What does Labour need to do to get back into government?

all they really have to do is hang around long enough, sadly.

and hope to fuck the Greens don't run off with the unions!

I think that unis need to be more imaginative about how degrees are delivered. Modern technology should make it cheaper to produce high quality courses. Video conferencing makes it possible to study from anywhere in the world. There needs to be more flexiblity so that people can choose how they study. I would like more people study part time on day release. It would be a way out for single mothers trapped in povety.

I agree with subsidizing further ed colleges and the OU. I think it was a mistake taking away all subsidy from evening courses. Barnfield College in Luton does a lot of excellent evening courses, but look at the cost. They used to run courses during the day for adults before the credit crunch. The high costs of courses make it difficult to change career.

Social housing is hard, we need to encourage people to move and set up businesss in deprived areas of the UK. It is silly everyone living in the south east. I think we need to dramatically improve rail and transport links to help the north east.

1. Abolish tuition fees and fund living expenses for those at university. This would be paid for by slashing the number of places available, perhaps by as much as 75%. Entry would be on merit alone, nothing else.

1. Reintroduce polys, possibly restyled along the lines of US community colleges, so that adults who want to retrain but are not looking to be academic leaders in their field, can accumulate degrees/diplomas/NVQs etc just the same way you can study for an OU degree around your other commitments. We are wasting talent in this country because people can't retrain. Making use of people's talents and putting them in the right job frees up the NMW-type jobs for others, creates a happier society, increases social mobility and is good for the economy. Local FE colleges that only offer GCSEs or classes in woodwork and beauty therapy are not much help to anyone.

1. Introduce linked salaries/bonuses so that those at the top cannot earn more than a certain multiple of those at the bottom.

1. Invest in a massive social housing building scheme. After WWII this did loads to encourage economic growth as well as solving housing problems.

1. Form a cross-party commission charged with looking at regulating banks and big business. Politicians of all colours are terrified of offending the big players and that is bad for everyone (other than the CEOs at the top of course).

1. Invest in public transport but at the same time recognise that the UK is not just London. People in other areas have no choice but to use cars. Reduce tax on fuel (also good for business and public transport) but slap it on road tax and vary it by location.

1. Massively subsidise childcare. The amount of tax it will raise will pay for itself. There are other social justifications, but that's the economic one.

1. Find a more charismatic leader

I did a physics degree and I earnt well before babies. The computer programming skills I learnt as part of my degree made me employable in software development. Other people I know with Physics degrees have gone on to become an actuary, worked for oil companies doing mathematical modelling or teaching.

Nurses do earn well and infact you don't need to get into mountains of debt to become a nurse. You get your fees paid and a means test bursery for a nursing degree. Nurses start at 21K and a nurse in a management position can do very nicely.

Surely universities aren't scared that their graduates will have poor job prospects?

reallytired - Not sure i agree. Nothing wrong intrinsically with specialists - we need not all be generalists as long as between us we have a range of skills. However, your original idea falls down anyway on its underlying presumption that the most valuable degrees ie those we should as a society be encouraging are those which earn the most - I'd disaree that bankers are way more valuable than nurses say. I really don't think you can put a price on everything; or if you can, it may not actually be the right one.

A Physics graduate is useless if they have no interpersonal skills or they get a third. An English graduate is useless if they have no IT skills. I feel its vital that unis develop the entire person.

A good physics course will develop a rounded person. In the past there have been so few people wanting to do physics degrees it has been possible to get on a physics degreee with weak qualficiations and it led to people getting thirds inspite of working hard.

I think a degree in basket weaving would be useful if combined with business studies so that the graduate can sell their baskets.

mr pants - is physics useless? Or indeed basketweaving?

useful fits just as well.

So TOTALLY agree Mrs Cog!

Housing is the fuck-off massive elephant in the room, as far as the economy is concerned (excuse language but get heated on this one).

MrPants and Bread&Butterfly I like both your ideas although like others have said, I think they are more traditional tory ideas!

I think actually where the tory/Labour problem lies is that neither party really represents the true middle ground which people want to see any more.

