Are summer schools the answer? Five questions for Nick Clegg

Nick Clegg is to announce that he will be spending £50m to set up summer schools for children on the verge of starting secondary school as a “compassionate response” to last month’s riots.

I’m all in favour of anything being provided for young people, who seem to be at the sharp end of a lot of current cuts.  But I do have some questions:

  1. This money seems to be being taken from the pupil premium fund designed to help schools to support children in most need (ie it doesn’t appear to be new money).  How does making schools spend their money in this particular way support the government’s notions of promoting freedom and school autonomy?
  2. Where’s the evidence that a fortnight’s voluntary summer school at 11 will have any impact on stopping young people “falling through the cracks” ?  Is the government already so clear about the causes of the riots that Ministers are prepared to spend a substantial sum (admittedly of someone else’s money) to put it right?  As Theresa May said earlier this month,  “it [is] not helpful for politicians to “suddenly speculate” over what happened. The causes would only be known once all the evidence had been analysed”.
  3. The summer schools are not, apparently, going to be compulsory.  Being realistic, how many of the target children, those seemingly at risk of falling through the cracks into rioting, criminality and beyond are likely to attend them? How will the impact of the scheme be measured?
  4. Assuming that the target children do turn out for the fortnight.  What is being planned to keep them on the straight and narrow afterwards?  Or is 14 days of the right kind of training going to be enough?
  5. How far would £50m go if it was put back into Connexions or some other form of careers advice for school leavers to “put them in touch with their own future” through  training or employment? (The Guardian reported recently that:  Under proposed reforms to careers guidance, a new national service is due to launch next April, which would see teenagers no longer entitled to any face-to-face careers guidance. Instead they will be pointed to a website or told to call a helpline. The duty to provide face-to-face advice will be transferred to schools, though they are to get none of the £203m central funding that pays for the existing service.)

And here are some more rhetorical questions:  Is this anything more than a media gimmick to give Clegg a soundbite for his conference speech?  What’s the betting that we will hear this wheeled out over the coming months as an example of how the Lib Dems are stamping their belief in fairness all over the Coalition? Is there any wonder that another speedy response to the riots concluded that lack of trust in politicians was a cause?  Could Ministers attend summer schools in practical policy making next year, instead of pandering to their conference audiences?  What do you think?

Missing the Minister’s box

I had the unusual sensation of feeling sorry for Nick Clegg when I caught up with the Sunday Telegraph’s story about his refusal to accept new business via the red box after 3pm.

For the record, this does not mean that he is knocking off early to have a game of frisbee in St James’s Park with Miriam and the kids.  It means that if a civil servant wants him to respond to a query or approve a decision, the paperwork has to be  with Private Office by 3pm – else it will have to wait til the next day. That’s all.  The stuff in the box is  what gets taken home to be ploughed through at night, once the day’s meetings have been done.  Box times are just a signpost for officials, they have nothing to do with how Ministers spend their days.   There are, in any case, very few decisions in Whitehall which absolutely MUST be taken within 24 hours (whatever civil servants think), and I’m sure that if Clegg’s private office felt they had one of those on their hands after the 3pm deadline they’d find a way of getting in touch with him about it.

Oh, and far from it being unprecedented to close the box early, Ruth Kelly did the same when she was at DfES.  Her deadline was 4.30, I seem to remember.  It caused the odd raised eyebrow at the time, but the Department didn’t spin wildly out of control as a result.

Now, presumably the Telegraph knows all this.  So why are they gunning for the Deputy Prime Minister?

Reasons to be cheerful 1-2-3

1.  We are too skint to have been away over Easter and so are not now stranded with two children and caffeine poisoning at a foreign airport, ferry port, Eurostar terminal or beach-head 

2.  Not only does Cleggmania put a spanner in the Tories’ works (just feel the outrage fizzing off the Mail’s presses – someone was stupid enough to let David Cameron prove that that he’s second rate.  Heads must roll!)  But just as satisfying,  it could also really upset Rupert Murdoch 

3.  Spring is sprung, the grass is ris, and you can hear the birds in the back garden