem so much getter preapred, more confident and generally able- and indeed harder working.

I think lots of things are better - primary schools are DEFINITELY better, don't know about secondary yet. Maternity benefits, minimum wage, better levels of employment. I do think lots of things have improved. I also think the extra authority given to the Bank of England to set interest rates is good, as this prevents political manipulation of the economy.

Where I think things haven't improved is the amount of paperwork etc to prove that 'things are getting better', so a teacher or a doctor has far more admin to do, just to prove that standards are rising. And although in many ways the NHS seems to be doing better, with shorter waiting times, the situation for doctors is quite bleak, with a real bottleneck in jobs, and lots of doctors being driven abroad.

maternity ahs improved hugely- with ds1 and ds2 I had to go back at 9 weeks, with ds3 I had a year off and it would be more now. That matters.

Our local maternity hospital has closed and our A and E been downgraded in favour of a 'super-hospital' 12 miles away.

(sorry I meant maternity leave rather than maternity)

Thats sad Avalon (you're not from Glastonbury are you? Just Dh sopent many years inmeare and the name and all.... anyway....)
our A&E back home (Bridgwater) was downgraded too (bridgwater) which is a nightmare for locals like my Mum

Still think on balance has been a goot time for the UK

Unfortunately, not, PC. Nice place.

OK

1. Labour in power for the last 10 years has been generally good for the UK imo

• it was SOOOO time for a change
• general prosperity
• min. wage
• tax credits (system's a mess but they do benefit lots of people)
• mat. pay
• devolution for Scotland and Wales
• they cannot be solely blamed for the mess of the NHS - even after 10 years - it was totally screwed over by the Tories
• N Ireland

1. Blair as PM however not so good - this weirdy 'history will judge' and 'God told me to invade Iraq' (I'm paraphrasing obv) - he seems a bit unhinged frankly

other negatives

• PFI - in a nutshell tax £ to increase private profits - not good
• changes to incapacity benefit etc
• ID cards, detention without trial etc - not good

As for Brown as PM - personality may be different, but there's nothing to choose between them in policy terms - will not be a huge change.

Can't comment too much on the NHS, thankfully I don't use it too much (not cos i'm rich, just never get ill thank God) although I do remember the days of waiting two weeks for a GPs appointment. One thing mentioned alot with regards to the NHS is the profusion of great new premises. I agree it's no substitute for front line staff, but I do remember those crumbling victorian institutions of the 80s.

On the econonmy front.... my parents lost just about everything in the late 80s, were encouraged by the government of the day to be entrepreneurial, my mum started her own business and made a lot of money, and then lost most of it when interest rates went up to 15% and the whole ERM fiasco.

Gordon Brown has done a good job with the economy, lots of that was to do with the global economy but also to do with the independence of the bank of England, one of the first things they did in '97. If you can remember pre '97 the first thing a government in power did in the run up to an election was to lower interest rates to give everyone a bit more money in their pockets and increase the feel good vibes, regardless of the impact on inflation, unemployment and the whole house of cards.

Gordon Brown as PM... hmm jury's out. I'm concerned about the spectre of Blair hanging over him. I'd like to see him make positive steps to help the housing market. Not the top end, we all know crazy bonuses in the City have fuelled the £1million plus market, but there needs to be loads more houses built to encourage the middle market. It's not just first time buyers that are struggling, but people who can't move beyond their first home. Social stagnation is never good.

As for the Tories.... I cannot bring myself to ever like or respect them. David Cameron makes me feel ill, I loathe his "folksy, I'm with you chaps" demeanour. It's so patronising, he's not one of us, neither myself nor any of my friends went to Eton, are descended from high ranking Tory MPs, are members of White's the exclusive Mayfair private members club or are married to the daughter of wealthy landowners with a few hundred acres to their name. His charming nature and accessibility seem to be his selling points, rather than a geniune groundbreaking political agenda. In '97 Labour had something geniuinely original to offer (whether you think they did deliver or not). I'm not electing someone to run this country based as far as I can see it on the fact that he's a nice chap with young kids and a sweet wife. Not enough I'm afraid!

Still this was meant to be about Blair!! oops sorry for ramble!

that it was continuation of thatcher ...only with unresolved unlawful war...

and that its not over yet gugs was part of it all new labour...and never stood up to him over important stuff..he signed the cheques for iraq....

dont get me started...

MrsMar eloquent post

Agree about DC< I cant seem to work him out, and I find that rather scary. I actually believe he's either
A) just pretending to be nice for votes
B) Hiding some reallys cary policies
C) (more likely) has no policies worth a mention
D) Is really TB's long lost twin and waiting to hand an election back to TB so new Labour win whatever LOL!

Actually don't vote Labour (or Tory) but doesnt stop me giving TB et al a fair (imo) assessment

MrsMar I like your post.

GB has done some good things for the economy, but he is every bit as pro-Iraq war as TB (has said he would finance it all over again and money will always be available - his top priority) and I can't get past that. And he hasn't done much for the pensioners, as my fil can't stop reminding me.

LOL about DC peachy!!!

Suzy don't even get me started on the Falklands war.... oh go on then... As an Argentine I understand I'm biased, but... if you were the leader of a rich European country and another country invaded your territory (allbeit illegally) and bearing in mind that that country was under a military dictatorship where political dissent was rewarded with a quick drop from a plane without a parachute, the country was in the grip of an economic crisis and most of the army weren't fed, clothed or armed properly, would you a) continue with all diplomatic measures to overcome the crisis including possibly even meeting with the Argentine leadership on neutral territory to discuss the situation with those involved or b) invade with the largest seaborne armada since the 1600s and crush those who couldn't possibly put up an equal fight because you've got an election coming up and a bit of gung ho glory bull always wins elections?

