Thousands march on London 16/4/16

Bet you all heard about that one didn't you?

So on the day that thousands maybe hundreds of thousands marched on London. The BBCs top headlines for England were .......

Family concern over missing man in Peru

Park run petition tops 1,000 signatures

Football fan dies over 5-0 win

Two dead in house treated as murder

Largest weapons haul to be destroyed

Hundreds evacuated in hotel blaze

Etc Etc.....

Thousand marching on London calling for Cameron to resign ..... Nothing!

Its like it didn't happen.

Now why would that be?

Bernie Saunders closing speech

Go go Bernie ... With Saunders that side of the pond and Corbyn this side, we could end up with a much fairer world.

Is that so weird, so out of this world, that we could all consider helping each other. When someone has fallen down we reach down and give them a helping hand, what about that scares people?

That doesn't mean the wealthy have to give up their wealth, Inherited or worked for, just it'll be slightly less wealth, You wont even notice it. The super rich ... the 1% .... you wont even notice it. The corporations, the share holders you wont even notice it. But in your ivory towers you cannot even comprehend the difference it will make to the world.

Stop trying to control the world, the water, the people with your failed austerity, designed to keep people in their place.

The world is everyone's, the planet belongs to us all!

To Stay or Not to Stay That is the Question

Reality Check: The EU referendum : Key Points  Sometimes the BBC gets it right one of the best sources of facts regarding the key points ive found.

The UK's EU referendum: All you need to know   What are the main changes David Cameron has agreed?

Mr Cameron agreed a package of changes to the UK's membership of the EU after two days of intensive talks with other member states' leaders in Brussels in February. The agreement, which will take effect immediately if the UK votes to remain in the EU, includes changes to:

• Child benefit - Child benefit payments to migrant workers for children living overseas to be recalculated to reflect the cost of living in their home countries
• Migrant welfare payments - The UK can decide to limit in-work benefits for EU migrants during their first four years in the UK. This so-called "emergency brake" can be applied in the event of "exceptional" levels of migration, but must be released within seven years - without exception.
• Eurozone - Britain can keep the pound while being in Europe, and its business trade with the bloc, without fear of discrimination. Any British money spent on bailing out eurozone nations will be reimbursed.
• Protection for the City of London - Safeguards for Britain's large financial services industry to prevent eurozone regulations being imposed on it
• Sovereignty - There is an explicit commitment that the UK will not be part of an "ever closer union" with other EU member states. This will be incorporated in an EU treaty change.
• 'Red card' for national parliaments - It will be easier for governments to band together to block unwanted legislation. If 55% of national EU parliaments object to a piece of EU legislation it will be rethought.
• Competitiveness - The settlement calls on all EU institutions and member states to "make all efforts to fully implement and strengthen the internal market" and to take "concrete steps towards better regulation", including by cutting red tape.
• Some limits on free movement - Denying automatic free movement rights to nationals of a country outside the EU who marry an EU national, as part of measures to tackle "sham" marriages. There are also new powers to exclude people believed to be a security risk - even if they have no previous convictions.

UK and the EU: Better off out or in?  A referendum on whether Britain should remain in the European Union is to be held on Thursday, 23 June,

Reality Check: Has referendum weakened the pound?  Reality Check verdict: The referendum debate is likely to be one of the factors weakening the pound, but things like delayed interest rate rises are also responsible.

EU referendum: Moody's predicts 'small' UK economic hit from EU exit  The UK economy would be hit by leaving the EU, but the impact would be "small" and unlikely to lead to big job losses, according to credit agency Moody's.

IMF: EU exit could cause severe damage  The UK's exit from the European Union could cause "severe regional and global damage", the International Monetary Fund has warned in its latest outlook.

On Brexit, IMF is speaking Osborne’s language

Reality Check: Should you care about economic models?  As the EU referendum campaign continues you will be seeing lots of headlines about how much Brexit would cost or benefit the UK economy, or indeed how much staying in will cost the economy.

Now, some of these figures will be plucked out of the air, but some of them will be based on serious economic modelling - carried out by folk with brains the size of planets, most likely swimming around in think tanks.

Should you believe all of them, some of them or none of them and how do you know which to treasure and which to discard?

