Conservatives

[Alexia]

Portillo isn't (publicly) gay. He's been married since 1982.

[Chie]

They may have words on their website, but there is no details, nothing there is fixed in place and their plans constantly change. Most of what they say is aspirational clap-trap, compared to Labour who may not be the most shining of parties, but they have the figures, they took the right decisions on the economy, and have been hit with a worldwide tsunami or events, which have derailed the good Tony Blair had done for the country (ignoring Iraq which is a marmite of a subject)

You must have missed their draft manifesto then, it's got graphs and everything.

Health
Education
Ecomomy
Government Transparency Part 1
Government Transparency Part 2

All of the parties' plans have been constantly changing. We'll have to wait for the full manifestos.

It is the wealthy in the city which have caused the huge deficit to be lumped on the public, so all our hard earned savings were not lost in collapsed banks. And then the Tory's who would have allowed that to happen, then come and tell the public we need public services cut, with their wealthy banker friends, saying "we're all in it together", this is why many see them as obscene, take great offence, and fear an incoming Tory government - As well as those who suffered during the 80's and early 90's with them.

Oh? But I thought the global financial crisis was a global problem that was started in the US by American bankers.

It's outrageous for you to say the Tories would have allowed British banks (and therefore their wealthy banker friends to go bankrupt, haven't thought this through have you) to collapse. Whoever was in government at the time would have had to do exactly the same thing Labour did, begrudgingly or otherwise.

So we should let big business do what they want as long as they make money. This is the heart of difference between left and right. I believe there is such a thing as obscene amounts of profit.

You have to remember that profit is a percentage of a company's revenue that reflects the number of people it employs, the amount of tax it pays, and the benefits it offers to society as a service.

And I think if a company is to be allowed to make lots of money (without exploiting people thanks to Labour's minimum wage) they should also legally be made to agree to plowing some of that money back into the country, to help those who need it.

Martin, people are still exploited by British companies despite the minimum wage. They pay their employees far less than the poorest British people were payed before the introduction of our minimum wage. Like all those thousands of call centre and IT jobs that have been farmed out to India, and all the manufacturing jobs that have gone to the Far East. But as long as it's no longer happening in the UK, I guess that makes it alright?

The Tories would call this responsibility, but would never demand it of business. To the Tories, the individual is always responsible, and big business is always right.

To put a finer point on it, the individual is always responsible for themselves and each other. That is the true Tory ethos.

When it comes to the Economic policies, I find myself leaning towards the LibDems.

Because most of what the Lib Dems say isn't "aspirational clap-trap" at all!

There is a sort of 'brain drain' (if you count greedy bankers and execs as brains), but lets not forget that the Tories destroyed the UK's manufacturing industries, because they didn't make HUGE profits.

No, they made a huge loss, or weren't far off from beginning to make a huge loss due to lack of efficient modernisation and cheaper foreign competition.

Look to Royal Mail and BA for modern day comparisons.

They did nothing to help move people into developing new skills, leaving generations of underskilled people unemployable.

What sort of new skills would you have suggested they develop?

Labour encouraged people to educate themselves and university has become a real possibility for many younger people (although the state of education is not perfect).

Those would be the universities that Labour would like 50% of young people to go to. Just how many graduate sector jobs are there, Martin?

The banking, and financial service sector was what the Tories encouraged, and it is this sector which have plunged us all in the shit. And now what work is there for those who do not have the academic abilities to get through school, let alone college or university? The very few manufacturing or unskilled jobs are taken up by migrant workers, because employers can exploit them easier, and their respective countries are used to manufacturing roles.

The minimum wage, which has risen above inflation, has steadily forced a lot of companies to move manufacturing abroad where wages and business taxes are cheaper. So much so, that manufacturing now makes up 12% of our economy, compared to 20% in 1996. You can't realistically complain about the lack of manufacturing work whilst praising the minimum wage.

