How dangerous a line is this for Cameron?
July 8th, 2008
How will the poor takes lessons on their plight from an Old-Etonian?
A day after Gordon Brown was lecturing us about not wasting food the Times is splashing Cameron’s speech yesterday when he said that some of those “who are poor, fat or addicted to alcohol or drugs have only themselves to blame.”
The report goes on:“In a conscious shift of strategy, the Tory leader said he would not shirk from discussing public morality and claimed that social problems were often the consequence of individuals’ choices. “We talk about people being ‘at risk of obesity’ instead of talking about people who eat too much and take too little exercise,” he said. “We talk about people being at risk of poverty, or social exclusion: it’s as if these things — obesity, alcohol abuse, drug addiction — are purely external events like a plague or bad weather…“Of course, circumstances — where you are born, your neighbourhood, your school and the choices your parents make — have a huge impact. But social problems are often the consequence of the choices people make.“
Just reading the article you can see this approach appealing to the core Tory vote - but what about others? And Cameron himself is getting onto pretty thin ice when he talks about poverty.
In the hard world of politics there are enough things in the speech for his opponents to latch onto which when separated from the overall theme might not look so defensible.
I just wonder whether the appalling spate of bad news and poor ratings for Brown and Labour has made the Tory leader a bit too confident. Dangerous.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Sounds like Cameron’s been watching too much Jeremy Kyle…
Not sure Mike. From a purely political perspective, this kind of message chimes with precisely the right people, the C2s and Ds who were the backbone of the Thatcher and Blair co-alitions, whom the Tories have lost touch with for some time. Unless I’m mistaken, Cameron’s policy is not to reach out to Hampstead Heath and Richmond, but rather Hornchurch and Orpington.
However you are right that the papers could cause trouble detached from the underlying message - “Tories in disarray” nonsense like they have tried (and apparently failed) over Ray Lewis. However I think with Brown being Brown there is still a substantial cushion to fall onto even if one message goes seriously off-key …
alot of this could be spun badly by Labour, but at the end of the days Cameron is telling the truth. I’d rather we had a PM who said we were being stupid, said we were seeing up our own lives, than a PM like Brown, who runs a nanny state, and attempts to cover the whoe country in a veneer of PC
Why is it dangerous for Cameron to point out that into the twelfth year of Labour, the public health has deteriorated, with less exercise, worse diets and rising obesity? If Labour want to try and spin the “but Cameron can’t speak on this because he is loaded!” line, fine - but he’s right to remind people that under Labour, the poor have got poorer - which has fueled these problems. The public mood is that after a vast increase in taxes and borrowing, this Government has not tackled child poverty as promised (mostly because we continue to import it through essentially open borders); has seen us slide down the international rankings on reading and numeracy skills; and has allowed many of the domestic unemployed to become long-term unemployable, as they slide into dependance on the state (when work they could have been performing is undertaken by imported foreign workers - whose presence has driven up rents and house prices and looping all the poor - working or not - back into poverty).
Labour has given us a fatter, thicker, poorer population, addicted to alcohol, drugs and credit. And it is always someone else’s fault.
Has David Cameron ever done a day’s work in his life?
What did he do for a living prior to becoming an M.P.?
I agree with Mike - it is the first really bad headline I have seen from Cameron for a long time.
Also, what is the policy implication of this? Politicians lecturing the “poor and fat” isn’t really going to make things any better…….if you reject the “nanny state”, you have to come up with a way of helping people to make better choices. No sign that Cameron has any useful ideas in that regard.
Er, don’t you think that Cameron is includin himself in “the fat”?
Strange how you hear these rich politicians who have never had to struggle to buy food or clothes for their kids lecture people on their lifestyles . They seem to think it is ok for their pals to live a champagne swilling cocaine snorting Bullingdon club existence .
5. - Why do you ask? It makes a difference?
8 - Mark Senior - Shame on you. I ever thought to hear you talk about dear Gordon in that way!
9.
I will leave that to my good friend, Dennis Skinner to answer
More generally i think the thread misses the point, and falls into the Blairite trap of believing that winning elections is the end, not the (necessary) means to the end. If you are an unabashed believer in “big tent politics” then of course you will criticise anything that has a chance of losing even a single vote. But if a politician wants to achieve anything substantial then he knows that this is ultimately a pipe dream anyway.
Cameron’s big political message is social responsibility, and reducing reliance on the state. If the Conservatives want to put this message into action then it doesn’t do them any good to wait until they are in Govt before spelling out the implications. As long as people blame their circumstances or the State for their every suffering, then they will expect the State to provide the solutions.
And such a message can also be a vote winner with the right people. And those right people are most likely to be found in those who will decide an election.
5,11- he worked on policy and campaigns for a decade, he often worked 20 hour days.
Mike is right (I don’t say that very often!) And the reactions here this morning show it pretty categorically. The Tory core people here think that’s exactly what he should be doing, the non-Tories take against it big time, and Alex, the thinking person’s political agnostic weighs it all up very carefully!
Seem to remember Edwina Currie saying something similar!
Hmmmm perhaps Cameron should announce a Ministry to deal with such matters as obesity when he becomes PM, may I suggest Eric Pickles to lead it.
14 - lol, I thought mine was a pretty pro-Cameron post!
What is interesting is that Cameron made the speech when campaigning in Glasgow. So he obviously thinks that this is something that can resonate in unlikely areas.
The Guardian are rather less sensationalist in their reporting.
It is dangerous, but I suppose there is a question of what David Cameron is in politics for. If it is for anything more than getting elected, now is the time to explain what.
Like Mr Smithson, I don’t like the tone of this message: it’s quite a toff to tell a scruff the big mistake he’s making. But it is of a piece with caring Conservatism. The much more friendly Rachel Sylvester article, also in the Times today, gives more insight into the Tories’ thinking. We may be seeing just where David Cameron really wants to plant his flag.
11 - Ah yes, good old Dennis. Aged 76 years - exactly half of which have been as an MP. His honest years working as a miner are, unfortunately, a distant memory.
Got any proof of the cocaine snorting Mark or are you just been your normal offensive self?
Ladbrokes, Paddy Power and William Hill have all taken down their Glasgow East prices. On Betfair the Lib Dems have tightened from 200 yesterday to 100:
Lab 1.91
SNP 2.06
LD 100
Con 150
Any Other 200
http://www.betfair.com/
19. Of course he has no proof, he just like’s insulting tories, actually backing it up is ignored.
Betfair - Next General Election: Overall Majority
Con Majority 1.78
No Overall Majority 3.6
Lab Majority 5.9
Any Other Party Majority 130
It’s going to resonate with the female votes still not sure about whether Cameron is ‘for real’. Up to now there has been some reluctance to David Cameron from this group, they think he is a nice guy saying anything to get elected just like Tony Blair did; and it’s not what they want any more.
They know what he is saying is true, and the fact that it’s not a popular thing to say will impress them for the fact that he is being open.
I agree with Mike, it is a risky strategy that could go wrong but hey, I’d rather have a leader prepared to take risks - especially if they are facing up to the genuine issues we face as a society.
Thats what I thought, but Mark likes to dish it out. Can never take it though.
With Britain on the brink of recession - even according to a survey that has up till now been relatively upbeat - Cameron can afford to take a few chances.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2008/07/08/nborrow508.xml
Re Mark at 8, I have to agree with the first sentence. Mr Cameron really has no real idea of what life is like for some. BUT he is not alone in this and politicans of all parties share this neglect, especially when seeking the support of the media.
If he or they had been brought up in a poor area and worked in that environment on a daily basis I do not think he would say that. For some their is little or no choice.
A sad day for a Conservative party seeking to spread its appeal.
At last something we can all agree on. A disgraceful attack on PBs own Nick Palmer in the Daily Maily - Quentin Letts http://tinyurl.com/6cywa5
“Easily the most prattish comment of the day came from Nick Palmer (Lab, Broxtowe), a mystifyingly useless parliamentarian who claimed that Mr Benn’s ‘courageous decision’ just showed that the Tories took the attitude of ‘when in doubt, kill something’.”
I cannot imagine anyone who visits PB buys the Daily Mail (which is all about Max Moseley’s hobby today - but if anyone does a boycott is in order.
PB.com in discussion of Tory Policy( I might keep a running tally as by my reckoning thats the 2nd one in a week).
It gets worse:
“By the way, I notice that the gormless, idiotic Palmer used to take quite a few thousand quid a year from Novartis for his constituency work and newsletters.
Novartis is a science company. Mr Benn’s statement yesterday, with its promises of state-funded research into cattle vaccines, will benefit the science world.”
The obvious solution would be to vacinate the Cows - a lot of TB is spread by cattle movements and once you have killed all the badgers what about deer etc. etc.
Now if the proposal had been to get rid of cats that sh1t in my garden and kill song birds I would be all for it but I’m with Nick on badgers.
The Times headline doesn’t accurately portray the speech. Not read the whole thing, but long portions of it.
Cameron does say that the circumstances of your birth to play a huge role, but so too does personal responsibility. Most memorable example he raised was “at risk of obesity” when in fact people eat too much and exercise too little.
I can’t see how that is controversial. Regardless of the place and parents you’re born in and to you have real decisions to make which affect your life. Pretending that you’re fat because you’re middle class instead of because you eat pies all day, or that you smoke because you’re working class instead of because you buy cigarettes all the time is nonsense.
It is being spun badly for Cameron. This will probably go one of two ways, regarding polls. It could cause the shift seen in Populus (hard to say if a rogue or emerging trend) to become a pattern (ie pro-Labour anti-Tory momentum). Or people considering Cameron too populist or simply lacking any beliefs at all could start thinking of voting Tory.
I think it’s a damn shame that people consider it controversial to tell the overweight it’s their own fault. Barring medical conditions, it is.
Two speeches yesterday - one a public exposition of belief, the other a briefing to journalists.
Cameron’s speech was thoughtful and in line with his & the Party’s themes on social justice, responsibility & empowerment. Thoughtful, but like his so-called Hug a Hoody speech open to being used by his opponents. The Times main report shows how easy it is to misconstrue what he said and present it as “Tory Toff tells poor to shape up”. Will it damage Cameron? probably not , and if Mike Smithson’s rule on Cameron & publicity holds will most likely be positive in polls.
Gordon Brown gives a similar speech on personal responsibility, telling the poor to clear their plates, eat their greens and think about the starving Africans. OK, that’s not exactly what he said but it couldn’t be described as a thoughtful piece, especially the comments about supermarkets withdrawing special offers & two for one deals to reduce waste. It shows a politician cut off from real concerns and the reality of everyday life. Reporting was in effect, look at the powerful in their bubble, feasting on an 8 course meal while lecturing us on tightening our belts. Effect on polls probably negative (not sure if Gordon can further damage his standing but this doesn’t help improve it).
Nick Palmers comment wasn’t exactly helpful, far from engaging in debate he decided to just take a swipe at the tories, a rather lame one as well.
23
But isn’t this a bit, ‘Nanny State’ surely people have the right to be fat slobs if they want to, after all most MP’s are.
A glance along the benches and all you seem to see are paunches poking out through the buttons of their over stuffed shirts.
The fittest MP I can remember was Matthew Parris a sub three hour marathon runner, but then he used to do a lot of nocturnal training up on Clapham Common, according to his bio.
Mike S makes a good point. That said the Times is a problem area for Conservatives as it has supported new Labour and has Lib Dem leaning friends in its political team.
8 Mark Senior has clearly been over indulging in chemical substances.
27 of course Nick P quotes “reliable scientific views” when they suit him. The Govts Chief Scientific advisor recommended badger culling. He was then moved on/retired and the Govt decides to listen to a different piece of scientific advise who advise against culling.
Why did Nick P not blame the former Chief Advisor but instead blamed the Conservatives? Just partisan politicking.
35 should be advice and advise.
“A feasibility study into offshore renewable energy projects, and how the power they generate could be transmitted to the respective national grids, is to be conducted by the Scottish Government in partnership with the Irish government and the Northern Ireland Executive.”
http://www.theherald.co.uk/politics/news/display.var.2383627.0.Scotland_and_Ireland_to_launch_joint_renewable_energy_study.php
32. Benn’s decision looks like part of the ’scorched earth’ policy another poster was alluding to the other day - Labour throwing away any attempt at governing objectively and instead seizing at the chance to have another go at the farming community (and gloat about it as well).
A small comfort, perhaps, to offset the fury Labour must be feeling at the sharp rise in food prices over the last couple of years - which came just when they thought they had reduced farming to its knees.
Oh, and it’s worth noting that Polly Toynbee’s exit from the Brown camp is now complete, as she starts talking about the thinking of Labour plotters:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jul/08/glasgoweast.labour
Polly Toynbee comes in for a lot of flak, but if there’s one subject she knows inside out it is Labour party machinations. I wonder who she could mean by:
“A sizeable group of senior back-benchers is ready to move against Brown if there were a signal from cabinet ministers. But so far most lead plotters are Blairites who would only trigger a tribal war. These conspirators include many lean and hungry Cassiuses but they need a Brutus - some Brownite minister reluctantly wielding a dagger against a friend, not to settle old scores but for the sake of party and country. That would be the “Et Tu” moment.”
‘Doctors’ chief says England must follow Scots lead on NHS funding’
http://news.scotsman.com/latestnews/Doctors39-chief-says-England-must.4264198.jp
“Health Secretary Nicola Sturgeon will tell a British Medical Association conference how she intends to prevent firms getting a foothold in GP care.
In England a host of firms are bidding for contracts to run GP services after encouragement from ministers.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7493657.stm
http://www.theherald.co.uk/search/display.var.2383599.0.sturgeon_to_close_loophole_in_bid_to_safeguard_gp_surgeries.php
Boris explaining it was his, ‘Civic Duty’ to sit in the Royal Box at Wimbledon.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/07/08/do0801.xml
It may open a chink in the Tory armour - but Cameron is exactly right on this one. Britain has been buggered in so many ways by New Labour and we can’t realistically hope to sort the mess out without some up-front honesty. The ‘rights’ culture, sense of entitlement, benefits dependency, moral vacuum, sense of hopelessness, etc are all driven by government policy over the last 11 years.
