My 6 months were up yesterday. This morning I got my reminder and I am booked for my booster on Monday. All in all pretty slick operation.
Rubbish operation in Ayrshire. Mrs Fairliered and I have always been called together for our jags, whether Covid or Flu. I have received a letter to attend for my flu jag (and presumably my Covid booster) next Saturday. Mrs Fairliered didn’t receive a letter until this morning. She is being asked to go the following Saturday, when we are away for a family celebration. The online booking system (referred to in her letter) wouldn’t let her log in, as it is only for health and social care workers. She phoned and eventually spoke to someone who told her there were no other appointments anywhere, or at any time.
Yeah, but that was a preserved operation. Surely you need to do it again now it's part of the official network. Do you need much of an excuse?
(It's actually going to be brilliant for walkers and riders. Really convenient for some brilliant terrain; sadly, not an area I've done yet.)
NOT a preserved operation, it was a GWR summer Sunday service. So there!
The one I really regret not doing before the pandemic was Dale Rail (Clitheroe to Hellifield). Oh, and the small matter of Inverness to Kyle, and also the Thurso/Wick line. Also need to do the Metrolink branch to Trafford Centre.
But in September I at least added the Battersea Power Station branch of the Northern Line
My two favourite lines are the Settle to Carlise: absolutely stunning and, of course, the West Highland Line which has justifiably been voted the most beautiful railway journey in the world.
The Okey line is pretty. As, of course, is the Dawlish line too.
Surely the Okey line should be just a bit above or below average - i.e. roughly OK?
One of the best things about Okehampton station is that it's high above the town so for hikers and cyclists there's great access to the moor in a variety of directions.
She had bigger battles to fight. And at least she didn't complete the closures. Her own school for example remains a Grammar to this day.
You are still not answering why you think your bought privileges should be denied to others less fortunate than yourself?
Because my 'bought privileges' didn't harm other children in the way grammar schools do.
In what way does a Grammar school harm the children who don't attend it?
Results for secondary moderns (i.e. none Grammar schools) in Bucks are better than a lot of Comprehensives elsewhere.
Heck their results are better than all bar 2 of my local comprehensives - and that's after the top 20% of the children have been removed. I say top 20% because it's remarkable how many Grammar School pupils commute into Buckinghamshire from Harrow.
Grammar schools damage social cohesion and make no difference to exam grades — new research
...The damage of grammar schools.
But this is not just a UK issue, as evidence shows that the disproportionate clustering of students within schools in terms of their ability, is a matter of concern worldwide.
All other things being equal, research shows that school systems across the world with higher levels of segregation of students by their parental income or immigrant status have been linked to lower overall attainment and weaker progress wherever this has been assessed.
It is also likely that children going to school in segregated areas will have less qualified teachers. This can lead to reduced opportunities to learn.
The school mix by socioeconomic status even seems to negatively influence how students are treated in school, as well as teachers’ expectations, and their relationships with pupils. This socioeconomic schooling divide also seems to have a negative impact on wider non-cognitive outcomes, such as emotional and behavioural problems, students’ sense of justice, civic knowledge andinflue engagement.
All of which shows that dividing children by their ability levels from an early age, does not appear to lead to better results for either group. This is not to decry the schools that are currently grammars, or the work of their staff. It simply shows that the kind of social segregation experienced by children in certain areas in England exists for no clear gain.
Nope, because the state isn't quite so influential with private schools as they are with grammar schools.
Can you explain?
Surely the percentage of children entering private schools also influences the socioeconomic demographics of the schools they would have enrolled in.
Losing ~7% of the wealthiest children should also " negatively influence how students are treated in school, as well as teachers’ expectations" no?
I'll do it in a thread in the next few weeks, will include my plan to abolish the DfE and give the money to parents directly via vouchers, the poorest parents get more vouchers.
Still influencing the demographics. Assuming you're allowing the schools charge beyond the means of the poorest.
The thing is that throughout the world people have spent the last 100 years trying to get economic advantages out of school selection - and absolutely nothing works because the brighter parents will read the rule book and find the tricks that get them what they want.
The only solution that vaguely works is Private Education because at least it just removes those who agree with it and can afford it from the equation.
I understand, there will never be a perfect system.
For me equality of opportunity should be all. But in our bifurcated system it seems a minority get the superior opportunities and therefore the superior outcomes.
A perfect summation of the attempts to level the system -
Where I live, there are basically 2 state primaries. One is crap and the other brilliant - people have been convicted in court of lying about their address to get into the good one.
The brilliant one is right next to some social housing. Everyone in the social housing sends their children to the crap one - which is further away (99% anyway).
The brilliant one is very middle class.
The reasons? The good one - "isn't for the likes of us"... "too much homework and reading"... "really strict about going on holiday in term time"...
She had bigger battles to fight. And at least she didn't complete the closures. Her own school for example remains a Grammar to this day.
You are still not answering why you think your bought privileges should be denied to others less fortunate than yourself?
Because my 'bought privileges' didn't harm other children in the way grammar schools do.
In what way does a Grammar school harm the children who don't attend it?
Results for secondary moderns (i.e. none Grammar schools) in Bucks are better than a lot of Comprehensives elsewhere.
Heck their results are better than all bar 2 of my local comprehensives - and that's after the top 20% of the children have been removed. I say top 20% because it's remarkable how many Grammar School pupils commute into Buckinghamshire from Harrow.
Grammar schools damage social cohesion and make no difference to exam grades — new research
...The damage of grammar schools.
But this is not just a UK issue, as evidence shows that the disproportionate clustering of students within schools in terms of their ability, is a matter of concern worldwide.
All other things being equal, research shows that school systems across the world with higher levels of segregation of students by their parental income or immigrant status have been linked to lower overall attainment and weaker progress wherever this has been assessed.
It is also likely that children going to school in segregated areas will have less qualified teachers. This can lead to reduced opportunities to learn.
The school mix by socioeconomic status even seems to negatively influence how students are treated in school, as well as teachers’ expectations, and their relationships with pupils. This socioeconomic schooling divide also seems to have a negative impact on wider non-cognitive outcomes, such as emotional and behavioural problems, students’ sense of justice, civic knowledge and engagement.
All of which shows that dividing children by their ability levels from an early age, does not appear to lead to better results for either group. This is not to decry the schools that are currently grammars, or the work of their staff. It simply shows that the kind of social segregation experienced by children in certain areas in England exists for no clear gain.
If you support private school choice, as I do, then you also should support grammar school choice in my view. If you want to allow selection by parental income you must also allow selection by academic ability.
