h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

tbat's rich coming from you, SWL.

You could be right - was it 6 million? UB 40 singing I am a 1 in 10?

Sorry, brain wasnt in great form last night.

I thought it was 3 actually.

Hello, by the way. Just popped in to see if The Forum was really as scary and evil as I'd heard. So far it's been pretty cutthroat.

Anyway, I'm not really old enough to remember the Thatcher years so I can't offer any real comparissons with the Tories but, to be honest, although that has always been a key Blair argument, I don't think it's a good one. Any Government needs to be judged objectively on it's own acheivements, rather than how much less badly they did than the other guys.

In terms of domestic issues, I'm not convinced. Education has improved, yes, in some ways, especially the English curriculum. On the other hand the bar of GCSE / A'level results is consistently moved to enable targets to be met and there are still issues of gross underfunding, including saleries and provision for special needs.

To say the NHS is in a decent state is laughable. The care you get is a postcode lottery, the response speed is ludicrous and the fact that hospitals are hugely in debt and treated like businesses is ridiculous.

For me disability rights have been improved in various ways, although I still find funding for people with disabilities very poor, but it is progress, and carers have seen legislative improvements as well, which is good.

The unemployment system is a mess, poor funding for people legitimately trying to work and little in the way of pressure or motivation for people trying to skive.

Introduction of legislation protecting gay rights and abolishing fox hunting are, for me, good things.

However I'm afraid I have to say that he ends his premiership still having failed to get past the fact that he sent us to war on the basis of very dogey intelligence and a scandal which forced a suicide, and as the only serving prime minister to have been interviewed by the police. For that, if nothing else, he should be ashamed.

Incidentally (have I gone on too long already?) I would like to ask older contributers whether they have ever felt they had a really good PM? How does Tony stack up against others than people can remember?

>>> I'm not really old enough to remember the Thatcher years <<<
Oh, it was a real riot.





Blair, did he help Bush move away from an isolationist policy?

Interesting points peeps

For me, the *real* legacy of Blair is his shifting the Labour Party to the right, and the entrenchment of the Thatcher era. The 'excesses' of the 80s are *nothing* to those of today, the income gap is wider than ever, the rule of the market has penetrated far further into society than ever before, and many of the jobs created to fill the void left by the Tories are McJobs, with poor pay and few benefits, consolidataing the above. Also the trend towards individualism was reinforced, rather than attempting to contain or redirect it.

The continuation of so many essentially Conservative policies will shape Britain for longer than the war in Iraq, IMO. Another facet of this is that, by effectively eliminating the left from government, it's possible Blair has sent us down the American route politically, with one party being a progressive, but centre-right group, with the other being further to the right and more conservative.

I think New Labour has been too frightened, in many respects, to push the progressive agenda they would have liked. There's little mention of the reduction in child poverty, for example, which is a GOOD THING, looked at from any perspective. 'Stealth' taxes are another example. There have been enormous increases in public spending, partly paid for by the economics success, but also paid for by rising taxes (although they haven't risen *that* much). But the arguments *for* higher taxation have been muted at best. Hence the stealth.

It's got to be said that there have been many successes of the Blair years. The economy has been remarkably successful. Of course, this hasn't been entirely their doing, but it's remarkably easy to balls things up, even when global conditions are relatively benign. The stock market decline of 2000-03 didn't cause much grief in the wider economy, for example, so they didn't *just* ride the crest of a wave. The civil partnership laws have been a huge step in the right direction, as was the Scottish Parliament, removing hereditary peers from the House of Lords, and others I can't remember right now.

So, a mixed bag overall, which is (of course) what you'd expect. And it's way too soon to say what his legacy really is. We'll need to wait 10 or 20 years to see which of the things he set in motion carry the most momentum.

What he said.

I agree entirely.

'Blair, did he help Bush move away from an isolationist policy'

No I think that was Bin Laden.
I wrote a whole thing about how Bush isn't really that non-isolationist anyway, but then I deleted it by accident. My points stands.
Who kept voting for Thatcher? That always baffled me as a child.

"The 'excesses' of the 80s are *nothing* to those of today, the income gap is wider than ever, the rule of the market has penetrated far further into society than ever before, and many of the jobs created to fill the void left by the Tories are McJobs, with poor pay and few benefits, consolidataing the above. Also the trend towards individualism was reinforced, rather than attempting to contain or redirect it."

