Tuesday 1st March 2016

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 6:42 am

Morning all.

The national v local election campaign spending rumbles on. Good. Let's hear this pushed at PMQs please. An approach to the police with the strongest case would be a great beachhead. As Tubby said, there's quite a few slim majorities involved, has Lib Dem Tim made any comment on this that I've missed? A final thought, can I spy Clarke in a couple of those pics?

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 6:55 am

It seems we overlapped, Steve, so I've deleted my earlier contribution and have added here. Same topic with much the same suggestion I see.

Good morning.

Perhaps 'Tory MPs 'broke election laws' by failing to declare battle bus spending to win marginal seats (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/to ... ws-7467576) should be the main topic of PMQs tomorrow and force our acting PM to either defend or admit such actions to the House. I would call having an illegitimate government a constitutional crisis and deserving of a vote of no confidence. This government does not act in the national interest with their political sleight of hand and shortsighted privatisation of services as well as rapid disposal of public assets regardless of the future cost of provision. I've often wondered at the failure to appreciate the long term costs of Thatcherism run amok, otherwise known as 'the long term economic plan'.

There should at least be a temporary hold on such acts until the validity of this government is established. Even so, failing electoral reform I would argue for introduction of far greater safeguards to public services and assets requiring of cross-party consensus.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 9:14 am

Morning.

James Mitchinson ‏@JayMitchinson 2h2 hours ago
The Great Betrayal of Sheffield: Tom Richmond >> #NorthernPowerhouse my foot, says YP writer http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/opi ... -1-7758665" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

This is a must read from the Yorkshire Post. Absolutely excoriating of this government's cynicism and betrayal.

... As the Tory peer ventured to Manchester, Universities and Science Minister Joseph “Jo” Johnson – younger brother of the omnipresent Boris – was being torn to shreds in Parliament over the decision to make 247 Sheffield civil servants redundant.

After his colleague Anna Soubry’s contemptuous performance when the decision was first announced, I thought that Mr Johnson might have been better prepared.

Not a bit of it. His defence was so feeble that it compared unfavourably with Environment Secretary Elizabeth Truss and her ineptness over the floods. A Minister – and Government – committed to the North should have foreseen the questions when Paul Blomfield, the Sheffield Central MP, rose to his feet.

Question one. Why does the Government’s 90-day consultation not include the rationale behind the closure decision? If Ministers believe this move is in the public interest, they should publish the “business case”...

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/opi ... z41dnwPIQJ" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 9:28 am

Small bit of good news. One bit of democracy the Tories haven't been able to cudgel senseless.

Although I gather from a tweet elsewhere that they have decided to 'reassert the minister right to veto'. That could mean they intend to say No to just about everything in Tory language.

Review decides not to change Freedom of Information Act
Commission instigated by Matthew Hancock, the Cabinet Office minister, found that after 10 years, FoI is working well
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... ges-to-act" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 9:33 am

utopiandreams wrote:It seems we overlapped, Steve, so I've deleted my earlier contribution and have added here. Same topic with much the same suggestion I see.

Good morning.

Perhaps 'Tory MPs 'broke election laws' by failing to declare battle bus spending to win marginal seats (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/to ... ws-7467576) should be the main topic of PMQs tomorrow and force our acting PM to either defend or admit such actions to the House. I would call having an illegitimate government a constitutional crisis and deserving of a vote of no confidence. This government does not act in the national interest with their political sleight of hand and shortsighted privatisation of services as well as rapid disposal of public assets regardless of the future cost of provision. I've often wondered at the failure to appreciate the long term costs of Thatcherism run amok, otherwise known as 'the long term economic plan'.

There should at least be a temporary hold on such acts until the validity of this government is established. Even so, failing electoral reform I would argue for introduction of far greater safeguards to public services and assets requiring of cross-party consensus.

Let's get the impression of plenty of prep for tomorrow. The number of potential replies from Cameron to this at PMQs is small. Show us that they've been anticipated. Similarly any personal attacks, squirrels and dead cats to be brushed aside. Laser focused and concise questions please. The longer Corbyn speaks Cameron has time to gather his thoughts. Cameron has plenty of bruises. Choose one and jab repeatedly at it.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 9:39 am

Andrew Neil Retweeted
BBC This Week ‏@bbcthisweek 24m24 minutes ago
It's #manontheleft & Esther McVey joining @afneil on the #bbctw sofa

Thu from 11.45pm (no ChooChoo for one night)

Aaargh and GAAAH followed by another Aaargh.

