Archive for December, 2010

Monday News Review

13/12/2010, 06:59:49 AM

Action on EMA’s

Tens of thousands of teenagers, college lecturers and teachers will take to the streets tomorrow to protest against the abolition of a grant that helps young people from low-income households stay in education after the age of 16. Demonstrators have organised lunchtime marches across the country – from Hackney in north-east London to Gateshead – in a last-ditch effort to reverse the government’s decision to scrap the Education Maintenance Allowance. Almost 647,000 of England’s 16- to 18-year-olds receive the allowance, which was introduced in 2004, in return for agreeing to remain in education: £30 a week when household income falls below £20,817; £20 a week if household income is between £20,818 and £25,521; and £10 a week if it is between and £25,522 and £30,810. In some parts of the country, such as Birmingham and Leicester, four-fifths of 16-year-olds receive the allowance. Campaigners say black and minority ethnic students will be particularly affected by its abolition because a high proportion claim the grant. David Cameron announced in October the allowance would be stopped at the end of the academic year, and it closes to new applicants next month. Before the general election, Michael Gove, now education secretary, denied that his party intended to end the benefit. – The Guardian

Warning siren for Lib Dems

Extensive polling of 2,000 people who voted for Nick Clegg’s party in May suggests just 54 per cent will back the Lib Dems in five years’ time. Some 22 per cent of Lib Dem voters say they will chose Labour. The polling, conducted by Lord Ashcroft, the former Tory deputy chairman, and revealed exclusively by The Sunday Telegraph, also shows that 44 per cent of Lib Dem voters in May say their view of the party has “got worse.” The findings will make grim reading for Mr Clegg and his fellow Lib Dem ministers. The polling, all in Lib Dem-held seats, was done 10 days before last week’s key parliamentary vote to increase university tuition fees to up to £9,000 a year, which saw the party’s MPs split three ways and the coalition’s Commons majority slashed by three quarters. Mr Clegg faces a series of further tests of his leadership, starting this week when the House of Lords votes on the tuition fee rises. Insiders predict the result could be “even tighter” than last week. – The Telegraph

A Liberal Democrat MP has warned Nick Clegg that he needs to convince his party that he remains the right person to be leader. In an open attack on Mr Clegg, Greg Mulholland, a former schools spokesman for the party, who voted against raising tuition fees on Thursday, questioned the wisdom of the party being in the Coalition. And he warned Mr Clegg that the party was “hurting”. “It is very important that Nick gets out to the wider party and reassures people that the Coalition is not only doing a good job for the country but also that it is the right thing for the Liberal Democrats as a party,” he told the BBC’s The World This Weekend programme. “He has done a very good job as Deputy Prime Minister but he also needs to show that he remains the right person to get out and communicate with our members.” It emerged that Labour is to step up its efforts to woo the 26 Liberal Democrat MPs who refused to support Mr Clegg on tuition fees. “I want to make a clear offer to them that I want to work with them,” said Labour leader Ed Miliband. – The Independent (more…)

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

Labour selects candidate for Oldham East & Saddleworth by-election

12/12/2010, 04:40:38 PM
Debbie Abrahams

Debbie Abrahams has been selected to fight Oldham East & Saddleworth

Labour has selected Debbie Abrahams as its candidate in the Oldham East and Saddleworth by-election which follows the disqualification of former MP, Phil Woolas. She beat Riaz Ahmed and Cllr Abdul Jabbar, who were also shortlisted yesterday, in a selection by members at a count at Queen Elizabeth Hall in Oldham.

Abrahams was Labour’s candidate in Colne Valley at this year’s general election, coming third behind the Tories and Lib Dems. She is a public health consultant, a former director of public health research at Liverpool university and is the former chair of Rochdale primary care trust. She lives in Oldham with her husband, a former professional cricketer who now coaches the England under 19s, and their two daughters.

On winning the selection she said:

“It’s an honour and a privilege to have been selected as Labour’s candidate. Now I’m looking forward to getting out and meeting as many residents as possible in the next few weeks to listen to their concerns.

