Sentences with phrase «labour government did»

The Labour government did reduce the national debt - as shown in the national accounts - as a share of national income at the end of the last century (although it's questionable whether most people would understand this to be the «last few years» of which Brown went on to speak).

The Labour Government did not carry out a comprehensive impact assessment.

What the last Labour government did deliver was the lowest rates of new house - building since the Second World War.

But he pointed out «the most popular thing that the last Labour government did was the minimum wage, a demand of the trade unions».

It is enough that Labour would, as it did in the days of George Lansbury, be directed into a position of «peace at any price», even if that were saving lives from genocide in Kosovo and Sierra Leone, as a previous Labour government did.

And, of course, the Labour government did not have a «Star Chamber» and all agreed on spending plans.

Clement Attlee's Labour government did in 1950, with a majority of just five.

Tessa Jowell admitted «there was not any good reason» why the Labour government did not take action against the illegal activities of newspapers.

Miliband says last Labour government did not act against press «because they feared consequences»

I can give you plenty of examples where the last Labour government did not spend money well and, as someone who believes that spending on health and education can change lives, it is incumbent on me to make sure that every pound is well spent.

I thought what the last Labour government did overall was really good.

As I have said before, the last Labour government did not spend every pound of public money well.

So in the coming weeks and months, when people ask what would a Labour government do, let's go out and tell them:

What would a Labour government do if it came to power?

John Hutton today attempted to prove the Labour government does have a vision on the environment.

Then it's out of our hands — at the moment we decide — or at least a Labour government does.

The definition of socialism is what a Labour government does and anything this government does is progressive reform — by definition.

«Time and time again Welsh Liberal Democrats have called for an audit of Welsh procurement, yet what has the Labour Government done?

Not exact matches

Just in from Paris, some fascinating quotables from the OECD: Governments must do more to help workers adapt to new global economy, says OECD Rather than seeing globalisation as a threat, OECD governments should focus on improving labour regulations and social protection systems to help people adapt to changing jGovernments must do more to help workers adapt to new global economy, says OECD Rather than seeing globalisation as a threat, OECD governments should focus on improving labour regulations and social protection systems to help people adapt to changing jgovernments should focus on improving labour regulations and social protection systems to help people adapt to changing job markets.

Kenney also said the government is particularly unhappy that wages have not kept up with inflation, which does not suggest a tight labour market.

Nor does it in any way restrict federal, provincial or territorial governments from implementing new laws and regulations in areas such as health and safety, labour protection, education and the environment.

There's much more to do before the government can claim to be a climate leader, warns Labour's Barry Gardiner

A number of provincial governments are understandably reluctant to do anything that might significantly increase the cost of labour and therefore weaken an already - fragile economy.

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said: «I think what we need in this country is something more robust like a War Powers Act so that governments do get held to account by Parliament for what they do in our name.»

In the 1960s, the Harold Wilson Labour government forced secondary schools to become comprehensive and the Catholic system changed in a matter of years almost as if going comprehensive was something to be done «in the spirit of Vatican II».

I don't think there are many who relish another Tory Government, but frankly, when you have «New Nazi» in power for 12 long and bloody years (Iraq & Afghan Wars) you get to the stage where absolutely ANYONE BUT LABOUR will do.

The hypothetical (and it is a very, very extreme one, not a prediction) would involve Harriet Harman or someone else leading Labour, while A.N.Other politician, with whom the Liberal Democrats felt they could do business, acting as the head of a coalition government.

McKeever advises that businesses can break through if they adopt «a real engagement with the principles that were in the Labour manifesto — around pay ratios, what businesses would have to do to get public sector contracts under a Labour government».

The «raft of authoritarian legislation» introduced by the Labour government has done little to improve security, Menzies Campbell has warned.

«I agree with Jeremy that we should have a Labour government, but I just don't think he really believes that,» Labour MP Chris Bryant said.

Look away from the bubble and see municipal politicians such as Sir Richard Leese, Labour leader of Manchester City Council, doing their best to use the heavily circumscribed powers of local government to gain real results for their populations.

Luke, you don't seem to have much confidence in Labour as a party that can retain popular support if the Lib Dems got a share of government.

Of course, as Littlejohn rightly points out, after 13 years of Labour government, «if the public really did have the power to change legislation, the government would pass a law against it».

Surely some of New Labour's right - wing excesses reflect an attitude that Labour can more or less do what it likes in government without alienating too much of its core progressive constituency as this constituency has nowhere else to go.

I do find it somewhat odd that Baker continues to serve in the govt if he believes this but is it any odder than (say) Tony Benn staying in the 1974 - 9 Labour government?

I agree that the redistributive settlement needs to be embedded within society's concept of how things work rather than seen as after - the - fact «meddling» in outcomes, but I think this is incompatible with a government that very clearly is meddling in all kinds of things, as New Labour did.

I do think both the media and the government itself can easily caricature «Old Labour» (the idea was to create a caricature) as if ideas of gradual change, appealing to broad coalitions had not been thought of pre-1945, in 1945, in the 1960s, etc..

He told the Guardian: «There are quite a lot of Labour MPs who will take the view that if I'm going to rebel against the government, today is not the day to do it.»

Alistair Campbell once said of the New Labour government «we don't do God», and there remains strong reasons why the current government should continue to abide by this principle.

Its recent years in government hide the fact that the Labour movement has an amazing and unique story, itself growing from disenfranchised people organising in much the same way as the students are doing today.

Abrahams does her best to outline the steps the Labour government has taken, mirroring the explanations of Gordon Brown about the «tough but fair» points - based system.

We need Jeremy to do the right thing for the party, for the country and for people who most need a Labour government.

The government's new lobbying bill has very little to do with lobbyists, and everything to do with restricting the ability of trade unions to campaign for Labour.

If the party does attempt to compete on this basis, a Labour government might find it difficult to reverse Tory spending cuts.

«When we first did it, the audience's obsession was much more about the coalition government in 2010 and how that was working out, and now it's much more about what's happening in the Labour party.»

Road and pipeline construction is labour intensive, but often done by existing companies and government contractors using workers from other parts of the country.

Coalition ministers are expected to propose the move in the lobbying bill, which will be published today, but Labour is promising to table amendments pushing the changes through if they do not appear in the government package.

But that doesn't mean that the Blair - Brown wars that paralysed the last three Labour governments are now ancient history and that everybody has moved on.

I watched Brown to day, he is a very very poor leader end of story, he is dragging this government into a very very long stay out of power, I do think people will see Labour in the future as we see the Lib Dem's OK to sit in opposition sadly a waste of time running the country, what next a New Toy Blair, a new newer lLabour in the future as we see the Lib Dem's OK to sit in opposition sadly a waste of time running the country, what next a New Toy Blair, a new newer labourlabour.

Labour, which will have been in power for 12 years by this May, can not sell itself on a concept of «change»: right now, it's only real narrative is that the last thing Britain needs to do is change its government.