I remember all 5 of us having to live in a 1 bedroom flat, on a council estate towerblock, with druggies and prostitutes all around. My block was one of 5 towers, the only one still standing, due for demolition in a few months time. Now replaced by beautiful new build flats and houses, with a revitalised park.

New build flats and houses are just as cramped, cheap and shoddy as the ones that went before them. The facade is just prettier, that's all.

I have seen areas like Kings Cross improve. The hospital I was born in, The Whittington, whilst may be seeing an A&E closure, which is being fought against by our Labour MP, and the other candidates staying, despite this new threat. The Whittington has seen vast design improvements. I could go on...

Thanks to private finance initiatives.

As for the opinions of Chris Grayling... The issue is partly he is not on message with party policy, imagine what his GLBT constituents will now think. The MP is supposed to not only represent the majority of views from his region, but also stand up for those that are oppressed or suffering, if not for his party, than to just be a fucking decent human being! This also speaks to a problem for the Tories. Why has he not been thrown out of the party, unless David Cameron doesn't have a problem with these views?! If that is the case, why is it Tory policy, if the leader doesn't agree with it? It couldn't be they Tories are saying one thing to one group of people to gain votes, but really believe something different (sarcasm meter activated in 5, 4, 3, 2, 1)...

Why should David Cameron throw someone out of the party for expressing a personal opinion, moreover in private? Wouldn't that be rather fascistic and Stasi-like?

I don't agree with Chris Grayling, but neither can I abide this kind of hypocrisy. I've learned that tolerance works both ways and we must tolerate the right of people to vocalise their opinions and feelings whatever they may be, especially in private.

Words and thoughts are nothing compared to actions. When Grayling starts hurling homophobic abuse at us (or doing it behind our backs) or beating gay people up in the street, that's the time to worry and do something about it.

Look how right wing America became under George Bush, following a Democratic president. And think how would Bill Clinton or Obama, have reacted to 9/11 and how that would have affected the UK and the rest of the World...

'Became'? America was already very right wing in comparison to the UK. The Democrats aren't ones to shy away from war either.

[nidave]

This is a interesting website http://mygayvote.co.uk/
It shows the amount of support the various parties gave the LGB community.

Click on the # for details of each vote.

[Chie]

So David Cameron's just announced a voluntary two-month course of non-military National Citizens Service for young people who crave discipline, adventure and structure in their lives (my words), with on-stage endorsement from Michael Caine. Brilliant.

[Gavin Scott]

So David Cameron's just announced a voluntary two-month course of non-military National Citizens Service for young people who crave discipline, adventure and structure in their lives (my words), with on-stage endorsement from Michael Caine. Brilliant.

Will you sign up?

[Chie]

Too old. It's for 16-year-olds only, for the time being at least.

[Gavin Scott]

Oh god.

I just watched the clip of this on the Beeb, and Sir Michael referred to the tories as "this government" several times.

Out of touch much?

[marksi]

So David Cameron's just announced a voluntary two-month course of non-military National Citizens Service for young people who crave discipline, adventure and structure in their lives (my words), with on-stage endorsement from Michael Caine. Brilliant.

Indeed, brilliant. He's invented the Duke of Edinburgh's Award Scheme.

[Gavin Scott]

I do like the comment on the Robin Hood Tax facebook page about this scheme:

So now the Tories answer to "Broken Britain" is a Volunteer National Service! Don't they get it? The vast majority of 16-18 year olds are either in full time education or employment, and youth organisations of every colour are well subscribed.

They are targeting the "ASBO Generation", a tiny minority of unfortunate socially disadvantaged youth; the last demographic who will be inclined to sign up to a high vis, orange dungaree wearing band of roadsweepers, gardeners and fence painters.

This is a mis-guided and poor attempt at misleading the public into believing that the Tories "care" about our working class youth. These schemes are already in place, community groups working at the coal face dealing with gang and drug culture and youth unemployment.

This is window dressing.

Fatuous.

