Coffee House

Gove row paints dispiriting picture of a post-2015 Lib-Con coalition

3 February 2014

8:51 AM

3 February 2014

8:51 AM

The row between the Lib Dems and Conservatives over Ofsted has taken a curious turn this morning, with Lib Dem MP David Ward, not particularly well-liked by the leadership, appearing as a party spokesman on the Today programme.

Given this is about someone’s fixed-term contract not being renewed (any voters who are bothering to pay attention to this row will wish a similar fuss was made when the same thing happened to them), it is, as Fraser said on Saturday, an entirely manufactured row designed to appeal to that very specific group of voters Nick Clegg is trying to court.

But this row does raise an interesting question about the Coalition. James wrote in his politics column this week that the two parties are merely cohabiting now. This means they can go the distance to 2015. But what does it mean after 2015? The three party leaders must think carefully about their red lines so that in the event of a hung parliament, another deal isn’t impossible. But what if the Tories and the Lib Dems end up in Coalition again? One of the reasons for cohabitation is that they have run out of road for reforms that both will agree on. This could mean that a post- 2015 coalition has very little room for radicalism, leaving the two parties bickering about Michael Gove for five years.

Subscribe to The Spectator today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Get more Spectator for less – just £12 for 12 issues.


Show comments
  • scampy1

    The butch looking Morgan spent ten years going along with the lies of Tony the phony Blair.

  • scampy1

    The Tories have got to keep hammering on about the labour and lib dem luvvies against deporting foreign criminals stop and search black and Asian knife carriers, unlimited immigration of uneducated third world immigrants to suck on our benefits and breed like dogs?
    We do not welcome their diversity
    The labour stooge Alan Johnson did not lie awake worrying about the number of immigrants but must have been sleeping when his protection cop ran away with his wife.

  • Tony Quintus

    People need to calm down about 2015, may 2014 is going to decide the tone of the next general election, and it isn’t going to be pretty. Labour dodged a big bullet last year because the metropolitan district councils which they dominate didn’t face the electorate, so they cut where they liked and jacked up council tax as much as they could without triggering a referendum. In places like sheffield (Where the Labour council closed the Don Valley Stadium before they had even finished paying it off and then spent more money to up Woodburn road) and Doncaster, among many others, people are looking to kick Labour hard for playing politics with the cuts, and with entreched Tory hatred, the Lib Dems being a busted flush and the EU elections increasing their prominance, it is going to be a very good year for UKIP.

    And once a traditional Labour voter has found a new place to call home, what do you think the chances of them going back to the shadow cabinet of millionaires, most of whom were part of the government which bankrupted the country, while under the pressure of a million-and-one attack ads from Crosby covering everything from public spending to Europe to Mid Staffs?

  • BarkingAtTreehuggers

    A Lib/Con coalition? What Lib/Con coalition?
    There isn’t one now.

  • CharlietheChump

    Coalition? Again? Or, they could have the decency to be truthful to the electorate and explain why the job’s not done, we are still broke, QE will have to be reversed and any significant rise in interest rates will cripple the State PDQ.
    Have the guts to say to the electorate that a majority government must be the result from the election and the largest party should stand clear of coalition deals, fixes and back room shuffling and promise another election should the first result be indecisive.
    And no more libdem nonsense in government. They are clearly not fit to be anywhere near power.

  • Tony_E

    I don’t think there can be another coalition beyond 2015, whatever the electoral arithmetic. The country would turn its back on such an agreement and whichever coalition that was formed would find it difficult.

    Think about the LibDem/Tory potential. No more reform available – Lords reform and Boundary reform off the table, public sector reform off the table due to the current position the LIbDems are taking. It would be a pointless mess.

    A LibDem/Labour coalition would be possible, but only if the entire Right wing of the parliamentary LibDems were jettisoned. And as the left wing of its vote has already migrated to Labour there is only really the ‘Orange Book’ liberals left on the ground, who have little in common with the now more socialist Labour party.

    So even if by chance Miliband falls a few seats short, (and I would be surprised at that anyway), he would surely much rather rely on the Lib Dems abstaining or simply voting in enough numbers to suppress the Tories in their own interest while offering them no real access to the ministries.

