Probably cause New Labour is as dead as Jeremy Corbyns career right now, they've turned into more of an extreme socialist party than they've ever been before
Well look at what is in charge as of today (April 2020)_ a motley crew of well connected multi millionaires who go on TV to talk talk and talk again and yet say nothing. The prime example is Matt "Blazing Saddles" Hancock with his empty platitudes and his bloody badges.
Regardless of opinions of of the policies by either of these two. I think it would be fair to say that the PMQ's between Blair and Howard were some of the most enjoyable to watch. Howard was, in my opinion, the only one to match Blair at the box.
@@kevinlongman007 You're having a laugh aren't ya... Blair used to own Hague every week when Hague was leader! Mind you he did become leader a bit too early as in his later years after he stood down he became better at dispatch box! Similar with Ed Miliband now!
Even though the Conservatives didn't win in 2005, Howard should be give alot of credit for the eventual political clawback by the Conservatives. Cameron should be thanking him for the rest of his political career.
I completely agree, his backing of cameron as the next leader essentially allowed Cameron to enter as a an unknown young politician, without a doubt this helped reform the conservatives so they were tasteful to the electorate
Tony Blair was one of the best Prime Ministers this country ever had. I am opposed to Iraq and I regard it as a terrible mistake. However if you ignore Iraq his legacy stands as: introducing minimum wage, record investment in NHS, banning of black listing of trade unionists, banning hand guns, banning section 28, banning fox hunting, banning smoking in public places, allowing civil partnerships, allowing flexible working hours, devolution, peace in Northern Ireland, peace in Serbia, longest period of sustained economic growth, record low waiting times and record low crime rates, and increased welfare for those who are in need.
MrKingpenguin123 y There was at least 1 million people who took the streets to protest the iraq war in 2003. And theres only about 45 million eligible voters pal.
There is no peace in Northern Ireland, I live here. All what you said is like some party political broadcast on behalf on Tony Blair's time in office. It's people like you that have no idea at all what's going on, the economic growth was due to external factors just like the crash in 08 was due to external factors. Tony Blair and Bush lied to the whole world about WMD, from 2003 until 2011 the estimated people in Iraq that have died is 116,277. From 1979 until 2003 under Saddam is estimated at 300,000. That is 24 years compared with 10 years. Blair's actions led directly to the ISIS problem now. Working class areas are destroyed from Scotland to Cornwall, since Thatcher introduced Friedman economics in 1979 There is no fundamental difference between Labour and the Tories.
I think if Blair had not have invaded Iraq in 2003, he would have been up there with David Lloyd George as one of Britain's greatest ever prime ministers.
Conservatives were against them back then, only reason they’re supported now is due to the reckless spending from the Labour government which means they have to be supported to make ends meet.
it's interesting that the approach Howard took here of "look at the Prime Minister's broken promises" is the same exact one that Miliband took against Cameron in 2015. BOTH LOST
Yes same reason why Labour will lose next time. Opposition parties need to inspire confidence with a vision. Thatcher Blair Cameron all did it, as did Johnson
What rubbish - is that why Howard's party went on to lose the election - again?! The majority of people in the country chose to believe Blair's account, & NOT Howard's, who - thankfully - went on to resign.
@Paulo Ferreira So how about the minimum wage, the winter fuel allowances and free TV licences for pensioners as well as new legislation regarding the rights of the LGBT community, disabled people and the BAME community, all of whom were sidelined under 18 years of Conservative government?
this is a master class of how to be an opposition mr corbyn might like to learn from this.but he wont .he will carry on his pathetic self righteous pantomime.
Despite Iraq the economy was in good shape. The Conservatives were way too many seats behind (about 150 before the election I think) to have any hope of forming a government because of Labour's landslides in the two previous elections. In terms of votes though, Labour only had 35% of the popular vote (with the Conservatives only a few hundred thousand behind) which was and still is the lowest of any majority government ever.
@@TheRoyalCavalier The economy wasn't in bad shape but it had certainly started to stagnate. We saw very strong growth from 1994-2002 but around 2003 onwards you see unemployment flatline and gdp growth get stuck around 2%. Blair was lucky that his end time coincided with the cooling off of the economy and that he got out before it turned nasty.
I think Howard would have been a great PM. Excellent speech giver and very good at the dispatch box. He set up Cameron to succeed. Howard deserves a lot more credit than what he gets.
