How does cameron differ from thatcher

A new German economic era dawns as the Bundesbank changes guard 22 October On defence, the ball is in Europe's court 18 October Judy Asks: Can Germany provide leadership to Europe?

El miedo a perder a Merkel 24 September Opinion piece Carnegie Europe. Charles Grant Twitter. He says his new approach contrasts both with the "booster capitalism" of the past decade, but also, in a telling phrase that will infuriate the committed Thatcherites who still inhabit parts of the party, "it's a change from the s, when we rightly had the spirit of enterprise, but on which we now need to build the sense of responsibility".

Thatcher's administration was responsible for tearing down the capital controls and other regulations that constrained the activities of the City of London, in a deregulatory spree that was continued by New Labour after Like the Republicans in the US, Cameron's party has struggled to set out a coherent response to a crisis resulting from the excesses of global finance. To aid education, schools need to pay attention to social care but, under Gove, programmes for nutrition and special needs were abandoned.

The reactionary strain in Gove was unmistakeable. He was largely uninterested in what schools did for the less able. An end to council planning led to a shortage of primary school places in many areas. Nor were they accountable to anyone — many now operated by mysterious chains of sponsors, which Gove forbade Ofsted from inspecting. Free schools careered along like driverless cars on unmarked roads, and a few duly crashed as their unsupervised management plunged into special measures or closure.

He treated the entire profession with puerile contempt. Eventually, his abrasive style did for him and he, like Lansley, was defenestrated.

Cameron vacillated. Local government secretary Eric Pickles instructed councils to empty refuse bins weekly while banning them from raising council tax. At the same time he cut their budgets by a third in real terms over five years; the revenue gap facing Tory Surrey as well as Labour Newcastle-upon-Tyne and scores of other authorities is profound.

On her watch a mighty constitutional change occurred in the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act, which upset a year-old precedent by putting the police in England and Wales under the direct supervision of politicians.

In government you need officials. Downing Street said Whitehall was overstocked with overpaid officials and cut them back. That requires officials with imagination and expertise. Even granting contracts to the private sector requires skill and experience, as the transport secretary found to his cost when he left under-strappers to negotiate the lucrative contract for the West Coast train line.

Tories did believe in parts of the state. Civil servants disappeared from the No 10 policy unit to be replaced by paid Tory advisers.

The number of special advisers to ministers went up from 85 to 98, defying a coalition agreement pledge. When Cameron appointed as his political strategist Lynton Crosby, a professional lobbyist for the tobacco industry, no one was surprised plain packaging was swept off the agenda, only now to return, coincidentally just before the general election.

Conservative governments have always sought to protect the wealthy, and over the past five years the influence of the rich has if anything increased. In May , the Tory party took over the Hurlingham Club in Fulham and, among other trophies, auctioned off the chance to play tennis against Cameron and Boris Johnson. The guest list, published in the Guardian, displayed the extent to which Westminster has become government by the rich, for the rich.

In parallel, Tory eagerness to avoid state investment has led them to invite the Chinese to take over a significant proportion of the electricity supply, along with the sewers under London streets. No wonder former patriotic and working-class Tories transfer their allegiance to Ukip. Toryism is now in deep intellectual disarray. He wants to deliver a powerful financial incentive for those on middle to high incomes to ignore the siren call of UKIP and vote Tory.

But is there economic - and social dare I ask? One is whether the tax cuts would provide an incentive for people to work harder and smarter, for their own benefit and the UK's. There may be a risk that lifting the zero-tax band will reinforce a shift to the creation of a growing number of workers, especially among the young, who are minded not to earn more than the tax-free minimum, to avoid the cost and hassle of paying any tax.