View on Tony Blair's legacy

[boberz]

i do understand the hitler comment was totally flawed but it did start the debate well, as that comment always does.

However i still believe that a PR government lacks the basic confidence of the people and can often fail (even more than the current system) in representation locally

[Norse]

I put 'other'

He will be remembered for making british politics a 'show-business' type affair, whilst deflecting the actualities of politics.

He shows up, comments on meaningless occurances, such as David Beckhams return to international football, smiles and avoids any difficult questioning.

The British public, being an ever dumbed down celebrity-loving culture do not know how badly Blair has done;

-how the educational standards of this country has dropped
-We have sold off even more of our industry, not to mention the gold reserves at rock-bottom prices
- There simply is not as many jobs as there were when he took over power, the labour government have simply fiddled the figures by luring more 16-24 year olds to take on meaningless college courses.
-There are the most children since victorian times living in poverty.
-Teenage pregnancy is the highest in europe among teens
-Teenage alcoholism and drug use is the highest in europe
-We have been plunged deeper and deeper into the EU, without our consent (If you are interested, read up about the EU, it scares the shit out of me)

I suggest the book 'The great deception'.

[nagerous]

ah so you are a Euro-Sceptic like me. In regards to Europe, I agree with Blair's signing of the social chapter as it deals with child poverty and equality in all the European countries. However, I am not a fan of the change from vetoes to QMVs. By taking away Britain's veto is just another example of our national sovereignty being eroded. Sure you may be thinking whats a crazy libertarian like me doing supporting a veto system that ensures a democratic deficit. Well basically Europe is becoming a strong government based supranational power and this loss of sovereignty for Britain is stark as a nation. Unfortunately Blair supported Europe and this will be another factor of his legacy. He signed away our national sovereignty at Amsterdam and Nice with no national referendum and was only willing to give us a referendum on the Euro when the political climate was right i.e when he would win. Thankfully one attribute of Gordan Brown is he is more of a euro-sceptic than Blair will ever be and doesn't support the Euro.

[Norse]

Well, as Blair himself said not long ago, there will not be a referendum at all for the british public to decide. So if there are any further commitments made, this will be done without the consent of the public.

What really annoys me about this whole affair, is that there is absolutely no information about this 'european treaty' that they are going to be trying to pass that has been made public knowledge.

No specifics, no information, nothing.

Leads one to become suspicious.

[nagerous]

However once they have been elected why should we strip them of power by using PR, it causes weak instable governments and at the first sign of trouble everyone complains and we get a new government. I understand my Hitler argument doesnt hold up on its own, but it succeeded in firing the debate.

Weak government is not necessarily a bad thing either. As far as I'm concerned minimal government is the way forward and prevents the formation of a 'nanny state.' If government is weak they cannot enforce legislation like the terror legislation which curbed minority rights to a great extent. Sure PR will create a weaker government but it also creates more of a pluralist government where the views of the people are listened to via referenda. This creates more of a direct democracy as opposed to the flawed representative democracy, which in my view is an oxymoron.

[Guiscard]

Well, as Blair himself said not long ago, there will not be a referendum at all for the british public to decide. So if there are any further commitments made, this will be done without the consent of the public.

What really annoys me about this whole affair, is that there is absolutely no information about this 'european treaty' that they are going to be trying to pass that has been made public knowledge.

No specifics, no information, nothing.

Leads one to become suspicious.

Why? Its early stages. What they have agreed upon now is public knowledge (the dual majority system, for example) and what we don't knwo hasn't been decided.

For those who want to criticise the signing of this treaty, remember that the countries who held referendums last time which kicked the old treaty out haven't held them this time - they don't see the need! We have no legal basis to request a referendum.

As for my opinion, its Europe or America. I think we need to be seen as s willing player on the European scene. The EU will provide a sorely needed power bloc to counter the US, China and India and I'd rather be a major player in that than a sub on the American team, as it were! We can't keep shoving everything back in the face of the EU. Its time to commit now. That doesn't mean we should lose all sovereignty and give over all our powers to Brussels, but I have a significant disdain for the hysterical eurosceptics among us.

[Guiscard]

I think his biggest legacy will be a further disillusionment of the left with Labour and thus the whole parliamentary party system. Three massive majorities in parliament and very little to show for it. Every reform he implemented "he wished he went further" (his own words) - what stopped him?

Labour have introduced some worthy policies (minimum wage, partial reforming house of lords, massive investment in education and committing to keeping the NHS) but have been found wanting to use their unheard of majorities to drive forward radical change. Tony worried too much about polls, opinion focus groups, re-election and international appearance to focus on implementing lasting change. We've squandered the change and I think we will regret not using these "golden years" of a booming economy and a feeble Tory opposition to our advantage.

