I await to see the male-only shortlists for primary school teachers.
Would you like to see that?
Personally, no (you can’t say one form of positive discrimination is wrong and another is right) but something needs to be done in that area.
Why can't one discriminate between different types of discrimination? I gave an example earlier.
Top uni has 100 places and 20,000 applicants all expecting to get the AAA criteria and with school reports saying they'd do great on the courses offered. The applicants are split 50/50 state v private school but the uni wants to favour state applicants and so splits its offers 75/25.
That's a world away from (eg) a merchant bank going, "We need a new CFO, let's get a black woman with a gammy leg, tick 3 boxes in one go, what?"
Exaggerating to make the point there obviously. But the point is surely right. You CAN be in favour of one form of positive discrimination but not another. Course you can.
If there's 20,000 applicants all getting AAA and only 100 places, that's a failure of the letter system that we use. Not all A's will be the same, but they're all treated the same.
In Victoria, Australia when I lived there the locals did a system called the VCE which ranked people based upon percentile. The top people in the state would get 99.95, the next would get 99.9, then 99.85 etc down in 0.05 increments down to a bottom percentile of 30 (since 30% wouldn't sit the VCE or wouldn't pass).
That way there'd only be about 4 or 5 people statewide getting the same grade, instead of letters and everyone getting an A. Plus grade inflation is impossible in a percentile ranking.
Universities then could set the cut-off for applications at an exact percentile to fill the spots rather than sifting through tens of thousands on the "same" grade.
Sounds good. Very very discriminating, as it were. But the issue doesn't go away.
I get 99.95 from a top school. You get 99.9 from one in Special Measures.
You've beaten me, really, haven't you? (just for once)
If there's one place going at BEST UNI that we both want, they should go with you, right? Or at least to go with you wouldn't be utterly outrageous and a violation of all that's good and true in this world, would it?
If you wanted to do a 'handicap' based on schools then that would be analytics not positive discrimination.
Though it would make sense to do that based on schools etc not race.
I await to see the male-only shortlists for primary school teachers.
Would you like to see that?
What about women-only shortlists for.... custodial sentences?
Yeah, and what about 'smug affluent middle-class PBtory bloke' shortlists for cleaning the bogs at London Bridge station?
I wonder who gets Euston bogs? (following the discussion yesterday).
Oh I missed that. Was there a quality convo about public toilets? Pity, I could have added serious value there, I reckon.
It was a discussion of trains and rail travel which explored, amongst much else, the way in which Euston has become run down in the anticipation of HS2- one of us remarked that the bogs were abominable by global standards (I forget whom alas). And, remarkably, Leon discovering his current residence is featured in one of the Bourne prints showing the devastation the navvies building the original railway wrought up through Camden and Primrose Hill - the Chesham of their day, evidently.
Plan B now. In a few weeks I think we will regret not taking action now.
Basically agree, but plan B has a mix of stuff in there, some of which I'm not sure about.
We should definitely do all the low/no-cost stuff: bring back facemasks for public spaces/transit/buildings, encourage WFH. We should also be doing better ventilation in schools, workplaces. We could update the symptom guidelines which are out of date. We could be sorting out sick pay for people isolating.
Basically throw everything cheap and easy at this. Then hope it's enough.
Your daily reminder that mandating masks in public spaces is not no cost.
+ it doesn't even work cf Scotland and England Covid rates during the Summer/Autumn.
I'm going to copy and paste this as often as is needed:
I've been thinking about how to best explain why the "Wales / England, masks / maskless" comparisons don't work. It's a car analogy.
Person A: "Using winter tyres in the summer uses more petrol, so it's better to shift to summer tyres when it's warm." Person B: "Ah-ha, but I'm using winter tyres here in Norfolk and you're using summer tyres there in Braemar, and my fuel efficiency is the same as yours! Therefore it makes no difference!" Person A: "Yes, because I'm forever driving up steep hills, and you're not. It would be worse again for me if I was using winter tyres"
Obviously, this vignette also proves nothing, but try to keep it in mind when you think about bulk comparisons between two different places implementing different policies.
The claim is that masks lower infection rates compared to not using them. The claim is NOT that masks make your infection rates lower than unmasked places.
It's a subtlety that can easily be lost in a debate, but it's a vital one for any system where multiple independent variables control a dependent variable (which is say basically everything in the real world).
I'm too drunk too understand the nuances in your argument. But I wear my mask in the local shop when most people don't seem to.
Then I'll simplify it: you might well be saving their lives, so well done.
I understood your point on re-reading. I don't really agree but I do wear my mask so a happy compromise.
You don't really need to agree for me to be right. I won't tread on your opinion but on a point of scientific fact, masks work.
If masks work then why the disparity in the Scotland and England Covid rates over the summer/autumn?
I'm going to copy and paste this as often as is needed:
I've been thinking about how to best explain why the "Wales / England, masks / maskless" comparisons don't work. It's a car analogy.