Plus Germany still has selective schools, Gymnasiums and is a generally meritocratic, prosperous economy with a bigger manufacturing base than we have
Don't start me on Grammar Schools HY. I went to one. An absolutely loathsome place, and besides which selection for life at aged 11 is immoral.
It's such backward thinking this hankering for Grammar schools. They were outdated 50 years ago let alone now. There are tons of innovative ideas kicking around in education, different options and ways we can structure it for the contemporary world, free of elitism by money or narrow academic selection.
No one in this case is coming out well. It was interesting that so many US lawyers on all sides were criticising the prosecution yesterday for attacking Rittenhouse's use of the right to silence. Apparently in the US this is absolutely sacrosanct and there was a lot of anger about him trying to convince the jury that its use was in some way an admission of guilt.
Mind you the judge really is a piece of work.
Indeed. One of the two warnings when an arrestee is read their rights in the UK would be considered unconsititutional in the US:
“But, it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court.”
No one in this case is coming out well. It was interesting that so many US lawyers on all sides were criticising the prosecution yesterday for attacking Rittenhouse's use of the right to silence. Apparently in the US this is absolutely sacrosanct and there was a lot of anger about him trying to convince the jury that its use was in some way an admission of guilt.
Is that really that uncommon, even with it supposed to be sacrosanct? There's a lot of people who conditionally support that right but want a lot inferred from silence or refusal to 'clear your name', and given that I'd think there are enough disruptable lawyers to try it on.
Of course, if TV were in any way accurate (it isn't..I hope) lawyers constantly say and do things that are flagrantly wrong but it's totally ok if you just say you withdraw it afterwards.
Sort of yes to the first one and yes to the second one. The hospital funnel is definitely negative in that more people are leaving hospitals than turning up.
I know a lot of people who are really angry about this tory sleaze. And they're not your left-wing types.
I was chatting to a woman from Essex yesterday (I know, but still, I was), a working class Leaver who hated Corbyn and voted enthusiastically Con at GE19, and she told me there was 'no way' she was voting Con next time because Johnson is 'just a liar'.
Doesn't matter in Essex, not a single Conservative seat in Essex is now in the top 100 Labour targets or top 50 LD target seats.
Essex is now a safe Tory county compared to the Blair years when it was full of Tory marginals New Labour won in 1997 (the same largely goes for East Kent)
Pride comes before a fall
No, just facts.
Labour would need a huge swing of 8.8% to win its first seat in Essex, Colchester and the LDs would need an even bigger swing of 15% to win their first seat in Essex, Chelmsford
Today's facts are not tomorrow's
Boris has damaged trust in an idiotic manoeuvre and cannot even say he is sorry but disappears to Glasgow
Meanwhile Rishi gives an assured interview and agrees HMG got it wrong
Didn't see the Rishi interview but he is, assuredly, the ideal antidote for a country tired by Boris and his antics, but distrustful of Labour. My impression is that the polls are being driven by Tory voters withdrawing their support rather than swinging enthusiastically into the Labour (or LibDem) columns. Rishi could well win them back with his modesty/sincerity/competency shtick.
Given the choice of Starmer and Rishi for PM, I suspect a lot of people will plump for Rishi just to remove the risk of a Labour SNP coalition.
She had bigger battles to fight. And at least she didn't complete the closures. Her own school for example remains a Grammar to this day.
You are still not answering why you think your bought privileges should be denied to others less fortunate than yourself?
Because my 'bought privileges' didn't harm other children in the way grammar schools do.
In what way does a Grammar school harm the children who don't attend it?
Results for secondary moderns (i.e. none Grammar schools) in Bucks are better than a lot of Comprehensives elsewhere.
Heck their results are better than all bar 2 of my local comprehensives - and that's after the top 20% of the children have been removed. I say top 20% because it's remarkable how many Grammar School pupils commute into Buckinghamshire from Harrow.
Grammar schools damage social cohesion and make no difference to exam grades — new research
...The damage of grammar schools.
But this is not just a UK issue, as evidence shows that the disproportionate clustering of students within schools in terms of their ability, is a matter of concern worldwide.
All other things being equal, research shows that school systems across the world with higher levels of segregation of students by their parental income or immigrant status have been linked to lower overall attainment and weaker progress wherever this has been assessed.
It is also likely that children going to school in segregated areas will have less qualified teachers. This can lead to reduced opportunities to learn.
The school mix by socioeconomic status even seems to negatively influence how students are treated in school, as well as teachers’ expectations, and their relationships with pupils. This socioeconomic schooling divide also seems to have a negative impact on wider non-cognitive outcomes, such as emotional and behavioural problems, students’ sense of justice, civic knowledge and engagement.
All of which shows that dividing children by their ability levels from an early age, does not appear to lead to better results for either group. This is not to decry the schools that are currently grammars, or the work of their staff. It simply shows that the kind of social segregation experienced by children in certain areas in England exists for no clear gain.
If you support private school choice, as I do, then you also should support grammar school choice in my view. If you want to allow selection by parental income you must also allow selection by academic ability.
Plus Germany still has selective schools, Gymnasiums and is a generally meritocratic, prosperous economy with a bigger manufacturing base than we have
Don't start me on Grammar Schools HY. I went to one. An absolutely loathsome place, and besides which selection for life at aged 11 is immoral.
It's such backward thinking this hankering for Grammar schools. They were outdated 50 years ago let alone now. There are tons of innovative ideas kicking around in education, different options and ways we can structure it for the contemporary world, free of elitism by money or narrow academic selection.
It would be impossible to do sanely but it does seem strange in the 21st century that you are taught in the classroom (usually by a second or third rate presenter) and then practice at home. It would make a lot more sense to use homework time for the actual lessons (via computer with top notch presenters and explanations) with school time spent practicing with the teachers there to solve misunderstandings and correct mistakes.
I know a lot of people who are really angry about this tory sleaze. And they're not your left-wing types.
I was chatting to a woman from Essex yesterday (I know, but still, I was), a working class Leaver who hated Corbyn and voted enthusiastically Con at GE19, and she told me there was 'no way' she was voting Con next time because Johnson is 'just a liar'.
Doesn't matter in Essex, not a single Conservative seat in Essex is now in the top 100 Labour targets or top 50 LD target seats.
Essex is now a safe Tory county compared to the Blair years when it was full of Tory marginals New Labour won in 1997 (the same largely goes for East Kent)
Pride comes before a fall
No, just facts.