She's back. One to avoid if you want your telly to remain in working condition.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 9:41 am

Morning all.

Excellent news - a full clear-out of outsourcing companies.

Now, what's next...prisons and justice please.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 9:42 am

Good morning.

I have been wondering how well-off benefit claimants are in comparison to our MPs.
After all, our leaders are very concerned about the "something-for-nothing" culture, and now we have an "academic" in Adam Perkins writing in the Tory press about the Welfare Trait gene.......

Compare and contrast.....

-------------------------------------------------

If you are a person who is claiming out-of-work benefits the amount of money the government says you have to live on is £73.10PW or less.
You may be allowed to claim a supplement if you have children or are ill; although those supplements might be abolished.
You will get no help with the costs of looking for work, eg. travel, phones, internet, postage.

You are more likely than not to be sanctioned at some point - hardship payments are assessed on need, are not paid for the first 2 weeks, and in many cases take the form of a loan which must be paid back. Discretionary Housing Payments are difficult to claim and a bit of a lottery.

The basic annual income of a benefit claimant aged 25-plus before supplements is £3,801.20p PA.

----------------------------------------------

If you are a Member of Parliament, the amount of money the government says you have to live on is a pre-tax basic of £1,423PW.
You can get supplements for chairing a Select Committee (£15,025PA) or being the Prime Minister (£74,990PA).
You can also get expenses for accommodation including second homes, travel, and sometimes food. Plus office costs, phones, IT, etc.

You are very unlikely to be sanctioned or fined, unless you commit some serious offence and are sacked or deselected.
If you lose your job at an election, this is what you get - a resettlement grant of 50% to 100% of your salary, of which the first £30,000 is tax free; up to £42,000 "winding-up allowance"; and MPs who fail to get re-elected will get a "loss of office payment".

Ex-MPs who fall into "hardship" can avail themselves of help from the MPs very own hardship fund, worth £6.5 Million in 2013.
Osborne has increased the Treasury's contribution to this fund, and adds more than £200,000PA to it.
In 2013, there were 50 beneficiaries of £150,000; of which a third went on administration costs - thus the average payout was £3,000.

The basic annual income of an MP pre-supplements is £74,000PA.

-------------------------------------------------------------

The first MP ever to sign on for JSA was Nick Palmer, a Labour MP from 1997 who lost his seat to Soubry in 2010.
I haven't been able to find any more.

The people who decide benefit rates are paid a minimum of 19 times what they grant the poor to live on.
This disgusts me.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 9:54 am

H of C.vote on Welfare +Work Bill sometime tomorrow,apparently.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 10:02 am

HindleA wrote:H of C.vote on Welfare +Work Bill sometime tomorrow,apparently.

What's the betting that IDS will put up a minion to invoke financial privilege?

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 10:05 am

Well,they kind of have,that is why the amendment was in the form it was.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 10:09 am

You weren't impressed by the 50p per claimant discretionary fund for JCP's ?You people are never satisfied.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 10:11 am

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/ ... -challenge" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The government must take steps to tackle air pollution within days or face further legal action, it has been warned.

Environmental law firm ClientEarth has sent a final warning letter to environment secretary, Liz Truss, giving her 10 days to act or face action in the high court.

You'd think Tory ministers, living and working in London, surrounded daily by traffic fumes that are polluting their own lungs, would care a bit more about air quality, if only for the sake of their own health, if not for others.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 10:13 am

Supreme Court hearing continues today with the Government's argument.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 10:29 am

http://www.theguardian.com/housing-netw ... are_btn_tw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Compromised and under pressure: social housing in the wake of universal credit
Welfare reform has spurred record levels of debt among tenants, with 25% of council tenants on universal credit facing legal action in some areas

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 10:45 am

Latest version of W and Work Bill,hadn't realised that PingPong recognised name,just thought it was a colloquialism.
http://services.parliament.uk/bills/201 ... dwork.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 10:46 am

HindleA wrote:http://www.theguardian.com/housing-netw ... are_btn_tw

Compromised and under pressure: social housing in the wake of universal credit
Welfare reform has spurred record levels of debt among tenants, with 25% of council tenants on universal credit facing legal action in some areas

In that article, there is a case of a woman claiming UC - the difference between her rent and the UB housing element was £388/month.