Person A: "Using winter tyres in the summer uses more petrol, so it's better to shift to summer tyres when it's warm." Person B: "Ah-ha, but I'm using winter tyres here in Norfolk and you're using summer tyres there in Braemar, and my fuel efficiency is the same as yours! Therefore it makes no difference!" Person A: "Yes, because I'm forever driving up steep hills, and you're not. It would be worse again for me if I was using winter tyres"
Obviously, this vignette also proves nothing, but try to keep it in mind when you think about bulk comparisons between two different places implementing different policies.
The claim is that masks lower infection rates compared to not using them. The claim is NOT that masks make your infection rates lower than unmasked places.
It's a subtlety that can easily be lost in a debate, but it's a vital one for any system where multiple independent variables control a dependent variable (which is say basically everything in the real world).
Also - the timing differences in peaks show prima facie that it is not a simple matter of masks causing covid.
Scotland is now (pace COP26) much lower in covid than England generally, but I haven't seen folk on here ascribing that entirely to the continuation of mask wearing.
Just to add to my bits of positive discrimination, I think academic admissions should concentrate on potential, not just on grades to date.
My daughter goes to a very pushy private school here in Los Angeles. I have absolutely no doubt that she will ace her SATs for college. But then so she should - she'll have been very intensively coached for them in a highly competitive environment. She will be achieving 99% of her best possible result.
For someone from a cash starved school (all the public money is going on historic pensions), and where parents didn't go to college, and just getting kids to graduate is the major goal of the teachers, then kids aren't going to be performing at 99% of their potential. Academic admissions should reflect that.
Yes. If you were a Cambridge admissions tutor for history, who has the most potential? The candidate with an A* from Eton, or the w/c candidate with an A* from Bootle comprehensive? Hard to tell, but I know which is the greater achievement. This gets more tricky if the same two candidates had, respectively, say A*A*A*,and A*AA. Would it be legitimate to positively discriminate in favour of the latter? On the grounds of potential, I'd suggest yes.
If you've interviewed both the candidates and formed a view based on that, then you would be simply discriminating in the positive sense of the word.
Plus you wouldn't just be substituting a lazy assumption about the equality of grades with a lazy assumption about the effect of schooling and the backgrounds of people who went to them.
Tony Connelly @tconnellyRTE · 1h BREAKING: The European Commission has told member states that the role of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in the Northern Ireland Protocol is not up for discussion.
Mr. kinabalu, apologies, I missed your reply before.
I'm not in favour of limiting recruitment by sex. Because of the particular nature of primary school teachers (often providing parental figures for those either lacking one or both parents or as a better version if said parents are rather bad examples) and the heavily slanted sex composition of schoolteachers I would like to see a recruitment drive for male teachers to increase the numbers. I would not advocate either all-male shortlists or some sort of quota, however.
Well that would be positive discrimination - and I think I'd agree with it too. So, ok, you bridle at "quotas" and the like, but you can get behind positive discrimination where you see a real problem. Therefore it's a matter of where you see these real problems. Maybe that's restricted to 'too few men in primary teaching' but I'd be surprised if this were the case. I mean, there's so many high status arenas where women and/or certain minorities and/or working class people are underrepresented. There really is no doubt about that. It's simply a matter of do we wish to address it and if so how. My suspicion is that the answers are (i) not really and (ii) n/a. I think we're oddly attached to privilege in this country. We quite like it, including many of those who don't have it. We find it a comfortable notion.
If by positive discrimination all you mean is adverts targeted at a group that don’t normally apply for a particular job persuading them to give it a try, then I don’t think anyone would have a problem with it.
Drat! Because I do mean more than that. Show me a determination to tackle inequality in a way that nobody has a problem with and I'll show you a determination not to tackle inequality.
Tony Connelly @tconnellyRTE · 1h BREAKING: The European Commission has told member states that the role of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in the Northern Ireland Protocol is not up for discussion.
Tony Connelly @tconnellyRTE · 1h BREAKING: The European Commission has told member states that the role of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in the Northern Ireland Protocol is not up for discussion.
Queen advised to rest for at least the next fortnight by the doctors.
London Bridge is going to fall down soon isn't it?
During COP26 perhaps?
I'm in London between the 25th of November and the 28th of November, I would greatly appreciate if Brenda can delay things until after that. I have non refundable tickets and hotel rooms and don't want to see them become unusable.
Queen advised to rest for at least the next fortnight by the doctors.
London Bridge is going to fall down soon isn't it?
Quite possibly not, although if this turns into a permanent physical decline that limits her ability to discharge her role then the time will have come for retirement.
If the Queen point blank refuses to abdicate then that's no barrier: the mechanism exists to declare a Regency.
Queen advised to rest for at least the next fortnight by the doctors.
London Bridge is going to fall down soon isn't it?
Quite possibly not, although if this turns into a permanent physical decline that limits her ability to discharge her role then the time will have come for retirement.
If the Queen point blank refuses to abdicate then that's no barrier: the mechanism exists to declare a Regency.
I'm going to ask Shadsy to put up a market on who the Regent shall be.
