Is there any polling on Secondary Moderns on the same lines? After all, that is where most children would go...
Ah, but Tories all assume they'll leave someone else with the shitty end of the educational stick.
PS And re Matrons, I expect they will see no harm in repeating it - like double counting "new hospitals" and defining minor extensions as "hospitals". The old jokes are the best.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 13h The reason grammar schools were gradually phased out from the early 60s onwards is that voters hated them. If you want to explain to 85% of your constituents why their kids are going to rubbish schools, go ahead, be my guest. You'll get nowhere.
Except as I already pointed out 38% want more grammars created, only 23% want to scrap existing grammars and 17% want to keep current grammars but create no more. Even 33% of former secondary modern pupils want more grammars.
While the Tories will lose Wakefield, I think they narrowly hold Tiverton and Honiton by a couple of hundred with a good local candidate. Much like Labour scraped home in Batley and Spen last summer when they were doing worse in the polls
Lol @ good candidate
Why do you think the Tory candidate in Tiv & Hon is a good one, young HY? She strikes me as a bit of a fly-by-night character, who never stays anywhere long, and moves on to the next thing before she gets found out. I suppose that, in this way, she could be seen as a good representative of the present Conservative Party.
Do local people actually like her?
She is a local headteacher and businesswoman, who knows the area well. She also performed confidently at the hustings. She is miles better than the non local Tory candidate in North Shropshire
The trouble is, young HY, that she does not go into details in her publicity. She does not say just how long she was a headmistress - I have the impression that it was just a couple of years, having been headhunted by an Academy Chain Business to sort out some problems (which probably means being brutally tough with members of staff far more experienced than herself) just long enough to tick a few boxes - but this was nowhere near actually leading a school staff and coaxing the best out of people.
And then a "businesswoman".... Is she not actually a shopkeeper? A business of a kind I suppose... But you do make her sound like a director of a FSTE company. But then again, one of the candidates to become leader of the Conservative Party also did something like this, if I remember correctly, so I suppose it is par for the Conservative course.
What she says about herself reads like a shabby CV that has been spun out of recognition bby a third-class applicant for a job.
And as for her being "miles better than the non local Tory candidate in North Shropshire", well she would have to be, wouldn't she? I felt very sorry for him, as I do for the poor Conservative candidate you have put up in Wakefield. You Conservatives are not very kind towards your candidates, are you? Or respectful towards the electorate.
A director of a FTSE company based in London would be less of an asset in a by election for a seat in Devon than a local small businesswoman based in Devon as well as local former headteacher
I suggest you watch the video of her performance at the recent hustings, then come back and tell us that she is a strong candidate.
She was certainly a better performer than the LD
Oh dear.... Well, I really hope you choose the rest of the Tory candidates.
While the Tories will lose Wakefield, I think they narrowly hold Tiverton and Honiton by a couple of hundred with a good local candidate. Much like Labour scraped home in Batley and Spen last summer when they were doing worse in the polls
Lol @ good candidate
Why do you think the Tory candidate in Tiv & Hon is a good one, young HY? She strikes me as a bit of a fly-by-night character, who never stays anywhere long, and moves on to the next thing before she gets found out. I suppose that, in this way, she could be seen as a good representative of the present Conservative Party.
Do local people actually like her?
She is a local headteacher and businesswoman, who knows the area well. She also performed confidently at the hustings. She is miles better than the non local Tory candidate in North Shropshire
The trouble is, young HY, that she does not go into details in her publicity. She does not say just how long she was a headmistress - I have the impression that it was just a couple of years, having been headhunted by an Academy Chain Business to sort out some problems (which probably means being brutally tough with members of staff far more experienced than herself) just long enough to tick a few boxes - but this was nowhere near actually leading a school staff and coaxing the best out of people.
And then a "businesswoman".... Is she not actually a shopkeeper? A business of a kind I suppose... But you do make her sound like a director of a FSTE company. But then again, one of the candidates to become leader of the Conservative Party also did something like this, if I remember correctly, so I suppose it is par for the Conservative course.
What she says about herself reads like a shabby CV that has been spun out of recognition bby a third-class applicant for a job.
And as for her being "miles better than the non local Tory candidate in North Shropshire", well she would have to be, wouldn't she? I felt very sorry for him, as I do for the poor Conservative candidate you have put up in Wakefield. You Conservatives are not very kind towards your candidates, are you? Or respectful towards the electorate.
A director of a FTSE company based in London would be less of an asset in a by election for a seat in Devon than a local small businesswoman based in Devon as well as local former headteacher
How does one know she was in a local school? She's not saying that in her website. You'd think she'd be proud of it. In fact a little checking suggests that the (apparently small, four classes) primary school she was head of is in the constituency.
With regard to the death penalty; unfortunately I am pretty sure it will come back. You have to look at the rage that happens when we get a brutal murder, which just gets amplified by social media and no one can control. 30 year minimum sentences aren't enough, it now needs to be 'whole life', and every time the parole board let out a murderer the same anger erupts. Eventually politicians will give the people what they want, its abolition was never popular; the last few decades are best thought of as a failed elite liberal experiment. But its really just another moment in the decline of western civilisation.
I see we have reached the 'we'll look into bringing back grammar schools' part of the collapse of a Tory government.
I can't remember, does Fox hunting come before or after grammar schools? It feels like it should be after, appealing to the most reactionary of the base, but istr that May talked about fox hunting before bringing back grammars.
I think it depends on the by-election calendar.
The standard 'collapse of tory administration dead cats' are listed in order on wikipedia as follows:
Do something about immigration that winds up leading church of england clerics
Return of Imperial units
Return of Grammar schools
Crackdown on benefit fraud with new whizzo fraud unit of 1000s of civil servants.
Fox hunting
Return of corporal punishment in schools
Return of national service
All schools to have a singing of national anthem to start the day
...and if things are looking really dicey:
Increase pensioner benefits.
Does the sackings of pen-pushing civil servants come before or after "Crackdown on benefit fraud with new whizzo fraud unit of 1000s of civil servants"?
You forgot Hanging.
[Snip]
Bring back forgotten regiment names of the British Army could be one that we haven't seen for a while.
Oooh, my inner Gammon stirs. Didn't even know this was a thing, but I always thought it a bit unfair old, distinguished and otherwise famous regiments got disbanded and replaced. Has it finally happened? Have the Tories got me?
That said, nerds who watched a lot of Sharpe as a teenager can't be that big of a demographic, can it?
While the Tories will lose Wakefield, I think they narrowly hold Tiverton and Honiton by a couple of hundred with a good local candidate. Much like Labour scraped home in Batley and Spen last summer when they were doing worse in the polls
Lol @ good candidate
Why do you think the Tory candidate in Tiv & Hon is a good one, young HY? She strikes me as a bit of a fly-by-night character, who never stays anywhere long, and moves on to the next thing before she gets found out. I suppose that, in this way, she could be seen as a good representative of the present Conservative Party.
Do local people actually like her?
She is a local headteacher and businesswoman, who knows the area well. She also performed confidently at the hustings. She is miles better than the non local Tory candidate in North Shropshire
The trouble is, young HY, that she does not go into details in her publicity. She does not say just how long she was a headmistress - I have the impression that it was just a couple of years, having been headhunted by an Academy Chain Business to sort out some problems (which probably means being brutally tough with members of staff far more experienced than herself) just long enough to tick a few boxes - but this was nowhere near actually leading a school staff and coaxing the best out of people.
And then a "businesswoman".... Is she not actually a shopkeeper? A business of a kind I suppose... But you do make her sound like a director of a FSTE company. But then again, one of the candidates to become leader of the Conservative Party also did something like this, if I remember correctly, so I suppose it is par for the Conservative course.
What she says about herself reads like a shabby CV that has been spun out of recognition bby a third-class applicant for a job.
And as for her being "miles better than the non local Tory candidate in North Shropshire", well she would have to be, wouldn't she? I felt very sorry for him, as I do for the poor Conservative candidate you have put up in Wakefield. You Conservatives are not very kind towards your candidates, are you? Or respectful towards the electorate.
A director of a FTSE company based in London would be less of an asset in a by election for a seat in Devon than a local small businesswoman based in Devon as well as local former headteacher
How does one know she was in a local school? She's not saying that in her website. You'd think she'd be proud of it. In fact a little checking suggests that the (apparently small, four classes) primary school she was head of is in the constituency.
Als\o it doesn't say where her business is. This is the candidate's own website ...
"I am thrilled to be selected as the Conservative candidate for Tiverton and Honiton.
This is where I was born, where I was raised, where I was educated, where I have worked and where I have raised my children.
This means that I understand the local issues people want addressing across the constituency - as they are my local issues too.
But most of all, I know that people here want an MP to get on with the job and deliver on our priorities. And like them, I want this constituency to thrive and take all the opportunities we have here.
My campaign will focus on delivering on people’s priorities for the area including improving transport links, supporting farmers and businesses. Working with Government to secure further investment in the area’s infrastructure including road upgrades for the North Devon Link Road and A303, a new train station for Cullompton and rollout of rural broadband.
I believe I have unrivalled experience and knowledge of the local communities, education, hospital and health services, transport and tourism industry – this is my patch."
"where I HAVE worked ..." and no indication of where she actually lives and where her business trades.
I also notice BTW that the funding for the new Cullompton rail station has already been provided - so that's a bit excessive to claim she will secure it ... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-59082444
Is there any polling on Secondary Moderns on the same lines? After all, that is where most children would go...
Ah, but Tories all assume they'll leave someone else with the shitty end of the educational stick.
PS And re Matrons, I expect they will see no harm in repeating it - like double counting "new hospitals" and defining minor extensions as "hospitals". The old jokes are the best.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 13h The reason grammar schools were gradually phased out from the early 60s onwards is that voters hated them. If you want to explain to 85% of your constituents why their kids are going to rubbish schools, go ahead, be my guest. You'll get nowhere.
Except as I already pointed out 38% want more grammars created, only 23% want to scrap existing grammars and 17% want to keep current grammars but create no more. Even 33% of former secondary modern pupils want more grammars.
Is there any polling on Secondary Moderns on the same lines? After all, that is where most children would go...
Ah, but Tories all assume they'll leave someone else with the shitty end of the educational stick.
PS And re Matrons, I expect they will see no harm in repeating it - like double counting "new hospitals" and defining minor extensions as "hospitals". The old jokes are the best.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 13h The reason grammar schools were gradually phased out from the early 60s onwards is that voters hated them. If you want to explain to 85% of your constituents why their kids are going to rubbish schools, go ahead, be my guest. You'll get nowhere.
Except as I already pointed out 38% want more grammars created, only 23% want to scrap existing grammars and 17% want to keep current grammars but create no more. Even 33% of former secondary modern pupils want more grammars.
I see we have reached the 'we'll look into bringing back grammar schools' part of the collapse of a Tory government.
I can't remember, does Fox hunting come before or after grammar schools? It feels like it should be after, appealing to the most reactionary of the base, but istr that May talked about fox hunting before bringing back grammars.
I think it depends on the by-election calendar.
The standard 'collapse of tory administration dead cats' are listed in order on wikipedia as follows:
Do something about immigration that winds up leading church of england clerics
Return of Imperial units
Return of Grammar schools
Crackdown on benefit fraud with new whizzo fraud unit of 1000s of civil servants.
Fox hunting
Return of corporal punishment in schools
Return of national service
All schools to have a singing of national anthem to start the day
...and if things are looking really dicey:
Increase pensioner benefits.
Does the sackings of pen-pushing civil servants come before or after "Crackdown on benefit fraud with new whizzo fraud unit of 1000s of civil servants"?
You forgot Hanging.
[Snip]
Bring back forgotten regiment names of the British Army could be one that we haven't seen for a while.
