Taxing question about the City

If, as your business editor suggests, the Square Mile "is responsible for around £72bn in taxes each year", rather than forgetting the role played by the City in the financial chaos of 2008-9, and the huge debt banks owe to British taxpayers after their bailout, shouldn`t the relevant "taxing question"  be -  how much more profit can the banks hope to make out of the British people? (A taxing question, 11/10/18) Why can`t banks offer mortgages to first time buyers that won`t cripple them financially for years to come rather than having interest rates which guarantee obscene bonuses and massive profits. What happened to the billions given to banks through quantitative easing which was meant to be re-invested in British businesses? Then there`s the small matter of tax evasion, offshore accounts, money laundering, and advice given by financial institutions on tax avoidance! "Star status"?

Isn`t it the truth that the City, in fact, should be contributing far more than "11 per cent of total GDP"?

Ideas to reduce teacher workload

It`s no wonder triple marking is "of particular concern" for teachers suffering from massive work overload (Morning Star, 02/10/18). Whoever thought it a good idea certainly wasn`t teaching in a state school, and probably had no experience of the pressure teachers are continually placed under; neither had the various secretaries of state who keep undermining the work of teachers with their support for an inspection process which bases conclusions on results and data.

     In fact, the amount of time given to marking pupils` work has to be reconsidered at the highest level, and appropriate action taken. It is no good suppressing teachers` pay, doing nothing to reduce workload, and then complaining that too many teachers are leaving the profession, creating an increase in the size of the recruitment problem. Where is the education secretary brave enough to tell all parents of children in state schools that class and subject teachers cannot possibly manage to mark all of the work completed, and that they should take an active role in its monitoring? Where is the prime minister brave enough to give his or her secretary of state 100% support, and risk upsetting parents, particularly middle class ones?

     Expectations of parents in relation to written, detailed reports of their children`s progress and attainment also need government intervention. Once a year is ample, with other reports given verbally at parents` evenings, or when urgently required. The NEU joint general secretary is absolutely right to urge the DfE to give headteachers the "confidence to drop much of the extra work that bogs teachers down", but more is needed. Smaller classes, more teaching assistants and more support for welfare and behavioural issues are all urgently required, but like the creation of a level playing field and equality of opportunity, unlikely in a million years to be addressed by this or any Tory government.

   The section of Labour`s next manifesto devoted to education needs to be both detailed and long!

Guardian letter on unfairness of Pre-U exams

With Oxford and Cambridge universities "still dominated by white, wealthy students, many of whom privately educated", the "transition programme" being introduced by Cambridge does not go far enough (Cambridge sets up £500m scheme to help poor students, 02/10/18). Whilst both universities are willing to accept Pre-U examinations as entrance qualifications instead of insisting on A-levels, which as Ofqual admits are "national qualifications based on content set by the government", it is difficult to judge the relationship between Oxbridge and the private education sector as anything but too cosy.

     Pre-U exams, run by Cambridge Assessment, are "indeed regulated by Ofqual", as stated by the awarding body`s chief executive (Letters, 13/07/18), but as a recent reply to a FOI request revealed, are not subject to the "additional rules" which apply to A-levels. These Subject Level Conditions include that all awarding organisations review "similar qualifications made available by other awarding organisations". The FOI request also disclosed that Ofqual does not collect information relating to the number of Pre-U papers set and marked by teachers in the independent sector.

    Jonathan Wolff rightly complains that "there are no fruitful ideas" from the new universities minister, but doesn`t even mention the two-tiered entry qualification (In his first appraisal, it`s no performance related pay rise for the universities minister, 02/10/18). Having privately educated pupils competing with students from underfunded state schools for the same university places is obviously unfair, but allowing the former to use a different entry route as well, is simply unjust. 

Unpublished Observer letter on Pre-U exams

Barbara Ellen rightly criticised the "two-tier child society" which exists in modern Britain, with financially advantaged "absurdly mollycoddled" (While well-off children are cosseted, we throw poorer kids to the wolves, 30.09.18). What she didn`t mention is how the pampering continues up to university age, with many schools in the private sector now replacing A-levels with Pre-U exams, mostly marked and set by private school teachers, and with very high A*-A grade percentages.

  The examination watchdog, Ofqual, does regulate Pre-U exams, but does not apply what it called in a response to a FOI inquiry, "additional rules", which are only relevant to A-levels; Cambridge Assessment, which runs the Pre-U exams, is not obliged, for example, to review "similar qualifications made available by other awarding organisations" to promote consistency.

    Cosseting rich children reaches heights of absurdity when they are no longer expected to take the same university entrance exams as everyone else. It`s bad enough that children in our massively underfunded state schools have to compete with privately educated pupils for the same university places, but allowing the latter to use a different route is simply indefensible!

i letter on Pre-U exams

Sperlinger, McLellan and Pettigrew are right to say that a "more radical rethink of the form and structure of the higher education system" is essential, but more thought is needed to increase fairness when achievement is considered for admission (Scrap degrees, forget graduation! Study for free! 04/10/18). Making "higher demands" for applications from those attending private schools is fine as long as the same means of gaining the necessary examination grades is used.

   At present far too many private schools are abandoning A-levels in favour of Pre-U exams, which are nearly all set and marked by teachers in the independent sector, have higher percentages of A*-A grades, are run by Cambridge Assessment, itself a department of the university, and are not subject to the same strict regulations as A-levels.

Reform universities by all means, but ending the cosy relationship between our so-called "top" universities and the private education sector must be a priority.

The citizenship test!

Like Sajid Javid, I fail to see any point in a citizenship test which requires knowledge of Henry VIII`s wives, but what I would like to know is what exactly are the "British values" he and the rest of the Tory party think "bind our society together" (Javid to toughen citizenship test, 03/10/18). Judging by the last eight years of Tory rule, they would appear to be a belief in increasing inequality, encouraging tax avoidance, imposing austerity measures on the most unfortunate, allowing Rachman-like landlords free rein to exploit tenants, and decreasing the life chances of all but the richest.

 Everyone should understand "liberal and democratic values", but also that they are neither solely British, nor the ones being promoted by this most illiberal of governments!

Acronym for Johnson!

Every Labour proposal to end austerity and create a fair society is questioned by the media in detail about the funding, yet when Rees-Mogg  says "taxes should be slashed" whilst also stating there should be "extra funding for the health system" and more houses, he is given an easy ride (Party needs "clear message" for voters, insists Rees-Mogg, 02/10/18).

  Similarly Johnson gets away with extravagant promises, and is far too often chummily referred to as "Boris" (Moment of truth for Boris, 02/10/18) when clearly this "former foreign secretary" needs only its acronym to identify him. The report of his childish Trump-like mockery of May in the cornfield, for example (May mocked in field photograph, 02/10/18), would be hugely improved by the addition of FFS!