Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
I hate him already.
I don't even have to explain why. Now that's democracy.
he's better looking than Blair
Cameron becoming PM is one of two things that will make me renounce my claim to British Citizenship. The other will be the creation of Sir and Lady Beckham.
would make me immensely happy
horses for courses
I am a fully paid-up member of the Labour Party
paid-up scallywag you.
you will no longer be British citizen then.
but maybe his next move will be to offer Cameron some kind of deal - 'hey, neither of us really want to go to the bother of having any distinct policies anymore, what say we just govern together? Party labels are like, so a symbol of 'old style politics''.
then we wouldn't need to bother with elections. We could just let them decide between themselves who ran the country. and if they couldn't agree they could use force to decide.
the winner could have a crown or something and pass on leadership to their children.
Actually this is probably safest because we know that god would intervene to make sure the best person won. Like he did with George W Bush when he didn't actually win the election but got made president anyway. God did it!
just as Gordon brown hasn't really been elected either and will now be ruling, sorry, running the country.
what was I saying? Oh yeah. whatever happened to white dogshit? Fucking tories.
so it is up to them. I don't understand why people think we now need to have another election just because the PM has changed. I know that's not what you're saying, just something that ooh don't half get me goat.
Tony Blair wasn't voted into office - the Labour Party were. It's happened in the past... Thatcher and Major being a case in point.
is that he's now trying to get Lib Dems into the Cabinet because he knows that Labour don't really stand much of a chance without the support of the Lib Dems now. And someone made that point on Question Time last night, saying we didn't vote for the Lib Dems, and the Home Office Minister's response was that Paddy Ashdown is a Lord. Which is even worse! That means NO ONE voted for him.
And at the end of the day, Labour were elected by only 28% of the electorate, so the whole thing's a fucking sham as it is.
But not the people who voted for Labour, which was supposedly the majority, hence them winning the election.
What the cunts say about ID cards...
who say about Id cards?
you mean the Conservatives, you obviously haven't looked very far.
They have, sice the very beginning, bee against ID cards. It has been one of their largest campaigns.
the Countryside Alliance.
I do. But i'm confused: are people saying the Conservatives are good for supporting ID cards, or bad?
They really, honestly, do not support ID cards.
Well, if your gut feeling says so, it must be true.
that was a little sarcastic. But still, that is a bit stupid, no?
The Conservatives really are against ID cards and, indeed, anything that imposes upon civil liberties.
But we know full well that the Tories are a grasping shower of cunts who'll do anything to get into power, and I don't trust them AT ALL.
And yet...I feel strongly enough about ID cards/civil liberties that it might sway me if they make a clear statement about it. And I mean clear.
a social worker who likes the Conservative party.
was to say he votes Tory. Frankly he's slightly less convincing than Mickey Loosefit
myself and Mickey Loosefit:
1) I'm real, as far as i'm aware, Mickey isn't.
2) Mickey Loosefit is funny.
Or, indeed, unfunny?
apart from when they voted for the first reading and abstained en masse on the third reading, then.
they sound suspiciously like passports to me...
like Davina McColl
you're going to be required to carry them around at all.
AT LEAST AT FIRST...
David 'Dave' Cameron.
David Cameron hate that has come out of this thread.
is it SIMPLY because he's a Tory?
what are you basing it on?
a good answer. Though I don't necessarily agree with what you say,you have a justification for why you don't want to vote for someone, rather just saying Tories=cunt, which is unconstructive and frankly stupid.
It's a democracy i guess, you can vote for who you want for whatever reason.
All Tories are bad is the same as saying all black people commit crime. Neither statement is true.
but yes I don't think all Tories are bad, just that there is a high correlation. Your political views generally say something about the way that you consider the world and other people.
there is definitely a shared mind-set, but there are roughly 200 Tory MPs, and a lot of them disagree on a lot of issues.
I think I'll vote for them
They are individuals and, shock horror, individuals have different on certain things!
not David Cameron. Get it right.
It's just 'Dave'. Like Prince. Or Madonna. Or Stingray.
It's because he stands for nothing.
