@Kozzy06 Section 28 which was brought in by the Thatcher's Govn late in the 1980s. A very homophobic piece of legislation and it is one of these reasons why people turned to Labour. I don't agree with a lot of things New Labour did, however, no question they helped modernise by giving the green light to civil partnerships to name one of a few. That is why Cameron has done to the Tories what Blair did for Labour: Modernise it. In fact, Tories had no choice if they wanted to be elected again.
@MrHair48 - It sure does and history does show that the countries that have a open free market system are the ones that flourish and that those countries that depart from those principals are the ones where you see the grinding poverty. Of course if that's not the case then maybe we can look back at history and find ourselves a better system of government that has pulled more people out of poverty then capitalism has.
Left the economy in good shape, only for the traitors Blair and Labour to come un, open the borders of the country to mass immigration, and leave the country with the largest budget deficit in Europe.
@Kozzy06 Hugely underrated PM I agree. However, he was let down by all round him who ended up being caught out by taking cash for questions and the amount of times Tory MPs ended up frontpage of newspapers with their trousers round their ankles.
Plus, it was at a time when the country wanted change (as Labour would find out years later) and that is only natural when one party is in government for so long. Not too mention, there was no sign of modernising the party. Take Section 28..
Sir John Major was an excellent PM for Britain. He rejected the euro which proves Thatcher and him both correct as we see it coming apart at the seams. Britain is as great a country today because John Major continued Margaret Thatcher's policy of no single currency. They are both correct and Sir John Major does not get his much earned and due credit.
History will judge John Major to have been a better Prime Minister than many now believe. When he left office, the economy was flourishing. At the end of Labour's time in power, it had been ruined by socialism.
@MrYoungIndependence Ruined by socialism??? Either you are an idiot or have the memory of a goldfish. The last government had to bail out multiple collapsing banks who had overreached themselves with irresponsible loans. That's not socialism - it's the complete opposite - unfettered capitalism.
@MrYoungIndependence The banks started trading some extremely dodgy, high risk instruments such as CDOs. This was what started the chain of collapses. The banks were taking more and more outrageous risks to achieve profit. Damn right we should demonise the banks.
@markinyo76 Bankers do no more than they are allowed to do; the government that oversaw Britain's biggest industry for thirteen years must take responsible for the events that occurred under its watch.
@markinyo76 Socialism is defined by nationalisation. Gordon Brown nationalised the banks as a solution to our economic woes. RBS is now loss-making and Iceland (which didn't nationalise its banks) is in full recovery.
@tdp1909 The idea that Gordon Brown nationalised the banks as part of some socialist programme is not credible. He nationalised them because allowing them to collapse would have been a complete catastrophe. He had no choice - unless you think it's ok for people to lose all their savings etc.
@markinyo76 "complete catastrophe"? Not necessarily. Iceland had a worse disaster than us, didn't nationalise their banks and are now in full recovery. Oh, and they also have far higher growth rate than us, despite people losing their savings. All Gordon Brown did is nationalised a load of bad debt and committed us to sending good money after bad for years to come...
@tdp1909 Iceland?! Glad you could come up with such a shining example... Iceland has less people in it than Manchester. Try again. Do you have any idea what would have happened if the government had let a large part of our banking sector collapse?
@MrYoungIndependence Agreed - it reminds me of that Russian tale about "he who puts you in the sh*t isn't necessarily your enemy and he who takes you out of the sh*t isn't necessarily your friend". People may hate the Tories and many love Labour, but that doesn't mean Labour are not consistently disastrous...
@MrYoungIndependence New Labour wasn't socialist, they were even more Authoritarian than the Tories, look at political compass, In fact they were more Tory than the Torys were pre-1979. Idiot.
@whiskey225 You make it sound like socialists aren't authoritarian. Socialism is extremely authoritarian/interventionist on economic policy, just as traditional right-wing parties are authoritarian on social policy.
Trouble with things like political compass is that it is one dimensional. Parties can differ on both economic and social policies, and probably other things too.
As for New Labour, they were pretty socialist on welfare policy, rather than helping people get into employment.
@ChristopherHeward Socialism in its british form is fundementally social liberal, unlike Marxist-lenninist socialism, which is effectively communism. Authoritarianism on political compass means only socially conservative, and the Tories were less conservative than New labour in their policies at that time. Labour were also pretty far right economically, as can be seen with their bailing out of the banks and dong nothing about the bankers' ridiculous bonuses. They werent proper socialists.
@whiskey225 It's social liberal because the implication is that they're not economic liberal (which would mean low tax and spend). Whilst you're right to say there's a clear difference from the other systems such as experienced in USSR, I assume this is because they have social policies that were fairly authoritarian also. So nothing about this brand of socialism was liberal, whereas in UK social policy would be liberal.
With regards to communism, I think that this is actually more to do with property ownership. Under capitalism individuals have property rights; under communism there is no such thing as it is owned by the state. Socialism then tends to be in a capitalist system as it is more to do with taxing and spending money out of a capitalist system. Britain is largely capitalist but mildly communist as there are some state-owned assets, and it is also pretty socialist given it's fairly large state.
