LEARN ENGLISH | THERESA MAY: Britain, the Great Meritocracy (English Subtitles)

When I stood in Downing Street as Prime Minister
for the first time this summer, I set out my mission to build a country that works for
everyone. Today I want to talk a little more about what
that means and lay out my vision for a truly meritocratic Britain that puts the interests
of ordinary, working class people first. We are facing a moment of great change as
a nation. As we leave the European Union, we must define
an ambitious new role for ourselves in the world. That involves asking ourselves what kind of
country we want to be: a confident, global trading nation that continues to play its
full part on the world stage. But at the same time, I believe we have a
precious opportunity to step back and ask some searching questions about what kind of
country we want to be here at home too. In fact, it’s not just an opportunity, but
a duty. Because one thing is clear. When the British people voted in the referendum,
they did not just choose to leave the European Union. They were also expressing a far more profound
sense of frustration about aspects of life in Britain and the way in which politics and
politicians have failed to respond to their concerns. Some voted for the first time in more than
30 years. Some for the first time ever. And they were inspired to do so because they
saw a chance to reject the politics of ‘business as usual’ and to demand real, profound change. Fed up with being ignored or told that their
priorities were somehow invalid, based on ignorance and misunderstanding, or even on
occasion that they were simply wrong to voice the concerns that they did, they took their
opportunity to send a very clear message: they will not be ignored anymore. They want to take back control of the things
that matter in their lives. They want a government that listens, understands
and is on their side. They want change. And this government is going to deliver it. Everything we do will be driven, not by the
interests of the privileged few. Not by those with the loudest voices, the
special interests, the greatest wealth or the access to influence. This government’s priorities are those of
ordinary, working class people. People for whom life sometimes can be a struggle,
but who get on with things without complaint. They get on with their jobs – sometimes
2 or even 3 of them – because they have families to feed and support, bills to pay
and because to work for a fair reward is the right thing to do. They get on with their lives quietly, going
about their business, going out to work, raising families, helping neighbours, making their
communities what they are. They don’t ask for much, but they want to
know that the people that make the big decisions are on their side, working for them. They want to believe that everyone plays by
the same rules and things are fair. And above all they want to believe that if
they uphold their end of the deal – they do the right thing, they work hard, they pay
their taxes – then tomorrow will be better than today and their children will have a
fair chance in life, the chance to go as far as their talents will take them. These are not outrageous demands or ridiculous
desires, but for too many of these people today life does not seem fair. They are the people who made real sacrifices
after the financial crash in 2008, though they were in no way responsible. They wonder if others – some of whom really
do bear responsibility for the crash – did the same. More than anything else, they worry – truly
worry – that the changing world around them means that their children and grandchildren
won’t have the same opportunities they have enjoyed in life. They deserve a better deal. And to give them that, we should take this
opportunity to step back and pose a fundamental question: what kind of country – what kind
of society – do we want to be? I am clear about the answer. I want Britain to be the world’s great meritocracy
– a country where everyone has a fair chance to go as far as their talent and their hard
work will allow. I want us to be a country where everyone plays
by the same rules; where ordinary, working class people have more control over their
lives and the chance to share fairly in the prosperity of the nation. And I want Britain to be a place where advantage
is based on merit not privilege; where it’s your talent and hard work that matter, not
where you were born, who your parents are or what your accent sounds like. Let us not underestimate what it will take
to create that great meritocracy. It means taking on some big challenges, tackling
some vested interests. Overcoming barriers that have been constructed
over many years. It means not being afraid to think differently
about what disadvantage means, who we want to help and how we can help them. Because where once we reached for simple ways
of labelling people disadvantaged and were quick to pose simple – and often fairly
blunt – solutions, in these modern times disadvantage is much more complex. It’s often hidden and less easy to identify. It’s caused by factors that are more indirect
and tougher to tackle than ever before. But tackle it we must if we are to give ordinary,
working class people the better deal they deserve. It means marking a significant shift in the
way that government works in Britain too. Because government and politicians have for
years talked the language of social justice – where we help the very poorest – and
social mobility – where we help the brightest among the poor. But to make Britain a great meritocracy, we
must move beyond this agenda and deliver real social reform across every layer of society
so that those whom the system would currently miss – those just above the threshold for
help today yet those who are by no means rich or well off – are given the help they need. It means putting government firmly on the
side of not only the poorest in our society, important though that is and will remain,
but also of those in Britain who are working hard but just about managing. It means helping to make their lives a little
easier; giving them greater control over the issues they care about the most. This is the change we need. It will mean changing some of the philosophy
underpinning how government thinks and acts. It will mean recalibrating how we approach
policy development to ensure that everything we do as government helps to give a fair chance
to those who are just getting by – while still helping those who are even more disadvantaged. I don’t pretend this change will be easy