Queen advised to rest for at least the next fortnight by the doctors.
London Bridge is going to fall down soon isn't it?
Quite possibly not, although if this turns into a permanent physical decline that limits her ability to discharge her role then the time will have come for retirement.
If the Queen point blank refuses to abdicate then that's no barrier: the mechanism exists to declare a Regency.
I'm going to ask Shadsy to put up a market on who the Regent shall be.
My money will be going on Boris Johnson.
Perhaps a well-known resident of Regent's Park, Peter Mandelson.
Queen advised to rest for at least the next fortnight by the doctors.
London Bridge is going to fall down soon isn't it?
During COP26 perhaps?
I'm in London between the 25th of November and the 28th of November, I would greatly appreciate if Brenda can delay things until after that. I have non refundable tickets and hotel rooms and don't want to see them become unusable.
Tony Connelly @tconnellyRTE · 1h BREAKING: The European Commission has told member states that the role of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in the Northern Ireland Protocol is not up for discussion.
Queen advised to rest for at least the next fortnight by the doctors.
London Bridge is going to fall down soon isn't it?
How soon after do you expect to be told IRL?
Well, as Mike can confirm, I was told about an hour before the world (and indeed before the Queen was) that David Cameron (pbuh) was going to resign as Prime Minister.
So I'm hopeful I'll be told before Charles will be.
Plan B now. In a few weeks I think we will regret not taking action now.
Basically agree, but plan B has a mix of stuff in there, some of which I'm not sure about.
We should definitely do all the low/no-cost stuff: bring back facemasks for public spaces/transit/buildings, encourage WFH. We should also be doing better ventilation in schools, workplaces. We could update the symptom guidelines which are out of date. We could be sorting out sick pay for people isolating.
Basically throw everything cheap and easy at this. Then hope it's enough.
Your daily reminder that mandating masks in public spaces is not no cost.
+ it doesn't even work cf Scotland and England Covid rates during the Summer/Autumn.
I'm going to copy and paste this as often as is needed:
I've been thinking about how to best explain why the "Wales / England, masks / maskless" comparisons don't work. It's a car analogy.
Person A: "Using winter tyres in the summer uses more petrol, so it's better to shift to summer tyres when it's warm." Person B: "Ah-ha, but I'm using winter tyres here in Norfolk and you're using summer tyres there in Braemar, and my fuel efficiency is the same as yours! Therefore it makes no difference!" Person A: "Yes, because I'm forever driving up steep hills, and you're not. It would be worse again for me if I was using winter tyres"
Obviously, this vignette also proves nothing, but try to keep it in mind when you think about bulk comparisons between two different places implementing different policies.
The claim is that masks lower infection rates compared to not using them. The claim is NOT that masks make your infection rates lower than unmasked places.
It's a subtlety that can easily be lost in a debate, but it's a vital one for any system where multiple independent variables control a dependent variable (which is say basically everything in the real world).
I'm too drunk too understand the nuances in your argument. But I wear my mask in the local shop when most people don't seem to.
Then I'll simplify it: you might well be saving their lives, so well done.
I understood your point on re-reading. I don't really agree but I do wear my mask so a happy compromise.
You don't really need to agree for me to be right. I won't tread on your opinion but on a point of scientific fact, masks work.
If masks work then why the disparity in the Scotland and England Covid rates over the summer/autumn?
I'm going to copy and paste this as often as is needed:
I've been thinking about how to best explain why the "Wales / England, masks / maskless" comparisons don't work. It's a car analogy.
Person A: "Using winter tyres in the summer uses more petrol, so it's better to shift to summer tyres when it's warm." Person B: "Ah-ha, but I'm using winter tyres here in Norfolk and you're using summer tyres there in Braemar, and my fuel efficiency is the same as yours! Therefore it makes no difference!" Person A: "Yes, because I'm forever driving up steep hills, and you're not. It would be worse again for me if I was using winter tyres"
Obviously, this vignette also proves nothing, but try to keep it in mind when you think about bulk comparisons between two different places implementing different policies.
The claim is that masks lower infection rates compared to not using them. The claim is NOT that masks make your infection rates lower than unmasked places.
It's a subtlety that can easily be lost in a debate, but it's a vital one for any system where multiple independent variables control a dependent variable (which is say basically everything in the real world).
Also - the timing differences in peaks show prima facie that it is not a simple matter of masks causing covid.
Scotland is now (pace COP26) much lower in covid than England generally, but I haven't seen folk on here ascribing that entirely to the continuation of mask wearing.
Everyone has pet theories about the *why* of each peak. I seem only to find reasons why each idea is not correct.
For example the recent decline in cases in England isn't caused by half term (peaked around the 16th) and isn't due to everyone being on holiday (positivity)
Queen advised to rest for at least the next fortnight by the doctors.
London Bridge is going to fall down soon isn't it?
Quite possibly not, although if this turns into a permanent physical decline that limits her ability to discharge her role then the time will have come for retirement.
If the Queen point blank refuses to abdicate then that's no barrier: the mechanism exists to declare a Regency.
