It is a sick government, in terms of depravity rather than wellbeing, that uses the nation's children as pawns in a political game with the not-particularly militant teaching unions. The suggestion that parents could help keep schools open while teachers strike, a perverse idea by Education Secretary, Michael Gove, is perhaps the most dispiriting of all the divisive ideas coming from this government.
He is proof there is a bit of Thatcher in all of today's Conservative party. Is this a surprise? Not at all. Many of today's Tory parliamentarians were fresh-faced recruits during the days of Thatcher and soon after. Thatcherism drips across the Conservative party, perhaps more so than during her own time in power.
I grew up in the 1980s when teaching strikes happened occasionally. We would be given work to do at home. We loved it because it gave us a day off school. And however much inconvenience this may cause parents, they should be sticking with the teachers, not being encouraged to campaign against them.
'Big Society' was David Cameron's big idea for public participation in social affairs. It is something he talks about because it sounds nice, but parents and children being politicised in a struggle between teachers and government is not my idea of the 'Big Society' in action.
It makes me glad I am not a child in today's nasty society (which sounds more realistic than this 'Big Society' nonsense). I would not want to be the one beaten up on the playground by other children, blamed for keeping the school open by classmates who hoped they would be getting an unscheduled holiday. I would not want to be the one who the teachers give less assistance to in the classroom because their parents undermined their industrial action. Some militant teachers may be temped by this, mark my words.
The truth is, despite my use of the word 'militant' above, teachers are generally not that militant at all. They are not known for striking. The ATL (Association of Teachers and Lecturers) is a union definitely not renowned for striking, so you can be sure if they have downed tools, then they are not happy.
If last minute talks could avert a strike this Thursday, even at this late stage, nobody would be more happier than the teachers themselves. After all, they go into teaching because of a wish to help and develop young people. It certainly is not for the money, or the abuse they have to take from those they try to do their best for.
The lack of militancy from the teachers makes the fighting talk by Gove all the more exasperating. I would say roll on the next cabinet reshuffle, but the pool of Thatcher's children is hardly likely to produce anyone more sympathetic to society's educators.
Showing posts with label Big Society. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Big Society. Show all posts
Monday, 27 June 2011
Sunday, 20 February 2011
The Sunday Supper guide to the big society
David Cameron continues to cause confusion in the Tory ranks by using a word which has historically failed to register with many Tories - 'society'.
After years of being coached by headmistress Thatcher that there was no such thing as the elusive 'S' word, now 'society' features prominently in Cameron's rhetoric. So what is this Big Society he keeps talking about?
We at Sunday Supper are not sure either, so we created our own interpretation of it. This definition is probably not too far off, so hopefully it will help those Tories who need the Big Society explained to them.
It is Tory tradition to cut, cut and cut public services. Their proposed cuts may be less extreme if it was not for the global financial crisis and the behaviour of banks. However it is fair to assume that they would have perceived much Labour spending to be "wasteful" anyway and thus taken remedial action.
The Tories have always loved to preside over a state that has a strong backbone but not bloated. They have never been good at welfare - the public are by and large left to get on with it as one by one services are taken away. The exception is the drive towards more bin collections, a public service that has always warmed Tory hearts.
The problem for the Tories is that their dated ideology needs to be communicated to a public which no longer believes in the 1980s 'greed is good' discourse, where individualism reigns supreme.
This is the age of the ethically conscious, where wealth is envied and treated with contempt. Recycling is a principle which flows through the centre ground. If people see something immoral on the television they are online complaining to Ofcom quicker than you can say "Russell Brand".
This is where the Big Society comes in. While services are being retracted, the idea is the public should get involved in helping communities instead, preferably for free. Cuts in elderly care? No worries, the neighbours can cook a meal for the old dears... hopefully. No rubbish collectors anymore? No problem - the locals can 'muck in' and keep things tidy.
The implementation of it all may be difficult for Tories to comprehend, as society working together is an off-centre concept to them, but they should fear not. From this definition, it is not that far removed from the old Tory line. In 1981, when the purse is closed you are on your own. In 2011, when the purse is closed you are still on your own. The only difference is in that 2011 the public are expected to commiserate together.
After years of being coached by headmistress Thatcher that there was no such thing as the elusive 'S' word, now 'society' features prominently in Cameron's rhetoric. So what is this Big Society he keeps talking about?
We at Sunday Supper are not sure either, so we created our own interpretation of it. This definition is probably not too far off, so hopefully it will help those Tories who need the Big Society explained to them.
It is Tory tradition to cut, cut and cut public services. Their proposed cuts may be less extreme if it was not for the global financial crisis and the behaviour of banks. However it is fair to assume that they would have perceived much Labour spending to be "wasteful" anyway and thus taken remedial action.
The Tories have always loved to preside over a state that has a strong backbone but not bloated. They have never been good at welfare - the public are by and large left to get on with it as one by one services are taken away. The exception is the drive towards more bin collections, a public service that has always warmed Tory hearts.
The problem for the Tories is that their dated ideology needs to be communicated to a public which no longer believes in the 1980s 'greed is good' discourse, where individualism reigns supreme.
This is the age of the ethically conscious, where wealth is envied and treated with contempt. Recycling is a principle which flows through the centre ground. If people see something immoral on the television they are online complaining to Ofcom quicker than you can say "Russell Brand".
This is where the Big Society comes in. While services are being retracted, the idea is the public should get involved in helping communities instead, preferably for free. Cuts in elderly care? No worries, the neighbours can cook a meal for the old dears... hopefully. No rubbish collectors anymore? No problem - the locals can 'muck in' and keep things tidy.
The implementation of it all may be difficult for Tories to comprehend, as society working together is an off-centre concept to them, but they should fear not. From this definition, it is not that far removed from the old Tory line. In 1981, when the purse is closed you are on your own. In 2011, when the purse is closed you are still on your own. The only difference is in that 2011 the public are expected to commiserate together.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)