Forum Topic

Isn't it time the Lib Dems apologised for their support for the euro ?

Thank goodness the campaign to Keep the Pound led by William Hague when he was Leader of the Conservative Party won the support of the majority of the British people and persuaded Gordon Brown to force Tony Blair to keep us out of joining the euro.We are in a fine mess now thanks to 13 years of disasterous Labour misgovernment and financial and economic mismanagement but think of the even deeper mess we would have been if we had ditched the pound and adopted the euro ? We could be in the same or similar position as Greece, Portugal, Ireland, Italy or Spain.But throughout all this the Lib Dems have steadfastly advocated that the UK should join the euro and accept every other half- baked, crazy, economically illiterate ,undemocratic euroidea and euroscheme originating in euroland.Isn't it time the Lib Dems apologised to the British people ?

David Giles ● 5438d41 Comments

When are you going to apologise for selling off the utilities cheap and using them to cut taxes for the rich?

Susan Kelly ● 5438d

Well said Susan.

Sarah Gates ● 5438d

The conservatives should certainly apologise for privatising the market and giving us amongst other things, pretty reasonable utility costs compared to many European consumers.http://billothewisp.blogspot.com/2011/06/european-electricity-prices-compared.html

Chris Martin ● 5438d

Oh, and there's the small question of North Sea oil revenue being squandered on tax cuts for the rich too. Norway, for example, used theirs to build schools and hospitals and make it the richest country in Europe as well as the most literate.

Susan Kelly ● 5438d

try luxembourg

joseph birotz ● 5438d

no ...try liechtenstein....

joseph birotz ● 5438d

Norway is a very good example of a country whose citizens voted in referenda and elections consistently to stay out of the EEC and its successor the EU. Norway,while being a member of the European Economic Area along with Switzerland,Iceland and the EU has retained it's own sovereignty,independence, currency and control over its own natural resources,oil,gas,fisheries and laws. Consequently Norwegians enjoy a high standard of living,plentiful well paid employment and good quality health,education and social services. Its currency is strong and its debts are low.Maybe the UK should be more like Norway and be less like Greece,Portugal,Ireland and Italy whose democratically elected leaders are being told what to do by the EU, the IMF,the ECB and whatever set of unelected acronyms happens to be given power by the German and French dominated Eurozone for the time being.In any case,is it not time that the Lib Dems apologised for advocating for many years that Britain should join the euro, a political project that was bound to end in economic disaster.

David Giles ● 5437d

David, the plural of referendum is NOT referenda.

Susan Kelly ● 5437d

,,,, is Norway as class riddled as the UK with the same kind of pirate economy?

Gail Peters ● 5437d

I think the original Norwegians - known as Vikings -were pirates. It is of course nonsense to describe the UK as a pirate economy. In my experience of doing business with Norwegians they are determined, intelligent, very well educated and very determined to protect their own interests. The Norwegian Government works closely with Norwegian business to protect Norwegian interests. They are successful because they have rejected joining the EU and the euro.

David Giles ● 5437d

Susan Said"When are you going to apologise for selling off the utilities cheap and using them to cut taxes for the rich?". The answer I hope is never. The utilities that Margaret Thatcher privatised were costing the taxpayers of this country a fortune, and the level of service was pretty useless in a lot of cases. Afte they were privatised, service levels improved, investment levels in their infrastructure increased as they were no longer dependant on a government that had other priorities to fund. These privatised companies soon started to generate profits which they paid taxes on so instead of being a drain on resources, they actually contributed to them. Why would we apologise for that.

Colm Costello ● 5436d

And it doesn't bother you, Colm, that every single share soared on the first day of trading, sometimes doubling in value? Certain proof that they were flogged off cheap. It is that which concerns me, not the principle of the sale itself.Only people with spare cash could buy the shares, a clear case of redistribution of wealth from the poor to the rich.

Susan Kelly ● 5436d

The Tories must be a bit ruffled at the moment when their local councillors are standing up for 25 year old policy on neighbourhood websites. What the Lib Dems should be apologizing for is the stitch up of having a 5 year fixed term Parliaments which means we have to endure Dave and Gideon for a lot longer than is necessary.But the way things are going in the Tory part Dave's popularity seems to be dwindling with the twin set and pearl brigade so his reign might be brief anyway.

Colin Carroll ● 5436d

Colin,What 25 year old policy are Conservative councillors standing up for ?I am sure most Conservative councillors are prepared to stand up and defend most policies the Conservatives have favoured over the past 25 years.However it is well known that most grassroots Conservative supporters and members are not happy with the coalition with the Lib Dems and we are hoping it will end sooner rather than later.The Conservative Party will remain strongly united behind David Cameron as long as he continues to advocate and implement Conservative policies.