I'm going to ask Shadsy to put up a market on who the Regent shall be.
My money will be going on Boris Johnson.
"Regent"? I think you mis-spelt Lord Protector, in that case.....
Queen advised to rest for at least the next fortnight by the doctors.
London Bridge is going to fall down soon isn't it?
Quite possibly not, although if this turns into a permanent physical decline that limits her ability to discharge her role then the time will have come for retirement.
If the Queen point blank refuses to abdicate then that's no barrier: the mechanism exists to declare a Regency.
I seem to recall reading that HMQ would, basically, retire to Balmoral when Prince Philip passed. That certainly hasn't happened and up until very recently she has seemed very prominent. Maybe HM has just overdone it a bit. Hope it's just that.
Queen advised to rest for at least the next fortnight by the doctors.
London Bridge is going to fall down soon isn't it?
How soon after do you expect to be told IRL?
Well, as Mike can confirm, I was told about an hour before the world (and indeed before the Queen was) that David Cameron (pbuh) was going to resign as Prime Minister.
So I'm hopeful I'll be told before Charles will be.
If you buy shares in Interflora in that hour, is it insider trading?
Queen advised to rest for at least the next fortnight by the doctors.
London Bridge is going to fall down soon isn't it?
Quite possibly not, although if this turns into a permanent physical decline that limits her ability to discharge her role then the time will have come for retirement.
If the Queen point blank refuses to abdicate then that's no barrier: the mechanism exists to declare a Regency.
I'm going to ask Shadsy to put up a market on who the Regent shall be.
My money will be going on Boris Johnson.
"Regent"? I think you mis-spelt Lord Protector, in that case.....
Nah, he'll solemnly announce that the Queen's final act was to appoint him Duke of Windsor.
Queen advised to rest for at least the next fortnight by the doctors.
London Bridge is going to fall down soon isn't it?
During COP26 perhaps?
I'm in London between the 25th of November and the 28th of November, I would greatly appreciate if Brenda can delay things until after that. I have non refundable tickets and hotel rooms and don't want to see them become unusable.
I think the thing we all need to know is has Mike got any holidays booked?
To be honest, an all woman shortlist might be the only way Labour elects a female leader. And even then I'm not convinced that they wouldn't mess it up!
Would physically-male-candidates-who-self-identify-as-women* be allowed to stand
* genuine question - am so confused by the right words now… there must be a snappier way of describing someone like that?
Transwomen.
Sorry to hear about the confusion over words. I'm sure it's nothing. Did you get your 8 hours last night?
I start from the position of not wishing to inadvertently cause offence. As the topic is so fast moving and controversial and I don’t really care enough to follow it in detail I didn’t want to make a mistake
Yes, sorry, my snark wasn't apt there. Thought you were pushing the old "oh lord, what DO you call these types these days?" general reactionary trope - ho ho and yawn yawn - but I now sense you weren't. I'm a bit 'off' today, not sure why. Probably because I've been staying in the Cotswolds. That can mess with your head a bit.
French PM Jean Castex has sent a letter to Ursula von der Leyen, the Commission’s president, to notify her of Paris’ planned reprisals against the UK in the fish war. Castex asks for support because the EU needs to show ‘leaving the Union is more damaging than remaining in it’.
Why should one expect every profession to reflect the make up of society at large?
When they are making laws for society at large, frankly or even serving them coffee, then I think they absolutely should do.
You were an army officer. Should the army operate on the basis that 51% of its officer class must be be female, 15% from ethnic minorities, 93% from State schools etc.?
I struggle to see how the army would be worse if so. The entry requirements are the entry requirements.
And I've got to believe that we are close to that for those last two (ethnic minorities and state schools, although it probably repays some googling).
Edit: 12.9% ethnic minorities in the army it seems from Google.
And had you been turned down, because your particular social group had reached its quota for that year, would you consider that fair?
Edit: I do note that in 2019 49% of officer cadets came from private schools, compared to 7% of the population.
Where did you get that figure from? It is misleading at best: 7% of the school age population are at private schools, but as many mix and match the proportion that spend some time at a private school is over double: 18% of sixth-formers are at an independent school according to wiki.
Fair point. Btu, certainly, the army officer class is disproportionately drawn from the privately educated.
How many state schools have CCF contingents (and I know some do from direct experience: in most schools seeing some of your pupils with weapons would lead to a panicked call to the Head or even the police, in that one you just thought “must be Thursday” and moved on).
Mine does.
Not that some of them need an excuse to carry weapons, tbf.
I once confiscated a sword...
Never been that far. A kukri is the best one I've had to deal with.
When I was about 13, I bough a hunking great Kukri from a stall at the Ideal Home Exhibition at the NEC.
Queen advised to rest for at least the next fortnight by the doctors.
London Bridge is going to fall down soon isn't it?
Quite possibly not, although if this turns into a permanent physical decline that limits her ability to discharge her role then the time will have come for retirement.
If the Queen point blank refuses to abdicate then that's no barrier: the mechanism exists to declare a Regency.
