Is that true, because I certainly remember having free milk when I first went to school but then not getting it later on and I wasnt born till 1974.

Hang on, here's a simple test. Can you also remember being woken in a bright room full of grey beings with large heads coming towards you with "probes"?

I certainly remember having free milk when I first went to school but then not getting it later on and I wasnt born till 1974.

+1

sorry smart alec nay-sayers.. we had milk in little tiny milk bottles with a straw..

Towns that used to rely on mining are still fairly grim places, over 25 years on from the miner's strike

I live in a former pit village and work primarily in a former pit town. I can assure you that it is far from grim. I didn't live in the area 25 years ago but from talking to colleagues, film footage etc etc. I would say that, on the whole, things are considerably better than they were when the area was reliant upon mining.

I certainly remember having free milk when I first went to school but then not getting it later on and I wasnt born till 1974.

+1

sorry smart alec nay-sayers.. we had milk in little tiny milk bottles with a straw..

Harold Wilson removed school milk for secondary schools in 1968 and Ted Heath removed it for primary schools in 1971. Since then I believe it's been a local authority decision. But it's no doubt all Thatcher's fault – "Harold Wilson – Milk Snatcher" doesn't have quite the same ring… 🙄

I remember at my school a few people drank the milk but most of it was thrown away – it was a post-war policy designed probably as much to help milk farmers as the children.

I live in a former pit village and work primarily in a former pit town. I can assure you that it is far from grim.

We must have different standards of grim. Most of the places round here (North Notts / Derbyshire) that had pits and now don't are still conspicuously poor areas. Some, like Manton, are horrendous.

We had free school milk, but that was because our school (it might have been the LEA I can't remember) made sure it was available to us. Most of the kids drank it and enjoyed it. The reason behind free school milk was to ensure all young children were given valuable nutrition. The vitamins and Calcium in milk are vital to help growing bones. In deprived areas, the benefits of this were proven, with a significant improvement in the health of young children. Not so important for older kids, hence not absolutely necessary in secondary schools.

Removing free school milk from primary schools is just another sign that the Tories don't actually give a **** about the people of Britain. The poorer working classes? As long as they can do the menial tasks, fine; that's all they're good for…

Is that true, because I certainly remember having free milk when I first went to school but then not getting it later on and I wasnt born till 1974.

Hang on, here's a simple test. Can you also remember being woken in a bright room full of grey beings with large heads coming towards you with "probes"?

nope, never been in such a situation as far as I can remember. What does that have to do with milk?

I remember being forced to drink milk out of little bottles with a straw in that had sat around in the sun all morning, this would have been mid to late 70s.

Still can't face milk without adding Nesquik.

Tron

I'm not familiar with Derby (I live 3 miles from Durham) and I'm not saying it's all rosy. There are still some very poor areas (eg. Easington where Billy Elliot was filmed) but there were 'poor areas' even when the mines were operating. The NE was hit very hard with the demise of shipbuilding, mining and steel to name but a few, there has been a good deal of regeneration and influx of new business and overall things are better. IMHO of course. 😉

Ted Heath removed it for primary schools in 1971

No he didn't, the decision was taken by the education minister. And I doubt very much that the School Milk Act, which was introduced by a Labour government a few months after the end of WW2, was designed to help "milk farmers". Britain still had rationing, and farmers would hardly have encouraged to produce something which wasn't actually needed or necessary.

I remember being forced to drink milk out of little bottles with a straw in that had sat around in the sun all morning, this would have been mid to late 70s.

Early 80's onwards for me. Small glass bottles+straw. Always remember the milk being slightly bloody warm and yuk!

Education Secretary (1970–1974)

When the Conservative party under Edward Heath won the 1970 general election, Thatcher became Secretary of State for Education and Science. In her first months in office, Thatcher came to public attention as a result of the administration of Edward Heath's decision to cut spending. She gave priority to academic needs in schools,[37] and imposed public expenditure cuts on the state education system, resulting in, against her private protests, the abolition of free milk for school-children aged seven to eleven.[38] She believed that few children would suffer if schools were charged for milk, however she agreed to give younger children a third of a pint, daily, for nutritional purposes.[38] This provoked a storm of protest from the Labour party and the press,[39] and led to the unflattering moniker "Margaret Thatcher, Milk Snatcher".[38] Of the experience, Thatcher later wrote in her autobiography, "I learned a valuable lesson. I had incurred the maximum of political odium for the minimum of political benefit."[39]

She successfully resisted the introduction of library book charges. She did not volunteer spending cuts in her department, contrary to her later beliefs.[38] Her term was marked by support for several proposals for more local education authorities to close grammar schools and to adopt comprehensive secondary education. Thatcher, committed to a tiered secondary modern / grammar school system of education, was determined to preserve grammar schools, which prepared more students for admission to universities.[37] She abolished Labour's commitment to comprehensive schooling, and instead left the matter to local education authorities.[37]

S'funny, how modern thinking has been so poisoned by freemarket Thatcherite thinking, that someone suggests that free school milk was simply a scheme to keep bolshevik farmers employed by the state!.
(assuming,jokingly for a second, it was true)-'Keeping farmers in jobs! how is that in the national interest!?' 🙄

Thing is. Every says Thathca Thathca Thathca. Why not focus on the here and now? Lets face it Labour has the murderer who found God and the bungler who currently has us close to a trillion of debt. how can a small Island have close to that mucch national debt?

