Labour are truly bereft of original ideas, and they keep going back to the standard: ¬†spend more money to solve a problem.
As we’ve often said, because Labour make it so necessary to say it, if spending more money solved problems, we could spend ourselves into health, prosperity and zero unemployment.
We all know it doesn’t work that way.
On the face of it 2000 extra teachers sounds like a great idea, until you think it through. ¬†Forget the actual cost of it right now, that’s the least of the problems with this policy.
Where are these 2000 teachers coming from?
Teachers colleges turn out several hundred a year. ¬†So Cunliffe says old, tired, disillusioned teachers are going to be attracted to the profession. ¬† And he will be looking at immigrants.
Let’s break that down a little further. ¬†Teachers that have given up on teaching already will need to be “encouraged”, but the whole payment and reward system of the teaching profession is diametrically opposed to anyone being paid even once cent more than anyone else with the same qualifactions, experience and responsibilities.
So, they won’t be getting any more money. ¬†It flies against everything the teachers unions stand for. ¬†Equality in everything, and all that.
So if you aren’t going to be able to pay or reward these teachers for coming back, what form will Labour incentives take?
These teachers¬†coming back are disillusioned or retired. How are they going to hit the ground running with iPads, chromebooks, WiFi Internet?
These teachers¬†coming back are disillusioned or retired. How are their colleagues going to accept them? ¬†How would you like to be perceived as a burnt-out, disillusioned, retired teacher that only came back for whatever Labour is going to use to incentivise them?
How are your colleagues going to treat you, knowing you walked away from them in the past? ¬†You rejected the profession then, what’s changed? ¬†A Labour bribe?
Read more »