Weekly Poll Lowdown

Red Ed is going to have to make a tough choice soon because he wants to reshuffle his cabinet. So short of getting rid of all these useless pillocks, you would choose Ed Balls to the one to go first from the Shadow Cabinet. This was closely followed by Chuka Umunna the Shadow Anti-Business Secretary who is supposed to criticise Vince Cable, the current Anti-Business Secretary.  Douglas Alexander and Yvette Cooper will sleep soundly with knowledge that they will not go if it was up to the masses as to whether they should keep their jobs.

 Red Ed: Who should I fire to take the attention off my obvious failings?

Who should most be sacked from the Shadow Cabinet?

Ed Balls	33%
Harriet Harman	6%
Douglas Alexander	0%
Yvette Cooper	0%
Sadiq Khan	11%
Stephen Twigg	6%
Andy Burnham	6%
Liam Byrne	11%
Chuka Umunna	28%

Total votes: 18

I don't think Ed Balls is really the worst in the Shadow Cabinet on performance. Ed Balls hasn't done what Labour really need at the moment and that is to put together the basics of an economic plan which sounds reasonable to the public. The public could except a plan which increased levels of spending in certain areas if a commitment to spend the same as the Coalition was made. However, Labour want to keep on borrowing out of the twisted economic experiences of Ed Balls and that's a major root of the problem for Labour's unelectability. But Ed Balls at least does something, and although it's not very good it is broadly left wing. The Unions are at least happy with Balls, even though he is a balls up.

 Ed Ball's economic message is patchy at best.

The person I think should get the sack has done nothing since becoming Shadow Home Secretary. Yep, none of you voted for her, but I would sack Yvette Cooper. She received the most votes of all Shadow Cabinet Ministers at the Labour Party Conference yet what has she actually done? She's criticised the government over the riots blaming it on cuts before they took place. And what else after that? Theresa May has tackled Abu Qatda. What did Yvette say? Nothing. Immigration has been a big topic for the Home Secretary where, despite immigration currently down by a third*, there have been lots of mistakes. But not a peep out of Yvette Cooper.

What Yvette Cooper is is a great disappointment. Someone who should be a key member of the Shadow Front Bench, but is actually as important to the Labour party as Ken Clarke to the progress of Euro-scepticism. Despite all the hype she has done bugger all. 

 The Great disappointment.

In my opinion this makes her worse than Stephen Twigg whose opposition to Coalition reforms is also non-existent. It could be this is because they're super reforms, which I believe is actually the case. But that means that if you want a good education department vote Conservative. This is obviously not the message that Stephen Twigg wants. But his saving grace from being the worst member of the Shadow Cabinet is the fact that there is no hype around him, he is expected to perform averagely at best.

 Even Stephen Twigg is surprised at how bad he actually is.

So there you are, if you're reading Ed don't look to Great Balls Up as a fall man choose his wife as the first to be fired from your socialist squadron. He won't fire her though, he's too weak.

 All voters need to know about the Labour leader.

Vote in the New Poll on the Sidebar.

*Note I say currently because lots of Romanians and Bulgarians are about to take a permanent holiday in the UK.

Gap in the Market

Have you had a look at the Unite polling by Lord Ashcroft? Do, it makes good reading to see that only 12% of Trade Unionists want to be Labour party members and 53% of Trade Unionists would not opt into the political party fund. This is bad news for the Labour Party because funding will be cut off and it shows they are not really that in touch with what is their own stereotypical voter base.

 Everyday Ed Miliband becomes more out of touch with the public. No wonder not even Trade Unionists will back him.

But actually this poll is worse for the Conservatives because only 23% of Trade Unionists, who are a good representation of ordinary people, will vote for the Tories in 2015. How can this problem be overcome?

As a foreword nobody should expect a miracle sized amount of Trade Unionists to vote Conservative. The majority of unionists will be tribal or in the public sector who in no way are going to become Conservative voters. But considering that the Conservative Party needs to gain 3% in the polls an attempt should be made to try gain around 10% of trade unionist voters and importantly by doing this will become closer to getting real people in the country to vote for them. The idea at the moment of an 'aspiration nation' is good but the Tory Party must expand and toot three key areas greatly to win these voters and in 2015.  

