Chloe smith interview in Newsnight

[dev9aug]

Link The interview starts at 6.18.
Do you think she was deliberately sacrificed to the media for this latest u turn? DC and GO knew it would be a difficult interview so why did they not send one of the bigwigs to the interviews, especially when CS had already struggled on C4 news earlier.

I can't quite decide on the reasons, it could be either..

1. she is a newbie or

2. she is female

3. they ran out of ministers to defend their u turns.

They have a plan? Really? All they have to do to reduce the 'deficit' is to apply the existing tax laws fairly and stop the rich and the corporations from avoiding paying their tax.
The decision is right for the tories. It means inflation doesn't rocket in September which is when the pensions are set for next year.
The oleaginous posh wankers in charge don't have a clue what they're doing. Over 30 u-turns since the budget show that none of his policies work. Osborne is a waste of skin.
As for 'sneering contempt', no wonder. Smith wouldn't and indeed didn't give answers to any of his questions. This government doesn't even lie straight in bed. They're all on the take, whoring for their corporate masters.

Don't really understand where you are coming from NT. Petrol prices are falling atm so will have a negative effect on inflation. Applying the tax increase would have meant that petrol prices remained around the same month on month instead of being slightly cheaper (diesel 1.37 as opposed to 1.40 round here) - hardly contributing to 'rocketing inflation' as you call it.
Can you explain to me what is so great about Paxman sticking the boot in over the timing of a decision which the hapless junior minister had no say in. This is quite different to when Paxman took on Michael Howard as Howard was the architect of the decisions that he was defending. IMO it is completely irrelevent when decsions are made as long as the right ones are made - something that Smith should have pointed out. From your reply I can only assume that you would like tax on petrol to increase (which is a regressive form of taxation hurting the poor far more than the rich) - is that correct?

'nice'guy-

It would have been passable I think to say that the fuel duty increase was 'delayed' to help families who are struggling. And that if they hadn't have delayed it then Paxman would be saying why are we not helping families in their time of need? The coalition are doing everything they possibly can to help and this sort of announcement shows a responsive government doing their best to help.

The coalition are doing everything they possibly can to help? Really? Can you give some examples?

It looks to me, and most other people I think, that the coalition are doing everything they can to make life miserable for everybody?

Would you like some examples of of policies which are making life miserable for the majority? I'm sure there are plenty of people on here who would be happy to oblige.

i saw the interview & didnt think she did as badly as most people make out.

she was also fairly funny next day at the house of commons & did a good job of laughing at herself.

No Burro, I don't agree with the tax. Petrol round here is £1.32/litre, the increase would have put that up to about £1.40ish. I'm not surprised at yet another u-turn, the bollock chinned tosspot doesn't have a clue, and it must have taken someone with a functioning brain to tell him this would make his party even less popular.

The hapless junior minister could have at least had the grace and decency to answer some questions with a bit of honesty instead of waffling out non answers.

If you like I could probably find articles to back up what I said in my previous post, but I've found that right wingers tend not to like being proved wrong. One even called me a bully! :o

Burro inflation is not caused solely by rises in petrol prices. The inflationary forecast is far from positive.

NT - In your world I suppose a 'right winger' is someone who doesn't write personalised abuse about Conservatives on an internet message board. What a hard man you are. You haven't answered my question yet - would you prefer it if the govenment had not made this Uturn?

From your reply I can only assume that you would like tax on petrol to increase (which is a regressive form of taxation hurting the poor far more than the rich) - is that correct?

No it isn't correct as I Posted. The original tax thought out by the clueless buffoons who are selling the bits of our economy we still own would have impacted more on the poorer strata of society, amongst whom I stand.

No, a right winger (imo) is somebody who wishes to cut benefits for disabled people, who wants to take away housing benefit from under 25s and cut it for those in work, meaning many will have to move and then spend more in order to keep their jobs. And all the while crying 'we're all in this together' and calling it fair.

If you don't like me and my politics (I'm fairly egalitarian), you'll hate Steve Bell. :o

If you can link to an article or a study somewhere that proves this government's policies will help the majority of people in this country I'd be grateful. I asked various right wingers on another thread and they couldn't. I'd really love to be proved wrong, honest I would.

