Super David Cameron's Key Note Speech Today

[Man of Harveys]

Yeah, come on everyone, just grow up a bit. Please, just because I said so, just ignore the fact that your beloved precious children's entire education is likely to be decided by people whose entire experience of the state education system is this. It's pathetic. Honestly. How old are you lot, really? Pipe down :wantstoseeleeflounce:

 

[Buzzer]

why class war - it was a statement on reality. If i am sending my son abroad, i need to trust that they will be safe and looked after. In the uk that is achieved by a police check. what's wrong with that? But exchange's aren't really your average comprehensive these days are they?

So in reality Tories have maids in their outhouses, do they?

Can't really be arsed with this level of debate anymore. Yes, you're right - all us Tories are upper class snobs with big houses, servants and really couldn't give a toss about anything except fox hunting and summer balls.

I'm outta this thread. Got poachers to shoot

 

[Man of Harveys]

all us Tories are upper class snobs with big houses, servants and really couldn't give a toss about anything except fox hunting and summer balls.

You also left out "greedily feathering their own nests and sodding the wider consequences".

 

[London Calling]

Agree completely. Gone are the days when we had ordinary politicians like Howe (Winchester and Cambridge), Heseltine (Shrewsbury and Oxford) and Howe(Winchester and Cambridge) who really understood what it was like to be an average working family.

Now we have people like David Davis (one-parent family on a council estate) or Eric Pickles (grammar school boy from Leeds) or Sayeeda Warsi (born to Pakistani immigrants). Completely out of touch. Fortunately we have some down to earth souls in Labour. Let's not forget Tony Blair (Fettes and Oxford), Hilary Benn (Holland Park, son of a peer),, Harriet Harman (granddaughter of an earl went to St Pauls) or Ed Balls (Nottingham independent High school and Oxford).

We could play this game all day.

Though, Heseltine Family ( I believe) were managers of mining enterprises such as "Rinto".

Leeds Grammar school is one of the Country elite (very middle class) and above. Though I know Eric Pickles from my days in Wakefield. Could easily have some more beers with him.

Doesn't Labour have more barristers in Parliament than the other parties.

My concern is that we still have this elite establishment in our society, which for all purposes, operates in a separate universe to the rest of us. They may end up in POlitics but have few links with the vast majority of people in this country.

Their Eton, Oxford etc links faciliate good opportunities in Consultancies, the media, in the City.

Opportunities - the majority of us will never have.

To me it is still a weakness of our society and how on earth in a modern society can we break it down.


I know the Swedes after 1945, introduced very progressive taxation, property ownership and liberalised land ownership.

I just cannot see that happening, when the elite has taken over control of our main political parties.

 

[London Calling]

We're still the 6th largest manufacturing country in the world.

The Unions f***ed so much of the manufacturing in the country due to the constant strikes on the '70's. That's when the manufacturing was hit.

Also, it's not down to jobs in manufacturing, it's down to output. We need to be efficient by our use of technology, as we can't throw cheap labour at it, as per China, India etc.

But, hey-ho, don't let economic reality affect your prejudice.

Also, Labour's been in power for 10 years, and what have they actively done to encourage manufacturing? Please enlighten me, as I genuinely cannot think of anything.

Outside the Car Industry there were few strikes across the other industrial sectors. And even in the car industry no more than in comparable economies.

Lets not forget 68 Paris and total closure of Citrone and Renault.

Basically, we lost our main manufacturing base due to cheaper labour elsewhere, the technology was no better (again car industry was different).

Established British textile/ clothing/ chemical companies like Courtaulds, closed factories all over the north and midlands. First moving to fascist spain and portugal the lowest wage areas in Europe but good links to Europe and then when their wages became too high off to India and far east before settling down to India and China.

We lost our apprenticements more because of:

Closer of the Skill Councils,
Closure of Technology Colleges and mass closure of courses.
Removal of subsidies from training, leaving businesses to pay for all the costs.
The last has hit home the most and businesses know and fear that they will train the staff for them to be poached else where.

And finally the privisation of our utilities:

The gas, water, steel and electricity industries were major trainers of good quality labour - just a shame they never put into pratice!

 

[London Calling]

INTERESTING READING AND FROM A DIVERSE RANGE OF PUBLIC AND ACADEMIC SOURCES


Commenting on the decision to invest in these projects, Science and Innovation Minister Ian Pearson said: "Manufacturing is a vital sector of the UK economy, accounting for over 50% of our exports.

