Tag Archives: politicians

Pay tuition fees of trainee teachers

Posted on by
1

The House of Commons Treasury (Select) Committee today published its report into university tuition fees. One of its conclusions was that;

2. 3. 4. The student loans system is complex. The terms and conditions of loans must be examined within the context of the entire system. The overall level of subsidy provided by the state to the individual is the defining factor in how the loan then operates. (Conclusion, Paragraph 17) Although the government claimed that its subsidy is in the region of 30% to 40%, we saw evidence indicating that individual contributions from students graduating today could be as high as 95%. That was not what the government or Parliament intended, when Parliament agreed the Plan 2 legislation. Society benefits from individuals going to university. Therefore, society should contribute to the cost of an individual’s higher education. We agree with Sir Philip Augar that the split between state and individual should be around 50:50. Terms and conditions matter. Even a very clever system that strikes a generally acceptable balance between the taxpayer and individual contributions will not be sustainable in the long term, if individual terms and conditions within that system are deemed economically or politically intolerable by stakeholders or loan holders. (Conclusion, Paragraph 18)

Student loans: Broken and unfair? My highlighting in bold

Reading that conclusion made me wonder how much should someone wanting to be a teacher expect to pay in tuition fees and interest on the loan in order to enter the profession?

Does it matter that a twenty two year old will pay far more in tuition fee repayments, due to interest costs, than someone entering teacher training in their thirties from a high paying job in London with their original undergraduate loan paid off? The twenty two year old will likely be paying interest on their combined undergraduate and ITT tuition fees for their whole teaching career.

Does it matter that if you are on Teach First, a graduate teaching apprenticeship, or some other route that pays a salary, you will incur no extra student debt training to become a teacher? Should there be equity between routes into teaching?

Yesterday, in my post about teachers’ pay, I revealed how poorly teachers were paid compared with many other graduate professions. Are teachers paid a fair wage for being a graduate? | John Howson

Now for a bit of history. When the Labour government took power in the summer of 1997, and decided to introduce tuition fees for courses including postgraduate ITT courses, I was still working at the then Teacher Training Agency, as its Chief Professional Adviser on Teacher Supply.

Frank Dobson, as Secretary of State for Health was adamant that trainee nurses should not pay tuition fees, although I need to remind myself whether or not he took the same line about the professions allied to medicine and for trainee doctors.

David Blunkett, as Secretary of State for Education, took the line that undergraduate trainees should pay tuition fees, but that the State would effectively pay the fees of those on approved postgraduate courses leading to QTS. One consequence of this decision, a decision that I recall discussing with a senior civil servant at the Department, was the decline in undergraduate ITT, especially for secondary subjects: it still lingers on for would-be primary school teachers.

One of the more pernicious and short-sighted decisions of the coalition government that emerged after the 2010 general election was to remove the payment of tuition fees by the government for postgraduate ITT courses.

I have always opposed that decision. A better solution would have been to rebate the tuition fee once a teacher started working for the State. To make it fair, it would have been necessary to ensure all those gaining QTS, and having paid tuition fees, were offered a teaching or other government funded post. Those working for private school or outside teaching would still have had to repay their loans.

In the light of today’s Treasury Committee’s conclusion that they, ‘saw evidence indicating that individual contributions from students graduating today could be as high as 95%.’, I believe that the current Secretary of State should either revert to the pre-2010 situation or find some other way of relieving trainee teachers of the burden of tuition fee debt.

Sadly, I think there is little that can be done for previous generations of teachers still weighed down with tuition fee debt, except perhaps a deal with mortgage companies to allow the debt to be transferred to extend a mortgage to repay the capital and allow the remaining debt to be paid at a lower rate of interest than the government charges.

Alternatively, schools, MATs and local authorities might look at ways of taking over the debt at a lower interest rate.

I think it says something about the teaching profession, and its professional associations that the issue of the burden of tuition fees for teachers has not been a higher priority.

Perhaps the present evidence from the STRB and Treasury Reports might persuade the professional assoiations into action on behalf of their members.

Action from the Liberal Democrats, my Party, and a participant in the 2010 decision to make trainee teachers pay fees, would also be welcome; I am not holding my breath.

