Winky to use the word "Cuts"
Discussion
Have you heard Cameron say it regarding Conservative policy?
NO politicians are happy using the "cut" word because they know that, if they do, they will be leapt upon by the opposition and the media. They much prefer euphemistic alternatives such as "tough decisions" or "better allocation of resources".
NO politicians are happy using the "cut" word because they know that, if they do, they will be leapt upon by the opposition and the media. They much prefer euphemistic alternatives such as "tough decisions" or "better allocation of resources".
Eric Mc said:
Have you heard Cameron say it regarding Conservative policy?
NO politicians are happy using the "cut" word because they know that, if they do, they will be leapt upon by the opposition and the media. They much prefer euphemistic alternatives such as "tough decisions" or "better allocation of resources".
Indeed so. But why why why why are they all such lieing dishonest morons. This country heading well and truely down the pan.NO politicians are happy using the "cut" word because they know that, if they do, they will be leapt upon by the opposition and the media. They much prefer euphemistic alternatives such as "tough decisions" or "better allocation of resources".
Slate99 said:
Eric Mc said:
Have you heard Cameron say it regarding Conservative policy?
NO politicians are happy using the "cut" word because they know that, if they do, they will be leapt upon by the opposition and the media. They much prefer euphemistic alternatives such as "tough decisions" or "better allocation of resources".
Indeed so. But why why why why are they all such lieing dishonest morons. This country heading well and truely down the pan.NO politicians are happy using the "cut" word because they know that, if they do, they will be leapt upon by the opposition and the media. They much prefer euphemistic alternatives such as "tough decisions" or "better allocation of resources".
It is even impossible to get them to say simple things like "yes" and "no".
I certainly don't think many of them are morons at all. In fact, many are very clever people (TOO clever, some might say). However, they live in a world where ANYTHING they say will be picked up and used against them. This makes them extremely cautious and non-committal whereever possible.
It is very annoying - but totally understandable in the current vitriolic era of news reporting.
Puggit said:
Cameron certainly has said 'cuts' - I heard it yesterday on R5. He is talking about targetted cuts of around 10% in public sector something or another.
It's Brown who is running scared, the Tories (and Fence-Sitters) are being slightly more honest about it.
He's been saying it for a few weeks now, he came out and said that whoever won the next election would have to make cuts way before Winky had the balls to.It's Brown who is running scared, the Tories (and Fence-Sitters) are being slightly more honest about it.
Office_Monkey said:
What, like they were admitting back in July
OT but relatedhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4AO0GCPDtA&NR=...
Eric Mc said:
Have you heard Cameron say it regarding Conservative policy?
NO politicians are happy using the "cut" word because they know that, if they do, they will be leapt upon by the opposition and the media. They much prefer euphemistic alternatives such as "tough decisions" or "better allocation of resources".
In all fairness to the guy, Cameron and most of the Conservatives have been saying they need to make cuts in spending, yes it's been said in double speak but it has been there, until Mandleson broached the subject labour had been claiming there would be no cuts at all AND there would be increases in spending, the amount of increase has steadily been going down over the past 4-5 months, culminating in Winky's greatest political statement, that unlike the conservatives labour would increase spending and would increase it by 0% . . . . . . I'm no financial genius, but 0% isnt a rise!NO politicians are happy using the "cut" word because they know that, if they do, they will be leapt upon by the opposition and the media. They much prefer euphemistic alternatives such as "tough decisions" or "better allocation of resources".
AndrewW-G said:
Eric Mc said:
Have you heard Cameron say it regarding Conservative policy?
NO politicians are happy using the "cut" word because they know that, if they do, they will be leapt upon by the opposition and the media. They much prefer euphemistic alternatives such as "tough decisions" or "better allocation of resources".
In all fairness to the guy, Cameron and most of the Conservatives have been saying they need to make cuts in spending, yes it's been said in double speak but it has been there, until Mandleson broached the subject labour had been claiming there would be no cuts at all AND there would be increases in spending, the amount of increase has steadily been going down over the past 4-5 months, culminating in Winky's greatest political statement, that unlike the conservatives labour would increase spending and would increase it by 0% . . . . . . I'm no financial genius, but 0% isnt a rise!NO politicians are happy using the "cut" word because they know that, if they do, they will be leapt upon by the opposition and the media. They much prefer euphemistic alternatives such as "tough decisions" or "better allocation of resources".
AndrewW-G said:
Eric Mc said:
Have you heard Cameron say it regarding Conservative policy?
NO politicians are happy using the "cut" word because they know that, if they do, they will be leapt upon by the opposition and the media. They much prefer euphemistic alternatives such as "tough decisions" or "better allocation of resources".
In all fairness to the guy, Cameron and most of the Conservatives have been saying they need to make cuts in spending, yes it's been said in double speak but it has been there, until Mandleson broached the subject labour had been claiming there would be no cuts at all AND there would be increases in spending, the amount of increase has steadily been going down over the past 4-5 months, culminating in Winky's greatest political statement, that unlike the conservatives labour would increase spending and would increase it by 0% . . . . . . I'm no financial genius, but 0% isnt a rise!NO politicians are happy using the "cut" word because they know that, if they do, they will be leapt upon by the opposition and the media. They much prefer euphemistic alternatives such as "tough decisions" or "better allocation of resources".
They only use it when they are talking about what their opposite numbers are intending to do.
So, Labour will say that the Conservatives will make cuts but that Labour will make "tough decisions".
But it is Labour investment vs Tory cuts! 
nick robinson said:
Peter Mandelson has been re-writing the government's line on public spending cuts but no-one can re-write political history.