he was certainly very good in the commons.... and i was very much a supporter at the time.... but now i just think the tory party have done virtually zero to earn the respect to gain power since the fall of thatcher..... the poison is europe.... and as long as they wriggle out of pulling out of europe in order to keep party unity then they deserve to be in opposition. i wish they had split in 1990.... i know which half of the party would have been dead by now..... i had high hopes for cameron at one time.... but hes not up to it
I think Cameron, on balance, is a good leader but the flaw he made was that he tried too hard to copy Tony Blair. It may well cost him the next election but luckily for him Ed Milliband isn't a very strong threat
***** One could hope that the Tories will do better now that they are no longer shackled by a coalition government. It sounds like Osborne is serious about putting in place the remainder of what he wanted, but which wasn't possible with the coalition government. I certainly envy you guys. For all the faults of Cameron, you have the better end of the bargain as compared to we Yanks with Obama. It shows how seriously boneheaded we've become in America to elect Obama and then to re-elect him. Oh, for another Reagan. There really isn't one in the wings. It seemed that Scott Walker (Governor Wisconsin) was the closest, but then he also came out for the TPP which Reagan wouldn't have touched with a 10 foot pole. The Republicans have drifted from their base just as the Tories have. No one fights for what is right for the nation, and this new Congress full of Republicans proves just that. This TPP will kill us if it goes through. I never liked the idea of the UK being part of the EU. Also, whoever went behind Thatcher's back and entered in the Exchange Rate Mechanism should have been hanged for treason. Monetary policy is that serious and important. Whoever did that did so because it was their pet project during their time in politics, and it became an ego thing. Was it Heseltine? Whoever it was sure sold the UK out over that SNAFU.
Labour promising not to introduce tuition fees and top up fees? Sounds familiar... would that be the same Labour party that had the gall to lambast the Liberal Democrats for doing the same? As well as the Tories, who never made such a promise.
the tories are no better these days. cameron promised much in his failed green agenda.... broken promises. he promised a refferendum on europe... broken promise. he promised not to let the tripple A credit rating drop.... broken promise. he promised to cut spending by 25% and yet its actually gone up.... broken promise. worst of all he promised to half the deficit in 5 years and will struggle to achieve one third. i supported the tories for a long time but the sad fact is they are just as bad as the others. they do not deserve my vote when they cant even live by their own arguments. britain needs a political revolution to fix our poisoned politics. its not going to come from the big parties and that is why im voting ukip. nigel farage would make a very fine pm and he is exactly what we need. getting out of europe is the first step on the road back to greatness and that cannot be achieved with the non entity yes men full of broken promises that we have had for 24 years.
***** He promised a referendum on Lisbon Treaty, not membership of the EU. Given that the treaty was ratified by the time he came to power, he was powerless to offer the people a say. Only the Liberal Democrats offered a straight in/out say. Our AAA rating is not within the control of the government, thus they can only promise to safeguard it the best they can. Given that nearly every other major economy has also lost their AAA rating, our interest rates have not in real terms gone up. They remained the same, which economically is more important than a badge of honour. Likewise, spending cuts and the size of the budget deficit are more or less at the mercy of the markets, economic shifts such as the continued Euro Crisis and their effects could not be predicted. The fact that the 2008 recession was far deeper than first thought, and we had sluggish growth for the first years of the Parliament meant that the reduction of spending, and decreasing of the deficit was slower than predicted. The government can only set the conditions, they can't micromanage. Though these are 'promises' that you might say are broken, I would argue otherwise as they did not chose to break them, especially since at heart they were projections, as ever economist and political observer knew. Not that much has changed; when Margaret Thatcher came to power spending went up, unemployment went up, debt went up, and so forth. The same was true then as today. Politicians should not make decisions on the economy that work in the short term, aiding electorally, and despite my misgivings about this government being too close to the centre, I admire Osborne for doing whats best for the economy, not what's best for his party and his leadership ambitions. Nigel Farage is a good speaker, but he would make a poor PM. For a start, he could only lead a government if he had the confidence of the house - and based on who UKIP field as candidates, them winning would just about crush the credibility of parliament once and for all. Beyond that, they are liars. Almost worse than the rest. I could hardly find a party credible when they tell Southern 'Tory voters' one thing, and Northern 'Labour voters' another. It's a cynical way of winning votes, because as the UKIP Communications Director said, they've maxed out their Tory votes. Though even if this wasn't true, it's not as if it would be possible for UKIP to win power. Not in 2015, not in 2020. So if you really think UKIP are the ones to do it, I'm afraid you'll be waiting a long old time.
***** Such a weak retort. Did you not read *anything* I said? I clearly explained that they were not promises that were abandoned, they were targets that the were unable to be kept. It's curious how you have a problem with the Tories making promises they are _unable_ to keep, but not UKIP and Nigel Farage, who make promises that they _know_ they won't be able to keep. Believe me the list is quite extensive.
theonlylampshade ***** I have to agree with theonlylampshade, Cameron did not promise a referendum on Europe. That's a lie. He wanted a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, but by the time he was Prime Minister, the treaty had already been ratified and he couldn't give a referendum on it! He never promised an in/out referendum. The only way to get a referendum is by voting Conservative. And I don't blame people for not really believing Cameron, but if he didn't give one after everything that's been said and done up to now, he would be thrown out as Tory leader quicker than you can say "Thatcher". His back benchers would have his head.
