Curious, anyone done any research on MP's in and around the Somerset Levels? As someone previously mentioned, in a similar situation, Obama came out smelling of roses while Paterson and Cameron didn't. It could also mean problems with potential seating arrangements on green leather for a lot of the incumbent MPs if with all the Cobra meetings taking place whenever a bad headline is printed, leads to very little actually happening. Sorry, but until very recently, I was totally unaware of the Somerset Levels, let alone that it was a recovered flood plain.
The NUT held a national strike in 2008. There not being a national strike during the Blair years isnt a particularly strong point because there wasnt one for the 10 years before Blair took power either. I think the facts show that teachers take action on the merits of the arguments as they see them irrespective of who is in power.
I think that's the key point: (my bolding)
Labour was very happy to go along with the producer interest - especially after Brown emasculated the Academy reforms. So, I'm sure there were the occasional squabbles about pay and rations.
Gove is challenging the very philosophy of the producer interest / LEA structure. IF successful it will dramatically undermine the power of the unions and other vested interests. So they see it as a fight they simply must win
The NUT held a national strike in 2008. There not being a national strike during the Blair years isnt a particularly strong point because there wasnt one for the 10 years before Blair took power either. I think the facts show that teachers take action on the merits of the arguments as they see them irrespective of who is in power.
When do you think all the major changes took place ? In the Blair years, and not a squeak. It's like saying you'll send emergency aid to Ireland today to help with the potato famine. Horse. Stable. Bolted. However if you wish to claim that unions aren't naturally inclined to the left and that they view things totally neutrally then don't let me stop you kidding yourself.
However if you wish to claim that unions aren't naturally inclined to the left and that they view things totally neutrally then don't let me stop you kidding yourself.
My point was that teachers are just as inclined to protect their own interests when Labour is in power as when the Tories are running things. In particular I think the facts disprove your assertion that they short change themselves by only challenging one side.
Tom Hunter's project to inject some hard data and evidence into the indy debate has some interesting results. Bettertogether and associated UKOKers seemed to have got the wrong idea about what's important to the voters.
'Only 3% and 2% of those polled respectively said EU membership or currency was most important to them in deciding how to vote in the referendum yet our politicians see these issues as priorities.'
In addition there's an ongoing argument between those who say we're all one big happy, homogenised Brit family, and those who say there are major difference between Scotland & the rest of the UK. Regarding immigration, the latter certainly seems to be the case. The last Yougov UK wide 'Issues' poll had immigration 2nd highest.
'When asked which of a prompted list of seventeen issues was most important in deciding how you might vote, the economy and job prospects were tied equally with 15% indicating these issues were most important, followed by healthcare (11%), pensions/benefits (8%), education (8%) and then personal finances (6%). Immigration (4%) ranked higher than EU membership and currency.'
However if you wish to claim that unions aren't naturally inclined to the left and that they view things totally neutrally then don't let me stop you kidding yourself.
My point was that teachers are just as inclined to protect their own interests when Labour is in power as when the Tories are running things. In particular I think the facts disprove your assertion that they short change themselves by only challenging on side.
The 2008 strike was about pay and lasted 24 hours, it wasn't exactly the miners. And my point re Unions being better for members when they have no political axe to grind stands. The NUT are quite happy to agitate when faced with the coalition rather than Labour hence the current raft of "action". They're faster off the mark and less likely to compromise - that's politics.
They're faster off the mark and less likely to compromise - that's politics.
Why would teachers be more likely to accept a poor pay deal from Labour than the Tories? That polling of teachers showed that more of them voted Tory than Labour in 2010.
Astonishing WATO interview with Climate change scientist:
"So Climate change deniers are wrong?"
"What I say to climate change sceptics is show me the data"
"Your message to the government is that the failure to reduce Co2 has led directly to this flooding....
"I'm not saying that - climate change may be playing a part in the weather we are seeing"
Talk about "leading questions" - in fairness the scientist (who had "spent her career in climate change science") played a straight bat to severely loaded questions
They're faster off the mark and less likely to compromise - that's politics.
Why would teachers be more likely to accept a poor pay deal from Labour than the Tories? That polling of teachers showed that more of them voted Tory than Labour in 2010.