Labour would need a huge swing of 8.8% to win its first seat in Essex, Colchester and the LDs would need an even bigger swing of 15% to win their first seat in Essex, Chelmsford
Today's facts are not tomorrow's
Boris has damaged trust in an idiotic manoeuvre and cannot even say he is sorry but disappears to Glasgow
Meanwhile Rishi gives an assured interview and agrees HMG got it wrong
Didn't see the Rishi interview but he is, assuredly, the ideal antidote for a country tired by Boris and his antics, but distrustful of Labour. My impression is that the polls are being driven by Tory voters withdrawing their support rather than swinging enthusiastically into the Labour (or LibDem) columns. Rishi could well win them back with his modesty/sincerity/competency shtick.
Given the choice of Starmer and Rishi for PM, I suspect a lot of people will plump for Rishi just to remove the risk of a Labour SNP coalition.
I'd quite like a Labour SNP coalition.
I did for 30 seconds and then imagined the £100m+ that would need to be thrown towards Scotland every time a difficult vote came up...
My 6 months were up yesterday. This morning I got my reminder and I am booked for my booster on Monday. All in all pretty slick operation.
Rubbish operation in Ayrshire. Mrs Fairliered and I have always been called together for our jags, whether Covid or Flu. I have received a letter to attend for my flu jag (and presumably my Covid booster) next Saturday. Mrs Fairliered didn’t receive a letter until this morning. She is being asked to go the following Saturday, when we are away for a family celebration. The online booking system (referred to in her letter) wouldn’t let her log in, as it is only for health and social care workers. She phoned and eventually spoke to someone who told her there were no other appointments anywhere, or at any time.
Very odd, over in the SE of Scotland we had letters 2 weeks in advance for both of us together, and we could change online or on the phone, and the letter gave us the necessary codes. Must be a health board region thing.
Possibly the lack of appointments could be because takeup is very high. There weren't that many slots left when we had a look, and the nurses said it was very much taken up.
Has nobody spotted that yesterday had the highest number of first doses of Vaccine since July.
(And highest number of second doses since Sept).
I did. But I was told it is "data catch up" by Max, who normally knows his Covid onions
It's still good because what we thought were poor numbers was just an underreporting error. The booster shots look positively smashing at the moment. Should hit 3m per week next week.
Yeah, but that was a preserved operation. Surely you need to do it again now it's part of the official network. Do you need much of an excuse?
(It's actually going to be brilliant for walkers and riders. Really convenient for some brilliant terrain; sadly, not an area I've done yet.)
NOT a preserved operation, it was a GWR summer Sunday service. So there!
The one I really regret not doing before the pandemic was Dale Rail (Clitheroe to Hellifield). Oh, and the small matter of Inverness to Kyle, and also the Thurso/Wick line. Also need to do the Metrolink branch to Trafford Centre.
But in September I at least added the Battersea Power Station branch of the Northern Line
Get on with the northern branches when you can. Well worth it. At least the train reverses and trundles from Thurso to Wick before going south, IIRC, or maybe it is the other way round, so you mayn't need to go twice north of Dingwall.
She had bigger battles to fight. And at least she didn't complete the closures. Her own school for example remains a Grammar to this day.
You are still not answering why you think your bought privileges should be denied to others less fortunate than yourself?
Because my 'bought privileges' didn't harm other children in the way grammar schools do.
In what way does a Grammar school harm the children who don't attend it?
Results for secondary moderns (i.e. none Grammar schools) in Bucks are better than a lot of Comprehensives elsewhere.
Heck their results are better than all bar 2 of my local comprehensives - and that's after the top 20% of the children have been removed. I say top 20% because it's remarkable how many Grammar School pupils commute into Buckinghamshire from Harrow.
Grammar schools damage social cohesion and make no difference to exam grades — new research
...The damage of grammar schools.
But this is not just a UK issue, as evidence shows that the disproportionate clustering of students within schools in terms of their ability, is a matter of concern worldwide.
All other things being equal, research shows that school systems across the world with higher levels of segregation of students by their parental income or immigrant status have been linked to lower overall attainment and weaker progress wherever this has been assessed.
It is also likely that children going to school in segregated areas will have less qualified teachers. This can lead to reduced opportunities to learn.
The school mix by socioeconomic status even seems to negatively influence how students are treated in school, as well as teachers’ expectations, and their relationships with pupils. This socioeconomic schooling divide also seems to have a negative impact on wider non-cognitive outcomes, such as emotional and behavioural problems, students’ sense of justice, civic knowledge and engagement.
All of which shows that dividing children by their ability levels from an early age, does not appear to lead to better results for either group. This is not to decry the schools that are currently grammars, or the work of their staff. It simply shows that the kind of social segregation experienced by children in certain areas in England exists for no clear gain.
If you support private school choice, as I do, then you also should support grammar school choice in my view. If you want to allow selection by parental income you must also allow selection by academic ability.
Plus Germany still has selective schools, Gymnasiums and is a generally meritocratic, prosperous economy with a bigger manufacturing base than we have
Don't start me on Grammar Schools HY. I went to one. An absolutely loathsome place, and besides which selection for life at aged 11 is immoral.
It's such backward thinking this hankering for Grammar schools. They were outdated 50 years ago let alone now. There are tons of innovative ideas kicking around in education, different options and ways we can structure it for the contemporary world, free of elitism by money or narrow academic selection.
It would be impossible to do sanely but it does seem strange in the 21st century that you are taught in the classroom (usually by a second or third rate presenter) and then practice at home. It would make a lot more sense to use homework time for the actual lessons (via computer with top notch presenters and explanations) with school time spent practicing with the teachers there to solve misunderstandings and correct mistakes.
There's a school near me that does it that way around. I'd quite like middle daughter to go there. But, alas, for the reasons discussed earlier, there's no actual choice: it's either the nearest school or the sink school.
She had bigger battles to fight. And at least she didn't complete the closures. Her own school for example remains a Grammar to this day.
You are still not answering why you think your bought privileges should be denied to others less fortunate than yourself?
Because my 'bought privileges' didn't harm other children in the way grammar schools do.
In what way does a Grammar school harm the children who don't attend it?
Results for secondary moderns (i.e. none Grammar schools) in Bucks are better than a lot of Comprehensives elsewhere.
Heck their results are better than all bar 2 of my local comprehensives - and that's after the top 20% of the children have been removed. I say top 20% because it's remarkable how many Grammar School pupils commute into Buckinghamshire from Harrow.
Grammar schools damage social cohesion and make no difference to exam grades — new research
...The damage of grammar schools.
But this is not just a UK issue, as evidence shows that the disproportionate clustering of students within schools in terms of their ability, is a matter of concern worldwide.
All other things being equal, research shows that school systems across the world with higher levels of segregation of students by their parental income or immigrant status have been linked to lower overall attainment and weaker progress wherever this has been assessed.
It is also likely that children going to school in segregated areas will have less qualified teachers. This can lead to reduced opportunities to learn.
