Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Saturday, 22nd November 2008 Change Date

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Conservatives in Birmingham: Tories appreciate the need to 'seal the deal' with voters


Cameron's Conservatives are enjoying a lead in the polls, but they know there is no place for complacency, writes Ross Lydall

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 29 September 2008
THIS is the week that Labour has anticipated as much as the Conservatives. For months, the party of government has been desperate for the media spotlight to be shone into the darkest corners of Her Majesty's official Opposition. Why? Because, as minister after minister complains, David Cameron has for too long been able to escape the scrutiny that dogs every utterance of Prime Minister Gordon Brown.
This has allowed the reborn Tories to present themselves as a fresh alternative to what is, for many, a tired and tainted government. But the party's annual conference now has to prove that there is substance behind the style. The Thatcher-less Torie
s may now be socially acceptable, but are they electable?

Opinion polls have been telling us so for the last 12 months. It was this time last year when the Tories outmanoeuvred Labour on inheritance tax, Mr Cameron dazzled with his leader's speech and Mr Brown's honeymoon ended. Then came the election that never was and a reversal in both parties' fortunes.

Yesterday one opinion poll put the Tories on 43 per cent to Labour's 31 per cent. The lead may have halved – a result of the post-Labour conference "Brown bounce" – but it is still enough to give Mr Cameron a Commons majority of 58. A week earlier, the most detailed survey ever done of marginal constituencies estimated a Labour meltdown and a Tory landslide with a majority of 146. Yesterday the Electoral Calculus website, which tracks all opinion polls, put the Tory majority at 86.

As such, there is no doubt that voters favour the Tories, at least when talking to pollsters. The difficulty is in turning that theoretical lead into reality. One problem is in overcoming the effects of the electoral system, with its in-built Labour advantage. There is the danger of complacency. Thirdly, there is the need for the Tories to present a compelling case of their own rather than merely relying on current Labour unpopularity. These are dangers that are familiar to Mr Cameron. The phrase in vogue at Conservative headquarters is that the party has yet to "seal the deal" with voters. As Mr Cameron told the BBC yesterday: "People say: 'They haven't sealed the deal.' They are right, we haven't, but we can and we will."

According to yesterday's BPIX poll, the Tory lead over Labour had slipped from 23 points in August to 12 points a month later. Worryingly for the Conservatives, it was the second poll in three days to find that voters – by a narrow margin – preferred Gordon Brown and his Chancellor, Alistair Darling, over the Tory alternatives of Mr Cameron and George Osborne.

Hence the need to avoid complacency was a familiar refrain at the opening day of conference. The c-word (complacency) was mentioned by party chairman Caroline Spelman, shadow foreign secretary William Hague and by Mr Cameron himself in an impromptu address prior to an emergency discussion on the economy.

"Our response to our accumulating success in local elections and by-elections will not be to relax our efforts but to redouble them," said Mr Hague. "There must be no complacency. But there can be quiet confidence that this will show we are strong, united positive alternative to that weak and washed-out government."

For her part, Ms Spelman mapped out a five-point plan to win the next general election. The core principle was to stick to the centre ground and stay united, in contrast to Labour infighting. There was also the need to set out a clear plan for change and win the battle of ideas. The icing on the cake would be to "fix our broken society as well as our broken economy".

But despite the rhetoric, there exists a perception that the Tories are lacking in policies; that they have few thought-through ideas. This is not quite the case. At the request of Mr Cameron, senior figures such as Iain Duncan Smith, Ken Clarke and John Redwood have chaired policy groups to devise ideas on poverty, the constitution and transport behind the scenes.

This has led to the emergence of solid commitments, though there has been more of a trickle than a flood. The party is committed to a "fair fuel stabiliser" – remarkably similar to the SNP's fuel duty regulator – that would slice 5p off a litre of petrol. It wants to lift the stamp duty threshold to £250,000, which would remove nine out of ten first-time buyers from the house-purchase tax. It would cut corporation tax to 23 per cent and give the Bank of England greater powers to take over failing institutions.

