So it's been announced, at last, that the new leader of the Labour Party is a Miliband and it is of the Ed variety. No surprises there then but the margin is hardly a ringing endorsement for him. One is left wondering how long he will last and whether we are simply waiting for a couple of failures in local elections before a fuller election is held with the likes of Alan Johnson standing. Ed Miliband does not feel - yet - like a Prime Minister in waiting. Unlike Cameron who felt like he might make it, the younger Miliband does not feel like he will make it all the way to number 10 or have the right gravitas for such a role. But I may be wrong and his leader’s speech may give out different signals.
Some of the papers have already been calling the next election as a Tory win. Despite my above comments, I think they need to be careful, even 4 months into a 5 year parliament, of how they plan to take on new Labour. Both parties now have younger politicians at their helm and it is clear that over the last few weeks there has been a passing of power to a new generation. The young, fresh aspect of Cameron was lost the moment he came into power and further hidden now there is newer, younger man on the scene.
Also, all the Tories are in power, they neither won the last election nor have full power. They are having to react far more to what another party says (the Lib Dems) than ever before. Just like the Lib Dems, the Tories will need to set out their own stall and show what they are about. What one can see if coalition politics is to continue is that you have parties campaigning on one issue and compromising in power. We’ve seen this for years in the Welsh Assembly and Scottish Parliament as well as in numerous councils but the difference between promises in manifestos and actual plans for government are only going to be greater now coalition has come to Westminster.
The Tories also need to work out what will happen if they do win an outright majority in the next parliament; do they keep some links with the Lib Dems as it will be somewhat down to their involvement if they remain in power or do they cast Britain’s third party off as they will have fulfilled their usefulness? And the Lib Dems need to ask if they could swap sides and work with Labour if there is a slight shift in the numbers?
The Tories also need to be careful as the next election will come sooner than they think. A set term parliament means that we cannot be surprised so after the council and European elections in 2014, the campaign will start, particularly at the party conferences in the autumn of 2014. In many ways, just as this year and in 1997, when the date of the election is known the campaign lasts almost forever. So the parties only have 3 and a half years until campaigning for the general election will slowly start. Not long to solve the problems of state or develop new policies on how to tackle the big issues.
What I am trying to highlight here that coalition government coupled with a new Leader on the Labour side makes the next election unreadable. Along with the current political and economic issues, one cannot predict easily how politics will look in five years time. Therefore, the Tories need to act as if they are in opposition, creating a personality and identity away from the other parties and being self-critical of their acts in government. Just like the Lib Dems, the Tories must defend their identity for their own electoral success and also to make sure how politics do not go from Blue, Red and Yellow to a shade of Beige.
But the Tories have always been clever at positioning themselves (with or without Lord Ashcroft’s cash) so discussions will already be underway. But what would my betting be for the next election even at this early stage? I am not sure that much will change. Labour does not look yet like a strong force and the country is not that much in love with the Tories and has certainly fallen out of love with the Lib Dems. I would bet on a small Tory majority or a further coalition as we head into the next parliament. But who knows? As the cliché goes, a week is a long time in politics so four and a half years is a life time in – particularly coalition – politics.
Showing posts with label General Election. Show all posts
Showing posts with label General Election. Show all posts
Monday, 27 September 2010
Thursday, 13 May 2010
The Man in Charge of Higher Education
Good to see that we now have a Department of Education back rather than some collection of letters which we don't quite understand. That said, also interesting that Higher Education is to remain in Business (which could indicate a perception that it is an economic tool rather than an educational one) which poses a few questions. Good news for HE, I suppose, is that it ultimately comes under a Lib Dem rather than a Tory which might look at it more kindly (though don't hold your breath in these 'hard times'). Not confirmed but it will probably be David Willettts will become Universities Minister carrying on his shadow role. A thoughtful man but be interested to see what happens now he has to implement all that he talked about in opposition.
In other post-election revelations, there has been some guidance on what policies to expect on tuition fees from the Con-Lib coalition after the Browne review: basically some sort of tuition fees but the coalition partners can go there own way in voting terms. Also looking very likely that the Research Excellence Framework (assessing the quality of the UK's research) will be delayed by a year or two.
Just the small question of those budget cuts now ...
In other post-election revelations, there has been some guidance on what policies to expect on tuition fees from the Con-Lib coalition after the Browne review: basically some sort of tuition fees but the coalition partners can go there own way in voting terms. Also looking very likely that the Research Excellence Framework (assessing the quality of the UK's research) will be delayed by a year or two.
