The Clegg phenomenon and the 2010 UK Election

[Ghân-buri-Ghân]

I have an issue with higher rates of attendance at universities being set as an objective of education policy and of itself. The purpose of post-secondary education is to give people the training that a) they would get the most personal fulfilment out of and b) that would allow them to make their maximum contribution to society and the economy.

Simply paying people to stay in education is, in my view, misguided. Not only does it ignore the fact that many of those students would be happier and working more to their skills in other areas, but it allows the government and institutions of higher learning to fail to address other issues that might dampen attendance.

Except that this is not post-secondary higher education incentivisation, but 16-18 secondary education incentivisation, and includes "non-academic" vocational training.

[River]

While there's a lot to be said for wandering around finding oneself, I'm not sure just parking one's behind in a university is the way to go about it. That's a slot that could be taken up by someone who's actually dedicated to their education. When I started grad school ~7.5 ( ) years ago we were in the midst of a recession. I had a much harder time than anticipated (you'd think a couple publications, some teaching experience, some academic honors and a spiffy GRE score would be enough, but no) getting in because of all the people trying to shelter from the storm. In fact, I had a few classmates who were basically there to shelter from the storm and find themselves and maybe pick up a qualification on the way (anyone who thinks a doctorate will make them more employable needs to be slapped). On one hand, it was a slick move - they got their stipends and some free classes. On the other, not a single one made it to the end and I have to wonder who was rejected so these people could have a slot. One took a master's in lieu of quals. The other three vanished. And after that my department rethought its approach to admissions.

Aside from that, there's also the matter of waste and inertia. Not everyone is cut out for college.

[Inanna]

You covered what I was planning to say, river, although I have to say that this caveat likely applies to PhD/postgrad -education more than anything else.

That said, I am uncomfortable with actually paying people to study, to get good grades etc. Time and again, it has been shown that social incentives play a bigger role than just financial incentives. Unfortunately, they take much longer to take hold. But paying students to study.... it just... sound wrong. And I realize thats a lame argument, but it will have to do for now. Till I marshall my thoughts and get some alcohol outta my system.

[eborr]

Happily, according to a Labour-commissioned study, 88 percent of teenagers receiving the £30/week "encouragement" to attend post-compulsory education reported that they would be able to attend college even if it was eliminated. It's also rather staggering that the allowance was apparently claimed by nearly half the post-compulsory student demographic.

http://www.economist.com/node/17967036

Sadly you are a victim of our very efficient news/media management service which goes on in the UK.

This particular report was a rougue study, in respect of the results it achieved. Like pretty much every other Labour commisioned report it achieved the results that the then labour govt wanted, eg they wished not to increase the funding for EMA.

And bless them the CON-DEMs picked up on it

Every other report, including the report in the link below demonstrated the importance of EMA

http://www.cypnow.co.uk/news/1049695/Ab ... vey-finds/

Having worked for the greater part of the last 2 years with students in the 16-19 year group, who study at varying institutions would confirm that the EMA is essential to them studying.

When the EMA was first announced I was highly sceptical suspecting that it was just a ruse to remove young people from the unemployment stats, however seeing it in operation convinced me that my uniformed judgement was wrong.

For the average 15-16 year old who is not strongly motivated or academic the prospect of spending two additional years in education is not a good one, partucularly children who come from homes where the culture of work is not current.

The availability of the funding proved sufficient incentive for many young people to continue with their eductation, and quite a lot of cases as the students matured they came to appreciate the benefits of the education and training and the life opportunities that staying on and geting extra qualifications was giving them.

Without wishing to be rude to other members of this community I would urge you not to make judgements on these young people without a very careful consideration of their circumstances, the cultural context in which many of them live is that working and education is for mugs, and the smart people get on through borderline criminality and dreams of success through celebrity.

The rules for payment of EMA are much stricter than other systems of state support. One part of the allowance is paid on the basis of their attendance at all classes, failure to attend without providing proper reasons results in allowance being denied or limited. A second part of the allowance is paid on the basis of completion of work, eg if students do not complete their assignments then again allowance is denied.

This gives an intersting context in the classroom in that you have a body of students who don't recieve allowance who can be tardy in handing in work, whereas the EMA students almost always have work in on schedule.