With regards to bailing out the banks that is anything but economic libertarian (which I guess is what you're implying by 'far right'). To buy out the banks was very socialist and mildly communist. People like the Tea Party were angry the banks were bailed out and said they should have been allowed to collapse.
Think you're right about New Labour being more authoritarian on social policy than Conservatives, although the Conservatives are desperately trying to catch up, despite Clarke's efforts!
@MrYoungIndependence Quite right. I really don't understand how the Tories got so thumped in '97. The only explanation i can give is that they were a victim of their own success.
not funny at all if you ask me. Do you love john major or something? I mean, John was never a great oratorical speaker. But even this is poor by his standards!
He is more boring than Gordon Brown
glasgow1234 1 month ago
Back in the day people wore huge spectacles.
lgarvey1979 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Major was a terrible PM
A better man than Tony Bullshit. He as unfortunate, got in at the wrong time. He was a good man, more middle right, concerned about the poor.
MilibandDavid 3 months ago
Major was a terrible PM.
densaner77 4 months ago
Comment removed
boffinme80 1 month ago
boffinme80 is a loony!
densaner77 1 month ago
Comment removed
boffinme80 1 month ago
@Kozzy06 Section 28 which was brought in by the Thatcher's Govn late in the 1980s. A very homophobic piece of legislation and it is one of these reasons why people turned to Labour. I don't agree with a lot of things New Labour did, however, no question they helped modernise by giving the green light to civil partnerships to name one of a few. That is why Cameron has done to the Tories what Blair did for Labour: Modernise it. In fact, Tories had no choice if they wanted to be elected again.
Smogkop1989 4 months ago
the main enemy of Russia. he is fucking bastard.
1738Alexander 4 months ago
@MrHair48 - It sure does and history does show that the countries that have a open free market system are the ones that flourish and that those countries that depart from those principals are the ones where you see the grinding poverty. Of course if that's not the case then maybe we can look back at history and find ourselves a better system of government that has pulled more people out of poverty then capitalism has.
Freddie1980 4 months ago
Hugely underated PM.
Left the economy in good shape, only for the traitors Blair and Labour to come un, open the borders of the country to mass immigration, and leave the country with the largest budget deficit in Europe.
Scumbags.
Kozzy06 4 months ago 3
@Kozzy06 Hugely underrated PM I agree. However, he was let down by all round him who ended up being caught out by taking cash for questions and the amount of times Tory MPs ended up frontpage of newspapers with their trousers round their ankles.
Plus, it was at a time when the country wanted change (as Labour would find out years later) and that is only natural when one party is in government for so long. Not too mention, there was no sign of modernising the party. Take Section 28..
Smogkop1989 4 months ago
Paddy Pantsdown is useless
ukipwarrior 6 months ago
Why the hell is John McCain sitting behind Paddy Ashdown?
santana26491 6 months ago
Sir John Major was an excellent PM for Britain. He rejected the euro which proves Thatcher and him both correct as we see it coming apart at the seams. Britain is as great a country today because John Major continued Margaret Thatcher's policy of no single currency. They are both correct and Sir John Major does not get his much earned and due credit.
fair66115 7 months ago 16
I never vote Conservative but I miss John Major, very witty man.
MrGurlyboy 8 months ago
@MrGurlyboy I agree. I'm not a Tory but John Major was definitley brilliant.
LoonyInSpace 7 months ago
The members are so much nosier nowadays in the chamber...
05HK09 9 months ago
History will judge John Major to have been a better Prime Minister than many now believe. When he left office, the economy was flourishing. At the end of Labour's time in power, it had been ruined by socialism.
MrYoungIndependence 11 months ago 20
@MrYoungIndependence Ruined by socialism??? Either you are an idiot or have the memory of a goldfish. The last government had to bail out multiple collapsing banks who had overreached themselves with irresponsible loans. That's not socialism - it's the complete opposite - unfettered capitalism.
markinyo76 10 months ago
@markinyo76 It is important not to demonise the banks. We must avoid scapegoating at all costs.
MrYoungIndependence 10 months ago
@MrYoungIndependence The banks started trading some extremely dodgy, high risk instruments such as CDOs. This was what started the chain of collapses. The banks were taking more and more outrageous risks to achieve profit. Damn right we should demonise the banks.
markinyo76 7 months ago
@markinyo76 Bankers do no more than they are allowed to do; the government that oversaw Britain's biggest industry for thirteen years must take responsible for the events that occurred under its watch.
MrYoungIndependence 7 months ago
@markinyo76 Socialism is defined by nationalisation. Gordon Brown nationalised the banks as a solution to our economic woes. RBS is now loss-making and Iceland (which didn't nationalise its banks) is in full recovery.