Reality Check: Would Brexit cost every household £850?  The UK leaving the European Union would knock £850 off the average UK household's income, according to a report from the Centre for Economic Performance (CEP) at the London School of Economics.

Reality Check: Did the UK lose its sovereignty in 1972?  Mayor of London Boris Johnson says: "You cannot express the sovereignty of Parliament and accept the 1972 European Communities Act."

Jeremy Corbyn: leaving EU would lead to ‘bonfire of rights’
Who are the Tory MPs on each side of the EU debate?
The Guardian view on parliament and Europe: a cold blast of reality in the hothouse
Britain would be 'killed' in trade talks if it left EU, says French minister
Brexit unlikely to cause significant fall in immigration, says report
IMF chief issues impassioned plea for Britain to stay in EU
Bank of England warns Brexit could do serious harm to UK economy

Never thought Id agree with Boris Johnson

Garys Thought: 

If there are spending limits imposed on political parties why is David Cameron spending £2m more than the limit and why isn't the money coming from the Conservative party. 

Why is the tax payer paying for it.?

Are other political party's allowed to use tax payers money for their campaigns?

Any money spent on these leaflets should be paid back to the tax payer out of Conservative party funds.


STOP CAMERON spending British taxpayers’ money on Pro-EU Referendum leaflets
Prime Minister David Cameron plans to spend British taxpayers’ money on a pro-EU document to be sent to every household in the United Kingdom in the run up to the EU referendum. We believe voters deserve a fair referendum - without taxpayer-funded biased interceptions by the Government.

What are the rules for campaigning?

The Electoral Commission is in charge of making sure it's a fair contest. It will select a designated lead campaign for both the "leave" and "remain" sides. The official campaigns will get access to a grant of up to £600,000, an overall spending limit of £7m, campaign broadcasts, free mailshots and free access to meeting rooms. Other groups are free to run their own campaigns but they will be limited to a spend of £700,000 if they register with the Electoral Commission and will have to report the source of donations. If they don't register with the Commission they will be limited to spending less than £10,000. The Electoral Commission haspublished a guide to the rules.

How much can the parties spend?

The spending limit for political parties depend on the percentage of the vote they received at the general election. The Conservatives have the highest spending limit - £7m - because they got the most votes at the general election. Labour is limited to £5.5m, UKIP £4m and the Lib Dems £3m. The SNP, Greens, Plaid Cymru and other parties that got less than 5% of votes cast in May will be limited to £700,000.

EU referendum: PM 'makes no apology' for £9m EU leaflets  David Cameron has defended a government pro-EU membership campaign, amid criticism that £9m of public money is being spent on "one-sided propaganda".

Reality Check: The government's referendum leaflet  The government is sending out a leaflet to 27 million homes explaining why it thinks people should vote to stay in the European Union.  Here is a selection of some of the claims made in the leaflet.

Sensing a Backlash - Cameron Ponders

Title deeds of the school and the land, transferred to a private company when the school becomes an academy.

http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/education/a1540850--1billion-of-title-deeds-for-schools-transferred-to-private-companies
1. The title deeds of the school and the land are transferred to a private company when the school becomes an academy

2. Michael Gove borrows £25,000 to pay the legal fees for the private companies to ensure the title deeds are transferred from the council (us taxpayers who paid to build the schools - to these private companies)

So are these points and indeed the article correct.........

Regarding point 1 above I find this comment on page 5 of the Governments document regarding land transfer advise produced by the Department for education
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/254887/land_transfer_advice_april_2013.pdf
"Our expectation is that all land and facilities used wholly or mainly for the purpose of the converting school will transfer and be made available to the academy in accordance with the mechanisms set out in this guidance. We expect local authorities, foundation trusts, and schools to take timely steps to ensure that such transfers are completed in time for conversion."

Regarding point 2 as yet haven't found anything regarding Gove borrowing £25,000 for legal fees but going on what I already found Im sure its there. So will update.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/academy-support-grant

However....

 "Taxpayer-funded academy chains have paid millions of pounds into the private businesses of directors, trustees and their relatives, documents obtained from freedom of information requests show."

"Grace Academy, which runs three schools in the Midlands and was set up by the Tory donor Lord Edmiston, has paid more than £1m either directly to or through companies owned or controlled by Edmiston, trustees' relatives and to members of the board of trustees."

