Tony Blair claimed today that Britain had been transformed beyond recognition by the Labour government as he prepares to mark his 10th anniversary in power next week.
In a letter to his party's MPs - which was accompanied by a 25-page dossier on the Blair legacy - the Prime Minister insisted Labour had overseen remarkable changes in our hospitals and schools, in law and order and in the economy.
Mr Blair, who is poised to announce he will stand down after completing a decade in Number 10 on Tuesday, brushed aside criticism of his tenure to declare “the initial insight that brought us to power has stood the test of time, with the results to prove it.”
While he conceded many people still had “strong views” about his decision to back the invasion of Iraq, he argued that “history will make its own judgement on our policy.”
Claim and reality: an audit of Tony Blair's legacy
Tony Blair's letter to MPs was accompanied by a dossier outlining Labour's achievements over the last 10 years. Here we contrast the claims he makes with the reality people across Britain face every day.
Health
The claim: Care in the NHS has been “improved across the board [by] putting patients and their needs in the driving seats.” Waiting lists have been cut, waiting times are down and thousands more doctors and nurses have been employed.
The reality: There have been improvements but few believe taxpayers have got value for money out of the billions of pounds poured into the health service. There are also a host of new problems. Scores of trusts are mired in financial crisis, with 17,000 jobs in the NHS lost last year alone. MRSA and other superbugs are rife on many wards, while thousands of junior doctors are struggling to find a job.
Education
The claim: Britain's education system has been transformed and the days when “communities accepted that their local schools were destined to fail is over.” Standards are up in primary and secondary schools, as well as universities. There has been a wave of new school buildings and a “motivated, highly-qualified teaching profession.”
The reality: Literacy and numeracy standards have improved in primary schools but the progress has stalled in recent years. The standard of secondary schools remains a problem, particularly in many of Britain's big cities. Confidence in the education system has also been hit by claims that GCSEs and A-Levels have been “dumbed down” while university students are running up large debts to pay for tuition fees and living costs.
Families
The claim: New rights to work more flexibly are helping families juggle their work-life balance, alongside increases in maternity pay, new payments for fathers and help with childcare. Same sex couples have also been given new rights to adopt and enter into civil partnerships.
The reality: Many families are struggling to make ends meet as the try to cope with a rising tax burden, increases in council tax and hefty utility bills. Family breakdown - particularly in Britain's most deprived areas and sink estates - is widely accepted now as a pivotal cause of spiralling anti-social behaviour.
Law and order
The claim: Crime has fallen over the last 10 years as a result of Labour's “investment in law enforcement, the introduction of a new suite of powers and targeting the offender not the offence.” The introduction of Anti-Social Behaviour Orders (Asbos) and new on-the-spot fines has helped communities fight back against the yobs who terrorise many estates.
The reality: Violent crime and gun crime have doubled and there is growing concern that only one in four crimes is now cleared up by the police. Despite introducing a host of new powers, anti-social behaviour remains a massive problem in many areas with the authorities apparently powerless to deal with the hardcore of persistent offenders.
Economy
The claim: Britain is “better prepared for the challenge and opportunities of globalisation than any other in the Western world.” Labour has presided over a “record and sustained period of growth with low inflation, rising living standards and high employment.”
The reality: The economy has been relatively stable over the last decade but experts question how much Labour can claim the credit. On the downside, Britain's pensions are in crisis, public spending has rocketed, families are paying out more and more in tax and Britons have run-up eye-watering levels of personal debt. Brace yourself for rocky times ahead.
Climate change
The claim: We have “given the lead at home and internationally on tackling this threat” by helping to broker the Kyoto Treaty. “The debate has moved on from questioning the science to agreeing how to react to what it is warning.” More recently, the Stern Report - commissioned by the British Government - has made the case that it is “economically sensible to act” to tackle global warming.
The reality: Carbon dioxide emissions have risen since 1997 and many green groups complain that Mr Blair's commendable rhetoric has not been matched by action. Despite warnings about the impact of aviation on global warming in the coming decades, for example, ministers are still pressing ahead with plans to expand Britain's airports.
Iraq and foreign policy
The claim: Britain has led the way in tackling a range of key issues, including the removal of “brutal regimes in Iraq and Afghanistan” and “interventions to defend human rights in Bosnia, Kosovo, East Timor and Sierra Leone.” Britain is now “punching above weight on the world stage and setting the agenda” on issues from terrorism to climate change.
The reality: Britain's international reputation has been left battered by our role in the Iraq war and our unflinching support for George Bush. High profile attempts to use Britain's presidency of the G8 to “make poverty history” in Africa have failed to deliver, while our influence in Europe is on the wane.
The wheel has gone turned full circle. The people of Britain are sick of Blair and his cronies. But is there a credible alternative? I hope so.
My epitaph to Tony Blair can be summed up in one word-Tosser.
Chris Sabian, Peak District View - 2007-04-28 06:48:38
Showing posts with label tony blair. Show all posts
Showing posts with label tony blair. Show all posts
Sunday, April 29, 2007
Sunday, March 18, 2007
Turncoat Levitt supports Trident replacement
High Peak MP Tom Levitt was amember of CND in the 1980's and a key activist in the campaign to halt French nuclear tests. Now in a complete reversal, he is supporting Labour's controversial plans for Trident.
