Excellent speech and an excellent conference. Very proud today of what has been achieved so far and hoe much more can be done. Shame more attention hasn't been paid to other good reforms like Gove's work on rehabilitation and prison reform.
As for tax credit changes some on the left still don't get it. Reforms are to improve opportunities for those who have their incomes capped under tax credits and Gordon Brown's 80% tax for those on tax credits. By raising incomes and lowering taxes we can get true social mobility and uncapped low tax for those on low incomes to improve their lot. Capping incomes through welfare is the wrong way to help people. We can help people in a positive manner instead.
I'm confused. Now the tories are the new Labour, just as Cameron always wanted, why would a small c conservative vote for them any more? This is the same game Blair tried, and that worked out well for Labour in the end didn't it...
The smartest tweet this morning was from Tim Shipman:
Tim Shipman @ShippersUnbound · 2h2 hours ago This may be the easiest speech any leader has made in 50 years. Standing ovations for opposing terrorism, supporting nuclear deterrence etc
That is entirely consistent with it being his best. You can only play against the opposition that you've got, as any football manager will tell you.
It was a good speech, right for the moment, right for the current state of the opposition, and of course right for Cons supporters.
There is one hole which will probably not go away and I wish they would plug it - namely that there will be losers with tax credit reform.
Everyone including Cam himself and Gove just now on WatO skirts round the issue. I suppose it is not allowed in today's soundbite economy to tell it like it is - that the Cons want to rebalance the economy away from tax credits (for reasons well-rehearsed on here), and as a result, as things stand, and during the transition...some people will be worse off.
But it leaves the wound open and me as a Cons supporter uneasy. If there was a halfway decent opposition (rather than much more bat awayable media questioning), it would be a problem.
The smartest tweet this morning was from Tim Shipman:
Tim Shipman @ShippersUnbound · 2h2 hours ago This may be the easiest speech any leader has made in 50 years. Standing ovations for opposing terrorism, supporting nuclear deterrence etc
That is entirely consistent with it being his best. You can only play against the opposition that you've got, as any football manager will tell you.
The dig at Ashcroft was the sign of Dave being at the peak of his powers.
In the last month, Lord Ashcroft has discomfited Dave more than Corbyn has.
Cameron's best speech, even better than his 2007 speech.
He's not the heir to Blair, he's the heir to MacMillan and Disraeli.
Hear hear.
Now we need to make sure his successor is also from the centre ground. The Conservative party is once again a big tent and needs a leader towards the left of the party (ie the national centre ground). With UKIP to the popularist right and Labour to the far left, and of course the Lib Dems gone, the Conservatives can take control of pretty much the entire centre-left to traditional right ground.
And of course another important thing to get right before 2020 is boundary changes. That plus a decent centrist leader and there could well be a Tory landslide in 2020.
I'm surprised that anyone is surprised by the speech, which expressed his political philosophy and principles in a very similar way to previous speeches, going right back to his famous 2005 bid for the leadership.
It was a good speech, right for the moment, right for the current state of the opposition, and of course right for Cons supporters.
There is one hole which will probably not go away and I wish they would plug it - namely that there will be losers with tax credit reform.
Everyone including Cam himself and Gove just now on WatO skirts round the issue. I suppose it is not allowed in today's soundbite economy to tell it like it is - that the Cons want to rebalance the economy away from tax credits (for reasons well-rehearsed on here), and as a result, as things stand, and during the transition...some people will be worse off.
But it leaves the wound open and me as a Cons supporter uneasy. If there was a halfway decent opposition (rather than much more bat awayable media questioning), it would be a problem.
Tax credits are a £34 billion item per year that contributes massively to the deficit. The Gov'ts approach of replacing it with proper employer paid wages is entirely the right one.
I'm confused. Now the tories are the new Labour, just as Cameron always wanted, why would a small c conservative vote for them any more? This is the same game Blair tried, and that worked out well for Labour in the end didn't it...
The thing is, the Tories only moved to the right in the 80s. This is the proper One Nation Conservatives, which is actually rooted in the centre ground, with conservative and liberal tendencies and of course a bent towards the right on economic issues.
Wildly off topic, but last night's Panorama was television at its very finest. The BBC should be very proud of having made such an important documentary on such a difficult subject with such sensitivity and without ducking conclusions.
The Britain hating segment could only have come from Cameron.
Whilst Dr Johnson was right, Corbyn has to explain why he doesn't hate Britain, doesn't support terrorism, and that's not going to be pleasant for him or Labour.
Listening to the speech now and finding it tedious. Personally I think Osborne's speech was more interesting not least for having a degree of humility and self-awareness. And at least Boris is always entertaining. Still I must be in the minority........
TSE - Sorry but McMillan and Disraeli would probably be turning in their graves at Cameron's recklessness towards Scotland and lord knows what they'd make of a party with a zombie membership and reliant on millionaires for their advertising campaigns.
Wildly off topic, but last night's Panorama was television at its very finest. The BBC should be very proud of having made such an important documentary on such a difficult subject with such sensitivity and without ducking conclusions.
The Met sounded quite unhappy with it on the radio this morning ! I agree it was very good though.
Cameron's best speech, even better than his 2007 speech.
He's not the heir to Blair, he's the heir to MacMillan and Disraeli.
Hear hear.
Now we need to make sure his successor is also from the centre ground. The Conservative party is once again a big tent and needs a leader towards the left of the party (ie the national centre ground). With UKIP to the popularist right and Labour to the far left, and of course the Lib Dems gone, the Conservatives can take control of pretty much the entire centre-left to traditional right ground.
And of course another important thing to get right before 2020 is boundary changes. That plus a decent centrist leader and there could well be a Tory landslide in 2020.
If the Tories survive the referendum and there's no recession, then we might talk about landslides.
The chat at conference was not to display hubris.
But Dave is making sure the party thinks it can only win with a continuity Cameron candidate.
