Clegg pushes for greater Social Mobility

Whilst many parties and media pundits are happy to concentrate on battles that We have lost in Coalition and even on joining the Tories in the first place, today I am going to trumpet a genuine Liberal Democrat triumph (doing my bit for Tough Liberalism) - and one brought about by Nick Clegg.

Today he announced that Several banks and legal firms have signed a "Business Compact" to allow greater Social Mobility.

So what does that mean?

Well...

• The Internship program will be as transparent as possible and remove barriers for those from a poorer background. 
• Advertise Internships - including Work experience and general recruitment places fairly.
• Support local Schools with mentoring and reading programs to encourage pupils of all ages and backgrounds to show them that they can shoot above their means.

A lot of this sounds straight forward like it should already exist but it is a sad truth that even in these modern times that someone who goes to a State school and studies at an old Poly university cannot go on to be head of a multi national bank despite grades and ambition just because their parents cannot afford to send them to Oxbridge.

On the other hand someone who's father went to Eaton with the Chief Exec can get the job or internship without a problem whether they're qualified or not. This is the life Nick had, he managed to get a good internship and work because of his background and it is a life he has fought to overturn for future generations. It isn't fair and should no longer be tolerated in a modern society. He has suffered criticism, which I wrote about  here for having this background but lets be honest, we don't chose our backgrounds or where we've come from but we can change where we're going and the world we want for tomorrow and that is what Nick has done and he should be commended.

This is an important step towards a society where it's what you know, not who you know, that counts,

Working with the Coalition, the biggest hitters in the City of London are helping lead the way to a fairer, more open society.
By opening their doors to young people from all walks of life, this marks the start of a culture shift at the heart of British Business, driven by the belief that ability and drive should trump connections and privilege.

HSBC, Barclays, Credit Suisse, RBS, Allen and Overy, Addleshaw Goddard, Ashurst - Baker and McKenzie, CMS Cameron McKenna, Hogan Lovells, Norton Rose, Simmons & Simmons, Irwin Mitchell to list but a few have signed up to the Compact.

Social Mobility is an ideal that is at the very heart of the Liberal Democrat party and the belief in people and this accomplishment is one that should be trumpeted. Hopefully this is the opening of a fairer society and gives kids from a poorer background the opportunity to achieve more and reach above the old idea of "Social position." and let those who can attain to actually do.

Clegg campagin sees City Firms open their doors to less well-off, Nicholas Cecil, The Evening Standard, 11-1-12

Crouch vs. Balls & Labour's five point plan.

Now, those who know me know that I'm no Mathematician and I loathe Economics which is why so few of my Blog Posts talk about it. However I was sent a Link to Labour's Five step plan

The Basics of the plan are;

1.A £2bn tax on bank bonuses to fund 100,000 jobs for young people.


2. Bringing forward long term investment projects such as schools, roads and transport to get people back to work and strengthen the economy for the future.

3. Reversing the VAT rise giving a couple with children a £450 boost - immediate help for our high streets and for struggling families and pensioners.

4. A one year cut in VAT to 5% on home improvements -Repairs and maintenance to help homeowners and small businesses.

5. A one year National insurance tax break for every small firm which takes on extra workers - helping small businesses to grow and create jobs.

Now I agree with taxing bankers and the extra £w billion would be a definite boost to the country's coffers and could be used to dull cuts in other sectors.
I get hazy around the extra 100,00 new jobs for young people though. Where and how are they created? I am genuinely interested.
It seems to me, a layman, a bit like trying to win votes rather than a policy - after all we all dislike bankers and we all like young people - the next generation.
Also 100,000- only 100,000? And why only young people? I'm 30 (31 on Friday) so will I count?

I also agree with the investment in roads, education etc but I don't know where the money for this is coming from. Surely Mr Balls is not suggesting we Increase the deficit?

A VAT cut would be good, companies and families are struggling and losing money on the 20% rate and the drop would get people spending again although from my family's point of view - Luxuries are a rarity and only food and clothing comes out of the Sams purse.

A VAT cut to home improvements would mean I could look at all the jobs that and doing such as double glazing, central heating, a real conservatory rather than corrugated plastic... Still this is still going to cost money I really don't have and apparently our family income of around £30k is one of the middle.

I do fully support the NI cut for small businesses though. It will do wonders for failing family business and shops.

Last week Mr Balls came to Chatham to see young people and to discuss issues they were facing. This,
 is a move that neither George Osborne or Dr Cable have made and he won't be the last (nor the first) Labour Politician scouting around the marginal seats in Medway trying to recapture confidence.This may have been because Youth unemployment in Medway has doubled to 740 in the Medway towns and nationally to one million.
Here in Chatham the rise is terrible, and if it carries on it's going to be very damaging long-term for this part of the world.
The government choked off the recovery, they tried to cut the deficit too fast. you would think we had learned from the mistakes of the 1980s.
It is very hard for employers when the economy is not growing, unemployment's rising and their own finances are under pressure. Says Mr Balls.

Youth Unemployment didn't start to rise after the general election. We have inherited 97% of this figure. Tracey Crouch returns fire.


Tracey Crouch Vs Ed Balls



This hits the nail on the head.

The Coalition has only been in power for eighteen months. The recovery of the nation's finances will take more than that, after all the original problems started back in 2008-9 whilst Labour were in power, in fact it was their mismanagement of the situation that lost them power in Westminster.

Local Labour politicians (and their National counterparts) have been quick to shout that the Coalition's policies, which I do not necessarily agree with all the time, for not reversing the economic crisis. If you look at history though, no new Economic policy has miraculously reversed a nation's fortunes in such a small period of time.
Economic policy is like agriculture; it takes time. You cannot plant seeds and expect fruit bearing plants straight away. It requires time and nurturing to grow. Quick fixes will not work here.
Further more, like agriculture, the growth is dependent on on external pressures and our economy has been hit by the collapse of the Eurozone and several banks in Europe. All of these are beyond the control of the Coalition Government.

Tracey makes a good point as well that unemployment and economic trends are on going. The nation did not wake up to completely new circumstances on 12th May 2010, in the same way they didn't in May 1997. The unemployment figures, and indeed this whole crisis began under Labour's watch and is why they lost the election in the first place!
It seems rather dishonest for any party to blame or take credit for occurrences. It is nothing short of political point scoring for votes with no substance behind it. It makes me think of the tag line from Alien Vs. Predator;
Who ever wins, we lose.

Mr Balls also commented on the use of unpaid interns by Politicians- something that Nick Clegg and the Lib Dems have worked against earlier this year.
Even if your family can afford to subsidise you, working with no pay is not good enough. Very true Nick - I mean Ed...

Lets take a brief look at our local MPs. Well predictably Rehman Chishti;
Did not answer requests for comment (see end note reference.)

Mark Reckless has no interns but offers one month work experience students. This actually is fairly vital as employers always want experience so in a way it is worth more than money.

Finally, Tracey Crouch also takes short term work experience staff and has one intern on minimum wage.

Mr Balls has three interns on minimum wage.

I make that 2-0?

Reference: Balls clashes with MP over Youth Unemployment Crisis, D. Bloom, Medway Messenger, 18-11-2011

Clegg and the Interns.

This story probably sounds more interesting than it actually is. In tonight's "Evening Standard." a story was run about Nick Clegg's stance on social mobility and the new governmental move to cut out Interns getting their positions through family connections. This move is a great move for social mobility.

"For too long internships have been the almost exclusive preserve of the well connected. Unfair, informal internships can rig the market in favour of those who already have opportunities. We want a fair job market based on merit, not networks. It should be about what you know, not who you know. A country that is socially mobile bases opportunity on your ability and drive, not on who your father's friends are."

I don't think I need to explain the policy any further than that. There has always been a certain amount of nepotism and networking especially amongst old school alumni and close families which could and invariable does mean that someone who would be better suited to a opportunity and a much needed spring board into a career would be passed over in favour of the Chairman's old school friends inept son. This is a big stride forward and is a positive move.

Should the media focus on this as a great achievement and a positive policy for the beleaguered Deputy Prime minister?

No.

Instead the Standard ran the horrifying news that when Nick was a young adult his father, Nicholas who was chairman of united trusts bank, helped him secure a post between his £10,000 a term Westminster school and Cambridge. Well stop the presses!!!!

So he comes from a rich background. Well no one chooses their family or background, after all the whole idea of Social Mobility is that, no matter your background your path is for you to chose. Birth is not a right to privilege. Could Mr Clegg not be trying to rectify the injustices of a system that he benefited from having
realised how corrupt is later? Who is to say that he didn't resent his father's interference in his life and wanted to get the positions on his own merit? After all the Standard then goes on to reveal that his other two internships at "Nation Magazine" and "GE24" were both attained through the going through the interview process and competing with everyone else.  His first job, working for former European Commissioner Lord Brittan was also on a recommendation by Lord Carrington a former foreign secretary but the Standard does not go into details as to what the basis of the recommendation was. Carrington could have worked with Clegg or observed his work at "GE24" and been impressed or he could have been a close family friend. It isn't clear and would be unfair to say.

What is unfair is that the media, spurned on by the comments of John Mann MP in DPMQ's is the accusation of "Hypocrisy." This is a good policy, one that will benefit people's lives and careers and we are looking at the negative side of a man's past, something that he has forsaken to make a difference for people. It would have been easy for him to become a Conservative or a chairman in a company but no, he chose the role of a LibDem and is, in his own round about way, trying to help make Britain fairer. The accusations would be fairer if he was using his name and networks to get his sons jobs but as that hasn't happened, yet, it's not an issue in my opinion. It would be the same as, when I was a youth I did not fasten my seat belt in the car on a few occasions, courting death and injury but I will certainly be telling Sophie to do her seat belt up and making sure it is done. Does this make me a hypocrite to?