Current Affairs The Conservative Party

Status
Not open for further replies.
If people genuinely understood what the Daily Mail has done to this country everyone involved in it would be treated worse than nonces.
I was on a plane going to Spain years ago. I got chatting to the guy sat next to me. Eventually the chat got around to what we both did for a living. He said “ I work in a lie factory, I’m a printer at The Daily Mail. “
 
It is a difficult topic to discuss. Brexit has really forced this issue into either you are racist if you mention it and woke if you support it.

There are valid concerns on migration though, you can look at the population growth since Conversatives came into power under Cameron is an extra five million in net migration into the UK. Which when you take into account the GDP growth that gets stated then actually GDP per head has fell for the previous six quarters. And we are poorer since they came into power.

My partner entered the UK from India two years ago as a skilled worker. So I understand the massive benefits of having people enter the UK and staying in the UK. But you can't deny issues when individuals come into the country and the added strain that adds to public services and added risk of under skilled British people as skills are sought from outside the UK.

The solution as always is not an easy one. I don't like the Stop the boats slogan or the Rwanda scheme. I like the Aussie model of a points based model and having to put money into the system to get the benefits of the nation in return.

And I have always felt that migration is caused from nations who constantly abuse the strength of other nations and their generosity by neglecting their citizens and forcing them out. As a vicious cycle of oppression. When will that ever be mentioned and actually something be done about it.

strong nations? you mean the ones that have exploited and stole from others for centuries?
maybe these strong nations now need to do something to repent for their previous despicable sins like take some migrants in.
 

2010-2014: 14 Wasted Years? and it is published by Cambridge University Press.

Tory government from 2010 to 2024 worse than any other in postwar history, says study by leading experts

As John Stevens reports in a story for the Daily Mirror today, Jeremy Hunt, the chancellor, was complaining at a private Tory dinner earlier this year about the electorate’s “total failure to appreciate our superb record since 2010”.

But just how good is the Conservative party’s record in government over the past 14 years? Thankfully, we now have what is as close as we’re going to get to the authoritative, official verdict. Sir Anthony Seldon, arguably Britain’s leading contemporary political historian, is publishing a collection of essays written by prominent academics and other experts and they have analysed the record of the Conservative government from 2010 to 2024, looking at what it has achieved in every area of policy.

It is called The Conservative Effect 2010-2014: 14 Wasted Years? and it is published by Cambridge University Press.

And its conclusion is damning. It describes this as the worst government in postwar history.

Here is the conclusion of the final chapter, written by Seldon and his co-editor Tom Egerton, which sums up the overall verdict.

In comparison to the earlier four periods of one-party dominance post-1945, it is hard to see the years since 2010 as anything but disappointing. By 2024, Britain’s standing in the world was lower, the union was less strong, the country less equal, the population less well protected, growth more sluggish with the outlook poor, public services underperforming and largely unreformed, while respect for the institutions of the British state, including the civil service, judiciary and the police, was lower, as it was for external bodies, including the universities and the BBC, repeatedly attacked not least by government, ministers and right-wing commentators.

Do the unusually high number of external shocks to some extent let the governments off the hook? One above all – Brexit – was entirely of its own making and will be seen in history as the defining decision of these years. In 2024, the verdict on Brexit is almost entirely negative, with those who are suffering the most from it, as sceptics at the time predicted, the most vulnerable. The nation was certainly difficult to rule in these fourteen years, the Conservative party still more so. Longstanding problems certainly contributed to the difficulties the prime minister faced in providing clear strategic policy, including the 24-hour news cycle, the rise of social media and AI, and the frequency of scandals and crises. But it was the decision of the prime minister to choose to be distracted by the short term, rather than focusing on the strategic and the long term. The prime minister has agency: the incumbents often overlooked it.

Overall, it is hard to find a comparable period in history of the Conservatives which achieved so little, or which left the country at its conclusion in a more troubling state.