    • HookesLaw

      All the more reason to vote Tory to avoid a coalition

      • Alexsandr

        rather vote for a party that shares my views. Not into voting for one useless lot to keep another useless lot out.

        • HookesLaw

          That’s your problem. The reality is the tories are not useless that’s your fantasy you need to feed to justify how irrational you are.

          • Alexsandr

            bonfire of quangoes – not delivered
            balance budget by 2015 -wont be delivered
            cut immigration -not delivered
            Cast iron guarantee of EU referendum – Hmmm (Yes I know there were caveats)
            ring fenced DFID budget
            gay marriage not in manifesto.
            Need I go on?

            • Denis_Cooper

              Actually there were no caveats when that cast-iron guarantee was given in the pages of the Sun, as Andrew Neill pointed out to David Lidington here:

              http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2013/01/28/camerons-public-plot-to-stay-in-the-eu/

              “DL: No what David Cameron had said on Lisbon was that if it had not come into legal force by the General Election we would hold a referendum to decide whether the British people –

              AN: Actually his famous Sun articles where he said this he did not put that caveat in.

              DL: He had said very consistently –

              AN: He had not put the caveat in.

              DL: He and William Hague as Shadow Foreign Secretary had said very consistently that the referendum was linked to whether Lisbon has come into force or not, and when it did, when every country had ratified it and it came into force he and William Hague made very public statements to say that that matter was now closed and we would take things forwards on different –

              AN: No, we’ve been through the cuttings and nowhere did Mr Cameron make it clear that he was only talking about a situation where Lisbon hadn’t become law.”

            • HookesLaw

              The quango facts are clear and you ignore them.
              Also in the sky news report was the point that workforce numbers in tqhe Public Bodies Reform programme were on target for a 29% reduction over the review period.
              Immigration is being cut. A free vote on gay marriage was in the manifesto. Rolling out gay marriage again is just pathetic.
              As are your arguments about the economy. But go ahead throw 5 years of hard work away. The only people laughing will be the limp dems.

              • Mynydd

                When Mr Heath the conservative Prime Minister signed the Treaty of Rome, without a referendum I might add. and then Mrs Thatcher signed up to the Single Market, without a referendum I might add, no government can cut immigration from the EU. With respect to referendums on Europe only the Labour party has held one. For Non EU countries the outgoing Labour party introduced a points based system which is still in use today.

                • Makroon

                  The referendum was indeed held by the Labour party.
                  Unfortunately, (or fortunately) that Labour party is long defunct – a dead parrot.
                  What we have now is the Brown gang usurpers, whose only real policy is to grab power by smear, sleaze and an ultra left-wing populist manifesto.

    • Makroon

      The LibDems labour under the delusion that “they have more in common with Labour” and that Labour will be kinder and fluffyer to them, you have to laugh, Red and Balls as the kind and fluffy to LibDems people !
      They should check out what happened last time there was a “LibLab pact” (sic).
      The fact is, EVERYONE hates these two-faced, unreliable weirdos.

  • ButcombeMan

    Just why is the Speccie still feeding this synthetic row?

    Nothing to see here, move along please.

    • Makroon

      The Speccie is just following the “news agenda”, as set by the BBC. As they always do.

  • Denis_Cooper

    It seems a little premature for any of the parties to think very deeply about potential coalitions when as things stand there is estimated to be a 74% chance that Labour will get an overall majority at the next general election:

    http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html

    And that is especially true of the Tory party, as the chance of a continuation of the present coalition is estimated at only 4%.

    I note that Labour’s average poll lead over the Tories is given there as just over 5%, based on polls between 11th and 31st of January, not the 1% or 2% that has been cited in articles here.

    • Makroon

      Keep taking the koolade Mr UKIP, are you sure it’s not 74.1% ? What is it they say about meaningless “statistics” ?

      • Denis_Cooper

        Do you understand what is meant by “estimated”?

        So what do you think is the chance that Cameron will still be Prime Minister after the next election?

        Given that the LibDems stopped the Tories getting the boundary changes they wanted and so the Tories will still need to be about 6% ahead of Labour to have a chance of getting an overall majority, and for the past eighteen months or so the Tories have instead been running around 6% behind Labour, give or take, and there is no certainty that the gap has now narrowed to only about 5%, but it definitely is not the case that Miliband now has only a “vulnerable” 1% lead and victory is within the grasp of the Tories, as pretended in recent articles by Spectator journalists?