I think lower housing costs are absolutely key (in reality this is really the only cost of living component govt can do a lot about - but it would make a huge difference if the cost of housing (bought or rented) was reduced over time by 30-40%) I think BTL mortgages should be phased out and banned over the next 5 years, yes, investment in property should be allowed but only if you have the full cost of the property in cash to start with. It makes me sick that people are paying other people's mortgages for them - the cost of renting is normally slightly more than the mortgage would be for the property!

I think that a huge housebuilding programme and the phasing out of BTL landlords would help enormously.

"But even if what you say was true, I'd still disagree with you strongly - I think the purpose of education is far beyond the strictly vocational - it is about realising our potential as human beings and our place in the world and in time, our skills and our limitations, confidence and yet humility."

Surely we all need SOME vocational skills to survive. Education should not be 100% vocational, but if graduates are completely useless then they have been failed.

Surely its possible to find a way of addressing this

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2026858/Bosses-condemn-useless-degrees-leave-graduates-lacking-basic-skills.html

and allow someone to follow their passion to study medival history or basket weaving or physics. The problem with these high debts is that students cannot afford to train to do something useful.

reallytired, most graduate jobs that make money are not dependent on degree subject - law, accountancy etc are good examples of professions where an arts or humanities degree will be no hindrance and may be a help - they require thhe ability to analyse information, but no high degree of pure maths and can and are done succcessfully by many arts/humaiies grads. Likewise, Britain excels in creative industries - our theare, film, fashion, music etc are world-class exports (also impacting on our tourism); it's a very one-sided and old-fashioned view of the economy in which anything that is not manufactured by an engineering process, or high finance ie requiring degree-level maths or equivalent, is worthless and unable to produce a profit.

But even if what you say was true, I'd still disagree with you strongly - I think the purpose of education is far beyond the strictly vocational - it is about realising our potential as human beings and our place in the world and in time, our skills and our limitations, confidence and yet humility.

The nhs needs reforming it cannot go on in its present form, simples.

"Like those ideas reallytired though I think that your university fees one is not really workable - it would act as a major disincentive to any university offering arts or humanities courses at all, where graduates tend to earn less, or to a v successful uni where large numbers of graduates go into academia and so earn less - rather counter-productive"

I have no objection to the existance of arts/ humanties courses, but should they REALLY be charged at 9K a year and unis able to expand these courses without consequence. There are only so many jobs in academia. I would like humanties students to be encouraged to take a minor in something useful. Ie. English with legal studies or Politics with personal management or French with accountancy.

"I think it is fundamentally misconstrued because it starts from the assumption that the value of an education can be measured in £ and p, which is something I strongly disagree with."

Why? Do you honestly think an English degree with 5 lectures a week and one tutorial should be charged at 9K a year? Unless you have a rich daddy who can support you for life most people NEED to earn their living. My mortgage is measured in £ and p.

breadandbutterfy, I agree with you.

By intelligentsia, I don't mean academics and intellectuals, I really mean the political opinion formers, the spinners who try to spin their line to the public.

By the "I'm Alright Jacks", I really mean the political spinners and opinon formers who ignore the opinion of the public.

I agree about the 'squeezed middle' who have been ignored for so long by the Labour "I'm Alright Jacks". They are not just left wing.

claig, I doubt most members of your so-called intelligentsia flipped homes or are alright jack, actually. I think they are up in arms with their brethren who work in factories rather than factories of the mind about the huge corruption both at the top of society as well as the culture of entitlement at the bottom. Don't forget, the intelligentsia - by whom i assume you mean academics, teachers, etc - have all suffered hugely over the last decade; by example, a v close friend, a Cambridge don, had to give up working as an academic and become a consultant because on an academic's salary she couldn't afford to even buy a flat in Cambridge.

The people who are alright Jack and have been flipping homes etc are not the intelligentsia (unless you extend the definition to include MPs? - not sure they fit), but capitalists - all those who Peter Mandelson effed off the left by saying he was totally relaxed about.

I can assure you, both middle class and working class left wingers are united in not being terribly relaxed about this - has the expression 'the squeezed middle' passed you by, or do you still imagine that everyone has does not do manual labour actually has a really cushy life??

