Education & Skills

Monday, 4 April, 2016

Last Monday evening I was one of the sponsors of what turned out to be an interesting debate about Educational Attainment in Yorkshire and the Humber. The debate centred on a report from the Social Market Foundation that drew attention to the depressingly low levels of attainment in the region.
Although there was a certain amount of political point-scoring most contributors recognised that this was as serious issue deserving of serious consideration and that the statistics showing poor performance don’t just happen when one or other party comes to power; they are deep-seated and have come about over many years.
The report stated that “GCSE performance at age 16 across England and Wales reveals marked disparities between regions, with over 70% of pupils in London achieving 5 good GCSEs compared to 63% in Yorkshire & Humber.”
It goes on “Regional differences in attainment are already apparent by the end of primary school”. It also says: “Regional disparities persist, with some areas such as Yorkshire and the Humber falling further behind and London’s performance surging over the last three decades.”
Some of the political argument centred around the Government’s proposal that all schools should become academies. In North East Lincolnshire where all secondary schools are academies we are fortunate to have some excellent performing schools, with good sponsors, first-rate teachers and leadership of the highest quality. They score well in the league tables and yet we have, as the SMF report notes some extremely disappointing overall attainment.
I have raised this conundrum previously and in February the David Cameron wrote to me following a question I put to him at Prime Minister’s Questions. He made clear that the Government recognised the problem and said “…the Government is committed to educational excellence everywhere and we want to eradicate the pockets of underperformance where too few children have access to a good school.”
If our young people are not given a good grounding at school and shown what can be achieved then they may grow up lacking ambition. The truth is that from whatever background and wherever you live you can succeed. However hard governments work to ensure equal opportunity background and home circumstances make a difference and one of the factors that contribute to success is the active involvement and support from parents.
In the past the core industry in most towns be it fishing, steel, mining or whatever provided work for the youngsters coming out of school but nowadays you need qualifications even for low-skilled jobs. Around the area we have some excellent work being done by our Further and Higher Education colleges and by training facilities such as CATCH in Stallingborough where I was pleased to visit last week to open their new workshop.
Despite their hard work when I visit many local businesses they will tell me about the difficulty they have finding a sufficient supply of skilled labour. This isn’t just a local problem; major infrastructure projects struggle to recruit skilled people in the numbers required, often have to bring in workers from abroad.
I welcome North East Lincolnshire Councils decision to employ a Director of Skills and Learning. If we are to overcome some of the inherent problems facing the area we must be prepared to bring in top people to improve things.  
Parliament is often assumed to be a political knockabout akin to Prime Minister’s Questions from dawn till dusk day-in, day-out but anyone following these things closely will know better. Not only did we have the three hour education debate mentioned above but on Wednesday afternoon a debate about the genocide been perpetrated on the Yazidis, Christians and other ethnic and religious minorities.
My Conservative colleague Fiona Bruce initiated the debate saying that “Christians, Yazidis, and other ethnic and religious minorities in Iraq and Syria are suffering genocide at the hands of Daesh; and calls on the Government to make an immediate referral to the UN Security Council with a view to conferring jurisdiction upon the International Criminal Court so that perpetrators can be brought to justice.”
Exactly why the Government seem to be resisting referring the matter to the International Court wasn’t entirely clear and when a vote was taken it was passed by 258 to none. The vote is not binding on the Government but it may, in time, well result in a change of policy.
After which we discussed continuing printing Acts of Parliament on Vellum – of course we should. Magna Carta wouldn’t have survived had it been on paper. Fortunately there was a large majority in favour.

Autumn Statement

The big political event of last week was the Chancellor’s Autumn Statement though locally confirmation that through trains between Cleethorpes, Scunthorpe and Manchester would be retained in the new franchise to be finalised next year was the decision that would have resulted in a collective sigh of relief. It was the result of a massive campaign. As well as the Telegraph’s highly successful campaign that resulted in around 7000 coupons being delivered to the minister by myself and Michelle Lalor, editor of the Grimsby edition. I and my colleagues asked countless questions in Parliament, held a full-scale debate, Select Committee hearings and lots of meetings both formal and informal with ministers, in particular the quiet word here and there cannot be underestimated showing that Government backbenchers with access to ministers can use their influence effectively. It also demonstrates that if the public engage with the consultation processes that governments carry out then ministers must take note – the system works. The temptation, when a decision goes against you, is always to claim that no one listens, it was all a done deal and so on; not so democracy is a two-way process, get involved and things can change.

The Autumn Statement itself ‎was well-balanced and responsible.

At local level there was really good news for those affected by, not just last year’s tidal surge, but also previous floods. £80 million has been allocated as the first instalment of funding for the various projects needed to strengthen the Humber defences and specifically mentioned is the area in the Barrow Haven/New Holland area. The plans put together by the local authorities and the Environment Agency to increase the level of defences from what is described in the jargon as a ‘one in fifty year event’ will be upgraded to ‘one in 200 year event’ are being trawled over by officials at the Department of Environment and in the Treasury. The proposals are estimated at £1.2 billion spread over seventeen years. Obviously before expenditure at this level is given the go-ahead there is much work to be done but the £80 million is a positive message from Government that the work is not just necessary but vital for both residents and to protect industry much of which is of strategic importance.

There was also funding for housing developments on brownfield sites, and the abolition of Air Passenger Duty for children will be welcome news not just for families but Humberside Airport as well; abolition of National Insurance contributions for apprentices, a boost for the High Street with help on Business Rates and the very welcome reform of stamp duty.

George Osborne has stuck to his strategy outlined at the start of the Coalition Government and we are now the fastest-growing of the world's major economies. It will take a few more months before the benefits filter through with further increases in personal tax allowances and the like but we can all feel that little more confident that better times are ahead.

Locally there is much to be optimistic about with growing confidence in the business community and 2015 will be the year when everyone starts to feel the benefit.     

December 1st 2014

A week or two after Douglas Carswell then the Conservative MP for Clacton announced he was switching to UKIP I attended a meeting with my Parliamentary colleagues I said that 'despite speaking as another troublesome Eurosceptic backbencher from an East Coast resort beginning with Cl I would not even consider switching to UKIP.'
‎
The reason is simple; not only would I be letting down all those who worked hard to help my election I would be letting down my constituents. It's often said by UKIP supporters 'they tell it like it is, the other parties daren't give us it straight.' Well that's fine if you just want an MP who is all talk, but surely most people want to be represented by someone who not only speaks up for those he or she represents but can also achieve things for the constituency.

As a UKIP MP I would be a voice in the wilderness with little or no access to ministers, unable to lobby and cajole them at Party meetings and in the Division Lobbies, unable to bend their ear about constituency issues.

General Elections are about electing governments that have a coherent set of policies. We are told that older voters are those more attracted to UKIP. I say to them; do you know what their pensions policy is? If your children or grandchildren are struggling to get onto the housing ladder do you know what UKIP's housing policies are? What are their policies for transport, schools, business support, support for the regions I could go on, and I haven't even mentioned their thoughts on privatising the NHS.

The business of government is complex in the extreme; you can be certain that someone who comes along with simple solutions is wrong.

The one certainty about next May's election is that it will result in either David Cameron or Ed Miliband as Prime Minister. One of these men has guided the country through a recession and restored economic stability the other leads an Opposition in chaos and includes former ministers  who were in charge when Gordon Brown was driving the economy of the cliff edge.

I come from a working class background having been born in Cleethorpes and spent most of my childhood on a Grimsby council estate, I've experienced redundancy. Whatever background you are from we all want the best for our families and that means job security and an economy that allows business to flourish so that we can finance the public services we all rely on - history tells us it's the Conservatives that achieve this. The election is about the future not the past.

And by the way if Europe is your big issue only the Conservatives can give us the referendum the country urgently need.

October 27 2014

It’s strange how some of my parliamentary colleagues seem determined to hold out against one of the most logical and much-needed reforms. Admittedly their arguments are based on good constitutional practice; but when the public are so disillusioned with the political process then change becomes essential.

I refer in particular to the Recall Bill that will allow voters to recall their MP mid-term if he or she falls below the standards expected. Recall exists in many countries though in many different forms. Full marks to the Government for at least bringing proposals forward though they fail what I consider to be a fundamental ingredient of any process of recall; it is the voters who should be in the driving seat not a committee of MPs even though it may be supplemented with lay members – I doubt that the powers that be would pluck those lay members from the streets of Immingham or Cleethorpes. Most likely they would be from the ranks of the ‘great and the good.’ Most of these are indeed decent, honourable people but for the public to have faith in the system it must be seen to be completely transparent and such is the state of public opinion at the moment that won’t be the case if the Government appear to be in control.        

I made this and other points during the debate and it was quite clear that there is a widespread view that those of us who will be putting forward some far-reaching amendments over the next week or two are growing in number. The Government are indicating that they might support some change – I hope so.

There needs to be proper protection against politically motivated campaigns that force by-elections based on the political stance of a sitting member. Many significant changes have come about as a result of MPs campaigning for changes which, at the time, were unpopular. Public opinion changes and some of these are now accepted by the overwhelming majority.

