Cameron’s speech unraveling fast

Left Foot Forward

David Cameron's Tory party conference speech is unraveling fast - with many false facts and unfair accusations, like his unfounded attack on Ed Balls.

Following our line-by-line fisking of the prime minister’s speech yesterday, more of David Cameron’s claims have come under scrutiny – with last night’s Newsnight exposing the hollowness of his attack on Ed Balls over “winners” and “aspiration”.

Mr Cameron said of Mr Balls:

“…he said one of the dangers of our schools policy was that it would create winners. Winners! I mean we can’t possibly have winners. I mean the danger that your child might go to a school and turn out to be a winner. Anti-aspiration, anti-success, anti-parents who just want the best for their children…”

Yet, as Michael Crick revealed, the former schools secretary had actually said:

“The danger is that there will be winners in this policy, but it is dishonest not to say that there will be losers as well.“

Watch it:

Additionally, Channel 4 News’s Cathy Newman has fact-checked Mr Cameron’s speech, finding fault with his statements on academies, university places, the NHS, parallels with Greece and crime – the latter particularly egregious since, as Left Foot Forward has repeatedly reported, crime actually fell 43 per cent during Labour’s time in power.

No related posts.

25 Responses to “Cameron’s speech unraveling fast”

  1. glassfet

    Balls said precisely what Cameron alleged. The word “danger” attached to the existence of “winners”, not to the fact that there would also be losers.

    There was no difference in substance between what Ed Balls said then and what John Prescott said in 2005:

    If you set up a school and it becomes a good school, the great danger is that everyone wants to go there.

    http://ind.pn/dDxNki

  2. Steve Ratcliffe

    RT @ralphferrett: RT @leftfootfwd: Cameron's speech unraveling fast http://bit.ly/dq0QwM

  3. alexlockwood

    RT @leftfootfwd: Cameron's speech unraveling fast http://bit.ly/dq0QwM

  4. Alan W

    @glassfet

    Balls’ phrasing may have been a bit clunky, but Cameron is being wilfully obtuse in his interpretation and so are you.

    It’s blatantly obvious that Balls’ concern is that the free schools policy can only be delivered at the expense of existing mainstream schools. To construe from this that Balls is somehow “anti-aspiration, anti-success”, is preposterous.

  5. Steve Hill

    RT @alexlockwood: RT @leftfootfwd: Cameron's speech unraveling fast http://bit.ly/dq0QwM

Comments are closed.