Nothing wrong with pointing out SKS’s flaws. He has them, and he makes mistakes, and there may come a time when they cost him. At the moment, the Tories are so utterly crap that anything SKS does or doesnt do pales into insignificance, which is why he will win the election, and I hope he does.
What exactly are his flaws? He hasn't really done anything wrong in my view, that's why he's been so successful.
He was prepared and worked to make Jeremy Corbyn Prime Minister, that is huge red flag and flaw.
I can agree with that.
Eliminate from the next election everyone who worked for any of Corbyn, Johnson or Truss to be Prime Minister, and the LibDems might stand a fighting chance….
Yep. There's your silver bullet for the big LibDem 'breaking of the mould'.
What does the judge imagine is the point of naming the killers if it does not lead to opprobrium against their families, even if she does not hope to see violence?
So far the anti Starmer brigade have come up with several reasons why he should not PM. Went to a private school, not tall enough, flip flops, boring and out of touch. I wonder if any can spot the fatal flaw why this might not quite work......
Sir Keir Starmer did not go to a private school.
Is Wikipedia wrong?
"He attended the selective state Reigate Grammar School, which became a private school while he was a student."
Average Ninja is correct, as 'go' is usually read as "being sent by his parents". And he couldn't very well be 'sent' more than once could he?
Also - his status didn't change (grandfather rights), so no fees IIRC.
I believe he had grandfather rights to 16. He could have gone to a state sixth form college for his A Levels but instead was paid for by the state to stay on at Reigate Grammar.
What I find odd about all this is that no one talks about the fact he passed the eleven plus and went to a grammar school. Not that social mobility is really that important politically, but he makes a big thing of his working class roots. I’d genuinely be interested to hear if he thinks he could have made it to DPP if he’d gone to a comprehensive.
I don't know of course but I suspect he'd say 'no'.
That of course, is not an argument for grammar schools or the 11+, quite the opposite.
That's the attitude that results in opportunities being taken away from working class people in the name of progress.
The exact opposite tends to happen. Middle class parents get their children tutored for the 11 plus whereas working class parents often don't so the Grammar school system is biased against working class children.
Exactly right. In Kent, for example, only 50% of children are entered for the Kent Test (local version of the 11+).
The idea that the 11+ aids social mobility is completely out of date and out of touch. It actually leads to bright working class kids being less likely to come into contact with similar middle-class kids who could act as role models for them.
During the last Labour Government, people were annoyed that they were being seen too quickly by their GP. The 48 hour target was hit so often, that people were told they needed to book within 48 hours.
Under the last Labour Government, the cancer target was hit.
Under the last Labour Government, the A&E 4 hour target was hit in over 90% of cases.
Before the last Labour government, all targets were missed and the NHS was on its knees. After the last Labour government, all targets are being missed and the NHS is on its knees.
The Tories are the problem. It is hard to conclude they are anything but incompetent at running it.
Governments shouldn’t be running things
I certainly agree that Tory Governments shouldn't be running things.
They are not so much 'running things' as running things into the ground.
At this point I believe it is on purpose. Rishi should stop being a coward and call the election.
Is this the current incarnation of 'Lockdown NOW' that a certain non wired equine kept opining for?
So you are out of up to date points.
If you wish to discuss lockdown, I now believe the entire thing was a mistake. I was wrong to call for a lockdown and I regret doing so.
I am able to hold my hands up, will you ever apologise for supporting this bunch of arseholes?
Vs Corbyn? Not at all, I think my spending a month helping to run a parliamentary campaign was time well spent.
Just as I would take 3 months off to go and help a Scindy defence!
I won't be voting for Sunak next time, however. We've had enough of this Lib dem-esque govt imo...
Lib Dem like? What planet are you living on?
Banning things, putting up taxes, growing the state etc etc
Most left wing govt of my lifetime.
I've said it again, the Boris Johnson government is delivering large parts of Michael Foot's 1983 manifesto.
Leave the Common Market, progressively enacting unilateral nuclear disarmament (by reducing the number of subs, number on patrol, number of warheads), reduction in military expenditure, reducing the number of carriers, deficit spending...
You may remember I have taught my dog the 3 card trick (with cups and kibble under one of the cups). I shuffle the cups and he taps the cup with the treat under it (It works with me also with a pint of Shere Drop).
My daughter is home for Christmas and wanted to have a go (not finding the kibble, but moving the cups). She then complained that the dog couldn't find the treat. He kept tapping the wrong cup apparently. So I asked her to show me what she was doing. She was doing it like the con artists at the race track playing find the lady. I couldn't damn well find the treat let alone the dog (find the treat I mean, I knew where the dog was). Her expectations of the dog were rather ambitious. He needs you to move the cups very very slowly. Even then the concentration is intense.
During the last Labour Government, people were annoyed that they were being seen too quickly by their GP. The 48 hour target was hit so often, that people were told they needed to book within 48 hours.
Under the last Labour Government, the cancer target was hit.
Under the last Labour Government, the A&E 4 hour target was hit in over 90% of cases.
Before the last Labour government, all targets were missed and the NHS was on its knees. After the last Labour government, all targets are being missed and the NHS is on its knees.
The Tories are the problem. It is hard to conclude they are anything but incompetent at running it.
Governments shouldn’t be running things
I certainly agree that Tory Governments shouldn't be running things.
They are not so much 'running things' as running things into the ground.
At this point I believe it is on purpose. Rishi should stop being a coward and call the election.
Is this the current incarnation of 'Lockdown NOW' that a certain non wired equine kept opining for?
So you are out of up to date points.
If you wish to discuss lockdown, I now believe the entire thing was a mistake. I was wrong to call for a lockdown and I regret doing so.
I am able to hold my hands up, will you ever apologise for supporting this bunch of arseholes?
Vs Corbyn? Not at all, I think my spending a month helping to run a parliamentary campaign was time well spent.
Just as I would take 3 months off to go and help a Scindy defence!
I won't be voting for Sunak next time, however. We've had enough of this Lib dem-esque govt imo...
Lib Dem like? What planet are you living on?
Banning things, putting up taxes, growing the state etc etc
Most left wing govt of my lifetime.
I've said it again, the Boris Johnson government is delivering large parts of Michael Foot's 1983 manifesto.
Leave the Common Market, progressively enacting unilateral nuclear disarmament (by reducing the number of subs, number on patrol, number of warheads), reduction in military expenditure, reducing the number of carriers, deficit spending...
Leaving the EC/EU, nationalising anything that moves, higher taxes and government spending....
It wasn't in the manifesto, but Boris Johnson dresses like a scruff*.
*Michael Foot was unfairly maligned for the supposed donkey jacket.
You may remember I have taught my dog the 3 card trick (with cups and kibble under one of the cups). I shuffle the cups and he taps the cup with the treat under it (It works with me also with a pint of Shere Drop).
My daughter is home for Christmas and wanted to have a go (not finding the kibble, but moving the cups). She then complained that the dog couldn't find the treat. He kept tapping the wrong cup apparently. So I asked her to show me what she was doing. She was doing it like the con artists at the race track playing find the lady. I couldn't damn well find the treat let alone the dog (find the treat I mean, I knew where the dog was). Her expectations of the dog were rather ambitious. He needs you to move the cups very very slowly. Even then the concentration is intense.
Has the dog worked out the Monty Hall paradox yet?
So far the anti Starmer brigade have come up with several reasons why he should not PM. Went to a private school, not tall enough, flip flops, boring and out of touch. I wonder if any can spot the fatal flaw why this might not quite work......
Sir Keir Starmer did not go to a private school.
Is Wikipedia wrong?
"He attended the selective state Reigate Grammar School, which became a private school while he was a student."
Average Ninja is correct, as 'go' is usually read as "being sent by his parents". And he couldn't very well be 'sent' more than once could he?
Also - his status didn't change (grandfather rights), so no fees IIRC.
I believe he had grandfather rights to 16. He could have gone to a state sixth form college for his A Levels but instead was paid for by the state to stay on at Reigate Grammar.
What I find odd about all this is that no one talks about the fact he passed the eleven plus and went to a grammar school. Not that social mobility is really that important politically, but he makes a big thing of his working class roots. I’d genuinely be interested to hear if he thinks he could have made it to DPP if he’d gone to a comprehensive.
I don't know of course but I suspect he'd say 'no'.
That of course, is not an argument for grammar schools or the 11+, quite the opposite.
That's the attitude that results in opportunities being taken away from working class people in the name of progress.
The exact opposite tends to happen. Middle class parents get their children tutored for the 11 plus whereas working class parents often don't so the Grammar school system is biased against working class children.
Exactly right. In Kent, for example, only 50% of children are entered for the Kent Test (local version of the 11+).
The idea that the 11+ aids social mobility is completely out of date and out of touch. It actually leads to bright working class kids being less likely to come into contact with similar middle-class kids who could act as role models for them.
Education. I shall spend an hour on Christmas Day composing my letter, personal and confidential, to Starmer about his policy that will costing parents, who really scrape by to send their kids to private education, another 20%, because of his class based plan over VAT and Tax. I am in a Con/Lab marginal and would have voted Labour for the first time in 60 years, but not now, be either a wasted Lib Dem vote or abstain.
We'll have a whip round for you.
Sorry, but no sympathy. Charitable status for privates schools is an utter sham. No reason on earth why an VAT exemption that benefits the wealthiest 7% of the population should persist. Private education is a corrosive influence on this country.
And yet, for example, look at the King Henry VI Foundation.
The school fees cover the operating cost of the school (Eton)
Fundraising plus 10% of endowment income goes to maintain the fabric of the historical estate
20% of endowment income is spent on on scholarships at Eton
70% of endowment income is allocated for educational projects outside of the school.
How is that not a charity? The endowment is about £600m so these are not small sums.
I love this but apparently I am a moderate Hanovarian Tory. Is that an eighteenth century centrist dad? Quite alarmed to be a Tory, anyway, might need to go and lie down for a bit.
Same as HYUFD. That is a worry. Let's not dwell on it.
I know, terrifying, right? It's interesting to see how in the absence of mass suffrage the political questions of the time didn't really split down left/right lines. Standing army or no standing army? Stuarts or Hanovarians? Hard to care one way or t'other.
Church of England or nonconformists and Papists and The Union or Not too (the latter still an issue)
You may remember I have taught my dog the 3 card trick (with cups and kibble under one of the cups)....
I remember it fondly. In a very bad world, it was one of the few sweetest things on PB. Please continue with your little dog and I hope it brings joy to you both.
During the last Labour Government, people were annoyed that they were being seen too quickly by their GP. The 48 hour target was hit so often, that people were told they needed to book within 48 hours.
Under the last Labour Government, the cancer target was hit.
Under the last Labour Government, the A&E 4 hour target was hit in over 90% of cases.
Before the last Labour government, all targets were missed and the NHS was on its knees. After the last Labour government, all targets are being missed and the NHS is on its knees.
The Tories are the problem. It is hard to conclude they are anything but incompetent at running it.
Governments shouldn’t be running things
I certainly agree that Tory Governments shouldn't be running things.
They are not so much 'running things' as running things into the ground.
At this point I believe it is on purpose. Rishi should stop being a coward and call the election.
Is this the current incarnation of 'Lockdown NOW' that a certain non wired equine kept opining for?
So you are out of up to date points.
If you wish to discuss lockdown, I now believe the entire thing was a mistake. I was wrong to call for a lockdown and I regret doing so.
I am able to hold my hands up, will you ever apologise for supporting this bunch of arseholes?
Vs Corbyn? Not at all, I think my spending a month helping to run a parliamentary campaign was time well spent.
Just as I would take 3 months off to go and help a Scindy defence!
I won't be voting for Sunak next time, however. We've had enough of this Lib dem-esque govt imo...
Lib Dem like? What planet are you living on?
Banning things, putting up taxes, growing the state etc etc
Most left wing govt of my lifetime.
I've said it again, the Boris Johnson government is delivering large parts of Michael Foot's 1983 manifesto.
You may remember I have taught my dog the 3 card trick (with cups and kibble under one of the cups). I shuffle the cups and he taps the cup with the treat under it (It works with me also with a pint of Shere Drop).