Howard gave us the last two Tory governments! Many of his shadow cabinet became govt ministers now and he did a Corbyn nearly won yet Blair still had more than half the parliament seats so didn't need as Brown had in 2010 a coalition
redsox39 He was mostly it is very hard to prove the future in the present.Howard was right and looked ahead and it seems Cameron and May didn't learn from him.Brexit what that side didn't want but ended up having as Blair and Brown didn't have Treaty change referenda.However some wanted to completely leave the EU and joined UKIP which then was hardly known.Interesting hardly any joined from Labour or Liberals more from Tories when it was a former Liberal who set UKIP up.
To be honest, the one good thing the Coalition Government did was to introduce Fixed Term Parliaments, so that governments can't keep on prolonging themselves indefinitely.
Michael Howard. The first man to hurt Blair. Blair must have noticed his time was going to be short, and although he won, he know Labour wouldn't win next time. So, he snaked out the back door, and let his "mate" Gordon deal with the humiliation of defeat.
@@SiLoJayLo He began the decline of Labour. It wasn't enough to topple them. And, I tell you why he resigned...He actually said himself that he was getting too old to carry on as leader.
@@joecurran2811yes there would have been - in stead of a Labour majority of 65 it would have been a hung parliament. The electoral FPTP system is biased to Labours favour.
And to think by this point, Labour had already long began building up a bigger and bigger deficit, slowly creating disastrous public finances that we are STILL having to clear up and are some way off doing.
Clearly, you don't fully understand how public finances work. If you did, you'd know that the deficit is measured annually, and so you cannot say that Labour were building up a bigger and bigger deficit, because it doesn't make any sense. Furthermore, if you actually look at the history of our national debt, you'll see that the coalition government has added nearly £700 billion to the national debt in just four years, which is way more than Labour added to the national debt in thirteen years of government. So, when it comes to public finances, I think it's pretty ludicrous to applaud the Tories.
Howard was quite good here but he went on to win just 198 seats in the 2005 general election, which is less than Corbyn won in 2019 and Labour had a 66 seat majority.
So who are you (thatcheritescot) cheering for ie Blair or Howard? A little hard to determine given that Thatcher inscribed Blair/newLabour her "GREATEST ACHIEVEMENT"...
So Blair and Brown were on the same page in those days until they formed a disagreement of their own. I'd say, Howard would have been worse then Brown then, if he was ever chosen to be a Prime Minister.
At this point, Blair and Browns fued was amping up and coming out into the open, after 2001 Browns pressure kept increasing calling on Blair to stick to their agreement fracturing the relationship between 10 and 11 downing Street, also definitely agree with you on Howard being worse than Brown there (but it would've been interesting as a Howard victory would see Blair step down, and a more freed Brown making more of a left of Blair pitch as he would likely win the labour leadership)
Tony bangs on about how liebour created economic growth, but the FACT is that John Major and Ken Clarke gave liebour the strongest growth in europe, low inflation, falling unemployment and healthy public finances.
In pumping money into the economy to make the transition to poll tax less dreadful, they boosted the economy and when poll tax proved a disaster thry did so again on the transition to council tax. These resources helped - only helped - the economy away from the direst Thatcherite monetarism. But they still managed to have a Lamont Black Monday where interest rates rose several times in one morning (Cameron as bag carrier lurking in the background). Tory economic competence is a long-running lie, sadly still mot grasped by the electorate.
The Bow group Tories (Lilley, Portillo, Howard) all disagreed with the ERM and so the credit for the strong 90s growth should go to them. Major backed the ERM and it failed.
I mean, I know that 2008 would have been just as bad if the Tories had been in government, but still, when Blair talks about protecting jobs and mortgages...damn...
As a pokitucal junkie from canada who inherited yiur parliamentary system with quesriin period etc i must say the best pmq to watch was brown v cameron
I remember the years before 1997. They weren't pretty but they got the job done. Now the place looks pretty but the country is going backwards and all the jobs are with foreign owned companies. What's the last 100% British item you got that wasn't fruit, veg or some dead animal you bought to eat?
he sounded a complete knob the second time he used the "in the words of the chancellor, why should we ever trust him again" let alone the twelfth. And as for answering a question...........Paxman interview..... just saying
It's so strange to see a labour government, as it feels so remote now.
Probably cause New Labour is as dead as Jeremy Corbyns career right now, they've turned into more of an extreme socialist party than they've ever been before
Otto von Steinberg You say that like it’s a liability.
I remember when it was the stern establishment. Can't believe I've linked Labour with that word.
Well look at what is in charge as of today (April 2020)_ a motley crew of well connected multi millionaires who go on TV to talk talk and talk again and yet say nothing. The prime example is Matt "Blazing Saddles" Hancock with his empty platitudes and his bloody badges.
Not anymore, not with Starmer at the helm
You could tell Michael Howard enjoyed taking on Blair at PMQs. He was better than Hague and Cameron at the dispatch box imo.
Blair vs Howard was ridiculously entertaining.
Regardless of opinions of of the policies by either of these two. I think it would be fair to say that the PMQ's between Blair and Howard were some of the most enjoyable to watch. Howard was, in my opinion, the only one to match Blair at the box.
Hague was better than Howard at PMQ's.
@@kevinlongman007 You're having a laugh aren't ya... Blair used to own Hague every week when Hague was leader! Mind you he did become leader a bit too early as in his later years after he stood down he became better at dispatch box! Similar with Ed Miliband now!
Two former barristers: always going to be good 👍🏻
@@Jw._02 Blair, unlike Cameron, answered questions.
Cameron was the best of the Conservatives during that 20 year period at the dispatch box, but he hadn't grown into it yet while Blair was still there.
Even though the Conservatives didn't win in 2005, Howard should be give alot of credit for the eventual political clawback by the Conservatives. Cameron should be thanking him for the rest of his political career.
redsox39 reducing the majority from 160 to 66. That's amazing
I completely agree, his backing of cameron as the next leader essentially allowed Cameron to enter as a an unknown young politician, without a doubt this helped reform the conservatives so they were tasteful to the electorate
Great Jamie The Lib Dems helped with that-it wasn’t solely a Tory campaign achievement
Tej Sandhu true but still
@@jamiengo2343 cutting the vote margin to only 2.5% was very good. The electoral system flattered Labour number of seats.
I loved the "up" "down" part near the end.
Yeh that was hilarious! 😄
I'm not Tory, but that was actually quite well done 😂
As much as I despise Blair, his debates are pretty interesting and entertaining
Tony Blair was one of the best Prime Ministers this country ever had. I am opposed to Iraq and I regard it as a terrible mistake. However if you ignore Iraq his legacy stands as: introducing minimum wage, record investment in NHS, banning of black listing of trade unionists, banning hand guns, banning section 28, banning fox hunting, banning smoking in public places, allowing civil partnerships, allowing flexible working hours, devolution, peace in Northern Ireland, peace in Serbia, longest period of sustained economic growth, record low waiting times and record low crime rates, and increased welfare for those who are in need.
+Matt Corrick "If you ignore Iraq"... the single biggest political issue probably since the Falklands. Yeah well done mate.
+MrFrankster25 Yeah it may be for a few thousand hardcore politicos, but for the 60-odd million people who are normal voters, it's really not
MrKingpenguin123 y There was at least 1 million people who took the streets to protest the iraq war in 2003. And theres only about 45 million eligible voters pal.
+MrFrankster25 the silent majority? Besides I disagree with Iraq but I believe he genuinely believed what he was doing was right.
There is no peace in Northern Ireland, I live here. All what you said is like some party political broadcast on behalf on Tony Blair's time in office. It's people like you that have no idea at all what's going on, the economic growth was due to external factors just like the crash in 08 was due to external factors. Tony Blair and Bush lied to the whole world about WMD, from 2003 until 2011 the estimated people in Iraq that have died is 116,277. From 1979 until 2003 under Saddam is estimated at 300,000. That is 24 years compared with 10 years. Blair's actions led directly to the ISIS problem now. Working class areas are destroyed from Scotland to Cornwall, since Thatcher introduced Friedman economics in 1979 There is no fundamental difference between Labour and the Tories.
That man should have been our Prime Minister.
I think if Blair had not have invaded Iraq in 2003, he would have been up there with David Lloyd George as one of Britain's greatest ever prime ministers.
Magic Blade he is Already up theee with him and Thatcher and Churchill and Brown.
No. The Blair creature was/is appalling.
@@turbolevo8703 Blair isn’t a creature
Well he did so
God, Blair could debate well, I have to give him that!
I don't think Blair more openly loathed a Tory leader than Howard
Probably cause Howard had been the only Tory leader so far to really make Blair look and feel vulnerable
You could be right. Blair mentioned Major and Hague in his victory speeches, he never mentioned Howard!
@@ciaranmarsh255 can I find the speechs he mentioned major please
@@hudeifa7398 Sure - th-cam.com/video/y3Nhw_bmfes/w-d-xo.html at 9.13
That's because he was actually a challenge to him
Michael Howard is complaining about Tuition Fees? As if the Tories are against Tuition Fees!
+Your Big Black Penetrative Daddy He's complaining about his endless lies
+Your Big Black Penetrative Daddy The Conservatives were against it at the time, but changed policy during the recession.
The Conservatives were against fees in 2005.
Conservatives were against them back then, only reason they’re supported now is due to the reckless spending from the Labour government which means they have to be supported to make ends meet.
@@brumav9779 lol bullshit
Michael Howard always made me think of the Count from Seasme Street
well he was born in Transylvania
***** No, he was born in Wales.
dlk1dlk1
ah yes... my mistake. it was his parents.
Pensioners can't find NHS dentists? Pensioners today can't find the NHS FULL STOP!
it's interesting that the approach Howard took here of "look at the Prime Minister's broken promises" is the same exact one that Miliband took against Cameron in 2015. BOTH LOST
Yes same reason why Labour will lose next time. Opposition parties need to inspire confidence with a vision. Thatcher Blair Cameron all did it, as did Johnson
@@leewes29 Labour will win next time.