– change rarely is – but this is the change we need if we are to make Britain the great
meritocracy I want it to be. Over the coming weeks and months the government
will set out an ambitious programme of economic and social reform that will help us make this
change and build a true meritocracy in our country. But there is no more important place to start
than education. Because if the central concern ordinary working
class people have is that their children will not enjoy the same opportunities they have
had in life, we need to ensure that there is a good school place for every child, and
education provision that caters to the individual needs and abilities of every pupil. Schools that work for everyone
We start from a position of strength. This government has a proud record of school
reform. We have opened up the system, introducing
a real diversity of provision. We have schools where teachers and headteachers
are free to make the decisions that are best for them. And through successful policies such as a
renewed focus on learning the basics of reading in primary schools, and initiatives to help
young people pursue a strong academic core of subjects at secondary level, we are ensuring
that every child has the opportunity to develop the core knowledge that underpins everything
else. We have put control in the hands of parents
and headteachers, and encouraged people from all walks of life who are passionate about
education to bring their best ideas and innovations to our school system. The Academies and Free Schools movement overseen
by pioneers such as Andrew Adonis and Michael Gove has been a huge success and begun to
build an education system fit for the future. As a result, there are more good or outstanding
schools today than ever before in our country. And there are now more than 1.4 million more
pupils in schools rated good or outstanding than in 2010. Our curriculum reforms mean that the proportion
of pupils taking core academic subjects at GCSE is up by almost 4-fifths. We are driving up school standards to match
the best international comparisons, with a record number of pupils securing a place at
one of our world-class universities this summer. We can be proud of these achievements but
there is still a long way to go. Because for too many children, a good school
remains out of reach. There are still 1.25 million attending primary
and secondary schools in England which are rated by Ofsted as requiring improvement or
inadequate. If schools across the north and Midlands had
the same average standards as those in the south, nearly 200,000 more children would
be attending good schools. Let’s be honest about what these statistics
mean. They mean that for far too many children in
Britain, the chance they have in life is determined by where they live or how much money their
parents have. And they mean that for far too many ordinary
working class people, no matter how hard they work, how many hours they put in or how many
sacrifices they make, they cannot be confident that their children will get the chances they
deserve. For when you are working 2 jobs and struggling
to make ends meet, it is no good being told that you can choose a better school for your
children if you move to a different area or pay to go private. Those aren’t choices that you can make. And they are not choices that you should have
to make. So we need to go further, building on and
extending our reforms so that we can truly say that there will be a good school place
for every child, and one that caters to their individual needs. But as we do it, we also need to change our
philosophy and approach, because at the moment the school system works if you’re well off
and can buy your way into the school you want, and it provides extra help and support if
you’re from a disadvantaged family. If you’re eligible for free school meals,
and your parents earn less than £16,000 a year, then there is extra help on offer. That is good and right – and as long as
I am Prime Minister, the pupil premium for the poorest children will remain. But the free school meals measure only captures
a relatively small number of pupils, whose parents are on income-related benefits. If we are going to make the change we need
and build a great meritocracy in Britain, we need to broaden our perspective and do
more for the hidden disadvantaged: children whose parents are on modest incomes, who do
not qualify for such benefits but who are, nevertheless, still only just getting by. If you’re earning 19, 20, 21 thousand pounds
a year, you’re not rich. You’re not well off. And you should know you have our support too. At the moment there is no way to differentiate
between the school experience of children from these families and those from the wealthiest
10%. Policy has been skewed by the focus only on
those in receipt of free school meals, when the reality is that there are thousands of
children from ordinary working class families who are being let down by the lack of available
good school places. Putting this right means finding a way to
identify these children and measuring their attainment and progress within the school
system. That work is underway and is central to my
vision of a school system that truly works for everyone. But we must also deliver a radical increase
in the capacity of the school system so that these families can be sure of their children
getting good school places. And this is really important. Because I don’t just want to see more school
places but more good school places. And I don’t just want to see more new schools,
but more good new schools that each in their way contribute to a diversity of provision
that caters to the needs and abilities of each individual child, whoever they are and
wherever they are from. Every child should be given the opportunity
to develop the crucial academic core. And thanks to our reforms that is increasingly
the case. But people understand that every child is
different too, with different talents, different interests, different dreams. To help them realise their potential and achieve
those dreams we need a school system with the capacity and capability to respond to
what they need. School capacity
So as we radically expand the number of good school places available to all families – not
just those who can afford to buy an expensive house, pay for an expensive private school,
or fund the extra tuition their child needs to succeed – I want to encourage more people,
schools and institutions with something to offer to come forward and help. In the last 6 years, we have seen individuals