The school mix by socioeconomic status even seems to negatively influence how students are treated in school, as well as teachers’ expectations, and their relationships with pupils. This socioeconomic schooling divide also seems to have a negative impact on wider non-cognitive outcomes, such as emotional and behavioural problems, students’ sense of justice, civic knowledge and engagement.
All of which shows that dividing children by their ability levels from an early age, does not appear to lead to better results for either group. This is not to decry the schools that are currently grammars, or the work of their staff. It simply shows that the kind of social segregation experienced by children in certain areas in England exists for no clear gain.
If you support private school choice, as I do, then you also should support grammar school choice in my view. If you want to allow selection by parental income you must also allow selection by academic ability.
Plus Germany still has selective schools, Gymnasiums and is a generally meritocratic, prosperous economy with a bigger manufacturing base than we have
Don't start me on Grammar Schools HY. I went to one. An absolutely loathsome place, and besides which selection for life at aged 11 is immoral.
It's such backward thinking this hankering for Grammar schools. They were outdated 50 years ago let alone now. There are tons of innovative ideas kicking around in education, different options and ways we can structure it for the contemporary world, free of elitism by money or narrow academic selection.
It would be impossible to do sanely but it does seem strange in the 21st century that you are taught in the classroom (usually by a second or third rate presenter) and then practice at home. It would make a lot more sense to use homework time for the actual lessons (via computer with top notch presenters and explanations) with school time spent practicing with the teachers there to solve misunderstandings and correct mistakes.
I would suggest that comment reveals much about your lack of understanding of the home circumstances of many kids. My wife as an example would go to the library after school every day as, living in a small terrace containing parents and 3 other siblings, it was impossible for her to work or study at home.
For very large numbers of people school provides not just the educators but also the space for them to actually do their learning.
She had bigger battles to fight. And at least she didn't complete the closures. Her own school for example remains a Grammar to this day.
You are still not answering why you think your bought privileges should be denied to others less fortunate than yourself?
Because my 'bought privileges' didn't harm other children in the way grammar schools do.
In what way does a Grammar school harm the children who don't attend it?
Results for secondary moderns (i.e. none Grammar schools) in Bucks are better than a lot of Comprehensives elsewhere.
Heck their results are better than all bar 2 of my local comprehensives - and that's after the top 20% of the children have been removed. I say top 20% because it's remarkable how many Grammar School pupils commute into Buckinghamshire from Harrow.
Grammar schools damage social cohesion and make no difference to exam grades — new research
...The damage of grammar schools.
But this is not just a UK issue, as evidence shows that the disproportionate clustering of students within schools in terms of their ability, is a matter of concern worldwide.
All other things being equal, research shows that school systems across the world with higher levels of segregation of students by their parental income or immigrant status have been linked to lower overall attainment and weaker progress wherever this has been assessed.
It is also likely that children going to school in segregated areas will have less qualified teachers. This can lead to reduced opportunities to learn.
The school mix by socioeconomic status even seems to negatively influence how students are treated in school, as well as teachers’ expectations, and their relationships with pupils. This socioeconomic schooling divide also seems to have a negative impact on wider non-cognitive outcomes, such as emotional and behavioural problems, students’ sense of justice, civic knowledge andinflue engagement.
All of which shows that dividing children by their ability levels from an early age, does not appear to lead to better results for either group. This is not to decry the schools that are currently grammars, or the work of their staff. It simply shows that the kind of social segregation experienced by children in certain areas in England exists for no clear gain.
Nope, because the state isn't quite so influential with private schools as they are with grammar schools.
Can you explain?
Surely the percentage of children entering private schools also influences the socioeconomic demographics of the schools they would have enrolled in.
Losing ~7% of the wealthiest children should also " negatively influence how students are treated in school, as well as teachers’ expectations" no?
I'll do it in a thread in the next few weeks, will include my plan to abolish the DfE and give the money to parents directly via vouchers, the poorest parents get more vouchers.
Still influencing the demographics. Assuming you're allowing the schools charge beyond the means of the poorest.
I'm potentially interested in TSE's plan so long as the schools can only charge fees in a narrow range. Eg the most expensive can't be more than double the cheapest.
I know a lot of people who are really angry about this tory sleaze. And they're not your left-wing types.
I was chatting to a woman from Essex yesterday (I know, but still, I was), a working class Leaver who hated Corbyn and voted enthusiastically Con at GE19, and she told me there was 'no way' she was voting Con next time because Johnson is 'just a liar'.
Doesn't matter in Essex, not a single Conservative seat in Essex is now in the top 100 Labour targets or top 50 LD target seats.
Essex is now a safe Tory county compared to the Blair years when it was full of Tory marginals New Labour won in 1997 (the same largely goes for East Kent)
Pride comes before a fall
No, just facts.
Labour would need a huge swing of 8.8% to win its first seat in Essex, Colchester and the LDs would need an even bigger swing of 15% to win their first seat in Essex, Chelmsford
Today's facts are not tomorrow's
Boris has damaged trust in an idiotic manoeuvre and cannot even say he is sorry but disappears to Glasgow
Meanwhile Rishi gives an assured interview and agrees HMG got it wrong
Didn't see the Rishi interview but he is, assuredly, the ideal antidote for a country tired by Boris and his antics, but distrustful of Labour. My impression is that the polls are being driven by Tory voters withdrawing their support rather than swinging enthusiastically into the Labour (or LibDem) columns. Rishi could well win them back with his modesty/sincerity/competency shtick.
Given the choice of Starmer and Rishi for PM, I suspect a lot of people will plump for Rishi just to remove the risk of a Labour SNP coalition.
I'd quite like a Labour SNP coalition.
I did for 30 seconds and then imagined the £100m+ that would need to be thrown towards Scotland every time a difficult vote came up...
Maybe throw £10bn a year at Scotland, then give them a referendum on whether or not to keep receiving it?
Has nobody spotted that yesterday had the highest number of first doses of Vaccine since July.
(And highest number of second doses since Sept).
I did. But I was told it is "data catch up" by Max, who normally knows his Covid onions
It's still good because what we thought were poor numbers was just an underreporting error. The booster shots look positively smashing at the moment. Should hit 3m per week next week.
I read that the Netherlands (I think) has only just started boostering over 80s. Madness
Has nobody spotted that yesterday had the highest number of first doses of Vaccine since July.
(And highest number of second doses since Sept).
I did. But I was told it is "data catch up" by Max, who normally knows his Covid onions
It's still good because what we thought were poor numbers was just an underreporting error. The booster shots look positively smashing at the moment. Should hit 3m per week next week.
Yeah Boosters seem to be going brilliantly at the moment.