The smartest tweet this morning was from Tim Shipman:
Tim Shipman @ShippersUnbound · 2h2 hours ago This may be the easiest speech any leader has made in 50 years. Standing ovations for opposing terrorism, supporting nuclear deterrence etc
Speech seems a bit vacuous. Generally in favour of motherhood and apple pie, but no obvious plan to achieve any of it. As such, I suspect disappointment beckons despite the cheers today.
Meanwhile today, back in reality, if you have kids and are on a low income, you're worse off.
It was a good speech, right for the moment, right for the current state of the opposition, and of course right for Cons supporters.
There is one hole which will probably not go away and I wish they would plug it - namely that there will be losers with tax credit reform.
Everyone including Cam himself and Gove just now on WatO skirts round the issue. I suppose it is not allowed in today's soundbite economy to tell it like it is - that the Cons want to rebalance the economy away from tax credits (for reasons well-rehearsed on here), and as a result, as things stand, and during the transition...some people will be worse off.
But it leaves the wound open and me as a Cons supporter uneasy. If there was a halfway decent opposition (rather than much more bat awayable media questioning), it would be a problem.
Tax credits are a £34 billion item per year that contributes massively to the deficit. The Gov'ts approach of replacing it with proper employer paid wages is entirely the right one.
For once I agree , it is a scandal that we have been subsidisng poverty wages.
Wildly off topic, but last night's Panorama was television at its very finest. The BBC should be very proud of having made such an important documentary on such a difficult subject with such sensitivity and without ducking conclusions.
The Met sounded quite unhappy with it on the radio this morning ! I agree it was very good though.
Of course the Met are going to be unhappy with it. They were made to look like complete muppets.
As regards content, the most interesting bit was the stuff on prisons and rehabilitation. That's a new (and very welcome) emphasis. I wonder if Gove was appointed because Cameron wanted to tackle this long-standing problem, or has Gove, following his appointment, persuaded Cameron to give it more priority?
Totally agree. I'm very interested in prison rehabilitation and detest the use of CRB checks for people applying for back office admin jobs - it's pernicious and totally undermines the whole idea of past sentences.
Excellent speech and an excellent conference. Very proud today of what has been achieved so far and hoe much more can be done. Shame more attention hasn't been paid to other good reforms like Gove's work on rehabilitation and prison reform.
As for tax credit changes some on the left still don't get it. Reforms are to improve opportunities for those who have their incomes capped under tax credits and Gordon Brown's 80% tax for those on tax credits. By raising incomes and lowering taxes we can get true social mobility and uncapped low tax for those on low incomes to improve their lot. Capping incomes through welfare is the wrong way to help people. We can help people in a positive manner instead.
Wildly off topic, but last night's Panorama was television at its very finest. The BBC should be very proud of having made such an important documentary on such a difficult subject with such sensitivity and without ducking conclusions.
The Met sounded quite unhappy with it on the radio this morning ! I agree it was very good though.
Of course the Met are going to be unhappy with it. They were made to look like complete muppets.
They should be used to that with all the practice they have had.
I'm confused. Now the tories are the new Labour, just as Cameron always wanted, why would a small c conservative vote for them any more? This is the same game Blair tried, and that worked out well for Labour in the end didn't it...
Because they combine fiscal rectitude (or at least St. Augustine's approach) together with social liberalism.
Listening to the speech now and finding it tedious. Personally I think Osborne's speech was more interesting not least for having a degree of humility and self-awareness. And at least Boris is always entertaining. Still I must be in the minority........
TSE - Sorry but McMillan and Disraeli would probably be turning in their graves at Cameron's recklessness towards Scotland and lord knows what they'd make of a party with a zombie membership and reliant on millionaires for their advertising campaigns.
Cameron won the once in a generation referendum to keep Scotland in the Union.
As someone who has been espousing one nation conservatism long before Cameron came to the fore, he's the heir to MacMillan and Disraeli.
Look when he was at his most passionate, talking about a child at school is statistically more likely to have a smart phone than a father living at home, or 70% of prostitutes were ex care home children.
I'm confused. Now the tories are the new Labour, just as Cameron always wanted, why would a small c conservative vote for them any more? This is the same game Blair tried, and that worked out well for Labour in the end didn't it...
Because they combine fiscal rectitude (or at least St. Augustine's approach) together with social liberalism.
I wouldn't say the party is socially liberal. We are sensibly conservative on immigration, integration and marriage.
I can't help but think that 5 years of coalition has given Cameron the chance to define himself as something new. Yep, it would all have been done already if it weren't for those pesky Lib Dems.
He's making some interesting remarks on discrimination now but what will he do without intervention? Most of which Tories have spent years deriding as PC.
I think he's moved the Overton window to the Tories myself. Now it's fine to be a Tory.
Well it is better than having yourself associated with a saliva distributing angry shouting foul mouthed potentially violent self pleasuring individual.
The smartest tweet this morning was from Tim Shipman:
Tim Shipman @ShippersUnbound · 2h2 hours ago This may be the easiest speech any leader has made in 50 years. Standing ovations for opposing terrorism, supporting nuclear deterrence etc
Speech seems a bit vacuous. Generally in favour of motherhood and apple pie, but no obvious plan to achieve any of it. As such, I suspect disappointment beckons despite the cheers today.
Meanwhile today, back in reality, if you have kids and are on a low income, you're worse off.
Only if you ignore the substantial improvement in jobs growth over the last few years. The Conservatives always have to fix Labour's unemployment mess.
I'm confused. Now the tories are the new Labour, just as Cameron always wanted, why would a small c conservative vote for them any more? This is the same game Blair tried, and that worked out well for Labour in the end didn't it...
Because they combine fiscal rectitude (or at least St. Augustine's approach) together with social liberalism.
I wouldn't say the party is socially liberal. We are sensibly conservative on immigration, integration and marriage.
Not even close. Bernie can go to Regent University (ultra right, ultra conservative Christian college, set up by Pat Robertson) and deliver a commencement speech that deserves and gains the respect of his audience (and the media). He is not a US-basher, and whatever you think of his populist left-wing economics, they at least form a coherent philosophy which would in fact be pretty mainstream in the European centre left.