'Ruined by socialism'? Absolutely.
tdp1909 9 months ago
@tdp1909 The idea that Gordon Brown nationalised the banks as part of some socialist programme is not credible. He nationalised them because allowing them to collapse would have been a complete catastrophe. He had no choice - unless you think it's ok for people to lose all their savings etc.
markinyo76 7 months ago
@markinyo76 "complete catastrophe"? Not necessarily. Iceland had a worse disaster than us, didn't nationalise their banks and are now in full recovery. Oh, and they also have far higher growth rate than us, despite people losing their savings. All Gordon Brown did is nationalised a load of bad debt and committed us to sending good money after bad for years to come...
tdp1909 7 months ago
@tdp1909 Iceland?! Glad you could come up with such a shining example... Iceland has less people in it than Manchester. Try again. Do you have any idea what would have happened if the government had let a large part of our banking sector collapse?
markinyo76 4 months ago
Comment removed
MrGurlyboy 8 months ago
@MrYoungIndependence Agreed - it reminds me of that Russian tale about "he who puts you in the sh*t isn't necessarily your enemy and he who takes you out of the sh*t isn't necessarily your friend". People may hate the Tories and many love Labour, but that doesn't mean Labour are not consistently disastrous...
tdp1909 9 months ago
@MrYoungIndependence New Labour wasn't socialist, they were even more Authoritarian than the Tories, look at political compass, In fact they were more Tory than the Torys were pre-1979. Idiot.
whiskey225 6 months ago
@whiskey225 in someways yes, but they were still socialist - they used capitalism to fund high public spending. true 'tories', would never do that.
JREwingofDallasTexas 5 months ago
@whiskey225 You make it sound like socialists aren't authoritarian. Socialism is extremely authoritarian/interventionist on economic policy, just as traditional right-wing parties are authoritarian on social policy.
Trouble with things like political compass is that it is one dimensional. Parties can differ on both economic and social policies, and probably other things too.
As for New Labour, they were pretty socialist on welfare policy, rather than helping people get into employment.
ChristopherHeward 5 months ago
@ChristopherHeward Socialism in its british form is fundementally social liberal, unlike Marxist-lenninist socialism, which is effectively communism. Authoritarianism on political compass means only socially conservative, and the Tories were less conservative than New labour in their policies at that time. Labour were also pretty far right economically, as can be seen with their bailing out of the banks and dong nothing about the bankers' ridiculous bonuses. They werent proper socialists.
whiskey225 5 months ago
@whiskey225 It's social liberal because the implication is that they're not economic liberal (which would mean low tax and spend). Whilst you're right to say there's a clear difference from the other systems such as experienced in USSR, I assume this is because they have social policies that were fairly authoritarian also. So nothing about this brand of socialism was liberal, whereas in UK social policy would be liberal.
ChristopherHeward 5 months ago
With regards to communism, I think that this is actually more to do with property ownership. Under capitalism individuals have property rights; under communism there is no such thing as it is owned by the state. Socialism then tends to be in a capitalist system as it is more to do with taxing and spending money out of a capitalist system. Britain is largely capitalist but mildly communist as there are some state-owned assets, and it is also pretty socialist given it's fairly large state.
ChristopherHeward 5 months ago
With regards to bailing out the banks that is anything but economic libertarian (which I guess is what you're implying by 'far right'). To buy out the banks was very socialist and mildly communist. People like the Tea Party were angry the banks were bailed out and said they should have been allowed to collapse.
Think you're right about New Labour being more authoritarian on social policy than Conservatives, although the Conservatives are desperately trying to catch up, despite Clarke's efforts!
ChristopherHeward 5 months ago
@whiskey225 I dont think the Tories would have had an immigration and social policy anything like Labour had.
Kozzy06 4 months ago
@MrYoungIndependence Labour weren't socialist though.
SwordInAir 1 month ago
@MrYoungIndependence Quite right. I really don't understand how the Tories got so thumped in '97. The only explanation i can give is that they were a victim of their own success.
N330AA 1 month ago
@MrYoungIndependence funny he was destroyed by blair in 97
TheJaaysog 2 weeks ago
Paddy hardly has an Irish accent at all
StanleyDonwood 1 year ago
and now Paddy supports the Coalation ! ahha
VAT AND TUITION FEE FREEZE NOW !!!!
at least we dont have a US style 2 party system
harj2009 1 year ago
interesting, but by no means funny
jzep1993 1 year ago
Paddy stands like a retard.
usainlightning 1 year ago
@usainlightning wouldn't say that to his face even today he is ex SAS
nolderine 1 year ago
@nolderine marine
SirOneoneselfandone 1 year ago
@SirOneoneselfandone Yes very correct I did mean SBS
nolderine 1 year ago
We goona kill u PADDY!!!!!!!!
KOSOVO IS SERBIA !
DelijaFromCp6uja 1 year ago
We goona kill u PADDY!!!!!!!!
KOSOVO IS SERBIA !
DelijaFromCp6uja 1 year ago
yeah that was hilarious...are you German?
swisscottagelondon 1 year ago
not funny at all if you ask me. Do you love john major or something? I mean, John was never a great oratorical speaker. But even this is poor by his standards!
flobbingdonkey 1 year ago
flobbingdonkey john major was to busy shafting edwina egg curry
archiedownie 1 year ago
/watch?v=-QJ7KakOk_Q
fonsidream 2 years ago