As a result of Mr Clarke's work, there is also the clear pledge to address the West Lothian Question and give English MPs a "decisive say" over laws that relate only to England. But the biggest unanswered question remains the party's tax policy. The general Tory principle is to prevent government growing as quickly as the economy, thereby generating savings as tax receipts return to the Treasury while a tight hold is kept on money going out. Unfunded tax cuts would be avoided – and tax cuts of any kind may not materialise until a second term of Tory government. The promise is to "share the proceeds of growth" – but that is difficult in a recession, when there is no growth to share.

According to John Curtice, a politics professor at Strathclyde University, the Tories need to deliver a clearer message on tax. He said the party needed to recognise that, following a decade of massive state spending under Labour, there was now a mood for lessening the tax burden on individuals. Prof Curtice said: "The party cannot hope to ride to victory by simply standing on the sidelines as the government tries to handle an apparently endless stream of economic woes. It has to use its spot in the limelight this week to convince voters it has a clear strategy for steering the country out of the economic mess.

"And given the public's obvious worries, that strategy should be delivered with an air of gravitas and statesmanship rather than the political knockabout that often prevails at party conferences."

Asked how Mr Cameron would be able to "seal the deal" with voters, Scottish Tory leader Annabel Goldie told The Scotsman: "At the moment, all we can do is look at the trend in the polls.

"Across the UK, David Cameron is certainly interesting voters. I think it's clear that he has broken through to an audience that the Conservatives were not previously reaching. The average we are polling is now in the lower twenties. That is a vast improvement on where we were in 2005."

Letwin aims to replicate the pre-planning of New Labour

A SERIES of "bold" policies will be unveiled at the Conservative Party conference this week, the party's policy chief promised last night

Oliver Letwin, the former shadow chancellor who has been working behind the scenes for two-and-a-half years, said the aim was to replicate the pre-planning of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown before New Labour came to power – but implement the ideas more successfully.

He said: "It's not just the specific policies that we have been introducing to this conference that matter. It's part of an architecture that has been very carefully developed. We have spent two years hard at work opening up the issues.

"Since the completion of that last summer, we have been steadily producing green papers going through how we are going to change the schools system, the welfare system, how we are going to take people out of the crime system. There is now a very substantial body of very carefully crafted Conservative policy."

However, Mr Letwin, speaking at a fringe event at the conference, rejected calls from figures such as former Scottish secretary Lord (Michael) Forsyth for a commitment to tax cuts. He said the Tories had vowed to follow Labour's spending plans, due to be reviewed in 2010, because they were suitably "tough" for the current economic downturn.

He said tax cuts could only be guaranteed "over an economic cycle" – which tend to last around a decade – because government spending could be reduced by comparison to the growth of the economy, thereby leaving spare cash to give back to taxpayers.

Matthew Taylor, a former 10 Downing Street adviser, warned that politicians of all parties would be trying desperately to win over voters in the next 18 months.

He said that "in electioneering mode, all politicians will be prone to pandering to the electorate" and were unlikely to be honest about imposing tough policies.

"They're going to say Britain is falling apart, they're going to say it's the job of government to give the public what the public wants, and they're going to say that what it needs to make society better is new government," he said.







The full article contains 1498 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 28 September 2008 10:46 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Conservative Party
 
1

Andra, Dundee,

29/09/2008 00:16:10
Why do the Tories call it "England Only Voting" when they really mean "Devolution for England".
In practice there will soon be Conservative majority in England but with no majority or Lib/Lab majority in UK (not necessarily at next election). The only option will be two Prime Minsters - one for England only matters and one for UK matters.
Stop calling it "England Only Voting" when you really mean "Devolution for England". Tell the voters what you really propose.
If England goes down that route - with MPs reporting the Engish Parliament on Mon/Wed/Fri and to the UK parliament on Tues/Thurs, How long can Scotland justify haveing TWO sets of MPs/MSPs???
2

Boy Wonder,

29/09/2008 07:47:41
Cameron is a smug and smarmy, untrustable Tory git ... and the rest of his party are right up there with him.