        • CharlietheChump

          True, Labour still have a massive payroll vote in public services never mind expensive quangocrats

        • Mynydd

          Last weeks poll in the conservative backing Sun was Conservatives 32%, Labour 42%, Lib Dem 8% UKIP 12% which would result in a Labour majority of 76 seats.

          • Denis_Cooper

            Yes, but that single poll was at the opposite extreme to the single poll preferred by Spectator journalists showing the Labour lead as only 1%, upon which single poll they erected an entire narrative of victory being within the grasp of the Tory party if only all Tory MPs would unite in not trying to represent their constituents.

      • Denis_Cooper

        Oh, and since you mention UKIP – the four charts here:

        http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/polls.html

        have just been updated, at long last, and insofar as the Labour lead over the Tories has now slightly narrowed that is because support for Labour has dropped by about 1% more than support for the Tories, while the support for UKIP has gone up by about 3%; so if you think about that you may see some reason to be grateful to UKIP.

      • Tony_E

        Makroon, while I am no UKIPer – Denis is absolutely right. Labour are pretty much nailed on for the next election.

        You just cannot sustain a government that ‘redistributes’ less in the current modern European environment. It is expected that people’s lives will always get better, and it’s government’s fault (not their own) if it does not. This is the modern mood of the British electorate. No government can implement real cuts any more and expect to be re-elected.

        When I speak to UKIP voters in my own family, I find a deep sense of disenchantment that the England they knew is gone, finished. They don’t have sophisticated political views, they are mainly much older than my 40 odd years, and no longer have any trust for politics at all. Even when the government is doing something that is clearly in their own interests they don’t recognise it because the distrust over core issues is too deep. They don’t understand the arguments on the whole, in the same way that most tribal Labour voters don’t understand the arguments but simply hate the ‘Tories’ as a birthright.

        They won’t be won back, but the Labour tribal vote is much more solid, because the Labour movement is movement based on struggle, and the modern environment of protest and disenchantment suits it better and bolsters that support in most places.

        This makes Labour the natural force of government in the UK. Only in extreme circumstances will this trend be reversed.

        • Denis_Cooper

          A crucial factor is that during the eight months or so after they went into coalition with the Tories support for the LibDems collapsed from about 24% to about 10% and it has stayed at around that level ever since, and of that 14% of support lost by the LibDems about 11% seems to have switched to Labour.

          That process can be seen on the left hand side of the charts to which I have linked below, the yellow line in steep descent while the red line rises steeply and crosses the blue line.

          Obviously it will be much more difficult for the Tories to win while so many of their opponents remain consolidated around one party, Labour, instead of being split off to another party, and paradoxically it would make sense for the Tories to look for ways to bolster the LibDems so they could pull some of that lost support back from Labour.

          • Tony_E

            That’s the problem though – they cannot bolster it from the left side of policy ( their backbenchers and own voters won’t wear it), and if they did they would see defections to UKIP step up in pace.

            The only way the right can ever win again is with a broad coalition of the right, UKIP and other independents rallying around a single leading candidate for PM but with ministerial posts for specific skilled individuals if they manage to secure a parliamentary seat.

          • HookesLaw

            Liberals regularly had a vote of less than 10% and we saw Tory govts. If people do not vote Tory then you will get labour. A europhile labour. Pro immigrant pro benefits labour. All else is fantasy. If you want to see your country destroyed then sit on your hands and see labour elected.
            As Matthew Paris points out in the Times Cameron and the Tories havev done a lot in difficult conditions. Sit back and see labour waste it.

            • Denis_Cooper

              That was then, before the Tory party went into what may prove to be terminal decline, and this is now.

              I won’t be sitting on my hands here in May 2015 if there is a UKIP candidate, as I expect there will be.

              As I am committed to our national sovereignty and democracy I certainly won’t be supporting any parliamentary candidate who does not share that fundamental commitment, which means I will not being supporting any of the candidates put forward by the three old parties, which will include Theresa May.