David Giles ● 5436d

SusanI hear what you are saying but disagree that only the rich have spare cash. I know plenty people who bought privatisation shares and still have them. They hadn't ventured into the stock market before, so the privatisations introduced loads of people to this kind of investments. The service improvements that the privatised utilities delivered and the fact that they soon started paying money into treasury coffers instead of being a constant strain on resources, was another positive outcome of that policy.

Colm Costello ● 5436d

David, the selling off of the utilities. I find it funny that a councillor for another part of the borough will come on here to defend party policy but having read his blog he seems to be glad to perform anywhere. A rising political star no doubt rehearsing for his spot in the big leagues.Also just call me Dave is not the golden boy he once was with you Tories. As someone once said "all political careers end in failure"

Colin Carroll ● 5436d

Perhaps Norway's economic success has more to do with all the gas and oil they are sitting on rather than not joining the Euro. Iceland stayed out and look what happened to them.

Catherine Evans ● 5434d

Norway's economic success is due to a large number of factors. Their oil and gas reserves and the careful way they have developed them over the past 40 years is undoubtably one of them. Norway has been able to develop its oil and gas reserves in its own way using its own rules, laws and regulations and independently of EU interference. As a result Norway now has a major oil company,  Statoil, which is active and strong internationally, and numerous Norwegian engineering and oil services companies who compete successfully internationally.Norway also has a very large shipping industry and still has a shipbuilding industry.Despite  Noway's membership of the European Economic Area, anyone with experience of doing business in Norway will tell you that the Norwegian market and companies are protected by the fact that Norway is not a member of the EU.Norway is also not bound by the terms of the EU's Common Fisheries and Agricultural policies. This means that the Norwegian fishing and agricultural sectors are protected against competition from EU countries. Norwegian control of its fisheries is particularly important.Norway has a good educational system and Norwegians are highly educated and this all contributes to the success of the Norwegian economy in sectors outside oil and gas.And of course Norway is not bound by all the EU's social and employment legislation and controls its own taxation, social welfare and immigration policies.But of course Norway has its own currency - the krone - which is independent of the euro. This means the currency has its own interests and exchange rates and that monetary policy and inflation is controlled from Oslo and not by the ECB in Frankfurt.Iceland is a different case. Iceland's problems were related to an boom that went bust (rather like but more serious than Ireland's) but Iceland has the advanatage over Ireland, Greece, Portugal, Spain and Italy in that as it is not part of the EU or the Eurozone, it can and has devalued its currency, defaulted on its debts and is now able to work and trade its way out of its very serious difficulties. Iceland despite its problems remains independent and does not have to accept orders from the EU, ECB, Paris or Berlin.

David Giles ● 5434d

If Norway is so perfect why don't you go live there and stop trying to force your Tory views down our throats.All very tiresome really.I am sure it is not that perfect but I am sure you have the facts and figures to prove otherwise.Iceland were not they having to dance to the IMF's tune not so long ago I bet you they loved that.

Colin Carroll ● 5433d

ColinI am as entitled to my views as you are to yours.Norway is not perfect- nowhere is - but it has avoided getting dragged into the euro, eurozone and the EU and it is free, democratic, egalitarian and prosperous.Don't you think the Lib Dems owe us all an apology ?

David Giles ● 5433d

What a piss poor comment from you Colin, you can do better than that (or maybe not?) and we expect more! David's missive on Norway's success was reasonable and made sense, so come on, a stronger Lefty attack demolishing what he has stated please!!

Rosco White ● 5433d

Why is Norway prosperous because they used their oil revenues in the 1980s to invest in their society unlike Thatcher and Howe who used our oil revenue to pursue their dogmatic pursuit of the free market a free market which we are now seeing in a perilous state. And also it has largely remained a social democratic country with until recently government ownership over strategic industries that's probably why they still have a ship building industry.The disastrous early 80s budgets of Howe could only have been paid  for by the oil revenue. But I am one that believes in Europe and especially the better social policies as it makes for a better society. Unlike this present Tory regime which wants to take us back to the dark ages once again. But there you go Roscoe I am glad to be a lefty and I don't care what you think of my statements. Please feel free to make more incisive and informed comments but you will probably revert to insults.

Colin Carroll ● 5433d

I do not think the Lib Dems will be around long enough to give us an apology.I suspect that Norway is egalitarian for many other reasons than being part of the EU.We are in the EU get over it and move on or move to Norway where you can be Free and egalitarian and pay higher taxes VAT @ 25% and pay £10 for a pint of beer. Yes things are great outside the EU too.

