David Cameron, who avoided mentioning Europe
during his speech and spent a large proportion on the
environment (David Bebber/The Times)
Posted on 10/04/2006 3:31:14 PM PDT by familyop
David Cameron, who avoided mentioning Europe
during his speech and spent a large proportion on the
environment (David Bebber/The Times)
David Cameron warned Tory activists that there could be no turning back to the policies of the Thatcher era as he put safeguarding the National Health Service at the heart of his efforts to return the Tories to power at the next election.
In an hour-long speech ending his first party conference as leader, Mr Cameron also took on critics who accuse him of lacking substance or policy, using the key issue of taxation policy as an example that they were wrong.
Tax has been the main battleground of the conference as rightwingers spearheaded by Lord Tebbit, the former party chairman, argued that Mr Cameron should pledge tax cuts at the next election.
"Substance is not about producing a ten-point plan. It is about deeper things than that," Mr Cameron said. "It is about knowing what you believe, it's about a clear idea of the Britain that we all want to see."
He added: "Everyone in this hall, me included, knows that a low-tax economy is a strong economy. But some people want me to flash up some pie-in-the-sky tax cuts to show what we stand for.
"Let me tell you straight: that is not substance and that is not what we stand for. Do you know what I think? I think that when some people talk about substance, what they mean is they want the old policies back.
"Well they're not coming back. We're not going back."
It was a speech aimed well beyond those in the hall - many of whom are uneasy about the party's shift to the centre ground and Mr Cameron's brand of touchy-feely politics - and which stole shamelessly Labour's policy clothes on issues such as crime.
Presenting himself as a committed family man optimistic about the country's future, Mr Cameron also took pains to make clear that public services would not be slashed under a Conservative government.
He devoted much of his speech to the message that the National Health Service would be safe under his government, implicitly linking his personal attachment to free healthcare to the fact that he has a severely disabled son.
"The NHS is vitally important to every family in this country - and my family is no exception, it's vital to us," Mr Cameron declared.
"I believe that the creation of the NHS is one of the greatest achievements of the 20th century. It is founded on the noble but simple ideal that no person should ever have to worry about their healthcare.
"But it's about more than that. The NHS is an expression of our values as a nation. It is a symbol of collective will, of social solidarity. That is why the British people, of all political parties and none, are so proud of it and so attached to it."
He added: "For me, it's not a question of saying the NHS will be safe in my hands. Of course it will. My family is so often in the hands of the NHS and I want them to be safe there.
"Tony Blair once told us that his priorities could be summed up in three words: education, education, education. I can do mine in three letters: NHS.
"We will serve and support the National Health Service, we will always support the NHS with the funding it needs, but we will make sure that the money is well spent."
The Conservative leader told his party that he would back successful Labour initiatives, such as Bank of England independence and the minimum wage, promising to increase it if possible.
But he then rounded on Tony Blair for giving up on Cabinet government and taking decisions instead around the sofa in his office at No 10.
"No notes are taken. No one knows who's accountable. No one takes the blame when things go wrong," Mr Cameron said. "That arrogant style of government must come to an end. I will restore the proper processes of government.
"I want to be Prime Minister of this country, not a president."
Heralding proposals for new green taxes, Mr Cameron said: "I want to tell the British people some uncomfortable truths - there is a price for progress in tackling climate change.
"Of course, low-energy light bulbs, hybrid cars - even a windmill on your roof - can make a difference and also save money. But these things are not enough.
"Government must show leadership by setting the right framework: binding targets for carbon reduction year on year. That would create a price for carbon in our economy.
Perhaps the loudest applause came when the Tory leader heaped praise on British troops fighting abroad in Afghanistan and Iraq, saying: "We should do more - a lot more - for them."
On domestic security and the terrorist threat, Mr Cameron promised that he would always listen to the police and security services.
"I will never play politics with this issue - what I will do is my duty, which is to support the Government when they do the right thing and hold them to account when they do the wrong thing," he said.
"So let me say plainly, I do think that this government is getting some things wrong. They're pressing ahead with ID cards that won't stop dangerous people coming into our country when they can't give us proper border controls that just might.
"They're bringing in new offences that aren't being used but they haven't changed the law so that wire-tap evidence can be used to prosecute terror suspects in court."
