Leeds

Don’t underestimate the university of life

University

Tony Blair famously stated that ‘education, education, education’ would be his government’s top priority, and it is fair to say that literally billions of pounds were invested into academia during the New Labour years.

Undoubtedly, some of this spend was absolutely essential. Decades of neglect, particularly in the North of England, meant that many primary and secondary schools were in an antiquated state by 1997.

The need for a huge spend to improve the infrastructure of education in our country did not come soon enough, and it is now the exception rather than the rule to see run down, dilapidated, inner city state schools.

The loosening of the grip of Local Education Authorities over the management of schools, the introduction of Academies and the shift in emphasis on the importance of schooling were positive contributions that the Blair government made to the education agenda.

However, as was the case in many areas where public sector spending was dramatically increased by New Labour, the government failed to maximise the impact of its investment.

Most obviously, many schools failed to modernise, both in terms of management and in terms of grasping the opportunity of flexibility to learning and the curriculum that Blair, if not all of his colleagues, wanted to see.

There was also a failure to introduce a more diverse range of teaching and teaching methods; the working practices of those in higher education was a joke; and the quality of tutors across the piece remained, at best, average.

Most disappointingly for me though was the government’s obsession with University. Further education is always to be encouraged, but why this must always end with students donning a cap and gown is beyond me. Far too many people who were not going to benefit from University were encouraged to attend. Degrees were being offered in everything from origami to allotment management!

This led to a generation of young people having a university education – but often lacking any basic skills that readied them for the workplace. A degree in common sense was clearly not an option if some of the university graduates I have employed in the past are anything to go by.

There may be good arguments against the introduction of high university fees, however it has put a stop to young people using the years of 18-21 to ‘find themselves’ and have not even one eye on what career they wish to pursue as an adult.

The new agenda that offers good vocational courses, apprenticeships, internships and on-the-job learning is to be welcomed and offers a much more comprehensive learning journey to students. It is also a more attractive environment for more mature learners who are in need of re-training.

The more innovative schools and colleges are now inviting entrepreneurs and business leaders into their classes. Even football clubs are getting involved, the likes of Everton establishing a free school and proving that hard to reach kids do not have to be written off.

Of course, university is always going to be a good option for some – but now graduates are more likely studying subjects that will enhance their career prospects rather than opting for courses that enable them to frequent the student union and city bars most regularly.

Getting an individual ‘work ready’ is not the only thing that education is for. But it is one of them. ‘Education, Skills and Training’ is a better mantra than that of Blair’s which in the end actually translated into ‘University, University, University.’ It was good for the academics, but bad for business.

Will the North ever love the Tories?

Conservatives

This week saw the three main political parties reshuffle their cabinet and shadow cabinet members respectively.

The key aim of such a process is not necessarily to replace incompetent or underperforming politicians with better people, but often about boosting your party’s appeal to the electorate.

Certainly, the spin coming out of the Prime Minister’s office this week was that he wanted the changes he made to signal a more inclusive Conservative Party, with the elevation of female MP’s and MP’s from northern constituencies.

Among the Northern contingent to get the call from the PM were Esther McVey, the formidable Wirral West Liverpudlian MP, who ticked both boxes, and was rewarded for her tenacious role in selling the welfare reform agenda with a job as Employment Minister, and Yorkshire MP and former Bradford council leader Kris Hopkins, who has been appointed as the new Housing Minister.

Overall there is certainly a more ‘northern feminine’ feel to the Cameron team, albeit none of those promoted will be sat at the top table of government just yet.

So, will these personnel changes make it more likely for the northern electorate to support the Tories at the 2015 General Election?

On a straw poll of about a dozen people so far, the answer is a resounding no. I accept that this is hardly a scientific sampling of voting intentions, but they were all the type of folk who the main political parties use as their ‘barometer’ – although I’m not sure all of them have or aspire to have conservatories, which apparently is the new ‘sweet spot’ as far as the politicos are concerned (I kid you not).

Without exception, and as I wrote last week, the key thing for all of them is the economy. If the recent upturn proves to be sustainable, the Tories will win. If not, then Miliband’s pitch to ‘the squeezed middle’ might just resonate – though, worryingly for Labour, he still fails to meet the ‘I can see him as a Prime Minister’ test.

Personalities in politics are clearly important, but anyone at government level outside of the PM, Chancellor, Foreign Secretary and Boris Johnson, not in the government per se, but more powerful than most politicians, just doesn’t hit the radar of most of us.

So it is the Prime Minister’s highest ranking (northern) Minister and colleague, Tatton’s George Osborne, who can deliver victory for him at the next election, rather than the smattering of female MP’s with northern accents who have climbed another rung on the slippery Westminster ladder this week. Oh, and by the way, even if we vote Tory in this part of the world, few of us actually love ‘em!

It’s still the economy stupid

Ed Milliband

4 October 2013 at 11:30

Not for the first time the Tories wrote off Labour leader Ed Miliband during the summer parliamentary recess.

He has continued to struggle at the dispatch box at Prime Minister Questions; he had gone AWOL without beeper, laptop or mobile phone for the holiday season, and Labour colleagues from past and present were publicly and privately briefing the press about their dissatisfaction of their leaders’ performance and his inability to make any significant breakthrough in the polls.

On the face of it you would think this was good news for the Prime Minister. In fact a weak opposition that appears unlikely to offer a serious challenge to the government at the next election simply provides an environment of complacency to develop which results in Tory backwoodsmen indulging in right wing gesture politics, and an unhealthy flirtation with the Monty Python political party that is UKIP.

Rather than capitalise on its advantage over the summer months, Conservatives turned inward, rather than engaging with the electorate – and by the end of the conference season they are horrified to discover that ‘Red Ed’ is far from dead.

Demonstrating a steely determination that few other than those closest to him would give him credit for, Miliband has taken on the press barons, stopped what would have been a premature jump into a war with Syria, and now has decided to take on the hated energy companies.

All of a sudden Labour has a poll ranking of 41% – more than enough to give them an overall majority at the next election.

David Cameron will be hoping that Ed’s bounce will force his party to re-engage with their brains, and with the issues that matter to the British electorate, which quite frankly do not include huntin’, fishin’, fracking, or even the EU.

Cameron’s conference speech this week in Manchester may have been short on policy, but it was long on warnings. Warnings about Labour’s spending plans. Warnings about Socialism. Most of all warnings about a Tory return to opposition. The intention of Cameron’s 45 minutes in the spotlight was to remind his party that the next election is not in the bag, and that they must refocus on the issues that go beyond their individual hobby horses.

In the end it is ‘the economy stupid’ for the vast majority of voters, and for that Cameron and his chancellor will be grateful.

Because in poll after poll, the area where Labour continues to lag far behind the Tories is on the question of economic competency. The recent upturn in the economy has blown out of the water Ed Balls’ claim that austerity would lead to disaster. Bashing energy companies, banks and big business may look attractive two years out from an election, but will such anti-enterprise rhetoric look as appetising to an electorate that at its core is more aspirational than altruistic?

In the short term concentrating on living standards, ‘the squeezed middle’ and his ‘Britain can do better than this’ message will serve Ed Miliband well. However, if the economy continues to recover, a Tory narrative around paying down the deficit, tax cuts for ‘hard working families’ and support for enterprise will likely win the day.

Nonetheless, Miliband has proved that he cannot be written off, should not be underestimated, and will provide a far tougher challenge to the Conservatives’ in 2015 that many thought possible. For that, David Cameron might just be grateful.

When a ‘Market’ is not a ‘Market’

Freezing Energy Prices

There has been much furore this week from certain sections of industry and the press following Ed Miliband’s announcement that a future Labour government would freeze energy prices for eighteen months.

Opponents have suggested that this move is ‘Red’ Ed’s attempt to interfere in the market and with market forces. But that’s a load of codswallop.

Instinctively, as a business owner and the chief executive of a private sector lobbying organisation, I am against the notion of imposed price caps, or of politicians attempting to skewer the market place with unnecessary interventions.

I would not be best pleased if Mr Miliband was proposing that business organisations had to set the same level of subscription, and that this price would be frozen, for example.

However, the difference between the products I sell, and that of the owners of utility companies, is that if you choose not to buy from me, then you don’t have to.

In the arena of utilities we have allowed a cartel of sorts to be established. They have different brands, different management structures, different bank accounts, and on occasion price differential too. But they are nowhere near as diverse or competitive enough, because they don’t have to be.

I don’t have a choice as to whether I heat my home, cook my food, use my laptop to write my always ‘on the deadline’ blog from my armchair.

We were promised by a Tory government in the eighties that the sale of our nationalised assets to ‘Sid’ would lead to more robust competition – not only on energy prices, but in the water industry and telecoms as well. That may have been the intention, but it has never materialised, and we have been royally ripped off by the big energy companies ever since.

Miliband’s proposal isn’t anti competitive; it won’t lead to a blackout; it’s certainly not Socialist. But it is long overdue.