Wednesday, October 06, 2010

Cameron on the back foot...

First, in the backlash of the child benefits debacle, he was forced to apologise that axing benefits for more than a million families was NOT in the Tory election manifesto.

(In fact, the Tories spent the general election campaign accusing Labour of scurrilous scaremongering after the Tories' secret plans to cut child benefit were exposed).

And secondly today, the Prime Minister was forced to defend his Chief spindoctor, former editor of the News of the World Andy Coulson after more revelations in the phone-hacking scandal.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

I wonder what would the out come have been if he had stopped the benefit for the poorest single mothers living on council estates.

they are tramps, more then likely.

Geoffrey G Brooking said...

I think that if you asked them politely these people would give up these benefits for the sake of the economy anyway.

The one's who cheese me off are the one's who have child afeter child after child and expect the state to pick up the bill all the time.

Maybe as well as this cut we could limit child benefit to a maximum of two children?

Anonymous said...

Is that limit for the poorest or for the rich, seems a few rich are like rabbits and they get Child benefit.

the problem is of course where does all this stop, and who are people going to vote for now, the Liberals have gone we have Tory Newer labour and nobody else.

the question should be! would labour reverse any of these cuts the simple answer is no of course no