What does 2010 prove, teachers aren't the Union. The Union is more the realm of activists and people with political axes to grind. Union reps are quite capable of having different views than their members and setting their own agenda. As I said if you want to kid yourself political views have no effect so be it.
They're faster off the mark and less likely to compromise - that's politics.
Why would teachers be more likely to accept a poor pay deal from Labour than the Tories? That polling of teachers showed that more of them voted Tory than Labour in 2010.
The unions lead the call for strike action, not the membership
[NOTE to NUT bods: your website is weird. Fairly standard practice to have bios of the union leadership in an obvious place. If you'd done that I wouldn't have had to rely on wiki]
* Prefers mixed ability teaching instead of streaming because it does not “create the sheep and goats situation that comprehensives were set up to avoid.”
* Critic of grammar schools, SATs and the school regulator
* Supported and spoke at conference for the "People's Assembly" [against Austerity]
* Opposed league tables
More generally: I have a real problem with unions striking on "political" issues. Pay and ratios, job losses, etc: all absolutely fine to strike over. But resisting education reform? That's outwith their responsibility. The politicians are responsible for that. Teachers and the unions should comply with the wishes of the government in matters like that.
They're faster off the mark and less likely to compromise - that's politics.
Why would teachers be more likely to accept a poor pay deal from Labour than the Tories? That polling of teachers showed that more of them voted Tory than Labour in 2010.
The unions lead the call for strike action, not the membership
[NOTE to NUT bods: your website is weird. Fairly standard practice to have bios of the union leadership in an obvious place. If you'd done that I wouldn't have had to rely on wiki]
* Prefers mixed ability teaching instead of streaming because it does not “create the sheep and goats situation that comprehensives were set up to avoid.”
* Critic of grammar schools, SATs and the school regulator
* Supported and spoke at conference for the "People's Assembly" [against Austerity]
* Opposed league tables
More generally: I have a real problem with unions striking on "political" issues. Pay and ratios, job losses, etc: all absolutely fine to strike over. But resisting education reform? That's outwith their responsibility. The politicians are responsible for that. Teachers and the unions should comply with the wishes of the government in matters like that.
Charles, Unions are institutionally neutral as you know. Please don't upset Neil.
Tom Hunter's project to inject some hard data and evidence into the indy debate has some interesting results. Bettertogether and associated UKOKers seemed to have got the wrong idea about what's important to the voters.
'Only 3% and 2% of those polled respectively said EU membership or currency was most important to them in deciding how to vote in the referendum yet our politicians see these issues as priorities.'
In addition there's an ongoing argument between those who say we're all one big happy, homogenised Brit family, and those who say there are major difference between Scotland & the rest of the UK. Regarding immigration, the latter certainly seems to be the case. The last Yougov UK wide 'Issues' poll had immigration 2nd highest.
'When asked which of a prompted list of seventeen issues was most important in deciding how you might vote, the economy and job prospects were tied equally with 15% indicating these issues were most important, followed by healthcare (11%), pensions/benefits (8%), education (8%) and then personal finances (6%). Immigration (4%) ranked higher than EU membership and currency.'
The PB tories are always wrong. The PB tories never learn.
Cybernats - bless:
Most important way to get information to help make a decision about how to vote: TV: 45 Newspapers: 12 Online news: 11 Leaflets: 5 Friends/family: 4 Blogs/Internet discussion : 2
"What I say to climate change sceptics is show me the data"
Rather ironic considering that the global warming zealots have systematically refused to release data; claiming, amongst other excuses, that readings have been lost or would be turned back against the religion.
For a few years there was a a sub-community on PB playing the game of Diplomacy, then for various reasons it died away. Recently Luicien_Fletcher, gent of this Parish, put up a post for a new game and it "sold-out" inside half-an-hour. If you weren't on line when it came up then you missed it, and I know there were several posters who would have liked to have joined if they had got the chance.
That game has been running very successfully for a couple of weeks and has had its fair share of plots, schemes, back-stabbings and mild skull-duggery. It is also reaching the point were the first eliminations could be expected to take place in the near future.
So, it occurs that it might be time to kick off a new game or, maybe, two. You see experience has shown that everyone's enjoyment is improved if the players are, generally-speaking, and taking on theing with another, on much the same level. I therefore propose to set up two games:
PB Diplomacy Novice Hurdles
A standard game* open to only those who have not previously been either an outright winner or a member of a wining alliance.
