Quantum physics and how the ‘coalition agreement’ works
“Hi, Jon, I’m Madbiscuit (or some such), I’m one of your followers, can I have a photo with you?” I was on a train headed for Oxford. She was, young, attractive, and of perhaps South Asian ethnicity. There was a titter locally in the carriage, she got her photo, gave me a peck on the cheek, and was on her way.
I was sitting opposite a Chinese woman, with whom thus far I had had no conversation. But the Twitter encounter provoked her to question me: “Are you a singer?”
“No” I exclaimed, “I work on the news”.
She laughed, we both laughed.
To be honest, I don’t meet many of my “followers” on Twitter… in fact I don’t think I have ever been accosted by one before. I am always slightly relieved to find myself engaging with someone who hasn’t a clue what I do. So I asked the Chinese woman what she did. “I am a quantum physicist,” she said. Now there’s a conversation stopper if ever there was one. Physics? I didn’t even get an O’level in it, I had been spared going on with the subject for my own protection. But the conversation did not stop. Here was this small young woman, with an infectious sense of humour and a passion for her subject.
She had done her first degree in China and come to Oxford for her PhD. Now she was a full fledged postdoctoral researcher working in a team of twenty equally high powered former students, working on a major research project.
She lost me a bit on what it was, save that the team has in some way managed to organically liquify a naturally occurring metal, and in so doing produced a bankable energy source that could transform battery life and energy generation across the world. It is in the very final stages and will be in production within perhaps two or three years.
In her spare time my new Chinese friend organises fashion shows. “Crumbs!” I thought. And I thought too how enriching to our economy her presence in Oxford is. And then I thought about the immigration caps, and the home secretary’s promise to reduce annual “immigration” to the “tens of thousands” a year, and the impact it is already having on Indian and Chinese students trying to get visas to come and study here and potentially ‘enrich our economy’.
The next day I had the coincidental good fortune to have a meal with a Coalition Minister. I raised my train story with the politician. The Minister said very baldly and very loudly that the “reduction to the tens of thousands (articulated by Theresa May only days ago in Parliament) is certainly Conservative policy, but it is not Coalition policy”. This power wielding politician is a Conservative, but spoke as an interestingly Coalitional individual.
In one weekend I have encountered the ‘visa crisis’ that the desire to “bare down on immigration” is reportedly provoking. But I also learned much more about how the coalition works. The politician told me that the manifestos of both Coalition Parties have to be “left at the Ministerial office door”. Further, that the “Coalition Agreement” is the guiding star of Government policy. Maybe it is having an impact on the NHS reform proposals too.
Fascinating. I must take more train journeys, meet more “followers”, and try to get along to one of the young Chinese woman’s fashion shows. The quantum physics? Mmm, I think I may have to leave that at the door.
Related posts:
- Strangers on a train: part two
- A fit of 'peak' on the 05.58 from Paddington
- Was this when coalition love first bloomed?
- Spanner in works of search and rescue sell-off
- Strangers on a train: part one
There are 37 comments on this post
My immediate thought , was the “STING”.Our Jon set up to break immigration rules,or about to join the “Woods”,”Clarkson” club
Instead an insight as to why AV needs to be left in the gutter,and the country get back to Manifesto policies instead of compromise that leaves the country almost rudderless.and impotent.
You either have policies to sort out the mess created and left by Labour or you have policies that compromise the solution ,but maintain the weak power of a coalition
The country may be rudderless but for some tastes it is far too potent. You only have to look at the proposed NHS changes – the biggest health bill since the introduction of the NHS – to realise how potent they are trying to be.
And the reference to AV is a little bit of a non sequitor because the coalition was produced by FPTP.