It's true that inequality has increased rather than decreased under Labour, but the poor are now better off than they were under the Tories. Increasing inequality is undoubtably a bad thing (for social coheseion, for equality of opportunity to name but two reasons), but at least this time the poor have some share in increased prosperity. Better a McJob with a minimum wage, increased rights at work, and a working time directive that includes holiday pay, than having no job at all.

The Tories opposed all extensions of workers' rights and the minimum wage legislation tooth and nail. I think it's true, on balance, that the Blair government failed the very poorest, but that's not a reason to let the Tories back in, or to convince oneself that they're the same.

Some interesting observations.

Been mulling this over, and thinking about how policies have affected me personally over the last 20 years.

In the 80s I was a protesting student - but that was pre-student-loans. I bought a house (affordable) but did suffer from the negative equity problem. Northern Ireland was a wasteland. Unemployement affected many families.

In the 90s I had children - very happy with the quality of care I received on the NHS, and have continued to receive. I despaired of the segregated schooling system in NI, so set up an integrated primary school for them to attend (OK, there were a few others involved too!). Fought a bit with the Dept of Education, but got there in the end.

In the noughties I lived abroad, missed lots of things aout the UK and Ireland, ruled out emigrating to Australia, and moved back to Belfast. My house rose enormously in value - but then the new house I moved to was as expensive. I'm more than satisfied with the education my children have received - it's way better here than it was in Luxembourg. But then, in NI we still have selection, and falling roll numbers mean that I've been able to secure places at whatever schools I've applied to. I am a governor at a special school, and while it's not perfect, I am not unhappy at the funding and support it gets. NI is now a great place to live. Public transport isn't bad, there are roadworks improving the infrastructure, it now takes about an hour and a half to get to Dublin as opposed to 3. Most of that is EU funding.

This year I've assisted in getting NI's first Green MLA, and we now appear to have the basis of a lasting peace. I don't feel I pay too much tax, although I don't like it being used for nuclear weapons or questionable wars.

So, broadly, a satisfied customer.

>>> Bush isn't really that non-isolationist anyway <<<

Whatever Bush is or isn't matters less than my real question (under expressed). I was trying to ask do people see Blair as one to 'get in there' and champion the cause for Britain, or did he *just turn-up* for work?

Legacy of Blair: To me is he was a great salesman. Got the wrong product to push now and again, but he'd sell it anyway.... I am going to miss watching Blair on BBC Parliament.

Brown ooh he could turn out a 'reet b*stard* but he could he win an election? That's the difference, that's Blair.



>>> Who kept voting for Thatcher? That always baffled me as a child.<<<

“The money.”

Blair managed to appear as 'son of Thatcher' when needed, and friend of the worker the next, he managed to distract enough people with this to keep winning elections.

As for Thatcher, she managed the country in a different way, and nobody could put up a valid opposition to her. Nobody wanted to go back to 1970's Britain.



Blair made a claim, this has been the best government post 1945, it could well be. Iraq, if I agree with it or not, 20 years from now there will be people saying he was right if only to ensure the Oil. Same as people will say Thatcher was right on issues that at the time were so destructive to so many.

Thatcher: Home; 6 million unemployed, social exclusion. World; we didn't even register.

Blair: Home; social inclusion. World; we're open for business.

Legacy of Blair, “he” has got the country to a point were heavy industry could start-up tomorrow, and it has taken 10 years to get here.

'Whatever Bush is or isn't matters less than my real question (under expressed). I was trying to ask do people see Blair as one to 'get in there' and champion the cause for Britain, or did he *just turn-up* for work?'

Do you mean in terms of international policy? His heavy involvement of the nation in both iraq and Europe have not been popular, but he has done his best, I think, to be making an impact. Whether we really benefit from either of these is a different matter but I guess you can't accuse him of not trying.

'Legacy of Blair: To me is he was a great salesman'

Undoubtedly, he was presentation king. I can't help feeling that undermined him in the end though, because you knew he could be plausible about anything, so you never knew what he actually meant about anything. Maybe his resignation speech was geniune, but it looked like the usual Blair bulls*cough*t to me.

'Thatcher: Home; 6 million unemployed, social exclusion. World; we didn't even register.

Blair: Home; social inclusion. World; we're open for business.'

I think you may have oversimplified. How socially included are the Muslims? In any event your 'home' anaysis ignores the ludicrous business for young couples trying to get any sort of place to live, and the fac that old people are either choosing between food and heat or being arrested for non-payment of council tax.