PB Diplomacy 2014 Death Match
A standard game with one exception, there can only be one winner alliances are not allowed. One player has to make 18 centres to win. Anyone can join but be aware this is going to be a devious, vicious, no holds barred, bring a gun to a knife fight sort of game. Not really for novices, the feint-hearted or anyone who likes their gaming fair and honest. Andy Cooke is now a confirmed runner so here is a chance for PB Diplomatists to test their metal against the most cunning, devious and treacherous player seen on the Diplomacy board for many a long year.
Those who are interested in either game should email me at HurstLlama at gmail dot com for details.
*For those who don't know Diplomacy is a game without dice, without any element of external luck which is built around one central paradox: there are 7 players each of whom want to win but it is impossible for any one player to win on their own they must enlist allies amongst the other 6 to help them. The game is therefore one of negotiation, decit, blackmail, treachery and all round good-fellowship. The rules can be learned in half an hour but the play depends on human interaction and so is eternal and unlimited.
It is perfectly possible to get rid of the "green crap" and take both climate change and environmentalism seriously.
When green issues became hyper fashionable a few years ago, a lot of greenwash and green posturing made it through to policy, in all parties. A review to prune out the ineffective policies and refocus on the important ones such as flood management, and infrastructure resilience to weather events is just what is needed. The right sort of environmentalism plays very well to a conservative leaning audience, witness the countryside alliance and CPRE.
The unions lead the call for strike action, not the membership
Unions are its members. I know lots of people on pbc dont understand this but it's still true.
What % of RMT members voted for the tube strike?
RMT membership has been growing strongly, if you want to give an example of a trade union that is not acting in its members' interests or whose members are not satisfied with what it is doing you'd be advised to look elsewhere.
The unions lead the call for strike action, not the membership
Unions are its members. I know lots of people on pbc dont understand this but it's still true.
Yeah in the same way as political parties are their members and the leadership always reflect their views - cf Blair Iraq, Cameron AGW.
No, in a much more meaningful way, for example unions cant take industrial action without their members agreeing.
That's a function of the law not the Unions' choice. As has been pointed out downthread the decision whether to hold a ballot or not sits with the leadership, so the activists have the playing field slanted towards them.
For a few years there was a a sub-community on PB playing the game of Diplomacy, then for various reasons it died away. Recently Luicien_Fletcher, gent of this Parish, put up a post for a new game and it "sold-out" inside half-an-hour. If you weren't on line when it came up then you missed it, and I know there were several posters who would have liked to have joined if they had got the chance.
That game has been running very successfully for a couple of weeks and has had its fair share of plots, schemes, back-stabbings and mild skull-duggery. It is also reaching the point were the first eliminations could be expected to take place in the near future.
So, it occurs that it might be time to kick off a new game or, maybe, two. You see experience has shown that everyone's enjoyment is improved if the players are, generally-speaking, and taking on theing with another, on much the same level. I therefore propose to set up two games:
PB Diplomacy Novice Hurdles
A standard game* open to only those who have not previously been either an outright winner or a member of a wining alliance.
PB Diplomacy 2014 Death Match
A standard game with one exception, there can only be one winner alliances are not allowed. One player has to make 18 centres to win. Anyone can join but be aware this is going to be a devious, vicious, no holds barred, bring a gun to a knife fight sort of game. Not really for novices, the feint-hearted or anyone who likes their gaming fair and honest. Andy Cooke is now a confirmed runner so here is a chance for PB Diplomatists to test their metal against the most cunning, devious and treacherous player seen on the Diplomacy board for many a long year.
Those who are interested in either game should email me at HurstLlama at gmail dot com for details.
*For those who don't know Diplomacy is a game without dice, without any element of external luck which is built around one central paradox: there are 7 players each of whom want to win but it is impossible for any one player to win on their own they must enlist allies amongst the other 6 to help them. The game is therefore one of negotiation, decit, blackmail, treachery and all round good-fellowship. The rules can be learned in half an hour but the play depends on human interaction and so is eternal and unlimited.
The unions lead the call for strike action, not the membership
Unions are its members. I know lots of people on pbc dont understand this but it's still true.
Yes, but the leadership tends to get elected by the most active, who also tend to be the most politically committed.
They then set the tone for discussions and ballot for strike actions - once a strike is called, even on a low turnout, many (I would assume) go along with it for all sorts of reasons - peer pressure, a day away from work, path of least resistance as examples - even if they are not ideologically committed to supporting the objective of the strike
The unions lead the call for strike action, not the membership
Unions are its members. I know lots of people on pbc dont understand this but it's still true.
What % of RMT members voted for the tube strike?
RMT membership has been growing strongly, if you want to give an example of a trade union that is not acting in its members' interests or whose members are not satisfied with what it is doing you'd be advised to look elsewhere.
Actually I'd agree with you on that, if I was in a Union I'd want Bob Crow looking after my interests. While he has some of his own political sidelines the fact that he treats Labour and Tory the same means he gets a good deal for his members as long as he doesn't kill the golden goose.
For a few years there was a a sub-community on PB playing the game of Diplomacy, then for various reasons it died away. Recently Luicien_Fletcher, gent of this Parish, put up a post for a new game and it "sold-out" inside half-an-hour. If you weren't on line when it came up then you missed it, and I know there were several posters who would have liked to have joined if they had got the chance.
That game has been running very successfully for a couple of weeks and has had its fair share of plots, schemes, back-stabbings and mild skull-duggery. It is also reaching the point were the first eliminations could be expected to take place in the near future.
So, it occurs that it might be time to kick off a new game or, maybe, two. You see experience has shown that everyone's enjoyment is improved if the players are, generally-speaking, and taking on theing with another, on much the same level. I therefore propose to set up two games:
PB Diplomacy Novice Hurdles
A standard game* open to only those who have not previously been either an outright winner or a member of a wining alliance.
PB Diplomacy 2014 Death Match
A standard game with one exception, there can only be one winner alliances are not allowed. One player has to make 18 centres to win. Anyone can join but be aware this is going to be a devious, vicious, no holds barred, bring a gun to a knife fight sort of game. Not really for novices, the feint-hearted or anyone who likes their gaming fair and honest. Andy Cooke is now a confirmed runner so here is a chance for PB Diplomatists to test their metal against the most cunning, devious and treacherous player seen on the Diplomacy board for many a long year.
Those who are interested in either game should email me at HurstLlama at gmail dot com for details.
*For those who don't know Diplomacy is a game without dice, without any element of external luck which is built around one central paradox: there are 7 players each of whom want to win but it is impossible for any one player to win on their own they must enlist allies amongst the other 6 to help them. The game is therefore one of negotiation, decit, blackmail, treachery and all round good-fellowship. The rules can be learned in half an hour but the play depends on human interaction and so is eternal and unlimited.
There are still vacancies in both games.
Interested. Where do I sign up?
Jonathan,
Good that you want to play, just drop me a note at HurstLlama at gmail dot com saying which game your interested in, Novice Hurdles or Death Match.
I see Dr. Sox is about. Doc, you expressed an interest in the joining the current game but missed out because it filled so quickly, can I not tempt you to one of the two new games?
It is perfectly possible to get rid of the "green crap" and take both climate change and environmentalism seriously.
Just like it's perfectly possible for a pro-EU tory like Cammie to posture endlessly against Europe for gullible tory Eurosceptics? So why does he then get so upset when they keep humiliating him after they discover all the posturing is worthless?
The PB tories always know best so presumably their geographic knowledge came in handy for when the incompetent fop from afar led every single scottish news broadcast on Friday.
Twisted Fire Stopper - Regarding the Public Sector, the problem I see it is there are 2 public sectors. You have one public sector that has dedicated people working on the coalface such as HCPs, teachers, police, firefighters etc and then you have another public sector which is mostly the bits the public can't see that is full of bureaucrats, inefficiency and waste.
Where I think the Government has gone wrong is that it has cut a lot of things (except aid and the NHS) equally. What I would have done is gone through everything the Government does and prioritise as follows:
1) Essential services 2) Nice to have 3) Not important
I would then have cut the 3s completely, had heavy cuts to the 2s and hopefully no cuts to the 1s at all
Part of the problem is that the Govt talked about cutting Quangos but hasn't done very well at this. Part of this is that Quangos are expensive human shields to cover the Gvt from flack if stuff goes wrong - see the EA
Comments
It could also mean problems with potential seating arrangements on green leather for a lot of the incumbent MPs if with all the Cobra meetings taking place whenever a bad headline is printed, leads to very little actually happening.
