Mr Garvie's letter in the NWN today (20/12) is disingenuous Options

[GMR]

LETTER IN THE NWN TODAY (20^TH Dec) by Richard Garvie

"With you in tough times?

FAILING schools, rising fuel prices and help for the growing number of homeless in West Berkshire. All subjects featured in last week's letters in Newbury Weekly News.

Is this what people vote for at the last General Election when they voted Tory, or Lib Dem? Did they vote for longer waiting times at the Royal Berkshire Hospital, the withdrawal of support for those in full-time education, or the need to reply on food banks?

The economic policies of this Government have failed, and whilst our local MP 'praises' the work of local food banks, I feel he, and our local Liberal Democrat candidate, need to think about why these food banks exist in the first place.


Richard Garvie,
Newbury Labour Party"

I must take umbrage with Richard Garvie's letter in the Newbury Weekly News today. Either he is stupid or playing politics.

In his letter he says "The economic policies of this Government failed". Did anybody really expect that any government, any economic policies would solve our crisis – which I might add were caused by the Labour Government – within 2 years of being elected? The state of our debt was going to take many years into the future and properly beyond. I also must remind Mr Garvie that Alistair Darlings and Brown's economic policies weren't that far of from the Tories. All the failures that Mr Garvie pointed out would have happened whoever was in power.

Mr Garvie say the government's economic policies have failed? According to whom (apart from Labour politicians and Mr Balls)? If you listen to independent economic experts the governments polices have better chance than the current Labour parties policies of spend, spend, spend.



Mr Garvie said in today's paper "is that what people voted for at the last General Election? That is a stupid comment. We are in debt and whoever would have been in power would have created the same results. Even Balls said he wouldn't undo the coalition's government current economic policies. He is being totally disingenuous and insulting with his letter. To suggest that Labour would have solved the problems that Labour created themselves is laughable.



Just a matter of interest; we had soup kitchens and food parcels under the last failed Labour government. And didn't Brown and Darling praise those soup kitchens and food parcels when they were in government?

[Andy Capp]

No party put us in the situation we, as a country, find ourselves; fate and the population did that.

[On the edge]

No party put us in the situation we, as a country, find ourselves; fate and the population did that.

Nevertheless, politicians steer us and set the drum beat. Labour still haven't quite got it. For instance, listening to Margaret Beckett being very sanctimonious on the committee grilling Starbucks and the like about avoiding taxes, legally avoiding that is where she was twittering on about moral duties!! I would love to have been the Company representative answering her questions! All we've done is copied the House Mrs B but at least we kept the law! Similarly, us off shoring our HO function and doing high recharges; well we thought you lot liked PFI! Similarly, all the Socialist squealscalling for Mitchell's resignation because he swore at a Copper but OK for the Deputy PM to physically assault a member of the public!

Lets have some real difference and can't the Labour Party remember first principals. Not a chance these days as we all have short memories so suspect that's what Richard Garvey is hoping for!

[Andy Capp]

Nevertheless, politicians steer us and set the drum beat. Labour still haven't quite got it. For instance, listening to Margaret Beckett being very sanctimonious on the committee grilling Starbucks and the like about avoiding taxes, legally avoiding that is where she was twittering on about moral duties!! I would love to have been the Company representative answering her questions! All we've done is copied the House Mrs B but at least we kept the law! Similarly, us off shoring our HO function and doing high recharges; well we thought you lot liked PFI! Similarly, all the Socialist squealscalling for Mitchell's resignation because he swore at a Copper but OK for the Deputy PM to physically assault a member of the public!

Lets have some real difference and can't the Labour Party remember first principals. Not a chance these days as we all have short memories so suspect that's what Richard Garvey is hoping for!

People voted Labour in with a significant majority; 'more the same please' we said. I saw no popular concern at the time by the general public that the economy was 'over-heating'.

[On the edge]

People voted Labour in with a significant majority; 'more the same please' we said. I saw no popular concern at the time by the general public that the economy was 'over-heating'.

I think you echo what the Queen said to the economists - didn't you see it coming? There was no popular or indeed professional concern that there was anything wrong with the economy. Everything going very well, the statistics actually supported that. Certainly before Blair took a dive, Gordon Brown was seen by many as 'Mr Prudence'.

However, we all thought that Bankers and their auditors had some degree of integrity, ruthless yes, but 'my word is my bond'. As this turned out to be untrue, our economy was built not on sand, but sh**.

So why blame Labour? Well, for me, and I know this isn't popular, I don't go along with 'having a good spend up' at any time, good or bad. Public money should be spent very very carefully. During the Brown years, we were simply throwing money at education, health and so on - but as it was unfocussed, no real benefit.