‘Why do you care about young people when most of them don’t vote?’ Ed Miliband was asked many questions last night on BBC Three’s ‘Free Speech’, from a referendum on EU membership to tuition fees. But the question on why the Labour party cares is the one that sticks with me. As a young Labour party member, who is leaving university this year, I am proud of the policies our party has put forward for the young people of Britain.
For me the Labour party is the only one which is offering young people a future worth voting for. Like many of the people in that audience last night, this general election will be the first in which I can vote and, like many of the people sitting at home, I was unsure if I was still registered to vote. The Labour party is showing that it cares about reaching young people like me. It is setting up teams of students to register everyone on their campuses to vote, joined by Labour Student clubs running scores of voter registration campaigns across the country. Thanks to them I know I am registered and, thanks to Ed setting out some fantastic policies, I know young people like me have a party they can trust.
The audience erupted into applause last night when Ed discussed lowering tuition fees and raising grants. Students this year will be graduating with over £40,000 of debt, no one, whatever their background, should leave university with that sort of burden. A Labour government would put an end to this, and balance the books while doing so. Finally, young people have a fully costed, progressive and, ultimately, fair deal on tuition fees. One that Ed, unlike Nick Clegg, has given a cast iron promise he will deliver.
A Labour government would not just concern itself with the cost of university but also what it takes to get there in the first place. Making sure that young people, no matter what their background, have an equal chance of getting into university if they want to. This sort of accessibility to university starts in early years, and I feel the Labour party knows this. By reducing class sizes, banning unqualified teachers and, of course, by doubling the number of Sure Start centres a Labour government will improve the path to universities for all.
Having the power to vote means having the power to shape the future of our country, that’s why for me one of the most exciting policies we have is votes for 16 and 17 year olds, supported by improved citizenship education. By allowing votes earlier, as well as teaching young people about how important their vote is, we might start to build a future young people can actually look forward to.
Ed showed a genuine passion for making the party more representative of the country it seeks to serve. As a proud feminist I am happy that we have more women members of parliament than the rest of the parties put together. However, what Ed said last night was right, this still simply is not good enough. As a young woman it makes a massive difference to me to see inspirational women making their voices heard in the very place that decides the future of our country.
The coalition government has failed young people in countless ways. ‘Free Speech’ showed just how important this election is for creating the change that young people desperately need. Let’s work together and make sure that the next government is one that fights for fair pay, ends ridiculous levels of university debt and properly empowers a generation of forgotten young people.
Electing a Labour government this May is the only way to secure a better future for my generation.
———————————-
Erin Mulhatton is chair of Scottish Labour Student and national campaigns and membership officer-elect of Labour students. She tweets @ErinMulhatton
———————————-
in my area if you don’t register to vote it’s an £80 fine.pensioners have always voted.sorry at 16/17 you have’nt a clue about the real world.the world does’nt owe you a living.the rules have changed.to longer leaving school with few qualifications,and then get pregnant,and all the benefits follow.not all young people are academic or want to go to university.canada had Vocation Schools in the 60’s.the young people would not be left to linger on the ‘dole’.no they won’t balance the books re tuition fee’s.what is this ‘proud feminist’? there were 52 children in my
primary school in the 50’s.but we had 10 spellings to learn every night.we did mental arithmatic,a strong work ethic was installed in us by our parents,and all schools.discipline was high on the agenda.what the problem today is everyone talks about ‘rights’.zero about responsibilties.nobody can make any promises until they see the books.we all want a fairer society.a living wage,good employment benefits.many have suffered austerity measures.in 2015 in one of the richest countries we have food banks.the tories have always played one generation against another.the north south divide is the worst i can remember.not all pensioners are wealthy,many are widows,and widowers.at least ed balls,and labour have said the bus pass,tv licence,and triple lock will remain.the upper tax limit pensioners will lose winter fuel allowance.if the elderly,the poor,the disabled are not treated with dignity what country do we have?
If you were male and wanting to get into politics your view would be a lot different…
Don’t be conned into believing they care, they don’t, they’re just pandering, like Cleggy did, to get your vote.
Banning unqualified teachers? Even if they are good teachers and are doing well in the particular jobs for which they have been recruited? Even if their headteachers are pleased with their performance and they have won the confidence of pupils, parents and colleagues?
By all means, promote training for all teachers but declaring that all teachers who have joined their profession by the “unqualified” route are bad teachers, without producing any evidence in support, is not a policy, it’s prejudice. This is not progressive, it’s stupid and nasty.
Some teachers are unqualified. Get over it.
Easy, all non-qualified teachers can get proper training whilst continuing in their jobs. Agreed that being qualified does not automatically a good teacher make, and I’m sure some non-qualified have passion and ability, but I would not have wanted my children taught by people without a proper training. Too many people think teaching simply requires knowledge and communication skills. There are all sorts of class-room issues that also require a thorough knowledge of class room technique, pedagogy, legislation etc. As a former school governor I would never have considered employing a non-qualified teacher however seemingly gifted.
If currently unqualified teachers can easily get training while remaining in post, why the talk of “banning” them? Tristram Hunt keeps saying they “drag down standards” but he’s never produced any evidence.