No one in this case is coming out well. It was interesting that so many US lawyers on all sides were criticising the prosecution yesterday for attacking Rittenhouse's use of the right to silence. Apparently in the US this is absolutely sacrosanct and there was a lot of anger about him trying to convince the jury that its use was in some way an admission of guilt.
Is that really that uncommon, even with it supposed to be sacrosanct? There's a lot of people who conditionally support that right but want a lot inferred from silence or refusal to 'clear your name', and given that I'd think there are enough disruptable lawyers to try it on.
Of course, if TV were in any way accurate (it isn't..I hope) lawyers constantly say and do things that are flagrantly wrong but it's totally ok if you just say you withdraw it afterwards.
Well it was serious enough that some lawyers who have been heavily critical of Rittenhouse were suggesting it might be reasonable grounds for a dismissal with prejudice of the case (meaning no retrial) at the judges conclusion.
Basically with a Judge who is apparently this flaky it seems particularly daft to give him any grounds at all for instructing the jury to dismiss.
She had bigger battles to fight. And at least she didn't complete the closures. Her own school for example remains a Grammar to this day.
You are still not answering why you think your bought privileges should be denied to others less fortunate than yourself?
Because my 'bought privileges' didn't harm other children in the way grammar schools do.
In what way does a Grammar school harm the children who don't attend it?
Results for secondary moderns (i.e. none Grammar schools) in Bucks are better than a lot of Comprehensives elsewhere.
Heck their results are better than all bar 2 of my local comprehensives - and that's after the top 20% of the children have been removed. I say top 20% because it's remarkable how many Grammar School pupils commute into Buckinghamshire from Harrow.
Grammar schools damage social cohesion and make no difference to exam grades — new research
...The damage of grammar schools.
But this is not just a UK issue, as evidence shows that the disproportionate clustering of students within schools in terms of their ability, is a matter of concern worldwide.
All other things being equal, research shows that school systems across the world with higher levels of segregation of students by their parental income or immigrant status have been linked to lower overall attainment and weaker progress wherever this has been assessed.
It is also likely that children going to school in segregated areas will have less qualified teachers. This can lead to reduced opportunities to learn.
The school mix by socioeconomic status even seems to negatively influence how students are treated in school, as well as teachers’ expectations, and their relationships with pupils. This socioeconomic schooling divide also seems to have a negative impact on wider non-cognitive outcomes, such as emotional and behavioural problems, students’ sense of justice, civic knowledge and engagement.
All of which shows that dividing children by their ability levels from an early age, does not appear to lead to better results for either group. This is not to decry the schools that are currently grammars, or the work of their staff. It simply shows that the kind of social segregation experienced by children in certain areas in England exists for no clear gain.
If you support private school choice, as I do, then you also should support grammar school choice in my view. If you want to allow selection by parental income you must also allow selection by academic ability.
Plus Germany still has selective schools, Gymnasiums and is a generally meritocratic, prosperous economy with a bigger manufacturing base than we have
Don't start me on Grammar Schools HY. I went to one. An absolutely loathsome place, and besides which selection for life at aged 11 is immoral.
It's such backward thinking this hankering for Grammar schools. They were outdated 50 years ago let alone now. There are tons of innovative ideas kicking around in education, different options and ways we can structure it for the contemporary world, free of elitism by money or narrow academic selection.
It would be impossible to do sanely but it does seem strange in the 21st century that you are taught in the classroom (usually by a second or third rate presenter) and then practice at home. It would make a lot more sense to use homework time for the actual lessons (via computer with top notch presenters and explanations) with school time spent practicing with the teachers there to solve misunderstandings and correct mistakes.
I would suggest that comment reveals much about your lack of understanding of the home circumstances of many kids. My wife as an example would go to the library after school every day as, living in a small terrace containing parents and 3 other siblings, it was impossible for her to work or study at home.
For very large numbers of people school provides not just the educators but also the space for them to actually do their learning.
Why do you think I started the statement with - "It would be impossible to do"
Has nobody spotted that yesterday had the highest number of first doses of Vaccine since July.
(And highest number of second doses since Sept).
I did. But I was told it is "data catch up" by Max, who normally knows his Covid onions
It's still good because what we thought were poor numbers was just an underreporting error. The booster shots look positively smashing at the moment. Should hit 3m per week next week.
I read that the Netherlands (I think) has only just started boostering over 80s. Madness
Europe hasn't really learned from out failures at all. I read that they aren't planning to start over 60s boosters until Jan 2020, it's not as though they don't have the supply either. Europe is sitting on something like 200m Pfizer doses for it's booster programme.
I am no Meghan Markle fan, but I do wonder whether the media pundits have got this one right. Reports say that, because Meghan drafted the letter to her father with the possibility of it being leaked in mind, that undermines her claim to 'an expectation of privacy'.
That just does not make sense to me as an argument. I, as a diplomat, drafted many written communications, from internal memos to telegrams to policy documents, that were classified, and hence clearly had an expectation of privacy. But I also wrote them with a view to how I would defend what I had written if it became public. It would be ludicrous to argue that the classification of those documents should be challenged because I wrote them with the possibility of them becoming public in mind. Similarly, on the face of it, it seems ludicrous to argue that Meghan Markle's expectation of privacy should be questioned purely on the basis of her recognition that, despite that expectation, it might be leaked.
She had bigger battles to fight. And at least she didn't complete the closures. Her own school for example remains a Grammar to this day.
You are still not answering why you think your bought privileges should be denied to others less fortunate than yourself?
Because my 'bought privileges' didn't harm other children in the way grammar schools do.
In what way does a Grammar school harm the children who don't attend it?
Results for secondary moderns (i.e. none Grammar schools) in Bucks are better than a lot of Comprehensives elsewhere.
Heck their results are better than all bar 2 of my local comprehensives - and that's after the top 20% of the children have been removed. I say top 20% because it's remarkable how many Grammar School pupils commute into Buckinghamshire from Harrow.
Grammar schools damage social cohesion and make no difference to exam grades — new research
...The damage of grammar schools.
But this is not just a UK issue, as evidence shows that the disproportionate clustering of students within schools in terms of their ability, is a matter of concern worldwide.
All other things being equal, research shows that school systems across the world with higher levels of segregation of students by their parental income or immigrant status have been linked to lower overall attainment and weaker progress wherever this has been assessed.
It is also likely that children going to school in segregated areas will have less qualified teachers. This can lead to reduced opportunities to learn.
The school mix by socioeconomic status even seems to negatively influence how students are treated in school, as well as teachers’ expectations, and their relationships with pupils. This socioeconomic schooling divide also seems to have a negative impact on wider non-cognitive outcomes, such as emotional and behavioural problems, students’ sense of justice, civic knowledge and engagement.
