Education

There has been a criticism of how the Coalition is trying to push through its Academies bill before Parliament rises for the summer. Ed Balls, in his typical understated fashion, has compared it to how anti-terrorism legislation is rammed through and the Tory Chairman of the Education Select Committee, Graham Stuart has said that the Bill should have more time. But there’s a simple reason why the Bill has to get through before parliament goes down for the summer, the school year starts in September. If the legislation was not to pass before the summer recess, many of its effects would be effectively delayed by a year. The Tories have

Nick Clegg is a liberal, and just in case you’d forgotten that fact he gave a speech today in which the word features some 64 times.  As it was made at the think-tank Demos, it’s a touch more wonkish than his recent efforts on cutting back the state – but still worth a read for those who want a general sense of how the coalition sees itself. The main purpose of the speech is, I suspect, political.  It says, to any of Clegg’s sceptical colleagues, that the government’s agenda is liberal, liberal, liberal all the way.  From cutting state spending to Michael Gove’s schools reforms, the goal is to “disperse

Vince Cable has floated a solution to university finance, but he’s also politicking and I wonder what David Willetts, the Higher Education Minister, makes of it. The coalition agreement does not mention a graduate tax. The agreement merely states that the government will wait for the Browne Report into university funding. When in opposition, the Liberal Democrats did not support Browne because he was likely to recommend increasing tuition fees. Cable has pre-empted Browne in partisan spirit. If he can convince the government to adopt a graduate tax, he will have abolished tuition fees, which would do him no end of good with Lib Dem voters. It’s typical Cable: eye-catching,

This afternoon’s education question felt like a pressure valve being released. For a week now, the story has been all about the heat building-up under Michael Gove. But, today, the Education Secretary looked far more comfortable, and managed to swing the blowtorch back in Ed Balls’ direction. The message that the coalition had been struggling to make previously came out clear and loud: the Building Schools for the Future cuts are a result of waste and bureaucratic mismanagement by the previous government. And Gove even came armed with examples, such as the £1.3 million paid to an individual consultant from the BSF fund. His point: this would be better directed

David Cameron has today told the News of the World that he is “terrified” about the prospect of sending his children to an inner-London state school. This is quite some statement, given how many tens of thousands of parents are in the same predicament. Isn’t it the classic politician’s error? To betray how his aloofness from voters by showing how he fears what ordinary parents have to put up with? That’s what Tony Blair thought – so he’d pretend to be happy with state schools while sending his kids to the ultra-selective Oratory School. That is hypocrisy. What David Cameron has said represents honesty. After all, why shouldn’t he be

His apology earlier this week was a reminder of how Cabinet Ministers used to behave. Today’s cock-ups and crises have increased the pressure on the Education Secretary – two schools face cuts despite meeting the government’s criteria. Now Gove has penned a defensive article for the Sunday Express. He writes: ‘Reform is never easy, and certainly not when cash is tight… but school building will not stop under this government.’ Gove is, of course, right. Money is tight. But he must explain why reform is necessary in and of itself, and why his ideas should be adopted. There was an aloofness and arrogance about his performance on Newsnight on Monday, suggesting that Gove believes

“Aspiration” tends to be a convenient word for politicians, in the sense that any policy that they can’t implement now can be glossed over as something they want to do in future. But, if Vince Cable’s interview with the Times is anything to go by, it could become a troublesome word for the coalition. Speaking about the Lib Dem’s election promise to scrap university tuition fees, Cable says that: “It is an aspiration, but we’re highly constrained financially and we have got to try to work out ways of doing it. I’m not Father Christmas.” But nowhere does the coalition agreement say that scrapping tuition fees is an “aspiration”. Instead,

John Redwood has written a typically thoughtful piece, questioning the government’s arch cuts rhetoric. He writes: ‘Ministers would be wise to tone down the rhetoric of massive cuts. They need to mobilise, energise and reform the public services. Labour made clear in their marathon moan in the Commons yesterday into the early hours of this morning that they are out to talk the economy down, highlight alleged huge cuts in jobs and services and campaign with the Unions against sensible change. The government needs to be smart and careful in its choice of words to bring about the improvements in quality and performance needed.’ Ministers sound terse and defensive at

Michael Gove’s welcome freeze on Building Schools for the Future will invite tomorrow’s press to claim only that this means 715 various building projects are not being carried out. In fact, what it means is that the fund will be open for the Swedish-style new schools. The budget will be transferred from bureaucratic priorities to those of communities, as expressed by those who wish there to be a new school. One of the great tragedies of the politicians’ stranglehold over education is that they just love huge, shiny buildings to point at, complete with new whiteboards and all the latest gadgets. The Swedish experiment has shown the parents care not

George Osborne has an historic opportunity to begin to turn the UK’s public finances back into the black. As Reform noted in an alternative budget released last week, while this will require making the toughest spending choices for a generation, history will smile on him if he does this in the right way. What the right way is will largely reflect three key things. First, George Osborne’s Budget needs to be ambitious in its timeframe for reducing the deficit. Setting out to, say, simply “eliminate the bulk of the structural deficit in the term of this Parliament” will not be enough. Delay will make fiscal consolidation harder as interest payments

Thank God for Iain Martin, who has called Labour’s response to the Gove ‘Free schools’ idea what is: ‘moronic’. He writes: ‘Labour warned that the resulting experiment risks creating a “two-tier” education system. Good grief. And Britain doesn’t have a two-tier schools system now? Actually it’s more like 10 tiers. In this troubling context, claiming that Britain somehow has a splendid one-tier education system that must be preserved is moronic.’ If enacted and delivered, the Gove school reforms will transform education: either they will inaugurate extraordinary improvements, or they’ll be catastrophic. For my money, I don’t think Gove has done enough to explain how buildings will be paid for, how