Look what happened to Brutus and Cassius? They acted to stop a dictator and where did it all end up? With a dictator.
26. But I think it’s deeply patronising to imagine that *because* you are brought up in a poor area or are ‘in that environment on a daily basis’ (whatever you mean) you are unable to take some responsibility for not getting hooked on drugs or eating to excess.
The often forgotten point is that the majority of people who start out badly in life manage do manage to better themselves (less now than under the Tories, it has to be said) and they do so not because of Government handouts or because they are labelled as victims but because they have enough personal ambition, enough confidence and the odd role model to inspire them to get out there and make the best of what cards life has dealt them, in spite of their poor start. I am worried about these people being forgotten in the rush to attend to the few who don’t manage to or for some reason can’t rise to the challenge of modern life.
Hardly a policy though is it “pull a bit harder on those bootlaces”.
Stock market through the floor down 138 points so far and falling.
46, what time does the FTSE open?
Just checked the graph and it plunges vertically, and has actually made a small recovery.
46. Icarus
… and the BBC’s UK section leads with a headline shouting the magic word: “Recession” -
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7494508.stm
Not pretty.
46 B&B down a further 6p at 36p - oh dear.
Opens at 8 - now down 132 points at 5381 - are you looking at the 15 minutes delay screen? (O/T Why the time lag?)
39. If I were a Labour member I would hold fire on my plots. The Tories position is nowhere near cemented, and whether the Tories like it or not, or agree with it or not, there are an awful lot of people who will not like the ‘idea’ that a Tory ‘Toff’ thinks that its the ‘poor wot deserves the blame’ - especially when the other Tory ‘Toff’ (the one that’s been elected) seems determined to shoot both feet off at the beginning of his 4 year stint - and the third Tory ‘Toff’ is under pressure for taking ten tousand quid for speaking.
I agree with Ted. The Tories are being taken out of context / misrepresented (although I don’t agree with Cameron). But that is always the case in politics. The Tories have had a free pass for 6 months - perhaps it is expiring - who knows?
Have we heard from Gabble (stock market up yesterday, down over 2% at the start of today) in the last couple of days? Could he really be in Japan?
I consider that those who do not, or more likely do not wish, to believe that people should take (more) responsibilty for their own situation are the ones who are letting down those about whom they pretend to be concerned. Comments such as Mark Senior’s in 8 above, whilst superficially supposedly amusing, are in reality an insult to those who are struggling to make a better life for their families.
As the economy deteriorates, millions of people are going to have to find the inner strength to get through the next few years (yes, it will take that long for the excesses of the last decade to work through) and some regretably will not be able to do it. There will not be the physical and financial resources to spread across a large proportion of the population, even if that were really the right thing to do. They will have to be encouraged, not directed, to help themselves. At the same time the available resources will have to be concentrated on those who really cannot do so.
47 8a.m.
People have grudging respect for the truth.
49.
A huge problem at B&B indeed.
The end of B&B is very significant. Could we see Queues forming as savers try to get their money out despite Brown’s assurances that the British economy is well placed to avoid the downturn that is affecting the rest of the world?
53, 50, thanks.
And yeah now I see the graph is 15 mins delayed. No idea why.
I think that Cameron is being totally realistic as he describes things as they are and that his analysis will resonate with many.
#46,#49 Bradford and Bingley trading around 30p some 30% down - underwriters sitting on a loss of £160m+ aka our pensions - ouch.
39. “These conspirators include many lean and hungry Cassiuses but they need a Brutus - some Brownite minister reluctantly wielding a dagger against a friend, not to settle old scores but for the sake of party and country. That would be the “Et Tu” moment.”
More knife crime in London.
it is doubtful that those to whom Cameron refers even vote.
56 15 minute delay because you have to pay for a live feed of up to date data - that’s what Reuters, Bloomberg etc make their money on.
This isn’t aimed at the tory vote it’s aimed at the working class vote.
As I know from my own background, there are the ‘deserving’ and the ‘undeserving’, working class voters will support anyone who makes this distinction. The ‘undeserving’ are, of course,much less likely to vote in any case.
Alliance & Leicester down 8% today and 80% off their 12 month high. Could this be the next one after Northern Rock and now the ever increasingly problematic Bradford and Bingley.
One wonders if Cameron’s little chats on obesity have included the svelt-like Eric Pickles and that Sussex stick insect Nick Soames !!
56 - Having worked with live stock exchange feeds you would place a 15 minute dissemination delay for internal validation purposes. Not everything that gets fed is reliable…
There’s a certain schadenfreude, I suppose I’d call it, about checking the FTSE data and seeing that the biggest loser is currently “London Stock Exchange Group” (-7.69% for the day right now)…
61. It might be a clause in the BBC’s contract with the Stock Exchange, they can display the data from 15 mins earlier, but not real time. Knowledge is power…
Not a good editorial for Brown in the Sun.
6 - The new book ‘Nudge’ is apparently being read and inwardly digested by Obama and Cameron alike, within it is the core of ‘libertarian paternalism’ which does what you suggest.
Read the whole speech for yourself here.
Judge for yourself; you may not want to rely on those uselss journalists …
I get an approximation for free with Spreadfair
67. dr spyn: Not a good editorial for Brown in the Sun.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/sun_says/article244723.ece
Ouch.
[More ouch is that something in the editorial triggers Mike's spam trap!]
67 Nor are the opinion pieces good for him
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/columnists/fergus_shanahan/article539512.ece
Though the truly shocking story is the police asking the suspect in the French student murder to hold on in waiting room until he could be arrested, the type of story that feeds into the narrative of poor state response to fears of crime:
“It shows he went to the front counter and was spoken to by a member of police staff. He then went into a cubicle for the next three minutes.“After that he was let back out and remained in the front reception area for another five minutes before he was arrested.”
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article1393584.ece
People have mixed feelings about this sort of comment (and about food wastage too) - as I think David Herdson said, it’s something they quite often say themselves, but they are wary of hearing it from politicians. I wouldn’t think it will do much damage on its own. Norman: if that wasn’t a rhetorical question, David Cameron did have a job before politics. He worked in marketing. It colours his approach IMO.
Thanks, Icarus - attacks by the Daily Mail are fine with me.
I’ll take a 10-year scientific study by a panel of scientists specialised in the field over a one-off comment by the retiring chief scientist any day.
The technical problem about a cull is that if you kill some but not all badgers, the remaining ones move into the vacated setts, increasing mobility - which spreads the disease faster. If you don’t have complete cooperation (e.g. the National Trust has said it will not cooperate), the problem gets worse still. You could try eradicating every badger in Britain, but even the NFU doesn’t go that far, and anything short of that is unlikely to work.
Tory (and indeed LibDem) policy on this is so feeble - they know perfectly well that the case for a cull is weak, but essentially say, “Something must be done, so let’s gas a lot of badgers and maybe it will help”. “If in doubt, kill something” precisely sums it up.
Only 54 weeks since we said “Farewell” to Yogi Blair ..
And now the sun had stretched out all the hills,
And now was dropped into the western bay;
At last HE rose, and twitched his mantle blue;
Tomorrow to fresh woods and pastures new…
leaving Boo Boo in charge of the picnic baskets.
They’ve now been plundered and hunger looms in Jellystone Park.
So Boo Boo has come up with this brilliant idea. A bear market!
Anyone want to buy Paddington - cheap?
There is a crucial piece of Camerons speech missing from the Times report above:
“We as a society have been far too sensitive. In order to avoid injury to people’s feelings, in order to avoid appearing judgemental, we have failed to say what needs to be said. We have seen a decades-long erosion of responsibility, of social virtue, of self-discipline, respect for others, deferring gratification instead of instant gratification.
“Instead we prefer moral neutrality, a refusal to make judgments about what is good and bad behaviour, right and wrong behaviour. Bad. Good. Right. Wrong. These are words that our political system and our public sector scarcely dare use any more.
“Of course as soon as a politician says this there is a clamour - “but what about all of you?” And let me say now, yes, we are human, flawed and frequently screw up.
“Our relationships crack up, our marriages break down, we fail as parents and as citizens just like everyone else. But if the result of this is a stultifying silence about things that really matter, we re-double the failure. Refusing to use these words - right and wrong - means a denial of personal responsibility and the concept of a moral choice.
“
71. I had wondered why I couldn’t post a cut and paste quote from the Stun.
73. ‘if in doubt, kill it’ is just basically a comment to try and grab attention. It’s not particularly witty or bringing anything to the debate, just you trying to score points off the tories and lib dems.
75. Those are impressive and ringing words, Marcus. They would be more impressive if Mr Cameron and his colleagues had paid more attention to right and wrong over Iraq… arms to Iraq… arms to Saudi Arabia… cash for questions… ad infinitum.
Personal responsibility is central to a liberal society, but it can only really be secured if the state and corporate bodies are held to their responsibilities as well.
It really does look like a classic bear market,a plunge, a partial recovery, yet another plunge and so on and so forth.
It looks like the doom and gloom merchants are on the money
These forays into moralising are always risky for a politician. Of course eating unwisely and taking too little exercise leads to obesity. Family breakdown can lead to poverty and disturbed children. The problem is that if you preach this, people will judge you as well. Woe betide the Tory MP who fathers a child out of wedlock or the MP caught under the influence of alcohol. One can argue that we always fall short of our high ideas, and hence high ideals and hypocrisy go hand in hand. But this is a sophisticated argument. The Newspapers will have a field day showing the discrepancy between what is preached and what is practised.
Dave is exactly right.
I’m slightly overweight. Not much, but a little. Whose fault is that? Mine, for a couple too many helpings of chips and too few outings on my bike.
I don’t have very much money either. Whose fault? Mine again, for not getting a degree, and for choosing easy jobs and the easy life.
I wouldn’t dream of blaming my poor working class background for either of those things. I’m a grown man, I am quite capable of taking responsibility for own decisions and the consequences of them.
How refreshing to hear a politician actually dare to say these things.
73 Gordon Brown spent 8 years at University, then 3 more as a Lecturer at a Tech on politics followed by 3 years as a politics journalist at which point he became an MP. That in my opinion colours his approach.
Perhaps he wouldn’t be so inept if he had taken a job in Marketing or in fact a job doing something other than politics
75 - I can see what Cameron is doing but to trade in absolutes is only a short term benefit, sooner or later you have to acknowledge grey areas, look at any moral issue and, even with murder for example, there can be justifications.
Moral neutrality is not the same as moral realism.
82. I read somewhere that Brown was brilliant as an undergrad, but struggled with his PhD thesis and took unusually long to complete it. Someone on here may be able to corroborate that.
If it is true, what does that tell us about Brown?
81 - except not getting a degree is not usually the decision of an adult, is it? It is the result of experiences and decisions made for someone when they are still a minor.
The risk to Cameron, if any, is in the way hostile or glib commentators and journalists interpret or paraphrase his speech(es). If he wants to be Prime Minister - and I think we’ve established he does - then he has to be able to address issues applying to all parts of the social spectrum. Nothing can be off-limits.
I know it does not appeal to the world view of some of the Lib Dem supporters on here, but being born into the higher classes does not deprive Cameron of the right to talk about the issues affecting the poorest in society; and as much as you might like to live in a pretend world where Cameron and his fellow Eton toffs care only about how to use the machinations of state to enrich their cabal of public school chums and keep the lower classes in their place, the reality is that Cameron stems from a long line of Tory tradition which is genuinely appalled by the lack of social mobility in this country and will not shy away from identifying the causes. Policies to address them will follow, but a key part of the process - the essence of conservatism, no less - is the recognition that there is a limit to what the State can achieve. After a certain point, individuals need to stop blaming society, their parents, their background, their estate, their school - and take some responsibility.
It is notable that nobody on here has challenged the substance of what Cameron has said. Nor can you. His speech was finely balanced. He has learnt from the Thatcher years that the electorate dislikes high minded, unsympathetic moralising, and the new message is a more educated, more socially aware message.
The sooner Cameron’s opponants accept that he is a new proposition, the sooner they can start to challenge him effectively, and perhaps even peg back the outrageous poll leads. I am constantly amazed and amused by the way so many on this site underestimate him, and/or believe the politics of class envy is the way to take him down. It’s worked so far, eh?
Anyone with over the £37k (or whatever) limit in B&B should spread their risk today.
75 it is that part of the speech which will guide tory policy development. I suspect that once again the Westminster journalists will misread the public mood and then change their minds.
Yesterday we had nanny Gordon telling us to brush our hair and eat up our greens. The same day we had Cammo telling people ‘you can choose your destiny but don’t blame others for your choices’. If people really want the State to guide their every mood then these two speeches give them a clear choice.
Cameron chose his location and timing well - he’s looking to hoover up the C2/Ds and is going the right way about it.
Sorry to go completely off topic but a few minutes a go B&B share price went down to 30p. Remarkable because it implied a zero value for the company. The rights issue at 55p would raise £400m after £50m in costs, yet the market cap of B&B after the rights issue at 30p would only be around £400m.
Thise participaiting in the rights issue were paying more for a 55% share than the whole company would presumably be valued at after the rights issue.
Incidently B&B last dividend cost around half their current market cap.
Cameron’s approach here is modelled on Bush’s compassionate Conservatism, c. 2000. Bill Clinton described it as ‘I really want to help you, but I can’t’.
I don’t think the rhetoric is unpopular (particularly as others have said, with the voters who the Tories are aiming to attract), but the actual policies might be - most people think that when there is a problem, the government ought to do something about it, after all. Part of the question will be about whether Labour want to make this a dividing line or not.
