Lib Dems or Labour - Best for the City?

[Tony Sebo]

yeah, and that was going to happen if the International Brigades had won the battles.. the politico's had one thing in mind... and it may have been even worse then what the cunt franco inflicted on Spain when he came out victorious.

This is the point I'm raising remember, not really the men and thier ideals, but the automatic celebration of the politics behind the campaign that they joined.. the democracy part is bollocks!

[the golden vision]

Originally Posted by Tony Sebo

yeah, and that was going to happen if the International Brigades had won the battles.. the politico's had one thing in mind... and it may have been even worse then what the cunt franco inflicted on Spain when he came out victorious.

This is the point I'm raising remember, not really the men and thier ideals, but the automatic celebration of the politics behind the campaign that they joined.. the democracy part is bollocks!

That's your interpretation but we know anyway that a far left government in Spain wouldn't have lasted more than a couple of years after 1945. The British and the Yanks would've ben in there to depose it,democratic or not,just like they rigged the elections in Italy just after the war,when the far left were going to get in. Franco on the other hand,was feted by the US from 1955 onwards.

[Tony Sebo]

Yes, you are possibly right, you can paint many scenarios by putting IF in it somewhere! We don't have to put IF into the all too real actions of our lefty/internationalist allies from the USSR

Still doesn't clear up my point. However, it was meant as a prompt for consideration more than the stimulus for debate anyway, so I think I'll leave this now and go and moan about the Lancashire Echo instead then watch Scotland v FYR Macedonia!

[the golden vision]

Originally Posted by Tony Sebo

Yes, you are possibly right, you can paint many scenarios by putting IF in it somewhere! We don't have to put IF into the all too real actions of our lefty/internationalist allies from the USSR

Still doesn't clear up my point. However, it was meant as a prompt for consideration more than the stimulus for debate anyway, so I think I'll leave this now and go and moan about the Lancashire Echo instead then watch Scotland v FYR Macedonia!

Agree.

[Babaloo]

I watched Mr Darling being interviewd on C4 news last night. He went on about how good Labour has been for the financial services sector in this country. He underlined how in particular the government had helped to grow the provision of financial services in Leeds, Manchester and Edinburgh.

No mention of Liverpool (for obvious reasons)!

It reinforced for me just how bad Labour is for Liverpool's long-term economic interests. Then I started to think about why we continually (these past 30 years or so) vote for Labour MPs in this city. I asked myself - if I were living in ex-corpy accomodation in the city who would I vote for.

Labour!

When it comes to housing policies the Lib Dems are no better than Labour. Apart from being more business friendly I struggled to find a difference that would cause me to vote for a Lib Dem MP rather than a Labout one.

So I would vote for the continuation of a Labour government that deliberately marginalises Liverpool.

There's the rub!

[Bay City]

Originally Posted by Babaloo

I watched Mr Darling being interviewd on C4 news last night. He went on about how good Labour has been for the financial services sector in this country. He underlined how in particular the government had helped to grow the provision of financial services in Leeds, Manchester and Edinburgh.

No mention of Liverpool (for obvious reasons)!

In the current world economic climate, the vast big guns experience of Gordon Brown is what we need. HBOS gets into trouble, the next day Lloyds come in, the next day a the take over. Brown instigated that. Without that the British banking industry could have gone on a big slide. The Northern Rock rescue a year later was seen and financial experts as the right thing to do as well. After 9/11, the western world went in to recession - it never happened here. The pund over 11 years has been almighty strong. God help us if the others were in charge.

So I would vote for the continuation of a Labour government that deliberately marginalises Liverpool.

Liverpool does not bat hard enough for itself. Disunity in the LibDems doesn't help. Not being in the same political camp as the government doesn't help either.

I am listening to his speech. So far so good. Quite impressed. Millibrand is looking good too - except he a needs a decent hairstyle.

[Chris B]

Originally Posted by Bay City

Not being in the same political camp as the government doesn't help either.

A city council being of the same political persuasion as the current government should not be a pre-requisite for that government serving the city well.

Personally I don't think we do too badly under Labour (compared to how we faired under the Tories), however I do agree that there is room for improvement.

[Bay City]

Originally Posted by Chris B

A city council being of the same political persuasion as the current government should not be a pre-requisite for that government serving the city well.

I agree. But....wheels within wheels. Labour hold the Westminster seats in Liverpool, and only just lost the city in the local elections by one seat, so they do not want to put the city at a disadvantage. In Manchester, the local Labour party naturally has connections to pull strings in Westminster - they all know each other. It is just the way it goes.

Also, Manchester is just a bloody good council with its head screwed on - irrespective of political colour.

BTW, I am an ABC, Anyone But Conservative.

Personally I don't think we do too badly under Labour (compared to how we faired under the Tories), however I do agree that think is room for improvement.

There is always room for improvement with any government. But what they have done over the past 11 years is phenomenal, when compared to the incompetence and blatant favouring of the rich, what we had before.

Just look at the regional cities.

