Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Vox Populi, Vox Dei, the polling that explains why Mrs May

SystemSystem Posts: 11,713
edited September 2016 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Vox Populi, Vox Dei, the polling that explains why Mrs May is backing grammar schools

Last month YouGov conducted some polling on grammar schools, some of polling explains why Mrs May has so publicly endorsed the expansion of grammar schools today, it would be appear people view them as good for social mobility. and they would like their children to go to grammar schools.

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • Options
    Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664
    1!!
  • Options
    MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,319
    Once the Cameron retirement Peers have all taken their seats the House of Lords State of the Parties will be:

    Con 257, Lab 209, LD 105, Crossbench 179

    When they make a real effort Con has out turnouted Lab by a few percentage points - eg Con 80%, Lab 72% was typical of some votes in the last year which Con regarded as important and of course Con won the two key votes on electoral registration and EU referendum votes at 16 - which were before the latest influx of Peers which give Con a net gain of 12 (Con 13, Lab 1).

    Conclusion: Whilst Lab + LD may well be able to block grammar schools it's by no means a certainty - if Con push very hard and can get more Crossbench with them than against then it could well get very close.

    And that's before May might appoint a few more Con Peers.
  • Options
    FTP

    Everyone was saying there's no way the grammar school changes will get through the Lords, would anyone explain why this is the case? Just Labour and Lib Dems blocking it?
  • Options
    However the polling also found more people in favour of scrapping existing current grammar schools/or not creating any more grammar schools. This is probably based on the studies that show
    Voters don't read studies.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,974
    Wow, that polling is, umm, pretty conclusive on the issue. Mrs May is clearly parking her tanks on the lawn of populist middle Britain.
  • Options

    FTP

    Everyone was saying there's no way the grammar school changes will get through the Lords, would anyone explain why this is the case? Just Labour and Lib Dems blocking it?

    I'd expect 100% opposition from Labour and LibDem peers. Conservative peers will be split on it. Crossbench peers will be largely against, I'd expect. There's no way that adds up to the Lords approving it, IMO.
  • Options
    TonyETonyE Posts: 938
    If Nicky Morgan is against it, it tends to suggest to me that there's some good to be had from it. Even a broken clock is right more often than Morgan.
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    MikeL said:

    Once the Cameron retirement Peers have all taken their seats the House of Lords State of the Parties will be:

    Con 257, Lab 209, LD 105, Crossbench 179

    When they make a real effort Con has out turnouted Lab by a few percentage points - eg Con 80%, Lab 72% was typical of some votes in the last year which Con regarded as important and of course Con won the two key votes on electoral registration and EU referendum votes at 16 - which were before the latest influx of Peers which give Con a net gain of 12 (Con 13, Lab 1).

    Conclusion: Whilst Lab + LD may well be able to block grammar schools it's by no means a certainty - if Con push very hard and can get more Crossbench with them than against then it could well get very close.

    And that's before May might appoint a few more Con Peers.

    105 Lord LDs with only 8 MPs already talking of blocking the policy - absurd situation.
  • Options
    TonyE said:

    If Nicky Morgan is against it, it tends to suggest to me that there's some good to be had from it. Even a broken clock is right more often than Morgan.
    Nicky Morgan has raised and improved education standards in this country, she knows what she is talking about.
  • Options
    TonyETonyE Posts: 938

    TonyE said:

    If Nicky Morgan is against it, it tends to suggest to me that there's some good to be had from it. Even a broken clock is right more often than Morgan.
    Nicky Morgan has raised and improved education standards in this country, she knows what she is talking about.
    I've got three kids in full time education. I would beg to differ.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,079

    FTP

    Everyone was saying there's no way the grammar school changes will get through the Lords, would anyone explain why this is the case? Just Labour and Lib Dems blocking it?

    I'd expect 100% opposition from Labour and LibDem peers. Conservative peers will be split on it. Crossbench peers will be largely against, I'd expect. There's no way that adds up to the Lords approving it, IMO.
    Not without chunks taken off it at least.
  • Options
    I see no reason why those who have been to or have kids in private schools should have any issues with said schools being asked to do more to help public sector schools.
  • Options
    Miss Plato, useful for May, though.

    If the Lords block it (assuming it passes the Commons) then she gets to benefit from the populism now *and* put it in the manifesto.
  • Options
    mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    Of course, I suspect that she's now able to send her child to the local grammar school....
  • Options
    MikeL said:

    Once the Cameron retirement Peers have all taken their seats the House of Lords State of the Parties will be:

    Con 257, Lab 209, LD 105, Crossbench 179

    When they make a real effort Con has out turnouted Lab by a few percentage points - eg Con 80%, Lab 72% was typical of some votes in the last year which Con regarded as important and of course Con won the two key votes on electoral registration and EU referendum votes at 16 - which were before the latest influx of Peers which give Con a net gain of 12 (Con 13, Lab 1).