All the actual Tories hate him because he's not openly racist and supports women having jobs.
so no REAL reasons, just a silly extreme hate of the Tories.
how can everyone hate so extremely someone/something that is just so NOT extreme. it doesnt seem congruent.
i find it hard to HATE Blair too, because he's just a bit 'meh'.
none of the reasons for hating DAVID Cameron are legitimate, just silly sloganeering.
And just because someone doesn't what the Tory policies are, doesn't mean they don't have any.
it will interesting to see how Brown and Cameron will fight it out come election year.
Specifically, where Cameron differs from Blair/Brown.
is in the way political power is used. Gordon wants 'Big Government' (his term not mine), which means more bureaucracy and more intervention into your life. The Tories want to give as much power back to the people as possible to let them make their own decisions. Also, there is an admittance that MPs don't always know what's best and as such letting the 'experts' make decisions. For example, letting frontline nurses and doctors run hospitals rather than imposing impossible targets. Letting parents raise their children rather than having a 'nanny-state' etc. They want a bottom-up process rather than top-down.
how much scope is there really for drastically cutting down the size of the governing structures in this country which are so deeply established and employ so many people: not much.
Is there any evidence that a propspective Conservative government have plans in place to actually do this, or would be able to enact such plans?
Major cut the size of the Civil Service quite dramatically by streamlining certain procedures and working methods. So yes, it is possible. don't ask for figures though, I don't have any.
not really, but do you have any idea if the Civil Service has increased in size since that time?
it was meant to say, 'just because someone doesn't KNOW what Tory policies are,doesn't mean they don't have any.'
And it's not quite a simply as saying 'go on then, what are the Tory policies?' Policy on what exactly? Parliament runs pretty much much every facet of your liffe and will have a million different policies for a million different issues.
Gosh, I didn't realise that! Every...? You must know lots about politics to know that!
I am interested in what his positions are on crime, the environment and, oh, let's say immigration.
to tell you what the Tory policies are. Just because David Cameron doesn't come on DiS and tell you what Tory policies are doesn't mean he doesn't have any. What you mean is, you can't be bothered to go out and find out what they are, you want to be spoon-fed, the very thing Tories are against!
If you're really interested, I advise you start here:
That'll tell you most of what you want to know.
if you must have a general outline of what the Tories believe, here you go:
Cameron: Security for our society; opportunity in your life
In a keynote speech in Tooting, Conservative Party Leader David Cameron said:
"Very soon, the real battle in British politics will begin.
Tony's going, and the phoney war will be over.
The British people will have a clear choice.
A choice between two different visions of society.
A choice between two different approaches to running the country.
And a choice between the old and the new politics.
Us against Gordon Brown.
That's the choice at the next election, and today I want to spell out exactly what it means.
BUILDING OUR HOUSE TOGETHER
At our party conference last year I said that getting ready for the responsibility of government is like building a house together.
First you prepare the ground.
Then you lay the foundations.
And then, brick by brick, you build your house.
That is the plan I laid out when I became leader of this Party and that is exactly the plan we've been following.
We started by preparing the ground.
We stopped fooling ourselves that we played the same old tunes we'd somehow get a different result.
We remembered the importance of rebuilding that broad Conservative coalition without which we've never won in the past.
And we moved this Party back to the ground on which our success has always been built, the centre ground of British politics.
That meant addressing the issues that matter to people today...
…so we became the party of the environment and well-being as well as the nation state.
It meant understanding the real priorities of people today…
…so we put economic stability before up-front tax cuts.
And, vitally, it meant standing up for all of the people all of the time, not just some of the people some of the time…
…so we pledged to improve public services for everyone, not give opt-outs to a chosen few.
Today we're back in the mainstream of political debate, we're setting the agenda, we're winning the arguments - and we're winning elections.
Nine hundred more councillors this year.
Breaking through in the north of England.
A forty per cent Party once again.
Our party is once again a force that can change our country.
THE FOUNDATIONS - SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
The second stage in building our house was laying the foundations.
As I said at our conference last year, that's not about detailed policies.
It's about the idea on which all our policies will be built.
Policies without intellectual foundations don't stand the test of time.
We've had ten years of short-term initiatives announced to get headlines in the papers.
People have had enough of Labour's fast-food politics: they want something more serious and more substantial.
