An Education Minister and his personal secretary are talking
Graham Fowler eavesdrops
Secretary: Why did you say the diplomas will not be ready Minister?
Minister: We don't know when they will be delivered. They are coming together at different rates. Some employer groups have scarcely started.
There is a real danger the whole thing will turn into a fiasco.
Secretary: You can't say that either Minister! It will look as though they should have been better coordinated, as though you shouldn't have given them to employers to develop.
Minister: Why did I?
Secretary: No idea, Minister. You are not going to teach on the diplomas are you?
Minister: Of course not, there is no reason why I should.
Secretary: Precisely, Minister. And there is no reason why employers should teach on them either.
Minister: I didn't say they should.
Secretary: Yes you did, Minister. You said you wanted employers to be involved in developing the diplomas, and practitioners from the workplace to enter the classroom to teach potential recruits.
Minister: Did I? Well, we do want employers to have more say.
Secretary: Why is that, Minister?
Minister: It has been our policy. Employers are always saying they want more say.
Secretary: Perhaps so, Minister, but I have rarely heard them say they want to do more teaching!
Minister: I can now judge their willingness to be involved from the fact the diplomas are nowhere near ready.
Secretary: Indeed you can, Minister. Perhaps you should have stood more firmly against employer wishes. Then you could have put educators in charge and they would have co-ordinated the whole suite of diplomas, giving them a meaningful rationale.
Minister: It's too late for that.
Secretary: Not necessarily, Minister. Delay the diplomas for a year, as even employers want, and put educators in charge. You'll be surprised the difference it makes having someone running things who knows what they are doing.