It’s important that the real issues and concerns of people in the borough are not lost during this by-election campaign. People feel let down by the LibDem-Tory broken promises on police cuts, tuition fees and VAT.  It doesn’t have to be this way, there is an alternative.

This is an opportunity for people to send a message to the government. Oldham East and Saddleworth needs a Labour MP who will stand up and fight for them. I’m determined to keep my promises and deliver the best possible deal for people in this borough”.

The writ is expected to be moved in the new year, with Labour looking to hold the by-election on February 3rd.

UPDATE: Debbie has just recorded this message..

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

Tom Watson: Who paid Andy Coulson’s legal fees?

12/12/2010, 01:00:43 PM

If you can’t see the letter in the document viewer below, the plain text version is here.

Gus O Donnell Andy Coulson Legal Fees

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

Tom Watson: Who paid Andy Coulson’s legal fees?

12/12/2010, 12:59:02 PM

Sir Gus O’Donnell

Head of the Home Civil Service

Cabinet Office

70 Whitehall

London

SW1A 2AS

December 2010

REPORTING OF GIFTS FOR SPECIAL ADVISERS

I understand that whilst giving evidence under oath at the Tommy Sheridan perjury trial on Thursday 9th December, the Prime Minister’s Communications Director, Mr Andy Coulson, appeared to state that media organisation News International was paying his legal fees. (more…)

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

Sunday News Review

12/12/2010, 09:38:36 AM

EU parachute for Clegg?

Nick Clegg (pic: PA)

Clegg's Sheffield seat will be targeted at election

Nick Clegg is being lined up for a top EU job in an “emergency exit” strategy as he faces a revolt in his party over tuition fees. David Cameron is ready to ­parachute the Lib Dem leader into Brussels as Britain’s EU Commissioner amid fears Mr Clegg will struggle to hold his seat as an MP at the next election, say Downing Street sources. The Deputy PM would ­replace Labour peer Baroness Ashton in the post which carries a £239,000 salary and perks package worth ­another £100,000 a year. The Foreign Affairs chief is due to stand down with the other EU ­Commissioners in October 2014 – just ahead of the next general ­election in May 2015, though there is speculation she could quit sooner. A Downing Street source revealed: “David Cameron owes Nick Clegg a huge debt for coming into the coalition and taking a massive personal hit over tuition fees. “If it looks like he will lose his Sheffield Hallam seat, there will be an emergency exit strategy which could see him land one of the big jobs in Brussels. – The Mirror

Lib Dem grassroots look towards Miliband

The depth of anger among the Liberal Democrat grassroots over tuition fees is laid bare tonight in an astonishing article by the party’s former director of policy. Richard Grayson claims that most Lib Dem members have more in common with their counterparts in the Labour party and the Greens than with their own leadership. Grayson, who was director of policy between 1999 and 2004, and until October a vice-chairman on the party’s federal policy committee, says the divisive issue of tuition fees should make ordinary Lib Dems “sit up and think”. He urges the party to seize the “exciting opportunity” of Ed Miliband‘s leadership and to engage more with its traditional enemy. He says the Labour leader is a genuine pluralist and points to the fact that he has signed up to the campaign for the alternative vote (AV). But he adds: “The current Liberal Democrat leaders will not always be our leaders. In time, the centre-left roots of the party should (or at least could) reassert themselves.” – The Observer

Research by Ipsos MORI for the News of the World underlines the damage from last week’s Commons showdown which saw the party’s MPs split three ways. Mr Clegg has appealed for the Lib Dems to come together in the wake of the bitter arguments, disclosing new details of the Pupil Premium for poor children in an effort to highlight the benefits of being in coalition with the Tories. But some backbenchers have been highly critical of his handling of the fees issue and there are even rumours of a leadership challenge. Labour leader Ed Miliband used an interview to try to capitalise on disaffection in the ranks, appealing for Lib Dem MPs to come and work with the Opposition. “I want to extend a welcome to them to work with us,” he told The Sunday Times. – PA

Labour ahead in poll of polls

For nearly a fortnight the YouGov daily poll has had the Tories equal or ahead making it out of line with all the other firms. Now that has changed tonight with the Politicalbetting All Pollsters Index (PAPA) showing a Red-Blue gap of more than three points. For the Lib Dem the polling woes continue with YouGov having them down once again into single figures. The hit that the party has taken is enormous and we’ll be able to see the full impact when the other December polls come in. – Politicalbetting

Tories at war over justice reforms

The reaction from the public – and from Fleet Street – has already forced the Coalition to toughen its policy: 24 hours after Clarke announced the abolition of minimum sentences for murderers, he was ordered by Cameron to reinstate them. A fascinating battle is raging between Andy Coulson, Downing Street’s tabloid-attuned head of communications, and the Justice Secretary. Clarke is not, however, a man to be bullied. Like Iain Duncan Smith, he has no ambitions for promotion. If he isn’t allowed to deliver the reforms he wants, he will simply light one of his favourite cigars, slip on his famous hush puppies, and walk out of the Government. – The Telegraph

Coulson under fire for fees

Coulson, while he was in court last week, as a witness in the Tommy Sheridan perjury case in Glasgow, he gave the impression that, having taken legal advice, his fees had been paid by his former bosses at News International. This has caught the eye of Labour MP Tom Watson, who suspects any such payment may constitute a “gift” (or at least may invite suspicion of a lingering outside influence), and therefore needs to be declared to his civil service bosses. Just to make absolutely certain (many a slip, and all that), Watson has dropped a line to Cabinet Secretary, Gus O’Donnell. Independent on Sunday

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

Andy Coulson is not J Edgar Hoover

12/12/2010, 09:36:23 AM

By Dan McCurry

J Edgar Hoover originally brought scandal upon himself when he worked in the private sector. However, he was saved from his disgrace when the US president offered him a job as his head of communications. As the holder of one of the most powerful civilian ranks in the US government, he answered directly to the president without the constraint of civil service accountability to stand in his way.

That paragraph is, of course, ridiculous. Why would anyone hire the disgraced J Edgar Hoover? Who in their right mind would be interested in a man whose view of the private lives of others was so contemptible that he bugged thousands of public figures? Not for national security reasons, but to pursue his own selfish ends.

Of all people, why would the US president hire J Edgar Hoover after he came to public notoriety following a bugging and deception scandal? A scandal that sent people around him to jail and over which he only narrowly avoided prosecution. It is inconceivable.

Yet that is exactly what David Cameron did when he hired Andy Coulson. There then followed a spate of bugging and burglary scandals involving the Tory party as beneficiaries. Questions were asked. The Guardian investigated. (more…)

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

The week Uncut

11/12/2010, 10:39:37 AM

In case you missed them, these were the best read pieces on Uncut in the last seven days:

Dan Hodges says let’s not defend our record – it’s been trashed by the voters.

This Tory-Lib Dem government is particularly clobbering women says Sally Bercow

Tom Watson is sick of the Tory-Lib Dem lies

Voting for tuition fees to teach protesters a lesson is appalling, and will be remembered says Dora Meredith

John Woodcock sticks up for big Gordy and his ideas

Open data: by itself, the big society amounts to little more than “behave decently” says Jon Bounds

Andy Dodd thinks Students are paying the price of this arranged marriage

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

Dave, Boris and Parliament Square: Ian Austin seeks the truth

10/12/2010, 02:40:07 PM

IanA_Cam

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

Intra-school rankings could improve social mobility

10/12/2010, 12:00:06 PM

by Nick Keehan

The first episode of Ian Hislop’s Age of the Do-Gooders broadcast on BBC Two last week told the how in 1854 Charles Trevelyan introduced the practice of competitive examination for entry into the civil service. The reform was the first step towards a system in which government positions were filled based on merit, rather than being handed out to political allies or reserved for the younger sons of the aristocracy. “From the time this measure receives Royal assent”, a Times editorial in support of the reform proclaimed, “it will be the fault of the people if the public service does not become their birthright, according to the talent, education, and industry of each”.