Oooh, my inner Gammon stirs. Didn't even know this was a thing, but I always thought it a bit unfair old, distinguished and otherwise famous regiments got disbanded and replaced. Has it finally happened? Have the Tories got me?
That said, nerds who watched a lot of Sharpe as a teenager can't be that big of a demographic, can it?
Not a big demographic, but eye catching for Daily Mail (throw in a few tales of yore about said regiment sticking up the fuzzies or whatever) and of course what demographic there is also bloody vote.
Is there any polling on Secondary Moderns on the same lines? After all, that is where most children would go...
Ah, but Tories all assume they'll leave someone else with the shitty end of the educational stick.
PS And re Matrons, I expect they will see no harm in repeating it - like double counting "new hospitals" and defining minor extensions as "hospitals". The old jokes are the best.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 13h The reason grammar schools were gradually phased out from the early 60s onwards is that voters hated them. If you want to explain to 85% of your constituents why their kids are going to rubbish schools, go ahead, be my guest. You'll get nowhere.
Except as I already pointed out 38% want more grammars created, only 23% want to scrap existing grammars and 17% want to keep current grammars but create no more. Even 33% of former secondary modern pupils want more grammars.
Jesus. What the flying f***k is your IQ? I'm thinking minus. You actually think your comments add to the debate? No.. I'm not going to rise to this garbage... It is literally like letting the cretins take over the asylum.
Is there any polling on Secondary Moderns on the same lines? After all, that is where most children would go...
Ah, but Tories all assume they'll leave someone else with the shitty end of the educational stick.
PS And re Matrons, I expect they will see no harm in repeating it - like double counting "new hospitals" and defining minor extensions as "hospitals". The old jokes are the best.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 13h The reason grammar schools were gradually phased out from the early 60s onwards is that voters hated them. If you want to explain to 85% of your constituents why their kids are going to rubbish schools, go ahead, be my guest. You'll get nowhere.
Except as I already pointed out 38% want more grammars created, only 23% want to scrap existing grammars and 17% want to keep current grammars but create no more. Even 33% of former secondary modern pupils want more grammars.
Jesus. What the flying f***k is your IQ? I'm thinking minus. You actually think your comments add to the debate? No.. I'm not going to rise to this garbage... It is literally like letting the cretins take over the asylum.
They add to the debate from the right. Do I care what left liberals like you think? No. If you want an echo chamber tough!
Is there any polling on Secondary Moderns on the same lines? After all, that is where most children would go...
Ah, but Tories all assume they'll leave someone else with the shitty end of the educational stick.
PS And re Matrons, I expect they will see no harm in repeating it - like double counting "new hospitals" and defining minor extensions as "hospitals". The old jokes are the best.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 13h The reason grammar schools were gradually phased out from the early 60s onwards is that voters hated them. If you want to explain to 85% of your constituents why their kids are going to rubbish schools, go ahead, be my guest. You'll get nowhere.
Except as I already pointed out 38% want more grammars created, only 23% want to scrap existing grammars and 17% want to keep current grammars but create no more. Even 33% of former secondary modern pupils want more grammars.
I see we have reached the 'we'll look into bringing back grammar schools' part of the collapse of a Tory government.
I can't remember, does Fox hunting come before or after grammar schools? It feels like it should be after, appealing to the most reactionary of the base, but istr that May talked about fox hunting before bringing back grammars.
I think it depends on the by-election calendar.
The standard 'collapse of tory administration dead cats' are listed in order on wikipedia as follows:
Do something about immigration that winds up leading church of england clerics
Return of Imperial units
Return of Grammar schools
Crackdown on benefit fraud with new whizzo fraud unit of 1000s of civil servants.
Fox hunting
Return of corporal punishment in schools
Return of national service
All schools to have a singing of national anthem to start the day
...and if things are looking really dicey:
Increase pensioner benefits.
Does the sackings of pen-pushing civil servants come before or after "Crackdown on benefit fraud with new whizzo fraud unit of 1000s of civil servants"?
You forgot Hanging.
[Snip]
Bring back forgotten regiment names of the British Army could be one that we haven't seen for a while.
Oooh, my inner Gammon stirs. Didn't even know this was a thing, but I always thought it a bit unfair old, distinguished and otherwise famous regiments got disbanded and replaced. Has it finally happened? Have the Tories got me?
That said, nerds who watched a lot of Sharpe as a teenager can't be that big of a demographic, can it?
Not a big demographic, but eye catching for Daily Mail (throw in a few tales of yore about said regiment sticking up the fuzzies or whatever) and of course what demographic there is also bloody vote.
Unlike the kids.
Trouble is, the Army is so small you end up either upsetting the supporters of the existing regts which have neen disbadged to make room for the new one, or you get more badge engineering than a BMC Mini - vide eg. the RRS.
Is there any polling on Secondary Moderns on the same lines? After all, that is where most children would go...
Ah, but Tories all assume they'll leave someone else with the shitty end of the educational stick.
PS And re Matrons, I expect they will see no harm in repeating it - like double counting "new hospitals" and defining minor extensions as "hospitals". The old jokes are the best.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 13h The reason grammar schools were gradually phased out from the early 60s onwards is that voters hated them. If you want to explain to 85% of your constituents why their kids are going to rubbish schools, go ahead, be my guest. You'll get nowhere.
Except as I already pointed out 38% want more grammars created, only 23% want to scrap existing grammars and 17% want to keep current grammars but create no more. Even 33% of former secondary modern pupils want more grammars.
Is there any polling on Secondary Moderns on the same lines? After all, that is where most children would go...
Ah, but Tories all assume they'll leave someone else with the shitty end of the educational stick.
PS And re Matrons, I expect they will see no harm in repeating it - like double counting "new hospitals" and defining minor extensions as "hospitals". The old jokes are the best.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 13h The reason grammar schools were gradually phased out from the early 60s onwards is that voters hated them. If you want to explain to 85% of your constituents why their kids are going to rubbish schools, go ahead, be my guest. You'll get nowhere.
Except as I already pointed out 38% want more grammars created, only 23% want to scrap existing grammars and 17% want to keep current grammars but create no more. Even 33% of former secondary modern pupils want more grammars.
So lovely argument based on 6 year old data when more accurate and recent data is available.
Demand for Grammar schools has died as pensioners have died out.
So even on your link the 29% who want more grammar schools is more than the 23% who want to stop grammars selecting on academic ability and make them into comprehensives
Is there any polling on Secondary Moderns on the same lines? After all, that is where most children would go...
Ah, but Tories all assume they'll leave someone else with the shitty end of the educational stick.
PS And re Matrons, I expect they will see no harm in repeating it - like double counting "new hospitals" and defining minor extensions as "hospitals". The old jokes are the best.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 13h The reason grammar schools were gradually phased out from the early 60s onwards is that voters hated them. If you want to explain to 85% of your constituents why their kids are going to rubbish schools, go ahead, be my guest. You'll get nowhere.
Except as I already pointed out 38% want more grammars created, only 23% want to scrap existing grammars and 17% want to keep current grammars but create no more. Even 33% of former secondary modern pupils want more grammars.
Is there any polling on Secondary Moderns on the same lines? After all, that is where most children would go...
Ah, but Tories all assume they'll leave someone else with the shitty end of the educational stick.
PS And re Matrons, I expect they will see no harm in repeating it - like double counting "new hospitals" and defining minor extensions as "hospitals". The old jokes are the best.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 13h The reason grammar schools were gradually phased out from the early 60s onwards is that voters hated them. If you want to explain to 85% of your constituents why their kids are going to rubbish schools, go ahead, be my guest. You'll get nowhere.
Except as I already pointed out 38% want more grammars created, only 23% want to scrap existing grammars and 17% want to keep current grammars but create no more. Even 33% of former secondary modern pupils want more grammars.
Jesus. What the flying f***k is your IQ? I'm thinking minus. You actually think your comments add to the debate? No.. I'm not going to rise to this garbage... It is literally like letting the cretins take over the asylum.
BiB - love it, but I think you just did.
FWIW, HYUFD is rightly a respected poster on several matters. On education, however, he is utterly clueless. Sorry, HYUFD, but you don't know what you're talking about. Grammar schools will never return countrywide, nor should they.
Is there any polling on Secondary Moderns on the same lines? After all, that is where most children would go...
Ah, but Tories all assume they'll leave someone else with the shitty end of the educational stick.
PS And re Matrons, I expect they will see no harm in repeating it - like double counting "new hospitals" and defining minor extensions as "hospitals". The old jokes are the best.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 13h The reason grammar schools were gradually phased out from the early 60s onwards is that voters hated them. If you want to explain to 85% of your constituents why their kids are going to rubbish schools, go ahead, be my guest. You'll get nowhere.
Except as I already pointed out 38% want more grammars created, only 23% want to scrap existing grammars and 17% want to keep current grammars but create no more. Even 33% of former secondary modern pupils want more grammars.
So lovely argument based on 6 year old data when more accurate and recent data is available.
Demand for Grammar schools has died as pensioners have died out.
So even on that link the 29% who want more grammar schools is more than the 23% who want to stop grammars selecting on academic ability and make them into comprehensives
Doesn't make any difference from my point which is that we now know you ignore recent polling if it doesn't agree with your viewpoint.
Is there any polling on Secondary Moderns on the same lines? After all, that is where most children would go...
Ah, but Tories all assume they'll leave someone else with the shitty end of the educational stick.
PS And re Matrons, I expect they will see no harm in repeating it - like double counting "new hospitals" and defining minor extensions as "hospitals". The old jokes are the best.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 13h The reason grammar schools were gradually phased out from the early 60s onwards is that voters hated them. If you want to explain to 85% of your constituents why their kids are going to rubbish schools, go ahead, be my guest. You'll get nowhere.
Except as I already pointed out 38% want more grammars created, only 23% want to scrap existing grammars and 17% want to keep current grammars but create no more. Even 33% of former secondary modern pupils want more grammars.
Jesus. What the flying f***k is your IQ? I'm thinking minus. You actually think your comments add to the debate? No.. I'm not going to rise to this garbage... It is literally like letting the cretins take over the asylum.
A lot of the pressure for more Grammar School places is in selective areas. Where the effect of opening more selective schools would be to make them... less selective.
Is there any polling on Secondary Moderns on the same lines? After all, that is where most children would go...
Ah, but Tories all assume they'll leave someone else with the shitty end of the educational stick.
PS And re Matrons, I expect they will see no harm in repeating it - like double counting "new hospitals" and defining minor extensions as "hospitals". The old jokes are the best.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 13h The reason grammar schools were gradually phased out from the early 60s onwards is that voters hated them. If you want to explain to 85% of your constituents why their kids are going to rubbish schools, go ahead, be my guest. You'll get nowhere.
85% of schools weren't rubbish, and most voters didn't hate grammar schools.
Is there any polling on Secondary Moderns on the same lines? After all, that is where most children would go...
Ah, but Tories all assume they'll leave someone else with the shitty end of the educational stick.
PS And re Matrons, I expect they will see no harm in repeating it - like double counting "new hospitals" and defining minor extensions as "hospitals". The old jokes are the best.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 13h The reason grammar schools were gradually phased out from the early 60s onwards is that voters hated them. If you want to explain to 85% of your constituents why their kids are going to rubbish schools, go ahead, be my guest. You'll get nowhere.
Except as I already pointed out 38% want more grammars created, only 23% want to scrap existing grammars and 17% want to keep current grammars but create no more. Even 33% of former secondary modern pupils want more grammars.
Jesus. What the flying f***k is your IQ? I'm thinking minus. You actually think your comments add to the debate? No.. I'm not going to rise to this garbage... It is literally like letting the cretins take over the asylum.
BiB - love it, but I think you just did.
FWIW, HYUFD is rightly a respected poster on several matters. On education, however, he is utterly clueless. Sorry, HYUFD, but you don't know what you're talking about. Grammar schools will never return countrywide, nor should they.
