Chris Grayling, who daily demonstrates how out of touch he is with the way the law works, is at it too.
Prisoner rehabilitation, he proposed, will be handed over to companies or charities who would be paid by results ie non re-offending. Each prisoner will have a mentor to help them find housing and training opportunities.
It sounds an excellent idea in principle.
Let's not ask difficult questions about 'not re-offending on what timescale?' and 'What responsible body would take on a job like that when the risks of failure and thus not getting paid were so high?' Let's ask an expert.
Baroness Corston, who admittedly had something of a political axe to grind being a Labour peer, but has the very slight benefit of having carried out a major review of rehabilitation, publishing her report in 2007, has pointed out that what he is proposing is exactly the opposite of what everyone had been working towards: a single scheme coordinated at the centre. She thinks it will not work.
Why ask someone who knows what is needed before announcing something completely out of the blue?
Sunday 25 November 2012
He's at it again
Michael Gove is working overtime. His latest idea is that vulnerable children could be removed from their parents and placed in care or adopted to prevent them suffering 'a life of soiled nappies, scummy baths, chaos and hunger'.
As the newspaper reported 'Tearing up two decades of child protection orthodoxy, Mr Gove said the state had far too long exposed children to appalling neglect and criminal mistreatment because of its preoccupation with the rights of biological parents'.
He apparently went on to suggest that most of us see the care system as being responsible '... for the numbers in prison, or suffering mental health problems, or without qualifications, or who are unemployed ...'
No Michael, we don't suggest that the care system is responsible for all the ills of society but the evidence is clear: children brought up by their biological parents are likely to do best in the long term. Not all biological parents expose their children to neglect and criminal mistreatment, even if they have not got a nanny to change the nappies, a cleaner to sort out the bath, a life coach to ensure harmony or a cook to provide meals: as you must have had.
Welcome to planet earth.
Late entry: we note that the Academies programme is a tiny bit overspent: only about £1bn. So, having stuffed money into them at a cost/pupil that is higher than other state schools, presumably Gove will now bleed even more money out of the other state schools and then justify the creation of the academies on the basis that the others are 'failing'.
As the newspaper reported 'Tearing up two decades of child protection orthodoxy, Mr Gove said the state had far too long exposed children to appalling neglect and criminal mistreatment because of its preoccupation with the rights of biological parents'.
He apparently went on to suggest that most of us see the care system as being responsible '... for the numbers in prison, or suffering mental health problems, or without qualifications, or who are unemployed ...'
No Michael, we don't suggest that the care system is responsible for all the ills of society but the evidence is clear: children brought up by their biological parents are likely to do best in the long term. Not all biological parents expose their children to neglect and criminal mistreatment, even if they have not got a nanny to change the nappies, a cleaner to sort out the bath, a life coach to ensure harmony or a cook to provide meals: as you must have had.
Welcome to planet earth.
Late entry: we note that the Academies programme is a tiny bit overspent: only about £1bn. So, having stuffed money into them at a cost/pupil that is higher than other state schools, presumably Gove will now bleed even more money out of the other state schools and then justify the creation of the academies on the basis that the others are 'failing'.
Friday 23 November 2012
Govian logic
The problem with being a minister is that you need to make announcements so that people think you are doing something. The 'I am today announcing that ...' strategy which will be rubbished the following day by those in the know by which time the original idea will be buried in chip paper.
A recent letter to the papers highlighted this.
In July, on the eve of the Olympics ('OMG we have four weeks coming up when we cannot announce anything controversial, people will think I am not doing anything'; or was it 'a good time to bury a difficult announcement'?) Michael Gove announced that academies and free schools could employ unqualified teachers if they were felt to be competent enough (discuss).
In October, he announced a more rigorous pre-entry assessment of potential teachers to make sure that the entry process was sufficiently challenging that anyone who gains a place would be likely to go on to become an excellent teacher. Evidence from around the world, he said, made it clear that this was the key to raising the standard and status of teaching.
But the government already had a carefully-considered policy on recruitment, drawn up after consultation with teachers and other professionals, and Gove's suggestions ran counter to that.
And then we had David Laws blaming staff and carers for the 'depressingly low expectations' of many young people. Apparently things were so bad that they did not think they were up to being an investment banker. No evidence was offered of course. Another London dinner party?
Perhaps it was not that they did not think they were up to it. Perhaps it was that they simply did not want to be an investment banker. After all, banking and being a politician, unlike teaching, are probably the most reviled professions in the country.
A recent letter to the papers highlighted this.
In July, on the eve of the Olympics ('OMG we have four weeks coming up when we cannot announce anything controversial, people will think I am not doing anything'; or was it 'a good time to bury a difficult announcement'?) Michael Gove announced that academies and free schools could employ unqualified teachers if they were felt to be competent enough (discuss).
In October, he announced a more rigorous pre-entry assessment of potential teachers to make sure that the entry process was sufficiently challenging that anyone who gains a place would be likely to go on to become an excellent teacher. Evidence from around the world, he said, made it clear that this was the key to raising the standard and status of teaching.
But the government already had a carefully-considered policy on recruitment, drawn up after consultation with teachers and other professionals, and Gove's suggestions ran counter to that.
And then we had David Laws blaming staff and carers for the 'depressingly low expectations' of many young people. Apparently things were so bad that they did not think they were up to being an investment banker. No evidence was offered of course. Another London dinner party?
Perhaps it was not that they did not think they were up to it. Perhaps it was that they simply did not want to be an investment banker. After all, banking and being a politician, unlike teaching, are probably the most reviled professions in the country.
Thursday 1 November 2012
Book prices
There was a time when diesel was cheaper than petrol. Manufacturers worked to improve the performance of diesel engines, people switched to cars which did a better mileage per gallon and hey presto: diesel is more expensive than petrol.
The recent news that Amazon sold more e-books in a month than 'paper' books has led to the obvious result. Here is a snip from Amazon of a pre-publication offer: the Kindle edition is more expensive than the paperback one.
Our government has given preferential road tax rates to cars which emit fewer pollutants and is now worried that it is not making enough money from road tax revenue. Let's see how it reacts.
The recent news that Amazon sold more e-books in a month than 'paper' books has led to the obvious result. Here is a snip from Amazon of a pre-publication offer: the Kindle edition is more expensive than the paperback one.
Our government has given preferential road tax rates to cars which emit fewer pollutants and is now worried that it is not making enough money from road tax revenue. Let's see how it reacts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)