Mr Cameron repeated his pledge to repeal the Human Rights Act and replace it with a new British Bill of Rights.
He also laid into the Prime Minister on crime, saying that his "cheap joke" at last week's Labour conference about Mr Cameron's "hug-a-hoodie" meant that he had given up on "one of the best things he ever said - that we need to be tough on the causes of crime".
"Everyone in this hall, everyone watching at home, knows that we will only tackle crime in the long term if we tackle family breakdown, if we tackle drug addiction, if we mend broken lives," he added.
On foreign policy, the Conservative leader drew on his family past, saying his grandfather had taken part in the D-Day landings and he himself had become involved in politics during the Cold War.
"But now Mr Blair objects when I say our foreign policy should not simply be unquestioning in our relationship with America.
"Well, if he's accusing me of wanting to be a British prime minister pursuing a British foreign policy, then I plead guilty.
"Questioning the approach of the US administration, trying to learn the lessons of the past five years does not make you anti-American."
Rounding off his speech with a message of optimism, he told delegates: "We must not be the party that says the world and our country is going to the dogs. We must be the party that lifts people's sights and raises their hopes.
"We are getting ready to serve again. We're standing up for what we believe. We're reaching out for what we can achieve. So let us say here today, confidently, that for Britain the best is yet to come."
FYI PING
Ping, and is this man absolutely mad?
So, what then is the difference between Labour and the Tories these days? Very little, it would seem.
Regards, Ivan
In England these guys are the Conservatives.Any less conservative and they would be establishing workers' soviets in the cities. Or is it that they must conserve the Marxist state that has developed in England?
This story would seem to prove the wisdom of your decision.
So they are going to make the same mistake as the US Republican Establishement and be Leftist lite?
I am a little tired of this lightweight Cameron continual negative tone on Thatcher. I also am nervous about the Tories on Iraq, which many of them call "Blair's War".
Regards, Ivan
Pardon my ignorance, but as I'm only familiar with Labour, the Tories, and the BNP...what is this party's platform?
According to the Heritage Foundation, an American conservative think tank, Britain is more economically free than the United States. Take a look:
Index of Economic Freedom 2006
So: if we're Marxist, what does that make you? North Korea?
Think before you post next time.
Ivan
UKIP stands for:
The leader of UKIP, Nigel Farage, is something of a bad boy on the European circuit:
From Wikipedia
Jacques Barrot controversy
On 18 November 2004 he announced in the European Parliament that Jacques Barrot, the French Commissioner designate, had been barred from elected office in France for 2 years, after being convicted in 2000 of embezzling £2 million from government funds and diverting it into the coffers of his party. He claimed that French President Jacques Chirac had granted Barrot amnesty[1]. BBC reports claimed that under French law this made it illegal to even mention the conviction [1]; French law, however, does not have any such prohibition [2]. Farage was attacked for his comments; he claimed to have been threatened with arrest [2]. The Parliament's President, Josep Borrell, enjoined him to retract his comments under threat of "legal consequences" [3], probably alluding to the possibility of libel accusations.[3] However, the following day it was confirmed that Barrot had received an 8 month suspended jail sentence in the case, and that this had been quickly expunged by the amnesty decided by Chirac and his parliamentary majority. The Commission's president, Jose Manuel Barroso admitted that he had not known of Barrot's criminal record when appointing him as a Commission vice-president.[4] The Socialist and Liberal groups in the European Parliament then joined UKIP in demanding the sacking of Barrot for failing to disclose the conviction during his confirmation hearings. However, they did not apologize to Farage for their attacks on him in the chamber, when, to all intents and purposes, they called him a liar.
José Barroso controversy
Through the spring of 2005, Farage pressed the European Commission for information as to where the individual Commissioners spent their holidays. After some delays, the Commission formally refused to answer, citing the right of privacy of Commissioners. It was then reported in the German newspaper Die Welt that the President of the European Commission, José Barroso had spent a week on the luxury yacht of the Greek shipping billionaire Spiro Latsis. It emerged soon afterwards that this had occurred only a month before the Commission approved 10.3 million euro of Greek state aid for Latsis' shipping company. It was also revealed that British Commissioner, Peter Mandelson, had accepted a trip to Jamaica from an unrevealed source.