• £533,789 to International Motors Limited, a company owned by Edmiston
• £4,253 to Subaru UK Ltd, where he is the ultimate controlling party. 
• £173,000 was also paid to the charities Grace Foundation and Christian Vision, both of which were set up by Edmiston
• £108,816 has been paid to a company controlled by the son-in-law of one trustee.
• Grace Academy also employs Gary Spicer, the brother of Lady Edmiston, as its executive director, on a salary of £30,000 plus pension.

"Leigh Academies Trust, run by Michael Gove's newly appointed schools commissioner, Frank Green, has paid £111,469 since 2010 to Shoreline, a private company founded by him, in consultancy fees."

And it goes on and on and on

http://schoolsweek.co.uk/lord-nash-announces-return-of-75000-grants-for-primaries-to-join-multi-academy-trusts/ http://www.theguardian.com/education/2014/jan/12/taxpayer-funded-academy-paying-millions-private-firms-schools-education-revealed-education
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/school_title_deeds_and_school_la
https://www.change.org/p/jeremy-corbyn-mp-who-has-the-title-deeds-for-schools-turned-into-academies
https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2012/08/499397.html
http://michaelrosenblog.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/gove-giver-schools-given-away.html
http://www.theguardian.com/education/2012/jun/12/michael-gove-curriculum-attacked-adviser
http://www.theguardian.com/education/2012/aug/13/michael-gove-maths-reforms-flawed-charity
http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/tory-donations-peerages-contracts.html
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/feb/06/ofsted-powers-inspect-academies-groups-david-laws
http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/michael-gove-ideological-vandalism.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Harris,_Baron_Harris_of_Peckham
http://www.theguardian.com/education/2012/aug/14/school-sports-fields-government-olympics?CMP=twt_fd
http://www.netmums.com/coffeehouse/general-coffeehouse-chat-514/news-current-affairs-12/807057-1billion-title-deeds-schools-transferred-private-companies.html
http://schoolsweek.co.uk/perry-beeches-academy-trust-paid-1-3m-to-private-company-run-by-superhead-liam-nolan/

Huw Thomas actually said "I am neither a simpleton or casual racist"... 10 years ago.

This is a good one that keeps reappearing due to it being a BNP created meme. Even though it was created over 10 years ago.

They are a bit like comets orbiting the earth they fly past and everyone comments on them and then they disappear to resurface years later, when a fresh group of people all comment on it without actually checking if there's any truth in it.

So Facts, for anyone that wants to actually check before blindly posting.

1. The comment was actually made in 2006 during the world cup.  That's 10 years ago.
2. It was made in relation to football supporters.

Lets have a look at what he actually said....

“The retail sector is also responsible for making the situation worse I think, and all across Britain not only in Wales. The World Cup, to a large extent, is just an opportunity for high street shops to ‘cash in’, using special offers and social pressure to create a fake group mentality – Nationalism Asda style!

“Having said this, I had the opportunity, when I had the opportunity to buy an England flag for half price in WH Smith, Oxford, to answer with the phrase: ‘Since I am neither a simpleton nor a casual racist I must decline your offer’. Poor ‘Stacey’ didn’t know where to look!”

So a Welshman commenting on English flags being sold at half Price, and probably a Welsh football supporter or maybe a Rugby supporter.

In the context of how it was originally made I don't see a problem with the comment. As banter between a rugby and football supporter it would be taken totally differently, but this has been twisted to the BNPs ends.  He has also since apologised for the comment made when a brash young student, but lets not tarry there as there are plenty of more important things that Cameron, Osbourne and crew should apologize for.

What I find funny is that in general, a lot of the BNP supporters (im using BNP here as there are too many offshoots from it to mention them all) would fall into the description that was memed by themselves.

Also Football, of which im no great supporter, far preferring Rugby, was long known for its racism and at one stage mindless violence which is where simpleton creeps in again.  HO HO  :-)

So the fact is Huw Thomas didn't actually say what was reproduced on the Meme. He did say "I am neither a simpleton or casual racist".

Taken in the context of the full quote it looks to me like it was more probably the banter of a Rugby supporter insulting the English football supporters, something the Scots, Irish, Welsh, French etc etc all like to do. 

