If someone walked up to you, then took away your money, wouldn't you hope that they'd at least use it wisely? Or have done their sums first, as to ensure they didn't need to come back later saying "Please Sir, can I have some more?"
I have a number of issues with the Labour party, some of which I will discuss. Firstly there is Iraq, I actually protested against this in sixth form. You may think that subsequently joining the armed forces may have been a bit of a conundrum, but it happened. I was younger back then and have since learnt much about how the world works, though I remain uneasy about the decision to go there in the first place.
I agreed with the threat of intervening in Syria, and regardless of any eventual action or not, I firmly believe that the "threat" of action was more important than any actual action. The mistakes of Iraq overshadowed the debate concerning Syria. I understand the lesson of learning from past mistakes, but if you constantly look into the past, you can't see where you are going. Much can also be said for the way in which the leader of the opposition played politics during the Syria debate.
There were Labour policies during 13 years in power, that if you judged purely on helping people, they may well have gotten my vote. Labour came into power in 1997 towards the back end of my first year in Comprehensive school. I grew up in the north east and became an adult under the previous Labour government; it would be a mistake to deny that my life has been shaped by their policies, but I will explain why I can't vote for them.
Regardless of whether bankers caused problems in the financial world, far too many people were reckless with their money. We were, and in some cases remain to be a nation intentionally living beyond our means. Labour spent beyond their means and we will be living in the fallout from that for many years to come. The mistake now, would be to make unfunded spending promises, which is precisely what Labour are doing.
I don't believe in everything the Conservative Party are doing. For example; the spare room subsidy is a policy I agree with, and whilst it is a policy that angers many people, I do accept how the implementation could have been done a hell of a lot better. The larger unseen issue is the particular needs, feelings and "wants" of the individual, which are often raw and painful; these often conflict with the wider concept that is the state as a whole.
What many with an interest in politics will never accept, is that not everyone agrees all of the time. Have you ever walked into a room of 20 people (all with opposing points of views) and tried to get everyone to sing from the same song sheet without any of them giving up ground? Now try being a politician and doing it with millions of people. Those in the north often feel aggrieved if people in the south complain about subsidising the north economically. Rather than try to come up with a solution to something which in many cases is cold hard fact, people take it as a personal attack.
I would like to see the day where we don't need to provide as much welfare. I do think we should make a concerted effort to protect the vulnerable in society, notice I say vulnerable and not just poor. Though rather than blindly increase spending to keep everyone "just ok" (and undoubtedly addicted to supporting Labour), I would much prefer people to neither want or need the support.
This is where my biggest issue with Labour arrives. Their spending during 13 years of power was like a parent who was present, but ambivalent, throwing money at a problem to try and make it go away. Since the last election it seems that the parental view of Labour is to bring back socialism and throw money at everything again. To me the Labour party thinks it is the absent parent, that come their five years in the wilderness (up to 2015), still doesn't want to take responsibility for their behaviour.
Whether physically in power or not, Labour's reckless spending and their promises for the future tell me many things. One of these is that somewhere between the election in 2010 and present day 2013, the last person in their policy department forgot to turn out the lights before leaving and locking the door behind them.
It seems that despite the lights being left on, they're having trouble finding the key. To hide this fact, they're plastering the red filter of socialism over the glass. It may look enticing and pretty to some, but it remains the same old ineffective Labour party. The lights are on but there's no credible policy home.