Avarice is greed, be it money, power or fame.

Personally I think he's selfish, slavish to dogma when pragmatism is required at the moment.

Yes I do. You do know that I was referring to Tony Bliar, don't you? Obviously not. This is what I said,

'But they cannot win an election on that alone and have previously branched into wider areas of the political spectrum and ignored their traditional voters with the most avaricious leader we will probably ever see.'

COYP

Caused by ineffective oppositions.

And I fully accept that my Conservatives have been less than impressive oppositions during certain periods.

Maybe most avaricious former leader/PM would be more accurate. On doing a a google search it appears print media left and right agree.

And I didn't know that in Labour's 1st year in power, Peter Mandelson told senior executives in Silicon Valley. “We are intensely relaxed about people get­ting filthy rich”, Peter Mandelson told senior executives in the US silicon valley.

I knew this was the case, I didn't know it was stated openly.

Anyway, I think we can all agree it's created a broader Labour party which will nearly always disappoint plenty, whether intentionally or as a result of aiming to please to many and unable/failing to.

COYP

Unfortunately that is what people look at when asked if he's been a good PM or his legacy. They then think again after hearing other people criticising him and asking exactly what has he done again?

Fiscal Discipline.
"Reducing the deficit by two thirds." Isn't it currently half what it was in 2010?

Legalising gay marriage.

800,000 less unemployed in starter jobs in a worldwide upturn. (I agree some hours are better than idleness)

Hardship for the disabled.

Working in a coalition govt.

Delivering progressive policies because of coalition partners.

Having ill thought and poorly planned policies reversed/cancelled/objected by his own party or not passed through the House of Lords.

It's not that impressive really. Maybe it would've been more impressive with 3 more years and fiscal discipline, which I thought was required to a certain extent for quite a long time, restricting what can be done. But for a while I've been unimpressed and thought something might happen to end him prematurely. I didn't think we'd get a majority vote for Brexit to cause it.

So it's not been a calamity but there's been no big tests or global economic crisis to test us, although the austerity was partly to be prepared for crises, which I again agree with.

Edited by Rudi Hedman (13 Jul 2016 5.31pm)

COYP

I agree with you, especially in bold.

Had a lot more to give and didn't fulfil his potential? Hmmmm, yep, probably.

The points I made I think should be raised, especially when you hear people talking about what's on the surface.

We now have a PM who isn't a saleswoman or considering her image all the time but has her own challenges of the time. Brexit. But if it wasn't for Brexit, she wouldn't be there.Same possibly for Dave and post 07/08 financial crisis.

COYP