Unfortunately ... so is New Labour!
3

tommytommy,

29/09/2008 08:03:19
The city financiers who are at the heart of the financial crisis are the very people who fund the conservative party.

Fre enterprise capitalism is what the conservatives and their city backers advocate.

We can all reaping the outcome.
4

tommytommy,

29/09/2008 08:05:46
3

Too quick on the keys.

"Free" enterprise and we are all reaping the outcome.

Back to bed.
5

danielrober,

29/09/2008 08:27:54
I'm very interested in the Conservative party at the moment and will be recoding the leaders speech (as i have with the others).

I'm interested in tax and solutions to dealing the the SUCESS of the past 15 years. Failure to manage success has been a particular British problem since the end of WWI.

The SNP are failing to manage (cope) with there election victory in Scotland and so instead are looking for a fight (with everyone). The labour party have succeed in a dozen major sectors but are handing management outside the islands because they can not cope with success.

Can the Conservative cope with these successes? We'll all be listening.
6

Ken S.,

Reading 29/09/2008 08:52:20
#1 Andra, Dundee,

"Why do the Tories call it 'England Only Voting' when they really mean "Devolution for England"

Because, unfortunately, that is only what they mean: merely an administrative fiddle within the committee stages of the minority of bills that are deemed to be England-Only.

Nothing anywhere like devolution, federation, English parliament, etc.
Tories have been hawking this tired little mouse of an idea around for a decade and it becomes less and less adequate with each passing year.

It is this lack of substantive action to handle the changed nature of the Union by any of the major UK parties that lubricates the slide to divorce between our two countries, by alienating England's electorate. That of course is great news if you're a Nat but, even then, it would be better for a separation to be arranged in a positive, friendly way rather than amidst a sudden, acrimonious bu@@er's muddle.

Mr Cameron has said he will pay any price to maintain the Union, thereby risking not gaining any extra Scottish votes but losing some English ones that could be crucial in marginal seats. He has described his fellow countrymen as Sour Little Englanders, yet would not dare to describe someone such as Alex Salmond as a Sour Little Scotlander!
7

danielrober,

29/09/2008 10:52:29
# 6 Ken S.,Reading

I read the comment above from an English Nationals, lending his/her support for the SNP. Interesting that the English nationals and SNP are united not by resolves to deal with problems but just to trash solutions to our problems that might be found on a UK or EU level. Interesting.
8

Nevsky,

Moscow 29/09/2008 11:23:55
7 Rober#


Looks like you might have to fight for your union on two fronts..never a good idea and will lead to certain defeat of course.

The unionist arguments looks more and more out of touch by the day, neither in touch with the English nor the Scots.

9

Nevsky,

Moscow 29/09/2008 11:27:40
I hope at the next election England gets the parliament it voted for, which will of course be conservative.

Scotland will have 5MPs in that parliament representing 5 million Scots for the next 8 to 12 years. Hardly an honest representation of the political preference in Scotland as i am sure any English voter will agree.

Scotland and England seperate and happy , the union unsatisfactory on both sides..simple solution to a simple argument.
10

Alan B,

29/09/2008 11:28:25
Labour have been so bad that i will be shocked if the tories do not get in.

Will they be any better. Have my doubts. Also dislike their anti eu slant.

Luckily in scotland we have Salmond as he stands head and shoulders above the westminster party leaders.
11

Alan B,

29/09/2008 11:38:26
#danielrober

If you define the last decade of labour as a success you have a very low threashold of success.

We have had more corruption openly in government than i can ever remember with even the prime minister being investigated by the police and countless dodgy donation scandals.

We have had complete economic incompetetence of most of the fundamentals. (monetary policy excluded). Much of the economic policy has been very short term that will take along time to unwind.
-Massive house price inflation.
-Massive consumer debt.
-Massive trade deficits.
-Massive public sector deficits.

We have seen disgusting raids on pensions. We have seen the uk which had a well funded pension funds sink into the current mess. We have seen empty reforms of pensions that have completely failed. Probably the biggest challenge for this government was over pensions. Dealing with the aging population to put a proper sustainable policy in place. They failed dreadfully as they hung on to every short term policy to satisfy their own greed for power.