Farage persuaded around 75 MEPs from across the political spectrum to back a motion of no confidence in Barroso, as a way of forcing him to appear before the European Parliament to explain himself. Various MEPs came under intense pressure from their respective groups to withdraw their names from Farage's motion, but nonetheless, the motion was successfully tabled on 12 May 2005. This forced Barroso to defend himself [6] and at the subsequent censure debate on 26 May 2005 the censure motion was heavily defeated. A Conservative MEP, Roger Helmer, was summarily expelled from his group, the EPP-ED in the middle of the debate by that group's leader Hans-Gert Poettering as a result of his support for Farage's motion.
Regards, Ivan
That looks like a response to "No Turning Back" which is apparently a Thatcherite group in the party. And that's a play on Mrs. Thatcher's 'To those waiting with bated breath for that favourite media catchphrase, the "U" turn, I have only one thing to say. "You turn if you want to. The lady's not for turning.'
"No Going Back" is a slogan Cameron uses to strike a Thatcherite pose of resolve, even when he's opposing Thatcherism.
Just like you have RINOs, we have CINOs.
Regards, Ivan
Some of the UKIP representatives actually make it quite entertainment to follow the action in the European parliament.
Here is a video of Farage giving Barroso a dressing down:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeDSQsanrc8
This one though is probably my favourite :-)
Nigel Farage on who's who in the EU commission
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWSYMpuCFaQ
Cheers.
Sad.
What a jerk!
Based on this article, you are wise to do so. Either the man is a charming lightweight...or one who lets his lack of substance cover for a more ambitious -- and pernicious -- agenda.
I don't think I like him...and it's a "character thing".
You are correct, IMO. The extent of socialism in the UK surpassing ours is common knowledge. And it's wise to follow a path of rank odor to see evidence of subjectivity.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Europe/index_archive.cfm
Snap!
To clarify my last comment, organizations sometimes try rather hard to improve partnerships. The Heritage Foundation does do much good work. Here's a freshly posted example.
British Conservatives Must Defend the U.S.–U.K. Special Relationship
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1713891/posts
My own stance is not one of complaining about other countries for the sole, simple purpose of complaining. IMO, we, as Americans interested in foreign relations and politics, should be educated on what's going on in those countries and in regards to our own leaders' foreign policies. For example, blindness to negative foreign relations trends will not help in our discussions with foreign nationals any more than dishonesty toward negatives would. Our input (negative and/or positive as needed) to foreign nationals can help in their decisions on their own foreign policies regarding our nation. In return, we hope to see discussions toward solving those problems (not denials or apologies).
Hi MadIvan,
I have to ask you for your opinion. Is the Tory party that far gone? Is using the words Tory and Conservative in the same breath no longer accurate?
And yes, I realize Tory's are not as conservative as Republicans in the USA. I'm only wondering if UK conservatives are that far gone to the left?
Morgan
There are broadly speaking two flavours of anti-Americanism among all the non-US Western world. One is self-loathing type (eg "Red" Ken Livingstone) who hate the West collectively: they hate America just as they hate Britain, and a nationalist variety of which "we hate America just because we are patriotic [whoever]: America has become too powerful and too injorious to our national interests!" (eg Australia's Malcolm Fraser, Canada's Red Tories such as the late John Diefenbaker)
Don't assume the non-US conservatives will be automatically friendly to the US. Some will be brainwashed by the media propaganda, while others are scheming nationalists who now believe working against America serve their national interests.
That was well said. It's obvious that you've studied quite a bit of history. They'll someday leave desires for and accusations of empire out of negotiations. Hopefully, that will happen sooner rather than later.
Here's another related post (see the map in #7).
Get ready for freak weather, world's polluters told
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1713997/posts
We all know that you're anti-British, so you are going to interpret anything you see in that light. Let's take each of these statements one-by-one:
"With our immigration policy a shambles, and our borders wide open to hundreds of thousands of people, the Prime Minister is travelling the world exposing himself as Bush's lapdog and talking to Arnie the Terminator." --UK Independence Party MEP (Party Leader), Nigel Farage
The point of this statement is to say Blair is going off to the USA rather than actually dealing with problems at home. Furthermore, Blair does have a perception problem that he is doing everything that Bush tells him to do and talking about nonsense with Arnold.
The point is to make Blair look weak...which in some ways, he is.