[Chie]

So now the Tories answer to "Broken Britain" is a Volunteer National Service! Don't they get it? The vast majority of 16-18 year olds are either in full time education or employment, and youth organisations of every colour are well subscribed.

Except all of that's totally irrelevant, because the National Citizens Service course would only take place during the 'school holidays' between leaving school and beginning further eduction / resits.

They are targeting the "ASBO Generation", a tiny minority of unfortunate socially disadvantaged youth; the last demographic who will be inclined to sign up to a high vis, orange dungaree wearing band of roadsweepers, gardeners and fence painters.

Where does the person who wrote that live? I bet it's the south east.

To refer to the so-called "ASBO Generation" as a tiny minority is extremely offensive. I'd like better statistics, but as of 2008, 16.6% of 18-year-olds were not in employment, education or training. It would be interesting to see how the level differs on a regional basis.

This is a mis-guided and poor attempt at misleading the public into believing that the Tories "care" about our working class youth. These schemes are already in place, community groups working at the coal face dealing with gang and drug culture and youth unemployment.

I can say from first-hand experience that the youth service is staffed by over-qualified pushovers who preoccupy themselves with how well their centre is performing in the internal league tables in the hope of getting promoted to a job in which they no longer have to work at the 'coal face'.

[martindtanderson]

You must have missed their draft manifesto then, it's got graphs and everything.

Health
Education
Ecomomy
Government Transparency Part 1
Government Transparency Part 2

All of the parties' plans have been constantly changing. We'll have to wait for the full manifestos.

The Tories manifestos you linked to, are a set of aspirations without any detail on how they would do it.

"We will safeguard Britain’s credit rating with a credible plan to eliminate a large part of the
structural deficit over a Parliament."
Where is the credible plan?

Oh? But I thought the global financial crisis was a global problem that was started in the US by American bankers.

It's outrageous for you to say the Tories would have allowed British banks (and therefore their wealthy banker friends to go bankrupt, haven't thought this through have you) to collapse. Whoever was in government at the time would have had to do exactly the same thing Labour did, begrudgingly or otherwise.

Are you stupid enough to believe that British Banks operate solely in the UK, with america, and the American Banks not involved?

And it is not outrageous to suggest that. The Tories voted against a financial stimulus, they voted against nationalising northern rock, and they voted against the rise in deficit to keep the banks open and kept the economy going. This is a matter of fact...

You have to remember that profit is a percentage of a company's revenue that reflects the number of people it employs, the amount of tax it pays, and the benefits it offers to society as a service.

So only Big companies can offer services to communities, and profit is essential to good society????

Martin, people are still exploited by British companies despite the minimum wage. They pay their employees far less than the poorest British people were payed before the introduction of our minimum wage. Like all those thousands of call centre and IT jobs that have been farmed out to India, and all the manufacturing jobs that have gone to the Far East. But as long as it's no longer happening in the UK, I guess that makes it alright?

What has the UK government got to do with jobs in India? And while we are at it, if it wasn't for Thatcherism, and the thirst for greed and profit, companies wouldn't need to hire cheap labour abroad in order to "Maximise Profit". The UK Government's duty is to its citizens, and the Minimum Wage (which the Tories voted AGAINST) has been one of the best ways to ensure employers don't exploit UK workers (as much as workers were exploited under Thatcher and other Tory administrations).

Because most of what the Lib Dems say isn't "aspirational clap-trap" at all!

Of all the parties, the Lib Dems have offered more detail on their plans at this early stage, but also because I believe that big companies and the rich, have a human, and financial duty to help the poorer people they employ, and to help those who can't help themselves.

No, they made a huge loss, or weren't far off from beginning to make a huge loss due to lack of efficient modernisation and cheaper foreign competition.

Look to Royal Mail and BA for modern day comparisons.

So if the company isn't making a profit, it is the duty of government to shut them down?!?! Even though they employed tens of thousands of people, and whole towns were supported and relied on these ports, and quarries, and mines, and factories. And let us look at Royal Mail and BA...

