Class size furore continues

The furore regarding class sizes in state schools continues to rubble on in relation to my growing indignation over the issue.

Peter Wilby questioned the motives in this week’s New Statesman while John Redwood MP rallied his support for Jim Knight on his recent blog. Though I’ve never really agreed with much John Redwood politics (but who am I anyway) I must say I’ve always admired his powerful intellect, resilience and steadfastness in holding fast to his beliefs, a rare virtue this day and age. Unfortunately so many contemporary MPs are driven by their careers, (or wallets) rather than their beliefs and values.

Notwithstanding these musings I’ve included below the comment I posted on Mr Redwood’s blog because I feel so passionate about the role of class sizes in education. I’ll admit as with so many things in life, it’s always too simplistic to reduce them to one singular cause nevertheless I believe the following……

“Calling for smaller class sizes is more than a convenient slogan they are the mechanism to improving attainment in the state sector. Jim Knight is like a lot of commentators and politicians as they seem to live in a different universe to the rest of us. Unfortunately the majority of people live in the real world where things aren’t perfect and so class size matters more than they appreciate.

John without sounding rude you ‘visit’ schools you don’t teach in them. Yes no doubt deliver fascinating talks to captive audiences especially in the privileged sector. Try delivering your talk to a mixed ability class in a better than average comprehensive school. Then do it four my times a day without feeling exhausted and trying to captivate the indifferent.

I teach in the state sector and achieve outstanding results in GCSE and A level in classes of 30. But I know I would do even better for every pupil if I had smaller class sizes. Wealthy parents are astute enough to realise this. That’s why they send their children to fee-paying schools.” Privileged parents use their economic advantage to purchase better teacher/pupil ratios and the associated benefits. The smaller the class the more time a teacher has with the individual child hence the better their attainment. That’s why unions and some politicians go on about it so much John. Indeed that’s why Jim Knight’s parents sent their son to Eltham College – need I say more!

Relief from buy-to-let greed

The credit crunch is in full swing in the USA and we in the UK will not be immune to this squeeze on credit.

Indeed banks are unlikely ever to be so free with their money again. They will have to keep more of their loans on their own books, rather than packaging them up and selling them on to other banks through securitization.

This is already evident in the housing market as just recently the Woolwich stopped offering mortgages to buy-to-let unless investors had at the very least a 25% deposit available.

However there are some benefits to this tightening of the credit supply. The buy-to-let market has taken a massive hit forcing many of these quasi-landlords into bankruptcy as their value of their property portfolio tumbles.

Well this can only be a good thing as many of these so called landlords have simply utilised the property market for their own gain.

There was no ‘social’ dynamic to their ‘industry’ only increased property portfolios. Their profit motive came at the expense of other people.

The buy-to-let market contributed to rising house prices by restricting supply. This in turn meant many forced time buyers were ‘forced’ to take out excessive mortgages just to get a room over their head otherwise they’d be forced to rent from a buy-to-let supplier in order to satiated their appetite for easy profit.

Looking for easy profit drove both the banks and building societies to provide loans that several years’ ago they wouldn’t have dreamed of creating, let alone provide to people.

At least the credit crunch will help bring back some equilibrium to the housing market by sifting out buy-to-let ‘entrepreneurs’ and bringing some sobriety to mortgage providers, after all the party is well and truly over!

© Copyright Chris Thompson (unless otherwise stated). You may republish if you include an active link to the original and leave this notice in place.

 

Understanding subprime mortgages and the credit crunch

The subprime mortgage crisis in the US arose from people being unable to service their mortgage repayments. The term subprime relates to the fact these people were a high credit risk. So why did banks loan them the money in the first place? From 2001 onwards there was a US house price boom. This resulted in some US states seeing phenomenal growth in house prices similar to the UK. Because of this growth people on low incomes were encouraged to borrow money to purchase the homes they already rented with mortgages they couldn’t afford. The idea was that these people would refinance their mortgages through equity release on the back of rising house prices. 

So what went wrong? 

House prices fell and so these sub-prime borrowers had mortgages that were substantially greater than the value of their homes and they foreclosed on their loans. 

Why did the housing market start to fall? 

There was due to an oversupply of property in around 2005-6 at a time when interest rate rises started to creep upwards resulting in stagnant then falling house prices. Alan Greenspan has been criticised for fuelling house price rises by low interest rates between 2000-3. Contast this with the Federal Reserve raising interest rates 17 between 2004-06. Many people simply were unable to pay their mortgages.  

But why did these people foreclose (stop paying their loans)?

 In order that sub-prime borrowers could take out these mortgages they were offered inducements such as interst free loan periods, while some had inducements known as ‘teasers’ these are lower interest rates for an introductory period. The problem is when these benefits cease the payments rise beyond the borrwers means. 

 So why didn’t the lenders appreciate the inevitability of their lending? 

This was due to the fact the lending was done through third party’s such as mortgage brokers rather than directly with the banks themselves. Thrid-party lending has the effect of allowing the borrower to be ‘hide’ behind a broker status. This has the potential of increasing moral hazards as the broker unlike the lender does bear the responsibility of its lending. This process is known as securitization and has the effect of hiding any risk. 

What is securitization?

 This is a very complicated concept.  You tend to imagine that banks put their customer’s money onto a big pile and just lend it back to them to them in the form of loans or mortgages. This doesn’t actually happen. Generally the money that individual people put into bank accounts is lent for a short time to big companies. They can’t lend it for a long time because you might want it back and so banks have to be careful that they can give you your money back when you want it. Therefore banks can’t use our money for long term loans like mortgages.

One way to fund long loans is for the bank to make the loan with the customer (you and me) then sell those loans on. When banks sell on loans, the borrower defaulting becomes the buyer’s problem (and the interest received becomes the buyer’s gain). The bank will carry on collecting the repayments. For mortgage companies when they provide a loan they get a fee for originating the loan.

 However they are also at risk of non-payment and of interest rates moving against them. This is where ‘Securitization’ comes in. Securitization involves turning old-fashioned loans/mortgages into securities (bonds). By selling bonds all the risk goes to the bondholders rather than the bank. Moreover as the bank has ‘sold’ the original debt and the bank has more money to lend and can get make more money from lending fees. 

But how does securitization affect the credit crunch?

 The relationship has changed between the bank and the customer. The ‘human’ interest between the lender and the borrower is no longer with the original lender but a third party – the real economic interest is now somewhere else. This is dynamic is more significant at when the laon is first sold. Unlike in the past when you had to meet the ‘bank’ you loan money from, the lender has very little interest in the actually borrower. The lender’s salesperson is simply looking to sell the loan rather than examining the viability of the loan (the borrowers ability to pay) and creates a conflict of interests.

 So how did banks used  to lend money for house purchases? 

A buyer bought a house by putting down a percentage of the total price, say 10%, the borrower then borrowed the rest of the money from a bank, which had taken in the money as deposits mainly from people in the local area. The bank took a cut by charging the borrower a little more in interest than it paid the depositors 

So why did these lenders start selling to high risk people?

 There are numerous answers to this some people argue as the housing boom started slowing down in the US, the lenders ran out of people to loan to. No more loans mean no more fees and their lending businesses slowed down. Naturally banks didn’t want that to happen, so they went down-market to riskier customers. Culturally there was an increased desire to own your own home, and many people along with the financial services started creating imaginative ways of getting onto the housing ladder. Especially as everyone thought housing was a good investment. 

But why would anyone want to buy another company’s debt?

 The opportunity to earn a higher rate of return on the investment, which in the case of securitization is seen as ‘safe’ investments due to their AAA rating. Hedge funds tended to like investing mortgage-backed securities through securitizations. 

What is a Hedgefund? 

These investors as their names suggests, hedge their investments through several methods mortgage backed securities. Global banks and hedge funds have been buying mortgage-backed securities, which offered strong returns and were seen as relatively safe investments during the US housing boom as many were given AAA ratings. However, higher interest rates led to a drop in the housing market and a surge in mortgage defaults, especially in the sub-prime sector which focused on clients with low incomes or poor credit leading to the collapse in the value of these investment portfolios.