When my phone rang at about 8.30 on Wednesday evening to tell me that the Parliamentary Committee that had been considering the Able UK application to develop the South Humber Marine Energy Park had reached its verdict and rejected ABP’s objections it was something of a relief as the word going round only 24 hours earlier was that it would be at least another week before a decision would be arrived at.

This brought to an end three years of meetings, lobbying and discussion during the exhaustive process to which the scheme has been subjected. All four northern Lincolnshire MPs have worked together, cross-party to bring about a development that has the potential for hundreds of jobs and help establish the Humber Estuary as the off-shore renewables capital of the UK. Hundreds are already benefiting from the growing number of jobs in this sector, and it’s not just those directly employed but the service industries that receive a boost as the local economy gets the shot in the arm it needs.

It’s often a surprise to constituents visiting Westminster that so much cross-party work goes on; we all have the same aim which is to benefit those we represent even if the route is very different.

Whatever reservations we may have about the benefits of off-shore wind turbines surely we should all agree that if they can be maintained, assembled, designed and preferably constructed here with all the jobs on offer then we must give our support and those politicians who oppose them will have to explain themselves.          

October 13 2014

As I write this column it’s the morning after the night before with the election of my former party colleague, Douglas Carswell, under the UKIP banner in Clacton. It’s a victory for a right-of-centre free market, libertarian politician elected with the help of voters who would normally shy away from a candidate with Carswell’s views. I make the comments as an observation, not a criticism as I can understand why voters acted how they did. He will now be a lone voice in Parliament with no access to ministers and unable to achieve the investment in his constituency that is so clearly needed. In this respect he has let his constituents down.

The Party Conference season has no come to its end; how have they may have changed the political landscape. I recognise that most people don’t take a close interest at the goings on in Birmingham, Manchester or wherever but the Conferences are an important forum for parties to highlight policy announcements and for the leadership to grab the all-important few minutes on the main news bulletins.

There’s no escaping that it was a bad conference for the Labour Party and Ed Miliband in particular. His 65-minute speech eventually ground to a halt without a mention of the deficit or immigration. Did he, as we are led to believe, ‘forget’ these issues of did he bottle it at the last moment fearing that facing up to them would again highlight the part the last Labour government played in bringing about financial disaster and their lack of immigration controls? Either way it showed that he is not up to the job of Prime Minister.

The Tory Conference on the other hand was upbeat and positive, with ministers setting out the framework for what a Conservative government elected next May will aim to achieve; it was a programme for government covering all aspects of policy, most notably the economy – the subject on which all governments are ultimately judged and with the British economy being the fastest-growing in the Western World we were able to give a clear indication of the benefits that will flow from that.

The Conference also allows backbench MP s to discuss a range of issues with ministers; for example I held (another) meeting with Rail Minister, Claire Perry, to again press the case for retaining the through train service between Cleethorpes and Manchester. It’s also an opportunity to meet with business representatives, and those from think-tanks who churn out policy ideas – some good, some bad, some completely mad!

The post-Conference polls indicate that voters did indeed pick up from media coverage that it was the Conservatives who have a programme for government rather than a series of sound-bites with little substance.

Though it’s the Conservative and Labour conferences that really matter, since it is David Cameron or Ed Miliband who will be Prime Minister after 7th May - I ought, in order to be even-handed mention the LibDems and UKIP. Somewhat bizarrely the LibDems seem to spend most of their time criticising the Conservatives who for over four years have been their partners in government, trying desperately to claim credit for restoring our economic fortunes and disowning just about everything else; trying to face both ways at the same time is the phrase that comes to mind.

UKIP, whose policies on pensions, housing, transport, health and just about everything else are unknown kicked off by announcing the defection of the appropriately named Tory, Mark Reckless. Above everything else Reckless wants an In/Out EU referendum and has now joined a Party that can’t deliver it; Reckless by name, but also attracted by reckless behaviour.   

September 29 2014

Ed’s Silence says it all

Ed Miliband, by his own admission ‘forgot’ to mention immigration and the deficit in his Conference speech. You may have noticed that he also forgot English voters altogether by seeking to ignore the big question left over from the Scottish referendum namely, ‘why do Scottish MPs vote on English only issues?’

The last Conservative Manifesto promised ‘English votes for English laws’ and circumstances have now brought about the perfect time to honour this commitment.

On 11th September this exchange took place in the House of Commons

Martin Vickers: The Government has understandably indicated that, if the Scottish people vote no, proposals will be introduced for further devolution to the Scottish Parliament within days. That will increase the concerns of my constituents and others in England that we are being treated less favourably than people in other parts of the UK. Will my right hon. Friend assure the House that an early statement will be made on how the Government intend to meet the aspirations of the English people and devolve further powers within England?

William Hague: The decision next week is a matter for the people of Scotland, but its implications will be felt across the UK. We have a good record of devolving powers, as we have to Wales or, through the Localism Act 2011, to local authorities. We are a flexible and adaptable Union—that is one of the great strengths of the United Kingdom. That must take account of the people of England as well. As proposals come forward on Scotland over the coming months, there must be every opportunity to debate the implications for England.

As you would expect a week ahead of the vote William Hague played a straight bat, but within an hour of the formal declaration that the Union was safe the Prime Minister was on the steps of Downing Street making clear that the Conservatives will move to prevent Scottish MPs voting on English-only legislation.

I don’t claim that I alone prompted the Prime Minister’s response just one week after my question but I was one of many backbenchers urging David Cameron to do exactly what he did by stating quite clearly that the English issue must be dealt with alongside granting more powers to the Scottish Parliament. This is yet another example of the importance of being part of one of the large party groups at Westminster that I mentioned in my column a couple of weeks ago.

‘English votes for English Laws’ is one simple part of the post-referendum settlement that can be introduced quickly and simply. Following from that we need more devolution to more powerful unitary councils headed by an elected mayor. Elected mayors are the equivalent of a directly-elected leader of the council. The Chris Shaw’s of this world should be elected directly by voters rather than emerge from a closed meeting of the Labour Party.

Back to Ed Miliband’s big omission; come next May it is the economy that will determine the outcome of the Election and the alternative prime minister forgets to address it in his last big Conference Speech before polling day.

Though the economy is improving households remain hard-pressed but it’s worth noting that disposable income is increasing. As the Asda Income Tracker published last week states:

   

The average UK household had £173 a week of discretionary income in July 2014, up by £3 a week on the same month a year before and coming close to the all time high of £174 in January 2010.

The improvement is slower than we would all like but stability and prosperity are returning.

I write just before the debate on Iraq gets underway; once again we risk being dragged into a Middle-Eastern conflict. That said the motion to be debated is very narrowly worded limiting the Government’s actions – rightly so.  

September 4 2014

There’s certainly not been a ‘silly season’ this August with the summer months dominated by news from many of the world’s troublespots, particularly the Middle East and when Parliament returns today there will be an opportunity for ministers to update the House with developments and to debate how to react to a fast-changing state of affairs.

The appalling events in Rotherham then dominated the headlines only to be overtaken, at least for 24 hours, by the bizarre decision of Tory MP Douglas Carswell to quit his seat and join UKIP. Why is this bizarre? Because it will achieve the exact opposite of what he would like to happen. By their own admission UKIP hope to win between three and six seats at the General Election and in our first-past-the-post electoral system that is an ambitious target. Though UKIP are now targeting Labour voters the polling organisations are agreed that it will be the Conservatives that are more likely to suffer if the UKIP vote increases substantially.  The result of which will be an Ed Miliband led government that will not deliver the Euro referendum that many of us have fought for many years to achieve and, with a Tory government, is now set for 2017; and for those who say, wrongly, that we failed to deliver on our last promise I can assure you that the pressure is such within the Conservative Party that there is no possibility of it not going ahead. It will happen; but only with a Conservative government.

The other aspect of Mr Carswell’s decision that has not featured in the recent coverage of the story is that it is bad news for his constituents. At the moment he is part of the Party in government and, as such, can bend the ear of Conservative ministers, have access to the Prime Minister, Chancellor of the Exchequer and others who can make decisions that will affect his constituency. All that will disappear, if he wins the by-election he will be a lone voice, shunned by his colleagues and even if he wins in next year’s General Election, and even if joined by two or three others he will have no influence over government policy and decisions whether it be David Cameron or Ed Miliband in Downing Street.

Like many Conservative voters I share some of the aims and aspirations of UKIP but I want the representative for Cleethorpes to have some influence. I’ll give one example; after over twenty years of campaigning this Government wrote off £150 million of debt and halved the tolls on the Humber Bridge. In our first interview days after the last General Election my colleague from Brigg & Goole, Andrew Percy and I committed ourselves to achieving a toll reduction. Countless meetings with the responsible minister, Justine Greening followed, she visited the area and after meetings with campaigners and the business community immediately appreciated the arguments and between us we then convinced the Treasury and Chancellor. The reduction has been hugely beneficial to individuals and businesses. Would ministers had been persuaded to listen and spend an enormous amount of time and energy for the representative of a party with just two or three MPs?

Today the main focus of the campaign to retain through train services between Cleethorpes and Manchester switches back to Westminster. Having persuaded the Chairman of the Transport Select Committee to include the issue in their current review of railway investment and to call the leaders of North and North East Lincolnshire Council as witnesses I'm confident that yet more pressure can be put on the Department of Transport to withdraw this particular option from the list of proposals.