As the Sun says goodbye - why I ditched Labour.

So the Sun has decided to ditch Labour for the Tories. A long overdue decision, and simply a reflection of the once-again changing political times. I agree with the decision, because it is clear to me that Brown simply cannot live up to what he says he can - he mentions "policies," but the time has passed to make any real difference - and we are left with many of the same challenges as twelve years ago.

To give Labour some credit though, of course it is in the Sun's interest to back who they percieve to be the "winner" and I am slightly cynical as to the ultimate motive - more sales. But putting this aside for a moment, I really do hope that the primary motive of the newspaper is to reflect the collective feelings of their readership, and to present political reality as it is.

Labour was needed in 1997. Hopes were high - achievements have been made. But over the past few years - and particularly since the 2005 election - what a failure. I have a list I made more than a year ago listing what I percieve to be failures - and my attention has been brought to more. To get to the crunch however, my biggest three problems with this government remains their stance towards the EU, their endless attack on civil liberties, and the divison that devolution has created - all policies that might be right in principle, but certainly not in practice.

I personally decided to forget Brown and Labour the day he arrived late to sign the Lisbon Treaty - trying to do it out of the limelight, in such an underhanded manner that HE KNEW how wrong his decision was. This is the moment that people will not forget Brown, for its effects will be felt for years to come. My decision is not just based on the classic argument of sovereignty, but on the idea that what Lisbon advocates is simply not what we want as a people from the process of European integration!

Now we just have to wait and see what Cameron does when he refers to "making a decision at the correct time" in relation to if Lisbon will be ratified before he enters office next year.

Scotland, Scotland.........

This article was written a year ago. I read it today with some interest, because of the title, which only intensified when I read the following part: "There needs to be consideration of when or if the nuclear option is deployed, a referendum on the Union to call Salmond's bluff. He wants to hold such a vote in 2010 as a plebiscite on what he presumes will then be Tory rule by Cameron. Instigated by Unionists much earlier than that, a year from now perhaps, it could shoot the wily Nationalist fox." The article was published on 6th May 2007, and here we are a year later, with the events of this week in Scotland with the Labour leader challenging the SNP to "bring it on." [A vote on a Scottish referendum of independence] Seems like an eerie prediction that came true on the part of this writer. But it still leaves me wondering how we got into this awful mess of devolution leading further and further towards the breakup of the UK.

Read the article here on suggestions to save the Union, written more or less exactly a year ago!

HM current government, what a waste of time you are!

Well, this is Brown all over, saying that he won't change his mind and then he lacks the courage to stand by his convictions. Also, it is terribly demonstrative of Labour policies - you start with a big policy, (e.g. scrapping the 10p tax rate) then you tweak little parts of it to appease certain groups, then you come back and say you will scrap tax rises because of the high cost of living, (showing that they weren't essential to government income in the first place, hence maybe not needed and also showing how Brown is trying to sucker us into a vote for him at the Election) and you end up with a policy picked apart that we'll just have to come back to and completely overhaul in a few years time. (i.e. immediately after the next Election) That my friends is certainly not what I would call consistency.

Brown to abolish tax rises?


Second article:

Gordon Brown faces a "stalking horse" challenge

Well, this would be the icing on the cake! (if there was a "stalking horse" to challenge Brown) Eventually I'll get round to posting on my blog a long list of things I disagree with about this man, or rather, what he represents at the present time. However, for those people who say "Get him out, he's unelected!" Although technically true, it's also true that our rules state that the leader of the party that has has the majority in Parliament is also Prime Minister. So when the Labour Party voted Brown in as leader, he did nothing unconstitutional to automatically assume the role of Prime Minister too.