It is probable that, had she been claiming HB under the old system, that shortfall would not have been so massive.

This is utter madness. It's all very well for councils/housing associations to set up advice/support services, but all that costs money which then cannot be spent on other services or investment.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 10:54 am

Always remembering that I didn't vote Corbyn and am not a Corbynista......

Well, he's for me getting it spot on with the Referendum. Firmly pro-EU but refusing to share a platform with Dave. Saying the EU he wants is completely different to what Dave wants. Focusing on how Labour would work to ensure the EU delivered better lives for ordinary folk.

It's exactly how I feel about it. So, thanks Jeremy.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 11:06 am

Yep, seconded. This is something on which the party as a whole is fairly united too.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 11:07 am

Willow904 wrote:http://www.theguardian.com/environment/ ... -challenge

The government must take steps to tackle air pollution within days or face further legal action, it has been warned.

Environmental law firm ClientEarth has sent a final warning letter to environment secretary, Liz Truss, giving her 10 days to act or face action in the high court.

You'd think Tory ministers, living and working in London, surrounded daily by traffic fumes that are polluting their own lungs, would care a bit more about air quality, if only for the sake of their own health, if not for others.

Yes, you'd think so - about this and a lot of things. If not for themselves, then for their children's sake (they're always on about not wishing to load indebtedness on future generations etc, etc - when it suits). But they don't - they're (most of them) short-term, make-a-quick-profit merchants with no vision.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 11:32 am

http://24dash.com/news/housing/2016-03- ... -till-2017" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

LHA cap won't hit supported housing till 2017

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 11:32 am

Willow904 wrote:http://www.theguardian.com/environment/ ... -challenge
The government must take steps to tackle air pollution within days or face further legal action, it has been warned.

Environmental law firm ClientEarth has sent a final warning letter to environment secretary, Liz Truss, giving her 10 days to act or face action in the high court.
You'd think Tory ministers, living and working in London, surrounded daily by traffic fumes that are polluting their own lungs, would care a bit more about air quality, if only for the sake of their own health, if not for others.

Good observation. Government probably decline to accept the laws of physics, for example,
when it interferes with business and personal interests. Sitting next to the cognitive dissonance,
are resources buying pollution mitigation.

The Camfil Roadshow will be in London in June 2016

http://www.keepthecityout.co.uk/#sthash.AemfYnP2.dpuf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

- Indoor air filtration units
- Frequent excursions to the country home(s)

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 11:33 am

Did we see this from last week?

Single Departmental Plans: implementing the Government’s promises?

http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.u ... -promises/

Last week we did some analysis of the publication of the Single Departmental Plans (SDPs). The plans failed to give a clear sense of the Government’s priorities, and in many instances were so vague that it will be impossible to tell whether the objectives have been achieved or not. They read more like a rehash of a manifesto than a clear plan to deliver the Government’s promises. It is difficult to see anybody – certainly not government departments or the centre of Whitehall – using these published documents to drive performance.

Late. Rushed. Not very good.

The UK used to be a leader in the use of transparent performance frameworks, setting out government priorities and showing progress towards achieving them. The Public Service Agreements (PSAs), introduced almost as an afterthought in 1998, were widely emulated. For example, in New Zealand they have a Better Public Services framework, while US states like Maryland have taken the public use of data to new levels. Leslie Evans, Permanent Secretary to the Scottish Government, also spoke at the Institute for Government last week about Scotland’s National Outcomes framework.

In 2010, the Coalition Government introduced Business Plans (with a different philosophical underpinning to PSAs, but still based on a firm belief in the power of transparency). Last week’s published SDPs mark an end to this phase in UK government. Ministers obviously no longer see the value of being transparent about their priorities and progress. This is a mistake – public accountability is a good in itself, but also provides a way to focus activity in the complex organisational environment of a modern state.

"Most transparent government ever."

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 11:40 am

Corbyn was on ITV's The Agenda last night it appears - and quite a lot of people seem to think he did OK.

I don't suppose any "bitterite" MPs currently "plotting" will have watched it (one of whom is currently making a complete arse of themselves blocking virtually everybody on Twitter)

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 11:47 am

"Most arse about face government ever"

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 12:03 pm

Ten new 'healthy' towns to be built in England

The 10 towns selected, stretching from Darlington to Devon, will comprise more than 76,000 homes and 170,000 residents.
They will be announced formally by the NHS England chief executive, Simon Stevens, at the King’s Fund in London on
Tuesday.

He said: “The much-needed push to kickstart affordable housing across England creates a golden opportunity for the NHS to
help promote health and keep people independent. As these new neighbourhoods and towns are built, we’ll kick ourselves if
in 10 years’ time we look back having missed the opportunity to ‘design out’ the obesogenic environment [which encourage
people to eat unhealthily and not take enough exercise], and ‘design in’ health and wellbeing.

Renowned clinicians, designers and technology experts will work together
to help deliver environments that promote healthy lifestyles.

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2016 ... in-england" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Where's the money coming from, please?
This is a Department of Health JHunt's personnel announcement on behalf of the 'NHS'
and I can't find any information on where the funding is coming from.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 12:05 pm

Ironically, one of the companies who is being told that their services are no longer required by Ofsted is Prospects.

Remember that post I wrote about their academy chain - the one based in Bromley with schools in Bexhill, Gloucester, Totnes and Torbay?

http://flythenest.freeforums.org/the-ri ... t1226.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ScarletGas · Post by **ScarletGas** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 12:12 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Corbyn was on ITV's The Agenda last night it appears - and quite a lot of people seem to think he did OK.

I don't suppose any "bitterite" MPs currently "plotting" will have watched it (one of whom is currently making a complete arse of themselves blocking virtually everybody on Twitter)

Watched on catch up this morning.

Gave very good, clear reasons why he would not be sharing a platform with Cameron.

Talked about his belief in the social chapter rather than the free market ambition of Cameron and his acolytes. Said they want the same end but for very different reasons.

What a contrast to "Machiavelli" Mandelson who gave a speech this morning that looks like it could have been delivered by his pal Osborne. All about trade (and I know that is important) nothing at all about any social aspect of EU (which in my view is equally important but has pretty much ignored by right wing "inners"

I think (although we probably knew this previously) we can ignore any contention from him about his so called Labour values.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 12:15 pm

Mandelson openly gloating over Miliband's defeat the weekend after the GE removed whatever residual credibility he had for pretty much all Labourites save the 4.5% brigade.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 12:23 pm

http://press.labour.org.uk/post/1402692 ... t-to-close" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Labour Press
Chancellor’s cuts to housing benefit set to close thousands of specialist homes for elderly & vulnerable - John Healey

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 12:51 pm

Regardless of view,of course if the Under occupancy even when it obviously isn't penalty,policy is as the DWP portray,they wouldn't be in the Supreme Court.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 12:53 pm

So I suppose arse about faceness can come back to bite them.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 1:03 pm

And it's all going so well...

UK manufacturing growth slows as demand weakens

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35696451

Output slowed sharply after levels of new business failed to increase from the numbers recorded in January.

Exports shrank for a second consecutive month, with orders down in mainland Europe, the US, Brazil and Russia.
"The near-stagnation of manufacturing highlights the ongoing fragility of the economic recovery at the start of the year and provides further cover for the Bank of England's increasingly dovish stance," said Rob Dobson, a senior economist at Markit.

martinson · Post by **martinson** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 1:09 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:Morning all.

Excellent news - a full clear-out of outsourcing companies.

Now, what's next...prisons and justice please.

Good afternoon.
I know that secondary schools are in the news at the moment for all sorts of reasons and particularly today when I think parents get to know about their chosen school but there is also a crisis in end of primary assessment that some may not be aware of. It demonstrates typical lack of detailed analysis at the DFE and real dereliction of duty. I've copied an open letter to Nicky Morgan below that explains the mess better than I ever could. Apologies if you have already seen it, it will take a few minutes to read but compare it to your own educational experiences and it is a bit shocking.

OPEN LETTER TO NICKY MORGAN

20th February 2016

Dear Mrs Morgan
I have been considering writing to you for some time and have decided, in the light of the publication of the exemplification materials by the DfE that I cannot leave it any longer. I am writing to complain about the standards now expected of Y6 pupils at the end of KS2. I had hoped that your recent video on Twitter would address some of my concerns and queries, but unfortunately it has compounded them. In this letter, I will raise all of my concerns relating to this topic and would very much appreciate you sharing your responses with me.

I am currently an English Leader at an outstanding 3FE primary school in London. We have consistently outstanding attainment and value added at KS2. I have led English in a variety of schools since 2001, have worked as an Expert Literacy Teacher in Tower Hamlets and also as a local authority moderator. As an English specialist I feel passionately that children need to learn to read and write with fluency before moving onto secondary school. I have seen many Government led changes: National Literacy Strategy, Primary Strategy, the Y6 Grammar test, the 2014 New Curriculum and abandonment of National Curriculum levels. I have worked with all these different changes but feel that the situation we have reached now is untenable. This is primarily because the standards expected are unrealistic.

KS2 Grammar test:
While I absolutely agree that standards in literacy need to reach a certain point before children begin their secondary education, I cannot agree with the content now expected of 10/11 year olds. As an English graduate, I have what I believe to be a good grasp of the English language and can show children how to use it for a range of purposes and audiences. However, the new grammar curriculum is forcing teachers to develop a didactic style, teaching by rote terminology such as “subordinating conjunctions” “subjunctive form” “passive” “modal” and “cohesion” to name but a few. For the children I work with, many of whom have Special Educational Needs or English as an Additional Language, these terms are abstract to the point of distraction. Whilst correct grammar is vital for writing to maintain flow and purpose, the requirement for children to use and apply this terminology is unnecessary and there has been no evidence published that this is an effective way of raising standards.

Many secondary colleagues of mine (English specialists) confirm that their secondary school pupils would struggle with much of this work. The standards expected now for grammar at the end of KS2 have risen so rapidly that we are struggling to get the content covered in time, let alone ensure the children have consolidated the concepts by teaching it in an engaging and meaningful way. A child in our school who achieved a Level 6 in GPS last year (with virtually full marks) sat the current sample test and only achieved 22/50 which would indicate that she would probably not currently meet expected standards. This really highlighted the massive gulf between standards expected in 2015 and 2016.

The children who do not meet the required standards will be required to take resits in Y7. These resits will create huge amounts of stress for young people who are already adjusting to life in secondary school. You were recently quoted in the Telegraph regarding the Y7 resits saying, “these would help more children make progress in basic numeracy and literacy, which are essential for studying other subjects.” I agree absolutely that grasping these basics is crucial for accessing the secondary curriculum, but would strongly disagree that these ‘involve’ identifying subjunctive verbs or analysing conjunctions to a level not even seen at GCSE level. This grasp of the ‘basics’ is something that you refer to frequently in your recent Twitter post but as I will outline in this letter, the KS2 tests are simply not testing ‘basics’ by any measure.

KS2 Reading test: Along with the new Grammar paper, there is of course a new reading paper too. We have been trying to keep up with the new demands of this new paper, which now focuses heavily on defining challenging vocabulary and analysing authorial intent (both previously skills which were very much within the Level 5 domain). The main problem we now face, as teachers, is that we have no indication of what raw score will equate to an expected level of attainment. In previous years, we knew that a child who was scoring approximately 22/50 in a practice paper would be on track to achieve a level 4b. Although I do not advocate ‘teaching to the test’ it would be doing our children a disservice not to allow them to become familiar with these practice papers. This year, the situation is different. We have no raw score benchmark by which to set our standards and expectations as teachers. If we look at the Interim teacher assessment framework for the end of Key Stage 2, the guidelines are not specific enough to support any teacher assessment, e.g. “read age-appropriate books with confidence.” So, when completing practice papers, the children have no target to reach for as the target has not yet been decided. It will not be decided until after the children have completed their tests. Many teachers discuss this and you hear people saying things like, “well I think the pass rate will be about 26/50.” We are pulling numbers out of thin air. Indeed, as we were led to believe the writing standard expected would be roughly equivalent to a 4b/4a and that has turned out to be more like a 5a, I am apprehensive about what the expected raw score for reading will be. In your Twitter video, you stated that it is impossible to publish the scaled scores until after the tests. I simply cannot accept that you are not able to give an indication of a raw score expectation. Any 11+, Common Entrance, GCSE, A Level, Degree or PhD level student would have a target to work towards. It is impossible to achieve your full potential (which I understand you feel strongly about) without this target in mind.

Writing Exemplifications: Last week saw the publication of the STA KS1 and KS2 Writing Exemplifications and it is this publication that has finally prompted this letter. For the last few years, we have been preparing for ‘life without levels’ since Dylan William advised the government to stop schools using them. This huge change has brought great uncertainty to schools as we are under continued pressure to produce outstanding results and progress but have been given no way of measuring these two things. It is rather like asking a GP to ensure that none of their patients suffer from hypertension but removing all sphygmomanometers from the surgery. Each year I work as a Local Authority moderator, moderating standards in writing at Y6. With the National Curriculum levels, moderation was a simple task as all teachers were speaking the same language and had a common reference point. We were all clear about what steps children needed to take to progress and how we could support them with this. This year, without levels, there is no common language. We have set up working parties within our local schools to address this lack of common language but, even with this increased professional dialogue, making the judgements has been difficult. Indeed, the disappearance of National Curriculum levels has created an unprecedented level of additional work, at a time when you are struggling to recruit and retain new teachers. So, we awaited the publication of the exemplification materials eagerly as we felt they would help us make judgements as to whether a child would meet end of year expectations or not. The exemplifications are problematic for a number of reasons:

1. Standards: The standard expected for the end of Y6 is now close to an old Level 5a (despite the predictions that they would be close to a 4b or 4a). Last year the expectation for writing was a 4b. This shows a jump in expected attainment of two years (i.e. from a 4b to a 5a). Whilst I am more than happy to have ambitious targets for children (last year some of our pupils moved from a L1 at KS1 to a L5 at KS2), these new standards go beyond ambitious into the realm of absurdity. In effect, you are expecting all children in Y6 to write as if they were able Y8 pupils. This jump is unrealistic and unachievable for a huge number of children, particularly as they have only been working on the new curriculum for 18 months. Although your department has judged that this is ‘enough’ time, I would disagree with this, as the huge amount of new concepts (particularly in grammar) is overwhelming. The fact that these exemplifications have only just been published contradicts what the DfE have said about giving teachers sufficient lead-in time for major changes.

2. Checklist not ‘best fit’: The end of KS2 statutory assessment criteria (which is to be used by teachers and moderators) is now a checklist and not a ‘best fit’ as the National Curriculum Levels were. This means that teachers will have to ensure that children have evidence of 29 different techniques/skills in virtually all their writing. As an example, a child who produces a wonderful range of writing (stories, poems, arguments) but fails to use enough modal verbs, will be deemed as not meeting the standard. This does not fit with your expectation of children leaving primary with a “good grasp of the basics.” Indeed, the CLPE (a much respected organisation working in many schools across the country) has recently published new writing scales to try and fill the assessment black hole created by the government. According to these scales, the expectations for Y6 children are to be what CLPE describe as a “mature, independent writers.” I had thought we were aiming for fluency in basic reading and writing, not necessarily maturity at the age of 10 or 11. You have dismissed this concern about checklists, saying that, “stories about how teachers need to make checklists of hundreds of different tick boxes are also just plain wrong”. Unfortunately, if you present assessment criteria as a checklist, then that is how it will be used.

3. Spelling: Spelling, which used to be tested separately, is now also assessed in the writing strand despite assurances in the past two years that this would not be the case. Children are expected to spell most of the Y3/4 word list and Y5/6 word lists correctly in all independent writing to achieve the KS2 standard. These word lists are not just functional, generic words (e.g. doesn’t or their) but specific words (e.g. accommodate, privilege, parliament and mischievous). These are words I would argue are not needed for ‘basic literacy’. For many years, I have encouraged children to develop their vocabulary in their writing, urging them to be creative and ambitious with their word choices. Now this ambition must be curbed as teachers will be encouraging their pupils to use only words they can spell correctly. This new expectation for spelling also means that no child with dyslexia or spelling processing problems will ever be able to start secondary school with an Expected Level of attainment. So, those children with Special Educational Needs who have flair, creativity and write with a strong authorial voice (and who will certainly be encouraged to use spellcheck or spelling software such as ‘Ginger’ for their secondary school essays) will be deemed as not ready for secondary. This seems discriminatory.

