On a semantics level, if they weren’t planning to vote against any increase in fees, then they weren’t lying.

What they have done is broken a dirty great promise which is morally worse in my book. There’s none of us gets through the day without lying, mostly harmless enough stuff. I see a lot of lying on here.

But, if you promise to do something, then you should do it. And not be the weasel that Clegg is, with his head up the arse of a group that are going to make Maggie’s government look like a day on the bouncy castle.

Either way Clegg is something that the swear filter would get. And he knows he is.

Molgrips – do yo work in marketing?

Every single Liberal Democrat MP signed a pledge to say ‘I will vote against any increase in tuition fees.’ Then some of them did not vote against a rise in tuition fees.

Only a lawyer or a marketing man would try to make out this is not a blatant lie

Oh FFS TeeJ, stop bloody digging your heels in. You’re only arguing semantics now.

but later it says they were just planning possible compromise options.

Eh ? 😕

You don’t “compromise” on a pledge……….that’s the whole point of it ffs.

That fact that they were even considering compromising on their ‘solemn and binding’ promise, exposes them as liars.

Do you not see how compromise is an essential part of politics?

Not if you solemnly promise to do something then you do not compromise on it. By doing so you show your lack of integrity.

Alpha1653 – Member
Ok, timeout, I’m confused: CaptJon said, “And why is your line of thinking never extended to those most useful of subjects classics, art history, linguistics, music, politics etc?” i.e. asking Flash why he doesn’t class them as mickey mouse degrees, yes?

And no, linguisitcs is not the learning of languages; it’s the science of human language. What you have there is me being unintentionally patronising and assuming that CaptJon had confused linguistics with languages degree as there aren’t many linguisitcs degrees about. My bad.

Thanks, but i wasn’t confused. I think you might be though 😉

I don’t understand why media studies always gets a beating, but reading classics or Latin doesn’t. The former has much greater direct uses, people who do classics end up as MPs. Anyway, i’ve found most people have little clue what gets taught on degrees (beyond their own if they did one) but feel perfectly qualified to declare some useless and/or not academic enough to be taught at a university.

What annoys me most is those politicians who say the increases are needed to help pay down the deficit quicker, but are silent on what happens in five years when it is sorted. Universities will be fundamentally changed, will future governments restore their publicly funded teaching budgets? Or will they remain privatised like so many public services and shortly the NHS?

what no cheers this time when the fee rise was voted in
seem to remember the torries cheering giddily when osborne announced the cuts that brought the government here
dont suppose these guys were worried about tuition fees

caption contest anyone?

…you show your lack of integrity.

Not only that, but you also show your contempt for democracy.

Each LibDem MP had a clear and undisputed mandate from their electorate, to vote against tuition fee increases today.

Despite that, most LibDem MPs decided to vote for something which they did not have mandate for.

So liars with a contempt for democracy then……..nice people 😐

Ernie – the only consolation ( and its not much) Is that they are finished as a political force and that will be Cleggs footnote in history – the man who finished off the lib dems
the are not even going to get a vote on AV thru.

Not if you solemnly promise to do something then you do not compromise on it.

But sometimes compromise is essential! There’s no point in being so obstinate that you lose everything, is there? At least, not in my world. You guys would make truly terrible politicians.

Each LibDem MP had a clear and undisputed mandate from their electorate, to vote against tuition fee increases today.

You should know it’s much more complicated than that. Unfortunately.

Dont recall any of the STW Leftie intelligensia being up in arms and promoting rioting in the streets over Nu-Labours breach of their election pledge to offer us a referendum on the European Constitution… 🙄

Or for that matter the Conservative breach of an election pledge that anyone caught with a knife would go to prison… No Leftie Liberals manning the barricades on that one either are there?

the point is the lib dems edged some marginal seats based on a lie they only got the chance to form a coalition because of that pledge

Molgrips – you cannot compromise on something you make a point of promising. Especially when you you use that pledge to gain votes. it shows a basic lack of integrity. Of course compromise is needed but not to the extent of losing your integrity

You are in marketing aren’t you?

caption contest lol ,”thats done buggerall for the cause” after the damage thats been inflicted by them , i have no sympaphy for them at all, they have done more harm than good.

if you ask me the police have come away today looking much worse what idiot drove them into a few hundred portestors!

Promises like that are essential as bargaining chips when forming the coalition policies. If you’ve not stuck your neck on the line for something, your “partners” will know that you can be easily shifted on it and it’s then worth nowt.

I see that Ed Miliband was unwilling to pledge to reduce the costs if Labour ever get in again. Is that because he really knows its the right thing to do? Mind you, I don’t recall the last Labour government overturning many of Maggies policies either, despite kicking up a stink when they were in opposition.

You should know it’s much more complicated than that.

Erm, no, not “complicated” at all ………in fact Nick showed just how easy it is :

See ? …..you sign a pledge and let everybody see you do it …..just to make absolutely certain that there is no confusion at all where you stand.

There’s no point in being so obstinate…….

It was Nick Clegg’s idea to be “obstinate” on tuition fees. No one forced him.

caption contest…….
“whatever happens dont say let them eat cake”

http://iaindale.blogspot.com/2010/04/labours-27-broken-manifesto-promises.html

druidh, I don’t think you understand what a pledge is………..or at least you pretend that you don’t understand.

We haven’t even started looking at the LibDems broken promises yet….nuclear power, child detention, no immediate cuts, etc, etc.

That’s a nice pin you’re dancing on the head of.

The thing is with the Lib Dems, it’s not just that they haven’t done what they said they would, they are enthusiastically doing the exact opposite.

:tiifoilhaton:

if you ask me the police have come away today looking much worse what idiot drove them into a few hundred portestors!

They did it on purpose.

Okay … haven’t read all the threads but what if the gov’t simply withdraw funding totally but then also not increase the fees nor dictate the fees structure? i.e. let the market forces do the work? What will happen?

Education is not a right I am afraid …

Everyone wants to be the boss so who are doing the dirty work ehh? China? India?

And druidh yes New Labour were also a massive disappointment, your point is?

Molgrips – you cannot compromise on something you make a point of promising

If the situation demands it, then you have to. Government is not a war of principles, it’s not a moral debate – it’s about getting things done. Banging your fist on the table and shouting does not get anything done. Even Iain Paisley figured it out eventually.

The problem is that they should not make rash promises in the first place. Or at least word things appropriately. However that’s not really practical. That photo of that pledge thing was a crass bit of electioneering. However, people won’t vote for anyone speaking in practical terms, so they have to spout this nonsense to get votes. Consequently, everyone things all politicians are duplicitous scum when they often aren’t. Being a politician is a no-win situation, so all you can do is get voted in and have a stab and doing a good job in terms of actually running the country.

I’m not in marketing, I’m a pragmatist.

Education is not a right I am afraid …

It is, up to age 15. After that, it definitely should be a right.

That’s a nice pin you’re dancing on the head of.

Oh I see …….you think pointing out the difference between a pledge and a promise is mere ‘pedantics’ do you ? 😀

And yet strangely enough, Nick Clegg felt that it was extremely important to emphasise the fact that it was a PLEDGE.

In fact, he signed it publicly and invited the press to photograph him doing so……have you seen the photo?

Druidh – plenty of Tory U turns as well happening

Knife crime – pre election pledge for mandatory gaol sentences, post election – discretion for judges

NHS 24 – pledged to be scrapped – not happening.

None of these stand comparison with a publicly signed pledge on a single issue that was a major point on the campaign.

The lib demns are shown to have no integrity and face electoral oblivion quite rightly as a result

I’ve got the solution to the university funding problem.

If you appear on TV demonstrating an embarrassing level of spoken English, you can’t go to university. Sorted.

molgrips – Member

It is, up to age 15. After that, it definitely should be a right.

Up to age 15 or 18 I agree but beyond that it’s luxury (privilege) and not a right.

Therefore, it “should” be if those attending it see the value of it but I bet majority just see it as a way to become “bosses” to step on majority of the 3rd world maggots.

TandemJeremy – Member
Druidh – plenty of Tory U turns as well happening

Knife crime – pre election pledge for mandatory gaol sentences, post election – discretion for judges

NHS 24 – pledged to be scrapped – not happening.

Indeed. It’s a feature of our political system.

None of these stand comparison with a publicly signed pledge on a single issue that was a major point on the campaign.

Says you (and ernie_lynch). You’re merely arguing semantics here.

The lib demns are shown to have no integrity and face electoral oblivion quite rightly as a result

The other two major parties seem to have survived quite a while despite breaking all manner of promises.

Caption contest: “When I am king….”

can the damage done be charged to the student unions, why should the tax payer have to pay for the damage that students have caused,

kimbers – Member: if you ask me the police have come away today looking much worse what idiot drove them into a few hundred portestors!

Actually, I was cheering the TV when I saw footage of the police charging to drive back violent protesters. What do you expect the police to do when students are willing to occupy buildings illegally, cause vandalism and attack the police? Push them back with a playful nudge to the ribs? Ask them nicely? Not that realistic when snooker balls are being launched at your head now is it? But what happens when you charge? They move back. Job well done.

scraprider – Member

can the damage done be charged to the student unions, why should the tax payer have to pay for the damage that students have caused,

Damn right!

You’re merely arguing semantics here. The other two major parties seem to have survived quite a while despite breaking all manner of promises.

Hardly semantics.

It has been become popular in recent years for politicians to make “pledges”. Labour has been using the tactic quite extensively since the ’97 election. In the 2005 election Labour made 6 pledges, and 5 in this last election.

The reason they have started using “pledges” is because they know that the electorate no longer believe and trust in promises. So they make a solemn and binding pledge which they guarantee will not be broken. Labour often, although not always, make the pledge deliberately vague, because they know that not keeping it is not an option. They are often in a hand written form and personally signed, just to emphasis the personal and serious commitment the politician concerned has to it.

The LibDems have now, as a result of not only not sticking to their pledge, but actually completely contradicting it, totally devalued the pledge in British politics. And have seriously undermined even further, people’s trust to the political process and politicians.

When Nick Clegg first announced the formation of the coalition, he promised a “new kind” of politics.
We now know what he meant.

I guess this sort of sums up the LD’s position:

Moral lesson: don’t make irresponsible promises in opposition. You might just find yourselves in power, and then where will you be? Faced with a lot of angry supporters who actually thought that you meant what you said.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/janetdaley/100067665/the-passing-of-the-tuition-fees-bills-destroys-the-lib-dems-credibility/

Well, one of the UK’s competitive advantages is its creatives industries – media graduates are needed for that.

Yes, but as pointed out in the post you were replying to, you only need so many of them. What is the unemployment rate like for media studies graduates, and how many of the employed aren’t working in a job where the media studies degree is actually useful? What exactly is wrong with the idea of reducing the numbers and making it more academically (rather than financially) selective.

And why is your line of thinking never extended to those most useful of subjects classics, art history, linguistics, music, politics etc?

Personally I’d quite happily extend the line of thinking to those subjects. It’s not like anybody’s complaining about the shortage of history graduates we have in this country is it?

Personally I’d quite happily extend the line of thinking to those subjects. It’s not like anybody’s complaining about the shortage of history graduates we have in this country is it?

Yes let’s just produce a country of drones who have only been trained specifically to earn money in a particular field, and have no wider knowledge or understanding of the world. Woop.

I do think there should be less students though – I don’t see why university shouldn’t be for the academically talented.