Too much statesman-like talking and spin and not enough action.

I think fickle Middle England will defect to the Tories now they look more electable, and the socialist left will continue leaving Labour in droves. The New Labour project will hopefully realise this and seek to regain the support of the left and drop this flirtation with the centre ground.

You make good points here. I'm a Labour supporter but I lean much more to the left than the current Labour stance. I think your projection is a little extreme, however. I'd much rather support a more centrist Labour government where people like John Cruddas can spring up from the back benches and make the government take notice of left-wing elements (he'll get a cabinet position because of immense party support) than stick strictly to my ideological guns and let the Tories f*ck the country up again.

Government is a hard job, and I think overall he's done a good job on the domestic front. He's the most successful and most capable politician we've had since Thatcher and I really do think Brown can continue concrete policies whilst moving away from the reliance on spin and the focus groups and opinion polls Blair relied upon. That can be Cameron's territory now, and he hasn't got the content in the same way as Brown. People are fed up of Blair and fed up of spin, but thats what he seems to be basing his politics on at the moment...

[Guiscard]

he will be remembered for the war although he shouldnt be. Making monetry policy independent was genious. The amount of money available is great. Target schemes are good in principle even if they need to be tidied up a bit. Just the war was a big mistake.

You make Gordon sound so undemocratic, Labour were voted in so under the impression that Tony would not fight another election. Much better view than the lady that was not for turning.

However am i the only one that realises Gordon is the same as John Major in terms of being a puppet for his master.

This is another good post (apart from the last bit).

Firstly, yes economic policy has been pretty brilliant over the last decade. No-one can really deny that. Better than Tory boom and bust...

Seconly, in this country we vote for a local MP whop belongs to a political party. The party with the majority of MPs forms a government and the leader of that party, chosen however the party wants too - they can do it by gladatorial contest if they wish - becomes PM (essentially). What is all this bollocks about Gordon Brown being unelected? Its happened before and I'm sure it will happen again. He's been elected in his constituency and that's all our political system requires. If you want that to change that's another matter, but its pretty ignorant to shout about his coronation as opposed to election (as a lot of the right-wing media are doing). We elected a Labour government knowing full well that Gordon Brown would become PM before the next election. Full well.

Thirdly, I'd argue that he's far from a puppet. He's a significant political force. Blair didn't guide Britain's economic prosperity over the last decade, Brown did. They have been at each others throats on many occasions. Hardly a puppet... He isn't a Blairite and he is moving away from Blairism. He is who he is.

[Huckleberryhound]

Dare i be contentious.

I think Blairs legacy for our country was his decision to allow free movement of people from eastern europe into our country.

It is nice to know that the hoodies and semi skilled of our country will be fighting for jobs with people who are prepared to work for half the money, twice the hours, and have free university training under their belts. When there is a college graduate happily washing dishes because the money is better than in Poland, how is the below average of our own country supposed to survive ?

[/contentious]

[Guiscard]

Dare i be contentious.

I think Blairs legacy for our country was his decision to allow free movement of people from eastern europe into our country.

It is nice to know that the hoodies and semi skilled of our country will be fighting for jobs with people who are prepared to work for half the money, twice the hours, and have free university training under their belts. When there is a college graduate happily washing dishes because the money is better than in Poland, how is the below average of our own country supposed to survive ?

[/contentious]

I don't know about you, but I live in a pretty working class town. People are categorically not losing out on jobs because, quite simply, they don't want to do them in the first place! I've done factory and warehouse work through recruitment agencies alongside many different types of people, and what I found was that most people simply didn't WANT to do that work! There were always spaces for legal immigrant workers to fill just as much as there was a space for me - white, university educated and lower middle class! We aren't fighting for jobs - we won't take them in the first place! And it wasn't his decision, it was European decision which is vital for our economic survival. We need a freedom of work and trade within Europe to be successful and this is just one result.

[diddle]

does anyone else think tony blair looks like tim henman?

[nagerous]

I'll tell you who does look like Tim Henman... Secretary of State for the Environment: David Milliband

[diddle]

I'll tell you who does look like Tim Henman... Secretary of State for the Environment: David Milliband

he's a nobhead, he could have stopped gordon brown descending upon us but he didn't

[Guiscard]

I'll tell you who does look like Tim Henman... Secretary of State for the Environment: David Milliband

he's a nobhead, he could have stopped gordon brown descending upon us but he didn't

No he couldn't. That's why he didn't run. He didn't get enough nominations. He would have run but too many Labour MPs didn't want to nominate him, and he'd never have got through the general vote anyway!