My daughter is home for Christmas and wanted to have a go (not finding the kibble, but moving the cups). She then complained that the dog couldn't find the treat. He kept tapping the wrong cup apparently. So I asked her to show me what she was doing. She was doing it like the con artists at the race track playing find the lady. I couldn't damn well find the treat let alone the dog (find the treat I mean, I knew where the dog was). Her expectations of the dog were rather ambitious. He needs you to move the cups very very slowly. Even then the concentration is intense.
It’s a huge challenge for a dog, as their memory is associative rather than sequential. A clever dog, knowing that its sense of smell is between 1,000 and 10,000 times better than yours, would just look away whilst you played with the cups, and then sniff out the right answer.
There’s also a good chance that you were unwittingly giving away the right answer when you do the trick, with some almost subliminal signal, whereas your daughter either didn’t give the same signal, or the dog isn’t familiar enough with her to have read them. Dogs spend their entire lives watching us and they often know what we’re going to do before we do.
So far the anti Starmer brigade have come up with several reasons why he should not PM. Went to a private school, not tall enough, flip flops, boring and out of touch. I wonder if any can spot the fatal flaw why this might not quite work......
Sir Keir Starmer did not go to a private school.
Is Wikipedia wrong?
"He attended the selective state Reigate Grammar School, which became a private school while he was a student."
Average Ninja is correct, as 'go' is usually read as "being sent by his parents". And he couldn't very well be 'sent' more than once could he?
Also - his status didn't change (grandfather rights), so no fees IIRC.
I believe he had grandfather rights to 16. He could have gone to a state sixth form college for his A Levels but instead was paid for by the state to stay on at Reigate Grammar.
What I find odd about all this is that no one talks about the fact he passed the eleven plus and went to a grammar school. Not that social mobility is really that important politically, but he makes a big thing of his working class roots. I’d genuinely be interested to hear if he thinks he could have made it to DPP if he’d gone to a comprehensive.
I don't know of course but I suspect he'd say 'no'.
That of course, is not an argument for grammar schools or the 11+, quite the opposite.
That's the attitude that results in opportunities being taken away from working class people in the name of progress.
The exact opposite tends to happen. Middle class parents get their children tutored for the 11 plus whereas working class parents often don't so the Grammar school system is biased against working class children.
The 11 plus is in theory designed to test raw IQ so there are limits to how much you can tutor for it.
In poorer deprived Northern or Midlands or Welsh city areas or seaside towns or rural areas the grammars did at least offer the chance of a more academic education that isn't there in the same areas now in state schools to the same extent
Personally, I would like to vote for a political party that had the following manifesto:
Look, this is all rather difficult, and who knows what the future will bring. I can't make any definitive promises about getting the economy moving, of reducing taxes, but these are going to be our guiding principles:
1. We're evidence based. Schooling. Policing. Health. You name it, we plan to run lots of trials. We have no idea which ideas will work. But unless we try things with a sensible system for evaluating results, we'll still never know.
2. Iteration. Iteration. Iteration. We're not going to rest on our laurels. We're going to be constantly seeing if we can improve things. Everything will be based on publicly available targets, and you will be able to judge us on those goals.
3. We're not that smart. We're going to make mistakes. Flip flopping is isn't bad, it's the correct response to new information that challenges existing views.
4. We will look for root causes, not try and treat symptoms. Why is it that the British economy is importing (say) certain types of labor? What is it we can change with the tax, benefit and education systems that makes it so that British people are more likely to be employed in these roles? Why is it that there are so few homes being built?
5. We won't lie to you. Things are going to be tough. There are an increasing number of people out there, all of whom want to live Western lives and they're willing to work longer and harder, because they're poorer. There's no free lunch and we can't simply shut ourselves off from the world.
How, within the space of one government, do you iterate trials of school policy ? Results are complicated by cohort, and take years to see out. And I would guess most parents would not be particularly keen on a mass parallel experiment with their kids as test subjects.
Your general point isn't a bad one, but it ignores the difficulties inherent in political, as opposed to commercial decisions.
The truth is, we've already had lots of experiments with various school systems - selective, comprehensive, LEA, direct grant, grant maintained, city academies, academies, academy trusts, vocational, academic, and on and on. The data goes back 80 years and is genuinely plentiful.
The problem is they all show one thing - our education system never achieves what we ostensibly want it too.
And that's because we've never done the one thing that might make a difference - made per pupil funding in state schools the same level as private schools.
And why not? Because no politician is willing to spend the money.
As we also see in transport, health, power generation...
Singapore tops the PISA rankings and spends and taxes less than we do.
As it has good discipline in the classroom and high expectations of its pupils. So what is actually needed is more of that and more choice for parents
IMV (and as I've said boringly many times): parents matters just as much as school. If a relatively unscholarly kid has parents who are willing to invest time and effort into their kid(s), then that kid may bloom - even if it is only in finding something that does 'click' with them. If a relatively bright kid has parents who are not interested in school, or in getting the kid to school (as I fear is happening with one of my son's friends), then that kid will always struggle.
Choice for parents is irrelevant if the parents are uninterested in educating their kids. IMV it is mainly of advantage to middle-class parents anyway.
In my case, our son will probably have the choice of two secondary schools (village colleges in Cambridgeshire-speak). I like both of them; but the one that is furthest away is in big demand and I doubt he'd get in. So the 'choice' becomes either the very local school, a *really* long drive, or private.
The 'choice' is not much of a 'choice' for many people...
Hence the case for more free schools too
No, it is a case for more local schools.
You won't get many new local secondaries in rural areas beyond maybe free schools, once they leave village primaries most pupils have to travel to the nearest town or city for secondary school
How would you get a Free School there - the money available from the DfE wouldn't provide enough for the school to work...
During the last Labour Government, people were annoyed that they were being seen too quickly by their GP. The 48 hour target was hit so often, that people were told they needed to book within 48 hours.
Under the last Labour Government, the cancer target was hit.
Under the last Labour Government, the A&E 4 hour target was hit in over 90% of cases.
Before the last Labour government, all targets were missed and the NHS was on its knees. After the last Labour government, all targets are being missed and the NHS is on its knees.
The Tories are the problem. It is hard to conclude they are anything but incompetent at running it.
Governments shouldn’t be running things
Good luck with your personal nuclear deterrent.
I always saw Trident as a metaphorical sock down the trousers, perhaps SW will bring this into actual being.
Yep. Pricey sock though. Costs more than the trousers in which it nestles. Cheap pair of kegs with a luxury sock stuffed down them. That's our look. Could be worse I suppose. But let's sell the sock and buy a shirt.
So far the anti Starmer brigade have come up with several reasons why he should not PM. Went to a private school, not tall enough, flip flops, boring and out of touch. I wonder if any can spot the fatal flaw why this might not quite work......
Sir Keir Starmer did not go to a private school.
Is Wikipedia wrong?
"He attended the selective state Reigate Grammar School, which became a private school while he was a student."
Average Ninja is correct, as 'go' is usually read as "being sent by his parents". And he couldn't very well be 'sent' more than once could he?
Also - his status didn't change (grandfather rights), so no fees IIRC.
I believe he had grandfather rights to 16. He could have gone to a state sixth form college for his A Levels but instead was paid for by the state to stay on at Reigate Grammar.
What I find odd about all this is that no one talks about the fact he passed the eleven plus and went to a grammar school. Not that social mobility is really that important politically, but he makes a big thing of his working class roots. I’d genuinely be interested to hear if he thinks he could have made it to DPP if he’d gone to a comprehensive.
I don't know of course but I suspect he'd say 'no'.
That of course, is not an argument for grammar schools or the 11+, quite the opposite.
That's the attitude that results in opportunities being taken away from working class people in the name of progress.
The exact opposite tends to happen. Middle class parents get their children tutored for the 11 plus whereas working class parents often don't so the Grammar school system is biased against working class children.
Selection on the basis of a test is still more of a level playing field than selection on the basis of money.
You may remember I have taught my dog the 3 card trick (with cups and kibble under one of the cups). I shuffle the cups and he taps the cup with the treat under it (It works with me also with a pint of Shere Drop).
My daughter is home for Christmas and wanted to have a go (not finding the kibble, but moving the cups). She then complained that the dog couldn't find the treat. He kept tapping the wrong cup apparently. So I asked her to show me what she was doing. She was doing it like the con artists at the race track playing find the lady. I couldn't damn well find the treat let alone the dog (find the treat I mean, I knew where the dog was). Her expectations of the dog were rather ambitious. He needs you to move the cups very very slowly. Even then the concentration is intense.
Amusing post.
Tried this with our dog. He unfailingly opts for whichever cup the treat was last under. I guess we should give him credit for remembering where he found it last time but really, the whole game is beyond him.
Still, he is a Pointer - notoriously not the brightest.
Education. I shall spend an hour on Christmas Day composing my letter, personal and confidential, to Starmer about his policy that will costing parents, who really scrape by to send their kids to private education, another 20%, because of his class based plan over VAT and Tax. I am in a Con/Lab marginal and would have voted Labour for the first time in 60 years, but not now, be either a wasted Lib Dem vote or abstain.
We'll have a whip round for you.
Sorry, but no sympathy. Charitable status for privates schools is an utter sham. No reason on earth why an VAT exemption that benefits the wealthiest 7% of the population should persist. Private education is a corrosive influence on this country.
The snag, as I have said before, is that VAT on school fees won't solve it.
It won't affect Eton, or Winchester, or Roedean.
It will wreck small private schools taking children who can't cope elsewhere, which actually *is* a valuable social function.
It will also wreck some right dodgy places too - hopefully including the private school in Cannock, which is a truly ghastly place on all levels (and which incidentally is a limited company already in common with most private schools) - but overall it feels to me like it's the wrong policy aimed at the wrong target.
As an aside, if reform of VAT to improve the education system were to be considered, a bloody good start would be to change the VAT status of VIth form colleges to bring them in line with schools.
My neighbour and friend who has recently retired as a teacher at what I guess is a middling local private school makes exactly the same point and I admit it has some power.
Of course the question this point begs is: what happens to those children who can't cope elsewhere and whose parents lack either the income and/or the motivation to send them to said private school?
I can answer this one because I listened to an LBC phone in Either Tom Swarbrick or Ben Kentish....
The local authority has a statutory duty to provide appropriate education (And transport to if pupils live beyond a certain distance of said institutions). There's a massive industry in providing said education for SEND pupils with no worries about parents paying any sort of bill because the Local authority is statutorily obliged to because there isn't appropriate state provision. And it sounded like a blank cheque for the private schools providing such education quite honestly.# You'd hope central Gov't would refund councils the VAT element of this if it's made obligatory for private schools as that's simply one area of Gov't shifting money to another, but I wouldn't hold my breath.
That's interesting. I will have to ask my friend if her school takes publicly funded pupils with extra needs. (I have a feeling not - the parents who are paying would surely object.)
In the sort of case that @Pulpstar is talking about they are dedicated schools run by organisation like Salutem
Sent out Christmas cards ft photos of him and his wife, photoshopped to stop him looking shorter than her
Donned military fatigues for a photoshoot
Two things that would be ridiculed relentlessly on here were it Boris, Sunak, or Farage, but ignored now. And if anyone does mention it… “weirdly obsessed”
You're at risk of getting weirdly obsessed with being called weirdly obsessed.
You could be right! I am weirdly obsessed with the fact Sir Keir does a lot of things other political leaders get slaughtered for on here, yet mentioning them equals “weirdly obsessed”
You may remember I have taught my dog the 3 card trick (with cups and kibble under one of the cups). I shuffle the cups and he taps the cup with the treat under it (It works with me also with a pint of Shere Drop).
My daughter is home for Christmas and wanted to have a go (not finding the kibble, but moving the cups). She then complained that the dog couldn't find the treat. He kept tapping the wrong cup apparently. So I asked her to show me what she was doing. She was doing it like the con artists at the race track playing find the lady. I couldn't damn well find the treat let alone the dog (find the treat I mean, I knew where the dog was). Her expectations of the dog were rather ambitious. He needs you to move the cups very very slowly. Even then the concentration is intense.
