Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

What would you have done 20 years ago if you were PM? (Invite to party leaders & MPs) Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    With hindsight about the problems our country/the world is facing today (Recession, Terrorism, etc.) if you were the PM 20 years ago, what changes would you have implemented and why?

    For Party Leaders & Members, how have your core beliefs as a party been affected by the above troubles? How would your party and the government be different without them?

    Hopefully this will incite some interesting debates, sorry if I posted this in the wrong place.

    Tom
    Offline

    12
    I would have reformed the banks in order to stop the Financial Crisis of 2007/08 from having as bad as an affect. Britain would have been not as badly effected by it all and would emerge victorious.

    But I'm saying that with hindsight, and I wouldn't have had it then
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MacDaddi)
    I would have reformed the banks in order to stop the Financial Crisis of 2007/08 from having as bad as an affect. Britain would have been not as badly effected by it all and would emerge victorious.

    But I'm saying that with hindsight, and I wouldn't have had it then
    For Party Leaders & Members, how have your core beliefs as a party been affected by the above troubles? How would your party and the government be different without them?
    ^^What about that point? The Libertarian Party seems to be very much about giving more economic 'freedoms' (ie. reducing tax). Do you think that the current economic climate, caused by the recession has affected that policy? If money was not so tight for many people would you still support it, and do you think it would it be more or less popular with people?
    Offline

    12
    (Original post by dathtom)
    ^^What about that point? The Libertarian Party seems to be very much about giving more economic 'freedoms' (ie. reducing tax). Do you think that the current economic climate, caused by the recession has affected that policy? If money was not so tight for many people would you still support it, and do you think it would it be more or less popular with people?
    I'm not old enough for it to have affected my core beliefs tbh. I don't think the recession has affected that policy no, as if the government provided stimulus there's no guarantee that consumers would spend as well. Throwing cash at something wont always make it work, which was one of the problems with the Labour government, however the increase in investment was necessary and did improve standards it could have been done better.

    Give people the money to do what they want with it, spend or save, it's a win win for the banks.
    • Community Assistant
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    I would have not sold off the oil and gas industry totally and essentially done what Norway did which is a public/private partnership with the revenue going into a sovereign wealth fund.

    Like MacDaddi i would have raised capital reserves for the banks.

    I would have ran a continued surplus of at least 3%.

    I would have devolved power to the regions including the ability to levy additional income and corporation taxes.

    ......

    None of the events of the recent past have really affected my core beliefs in any major way, i suppose I've become a bit more moderate in the sense that i'm skeptical of the whole self-regulation thing and more open to public-private rather than 100% private though equally I've come to see that the state is a hindrance in some areas like the railways and a coward when it comes to utilities.

    It's not totally down to the recent past but I've also come to realize that there's more than one way to skin the economic cat. Rather than saying that we should be like country x, we should take the best bits from countries x, y and z (there are currently 6 countries which are examples for me in various aspects).
    Offline

    12
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    I would have not sold off the oil and gas industry totally and essentially done what Norway did which is a public/private partnership with the revenue going into a sovereign wealth fund.

    Like MacDaddi i would have raised capital reserves for the banks.

    I would have ran a continued surplus of at least 3%.

    I would have devolved power to the regions including the ability to levy additional income and corporation taxes.

    ......

    None of the events of the recent past have really affected my core beliefs in any major way, i suppose I've become a bit more moderate in the sense that i'm skeptical of the whole self-regulation thing and more open to public-private rather than 100% private though equally I've come to see that the state is a hindrance in some areas like the railways and a coward when it comes to utilities.

    It's not totally down to the recent past but I've also come to realize that there's more than one way to skin the economic cat. Rather than saying that we should be like country x, we should take the best bits from countries x, y and z (there are currently 6 countries which are examples for me in various aspects).
    I would actually nationalise any oil in the Falklands.
    • Community Assistant
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by MacDaddi)
    I would actually nationalise any oil in the Falklands.
    If it were twenty years ago i agree although we'd have to be prepared for an actual war (or at least to destroy all their coastal military assets). Today they have too much support from Brazil, we'll lose the islands eventually or at least have to compromise (with that said we could use cheap Argentinian labour).
    Offline

