UP-DATED TUESDAY MAY 1/2012

A couple of developments since we published our original story about the number of private school pupils being offered places at Kent's grammars. First a story in which KCC underlines that coaching is not permitted and emphasising that schools (both independent and state) could face sanctions if they breach its rules.

And here, courtesy of KCC, is an extract from the rules sent to every school each year about the 11+. What intrigues me is that it is very evident from anyone you speak to that coaching and preparation takes place at many schools. Whether they are technically in breach of these rules is anybody's guess but it is hard to imagine, given the intense competition for places, that there aren't some who sail pretty close to the wind.

KCC - what it tells schools they can't do:

Back in 2007, the then Conservative education spokesman David Willetts made a keynote speech in which he had the temerity - some say bravery - to announce that a future Conservative government would not re-introduce selection or the 11-plus. 

Why? Because the party believed that grammars no longer offered a leg up to children from poorer backgrounds and the argument they enhance social mobility was not borne out by the evidence.

He said: "If the evidence were different and if grammar schools could still work as they might once have done, transforming the opportunities of many children from poor backgrounds then we would be obliged to look very seriously at the case for their introduction. But the fact is that grammar schools don't any longer work like that."

It is an argument that is reinforced by data we publish today detailing the impact - significant in many grammars in Kent - that fee-paying schools have in terms of taking up places.

In some senses, the statistics do not come as a surprise. There has always been plenty of anecdotal evidence around that prep schools are seen as a way, for those who can afford it, to secure a place at a top-performing state selective school.

But the figures, coupled with the strikingly low number of children on free school meals at grammars and the intensive private coaching culture used by parents to advance the prospects of their children passing the 11-plus, show David Willetts had a point.

Despite the hue and cry among those in the party who were aghast that the Conservatives were ditching a totemic policy, it is hard to advance an argument that there is a level playing field when it comes to the 11-plus.

Of course, the argument can be made that the way to counter the impact of private schools and improve social mobility would be to have more grammars. 

But unless they could somehow be ring fenced for pupils at state primaries, the likelihood is they would become vulnerable to the same phenomenon - and it will be interesting to see what will happen to the intake of the new satellite grammar school planned for Sevenoaks. I imagine the thriving independent sector in that part of the county will simply see the availibility of more places as something to exploit and there will be nothing anyone - least of all Kent county council - can do to stop it.

It's worth making the point that independent schools, unlike state primaries, are not encumbered by the key stage one and two tests meaning they have a further advantage.

So, given that the selective system is not going to go away in Kent, is there a solution? KCC has asked headteachers to examine whether there could be changes to the tests that would make them less susceptible to the coaching culture.

It is a conundrum that no-one has yet been able to resolve - the existing tests were said to be immune from coaching but that has long been acknowledged as a fallacy.  

It is hard to disagree, in the face of the evidence, with David Willetts' conclusion that "the uncomfortable truth is that our schools are not still spreading educational opportunities, they are entrenching social advantage."

Kent has plenty of challenges on the education front.

But if our politicians are to tackle the disadvantages faced by children from poorer backgrounds and wish to be able to claim that grammars do act as agents of social mobility, they will have to do much more to tackle the disparity between the intakes of selective and non-selective schools.

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

Ever wondered what county councillors might do if they were forced by the public to debate a plan to reduce their numbers and cut the amount of money they cost the taxpayer?

Well, a petition demanding just that has appeared on KCC's website for e-petitions. It has a bit of a way to go before reaching the threshold for a debate but here's a thought: if our elected representatives are so sure of their value for money, surely the best thing to do would be for them to sign it so we can all hear their arguments?

Read the petition here:

https://democracy.kent.gov.uk/mgEPetitionDisplay.aspx?ID=192&RPID=4216050&HPID=4216050&TPID=4216052

testsrules.doc (20.50 kb)

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

I SPENT a fair amount of time earlier this year reporting on the activities of Allhallows Parish Council.

It is one of those authorities to which the Prime Minister wants to hand over greater responsibility. The trouble is, most parish councils in Kent are self-perpetuating oligarchies.

