Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Politics

David Cameron's conference speech - live stream from 11.15am today

220 replies

JaneGMumsnet · 10/10/2012 09:09

Hello,

David Cameron's conservative party conference speech will be live streamed here at 11.15am today, if you're interested in taking a look:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19890459

MNHQ

OP posts:
chipstick10 · 10/10/2012 21:14

Some things written on this thread are vile. Its hateful, bitter and cheap.

threesocksmorgan · 10/10/2012 21:27

offensive terms aside.
I see that DC won the sympathy vote.
strange that he can bring up his disabled relatives.
and still cut all the resources disabled people need.

domesticgodless · 10/10/2012 21:41

Ttosca unfortunately claig is right here. They'd all have done the same. Labour originally tripled the fees. Please bear in mind im a university lecturer and about as un Tory as its possible to be: but two party politics is no use here. It just buys into the cheap politics of blame which is finishing the country off. And which the Tories ATM are milking for all they are worth.

domesticgodless · 10/10/2012 21:42

Btw before people start exclaiming about the illiterate lecturer, it's the bloody iPhone auto 'correcting' everything!

edam · 10/10/2012 22:13

threesocks is right. Appalling but true - Cameron pretended that having a severely disabled son meant he was not a 'nasty' Tory of the kind Teresa May described but someone who understood what it was like to be vulnerable and to rely on public services.

The minute he came to power, he started attacking kids like Ivan and their families. His government's treatment of disabled people would be disgusting whoever was involved - but in his case it's the most hideous betrayal.

chipstick10 · 10/10/2012 22:14

domestic I cant spell, sometimes i set out a post and then have to cancel it because the red spellcheck thing on here is all over the place, so my kids wonderful clever brains dont come from me Confused Blush Grin so the illiterate lecturer is wasted on me.

domesticgodless · 10/10/2012 22:37

Hehe chipstick. I am a demon speller but this ghastly device has ruined it all!! It 'corrects' my words to incorrect spellings and capitalises everything! Yet I can't live without it and spend the evening chained to the thing! No good!

LadyStark · 10/10/2012 22:43

Just a couple of points, firstly, it's a mid term conference speech. Not many people a) care or b) will remember.

It's also worth noting that the top 1% of earners contribute 30% of income tax revenue. Whilst we should be fair, we shouldn't be whacking higher earners anymore in my opinion.

SomethingOnce · 10/10/2012 22:44

IMO what's really killing aspiration in this country is that it's clear to most that social mobility is non-existent, and we're not doing well with inclusion either.

Katiebeau · 10/10/2012 23:04

I agree social mobility is none existent. My parents and myself have benefited hugely from social mobility offered by state education. Grammer Schools. That is the foundation of our social mobility from miners 2 generations ago.

edam · 10/10/2012 23:37

Ladystark - that sounds impressive but actually all it means is 'people who earn the most have the most'. Yet actually the highest marginal rate of taxes are inflicted on the extremely low paid. Very low earners who may have something like 85p in every pound deducted once they start earning over a tiny amount - something like £70 a week.

0liverb0liverbuttface · 10/10/2012 23:38

He has nothing to say that will interest me.

Listening to him will just make me feel ill.

He disgusts me to be honest.

edam · 10/10/2012 23:40

There's another weird stat I found recently - something about only two people are responsible for paying the lion's share of taxes contributed by all the UK billionaires put together. Think one was JK Rowling. Basically all the other billionaires are 'minimising their tax bills'* and leaving far less well paid people to pick up the slack.

  • If someone on benefits was doing it, it'd be called cheating, of course. But because it's a rich person paying lawyers and accountants, it's all fine. Apparently.
0liverb0liverbuttface · 10/10/2012 23:41

Claig - I think the fact Cameron has lived with close family with disability makes his policies even more sickening and simply demonstrates how shielded by wealth he is.

LadyStark · 10/10/2012 23:51

That doesn't mean we need the tax receipts any less though! The example you give is a flaw in the benefits system, not the tax system, isn't it? And if we want a better benefits system, someone has to pay for it.

I think most people regardless of party wants a good benefits system that incentives people to work. Isn't the whole point of universal credit to avoid things like this?

Don't get me wrong, lots of things about this government I don't like (reducing abortion limit, limiting number of children you can claim for, cutting benefits for under 25s) but I don't think demonisation of high earners is any better than demonisation of the working classes. Both of the main try to engender class war as means of gaining votes - we shouldn't get drawn in. I would just like evidenced based policymaking, couldn't give a stuff which party it is.

domesticgodless · 11/10/2012 07:57

The Tories do not demonise high earners and neither do Labour. A bit more pressure on them rather than tax CUTS would not go amiss. They can take it; they're rich already.

Class war?! what rubbish. We have it already: a war against the poor.

chipstick10 · 11/10/2012 08:14

I dont profess to know my history on politics but wasnt it labour who got rid of grammar schools?

domesticgodless · 11/10/2012 08:26

I'm not sure either chipstick :S I'm pro grammar schools myself although am concerned that while we don't provide proper non-academic skills training to those who do not pass an 11 plus the rest would end up on a great big scrapheap.

Katiebeau · 11/10/2012 08:36

It was Chapstick. That and creating a benefits system which outweighs lower level earnings and low wages paid by employers bolstered by tax credits etc.

Rather than keeping wages apace with real living costs and also inflating housing costs based on incomes shored up with tax credits etc. so people felt they could afford the inflated prices. Didn't they learn anything from the '80's??

The bubble had to burst. Outgoings cannot forever exceed incoming funds. But socialists will insist on the state borrowing to inflate the standard of living.

Benefits first and foremost should ensure no one is homeless, hungry or cold. Any system which fails at that fails overall. I include in that putting families in crappy accommodation instead of freeing up larger council houses with single older residents. Private owners move later in life all the time!!

I say this as someone lucky enough to pay a lot in tax and who agrees no benefit should be universal.

We have had to trim the fat from our life style due to increased taxes and living costs but we had fat to trim. I am under no illusions others do not have anything left to give.

That said I think Milliband forgot that borrowing money they can't pay back isn't accepted on the global stage anymore. Wake up Millband it's 2012 not 2002. Change your ideas man. Your last lot didn't work out so well.

sunflowersfollowthesun · 11/10/2012 08:45

oliver How can you possibly make an informed decision if you don't listen to all the parties?

threesocksmorgan · 11/10/2012 08:49

Edam so true, but sadly although he uses his child to score points, the very parents/ adults he has stitched up are not allowed to mention Ivan !!
wrong on so many levels.
this puts it so well

sunflowersfollowthesun · 11/10/2012 08:55

Cameron pretended that having a severely disabled son meant he was not a 'nasty' Tory
He did absolutely no such thing. He spoke of his appreciation that attitudes towards people who need to use wheelchairs seems to be shifting following the paralympics.
I'm sorry, but the inverted snobbery of people on here is breathtaking ? Cameron's son's disabilities weren't as devastating as ours ? because he has money???

sunflowersfollowthesun · 11/10/2012 09:01

threesocks do you ever have any opinions of your own, or do you always rely on links to blogs and left leaning articles to do your thinking for you? (And that last link was particularly repellent ? hinting that Ivan had been posed like a prop. Dissembling of the highest order.)

domesticgodless · 11/10/2012 09:20

It is clearly less difficult to care for a disabled child or indeed to care for any person who needs care (an infant, elderly person) if you have money to buy the goods and services they need. Hardly 'inverted snobbery'.

domesticgodless · 11/10/2012 09:25

What wealth will of course not do is insulate you from the grief and disappointment of having to see your child suffer.