Like those ideas reallytired though I think that your university fees one is not really workable - it would act as a major disincentive to any university offering arts or humanities courses at all, where graduates tend to earn less, or to a v successful uni where large numbers of graduates go into academia and so earn less - rather counter-productive. I think it is fundamentally misconstrued because it starts from the assumption that the value of an education can be measured in £ and p, which is something I strongly disagree with.

"Labour needs to find a fairer and cheaper way to manage child benefit/ tax credits. I like the idea of a bigger personal allowance for people with children. I also think that a SAHM parent of a child under seven should be allowed to transfer some of his/her personal allowance to a working partner. It would also be a good way of supporting single parents."

What a I mean is a single parent could be given a bigger tax allowance than a single parent without kids. Life is tougher for a single mother on 45K than a two parent family with both parents earning 40K (joint income 80K).

Labour needs to find a fairer and cheaper way to manage child benefit/ tax credits. I like the idea of a bigger personal allowance for people with children. I also think that a SAHM parent of a child under seven should be allowed to transfer some of his/her personal allowance to a working partner. It would also be a good way of supporting single parents.

I feel its unfair that some groups in society have been left untouched. Like childless high income tax payers and wealthier pensions.I would like the tax system take money more money from wealthy pensioners through income tax. I suggest that pensioners should start paying higher rates of income tax at 25K. Such people usually own property with no mortgage and have no dependents. I would tax relief on those who have to pay rent and do not own property.

Not all pensioners are poor, some pensioners with large final salary pension schemes have pensions that are more than some families.. A wealthy pensioner pays no national insurance and will pay less VAT as they tend to spend less. Wealthy pensioners also get free bus passes, winter fuel allowance and a free TV licence (if over 75).

As far as uni fees go. I think that unis need to take some of the financial risk of setting high fees. There is no disintentive not to charge 9K a year for a crap English course. I think that future funding of a university should depend on what percentage of the student loans have been paid back within 5 years.

If an OU course costs 15K and the average student has paid back 5K after 5 years then that is an excellent return. If a crappy media course costs 60K and average student has only paid off 1K after 5 years then that is poor value of money. I feel that unis that give poor value for money should be fined and the sucessful unis should be given a bigger teaching grant. It would focus unis on keeping costs down and making their students employable. Unis would be more moviated to be flexible and offer two year degrees or part time degrees to fit in with working.

knocked

'Working-class communitarians, by contrast, have a more collectivist view of rights, and place great stress on community membership. They worry about welfare free-riding, they value the familiar and the local, and are sceptical about mobility and mass immigration. They are draconian on crime and not very green. They are uncomfortable with globalisation, and tend not to benefit from it economically or culturally. At the more extreme end, they shade into racists.'

Yes they are more conservative than the middle class liberals. That is why many admired and voted for Thatcher. There are millions of them and they are not "alright Jack". They are the majority and they don't read the newspapers that the intelligentsia read. Sustainability is not at the top of their list of priorities. They know that the 'I'm Alright Jacks" have fooled them and taken their vote for granted.

They don't fall for the tricks of the "I'm Alright Jacks" who call the opposition childish names like the 'Nasty Party'. They don't believe the 'I'm Alright Jacks' who flipped their homes and tried to scare them about the Tory boogieman.
They didn't fall for the empty rhetoric of the patronising "I'm Alright Jacks" whom they had never seen for 13 years until they nocked on their doors asking for their votes, telling them about that other "Nasty Party". They were too sophisticated for that, they were 'Blue Labour', not Tim Dim But Nice and they made New Labour pay the price.

abour Party = Labour Party. But you probably guessed that.

You're right claig, in much of what you say.

And yet... rereading your 'communitarian' description, it reads as a perfect fit for your average Daily Telegraph reader - read it yourself and try - do you see?

I know I'm a bit biased here, but to me Labour is the party with morality on its side ie the party of the Decent Brit as described above. Whilst the Tory party is the party of I'm Alright Jack aka THe Nasty Party.

I want the abour Party to stop trying to get in with the nasty kids by being mean to the poor kids and become nice again. :)

Then I'll vote for them. :)

Simples.