Labour Leadership watch

Blimey, dj, you even know what websites posters visit now, do you?

Your powers of self-delusion are beyond belief!

"Since 1913 there had been a decline in the production of coal. Until 1947, the pits had remained privately owned and the bosses weren’t keen on investing.

So Labour nationalised the mines?– costing £358million – to ensure that we had the means to control the production of coal to fuel the post-war economy.

Clement Attlee set out a Plan for Coal to increase mining and safeguard jobs.

But when the Tories came back in 1951, they scrapped the planned investment and increases in coal production to pursue a different energy policy – relying more on oil and nuclear. The black gold beneath their feet was not a priority.

But by the 1970s, the cost of oil increased by 600 per cent and coal looked a far better deal.

So when Labour returned to power in 1974, Harold Wilson developed a new Plan for Coal.

The mining industry would be expanded through a massive investment programme and production increased, mainly by developing coal reserves it had not been able to mine before.

But at the same time, Tory MP Nicholas Ridley was writing another report that would be Thatcher’s blueprint for the death of the mining industry.

Ridley suggested building up coal stocks to prepare for a strike, that ­power stations should be fired by oil not coal, increasing coal imports, cutting welfare benefits for strikers and their families and setting up a mobile police squad to handle “any social disorder arising from picketing and industrial violence”.

So when Thatcher returned to power, she ripped up our Plan for Coal and replaced our targets on coal production with very high financial ones, making viable pits “uneconomic” overnight.

During Harold Wilson’s government more mines were closed than under Thatcher. But our closures had been agreed with the union and the National Coal Board on the basis that those mines didn’t have enough coal left or were genuinely economically unviable.

If you add up the figures from 1947 to 1997 you see the real picture??– 345 pits were closed under Labour governments but 597 went under the Tories.

A total of 235,000 mining jobs were lost under Labour but 458,000 under the Conservatives. "

That's been discussed lots of times before, Notso. You will insist on believing Conservativehome.
The pits closed by Wilson were done with the agreement of the unions because they were worked out. Thatcher closed them out of spite and to destroy the unions. There is a difference.

dj I'm sure you know that 13 years of subsequent Labour government did nothing to reverse the legislation that had been brought in to 'smash the unions' The arguement that those 13 years were not 'true' Labour doesn't wash. The fact remains.

I'm sure you also know that Harold Wilson closed over 100 mines more than Margaret Thatcher did.

Eh?

How dare you speak for the dead of two world wars - and so disrespectfully DJ that is absolutely beyond what is acceptable from any side in a political debate. In any debate.

You do not use war dead as pawns in an argument.

Disgraceful.

So all those people who died in the war and to get women the right to vote will, I am sure, be so pleased at how you are using your right to free speech.

I assume those of you who think that it was right to smash the unions and reduce pit villages to penury will also be writing to the government praising its new union bill, too.

Hmm...I will repeat that only 400 Conservative party members were weeded out but 1,900 Green Party members had made fraudulent applications.

I thought the Greens were proud of their integrity...

I have a Tory-supporting relative of 17 who has tried to register with the Labour party to skew the leadership election. He's aiming for a career in politics. I do hope that, if he ever gets there, someone will dig up that he lied about his age and lied about his support. Politics is a dirty business and he is evidently cut out for it.

Gg put your teeth in before you post!

that's what we ... grrr

that what we

I have just been thinking about the style over substance that is so beloved by the DM and others, some on here, on the right.

There was a guy who, if the DM had been around at the time, would undoubtedly have been described as a sandal wearing. bearded lefty. Is that we remember - no - for 2,000 years we have remembered what he said and what his principles were. I am sure, in the long run that this is what matters to all who are trying to do what they consider to be helping their neighbours, the country, the world.

Of course his brand was taken over by the right wing of his time and privatised but it was ever thus.

No actual secret files but an OBR report which states that Gid- Geo Osborne plans to reduce public spending will take it to the same % of GDP as we saw in the 1930s

Sad that some people have no sense of humour.

Just a general thought but in our house that is called the bullies retort

But isn't referring to people by a name they hate and have changed a form of bullying?
Not directly, of course, as I dare say George doesn't read our posts - better things to do I dare say.

this government has a secret abenda of reducing the state to a level not seen since the 1930s with all its attendant hardship, and destruction of everything the tax payer has achieved over the decades

whitewave are you privy to secret files that the rest of us know nothing about??

That would certainly take some doing, as there was no welfare state at all in those days and the welfare state we have today is much more far-reaching than the one envisaged in the Beveridge Report.

Sad that some people have no sense of humour.

Just a general thought but in our house that is called the bullies retort as it is usually used when people are either loosing an argument or can't get their own way.

Presumably it is the name he was christened with?

Many people are lumbered with names they hate that their parents thought were different, unusual, trendy, biblical, whatever.

Perhaps Gideon's Way was on the telly at that time.

I know ana but I can't resist it Presumably it is the name he was christened with?

Of course the Tories understood exactly what image does and with help from friends in the media took down the notorious Bullingdon Club photo. But of course the media were never going to cooperate with Foot and neither will they with JC

Not very nice to persist in calling him 'Gideon' though, is it, when you know perfectly well he changed his name to George many years ago...?

I agree that it's good that young men no longer have to do back breaking work down the mines. The problem is that when the mines closed [and I would imagine most pit villages are pretty much the same now] no one provided them with alternative employment. That was the cruelty of it.

An intense and heartfelt post from you WW.I have to admire your energy in ferreting out all these facts and figures and what not about George.

Not to me, AB,
Have already said that in the other post. To the nation at large it did matter ( some of it) and to the newspapers at the time.

So rosesarered, more important that Thatcher looked extra smart at the cenotaph 1881 and Michael didn't . The same Michael who worked in the secret service during the war, who was a pacifist, who abhorred apartheid and the same Thatcher who supported apartheid and had a close friendship with Pinochet , yes looking extra smart is just far more important , for some

I am on a roll here, but must admit it is so easy when looking at Tory economics

The last recession from 2010.
I now bring you Gideon Osborne

Ex-Bullingdon club member and wearer of archane dress coats.

An admirer of Thatcher, monetarism and a small state.
Where to begin?
OK In 2008 as we have seen a recession was caused by the sub prime mortgage fiasco, and the subsequent credit crunch. In reaction the Labour Government in order to mitigate the effects of the recession used Keynsianism economics to help growth back into the economy. And indisputably this was showing signs of success by 2010. Growth which would do 2 things. First increased revenue to be used to pay down debt, and se ondly growth to decrease the deficit.
On the stage arrives Gideon, an admirer of Thatcher and her monetarist policies.
But poor Gideon had not learned the lesson of history, either that or he doesn't care that such po!icies will cause hardship to millions of workers whilst rewarding the rich - at a guess I would say the latter.
So off we go again down the same road that That her lead us in the 80s, only this time there is a twist to the story, this government has a secret abenda of reducing the state to a level not seen since the 1930s with all its attendant hardship, and destruction of everything the tax payer has achieved over the decades
So Gideon is trying to achieve something even Thatcher did not care to do.
However what is that I see in the distance? a white knight known to his admirers as JC. Hoorah!!! Someone at long last to remind us that it doesn't need to be like this, that care and compassion is still in many people hearts.