Colin Carroll ● 5433d

Colm explain rail privatisation?

Colin Carroll ● 5433d

I agree with you that the Lib Dems won't be round for long.UKIP are already only one point behind them in the opinion polls.The Lib Dems are way out of touch with public opinion.The price of beer is certainly a good reason for not living in Norway. Another is the language and another is the climate.

David Giles ● 5433d

Rail privatisation has resulted in much better rail services, better trains and many more people using them. Another big Conservative success story.

David Giles ● 5433d

Really? Higher fares and increased subsidies to the private train companies how is that successful?Even Thatcher considered it a privitisation too far.And do not forget Railtrack.Yes very successful I am sure.

Colin Carroll ● 5433d

Fares would have increased even if the railways had not been privatised or else the quality,quantity and frequency of the services would have got even worse.The Government subsidises rail services for perfectly good social and regional policy reasons of which I am sure you would approve.The subsidies would have had to be far higher if the railways had remained nationalised because the nationalised railways were so inefficiently run.And how about all the lovely new rolling stock, the new signalling systems, the improvements to the track, stations and infrastructure that has taken place since privatisation ?And yes rail companies are fined or lose their franchises if they fail to perform. That wasn't possible when the railways were state owned and trade union dominated.

David Giles ● 5433d

David have you ever read Roger Ford the railway journalist on  the subject of investment in the Railways pre-privitisation he would debunk the myth that it was  starved of investment and the infra structure was poor. In fact he advocates that many of the major projects carried out after privitisation were implemented by British RailRead what he says he is an expert unlike yourself. So what has been the point of rail privitisation then? What do you think of Rail Tracks modernisation of the West Coast line?  Privitisation at it it's best? They could not deliver on budget it cost £7billion more than they estimated and they did not deliver what they promised no 160mph trains only 125mph.Tell me more about it's success because I am all ears?

Colin Carroll ● 5432d

I have read articles written by Roger Ford  when I used to subscribe to "Modern Railways" but I must admit I haven't read anything he hsa written recently. It is my understanding that he is a railway journalist rather than an economist and that he has been a long standing opponent of privatisation.I am sure that many of the major projects carried out after privatisation were proposed or planned by British Rail engineers prior to privatisation but the fact remains they were not implemented by British Rail. British Rail couldn't have implemented them beacuse British Rail depended on the Government and the taxpayers for funds and the funds were not available. In addition, British Rail lacked the expertise and organisation to implement many of the large projects that have been carried out in recent years. The privatised industry has been able to raise funds from many sources. Consequently there has been a huge investment in infrastructure and rolling stock that simply would not have been possible under the old nationalised set-up.The modernisation of the West Coast Main Line has been a major project which probably should have been carried out years before by British Rail but wasn't. Initial budgets for major projects such as this are difficult to estimate and are often deliberately minimised for political reasons to convince Government, private sector investors and other stake holders that the project should go ahead.  What percentage of the original budget is £7 billion ?If the project had been carried out by British Rail normal commercial and contracting disciplines would not have applied and, like many MoD projects,  I am sure that the cost overruns would have been much greater.I don't know why the trains can only run at 125 mph. Do you ?A Eurostar train set a new British speed record of 334.7 km/h (208.0 mph) on 30 July 2003. It is a pity that other hifgh speed trains in the UK cannot reach similar speeds but possibly it has something to do with the type of track, the type of train or the signalling systems.

David Giles ● 5432d

£2billion was the initial estimate and the over spend was instrumental in rail Track's demise. Who had to pick up the tab the taxpayer. So much for the market being the most efficient way of allocating capital.  You advocates of privitisation make it up as you go along and when it all goes wrong blame the previous system.I'll be interested to see what you have to say after your lot privitise the Health Service. You might have to keep your head down on that one seeing as it was not even mentioned in your manifesto and you have not got a mandate from the electorate. Good luck with that one.

Colin Carroll ● 5431d

Colin,I have been involved in a number of multiple-billion projects in my time and I have an understanding how budgets develop and grow. The West Coast Mainline Budget grew in a way with which I am familiar.The initial Railtrack budget way back in 1996 was indeed two billion pounds. However this budget was an an preliminary budget only and such budgets often understate the costs for political and commercial reasons in order to convince management,partners, bankers, governments and investors to support the project. Such budgets are notoriously unreliable and often leave out major cost items or to take into account factors such as inflation, escalating costs of land, labour, materials and equipment and competition from other similar projects for resources.It is also fair to say that nobody either in British Rail or Railtrack had experience of estimating the cost of such a major project. The two billion pound budget was obviously very  inaccurate as such preliminary budgets frequently are.Once the  preliminary budget  was approved, the project team spent several years working on detailed designs, studies and estimates. This is normal on such big projects. More accurate information makes a more accurate budget possible.  By the time Network Rail took the project about 2001, the budget was between eight and ten billion pounds. I have no idea of the final cost of the project but I doubt very much if it cost seven billion more than the detailed budget. The West Coast Main Line Project was a success.If British Rail had not been privatised, the West Coast Main Line project may never have been completed.If British Rail had managed the project, would it have come in under budget and to schedule ? I doubt it.Anyway, how about the euro ?The crisis gets worse everyday.