One of the weird things about how all of this has been reported is that it is treated as if Cameron is proposing something novel which hasn’t been tried before. In the USA, it led to rising levels of poverty during a time of overall economic growth, and didn’t achieve any of its stated aims (though once elected, Bush was rather less interested in being a compassionate Conservative, which I guess might be more where Cameron is going with this).
84 Did he “dither” over it?
Perhaps Mr Cameron would like to explain what led him and George Osborne to drugs?
I hate to use the old “doorstep” chestnut but for those of us who spend our lives out campaigning, the Cameron line addresses what I hear at every second house.
My constituency is southern and, in places, it’s very affluent. But in many places like Waterlooville, Cowplain, Hart Plain and Horndean it’s full of people living modest lives in modest homes who have worked long and hard for what they have.
It is for these people (of whom there are many millions) that DC’s words will clearly resonate.
They all know and understand that there are people who, through no fault of their own, need our help and they don’t begrudge it. What they cannot stand is the fecklessness and the lack of responsibility amongst people who, in their eyes, could easily look after themselves if they cared to do so.
The speech might not go down well in Islington restaurants but it will hit a real cord in lounges in Horndean.
79 Yes. One of the many problems with Brown’s leadership is that he does not recognise the fact that the economic good times are over and will not come back until well after the next general election. This is not a political point - the main factors involved are the credit crunch and the rise in commodity prices, neither of which are much to do with the government.
But because Brown has been so used to taking credit for economic success he can not now stop saying things like “we have to get the economy going” even though he is powerless to do this, and making comments like this is a huge hostage to fortune because he will be held responsible when the economy does not get going.
The government needs to talk the language of burden-sharing and also make clear whose side it is on. It is outrageous that directors of banks - all of which are being supported by the Bank of England thorugh the special deposit scheme - are still paid millions of pounds in bonuses whilst they are busy throwing the unfortunate victims of their imprudent lending out of their homes. And what has the government ot say about this?
Answers on a very small postcard please.
86 - “After a certain point, individuals need to stop blaming society, their parents, their background, their estate, their school - and take some responsibility.”
And at what point is that?
This is the nub of the problem. That point is different for every individual, and is a highly complex mix of their upbringing, nature, genetics, present personal circumstances and external circumstances.
It is also extremely difficult to get people to think positively about how to take responsibility for getting out of a situation rather than behave like a victim. And when you’re in that mind set, to be told to “take responsibility” by someone who has never and will never have to worry about their own circumstances might be a little trying.
To go to Mike’s premiss, however, is this dangerous for Cameron? It depends who he’s trying to keep inside his tent. If he’s going for the Working Class battlers, then, as others have pointed out, its might well be a sound strategy (”I’ve pulled myself up by my bootstraps, why shouldn’t the other b*ggers?”). But if he’s trying to hold onto the more liberal Middle Class vote, then this approach may well grate.
66 - LS - There’s a certain schadenfreude .. checking the FTSE data …
Even as a shareholder, I gain some painful amusement viewing the BBC’s list of 40 “Popular” shares, every single one of which is losing money this morning. That’s “popular”?
On the plus side of the share crash is that Trinity Mirror are going down the drain - hopefully Kevin McGuire will be first against the wall
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/fds/hi/business/market_data/shares/3/23377/three_month.stm
Quentin Letts isn’t impressed with Nick Palmer…
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1033087/Clank-chain-Whoosh-70m-khazi.html
92. The speaking clock was funnier.
96, down almost 150 now:(
There is a reason that politicians and government have hitherto been shy of moralising politics in such a simplistic way. The whole process is fraught with difficulty. To gain a genuine understanding of agency, responsibility and culpability is fraught with difficulty even when we are dealing with the individuals closest to us in our lives; when politicians are dealing with people who are distant, or large classes of people like the obese, the dangers of misunderstanding and oversimplification are massive.
Simple moral schemes with their talk of individuals who are good or evil, who act in ways right and wrong, leave too much out. They eliminate the complexity of context so that they can say something strong and definite. People’s actions are partly determined by their histories, the institutions of which they are a part, the cultures into which they have been socialised, the economic system in which they have to survive. Talk of right and wrong tends to abstract from these things because they are complicated and messy and generally leave one with no one to blame.
To read more of my views link to my blog, Just who the hell are we? on wordpress.com at:
http://adammcnestrie.wordpress.com/
85 - in my case yes, as I started doing a degree, got bored by it (too easy, too dull) and so chose to do something more interesting instead. I’d say that if you’re old enough to start a degree, you’re old enough to appreciate the importance and likely consequences of that decision.
86 - talking of effective challenges, someone pointed me to this critique of Gove’s education ideas on, of all places, ConHome, which rather neatly, if lengthily, encapsulates the charge that current Conservative ideas might sound good in theory but in practice are ful of holes:
“a fair number of questions regarding the practicalities of such proposals come to mind (and no doubt there are numerous others). As someone whose children have now left the educational system it is very much an uninformed layman’s perception but a taxpaying layman’s perception at that. However given the level of expectation that such a proposals will likely generate and many people will be equally as uninformed as myself, politically it is important that expectations of an improved education system as a result of such an initiative can be clearly perceived.
Furthermore, I’m using a ‘one bad apple’ viewpoint as it is often the minority of high-profile failures that undermine the majority of invisible successes that doom an initiative to failure. If this is to work it must provide a stable and sustainable education system at the end of it and not a continuation of the seeming never-ending dissatisfaction and decline that changes in the education system have seemingly caused in recent decades. I’m sure there are already valid answers already available to many of the observations below.
We will change the law so that all sorts of organisations, including those which currently run independent schools, other charities, cooperatives and new education providers can set up new state Academies, independent of political control.
I have a number of concerns on this point. Firstly, regarding funding, how will Government ensure that taxpayer’s money is not misappropriated or misused by these organisations? How will the organisations be accountable both to parents and the taxpayer in general if they are ‘politically independent’? How would Government ensure that the education provided at these schools meet the needs of the country? The article talks about the challenges of a global society and therefore it would seem that there must be some sort of pre-defined formula that these schools/ academies must adhere to?
Secondly, regarding timescales, how long will it take to set up a new school? I can envisage a situation where if it takes too long then there will be little motivation for parents to support such new schools (as their children will have moved on or be close to be moving on as part of their natural progression in life). Without sufficient demand such an initiative could be undermined before it commences and with it potentially the waste of considerable sums of public funds.
As for being independent of ‘political’ control, I neither believe this is achievable or practical. As many comments in this post will also infer a level of strategic ‘political’ control may well be essential.
All new Academies will be free and non-selective.
Fair enough in theory, but surely in reality there will come a point when the most successful of these new schools or academies reach their capacity and demand for places outstrips supply. Without selective criteria how will such schools and academies meet the demand for places?
Does this initiative solely apply to secondary education?
This means that failing schools with bad management in poorer areas just keep failing - there is no way for parents to do anything about it because their complaints can just be ignored
However, these are exactly the areas that are least likely attractive to this sort of initiative. How would Government ensure that such initiatives will focus on these areas and not polarise toward more affluent areas without asserting some level of ‘political’ control?
Even if additional education funding is funnelled into these poorer areas, how long would such additional funding be sustained? Without the necessary associated funding to improve the area as a whole, young people will just move on to better areas once their education is complete. The areas will still remain poor.
Furthermore, should these new schools not prove successful, how long would Government continue to fund them and under what circumstances would they intervene or cut funding?
Similarly, how would Government ensure that more sparsely populated areas (e.g. rural areas) where demand is naturally less receive an equivalent service? Once again given the likely lower demand in these areas they would likely be less attractive? Would they get the same financial support as urban areas?
Furthermore, at what point in a poorer areas education systems’ improvement would such additional funding be phased out to be reallocated to schools in other areas that had slipped into some ‘poorer area/failing school’ status?
One of the underlying flaws in the current regional allocation of funding (PESA) and the Barnett Formula is not that certain areas attract additional subsidy persay but the fact they have been getting that additional subsidy for 30 years or more with little visible sign that they can better survive without it and have seemingly failed to become more self-sufficient. At the same time other areas have been subsidising them for the whole of the period. Unless there is a clear and consistent policy of ‘use it properly or lose it’ then such additional continued funding will attract resentment and opposition from those who do not benefit undermining the initiative in the medium to long term.
“Parents will have the power to take their child out of a school they think is failing”
Where a school is genuinely failing people should be allowed to move their children. However, once again I see a number of potential difficulties here.
Firstly, how quickly will the transition from one school to another take and what justification will parents need to allow them to do so? I see a number of potential pitfalls, not least for the children involved, in navigating such a transitional period.
In this society where the media exaggerate and distort reality and Government statistics are increasingly criticised what reliable measures will be put in place to demonstrate to parents that a failing school is really a failing school? How will unfair claims of failure be refuted and resisted?
How would Government support poor but improving state schools in the face of parental unpopularity? Potentially, there is a perception gap between when things actually start improving and when people recognise (if ever) that performance has improved. Surely where progress is being made we should not pull the plug, with the resultant loss of investment not just in terms of money but in terms of all resources being utilised?
Additionally, how do you stop knee-jerk reactions to one-off ’scandals’? It may be that there is a particular ’scandal’ which prompts significant numbers of parents to opt to leave an otherwise competent school? As the result of a single scandal (based in fact or not), a perfectly good school could be lost.
Furthermore, how do you deal with a school where over a period say 60% leave and there is a decline in place uptake because the school is perceived as failing but 40% think it is still a good school?
If the school becomes unsustainable for whatever reason what happens to the 40%? If there are insufficient places in the other schools in that locality for these students what happens to them?
Also, how do you stop parents with less than successful children, school-hopping (i.e. blaming the school when really it is their expectations for their children that are excessive?).
The amount the state would give to fund the education of every child from a disadvantaged background would be specifically increased.
It’s absolutely right that we should give our disadvantaged children the best possible start to life. However, given the current gloomy long-term economic forcasts where’s the additional money for this and the other measures here going to come from?
Furthermore, how will Government confirm that a child is from a disadvantaged background? What criteria will they use and what happens if the parents of that child are no longer considered disadvantaged? What ramifications might this have in terms of the relationship between the school, the family and in particular the children?
How will these schools be stopped from selecting based on those children who attract the most funding per head?
Under our proposals schools would have to work harder to attract the funding some take for granted – because parents would be in control. Schools would be actively seeking out parents and pupils, leafleting their communities with prospectuses showing why they deserved your support
This is the one idea here that I find truly disturbing if not unrealistic and wasteful. In saying this, the key consideration is that it is taxpayers’ money being spent that we are talking about.
Is it seriously suggested that schools go campaigning and spend good money on ‘glossies’ when the time and money could be better spent on educating children and providing extra curricular activities?
How would Government ensure that the marketing of a school is accurate and does not inflate parents’ expectations so that perfectly good schools are perceived badly because their marketing has overplayed their positive attributes?
How would Government ‘protect’ schools that quite rightly put an emphasis on education over marketing but are perceived less positively simply because their marketing operation is low key?
Furthermore, will such marketing activities not be an unnecessary diversion, in terms of time and resources from the primary objective of providing a quality education? What I suspect people want is a quality curriculum and quality teaching for their children not a quality marketing operation that eats into the taxpayer funded education budget of the school.
Lastly on this topic, how would such a marketing campaign target its customer base? As both my children are now adults having reasonably successfully navigated their educational years I would be somewhat concerned to be receiving marketing materials or visits from representatives of local schools. To ensure people such as myself are omitted does this not put an excessive administrative resource burden on the schools for such activities?
Lastly, given all these types of issues it would seem that some sort of additional layer of bureaucracy will be required to oversee this initiative. How will this be structured and what controls will be put in place to minimise the cost of such bureaucracy?
In summary, whilst the general thrust of these proposals is sound I do think that it is currently lacking a detailed framework within which it can function successfully and the points I have raised, amongst many others, if not answered, provide plenty of opportunities for those who would for whatever reason want to discredit the proposals as a whole, to do so.
Most of all, drop the idea of actively marketing schools, it’s unwarranted and it’s a loser. Any educational establishments should not be allowed to fund advertising campaigns from the taxpayers’ pocket. “
95 - Tabman, I think it may grate with *some* sections of the middle classes (the Guardian reading tendency, mainly), but to suggest that encouraging people to take responsibility for their own lives somehow conflicts with the tenets of liberalism is indicative of a degree of intellectual confusion. Or did you mean Liberal?
102 - which is fine, but what of the person who, through no fault of their own, was not given the opportunity to go to University? How do they “take responsibility” for that?
104 - I meant “liberal” in the Guardian-reading sense. Most Liberals would expect people to take responsibility for their own actions, but similarly, to ensure that the playing field is levelled to ensure they are protected from consequences not of their own making.
105. The worst thing you can do is mope about it or, equally importantly, be encouraged to mope. For every problem there is an opportunity. Those who get on make the most of the opportunities. Even a small shift in thinking can change the perception that it is all a problem.
105 - Tabman, I’ve always taken the view that if I could go to university, practically anyone could.
I am happy to be corrected if there really are significant numbers of people who (for non-academic reasons!) genuinely cannot, however.
86 - Tabman - you are entirely correct on the first part. But it does not follow that, just because each case is highly individual, politicians should shy away from stating a general truth. All politics involves shades of grey; if you waited for an absolute truth to exist before saying something, you’d be silent for a very long time, and then only stating the obvious.
On your second point, I think you exaggerate the negative impact. While Cameron is trying to build a broad coalition, including liberal elements who are attracted by the Tories stance on ID cards, 42 days etc, he knows the Tories are never going to be natural bedfellows to people who believe individuals are entirely the product of society and have no impact on or responsibility for their own decisions. This speech, and the reporting of it, might consolidate Mark Senior’s anti-Tory prejudices and might lead to hand wringing from the so-called liberal press, but if there is anyone out there who was contemplating voting Tory but now as a result of this won’t I would be very surprised.
106 - I think the whole point is that the definition of “consequences not of their own making” has now become so all-encompassing that it covers almost every possible ill. *That* (if I understand Cameron correctly) is what the aim is to row back against.