[diddle]

I'll tell you who does look like Tim Henman... Secretary of State for the Environment: David Milliband

he's a nobhead, he could have stopped gordon brown descending upon us but he didn't

No he couldn't. That's why he didn't run. He didn't get enough nominations. He would have run but too many Labour MPs didn't want to nominate him, and he'd never have got through the general vote anyway!

oh right, politics aren't really my thing, i'm only 14

[Guiscard]

oh right, politics aren't really my thing, i'm only 14

No worries.

[nagerous]

Guiscard you're slightly wrong this time... Milliband would have got enough nominations to enter a leadership contest against Brown. He was very popular and a lot of Blairites would have backed him. However, he chose not to stand and that meant that Brown was the only MP to receive the right amount of nominations to enter a contest. Milliband would have received enough but wouldn't have ran. However, Milliband didn't run because he didn't want to stand up against Brown in a possible leadership election as he wanted to get on Brown's good side and not damage his future political career by running too early.

[Guiscard]

Guiscard you're slightly wrong this time... Milliband would have got enough nominations to enter a leadership contest against Brown. He was very popular and a lot of Blairites would have backed him. However, he chose not to stand and that meant that Brown was the only MP to receive the right amount of nominations to enter a contest. Milliband would have received enough but wouldn't have ran. However, Milliband didn't run because he didn't want to stand up against Brown in a possible leadership election as he wanted to get on Brown's good side and not damage his future political career by running too early.

I know this, don't worry. I think my original post should have read 'he couldn't get enough nominations'. It is still thought by some that he may well have run if he'd have been guaranteed the nominations but purely BECAUSE he's such a Brown supporter he wouldn't have gotten them. I think he'd have stood if he had a chance, although I'm fully aware of his commitment to, and support of Brown to this day. He stuck his toe in the water, realised he had no chance and so sensibly didn't take it as far as McDonnel or Meacher.

Its all speculation though so I don't suppose it matters really.

[Huckleberryhound]

Dare i be contentious.

I think Blairs legacy for our country was his decision to allow free movement of people from eastern europe into our country.

It is nice to know that the hoodies and semi skilled of our country will be fighting for jobs with people who are prepared to work for half the money, twice the hours, and have free university training under their belts. When there is a college graduate happily washing dishes because the money is better than in Poland, how is the below average of our own country supposed to survive ?

[/contentious]

I don't know about you, but I live in a pretty working class town. People are categorically not losing out on jobs because, quite simply, they don't want to do them in the first place! I've done factory and warehouse work through recruitment agencies alongside many different types of people, and what I found was that most people simply didn't WANT to do that work! There were always spaces for legal immigrant workers to fill just as much as there was a space for me - white, university educated and lower middle class! We aren't fighting for jobs - we won't take them in the first place! And it wasn't his decision, it was European decision which is vital for our economic survival. We need a freedom of work and trade within Europe to be successful and this is just one result.

I'm talking about the uneducated lower working class, not the university educated lower middle class. There ARE people out there who have historically filled those jobs, before the enlargement of the EU, and i'm talking of those who use them as a way out of poverty or use them to eleviate them from poverty.

[Guiscard]

Dare i be contentious.

I think Blairs legacy for our country was his decision to allow free movement of people from eastern europe into our country.

It is nice to know that the hoodies and semi skilled of our country will be fighting for jobs with people who are prepared to work for half the money, twice the hours, and have free university training under their belts. When there is a college graduate happily washing dishes because the money is better than in Poland, how is the below average of our own country supposed to survive ?

[/contentious]

I don't know about you, but I live in a pretty working class town. People are categorically not losing out on jobs because, quite simply, they don't want to do them in the first place! I've done factory and warehouse work through recruitment agencies alongside many different types of people, and what I found was that most people simply didn't WANT to do that work! There were always spaces for legal immigrant workers to fill just as much as there was a space for me - white, university educated and lower middle class! We aren't fighting for jobs - we won't take them in the first place! And it wasn't his decision, it was European decision which is vital for our economic survival. We need a freedom of work and trade within Europe to be successful and this is just one result.

I'm talking about the uneducated lower working class, not the university educated lower middle class. There ARE people out there who have historically filled those jobs, before the enlargement of the EU, and i'm talking of those who use them as a way out of poverty or use them to eleviate them from poverty.

Yeh and I'm talking about the same people. I'm just illustrating my point by showing how it is just as easy for someone like me, lower middle class, to find the kind of work you think the working classes are excluded from. I can get shift work in factories, and so can the people you see as being excluded from jobs in favour of immigrant workers. There are employment opportunities to be used as a way out of poverty, but often people won't take them. Immigrant workers will. They work for the same legal wage as we do. We have the same employment laws as they do. There are always vacancies.