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/chavs-sickening-england-flags-words-9018453

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/04/10/labour-candidate-huw-thomas-called-people-who-fly-england-flags-simpletons-and-casual-racists_n_7043634.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-wales-32249455

http://www.southwales-eveningpost.co.uk/Labour-candidate-told-people-vandalise-cars/story-26313656-detail/story.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3034764/Labour-parliamentary-candidate-called-people-displaying-England-flags-simpletons-racists-urged-throw-Tippex-cars-carrying-them.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11528421/Labour-candidate-People-who-fly-England-flags-are-simpletons-and-casual-racists.html

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2015/04/leftist-labour-candidate-people-who-fly-england-flags-are-simpletons-racists/

http://news.channel4.com/election2015/04/10/update-1731/

http://www.dailystormer.com/uk-labour-candidate-said-people-who-fly-english-flag-are-racists/

The REAL reason this country is in the state it is in !!!! ... The Tories.

Statement
The REAL reason this country is in the state it is in !!!! Look at the last column and you will see the Annual Net Migration.

And my answer is .......



An interesting question and much is made of immigration. 

Unfortunately we have the British Empire to blame for influxes from India one of the biggest groups. But hey I happen to like Indian food and Chinese and Italian and french and kebabs.

But moving forward to what has led to the biggest free movement of people from EU states. We have to look to the Tories and Edward Heath who took us into the EU in 1972 and in fact may have done it illegally. Heath didn't have a referendum because opinion polls at the time (1972) showed that the British people were hugely opposed (by a margin of two to one) against joining the Common Market. Instead, Heath merely signed the documents that took us into what became the European Union on the basis that Parliament alone had passed the European Communities Bill of 1972. After that all parties in power since then have had one hand tied behind their back on immigration due to EU regulation.

Personally Im not in favor of the EU. 

However as a country we are neither High or Low on immigration stats compared to other EU countries as we sit right in the middle of the table at 3.6% . Belgium is highest at 6.5% and also has the 2nd highest population density. Portugal is lowest at 1.8%. 

So Having researched it, the answer to your question is Ted Heath opened the door in 1972 by taking us into the EU (Possibly illegally) with out a referendum. Had that referendum happened we wouldn't be in the EU. Because no party would have been able to get away with taking us into the EU once a referendum had already happened.......

In fact Harold Wilson tried but dismally failed to retrospectively correct the decision by later holding a referendum, which interestingly may have also been illegal.

Q: What is the 2nd most spoken language spoken in the UK apart from English?

Interestingly, in the List of countries by net migration rate, the UK is 38th with 2.56 migrants per 1,000 people. Is this good or bad? that depends on your opinion, however its not as bad as the press paints it. Now if you were in Lebanon with 83.82 migrants per 1,000 you might be concerned.

You could look at UKs migration level and say that its really low, which it is, per 1000 population, however once you bring density into the equation its actually dare I say about right but starting to get too high. But we certainly need limitations from now on and wont get that within the EU. 

http://www.vernoncoleman.com/euillegally.html

http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/data-and-resources/charts/contribution-net-migration-average-annual-population-growth

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poles_in_the_United_Kingdom

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/british-politics/a-history-of-the-european-union-and-great-britain/

www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/sn06077.pdfhttp://www.theguardian.com/politics/2005/jul/18/uk.conservatives1
Monumental deceit: How our politicians have lied and lied about the true purpose of the European behemoth 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_European_Communities_membership_referendum,_1975
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_migration_rate
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_net_migration_rate

George Osborne wasn't so keen on balanced budget laws when Gordon Brown proposed one

George Osborne derided the idea of laws to force governments to balance their budgets when Gordon Brown proposed one in 2009, parliamentary records show.

Mr Osborne today however said he would bring forward a similar law that would compel him and future Chancellors to maintain a budget surplus when the economy is growing.

Gordon Brown had wanted to pass a Fiscal Responsibility Bill committing the Government to reducing the deficit in the next parliament.

The Government is committed to balancing day-to-day spending by eliminating the structural deficit by the end of 2017-18.

UPDATE 08/04/18
The chancellor (Phillip Hammond) has put no date on eliminating the deficit claiming now that its a long term project. 