I believe you need to read your legal law books Saltaire
Though this coalition came about as a result of FPTP and because Cameron was afeard to lead a minority government,it clearly shows what coalitions will be like in the future.AV will provide such coalitions for ever more and probably with more diverse parties as part of them,so the term “non sequitor” is completely inappropriate
I too only achieved 8% for remebering Ohm’s Law, but enjoyed playing with a magnet and fe filings and enthusiastically watched lights bent through prisms, but alas! I was only an artisic, musical female with lower middle class parents..so was disuaded from this line.
It is good that this Chinese lady is allowed to enrich our society but, and I have very large reservations ,it smacks of elitism which offends my sensibilities.Only the special people allowed through eh?
We already have a strong heritage of multiculture and I would prefer promoting ‘British’ with the talent we have , should it ever be allowed to develop with University fees etc.
Margaret, talent isn’t stifled by university fees,though ambition might be.Yet it would only be a transitory ambition so stifled.
I am not a multiculturist of the Labour mode,where they believed by letting anyone in anyone and everyone from different ethnicities would perpetuate their vote.
We are already overpopulated with different ethnicities and one only has to see the rise of hate groups like the BNP to see the probable consequences of a further influx of immigrants,with the costly pandering to ethnicity ,diversity and political correctness. Every public sector missive written in about 20 different languages when there should only be one and that is English.
By all means let ladies like Jon’s Chinese lady,into our major universities , as long as they pay the fees, and let them help in future beneficial projects, but it would be better were we to sort out our own education system where ALL students leave school educated , instead of so many turning out mindless illiterate thugs.
In my experience much talent has been stifled and lost, by a tarbrush assertion and a way of thinking that states if a person has talent then it will show anyway. Not so, our generation has lived through class wars, education wars , a disparity in the availability of ready money , categorisation of school children without the a potential for academic flexibility, exam wars, streamlining the three R’s at the loss of creative thinking and a failure to allow the dynamic pursuit of a learners own desires.
My personal experience as a teenager was also thus. I, as a school girl taught music theory in breaks to other students, achieved 98 % in exams.When I came out with flying colours the course was stopped and all credit given to the school of music. This is typical of the intellectual and creative plagiarism which surrounds learning and subsequent redirection of credit to others. That is an enthusiam flattener. All need encouragement to develop.
Margaret you almost answer your own criticism.It isn’t university fees that stifle opportunity or ambition .It was the left wing attempt in the late 60′s 70′s to dumb down education to prove all could be equal in despondency and failure.Look at the state of our education now , where firms say they can not find enough educated workers from within.Like every other institution touched by the left , we have chronic failure.That goes for our health service too , held back by ethnicity, diversity, political correctness and union control.
The old central control, interfering taking away competition,dumbing down to the lowest common denominator and calling it success.That is the story of the last thirteen years and there are so many wishing to continue it that we might just as well become the third world country they appear to aspire to
Adrian just one word : etcetera
Jon
I think this might be a great time for C4News to conduct a census of what research is happening in our universities so that we have a solid base to compare with when the university fees and immigration caps have had their effect.
Week by week Factcheck exposes how much governments rely on misleading truths and manipulated statistics to tell us how great they are. We rely even more than ever on the fourth estate to find out the truth.
Also seconded!
Instead of focusing on funding, we should be looking at outcomes: what exactly happens to the research findings, and how do we benefit materially or culturally? Comparing spending levels isn’t going to give you a meaningful statistic.
Instead of arguing over whether or not things should be cut, failed polices should be routinely cut, without embarassment. E.g, the war on drugs, where we spend millions in persuit of an inarguably good cause but get an outcome of more drug addicts and rich untouchable criminals. Or the rules which see social security claimants penalised for living with a partner which have the outcome of harming childens’ standard of living, life chances and happiness.
Has the massive expansion of uni education worked? That is what we should be arguing about – cutting or not cutting is a blind alley which politicians want to dumb the debate too – its emotional, irrational and sets us off fighting without looking at facts.
And the 4th estate makes it worse by focusing on the story presented by politicns in persuit of ‘neutrality’.
And also seconded.
Though I’d also ask for a tracker of not just student numbers but for how female students numbers are being affected. (There is still no hope of humanities seeing any public money, right?)
Tom i totally agree.Without the drastic needs for cuts caused by the excesses and mismanagement of the last thirteen years,there was a case anyway for serious cuts in the public sector and even the NHS ,and Police,caused by the rise in bureaucracy and political correctness.
The problem is that unfortunately many of the cuts are being made in front line services and not that bloated bureaucracy,but i am afraid that the left only see it as a tory scheme to protect the rich.The proof of that is in the poll ratings,where Labour is at 40% despite having been the architects of the problem.
At the same time i believe the coalition are also being hypocritical by still fighting in Afghanistan,opening up a new front in Libya and drastically cutting the armed forces.At the same time pouring aid into Pakistan.
I never saw the left calling for census or checks on the University spending whilst Labour were encouraging youngsters to go to University and study for useless,meaningless degree courses,nor on the drop out rate and waste.They still believe the way forward is to borrow more and more
Off topic: Congratulations.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/apr/04/zac-goldsmith-channel-4-news-complaint
Seconded!
@margaret:
As a research group leader in the UK I can assure you that I would dearly love to recruit and foster indigenous talent. However, we get very very few UK applicants for post doctoral positions and, with just a few exceptions, UK applicants cannot hold a candle to those educated abroad. Without imported expertise our science base would be in tatters.
I completely agree! I’m also a research group leader (as well as an EU immigrant), and the quota limiting the number of overseas employees imposed upon University departments makes recruiting for post doctoral positions extremely difficult. You can’t just ask the local job centre to supply you with a qualified quantum physicist or molecular biologist.
In addition to this, however, what worries me more and more is how all these new government initiatives, in addition to the tone of the discussions on immigration dominating the media for some time now, is beginning to change attitudes. I know Britain as a very tolerant country, but see this slowly changing as the whole discourse is increasingly biased towards anti-immigration arguments (which involve some, typically unconscious or concealed, form of racism, say what you want!). There are no strong rational arguments in favour of reduced immigration, see e.g. Danny Dorling’s work for discussion.
As a scientist, I enjoy ‘multiculturalism’ every day, and in fact multicultural societies are probably a natural consequence of globalisation. This trend can not be reversed, and it’s a pity the govt does not accept this.
John , so the problem then would seem to be earlier on in a learners life as I suggested in my blog of last evening. Why have we got a gap ? There seems to be many out there who have intellectual capability , creativity , but for some reason in their learning career have not managed to achieve academic standing. As a person who is in a position to recruit , you yourself must be aware of the many hurdles and movement of goal-posts we all have to face. There is No clear way through , even with the drive ambition and potential. We have to live our lives jumping through hoops we jumped through 30 yrs ago even to be recognised as someone who is qualified. Progress is being unfairly blocked.
Matt, when you are pestered at a bus stop by a “lady” from eastern Europe (obvious from her dress) for a cigarette, when you next see someone of the same ethnicity lifting her skirts & squatting in the gutter to relieve hersef, then accosting a man for money – then you might just begin to understand the groundswell of sheer rage here in England.
Yes, we alway used to be known for our tolerance, our welcome of strangers and our efforts to include them, but now we face being over-run, swamped, and as Adrian has often pointed out, in great danger of losing our national identity – our “Englishness” that foreigners seemed always to appreciate.
Now, Cameron announces £650 MILLION to help Pakistan to educate its children! Why should we, when EMA’s being cut to the bone & students have now to face great debt for a privilege that used to be a right? Pakistan has the skill and the cash to build and maintain nuclear weapons, yet it can’t give its children schools? Today I heard that Pakistan has one of the lowest tax revenues in relation to GDP of any country. Why can’t they devise a tax system that addresses that? It all stinks to high heaven and I’m seething with anger and resentment.
Annie , i agree , especially about Cameron’s announcement of aid to Pakistan.If he believes that will stop the ethnic fighting there and keep Pakistan as an ally and not a terrorist base, not only is he living in cloud cuckoo land ,but that should never be the reason for aid.
First and foremost his job is to look after the British people,and sort the financial mess we are in,not give monies we need to borrow away.
As for immigration,both Sanebiscuit and Matt have their wires crossed,unless they are recruiting just immigrants.I certainly have no objection to highly qualified immigrants coming to this country both to progress their careers and the countries advancement.What we do not need are,waiters, fruit pickers window cleaners, taxi drivers etc.Our first object is to get the unemployed ,employed ,into meaningful work.
Labour very cynically and secretly let immigration boom,with the objective of creating multiculturism and a larger core vote.
What it has done instead is promote the odious BNP and English Defence League.When the English see their culture being destroyed,the rise of the Muslim religion in this country,it is time to say enough is enough.
ah but then there are people like myself, unemployed and with 1st class honours in physics who’d love to get any kind of research job in physics
so where do i fit in then?
of course i only have an advanced diploma and not a phd, who can afford a phd here now?
should that matter?
well i guess it should, but lets be clear you’re just like our football clubs and would rather buy in talent at the expense of our locals, but don’t worry there’s no risk in carrying this on is there, you know like ending up with no one here wanting to take up these subjects..
Very well put Jon.
While the conservatives try to please the electorate, the truth is this country has benefited a great deal from immigration. It has, and will continue to rely on talent from abroad.
Look at Dubai, America, Singapore as an example. You can’t please everyone, but you can try to keep both sides happy. And immigration is sadly becoming an old chestnut to fall back on to divert (or preying) on the electorate from main issues.
G. Osborne, sadly, is focussing on cuts. To increase a countrys productivity is the core of growth. Right now people are spending more with stagnant wages, and no savings. While we focus on the present, 5-10 years from now, the welfare state will be called on to dish out more benefits. It’s simple economics. And it becomes a vicious cycle.
One thing i’l say is the cuts now may be harsh. In a way it’s going to get very bad before it get’s good. But I fear (as many), the cuts are too fast and too steep.
And finally labour bashing on the mess they left. Take note how the Obama administration has left that bandwagon of bashing the previous government. Condems you will be judged by what you are doing now, not on the old labour mess they left
And finally labour bashing on the mess they left. Take note how the Obama administration has left that bandwagon of bashing the previous government. Condems you will be judged by what you are doing now, not on the old labour mess they left
Jon that sad statement is so very true.People are already forgetting the mess caused by Labours mismanagement.You will see it next month when Labour win many seats and probably again at the next general election.
The problem with excess borrowing is it doesn’t affect anyone until the bailifs move in,then all hell is let lose.The last election meant the bailifs haven’t moved in so the left can still not only live in denial but they can blame everyone but themselves and more to the point , get away with it.
It is a pity they can not be subject to DNA testing.Yet then again ,how many still believe murderers, rapists,criminals are innocent and heroes.What a sad state our schools and universities are in because of a low level(dumbed down) of teaching.
Blimey, Adrian, all your prejudices and frustrations wrapped up in one blog.
We’ve been over the ground so often, let’s just settle for the fact that in almost every case you are misguided.
I’m hazarding a guess that you wouldn’t advocate paying off a house mortgage quicker than the term agreed if it meant that you had to eat bread and water and only had the heating on an hour a day in winter. That’s what this government is doing. The difference of course is that in the first example the cutter suffers the hunger and cold, while none of the government is going to be affected by their cuts.
I’m sure the labour government could have done much better – they could have saved billions by not invading Iraq to start with. But you must remember they didn’t only throw money at the poor – one of their biggest failings was to suck up to the City.
It’s pathetic that the only way the current government seeks to justify what it’s doing is by blaming labour. There are alternatives – the could be cutting slower, they could be taxing the very wealthy more, they could be closing tax loopholes, they could be doing more to encourage growth rather than curbing it.
I find it strange Saltaire,that my philosophy is prejudiced and frustrated,where your Socialist philosophy and support can not accept blame for any of the last governments shortcomings.I never see an explanation of why every Labour government since the war has left us deep in debt and all the poorer.
Your blog does explain the impracticalities of Socialist thinking and excuses though.
I would not advocate paying off a mortgage quicker than the term , because it gains tax relief . particularly for higher rate tax payers.Having said that there are some benefits for the poorer in so doing. If those mortgage payers by their excesses get into financial trouble by borrowing beyond their means,then yes they have to make cuts somewhere unless they wish to lose their accomodation .
The government is no different.Go tell Ireland ,greece and Portugal that it doesn’t matter how bad their finances are ,they can cut as slow as they like,but they will(have) lost their credit rating and have to go crawling to others to bail them out.
I suppose you have forgotten the last IMF bailout,where we no longer controlled our own economy.It sounds as if you want more of the same.
Re NHS: Lansley plans weren’t even in ‘coalition agreement’, but have been, according to director of Adam Smith Institute, in Tory pipeline for 20 years. OK, Lansley wants to abolish the PCTs that hadn’t been invented back then but, though a big detail, that’s not the thrust of the proposals. PCTs are simply in the way of ‘any willing (private) provider’ undercutting NHS services. NB Shirley Williams excellent on today World at One BBC R4 news. Puts Labour to shame with its lack of clarity on issue.
But ass worrying as the proposed changes themselves is the undermining of the democratic process which is going on in parallel. See, eg, from yesterday’s Telegraph:
‘NHS reforms ‘gone too far already to be undone’: http://bit.ly/hNhgW8.
As Lansley’s Health and Social Care bill hasn’t yet been passed by parliament (and might fall at its 3rd reading if the 57 LIbDem MPs reject it) how can the ‘reforms’ have gone ‘too far’? Part of the answer lies with some GPs/PCTs playing the ConDem game (former have already begun to form themselves into groups/’consortia’, the latter to disband. Ironic that doctors could be said to be complicit in this undermining of the democratic process.
Meg
It looks as though we are winning the argument but like you, I wish the labour party were a bit more active and firm. Shirley Williams was excellent (as usual)
I think one of the key questions we need to ask the coalition while they are ‘listening’ (which usually means them talking at us, trying to persuade us) is: private care has virtually taken over dentists and it is now hard to find an NHS dentist. Why do they believe the same thing won’t happen with doctors?
Meg,whilst in a lot of ways i can agree with you,but do you honestly believe that the NHS can continue in its current form , led by an expensive bureaucracy.Do you think nothing needs to be done and if you do,how do you think it should all be paid for?
I certainly do not believe this government is much better than the previous one except for one thing and that is,that it is trying to sort the deficit and financial mess left by Labour ,over 13 years.
Undoubtably the country can not afford the Public sector in its current form and strength,but there are areas that considerable savings can be made and are not being tackled.
Ethnicity,diversity and political correctness should be the first to go,swiftly followed by the European Union.Certainly a large restructuring of the top heavy public service bureaucracy rather than frontline jobs.Were those areas dealt with i am sure the cuts would be much more palatable
The most significant omission from the planned NHS reforms is public accountability. I’m not too excited about whether a PCT or a GP Consortium undertakes the commissioning of my healthcare, it’s only a different device for achieving the same objective.
I’m also non uncomfortable with ‘private’ companies delivering any element of the service rather than units within the NHS body-corporate – so long as the service quality is as good, it doesn’t cost any more and it remains free at the point of delivery.
However, as it’s a public service, paid for out of my taxes, then I want there to be some independent and objective over-view of the service delivery.
The ‘halo’ worn by GPs is unwarranted – they are now simply self-employed contractors aiming to maximise earnings for minimum input and the proposed Consortium method just offers new opportunities to milk the generous state funding even more.
Whether it’s an elected commission for each area or a ‘Service Auditor’ system, or both, should be discussed and resolved, but please don’t let all that money of ours rest solely in the slippery hands of a few over-rated ‘body-technicians’.
Good question, Sam. Here’s a reminder of how doctors may benefit from present Lansley proposals:
bit.ly/ePbR85
Time for salaried GPs?
Meantime, here’s a link to private healthcare connections of some Andrew Lansley, David Cameron and Tony Blair: http://bit.ly/eTR0cA
Thankyou for the link Meg. That has made it easy for me to see the ridiculous situation I have found my self in for simply exacting my job with safety .Politics befor people.
Re ” Conservative policy but not Caolition policy ” – What a copout . And waht will the Lib / Dems be saying re varios manifesto ” promises ” – the exact same – except for one word . Does it really make any differnce which party is in ” power ” . Their main aims seem to be identical and main problem – trying to convince the Electorate that there is any substatil differnce between them .They blightly acknowledge that their Election ” Promises ” mean nothing – and get away with it .
Virtually all ”Western ” – indeeed all societes are about money . A Private health service will cost the user way more than the NHS at presnet . They would nt be trying so hard to Privatise it – otherwise . Comapared to the Banks performance – the NHS must be a shining light but these political ” leaders ” have orders from their bosses -. One of these IMO is Privatise everthing that moves . If you want to see the future – just look at the U.S. health service or any other part of the U.S.- where even Obamas limited Healthcare plan caused uproar – from the Public !!!!.
What a great post. A week or so after ‘Everything & Nothing’ I would have been genned up on Quantum Physics:)
Great stuff on social mobility tonight, Jon and for once I found myself agreeing with a tory MP. Hallelujah! Of course education is the key and only an idiot or Nick Clegg, would choose to ignore the statistic that 7% of the country go to private schools but they fill more than 50% of the top jobs.
As your tory MP said, kids from poor backgrounds tend to go to schools with the least qualified teachers, so there already poor start in life is immediately made worse.
One other thing, Clegg said in the Commons today that labour had doubled the funding on this but it had not worked. How does he know? He admitted it is a slow process – I think he said it wouldn’t be solved in the lifetime of any current MPs. Yet he ignores the fact that the children born in 1997 when labour first came to power – and remember they were slow to do anything! – are still only 14 years old. They’ve not even taken their A levels yet.
Saltaire you have hit the nail on the head ,yet poor logic misses the obvious.I will take your own figures which are probably correct.50%of top jobs go to the 7%of the population who go to private schools.Why? Because they are educated to a standard needed for those jobs.
Why should we be accepting poor teachers , teaching any of our children.It came about (i hate to say it) but with the left’s belief in the comprehensive system .Take away the opportunity for brighter kids to go to grammar school, all in the name of equality.By its very nature an acceptance of the lowest common denominator.To make that equality even better, reduce the quality of exams, dumb down education and end up with what we have.A generation of unemployable youngsters.
What should be happening is turn out teachers of a higher standard.Set the goalposts higher.Increase the opportunities for all youngsters not only to attain their potential, but give them the incentive to do it.
Jon
The next time you get the chance, could you please ask Cameron, Clegg or Osborne a simple question?
One of the reasons they say we must pay off the debt is because it costs us billions every year in interest. More, I seem to remember than the defence budget and Nick Clegg said something about being the equivalent of being able to build a new school every 20 minutes.
So my question is: if they are successful and all this pain results in wiping out the debt, what are they going to do with all that extra money?
Will they build more schools, raise education standards, create more social housing, raise wages in the public sector? or will they just reduce the tax on the wealthiest?
My bet is on the latter.
This is a Pavlov,s dog fishing trip one. Yea induced EMF , it,s going to be our main source of energy , are only source soon.So any inprovement in batteries , faster recharge , longer life , more charge held per unit volume,a break through like Stephensons steam governer was in it,s day.We,ve enough people of chinese origin here British who should be learning this at oxford or a less snobby place , this is the real problem.