That's why we've spent the last few months setting out, patiently and consistently, the big idea on which we'll build our plan for government.
That idea is social responsibility.
It's the idea that there is such a thing as society, it's just not the same thing as the state.
Social responsibility means that every time we see a problem, we don't just ask what government can do.
We ask what people can do, what society can do.
That's the big difference between us and Gordon Brown.
His answer to crime, his answer to education, his answer to everything - is a top-down government scheme.
Whatever the issue, whatever the challenge, whatever the circumstances… it's always the same.
Under Gordon Brown all we'll get is "he knows best" politics, as he sits as his desk expecting a grateful nation to wait with bated breath for the latest master-plan to emerge.
He won't even commit to giving the British people a say over the EU constitution.
I profoundly believe that it's wrong to change the way in which we are governed without giving people the right to say "yes" or "no".
Gordon, the top-down days are over.
It's the twenty-first century.
It's the age of "people know best."
Parents know best what works for their kids.
Doctors and nurses know best how to improve the NHS and give patients great healthcare.
Residents know best how to make their neighbourhoods better places to live.
We're living in an age where people want to control their government, not have their government control them.
Every day in countless ways, people are getting together to work out new solutions to old problems.
They're getting together online, in community groups, in their workplaces, as friends and neighbours and collaborators.
They want and need a government that's on their side, that trusts them, that positively wants to put power and control in their hands.
We get the modern world, he doesn't.
We trust people, he's suspicious of them.
We believe in social responsibility, he believes in state control.
VISION FOR BRITAIN: SECURITY AND OPPORTUNITY
So we've prepared the ground by moving to the centre.
We've laid the foundations with our big idea, social responsibility.
And now, with our Policy Groups set to publish their reports, we can move forward to the next stage - showing what we will build for Britain.
This is my vision.
A Britain that combines collective security with individual opportunity.
A Britain that achieves these things through social responsibility, not state control.
And a Britain where a strong society gives everyone the chance to shape their own life, making the most of all that this amazing country, in this amazing century, has to offer.
Our Society. Your Life.
Collective security and individual opportunity.
That's the combination that's right for our times and right for the future.
And it's a combination that only we in this Party can offer.
First, because we understand that social responsibility, not state control, is the best way to provide security and opportunity.
And second because we understand the deep and important connection between them.
This Party has always understood the importance of security, including a strong role for the state where it has a duty to protect its citizens.
Social responsibility means a strong society where possible; a strong state where necessary.
Today we need strong defences to protect our country - from threats old and new.
That's why we're committed to setting up a national border police, with Lord Stevens leading a task force to produce a plan for making it happen.
In the months ahead, our Security Policy Group, led by Pauline Neville-Jones and Tom King, will publish their recommendations.
They will advise us on the steps we must take to protect our country from terrorism, and from the new risks of an increasingly unstable world.
We also understand the need for a strong response to the everyday threat to people's security that comes from crime and anti-social behaviour.
I believe that Tony Blair's pledge to be tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime is his biggest broken promise.
Being tough on crime is not about soundbites and headlines.
It's about serious long-term thinking: analysing what's gone wrong with our criminal justice system, and developing serious plans to put it right.
That's why I've placed such emphasis on the need for police reform.
David Davis and his team have produced a detailed and impressive set of proposals.
We're working on them with the police, trusting in their professionalism…
…asking them to make the changes that are necessary in return for tearing up the pointless targets and paperwork and giving them the freedom to do the job they desperately want to do.
Security is vital in the economy too.
Conservatives instinctively understand the importance of sound money and sensible economic management.
That's why it is the absolute expression of our traditions, not the denial of them, when we say that we will put economic stability first.
And that's why we feel so strongly about the way Gordon Brown has wrecked our pensions system, destroying millions of people's economic security without a word of apology or remorse.
But our collective security is not just about the economy, or crime, or terrorism.
It is also about the fabric of our society. About wanting people to feel a real sense of belonging.
We believe in building a cohesive society, where Britishness means inspiring people with a love of country…
…not bullying them with instructions to integrate, or insulting them with cheap 'flags-on-the-lawn' gimmicks.