Transport has also got no better under labour. We still do not have a fast train to london despite all the promises in opposition. And still no electrification of glas to edin etc. All they managed to do was create a strategic rail authority and then abolish it afew yrs later as not fit for purpose. Lie in order to bankrupt railtrack.

And finally in scotland they have simply completely failed to deal with the north south divide, continuing scotland in its path to slow economic growth. Sold out for the price of power.

12

Nevsky,

Moscow 29/09/2008 11:38:29

Seems simple that in removing Scotland and England from the constitutional equation that both countries can focus their efforts on their respective populace to the benefit of both.

Alan#
You are right, Salmond is a gifted politician who always seems to be one step ahead of everyone else. He is outward looking, pro-active and imaginative..compare that with McConnell who walked a tight-rope between both parliaments and was constrained as a result.

Under Salmond the parliament is at least exploring the maximum of it's potential, the unionists hate it but the Scots seem to love it!
13

vimto,

29/09/2008 11:59:18
12. Headlines this morning: Salmond under fire over visit to seek Middle East loans,and SNP accused of deceiving parents over key pledge on nurseries,yep,salmond is gifted alright!
14

Ken S.,

Reading 29/09/2008 11:59:52
#7 danielrober,

Problem of definition here. What is an "English Nationalist"? Unless there is a little gang lurking somewhere, I am not aware of any organised grouping that seeks independence for England, in like fashion to Scots and Welsh Nationalists.

I subscribe to English Democrats, which one might summarise as "Revised Unionists". Extract from website:

"... We would like to see a continuation of the Union of Great Britain, but with willing participants, and a new post devolutionary agreement. We would govern in the name of England, and would work with political parties in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland for the good and stability of the union.

Our model is for there to be a Parliament for Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and England and for the existing House of Lords to be scrapped and replaced by representatives of all parts of the United Kingdom which would work to scrutinise policy across the Union and minimize differences to keep the Union stable. The current asymmetrical devolution is unstable and is likely to destroy the Union in the medium term – we would not want to see this happen...

...English Democrats have no links with the BNP or any other political party, and seek simply to provide political representation for England in the same way that the SNP (Scottish National Party) provides a Scottish political representation and Plaid Cymru provides political representation for the Welsh...."


Not sure I have taken your point about EU. Eng Dems are against political EU, whereas I thought that SNP saw Scotland's future as lying within EU. Therefore not sure what scope for collusion between Eng and Scot Nats in this respect.
15

vimto,

29/09/2008 12:08:14
14. Hows Robin these days,he does a great job.
16

Ken S.,

Reading 29/09/2008 12:29:28
#15 Vimto

Haven't met him personally but he certainly works hard at it!
(I'm not a political activist, just an ordinary bloke who wants to see the constitutional deficiency resolved and therefore pays sub in support of that party)
17

Alan B,

29/09/2008 13:03:21
#13 vimto

Do not understand your point. The scotsman as you will be well aware are very anti snp to almost a ridiculous extent. So the fact it comes up with some negative headlines is not surprising. Both articles that you meantioned are not exactly big issues and neither have any serious negative relationship to the snp.

Salmond is far better than any of the other political leaders in the uk at the moment. That is party why a party that has never served in government before is heading the scottish government.

18

Liberal for life,

Dunblane 29/09/2008 13:07:15
If the Tories are considered the best option we have to new/old Labour then heaven help us.
19

danielrober,

29/09/2008 14:13:30
# 8 Nevsky,Moscow

Yep. But then our collective ancestors recently fought and won a war not only on five different fronts but in fact two different theatres.

See thing is my fake Russia pal is that I come from a long line of winners (bleeders too but that's the price).
20

danielrober,

29/09/2008 14:20:34
# 14 Ken S.,Reading

If your not an English Nationalist, then accept my apologies. If you are then no apology is needed and why should that be an insult anyway. You well know your best chance of an English Parliament is too push the Scots away and then blame them for higher taxes.

