Is Theresa May trying to crash her government ?

When I first heard about the Grammar school proposal I was amused as the photographed document on the way into No10 is clearly a plant, and it shows the political skills of getting two bites of the media cherry for a policy.

I'm broadly in favour of more Grammar schools, but wonder if it isn't a further attempt to steal UKIP's clothes by a Conservative party who seems much more concerned about UKIP than it is Labour.

However, a further question has to be asked. Is Theresa trying to destroy her government, as a way of saving the EU's dominion over the United Kingdom ?

She's made a lot of enemies very quickly. The Toffs won't have liked their butchering in her reshuffle, and in case that didn't work attacking independent schools where they and their children attend today will reinforce the message. The hardened anti-UK re-moaners ( and there are plenty of them in what is laughingly called the Conservative party ) hate her for not allowing their more obvious schemes to destroy the Brexit mandate.

You can be sure that Grammar schools guarantees an almighty fight. Education failure and the destruction of life chances of middle class children is the dream and prime objective of the British left, along with the humiliation and extermination of our culture and Christian heritage. Its what gets them out of bed in the morning.

You can be sure the BBC will go nuts on this, its about the only thing that could force Brexit of the news cycle ( now there's a thought ...  and a motive).

But here's the problem - Theresa only has a narrow majority of a split party where she has just humiliated the former ruling faction. Not a formula for political success right ?

Is she really trying to sabotage her own government, knowing that its fall will save her beloved European Union ? Or is she trying to engineer an early general election given the Corbyn is likely to still be leading Labour ?Just a thought ...

The solution that dare not speak its name

Its time for the Radio 4 Today program panic about social mobility again.

Guess what ? All the fixes, fiddles and plain bodges to get children who's education has failed at state schools into top Universities isn't fitting the targets which have been dreamed up.

They'll try anything - scholarships ( free money for some people taken from others ), summer schools, putting out information that a half consious monkey could figure out for themselves on A levels required. But it not working.

The system has failed since - the Grammar school ruled.

But we must not have selective education !

But of course we already do. Almost every secondary school will stream, and yet the monster comprehensives aren't achieving the same results with their top streams. Why ?

The answer has to to do with wider issues that you get when your in a school with people of similar capability, but not just in a class of them.

Because of the stranglehold the BBC and Guardian have on the windpipe of English education this question will never get asked.

And ugly of class warfare will be called upon instead.

From rebellion to insurrection - or just a bump in the road to government ?

Things are starting to move into a new phase with the revolt inspired David Willetts CBI speech.

But first the basis of the arguments haven't changed. The Team Cameron line is that its the media that whipped this all up and David Willetts wasn't saying anything new. They seem to refuse (if Alan Duncan's interview on Radio 4 on Sat is anything to go by) to acknowledge that the statements about middle classes dominating the existing grammar school provision have been taken as an attack on the aspirational classes ( in my view they are ). They also miss that they have green lighted the socialists to move in to kill off the remaining grammar schools in there continuing revenge on the middle classes.

However, clearly they do acknowledge the deep water with the parliamentary and wider party they are in - hence the climb down over allowing new grammar schools. When a week or two earlier the membership of the party were being branded delusional by its leader and told that all this was out of the question.

There was a definite attempt by the Tory bloggersphere to back off last week. Conservative home wanted to limit the damage, and we could all see that olive branches graciously accepted were in the best interests of everyone in the party.

But the mood of the MPs seems to be darker than I might have expected. The question I'm asking myself is are we moving from a rebellion over a single issue to a more general insurrection phase, where wider issues, the broader Cameroonie project for example, are being targeted. We now have the first angry ex-front bencher, Graham Brady, launching an attack in today's News of the World. Other MPs seem to have been lining up to support grammar schools.

