IT might be a West of Scotland thing, but the word "apprenticeship" tends to conjure up the image of a shipyard at the height of our industrial prowess.

In this context, the word has positive connotations. It evokes the image of young people learning a trade.

The pay might be relatively low during the period of training but this will all be worth it in the end, with the apprentice turning into an experienced and skilled worker who can earn a good living from what, particularly given the de-industrialisation suffered by Scotland during the Thatcher era, are viewed as "real jobs".

While this image may be the first to spring to mind, apprenticeships can present good opportunities across a range of trades and professions.

In Charles Dickens's "A Christmas Carol", a young and at that stage pleasant Ebenezer Scrooge is apprenticed to textile factory owner Mr Fezziwig in what is portrayed, in this fictional but well-grounded tale, as a good opportunity with a kind-hearted and astute businessman. Mr Scrooge, in this role, looks after the ledgers.

While it has to be acknowledged that there are at times certainly shades of the Victorian era in Conservative Party policy, these often appear to be the worst aspects of these bygone days. And the way in which Prime Minister David Cameron used the word "apprenticeships" in his speech this week on welfare was anything but positive.

Mr Cameron declared: "Access to Jobseekers' Allowance for 18 to 21-year-olds will be abolished and replaced by a Youth Allowance, time-limited to six months, after which you will have to take an apprenticeship or do daily community work for those benefits."

He went on to talk about using the consequent savings on welfare spending to help fund three million more apprenticeships.

It is worth examining the Prime Minister's combative and challenging language in detail here - especially the "you will have to take an apprenticeship" part.

He is being pretty clear here. This is not a matter of choice. Whether or not those young people who have not had the good fortune to find a job through other efforts like it or not, they will be forced to take an apprenticeship or do community work.

There are big problems with this aggressive and ill-conceived approach.

It is worth noting that the tens of thousands of youngsters in the UK who, we are told, will have to take an apprenticeship or do community work in return for benefits if Mr Cameron's party wins this year's election will be doing work that you might imagine would, in normal circumstances, provide a living for other people.

Some in the Coalition Government have, lamentably, not appeared unhappy about the ridiculous and scandalous portrayal of welfare claimants, in some parts of the media, as lazy scroungers.

This is a great pity because these politicians should have enough life experience to know that the sensationalist stories about a few extreme cases of abuses of the welfare system do not tell us anything about the lives and aspirations of the vast bulk of people who find themselves having to claim benefits. The politicians should educate themselves in this regard.

The fact is that youth unemployment is a big problem in the UK. The problem has been exacerbated by the Coalition Government's poor economic track record. The Coalition has not delivered what it promised. And some of the architects of its economic policies, in light of this poor showing, would be lucky to scrape a D-Minus rating if they were being assessed.

It is not that young people without jobs are lazy, or do not have the talents to find their own way into the workforce. It is just that the opportunities are lacking.

These people should have the choice of which path they wish to take, not be pushed down certain routes just because what is being proposed might be viewed as a vote-winner by Mr Cameron and his Conservative Party colleagues.

However, there is another important point here.

Much work has been done in recent years on reviving apprenticeships. And these have, in many although far from all cases, provided good opportunities for those who have taken them up.

In this regard, there is a twofold problem with Mr Cameron's approach.

The first aspect is that apprenticeships will work if they are taken up by those who wish to follow this route. They are unlikely to work for people who are forced down this path against their will.

The second issue is that Mr Cameron's approach could devalue apprenticeships. The term "apprenticeships" should not be moulded to cover a whole load of types of poorly-paid roles which will not give those who take them up, or are forced into them, any significant useful experience they can use to make a decent living once they come to an end. There appears a huge danger of the whole nature of apprenticeships changing as a result of the Conservatives' draconian proposals.

Apprenticeships can be very valuable to young people, companies, and the economy as a whole.

However, they must offer a true opportunity for people to gain valuable skills. They must not be used as a means for companies to secure cheap, convenient labour, whether in the form of willing or reluctant "apprentices".

Keith Anderson, chief corporate officer of electricity and gas company ScottishPower, has this week highlighted looming skills shortages for the utility sector as thousands of older workers retire.

In particular, he has flagged a need to attract many more young people into engineering.

As Glasgow Chamber of Commerce chief executive Stuart Patrick has pointed out, there is a need to recruit people into the engineering profession at various levels, not just into graduate schemes but into apprenticeships and also at technician level.

Apprenticeships are an ideal means to train up thousands of the new engineers we will need. Such openings would benefit both youngsters and companies, and also the Scottish and wider UK economy, over coming decades.

These are real apprenticeships. It would make a mockery of the term "apprenticeship" if it were applied to very poorly-paid work offering no real prospects, into which people who have not had the good fortune in life to find employment might be forced under a future Conservative government.