Just the small question of those budget cuts now ...
Wednesday, 12 May 2010
And so to Work
On way to work again and the world's sunny. Discussions about the cabinet continue in Westminster but there's relief and a realisation that history is being witnessed.
But now my job calls; training session to lead on bidding at lunchtime.
Then a tutorial this evening, my first in several months so need to revise my thesis. Nervous that I'm heading the wrong way or not how my tutors want. The nervousness of the PhD student. A report to follow ...
But now my job calls; training session to lead on bidding at lunchtime.
Then a tutorial this evening, my first in several months so need to revise my thesis. Nervous that I'm heading the wrong way or not how my tutors want. The nervousness of the PhD student. A report to follow ...
Tuesday, 11 May 2010
History: Democracy in Action
On train back from choir practice waiting listening to announcement about new government. Nights like tonight are historic and, as in 1997, we will remember where we were that night.
Brown acted with dignity as he has throughout the discussions, very much developing his role as statesman.
But after an expected Lib Dem surge, this sees them with the power if not the seats. But Cameron has also acted with leadership. His position will be difficult and we're not sure what the final cabinet will be.
Whatever, the markets will be happy and voters will have resolution. As I said on election night, polling days have start, middle and ends. This is now the end but really we're starting on a narrative our parents have not seen. The challenges of coalition and cuts face us. But perhaps the most important thing is - whether you like the result or not - this decision has happened peacefully and democracy has worked. For that you must be grateful.
Brown acted with dignity as he has throughout the discussions, very much developing his role as statesman.
But after an expected Lib Dem surge, this sees them with the power if not the seats. But Cameron has also acted with leadership. His position will be difficult and we're not sure what the final cabinet will be.
Whatever, the markets will be happy and voters will have resolution. As I said on election night, polling days have start, middle and ends. This is now the end but really we're starting on a narrative our parents have not seen. The challenges of coalition and cuts face us. But perhaps the most important thing is - whether you like the result or not - this decision has happened peacefully and democracy has worked. For that you must be grateful.
History
On train into work listening to 'Today' on the radio.
Yesterday was historic with the announcement of the intended resignation of Gordon Brown and the announcement by the Tories on electoral reform. I walked back through the media village outside parliament last night and it was buzzing. I was sad not to be a journalist reporting on it.
There's a song I like called 'Historymaker' calling on each person to change the world around them. If yesterday was historic, I suspect today could be more so. Isn't politics amazing?
Yesterday was historic with the announcement of the intended resignation of Gordon Brown and the announcement by the Tories on electoral reform. I walked back through the media village outside parliament last night and it was buzzing. I was sad not to be a journalist reporting on it.
There's a song I like called 'Historymaker' calling on each person to change the world around them. If yesterday was historic, I suspect today could be more so. Isn't politics amazing?
Friday, 7 May 2010
General Election - The Story So Far.
It’s just after 5am in the morning in the UK (6am where I am in France) and the family abandoned me about 90 minutes ago to keep watching the results as they come in. Elections are exciting and, as one journalist once said, they are good news events as they have a start, middle and end. And yet tonight’s does not seem to be an end but rather a continuation, a story extending way beyond tonight. In 2005 we were rapidly approaching a result at this hour and this time we are nowhere near. There seems to be a lack of celebration over the democracy taking place – and certainly no victory dances from any of the parties.
In my previous post I made a variety of predictions – how are they doing now?
1. Constituencies in which the family voted: Croydon North is still to declare, Clwyd South swung by 6% to Conservatives but still safe Labour and Bury St Eds swung to Lib Dems by 2.8% but firmly Conservative. The Lib Dems have had a very bad night and are no further ahead. Labour has had a bad night but perhaps not as bad as they might have expected. And the Tory’s momentum did not move them forward them fast enough.
2. Turn out is up and about 65-70% so nearly 1997 levels so a tight election obviously pulled out the voters even if the TV debates may not have thrown things (as seen by the Lib Dem results).
3. Minorities have not done well – Wyre Forest now Tory, Plaid lost a seat, SNP did not gain but it is looking likely that the Greens have got Brighton Pavillion. Interesting story in Northern Ireland with Peter Robinson losing his seat but still being first minister in the Northern Ireland Assembly. He says he still has a mandate but it’s not clear he does.
