A familiar ring
This week, Johann Lamont called for an end to the “something for nothing culture” with regard to the provision of universal benefits in Scotland. We found the phrase oddly familiar. But where had we heard it before, and from whom?
“This is our contract with the British people – to bring an end to the something for nothing culture”
– Iain Duncan Smith, Conservative minister, October 2011“We are repairing the damage of an age of irresponsibility. Ending the something for nothing society that flourished during it”
– George Osborne, Conservative Chancellor Of The Exchequer, October 2011“The hard working people of Britain want their government to bring an end to Labour’s something for nothing culture”
– Baroness Warsi, Conservative peer and former chairman, December 2011“[The welfare state] has sent out some incredibly damaging signals. That it pays not to work. That you are owed something for nothing”
– David Cameron, Conservative Prime Minister, June 2012“There are some who really are sitting at home and putting little effort into moving on in life… A something for nothing culture does no one any favours”
– Chris Grayling, Conservative minister, August 2012“Jobless young adults will soon be forced to do three months’ full-time work or have their benefits cut under a scheme being piloted in Croydon to tackle its “something for nothing culture””
– Boris Johnson, Conservative mayor of London, September 2012
Oh yeah. Now we remember.
Either Lamont is due to be sued for plagiarism OR she has just confirmed that she is now a fully fledged paid up member of the Tory party.
I’m still having a wee problem trying to figure out which one it is. 😀
Labour are without doubt the McThatchers. !!
I assume that the leader of the “Scottish” Labour Party is paid. It would seem that given her recent political productivity her employers are obviously in favour of a “something for nothing” culture.
Excellent investigative work Rev. I am still not sure what is going on, I just can’t understand what McMaggie thought she would gain from stealing the Tories clothes. Is she taking orders from London? Does she really believe in this honest debate malarky? Any thoughts anyone?
The tories have always been bastards pure and simple – you knew were you stood with them. But Scottish labour is trying to tackle universal benefits by aiming at people like fred the shred and people earning 100k or more. Of course although they as the law stands fully entitled to this support, I suspect no one in that income bracket would ever consider applying for any of it. So you do have to wonder what the point of it was. Sadly I think this is a case of life imitating art – for example the 2nd episode of “in the thick of it” – Picture the scene – hapless leader of opposition decides to take charge and back a one very unpopular policy adopted by the opposition. As she announces her support of this policy because of austerity – she is caught out when the opposition announce they are dropping it. Something very similar happened to Lamont, no sooner had announced it without adding substance or clear direction, she is wrong footed by Miliband who announces on the same day, that he will fight to keep universal benefits.
The only ones who agree with her now, are the tories and the screech monkies in the right wing press. Now we keep seeing them try to say – “no no – its only very rich people and young kids with rich kids we want to exclude” – then trying land some cheap shots on sturgeon after lamont got beaten up by her in FMQs. But the morons still left a vacuum at the heart of their story and the press have taken over it. As far as the right is concerned she is a champion of the rich seeking to lay into the poor, as far as the left are concerned she has committed a vile act of treachery. Any attempt to distance themselves from the oncoming storm is undermined by various comments from labour sources. Revstu has posted some quite mind boggling ones from a labour councillor called J docherty – these have to be seen to be believed.
Its a screw up of their own making. This will hang over her head from now until 2014 and beyond. For Thatcher it was the poll tax, for major it was care in the community & back to basics , Blair – the Iraq war, Brown – Browns bottom – Cameron – the verdict is still out, but there so many waiting in the wings….and then there is Lamont – And end to something for nothing.
she and her non-policy announcement are the story. Any attempt to deflect it will just bite them back harder and harder.
Frankly – at this stage as far as I am concerned, labour are dead to me, they shoud get themselves buried.
@JM.
As an avid poll geek – I’d agree. This turd is not for polishing. Going to hit them hard.
Is she taking orders from London?
The REAL question though Bill is she taking her instructions from TORY H.Q. in London OR LABOUR H.Q. in London?
Is there a difference, Arb?
It seems to me that what lies at the heart of this matter is the West Lothian Question.
Lamont is leader of both Scottish Labour MSPs and MPs and these Scottish MPs are allowed to vote on matters which only affect voters in England. How can she, for example, advocate free tuition for students in Scotland and, at one and the same time, advise her MPs to vote in favour of tuition fees for students in England? There is no credibility in such a position, so it follows that Scottish Labour needs to follow the same policies as Westminster Labour. I suspect this is what Lamont thought she was doing.