One final point on this in July I was working in a sixth form in Reading at a school in difficult catchment area, In addition to teaching I was tutor to a group of year 13 students who were graduating. I would say something like 75% of them received EMA. Of the group of 20 all but 2 were going on too higher education(and got the grades) I wonder how many of them would have achieved this without the EMA( and I am thinking here especially of the Asian girls, where the family pressure might have been quite strong on them to do other things).

[eborr]

Another fine example of the absolute hypocricy of the Cameron and chums and they pompously parade around announcing no-fly zones over Libya,at the same time as they are cutting 10% of the jobs in the RAF, Specifically they are cutting elements of the RAF that have a capability to attack the air defence systems that Gadaffi currently has,unless those systems are eliminated, or air superiority fighters will not be able to force the blockade.

They have announced today that no soldiers serving in Afghanistan will be made redundant, however this gurantee does not extend to the troops who are currently on duty there who are due to return in April, imagine being expected to go out on foot patrol with your redendancy notice in your pocket. I expected better of Cameron, looks like he is catching a boad dose of sleaze from his new best mate Nick

[Aravar]

Libya is precisely the stiuraiotn where a a carrier would be useful. It appears that the intention is now to use Cyprus to base aircraft. Somehow that reminds me of Mussolini's assertion that Italy did not need aircraft carriers because Italy was one big aircraft carrier.

[eborr]

It seems even the right wing Daily Torygraph shares my views
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstop ... o-one.html

[eborr]

Barnsley By Election.

Great opportunity to test how countries reaction to the Governments policies, the election was caused by the resignation of the current MP who has just been sentanced for fraud, given that he had previously been a labour MP it was the voters chance to demonstrate their disaproval of the labour party.

Unfortunately for the Lib Dems they moved from 2nd place to 6th. They were less popular than the obviously Fascist British National Party, and less popular than the Xenophobic Ukip and an independent candidate.

What was especially interesting was the President of the Lib-Dems when given the opportunity to explain his parties disaterous showing, compared the political situation in Barnsley with North Korea.

I am not surprised in the least by this opinion it is very clear that the Lib-Dems have nothing but contempt for the principles of democracy, trying with some cheap jibe to question the freely expressed choice of the voters in Barnsley.

Dan Jarvis (Lab) 14,724 (60.80%, +13.53%)

Jane Collins (Ukip) 2,953 (12.19%, +7.53%)

James Hockney (C) 1,999 (8.25%, -9.01%)

Enis Dalton (BNP) 1,463 (6.04%, -2.90%)

Tony Devoy (Ind) 1,266 (5.23%, +3.58%)

Dominic Carman (LD) 1,012 (4.18%, -13.10%)

Kevin Riddiough (Eng Dem) 544 (2.25%)

Howling Laud Hope (Loony) 198 (0.82%)

Michael Val Davies (Ind) 60 (0.25%

[eborr]

It was interesting to hear Mr Clegg on the radio today, claiming the Lib Dems had no party organisation in Barnsley, this was an unusual statement because if this had been the case it hadn't harmed them in the general election when they came second.

Funnily enough he was immeadiately followed on the radio by the chairman of the local party organisation(which according to Mr Clegg doesn't exist.

Given that Barnsley is less than 30 minutes drive from Mr Cleggs own constituency, I find his lack of local knowledge quite surprising.

Later the defeated lib Dem candidate Mr Carmen was asked on the news, what message of support and sympathy he had been given by the party leadership in the wake of his defeat. Carmen was forced to admit that Clegg had not bothered to phone him. Such are the personal and leadership qualities of the Deputy Prime Minister.

[Inanna]

[For the average 15-16 year old who is not strongly motivated or academic the prospect of spending two additional years in education is not a good one, partucularly children who come from homes where the culture of work is not current.

The availability of the funding proved sufficient incentive for many young people to continue with their eductation, and quite a lot of cases as the students matured they came to appreciate the benefits of the education and training and the life opportunities that staying on and geting extra qualifications was giving them.

Without wishing to be rude to other members of this community I would urge you not to make judgements on these young people without a very careful consideration of their circumstances, the cultural context in which many of them live is that working and education is for mugs, and the smart people get on through borderline criminality and dreams of success through celebrity.

