Best Of

Our University sector is very strong but in a serious financial situation having over expanded and having become too reliant on overseas students. Right now we are seeing waves of redundancies and possible closures. Is Erasmus really the best use for £570m? How many people in the UK will be denied a University education from that choice?

My daughter did a year in the Netherlands with Erasmus. She enjoyed it immensely but the longer term benefits are a lot less clear. It was also interesting to see her cohort. I think she was definitely one of the poorer participants and the weighting to privileged private school kids was very high.

Interesting, that latter point.

The Scottish universities' admissions policies is weighted to favour applicants from less successful schools in Scotland. So you can get in with lower grades.

Sounds like it might help kids from poorer or less supportive backgrounds?

In fact, in the town I know well, it works in favour of the kids who have parents who pay for private tuition. Pretty well all the kids who have been offered places at the "ancients" (St Andrews, Edinburgh etc) have been tutored to pass the exams they need for medicine, law, etc.

The law of unintended consequences.

And, of course, the free tuition fees, which are supposed to help disadvantaged kinds is, actually, overwhelmingly trousered by well-to-do middle-class families.

We offer lower grade entry to kids from poor backgrounds (essentially based on the postcode being in a deprived area).

We have an "Access to Medicine" course for such applicants as a 6th year of Med School. They have to meet the same academic standards when on the course.

I am mid-interview cycle for our applicants and recently I have been thinking on Bourdieu's concept of Social Reproduction in terms of our Medical School entry, and I think it remains presemt despite our efforts. I am not quite sure where we should go next.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_reproduction#:~:text=All four of Pierre Bourdieu,the system of social stratification.

I once watched a documentary on candidates applying for officer training at Sandhurst. Interviews conducted by 'chaps' - mostly well off background, usually private school, played rugby not football but may have called it football etc. Tended to think that applicants from that kind of background did best at interview...

Lots to unpick. How good is the interview at predicting future success? Are the interviewers aware of their own biases? How do you overcome that in a system?

We do have a feedback system where we look at in course performance and look back at positive and negative indicators at interview, and modify these accordingly. This does rather beg the question as to whether our in couse assessments are also influenced by Social Reproduction!

I think Univrrsity does act as a finishing school for the middle classes, and this has both good and bad aspects, in particular it does enable some upward social mobility as per Educating Rita. From the narrow political perspective it is also why Labour shouldn't defund universities. They are a major source of future voters and ecenomic reviaval in Northern towns.

That feedback system sounds interesting - we are going to be looking at something like that ourselves (in our case primarily about ethnicity and outcomes).

Accidental racism from Starmer.

https://x.com/lewis_goodall/status/2001262534545092623

Keir Starmer: "I have a Christmas message for Reform. If mysterious men from the east come bearing gifts...this time, report it to the police."

I see the intention... but it doesn't really work as a joke.

One of Starmer's biggest problems is that he seems entirely humourless. It is basically impossible to warm to him unless you're also a paid up member of the Fabian Human Rights Lawyer Lanyard Class

Ooh lanyards again! This is the edgy content we come here for.

I've worked in plenty of private sector offices where keycards were used. I never saw the need to wear it around my neck; nor did my colleagues. Isn't that what wallets are for holding?

Accidental racism from Starmer.

https://x.com/lewis_goodall/status/2001262534545092623

Keir Starmer: "I have a Christmas message for Reform. If mysterious men from the east come bearing gifts...this time, report it to the police."

I see the intention... but it doesn't really work as a joke.

One of Starmer's biggest problems is that he seems entirely humourless. It is basically impossible to warm to him unless you're also a paid up member of the Fabian Human Rights Lawyer Lanyard Class

Ooh lanyards again! This is the edgy content we come here for.

Yesterday, I left my ID card at home when I came into the office. I had to use the emergency spare lanyard and keycard!

The badge of shame, as it's known at our place.

Well, at least the Tories have found their floor?

Broadly. Imo, Labour continue to leak support, Tories are still at 'core' but certainty to vote amongst core firming (thus bumping VI) alongside Badenochs figures improving, Greens picking up WNV/DNV, Corbyn curious and Labour defectors which is restricting Reform/taking some of their 'NOTA' who are near ceiling and LDs are drifting somewhat aimlessly whilst they work out best approach

I'd mostly agree, except I would say the LDs are drifting aimlessly so much as have maxed out their support. Despite the common accusation at election time being they are no different from Labour that's not how they are perceived in many places, and they've already swept most of the southern anti-Tory vote, whilst those areas who want more exciting non-Tory options have Reform, Greens, or Corbyn's mob (plus PC and SNP in specific regions).

Certainly the LDs have a tricky job to advance. How well they defend whats currently theirs will be interesting

The good news for the Lib Dems is they scarcely register in 550 seats. It makes it easy to concentrate resources in the 72 seats they hold, and the 30 they have a fair chance in.

The bad news is that's the limit. They have a substantial niche vote, of well to do, centrist voters. But, they have very little appeal beyond that niche.

Our University sector is very strong but in a serious financial situation having over expanded and having become too reliant on overseas students. Right now we are seeing waves of redundancies and possible closures. Is Erasmus really the best use for £570m? How many people in the UK will be denied a University education from that choice?

My daughter did a year in the Netherlands with Erasmus. She enjoyed it immensely but the longer term benefits are a lot less clear. It was also interesting to see her cohort. I think she was definitely one of the poorer participants and the weighting to privileged private school kids was very high.

Interesting, that latter point.

The Scottish universities' admissions policies is weighted to favour applicants from less successful schools in Scotland. So you can get in with lower grades.

Sounds like it might help kids from poorer or less supportive backgrounds?

In fact, in the town I know well, it works in favour of the kids who have parents who pay for private tuition. Pretty well all the kids who have been offered places at the "ancients" (St Andrews, Edinburgh etc) have been tutored to pass the exams they need for medicine, law, etc.

The law of unintended consequences.

And, of course, the free tuition fees, which are supposed to help disadvantaged kinds is, actually, overwhelmingly trousered by well-to-do middle-class families.

We offer lower grade entry to kids from poor backgrounds (essentially based on the postcode being in a deprived area).

We have an "Access to Medicine" course for such applicants as a 6th year of Med School. They have to meet the same academic standards when on the course.

I am mid-interview cycle for our applicants and recently I have been thinking on Bourdieu's concept of Social Reproduction in terms of our Medical School entry, and I think it remains presemt despite our efforts. I am not quite sure where we should go next.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_reproduction#:~:text=All four of Pierre Bourdieu,the system of social stratification.

I once watched a documentary on candidates applying for officer training at Sandhurst. Interviews conducted by 'chaps' - mostly well off background, usually private school, played rugby not football but may have called it football etc. Tended to think that applicants from that kind of background did best at interview...

The first question at my Admiralty Board interview in 1988 was "What does your father do?" An inquiry obviously freighted with the subliminal prejudices and expectations of the British class system. I languidly replied, "Mainly annoy my mother but he also seems to have some role as a minor functionary in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office." They fucking loved this response. If I'd said "E's a fuckin brickie, like." I'd have been out on my arse.

I think Trump's dire performance as President is in danger of making us forget what a dismal candidate Harris was. She never seemed to say why she wanted to be President, had no original or inspiring ideas and, when given the chance to put her point across, actively fled from the media.

As I've said before, Democrats win when they have a charismatic bullshitter who inspires the young and the left without terrifying the centre and the middle-aged then lets them down in office - see Kennedy, Clinton, Obama. Trump may be so unpopular by 2028 that even Harris will win, or maybe she will be able to fake enough charisma, but the Democrats would be unwise to bank on that.

For all their faults Kennedy, Clinton, & Obama were three of the most outstanding political leaders of my lifetime. The only potential candidate coming anywhere near now is Buttigieg.

What do you think?

Sadly, I just can't see how Buttigieg gets through the primaries in the South.

Buttigieg needs to first explain why he repeatedly lied about Biden's fitness for office.

He can then explain what he achieved himself as transport secretary for four years.

You'll be going on about Hunter Biden next.
None of that is in the slightest bit relevant to Democratic primaries in three years time.

Assuming the US still has a democracy (not 100% guaranteed), the record of the current administration will be uppermost in voters minds, and whoever has the best shot at uniting the Democrats is likely to get the nomination.

I doubt that will be Harris, and on current form, it might just be Newsom. He's not exactly adored by the Democratic base, but he's getting traction for leading the opposition to Trump. Quite what he does after leaving the governor's office at the end of 2026 is an interesting question.

Thanks for confirming how vulnerable Buttigieg is on his dismal record of lying and incompetence.

And also thanks for reminding us of Hunter Biden, that great polymath whose PB defenders started with "Hunter Biden has done nothing wrong and is being politically persecuted" and ended at "Joe Biden will never give a presidential pardon to his son".

When you have seen how Trump has behaved do you not have any sympathy for Biden’s decision to protect his son?

It was wrong from a presidential perspective (I worried about the precedent but… well… ) but as a man it was completely understandable

Whoever the Democrats choose it must not be someone who can be characterised as a Wokester with a problematic beltway reputation to defend. Hillary and Kamala could have been chosen by Trump to be his opponents. Dreadful candidates, whatever other merits they may have possessed.

I think they need a white, male, straight, Governor from a swing-state. Sorry to have to use those terms, but no use employing wishful thinking when dealing with MAGA and the Trump crowd. They cannot afford to lose in 2028 for all our sakes.

As tipped earlier, Andy Beshear from Kentucky.

For data as to Reform voters’ otherwise preferences, we are reduced to looking at Scottish data, the Scots being wise enough to use the critically acclaimed STV voting system for its local government elections, whereas in England and Wales the votes for losing candidates simply get transferred to the WPB.

The Falkirk South by-election of October 2024 is a rare example where the Reform candidate was eliminated with the Tory still in the race. The Tory candidate in that election got 34% of the transferred Reform votes, the SNP getting 9% and Labour 8%, with 50% of the Reform votes becoming non- transferable (meaning those voters either expressed no further preference or wanted their votes transferred to an already-eliminated candidate - the LibDem, Green, or an Independent).

That only a third of the Reform votes transferred to the Tory ought to be food for thought.