    Conclusion: Whilst Lab + LD may well be able to block grammar schools it's by no means a certainty - if Con push very hard and can get more Crossbench with them than against then it could well get very close.

    And that's before May might appoint a few more Con Peers.

    How on earth can the Lib Dems really justify having over 100 Lords?
  • Options
    Patrick said:

    I see no reason why those who have been to or have kids in private schools should have any issues with said schools being asked to do more to help public sector schools.

    I agree. I think TSE is wrong to think this will go down badly.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,974
    edited September 2016
    PlatoSaid said:

    MikeL said:

    Once the Cameron retirement Peers have all taken their seats the House of Lords State of the Parties will be:

    Con 257, Lab 209, LD 105, Crossbench 179

    When they make a real effort Con has out turnouted Lab by a few percentage points - eg Con 80%, Lab 72% was typical of some votes in the last year which Con regarded as important and of course Con won the two key votes on electoral registration and EU referendum votes at 16 - which were before the latest influx of Peers which give Con a net gain of 12 (Con 13, Lab 1).

    Conclusion: Whilst Lab + LD may well be able to block grammar schools it's by no means a certainty - if Con push very hard and can get more Crossbench with them than against then it could well get very close.

    And that's before May might appoint a few more Con Peers.

    105 Lord LDs with only 8 MPs already talking of blocking the policy - absurd situation.
    Yep, they're upset that they lost their MPs so they're determined to stop the government doing anything.

    A couple of new Tory Peers a week for a few months should help redress the balance, I'm sure there's a few here that would volunteer to wear Ermine for the cause.
  • Options

    FTP

    Everyone was saying there's no way the grammar school changes will get through the Lords, would anyone explain why this is the case? Just Labour and Lib Dems blocking it?

    I'd expect 100% opposition from Labour and LibDem peers. Conservative peers will be split on it. Crossbench peers will be largely against, I'd expect. There's no way that adds up to the Lords approving it, IMO.
    Ah right. So I imagine we'll have a similar problem with all but the most non-controversial Tory legislation. Creates a bit of a problem doesn't it?
  • Options
    SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    I heard an obviously left wing head teacher of a Comp on the radio.. The longer she spoke, the more I supported Grammar schools.
  • Options
    However the polling also found more people in favour of scrapping existing current grammar schools/or not creating any more grammar schools.

    Dear oh dear oh dear.....since we're misleadingly adding numbers....

    You could have written.

    The polling finds more than twice as many people are in favour of creating more grammar schools or just keeping the current ones (55%) than scrapping existing grammar schools (23%)

    But you didn't.

    Instead you pretended 38 and 40 are statistically different......

    Bottom of the class!

    That expensive education gone to waste.....
  • Options
    Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664
    Patrick said:

    I see no reason why those who have been to or have kids in private schools should have any issues with said schools being asked to do more to help public sector schools.

    Because it will feed through into higher fees: help costs money.
  • Options
    @CopperSulphate That's why Theresa May should be calling an early general election.
  • Options

    Ah right. So I imagine we'll have a similar problem with all but the most non-controversial Tory legislation. Creates a bit of a problem doesn't it?

    Depends on whether it was in the manifesto, because the Salisbury Convention applies if it was. But, yes, it is a bit of a problem (although opponents of the government will argue that that is how it's supposed to work).
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,005
    FPT not_on_fire

    Surely a conviction for dishonesty would enhance one's chances of being employed in financial services?

  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,956
    As well as being the right thing to do and popular with the public, it will bring back UKIP votes in the South West.
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,956
    Mortimer said:

    As well as being the right thing to do and popular with the public, it will bring back UKIP votes in the South West LD "marginals"

  • Options

    Patrick said:

    I see no reason why those who have been to or have kids in private schools should have any issues with said schools being asked to do more to help public sector schools.

    I agree. I think TSE is wrong to think this will go down badly.
    I'd be delighted for my girls' school to let other schools use their pitches or pools or offer whateverology lessons in the evening. TSE has had a bee in his bonnet since Brexit. Has to go to France or something dreadful.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,079
    edited September 2016

    MikeL said:

    Once the Cameron retirement Peers have all taken their seats the House of Lords State of the Parties will be:

    Con 257, Lab 209, LD 105, Crossbench 179

    When they make a real effort Con has out turnouted Lab by a few percentage points - eg Con 80%, Lab 72% was typical of some votes in the last year which Con regarded as important and of course Con won the two key votes on electoral registration and EU referendum votes at 16 - which were before the latest influx of Peers which give Con a net gain of 12 (Con 13, Lab 1).

    Conclusion: Whilst Lab + LD may well be able to block grammar schools it's by no means a certainty - if Con push very hard and can get more Crossbench with them than against then it could well get very close.

    And that's before May might appoint a few more Con Peers.