In their concluding essay, Seldon and Egerton argue that poor leadership was one of the main problems with the 14-year administration. They say that Boris Johnson and Liz Truss were “not up to the job” of being prime minister, and they have a low opinion of most of the other leading figures who have been in government. They say:

Very few cabinet ministers from 2010 to 2024 could hold a candle to the team who served under Clement Attlee – which included Ernest Bevin, Nye Bevan, Stafford Cripps, Hugh Gaitskell and Herbert Morrison. Or the teams who served under Wilson, Thatcher or Blair. Michael Gove, Jeremy Hunt and Philip Hammond were rare examples of ministers of quality after 2010 …

A strong and capable prime minister is essential to governmental success in the British system. The earlier four periods saw two historic and landmark prime ministers, ie Churchill and Thatcher, with a succession of others who were capable if not agenda-changing PMs, including Macmillan, Wilson, Major and Blair. Since 2010, only Cameron came close to that level, with Sunak the best of the rest. Policy virtually stopped under May as Brexit consumed almost all the machine’s time, while serious policymaking ground to a halt under Johnson’s inept leadership, the worst in modern premiership, and the hapless Truss. Continuity of policy was not helped by each incoming prime minister despising their predecessor, with Truss’s admiration for Johnson the only exception. Thus they took next no time to understand what it was their predecessors were trying to do, and how to build on it rather than destroy it.

Seldon’s first book, published 40 years ago, was about Churchill’s postwar administration, and he has been editing similar collections of essays studying the record of administrations since Margaret Thatcher’s. He is a fair judge, and not given to making criticisms like this lightly.

The book is officially being published next week, and I’m quoting from a proof copy. In this version, the subtitle still has a question mark after 14 Wasted Years? Judging by the conclusion, that does not seem necessary.
 
strong nations? you mean the ones that have exploited and stole from others for centuries?
maybe these strong nations now need to do something to repent for their previous despicable sins like take some migrants in.
Let's not play some countries are innocent 😇 game everyone of them has blood on their hands.

I'm taking about current politics, what is your opinion on the matter?
 
It is a difficult topic to discuss. Brexit has really forced this issue into either you are racist if you mention it and woke if you support it.

There are valid concerns on migration though, you can look at the population growth since Conversatives came into power under Cameron is an extra five million in net migration into the UK. Which when you take into account the GDP growth that gets stated then actually GDP per head has fell for the previous six quarters. And we are poorer since they came into power.

My partner entered the UK from India two years ago as a skilled worker. So I understand the massive benefits of having people enter the UK and staying in the UK. But you can't deny issues when individuals come into the country and the added strain that adds to public services and added risk of under skilled British people as skills are sought from outside the UK.

The solution as always is not an easy one. I don't like the Stop the boats slogan or the Rwanda scheme. I like the Aussie model of a points based model and having to put money into the system to get the benefits of the nation in return.

And I have always felt that migration is caused from nations who constantly abuse the strength of other nations and their generosity by neglecting their citizens and forcing them out. As a vicious cycle of oppression. When will that ever be mentioned and actually something be done about it.
It always somewhat amazes me that we've by and large moved away from the notion that we can have a centrally managed economy, yet we still hang onto this notion that we can have a centrally managed labour market. What makes it even stranger is the people advocating the latter are typically those would think the former is utterly crazy.
 

2010-2014: 14 Wasted Years? and it is published by Cambridge University Press.

Tory government from 2010 to 2024 worse than any other in postwar history, says study by leading experts

As John Stevens reports in a story for the Daily Mirror today, Jeremy Hunt, the chancellor, was complaining at a private Tory dinner earlier this year about the electorate’s “total failure to appreciate our superb record since 2010”.

But just how good is the Conservative party’s record in government over the past 14 years? Thankfully, we now have what is as close as we’re going to get to the authoritative, official verdict. Sir Anthony Seldon, arguably Britain’s leading contemporary political historian, is publishing a collection of essays written by prominent academics and other experts and they have analysed the record of the Conservative government from 2010 to 2024, looking at what it has achieved in every area of policy.

It is called The Conservative Effect 2010-2014: 14 Wasted Years? and it is published by Cambridge University Press.

And its conclusion is damning. It describes this as the worst government in postwar history.

Here is the conclusion of the final chapter, written by Seldon and his co-editor Tom Egerton, which sums up the overall verdict.

In comparison to the earlier four periods of one-party dominance post-1945, it is hard to see the years since 2010 as anything but disappointing. By 2024, Britain’s standing in the world was lower, the union was less strong, the country less equal, the population less well protected, growth more sluggish with the outlook poor, public services underperforming and largely unreformed, while respect for the institutions of the British state, including the civil service, judiciary and the police, was lower, as it was for external bodies, including the universities and the BBC, repeatedly attacked not least by government, ministers and right-wing commentators.