And above all, our collective security is about the one institution in our society which matters to me more than any other.
That is the family.
Why do I focus on the family?
Why am I so proud of the magnificent work that Iain Duncan Smith is leading in our Social Justice Policy Group, with his final report soon to be published?
Because I believe, as I said in my speech to our Spring Forum in [March], that the greatest challenge this country faces today is reversing the social breakdown we see all around us.
And strengthening families is the best way to do it.
Let's be clear about this.
It is simply no use talking about opportunity for all unless we give every child in our country the secure start in life that comes from a stable, loving home.
We are far from that position in Britain today, and turning it around will be the greatest challenge - and I hope the greatest achievement - of the next Conservative government.
That's because ensuring our collective security - whether protecting people from physical harm, providing economic stability, or giving children emotional stability - is not just an end in itself.
It is about creating the platform for the great driving force of Conservatism through the ages - the promotion of individual opportunity.
But I will not allow this Party, or this country, to overlook the connection between security and opportunity.
Only by meeting our collective obligations to each other, and building a strong society, will we create the conditions for every individual to enjoy real opportunity.
Our Society. Your Life.
And what a life it can be if we enable people to make the most of the modern world.
I suppose every generation thinks their time is the most exciting there's been.
But truly, no generation has ever faced such an extraordinary range of possibilities as we do today.
Of course we can look at the future negatively - the threats of new weapons, of new and dangerous ideologies; the looming catastrophe of climate change; the fracturing of traditional communities and the growing sense of atomisation.
But I am a determined optimist.
I want us to look at the future positively.
Every year we get closer to curing the great diseases.
There are technologies that will give us the energy to power the world without wrecking the planet.
We have communications which overcome every obstacle not just of distance but of culture - making one world.
We see the potential of the future in places like South Korea.
Britain took four hundred years to move from an agricultural to a high-tech economy -
Korea has done it in just forty.
There's no reason why similar miracles can't happen elsewhere in Asia - and in Africa.
Peter Lilley's Policy Group on Globalisation and Global Poverty will have many recommendations for what needs to be done to make that a reality.
The task for this Party is to match our determination to build a strong and secure society with a policy programme that extends opportunity ever more widely…
…with no-one excluded from the possibilities of the modern world.
Here's how we'll go about it.
If we in Britain want to be in the fast lane of global progress, we need to improve our own dynamism, our own competitiveness.
That's the thinking behind Michael Heseltine's radical proposals for devolving power from Whitehall, so our great cities can get the strong leadership they need to compete on the world stage.
In our economy, we must lead the world in innovation, and stimulate the creation of new businesses and new jobs.
That's the thinking behind the work of John Redwood's Economic Competitiveness Policy Group.
But above all, extending opportunity means liberating the potential of our young people, with world-class education at every level.
That's why we're developing a robust and radical plan for reforming state schools, addressing both standards and structures.
Bringing rigour to the curriculum and testing.
More setting and streaming, with a 'grammar stream' in every subject in every school, so bright pupils are stretched and all pupils are taught at the right level.
Tackling disruptive behaviour by giving head teachers control over discipline.
And making it easier to set up new schools so we get genuine diversity and parents have a real choice.
Stephen Dorrell and Pauline Perry will show in their Public Services report how in schools, just as in the NHS…
…we will replace Labour's culture of top-down targets and centralisation…
…with a relationship of trust and accountability between those who use public services and the professionals who provide them.
Last week we unveiled proposals to transform young people's skills…
… not trusting in the bureaucracy of the Learning and Skills Council, but with new professional apprenticeships that engage employers and match the future needs of the economy.
Next week David Davis will launch a taskforce to examine the recent fall in social mobility - and find ways to reverse it.
For us, expanding opportunity means not the backward-looking plans of Labour's Deputy Leadership candidates - who only see a future for more state-owned and run housing - but helping young people onto the housing ladder through a massive extension of shared ownership and the right to buy.
Expanding opportunity means not leaving up to thirty per cent of men in some of our towns and cities languishing on Incapacity Benefit, as has happened under Labour …
… but our plans to harness the expertise of the voluntary sector in helping people off welfare and into work.