@@leewes29Except in both 2005 and 2015, the incumbent governments were doing relatively well
That Labour MP joining in the chants at 8:59...
PMQs are like wwe main events at wrestlemania. 2 opponents against each other.
Blair vs. Howard PMQ's were must-see viewing. Always entertaining.
After Hague, Michael Howard was the only Tory leader who could really take on Blair at the dispatch box.
What rubbish - is that why Howard's party went on to lose the election - again?! The majority of people in the country chose to believe Blair's account, & NOT Howard's, who - thankfully - went on to resign.
SiLoJayLo I'm not saying he was better than Blair but Howard was a better Common's performer at PMQ's than Major, Iain Duncan Smith and Cameron.
Blair might have been a war monger but that aside he was a heavy weight prime minister. We haven’t had one since to this day
Kev L Cameron was decent against Blair tbf
@@LplusRatioplusNobodyCares Cameron was better vs. Brown than he was up against Blair.
"An issue that needs to be dealt with, not exploited."
If only that had worked out as intended.
Blair - ten years of GDP growth, Good Friday Agreement ended the troubles in Northern Ireland, a period of immense prosperity- great PM
You obviously forgot about Iraq
Blair was a bloody good PM.
Wasn't alot of that thanks to previous work and legislation by the major government. Blair took a well lit baton and ran with it.
Say what you like about Blair but domestically he was a brilliant PM, but he made a big mistake over Iraq.
@Paulo Ferreira So how about the minimum wage, the winter fuel allowances and free TV licences for pensioners as well as new legislation regarding the rights of the LGBT community, disabled people and the BAME community, all of whom were sidelined under 18 years of Conservative government?
Its weird watching this ten years later.
18 years now
And labour never mentioned immigration again...
This is proper "Prime Minister's Questions"
...Blair v Howard was "legendary"!!
this is a master class of how to be an opposition mr corbyn might like to learn from this.but he wont .he will carry on his pathetic self righteous pantomime.
howard was a slimey asshole, hardly someone to compare with!
Paul Tindall, to be an opposition you have to be Tory Lite?
he lost...
Michael Howard had an awesome PMQ's here.
Yeah but a few weeks later the Conservatives lost their third general election in a row!
Kev L they were hardly going to win though.... Labour had a 170 something majority
@@jamiengo2343 Yeah but he could have done better than winning only 198 seats. Even Corbyn won more than that in 2019!!
Kev L yeah, tbf the exit polls showed that Corbyn could’ve but it wasn’t meant to be. Shame really
@@kevinlongman007 He didn't have long enough to get established, taking over mid-way as he did from IDS.
And Labour won the election. Makes me wonder how Howard would have been as PM.
Despite Iraq the economy was in good shape. The Conservatives were way too many seats behind (about 150 before the election I think) to have any hope of forming a government because of Labour's landslides in the two previous elections. In terms of votes though, Labour only had 35% of the popular vote (with the Conservatives only a few hundred thousand behind) which was and still is the lowest of any majority government ever.
@@TheRoyalCavalier The economy wasn't in bad shape but it had certainly started to stagnate. We saw very strong growth from 1994-2002 but around 2003 onwards you see unemployment flatline and gdp growth get stuck around 2%.
Blair was lucky that his end time coincided with the cooling off of the economy and that he got out before it turned nasty.
I think Howard would have been a great PM. Excellent speech giver and very good at the dispatch box. He set up Cameron to succeed. Howard deserves a lot more credit than what he gets.
It would have been interesting to see how he would have got on with GW Bush
Louis Smith If I remember correctly, Howard was in favor of the Iraq War, so probably well.
I loved Michael Howard. His leadership was ahead of its time and I would have preferred him to David Cameron
he was certainly very good in the commons.... and i was very much a supporter at the time.... but now i just think the tory party have done virtually zero to earn the respect to gain power since the fall of thatcher..... the poison is europe.... and as long as they wriggle out of pulling out of europe in order to keep party unity then they deserve to be in opposition.
i wish they had split in 1990.... i know which half of the party would have been dead by now.....
i had high hopes for cameron at one time.... but hes not up to it
I think Cameron, on balance, is a good leader but the flaw he made was that he tried too hard to copy Tony Blair.
It may well cost him the next election but luckily for him Ed Milliband isn't a very strong threat
Samuel Coe how right you were :)
***** One could hope that the Tories will do better now that they are no longer shackled by a coalition government. It sounds like Osborne is serious about putting in place the remainder of what he wanted, but which wasn't possible with the coalition government. I certainly envy you guys. For all the faults of Cameron, you have the better end of the bargain as compared to we Yanks with Obama. It shows how seriously boneheaded we've become in America to elect Obama and then to re-elect him. Oh, for another Reagan. There really isn't one in the wings. It seemed that Scott Walker (Governor Wisconsin) was the closest, but then he also came out for the TPP which Reagan wouldn't have touched with a 10 foot pole. The Republicans have drifted from their base just as the Tories have. No one fights for what is right for the nation, and this new Congress full of Republicans proves just that. This TPP will kill us if it goes through.
