paves etiketine sahip kayıtlar gösteriliyor. Tüm kayıtları göster
paves etiketine sahip kayıtlar gösteriliyor. Tüm kayıtları göster

6 Mart 2017 Pazartesi

Theresa May paves way for new generation of grammar schools

Theresa May will pave the way for a new generation of grammar schools on Wednesday, as her chancellor uses the budget to push ahead with a controversial policy that is seen as a key priority for the prime minister.


Philip Hammond will plough £320m into expanding the government’s free school programme, creating 70,000 places in 140 schools, which will be free to offer selective education after the government passes legislation.


May’s pledge to end the ban on grammars during this parliament means that many of the new schools, which are largely due to open after 2020, could opt to choose pupils based on academic merit.


The chancellor will underline the government’s focus on selective education by also extending free public transport for the poorest children to grammar schools, covering those within two to 15 miles of their homes.


The news triggered an immediate backlash from groups representing teachers, asking why the money wasn’t going to existing state schools. They claimed that a funding crisis meant children faced being taught in bigger class sizes, with limited resources and fewer teachers.


Labour accused the government of “throwing more good money after bad” while the Liberal Democrats described it as an unbelievable decision in the face of “devastating cuts to school budgets”.


The policy comes alongside plans, expected to be announced on Wednesday, to put aside rising tax revenues to help build up a £60bn reserve to deal with Brexit-related uncertainty.


Hammond is also likely to react to a Conservative backlash over the government’s business rates reforms by offering more transitional relief to companies and to put money towards plugging a massive funding gap for social care.


But the decision to place the possibility of more grammar schools at the heart of a budget that will be seen as the chancellor’s chance to steady the ship before article 50 is triggered underlines a determination to drive forward what many consider May’s flagship education reform.


The prime minister insisted that the proposals would guarantee more choice for parents. “For too many children, a good school place remains out of reach with their options determined by where they live or how much money their parents have,” she said. “Over the last six years, we have overseen a revolution in our schools system and we have raised standards and opportunity, but there is much more to do.”


Hammond insisted that the core schools budget – which stands at more than £40bn a year – would be protected and that the policy would help to ensure that children could access quality education whatever their background.


“Investing in education and skills is the single most important thing that we can do to equip our children for the future,” he said.


The policy will also see £216m of investment into school infrastructure to help rebuild and refurbish existing schools, which the Treasury said would be on top of £10bn to be spent on the condition of schools. It said that 1.8m more pupils were being taught in good or outstanding schools – now making up 89% of the total – but argued that more than 1m were still in under-performing institutions.


The new schools will come on top of 500 free schools already in train for 2020, with 110 of the 140 expected after the next election. Examples of successful free schools provided by the Treasury included Tauheedul Islam boys’ high school in Blackburn, Exeter mathematics school and the London Academy of Excellence.


While not all the new schools will choose to become grammars, officials made clear that the new money was to support the proposals in the green paper called schools that work for everyone in which the notion of expanding selective education was key.


Dr Mary Bousted, the general secretary of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers, said teachers and heads would be dismayed to see Hammond throwing money at free schools and grammar schools when others were facing big real terms funding cuts.


“These spending pledges are totally insufficient to tackle the funding crisis the government is inflicting on schools by forcing them to make over £3bn of savings by 2020. Bigger class sizes, fewer learning resources and fewer teachers with greater workloads are the likely consequences,” she said.


She argued that “funding the expansion of selective education is a mistake that will result in a small minority benefitting at the expense of the vast majority of the country’s young people”.


The shadow education secretary, Angela Rayner, said free schools were being opened in areas where they were not needed. “This is now throwing more good money after bad. It will do nothing to address the shortage of available school places,” she said, pointing to £3bn of funding cuts.


The Lib Dem education spokesman, John Pugh, said: “This is unbelievable. Two weeks ago, the free schools programme was shown to have overspent to the tune of £9bn, at the same time as existing schools struggle to pay for books, cut teachers and their buildings decay around them.”


But Toby Young, director of the New Schools Network said: “I’m delighted that the government has renewed its commitment to free schools. It’s a recognition that free schools are the most cost-effective way of providing much-needed new places, as well as popular with parents and more likely to be ranked ‘outstanding’ by Ofsted than any other type of school.”