Get someone in who knows how to make money/run a business FFS.

Get someone in who knows how to make money/run a business FFS.

irrespective of our political differences this is a bizarre statement, surely we need someone who can run a country?

You really need to brush up your reading skills Ernie. I'll give you a couple of short easy examples:

Germany has had a stable currency with low inflation for years but unemployment that has often reached 10%, despite the unemployment Germans live well, even the unemployed.

Argentinia despite its potential has suffered runaway inflation that has bankrupted companies, banks and individuals leading to significant collective suffering. The economic woes caused by high inflation have led to unemployment of up to 25% contrary to what you say about unemployment having remained low.

I stand by my original assertion that inflation and currency instability are far greater threats than unemployment and Thatchers decision to fight inflation was the right one – as proved by the improving economic fortunes of Britain over the period 1979 to 1997. John Major handed over Britain's economy to Blair in fine form – look what Labour have done, again.

The similarities between the end of labour's last stint are striking: Non elected prime ministers presiding over huge public deficits. It took Thatcher five years to get the budget deficit she inherited from Labour down to reasonable levels. I wonder how long it will take the Tories or Clegg this time.

irrespective of our political differences this is a bizarre statement, surely we need someone who can run a country?

It's Hora – bizarre statements are his stock in trade

Get someone in who knows how to make money/run a business FFS.

Who do you suggest Hora? I don't think Dave or Gideon have ever run a company

It really would be great if Labour won, not because I have any great affection for them but Hora's rant if they do will be epic in many ways

Edukator – so you actually meant what you said…….Germany between the wars, and Argentina in recent years, are examples of "stable economies" ?

Yeah, ok mate……….I think we'll leave it there. Thanks.

Do you enjoy making a fool of yourself Ernie? The problem with trying to distort what people say on this forum is that there are hundreds of other people out there that do read and do understand even if they don't agree. The vast majority then present their own counter or complementary views and arguments and the debate progresses.

We're not mates as far as I know and you may wish to leave it there but I'm quite enjoying myself and will continue as long as I have something I hope others find interesting, amusing or mildly annoying to add.

What does that have to do with milk?

Just checking for False Memory Syndrome

I don't think Dave or Gideon have ever run a company

Nor has James*. He's not even an economist, despite his proclamations.

*You may know him as Gordon. Odd that. No one ever makes anything of the fact he has chosen Gordon over James, yet you dull Guardian readers never shut up about Osborne using George over Gideon. Why is that, I wonder? Something to do with class and inverted snobbery perhaps? No, of course not……

The problem with trying to distort what people say……….

No mate, you can say whatever you want say – it really doesn't bother me. I'm just slightly annoyed that I took you seriously. But then you probably see that as a result – so well done.

I'll try and ignore you in future – so no risk of me "distorting" what you say.

Keeping farmers in jobs! how is that in the national interest!?

Well….

Assuming that we will have an unlimited supply of oil into the distant future, and that burning that oil will have no environmental consequences, then it isn't important.

But, given that we have a finite amount of oil, and that we are being urged to preserve it, not just for economic, but also for environmental reasons, then imported foodstuffs will become more expensive and face possible interuption. At which point we might be glad to still have people around with the skills and knowledge to produce the food we will need to survive.

In fact it's a similar argument to the one that goes for Trident missiles – at some unknown time in the future we will be glad we've got them, although of course it's different because in the case of farmers, we actually do know that in time we really will need them.

*You may know him as Gordon. Odd that. No one ever makes anything of the fact he has chosen Gordon over James, yet you dull Guardian readers never shut up about Osborne using George over Gideon. Why is that, I wonder? Something to do with class and inverted snobbery perhaps? No, of course not……

Actually I didn't know that. Being a Grauniad reader I thought his first name was Gudgeon.

Being a Grauniad reader I thought his first name was Gudgeon.

Genuine PMSL moment! 🙂 Brilliant!

Obviously a Thomas the tank engine fan Mr Brown.

Gordon is the senior member of the engine family, the fastest and most powerful engine on the rails. He's extremely proud and inclined to boast. He's good-hearted, always willing to use his superior strength to help smaller engines out of trouble.

James is a medium sized engine. He likes to think of himself as a really splendid engine. This can occasionally lead to grandiose ideas about the sort of work suitable for such a noble creature, which invariably lands James in trouble. James is a mixed traffic engine, which means he can pull both passenger coaches and freight cars.