Are teachers paid a fair wage for being a graduate?

Posted on by
1

Last week, the DfE published the latest report from the School Teachers Review body (STRB) School Teachers’ Review Body – THIRTY-SIXTH REPORT – 2026 This is the 36th Report from this body. Its recommendations on pay were accepted by the Secretary of State.

While the headline increases in pay, in percentage terms, seem generous, in reality they are part of a catching up exercise of a similar type to that which caused the hard-fought battle with resident doctors in the NHS.

Here’s what the STRB said about teachers’ pay over the past decade and a half:

• The real-terms value of median teacher earnings has fallen since the early 2010s. The fall in real teacher pay has been greater than that for other professional occupations.

• When comparing teachers’ pay to that of other professional occupations by age and region using data from the SWC and the ONS, teachers fell below the comparators in all groups. The gaps between median teacher pay and that of other professionals was greatest in London.

• Based on proprietary benchmarking data, starting pay for teachers is between the lowest quartile and median for roles of comparable size and scope.

These three comments seem to justify the pay rise, and it is not a generous settlement in a vibrant labour market for graduates. If that market cools between now and 2027, possibly because of the effects of AI on entry level jobs, it will be interesting to see what the next STRB pay report suggests.

The STRB summed up the situation in the most recent period as follows:

In 2024-25, for the Rest of England and London, teachers’ median earnings were below those of the comparator groups for all age bands. The gaps between teachers’ earnings and those of the comparator group were greatest in London.

Across most age categories, the relative earnings of teachers deteriorated from 2014-15 to 2019-20, both in the Rest of England and London. After a slight improvement in 2020-21 during the COVID-19 pandemic, this downward trend for relative earnings continued across all age categories to 2023-24. Over the latest period, between 2023-24 and 2024-25, the relative earnings of teachers have slightly improved, although their median earnings remain below other professional occupation counterparts.

Overall, teachers aged 21 to 30 compared least favourably against the other professional occupations, both in the Rest of England and in London. Those in the oldest age group (over 60) compared most favourably, although are still behind relative earnings of those in other professional occupations. Page 70

In summery the STRB concluded that;

Our analysis of real-terms pay changes over time suggests that the competitiveness of teachers’ earnings compared to the whole economy, wider public sector and to professional occupations, was lower in 2024/25 compared to 2010/11. Figure B.10 shows how the real-terms value of teachers’ median earnings fell throughout the early 2010s. The chart shows there was some improvement for teachers between 2018/19 and 2020/21, prior to the pay pause in 2021/22, and a period of decline to 2023/24. There was some improvement in 2024/25, however we estimate that teachers’ median gross earnings in 2024/25 were 13.9% below their level in 2010/11 in real terms. Median gross earnings for the whole economy were 0.6% below their 2010/11 level, whilst median gross earnings for professional occupations were 9.2% below their 2010/11 level, in real terms. Page 71

One issue potentially facing the STRB could be the problem of a single pay scale for all teachers when the labour markets for primary and secondary school teachers are operating in very different ways. However, it would be a brave government that tackled this issue. Most likely, a move on allowances, and how they are offered, could be the obvious way to tackle over-supply in the primary school labour market, and areas of shortage in the secondary school teacher labour market.

The STRB had something to say about the axing of bursaries from some ITT subjects.

111. The number of bursaries available for 2026/27 has been reduced across a range of subjects, with others seeing a reduction in the bursary value. The bursary values for Biology and Geography are both down by 21,000, while Modern Foreign Languages and Design Technology are down by 6,000. Art, Music and Religious Education are down by 10,000 to zero, with English down by 5,000 to zero. We also note that for Business Studies, Music, Religious Education, Modern Foreign Languages and Design Technology, the reduction in bursary value coincides with the failure to reach target entrant numbers in 2025/26. P101 My emphasis

There is also an interesting table (B21) that provides evidence to support my posts over the past year querying why music and also Religious Education lost their bursaries. Pages 100 to 102, and especially table B21, where music and Religious Education were placed in the top three subjects for the lowest percentages of ITT placed filled, provide cogent evidence for the need for an explanation as to how bursaries are allocated to different subjects?

I think the STRB are sending a coded message to the DfE in this report about the lack of bursaries in some of the subjects that struggle most to recruit. The DfE’s answer, backed by HM Treasury, would no doubt be that there are few graduates in these subjects to entice into teaching, so the bursary would be paid to those already choosing teaching as a career. Funny how that argument doesn’t work for physics or mathematics.

A couple of other interesting nuggets for the STRB report:

• In 2024/25, male teachers had higher earnings overall than female teachers across all school types. Median earnings were higher in secondary schools than in primary and nursery schools.

• Based on proprietary benchmarking data, starting pay for teachers is between the lowest quartile and median for roles of comparable size and scope. …. The comparative basic salary position of leadership roles in primary schools is generally below the market base salary data, whilst roles in secondary schools are better aligned to the market base salary data.

• The full-time equivalent (FTE) teacher workforce decreased by 0.1% or 432 between 2023 and 2024. Secondary schools once again saw the largest absolute increase in teacher numbers.

• The proportion of teachers from an ethnic minority background remained stable, with 89% of teachers across state-funded schools being white. The proportion of white teachers is higher in nursery and primary schools than in secondary schools and increases with seniority in leadership roles.

Finally, a word about leadership pay. The STRB concluded that:

2.25 The comparative salary position of leadership roles in primary schools falls below the market salary data in all regions, whilst leadership roles in secondary schools are better aligned to the market salary data. P11

After a year of tracking headteacher vacancies, I do wonder why anyone would take on a job both teaching and leading a small primary school for a salary of little more than £60,000 from September when a classroom teacher with no responsibilities, and a similar length of service could be earning nearly £53,000.

Little more than £10,000 extra, for both the loss of the 1,265 working time protection and all the extra responsibilities, seems like a gross imbalance in differentials. This is especially the case when all primary leaders, and not just headteachers, work on average 5.1 hours more than classroom teachers. Table B14 page 91.

I will say more about the issue of headteachers’ pay when I publish my review of headteacher vacancies for 2025-26 at the end of August.

The saviour for the government when considering future pay is ‘falling pupil numbers’. This issue makes the need to recruit teachers, especially with the current age distribution of those teachers in employment less of an overall challenge.

However, as indicated earlier in this post, dealing with the consequences of different primary, secondary and further education labour markets may be a real issue for the next STRB Report.

Lucy Heller: Thank you

Posted on by
Reply

I suppose it was inevitable that Lucy heller would eventually leave he role in leading ARK as an organisation and its schools. Interview: Lucy Heller, CEO of Ark Schools | Tes I commend this interview with the TES magazine to anyone interested in schooling in England, and how the system works. Lucy Heller discusses many of the issues this blog has mentioned over the past 13 of the 22 years that Lucy has headed up ARK.

It is, of course, fitting that Lucy Heller should give an interview to the TES, as it was while she was working there that I first met with her, when she was running the paper, and I was writing my weekly column on some aspect of data. At that time, I was also advising those running the TES abut the implications for their business model of the switch from print to on-line recruitment advertising, and the threat to their whole way of life. The rest, as they say, is history.

Lucy Heller went to ARK schools when they had a small part to play in the education scene, and has overseen both its growth and its reputation as an organisation, not least its reputation for hiring those that have subsequently helped shape the whole system of schooling.

Regular readers will know of my preference for a local democratic involvement in the organisation and development of state-schooling. That preference does not blind me to the fact that local government these days is more concerned with children’s social services than with education, and that most of our leaders and thinkers about schools and education are now leading multi-academy trusts.

Politicians not in power, and those not running schools, each have more freedom to be more open in what they say than those that are actually operating the system, so, even though we have had to wait until her departure, Lucy Heller’s interview marks an important point in the discourse about our school system.

I entirely agree with Lucy Heller’s comment in the interview that;

There has always been a tension between the narrative politicians have leaned into about headteachers being at the centre of the system and central government’s desire to manage the detail of school life,” she says. “It is a very hard balance to strike – it would be good if government spent less time thinking about how schools should be run day to day and more about how they manage the system as a whole.

As a nation we are not good about both system leadership and understanding the role of government in policy-making. MATs can play an important role in helping keep governments aware of policy outcomes: a role once fulfilled by local authorities and their chief education officers. Lucy Heller had played that role with vision, and without seeking the limelight others might have sought.

I hope that Lucy’s public service will be appropriately recognised, and I am sure that there is more to come as Lucy moves on to the next challenge.  It has been privileged to have known Lucy Heller, and I wish her well for the future.

STRB and teacher recruitment

Posted on by
Reply

Before 2015, the STRB (School Teachers’ Pay Review Body) used to report no later than March in most years, School Teachers’ Review Body (STRB) reports – GOV.UK (www.gov.uk) However, since the Conservative Party took over the sole management of the country in 2015, the publication of the STRB’s annual report, along with other pay body reports, has moved to July each year.

Such a date, so late in the annual government business cycle, at a point where departments should already be gearing up the next round of economic arguments within government, is unhelpful in many ways.

Obviously, it leaves The Treasury unsure about government expenditure, assuming the suggestions of the STRB are both accepted and fully funded. If one or other of those assumptions isn’t correct, but pay scales are increased from the September, then it places a burden on schools to find the cash to pay any increases, as I discussed in an earlier post. Sunak’s blunt axe | John Howson (wordpress.com)

The lack of clarity around starting salaries also makes recruitment into the profession potentially more challenging. A significant proportion of those entering the profession are still required to make a financial sacrifice to train as a teacher. To do so not knowing what either the possible salary they will receive during training – if paid on the unqualified scale – or their potential starting salary, if on a fee-paying course, is not an incentive to enter teaching. This may be specially the case for the important group of career switchers that are needed during the present dip in the number of new home-based graduates in their early 20s.

Once the new generation of graduates from the last baby boomer generation exits university, in a few years’ time, this may be less of an issue, assuming higher education entry rates hold up, and those most likely to become teachers don’t opt for apprenticeships or direct entry into the labour market and a salary immediately after leaving school.

Governments have always faced economic crises, lucky the Chancellor with benign economic headwinds, and must take difficult decisions. 101 years ago, the Liberal Government faced with the massive increase in government expenditure sanctioned by a government to fight the first world war, and seeking to restrain sky-high rates of taxation, looked for areas where public expenditure could be reduced – or cut – an exercise known after the chairman of the committee, Lord Geddes.

Perhaps, The Labour Party’s Leader’s speech on the ‘class ceiling’ was no accident, because it is those trying to crash through the ceiling that experience the worse outcomes of any pay restraint that leaders to teacher shortages. As I pointed in an earlier post, out, identifying the issue is one thing; solving it needs policies, and they were in short-supply in the speech from Sir Kier Starmer last week.

Perhaps, as suggested in the 1920s, rather than just telling schools to save money, the government might be more draconian in enforcing savings to pay for increased pay. But then, this, sadly, isn’t an area where the present government has had a good track record in recent times.  

Merry-go-round of Ministers has repercussions

Posted on by
Reply

I am grateful to freelancer and former TES journalist, Adi Bloom, for this interesting fact

Between the start of July and the end of October last year [2022], there were four new education secretaries, as well as a succession of junior ministers. And, between them they held 133 events labelled “introductory meeting to discuss the organisation following the ministerial reshuffle”.

This paralysis no doubt was replicated across government. Adi has written a witty piece on her LinkedIn page about the current Secretary of State’s possible icebreaker meeting with the key trade union (professional association) general secretaries of the teacher groups that readers might with to search out. In passing, I wonder whether Secretaries of State ever hold such meeting with trade unions representing the non-teaching staff in schools that now outnumber teachers?

Anyway, the essential point is whether this rapid turnover of ministers may have contributed to the government’s challenges over public sector pay. Might a Cabinet with more experience of their department, running to more than a few days tenure, have anticipated the implications of public sector pay review bodies controlling pay rises each year and a rapid an unpredicted increase in inflation better than seems to have been the case.

Might ministers, such as the Secretary of State for Education, that had been in post for some time, and thus more secure in their portfolio, have both had better relations with civil servants in order to have been able to ask questions about pay policy and recruitment and retention of the teacher workforce and have struck up some sort of rapport with teachers’ leaders? Possible as a scenario, but unlikely I grant you, but impossible with such a rapid turnover of minsters?

Much must also depend upon the character of the individual as Secretary of State, and their willingness to create inter-personal relations with key players in the education landscape. The absence of the Secretary of State from the ASCL conference, plus a relative lack of appearances in the media raises the question as to whether the present incumbent of the top job at Sanctuary Buildings isn’t one for the limelight. Some that have held the office or Secretary of State have enjoyed the public nature of their role while others, were rarely seen in public, and their stewardship goes largely unremembered.

We have now entered that phase of the life of a parliament where it becomes more of a challenge to create policy, except in areas where ministers have direct control. Intermediaries can now drag their feet secure in the knowledge that a general election is likely to be no more than 18 months away, and that the present government isn’t likely to be returned with the same majority as a present, even if it is returned at all.

Equally, ministers can leave difficult decisions to their successor to deal with. It’s worth recalling that under the coalition’s fixed term Parliament Act there would have had to have been an election this year. Perhaps the current Prime Minister might use that as an excuse for an autumn election is next month’s local elections are really frightful?

Marking time between PMs

Posted on by
2

The current political turmoil at Westminster has led commentators and journalists to suggest that the Schools Bill is now effectively dead in the water. The Bill had been struggling ever since it was introduced into the House of Lords and then received a right mauling, such as Upper House can sometimes deliver. Even Tory members of the ‘revising chamber’ seemed unimpressed by their own government’s attempts at reform. The strongest support at that point in time seemed to come from the bench of the Lords Spiritual in the form of the Church of England Bishop with the speaking rights for their schools.  

So, while the DfE also waits to see whether kit Malthouse joins the ranks of those passing through Sanctuary buildings or will be allowed to stay on in post as Secretary of State by the next prime minster, what might civil servants do with their time if the Bill has effectively been dropped?

Personally, I would like to see the regulations for in-year admissions updated to provide more power provided for local authorities, especially with regard to children in care and those with an EHCP that move into a new area. These are some of our most vulnerable children, and the present system of opt-out by academies for in-year admissions sometimes doesn’t help their education.

I have called this a need for a Jacob’s Law to change this situation, but in reality, it doesn’t need a law, just a change in regulations and secondary legislation.

For those that want to read the history behind the need for a Jacob’s Law, see  Time for Jacob’s Law | John Howson (wordpress.com) It is now 5 years since Jacob returned to Oxfordshire and started his period of 22 months without a school accepting him on roll. We must not let this happen again.

The last two White Papers have both contained references to returning control of in-year admissions to local authorities and the government has confirmed that to do so doesn’t need primary legislation.

The loss of the Schools Bill also puts at risk the idea of a register of young people of school age. Such a list would allow movement of young people to be tracked and make it harder for children to disappear off the radar. Not impossible, because parents can take drastic action such as disappearing overseas, but at least it might help policymaker understand the extent of home schooling and encourage debate about the rights of children and their parents to education and what that term actually means in the modern age?

The 25-49 age group that contains most parents of school-age children was one of the groups least supportive of the Conservatives in the latest polling of the public, even putting the Party behind the Lib Dems nationally among this age-group! PeoplePolling / GB News Survey Results

That was The Week That was…

Posted on by
Reply

This was an interesting week to have been away from one’s desk. Three Secretaries of State in a week! That’s one for the record books, along with so much else that has happened in Westminster politics during the past seven days.

How much will education feature in the debate over the selection of the next Prime Minister? Will some education journalist ask the obvious questions such as:

If you are going to cut taxes, what will happen to funding for schools, especially in the period before inflation is brought under control?

What are you going to do about the present teacher shortage?

Will you review the way that the apprenticeship Levy operates so that it isn’t a tax on small primary schools?

How important is helping young people recover from the effects of the covid pandemic and what would you do to help boost their mental health?

Do you believe in local democratic control of schooling?

What are you plans for levelling up as it affects the Roma and Traveller communities across England?

Was the EBacc a mistake?

How important do you see the youth Service and other out of school activities?

Will you offer Free School Meals to all primary school children for free?

I am sure that readers can add to this list with this with their own priorities. I am also pretty certain that most of these questions won’t be asked of the candidates.

Education, and schooling in particular doesn’t often feature in either leadership or general election campaigns. It is possible that there could be a debate about selective education, started by one of the candidates, as it is a topic that appeals to the older generation of Tory voters even if most younger Tories have never experienced it, unless they come from parts of the Home Counties. Faced with rising private school fees, some Tories might also see selective state education as a tax cut for parents no longer needing to pay school fees.

And on fees, where will the candidates stand on higher education, university fees and student numbers? It will be especially interesting to see what the Chancellor says as a former Education Secretary. 

Talking of former Education Secretary’s, I wonder whether there was time to take the Ministerial photograph of Michelle Donelan to hang on the wall at Sanctuary Buildings or whether they will use one taken in her previous Ministerial role in the department.

Finally, there is the future of the Schools Bill to consider. This mess of a piece of draft legislation was mauled in the House of Lords and is being reconsidered. The oversight and regulation of academy trusts is an important addition to the legislation on schooling, but I hope that the new team will also listen to their councillors about the importance of both place in the governance of schooling and the need for democratic local accountability.  Local Authorities will not accept the need for responsibility without involvement in decision-making and that matters for admissions, pupil place planning and SEND.

New Role: different blog

Posted on by
2

As regular readers of this blog know, I have been a county councillor in Oxfordshire for the past eight years and was re-elected for another term of office earlier this month.

Yesterday, my colleagues across the political parties elected me as their Chair of the County Council for the next year. In this role, I am the public face of the Council in non-political matters. As a result, this blog will mostly confine itself for the next twelve months to matters relating to teacher supply and the labour market for teachers that are part of my professional interest as chair at TeachVac http://www.teachvac.co.uk and my travel book Twin Tracks.

I would like to thank readers for their support and comments over the years that I have been writing this blog. As Chair of the County Council, I support a number of Charities including Children Heard and Seen that works with children where a parent is in prison.

If any reader would like to make a donation to this Charity in appreciation of the posts on this blog over the years, then their web site is at https://childrenheardandseen.co.uk/?fbclid=IwAR3AmbJ97d6NOkq4r9sWoTwsbvsDYODJq8vfbRxPtlit_H8wQbFLdbeJCYM or their Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/childrenheardandseen Please mark any donations ‘Oxfordshire Chair’s appeal’.

Policy making is not campaigning

Posted on by
Reply

This blog is mostly about education. However, after three months of campaigning for last week’s elections, including fighting the Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) for Thames Valley (TV) election for the Liberal Democrats, I felt like a final foray into a reflection on the interesting events of last Thursday.

During the whole of my recent campaign as Liberal Democrat candidate for Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) for Thames Valley (TV) I was never once emailed and asked for a manifesto of my policies. Sure, there were a couple of emails along the lines of we haven’t heard anything from you and what do you stand for. There were also several media events, including an appearance on BBC South Politics show were questions were asked about particular policies.

Despite this lack of voter interest in the details beyond what was available at https://www.choosemypcc.org.uk/ and other similar sites, turnout for the PCC election was 35.9% this time compared with25.6% in the last PCC election in May 2016. Not surprisingly turnout was higher where there were other elections being held on the same day as the PCC election. We won’t know the result until sometime on Monday.

There is an essential lesson to be learnt here. However good your policies, and, as in Education, the Liberal Democrats had devised some really good policies, as they  have for tacking crime and handling policing, it is the campaigning that matters. Know your electorate. The Obama Team in the USA were great at that understanding when helping him first win the US Presidency. The Tories have learnt that lesson: others haven’t.

Here’s an interesting analysis of the Hartlepool by-election from Mark Pack, President of the Lib Dems:

The by-election has simply seen Hartlepool’s politics catch up with elsewhere.

