Education Maintenance Allowance - Good or Bad?

[TattiesMum]

I've grown up hearing about and living with how bad the Tories were. It seems amazing how few people seem to grasp the damage that was done then and the effects that we still feel today not just in education but across the state board. But then even my husband who's only 3 years younger than me seems to have grown up in a different era, even though his mum was a single mum in a council house who worked and studied her way up in the world. So how can we expect 20 year olds to have a clue about what a Tory government means?

I'm younger than your Mum (at 45) but I remember those years so clearly ... terrible, terrible times and so many of the problems that we have now, as a society, were born in those years

The whole benefits culture derives from those times ... there was such high unemployment generally ... and then the destruction of whole communities with the closure of Mines and British Steel it just led to whole generations of people in some areas being born into and raised without any expectation of work....

Then the wholesale selling off of Social Housing caused the ridiculous rises in property prices, which had a knock on effect in the rental markets, which in turn has led to a huge shortage in affordable housing and thus to the high amounts on housing benefit being paid If the Council Houses hadn't have been sold off in the first place, or at the very least if the Tories hadn't vetoed the profits from their sale being used to build new social housing, then we wouldn't BE in this mess

I don't expect 20 year olds to understand instinctively what a Tory Gov't means ... I just wish that people would study a little bit of history and try to understand how things that trouble them today have evolved as a result of long ago Gov't policies

 

[PeanutBean]

The social housing thing, I only recently found out that the proceeds from the sale apparently went to central government and not the local authorities, or at least it was so in Wales. Not surprising if that's how it was as capital sale is the quickest, sliest way of plugging economic holes (just as this government is going to sell off all our forests) but how crap!

I just don't know where people can learn about our political history, my knowledge is all homegrown. Almost all our media outlets are right-wing so any comment/history pieces there will not be telling the whole (or even truthful) story. I've always felt we should learn about how the political system works (at least) when in school but even with citizenship classes now I'm not sure that's really covered.

 

[lesleyann]

citizenship classes teach nothing really its more just a lesson so skive off in from what ive heard its all just how to be a good person ect nothing about political past times

 

[Rhi_Rhi1]

terrible idea!

 

[TattiesMum]

The social housing thing, I only recently found out that the proceeds from the sale apparently went to central government and not the local authorities, or at least it was so in Wales. Not surprising if that's how it was as capital sale is the quickest, sliest way of plugging economic holes (just as this government is going to sell off all our forests) but how crap!

I just don't know where people can learn about our political history, my knowledge is all homegrown. Almost all our media outlets are right-wing so any comment/history pieces there will not be telling the whole (or even truthful) story. I've always felt we should learn about how the political system works (at least) when in school but even with citizenship classes now I'm not sure that's really covered.

Oh yes - the whole social housing thing was disgraceful ... and even at the time it was obvious that it was going to cause problems down the line But greed kept it going without much protest - that 'I'm alright Jack' thing that the Tories foster so well .... and of course they were essentially 'buying off' those who's children's futures were going to be/are now affected (and who should have been protesting) by selling them their houses at less than market value - what can you do?

Obviously - for me - that part of our political history is actual memory and like your parents I've always talked about it so my kids have some idea of the differences between right and left ideologies...

But Labour really didn't do the public OR themselves any favours when it came to 'New Labour' ... the whole image thing just narrowed the apparent gap between the parties. In real terms it hasn't really narrowed at all - but public perception is that there isn't much to choose between them and so they don't care to look at political ideals and models and so don't understand what the basic differences are between Left and Right.

To me it seems obvious which papers/media are Right Wing and which are Left ... but I was taught that (and how to spot political slant) when I was at school .... there is no reason that Politics shouldn't be introduced as part of Citizenship, but just simply knowing which way the newspaper you are reading is slanted must surely then lead to you wondering just how much of what you are reading is true. It's then a short step to deliberately choosing to read about the same topic in an opposing paper as well in order to get some idea of how YOU think and how things work?

 

[PeanutBean]

But (and this is going to sound terribly negative) I don't think most people really understand that papers are full of bias and lies. This goes across all fields. For example as a scientist I am often in dismay at the way science and science issues are portrayed in the media. Knowing that has helped me question the slant placed on other fields too but there are lots of people who don't have a specialist knowledge of the sort to naturally open their eyes iyswim. For many their only access to this sort of information is through the newspapers they read, or perhaps have been brought up to read. I realise I sound cynical but hopefully you see what I'm saying.

I agree that New Labour wasn't quite the thing but I believe they are what it took to get the Tories out. I remember the last election they lost. The absolute horror and misery that swept the nation, how could they not have got in? I think it's the right thing for Ed M to give a fresh impression and it's one of the reasons I didn't vote for David M. But I think Gordon did a lot of good socialist things, not everything they did in those 13 years was right but they had to build on what they were left with and made mistakes as every government does.

There are lots of things we are no longer taught in school, politics, grammar etc. I suspect that has something to do with the Tories too as I certainly learnt NO grammar at all and I am one of Thatcher's children! We definitely should have grounding subjects in the culture/state/language/etc we live with.

I've a friend who heads up a department and she teachers A-level sociology, politics allsorts like that. She says it's heartbreaking, when she asks for the kids to bring in newspaper cuttings they are all from the Mail, when they had a Tory MP in before the election she suggested a wide variety of questions they could ask but they all just went on about immigration. She's just moved schools actually!

 

[TattiesMum]

I think you are possibly - no probably, depressingly, tragically right Hon - most people don't realise just how biased their daily newspaper is .... they don't understand how totally a newspaper owner dictates what is and isn't written about, the way that stories are distorted and the (sometimes blatant) lies/misrepresentations that are made .... and I'm not talking tabloid/celebrity/tripe 'news'.

But HOW can people not realise? That's what I, genuinely, can't understand .... how can people read the Daily Mail and not realise that they are being fed their own bile and worst thoughts in such a way that it makes the unacceptable seem normal while distracting them from the real issues? There is a fabulous quote in the new Ken Follett on the Daily Mail ethos, which I frustratingly can't remember ... but you absolutely must read the book (Fall of Giants) PB - you'll love it - !!

And yes you're right - before 'New' Labour the party was unelectable - sad but true Personally I think that might have changed (without all the gloss and spin) if John Smith had lived, but with him gone, yes it was a case of shape up or ship out ....

I was never a big fan of Gordon Brown personally - and I do think that conceding leadership to him rather than allowing the party to pick a new leader was a BAD mistake ... the man was quite simply not up to the job personality wise (nothing wrong with his financial acumen and political ideals - just not a man whom people warm to ).

The trouble with both of the above though is that the knock on effect has been that the 'political divide' has become so subtle to the casual observer that the general public no longer have any interest in it If they did then politics etc wouldn't need to be taught in schools ... it would be - as it should be - part of everyday life

 

[PeanutBean]

Interesting, I'll see if I can get the book from the library. No Gordon wasn't sufficiently personable for PM but his politics were spot on IMO. I do feel we're getting a bit too celebrity in our politics.

You know I wonder why people think the news is necessarily true but then until the Great Global Warming Swindle even I assumed documentaries were meant to have some fact though it turns out only the TV news is obliged to be factual, not that that removes a political slant though. I just think the majority of people are simply not taught critical thought. I sound terribly patronising now!

 

[TattiesMum]

Interesting, I'll see if I can get the book from the library. No Gordon wasn't sufficiently personable for PM but his politics were spot on IMO. I do feel we're getting a bit too celebrity in our politics.

You know I wonder why people think the news is necessarily true but then until the Great Global Warming Swindle even I assumed documentaries were meant to have some fact though it turns out only the TV news is obliged to be factual, not that that removes a political slant though. I just think the majority of people are simply not taught critical thought. I sound terribly patronising now!

It's a great book (the first in a trilogy charting social change over the 20th century)

I agree with you totally in respect of wanting our politicians to be celebrities ... but that ties in with the lack of critical thought ... Our daily lives are so hectic and stressful now that anything extra fries the brain, so it's become too much effort for most of us to understand political policies in terms of cause and effect, too much effort to question what we are told, too much effort to spot the nuances between parties - so people just opt for the ones who jump up and down, shouting 'Me, Pick Me' in the loudest and prettiest ways .... whether they 'stand out from the crowd' for good reasons or not becomes irrelevant

I'm passionate about politics - always have been. My grandmother was a suffragette ..... she raised me for the first 5 years of my life and played a huge part in my growing up, so I was raised to read different papers, work things out for myself and to believe that it is every person's duty and responsibility to be interested in politics .... sorry <gets off soap box> ... got carried away there But it is rare to find others who feel the same way - or are even interested enough to discuss it

 

[PeanutBean]

Well I'm always up for political discussion and always up for learning more. It's funny I don't really believe in conspiracy theories as such but I do believe that a better understanding of policitcs and diplomacy allows an understanding of what is probably going on behind the scenes, good and bad. A way of reading between the political lines I suppose. I often think I'd like to stand for Councillor but there's no Labour where I live so no point really and I'm not au fait enough with political procedure.

I had a look for that book on Amazon so I think I found the right one. Looks like it's probably quite popular so I bet DH will be able to get it in the library for me. I'm on some manga at the moment so I'm due a new novel soon.

I think I must've talked sufragette with you before now you mention it, I seem to remember thinking it was awesome in the literal sense!

 

[TattiesMum]

LOL - yes Granny and her highly 'unsuitable' behaviour came up just before the election in a debate about whether voting should be compulsory. Her family never spoke to her again you know ... she had brought disgrace on them and that was that

I've never fancied actually getting into politics in any formal way to be honest ... I'm far too co-dependent and panic ridden for that but I'm always up for talking politics (except with my DH who's barely hidden 'isms' would probably force me to batter him senseless with the iron within minutes).

It's so disheartening living in an area with only two viable parties when neither of them are the party of your choice isn't it? When I lived in Somerset and then Hertfordshire back in the 80's I used to have to vote Liberal just to feel like I'd tried my best to get the Tories out

Thank God I moved to Luton ... no danger of having to vote tactically here

 

[rubixcyoob.]