Has the dog worked out the Monty Hall paradox yet?
What does the judge imagine is the point of naming the killers if it does not lead to opprobrium against their families, even if she does not hope to see violence?
She's a judge. Imagining nothing, she knows perfectly well that she has to decide between options each of which has potentially bad outcomes because the human condition is like it is. No doubt in due course she will be criticised for (whatever sentence she gives) for making it too short. Same applies. BTW a few weeks ago she was presiding over the Cashman trial. We are fortunate to have such brilliant judges.
Banning things, putting up taxes, growing the state etc etc
Most left wing govt of my lifetime.
You must be on a wind-up. Most left wing government of your life?
I was born in the 1980s, and it absolutely is the most left-wing govt I've experienced.
No way. Blair was only just left of centre but a long way to the left of the current govenment.
You see 'inept' and assume it must be left-wing, whereas the ineptitude is available on both sides of the political spectrum (see Heath 1970-74).
Nope, I see a state that is incompetent except in growing itself. I see a state that doesn't have the confidence to allow people freedoms. I see a state that seeks to change behaviour by edict rather than election. I see a left-wing state, and I'm not afraid to call it as such.
So far the anti Starmer brigade have come up with several reasons why he should not PM. Went to a private school, not tall enough, flip flops, boring and out of touch. I wonder if any can spot the fatal flaw why this might not quite work......
Sir Keir Starmer did not go to a private school.
Is Wikipedia wrong?
"He attended the selective state Reigate Grammar School, which became a private school while he was a student."
Average Ninja is correct, as 'go' is usually read as "being sent by his parents". And he couldn't very well be 'sent' more than once could he?
Also - his status didn't change (grandfather rights), so no fees IIRC.
I believe he had grandfather rights to 16. He could have gone to a state sixth form college for his A Levels but instead was paid for by the state to stay on at Reigate Grammar.
What I find odd about all this is that no one talks about the fact he passed the eleven plus and went to a grammar school. Not that social mobility is really that important politically, but he makes a big thing of his working class roots. I’d genuinely be interested to hear if he thinks he could have made it to DPP if he’d gone to a comprehensive.
I don't know of course but I suspect he'd say 'no'.
That of course, is not an argument for grammar schools or the 11+, quite the opposite.
That's the attitude that results in opportunities being taken away from working class people in the name of progress.
The exact opposite tends to happen. Middle class parents get their children tutored for the 11 plus whereas working class parents often don't so the Grammar school system is biased against working class children.
The 11 plus is in theory designed to test raw IQ so there are limits to how much you can tutor for it.
In poorer deprived Northern or Midlands or Welsh city areas or seaside towns or rural areas the grammars did at least offer the chance of a more academic education that isn't there in the same areas now in state schools to the same extent
"The 11 plus is in theory designed to test raw IQ"
The level of nonsense you come out with really is stupendous.
My 10,000th post. Couldn't think of anything witty or earth shatteringly profound so instead:
Happy Christmas and a happy new year everyone no matter who you do and don't vote for.
Worthy sentiment, but I fear that it's unlikely to be a very happy 2024 for the remaining Conservative voters among us
I am still most definitely a Conservative; the problem is my party is led by people like Sunak and Hunt, who seem to want to pull it to the left of centre....
Education. I shall spend an hour on Christmas Day composing my letter, personal and confidential, to Starmer about his policy that will costing parents, who really scrape by to send their kids to private education, another 20%, because of his class based plan over VAT and Tax. I am in a Con/Lab marginal and would have voted Labour for the first time in 60 years, but not now, be either a wasted Lib Dem vote or abstain.
We'll have a whip round for you.
Sorry, but no sympathy. Charitable status for privates schools is an utter sham. No reason on earth why an VAT exemption that benefits the wealthiest 7% of the population should persist. Private education is a corrosive influence on this country.
The snag, as I have said before, is that VAT on school fees won't solve it.
It won't affect Eton, or Winchester, or Roedean.
It will wreck small private schools taking children who can't cope elsewhere, which actually *is* a valuable social function.
It will also wreck some right dodgy places too - hopefully including the private school in Cannock, which is a truly ghastly place on all levels (and which incidentally is a limited company already in common with most private schools) - but overall it feels to me like it's the wrong policy aimed at the wrong target.
As an aside, if reform of VAT to improve the education system were to be considered, a bloody good start would be to change the VAT status of VIth form colleges to bring them in line with schools.
It's a rather strange idea that private schools are for "the wealthiest 7%" and quite telling of the poster's attitudes.
My parents certainly weren't in the wealthiest 7% when they sent me, doubt they'd have made the wealthiest 25%. But they were strivers, and they believed the best way to lift yourself out of poverty was to get the best possible education you could, for yourself and for your kids. In my case, that meant they had to sacrifice what a lot of people take for granted - holidays, new car every three years etc - for them it was an opportunity cost. They spent disproportionately on education because it was something they believed had enormous value. Not because they were rich.
They were precisely the type of people who will be priced out by a 20% increase. While those who can afford to send their kids to 50k a year boarding schools are spending a comparatively small proportion of their incomes on education, and are better able to afford it.
Turns out I'm a moderate Hanoverian Tory. I always thought I was a Whig, but on the actual issues apparently not.
Not many of us true Whigs around it seems. No wonder the country's going to the dogs!
Thatcher would probably have been a Whig, as would Vince Cable. Pre universal suffrage and the rise of the unions and Labour Party the Whigs were often more free trade and free market than the 18th and early 19th century Tories who tended to be more rural aristocracy, landed gentry and wealthy farmers and Anglican clergy.
Today's Conservative Party is a merger of Tories and some Whigs effectively, the Labour Party was set up to represent the working classes who didn't have a vote when those parties dominated.
The LDs a merger of liberal Whigs and SDP wing of the Labour Party
Education. I shall spend an hour on Christmas Day composing my letter, personal and confidential, to Starmer about his policy that will costing parents, who really scrape by to send their kids to private education, another 20%, because of his class based plan over VAT and Tax. I am in a Con/Lab marginal and would have voted Labour for the first time in 60 years, but not now, be either a wasted Lib Dem vote or abstain.
We'll have a whip round for you.
Sorry, but no sympathy. Charitable status for privates schools is an utter sham. No reason on earth why an VAT exemption that benefits the wealthiest 7% of the population should persist. Private education is a corrosive influence on this country.
And yet, for example, look at the King Henry VI Foundation.
The school fees cover the operating cost of the school (Eton)
Fundraising plus 10% of endowment income goes to maintain the fabric of the historical estate
20% of endowment income is spent on on scholarships at Eton
70% of endowment income is allocated for educational projects outside of the school.
How is that not a charity? The endowment is about £600m so these are not small sums.
I assume there's some complex relationship between the Foundation and Eton?
But whether or not the Foundation can be said to be a charity (from that summary of it, it certainly sounds like an arguable case, though the 10% for the physical upkeep is pushing at the boundaries and probably over it, IMO), that doesn't mean it follows that Eton, as the school itself, is a charity.
Education. I shall spend an hour on Christmas Day composing my letter, personal and confidential, to Starmer about his policy that will costing parents, who really scrape by to send their kids to private education, another 20%, because of his class based plan over VAT and Tax. I am in a Con/Lab marginal and would have voted Labour for the first time in 60 years, but not now, be either a wasted Lib Dem vote or abstain.
We'll have a whip round for you.
Sorry, but no sympathy. Charitable status for privates schools is an utter sham. No reason on earth why an VAT exemption that benefits the wealthiest 7% of the population should persist. Private education is a corrosive influence on this country.
The snag, as I have said before, is that VAT on school fees won't solve it.
It won't affect Eton, or Winchester, or Roedean.
It will wreck small private schools taking children who can't cope elsewhere, which actually *is* a valuable social function.
It will also wreck some right dodgy places too - hopefully including the private school in Cannock, which is a truly ghastly place on all levels (and which incidentally is a limited company already in common with most private schools) - but overall it feels to me like it's the wrong policy aimed at the wrong target.
As an aside, if reform of VAT to improve the education system were to be considered, a bloody good start would be to change the VAT status of VIth form colleges to bring them in line with schools.
It's a rather strange idea that private schools are for "the wealthiest 7%" and quite telling of the poster's attitudes.
My parents certainly weren't in the wealthiest 7% when they sent me, doubt they'd have made the wealthiest 25%. But they were strivers, and they believed the best way to lift yourself out of poverty was to get the best possible education you could, for yourself and for your kids. In my case, that meant they had to sacrifice what a lot of people take for granted - holidays, new car every three years etc - for them it was an opportunity cost. They spent disproportionately on education because it was something they believed had enormous value. Not because they were rich.
They were precisely the type of people who will be priced out by a 20% increase. While those who can afford to send their kids to 50k a year boarding schools are spending a comparatively small proportion of their incomes on education, and are better able to afford it.
Well said; it pretty much perfectly sums up my parents too.
Whilst my aunts, some of whom were on benefits, spent their money on new dresses, and my uncles spent on 'going out', my mother scrimped and my father barely drank - and sent me to a private prep school. I think she Ma maybe a new dress every 3 years when I was growing up....
You may remember I have taught my dog the 3 card trick (with cups and kibble under one of the cups). I shuffle the cups and he taps the cup with the treat under it (It works with me also with a pint of Shere Drop).
My daughter is home for Christmas and wanted to have a go (not finding the kibble, but moving the cups). She then complained that the dog couldn't find the treat. He kept tapping the wrong cup apparently. So I asked her to show me what she was doing. She was doing it like the con artists at the race track playing find the lady. I couldn't damn well find the treat let alone the dog (find the treat I mean, I knew where the dog was). Her expectations of the dog were rather ambitious. He needs you to move the cups very very slowly. Even then the concentration is intense.
Has the dog worked out the Monty Hall paradox yet?
A good letter. Those are quite possibly the dumbest attacks possible, so it isn’t surprising the Telegraph went all in on them.
Are they dumb? This is how populism works. They know what they’re doing.
They know the cab rank rule. They don’t care. Many of their readers won’t care either. They’ll share the “findings” happily.
I don’t think so - Sir Keir can bat them off easily
Made me think about lawyers though - how can they sleep at night when they defend people they know are guilty, and hope to get them off on a technicality?
It seems to be the case that criticism of Sir Keir is impossible. I can only blame the referendum result - these people need revenge
Well done, you have achieved the impossible! On a daily basis too.
What is perhaps impossible is to convince the majority of this board, or the wider British public, that Starmer is worse than Sunak, or worse than average recent Tory PMs. But that is very different to claiming that he can't be criticised.
Education. I shall spend an hour on Christmas Day composing my letter, personal and confidential, to Starmer about his policy that will costing parents, who really scrape by to send their kids to private education, another 20%, because of his class based plan over VAT and Tax. I am in a Con/Lab marginal and would have voted Labour for the first time in 60 years, but not now, be either a wasted Lib Dem vote or abstain.
We'll have a whip round for you.
Sorry, but no sympathy. Charitable status for privates schools is an utter sham. No reason on earth why an VAT exemption that benefits the wealthiest 7% of the population should persist. Private education is a corrosive influence on this country.
The snag, as I have said before, is that VAT on school fees won't solve it.
It won't affect Eton, or Winchester, or Roedean.
It will wreck small private schools taking children who can't cope elsewhere, which actually *is* a valuable social function.
It will also wreck some right dodgy places too - hopefully including the private school in Cannock, which is a truly ghastly place on all levels (and which incidentally is a limited company already in common with most private schools) - but overall it feels to me like it's the wrong policy aimed at the wrong target.
As an aside, if reform of VAT to improve the education system were to be considered, a bloody good start would be to change the VAT status of VIth form colleges to bring them in line with schools.
It's a rather strange idea that private schools are for "the wealthiest 7%" and quite telling of the poster's attitudes.
My parents certainly weren't in the wealthiest 7% when they sent me, doubt they'd have made the wealthiest 25%. But they were strivers, and they believed the best way to lift yourself out of poverty was to get the best possible education you could, for yourself and for your kids. In my case, that meant they had to sacrifice what a lot of people take for granted - holidays, new car every three years etc - for them it was an opportunity cost. They spent disproportionately on education because it was something they believed had enormous value. Not because they were rich.