Getting rid of deficits is disastrous for economies – as Bill Clinton proved in the 1990s. But don’t expect Philip Hammond to ditch this crazy obsession

LINKS
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/george-osborne-wasnt-so-keen-on-balanced-budget-laws-when-gordon-brown-proposed-one-10309624.html
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/nov/20/budget-increase-national-debt-pay-rise-britain-bill-clinton-philip-hammond

Was Gordon Brown a good Chancellor

After emerging from recession in 1992, Britain's economy enjoyed the longest period of expansion on record during which time growth outpaced most of Western Europe. In 2008, however, the global financial crisis hit the economy particularly hard, due to the importance of its financial sector.

Gordon Brown was actually not a bad Chancellor. "He is widely credited for having been a model of fiscal prudence which has allowed the UK to go from the laughing stock of Europe to one of the best performers in the OECD."  [More Here]


For all the bad-mouthing he suffered in this country during his ill-fated premiership, Gordon Brown was considered a hero by Presidents Obama and Sarkozy.

He was the driving force behind the recapitalisation of the Western banking system in 2008.

And, as chairman of the Group of 20 in April 2009, he masterminded the combined ‘stimulus’ – of tax cuts, spending increases and augmentation of the resources of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund – which arrested the dramatic decline in world trade that year.

That was the high point of international economic policy co-ordination in this relatively young century.
After the stimulus was agreed at the London G20 Summit, Brown tried to persuade Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor, to build on this by signing up to a global economic growth target.

She refused, and proceeded to be a champion of the programme of austerity which has been impoverishing so many citizens of southern Europe, and whose ramifications are even beginning to drag down Germany’s own economic performance.

Merkel was not the sole culprit. The European Commission, the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund were all in it together as preachers of austerity.

It is all very well for the ECB President Mario Draghi to promise to do ‘whatever it take’ to preserve the eurozone; but, unfortunately, it is a eurozone whose design is faulty, indeed pre-Keynesian, in the way it demands spending cuts and tax increases of economies that are already on their knees.

By not signing up to the eurozone, the UK has at least been able to adjust its exchange rate to the realities of its uncompetitive trading position. The Greeks, the Italians, the Spanish  and even the French cannot do that.  [Read more]

"Gordon is without doubt one of the political figures of our time, with a great mind and an ability to focus on really big challenges and understand the role of politics in meeting those challenges," Campbell said.
"At his best his was absolutely brilliant. Equally, at other times he could be nightmare to work with."
[More Here]


Brown will be remembered as the most successful peacetime Labour chancellor who also kept the UK out of the fatally flawed single European currency. As prime minister, he will be remembered for having rescued several major UK banks, but at vast cost to UK taxpayers. He is also likely to be assured a place in British political history as the last prime minister of the UK to have represented a Scottish constituency. [More Here]



Personally, I think as a Prime Minister he was lacking.





http://econ.economicshelp.org/2007/03/economic-record-of-gordon-brown.html

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2334743/Gordon-Brown-bad-mouthed-hes-economic-hero-others.html

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/gordon-browns-brilliance-stopped-tony-blair-sacking-new-labour-chancellor-says-alistair-1477624

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/4256501/Gordon-Brown-is-not-a-good-Chancellor.html

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/nov/29/gordon-brown-government-britain-labour

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/nov/29/gordon-brown-government-britain-labour

I was asked what Socialism was ...

 This is it

Begging email from the tories ~ Brilliant Reply by Billy J Wells

On the 22nd of January 2016 I received this email from the Tories. I was thinking of responding but decided it wasn't worth my time as they would take no notice anyway and just continue pumping out Lie after Lie after Lie. Then I came across someone who had responded and in a far better way than I ever could and not just because he's ex forces but because its accurate on all points that the Tories continue to lie about.

Do we really want to elect a political party based on whether it can lie better than the rest? Because if you voted Conservative that's what you voted for ... THE BEST LIER.

Just for clarity, I've posted the email sent to me, Billy will have received one in his name and replied to that.... so now that's cleared up.

The [LIE1] etc comments I have added, please check a video to see what was actually said, dont believe the Tory press which is 95% of newspapers. Everything they say is misquoted.

