Tuesday, December 07, 2010

Student loans - Its simples really

The Liberal Democrats have had a lot of flack just recently over student loans, according to tonight's news Lib Dem ministers will vote in favour of the governments proposals.

The proposition put forward by students, led I suspect by militant Labour supporters, that Liberals have cheated on a promise, to me seems somewhat flawed since Nick Clegg's party did not win a majority in Parliament, so therefore has never had the opportunity to renege, as they have not been in the position to go with manifesto policy.

This whole attack, is almost as sensible as suggesting that students have let themselves down by not ensuring a majority Liberal Democrat government, who would have abolished student loans.

What is clear is that Labour introduced student loans, backed by its many Scottish MP's, who have  not seen this nonsense north of the boarder.

And in any case who screwed up the economy Labours rag back of self serving and selfish MP's, some of whom spent much of the last Parliament defrauding the taxpayer, at the cost of today's students.

I'm sure Labours leading lights who involved this country, in what many regard as an illegal war with Iraq, are really bothered about student's plight and are in no way just using students as a convenient purpose as they did with the Iraqi people.


  1. It wasn't quite that pledge though, was it? It was actually "We will vote against an increase in fees if elected as MPs". That's rather a different pledge - it's a personal one. It has nothing to do with the makeup of the government, and who has a majority. It has a lot to do with why someone would vote for an MP in the first place though.

  2. Still no war crimes unlike your lot 1004

  3. I do telephone work for the Lib Dems and although there has been some flack regarding the issue it hasn't been as much as people say.

    Don't forget that a lot of people who don't or haven't been to uni resent paying for the `middle classes` who can't unless there's a good reason to.

    What about their voices - they don't have a union.

    As it happens a lot of students didn't come out to vote at the last election. It was the over 25s say who voted in higher numbers in percentage terms so the real impact on the Lib Dems is less than people make out.

  4. A complete waste of time voting for any of them when they are really all the same party. It wouldnt have made a blind bit of difference if the LIB DEMS had a majority vote the result would be exactly them same , it is all contrived.


  5. All Liberal Democrat government ministers will vote to raise the cap on university tuition fees in England, party leader Nick Clegg has said.
    There had been speculation that some might abstain from a vote over the controversial policy, which has prompted weeks of student protests.
    But Deputy PM Mr Clegg said ministers were "as one on this" and would vote "as a team" on Thursday.


    the youth sold down the river yet again !

  6. If you're not acting as the local mouthpiece for the Liberal Democrats - which you have condemned Mark Nottingham for claiming - why post this apologist item?

    Your allegation that the students are being led or cajoled by Labour in some way is a disgusting and unfounded smear, intended to do no more than deflect attention from the mire in which your Party is now immersed.

    You should be ashamed of yourself.

    Your Liberal Democrat Party has got itself into an unfounded, unprincipled mess on this issue. The Party deceived the electorate. It has reneged on its pledges and broken its promises. The only (lame) excuse you and other apologists can offer is "we've had to compromise in coalition". It doesn't wash.

    What also doesn't wash is your constant mention of Labour in every post. They are not in power. Your Party is. Move on. You are becoming a laughing stock.

  7. Nick "Smegg" Clegg is letting Davey Boy Cameron Shaft him everynight. There both scum of the highest order. I dont get where you blame the economic situation on Labour, the situation would have happened with anyone in charge.

    Iraq war has never been "ILLEGAL" i believe that we had a leader to do what he though was right for the country at the time no shafting the everyday people just what he thought was right for GREAT BRITTAIN.

    As for the spongers wasnt it your Lot (Torys because them and the libs dems are now both the same) that intoridced the dissability benefits so that to get the unemploymrnt figures down.

    The Torys will manipulate the figures ( such as the ones that say the economy is growing) another reccession is on its way.

    As for the Students - Hey Ho, you voted for these wishy washy spineless wankers everyone knew that they were just desperate to get some form of power there like a power hungry school prefect all flash badge but actualy no power just there to stop people running in the coridoors and agree with the older big boys because there scared.

  8. There is simply no grasp of economic realities in this country if this collection of comments is to be considered in anyway representative of public opinion.

    10:37 is the nearest, not in the statement that they are all the same, but by implication that it would not have made much difference who was elected. The country is in the mire financially and any government would have had to take drastic action on costs.

    Let us also not forget that it was the Labour party who first introduced tuition fees, Labour who commissioned the report on university funding, which recommends no cap on how much they can charge, and Labour now who is trying to pretend, having only a blank piece of paper for policy, that they would have done something different.

    As to the Iraq war, whether it was legal or not is now irrelevant. The big question is over its necessity and I do not think it is much consolation to those who lost so much that Blair and his cabinet thought it was. They did not even wait for the UN resolution which was quite unforgiveable.

    As to accusing Tony of being a mouthpiece for the Liberal Democrats, as labelled by Mark Nottingham, well why not. Surely other bloggers are mouthpieces for Labour. Leastways Mark was until he threw his toys out of the pram after being deselected!

    Actually Tony is his own man in my view. A Liberal Democrat but with definite and not always party line towing views of his own. You keep blogging your way, Tony, for others are collapsing all around you.

  9. Whoo hoo hoo! Fruity old bluenote blowing smoke out of his backside as usual. Whoo hoo hoo!

  10. Whatever turns you on, old fruit, for I am starting to feel a certain seasonal benevolence to my fellow man.

    You have a nice day and keep wrapped up warm. Don't want you going out there in the cold at your age, 10:32, and you really need to do something about that whoohooing cough of yours.

  11. Bluenote, my (06.39) point was not whether the Labour Party have a right to attack on tuition fees - I never mentioned them - but about the deception dealt by the Liberal Democrats.

    It may suit Mr Flaig, and now you, to try to deflect attention from the Coalition by introducing the "Labour card" but the issue here has nowt to do with them.

    And surely even with your blue-biased eyes (just as mine are biased towards the Left) you cannot condone the wild suggestion that Labour are somehow behind the student protests. You have condemned those who have made repeated claims here about freemasons, so be consistent and condemn THIS claim - even though you might like to read it.

  12. In my view the blogger who consistently set out economic reality was Simon Moores.

    I do not agree that the illegality of the Iraq war is now irrelevant.

    Labour's use of the Attorney General (legality advice and public interest custodianship) powers and use of Home Secretary and Justice Minister powers deserve a thorough scrutiny.

    Jack Straw took a couple of decisions which do have Iraq war implications but yet are local issues too.

    (1) He over ruled tory chair of Kent Police Authority (Sir John Grugeon) who in 1997 called for inquiry into the Deal Barracks security history and bombing by IRA 1989.

    (2) As Justice minister he repealed the Unlawful Drilling Act 1819 whilst the KPA call (and other complaints) for inquiry into paramilitary training crimes (contrary to the act) were still open and current.

    Security inquiry (or an Article 2 Inquest into the killing of 11 Royal Marines at Deal 1989) would raise questions about the use of Deal Barracks by non-armed forces personnel to create two organisations The International Law Enforcement Training Agency and the International Bodyguards Assn

    These groups (I rely on a reply to my MP from Sec of State Defence) had no Crown authority. IE Any armed live fire training they conducted was an offence against the act carrying seven years prison for instructors and three years for trainees.

    If we rely on the CV attributed to James Shortt (the founder of IBA and ILETA) then we see that amongst his armed forces contacts circa 1982 Pirbright was a certain Tim Spicer.

    Tim Spicer,Jack Straw and an inconvenient act making mercenary training unlawful in UK swept aside by Straw

    So Shortt was an associate of Tim Spicer whose firm Aegis is now the biggest private army in the world providing security contractors in Iraq ?

    But Shortt was also a UK contact of Dr Wouter Basson who traded with Margate Thor Chemicals re the infanmous nuclear chemical red mercury (later a pillar of the false WMD case made for invading Iraq)

    Thor red mercury murder

    So I would think that Jack Straw has his reasons and in addition to the high flying civil servant at MOD who instituted Maggie Thatcher's cost cuts re barracks security in the 80s. Mrs Jack Straw. Reliance Security got a contract and eleven Royal Marines got dead. But now an Article 2 inquest would be interesting.

    Not least locally Bluenote because Thanet Council would be required to give evidence including one Cllr Bill Hayton.

    Now what did he tell the High Court in 1998 re Cllr George Richard MAISON (arrested under Unlawful Drilling Act 1819 in 1987) Did HAYTON tell the Court there was no process of inquiry or call for further inquiry re offences under the act ?

    Also at such an Article 2 inquest ex Chief Supt Rogers. Re UNlawful Drilling Act 1819 and Kent Adventure Training Corps instructors MAISON and another employed 89 as a civvi guard at Deal Barracks ? Did the Supt lie for two years to KCC Youth group affiliation inquiries ?

    If so then on the face of it a Supt was lying to KCC in the same matter as a member of the police authority lied on oath to High Court about.

    Letting corrupt tory cllrs and kent plod off the hook seems to very much have suited new labour eh ?

    What makes me laugh is that the Thanet tories seem to think "Oh it is just a routine fib can't be important". Well if ever an Article 2 Inquest or a proper inquiry into the WMD case is held we would have a reckoning.

    But don't hold your breath. Thanet tories quite happily enjoy the protective umbrella of new Labour's coverups.

  13. Anon 1:04PM

    Whether Labour are behind the student demonstrations or not is irrelevant. The fact remains that senior Labour politicians are not speaking out against the excesses of this protest. It is also beyond doubt that certain extreme elements are hijacking the demonstrations for their own anarchistic agenda. That should be condemned by all responsible persons.

    As to trying to deflect attention from the Coalition, nothing could be further from the truth. I happen to believe that there is no real alternative now but to raise tuition fees and it is not without significence that no other party has offered a credible alternative.

    Ed Miliband may have muttered about a graduate tax but, his Shadow Chancellor, Alan Johnson, does not consider such workable. Hardly an alternative then!

