The Tories' new attack poster is Brownite politics at its worst

David Ossitt

Peter Hoskin.

“I'm not currently considering that as a lead option for reform”

Peter; the clue is in the word ‘currently’, this is new labour speak for ‘but I will be considering it once I have stopped speaking to you’.

Publius

Mr Hoskin quotes:
"The Guardian story suggests a £20,000 flat levy. I'm not currently considering that as a lead option for reform."

-- So, in Labour-speak, £19,999 may be under consideration, or £20,000 is being considered but not as a lead option, or maybe £21,000....

Charlie Beckett

I think you are right. I know that the polls have narrowed, but the Conservatives are in danger of abandoning the moral high ground which they waited so long to occupy. Chris Grayling's nonsense about crime figures made the Tories look like both the stupid and the nasty party all over again.
Isn't there enough real stuff to be going on with?

Pete Hoskin

David Ossitt: and that's why I wrote this passage:

"Sure, the Health Secretary has left himself some wiggle room â“ he could still introduce the levy. But the fact remains that the death tax isn't current Labour policy. It may never be. And it's disingenuous to suggest otherwise."

luke

Good poster. Shame it's not true.

Surely this will back fire though. The tories can now never complain about a single labour or media distortion of any of their policies.

welease woger

Where is the outrage when Brown routinely lies about Tory policy? When he says that the Tories' policies will mean x fewer nurses and y fewer coppers?

Labour have been playing dirty for months and I'm glad there is now a fightback. If Labour cry foul then it gives the Conservatives a chance to highlight the Labour distortions and speculation that Brown and co throw out as facts.

Labour can't afford to fight fair because they know they are onto a loser. If they continue to speculate wildly about Tory policy then I think it is fair enough to speculate about their policies in return.

In this case they have a warm cuddly policy that is as always unfunded. If they can't or won't say where the money is going to come from then why not highlight this by speculating about how it will be financed? Either it will force some honesty out of them or they will have to admit they don't have a clue.

michael

They continually lie about our policies. I say lets play them at their own game!!!!

Hawkeye

Who cares if it is accurate? As long as it gets Brown out of No. 10....

TrevorsDen

Letting cancer patients die is not current tory policy - but that does not stop labour inventing it.

The notion that labour would not do something similar is as risible as the one that they would eventually not sting us to fund their electioneering promises.

Only a fool would believe the word of a desperately backtracking Burnham. Their promise comes direct from the green paper, its total fair game to use it. And its basically correct, because Burnham cannot say where the money will come from without this death tax.

Kittler

I prefer to have my tax deferred until after I am dead, rather than the pay today scheme.
Surely I am not alone?

Martyn Rowe

I'm with Hawkeye.

I've long harboured naive hopes for a more grown-up politics but with Gordon Brown on the scene those hopes are impossible.

Even his own side know he is a shameless, conniving bully who will say anything to win votes, regardless of his supposed moral presbyterianism.

Fight them at their own game and fight dirty. When Brown is gone perhaps politics at the very top will become less divisive. But then the Tories face terminal fight with the Unions. They will be just as aggressive and nasty.

I'm happy with anything that gets Brown out, even if it is someone from his own side.

Beer Moth

This poster would appeal to anyone who is lucky enough to have £20,000 at the end of their life.

A surprise perhaps, but there are actually people out there who have worked all their lives for wages that don't enable such accumulation (just imagine).

They are very many and all have a vote.

rparker

tho other lie is inheritence tax labour says its only 2000 estates that will benefit actually its 5.5 million

DavidDP

But...but...you've all been arguing for months that the Tories need to do something like this......

JONNY

'I'm not currently considering that'
eh, eh?
Say no more -so it's on their agenda then.
Smart move by ther Tories.

JONNY

I almost added
let's play dirty.
It did pretty well for Carl Rove.

Chuck Unsworth

What's a 'lead option'?

Does Burnham mean Lead - as in Lead Coffin? Or does he merely mean that it is one of his options, one that he's carefully stacked away until after the General Election. Of course, that would be to assume he'll still have the job. Anyway, he hasn't actually denied the possibility has he?

Watt Tyler

What do you expect from BluLabour?

Boudicca

There are so many get-outs in Burnham's statement that anyone would be very foolish not to think that Gordon is, indeed, planning something like this. Not £20,000 - maybe less, maybe more. Not the lead item - maybe it's second. Not currently planning - just thinking about it.

As for the argument that it is dispiriting to see the Tories using the same techniques as Labour - what are they supposed to to? Gordon lies and lies again about Tory policies. Are they supposed to just accept it and not fight back. Get real.

If thre was a relatively honest and honourable man leading Labour, things might be different. As it is we have the least honourable PM in living memory.

JP

There were either quick off the mark, or had it ready.
They don't actually have to put many up, the press release gets it airtime.
Labour will have to deny it of course! They are expert at 'doorstepping' and extrapolating policies to their nth degree making them look bad, so it's good to get on the front foot

Jim

You can't fight fair against a man who has no problem with hitting below the belt, poking you in eye and kicking you in the goolies. If Brown was an honourable man then they could all play nice but that's not the case.

