Cameron calls for users to help pay for new motorways and expanded higher education

An article in yesterday’s Spectator by the anti-war Peter Oborne tried to big-up the leadership hopes of anti-war Clarke.  Oborne believes that Clarke’s anti-war stance makes him “the candidate Tony Blair would least like to win”.

But it is Ken Clarke's most likely rival to be 'the-stop-Davis-candidate' - David Cameron - who continues to pour most energy into his leadership bid.  Mr Cameron uses an interview with today's FT to say that Tories must address "inter-generational" issues like pensions, energy and education in their next manifesto.  He says that Conservatives must offer ideas that will serve a twenty-year period.  He also supports "co-payment" for public services from which certain people derive disproportionate benefit.  Part of the cost of new motorways, for example, and the expansion of higher education should be borne by the motorists and students who directly benefit.  This is a further illustration of his 'big idea' of 'shared responsibility' and, in particular, confirmation that Mr Cameron will jettison the IDS/ Michael Howard policy of opposing tuition fees.

Mr Cameron says he is standing for "Conservatism with a soul":

"My default setting is one of a compassionate Conservative who believes in the ladder up which all can climb and a net beneath which no one should fall. That's who I am: if you cut me down the middle that's what my core is."

Comments

[Mark O'Brien]

It's refreshing to start hearing more from the big candidates about policy. But on Cameron's co-payment ideas, if this can be described as a 'big idea', why do I find myself rather uninspired with the way he talks about it?

Is it me? Am I too demanding? Or am I spending too much time damning all the candidates?!

[James Hellyer]

Co-payment can get very complicated. It tends to be means-tested, one way or another - otherwise the impoverished people may not be able to afford any services. Means-testing would be a major bureaucratic problem. Previous Governments after the war repeatedly looked at charging people for visiting a General Practitioner. Each time it was decided that the costs of administering small co-payments would be so high as to make such any such system absurd.

I'm also deeply sceptical of the current fad for "user pays" systems. These seem to make individuals pay for services rather than fund them out of direct taxation. But they never seem to be accompanied by any decrease in taxation. They are little more than stealth taxes.

[Mark O'Brien]

James, I think you are right about the user pay systems. For example, the present myriad of taxes on motorists: fuel duty, car tax, etc. amount to about four times more than the transportation budget. Unless you have proper structures in place to ensure that user pay systems actually go back into the service, i.e. taxes on motorists going directly to local transport commissioners, all they do is turn into a cynical revenue-raising device to pay for domestic, election-winning adventures like the child trust fund.

(But, of course, David Cameron says he doesn't like talking about structures, so there may be little hope there.)

[Jack Stone]

Oh Please! Why do people on this site have to complicate things so much. All Daid Cameron is saying that he believes that those who use the motorways and higher education system should pay the most for them.
Why should a middle aged single person who doesn`t drive have to pay the same as someone who drives on the motorways regularly and who`s children attend university.
Cameron is talking about a system that would basically be more fair then the system we have today. For god sake no one is contemplating means testing car owners. If you have a car and use it regularly for long journeys you will pay more than someone who hardly uses there car at all.Its not rocket science!
Finally its pleasing to see at least one contender for the leadership actually making an effort to come forward with new policys unlike some I can name who`s campaign seems to consist of nothing more than more of the same.

[Mark O'Brien]

"Oh Please! Why do people on this site have to complicate things so much. All Daid Cameron is saying that he believes that those who use the motorways and higher education system should pay the most for them."

Because we're too used to politicians giving us policy ideas which look decent on paper but which turn out badly in practice because they didn't have the brains to think the implications and the intricacies through in the first place.

[James Hellyer]

"For god sake no one is contemplating means testing car owners."

I didn't say they were. They are however talking about co-payment for Higher Education. That involvesd means testing unless you want to shut the poorest students out.

[AnotherNick]

While I broadly support the ideas on users paying for road building. I would be disapointed to see the party move away from it's opposition to university tuition fees.

