We have a new Prime Minister

[tom lawson]

Basically the election was like my bowel it pushes brown out to be replaced by more sh*t!! Thats my opinion anyway! Can`t trust any of them.None of them have a clue what real life is like they are all public school boys who have lived off their parents wealth and never had a taste of what living in the uk is like for us less well off folk! They all talk ###### and the country will be no better off no matter who is in power!

 

Yeah, you know what you're talking about, don't you.

 

http://www.andrewmurrison.co.uk/

 

http://www.jacklopresti.com/

 

http://www.krishopkins.co.uk/about_kris_hopkins.htm

 

http://www.rorystewart.co.uk/about-me/home-a-background

 

All of the above are serving or have served, several in Iraq and Afghanistan.

[creepingfear]

The Tories are back in power.

I'm a public servant.

I'm buggered.

 

Depends what kind of public service job you do. If your job is nothing more than a stupid non-job created by Tony "War Criminal" B Liar/Gordon "Slack Jawed" Brown and Co just so they can get your vote come election time (the old saying a dog never bites the hand that feeds springs to mind) then I have very little sympathy, however, if it is a genuine job that does indeed contribute something to the people/country ect then you do have my sympathy.

[-Angel-]

ummm why , unions are the only ones that stop companys doing what they want with people. Politician have no right to tell unions what to do, as long as they dont break the law. I dont mind missing a flight, train or not recieving a letter for a few days if it means some hard worker doesnt get *fruitcage*ed in the *albatross*. I work for Royal Mail (yeah yeah) and if you heard half the stuff management pulled you would vote for strike too.

 

No, we have employment law to stop companies "doing what they want with people". Unions just give certain individuals an excuse to have a very well paid 'non-job' and stir up s**t once in a while.

 

My experience of them involved the employees and company agreeing on a course of action for standardising terms between 'divisions' which had long been a contencious point with staff. Cue the union jumping in to block the whole arrangement because they "hadn't been consulted". RMT and Unite are good examples in the media right now, rattling thier sabres and forcing industrial action during a time common sense and flexibility are needed.

[The General]

My hope is that the Liberals can temper the hate and knee jerk reactions that a Conservative govt would otherwise make on a regular basis.

 

Being unemployed and fed up with the current situation in the country, I did vote Conservative. I am very worried they are going to hammer those who like me are struggling at the bottom. However I believed and still do that the Labour party was destroying small business and went ban hammer happy with everything. Labour getting in again would have been far worse than giving the Cons a shot in my opinion.

 

What ever happened, big cuts are on the cards, we all know it.

 

I just hope the Cons will consider how Labour were shown to be quite unpopular and Labour did not lose, the Cons did not win!

 

Personally I wanted a Lib/Con govt and thats what happened. On that score, I am pleased. Concerned but pleased.

[Pilko]

Personally, as a Labour voter I think this is probably the best outcome for Labour. It's going to divide the Tories, divide the Lib Dems and push voters towards Labour. Let's face it opposition is a hell of alot easier and will allow the party to regroup and find our new champion. As for the whole "the country's got more *suitcase* over the last ten years" argument, I think that's nonsense. I'm sure this coalition will still manage to push the country forward, let's face it they're all centre parties the differences aren't massive.

[Stealthbomber]

Depends what kind of public service job you do. If your job is nothing more than a stupid non-job created by Tony "War Criminal" B Liar/Gordon "Slack Jawed" Brown and Co just so they can get your vote come election time (the old saying a dog never bites the hand that feeds springs to mind) then I have very little sympathy, however, if it is a genuine job that does indeed contribute something to the people/country ect then you do have my sympathy.

I guess that kind of attitude is an inevitable response to all the touchy-feely, PC, multicultural, sandal-wearing, tree-hugging junk that we've endured under Labour but it's not actually realistic.

 

I dunno if you'd consider nursing or teaching as "non-jobs" but those groups didn't exactly do well under the last conservative government.

It's gonna be fun for teachers (and their pupils) when they get a spending freeze for the next 4 years so they'll be teaching from obsolete books.

Also, school kids should start writing smaller cos there's no money for new excercise books.

Or milk.

 

I know I'm getting on a bit so my mind is growing weak and feeble but I seem to recall groups like firemen, ambulance drivers, teachers and even the rozzers felt compelled to strike for better pay and improved working conditions far more under the Tories than at any time in the last ten years.

I'd have to assume they weren't all being bolshie lefties and did actually feel justified in that extreme action.

 

No, we have employment law to stop companies "doing what they want with people". Unions just give certain individuals an excuse to have a very well paid 'non-job' and stir up s**t once in a while.

Right, cos that's all unions do, innit?

 

I'm sure you think of, for example, the Liverpool dock workers as bolshie lefties when, in fact, the reality was that dock workers who'd signed contracts which included holiday and health benefits were being forced to forego those benefits or face being replaced by workers who were happy to agree to work for lower pay and less no benefits.

The dock managements didn't break any laws. They simply asked workers to revise their contracts and then replaced those who refused.

 

The problem with unions is that they do have a poor history in recent years and the stuff that gets onto the telly does tend to involve the more extremist personalities but unions are an absolutely crucial system for ensuring fair treatment to workers.

The biggest problem is that, traditionally at least, a Labour government is more likely to actually consider union demands whereas the Tories won't even listen to them which usually means they're forced to resort to their only "weapon"; strikes.

Expect more of those.

 

Being unemployed and fed up with the current situation in the country, I did vote Conservative. I am very worried they are going to hammer those who like me are struggling at the bottom. However I believed and still do that the Labour party was destroying small business and went ban hammer happy with everything. Labour getting in again would have been far worse than giving the Cons a shot in my opinion.

 

What ever happened, big cuts are on the cards, we all know it.

Look forward to the Tories closing down every jobcentre within 50 miles of where you live, telling you to attend at least 5 job interviews a week or face having your dole stopped and then, just for good measure, trying to take your vote away if you're in the same situation come the next elections.

[AceOfSkulls]

 

RMT and Unite are good examples in the media right now, rattling thier sabres and forcing industrial action during a time common sense and flexibility are needed.

 

are you a member of the RMT or Unite? if any action is taken it requires a vote, usualy these votes come out as a very deffinate yes or no. So it is not the union it is every worker that votes yes or no that decides. The BA strike and i beleive the RMT strike's where both voted through with a large majority. So who are you to tell these workers wether they have the right to strike for better conditions or not?

 

my experience is working for royal mail, management saying "these are your new terms and condition" with little or no consoltation and trying to completly shaft us. The union often agrees to alot of stuff that management puts forward but sometimes its too much or too major and we vote on it. Employment law doesnt protect all aspects of a job only the very basic stuff.

[creepingfear]

Nappy Co-ordinator, 2 a day teeth brushing consultant and all those other quite stupid non jobs. thats what I was refering to as a non job.

[Triggerhappychappy]

^^The pointless Qangos and thinktanks/ advisory groups that cost a fortune yet acheive very little if anything ( useful, or otherwise ) ? Thats one of my major beefs.

 

Seems like Cameron has said MPs have to take a paycut straight away- hows that for a start...

[mattmanic]

To fix the economy could they not just work out some EU deal to tax footballers more? I mean, if they earn £1m a year an 80% tax would still give them more than enough money to waste on cars and houses.

[Graeme]

Glad to see the Tories in power (albeit through a coalition). From where I am though I am most certainly in the minority and our consituency would NEVER have been Tory considering the people of Ayrshire and Glasgow would elect Labour if the leader was a monkey (like most, but not all, Labour voters imo).

[bbondaloose]

You guys wanna trade?

Obama for Cameron?

I'll even add a bag of bb's with it.

[Habakure]

I think the first people to strike, will be the police and then the teachers (if the following does take place). Cut backs for the police and also trying to cut pensions for teachers will make them strike.

 

Time will tell, it is very early doors at the moment. I reckon one of the first things they should do, is raise the tax on booze (And I am a drinker by the way) seeing as a lot of crime and damage (In my area) comes from booze fueled bouts of insanity.

[Azubi]

I thought the police weren't allowed to strike?

[Chimpy]

I thought the police weren't allowed to strike?

 

They aren't officially.

 

But how would you stop them?

[Azubi]

It's a fair point Chimpy but fear of losing your job, especially with all this economic instability we are told about all the time, will do alot to dissuade many I would imagine. I've known plenty who won't even bend the rules with the Union in order to prove a point or get something, nevermind take part in an illegal strike.

 

Ok, they wont sack everyone who does strike as that would leave the country without a police force but at the end of the day, it's the fear you could lose your job that will cause people hold back from striking.

[snowman]

To be honest, you'd have to question the credibility of a Police force made up of people who'd broken the law, wouldn't you?

 

I suspect most Police officers would feel the same way - I don't see them 'striking' - Maybe refusing overtime or whatever legal actions they can take, but not actually breaking the law 'en masse'.

 

I guess we'll have to see where this Conservative led coalition takes us. On a personal level, I find Cameron as fake and disreputable as I found Blair when he came to power, but I'll be happy to be proved wrong.

 

The truth is that all the Governments since the war have contributed to the mess we're in now in one way or another, I don't really expect this one will make things much better for anyone except Bankers, Bernie Ecclestone and deviants who get their sexual kicks from smearing their kids faces with the blood of an animal torn to shreds by dogs.

 

Cheers.

[Chimpy]

I don't think it's actually a criminal offense for them to strike, might be wrong on that though.

 

Things like work to rule would certainly stuff a lot of forces though.

[Scuffer]

I don't think it's actually a criminal offense for them to strike, might be wrong on that though.

 

Things like work to rule would certainly stuff a lot of forces though.

You're correct, illegal to strike. But there's nothing stopping them gathering legally on mass for a peaceful march, as has happened before a few months back over pay/conditions.

 

I'm fairly sure Cameron won't go after the police first, never know how much support they'll need from them should any other reductions create any up-roars or kick offs. That said the police force is braced for cuts, seemily all forces have frozen recruitment and there are no costly decisions being made in house at the moment.

[galactica]

I think we're a long way from Police strikes. The Police isn't where the big money is going - it's the welfare state as we all know.

 

Personally, i'm a libertarian and liberal in the old british sense of the word (and proud to be in the Bill O'Reilly sense of the word too...fruitcage you Bill!) and though I am no Tory fan, they at least share libertarian ideas with the LDs and will be ripping up all of Labour's most horrific civil liberties revocations, and hopefully the DEB too- and it goes without saying that an elected second chamber and electoral reform are big on my list. If it can be held together, there is a very interesting experiment in consensus politics to be done here, something well worth a term of the tories being "back in" - there's nothing more wearying than Labour tribalist woegasms that anything apart from Labour is disastrous - now the rose-tinted specs are on regarding Brown's term in office, everyone seems to be forgetting about the torture, David Kelly, the snatch Land Rovers, the gold sold for £10, the destroyed pensions....

[Stealthbomber]

The truth is that all the Governments since the war have contributed to the mess we're in now in one way or another, I don't really expect this one will make things much better for anyone except Bankers, Bernie Ecclestone and deviants who get their sexual kicks from smearing their kids faces with the blood of an animal torn to shreds by dogs.

Well, if they're anything like they were in the 1980's they'll be all for throwing people in jail for their sexual kinks.

 

I see that, among the first batch of "improvements" the tories are making, are a rise in VAT, a rise in national insurance and "substantial" cuts in military spending.

I hope the muppets on the ARSSE forums who all voted for Cameron cos tories like a strong military are crying on their keboards now.

 

Also, I hear that George Osbourne and Vince Cable are refusing to talk to each other and refusing to share an office.

Cable has been made Business secretary and put in charge of a department he famously once said was a total waste of time and that, if he came to power, he'd close down.

Funny how a persons perspective can change, eh?

 

As for the MPs 5% pay cut, we'll have to see what they do about MP expenses.

For a long time it's been felt that MPs were "underpaid" and that they used expenses to unofficially make up the shortfall so, after the recent clamp-down on expenses, a relaxation of the policing of expenses could easily offset a 5% pay cut.

 

Interesting, as well, to see Tory and Lib-Dem pundits already suggesting that all the bad stuff is the fault of the "other" part of the coalition.

 

Finally, while searching for a suitable way to describe the coalition, some wag suggested "The Con-Dem's"

[-Angel-]

VAT was going to go up eventually, regardless of who got to power.

 

Have you got a link for the NI increase? It was Labour who wanted to raise it by 1% but the coalition had scrapped it?

[tom lawson]

I see that, among the first batch of "improvements" the tories are making, are a rise in VAT, a rise in national insurance and "substantial" cuts in military spending.

I hope the muppets on the ARSSE forums who all voted for Cameron cos tories like a strong military are crying on their keboards now.

 

Do you really think that the UK needs the number of fast jets, tanks and the amount of heavy artillery it has now? Those are the three things that the former head of the Army has proposed reducing. Their need, in great numbers, seems to be a bit of a leftover from the Cold War days of having to be ready to fight a large-scale land battle.

[Stealthbomber]

Have you got a link for the NI increase? It was Labour who wanted to raise it by 1% but the coalition had scrapped it?

Was on the telly this morning. Can't see anything about it on the interweb yet.

 

Do you really think that the UK needs the number of fast jets, tanks and the amount of heavy artillery it has now? Those are the three things that the former head of the Army has proposed reducing. Their need, in great numbers, seems to be a bit of a leftover from the Cold War days of having to be ready to fight a large-scale land battle.

We probably don't need Typhoons to fight the Taliban (although I bet troops would take all the tanks they can get) but you're still assuming that all we're ever gonna do is fight unconventional wars.

 

We're only just in the process of replacing planes that were over 30 years old in the RAF.

It's not like we're escalating our arsenal. We're simply maintaining a state of readiness.

 

It seems a bit blinkered to suggest not replacing old hardware when we could probably afford to buy a new Typoon every day if we withrew from Afghanistan instead.

[tom lawson]

I never said that we should completely get rid of fast jets, tanks (I don't think they're used very much in Afghanistan - I've not seen any pictures of CR2's in use)and heavy artillery, just that the numbers that we have could be cut back whilst still maintaining that capability.