I'm going to ask Shadsy to put up a market on who the Regent shall be.
My money will be going on Boris Johnson.
"Regent"? I think you mis-spelt Lord Protector, in that case.....
Nah, he'll solemnly announce that the Queen's final act was to appoint him Duke of Windsor.
Queen advised to rest for at least the next fortnight by the doctors.
London Bridge is going to fall down soon isn't it?
During COP26 perhaps?
I'm in London between the 25th of November and the 28th of November, I would greatly appreciate if Brenda can delay things until after that. I have non refundable tickets and hotel rooms and don't want to see them become unusable.
I think the thing we all need to know is has Mike got any holidays booked?
He hasn't informed me and normally he tells me a couple of months in advance.
French PM Jean Castex has sent a letter to Ursula von der Leyen, the Commission’s president, to notify her of Paris’ planned reprisals against the UK in the fish war. Castex asks for support because the EU needs to show ‘leaving the Union is more damaging than remaining in it’.
Queen advised to rest for at least the next fortnight by the doctors.
London Bridge is going to fall down soon isn't it?
How soon after do you expect to be told IRL?
Well, as Mike can confirm, I was told about an hour before the world (and indeed before the Queen was) that David Cameron (pbuh) was going to resign as Prime Minister.
So I'm hopeful I'll be told before Charles will be.
If you buy shares in Interflora in that hour, is it insider trading?
Queen advised to rest for at least the next fortnight by the doctors.
London Bridge is going to fall down soon isn't it?
During COP26 perhaps?
I'm in London between the 25th of November and the 28th of November, I would greatly appreciate if Brenda can delay things until after that. I have non refundable tickets and hotel rooms and don't want to see them become unusable.
I think the thing we all need to know is has Mike got any holidays booked?
He hasn't informed me and normally he tells me a couple of months in advance.
Then relax, HM should be safe until you get that notification.
Queen advised to rest for at least the next fortnight by the doctors.
London Bridge is going to fall down soon isn't it?
How soon after do you expect to be told IRL?
Well, as Mike can confirm, I was told about an hour before the world (and indeed before the Queen was) that David Cameron (pbuh) was going to resign as Prime Minister.
So I'm hopeful I'll be told before Charles will be.
If you buy shares in Interflora in that hour, is it insider trading?
Queen advised to rest for at least the next fortnight by the doctors.
London Bridge is going to fall down soon isn't it?
How soon after do you expect to be told IRL?
Well, as Mike can confirm, I was told about an hour before the world (and indeed before the Queen was) that David Cameron (pbuh) was going to resign as Prime Minister.
So I'm hopeful I'll be told before Charles will be.
If you buy shares in Interflora in that hour, is it insider trading?
Will the Labour membership vote for a woman? Every single woman who has stood for a membership vote for leader, has been beaten by every man in the contest.
Finally an admission from the right that status quo/traditional selection processes dont automatically pick the best person for the job. Hope that will be remembered for the next positive discrimination discussions, the Labour Party is a great example to use.
If the prior processes are not picking the right person for the job then the solution is to tackle the discrimination so that going forwards the best person is chosen.
"Positive discrimination" is still discrimination, it doesn't do that.
Yes of course, if you could magically get rid of all the discriminatory biases and processes in the real world that would be fantastic. Also magical, it ain't gonna happen. Human brains are built on using bias and pattern recognition very heavily, more than we use rationality.
No need for magic, just tackling the real issues.
"Positive discrimination" is no better at finding the right person for the job, if you're still discriminating against the people you were discriminating against then the 'right person' still suffers because they're being discriminated against. Promoting someone else from the same group because "they all look the same" to you isn't a fix.
What a random non sequitur. All woman and all men do not look the same time to me.
Shh. You’re interrupting my lunch setting me worrying about what a non-random non sequitur would look like.
On reflection, ISTM that this who be somebody who, whatever you had said, started talking about carrots. Definitely not random. But you wouldn’t know that, the first time.
Queen advised to rest for at least the next fortnight by the doctors.
London Bridge is going to fall down soon isn't it?
How soon after do you expect to be told IRL?
Well, as Mike can confirm, I was told about an hour before the world (and indeed before the Queen was) that David Cameron (pbuh) was going to resign as Prime Minister.
So I'm hopeful I'll be told before Charles will be.
If you buy shares in Interflora in that hour, is it insider trading?
Tony Connelly @tconnellyRTE · 1h BREAKING: The European Commission has told member states that the role of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in the Northern Ireland Protocol is not up for discussion.
Looks like the end of the protocol unless common sense is applied by both sides and urgently
Triggering Article 16 does not mean the end of the Protocol at all. It means that either side can take action they deem necessary to prevent societal, economic or environmental difficulties. Indeed even if it is triggered nothing changes for a month and during that time both sides are supposed to meet to resolve the issues. Only if they fail is any action actually taken. And that cannot reasonably be the suspension of the whole Protocol. UK or EU actions are strictly limited under the treaty to what is necessary to prevent the disruption.