Did it not occur to Jim Murphy and friends that they were creating this problem when they reorganised? Of course, she could advise the MPs to abstain from voting on matters affecting only voters in England, as the SNP does. But what then happens if Labour finds itself in government at Westminster and needs the Scottish vote to force through one of their policies?
I just don’t see how she can square this circle.
On the other note, it’s ridiculous and deceitful to refer to universal benefits as a “something for nothing culture”. These services are not free as they are paid for through our taxes. What happened in the past is that most of us paid for them, not once, but twice, and these days we pay for them once, whether we use the services or not. I am more than happy to pay taxes so that everyone can access services, but I object to the suggestion that the services are free and therefore “something for nothing”
Sorry I missed the other posts this week, but was otherwise busy patrolling Hadrian’s Wall!
You’ve nailed her predicament nicely, Jeannie.
Is there a difference, Arb?
Not from where I’m sitting Holebender, but you can NEVER tell with these London parties. 😀
Don’t worry about the Hadrian Wall patrols Jeannie, relief is on its way! 😆
I’m sure it’s been said before but “something for nothing” makes no sense at all. She wants to take “something” away from the very people who are actually paying for it, to benefit those who pay nothing.
Surely she means she wants to end the “something for something” culture.
Sorry for going O/T, but in today’s Guardian there is a good article by Richard Seymour (blog: Lenin’s Tomb) titled, Scottish Labour is blinded by hostility to the SNP.
I’m surprised the Guardian let it be published as they are yet another member of the MSM and their ‘out to get’ the SNP/do down Scotland/anti-Scottish independence agenda. To read in the Guardian an article that, for once, tells the truth concerning Scottish politics is not only amazing, but refreshing. It won’t be long though, of course, until Severin Carrell and Kevin McKenna are on site with their usual unionist tripe.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/sep/28/scottish-labour-hostility-snp
I’m commenting on that thread, and even stole this post for it. There is a Labour chap out there, who has, in the past claimed to be in fear should Scotland get independence, who reminds me of Dunky H.
I almost never get to the end of reading these threads, to think of commenting. They grow faster than I can read them. I think the commentators must all be housebound invalids or something.
Given tha syste on other threads to sick & disabled i suspect not.
I did wonder if some of the accounts may be party activists on the day job
Tartan tories seems apt, if people in Scotland continue to vote labour then in some ways, they deserve what they get. I know, its harsh but voting to take away your own bus pass and free prescriptions if your working class is stupid.
I know I shouldn’t but I dipped into Guido. A link caught me eye – Johann Lamont Grows Up. It takes you to an article on labourlist the full title of which is Johann Lamont has shown Scottish Labour to be Grown up and Long Term.
Yes I know you couldn’t make it up, but someone did.
Pile in boys and girls.
Two things intrigue me. One is the concentration on party loyalty. People saying, well they could be persuaded to vote SNP, for example, or they’ll never vote Labour again.
What, at the Euro elections? Who gives a flying one about the Euro elections, as a general rule?
There is not going to be an election that matters in Scotland (or England) until after the referendum. I don’t give a monkey’s what people’s current party voting intentions are for 2015 or 2016 at the moment. I call all independence voters my brothers and sisters. After the referendum we start with a clean slate, and a lot of things may change, who knows. But right now, you’re either for hope or fear, and nothing else matters. Why do so few people see this, even those commenting on political blogs?
The other is the rhetoric encountered with moderate frequency where unionists gloat about the inevitable NO vote, and how happy they’ll be. One little cross, one enthuses, and that will be the hated SNP dead and buried. As if only his little cross counts. Pissing into the wind? What’s the purpose of these posts?
An earlier something for nothing quote Ms Lamont is just falling into line it would seem
From Guardian 30/9/2011
These are the questions that housing providers now face as they unpick the policy statements coming out of the political party conferences. Labour leader Ed Miliband chose a risky strategy this week, linking the provision of welfare and benefits – including social housing – to a positive contribution to society. There is now a political consensus across the three main parties that time has been called on our “something for nothing” culture.
THANK YOU RANDOMSCOT, I have been looking at that Guardian site and the first thing I thought was the entries by “Niclas” was by Duncan Horthersall as he always contorts his answers in a very distinctive style. Also good old “John Ruddy” is well out of his comfort zone of labour hame and has to try and answer his postings instead of getting them modded off as usual.
I cant log-on to that site from work but say hello to Dunkty for me.
PS. this has been a very happy happy week hasn’t it.
