Was Tony Blair one of "the greatest"? Watch

This discussion is closed.
Daveo
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#41
Report 16 years ago
#41
(Original post by Muffle)
It is being tackled, like I said you cant solve things overnight and often things get worse before they get better.

Anyway enough, we will see at the next election
Hopefully we will see after this week when with a bit of luck the 'real' most powerful man will take over the leadership.
0
Muffle
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#42
Report 16 years ago
#42
(Original post by Daveo)
Hopefully we will see after this week when with a bit of luck the 'real' most powerful man will take over the leadership.
Bah, dont forget to send him a valentines card Anyway even if he did loose the vote and a vote of confidence was called- he would win that since the peeps voting against top-up fees are largley in support of him continuing as PM.
0
Daveo
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#43
Report 16 years ago
#43
(Original post by Muffle)
Bah, dont forget to send him a valentines card Anyway even if he did loose the vote and a vote of confidence was called- he would win that since the peeps voting against top-up fees are largley in support of him continuing as PM.
:rolleyes:
That isn't strictly true! But lets hope we'll soon see!
0
emom100
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#44
Report 16 years ago
#44
i think in 50 odd years time when kids are covering his era in history lessons he will be used as an example of how a PM made a hash out of things.I can see i question such as to what extent did Atlee's and Blairs idealism lead to the downfall of both of their governments. (atlee for te imposition of all his post war policies too quickly and blair for war with Iraq, tuition fees .......

To be honest you can never predict who will be remembered as "great". During his time, Churchill had implimented many dodgy policies and after the war people respected him as a war leader but not as a domestic politician which was why Labour came to power. Also he was not a popular choice originally to be leader during the war. Just goes to show popularity doesn't mean everything
0
Howard
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#45
Report 16 years ago
#45
(Original post by Pencil Queen)
Doesn't that imply that the general public are less worried about the economy, education, drugs and Europe after 7 yrs of Labour government
No.
0
rah
Badges:
#46
Report 16 years ago
#46
(Original post by Daveo)
Hopefully we will see after this week when with a bit of luck the 'real' most powerful man will take over the leadership.
gordon brown has none of the charisma necessary to be a good prime minister, yes he is more than capable in economic matters but as an 'old' labour mp he would be very damaging to the labour party.

i still confidently believe blair is our best option for pm, far ahead of howard, brown or kennedy
0
rah
Badges:
#47
Report 16 years ago
#47
(Original post by Daveo)
The country is in tatters virtually! Well i suppose it has imporved since 1997 but its still pretty shocking!
Blair is a liar anyway! - The so called 'Agreement' between them did exist but Blair changed his mind because he is power mad.
well if its improved since 1997 then that *is* tony blair's work, much of the 'tatters' you talk about are the result of the conservatives.
0
BossLady
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#48
Report 16 years ago
#48
(Original post by Daveo)
Well lets just say the top-up fees vote would have gone against Blair if it wasnt for Brown therefore he clearly has power over more people than Blair.

And Brown is the most powerful man in the country:
http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_843571.html?menu=

And as for the Brown and Blair relationship - Blair fears Brown - At least thats the impression i got from Gordon.
Lol you do realise that survey was taken by GQ magazine right? ie a mens magazine. You're hardly going to get the same results, that would have been gotten had the survey been taken by The Times or another broadsheet, with readers who are probably more intellectual.

(Original post by Daveo)
We'll see! But if it wasn't for Brown not only would most of the country be in tatters so would the economy!
The sooner Blair is outsed the better.
Actually our economy is looking pretty worrying in terms of the budget deficit. In fact the OECD recently warned Brown about our rising budget deficit as the "UK budget deficit will exceed the limit set by countries in the eurozone of 3% of GDP by 2005." Article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3412495.stm

True Germany and France flaunt rules anyway (Growth and stability pact), but the fact that the OECD has tried to warn Brown about it, shows it is worrying. Our esteemed Chancellor really should have done his calculations properly before the spending spree and he may have himself in a bit of a noose. Ohwell, let's hope he can save public finances somehow hehe.