They have insufficient candidates and select from friends and "interested" individuals. It rapidly opens the way to abuse of the system as I immediately discovered the minute I turned up for my first meeting.

"Who are you?" and "What do you want?" were rapidly followed by a refusal to make available papers to which any member of the public is legally entitled - agendas, minutes and any reports.

The problem in the village of Allhallows was the youth club had become a very popular attraction for the local kids who had nowhere else to go.

A couple of recently-appointed councillors had got to grips with the problem, taken over The Brimp (a tatty old builders' hut complex), roused local support from kids, parents and assorted adults, and transformed it.

That upset the Old School of Benevolents who handed out grants, ran a handful of activities and claimed the praise for so doing. They tried to shut it.

They were up against some angry residents.

The most disgraceful thing (for any observer or believer - however jaded - in democracy) was the way the local police support officer was ticked off in public by a councillor for having the temerity to praise the club for the work it was doing with the young people..

Several residents decided to force an election last May.

Hate and abuse messages started to fly through the ethernet, by phone, through whispering campaigns and even at this blog.

The election went ahead, and most of the old school was turfed out.

I raise this issue five months later because in the past few days the newlook parish council has won two of the top five awards in this year's Kent Village of the Year competition.

One was for best newcomer.

The other was for The Brimp - taking the best Social Action award.

It pays over £3,000 a year as a mayoral allowance, it still has a mayor's chain, and the recipient of the mayoral thousands wears the civic bling.

It simply lacks a mayor.

The man appointed to the position, Cllr Tony Searles, decided off his own bat to drop the title - and become the council's chairman.

No one seems to have approved the decision, consulted on it, or bothered to tell the person who runs their website which introduces Swanley Town Council with these words: "It is essentially a parish council but has adopted town status which means the chairman of the town cCouncil is designated mayor."

The first of the new guest post feature. Liam Batch, A Level politics student from Kent, writes about the lack of environmental discussion by our political leaders.

With issues cropping up in recent years such as the recession, civil unrest in Libya and Egypt, controversy over wiki-leaks and the infamous ash cloud which to their credit, are all topics that cannot be understated in their importance, it appears however that one topic is slowly disappearing away from both the political agenda, and from the headlines.

The state of the environment has been subject to much anxiety and concern in previous years, but has the issue progressed into becoming a fundamental element of Party’s manifesto’s? The subject appears to have noticeably declined in recent months, and for one reason or another, nothing substantial appears to be getting done.

Anthony Downs once created a ‘five stage model’ in which he outlines the five stages in which public interest gains and loses mobility in the event of a monumental crises. Number four of the cycle is the ‘gradual decline of intense public interest’ which has substantial resonance to the situation we face today. With the complexity and cost attached to this environmental disaster we face, public interest has inevitably plummeted and progress is racing along at a snail’s pace. One possible answer is the style of politics within the UK which unfortunately sees politicians focussed on the short term issues which will ultimately win an election, and not the long term goals which will not be completed within a five year term in Governance. Gone are the days of the selfless politician, they are indisputably a dying breed of few who are here to represent the people, and are not conversely fixated upon getting as far as they can climb up the political ladder, professional politicians as they are often labelled. The competitive nature of British politics has blinkered those we elect away from actually solving the monumental problems of the world, and instead merely doing what is necessary to insure power is sustained.

Last month, the BBC reported that Global Carbon emissions have reached an all time high and were recorded 5% higher than the previous recording in 2008. We are too often manipulated in to believing by Cameron and his cronies that ‘they are doing all they can to preserve the environment’, when in actual fact, it is sitting at the bottom of their agenda. A few weeks before the most recent general election, Conservative party leader David Cameron promised to limit new power plants to be as clean as a modern gas plant. However, shortly after the Election the Guardian reported than ministers were set to raise the amount of emissions that coal and other power plants were allowed to omit more into the atmosphere. How can politicians tell us to act more ecologically, when they are evidently at the height of anthropocentrism? To the Conservatives credit, they have already implemented one of their pre election promises by ensuring every household has access to a ‘green deal’ of up to £6,500 to improve energy efficiency. But is this enough? Is this really sufficient in the grander scheme of things, it is my view simply both a sweetener and an illusion designed to persuade the electorate that they are making substantial efforts to tackle the environmental problems we face.

