I don't suppose you have offended anyone here, afterall, the notion that Labour has some god-given right to rule Britian is immature in a democracy.

David Johnson (Labour) said it all this morning...."We have left the country in a better state than it was when we took office in 1997".

Oh really?

Tell that to the voters who heard Blair say in 1997 that he would not be touching the economy for the first two years of his regime, in other words, there was now't wrong with the economy. Tell that to those denied a NHS dental service. Tell that to people who have witnessed record levels of immigration into their towns and cities when the people already settled there have not been able to find employment (two and a half million people unemployed now).

Labour has simply done what it did in 1951, 1970 and 1979...... It is leaving workers, not benefit claimants, to pay for their irresponsible ideology.

This is simply a response from someone at the opposite end of the bar and who has also been roped into repay the national debt.

It is perhaps worth pointing out that these days the Government at Westminster does not run Scotland. Thanks to devolution , Scotland, by and large is run by Alec Salmond and his mates. And this arrangement was put in place by a party dominated by people from Scotland , essentially without any input , consultation, or consent from the English people, precisely to ensure that a future Tory Government at Westminster would be powerless to do anything meaningful in Scotland

At the same time that party seemed to intend to rule England using Scottish and Welsh MPs votes at Westminster ad infinitum . Hence no form of "English votes for English laws"

It has been rather striking in the last few days how many of those appearing in front of the cameras expressing their views on what should be the Government , essentially, of England have been Scots (John Reid, Tom Harris , David Steel , Alex Salmond, Gordon Brown, etc etc),- not to mention the un-elected players (Lords Mandelson & Adonis and Alaister Campbell) Sometimes elected English voices seemed far and few

The old cry of "no mandate to govern in Scotland" cuts both ways. Given the overwhelming rejection of the previous Government in England , the agonising over whether the Scots would tolerate the English replacing the Government they had rejected with something else looks a bit odd to English eyes. Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander

Again - very simply , Scotland is largely autonomous these days and a situation where people are agonising over whether a given Government would be acceptable to people whom (by and large) it doesn't govern , when its evidently acceptable to those it does, looks mighty odd. Can you really have laws for England only being voted through with the votes of MPs from half a dozen parties which did not even stand in England, let alone attract a single vote there?

Take out the party names and policies , and in the abstract it would still have been a very curious and problematic situation