I think he's moved the Overton window to the Tories myself. Now it's fine to be a Tory.
Well it is better than having yourself associated with a saliva distributing angry shouting foul mouthed potentially violent self pleasuring individual.
It was a good speech, right for the moment, right for the current state of the opposition, and of course right for Cons supporters.
There is one hole which will probably not go away and I wish they would plug it - namely that there will be losers with tax credit reform.
Everyone including Cam himself and Gove just now on WatO skirts round the issue. I suppose it is not allowed in today's soundbite economy to tell it like it is - that the Cons want to rebalance the economy away from tax credits (for reasons well-rehearsed on here), and as a result, as things stand, and during the transition...some people will be worse off.
But it leaves the wound open and me as a Cons supporter uneasy. If there was a halfway decent opposition (rather than much more bat awayable media questioning), it would be a problem.
Tax credits are a £34 billion item per year that contributes massively to the deficit. The Gov'ts approach of replacing it with proper employer paid wages is entirely the right one.
no one's disputing that, least of all me but the fact is that the policy will create "losers".
I agree it's the right thing to do, you agree it's the right thing to do and Cam agrees it's the right thing to do.
But those losers will be losers and the Cons need to admit and explain it.
I'm confused. Now the tories are the new Labour, just as Cameron always wanted, why would a small c conservative vote for them any more? This is the same game Blair tried, and that worked out well for Labour in the end didn't it...
Because they combine fiscal rectitude (or at least St. Augustine's approach) together with social liberalism.
I wouldn't say the party is socially liberal. We are sensibly conservative on immigration, integration and marriage.
I think he's moved the Overton window to the Tories myself. Now it's fine to be a Tory.
Well it is better than having yourself associated with a saliva distributing angry shouting foul mouthed potentially violent self pleasuring individual.
The discussion in every blue-collar household in the new year:
"That bloody government has taken £1000 out of my wage" "Never mind, David Cameron once said in a speech that he's concerned about poverty, that's all that matters."
I'm confused. Now the tories are the new Labour, just as Cameron always wanted, why would a small c conservative vote for them any more? This is the same game Blair tried, and that worked out well for Labour in the end didn't it...
Because they combine fiscal rectitude (or at least St. Augustine's approach) together with social liberalism.
I wouldn't say the party is socially liberal. We are sensibly conservative on immigration, integration and marriage.
Ladbrokes Politics @LadPolitics · 29s29 seconds ago David Cameron is 50/1 to win the Nobel Peace Prize, sneaks ahead of Jeremy Corbyn at 66/1. http://ow.ly/T7hZp
To be honest, I can't see much value anywhere there.
If Edward Snowden wins, the internet might just break.
The smartest tweet this morning was from Tim Shipman:
Tim Shipman @ShippersUnbound · 2h2 hours ago This may be the easiest speech any leader has made in 50 years. Standing ovations for opposing terrorism, supporting nuclear deterrence etc
Speech seems a bit vacuous. Generally in favour of motherhood and apple pie, but no obvious plan to achieve any of it.
No need. People are generally quite happy to voluntarily engage in the activity that causes motherhood, and apple pies are adequately providred by the market. No reason for the State to intervene.
As regards content, the most interesting bit was the stuff on prisons and rehabilitation. That's a new (and very welcome) emphasis. I wonder if Gove was appointed because Cameron wanted to tackle this long-standing problem, or has Gove, following his appointment, persuaded Cameron to give it more priority?
I always get the impression (rightly or wrongly) that Cameron is more likely to be led on policy by the likes of Gove and Osborne than the other way around. I, am finding Gove an interesting contradiction at Justice - there are signs of being genuinely liberal and reformist, and then there are implementations that smack of the worst of the (horrific in my opinion) Grayling era. One to keep a close watch on.
I'm confused. Now the tories are the new Labour, just as Cameron always wanted, why would a small c conservative vote for them any more? This is the same game Blair tried, and that worked out well for Labour in the end didn't it...
Because they combine fiscal rectitude (or at least St. Augustine's approach) together with social liberalism.
I wouldn't say the party is socially liberal. We are sensibly conservative on immigration, integration and marriage.
...
Did you really just say that and mean it?
have you stopped laughing yet
Less laughter more stunned disbelief. Starting to think the Conservatives need their own Corbyn moment...
But it isn't *every* household. And that's Labour's problem - it's probably a few tens of thousand at most. And that's assuming it isn't spread out a bit over another year.
This isn't a Poll Tax moment - just like higher rate CTC weren't despite all the moaning.
The discussion in every blue-collar household in the new year:
"That bloody government has taken £1000 out of my wage" "Never mind, David Cameron once said in a speech that he's concerned about poverty, that's all that matters."
That was it. A speech made four years before the next election, by a leader who probably won't be running again, against a party that will probably have a different leader, has just won it all....
I feel in the same mindset as Gove myself - liberal on reforming/helping those who are willing to change/will try to make a go of it - and jump all over those who don't/revel in their behaviour.
Ditto schools - a hand-up to those who want to make the most of themselves, and fine indolent parents who don't bring their kids up to value education.
As regards content, the most interesting bit was the stuff on prisons and rehabilitation. That's a new (and very welcome) emphasis. I wonder if Gove was appointed because Cameron wanted to tackle this long-standing problem, or has Gove, following his appointment, persuaded Cameron to give it more priority?
I always get the impression (rightly or wrongly) that Cameron is more likely to be led on policy by the likes of Gove and Osborne than the other way around. I, am finding Gove an interesting contradiction at Justice - there are signs of being genuinely liberal and reformist, and then there are implementations that smack of the worst of the (horrific in my opinion) Grayling era. One to keep a close watch on.
I'm confused. Now the tories are the new Labour, just as Cameron always wanted, why would a small c conservative vote for them any more? This is the same game Blair tried, and that worked out well for Labour in the end didn't it...
No. Labour combined good intentions with spending, spending and spending.
Cameron is combining responsible conservative principles with classic conservative zeal for social justice.
