Do we have the right to expect the coalition to stick to their word?

[studentbob]

If the coalition government didn't have access to the figures that revealed just what a mess labour had made of the economy until they were elected, how can they be blamed for having to change their economic policies to get us out of the mess?

 

Even if the argument about not knowing the figures was valid, it is not appropriate in this situation. The government has expressed a desire to tackle excessive bonuses. If they don't do it then that's because they have changed their minds, or they never intended to do it in the first place.

 

Of course if the banks go ahead with the big bonuses then the government will probably just fall back on the old 'we have to allow companies to be able to retain staff who otherwise would go abroad' argument.

 

It is morally unjustifiable for a government to use the wealth creation argument, when the wealth created is shared by such a small and ever dwindling proportion of the population.

 

At least Blair gave us a few quid back in tax credits.

[Mecky]

It doesn't matter if they do or don't. What matters is what you're going to do about it.

[HeadingNorth]

What excuse do they have for not seeing through their own coalition agreement re bankers bonuses?

 

How do you know that they don't intend to see it through? Were you under the impression that a governing party decides to do something one day, and it becomes law the next?

[Guest sibon]

How do you know that they don't intend to see it through? Were you under the impression that a governing party decides to do something one day, and it becomes law the next?

 

You are correct of course, it does take time.

 

What steps have they taken so far in pursuit of their "robust action"?

[taxman]

How do you know that they don't intend to see it through? Were you under the impression that a governing party decides to do something one day, and it becomes law the next?

 

No, but they didn't drag their feet on the VAT rise, the school cuts or the increase in student fees.

[Keith Rich]

Much has been made on this forum of the reasons for the Lib Dems shunning most of their manifesto. So, they are a minority party. They can't implement most of their ideas. Apparently it also allows them to break pledges at will.

 

Today the entire coalition gets a chance to show the country what to expect. Consider this story:

 

Bankers to pay themselves outrageous levels of bonuses again.

 

and

 

compare it to section 4 of the coalition agreement.

 

Will we finally see Cameron and Clegg keeping their word?

 

There's very little governments can do about greedy bankers except tax them higher.

[Guest sibon]

There's very little governments can do about greedy bankers except tax them higher.

 

What about Governments that own banks?

[HeadingNorth]

What about Governments that own banks?

 

That depends how the bank's constitution is set up. (Constitution's probably the wrong word but I can't think of the right one.)

 

Pay and bonuses are most likely set by a remuneration committee and not by shareholders.

[Gormenghast]

It doesn't matter if they do or don't. What matters is what you're going to do about it.

 

I'm going to vote against him so that Clegg, or any other Liberal candidate, doesn't get elected again as my MP.

 

But by then he'll probably have defected to the Tories and be in a safe seat down south to pay him back for his support.

[andyofborg]

I think they've just decided to use the fact that there are two parties in a coalition as an excuse to change what they said. Take VAT. both parties were opposed to an increase and yet both have supported it.

 

That said, maybe they'll surprise us all. They have majority control of several banks remember, so it shouldn't be too difficult to get the bonuses under control.

 

only one bank