In favour of a People`s Vote

Your editorial on Brexit stated that EU rules were responsible for the British people seeing "wages and pensions slashed", and "privatisation and poverty soar", but doesn`t the responsibility for all of these lie with right wing governments, both Tory and New Labour (Morning Star, 21/10/18)? I am as unhappy as the next person about the lack of "direct voter accountability for the key Council Of Ministers or the European Commission", but it is less likely to reform without Britain.

        It is extremely doubtful that May`s government negotiations will result  in "a Brexit in name only"; with preparations for chaos well under way, with the M20 being prepared for its new role as a lorry park, and many union leaders worried about the future of their members` jobs, the British economy is being readied for a hit which will have lasting effect for many years. No doubt financiers will be encouraged to stay with the promise of yet lower taxes for the rich, and less monitoring of tax avoidance!

  Just because some coaches for the march last week were paid for by the likes of the awful Mandelson and Heseltine does not mean the wishes of the marchers should be ridiculed - most of the Leave voters must realise by now that most of what the politicians told them pre-referendum was false, and that there isn`t a "glorious past" of Britain coping wonderfully on its own! Without workers from Europe will the NHS and caring industries be able to exist?

      Yes, the people`s vote in 2016 "must be respected", and it has been, with the result being absolutely nothing like the one 52% of those who participated in the referendum voted for. What if another Tory government results from the next election, austerity is continued, recession occurs and homelessness from evictions treble? We would all  demand another election immediately, to correct a very bad situation, but that would not mean democracy was being disrespected - quite the opposite! Democracy has to be used to benefit the people, to protect jobs, to retain work and food regulations and everything a Tory government cares so little about! Without free trade with Europe, goodness knows with which dictatorships Tory governments would end up doing business!

Guardian letter on grade inflation

It appears logical that having worked on grade inflation at GCSE and A Levels, the government should now announce plans to do the same in the higher education sector (Crackdown on grade inflation at universities, 22/10/18). The "rise in degree outcomes" clearly needs investigation to determine whether it has been caused by "legitimate improvement", or whether the "integrity of the system" is being undermined.

    What is rather less logical, and therefore owing much to political ideology, is why the government is seemingly showing such little concern about the integrity of the examination system being undermined by the obvious grade inflation in Pre-U examinations. With many private schools and some state schools now opting for these examinations instead of A-levels, should there not be a similar "crackdown"?  If the much higher percentages of A*-A grades awarded in all subjects in Pre-U exams than in traditional A-levels does not amount to grade inflation, what does?

End charitable status of private schools

With austerity allegedly ending, and the government desperate for both extra finance and an improved electoral image, it beggars belief why private schools are allowed to retain their charitable status, especially when they do so little to share facilities with the local community (Ministers urge private schools to open pools, 21.10.18). Is it any wonder that only 304 independent schools, out of a total of 603 with their own pools, "share them in some way with state school pupils", when the Charity Commission only requests, rather than demands, them to "report how they are opening up access to their sports and arts facilities"?    Charitable status enables schools in the private sector to avoid 80% of their business rates, denying the treasury of millions of much needed pounds. What is worth more? Adding to the wealth of very rich institutions which only serve 7% of the most privileged children in the country, or providing much needed funds for our public services? For most of us, that`s a no-brainer! ReplyForward

Prerequisites for losing knighthoods

We know avoiding tax on a mammoth scale, living abroad simply for tax purposes, "systematically plundering" your business whilst allowing it to build up pension deficits of £571 million, and directly causing the loss of 11000 jobs are not deemed valid reasons for the removal of  knighthoods (Philip Green: I am not guilty of unlawful sexual, racist behaviour, 26/10/18). Perhaps "serious and repeated sexual harassment, racist abuse and bullying" will be.

 Anyone holding their breath? Me neither!

Letters on Clegg`s job with Facebook

Stefano Hatfield is right to defend the right of politicians to seek work outside parliament when their careers have stalled; as he says, they have "families they need to provide for", and "most are not cynical" (Remember, politics is not a job for life, 22/20/28). Clegg`s cynicism, however, is blatant, sacrificing all liberal principles at the altar of political power when joining with Cameron in the "all in it together" coalition, reducing tax on the rich, and imposing austerity policies on the least fortunate.