And the UK is the world's sixth biggest manufacturer.



Given the UK's high-wage economy, future productivity and global competitiveness depend upon our ability to develop high-quality, clever technology and products. Major investment in innovative research and development, such as the twenty million pounds announced today, will enable us to maintain and improve the quality of the UK's manufacturing capability in key areas such as aerospace, healthcare, energy and recycling."


The UK's services industry is seen as the engine of growth for the national economy, accounting for a hearty 66% of gross domestic product (GDP).

By contrast, manufacturing shares little of the glory - and is in decline according to economic data from the ONS.

Therefore some might argue that such cut and dry definitions paint a misleading picture.

Nevertheless, it is generally acknowledged that UK manufacturing has suffered from years of under-investment.



Manufacturing output accounts for about 20% of the national economy, generating more than £150bn a year.

The sector also employs four million people - representing roughly 14% of everyone working in the UK.

A further 2.4 million jobs in the services industry depend upon manufacturing, says the CBI.



Manufacturers also provide 60% of the UK's exports - a sizeable contribution for a country that is heavily involved in international trade.

However, the economic influence of the manufacturing sector is slowly dwindling.

Just after World War II, for example, manufacturing accounted for almost 40% of the UK economy.

The sector also employs considerably less people than it used it. At the end of the 1970s, it employed just under a third of the total UK workforce.

And in the last year alone, an estimated 150,000 manufacturing jobs were lost.



The British manufacturing sector is fairly diversified, but its key strengths lie in the aerospace, high technology and pharmaceutical industries - and to some extent car production.

One of the largest manufacturing sectors is the production of food, beverages and tobacco.

However, many of the traditional heavy industries in the UK, such as ship-building and metal-bashing, have seen their fortunes decline.



image have also robbed manufacturing of the ability to modernise and attract new blood.

In addition, cheaper labour costs abroad have persuaded some companies to move their production operations to Eastern Europe or Asia.

Finally, the collapse of the telecom and technology sector last year dragged down even more the performance of the manufacturing industry as a whole.



(1st October 2008) In a further sign that manufacturers are struggling, Ford was gearing up to introduce a four-day week at a UK factory, although employees will stay on full pay.

The company said the production line at its Transit van plant in Southampton would fall silent on Mondays, and that 125 temporary workers would not be kept on at the site.

It blamed the "tough" economic climate for the move, which will see output fall from 74,000 vehicles in 2007 to below 70,000 this year.

British manufacturing is now shrinking at the fastest rate since records began nearly 17 years ago, figures released today showed.



The UK’s experience is not unique. The share of industrial activity in most OECD countries is also falling, with services now accounting for over 60 per cent of total GDP in all OECD countries.



Output per hour worked - the most commonly cited measure of labour productivity - in the market sector of the UK economy is 39 per cent below that in the United States. The UK’s productivity gap with France and Germany is around 20 per cent. The UK’s manufacturing sector contributes to this disadvantage.

US and French productivity advantages over the UK are driven by three sectors: the distributive trades (wholesale and retail), manufacturing and financial and business services. Germany’s productivity advantage is driven by a lead in manufacturing and financial and business services .However, the productivity gap with the US has disappeared in both mining and quarrying, and in the electricity, gas and water sectors.

 

[User removed 4]

You also left out "greedily feathering their own nests and sodding the wider consequences".

how you can say that without mentioning the labour party beggars belief.

 

[ROSM]

So in reality Tories have maids in their outhouses, do they?

Can't really be arsed with this level of debate anymore. Yes, you're right - all us Tories are upper class snobs with big houses, servants and really couldn't give a toss about anything except fox hunting and summer balls.

I'm outta this thread. Got poachers to shoot

I didn't say Tories had , I said Cameron's Middle England i.e. cameron himself had. Tell me I'm wrong?

Interestingly in a 4 paragraph post I made about comparing to thatcher in 79 or new labour and knowing the people and policies, you ignored all of it except the last bit which you have then misunderstood.

It was you that drove that level of debate - if you're so keen on high brow discussion how about covering the other items I raised - and whilst at it, please name 9 current Tory front benchers?