The policy comes as Hammond is being urged to scrap cuts to inheritance, corporation and income tax in order to plough money into benefits, as figures reveal the extent to which living standards are going to be squeezed by rising inflation.


Analysis by the Resolution Foundation shows a “double whammy” for lower-income working families who the government has said it wants to target.


It finds that real wages could start falling by the end of the year while the government’s welfare freeze will inflict far more pain than has been predicted, taking £3.6bn more than expected from some of the poorest people in the country by 2020.


Torsten Bell, the thinktank’s director, warned that the pattern of external forecasts since November suggested that the Office for Budget Responsibility could revise up its inflation forecast to 2.6% this year and next. He said the impact on wages could be catastrophic.


Hammond will respond to concern over the deterioration of social care in England by announcing a £1.3bn emergency boost for those services, Whitehall sources say. The money will be made available over the next two financial years, starting next month, but is unlikely to appease critics such as the Local Government Association and Age UK, who claim the sector needs at least £2bn a year more giving rising costs and the growing elderly population.


Hammond is expected to say that the money should directly benefit the NHS by reducing the number of patients who end up stuck in hospital despite being medically fit to leave because social care in their area is unavailable.


It is likely to be directed at schemes that aim to tackle what the NHS calls delayed transfers of care, or bedblocking, and the risk of mainly older patients being admitted or readmitted to hospital.


However, Hammond is set to face down demands from Labour, the British Medical Association and many NHS bodies by refusing to increase the health service’s budget beyond the sums already agreed.


The BMA has called for an extra £10bn a year for the NHS, while Labour has demanded £12bn for health and social care.


But he is expected to make an extra £200m available for NHS capital projects in 2017-18, after warnings from NHS England chief Simon Stevens that his planned “transformation” of the health service in England would struggle unless local NHS bodies had more money to spend building and repairing premises.


Jeremy Hunt, the health secretary, controversially moved more than £1bn from the NHS’s capital budget to its revenue budget in an attempt to give hospitals more money to spend amid an unprecedented financial squeeze.


Lib Dem MP Norman Lamb has organised a cross-party group of 28 MPs who have met the prime minister to urge action on the issue. They are calling for £2bn for social care over 2017-18, £1.5bn for the NHS focused on out of hospital care and £500m dedicated to mental health.



Theresa May paves way for new generation of grammar schools

16 Şubat 2017 Perşembe

House vote paves the way for states to defund Planned Parenthood

The House on Thursday approved a resolution that would permit states to withhold federal family-planning funds from affiliates of Planned Parenthood and other healthcare providers that offer abortions. Abortion foes immediately hailed the measure, which is expected to pass the Senate, as a critical victory, while public health advocates worried that the cuts would blow a hole in the nation’s fragile family planning safety net.


The measure would overturn a rule, issued by Obama’s department of Health and Human Services, prohibiting states from withholding federal family-planning dollars from groups that provide abortions. States can only withhold those funds for reasons related to a provider’s ability to deliver family planning services, the rule says.


The Obama administration finalized the rule during his last weeks in office, and it took effect just two days before the inauguration of Donald Trump.


Planned Parenthood on Thursday seemed open to taking the issue to court. The group argues that because family planning grants are competitive – that is, they are supposed to be awarded based on a provider’s demonstrated abilities to distribute care – excluding Planned Parenthood is illegal under federal law.


“To date, every court to consider the issue on the merits has ruled that state politicians cannot block access to care at Planned Parenthood” through these types of cuts, a Planned Parenthood spokeswoman said.


The resolution targets Planned Parenthood’s participation in Title X, the federal program that allows medical providers to offer reproductive healthcare to millions of low-income Americans at little to no cost. States receive Title X funds as block grants and distribute the money on a periodic basis to the healthcare providers that are best qualified to provide family planning services.


Planned Parenthood receives more than $ 500m annually from the federal government, and about a quarter of that comes from Title X.


Planned Parenthood says it serves 1.5 million people through Title X, or more than one-third of the 4 million people who receive Title X services. Seventy-eight percent of those Planned Parenthood patients earn 150% or less of the federal poverty level, and about a third are black or Latina. The organization does not spend the funds it receives from states on abortion, but on services such as pap tests, HIV and STI screenings, breast exams and contraception.


What is the ‘global gag rule’, and why does Trump support it?

Title X is a popular target for conservative lawmakers looking to slash government budgets. Republican governors in several states have attempted or succeeded in cutting the state’s family planning budget to nearly zero. And in 2015, Republicans on a House appropriations subcommittee offered a budget that would have eliminated Title X funds completely.


Healthcare providers are prohibited from spending Title X funds on abortion by federal law. But by choosing to single out Planned Parenthood, Republicans on Thursday portrayed the resolution as a referendum on abortion. The resolution’s sponsors, congresswoman Diane Black of Tennessee and Senator Joni Ernst of Iowa, have both cited misleading videos, which were edited to look like Planned Parenthood sold fetal parts for a profit, as a reason to strip Planned Parenthood of its federal funding.


The resolution is based on a little-used law that allows Congress, on a fast-tracked timetable, to overturn a new federal rule. It requires only 51 votes to pass the Senate, where Republicans control 52 seats, and Donald Trump is expected to sign.


Supporters of the measure denied that it would impact people who rely on Title X, because the money Planned Parenthood received would be rerouted to “comprehensive healthcare clinics”.


But public health advocates are skeptical that other providers are primed to absorb Planned Parenthood’s millions of patients.



Supporters of Planned Parenthood rally outside a clinic in Detroit, Michigan.


Supporters of Planned Parenthood rally outside a clinic in Detroit, Michigan. Photograph: Rebecca Cook/Reuters

Community health centers “have wait lists for the people they’re serving today, much less having to absorb all of Planned Parenthood’s patients as well,” Sara Rosenbaum, a professor of health policy at George Washington University, said recently. “The notion they can suddenly ramp up their capacity to absorb all of the services Planned Parenthood can offer … is absurd.”


A recent study of community health centers and similar clinics found that only about one in five large centers prescribe and dispense the full range of contraception. More often than not, these centers don’t stock common methods of contraception, such as birth control.


Healthcare providers are already prohibited by federal law from spending Title X funds on abortion. In 2000, under pressure from anti-abortion groups, the Clinton administration approved a rule requiring Planned Parenthood and other providers offering abortion to keep Title X funds “separate and distinct” from abortion activities.


Republicans have since then sought to cut Title X funding to Planned Parenthood altogether, arguing that organizations that provide abortions should not receive any material support from the government. Several proposals introduced to the House of Representatives under George W Bush failed. But those efforts gained steam under Obama, and in 2011, then-congressman Mike Pence attached a rider to defund Planned Parenthood to a critical spending bill and nearly triggered a government shutdown.


Many states controlled by Republicans have also taken action to strip Title X funds from Planned Parenthood.


The governors of Tennessee and New Hampshire, respectively, stripped $ 1.04m and $ 1.8m in Title X dollars from Planned Parenthood in 2011. The same year, the Kansas legislature blocked Title X dollars to the group.


Just as Republicans argued on Thursday, the governors in those states claimed that other healthcare providers would step up to care for Planned Parenthood’s patients. But those are questionable claims. A year after Kansas kicked Planned Parenthood of its Title X program, the number of Kansans receiving contraception, STI tests, and cancer screenings subsidized by Title X had fallen by more than 14,000.


Some efforts to kick Planned Parenthood out of Title X have proved vulnerable to challenges in court.


A federal judge ruled last summer that Florida could not block Title X funds to Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood’s Florida affiliates had been using the funds to provide healthcare screenings and finance a school dropout prevention program.


But others states have managed to make their cuts stick.


In Texas, eliminating Planned Parenthood from the public safety net had a particularly profound effect on rural communities. “I hate to say it, but I think an awful lot of women just opted to go without care,” said Mike Austin, the chief executive of Midland Community Healthcare Services. His clinic emerged as the only major alternative to Planned Parenthood in Midland-Odessa in west Texas after the cuts.


“We are seeing a subsequent rise in STDs and a subsequent rise in unplanned pregnancies,” Austin recently told the Guardian. “And I’m sitting here going, ‘See? I told you so. This is what happens.’”



House vote paves the way for states to defund Planned Parenthood