The whole system needs a sorting out imo.
I go to uni and I get eff all. Nothing. No benefits to help. No EMA. Why? All because I can take out a student loan and get into debt.
Should I drop out uni and go to college or do nothing however, I'll get all the money they can thrown at me.

Totally discriminatory in the education system - you get help, up until a certain point. Either everyone gets it, means tested, throughout ALL levels of education - or no one.

I mean, if I went to college I would get EMA to help, yet I am still as equally poor going to uni just now and don't. Where is the logic in that?

I know it seems loopy, but there IS a reason for it ....

Back in my day (yeah sorry ... the old crone is off again ) no-one got money for Further Education (ie 6th form/6th form college - the 16 to 18 age bracket) ...... BUT anyone of between 16 and 18 who wasn't in full time education or full time employment got The Dole (no such thing as Jobseekers Allowance back in the stone ages ) - that wasn't actually that many people though because apprenticeships were widely available

At the same time Uni students got their tuition fees paid in full AND a Grant for their living costs AND Housing Benefit towards their rent .... BUT only the top 10% of all students went on to Uni so it was sustainable

Then came the last Tory Gov't ....

Unemployment went through the roof ..... apprenticeships vanished .... loads of 16-18 year olds suddenly swelled the unemployment figures even more ...

Solution? Stop the dole for 16 - 18 year olds, thus removing them in one fell swoop from the unemployment figures.

That worked to tweak the figures, but it created a whole problem with huge quantitiies of young people with no further education, no apprenticeships, no jobs and no future The Tories fannied about a bit with Gov't backed trainee schemes over a number of years but they were just a joke ......and then Labour took over ...

Their solution was to encourage as many of the disenfranchised 16-18 year olds into education, and to keep them there for as long as possible so that they were both occupied and not re-included in unemployment figures (which would have caused a huge jump and looked bad - even though these people were technically unemployed anyway iyswim)

I won't even get started on why encouraging an entire nation into cerebral education rather than encouraging manual/blue collar skills is a bad idea in general ... but in terms of finances this policy meant that SO many people were going to university that to provide them all with a full grant was just impossible - so Student Loans were brought in (and later - in England - no free Tuition Fees as well) and grants were phased out .... the savings were then used to 'bribe' school leavers (16 to 18 is the most vulnerable point for leaving education in search of a bit of money and independance) into staying in further education - hence EMA.

You're right - the whole system is screwed up .... but it's the result of over 20 years of change, some of which - like apprenticeships and old ways of starting work alongside your Dad/Mum at 16 - have gone forever

I do understand what you're saying and I know that is the reason behind it but really, I'm so so effing annoyed at the system.
If I were exceptionally poor and wanted to go to uni, I would of been eligable for a scholarship to help pay. So I would have no debts.
I'm not rich but nor poor (I am still egligable for benefits) yet I have to take out a loan! Which means once I gradute and earn over £15k it gets taken right back off me. Any other loan I take out - I pay back too. I do not get any grants, scholarships, bursaries, nothing for free.

I actually got told, money wise, I would be better off dropping out university and never going or going to college or not working or anything like that. Because at least then I wouldn't have to pay money back. Can you believe that!?

I work my ass off in a part time job and at uni to try and provide for my son and in the future to provide for our countries economy, yet they don't give me a little help to do this! No. Instead they want me to pay my money back, plus interest!

I'm only 17 - when I was 16 I was already £4K in debt for uni loans - yet I'm not old enough to take a loan from a bank wtf!? By the time I gradute I'll be atleast £20k in debt. If I drop out and do nothing or go to college, I would be so much better off financially for just now. Our education system is disgusting.

 

[TattiesMum]

I know it is Hon

Personally I'd like to turn the clock back and give all students Grants ... but that would never work financially with the amount of students we have now and with the Uni's running as businesses

Something that would go someway towards redressing it would perhaps be to give Grants to all students on certain degree level courses ... say ; Law, Medicine, Hard Sciences, Maths, Economics? .... as a Country we need people with these skills at the highest levels and it makes sense to encourage high achievers from the widest possible backgrounds rather than putting them off HE with the prospect of huge debt.

What do you think? A partial solution or discrimination?

 

[PeanutBean]

Tattiesmum there are already schemes in place to give bursaries in those fields. For example trainee teachers get their fees paid and a bursary which is higher for shortage subjects. Postgraduates get bursaries and fees paid if they do a PhD in the sciences. There are even extra generous bursaries for women going into engineering at postgrad level. It's just the undergrad degree where there are financial issues.

We definitely need to rethink how HE will be paid for. It's likely we'll need to go the scholarship route for most I think. The government are mumbling about requirements for universities to improve access for those from poorer backgrounds. We'll see...

 

[Char.due.jan]

Bit of an old thread but wanted to put in my two cents.. I get The full £30 a week EMA and it all goes on getting me to college and feeding myself while there. After that theres none left. I also have a part time job, it makes me laugh at college when people say 'i have to work for my money!' well yeah, I also have a job and in most cases its more well paid than theirs if everyone was offered EMA they would take it haha!