They were precisely the type of people who will be priced out by a 20% increase. While those who can afford to send their kids to 50k a year boarding schools are spending a comparatively small proportion of their incomes on education, and are better able to afford it.
That was then, though.
Private school fees have risen massively in the last twenty years or so, and priced out a lot of parents like yours.
(Which, in turn, is why I'm pretty cynical about the idea that schools don't want to exclude poorer families. They've really not worked hard, or at all, to keep costs down.)
Education. I shall spend an hour on Christmas Day composing my letter, personal and confidential, to Starmer about his policy that will costing parents, who really scrape by to send their kids to private education, another 20%, because of his class based plan over VAT and Tax. I am in a Con/Lab marginal and would have voted Labour for the first time in 60 years, but not now, be either a wasted Lib Dem vote or abstain.
We'll have a whip round for you.
Sorry, but no sympathy. Charitable status for privates schools is an utter sham. No reason on earth why an VAT exemption that benefits the wealthiest 7% of the population should persist. Private education is a corrosive influence on this country.
The snag, as I have said before, is that VAT on school fees won't solve it.
It won't affect Eton, or Winchester, or Roedean.
It will wreck small private schools taking children who can't cope elsewhere, which actually *is* a valuable social function.
It will also wreck some right dodgy places too - hopefully including the private school in Cannock, which is a truly ghastly place on all levels (and which incidentally is a limited company already in common with most private schools) - but overall it feels to me like it's the wrong policy aimed at the wrong target.
As an aside, if reform of VAT to improve the education system were to be considered, a bloody good start would be to change the VAT status of VIth form colleges to bring them in line with schools.
It's a rather strange idea that private schools are for "the wealthiest 7%" and quite telling of the poster's attitudes.
My parents certainly weren't in the wealthiest 7% when they sent me, doubt they'd have made the wealthiest 25%. But they were strivers, and they believed the best way to lift yourself out of poverty was to get the best possible education you could, for yourself and for your kids. In my case, that meant they had to sacrifice what a lot of people take for granted - holidays, new car every three years etc - for them it was an opportunity cost. They spent disproportionately on education because it was something they believed had enormous value. Not because they were rich.
They were precisely the type of people who will be priced out by a 20% increase. While those who can afford to send their kids to 50k a year boarding schools are spending a comparatively small proportion of their incomes on education, and are better able to afford it.
That was then, though.
Private school fees have risen massively in the last twenty years or so, and priced out a lot of parents like yours.
(Which, in turn, is why I'm pretty cynical about the idea that schools don't want to exclude poorer families. They've really not worked hard, or at all, to keep costs down.)
Just checked; my old school fees are about double what they were when I left. 25 years ago. Seems about right.
My 10,000th post. Couldn't think of anything witty or earth shatteringly profound so instead:
Happy Christmas and a happy new year everyone no matter who you do and don't vote for.
Worthy sentiment, but I fear that it's unlikely to be a very happy 2024 for the remaining Conservative voters among us
I am still most definitely a Conservative; the problem is my party is led by people like Sunak and Hunt, who seem to want to pull it to the left of centre....
I was nodding along until I got to "left of centre". Wasn't expecting that bit!
You may remember I have taught my dog the 3 card trick (with cups and kibble under one of the cups). I shuffle the cups and he taps the cup with the treat under it (It works with me also with a pint of Shere Drop).
My daughter is home for Christmas and wanted to have a go (not finding the kibble, but moving the cups). She then complained that the dog couldn't find the treat. He kept tapping the wrong cup apparently. So I asked her to show me what she was doing. She was doing it like the con artists at the race track playing find the lady. I couldn't damn well find the treat let alone the dog (find the treat I mean, I knew where the dog was). Her expectations of the dog were rather ambitious. He needs you to move the cups very very slowly. Even then the concentration is intense.
It’s a huge challenge for a dog, as their memory is associative rather than sequential. A clever dog, knowing that its sense of smell is between 1,000 and 10,000 times better than yours, would just look away whilst you played with the cups, and then sniff out the right answer.
There’s also a good chance that you were unwittingly giving away the right answer when you do the trick, with some almost subliminal signal, whereas your daughter either didn’t give the same signal, or the dog isn’t familiar enough with her to have read them. Dogs spend their entire lives watching us and they often know what we’re going to do before we do.
The hardest bit was getting him to tap the cup with his paw (he knows 'paw', 'other' (other paw) and 'high five' so used those commands to get the paw on the cup. When he fluked one he got high praise and the kibble). He now knew to touch a cup to get the treat and praise. This was with one cup and no movement.
I looked on the internet for the trick, but both examples I found were cheats (using smell or finishing at the same place always). I started with 2 cups before moving onto 3. To get him to watch I moved the cup only a few inches at a time to begin with. As we progressed I moved it in an arc forward so it was the cup nearest to him so the obvious one to touch. Gradually I completed the arc so it now replaced another cup (which I moved quickly to the place the treat cup came from). He watched the movement of the cup (he stares at the treat cup intensely) and I move it slowly. I have not tried to move a pair of cups more than once. My daughter moved the cups umpteen times and at 100mph.
Education. I shall spend an hour on Christmas Day composing my letter, personal and confidential, to Starmer about his policy that will costing parents, who really scrape by to send their kids to private education, another 20%, because of his class based plan over VAT and Tax. I am in a Con/Lab marginal and would have voted Labour for the first time in 60 years, but not now, be either a wasted Lib Dem vote or abstain.
We'll have a whip round for you.
Sorry, but no sympathy. Charitable status for privates schools is an utter sham. No reason on earth why an VAT exemption that benefits the wealthiest 7% of the population should persist. Private education is a corrosive influence on this country.
The snag, as I have said before, is that VAT on school fees won't solve it.
It won't affect Eton, or Winchester, or Roedean.
It will wreck small private schools taking children who can't cope elsewhere, which actually *is* a valuable social function.
It will also wreck some right dodgy places too - hopefully including the private school in Cannock, which is a truly ghastly place on all levels (and which incidentally is a limited company already in common with most private schools) - but overall it feels to me like it's the wrong policy aimed at the wrong target.
As an aside, if reform of VAT to improve the education system were to be considered, a bloody good start would be to change the VAT status of VIth form colleges to bring them in line with schools.
My neighbour and friend who has recently retired as a teacher at what I guess is a middling local private school makes exactly the same point and I admit it has some power.
Of course the question this point begs is: what happens to those children who can't cope elsewhere and whose parents lack either the income and/or the motivation to send them to said private school?
In reply to your question, depends on the school. Elite selective ones, yes, but we're not really talking about those. We're talking about the likes of say, Dean Close in Cheltenham not Cheltenham College.
You may remember I have taught my dog the 3 card trick (with cups and kibble under one of the cups). I shuffle the cups and he taps the cup with the treat under it (It works with me also with a pint of Shere Drop).
My daughter is home for Christmas and wanted to have a go (not finding the kibble, but moving the cups). She then complained that the dog couldn't find the treat. He kept tapping the wrong cup apparently. So I asked her to show me what she was doing. She was doing it like the con artists at the race track playing find the lady. I couldn't damn well find the treat let alone the dog (find the treat I mean, I knew where the dog was). Her expectations of the dog were rather ambitious. He needs you to move the cups very very slowly. Even then the concentration is intense.
Has the dog worked out the Monty Hall paradox yet?
You may remember I have taught my dog the 3 card trick (with cups and kibble under one of the cups). I shuffle the cups and he taps the cup with the treat under it (It works with me also with a pint of Shere Drop).
My daughter is home for Christmas and wanted to have a go (not finding the kibble, but moving the cups). She then complained that the dog couldn't find the treat. He kept tapping the wrong cup apparently. So I asked her to show me what she was doing. She was doing it like the con artists at the race track playing find the lady. I couldn't damn well find the treat let alone the dog (find the treat I mean, I knew where the dog was). Her expectations of the dog were rather ambitious. He needs you to move the cups very very slowly. Even then the concentration is intense.
Has the dog worked out the Monty Hall paradox yet?
It's not a paradox.
Don't confuse the poor mutt before he's tried.
You should try living with a couple of border collies.
Do not on any account ever try to play poker with them.
Education. I shall spend an hour on Christmas Day composing my letter, personal and confidential, to Starmer about his policy that will costing parents, who really scrape by to send their kids to private education, another 20%, because of his class based plan over VAT and Tax. I am in a Con/Lab marginal and would have voted Labour for the first time in 60 years, but not now, be either a wasted Lib Dem vote or abstain.
We'll have a whip round for you.
Sorry, but no sympathy. Charitable status for privates schools is an utter sham. No reason on earth why an VAT exemption that benefits the wealthiest 7% of the population should persist. Private education is a corrosive influence on this country.
And yet, for example, look at the King Henry VI Foundation.
The school fees cover the operating cost of the school (Eton)
Fundraising plus 10% of endowment income goes to maintain the fabric of the historical estate
20% of endowment income is spent on on scholarships at Eton
70% of endowment income is allocated for educational projects outside of the school.
How is that not a charity? The endowment is about £600m so these are not small sums.
I assume there's some complex relationship between the Foundation and Eton?
But whether or not the Foundation can be said to be a charity (from that summary of it, it certainly sounds like an arguable case, though the 10% for the physical upkeep is pushing at the boundaries and probably over it, IMO), that doesn't mean it follows that Eton, as the school itself, is a charity.
I don’t think the 10% for physical upkeep is unlikely as there are many many old buildings that need specialist upkeep which isn’t cheap. My old place has more grade 1 listed buildings than Manchester has and they are constantly having to inspect and repair and clean (again the cleaning can’t just be a guy with a power washer).
The school are spending £1m just on the War Cloister to restore and protect all the names of the dead carved in stone so not cheap jobs.
So far the anti Starmer brigade have come up with several reasons why he should not PM. Went to a private school, not tall enough, flip flops, boring and out of touch. I wonder if any can spot the fatal flaw why this might not quite work......
Sir Keir Starmer did not go to a private school.
Is Wikipedia wrong?
"He attended the selective state Reigate Grammar School, which became a private school while he was a student."
Average Ninja is correct, as 'go' is usually read as "being sent by his parents". And he couldn't very well be 'sent' more than once could he?
Also - his status didn't change (grandfather rights), so no fees IIRC.
I believe he had grandfather rights to 16. He could have gone to a state sixth form college for his A Levels but instead was paid for by the state to stay on at Reigate Grammar.
What I find odd about all this is that no one talks about the fact he passed the eleven plus and went to a grammar school. Not that social mobility is really that important politically, but he makes a big thing of his working class roots. I’d genuinely be interested to hear if he thinks he could have made it to DPP if he’d gone to a comprehensive.
I don't know of course but I suspect he'd say 'no'.
That of course, is not an argument for grammar schools or the 11+, quite the opposite.
That's the attitude that results in opportunities being taken away from working class people in the name of progress.
The exact opposite tends to happen. Middle class parents get their children tutored for the 11 plus whereas working class parents often don't so the Grammar school system is biased against working class children.
The 11 plus is in theory designed to test raw IQ so there are limits to how much you can tutor for it.
In poorer deprived Northern or Midlands or Welsh city areas or seaside towns or rural areas the grammars did at least offer the chance of a more academic education that isn't there in the same areas now in state schools to the same extent
"The 11 plus is in theory designed to test raw IQ"
The level of nonsense you come out with really is stupendous.
It is, mainly verbal reasoning and numerical logic tests
A good letter. Those are quite possibly the dumbest attacks possible, so it isn’t surprising the Telegraph went all in on them.
Are they dumb? This is how populism works. They know what they’re doing.
They know the cab rank rule. They don’t care. Many of their readers won’t care either. They’ll share the “findings” happily.
I don’t think so - Sir Keir can bat them off easily
Made me think about lawyers though - how can they sleep at night when they defend people they know are guilty, and hope to get them off on a technicality?
