Why aren't you asking the obvious question?

Every now and then, during an interview on the radio or TV, I'll find myself yelling at the interviewer, 'Why aren't you asking the obvious question?' It seems to me that there is such a killer point to make, yet they fail to do so.

I had such a frustrating moment this morning, during an interview with Michael Gove (pictured), the Conservative spokesman on children, schools and families. Now admittedly Michael Gove is one of those individuals who single handedly makes me not want to vote Conservative, even if I was in complete agreement with all their policies, but even so he was begging to be asked that killer question.

Gove was telling us that we need to get better teachers - can't disagree with that - and the way to do it is to increase the standing of the profession. I can't disagree with that either, as long as it's not the only measure. However, when asked about paying teachers more, Gove said that no, no, this wasn't the answer, you don't get better people by paying more.

On the whole he was allowed to get away with this - but I was dying for him to be asked 'What about the banks?' When all those bankers claim that the only way they can get the best people is paying oodles of cash, surely we ought to be saying 'No, not at all. You need to increase the standing of the profession (and let's face it, the only way is up).' Let's limit all bankers' pay to the same level as teachers (oh and do the same for civil servants and MPs too, I hope), and put a lot of effort into talking up the job. Because, after all, paying more isn't the way to get the best people. Michael Gove said so.

Comments

Why I hate opera

If I'm honest, the title of this post is an exaggeration to make a point. I don't really hate opera. There are a couple of operas - notably Monteverdi's Incoranazione di Poppea and Purcell's Dido & Aeneas - that I quite like. But what I do find truly sickening is the reverence with which opera is treated, as if it were some particularly great art form. Nowhere was this more obvious than in ITV's 2010 gut-wrenchingly awful series Pop Star to Opera Star , where the likes of Alan Tichmarsh treated the real opera singers as if they were fragile pieces on Antiques Roadshow, and the music as if it were a gift of the gods. In my opinion - and I know not everyone agrees - opera is: Mediocre music Melodramatic plots Amateurishly hammy acting A forced and unpleasant singing style Ridiculously over-supported by public funds I won't even bother to go into any detail on the plots and the acting - this is just self-evident. But the other aspects need some exp...

Murder by Candlelight - Ed. Cecily Gayford ***

Nothing seems to suit Christmas reading better than either ghost stories or Christmas-set novels. For some this means a fluffy romance in the snow, but for those of us with darker preferences, it's hard to beat a good Christmas murder. An annual event for me over the last few years has been getting the excellent series of classic murderous Christmas short stories pulled together by Cecily Gayford, starting with the 2016 Murder under the Christmas Tree . This featured seasonal output from the likes of Margery Allingham, Arthur Conan Doyle, Ellis Peters and Dorothy L. Sayers, laced with a few more modern authors such as Ian Rankin and Val McDermid, in some shiny Christmassy twisty tales. I actually thought while purchasing this year's addition 'Surely she is going to run out of classic stories soon' - and sadly, to a degree, Gayford has. The first half of Murder by Candlelight is up to the usual standard with some good seasonal tales from the likes of Catherine Aird, Car...

Is 5x3 the same as 3x5?

The Internet has gone mildly bonkers over a child in America who was marked down in a test because when asked to work out 5x3 by repeated addition he/she used 5+5+5 instead of 3+3+3+3+3. Those who support the teacher say that 5x3 means 'five lots of 3' where the complainants say that 'times' is commutative (reversible) so the distinction is meaningless as 5x3 and 3x5 are indistinguishable. It's certainly true that not all mathematical operations are commutative. I think we are all comfortable that 5-3 is not the same as 3-5. However. This not true of multiplication (of numbers). And so if there is to be any distinction, it has to be in the use of English to interpret the 'x' sign. Unfortunately, even here there is no logical way of coming up with a definitive answer. I suspect most primary school teachers would expands 'times' as 'lots of' as mentioned above. So we get 5 x 3 as '5 lots of 3'. Unfortunately that only wor...

Search This Blog