This is politics. I'm not a politico and these are not my motives, but i would rather discuss and debate ploitically rather than have to tense my knuckles (again, that's in the past). So i welcome debate with you - on why breaking up the UK would be a disaster for Scotland and England.
21

danielrober,

29/09/2008 14:33:28
# 11 Alan B

Okay here are a few points, on labour successes that they have failed to manage.

Minimum wage. Its improved standards of many company, but has become misunderstood as a living wage. It was intended to stop people been exploited. I new guys working for £1.50/hr in sercurity. They have done better for these new rules.

Constitution. Devolution has opened up debate and argument of standards across most of the country. However a minority of 'i want more' politicians have high jacked the system, grinding it to a halt.

Banking. Fiance has been a success and one that has paid for many government schemes with vast amounts of tax. Now what to do about millions of people who really do not want to pay the money back (i don't know)

Engineering. Engineering has had huge contracts awarded allowing entire sectors to upgrade. But contract bids have been lost to confusing committees, with little understanding of practical science, let along the drying times required for concrete.

Health Service. The life span f people is raising not falling. But pockets of bad health have developed and the government needs teeth to get those guys in those areas to meet national standards, for what they get paid not for an extra incentive.

Schools. Kids bust there guts each year delivering better grades, due to their hard work. Yet the moan show 'when i was young', each treats these kids terribly.

Success, that are real, rewarding and have failed to be managed to there best capability.

Dealing with success is not easy. Failure's are easy as no one has any expectations. the Conservatives are going to have there hands full not only with successes but also with those who are wishing for rain. I may not like Politicos, but i do appreciate how hard their roles are (they just need to realized they are not on there own).
22

Peter,

The end is nigh! 29/09/2008 15:38:08
The problem for Curtis' argument is that the Conservatives are supposed to have a UK national vote share of 50%+. The reality in Scotland is that their vote share is around 18% so this 50% averaging skews commentators into false assumptions on the success of the Conservatives in general. There is no doubt that Labour in England are facing a near wipe out on this vote share in the same disastrous way that the Liberals were cuffed in the 1920's but to pretend, as many commentators and Unionists appear to do, this will be the case in Scotland is disingenuous. The likelihood is that Mundell may just hold his seat but they are unlikely to gain elsewhere with the SNP on 50% of the vote share in Scotland.

The nightmare scenario for Unionist supporters is Labour being wiped out south of the border and ending up in third behind the Libdems - a distinct possibility - and loosing over half their Westminster seats (probably more) in Scotland to the SNP.

Scottish Unionists will loose their influence and Cameron will be hard pressed to justify the Union given he will have one, maybe two Scottish MP's. Labour at Holyrood will be shifting their political position so fast that smoke will rise from John Smith House as they try to save their own skins at Holyrood.

Their will be no place left to hide the failure of this iniquitous Union.
23

Geoff,

sa 29/09/2008 16:13:54
14Ken S.-agree with your vision of the future as articulated by the English democrats. The present situation is untenable with westminster acting as UK and a poor ad hoc English assembly. 4 equal houses for the home nations with Westminster as 'federal' UK parliament is the inevitable alternative outcome if the Nats of all hues fail in their quest to smash the Union.
22 Peter-your point about the tories support being confined to England is again, a reality that Cameron has to face and deal with if he is serious about preserving the Union. In the absence of some miraculous revival in scottish labours support they will continue to bleed followers to the SNP camp-not all of them i think necessarily supporters of full independence but as fedup Labourites where else do they go? The Libdems have a golden opportunity to attract some of NuLabs disillusioned-their policies with one BIG exception are not disimmilar to those of NuLab and the SNP, but they dont seem to have the necessary leadership to make it happen. There is nodoubt that most scots have a deep seated mistrust of the Tories-a pity-they are very different from the party of thatcher and perhaps deserve a better hearing in Scotland?



24

Alan B,

29/09/2008 16:28:18
#danielrober

I do not think your list is really credible. Yes labour have achieved somethings but overall they have been poor at governing the country.

The minimum wage was good. The independence of BOE which you missed out was excellent.

