My First Four Weeks on LBC

I’ve now been presenting my LBC show every weeknight for four weeks. I’m doing this in addition to my normal day job, which is running a publishing company, so you can imagine it’s not an easy schedule to juggle. But I love every minute of it.

Most of the show is phone in based, and I have to say I have been pleasantly surprised by the quality of the calls which come in from the great British public. People imagine that phone in shows are mainly populated by people who want to rant on about immigration or some other controversial subject. Not a bit of it. Some of our best shows have taken calls from women who’ve been through IVF treatments, had abortions, or are struggling to juggle their job and looking after their children. The LBC producers tell me people open up to me because I have a calm, reassuring voice and don't interrupt all the time, so people know they will be able to have their say.

I never ceased to be amazed by the subjects which provoke phone calls from listeners. With an audience of close on half a million you know that whatever subject you’re discussing will touch a nerve with someone. I have to say I love it, and when I took two nights off this week I really missed talking to my audience. And of course when any radio presenter takes time off, there’s always this fear that the person covering for you will turn out to be better than you! And I have to say Mehdi Hasan was excellent. I'd better watch out!

One of the best things about presenting a show in the timeslot I have (7-10pm every weeknight) is that no other radio station is doing politics at that time, although not all the show is political. But the worst thing is that I now have absolutely no social life at all during the week - no dinners, no parties, no receptions, no booklaunches. Between now and Christmas I have only two more nights off - hosting Ann Widdecombe in Clacton on November 29th (!) and one other. Still, at least I have a good excuse not to go to any Christmas parties...

I do realise that the majority of you may well have no interest in my LBC Show, but I know many of you listen from the calls, texts and emails. I talk about it on the blog from time to time because it is now a major part of what I do, and this is, after all, a diary.

* This is an amended version of a piece I wrote for my EDP column today.

Review: Cliff Richard's 'Bold as Brass' Concert

Going to see one of your musical heroes in concert is an experience always fraught with danger. Why? Because frankly, few people in the audience are ever interested in hearing new songs – all they want to hear are the big hits. And so when I went to see Sir Cliff Richard’s 70th birthday concert at the Royal Albert Hall on Wednesday, it was with a feeling of some trepidation. The concert was titled ‘Bold as Brass’ and we knew in advance that Cliff would be accompanied by the big band sound of the Orchestra de Ville.

It really was a concert of two halves – the first replete with some of Cliff’s more well known hits like Devil Woman and The Day I Met Marie. Each song had a very different arrangement to the original, with All my Love and the Twelfth of Never being particular highlights. But the piece de resistance was, as usual, Miss You Nights, which remains my favourite song of all time by any artist. When this was released as a single back in 1975 it struggled to get to number 15 in the charts, yet no Cliff concert would be complete without it. It’s one of those ballads that make the hairs on the back of your neck stand up.

Well, so far, so good. We all enjoyed the first half. Sadly the same could not be said for the second which consisted entirely of big band renditions of songs totally unfamiliar to the audience. In fact, Cliff sang every single song on his new Bold as Brass album, and frankly I didn’t really enjoy one of them. Judging by the tepid applause from the rest of the audience, nor did they. My partner described his rendition of a couple of Cole Porter numbers as “murdering” them. It was Harry Connick Junior mixed in with Frank Sinatra – or at least it was supposed to be.

The trouble is, Cliff’s voice isn’t suited to this kind of music. It’s too mellow. It hasn’t got an edge. Don’t get me wrong, even at 70 he can still belt them out and his voice certainly hasn’t deteriorated with age, but he’s just not suited to this type of music. The only saving grace was that right at the end he gave us We Don’t Talk Anymore. Everyone loved it, but the fact that there was no encore told its own story. The audience upped and left as soon as We Don’t Talk Anymore was over.

And I was left thinking that it was very odd to go to a Cliff Richard concert when he didn’t even sing Move It or Living Doll.

* This first appeared in my EDP column this morning.