The rules for payment of EMA are much stricter than other systems of state support. One part of the allowance is paid on the basis of their attendance at all classes, failure to attend without providing proper reasons results in allowance being denied or limited. A second part of the allowance is paid on the basis of completion of work, eg if students do not complete their assignments then again allowance is denied.

eborr, my apologies for jumping the gun. I agree that I was a) not aware of the terms of the incentive and b) did not take the cultural context into account (and I should know better than that).

I am reminded of the movement in India of giving free, wholesome lunch to students in rural schools and what in the US you would call "inner-city" schools. Attendance has shot up as parents are sending their kids to school so that they can atleast have one good meal. for free. So, incentives do work.

However, I still feel monetary incentives are not the final word. There has been a recent move in the US to incentivize kids by paying them when they get good grades. The couple of small trials that have been done show that it works. But I always wonder, for how long and for whom? Problem also is that the monetary incentives are easy to implement, and success is easy to track. Social incentives are long-winded, heavily tied up with home and culture, and almost impossible to gauge. And it is definitely not the job of the education department to change social norms/cultural aspects of communities. I just worry - that these students will lose the ethics of doing a job well, and tie all thier efforts to monetary gain. And that does not necessarily lead to satisfaction or happiness. The cumulative effect, over years, of such a generation.... But then the question is - cumulative effect compared to what? no education at all?

[Túrin Turambar]

At least the Lib Dems can take comfort in the fact that they beat the Monster Raving Loony candidate.

In other news, so Wales is now an equal partner in the U.K. to Scotland and Northern Ireland?

[ToshoftheWuffingas]

At least the Lib Dems can take comfort in the fact that they beat the Monster Raving Loony candidate.

Reminds me of the 1992 election aftermath when Thatcher's successor got back in. A stand up comic remarked that the Monster Raving Loony Party did well, then waited the requisite number of milliseconds then continued, 'I just never thought they'd get back in again.'

ETA, to give a taster for the colourful side of British electioneering, here is a YouTube of an election result. The video is of a journalist winning on an anti corruption campaign but that's the boring bit. Watch out for the political candidate in the orange leather costume on the platform too. Despite the best efforts of the camera crew to ignore him his fake breasts manage to bracket the speakers heads tellingly. I bet he got a fair number of votes too

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fS6SE9IGOeQ

[eborr]

Mahima. no worries, as I said in my post, I was initially very sceptical of the ema scheme, I needed to get on the inside to appreciate it's worth.

[eborr]

British Special Forces captured by the rebels in Libya. No doubt the Govt. will try to blame this on their second favourite scape goat the MOD.

However the mission sounds like a horrendous foriegn policy gaffe, not only have they annoyed the rebels, they will have also made things worse with Gadaffi.

It is inconceivable that the SAS are deployed on foriegn territory without the direct permission of the Prime Minister.

[eborr]