So given that the involvement of the ECJ is extremely unlikely to cause immediate disruption on any of those 3 grounds I think it would be difficult to justify triggering the article on that basis. It would require the UK to do something which the ECJ rules to be in breech and then for that to cause disruption. A theoretical oversight does not seem to meet the necessary criteria.
Queen advised to rest for at least the next fortnight by the doctors.
London Bridge is going to fall down soon isn't it?
How soon after do you expect to be told IRL?
Well, as Mike can confirm, I was told about an hour before the world (and indeed before the Queen was) that David Cameron (pbuh) was going to resign as Prime Minister.
So I'm hopeful I'll be told before Charles will be.
If you buy shares in Interflora in that hour, is it insider trading?
I'm like Caesar's wife.
You self-harm?
Well I've spent a lot of time with men in drag.
I didn’t think you did much trial work.
Only as a witness.
However in my student days I spent a lot of time in gay bars and a lot of long lasting friendships were begat in those bars and clubs.
Mr. kinabalu, apologies, I missed your reply before.
I'm not in favour of limiting recruitment by sex. Because of the particular nature of primary school teachers (often providing parental figures for those either lacking one or both parents or as a better version if said parents are rather bad examples) and the heavily slanted sex composition of schoolteachers I would like to see a recruitment drive for male teachers to increase the numbers. I would not advocate either all-male shortlists or some sort of quota, however.
Well that would be positive discrimination - and I think I'd agree with it too. So, ok, you bridle at "quotas" and the like, but you can get behind positive discrimination where you see a real problem. Therefore it's a matter of where you see these real problems. Maybe that's restricted to 'too few men in primary teaching' but I'd be surprised if this were the case. I mean, there's so many high status arenas where women and/or certain minorities and/or working class people are underrepresented. There really is no doubt about that. It's simply a matter of do we wish to address it and if so how. My suspicion is that the answers are (i) not really and (ii) n/a. I think we're oddly attached to privilege in this country. We quite like it, including many of those who don't have it. We find it a comfortable notion.
We are attached to privilege but not just in this country.
When we gain a coveted position, most of us take the view that "God has given us the Papacy, let us enjoy it."
It's also human nature to think we deserve it. This, imo, is one of the major handicaps the left in politics faces. That the biggest single determinant in life outcome is birth circumstances, this is true but a hard sell. It's not romantic. It's not nice to think about. And furthermore for most individual successes, the person owes a massive amount to luck and to other things/people, as opposed to their own 'merit'. Eg the bank trader using the firm's settlement and accounting processes, IT, balance sheet etc will nevertheless think HE has made the money. It's total bollox. But it's a necessary mental piece of falsethink for self esteem and justification. You see this all the time. The truth, the cold collectivist deterministic truth, is not palatable, therefore people reject it, protect the status quo, vote Conservative. This is why Labour don't win many elections - and why when they do they need to make it count.
Tony Connelly @tconnellyRTE · 1h BREAKING: The European Commission has told member states that the role of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in the Northern Ireland Protocol is not up for discussion.
Looks like the end of the protocol unless common sense is applied by both sides and urgently
Triggering Article 16 does not mean the end of the Protocol at all. It means that either side can take action they deem necessary to prevent societal, economic or environmental difficulties. Indeed even if it is triggered nothing changes for a month and during that time both sides are supposed to meet to resolve the issues. Only if they fail is any action actually taken. And that cannot reasonably be the suspension of the whole Protocol. UK or EU actions are strictly limited under the treaty to what is necessary to prevent the disruption.
So given that the involvement of the ECJ is extremely unlikely to cause immediate disruption on any of those 3 grounds I think it would be difficult to justify triggering the article on that basis. It would require the UK to do something which the ECJ rules to be in breech and then for that to cause disruption. A theoretical oversight does not seem to meet the necessary criteria.
I tend to think that the debate about the ECJ is a bit of a red herring.
Unless I missed something the role is quite limited.
Prince Andrew is going to be part of the Regency Council isn't he?
Prince Andrew is one of the counsellors of state (as is Prince Harry) but I don't think that's likely to become relevant. AIUI they aren't involved in the process of declaring the incapacity of the monarch in any case. That's up to a separate list of figures currently including Dominic Raab and Lindsay Hoyle.
I am working on the assumption here that the most likely grounds for a regency is actually the Queen declaring her own wish to retire from public life on the grounds of infirmity, clearing the way for Prince Charles to be appointed in accordance with the relevant legislation.
Mr. kinabalu, apologies, I missed your reply before.
I'm not in favour of limiting recruitment by sex. Because of the particular nature of primary school teachers (often providing parental figures for those either lacking one or both parents or as a better version if said parents are rather bad examples) and the heavily slanted sex composition of schoolteachers I would like to see a recruitment drive for male teachers to increase the numbers. I would not advocate either all-male shortlists or some sort of quota, however.