Everyone has the right to change their opinion but how can such a change be so dramatic. Let's face it is the need for nuclear weapons more now or more in the 1980's when the Iron Curtain was still up.
In response to this Blairite principle i.e. no principles whatsoever, Greenpeace activists presented Tom Levitt with a 925 signature petition against replacing Trident. (Levitt's majority was just over 700 at the last election.)
Local Greenpeace activist, Janet Miller said: "Nearly 40 years ago the UK and other countries promised to eliminate their nuclear weapons in exchange for other countries abandoning plans to develop their own nuclear capability.
"Now Tony Blair is heading in the opposite direction with his determination to rush through a decision to replace Trident, in defiance of international law.
"While the UN is in negotiations to dissuade other countries from developing nuclear weapons, the timing could not be more provocative.
"Our government should be leading the world towards genuine disarmament, not fuelling a new arms race."
Greenpeace claim that replacing nuclear weapons amounts to breaking the international Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, signed by 188 countries since it was introduced in 1968.
The second 'pillar' of the treaty states that all signatories should pursue plans to reduce stockpiles of nuclear weapons.
Mr Levitt claims the government's proposal is legal because the treaty allows for recognised nuclear countries to replace stock.
In a letter to Ms Miller, Mr Levitt said: "The same international agreements which allow replacement forbid any new country to 'join the club'.
"We are pursuing multilateral nuclear disarmament through treaties and diplomacy. We are the only country which has halved our sea-based nuclear warhead stock and abandoned all our land and air based capability."
He said he resigned from the CND in the early 1990s because international circumstances had changed and the organisation was broadening its interests. Or perhaps being associated with CND had got him elected in the first place.
But unfortunately it doesn't stop there. Conservative parliamentary candidate Andrew Bingham said: "I think the nation's security should be top priority, so the government is quite right to raise these issues now.
"Trident is getting old and it will take up to 20 years to replace.
"We need a nuclear deterrent and if 'rogue' states develop nuclear weapons we would be foolish not to. We can't predict war." Unless your Tony Blair when you start one whenever you like.
What I don't understand is that development of a Trident replacement is down to the Americans, since that is who we are going to be buying them from. Therefore, money straight out of our economy.
Secondly, the government proposes spending anything up to £80 billion and yet it cannot equip our soldiers fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Thirdly, wouldn't the cheaper alternative be to build a few silos and pretend we've got a replacement. Who will know? And if anybody fires on us, I'm sorry to say, but it's asta la vista baby whether we have nukes or not.
At least global warming wouldn't top of the agenda-never mind a 3 degree rise in temperature try 1,000.
Chris Sabian, Peak District View - 2007-03-15 15:03:43
Everyone has the right to change their opinion but how can such a change be so dramatic. Let's face it is the need for nuclear weapons more now or more in the 1980's when the Iron Curtain was still up.
In response to this Blairite principle i.e. no principles whatsoever, Greenpeace activists presented Tom Levitt with a 925 signature petition against replacing Trident. (Levitt's majority was just over 700 at the last election.)
Local Greenpeace activist, Janet Miller said: "Nearly 40 years ago the UK and other countries promised to eliminate their nuclear weapons in exchange for other countries abandoning plans to develop their own nuclear capability.
"Now Tony Blair is heading in the opposite direction with his determination to rush through a decision to replace Trident, in defiance of international law.
"While the UN is in negotiations to dissuade other countries from developing nuclear weapons, the timing could not be more provocative.
"Our government should be leading the world towards genuine disarmament, not fuelling a new arms race."
Greenpeace claim that replacing nuclear weapons amounts to breaking the international Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, signed by 188 countries since it was introduced in 1968.
The second 'pillar' of the treaty states that all signatories should pursue plans to reduce stockpiles of nuclear weapons.
Mr Levitt claims the government's proposal is legal because the treaty allows for recognised nuclear countries to replace stock.
In a letter to Ms Miller, Mr Levitt said: "The same international agreements which allow replacement forbid any new country to 'join the club'.
"We are pursuing multilateral nuclear disarmament through treaties and diplomacy. We are the only country which has halved our sea-based nuclear warhead stock and abandoned all our land and air based capability."
He said he resigned from the CND in the early 1990s because international circumstances had changed and the organisation was broadening its interests. Or perhaps being associated with CND had got him elected in the first place.
But unfortunately it doesn't stop there. Conservative parliamentary candidate Andrew Bingham said: "I think the nation's security should be top priority, so the government is quite right to raise these issues now.
"Trident is getting old and it will take up to 20 years to replace.
"We need a nuclear deterrent and if 'rogue' states develop nuclear weapons we would be foolish not to. We can't predict war." Unless your Tony Blair when you start one whenever you like.
What I don't understand is that development of a Trident replacement is down to the Americans, since that is who we are going to be buying them from. Therefore, money straight out of our economy.
Secondly, the government proposes spending anything up to £80 billion and yet it cannot equip our soldiers fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Thirdly, wouldn't the cheaper alternative be to build a few silos and pretend we've got a replacement. Who will know? And if anybody fires on us, I'm sorry to say, but it's asta la vista baby whether we have nukes or not.
At least global warming wouldn't top of the agenda-never mind a 3 degree rise in temperature try 1,000.
Chris Sabian, Peak District View - 2007-03-15 15:03:43
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)