Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Michael Gove’s flagship educational policies could turn out
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Michael Gove’s flagship educational policies could turn out to be a GE2015 liability not an asset
Latest YouGov "best on Schools & Education" ratings point to Gove's policies being a driver of LD > LAB switching pic.twitter.com/ZiTIbhgPKw
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I know they didn't use those words, but that was the gist and thrust of Twiggs outpourings yesterday.
How will this capitulation make those poor tortured ex LibDem (who implemented Gove in power) now Labour (who agree with Gove) educationalists vote?
Betting PostBacked Nieminen to beat Lopez in the AEGON International at 2.54. He's got a 6:2 head-to-head lead, including the last match on grass.
Gove has articulated his own drawbacks himself. I think he is a 'Marmite' politician, you love or hate and very few are ambivalent. In some ways I think it is good to have a figure who is divisive, otherwise we are far to metropolitan and bland.
What do you think he was saying, as the BBC article didn't make much sense?
The test of the Free Schools project will be their examination results when compared with LEA state schools serving the same community.
The first results will be in before the 2015 GE.
It looks like Free Schools will now be called Parent Academies or some such
"Part of Blunkett's remit will be to examine a new policy that Twigg called "parent academies", allowing parents to sponsor academies "to bring outside energy and expertise into the schools system" – suggesting that new academies could continue to be set up under a Labour administration."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/jun/17/labour-free-schools-stephen-twigg
Wyn Jones , Plaid Welsh assembly member for Ynys Mon is to resign probably today Tuesday giving a by election later this year .
The first I would like to see is an current expense to grade achievement ratio. That would be a true measure of spending effectiveness and taxpayer value.
And just how will Twigg respond when untrained teachers in Free Schools secure higher examination results than the trained teachers in LEA schools?
More teacher training perhaps?.
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/06/labour-u-turn-free-schools-its-not-simple
"Crudely speaking, the Conservatives like free school and academies because they are supposed to give complacent local authority schools a kick up the backside, while Labour can live with free schools and academies if they give local authority schools a helping hand."
•The Consumer Prices Index (CPI) grew by 2.7% in the year to May 2013, up from 2.4% in April.
• The largest upward contributions to the change in the rate came from transport (notably air transport and motor fuels) and clothing.
• The largest downward contribution came from food.
• The inflation rate has returned to the levels seen between October 2012 and March 2013 after the slowing in the rate to 2.4% in April.
• CPIH, the new measure of consumer price inflation including owner occupiers’ housing costs, grew by 2.5% in the year to May 2013, up from 2.2% in April.
• The slower growth in CPIH than CPI is due principally to owner occupiers’ housing costs increasing more slowly than overall inflation for other consumer goods and services in the year to May.
Now, I understand there is a 125-year lease between the Trustees of said school and the LA which means that the land will revert to LA control if the school closes but I don't see why these free school groups can't go off and buy their own land and build their own school. That would make them truly independent.
The reality is that a large portion of them are left of Labour and/or were Labour-against-the-Iraq-war. I'm not surprised that they are pro-statist, pro-union
Additionally, do you really expect a group of people whose historical power base was in the local authorities to be pro the reduction of the power of local authorities over education which is one of relatively few meaningful areas they have influence?
Those who will vote primarily on education fall into four main camps:
1. Education activists - likely to vote anti-Tory anyway
2. Teachers / education professionals - would assume they will be more mixed (does anyone have employment specific polling?) but probably with a leftwards bias
3. People who believe in local authority power over education - probably not Tories
4. Parents
I would argue that 1/2/3 are unlikely to vote Tory anyway. So the question really comes down to does the policy encourage group 4 to split more to the Tories than previously. My instinct is that it will - most people will either see no change (hence no change in voting intention) or will be encouraged by the increased opportunities available for their kids (hence more likely to vote Tory)
Gove being unpopular with teachers and the DoE is a good metric that he is doing a good job.
Also - what LD voters at the last election think is a topic we should enjoy while it is still relevant.
• In the 12 months to April 2013 UK house prices increased by 2.6%, down from a 2.7% increase in the 12 months to March 2013.
• House price growth remains stable across most of the UK, although prices in London are increasing faster than the UK average.
• The year-on-year increase reflected growth of 2.8% in England and 6.2% in Wales, which were offset by declines of 1.2% in Scotland and 0.8% in Northern Ireland.
• Annual house price increases in England were driven by a 6.0% rise in London and a 3.6% increase in the East Midlands.
