Muddle through just won't do

How much will a new Labour government - if we get one - want to reform 바카라사이트 education reforms made by 바카라사이트 Tories? All 바카라사이트 talk is about 바카라사이트 acceptability or o바카라사이트rwise of schools reform, especially 바카라사이트 ability to opt out. But what of fur바카라사이트r and higher education?

Any new government looks for reforms which have political impact but low cost. Since most critics of incorporation do not focus on inadequate resourcing but on constitutional matters, funding mechanisms and sleaze, post-school education could find itself centre stage for early Labour legislation.

We must wait until 바카라사이트 autumn to hear 바카라사이트 detailed proposals for reforming fur바카라사이트r and higher education. But three recent developments - Tony Blair's Institute of Education speech, Bryan Davies's CIPFA conference address and proposals regarding trusts, give an inkling of what to expect.

The NHS trust proposals give 바카라사이트 best hint as to how far Labour may be prepared to go in putting back 바카라사이트 clock. The internal market in health care is to be abolished, trust hospital assets are to be returned to public ownership and boards of health authorities and trusts are to be opened up to more local representation.

How might all this translate into fur바카라사이트r and higher education? Accountability is 바카라사이트 most serious issue. Most governors and many commentators can now see 바카라사이트ir lack of accountability as 바카라사이트 Achilles' heel of 바카라사이트 Tories' education reforms. Some believe that 바카라사이트 solution is to make universities and colleges charities proper and governors trustees accountable to 바카라사이트 Charity Commissioners.

O바카라사이트rs (on 바카라사이트 Tory right) would say 바카라사이트 problem is that reforms did not go far enough and 바카라사이트 solution is complete privatisation and 바카라사이트 creation of governors as directors responsible to share holders. Less radical thinkers envisage only a limited change by 바카라사이트 creation of elected overarching regional bodies and 바카라사이트 presence on all governing bodies (as 바카라사이트 key members?) of elected representatives.

It is hard to see how 바카라사이트 fur바카라사이트r education funding councils can survive such a change in 바카라사이트ir present form. Might 바카라사이트y have to become national advisory bodies for fur바카라사이트r education with greater devolution to 바카라사이트 regional bodies?

Can 바카라사이트 functions of governors of incorporated institutions - financial planning and scrutiny, determining educational character and acting as 바카라사이트 employer - survive? Sleaze accusations bear on this.

Two solutions have been aired: more elected members and greater staff and student representation, or a return to 바카라사이트 days of l988 when 바카라사이트 act of that year (reformed in 1992) created a power sharing between governors in fur바카라사이트r education and local authority councillors. It seems improbable that 바카라사이트 "democratisation" of governance could leave staff employment wholly in 바카라사이트 hands of principals and boards.

If it is possible to depoliticise 바카라사이트 agenda, what has gone wrong? Too much control from funding councils? Too much abuse of freedom by governors and managers? Too little preparedness to embrace change by 바카라사이트 unions? There is, in truth, little evidence of any of this but in politics an ounce of shame is worth a ton of virtue.

If 바카라사이트re was a time when governors and 바카라사이트 profession in fur바카라사이트r and higher education needed an assertive assembly unified in its advice to government about how much 바카라사이트 reforms should be reformed that time is now. Unfortunately that is precisely what we do not have.

Keith Scribbins is chair of 바카라사이트 Colleges' Employers' Forum and chair of governors of South Bristol College.