I think it’s something that does trouble litigators - not just in criminal but in civil and commercial law. Equally so for prosecutors who get people convicted when they’re not convinced they are guilty.
But most jobs involve some ethical dilemmas. Anyone running a pub or off licence knows they’re selling alcohol to people who might be terminal alcoholics. Even more so if they’re marketing or advertising booze, or junk food, or tobacco. Anyone in the armed forces has this dilemma. If you work in the home office determining asylum claims or you’re processing incapacity benefit claims you know your decision could destroy someone’s life.
People with jobs that are 100% virtuous are lucky.
A good letter. Those are quite possibly the dumbest attacks possible, so it isn’t surprising the Telegraph went all in on them.
Are they dumb? This is how populism works. They know what they’re doing.
They know the cab rank rule. They don’t care. Many of their readers won’t care either. They’ll share the “findings” happily.
I don’t think so - Sir Keir can bat them off easily
Made me think about lawyers though - how can they sleep at night when they defend people they know are guilty, and hope to get them off on a technicality?
I think it’s something that does trouble litigators - not just in criminal but in civil and commercial law. Equally so for prosecutors who get people convicted when they’re not convinced they are guilty.
But most jobs involve some ethical dilemmas. Anyone running a pub or off licence knows they’re selling alcohol to people who might be terminal alcoholics. Even more so if they’re marketing or advertising booze, or junk food, or tobacco. Anyone in the armed forces has this dilemma. If you work in the home office determining asylum claims or you’re processing incapacity benefit claims you know your decision could destroy someone’s life.
People with jobs that are 100% virtuous are lucky.
I work in financial services so luckily I can sleep easily at night.
A good letter. Those are quite possibly the dumbest attacks possible, so it isn’t surprising the Telegraph went all in on them.
Are they dumb? This is how populism works. They know what they’re doing.
They know the cab rank rule. They don’t care. Many of their readers won’t care either. They’ll share the “findings” happily.
I don’t think so - Sir Keir can bat them off easily
Made me think about lawyers though - how can they sleep at night when they defend people they know are guilty, and hope to get them off on a technicality?
I think it’s something that does trouble litigators - not just in criminal but in civil and commercial law. Equally so for prosecutors who get people convicted when they’re not convinced they are guilty.
But most jobs involve some ethical dilemmas. Anyone running a pub or off licence knows they’re selling alcohol to people who might be terminal alcoholics. Even more so if they’re marketing or advertising booze, or junk food, or tobacco. Anyone in the armed forces has this dilemma. If you work in the home office determining asylum claims or you’re processing incapacity benefit claims you know your decision could destroy someone’s life.
People with jobs that are 100% virtuous are lucky.
I work in financial services so luckily I can sleep easily at night.
I’m out on the doorstep every Thursday clapping for the bankers.
So far the anti Starmer brigade have come up with several reasons why he should not PM. Went to a private school, not tall enough, flip flops, boring and out of touch. I wonder if any can spot the fatal flaw why this might not quite work......
Sir Keir Starmer did not go to a private school.
Is Wikipedia wrong?
"He attended the selective state Reigate Grammar School, which became a private school while he was a student."
Average Ninja is correct, as 'go' is usually read as "being sent by his parents". And he couldn't very well be 'sent' more than once could he?
Also - his status didn't change (grandfather rights), so no fees IIRC.
I believe he had grandfather rights to 16. He could have gone to a state sixth form college for his A Levels but instead was paid for by the state to stay on at Reigate Grammar.
What I find odd about all this is that no one talks about the fact he passed the eleven plus and went to a grammar school. Not that social mobility is really that important politically, but he makes a big thing of his working class roots. I’d genuinely be interested to hear if he thinks he could have made it to DPP if he’d gone to a comprehensive.
I don't know of course but I suspect he'd say 'no'.
That of course, is not an argument for grammar schools or the 11+, quite the opposite.
That's the attitude that results in opportunities being taken away from working class people in the name of progress.
The exact opposite tends to happen. Middle class parents get their children tutored for the 11 plus whereas working class parents often don't so the Grammar school system is biased against working class children.
The 11 plus is in theory designed to test raw IQ so there are limits to how much you can tutor for it.
In poorer deprived Northern or Midlands or Welsh city areas or seaside towns or rural areas the grammars did at least offer the chance of a more academic education that isn't there in the same areas now in state schools to the same extent
"The 11 plus is in theory designed to test raw IQ"
The level of nonsense you come out with really is stupendous.
It is, mainly verbal reasoning and numerical logic tests
We have done this before, but yes you can train for such tests. You can't train someone stupid to do them and you probably won't improve the score of someone very bright, but in the average IQ range you can make a big difference and after all this is where it counts for the 11 plus. I believe @rcs1000 quoted a difference of 20 points sometime ago. That is really significant.
Verbal reasoning is almost entirely education. As far a numerical knowledge is concerned there are some pretty simple tricks eg if you have a sequence and can't see the pattern take the difference between all adjacent numbers and write them below and keep doing this until a pattern appears. At 11 plus level it will probably always work and probably on the first iteration. Approximation calculations can easily be taught, which is very handy in IQ tests and in spacial awareness tests there are oodles of tips and tricks that can be taught. Most of these techniques are very simple and just need lots of practice. I had to take an IQ test for one of my jobs and later managed the setting of the test for the graduate intake.
Personally, I would like to vote for a political party that had the following manifesto:
Look, this is all rather difficult, and who knows what the future will bring. I can't make any definitive promises about getting the economy moving, of reducing taxes, but these are going to be our guiding principles:
1. We're evidence based. Schooling. Policing. Health. You name it, we plan to run lots of trials. We have no idea which ideas will work. But unless we try things with a sensible system for evaluating results, we'll still never know.
2. Iteration. Iteration. Iteration. We're not going to rest on our laurels. We're going to be constantly seeing if we can improve things. Everything will be based on publicly available targets, and you will be able to judge us on those goals.
3. We're not that smart. We're going to make mistakes. Flip flopping is isn't bad, it's the correct response to new information that challenges existing views.
4. We will look for root causes, not try and treat symptoms. Why is it that the British economy is importing (say) certain types of labor? What is it we can change with the tax, benefit and education systems that makes it so that British people are more likely to be employed in these roles? Why is it that there are so few homes being built?
5. We won't lie to you. Things are going to be tough. There are an increasing number of people out there, all of whom want to live Western lives and they're willing to work longer and harder, because they're poorer. There's no free lunch and we can't simply shut ourselves off from the world.
How, within the space of one government, do you iterate trials of school policy ? Results are complicated by cohort, and take years to see out. And I would guess most parents would not be particularly keen on a mass parallel experiment with their kids as test subjects.
Your general point isn't a bad one, but it ignores the difficulties inherent in political, as opposed to commercial decisions.
The truth is, we've already had lots of experiments with various school systems - selective, comprehensive, LEA, direct grant, grant maintained, city academies, academies, academy trusts, vocational, academic, and on and on. The data goes back 80 years and is genuinely plentiful.
The problem is they all show one thing - our education system never achieves what we ostensibly want it too.
And that's because we've never done the one thing that might make a difference - made per pupil funding in state schools the same level as private schools.
And why not? Because no politician is willing to spend the money.
As we also see in transport, health, power generation...
Singapore tops the PISA rankings and spends and taxes less than we do.
As it has good discipline in the classroom and high expectations of its pupils. So what is actually needed is more of that and more choice for parents
IMV (and as I've said boringly many times): parents matters just as much as school. If a relatively unscholarly kid has parents who are willing to invest time and effort into their kid(s), then that kid may bloom - even if it is only in finding something that does 'click' with them. If a relatively bright kid has parents who are not interested in school, or in getting the kid to school (as I fear is happening with one of my son's friends), then that kid will always struggle.
Choice for parents is irrelevant if the parents are uninterested in educating their kids. IMV it is mainly of advantage to middle-class parents anyway.
In my case, our son will probably have the choice of two secondary schools (village colleges in Cambridgeshire-speak). I like both of them; but the one that is furthest away is in big demand and I doubt he'd get in. So the 'choice' becomes either the very local school, a *really* long drive, or private.
The 'choice' is not much of a 'choice' for many people...
Hence the case for more free schools too
No, it is a case for more local schools.
You won't get many new local secondaries in rural areas beyond maybe free schools, once they leave village primaries most pupils have to travel to the nearest town or city for secondary school
How would you get a Free School there - the money available from the DfE wouldn't provide enough for the school to work...
With the right teachers and leadership it could
Where would you look to find the right teachers, young HY?
So far the anti Starmer brigade have come up with several reasons why he should not PM. Went to a private school, not tall enough, flip flops, boring and out of touch. I wonder if any can spot the fatal flaw why this might not quite work......
Sir Keir Starmer did not go to a private school.
Is Wikipedia wrong?
"He attended the selective state Reigate Grammar School, which became a private school while he was a student."
Average Ninja is correct, as 'go' is usually read as "being sent by his parents". And he couldn't very well be 'sent' more than once could he?
Also - his status didn't change (grandfather rights), so no fees IIRC.
I believe he had grandfather rights to 16. He could have gone to a state sixth form college for his A Levels but instead was paid for by the state to stay on at Reigate Grammar.
What I find odd about all this is that no one talks about the fact he passed the eleven plus and went to a grammar school. Not that social mobility is really that important politically, but he makes a big thing of his working class roots. I’d genuinely be interested to hear if he thinks he could have made it to DPP if he’d gone to a comprehensive.
I don't know of course but I suspect he'd say 'no'.
That of course, is not an argument for grammar schools or the 11+, quite the opposite.
That's the attitude that results in opportunities being taken away from working class people in the name of progress.
So far the anti Starmer brigade have come up with several reasons why he should not PM. Went to a private school, not tall enough, flip flops, boring and out of touch. I wonder if any can spot the fatal flaw why this might not quite work......
Sir Keir Starmer did not go to a private school.
Is Wikipedia wrong?
"He attended the selective state Reigate Grammar School, which became a private school while he was a student."
Average Ninja is correct, as 'go' is usually read as "being sent by his parents". And he couldn't very well be 'sent' more than once could he?
Also - his status didn't change (grandfather rights), so no fees IIRC.
I believe he had grandfather rights to 16. He could have gone to a state sixth form college for his A Levels but instead was paid for by the state to stay on at Reigate Grammar.
What I find odd about all this is that no one talks about the fact he passed the eleven plus and went to a grammar school. Not that social mobility is really that important politically, but he makes a big thing of his working class roots. I’d genuinely be interested to hear if he thinks he could have made it to DPP if he’d gone to a comprehensive.
I don't know of course but I suspect he'd say 'no'.
That of course, is not an argument for grammar schools or the 11+, quite the opposite.
That's the attitude that results in opportunities being taken away from working class people in the name of progress.
The biggest negative for selective education is the 90% who wind up in the secondary modern sector.
From my well resourced Worcestershire comprehensive (a former secondary modern) we had in my year a British High Commissioner to Peru and in the year above a Vice President HR for Reckitt Benkieser, there were lots of other success stories. It is now a mediocre underfunded academy with buses heading in the opposite direction to well funded Alcester Grammar School in Warwickshire.
From my Grammar which I attended when we relocated, there were no super high flyers to speak of, just estate agents, provincial solicitors and accountants.
Personally, I would like to vote for a political party that had the following manifesto:
Look, this is all rather difficult, and who knows what the future will bring. I can't make any definitive promises about getting the economy moving, of reducing taxes, but these are going to be our guiding principles:
1. We're evidence based. Schooling. Policing. Health. You name it, we plan to run lots of trials. We have no idea which ideas will work. But unless we try things with a sensible system for evaluating results, we'll still never know.
2. Iteration. Iteration. Iteration. We're not going to rest on our laurels. We're going to be constantly seeing if we can improve things. Everything will be based on publicly available targets, and you will be able to judge us on those goals.
3. We're not that smart. We're going to make mistakes. Flip flopping is isn't bad, it's the correct response to new information that challenges existing views.
4. We will look for root causes, not try and treat symptoms. Why is it that the British economy is importing (say) certain types of labor? What is it we can change with the tax, benefit and education systems that makes it so that British people are more likely to be employed in these roles? Why is it that there are so few homes being built?
5. We won't lie to you. Things are going to be tough. There are an increasing number of people out there, all of whom want to live Western lives and they're willing to work longer and harder, because they're poorer. There's no free lunch and we can't simply shut ourselves off from the world.
Agile politics
Minimum Viable Politics - shudder.
The whole country's well on the way to becoming a Minimum Viable Product after 13 years of Tory misrule.
It is vital policies are based on the beliefs of people who have no experience of the area.
Evidence based policy making might result in policies that don’t Make Me Feel Good.
So far the anti Starmer brigade have come up with several reasons why he should not PM. Went to a private school, not tall enough, flip flops, boring and out of touch. I wonder if any can spot the fatal flaw why this might not quite work......
Sir Keir Starmer did not go to a private school.
Is Wikipedia wrong?
"He attended the selective state Reigate Grammar School, which became a private school while he was a student."
Average Ninja is correct, as 'go' is usually read as "being sent by his parents". And he couldn't very well be 'sent' more than once could he?
Also - his status didn't change (grandfather rights), so no fees IIRC.
I believe he had grandfather rights to 16. He could have gone to a state sixth form college for his A Levels but instead was paid for by the state to stay on at Reigate Grammar.
What I find odd about all this is that no one talks about the fact he passed the eleven plus and went to a grammar school. Not that social mobility is really that important politically, but he makes a big thing of his working class roots. I’d genuinely be interested to hear if he thinks he could have made it to DPP if he’d gone to a comprehensive.
I don't know of course but I suspect he'd say 'no'.
That of course, is not an argument for grammar schools or the 11+, quite the opposite.
That's the attitude that results in opportunities being taken away from working class people in the name of progress.
So far the anti Starmer brigade have come up with several reasons why he should not PM. Went to a private school, not tall enough, flip flops, boring and out of touch. I wonder if any can spot the fatal flaw why this might not quite work......
Sir Keir Starmer did not go to a private school.
Is Wikipedia wrong?
"He attended the selective state Reigate Grammar School, which became a private school while he was a student."
Average Ninja is correct, as 'go' is usually read as "being sent by his parents". And he couldn't very well be 'sent' more than once could he?
Also - his status didn't change (grandfather rights), so no fees IIRC.
I believe he had grandfather rights to 16. He could have gone to a state sixth form college for his A Levels but instead was paid for by the state to stay on at Reigate Grammar.
What I find odd about all this is that no one talks about the fact he passed the eleven plus and went to a grammar school. Not that social mobility is really that important politically, but he makes a big thing of his working class roots. I’d genuinely be interested to hear if he thinks he could have made it to DPP if he’d gone to a comprehensive.
I don't know of course but I suspect he'd say 'no'.
That of course, is not an argument for grammar schools or the 11+, quite the opposite.
That's the attitude that results in opportunities being taken away from working class people in the name of progress.
The biggest negative for selective education is the 90% who wind up in the secondary modern sector.
From my well resourced Worcestershire comprehensive (a former secondary modern) we had in my year a British High Commissioner to Peru and in the year above a Vice President HR for Reckitt Benkieser, there were lots of other success stories. It is now a mediocre underfunded academy with buses heading in the opposite direction to well funded Alcester Grammar School in Warwickshire.
From my Grammar which I attended when we relocated, there were no super high flyers to speak of, just estate agents, provincial solicitors and accountants.
Nothing to do with selection or not, but I attended two state, and two public, schools. Although some from the schools have done well in life, there's only one who is noteworthy (*): and he went to one of the state schools. The roughest one, actually.
(*) Noteworthy unless you include cricket, which I don't...
You may remember I have taught my dog the 3 card trick (with cups and kibble under one of the cups). I shuffle the cups and he taps the cup with the treat under it (It works with me also with a pint of Shere Drop).
My daughter is home for Christmas and wanted to have a go (not finding the kibble, but moving the cups). She then complained that the dog couldn't find the treat. He kept tapping the wrong cup apparently. So I asked her to show me what she was doing. She was doing it like the con artists at the race track playing find the lady. I couldn't damn well find the treat let alone the dog (find the treat I mean, I knew where the dog was). Her expectations of the dog were rather ambitious. He needs you to move the cups very very slowly. Even then the concentration is intense.
Amusing post.
Tried this with our dog. He unfailingly opts for whichever cup the treat was last under. I guess we should give him credit for remembering where he found it last time but really, the whole game is beyond him.
Still, he is a Pointer - notoriously not the brightest.
Ours is a Sproodle (Springer/Poodle cross) so from two dogs that are supposed to be bright. He is a handful though. He is utterly bonkers. Everyone comments he is the most excitable dog they have ever met. He got expelled from the dog training class because he reduced it to mayhem. Owners and dogs lined up nicely and he arrives and there were dogs everywhere out of control. He loves being chased. He has learnt if he steals balls other dogs and owners will chase him. Lots of apologies from us. He has learnt a lot of commands that he obeys perfectly until there is a distraction and then he is stone deaf. He steals food relentlessly and is cunning about it. He has learnt how to distract you before stealing the food. The vet bill or fee for calling the toxic helpline has been huge through things he has eaten and shouldn't have.
So far the anti Starmer brigade have come up with several reasons why he should not PM. Went to a private school, not tall enough, flip flops, boring and out of touch. I wonder if any can spot the fatal flaw why this might not quite work......
Sir Keir Starmer did not go to a private school.
Is Wikipedia wrong?
"He attended the selective state Reigate Grammar School, which became a private school while he was a student."
Average Ninja is correct, as 'go' is usually read as "being sent by his parents". And he couldn't very well be 'sent' more than once could he?
Also - his status didn't change (grandfather rights), so no fees IIRC.
I believe he had grandfather rights to 16. He could have gone to a state sixth form college for his A Levels but instead was paid for by the state to stay on at Reigate Grammar.
What I find odd about all this is that no one talks about the fact he passed the eleven plus and went to a grammar school. Not that social mobility is really that important politically, but he makes a big thing of his working class roots. I’d genuinely be interested to hear if he thinks he could have made it to DPP if he’d gone to a comprehensive.
I don't know of course but I suspect he'd say 'no'.
That of course, is not an argument for grammar schools or the 11+, quite the opposite.
That's the attitude that results in opportunities being taken away from working class people in the name of progress.
So far the anti Starmer brigade have come up with several reasons why he should not PM. Went to a private school, not tall enough, flip flops, boring and out of touch. I wonder if any can spot the fatal flaw why this might not quite work......
Sir Keir Starmer did not go to a private school.
Is Wikipedia wrong?
"He attended the selective state Reigate Grammar School, which became a private school while he was a student."
Average Ninja is correct, as 'go' is usually read as "being sent by his parents". And he couldn't very well be 'sent' more than once could he?
Also - his status didn't change (grandfather rights), so no fees IIRC.
I believe he had grandfather rights to 16. He could have gone to a state sixth form college for his A Levels but instead was paid for by the state to stay on at Reigate Grammar.
What I find odd about all this is that no one talks about the fact he passed the eleven plus and went to a grammar school. Not that social mobility is really that important politically, but he makes a big thing of his working class roots. I’d genuinely be interested to hear if he thinks he could have made it to DPP if he’d gone to a comprehensive.
I don't know of course but I suspect he'd say 'no'.
That of course, is not an argument for grammar schools or the 11+, quite the opposite.
That's the attitude that results in opportunities being taken away from working class people in the name of progress.
The biggest negative for selective education is the 90% who wind up in the secondary modern sector.
From my well resourced Worcestershire comprehensive (a former secondary modern) we had in my year a British High Commissioner to Peru and in the year above a Vice President HR for Reckitt Benkieser, there were lots of other success stories. It is now a mediocre underfunded academy with buses heading in the opposite direction to well funded Alcester Grammar School in Warwickshire.
From my Grammar which I attended when we relocated, there were no super high flyers to speak of, just estate agents, provincial solicitors and accountants.
Nothing to do with selection or not, but I attended two state, and two public, schools. Although some from the schools have done well in life, there's only one who is noteworthy (*): and he went to one of the state schools. The roughest one, actually.
(*) Noteworthy unless you include cricket, which I don't...
I wouldn't say Tim Mason was specially noteworthy anyway, if I'm honest.
You may remember I have taught my dog the 3 card trick (with cups and kibble under one of the cups). I shuffle the cups and he taps the cup with the treat under it (It works with me also with a pint of Shere Drop).
My daughter is home for Christmas and wanted to have a go (not finding the kibble, but moving the cups). She then complained that the dog couldn't find the treat. He kept tapping the wrong cup apparently. So I asked her to show me what she was doing. She was doing it like the con artists at the race track playing find the lady. I couldn't damn well find the treat let alone the dog (find the treat I mean, I knew where the dog was). Her expectations of the dog were rather ambitious. He needs you to move the cups very very slowly. Even then the concentration is intense.
Has the dog worked out the Monty Hall paradox yet?
It's not a paradox.
Don't confuse the poor mutt before he's tried.
The dog has read this on Wiki, so is confused:
The problem is a paradox of the veridical type,
I meant kjh..
The dog can't keep up and PB posts have no smell. Usually.
There are rumours that the Ukrainians have shot down three SU34 fighter-bombers in the last day or so. Quite a loss for one of Russia's more capable aircraft.
They have over 155 of them, and they've lost over 25 or so in various conflicts.
So far the anti Starmer brigade have come up with several reasons why he should not PM. Went to a private school, not tall enough, flip flops, boring and out of touch. I wonder if any can spot the fatal flaw why this might not quite work......
Sir Keir Starmer did not go to a private school.
Is Wikipedia wrong?
"He attended the selective state Reigate Grammar School, which became a private school while he was a student."
Average Ninja is correct, as 'go' is usually read as "being sent by his parents". And he couldn't very well be 'sent' more than once could he?
Also - his status didn't change (grandfather rights), so no fees IIRC.
I believe he had grandfather rights to 16. He could have gone to a state sixth form college for his A Levels but instead was paid for by the state to stay on at Reigate Grammar.
What I find odd about all this is that no one talks about the fact he passed the eleven plus and went to a grammar school. Not that social mobility is really that important politically, but he makes a big thing of his working class roots. I’d genuinely be interested to hear if he thinks he could have made it to DPP if he’d gone to a comprehensive.
I don't know of course but I suspect he'd say 'no'.
That of course, is not an argument for grammar schools or the 11+, quite the opposite.
That's the attitude that results in opportunities being taken away from working class people in the name of progress.
The exact opposite tends to happen. Middle class parents get their children tutored for the 11 plus whereas working class parents often don't so the Grammar school system is biased against working class children.
The 11 plus is in theory designed to test raw IQ so there are limits to how much you can tutor for it.
In poorer deprived Northern or Midlands or Welsh city areas or seaside towns or rural areas the grammars did at least offer the chance of a more academic education that isn't there in the same areas now in state schools to the same extent
"The 11 plus is in theory designed to test raw IQ"
The level of nonsense you come out with really is stupendous.
It is, mainly verbal reasoning and numerical logic tests
We have done this before, but yes you can train for such tests. You can't train someone stupid to do them and you probably won't improve the score of someone very bright, but in the average IQ range you can make a big difference and after all this is where it counts for the 11 plus. I believe @rcs1000 quoted a difference of 20 points sometime ago. That is really significant.
Verbal reasoning is almost entirely education. As far a numerical knowledge is concerned there are some pretty simple tricks eg if you have a sequence and can't see the pattern take the difference between all adjacent numbers and write them below and keep doing this until a pattern appears. At 11 plus level it will probably always work and probably on the first iteration. Approximation calculations can easily be taught, which is very handy in IQ tests and in spacial awareness tests there are oodles of tips and tricks that can be taught. Most of these techniques are very simple and just need lots of practice. I had to take an IQ test for one of my jobs and later managed the setting of the test for the graduate intake.
It is much less easy to train for verbal and numerical reasoning tests than say a factual recall test. The 11+ tests are also designed to identify the top 10% or 25%, depending on the selectivity of the grammar school, of the pupil cohort. So the brightest and highest iq from a poor background would still get in even if they did no prep at all.