At a small function tonight and Mrs Graham’s speech was mentioned at my table. All in disbelieve at the content, some Labour (normally) supporters. Labour in Scotland not too popular this week.
Without taking anything away from the general, this means labour in scotland have turned their back on anything they believed in and incidentally any real political ethic other than they have to win, because they hate the snp SO much…
is there a thread here that because la lamont has been elected leader of labour in scotland because as any fule kno eck has a problem with women – labour in scotland must now appeal to the most important ( the biggest potential ahem ‘swing’ voter group) group in scottish politics ie daily mail reading women?
the last line of defence no for Bitter Together team will now be that the opposition is so incompetent Independence can only result in a one party state! Now is the time for the SNP to emphasise the fact that Independence is the only way to get a real opposition through the other parties finally only going to be independent of Westminster and attracting the best people. Promising a written referendum to guarantee that could “pull the rug” from under the naysayers. Finally a serious high profile attempt to emphasise not the moral unacceptability of Trident but the economic obscenity would finally nail Lamont. She cannot possibly defend her party’s position on this in the face of the cuts?
Ewan Crawford said thephrase was first coined by Peter Lilley in 1992 when he was Social Security Secretary
https://twitter.com/ewansc/status/251266860534857728
Well, there you go, the Big Lie theory put to work by the British Establishment of the Red Tories, the Blue Tories and the Orange Tories … “to bring an end to the something for nothing culture” …
The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous. – Joseph Goebbels
If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. – commonly attributed to Goebbels as a variation on Hitler’s Big Lie theory.
The key-word here is blackwhite. Like so many Newspeak words, this word has two mutually contradictory meanings. Applied to an opponent, it means the habit of impudently claiming that black is white, in contradiction of the plain facts. – Big Lie theory from Orwell 1984.
Definition of doublethink: To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed… – Orwell 1984
Remember the First Gulf War 1990? President George H Bush wanted to secure international cooperation in having a military presence in the Middle East. To do this a war had to be waged against Saddam’s invading army in Kuwait. Even though the invasion threatened to put up the price of oil which was at it’s lowest prices during the 80s, the West remained sceptical. So the Big Lie was brought out to convince the United Nations that action against Saddam was needed. George Bush Sr gave a speech on atrocities being committed by Iraqi troops on Kuwaiti babies, killing them in incubators, stealing hospital equipment and leaving babies to die, hundreds of babies dead and so on … 24 times the President gave that speech to the world’s media (repeated by Douglas Hurd) including a testimony from a 15 year old girl who supposedly witnessed the horrible events (she wasn’t actually in the country apparently). All over the press the story went, not long after the War began. Of course after the dust settled it was found out that the baby killing spree by Iraqi soldiers was false with the NY Times saying “the incubator story seriously distorted the debate about whether to support military action” and Amnesty reported “found no reliable evidence that Iraqi forces had caused the deaths of babies by removing them or ordering their removal from incubators.” The Big Lie worked as the oil continued to flow and the USA has a permanent military presence in the Middle East, although the baby killing story is now filed under ‘war propaganda’.
Fast forward to 2003 and another Big Lie gets trotted out. Tony Blair and the WMD’s. We were all told time and time again that Britain could be hit in 40 minutes by Saddam’s Weapons of Mass Destruction. We know the story, the lies and the outcome. Oil, regime change, military presence, deals for British industry etc etc etc. Except this time we’re not selling arms and torture equipment to Saddam like in the 1980s when he was killing the Kurds, no, we have a more acceptable regime to be doing business with … how many Iraqi civilians paid the price (and continue to do so) for Blair’s Big Lie?
Let’s not forget the Big Lies about Vietnam War too, The Gulf of Tonkin Incident and the Domino Theory (oil again). History over the past 50 years is littered with the Big Lie and it’s mostly to do with oil, gas and banking.
Here’s the thing though, how far will the British Establishment go with the Big Lies to keep Scotland in the Union when there is oil and gas at stake (25% of UK corporation tax alone) and the threat of Scotland having corp tax at less rate than rUK! Forget stories that Tories would like to be rid of us really, maybe we the people, but not the assets. The calculations have been done in secret, kept away like the McCrone report. It will say that Scotland leaving the Union with all its assets plus 9 percent of UK assets will economically wreck England and the rUK for decades. It always comes down to the figures and that is where the real panic will come from.
The Tories will concentrate on economic squeezing of the Scottish Government while saying Scotland is too poor, too small and too stupid.
The Lib/Dems will push the ‘Extremists’ angle and the Nazifying of the SNP.
