Bag's Rants

Raising the school leaving age is a distraction.

Seems there is a campaign doing the round that he raising of the school leaving age is similar to the introduction of conscription. Forced learning for an additional two years.

Another site equates this with Slavery. I posted a comment on that site with the question of what about the child slaves then? The ones up to 16. Just to get the ball rolling.

It does seem like a way for the state to continue its indoctrination and massage the employment figures but it will be almost impossible to implement. Sure, a lot will just carry on for another few years. They will leave with worthless certificates and they will know it. Others will go on and do a degree, providing their parents don't have one of course. Must not be greedy. The louts will go to school but all they will do is take up resources and still leave unable to read, write and do sums. The state will have massaged the figure but it will cost. Another two years will require secondary schools to extend by 40% if they all stayed on. Currently where I live they are looking at closing one of the three schools and converting the remaining two to super schools. Whatever that means. There is no way that they can increase the loading to 140% of three schools with two, no matter how super they are. So they are all pulling in opposite directions and don't have a clear way forward. What else is new?

But I wonder if this policy will actually get enacted. Any employer taking on a 16 to 18 year old will need to ensure he spends 280 hours a year being trained. Other than apprenticeships that means one day a week for two years in training. Only the really big companies will do either of these things. So the bulk of this will fall on schools in general. That will require funding and there does not seem to be much funding available.

I just don't see them being able to afford it unless they think that removing the NEETs from the welfare will make up the difference especially now that all the other 16 to 18s who would be working and paying tax now won't be and therefore the number needing paid for will increase.

So, the whole thing is a distraction.

There are other thing that demand money be spent. Prisons, our new Anti-Terror task forces, the NHS, ID cards, the list goes on. I just don't see this one happening. I suspect it's just a politician getting his name in the paper with a policy that will see him moved up while the policy is quietly discarded.

Although one thing does nag at me. Why two years? Surely one additional year would have been a better target. Increased education, less cost, less turmoil. All the pluses and all the negatives reduced. Two years doubles the lot.

posted by Bag @ 10:46 am