SALAMI SLICING THE COALITION?
>> Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Been a busy day, which started with me debating the Bishop of Hulme, Stephen Lowe, on the BBC this morning here. Go to 30 minutes in here and listen for half an hour, if you dare! Meanwhile, back on the Today programme, Justin Webb was on the attack against the very well spoken (if a tad dripping wet) Andrew Lansley. Yesterday it was IDS who got the treatment and today it was Lansley - same tired BBC meme, namely that reform of any part of the Public Sector is just, well, impossible. I though the hectoring and interruption by Webb did him no favours and I liked the way the parroting of Stephen Dorrell's comments by Webb were nicely countered by Lansley. Don't get me wrong - there is nothing wrong with a Government Minister being robustly challenged on the BBC - that is fine by me - BUT during the long hard Labour years, there was a stunning silence from the BBC when Brown and co went about building up a bloated and inefficient NHS. Now, they go on the attack when the Coalition try to do something about it! The pro-Statism meme is always in play and it just surfaces in al kinds of places!
10 comments:
I noted Andrew Lansley's tactic of simply continuing to talk over Justin Webb's interruptions, which appeared to confound Mr Webb somewhat. More should do that until interviewers learn to listen to an answer and only interrupt once it descends into waffle.
Nice job, DV. The pathetic bishop just refused to admit there's a difference between people who have been put out of work and those on the permanent benefits lifestyle. It's so dishonest, and is the same Narrative the BBC was pushing yesterday. The one time you tried to highlight it, Nolan stepped on you to focus on the cap, which kind of distracts from the key for most people.
The bishop is in favor of a cap, yeah: so long as you don't lower it. People get an allowance "according to their need", eh? Do they need to live in a high-rent district? Imagine how many other families in "poverty" you could house if those in high-rent districts moved to more affordable domiciles.
From each according to his abilities, to each according to his need.....
Thanks David - I had a Biblical quote but the Bishop didn't seem that interested in that aspect of things :-D
The 'Labia party' as I think of them also gave us foundation hospitals (thanks to their block jock vote) and endless PFI schemes that are cositng the NHS billions.
Not a word was said by the BBC when this massive shackle was placed around the neck of the NHS, in fact the BBC continually praised Gordon Brown for being an economic genius.
<span>"The 'Labia party' as I think of them "</span>
<span></span>
<span>I assume you think they are a load of</span>
Agree with David P. David V, you gave a good account of yourself, interesting that you were asked for a figure for NI and you said 15,000 - 17,000 but the higher figure was totally ignored from that point. The one caller you reckoned 15,000 was too high as he didn't know anyone who earned even that amount.
The Bishop was amazingly dense, he couldn't see how his arguments didn't fit together. He kept using London as an example although the discussion should have been about NI. I agree that the Child Benefit is a bit of an anomaly but it should also be only given to those that need it.
Another thought, by me, is that why should everyone else subsidise people who choose to have large families? If they want all these children they should pay for them themselves - Child Benefit should be set at a maximum for two children. Any more should obtain no more money, it might even encourage people to act responsibly before over-breeding.
<span>Agree with David P. David V, you gave a good account of yourself, interesting that you were asked for a figure for NI and you said 15,000 - 17,000 but the higher figure was totally ignored from that point. The one caller reckoned 15,000 was too high as he didn't know anyone who earned even that amount.
The Bishop was amazingly dense, he couldn't see how his arguments didn't fit together. He kept using London as an example although the discussion should have been about NI. I agree that the Child Benefit is a bit of an anomaly but it should also be only given to those that need it.
Another thought, by me, is that why should everyone else subsidise people who choose to have large families? If they want all these children they should pay for them themselves - Child Benefit should be set at a maximum for two children. Any more should obtain no more money, it might even encourage people to act responsibly before over-breeding.</span>
Stephen Lowe has left Hulme in pretty much the same state as when he left it-his version of church leadership is blessing gun crime sites and bussing in paninis for media freeloaders.
Just the kind of prelate the BBC can do business with-hence his towel wringing performance on the radio.
Hope the seat he was sitting in has dried out by now...and the fact that the likes of Stephen Lowe make me pine for the relative rectitude of Derek Nimmo says a lot!
As a certain h/wag might have said: They put the "n" in "benefit cuts".
Sorry, somebody had to say it eventually....
"Don't get me wrong - there is nothing wrong with a Government Minister being robustly challenged on the BBC - that is fine by me - BUT during the long hard Labour years, there was a stunning silence from the BBC when Brown and co went about building up a bloated and inefficient NHS. Now, they go on the attack when the Coalition try to do something about it!"
hear hear. exactly. Government must be challenged...but some governemnts are more equal than others.
Post a Comment