Wednesday, August 18, 2010

Did Cameron Lie ?

When New Labour distributed their leaflets they had no grounds for suggesting the Conservative Party had plans to ditch WFA . In suggesting they did ,they were therefore lying .Simple
The material contrasted the supposed benevolence of the Conservative Party to millionaires ‘like Cameron’ and vindictiveness to poor old people ..usual stuff . Cameron would not rule out reforming these perks they said . Meaningless literally , but the implication was that the cuts were pencilled in .Not so .
In fact said leaflets were just another part of the class war / scorched earth policy New Labour adopted under Brown in his bunker days .Fantasy spending was promised in marginal seats and the country mortgaged even further .New Labour could promise any spending they liked and deny any taxes they liked spend borrow and ruin leaving a wreck behind them . The Oldster scare story was cooked up , like others before it ( See 97 pensions scare ) so activitists could go at get core old dears out of bed to vote .

It had no basis in reality expect New Labour’s knowledge they had bankrupted the country and so nothing could in reality be ruled out

Frankly the headline “ Blairites Outraged at Political Dishonesty” is beyond parody so we need not bother to much about high principles . What does concern me is what is going on within the coalition for such a clear attempt to embarrass Cameron to surface

10 comments:

Mark Wadsworth said...

I could ask, "Is Cameron a politician?"

As it happens, I think the WFA is an expensive gimmick, but at least it's universal and non-means tested, I suppose.

asquith said...

I agree with Mark Wadsworth, if they are going to make savings in WFA it should be by raising the age rather than means-testing it. Things like pension credits discourage old-timers who are of the skilled working class & lower middle class from saving. I would raise the basic pension to protect the poorest, they may still lose out but in my view that would be outweighed by the fact that it would encourage people to provide for thesmselves.

It would also neutralise the resentment people who have saved up feel when they don't get free services which their less careful neighbours get. It happens a lot where I live with the right to buy people, who must often wonder why they bothered.

Even politically, I don't see why Camoron would touch universal benefits that his own lower middle class voters are on. Far more so than people like me who are at a lower level & not natural conservatives.

Page With A View said...

The post is spot on. Labour's pre-election bunker mentality spewed out a shed load of leftie abuse at Cameron in the hope that some of the mud would stick.

The fact that WFA is universal is a bad thing (like child benefit). Why should we borrow money we can't afford, simply to waste it on rich pensioners or rich mums?

Move the WFA age to 65 for all now and then keep it in line with the state pension age. And means test it.

Cutting the amount is the worst of all worlds - the rich still get most of it even though they don't need it whilst the poor don't get enough to keep themselves warm.

Newmania said...

Ta , I rarely post so its nice to see a reaction . I`m not sure I understand all of your comment Asquith sounds interesting.

Don`t mind universal benefits really . The NHS , for example is not soemthing I would invent today but its there it works and it re-distributes from healthy to sick.

Page - the problem is that thoseof us who have children paid for our lot and if we do not get it it is in effet a tax rise on the middling family

As a Conservative that does not please me one bit

Newmania said...

Ta , I rarely post so its nice to see a reaction . I`m not sure I understand all of your comment Asquith sounds interesting.

Don`t mind universal benefits really . The NHS , for example is not soemthing I would invent today but its there it works and it re-distributes from healthy to sick.

Page - the problem is that thoseof us who have children paid for our lot and if we do not get it it is in effet a tax rise on the middling family

As a Conservative that does not please me one bit

asquith said...

What I was trying to say is that if they want to make savings in the budget for Winter Fuel Allowance they should raise the age (perhaps as Camoron says to 66) rather than means test it.

Nick Drew said...

good post Mr M, I have name-checked you here

Newmania said...

Coo fame at last , just the odd gallop Mr. Drew

Nick Drew said...

I have name-checked you before Mr M, though perhaps just a little flippantly that time ...

Newmania said...

Aha been searching for that quote for ages

"I refuse to believe that any teenage girl would ever get pregnant in order to obtain a council flat. And even if I am wrong about this, it is to my credit that I do not believe it."
Fab

Reminds me of Wittgenstein .Faced with the charge that his conclusions were invalidated by his initial assumptions he claimed logic could be used as a ladder and once you had reached certain level the steps taken getting there could be thrown away . Cobblers obviously

Blog archive