“… and, there’s the important first opinion poll that Survation carried out in the seat. Their final poll, showing a big Conservative lead attracted a lot of scepticism but was right.. However, it is their first poll for the by-election that is important for understanding what happened.

Combined, Conservatives and Brexit Party got 55% in 2019. Survation’s first poll put the Conservatives on 49%. Their second and final one put the party on 50% and the result saw the Conservatives secure 52%. No great drama there. But for Labour it was 38% in 2019, 42% in the first poll and then… 33% in the second poll followed by 29% in the actual result.

The story here is of Labour failure, not of Conservative surge. That’s a point reinforced by the English local elections. At 36%, the Conservative equivalent national vote share is decent but not stellar. That’s not some new era-defining level of support for Boris Johnson’s party. It’s a fragile result that has brought success this time, but could very plausibly be followed by failure.

It looks like Labour badly messed up its candidate selection and campaign. …I suspect that once more detailed analysis is in, this will turn out to have mattered rather more than the Labour candidate being a previous Remainer who lost his seat in 2019.”

There’s no doubt that a large section of the population of England like an identifiable character; Churchill’s cigar and Wilson’s pipe as well as Boris’s hair are visual signals the electorate can see and easily remember. Even Mrs May’s shoes and Mrs T’s handbag are what people remember. It works in local elections, where independents are rarely shrinking violets.

Of course, cash helps. It is no surprise that Liberal Democrats went from no Councillors on Amersham Town Council in Buckinghamhire on Wednesday to taking control after the votes were counted, with eight new Councillors. The impending by-election and local spending by the national party has made a difference by adding the push that was needed to shift unhappy tory votes into the Lib Dem camp.

Know your electorate is as important as know your class is for a teacher and for candidates and Councillors tailor your material appropriately. But, nothing still works as well as talking to voters on the doorstep and being visible in the high Street.

Governments lose elections more often than oppositions win them. But, sometimes, oppositions lose elections as well producing unexpected outcomes.

Baroness Williams of Crosby

Posted on by
Reply

I am saddened to hear of the death earlier today of Shirley Williams, Baroness Williams of Crosby.

Baroness Williams was one of the founders of the SDP and had previously been an education secretary during the Labour government of the late 1970s. Created a Life peer in 1993, Baroness Williams played an important background role in education for the Party in her role as a senior politician of wide experience. Her great speaking ability motivated many audiences in both the conference hall and at fringe meetings during many Liberal Democrat conferences over the years. She finally retired from the House of Lords in 2016, but remained an inspiring figure for many in the Liberal Democrats.

In a blog post when another Liberal Democrats stalwart of the House of Lords, Baroness Sharp of Guildford retired, I paid tribute to these two Peers along with Annette Brooke the former MP. All were important for the Liberal Democrats in the field of education, from early years to higher education.

I first encountered Shirley Williams when she was Secretary of State for Education. She initiated The Great Debate in Education on the back of the Prime minister’s famous Ruskin College speech. This was the start of the shift from a national service locally administered to a nationally driven education service that we now have in England. I had achieved some notoriety after appearing in the national press and was invited to several media events where Shirley Williams was the speaker. I especially recall one such event in the Royal Institution where she was opposed Norman St John Stevas, possibly one of the best Secretaries of State we never had.

It was Shirley William’s misfortune to be secretary of State when the government of Jim Callaghan was teetering on the edge of collapse. She had to endure the ‘winter of discontent’ and during that period she failed to stop the caretaker’s strike in Haringey that lead to several weeks of school closures.

Although successful in taking North Yorkshire County Council to court over the need to create non-selective education in Ripon, it was too late in the parliament and the life of the Labour government for any action to be taken on the result that backed the government’s view of the 1976 Education Act, and so, along with the other selective schools that she tried to convert to comprehensive education, selective education still remains in that part of Yorkshire, helped by Mrs thatcher’s prompt repealing of the 1976 Act as one of her first actions as Prime Minister.  

Shirley Williams was an inspiring orator and a joy to listen to when speaking at Liberal Democrat events, either extempore or from a prepared speech. She was not a good timekeeper and was often late, but nobody ever seemed to mind. She was also a great European and had the courage to from a new political party. Along with many other, I will miss her.