And expanding opportunity means not wasting the proceeds of growth as Gordon Brown has done, but sharing the proceeds of economic growth between better public services and lower taxes.
In all these ways, we will show how we are the Party with the new ideas - the serious ideas - to expand individual opportunity in our country.
And we will show we understand that individual opportunity is not something that can or should be defined by politicians in Westminster.
Your life is just that - yours, not mine.
For many people today, opportunity is not just about more money, it's about more time with the kids.
It's about the journey to work, the food the family eats, the state of the neighbourhood.
This is the new politics, a world away from the preoccupations of old Westminster and the political elite.
We're making this new politics our own, just as we're setting the agenda on the environment and climate change.
And soon the report of our Quality of Life Policy Group will make another significant contribution to that whole debate.
STAND UP, SPEAK UP
Right across the range of issues, our policy debate is about to start in earnest.
We will soon be launching Stand Up, Speak Up - a chance for everyone in this country to get involved in shaping the next Conservative manifesto.
We hear a lot about political apathy these days.
Well I want all of you here and all our Conservative friends around the country to stand up and lead the way in getting people involved in a massive grass-roots debate on the future of our country.
Let's show the cynics some energy, not apathy.
So as we start this great policy debate, we can be clear about the shape of the house we're building.
It's designed to deliver collective security, as the platform for individual opportunity.
Security for our society; opportunity in your life.
Not copying New Labour, but learning from its mistakes.
Not abandoning Conservative principles, but applying them in new ways to new challenges.
And in the process making this Party the true force for progressive politics in Britain today.
Our foundations are strong, while Gordon Brown's are shaky.
Our vision is built on the truth that no politician, no bureaucrat, no government official, can ever achieve as much as a strong society working together.
Social responsibility, not state control.
That's what we believe, and that's why we'll win."
I gave you enough Tory policy to keep us debating for a thousand posts and you didn't read it. You say you want to know Tory policy, but you don't really.
You don't care and that's fine, politics isn't for everyone. It is often perceived as 'boring' and can, at times, be very complicated.
I think there's a copy of nuts around somewhere I can give you to read aif you like?
sarcasm is clever.
Do you honestly think the running of a country and everything that is involved in doing that, can be summarised in a 'few bullet points'? MPs single issues for literally months on end, you can't some issues up in one line.
but for all the actual information in that speech you posted, you might as well have tried for some one-line summaries. it really wouldn't have harmed your cause much.
I'm reluctant to elaborate?! There are about 5000 words just above this post that elaborate a lot of the things the Tories stand for.
and spouting a load of uninformative, vague, self-aggrandising toss?
'economic stability before up-front tax cuts'
so do you believe in tax cuts or not?
'He won't even commit to giving the British people a say over the EU constitution.'
anyone else slightly worried by the combination of this
'We're living in an age where people want to control their government, not have their government control them.'
'And strengthening families is the best way to do it.'
if this actually translates to concrete policies at all, it'll be things like pro-marriage propaganda and tax breaks, and maybe even cutting single parent benefits. hardly a 'people know best' approach.
genuinely the only policies i can find amidst the woolly rhetoric are:
national border police
i'm sorry gayguevara. calling us stupid or impatient really isn't good enough when you appear to equate the length of a speech with the amount of policy 'meat' it contains. i'm not saying labour are much better, but there it is.
be bothered to read. A bit too much like hard work, and you might actually learn something.
Serious debate is hard to come by round these parts.
But i'm not going to spoon feed you. I've made it pretty easy for you and put all the information right under your nose. If you're genuinely interested, read the above post. If you're not interested, don't comment on something you know nothing about.
and I am in no way enlightened as to a) how the Conservatives are in any way different from Labour and b) what Cameron's specific policies actually are. The whole thing is recycled bullshit. The only thing of real note that can be drawn from it is that security comes before opportunity and education.
If that's what's passing as his manifesto, then my suspicions about Cameron- that he is a watery careerist without any real ideas or drive- are confirmed. Please drop the attitude, Guevara. After getting snotty about us hating Cameron without knowing what his policies were, you revealed you didn't know what they were either. Who does know what Cameron's actual policies are? I doubt Cameron knows himself. The man's going to lose.
True to a point.
I don't have Dave though. You can't hate what doesn't exist.
to be purely based on being 'Dave'. An eco friendly warrior who's really a rather nice guy and not a stuffy old school Tory. It's all personality and no substance. No one seems to know which direction they're going policy wise - least of all those in the party themselves.
but he seems fake. He was heavily associated with the worst policies of the last Tory administration and I doubt that he has changed his views.
He became party leader because the unelectable dinosaur Tories such as Michael Howard were prepared to accept him, knowing that he was really 'one of them'.
In the meantime, all he wants people to do is call him 'Dave' and watch him ride a bike (while his official car drives along behind him with all his papers in)
Now he WOULD get my vote.
a Labour minister/spokesman said the day before yesterday that "they will be a great British institution, like trains were in the 19th century"
With regard to above, the tories are about what they've always been about, tax cuts for high earners at the expense of pesky public services like the NHS
Tax cuts aren't just for rich people. Poor people pay tax too you know. The only people that it effects are thos on benefits, and god forbid they have to go out and get a job.
you're either a fake or deluded, perfect tory then
I was being a bit sly. But just because someone works hard, why should they then have to give it all away? They earnt it. People are paid big salaries for a reason: because they do important jobs. People don't get paid £200,000 a year to sit around on DiS all day. Which is why, i'm guessing, no-one on here hwho posts all day long is earning those kind of salaries!
because no other Party does that, just the Tories. No that that justifies it, but it it's a fair point.
your naive sucking of the free market teat is illuminating
so tax is theft then?
Dave vs David debate.
I met him once and said "good afternoon Mr Cameron" and he said "no no, call me David".
So DAVID it is.
insisting on the last word without addressing what was just said
I just posted possibly the longest post on DiS, which nobody bothered to read. If nobody reads I can't discuss it. Unless you want an uninformed, i'll-educated debate. Which seems quite common place round here.
complex social, political and economic issues in one line. To do so, would be to undermine the true understanding of an issue. This is true for the policies of any party, not just Tories.
I commend you for what is a measured and level-headed response, especially for someone so young (that is genuinely not meant in a patronising way). A few comments are needed however.
It may not be what you see as groundbreaking stuff, but then it doesn't need to be. The Tories feel that that is where the main problems lie, in the basics. The foundations need to be rebuilt. And, if we're honest (ooh, how rare for a Tory, etc) Conservatives have never been a 'radical' party.
Furthermore, Conservatives did support the Government (not Labour) in going to Iraq and on the renewal f Trident, but there is good reason for this. The defence of democracy and the freedoms that come with that is a very traditional Conservative value. Thus, going to war was, at the time, in keeping with this principle. The fact that Saddam later turned out to have no WMDs is a different matter.
Similarly, defence of the realm is another area key conservative belief. They felt that Trident is one way of doing this and therefore voted for it.
Finally, the Conservatives, despite what you may have read in the media, had no intention of hiding their expenses from the public. If you read David Mclean's Bill, you will find no mention of this.
In conclusion, there is alot more cooperation between the parties than most people realise. In fact, there is a lot of cooperation. The Conservatives (or any opposition party for that matter) don't disagree with the Government just for the sake of it, that wouldn't be constructive in the slightest. If the major parties agree on something, then they agree and that's it. If, for example, the Tories had voted against Trident renewal for the sake of it then got into power at the next election and tried to renew it again (as has always been their policy), then they would get in rather a lot of bother.
Cameron has vague policy at best, and is more in favour of education, less crime, better healthcare, being nice people, not ruining the earth and sunshine for all etc. People wont disagree with this because youd be stupid to, the difference comes in policy and we have yet to see any real indications of exactly what Cameron and Brown are actually proposing.
and I've never known someone to say so much while simultaneously saying absolutely nothing. It's a talent, for sure.
see- Tony Blair.
who used to be head of 'communications' (ie PR) at Carlton TV.
Jeff Randall, senior exec of The Daily Telegraph, said he would not trust Mr Cameron "with my daughter's pocket money..."
Sun business editor Ian King described Cameron as a "poisonous, slippery individual".
He really is scum. And these are quotes from journos from the Torygraph and the Sun.