Personally I think the ship can still be steadied. But Team Cameron need to understand that if they want large changes they need to persuade rather than launch surprise announcements. A bit of decent media management - welcome Mr Coulson - wouldn't hurt either ( see two examples of how not to do things below ). David Willetts - and Oliver Letwin and Boris Johnson for safe measures, should all be dropped from the shadow cabinet. They are just liabilities. If Dave wants some sacrifice from the the membership on green issues, MP selection, education etc - he needs to make some of his own and set an example - that's leadership too.

Time is running out, David Cameron has had little time to reflect in Crete (not exactly the climate change leadership green people expect) this week and hopefully he'll learn something deeper about leadership - like how to listen.

We stand on the edge. This is either a blip on the road to government, or the start of that insurrection I see starting to smoulder.

The skills of David Cameron's leadership will determine which.

Update: Melissa Kite has a far better article here, which is worth a full read. (Credit where credit is due even if she isn't exactly a friend of Tory bloggers right now.)

---

Below are two examples from David Willetts showing why he needs some time on the back benches.

Willetts denies grammar U-turn"> Willetts denies grammar U-turn

Education spokesman David Willetts has denied the Conservatives have changed their grammar school policy. 31 May 2007

David Willetts and Nigel Farage in TV am with Andy Marr.

Don't let the sun go down on a quarrel

Team Cameron have made a very big mistake. They may now be realising its scale.

The Conservative party is not the Labour party - at least I hope not.

We will not allow ourselves to be told what to think one morning by party spokespeople.

We will not sacrifice our, or other peoples, children on trendy experimental education policies designed to win over confused Liberal Democrat voters, who are the only group who oppose the effective eduction provided by grammar schools.

If this is getting though to Team Cameron then all well and good - if not then its going to get very messy.

I'm not resigning - its the party of my aspirations and I believe the best hope for all of my fellow citizens. If it really turns out that we have been hijacked then I propose we fight for what we believe in and hold to be true.

It would be better for Team Cameron to make effective peace now.

Never let the sun set on a quarrel between friends - unless we are no longer that.

"But on this issue he (David Cameron) is plain wrong"

See Matthew d'Ancona in the Sunday Telegraph.

Maybe Team Cameron don't read the Telegraph any more ? ( Does Steve Hilton let them ? )

What has made this mess so much worse than when David Willetts condemned the middle classes for wanting a good education for their children has been, after a wobble, the decision to make it a leadership type issue. The Delusional membership vs the reforming leader - but the problem with this - on this issue - is just blindly obvious and as Matthew says:

"There is something deeply distasteful about listening to the Cameroons preen themselves over their tough line on state grammar schools, before, without missing a beat, they go on to discuss the selective examinations for top private schools facing their own children.

The wiser Tory strategists admit that the worst moment of Mr Cameron's leadership so far has been the revelation that a car carrying his papers sometimes purred behind Dave on his bike. It had the whiff of inauthenticity, of Marie Antoinette playing shepherdess. The last thing I would wish for is that the next election be fought along class lines, with Brownite Scots biffing English toffs. But the Cameroons are asking for it rather: we go to these private selective schools, but you lot really wouldn't benefit from similar academic selection in the state sector."

Full article here -

I'm of to Euro Disney for a few days - by the time I get back I hope the fantasy has stopped.

The party needs to say something positive to the aspirational, hard working people of this country.

Restricting excellence just to those whose parents can afford to pay....

The full quote from today's Economist (26th May UK edn I suspect ) is:

"Restricting excellence just to those whose parents can afford to pay for it cannot make sense".

It goes on to say ...

"Social mobility is a good thing, and the Tories are right to want to foster it. But so is an elite. After all, there's not much point in moving upwards if there's nowhere to go."

The point they make is that Grammar schools allowed state pupils to access that elite. The fault isn't that middle classes parent monopolise the resource, but that other children aren't prepared to get their fair crack at the places going ( and that's without the argument on the only surviving schools being were Conservatives could protect them - ie more middle class areas away from the Socialists and their Lib Dem side kicks).

The full article is here - but its a subscriber only link, so like a good education in Britain you'll now have to pay !

Iain Dale my try to talk David Willetts up this week on his blog citing a good commons performance, but only a policy rethink is going to convince me, and I suspect many other aspirational voters.

My Family on David Cameron and grammar schools

Nearly every year, after the passing away of the last of my grandparents on my Father's side, most of my cousins get together for a reunion. We're busy organising it now, and as the confirmed foaming at the mouth Tory of the family I let slip a one liner about Grammar schools and week or so ago.

Let me share with you the answers - there are a few bits of other threads mixed in, but I'm sure you can figure out where (names changed to protect myself mostly ):

Man in a Shed

Sounds great ! thanks,

XXXXXX(MiaS).

Haven't tried facebook yet - too busy roasting David Cameron over the Grammar school fiasco on the interweb thingy. ( I'm now a rebel. )

Tall cousin

I'm with you there, MiaS. What's he playing at?

Frighteningly efficient Cousin ( she comes camping with small baby in arms and still finds time to help everyone else put up their tents ! )

What is facebook?

Will try to make effort to read up on cons grammar school thing. All
conservative councillors -hoping-to-be-before-election, mentioned keeping them going.


DC perhaps a bit too Boden for me.

Am still being political though TC- bought another Branston brown sauce
yesterday, that's 2 now. Bet HP are sorry. Obviously I haven't bought much
Burberry for a while either.

XXXX

Tall cousin

Good for you, XXXX! Same here.

Eldest Cousins and a Senior Nurse (MiaS has always had her down as being a little left of centre, along with her husband )

MiaS
Feel free to add further basting to your David Cameron roast on our
behalf. Since Fred got into grammar school he has been stretched for the
first time ever. It is the first school that has shown any interest in
him achieving his potential rather than hitting some very average
targets. I am very cross.
Nursing Cousin

I couldn't put it better myself. Fred lives in the north and, apart from the fact his family suffers from Hull City supporter's syndrome ,should have a bright future ahead of him thanks to his school.

Its the last response that should create fear at CCHQ. I've kept saying people are very cross - perhaps dinner parties in Notting hill Gate don't get to hear about it, the worry being on school fees etc. Angry people get very motivated - you won't just lose their votes, but those of every one they can influence - and they will try.

Note to family: Try and remember its an anonymous blog in any comments you post. Sorry about the short hand I've used for you all - you can get even at the camping weekend if your feeling lucky enough ! (I'm moderating - so behave.)

PS Anyone else spotted Conservative support head down with the current attack on its aspirational supporters ?

Other posts on subject:

Nick Robinson and comments
David Cameron on R4

The Labour attacks on grammar schools begin

The Press Association is reporting the following:

Every grammar school in the country should twin with a failing comprehensive to raise standards, a top Government adviser said on Wednesday.

Sir Cyril Taylor, chairman of the Specialist Schools and Academies Trust, said grammars need to do more to help children from the poorest families.

He said he would not want to close the remaining 164 selective grammars in England but suggested that every one of them could form partnerships with weaker schools nearby. (the rest here ).

There's going to be a lot of this - in part to keep the Conservative party off balance and in part to put the knife into a long standing socialist enemy - the aspirational people of the working and middle classes.

This is what most natural Conservative supporters knew would happen and part of what makes us so angry with Team Cameron right now.

Nick Robinson 'gets it !'

Nick Robinson has a fine post here - he understands the wider issues in play, even beyond the issue of attacking the aspirational middle class on education.

Team Cameron really needs to sit up and take note whilst there is still time.

I quote a section from Nick Robinson's blog here:

Yesterday, I asked the Tory leader at his news conference how he would answer those who said his policy was fine for a "posh, rich kid" like himself but wondered how it would help someone like Michael Howard, his predecessor, the son of poor immigrants, who believes that a grammar school education was the key to escape from poverty. The Tory leader retorted that focussing on his background was old fashioned and irrelevant.

Many will agree.

However, the key to success as a leader is persuading people that even if you're not one of them you understand how they feel. The Tories who feel wounded by the Great Grammar School Row fear that he hasn't a clue how they feel and never will.

Update: Peter Hitchens is on the right track maybe (IMHO of course).
Cranmer has his own take on selection and ability also.

David Cameron on Grammar schools (R4 Today)

My wife just called me downstairs to listen to what David Cameron was saying in his interview on the Today program this morning.

To my disappointment David Cameron still doesn't seem to get why he's in so much trouble over his dumping of Grammar schools. Let me explain:

1) He really is dumping Grammar schools, despite his protestations that the last Conservative government didn't build any new ones anyway. Why ? Because as soon as the Conservative party stops defending those schools the wolves of socialism and the educational establishment will close for the kill - see an example here. As I've said before the argument will be that even the Conservatives don't support them any more.
2) Grammar schools prove what is possible - by removing them ( and see 1) that's what the impact of these announcements will be - if only by another's hands ) there will be no bench mark to show what possible.
3) The attack on the middle classes in David Willetts speech ( they're monopolising the good schools) and the insistence of using the free school meals measure ( despite the fact everyone knows the argument is totally inappropriate ). The message here is that the middle classes are selfish and should dam well allow the government to destroy the education of their children in the latest educational experiment, whilst it will continue to be OK for Conservative party MPs to send their children to selective at 13 independent schools which will have no truck with trendy educational initiatives. (You may be able to argue that the new policies will make everything better for everyone and they sound fine, but we've seen the experimental initiatives before. It takes 4 years or longer to admit they fail [ see GCSEs and course work or the dumbed down A levels ] during which time a lot of children's education will have been ruined.
4) Only William Hague can talk about Comprehensive education will the authority of having been their himself. The pictures being run in the press of the shadow cabinet and where they went to school, and in David Willetts case sent his children to school - shows a I'm all right Jack attitude.

The whole thing has been mishandled. (Yes it has - and admitting that is needed to draw the poison. ) I saw Caroline Hunt on 18DS Vox Politics last night and she doesn't get why there is such a fuss. Unfortunately neither does Dave. Well let me tell them that it isn't because we don't understand the business of party loyalty - its because we are very very angry. Not over just Grammar schools - but over the direct and insulting attack on the parental aspiration of many of their fellow party members and the middle class in general. Many will be angry enough to vote for another party in the secrecy of the polling booth.

Finally - and I didn't think I'd ever here myself saying this - thank you to the Today prog for putting Cameron on the spot, especially over the point of the aspirations of the middle classes. He needs to realise that Leadership isn't just about being in charge, but also about listening and knowing your party. If he really has picked a fight with his party over this, which he denies, then he has made a very very bad mistake.

PS Let me suggest that knowing when to say sorry is part of leadership also.

Update:

See UK Daily Pundit for a far more succinct explanation of what sort of trouble David Cameron has made for himself.

08:58 I can now hear left wing commentator on R4 closing in for the kill on Grammar schools - that was quick ! He now arguing against setting - saying most kids benefit from having the brighter kids in their group ( ie sacrifice the education of the bright for the less able ).

Tim Montgomerie was on Today at 7:16am (listen again here ) and has a piece on this on Conservative home here.

The social mobility myth - part 2

There is an article in The Sunday Telegraph which explores the point I was making earlier in the week on social mobility. Its worth reading in its entirety ( sorry I can't identify the author to credit ), but I leave a few quotes below (highlighting with underlining is mine):

Most people would probably share Mr Willetts' two assumptions. They certainly now amount to the orthodox view within much of academic sociology, which has for decades taken it for granted that differences in achievement between individuals and groups must be explained by some form of social injustice: if society were completely fair, so the orthodoxy goes, there would be no differences in what people were capable of achieving.

There is, however, an increasing amount of evidence that this is not true. "Just about all the research that has been done on this topic demonstrates that intelligence is not randomly distributed across society," says Ben Sacks, a former professor of psychiatry at Charing Cross Hospital. "Intelligent, well-educated women tend to marry intelligent, well-educated men, and they tend to have intelligent children who end up being well-educated.