and communities put staggering amounts of time and effort into setting up good new schools. Some of the best state schools, charities,
universities, private schools, and businesses have stepped forward to get involved. And, increasingly, the best state schools
are sponsoring the least good. This has been a revolution in our schools
system. But with 1.25 million children still attending
schools that are struggling, we need to do much more to increase the capacity of the
system so every child can get the education they deserve. So let’s now build on the success of school
reform, let’s encourage others to play their part, and let’s remove the barriers they
face so we can do more. Let’s sweep away those barriers and encourage
more people to join us in the task of delivering a good school place for every child. Let’s build a truly dynamic school system
where schools and institutions learn from one another, support one another and help
one another. Let’s offer a diverse range of good schools
that ensure the individual talents and abilities of every child are catered for. That is my ambition. And there are 4 specific proposals I want
to talk about today that I believe will help. Universities
Firstly, I want to build on the success we have already experienced when some of our
great universities have stepped in to help by sponsoring or supporting a local school. Universities have a huge amount to offer England’s
schools. They have been part of the fabric of our education
system since the 13th century and have had a profound impact on our schools over generations. Recently we have seen The University of Cambridge
establish The University of Cambridge Primary School and The University of Birmingham open
an impressive new free school for secondary school pupils and sixth formers. The new specialist Sixth Form, King’s College
London Mathematics School, is already performing impressively and the University of Brighton
is involved in sponsoring more than a dozen different primary and secondary schools. These are the kinds of innovation I want to
encourage. This kind of active engagement in building
the capacity of our school system is in my view far more effective than spending huge
sums on bursaries and other financial support that tackle the symptoms but not the cause. The right for a university to charge the higher
level of tuition fee has always been dependent on their ability to fulfil specified access
requirements. And this year, in fulfilling these requirements,
they are expected to spend over £400 million on bursaries and other forms of financial
support for students. Yet the evidence is clear: it is the attainment
of pupils at school that is the over-riding factor in predicting access to university. I am not saying there is no place for bursaries. But overall, I do think the balance has tilted
too far. We need to go to the root of the problem,
which is that there are not enough students from disadvantaged backgrounds and from ordinary
families fulfilling their potential with the grades to get into the best universities. So I want our universities to do more to help
us to improve the quality of schools so that more students of all backgrounds have the
grades, the subjects, and the confidence, to apply to top universities and to be successful
in their exams in the first place. So the government will reform university fair
access requirements and say that universities should actively strengthen state school attainment
– by sponsoring a state school or setting up a new free school. And over time we will extend this to the sponsorship
or establishment of more than one school, so that in the future we see our universities
sponsoring thriving school chains in every town and city in the country. Faith schools
Second, I want to remove the obstacles that stop more good faith schools from opening. Britain has a long history of faith schools
delivering outstanding education. They already account for around a third of
all mainstream schools in England. They are popular with parents and significantly
more likely than other schools to be rated by Ofsted as good or outstanding. I believe we should confidently promote them
and the role they play in a diverse school system. Yet for Catholic schools in particular there
are barriers in their way. When a faith-designated free school is oversubscribed,
it must limit the number of pupils it selects on the basis of faith to 50%. The intention is to improve the diversity
of the school’s intake but in practice it has little impact on many Jewish, Muslim,
Sikh and Hindu schools because they tend not to appeal to parents of other faiths. So despite the best intentions, the rule is
failing in its objective to promote integration. But it does prevent new Catholic schools opening,
because the Catholic Church believes it contravenes its own rules for a Catholic bishop not to
prioritise the admission of Catholic pupils. This is especially frustrating because existing
Catholic schools are more ethnically diverse than other faith schools, more likely to be
located in deprived communities, more likely to be rated good or outstanding by Ofsted,
and there is growing demand for them. So we will remove this 50% rule to allow the
growth in capacity that Catholic schools can offer. Instead we will consult on a new set of much
more effective requirements to ensure that faith schools are properly inclusive and make
sure their pupils mix with children of other faiths and backgrounds. Of course, there must be strict and properly
enforced rules to ensure that every new faith school operates in a way that supports British
values. And we should explore new ways of using the
school system to promote greater integration within our society generally. We will encourage the grouping together of
mono-racial and mono-religious schools within wider multi-racial and multi-religious trusts. This will make it easier for children from
different backgrounds in more divided communities to mix between schools, while respecting religious
differences. We will explore ways in which schools can
enter into twinning arrangements with other schools not of their faith, through sharing
lessons or joint extra-curricular activities to bring young people from different schools
together. And we will consult on the idea of placing
an independent member or director who is of a different faith or no faith at all on the
governing body of new faith schools. We will also explore new requirements for
new faith schools to prove that parents of other faiths would be happy to send their
children to the school through a proper process of consultation. But fundamentally I believe it is wrong to
deny families the opportunity to send their children to a school that reflects their religious
values if that’s what they choose. And it’s right to encourage faith communities
– especially those with a proven record of success, like the Catholics – to play
their full part in building the capacity of our schools. Independent schools
Third, I want to encourage some of our biggest independent schools to bring their knowledge,
expertise and resources to bear to help improve the quality and capacity of schools for those
who cannot afford to pay. This is entirely in keeping with the ethos
that lies at the heart of many of these institutions. Most of the major public schools started out
as the route by which poor boys could reach the professions. The nature of their intake may have changed
today – indeed these schools have become more and more divorced from normal life. Between 2010 and 2015 their fees rose 4 times
faster than average earnings growth, while the percentage of their pupils who come from
overseas has gone up by 33% since 2008. But I know that their commitment to giving
something back to the wider community remains. These are great schools with a lot to offer
and I certainly don’t believe you solve the divide between the rich and the rest by
abolishing or demolishing them. You do it by extending their reach and asking
them to do more as a condition of their privileged position to help all children. Through their charitable status, private schools
collectively reduce their tax bills by millions every year. And I want to consult on how we can amend
Charity Commission guidance for independent schools to enact a tougher test on the amount
of public benefit required to maintain charitable status. It’s important to state that this will be
proportionate to the size and scale of the school in question. Not every school is an Eton or a Harrow. Many public schools are nowhere near that
size. Smaller independent schools who do not have
the capacity to take on full sponsorship of a local state school will be asked to provide
more limited help such as direct school-to-school support where appropriate. This could include supporting teaching in
minority subjects such as further maths or classics, which state schools often struggle
to make viable. It could include ensuring their senior leaders
become directors of multi-academy trusts; providing greater access to their facilities
and providing sixth-form scholarships to a proportion of pupils in year 11 at each local
school. But for those with the capacity and capability,
we will ask them to go further and actually sponsor or set up a new government-funded
school in the state sector and take responsibility for running it and ensuring its success. Alternatively, we will ask them to fund a
number of places at their own school themselves for those from modest backgrounds who cannot
afford to pay the fees. We know this can work. For example, Westminster School is the key
partner in sponsoring Harris Westminster Sixth Form, where students at the free school share
the facilities and teaching expertise of Westminster School. In my own constituency, Eton College sponsors
Holyport College, offering Holyport pupils access to its sports facilities and the chance
to join its educational activities. And before it became a state-funded academy,
Belvedere School in Liverpool worked with the Sutton Trust to create an Open Access
Scheme where places were awarded purely on the basis of academic merit, and parents were
then asked to pay on a sliding scale of fees fairly tailored according to their means. I want all independent schools with the appropriate
capacity and capability to take these kinds of steps. I want them to play a major role in creating
more good school places for children from ordinary working families; because this government
is about a Britain that works for everyone – not just a privileged few. Selective schools
There is one final area where we have placed obstacles in the way of good new schools – obstacles
that I believe we need to take away. The debate over selective schools has raged
for years. But the only place it has got us to is a place
where selection exists if you’re wealthy – if you can afford to go private – but
doesn’t exist if you’re not. We are effectively saying to poorer and some
of the most disadvantaged children in our country that they can’t have the kind of
education their richer counterparts can enjoy. What is ‘just’ about that? Where is the meritocracy in a system that
advantages the privileged few over the many? How can a meritocratic Britain let this situation
stand? Politicians – many of whom benefited from
the very kind of education they now seek to deny to others – have for years put their
own dogma and ideology before the interests and concerns of ordinary people. For we know that grammar schools are hugely
popular with parents. We know they are good for the pupils that
attend them. Indeed, the attainment gap between rich and
poor pupils is reduced to almost zero for children in selective schools. And we know that they want to expand. They provide a stretching education for the
most academically able, regardless of their background, and they deliver outstanding results. In fact, 99% of existing selective schools
are rated good or outstanding – and 80% are outstanding, compared with just 20% of
state schools overall. So we help no one – not least those who
can’t afford to move house or pay for a private education – by saying to parents
who want a selective education for their child that we won’t let them have it. There is nothing meritocratic about standing
in the way of giving our most academically gifted children the specialist and tailored
support that can enable them to fulfil their potential. In a true meritocracy, we should not be apologetic
about stretching the most academically able to the very highest standards of excellence. We already have selection to help achieve
this in specialist disciplines like music and sport, giving exceptionally talented young
people access to the facilities and training that can help them become world class. I think we should have more of this. But we should also take the same approach
to support the most academically gifted too. Frankly, it is completely illogical to make
it illegal to open good new schools. So I want to relax the restrictions that stop
selective schools from expanding, that deny parents the right to have a new selective
school opened where they want one, and that stop existing non-selective schools to become
selective in the right circumstances and where there is demand. In return, we will ensure that these schools
contribute meaningfully to raising outcomes for all pupils in every part of the system. In practice this could mean taking a proportion
of pupils from lower income households, so that selective education is not reserved for
those with the means to move into a catchment area or pay for tuition to pass the test. They could, as a condition of opening a new
selective school, be asked to establish a good, new non-selective school. Others may be asked to establish a primary
feeder school in an area with a high density of lower income households to widen access. They might even partner with an existing non-selective
school within a multi-academy trust or sponsor a currently underperforming non-selective
academy. But the principle is clear: selective schools
have a part to play in helping to expand the capacity of our school system and they have
the ability to cater to the individual needs of every child. So the government will make up to £50 million
a year available to support the expansion of good or outstanding existing grammars. Now I know this will be the source of much
debate in the consultation over the coming months, so I want to address very directly
some of the key arguments made by those who oppose the expansion of grammar schools. First, there are those who fear this could
lead to the return of a binary system, as we had in the past with secondary moderns. But this fear is unfounded: there will be
no return to secondary moderns. As I have set out today, far from a binary
system we are supporting the most diverse school system we have ever had in our country. From free schools sponsored by universities
and independent schools, to faith schools and selective schools, the diversity of high
quality school provision means we will be able to cater properly for the different needs
of all pupils and give parents real control over the kind of school they want for their
children. We do not want to see whole new parts of the
country where the choice of schools is binary. So we will use the approvals process to prevent
that from happening. Second, there are those who argue that selective
schools tend to recruit children from more affluent backgrounds. The problem here is not selective schools
per se but rather the way that wealthier families can already dominate access to the schools
of their choice through selection by house price. I want to stop that and new grammars can help. We are going to ask new grammars to demonstrate
that they will attract pupils from different backgrounds, for example as I said, by taking
a proportion of children from lower income households. And existing grammars will be expected to
do more too – by working with local primary schools to help children from more disadvantaged
backgrounds to apply. Third, there are those who argue that grammars
don’t actually select on ability because wealthy families can pay tutors to help their
children get through the tests. This might have been the case in the past
with the old 11-plus. But it does not have to be the case today. While there is no such thing as a tutor-proof
test, many selective schools are already employing much smarter tests that assess the true potential
of every child. So new grammars will be able to select in
a fair and meritocratic way, not on the ability of parents to pay. Fourth, there are those who worry about the
cliff-edge of selection at 11. Some fear it is too early, some fear it is
too late. The truth is that it doesn’t have to be
a cliff-edge at all. This is back in the old mindset of the grammar
schools of the past. A modern, meritocratic education system needs
to be much more flexible and agile to respond to the needs of every child. So we will demand that new grammars make the
most of their freedom to be flexible over how students move between schools, encouraging
this to happen at different ages such as 14 and 16 as well as 11. This means that children who are at a non-selective
school sponsored by a grammar might join the grammar for specific subjects or specialisms
where they themselves are outstanding – or they might move to the grammar full-time later
than aged 11, based on their performance at their current school. Finally, people get lost in the argument about
whether the grammars schools of the 1950s and 60s improved social mobility or not. But I want to focus on the new grammars of
the future: those that will be just one element of a truly diverse system which taken as a
whole can give every child the support they need to go as far as their talents can take
them. And give every parent access to a good school
place for their child. This is the true test of schools that work
for everyone. And the true test of a meritocratic society. The great meritocracy
There has been a lot of speculation in the last few weeks, but as you now know this is
not a proposal to go back to a binary model of grammars and secondary moderns but to build
on our increasingly diverse schools system. It is not a proposal to go back to the 1950s
but to look to the future, and that future I believe is an exciting one. It is a future in which every child should
have access to a good school place. And a future in which Britain’s education
system shifts decisively to support ordinary working class families. These families are not asking for the world. They just want to know that their children
and grandchildren will enjoy the opportunities they have enjoyed and be given the chance
to go as far as their talents will take them. Unhindered by background or circumstance. And by the artificial barriers some want to
put in their way. In a country that works for everyone it doesn’t
matter where you were born, or how much your parents earn. If you work hard and do the right thing, you
will be able to go as far as you can. I want this country to be a great meritocracy. I want to see more houses built, better productivity
so we can have more well-paid jobs, more economic growth not just in the south-east of England
but across the whole country to help more people get on. But more than anything else, I want to see
children from ordinary, working class families given the chances their richer contemporaries
take for granted. That means we need more great schools. This is the plan to deliver them and to set
Britain on the path to being the great meritocracy of the world.

