I first posted on this blog one year ago today. It was in the middle of the storm over tuition fees and I was bombastic enough to think giving advice to Vince Cable was a good idea.
The post had just nine page views - mainly my own trying to work out formatting and other things.
Well since then I've written a further 267 posts (including this one) and the blog has had more than 26,000 page views - and I'm pretty sure they can't all be my own.
30 November 2011
29 November 2011
Time for a parents' strike?
With most schools closed tomorrow many millions of parents will not be able to go to work. While an extra day at home with the little darlings will be welcomed by many, those with jobs without the long term security of the public sector or the guaranteed publicly subsidised pensions (whether gold plated or not), or those self employed will be the big losers with another productive day wiped out by the selfish actions of the public sector unions.
The unions argue that their members are paying the price for bailing out the banks - which is simply untrue. Around half the deficit was caused by propping up the banks - the other the other half (the structural deficit) was spent by Brown, Balls and co on things like NHS computers that didn’t work, management consultants, ID cards, providing handouts to their client voters condemning them to dependency and the poverty trap and helping to crowd out entrepreneurialism.
So given the huge public sector spending splurge of the previous government - unfunded by current taxation - retrenchment was always going to be painful for the public sector - just as the crash of 2008-10 was very painful for the private sector.
The leadership of the public sector unions serve their members badly by calling these selfish, politically motivated strikes. As a result they will make things worse rather than better for their members in the long term.
The good will of parents (and no doubt other hit by these strikes) is running out - if teachers persist in disrupting children's education - parents who provide a huge financial and other commitment to the smooth running of most schools may start to feel less inclined to support teachers in their jobs.
At my childrens' schools parents are happy to volunteer in class rooms, talk to children about their experiences help with school trips and generally make life easier for pupils and teachers alike. The Parent School Association raises thousands of pounds each year for things like playground equipment, sports equipment, classroom pets and equipment, visits to school by authors, artists and musicians etc. Yes it provides a more interesting and diverse curriculum for the kids - it also makes the job of teaching them more rewarding.
So if this latest round of industrial foolishness causes fewer parents to participate in their schools (even if it is just to make up the pay lost through taking leave to cover the strike) teachers will lose out too.
So it's time for the trots at the top of the teaching unions to accept the inevitable, stop their undergraduate posturing and agree a deal that protects their members as best they can in harsh economic conditions and encourages a more benign view of the profession from parents (well from this one at least).
The unions argue that their members are paying the price for bailing out the banks - which is simply untrue. Around half the deficit was caused by propping up the banks - the other the other half (the structural deficit) was spent by Brown, Balls and co on things like NHS computers that didn’t work, management consultants, ID cards, providing handouts to their client voters condemning them to dependency and the poverty trap and helping to crowd out entrepreneurialism.
So given the huge public sector spending splurge of the previous government - unfunded by current taxation - retrenchment was always going to be painful for the public sector - just as the crash of 2008-10 was very painful for the private sector.
The leadership of the public sector unions serve their members badly by calling these selfish, politically motivated strikes. As a result they will make things worse rather than better for their members in the long term.
The good will of parents (and no doubt other hit by these strikes) is running out - if teachers persist in disrupting children's education - parents who provide a huge financial and other commitment to the smooth running of most schools may start to feel less inclined to support teachers in their jobs.
At my childrens' schools parents are happy to volunteer in class rooms, talk to children about their experiences help with school trips and generally make life easier for pupils and teachers alike. The Parent School Association raises thousands of pounds each year for things like playground equipment, sports equipment, classroom pets and equipment, visits to school by authors, artists and musicians etc. Yes it provides a more interesting and diverse curriculum for the kids - it also makes the job of teaching them more rewarding.
So if this latest round of industrial foolishness causes fewer parents to participate in their schools (even if it is just to make up the pay lost through taking leave to cover the strike) teachers will lose out too.
So it's time for the trots at the top of the teaching unions to accept the inevitable, stop their undergraduate posturing and agree a deal that protects their members as best they can in harsh economic conditions and encourages a more benign view of the profession from parents (well from this one at least).
Glum councillors website is back
The Glum councillors website which features Britain's councillors and campaigners pointing at things and looking down hearted has recently started posting new material after going a bit quiet over the summer.
However one can't help noticing just how scruffy the councillors are in the more recent postings - surely the UK's elected representatives should take a bit of pride in being glum?
However one can't help noticing just how scruffy the councillors are in the more recent postings - surely the UK's elected representatives should take a bit of pride in being glum?
26 November 2011
25 November 2011
Friday favourite 34
Returning to Old Reekie's finest punk band - the Rezillos. Here they are performing on the Peter Cook inspired Revolver ITV show from 1978. According to Wikipedia only 8 shows were ever made and the show was first moved to a graveyard slot and then dropped because of its then controversial focus on punk. Enjoy.
Fenton makes Hollywood blockbuster...
The internet sensation that is badly behaved labrador Fenton/Benton has spawned a number of spin-offs. This one is one of the best...
24 November 2011
Worst football team ends 20 year losing streak...
American Samoa have finally won a game of football - defeating Tonga 2-1. The Beeb has the report.
American Samoa hold the record for the biggest ever international defeat 31-0 to the not exactly great (in football terms) Australia. That's only 5 short of the most one sided match in history 36-0 Arbroath v Bon-Accord - an Aberdeen cricket team in the Scottish cup of 1885. On the same day another Aberdeen team went down 35-0 to Dundee Harp - in probably the worst day for Aberdeen football.
American Samoa hold the record for the biggest ever international defeat 31-0 to the not exactly great (in football terms) Australia. That's only 5 short of the most one sided match in history 36-0 Arbroath v Bon-Accord - an Aberdeen cricket team in the Scottish cup of 1885. On the same day another Aberdeen team went down 35-0 to Dundee Harp - in probably the worst day for Aberdeen football.
22 November 2011
Will Coombe Vale see Zac's jackets and scooters reappear?
Coombe Vale is the first electoral contest in the Richmond Park constituency since the general election when Zac Goldsmith narrowly defeated Lib Dem Susan Kramer.
Goldsmith immediately got into to trouble over his election expenses, with an official Electoral Commission investigation concluding:
The Commission estimated that Goldsmith overspent by nearly £1,000 in the so called 'short campaign' - the period from the dissolution of Parliament to polling day. However as they they felt it was due to incompetence rather than intent and it wasn't suffciently serious they somewhat bizarrely did not refer his case to the police for prosecution.
In their investigation the Commission somewhat controversially excluded two high profile campaign accessories - a large number of bright blue jackets emblazoned with 'I back Zac' and four electric delivery scooters. Their rationale was that these had been purchased by the Conservative association, with the jackets having removable stickers and the scooters being hired by the campaign on a daily basis. The report can be found here.
Zac's jackets and scooters on display outside his then HQ. Photo by Kingston Guardian.
So, given Richmond Park Conservative Association has invested several thousand pounds in these jackets and scooters, one can assume they will play a prominent part in the Coombe Vale by-election. We'll see...
Goldsmith immediately got into to trouble over his election expenses, with an official Electoral Commission investigation concluding:
"...we consider that the way in which some election costs were apportioned between Mr Goldsmith's Parliamentary campaign and the concurrent local government election campaign was not consistent with the Commission's guidance or good practice. Had the costs been apportioned in a way more consistent with our guidance, Mr Goldsmith would have exceeded the spending limit..."
The Commission estimated that Goldsmith overspent by nearly £1,000 in the so called 'short campaign' - the period from the dissolution of Parliament to polling day. However as they they felt it was due to incompetence rather than intent and it wasn't suffciently serious they somewhat bizarrely did not refer his case to the police for prosecution.
In their investigation the Commission somewhat controversially excluded two high profile campaign accessories - a large number of bright blue jackets emblazoned with 'I back Zac' and four electric delivery scooters. Their rationale was that these had been purchased by the Conservative association, with the jackets having removable stickers and the scooters being hired by the campaign on a daily basis. The report can be found here.
Zac's jackets and scooters on display outside his then HQ. Photo by Kingston Guardian.
So, given Richmond Park Conservative Association has invested several thousand pounds in these jackets and scooters, one can assume they will play a prominent part in the Coombe Vale by-election. We'll see...
21 November 2011
Charting the rise and fall of Nick Clegg...
An interesting academic take on recent history of Nick Clegg has been published by the LSE.
However I disagree with their fundamental point that Clegg appears to some sort of a victim of events outwith his control and a focus on personalities rather than policy. Clegg's fall (which has brought the Lib Dems down with him) are almost entirely of his own making and failure to communicate Liberal values and Lib Dem priorities in the first six to nine months of the coalition.
The widely held view that Clegg is some sort of lapdog to Cameron is entirely down to the strategy of 'owning the coalition' in the interest of economic stability in the early months of the coalition and the failure to communicate any sort of position over student support. That ground hasn't been made up - in fact the party's position has slipped - since a more argumentative position has been adopted by the party. The public rightly view this as a contrived reaction to the near wipeout the party faced at the polls last May.
But Clegg can turn his ratings (and therefore the party's) around. Earlier this year I carried out some focus group market research for the party in the north of England. The participants were clear that almost all the good will shown to Clegg in the 2010 election had now gone. He wasn’t seen to add anything distinctive to an essentially Conservative government.
But what these voters needed from Clegg and the party was a few clear messages about what the Lib Dems have and will achieve in government – along the lines of the £10,000 tax threshold. They would rather see Liberal Democrat ministers talking about what they are trying to achieve in government rather than justifying essentially Conservative spending cuts.
However I disagree with their fundamental point that Clegg appears to some sort of a victim of events outwith his control and a focus on personalities rather than policy. Clegg's fall (which has brought the Lib Dems down with him) are almost entirely of his own making and failure to communicate Liberal values and Lib Dem priorities in the first six to nine months of the coalition.
The widely held view that Clegg is some sort of lapdog to Cameron is entirely down to the strategy of 'owning the coalition' in the interest of economic stability in the early months of the coalition and the failure to communicate any sort of position over student support. That ground hasn't been made up - in fact the party's position has slipped - since a more argumentative position has been adopted by the party. The public rightly view this as a contrived reaction to the near wipeout the party faced at the polls last May.
But Clegg can turn his ratings (and therefore the party's) around. Earlier this year I carried out some focus group market research for the party in the north of England. The participants were clear that almost all the good will shown to Clegg in the 2010 election had now gone. He wasn’t seen to add anything distinctive to an essentially Conservative government.
But what these voters needed from Clegg and the party was a few clear messages about what the Lib Dems have and will achieve in government – along the lines of the £10,000 tax threshold. They would rather see Liberal Democrat ministers talking about what they are trying to achieve in government rather than justifying essentially Conservative spending cuts.
18 November 2011
Friday favourite 33
Tomorrow is the 35th anniversary of the release in the UK of the Rutles seminal 'Tragical History Tour' album - even though it had been released in the US nine years earlier. It marked the start of the band's decline, following the departure of their long time manager and confidant Leggy Mountbatten who had tragically accepted a teaching post in Australia. It was rightly panned by the critics and the official Rutles site describes the concept as 'not the stongest idea for a Rutles film, four Oxford History Professors on a walking tour of English Tea Shops'.
Just over two years later irreconcilable differences saw the band who had inspired both the Beatles and the Stones split for good.
But here they are at their pomp at the Che Stadium in New York in 1965:
Just over two years later irreconcilable differences saw the band who had inspired both the Beatles and the Stones split for good.
But here they are at their pomp at the Che Stadium in New York in 1965:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)