              I am not going to accept that I have to vote for your rubbish party’s candidate on the grounds that she may be slightly less unpatriotic and treacherous than the Labour or LibDem candidate, either I will vote for the UKIP candidate or if there isn’t one possibly I will choose an independent candidate or not vote at all.

              You can fulminate as much as you like and hurl as much abuse as you like, if it makes any difference at all it will only be to stiffen my determination not to give your party or either of the other two old parties any aid or comfort at all.

              Not that it is likely to have any decisive effect here, of course, as the Tory who supposedly represents this constituency at present is more or less sure to find enough fools like you to vote her back in, even though she would have no great problem if any of them were to be carted off to languish for months in a foreign jail under the EU Arrest Warrant she supports …

              • HookesLaw

                You are thick. And all you say is now clear is based on your political prejudice. You a) want to destroy the Tory party and b) are in the business of seeing in the election of a labour govt.
                I totally despise you as a traitor to your country.

                • Denis_Cooper

                  You’re the traitor, chum, you and all your fellow traitors who have lied in support of the Tory party leadership since it first embarked upon its betrayal of our country nearly six decades ago.

            • the viceroy’s gin

              Goodness, lad, from the sounds of your post, the Millipedes are so terrible you Cameroons better vote UKIP, so they don’t get in.

        • Alexsandr

          I think you are out of date. I think we will see the beginning of the tribal vote. Most have middle class aspirations now, to get on and to do well for their kids. Ripe for a right of centre party. but still so many wont vote tory because of the brand

      • CharlietheChump

        With the disgraceful boundary set up the likelihood is probably 90% though, if the Scots clear off, it may even things up a bit

  • Colonel Mustard

    Dan Hodges is on the case too:-

    “A Telegraph investigation found that over the first decade of his (Blair’s) administration, the number of quangos had soared to more than two and a half thousand, an increase of 41 per cent. The cost of running them had risen to £123.8 billion. And by the time Labour finally left office in 2010, data released by the Commissioner for Public Appointments revealed 77 per cent of quango appointees who declared a political background were Labour supporters, 14 per cent Tories and 4 per cent Lib Dems.”

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100257738/what-happened-to-the-bonfire-of-the-quangos/

    • Mynydd

      Mr Cameron promised a bonfire of quangos, can you explain why he has not do it. The bonfire would have helped reduce the deficit.

      • Colonel Mustard

        Stop being so stupid. This point has been raised by many right wing commentators here including me with speculation as to why has not done it.

        Here’s a question for you. Why do you keep tagging my comments with your perpetual blame game of the Tories?

        • Mynydd

          Maybe it’s because you keep tagging my comment child.

          • Nicholas chuzzlewit

            You are a Labour Troll and it is important to ensure that no sensible reader believes any of your leftist nonsense.

            • Mynydd

              If you doubt the facts in the comment, information has been included so you can check the facts your self. There again it is becoming common knowledge that Conservative Trolls don’t do facts.

              • Nicholas chuzzlewit

                Labour Troll please ignore.

          • Colonel Mustard

            Difficult to do that when my comment came first and yours followed demanding an answer from me.

            You moron.

            • HookesLaw

              According to sky news a year ago the Tories had created 9 new quangos but abolished 114 out of 900 and were merging over150 more into fewer than 70.
              This is following the work of Francis Maude who says there is still more to do.
              Indeed.
              It won’t get done until you vote Tory. Nutjobs need to stop pretending things like the above are not happening. And rest assured unless you vote Tory you will not get a referendum in 2017

              • Denis_Cooper

                And rest assured that if we don’t have a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty then we would have a treaty in force which lacked democratic legitimacy in this country and gave the EU too much control over our national policies, and that would not be acceptable to a Tory government and we would not let matters rest there.

                Oh no, sorry, that was Hague in November 2007:

                http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmhansrd/cm071112/debtext/71112-0008.htm

                but after it had served its purpose in the Tory manifesto for the 2009 EU Parliament elections that pledge was cancelled by Cameron in November 2009.

                • HookesLaw

                  Stop pretending. The tory manifesto commitment was clear and adhered to. No pledge was cancelled. The fact is Lisbon was in place by 2010. Brown signed up to it.
                  And the follow up is being adhered to. Renegotiation and referendum in 2017.
                  You are hysteric and irrational. A tory majority = referendum. You need to stop twisting the truth to pander to your prejudice.

