Fair? - mebbe not. Better? - Yup.
Since when has everything had to be “fair” (ie universally shit)? Nothing else is “fair” so why should this be. This vile government of chancers always says that “hard working families” will be given the rewards for their hard work - this is a reward. Why can’t they have it?
And what’s the alternative? What’s the remedy being proposed by Labour? To keep the status quo and have everyone’s waiting times remain the same? That’s exactly what’s going to happen.
You talk about fairness as if the current system is fair in the first place. Is it fair that a man should have to wait months (years) for an operation when he could receive his care immediately if he goes private? Is it fair that, after being virtually forced into private care by the waiting times on the NHS, his NI contributions should be eaten? No, it isn’t. What’s more, the Tories are only generalising what is already happening in the NHS. £80 million a year is spent on private care in the NHS. Why shouldn’t all patients in every part of the country be able to benefit from this scheme?
Frankly, a large increase in quality of care for the “rich” (although I don’t necessarily think you have to be rich to pay for many operations) and a slight increase in the quality of care for everyone else is better than what Labour are proposing.
What has this got to do with the NHS paying half of the cost of an NHS operation to a private company?
Give them a peerage so they can serve as a member of the House of Lords?
Lynda Chalker, Conservative Minister for Overseas Development, lost her Wallasey seat in the 1992 election, was promptly made a life peer and continued in her ministerial post as Baroness Chalker until Labour won the election in 1997.
I know little about constitutional matters, but could that not happen if the PM lost his seat?
Me too. I come from an ex-mining town. There’s no point in even bothering to vote. Franky, Labour could nuke Wigan and they’d still be elected with a large majority.
Be careful what you wish for…
I live in a VERY marginal seat (Putney) which is within easy reach of Westminster, so I cannot move without being pestered by some cocksocket with a rosette on. I’d get them to kiss the “babies” if I could, as I know my brats would bite their noses off.
Believe me - it’s a royal nuisance.
Conventionally, 20th century and beyond, anyhow, the Prime Minister is the leader of his party in the Commons. I can’t find anything to say this has to be the case, and certainly it’s not always been so. However, given the Commons is where the power is, it would be pretty much impossible to lead from the Lords. Tony Bann had to get an act of Parliament to allow him to renounce his peerage in order to retain his seat in the Commons.
Ahh, that’s just at home. When I’m at university, I can’t even walk down the street to Tesco without being pestered by some far left party attracted to the area by the number of students.
In the unlikely event that a PM lost his seat an MP in a very safe seat would apply for the Chiltern Hundreds and he would be parachuted in.
In the meanwhile he would be represented in the commons by an appointee.
(ie Prescott as PM - Imagine the hilarity)
Celebrity annoying twat Paul Daniels did vow to leave the country if Labour won in 1997. So, enthused by this more than by anything a politician had ever said, I voted Labour. But the fucker’s still here :mad:
Well, I went into town yesterday and enjoyed the St George’s Day celebrations but there were no hustings. 
There were only some people from the Respect party handing out leaflets.
I see that Reg Keys, whose son was killed in Iraq, is standing against Blair in Sedgefield.
Come on, people of Sedgefield, you know you want to…
What are “hustings”?
‘Hustings’ usually refers to an organised public event, where each candidate has a chance to speak and put forward their policies.
Is that something different than a candidates’ debate? (In the U.S., candidates for any office above the level of county commissioner give most of their public speeches to rallies of their own supporters; they face opponents directly only in a structured debate setting with a moderator and, usually, prepared questions.)
It’s less organised than a debate - pretty much just a series of speeches. It’s something that essentially belongs to pre-television days, when getting out into the local area and being seen making speeches was an effective form of publicity.
Yep - it’s less formalised - it is neither a formalised one-to-one arranged for televsion, nor a speech only to the candidate’s *own" supporters. More along the lines of a public meeting whether supporters and others may attend as wished, and ask questions.
We have those too – but only for local politicians. I’ve never seen a candidate even for a stage legislature appear in such a setting.
We had them on Saturday in our local church hall. They were well attended (I didn’t go - i just noticed in passing)
Jeremy Paxman’s interviews with the 3 leaders can e seen at the following link.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/newsnight_election_2005/4421655.stm
He gave Blair a bit of a bashing.
Good to see leaders being put to task. With a tough questioner asking tough questions.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzz