With voting imminent it still looks to be a straight fight between the Milibands. My guess is Burnham and Balls will urge supporters to go for David over Ed. No matter what Diane Abbott says I think most of her supporters will go for Ed Milband over David.
I have thought Ed would win from the start but I am less sure now. If everyone voting was absolutely clear that David Milband was the Blairite candidate I think his chances would be reduced. But many voting are less than clear what they are voting for. I have heard a Labour party member lay into 'New Labour' about as harshly as one could and then said he would vote for Burnham because he heard him use the word 'socialism'. If Ed Miliband is to win I think the efforts of the big unions who are supporting him will be crucial. If they get the message over that if you want to move the party on whether one sees themselves as Right or Left then a vote for the younger Miliband makes sense. Hopefully, this will nullify the efforts of Cruddas, the Daily Mirror, the high priests of new Labour and the money David Miliband has behind him.
I don't think David Miliband would be a disaster. I think he could well be a decent leader, but my fear is he would be too keen to privatise the public services and carry on some of the reforms that Labour should not have introduced in government such as Academies.
Monday, 30 August 2010
Sunday, 22 August 2010
Australian General Election Results
So the results are coming in. Not the greatest result for the ALP. Going to be a very close result in terms of seats and a hung parliament. The internet is a great development for following such events, I spent a few hours yesterday following the ABC's election night coverage which I was greatly interested in. Their coverage is much less 'showy' than in Britain today.
The five likely (ish?) members of the lower house who are not from the two main parties. The Green in Melbourne (their Brighton Pavilion?), the Independent in Denison (the most uncertain about their fate at the time of writing), Tasmania and the three rural independents will obviously be vitally important.
The workings are the AV system should be of real interest to those in the UK who are deciding whether to support the change to the electoral system in the UK. The seat of Denison appears to be a very interesting one to examine where the Independent finishing second might well be better for the Coalition than securing second themselves as they have instructed supporters to give their second preferences to the Independent candidate. I think such a case amply displays why STV is preferable to AV.
Anyway I will be closely following what transpires over the next couple of days.
The five likely (ish?) members of the lower house who are not from the two main parties. The Green in Melbourne (their Brighton Pavilion?), the Independent in Denison (the most uncertain about their fate at the time of writing), Tasmania and the three rural independents will obviously be vitally important.
The workings are the AV system should be of real interest to those in the UK who are deciding whether to support the change to the electoral system in the UK. The seat of Denison appears to be a very interesting one to examine where the Independent finishing second might well be better for the Coalition than securing second themselves as they have instructed supporters to give their second preferences to the Independent candidate. I think such a case amply displays why STV is preferable to AV.
Anyway I will be closely following what transpires over the next couple of days.
Wednesday, 18 August 2010
Australian General Election
Still hoping for an ALP victory.
Been really interesting to follow the last Australian Parliament more closely than I've probably ever followed any other country's political fortunes.
Not so long ago it seemed an ALP landslide was on the cards. Abbott was widely portrayed as someone who would not have a chance as the Liberal Leader but he has done better than most would have expected.
From this distance it is hard to be sure what will happen (I was pretty accurate with regards to the last British election). I expect the ALP to win and Julia Gillard to continue as PM. My one fear (discounting any last minute surprises) is that the swing in marginal seats in New South Wales and Queensland could favour the Coalition parties more than the overall national swing. Polling evidence has suggested that might be the case.
Some problems aside (e.g. problems with home insulation, Rudd's perceived arrogance) I think the ALP do deserve to win not least for avoiding a recession, but I will be very interested to see exactly what does happen.
Been really interesting to follow the last Australian Parliament more closely than I've probably ever followed any other country's political fortunes.
Not so long ago it seemed an ALP landslide was on the cards. Abbott was widely portrayed as someone who would not have a chance as the Liberal Leader but he has done better than most would have expected.
From this distance it is hard to be sure what will happen (I was pretty accurate with regards to the last British election). I expect the ALP to win and Julia Gillard to continue as PM. My one fear (discounting any last minute surprises) is that the swing in marginal seats in New South Wales and Queensland could favour the Coalition parties more than the overall national swing. Polling evidence has suggested that might be the case.
Some problems aside (e.g. problems with home insulation, Rudd's perceived arrogance) I think the ALP do deserve to win not least for avoiding a recession, but I will be very interested to see exactly what does happen.
New Labour figures helping the Tories
How many more Blairites are going to be found helping out the Coalition. I would be interested to know who they would be voting for (in order) in the Labour Leadership election.
Saturday, 17 July 2010
Hoping for a Labor Victory
Australian Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, has called a snap general election for 21 August. For all the ALP's faults I wouldn't want to be Australian if the Liberal Party gets back in. Looking forward to reading about, watching and especially listening to what is going on the other side of the world.
Friday, 16 July 2010
How Things Change...
Imagine the scene thirty years ago.....
Someone comes up to you and says that in 2010 a Labour leadership candidate would have the support of Tony Benn and Roy Hattersley. Who would have believed it?
Someone comes up to you and says that in 2010 a Labour leadership candidate would have the support of Tony Benn and Roy Hattersley. Who would have believed it?
Monday, 21 June 2010
Contact Your MP
We all need to be clear that state comprehensive education in Britian is under attack as never before.
Contact your MP to sign up to EDM 135 - See details below
That this House notes with serious concern and rejects the Secretary of State for Education's proposals to expand the number of academies by conferring on all school governing bodies the right for their school to become an academy without proper consultation with parents, school staff or the local authority; notes the Secretary of State for Education's recent invitation to all schools deemed outstanding to become academies; and believes these plans will result in further disadvantage to already disadvantaged children and families, and raise fundamental issues such as loss of local democratic accountability, excessive cost, lack of fairness and administrative confusion.
http://www.edms.org.uk/edms/2010-2011/135.htm
Contact your MP to sign up to EDM 135 - See details below
That this House notes with serious concern and rejects the Secretary of State for Education's proposals to expand the number of academies by conferring on all school governing bodies the right for their school to become an academy without proper consultation with parents, school staff or the local authority; notes the Secretary of State for Education's recent invitation to all schools deemed outstanding to become academies; and believes these plans will result in further disadvantage to already disadvantaged children and families, and raise fundamental issues such as loss of local democratic accountability, excessive cost, lack of fairness and administrative confusion.
http://www.edms.org.uk/edms/2010-2011/135.htm
Sunday, 20 June 2010
'Collaborators?'
John Prescott has referred to three prominent Labour figures (John Hutton, Frank Field and Kate Hoey) as 'collaborators' for working with the Conservatives. I could not agree more. For a long time I have failed to see how those three are in any meaningful way 'Labour'. The best thing Labour could do is chuck them out of the Party with immediate effect.
Thursday, 17 June 2010
Compass Conference Part II
The Conference ended with keynote addresses by Pam Giddy, Jon Cruddas and Chuka Umunna. The latter's was the pick of the three and it would not surprise me if he was on the Labour frontbench within the next few years. Cruddas' speech was decent, but the couple of times I have heard him speak the content has certainly been better than the rather workmanlike delivery. It seems a little churlish to say this but the standing ovation from some quarters seemed a bit over the top, though generally I don't like standing ovations - they seem rather infantile to me.
However, before these final addresses we had the five leadership candidates taking questions. I think there were about five questions which included one from Billy Bragg and one from Fiona Millar. I thought it was a bit of a shame that two of the questions were asked by such well known figures.
I certainly did not think any candidate was head and shoulders above the rest. I would have liked one to come out in support of PR, but not surprisingly that was not to be. So what did I think of each of them? I thought all had something to commend them. I will comment on them in the order they were sat.
David Miliband came over as someone who could certainly be leader. He was, for want of a better term, statesmanlike, intelligent and his answers were considered. He certainly was not afraid of being rather 'highbrow' and unapologetic about Labour's record in government. I can certainly see why many will back him. If I was still hankering after Blair I would probably support him. But if the party is to decisively move away from the Blair / Brown years I don't think he is the man to do so.
Ed Miliband's responses were rather 'safe' I thought and he looked more ill at ease than I expected. My guess is he would neither have gained nor lost much support with his answers.
Ed Balls came over as a fairly smart political operator and he was scouring the audience like a headteacher trying to identify a miscreant in a school assembly. He seems to be modelling himself as almost a latter day Callaghan trying to appeal to the centre of the party. Even though I don't rate his record in his last ministerial post I felt he came over very well when he dealt with the question on education.
Andy Burnham spent much of the session playing up his 'ordinary' roots. This is not a stupid policy, but it can become a little repetitive. I felt he warmed up throughout the session and fared quite well. His unapologetic defense of comprehensive education was perhaps the highpoint of the whole hustings and one did feel that he was totally sincere about that. One also felt he understood the issues better than Ed Miliband for example.
Diane Abbott was clearly a favourite for much of the audience. I felt she was competent, but probably did not make the most of the advantages she had. As with Ed Miliband I felt she probably neither gained nor lost support.
All in all a bit of a score draw. Competence rather than excitement seemed to abound. I think an interesting issue will be exactly how Burnham positions himself - how 'Right Wing' would he be? I think the latter preferences of the electorate could well prove to be crucial. I think it is all still to play for.
One interesting element of the Conference was to see how many of the speakers and Leadership candidates throughout the day appeared to like the old Grecian 2000. There were so many people on platforms who were a fair bit older than me but with barely a grey hair in sight. I suppose one has to praise Balls for going rather easier on the hair dye than so many at the London Institute of Education.
However, before these final addresses we had the five leadership candidates taking questions. I think there were about five questions which included one from Billy Bragg and one from Fiona Millar. I thought it was a bit of a shame that two of the questions were asked by such well known figures.
I certainly did not think any candidate was head and shoulders above the rest. I would have liked one to come out in support of PR, but not surprisingly that was not to be. So what did I think of each of them? I thought all had something to commend them. I will comment on them in the order they were sat.
David Miliband came over as someone who could certainly be leader. He was, for want of a better term, statesmanlike, intelligent and his answers were considered. He certainly was not afraid of being rather 'highbrow' and unapologetic about Labour's record in government. I can certainly see why many will back him. If I was still hankering after Blair I would probably support him. But if the party is to decisively move away from the Blair / Brown years I don't think he is the man to do so.
Ed Miliband's responses were rather 'safe' I thought and he looked more ill at ease than I expected. My guess is he would neither have gained nor lost much support with his answers.
Ed Balls came over as a fairly smart political operator and he was scouring the audience like a headteacher trying to identify a miscreant in a school assembly. He seems to be modelling himself as almost a latter day Callaghan trying to appeal to the centre of the party. Even though I don't rate his record in his last ministerial post I felt he came over very well when he dealt with the question on education.
Andy Burnham spent much of the session playing up his 'ordinary' roots. This is not a stupid policy, but it can become a little repetitive. I felt he warmed up throughout the session and fared quite well. His unapologetic defense of comprehensive education was perhaps the highpoint of the whole hustings and one did feel that he was totally sincere about that. One also felt he understood the issues better than Ed Miliband for example.
Diane Abbott was clearly a favourite for much of the audience. I felt she was competent, but probably did not make the most of the advantages she had. As with Ed Miliband I felt she probably neither gained nor lost support.
All in all a bit of a score draw. Competence rather than excitement seemed to abound. I think an interesting issue will be exactly how Burnham positions himself - how 'Right Wing' would he be? I think the latter preferences of the electorate could well prove to be crucial. I think it is all still to play for.
One interesting element of the Conference was to see how many of the speakers and Leadership candidates throughout the day appeared to like the old Grecian 2000. There were so many people on platforms who were a fair bit older than me but with barely a grey hair in sight. I suppose one has to praise Balls for going rather easier on the hair dye than so many at the London Institute of Education.
Saturday, 12 June 2010
Compass Conference 2010 Part I
Went to the Compass Conference today and enjoyed it. Where else can you walk into the toilets to come face to face with Andy Burnham, then turn the corner to see a sheepish looking Ed Miliband?
Here goes with a review of the day as it occurs to me after enduring England's performance against USA. The one thing that I will remember about watching the match was my father's cry of 'GREEN' after their goal went in.
The Conference kicked off with four keynotes addresses. I think two would probably do. Caroline Lucas, the Green Leader and MP kicked off. Some Labour members tend to be rather critical that Compass invite such non-Labour figures to their events. My verdict is that she speaks very well and got a very good reception. I couldn't help thinking that as a candidate in a Labour leadership election she would probably not do that badly. Nick Dearden, from the Jubilee Debt Campaign then spoke and also went down well with his criticism of the treatment of the debts of LEDCs. Next up was Christine Blower of the NUT. Her style was not as fluent as the earlier two, but she does veer between making very good, apt and popular points and a partially faltering delivery. NUT Deputy General Secretary, Kevin Courtney, was warmly applauding her efforts at the end and Blower's speech again went down well. Neal Lawson's address was not the highpoint of the day. For me, he doesn't quite hit the mark. His repeated tree metaphor became very tedious.
Next I attended a seminar run by CND entitled 'After New Labour's Interventionism: towards a progressive foreign policy'. The session included contributions by Seamus Milne of The Guardian and Eric Joyce MP. The session was thought provoking and worth attending. Essentially, there was considerable agreement that Labour's foreign policy going forward needed to be rather different to that of the last thirteen years.
After lunch, I was struggling to decide which seminar to attend. Eventually I plumped for one run by the New Statesman entitled 'Will the new coalition ConDem Labour to another 18 years in opposition, or will it breakdown in 18 months?'. The two speakers were Mehdi Hassan and John Harris, both of whom were excellent and a lively debate ensued. This session was a definite highpoint of the day with numerous interesting contributions from delegates.
Part II to follow.....
Here goes with a review of the day as it occurs to me after enduring England's performance against USA. The one thing that I will remember about watching the match was my father's cry of 'GREEN' after their goal went in.
The Conference kicked off with four keynotes addresses. I think two would probably do. Caroline Lucas, the Green Leader and MP kicked off. Some Labour members tend to be rather critical that Compass invite such non-Labour figures to their events. My verdict is that she speaks very well and got a very good reception. I couldn't help thinking that as a candidate in a Labour leadership election she would probably not do that badly. Nick Dearden, from the Jubilee Debt Campaign then spoke and also went down well with his criticism of the treatment of the debts of LEDCs. Next up was Christine Blower of the NUT. Her style was not as fluent as the earlier two, but she does veer between making very good, apt and popular points and a partially faltering delivery. NUT Deputy General Secretary, Kevin Courtney, was warmly applauding her efforts at the end and Blower's speech again went down well. Neal Lawson's address was not the highpoint of the day. For me, he doesn't quite hit the mark. His repeated tree metaphor became very tedious.
Next I attended a seminar run by CND entitled 'After New Labour's Interventionism: towards a progressive foreign policy'. The session included contributions by Seamus Milne of The Guardian and Eric Joyce MP. The session was thought provoking and worth attending. Essentially, there was considerable agreement that Labour's foreign policy going forward needed to be rather different to that of the last thirteen years.
After lunch, I was struggling to decide which seminar to attend. Eventually I plumped for one run by the New Statesman entitled 'Will the new coalition ConDem Labour to another 18 years in opposition, or will it breakdown in 18 months?'. The two speakers were Mehdi Hassan and John Harris, both of whom were excellent and a lively debate ensued. This session was a definite highpoint of the day with numerous interesting contributions from delegates.
Part II to follow.....
Thursday, 10 June 2010
Supporting Ed Miliband
http://edmiliband.org/
Not overly delighted with the five candidates and I would prefer one to be firmly pro-PR. However, given the choice I will vote and campaign for Ed Miliband.
Abbott would be our IDS. As a party not a pressure group we have to try to win power, that would not happen under Diane. David Miliband is too firmly associated with the Blairites - look at his nominations. Can't see the point of going for Andy Burnham - may as well go for Miliband senior. Balls would be unelectable as well and he is unpopular among the general public. I am not greatly impressed by his stint at Education - I am far from convinced that he mastered his brief.
So partially by default I am backing Ed. Miliband. His approach is most likely to appeal to a variety of opinions in the party. He is the most media friendly and the best orator (though some may see Burnham as quite strong in this area). I also think he is the most likely to ensure Labour is what it needs to be: an electable, modern party committed to a fairer Britain.
Not overly delighted with the five candidates and I would prefer one to be firmly pro-PR. However, given the choice I will vote and campaign for Ed Miliband.
Abbott would be our IDS. As a party not a pressure group we have to try to win power, that would not happen under Diane. David Miliband is too firmly associated with the Blairites - look at his nominations. Can't see the point of going for Andy Burnham - may as well go for Miliband senior. Balls would be unelectable as well and he is unpopular among the general public. I am not greatly impressed by his stint at Education - I am far from convinced that he mastered his brief.
So partially by default I am backing Ed. Miliband. His approach is most likely to appeal to a variety of opinions in the party. He is the most media friendly and the best orator (though some may see Burnham as quite strong in this area). I also think he is the most likely to ensure Labour is what it needs to be: an electable, modern party committed to a fairer Britain.
Monday, 7 June 2010
Labour and PR
Does the recent election bring the prospects of Labour supporting PR any closer? Hard to say. I think in terms of 'fairness' people inside, and outside, of the party are (or least were) warming to it; but I am not sure the horsetrading after the election will necessarily serve to make it more popular. However, if politics is about anything it is about justice and I still remain wedded to the principle that if say 35% of the people want to vote Labour or Conservative or the Lib Dems or the Greens or whoever they should do so, their vote should be of an equal value and the proportion of votes should translate into roughly the same number of seats. At present we really don't know who people want to vote for. So often now people are voting against, rather than for parties. I also think that some of the worst excesses of governmental decision making may be curbed and I also believe that interest in politics will increase.
Sunday, 30 May 2010
The Coalition and Education
The Conservative-Lib Dem Coalition can't be accused of having let the grass grown under its feet on education. They are clearly starting as they mean to go on. The centrpiece of their plans revolves around the massive expansion of the Academies programme and the introduction of Free Schools.
Let's be clear from the outset I am strongly opposed to these policies and believe they will have unwanted consequences for education in Britain. However, one should not forget that Labour had already opened the doors to the priviatising agenda in education and the new government has driven a coach and horses through it.
So why am I opposed?
1. I don't think education as a market works like other areas. If schools continually open and close the education for many is likely to get worse not better. If one school fails will others be able to enter the market quickly enough to provide places to a high enough standard?
2. The conditions for those working in education are likely to diminish and this is unlikely to lead to better provision.
3. There is a profound democratic deficit - schools will not be locally accountable. You only choice will be to go there or not to go there and often you won't even have that choice due to oversubscription elsewhere.
4. The supposed improvements in Academies have often been for reasons far removed from excellence. 'Easier' courses are chosen which carry more points. Academies, I believe, are not covered by FOI legislation - what have they got to be scared of? What will academies do for the number of linguists, scientists etc. that are needed -my guess is not a lot. There is a real fracturing of comprehensive education. Many students from poorer backgrounds are doing better in one sense, but at what cost? I heard from a college principal who was concerned that students were keen to do A Level Sciences but their GCSE courses and increasingly equivalents had made this near impossible. Also academies have a tendency to 'alter' their intake leading to better results.
5. I fear we will move back to de facto secondary moderns and I can already see this in some schools. I would be very surprised if there is not more selection in a decade's time.
What is wrong with local schools, democratically accountable to their local community? Seems to work pretty well in Finland.
Let's be clear from the outset I am strongly opposed to these policies and believe they will have unwanted consequences for education in Britain. However, one should not forget that Labour had already opened the doors to the priviatising agenda in education and the new government has driven a coach and horses through it.
So why am I opposed?
1. I don't think education as a market works like other areas. If schools continually open and close the education for many is likely to get worse not better. If one school fails will others be able to enter the market quickly enough to provide places to a high enough standard?
2. The conditions for those working in education are likely to diminish and this is unlikely to lead to better provision.
3. There is a profound democratic deficit - schools will not be locally accountable. You only choice will be to go there or not to go there and often you won't even have that choice due to oversubscription elsewhere.
4. The supposed improvements in Academies have often been for reasons far removed from excellence. 'Easier' courses are chosen which carry more points. Academies, I believe, are not covered by FOI legislation - what have they got to be scared of? What will academies do for the number of linguists, scientists etc. that are needed -my guess is not a lot. There is a real fracturing of comprehensive education. Many students from poorer backgrounds are doing better in one sense, but at what cost? I heard from a college principal who was concerned that students were keen to do A Level Sciences but their GCSE courses and increasingly equivalents had made this near impossible. Also academies have a tendency to 'alter' their intake leading to better results.
5. I fear we will move back to de facto secondary moderns and I can already see this in some schools. I would be very surprised if there is not more selection in a decade's time.
What is wrong with local schools, democratically accountable to their local community? Seems to work pretty well in Finland.
Sunday, 23 May 2010
Labour Leadership Considered
Thought I should post with my thoughts on the Labour Leadership Contest.
Thought Number 1 - It should be easier for candidates to get on the ballot paper, especially when there is a 'vacancy'. I certainly don't think constant challenges to the Leader are a good idea, but when there is an open contest, it should be really 'open'. I think it would be a good thing for McDonnell or Abbott, or both, to be on the ballot paper, especially as it is not a FPTP election.
Thought Number 2 - There should be a Deputy Leadership Election at the same time. If that had happened I would have voted for Cruddas.
Thought Number 3 - I don't think the field is the strongest I have ever seen. Compare with 1976 when Jenkins, Healey, Crosland, Callaghan, Benn and Foot stood. Are potentially good candidates put off by the style of modern politics?
Thought 4 - So who to vote for? I am sure all the candidates have their virtues and it would be good if as many as possible could stand. Whether fair or not, I feel that Balls will never be popular enough in the country to serve as PM. I was not massively impressed by him at the DCSF. Milliband (D)'s support from some of the most Blairite probably does not help his cause and there is a feeling that his candidature is a 'back to the future' one. I don't see McDonnell or Abbott having a chance. So that leaves Burnham and Miliband (E). So as things stand I can see myself plumping for Ed Miliband and I have thought from the outset he will win. He is an extremely good speaker and I don't see him provoking the opposition that others might face from specific groups in the party. I think he needs to stake out a modern, liberal, social democratic approach where the Labour Party will be more committed to equality. If he does that I can see him being the next Labour Leader.
Thought Number 1 - It should be easier for candidates to get on the ballot paper, especially when there is a 'vacancy'. I certainly don't think constant challenges to the Leader are a good idea, but when there is an open contest, it should be really 'open'. I think it would be a good thing for McDonnell or Abbott, or both, to be on the ballot paper, especially as it is not a FPTP election.
Thought Number 2 - There should be a Deputy Leadership Election at the same time. If that had happened I would have voted for Cruddas.
Thought Number 3 - I don't think the field is the strongest I have ever seen. Compare with 1976 when Jenkins, Healey, Crosland, Callaghan, Benn and Foot stood. Are potentially good candidates put off by the style of modern politics?
Thought 4 - So who to vote for? I am sure all the candidates have their virtues and it would be good if as many as possible could stand. Whether fair or not, I feel that Balls will never be popular enough in the country to serve as PM. I was not massively impressed by him at the DCSF. Milliband (D)'s support from some of the most Blairite probably does not help his cause and there is a feeling that his candidature is a 'back to the future' one. I don't see McDonnell or Abbott having a chance. So that leaves Burnham and Miliband (E). So as things stand I can see myself plumping for Ed Miliband and I have thought from the outset he will win. He is an extremely good speaker and I don't see him provoking the opposition that others might face from specific groups in the party. I think he needs to stake out a modern, liberal, social democratic approach where the Labour Party will be more committed to equality. If he does that I can see him being the next Labour Leader.
Sunday, 16 May 2010
The Coalition Viewed from the South West
The Election results were actually very similar to what I expected. But I did not expect a full blown Conservative - Liberal Coalition. I think it is the Lib Dems who are most at risk. In the South West many of their candidates have traditionally received support from members of the electorate who might well vote Labour under another election system. Already many of those who felt themselves to be broadly on the Left say they will never vote Lib Dem again. Also any successes the Government has will probably be seen as due to the Conservatives.
Whereas many Labour supporters in the South West have not really pushed things over the last few weeks in terms of opposing the Lib Dems in many constituencies I doubt that will be the case at the next General Election. If Labour play their cards right there is a substantial group of 'Left Liberal' voters who will find it very hard to vote Liberal next time.
Whereas many Labour supporters in the South West have not really pushed things over the last few weeks in terms of opposing the Lib Dems in many constituencies I doubt that will be the case at the next General Election. If Labour play their cards right there is a substantial group of 'Left Liberal' voters who will find it very hard to vote Liberal next time.
Sunday, 28 February 2010
Arts and Humanities in Higher Education
The Observer today carries a letter from prominent academics under the heading 'Don't ditch the arts in favour of science. They're vital to us all' This is along with an article and an editorial piece on the subject.
I think that Labour since 1997 could have been considerably more positive about the arts and humanities in education in general. In compulsory education, STEM and vocational options have been favoured - partly for good reasons and partly to boost supposed attainment. The arts and humanities are not the major problem why people are not going into STEM subjects - league tables do not help and neither does the longstanding shortage of teachers in those areas. Obviously putting higher education under the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills was never going to help the subjects deemed to be 'non-vocational'.
Education should be about the long-term not the short-term and the maintenance of learning opportunities at all levels is not a luxury for the United Kingdom, or indeed any other country.
I think that Labour since 1997 could have been considerably more positive about the arts and humanities in education in general. In compulsory education, STEM and vocational options have been favoured - partly for good reasons and partly to boost supposed attainment. The arts and humanities are not the major problem why people are not going into STEM subjects - league tables do not help and neither does the longstanding shortage of teachers in those areas. Obviously putting higher education under the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills was never going to help the subjects deemed to be 'non-vocational'.
Education should be about the long-term not the short-term and the maintenance of learning opportunities at all levels is not a luxury for the United Kingdom, or indeed any other country.
Tuesday, 16 February 2010
Alternative Vote
Obviously Parliament voted in favour of a referendum on AV. Were they right?
I am strongly in favour of PR for all sorts of reasons - most notably that I think it is fairer system and is clearly more representative, but AV could be even more disproportionate.
However, on balance I would support AV as it gives voters a chance to list candidates in the order they would want them. So where I live Labour have almost no chance of getting in, but under AV voting for them would not be a wasted vote. I could vote Labour then Lib Dem or Green and then almost everyone before the BNP.
But Brown's conversion at such a late stage does owe more than a little to political opportunism. Labour should have adopted AV+ or AMS or best still STV a decade ago.
I am strongly in favour of PR for all sorts of reasons - most notably that I think it is fairer system and is clearly more representative, but AV could be even more disproportionate.
However, on balance I would support AV as it gives voters a chance to list candidates in the order they would want them. So where I live Labour have almost no chance of getting in, but under AV voting for them would not be a wasted vote. I could vote Labour then Lib Dem or Green and then almost everyone before the BNP.
But Brown's conversion at such a late stage does owe more than a little to political opportunism. Labour should have adopted AV+ or AMS or best still STV a decade ago.
Sunday, 10 January 2010
Best Films I Can Remember Seeing of the Decade
The Top 25
1. Before Sunset
2. Lost in Translation
3. Amelie
4. The Motorcycle Diaries
5. United 93
6. Lilya 4 Ever
7. Best of Youth
8. The Son’s Room
9. City of God
10. The Lives of Others
11. Far From Heaven
12. Good Night and Good Luck
13. Diving Bell and the Butterfly
14. Open Hearts
15. The Constant Gardener
16. Elephant
17. Up
18. Downfall
19. Italian for Beginners
20. Fear and Trembling
21. Me, You and Everyone We Know
22. Facing Window
23. Trilogy
24. Last Orders
25. Lantana
1. Before Sunset
2. Lost in Translation
3. Amelie
4. The Motorcycle Diaries
5. United 93
6. Lilya 4 Ever
7. Best of Youth
8. The Son’s Room
9. City of God
10. The Lives of Others
11. Far From Heaven
12. Good Night and Good Luck
13. Diving Bell and the Butterfly
14. Open Hearts
15. The Constant Gardener
16. Elephant
17. Up
18. Downfall
19. Italian for Beginners
20. Fear and Trembling
21. Me, You and Everyone We Know
22. Facing Window
23. Trilogy
24. Last Orders
25. Lantana
Saturday, 9 January 2010
Hewitt and Hoon's Plot
Words fail me about these two. I think most Labour supporting commentators are as exasperated as I am about their treachery.
I can understand why some (especially ultra-Blairites) are not too keen on Brown. But they should have put up when he was about to become Leader or even when Purnell resigned last year. But now is the time to shut up.
The likes of Hoon and Hewitt have had a good innings at the top of the party, now they behave like demented spurned young lovers. Now is the time for unity as expressed by the likes of Sam Tarry on Labourlist http://www.labourlist.org/hoon-hewitt-brown-leader-election-sam-tarry and Luke Akehurst in his blog http://lukeakehurst.blogspot.com/. I also can't help thinking back to Hewitt at the 1980 Conference. What a joke.
I can understand why some (especially ultra-Blairites) are not too keen on Brown. But they should have put up when he was about to become Leader or even when Purnell resigned last year. But now is the time to shut up.
The likes of Hoon and Hewitt have had a good innings at the top of the party, now they behave like demented spurned young lovers. Now is the time for unity as expressed by the likes of Sam Tarry on Labourlist http://www.labourlist.org/hoon-hewitt-brown-leader-election-sam-tarry and Luke Akehurst in his blog http://lukeakehurst.blogspot.com/. I also can't help thinking back to Hewitt at the 1980 Conference. What a joke.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)