"dumbing down of the media....

Education, edukashun, ejook8shun ... what a joke. Educate people to be stupid and you can get away with whatever you want.

Blair took shallow to new heights.

You're right SWL I cant even tell if your last sentence there is an oxymoron or mixed metaphor.

Under Blair some good things have happened and so have some bad things there are a lot to list and many of them have already been flagged up by you good people, but two of his worst have been the increase in red tape and the continuation of sleaze and corruption.



Im not against new legislation but what there has been should have been better thought through. the ban on Hunting with hounds ws a right dofs dinner. Family tax credits though a laudable idea could have been replaced more easily with a reduction or removal of VAlue Added Tax and other which take a larger proportion of poorer peoples incomes then they do out of the incomes of those earning more.

Blair did take some tough decisions but did he really need all the underhanded spin lies and bungs of cash to get the things done. Regardless of what he says about respect not acting in a respectable way has set back trust in politics and authority another generation.

one love

'has set back trust in politics and authority another generation.'

That is a potentially massive truth. How many people feel that their vote has little or no impact on what Governments actually do? How far are we from a situation where the elected Government has a mandate from less than a third (or even less than a quarter) of people elligible to vote? This voter apathy is also what opens the door to the likes of the BNP.

>>> Do you mean in terms of international policy? <<<

Yes.



>>> I think you may have oversimplified <<<

Possibly. But I feel included more now than I did 10 years ago.

True. I guess we all start by looking at how things have improved for us. I fear that there will always been a social scapegoat somewhere, though. We have to hate someone, don't we?

To be honest, the major changes in the last 10 years have been nothing directly to do with Blair.

We would still be in Iraq, though arguably on the scale of Australia - a token force to show moral authority. So it's maybe unfair to judge Blair on Iraq.

The main changes have come via the EU, which no PM has the authority to stand against. The massive legal immigration is changing our society in ways that have yet to become fully apparent. The illegal immigration is just symptomatic of endemic corruption and inefficiencies. No govt in living memory would have done a better job of stemming the flow.

I rather think Blair may well be remembered like Clinton. A master of presentation, respected abroad but despised at home.

Otto, you're right than any job is better than no job, but I'd have thought the whole point of a Labour government is the redistribution of wealth in favour the less well-off, not the rich. The management of the economy has been a success, what was done with the proceeds is much more of a mixed bag.

A lot of the major changes didn't have anything to do with Blair. The rise of China as a major exporter of goods wasn't directly related to him. As a result, it helped the world economy grow faster than it would have without inflation. This was one of the cornerstones of the constant economic growth of his PMship.

SWL <>

Clinton's popular in America, even though his presidency didn't achieve much. Blair is *far* more unpopular here.

Well I've got a few minutes so I might just take the time to consider respective administrations insofar as they affcted me:

80's: I was born. I do not give Mrs Thatcher any credit at all for this.
My father was in work, rising through the ranks and doing pretty well. The last time I had school milk it had gone off and I hated it. School meals were ok, the national cirriculum came in and we saw less of the sandpit. Bummer.

The 90's: Still at school. Dad made redundant during this period, I do not know if that was specifically John Major's fault. We had climbed the property ladder to a bigger house. In due course, school dinners went private and they served nothing but bloody chips. That may have been the labour party, but I prepared to be reasonable.

the 00's. I emerge from 3 years of education for which my parents have had to pay, £10,000 in debt. I find work with reasonable ease but I am unable to earn enough to move into my own home, even when my wife and I are both earning. During this time my wife is diagnosed with a serious health condition and the response from the hospital is slow and ponderous.
We move to Eastbourne where we find a place to live but struggle to make ends meet. Clare gets MUCH better help with her new hospital, and physio is better, but the wait for referrals is still very slow. She is still fighting to get any sort of benefit at all despite her health condition. We do not earn enough to claim working tax credits.

Clare's status under the disability discrimination act and other laws is key for me. Her legal status has improved but her health support depends where she lives and her ability to get any sort of benefit seems almost deliberately sabbotaged by legislation. Moxed bag, for me.

I think it's far too early to really judge Blair. Every PM in my lifetime, when they left office, was slated and boo hoood. Starts to make you that maybe being PM is a darned difficult job to do in actual reality......Those Lib Dem leaders are canny fellas aren't they?

SWL, Clinton is only despised at home by your friends, our local right-wing nut jobs.