100 thoughts on “LEARN ENGLISH | THERESA MAY: Britain, the Great Meritocracy (English Subtitles)”

  1. ❤️ You can download our FREE English eBooks, the full TRANSCRIPT, and the AUDIO of this speech on our website:
    Always FREE ❤️Thanks!

  2. Theresa May, may I asked if England really oppt out of European Nation, what is the worst sanerio English people that can accept for their economy n initially what is the cause of English people wanted Brexit, it's no kidding matter.

  3. One thing is what she says in her speech; another very different thing is how she voted in parliament. Enjoy her accent but don't be deceived by her words:

    How Theresa May voted on Welfare and Benefits

    Generally voted for reducing housing benefit for social tenants deemed to have excess bedrooms (which Labour describe as the "bedroom tax")

    10 votes for, 0 votes against, 8 absences, between 2012–2018

    Consistently voted against raising welfare benefits at least in line with prices

    0 votes for, 5 votes against, in 2013

    Generally voted against paying higher benefits over longer periods for those unable to work due to illness or disability

    0 votes for, 8 votes against, 7 absences, between 2015–2016

    Generally voted for making local councils responsible for helping those in financial need afford their council tax and reducing the amount spent on such support

    2 votes for, 0 votes against, 2 absences, in 2012

    Generally voted for a reduction in spending on welfare benefits

    36 votes for, 0 votes against, 18 absences, between 2012–2016

    Generally voted against spending public money to create guaranteed jobs for young people who have spent a long time unemployed