So Tory email at top and below is Mr Wells eloquent reply, Bravo Mr Wells who can be found here ... https://www.facebook.com/billyjwells



Dear Gary,
This week, we had yet another warning that the Labour Party are a threat to our national security.
Labour have said they would weaken Britain's defences by having a nuclear deterrent without any nuclear weapons [LIE1], they would negotiate with Daesh terrorists [LIE2], and they want to end the Falkland Islanders' right to self-determination [LIE3].
Gary, it may be Labour's defence policy to have no defence, but we must make sure that it will never be Britain's.
It’s clearer than ever that Labour are a threat to our national and economic security. And with their candidates standing for election up and down the country this May, we need your help to stop them.
Donate today to ensure that we can deliver national and economic security for the working people of Britain.
Best wishes,

Rt Hon Michael Fallon MP
Secretary of State for Defence


The below is by Mr Billy Wells and all credits to him for it.

Dear Mr Fallon,
It's the Conservative party who I fear not to protect us. Recently Cameron took us to Syria putting this country under threat of street massacres of the kind we have seen in France. You have cut our forces, subs without nuclear weapons is no more ridiculous than aircraft carriers without aircraft only Mr Corbyns plan is to have an alternative weapon on board those subs. May I ask what you have on board those aircraft carriers instead of aircraft?

Wasn't it Margaret Thatcher who refused to negotiate with terrorists in the form of the IRA? Wasn't it negotiations that brought about peace and stopped the killing? I wonder how many deaths could have been avoided had Mrs Thatcher done the right thing and I can't help wondering if Mr Corbyn has a point when talking of back door negotiations with Deash. Fighting fire with fire just creates a bigger fire and haven't we already done enough damage in the Middle East already? Has it made the world a safer place? Maybe just maybe it's time to try something else, maybe it's time we did what's right and stay out of wars.

As an ex soldier I see moral in the forces at an all time low, a smaller armed forces and a poorly equipped one at that. We are no longer a world power and I for one have had enough of our politicians voting to kill and putting our lives in danger. Bombing another country is not defending our shores which, is what our defence forces should be there for and no more.

It's you the conservatives I do not trust.

You take from people like me then have the audacity to ask me to donate money to your cause. How much are putting in out of your own pocket? I would sooner burn my money than support a heartless lying bunch of elitist privileged fools who have no idea what it is to struggle to feed, clothe and stay warm. Nothing this government has done has helped me, I had a nice little business but thanks to the lie of austerity that both you and I know is only about shrinking the state, I am now struggling to keep a roof over my head. You are destroying the NHS, selling assets owned by me and other tax payers at knock down prices, stealing from the poor and giving to the wealthy. How dare you ask me to support the conservatives.

I could go on but I have wasted enough time on your begging letter but just to make it clear. I AM A MEMBER OF THE LABOUR PARTY I DO NOT WANT EMAILS BEGGING ME FOR MONEY TO HELP YOUR CAUSE. STOP SENDING ME EMAILS.

Your sincerely B. Wells

Did the last Labour Govenment cause the financial crisis

NO THEY DID NOT, BANKS THE WORLD OVER CAUSED THE GLOBAL CRASH

Banks the world over were investing in riskier and riskier investments hoping to make bigger and bigger profits, because they felt they couldnt fail. That in a nut shell is the reason for the global crash. The crash of Lehman Brothers was a big factor in this again a greedy bank overstretching itself. [More here]

Its amazing how this one just seems to perpetuate despite being absolutely incorrect.

Probably caused by Labour's insistence on not dealing with the public belief, installed by the Tories, that the crash was caused by Labour. The fact is its just not true and they should have all have fought against the Tory propaganda.

But lets stick to facts and not what Labour should have done.

Lets not have rose tinted glasses on either because no government is going to be perfect and Labour wern't, but they were much, much better than they have been painted by the Tories and the economy the Tories were handed in 2010 was already in recovery. Unfortunately the austerity policies stopped the recovery in its tracks and instead we had the longest period of stagnation ever. [More here]