4. The percentage of the vote is yet to be clear but it looks like Conservatives take some 37%, Labour 27%, Lib Dems 23% and others 13%. Not very significant and though the proportion of seats in the final House of Commons will not reflect this, it is not quite as important had the Lib Dems beat Labour into third.
5. The results. A Conservative Administration looks likely, probably with a minority government and not the small win I predicted. A Lib Lab pact will not hold sufficient seats to win and a Con Lib link unlikely. But it's not in the bag that the Tories will get over 300 yet - and they will definitely not get over 325.
One of the major stories I did not predict was that some people would not be able vote and problems with the voting system. This will rumble on along with the discussions over voting reform and electoral form will feature in the next few years.
So what next? Results will continue dribbling in over the coming hours but by tomorrow afternoon I think there will be a collection of trips to Buckingham Palace but the answers are yet to be clear.
UPDATE AT 0552
Well, three interesting stories within moments of eachother.
Croydon North had a fractional swing to Labour of 0.3% with an increase in their majority. Interesting how some trends are bucked.
The Greens have gained Brighton Pavillion which is a new party in the Commons and another complication in predicting coalitions.
And the BBC have a prediction of Conservative 306 seats, Labour 262 seats, Lib Dems 55 seats and Others 27 seats. So there is now the room for a Lib Lab Coalition would command 317 seats so a minority government but the Tories must be worried. Keep watching. The trading continues.
In my previous post I made a variety of predictions – how are they doing now?
1. Constituencies in which the family voted: Croydon North is still to declare, Clwyd South swung by 6% to Conservatives but still safe Labour and Bury St Eds swung to Lib Dems by 2.8% but firmly Conservative. The Lib Dems have had a very bad night and are no further ahead. Labour has had a bad night but perhaps not as bad as they might have expected. And the Tory’s momentum did not move them forward them fast enough.
2. Turn out is up and about 65-70% so nearly 1997 levels so a tight election obviously pulled out the voters even if the TV debates may not have thrown things (as seen by the Lib Dem results).
3. Minorities have not done well – Wyre Forest now Tory, Plaid lost a seat, SNP did not gain but it is looking likely that the Greens have got Brighton Pavillion. Interesting story in Northern Ireland with Peter Robinson losing his seat but still being first minister in the Northern Ireland Assembly. He says he still has a mandate but it’s not clear he does.
4. The percentage of the vote is yet to be clear but it looks like Conservatives take some 37%, Labour 27%, Lib Dems 23% and others 13%. Not very significant and though the proportion of seats in the final House of Commons will not reflect this, it is not quite as important had the Lib Dems beat Labour into third.
5. The results. A Conservative Administration looks likely, probably with a minority government and not the small win I predicted. A Lib Lab pact will not hold sufficient seats to win and a Con Lib link unlikely. But it's not in the bag that the Tories will get over 300 yet - and they will definitely not get over 325.
One of the major stories I did not predict was that some people would not be able vote and problems with the voting system. This will rumble on along with the discussions over voting reform and electoral form will feature in the next few years.
So what next? Results will continue dribbling in over the coming hours but by tomorrow afternoon I think there will be a collection of trips to Buckingham Palace but the answers are yet to be clear.
UPDATE AT 0552
Well, three interesting stories within moments of eachother.
Croydon North had a fractional swing to Labour of 0.3% with an increase in their majority. Interesting how some trends are bucked.
The Greens have gained Brighton Pavillion which is a new party in the Commons and another complication in predicting coalitions.
And the BBC have a prediction of Conservative 306 seats, Labour 262 seats, Lib Dems 55 seats and Others 27 seats. So there is now the room for a Lib Lab Coalition would command 317 seats so a minority government but the Tories must be worried. Keep watching. The trading continues.
Thursday, 6 May 2010
General Election - What I'm Looking Out For.
After much fear, we now have internet access here in France. Not the most logical way as a 20m cable is needed to link next door's garage, through our window and into my computer (see pictures left). But it does mean that I will be blessed with David Dimbleby's and the BBC's company here in France tonight, for which I am very grateful to the owners for pleasing this political/news geek. So what am I looking for:
1. The consituencies the family have voted in: Croydon North (me), Clwyd South (Parents) and Bury St Edmunds (Bro). The first two are safe Labour and the last safe Conservative but these will be indicative of a wider vote even if they do not change hands. Has Labour lost ground? Have the Tories strengthened? Have the Lib Dems had any sort of break through?