                • Denis_Cooper

                  Let me explain my position to you very clearly.

                  In September 2007 Cameron gave an unqualified pledge, a “cast-iron guarantee” that if Brown did not hold the promised referendum on the Lisbon Treaty then as Prime Minister he would hold that referendum.

                  It was, he said, a matter of “trust”.

                  He said it in the Sun over his signature, and he repeated it in his speech to the Tory party conference a week later.

                  Then over the next few weeks under pressure from the eurofanatic wing of the Tory party he drew back from that unqualified pledge and it morphed into the “we would not let matters rest there” formulation first stated by Hague in the Commons as linked above.

                  Now at one time I was prepared to let that go and just say that his original unconditional pledge didn’t last long, but because Tories like you lied about it, and pretended that it was always conditional on the treaty not having come into force, see the liar Lidington being torn to shreds by Neil as I posted above, as I say because Tories like you reverted to type by lying about it, I no longer saw any reason why I should be that generous and just let it go.

                  So for two years the Tory position was that if the treaty had already come into force then they “would not let matters rest there”, and that was repeated, and repeated in the Tory manifesto for the 2009 EU Parliament elections which you can still check here:

                  http://www.conservatives.com/~/media/Files/Downloadable%20Files/Euro%20Election%202009/euro-manifesto.ashx

                  “We pledge that if the Lisbon Treaty is not in force in the event of the election of a Conservative Government this year or next, we will hold a referendum on it, urge its rejection, and – if successful – reverse Britain’s ratification. And if the Constitution is already in force by then, we have made clear that in our view political integration in the EU would have gone too far, the Treaty would lack democratic legitimacy, and we would not let matters rest there.”

                  Although just before those elections an attempt was made to spread a rumour that the policy had been changed back to having a referendum even if the treaty had come into force, with Cameron writing in the Guardian:

                  http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2009/may/25/david-cameron-a-new-politics1

                  “We will therefore hold a referendum on the Lisbon treaty; pass a law requiring a referendum to approve any further
                  transfers of power to the EU; negotiate the return of powers, and require far more detailed scrutiny in parliament of EU legislation, regulation and spending.”

                  Causing Mark Mardell to spend time trying to find out if this was a genuine change of policy, and concluding:

                  http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/05/cameron_tougher_on_lisbon.html

                  “But surely in a speech which was about the importance of honesty and transparency for politicians, Mr Cameron would not have been less than straightforward? Whether he meant it or not it is now on the record: in government the Conservatives will hold a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, no ifs, no buts.”

                  However that was before polling day; it was on June 15th 2009, after people had voted on whatever they thought the Tories were pledging, that Clarke revealed the truth:

                  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1192981/Ken-Clarke-We-wont-tear-Lisbon-Treaty-Ireland-votes-yes-election.html

                  “Ken Clarke: We won’t tear up the Lisbon Treaty if Ireland votes yes before election”

                  “Yesterday Mr Clarke told BBC1’s The Politics Show: ‘If the Irish referendum endorses the treaty and ratification comes into effect, then our settled policy is quite clear that the treaty will not be reopened.'”

                  “But Eurosceptic Tory MP Bill Cash said: ‘It appears Kenneth Clarke has reinvented unilaterally Conservative Party policy on Europe. It is essential we have a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty irrespective of the Irish vote, and this is supported by a very substantial number of Conservative MPs.'”

                  “A Tory spokesman said: ‘There is no change to Conservative policy. As Ken Clarke explained, if the Lisbon Treaty is ratified and in force across the EU by the time of the election of a Conservative government, we have always made clear that we would not let matters rest there.”

                  But anyone who still fondly imagined that “we would not let matters rest there” meant that Cameron would actually do something about it should have been finally disabused of that idea by his announcement on November 4th 2009, when he resorted to another lie to try to justify his decision to swallow the Lisbon Treaty whole, a pathetic lie that it was impossible to hold a referendum on the treaty because it no longer existed as a treaty.

                  It was all lies, lies designed to string along Tory supporters and the wider public, because lies have long been the stock in trade for those leading the Tory party and nothing they say can ever be taken at face value, any more now than in the past.

