Tory Education Secretary is right: She should be held responsible for the mess in our schools
Nicky Morgan: Under-achieving Education Secretary.
Conservative Education Secretary Nicky Morgan has rejected calls for an independent body to make decisions about the school curriculum, saying parents should be able to hold politicians to account for their decisions.
What a generous statement! This is possibly the modern-day equivalent of stretching one’s neck out over the executioner’s block.
It is heartening that she is prepared to let the Conservative Party take the blame for its ‘Free Schools’ pet project, which has been rocked by successive failures including that of its flagship, the Discovery School – declared inadequate by Ofsted and shut down. The Observer revealed that former Education Secretary Michael Gove wanted to hush up further damaging revelations by ensuring that problems were tackled before Ofsted could publicise them.
Free Schools have taken billions of pounds of public money and given nothing back – certainly not an education. Academy schools – publicly-funded companies set up by central government and answering to central government and not to the local education authority or even parents – have also overspent by more than a billion pounds.
In 2013, the “ring-fenced” education budget was cut by 5.7 per cent in real terms. The remaining funds were divided up, with non-academy schools receiving a cut of 4.31 per cent, infrastructure spending was cut by 81 per cent, and academy schools received a funding increase of no less than 191 per cent.
As Kerry-Anne Mendoza put it in Austerity – The Demolition of the Welfare State and the Rise of the Zombie Economy: “The state sector is being starved of funds, while the academy sector enjoys a glut of funding, which it spends inefficiently and opaquely.”
It is also heartening that Nicky Morgan is prepared to take the flak for Tory attempts to curtail the teaching of science in our classrooms – notable in Mr Gove’s attempts to halt the study of climate change; he wanted to deny it exists.
This writer is glad that the Tories are willing to take the rap for trying to reduce World War One into a display of “patriotism, honour and courage” while deriding examples of popular culture like Oh, What a Lovely War! and Blackadder Goes Forth. Gove claimed that the war was a “noble cause” and a “just” conflict against the “social Darwinism” of the Germans, while Blackadder portrayed it as “a misbegotten shambles – a series of catastrophic mistakes perpetrated by an out-of-touch elite. Even to this day there are Left-wing academics all too happy to feed those myths.”
It is, frankly, terrifying that a man with such ludicrous and – in context – dangerous views has held the position of Secretary of State for Education.
Do you remember Kate Nash on the BBC’s This Week, ripping into Gove’s attitude that learning-by-rote is better than understanding and creativity? She said: “There are certain things we need to be addressing, that are being completely missed – and that’s to do with education being inspiring and interesting for young people, rather than just about purely passing tests and pressure.”
Television historian Simon Schama has described Gove’s curriculum as “insulting and offensive”. He told an audience at the Hay Festival, “This is a document written by people who have never sat and taught 12-year-olds in a classroom.”
There are many more examples of Tory education ineptitude, but let’s finish this with a poem – ‘Dear Mr Gove’ by Jess Green, from only a little less than a year ago. At the time Vox Political first publicised this video, I wrote: “If enough parents saw, and listened, and thought about what this poem says – about their own lives and the lives their children can expect thanks to the worst-ever British government, perhaps it might persuade them to think again before putting their cross next to the Conservative candidate at the next few elections.
“It isn’t rocket science.”
Oh, and if you’re wondering why this article hasn’t mentioned any of Nicky Morgan’s achievements as Education Secretary, the reason is that she simply hasn’t had any.
Follow me on Twitter: @MidWalesMike
Join the Vox Political Facebook page.
If you have enjoyed this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:
Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
teaching the public about the disaster that is Tory-run state education.
Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:
Have Labour put forward any plans for academies and free schools Mike?
Labour’s Education spokesman is Tristram Hunt and I reckon he’s a waste of space. This blog opposes all three.
So, another Blairite is he?
Also, what do you make of Rachel Reeves comments on Labour not wanting to be seen as the party of people who are unemployed and/or on benefits?
Also Ed Balls stating that there was nothing in the budget he would reverse.
Were they mis-quoted?
What do they have on Ed Milliband to keep their place in the Labour Party?
I’ve covered Reeves’ comments elsewhere.
As for Ed Balls – first I’ve heard of it.
It’s not looking good.
So we have a shadow chancellor who won’t reverse any part of a bad budget, a shadow work a pensions minister who seems little different to RTU and a shadow education minister who wants to continue using education as a political football.
If the shadow health minister comes out and says “you know, that health and social care bill isn’t that bad really” and “there is a place for private sector involvement in the NHS”
Then well!!!!