    How on earth can the Lib Dems really justify having over 100 Lords?
    Because it's a chamber which appoints for life? It's amusing that it is so different from their proportion of MPs, but even if they struggle to justify it it is perfectly justifiable - appontments are made occasionally to make proportions generally reflect the commons (but even then with the exemption of crossbenchers) but there is not procedure to mass exclude in order to achieve the same end, so it is implicit in the system a wipeout or landslide win will not be immediately reflected in the chamber. Their lordships and their procedures more at a more sedate pace.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,213
  • Options

    TonyE said:

    If Nicky Morgan is against it, it tends to suggest to me that there's some good to be had from it. Even a broken clock is right more often than Morgan.
    Nicky Morgan has raised and improved education standards in this country, she knows what she is talking about.
    Not bad for two years in the job.....how can you tell?

    Oh, and what happened to Osborne's her 'compulsory' voluntary Academies for all?
  • Options

    So the elite don't like the plebs getting better education.

    Right, got it.

  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,213
    On Nicky Morgan, do we know what type of school she has sent her son to?
  • Options
    EssexitEssexit Posts: 1,956
    A frankly heroic interpretation of the polling on creating more grammars. Once you strip out don't knows and those in favour of the status quo there are far more in favour of expansion than destruction, but you've lumped in the status quo-ers with the scrappers. Selective education is quite a popular policy, and the kind of people who are strongly anti don't tend to vote Conservative anyway.

    The evidence is not overwhelmingly against grammar schools. Even as a proponent of them I'd admit that it's mixed, but there are concrete steps which could be taken to improve the system*. This is unlike, say, the EU, where people blithely said we could 'Remain and reform' as if we hadn't been trying and failing at that for 43 years.

    *additional selection at 13/14, tutor-proofing tests, selecting on performance at primary school as well as/instead of the 11+
  • Options
    Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664
    Patrick said:

    Patrick said:

    I see no reason why those who have been to or have kids in private schools should have any issues with said schools being asked to do more to help public sector schools.

    I agree. I think TSE is wrong to think this will go down badly.
    I'd be delighted for my girls' school to let other schools use their pitches or pools or offer whateverology lessons in the evening. TSE has had a bee in his bonnet since Brexit. Has to go to France or something dreadful.
    Well done, but I assume you would be "delighted" if and only if the cost of the exercise to you was nil.

    As with prime London property, that Russian and Far Eastern money is swamping the indigenous punter, and putting public school fees out of reach of the average uk professional.
    “Between 2010 and 2015 their fees rose four times faster than average earnings growth, while the percentage of their pupils who come from overseas has gone up by 33% since 2008. But I know that their commitment to giving something back to the wider community remains.” says Mrs May.

    This has hit a lot of traditional tory support.
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,978
    edited September 2016
    Sandpit said:

    Wow, that polling is, umm, pretty conclusive on the issue. Mrs May is clearly parking her tanks on the lawn of populist middle Britain.

    It depends on the question. Do you think 80% of children should be denied the opportunity to attend the best state schools might get a different response. This is the issue.

  • Options
    Incidentally, few people seem to have noticed that Theresa May, as the true Cameroon she is, is merely rehashing a Cameron proposal with her stuff about public schools:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/uk-politics-14860411
  • Options
    JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,215
    edited September 2016
    I have a sneaking feeling that this may not end well unless the consultation process results in a scaling back of the ambitions.

    Neil Carmichael, the Tory Chairman of the Select Committee, is a pretty reasonable chap and if he is joined in his reservations by others (Nicky Morgan has already joined the fray...will Gove follow...plus some of the ultra Cameroons-in-exile, Boles and La Soubry immediately spring to mind), then it may take more than the DUP to get legislation even through the Commons.
  • Options
    mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    tlg86 said:

    On Nicky Morgan, do we know what type of school she has sent her son to?

    Yes. Do your own witch-hunting.
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,811
    The politics are good, I think. It's something different and it appeals to the base when the May regime are establishing themselves. It changes the conversation from the relentless dreariness of Brexit.

    A couple of issues if she really is serious about a grammar schools revolution.

    Firstly, parents collectively don't like them. If you promote the 20% by definition you demote the 80%. The days when people accepted second class provision as the natural order are long gone.

    Secondly, studies including PISA show that successful education systems have standardised schools with homogeneous intakes. Introducing greater inequality will show up in poorer educational attainment figures. Poor rankings come back to bite governments as the SNP government in Scotland is discovering.

    Thirdly it will be difficult to get through parliament as there is no consensus there for more grammar schools.

    May talks mentions the various hoops schools going selective will have to go through. It may just be putting a toe into the water for now with a more modest and rigorous programme.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,079

    Incidentally, few people seem to have noticed that Theresa May, as the true Cameroon she is, is merely rehashing a Cameron proposal with her stuff about public schools:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/uk-politics-14860411

    She seems keen for people to disassociate her from Cameron though, so if there's confusion it's of her making.
  • Options
    Utterly off-topic: posted a shortish ramble about Eastern Empresses:
    http://thaddeusthesixth.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/eastern-empresses.html

  • Options
    tlg86 said:
    A 'I will make you regret you sacking me' post.
  • Options

    Ah right. So I imagine we'll have a similar problem with all but the most non-controversial Tory legislation. Creates a bit of a problem doesn't it?

