Speeches & Articles

Speech in House of Commons committee on the end of the Child Trust Fund

Source: Official Report, House of Commons General Committee (Draft Child Trust Funds (Amendment No. 3) Regulations), 20 July 2010

5.09 pm

Mr David Blunkett (Sheffield, Brightside and Hillsborough) (Lab): It was said earlier that I had campaigned vigorously for the development of the child trust fund. I was indeed responsible for initiating research by the Department of Education and Employment between 1997 and 2001, and encouraging my right hon. Friend the former Prime Minister to take up the cause of the child trust fund when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer. I did so for three reasons. 

First, the country’s greatest long-term challenge is the asset divide, which is growing by the day. In London and the south-eastern part of the country, the assets held by domestic owners include the value of houses that are, for many, passed on from grandparents, parents, uncles and aunts, which is equivalent to winning the lottery. In many other parts of the country, there is greater take-up of rented accommodation, so ownership values are much lower, and the asset values passed on are lower. It will be a matter of regret in years to come that the divide is still growing, because it affects not only the individual’s financial well-being but, as research has unequivocally proved, the individual’s contribution to society. 

Secondly, people who have an asset and, therefore, a stake in society, contribute more not only to society and to their own financial well-being but to reciprocity and mutuality—including people being more interested in education and fostering their children’s interest in it and in voting and participation in what is now being called the big society. There is a major spin-off, and there will be a major reversal from that spin-off if we cut the contribution to future asset accumulation. 

Thirdly, we all agree that there is a savings gap; the ratio in 2008 may have been neutral. Many, on all sides of politics, thought that we needed to do something to encourage savings. Nothing could be more radical than ensuring that every child had a savings fund from the moment they were born, so that they could inherit a trust fund at the age of 18, up to an average of £10,000, and could take it forward into their adult lives. 

I have a threefold criticism of what we did. First, we did not campaign hard enough to explain what we were doing and why. Secondly, we did not put enough into the trust funds to demonstrate the change in capital asset that would be held until the child reached adulthood at the age of 18. Thirdly, although I argued vehemently with the Treasury that funds should be ring-fenced, they would have none of it. I believed that they should have been ring-fenced so that they could be used only in the initial stages of adulthood for particular long-term gains, such as making a contribution towards starting a home, paying university fees or setting up in self-employment or similar work. 

Peter fell in love with himself at an early age. His tragedy is that he rarely heeds the wise advice he gives others

Published: Daily Mail, 13 July 2010

The astonishing secret about Peter Mandelson is finally out. The self-styled Prince of Darkness really does seem to have supernatural powers, judging by the release of his memoirs this week.

It’s barely two months since Labour’s undeniably disappointing defeat in the General Election.

Yet, in the eight weeks since, Peter has somehow found enough time to write his autobiography.

I knew he always prided himself on being a smooth operator, but this is remarkable.

There has not been a creative achievement of such rapidity since Handel wrote the Messiah in 24 days flat.

Peter could certainly have taught a thing or two to Lord Saville, who expended 12 years of toil over his report into Bloody Sunday.

I somehow doubt, however, that Tony Blair is lost in admiration at the formidable writing speed of his old ally.

Tony’s memoirs are due out in September. Their key selling point was that they were meant to represent the inside story of New Labour.

Now Tony has been trumped by Peter’s quick-fire effort.

I was at a friend’s 60th birthday party last weekend and one of the guests asked how many of us had read Alastair Campbell’s latest, unexpurgated volume of his diaries.

When most of us indicated that we had, she said, reflecting on the various altercations between the people at the top of the party: ‘How on earth did you lot manage to run a government at all?’

It was a good question; for throughout its 13 years of rule, Labour was hampered by those bitter quarrels, including the hostility between Gordon Brown and Tony Blair — and now Peter is once again returning to the fray.

Too many reminders of tribal disagreements through this summer and autumn will not do a great deal to help the task of rebuilding Labour’s fortunes.

The party is going through a crucial period at the moment, not only in coming to terms with the severe defeat at the polls, but also in choosing a new leader.

It should be a time for serious reflection, and learning the lessons of avoiding the internecine mistakes of the past.

The country is also crying out for a mature Opposition that will hold the new Coalition to account, particularly over the economy and cuts in public spending.

Forecast for BBC

Published: Times Letters, 6 July 2010

Sir,

At the end of The World This Weekend on Radio 4, a listener e-mailed in to say what a waste of money the BBC's radio weather forecast has become.

That morning, as I awoke in Cumbria, gale-force winds were blowing and a torrential rain, which grew worse during the day, was soaking the whole of the countryside. Shap Fell on the M6 was treacherous at midday — and, therefore, I was astonished to listen to the weather forecast just before 1pm and to hear some vague nonsense about the weather being "bad in the South West of Scotland" and the possibility of showers across the North of England, which "might" spread.

Perhaps the BBC could just get people to phone in regularly and save us all a great deal of money by scaling back the Met Office?

Rt Hon DAVID BLUNKETT MP

Learning valuable lessons from vocational education

Published: The Times (Public Sector supplement), 2 July 2010

I suppose I'm living proof of how to integrate vocational and academic education, work-based and classroom-based learning, and self-help with mutual help.

This is not solely because I undertook much of my study at evening classes between the ages of 16 and 22, when I went to the University of Sheffield to study politics, but because I benefited from what was then common practice in major industries: day release. I could attend college for one day (and one evening) provided I made a commitment myself. I went two evenings a week, taking A levels alongside the National Certificate in Business Studies.
 
The courses, particularly in economics and law, overlapped, enabling me to get a vocational qualification while taking A levels, which would stand me in good stead. I was doing the A levels one night a week for a year, so it's a miracle that I passed — although, when you love a subject (I achieved a B in economic history), you strive to succeed.

The National Certificate wasn't my sole foray into vocational training. I'd already taken a typing course to stage 3 (advanced) and Braille shorthand to 110 words a minute. Both were very beneficial, both in getting the job from which, for those two years, I obtained release from work, and in being able to progress to further study. In addition to my degree, I also undertook a Postgraduate Certificate in Education for teaching in a college of technology. Of course, the teaching certificate itself is a vocational qualification.

That is why, when I became Education and Employment Secretary in 1997, with responsibilities ranging from early years through further education and skills to universities, I was keen to try to combine commitment to high-quality academic scholarship with commitment to vocational learning, both on and off the job. We made some progress. The development of valuable, but too limited, learning out of school for teenagers who would benefit from it, through to the development of foundation degrees (work-based wherever possible), showed some modest improvement. The economic austerity programme makes returning to these issues even more important if we are to avoid the mistakes of the interwar years, when future skills were neglected on the ground of being "unaffordable". The truth is we cannot afford not to equip ourselves for the world of tomorrow.

If we are to progress at this time of stringency, there will be one absolute necessity: employer commitment. With limited government funding and the danger of the disillusionment that bedevilled disadvantaged areas in the 1980s — when often the mantra was "If there's no job to go to, why bother?" — we need that old commitment that allowed me to gain my qualifications, to enter university as a mature student and to succeed in later life.

I have always wanted for others any benefits that I have gained for myself. For me, education was the one benefit that transformed a potential life of underachievement and frustration into a life on the front line of decision-making and having the privilege of improving the lives of others.