Not that it was expected that all parts of the public service would become the birthright of all parts of the people. Competition was open to all, but it would still only be the “lower class of appointments”, those “small posts which might recompense the industry of the head boy in the village school”, and which would be “filled by just such an examination as the readiest and best-conducted lads in these schools would succeed in”, to which young people from the lower orders could realistically aspire. Those positions “of great importance and pecuniary value, demanding the attainments and worthy [of] the pursuit of the most educated Englishmen” would in all likelihood remain the preserve of the better off, in whom, it could be safely assumed, the highest levels of talent, education and industry resided.

Attitudes towards aspiration have changed greatly since then, of course. Social mobility is the ideal of all political parties. Nowadays, very few would maintain that talent and industry are the monopoly of the offspring of upper echelons of society. So how to explain the overwhelming predominance of young people from better-off families at elite institutions?

Take universities. On Tuesday David Lammy released some research he had conducted on Oxbridge admissions. While it contained interesting details and highlighted the extent of the problem, the research, for the most part, served to confirm what was generally well-know about our elite universities in general: that they are dominated by the upper and middle classes and that the poor are generally excluded.

Commenting on Lammy’s research, education secretary, Michael Gove, stated that the reason for the lack of poor people at Oxbridge was that “our schools system is not good enough”. This is only partly right. The problem is not the overall level of quality in our schools – after all there is no shortage of applicants with the necessary grades to get into Oxbridge – but with its distribution. Put simply: children from poor families do not get to go to the best schools. The better-off do not monopolise talent and industry, but they do tend to dominate when it comes to receiving the highest standards of education.

Can it be right, however, that the quality of education received should deny young people an opportunity that their ability and hard work would in other circumstances permit them to enjoy? If their standard of education prevents them from benefitting from that opportunity to the same extent as someone who has received a higher standard of education then, maybe, yes. Research, however, suggests that this is not the case.

A five-year research study, co-funded by the department for business, innovation and skills, the national foundation for educational research, the Sutton trust and the college board, found that comprehensive pupils outperform independent and grammar pupils in university degrees. For example, a comprehensive school student with three Bs at A-level is likely to perform as well at university as an independent or grammar school student with an A and two Bs, or two As and a B. At the same time, comprehensive school pupils also performed better than similarly qualified independent and grammar school pupils in degrees from the most academically selective universities and across all degree classes.

These results suggest that it would be worthwhile for university admissions departments to consider the educational backgrounds of applicants. This has always been an option for universities and many do consider educational background and other similar factors when deciding on applications. However, given the general failure of our elite universities to ensure a socio-economically diverse student population, government could also have an important role to play in supporting these efforts.

In 1999, Peter Wilby proposed a radical reform of university admissions: give every school an Oxbridge place. Basically, the top student at every sixth form or college would be offered a place at Oxford, Cambridge or another top university. Set out in the deliberately crude way that WIlby chose to explain it, the policy was never going to be politically tenable. But the principle was, and is, sound. With some minor changes and a bit of fine-tuning it could work.

An altered version of the policy could operate as follows: alongside the traditional A-level and GCSE grades, exam boards would publish a student’s position within the school based on those grades, either as a ranking, or as a percentile or some other fraction. Universities would be under no compulsion to consider the rankings when making admission decisions. A-level grades could still form the primary basis for university offers. The rankings would, however, be a useful and readily available source of information for admissions officers that would enable them to see how applicants fared in relation to those who achieved the same standard of education. It would be one of those nudges that David Cameron and Steve Hilton like to go on about. One that would enable universities to distinguish more easily between, in the words of Michael Gove, “rich, thick kids” and “poor, clever” ones.

It would not be a panacea. Improving the performance of schools catering for the worst off and ensuring that their pupils felt that going to a top university was something to aspire to would still be necessary goals. The details would need working out. But such a policy could be useful for Labour as it seeks to promote social mobility and equality of opportunity and to further test the Tory-Liberal government’s professed commitment to those ideals.

Nick Keehan works in Parliament.

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

Is this the new road you promised Nick?

10/12/2010, 08:15:45 AM

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon