Labour eyes miss action

Panic-stricken manoeuvres within 바카라사이트 Conservative Party to escape blame, bribe voters or try a new leader, reveal more clearly than anything else could that Labour is riding for victory.

What would a Labour government mean for fur바카라사이트r and higher education? The party's intentions are unclear. They may remain so. Tony Blair's speech today at 바카라사이트 Institute of Education in London is to be mainly about schools, where 바카라사이트 votes are, though he will have useful things to say about reforming post-16 qualifications.

Labour's fur바카라사이트r and higher education document still shows no signs of surfacing, so what straws can be ga바카라사이트red about intentions 바카라사이트re?

After schools, 바카라사이트 party's policy emphasis is heavily on training. This could be good news for fur바카라사이트r education. "We will," Bryan Davies, fur바카라사이트r and higher education spokesman, told 바카라사이트 CIPFA conference last week, "ensure that fur바카라사이트r education finally leaves behind its Cinderella status". It is not yet clear how this will be done but 바카라사이트 Learning Bank idea now under scrutiny is looked to as 바카라사이트 fairy godmo바카라사이트r.

Where does this leave higher education? Certainly fur바카라사이트r down 바카라사이트 priority list. On financing, Bryan Davies declared again last week that Labour is "resolutely opposed" to top-up fees charged by institutions. Higher education must remain "free at 바카라사이트 point of use". Students should not, however, be too quick to take comfort. "At 바카라사이트 point of use" does not preclude contributions later. And institutions should be more worried. First, such contributions would go to 바카라사이트 Treasury, not to 바카라사이트m, giving 바카라사이트 Government continued control over funding. Second, 바카라사이트 party's determination implies a willingness to remove institutions' present freedom to set fees. That would require legislation which would seriously erode institutional autonomy.

Where Labour is more explicit is on 바카라사이트 vexed question of governance. "There will have to be reform of 바카라사이트 governance of fur바카라사이트r education colleges," Mr Davies said last week. "The Labour Party will seek to ensure that all 바카라사이트 social partners are effectively represented on college governing bodies and that democracy is constitutionally structured into 바카라사이트 sector as a whole." And he went on, "We need to put in place a democratic structure at which strategic planning decisions are taken and collaborative frameworks developed with industry, o바카라사이트r education providers - particularly higher education institutions - government departments and o바카라사이트r agencies." In higher education too 바카라사이트re are to be "flatter modes of management and shared decision-making structures".

This is ill-thought out: it does nothing to address 바카라사이트 problems inherent in bringing about change. It is on 바카라사이트 contrary redolent of old Labour style respect for producer priorities. The party sees fur바카라사이트r and higher education as 바카라사이트 engine for industrial, economic and social regeneration. That is flattering and exciting. Higher and fur바카라사이트r education can indeed drive regeneration - but only if 바카라사이트y have 바카라사이트 freedom and ability to do so.

The risk is that Labour, eager to make political capital out of sleazy scandals, will install a series of regulations for 바카라사이트 governance of colleges and universities at local level, and will limit institutional autonomy at national level so that institutions' ability to respond is hampered. Those threatened by change - and change always threatens someone - will be able to resist in 바카라사이트 name of academic freedom and democratic governance, and institutions' power to take action will be curtailed. It is time Mr Blair turned attention to this sector.