    Depends on whether it was in the manifesto, because the Salisbury Convention applies if it was. But, yes, it is a bit of a problem (although opponents of the government will argue that that is how it's supposed to work).
    So it seems May can't really do very much without having a general election first.
  • Options

    Patrick said:

    I see no reason why those who have been to or have kids in private schools should have any issues with said schools being asked to do more to help public sector schools.

    I agree. I think TSE is wrong to think this will go down badly.
    If 40% support it, and are in the clear plurality, it'll be enough.

    If just 30% support it then that's not quite enough.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,213
    matt said:


    tlg86 said:

    On Nicky Morgan, do we know what type of school she has sent her son to?

    Yes. Do your own witch-hunting.
    People who send their children to private schools forego the right to have a view on grammar schools.
  • Options
    MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    matt said:

    Of course, I suspect that she's now able to send her child to the local grammar school....
    Anyone who blithely wants to 'narrow the achievement gap' is thinking only of the bottom element. Of course, we should want to raise the floor of achievement. But narrowing the gap implies holding back the very top.

    We need to ensure that the very brightest progress in their education at a speed which is concomitant with their learning abilities and inclinations. Glad to see that specialist schools in the UK (magnet schools in the US) have expanded considerably in the last 15 years. Are they any part of this debate?
  • Options
    kle4 said:

    Incidentally, few people seem to have noticed that Theresa May, as the true Cameroon she is, is merely rehashing a Cameron proposal with her stuff about public schools:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/uk-politics-14860411

    She seems keen for people to disassociate her from Cameron though, so if there's confusion it's of her making.
    Everything I’ve seen of May so far is that she’s her own woman and cutting her own furrow.
  • Options
    Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    Mortimer said:

    As well as being the right thing to do and popular with the public, it will bring back UKIP votes in the South West.

    It's a politically highly astute policy. She is clearly going after a slice of the old Labour core vote that finds itself more alienated than ever before from the party under the Corbyn leadership, as well as Ukip supporters. It also gives both of those parties fresh headaches when they could least do with having them: Ukip loses one of its most popular policies, and Labour will find itself campaigning loudly against something that substantially more parents welcome than oppose.

    And I don't buy the idea that enough Tory MPs will be sufficiently enraged over the new demands made on independent schools to threaten the reforms. Their Lordships, on the other hand, can block the proposals if they're really determined to do so, but they're already skating on thin ice over the noises they've been making about trying to frustrate or reverse the EU referendum result - and May can always steamroller her project through with the Parliament Act after a year.
  • Options
    Just as it is hard to believe Jeremy Corbyn is Labour leader, it's a struggle to get my head round the fact David Davis is in the cabinet:
    https://politicalscrapbook.net/2016/09/britons-time-to-celebreate-today-is-our-brexit-ministers-big-bang-trade-deal-day/
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,014
    tlg86 said:


    People who send their children to private schools forego the right to have a view on grammar schools.

    Eh ?
  • Options
    Mr. Rook, doesn't the Parliament Act require (or, at least, is meant to only be used in reference to) a manifesto commitment?
  • Options
    tlg86 said:
    Are you a member of the Labour party or the SWP? Because you seem as obsessed as them as to where someone was educated.
  • Options
    Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    I heard an obviously left wing head teacher of a Comp on the radio.. The longer she spoke, the more I supported Grammar schools.

    The Left is incandescent over these proposals. Excellent. It's always a sign that an idea is a good one when it makes the correct people angry.
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    Ipsos MORI
    Sense of humour is the best British characteristic, followed by good manners & tolerance: https://t.co/NDZfRiZSVf https://t.co/GobFwoN8s9
  • Options
    JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,215

    tlg86 said:
    A 'I will make you regret you sacking me' post.
    Even more so if Gove wades in too. How he must be tempted, perhaps via Ms Vine?
  • Options

    Mr. Rook, doesn't the Parliament Act require (or, at least, is meant to only be used in reference to) a manifesto commitment?

    Thats the salisbury convention isn't it?
  • Options

    Mr. Rook, doesn't the Parliament Act require (or, at least, is meant to only be used in reference to) a manifesto commitment?

    You're confusing the Parliament Act with the Salisbury-Addison convention
  • Options
    EssexitEssexit Posts: 1,956

    Sandpit said:

    Wow, that polling is, umm, pretty conclusive on the issue. Mrs May is clearly parking her tanks on the lawn of populist middle Britain.

    It depends on the question. Do you think 80% of children should be denied the opportunity to attend the best state schools might get a different response. This is the issue.