All of which shows that dividing children by their ability levels from an early age, does not appear to lead to better results for either group. This is not to decry the schools that are currently grammars, or the work of their staff. It simply shows that the kind of social segregation experienced by children in certain areas in England exists for no clear gain.
If you support private school choice, as I do, then you also should support grammar school choice in my view. If you want to allow selection by parental income you must also allow selection by academic ability.
Plus Germany still has selective schools, Gymnasiums and is a generally meritocratic, prosperous economy with a bigger manufacturing base than we have
Don't start me on Grammar Schools HY. I went to one. An absolutely loathsome place, and besides which selection for life at aged 11 is immoral.
What rubbish.
Most grammars have intakes at 13 and 16 and we all are effectively selected via GCSEs, A Levels, BTECs, university entrance anyway
Yes we do have selection all through life often based on exams, but 11 is far too young. As I saw from my own experience it does a huge amount of damage to those who flourish later and the young high flyers who stall in their teens.
Making decisions from GCSE onwards seems more appropriate.
I know a lot of people who are really angry about this tory sleaze. And they're not your left-wing types.
I was chatting to a woman from Essex yesterday (I know, but still, I was), a working class Leaver who hated Corbyn and voted enthusiastically Con at GE19, and she told me there was 'no way' she was voting Con next time because Johnson is 'just a liar'.
Doesn't matter in Essex, not a single Conservative seat in Essex is now in the top 100 Labour targets or top 50 LD target seats.
Essex is now a safe Tory county compared to the Blair years when it was full of Tory marginals New Labour won in 1997 (the same largely goes for East Kent)
Pride comes before a fall
No, just facts.
Labour would need a huge swing of 8.8% to win its first seat in Essex, Colchester and the LDs would need an even bigger swing of 15% to win their first seat in Essex, Chelmsford
Today's facts are not tomorrow's
Boris has damaged trust in an idiotic manoeuvre and cannot even say he is sorry but disappears to Glasgow
Meanwhile Rishi gives an assured interview and agrees HMG got it wrong
Didn't see the Rishi interview but he is, assuredly, the ideal antidote for a country tired by Boris and his antics, but distrustful of Labour. My impression is that the polls are being driven by Tory voters withdrawing their support rather than swinging enthusiastically into the Labour (or LibDem) columns. Rishi could well win them back with his modesty/sincerity/competency shtick.
Given the choice of Starmer and Rishi for PM, I suspect a lot of people will plump for Rishi just to remove the risk of a Labour SNP coalition.
I'd quite like a Labour SNP coalition.
I did for 30 seconds and then imagined the £100m+ that would need to be thrown towards Scotland every time a difficult vote came up...
Maybe throw £10bn a year at Scotland, then give them a referendum on whether or not to keep receiving it?
In reality, SNP would have very little leverage over Starmer. What would they do, put the Tories in? And fooling around, threatening to bring down the Govt if it didn't concede a referendum, would definitely put middle-of-the-road Scots off them big time.
A situation of No Overall Control at Westminster would present very real dilemmas for the nationalists. They would much prefer a majority Tory or Labour Govt.
She had bigger battles to fight. And at least she didn't complete the closures. Her own school for example remains a Grammar to this day.
You are still not answering why you think your bought privileges should be denied to others less fortunate than yourself?
Because my 'bought privileges' didn't harm other children in the way grammar schools do.
In what way does a Grammar school harm the children who don't attend it?
Results for secondary moderns (i.e. none Grammar schools) in Bucks are better than a lot of Comprehensives elsewhere.
Heck their results are better than all bar 2 of my local comprehensives - and that's after the top 20% of the children have been removed. I say top 20% because it's remarkable how many Grammar School pupils commute into Buckinghamshire from Harrow.
Grammar schools damage social cohesion and make no difference to exam grades — new research
...The damage of grammar schools.
But this is not just a UK issue, as evidence shows that the disproportionate clustering of students within schools in terms of their ability, is a matter of concern worldwide.
All other things being equal, research shows that school systems across the world with higher levels of segregation of students by their parental income or immigrant status have been linked to lower overall attainment and weaker progress wherever this has been assessed.
It is also likely that children going to school in segregated areas will have less qualified teachers. This can lead to reduced opportunities to learn.
The school mix by socioeconomic status even seems to negatively influence how students are treated in school, as well as teachers’ expectations, and their relationships with pupils. This socioeconomic schooling divide also seems to have a negative impact on wider non-cognitive outcomes, such as emotional and behavioural problems, students’ sense of justice, civic knowledge and engagement.
All of which shows that dividing children by their ability levels from an early age, does not appear to lead to better results for either group. This is not to decry the schools that are currently grammars, or the work of their staff. It simply shows that the kind of social segregation experienced by children in certain areas in England exists for no clear gain.
Nope, because the state isn't quite so influential with private schools as they are with grammar schools.
Ever been to Scotland - there are a lot of people there who use private education because the local offering is so bad.
Everything you have so far posted shows that money (sometimes sent directly to the school) sometimes spent on a house to ensure you get to a particular school solves the problem for you.
What is your opinion on Church of England / Catholic schools - or are they equally sinful.
That is complete and utter bollox of the first order. Obviously you have never been to Scotland spouting that utter claptrap. Halfwitted nutter.
What is wrong with that first sentence.
there are a lot of people there who use private education because the local offering is so bad.
It's a simple fact because if it wasn't (perceived to be) true private education wouldn't exist in Scotland.
That is not the reason why people use private schools. Many of the state schools get far better results. It varies from perception to oneupmanship and them wanting to pretend they are better than the plebs. Some may believe it but given they will nearly all be loaded they will be living in catchment areas that have the best state schools available. I doubt you have any knowledge of Scottish schools and at best formed your opinion from the Daily Heil.
Nope mainly from our Friends up there (who are in the private school camp in the way none of our other friends are).
It's the scale of the difference (100% of Scottish friends using Private schools (some not rich), but no NI, Welsh or English friends doing so) that makes me wonder why they do so.
Top school is not a private one that is for sure and many state schools get as good and better than many of the private ones. Catholic schools do particulary well.
She had bigger battles to fight. And at least she didn't complete the closures. Her own school for example remains a Grammar to this day.
You are still not answering why you think your bought privileges should be denied to others less fortunate than yourself?
Because my 'bought privileges' didn't harm other children in the way grammar schools do.
In what way does a Grammar school harm the children who don't attend it?
Results for secondary moderns (i.e. none Grammar schools) in Bucks are better than a lot of Comprehensives elsewhere.
Heck their results are better than all bar 2 of my local comprehensives - and that's after the top 20% of the children have been removed. I say top 20% because it's remarkable how many Grammar School pupils commute into Buckinghamshire from Harrow.