Our people ie Tories very much want more grammar schools and they are the people the government desperately needs to win back and shore up. It does not have to be universal return to the 11+, just allowing local parents to ballot to open new grammars would be a start, now you can only ballot to close existing grammars
Tremendous result for the centre-right in the Andalusian Regional election yesterday.
PP won an absolute majority gaining 32 seats to win 58 in the regional Parliament. The party won 43% (+22.4%), more than doubling its vote share from the 2018 election. This was an incredible result, admittedly much of it was absorbing the former Citizens votes and seats completely but for PP to win a clear majority in a region that has been predominantly socialist is a huge fillip for new PP leader Alberto Feijoo who is a centrist.
PSOE won 24% and lost three seats to end up on 30 - the party's worst result ever in a region it used to dominate. Seville, a former stronghold, was won by PP for the first time.
VOX won 13.5% (+2.5%) and gained two seats to 14 but that was a pretty underwhelming result and they will have no influence in the new Parliament given PP's majority and it may be Feijoo will take the view he can win a national election without having to pander to VOX.
The For Andalusia left/green slate won 7.7% of the vote and five seats while the regionalist Forward Andalusia were one of the two big losers of the night, winning just 4.6% of the vote and losing ten seats to end on just two.
Biggest losers were Citizens who polled 3.3% (-15.0%) and lost all 21 seats it was defending.
Pre-election polls suggested PP would just fail to win a majority but on the day the voters came out in strong support of Juan Moreno - PP plus Citizens had won 54 seats in the 2018 elections and had governed with VOX support but Moreno now has a clear mandate to govern.
It's a desperate result for PSOE who remain close to PP in national polls but the most recent suggest PP and VOX between them would be very close to a majority.
Is there any polling on Secondary Moderns on the same lines? After all, that is where most children would go...
Ah, but Tories all assume they'll leave someone else with the shitty end of the educational stick.
PS And re Matrons, I expect they will see no harm in repeating it - like double counting "new hospitals" and defining minor extensions as "hospitals". The old jokes are the best.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 13h The reason grammar schools were gradually phased out from the early 60s onwards is that voters hated them. If you want to explain to 85% of your constituents why their kids are going to rubbish schools, go ahead, be my guest. You'll get nowhere.
Except as I already pointed out 38% want more grammars created, only 23% want to scrap existing grammars and 17% want to keep current grammars but create no more. Even 33% of former secondary modern pupils want more grammars.
So lovely argument based on 6 year old data when more accurate and recent data is available.
Demand for Grammar schools has died as pensioners have died out.
So even on that link the 29% who want more grammar schools is more than the 23% who want to stop grammars selecting on academic ability and make them into comprehensives
Doesn't make any difference from my point which is that we now know you ignore recent polling if it doesn't agree with your viewpoint.
Even your polling showed more want more grammars than want to shut them, so both polls had more grammars the most popular option amongst voters.
They know that grammars at least selected by academic ability, now we still have selection just it is by school fees, house price and catchment area or church attendance
Is there any polling on Secondary Moderns on the same lines? After all, that is where most children would go...
Ah, but Tories all assume they'll leave someone else with the shitty end of the educational stick.
PS And re Matrons, I expect they will see no harm in repeating it - like double counting "new hospitals" and defining minor extensions as "hospitals". The old jokes are the best.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 13h The reason grammar schools were gradually phased out from the early 60s onwards is that voters hated them. If you want to explain to 85% of your constituents why their kids are going to rubbish schools, go ahead, be my guest. You'll get nowhere.
Except as I already pointed out 38% want more grammars created, only 23% want to scrap existing grammars and 17% want to keep current grammars but create no more. Even 33% of former secondary modern pupils want more grammars.
Jesus. What the flying f***k is your IQ? I'm thinking minus. You actually think your comments add to the debate? No.. I'm not going to rise to this garbage... It is literally like letting the cretins take over the asylum.
BiB - love it, but I think you just did.
FWIW, HYUFD is rightly a respected poster on several matters. On education, however, he is utterly clueless. Sorry, HYUFD, but you don't know what you're talking about. Grammar schools will never return countrywide, nor should they.
Our people ie Tories very much want more grammar schools and they are the people the government desperately needs to win back and shore up. It does not have to be universal return to the 11+, just allowing local parents to ballot to open new grammars would be a start, now you can only ballot to close existing grammars
You Tories have been in power for the last 12 years. And before Blair, you were in power for 18 years. So you've had 30 years to do this, but haven't. Guess why? Because even Tory educationalists recognise that expanding grammar schools would be a retrograde step, as well as electorally unpopular.
Is there any polling on Secondary Moderns on the same lines? After all, that is where most children would go...
Ah, but Tories all assume they'll leave someone else with the shitty end of the educational stick.
PS And re Matrons, I expect they will see no harm in repeating it - like double counting "new hospitals" and defining minor extensions as "hospitals". The old jokes are the best.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 13h The reason grammar schools were gradually phased out from the early 60s onwards is that voters hated them. If you want to explain to 85% of your constituents why their kids are going to rubbish schools, go ahead, be my guest. You'll get nowhere.
Except as I already pointed out 38% want more grammars created, only 23% want to scrap existing grammars and 17% want to keep current grammars but create no more. Even 33% of former secondary modern pupils want more grammars.
Is there any polling on Secondary Moderns on the same lines? After all, that is where most children would go...
Ah, but Tories all assume they'll leave someone else with the shitty end of the educational stick.
PS And re Matrons, I expect they will see no harm in repeating it - like double counting "new hospitals" and defining minor extensions as "hospitals". The old jokes are the best.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 13h The reason grammar schools were gradually phased out from the early 60s onwards is that voters hated them. If you want to explain to 85% of your constituents why their kids are going to rubbish schools, go ahead, be my guest. You'll get nowhere.
Except as I already pointed out 38% want more grammars created, only 23% want to scrap existing grammars and 17% want to keep current grammars but create no more. Even 33% of former secondary modern pupils want more grammars.
Jesus. What the flying f***k is your IQ? I'm thinking minus. You actually think your comments add to the debate? No.. I'm not going to rise to this garbage... It is literally like letting the cretins take over the asylum.
A lot of the pressure for more Grammar School places is in selective areas. Where the effect of opening more selective schools would be to make them... less selective.
Funny old world.
We've had this conversation in the past where @Cookie has difficulty getting his children into the local Grammar schools due to children from out of the local authority grabbing the spaces.
I suspect however given a choice between more grammar schools or grammar schools being allowed to only accept children from within the local authority the grammar school is in most people would prefer the latter rather than the former.
Is there any polling on Secondary Moderns on the same lines? After all, that is where most children would go...
Ah, but Tories all assume they'll leave someone else with the shitty end of the educational stick.
PS And re Matrons, I expect they will see no harm in repeating it - like double counting "new hospitals" and defining minor extensions as "hospitals". The old jokes are the best.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 13h The reason grammar schools were gradually phased out from the early 60s onwards is that voters hated them. If you want to explain to 85% of your constituents why their kids are going to rubbish schools, go ahead, be my guest. You'll get nowhere.
Except as I already pointed out 38% want more grammars created, only 23% want to scrap existing grammars and 17% want to keep current grammars but create no more. Even 33% of former secondary modern pupils want more grammars.
So lovely argument based on 6 year old data when more accurate and recent data is available.
Demand for Grammar schools has died as pensioners have died out.
So even on that link the 29% who want more grammar schools is more than the 23% who want to stop grammars selecting on academic ability and make them into comprehensives
Doesn't make any difference from my point which is that we now know you ignore recent polling if it doesn't agree with your viewpoint.
Even your polling showed more want more grammars than want to shut them, so both polls had more grammars the most popular option amongst voters.
They know that grammars at least selected by academic ability, now we still have selection just it is by school fees, house price and catchment area or church attendance
I'm not concerned about the polling - my concern is that I've once again caught you using historic data (which you implied was the most recent so relevant) to prove your point..
Which shows that we can't trust the data sources you are using - which means your analysis can't be trusted.
Is there any polling on Secondary Moderns on the same lines? After all, that is where most children would go...
Ah, but Tories all assume they'll leave someone else with the shitty end of the educational stick.
PS And re Matrons, I expect they will see no harm in repeating it - like double counting "new hospitals" and defining minor extensions as "hospitals". The old jokes are the best.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 13h The reason grammar schools were gradually phased out from the early 60s onwards is that voters hated them. If you want to explain to 85% of your constituents why their kids are going to rubbish schools, go ahead, be my guest. You'll get nowhere.
Except as I already pointed out 38% want more grammars created, only 23% want to scrap existing grammars and 17% want to keep current grammars but create no more. Even 33% of former secondary modern pupils want more grammars.
Jesus. What the flying f***k is your IQ? I'm thinking minus. You actually think your comments add to the debate? No.. I'm not going to rise to this garbage... It is literally like letting the cretins take over the asylum.
BiB - love it, but I think you just did.
FWIW, HYUFD is rightly a respected poster on several matters. On education, however, he is utterly clueless. Sorry, HYUFD, but you don't know what you're talking about. Grammar schools will never return countrywide, nor should they.
Our people ie Tories very much want more grammar schools and they are the people the government desperately needs to win back and shore up. It does not have to be universal return to the 11+, just allowing local parents to ballot to open new grammars would be a start, now you can only ballot to close existing grammars
You Tories have been in power for the last 12 years. And before Blair, you were in power for 18 years. So you've had 30 years to do this, but haven't. Guess why? Because even Tory educationalists recognise that expanding grammar schools would be a retrograde step, as well as electorally unpopular.
Special measures for you, I'm afraid.
Yet even Theresa May got a higher voteshare and more seats in 2017 promising to expand grammars than Cameron did in 2010 after he had ruled out new grammars.
Some new grammars have been created in selective areas
Is there any polling on Secondary Moderns on the same lines? After all, that is where most children would go...
Ah, but Tories all assume they'll leave someone else with the shitty end of the educational stick.
PS And re Matrons, I expect they will see no harm in repeating it - like double counting "new hospitals" and defining minor extensions as "hospitals". The old jokes are the best.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 13h The reason grammar schools were gradually phased out from the early 60s onwards is that voters hated them. If you want to explain to 85% of your constituents why their kids are going to rubbish schools, go ahead, be my guest. You'll get nowhere.
Except as I already pointed out 38% want more grammars created, only 23% want to scrap existing grammars and 17% want to keep current grammars but create no more. Even 33% of former secondary modern pupils want more grammars.
So lovely argument based on 6 year old data when more accurate and recent data is available.
Demand for Grammar schools has died as pensioners have died out.
So even on that link the 29% who want more grammar schools is more than the 23% who want to stop grammars selecting on academic ability and make them into comprehensives
Doesn't make any difference from my point which is that we now know you ignore recent polling if it doesn't agree with your viewpoint.
Even your polling showed more want more grammars than want to shut them, so both polls had more grammars the most popular option amongst voters.
They know that grammars at least selected by academic ability, now we still have selection just it is by school fees, house price and catchment area or church attendance
I'm not concerned about the polling - my concern is that I've once again caught you using historic data (while implying its the most recent so relevant) to prove your point..
Which shows that we can't trust the data sources you are using - which means your analysis can't be trusted.
The other day, he was snotty when I complained about him using data "two years old". That was his own wording!! Apparently it was actually two days old. But what's a chap to think?
Is there any polling on Secondary Moderns on the same lines? After all, that is where most children would go...
Ah, but Tories all assume they'll leave someone else with the shitty end of the educational stick.
PS And re Matrons, I expect they will see no harm in repeating it - like double counting "new hospitals" and defining minor extensions as "hospitals". The old jokes are the best.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 13h The reason grammar schools were gradually phased out from the early 60s onwards is that voters hated them. If you want to explain to 85% of your constituents why their kids are going to rubbish schools, go ahead, be my guest. You'll get nowhere.
