You are not currently logged in.
Thursday, May 24 2012

March 30: Who won the Chancellors' TV debate?

Alistair DarlingWho won the Chancellors’ TV debate?

The consensus seems to be that Lib Dem Vince Cable emerged with the best notices from the critics largely because he got the most rounds of spontaneous applause from the audience; that George Osborne did OK because he didn’t make any major mistakes and managed to avoid looking too posh and prvileged and that Alistair Darling made a decent fist of things and continues to present himself effectively as a safe(ish) pair of hands.

In other words: there was no clear winner. I must admit I watched expecting it to be fairly dull fare but ended up being quite absorbed. Inevitably, there is a sense in which these events are all about avoiding mistakes, neutralising your opponent and landing the occasional blow rather than going for a grand-standing knockout.

It was a good warm up for the leader’s debates and I’m even more convinced that the three TV events during the election campaign will play more to the Liberal Democrats than Labour and the Conservatives. But I suspect there are a few Lib Dems who might prefer to have Cable at the rostrum rather than Clegg.

Perhaps Nick could be persuaded to throw a sickie…

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

County HallSome interesting news from County Hall, which has just announced that it is to get an additional £350,000 from the government to help lift standards at its poorest performing schools – those that are on Ed Ball’s "National Challenge" initiative and which are expected to be getting at least 30 per cent of pupils achieving five or more good GCSEs at grades A* to C by 2011.

Extra cash is always welcome of course and I don’t expect KCC will be turning its nose at the offer. But you might argue that the government’s agreement to plough more money into Kent schools that are struggling is a sign that KCC’s progress is not quite as fast as ministers would like to see.

Indeed, there is a slightly ominous tone to a letter sent by secretary of state Ed Balls to KCC’s children’s services director Rosalind Turner about the authority’s response to the recommendations of a review into what it was doing to help its 33 National Challenge schools.

In it, he says his officials will reviewing KCC’s proposals in the summer for some schools "with a view to reconsidering in September all the options available…if they are making insufficient progress".

Still, at least there seems to have been a more harmonious relationship between central government and KCC's political leadership after Conservative leader Paul Carter denounced Mr Balls and the National Challenge initiative as a "kick in the guts" to the 33 schools when it was first announced.

According to a review by government advisers "KCC has engaged well with central government to consider the full range of options at the most challenging schools." Goodness me - KCC getting along with Mr Balls?

You can read Ed Balls' letter here>> 

You can read the report of the government into Kent's National Challenge progress here>>>

Tuesday, March 30 2010

Comments are closed

The KM Group does not moderate comments.
Please click here for our house rules.

Terms of Comments
We do not actively moderate, monitor or edit contributions to the reader comments but we may intervene and take such action as we think necessary, please click here for our house rules.. If you have any concerns over the contents on our site, please either register those concerns using the report abuse button, contact us here, email multimediadesk@thekmgroup.co.uk or call 01634 227834.

Advertisement

Copyright: You may not copy, reproduce, republish, download, post, broadcast, transmit or otherwise use content on this site in any way except for your own personal, non-commercial use. You also agree not to adapt, alter or create a derivative work from any content on this site except for your own personal, non-commercial use. Any other use of content requires the prior written permission of the KM GROUP. Read full terms and conditions.