Furthermore, immigrant workers are not generally embarking on career-path based employment. To alleviate yourself from poverty you people need to be employed in jobs with genuine prospects, and a lot of working class people are going along those routes - learning trades like plastering, going to college to train for jobs etc. The nature of the workplace has changed. People are not content with sitting on the same factory line for 50 years. They may well have done 20 years ago but not now, and that is why immigrant workers are employed more in those areas. Short term work.

[Huckleberryhound]

Yeh and I'm talking about the same people. I'm just illustrating my point by showing how it is just as easy for someone like me, lower middle class, to find the kind of work you think the working classes are excluded from. I can get shift work in factories, and so can the people you see as being excluded from jobs in favour of immigrant workers. There are employment opportunities to be used as a way out of poverty, but often people won't take them. Immigrant workers will. They work for the same legal wage as we do. We have the same employment laws as they do. There are always vacancies.

Furthermore, immigrant workers are not generally embarking on career-path based employment. To alleviate yourself from poverty you people need to be employed in jobs with genuine prospects, and a lot of working class people are going along those routes - learning trades like plastering, going to college to train for jobs etc. The nature of the workplace has changed. People are not content with sitting on the same factory line for 50 years. They may well have done 20 years ago but not now, and that is why immigrant workers are employed more in those areas. Short term work.

"You People" ????

You are making a false assumption. I am in full time, career based employment, and for the record, i don't live in the UK anymore. I moved to Southern Ireland, another country that accepted the masses from the accession states and the things i am talking about are very real. Maybe your area is not effected to any great degree, don't consider your own personal experience to be a yard stick to judge what is happening in the rest of the country.

[Guiscard]

Yeh and I'm talking about the same people. I'm just illustrating my point by showing how it is just as easy for someone like me, lower middle class, to find the kind of work you think the working classes are excluded from. I can get shift work in factories, and so can the people you see as being excluded from jobs in favour of immigrant workers. There are employment opportunities to be used as a way out of poverty, but often people won't take them. Immigrant workers will. They work for the same legal wage as we do. We have the same employment laws as they do. There are always vacancies.

Furthermore, immigrant workers are not generally embarking on career-path based employment. To alleviate yourself from poverty you people need to be employed in jobs with genuine prospects, and a lot of working class people are going along those routes - learning trades like plastering, going to college to train for jobs etc. The nature of the workplace has changed. People are not content with sitting on the same factory line for 50 years. They may well have done 20 years ago but not now, and that is why immigrant workers are employed more in those areas. Short term work.

"You People" ????

You are making a false assumption. I am in full time, career based employment, and for the record, i don't live in the UK anymore. I moved to Southern Ireland, another country that accepted the masses from the accession states and the things i am talking about are very real. Maybe your area is not effected to any great degree, don't consider your own personal experience to be a yard stick to judge what is happening in the rest of the country.

'You people' was a typo. I'd originally written 'you need to be employed' and changed it to 'people need to be employed' but didn't delete, apparently. No offence meant.

But sure, I shouldn't judge the entire country on the experience of my area (although I've seen pretty much the same in the Midlands and up north in Leeds.) Then again, we're both guilty of that.

[RobinJ]

In my opinion one of his greatest acheivments was Northern Ireland. Here is one area where he actually did more than expected. While there was great hope when he started, I doubt anyone 10 years ago would have seen a former IRA man, Martin McGuinness, now of Sinn Fein, and a hardline Unionist, Ian Paisley, who once vowed to smash Sinn Fein, sitting at a table and actually working out solutions to important issues. I'm serious - it is really weird watching 2 people who have hated each other now joking together. Still, it is brilliant for us and for that I think Tony Blair deserves huge credit, even though he may have led us astray a few times.

However, he will be remembered more than anything for the Iraq War, of course.

One thing Ian Paisley suggested rings very true with me: Tony Blair is a diplomat and diplomats talk a lot but never really do anything about it. True, Iraq was a radical decision but he never really delivered entirely on all the things he promised.

The question is whether Gordon Brown will be any better, something that I am very unsure about. He seems very able but lacks the charisma of Tony Blair. Then, there is David Cameron, who I think says a lot of stuff that is very true and very needed but, in my opinion, he is also just trying to please everybody. He might be very similar to Tony Blair (if he ever gets in) in that he will promise but not deliver while managing to talk a lot and sound good, when really he is bullshitting quite often

[boberz]

On the europe debate. I believe even if the foreign workers are taking away jobs it will only encourage the (as huckleberryhound says) the hoodies and semi-skilled to become fully skilled and therefore more employable.

Also a lower average wage should also help slow down inflation

[Norse]

Anyone who wants concise knowledge of exactly where the EU are coming from, and exactly what the EU hopes to achieve, read this book;-

It scares the fookin crap out of me.



The Great deception