[Brian Hough]

Dear Sir,
As a life long tory voter I feel more and more that I am hearing the same old stories over and over again.After 50+ years of listening to politicians of every persuation from Churchill and Attlee to those of the present day like most people I am still waiting for that wonderful breakthrough that let's face it none of you are ever going to deliver.OK the present PM is telling us that he is the man to see us through the current crisis.This is the man who sold Britain's gold reserves at bargain prices.Who gave one man permission to do this?As a Chancellor he was a disaster and as a PM he is worse--an absolute disaster and an unelected one at that.The question is will you be any better.
Now this is the answer and one that is traditionally an unelectable one but one that until someone grasps it and has the courage to face it will continue to restrict this country and eventually destroy it on the world stAge.What is it?Very simple.In the 21st.Century it is simply unexceptable that one section of the population (the private sector)should retire at age 65 and at the same time pay for another sector(local and central government workers) to retire at 60 and have inflation proof pensions for life plus lump sum payments when they retire.Brown recently backed down on such proposals under Unison pressure.It is time for someone to grasp the nettle and they would find that it might just be a vote winner not a vote loser.A country like ours has for too long spent too much time paying people to spend money rather than earn it.Remember Maggie.She did the supposedly unattainable.She ended the mass votes for action in strike action in such as Longbridge's car park or the Wilson habit of the TUC going into 10,Downing St. to tell him what was expected.All things that everyone accepted as the British way and unchangeable.In fact she killed the long accepted but financially destructive nationalised industries something that everyone accepted as unchangeable.NOTHING IS!!!She introduced the Poll Tax.A great idea.After all if you work you pay income tax.No one accepts any less.If you are not in work you don't.Perfectly normal.Why therefore if you do not work do you pay local tax(council tax).The poll tax was a solution.Her mistake was that she should have said to local authorities you have xxx people at work in your area and the national poll tax rate is xxx pounds per person.If this is not enough then you as the LA need to get off your backsides and get out there in the big wide world and attract more business into your region and thereby increase your income.Instead she made the mistake of letting them set their own rate which they did with great glee and hence what should have been the popular alternative to council tax became so unpopular that it destroyed her.For God's sake let's have a prospective government with enough courage to do something different and radical for the first time since Victoriana and have the guts to lift this long suffering country and it's people from the ever boring non productive misery .Let's see China and India and yes even the USA opening their call centres and more in GREAT BRITAIN because that is where quality and security is.For God's sake be different.Surprise us and we will surprise you.,Sir,I have faith in you.DO IT,WE NEED YOU.

[Brian Hough]

Dear Sir,
As a life long tory voter I feel more and more that I am hearing the same old stories over and over again.After 50+ years of listening to politicians of every persuation from Churchill and Attlee to those of the present day like most people I am still waiting for that wonderful breakthrough that let's face it none of you are ever going to deliver.OK the present PM is telling us that he is the man to see us through the current crisis.This is the man who sold Britain's gold reserves at bargain prices.Who gave one man permission to do this?As a Chancellor he was a disaster and as a PM he is worse--an absolute disaster and an unelected one at that.The question is will you be any better.
Now this is the answer and one that is traditionally an unelectable one but one that until someone grasps it and has the courage to face it will continue to restrict this country and eventually destroy it on the world stAge.What is it?Very simple.In the 21st.Century it is simply unexceptable that one section of the population (the private sector)should retire at age 65 and at the same time pay for another sector(local and central government workers) to retire at 60 and have inflation proof pensions for life plus lump sum payments when they retire.Brown recently backed down on such proposals under Unison pressure.It is time for someone to grasp the nettle and they would find that it might just be a vote winner not a vote loser.A country like ours has for too long spent too much time paying people to spend money rather than earn it.Remember Maggie.She did the supposedly unattainable.She ended the mass votes for action in strike action in such as Longbridge's car park or the Wilson habit of the TUC going into 10,Downing St. to tell him what was expected.All things that everyone accepted as the British way and unchangeable.In fact she killed the long accepted but financially destructive nationalised industries something that everyone accepted as unchangeable.NOTHING IS!!!She introduced the Poll Tax.A great idea.After all if you work you pay income tax.No one accepts any less.If you are not in work you don't.Perfectly normal.Why therefore if you do not work do you pay local tax(council tax).The poll tax was a solution.Her mistake was that she should have said to local authorities you have xxx people at work in your area and the national poll tax rate is xxx pounds per person.If this is not enough then you as the LA need to get off your backsides and get out there in the big wide world and attract more business into your region and thereby increase your income.Instead she made the mistake of letting them set their own rate which they did with great glee and hence what should have been the popular alternative to council tax became so unpopular that it destroyed her.For God's sake let's have a prospective government with enough courage to do something different and radical for the first time since Victoriana and have the guts to lift this long suffering country and it's people from the ever boring non productive misery .Let's see China and India and yes even the USA opening their call centres and more in GREAT BRITAIN because that is where quality and security is.For God's sake be different.Surprise us and we will surprise you.,Sir,I have faith in you.DO IT,WE NEED YOU.

[driving school worcester]

Motorways and higher education system should pay most for people who uses it often than those normal ones. It's just a matter of thinking wisely.