I never liked the idea of the UK being part of the EU. Also, whoever went behind Thatcher's back and entered in the Exchange Rate Mechanism should have been hanged for treason. Monetary policy is that serious and important. Whoever did that did so because it was their pet project during their time in politics, and it became an ego thing. Was it Heseltine? Whoever it was sure sold the UK out over that SNAFU.
Daniel Hughes oh dear. someone's trying waaaaaay too hard to be provocative. oh..and failing.
Pity, that Lord Howard did not become pm!! He is a great man!!❤️❤️🇬🇧🇬🇧❤️❤️
"There is no policy more ayyleetist than that!"
Different level to the shit show that it is today.
Labour promising not to introduce tuition fees and top up fees? Sounds familiar... would that be the same Labour party that had the gall to lambast the Liberal Democrats for doing the same? As well as the Tories, who never made such a promise.
the tories are no better these days. cameron promised much in his failed green agenda.... broken promises. he promised a refferendum on europe... broken promise. he promised not to let the tripple A credit rating drop.... broken promise. he promised to cut spending by 25% and yet its actually gone up.... broken promise. worst of all he promised to half the deficit in 5 years and will struggle to achieve one third.
i supported the tories for a long time but the sad fact is they are just as bad as the others. they do not deserve my vote when they cant even live by their own arguments.
britain needs a political revolution to fix our poisoned politics. its not going to come from the big parties and that is why im voting ukip. nigel farage would make a very fine pm and he is exactly what we need. getting out of europe is the first step on the road back to greatness and that cannot be achieved with the non entity yes men full of broken promises that we have had for 24 years.
***** He promised a referendum on Lisbon Treaty, not membership of the EU. Given that the treaty was ratified by the time he came to power, he was powerless to offer the people a say. Only the Liberal Democrats offered a straight in/out say.
Our AAA rating is not within the control of the government, thus they can only promise to safeguard it the best they can. Given that nearly every other major economy has also lost their AAA rating, our interest rates have not in real terms gone up. They remained the same, which economically is more important than a badge of honour.
Likewise, spending cuts and the size of the budget deficit are more or less at the mercy of the markets, economic shifts such as the continued Euro Crisis and their effects could not be predicted. The fact that the 2008 recession was far deeper than first thought, and we had sluggish growth for the first years of the Parliament meant that the reduction of spending, and decreasing of the deficit was slower than predicted.
The government can only set the conditions, they can't micromanage. Though these are 'promises' that you might say are broken, I would argue otherwise as they did not chose to break them, especially since at heart they were projections, as ever economist and political observer knew.
Not that much has changed; when Margaret Thatcher came to power spending went up, unemployment went up, debt went up, and so forth. The same was true then as today. Politicians should not make decisions on the economy that work in the short term, aiding electorally, and despite my misgivings about this government being too close to the centre, I admire Osborne for doing whats best for the economy, not what's best for his party and his leadership ambitions.
Nigel Farage is a good speaker, but he would make a poor PM. For a start, he could only lead a government if he had the confidence of the house - and based on who UKIP field as candidates, them winning would just about crush the credibility of parliament once and for all.
Beyond that, they are liars. Almost worse than the rest. I could hardly find a party credible when they tell Southern 'Tory voters' one thing, and Northern 'Labour voters' another. It's a cynical way of winning votes, because as the UKIP Communications Director said, they've maxed out their Tory votes.
Though even if this wasn't true, it's not as if it would be possible for UKIP to win power. Not in 2015, not in 2020. So if you really think UKIP are the ones to do it, I'm afraid you'll be waiting a long old time.
theonlylampshade
then he should not have offered it or any of the other things that were abandoned with such ease.
***** Such a weak retort.
Did you not read *anything* I said? I clearly explained that they were not promises that were abandoned, they were targets that the were unable to be kept.
It's curious how you have a problem with the Tories making promises they are _unable_ to keep, but not UKIP and Nigel Farage, who make promises that they _know_ they won't be able to keep. Believe me the list is quite extensive.
theonlylampshade
***** I have to agree with theonlylampshade, Cameron did not promise a referendum on Europe. That's a lie. He wanted a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, but by the time he was Prime Minister, the treaty had already been ratified and he couldn't give a referendum on it! He never promised an in/out referendum. The only way to get a referendum is by voting Conservative. And I don't blame people for not really believing Cameron, but if he didn't give one after everything that's been said and done up to now, he would be thrown out as Tory leader quicker than you can say "Thatcher". His back benchers would have his head.
Blair can defend anything.
True
I had forgotten what it was like for a Prime Minister to answer questions at PMQs
Two very good parliamentarians
Howard really raised the tories game in parliament anyway during his couple of years
Political allegiances aside... this is far more entertaining, stimulating, engaging and interesting than watching Theresa May v Jeremy Corbyn!!