            • Mynydd

              But you never answer any simple questions

              • Colonel Mustard

                You got ‘simple’ right at least.

      • Alexsandr

        limp dumps?

  • Colonel Mustard

    This story and the way it is being peddled is literally incredible. If the Tories in cabinet haven’t got the message yet about the BBC as the propaganda wing of the Labour party they must be stupid beyond belief. Are they even bothering to set the record straight?

    I see that Sir David Bell has also now waded into this one bleating about ‘yes men’ which given Mr Nelson’s exposure of the Labour support and sponsorship in the quangocracy is quite fantastic.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Bell_(university_administrator)

    And:-

    http://order-order.com/2014/02/03/labour-dominates-quangocrats/

    • Nicholas chuzzlewit

      Spot on. Why not kick the BBC as hard as you can whenever you can. They are going to misreport or oppose the Tories whatever they say or do. It is the broadcasting arm of the Labour Party for goodness sake so the Tories should just get stuck in. Promising to turn the BBC into a subscription channel for those who actually want it would surely find support amongst those who resent handing over £150 a year, or risk imprisonment, for the privilege of listening to leftist propaganda.

    • Mynydd

      Mr Cameron appointed a conservative, indeed an ex-minister, as chairman of the BBC Trust. the Trust is charged with overseeing the BBC to ensure it operates in accordance with its charter. The charter requires the BBC to be politically neutral. Now if you have actual evidence that the BBC is acting as the propaganda wing of the Labour party, then you are duty bound to take it to the conservative chairman of the BBC Trust for his action

      • Colonel Mustard

        Fat Pang is far from being a conservative. Evidence for BBC bias is all over the internet and Fat Pang has been made aware of it many times.

        • Mynydd

          No doubt you could find evidence all over the internet that the BBC is bias towards the Conservative Party, the Green Party, Lib Dems, SNP and anyone else, but it doesn’t make it true. As I said if you have hard evidence you are duty bound to send it to the chairman of the BBC Trust

          • Colonel Mustard

            Er no, you couldn’t. Your myopia and tribal infatuation with Labour are not my problems.

            http://biasedbbc.org/

            • Mynydd

              It seem that now it’s only other ranks have a duty to report misdoings in public bodies.

              • Colonel Mustard

                It seems quite a lot of things to you, none of which have much relationship to any kind of reality.

  • Shinsei1967

    Alternatively, come 2015 if the election results decree that a Con-LD coalition is the only sensible solution then the participants will just start with a fresh sheet of paper in determining the 2015 Coalition Agreement and forget about the previous five years.

    Plenty of nations have more or less continuous coalition governments, involving the same main participants, so all these theoretical roadblocks you keep highlighting have been dealt with in the past countless times.

    People just get on with things. Stop trying to invent problems.

    • Colonel Mustard

      I have a problem with the concept of an unelected Liberal Democrat government, which is far from liberal and not at all democratic, ruling over me on a permanent basis because the Tory leadership are wet.

      • Shinsei1967

        Technically you elect your MP as an individual. After that he or she can do what they want. They don’t have to obey their party’s whip. And their party doesn’t have to implement its manifesto 100%.

        But I’m not sure what your solution is when no party has an overall majority. Sure you can run as a minority, until you (probably) inevitably get defeated. Then you hold another election, and risk the same thing (no overall majority) happening again (and again). Much like Italy.

        • Colonel Mustard

          My solution would be to make sure you win as Labour understand perfectly but the Tories don’t seem to. This would involve things like leadership and making sure Andrew Lansley was never allowed near any strategic project ever again.

    • CharlietheChump

      Stop trying to invent coalitions, a pernicious excuse for opacity and dirty back room fixes

  • swatnan

    Its not just the marriage of convenience at stake, its more; its the whole educational system going down the tube with Gove. I’ve never known all sectors of the education so disillusioned with a Govt before.

    • DWWolds

      If you look at the OECD league tables it was under Labour that our educational system went down the tube. From 2000 to 2010 the attainment of our 15 years in the key subjects of maths, science and literacy nose dived.

    • Makroon

      Wake-up call for you Swatnan !
      The education system is already at the bottom of the “tubes”.
      The only way is up !!