The problem is what Cameron says is true - people do need to take more responsibility for themselves. Stop blaming governments, banks, etc. etc.
The Consumer culture and their associated Consumer Rights Pressure Groups don’t help either - their attitudes assume that consumers can do no wrong, and that the retailer is always wrong. The militant Consumer Groups are no different to Trade Unionists of the 1970s.
110 - If you understand him correctly, would be a more powerful message coming from someone like Davis who has actually done it?
Perhaps the Glasgow East by-election has come a year or 18 months too early for Cameron. A by-election in a supposedly rock-solid Labour seat with a poorer population and higher unemployment could be the perfect chance to contrast the Tory plans with Labour’s 10 years of failure to solve these deep-seated problems. It’s just that the Tories would (I assume) want to wait til near the election before they give us their detail on social policy.
On the detail of Cameron’s speech, I think it’s welcome for a politician to give us something different to the standard lexicon on poverty including all those mis-used words e.g. “At Risk of” suggesting it’s nothing to do with their own actions. Well said Cameron. Other classics are “Deprived” and “Lifting people out of poverty”.
101 - In other words, we can’t do anything about it, so why bother?
112 - no, absolutely not, no more so than Jill Saward is better placed to lead the fight against civil liberties.
“I’ve done it, so so can you” actually contaminates the message, medium term.
108. tuition fees and a lifetime of debt are putting the poor off university in massive numbers. these people certainly have far less chance of going to a _good_ university; going to the wrong school in the wrong area really depresses your grades, and then you can add widespread “lack of ambition” i.e. non-pushy parents.
on topic, this message is a bit reminiscent of “on yer bike”, and is bound to polarise opinion if it receives airtime. we will have to wait and see what policies actually spring from it.
The speech might not go down well in Islington restaurants but it will hit a real cord in lounges in Horndean.
Which cord would that be, George? The one that turns the light out in the country?
If only people listened to Gordo and stopped wasting food - all their problems would be solved (and Africa’s too).
Food for thought in an extract from piece in “The First Post”, and my belief is that the SNP will capture Glasgow East
Looking further ahead, more thoughtful Tories are also beginning to worry that if they win big in England at the next election and the SNP do likewise in Scotland, Alex Salmond will be well set for the referendum on independence which he has pencilled in for 2010.
Whatever the tactical advantage to the Conservatives of a smaller Scots Labour presence at Westminster (or even none at all), they do not want the United Kingdom to fall apart on their watch and certainly not in their first year in office.
But if the SNP captures Glasgow East, it could become unstoppable. And while that would be very bad news indeed for Labour, in the medium term it could give the Tories serious problems, too.
FTSE: free live quotes are now available on some sites, I think MSN money is one (free registration required)
106 - it is impossible to level the playing field to the extent you would require in order to do that. Even if you could address inequalities in housing, leisure provision, education and social provision (which is theoretically possible but practically unachievable), you cannot eliminate the differences between two human beings, their parenting skills, their intelligence, personality and the life-schanging experiences they undergo. Put it another way, you could have two little boys growing up in identical houses next door to each other and attending the same school. One is an only child, intelligent, has educated parents who read to him every night, fill his life with interesting experiences and support him at school. The other has learning difficulties, eight siblings by three different fathers, his parents smoke and drink and his step-dad occasionally beats him. All of those are “consequences beyond his making” as you would say, but there is little (if anything) the State or society can do to level that particular playing field.
I thought it was a great speech. It was all about people taking more responsibility for their own lives. As a disabled person I have to say that David Cameron has hit the nail on the head with this speech.
There is such a thing as the poverty industry. The poverty industry is
about people building power empires not about helping the people who
need it.
In general people are able to take decisions for themselves if they get the chance.
There seems to be a lot of anger on here about this. But I think it fake anger from people who have not experienced what David Cameron was
talking about.
A really impressive thread this morning, perhaps just the kind of conversation that Cameron is trying to engender more widely.
Like others, I do think he needs to tread a little warily in these areas (though the message is self-evidently sound and is a consistent theme) to avoid sliding into the back-to-basics stuff that proved so calamitous for Major. Cameron needs to complement the sombre side of the message with his essentially optimistic outlook given voice in his victory speech in December 2005:
“We need to change the way we feel. No more grumbling about modern Britain. I love this country as it is not as it was and I believe our best days lie ahead….”
And his much quoted, “If there was ever a war against single mothers, the weapons have been put beyond use. You have to think about society more broadly…”
105 they do what I did and go at the age of 32. I decided to sacrifice some decent earning power and ended changing careers and earning about 30% of what I used to but enjoying my work much more and spending more time with my family.
Where I think the State could play a part and help more is not assisting people in making excuses for their low aspirations but provide a proper framework for building up self-esteem.
I think the Labour party have tried to do this with programmes like SureStart but have failed to make the impact they would have hoped for because control is maintained by the centre.
one of the most interesting aspects of Michael Portillo’s venture into the lives of a single parent family was the his surprise at the lack of aspiration. It is this weary acceptance of their lives that hurts people more than anything else.
125 - It’s not just lack of aspiration, in many cases it’s actual hostility to aspiration.
125. people who live on or near the poverty line (of which there are WAY too many in the UK, a supposedly developed country) would be unlikely to make that sacrifice that earning power, or take on student loans.
What a fantastic thread! Pretty much everyone who has posted has made very valid points about the positives and negatives of Cameron’s speech, and how it could chime with some but risks losing others. pbc at its best!
I think with many touchy subjects, politicians can find it difficult to talk about such issues. Clearly one’s life is a product of external circumstances and our own choices. Cameron is stuck with having to speak about both sides of that coin, while also not parsing so much that he sounds like he’s not saying anything at all. But that in itself means that he risks headlines like the one in the Times today, which loses the original nuance. Obama often has the same problem (see his two press conferences in one day to clarify things!). Still, bravo to Cameron for taking such a risk!
This argument has been with us for centuries, has its origins in the concept of pre-destination, in which humanity was divided up into two distinct groups, the elect and the reprobates.
Hmmm next thing we know Cameron will be telling us that the, ‘Bullingdon Club’ was really an athletics club, whose members were dedicated to improving their pb’s.
I’d like to see all those MP’s who preach this sort of stuff, out on a really hard cross country run, I can recommend a good course, Studland Beach to Nine Barrow and back, there’d be a lot of by-elections after that particular jaunt.
127. Student loans only have to be paid back when you’re earning above a certain amount, and they have no interest. There’s no reason why that should be a disincentive, if a degree will see you earn more money (which is admittedly in dispute if you get one of the lesser end degrees). The real problem is that student loans don’t actually cover the cost of living.
129. So anyone who hasn’t lived a perfect life isn’t allowed to talk about responsibility?
Tim13 @ 118. Sorry. Must be thick but I don’t understand a word of that.
As times get harder, money gets tighter, and recession bites there will be a growing backlash against various targets including the government, immigrants, high taxes etc etc. One of these targets will be the army of obese, takeaway guzzling, ciggie devouring, bone-idle, layabouts who live their whole lives on benefits giving birth to numerous children who they, sadly, condemn to being the next generation of benefit claiming, work-shy, underclass. This group has increased massively under eleven years of Labour, hence the vast numbers of Poles and others encouraged over here to work.
Cameron is striking a chord highlighting this group. It is no good for them and their kids to live lives that are so physically unhealthy and so intellectually impoverished ( I’m including several of my Manc cousins here!)It is also infuriating more and more working-class people now feeling the pinch and resentful of Maccy D guzzling chavs, often living in the same street, never going out to work but having plenty for ciggies, drugs, takeaways, holidays etc.
Cameron is onto a vote winner here IMO.
Even though I think Cameron is correct in many regards with the big exception of medical conditions,( steroids need to be used for example).
However for many centrists who have doubts that he will stick to a New Conservative agenda, this will add some more, that once in power he will track at some degree to the right.
The very opposite of Blair, who we knew would not track left, even if Conservatives kept saying he had devil eyes, and was old Labour in disguise.
Just as New Labour needed at least a 60 majority, to stop the hard left having a disproportionate influence.
The same applies to Cameron from the right.
If we are going into recession,I really dont want to hear the Tebbit types telling us to get on our bikes.
I was made redundant in the 80s and 90s and the no sympathy right are not an endearing bunch of people.
130
I though Gordo flogged of the student loan book, and that interest is applicable at a higher rate than previously???
Simon in Wigan at 113 spot on, the saying ‘lifting people out of poverty’ should always be ‘helping people lift themselves out of poverty’.
A=Should people be merely passive recipients or active participants?
131
I’d have to have some confidence that if someone is preaching to me, that they are on pretty secure grounds before they do so.
Politicians who attempt this sort of thing always seem to end up with egg on their faces: ask Edwina Currie!
I you abolish state dependants what is the point of Labour ? Gordon isn’t stupid - he’s been expanding his client state/voting bank for years. Soon they’ll be the only ones still voting Labour (except in Scotland).
27 Icarus.Not disgraceful at all. It is very unwise to take NickP at face value.Perhaps he would repeat on here his comment in the Commons “The Tories took the attitude of when in doubt, kill something” - quoted by you with obvious agreement.His job on here is quite clear, to show if possible the “Acceptable face of Labour”,while undermining the Conservative position.He even once mildly reinforced a rant by Coldstone (of all people!) about BJ not completing a full term.Something along the lines “Yes,I wonder what would have to happen”. To those who have swallowed his line, “Beware of Greeks bearing gifts”.
139. Very astute post.
138
Well the idea it is only the Labour areas that are dependent on, ‘State Handouts’ is absurd. The West Country certainly the rural areas, are highly dependent on the state, from the enormous amounts that is handed out to farmers, in subsidies down to housing benefit which many people who live here could not survive without.
Anyway we have an expert this morning Mr Marcus Wood, I’ve often wondered how Marcus has coped with the change in culture from M25 land to Torbay, where if there wasn’t a black economy, there wouldn’t be an economy: must have been quite an eye opener Marcus!
Until recently I lived in a village, where I would say, at least a third of the 2000 pop. were in reciept of state support of some kind.
128 “What a fantastic thread! Pretty much everyone who has posted has made very valid points about the positives and negatives of Cameron’s speech, and how it could chime with some but risks losing others. pbc at its best!”
Totally agree - and the reason for this is that people have in the main debated the points rather than resorting to ad hominem or peurile name-calling. Indeed, much like the “old days” … [whistful stare]
142, testimony to Cameron’s excellent speech bringing out the best in us?:p
It looks like Cameron is talking about good, old fanshioned Consvertaive principles, here. The state should do LESS and the individual MORE. I’m happy he’s saying it and time for a change in this country and a move away from Labour over-bearing nannying!
BTW, I notice we’re now on the brink of recession. Whoi was it that said we would never again see a recession, because he and he alone had done away with the economic cycle? Yep, the same man that was yesterday blaming British people for food costs rising and the economy going down the pan. Gordon Brown is now completely naked and bereft and its not a pretty site. In his panic and scrabling to find a scape-goat for out economic misfortunes, I suspect he’ll attack the people more and more over the next few months.
What a load of sanctimonious claptrap on here this morning from the fawning Cameroon supporters who see his every word as the being the ultimate truth .
To try and preach to people who do not know where the next meal for their kids is going to come from that they have only themselves to blame is just sheer hypocrisy . Being able to afford only a £20 bottle of champers and do 2 lines of coke a night may be financial hardship to his circle of friends but it is a world away from those he is aiming his comments at .
142. And then Mark Senior kicks in at 145.
137 The problem with all this preachy stuff is that no two people have the same definitions of “right” and “wrong” when it comes to social issues. Some people think single parents/obesity/[insert name of social problem] is wrong per se, others will take a less censorious view.
To what extent are alcoholics/drug addicts/obese people responsible for their own problems and to what extent are they victims of social pressures, business lobbies, etc etc?
145. Is there anything you hate more than the Conservatives Mark ? Please let me know as I will refrain from mentioning it/them in a post to spare us from the vitriol.
Its certainly remarkable to hate a party not in power more than the party that’s in power and doing a very bad job.
145 - Deliberate defamation is the only refuge for the intellectually insubstantial.
The Consumer culture and their associated Consumer Rights Pressure Groups don’t help either - their attitudes assume that consumers can do no wrong, and that the retailer is always wrong. The militant Consumer Groups are no different to Trade Unionists of the 1970s.
Quite right. And this is a good thread.
Overall, I think the impact will be beneficial for Cameron.
147.
“There is no such thing as society” - M Thatcher.
“Some nasty Africans want to lock me away from society” - M Thatcher
149.
“145 - Deliberate defamation is the only refuge for the intellectually insubstantial.”
Pot-kettle calling in la-de-da-language is the last-but-one refuge of the scoundrel?
I understand what Cameron is trying to do and on one hand I appreciate it, I’ve always bought into the side of the Labour party with Frank Field and the cooperative party. The ideas of encouraging self fulfillment and putting power directly into the hands of the workers.
However Cameron misses the point about poverty. Most people are poor because they aren’t paid very much. There are a finite number of well paid jobs.
Cameron may be wishing to make a feature of his government the expansion of high skilled, well paid jobs, which would be a laudable aim. However, even if he achieves that he would need to revolutionise vocational education and just education in general, in order to make British workers competitive. I don’t see that willpower or where he will get the money.
130/135 student loans are still paid at an interest rate tied to RPI but as socrates states only need to be paid when earning above a certain level.
127 ed, I was poor - at the age of 25 I had no money at all so don’t need to be told about not buying any food over the weekend because of waiting for my giro to clear or other aspects of being hard up. the left’s addiction to ‘the poverty line’ is logical nonsense.
As someone who spends their working life trying and sometimes succeeding in giving help and direction to young people and hopefully inspiring them to develop personal goals your typically negative ‘they’re poor they won’t want to do this’ approach says a lot about why socialism is always doomed to fail - you simply don’t believe in the people you claim to speak for.