So let's get this straight - you are critical of Chloe Smith for (badly) trying to defend a policy that you actually agree with. I can only wonder what you would have said about her if you had not agreed with the decision of the government!

Writing personalised insults about people who cannot defend themselves whilst using the anonimity of an internet message board makes you look very small. Criticise and analyse the policies by all means but what political point are you making when you call GO a 'bollock chinned tosspot'? I am unsurprised that others have called you a bully. You assue that I am a 'right winger' because I don't like the sight of Paxman getting his jollies hitting a punchbag - you are wrong again.

On your points;
The clueless buffons that you refer to are the Labour party who started the fuel escalator tax that this rise was a part of.
I have seen Steve Bell's cartoons many times over the years and I don't hate them - in general to me they seem a little simplistic and purile - and ultimately just not funny.
Given the style and content of your postings I am not at all surprised that you are a fan of his.

That Chloe Smith was sent out to explain and defend a u-turn she herself opposed just a month ago is risible. She wanted to keep it to 'pay down the deficit' when we all know the best way to do that is to get the corporations and the rich to stop avoiding tax.

Writing personalised insults about politicians who set out to screw the majority of us over is reasonable. Plus it amuses the fuck out of me. Bollock chinned tosspot is one of the milder ones I reserve for Giddyup.

I think you're referring to the bankers and the toryscum when you refer to clueless buffoons. The banks got us in this mess, the tories are going to keep us there.

You've read all my posts then. Righto.

Again, post a link that proves the piggy-eyed fuckwit has the interests of the majority at heart rather than his rich friends and the corporations then I'll think about changing my mind about him.

Ooh, I am a nasty fucker aren't I?

No you are not nasty - just a bit boring and unable to hold your own in a debate. And no, I haven't read all your posts.
The fuel escalator tax, the tax which caused this policy uturn, was introduced by the last Labour govenment, that is a matter of fact. Labour also encouraged excessive greed and did not regulate the banking industry when they had the chance. The last Labour government also accelerated spending during an economic boom leaving no ammunition for whatever government when there was the inevitable downturn.
It is so lazy just to blame bankers and 'toryscum' for the current mess. We are all partially responsible bankers, consumers and government.

Boring, yes. Extremely so. Unable to hold my own in a debate, no. I can not only hold my own but best others. Use of articles proving my points usually suffice.

Labour made many mistakes. Keeping public spending high wasn't one of them. Reversing Thatcher's mistakes was. Starting wars based on nothing other than oil was wrong, and the reason they don't get my vote.

The banks caused this recession with their fraudulent loans. Packaging sup prime loans and mixing them up with 'good' loans and labelling the package as having an A1 credit rating is not just wrong, it is fraud. The whole system has been wrong since Reaganomics was introduced in the '80s.

Again, if you want me to provide links just ask.

But, if you want to prove we're all better off under this system please feel free to flame me without providing any evidence. As usual.

Posting links to articles that support your view is not, IMO, holding your own in a debate. It is merely saying that agree with someone else who is in all likelihood more articulate than you. In any case, you are naive, to say the least, if you believe that articles posted on the internet form an objective test of the truth about a situation.

Where did I ever say 'we're all better off under this system' - whatever that means, so why do I need to prove it? All I did was expose the hypocrasy of criticising a government about a decision they have made - when in this case you actually agree with the decision that they have made.

El Burro - other posters on here are not MPs and are not elected - I don't really care if they are hypocritical or can defend their views.

I do care if a givt minister who is being 90K a year out of my taxes is a hypocrite and is failing in the most cringeworthy manner on national TV to exlain or support a U turn to a policy that a month ago she said could not be changed and was essential to resolve the deficit!

Can you really not see the difference??

govt minister who is being paid

Why is she failing? The decision made is the correct one - the defence of it was very poor but so was the tone of the interview as a whole. I am very glad that politicians can change their minds about issues when facts change - surely that is just common sense. You seem to be saying that it would be better for the uturn not have been performed, with all its negative consequences for the poor, just so the govenment could look consistent.

Hello Burro. Could you point to any of my posts which says I think the proposed tax rise should stay? Oh no, you can't, as I never said that.

Paxman is earning about 800k if we are bringing Chloe's salary into it.