However, this isn’t just a British problem, but a world problem as repetitively the efforts of many are stamped upon by World leaders at Earth summits where the Governments around the world are too busy weighing up the cost the proposals make to their economy rather than the cost they are causing to the Environment by doing nothing.

With resources scarce, and the Earth showing increasing signs of entropy each and every day, it is vital that Politicians wake up to the idea that action is needed, and needed quickly. It isn’t an issue that will disappear, and if action isn’t taken soon, the damage we are causing will be ultimately irreversible.

We've known for a while that KCC was planning to increase charges for some aspects of its domiciliary care services and now we have some flesh on the bone.

KCC plans hike in care charges>>>

It's worth noting that the council has conceded that it has not consulted about whether there should be increases but is consulting about how they should be implemented - a subtle difference. So, even if you disagree with the principle it won't count for much in this particular consultation.

But the proposals raise something else. Like a lot of councils, KCC has made much of the fact that its spending plans for the year have preserved "frontline" services. In the main, I'd probably agree. But there are an increasing number of policy decisions and reviews about policy that indicate that KCC is clearly banking on raising more income from service users than it previously has to plug the gap caused by cuts in government grants, a freeze on the council tax and a rising demand for some services.

This proposal for care charges to rise is  a classic example. No services are being cut but several thousand face paying more for them. It was the same for the Freedom Pass - the scheme remains in place for free bus travel for teenagers but the administration costs are rising to £100 from £50.

Looking ahead, I expect KCC will be examining other ways of raising cash - including the use of its waste tips. All these could quite legitimately be characterised as extra taxes - people are having to pay more for services, whether it be for parking, a bus pass, a planning application fee or, as in this case, essential home care.

Some may wonder whether a freeze on their council tax bill has that much to commend it if, as is increasingly apparent, they are getting hit in their pockets by all sorts of other charges.

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

Not everyone who got ousted at the local elections - especially defeated Lib Dems and Labour candidates and former councillors - is unhappy.

Over the next four years, town halls will be inflicting some pretty serious cuts on residents as they deal with a 28 per cent cut in government grants as part of the austerity drive.

By the time 2015 comes around, those running our town halls may well have a fairly lacklustre record to defend and many will find that voters who were prepared to tolerate a degree of hardship in the national interest in 2011 won't be quite so content to do so when they next go to the polls.

As one defeated candidate put it: These were good elections to lose. 

I have been attending counts at elections since 1964.

Normally candidates get to bed just as the sun's rays are bursting over the eastern horizon, lulled by the dawn chorus. Not this time.

At 9am, the last result was finally declared after two recounts, after 11 hours of most local government counters twiddling their thumbs. 

The count was held up until 6am by some civil servant wanting to validate the AV referendum figures for the region. Every polling station was supposed to sit still and wait - and wait - and ......

It was the most ridiculous delay of the democratic process I have ever experienced.

What was even more ridicidulous was that the ward counts had taken place (otherwise we would probably still have been in Medway Park tonight!). Eventually Neil Davies, the Returning Officer and Chief executive of Medway Council, announced he had been given permission to tell the candidates the results - but not the people who had counted... and not the media (representing the general public, the voters if you prefer, 3waiting there to pass on the news to the world at large).

Ofcourse immediately he had given out the "confidential informal announcement" those sworn to secrecy told the rest of us.

Ridiculous? You bet.

***

Politicians are gathering in their private hideholes this weekend, trying to fathom out what happened to their campaigns in Medway.

The Conservatives and Liberal Democrats had expected a kicking from the electorate. Instead, there was the shock of increased personal votes and an increase in members among the Tories - and virtual annihilation for the LibDems.

Labour, by comparison, finally got Adam Price back in the chamber after years in isolation.

Rodney Chambers, leader of the Conservative Group and currently Leader of the Council, became increasingly cock-a-hoop during the night.

By comparison, Geoff Juby's bright yellow jacket and tie covered in playing card images began to look sicker and sicker as he walked from table to table.

One or two people were vitriolic. No more so than in Watling Ward where Tory and LibDem ladies will be side by side.for the next four years.

The comment that "I want to work with her…" never sounded less truthful.

***

It was a damned close run thing in Allhallows where the old brigade narrowly lost out to those seeking a more open parish council.

The results were declared with three of the Old Brigade (led by the current chairman, Yvonne Forrest) and five of the "Change Brigade".

One of those to lose hisplace was Peter Apostel, the quiet voice of reason on the council, who had tried to bring sense and sensibility to the often ludicrous behaviour in the village hall. Dibley? - eat your heart out.

It meant the likely end of Cross Park Association influence. Three of the association's committee left the council.

It also promises to be an interesting few months for the clerk, for the borough council's legal officers and for the new chairman.

For example, how will the chairman unite the council?

Is there a fly with a video camera who could oversee the discussions with the clerk?

And will the promised training to be given by the borough council actually result in all in the parish council to attend?

That has been the biggest problem at Allhallows: a failure to know what the rules are under which the parish council, its members and paid officers, operate.

***

Well, the votes are in and counted. Kent has voted, it seems the turnout is up, and there has been a few changes. Predictably, the Liberal Democrat vote has capitulated in places (most notably Canterbury) and Labour has made gains.

Gravesham is a council Labour are championing this morning with a spectacular win, with Ed Miliband claiming ('the result proves' theory) his party 'are on the come back'. Alas, though; Dartford, Shepway and Medway have seen Labour fail to make any real gains; seats that were on the Labour target list. Conservatives have either maintained control or increased their representation. Thanet has fallen to No Overall Control (NOC), which is disappointing after Harriet Harmen and others visited this week. Labour failed to make, well, easy gains that they were expected to achieve.

Ed Miliband is touring the county and marching through the towns like a victorious Caesar, but it is covering up a modest night for Labour. And that is being kind. The infamous '+1,000 councillors easy' claim has proved to be false. The anti-cut message is not adequate due to Tory gains across the council. Cameron is the true winner in Kent.

More worrying, the Liberal Democrat vote did not move to Labour – it shows signs of the Tories benefiting. Canterbury, for example, has seen the Tories increase their councillors to over 30 with Labour (again) have no genuine presence on the council. Only 3 councillors.

Kent is still blue, and strongly blue, with a few spots of red and yellow.

note: Liberal Democrat leader at Canterbury City Council had this to say on twitter;

@ AlexCanterbury It was like sending your batsmen to the crease only for them to find their bats had been broken by the team captain #libdems

Ed Miliband urged voters ahead of the polls to use their vote to register their dissatisfaction with the government - a tactical ploy commonly used by parties in opposition. So what did they do in Kent? So far, the messages are rather mixed. Ed, who is heading to Gravesham this morning to congratulate his party's candidates on their success in north Kent, has not in truth really made a huge breakthrough in the county.

Kent's election results - read all our up-to-date coverage here>>

Yes, it has won Gravesham but not because it wiped out a huge majority - it grabbed a handful of seats that were enough to tip the balance of power their way. Labour also made enough gains in Thanet to claim a sort of victory even if the council is hung.

But Mr Miliband will need to ask himself why it was that voters in Gravesham appeared to hear his plea while those in neighbouring Dartford were deaf to it, as they were in Medway. If voters were prepared to back the ruling Conservative administrations at some town halls in Kent, why not in others?

In fact, the results in Medway strike me as particularly concerning for Labour. I'd expected them to make some significant gains at the expense of the Tories but they failed to do so - the Conservative vote held up strongly and Labour's inroads were largely at the expense of the Lib Dems, who look to be imploding in Kent and will have hardly any councillors here by the end of  the day.

Medway has become totemic for both the Labour party and the Conservatives. In the endless battle to win over the squeezed middle, both know that at a general election that unless they win seats there, they are unlikely to form the next government. Of coures, we are only one year into the coalition government and the impact of the spending cuts are still filtering through, so voters may have been disinclined to give the Conservatives a bloody nose.

But even so, not to claim any scalps from the Conservatives will be a major disappointment.