Some of the talk about aspiration has been sidetracked into talking about university degrees and using them as a measure for aspiration, but it is a much bigger playing field than that.
People need to feel valued and their desire to improve their own lives and have some measure of control is as, if not more important, than getting more education. We don’t a need a population of PhD’s but we do need a population willing and able to help their fellow citizens without relying on a bullying faceless State bureaucracy to tell them what to do.
150 - I blame Esther Rantzen
148 Hate is too strong a word , perhaps you should address it to the motivation behind post 133 for example .
153, as I stated above, I’ve read longish portions of the speech but not the whole thing, so I might be mistaken but I think the thrust of Cameron’s argument isn’t economic but social.
I’ve read him referring to obesity, and the like, but not about economic issues (such as jobs, obviously). I concur there’s a finite number of well-paid jobs, which is one reason why an arbitrary university target of 50% is daft.
146 -
Timing so beautiful, even Rafael Nadal would look on in wonder.
Morning all
Indeed,a good discussion of an interesting speech and I’ve reviewed said speech at length here:
http://aloadofoldstodge.blogspot.com/2008/07/can-cameron-mend-broken-society.html
As you might expect, I have some reservations about the Cameron approach. The obvious is that a lot of what he wants to do is predicated on a “strong economy” but I just don’t see where that is coming from anytime soon.
On the morality issue, I don’t agree we live in a “de-moralised” society. I think the issue is more complex than even Cameron asserts it to be. There is a place for morality but I’m uncomfortable with David Cameron acting as some form of moral arbiter when moral guidance is available from most Faiths.
156.
Funny that vox pop at 133 omitted “the army of obese, takeaway guzzling, cigar-devouring, coke-lining, bone-idle, layabouts who live their whole lives on inherited cash giving birth to numerous children who they, sadly, condemn to being the next generation of tax-dodging, work-shy, overclass.” - the people who wouldn’t recognise a ‘free market’ if it hit them in the face with a wet fish. Every bit as much a problem as those who give him sleepless nights.
159, I disagree with your belief that moral guidance (which is undoubtedly available from faiths) should not or cannot come from other sources, including politics.
After all, it was due to political morality that slavery was abolished.
Plus, as an atheist, the notion that you require some sort of cosmic superbeing to be able to propound a ‘valid’ morality is completely at odds with the idea of a moral secular society.
Morality in ages past came from philosophy (Marcus Aurelius was a Stoic, I think), and now presently is considered the domain of religion but it should not exclusively the province of faith.
160, so you agree with Cameron that personal responsibility is important?:p
130. that isn’t the perception - a debt is a debt for many people. I find that it is mostly the relatively well-off who take a cavalier attitude to being in the red.
as you say there will be other debts accrued also whilst at university.
159. “I’m uncomfortable with David Cameron acting as some form of moral arbiter when moral guidance is available from most Faiths.”
But the problem is that most religions have lost credibility since the scientific revolution, and we’ve thrown the discussion of morality and ethics out with the superstitition.
145. I’m sure a man of David Cameron’s taste and background can manage more than a mere £20 for a bottle of champagne. You don’t get much for that kind of loose change.
163. Then people should be educated about it more. The problem with debt is that you may find yourself in the situation of having to pay it back when you can’t afford it, and find yourself in a spiral of poverty. With student loans that isn’t going to happen.
165 - Runnymede - You really can’t expect the peasants to know the cost of a decent champagne.
156. And then he wonders why the BNP are polling high in many of the wards they stand in.
167 - to be honest, champagne is more of a breakfast drink, anyway.
These speeches are all pointless anyway, there is nothing we can do about, what we are:-
Double predestination is the eternal act of God, whereby the future of every particular person in the human race has been determined beforehand, by God. Whatever the individual wills or does, for good or for evil, is conceived as performing a functional part, or outworking of that ordained purpose. This prior determination applies to both, the elect and the reprobate. This idea is formed on an interpretation of various Scriptures in the Old and New Testaments. Romans 9 is frequently quoted in explanation of the doctrine.
19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? 20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? 21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? 22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: 23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory - KJV
So its all f***ing pointless.
As a reprobate, (I’ve got the Tshirt) I’m off to hell anyway.
148 It depends what age group your from, the recessions of the 80s an 90s, and the comments and actions of the governing Conservative party at the time, are seared into the memory.
Maybe the thought in two years time it may be repeated, is making some quite nauseous.
162.
I know what My views on personal responsibility. i will see how close to them Cameron comes when he does something serous about his Euro-sleaze team of MEPs and when he deals with the Spellwoman’s amnesia problems which appear to dwarf those emerging from Boris’ Barking Bishop encounters.
153 G - accepting the Jospeh Rowntree figures at face value wouldn’t it be true to say that what most people really want is enough money to feel like a member of regular society rather than being rich?
I don’t therefore think the focus should just be on trying to turn every single perosn into a ‘highly skilled’ worker but on helping people identify and achieve worthwhile goals (ie being the hardest gang member on your estate is not a worthwhile goal)?
This means a genuine shake up of education structures and I fear you may well be right in the willpower being lacking - no government since the great Education Act 1944 has successfully addressed the problem of getting education right.
The current government’s destruction of Adult Learning provision and the move away from investing in the Lifelong Learning Sector is something I think Cammo should reverse but suspect he won’t. The ridiculous Diplomas beloved of Ed Balls are a pointless and expensive distraction and the chronic underfunding of vocational education (which Diplomas do NOTHING to address) means effort and interest are focussed on an important but narrow part of the community.
The future of education is going to need brave and determined leadership - I think Cammo is much more likely to provide that than Gordon but don’t have very high expectations of either.
172, there are investigations into both of those. We’ll have to wait and see what the outcomes are before we judge.
And it’s worth remembering he got rid of Conway quickly, in stark contrast to Brown with Hain, and Harriet Harperson.
Cannot help yourself Mark can you? Thats one very big chip on your shoulder.
I thought Camerons speach was very good. It has certainly sparked a debate on here. The question is will it resonate with the wider public and if so how.
159. Only way we can get a strong economy again is to cut spending - massively…
The Government is facing a multi-billion pound shortfall in its finances because of the economic downturn, a study of Treasury figures said.
According to reports, the analysis, by an economic research institute, predicts the slowdown in the economy will cut at least £8bn from the tax revenues that Chancellor Alistair Darling forecasted in his March Budget.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/newsheadlines/article-23512586-details/Government+coffers+%27face+shortfall%27/article.do
170 Predestination (even if one believes in it theologically) is not the same as fatalism.
On the way into the City for a rare day of work I read a page in the Racing Post by Matthew Engel on political betting which focused mainly on the US Presidentials, VP markets and whether Brown would go this year. It was a perfectly reasonable piece, although it made no mention of Webb’s announcement that he would not be running for VP. There was nothing however to be learned from it by anybody who regularly visits this site - another demonstration, if any were needed, that in such matters the MSM trails well behind the blogosphere.
172 I thought that with Camerons promised firm action on sleaze he had already sacked her , clearly another broken pledge .
154. why is the “poverty line” logical nonsense?
I don’t/didn’t intend to sound negative, but there is a genuine problem that the hard-working poor do find it difficult to see beyond next week’s wages. “aspiration” from poverty isn’t something you can really have without some sort of path out.
The problem is that all of this stuff is just rhetoric. The difference between “lifting people out of poverty” and “helping people lift themselves out of poverty” is what, in practical terms?
A cynic would say that one is code for encouraging scroungers to stick on the dole, do nothing with their lives, and not cause too much trouble, and the other is code for “we’ll cut state services and then blame the resulting misery on the newly-created destitutes themselves”.
Realistically, however aspirational and ambitious, the people Cammo is talking about require significant funding from somewhere both to continue living or to “lift themselves out of poverty”. And the inequalities we already have in society mean that even the most successful will never reach the status that Cameron was guaranteed by birthright.
156, Mark 133 comments makes one hope he is not a conservative politician/supporter about to gain power.
Re: 164 - I disagree, Socrates. I think many faiths provide a moral code or framework which people use in lieu of creating one of their own. I think a lot of the rise of Islam stems from its ability to provide a coherent moral background (so converts believe) with which to manage an often fragmented existence.
I have no Faith yet I have a strong sense of personal morality. I’m a little affronted that Cameron seems to think morality and self-responsibility is a preserve of conservatives. There are many extremely moral people in the Labour Party - I think Gordon Brown is one - and there is a strong tradition of Christian Socialism within the Labour party.
In liberal history, you have the quakers and the non-conformists who in their way were driven by a strong sense of personal morality.
I have my own code of morality with which I’m comfortable and I’m not a conservative with which I’m equally comfortbale.
166. I agree with you there, but such education is currently not forthcoming.
169 it’s what cornflakes were invented for.
“Cameron’s approach here is modelled on Bush’s compassionate Conservatism, ”
No it isn’t, it’s the idea of ‘paternal libertarianism’, something that Obama is also feeding off.
It is clearly antithetical to the Bush doctrine, not to say I agree with it but there is a clear difference.
Morning all,
My thoughts in brief:
1) Cameron is, on this particular issue, right - I am a little rotund and there are no surprises as to why. “It’s not a beer belly, it’s a burgundy belly, and it cost me rather a lot of money”
2) He needs to be careful that this is limited to social issues (like obesity or crime) but not to economic issues - economic circumstance is less within the control of the individual, and to extrapolate this policy to a general “you are what you choose” in the economic sphere would be repeating the mistakes of Thatcherism.
3) He should probably be a little more careful about lecturing the poor - doesn’t mean he’s wrong, but some people will take it the wrong way. Priviledged is one thing, paternalistic and privileged would open up an entire flank of attacks.
4) Nick, I don’t think you should be so dismissive of David King - he’s a decent chap, and no-one supports badger culls unless they really think it will help with bovine TB, whereas people would oppose them even if a cull would work because they believe in animal rights. David wouldn’t have taken this line unless he was convinced - he is not scared of being unpopular, as his support of green issues *and* nuclear power showed during his tenure.
5) Neither Brown, nor Cameron, has ever had what I would consider a *real job*. Not a lot we can do about that now. Work experience for PMs in waiting?
Need to get back to work - agree with Socrates, a very good thread.
As I think was said earlier, the reason this is easy to attack is because Cameron is lecturing without presenting some ideas. Some people make bad choices! OMG~!~!~! What are we going to do about it once they have? Point at them? It doesn’t help that he comes from a background where it’s easier to make wrong choices and fight back but I don’t buy the Cameron toff line. I do think that he is terribly lacking in ideas.
an interesting and I think ironic twist to this speech about personal responsibility is that one of the enemies of taking that responsibility is the speed at which opponents and the media jump on anything contraversial or which actually might point the blame in the right place.
straight away Cameron holds up a mirror to Britain and says “have a look” and immediately the Times says “how dare you”, Mark Senior calls him a drug taking toff. It would be so much easier to just carry on and say that fat people “suffer from obesity” and just let it be. thankfully Cameron hasn’t done this imho but he will inevitably get stick for it. However, doesn’t smithson’s rule apply to cameron….he has been out of the papers a bit recently.
164, 170. in fact if you believe only in the physical laws of science governing the universe, and not in any higher power, then you must logically believe in predestination, as every plant, animal and mineral in the universe is just a collection of atoms conforming to a path determined entirely by those laws.
178. Mr Smith Goes to London.
187, isn’t the whole point of his speech that it isn’t for the state to make decisions all the time and issue instructions but for individuals to take both decisions and responsibilities for themselves?
126 - Interesting point. We do seem to live in a highly materialistic and envious society these days. Rather than attempting to replicate success many seem to resent those that achieve it.
I just want to make a brief point about “poverty”. In this country if you’re “poor” you will still have a roof over your head, free education, free healthcare, money from the state
and support from the voluntary sector. There are real opportunities available for people to succeed. Contrast this with the poor people of Zimbabwe.
I think you’re letting your Lib Dem sympathies get the better of you, Mike. The vat majority of people know that the vast majority of the whingers need to look to themselves for the cause of their predicament and not blame “society”.
Fat people going on about how it’s their low metabolism that makes them fat annoys everyone else. “It’s me glands”. It’s not your bloody glands, it’s that the hole at the top is bigger than the hole in the bottom.
187 - I think Cameron is trying to suggest that we need to move to a situation where the state isn’t forever involved in divorcing actions from consequences. It is a toughie because if you over-egg this particular pudding it can make you look crass and insensitive, however if you do not grasp the nettle you perpetuate the creation and maintenance of an underclass. Tricky tightrope to walk all round.
186 Morus - ‘I am a little rotund’.
I noted recently that one of our less perspicacious posters described you as a left-leaning pro-abortionist. Perhaps the same clot would now be kind enough comment on your physical appearance.
I look forward to him referring to ‘the svelte Morus’, or something like that.
193. yes, the problem is that “whingers” probably are the majority in the UK! and may get offended.
Further to 178, the link to the Racing Post article if anybody is interested is…
http://www.racingpost.co.uk/news/master.sd?psection=racingpost.co.uk&page=OtherSport&category=Politics&story_id=982834
196. In which case we are doomed, all doomed.
196. a good point well made. I know when i get put in charge it will be the fat whingers which are first against the wall
198. of course it is still possible to play whingers off against each other, in fact that is the basic idea of party politics isn’t it?
I love to see the middle-class lefty/liberals on here pleading poverty on behalf of the benefit-claiming classes with Mark Senior even claiming some of these poor unfortunates “don’t know where their next meal is coming from” Well boo hoo, it’s terrible being spoilt for choice……..”should we go to the chippie, the kebab, curry house, or hows about a pizza, and score us some weed while you’re down the shops”
Some of you Guardian readers should try meeting some of the never-had-a-job “underclass” whose corner you’re so keen to fight. I’m related to quite a few of ‘em. You’d be amazed how they’re never short of cash for ciggies, booze, drugs, and the next takeaway. Their lives are shit and so are the lives of their kids, and it’s mainly because the welfare system panders to their worst instincts. Living on benefits ain’t doing ‘em any good.
