Graph !!!!!!, the ££B lavish by Labour on the bloated public sector

LydiaJ

The end of free university education was only a matter of time after the decision was made to aim to increase numbers until 50% of 18-year-olds were going to university.

carolt

drc wrote: »

It's weird that they spent so much more money on education yet standards have fallen, university education is no longer free (as it was under the Conservatives) and there is so much more red tape. Not sure if the extra money really helped.

'Standards have fallen' - quite a big claim.

Please provide proof.

Re the NHS, I find it hard to believe that GPs were paid as little as 44K in 1996 - if they were, they were desperately underpaid for a very important job.

A._Badger

LydiaJ wrote: »

The end of free university education was only a matter of time after the decision was made to aim to increase numbers until 50% of 18-year-olds were going to university.

And that was a bright idea, wasn't it? PhD burger flippers. Just what the country needs.

amcluesent

>'Standards have fallen' - quite a big claim.<

Britain nosedives in education league tables

How Labour's 'reforms' of A-levels have dumbed down exams

Graham_Devon

GP pay is difficult to calculate. For instance, they have been given opportunities to do more, locally, which saves a possibly admission, so saves a bed. Obviously there is renumeration for this. That's just one of the ways graphs show GP paying going up.

nickmason

carolt wrote: »

'Standards have fallen' - quite a big claim.

Please provide proof.

Re the NHS, I find it hard to believe that GPs were paid as little as 44K in 1996 - if they were, they were desperately underpaid for a very important job.

I don't actually disagree with this, but I presume that means that MPs, paid at the same level, were therefore desperately underpaid for an even more important job?

sabretoothtigger

44k was more money in 96 then it is now





If we're generous and call it 1% GDP growth PA 97 to 09 or 12.7% compounded then the two figures can be compared more fairly ?

Population growth would have to be considered too but otherwise I think its fair to say labour is spending more on everything bar interest due to low rates I guess

stevsand

I like how people ignore that it was the banks which trashed the economy not the public sector,but carry on

sabretoothtigger

I agree, public sector isnt part of the economy. Government spending occurs at the expense of the economy, unless its excessive it wouldnt be the cause either

I think the banks trashed themselves more then the economy of which they are part

Generali

carolt wrote: »

To be fair, looking at my area (education) I'd be pretty miffed if spending hadn't gone up massively in real terms, given their manifesto went on about 'education, education, education'.

I mean, what exactly did you expect them to do? They promised to spend the extra money and they did. They were voted in to do so, by voters sick of 18 years of Tory underfunding of public services.

As a teacher, do you think that British children are substantially better educated in 2010 than they were in 1997? I mean in a qualitative sense rather than by using statistical measures.