    Yes it would, but people appreciate that 80% not going isn't the same as 80% being denied the opportunity to go.
  • Options

    However the polling also found more people in favour of scrapping existing current grammar schools/or not creating any more grammar schools.

    Dear oh dear oh dear.....since we're misleadingly adding numbers....

    You could have written.

    The polling finds more than twice as many people are in favour of creating more grammar schools or just keeping the current ones (55%) than scrapping existing grammar schools (23%)

    But you didn't.

    Instead you pretended 38 and 40 are statistically different......

    Bottom of the class!

    That expensive education gone to waste.....

    Nah, it is the intellectual self confidence of a private education that allows me present the numbers thusly.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,014

    I heard an obviously left wing head teacher of a Comp on the radio.. The longer she spoke, the more I supported Grammar schools.

    The Left is incandescent over these proposals. Excellent. It's always a sign that an idea is a good one when it makes the correct people angry.
    Yes it does seem to have got the left incandescent, and the right leaping for joy....
  • Options
    It may come as a great surprise to TSE that I endorse this.

    "Additionally Mrs May saying ‘private schools must do more to keep tax breaks’ might go down very badly with the 48% of Tory MPs who were privately educated. I fear Mrs May is fighting the wrong battles and forgetting the Tories enjoy a majority of only 12 in the House of Commons."
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,213
    Pulpstar said:

    tlg86 said:


    People who send their children to private schools forego the right to have a view on grammar schools.

    Eh ?

    tlg86 said:
    Are you a member of the Labour party or the SWP? Because you seem as obsessed as them as to where someone was educated.
    So on the one hand Morgan is outraged by the government's new policy on grammar schools and is very keen to tell us that comprehensives are wonderful. Yet when it comes to it, they're not good enough for her own son?

    The problem with the likes of Morgan is they've met too many people like them.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,956
    edited September 2016

    Patrick said:

    I see no reason why those who have been to or have kids in private schools should have any issues with said schools being asked to do more to help public sector schools.

    I agree. I think TSE is wrong to think this will go down badly.
    Moreover, when one considers that high performing state schools often offer school to school support within their local authorities, despite their much more significant resource constraints, it's hard to see how private schools can continue to claim to be charitable should they refuse to do likewise.

    There are benefits as well as costs in engaging with the outside world. I can understand that there are those who see social segregation as a benefit of attending a private school, but again, providing a refuge from the oiks ought not to be viewed as a charitable aim.
  • Options

    However the polling also found more people in favour of scrapping existing current grammar schools/or not creating any more grammar schools.

    Dear oh dear oh dear.....since we're misleadingly adding numbers....

    You could have written.

    The polling finds more than twice as many people are in favour of creating more grammar schools or just keeping the current ones (55%) than scrapping existing grammar schools (23%)

    But you didn't.

    Instead you pretended 38 and 40 are statistically different......

    Bottom of the class!

    That expensive education gone to waste.....

    Nah, it is the intellectual self confidence of a private education that allows me present the numbers thusly.

    "intellectual self confidence"

    You are Ed Miliband and I claim my €5.00

  • Options
    JohnO said:

    tlg86 said:
    A 'I will make you regret you sacking me' post.
    Even more so if Gove wades in too. How he must be tempted, perhaps via Ms Vine?
    Quite possibly. Thing is, I think Gove would be naturally more sympathetic to it.

    Depends whether May's message of demonstrating loyalty, or not, before being allowed back is still ringing in his ears, and if he's been chastened by his experiences of recent months.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,005

    Utterly off-topic: posted a shortish ramble about Eastern Empresses:
    http://thaddeusthesixth.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/eastern-empresses.html

    I chuckled at "Irene, who was not overflowing with maternal sentiment...."

    Faustina, the first wife of Constantine the Great, Eudoxia, the wife of Arcadius, Helena, the wife of Constantine Porphyrigenitus, and Theophano. the mother of Basil II, were equally interesting.
  • Options
    Mr. Eagles, it's a nonsense to place don't knows (and don't cares) with either supporters or opponent of a measure.

    Mr. Eagles/Mr. Slackbladder, conventions are best followed, though. One refers one to the current travails of the Labour Party.

    My thanks for the correction.
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,811

    However the polling also found more people in favour of scrapping existing current grammar schools/or not creating any more grammar schools.

    Dear oh dear oh dear.....since we're misleadingly adding numbers....

    You could have written.

    The polling finds more than twice as many people are in favour of creating more grammar schools or just keeping the current ones (55%) than scrapping existing grammar schools (23%)

    But you didn't.

    Instead you pretended 38 and 40 are statistically different......

    Bottom of the class!

    That expensive education gone to waste.....