200. Fat vs lazy - could show it live on Sky 1.
201. and what is your proposed solution, beyond blaming them?
201. an interesting one was the programme about the man with 20 children on TV last night.
202. I think having a programme about fatties fighting over scarce resources would be good. a sort of fatty “survivors” crossed with “battle royale”
If “the right” doesn’t take on professional victimhood it might as well give up, because it will be forced to play on the left’s terms. These, in short, are that “compassion” is judged by how much taxpayers money you’re prepared to shower on anyone with a grievance.
201 The true face of Conservatism rears it’s ugly head .
206 - Not at all, he is merely describing the effect of treating the symptons not the cause.
206. Your contribution to the arguement so far as either been to insult Cameron or just try and get on your high horse.
206 - oh, for goodness sake, Mark, give it a rest.
And it’s “its” if it’s possessive, not “it’s”.
206. I’d prefer that to non stop politics of envy.
206 Grammar, Mark. “its ugly head” not “it’s ugly head”.
If you’re humble enough to take some advice, give it a rest, Mark.
For the sake of the LibDems.
206 - You and Martin Day should elope together…you’re simply made for each other (I’m probably being a little too hard on Martin).
“How dangerous a line is this for Cameron?”
Naughty Mike, subtly raking up Osbourne’s past again!
206 I voted Labour regularly upto and including 1997 Since then I’ve voted Lib Dem a couple of times and Tory once. I’ll be voting Tory at the next GE to help get rid of this odious Labour government. So I’m hardly “the true face of Conservatism” comrade.
212.
“I’m probably being a little too hard on Martin”
I’m sure he will scream out in his Max Mosely moment (when it’s too tuff to continue!)
189 — never heard of quantum theory or chaos theory? Systems can unfailingly follow precise physical laws and yet still produce random, utterly unpredictable outcomes, even encompassing (very rarely) the theoretically impossible.
On a more positive note, I saw a programme at the weekend hosted by Austin Healey. It involved Sale rugby club taking teenagers from some of Liverpool’s most down-at-heel estates, forming them into a side and coaching them. While this was going on the project leader was helping the lads think about the future, apply for jobs etc.
At the start of the programme the lads were without hope. They had no role models, little education, few job prospects. Some openly admitted to criminality and one missed a few weeks training while on remand for threats to kill. The brighter ones were desperate to avoid the plague of drugs they saw bringing down their estate.
By the end of the show they had learned a lot about teamwork, cameraderie, hard work, discipline, commitment etc. They played an army team (Duke of Lancs) and got beaten quite soundly (35-3) but they worked hard. Some of the lads have now got jobs - mainly in the army.
Some parts of this country have got real problems, and the caricature Voxpop portrays is grounded in truth to a certain extent. But solutions do exist. We won’t find them if we try to close down debate just because the protaganist is posh.
214 — very similar voting patterns to mine, then.
203 “201. and what is your proposed solution, beyond blaming them?”
I don’t have a “solution” I’m not a miracle worker. The rot is in so deep now, as you would see if you visited many of the people and place I go to.
As for blaming them. Who’s “them” People should take personal responsibility but Browns benefit system encourages indolence and dependance.
201 The Tories have been banging on about the undeserving poor since at least the 19th century. If they haven’t managed to sort out the problem by now then I think it’s fair to say they never will.
201.
“they’re never short of cash for ciggies, booze, drugs, and the next holiday. Their lives are shit and so are the lives of their kids, and it’s mainly because Gordon Brown’s Tory tax regime panders to their worst instincts. Living on inheritance and state ’sweetners’ ain’t doing ‘em any good.”
The ‘top’ are the complete mirror of everything you say about the ‘bottom’ (The fecklessness of some of (both sections of) whom I would never defend)
186 - good post.
One other issue that Cameorn should have considered with this speech, is that its timing arather takes the spotlight off Brown’s ill judged remarks on wasting food. It was probably a time to emphasise the responsibility of governments rather than individuals.
206 - care to offer an alternative explanation/analysis?
220 Who’s talking about the poor. I’m talking about benefit recipients who’ve never worked in their life and never intend to, who’re receiving the gross equivalent of £25k and more pa for sitting round smoking their heads of and encouraging idleness and dependance in their kids. What’s poor, in the financial sense, about that? That’s more than many people get who are out working their arses off every day.
216. unpredictable, yes. indeterminate, no.
if you believe that the laws of science are the highest power out there, you must accept that everything is taking place according to those laws, and will continue to do so. as a result, arriving at the inevitable outcome is a mere formality.
The most militant anti-badger person I’ve ever met is a former neighbour who contracted TB as a child, reputedly from milk, although last heard of she was still going strong into her eighties. She would have personally exterminated the species world-wide if given the chance.
I do not know what the badger population is around where I live. However, so far this year we are already into double figures for those killed on the road within our village of fewer than 200 houses.
There used to be a badger carcase collection service which analysed dead ones. They once told me that all had died in road traffic accidents and none through shooting, gassing or the like. However, they would not provide figures for those infected with TB.
The carcases are now collected by the local council. The last one killed was seen running down the side of the road 11 days after death. The smell was off putting at more than 100 paces.
I suspect that population control is vital for the benefit of both the badger and the health of the farming industry. It is a pity that the latest ministerial decision in reality procrastinates until the scientists comes up with something.
216. pedantic note: I don’t think there is, or will ever be, a theory that allows for the “theoretically impossible”
Cameron’s comments sound a bit like Tebbit’s ‘get on your bike ‘comments.Methinks a lurch to the right for our dave.
224. this is encouraging a myth. noone lives well off benefits. working full time is worth considerably more.
81 - “I’m slightly overweight. Not much, but a little. Whose fault is that? Mine, for a couple too many helpings of chips and too few outings on my bike.”
I think we need to make a distinction between the individual, and their choices, and society, and its choices. I don’t see society as simply the aggregation of individual actions. Take smoking as an example.
It is fair to say that smoking is decreasing in Britain, and it would also be fair to say that the high tax on cigarettes, and social disapproval evident in the creeping banning of smoking from public places, has had a large impact on this in society as a whole. Yet it might only have played a small part in each individuals decision to quit smoking, or avoid taking up the habit in the first place.
So there are decisions that a society can make, such as the relative priority given to pedestrians, bicycles and cars in the planning of roads, the amount of free access green space, advertising of unhealthy foods to youngsters helping to create bad eating habits early on, etc.
These can have an effect on a society-wide level, even if it is individuals choices that have a larger impact on their own personal situation.
214, 218. noone believes either of you, by the way
The way Labour have encouraged people to see themselves as victims of circumstance and not responsible for their actions is one of their worst failings. Terms like ’social exclusion’ are irresponisle when applied to people who have chosen to exclude themselves. This does not in my opinion encourage people to believe their destiny lies in their own hands. It encourages helplessness and then wilfull surrender to the control of the state. I hate to say this but there are many people working in the caring professions who love nothing more than controlling other people’s lives. It’s all very debilitating.
So Cameron has a point. Though he’s challenging the status quo the voters have got used to. As Mike says, very dangerous.
[224] - Please do tell me how you would manage to get £25k in benefits per year.
73 Nick Palmer MP. O/T but I have to respond
Nick sadly your comment : “The technical problem about a cull is that if you kill some but not all badgers, the remaining ones move into the vacated setts, increasing mobility - which spreads the disease faster. If you don’t have complete cooperation (e.g. the National Trust has said it will not cooperate), the problem gets worse still. You could try eradicating every badger in Britain, but even the NFU doesn’t go that far, and anything short of that is unlikely to work.”
….proves you know absolutely nothing about farming, nor the vast majority opinion of Farmers in the UK. Farmer who I am friendly with and on who’s land I shoot will now just have to hang on until 2010 until your government is filletted by the electorate. I will spike my guns until 2010…..
I cannot even be bothered to show how ridiculous your point is. If that is the best opinion we can get from our supposed leaders then I am truly shocked.
201. “What is your proposed solution?”
One would be Cameron’s proposed national volunteer programme (can’t remember it’s proper title). Another would be to pay private job centres by results - Tory policy. Another would be to give parents vouchers for the education of their children - Gove’s new model. Another would be to break up the monopoly of state social services in the provision of care - see Grayling ad infinitum. Another would be a time limit or lifetime cash limit on benefits - under consideration by the Tories.
Voxpop’s Austin Healey story is the type of action that IDS’s Centre for Social Justice has been championing, tackling areas from youth delinquency to marriage breakdown, debt and drug rehab.
There are plenty of ideas out there. What is needed is a government with the will to put some of them into practice and the stickability to hang in there when the going gets tough in the media.
For the past eleven years we have had a government willing to talk the language of action and compassion but with neither the will to take the tough decisions nor the determination to face down a hostile media.
I’ll be criticised on here for this, but Labour have betrayed their principles and history, leaving Cameron (and IDS) as the best and brightest hope for Britain’s poorest communities.
227 — what I meant, I confess, was actually how quantum theory permits events that are *classically* impossible, such as escaping from a black hole, or the fact that so-called ‘empty space’ is packed full of short-lived ‘virtual particles’. In quantum theory there’s no atomic event that’s impossible, merely extremely improbable.
229/233 - There are always myths and half-truths when benefits figures are bandied around, but it is not necessarily correct to say that people are always better off working. The marginal benefits of taking low-waged employment are often insufficient to outweigh the immediate disadvantages of leaving the family home; the state benefits system can encourage inertia - and I don’t think you can entirely blame people for not taking the longer view and thinking about distant promotions and pay rises.
I spoke to a friend of mine recently - a low-mid paid single father in a live-in relationship with a girl who has two kids of his own. A complicated situation but not that unusual where I grew up. He recently turned down the offer of a significant pay rise because the complexity, time and heartache involved in unwinding his family’s benefit arrangements did not justify the marginal increase he would actually receive. The system is badly flawed, and the flaws need to be addressed.
231 — too damn bad, and to hell with you if you don’t, ed.
O/T - The electoral commission yesterday published proposals for new Unitary Authorities for Norfolk/Suffolk and Devon .
The preferred proposal for Norfolk and Suffolk are for 3 Unitary Authorities
Norfolk plus Lowestoft
Ipswich plus Felixstowe
Remainder of Suffolk
For Devon there is marginal preference for one new Devon UA with the 2 present UA’s of Plymouth and Torbay unchanged but also a 2nd proposal for 2 new Unitaries
Exeter/Exmouth
Remainder of Devon
235. most of those are reorganisation of existing services though. i.e. getting a voucher for schooling that you then spend on a school, instead of sending your kids to school for free, is not tackling the problem under discussion.
time limit on benefits is the most radical of those, and it seems rather risky to me! what happens when you run out of time?
236. ok. but quantum does still not allow for the possibility of any moral decision to be made. your life’s path is already mapped out, if God doesn’t exist (and quite possibly even if God does exist).
[237] - I agree with much of what you say, but I’ve heard no solutions to the problem other than cutting the gent’s benefits in the first place, so that people who didn’t have his opportunity would be worse off.
This then funds a good tax cut for the already well off…
235. “leaving Cameron (and IDS) as the best and brightest hope for Britain’s poorest communities.”
whether you are right or wrong about that, voting records would indicate that the communities you mention do not feel this way or share this hope. and Cameron’s words would indicate that he is prepared to [possibly] further alienate them.
226 Badger was a popular food in medieval England, and is still eaten by people who enjoy cooking and eating road-kill.
242. I think it is fair to say that the current system is a bit too complicated, and there may be some good tweaks to be made.
However, most people who try to rubbish it aren’t saying that, and have no idea even how the system works, preferring instead to invoke anecdotes about so-and-so off the telly who earns £50k in benefits, or my mate who would be worse off in a job, etc.
Not wishing to sound like the Daily Mail (God forbid) but if you’re up for rallying against ‘rip off Britain’ you can join a little Facebook group I’ve started
http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#/group.php?gid=36243045352&ref=mf
244 - really? What does it taste like?
224, 229 People who think life on benefits is such a good thing should try it.
Far too many posters imagine the working class as an amorphous mass, whereas there are a mix of the socially responsible and irresponsible *from the same background*. It is just wrong to claim that the former are at one with the latter, in fact the party that attacks the feckless with greater gusto is the one that will gain the socially responsible working class vote.
This grouping accounts for most of my family and it was my background when growing up, the idea that ‘do-gooders’ are the problem is one that is part of the working class credo.
246. what makes you think that services which cost money should be provided for free?
247 I’ve never tried it. Probably rather strong and gamey, like wild venison.
The problem is there that the current benefits system has a lot of points at which the marginal impact is enormous and consequently the system acts as a massive cap on aspiration.
252. of course a lot of people who are aspirational but on benefits would in fact be helped by a more generous system that allowed them to hold out for a good job and trusted them to find one.
231.
“214, 218. noone believes either of you, by the way”
You suggesting they are Cameron and Boris?
Part of the problem is the incessant segregation of society under this Government, you can’t be heard or apprently hold an opinion unless you belong to some completely false arbitrary classification: pensioner, single parent, gay, an ethnic minority, a working mother, ’special needs’, unemployed youngster, hard-working family; and of course, the original and best ‘working class’.
Why do left wing Governments always do this? In a desperate effort to reach equlaity they usually do far more to divide than unite.
191, Morris Dancer:
“Isn’t the whole point of his speech that it isn’t for the state to make decisions all the time and issue instructions but for individuals to take both decisions and responsibilities for themselves?”
No. That may have been the point but what he’s effectively doing is saying, “You are fat. Stop being fat.” He doesn’t want people to be too fat or hooked on drugs or too poor, whatever that means, so he tells them so and then doesn’t suggest what they can do about it. He doesn’t have to issue instructions. But he could set up a framework in this country where people can get help if they take the decision to seek it. And we know people do seek it because so much money is spent on self-help material in this country and in the western world. With smoking, for example, people can quit by themselves but others benefit from support, either by quitting with someone else or with a group of people. Will power is strengthened by external influence.