Sorry, but until very recently, I was totally unaware of the Somerset Levels, let alone that it was a recovered flood plain.
Labour was very happy to go along with the producer interest - especially after Brown emasculated the Academy reforms. So, I'm sure there were the occasional squabbles about pay and rations.
Gove is challenging the very philosophy of the producer interest / LEA structure. IF successful it will dramatically undermine the power of the unions and other vested interests. So they see it as a fight they simply must win
"So Climate change deniers are wrong?"
"What I say to climate change sceptics is show me the data"
"Your message to the government is that the failure to reduce Co2 has led directly to this flooding....
"I'm not saying that - climate change may be playing a part in the weather we are seeing"
Talk about "leading questions" - in fairness the scientist (who had "spent her career in climate change science") played a straight bat to severely loaded questions
[NOTE to NUT bods: your website is weird. Fairly standard practice to have bios of the union leadership in an obvious place. If you'd done that I wouldn't have had to rely on wiki]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christine_Blower
* Prefers mixed ability teaching instead of streaming because it does not “create the sheep and goats situation that comprehensives were set up to avoid.”
* Critic of grammar schools, SATs and the school regulator
* Supported and spoke at conference for the "People's Assembly" [against Austerity]
* Opposed league tables
More generally: I have a real problem with unions striking on "political" issues. Pay and ratios, job losses, etc: all absolutely fine to strike over. But resisting education reform? That's outwith their responsibility. The politicians are responsible for that. Teachers and the unions should comply with the wishes of the government in matters like that.
Most important way to get information to help make a decision about how to vote:
TV: 45
Newspapers: 12
Online news: 11
Leaflets: 5
Friends/family: 4
Blogs/Internet discussion : 2
which part of Surrey is Newsnet based in ?
Cammie scared witless of the kippers making immigration and the chumocracy headline news for days.
When green issues became hyper fashionable a few years ago, a lot of greenwash and green posturing made it through to policy, in all parties. A review to prune out the ineffective policies and refocus on the important ones such as flood management, and infrastructure resilience to weather events is just what is needed. The right sort of environmentalism plays very well to a conservative leaning audience, witness the countryside alliance and CPRE.
@UKIP: UKIP leader @Nigel_Farage has called for a public inquiry into the flooding that has devastated the Somerset Levels http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/Flood-victims-state-compensation-Ukip-leader-says/story-20592157-detail/story.html#ixzz2spdxQdQs
http://websiteipaddress.com/Site/newsnetscotland.com
http://websiteipaddress.com/Site/newsnetscotland.com
ROFL :-)
They then set the tone for discussions and ballot for strike actions - once a strike is called, even on a low turnout, many (I would assume) go along with it for all sorts of reasons - peer pressure, a day away from work, path of least resistance as examples - even if they are not ideologically committed to supporting the objective of the strike
You don't think it could have anything to do with the (in) action of the last Labour Climate change SoS, do you?
Good that you want to play, just drop me a note at HurstLlama at gmail dot com saying which game your interested in, Novice Hurdles or Death Match.
I see Dr. Sox is about. Doc, you expressed an interest in the joining the current game but missed out because it filled so quickly, can I not tempt you to one of the two new games?
Just like it's perfectly possible for a pro-EU tory like Cammie to posture endlessly against Europe for gullible tory Eurosceptics? So why does he then get so upset when they keep humiliating him after they discover all the posturing is worthless?
ROFL
Where I think the Government has gone wrong is that it has cut a lot of things (except aid and the NHS) equally. What I would have done is gone through everything the Government does and prioritise as follows:
1) Essential services
2) Nice to have
3) Not important
I would then have cut the 3s completely, had heavy cuts to the 2s and hopefully no cuts to the 1s at all
Part of the problem is that the Govt talked about cutting Quangos but hasn't done very well at this. Part of this is that Quangos are expensive human shields to cover the Gvt from flack if stuff goes wrong - see the EA