    TSE's point is valid. It's the difference between change and the status quo when the question is whether to create more grammar schools. If the question were, should grammar schools be abolished, your point would be valid.
  • Options
    PlatoSaid said:

    Ipsos MORI
    Sense of humour is the best British characteristic, followed by good manners & tolerance: https://t.co/NDZfRiZSVf https://t.co/GobFwoN8s9

    NHS still the national religion, I see.
  • Options
    MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034

    Mortimer said:

    As well as being the right thing to do and popular with the public, it will bring back UKIP votes in the South West.

    It's a politically highly astute policy. She is clearly going after a slice of the old Labour core vote that finds itself more alienated than ever before from the party under the Corbyn leadership, as well as Ukip supporters. It also gives both of those parties fresh headaches when they could least do with having them: Ukip loses one of its most popular policies, and Labour will find itself campaigning loudly against something that substantially more parents welcome than oppose.

    And I don't buy the idea that enough Tory MPs will be sufficiently enraged over the new demands made on independent schools to threaten the reforms. Their Lordships, on the other hand, can block the proposals if they're really determined to do so, but they're already skating on thin ice over the noises they've been making about trying to frustrate or reverse the EU referendum result - and May can always steamroller her project through with the Parliament Act after a year.
    I am more and more convinced the Lords have to be replaced with something like the US Senate - a body of elected representatives who serve a longer period than MPs, but whose membership is reelected in tranches so that you benefit both from continuity (to act as a temporary brake on sudden policy shifts coming from the Commons during a temporary majority) and from regularly changing membership (to reflect changes in the nation's political mood).
  • Options
    Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664
    Nigelb said:

    Patrick said:

    I see no reason why those who have been to or have kids in private schools should have any issues with said schools being asked to do more to help public sector schools.

    I agree. I think TSE is wrong to think this will go down badly.
    Moreover, when one considers that high performing state schools often offer school to school support within their local authorities, despite their much more significant resource constraints, it's hard to see how private schools can continue to claim to be charitable should they refuse to do likewise.

    There are benefits as well as costs in engaging with the outside world. I can understand that there are those who see social segregation as a benefit of attending a private school, but again, providing a refuge from the oiks ought not to be viewed as a charitable aim.
    They already are: http://www.etoncollege.com/Educational_Initiatives.aspx for instance.
  • Options
    SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095

    Mr. Eagles, it's a nonsense to place don't knows (and don't cares) with either supporters or opponent of a measure.

    Mr. Eagles/Mr. Slackbladder, conventions are best followed, though. One refers one to the current travails of the Labour Party.

    My thanks for the correction.

    It is however correct to point out that Don't know is a more popular answer than Jeremy Corbyn.
  • Options
    mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    edited September 2016
    tlg86 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    tlg86 said:


    People who send their children to private schools forego the right to have a view on grammar schools.

    Eh ?

    tlg86 said:
    Are you a member of the Labour party or the SWP? Because you seem as obsessed as them as to where someone was educated.
    So on the one hand Morgan is outraged by the government's new policy on grammar schools and is very keen to tell us that comprehensives are wonderful. Yet when it comes to it, they're not good enough for her own son?

    The problem with the likes of Morgan is they've met too many people like them.
    You tell me which school her son attends then.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,974
    Essexit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Wow, that polling is, umm, pretty conclusive on the issue. Mrs May is clearly parking her tanks on the lawn of populist middle Britain.

    It depends on the question. Do you think 80% of children should be denied the opportunity to attend the best state schools might get a different response. This is the issue.

    Yes it would, but people appreciate that 80% not going isn't the same as 80% being denied the opportunity to go.
    Quite, and the polling above says that only 15% wouldn't try and get their own child into a grammar school, if given the opportunity.
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    tlg86 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    tlg86 said:


    People who send their children to private schools forego the right to have a view on grammar schools.

    Eh ?

    tlg86 said:
    Are you a member of the Labour party or the SWP? Because you seem as obsessed as them as to where someone was educated.
    So on the one hand Morgan is outraged by the government's new policy on grammar schools and is very keen to tell us that comprehensives are wonderful. Yet when it comes to it, they're not good enough for her own son?

    The problem with the likes of Morgan is they've met too many people like them.
    She speaks Guardian - says it all really.
  • Options
    MTimT said:

    Mortimer said:

    As well as being the right thing to do and popular with the public, it will bring back UKIP votes in the South West.

    It's a politically highly astute policy. She is clearly going after a slice of the old Labour core vote that finds itself more alienated than ever before from the party under the Corbyn leadership, as well as Ukip supporters. It also gives both of those parties fresh headaches when they could least do with having them: Ukip loses one of its most popular policies, and Labour will find itself campaigning loudly against something that substantially more parents welcome than oppose.

    And I don't buy the idea that enough Tory MPs will be sufficiently enraged over the new demands made on independent schools to threaten the reforms. Their Lordships, on the other hand, can block the proposals if they're really determined to do so, but they're already skating on thin ice over the noises they've been making about trying to frustrate or reverse the EU referendum result - and May can always steamroller her project through with the Parliament Act after a year.
    I am more and more convinced the Lords have to be replaced with something like the US Senate - a body of elected representatives who serve a longer period than MPs, but whose membership is reelected in tranches so that you benefit both from continuity (to act as a temporary brake on sudden policy shifts coming from the Commons during a temporary majority) and from regularly changing membership (to reflect changes in the nation's political mood).

    The Lords is meant to be a revising chamber, not a reversing chamber. I think they forget that sometimes.

  • Options
    Mr. F, thanks, it did seem fitting. If I'd broadened the scope, a comparable comment may have been made in the opposite direction regarding Nero and Agrippina.

    Thanks for those suggestions. I shall make a note, and may write a part 2 at some point (although a review of Twelve Caesars and a grumble about the new PS4 shall likely be first).
  • Options
    JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,215

    JohnO said:

    tlg86 said:
    A 'I will make you regret you sacking me' post.
    Even more so if Gove wades in too. How he must be tempted, perhaps via Ms Vine?
    Quite possibly. Thing is, I think Gove would be naturally more sympathetic to it.

    Depends whether May's message of demonstrating loyalty, or not, before being allowed back is still ringing in his ears, and if he's been chastened by his experiences of recent months.
    Yes, who knows, but as the architect of the 2010-15 reforms he is bound to be asked for his opinion in the next few days. Looking ahead, I suspect that Gove might stand down from the Commons in 2020 and return to full-time journalism. I don't think there's any way back for him to office.
  • Options
    Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    Mr. Rook, doesn't the Parliament Act require (or, at least, is meant to only be used in reference to) a manifesto commitment?

    My understanding is that the Parliament Act enables the Commons to override the will of the Lords on ANY piece of legislation which has been delayed in the Upper House for at least one year.
  • Options
    SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    PlatoSaid said:

    tlg86 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    tlg86 said:


    People who send their children to private schools forego the right to have a view on grammar schools.

    Eh ?

    tlg86 said:
    Are you a member of the Labour party or the SWP? Because you seem as obsessed as them as to where someone was educated.
    So on the one hand Morgan is outraged by the government's new policy on grammar schools and is very keen to tell us that comprehensives are wonderful. Yet when it comes to it, they're not good enough for her own son?

    The problem with the likes of Morgan is they've met too many people like them.
    She speaks Guardian - says it all really.

    Is she mates with Diane Abbott?
  • Options
    Mr. Hopkins, for the yellows, it's a final bastion of relevance and influence.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,014
    @tlg86 I'm confused as to why people who have sent their offspring to private schools should not be allowed to have an opinion on grammars.
    My parents for instance...
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,014

    PlatoSaid said:

    tlg86 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    tlg86 said:


    People who send their children to private schools forego the right to have a view on grammar schools.

    Eh ?

    tlg86 said:
    Are you a member of the Labour party or the SWP? Because you seem as obsessed as them as to where someone was educated.
    So on the one hand Morgan is outraged by the government's new policy on grammar schools and is very keen to tell us that comprehensives are wonderful. Yet when it comes to it, they're not good enough for her own son?

    The problem with the likes of Morgan is they've met too many people like them.
    She speaks Guardian - says it all really.

    Is she mates with Diane Abbott?
    No, that is Corbyn.
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    Steve
    Grammar schools were such a disaster for most of the shadow cabinet, ended up being trapped in an antisemitic cult https://t.co/XRkjVG0szO
  • Options
    @JohnO Theresa May has been quite careless in the way that she has left some pretty capable people with no realistic way back to office while she is Prime Minister. They have a powerful motive to see her flounder (and seem very keen on the plotting aspects of politics too).
  • Options
    JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,215

    @JohnO Theresa May has been quite careless in the way that she has left some pretty capable people with no realistic way back to office while she is Prime Minister. They have a powerful motive to see her flounder (and seem very keen on the plotting aspects of politics too).

    Noticed at PMQs (as did Quentin Letts) that Osborne was sitting in the naughty corner at PMQs with Anna Soubry, Tim Loughton and Keith Simpson....
  • Options
    MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    edited September 2016
    Nigelb said:

    There are benefits as well as costs in engaging with the outside world.

    Very much indeed. Just finished reading a very interesting book by Harvard's guru on creativity on what drives creative individuals, The Progress Principle by Teresa Amabile. It fits in with another book on motivation and drive (aptly called Drive, by Daniel Pink). Both argue that having a purpose greater than oneself, and that internal mindsets and motivators are far more important than profit or even praise in driving innovation and creativity.

    Given that we are perforce becoming an knowledge and creative economy, it is long overdue that education followed suit. And that the institutions also developed a sense of purpose greater than themselves and profit.
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,811
    Essexit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Wow, that polling is, umm, pretty conclusive on the issue. Mrs May is clearly parking her tanks on the lawn of populist middle Britain.

    It depends on the question. Do you think 80% of children should be denied the opportunity to attend the best state schools might get a different response. This is the issue.

