At the weekend David Cameron said, “we could see bonuses being paid out for a second year to executives in taxpayer owned banks which is unacceptable” (Source: Conservative Party website).
But the thing is, he thinks that this sort of stance is cheap: “What you won’t hear from me is easy cheap lines bashing financiers” (Evening Standard, 28 September 2008).
He also thinks it is a “lurch to the left” (PMQs, House of Commons, 21 February 2007, on calls for curbs to city bonuses).
And he thinks criticising bonuses is “Not sensible, not sensible at all” (Sky News, 26th September 2008).
Glad that’s all cleared up.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Reform own goals
Following the course of the River Leen through Nottingham
Trumps' White House thuggery appals the world including most Americans
Jason Connor
David Le Grice
Simon Banks
17 Comments
Gosh, you guys are *obsessed* with Cameron and the Tories. Perhaps you should get your own house in order before attacking others? And do try focusing on yourselves. After all, what is LDV for?
http://www.hamhigh.co.uk/content/camden/hamhigh/news/story.aspx?brand=NorthLondon24&category=Newshamhigh&tBrand=northlondon24&tCategory=newshamhigh&itemid=WeED17%20Feb%202009%2022%3A13%3A46%3A840
Cameron, unless they know something greater than the average whalla, is trying far too hard to appeal to the masses by exploiting the latest fad on the roundabout and he’s failing. If the economy does, by some miracle, pick up later this year he is in grave danger of appearing to be without substance and thus allowing Labour more control. He really could do himself a massive favour in the public’s eyes by, for example, putting forward a fair and acceptable alternative to MPs expenses. If he get’s in by default of the failure of the Labour Party he’ll almost certainly prove to be yet another inconsequential with all the political pot holes that will go with it.
So far I’m not impressed at all.
The weird thing is – both Derek Draper and you seem to be focussed on ‘attacking’ other parties. Why don’t you come up with something constructive? LabourHome tried to do what Conservative Home does so beautifully – it is a place for constructive discussions, not just slagging off other parties.
Or is it the case that the LibDems have nothing to say beyond Vince Cable’s sage advice?
Look back through past posts, and you’ll find plenty that aren’t attacking other parties, such as online campaigning advice ( https://www.libdemvoice.org/mark-pack-daily-blog-tips-11504.html ), Nick Clegg on families ( https://www.libdemvoice.org/why-nick-was-right-to-speak-out-11494.html ), lessons from the US ( https://www.libdemvoice.org/howard-dean-11483.html ) and, err…, a cricket team ( https://www.libdemvoice.org/the-liberal-1st-xi-11454.html ). Sorry to bore you with some facts đ
Know It All: why does the news that a Liberal Democrat councillor has suffered from some health problems mean I shouldn’t write about David Cameron? Does seem a rather strange logical leap to me!
Hm, has anyone else noticed how ever since we’ve started polling better we’ve picked up more random Tory trolls? đ
Know It All & VS, we have a number of semi-regular Tory visitors who seem to enjoy debating with us here, so we can’t be that bad at it. Why not take your own advice and come back to offer something constructive to one of the many, many substance pieces sometime?
Oh, so as members of an opposition political party we’re not supposed to have an opinion about or discuss the actions of the party in government or those of the party which is likely to form the next government?
And on the subject of the next government, I haven’t seen much comment on Mr Cameron’s plans for local government which were announced this week. I think he said something like, “I am a great believer in elected mayors….” This should be translated as, “I am a great believer in imposing centrally dictated policies on people who may already have democratically decided for themselves that they don’t want an elected mayor”. Same old socialist Tories.
Ah yes Mark Pack the Lib Dem paid attack dog attacks Cameron. About as novel as Bears antics in woods.
Draper also spends his time attacking people online, so what is the difference? At least Draper does not work full time for his party.
Very good, and very true. Dave is indeed a PR driven con merchant. Do hope your next headline will be;
Any ‘Liberal’ Democrat: Iâm a liberal, supporting increased powers to an authoritarian, protectionist European entity’
Glad we’ve cleared that up.
Hypocrites ~ takes one to spot one.
How come Mark has nothing to say about the Lib Dem peer Carlile and his statements defending Labour’s damage to our rights? in the latest episode this week Carlile attacks Stella Rimington in the media when she dared to say that our rights are being damaged.
This issue is of much more importance to all of us than the trivial matter that you right about above. Where is the condemnation of Carlile? Have you people forgotten your liberal principles?
Troll yes, but not a tory troll. I read Guido because he is, humourous, not up his own yellow Welly Jeremy Thorpe and not pushing any particular philosophy except to expose Corrupt MPs and associates.
AND, he has the keys to the Kingdom because he knows what blogging is really about – you lot totally miss the point.
Guido Fawkes has got you all whooped and he’s the only blog I read on a daily basis – it’s fresh everyday with something ALWAYS worth reading and you don’t have to be a political insider to join in and enjoy the expose of twerps.
M Cooper, I wasn’t thinking of you at all when I mentioned trolls. You said something about the subject under discussion. The others said “Waaah! You’re not allowed to point out inconsistencies in what David Cameron says! Snot fair!”
Alix Mortimer what is your view on Lord Carlile’s attacks on Stella Rimington on the News channels a few days ago?
I didn’t see them, but on past form I’d guess he’s being illiberal. Again. I’m not entirely sure why he’s still in the party, actually. I’d be surprised if you’d find anyone ready to defend him in these parts, ever since he refused to condemn 42 days (in fact, plenty of people round here are still grumpy that we gave in to 28).
You should take a look at the Geert Wilders thread if it’s outraged liberalism you want. A Tory visitor on there made the interesting observation that the grassroots on both LDV and ConHome tended to be more liberal than their respective parliamentary parties.
I suppose it is possible to be opposed to large bonus payments from banks that have been bailed out by the taxpayer, without being opposed to general curbs on bank bonuses.
Cameron is at least being sensible when he says that some bonuses should be allowed. Unlike Cable who is bouncing up and down on this particular bandwagon harder than anybody else with his calls for no bonuses at all.
That would be Vince – nationalise it, no, don’t nationalise it, yes, do nationalise it, Cable.
The man swings with the public mood far faster than a wind turbine in a force 6. Actually, that’s not very hard because wind turbines don’t work in winds higher than force 4.
======================================
He also thinks it is a âlurch to the leftâ (PMQs, House of Commons, 21 February 2007, on calls for curbs to city bonuses).
And he thinks criticising bonuses is âNot sensible, not sensible at allâ (Sky News, 26th September 2008).
======================================
With respect to the first comment, the credit crunch hadn’t even started. It’s unfair to criticise the February 2007 comment since the only people criticising bonuses at that point were the militant socialists.
And regarding the second comment, RBS hadn’t been nationalised at that point – not for another 2 weeks. The bonus revelations didn’t begin until December 2008/January 2009 – at that point everyone pretty much presumed that bonuses wouldn’t be paid. It’s only because RBS management decided to pay some employees bonuses that politics has entered the equation.