Labour leads to bankruptcy and the poor suffering the most. Conservatives lead to progress.
The discussion in every blue-collar household in the new year:
"That bloody government has taken £1000 out of my wage" "Never mind, David Cameron once said in a speech that he's concerned about poverty, that's all that matters."
Now's the time to put forward such stuff given the populace generally has the memory of a goldfish. It'll be forgotten by election time, when said blue collar worker is deciding between the Tories and Corbyn.
That was it. A speech made four years before the next election, by a leader who probably won't be running again, against a party that will probably have a different leader, has just won it all....
The discussion in every blue-collar household in the new year:
"That bloody government has taken £1000 out of my wage" "Never mind, David Cameron once said in a speech that he's concerned about poverty, that's all that matters."
I could be persuaded if he started to give some of it back to the ones that have paid for it for years.
Interesting discussion at the start of the last thread about the next Tory leader. But I can't agree with the view that May would be the right-wing candidate to Osborne's "centrist" candidate.
I honestly think public perception is the exact opposite: Osborne comes across as the right-wing ideologue who loves slapping poor people in the face, while May comes across as the sensible grown-up putting national interest ahead of party interest. And the (admittedly limited) number of polls so far have put May ahead of Osborne with non-Tory voters.
I'm confused. Now the tories are the new Labour, just as Cameron always wanted, why would a small c conservative vote for them any more? This is the same game Blair tried, and that worked out well for Labour in the end didn't it...
Because they combine fiscal rectitude (or at least St. Augustine's approach) together with social liberalism.
I wouldn't say the party is socially liberal. We are sensibly conservative on immigration, integration and marriage.
I don't think any of those positions are anything to do with social liberalism.
I'm talking about acceptance of homosexuality, lack of racism, judging people on their merits not group characteristics, etc.
The smartest tweet this morning was from Tim Shipman:
Tim Shipman @ShippersUnbound · 2h2 hours ago This may be the easiest speech any leader has made in 50 years. Standing ovations for opposing terrorism, supporting nuclear deterrence etc
That is entirely consistent with it being his best. You can only play against the opposition that you've got, as any football manager will tell you.
To further the analogy as the FA Cup often shows you can also slip up against non league opposition if you aren't careful. Must be guarded against complacency.
The discussion in every blue-collar household in the new year:
"That bloody government has taken £1000 out of my wage" "Never mind, David Cameron once said in a speech that he's concerned about poverty, that's all that matters."
Now's the time to put forward such stuff given the populace generally has the memory of a goldfish. It'll be forgotten by election time, when said blue collar worker is deciding between the Tories and Corbyn.
Perhaps, although the 10p tax was apparently being mentioned to Labour canvassers for years afterwards.
Downing Street said that the new inspection regime would apply to an estimated 5,000 religious institutions offering eight or more hours of study a week to children in England, including Christian Sunday schools and Jewish yeshivas as well as up to 2,000 madrassas.
Many of these offer teaching within places of worship, but others are conducted in homes.
At present, these institutions are not required to register with the authorities and are not subject to inspection.
They will now have to register with the Department for Education, and faith groups will be consulted on the precise details of how inspections should be conducted and whether they should be carried out by schools watchdog Ofsted or another body.
What I have found a bit startling about this Conference is the number of new ideas and initiatives, frankly a lot more than we saw in the election campaign itself. The overall image is of a party fizzing with ideas and keen to address many underlying and neglected issues in this country.
Of course many of these problems have been neglected by politicians of all stripes because they are very difficult. Where are these 200K homes going to be built? What do we do about racism in employment? Will Gove's ideas actually work? How do we stop large scale immigration without taking away the right of UK citizens to marry who they choose? Are we really going to send thousands of failed asylum seekers back to very dodgy regimes like Iran on the basis that they are nicer now? Will the northern powerhouse deliver any more than Heseltine's failed attempts to revive Liverpool? How do we balance the campaign against extremism and freedom of speech? Is there not a risk that the reforms of LG spending will doom poorer areas to a cycle of despair and abandonment? Who will provide the specialist services for children with additional needs such as speech therapy when LEAs no longer exist?
So many questions and inevitably some disappointments and failures down the line. But, ultimately, a party engaging with the world how it is unlike the dreamland that Labour have gone to.
Cameron admitted that Britain has admitted a great number of migrants who don't assimilate, preach hate, and don't share the same 'values' as Britain (whatever they may be).
The sensible solution is to deport those preaching hate and tighten our borders. Neither of those things will happen.
I'm confused. Now the tories are the new Labour, just as Cameron always wanted, why would a small c conservative vote for them any more? This is the same game Blair tried, and that worked out well for Labour in the end didn't it...
But whether by accident or design, this speech by Cameron is politically very clever: he sets the mood music, and a lot of the centre-left are convinced it's a centre-left speech, but meanwhile his government/ministers get on with quite a bit of right-wing stuff. Only yesterday he was applauding May's tougher stance on immigration (and I'm sure it wasn't by accident that she said that rather than he) and this government's approach to free schools, welfare reform, defence, top-rate tax cuts, marriage relief, countryside/rural policy, inheritance tax cuts, human rights reform, trade union reform and EVEL are certainly not left-wing.
I agree with antifrank. This continues to be a right-wing government that sounds centrist. The very fact that Cameron can convince so many to the contrary is a testament to the success of his strategy.
?? He's continuity Blair/Cameron. Whats so massively right wing about him ? He's not instantly popular like say Boris is, but I can't get him being a 'right wing ideologue'.
Wildly off topic, but last night's Panorama was television at its very finest. The BBC should be very proud of having made such an important documentary on such a difficult subject with such sensitivity and without ducking conclusions.
The Met sounded quite unhappy with it on the radio this morning ! I agree it was very good though.
Of course the Met are going to be unhappy with it. They were made to look like complete muppets.
They should be used to that with all the practice they have had.
But, unlike the Scottish police, they're unlikely to leave someone dying in the wreckage of a car accident for 3 days.
