See older posts (57 more)Loading...
Today, David Cameron and Michael Gove spoke at a rally of parents in Kirklees.
These parents are frustrated at the quality of education on offer for their children are demanding change - change which is being blocked by the Labour-led council and Ed Balls in Westminster.
David Cameron spoke about the choice facing parents at this election:
If you want to carry on with nearly 400,000 children a year suspended for violence and disruption, vote for Gordon Brown.
If you are content with millions more children leaving primary school unable to read and add up properly, and leaving school without English and Maths GCSE, vote for Brown.
If you want to keep good schools rationed by house price and income, vote for Brown.
If you want politicians to have more power over schools instead of teachers running schools, vote for Brown.
But if you want to change course, vote Conservative:
We will give teachers the powers they need to keep order.
We will give heads the power to pay good teachers more.
We will let all state schools do high quality international exams now studied in top private schools but banned in state schools.
We will replace the leadership of schools with persistent serious behaviour problems, poor teaching, and children unable to read properly.
We will build a new generation of independent smaller state schools with smaller classes, funded by taxpayers but run by teachers who know the children's names and responsible to parents - not run by politicians.
Education is a huge issue on the doorstep - particularly with parents and I believe that the Conservatives are the only choice at the next election to protect and improve the education of our children.
I am absolutely clear about the commitments that I can give to the residents of Brighton & Hove about the NHS. A Conservative government will:
I was therefore very concerned when a local resident pointed out the notes of a recent meeting attended by Geraldine Hoban, Deputy Director of Commissioning for NHS Brighton & Hove which have been posted on the internet here.
Reading through the minutes, one section jumps out as being very worrying:
"NHS informed SECT [Social Enterprise Complimentary Therapy] that the PCT management costs nationally have to be cut by 30% in 2 years time, but in Brighton and Hove the cut will be 39%. This will mean that the commissioners will have to manage with almost half the present number of staff. SECT were shocked at this news, which contrasts with the prime minister's public statements that ‘frontline jobs will be secure.'"
Not only are these cuts deep, they are also higher in Brighton & Hove than in other parts of the country. Why aren't our Labour MPs fighting our corner in Westminster?
Blogging has been non-existent since the beginning of the campaign and I am not sure how many I will do before polling day. My focus is on getting our positive Conservative message across to as many people in Brighton Pavilion as possible - and it is going down very well.
Our manifesto is radical and even people who are thinking of voting Labour are impressed by the way we have captured the feeling of a modern society, that we have a vision for a modern society now and in the future.
Locally my days are very busy and great fun. I combine doorknocking with visits and of course there is a fair chunk of media to do too. Slowly but surely the media are changing their narrative about the Green Party and it is good to see Caroline Lucas admitting that the Greens aim to occupy 'the gap on the Left'. This would be the gap left by Old Labour and I think we finally have clarity about where the Greens see themselves - firmly in the Old Labour arena.
I continue to believe that we need a Conservative MP in Brighton Pavilion for a strong and diverse local economy and effective public services - and we need a Conservative MP in a Conservative government for a better Brighton and a better Britain. Anything else would mean five more years of Gordon Brown.
"Dear Sir
Stop the Jobs Tax
When people vote in the general election, they will be choosing which party they trust most to get us out of the longest and deepest recession for generations. And the choice is very clear.
If you put your cross against Labour, you are voting for a tax on jobs - on everyone earning over £20,000 - that will help kill the recovery.
Just think about it for a moment and you can see why this tax is such a bad idea. At the very time we want to help businesses generate jobs and protect existing ones, Gordon Brown will make it more expensive to employ and hire people. Business experts predict that it will cost 57,000 jobs in small and medium size firms alone. The Chancellor thinks such job losses are "manageable".
And think about who will be hit by this tax. Nurses, teachers, policemen - Labour clearly think you are rich if you earn over £20,000. They seem to have no idea just how hard-pressed people's budgets are thanks to the recession. How out of touch can you be?
Worse still, Labour are raising taxes on working people while doing nothing about government waste. They know the waste is there, but they are waiting a year before they even start to cut it.
So a Conservative government will stop the most damaging part of Labour's tax on jobs, by cutting billions of pounds of wasteful government spending this year. Our plans means government will save just under £1 in every £100 government spends. Thanks to our plans seven out of ten working people will be better off with the Conservatives than under Labour, and employers will save too, helping them to take people on.
Our approach has been backed by the leaders of some of Britain's largest companies - such as Sainsbury's, Marks & Spencer and Next - which, between them, employ over 500,000 people, as well as the leaders of Britain's business organisations.
So, that is the choice we face: five more years of Labour's debt, waste and taxes, or change with the Conservatives who will cut waste, stop the jobs tax and get the economy working for everyone.
Yours faithfully
Charlotte Vere (Conservative Parliamentary Candidate for Brighton Pavilion)"
Over ten years ago Labour introduced the IR35 rules which affect over a million self employed people. Whilst there were problems with tax evasion, Labour Ministers introduced the rules in such a clumsy way that they have affected tens of thousands of people who are acting perfectly reasonably.
The IR35 tax rules are part of a wider problem surrounding the taxation of small businesses by Labour. Ever since 1997, Gordon Brown has constantly tinkered with the tax treatment of the self employed, husband and wife businesses and other similar small enterprises. The result is the worst of worlds for the self employed: uncertainty, unnecessary risk and unfairness.
It is clear that simply scrapping IR35 would not resolve many of issues around the taxation of small businesses. Indeed it would, on its own, be the same piecemeal approach which has failed under Labour.
So instead a Conservative Government would undertake a fundamental review of small business taxation matters, including IR35. We would mandate the new Office of Tax Simplification to conduct this review, with the aim of creating a comprehensive and lasting regime.
Our aim would be to create a clearer, stable and lasting tax regime for the self employed and small businesses. This review is part of a wider Conservative aim to free enterprise and small business across the UK.
One of the messages that comes up on the doorstep again and again is that we are losing our sense of community and that politicians are all talk, no action. Conservatives are commited to changing that and one small way of doing our bit is to get involved in local action projects.
Over the past couple of months I have joined teams of Conservative volunteers helping out at Brighton Housing Trust, where we repainted the dining room (and ate wonderful homemade jam!), Impact Initiatives where we helped them to get their new offices ready and at Coldean Woods, where we spent a morning clearing rubbish. Some of the items found at Coldean included a burnt out motorcycle, a bike, a TV, a mobile phone and most worryingly, a knife.
We all really enjoyed these activities and I think we made a difference, however small. Please do let me know if you know anyone else that could do with a helping hand - I can be reached on charlotte@charlottevere.com
Two items have gripped politics this week. One, of course, is the Budget. The other is the scandal that was revealed earlier on Monday that former Ministers were touting their continued influence within Government for payments from third parties.
I was pleased that at his press conference, Conservative Party Leader, David Cameron, set out five key points that would be introduced by the Conservatives if they form the next Government.
I remember David's prescient comments a few months ago when he said the lobbying was the next scandal waiting to happen.
At his conference, David Cameron proposed the following:
Ex-Ministers will not be allowed to use the contacts and knowledge gained in government for their own private gain
Ex-Ministers will be forbidden to lobby government for two years after they leave their post, up from twelve months currently
The period during which ex-Ministers must seek advice from the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments will be extended to ten years
The Advisory Committee on Business will be put on a statutory basis, so ignoring its advice will be an offence
One part of government will no longer be able to lobby another
The sooner we get fresh people in a fresh Government in power, and not career politicians, the better.
I was pleased to receive an email from Neal Lawson, Managing Director of First Capital Connect, earlier today outlining a £10million programme of customer benefits and investment. His email says:
"Since our services returned to normal in January, my colleagues and I have spoken to and corresponded with many customers as well as meeting with a high proportion of MPs [and PPCs! - says CV] along the route.
Having listened to concerns that were expressed we have made the following decisions:
Customer Information
In the coming months there will be an upgrade to the Customer Information System that will load more accurate train information to customer display screens. In addition station staff will be provided with PDA/Smart Phone devices to access service updates quickly to better inform customers. There will also be major improvements to our website.
Train reliability
The 20-year old class 319 trains used on the Thameslink route can be made more reliable. We will be introducing a £3m modification and renewal package to resolve reliability issues, focusing on the door mechanisms to reduce the delays and cancellations you experience.
Discount scheme
We will be enhancing the discount scheme introduced following the winter's service disruption. Affected annual ticket holders will now be entitled to a 7% discount (increased from 5%) or 15 tickets increased from 10. Monthly ticket holders will be entitled to a further two free tickets (in addition to the 10 offered previously). The discount scheme is in addition to the standard delay-repay compensation scheme.
FCC will contact customers who have already claimed under the scheme with details of additional entitlements. Customers who haven't yet made a claim you can still do so until 23 April 2010."
I welcome this programme of improvements and I will continue to act as a conduit for our concerns about First Capital Connect. Please send any thoughts or comments to charlotte@charlottevere.com
Getting published in The Argus is a bit hit and miss sometimes so I thought I would add my letters to my blog - just as a matter of record in case they are useful.
Dear Sirs,
Fair play for Equitable Life policy holders
As a parliamentary candidate, one of the topics mentioned by local residents is from policyholders of Equitable Life, who have been so badly treated by this Labour Government.
The Parliamentary Ombudsman, an independent arbiter, ruled eighteen months ago that the Government should make payments to policyholders who have suffered losses as a consequence of the Government's failure to regulate Equitable Life properly.
From the outset, Conservatives accepted the Ombudsman's recommendations that there should be a scheme to deal with the losses suffered by policyholders, that payments should reflect relative and not absolute loss (i.e. take into account market performance), and that the impact on the public purse should be taken into account in the design of a scheme.
Yet Gordon Brown has failed Equitable policyholders and sought at every stage of the process to block, frustrate and delay justice for policyholders. In a debate in the House of Commons, Labour MPs, including the incumbent MP in Brighton Pavilion David Lepper, did so again.
It is disappointing that Gordon Brown's MPs are blocking a fair remedy, but I can assure readers of The Argus that a Conservative Government is committed to ensure justice to Brighton & Hove's policyholders.
Yours faithfully,
Charlotte Vere (Conservative Parliamentary Candidate for Brighton Pavilion)
Brighton & Hove is home to two excellent universities. We are incredibly lucky to have them and the graduates that choose to stay in the city after graduation make Brighton & Hove special and are a valuable resource for the local economy.
Staff and students at our universities are rightly concerned about the future and over recent years much has been promised but there are still issues to be addressed:
Shortfall in University Places: Tens of thousands of young people were unable to go to university in 2009 because of a shortfall in the number of places available. In the summer of 2009, 140,000 applicants eligible for a place at university failed to get one, compared with 110,000 in 2008
Student Loans Crisis: In October 2009, thousands of students were forced to start university without adequate funding because of huge backlogs in the student loans system. More than a week after the beginning of the new academic year, up to 175,000 students had still not received the loans and grants to which they were entitled
University Funding Review Announced: On 9 November 2009, the Government announced an Independent Review of Higher Education Funding and Student Finance which aims to 'analyse the challenges and opportunities facing higher education, and their implications for student financing and support', taking into account the goals of 'widening participation, affordability and the ... simplification of the student support system'. Conservatives have long been calling for the review to take place and we await its results with interest.
Failing on widening Participation: Ministers repeatedly have pledged to help more people from disadvantaged backgrounds go to university, but the evidence shows that social mobility is stalling. Just one in five disadvantaged youngsters go to university, compared to well over half of young people from wealthier backgrounds. The gap between the proportion of rich youngsters and poor going to university is getting wider.
Inadequate Guidance: Conservative Party research has shown that a third of A-level exams are taken in subjects regarded as 'non-preferred' by the top universities. Careers advice and information on student finance in schools is woefully inadequate: in around two-thirds of schools in England, careers advice is co-ordinated or delivered by staff without any formal qualifications in the field
A Conservative Government would get to work immediately on improving our Universities:
10,000 New University Places: In 2009, thousands of young people with good exam results who wanted to go to university were unable to do so because of a shortage of university places. At a time of rising youth unemployment and intense international competition, it is vital that we avoid a similar crisis in 2010. A Conservative government would help fill the gap between supply and demand by creating an extra 10,000 funded university places in 2010.
Tuition Fees: We support the principle that those who benefit from higher education should meet some of the cost of their degree. At the same time, we must ensure that people who could gain from university are not put off by the prospect of debt. We cannot know what impact top-up fees have had without a thorough review. It would be reckless of us to pre-empt the fees review and commit to a policy without looking at the evidence. However, we believe that if students are to be charged higher fees, they should be given clear evidence that they will receive a better service in return for their money. A better educational experience for students is an essential quid pro quo for any change to the tuition fees cap.
Better Information: We are committed to giving students the best possible information about university courses, helping them choose the institution and course which best matches their career plans and abilities. A website which we are developing will provide information about the true costs of attending different universities, the earnings achieved by graduates and students' satisfaction with different courses so that prospective students will be well-informed before deciding whether to take on debt.
Widening Participation: We believe that young people from all backgrounds should be encouraged and helped to attend university. There is a serious problem of those from modest backgrounds not getting to university. But this is because, firstly, not enough people from disadvantaged backgrounds are applying to university and, secondly, those who have often not been given appropriate advice and guidance. These problems will not be solved by Ministers trying to instruct universities about who should and who should not be admitted. The proper measures to widen participation further include more good schools, better support for young people considering university, more flexible learning, a strong further education sector and reform of bursaries. We are committed to providing students with better information and advice about institutions and courses, and to creating a university funding system which provides proper financial support for those that need it most.