    12
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    If it were twenty years ago i agree although we'd have to be prepared for an actual war (or at least to destroy all their coastal military assets). Today they have too much support from Brazil, we'll lose the islands eventually or at least have to compromise (with that said we could use cheap Argentinian labour).
    Brazil won't support Argentina. They wouldn't join them in war as a NIC they have too much to lose.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MacDaddi)
    Brazil won't support Argentina. They wouldn't join them in war as a NIC they have too much to lose.
    Very much like NK (or at least how I understand it). China would be silly to involve themselves with a war against the west because it relys too heavily on exports. In 10 or so years time, the story will probably be different where NIC's like Brazil, China and India will hold all the cards.
    • Community Assistant
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by MacDaddi)
    Brazil won't support Argentina. They wouldn't join them in war as a NIC they have too much to lose.
    Brazil already appear to support them politically. There'll be no war now, i meant 20 years ago it would have escalated (though Brazil would not have been involved at all back then).
    Offline

    12
    (Original post by dathtom)
    Very much like NK (or at least how I understand it). China would be silly to involve themselves with a war against the west because it relys too heavily on exports. In 10 or so years time, the story will probably be different where NIC's like Brazil, China and India will hold all the cards.
    I would agree there. I would give it at least 20 years though, until China catches up on high-tech manufacturing.

    (Original post by Rakas21)
    Brazil already appear to support them politically. There'll be no war now, i meant 20 years ago it would have escalated (though Brazil would not have been involved at all back then).
    Yes. Uruguay would certainly support the UK, they have a certain dislike of the Argentinians at present
    • Community Assistant
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by MacDaddi)
    I would agree there. I would give it at least 20 years though, until China catches up on high-tech manufacturing.

    Yes. Uruguay would certainly support the UK, they have a certain dislike of the Argentinians at present
    We could outflank them.

    Glory to the empire, may she rise again!
    Offline

    12
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    We could outflank them.

    Glory to the empire, may she rise again!
    Ahaha check this out:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-22044970
    • Community Assistant
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Would be interested to hear the opinions of the other party leaders to the questions at the top.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    Where to start? Decades of short-termism, incompetence and weak leadership have led to our current predicament. With a great deal of hindsight, I present my alternative manifesto:

    Firstly, I would have made sure our defence budget was reduced. 20 years on, this would have meant a more efficient MOD with no British involvement in unnecessary conflicts. The threat from Islamic terrorism would have been substantially less for Britain with a non-existent military presence in the Middle East (aside from UN-backed peacekeeping).

    The money cut from defence would have been spent on heavily upgrading our transport system - extensive high speed rail (still nationalised), bypass schemes and safeguarding local buses in particular. Investment in nuclear power stations should also have been prioritised around 1991, in order to make Britain energy independent and eliminating fossil fuel power by 2010. This energy strategy would also have allowed us to produce large amounts of energy for export, providing a reliable income to offset the national deficit without the need for huge cuts.

    I would have ensured changes to NHS management that occurred around 1990 were scrapped, retaining the matron system and placing medical professionals in budgeting and development roles rather than appointing outsourced managers and creating a layer of bureaucracy. In addition, I would have stopped the creation of education league tables and internal competition, to ensure schools were funded and operated on a level playing field.

    Employment wise, more could have been done to protect our industry after the 1980s, with investment in emerging technologies such as microchips and mobile telecoms, in order to maintain manufacturing jobs and retain a sustainable base for apprenticeships. The public sector should not have been allowed to increase in size, to prevent the mass redundancies we're seeing now as many irrelevant posts are cut to save money. I would have ensured MG Rover was protected and viable, to prevent the total collapse of Britain's car industry.

    I would have looked to improve our democracy - democratising the House of Lords, introducing proportional representation, banning corporate lobbying and other reforms 20 years ago could have prevented the large crisis of confidence our political system now has.

    Finally, the profits from frequent budget surpluses between 1997 and 2006 would have been used to enable large-scale tax cuts, particularly the raising of the minimum income tax threshold to £19,000.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    1. Implement a system of capital controls to prevent wealth being stripped from the country in a pre-emptive attack on subsequent reforms.
    2. Nationalise private capital.
    3. Abolish the monarchy and introduce proportional representation.
    4. Reform company law to hand control of every company over to its workforce.
    5. Abolition of the police. Replacement with militias assembled by local people's assemblies.
    6. Bill of essential rights (freedom from oppressive treatment, undue restraint, invasions of privacy etc.).
    7. Ensure that everyone willing and able to work is given a productive and useful job, and that those deemed unfit to work are treated generously.
    8. Replace most of the professional standing army with a conscription service, and commit the country to abiding by international law.
    9. Nationalise companies whose services would be better run if managed with the public good in mind (i.e. utilities).
    10. Introduce a properly comprehensive, well-funded, and well-staffed education system.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MacDaddi)
    I would have reformed the banks in order to stop the Financial Crisis of 2007/08 from having as bad as an affect. Britain would have been not as badly effected by it all and would emerge victorious.