    0 votes for, 3 votes against, 6 absences, between 2011–2014


  4. Yes,Excellent,excellent and excellent speech,the greatest Great Britain
    Prime Minister===Theresa May,each words,each tone and each rhythm are
    all gorgeous,fascinating,fantastic to touch down,inspire and aspire
    audience inner mind,inner heart and inner soul,no wonder English is the
    greatest charming,elegant and beautiful language in the world with
    highly advance civilization.God save the Queen,God save the Queen,God
    save the Queen ,the most outstanding,gorgeous and high-class national
    songs int the world.Salute,salute and salute to Royal Families all the
    time.Similarly,national song such as States,Canada,Australia,New Zealand
    have all inheritance of English so unique tone,pitch and rhythm at
    all.Cheers to all.Don/t give up ,when it is going get tough,tough get going.EU,definitely
    give a excellent ,excellent and excellent deal to Great Britain and
    Royal Families at all.Tell the world,up to 21 century,globally no matter
    what nation,what languages and what kinds of engineering still using
    Newton===gravity,energy,and calculus theories to calculate all kinds of
    mathematics in civil engineering,architecture and inter-design subjects
    at all.The musics,songs and orchestra produced last century still
    touching down,inspiring and aspiring audience globally at all.Cheers to
    all.Salute ,salute and salute to Great Britain Prime Minister===Theresa
    May ,Queen Elizabeth 2,Royal families at all.

  5. Mother and motherland are greater than heaven itself, I have read this one of 📚 books, gardens of life………. Huaaaaaaaa maaaaaaaaa maaaaaaaaa माँ Ⓜ️ maaaa

  6. Hello, I'm starting to learn to listen English, I hope this videos help me to get improve my English. Thanks for recording and up this videos!!!!

  7. O som soa muito bem! Amei o vídeo e esse sotaque é lindo! Quero adotar pra mim agora que estou aprendendo inglês

  8. Thanks, i started to learn English today, and i decide to choose British Accent…. > American Accent

  9. Excellent politic speech. The text is very good as a support for english learning endeed.

  10. in my country we learn RP accent but it sad that the accent is only used by 2 percent of British population

  11. Brexit never I am spanish but I believe London don't want the Brexit I know its radical but its is the right decisión

  12. Wow,Great quality PM Theresa May's great meritocratic education plan in Britain.Every countries should advanced this type of plan.I request please,don't rough bias to win to another to do advanced Theresa May's plan.A great thank for May.Instead of BD school is not good qualities in structure and not enough of teacher monthly pay in world classes.BD prime minister hard try to good quality education implement in Bangladesh but his need great budgets for it.If education is the back bone of the world of good life and enjoy so every development countries should help primary level education every countries around the world especially more need Bangladesh in the meantime is running but it is not enough budgets for Bangladesh hence this type of money expend only for enjoy or deferent type fighting materials in developed countries.A great countries should help little bit for developing countries for world human being.

  13. It is so funny to hear from so stupid lady her personal vision on the meritocracy matter! Basing on her real actions in international affairs in politics gives us a clear prompt that her education is on a very low level.
    The problem for UK in the situation is that there is no any more or less appropriate person in UK to replace the lady in her position!

  14. Clear idea 💡 clear language and high education thanks for this video so that great lesson for someone and for all

  15. Theresa May"s concept on 'Britain to be the world"s great meritocratic country', I support. She insisted to develop the Educational system, specially the schools to the best. Her voice is so clear is good for the English learner as I am. We are pleased with this Subtitles, presented to us with the oratory of a former great Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.

  16. I have dream to visit a country that works for everyone as well as Theresa May before my political maturity to get piece of advice from her in addition to what I follow via YouTube. Still hope for country than PM. Gobena, Bule Hora.

  17. Hi I really practice with these kind of videos but I think there is a mistake in the minute 7:53 she said needs and abilities of every PUPIL and not every PEOPLE,there are some others mistakes related to this one but anyway good video

  18. This is a very poweful website to present all the speeches lovers who can learn truly a lot and be inspired by those who have made great contriutions to the country, to the education, to the science, to the world as well as to the whole human world. It is good and worthwhile. Thank you!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *