A Ray of Hope and the Budget for Jobs

Rhoda Klapp

Yeah, 'cos Prescott would never get involved in any scandal, or abuse his position with the staff, or with the taxpayer's money.

You really are a sad case.

Further analysius on housing, jobs and young people when the details are out. Some of us have learned not to bother about stuff trailed by this government, the delivery never meets the hype.

mac

A New Labour chancellor keeping his eye on the ball? We wish Mr Bright, we wish.

And you fondly admire Prescott? Sorry, but Nicholas Soames long ago in the Commons Tea Room identified the essential Giovanni. Liberally sprinkle exclamation marks at the end of each sentence in the last paragraph and it reads like a Glenda Slagg piece.

Ronnie

Martin, Martin Martin. What are we to do with you?

Darling has kept his eye on the ball - but he doesn't actually have the ball, it's kept in a cupboard next door.

Prescott will ride to the rescue - but, as Rhoda reminds us, he left in his taxi long ago and nobody has forgotten his disgrace.

You need a new party Martin because this one genuinely isn't anywhere near good enough for you.

Hawkeye

Martin, how can you complain about nepotism in the Georgia Gould case and not then admire Prescott whose son made a splash in the news last year for wanting to "inherit" his father's seat?
.
I recall hearing rumours of a similar thing for Speaker Martin's son. Then there are Mr & Mrs Balls, the Bennite dynasty, the Milipede brothers, Mr & Mrs Keen and their in-law Sylvia Heal and we most not forget the Eagle sisters.
.
Labour is a family business.
.
.
"But the interview suggests he has kept his eye on the ball: housing, jobs and young people have to be the priority. Presumably even readers of this website wouldn't disagree with that."
.
Fair enough, but we all know that most of the announcements will never result in anything. Go read Matthew Parris's piece published a few days ago if you want examples of what I mean.

Nicholas Hallam

"Presumably even readers of this website wouldn't disagree with that."

I don't think a blog can really work if you despise its readers.

Robert Simpson

I would suggest that the priority of the Budget should be to avoid Britain going to the IMF. This is to try and chart out a believable path to paying off our debts to try and calm those we want to buy our debt off us.

I know many people scoff at the idea of Britain being unable to raise the finance, but with government ministers making scary comments about the IMF being like a spa, it must be a realistic possibility.

If Darling can't make sure the government can raise all this finance then you can forget about helping anyone at all - he'll be forced to adjust Britain's government spending to reality much more quickly and painfully than he currently intends (the Tories) to.

Andrew

It's Balls the Interim Chancellor needs to be keeping his eye on.

JohnAnt

"housing, jobs and young people have to be the priority. Presumably even readers of this website wouldn't disagree with that."
Yes, of course we would. Why is the government forcing the taxpayer to help out with the mortgages of the greedy and feckless? Why is the government not forcing LAs to offload public housing stock to trusts that will lease and look after it properly and fairly? Why are the eco-towns not being halted? Why is property not being taxed on sale, rather than purchase??
Why are public service jobs sacred, while spending rockets and private industry - the net contributor to the economy and HMRC - bleeds jobs?
Why are government golden elephant pensions sacred, while the rest of us work till we drop?
As for young people - they have their bloody PARENTS - who should take responsibility for them if they can't be responsible for themselves.

Steve.W

A while back you parked one of your jokes on the blog and I for one failed to get it, I don't think I was alone either. Now Martin you say -

“Who'd have thought the old trooper (John Prescott) would become Labour's greatest asset in the run-up to the next election”.

So am I to put hands to my face and rock to-and-fro with laughter?

However, before I typed this, I spoke to three neighbours each had been a member of Nulabour and each thought Prescott was, is, a joke.

Were members, but not any more. Their leaving was nothing to do with Prescott but their not coming back because of him either. I asked.

So is this a laugh or are you serious?

Forlornehope

Prescott still retains credibility with "Old Labour". He is therefore in a position to prevent the total disintegration of the party. Prescott is not, however, someone who can appeal to the middle class professionals in the public services who are the real Labour constituency; they are, after all, the ones with most to gain from Labour policies. A Labour party built around "the Prescott Wing" will at the very most appeal to about 25% of the voters and will never be electable as a government. This might be a better outcome, from the Labour viewpoint, than complete destruction, which seems to be the alternative. What it would mean for politics in general, one can only guess.

cuffleyburgers

"Presumably even readers of this website wouldn't disagree with that."

If you took the trouble to read the other posts and comments on this blog you would see the vast majority of readers care passionately about haveing a country that functions well, most are about how public education can be improved, about how the health service can be reformed and welfare too, and again the vast majority is focussed on delivering better results and not on spending less.

I have never seen a posting on this site saying that trade unions should be outlawed, tax on the rich should be abolished or that the working classes shouldn't be allowed into the theatre and should touch their caps to their betters in the streets.

Thepoint is Mr Bright that the majority of readers do not think these laudable aims can be achieved by government dictat or by greater centralization.

Your type of class war mentality is frankly pathetic. It might have been appropriate in 19c Russia but how can you fail to see that Brown's socialist experiment has brought the country to its knees, and furthermore that this was inevitable?

The only reason they were voted in in the first place was they said they would have Tory economic policies, the Tories themselves having been sidelined by sleaze.

LOL.

TrevorsDen

Just how much credibility does Prescott have with old labour women?

Priorities Mr Bright? Fair enough but even you must know that very little will escape the gravitational pull of the black hole of labours deficit and financial mess.
You and other lefties will big up the meagre fare to as big a headline as you can but the shambolic mess of our economy will be a massive drag.

The very fact that you are writing in the Spectator illustrates that you are well aware of Brown Balls and co's methods. Blair and Campbell went before them, as Dr Kelly knows only too well.
So I find it hard to see how you can justify the continued supine presence of most of the cabinet. You would get more credibility on here and justifiably so if you called for them to take action against the horrible mess your party has become.
But there are no statesmen in the Labour Cabinet and precious few honourable people on the left of the media.

Go Fourth should be renamed 'P!$$!ng in the Wind' or given Prescotts activities 'Gobbling for Gordon'.
Crude but these are the harsh facts Mr Bright.

Bexleyite

housing, jobs and young people have to be the priority. "Presumably even readers of this website wouldn't disagree with that."

I disgree. pensioners and savers have to be the priority. They're the ones with the money.