We have got to keep proving as a party that we are an 'aspiration nation'. Everything needs to be centred round this and policies must be centred around ordinary people.

Education and Training is very important and has arguably been the most successful area of government policy. Parents are very keen children have a decent education and Academies and Free Schools have been improving this throughout the country. But what is also important is the alternatives to secondary school education and university. The lie of university for everyone has been well exposed and people are now looking towards apprenticeships and skill training for a future career. The Conservatives have achieved 63 per cent increase in apprenticeships because of investment. Such moves need to be made easier with greater benefits for firms, a tax cut for employing apprentices for example.

Taxes are down for the average family in the country but we could do more. Taking out of tax those who earn £10,000 or under is a good policy. Soon everyone hit but Gordon Browns 10p tax rate hike will be out of tax completely. But what about National Insurance for employer and employee which is taken off people's pay packet? There has been little change there and VAT has gone up to boot, not good. And what of those slightly above average? Middle earners are paying the most out of all the levels of tax in the country which is surely not good to inspire people to better their lives. Tax cuts for the average family are what is needed more than ever. We've made a good start but I'd like to see more in the 2014 budget. 

The price of basic commodities that everyone uses must come down too. The government has a large amount of control over the cost of items such as beer and petrol and it should be using this power to keep prices lower when too high. Take fuel duty, the government has already frozen and cut this to a small extent resulting in a motorist being 13p better off per litre than under Labour. However, there is still more to do as the average family still spends £1,700 in filling up their car. This turns out to be one tenth of a families salary so technically most families in the UK suffer from fuel poverty when driving. A sizeable cut in fuel duty and more robust measures to stop cartels would improve people's lives greatly.

The Conservative Party is starting to really get in touch with ordinary families but there is a long way to go before Britain truly is an 'aspiration nation'. There is a gap in the political market because the Unite Ashcroft poll shows Labour is failing on all these three areas. Only then will we win enough Trade Unionists and ordinary people's votes to form a government in 2015. 

Bring Back Grammar Schools?

Today Ofsted have come out to say that the state education system in the UK has meant that clever children have been 'let down'. Thousands of children have been 'systematically failed' because we do not have a selective based education system. But should we bring back Grammar Schools then? Before I answer this question, I'd like to point out the bias that I went to Spalding Grammar School.

The problem that comprehensive education has is quite simple. Its catering for the needs of a few in the middle achievement level of society and nobody else. This is why we are failing to produce enough technically skilled workmen in Britain and thus to an extent use more foreign labour. Similarly this is why Oxbridge has to artificially select pupils from state schools, who would not meet their standards on merit, under pressure from the Government. Social mobility is on the decline in the UK.

However this was not a problem after the war with Grammar Schools. Selection of the brightest students, but also of those who are more technically able, led to the greatest moments of social mobility the country saw in the 1970s and 1980s. The Wilson, Heath, Callaghan and Thatcher government saw the break through of people who were not at Eton or a member of the aristocracy.

My School was Spalding Grammar School. But who is the chap in the blue suit?

Grammar Schools however have a problem though. During the 1960s the Labour government  decided that they didn't produce social mobility. This was partially out of an ideological belief of equality but also because the Secretary of State for Education had a bias of being lower members of upper middle class society. Anthony Crosland as Education Secretary said at the time "If it's the last thing I do, I'm going to destroy every f*#@ing grammar school in England. And Wales and Northern Ireland." Since then there has been a stigma against Grammar Schools, by those who have believed the Labour lie, were actually elitist places for those who just missed out on Harrow.

Areas in red kept Grammar Schools after the 1960s, a good idea.

So what is to be done? Well I think there is promise in the governments education programme. With academies and free schools there is an ability to select and differentiate between the teaching of pupils according to their ability. In this country we select on the basis of religion as well as musical, artistic and sporting ability. Scholarly ability is the next step but it should not be called Grammar Schools because the brand is a bit to damaged for implementation of them.