David Giles ● 5431d

So what happened to Railtrack where was their financial acumen? Bit off more they could chew. So if Railtrack had no idea why were they allowed to undertake the project?It cost £9billion.Typical politico avoiding the question. Euro? I have not mentioned it. What will happen to the NHS after Lansley has hived it off to US healthcare companies? You won't be a proud Tory then.

Colin Carroll ● 5431d

Please don't forget to include our Conservative MP, Angela Bray, in any apologies requested for supporting the pro-EU/euro connivences to circumvent a referendum on the UK's membership of the EUSSR. Bray put party policy before the best interests of her country and its democratic principles - voting 'against' the referendum, as instructed to do so by her party leader. This against the wishes of the electorate in general and those who, in particular (like me), voted her into parliament to represent them. In a two-page letter, composed mainly of boiler-plate text, Bray defended her position to me. Guess her main defence: that she had received only 24 emails requesting her to vote for a referendum. Even if true, this would not in any way justify her action in the face of every national newspaper, radio and tv poll throughout the nation showing that from 60 to 75% of those polled wished to have the referendum. The latest moves of Germany and France against the democratically elected government of Greece have brutally illustrated how right the British electorate were to support standing back from the euro and now to consider forcing the repatriation of our right to govern ourselves, which we blithely signed away in the Lisbon Treaty. Next time, it's UKIP for me and goodbye and good riddance to Angela Bray.

Mike Fox ● 5431d

Please don't forget to include our Conservative MP, Angela Bray, in any apologies requested for supporting the pro-EU/euro connivences to circumvent a referendum on the UK's membership of the EUSSR. Bray put party policy before the best interests of her country and its democratic principles - voting 'against' the referendum, as instructed to do so by her party leader. This against the wishes of the electorate in general and those who, in particular (like me), voted her into parliament to represent them. In a two-page letter, composed mainly of boiler-plate text, Bray defended her position to me. Guess her main defence: that she had received only 24 emails requesting her to vote for a referendum. Even if true, this would not in any way justify her action in the face of every national newspaper, radio and tv poll throughout the nation showing that from 60 to 75% of those polled wished to have the referendum. The latest moves of Germany and France against the democratically elected government of Greece have brutally illustrated how right the British electorate were to support standing back from the euro and now to consider forcing the repatriation of our right to govern ourselves, which we blithely signed away in the Lisbon Treaty. Next time, it's UKIP for me and goodbye and good riddance to Angela Bray.

Mike Fox ● 5431d

I have seem to have fallen into some sort of little Englander nightmare.The revolution will not be Torified!

Colin Carroll ● 5431d

I'm still waiting for the Lib Dems to apologise for supporting the Tories.  Like that would help....

Adam Kimmel ● 5431d

ColinI think I have explained the difference between Railtrack's initial estimate and Network Rail's budget.Maybe Railtrack wasn't too clever but British Rail would have been worse. And British Rail was starved of investment for over 40 years under Government control and ownership.The demise of Raltrack happened a long time ago.The demise of the euro is now.

David Giles ● 5430d

I think a lot of Conservatives are unhappy with the Coalition.There is  no doubt that many people who voted Lib Dem at the last election are unhappy with the Coalition.The Lib Dems will be wiped out at the next General Election.UKIP could do well and cost some Conservative MP's their seats.It will be interesting to see if Labour will support the Coalition's commitment to pledge tens of billions to the IMF to bailout the Eurozone.After Ireland,Portugal and Greece, Italy is now in deep trouble and in need of rescue. 150 years of Italian independence ist kaput.

David Giles ● 5430d

If the Lib Dems are wiped out then most of their votes will go to Labour.

Susan Kelly ● 5430d

Not necessarily. Labour is too right wing for many urban Lib Dem voters. Many of then would vote Green. In rural areas where Lib Dems are more right wing and old-fashioned Whigs, many would vote Tory. Some would vote UKIP because of the contradictions between essential liberal and democratic values and the growing authoritarism of the EU. Many grassroots Lib Dems are not happy with the party leadership's position on the EU.

David Giles ● 5430d