Btw, I don't particularly like Blair ( I tend to support tories...lol) but our country can't really be described as being in 'tatters'. I don't see buildings falling down everywhere or the collapse of westminister. I don't see crazy nutters filling up every street ready to murder me or widepsread famine
0
*dave*
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#49
Report 16 years ago
#49
People are always moaning that 'this' thing is bad or 'that' thing is bad. You can't have everything great. There isn't that much money in the world to make 'everything' great, so you have to compromise. The fact that asylum seekers is the third biggest worry amongst the British public shows that the country is actually in great shape. Despite what the papers say, the NHS and education are in better shape than ever before. To go back to Tory Government would be suicide.

TopUpFees- You can't have it all. Taxpayers shouldnt have to pay for all university education. You can say 'but doctors are a needed public resouce' and they are. ut what about all the philosophy and history graduates? What essential public services are they generically filling?
I think the Bill is a great compromise. If you are poor, you get it literally paid for anyway. And if you are rich you dont have to pay upfront, which you had to do before anyway. As for people in the 'middle', you have to have a parental income of over 30000 to not get any help. Surely parents should contribute in this circumstance.
0
Daveo
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#50
Report 16 years ago
#50
(Original post by rah)
gordon brown has none of the charisma necessary to be a good prime minister, yes he is more than capable in economic matters but as an 'old' labour mp he would be very damaging to the labour party.

i still confidently believe blair is our best option for pm, far ahead of howard, brown or kennedy
HUH! Have you ever met him? He is a very charismatic man.
He wouldn't be damaging to labour he would only improve it.

I think that Brown should be first option but i'd rather keep Blair than howard or anybody else.
0
Bigcnee
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#51
Report 16 years ago
#51
(Original post by Howard)
Well, I don't think he has much to sing about. His domestic policies have been an unmitigated shambles.

Despite splashing out vast gobs of cash there has been no marked improvement in the NHS or education.

His transport policy is a sham. He has failed to address spiralling crime and hasn't a clue how to tackle the immigration issue.

Domestically, a flop.

His international policy seems to revolve only around giving Bush great head, and sending troops to wars without any clear consensus of British opinion, and without basic equipment for the job.

The man is an unmitigated disgrace and should fall on his sword before someone knives him in the back.
Read the question.
0
Muffle
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#52
Report 16 years ago
#52
(Original post by Daveo)
HUH! Have you ever met him? He is a very charismatic man.
He wouldn't be damaging to labour he would only improve it.

I think that Brown should be first option but i'd rather keep Blair than howard or anybody else.
In person maybe, but he isnt going to meet many people in person before an election
0
Daveo
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#53
Report 16 years ago
#53
(Original post by BossLady)
Lol you do realise that survey was taken by GQ magazine right? ie a mens magazine. You're hardly going to get the same results, that would have been gotten had the survey been taken by The Times or another broadsheet, with readers who are probably more intellectual.



Actually our economy is looking pretty worrying in terms of the budget deficit. In fact the OECD recently warned Brown about our rising budget deficit as the "UK budget deficit will exceed the limit set by countries in the eurozone of 3% of GDP by 2005." Article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3412495.stm

True Germany and France flaunt rules anyway (Growth and stability pact), but the fact that the OECD has tried to warn Brown about it, shows it is worrying. Our esteemed Chancellor really should have done his calculations properly before the spending spree and he may have himself in a bit of a noose. Ohwell, let's hope he can save public finances somehow hehe.

Btw, I don't particularly like Blair ( I tend to support tories...lol) but our country can't really be described as being in 'tatters'. I don't see buildings falling down everywhere or the collapse of westminister. I don't see crazy nutters filling up every street ready to murder me or widepsread famine
I'd like to see the results of a survey in the Times for example - I think you would be very surprised.