[Tony Sebo]

Originally Posted by Babaloo

I watched Mr Darling being interviewd on C4 news last night. He went on about how good Labour has been for the financial services sector in this country. He underlined how in particular the government had helped to grow the provision of financial services in Leeds, Manchester and Edinburgh.

No mention of Liverpool (for obvious reasons)!

It reinforced for me just how bad Labour is for Liverpool's long-term economic interests. Then I started to think about why we continually (these past 30 years or so) vote for Labour MPs in this city. I asked myself - if I were living in ex-corpy accomodation in the city who would I vote for.

Labour!

When it comes to housing policies the Lib Dems are no better than Labour. Apart from being more business friendly I struggled to find a difference that would cause me to vote for a Lib Dem MP rather than a Labout one.

So I would vote for the continuation of a Labour government that deliberately marginalises Liverpool.

There's the rub!

yes, they have 'helped grow' these sectors in those cities.... in fact, I would say they where pretty central to it!

[Chris B]

From the Echo -

Brown and Co plan a city cabinet date

Oct 14 2008 by Ian Hernon, Liverpool Echo

GORDON Brown will bring his cabinet to Liverpool early next year.

It will be only the second time since 1921 that a prime minister has called a meeting of his top team outside London.

Ministers will spread out across Merseyside in an effort to win back support from Labour heartlands.

Mr Brown has pencilled-in January 8 for the Liverpool session, but the venue and programme will not be confirmed for security reasons.

Earlier this month, the cabinet met in Birmingham, and Liverpool will be the second in a “rolling tour” of Britain until the next general election.

Polls recently predicted Labour could lose seats in Wirral, Sefton and even Liverpool due to the Conservatives’ revival and dissatisfaction with the government’s performance.

A Downing Street spokesman said: “This is about the cabinet as a whole spending more time in the regions.”

The cabinet office will not reveal the cost of the operation, but energy secretary Ed Miliband said: “It is important that the government does not spend all its time in London.”

After the expected 90-minute cabinet session, ministers will then visit several Merseyside projects, including Liverpool’s waterfront World Heritage Site and city centre developments.

Article continues here - http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liver...0252-22026693/


Interesting that the article mentions Labour potentially losing seats due in part to a Conservative revival, when in Liverpool at least, depending how people vote in May 2010, it'll be the Lib Dems that will be the party to take seats off Labour's hands. Seems rather odd they wouldn't mention that.

Political issues aside though, it should be a bit of positive exposure for the city, right as Capital of Culture is wrapping up.

[eyeam]

Originally Posted by Chris B

From the Echo -



Article continues here - http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liver...0252-22026693/


Interesting that the article mentions Labour potentially losing seats due in part to a Conservative revival, when in Liverpool at least, depending how people vote in May 2010, it'll be the Lib Dems that will be the party to take seats off Labour's hands. Seems rather odd they wouldn't mention that.

Political issues aside though, it should be a bit of positive exposure for the city, right as Capital of Culture is wrapping up.

I imagine they are talking about posh areas in Wirral and Sefton councils when they talk about a resurgent Tory party, possibly the odd ward in the south end as well. It will be a straight fight between Labour and the Lib Dems everywhere else.

[EdgeHill]

I think this is referring to Liverpool Wavertree, where if some Labour voters switch directly to the Tories it would result in the Lib Dems winning the seat.

[Babaloo]

Warren Bradley’s inquiry findings
Nov 10 2008 by Marc Waddington,
Trinny North West

COUNCIL leader Warren Bradley has received the findings of a Standards Board for England inquiry into claims he conspired to oust the former Culture Company head.

The details of the board’s report into whether Cllr Bradley and former leader Cllr Mike Storey attempted to remove culture boss Jason Harborow from his post has finally been completed.

A copy of the draft report was sent to Cllr Bradley, Labour leader Cllr Joe Anderson, who lodged an initial complaint, and Mr Harborow.

All parties in the case are at this stage forbidden from commenting on the findings, under the threat of prosecution if they breach the strict confidentiality.

I know all sides are bound to confidentiality but I wonder if the accompanying picture of Bradley (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liver...0252-22220241/) that makes him look as though he's had a kilo of lemons shoved up his arse is giving us a clue?

[v4vendetta]

Gordon Brown was looking for a lady of the night.

He found three such girls in a local pub, a blonde, a brunette and a redhead.
To the blonde he said, 'I am the Prime Minister of England. Now how much would it cost me to spend some time with you?'

She replied, £200.'

To the brunette he asked the same question.

Her reply was £100.

He then asked the redhead

Her reply was, 'Mr. Prime Minister, if you can get my skirt up as high as my taxes, my pants as low as my wages, get that thing of yours as hard as the times we are living in, and keep it rising like the price of petrol, keep me warmer than it is in my flat and screw me the way you have Pensioners, then it isn't going to cost you a bloody penny!'

[Medici]

We may be coming to a point now in Liverpool where the Lib Dems have run their course as is natural with any ruling party in a democracy.

Nationally, of course, the Labour Party is also reaching the end of it's natural cycle.

Therefore, we may see the return of a Tory government and a Labour council.

