There is a thought-provoking article in today’s Guardian from Tony Wright. In it he gets to the root of the issue as to why a re-alignment of the centre left hasn’t happened, didn’t happen after the election in May, and is not likely to happen anytime soon.
It is the challenge about how politicians on the centre-left view the State and its future. Wright points to a real argument is opening up about the size, shape and role of the state.
“Part of the argument is to make the distinction between those who see deficit reduction as a political opportunity and those who accept it as an economic necessity… If people come to feel that the cuts are not the product of grim necessity but of an ideological enthusiasm for reducing the state then that common sense will change. What will not, however, is the debate that has started about the state, and Labour needs to be part of it. Simply defending the state will not be enough – nor will attacking cuts without describing the alternative.urope have nothing distinctive to offer.”
Wright cites Tony Judt’s chiding that “Social Democrats in today’s Europe have nothing distinctive to offer”, and claims that among the parties of the left: “There is a profound disorientation of ideas. The neoliberal ascendancy of the last 30 years has crashed to the ground, but the materials for its replacement have not yet even begun to be assembled. In every sense it is a time for fundamentals, on the economy, society and political system, in the circumstances in which we now find ourselves. It is time for some genuinely big ideas, capable of finding public resonance.”
He hopes, probably in vain, that the forthcoming Labour leadership contest will give some impetus to this important debate and crucially he contends that then “…we might start to build a progressive alliance that is worthy of the name.”
Wednesday, 30 June 2010
Monday, 28 June 2010
It's Only A Game!
Yes, in spite of what the late Bill Shankly said, a game of football is simply that, a game. I have always understood that a game of football is a game between two sides of nominally eleven players at any one time and the better team on the day wins. Now forgive me if I have missed something yesterday, but isn’t that what happened?
There were, of course, other sporting events taking place over the last couple of days. One Andy Murray won a gripping tennis match against Gilles Simon, Jorge Lorenzo won an excellent Dutch MotoGP at Assen, Sebastian Vettel led two British drivers home at the European Formula 1 Grand Prix at Valencia, even an “England” team won a cricket match against Australia and thereby clinched a series win against an old enemy.
The superb and exciting sporting performances are being ignored by an outrageously biased and irresponsible media who only want a re-run of WWII for the umpteenth time on a football pitch.
Let’s be absolutely clear, an over-hyped game of football between two teams, one representing England and one representing Germany, is still ONLY A GAME! It is NOT that important.
There were, of course, other sporting events taking place over the last couple of days. One Andy Murray won a gripping tennis match against Gilles Simon, Jorge Lorenzo won an excellent Dutch MotoGP at Assen, Sebastian Vettel led two British drivers home at the European Formula 1 Grand Prix at Valencia, even an “England” team won a cricket match against Australia and thereby clinched a series win against an old enemy.
The superb and exciting sporting performances are being ignored by an outrageously biased and irresponsible media who only want a re-run of WWII for the umpteenth time on a football pitch.
Let’s be absolutely clear, an over-hyped game of football between two teams, one representing England and one representing Germany, is still ONLY A GAME! It is NOT that important.
Saturday, 26 June 2010
What Is Education For?
Back from holiday in a very civilised part of France, the Charentes Maritimes, to find that the LibDems in coalition have become everybody’s whipping boys. I guess the general message is there’s no gain without pain as I learnt when I was a member of Watford Harriers many years ago, and parts of me are still hurting (or is that simply old age?)
VAT rise - I think that was inevitable whoever had formed the government after the election. Is it regressive, strictly speaking, yes but the exempted items make it less so.
Public sector pay and pension freeze – again inevitable but if they think the private sector are going to be shamed into acting responsibly on the pay front, the Network Rail example simply proves that fat cats have no shame and that greed is a constant feature in human nature.
Do we really have any other choice but to grin and bear it? No we don’t, at least not until our sovereign debt has been reduced to an acceptable level and our banks re-discover the correct balance between prudence and risk.
The coalition, by moving to reduce corporation tax, has embarked on a risky strategy of relying on the private business sectors, both small and large, to pull the country back into growth and to expand employment. They think that the private sector is up to the task and will act collectively for the benefit of the country. Recent experience would suggest otherwise. Small businesses in general are particularly reluctant to take on additional staff at any time because of the onerous administrative requirements of our current employment legislation. Larger businesses are going to become increasingly reliant on short-term contracts and the use of agency staff to cover any labour shortages that their growth might generate.
For most people of working age, portfolio working will become the norm rather than the exception and a “job for life” will become a quaint anachronism. The real challenge in this is for our education system and its ability and preparedness to deliver truly transferable skills for new generations.
Our modern economy requires much less knowledge and much more skill from its workforce, but are our schools ready or even able to teach modern and transferable skills in preference to traditional knowledge? Judging by their eagerness to make sacred cows of their sixth forms, the answer seems to be an emphatic “No”.
What is required is a new approach to the question “What is education for?” Over recent years successive governments have sought to expand education, particularly higher education, in the mistaken belief that everyone needs more knowledge to serve a knowledge-based economy. But is this right? It would seem to me that the knowledge-based economy needs only a few with the knowledge and many with the skills to apply that knowledge to the benefit of the economy in particular and society in general.
Is it time to re-think our notions of “comprehensive education” and to recognise that some schools need to serve those that require knowledge and perhaps other, different schools need to concentrate on providing skills relevant to work in a modern economy. Is it time to stop kidding ourselves that, as far as education is concerned, one type of comprehensive education from 11 to 16 is suitable for all pupils?
VAT rise - I think that was inevitable whoever had formed the government after the election. Is it regressive, strictly speaking, yes but the exempted items make it less so.
Public sector pay and pension freeze – again inevitable but if they think the private sector are going to be shamed into acting responsibly on the pay front, the Network Rail example simply proves that fat cats have no shame and that greed is a constant feature in human nature.
Do we really have any other choice but to grin and bear it? No we don’t, at least not until our sovereign debt has been reduced to an acceptable level and our banks re-discover the correct balance between prudence and risk.
The coalition, by moving to reduce corporation tax, has embarked on a risky strategy of relying on the private business sectors, both small and large, to pull the country back into growth and to expand employment. They think that the private sector is up to the task and will act collectively for the benefit of the country. Recent experience would suggest otherwise. Small businesses in general are particularly reluctant to take on additional staff at any time because of the onerous administrative requirements of our current employment legislation. Larger businesses are going to become increasingly reliant on short-term contracts and the use of agency staff to cover any labour shortages that their growth might generate.
For most people of working age, portfolio working will become the norm rather than the exception and a “job for life” will become a quaint anachronism. The real challenge in this is for our education system and its ability and preparedness to deliver truly transferable skills for new generations.
Our modern economy requires much less knowledge and much more skill from its workforce, but are our schools ready or even able to teach modern and transferable skills in preference to traditional knowledge? Judging by their eagerness to make sacred cows of their sixth forms, the answer seems to be an emphatic “No”.
What is required is a new approach to the question “What is education for?” Over recent years successive governments have sought to expand education, particularly higher education, in the mistaken belief that everyone needs more knowledge to serve a knowledge-based economy. But is this right? It would seem to me that the knowledge-based economy needs only a few with the knowledge and many with the skills to apply that knowledge to the benefit of the economy in particular and society in general.
Is it time to re-think our notions of “comprehensive education” and to recognise that some schools need to serve those that require knowledge and perhaps other, different schools need to concentrate on providing skills relevant to work in a modern economy. Is it time to stop kidding ourselves that, as far as education is concerned, one type of comprehensive education from 11 to 16 is suitable for all pupils?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