And whilst we may be borrowing money we are by no means as bad as much of Europe and the USA!
0
Daveo
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#54
Report 16 years ago
#54
(Original post by rah)
well if its improved since 1997 then that *is* tony blair's work, much of the 'tatters' you talk about are the result of the conservatives.
Ok tatters was an exageration! And i agree Blair has done much for this country however the country is by no means functioning at its top level.
0
*dave*
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#55
Report 16 years ago
#55
(Original post by Daveo)
Ok tatters was an exageration! And i agree Blair has done much for this country however the country is by no means functioning at its top level.
We would be a lot worse under the Tories. They have no credible alternative for top-up fees for example. They are supposed to be an opposition?!?!?
0
ChrisR
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#56
Report 16 years ago
#56
He will be remembered for starting an unecessary war and for wrecking the country
0
Daveo
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#57
Report 16 years ago
#57
(Original post by *dave*)
We would be a lot worse under the Tories. They have no credible alternative for top-up fees for example. They are supposed to be an opposition?!?!?
Yes I completely agree! But it is time for a change.
0
BossLady
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#58
Report 16 years ago
#58
(Original post by rah)
gordon brown has none of the charisma necessary to be a good prime minister, yes he is more than capable in economic matters but as an 'old' labour mp he would be very damaging to the labour party.

i still confidently believe blair is our best option for pm, far ahead of howard, brown or kennedy
Don't agree with you about being capable in economic matters, see my previous post, but i do agree he doesnt have enough charisma to be PM. He doesn't try and motivate people, he doesn't have the same enthusiasm as Mr Blair. I must admit I see Blair as a bit of an innocent politician who makes mistakes because he can't see the right way to do things, (clearly he isn't) but because of this, I think he is more charismatic, because u get the impresseion he believe terribly in all that he says. Kinda sweet really. Also, with a youngish family, well the family man image looks very good from Mr Blair, although Gordon is now trying to achieve this image himself too.

Howard is much to smug and condescending, plus far too old to be PM. (Dammit why didn't Portillo run for leader?! :mad: ). Howard is certainly decent enuff as leader of opp party, because he can be quite sharp and launch more stingin attacks (esp compared to the "quite man" who wasn't here to stay)
Kennedy has no hope anyway, and he sounds like a 'know it all', not very indearing....
Brown, well again I don't find him as motivating or enthusiastic. Not really impressed by his whole demeanour and I don't think a great deal of the pop are.
0
Daveo
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#59
Report 16 years ago
#59
I'd ask you all to read this:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3433391.stm
Please comment on it if you have anything to say.
0
BossLady
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#60
Report 16 years ago
#60
(Original post by Daveo)
I'd like to see the results of a survey in the Times for example - I think you would be very surprised.

And whilst we may be borrowing money we are by no means as bad as much of Europe and the USA!

Nah, Brown really isn;t seen by the public as the most powerful man in the country. TB has more connections and I reckon gives a better overall impression. It's nice TB has some competiton thugh, it'll make him work harder to get things right. I have a feeling if GB made PM, he's be more concerned about the status than leading the gov and our country.

Certainly we are not as bad as Europe and America, but we were saved quite a deal by our Housing Boom which was one thing that did help keep the economy afloat. With everyone else heading for recession, our consumers carried on spending, whilst the BoE(which is independant of the gov) finely tuned interest rates to encourage them to do this, so keeping our economy in a decent state. Companies managed to make up lost sales from overseas, by selling to the domestic market and although our growth deccelerated, our economy didn't contract. But what did Mr Brown have to do in all of this, he had to calculate the figure that would balance our budget. His predicitions were way over what we achieved in terms of econ growth and his little spending spree turned into a bit of an 'oopsie' for our lovely budget deficit. A budget deficit which is getting no better, although our economy is picking up its growth rate.
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

People at uni: do initiations (like heavy drinking) put you off joining sports societies?

Yes (389)
67.3%
No (189)
32.7%

Watched Threads

View All