Grammar schools damage social cohesion and make no difference to exam grades — new research
...The damage of grammar schools.
But this is not just a UK issue, as evidence shows that the disproportionate clustering of students within schools in terms of their ability, is a matter of concern worldwide.
All other things being equal, research shows that school systems across the world with higher levels of segregation of students by their parental income or immigrant status have been linked to lower overall attainment and weaker progress wherever this has been assessed.
It is also likely that children going to school in segregated areas will have less qualified teachers. This can lead to reduced opportunities to learn.
The school mix by socioeconomic status even seems to negatively influence how students are treated in school, as well as teachers’ expectations, and their relationships with pupils. This socioeconomic schooling divide also seems to have a negative impact on wider non-cognitive outcomes, such as emotional and behavioural problems, students’ sense of justice, civic knowledge and engagement.
All of which shows that dividing children by their ability levels from an early age, does not appear to lead to better results for either group. This is not to decry the schools that are currently grammars, or the work of their staff. It simply shows that the kind of social segregation experienced by children in certain areas in England exists for no clear gain.
If you support private school choice, as I do, then you also should support grammar school choice in my view. If you want to allow selection by parental income you must also allow selection by academic ability.
Plus Germany still has selective schools, Gymnasiums and is a generally meritocratic, prosperous economy with a bigger manufacturing base than we have
Don't start me on Grammar Schools HY. I went to one. An absolutely loathsome place, and besides which selection for life at aged 11 is immoral.
I experienced both secondary modern then grammar school. The system was spectacularly flawed with so many kids in their teens being in the wrong school and being let down by the system very badly. You need schools where you can evolve smoothly, not change schools.
My 6 months were up yesterday. This morning I got my reminder and I am booked for my booster on Monday. All in all pretty slick operation.
Rubbish operation in Ayrshire. Mrs Fairliered and I have always been called together for our jags, whether Covid or Flu. I have received a letter to attend for my flu jag (and presumably my Covid booster) next Saturday. Mrs Fairliered didn’t receive a letter until this morning. She is being asked to go the following Saturday, when we are away for a family celebration. The online booking system (referred to in her letter) wouldn’t let her log in, as it is only for health and social care workers. She phoned and eventually spoke to someone who told her there were no other appointments anywhere, or at any time.
Yes they do seem crap , mine is other way , I have yet to get my appointment and am 2 weeks at least past the 6 months. Shambolic.
I know a lot of people who are really angry about this tory sleaze. And they're not your left-wing types.
I was chatting to a woman from Essex yesterday (I know, but still, I was), a working class Leaver who hated Corbyn and voted enthusiastically Con at GE19, and she told me there was 'no way' she was voting Con next time because Johnson is 'just a liar'.
Doesn't matter in Essex, not a single Conservative seat in Essex is now in the top 100 Labour targets or top 50 LD target seats.
Essex is now a safe Tory county compared to the Blair years when it was full of Tory marginals New Labour won in 1997 (the same largely goes for East Kent)
Pride comes before a fall
No, just facts.
Labour would need a huge swing of 8.8% to win its first seat in Essex, Colchester and the LDs would need an even bigger swing of 15% to win their first seat in Essex, Chelmsford
Today's facts are not tomorrow's
Boris has damaged trust in an idiotic manoeuvre and cannot even say he is sorry but disappears to Glasgow
Meanwhile Rishi gives an assured interview and agrees HMG got it wrong
Didn't see the Rishi interview but he is, assuredly, the ideal antidote for a country tired by Boris and his antics, but distrustful of Labour. My impression is that the polls are being driven by Tory voters withdrawing their support rather than swinging enthusiastically into the Labour (or LibDem) columns. Rishi could well win them back with his modesty/sincerity/competency shtick.
Given the choice of Starmer and Rishi for PM, I suspect a lot of people will plump for Rishi just to remove the risk of a Labour SNP coalition.
I'd quite like a Labour SNP coalition.
I did for 30 seconds and then imagined the £100m+ that would need to be thrown towards Scotland every time a difficult vote came up...
Maybe throw £10bn a year at Scotland, then give them a referendum on whether or not to keep receiving it?
In reality, SNP would have very little leverage over Starmer. What would they do, put the Tories in? And fooling around, threatening to bring down the Govt if it didn't concede a referendum, would definitely put middle-of-the-road Scots off them big time.
A situation of No Overall Control at Westminster would present very real dilemmas for the nationalists. They would much prefer a majority Tory or Labour Govt.
I think matters would be out of their hands anyway. Even continuing their normal practiuce of not voting on English matters (and don't forget Wales and NI) would instantly cause a huge crisis because the Tories could defeat any English bill.
Has nobody spotted that yesterday had the highest number of first doses of Vaccine since July.
(And highest number of second doses since Sept).
I did. But I was told it is "data catch up" by Max, who normally knows his Covid onions
It's still good because what we thought were poor numbers was just an underreporting error. The booster shots look positively smashing at the moment. Should hit 3m per week next week.
I read that the Netherlands (I think) has only just started boostering over 80s. Madness
Europe hasn't really learned from out failures at all. I read that they aren't planning to start over 60s boosters until Jan 2020, it's not as though they don't have the supply either. Europe is sitting on something like 200m Pfizer doses for it's booster programme.
Hmm.. you're making the classic mistake of thinking that 'Europe' acts as though it were a single country. Ireland, France, Denmark, and Spain are far ahead of the UK in jab take-up despite the botched start, and France in particular is going great guns on the boosters. On the other hand, Germany, Switzerland and Austria are still miles behind the UK, and it's beginning to show in their deaths and hospitalisation figures. Further east it's disastrous.
The Netherlands is about the same as us in total take up, and you can see the protection in the figures. Like us, though, they've got too many cases for comfort:
She had bigger battles to fight. And at least she didn't complete the closures. Her own school for example remains a Grammar to this day.
You are still not answering why you think your bought privileges should be denied to others less fortunate than yourself?
Because my 'bought privileges' didn't harm other children in the way grammar schools do.
In what way does a Grammar school harm the children who don't attend it?
Results for secondary moderns (i.e. none Grammar schools) in Bucks are better than a lot of Comprehensives elsewhere.
Heck their results are better than all bar 2 of my local comprehensives - and that's after the top 20% of the children have been removed. I say top 20% because it's remarkable how many Grammar School pupils commute into Buckinghamshire from Harrow.
Grammar schools damage social cohesion and make no difference to exam grades — new research
...The damage of grammar schools.
But this is not just a UK issue, as evidence shows that the disproportionate clustering of students within schools in terms of their ability, is a matter of concern worldwide.