2. The Turn Out: Will the debates and the chance of a close election have raised the turn out from 61% in 2005 to even 71.4% in 1997 or higher? My guess - up a few per cent but those who were interested in the debate were not necessarily new voters but old geeks like me. And what about the impact of postal voting. It increased the turnout in 2005 - will 20% still use Royal Mail and not the Polling Station?
3. The Popular Vote: For once this is going to be more closely examined than ever before. Partiularly if the Lib Dems come second in the popular vote will this provide momentum for a proportional system?
4. The Margins: Will Barking go BNP, Brighton go Green and Wire Forest remain 'Save Kiddeminster Hospital'. What about the nationalist parties who could be powerful?
5. The Result: My guess would be a stronger Tory vote than expected (possibly with a small majority with support from others they had the momentum), a good showing for the Lib Dems (best numbers ever though not as strong as after the first debate) and disaster for Labour. But who am I to know?
Above all, I predict some blurred eyes and some indecisive results! Happy Election Night!
Thursday, 29 April 2010
Higher Education and the General Election 2
Tonight was the third and final Prime Ministerial Debate and this time on the economy but was actually the strongest and most exciting of the three debates. As you can imagine those of us in the public sector (including universities), watched listening for any sign of where budget and job cuts will be coming from but there were no real hints. That said, following on from my last posting on the election, a few more reflections have come to mind.
The economy has been hitting the headlines today with the Greek 'austerity cuts' and an article from the Economics Editor at the Telegraph saying that the Governor of the Bank of England thinks that whoever gets in will have to make such severe cuts that they will be voted out of power for a generation. Both of these have given us a bigger hint on what we can expect under the next government than the actual parties fighting to form it. There are going to be cuts and they're going to be severe but we're still not clear when or how bad they're going to be. Immigration featured again in the debate but the issue of student immigration was not mentioned this time.
Now the General Election's still continued to mention Higher Education at various points from Cameron getting a rather good grilling by a student on funding to articles in the Times Higher on the power of the student vote. There was an article in Research Fortnight (which I can't link to as it is a subscription service) which has also discussed the Manifestos pointing out the Tory and Labour plans for £extra places, a bigger push for universities to commercialise their knowledge and a promise to consider an ongoing review into student fees." They also pointed out that Labour and the Lib Dems plan to 'ring-fence' research (though the article questions what that means). They have also counted the number of times each party uses the words Education or University: Labour wins (57), followed by the Lib Dems (35) and the Conservatives last (22).
The best summary has been by International Focus, a newsletter for people working in that domain in HE. Their analysis says Labour is the only one to actually tackle internationalisation of HE saying they want it to be "a great export business." I disagree with this because education can not be seen purely as a business (though it needs a greater business sensibility, education is about people not numeric bottom lines) and also that education is something that is exported. This implies colonialism, 'giving something to the world' when actually we welcome a huge number of students and the idea of cross-cultural exchange would reflect the nature of the UK's universities today. The leaflet goes on to say that the Tories focus (vaguely) on student immigration and the Lib Dem's focus on HE from a domestic point of view. Whatever it predicts that the new government's position on "HE will probably be to invest less and manage more." Not rocket science as we've already seen it start but succinctly put.
That's all the detail I'm going to have on education though I do miss the BBC's Daily Politics debate on education as I travel to France on Saturday. Which means I now have all the information I will have to cast my postal ballet. Now, as with all elections and all voters, this isn't a single issue vote. How I much I want to pay in taxes, how I want those taxes spent, the role of society in the individuals' life, the economic downturn, who I believe I can trust to deliver their promises, the implications of a balanced parliament in a 3 party system and numerous other issues have influenced my vote. The one option which was closed to me was not voting. That said, looking at how one issue affects has shown how many areas impact on my career and my sector has been fascinating. The words Higher Education or Universities may not be heard that much in this election but its spirit influences many areas. From immigration to diplomacy, from home affairs to economic growth, from European relations to the value of education, it touches it all.
Tomorrow I will have to take that decision. I have been betting for 3 years that there will be a Conservative/Lib Dem mix in the next government. Will I be right? What will be the impact of my and your vote? What's the future for Higher Education under the next Government? We can start (or continue) these questions in a week's time but I suspect the answer to them will remain unknown for some time.
The economy has been hitting the headlines today with the Greek 'austerity cuts' and an article from the Economics Editor at the Telegraph saying that the Governor of the Bank of England thinks that whoever gets in will have to make such severe cuts that they will be voted out of power for a generation. Both of these have given us a bigger hint on what we can expect under the next government than the actual parties fighting to form it. There are going to be cuts and they're going to be severe but we're still not clear when or how bad they're going to be. Immigration featured again in the debate but the issue of student immigration was not mentioned this time.