Well that would be positive discrimination - and I think I'd agree with it too. So, ok, you bridle at "quotas" and the like, but you can get behind positive discrimination where you see a real problem. Therefore it's a matter of where you see these real problems. Maybe that's restricted to 'too few men in primary teaching' but I'd be surprised if this were the case. I mean, there's so many high status arenas where women and/or certain minorities and/or working class people are underrepresented. There really is no doubt about that. It's simply a matter of do we wish to address it and if so how. My suspicion is that the answers are (i) not really and (ii) n/a. I think we're oddly attached to privilege in this country. We quite like it, including many of those who don't have it. We find it a comfortable notion.
We are attached to privilege but not just in this country.
When we gain a coveted position, most of us take the view that "God has given us the Papacy, let us enjoy it."
It's also human nature to think we deserve it. This, imo, is one of the major handicaps the left in politics faces. That the biggest single determinant in life outcome is birth circumstances, this is true but a hard sell. It's not romantic. It's not nice to think about. And furthermore for most individual successes, the person owes a massive amount to luck and to other things/people, as opposed to their own 'merit'. Eg the bank trader using the firm's settlement and accounting processes, IT, balance sheet etc will nevertheless think HE has made the money. It's total bollox. But it's a necessary mental piece of falsethink for self esteem and justification. You see this all the time. The truth, the cold collectivist deterministic truth, is not palatable, therefore people reject it, protect the status quo, vote Conservative. This is why Labour don't win many elections - and why when they do they need to make it count.
You also run up against one of the most powerful instincts of all: the need to make sure that your offspring succeed though whatever help you can give them. Any policy that seems to reduce the ability of people to help their children do better is not going to go down well, which is why IHT is so unpopular.
Since we're hot on the Sci-fi metaphors at the moment-
Has Herdson Sublimed?
David Herdson @DavidHerdson · 3m I don't think I'm going all conspiracy theory here to suggest that we're not being given the whole picture.
You don't *extend* an advised period of rest by this much unless the problem it's designed to deal with has worsened
David makes the point I was going to raise.
Going by this schedule, HM is due to return to her normal duties with the Remembrance Day service.
That's an unmovable commitment unless she really is very unwell.
If she misses that...
Doesn't she watch from a third floor window these days?
I think it's pretty obvious what the issue is. Not sure why they won't just say it.
Not to me it isn't. Explain?
Bear in mind how medicine minimises to the patient: not necessarily a tumour, not necessarily malign, not necessarily moved to the lymph glands, not necessarily moved beyond the lymph glands ... etc. That's what HM herself is being told at the moment; it won't be the case that the palace has been given worse news than it is passing on.
Queen advised to rest for at least the next fortnight by the doctors.
London Bridge is going to fall down soon isn't it?
How soon after do you expect to be told IRL?
Well, as Mike can confirm, I was told about an hour before the world (and indeed before the Queen was) that David Cameron (pbuh) was going to resign as Prime Minister.
So I'm hopeful I'll be told before Charles will be.
If you buy shares in Interflora in that hour, is it insider trading?
Jersey Fisheries Association chap on R4 - pointing out that some of the boats claiming to have been fishing in Jersey waters in the past would have been doing so illegally as they didn’t hold licences then. So Jersey is asking the French “do you WANT us to prosecute them for historic illegal fishing?”.
Will the Labour membership vote for a woman? Every single woman who has stood for a membership vote for leader, has been beaten by every man in the contest.
Finally an admission from the right that status quo/traditional selection processes dont automatically pick the best person for the job. Hope that will be remembered for the next positive discrimination discussions, the Labour Party is a great example to use.
If the prior processes are not picking the right person for the job then the solution is to tackle the discrimination so that going forwards the best person is chosen.
"Positive discrimination" is still discrimination, it doesn't do that.
Yes of course, if you could magically get rid of all the discriminatory biases and processes in the real world that would be fantastic. Also magical, it ain't gonna happen. Human brains are built on using bias and pattern recognition very heavily, more than we use rationality.
No need for magic, just tackling the real issues.
"Positive discrimination" is no better at finding the right person for the job, if you're still discriminating against the people you were discriminating against then the 'right person' still suffers because they're being discriminated against. Promoting someone else from the same group because "they all look the same" to you isn't a fix.
What a random non sequitur. All woman and all men do not look the same time to me.
Shh. You’re interrupting my lunch setting me worrying about what a non-random non sequitur would look like.
On reflection, ISTM that this who be somebody who, whatever you had said, started talking about carrots. Definitely not random. But you wouldn’t know that, the first time.
So a random non-sequitur really only exists in the plural.
Tony Connelly @tconnellyRTE · 1h BREAKING: The European Commission has told member states that the role of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in the Northern Ireland Protocol is not up for discussion.
Probably true for them, but that's the problem with saying earlier things were red lines and then it turned out they were not, it makes the other side believe they are not red lines.
@ABC "What happened was, to use an English phrase, what we did was clumsy," Pres. Biden says during meeting with French Pres. Macron about the recent U.S. snub of France for nuclear submarine technology in favor of Australia.
"France is an extremely, extremely valued partner."