Labour will question SNP policy through doublethink while ignoring facts and debate.
The MSM will continue giving wholesale backing to the Unionists and the destruction of democracy in Scotland.
I say all of this above because the British Establishment are predictable, they have done this time and time before and that will work to the Independent Movement’s advantage. Knowing their strategy and what will have to be faced. None of this should be a surprise, but the difficulty will be is not to be buried under the sheer weight of the Big Lies and be tactically smart to overcome what will be a very powerful force. The British Establishment used to run an empire, they think that they still do, but they still have the institutions that kept the Empire and the Union together.
What will work against them will be their own suffocating arrogance and stupidity, and the will of the Scottish people who are not bullied easily. The Independence Movement (and SNP Gov) needs to be quick ahead, clever, tactically aware and ensuring that their voice is heard among the people. They, along with the Greens, SSP, Labour Indy and others also need money for campaigning. I believe Scots for independence can only grow in size while the Unionists can only shrink and I believe we can achieve a 60% YES vote on a single question. The Unionists have to risk everything to stop Scottish Independence, it’s the only way they could possibly win and it could be their downfall.
Make of this what you will but prepare yourselves for some comedy gold…
http://www.heraldscotland.com/comment/columnists/lamonts-gambit-will-require-the-sale-of-the-century.19009104
I have no idea how Gardham even has a job, there is nothing correct in the link above. I’m no political heavy weight, but even I can tell that, it’s all demonstrably and provably incorrect or at best, opinion masquerading as fact.
An example; “Contrary to the SNP spin, comment on Labour websites and Facebook pages has been largely supportive.”
I mean, to base an argument or point on this basis is daft because messages on labour websites are massively edited and culled, (even if they weren’t it can’t be regarded as empirical.)
It would the same as using newsnetscotland and (dare I say) this admirable website’s comments as proof of support for SNP policies, the day a newspaper reporter does that is the day bats fly out my arse.
We all know Gardham etc do this sort of thing, its frustrating to think others might read his arse gravy outpourings and regard it as being informed. His really is an article of faith.
Was labour’s defeat in 2010 the worst in 70 years? I was under the impression nobody won that election, hence the coalition.
Whatever, the man talks mince.
The problem with the big lie is that it works as long as you hide reality from those you are attempting to sell it to. Once the big lie bumps up hard against reality, people can sense that something somewhere is going horribly wrong.
They call Salmond Hitler and his supportists are labelled as black shirts – the people look around them – they don’t see any facist marches, they don’t hear of people being disappeared. There are no punishment camps being set up or re-education centres. No one is being assassinated (except in the press, buts business as usual) In fact they don’t see anything that fits the narrative.
“Whit are they oan aboot?”
Then look a little harder and listen – what to do they hear from the unionists? Cuts to services, Cuts to education, Hounding and harvesting of the disabled. Old religious hatreds being stirred up again. Dreary announcements of disaster. Embarrassing gaffes backed up with less than convincing bravado. Sniping, sneering, carping, Jeering, finger jabbing, finger wagging. Cognitive dissonance, Narrative fallacy and self serving bias. And this is them lying about everything and nothing.
2 years of this remember. Salmond doesn’t have to defend independence and define what it means. The unionists are doing it for him by defining what Union is to them and showing people that there is an alternative.
Lamont’s generous gift to the YES Campaign comes days after Willie Rennie’s stroke of genius in inviting the English to tell the Scots that they should vote to stay in the union. Christmas come early.
I actually thought Gardhams peice was – as far as he can go – not really that supportive of Lamont.
i do agree that he has mistaken “Labour grass roots” as being those who post on Labour(s)hame – nothing could be further from the truth. That site only accepts posts from the most slavering extremists who would support Labour no matter what.
the rest was not exactly a ringing endorsement.
McHaggis
I think that Gardham’s piece was as honest as it could be.
The comedy gold was…
A thoughtful and loyal Labour stalwart I spoke to yesterday described Ms Lamont’s gambit thus: “It’s morally right but tactically disastrous. I don’t think it’s sellable. It means we’ll enter the next election miles ahead in the polls but then, in the privacy of the polling booth, people will vote Nat.”
When I think about THAT speech by Lamont the other day I have visions of a Pol Potesque “Year Zero” approach occurring if Labour win in the next G.E. and Holyrood elections.
Be afraid, VERY afraid!
Seasick Dave, maybe it was a comment on how unreliable opinion polls are, especially in Scotland?
(Is there a tongue in cheek smiley face I can use?)