Legislation
Does the government understand that passing legislation is sufficient? Douglas Carswell says on his blog that the government is to ban things that are bad.
This highlights the government’s failure to understand legislation. By passing an act of parliament you need society to accept, and the courts to enforce it. Simply passing a law does not mean that everyone will obey it, as he points out the success of ASBO’s show how legislation alone has failed it needs enforcement
A few years ago, I heard Lord Hurd speak; he raised the issue that an incoming conservative government should not legislate for two years thereby allowing legislation to settle down and be incorporated into the country and not produce a raft of new legislation. Obviously this is not completely possible but repealing legislation should be an important cornerstone of an incoming government.
The way that Labour has worked since 1997 is base legislation on announcements, press releases and comments that it can make in the media. Thus policy is created with the view to a headline and to show that they are taking a matter serious, not as an action to an outcome. Thus they have passed an act of parliament so they think the problem will now go away. This concept is fatally flawed as it does not take into consideration the way that it is implemented in society.
The concept of banning things that are bad shows a government that is running out of steam and looking for cheap headlines.
Wednesday, April 08, 2009
Friday, March 27, 2009
Thursday, March 26, 2009
The problems for the PIGS continues
In the Times today Charles Grant highlights the problems with the single currency in Europe and the problems that this creates. The lack of flexibility in the single currency and the inability to pull out could cause much greater problems.
In the Times today Charles Grant highlights the problems with the single currency in Europe and the problems that this creates. The lack of flexibility in the single currency and the inability to pull out could cause much greater problems.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
The bringing of the market into education
The news that four schools are going for trust status should be welcomed, especially by the parents of the city. The need to change the failing education system has to be a priority for the parents and the council.
The introduction of markets into schools has taken place in America and Sweden, with a level of success that would be welcomed to our education system. Market principles require regulation – but smart and unbureaucratic regulation. The failings of a centralised culture can be seen in the nationalised industries of the post war labour government. These created large bureaucratic systems that were more interested in the preservation of there existence rather than the delivery of service. The same can be said of the education system. The education system should be about obtaining the best for children rather than the preservation of a system.
Last week it was announced that more than 42 per cent of the 75,000 pupils entitled to free lunches last year could not manage a single 'C' grade in any subject. This is a failure that can not be accepted. Change in the education system is required, the news that schools wish to take control and be accountable to the people they serve (pupils and parents) should be welcomed. This should allow the innovation that is required and allow for investment in the areas that are needed for the local area, rather than targets from Whitehall.
The news that four schools are going for trust status should be welcomed, especially by the parents of the city. The need to change the failing education system has to be a priority for the parents and the council.
The introduction of markets into schools has taken place in America and Sweden, with a level of success that would be welcomed to our education system. Market principles require regulation – but smart and unbureaucratic regulation. The failings of a centralised culture can be seen in the nationalised industries of the post war labour government. These created large bureaucratic systems that were more interested in the preservation of there existence rather than the delivery of service. The same can be said of the education system. The education system should be about obtaining the best for children rather than the preservation of a system.
Last week it was announced that more than 42 per cent of the 75,000 pupils entitled to free lunches last year could not manage a single 'C' grade in any subject. This is a failure that can not be accepted. Change in the education system is required, the news that schools wish to take control and be accountable to the people they serve (pupils and parents) should be welcomed. This should allow the innovation that is required and allow for investment in the areas that are needed for the local area, rather than targets from Whitehall.
Monday, February 16, 2009
He is to save the world!
The irony of being a leader of the Labour party.
After one leader takes us to war several times – he becomes an international peace keeper. The next brings the UK to its knees due to gross incompetence on the economy and he is now touted as becoming the international regulator on finance.
The irony of being a leader of the Labour party.
After one leader takes us to war several times – he becomes an international peace keeper. The next brings the UK to its knees due to gross incompetence on the economy and he is now touted as becoming the international regulator on finance.
Monday, February 09, 2009
Obama and 1997
Obama is sounding more and more like Blair when Blair was first elected into office. The rhetoric is how he is going to create change – much supported by the public at large. This is after a campaign saying how bad things are, therefore the public demand change wither it is needed or not. The problems are that the change is harder than they envisaged and they become bogged down in worrying about re-election and keeping the different vested interests that got them to the highest office happy.
Obama has a much more difficult situation than Blair. Blair had an economy that was on the up. Obama has an economic crisis that is getting worse and the challenge of two wars and climate change. The need to create change or tackle these problems is required, or will he be the American Blair much loved around the world but derided at home?
Obama is sounding more and more like Blair when Blair was first elected into office. The rhetoric is how he is going to create change – much supported by the public at large. This is after a campaign saying how bad things are, therefore the public demand change wither it is needed or not. The problems are that the change is harder than they envisaged and they become bogged down in worrying about re-election and keeping the different vested interests that got them to the highest office happy.
Obama has a much more difficult situation than Blair. Blair had an economy that was on the up. Obama has an economic crisis that is getting worse and the challenge of two wars and climate change. The need to create change or tackle these problems is required, or will he be the American Blair much loved around the world but derided at home?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