    • Colonel Mustard

      It’s really only the Labour dominated and ideologically hidebound left wing sectors of education that are ‘disillusioned’ with Gove, and that is because his reforms threaten their power to politically indoctrinate the young, a staple of Fabian strategy.

      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/10565264/Left-wing-thinking-still-prevails-in-schools.html

      • swatnan

        Gove is the most politically driven Idealogue in Education I’ve ever come across; even Mrs T had sense to continue with comprehensives and not bring back Grammar/Crammers, but unfortunately she brought in LMS and GMS and scuppered the whole basis of State Education, and after 18 years Labour came in to deal with a System so decimated by the Tories almost diffiucult to turn around, but they tried with Literacy Hours and simplifying SATs and the NC and Suretart. Blame the Tories for privatising Education!

        • Colonel Mustard

          Clearly you have not actually read anything Gove has written about education and can only bleat tediously predictable and trite left-wing myths about him.

          If he is guilty of anything it is adopting a directorial, top down approach but given the werewolf opposition he doesn’t have much choice.

          Personally I would make it a criminal offence for a teacher to be a member of a political party, to engage in activism for one or to reveal their voting intentions/support to any students in their care.

          • Tony_E

            That’s the tactic though Colonel. Spread the lie til it engulfs the truth in fog.

        • CharlietheChump

          Socialist driven education has been a national shame for 50 years. Thank you Gove et al.

          • Nicholas chuzzlewit

            Hear, hear! Scour the rancid filth of socialism from state education.

        • Nicholas chuzzlewit

          If only they would privatise education. Ineffective teachers would be fired and good teachers rewarded properly. Then we might see the ‘state schools’ begin to catch up with our excellent private schools.

      • BarkingAtTreehuggers

        How has deskilling a market sector *ever* worked in favour of the quality of the product? – ever?

        • Colonel Mustard

          I don’t think I mentioned ‘de-skilling a market sector’. Has Gove said or written somewhere that he wants to ‘de-skill the market sector’ in education? How bizarre.

          • BarkingAtTreehuggers

            He did. How bizarre indeed.

            • Colonel Mustard

              Really? Where? Evidence? Links to speeches, articles? Or is it another ‘allegation’?

              • BarkingAtTreehuggers

                The teacher qualification debate has passed you by completely? Really? How did that happen?

                • Colonel Mustard

                  Oh, I see. The teacher qualifications DEBATE. So not actually de facto ‘de-skilling a market sector’ after all since if qualifications automatically conferred consistent ‘skills’ we would not have had this:-

                  http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9616000/9616432.stm

                  On a personal note in my long and varied life across the globe I have worked with many people who had impressive qualifications in fields where they were able to demonstrate breathtaking incompetence and vice-versa I have worked with those who were naturals with not a qualification in sight. But you are really talking about licensing which is a Labour party policy.

                  PS Sorry about the plural use of qualification(S). Don’t make a song and dance about it.

                • BarkingAtTreehuggers

                  No song and dance from me indeed.
                  In agreement with your globetrotting analysis in fact, yet the broad-brush deskilling that is on the cards here just does not sound right to me. If you needed to break up encrusted structures in our education system why don’t we just break them up? How about sacking those who repeatedly do not deliver? No – we cannot do that, we will deskill yet another sector.

                  In case i have been amibiguous – I do not give a monkey’s whether that is a ‘Labour’ position. It is my position.

                • Colonel Mustard

                  You can have the last word . . .

                • BarkingAtTreehuggers

                  Fill in the blanks ………………
                  with what you want to hear.

                • Nicholas chuzzlewit

                  Hilarious. The absence of a certificate which has neither value or merit is deemed to constitute ‘de-skilling’. Our excellent private schools do not care a wit for this fatuous piece of leftist nonsense.

                • BarkingAtTreehuggers

                  I am deliberately misunderstood.
                  It is *leftist* to have qualifications and do a job/act in a professional capacity? Fantastical outpourings.

                • Nicholas chuzzlewit

                  No problem with “qualifications” they are an obvious essential. No time for ludicrous, valueless teaching certificates which are of no use to anybody save the teaching unions who care nothing for the education of pupils.