Although I´m not particularly a fan of Cameron I thought his speech was a brilliant effort to get moderate Labour supporters to switch to the Tories. In those terms it was pitch perfect.
Although I´m not particularly a fan of Cameron I thought his speech was a brilliant effort to get moderate Labour supporters to switch to the Tories. In those terms it was pitch perfect.
?? He's continuity Blair/Cameron. Whats so massively right wing about him ? He's not instantly popular like say Boris is, but I can't get him being a 'right wing ideologue'.
Osborne believes in sensible finances. Therefore by definition he's a 'right wing ideologue'.
It was a good speech, right for the moment, right for the current state of the opposition, and of course right for Cons supporters.
There is one hole which will probably not go away and I wish they would plug it - namely that there will be losers with tax credit reform.
Everyone including Cam himself and Gove just now on WatO skirts round the issue. I suppose it is not allowed in today's soundbite economy to tell it like it is - that the Cons want to rebalance the economy away from tax credits (for reasons well-rehearsed on here), and as a result, as things stand, and during the transition...some people will be worse off.
But it leaves the wound open and me as a Cons supporter uneasy. If there was a halfway decent opposition (rather than much more bat awayable media questioning), it would be a problem.
Tax credits are a £34 billion item per year that contributes massively to the deficit. The Gov'ts approach of replacing it with proper employer paid wages is entirely the right one.
This is exactly right. It should not be the job of the Government to subsidise low paying employers by topping up incomes to a reasonable level. It is employers who benefit from the hard work of their employees and they should pay for it as well.
Personally I would extend that principle to anyone bringing in Labour from outside of the country. They should be liable to pay in full all the costs associated with that person being in the country from the time they arrive to the time they leave. So if you import labour from Poland or Portugal and then get rid of it after a year when you don't need it anymore, then as an employer you should be charged the full costs of the benefits that person is paid until they either leave the country or find alternative employment. What you should not be allowed to do is import labour and then deny any further responsibility once you no longer need them.
I'm confused. Now the tories are the new Labour, just as Cameron always wanted, why would a small c conservative vote for them any more? This is the same game Blair tried, and that worked out well for Labour in the end didn't it...
Because they combine fiscal rectitude (or at least St. Augustine's approach) together with social liberalism.
I wouldn't say the party is socially liberal. We are sensibly conservative on immigration, integration and marriage.
They are crap on immigration , clueless.
I agree to a large extent, except that I think net immigration would be *even higher* were it not for the restrictions and reforms during the 2010-2015 coalition government (prob by 20-40k per year) and this government has been commendably firm on the EU-fanned MENA mass exodus.
I don't think either of those things would have happened with a Labour government.
I'm confused. Now the tories are the new Labour, just as Cameron always wanted, why would a small c conservative vote for them any more? This is the same game Blair tried, and that worked out well for Labour in the end didn't it...
Because they combine fiscal rectitude (or at least St. Augustine's approach) together with social liberalism.
I wouldn't say the party is socially liberal. We are sensibly conservative on immigration, integration and marriage.
I don't think any of those positions are anything to do with social liberalism.
I'm talking about acceptance of homosexuality, lack of racism, judging people on their merits not group characteristics, etc.
What I have found a bit startling about this Conference is the number of new ideas and initiatives, frankly a lot more than we saw in the election campaign itself. The overall image is of a party fizzing with ideas and keen to address many underlying and neglected issues in this country.
Of course many of these problems have been neglected by politicians of all stripes because they are very difficult. Where are these 200K homes going to be built? What do we do about racism in employment? Will Gove's ideas actually work? How do we stop large scale immigration without taking away the right of UK citizens to marry who they choose? Are we really going to send thousands of failed asylum seekers back to very dodgy regimes like Iran on the basis that they are nicer now? Will the northern powerhouse deliver any more than Heseltine's failed attempts to revive Liverpool? How do we balance the campaign against extremism and freedom of speech? Is there not a risk that the reforms of LG spending will doom poorer areas to a cycle of despair and abandonment? Who will provide the specialist services for children with additional needs such as speech therapy when LEAs no longer exist?
So many questions and inevitably some disappointments and failures down the line. But, ultimately, a party engaging with the world how it is unlike the dreamland that Labour have gone to.
I'd agree with most of that. However I think it's many of Cameron's media admirers who are in dreamland also and could do with reading your post for a dose of reality.
Although I´m not particularly a fan of Cameron I thought his speech was a brilliant effort to get moderate Labour supporters to switch to the Tories. In those terms it was pitch perfect.
I'm confused. Now the tories are the new Labour, just as Cameron always wanted, why would a small c conservative vote for them any more? This is the same game Blair tried, and that worked out well for Labour in the end didn't it...
But whether by accident or design, this speech by Cameron is politically very clever: he sets the mood music, and a lot of the centre-left are convinced it's a centre-left speech, but meanwhile his government/ministers get on with quite a bit of right-wing stuff. Only yesterday he was applauding May's tougher stance on immigration (and I'm sure it wasn't by accident that she said that rather than he) and this government's approach to free schools, welfare reform, defence, top-rate tax cuts, inheritance tax cuts, human rights reform, trade union reform and EVEL are certainly not left-wing.
I agree with antifrank. This continues to be a right-wing government that sounds centrist. The very fact that Cameron can convince so many to the contrary is a testament to the success of his strategy.
I'd disagree.
It's a very Liberal government, not a right-wing one.
It's a government that believes in the people to do the right thing, in unleashing them from the dead hand of the state and permitting them to fulfill their potential.
?? He's continuity Blair/Cameron. Whats so massively right wing about him ? He's not instantly popular like say Boris is, but I can't get him being a 'right wing ideologue'.
It's a bit hard to say he's continuity New Labour when he's made his main mission undoing much of what the last Labour government did (not least, tax credits).
Plus, although he can't help this, his manner and personality just comes across as a "typical Tory" in a way that May and (to some extent) Cameron do not.
What I have found a bit startling about this Conference is the number of new ideas and initiatives, frankly a lot more than we saw in the election campaign itself. The overall image is of a party fizzing with ideas and keen to address many underlying and neglected issues in this country.