At least then bright pupils from a poor area have a much greater chance of an academic education at the local grammar school than the inadequate or requires improvement comprehensive or academy they will likely end up at otherwise
You may remember I have taught my dog the 3 card trick (with cups and kibble under one of the cups). I shuffle the cups and he taps the cup with the treat under it (It works with me also with a pint of Shere Drop).
My daughter is home for Christmas and wanted to have a go (not finding the kibble, but moving the cups). She then complained that the dog couldn't find the treat. He kept tapping the wrong cup apparently. So I asked her to show me what she was doing. She was doing it like the con artists at the race track playing find the lady. I couldn't damn well find the treat let alone the dog (find the treat I mean, I knew where the dog was). Her expectations of the dog were rather ambitious. He needs you to move the cups very very slowly. Even then the concentration is intense.
Has the dog worked out the Monty Hall paradox yet?
It's not a paradox.
Don't confuse the poor mutt before he's tried.
The dog has read this on Wiki, so is confused:
The problem is a paradox of the veridical type,
I meant kjh..
The dog can't keep up and PB posts have no smell. Usually.
There were a few trolling for Trump and linking to far right Twitter streams this morning that definitely stank.
So far the anti Starmer brigade have come up with several reasons why he should not PM. Went to a private school, not tall enough, flip flops, boring and out of touch. I wonder if any can spot the fatal flaw why this might not quite work......
Sir Keir Starmer did not go to a private school.
Is Wikipedia wrong?
"He attended the selective state Reigate Grammar School, which became a private school while he was a student."
Average Ninja is correct, as 'go' is usually read as "being sent by his parents". And he couldn't very well be 'sent' more than once could he?
Also - his status didn't change (grandfather rights), so no fees IIRC.
I believe he had grandfather rights to 16. He could have gone to a state sixth form college for his A Levels but instead was paid for by the state to stay on at Reigate Grammar.
What I find odd about all this is that no one talks about the fact he passed the eleven plus and went to a grammar school. Not that social mobility is really that important politically, but he makes a big thing of his working class roots. I’d genuinely be interested to hear if he thinks he could have made it to DPP if he’d gone to a comprehensive.
I don't know of course but I suspect he'd say 'no'.
That of course, is not an argument for grammar schools or the 11+, quite the opposite.
That's the attitude that results in opportunities being taken away from working class people in the name of progress.
So far the anti Starmer brigade have come up with several reasons why he should not PM. Went to a private school, not tall enough, flip flops, boring and out of touch. I wonder if any can spot the fatal flaw why this might not quite work......
Sir Keir Starmer did not go to a private school.
Is Wikipedia wrong?
"He attended the selective state Reigate Grammar School, which became a private school while he was a student."
Average Ninja is correct, as 'go' is usually read as "being sent by his parents". And he couldn't very well be 'sent' more than once could he?
Also - his status didn't change (grandfather rights), so no fees IIRC.
I believe he had grandfather rights to 16. He could have gone to a state sixth form college for his A Levels but instead was paid for by the state to stay on at Reigate Grammar.
What I find odd about all this is that no one talks about the fact he passed the eleven plus and went to a grammar school. Not that social mobility is really that important politically, but he makes a big thing of his working class roots. I’d genuinely be interested to hear if he thinks he could have made it to DPP if he’d gone to a comprehensive.
I don't know of course but I suspect he'd say 'no'.
That of course, is not an argument for grammar schools or the 11+, quite the opposite.
That's the attitude that results in opportunities being taken away from working class people in the name of progress.
The biggest negative for selective education is the 90% who wind up in the secondary modern sector.
From my well resourced Worcestershire comprehensive (a former secondary modern) we had in my year a British High Commissioner to Peru and in the year above a Vice President HR for Reckitt Benkieser, there were lots of other success stories. It is now a mediocre underfunded academy with buses heading in the opposite direction to well funded Alcester Grammar School in Warwickshire.
From my Grammar which I attended when we relocated, there were no super high flyers to speak of, just estate agents, provincial solicitors and accountants.
Nothing to do with selection or not, but I attended two state, and two public, schools. Although some from the schools have done well in life, there's only one who is noteworthy (*): and he went to one of the state schools. The roughest one, actually.
(*) Noteworthy unless you include cricket, which I don't...
I wouldn't say Tim Mason was specially noteworthy anyway, if I'm honest.
So far the anti Starmer brigade have come up with several reasons why he should not PM. Went to a private school, not tall enough, flip flops, boring and out of touch. I wonder if any can spot the fatal flaw why this might not quite work......
Sir Keir Starmer did not go to a private school.
Is Wikipedia wrong?
"He attended the selective state Reigate Grammar School, which became a private school while he was a student."
Average Ninja is correct, as 'go' is usually read as "being sent by his parents". And he couldn't very well be 'sent' more than once could he?
Also - his status didn't change (grandfather rights), so no fees IIRC.
I believe he had grandfather rights to 16. He could have gone to a state sixth form college for his A Levels but instead was paid for by the state to stay on at Reigate Grammar.
What I find odd about all this is that no one talks about the fact he passed the eleven plus and went to a grammar school. Not that social mobility is really that important politically, but he makes a big thing of his working class roots. I’d genuinely be interested to hear if he thinks he could have made it to DPP if he’d gone to a comprehensive.
I don't know of course but I suspect he'd say 'no'.
That of course, is not an argument for grammar schools or the 11+, quite the opposite.
That's the attitude that results in opportunities being taken away from working class people in the name of progress.
So far the anti Starmer brigade have come up with several reasons why he should not PM. Went to a private school, not tall enough, flip flops, boring and out of touch. I wonder if any can spot the fatal flaw why this might not quite work......
Sir Keir Starmer did not go to a private school.
Is Wikipedia wrong?
"He attended the selective state Reigate Grammar School, which became a private school while he was a student."
Average Ninja is correct, as 'go' is usually read as "being sent by his parents". And he couldn't very well be 'sent' more than once could he?
Also - his status didn't change (grandfather rights), so no fees IIRC.
I believe he had grandfather rights to 16. He could have gone to a state sixth form college for his A Levels but instead was paid for by the state to stay on at Reigate Grammar.
What I find odd about all this is that no one talks about the fact he passed the eleven plus and went to a grammar school. Not that social mobility is really that important politically, but he makes a big thing of his working class roots. I’d genuinely be interested to hear if he thinks he could have made it to DPP if he’d gone to a comprehensive.
I don't know of course but I suspect he'd say 'no'.
That of course, is not an argument for grammar schools or the 11+, quite the opposite.
That's the attitude that results in opportunities being taken away from working class people in the name of progress.
The biggest negative for selective education is the 90% who wind up in the secondary modern sector.
From my well resourced Worcestershire comprehensive (a former secondary modern) we had in my year a British High Commissioner to Peru and in the year above a Vice President HR for Reckitt Benkieser, there were lots of other success stories. It is now a mediocre underfunded academy with buses heading in the opposite direction to well funded Alcester Grammar School in Warwickshire.
From my Grammar which I attended when we relocated, there were no super high flyers to speak of, just estate agents, provincial solicitors and accountants.
I would say solicitors and accountants are rather higher flyers than 'Vice President HR for Reckitt Benkieser', whose UK head office is in Slough
So far the anti Starmer brigade have come up with several reasons why he should not PM. Went to a private school, not tall enough, flip flops, boring and out of touch. I wonder if any can spot the fatal flaw why this might not quite work......
Sir Keir Starmer did not go to a private school.
Is Wikipedia wrong?
"He attended the selective state Reigate Grammar School, which became a private school while he was a student."
Average Ninja is correct, as 'go' is usually read as "being sent by his parents". And he couldn't very well be 'sent' more than once could he?
Also - his status didn't change (grandfather rights), so no fees IIRC.
I believe he had grandfather rights to 16. He could have gone to a state sixth form college for his A Levels but instead was paid for by the state to stay on at Reigate Grammar.
What I find odd about all this is that no one talks about the fact he passed the eleven plus and went to a grammar school. Not that social mobility is really that important politically, but he makes a big thing of his working class roots. I’d genuinely be interested to hear if he thinks he could have made it to DPP if he’d gone to a comprehensive.
I don't know of course but I suspect he'd say 'no'.
That of course, is not an argument for grammar schools or the 11+, quite the opposite.
That's the attitude that results in opportunities being taken away from working class people in the name of progress.
So far the anti Starmer brigade have come up with several reasons why he should not PM. Went to a private school, not tall enough, flip flops, boring and out of touch. I wonder if any can spot the fatal flaw why this might not quite work......
Sir Keir Starmer did not go to a private school.
Is Wikipedia wrong?
"He attended the selective state Reigate Grammar School, which became a private school while he was a student."
Average Ninja is correct, as 'go' is usually read as "being sent by his parents". And he couldn't very well be 'sent' more than once could he?
Also - his status didn't change (grandfather rights), so no fees IIRC.
I believe he had grandfather rights to 16. He could have gone to a state sixth form college for his A Levels but instead was paid for by the state to stay on at Reigate Grammar.
What I find odd about all this is that no one talks about the fact he passed the eleven plus and went to a grammar school. Not that social mobility is really that important politically, but he makes a big thing of his working class roots. I’d genuinely be interested to hear if he thinks he could have made it to DPP if he’d gone to a comprehensive.
I don't know of course but I suspect he'd say 'no'.
That of course, is not an argument for grammar schools or the 11+, quite the opposite.
That's the attitude that results in opportunities being taken away from working class people in the name of progress.
The biggest negative for selective education is the 90% who wind up in the secondary modern sector.
From my well resourced Worcestershire comprehensive (a former secondary modern) we had in my year a British High Commissioner to Peru and in the year above a Vice President HR for Reckitt Benkieser, there were lots of other success stories. It is now a mediocre underfunded academy with buses heading in the opposite direction to well funded Alcester Grammar School in Warwickshire.
From my Grammar which I attended when we relocated, there were no super high flyers to speak of, just estate agents, provincial solicitors and accountants.
Nothing to do with selection or not, but I attended two state, and two public, schools. Although some from the schools have done well in life, there's only one who is noteworthy (*): and he went to one of the state schools. The roughest one, actually.
(*) Noteworthy unless you include cricket, which I don't...
I wouldn't say Tim Mason was specially noteworthy anyway, if I'm honest.
Given Leon is presumably still in the sin bin perhaps I can do the random off topic spam post instead.
We were reflecting (while listening to Let it go in the car, as you do) that there are very few films or TV series that are specifically about siblings. Ie ones where the sibling relationship is THE central plot device.
There’s Frozen of course, but beyond that we managed The Lion King, Succession, Little Women, Rain Man, then struggled. Plenty of plots where siblings or sibling rivalry are involved, like The Godfather, but it’s not the primary relationship. What am I missing?
You are on the most extreme wing of the Whig Party. You burn a flame for the 'Good Old Cause' of regicide and republicanism. You're almost certainly either an extreme Protestant Dissenter or a Deist. You would disestablish the Church, and believe that government is purely a secular, contractarian affair. Examples: Robert Molesworth, Walter Moyle
Given Leon is presumably still in the sin bin perhaps I can do the random off topic spam post instead.
We were reflecting (while listening to Let it go in the car, as you do) that there are very few films or TV series that are specifically about siblings. Ie ones where the sibling relationship is THE central plot device.
There’s Frozen of course, but beyond that we managed The Lion King, Succession, Little Women, Rain Man, then struggled. Plenty of plots where siblings or sibling rivalry are involved, like The Godfather, but it’s not the primary relationship. What am I missing?
Given Leon is presumably still in the sin bin perhaps I can do the random off topic spam post instead.
We were reflecting (while listening to Let it go in the car, as you do) that there are very few films or TV series that are specifically about siblings. Ie ones where the sibling relationship is THE central plot device.
There’s Frozen of course, but beyond that we managed The Lion King, Succession, Little Women, Rain Man, then struggled. Plenty of plots where siblings or sibling rivalry are involved, like The Godfather, but it’s not the primary relationship. What am I missing?