 He even, two and a half years into his alliance with the Tories, had the gall to say that it was time to "hardwire fairness into government policies", with no effect whatsoever! If Facebook needs someone respected and principled to lead its defence against the threat of government regulation, they`ve clearly gone for the wrong person!

Nick Clegg might well have been impressed with the seriousness with which Facebook`s chiefs "recognise the profound responsibilities" the company has "to society at large", but whether he is the person to bring about any change is extremely doubtful (I`m joining Facebook to help tech be a force for good, 20/10/18). He was meant to be taking the Lib Dems into coalition with the Tories in 2010 to be "a force" for the good of the nation then, but sacrificed all his party`s principles at the altar of personal power. After two and a half years of breaking his promises and helping the Tories to wage war against the least fortunate with their ideologically driven austerity policies, to reduce taxes for the rich, and do nothing to end tax avoidance, Clegg, as many readers will undoubtedly remember, said with no effect whatsoever, that it was time to "hardwire fairness into government policies"!

    Clearly Facebook needs someone respected and principled to lead its defence against the threat of government regulation, but if Clegg and Osborne were the front-runners, the judgement of Zuckerburg has again to be questioned.

Regulating the regulators

With Sir John Kingman "conducting a review for government" to determine whether the audit watchdog, the Financial Reporting Council, is "fit for the future", and the Competition Markets also investigating the audit market, would it not be an appropriate time to suggest enquiries should be launched into the effectiveness of all so-called "watchdogs" (Business Leader, 14.10.18).

     Will Hutton claims that Ofwat is "getting tougher" and that some of the water companies are now "showing a commitment to their customers" (We let finance rip and flogged our assets - today`s austerity was bound to follow, 14.10.18)! That is hardly encouraging, when we have been told that water leakage increased for the second consecutive year, with nine of the private water companies failing to meet their targets on cutting leakage. After all, Ofwat was set up back in 1989 to ensure consumers were provided with "an efficient service at a fair price". 

  In education the examination watchdog ignores the fact that private schools can avoid the tougher GCSE examinations by entering pupils for Cambridge Assessment`s iGCSE, presumably an easier option. Similarly, many private schools are by-passing A-levels in favour of the same awarding body`s Pre-U exams, set and marked by teachers in the independent sector, apparently regulated by Ofqual, but not subject to the "additional rules" which are only applied to A-levels!

   A survey of the other "watchdogs" would no doubt reveal similar shortfalls, especially as Tory governments are not renowned for their regulation, so it looks like a few more paragraphs are needed in the next Labour manifesto!

Tory propaganda against teachers continues

As Angela Rayner says, the Tories "need to come clean and stop deceiving the public" over their deliberate underfunding of state schools" (Morning Star, 09/10/18). "Using misleading figures on school funding" is simply one way this government dupes the electorate, but lying is only one of its methods.

  Years of cuts have meant inevitably that schools have to reduce the subjects on offer, especially at examination level, and the latest one to suffer is music. The number of schools offering music at A-level has apparently fallen by 15% in two years, whilst research by Sussex University shows that in only 47.5% of schools is music compulsory for 13-14 year-olds, compared to 84% five years ago.

But what does the Local Government Association have to say about this? More cuts are likely because of the "pay rises agreed for teachers"! This is disgraceful use of  propaganda, with the teaching profession becoming yet again the scapegoat for government policy. 

Is it any wonder that there is a recruitment problem in the profession when teachers, who at long last have been awarded a small increase in pay, have to shoulder blame for this government`s callous policies? Ofsted ignores the problems caused by underfunding when inspecting schools, but let us make no mistake where the blame lies, and it`s not with the teachers. Ofsted and the DfE should be praising their efforts, congratulating them on their success, and promising to help reduce their workload. This might not end the recruitment problem, but it would certainly make a change!