• Excluding London and the South East, UK house prices increased by 1.4% in the 12 months to April 2013.
• On a seasonally adjusted basis, UK house prices increased by 0.4% between March and April 2013.
• In April 2013, prices paid by first-time buyers were 4.7% higher on average than in April 2012. For owner-occupiers (existing owners) prices increased by 1.9% for the same period.
So no "sub-prime house price bubble" then? We should really stop listening to the partisan witterings of the uninformed.
Anyone pining for a LEA to educate their child ?" My evil ex husband pays for Eton fees - I wish they could be in the local comp..."
Labour lead vs Con among 2010 LDs: (Current LD VI)
NHS: +33 (+6)
Asylum/Immigration: -5 (-23)
Laura Norder: -1 (-19)
Education: +22 (-3)
Tax: +15 (-6)
Unemployment: +22 (-1)
Economy: +10 (-12)
Europe: +8 (+1)
As Charles pointed out, more than a few Lib Dem 2010 voters were disgruntled Labour...
UKIP are now being accused---probably inaccurately---of being the current party of choice to make a protest.
Oddly, ex-2010-LD voters are a sub-set of the voting population who are particularly susceptible to the 'knocking' of UKIP by certain senior tories.
Hardly any ex-LD protest voters are choosing UKIP.
• In the year to May the output price index for goods produced by UK manufacturers (factory gate prices) rose 1.2%, compared with a rise of 0.9% in the year to April.
• Between April and May factory gate prices were unchanged, compared with a fall of 0.2% between March and April.
• In the year to May core factory gate prices, excluding the more volatile food, beverages, tobacco & petroleum products, rose 0.8%, up from a rise of 0.7% in the year to April.
• In the year to May the overall price of materials and fuels bought by UK manufacturers for processing, known as total input prices, rose 2.2%, compared with a fall of 0.1% in the year to April.
• Between April and May total input prices fell 0.3%, compared with a fall of 2.3% between March and April.
Some indication then in the two inflation figures that inflationary pressures are increasing as the economic recovery becomes more embedded. We need more than a single month's figures to confirm the trend though, especially as the direction of movement is counter to that prevailing in Europe as a whole.
Dear Conservative activist: I know these are difficult times. The membership of your local party is smaller and older than it has ever been. You lost seats to UKIP in last month’s local elections. You want Britain out of the EU and fear that the Prime Minister is dragging his feet. You don’t like your party’s MPs squabbling at Westminster, and blame David Cameron. You ask what possessed him to promote gay marriage – a terrible idea that the government was under no pressure to back. You feel that Cameron is allowing the Liberal Democrat tail to wag the coalition dog. You have always thought yourself as a loyalist who distrusts the party’s right-wing ideologists; but you have come to the conclusion that this time they are right. Cameron is a liability. If your party is to have any chance of winning the next election, you reckon he must go.
http://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/06/18/cameron-must-stay/
I realise that this proposition will not appeal to those who genuinely believe that Cameron is betraying Conservative principles, surrendering too much to social liberalism and failing to fight hard enough to protect British life from the scourges (as they see it) of Europe and immigration. Some of them would undoubtedly prefer to lose the next election under a true Tory than to win under Cameron. They belong to a long line of principled romantics who prefer purity to power. Every democracy needs people like them with their glorious stubbornness and their refusal to sacrifice their dreams of tomorrow to the compromises of today. Thank goodness they exist.
However, those anti-Cameron Tories need to realise that their principles have a price. To divide their party, dispose of its greatest electoral asset and drive it further to the Right will not win them victory in 2015. Instead it will guarantee their party’s defeat.
- See more at: http://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/06/18/cameron-must-stay/#sthash.b8XAi3jv.dpuf
The problem with renaming Free Schools "Parent Academies" is that would be both outdated and untrue, A typical Labour misnomer like Gordon renaming "borrowing for current expenditure" as "investment".
It is interesting to note that the momentum for forming new Free Schools is now coming more from teachers and the 'educational establishment' than it is from self-organising parental groups.
Take this summary of the 102 Free Schools approved for opening in September.
Of the 102 free schools, 33 are primary schools, 11 are all-through schools, eight are special schools and 16 are alternative provision.
The majority of the schools (70) are being set-up by teachers, existing schools and educational organisations, while 32 are being set-up by parents, communities, charities and other groups.
More than half are in London (46) and the south-east (11). Thirteen of the schools are in the Midlands, nine in Yorkshire and the Humber and three in the south-west of England.