"Are we ‘anti-American’ because we do not want George Bush as President of our country?" --"Roger Knapman MEP and UKIP Leader South West Region"
This is not an anti-American statement. If Bush had a perception problem of doing everything Blair told him, certainly, your politicians would be asking a similar question.
"Support for Mr Bush has dwindled following the war in Iraq and a seeming failure to combat the terrorists." --[UKIP] Press Office - Daily Summary
Opinion polls say this even in the United States.
Nice try at sliming us, once again. You are a spin doctor worthy of the Clinton Administration.
Ivan
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus
This is going to create a problem for America if this attitude persists not just for Britain but for other countries. I've had plenty of acquaintances who have looked at this website, seen the kind of statements made here and really seriously questioned whether we should really even bother to maintain the special relationship, if the public is going to persist in willful ignorance and downright hostility towards us. I've had to explain people like you away as being a minority that's not worth caring about.
Now, you may indulge in your masturbatory fantasy of America alone, but its not in your country's interest. If British troops withdraw from Afghanistan and Iraq, it will be American boys who will have to take their place, fight and die. In other words, if you care about making America look good, if you care about maintaining alliances, you will get over yourself and your sick anti-British crusade.
Ivan
There is an alternative with the UK Independence Party. I suspect a lot of former Tories will walk.
Regards, Ivan
The Party did not want Mrs. Thatcher to go. The Leadership, as represented by MPs in Parliament, sadly did. The Leadership won.
The Party has genuine problems with Cameron's Tree Party. Lord Tebbit, who is one of the old Thatcherite warriors gave a speech which I saw on television that said "Let's cut taxes and leave the European Union"; he got thunderous applause. There are groupings within the Tories, like the Monday Club which believe the tree is only an appropriate symbol if it means that's what Cameron should be dangling from. I assure you there are many Tories who actually regard Republicans as being too soft; during my days in the Young Conservatives, many of my peers regarded George Bush Senior as being too far of a left wing deviation from Ronald Reagan.
However I am very tired of the Leadership, so I walked to the UKIP, no matter how good the Party may be. I am very concerned that Cameron is trying to purge out the Party to make it reflect the Leadership.
Regards, Ivan
Oh do please get over yourself. If you were actually interested in sorting problems out, you'd post articles which are favourable to Britain as well as negative. I challenged you at one point to cite references where you did just that - you couldn't.
You know very well that posting an article negative to Britain, and spinning commentary to suggest that all British are anti-American is going to create a knee-jerk reaction on this board, in which people are going to say "England is doomed". Your postings, as well as this intentionally provoked reaction as I'm pointing out, will only drive a wedge between our two people. It will harm, not heal.
I want America and Britain to be allies. I'm telling you right now - selective quoting, posting negative articles and basically sliming Britain at every opportunity on a board which is seen by a lot of people in the United Kingdom does not help. You may think you are "informing" Americans - it's not true, but never mind - what you are doing is switching off Britons. You're basically part of creating an additional perception problem: that Americans think the British are weak, socialist and doomed. This will not help Blair or anyone else who is pro-America. It will only make Americans look like arrogant jerks.
Ivan
Great Britain is better off in the hands of Labor.
Obviously, many Americans believed Bush 41 was too liberal as well. Little did anyone know how bad the alternative would turn out to be, but we found out for the next eight years.
Sorry to hear you left the Tories. Change has to come from within and if conservatives leave it allows the liberal branch more room to operate.
When I heard of the new tree I liked it. Then I saw a picture of it and all I could do was laugh. I guess I was expecting something closer to what a tree looks like.
Viewing the EU from here, on the surface it seems like this could be one huge experiment in the law of unintended consequences. I will always believe this was a mistake conceived by the French and other communists in their mistaken quest to compete with the USA.
To conclude, you help nothing. You assist nothing. You are creating disregard between nations which are allies; while I agree we have anti-American people here, you being anti-British only helps the anti-Americans in their cause. When that happens, Osama smiles.
By the way, I would be gratified to see if you're this "honest" as you put it about other countries like New Zealand, France, Germany etc. If you cannot post such links, then we know you are operating from a clear anti-British bias and agenda, which as I've said, helps no one but the terrorists.
Ivan
Sounds like Britain has their own version of Lincoln Chaffee
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.