Nick Clegg orders rebrand amid rumours of leadership challenge
Nick Clegg has ordered a rebranding of the Liberal Democrats amid signs that he could face a challenge to his leadership if his party continues to slump in the polls.
The Deputy Prime Minister has commissioned a complete rethink of Lib Dem strategy amid rumblings about his stewardship at the highest level.
Insiders say senior party figures including Chris Huhne, a former leadership contender, have been jockeying for position behind the scenes.
Rumours about Mr Clegg's leadership have emerged after mounting discontent among party members in the country who are furious at the direction the party has been taking in government.
Rank and file activists, who are more left wing than Mr Clegg, reject many of the more right wing policies adopted by their leader since he entered into coalition with the Tories.
The rise in university tuition fees and the speed and depth of cuts to public spending are particular bones of contention
Mr Huhne, who ran Mr Clegg close in the last Lib Dem leadership election, has told colleagues privately that he would be interested in leading his party in the future.
His comments have raised eyebrows among fellow ministers and added to the heat on Mr Clegg, who is already considering radical measures to address his worsening ratings.
The rebranding exercise due to get under way next month will involve a total rethink of the party's direction and could even include changing the name and logo, insiders said.
Some party strategists believe the name should change to include the word "social", in order to reassure members and voters that it is more left wing.
The image of a bird in flight could go in favour of a new logo emphasising fairness and social justice, such as a scale.
Mr Clegg is particularly worried about his own personal ratings and has asked for ideas about good news initiatives he could be associated with.
The Lib Dems are stuck at an almost record low of 10 per cent in the opinion polls with Mr Clegg's personal ratings plummeting since last May.
Before the election the Lib Dems peaked at 33 per cent and Mr Clegg enjoyed sky high personal ratings during the televised leader debates.
Aides of Mr Clegg are said to be desperate to know how they can turn the situation around.
Many MPs in the party, meanwhile, are keen to reposition in the hope of doing a deal at the next election with Labour.
"We are playing a long game," said one backbencher. "If the Coalition burns out we will want to regroup and would hope to go into coalition with Labour. That is where the heart of the party is."
The worsening position of Mr Clegg has led to panic in Downing Street among aides of the Prime Minister.
David Cameron is said to be increasingly concerned that Mr Clegg will be fatally weakened if there is a "no" vote in the referendum on voting reform on May 5.
His deputy will be particularly vulnerable to a challenge if the Liberal Democrats suffer heavy losses in local elections on the same day.
Labour are so convinced that the referendum could trigger a meltdown of the coalition that officials have been put on alert to ensure the party is ready in the event of an emergency general election as early as this year.
Andy Burnham, the party's election coordinator, and Ray Collins, general secretary, have drawn up contingency plans.
In a further sign of the febrile atmosphere, the main broadcasters, including the BBC, have contacted the political parties to ask about their views on holding another televised leader debate.
Although Mr Cameron is campaigning for a "no" vote, he is understood to be deeply worried by the effect this will have on Mr Clegg, who has staked much of his reputation on securing a "yes" victory.
A referendum on the Alternative Vote system was the price Mr Clegg put on entering into partnership with the Conservatives.
Many Liberal Democrat MPs and grassroots members have only been prepared to swallow the major concessions made to the Tories since because they want to secure AV.
Without voting reform, the Lib Dem grass roots might decide to try to trigger an end to the coalition.
It is also feared the Lib Dems could lose up to 500 council seats in the local elections, further destabilising Mr Clegg.
The Lib Dem leadership rules state that a leader can be removed by a vote of no confidence passed by a majority of MPs or by a statement calling on him to go submitted by 75 local constituency parties.
One senior Conservative strategist said: "If it's a 'no' we are going to need to shore Clegg up a bit. If it's 'no' and heavy Lib Dem council losses, we are going to have to shore him up a lot.
"We might need to throw him quite a lot of concessions to keep this going."
Mr Cameron recently put Mr Clegg in charge of drawing up a House of Lords reform package in a bid to strengthen his position

This is from the Daily Telegraph, sorry it's a bit long, but I was unsure as to whether non-UK folks could see it.

Says so much about modern politics in that all the so and so's are concerned with is their own survival, and they imagine that can be fixed by a re-brand - what happened to doing the right thing ?

[Aravar]

eborr, have you read Peter Oborne's books The Tise of Political Lying and The Triumph of the Political Class? They have some interesting insights into the increasgin importance of spin and the like.

[eborr]

No but thanks for the info, I will try and get a copy, I have heard Oborne talk on the tele but he generally seems to be grandstanding right wing libertarian stuff, let's see if is writing is more measured and convincing

[Túrin Turambar]

Electoral reform goes down badly, and the Lib Dems are creamed in local elections. The Conservatives are holding their ground.

Vote 2011: UK rejects alternative vote

The UK has voted overwhelmingly to reject changing the way MPs are elected - dealing a bitter blow to Nick Clegg on top of heavy Lib Dem poll losses.

Officials say 19.1m people voted in the second UK-wide referendum in history - a higher than expected turnout of 41%.

With votes still being counted, the No campaign is on course to get 69%.

It comes as the Lib Dems suffered a rout in English local elections - and the SNP scored an historic victory in the Scottish Parliament poll.

Alex Salmond's party will form a majority government - humbling Labour in one of its traditional heartlands and paving the way for a referendum on Scottish independence.

'Clear result'

Labour made significant gains in town halls in the north of England and in the Welsh assembly elections, it fell just short of an absolute majority.

Labour also held Leicester South in a Parliamentary by-election with an increased majority, although the Lib Dems hung on to second place. Sir Peter Soulsby, whose decision to stand down triggered the contest, won the contest to be Leicester mayor.

The Conservatives managed to make significant gains too - with their Lib Dem coalition partners apparently bearing the brunt of public anger over spending cuts at English local elections.

And there was a double blow for Lib Dem leader and deputy prime minister Nick Clegg - who saw his dream of ditching Britain's first-past-the-post electoral system comprehensively dashed.