The rest of your list makes little sense. The point is most of the things labour have done and directly responsible for has been poor. Anyone can spend money the point is to spend it well. Also spending tax payer money is subsjective depending on whether you back lower taxes or not.

The economy which is the single most important thing has been badly managed for short term political reasons.

Can you really credibly say people living abit longer is due to labour. It makes no sense.

So to me they have been dishonest, poor economically, have spent tonnes of tax payer money without really delivering better public services. ie transport etc. And have been a shambles when it came to pensions, disgracefully hitting pensioners hard.

As for your comments regarding the constituion. Well I think they say more about you than anything else. People that support independence have that right. And if the people vote for that party it is not them high jacking anything.

The snp atleast are the only party that are willing to put it to a referendum. We have not seen labour clearing up the constitutional mess. Mind you its record on referendums is to fix them. Remember 79. Or is it ok in your book for democracy to be subverted if it is in the cause of the union. Remember how the dead were counted. Remember how on a 50% turnout you would need 80% of the vote. Labour are a disgrace.

Even with devolution which is a step in the right direction. Laobur have still made a mess of it. And then have thrown their toys out the pram when the lose the election.
25

Alan B,

29/09/2008 16:30:22
#Geoff

Just remember the english democrats campaign during the london major election. They do not come across as wanting a reformed union. Their whole campaign and web site was anti Scottish.

26

Ken S.,

Reading 29/09/2008 16:30:56
#20 danielrober,
"If you're not an English Nationalist, then accept my apologies. If you are then no apology is needed and why should that be an insult anyway"

Not a question of insult, apology, etc. Simply pointing out that "English Nationalist" is not a clearly defined label, in the same way that Welsh or Scottish is understood to be.

I'm very proud to be called one if meaning Eng Dem, as defined in #14 above. However, I'm not interested in achieving the desired outcome by pushing the Scots away. If I did, who would cook my mince & tatties and iron my shirts ;-)
27

Ken S.,

Reading 29/09/2008 16:33:08
#23 Geoff
"...4 equal houses for the home nations with Westminster as 'federal' UK parliament is the inevitable alternative outcome if the Nats of all hues fail in their quest to smash the Union."

Exactly
28

Ken S.,

Reading 29/09/2008 16:44:44
#25 Alan B,
As on these boards there are some who partake in kneejerk petty (and often ill-founded) sniping rather than focus on the calm, rational objective. Indeed, I have previously made that point to them, that the appearance of envious whingeing at times seems inconsistent with the target of living harmoniously within the UK amongst you #*%$@s ;-)

The issue is not whether the bleedin' Jocks get free this that or the other, sponging off the hardpressed English taxpayer - and all the other 'Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells' stuff. It's simply having a constitutional set-up that focuses on English circumstances, in the same way as Holyrood does for Scotland. Ain't nuffink that would thereupon guarantee that we got the same lollipops as you, or indeed any lollipops at all!
29

danielrober,

29/09/2008 20:15:31
# 24 Alan B,

I can hardly put down a list covering over ten years in power. So the list has to be cropped. Yet the points are relevant as these are factors directly affected by governments here in Europe.

The UK under the Labour party has recovered from the excesses of Thaterisum, but so too has some of the Conservative Party members. It was exactly the refusal to recognise that these were government problems that put the UK into such difficulty in the first place.

Today things are different. I could really go to town on a list of 'stuff' where we needed the government to have teeth and instead they bowed to internal/external pressure. In fact one the parties that has done well from this lack of teeth is the SNP. I'd have though some of the campaigns would have been crushed by a sensible government. Including the insanity of the trying to out do the President of the USA over this international banking crisis (crazy).

But no. To quote a phrase - the UK government has turned up to a knife fight when everyone else has a gun. But the government won't use their machine gun because its unsporting. Give me a break.

I'll not d+m the labour party for a respectable time in office, but it is time for a change. A sensible change without the SNP burning the house down.

The Conservatives have a chance and I'll listen just as i did to Blair in 1997. I also gave Alec.S a fair chance as well, last year. So lets play fair leave our machine guns at home and listen to these guys.