Maybe its because Gideon is a daft name?

Don't posh people always give boys daft names ?

What's your first name Flashheart ? 😉

Wot, like James.

Leonard James Callaghan. James Gordon Brown.

I'm putting money on Tarquin Meredith Flashheart..

(plus some more middle names.. probably three more)

Rightplacerighttime, I wuz being ironic (hence the quote marks)
I happen to think that it IS in the national interest to keep farmers in a job, and miners too for that matter…

I'm putting money on Tarquin Meredith Flashheart..

😀 ……actually I happen to know Flashheart's first name. And yes it is posh – very posh in fact some would say, but not actually daft. At least I hope not, as it happens to be my middle name ! Although in my defence I wasn't given it because it appeals to the English aristocracy (which it clearly does), I was named after a famous general which my father served under – and he wasn't British. Mind you, I reckon it's well cool in it's Spanish form.

Get someone in who knows how to make money/run a business FFS.

Hora, you are a true Child Of Thatcher….

Edukator – you show how little you know by asserting this

Edukator – Member
I stand by my original assertion that inflation and currency instability are far greater threats than unemployment and Thatchers decision to fight inflation was the right one – as proved by the improving economic fortunes of Britain over the period 1979 to 1997. John Major handed over Britain's economy to Blair in fine form – look what Labour have done, again.

Unsder the tories the economy was devasted – years of declining output and stagflation and the wasting of the north sea oil money on paying for the millions of unemployed.

the damage done and the missed opportunities can never be repaired. Norway got rich on the back of the oil money and invested it for the peoples future. thatcher wasted ours on paying benefits. without the oil money the economy would have collapsed totally. As it was it was virtually destroyed.

Really – you have now lost any credibility you have had. Remeber black wednesday? Remembner high inflation high interst rates and simultaneous falling GDP?

"*You may know him as Gordon. Odd that. No one ever makes anything of the fact he has chosen Gordon over James, yet you dull Guardian readers never shut up about Osborne using George over Gideon. Why is that, I wonder? Something to do with class and inverted snobbery perhaps? No, of course not…… "

Can I say, I'm a dull Guardian reader and I had no idea George Osborne's given name is Gideon til you mentioned it

The reason people laugh at Osbourne is that he stopped using gideon to try not to look so posh. As have others of the tories changed their used name to avoid looking so posh although some have refused. there is no particular difference in how James or Gordon are seen.

Conservative candidates are under pressure to drop aristocratic-sounding names to play down the blue-blooded image of David Cameron’s party, it was claimed last night.

The Conservative leader, who wears his Old Etonian background lightly and is known as Dave by friends, asked one candidate, Annunziata Rees-Mogg, to change her double-barrelled name to Nancy Mogg

However, other Tory candidates have anticipated ‘Dave’s De-toff’. Simon Radford-Kirby, candidate for trendy Brighton Kemptown, describes himself as plain Simon Kirby.

Fellow Tory Scott Seaman-Digby switched to Scott Digby for his unsuccessful bid to become the Brighton Pavilion candidate

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1231774/Camerons-bid-toff-Tories-backfires-candidate-tells-leader-I-like-double-barrelled-name.html

But aren't double barrelled names increasingly common due to women not necessarily taking the husbands name in marriage? No big deal nowadays IMHO.

Annunziata is quite a different story and Willy should be ashamed of himself ……… 😯

Unsder the tories the economy was devasted – years of declining output and stagflation

That was Labour, "stagflation" was a term first employed by Conservative Iain Mcleod to describe what was happening under Labour when he was shadow chancellor in the 60s.

The conservatives have always had lousy economic numbers during the first few years of their mandates as the clear up the economic mess left by Labour. You can't congratulate Blair for the first two years of his mandate because he was riding on the result of years conservative good management. Thatcher was elected after the winter of discontent and it took a while to pick up the pieces.

Labour: tax busines more, introduce labour laws that are expensive for the employer, allow sabotage of the work place by a minority of communist fanatics, expand the public sector and pay people not to work.

Consevative: tax business less, limit union powers and favour democracy in the work place, reign in public spending and encourage people to work with measures such as the £1000 to start a buisiness under Thatcher.

That's why the economy does better under the conservatives. I believe that can be combined with measures to assure equality in education and health that I call caring capitalism so my sympathies would lie with the Liberals if I had a vote.

Really – you have now lost any credibility you have had TJ in trouble and resorting to insult rather than argument, well I never.

Edukator

Are you Hora's intelligent brother? You are wasted in France m8, you should be writing speeches for Dave 8)

Dull Guardian readers, I am polished and shiny like a new penny.

Dont have an issue with Gideon changing his name, my dad was Francis Mervyn and always known as Merv. I have an issue with him being a buffoon 🙄

Likening our position to Norway is a bit daft there are only about 5 million Norges. We must have had that many unemployed. Also for good or for bad Norway is not in the common market.