Of course many of these problems have been neglected by politicians of all stripes because they are very difficult. Where are these 200K homes going to be built? What do we do about racism in employment? Will Gove's ideas actually work? How do we stop large scale immigration without taking away the right of UK citizens to marry who they choose? Are we really going to send thousands of failed asylum seekers back to very dodgy regimes like Iran on the basis that they are nicer now? Will the northern powerhouse deliver any more than Heseltine's failed attempts to revive Liverpool? How do we balance the campaign against extremism and freedom of speech? Is there not a risk that the reforms of LG spending will doom poorer areas to a cycle of despair and abandonment? Who will provide the specialist services for children with additional needs such as speech therapy when LEAs no longer exist?
So many questions and inevitably some disappointments and failures down the line. But, ultimately, a party engaging with the world how it is unlike the dreamland that Labour have gone to.
After "We are the builders" from George Osborne (delivered in the style of Kraftwerk's "We Are The Robots") and "from Generation Rent to Generation Buy", the government is going to have to build build build if it is going to have any credibility left in this area in 2020.
Cameron striking liberal tone on prisons and now on racism and sexism. Tories don't just want to own centre ground, but the centre left too
For better or worse (for me, better, sounds like for @Charles better also), it is the zeitgeist.
That the Cons can step back and say: with the exceptions of extremism and those who preach division, which we intend to address, society has moved and continues to move on and we recognise that and want to be a party for that society, is to their very great credit, and will add many many votes to their tally in 2020.
I'm confused. Now the tories are the new Labour, just as Cameron always wanted, why would a small c conservative vote for them any more? This is the same game Blair tried, and that worked out well for Labour in the end didn't it...
But whether by accident or design, this speech by Cameron is politically very clever: he sets the mood music, and a lot of the centre-left are convinced it's a centre-left speech, but meanwhile his government/ministers get on with quite a bit of right-wing stuff. Only yesterday he was applauding May's tougher stance on immigration (and I'm sure it wasn't by accident that she said that rather than he) and this government's approach to free schools, welfare reform, defence, top-rate tax cuts, inheritance tax cuts, human rights reform, trade union reform and EVEL are certainly not left-wing.
I agree with antifrank. This continues to be a right-wing government that sounds centrist. The very fact that Cameron can convince so many to the contrary is a testament to the success of his strategy.
I'd disagree.
It's a very Liberal government, not a right-wing one.
It's a government that believes in the people to do the right thing, in unleashing them from the dead hand of the state and permitting them to fulfill their potential.
That doesn't sound very right wing to me.
Sorry, that's exactly what right-wing means to me: trusting people (individuals, families, communities and nations) and facilitating them to help build strong responsible societies organically from the bottom up, rather than trying to refashion it according to ideological theory by dictat, regulation, tax and central control by the State from the top down.
I'm confused. Now the tories are the new Labour, just as Cameron always wanted, why would a small c conservative vote for them any more? This is the same game Blair tried, and that worked out well for Labour in the end didn't it...
But whether by accident or design, this speech by Cameron is politically very clever: he sets the mood music, and a lot of the centre-left are convinced it's a centre-left speech, but meanwhile his government/ministers get on with quite a bit of right-wing stuff. Only yesterday he was applauding May's tougher stance on immigration (and I'm sure it wasn't by accident that she said that rather than he) and this government's approach to free schools, welfare reform, defence, top-rate tax cuts, inheritance tax cuts, human rights reform, trade union reform and EVEL are certainly not left-wing.
I agree with antifrank. This continues to be a right-wing government that sounds centrist. The very fact that Cameron can convince so many to the contrary is a testament to the success of his strategy.
I'd disagree.
It's a very Liberal government, not a right-wing one.
It's a government that believes in the people to do the right thing, in unleashing them from the dead hand of the state and permitting them to fulfill their potential.
That doesn't sound very right wing to me.
Sorry, that's exactly what right-wing means to me: trusting people (individuals, families, communities and nations) and facilitating them to help build strong responsible societies organically from the bottom up, rather than trying to refashion it according to ideological theory by dictat, regulation, tax and central control by the State from the top down.
I'm confused. Now the tories are the new Labour, just as Cameron always wanted, why would a small c conservative vote for them any more? This is the same game Blair tried, and that worked out well for Labour in the end didn't it...
Yeah, that Cameron, he's nothing but a Tory in disguise, wait, what?
Moving onto Labour territory and then actually delivering would be an astounding achievement. But there is a long way to travel from a conference speech laying out objectives to then achieving them.
Some big promises have been made this week on housing, incomes and immigration, among other things. In normal circumstances, a Tory government might worry that not living up to them might spell electoral trouble. But with Corbyn in charge of Labour that is not a problem.
Basically, Corbyn's election has given the Tories free rein to do and say what they want knowing it will make no difference. That they have decided to tack left as a result is probably the most interesting development this conference season.
After "We are the builders" from George Osborne (delivered in the style of Kraftwerk's "We Are The Robots") and "from Generation Rent to Generation Buy", the government is going to have to build build build if it is going to have any credibility left in this area in 2020.
I guess that's part of the Northern Powerhouse idea. If not just jobs but careers can be created Up North then people can have houses too where land is cheaper.
I'm confused. Now the tories are the new Labour, just as Cameron always wanted, why would a small c conservative vote for them any more? This is the same game Blair tried, and that worked out well for Labour in the end didn't it...
Because they combine fiscal rectitude (or at least St. Augustine's approach) together with social liberalism.
I wouldn't say the party is socially liberal. We are sensibly conservative on immigration, integration and marriage.
I don't think any of those positions are anything to do with social liberalism.
I'm talking about acceptance of homosexuality, lack of racism, judging people on their merits not group characteristics, etc.
...welcoming Uber drivers, etc...
Sure. I'll welcome any company that abides by the rules
I'm confused. Now the tories are the new Labour, just as Cameron always wanted, why would a small c conservative vote for them any more? This is the same game Blair tried, and that worked out well for Labour in the end didn't it...
