Education

The scale of IDS’ and Gove’s challenge

Yesterday was a day of weighty reports. At 700 pages, the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s ‘How Fair is Britain?’ won the thoroughness stakes. Aside from the usual findings that a disproportionate number of young black men are imprisoned and that the white working class is outperformed at school by Indian and Chinese migrants, it made some telling discoveries. The report found that a staggering 50 percent of Muslim men and nearly 75 percent of Muslim women are unemployed in certain regions. No clues as to where, though the reasons as to why should now be familiar: the figures correspond with the Centre for Policy Studies’ view that Britain has

A sustainable and permanent solution

‘A sustainable and permanent solution’, that was Lord Browne’s refrain this morning. Browne has aimed to fill the £1bn university funding black hole with a system that doesn’t prejudice the disadvantaged or force universities to privatise. Browne recommends that the tuition fee cap goes, but insists the Treasury should collect a levy from universities that charge above £6,000: fees set at £9,000 will cede 50 percent of £1,000 above £6,000, which will rise to 75 percent for fees of £12,000. This tapered levy is designed to discourage institutions from charging US-style of £20,000. Browne says that no English or Welsh student should be confronted with upfront costs – at the moment,

Making the case for further tuition fees

Ever the opportunist, Ed Miliband recognised that university funding could be the coalition’s first test of resolve. Opposing a tuition fee hike has given him the chance to serenade disgruntled Liberal Democrats and to discard New Labour’s sheen (which so incensed Alan Johnson, the minister who introduced the fee in such difficult circumstances). Miliband is determined to mould the Labour party in his image. Speaking on the Politics Show yesterday (16:20 in), he said that the party, Johnson included, will strive to deliver a graduate tax. After a summer’s procrastination, the government has run out of time. The substance of Lord Browne’s recommendations is in the public domain and it

Vince Cable’s discomfort is shared by the coalition

The trouble with holding a ministerial debate in public is that, when it comes to the crunch, it’s obvious who the winners and losers are. So it is with Vince Cable and higher education funding. A couple of months ago, the business secretary tap-danced onto the stage with a (problematic) plan for a new graduate tax. Now, it seems clear that the Browne Review will reject his advice (£) in favour of increasing tuition fees. And so Cable has had to send out an excruciating email explaining why a graduate tax was never really a good idea in the first place. After the flip comes the flop, so to speak.

Alex Massie

More Mail Fail: Clegg Edition

Apparently the print edition of the Mail on Sunday screams “Hypocrisy” because Nick Clegg, though not a believer himself, is not averse to sending his eldest child to be educated at the (catholic) London Oratory. Like you, dearest reader, I look forward to the Mail opposing school choice. The online version of this nonsense does its best to be faux-outraged with “Why is atheist Nick Clegg considering sending his son to the same exclusive school as the Blairs?” It is not clear whether the atheism or the Blair connection is the more pernicious. Never mind that Clegg’s wife is catholic and the children are being brought up as catholics. Never

Gove re-emphasises his reform agenda

Michael Gove means business. His case is simple: standards have fallen; it is time to be radical. Under Labour, Britain fell from 4th to 14th for science, from 7th to 17th for literacy and from 8th to 24th for mathematics. With a fervour that was nothing short of zealous, Gove promised that the ‘injustice will end’. His ministerial career has had a difficult start – his message often lost under Ed Balls’ righteous indignation. Having faltered, he is beginning to re-direct his rhetorical emphasis to more fertile ground. Where once he wanted to empower parents, he now wants to empower teachers – no doubt to attract recalcitrant teaching unions to

Withdrawing child benefit at 16 would be the wrong call

In the last few weeks, there has been much speculation that child benefit would be stopped when a child reaches 16. Today’s announcement suggests that this is not going to happen, although the Tories are refusing to rule it out. If there are to be changes to child benefit — and given the financial situation there need to be — then removing it from households with a higher rate taxpayer is a better move than stopping it at 16. Child benefit ending at 16 would send out a message that at 16 a child should start earning its way in the world. This would, for obvious reasons, have a negative

Cameron, more ideological than he appears

The Tory conference in Birmingham is the last big political event before the cuts come. After the 20th, every time a senior Tory appears in public for the next few years they will be about why this or that is being cut. As the row over defence shows, these questions will come from right across the spectrum. For this reason, Simon Schama’s interview with Cameron in today’s FT is probably one of the last that will start with the assumption that Cameron is genial, non-ideological fellow. Once the cuts are happening, it will be harder to cast Cameron as a consensual figure. His edges will appear harder, more defined.  But

Why Cameron’s conference speech is vital

Forget Ed Miliband’s promise of ‘optimism’ – a mantra that became so repetitive it had me reaching for the Scotch and revolver. Philip Collins has delivered a far more cutting verdict on David Cameron’s obsession with austerity. He writes (£): ‘Conservatives such David Cameron are not philosophers. The question to ask of Mr Cameron is not: what does he believe? It is: what problems does he inherit? Mr Cameron really does just want to fix the roof. The reason he wants to fix the roof is because it’s broken. The value he brings to this task is the insight that it is better to be dry than wet. He’s simple

Ed Balls saves the pitch till last

Predictable lines from Ed Balls this afternoon. ‘DIY free schools’ are iniquitous; Michael Gove is like the child snatcher in Chitty-Chitty Bang-Bang. Naturally, he made a pitch for the shadow chancellorship. Nick Clegg was his target and his pitch was avowedly left-wing: ‘It was Nick Clegg: the man whose own election leaflets said ’Vote Liberal Democrat or you’ll get a Tory government, who said ‘stop the Tory VAT bombshell, who said spending cuts now would be ‘reckless’ and put jobs and the recovery at risk. It was Nick Clegg who has given us: a Tory Prime Minister, a Tory Chancellor, a massive and unfair hike in VAT and a Budget

Another obstacle in the way of free schools

A few weeks ago, I wrote a cover story about how teachers’ unions are trying to strangle the Gove schools agenda at birth. But I fear it is facing an even greater, more immediate threat: basic bungling by government departments. The FT today says that the Department of Transport wants to make sure that local authorities keep the right to veto a new school. Armed with such a weapon, it is a sure way of crushing any competition. The DoT’s argument is staggeringly banal: that a new school may play havoc with the traffic. If you’re a local authority, wanting to use any means possible to stop a new school

Liberal Democrat Misanthropes

Bagehot had the misfortune to attend a Liberal Democrat fringe meeting on education reform. But I’m glad he did because he’s produced a righteous post that demands to be read in full. Here’s a taste of it: The title of the meeting was blunt: “Will Schools Have Too Much Freedom in a Big Society?” Mr Hames tried pluckily to defend the idea of radical, permissive reforms to British education policy. Such change might be messy, he conceded, as different sorts of schools and academies sprang up. But his audience—well-meaning and “progressive” local councillors, school heads and school governors—appeared convinced that changes to education policy (and certainly any changes to the

A yellow spanner in the works

The teaching unions, it seems, haven’t been wasting their time in Liverpool: the Lib Dem conference has just passed a motion opposing the coalition’s free schools agenda. Even though the result throws up the bizarre image of, as Guido puts it, “Lib Dems voting against liberalism,” it comes as little surprise. As Fraser reported last night, there’s a tidal opinion in Lib Dem circles that these school reforms are little more than an attack on hardworking local authorities. A pity that Sarah Teather’s message about the “dead hand of local government” didn’t filter downwards sooner.   The concern now is what this actually means for the free schools programme. On

Live-blogging from the fringe: “Whose schools are they anyway?”

So where will the tension be at the Lib Dem conference? Easy: the free schools agenda. Clegg backs it, and when David Laws took over the agenda he backed Gove’s market-based reform. But the teaching unions are in a fight to the death against it. The Gove agenda would put power in the hands of parents, whereas it currently rests with unions and local authorities. The latter two have beaten everyone who has spoken about reform, from Callaghan to Thatcher to Blair. But Gove represents an existential threat. Luckily he is in coalition with the Lib Dem MPs, with whom both unions and local authorities have massive influence. The NUT

Who’s Afraid of Catholic Schools?

Since it’s Pope Day, let’s consider this tediously-hardy perennial too. Commenting on this post, Fifer asks: Since you’ve given this some thought, then, perhaps you can answer me this – why, exactly, are my taxes being used to fund an education system divided in Scotland on sectarian lines when, out of a population of 5 million, only 65,000 can be bothered turning up to see the head of their faith preach? Even Celtic can manage that turnout a few times a year. If we really are in the dire financial straits we’re told we are, perhaps it really is time to “think of the children” and educate them all as

Citizen Castro rains on Comrade Hattie’s last parade

There was praise for Fidel Castro – of all people – at PMQs today. That the tribute came from a Tory MP must make this a unique event in the annals of parliament. Castro’s recent admission that Cuba’s state monopolies might profit from a little nibbling around the edges gave Priti Patel, (Con, Witham), a bright idea. She asked the prime minister if the Marxist cigar-enthusiast might visit the TUC Conference to share his economic vision with the brothers. The PM, who seemed calm, fresh and genially bullish today, caught the joke and ran with it. He offered his own tribute to the semi-retired dictator. ‘Even Comrade Castro is on

The coalition faces its most important battle of the next five years

Strolling through central Birmingham yesterday, I came across one of those brewery advertisements from the early part of the last century. “Unspoilt by progress,” it boasted – a slogan that popped into my head when I heard the unions’ various interventions this morning. As Iain Dale suggests, there is something very 1970s about what Crow, Barber, Serwotka & Co. are saying today. The coalition will need to meet much of the unions’ belligerence with some fire of its own. David outlined some ways it can do that earlier. But, to my mind, there is one charge that demands a particularly ferocious counterattack. It’s the one made by Brendan Barber in

Field caught between reality and fantasy

Frank Field’s been thinking. He will make his report on poverty next week and he hints at its contents in an extensive interview with the Times (£). He is convinced that there is more to social mobility than money and he has some brilliantly simple ideas to alleviate poverty. He advocates creating four or five terms in the school year to shorten the long summer holiday, which he argues disadvantages the poor. ‘They have less help at home so they lose out even more in long holidays. They drop behind, they are not being read to or tutored or talked to in the same way as many middle-class children. They

Ed Miliband makes a very obvious pass at Vince

Not exactly on the ball are they? It took nearly six hours for a Labour leadership contender to try to resuscitate Vince Cable’s graduate tax, which lapsed into seizure following reports that Lord Browne will recommend a tuition fee hike instead. Ed Miliband, in Mephistophelean mood, has appealed to Vince Cable, offering to replace tuition fees with a graduate tax. ‘You’re welcome to each other,’ will be the retort of most Tories. But Miliband’s pass is significant. The coalition agreement promised to wait for the Browne Review. But the agreement is no longer sacrosanct. With both eyes on his wavering fans, Cable has reintroduced tuition fees, the Lib Dem’s discarded

The Vice Chancellors scupper Vince

Vince Cable won’t be slipping on his dancing shoes at this year’s Lib Dem conference. A draft of the Browne review into university funding is out today and apparently it does not mention a graduate contribution, Cable’s Lib-Dem friendly answer to tuition fees. The Times has caught wind of this rumour (£), which is also doing the rounds among higher education think-tanks and consultants. This is unsurprising. Neither David Willetts the universities minister, nor his predecessor Lord Mandelson, ever mentioned a graduate contribution until Cable went on manoeuvres because Lord Browne was not seriously considering such a measure. University Vice-Chancellors and the CBI have always believed it to be an