Now the General Election's still continued to mention Higher Education at various points from Cameron getting a rather good grilling by a student on funding to articles in the Times Higher on the power of the student vote. There was an article in Research Fortnight (which I can't link to as it is a subscription service) which has also discussed the Manifestos pointing out the Tory and Labour plans for £extra places, a bigger push for universities to commercialise their knowledge and a promise to consider an ongoing review into student fees." They also pointed out that Labour and the Lib Dems plan to 'ring-fence' research (though the article questions what that means). They have also counted the number of times each party uses the words Education or University: Labour wins (57), followed by the Lib Dems (35) and the Conservatives last (22).
The best summary has been by International Focus, a newsletter for people working in that domain in HE. Their analysis says Labour is the only one to actually tackle internationalisation of HE saying they want it to be "a great export business." I disagree with this because education can not be seen purely as a business (though it needs a greater business sensibility, education is about people not numeric bottom lines) and also that education is something that is exported. This implies colonialism, 'giving something to the world' when actually we welcome a huge number of students and the idea of cross-cultural exchange would reflect the nature of the UK's universities today. The leaflet goes on to say that the Tories focus (vaguely) on student immigration and the Lib Dem's focus on HE from a domestic point of view. Whatever it predicts that the new government's position on "HE will probably be to invest less and manage more." Not rocket science as we've already seen it start but succinctly put.
That's all the detail I'm going to have on education though I do miss the BBC's Daily Politics debate on education as I travel to France on Saturday. Which means I now have all the information I will have to cast my postal ballet. Now, as with all elections and all voters, this isn't a single issue vote. How I much I want to pay in taxes, how I want those taxes spent, the role of society in the individuals' life, the economic downturn, who I believe I can trust to deliver their promises, the implications of a balanced parliament in a 3 party system and numerous other issues have influenced my vote. The one option which was closed to me was not voting. That said, looking at how one issue affects has shown how many areas impact on my career and my sector has been fascinating. The words Higher Education or Universities may not be heard that much in this election but its spirit influences many areas. From immigration to diplomacy, from home affairs to economic growth, from European relations to the value of education, it touches it all.
Tomorrow I will have to take that decision. I have been betting for 3 years that there will be a Conservative/Lib Dem mix in the next government. Will I be right? What will be the impact of my and your vote? What's the future for Higher Education under the next Government? We can start (or continue) these questions in a week's time but I suspect the answer to them will remain unknown for some time.
Saturday, 24 April 2010
Strikes in Higher Education
The University and College Union has announced that London's Universities may be hit by a wave of strikes on 5 May including my own institution, the University of Westminster (UoW). Now The Socialist Worker has confirmed the statistics with 61% in favour of strikes and 64% in favour of action short of a strike. That said, there's been no confirmation of turnout and it's worth noting that unions at universities do not have a huge membership. That said, the vote reflects the unhappiness and uncertainty over the 'financial crisis' which is affecting universities. Job losses, cuts and restructuring are all the order of the day and I suspect that's what's behind these proposed strikes (which may be cancelled if negotiations are concluded).
Before I go any further it is worth noting that I am not unionised (they are not that powerful in my sector and I am not a huge fan of them anyway) and below are personal reflections unlinked to my institution. It's not the first time I have seen strikes at universities, as part of my Masters, the University of Sheffield refused to mark work until a pay dispute was resolved (which may be one of the 'actions short of strike' which may affect students at UoW as we enter exam season) and there have already been substantial protests at UoW in the 2 months I've been there.
That said, they are all (relatively) tame compared to the action I saw in France in Spring 2004. Though my University - Universite Stendhal, Grenoble 3 - continued to operate, this strike was led by the students' unions (which are more like trade unions than the drinking holes seen in the UK) and somewhat supported by the teaching unions. Students were protesting over cuts in the grants to graduates (particularly those unemployed), unhappiness over reforms and uncertainty about the new 'Bologna Process', installing the Degree-Masters-Doctorate progression that we are familiar with in the UK.
What resulted was several weeks of sit-ins, noisy invasions of lecture halls and general unrest. One rapidly got used to negotiating these things and there was a genuine excitement, a feeling of witnessing (if not actually participating) in something important. French academics are always a little nervous about striking students as they did nearly topple the government in May '68 and then, as in 2004, the students soon went back to work as soon as they realised that they risked failing their degrees.