    But I'm saying that with hindsight, and I wouldn't have had it then
    You may know this by now, but the use of "affect" and "effect" should be the other way around

    Try RAVEN..
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JPKC)
    1. Implement a system of capital controls to prevent wealth being stripped from the country in a pre-emptive attack on subsequent reforms.
    2. Nationalise private capital.
    3. Abolish the monarchy and introduce proportional representation.
    4. Reform company law to hand control of every company over to its workforce.
    5. Abolition of the police. Replacement with militias assembled by local people's assemblies.
    6. Bill of essential rights (freedom from oppressive treatment, undue restraint, invasions of privacy etc.).
    7. Ensure that everyone willing and able to work is given a productive and useful job, and that those deemed unfit to work are treated generously.
    8. Replace most of the professional standing army with a conscription service, and commit the country to abiding by international law.
    9. Nationalise companies whose services would be better run if managed with the public good in mind (i.e. utilities).
    10. Introduce a properly comprehensive, well-funded, and well-staffed education system.
    5. seems a bit odd, and 8? I'm certainly not going to be partaking in any conscription.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by Endless Blue)
    5. seems a bit odd, and 8? I'm certainly not going to be partaking in any conscription.
    A person's take on 5. would really depend on their experience of the Police. In my case, I'm pretty convinced that the current 'service' - with its corruption, penchance for unnecessary violence, and constant violations of basic rights - is unfit for the very important role assigned to it. Militias would simply be a democratically-managed, idealised version of the current police. The term 'militia' is borrowed from Orwell's account of anarchist Catalonia.

    If the only type of warfare a country engaged in was the repulsion of an invading enemy, would you object to it using conscription?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JPKC)
    1. Implement a system of capital controls to prevent wealth being stripped from the country in a pre-emptive attack on subsequent reforms.
    2. Nationalise private capital.
    3. Abolish the monarchy and introduce proportional representation.
    4. Reform company law to hand control of every company over to its workforce.
    5. Abolition of the police. Replacement with militias assembled by local people's assemblies.
    6. Bill of essential rights (freedom from oppressive treatment, undue restraint, invasions of privacy etc.).
    7. Ensure that everyone willing and able to work is given a productive and useful job, and that those deemed unfit to work are treated generously.
    8. Replace most of the professional standing army with a conscription service, and commit the country to abiding by international law.
    9. Nationalise companies whose services would be better run if managed with the public good in mind (i.e. utilities).
    10. Introduce a properly comprehensive, well-funded, and well-staffed education system.
    Conscription? :crazy:

    And in answer to your question, OP, as a Green, I believe that the visceral nature of our capitalist system and its consequences on foreign policy are inextricably linked. By this, I mean that the unsustainable desire to create a profit is based on our very finite access to natural resources. As the UK has very limited natural resources, it looks abroad for its fix. Sometimes, this fix comes in the form of invasive measures.

    My main measure of defence would have been to prevent the Iraq war, and prevent all associations with the United States as a henchman and instead promote more internationalist, reconciliatory politics with the United Nations at the heart, and a Green agenda at the furore. The connection I am making was highlighted in the US/UK oil agenda in Iraq; the link between terrorism and natural resources here is undeniable.

    And so, the most important measures to have implemented would have been creating a sustainable ecological economy, taking into account the natural balances between our biodiversity and the need to generate reasonable profit figures. Whilst I believe nationalisation of the Bank of England is necessary, I also believe that key staple industries should remain in public control. As well as this, Britain should have invested much earlier in renewable energy sources and led the way in moving away from oil-dependence. I would have kept the railways in public control, electrified them completely and provided free bus passes to all those in full time education, whilst simultaneously electrifying all railways and investing in hybrid bus technology.

    Trident would have been dismantled; our defence budget largely re-diverted alongside greater integration into the UN peacekeeping force. Emphasis would be less on NATO, and more on the EU and the UN as a military presence. However, I would not have embraced the EU wholly, it being a corporate supranational organisation with political motivations, and would have called for nations to retain their primary legislative powers.

    Beyond this, I think the most important areas of public policy are education and healthcare. Thus, I would have abolished prescription charges and preserved the NHS in its original form. In terms of education, I would have introduced compulsory foreign languages much sooner as well as increasing the ecological awareness of students about their environment and the impact of human activity on our planet's future.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: September 1, 2013
  • 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.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
  • 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.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.