Minting headless coins
The school leaving age in Britain is to be raised for the first time since since 1972, from 16 to 18. We are told this will reduce welfare payments. One wonders whether it will increase education payments by more or less than the welfare savings. At the margin, does it cost the Exchequer less, the same or more to pay teenagers to do nothing to wander the streets or to do nothing in a classroom?
What will an increase in the number of students who don't want to be there do to the classroom environment and life-prospects for the others in their final two years of school who do want to be there?
The report on this in the Times Online (by Anthony Browne and Philip Webster) had some real policy gems. There would be exemptions for under-18s who are caring for parents or relatives (so much for the Labour social safety net), and (the real gem) for young teenage mothers. This government of unintended consequences seems oblivious to the potential effects of passing legislation forcing teenage girls to stay in school while giving them the option of pregnancy as a "get out of school free" card. But hey, why miss an opportunity to create two new problems instead of one, especially when it can be done with just a few extra lines of legislation?
And another classic: Education Secretary Alan Johnson (who apparently sees no irony in the fact that he left school at 15 and rose to cabinet level) wants to launch guaranteed apprenticeships, so that any youngster who reaches a certain skill level will have the 'right' to follow a suitable apprenticeship.
And so another 'right' is minted at the great Rights Mint in Westminster Palace. This government seems not to realise that creating a right also creates an obligation or a liability. But who is holding the obligation, the liability of all these guaranteed apprenticeships? Who is the guarantor? Is the government planning to (re-)nationalise great swathes of British industry?
It's as if they are minting coins stamped with a value on one side, but blank on the other. Or printing bank notes with no mention of the Bank of England. Or writing cheques with no drawer.
If Labour ministers understand this, maybe they figure that counterfeit rights don't cost much, and may fool enough of the people enough of the time. Such is the cynicism of the counterfeiter. Or perhaps, far from understanding liberty, they understand almost nothing. Take your pick. Either way, these are the leaders and the legislators we have elected. A greater indictment of the Conservatives than the electoral success of this government could hardly be imagined. For a decade they have failed to hit such a large target, lumbering about blindly, causing havoc. But then again, each nation gets the Government (and the Opposition) that it deserves.
What will an increase in the number of students who don't want to be there do to the classroom environment and life-prospects for the others in their final two years of school who do want to be there?
The report on this in the Times Online (by Anthony Browne and Philip Webster) had some real policy gems. There would be exemptions for under-18s who are caring for parents or relatives (so much for the Labour social safety net), and (the real gem) for young teenage mothers. This government of unintended consequences seems oblivious to the potential effects of passing legislation forcing teenage girls to stay in school while giving them the option of pregnancy as a "get out of school free" card. But hey, why miss an opportunity to create two new problems instead of one, especially when it can be done with just a few extra lines of legislation?
And another classic: Education Secretary Alan Johnson (who apparently sees no irony in the fact that he left school at 15 and rose to cabinet level) wants to launch guaranteed apprenticeships, so that any youngster who reaches a certain skill level will have the 'right' to follow a suitable apprenticeship.
And so another 'right' is minted at the great Rights Mint in Westminster Palace. This government seems not to realise that creating a right also creates an obligation or a liability. But who is holding the obligation, the liability of all these guaranteed apprenticeships? Who is the guarantor? Is the government planning to (re-)nationalise great swathes of British industry?
It's as if they are minting coins stamped with a value on one side, but blank on the other. Or printing bank notes with no mention of the Bank of England. Or writing cheques with no drawer.
If Labour ministers understand this, maybe they figure that counterfeit rights don't cost much, and may fool enough of the people enough of the time. Such is the cynicism of the counterfeiter. Or perhaps, far from understanding liberty, they understand almost nothing. Take your pick. Either way, these are the leaders and the legislators we have elected. A greater indictment of the Conservatives than the electoral success of this government could hardly be imagined. For a decade they have failed to hit such a large target, lumbering about blindly, causing havoc. But then again, each nation gets the Government (and the Opposition) that it deserves.
Labels: education welfare unemployment
posted by SJW at 3:31 PM
1 Comments:
Conversation overheard in the office at work today:
"What's the leaving age for school?"
"16, but the date's set at June, you can't just leave if you're 16, you have to wait till June, but then, if the kid's in year 11 and not really going to do well, no-one's going to chase it up if he does walk out early"
Someone else pipes up:
"Oh, but that'll change when these new laws come in"
So what - the kid in question really doesn't want to achieve at school, hardly ever comes anyway, and when he is in school he's not in lessons - why can't we allow him to see how he fares in the real world!?? He's just wasting everybody's time in school - including his own.
Post a Comment
<< Home