 

[ROSM]

And finally the privisation of our utilities:

The gas, water, steel and electricity industries were major trainers of good quality labour - just a shame they never put into pratice!

and here's the rub - the companies were privatised by a conservative government - sold on to american asset stripping companies (as Seeboard were) under a conservative government and only now are returning to european hands. The companies now are making significant profits but for the first time in a generation are investing in the networks and energy generation and what is the answer proposed? Windfall tax them!

Luckily, the current government are unlikely to do that as Domestic Customer Price Review controls (DCPR) are in place to ensure that capital investment is maintained at a level commensurate to profits - and who developed that Framework? I'll give you a clue, it wasn't them wot sold it off in the first place.

 

[Buzzer]

I didn't say Tories had , I said Cameron's Middle England i.e. cameron himself had. Tell me I'm wrong?

Interestingly in a 4 paragraph post I made about comparing to thatcher in 79 or new labour and knowing the people and policies, you ignored all of it except the last bit which you have then misunderstood.

It was you that drove that level of debate - if you're so keen on high brow discussion how about covering the other items I raised - and whilst at it, please name 9 current Tory front benchers?

Okay. I'll bite seeing as you asked so nicely.

You know what, I have no idea whether Cameron has a maid nor do I know whether he has an outhouse. You seem to be in the know and hold a lot of store by it, you tell me. Why does this bother you so much?

Is it only Tories with maids and outhouses that you dismiss or do you do this to politicians of other parties? And if the Tory doesn't have a maid or an outhouse does that make their political views more relevant? I have neither but my politics seem eerily close to Cameron's therefore would you listen to my views but not his - even though they're very close. Can you see the absurdity of your position, you little class warrior, you?

Does Gordon Brown have a maid? What about Harman? I know Shaun Woodward has a butler - what do you make of him? More absurdities.

I ignored the rest of your diatribe because I skim read it and saw your little dig at Cameron and his "middle England" having maids and outhouses. Really, you could have written the most compelling argument ever for not voting Tory but I couldn't be arsed to read it as I think you're a deeply prejudiced and envy-ridden numpty. Maids and outhouses, eh? That's quite some basis for your political convictions.

On the subject of Cameron's middle England - and I'm sure you'll see why I inferred what I did from what you wrote - If you go around starting a paragraph with Daily Mail and ending it with phrases like Middle England (albeit Cameron's) I assume you mean a large proportion of the middle classes. Why is Cameron's middle England different from Blair's of 1997? It's the outhouse thing, isn't it? Damn - should have guessed.

Can I name 9 current tory frontbenchers? Of course I can. I'm quite a political animal, I'm staunchly Conservative and not exactly representative of the vox populi. Do you want me to name them? I can if you want but what purpose would it serve? I could just google them for all you know.

You're yet another anti-Tory poster hiding your class prejudices under some banner of "floating voter wishing to be persuaded". Perhaps NSC could start a support group.

 

[Man of Harveys]

Hey, I admit it: I really thought you meant it with your big old FLOUNCEROO.

 

[Southover Street Seagull]

so they didnt actively set out to destroy apprenticeships as you implied ?

I never once implied that they set out to destroy apprenticeships, I just answered your question on how I beleive they did it.

I think it may have been Strings who said they single-handedly destroyed apprenticeships.

 

[Southover Street Seagull]

London Calling, who was responsible for all of this?

We lost our apprenticements more because of:

Closer of the Skill Councils,
Closure of Technology Colleges and mass closure of courses.
Removal of subsidies from training, leaving businesses to pay for all the costs.
The last has hit home the most and businesses know and fear that they will train the staff for them to be poached else where.

And finally the privisation of our utilities:

The gas, water, steel and electricity industries were major trainers of good quality labour - just a shame they never put into pratice!
__________________

 

[User removed 4]

I never once implied that they set out to destroy apprenticeships, I just answered your question on how I beleive they did it.

I think it may have been Strings who said they single-handedly destroyed apprenticeships.

fair enough !

 

[Southover Street Seagull]

and here's the rub - the companies were privatised by a conservative government - sold on to american asset stripping companies (as Seeboard were) under a conservative government and only now are returning to european hands. The companies now are making significant profits but for the first time in a generation are investing in the networks and energy generation and what is the answer proposed? Windfall tax them!

Luckily, the current government are unlikely to do that as Domestic Customer Price Review controls (DCPR) are in place to ensure that capital investment is maintained at a level commensurate to profits - and who developed that Framework? I'll give you a clue, it wasn't them wot sold it off in the first place.