1. On the eve of the crash, U.K. government debt was 28 percent of gross domestic product, compared with 48 percent in the U.S. and an average of 43 percent in the euro area.
2. One of the biggest things that Brown did was kept us out of the Euro that shielded the UK when the crash came in 2008. [More Here]
3. At the start of 2007, there were few economists expressing concern at government borrowing running at 36% of GDP. By post-war standards, UK government debt was low and the government appeared to be meeting its own reasonable fiscal targets. [More Here]
4. Given the period of strong economic growth, it is unsurprising that Labour wished to increase spending on health care and education. If the financial crisis hadn’t materialised, we may have looked back on the great moderation with kinder eyes. [More Here] 
5. By 2007 Labour had reduced public sector borrowing slightly below the level it inherited from the  Conservatives. And  more  of that  borrowing  was  being  used  to  finance  investment rather than the day to day running costs of the public sector. Labour had also reduced public sector debt below the level it had inherited.  [Source Institute for Fiscal Studies]
6. Brown handed over the power to set interest rates to the Bank of England. This contributed hugely to economic stability. [More Here]
7. In 1997 national debt was £352bil in 2010 it was £902bil = £550bill so over 15 years Labour increased debt by £550 billion and most of that debt was caused by the the subprime crash.
8. In 2010 national debt was £902bil in 2015 its £1,637bil = £735bill so far in 5 years the Tories have increased debt by £735 billion, and there is no world crash happening and no banks to bail out that was all done under Labour.

THE Letter how could we not mention the letter.

Much was made over the letter or rather note left by Liam Byrne for the incoming Chief Secretary which turned out to be Liberal Democrat David Laws. The Joke note similar to one left by outgoing Tory chancellor Reggie Maudling in 1968 read. [More Here]

“Dear Chief Secretary, I’m afraid that there is no money. Kind regards and good luck! Liam.”

The note was disclosed at a press conference with one word changed by Osbourne and Laws that made all the difference. They added 'left' ... I’m afraid that there is no money left.

In 1964, outgoing Tory chancellor Reggie Maudling left a note for his Labour successor, Jim Callaghan:

“Good luck, old cock. Sorry to leave it in such a mess.”

Callaghan reportedly thought he was talking about the state of his office at first, before he looked at the books. [More Here]

The note was nothing more than a Joke but made into oh so much more by Laws and Osbourne who claimed they had no idea of the attention it would receive. Sorry, I'm not falling for that one, the pair of you knew exactly what you were doing from changing the word, to not releasing the actual letter. Everyone could have seen much earlier what was actually written if the letter was released sooner but that few days made all the difference.

CONCLUSION

With hindsight, Labour prior to 2007 could have reduced spending and paid down some of the debt. At the time things were going well and an election was coming up. Would the Tories have done any different? Any goverment likes to get some good feel out there towards the end of their term. Noone was complaining about investment in Schools and Hospitals and the Finacial crash would have required someone with a crystal ball to foresee. Brown was a long way from perfect but the two main things he did keeping us out of the Euro and giving the Bank of England control of setting interest rates, have done unmeasurable good for the UK economy.

Its also noteable that the Conservatives backed all of Labours spending plans in the commons prior to 2008. Why didnt they oppose them if they were that bad?

Did Labour cause the Finacial crisis, NO. 

In 2007 when Lehman Brothers went bust Labour was left with some hard decisions like bailing out Northern Rock and RBS. Had Brown not kept us out or the Euro things would have been much worse.

The question people should be asking is why, with all the Conservative austerity, has the debt risen by more than 70% to over £1.6 trillion?

Why?  Where is the money going? 

Why with the debt increasing did Osbourne in 2014 give £93billion away in tax concessions to big companies? [More here]

Sources

Government debt under labour 1997-2010
 
Jeremy Corbyn is right to blame the banks, not Labour, for the financial crisis

Labour overspending did not trigger financial crash, says senior civil servant

Government borrowing, debt and debt interest: statistics

A way forward for the centre left on deficits

United Kingdom national debt

United Kingdom Government Debt to GDP

Gordon Brown's U.K. Economic Record: A Reassessment

The origins of the financial crisis

Subprime Mortgage

Bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers

Case Study: The Collapse of Lehman Brothers

The Death Of Lehman Brothers: What Went Wrong, Who Paid The Price And Who Remained Unscathed Through The Eyes Of Former Vice-President

How One Hastily Scrawled Note Came To Haunt Labour In The Tightest Election In A Generation

Treasury chief's note to successor: There's no money

Labour Anger Over Ed Miliband's BBC Question Time Interrogator, Catherine Shuttleworth

Financial Crisis & Recessions

Hopes for UK economy

The myth of record debt

The £93bn handshake: businesses pocket huge subsidies and tax breaks

How big is the problem?

What’s the best way to reduce the deficit?

So, how was it for you, Gordon?

David Cameron and the national debt monster in three charts