Except as I already pointed out 38% want more grammars created, only 23% want to scrap existing grammars and 17% want to keep current grammars but create no more. Even 33% of former secondary modern pupils want more grammars.
Tariff Reform will be next. Followed by the Gold Standard.
Red flag in front of motor cars. Bringing back the Corn Laws. Oh, sorry, we did that with Brexit didn't we?
Motor cars is a tricky one.
Some aides want red flags in front of cars, others want an end to 70 mph limits on motorways and still other advisors demand scrapping smart motorways with no hard shoulder.
All are agreed that proper paper driving licences should be brought back. None of this euro plastic photo card shite.
Is there any polling on Secondary Moderns on the same lines? After all, that is where most children would go...
Ah, but Tories all assume they'll leave someone else with the shitty end of the educational stick.
PS And re Matrons, I expect they will see no harm in repeating it - like double counting "new hospitals" and defining minor extensions as "hospitals". The old jokes are the best.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 13h The reason grammar schools were gradually phased out from the early 60s onwards is that voters hated them. If you want to explain to 85% of your constituents why their kids are going to rubbish schools, go ahead, be my guest. You'll get nowhere.
Except as I already pointed out 38% want more grammars created, only 23% want to scrap existing grammars and 17% want to keep current grammars but create no more. Even 33% of former secondary modern pupils want more grammars.
Jesus. What the flying f***k is your IQ? I'm thinking minus. You actually think your comments add to the debate? No.. I'm not going to rise to this garbage... It is literally like letting the cretins take over the asylum.
BiB - love it, but I think you just did.
FWIW, HYUFD is rightly a respected poster on several matters. On education, however, he is utterly clueless. Sorry, HYUFD, but you don't know what you're talking about. Grammar schools will never return countrywide, nor should they.
Our people ie Tories very much want more grammar schools and they are the people the government desperately needs to win back and shore up. It does not have to be universal return to the 11+, just allowing local parents to ballot to open new grammars would be a start, now you can only ballot to close existing grammars
You Tories have been in power for the last 12 years. And before Blair, you were in power for 18 years. So you've had 30 years to do this, but haven't. Guess why? Because even Tory educationalists recognise that expanding grammar schools would be a retrograde step, as well as electorally unpopular.
Special measures for you, I'm afraid.
Yet even Theresa May got a higher voteshare in 2017 promising to expand grammars than Cameron did in 2010 after he had ruled out new grammars.
Some new grammars have been created in selective areas
Things that PB regularly says will happen which never do:
• capital punishment returning - nope • house price crashes - we need it but hey population growth • nationwide grammar school system - nope • the United States splitting - nope • the Bakerloo line closing down - that wasn't us that was LRT themselves in their last appeal for more cash
"As the report on Lambeth put it – “a succession of elected members and senior professionals ought to have been held accountable“. Yes – they ought. Not just in Lambeth but elsewhere. They haven’t been. They won’t be. The victims see those who should have protected them walk away with no adverse consequences. They see those who tried to help them or who blew the whistle derided or ignored or forced out of their jobs. They see some of their abusers convicted. But they see most not prosecuted and they see no accountability among those who were responsible for their care and let them down so badly."
Nothing ever changes. And we are now repeating the same mistakes in other contexts with the inevitable consequences: harm to children.
Is there any polling on Secondary Moderns on the same lines? After all, that is where most children would go...
Ah, but Tories all assume they'll leave someone else with the shitty end of the educational stick.
PS And re Matrons, I expect they will see no harm in repeating it - like double counting "new hospitals" and defining minor extensions as "hospitals". The old jokes are the best.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 13h The reason grammar schools were gradually phased out from the early 60s onwards is that voters hated them. If you want to explain to 85% of your constituents why their kids are going to rubbish schools, go ahead, be my guest. You'll get nowhere.
Except as I already pointed out 38% want more grammars created, only 23% want to scrap existing grammars and 17% want to keep current grammars but create no more. Even 33% of former secondary modern pupils want more grammars.
Jesus. What the flying f***k is your IQ? I'm thinking minus. You actually think your comments add to the debate? No.. I'm not going to rise to this garbage... It is literally like letting the cretins take over the asylum.
BiB - love it, but I think you just did.
FWIW, HYUFD is rightly a respected poster on several matters. On education, however, he is utterly clueless. Sorry, HYUFD, but you don't know what you're talking about. Grammar schools will never return countrywide, nor should they.
Our people ie Tories very much want more grammar schools and they are the people the government desperately needs to win back and shore up. It does not have to be universal return to the 11+, just allowing local parents to ballot to open new grammars would be a start, now you can only ballot to close existing grammars
You Tories have been in power for the last 12 years. And before Blair, you were in power for 18 years. So you've had 30 years to do this, but haven't. Guess why? Because even Tory educationalists recognise that expanding grammar schools would be a retrograde step, as well as electorally unpopular.
Special measures for you, I'm afraid.
Yet even Theresa May got a higher voteshare in 2017 promising to expand grammars than Cameron did in 2010 after he had ruled out new grammars.
Some new grammars have been created in selective areas
Tariff Reform will be next. Followed by the Gold Standard.
Red flag in front of motor cars. Bringing back the Corn Laws. Oh, sorry, we did that with Brexit didn't we?
Motor cars is a tricky one.
Some aides want red flags in front of cars, others want an end to 70 mph limits on motorways and still other advisors demand scrapping smart motorways with no hard shoulder.
All are agreed that proper paper driving licences should be brought back. None of this euro plastic photo card shite.
Knowing this government, we'll probably end up with both red flag men and abolition of the speed limit.
Tariff Reform will be next. Followed by the Gold Standard.
Red flag in front of motor cars. Bringing back the Corn Laws. Oh, sorry, we did that with Brexit didn't we?
Motor cars is a tricky one.
Some aides want red flags in front of cars, others want an end to 70 mph limits on motorways and still other advisors demand scrapping smart motorways with no hard shoulder.
All are agreed that proper paper driving licences should be brought back. None of this euro plastic photo card shite.
Not enough houses = charge as much as they want or you're homeless
The key point - which is not a very complicated one - is that housing prices are set ultimately by supply and demand.
And history suggests, it's much more pleasant to bring house prices into line by increasing supply, than by reducing incomes (and therefore demand).
WRT renting: there are good reasons for people to rent. Owning a home is great if it's somewhere you plan on being for a long, long time. It's not such a great idea if you think your needs might change in the near future, or that you may need to move somewhere else. It's also (almost) always going to be the case that people moving out of home/university aren't immediately in a place (financially) to buy their own home.
Lots of talk about imminent house price fall, I am unconvinced as are E&Y Item Club
To understand the housing market all you have to do is ask yourself: on the night of 15 April 1912 were the officers of RMS Titanic saying to one another We must do something to make lifeboat places more *affordable*
Eh?
I don't remember forecasting an "imminent house price fall".
But, I do think that raising interest rates to try and get on top of inflation would have pretty negative effects on the housing market. I don't think that's a particularly controversial view.
Not from you, in the press generally. There's a story a month in the torygraph saying ok another new record for house prices but The Crash Is Coming Be Extremely Afraid
On account of the fact that the readership of the right-wing dead tree press has an average age of about 75 and obsessing/panicking over the value of their main asset must be a favourite topic for that demographic.
I think most of us would concur that little short of an apocalypse is likely to cause a major downward correction in house prices in the UK. Hiking interest rates to 2% or 3% certainly won't. There's a fundamental issue of lack of supply, exacerbated by the fact that endless population growth renders our feeble attempts to build enough new homes to ease that problem largely redundant, and that residential properties are a more-or-less risk-free investment that offer large, guaranteed returns.
It is worth noting that almost exactly the same arguments were used about Hong Kong real estate:
- ever rising population as more and more people come from China - extremely limited supply of new housing as Government doesn't sell off new land or approve new developments - artificially low interest rates because of need to avoid the peg with USD being broken
Those arguments meant people bid up property to ridiculous rates. They thought it was risk free.
You just need to look at build costs. For the most part houses in the UK don't sell for much more than they would cost to build based on current build costs. If you see a modern 2 bed flat for sale for £120k, the reality is that it couldn't be built for that money. I think house prices can deflate significantly and will at some point, but it is likely to be variable between geographic locations, and there is a high floor based on demand and the cost of building replacement housing. I don't buy in to the narrative of a crash.
An interesting question though - is why are build costs so excessive? Why does this inflate at such a crazy rate?
Partly ()not wholly) regulation. All the new requirements that get put onto new houses (rightly so) inflate the price.
Going around the new development around here, many of the houses have chargers outside them (I assume the others do as well, just more hidden out of sight).
That would be a small but non-trivial cost. The same with all the other requirements as well.
I'm not saying the new regulations are wrong; just that they cost money.
I have a suspicion that regulation is not leading to houses being built better though. A lot of housing that is compliant with building regulations is very poor quality. I am dealing at the moment with a 5 storey block of flats built about 13 years ago which is having to be substantially rebuilt due to its timber frame design, rot is already setting in. Obviously there was also the phenomenon of supposedly high performance cladding being added to buildings which turned out to be highly flammable.
Not saying that I disagree with building regulations, but you really wonder if houses being built now will last in the way that those that were built in the 1970's will.
They tell me that the Conservatives have effectively privatised building control, in such a way that developers now call on heir own tame building control experts, and everything gets approved. But it is much quicker than having to get approval from the local council. innit?
Is there any polling on Secondary Moderns on the same lines? After all, that is where most children would go...
Ah, but Tories all assume they'll leave someone else with the shitty end of the educational stick.
PS And re Matrons, I expect they will see no harm in repeating it - like double counting "new hospitals" and defining minor extensions as "hospitals". The old jokes are the best.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 13h The reason grammar schools were gradually phased out from the early 60s onwards is that voters hated them. If you want to explain to 85% of your constituents why their kids are going to rubbish schools, go ahead, be my guest. You'll get nowhere.
Except as I already pointed out 38% want more grammars created, only 23% want to scrap existing grammars and 17% want to keep current grammars but create no more. Even 33% of former secondary modern pupils want more grammars.
Jesus. What the flying f***k is your IQ? I'm thinking minus. You actually think your comments add to the debate? No.. I'm not going to rise to this garbage... It is literally like letting the cretins take over the asylum.
BiB - love it, but I think you just did.
FWIW, HYUFD is rightly a respected poster on several matters. On education, however, he is utterly clueless. Sorry, HYUFD, but you don't know what you're talking about. Grammar schools will never return countrywide, nor should they.
Our people ie Tories very much want more grammar schools and they are the people the government desperately needs to win back and shore up. It does not have to be universal return to the 11+, just allowing local parents to ballot to open new grammars would be a start, now you can only ballot to close existing grammars
You Tories have been in power for the last 12 years. And before Blair, you were in power for 18 years. So you've had 30 years to do this, but haven't. Guess why? Because even Tory educationalists recognise that expanding grammar schools would be a retrograde step, as well as electorally unpopular.
Special measures for you, I'm afraid.
Yet even Theresa May got a higher voteshare in 2017 promising to expand grammars than Cameron did in 2010 after he had ruled out new grammars.
Some new grammars have been created in selective areas
Oh come on - she didn't do it, despite the promise! That's a new campus for an existing grammar school in Kent, which is atypical.
That's no different from calling a new wing at an existing hospital a new hospital. Oh, hang on......
Given the DUP also back grammar schools and she had a majority with the DUP she had a mandate to do so certainly.
It was Brexit failing to be delivered that did for May, not allowing some new grammar schools
Curiously in the last DUP manifesto Academic selection isn't mentioned once and the word grammar only appears once in the context of secondary and grammar schools. So I wouldn't say they support for Grammar schools is that great given the Sinn Fein had scrapping Academic selection as a key point in their manifesto.