Blair was absolutely on the ropes here against Howard
IDS was useless. Hague wasn't bad.
mts ts I'm an American, and I love UK politics. I thought Howard was a very impressive Tory leader.
Idiot. Portillo was a slimey bastard..he would have had no chance
Howard gave us the last two Tory governments! Many of his shadow cabinet became govt ministers now and he did a Corbyn nearly won yet Blair still had more than half the parliament seats so didn't need as Brown had in 2010 a coalition
Unsealed He was beaten by Labour's select committee chair for Int'l Development Stephen Twigg
redsox39 He was mostly it is very hard to prove the future in the present.Howard was right and looked ahead and it seems Cameron and May didn't learn from him.Brexit what that side didn't want but ended up having as Blair and Brown didn't have Treaty change referenda.However some wanted to completely leave the EU and joined UKIP which then was hardly known.Interesting hardly any joined from Labour or Liberals more from Tories when it was a former Liberal who set UKIP up.
To be honest, the one good thing the Coalition Government did was to introduce Fixed Term Parliaments, so that governments can't keep on prolonging themselves indefinitely.
SempiternalScientist They had a limit of 5 years anyway...
And all that's gone now
@@georgehayes3494It was to stop them going early at a time of their choosing
This was actually very funny
your intros are becoming somewhat legendary
4:46 Howard looks like an excited auctioneer there! :P
Michael Howard. The first man to hurt Blair. Blair must have noticed his time was going to be short, and although he won, he know Labour wouldn't win next time. So, he snaked out the back door, and let his "mate" Gordon deal with the humiliation of defeat.
Absolute rubbish! If Howard was so satisfied with the election result, why did he resign as Tory Leader?! He'd resoundingly FAILED his party!!!
Tony Blair would’ve won in 2010 against David Cameron
@@ciaranmarsh255 That's why he fled in 2007. Left his mate Gordon in the crapper.
@@SiLoJayLo He began the decline of Labour. It wasn't enough to topple them. And, I tell you why he resigned...He actually said himself that he was getting too old to carry on as leader.
@@SiLoJayLoHe said he was too old to lead a party into govt after this one
Michael Howard's slogan at the 2005 general election: "Less tax, Less blax"
That's a disgusting thing to say. It's 'fewer blax'.
Possibly the best pmqs of televised parliament
Michael Howard is a badass
You can see Blair squirming and fidgeting as Howard calls him out on all his lies and he has to try and defend them
Lord Howard vs Starmer would be spectacular!!!
And the choice they made was Blair’s Labour!
Barely though by 2.5% (36 vs 33.5)
@@GA-wq8xqUnder PR there wouldn't be that much difference
@@joecurran2811yes there would have been - in stead of a Labour majority of 65 it would have been a hung parliament. The electoral FPTP system is biased to Labours favour.
@@GA-wq8xq I meant in terms of the seat share. The constituencies have been updated for this election
Turns up well here to be fair Howard and gives a good account but still gets put away on the final question - and Blair was right about the choice
good performance from howard
And to think by this point, Labour had already long began building up a bigger and bigger deficit, slowly creating disastrous public finances that we are STILL having to clear up and are some way off doing.
Clearly, you don't fully understand how public finances work. If you did, you'd know that the deficit is measured annually, and so you cannot say that Labour were building up a bigger and bigger deficit, because it doesn't make any sense. Furthermore, if you actually look at the history of our national debt, you'll see that the coalition government has added nearly £700 billion to the national debt in just four years, which is way more than Labour added to the national debt in thirteen years of government. So, when it comes to public finances, I think it's pretty ludicrous to applaud the Tories.
Actually it does make sense to talk of building up a deficit and also, he did not applaud the Tories either.
Deficit is even bigger now.
yuna1971 No, the deficit is down. Debt is up, because that's how a deficit works!
So 600 billion in 13 years vs 1100 billion in just 7 years under cons. Do the maths
3:50 Net Immigration has TRIPEEELD!
Howard was the first person I voted for in a general election, when I lived in the UK.
an immigrant voting for an anti immigrant lol
@@tomgibson6801😂
Some immigrants are more valuable than others.
8:48 ironic that what most of what micheal howard complains about has got dramatically worse under the conservatives
I’ve always thought that it’s literally describing the Tories now
They really did try and fight hard the Tories, really backed up their leader
Tony Blair was simply magnificent at the despatch box.
4:41 funny to see that Cameron's recent trick at PMQs is unoriginal
Michael Howard is the shit. Wow. Need more vids. Too bad Britain fucked up and voted Blair again.
Fantastic stuff. Two great performers.
amazing PMq's
Howard was quite good here but he went on to win just 198 seats in the 2005 general election, which is less than Corbyn won in 2019 and Labour had a 66 seat majority.
Yes but he got a higher vote share than Corbyn did in 2019. The electoral system flattered Labour seat count
@@GA-wq8xq Barely...32.4% to 32.1%!!
wHy SHouLd PeOplE eVeR beLieve HIm agAin?