What's so terrible is that there were uneccessary casualties on both sides for what? Some crappy windswept Godforsaken islands in the South Atlantic when a mere 15 years later the same government handed over that jewel in the Far East, Hong Kong. So much for the sanctity of British territories overseas!

Phew, rant over!

In the end, sleaze is sleaze. Blair's 1st major screw-up was siding with his buddy Bush.

MrsMar I totally agree re Falklands. I used to love the way they referred to it as a 'crisis' and not a war - tell that to the bereaved families.

Unfortunately Blair has trumped Thatcher a thousand times over with his warmongering.

doggie, I agree. GB is totally in love with those with lots of money. He's done so much to make the UK a great place for the likes of Laksmi Mittal et al, but he's in danger of forgetting the normal folk who vote for him (including pensioners who ALWAYS vote). I do think it's important for the economy for these giants of the commercial world to find the UK a friendly place to stay, and the effects of trickle down reach us all.... However that said, he needs to start making a few concessions for us, perhaps moving thresholds for inheritance tax and stamp duty (I've always thought stamp duty should have many more bands, why should I pay the same rate of stamp duty as say, Madonna?) Most of the houses where I live are over £500k for a three bedroom house, so that'll be £20,000 for the chancellor before I've even bought the house!

I know doggie. I do hope and pray Blair writes the book we all deserve, ie the one with the absolute truth about iraq. We've all paid at some level for that war, some so much more than others, some the ultimate price. I think we deserve the truth, did he really think he was doing the right thing? Did they really think Saddam had WMD based purely on the fact they'd sold them to him decades earlier. Was that the basis for his conviction, obv couldn't say that to the public [cue TB handwringing gestures] "Look, we sold them the stuff, so we know they've got it!" Did he do it because he thought George W was mad and likely to start WW3 without someone to hold him back? Did he really think the US would give him something back and was he totally disappointed that the US said "thanks for the help, now run along!" I want the truth!!! (well his version of, he'd never write a book saying his ego ran away with him!!!)

aahh..iwas no supporter of that war either mrsmars...sorry and interesting to here argentinian view...
what i should have said was though that these wars were concluded in the tenure of thatcher she did not leave whilst still uncertain ...

reallyu have to rush now but no offence meant...

really i must rush

lol MrsMar, I'm not sure I want to know what went on in his head - TB's mind must be a scary place... I now think he was carried away by power and ego, and yes, maybe he did think he would get something in return from the US... the 'Yo Blair' conversation shows how daft that idea was.

that's fine suzy, whatever our reasons, I think we both think it was ill advised to say the least!

x

I do agree the Iraq war trumps the Falklands, but if you accept (and I do, some don't) that he was genuine in his motives then at least that war had more humaniatrian intentions than the Flaklands, which did seem rather pointless (or ather I know little about it but respect DH's opinions on such things and he knows quite a bit about it and says it was rather pointless).

As I said earlier I was against the Iraq invasion, although I can't quite see Saddam being removed can be a bad thing, its more the way it was done/ terrible ensuing humantarian crisis. I do also think that although TB needs a good bollocking and indeed perhaps a trial, ultimately the responsibility for the current mess goes to those who choose to set bombs amongst the busty amrketplaces and kill poeple, something that isn't sanctioned by any Government.

Housing is interesting- we sold our house to get us out of severe financial problems and as such rent, I firmly beieve that more secure tenancy law / better rules (such as the recent ones about deposits- we have fallen foul of the dodgy landlord keeping deposit before now) would help with the housing problem, in that poeple don't actually need to own a house, but they need a secure place to call home. In Europe (so I am told) renting is considered normal, and it does have benefits- we were, for example, much more able to move here when the chance came, a move that ahs improved all our lives. We're also more able to move up or down in terms of accomodation without incurring huge financial costs and suffering from the genral housing sector problems. I do thin a mindset change will help- we hope to buy, but later in life when we can choose the house we will stay in, not be on a ladder of any sort.

BUSy amrketplaces

Although they may well be busty, who knows?

Peachy - I so agree re iraq. I can't see that removing saddam hussein was wrong apart from the fact that it could be considered to have broken international law, and as such TB laid the UK exposed to accusations of war crimes. It's never acceptible to arbitrarily remove someone from power because you dislike the way they run their country (allbeit with horrific consequences) If it was acceptable, why haven't we done something in Zimbabwe? That said, it is naive to not accept that it's mad to have someone like saddam having so much
control over something so essential to the global economy like oil. Perhaps we should all be green and no longer be oil dependent, (we'll be fighting wars over cornfields in the future?) No, I think where Bush and Blair really stand in the firing line is their terrible failure to secure peace afterwards. So much was put in to the invasion and war, and the rebuilding of iraq was an afterthought. Surely our experience of sectarian violence in Northern Ireland would give us some clue as to what happens when there's a power vaccum? The murderers and psychos move in and take control.

He's PM not king
Tories did not privatise the NHS it is way worse under labour, and the privatisation is being accelerated and forced through since it is gov. policy
PFI is a disaster in the making we will be paying for all these flash new hospitals at way above inflation interest rates for many many years. It's not the freshness of the paint on the walls that makes you better.
MPC admitted that in 2004 it dropped interest rates to keep the housing market booming - a political decision if ever there was one.
Pre-labour university education was funded by general taxation individuals weren't forced to take huge personal loans as they are now.

What do I think?
A wasted opportunity.