Conservative Manifesto Launch

ah, but never the problem with that is that it exists to an extent already- parents appeal against admissions to get their child to the school they want- but these school become full- they simply do not have the space to expand!
his is the case with the single-sex school my DS and DD attended; people almost kill to get ther child there- but although the schools would like to expand they can't due to space - both are in central town locations.

the REAL answer is to make all schools GOOD schools, which has a lot to do with parents' expectations, parental support, how much they value education, as well as motivation of teachers and teachers' having high expectations- not to metnion great leadership.

Sadly- and I have spent years in educaiton- many "sink schools" are located in areas where parents simply don't value education. You need to change people's values as much as anything, as well as freeing -up teachers to teach rather than do paperwork, so they feel motivated.

I think the setting up own schools idea is interesting but doesnt really get to the heart of the matter. At the moment there is limited choice ie generally you are allocated a school by the LA regardless of whether its suits your child and also that their are alot of failing schools. I say give parents the choice by giving us vouchers. Say 4k a year for primary and 6k for secondary or whatever it is that the LA's pay to educate a child. The parent can pick any school regardless of catchments etc that they feel is best for their child, if they choose independent than they can pay to 'top up' as neccesary. The good schools will expand and the bad ones will fold, simple. Any party that proposes that will get my vote.

I think they are trying to break the hold on many public services that stop progress being made.

eg Independent schools have been around for centuries- they have a governing body and most have chartitable status.Allowing people to set up their own schools is another step in that direction except they won't need a benefactor/businessman to come up with the cash- the government will help I assume!

I like the overall philosophy which amounts to "hands off big and unwieldly state" and "hands on man in the street"- aslong as man in the street is able to get involved instead of just moaning about what they don't like, and doing bugger-all to change it- right down to being too apathetic to vote.

Gosh MissM, Sorry that I didn't make myself clear - all I meant was can't we just employ the best methods and teaching staff within the public sector.

The point I was trying to make was why employ a middle man to provide education when you could just pay the teachers up front directly.

Molly - he actually talks about Acton High as being the good school, and mentions Twyford as well (but is that the CofE school?) He says he does have a good school on his doorstep, but wants even more choice! He should think himself lucky .

I feel like you Italy in terms of no party ticking all the boxes. But as much as we need a new direction in this country, I am not convinced in any way that the Tories would offer that - they haven't demonstrated anything hard or fast as a solution as others here have said.

I heard Michael Gove on the radio and the idea for parent schools is that parents wouldn't necessarily run them themselves but could employ a private managing agent that would, for profit.

It is the privatisation of our state schools under the guise of parent power.

I know that area of West London very well indeed, as I went to a comprehensive there, the Outstanding Comp he refers to is Twyford and it is a good school, much in demand.

But there are quite a few other high schools in ealing/Greenford area , they just aren't good enough for TY kids.

To argue that his kids can't travel from Acton to Greenford is total nonsense.

I travelled that far every day, there are tubes (central line) and buses (207 plus other routes) that go between Acton and Greenford - a kid could cycle, would take 30 mins by bike, just down the Uxbridge Road.

I don't think there is one particular party that ticks all my boxes (is there ever for anyone), however, I do feel that Labour have seriously messed this country up over the last decade. The UK is a huge anti-social, over-crowded mess. Therefore, Labour will not be getting my vote.

I was interested to see what the Conservatives had to say about childcare vouchers and all I could find in the manifesto was this little nugget: ?we can no longer justify paying tax credits to households earning more than £50,000?. There didn't seem to be any further explanation.

So, does that mean that families with two working parents earning the equivalent of two average wages (about £25,000) will lose access to childcare vouchers? Surely these are exactly the types of families who need childcare! I'm not sure how we'd be able to cope without the vouchers - one of us will probably have to give up work altogether as childcare is so expensive...

I guess that these schools will have to teach the National Curriculum, they will be inspected by Ofsted, they will have to perform well on SATS etc, otherwise their licences would be revoked. They would be under pressure to perform, so I think that they would concentrate on the core curriculum and traditional teaching and standards. I think that they will cut out some of the child-centred curriculum stuff. It will then be interesting to see how well they perform and how popular they become with parents. I think it might open up a lot of opportunities for teachers, I think that they will be well rewarded if they can demonstrate good results and can turn around failing schools. Good teachers will become very valuable to these private companies as they will be the ones that will be able to deliver results. It may shake the system up a bit and lead to higher standards.

Absolutely Claig. The scenario I envisage is that if a school is judged as unsatisfactory or failing by Ofsted, private companies will start circling like vultures offering the parents an 'alternative', i.e. a school run by them. It'll all be dressed up in pretty language and accompanied by brochures full of happy smiling children and quotes from satisfied parents, but as I've said previously, I can't see where their accountability would lie.

Although I don't think that more choice necessarily means we'd have a better choice.

Did anyone watch the party political broadcast last night? Didn't really tell you anything I thought. However, sounded to me they're very much for the married unit (so am I) however I'm not that fortunate. There was nothing said of single parent families so nothing was said that would encourage me to vote for them.

gibberish nonsense. not sure if we are all going to have to run our own schools and hospitals what exactly david cameron and co are going to be doing? fox hunting perhaps. and ripping up speed bumps. and having referendums every 5 seconds is SUCH a bad idea - just means everything grinds to a halt in a sea of the civil service not being able to move a muscle or make a single decision without it being put through a long drawn out vote.
I think the manifesto is a good thing though - it finally shows the difference between labour and tories is still alive and well - labour is more about welfare state and making sure those at the bottom are ok, whilst the tories are about every man for himself, you only get out what you put in, sorry if you can't put anything in because you are a child of abusive parents / a refugee who can't speak english / mentally ill / a wage slave to your job so not much time left in the evenings to set up your own school. Etc etc etc.

Also - with the economy in the shape it is in, it really disgusts me to the pit of my stomach that David Cameron and the Tories want to cut inheritance tax - a benefit PURELY to rich people.

And, all this nonsense about ' a tax on jobs ' - it is a 1% rise in national insurance that employers would have to pay. many of the business leaders who signed the letter criticising this proposal obviously don't want to pay more money, but they can afford to, and even more ridiculously, it doesn't apply to most of their staff as it only applies to those earning £20k or more. Which is not most retail workers!

I think this parents setting up their own schools is a smokescreen. I think that what will really happen is that private educational companies will be allowed to set up schools with certain parents' and teachers' blessing.
If the teachers strike, it will play into the Tories hands because this will just speed up the policy of allowing new state schools to be formed, which are run by privare enterprise. I don't think this will be a bad thing, as it will give parents a choice and we will see which schools are the most successful and popular.

Just listened to Cameron on Vanessa Feltz's show and my text was read out with regards to the debacle that is the CSA that is STILL working against absent parents, children and compliant fathers

Mumsnet need to get heavily involved with this agency because 9 times out of 10 it is mothers left holding the baby.

I have a debt of £42,000 by the time my children leave the education establishmnent the debt will be £65,000. We have lack luster enforcement, i have just heard David Cameron say on vanessa feltzs show that absent fathers will be merclessly pursued, but they're not.

I have a charge on my ex husbands property he pays his maintenance in the forms of arrears that will take 50 years to clear making my children 67 & 69 years old by the time this debt is cleared

We do not have legislation in place to make an absent pay maintenance that is fact that not one political party will address!

The education policies terrify me on so many levels. The new primary curriculum has only just come in to schools. I hadn't realised that the bill didn't have cross party agreement. The tories will therefore scrap the new curriculum should they come in to power. Now, I am no labour supporter - I think most of what they have done to education in the last 13 years is reprehensible - SATs, targets, league tables, literacy strategy (the numeracy strategy is better). But FINALLY, FINALLY we have permission to have a child-centred, skills based curriculum where teachers can use their professional judgement about what their children need.

The tories (as I understand it) want to go back to discrete learning in subjects (children just don't learn best in compartmentalised boxes, none of us do, they need concrete, real experiences to link their learning to). They also want children to learn by rote - now some knowledge can be learnt like this (maths facts for example)but can you imagine the boredom!

As many other posters have said, the idea of parents setting up their own schools is just ridiculous.

Surely if the get in these policies won't actually get past the teaching unions. I, for one, would go on strike if these policies were actualised as none of them are in children's best interests!

OK, rant over!

Oh George Osborne makes me want to vomit. (And it doesn't help that he's a year younger than me either )

I watched the launch of this on the ten o clock news last night. I baulked at the idea of parents setting up their own school - ladened with problems on so many fronts. Then there was the bit about community groups starting a project, owning it and buying it. Reminded me of Thatcher selling off council houses. Scratch beneath the surface and this whiffs of traditional Toryism, not new Toryism. And as for smug George Osborne, looking lovingly as the Great Leader delivered his rousing speech to save the country, salivating at every word, well that man is just too much!

I haven't read through all of it, glanced through, and it seems a bit ... strange.

A lot of the rhetoric, illustrations etc. and the whole them of everyone working together is quit communist - completely bizarre for a conservative party. I think what they're doing is trying to appeal to the old left who've abandoned labour on some level. But, many of the policies are PURE tory/centre left - small government, curbing immigration, bringing back fox hunting (because that is actually what people are concerned about as the economy goes down the crapper ...)

Well basically I think that this is all about asking people to do stuff for free, because there is no money left.

The problem is that, in volunteering, the vast majority of people are retired (often widowed) women. People of working age are working. Younger people sometimes volunteer as it makes more sense than working in Primark (or a degree in Colouring In) as far as helping their chances of getting a job. But they are rarely - if ever - in it for the long haul.

The few volunteer-led projects that get off the ground are generally led by a very rare group of charismastic self-starters with a thick skin and a lot of skills - but these are very rare individuals and unfortunately the usual army of older women don't inspire this sense of purpose in younger, highly-skilled people.

The fact is that there are already enormous opportunities for communities to come together and get money for projects - but it happens very rarely because of the reasons I've stated above.

Basically it used to be SAHMs with lots of free time and "married women" who weren't allowed to work than did a huge amount of voluntary work - but this group don't exist anymore.

I've watched the link on the proposed school in west London, and to be honest I have even less sympathy than I might have had. Toby Young says himself that their local comp is very good with elements of outstanding, but his reason for wanting to set up another is 'because there is no other choice'. You already have an excellent school, why do you need more choice?!

And his emphasis on getting kids from the local estate to come too is a bit cringe-making. 'Oo look, here I am on a really tough council estate but we want these poor children too - I want to get them into a good university'. Personally I find that quite patronising, and presumably those children also have access to the already very good school in the area.

As for his claim that the school will be diverse, well just look at the steering group. One person who isn't white, and this is in an area of west London that has a huge ethnic mix. I just don't buy it.

jackstarbright - I think EVERYONE believes an increase in good schools is a good thing.

Exactly Daysoftheweek, and I also wonder what might happen to kids with special needs in these schools. Could the consortium or whoever running them choose not to have kids with particular needs (e.g. behavioural, autism) at their precious school because it might ruin the vibe?

'Couldn't we just pay up front?' - Alicatte I think that's what we already call private education

The fox-hunting thing is such a red herring. Would it really be a deal-breaker on who you vote for?

And what does the image 'Bye bye bureacracy' actually mean? There would be no red tape whatsoever under the Tories .