251 - Fair enough. A quick Google suggests a range of opinions, from goose & suckling pig-like through to halfway between gamey beef & venison.
Having to ‘de-grease’ in a river to get rid of the ‘uriney’ taste makes it sound like a bit of an acquired taste, though.
257 Kidneys taste nice after you’ve soaked them in water, although they’d certainly have a uriney taste if you didn’t, so I don’t see that as being a big problem with badger meat. I’m inclined to think the cross between beef and venison is more likely than the other two you mention. It would probably be quite tough, too, so probably most suitable for casseroles. Obviously, commerically farmed badger would have a rather different texture.
257. Perhaps the ‘bag’ from a nationwide badger cull could be provided to low income families, thus solving the bovine TB and food price problems at a single stroke.
253 - in the ideal world we don’t live in perhaps.
259 - The problem seems to be at a casual glance that the nutritious and ‘good’ foods are expensive and the un-nutritious and ‘bad’ foods are cheap. I think there is a case for penalising pre-packaged dross foods to subsidise staples, particularly as one can envisage a crisis of malnutrition developing.
195 - I quite look forward to *being* the ’svelte Morus’ again, PtP!
261 There are cheap nutritious foods, though. I’m quite a fan of offal, much of which comes cheap. Pork is cheap, too.
259. Throw in a few non-cruelly hunted foxes and hey presto a winner. Cheap organic food for the poor
253. Imagine you are an employer and two job applications land on your desk.
One from someone who took just about any job available to keep him/herself going and kept applying for better positions and one that sat on his/her duff and signed for their Giro every week until something they fancied turned up.
Which one impresses the most?
No contest.
Been there, done that, got the T-shirt.
264 Fox would taste horrible, surely.
266 - I’ve certainly seen it described as pretty vile.
251 Never tried badger or intend to but Count Stroganoff’s recipe for bear (now usually served using beef) would probably tenderise it and the cream and brandy would relieve the gaminess.
Surprised Gordon didn’t suggest greater use of badger, rabbit and squirrel in his new role as the latter day Lord Wooton. Perhaps he needs to appoint Delia to the Lords as Peoples Kitchen Commissar to come up with the recipes.
265 - you’d go for the one who chopped jobs around every few weeks and always took ‘better’ chances instead of staying at a job and helping it to develop then?
268 - squirrel’s actually quite tasty. Bit like stronger flavoured rabbit.
Only come in hors d’oevres-sized portions, though.
Dont know if this has been posted but a Sun journo sticks the boot in…
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/columnists/fergus_shanahan/article539512.ece
270 So, I’m told. Something I imagine would taste rather good, satayed, is hamster.
273 - almost no meat on a hamster. I think the only thing you could do with it (lots of them) would be make a pie.
Maybe a lasagna?
[OT]
Top US Airport japes:
A senior government official with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has expressed great interest in a so-called safety bracelet that would serve as a stun device, similar to that of a police Taser®. According to this promotional video found at the Lamperd Less Lethal website, the bracelet would be worn by all airline passengers.
This bracelet would:
• take the place of an airline boarding pass
• contain personal information about the traveler
• be able to monitor the whereabouts of each passenger and his/her luggage
• shock the wearer on command, completely immobilizing him/her for several minutes
http://www.washingtontimes.com/weblogs/aviation-security/2008/Jul/01/want-some-torture-with-your-peanuts/
sorry, 273 was a response to 272.
265. You are wrong - I did the any job, work your way up option. After a few jobs you become unemployable because you have *moved around too much*! You cannot win! I object to the people who say take any job (Usually these people have been with the same employer a significant time and have no idea)- Why don’t they jack their job in and do any job for a change. Don’t think many of these W*nkers would last more than a few months in any job! Many would not want to move.
Going back to the thread this is why i highlighted the Times article last night although i was guilty of spinning the link!
In tough times, this sort of message appeals more than those with “social concerns” will care to appreciate. It is a more robust line but put against Labour’s record of failure on the issue, what can Labour do or say about it? Labour’s policies have failed these people and the central state cannot dictate diet in a *free* country. It all goes back to the broken society theme, this encompuses civil disorder, 42 days, CCTV camaras, families, diet, lifestyle and work ethic/ opportunities.
Nobody mentions *opportunity society* these days, I for one think this has failed to be delivered by Labour.
A sound speech full of endearing cliches - and not wrong simply because we’ve heard it all before from grumpy old uncles like myself.
The point is anyone can say these things: what are the Tories proposing to improve the situation?
Well-thought out proposals are what would persuade me to vote for the Tories (or any other party who takes these problems seriously.) It’s got to be more than just headline grabbing, which is always my impression with Cameron, as he never seems to follow up with anything concrete.
Sorry if this disappoints. Personally, I’m extremely suspicious of charismatic politicians.
A sound speech full of endearing cliches - and not wrong simply because we’ve heard it all before from grumpy old uncles like myself.
The point is anyone can say these things: what are the Tories proposing to improve the situation?
Well-thought out proposals are what would persuade me to vote for the Tories (or any other party who takes these problems seriously.) It’s got to be more than just headline grabbing, which is always my impression with Cameron, as he never seems to follow up with anything concrete.
Sorry if this disappoints. Personally, I’m extremely suspicious of charismatic politicians.
273 - Surely you could make a very nice fur coat with lots of hamsters? Waste not want not, as our Prime Minister reminds us.
276.
“Nobody mentions *opportunity society* these days, I for one think this has failed to be delivered by Labour.”
Plenty of opportunities under Labour for Tory Euro-MPs to feather familial nests!
279 - Stop it before PETA get Heather Mills round here!
273.
“almost no meat on a hamster.”
UR Hazel Blears’ boyfriend and I claim my UKP5 (plus bonus bike ride).
269. How do you ‘develop’ jobs like shelf-stacking in a supermarket? Or unloading the empties from trucks at a brewery? Done both when times got tough. Swapping jobs every few weeks is a caution sign to potential employers - especially in this day and age when telling the truth on a reference can get you in deep trouble. (Way back when, my boss was a pathologist who was asked for a reference for a pretty hopeless employee who had resigned. It consisted of four words - “This person is unemployable.” Try that these days.)
Also in later years been responsible for interviewing and appointing (or recommending the appointment of) applicants. One of the major attributes an employer looks for is a willingness to work, and the best indication of this is the employment record. To paraphrase - employers are more willing to help those who help themselves.
281 - all we’re doing is talking about it. She wouldn’t have a leg to stand on.
I’ll get my coat….
258.
“commerically farmed badger would have a rather different texture”
Do the Conservatives have a new policy on badger-farming? It’s as good a place as any for them to start having policies.
280. I think MEP’s & MP’s who do this should be sacked - I do not support these greedy people. They should be expunged and forced out - this is not a Tory problem but one of the political system.
Why go on about Tories when Labour are just as bad, even the LD’s have the odd rotter.
Spit roasting Lib Dem canvassers has been a notable gastronic delight on my Scottish estate for some years. Their largely veggie diet means they need to be hung for a few weeks to bring out the fullest of flavour.
Sadly for some unfathomable reason they are becoming an endangered species and we now regard it as quite a coup to bag more than odd brace in the season.
287 - Nice to see that you enjoy a rich and varied diet!
afternoon all, an excellent posting with some first class comments.
David Cameron didn’t mention anything about class. His comments apply equally to fatty Soames in Mid Sussex as to some working class wifie in Easterhouse.
It’s time people regained a little respect for others and a good deal of self-respect for themselves. The problem is that regardless of whether its the single mother with 6 kids to 5 fathers or the stuck up “Hyacinth Bucket” type middle class horror with her alice band and Chelsea tractor, both think cooking consists of taking a ready meal (in one case bought in Farmfoods in the other in M and S or Sainsbury) and sticking it in the microwave. No-one seems to know how to cook anymore.
Healthy eating is not expensive but it does take a bit of effort. I can easily make a 3-course meal for 4 for under £10 and use the leftovers to make another meal.
How many people want to scream at the TV when yet another mother says she cannot cope with her darling children who have just been convicted of serious assault or drug dealing. Drug dealing is as much a problem of the darling middle class kids in their shiny uniforms as of the poor kids in a crappy comprehensive. In both cases the parents have abrogated their responsibilities since shagging and having the kids in the first place. They blame the teachers. What about the first 5 years before they go to school?
Whether people are rich or poor, married, single, divorced or separated, until people stop blaming society, schools, the government, the weather and everything else except themselves, things will only get worse. If DC can open the debate then good on him.
Most obese people (excluding the genuine few with real medical conditions) blame social conditions on their weight. If they just looked in the mirror and said”I am a fat bastard because I am shovelling too much crap down my throat” and decide to do something about it instead of wallowing in self pity and reaching for the next multibag of crisps, we would all be much healthier.
How many more “feral kids” have to be shot, stabbed or raped before politicians stop using nice words and set up endless commissions and study groups and get to the nub of the problem, the complete lack of self respect and respect for others in our “busy” society!
287. I hope you don’t mean “spit roasting” in the Premier League Footballer sense ?
241. Um, isn’t the basis of quantum theory uncertainty? That fate ultimately depends on chance - thus Einstein’s problem about God playing dice. Thus your life hasn’t been mapped out at all.
291. only in a technical sense based on measurability.
O/T - BBC execs are sitting pretty aren’t they? With up to 30% payrises. So much for restraint.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7494034.stm
292. Then why did Einstein have such a problem with it?
@291:
Quite. The whole point about QM, and why it was so problematic for those deeply rooted in the Newtonian tradition, is that it was the final death for determinacy.
The mechanistic Universe, whose complete evolution is theoertically determinable from its starting conditions, died with the ultraviolet catastrophe.
Quantum Mechanics is not merely a scam to hind the truth of determinism from us. This Universe is not deterministic. Deal with it.
@292:
Ed, I can comfortably say, from my ivory tower labeled ‘Master of Physics’, that you are making an arse of yourself on this point and should quit whilst you’re ahead.
292. For some reason your response reminded me of that great line from Feynman:
“Physics is like sex. There are practical outcomes, but that’s not why we do it.”
296. Martin, could you recommend any books explaining quantum mechanics that fall betwen “this is the way it is, and you’re too stupid for any explanation beyond analogies” and “you can only understand this book if you have a degree in maths and already know quantum mechanics”?
289
Agreed.
If Labour policies were successful, we would not be having this debate.
289 Easterross. “fatty Soames” !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
How dare you Sir. The Honourable member for Sussex Mid(rift) is a glorious example of streamlined Conservatism. Not an ounce of fine living is out of place … not a scintilla of culinary muscle(s)out of proportion(s) … not a ripple of gastronomic gluntony to be seen.
A career on the Conservative catwalk beckon. Move along the bus Kate Moss !!!
@298
QED: The strange theory of light and matter, by Richard Feynman
The Quark and the Jaguar, by Murray Gell-Mann.
Easily the best ‘general science’ books on modern Quantum Mechanics.
300 he is rather splendid. Far more so than Obama
298
Bascially quantume physics states you can know the energy or the position of extremely small subatomic particles but measurement of either leads to a change in energy so you cannot know both together. Well that’s Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle..
After 40 years my Physics degree is lost in the mists of time…
300 He is nevertheless put in the shade, Jack, by the svelte Morus. [Post 195 refers.]
303 Time, Madasafish? Now what exactly is that?
300. I thought Soames was the wardrobe, not the clothes hanger.
300/304 test/PtP.
…. Svelte Morus sounds a wee bit like a Viking p0rn star !!
306 - I’ve just recovered from thoughts of spitroasting well hung Lib Dems, I really don’t think that I can contemplate Conservative keys sticking out as well.
@303:
But that’s rather a simplification, because the assumption is that a quantum possesses both, but you can’t measure one without disturbing the other. But that’s not really accurate, at least not in the most commonly accepted interpretations of QM. If anything, that’s a pretty neoclassical interpretation.
303. I already understood that much, although I get a bit lost with some of the implications of it.
Odd there is still no market up today yet for Glasgow East from both Ladbrokes and PP?
@305:
Time is an illusion. Lunchtime, doubly so.
307 Like the now legendary F1 supremo, what Svelte Morus does in his own time and in the privacy of his home is his business, Jack, and nobody else’s.
310 - My interest in physics was curtailed by a teacher who couldn’t pronounce his ‘R’s and spent an entire lesson discussing Wawefwactional Ways.
295. it is the final death for determinism only if you are still looking at things from the standpoint of classical mechanics.
the QM “universe as a single wave function” idea is far from dead.
294. Einstein was wrong about a lot of the quantum stuff, and probably allowed his religion to cloud his judgement.
314 You err, James. Wawefwactional Way is a street in Myrthyr.
Latest Rasmussen Tracker :
McCain 43% .. Obama 49%
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
As Iain Dale says, Grey suits or Granita…
http://www.iaindale.blogspot.com/
@315:
It is the final death for determinism if we look at it from the viewpoint of how determinism is *defined* you mean?
The evolution of the quantum universe is probabilistic. The complete evolution of the Universe could never be modelled even if its complete starting conditions could be specified, which of course, they can’t.
Your talk of the “universe as a single wavefunction” is merely evidence of your not understanding how wavefunctions are used and what they represent in QM. A wavefunction does not represent a complete and deterministic model of how an entity behaves, for the Universe or anything else.
This is what I mean my determinism, it’s also what you mean, and what everybody else means. Pretending otherwise is disingenuous.
317. The trends in those favourable ratings aren’t looking good for McCain:
http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/favorable_ratings_for_presidential_candidates
And Obama’s centrist pivoting seems to be working:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/voters_perceive_obama_moving_to_the_middle
O/T
Barclays have stopped ALL lending through their “Firstplus” division.
The crunch deepens.