Dirty Euro

So labour want to tax rich people to improve our public services. So what!

David Ossitt

Dirty Euro

"So labour want to tax rich people to improve our public services. So what!"

Cretinous oaf!

Holly ......

Dirty Euro,
So what now for the disillusioned labour voters like yourself,who can clearly see where Brown has failed?
Even you agree our services need Improving, because of Brown's dismal record as
chancellor and his inept dithering to put things right whilst he has been Prime Minister.
That shows real guts on your part.
Many may mock you,but what you say is true.
Our public services are in desperate need of improving.I'm with you on this one and I agree with you in doubting whether Brown has got the nerve needed to stop giving rich bankers our money and put it where it is needed,into our public services.
We need more like you to point out where Gordon has failed.
Who said all Labour supporters are trolls?
Some are completely thick.
But not you Dirty Euro,you actually come on here and tell us how it is.
Brown is crap.

Fitalass

"The Tories' new attack poster is Brownite politics at its worst"

Sorry, but you have a short memory.
I don't see anonymous briefing against a colleague reported by a journalists, or anyone trying to do a bit of proper journalism here to actually check the facts on offer. No McBride style politics either.
No, I just see a bit of journalistic snobbery on display here. Not cricket to be seen to be sticking the political boot into Gordon and the Labour party just before a GE?

Benedict Brogan gets it right in one of his latest blog posts.
As the midwife might ask, are the Coffee House blog team too proud to push the right message?
C'mon, I bet that one made you laugh.

Vulture

I'm with Jonny on this: negative campaigning may not be nice, but it sure as hell works. Sod the moral high ground - the Tories have to get down and dirty because Liebour certainly will. Fight fire with fire..

A minor point: Bruin should never be referred to matily as 'Gordon' : it humanises and chummies a revolting monster.

TomTom

£20,000 + 40% IHT ? My, they are getting greedy. What next National Insurance Charges for the deceased ?

NickW

What Labour and the Tories will do with this stupid tit for tat campaigning is to give votes to the "others".

That suits Labour fine; they have nothing to lose.

The Tory campaign managers are clearly adolescent clots.

TGF UKIP

Bollocks, Peter, long past the time the Tories started mixing it and taking a leaf from the Bush playbook. The trouble is they're just not much good at it compared with their Labour opposite numbers.

That's the trouble with Dave style cronyism - you tend to end up with the wrong people.

DavidDP

"So labour want to tax rich people to improve our public services. So what!"

The levy is for everyone, you tit.

JONNY

Better hard-nosed negative than flaccid positive eh Vulture

Billy Blofeld

These negative posters are a pile of crap.

People out there want some leadership and a vision. Not this he said she said shite.

Kevin Davis

Except, of course, that Gordon Brown refused to rule it out and it is therefore clear that Andy Burnham is misleading us.

Any Colour but Brown

Seems to me that this death tax is a (sorry for the pun) dead cert. Think about it.
Cut, er, sorry, that would be introduce efficiencies in the NHS, so that more and more old folk die, so that you can collect 20 grand when they pass "Gone". Save on the NHS AND cop 20 grand when they kick the bucket.

Win-win, eh?

Truthmonkey

In an ideal world all of the parties would promote themselves with clear posters detailing the benefits of voting for them.

Sadly a lack of posters, or indeed clear policies seems to have lead to a Conservative tactic to "accuse" Labour and wait for them to rebut.

As other commentors suggest. Andy Burnham's assertion that "£20,000 isn't current policy" could imply both that the policy is £19,999 or that it will be policy next week.

The more clear denials that are generated the closer we will all be to understanding what we will have to suffer under the next parliament.

RichieP

Well, my own view as a punter is 'a plague on both your houses' but, frankly, given Labour's dirty tricks record and their undeniable desperation (financially, electorally, morally), I think it's just fine to stick it to them with stuff like this. I haven't forgotten McBride and a whole lot more. And, given Burnham's equivocal response, it sounds very likely that Liebore will give a tax as reprehensible as this a whirl if they can sneak it in. Graverobbers too eh?

David Ossitt

This lunchtime; on a program hosted by Martha Kearney (a new labour groupie) Andy Burnham actually admitted that this £20,000 tax was being considered.

Barbara

I don't know if this is true or not but the idea angers me. Why should we pay anything upon death if it's us who's worked for it. To say most wouldn't pay it is foolish, if you leave a property then you may well pay in the end. What about those who have smoked, drunk and whittled away their money will they pay too, and with what, or have we to fund those I've mentioned? This government are now proved they are a communist government, and their links to the KGB are stil active, we are being drawn completely into a totalitarian state, thank god we can throw the lot on the rubbish tip come the spring, I'm voting for the new I've had enough of the old for a lifetime. Time for change, lets DUMP THE LOT.