Donate SIGN UP

New Labour Success

Avatar Image
BenDToy | 16:09 Tue 14th Jan 2003 | News
12 Answers
When he was elected Tony Blair urged people to judge him on his performance in a number of key areas. From memory I think they may have been (in no particular order); education, health, crime, welfare costs. Since then we have been inundated with never ending, meaningless soundbites and acres of rhetoric, but has anyone ever seen a meaningful statistic to support any of this drivel. I am of the opinion that on all of his key areas he has failed to deliver anything which could even be remotely classed as an improvement. And the opposition parties are failing miserably to capitalise on any of this failure, even amidst all the sleaze which he promised to eliminate.
Gravatar

Answers

1 to 12 of 12rss feed

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by BenDToy. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
I think you'll find the economy is pretty shaky too judging by the number of people I know being made redundant. Some industries (like IT) seem to be shrinking by the second. For those of us who believe in voting where will we put our cross next election time? Maybe a war will distract us all from whats really going on, or am I getting old and cynical?
Question Author
Thanks for your contributions. I didn't mention the economy deliberately but I actually think we are being misled here. When we are told the economy is in good shape, what does that mean to you and me. Consider; low stock market values, erosion of pensions, high taxation levels. And what is so good about low inflation - low wage rises, low income from savings (pensioners etc) and debts which do not "reduce" through time.
There's nothing wrong with being old and cynical. When i think of Tony Blair, i also think "In power, but not in control."
I don't expect I'll get three stars for my answer! I'm not even convinced it'll be allowed to stay on site for very long...but here it is, anyway.

The absolutely most dangerous place for children to be is under their own roofs. There, they are vastly more likely than anywhere else to be sexually/physically abused or even killed by someone known to them - relative, baby-sitter, parent, "uncle" etc - yet most people are convinced that there is a murderous p�dophile on every street corner and that he is the one youngsters need protection from.

What has this to do with the question? Perception...that's what. Most of our perceptions are based on media distortions of reality, such as the one outlined above. For example, how many headlines did you see last summer trumpeting the fact that Government targets for primary-school education had been fully met a year ahead of schedule? I'll tell you...none. And why? Because the basic media scam is to report - even try to create - only 'bad' news.

We hear about it when schools have many teaching vacancies, but did you know that Britain now has more teachers in work than it has ever had in the past? Precisely the same is true of police numbers, but we see only shrieking headlines about rising crime. The truth is that crime has fallen, as figures recently published by the British Crime Survey - a body totally independent of Govenment - prove. Also, we have far more doctors and nurses than pre-1997 and, in every survey undertaken, about 90% of people invariably claim to be perfectly satisfied with the excellent treatment they received from the NHS.

So, there are some facts for you on education, crime and health, Ben. (How about a star-rating based on the quality of the answer rather than on its agreement with your own preconceptions?)

You make a lot of sense Quizmonster. I must pull you up on one thing though - I think you missed a vital word out of your point about falling crime. It perhaps should have read: "The truth is that reported crime has fallen...", my point being that people who have previously been victims of crime (myself included), have become so disillusioned with the poor performance of this country's Police force, that they simply don't bother to report minor crimes anymore. What's the point? From past experience, you just get given a crime number and told "there's very little we can do about it" and then given a leaflet about victims of crime. So you see, I think the "reported crime" figures are slightly misleading. Just because a crime hasn't been reported, doesn't mean it hasn't been committed. Politicians are very fond of quoting statistics. Did you know that 90% of statistics are made up on the spot? Well that one was, so I've just proved my own point I think! Sorry Quizmonster, it sounds like I'm having a go at you, but I'm not I can assure you. 99% of what you posted made sense to me! (now I've given myself the statistic bug!)
I see your point, Cactus, but I append an extract from the British Crime Survey (BCS) website:- "The BCS measures the amount of crime in England and Wales by asking people about crimes they have experienced in the last year. The BCS includes crimes which are not reported to the police, so it is an important alternative to police records. Victims do not report crime for various reasons. Without the BCS the government would have no information on these unreported crimes."

I have to confess one error, however, in my earlier answer. I said the BCS was independent of Government, when I meant to say it was independent of the Government's official police figures. It is, in fact, an element of the Home office. Nevertheless, it is often cited as the most reliable of all crime audits.

I quite agree with you about statistics in general, on the other hand! Cheers

-- answer removed --
Thanks Tj. It's nice to know occasionally that one isn't quite alone in holding one's views!
Question Author
Once again, thanks to all. I was inviting debate by taking a stand, and I am delighted to acknowledge those who have contributed to the discussion. (Hence the single star to the posts which are not directly contributing). I asked a question and it was answered intelligently and politely. I see no point in awarding stars only to answers which echo the sentiments in the question.
Of course, politicians are to an extent hoist, by their own poitard. Since they insist on presenting every bad statistic in the best possible light (it's noticeable how the "underlying rate of inflation" has gone out of fashion now it's above the RPI rate), it's hardly surprising people take even good statistics with a handful of salt - a case of crying wolf once too often.
Tony Blair. Best Conservative leader they never had. Just saying.

1 to 12 of 12rss feed

Do you know the answer?

New Labour Success

Answer Question >>