Positive stuff Conservatives have achieved whilst in power?

Soldato
Joined
30 Jun 2019
Posts
3,870
There's no reason to restrict immigration from the EU. Many from the EU are culturally similar, and have proficient English language skills.

The only reason is some Brits think they deserve more than EU nationals.
 
Associate
Joined
10 Apr 2021
Posts
126
It's hard to think of any major policy pledges they've kept too, many of their pledges are pretty weak, or get watered down. Here's some:

Allowed University tuition fee loans for 2nd degrees, but only for subjects considered 'worthy'.

Began Project Gigabit, but at a slow pace in many rural areas. Reduced their commitment on this to around 80% of the country I believe

Increased the tax free personal allowance on earnings to £12,570. Falls short of covering the salary of a 23 year old on the National Living Wage, working 40 hours a week (earning £18,532.80 annually).

Temporarily scrapped Stamp Duty for many home purchases. No longer in effect. First time buyers are still exempt from the tax for homes worth upto £500,000.

Controversial / debatable:
Kept house prices high - I hate them for what they've done to the property market. No thought for non home owners at all. It's one of the most divisive and harmful things they've done - besides Brexit

Haven't spent money on building new social /council houses. Personally, I hate this decision

Introduced a higher minimum wage, but only for those aged 23 and older called the National Living Wage. Discriminates against 18-22 year olds, who are legally adults (18 is the Legal age of majority in the UK).

Left the Single Market - Pretty awful decision in my view, but many still seem to believe it's worth it to avoid committing to freedom of movement with the EU.

Brought back 'proper' blue British passports. But, they seem more expensive than ever

Allowed a referendum on the Alternative Vote, but didn't support it - A wasted opportunity and a poor deal for the Liberal Democrats who advocate electoral reform

Are attempting to 'reduce fraud' in elections - mostly by restricting who is allowed to vote

Kept public spending relatively low until Boris came along. Forced austerity on many who were strongly opposed.

Created a comfortable environment to invest in. ISAs allow people to contribute 20k to investments every year... I'd argue it's too generous, I'd prefer a lifetime limit, maybe 50-100K would be tax free.

That's a good list. I thought pandemic was mostly the reason for the increased public spending since Boris came along.
 
Soldato
Joined
29 Jul 2004
Posts
6,666
Universal Credit has been a bit of an expensive disaster hasn't it?
Pretty much, but the concept is a very good idea, folding all different benefits into a single payment should make claims easier to manage and track. As per most government implementations, it's been run and designed by smooth brains.
 
Soldato
Joined
30 Jun 2019
Posts
3,870
Labour will probably always get my vote if they commit to building decent social housing, for the masses.

I'd probably even consider voting Lib-Dem if they shifted to a social democrat position, and advocated building millions of homes.

I've personally never understood the arguments not to do it. When asked, the Tories don't seem to have any answer. It's as if they've long since given up trying to support the young, or anyone who needs their own home.

So, I found this:
“It would have been in a Quad meeting, so either Cameron or Osborne. One of them – I honestly can’t remember whom – looked genuinely nonplussed and said, ‘I don’t understand why you keep going on about the need for more social housing – it just creates Labour voters.’ They genuinely saw housing as a petri dish for voters. It was unbelievable,” he said.
From here:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...e-labour-voters-nick-clegg-says-a7223796.html

Despicable if true.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
5 Mar 2010
Posts
10,198
Labour will probably always get my vote if they commit to building decent social housing, for the masses.

I'd probably even consider voting Lib-Dem if they shifted to a social democrat position, and advocated building millions of homes.

I've personally never understood the arguments not to do it. When asked, the Tories don't seem to have any answer. It's as if they've long since given up trying to support the young, or anyone who needs their own home.

So, I found this:
“It would have been in a Quad meeting, so either Cameron or Osborne. One of them – I honestly can’t remember whom – looked genuinely nonplussed and said, ‘I don’t understand why you keep going on about the need for more social housing – it just creates Labour voters.’ They genuinely saw housing as a petri dish for voters. It was unbelievable,” he said.
From here:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...e-labour-voters-nick-clegg-says-a7223796.html

Despicable if true.

Without diverging the thread too much, cost is normally the biggest factor. Governments can remove/reduce the red tape that dictates what can be built where / how etc. But with the cost of housing having increased magnitudes over the last few decades, the land itself has also increased. Meaning potential areas that councils would have purchased for building social houses now requires a substantial amount more money. There's then the shortage in building trades who are getting paid decent amounts by private housebuilding companies who aren't likely to go and work for the council for less money - which ultimately requires the council to pay more for it.

There are areas in the country where land is cheap, and plenty of it. But the moment anyone suggests building social housing there, councils and areas are accused of gentrification and shipping off the poor to other areas of the country.