Once all schools are above average, the clamour for grammar schools will decline.
On that statistical fail, goodnight!
How can all schools be above average, that is logically impossible?
Grammar schools however by selecting the brightest pupils by definition were always above average, even in relatively poor areas they offered a way out for bright pupils to top universities and the professions if they got into them. Now with the grammar schools mainly confined to relatively wealthy Tory areas they are not present any longer in those poorer areas which also have a higher concentration of inadequate and requires improvement state schools than nationally
Is there any polling on Secondary Moderns on the same lines? After all, that is where most children would go...
Ah, but Tories all assume they'll leave someone else with the shitty end of the educational stick.
PS And re Matrons, I expect they will see no harm in repeating it - like double counting "new hospitals" and defining minor extensions as "hospitals". The old jokes are the best.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 13h The reason grammar schools were gradually phased out from the early 60s onwards is that voters hated them. If you want to explain to 85% of your constituents why their kids are going to rubbish schools, go ahead, be my guest. You'll get nowhere.
Except as I already pointed out 38% want more grammars created, only 23% want to scrap existing grammars and 17% want to keep current grammars but create no more. Even 33% of former secondary modern pupils want more grammars.
So lovely argument based on 6 year old data when more accurate and recent data is available.
Demand for Grammar schools has died as pensioners have died out.
However, you'd expect that those with no memory of Grammar Schools wouldn't be especially fussed about seeing them come back... but that's not to say it would be a good (or bad) idea to bring them back.
Things that PB regularly says will happen which never do:
• capital punishment returning • house price crashes • nationwide grammar school system • the United States splitting • the Bakerloo line closing down
"the United States splitting"
We've always said that is scheduled for 2024-8 to be fair.
Whenever. It ain’t going to happen. Just another ludicrous PB fantasy.
I don't think USA will split... but it is a nation in very serious trouble. So much division and so many armed to the hilt... it's gonna be a rough 10-20 years.
While the Tories will lose Wakefield, I think they narrowly hold Tiverton and Honiton by a couple of hundred with a good local candidate. Much like Labour scraped home in Batley and Spen last summer when they were doing worse in the polls
Lol @ good candidate
Why do you think the Tory candidate in Tiv & Hon is a good one, young HY? She strikes me as a bit of a fly-by-night character, who never stays anywhere long, and moves on to the next thing before she gets found out. I suppose that, in this way, she could be seen as a good representative of the present Conservative Party.
Do local people actually like her?
She is a local headteacher and businesswoman, who knows the area well. She also performed confidently at the hustings. She is miles better than the non local Tory candidate in North Shropshire
The trouble is, young HY, that she does not go into details in her publicity. She does not say just how long she was a headmistress - I have the impression that it was just a couple of years, having been headhunted by an Academy Chain Business to sort out some problems (which probably means being brutally tough with members of staff far more experienced than herself) just long enough to tick a few boxes - but this was nowhere near actually leading a school staff and coaxing the best out of people.
And then a "businesswoman".... Is she not actually a shopkeeper? A business of a kind I suppose... But you do make her sound like a director of a FSTE company. But then again, one of the candidates to become leader of the Conservative Party also did something like this, if I remember correctly, so I suppose it is par for the Conservative course.
What she says about herself reads like a shabby CV that has been spun out of recognition bby a third-class applicant for a job.
And as for her being "miles better than the non local Tory candidate in North Shropshire", well she would have to be, wouldn't she? I felt very sorry for him, as I do for the poor Conservative candidate you have put up in Wakefield. You Conservatives are not very kind towards your candidates, are you? Or respectful towards the electorate.
A director of a FTSE company based in London would be less of an asset in a by election for a seat in Devon than a local small businesswoman based in Devon as well as local former headteacher
I suggest you watch the video of her performance at the recent hustings, then come back and tell us that she is a strong candidate.
She was certainly a better performer than the LD
You watch GBNews, and not ironically, so I suggest you might not be the best judge.
Tariff Reform will be next. Followed by the Gold Standard.
Red flag in front of motor cars. Bringing back the Corn Laws. Oh, sorry, we did that with Brexit didn't we?
Motor cars is a tricky one.
Some aides want red flags in front of cars, others want an end to 70 mph limits on motorways and still other advisors demand scrapping smart motorways with no hard shoulder.
All are agreed that proper paper driving licences should be brought back. None of this euro plastic photo card shite.
I've still got a paper licence.
How? They were abolished years ago as far as I know?
Is there any polling on Secondary Moderns on the same lines? After all, that is where most children would go...
Ah, but Tories all assume they'll leave someone else with the shitty end of the educational stick.
PS And re Matrons, I expect they will see no harm in repeating it - like double counting "new hospitals" and defining minor extensions as "hospitals". The old jokes are the best.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 13h The reason grammar schools were gradually phased out from the early 60s onwards is that voters hated them. If you want to explain to 85% of your constituents why their kids are going to rubbish schools, go ahead, be my guest. You'll get nowhere.
Except as I already pointed out 38% want more grammars created, only 23% want to scrap existing grammars and 17% want to keep current grammars but create no more. Even 33% of former secondary modern pupils want more grammars.
Jesus. What the flying f***k is your IQ? I'm thinking minus. You actually think your comments add to the debate? No.. I'm not going to rise to this garbage... It is literally like letting the cretins take over the asylum.
BiB - love it, but I think you just did.
FWIW, HYUFD is rightly a respected poster on several matters. On education, however, he is utterly clueless. Sorry, HYUFD, but you don't know what you're talking about. Grammar schools will never return countrywide, nor should they.
Our people ie Tories very much want more grammar schools and they are the people the government desperately needs to win back and shore up. It does not have to be universal return to the 11+, just allowing local parents to ballot to open new grammars would be a start, now you can only ballot to close existing grammars
You Tories have been in power for the last 12 years. And before Blair, you were in power for 18 years. So you've had 30 years to do this, but haven't. Guess why? Because even Tory educationalists recognise that expanding grammar schools would be a retrograde step, as well as electorally unpopular.
Special measures for you, I'm afraid.
Yet even Theresa May got a higher voteshare in 2017 promising to expand grammars than Cameron did in 2010 after he had ruled out new grammars.
Some new grammars have been created in selective areas
Oh come on - she didn't do it, despite the promise! That's a new campus for an existing grammar school in Kent, which is atypical.
That's no different from calling a new wing at an existing hospital a new hospital. Oh, hang on......
Given the DUP also back grammar schools and she had a majority with the DUP she had a mandate to do so certainly.
It was Brexit failing to be delivered that did for May, not allowing some new grammar schools
Curiously in the last DUP manifesto Academic selection isn't mentioned once and the word grammar only appears once in the context of secondary and grammar schools. So I wouldn't say they support for Grammar schools is that great given the Sinn Fein had scrapping Academic selection as a key point in their manifesto.
Once all schools are above average, the clamour for grammar schools will decline.
On that statistical fail, goodnight!
How can all schools be above average, that is logically impossible?
Grammar schools however by selecting the brightest pupils by definition were always above average, even in relatively poor areas they offered a way out for bright pupils to top universities and the professions if they got into them. Now with the grammar schools mainly confined to relatively wealthy Tory areas they are not present any longer in those poorer areas which also have a higher concentration of inadequate and requires improvement state schools than nationally
You could easily have the vast majority of schools above average as far as academic achievements go.
Imagine that there are five schools, and the academic achievements of four of the schools is 20/20, and for the fifth, it's 1/20. This means that the mean academic performance in 16/20, and four of the five schools are above average.
In this world, you'd be selecting based on stupidity, and sending all the idiots to a school where reading was actively discouraged.
Done correctly, you'd probably only need one in twenty schools being for idiots, which would ensure the other 19 were above average.
Is there any polling on Secondary Moderns on the same lines? After all, that is where most children would go...
Ah, but Tories all assume they'll leave someone else with the shitty end of the educational stick.
PS And re Matrons, I expect they will see no harm in repeating it - like double counting "new hospitals" and defining minor extensions as "hospitals". The old jokes are the best.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 13h The reason grammar schools were gradually phased out from the early 60s onwards is that voters hated them. If you want to explain to 85% of your constituents why their kids are going to rubbish schools, go ahead, be my guest. You'll get nowhere.
Except as I already pointed out 38% want more grammars created, only 23% want to scrap existing grammars and 17% want to keep current grammars but create no more. Even 33% of former secondary modern pupils want more grammars.
Jesus. What the flying f***k is your IQ? I'm thinking minus. You actually think your comments add to the debate? No.. I'm not going to rise to this garbage... It is literally like letting the cretins take over the asylum.
BiB - love it, but I think you just did.
FWIW, HYUFD is rightly a respected poster on several matters. On education, however, he is utterly clueless. Sorry, HYUFD, but you don't know what you're talking about. Grammar schools will never return countrywide, nor should they.
Our people ie Tories very much want more grammar schools and they are the people the government desperately needs to win back and shore up. It does not have to be universal return to the 11+, just allowing local parents to ballot to open new grammars would be a start, now you can only ballot to close existing grammars
You Tories have been in power for the last 12 years. And before Blair, you were in power for 18 years. So you've had 30 years to do this, but haven't. Guess why? Because even Tory educationalists recognise that expanding grammar schools would be a retrograde step, as well as electorally unpopular.
Special measures for you, I'm afraid.
Yet even Theresa May got a higher voteshare in 2017 promising to expand grammars than Cameron did in 2010 after he had ruled out new grammars.
Some new grammars have been created in selective areas
Oh come on - she didn't do it, despite the promise! That's a new campus for an existing grammar school in Kent, which is atypical.
That's no different from calling a new wing at an existing hospital a new hospital. Oh, hang on......
Given the DUP also back grammar schools and she had a majority with the DUP she had a mandate to do so certainly.
It was Brexit failing to be delivered that did for May, not allowing some new grammar schools
Curiously in the last DUP manifesto Academic selection isn't mentioned once and the word grammar only appears once in the context of secondary and grammar schools. So I wouldn't say they support for Grammar schools is that great given the Sinn Fein had scrapping Academic selection as a key point in their manifesto.
Tariff Reform will be next. Followed by the Gold Standard.
Red flag in front of motor cars. Bringing back the Corn Laws. Oh, sorry, we did that with Brexit didn't we?
Motor cars is a tricky one.
Some aides want red flags in front of cars, others want an end to 70 mph limits on motorways and still other advisors demand scrapping smart motorways with no hard shoulder.
All are agreed that proper paper driving licences should be brought back. None of this euro plastic photo card shite.
I've still got a paper licence.
I still have my paper licence too. I've lost my passport and applied for a new one so I'll soon be getting a blue "Farage" Passport lol!
Tariff Reform will be next. Followed by the Gold Standard.
Red flag in front of motor cars. Bringing back the Corn Laws. Oh, sorry, we did that with Brexit didn't we?
Motor cars is a tricky one.
Some aides want red flags in front of cars, others want an end to 70 mph limits on motorways and still other advisors demand scrapping smart motorways with no hard shoulder.
All are agreed that proper paper driving licences should be brought back. None of this euro plastic photo card shite.
I've still got a paper licence.
How? They were abolished years ago as far as I know?
You only need to get a photo licence if you move house. Until then (or if you hit 70) a paper licence remains valid.
“Texas Republicans push for a referendum to vote on the state seceding from the U.S. in 2023”
I think Texas uniquely has the right of succession, dating back to when it joined the union, or is that a myth?
Not quite:
the Republic of Texas did not join the United States until 1845, when Congress approved the Joint Resolution for Annexing Texas to the United States.
This resolution, which stipulated that Texas could, in the future, choose to divide itself into "New States of convenient size not exceeding four in number, in addition to said State of Texas" is often a cause of confusion about the state’s ability to secede. But the language of the resolution is clear: Texas can split itself into five new states. It says nothing of splitting apart from the United States.
