Talk:Norman Lamont
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| B | This article has been rated as b-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] | ||
 |
This article is supported by WikiProject Peerage. | ||
 |
This article is within the scope of the Scottish Islands WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of islands in Scotland. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. | ||
| B | This page has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. | ||
| Low | This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale. | ||
|
Article Grading: |
|||
Moved from article, a bit pointed to be left in unattributed.
- Following on from Lawson, Lamont also ducked the issue of giving autonomy to the Bank of England to set interest rates. As a result the tax incentives and other measures Lamont brought in for the 1991 and 1992 budgets as 'bribes' for the general election worsened the recession. Lamont did manage to wrongfoot the Shadow Chancellor John Smith during the election campaign as it was impossible for Smith to outflank Lamont on Tax incentives as the Conservatives own measures were unsustainable.
Pcb21| Pete 10:07, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
This section:
- Whatever the political problems his policies caused, it was during his time as Chancellor that the basic principles which led to Bruitain's economic success in the past 10 years were first spelled out. Conventional wisdom said that without membership of the ERM, there could be no successful counter-inflationary policy in the UK. In fact, within a remarkably short space of time a formal inflation target had been adopted, monetary policy had been given intellectual rigour and restoration of public finances had begun. All these measures caused great unpopularity at the time. But they became the building blocs of economic policy under his successors, who were able to reap the gain from the pain which he had inflicted on consumers.
appears to be a POV atack on Gordon Brown. I haven't changed it, but it needs backing up/referencing that Lamont is essentially to credit for the UK economy since he left office.
I agree, this is hagiography.1Z 12:23, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] No mention of the hundreds of thousands that lost their homes thanks to him.
hmm
[edit] Change the photo
What a partisan, biased photograph! There should not be a photo showing David Cameron more in the limelight, just Norman Lamont! It should be changed immediately. --Dovea 17:38, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Supposed Paddington Incident
I remember it being reported at the time; It was a wonderful example of tabloid journalism - a story aparrently based on no evidence being printed because it was salaciously ammusing and involved a senior politician. It also demonstrates the power of the libel laws in the UK to supress any mention of a story and the power of the press in that an untruth, once printed, can be denied and retracted, but never totally eradicated.
A Journalist interviewed a Mr Onanugu who was said to have served Mr Lamont. He was possibly paid by the journalist for the interview. The story sounds rather ammusing - but was it true? The evidence shows that it was not. NL denied the story. I seem to recall that no evidence was produced. I also recall that no other journalist could find a item combination for sale at the said shop totalling the ammount claimed. All reporting of the incident stopped, as it became aparrent that the story could not be proved. While lack of evidence would not normally get in the way of a good story, in this case, as NL had denied the incident, further reference to the incident would result in a libel suit with perhaps tens of thousands of pounds being awarded against the newspaper.
The aftermath, even unto the present day:
Mr Onanugu left the employment of Threshers soon after this. Some time later Labour politician Dennis Healy appeared in a television advert for a credit card brand and was pictured standing in front of a branch of Threshers raising his trademark eyebrows and making remarks referring obliquely to the incident. NL sued for Libel as a result of which the advert was withdrawn.[1] The Paddington incident, particularly Mr Onanugu, is still to this day referred to by Private Eye Magazine e.g. in this spoof review for a Dictionary of Biography:[2]
"Warren Onanugu (1962–1999), who 'earned his place in history' as 'the Paddington-based wineshop manager who once sold a plastic bag of clinking bottles to a Conservative Chancellor of the Exchequer';"
Impact of potential Libel suit:
Any repetition of the refuted allegations would leave the publisher open to libel.88.111.135.215 17:05, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
"Threshergate", along with all the other Lamont scandal stories, is in print in Major's memoirs (pp678-9), Seldon's biography of Major (p346) and Lamont's own memoirs (pp313-6), most of these books published nearly a decade later. Lamont does not mention suing for libel, merely that he later took it up with the Press Complaints Commission, only to be told that it was "out of time".
[edit] Unemployment
I remember Lamont being criticised for telling the House Of Commons that unemploymment was "a price well worth paying" for bringing inflation under control. This should be mentioned somewhere. Pawnkingthree 11:32, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Pinochet: POV?
Editors might wonder why there is no positive comment on NL's support for Pinochet. It's because I couldn't find any.1Z 13:08, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Business interests
Any reason why this section was deleted?1Z 20:03, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Threshers visit
Were they not cheap cigarettes etc? -- maxrspct ping me 01:09, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
No, they were "Raffles", a brand of which Lamont claimed never to have heard.
