Gove has gone!

[bleedingheart]

Leaving education role, moving to chief whip I think

[claig]

'I would never be so foolish as to describe any Guardian political commentator as 'neutral'. They are biased, and it is their job to be biased.'

I cannot disagree with any of that. But Quentin is a different kettle of fish and a different barrel of monkeys. It is true that he mercilessly mocks the Labour front bench, but that is because he calls it as he sees it and feels that they fully deserve it.

[Icimoi]

The suggestion that Letts is impartial is indeed hilarious. Letts is the misogynist who thinks it is the function of opera critics to criticise the body shape of female singers, and who always (unless they're thoroughly right-wing)) brings into his description of female politicians and indeed politicians' wives some gratuitous reference to their appearance or voice; who thought it was outrageous that Liam Fox should be called to account; who lied in order to justify his employers' disgraceful attack on a dead man which even they ended up having to apologise for (zelo-street.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/letts-not-bother-with-facts.html); who seriously thinks that the Supreme Court, which is the new incarnation of the centuries-old House of Lords, is a new-fangled leftie institution; and who is notorious for failing to check his facts or to take notes.

He is, quite simply, one of Dacre's obedient little attack dogs. Read his drivel if you want to, but please don't deceive yourself about its origins.

[claig]

'The suggestion that Letts is impartial is indeed hilarious.'

Then it had its effect as it was intended to add a touch of levity.

"He is, quite simply, one of Dacre's obedient little attack dogs"

But in all seriousness, independence of thought and an unstinting quest for the truth is the hallmark of the Daily Mail journalist. Obedience is not a word in the vocabulary of the Daily Mail commentator or correspondent. Please do not confuse the Daily Mail with the Guardian!

[pointythings]

But in all seriousness, independence of thought and an unstinting quest for the truth is the hallmark of the Daily Mail journalist.



Please stop it, claig. If I laugh any harder, I'll ache for days.

[dawndonnaagain]

But in all seriousness, independence of thought and an unstinting quest for the truth is the hallmark of the Daily Mail journalist. Obedience is not a word in the vocabulary of the Daily Mail commentator or correspondent. Please do not confuse the Daily Mail with the Guardian!

Only in your world Claig would this be believable or even possible.

[Icimoi]

Please tell me you don't seriously believe that, Claig? Maybe this is all a very sophisticated piss-take against mindless Mail followers? Even my mother, rabid right-winger and devoted Mail reader, knows full well that that Mail journos have no independence of thought and very little interest in the truth.

[claig]

'Please tell me you don't seriously believe that, Claig?'

I am stretching the truth a tiny bit, but the substance of what I am saying holds.

'Even my mother, rabid right-winger and devoted Mail reader, knows full well that that Mail journos have no independence of thought and very little interest in the truth.'

Then why does she persist in reading the world's most popular online newspaper, if not for the scathing excoriation of Labour hypocrisy and mendacity?

No other paper does it as well as the Mail, which is why New Labour acolytes describe it as beyond the pale.

They'll be dancing in the corridors of Labour HQ when they hear that Cameron has let go one of "his big brains", the terror of Tristram and trouncer of untruths. But in the corridors of the Mail, it is seen as a sad day when spin doctors, focus groups and polling statistics have brought down the man who struck fear and panic into the heart of the Labour front bench.

[duchesse]

I think neutrality may be in the eye of the beholder.

A pundit who agrees with me--> neutral
A pundit who disagrees with me--> horribly biased and toeing party line

We are none of us, NONE OF US, neutral.

[pointythings]

We are none of us, NONE OF US, neutral.

^^ This. And of course we don't have to be neutral either.

I think people read the Mail because of the salacious stories about slebs. If turnout in recent elections is anything to go by, most people don't give a stuff about politics, no matter which side of the political spectrum they are on. Which is a shame.

I did once find a very good recipe for wheat and dairy-free chocolate crispie cakes with dried fruit in the Mail, which was very handy because I had a group of colleagues with food allergies and I wanted to bake them a treat. So it isn't an entirely useless paper.