Child Mental Health: My final concern is that these issues will have a detrimental effect on the mental heath of our children. In December last year you joined forces with NHS England to launch a multi-million pound joint mental health pilot scheme for hundreds of schools, stating that, “mental health is a key priority for this government and for me personally…the development of good mental health is vital alongside academic success in equipping young people with the skills needed to fulfil their potential.” I would argue that the vast and sudden leaps in attainment expected by your government do not fit with this mental health agenda in any way. In July this year, there will be teachers across the country telling many many Y6 pupils, that (despite the fact that they have worked incredibly hard, trying to understand and apply over 50 different technical grammar terms and to use 29 different techniques in all their writing) they have not reached the required standard for children of their age. They would have been fine had they been born a year earlier as they would have met the required standard. However, this year, they will be deemed as not up to scratch and so will begin their secondary education feeling dispirited and ‘different’ to those children who did meet the standard. The Y7 resits will do nothing to allay these feelings.

I am keen for this letter not to be seen as the wild ramblings of a stressed teacher. So, I would make the following suggestions for things that would make an enormous difference to teaching professionals and the children in our care:

1. The ‘checklist’ model of the statutory assessment criteria for writing to be changed to a ‘best fit’ model.
2. Removal of compulsory spelling lists from the statutory assessment criteria.
3. Rapid publication of guideline raw scores which will denote the expected standard (for grammar and reading).
4. At the end of this interim framework, National Curriculum levels to be reinstated, allowing all professionals, pupils and parents to communicate once again with transparency and rigour.

At a time when teacher recruitment and retention is at crisis point (numbers of teachers leaving the profession has increased by 11% over the past 3 years) is it not the time to really reflect as a government on why these teachers are going? We are not workshy or wanting to coast along accepting mediocre outcomes for our children. We are passionate and desperate to send children off to secondary school with a love of reading and learning. Your current policies are doing all they can to extinguish this passion and pick apart this love of reading until we are left with a page littered with determiners, subjunctives and a collection of modal verbs, predominantly those of obligation not possibility.

I look forward to your reply and your thoughts on my suggestions. I would be delighted to share these views with your department as I know you are keen to listen to our views and make alterations as necessary.

Yours sincerely,

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 1:28 pm

re ^^^

There won't be any response apart from "we're blaming the unions for scaremongering".

Similar to the shortage of secondary schools - Gibb blames the local authorities for scaremongering.

He's utterly useless. Talks a good game but his ideological fixation of certain issues stops him from being flexible whenever there are problems.

Temulkar · Post by **Temulkar** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 1:33 pm

Dydd Dewi Sant yn hapus, pawb. Happy St David's Day, All.

Here's a blog post I have done. Exit Brittania - Brexit and the Fall of Rome.

http://jemahlevans.wix.com/jemahlevans# ... e9dfcd62d6

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 1:53 pm

http://www.parliament.uk/business/publi ... 1/HCWS559/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Government is increasing the residency requirement for EU nationals before they can access Higher Education student living cost support ..3 to 5 years.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 2:04 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Mandelson openly gloating over Miliband's defeat the weekend after the GE removed whatever residual credibility he had for pretty much all Labourites save the 4.5% brigade.

A clever man, but spiteful ...

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 2:08 pm

Temulkar wrote:Dydd Dewi Sant yn hapus, pawb. Happy St David's Day, All.

Here's a blog post I have done. Exit Brittania - Brexit and the Fall of Rome.

http://jemahlevans.wix.com/jemahlevans# ... e9dfcd62d6

The irony is, fear of a "leave" vote finally breaking up the UK could well be one of the reasons it doesn't actually happen.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 2:10 pm

ohsocynical wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:Mandelson openly gloating over Miliband's defeat the weekend after the GE removed whatever residual credibility he had for pretty much all Labourites save the 4.5% brigade.
A clever man, but spiteful ...

Get rid of Miliband and the party will come to its senses. Cooper or ideally Kendall. It's a woman's time. Return to Blairite policies. Oops. Careful what you wish for Mandy!