Do the unusually high number of external shocks to some extent let the governments off the hook? One above all – Brexit – was entirely of its own making and will be seen in history as the defining decision of these years. In 2024, the verdict on Brexit is almost entirely negative, with those who are suffering the most from it, as sceptics at the time predicted, the most vulnerable. The nation was certainly difficult to rule in these fourteen years, the Conservative party still more so. Longstanding problems certainly contributed to the difficulties the prime minister faced in providing clear strategic policy, including the 24-hour news cycle, the rise of social media and AI, and the frequency of scandals and crises. But it was the decision of the prime minister to choose to be distracted by the short term, rather than focusing on the strategic and the long term. The prime minister has agency: the incumbents often overlooked it.

Overall, it is hard to find a comparable period in history of the Conservatives which achieved so little, or which left the country at its conclusion in a more troubling state.

In their concluding essay, Seldon and Egerton argue that poor leadership was one of the main problems with the 14-year administration. They say that Boris Johnson and Liz Truss were “not up to the job” of being prime minister, and they have a low opinion of most of the other leading figures who have been in government. They say:

Very few cabinet ministers from 2010 to 2024 could hold a candle to the team who served under Clement Attlee – which included Ernest Bevin, Nye Bevan, Stafford Cripps, Hugh Gaitskell and Herbert Morrison. Or the teams who served under Wilson, Thatcher or Blair. Michael Gove, Jeremy Hunt and Philip Hammond were rare examples of ministers of quality after 2010 …

A strong and capable prime minister is essential to governmental success in the British system. The earlier four periods saw two historic and landmark prime ministers, ie Churchill and Thatcher, with a succession of others who were capable if not agenda-changing PMs, including Macmillan, Wilson, Major and Blair. Since 2010, only Cameron came close to that level, with Sunak the best of the rest. Policy virtually stopped under May as Brexit consumed almost all the machine’s time, while serious policymaking ground to a halt under Johnson’s inept leadership, the worst in modern premiership, and the hapless Truss. Continuity of policy was not helped by each incoming prime minister despising their predecessor, with Truss’s admiration for Johnson the only exception. Thus they took next no time to understand what it was their predecessors were trying to do, and how to build on it rather than destroy it.

Seldon’s first book, published 40 years ago, was about Churchill’s postwar administration, and he has been editing similar collections of essays studying the record of administrations since Margaret Thatcher’s. He is a fair judge, and not given to making criticisms like this lightly.

The book is officially being published next week, and I’m quoting from a proof copy. In this version, the subtitle still has a question mark after 14 Wasted Years? Judging by the conclusion, that does not seem necessary.
Does the book compare British performance with that of our peers (Germany, France, Italy et al)?
 
Let's not play some countries are innocent 😇 game everyone of them has blood on their hands.

I'm taking about current politics, what is your opinion on the matter?

you can't separate 'current politics' from history.
my opinion is anyone wanting to come to the UK for a better life should be welcomed.
 
you can't separate 'current politics' from history.
my opinion is anyone wanting to come to the UK for a better life should be welcomed.
Course you can separate them both, but with Gaza and Israel for example people would rather see loss of live on both sides than come to peace. I've stayed out of that debate and would kindly ask not to dragged into that please.

Your point on immigration is a more generalised which I'll respect but doesn't really achieve anything, no country operates on an open border policy.
 
He's comparing UK governments post war.
The reason I ask is that there have been a series of pretty major events, including the biggest financial crash for 100 years, the biggest pandemic for 100 years, a war that hugely disrupted supply chains, and Brexit. Obviously the latter was self-inflicted, but the others will have also affected Germany, France, and Italy, whereas they won't have affected Blair and Thatcher era Britain. So it seems wisest to judge us against our peers rather than previous eras as you're more likely to be comparing like with like.

There was a study a while ago (I'll try and dig it out if needs be) that basically said we judge leaders more highly when they thrive in benign circumstances than when they have modest results in much more challenging circumstances, despite that having no real logical basis to it. Given how awful the Tories have been, that shouldn't be the case, but the only way to prove one way or another is to assess them against others that have had similar circumstances to operate in.
 
Course you can separate them both, but with Gaza and Israel for example people would rather see loss of live on both sides than come to peace. I've stayed out of that debate and would kindly ask not to dragged into that please.

Your point on immigration is a more generalised which I'll respect but doesn't really achieve anything, no country operates on an open border policy.
Every single country in the world operated one until the early 1900s.
 
In an ideal world. Unfortunately, people will use this to their own ends and stoke racial divisions.
I don’t particularly know what the solution is but the dehumanising aspect must stop.

its only going to get worse as the planet continues to heat up and the war mongers continue to search for profits.
human race probably extinct in 100 years so all be over soon enough.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top