“Texas Republicans push for a referendum to vote on the state seceding from the U.S. in 2023”
Great. So what? Are you another one predicting a split?
I really don't get this idea. From that Daily Mail article it says " ....Congressional order of annexation merely stated Texas could - at a future date - divide itself into five states."
Now were Texas to split into 5 different states that 8 more senators most of whom would be Republican...
Tariff Reform will be next. Followed by the Gold Standard.
Red flag in front of motor cars. Bringing back the Corn Laws. Oh, sorry, we did that with Brexit didn't we?
Motor cars is a tricky one.
Some aides want red flags in front of cars, others want an end to 70 mph limits on motorways and still other advisors demand scrapping smart motorways with no hard shoulder.
All are agreed that proper paper driving licences should be brought back. None of this euro plastic photo card shite.
I've still got a paper licence.
How? They were abolished years ago as far as I know?
People that passed their test years ago are allowed to keep their paper licence (or apply for a photo licence) if they wish.Anyone that passes their test now has a photo licence and has for years so paper licences are being phased out gradually.
Is there any polling on Secondary Moderns on the same lines? After all, that is where most children would go...
Ah, but Tories all assume they'll leave someone else with the shitty end of the educational stick.
PS And re Matrons, I expect they will see no harm in repeating it - like double counting "new hospitals" and defining minor extensions as "hospitals". The old jokes are the best.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 13h The reason grammar schools were gradually phased out from the early 60s onwards is that voters hated them. If you want to explain to 85% of your constituents why their kids are going to rubbish schools, go ahead, be my guest. You'll get nowhere.
Except as I already pointed out 38% want more grammars created, only 23% want to scrap existing grammars and 17% want to keep current grammars but create no more. Even 33% of former secondary modern pupils want more grammars.
Jesus. What the flying f***k is your IQ? I'm thinking minus. You actually think your comments add to the debate? No.. I'm not going to rise to this garbage... It is literally like letting the cretins take over the asylum.
BiB - love it, but I think you just did.
FWIW, HYUFD is rightly a respected poster on several matters. On education, however, he is utterly clueless. Sorry, HYUFD, but you don't know what you're talking about. Grammar schools will never return countrywide, nor should they.
Our people ie Tories very much want more grammar schools and they are the people the government desperately needs to win back and shore up. It does not have to be universal return to the 11+, just allowing local parents to ballot to open new grammars would be a start, now you can only ballot to close existing grammars
You Tories have been in power for the last 12 years. And before Blair, you were in power for 18 years. So you've had 30 years to do this, but haven't. Guess why? Because even Tory educationalists recognise that expanding grammar schools would be a retrograde step, as well as electorally unpopular.
Special measures for you, I'm afraid.
Yet even Theresa May got a higher voteshare in 2017 promising to expand grammars than Cameron did in 2010 after he had ruled out new grammars.
Some new grammars have been created in selective areas
Oh come on - she didn't do it, despite the promise! That's a new campus for an existing grammar school in Kent, which is atypical.
That's no different from calling a new wing at an existing hospital a new hospital. Oh, hang on......
Given the DUP also back grammar schools and she had a majority with the DUP she had a mandate to do so certainly.
It was Brexit failing to be delivered that did for May, not allowing some new grammar schools
Curiously in the last DUP manifesto Academic selection isn't mentioned once and the word grammar only appears once in the context of secondary and grammar schools. So I wouldn't say they support for Grammar schools is that great given the Sinn Fein had scrapping Academic selection as a key point in their manifesto.
Once again you quote historic data to argue your point while I reference the actual 2022 manifesto.
You really are demonstrating how untrustworthy you are....
The 2022 manifesto is completely irrelevant to 2017, when May had a majority with the DUP for more grammars and both the 2017 Tory and DUP manifestos backed academic selection.
NI is of course still fully selective anyway and the DUP even now have not said they will reverse that
Tariff Reform will be next. Followed by the Gold Standard.
Red flag in front of motor cars. Bringing back the Corn Laws. Oh, sorry, we did that with Brexit didn't we?
Motor cars is a tricky one.
Some aides want red flags in front of cars, others want an end to 70 mph limits on motorways and still other advisors demand scrapping smart motorways with no hard shoulder.
All are agreed that proper paper driving licences should be brought back. None of this euro plastic photo card shite.
I've still got a paper licence.
How? They were abolished years ago as far as I know?
Existing paper licences remain valid until you need to update them with a change of address. Then you have to replace them with the photo licence.
Yet another policy decision that disincentivises people from downsizing.
Tariff Reform will be next. Followed by the Gold Standard.
Red flag in front of motor cars. Bringing back the Corn Laws. Oh, sorry, we did that with Brexit didn't we?
Motor cars is a tricky one.
Some aides want red flags in front of cars, others want an end to 70 mph limits on motorways and still other advisors demand scrapping smart motorways with no hard shoulder.
All are agreed that proper paper driving licences should be brought back. None of this euro plastic photo card shite.
I've still got a paper licence.
How? They were abolished years ago as far as I know?
You only need to get a photo licence if you move house. Until then (or if you hit 70) a paper licence remains valid.
That’s stupid. They have a key flaw: no photograph so they could belong to anyone. How many people still have them?
Tariff Reform will be next. Followed by the Gold Standard.
Red flag in front of motor cars. Bringing back the Corn Laws. Oh, sorry, we did that with Brexit didn't we?
Motor cars is a tricky one.
Some aides want red flags in front of cars, others want an end to 70 mph limits on motorways and still other advisors demand scrapping smart motorways with no hard shoulder.
All are agreed that proper paper driving licences should be brought back. None of this euro plastic photo card shite.
I've still got a paper licence.
How? They were abolished years ago as far as I know?
People that passed their test years ago are allowed to keep their paper licence (or apply for a photo licence) if they wish.Anyone that passes their test now has a photo licence and has for years so paper licences are being phased out gradually.
I passed my test ages ago and originally had a paper licence. It seems that I must have been given my photo licence when I changed address. I had no idea that the old ones were still valid, I haven’t set eyes on one for years.
Once all schools are above average, the clamour for grammar schools will decline.
On that statistical fail, goodnight!
How can all schools be above average, that is logically impossible?
Grammar schools however by selecting the brightest pupils by definition were always above average, even in relatively poor areas they offered a way out for bright pupils to top universities and the professions if they got into them. Now with the grammar schools mainly confined to relatively wealthy Tory areas they are not present any longer in those poorer areas which also have a higher concentration of inadequate and requires improvement state schools than nationally
You could easily have the vast majority of schools above average as far as academic achievements go.
Imagine that there are five schools, and the academic achievements of four of the schools is 20/20, and for the fifth, it's 1/20. This means that the mean academic performance in 16/20, and four of the five schools are above average.
In this world, you'd be selecting based on stupidity, and sending all the idiots to a school where reading was actively discouraged.
Done correctly, you'd probably only need one in twenty schools being for idiots, which would ensure the other 19 were above average.
Bobsyouruncle, and everyone's happy.
Except, of course, the parents of idiots.
Given the number of parents who willingly and lazily allow their children to go one of the local secondary schools (because it's the nearest) regardless of the fact it's been bouncing round special measures for 20 years - a number of parents would willingly send their children to the below average school.
Once all schools are above average, the clamour for grammar schools will decline.
On that statistical fail, goodnight!
How can all schools be above average, that is logically impossible?
Grammar schools however by selecting the brightest pupils by definition were always above average, even in relatively poor areas they offered a way out for bright pupils to top universities and the professions if they got into them. Now with the grammar schools mainly confined to relatively wealthy Tory areas they are not present any longer in those poorer areas which also have a higher concentration of inadequate and requires improvement state schools than nationally
You could easily have the vast majority of schools above average as far as academic achievements go.
Imagine that there are five schools, and the academic achievements of four of the schools is 20/20, and for the fifth, it's 1/20. This means that the mean academic performance in 16/20, and four of the five schools are above average.
In this world, you'd be selecting based on stupidity, and sending all the idiots to a school where reading was actively discouraged.
Done correctly, you'd probably only need one in twenty schools being for idiots, which would ensure the other 19 were above average.
Bobsyouruncle, and everyone's happy.
Except, of course, the parents of idiots.
That would still not be all schools above average though even then as was his aspiration and would in fact include 20% of schools which are absolutely appalling academically
Is there any polling on Secondary Moderns on the same lines? After all, that is where most children would go...
Ah, but Tories all assume they'll leave someone else with the shitty end of the educational stick.
PS And re Matrons, I expect they will see no harm in repeating it - like double counting "new hospitals" and defining minor extensions as "hospitals". The old jokes are the best.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 13h The reason grammar schools were gradually phased out from the early 60s onwards is that voters hated them. If you want to explain to 85% of your constituents why their kids are going to rubbish schools, go ahead, be my guest. You'll get nowhere.
Except as I already pointed out 38% want more grammars created, only 23% want to scrap existing grammars and 17% want to keep current grammars but create no more. Even 33% of former secondary modern pupils want more grammars.
The more grammar schools there are, the more parents will want more grammar schools.
Eventually, every school will be a grammar school, because who wants their kid to go to a non-grammar school?
But this is what we have now, more or less. All "kids" go the same schools, regardless of ability, because they all have to go somewhere. Currently we call them "comprehensives". They could equally meaningfully be called "grammar schools".
This is after all what the Conservatives did years ago, in the days of Thatcher, they called all the polytechnics "universities" but they all carried on pretty much as before, though with different job titles.
Tariff Reform will be next. Followed by the Gold Standard.
Red flag in front of motor cars. Bringing back the Corn Laws. Oh, sorry, we did that with Brexit didn't we?
Motor cars is a tricky one.
Some aides want red flags in front of cars, others want an end to 70 mph limits on motorways and still other advisors demand scrapping smart motorways with no hard shoulder.
All are agreed that proper paper driving licences should be brought back. None of this euro plastic photo card shite.
I've still got a paper licence.
How? They were abolished years ago as far as I know?
Still have one too, stopped owning a car before the photo ones were common so never had to update it
Tariff Reform will be next. Followed by the Gold Standard.
Red flag in front of motor cars. Bringing back the Corn Laws. Oh, sorry, we did that with Brexit didn't we?
Motor cars is a tricky one.
Some aides want red flags in front of cars, others want an end to 70 mph limits on motorways and still other advisors demand scrapping smart motorways with no hard shoulder.
All are agreed that proper paper driving licences should be brought back. None of this euro plastic photo card shite.
I've still got a paper licence.
How? They were abolished years ago as far as I know?
Still have one too, stopped owning a car before the photo ones were common so never had to update it
At one point Stewart was seen as a right wing loon on here. Who knew he'd become leftie Corbynista lol!
All I'd say about the rail strikes is that that I think they are actually one a weakest sectors to be making demands, as technology will eventually make the vast majority of train drivers redundant...
All trains will be driverless within the next 30 years I suspect and by striking they will just bring their demise ever closer...
“Texas Republicans push for a referendum to vote on the state seceding from the U.S. in 2023”
Great. So what? Are you another one predicting a split?
If Trump wins I think Calexit is more likely.
Never going to happen. These chunks of US land can't just go ahead and set themselves up as new nations willy-nilly. It's probably about as politically, socially and economically practicable as the Republic of West Sussex.
Is there any polling on Secondary Moderns on the same lines? After all, that is where most children would go...
Ah, but Tories all assume they'll leave someone else with the shitty end of the educational stick.
PS And re Matrons, I expect they will see no harm in repeating it - like double counting "new hospitals" and defining minor extensions as "hospitals". The old jokes are the best.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 13h The reason grammar schools were gradually phased out from the early 60s onwards is that voters hated them. If you want to explain to 85% of your constituents why their kids are going to rubbish schools, go ahead, be my guest. You'll get nowhere.