BA has a CEO who is determined to destroy the unions, just like the Tories wish to, and they would sacrifice staff and possibly safety in order to "maximize profits", when they have some of the more expensive ticket prices, and have in the past been involved in price fixing. Is this a shining example of good business?!

And the Royal Mail, who are forcing their workers to do more and more, and to carry heavier and heavier loads for the same pay, regardless of what the workers think. Adam Crozier was a tyrant, and a typical example of a Tory leaning boss.

What sort of new skills would you have suggested they develop?

Anything is better than nothing. Where were the phased reductions, or selling off of these industries, as well as the training, and support for the ex workers. Why did the Government not try to develop new industries for these people to move to? Because the Tories didn't care about these people, and saw this in only cold financial statistics, and that is something they will never be forgiven for. It is in these times where people are crying out for industrial jobs in this country, that we now miss them. The Tories were so short sighted!

Those would be the universities that Labour would like 50% of young people to go to. Just how many graduate sector jobs are there, Martin?

Thanks to the Tories destroying manual labour jobs in this country, many more jobs require a degree as a minimum expectation.

The minimum wage, which has risen above inflation, has steadily forced a lot of companies to move manufacturing abroad where wages and business taxes are cheaper. So much so, that manufacturing now makes up 12% of our economy, compared to 20% in 1996. You can't realistically complain about the lack of manufacturing work whilst praising the minimum wage.

Companies don't have to move workers abroad. They want to get more for their money, and this is not good for the country. I can praise the minimum wage, and also wish to see more manufacturing in this country. It is not right to make people work for obscene pay! If you wern't so supportive of the Tories, you may be a decent enough human being to actually see beyond profit, especially if it is at the expense of society, the country, and the lives of human beings!

New build flats and houses are just as cramped, cheap and shoddy as the ones that went before them. The facade is just prettier, that's all.

The difference is not just the buildings, but the areas around them. Tower block estates were a way for the Tories to house poor people efficiently. Yes it is a big problem not enough new homes are for families, and I wont defend the government for this. But at least the areas around these new estates, are designed for families and humans, with Doctors Surgeries, shops, community centres, sure start centres based on these estates.

Thanks to private finance initiatives.

Not all new NHS projects are private finance initiatives, and at least if they are going to use private money, they use it for public service initiatives, and not for private profit. Think back to the Tory's man in Europe, who on the record said the NHS has been a 60 year mistake! If anyone thinks that, they are a disgrace, and he was widely criticised, but I can assure you no Labour or LibDem member would even think that, let alone vocalise it!!!!!!

Why should David Cameron throw someone out of the party for expressing a personal opinion, moreover in private? Wouldn't that be rather fascistic and Stasi-like?

I don't agree with Chris Grayling, but neither can I abide this kind of hypocrisy. I've learned that tolerance works both ways and we must tolerate the right of people to vocalise their opinions and feelings whatever they may be, especially in private.

Words and thoughts are nothing compared to actions. When Grayling starts hurling homophobic abuse at us (or doing it behind our backs) or beating gay people up in the street, that's the time to worry and do something about it.

Grayling expressed his odious opinion in a public meeting, it just happened to be recorded, and exposed. The fact that he expressed these views, is at odds with his possible future role as Home Secretary. It would be bad even if he wasn't on the Shadow front bench, but its worse because he could one day be in the position of having to protect these people. If you were gay, could you trust people who hold these views to protect you. I suppose you think its ok for Police to keep their job if they made racist or other bigoted comments? Personal opinions show a state of mind for these politicians, and this state of mind will become evident in the decisions they make, and the policies they propose.

'Became'? America was already very right wing in comparison to the UK. The Democrats aren't ones to shy away from war either.

I can tell you that Bill Clinton would not have destroyed the reputation of the US, and the 8 years of George Bush has done much damage to the state of the world, let alone his domestic and UK politics.