Not too much to ask is it, just a fair chance.
30

danielrober,

29/09/2008 20:27:14
# 26 Ken S.,Reading

I spent some time around Reading during the dot com, so i have a notion of the place. The type of Englishness your talking about reminds me more of Wessex than of England.

England is a biggish place, with Yorkshire men, Men of Devon, Anglicans, Brummies, Gordies, Londoners, Canti and so many more. The same is true of Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and for the that matter France.

Englishness as you define it is real and a part of the patch work that makes great blanket. But to expect your idea to dominate the rest of us is a silly as Alec.S Tartan Tories alliance with old labour. Devastating locally but hardly a national issue - unless given matches.

Quite respect and tolerance yes, obedience - not likely.
31

Raymond Thomas Brooke,

Leven England 29/09/2008 20:56:29
As I see it all current politicians(except SNP)want the Union to remain in place simply for their own glorification and ego on the world stage,
This English votes for English Laws is just an absolute nonsense and is totally out of date.
I believe we have had this problem for sometime now probably through the opening up of our doors to all and sundry,legal or otherwise however it has been exasparated by New Labour giving devolution to the rest of the UK but not to England.
The final act before they go into oblivion is to give the promised referendums for an English Parliament and for continuing in th eEU
32

Ken S.,

Reading 29/09/2008 21:05:08
#30 danielrober

Not sure how I gave the impression of seeking domination & obedience??????????
33

danielrober,

29/09/2008 21:22:28
# 32 Ken S.,Reading

I'm reffering to some Wessex boys I met. Not yourself. It was very funny, but as i said i'm from a long line of winners and bleeders.

Ah Youth. These ASBO kids arn't that bad, you know. They just need the blind eye every now and then to be kids (some do need banging up though).
34

Ken S.,

Reading 29/09/2008 21:35:48
#33 danielrober

Aw, I'm only borderline Wessex (almost Mercia, really), via Gloucestershire, Bedfordshire and Shetland, since being born in Middlesex many years ago, when it was still a real county.
:-)
35

danielrober,

29/09/2008 21:57:14
# 34 Ken S.,Reading

I once suggested that Middlesex was not a real county, just a suburb of London. Yep, I NOW KNOW that NORTH LONDON has its own identity.

We live on a diverse island. More than enough room for different points of view. Just wish some of SNP excentics could accept that.
36

Barry Donald Scarfe,

Brentwood, Essex 29/09/2008 23:53:39
Re 7. A better solution would be to get rid of the farce of Folyrood and institute UK-wide electoral reform so that we have a real democracy based-upon the principle of one person, one vote and one VALUE to that vote whereever it is cast in the United Kingdom then we wouldn't get long terms of government by the so-called 'English-dominated' Tory Party or the 'Scottish-dominated' Labour Party and eact part of the UK would feel it had some representation in the government of the UK but of course such a solution is too democratic for the selfish morons of Tory and Labour to understand, let alone implement.
37

Ken S.,

Reading 30/09/2008 08:23:42
#35 danielrober
Middlesex was certainly a real county. Up until the creation of the old London County Council (1900ish?, all of London north of the river, except the City's Square Mile, was Middlesex. Which is why Middlesex Guildhall and Lords Cricket Ground (Middlesex CC) are now in the middle of London. Though effectively an ordinary London suburb, my bit of north London was just outside the LCC area, in the reduced but still existing county of Middlesex. Nowadays Middx is just part of some postal addresses.

.. And yes, north Londoners are so superior to east, south and west ones ;-)


Even less on topic ( but that seems to have fizzled now, anyway), I was amused, when researching family tree for Midlothian ancestors, that "Midl" abbreviation in original manuscript got transcribed to digital record as "Middlesex". Most of the initial volunteer transcribers were American, and if you look at a map of north-east USA and see how the British-derived placenames are jumbled up, you can understand the transcribers' lack of instinctive British geographical knowledge.
Doesn't explain how, in another instance,"Surrey" got transcribed as "Syrian Arab Republic, though!


 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.