Gove again...

Could it be that those on benefits are less likely to pay fines, for one reason or another? Or is it un-PC to suggest such a thing on here?

So why did Gove only mention taking the money from benefits?
I notice he was talking at Policy Exchange, the think tank that he set up with Maude.

'thought'

Of course. No one's disputing that. But they'd probably pay the fine without a second though.

It would need one clause in the Education Bill to enable the govt. to reduce child benefit for however long it took to pay the fine. Gove's just the sort of person who would do that.
However, people who earn over £50000 no longer get child benefit. They are just as likely to take their children on holiday in term time.

Attachment of earnings order springs to mind. Won't they have to take people on benefits to Court for non-payment of fines before they can cut their benefits anyway?

How, exactly, Ana? Taking them to court would cost more in time and money than the fines they could impose.

It is just impossible for parents to drag teenagers into school. I agree truancy is a problem but fining parents is not really a solution.

Go for parents out shopping in term time with school age kids and have patrols in shopping malls, which some area do try. Then make parents prove any "appointments" for dentists, doctors etc.

No, but there would be other means of getting parents not on benefits to pay up.

So it's only parents on benefits whose children play truant; is that what he believes?

Exactly Micelf - this micro-managing of the education system saps morale and stultifies initiative and imagination in teachers. It has to stop.

I am a governor at a tiny rural primary school, beloved of children, parents and the community, where pupils thrive in a loving environment and become self-confident young people. And what do we discus at out meetings? - data, OfSted etc. We are ticking the boxes to keep the inspectors happy when we should be concentrating on looking at the school with fresh eyes and trying to be innovative in how the children are taught.

Every conversation centres around what OfSted wants, what they might think, how we can tick their boxes.

I am tired of Gove failing to trust teachers; and failing to concern himself with their professional development and support - that is the key to success (however that is defined).

I see demoralised teachers working their tripe out with dedication, and all that they get from above is denigration and more boxes to tick. The sooner we get rid of this guy the better.

It's always been a mystery to me that a Party which abhors interference in the market is so keen to interfere and control the minutiae of other aspects of our lives in society.

Gove is the Great Controller - let's move him to the Department for Trade and watch him interfere with the antics of unscrupulous companies and tax dodging outfits. He might then find a more appropriate outlet for his totalitarian ways.

He's at it again on a headline grabbing spree.
He is going to be the fairy godmother that rid the country of illiteracy? Then why did he cut back on Surestart and why is obsessed with secondary educations (all ministers are because of the GCSE results)
www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-27741261

Oh and deduct child benefit money from parents who won't pay truancy fines. I'm sure the people who administer child benefit will be keen to spend a shedload of money to make that possible.
Glad to hear he's going to "lean in" though

This had now turned into a huge political row between Gove and Teresa May. They are both ambitious and trying to sling mud at the other one?
Sounds like Cameron furious and has asked the cabinet secretary to investigate.
Meanwhile OFSTED judgements are leaking out and causing controversy.

Aka - I feel the break up of LEA's is more likely to cause problems in education, than solve them. So much experience within LEA's just being dismissed as though it means nothing positive.

this is a very clear resume for anyone wondering what it's all about.

Talking to the leader of Birmingham City Council on local TV yesterday about the alleged Trojan Horse plot, he was saying that their powers were limited as most of the schools are academies.

Another consequence of the break up of LEAs?

The BBC has chosen the term 'Muslim hardliners' to describe the alleged plotters.
Where does a hardliner sit on the devout-extremist-terrorist spectrum, I wonder?
Is the BBC using a creative euphemism, or has it just consulted its lawyers?

Latest update.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-27128202

I'm far more sceptical than you are, jingle. This appointment sounds to me like a knee-jerk reaction.

Don't you think the letter is more likely to be just a very small part of the information the government has been given. A local mp for one, has expressed his concerns.

Considering what happens in some mosques re radicalisation, maybe schools could well be considered the next step.

I doubt if this appointment was made without a lot of background knowledge, and without a good deal of consideration as to the best person for the job. And I think the ordinary muslims in the area, the ones who have gladly adopted the British way of life (and law) will be able to understand this.

There are many devout Muslims in this country from many different cultural backgrounds. Most of them live quiet lives and make a valuable contribution to our country. I think we need to be careful before we label devout people as "extremists". It is a small step from calling them "extremists" or "fundamentalist" and a tiny step further to start calling them "terrorist sympathisers".
If people start doing this it will make more Muslims feel like outsiders in our country rather than insiders, and potentially increase interest in terrorism.
My point is that we should avoid a moral panic and grandstanding by politicians (and the head of ofsted) all on the basis of an anonymous letter - and before the police and the education authorities have had a chance to complete their investigations.

jess who did you think I was referring to? And why would I need to "be a bit careful"? ?

Yes, I think is does exactly that. I would have preferred to debate the issue of the governance of Birmingham schools per se.

But I stand by my statement that the man is an idiot. Sorry!

Surely not to the extent that any sense of reason goes out of the window regarding anything he's involved in?