According to the Department for Education, the new schools will be based in areas of deprivation, or where there is a shortage of school places.
The new schools will add to the existing 81, with a further 109 free schools opening this September.
Perhaps these educational insider groups are comprised of 2010 Lib Dem voters? Does anyone have any anecdotal evidence of their composition?
This is how he appears to my eyes.
Now as for his education policies, I must confess I simply don't know what exactly a 'free school' is other than LAB-LD supporters don't like it. I gather its outside Local authority control but then again I've never quite understood the purpose of a LEA. To me schools need a head teacher, probably a couple of deputy heads and a bod or two to run the (large) administration/accounting functions.
My only beef with Gove is that he said that 'programming should be the new latin', but so far as I can work out from my teacher pal programming isn't exactly prioritised at the moment.
The debate always seems to turn into Gove is great (For CON leaners) vs Gove is crap (For LD/LAB leaners) but I never really understand why as the whole 'free schools' vs LEA debate is never fleshed out.
"But the second point was that UKIP was eating into Labour’s support, rather than just the Tories. The question is not whether this is happening – it is, if in a modest way – it is why, and what should we do about it?
There are two ways to interpret the “why” – one obvious one is that there are voters switching from Labour to UKIP because they have evaluated the policy offerings of both and are choosing one above the other.
Since the local elections, the UKIP effect seems to have resulted in some feverish speculation in various corners of the party, perhaps a factor in the resurgence of some Blue Labour ideas in areas such as immigration and Europe.
The other way to interpret the swing from Labour to UKIP is hidden in an explanatory quote from Prof. John Curtice, who compiled the poll of polls:
“Labour’s relatively soft vote, much of it a protest vote, also seems vulnerable to UKIP’s appeal”
In other words, the UKIP voters are protest voters. Protest voters tend to swing about wildly between parties, for the simple reason that they are voting against something rather than for something. It is a much more reasonable explanation than the first one, for the simple reason that Labour’s and UKIP’s ethos and proposed programmes (such that are available at the time of writing) are so different as to be entirely incompatible.
Let’s look a little more closely at protest votes. Almost a year before Farage’s big surge in this year’s local elections, Left Foot Forward pointed out that much of Labour’s lead was down to Farage’s taking votes from the Tories rather than booming popular support for Labour. Ergo, when UKIP’s support thins out, as it almost inevitably will, it will be Labour who most suffers.
Why will it almost inevitably thin out? Because there exists something one might perhaps describe not as an iron law, but certainly a consistent pattern in British politics:
There will almost always be a protest party of some sort;
support for the protest party will generally be overestimated by the media, until
its inevitable poor showing in a general election under a first-past-the-post system.
At varies times it can be applied to the SDP, the Referendum Party, Respect and so on.
So, both Labour and UKIP are showing protest vote effects.
Conclusions from all this? First, not to forget that the Tory vote will strengthen as UKIP declines, and more than Labour will. Our lead is not only declining, but what remains is palpably soft because it contains its own edge of protest votes within it.
Second, it does not make a great deal of sense to tack towards a party whose policies are diametrically opposed to our own. There is no Labour/UKIP porous border.
There is a reason why it is attractive to cast around among the Lib Dems, UKIP, Respect or others to find specious electoral threats. And that is because it avoids us having to deal with the unpalatable truth that the Tories are really the only party standing between us and Number 10."
3 is included in deference to OGH!
What can 'free' schools do that normal state schools can not ?
What is so bad about LEAs, what is so bad about 'free schools' ?
I approach this subject with a genuinely open mind and am willing to listen to all arguments because I have no side here and am a personally disinterested party.
But all I see is 'Gove is crap', 'Gove is great' - never really why...
My argument is for the OGH's analysis to be meaningful you need to exclude groups 1, 2 & 3 as they will be heavily leaning to non-Tory anyway. It would be interesting to see parent specific polling - my last paragraph is an expectation rather than something that I have done research on it, so if anyone has data that would be interesting.
In view of the other day's talk about leading posters, here is my summary (number of posts according to vanilla) - apols if I have missed anyone.
Leading PB posters > 1,000
tim 4,451
TSE 1,873
Socrates 1,712
CarlottaV 1,671
Plato 1,657
MickPork 1,620
AveryLP 1,498
TGOHF 1,365
MorrisD 1,237
Alanbr/ke 1,164
SunilP 1,153
AndyJS 1,106
JamesK 1,096
SObserver 1,034
SeanT 934
March 21st to June 17th = 90 days,
Thus 1000 posts = 11.1 per day average, every day.
The core LAB strategy is to keep the Lib Dem switchers on board. That is why they are so important.
If a segment amounting to 6-7% of those voting stays with LAB then it is very difficult for the Tories to win. Labour will almost certainly win most seats if not a majority.
Surprised at that figure after all the Lib Dem posturing on abolishing student fees at the election and then agreeing to triple them.
Every time the Conservatives meddle with education or the NHS, they lose a few votes, no matter how good or bad the policies. If they want Tory-type policies, leave that to the Blairites to enact - they can do it with no electoral consequences.
EdM could be very fortunate in 2015; he gets into power as a minority government when a lot of the heavy lifting on austerity has been done, he fiddles around for a few months, giving out a few goodies, then goes back to the country on the basis of his economic credibility being restored. Will we fall it? Probably?
Labour believe so, as they never over-estimate the electorate's intelligence. It's why they know that they and government know best.
Incidentally, on R5L yesterday we had a Labour councillor from Newham, I think, talking about betting shops and why the population couldn't be trusted with them. He kept describing them as "vulnerable" when he meant too thick to do what he thought they should do.
Don't judge people by your own standards or else I'll have to crack the whip.
On a QoQ basis it is pretty broad. In fact all but one or two sectors have seen significant price rises in Apr/May when compared with the previous 4-6 months. This is not that unusual though for Apr/May, which is probably why the annual figure is used more commonly.
January though was unusually weak and that is feeding in to strong rises QoQ in Q2.
Next month could see another rise in headline CPI as Jun 12 actually fell MoM. But lets look on the bright side, rising headline CPI should weaken the argument for further QE if price stability *really is* the BoE mandate. /sarc
99% of parents would pick on the former and not give an Aylesbury duck about the latter.
Anyway, you can 'segment' catagories to your heart's content, but it's the overall polls that count. At present, Labour's lead is an anemic 5-10% with two years to go. It will be economic recovery, not education (and by a huge measure) that will determine the result and on that basis the Blues can be reasonably sanguine.
In *theory* an efficient and pragmatic LEA would be beneficial. They would help schools where it makes sense to help - say in centralised purchasing or, perhaps, organising sharing of teachers in specialist areas (i.e. take a topic like, randomly, Mandarin which may be interesting but probably doesn't justify a 5 day week at a single school - the LEA could organise 5 schools to share a single teacher). In practice, they become bureaucratic and tend to force the schools into a single approach which will, inevitably, tend to the mediocre
For example the Uk between 1997 and 2010.
My point is slightly different: I don't think the LD-Lab switchers are 'available' to the Tories. Hence to win the Tories need to (a) hope that some of those switchers revert to the LibDems [I'm slightly sceptical about this - I suspect a lot may, however, go to NOTA] and (b) win votes from elsewhere - moderate LibDems, moderate UKIP, NOTA, etc.
That's why education is such an interesting issue. Those who are instinctively negative, in my view, are *already* LD or Labour voters and will never vote Tory. Parents are a big group who may swing if they see a real benefit for their kids and want to protect it.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tobyyoung/100222305/is-labours-new-education-policy-designed-to-woo-lib-dem-voters/
"If this analysis is right, it's in the Conservative Party's best interests to emphasise the similarities between its education policies and Labour's, rather than the differences and persuade 2010 Lib Dem defectors to return to the fold. So the focus should be firmly on the fact that Labour now supports free schools parent-led academies and not on the other policies unveiled by Twigg yesterday.
This seems to be the conclusion Michael Gove has reached. In his reaction to Twigg's speech, he said: "Labour’s policy on free schools is so tortured they should send in the UN to end the suffering. On the one hand Stephen Twigg says he will end the free school programme, but on the other he says he would set up 'parent-led' and 'teacher-led academies' – free schools under a different name.""
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7R7dDJmwPY&noredirect=1
http://www.parliament.uk/documents/lords-information-office/2013/Lords-Notice-Reay.pdf
However, now our son nd his wife go from school to school checking on this, that or the other, comparing this that or the other and worrying everyone, including the children silly over "what's best." As do their friends. Can't be good for anyone.
' I wonder how many of those LibDems who have switched to Labour did so (and remain) because of the tuition fees betrayal?'
Clearly a much bigger deal for voters than a hundred or so Free Schools.
Also Ed was promising to cut tuition fees to £6,000,don't think he's u-turned on this yet.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1Khj7ZHMSo
http://www.cityam.com/article/why-cutting-public-sector-jobs-doesn-t-cause-unemployment-skyrocket
"WHILE visiting an Asian country in the 1960s, Milton Friedman observed a canal being built. As he walked around, he became perturbed by the lack of tractors or modern machinery. Instead, there were hundreds of men digging with shovels.
Turning to the government representative accompanying him, Friedman asked, “Why are there so few machines?”. “You don’t understand,” the bureaucrat replied. “This is a jobs programme.”
To which Friedman paused, before replying: “Oh, I thought you were trying to build a canal. If it’s jobs you want, then you should give these workers spoons.”"
Sorry to confuse you.
It seems the markets and financial press are welcoming the inflation figures for this month. The Producer Price Index came in lower than expectations even if CPI for the month was a notch higher. Most analysts are looking through the headline stats to see a healthier underlying trend than indicated in the last BoE forecast.
I wonder if the massive hike in airfares can be attributed to Ryanair introducing deterrent pricing on its Middle East routes?
Results and Ofsted ratings have improved dramatically.
I am not more minded to vote Labour - but all just an anecdote you understand.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Enough-Breaking-Free-World-Excess/dp/0340935928
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/10126578/Top-50-tell-tale-signs-of-ageing-revealed.html?placement=mid2
Perhaps you ought to go back to school?
Moderators : please delete tim's comments about MMR. Attacking someone's professional expertise in a public forum is unacceptable. It could potential cause very significant economic damage to my firm.
Those parents whose children have gone to a new Academy and had a positive experience are more likely to vote Tory. Those parents whose children had a less good experience than expected are likely to vote not-Tory.
Aggregate polling, like you post, has its uses. But it is certainly not the best way to determine the impact that a policy is going to have on likely voting. That's why parties commission very detailed and expensive private polling.
Events like Stafford, opposition to free schools and England's fall in some international education league tables have changed nothing.
The bald fact is Labour has big leads on these issues, whether they deserve them or not.
I have no idea if Animal Kingdom is a gara like Sprinter Sacre or an overhyped flop like Dawn Approach that cost me cash recently. Anyway it doesn't matter for the following:
Coral are taking on Animal Kingdom.
Small arb for £9 or so at Royal Ascot today:
BACK Animal Kingdom with £25 at Coral (2-1)
LAY Animal Kingdom with £36 stake at 2.14 on Betfair.
Alternatively just back with Corals.
May vs Othman (Qatada) development:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22953531
All you need is Gove, all you need is Gove,
All you need is Gove, Gove, Gove is all you need.
Gove, Gove, Gove, Gove, Gove, Gove, Gove, Gove, Gove.
All you need is Gove, all you need is Gove,
All you need is Gove, Gove, Gove is all you need.
There's nothing you can know that isn't known.
Nothing you can see that isn't shown.
Nowhere you can be that isn't where you're meant to be.
It's easy.
All you need is Gove, all you need is Gove,
All you need is Gove, Gove, Gove is all you need.
All you need is Gove (all together now)
All you need is Gove (everybody)
All you need is Gove, Gove, Gove is all you need.
@Charles, as I recall you have discussed MMR vaccines here in the past, which put your opinions on the subject up for criticism. Removing here since it's irrelevant, but if you discuss something on here then it's fair game.
Curious to see whether current LD-Lab switchers is equal to the previous group.
The bloke said the project was a work programme. The canal was the output but the Authority building the asset doesn't seem concerned about inputs as the objective was not profit motivated.
One wonders why that concept couldn't filter into Friedman's tiny mind?
Let's get Labour back in and...oh dear they're completely useless and screwed it all up in the first place.
To compare it with the selling of, for example, baked beans is the greatest fallacy!
Previously - which I regret given tim's obession with the subject - I mentioned a debate that my wife and I were having about whether to use MMR vaccines for our daughter. Arguably that could be a fair discussion topic, although not very interesting for most people
However: I am a professional operating in the vaccine space. There is a difference between disagreeing with my views and comparing me to Andrew Wakefield or saying that I have misunderstood the technical data on vaccines. Those kind of comments potential put my professional reputation at risk, something which is not acceptable.
I would rather MMR is not discussed at all.
In my estimate it was at least as big as Bobajob's.
Do you want us to do this sort of thing in this country? Inefficient, poor work for the people unfortunate enough to be unemployed? How will you get them to do the work? Reduce unemployment benefit?
And it's not exactly training them, either. When the 'jobs scheme' stops, they go back onto the scrapheap.
A typically harebrained scheme.