Perhaps the DCPR should be increased to reduce their obscene profits and give us even more capital investment?

 

[ROSM]

Perhaps the DCPR should be increased to reduce their obscene profits and give us even more capital investment?

or they could sell up and pass back to other companies who may make less obvious profit but dont invest back?

 

[Southover Street Seagull]

or they could sell up and pass back to other companies who may make less obvious profit but dont invest back?

That's the trouble isn't it, as you soon as you threaten these companies by taking away some of their vast profits they come back with the threat of selling up to someone slighlty less scrupolous than they are!

IMHO the Government should buy all the utilities back for what they were sold for in the 80's and 90's and we wouldn't have all these problems with obscene profits while people have their gas and electricity turned off in the winter!

 

[ROSM]

Okay. I'll bite seeing as you asked so nicely.

You know what, I have no idea whether Cameron has a maid nor do I know whether he has an outhouse. You seem to be in the know and hold a lot of store by it, you tell me. Why does this bother you so much?

Is it only Tories with maids and outhouses that you dismiss or do you do this to politicians of other parties? And if the Tory doesn't have a maid or an outhouse does that make their political views more relevant? I have neither but my politics seem eerily close to Cameron's therefore would you listen to my views but not his - even though they're very close. Can you see the absurdity of your position, you little class warrior, you?

Does Gordon Brown have a maid? What about Harman? I know Shaun Woodward has a butler - what do you make of him? More absurdities.

I ignored the rest of your diatribe because I skim read it and saw your little dig at Cameron and his "middle England" having maids and outhouses. Really, you could have written the most compelling argument ever for not voting Tory but I couldn't be arsed to read it as I think you're a deeply prejudiced and envy-ridden numpty. Maids and outhouses, eh? That's quite some basis for your political convictions.

On the subject of Cameron's middle England - and I'm sure you'll see why I inferred what I did from what you wrote - If you go around starting a paragraph with Daily Mail and ending it with phrases like Middle England (albeit Cameron's) I assume you mean a large proportion of the middle classes. Why is Cameron's middle England different from Blair's of 1997? It's the outhouse thing, isn't it? Damn - should have guessed.

Can I name 9 current tory frontbenchers? Of course I can. I'm quite a political animal, I'm staunchly Conservative and not exactly representative of the vox populi. Do you want me to name them? I can if you want but what purpose would it serve? I could just google them for all you know.

You're yet another anti-Tory poster hiding your class prejudices under some banner of "floating voter wishing to be persuaded". Perhaps NSC could start a support group.

now tell me what you really think?

it wasn't a diatribe and one throw away comment about maids, outhouses and the daily mail has you throwing a hissy'un

The point is, if Cameron wants to win big at the next election he has to win people like me over (late 30s, married, kids, homeowner, professional). I've voted Tory before - pre 92 - he needs to make me vote again. He hasn't yet and that's not a class thing - as you say there are many upper class labour members - it's I dont know what he stands for and how he will improve the society I live in.

 

[ROSM]

That's the trouble isn't it, as you soon as you threaten these companies by taking away some of their vast profits they come back with the threat of selling up to someone slighlty less scrupolous than they are!

IMHO the Government should buy all the utilities back for what they were sold for in the 80's and 90's and we wouldn't have all these problems with obscene profits while people have their gas and electricity turned off in the winter!

agree entirely - privatisation on many fronts has been a significant problem

 

[London Calling]

London Calling, who was responsible for all of this?

We lost our apprenticements more because of:

Closer of the Skill Councils,
Closure of Technology Colleges and mass closure of courses.
Removal of subsidies from training, leaving businesses to pay for all the costs.
The last has hit home the most and businesses know and fear that they will train the staff for them to be poached else where.

And finally the privisation of our utilities:

The gas, water, steel and electricity industries were major trainers of good quality labour - just a shame they never put into pratice!
__________________

Well it all started in 1979.................................

Being involved in economic development at the time, I was aware of the strategic policy to remove "state" training and the Govt mantra of "free market" will decide.

CBI, TU's, Employer Federations were all againgst the "package" but as I highlight, all the different elements on there own did not destroy the apprenticeships scheme and the Govt was always able to state this to an ignorant or non caring public..

Many people in my field of work and the businesses I work with, believe, the German edge on good training and our lack of training, is making the difference between our productivity and quality of good from the Germans. And when you read Germany, read the nordic countries which have even higher quality of production.