However, I think it illustrates a key point when the sector feels threatened, in whatever country, it wants its voice heard and strikes can be a tool. The French have traditionally been very good at this and universities in the Greek sector likewise (particularly after the recent budgetory cuts). In the UK, Academics have been less militant over recent years, there's a slight sense that the sector is there to serve and strikes would get in the way of that. That said, attack the status quo too hard or too fast and people will react against it.
The return of striking (or at least the threat of it) is in part due to the cuts from the economic downturn, reforms in universities and the general election with its resulting political shifts (note this new strike is scheduled for the eve of us going to the polls). People will agree with change until their lives are disrupted, as seen in students fearful of failing exams, and at which point the modern trend in strikes seems to be to urge people to return to work. Now, I think striking is going to be more assertive in a sector that is under-threat though I do wonder how effective it can be in academia which prizes academic and intellectual independence (something that the political bias of the unions threatens). For the main part, though, I think there is a growing realism in the UK (as there was in the strikes I saw in France in Spring 2004) that the changes will happen, no matter what, so the best possible victory for all the sides is that their opinions and justifications for action are heard even if the final outcome remains unchanged.
Before I go any further it is worth noting that I am not unionised (they are not that powerful in my sector and I am not a huge fan of them anyway) and below are personal reflections unlinked to my institution. It's not the first time I have seen strikes at universities, as part of my Masters, the University of Sheffield refused to mark work until a pay dispute was resolved (which may be one of the 'actions short of strike' which may affect students at UoW as we enter exam season) and there have already been substantial protests at UoW in the 2 months I've been there.
What resulted was several weeks of sit-ins, noisy invasions of lecture halls and general unrest. One rapidly got used to negotiating these things and there was a genuine excitement, a feeling of witnessing (if not actually participating) in something important. French academics are always a little nervous about striking students as they did nearly topple the government in May '68 and then, as in 2004, the students soon went back to work as soon as they realised that they risked failing their degrees.
However, I think it illustrates a key point when the sector feels threatened, in whatever country, it wants its voice heard and strikes can be a tool. The French have traditionally been very good at this and universities in the Greek sector likewise (particularly after the recent budgetory cuts). In the UK, Academics have been less militant over recent years, there's a slight sense that the sector is there to serve and strikes would get in the way of that. That said, attack the status quo too hard or too fast and people will react against it.
The return of striking (or at least the threat of it) is in part due to the cuts from the economic downturn, reforms in universities and the general election with its resulting political shifts (note this new strike is scheduled for the eve of us going to the polls). People will agree with change until their lives are disrupted, as seen in students fearful of failing exams, and at which point the modern trend in strikes seems to be to urge people to return to work. Now, I think striking is going to be more assertive in a sector that is under-threat though I do wonder how effective it can be in academia which prizes academic and intellectual independence (something that the political bias of the unions threatens). For the main part, though, I think there is a growing realism in the UK (as there was in the strikes I saw in France in Spring 2004) that the changes will happen, no matter what, so the best possible victory for all the sides is that their opinions and justifications for action are heard even if the final outcome remains unchanged.
Thursday, 22 April 2010
Higher Education and the General Election
It was debate number 2 this evening and it focussed on international affairs for at least some of the time. Not much to do with education though the last debate had very little on it, as well. Education policy in the UK seems to end at 18 when big public statements are made, leaving Higher Education (HE) somewhat out of the frame and International Education completely out of the frame unless it relates to immigration or Europe.
Now, the education policies of each of the parties have been compared with passing references to universities. The Conservatives and Labour have surprisingly close policies for HE: await the outcome of the Browne Review. Lord Browne is looking at student finance and how universities will finance themselves; he's widely expected to recommend lifting the cap on tuition fees so that universities can increase what they charge to help balance the books when there is less governmental support. In addition, revisions to student loans is expected (when to pay them back and how much) and adaptations to the scholarships schemes (who receives them and how much). None of this has been sorted and there have been various calls for an announcement ahead of the election by each of the parties on tuition fees but I doubt one will appear. That said, the Lib Dems have been discussing this and in his interview with Dermot O'Leary on BBC 3 discussed his plans to scrap tuition fees over 6 years and it was good to finally have a commitment to this even if it does fall slightly short of the immediate scrapping of all fees promised in 2005. Nothing much was said of removing the target of getting 50% of 18 year olds into HE though this is partially the way of funding the ending of tuition fees; fewer people going to university so more money to spend on those that do. Clegg did point out that this is a false claim by Labour saying this had been down-graded from attending to simply having an experience of Higher Education which could be as little as a couple of weeks.