Skills Scholarships: Expansion need not be solely about getting more post- A-level 18-year-olds into university. We believe talented people of all educational backgrounds should be able to access university places. That is why we are committed to strengthening the vocational pathway into higher education. This will be accomplished in part by offering Skills Scholarships for talented apprentices. We will invest £20 million by the third year of a Conservative government to provide over a thousand bursaries for new university places every year. In this way, we can more than quadruple the numbers of apprentices going into higher education. Qualified apprentices will be able, through their employers, to access, bursaries to fund part-time university study alongside employment. Bursaries will be available to cover the full tuition fee costs of studying for a foundation degree or honours degree. They will be worth, on average, £18,000 total for a three-year part-time foundation degree.
A Fairer Deal for Part-time and Mature Students: We are looking at ways to offer a better deal for part-time students. Currently there are 840,000 part-time students in the system, representing 40 per cent of total UK student numbers. Despite making up a sizeable portion of higher education students and being key to widening participation, part-time students get a raw deal in term of support. Part-time students are not eligible for student loans and there is no tuition fees cap for part-time courses.
My apologies for the long post - but it is a very important issue.
.@itscares What is #FairVotes? is that the official Yes campaign for the AV referendum?
1 hours ago
@AdamRamsay If you'd like to sign up to help with #NO2AV you know where I am ;-)
5 hours ago
Have working people in your prospective constituency told you that "we are incredibly lucky" to have these universities in Brighton? I doubt it, if you actually asked them they would explain how their communities are blighted by the anti-social behaviour of many students. Noise from late night parties, shouting in the street, rubbish strewn everywhere. And while you go on about the "prospect of debt" these apparently cash strapped students spend a vast amount on booze, takeaways and minicabs, luxuries that working people can't afford as they have to struggle with paying council tax (from which students are exempt). Finally, having interviewed graduates for jobs, I find many have poor numeracy and literacy and are unable to offer much in the workplace. We don't need more of them, we need less and for the vast sums of money wasted on their education to be returned to the taxpayer. That would be a proper conservative policy.
- Hanoverite
Having read your blog, I would take issue with some of the points you have made - You say that "We support the principle that those who benefit from higher education should meet some of the cost of their degree," but doesn't society as a whole benefit from higher education? Is it only the doctor, economist or lawyer that benefits from her/his education? If higher education was an entirely and merely of selfish, individual monetary benefit, then I'd agree with you, but then - what would even be the point in higher education in our society if that were the case? - You also say "A better educational experience for students is an essential quid pro quo for any change to the tuition fees cap," yet ever since tuition fees were introduced, students have seen no marked improvement to the education they have been given. Now it is being suggested that students should actually pay even more still for an education that is in fact receiving huge funding cuts, job losses and increasing class sizes. Graduates are more in debt than ever, with less jobs available than ever, in an economy largely damaged because of this increasing debt. What, in concrete terms, do the Tories really think that students, graduates and society as a whole will gain (other than higher debt, and declining social mobility) from paying more for their higher education? - You also talk about other candidates "promising things to win votes". That's what standing for election is all about is all about isn't it? It seems to me that you are simply avoiding having to take a stance on the issue - hiding behind the fees review gives little indication of what you're true intentions are regarding higher education. Is this review really likely to change your opinion on the issue, regardless of the outcome? If the review recommended that students pay nothing for their degree, would you agree with and respect that outcome? - Kind regards.
- USSU Comms
Thank you for your comments USSU Comms. Society does benefit from higher education which is why the student only bears some of the cost and the government, hence society, bears the rest. I can't comment on recent educational experience for students - but my comments represent a goal for a Conservative Government. I should imagine that the review will be an important component in our decision on the issue - suffice it to say that tuition fees will not be abolished under a Conservative Government but nor will they increase massively. Increases, if indeed there are increases, will be appropriate - it is critical that we encourage as many people as possible in to higher education and high tuition fees won't do that. Best wishes, Charlotte
- Charlotte Vere
Do we really need near enough 50 per cent of our young people to go to university, especially if there won't be enough jobs for them when they leave.? For that matter, do we need more than 10 per cent of young people to go to uni when work experience is the number-one must-have. I visited Sussex University the other week and walked past a notice that read 'Careers and Employability Centre'. What's so wrong with secondary schools that it takes a university to make someone employable?
- Michael Petek