French PM Jean Castex has sent a letter to Ursula von der Leyen, the Commission’s president, to notify her of Paris’ planned reprisals against the UK in the fish war. Castex asks for support because the EU needs to show ‘leaving the Union is more damaging than remaining in it’.
I genuinely thought the Afghans were going to win that, just shows how much a match can flip on a single over. Was anyone watching Betfair as that unfolded?
French PM Jean Castex has sent a letter to Ursula von der Leyen, the Commission’s president, to notify her of Paris’ planned reprisals against the UK in the fish war. Castex asks for support because the EU needs to show ‘leaving the Union is more damaging than remaining in it’.
Jean, that's what you say in the phone call, not the official letter. Do people just not even care about claiming the moral high ground anymore? That's actually a positive development.
YouGov is the start. In a few weeks it will be unpopular and Tories will pretend they never agreed with it
In a few weeks no one will be talking about it.
Are you saying the whole point of the Budget was just to achieve a temporary increase in the Conservative Party's poll rating?
Silly me - I thought it was meant to be a significant speech outlining the economic direction of the country.
I think he was saying that all budgets go through a news cycle and a few weeks down the line the cycle has passed for most people. Significance or lack thereof in a budget does not get shown by the public reaction I think.
Comments
Though it would make sense to do that based on schools etc not race.
Scotland is now (pace COP26) much lower in covid than England generally, but I haven't seen folk on here ascribing that entirely to the continuation of mask wearing.
London Bridge is going to fall down soon isn't it?
@tconnellyRTE
·
1h
BREAKING: The European Commission has told member states that the role of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in the Northern Ireland Protocol is not up for discussion.
https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1454098540301541377?s=20
If the Queen point blank refuses to abdicate then that's no barrier: the mechanism exists to declare a Regency.
My money will be going on Boris Johnson.
So I'm hopeful I'll be told before Charles will be.
For example the recent decline in cases in England isn't caused by half term (peaked around the 16th) and isn't due to everyone being on holiday (positivity)
Unless there's a whole bunch of other hospital visits that we've not been told about.
https://twitter.com/Barnes_Joe/status/1454110348005490693
https://twitter.com/OpiniumResearch/status/1453787187661713414?t=i_P3HcwzYN0UJkn-qADTBw&s=19
Has Herdson Sublimed?
David Herdson
@DavidHerdson
·
3m
I don't think I'm going all conspiracy theory here to suggest that we're not being given the whole picture.
You don't *extend* an advised period of rest by this much unless the problem it's designed to deal with has worsened
Next one due in the USN is the Nimitz I think, and all the ones from here are nucleonic.
Which is a bit tough to remove 50 years of radioactivity from.
Going by this schedule, HM is due to return to her normal duties with the Remembrance Day service.
That's an unmovable commitment unless she really is very unwell.
If she misses that...
I think it's pretty obvious what the issue is. Not sure why they won't just say it.
Unless this was only a day or 2 ago, in which case nice knowing you.
So given that the involvement of the ECJ is extremely unlikely to cause immediate disruption on any of those 3 grounds I think it would be difficult to justify triggering the article on that basis. It would require the UK to do something which the ECJ rules to be in breech and then for that to cause disruption. A theoretical oversight does not seem to meet the necessary criteria.
However in my student days I spent a lot of time in gay bars and a lot of long lasting friendships were begat in those bars and clubs.
Unless I missed something the role is quite limited.
I am working on the assumption here that the most likely grounds for a regency is actually the Queen declaring her own wish to retire from public life on the grounds of infirmity, clearing the way for Prince Charles to be appointed in accordance with the relevant legislation.
I remember they had like a gazillion Regents.
Prescribe a drug and London Bridge falls, you get the blame, but everyone knows brandy never killed anyone...
Bear in mind how medicine minimises to the patient: not necessarily a tumour, not necessarily malign, not necessarily moved to the lymph glands, not necessarily moved beyond the lymph glands ... etc. That's what HM herself is being told at the moment; it won't be the case that the palace has been given worse news than it is passing on.
Answer came there none…
I'm more intrigued by Biden today.
If I was meeting God's representative on earth - I think a kneel more than a simple handshake might be more appropriate??
@ABC
"What happened was, to use an English phrase, what we did was clumsy," Pres. Biden says during meeting with French Pres. Macron about the recent U.S. snub of France for nuclear submarine technology in favor of Australia.
"France is an extremely, extremely valued partner."
https://twitter.com/ABC/status/1454135251056447491
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/04/21/the-palace-is-laying-the-groundwork-for-a-regency/
Did it in six balls.
YouGov is the start. In a few weeks it will be unpopular and Tories will pretend they never agreed with it
Classic T20. Asif Ali MOTM for 7 balls!!
India were 430/9 needing 24 to avoid the follow on.
Kapil Dev then hit Eddie Hemmings for four consecutives sixes.
Narenda Hirawani was out next ball.
Silly me - I thought it was meant to be a significant speech outlining the economic direction of the country.
The ruthless enforcement of the Tebbit test in India has guaranteed it.