Given Leon is presumably still in the sin bin perhaps I can do the random off topic spam post instead.
We were reflecting (while listening to Let it go in the car, as you do) that there are very few films or TV series that are specifically about siblings. Ie ones where the sibling relationship is THE central plot device.
There’s Frozen of course, but beyond that we managed The Lion King, Succession, Little Women, Rain Man, then struggled. Plenty of plots where siblings or sibling rivalry are involved, like The Godfather, but it’s not the primary relationship. What am I missing?
Twins.
There are various films of Hamlet and Twelfth Night.
So far the anti Starmer brigade have come up with several reasons why he should not PM. Went to a private school, not tall enough, flip flops, boring and out of touch. I wonder if any can spot the fatal flaw why this might not quite work......
Sir Keir Starmer did not go to a private school.
Is Wikipedia wrong?
"He attended the selective state Reigate Grammar School, which became a private school while he was a student."
Average Ninja is correct, as 'go' is usually read as "being sent by his parents". And he couldn't very well be 'sent' more than once could he?
Also - his status didn't change (grandfather rights), so no fees IIRC.
I believe he had grandfather rights to 16. He could have gone to a state sixth form college for his A Levels but instead was paid for by the state to stay on at Reigate Grammar.
What I find odd about all this is that no one talks about the fact he passed the eleven plus and went to a grammar school. Not that social mobility is really that important politically, but he makes a big thing of his working class roots. I’d genuinely be interested to hear if he thinks he could have made it to DPP if he’d gone to a comprehensive.
I don't know of course but I suspect he'd say 'no'.
That of course, is not an argument for grammar schools or the 11+, quite the opposite.
That's the attitude that results in opportunities being taken away from working class people in the name of progress.
So far the anti Starmer brigade have come up with several reasons why he should not PM. Went to a private school, not tall enough, flip flops, boring and out of touch. I wonder if any can spot the fatal flaw why this might not quite work......
Sir Keir Starmer did not go to a private school.
Is Wikipedia wrong?
"He attended the selective state Reigate Grammar School, which became a private school while he was a student."
Average Ninja is correct, as 'go' is usually read as "being sent by his parents". And he couldn't very well be 'sent' more than once could he?
Also - his status didn't change (grandfather rights), so no fees IIRC.
I believe he had grandfather rights to 16. He could have gone to a state sixth form college for his A Levels but instead was paid for by the state to stay on at Reigate Grammar.
What I find odd about all this is that no one talks about the fact he passed the eleven plus and went to a grammar school. Not that social mobility is really that important politically, but he makes a big thing of his working class roots. I’d genuinely be interested to hear if he thinks he could have made it to DPP if he’d gone to a comprehensive.
I don't know of course but I suspect he'd say 'no'.
That of course, is not an argument for grammar schools or the 11+, quite the opposite.
That's the attitude that results in opportunities being taken away from working class people in the name of progress.
The biggest negative for selective education is the 90% who wind up in the secondary modern sector.
From my well resourced Worcestershire comprehensive (a former secondary modern) we had in my year a British High Commissioner to Peru and in the year above a Vice President HR for Reckitt Benkieser, there were lots of other success stories. It is now a mediocre underfunded academy with buses heading in the opposite direction to well funded Alcester Grammar School in Warwickshire.
From my Grammar which I attended when we relocated, there were no super high flyers to speak of, just estate agents, provincial solicitors and accountants.
Nothing to do with selection or not, but I attended two state, and two public, schools. Although some from the schools have done well in life, there's only one who is noteworthy (*): and he went to one of the state schools. The roughest one, actually.
(*) Noteworthy unless you include cricket, which I don't...
I wouldn't say Tim Mason was specially noteworthy anyway, if I'm honest.
Ah, cannot remember if he was there at the same time I was - probably was, given his age (unless he was divs and upper only). Can't find a red book (*) to check.
Comments
The idea that the 11+ aids social mobility is completely out of date and out of touch. It actually leads to bright working class kids being less likely to come into contact with similar middle-class kids who could act as role models for them.
[EDIT: bad haircut...]
My daughter is home for Christmas and wanted to have a go (not finding the kibble, but moving the cups). She then complained that the dog couldn't find the treat. He kept tapping the wrong cup apparently. So I asked her to show me what she was doing. She was doing it like the con artists at the race track playing find the lady. I couldn't damn well find the treat let alone the dog (find the treat I mean, I knew where the dog was). Her expectations of the dog were rather ambitious. He needs you to move the cups very very slowly. Even then the concentration is intense.
It wasn't in the manifesto, but Boris Johnson dresses like a scruff*.
*Michael Foot was unfairly maligned for the supposed donkey jacket.
The school fees cover the operating cost of the school (Eton)
Fundraising plus 10% of endowment income goes to maintain the fabric of the historical estate
20% of endowment income is spent on on scholarships at Eton
70% of endowment income is allocated for educational projects outside of the school.
How is that not a charity? The endowment is about £600m so these are not small sums.
https://x.com/thebarcouncil/status/1738115324371746944?s=20
Happy Christmas and a happy new year everyone no matter who you do and don't vote for.
There’s also a good chance that you were unwittingly giving away the right answer when you do the trick, with some almost subliminal signal, whereas your daughter either didn’t give the same signal, or the dog isn’t familiar enough with her to have read them. Dogs spend their entire lives watching us and they often know what we’re going to do before we do.
In poorer deprived Northern or Midlands or Welsh city areas or seaside towns or rural areas the grammars did at least offer the chance of a more academic education that isn't there in the same areas now in state schools to the same extent
Tried this with our dog. He unfailingly opts for whichever cup the treat was last under. I guess we should give him credit for remembering where he found it last time but really, the whole game is beyond him.
Still, he is a Pointer - notoriously not the brightest.
leaders get slaughtered for on here, yet mentioning them equals “weirdly obsessed”
Don't confuse the poor mutt before he's tried.
The level of nonsense you come out with really is stupendous.
They know the cab rank rule. They don’t care. Many of their readers won’t care either. They’ll share the “findings” happily.
My parents certainly weren't in the wealthiest 7% when they sent me, doubt they'd have made the wealthiest 25%. But they were strivers, and they believed the best way to lift yourself out of poverty was to get the best possible education you could, for yourself and for your kids. In my case, that meant they had to sacrifice what a lot of people take for granted - holidays, new car every three years etc - for them it was an opportunity cost. They spent disproportionately on education because it was something they believed had enormous value. Not because they were rich.
They were precisely the type of people who will be priced out by a 20% increase. While those who can afford to send their kids to 50k a year boarding schools are spending a comparatively small proportion of their incomes on education, and are better able to afford it.
Today's Conservative Party is a merger of Tories and some Whigs effectively, the Labour Party was set up to represent the working classes who didn't have a vote when those parties dominated.
The LDs a merger of liberal Whigs and SDP wing of the Labour Party
But whether or not the Foundation can be said to be a charity (from that summary of it, it certainly sounds like an arguable case, though the 10% for the physical upkeep is pushing at the boundaries and probably over it, IMO), that doesn't mean it follows that Eton, as the school itself, is a charity.
Whilst my aunts, some of whom were on benefits, spent their money on new dresses, and my uncles spent on 'going out', my mother scrimped and my father barely drank - and sent me to a private prep school. I think she Ma maybe a new dress every 3 years when I was growing up....
I changed my mind. Die Hard is Christmas movie. Let the healing begin.
https://twitter.com/markhoppus/status/1738193113531707557
The problem is a paradox of the veridical type,
What the Telegraph might want to think about is who will be judging who can buy the paper.
Made me think about lawyers though - how can they sleep at night when they defend people they know are guilty, and hope to get them off on a technicality?
What is perhaps impossible is to convince the majority of this board, or the wider British public, that Starmer is worse than Sunak, or worse than average recent Tory PMs. But that is very different to claiming that he can't be criticised.
Has HYUFD doen this yet? I'll be disappointed if not a High Church Tory Partisan
Private school fees have risen massively in the last twenty years or so, and priced out a lot of parents like yours.
(Which, in turn, is why I'm pretty cynical about the idea that schools don't want to exclude poorer families. They've really not worked hard, or at all, to keep costs down.)
I looked on the internet for the trick, but both examples I found were cheats (using smell or finishing at the same place always). I started with 2 cups before moving onto 3. To get him to watch I moved the cup only a few inches at a time to begin with. As we progressed I moved it in an arc forward so it was the cup nearest to him so the obvious one to touch. Gradually I completed the arc so it now replaced another cup (which I moved quickly to the place the treat cup came from). He watched the movement of the cup (he stares at the treat cup intensely) and I move it slowly. I have not tried to move a pair of cups more than once. My daughter moved the cups umpteen times and at 100mph.
In reply to your question, depends on the school. Elite selective ones, yes, but we're not really talking about those. We're talking about the likes of say, Dean Close in Cheltenham not Cheltenham College.
Do not on any account ever try to play poker with them.
The school are spending £1m just on the War Cloister to restore and protect all the names of the dead carved in stone so not cheap jobs.
But most jobs involve some ethical dilemmas. Anyone running a pub or off licence knows they’re selling alcohol to people who might be terminal alcoholics. Even more so if they’re marketing or advertising booze, or junk food, or tobacco. Anyone in the armed forces has this dilemma. If you work in the home office determining asylum claims or you’re processing incapacity benefit claims you know your decision could destroy someone’s life.
People with jobs that are 100% virtuous are lucky.
https://www.11v11.com/matches/liverpool-v-arsenal-29-december-2018-360625/
Verbal reasoning is almost entirely education. As far a numerical knowledge is concerned there are some pretty simple tricks eg if you have a sequence and can't see the pattern take the difference between all adjacent numbers and write them below and keep doing this until a pattern appears. At 11 plus level it will probably always work and probably on the first iteration. Approximation calculations can easily be taught, which is very handy in IQ tests and in spacial awareness tests there are oodles of tips and tricks that can be taught. Most of these techniques are very simple and just need lots of practice. I had to take an IQ test for one of my jobs and later managed the setting of the test for the graduate intake.
Just one coming up in the 90,000s.
From my well resourced Worcestershire comprehensive (a former secondary modern) we had in my year a British High Commissioner to Peru and in the year above a Vice President HR for Reckitt Benkieser, there were lots of other success stories. It is now a mediocre underfunded academy with buses heading in the opposite direction to well funded Alcester Grammar School in Warwickshire.
From my Grammar which I attended when we relocated, there were no super high flyers to speak of, just estate agents, provincial solicitors and accountants.
Evidence based policy making might result in policies that don’t Make Me Feel Good.
So did I.
We may well have gone down the following season had he not been given the sack.
Top ten posters
If it takes just a minute to post then the top poster has spend 1900 hours posting, or 80 days each 24hours solid, or 240 eight hour days
(*) Noteworthy unless you include cricket, which I don't...
They have over 155 of them, and they've lost over 25 or so in various conflicts.
At least then bright pupils from a poor area have a much greater chance of an academic education at the local grammar school than the inadequate or requires improvement comprehensive or academy they will likely end up at otherwise
I must be very bored to keep these records - or on the spectrum probably.
But it does beat work.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Mason
?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Mason_(cricketer)
Especially since I am not a shallow person and never chase cheap likes.
Please like this post if you disagree with me.
We were reflecting (while listening to Let it go in the car, as you do) that there are very few films or TV series that are specifically about siblings. Ie ones where the sibling relationship is THE central plot device.
There’s Frozen of course, but beyond that we managed The Lion King, Succession, Little Women, Rain Man, then struggled. Plenty of plots where siblings or sibling rivalry are involved, like The Godfather, but it’s not the primary relationship. What am I missing?
You are on the most extreme wing of the Whig Party. You burn a flame for the 'Good Old Cause' of regicide and republicanism. You're almost certainly either an extreme Protestant Dissenter or a Deist. You would disestablish the Church, and believe that government is purely a secular, contractarian affair. Examples: Robert Molesworth, Walter Moyle
The Chronicles of Narnia?
I was thinking of Snapey: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Snape
(*) The school produced a little book each year with a list of all pupils in and their subjects. It was quite good; is/was it unusual?