Also of a concern is that if Labour do lose the election, then a leadership challenge from any one of those ministers could arise.
Then Labour will really be fcuk’d.
You could be misunderstanding the shadow chancellor. A budget can be bad because it does very little that is positive, while also doing very little that is negative; Ed Balls might not see any point in changing the measures introduced in what was actually an insipid piece of work. That doesn’t mean he won’t change things when he arrives at 11 Downing Street later this year (if the electorate has any sense).
Rachel Reeves has made a fool of herself time and time again; your description of Tristram Hunt is your own (although I have very little time for him).
That does not stop Labour being the best hope for the future of the UK at this moment in time, and it would be wrong for people to believe otherwise as a result of reading your comment.
Ed Balls did day that Labour would not reverse income tax threshold changes, nor would they oppose the new House Deposit Isa, although he thought they were no solution. It is a fact that the incoming govt will not be able to change much of what has been announced, and are tied to the previous administrations budget for the first 6 – 12 months anyway. In terms of changes to the Welfare budget, as Osborne has refused to be specific about changes, Labour will quite rightly not allow themselves to be drawn into these hypothetical debates, so will not confirm or deny they would change anything. Ed Balls was making the point that the budget was useless for achieving an improvement in the economy, so there would be little that would be worth changing.
Of course, they can make changes like immediate repeal of bedroom tax, revoke non-dom tax status, and many other measures that are totally independent of the budget.
The last word should go the IFS, who after noting that the Tories must say what they will cut, especially on welfare, to allow analysis. but that the proposals put forward by Labour have been fully costed, and will mean that by the time of the next budget there will be no further need for any austerity cuts.
At least, that’s my understanding so far.
The incoming government can make changes from Day One if it wants. Remember Osborne’s ’emergency budget’ of 2010, that put the brakes on the economic expansion started by Alistair Darling?
I agree with your assessment of why Ed Balls doesn’t think the budget is worth changing.
I’m just surprised he didn’t make more of where the £12bn of welfare cuts would come from, (pensions take the largest percentage, will they be affected?) or why first time buyers are gettung a £50 top up towards a house deposit when there is a shotage of homes.
There are other measures which are clearly bribes to the Tories core voters, like the married/civil partners tax allowance. (Long term partners are not the Tories kind of people)
All of which Labour should be against.
I only know by looking through Hansard that Labour have opposed a lot of measures, but not everyone knows about or has time to read it.
If you just listen to the MSM, then is it any wonder people think Labour are Tories with a red rosette.
I don’t think we’ve heard the last of the £12bn cuts – not by a long way!
As for the rest, I suppose we’ll see.
I agree entirely that the govt can make any changes it wants from day 1, it’s just that implementation may take 6 – 12 months to take effect. The first 12 months 2010- 2011 were a good example, where those quarters were the only ones with positive performance (because of the lag effect) in the whole of the first three years – until Osborne started to quietly undo some of his damage, too little, too late, etc. Big changes can be made without recourse to parliament – as we have seen with so many of the pernicious changes under the 2012 Health Act that have been enacted by ministerial direction. If Rachel Reeves wants to abolish Bedroom tax on day 1, it would still take up to 3 months to feed through, adding in any time needed for an emergency bill if required.
Copied from Labours website:
” 1) We will put teaching standards first, ensuring that all teachers in all state schools become qualified and continue to build their skills, with more opportunities for high quality professional development, new career pathways and revalidation on a rolling basis.
2) We will introduce robust local oversight of all schools through new Directors of School Standards in every local area, responsible for intervening in underperforming schools so that standards are raised, and commissioning new schools transparently and fairly so that there is proper planning for new school places where they are needed.
3) We will transform vocational education in our schools and colleges, with a new gold standard Technical Baccalaureate for 16 to 19-year-olds, with rigorous vocational qualifications, accredited by employers, a high quality work placement and English and maths to 18.”
Sounds good but nothing about equality of funding or getting the private sector out of the equation.
“Nicky Morgan’s achievements as Education Secretary, the reason is that she simply hasn’t had any”.
I would think that she has had one simple achievement compared to other Tory ministers, especially Gove. She hasn’t actually created any massive cock-up of her own making (yet).
Hmm, well, I received a state education. I look back at those years and realise that my education began after leaving School.
Modern education is Brainwashing. Period. Encapsulating PC, misinformation, disinformation, unecessary education related to sexual proclivities thus undermining family/parental influences. Destroyed lives: A massive betrayal. I would say that the fact that one is required to “register” ones child should inform people that are awake.