Compare with Macron's reform which ensured the costs of adult training are paid for by:
- employers paying into a central fund
- the State
- adults who if in work (self employed or employed) are given 500€ (or 800€ if not in work) PER YEAR for training& manage this themselves
through an individual account, their Compte Personnel de Formation. Employers have to offer training too in house (or subcontract) including in badly paid jobs e.g. warehouse so employees can learn e.g. digital skills AND employers must pay them their salaries during training
Finally France put in place really good quality control on training bodies. The law was constantly reassessed & tweaked when needed.
He also put a lot of money into apprentiship, reformed it, extended the areas covered & opened it to up to 29 years old. As a result there was a huge increase in apprentiship.
The Tories talk the talk but put no money behind it. As always. As with the army reform (cuts), the sciences budget (cuts), the NHS (real term pay cuts), Green policies (scrapping the home insulation scheme). All spin & no substance.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
A progressive alliance between the 3 parties of the left would be a huge gamble, difficult to pull off. It would require genuine audacious leadership. But it could be a great electoral success. This is why. 🧵1/11
Some say that voters would react badly to an "explicit alliance". Perhaps if this alliance was only an electoral pact -presented as purely "opportunistic". But if it was focused on "flagship" policies on which the 3 opposition parties could unite (& hopefully unite the country)2/
-Dignity & security: at work, at home (housing), in old age, in communities (crime)
- Halting the privatisation of the NHS - much more should be said about the recent privatisation of GP surgeries for profit
- A genuine Green programme on job creation & protecting the planet 3/
@jemgilbert I read and enormously enjoyed your series of articles in Open Democracy. Like you I am convinced that a progressive alliance is a vital necessity. I would go further: it is a moral imperative.
One point which is thrown in response again & again is Labour Rule Book
Chapter 2 clause 1.4 section B of Labour's constitution excludes from membership:
"A member of the Party who joins and/or supports a political organisation other than an official Labour group or other unit of the Party, or supports any candidate who stands against an official
Labour candidate, or publicly declares their intent to stand against a Labour candidate, shall automatically be ineligible to be or remain a Party member"
I fail to see how this clause would prevent an alliance if there was a will to form one.
To combat the misinformation, Labour needs to learn from the Tories. A few powerful mantras repeated over & over again backed by specific examples. "Tories talk the talk, don't walk the walk" "all spin, no substance" e g. on armed forces (cuts), NHS, sciences (cut to the budget),
Erasmus (inept & costly "replacement"), on "levelling up" (Funding for towns) There are 100 of examples. But without message discipline & powerful mantras unifying the attacks into an all encompassing framework, disparate attacks get lost in the media noise as shown here
This is what would happen in real life: a big police cover up #LineOfDuty Osborne will be gently retired with honours (health reasons?) Carmichael promoted, Kate & Steve's careers will flounder - integrity always scares others - & corruption will continue.
Such an embarrassing scandal would NEVER be allowed to come out. Bravo Jeff Mercurio for daring to give us, not the ending we all craved for but the one which rings true. #LineofDutyFinale
1/17 This is such an interesting article by John Curtice on Labour's post-Brexit electoral strategy. It stop short of recommandations but the general line is clear.
I recommend reading the whole analysis but some extracts/summary below. onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.11…
2/According to the dominant narrative - confirmed by the unimaginative Fabian Society paper published this week by a number of Labour MPs- the route back to power rests on the party winning back as many of the party's traditional working‐class ‘red wall’ seats as possible.
3/The argument is that Labour needs to focus on reversing its losses among traditional working‐class voters, steering away from the near anti‐Brexit stance the party had come to embrace by the time of the 2019 election & preferably away from the issue of Brexit entirely.
I am in despair to still see articles saying: oh but the EU failed because the US vaccinated 38% of its adult population & the UK about 50%.
But these 2 countries didn't export any vaccines & the UK got 21 millions doses from the EU out of 31 millions vaccinated.
The EU allowed exports of 48% of vaccines made on its territory to countries which needed it. HOW MANY MORE WOULD BE VACCINATED IN THE EU IF IT BEHAVED LIKE THE UK AND THE US? 48% MORE. AND HOW MANY LESS IN THE UK? 21 millions less!
The EU behaved ethically & I am proud of it. And if now it blocks AZ vax from EU plants to the UK it is perfectly justified because the UK will still get its UK made AZ production + the EU Pfizer production (more than the AZ vaccines) + in a few weeks the Moderna vaccines. And