Katharie Birbalsingh "Resigns" Her Teaching Job.

Remember the teacher who stole the show at the Conservative Party Conference? Her name was Katharine Birbalsingh.

She was suspended from her job for having spoken at the conference by the same head teacher who played host to Tony Blair's 2001 election launch announcement. She was later reinstated, but this morning it has emerged that she has resigned her post - or should I say more likely been resigned from her post.

Archibishop Cranmer has the STORY.

Please watch the video above if you didn't see her speech. The woman is an inspiration and she highlights exactly what is wrong with our education system. ANd now she is lost to it. The leftist educational establishment wins again.

Is It Now Time to Ban Strikes in the Emergency Services?

There are some strikes where even the most diehard Tory can see that the union has got a point. But in the London firefighters dispute it is completely baffling as to why 79% of these brave men and women have voted to walk out on October 23 and November 1.

Ostensibly the dispute is all about working hours. Currently they work a 15 hour night shift and a 9 hour day shift. The employers want to change that to two 12 hour shifts, with the same amount of down time. They have been trying to get the FBU to agree to this for five years but eventually have lost patience and decided enough is enough. So there are no job losses, no station closures, no increase in working hours and the same four days on two days off shift pattern.

Last night on my LBC show we had quite a few firefighters phone in, several who had voted against strike action, but more who had. The conversations were very good natured and constructive, but the one thing I noted was that every one of them had a different reason for striking. Hardly any cited the reason given on the strike ballot paper.

Brian Coleman is the chairman of the London Fire Authority. He's just been on Ken Livingstone's LBC show giving a cast iron guarantee that there will be no night time station closures, which is one of the reasons given for strike action. He's said they will accept a 13-11 hour shift pattern rather than 12 and 12, but the unions won't accept this without a £10,000 payout per firefighter.

I think two issues come out of this. Firstly, there should now be a clamour for the Coalition government to introduce legislation to ban strikes in the emergency services. Under the International Labour Organisation agreement, convention 87, any government is entitled to do that. And the TUC is signed up to this too, I believe. At the very least there should be compulsory arbitration in disputes which affect the emergency services. I have always been a fan of so-called 'pendulum arbitration' where an arbitrator doesn't recommend a wishy-washy compromise but instead either has to accept one side's case or the other. That means that both the employers and the unions are likely to be rather more cautious in what they demand or offer right from the start.

Secondly, London will be put at risk on October 23 and November 1. Let's just hope we don't have a major incident on either of those two days, because there will only be 27 fire appliances available for deployment, rather than the 165 on a normal day. I have little doubt that if the worst happened, firefighters would indeed turn up at their stations, but I was astonished to hear FBU general secretary Matt Wrack say yesterday that they would continue the strike in those circumstances. He clearly doesn't know his members very well.

Lions led by donkeys. Just like the RMT.

The Daley (Half) Dozen: Friday

1. Ed Staite is feeling sorry for the new intake of MPs.
2. Mark Wallace looks at what exactly fairness is.
3. Political Scrapbook reports that a Labour activist dressed as poo.
4. Chris Mills responds to Nick Clegg's tuition fees letter.
5. Public Bar Wisdom has a hilarious tale of his visit to the local cafe.
6. And the Blog Action Day topic this year is Water.

On my LBC Show Tonight From 7pm...

On my LBC show tonight from 7...

7.10pm As London firefighters go on strike I'm asking should we ban strikes in the emergency services, and what would happen if there was a major terror incident during the strike?

8pm Have you been gazundered? And I want to hear from you if you're a victim of soaring rents in the London property market.

9pm LBC Gadget Hour with LBC Gadget Guru Darren. Phone in all your gadget related questions.

You can listen to LBC on 97.3 FM in Greater London, DAB Radio in the Midlands, parts of the North, Glasgow & Edinburgh, Sky Channel 0124, Virgin Media Channel 973 or stream live at lbc.co.uk

To take part in the programme call 0845 60 60 973, text 84850, Email iain AT lbc DOT co DOT uk or tweet @lbc973

If you miss the programme and want to download it as a podcast (minus the ads!) click HERE. There is a £2 monthly charge but you have access to the entire LBC archive and schedule.

Quote of the Day

"Some quangos do come to the end of their lives and you have to create other quangos."

Tessa Jowell last night on Question Time

Poor Gordon

Last night as I was walking down the famous staircase in Downing Street, the one with the pictures of all former Prime Ministers, I wondered if they had already hung a picture of Gordon Brown. So I whizzed up the staircase again to have a look. As I got back to the top I saw one of the permanent Downing Street staff looking at me rather quizzically.

"I was just seeing if there was a picture of Gordon Brown," I explained. "No, he hasn't chosen his picture yet," explained the staff member. "Well, I expect that will take him at least two years," I joked, thinking of his reputation for indecision. "I hope he takes much longer than that..." came the instant reply.

I took that to indicate there wasn't a lot of love for Mr Brown among the permanent staff at Number Ten. I almost felt sorry for him. Almost.

The Daley Dozen: Thursday

1. Toby Young looks at bullying in state schools.
2. Rob Carr can't come up with a decent criticism of the QUANGO bonfire.
3. The Tap wants to terminate envy.
4. David Nuttall explains how he voted in the AV referendum bill.
5. Stephen Hoffman shows us how to solve a problem like Libel Law.
6. Giles McNeill reports on George Osbourne's two new assets.
7. Crossfire explains exactly what the Big Society is all about.
8. CityUnslicker thinks there is still time to get a fixed rate mortage.
9. Anthony Painter wants a big state, not a big society.
10. Peter Black AM on the future of S4C.
11. Mabinogogiblog thinks the media can't handle reason.
12. Benedict Brogan highlights another example of EU waste.

(Second) Quote of the Day

"Sadly I have to accept that tonight

the Lady is not for returning."

Lady Thatcher, explaining that due to illness she was unable to attend tonight's party in her honour at Number Ten Downing Street.

Just Askin'...

Could someone explain why the Labour Party has withdrawn the whip from Denis MacShane, and at the same time promoted Phil Woolas to a frontbench post?

Just askin'.

MacShane has not been arrested. He has been charged with nothing, and frankly I doubt he ever will be. Yet Woolas is the first MP in decades to be up before an Election Court. Neither have been found guilty, and may never be, but it does seem that the Labour Party is applying some very odd rules of natural justice here.

Reasons for an English Parliament: No 94

I see Ming Campbell and Charles Kennedy are leading the LibDem rebellion on tuition fees. Er, they represent Scottish constituencies, which are unaffected by any change. What the hell has it got to do with them?

English Parliament, anyone?

Quote of the Day

"He's going to help me terminate the budget deficit."

David Cameron welcoming Arnold Schwarzenegger to 10 Downing Street

Paying for Local Government

A few days ago we got a magazine from Kent County Council called Around Kent. Presumably it has been delivered to every house in the county. It contained a lot of jolly useful information, all of which could have been available on the council's website, thus saving tens of thousands of pounds in production costs. It did contain two adverts - from Saga and Manston Airport - but I doubt whether they covered a quarter of the printing costs. Anyway, that whinge isn't really my main point.

The document gave figures for the amounts of money KCC spent on different things last year. Here's the breakdown...

£982 million - schools
£609 million - social care for families and children
£461 million - adult social care
£361 million - everything else inc transport, libraries, museums, env protection, waste disposal & youth services

So, KCC has a total budget of nearly £2.5 billion for a population of 1.4 million. 75% of the money comes from centrall government out of central taxation.

Surely if localism is to mean anything, that ratio has got to change. But it will be a brave politician who opens the hornet's nest of local government finance.

One other point. More than two thirds of the entire KCC budget is spent on children related services. I must admit that's a figure I hadn't been aware of. Indeed, from the breakdown provided, only about 10% of the budget is spent on services for people who don't have children in state education or relations in social care.

I think these figures goes a long way to explaining why much of the electorate feels very remote from local government sometimes.

UKIP Rival Scuppers Farage Question Time Appearance

Some political parties really don't know how to help themselves do they? Nigel Farage was invited to go on Question Time tonight and cancelled an important fund raising dinner to do so, figuring that an appearance on a programme with an audience of several million would do more for UKIP than a fundraising dinner.

But of course there's a UKIP leadership election going on at the moment, so one of his rival candidates took it upon himself to complain to the producers of Question Time, who instantly caved in and withdrew Farage's invitation to appear.

So in the week in which next year's EU budget was approved, UKIP now won't have any representation on Question Time tonight.

Rats in a sack. If they don't elect Farage we'll know they've lost what remaining marbles they have.

Enough Already!

Earlier today I got a bit of flak on Twitter for suggesting that watching the rolling coverage of the Chilean miner rescue had turned into a bore-a-thon and was akin to watching paint dry. And yet the two 24 hour news channels persist in pretending that there was no other news today. Viewers would have apparently not known that Ed Miliband had his first outing at PMQs today. Or that Lady Thatcher celebrated her 85th birthday in Downing Street. Because all we got was repetitive pictures of the emerging miners. Now don't get me wrong, it is a fantastic story and like everyone else I am delighted they have been rescued. But to fill 24 hours of two news channels with this story to the exclusion of everything else is surely worth a quizzical question or two.

I suppose both channels might have interrupted their coverage to bring us other news, but if they did I certainly wasn't watching at the time. Perhaps they know from their audience reaction that most people were happy for them to stay with the story and it may be the case that I am totally out of tune with the popular mood, but when I came back from my evening out wanting to get a roundup of the days news. both channels failed me.

Luckily Radios 4, 5 and LBC didn't follow suit and managed to maintain normal schedules. Yes, Chile was the lead story, and so it should have been, but they also covered other stories in the news too. So should the BBC News Channel and Sky have done.

What do you think?

The Daley Dozen: Wednesday

1. Lib Dem Voice has the letter Nick Clegg sent to his MPs over tutition fees.
2. Burning our Money thinks the Browne Report is spot on.
3. Guy Walters asks have the Germans got over Hitler?
4. Not a Sheep hopes for child free planes.
5. Guy the Mac thinks Philip Green drew the wrong conclusions.
6. Edwin Moore reports on the Sheridan trial.
7. Matthew Carn wants to know who killed Linda Norgrove.
8. Mehdi Hasan has some advice for Ed Miliband.
9. Dave Hill doesn't think Boris will make much of a difference.
10. James Cousins wants us to act more positive.
11. John Redwood shows us how to strengthen the economy.
12. Harry's Place introduces a new way to get your Middle Eastern news.

Guess Who I'm Seeing Tonight?

No LBC tonight. Ages ago I had booked to see Cliff Richard at the Albert Hall so I am leaving my programme in the more than capable hands of Mehdi Hasan.

Grant, bless him, had only ever heard two Cliff songs, so I have just introduced him to the delights of Miss You Nights. He's now sobbing his eyes out.

Truly, though, it is my favourite song of all time.

Seriously.

I mean it.

Exposing the Great Climate Change Fraud?

I linked to this in the Daley Dozen a few days ago, but having seen it again on James Delingpole's excellent blog, I thought it worth highlighting again here. Harold Lewis is Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of California, Santa Barbara. Here is his letter of resignation to Curtis G. Callan Jr, Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society. It is a brilliant exposure of the way climate change fanatics think they can win an argument, but then spectacularly fail.

Dear Curt,

When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago
it was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood (a
threat against which Dwight Eisenhower warned a half-century ago). Indeed, the
choice of physics as a profession was then a guarantor of a life of poverty and
abstinence—it was World War II that changed all that. The prospect of worldly
gain drove few physicists. As recently as thirty-five years ago, when I chaired
the first APS study of a contentious social/scientific issue, The Reactor Safety
Study, though there were zealots aplenty on the outside there was no hint of
inordinate pressure on us as physicists.

We were therefore able to produce what I believe was and is an honest appraisal of the situation at that time. We were further enabled by the presence of an oversight committee consisting of Pief Panofsky, Vicki Weisskopf, and Hans Bethe, all towering
physicists beyond reproach. I was proud of what we did in a charged atmosphere.
In the end the oversight committee, in its report to the APS President, noted
the complete independence in which we did the job, and predicted that the report
would be attacked from both sides. What greater tribute could there be?

How different it is now. The giants no longer walk the earth, and the
money flood has become the raison d’être of much physics research, the vital
sustenance of much more, and it provides the support for untold numbers of
professional jobs. For reasons that will soon become clear my former pride at
being an APS Fellow all these years has been turned into shame, and I am forced,
with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society.

It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions
of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried
APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful
pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who
has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the
ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford’s book organizes the facts
very well.) I don’t believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read
that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of
the word scientist.

So what has the APS, as an organization, done in the face of this challenge? It has accepted the corruption as the norm, and gone along with it. For example:

1. About a year ago a few of us sent an e-mail on the subject to a fraction of the membership. APS ignored the issues, but the then President immediately launched a hostile investigation of where we got the e-mail addresses. In its better days, APS used to encourage discussion of important issues, and indeed the Constitution cites that as its principal purpose. No more. Everything that has been done in the last year has been designed to silence debate

2. The appallingly tendentious APS statement on Climate Change was apparently written in a hurry by a few people over lunch, and is certainly not representative of the talents of APS members as I have long known them. So a few of us petitioned the Council to reconsider it. One of the outstanding marks of (in)distinction in the Statement was the poison word incontrovertible, which describes few items in physics, certainly not this one. In response APS appointed a secret committee that never met, never troubled to speak to any skeptics, yet endorsed the Statement in its entirety. (They did admit that the tone was a bit strong, but amazingly kept the poison word incontrovertible to describe the evidence, a position supported by no one.) In the end, the Council kept the original statement, word for word, but approved a far longer “explanatory” screed, admitting that there were uncertainties, but brushing them aside to give blanket approval to the original. The original
Statement, which still stands as the APS position, also contains what I consider
pompous and asinine advice to all world governments, as if the APS were master
of the universe. It is not, and I am embarrassed that our leaders seem to think
it is. This is not fun and games, these are serious matters involving vast
fractions of our national substance, and the reputation of the Society as a
scientific society is at stake.

3. In the interim the ClimateGate scandal broke into the news, and the machinations of the principal alarmists were revealed to the world. It was a fraud on a scale I have never seen, and I lack the words to describe its enormity. Effect on the APS position: none. None at all. This is not science; other forces are at work.

4. So a few of us tried to bring science into the act (that is, after all, the alleged and
historic purpose of APS), and collected the necessary 200+ signatures to bring
to the Council a proposal for a Topical Group on Climate Science, thinking that
open discussion of the scientific issues, in the best tradition of physics,
would be beneficial to all, and also a contribution to the nation. I might note
that it was not easy to collect the signatures, since you denied us the use of
the APS membership list. We conformed in every way with the requirements of the
APS Constitution, and described in great detail what we had in mind—simply to
bring the subject into the open.<>

As James Delingpole points out, Harold Lewis is Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara, former Chairman; Former member Defense Science Board, chmn of Technology panel; Chairman DSB study on Nuclear Winter; Former member Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Former member, President’s Nuclear Safety Oversight Committee; Chairman APS study on Nuclear Reactor Safety Chairman Risk Assessment Review Group; Co-founder and former Chairman of JASON; Former member USAF Scientific Advisory Board; Served in US Navy in WW II; books: Technological Risk (about, technological risk) and Why Flip a Coin (about decision making). Anthony Watts describes Prfoessor Lewis's letter in these terms...

This is an important moment in science history. I would describe it as a letter
on the scale of Martin Luther, nailing his 95 theses to the Wittenburg church door. It is worthy of repeating this letter in entirety on every blog that discusses science.

Hear hear to that.

Ed Miliband's Big Day

It's squeaky bum time for Ed Miliband this morning. He knows that his performance at his first PMQs this lunchtime will play a very big part in defining his future as Labour leader. If he fluffs a line or makes any kind of error Westminster watchers wil be merciless in their scorn. What he needs is a "You were the future once" moment. Miliband can expect to be smothered with kindness from Cameron initially, but that will soon change.

Ed Miliband's main problem is that he is so closely associated with the Brown regime. He even wrote the last Labour manifesto, and he knows that he will constantly be reminded of that fact. I would bet a lot of money that it will be raised by David Cameron today, and Miliband needs to have a response ready.

He has two other problems - what subjects to raise during his six questions, and what tone to adopt. Because the tone he sets today will play a large part in defining how he is reviewed by the punditerati.

Roll on 12 o'clock. At least Sky and the BBC might break away from this Chilean bore-a-thon. Yes, it's great that the miners are being rescued, but frankly, when you've seen one capsule emerge, you don't need to see it another 32 times.

Thatcher's Big Society (And Big Birthday)

I have recently been trawling through some Margaret Thatcher speeches and quotes, and came across this gem from the 1986 Conservative Women's Conference:

“[The Big Society] is one in which people do not leave it to the person next door to do the job.
It is one in which people help each other.
Where parents put their children first.
Friends look out for the neighbours, families for their elderly members.
That is the starting point for care and support—the unsung efforts of millions of individuals, the selfless work of thousands upon thousands of volunteers.
It is their spirit that helps to bind our society together.
Caring isn't measured by what you say:
It's expressed by what you do.”

Now doesn't that perfectly sum up exactly what the Big Society is all about; helping out your neighbours, looking after your friends and family and getting involved in your community. The only difference is Thatcher used the term "responsible society", which I think comes across a lot better than the "Big Society".

I wonder if Cameron's "Big Society" is in fact Thatcher's "Responsible Society"?

Oh, and very many happy returns to Margaret Thatcher on her 85th birthday. She'll be celebrating it this afternoon at Downing Street. The natural order of things has returned :)

The Daley Dozen: Tuesday

1. Better Nation asks is Scotland ready for cuts?
2. Tim Roll Pickering doesn't think the student vote exists.
3. Luke Akehurst reckons Lib Dem MP's will suffer from the right of recall.
4. Arden Forester remembers fond memories of Claire Rayner.
5. Hopi Sen analyses the future of higher education in the UK.
6. Clem says bollocks to Alan Johnson's critics.
7. Donal Blaney offers an even more radical change in university funding.
8. Stumbling and Mumbling is happy to be single.
9. Crooked Timber looks forward to Amazon's new idea.
10. Daniel Hannan says no to an increase in the EU budget.
11. His Grace asks whether you are British or English?
12. Next Left reports that Liam "no money left" Byrne and Peter "Wales is richer than Rwanda" Hain are to head to up Labour Party policy.

Quote of the Day

“Tell David Cameron that if he screws up my beloved NHS I’ll come back and bloody haunt him.”

Agony Aunt Claire Rayner's last words

On My LBC Show Tonight From 7pm...

On my LBC show tonight from 7...

7.10pm Should we show kids more "tough love" and cut benefits for poorer familes instead of cutting children's centres? Frank Field thinks so...

8pm Should the smoking ban be relaxed? Guests: David Nuttall MP & Deborah Arnott from ASH

9pm LBC Medical Hour with Dr Rob Hicks - call in with your medical problems

You can listen to LBC on 97.3 FM in Greater London, DAB Radio in the Midlands, parts of the North, Glasgow & Edinburgh, Sky Channel 0124, Virgin Media Channel 973 or stream live at lbc.co.uk

To take part in the programme call 0845 60 60 973, text 84850, Email iain AT lbc DOT co DOT uk or tweet @lbc973

If you miss the programme and want to download it as a podcast (minus the ads!) click HERE. There is a £2 monthly charge but you have access to the entire LBC archive and schedule.

Tory MP Tables Bill to Repeal the Smoking Ban

In this short video, Conservative MP David Nuttall explains why he's tabling a 10 Minute Rule Bill aimed at repealing the smoking ban.

My Reservations About Higher Tutition Fees

Today, Lord Browne publishes his controversial report into the future funding of our universities. And it looks like students are going to have to pay much more to fund their university education. Before we look at what he says, let’s set the debate into some historical context.

Remember when Neil Kinnock said he was the first Kinnock in a thousand generations to go to university? Well, I know what he meant because I was the first in my family to go too. But I shouldn’t have been. My mother, who went to school in the 1940s should have gone, and had she grown up nowadays she would have. She had the academic ability, but in those days universities really were the preserve of the very few. But in the 1960s a whole host of new universities were created and they opened up higher education to a whole new generation. For the first time, it wasn’t just the academically brilliant or the very rich who got places at university, it was people from normal backgrounds too.

But you still had to be part of an elite even if the wealth of your family ceased to matter. I went to the University of East Anglia, or university of easy access as it became known. I started my degree in 1980. I was on a full student grant. Tuition fees and student loans were only a gleam in Sir Keith Joseph’s eye in those days. So thirty years ago most students had a free university education, funded entirely by the taxpayer. Sounds good doesn’t it? Well, to those of us who had it, it was, but only 14% of 18 year olds went to university.

Since then polytechnics have turned themselves into full universities, student loans were introduced, and then Tony Blair introduced tuition fees too. Student loans I could just about understand – why should the taxpayer fund student drinking binges? But I always felt that tuition fees were one step too far – that they would put off students from poorer backgrounds from going to university and that higher education would become the preserve of the rich. Instead, though, applications went through the roof and we’ve now got to a point where 43% of 18 year olds go to university. Sounds good, doesn’t it? Except that it isn’t quite that simple.
Labour set an arbitrary target of 50% of 18 year olds should go to university. Why not 60, or even 70? The trouble is that those who don’t get to university are made to feel as if they’ve failed in life. They haven’t at all – it’s just that they may not be academically gifted. In other countries they would look to vocational training as an alternative, But that’s all but disappeared in this country.

And even worse than that, at some universities there is a 25% drop out rate in the first year. Again, needlessly, many 18 year olds feel a failure when it’s not their fault. They should never have been put in that position in the first place.

So, to return to the Brown Review. It has rejected a graduate tax but instead proposes that universities should be able to charge higher rates of tuition fees and that well off students should pay a higher rate of interest on their fees and loans than those who end up with poorer paid jobs.
It is amusing to see Labour politicians rail against this, when most of them voted for the introduction of tuition fees, even though it was not in their manifesto. I also can't help but find the twitchings of the LibDems on this subject somewhat hilarious to observe.

But the fact is that if we wish to keep higher education open to the masses, universities need to increase their income. With an ever increasing number of students wanting university places, what alternative is there? I do fear there will be a growing disparity between the top universities and the others, but in some ways it was ever thus. The difference is that it won't be your social class which stops you going to Oxbridge, it will be the size of your (or your parents' wallet).

We have made many mistakes in our higher education policy. Turning polytechnics into universities was one. Introducing a 50% target rate was another. It was always inevitable that tuition fees would have to rise and when Labour introduced the legislation they knew it too, but would never admit it.

I just hope that it won't put off academically gifted people from poorer backgrounds from going to good universities. But I fear it may.

UPDATE: John Rentoul complains that I don't say what I would do instead. He's right. I don't. Why should I? I was against them in the first place as I felt that had they been around in 1980 they would have deterred me from going to university. They clearly haven't deterred a lot of other people though, as we can see from the ever increasing number of people applying for places. So I may have reservations about these current proposals, but I am not sure I see any alternative.