Mr Clegg said: "I wish I could say this was a photo finish but it isn't, the result is very clear. I'm a passionate supporter of political reform but when the answer is as clear as this, you have got to accept it."

"This is a bitter blow for all those people, like me, who believe in the need for political reform."

Counting is likely to continue in the AV referendum for some time - but more than 9,873,000 No votes have already been counted - the 50% threshold after which the Yes campaign cannot win.

The official result will not be announced until all results have been declared.

'Resounding answer'

Labour leader Ed Miliband - who also backed AV, while many of his own party did not - said he was "disappointed" but the people had "spoken clearly and it's a verdict I accept".

But David Cameron, whose Conservative Party campaigned to keep first-past-the-post, said the referendum had delivered a "resounding answer that settles the question" over electoral change and people now wanted the government to get on with governing in the national interest.

So far more than 400 areas of the UK have voted No, while only 10 have voted Yes - six of which are in London.

The director of the No campaign, Matthew Elliott, said he had been "astonished" at the scale of the No victory: "I personally believe that this result will settle the debate over changing our electoral system for the next generation."

'Redouble efforts'

Mr Clegg told the BBC the Lib Dems were facing "the brunt of the blame" for coalition spending cuts, adding that, for some voters, they were bringing out "memories of things under Thatcher".

He promised to "redouble our efforts" and "get up and dust ourselves down".

BBC political editor Nick Robinson said the order had gone out from Conservative HQ that Tories, who campaigned against their Lib Dem coalition partners over AV, should not be seen gloating.

But he said while there was no serious talk about challenging Mr Clegg's leadership, Mr Clegg was expected to put up more of a fight against his Conservative colleagues so there would be more difficult months ahead for the coalition.

The Lib Dems have lost almost half their councillors whose seats were up for grabs but the Conservatives, who already controlled more councils than all the other parties put together, have increased their number of councillors and gained control of two councils.

In Northern Ireland, The DUP and Sinn Fein are expected to remain the biggest parties in the Northern Ireland Assembly, but there has been controversy over the system for counting votes.

The SNP's victory in Scotland is the first time any party has achieved a majority since the 129-seat Scottish Parliament was established in 1999.

Scottish Labour leader Iain Gray said he would stand down in the autumn.

In Wales, Labour won 30 assembly seats, one short of the 31 needed to gain an overall majority.

The Conservatives made gains, but Plaid Cymru and the Lib Dems suffered losses.

link

[Ghân-buri-Ghân]

Yes, it has been delightful listening to the LibDem ostriches attempting to explain away their worst electoral performance in 30 years. Apparently, it's because parties in power perform badly... so, how come the Tories performed pretty well, Cleggy?

The "Clegg Phenomenon" was dead by the time of the General Election last year. To watch the LibDem corpse imitate life would be painful if it wasn't for schadenfreude...

The LibDems will forever be tainted by their gross hypocrisy. They pretended progressive politics, when in reality they were opportunistic chancers, intoxicated by the whiff of power. Now? They can't afford to break the coalition, as they would be annihilated. Cameron can, basically, do as he wishes.

Poorhouse and workhouse? Back to Victorian values...

[eborr]

Best comment

Cameron accused of using surrounding himself with human shields, the body of the Lib-Dem parliamentary party has been keeping the flack off the Tories.

The reality is the Tories are having to either abandon or compensate for most of their flagship policies, there plan had been to charge adults at further education a fee of 1000 pounds.

Most adults who atttend further education do so because they have a very low level of education, and are seeking to improve their lot in life. As many of them had been in low paying employment, frequently enjoying benefit supplements, they don't have spare cash. Such people had qualified for free education as it was seen as a societal benefit.

As a consequence the FE Colleges were reporting a 90% decline in filled course places, meaning that many of the colleges were financially unviable. As they provide the main training/education provider for approximately 50% of 16-18 year olds, the country was facing a catastrophe - colleges providing education to 750,000 students closed.

So what is the solution, the Govt, is simply giving the colleges a hand-out. So money that previously had been allocated to train under-achieving adults is now going to prevent a Govt PR nightmare.

And why is this happening - the answer is simple - most of the clowns in the cabinet have never done a real day's work in their lives, and have no understanding that actions may have consequences.

Never has let them eat cake resonated so loudly round the Palace of Westminster