So not a hugely engaging start to a discussion on HE - nothing on reducing the grants to universities, research funding levels or a vision for the future of our universities. The issue of immigration was discussed at the first leaders' debate and this affects HE more directly than many would think. Now the Tories want to crack down on Student Visa Abuse which is fair enough (particularly when some students are conned into studying at the non-existent University of Kensington), Labour are asking all foreign nationals to have ID cards which seems an extension of the current visa (though why not make them carry their passports and visa - is that not enough proof?) and both the 'main' parties want to make English Language Testing harder. I haven't forgotten the Lib Dems but they don't seem to focus on this as much. The Tory and Labour policies follow on from the new points-based system which Labour introduced and the Tories would extend. For HE, this moved the emphasis to them acting as the police at times and having to track student movement. The harder regulations did result in a delay of some students' arrival. The further hardening of entry requirements could make studying in the UK less attractive and at a time when International Students help 'balance the books' for universities, this could make the economic situation worse for them.
Another possibility for such changes in UK immigration for Universities is where the student actually studies. There has been a growing trend (as highlighted by the UK Council for International Student Affairs) for students to study for a UK qualification but to never set foot in the UK. In 2007/8, 341,795 students came to the UK to study at a university (this number is before the new visa regulations so a drop is anticipated when figures are released) but 196,750 students studied for a UK qualification and never set foot in the UK. This latter number is expected to grow and actually exceed the number of students who undertake 'physical' mobility to the UK, with students instead preferring 'virtual' mobility and still receiving a British Degree. Now, some of this has been due to UK government support through the British Councils UKIERI and PMI2 schemes (which should feel threatened in any spending review) but much of it was happening anyway. This could be the way forward for the funding of UK Universities if immigration policy changes after the election but needs continued investment from the government - and no-one seems to be talking about it.
And what about Europe? The EU funds a surprising amount of UK research and Education through its FP7 (research) programmes, the educational Lifelong Learning Programme (which includes the famous Erasmus Scheme) and, of course, Erasmus Mundus! Now, we all know Labour would continue its relations with Europe (and supports its expansion), the Conservatives are more cautious (and would probably draw us to one side of the EU) and the Lib Dems are the most in favour of our participation in the EU. With the volume of funding which comes from the EU and the academic richness which is borne out of relationships with other European HE Institutions, would this be something universities (or governments for that matter) would be prepared to lose? But this evening's Leaders' Debate focussed on the Euro and socio-political discussions without actually looking at some of the close relationships we have with our nearest neighbours at an informal, extra-governmental level.
As to the wider world, Higher Education has quite a role to play in international policy and diplomacy. The variety of schemes funded by the British Council (including the UKIERI and PMI2 schemes mentioned earlier) are examples of where we are trying to use diplomacy and gradual education to change the world around us rather than force and tanks! Joseph Nye (former Dean of the JFK School of Government at Harvard) has described this as 'soft power' which roughly equates to the over-used idea of winning 'hearts and minds'; higher education has the real possibility to change international relations. Possibly not the driving force of any foreign policy but one which surely should be considered by all of the parties; instead of the large sums spent on defence, smaller and strategically aimed sums for global partnerships in Higher Education may be just as effective. None of this featured in the debate; there was no real fundamental debate on a direction for international policy instead the leaders focussed on military issues.
In a sense, education has featured in the discussions of this general election but not in a direct, concrete way. Universities feature in the international economic, diplomatic and political relations of this country and aren't simple 'ivory towers' to educate Britain's teenagers. The power of Higher Education may not have featured but each of the leaders in tonight's debate might want to consider their potential role in any future government.
And how will I vote? Well, the debates go on but as an individual voter I feel engaged in politics and policy in a way I have not felt before; there is a real three-way choice this time and I am going to wait to make a decision.
