Forum menu
I thought it would be handy if we could produce a list of positive things that these two parties have done over the last 100 years to make Britain a better place. That way we can have a nice list to judge the parties' track records by, to help select which party to vote for. I'm only after positive things, things that most of society can agree have made the countries better to live in, for instance the National Health Service, rather than things which are currently subject to widespread disagreement such as hunting with dogs.
So far I have -
Labour
======
NHS
Conservatives
=============
ok, it's not a very big list yet, so please add anything you can think of
aqueducts!
Sanitation!
Minimum wage.
NHS - I think the Tories did quite a bit to get the NHS going before Labour finalised it but the war got in the way.
When you say "done for us", do you mean "us - the masses" or "us - some people"?
I know (or rather I'm aware of) lots of people who made lots of money during the last conservative reign . . .
I'm on holiday the week of the election... what are my options, can I like prevote, quickly register for postal vote?
I always find this quite an interesting debate when looking backward - how far back is it legitimate or more importantly relevant to go back and still use when looking at the current political parties - for instance would current New Labour have put the NHS in place now - I suspect not.
Similarly, how far back is it legitimate to blame the conservative (Fatcha!) for things?
This will obviously be hugely relevant if the conservatives get voted in since as per the current government, everything will be blamed on the previous one even if it's well over a decade ago...
NHS - I think the Tories did quite a bit to get the NHS going before Labour finalised it but the war got in the way.
You mean they commissioned reports & studies that recommended some sort of social health system culminating with Beveridge's report during the war
When it came to actually voting for it - they fought the act in parliament, line by line & clause by clause in an attempt to stop it happening
Similarly, how far back is it legitimate to blame the conservative (Fatcha!) for things?
Think you can blame Fatcha for pretty much everything seeing as she was so influential that New 'Labour' basically carried on her philosophy.
Tories - Removed Thatcher. Surely the biggest contribution to the UK in the 20th Century?
Don't get a postal vote: they don't send them out in time for them to be returned from overseas. Get a proxy vote, if you can, and appoint someone at your favoured party's office.
Labour: NHS, implementation of Beveridge report, Human Rights Act, Scottish and Welsh devolution, minimum wage, Racial Discrimination Act, legalisation of abortion, Open University, Health & Safety at Work Act, Civil Partnership Act, Kosovo intervention, reform of House of Lords, London Mayor.
Tories: Cones Hotline.
(Of course, OP only asked what great things have been done, not what crap ones have been done - there would be a lot longer list in that case).
Willink was made a Privy Counsellor in 1943, the year he became Minister of Health. Willink served in this role until the Conservatives lost the 1945 general election. He, with John Hawton, was responsible for the 1944 White Paper, following the Beveridge Report, called A National Health Service. It proposed the creation of a fully comprehensive, universal healthcare system, free of charge and available to all citizens irrespective of means.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Willink
Willink proposed a private health service not a nationalised one
The Tories wanted free health care for all and made some of the progress to what we have now.
What did the Romans ever do for us?
The Tories wanted free health care for all and made some of the progress to what we have now.
Not claiming the [i]idea[/i] was necessarily Labour's - just that they [i]actually did it[/i].
Erm, Mudshark, I'm a little confused:
When Labour came into office in 1945, they presented their own plan in preference to Willink's, although they had supported it up until that point. The principal difference was that Willink's plan talked of a "publicly organised" rather than a "publicly provided" service, whereas Labour's plan brought hospitals into full national ownership. Bevan did however make concessions to General practitioners. [b]Willink said in Parliament that the NHS would, "destroy so much in this country that we value[/b]."
(My bold)
Winston Churchill (Conservative) was vehemently opposed to the formation of the NHS.
The Conservative Party has always been an elitist party serving mainly a relatively wealthy minority. They hearken back to a time when only the elite (men) cold vote anyway. They've probably only survived so long because the Middle Classes of Britain have grown to such a significant group.
It does seem that Labour are winning in the 'what good have the parties ever done for us' stakes...
In one debate in parliament Willinck claimed [b][i]The NHS will destroy so much in this country that we value[/i][/b]
The Tories voted against the bill [b]51 times[/b]
Right, so far the suggestions are -
Labour
======
NHS
Immplementation of Beveridge report
Human Rights Act
Scottish and Welsh devolution.
Minimum wage.
Racial Discrimination Act.
Legalisation of abortion.
Open University.
Health & Safety at Work Act.
Civil Partnership Act.
Kosovo intervention.
reform of House of Lords.
London Mayor.
Conservatives
=============
NHS
Cones Hotline.