Quote of the week from Max Mosley:-
“Had I wanted a Nazi scene, I would have said I wanted one and A would have got some of the inexpensive Nazi stuff from the joke shop that provides uniforms and would not have gone to Marks and Spencer and got quite expensive jackets.”
follow that!
“Student loans only have to be paid back when you’re earning above a certain amount, and they have no interest. ”
Oh yes they do. And, in recent months, it got changed from one level to a significantly higher one.
322. Max Mosely shops at M&S for S&M ?
315 “Einstein was wrong about a lot of the quantum stuff, and probably allowed his religion to cloud his judgement.”
Einstein identified culturally and politically with the Jews, but was not a practising Jew or at all religious.
I agree with Martin Coxall @ 296 and following.
Sheffield Hallam
County/Area: South Yorkshire (Humberside)
MP Nick Clegg (LIB) Electorate 68,573 Turnout 0.00%
2005 Share User Prediction
LIB 20,463 45.88% 35.95%
CON 13,499 30.27% 42.92%
LAB 8,414 18.87% 10.66%
OTH 2,162 4.85% 10.34%
MIN 61 0.14% 0.14%
LIB Majority 6,964 15.61% Pred Maj 6.97% CON
This would mean an LD gain!
301. Thanks. Appreciated.
323. Well it always used to be inflation rate interest, which is no interest in real terms. And even commercial rate interest shouldn’t be a problem if your degree was worthwhile.
323 The interest on student loans is linked to the RPI I think. Interest only accrues after you graduate.
326. Should keep Clegg busy during a GE…
323. On a serious note with regard to Student Loans it is worked out against RPI and not the governments preffered CPI measure!
Which do you think is the higher rate!!!! They are certainly not on my side!
The RPI has been going up more quickly than Average Earnings if i recall correctly and so in effect there is a process going on similar to fiscal drag! More in terms of “interest” rather than the payment threshold.
I am basically socialist at heart, but believe that the welfare state has got out of control, and while there are plenty of stereotypical poorly nourished, under-exercised, shell suit clad yobs around, there are also very many genuinely needy individuals around who need real help.
Well here is a suggestion: After 6 months on ‘conventional benefits’, no further cash payments to be made – instead Social Security recipients would be given a smart card instead of cash, which would be credited weekly with an appropriate amount, and which could be used with a PIN in exactly the same way as a debit card, but which could be used to pay for basic commodities only – fresh meat and vegetables, milk, asprin, soap, etc all OK – microwave meals, energy drinks, cigarettes; hair gel – not. Main supermarket chains can program their tills accordingly – smaller shops can simply be threatened that they will not be reimbursed for any purchase of non-essential items. If recipients want to spend money on cigarettes, alchohol etc then they will have to get a part-time job to get the cash, so an added incentive to find something to do.
Anybody out there brave enough to try this??
330. Yvette Cooper (nee Balls) told R5 live this morning that Labour has given you low inflation - whats your problem ?
328. Not so sure on that front - I was at university between 1994-98 the first time and i am sure that it started accrueing as soon as you took it out! A long time ago! My - if one could turn back time: More time spent studying less spent frivoulously.
the story is here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2007/jun/23/interestrates.studentfinance
and
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/3103281.stm
I thought they changed and used a different interest measurement but I guess I’m wrong there. I just recalled the minor bit of aggro about it.
But they do ‘earn’ interest - mine is getting quite high after a 4 year degree followed by 5 years post-graduate. Oh well, that was my decision.
334. I assume the increase in pay was worth it though!
331 This is like the system used for asylum seekers. My wife works in a supermarket and there are endless arguments about what they can and can’t buy with their tokens. A lot of the staff don’t bother to enforce the restrictions, and, although I don’t have any inside knowledge, I assume that the supermarkets just claim that everything was bought correctly even though they know this is untrue. The only was this could be checked would be for the DSS or whoever to have access to supermarket systems, and it would not be cost-effective for auditors to crawl over transactions for 50p of £1 - what are they going to do - fine the culprits (who have no money)? Throw them in gaol (at great public expense?). Threaten the supermarkets (who would just refuse to operate the system, which is a pain for them anyway)?
Not workable I ‘m afraid - has already been tried and failed.
325. he certainly seemed to want to work “God” into some of his solutions
331 - “smaller shops can simply be threatened” - yes, you’re a socialist, all right….
That would assume that I have finished the whole postgraduate studying thing, wouldn’t it …
I hope it will do, but I don’t *really* mind - would not have got to university without it in the first place.
334. the aggro was about the way it is calculated based on one specific month in the year - the result last year was a massive jump in interest from IIRC 2.4 to 4.8% or something like that - purely because that march (or whatever month) had been a single month of high inflation, and that was then enforced for the next 12 months.
slightly ludicrous technicality (within a system seemingly designed to throw up ludicrous technicalities at every oppo).
319. you miss the point
337 Einstein did not speak English very well.
I think the word normally translated as God is more literally transcribed as “the Old One” or “the Old Adam”. It more refers to a world-view than a deity.
331. What about those with Loans, Credit cards and other such things to pay - not to mention utility bills?
The idea has some merit but i am afraid the hard core benifit claimants will find money by ‘doing work’ that is probably linked to crime.
Last year i attended a ‘Welfare to Work’ type course for a few days. On this course one individual advised me he was better off on the dole and he acted as a fence for stolen goods! He even offered me a washing machine, Ciggerettes, Alchol and Acid. I poletly declined using poverty as my excuse. Not the most pleasant experience but an education in the under class!
Still it was good training for meeting CIS/ CO-OP customers
331: How about being old fashioned and giving money to those in need, and a kick up the behind to those who are lazy?
343 - without trying to sound like a Nazi, it should not be the role of the taxpayer to fund outstanding car loans, holiday credit card bills etc. But a law in which interest payments were frozen while claiming benefit (banks make enough money off everyone to self insure for this) (apart from NR and a few others….OT)
331 - The point of a smart card would be to automate the process to avoid argument. I accept that it would be much easier to apply to the big supermarket chains with EPOS but not so easy to apply to corner shops, but the current system does not deliver the benefits where they are needed.
341 You have absolutely no choice but to believe you have free will. Belief in free will is a product of evolution - it has great survival value. It doesn’t mean it is true though.
346. yes I agree
338 - threatened in the same way as you are threatened to do your VAT returns - keep proper records and expect to be audited - not neccesary to check every 50p spent - but you can not expect to be reimbursed for expenditure on PSP games made using a welfare smartcard.
348. it would be hard for the current crop of MPs to push through a system where benefit claimants need to be audited for every pound spent
344. How do you define someone who is lazy? Some people develop depression and other such mental illness whilst out of work. Could be part of a condition - you have to be careful when assessing people as quite often the real cases are neglected and refused. The bone idle parrasites slip through the net by utilising low cunning and deception.
Some *Right-Wingers* make me laugh they do not know the half of how society works outside their aspiration dream. Everybody cannot be at the top of the pile and some owe it to luck or who they know rather than skill or talent. Some of the left are equally guilty of overlooking the malign infliences that motivate the idle and the under class or turn a blind eye to it.
I do not think this lady will need any help or guidance from Harriet Harman!
http://news.scotsman.com/latestnews/Glasgow-East-byelection-Labour-launchs.4266160.jp
It seems to me that Labour’s cock up with their candidate procedure has turned out to be very fortunate for them and actually resulted in the selection of a very strong candidate who IMO will beat the SNP with ease.
350: ‘How do you define someone who is lazy?’
If we have a proactive dole office that finds people work that they are suitable for, and points them towards training if it is needed, those who refuse the reasonable offers of work that they are capable of are lazy and should not be supported by the taxpayer.
351 - in the interests of balanced reporting….
http://mreugenides.blogspot.com/2007/09/shadow-cabinet-of-all-talents.html
I see this problem in a quite different way from anyone who has so far posted on this thread. I would not criticise anyone of taking advantage of rights granted to them under a system set up to provide them with benefits. However, the social security system as currently established provides perverse incentives. In general, the social security system is devised to make life on low income more comfortable rather than to help people support themselves. In some cases, that is right: we should be supporting family carers, and not making them work. In many other cases, that is wrong.
305, PtP,
Time is the relative measurement of states of decay.
On the determinacy front - Martin Coxall and co are spot on - quantum theory killed determinacy nearly a hundred years ago. If you could run the same event twice, as identically as the universe could support, you could get totally different outcomes. With the exact same initial conditions. At that point, determinacy becomes hard to support.
350 - How do you define someone who is lazy?
Someone who is content working for the DSS ?????
345. Yes and screw someones creidt rating up? Silly idea!
Many jobs require a declaration of financial solvancy in the private sector including in the finance, Legal and retail sectors.
Not to mention the knock on effects in terms of getting a mortgage or other such things that are part of building ones life. You might not be aware of this but many “protection products” such as loan finance will fail to pay out for a whole number of reasons such as previous employment breaks legnth of service, reason for leaving a job or have a defereal period before they will pay (Usually optional but sometimes statutory).
The state provides a small security net - You percieve that all unemployed people or long-term unemployed people delibratly want to stay unemployed. This is not the case, people have some very odd and in my opinion bigoted views on this matter. The most vociferous should experience it themselves perhaps? As Michael Portillo once commented on his stay in that house in Liverpool: He “did not realise people lived like that” - they do and it is far greater in number than many would care to admit.
When i have been employment previously i have paid taxes and indeed still pay taxes now! VAT and other such pleasures!
The way to go about getting people back to work is the suggested Tory programme of using private orgasnisations to help people back to work.
Another interest point is why should we write debt off to third world countries who squander money on dictators but deprive our own of support. You are a strange type of socialist who thinks we should save lives in Africa but F*ck the underclass in this society? Sometimes it maybe better to ‘buy off’ the problem of the underclass than deal with it!
@342:
According to Wikipedia, a rather more accurate translation of the phrase from the Max Born letter is “Quantum mechanics is certainly imposing. But an inner voice tells me that it is not yet the real thing. The theory says a lot, but does not really bring us any closer to the secret of the ‘old one’. I, at any rate, am convinced that He does not throw dice.”
Make of that what you will. Sounds to me like he believes in Cthulhu.
248 224, 229 People who think life on benefits is such a good thing should try it.
Half of Wythenshawe have been “trying it” for years, and they’re having a fecking whale of a time with the taxpayer picking up the tab.
51 Goupillon, the woman is a hectoring banshee. She issued a challenge to John Mason the SNP candidate to have a public debate with her to which he replied any time anywhere and preferably everywhere. He will make mincemeat of the woman.
Margaret Curran is as we would say in Glasgow a “total numptie”. She stands up for the poor working class of Glasgow East. she doesn’t ask herself why after 50 years of almost uninterrupted control of Glasgow Council the people are still poor and living in substandard housing in many cases? The reason put simply is because the Labour Party in Glasgow couldn’t organise its way out of a public toilet. Sorry if that is getting close to spit roasting well hung Libdems. Not sure who suggested that but the mind boggles and I would rather it didn’t just this once
358 - I have never said anything about supporting africa dictatorships etc ahead of supporting our own underpriveleged.
I am trying to suggest a method for directing benefits where they are more clearly needed - if you want a benefits for all society then try living in France - minimum tax rate 22% rising to 60% very quickly!! You can not have it both ways.
298 - Socrates, you must read ‘the Elegant Universe’ by Brian Greene. Talks about how QM and General Relativity are resolved by Superstring theory. Absolutely brilliant - for non-scientists, but doesn’t cut any slack. Enthralling but challenging.
Good to see you all taking my good name in vain! I’m keeping a list…
@363:
Of course, then I’d have to kill you because String theory is pseudo-scientific drivel and not worthy of consideration.
New thread - Who’ll remember what this was supposed to be about?
Here’s a ray of hope for the embattled Prime Minister: according to a recent Rasmussen poll, the U.S. congress now receives a 9% approval rating (good or excellent).
http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/congressional_performance/congressional_performance
In spite of this, just about everyone expects that the party that is currently in control of Congress will not only keep its House and Senate majorities in November but will actually substantially increase those majorities. With Labour’s approval ratings currently exceeding those of the U.S. Congress, perhaps Brown has reason for hope. Any believers out there in PB land?
362. All i am saying is through my experience in work and out of work. A government has to be careful about what they are doing. As i said previously it is sometimes better to deal with a problem by buying it off rather than agitating it as Thatcher did in the 80’s with mining in the 1980’s etc?
Energy supply to this country is now insecure partly due to Thatchers persicution of the miners a view i have reached in hindcite. The Tories did not even spare the UDM in Notts for their help………..
@366:
Presumably, USians believe the alternative is substantially worse. This seems not be the case in the UK.
305
Apolgogies for the delay in defining time.
Time is something you have which is infinitely long, does not last when you are busy and does not pass when you are idle.
I suppose therfore time is an illusion.
It’s usually found on your hands…
368- That seems to be the obvious answer. Still, I can’t point to any other examples in modern western democracies where a legislature receives an approval rating in single digits and the majority party in that legislature nonetheless looks forward to big gains in the coming elections. Perhaps this highlights the possibility that Labour could still make a comeback if the Tories botch things very badly in the next year or so.
369 Thanks Madasafish, but didn’t Samuel Becket observe that time passes whether one wants it to or not?
Erm… Did he mention those addicted to tobacco who are progressively destroying their own lungs, costing a fortune in NHS services in their later years not to mention unecessarily ruining their own health, wealth and happiness.
He didn’t? I wonder why…
Those who say that DC or politicians are too shielded from reality in poorer areas (when they say people need to be more responsible and less dependent) obviously haven’t been canvassing in those areas! In many working class areas they deeply resent the “scroungers” (as they put it when they don’t use much stronger language). If we are going down the route where parts of the media will just rubbish things people say because the person saying it may be perceived as from a different class, then our country will end up ungovernable.
Has Clown Cameron looked at Eric Pickles recently? Pickles aint exactly a vision of health and fitness!