And latter on ...

So as a society comes to the egalitarian ideal of treating everyone equally, it will not see social mobility increase: on the contrary, social mobility will decrease. One consequence is that decline in social mobility could be an indicator of a fairer, more just society.

Now I've missed out a lot of the argument presented. Of especial interest is how social mobility is measured and the underlying assumptions.

But now let me add something - if all this is true, and I think it is - then the measure being proposed to create social mobility will be anti-meritocratic ! In effect a sort of educational 'A' list will be created where those who will win will be decided before the process is started, and many deserving and capable people (ie the children of the middle class) will have their life chances ruined in the name of political correctness.

Also those uplifted children will never know if they really had merit or not. To be sure a non-objective system run by the educational establishment can be guaranteed to be politically correct - ie discriminatory.

David Willetts and David Cameron are betraying peoples children - other peoples children they perhaps reassure themselves. So perhaps they don't care, as long as this gets them what they want ( I suspect that's a bit harsh on David Willetts - but no more so than the spin being used against those in the party that wanted this thought through and agreed.). David Cameron's attempt to bounce the party and then insult its membership by talking about the "shallow end" of the educational debate is equally unimpressive. My opinion of them has suffered considerably over the last week.

Update: Nadine Dorries has been in great form this week - see her last post here on the subject of the education policy announcements.

Also see this article in The Daily Telegraph on the abilities of students and their social backgrounds.

What if Gordon Brown promised new Grammar schools ?

The heat has dropped in the tea rooms of the palace of Westminster over the two Davids miscalculation on Grammar school support.

Yes we've all been told to go a and read what was actually said - but we all know its the message that counts. What MiaS heard was an accusation that Grammar schools were monopolised by those evil middle class people and that they wouldn't, indeed couldn't, be defended any more. David Cameron has attempted to back track by offering to get rid of the mechanism that allows Grammar schools to be abolished locally - but this illustrates the scale of the strategic mistake that was made. Nobody thought a David Cameron would abolish Grammar schools - but failure to give vocal support would allow a socialist government to abolish them, and to back the case by quoting directly from Conservative party policy ! Hence Dave's move to try and bolt this door, all a bit too late.

But what if Gordon Brown decided to support and indeed increase Grammar schools ? ( He could tinker with 11+ and have a campus type system with people able to transfer schools at latter times ). It would be his clause 4 (teaching unions / education academics and other general lefties furious etc ), not Dave's, and the middle classes would be simultaneously astonished, grateful and reassured.

Frankly it could deliver Gordon Brown the next general election. Blair would have seen the gap - but will Gordon ?

That's the importance of the strategic mistake that the Daves Willetts and Cameron made this week. You have to just hope the Brown camp can't capitalise on it.

Update: Those folks over at Labour Home see it more as an opportunity to kill of Grammar schools rather than to take electoral advantage. ( Their logic is as always completely divorced from reality - I'll leave you a small quote below.)

A Labour Home poster Mike Ion is quoted as saying (emphasis is mine - on the stuff the myself and most other Conservatives strongly disagree on - not sure where he gets his expectations from really.):

"With the Conservatives now convinced that grammar schools are bad for Britain and with the nation about to have a new Prime Minister in need of some passion-rousing policies that will unite his movement’s natural supporters and signal a shift towards a more radical and egalitarian agenda, are we nearing the time when selection by ability will finally be abolished for good? Almost all of the main political parties in Britain now agree that getting rid of selection in England’s schools (there is no selection in Wales or Scotland and it is on the way out in Northern Ireland) would produce an immediate improvement in the overall exam performance of the nation’s children, reduce poverty and inequality in many of our most deprived inner-city areas and overtly and transparently attack privilege that all too often masquerades as excellence...." (Full post here ).

Its hard to know whom to be more depressed by ....