What absolute ******** nonsense. To say nothing of the fact that Labour governments had to cope with economic crises immediately after the Tory or Tory-dominated govts of 1945, 1963, and Heath's self-inflicted boom and bust in 1974, the only governments they had post-war before Blair - they had to cope with the worst one yet in 2008, and actually managed to keep unemployment much lower than it ever had been under Thatcher.
The government of 1945-51 was Labour through and through. They won by a landslide directly after WWII - 'The Khaki Election' - with Atlee implementing the start of the Welfare State - thanks to the money that was given to the UK via the USA and the Marshall Plan. Labour managed to spend the lot, devalued the pound, lost the next 3 consecutive elections and let the Conservatives in for 13 years; when the UK actually managed to prosper once again. Profumo sank Macmillan and the Tories in 1963, not economics.
In 1967, within 3 years of Labour having gained power twice they'd devalued the pound - yet again - and by the time another General Election came round in 1970, had left the Conservatives industrial strife plus inflation to deal with too.
Doesn't seem like nonsense to me.
However, I couldn't disagree that Heath's 'dash for growth' under Barber was a failure; as was most of his time in office I personally felt that his cold, distant personality was a factor in motivating people to work with him. Economic problems were compounded by the Oil Crisis, the Yom Kippur War and subsequent energy crises. Plus the unions were at that time as powerful as they'd ever been, or will ever likely be; by the time Wilson won the 'Who governs Britain?' election, Heath at least discovered the answer to that one: it's not you, mate.
Labour's poor economic record after Wilson resigned was again plain to see though for everyone; there's no way anyone could say that the IMF auditing the UK's finances for a loan and supervision in 1976 was a brilliant move: it was a humiliation for Labour. Can you remember Chancellor Denis Healey preparing to fly abroad and having to be dragged back from the airport to deal with it? And by the time 1979 rolled round, well, they'd had two terms in office, with inflation at one time reaching a peak of something like 30% (this figure could be wrong, it's from memory) plus more union militancy and more strikes. No wonder the Conservatives won.
To say nothing of all that, and yet Gideon has managed to put Britain back into recession within six months, six ****** months, of his appointment as chancellor.
Actually recession is generally defined as two consecutive quarters of negative growth. You're basing your assertion on less time than that.
Well ******* done Tories. When we want a good, protracted recession with high unemployment we know who to come to, don't we? But then, we always did, because they don't actually ******* care that much about whether the country has anything approaching full employment, do they? Thatcher proved that much.
Some unemployment figures between 1979 and 2010 below:
1979 - 1.4 m
1982 - 3.3 m
1984/87 - 3.25 m
1990 - 1.5 m
1993 - 2.0 m
1997 - 1.7 m
2007 - 1.25 m
2010 - 2.5 m
I don't think that we'll ever see full employment again; no matter which party gets in.
reply
share