    • Nicholas chuzzlewit

      No the education system is being reorganised for the benefit of pupils and parents as opposed to its employees. He is introducing measures designed to improve standards of learning and attainment rather than inflating grades and leaving pupils virtually unemployable. Sorry, but we have had enough of the Labour party’s dedication to mediocrity and failure, stamping on aspiration and ambition and keeping the poor ‘ in their place’. Gove is attempting to scour the rancid filth of socialism from our education system and good luck to him. Hopefully, he will make it easier to fire ineffective teachers and remove the annual increment. They will have to get used to being paid on merit.

  • Andy

    Sally Morgan is a stupid woman. This ‘row’ is all about her sense of entitlement. It was a fixed term contract and actually there should be a policy of not renewing any such contract for people who chair or sit on quango boards. As BigAI points out the Fascist Labour Party filled 70% of public appointments with their own members or lackeys. There ought to have been a clear out in 2010.

    • Makroon

      Spot on.

      • the viceroy’s gin

        There ought to have been a clear out in 2010, yes, but you socialist Camerluvvies kept on all your fellow socialist quangocrats, and appointed them at rates consistent with your H2B’s mate Tone.

    • Nicholas chuzzlewit

      Nail hit on head. That said, I have enjoyed listening to this latest whinging, unproductive Labour waster grizzling about the loss of her post while her sense of self-entitlement crumbles around her ears. There is something deeply satisfying about seeing an unproductive Leftist fool having to go and look for a new way of draining the public purse.

    • telemachus associates

      This row is nowt to do with entitlement.
      This row originated because Gove is sore about recent adverse Ofsted reports on Free Schools.
      The doctrinaire chump is mortally terrified that unless he does something Ofstead will undermine the crazy project.
      Baron Laws of Expenses, hot on regulation, felt he had been overruled and appealed to Nick who frankly could not give a fig and sent Ward to bleat.
      The whole episode is about Gove and his ambitions to supplant Cameron.
      There is however no possibility of that because:
      a) he does not have the wit
      b) he does not have the looks
      c) he does not have the low cunning
      d) Labour are on track for a majority of 57 in May 2015

      • Tony_E

        D is right. The rest is bollocks

        • Colonel Mustard

          Or to use the technical term – tripe. It seems that telemachus junior is as thick and untruthful as telemachus senior.

          So much for invigorating the gene pool.

      • Andy

        It has everything to do with that silly bitch Morgan feeling she should have a second term as head of Ofsted – it screams ‘I’m entitled’. Well you’re not. A one term contract is exactly that: one term. The pervious Fascist Labour Government appointed over 75% of its members and/or supporters to Quangos. That was politization – ensuring that even if they can’t win at the ballot box they keep power. In May 2010 every single Quango board should have been dismissed and new appointments made.

        • the viceroy’s gin

          Why would Dave dismiss his socialist soulmates?

  • BigAl

    Good example this morning of how BBC can make a non story about Gove and Ofsted into a “Tories filling quangos with their own”. Waves and waves of news bulletins but little or no explanation that Labour filled 70% plus of its public appointments with its own. Ironically, Gove appointed the current Labour Ofsted leader!

    They even had to bring in a BBC correspondent to discuss it on R4 and make it sound like a debate was underway.

    • Shinsei1967

      What was particularly bizarre was the Beeb discovering the comment from a former Education Dept civil servant on some obscure blog. Do BBC researchers search through former Treasury civil servants blogs to find criticisms of Browns or Balls ? I think we can guess the answer to that question.

    • Makroon

      Away with this trivia !
      Latest UK Production PMI shows 20 year high investment goods orders, surging employment and steadily growing production and export orders.
      Seems as though the “makers” are on the march.
      Now, where are the “unbalanced economy” whingers ?
      Answer: filling the comment columns of the DT. Doh !

      • HookesLaw

        Very correct

    • CharlietheChump

      Gove should never have appointed the vile Morgan in the first place.

    • Alexsandr

      some ar$e on toady this morning would not let that point be made – kept saying we should not zoom out and de-focus. Stupid (Female) interviewer let him get away with it too.

      • Colonel Mustard

        The whole thing is being orchestrated and is all part of Labour’s pre-election campaigning.

Close
Can't find your Web ID? Click here