So who are you (thatcheritescot) cheering for ie Blair or Howard? A little hard to determine given that Thatcher inscribed Blair/newLabour her "GREATEST ACHIEVEMENT"...
He should have been our pm
what an amazing exchange
Does anyone have a video link for the 2006 Queen’s speech debate between Blair & Cameron? Can’t find it anywhere
Howard was quite cool actually
That's all very well Mr Howard, but DID YOU THREATEN TO OVERRULE HIM??!
So Blair and Brown were on the same page in those days until they formed a disagreement of their own. I'd say, Howard would have been worse then Brown then, if he was ever chosen to be a Prime Minister.
At this point, Blair and Browns fued was amping up and coming out into the open, after 2001 Browns pressure kept increasing calling on Blair to stick to their agreement fracturing the relationship between 10 and 11 downing Street, also definitely agree with you on Howard being worse than Brown there (but it would've been interesting as a Howard victory would see Blair step down, and a more freed Brown making more of a left of Blair pitch as he would likely win the labour leadership)
Tony bangs on about how liebour created economic growth, but the FACT is that John Major and Ken Clarke gave liebour the strongest growth in europe, low inflation, falling unemployment and healthy public finances.
In pumping money into the economy to make the transition to poll tax less dreadful, they boosted the economy and when poll tax proved a disaster thry did so again on the transition to council tax. These resources helped - only helped - the economy away from the direst Thatcherite monetarism. But they still managed to have a Lamont Black Monday where interest rates rose several times in one morning (Cameron as bag carrier lurking in the background). Tory economic competence is a long-running lie, sadly still mot grasped by the electorate.
daniel clarke John Major has no economic credentials whatsoever. He was single handedly responsible for the ERM crash in 1992.
You wait hours for a Daniel, then three come along at once.
The Bow group Tories (Lilley, Portillo, Howard) all disagreed with the ERM and so the credit for the strong 90s growth should go to them. Major backed the ERM and it failed.
What Blair should have said was
“I now ask the Honorable Gentleman, why would people ever vote for you again?”
Its the man who threatened to overrule derek lewis
Labour could do with mr Blair now such a mess no leadership infighting in abundence...Mr Howard was good entertainment pmqs were different!
I remember you had a video of the top 100 funny house of commons/pmq moments. Where can we find it?
Oh look _ it's Michael "Did you threaten to over rule him" Howard. 😅
Back in the days when Labour had over 400 seats. Blair was a Tory-destroyer
Howard needs credit here, fact based, incisive. Pity he stood on a shite record. Blair was a once in a lifetime combination of charisma and intellect
Except it wasn't investment in the health service- it was spent on current consumption such as salaries- See Beniyon''s book "The Blight of Blairism"
That whole "Up/Down" routine totally ripped off Al Gore
I mean, I know that 2008 would have been just as bad if the Tories had been in government, but still, when Blair talks about protecting jobs and mortgages...damn...
Because of the action labour took less homes were lost than under Major
If Howard won in 2005 and the recession happened, Gordon Brown would have won in 2009/10.
As a pokitucal junkie from canada who inherited yiur parliamentary system with quesriin period etc i must say the best pmq to watch was brown v cameron
ORDERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I remember the years before 1997.
They weren't pretty but they got the job done. Now the place looks pretty but the country is going backwards and all the jobs are with foreign owned companies.
What's the last 100% British item you got that wasn't fruit, veg or some dead animal you bought to eat?
Wait you're scottish but don't support a hugging leftie party?
Nope not hope Not every single Scot is a leftist.
Thatcher titled Blair/ newLabour her "greatest achievement"?
a "hugging leftie party" I don't think so!
JFC, this is like a rap battle.
And Howard went on to Loose the Election haha.
Is it me or does Howard sound very similar to Corbyn with his line of questioning. Honest look at Corbyn at pmqs it's very similar
michael howard mercilessly destroying blair is the best part
Best prime Minister ever!!!
👍😂😂😂😂😂
Pantomime still
howard was such a prat. kennedy was the only decent leader in 2005.
You can be one or the other bit you can't be both.
John Prescott looks hacked off
By then Prescott had no role other than to stand in at PMQs. In the early days he'd be jeering at the opposition.
Who that election anyway oh yea now I remember
1:50 Liar as he was Blair did protect the NHS, who is so confident about Cammers today and his privatisation of our nations greatest achievement?
What privatisation? Clown....
Mark Cox PFI
0:24 for start of PMQ
Michael Howard was a pretty crap politician and statesman compared to Blair, love him or hate him.
MrChorizokiller Howard was brilliant. Cameron was good at coming up with comebacks. I haven't made up my mind on May yet.
I'm a Conservative btw, never rated Howard and think he would've been a poor PM.
he sounded a complete knob the second time he used the "in the words of the chancellor, why should we ever trust him again" let alone the twelfth.
And as for answering a question...........Paxman interview..... just saying
David davis looks weird...