All other things being equal, research shows that school systems across the world with higher levels of segregation of students by their parental income or immigrant status have been linked to lower overall attainment and weaker progress wherever this has been assessed.
It is also likely that children going to school in segregated areas will have less qualified teachers. This can lead to reduced opportunities to learn.
The school mix by socioeconomic status even seems to negatively influence how students are treated in school, as well as teachers’ expectations, and their relationships with pupils. This socioeconomic schooling divide also seems to have a negative impact on wider non-cognitive outcomes, such as emotional and behavioural problems, students’ sense of justice, civic knowledge and engagement.
All of which shows that dividing children by their ability levels from an early age, does not appear to lead to better results for either group. This is not to decry the schools that are currently grammars, or the work of their staff. It simply shows that the kind of social segregation experienced by children in certain areas in England exists for no clear gain.
Nope, because the state isn't quite so influential with private schools as they are with grammar schools.
Ever been to Scotland - there are a lot of people there who use private education because the local offering is so bad.
Everything you have so far posted shows that money (sometimes sent directly to the school) sometimes spent on a house to ensure you get to a particular school solves the problem for you.
What is your opinion on Church of England / Catholic schools - or are they equally sinful.
That is complete and utter bollox of the first order. Obviously you have never been to Scotland spouting that utter claptrap. Halfwitted nutter.
What is wrong with that first sentence.
there are a lot of people there who use private education because the local offering is so bad.
It's a simple fact because if it wasn't (perceived to be) true private education wouldn't exist in Scotland.
That is not the reason why people use private schools. Many of the state schools get far better results. It varies from perception to oneupmanship and them wanting to pretend they are better than the plebs. Some may believe it but given they will nearly all be loaded they will be living in catchment areas that have the best state schools available. I doubt you have any knowledge of Scottish schools and at best formed your opinion from the Daily Heil.
Nope mainly from our Friends up there (who are in the private school camp in the way none of our other friends are).
It's the scale of the difference (100% of Scottish friends using Private schools (some not rich), but no NI, Welsh or English friends doing so) that makes me wonder why they do so.
Top school is not a private one that is for sure and many state schools get as good and better than many of the private ones. Catholic schools do particulary well.
Used to be said in my youth that was a lot to be said in favour of the girls from the Catholic school.
I booked a Covid test for foreign travel with a major provider of Covid tests, which was very competitively priced. After doing so I read their terms and conditions and privacy policy and 'fair processing notice'. It transpired from this that they appear to be collecting DNA samples from the swabs for the purposes of 'research', for which they declare an intention to share with companies and government agencies. They also set out in the privacy policy that there is no unconditional opt out of this research programme. It appears that the intention is to use the data from Covid testing to create a private DNA database. Looking further in the legality of this, they appear to be relying on 'legitimate interests' under the GDPR to avoid having to explicitly seek their customers consent for doing so - it was not mentioned at any point on the website, nor in the standard terms and conditions: only in the privacy policy which of course people are very unlikely to ever read.
I have complained to them asking for comments on the above, and they immediately refunded my test fee. Some people may not be concerned about this type of activity, but if you are, then I suggest you are extremely careful about non NHS covid testing. Unless the company in question come up with a very convincing explanation, I will be pursuing this privately with a complaint to the ICO.
This is outrageous & I suggest you also forward your concerns to your MP & maybe to any interested journalists you can track down?
There is no way that this is an appropriate use of the material provided to this company & they cannot possibly have acquired the appropriate permissions. If anyone within the NHS or UK research community tried to do this, the ethics ctte would string them up.
Yes indeed. I am waiting for their reply. They may be able to convince me that it is an innocent mistake, but otherwise I will be doing exactly that. The ICO is the first stop.
I have done a little digging & according to the MRC, the law does permit the use of tissue samples taken as part of diagnostic procedures in certain circumstances. They’re not very clear about what those circumstances are however.
Thanks, very useful information. Had a brief look at this, and even if it is the case; it is almost certain that they fall foul of the guidance on consent. My suspicion is that they are circumventing rules on medical ethics but think they are technically complying with the law.
Comments
(And highest number of second doses since Sept).
Where I live, there are basically 2 state primaries. One is crap and the other brilliant - people have been convicted in court of lying about their address to get into the good one.
The brilliant one is right next to some social housing. Everyone in the social housing sends their children to the crap one - which is further away (99% anyway).
The brilliant one is very middle class.
The reasons? The good one - "isn't for the likes of us"... "too much homework and reading"... "really strict about going on holiday in term time"...
“But, it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court.”
Cases and hospitalistions are much more tightly coupled in Scotland than they are in England.
Of course, if TV were in any way accurate (it isn't..I hope) lawyers constantly say and do things that are flagrantly wrong but it's totally ok if you just say you withdraw it afterwards.
Just silly, unnecessary, petty etc.
If you don’t like name calling between English and Australian cricketers and fans, you really won’t like what’s coming up this winter.
Possibly the lack of appointments could be because takeup is very high. There weren't that many slots left when we had a look, and the nurses said it was very much taken up.
Favourites to beat NZ
For very large numbers of people school provides not just the educators but also the space for them to actually do their learning.
Basically with a Judge who is apparently this flaky it seems particularly daft to give him any grounds at all for instructing the jury to dismiss.
This thread has been reviewed and called "out".
I am no Meghan Markle fan, but I do wonder whether the media pundits have got this one right. Reports say that, because Meghan drafted the letter to her father with the possibility of it being leaked in mind, that undermines her claim to 'an expectation of privacy'.
That just does not make sense to me as an argument. I, as a diplomat, drafted many written communications, from internal memos to telegrams to policy documents, that were classified, and hence clearly had an expectation of privacy. But I also wrote them with a view to how I would defend what I had written if it became public. It would be ludicrous to argue that the classification of those documents should be challenged because I wrote them with the possibility of them becoming public in mind. Similarly, on the face of it, it seems ludicrous to argue that Meghan Markle's expectation of privacy should be questioned purely on the basis of her recognition that, despite that expectation, it might be leaked.
What do the lawyers think on this?
Making decisions from GCSE onwards seems more appropriate.
A situation of No Overall Control at Westminster would present very real dilemmas for the nationalists. They would much prefer a majority Tory or Labour Govt.
The Netherlands is about the same as us in total take up, and you can see the protection in the figures. Like us, though, they've got too many cases for comfort:
https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1458748635609550848
Had a brief look at this, and even if it is the case; it is almost certain that they fall foul of the guidance on consent. My suspicion is that they are circumventing rules on medical ethics but think they are technically complying with the law.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/nphet-to-advise-government-people-should-work-from-home-wherever-possible-1.4726117