[Icimoi]

Claig, only my mother can explain why she still reads the Mail. I think Labour describes it as beyond the pale primarily because of its appalling conduct, its utter hypocrisy, and its extremely flexible attitude to facts and journalistic integrity.

As I say, everyone with any sense or humanity is pleased that Gove has gone from Education, but I doubt that Labour are pleased that they've been deprived of such an easy target and such a guaranteed vote-winner for them.

[Echocave]

This is totally off -topic but this sudden promotion of lots of women who may have little or no time to do anything except continue with the same policies until the election simply highlights the problem that there are fewer female Conservative MPs because many traditional Conservative policies are objectionable to many women.

And because Conservative strongholds may be less willing to choose a female MP to represent them (disclaimer: only my opinion here).

Thus, the reshuffle looks tokenistic at first glance (again, the ministers may be very good - but they haven't got much time to make their mark).

Cameron must have got heartily sick of Gove to give him the push as they sound like they're good friends.

[duchesse]

Gove could have lost the tories the election by himself. Although I suspect he is being groomed for the top job eventually and the job change is just another step on his mwhahaha plan, along with getting him out of the limelight for a few months. Also I daresay he'll toady up to DC a lot and help to keep the backbenchers in check.

[Icimoi]

Echocave, I agree that this promotion of women is totally tokenistic, as demonstrated by the timing. If Cameron really did believe in promoting women he could and should have done it at least a year ago. As it is, he's timed this immediately before the summer recess, so the reality is that the only real work they'll do will be between October and December. After that it will be heads down for the election. And, if he wins, they'll be quietly shunted aside within a year at most.

[Isitmebut]

Icimoi ….. On the subject of women in the 2010 coalition cabinet, let us remember THAT IT IS a coalition of two political parties, and in 2010 after the general election and the country facing a debt and social crisis, (rightly or wrongly) the ‘big beasts’ of both the Conservatives and Lib Dems were deemed to be male.

Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but of the total Conservatives in the cabinet, over a THIRD is now female reflecting the bright 2010 female intake to parliament (arguably) on both sides. lol

Can anyone tell me the last time a Labour cabinet had one third women, a woman P.M. or even a Deputy P.M. – even though there was a candidate under Brown clearly crying out for the job and being brushed aside e.g a Ms Harman who thought she’d been voted into the position by her peers?

P.S. I have no idea of the answer, but does anyone know how many of the 1997 'Blair's babes' as they were called made the Labour cabinet, or even still around after 2010?

[claig]

Welcome back, Isitmebut, I almost thought you might have been banned by the metropolitan elite.

[Isitmebut]

I have read through this thread with interest and see that for most people , the problem was Mr Gove’s confrontational style – and few can argue that it was confrontational - hence it became hard for Gove’s fans to be heard above those attacking him either fearing ‘change’, thinking the change was happening too quickly, or just ideologically opposed to any Conservative daring to demand change from a system failing our children.

The final point is fairly clear from this thread, as far from posters appearing mildly sympathetic to a new Conservative minister that is female, has children of her own and see how she handles the brief; they immediately start looking to accumulate political ‘negatives’ on the woman e.g her past voting record on education and other issues.

When will people concentrate more on the results of a UK State education both academically and how well equipped they are when they leave school, to make their way in the world e.g. fulfil their aspirations via employment?

Clearly parenting and the children themselves are key factors, but from just reading the OP from the link below few can argue that in 2010 the education system was letting down our children as proved by the handover (by Labour) of near 1 million unemployed 16-24 year olds, over half of which could not subtract the cost of one item from £100 and give you the right answer.
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/politics/1990838-UK-education-what-is-the-REAL-problem

We had 13-years under one administration agreeing with the teaching establishment and ‘achieved’ those results above, a Gove was needed to shake things up, lets see what Nicky Morgan can do and judge the coalition by their results, rather than their political ideology. IMHO.

[Isitmebut]

claig .... I'll remind you of your welcome next time you mention Ukip has all the answers, but thanks anyway. lol

Re your point, I'll 'plead the 5th', but lets just say I had to grovel for making one serious mistake. I have re read the rules, and I'm a new poster person - that will also cry to the mods every time I feel anyone is getting personal with me - what a shame I can't cite about 30 previous cases of abuse against ME.

Lucky I'm thick skinned and stick to the facts, how wrong can I go to anyone other than those who don't want them posted. Simples.

[pointythings]

Isitme speaking for myself it wasn't Gove's confrontational style that was the problem, it was the fact that he did everything in a spur-of-the-moment way, refused to listen to any but his own yes-men and then refused to take responsibility when things went wrong.

I would never argue that exam reform wasn't needed - it very clearly was. However, the rushed implementation of an utterly unpiloted system was never the answer, and Gove made no effort to do anything about vocational education. All he did was sweep a broom through GCSE courses he considered worthless without replacing them with something worthwhile. His blinkered focus on academia for everyone with a total one-size-fits-all approach completely overshadowed the genuine and necessary debate about what UK education needed to be. That debate was simply never had, because anyone whose views didn't mirror Gove's was labelled a 'blob' and an 'enemy of promise'. Like the Labour administration before him, his was a period of wasted opportunity.

His constant deriding of the teaching profession was also a block that stood in the way of reform. In his eyes, and in the eyes of the right-wing media, all teachers were bearded lefties only interested in their fat pensions, doing a job any idiot walking in off the street could do standing on their head. He made no effort to engage with the very many good teachers out there who wanted change, instead he just imposed central controls over them whilst all the time spouting the nonsense about freeing schools to teach. He was a mass of contradictory uselessness.

His constant stream of policy announcements made things worse, especially in those cases where what he was announcing as new was already happening. He never gave recent changes a chance to bed in. Ultimately he used the education position to raise his profile and put himself in a position to challenge for the Party leadership.

I don't expect anything better from his successor, nor from any politician of any colour. I'd like to see education become a cross-party run thing on a permanent basis - as it is, it's a political tool for advancement, always at the expense of our children.

[Isitmebut]

Pointythings …. Firstly, I would not be surprised at the ‘rush, rush’ type policies implementations in education, as the coalition, once they agreed a coalition and the basic aims for this parliament, seem to hit the ground running across most ministries to try sort out the problems, to be addressed within an annual £157 billion government overspend in 2010.

We could look at individual measures brought in by Gove and how he handled them, the facts are that by 2010 the education system was not working for those who needed to take their skills to find work and had to compete with workers from home and abroad. Before the financial crash, we already had near 600,000 unemployed 16-24 year olds TRENDING UPWARDS ANNUALLY yet we as a country were boasting about record EMPLOYMENT figures. So time was NOT on our side, economically as a nation, or for the social ramifications now and for years to come, for those youths seemingly without a hope of the chance of employment.

Re academia, we could go into what subjects are needed to find work in a global economy needing ever more semi and fully skilled workers to raise themselves well over the minimum wage, but basically as a country far few take them up as children don’t seem to have been prepared for the rigour of those subjects - allowing them to do what subjects they are comfortable with whether ‘commercial’ or not, up to degree standard, coming out with £20k of tuition debt and an ‘ology degree worth little in the workplace.

As I mention in that earlier link, with 3 children spaced several years ahead who had the option of doing the constant/rigorous I.B. at a State school based on their GCSE results, it went from Bs and Cs from my first child to A’s and strong B’s by my last – so there really did seem to be grade deflation over a number of years, probably to make our children feel like winners, rather than prepare them for the real world. FYI despite my little talks with them individually as exam time, I knew then, they admit now, they did not really push themselves, so I am not blaming individual teachers who I KNOW was pushing them.


I understand that few public sector employees ever want massive reforms over what seems a short time, but in the private sector, if your budget had been more than doubled, you’d been given a few hundred thousand (teaching) assistants, the company was overspending billions and you were several years into a crisis, maybe there would be less resistance to boss, whether you agree with him or not.

So with that implementation of change public sector time scale in mind, as you say, we need to set a STANDARD for our State education for all political parties to follow RELATED to the workplace across all skill levels, but try RAISE the standard in key subjects from Primary School – as there seems little point paying more per pupil place in the State system than the Private Schools and not getting the best education possible out of it.

Better an over qualified workforce ready for new higher skilled jobs, than set a standard that does not prepare them for the economy we have, not the industrial economy we and the rest of the west, had.

Arguably Gove had the right ideas for the future and the energy of a Duracel Bunny to see them through, but not so many over just one parliament – as he needed all the teaching establishment’s support, but failed over 4-years to get it, despite the urgency of the problem.

Hopefully teachers will give his successor a chance to communicate with them for the remainder of this parliament, and wait for what/who turns up next in 2015.

[pointythings]

You make some valid points, but I do feel that Gove undermined himself by the way focused exclusively on academic subjects. We should be looking at structuring our education system along the lines of Germany's system, so that young people can start learning skilled trades from a young age, alongside the essential skills of literacy and numeracy needed in the workplace. Nothing Gove has put out over the past 4 years has pointed towards him even considering that as an option.

I'm afraid I can't agree with the perception that schools were failing on a wholesale level to equip children with basic skills. When I look at what my children have done in their ordinary non-Outstanding schools over the years, it has been 2 years ahead of what I did at the same age in the 'good old days' when teaching was still 'rigorous'. Yes, there were children who were not accessing that teaching effectively, but it is simplistic to blame schools and teachers for that exclusively, as Gove has been doing. It is not rational to look at educational underachievement in the UK without also looking at the very high level of social and economic inequality that exists - I don't see anything being done to address that gulf by this government, quite the reverse.

To fix the problem, we need a 'big picture' approach, not endless tinkering with one small part of it and not endless blame-and-shame. What we certainly don't need is the breakneck dismantling of State education. I have a Free School in my area where things have gone horribly, disastrously wrong. The disaster could have been prevented, just as it could have been prevented at Al-Madinah, if the Free Schools programme had been brought in less quickly and with more forethought about potential unintended consequences.

Instead of bringing in change for the long term and doing a proper job of it, we end up with a bodge job that is going to take more time and money to fix. This is the crux of the problem - because education is so politicised, politicians feel that they have to fix everything in the course of a 5-year parliament. Take the politics out of education altogether and we could start building something that is well-thought-out and robust and which will last for the future.

[Isitmebut]

Pointythings …. So would I be correct in concluding from your posts that you believe the UK standard of State education within the basics in 2010 was acceptable, and OECD type findings back then that put the UK 22nd in literacy and 21st for numeracy out of 24 countries were somehow wrong in their assessment?
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/politics/1990838-UK-education-what-is-the-REAL-problem

As putting two and two together, it looks to me that our children had problems competing for jobs with their international peers, within their own county from the early 2000’s, as there was no shortage of work available as their unemployment figures annually rose.

Following on from that theme, how can the teaching establishment blame changes in government and the lack of policy continuity for such international results in the BASICS, surely that is a priority for teachers whoever is in power – and wasn’t this a priority of Mr Gove before re inventing any new wheels e.g. how an industrial powerhouse like Germany manages to ‘slot’ their children into specific careers (like the Reed advert) at an age ours have no idea what they want to do?

On a continuity basis, can anyone tell me why such a pro EU (and freedom of EU workers to live and work in any country) Labour Party and Education system were allowed to drop compulsory Foreign Languages from UK State schools, immediately putting our children at a disadvantage in doing what other EU citizens do, routinely take their language and other skills and look for career opportunities throughout Europe? Or was it the schools choice to replace them with easier subjects for League Table purposes?

Continuity again, this time via the breakneck speed of dismantling the State educating system , what was Blair’s Academies and such like all about, if not ‘continuity’ of giving parents a choice of an education for their children, away from a teaching establishment that doesn’t seem to realise that our State education standards have slipped, grade inflation to boost school League Tables meant nothing to employers looking for basic skills - and in a global economy/freedom of worker 21st century, any country patting their own backs giving children near useless skills/exam certificates, is storing up economic and social problems within England for decades to come.

Would an all party policy towards an English clone of the International Baccalaureate, giving a ‘rounded’ education/exam in 6 key subjects to equip our children in maths, English, a science and three others including at least one foreign language and possibly history, geography or an art, be ‘big picture’ enough for the teaching establishment?

I ask this as far too many of our children are embarrassingly ignorant in most of those subjects, so such an exam with 6 individual marks/grades, would give them a more rounded education for employers, and the rest of their life e.g. the pub quiz, away from ‘soaps’ and music. Lol

We also need to drop ideology from education via the militants within, as instead of deriding the Private Schools and those within, we need a ‘big picture’ target by the State system to narrow the gap as far as socially possible, rather than double to triple budgets and get new excuses why as a whole, the State system is still failing those from poorer families and social mobility is so low.

[pointythings]

isitme once we get transparency in the methodology of the assessments used by both PISA and OECD, we will be getting somewhere in terms of comparing education systems. Until then, international comparisons are a distraction from the need to develop some practical solutions to the very real problems the UK faces.

You seem to think that the teaching establishment are perfectly happy with the status quo, which turns out acres of mediocrity every year. I think that does them an injustice - teachers are enormously constrained by the demands of politicians - for data, for paperwork, for league tables. I suspect many teachers would jump at the chance of an English version of the IB such as the one you describe - as long as they are allowed to teach it, with a lot of data collection being swept away to make more teaching time.

Abolishing a compulsory MFL was an absolute crime on Labour's part, we agree on that. As a Dutch national, I understand the need for at least one MFL completely - in the Dutch system, no matter what 'stream' of options you choose, English is a compulsory exam subject. One could argue about what the language should be in the UK, but language learning is needed - and it MUST be done better. At the moment, MFL teaching up to GCSE is still so very phrase-book based and that method doesn't work. Learning a foreign language is hard work, you have to put in the graft - learn to conjugate verbs, learn your vocabulary, learn the rules of grammar. Those skills translate across other subjects too.

I also agree that throwing money at the problem of social and economic inequality is not a fix. However, the British system does make it very difficult to make work pay; the cost of childcare is a key factor in this. The government's current plans to address this are frankly insane - a couple on just under £300k between them does not need financial help with childcare costs. That money needs to be targeted at people on low to low middle incomes - say, £40k household income. That way people could get a really significant amount of help with childcare and see real money in their pockets from going to work instead of pennies if they're lucky.

As for private schools - I don't like the idea. They barely exist in Holland and their school system does very well, I am simply not convinced of their merits as something that is good for society as a whole. Obviously they are good for the children of parents who can afford to send them. That isn't about envy - I have friends who send their children private, for lots of reasons - but I would like to see a system where private schools are not necessary.

[Isitmebut]

Pointthings …… Regarding the UK’s abysmal international performance in literacy and numeracy according to organisations like the OECD, and your suspicions of the accuracy; may I suggest in numeracy at least, from here on we use a simple benchmark that tells us over half those at secondary school cannot take £64.23 from £100, and call it the Nationwide test?

“A study by Nationwide finds that more than half of secondary school pupils struggle to work out change in their heads, prompting claims that maths lessons are leaving them "unequipped for everyday situations"

//www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/10631728/Pupils-cannot-count-out-change-due-to-poor-maths-skills.html


Now your (for want of a better word) excuses, for people that started school under a Labour government, blames ‘the DEMANDS of politicians’ e.g. paperwork - which is almost certainly why the Teaching Establishment HATED Gove, coming in and horrified was trying to make urgent changes from a very low base line - when Labour’s Tristram Hunt seems to think that his party did the opposite.
www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/labour-admits-great-crime-on-education-tristram-hunt-says-his-party-encouraged-schools-to-aim-too-low--and-pupils-paid-the-price-9053693.html

That would account for the dropping of compulsory foreign languages, because languages as you say means they “have to put in the graft”, which comes down to the lack of rigour in the UK education system, at State level anyway.

Regarding the ideological ‘need’ for Private Schools you made, may I suggest when this country can rely on the 48% that COULD subtract one item from £100 and give the right answer to build a semi skilled to highly skilled vibrant UK economy, that employs shed loads of MORE people in their payroll e.g. engineers, we visit this subject again?


Finally regarding your widening of the debate to ‘childcare’, to be frank as my three are yet to provide ONE grandchild, I have no idea on how much money the last government offered parents by 2010, what the coalition have done to improve it (or indeed how much couples on megadosh currently claim on childcare), please tell me.

But surely the start rate of tax at £10,500 and trying to freeze Council Tax for a parliament has helped, from a government needing to reduce a £157 bil budget deficit, rebuild Private Sector jobs using tax incentives and help others struggling that endured huge costs of living increases under Labour e.g those relying on the State Pension, which the coalition increased.


For most people on the £40k incomes you mention, their ‘cost of living’ changed significantly when due the credit boom, the lack of new homes built and our population increasing by at least 2.5 million, home prices were driven up from £73k in 1997, to £232k in early 2008 – increasing their mortgages/debt and rental costs - and the Council Tax on their homes that went up over 110% under Brown.

BTW if teachers are so involved in politics, how many marched, or tried to oust a Minister, when by 2010 we had 1.7 million households (5 million people, many were children without a bedroom or in substandard conditions) needing Social Housing – and yet there was a net DECREASE in UK social homes from 1997 to 2010 in times of plenty? I’d worry more about that and the condition of the children arriving you are asked to mould, rather than (how many?) couples on £300k claiming childcare, that costs how much?

[pointythings]

I don't see where in any of my posts I was a Labour apologist, isitme . As far as I know, political tampering with education has been a feature since the 1970s, and it has nearly all been bad no matter who was in power.

Language teaching was as bad in the 1980s (under the Tories) as it was later under Labour, and I very much doubt that it was much better before the 1980s either. A good friend of mine who taught French to GCSE level showed me what she was having to teach a group of fifteen-year-olds - they weren't even having to produce so much as a couple of paragraphs of independent writing. Successive governments over decades have allowed MFL to rot - Labour's axing of the requirement was just a matter of putting the horse apple on the cake, but by that time the subject was such a joke that I doubt it made much difference.

Re private schools - I said I would like to see a system where private schools are not necessary because all schools are good. Do you not want this then? Is it not something we should strive for?

I brought childcare into the mix because frankly, work does not pay well enough in the UK. Funding childcare in the way Scandinavian countries do would really help that. If people see that work will put more money in their pocket, then it is more likely that they will make an effort to put themselves into a position where they can access work. I have no problem with some 'stick' in the welfare system, but there really isn't enough carrot at the moment.

And yes, it's great that the tax threshold has been raised - but that still does not justify this government's so-called support for paid childcare. The fact is that a couple on almost £300k qualify, and they simply should not - that limited pot of money should be spent on the people who need it most. That's a simple matter of fairness.

The cost of freezing Council Tax has been a very mixed blessing IMO - it has been paid for by cutting services for the most vulnerable.

If you want to talk about social housing - I agree there should be more. I also think it should never have been sold off in the first place. Remind me who it was that started that?

Lastly, I really don't like the sweeping way you talk about lack of rigour in the State system. Talking about as if it is all bad undermines the nuance of your arguments. I see my children doing things I was not doing at school until I was 2 years older than they are now - and I was considered pretty damn able. Clearly there is some good teaching going on in the State sector - I can claim some credit for how they are turning out, but certainly not all of it. I get so tired of State education being demonised, it adds nothing to the debate. We should be looking at what works well and then rolling that out - and yes, if a group of teachers or a particular school does not like it then let's by all means get tough.

[Isitmebut]

Pointythings …. Believe it or not, I not looking to label anyone Labour apologists, this thread is essence, is celebrating the political reshuffle of Mr Gove, for being ‘a Gove’, and trying to rush through education reforms.

My point is maybe the apology should be in the acknowledgement to the parents, taxpayers, employers and the children (if they are paying attention) that there ARE serious standards problems in State schools and that the Teaching Establishment running education has to work harder with Ministers to raise them significantly, asap.

Labour’s Tristram Hunt held his hands up to the obvious (in a link above) standards fell under them, Gove clearly came to that same conclusion, and you acknowledged teachers were not happy with mediocrity. Despite the fall of standards in the basics (literacy and numeracy, that should remain constantly high even if a new Chairman Mao came to power) the blame is not with them – it is with those setting the height of the bar and ensuring they give teachers the skills and support they need to hit it.


So then going into ‘defence mode’ stating politicians have tampered with education since the 1970’s, it helps no one today, and I wonder if our children taking the Nationwide survey subtracting one item from £100, had to use 1970’s Pounds, Shillings and Pence rather than a decimal system, if ANY would have got the bloody answer right. I left a London Comprehensive School in the 1970’s and before I left had a Saturday job serving in a greengrocers, and I had no problems adding up items as I went along, and I was a ‘thickie’ advised to take a CSE in maths.

Your children have clearly done well within the system, but I reiterate, if we had 580,000 unemployed 16 to 24 year-old unemployed in 2004, 711,000 unemployed before the 2007 crash (the height of the Brown Boom’) - and the UK ‘needed’ 2.5 million net new migrants to fill UK skills shortages – SOMETHING WAS WRONG with the education system, and the unemployed numbers both confirms and adds a social crisis to that fact.


Language teaching in the 1980’s might well have been sub standard, this is no excuse, but we were only looking to join a Common Market back then. When a committed pro EU government is signing Treaties acknowledging the UK was headed to a honking great EU superstate, with few ambitions to trade with any other nations and the 510(?) million citizens within, PREPARING our children for cross-border careers should have become a key education objective in RAISING STANDARDS, rather than being a dropped hot potato.

A key component of national prosperity is a bit of vision and the ability to ADAPT to global trends and skills requirements, not mull over the 1980’s.

On that point, re the net fall in social housing under Labour over 13-years with £billions to spend on Quangos, blaming Thatcher’s policy of allowing people to buy their council homes in/from the 1980’s is a lame excuse. Not just because the money was clearly there in the 2000's, but also for failing to ADAPT to Labour’s OWN EU and Non EU immigration policy from the early 2000’s, when also already warned in the Barker Report of 2003/4 Labour commissioned, we needed 200,000 new homes a year BEFORE immigration seriously picked up.

On the State system versus Private Schools, of course I want to see a State system achieving results somewhere close to Private Schools, haven’t you worked out I’m unhappy with the current situation? But as I’ve said, the country needs highly skilled employees and entrepreneurs that we seem a long way away from being able to rely on the State to provide.

I can understand why a left wing Teaching Establishment complicit in lowering State standard might be concerned of the widening gap between both, but attacking Private education is not the answer when the taxpayer is paying more per pupil – they should worry about getting their own ‘stuff’ in order, from top to bottom.

Finally the freeze in Council Tax ‘mixed blessing’, of course if after 13-years of above inflation rises key services have still had to be cut, like the Library in Coronation Street lol, that is not acceptable.

The question the Council taxpayers should ask, have all the ‘non jobs’ like ‘Nuclear Free Local Authorities Secretariat, Policy and Research Officer’ and ‘Head of Participation and Partnership’, on an average of £40k a pop gone yet? If Councils are still as ‘lean’ as Mr Pickles frame, taxpayers need to demand value for money with cuts on waste, not services. IMO.