My emphasis is on the creation of free health care for all rather than the vehicle
Immplementation of Beveridge report
Is that a report into coffee and tea?
How about the Tories getting us out of the darkness that was the 70s?
Anyway, we all have our opinions and we'll vote accordingly and the democratic process will sort it all out - even if Labour do have an advantage in the way constituencies are split....
Is that a report into coffee and tea?
But what about Beer? Wines and Spirits? Soft Drinks? Milk?
Racist...
How about the Tories getting us out of the darkness that was the 70s?
Hmm, the Seventies seemed quite colourful to me...
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
The questions I have are are the current parties anything like those of history, and so is history an accurate indicator of the future, and since supporters of either side like to view their own party with blinkers and rose tinted specs, what's the point in voting other than in notional agreement (or disagreement) with historic aims and objectives, which may or may not be an accurate reflection of what actually happens when any party gains power?
How about the Tories getting us out of the darkness that was the 70s?
Indeed - no more coal mines [it was definitely dark down the pit] all closed for the sake of political dogma rather than economics
[img] 
[/img]
Conservatives: grants started to be phased out in favour of student loans.
Labour: university tuition fees. 😕
Conservatives: 'non pupil' (aka Baker) days.
Labour: class sizes down in primary skools.
neither have done anything that wasnt demanded of them by the people.
both have put themselves and their greed for power in the way of progress.
vote how you like the politicians will always win.
even the media cant tell left from right nowadays.
High-5s SOOBalais - exactly how I feel, although I put it more simply...
Different shades, but both smell of shit.
My emphasis is on the [b]creation [/b]of free health care for all rather than the vehicle
At the risk of being a monomaniac about this: the Tories didn't create it, (Old) Labour did.
A Tory, working as part of a national coalition government, may have developed a white paper in response to an inquiry undertaken at the request of a Labour minister, but that paper was significantly different to what actually emerged in the NHS Act in 1946, and it was the Labour government that pushed that act through.
You get 0 points for [i]suggesting[/i] going to the moon and 10 points for actually doing it. 😉
Different shades, but both smell of shit.
My father has a saying; [b]"Shit is the same on both sides"[/b].
He's not wrong.
konabunny - Member
Don't get a postal vote: they don't send them out in time for them to be returned from overseas. Get a proxy vote, if you can, and appoint someone at your favoured party's office.
Labour: NHS, implementation of Beveridge report, Human Rights Act, Scottish and Welsh devolution, minimum wage, Racial Discrimination Act, legalisation of abortion, Open University, Health & Safety at Work Act, Civil Partnership Act, Kosovo intervention, reform of House of Lords, London Mayor.
Tories: Cones Hotline[i].
And most of thats good?
And most of thats good?
Er, yes? 🙄
Hmm, well the Tories are all about creating wealth through private enterprise, and small government. So whilst the list of big things they've actually done governmentally could be small, their influence could be felt much greater in the wealth they created and the economic growth. Which would be harder to track down in the historical record. Perhaps a graph of GDP over time correlated with one of party in power? You might have to normalise it against some kind of global average tho to factor in things like the oil crisis/sub-prime etc.
Speaking as a left-winger, mind.
But +1 for civil partnerships - that just about sums up the differences in the parties besides financial or fiscal ones...
They havent got crappy adverts at the top of stw like the lib dems have!
Conservatives took us into the EEC - which you may have good/bad thoughts about 🙂
They havent got crappy adverts at the top of stw like the lib dems have!
I don't like that, it makes me feel very uncomfortable, the way this site 'knows' what we're talking about...
They're quite good at killing bills to suit their mates
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/mar/13/cameron-pressure-identify-poverty-bill
The Conservative Party has always been an elitist party serving mainly a relatively wealthy [b]minority[/b].
[img] 
[/img]
I think someone needs to go and check the meaning of minority.
No matter which way one votes, its not a bad idea for everyone to remember that, certainly in the case of the main two parties, if you are going to make any insulting comments about a voter's intention then you are going to be insulting upwards of third of the population.
Most voters intentions are based on a broad opinion of the best government for the nation as a whole, not self-serving obsession.
Minority - less than half.
🙄
not quite TJ.
"being or relating to the smaller in number of two parts; "
the two parts need not make a whole. And my point was that for much of the last half century, conservative voters have number the same of more than labour voters, therefore not a "minority".
the point is the torries (and nu labour) do support an elite minority they just fool the rest of the populace into voting for them by waving around silly phrases like european beaurocrats, out of control immigration, deficit of doom and all the gibberish we will be bombarded with over the next month