egafd.com

I was quite optimistic when Gordon came around..I was fed up with happy clappy Blair..however is it me or is this bloke a spit of Major...grey and bland? 'Gordon Grey'..what do you think...I reckon that when the Labour party get a big stuffing at the Local elections then the knives will be out...

Except for Iraq, I thought Blair was a very fine PM.

Gordon Brown is not good.

Blair had his tounge right up Bush's arse during the Iraq war to worry about the problems back home........yes,BACK HOME,home as in the UK,the place he was meant to be serving.

Anyway's not long to go till Ken gets a right stuffing in the London elections,which will be damaging to New Labour's hopes of another four years in power,which they have two hopes.......and Bob is already dead.

>I thought Blair was a very fine PM.

Yes, everything he promised to do he got on and did it (NOT).

Crime and causes of crime - sorted.

NHS - sorted

Education - Sorted

He was a classic example of someone who said lots but did little.

He happened to be in power during an "easy" time for the world's economy so it made him (and Brown) look good.

He did not so much "govern" the country as stand back and let it run itself.

Mind you compared to Brown he was a master.

Guilbert wrote:

> >I thought Blair was a very fine PM.
>
> Yes, everything he promised to do he got on and did it (NOT).
>
> Crime and causes of crime - sorted.

Crime and the causes of crime will never be sorted because it evolves.

The introduction of the Crime and Disorder Act could and should have helped but far to many aren't using the powers they have and when they do some liberal prick harps on about civil liberties, human rights and other blah blahs.


> NHS - sorted

Will never be sorted but waiting lists reduced, more hospitals built etc blah blah blah

> Education - Sorted

Never will be sorted but class sizes reduced, more schools built, more kids achieving better grades (for what they are worth) etc blah blah blah

> He was a classic example of someone who said lots but did
> little. Little things like Northern Ireland ?
>
> He happened to be in power during an "easy" time for the
> world's economy so it made him (and Brown) look good.

So now its bad its the economy's fault not his?

> He did not so much "govern" the country as stand back and let
> it run itself.

Tosh. Bank of England etc

> Mind you compared to Brown he was a master.

Agreed

> He did not so much "govern" the country as stand back and let
> it run itself.

Frankly, that is a quality I appreciate in a PM - doing things for the sake of being seen doing something is a common flaw in democratic politicians.
Wouldn't exactly attribute this quality to Blair though - there were quite a few initiatives and bills too many...

Blair has one definite feather on his cap, and that is Northern Ireland. Of course, not all his own doing, but I doubt a different government would have achieved the same.

...on the other hand he has that real stinker of Iraq to answer for.

Public-private partnerships to finance hospitals and schools is another matter that gives me the shudders (short-term gain for long-term loss), but that may be more Brown's doing as the chancellor of the time.

He was promoted as a political 'heavyweight', a man with integrity, honour and foresight. However these alleged traits never came to fruition.