Yesterday the Prime Minister Gordon Brown launched the election 2010 campaign. But what do the three main political parties and what they stand for regarding the environment and education – key issues for readers of this blog.
MY OVERALL VIEW: Each party seems to have a mixed bag of positives and ideas that are not so pro-environment or education. With some oustanding efforts, particularly at Copenhagen, Labour has for me lost their way re the environment somewhat. A ban on fox hunting, lack of joined up thinking on a low-carbon environment (Transition Towns) and the ‘environment’ is not at the heart of the curriculum eg. lack of adequate funding re school trips – as illustarted in a previous blog. Conservatives relaunch to be the ‘pro-environment party’ yet the ‘environment’ again not at the heart of the curriculum. Hoorah for their Heathrow policy yet they would repeal the ban on fox hunting! The Lib Dems are positively focussed on ending our over-reliance on Nuclear power, with promises of investment in renewable energy and the ‘Green Grid’. But will they ever get enough votes to gain power or do we need a change in the form of ‘proportional representation’. Or otherwise, a major change in the form of the Greens?
And what do you think?
Source: The Independent http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/where-the-parties-stand-education-1930588.html
Environment
Labour http://www2.labour.org.uk/home is promising the make the transition towards a low-carbon economy that would not only tackle climate change but also provide large numbers of new green jobs, with the aim of seeing 1.2m people in environment-related employment by the end of the current decade. The party aims to give a quarter of British homes a full eco-makeover by 2020 and to install a smart meter in every home, also by 2020, making it easier to cut energy use and save money on bills; to give a further six million households help with insulation by 2012, and to have phased out high-energy light bulbs in favour of energy efficient ones by next year. The party would also continue with major efforts to tackle climate change internationally. Labour would maintain the ban on fox hunting, which the Tories would seek to repeal.
MY VIEW: With some oustanding efforts, partuicularly at Copenhagen, labour has for me lost their way re the environment somewhat. Good: Climate change and ban on fox hunting. Unconvinced re low-carbon (lack of joined up thinking )http://www.transitionnetwork.org/ and environment not at the heart of the curriculum http://www.naee.org.uk/eg. lack of adequate funding re school trips – see previous blog.
What do you you think?
David Cameron rebranded the Tory Party http://www.conservatives.com/with a green paintbrush but there are signs – watched anxiously by environmentalists – that the environment is losing its allure for the party. Although they back the current Government’s climate change targets for cutting carbon emissions and want restrictions on coal-fired power stations, they have yet to endorse publicly its renewable energy programme for building windfarms (not popular in the shires). Their most prominent green selling point at the moment is their pledge to cancel the planned third runway at London’s Heathrow Airport, and replace it with a high-speed rail line to the north. On the countryside, they would bring in a bill to repeal the Hunting Act 2004, the measure that outlawed foxhunting, and allow a free vote on it in government time.
MY VIEW: Unconvinced relaunch to be the ‘pro-environment party’; environment still not at the heart of the curriculum. Good: Heathrow. Bad: repealing ban on fox hunting.
What do you you think?
Most distinctively, the Lib Dems http://www.libdems.org.uk/home.aspx would scrap the move towards new nuclear power, which has been endorsed by the other main parties as part of their strategy to combat climate change, on the grounds that there are no plans yet to dispose of the new waste arisings and there will have to be a massive public subsidy to build any new plants. Instead, the party promises a massive programme of investment in renewable energy sources such as wind, wave and solar power, and ways to make the cost of energy less of a burden, with a fair social tariff system for disadvantaged families. On the countryside, the Lib Dems promise to promote schemes to enhance wildlife, such as a “Green National Grid“, which would link the habitats of rare species.
MY VIEW: Good: end Nuclear power over-reliance (though this is a large debate!), renewable energy and Green Grid. Will they ever get enough local votes to get into power…need proportional representation.
What do you you think?
Education
Labour would introduce a new school report card system – grading all schools on a range of issues such as exam performance, children’s wellbeing and behaviour. Ed Balls, the Schools Secretary, has said he believes they would give more information to parents than the current league tables based on raw results. Parents would also be given the power to ballot on a change of leadership if enough of them were concerned about the way their children’s school was being run. Labour has also indicated it is willing to see the controversial external national curriculum tests for 11-year-olds replaced by teacher assessments if the these prove robust enough.
MY VIEW: Unconvinced: Government has spent last years bringing in ever-more strategies and directives, putting more pressure on already over-worked teacheers. Bad: card system (not more paper work, please!) and parents having more power. Good: scrap tests.
What do you you think?
Tories Sweeping changes to the education system with the adoption of a Swedish-style education system whereby parents, teachers, universities and faith groups would be encouraged to set up their own independent “free” schools. In addition, all schools ranked outstanding by Ofsted, the education standards watchdog, would be given the right to become academies from September. Their heads would also be encouraged to take over failing schools in a bid to turn them round. An Education Bill to bring in these changes would be brought in immediately after the election. Moves to boost the quality of teaching would see stricter entry requirements for the profession with only those with a 2:2 degree or above qualifying for teacher training places. On discipline, appeals against exclusions would be abolished and the final word on disciplinary problems would rest with the headteacher.
MY VIEW: Unconvinced by what seems a very mixed bag of ideas Good: Worth trying the swedish system; exclusions idea. Bad: 2:2 degree – qualifications do make for better teachers!
What do you you think?
The key pledge in the Liberal Democrats’ manifesto will be to introduce a “pupil premium” – which will mean schools get extra cash for every pupil on free school meals they take on. The £2.5bn plan, which would mean an extra £2,500 per pupil for schools, would be funded from tax credits and would aim to provide an incentive to heads to enrol pupils from poor families. The party would also return to the exam system envisaged by the former chief schools inspector Sir Mike Tomlinson – with an overarching diploma covering both academic and vocational qualifications. The party is also committed to abolishing top-up fees for students of £3,240 a year – although it acknowledges that economic circumstances may prevent it from implementing this pledge in the short term.
MY VIEW: Good: Pupil premium could work; academic and vocational useful differentiated focus for young people who are not ‘academic’
What do you you think?