Except as I already pointed out 38% want more grammars created, only 23% want to scrap existing grammars and 17% want to keep current grammars but create no more. Even 33% of former secondary modern pupils want more grammars.
Jesus. What the flying f***k is your IQ? I'm thinking minus. You actually think your comments add to the debate? No.. I'm not going to rise to this garbage... It is literally like letting the cretins take over the asylum.
BiB - love it, but I think you just did.
FWIW, HYUFD is rightly a respected poster on several matters. On education, however, he is utterly clueless. Sorry, HYUFD, but you don't know what you're talking about. Grammar schools will never return countrywide, nor should they.
Our people ie Tories very much want more grammar schools and they are the people the government desperately needs to win back and shore up. It does not have to be universal return to the 11+, just allowing local parents to ballot to open new grammars would be a start, now you can only ballot to close existing grammars
You Tories have been in power for the last 12 years. And before Blair, you were in power for 18 years. So you've had 30 years to do this, but haven't. Guess why? Because even Tory educationalists recognise that expanding grammar schools would be a retrograde step, as well as electorally unpopular.
Special measures for you, I'm afraid.
Yet even Theresa May got a higher voteshare in 2017 promising to expand grammars than Cameron did in 2010 after he had ruled out new grammars.
Some new grammars have been created in selective areas
Oh come on - she didn't do it, despite the promise! That's a new campus for an existing grammar school in Kent, which is atypical.
That's no different from calling a new wing at an existing hospital a new hospital. Oh, hang on......
Given the DUP also back grammar schools and she had a majority with the DUP she had a mandate to do so certainly.
It was Brexit failing to be delivered that did for May, not allowing some new grammar schools
Curiously in the last DUP manifesto Academic selection isn't mentioned once and the word grammar only appears once in the context of secondary and grammar schools. So I wouldn't say they support for Grammar schools is that great given the Sinn Fein had scrapping Academic selection as a key point in their manifesto.
Once again you quote historic data to argue your point while I reference the actual 2022 manifesto.
You really are demonstrating how untrustworthy you are....
The 2022 manifesto is completely irrelevant to 2017, when May had a majority with the DUP for more grammars and both the 2017 Tory and DUP manifestos backed academic selection.
NI is of course still fully selective anyway and the DUP even now have not said they will reverse that
We are talking about Grammar schools now - the only person talking about 2017 is you because none of the current data matches the argument you are trying to make so you are focussed on a different (and completely historic) argument to everyone else here.
Yep May tried to increase Grammar schools but she failed. Now Bozo is talking about doing the same thing again for similar reasons but the interest in them has fallen since even 2017..... To the point that the DUP didn't even have retain Academic selection in their manifesto in 2022 while Sinn Fein talked about dumping it once and for all.
Once all schools are above average, the clamour for grammar schools will decline.
On that statistical fail, goodnight!
How can all schools be above average, that is logically impossible?
Grammar schools however by selecting the brightest pupils by definition were always above average, even in relatively poor areas they offered a way out for bright pupils to top universities and the professions if they got into them. Now with the grammar schools mainly confined to relatively wealthy Tory areas they are not present any longer in those poorer areas which also have a higher concentration of inadequate and requires improvement state schools than nationally
You could easily have the vast majority of schools above average as far as academic achievements go.
Imagine that there are five schools, and the academic achievements of four of the schools is 20/20, and for the fifth, it's 1/20. This means that the mean academic performance in 16/20, and four of the five schools are above average.
In this world, you'd be selecting based on stupidity, and sending all the idiots to a school where reading was actively discouraged.
Done correctly, you'd probably only need one in twenty schools being for idiots, which would ensure the other 19 were above average.
Bobsyouruncle, and everyone's happy.
Except, of course, the parents of idiots.
That would still not be all schools above average though even then as was his aspiration and would in fact include 20% of schools which are absolutely appalling academically
Good grief, can't you recognise a joke. Read Sandy's last sentence.
As I have said before you just don't comprehend others posts.
At one point Stewart was seen as a right wing loon on here. Who knew he'd become leftie Corbynista lol!
All I'd say about the rail strikes is that that I think they are actually one a weakest sectors to be making demands, as technology will eventually make the vast majority of train drivers redundant...
All trains will be driverless within the 30 years I suspect and by striking they will just bring their demise ever closer...
Doubt it - unless something comes out of left field because the cost of making things fully automatic cannot be justified unless on a brand new build...
Tariff Reform will be next. Followed by the Gold Standard.
Red flag in front of motor cars. Bringing back the Corn Laws. Oh, sorry, we did that with Brexit didn't we?
Motor cars is a tricky one.
Some aides want red flags in front of cars, others want an end to 70 mph limits on motorways and still other advisors demand scrapping smart motorways with no hard shoulder.
All are agreed that proper paper driving licences should be brought back. None of this euro plastic photo card shite.
I've still got a paper licence.
How? They were abolished years ago as far as I know?
Still have one too, stopped owning a car before the photo ones were common so never had to update it
And you have never moved house in that time?
Havent driven a car in that time, when I get a car again will update
“Texas Republicans push for a referendum to vote on the state seceding from the U.S. in 2023”
Great. So what? Are you another one predicting a split?
If Trump wins I think Calexit is more likely.
Never going to happen. These chunks of US land can't just go ahead and set themselves up as new nations willy-nilly. It's probably about as politically, socially and economically practicable as the Republic of West Sussex.
California as an independent nation would be the 5th largest economy in the world, it would be perfectly viable, more so than any individual nation of the UK even. However constitutionally difficult to achieve
Once all schools are above average, the clamour for grammar schools will decline.
On that statistical fail, goodnight!
How can all schools be above average, that is logically impossible?
Grammar schools however by selecting the brightest pupils by definition were always above average, even in relatively poor areas they offered a way out for bright pupils to top universities and the professions if they got into them. Now with the grammar schools mainly confined to relatively wealthy Tory areas they are not present any longer in those poorer areas which also have a higher concentration of inadequate and requires improvement state schools than nationally
You could easily have the vast majority of schools above average as far as academic achievements go.
Imagine that there are five schools, and the academic achievements of four of the schools is 20/20, and for the fifth, it's 1/20. This means that the mean academic performance in 16/20, and four of the five schools are above average.
In this world, you'd be selecting based on stupidity, and sending all the idiots to a school where reading was actively discouraged.
Done correctly, you'd probably only need one in twenty schools being for idiots, which would ensure the other 19 were above average.
Bobsyouruncle, and everyone's happy.
Except, of course, the parents of idiots.
That would still not be all schools above average though even then as was his aspiration and would in fact include 20% of schools which are absolutely appalling academically
Yes, but imagine if just one-in-twenty schools were these "sink" schools? In this way, 95% of parents would be overjoyed because their kids would be going to an above average school.
It's the perfect solution to the problem of how to make sure the maximum number of people think they're winning.
Is there any polling on Secondary Moderns on the same lines? After all, that is where most children would go...
Ah, but Tories all assume they'll leave someone else with the shitty end of the educational stick.
PS And re Matrons, I expect they will see no harm in repeating it - like double counting "new hospitals" and defining minor extensions as "hospitals". The old jokes are the best.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 13h The reason grammar schools were gradually phased out from the early 60s onwards is that voters hated them. If you want to explain to 85% of your constituents why their kids are going to rubbish schools, go ahead, be my guest. You'll get nowhere.
Except as I already pointed out 38% want more grammars created, only 23% want to scrap existing grammars and 17% want to keep current grammars but create no more. Even 33% of former secondary modern pupils want more grammars.
Jesus. What the flying f***k is your IQ? I'm thinking minus. You actually think your comments add to the debate? No.. I'm not going to rise to this garbage... It is literally like letting the cretins take over the asylum.
BiB - love it, but I think you just did.
FWIW, HYUFD is rightly a respected poster on several matters. On education, however, he is utterly clueless. Sorry, HYUFD, but you don't know what you're talking about. Grammar schools will never return countrywide, nor should they.
Our people ie Tories very much want more grammar schools and they are the people the government desperately needs to win back and shore up. It does not have to be universal return to the 11+, just allowing local parents to ballot to open new grammars would be a start, now you can only ballot to close existing grammars
You Tories have been in power for the last 12 years. And before Blair, you were in power for 18 years. So you've had 30 years to do this, but haven't. Guess why? Because even Tory educationalists recognise that expanding grammar schools would be a retrograde step, as well as electorally unpopular.
Special measures for you, I'm afraid.
Yet even Theresa May got a higher voteshare in 2017 promising to expand grammars than Cameron did in 2010 after he had ruled out new grammars.
Some new grammars have been created in selective areas
Oh come on - she didn't do it, despite the promise! That's a new campus for an existing grammar school in Kent, which is atypical.
That's no different from calling a new wing at an existing hospital a new hospital. Oh, hang on......
Given the DUP also back grammar schools and she had a majority with the DUP she had a mandate to do so certainly.
It was Brexit failing to be delivered that did for May, not allowing some new grammar schools
Curiously in the last DUP manifesto Academic selection isn't mentioned once and the word grammar only appears once in the context of secondary and grammar schools. So I wouldn't say they support for Grammar schools is that great given the Sinn Fein had scrapping Academic selection as a key point in their manifesto.
Once again you quote historic data to argue your point while I reference the actual 2022 manifesto.
You really are demonstrating how untrustworthy you are....
The 2022 manifesto is completely irrelevant to 2017, when May had a majority with the DUP for more grammars and both the 2017 Tory and DUP manifestos backed academic selection.
NI is of course still fully selective anyway and the DUP even now have not said they will reverse that
We are talking about Grammar schools now - the only person talking about 2017 is you because none of the current data matches the argument you are trying to make so you are focussed on a different (and completely historic) argument to everyone else here.
Yep May tried to increase Grammar schools but she failed. Now Bozo is talking about doing the same thing again for similar reasons but the interest in them has fallen since even 2017..... To the point that the DUP didn't even have retain Academic selection in their manifesto in 2022 while Sinn Fein talked about dumping it once and for all.
No, I was talking about the fact May had a mandate with the DUP for her manifesto commitment for more grammar schools in 2017. Who knows what the Tory manifesto will be in 2024.
As I also pointed out even on your poll link more voters want more grammar schools than to close existing ones ie the latest poling.
There has also been no change in DUP policy to now back ending academic selection like Sinn Fein (all of NI is still selective unlike most of GB)
At one point Stewart was seen as a right wing loon on here. Who knew he'd become leftie Corbynista lol!
All I'd say about the rail strikes is that that I think they are actually one a weakest sectors to be making demands, as technology will eventually make the vast majority of train drivers redundant...
All trains will be driverless within the next 30 years I suspect and by striking they will just bring their demise ever closer...
Point of order, GIN: the strikes don't involve any drivers. I don't think proponents of driverless trains actually favour having no staff at all.
Tariff Reform will be next. Followed by the Gold Standard.
Repeal of the 1832 Reform Act
Not sure about that, as that would probably also lead to a reversal of Brexit if only the wealthy upper middle class could vote. Even in 2016 most ABs voted Remain
Is there any polling on Secondary Moderns on the same lines? After all, that is where most children would go...
Ah, but Tories all assume they'll leave someone else with the shitty end of the educational stick.
PS And re Matrons, I expect they will see no harm in repeating it - like double counting "new hospitals" and defining minor extensions as "hospitals". The old jokes are the best.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 13h The reason grammar schools were gradually phased out from the early 60s onwards is that voters hated them. If you want to explain to 85% of your constituents why their kids are going to rubbish schools, go ahead, be my guest. You'll get nowhere.
Except as I already pointed out 38% want more grammars created, only 23% want to scrap existing grammars and 17% want to keep current grammars but create no more. Even 33% of former secondary modern pupils want more grammars.
