The last 12 years have seen a reduction in social mobility. What have they being doing all this time? And who is going to believe that they are going to be any different in future.
He also said "Opportunity and reward cannot be hoarded at the top and it is not enough to protect people at the bottom." Thats telling them. So ignore those at the bottom, in a desperate attempt to court the better off voters.
The prime minister said Labour would create "more middle class jobs than ever before". Mr Brown added that in the next decade, only 10% of jobs will be unskilled - the "biggest number of middle class jobs in our history". He said he would achieve this through education and that a target would be set of 75% of people aged under 30 to have access to either university or technical college.
If we can't afford to have 50% students now, where is the money coming from for 75%? And what about the people who want to learn something more practical, will there be no need for plumbers/electricians/carpenters/mechanics etc? What happened to those green jobs in insulating buildings, building renewable sources of energy. Planning like that is why we have needed so many skilled people from other countries. Maybe he needs an education.
In February 2009, the Economist magazine announced that over half the world's population now belongs to the middle class, as a result of rapid growth in emerging countries. It characterized the middle class as having a reasonable amount of discretionary income, so that they do not live from hand to mouth as the poor do. This allows people to buy consumer goods, improve their health care, and provide for their children’s education.Clearly they need help, Gordon to the rescue.
Could this be a cynical attempt to go for the majority of voters? Trying to out Tory the Tories will never work, he is no Blair, and we all stopped believing Blair anyway.
3 comments:
"The last 12 years have seen a reduction in social mobility"........absolutely right Adrian.....but why is that I wonder when you have a party in government that is supposed to be the upholder of those who are not so well of?
Reduction of social mobility always seems to happen with a Labour government!
Good education is always going to be key to allowing those from less priviledged backgrounds to fulfill their potential. Sadly standards have fallen over many years which does nobody any good , and then just for good measure this wonderful Labour government introduced top up fees which has discouraged some less well off youngsters from going to university.
Having said that , it is a pointless exercise to try to get 50% or more of people to go to 'university', just so that you can say the government has achieved some target or another.
What might be a better way to approach the problem is to make sure that those who wish to go to university and take a subject that is of some use to society (medics, engineers etc) are always able to do so cost free, and those that wish to take some of the courses that will never lead to employment in that field (media studies etc) have to fund it themselves.
Talking of education , what is the point of keeping children in school until the age of 18, when a large number of children are thoroughly bored by the age of 16 ?
Labour destroyed the grammar school system years ago, a system that would give a child who was academically gifted a top class education absolutely regardless of the background or wealth of their parents.......a system that encouraged social mobility!
Perhaps they haven't been telling the truth Howard.
I think education should be free for all, not just the courses you like. Who can say where an education can lead?
But apprenticeships should be available for all who don't want an academic route.
Yes, I very much agree that education should be free......but then again what the hell is the point of doing a degree in a subject where there is no hope of getting a job in that field?
Surely it would be better to encourage people to study subjects that lead to jobs that are actually in demand .
Post a Comment