I know building more social housing will help alleviate the property market. It also reduces demand on the rental market which in turn should make it cheaper to rent. I just don't see the UK having the available space to put every social tenant where they want to live.
 
Soldato
Joined
1 Apr 2014
Posts
14,750
Location
Aberdeen
Despicable if true.

I think it's a reference to a Labour politician. I cannot find the exact quote but someone like Bevan (but probably not him) said to a Tory on the subject of council housing something like "We'll build you out." (How's that for vague!)
 
Soldato
Joined
23 Oct 2002
Posts
11,617
Labour will probably always get my vote if they commit to building decent social housing, for the masses.

I'd probably even consider voting Lib-Dem if they shifted to a social democrat position, and advocated building millions of homes.

I've personally never understood the arguments not to do it. When asked, the Tories don't seem to have any answer. It's as if they've long since given up trying to support the young, or anyone who needs their own home.

So, I found this:
“It would have been in a Quad meeting, so either Cameron or Osborne. One of them – I honestly can’t remember whom – looked genuinely nonplussed and said, ‘I don’t understand why you keep going on about the need for more social housing – it just creates Labour voters.’ They genuinely saw housing as a petri dish for voters. It was unbelievable,” he said.
From here:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...e-labour-voters-nick-clegg-says-a7223796.html

Despicable if true.

Thatcher said the same. It was the reason behind the right to buy.
 
Soldato
Joined
30 Aug 2014
Posts
4,129
People keep sharing this, stuff Tony Blair achieved:
https://twitter.com/lesserspottedH/status/1477280010864050177/photo/1

I think every government achieves something.

Conservatives:
- Introduced National Living Wage
- The combining of benefits into Universal Credit.
- Benefit caps.
- Achieved Brexit (for positive or negative)
- Created the furlough scheme during the pandemic.
- Kept interest rates low during their time.
- altered schools to number grades from letters. (Why, I have no idea)
- Created a lot of apprenticeships
- Introduced a social care tax, that governments had been dodging.
- "Levelled up town centres"
- Started HS2?
- Got houses being built which previous governments (Tory and Labour) had neglected.
- Reduced immigration making it an employee rather than employer market.(although with damaging labour shortages)
-Introduced Academies.
-No dubious wars in their reign.

Negatives- a quite substantial list but just keeping it on the 'achievements' for now.
Tony Blair introduced academies and you forgot Libya under David Cameron which turned into an unmitigated disaster. Other than the National Living Wage (which wasn't a real living wage), apprenticeships (which Labour also did) and furlough those things were either bad, pointless or flawed in execution.

Also, expecting the Conservatives to actually 'level up' is like relying on the arsonist to put out the fire.
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
22 Nov 2005
Posts
41,855
Location
Newcastle Upon Tyne
- The combining of benefits into Universal Credit.
wasn't that massively over budget, took longer than expected and about 5 million people are still on legacy benefits? how is it positive?
same with brexit is it really over? where's all the trade deals? where's the benefits?
leveled up town centres? where? why not add the northern powerhouse on there whilst your at it..

HS2? doesn't even go north anymore..... utter waste of money

half the list is utter straw grasping
 
Soldato
Joined
3 Apr 2009
Posts
3,119
Location
Warrington
I think the only ones I agree with are 'created apprenticeships' and 'started HS2'. There is some controversy around them as not all of those apprenticeships are particularly useful ones (eg some stories of them being an excuse to pay young people less money to do a menial job in some sectors, or of apprenticeships effectively usurping funding that was perviously given to more versatile vocational courses), and HS2 is costing rather a lot and if I were winding back the clock 10 years I'd probably have allocated investment differently. Still, overall they're positives in my book.

Some of the other entries could perhaps have been positives if managed differently, but have ended up as negatives in my books due to the way they were bungled, or side effects (eg universal credit).

Edit: I suppose going further back I think with hindsight increasing university fees was the right thing to do, although at the time I didn't really see the point in gay marriage (purely because to me part of the definition of marriage was that it involved a man and a woman, not because I thought gay people shouldn't have the same rights and be valued equally etc, was possibly informed by my religious beliefs at the time too) I'll acknowledge that allowing same sex couples to call their formal legal unions marriage or civil partnerships seems to have been a very popular move, and the AV referendum was good to have even if I was really disappointed with how the campaigning was done and the result.

Edit2: ending the use of PFI contracts was a good thing imo, although I think it could be argued that any net benefit has probably been overshadowed by other methods of shovelling money into private hands at the expense of the actual public services.

Edit3: despite the pace of change being too slow, and personally being very disappointed that more wasn't done sooner and isn't being done now, they have overseen a significant drop in UK carbon emissions which some policies have supported.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
22 Nov 2006
Posts
22,121
We would have had tax hikes on top of the current disasters if Labour had got in.
 
Top