But whether by accident or design, this speech by Cameron is politically very clever: he sets the mood music, and a lot of the centre-left are convinced it's a centre-left speech, but meanwhile his government/ministers get on with quite a bit of right-wing stuff. Only yesterday he was applauding May's tougher stance on immigration (and I'm sure it wasn't by accident that she said that rather than he) and this government's approach to free schools, welfare reform, defence, top-rate tax cuts, marriage relief, countryside/rural policy, inheritance tax cuts, human rights reform, trade union reform and EVEL are certainly not left-wing.
I agree with antifrank. This continues to be a right-wing government that sounds centrist. The very fact that Cameron can convince so many to the contrary is a testament to the success of his strategy.
Although I´m not particularly a fan of Cameron I thought his speech was a brilliant effort to get moderate Labour supporters to switch to the Tories. In those terms it was pitch perfect.
but ill conceived.
Why
It looks like a tactical ploy rather than a strategic move. Maybe he wants to replace his own extreme right with centrists. That would be good for everyone, but that will require some tougher choices. For now it looks like games.
Whether such a strategic shift could work remains to be seen. Labour voters tend to vote against the Tories, so it's a very hard sell even with Corbyn.
I'm confused. Now the tories are the new Labour, just as Cameron always wanted, why would a small c conservative vote for them any more? This is the same game Blair tried, and that worked out well for Labour in the end didn't it...
No. Labour combined good intentions with spending, spending and spending.
Cameron is combining responsible conservative principles with classic conservative zeal for social justice.
Labour leads to bankruptcy and the poor suffering the most. Conservatives lead to progress.
Exactly. It will take 20 years to fully repair the damage by 13 years of Labours financial mismanagement.
There was a rather large hostage to fortune given in Cameron's speech on housing.
IF generation rent are STILL generation rent in four years time, things could get a bit awkward for the conservatives.
They have taken quite a few risks in several areas, banking on things working out for them. Given the tendency to play safe in most respects, I can appreciate that, even if some of them are risks perhaps they should not take.
Downing Street said that the new inspection regime would apply to an estimated 5,000 religious institutions offering eight or more hours of study a week to children in England, including Christian Sunday schools and Jewish yeshivas as well as up to 2,000 madrassas.
Many of these offer teaching within places of worship, but others are conducted in homes.
At present, these institutions are not required to register with the authorities and are not subject to inspection.
They will now have to register with the Department for Education, and faith groups will be consulted on the precise details of how inspections should be conducted and whether they should be carried out by schools watchdog Ofsted or another body.
Good. A small step in the right direction.
Speaking as someone who grew up in 1970s/80s Belfast, IMO organised religion has NO place in running educational establishments. All it does is embed the "them / us" attitude into young minds that then get hobbled with it.
And yes - for the avoidance of doubt - I include CoE and RC schools in that too.
Cameron striking liberal tone on prisons and now on racism and sexism. Tories don't just want to own centre ground, but the centre left too
I do find it interesting that the centre-left now define themselves by whether or not you care about racism and sexism, and that the opposite of that is right-wing who they believe by definition do not.
Comments
He's not the heir to Blair, he's the heir to MacMillan and Disraeli.
As for tax credit changes some on the left still don't get it. Reforms are to improve opportunities for those who have their incomes capped under tax credits and Gordon Brown's 80% tax for those on tax credits. By raising incomes and lowering taxes we can get true social mobility and uncapped low tax for those on low incomes to improve their lot. Capping incomes through welfare is the wrong way to help people. We can help people in a positive manner instead.
Tim Shipman @ShippersUnbound · 2h2 hours ago
This may be the easiest speech any leader has made in 50 years. Standing ovations for opposing terrorism, supporting nuclear deterrence etc
That is entirely consistent with it being his best. You can only play against the opposition that you've got, as any football manager will tell you.
It was a good speech, right for the moment, right for the current state of the opposition, and of course right for Cons supporters.
There is one hole which will probably not go away and I wish they would plug it - namely that there will be losers with tax credit reform.
Everyone including Cam himself and Gove just now on WatO skirts round the issue. I suppose it is not allowed in today's soundbite economy to tell it like it is - that the Cons want to rebalance the economy away from tax credits (for reasons well-rehearsed on here), and as a result, as things stand, and during the transition...some people will be worse off.
But it leaves the wound open and me as a Cons supporter uneasy. If there was a halfway decent opposition (rather than much more bat awayable media questioning), it would be a problem.
In the last month, Lord Ashcroft has discomfited Dave more than Corbyn has.
That's damning for Labour
Now we need to make sure his successor is also from the centre ground. The Conservative party is once again a big tent and needs a leader towards the left of the party (ie the national centre ground). With UKIP to the popularist right and Labour to the far left, and of course the Lib Dems gone, the Conservatives can take control of pretty much the entire centre-left to traditional right ground.
And of course another important thing to get right before 2020 is boundary changes. That plus a decent centrist leader and there could well be a Tory landslide in 2020.
Whilst Dr Johnson was right, Corbyn has to explain why he doesn't hate Britain, doesn't support terrorism, and that's not going to be pleasant for him or Labour.
TSE - Sorry but McMillan and Disraeli would probably be turning in their graves at Cameron's recklessness towards Scotland and lord knows what they'd make of a party with a zombie membership and reliant on millionaires for their advertising campaigns.
The chat at conference was not to display hubris.
But Dave is making sure the party thinks it can only win with a continuity Cameron candidate.
Meanwhile today, back in reality, if you have kids and are on a low income, you're worse off.
As someone who has been espousing one nation conservatism long before Cameron came to the fore, he's the heir to MacMillan and Disraeli.
Look when he was at his most passionate, talking about a child at school is statistically more likely to have a smart phone than a father living at home, or 70% of prostitutes were ex care home children.
I can't help but think that 5 years of coalition has given Cameron the chance to define himself as something new. Yep, it would all have been done already if it weren't for those pesky Lib Dems.
He's making some interesting remarks on discrimination now but what will he do without intervention? Most of which Tories have spent years deriding as PC.
Not even close. Bernie can go to Regent University (ultra right, ultra conservative Christian college, set up by Pat Robertson) and deliver a commencement speech that deserves and gains the respect of his audience (and the media). He is not a US-basher, and whatever you think of his populist left-wing economics, they at least form a coherent philosophy which would in fact be pretty mainstream in the European centre left.
I agree it's the right thing to do, you agree it's the right thing to do and Cam agrees it's the right thing to do.
But those losers will be losers and the Cons need to admit and explain it.
Did you really just say that and mean it?
Jeremy Corbyn’s first response to Cameron’s speech is to complain that the Prime Minister attacked him http://t.co/4YNoQ38Fgx
"That bloody government has taken £1000 out of my wage"
"Never mind, David Cameron once said in a speech that he's concerned about poverty, that's all that matters."
David Cameron is 50/1 to win the Nobel Peace Prize, sneaks ahead of Jeremy Corbyn at 66/1.
http://ow.ly/T7hZp
To be honest, I can't see much value anywhere there.
If Edward Snowden wins, the internet might just break.
Less laughter more stunned disbelief. Starting to think the Conservatives need their own Corbyn moment...
This isn't a Poll Tax moment - just like higher rate CTC weren't despite all the moaning.
It must have been good then.
I wonder how the Met & other forces will respond to DC's exhortations to prosecute perpetrators of FGM and forced marriages. Tumbleweed....?
Ditto schools - a hand-up to those who want to make the most of themselves, and fine indolent parents who don't bring their kids up to value education.
Cameron is combining responsible conservative principles with classic conservative zeal for social justice.
Labour leads to bankruptcy and the poor suffering the most.
Conservatives lead to progress.
I honestly think public perception is the exact opposite: Osborne comes across as the right-wing ideologue who loves slapping poor people in the face, while May comes across as the sensible grown-up putting national interest ahead of party interest. And the (admittedly limited) number of polls so far have put May ahead of Osborne with non-Tory voters.
I'm talking about acceptance of homosexuality, lack of racism, judging people on their merits not group characteristics, etc.
Downing Street said that the new inspection regime would apply to an estimated 5,000 religious institutions offering eight or more hours of study a week to children in England, including Christian Sunday schools and Jewish yeshivas as well as up to 2,000 madrassas.
Many of these offer teaching within places of worship, but others are conducted in homes.
At present, these institutions are not required to register with the authorities and are not subject to inspection.
They will now have to register with the Department for Education, and faith groups will be consulted on the precise details of how inspections should be conducted and whether they should be carried out by schools watchdog Ofsted or another body.
Of course many of these problems have been neglected by politicians of all stripes because they are very difficult. Where are these 200K homes going to be built? What do we do about racism in employment? Will Gove's ideas actually work? How do we stop large scale immigration without taking away the right of UK citizens to marry who they choose? Are we really going to send thousands of failed asylum seekers back to very dodgy regimes like Iran on the basis that they are nicer now? Will the northern powerhouse deliver any more than Heseltine's failed attempts to revive Liverpool? How do we balance the campaign against extremism and freedom of speech? Is there not a risk that the reforms of LG spending will doom poorer areas to a cycle of despair and abandonment? Who will provide the specialist services for children with additional needs such as speech therapy when LEAs no longer exist?
So many questions and inevitably some disappointments and failures down the line. But, ultimately, a party engaging with the world how it is unlike the dreamland that Labour have gone to.
The sensible solution is to deport those preaching hate and tighten our borders. Neither of those things will happen.
I agree with antifrank. This continues to be a right-wing government that sounds centrist. The very fact that Cameron can convince so many to the contrary is a testament to the success of his strategy.
Cameron striking liberal tone on prisons and now on racism and sexism. Tories don't just want to own centre ground, but the centre left too
IF generation rent are STILL generation rent in four years time, things could get a bit awkward for the conservatives.
Personally I would extend that principle to anyone bringing in Labour from outside of the country. They should be liable to pay in full all the costs associated with that person being in the country from the time they arrive to the time they leave. So if you import labour from Poland or Portugal and then get rid of it after a year when you don't need it anymore, then as an employer you should be charged the full costs of the benefits that person is paid until they either leave the country or find alternative employment. What you should not be allowed to do is import labour and then deny any further responsibility once you no longer need them.
I don't think either of those things would have happened with a Labour government.
It's a very Liberal government, not a right-wing one.
It's a government that believes in the people to do the right thing, in unleashing them from the dead hand of the state and permitting them to fulfill their potential.
That doesn't sound very right wing to me.
Plus, although he can't help this, his manner and personality just comes across as a "typical Tory" in a way that May and (to some extent) Cameron do not.
That the Cons can step back and say: with the exceptions of extremism and those who preach division, which we intend to address, society has moved and continues to move on and we recognise that and want to be a party for that society, is to their very great credit, and will add many many votes to their tally in 2020.
"Right-wing" is not code for arsehole.
▶ http://t.co/g1qeSnIToi http://t.co/jL4AaFCaMH
If they're failed, they're failed. You send them back. Otherwise, what's the point in having a system?
Some big promises have been made this week on housing, incomes and immigration, among other things. In normal circumstances, a Tory government might worry that not living up to them might spell electoral trouble. But with Corbyn in charge of Labour that is not a problem.
Basically, Corbyn's election has given the Tories free rein to do and say what they want knowing it will make no difference. That they have decided to tack left as a result is probably the most interesting development this conference season.
Whether such a strategic shift could work remains to be seen. Labour voters tend to vote against the Tories, so it's a very hard sell even with Corbyn.
Speaking as someone who grew up in 1970s/80s Belfast, IMO organised religion has NO place in running educational establishments. All it does is embed the "them / us" attitude into young minds that then get hobbled with it.
And yes - for the avoidance of doubt - I include CoE and RC schools in that too.
Even if they do, that may trample on very tory toes in the home counties and shires.