Now, the education policies of each of the parties have been compared with passing references to universities. The Conservatives and Labour have surprisingly close policies for HE: await the outcome of the Browne Review. Lord Browne is looking at student finance and how universities will finance themselves; he's widely expected to recommend lifting the cap on tuition fees so that universities can increase what they charge to help balance the books when there is less governmental support. In addition, revisions to student loans is expected (when to pay them back and how much) and adaptations to the scholarships schemes (who receives them and how much). None of this has been sorted and there have been various calls for an announcement ahead of the election by each of the parties on tuition fees but I doubt one will appear. That said, the Lib Dems have been discussing this and in his interview with Dermot O'Leary on BBC 3 discussed his plans to scrap tuition fees over 6 years and it was good to finally have a commitment to this even if it does fall slightly short of the immediate scrapping of all fees promised in 2005. Nothing much was said of removing the target of getting 50% of 18 year olds into HE though this is partially the way of funding the ending of tuition fees; fewer people going to university so more money to spend on those that do. Clegg did point out that this is a false claim by Labour saying this had been down-graded from attending to simply having an experience of Higher Education which could be as little as a couple of weeks.
So not a hugely engaging start to a discussion on HE - nothing on reducing the grants to universities, research funding levels or a vision for the future of our universities. The issue of immigration was discussed at the first leaders' debate and this affects HE more directly than many would think. Now the Tories want to crack down on Student Visa Abuse which is fair enough (particularly when some students are conned into studying at the non-existent University of Kensington), Labour are asking all foreign nationals to have ID cards which seems an extension of the current visa (though why not make them carry their passports and visa - is that not enough proof?) and both the 'main' parties want to make English Language Testing harder. I haven't forgotten the Lib Dems but they don't seem to focus on this as much. The Tory and Labour policies follow on from the new points-based system which Labour introduced and the Tories would extend. For HE, this moved the emphasis to them acting as the police at times and having to track student movement. The harder regulations did result in a delay of some students' arrival. The further hardening of entry requirements could make studying in the UK less attractive and at a time when International Students help 'balance the books' for universities, this could make the economic situation worse for them.
Another possibility for such changes in UK immigration for Universities is where the student actually studies. There has been a growing trend (as highlighted by the UK Council for International Student Affairs) for students to study for a UK qualification but to never set foot in the UK. In 2007/8, 341,795 students came to the UK to study at a university (this number is before the new visa regulations so a drop is anticipated when figures are released) but 196,750 students studied for a UK qualification and never set foot in the UK. This latter number is expected to grow and actually exceed the number of students who undertake 'physical' mobility to the UK, with students instead preferring 'virtual' mobility and still receiving a British Degree. Now, some of this has been due to UK government support through the British Councils UKIERI and PMI2 schemes (which should feel threatened in any spending review) but much of it was happening anyway. This could be the way forward for the funding of UK Universities if immigration policy changes after the election but needs continued investment from the government - and no-one seems to be talking about it.
And what about Europe? The EU funds a surprising amount of UK research and Education through its FP7 (research) programmes, the educational Lifelong Learning Programme (which includes the famous Erasmus Scheme) and, of course, Erasmus Mundus! Now, we all know Labour would continue its relations with Europe (and supports its expansion), the Conservatives are more cautious (and would probably draw us to one side of the EU) and the Lib Dems are the most in favour of our participation in the EU. With the volume of funding which comes from the EU and the academic richness which is borne out of relationships with other European HE Institutions, would this be something universities (or governments for that matter) would be prepared to lose? But this evening's Leaders' Debate focussed on the Euro and socio-political discussions without actually looking at some of the close relationships we have with our nearest neighbours at an informal, extra-governmental level.
As to the wider world, Higher Education has quite a role to play in international policy and diplomacy. The variety of schemes funded by the British Council (including the UKIERI and PMI2 schemes mentioned earlier) are examples of where we are trying to use diplomacy and gradual education to change the world around us rather than force and tanks! Joseph Nye (former Dean of the JFK School of Government at Harvard) has described this as 'soft power' which roughly equates to the over-used idea of winning 'hearts and minds'; higher education has the real possibility to change international relations. Possibly not the driving force of any foreign policy but one which surely should be considered by all of the parties; instead of the large sums spent on defence, smaller and strategically aimed sums for global partnerships in Higher Education may be just as effective. None of this featured in the debate; there was no real fundamental debate on a direction for international policy instead the leaders focussed on military issues.
In a sense, education has featured in the discussions of this general election but not in a direct, concrete way. Universities feature in the international economic, diplomatic and political relations of this country and aren't simple 'ivory towers' to educate Britain's teenagers. The power of Higher Education may not have featured but each of the leaders in tonight's debate might want to consider their potential role in any future government.
And how will I vote? Well, the debates go on but as an individual voter I feel engaged in politics and policy in a way I have not felt before; there is a real three-way choice this time and I am going to wait to make a decision.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