Jesus. What the flying f***k is your IQ? I'm thinking minus. You actually think your comments add to the debate? No.. I'm not going to rise to this garbage... It is literally like letting the cretins take over the asylum.
BiB - love it, but I think you just did.
FWIW, HYUFD is rightly a respected poster on several matters. On education, however, he is utterly clueless. Sorry, HYUFD, but you don't know what you're talking about. Grammar schools will never return countrywide, nor should they.
Our people ie Tories very much want more grammar schools and they are the people the government desperately needs to win back and shore up. It does not have to be universal return to the 11+, just allowing local parents to ballot to open new grammars would be a start, now you can only ballot to close existing grammars
You Tories have been in power for the last 12 years. And before Blair, you were in power for 18 years. So you've had 30 years to do this, but haven't. Guess why? Because even Tory educationalists recognise that expanding grammar schools would be a retrograde step, as well as electorally unpopular.
Special measures for you, I'm afraid.
Yet even Theresa May got a higher voteshare in 2017 promising to expand grammars than Cameron did in 2010 after he had ruled out new grammars.
Some new grammars have been created in selective areas
Oh come on - she didn't do it, despite the promise! That's a new campus for an existing grammar school in Kent, which is atypical.
That's no different from calling a new wing at an existing hospital a new hospital. Oh, hang on......
Given the DUP also back grammar schools and she had a majority with the DUP she had a mandate to do so certainly.
It was Brexit failing to be delivered that did for May, not allowing some new grammar schools
Curiously in the last DUP manifesto Academic selection isn't mentioned once and the word grammar only appears once in the context of secondary and grammar schools. So I wouldn't say they support for Grammar schools is that great given the Sinn Fein had scrapping Academic selection as a key point in their manifesto.
Once again you quote historic data to argue your point while I reference the actual 2022 manifesto.
You really are demonstrating how untrustworthy you are....
The 2022 manifesto is completely irrelevant to 2017, when May had a majority with the DUP for more grammars and both the 2017 Tory and DUP manifestos backed academic selection.
NI is of course still fully selective anyway and the DUP even now have not said they will reverse that
We are talking about Grammar schools now - the only person talking about 2017 is you because none of the current data matches the argument you are trying to make so you are focussed on a different (and completely historic) argument to everyone else here.
Yep May tried to increase Grammar schools but she failed. Now Bozo is talking about doing the same thing again for similar reasons but the interest in them has fallen since even 2017..... To the point that the DUP didn't even have retain Academic selection in their manifesto in 2022 while Sinn Fein talked about dumping it once and for all.
No, I was talking about the fact May had a mandate with the DUP for her manifesto commitment for more grammar schools in 2017. Who knows what the Tory manifesto will be in 2024.
As I also pointed out even on your poll link more voters want more grammar schools than to close existing ones ie the latest poling.
There has also been no change in DUP policy to now back ending academic selection like Sinn Fein (all of NI is still selective unlike most of GB)
Comments
Why are we watching the presenter at a screen at an angle?
Bonkers.
Millions wasted.
That said, nerds who watched a lot of Sharpe as a teenager can't be that big of a demographic, can it?
Next Conservative manifesto.
"I am thrilled to be selected as the Conservative candidate for Tiverton and Honiton.
This is where I was born, where I was raised, where I was educated, where I have worked and where I have raised my children.
This means that I understand the local issues people want addressing across the constituency - as they are my local issues too.
But most of all, I know that people here want an MP to get on with the job and deliver on our priorities. And like them, I want this constituency to thrive and take all the opportunities we have here.
My campaign will focus on delivering on people’s priorities for the area including improving transport links, supporting farmers and businesses. Working with Government to secure further investment in the area’s infrastructure including road upgrades for the North Devon Link Road and A303, a new train station for Cullompton and rollout of rural broadband.
I believe I have unrivalled experience and knowledge of the local communities, education, hospital and health services, transport and tourism industry – this is my patch."
"where I HAVE worked ..." and no indication of where she actually lives and where her business trades.
I also notice BTW that the funding for the new Cullompton rail station has already been provided - so that's a bit excessive to claim she will secure it ...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-59082444
I'm calling Bullshit
From a tweet earlier today
Gabriel Milland
@gabrielmilland
Support for more grammar schools among the general population: 29%.
Among over 65s: 46%
Among those of the most common parenting age (25-49): 24%
https://twitter.com/gabrielmilland/status/1538790827899596800
And that's from Yougov see https://yougov.co.uk/topics/education/trackers/how-the-government-should-handle-grammar-school-selection for the link.
So lovely argument based on 6 year old data when more accurate and recent data is available.
Demand for Grammar schools has died as pensioners have died out.
Unlike the kids.
Most parents don't know what a grammar school actually is.
I'm 55 and we didn't have them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Regiment_of_Scotland
Neither of us saw the benefit of them beyond the fact you want a school that streams children on ability...
The more grammar schools there are, the more parents will want more grammar schools.
Eventually, every school will be a grammar school, because who wants their kid to go to a non-grammar school?
FWIW, HYUFD is rightly a respected poster on several matters. On education, however, he is utterly clueless. Sorry, HYUFD, but you don't know what you're talking about. Grammar schools will never return countrywide, nor should they.
Funny old world.
PP won an absolute majority gaining 32 seats to win 58 in the regional Parliament. The party won 43% (+22.4%), more than doubling its vote share from the 2018 election. This was an incredible result, admittedly much of it was absorbing the former Citizens votes and seats completely but for PP to win a clear majority in a region that has been predominantly socialist is a huge fillip for new PP leader Alberto Feijoo who is a centrist.
PSOE won 24% and lost three seats to end up on 30 - the party's worst result ever in a region it used to dominate. Seville, a former stronghold, was won by PP for the first time.
VOX won 13.5% (+2.5%) and gained two seats to 14 but that was a pretty underwhelming result and they will have no influence in the new Parliament given PP's majority and it may be Feijoo will take the view he can win a national election without having to pander to VOX.
The For Andalusia left/green slate won 7.7% of the vote and five seats while the regionalist Forward Andalusia were one of the two big losers of the night, winning just 4.6% of the vote and losing ten seats to end on just two.
Biggest losers were Citizens who polled 3.3% (-15.0%) and lost all 21 seats it was defending.
Pre-election polls suggested PP would just fail to win a majority but on the day the voters came out in strong support of Juan Moreno - PP plus Citizens had won 54 seats in the 2018 elections and had governed with VOX support but Moreno now has a clear mandate to govern.
It's a desperate result for PSOE who remain close to PP in national polls but the most recent suggest PP and VOX between them would be very close to a majority.
They know that grammars at least selected by academic ability, now we still have selection just it is by school fees, house price and catchment area or church attendance
Special measures for you, I'm afraid.
I suspect however given a choice between more grammar schools or grammar schools being allowed to only accept children from within the local authority the grammar school is in most people would prefer the latter rather than the former.
Which shows that we can't trust the data sources you are using - which means your analysis can't be trusted.
Some new grammars have been created in selective areas
https://kccmediahub.net/second-grammar-school-campus-opens-in-sevenoaks745
• capital punishment returning
• house price crashes
• nationwide grammar school system
• the United States splitting
• the Bakerloo line closing down
Some aides want red flags in front of cars, others want an end to 70 mph limits on motorways and still other advisors demand scrapping smart motorways with no hard shoulder.
All are agreed that proper paper driving licences should be brought back. None of this euro plastic photo card shite.
That's no different from calling a new wing at an existing hospital a new hospital. Oh, hang on......
"As the report on Lambeth put it – “a succession of elected members and senior professionals ought to have been held accountable“. Yes – they ought. Not just in Lambeth but elsewhere. They haven’t been. They won’t be. The victims see those who should have protected them walk away with no adverse consequences. They see those who tried to help them or who blew the whistle derided or ignored or forced out of their jobs. They see some of their abusers convicted. But they see most not prosecuted and they see no accountability among those who were responsible for their care and let them down so badly."
Nothing ever changes. And we are now repeating the same mistakes in other contexts with the inevitable consequences: harm to children.
We've always said that is scheduled for 2024-8 to be fair.
It was Brexit failing to be delivered that did for May, not proposing to allow some new grammar schools
At the same time.
“Texas Republicans push for a referendum to vote on the state seceding from the U.S. in 2023”
US StormWatch
@US_Stormwatch
·
19m
Iran soared up to a scorching 52.2°C (126°F) today.
That's the hottest temperature recorded on Earth this year and one of the highest "pre-solstice" temperatures ever recorded.
https://twitter.com/US_Stormwatch/status/1539001882038784000
Buyers do have to beware though....
On that statistical fail, goodnight!
The DUP manifesto is at https://s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/my-dup/029232-DUP-Education-Policy-Document.pdf if you don't believe me....
Grammar schools however by selecting the brightest pupils by definition were always above average, even in relatively poor areas they offered a way out for bright pupils to top universities and the professions if they got into them. Now with the grammar schools mainly confined to relatively wealthy Tory areas they are not present any longer in those poorer areas which also have a higher concentration of inadequate and requires improvement state schools than nationally
As for the USA thing, I really don't know why you get so upset at hyperbole.
https://www.stratagem-ni.com/media/1203/dup-westminster-manifesto-2017.pdf
Imagine that there are five schools, and the academic achievements of four of the schools is 20/20, and for the fifth, it's 1/20. This means that the mean academic performance in 16/20, and four of the five schools are above average.
In this world, you'd be selecting based on stupidity, and sending all the idiots to a school where reading was actively discouraged.
Done correctly, you'd probably only need one in twenty schools being for idiots, which would ensure the other 19 were above average.
Bobsyouruncle, and everyone's happy.
Except, of course, the parents of idiots.
You really are demonstrating how untrustworthy you are....
I still have my paper licence too. I've lost my passport and applied for a new one so I'll soon be getting a blue "Farage" Passport lol!
the Republic of Texas did not join the United States until 1845, when Congress approved the Joint Resolution for Annexing Texas to the United States.
This resolution, which stipulated that Texas could, in the future, choose to divide itself into "New States of convenient size not exceeding four in number, in addition to said State of Texas" is often a cause of confusion about the state’s ability to secede. But the language of the resolution is clear: Texas can split itself into five new states. It says nothing of splitting apart from the United States.
Now were Texas to split into 5 different states that 8 more senators most of whom would be Republican...
NI is of course still fully selective anyway and the DUP even now have not said they will reverse that
Yet another policy decision that disincentivises people from downsizing.
Stewart Wood
@StewartWood
·
15m
Let’s make sure we understand this properly….
Restraints on City executives’ pay = regulatory burdens.
Restraints on ordinary workers’ pay = essential for the national interest.
https://twitter.com/StewartWood/status/1539009415415734273
This is after all what the Conservatives did years ago, in the days of Thatcher, they called all the polytechnics "universities" but they all carried on pretty much as before, though with different job titles.
All I'd say about the rail strikes is that that I think they are actually one a weakest sectors to be making demands, as technology will eventually make the vast majority of train drivers redundant...
All trains will be driverless within the next 30 years I suspect and by striking they will just bring their demise ever closer...
Yep May tried to increase Grammar schools but she failed. Now Bozo is talking about doing the same thing again for similar reasons but the interest in them has fallen since even 2017..... To the point that the DUP didn't even have retain Academic selection in their manifesto in 2022 while Sinn Fein talked about dumping it once and for all.
As I have said before you just don't comprehend others posts.
For reference we covered the automated /driverless train argument this morning - please read https://www.londonreconnections.com/2021/the-political-myth-of-the-driverless-tube-train/ to see the flaws in your argument (3rd time I've posted that link today)
It's the perfect solution to the problem of how to make sure the maximum number of people think they're winning.
As I also pointed out even on your poll link more voters want more grammar schools than to close existing ones ie the latest poling.
There has also been no change in DUP policy to now back ending academic selection like Sinn Fein (all of NI is still selective unlike most of GB)