I suggested on the Today programme this morning that if you listened hard you might just hear the sound of shredders in Whitehall as Gordon Brown's "lines to take" on spending were disposed of - in particular, the prime minister's insistence that the choice facing the electorate was "Tory cuts" versus "Labour investment". Lord Mandelson suggested that the words had never actually been used. Not so.
On 17 June 2009 (Hansard Column 295)
Prime Minister: "The first thing we are absolutely sure of is that, regardless of economic circumstances, employment, investment and inflation, the Conservatives will cut expenditure by 10%. The right hon. gentleman said it himself last week - Tory cuts versus Labour investment."
And again a few moments later:
Prime Minister: "The issue is that the Conservatives will cut current expenditure in real and cash terms. It is exactly what I said - Tory cuts, Labour investment."
This was at the time that Gordon Brown was labelling David Cameron "Mr 10 Per Cent" after the Tory Health Spokesman, Andrew Lansley had blurted out - also on the Today programme as it happens - that cuts of 10% in other departments would be needed to preserve increased spending on the NHS.
Update, 11:45: When the prime minister spoke of Tory cuts and Labour investment he was, Team Brown now claim, merely quoting David Cameron's own words back at him from the previous week's Prime Minister's Questions on 10 June (Hansard column 788).
Cameron: "The next election - when he has the guts to call it - will not be about Labour investment versus Tory cuts, but about the mismanagement - [Interruption.] It will be about the mismanagement of the public finances, the appalling deficit that he has left and his plan for cuts."
Mmmm. Gordon Brown used the phrase repeatedly on 17 June (Hansard column 296):
"His is the party of cuts; we are the party of investment" doesn't sound to me like a quote from the Tory leader.
Or, how about this one which doesn't use the key phrase but embodies the sentiment and talks about investment in the future and not just during the recession (Hansard column 295):
"We are investing to get ourselves out of the recession; the Opposition would cut, and they would make the recession last longer. That would lead to higher debts and higher deficits that would have to be spent for. As for spending beyond 2011, the right hon. Gentleman knows the truth: he wants to spend less - 10% less in most Departments - whereas we want to spend more."
I suggested on the Today programme this morning that if you listened hard you might just hear the sound of shredders in Whitehall as Gordon Brown's "lines to take" on spending were disposed of - in particular, the prime minister's insistence that the choice facing the electorate was "Tory cuts" versus "Labour investment". Lord Mandelson suggested that the words had never actually been used. Not so.
On 17 June 2009 (Hansard Column 295)
Prime Minister: "The first thing we are absolutely sure of is that, regardless of economic circumstances, employment, investment and inflation, the Conservatives will cut expenditure by 10%. The right hon. gentleman said it himself last week - Tory cuts versus Labour investment."
And again a few moments later:
Prime Minister: "The issue is that the Conservatives will cut current expenditure in real and cash terms. It is exactly what I said - Tory cuts, Labour investment."
This was at the time that Gordon Brown was labelling David Cameron "Mr 10 Per Cent" after the Tory Health Spokesman, Andrew Lansley had blurted out - also on the Today programme as it happens - that cuts of 10% in other departments would be needed to preserve increased spending on the NHS.
Update, 11:45: When the prime minister spoke of Tory cuts and Labour investment he was, Team Brown now claim, merely quoting David Cameron's own words back at him from the previous week's Prime Minister's Questions on 10 June (Hansard column 788).
Cameron: "The next election - when he has the guts to call it - will not be about Labour investment versus Tory cuts, but about the mismanagement - [Interruption.] It will be about the mismanagement of the public finances, the appalling deficit that he has left and his plan for cuts."
Mmmm. Gordon Brown used the phrase repeatedly on 17 June (Hansard column 296):
"His is the party of cuts; we are the party of investment" doesn't sound to me like a quote from the Tory leader.
Or, how about this one which doesn't use the key phrase but embodies the sentiment and talks about investment in the future and not just during the recession (Hansard column 295):
"We are investing to get ourselves out of the recession; the Opposition would cut, and they would make the recession last longer. That would lead to higher debts and higher deficits that would have to be spent for. As for spending beyond 2011, the right hon. Gentleman knows the truth: he wants to spend less - 10% less in most Departments - whereas we want to spend more."
Rather than worrying about terminology and how it would be accepted, I'm sure a bulls
t free expose would stop all the nay-sayers in their tracks.
If he came on TV and did a Mayor of Doncaster, he would blow the opposition into the weeds.
As it is, I think the NL spin machine will very flukily pull the cat out of the bag. Cue getting winky out, hotshot in, a bit of conservative sleaze, some good sound bites, etc. Done.
t free expose would stop all the nay-sayers in their tracks. If he came on TV and did a Mayor of Doncaster, he would blow the opposition into the weeds.
As it is, I think the NL spin machine will very flukily pull the cat out of the bag. Cue getting winky out, hotshot in, a bit of conservative sleaze, some good sound bites, etc. Done.
What annoys me about this is crass and obvious dishonesty of Winky and Co. stating that these cuts need to be done 'after the recession' - substitute the word recession with 'general election' and you're nearer the truth.
They are happy to take a seriously dodgy gamble with the economy for the sake of desperately trying to save their political lives.
I liked the headline on the news yesterday; summarising the latest opinion polls as "Any Leader but Brown" LOL.
They are happy to take a seriously dodgy gamble with the economy for the sake of desperately trying to save their political lives.
I liked the headline on the news yesterday; summarising the latest opinion polls as "Any Leader but Brown" LOL.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff