David Cameron says "red warning lights" are flashing for another economic crunch. Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

David Cameron's warning of another global recession could help the Tories

The Prime Minister cautions that we are on the brink of another global economic meltdown, but this could be politically expedient for his party.

David Cameron warns that we could be on the verge of another global recession. He refers to "red warning lights" flashing once again signalling another economic meltdown could be on the way, in an article for the GuardianHis opening paragraph reads:

Six years on from the financial crash that brought the world to its knees, red warning lights are once again flashing on the dashboard of the global economy.

In the piece, he writes of the economy worldwide potentially slowing down due to current affairs crises such as the ebola outbreak, the tempestuous situation in Ukraine and the Middle East, the eurozone's difficulties, and slow growth in emerging markets, as well as mentioning "stalled" global trade talks.

Labour's shadow chief secretary to the Treasury, Chris Leslie, has responded to this article suggesting Cameron is simply "making excuses for slower growth", referring to borrowing "going up so far this year" and exports falling "behind our competitors".

However, the Prime Minister's intervention is a tricky one for his opponents, because it is politically expedient for the Conservatives to suggest that the global economy remains precarious. Throughout his piece, Cameron uses the phrase "long-term plan", which is a clear echo of the Tories' slogan du jour "long-term economic plan". The way the party is fighting the upcoming election is to suggest that the only path to achieving financial stability is to stick with the government that has been tackling, with some effect, our economic problems for over four years, and not to risk changing the strategy by voting in a different party.

Cameron is undoubtedly preparing the country for the Chancellor having to explain, in the imminent Autumn Statement, awkward figures like why borrowing is increasing, and any corresponding harsh economic policies. However, as elements of a national economic recovery set in, and the Tories creep ahead in the polls, it seems the fact that they are still more trusted than the Labour party on the economy means that warning of future external destabilising factors could work in their favour. It has the added benefit of putting the economy, on which the Tories can speak with some authority, back at the top of the political agenda, as opposed to Ukip-friendly subjects such as immigration and Europe.

Anoosh Chakelian is senior writer at the New Statesman.

SHUTTERSTOCK / MONKEY BUSINESS IMAGES
Show Hide image

The price of accessing higher education

Should young people from low income backgrounds abandon higher education, or do they need more support to access it? 

The determination of over 400,000 young people to go into higher education (HE) every year, despite England having the most expensive HE system in the world, and particularly the determination of over 20,000 young people from low income backgrounds to progress to HE should be celebrated. Regrettably, there are many in the media and politics that are keen to argue that we have too many students and HE is not worth the time or expense.

These views stem partly from the result of high levels of student debt, and changing graduate employment markets appearing to diminish the payoff from a degree. It is not just economics though; it is partly a product of a generational gap. Older graduates appear to find it hard to come to terms with more people, and people from dissimilar backgrounds to theirs, getting degrees.  Such unease is personified by Frank Field, a veteran of many great causes, using statistics showing over 20 per cent of graduates early in their working lives are earning less than apprentices to make a case against HE participation. In fact, the same statistics show that for the vast majority a degree makes a better investment than an apprenticeship. This is exactly what the majority of young people believe. Not only does it make a better financial investment, it is also the route into careers that young people want to pursue for reasons other than money.

This failure of older "generations" (mainly politics and media graduates) to connect with young people’s ambitions has now, via Labour's surprising near win in June, propelled the question of student finance back into the spotlight. The balance between state and individual investment in higher education is suddenly up for debate again. It is time, however, for a much wider discussion than one only focussed on the cost of HE. We must start by recognising the worth and value of HE, especially in the context of a labour market where the nature of many future jobs is being rendered increasingly uncertain by technology. The twisting of the facts to continually question the worth of HE by many older graduates does most damage not to the allegedly over-paid Vice Chancellors, but the futures of the very groups that they purport to be most concerned for: those from low income groups most at risk from an uncertain future labour market.

While the attacks on HE are ongoing, the majority of parents from higher income backgrounds are quietly going to greater and greater lengths to secure the futures of their children – recent research from the Sutton Trust showed that in London nearly half of all pupils have received private tuition. It is naive in the extreme to suggest that they are doing this so their children can progress into anything other than higher education. It is fundamental that we try and close the social background gap in HE participation if we wish to see a labour market in which better jobs, regardless of their definition, are more equally distributed across the population. Doing this requires a national discussion that is not constrained by cost, but also looks at what schools, higher education providers and employers can do to target support at young people from low income backgrounds, and the relative contributions that universities, newer HE providers and further education colleges should make. The higher education problem is not too many students; it is too few from the millions of families on average incomes and below.

Dr. Graeme Atherton is the Director of the National Education Opportunities Network (NEON). NEON are partnering with the New Statesman to deliver a fringe event at this year's Conservative party conference: ‘Sustainable Access: the Future of Higher Education in Britain’ on the Monday 2nd October 2017 from 16:30-17:30pm.