It is not a good day to be a Lib Dem in Kent. They are clearly paying a price for the unpopularity of the national party and its role in the coalition and their desperate efforts to distance themselves from national policies have proved a failure. It will take some time for them to regroup - look at the wipeout of their councillors in Shepway. I expect something similar could be on the cards in Canterbury where traditionally, the city has been something of a stronghold for the party.

Conservative activists will be pretty happy with how things are going so far. I doubt they'll be troubled too much elsewhere in Kent, with the possible exception of Dover. They will hold sway in the bulk of town halls for the next four years - which, if things are going to get as bad as everyone expects in the public sector, may prove to be something of a mixed blessing.

The map of Kent may no longer completely blue but there needs to be rather more shades of red if Labour is to claim that it is back as a political force in the county.

Anyone staying up for the election count this week will need plenty of caffeine and high energy food. This looks like being a record breaker for the time it takes the counters to sort out who won what and when.

The doors shut at 10pm (by which time some of the polling station staff will be approaching 18 hours non-stop on the job).

Certainly by the time they hand over all the paperwork, the boxes and their secret contents, they will be ready for bed.

Meanwhile, the late shift will be getting settled for a very long night.

I am forecasting a 7am finish by the time the counting of the borough votes will have been completed. That may be optimistic.

This is because the Electoral Commission is insisting that officers have to verify how many people voted in the referendum by 2am. Only once they have accepted that has been done can the voting begin.

Voters will have at least two forms: the grey one will record our views on the referendum while a fetching lilac colour has been chosen for recording borough votes.

They will all be shoved into the same box.

Those places on the peninsula where there is a village ballot for parish councils will have a long wait - and white papers on which to record the council candidates they support. The delay is because counting the handful of votes will not begin before 4pm on Friday evening.

That's also the time when the way the 189,843 residents of Medway vote on whether to keep First Past the Post - or go for alternative votes.

Imagine if all 190,000 people voted (well, that minues 157).

Fortunately for those waiting up, swigging Red Cow, Coffee or whatever other fluid is available to keep their eyes open, more than 100,000 of them are liable to stay away from the 118 polling stations and 445 volunteers waiting to greet them in school rooms, pubs, caravans and assorted other electoral registration points.

From about 5.30am on Friday we plan to have early results up on the web, and to keep updating as they become available.

Then as the counters crawl away for bed (or we reporters head for the news room keyboards, video editing and soundtrack edit machinery) we at least can smirk - and the counters cannot. This is because they will have to start counting the referendum votes at 4pm - and also find time to declare the results in the parish council elections.

Me? I shall be in the Land of Nod, probably croaking a hoarse lament to the early swifts and swallows over Medway.

***

The Liberal Democrats are beginning to panic.

They appealed for help in Gillingham North from supporters as far away as London last weekend.

Since 23rd April 1661, the day Charles II became King and Monarchy was restored in England, have republicans felt ever so lonely. This will be quite the forlorn post filled with deep regret and sadness at the Royal Wedding.

I'm quite glad Kent has the lowest registered street parties tomorrow, thus my faith in humanity has been slightly restored, and we haven't gone over the top in plastic patriotism. The Union Flag (it is only called a 'Jack' when flown at sea) is a beautiful symbol and should be raised all the time, not just for the Monarchy.

But alas, Friday will be a depressing day for us republicans.

Tomorrow when the nations erupts into depressing exhilaration over the wedding, I shall ponder what Cromwell would've made of all this pomp and ceremony; as the Royal carriage passes his statue outside Parliament

Last night's emergency meeting at Allhallows was postponed. Instead it will take place the night before the election!

I just hope the parish councillors who attend don't make any decisions which are binding on the new council: they could find themselves faced with hefty bills if the new council disagrees with any decisions they reach during Purdah.

One almost believes the outgoing councillors have given up the fight, and are determined to go down with the ship.

I cannot comment on the reasons why the councillors feel it is so important to have a meeting hours before the polling stations open since I have not been sent a copy of the agenda (not unusual at Allhallows where it seems only those who are "in" are told anything. One does begin to feel the parish is being run for the benefit of Smiley's People.)