Let's just hope they don't automatically view each other as natural enemies and work together for the benefit of the city.

[Chris B]

Whilst I do agree that there is a natural cycle that can be observed in politics, I'm not convinced it's playing a role in Liverpool (at the current time), and the Lib Dems are on there way out as a result of it.

In the year or so before the last council elections, the Lib Dems were dogged by negative stories. This led many floating voters to err towards Labour (despite the fact that Labour weren't actually offering anything tangiable), hence the Lib Dems came very close to losing control of the council. Since then, there have been fewer negative stories, and those that have appeared have generally speaking been less damaging. Add to this the amazing success of Capital of Culture (which was only really finding its feet back in May), the arena, Liverpool One, and many other things that the council have had a hand in (to varying extents), and the council are probably appealing to people a lot more than they did 6 months ago. As such, if an election was held tomorrow, I doubt the vote would be so close.

Now of course, the next council elections aren't tomorrow, they won't happen until May 2010, and the council aren't totally out of the woods in terms of stories that could be very damaging - see the report posted above by Babs. However if the council can maintain the momentum that has built throughout 2008, by bringing events/investment to the city in 2009, and by keeping their noses clean, I don't see any reason why we shouldn't see at least another year of Lib Dem rule from May 2010 onwards.

[buggedboy]

I think the danger, from a Lib dem point of view, is that because of the recession, by 2010 ther won't be much in the way of new "wins" that the Lib Dems can point to. Liverpool One will be old hat by then, as will the arena. People have short memories and unless they can get Central Village and possibly another similarly scaled development(s) off the ground during 2009 (maybe St John's?) as well, they may struggle.

On the other hand, Labour may do well nationally from the recession, which may play into the hands of hte local party. Remember that, rightly or wrongly, local Labour people were bemoaning the huge levels of apartment developments in the city, which some now see as a contributory part of this entire recession e.g. over-reliance on p[roperty as a regeneration tool, little control over markets.

Even in America there is beginning to be a turn towards increased government over-sight, so this could all add to a more positive result for Labour here.

[Babaloo]

I think people in Liverpool have longer memories than that! The contrast between L1 and what was there before is seminal and not likely to be forgotten in a hurry. In many ways I think that this year's election was a high water mark for Labour in the city. I don't see any evidence that the Labour party is attracting new voters from outside their core constituency and the Lib Dems were hampered by the mess they made of CoC, Bradley's gaffs and Storey's Machiavellian string-pulling, and the infighting in the local party.

If the Lib Dems make more gaffs, and I except they will then I think the result in 2010 will be a hung council with Greens and 'Independents' holding the balance of power.

If the Lib Dems keep a clean sheet and the city's schools continue to improve, and Liverpool is less touched by the recession than elsewhere then they might even increase their majority.

If Labour wants to win more seats in south Liverpool then they seriously have to raise their game and appeal to a wider population by developing a more inclusive and dynamic vision of what they want Liverpool to become. Managed decline isn't acceptable.

[Bay City]

Originally Posted by Medici

We may be coming to a point now in Liverpool where the Lib Dems have run their course as is natural with any ruling party in a democracy.

The people only think of now, and not the future too much at all. They totally trust the powers that be that what they do is for their best interests. If all the dock water spaces are to be filled they accept that is way it should be.

The average voter is not interested in a future vision or if a strategy is in place to reach this vision.

All the Lib-Dems have to do is make sure the bins are emptied on time and keep the council tax down. The average voter couldn't care about whether Central Docks are developed or not, as he can't see that far ahead.

Nationally, of course, the Labour Party is also reaching the end of it's natural cycle.

Political parties do have a natural time limit in the minds of the people. Sometime they just want a change for the sake of it, not because it offers anything better. However, the Labour party have been a great success since 1997 and have world-wide been praised for their handling of the world-wide Credit Crunch.

In the next election they have to home in on that pulled us out of a world economic abyss, and point to their successes over the past 11 years. People forget far too easily and what it was like before they took control. They must be reminded of that.

Therefore, we may see the return of a Tory government

I hope not. A bunch old Eton boys in the cabinet and back to stage 1 again - in this day and age too. We 100 universities and all this matters is what school, out of about 3 of them, that someone went to. A sycophant I am not. Read Jeremy Paxman's book "Who Runs Britain", it ain't us mate, and it ain't for us either.

and a Labour council.

I am apolitical when it comes to Lab vs Lib in the city. I go on results and vision. I see little of any in the Libs in the city. However few people know of the rejection of the Brunwick Quay Tower which would have been built by now and been a catalyst for growth and development.

[Babaloo]

Not just in Liverpool but throughout the country, I think the calibre of people who end up in local politics is a bit suspect. I think Joe Anderson had the right idea when he said that he would give up his job as a social worker if he became leader of LCC. I don't see how it's possible to hold down a full or even part-time job and be leader of LCC. I guess people might argue that it's the civil servants who really run the city so it doesn't matter but audits of their performance and evidence derived from the kind of recommendations they make suggests that they, too, are often not fit for purpose.