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 2:16 pm

Temulkar wrote:Dydd Dewi Sant yn hapus, pawb. Happy St David's Day, All.

Here's a blog post I have done. Exit Brittania - Brexit and the Fall of Rome.

http://jemahlevans.wix.com/jemahlevans# ... e9dfcd62d6

I enjoyed that! Thank you.

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 2:33 pm

HindleA wrote:So I suppose arse about faceness can come back to bite them.

I would be quite happy if they devoured themselves, it would save the rest of us the trouble of dealing with them.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 3:01 pm

Social housing benefit cap deferred for a year
Government delays implementing policy while it carries out review of impact on tenants in supported housing
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2016 ... for-a-year" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Several U turns in a short space of time ...

They backtrack on the FOI restrictions.
Delay the social housing benefit cap.
And Roger tells us the DoE have stopped outsourcing inspections.

Their back of fag packet essential reforms going as well as expected then.

Temulkar · Post by **Temulkar** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 3:04 pm

ohsocynical wrote:
Temulkar wrote:Dydd Dewi Sant yn hapus, pawb. Happy St David's Day, All.

Here's a blog post I have done. Exit Brittania - Brexit and the Fall of Rome.

http://jemahlevans.wix.com/jemahlevans# ... e9dfcd62d6
I enjoyed that! Thank you.

Cheers ohso, it came to me of a sudden late last night, need to take a couple of picture tags.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 3:14 pm

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk ... rance-year" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Kevan Jones, give it a rest.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 3:23 pm

David Cameron needs to crush his party members – or risk Labour's fate
The election of Jeremy Corbyn shows you can't trust your grassroots. Reforming Conservative associations is long overdue
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... -fate.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

What a pleasant view of the world and people John McTernan has ...

Am I 'crushed'? Am I heck.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 3:36 pm

Just up on G politics blog ...

DWP launches review to consider case for raising state pension age faster than planned

The Department for Work and Pensions has announced that it is appointing John Cridland, the former CBI director general, to head a longterm review of the state pension age. It will consider changes that could come into force after 2028.

Owen Smith, the shadow work and pensions secretary, says this could lead to rises in the state pension age being speeded up, “throwing into chaos the retirement plans of millions of British workers”. In a statement he said:

The Tories have a record of failing to be straight with people about the true impact of their pension policy, always keen to trumpet any potential gains from reforms, but reluctant to be honest with those set to lose out. So people are right to worry that the terms of this review may suggest that the Tory government is set to speed up rises in the state pension age, throwing into chaos the retirement plans of millions of British worker...

And the cynic in me thinks what a coincidence it was that Womans Hour did a feature on a survey of older people just out that said those in their 70s were having 'the time of their life' ... and followed it up with a phone in with people who mostly seemed to be pretty much carefree - indeed the first one said he was better off than he had ever been. What it failed to point out was that the cohort of those in their 70s now are experiencing very different terms re pensions etc than those following them. There was no link between this item and a previous one which showed that the gender pay gap for woman now means that many of the lowest paid in society have no access to workplace pensions because they don't earn enough - even, for some, if they are working 3 part time jobs.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 3:43 pm

Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh 2m2 minutes ago
While attention on Brexit/snooper's charter, Govt hv quietly published a big pensions review that will hit young ppl
http://huff.to/1XXYbjZ" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Maeght · Post by **Maeght** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 4:57 pm

StephenDolan wrote:http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk ... rance-year

Kevan Jones, give it a rest.

I wish George Eaton would give it a rest as well. His articles trashing Jeremy Corbyn are getting seriously on my nerves.

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Tue 01 Mar, 2016 5:31 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Social housing benefit cap deferred for a year
Government delays implementing policy while it carries out review of impact on tenants in supported housing
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2016 ... for-a-year" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Several U turns in a short space of time ...

They backtrack on the FOI restrictions.
Delay the social housing benefit cap.
And Roger tells us the DoE have stopped outsourcing inspections.

Their back of fag packet essential reforms going as well as expected then.

And another piece of good news
http://www.express.co.uk/news/nature/64 ... -1-2m-fund" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Victory for animal lovers as Britain's wildlife crime unit SAVED with £1.2m fund