  14. Retired, you obviously believe in your mission to reveal all about corruption in high places but, I do think that your practice of naming councillors with unproven allegations of perjury is unworthy. From time to time you have made potentially libellous comments about one councillor in particular and even in the week that his wife died. At that point in my view you lost all vestige of human decency, destroying your own credibility in the process.

    Please do not address your future postings to me for I really don't want to know.

  15. Bluenote may not want to know about corruption Retired, but many of us do, keep on posting.

    Isnt it strange that they dont want to take you to court for libel, could it be that all the secrets would be revealed in open court for the world to see.

  16. The real fact is that I as a tax payer am expected to pay for these 'Rubbish' people to go through university and get a better job!!! I resent every penny I get taxed for supporting those who want to line their own pocket with a better job!

  17. Or just maybe, 4:11, they cannot be bothered with the rantings of an old fool. If there was really any substance in what he says do you not think collars would have been felt by now.

  18. If I understand the proposed rules correctly a graduate will have to pay back annually 9% of the difference between £21,000 and their annual salary. So if they can find a job on £30,000 they will pay back £810 in the first year an interest will accrue at 4%.
    With fees expected to be between £6 to £9 thousand p.a, allowing for keep, a typical loan will reach £30,000.
    That could take longer than a morgtage to pay back and what happens to the many women who take a career break and those students that fail to graduate and never earn the bigger salaries?

    Many families are reluctant now to let they children get into debt and do what they can to help but this will only become an option for the rich or those with rich grandparents.

    I know that those receiving free school meal may get their fees paid for two years but it is estimated that there will be less than 20,000 out of 500,000 students. But in any event these children could become higher earners and this subsidy can be seen to be unfair and maybe just a political sop.

    So the way I see it is that the number of students will fall with the knock on effect of closing universities and to the detriment of the countries workforce.
    But thats the price we have to pay unless funding can be found from high spending areas like defence.

  19. anon 5.01

    I have just read the rantings as you call them and they dont look like they are written by a fool but someone who would like to see justice. Wouldnt all decent people like to see this . The problem we have is that far too much is being kept hidden but not for much longer I suspect, hopefully the chickens will be brought home to roost, as they say !

  20. Anon 6:12 What you really mean is that you have read through your own rantings and then, as you do so often, pretend you are someone else in support of them. Trouble is you repeat terminology that you have used previously in your other guise.

    You ain't half as smart as you think or the rest of us are not so stupid.

  21. Anon 6:07

    In addition to students from lower income familes getting fees paid for two years, those from families earning less than £25,000 pa get a maintenance grant of £3,250. Those qualifying for this grant then normally receive a bursary on top from the university. Even students from families with income up to £42,000 pa can get some help towards maintenance.

    Fess only become repayable when earnings reach £21,000 after graduating. Students who do not complete their courses pay back nothing and for those, you mentioned looking after children, leaving enployment for a time, pay nothing whilst they are off work. Theere is also a cut off point where outstanding debt for non-earners is written off.

    You also mention Defence as an area of higher spending yet there are far higher demands on the coffers like Health and Benefits. Do you not consider the defence of our nation of any importance. Seems to me it is still a dangerous world out there.

  22. Tony can confirm that there are different people posting just because a doubting thomas's out there does not like it when people can see the truth.Tough !

    Good luck to Retired he sounds like he uses common sense instead of common purpose.

  23. Actually he can't. All it takes to post as several different contributors is access to more than one computer and terminal. Currently I have access to four and all with different email addresses.

    Nice try but your colours are firmly nailed to the flag yet again 7:43PM.

  24. I've had a long day but the next posting is back on same topic for which I don't apologise

  25. Yes there are a large number of posters from different poster however I have no way of knowing unless I give up work and invest in hours of analysis and alsorts of snooping software but a cursory glance does confirm

  26. Not since our defense was given to France and yes it is a dangerous world out there especially for children in the UK.

  27. Bluenote, I have respected you and your arguments up to now, even though I have not agreed with them. In your post of 1.41, however, you reveal your bias and hypocrisy.

    A dirty little smear is attempted by Mr Flaig to deflect attention from the lying, deceitful, unprincipled bunch that is the Liberal Democrat Party. You refer to that smear as irrelevant, yet condemn others for unfounded claims that happen to offend your political bias.

    You are, like the average politician, setting your politics above consistency and honesty in argument. I thought better of you.

  28. Sorry to disappoint you 5:33 but I can only tell as I see it. I too sincerely regret that our country has reached this point where it can no longer afford to fund higher education. However, we cannot debate the issue without considering the cause, the alternatives and what governments of differing persuassions might do in the same circumstances.

    The fact is that the whole question is being used to play the political game with the Lib/Dems in a no win situation. Perhaps foolishly, they made statements when campaigning, probably never expecting to win office, which they cannot live with when faced with the responsibility of government and managing the books.

    Labour see an opportunity to target disenchanted Lib/Dem supporters so they are concentrating their attack on them rather than the Conservatives. Hence we get all these silly names like Fib/Dems on the tested tactic that if you throw enough mud some will stick.

    Perhaps the saddest part is that, when our political leaders should be uniting to get us out of our debt crisis, they concentrate their efforts on political point scoring. It is all a sham whoever you support.