Relief for Miliband as Labour wins by-election

Labour holds onto Feltham and Heston seat -- but was the 8.5 per cent swing from the Tories enough?

Ed Miliband will be breathing a sigh of relief this morning, with the news that Labour has held on to the west London seat of Feltham and Heston in a by-election. Candidate Seema Malhotra increased Labour's majority from 4,658 to 6,203, a swing of 8.56 per cent from the Tories.

The seat was Labour's to lose after the death of Alan Keen, who won the seat from the Tories in 1992, meant that a speedy by-election was called, with time only for a short campaign.

The victory should - at least temporarily - shore up Miliband's leadership. Labour says that the results are a verdict on the failure of the coalition government to tackle unemployment and stabilise the economy.

However, it is likely that naysayers within the party will say that the swing should have been greater, as Labour's poll lead remains static and narrow. Predictably, the other parties have already downplayed the success. Alok Sharma, Conservative MP for Reading West, said that if Labour was doing well, it would have got a swing of 15-18 per cent. Sour grapes, perhaps, but it is certainly true that a loss would have been dire for Labour given the current economic situation.

Labour are not the only ones who averted disaster: Nick Clegg will also be relieved that his party did not lose out to Ukip. It had been speculated, based on the polls, that Nigel Farage's party could overtake the Liberal Democrats. But the Lib Dems just about managed to see off this threat, finishing in third place (after the Tories), with 6 per cent of the vote -- just 88 votes ahead of Ukip. The party avoided embarrassment this time, but the tiny gap portends the electoral wipe-out the Lib Dems could face in the next general election.

It's also worth noting the low turnout. At just 28.8 per cent (23,298 votes), this was the worst turnout in a by-election for 11 years.

Finally, the headline figures in full: Labour received 12,639 votes (54 per cent), followed by the Tories on 6,436 (28 per cent), the Lib Dems on 1,364 (6 per cent), and Ukip on 1,276 (5 per cent).

Samira Shackle is a freelance journalist, who tweets @samirashackle. She was formerly a staff writer for the New Statesman.

Getty
Show Hide image

The SATs strike: why parents are taking their children out of school to protest against exams

Parents are keeping their children away from school to highlight the dangers of “over testing” young pupils.

My heart is beating fast and I feel sick. I force myself to eat some chocolate because someone said it might help. I take a deep breath and open the door…

The hall is silent except for the occasional cough and the shuffling of chairs. The stench of nervous sweat lingers in the air.

“Turn over your papers, you may begin.”

I look at the clock and I am filled with panic. I feel like I might pass out. I pick up my pen but my palms are so sweaty it is hard to grip it properly. I want to cry. I want to scream, and I really need the toilet.

This was how I felt before every GCSE exam I took. I was 16. This was also how I felt before taking my driving test, aged 22, and my journalism training (NCTJ) exams when I was 24.

Being tested makes most of us feel anxious. After all, we have just one chance to get stuff right. To remember everything we have learned in a short space of time. To recall facts and figures under pressure; to avoid failure.

Even the most academic of adults can find being in an exam situation stressful, so it’s not hard to imagine how a young child about to sit their Year 2 SATs must feel.

Today thousands of parents are keeping their kids off school in protest at these tough new national tests. They are risking fines, prosecution and possible jail time for breach of government rules. By yesterday morning, more than 37,000 people had signed a petition backing the Let Our Kids Be Kids campaign and I was one of them.

I have a daughter in reception class who will be just six years old when she sits her SATs. These little ones are barely out of pull-up pants and now they are expected to take formal exams! What next? Babies taught while they are in the womb? Toddlers sitting spelling tests?

Infants have fragile self-esteem. A blow to their confidence at such an impressionable age can affect them way into adulthood. We need to build them up not tear them down. We need to ensure they enjoy school, not dread it. Anxiety and fear are not conducive to learning. It is like throwing books at their heads as a way of teaching them to read. It will not work. They are not machines. They need to want to learn.

When did we stop treating children like children? Maybe David Cameron would be happier if we just stopped reproducing all together. After all, what use to the economy are these pesky kids with their tiny brains and individual emotional needs? Running around all happy and carefree, selfishly enjoying their childhood without any regard to government statistics or national targets.

Year 2 SATs, along with proposals for a longer school day and calls for baseline reception assessments (thankfully now dropped) are just further proof that the government do not have our children’s best interests at heart. It also shows a distinct lack of common sense. It doesn’t take a PhD in education to comprehend that a child is far more likely to thrive in a calm, supportive and enjoyable environment. Learning should be fun. The value in learning through play seems to be largely underestimated.

The UK already has a far lower school starting age than many other countries, and in my opinion, we are already forcing them into a formal learning environment way too soon.

With mental health illness rates among British children already on the rise, it is about time our kids were put first. The government needs to stop “throwing books at heads” and start listening to teachers and parents about what is best for the children.

Emily-Jane Clark is a freelance journalist, mother-of-two and creator of stolensleep.com, a humorous antithesis to baby advice.