© Copyright Chris Thompson (unless otherwise stated). You may republish if you include an active link to the original and leave this notice in place.

Virgin Doctors

I am getting increasingly concerned over the demise of our NHS. I use the adjective ‘our’ not in that contrived way Marks & Spencer use ‘your’ in their advertising campaigns. ‘Your’ means by association, and in the case of M&S and other such businesses it’s a consumerist association. If you don’t buy it then it’s not yours. Contrast that with ‘our’; this adjective is about belonging, about being a part of something by default rather than merely consumption.

Our NHS was founded on collectivist principles of belonging. Unfortunately that sense of belonging is under threat from the very party that created. Labour’s ever increasing obsession with the use of private companies to run everything from schools, PFI’s and now healthcare is eroding our ability to belong to anything.

Richard Branson’s Virgin Health is has already embarked on its consultation process about their introduction of health care centres –otherwise known as polyclinics. Virgin’s own PR says it’s creating healthcare centres in order to “provide a selection of healthcare services tailored to local demand” and the first centre is opening in 2008 somewhere in the M4 corridor, with a further five more opening by the end of 2009.

Polyclinics will introduce larger, centralised health centres serving approximately 50,000 people and staffed by 25 or more GPs. The aim is to get GPs working within these centres – meaning that GPs would then be under private control. Currently GPs’ surgeries are run by partnerships of GPs. They have a contract with the NHS, but they also have some autonomy.

Virgin does not expect these polyclinics to make a profit: it will simply allow them to introduce other privately run commercial services like – dentistry, laser eye surgery, osteopathy, along with links to other post-operative Virgin services such as transport and media from these clinics.

Unlike the publicly funded NHS the delivery of health care isn’t a moral service but simply another platform for brand development through economic opportunity. Virgin aren’t alone in thinking health provision sits well with economic opportunity. As if by coincidence Labour’s Ben Bradshaw recently announced how NHS hospitals in England will be allowed from April 1 to advertise to attract patients. These NHS trusts will be allowed to use testimonials from patients, film stars and medical experts in order to promote their services and more alarmingly they won’t be restricted on how much they decide to spend on attracting patients.

So Labour has effectively paved the way for Virgin to build and administer Polyclinics through the ability to advertise their services and compete with other GP practices. Therefore what Keynes called ‘the love of money’ will allow the principles of avarice and greed to drive our healthcare. Moreover those with more money will undoubtedly have greater access to such health provision than those people from whom service providers can’t make as much profit from.   © Copyright Chris Thompson (unless otherwise stated). You may republish if you include an active link to the original and leave this notice in place.

Size matters!

Maybe the NUT’s Steve Sinnott ought to give Jim Knight a much needed maths lesson so he could refresh his mind on the power of ratios? The larger the student/teacher ratio, the less time a teacher has with students, it’s that simple. Many parents, like Mr Knight’s, recognise this and send their children to fee-paying schools where the teacher/student ratio is significantly smaller and overall attainment is better.

On listening to Jim Knight you’d think there’s a queue of fee-paying parents trying to send their kids to schools with class-sizes of 70. No, obviously not, nobody in their right mind would do that. So why then is this privately educated MP (Eltham College) trying to convince the state educated majority that learning in large class sizes is alright? My guess is it’s more to do with the ratio of privileged minority teaching the majority their place.

© Copyright Chris Thompson (unless otherwise stated). You may republish if you include an active link to the original and leave this notice in place.

An edited version of the above was published in Guardian letters

Engaging with Vettriano

So sensual are the narratives pervading much of Jack Vettriano’s work that the viewer, on seeing the work, becomes immediately subsumed in a metaphysical landscape of their own making. The artist’s passion, visible in all his creations, either through his use of colour, the setting or the pose of his characters, is attainable by everyone. For me this is what makes his work so alluring, a theme often translated in the pejorative vernacular of populism, its spontaneous accessibility. Such a perspective means the subtle nuances of his Vettriano’s work are lost in the babble of elitist translations. This paradox simply accentuates the vivid sensuality of his work. It is the essence of its clarity which strikes such resonance with so many people.

He’s often been quoted as seeing himself as an outsider to the ‘formal’ art world. Yet being the outsider, an observer, an interpreter even, allows him to encapsulates the essence of his chosen subject matter. By adopting such a position Vettriano’s art provides a pathway into multiple meanings of interpretation through depicting unequivocal clarity of moments. Such methods, by their very nature are not complex, they simply are. However this lack of complexity provides an accessible dimension for the viewer, for the only tools they need to read Vettriano’s work are their own experiences. So powerful is the visceral immediacy of his paintings that an existential resonance formulates an immediate comprehension, like life itself. As with all moments we witness there are a multitude of interpretations rather than one. The tools we use to interpret such moments may vary, but we are able to engage in the analysis of such moments and the subsequent metaphysical encounters.

Nowhere is this immediacy more evident than in Narcissistic Bathers. Like the woman in red we too gaze at our own reflection for sense of self a sense of place with the scene around us. And like her we are often scantily clad in regard to that understanding about what it is to ‘be’. Vettriano’s skill is the way his paintings narrate such basic themes. Two male protagonists adopt contrasting poses either side of the woman. By crouching down one man begins to ‘see’ new possibilities about themselves while in contrast the other looks on unquestionable ahead.

Such narratives are the attraction of the work. His images always speak to the view through questions. What are they doing? How do they relate to one another? What will happen next? Yes, it’s simple but consciously so. Not as an excuse for something but as a reason for being! Contemplation of Betrayal and A Very Married Woman exemplifies the erotic charge of his narration. The former has echoes of Edward Hopper’s Morning Sun as our gaze is drawn to the introspection of the woman; we’re compelled to move between two realities. What will she do with what would we do. This existential playground exists to perpetuate the narrative drive of the scene before us. By doing this the artist knows our gaze will remain on the woman, to eventually move over her body in search of a clue in her decision. The triangular shapes of the glass and her dress mirror the triangulation between the woman, viewer and the male protagonist.

This theme of female authority continues in A Very Married Woman. A forlorn man occupies the foreground his man’s head is cast downwards to the floor burdened by events. Above him stands a confident visibly satiated woman, tying back her hair. But the image asks us what gave her such satisfaction? Their state of undress could be post-coital, but the cold colours and the reflections in the mirror engender doubt. And so we’re encouraged to listen to what’s being said and that is why Vetrriano’s narrative continues to engage a large number of people.

More Patience Minister

Most people given a new ministerial position prefer a honeymoon period so they can acclimatise themselves to the intricate dynamics of the post. It’s understandable, especially as you could so easily be thrown feet-first into something you know nothing about.

Such is the fortitude of Caroline Flint that within days she’d rattled numerous cages with her concept of ‘commitment contracts’. For the uninitiated, a ‘commitment contract’ is an agreement for new housing tenants to look for work as part of their tenancy agreement. Therefore if the tenant becomes unemployed they face the additional humiliation of losing their council home as well.

Speaking to Labour members in Weymouth on Thursday 13^th March, the housing minister who is MP for Don Valley again reiterated her desire to challenge the “entrenched dependency culture evident on estates around Britain”. On the face of it such a proposal flies in the face of traditional Labour values which seek first and foremost to address the needs of vulnerable members of our society.

Many 1950s council estates were constructed in order to house the labour force which worked in the nearby factories. Somerford estate in Christchurch, Dorset is a prime example. The estate along with its primary and secondary schools were constructed to meet the needs of its workforce employed in the nearby Shand Kidd and Revvo Castor factories. They were other labour intensive factories in the area but hundreds of people worked on the sites build just minutes away from their homes.

The early 1980s saw these factories close taking the jobs with them. Moreover Thatcher’s right-to-buy policy changed the dynamic of this estate as well as dozens of other around the UK. Together these two factors precipitated a substantive social change. Instead of places of secure employment, council estates gradually became sites of either temporary or unemployment. Added to this, came demarcated housing. Those who could purchase their houses for next-to-nothing did so, and then understandably capitalised on their windfall by selling their homes in order to migrate to private housing estates.

Such social migration meant those left behind became socially segregated both culturally and economically. The stigma of estate-linked schools keeps the middle-classes away allowing the seeds of fatalism to take root. Whilst economically the decline of career opportunities is exacerbated by the closure of local Job Centres, a life line for many of those people already vulnerable to rapid social change.

However maybe Caroline Flint’s concept of ‘commitment contracts’ isn’t such a bad idea after all, as long as the commitment is reciprocal. Yes like mortgage payers, council tenants should to be in employment in order to pay their rent. But in the same way some mortgage payers are calling for state support in order to weather the credit crunch. Established vulnerable members of our society need a commitment from social policy makers to provide employment opportunities, as well as processes which alleviate barriers to employment, such as skills training, childcare and rental subsidies.

Proclamations delivered with unwavering zeal are treated with understandable suspicion to the extent they’re derided as draconian show-boating. Mrs Flint needs to recognise that in order for new ideas to flourish they first need to take root. By dismissing the sensibilities of those people she was trammelling over, her ideas become harder to sell. Especially for party activists looking to garner electoral support members looking for voters living in council houses around the UK.

So maybe all that Flint needs to do is to make a virtue out of patience in order to allow the ‘wisdom’ of her ideas a chance to percolate to the political surface in a more measured way.

© Copyright Chris Thompson (unless otherwise stated). You may republish if you include an active link to the original and leave this notice in place.

Caroline Flint’s Ascendency

Caroline Flint’s visit to Weymouth in Dorset on Thursday might not have hit the headlines but it proved to be a hit with the fifty or so Labour Party members who listened to her speak later that evening.

What is often missing in contemporary politics is the ability of the electorate to engage first hand with dynamism of the individual politician. Over the years so much emphasis has been placed on mediated political messages that it has eroded the value of individual charisma. The Minister for Housing, may not yet be classed as charismatic but it’s only a matter of time before she will be.

Her confidence resonated throughout the delivery of her assured speech which together with her confident vivacious demeanour is creating a formidable politician. Throughout her energetic delivery I saw flashes of Barbra Castle. This is due to the clever way her political tenacity is concealed by a mercurial charm. Such a combination is redoubtable simply because she can disarm opponents physically as well as intellectually.

Such dynamics are not so apparent on the television screen. Political sensibilities have become filtered through a medium which by contracting the image abbreviates the personality and therefore the very message being conveyed. That is why the Labour MP for Don Valley, was able to deliver such a strong message to her supporters, she is prepared to answer even the most challenging of questions. And for me there is nothing more exciting than asking a politician, of Mrs Flint’s standing a question and watching them reply with such verve and tenacity that you know you’re witnessing someone in their political ascendency.

© Copyright Chris Thompson (unless otherwise stated). You may republish if you include an active link to the original and leave this notice in place.

ITV’s Mark Austin’s Phone-In Fraud

 

Recent revelations regarding UK television’s abuse of premium phone lines go back even further to at least to 2002. Moreover the ’fraud’ becomes conspiratorial as it extends beyond ITV to include the Press Association, Mark Austin and national newspapers.

On Wednesday May 29^th 2002 I was writing copy for the BBC when a miracle occurred. ITV’s Survivor programme was being broadcast ‘live’, with presenter Mark Austin asking viewers to phone in and vote for the winner either Detective Constable Jonny Gibb, 31, or school teacher Susannah Moffat, 28 (my two children were keen viewers and were always voting).Three minutes into the programme and my computer screen flashed with Press Association copy (I still posses the copy) titled ‘Policeman wins £1m prize money’.

The detailed PA copy told of how Jonny Gibb had won the Survivor programme. Yet on the screen before me the programme continued being transmitted as live. Indeed for a further 40 minutes tens of thousands of innocent people continued to pay their money and vote. Infuriated I contacted newsrooms at The Sun, The Daily Mail and The Daily Mirror who all said they knew it happened all the time. Such a response was obvious as most newsrooms subscribe to the PA for a significant amount of their copy.

Indeed as a BBC journalist ‘lying’ was routine. On at least three occasions I was ordered to make up audience feedback so as to ‘sex-up’ regional news features. And a regional radio presenter explained to me how radio quiz shows were routinely rigged to retain audience figures.  But we all now know about similar scandals. Yet the bigger question is surely why now? Despite numerous attempts I couldn’t get anybody’s attention over the issues. Maybe media avarice for unscrupulousness grew to the extent it started eat itself. Or perhaps it’s a case of there being more Jayson Blair’s than we care to acknowledge. Whatever its the reason journalism is all the worse for this. © Copyright Chris Thompson (unless otherwise stated). You may republish if you include an active link to the original and leave this notice in place.

Harvester restaurant disaster

Have you ever looked forward to an evening out knowing it was going to be an abject failure at the outset?

Well I’ve just experienced that at a Harvester in Christchurch, Dorset. It was an opportune meal out. My two eldest children are at university, while my youngest is away for a couple of nights on a school trip. Therefore there was no need to organize any baby sitters. For the first time in years we only had to organize ourselves and could be spontaneous and just go out. We weren’t seeking anything lavish, just a humble meal with a drink or two and then home. Sadly like most things today the representation and the reality are two different things. 

Set on the outskirts of the New Forest the Cat and Fiddle thatched roof complements the tree lined green landscape surrounding the pub to the extent the busy A35 is easily ignored. However this natural beauty is immediately lost when you walk through the doors into the restaurant. 

The place looks tired; the seat covers on the chairs are dirty and stained by the food and beer of yesteryear. Some fixtures and fittings are coated in a grease coated dust. Light fittings are undermined with extinguished bulbs that look unlikely to be replaced.

This isn’t a good way to start an evening out. Nevertheless the Harvester brand name, perversely acts as a comforter to my better instinct. I decide to continue with the experience. It was my biggest mistake for some time.

The first let down the Nacho starter. The tortilla chips were rancid and tasted like they’d bathed in low temperature oil rather than cooked in it. This was immediately returned. Next on the menu was my Ribeye steak. It tasted fine but soon after heartily tucking into the ‘meat’, I soon realised that 40% of the steak was gristle, which was a massive let down at £12.99. By that time I just wanted to leave so we did. What a waste of an evening out especially at £31.13!!!

 © Copyright Chris Thompson (unless otherwise stated). You may republish if you include an active link to the original and leave this notice in place.

The above was emailed to the Harvester chain which generated the following on 17th March:

 

Dear Mrs Thompson

Reference No. 255136

Thank you for your recent e-mail and for taking the time to contact our Guest Services Department.  The details of your e-mail have been brought to the attention of both the Restaurant Manager andthe Retail Business Manager for this area.  Our Restaurant Manager ill contact you within the next seven days to respond personally to theissues you have raised.Once again, may I thank you for contacting us.  If you have any queries concerning the progress of this matter, please do not hesitate to contact us. Yours sincerelySarah PascoeGuest Services Representative    Hi Ann

Thank you for replying to my complaint 18 days ago; it is appreciated.

Unfortunately it would seem the manger/staff at the Harvester-Cat and Fiddle in Christchurch is of a different mind as to-date I’ve heard nothing. We have an answering machine at home, which works, and have no calls from the restaurant during the day or evening. Maybe this is indicative of the level of service at the Harvester-Cat & Fiddle, which would explain the poor quality of service which prompted my complaint in the first place! Because of this branch’s indifference I am going to write to a broadsheet columnist I know very well, in order that other members of the public are made aware of such pitiful service.Sorry if this sounds harsh but this branch of the Harvester chain takes money under false pretences!!

Yours sincerely

Chris Thompson 

                                ——————————————————————- 

Below is the Harvester’s reply to the above on 27th March

Dear Mrs Thompson

Ref 255136

Thank you for your email.  Please accept my sincere apologies for the delay in
this matter and rest assured we are doing everything we can to resolve the
issues raised. 

I will chase this matter up with our Manager straight away for
you and ask them to make contact with you as a matter of priority.

Until then, please do not hesitate to contact me if I can be of any further
assistance.

Yours sincerely

Sarah Pascoe
Guest Services Representative