    Yes it would, but people appreciate that 80% not going isn't the same as 80% being denied the opportunity to go.
    I am not sure people do accept the difference. More to the point they would be right to think 80% not going is the same as 80% being denied the opportunity to go. If the places aren't there, that 80% can't actually go to grammar school. The justification would be that the country only needs 20% of its children to be educated to that level. A pretty difficult justification to make, I would say.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,434
    s99 of the School Standards and Framework Act 1998 provides in part:"

    General restriction on selection by ability or aptitude.
    .(1) No admission arrangements for a maintained school may make provision for selection by ability unless—
    (a) they make provision for a permitted form of such selection; or
    (b) the school is a grammar school (as defined by section 104(7)).
    .(2) The following are permitted forms of selection by ability—
    .(a) any selection by ability authorised by section 100 (pre-existing arrangements);
    .(b) any selection by ability authorised by section 101 (pupil banding); and
    .(c) any selection by ability conducted in connection with the admission of pupils to the school for secondary education suitable to the requirements of pupils who are over compulsory school age.
    .(3) No admission arrangements for a maintained school may make provision for selection by aptitude unless they make provision for a permitted form of such selection.
    .(4) The following are permitted forms of selection by aptitude—
    .(a) any selection by aptitude authorised by section 100 (pre-existing arrangements); and
    .(b) any selection by aptitude authorised by section 102 (aptitude for particular subjects)."

    So it may be possible to expand existing schools (as has already been outlined) or to have specialist streaming for individual subjects with expertise in a particular school (for which ability in that subject is used as a criteria) but a swathe of new schools requires new legislation and I don't see how that passes.

    Presumably May thinks this fits well with her aspirational Britain vision of the Conservatives. Personally, I am not so sure.
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383

    PlatoSaid said:

    Ipsos MORI
    Sense of humour is the best British characteristic, followed by good manners & tolerance: https://t.co/NDZfRiZSVf https://t.co/GobFwoN8s9

    NHS still the national religion, I see.
    I was cheered that BBC was right down at 11%.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,005

    Mr. F, thanks, it did seem fitting. If I'd broadened the scope, a comparable comment may have been made in the opposite direction regarding Nero and Agrippina.

    Thanks for those suggestions. I shall make a note, and may write a part 2 at some point (although a review of Twelve Caesars and a grumble about the new PS4 shall likely be first).

    https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=empress+irene&biw=1536&bih=723&tbm=isch&imgil=X1ePzfw44dfMdM%3A%3BRuYa54q_O87scM%3Bhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.pinterest.com%252Fpin%252F63965257182146734%252F&source=iu&pf=m&fir=X1ePzfw44dfMdM%3A%2CRuYa54q_O87scM%2C_&usg=__m-WFRJrvAqrM1yc6F1dduuByS2E=&ved=0ahUKEwjKjdfrtoLPAhXEB8AKHWqKBMoQyjcIQA&ei=Hr7SV8qGAsSPgAbqlJLQDA#imgrc=X1ePzfw44dfMdM:

    You can see here that Irene was really attractive as a young woman. According to some accounts, she was chosen to be Empress by means of a beauty contest, like Esther. She bears more than a passing resemblance to Cersei.
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,956

    @JohnO Theresa May has been quite careless in the way that she has left some pretty capable people with no realistic way back to office while she is Prime Minister. They have a powerful motive to see her flounder (and seem very keen on the plotting aspects of politics too).

    I imagine Clem would have had a pithy response to the question 'why will Morgan not get back into government'.
  • Options
    I rarely disagree with TSE but I think this is all about Brexit and May is playing a blinder. May needs to buy time, distract from the " relentless dreariness " of Brexit and look like she's making a distinct break with the " Posh Boys ". Grammars are a Brilliant distraction from Brexit because they are so similar to Brexit. There's no evidence they work, noone ever talks about the downside and appeal to morose social conservatives who want a return to a better yesterday that never happened. However as left liberals like myself have discovered to our cost these post reality emotions are powerful and the new zeitgeist so we while we mock May in her own political terms is right.

    The other helpful thing for May is there are good reasons to believe very little grammar expansion will ever happen and not for several years. But as it's a distraction strategy that doesn't matter.
  • Options
    JohnO said:

    JohnO said:

    tlg86 said:
    A 'I will make you regret you sacking me' post.
    Even more so if Gove wades in too. How he must be tempted, perhaps via Ms Vine?
    Quite possibly. Thing is, I think Gove would be naturally more sympathetic to it.

    Depends whether May's message of demonstrating loyalty, or not, before being allowed back is still ringing in his ears, and if he's been chastened by his experiences of recent months.
    Yes, who knows, but as the architect of the 2010-15 reforms he is bound to be asked for his opinion in the next few days. Looking ahead, I suspect that Gove might stand down from the Commons in 2020 and return to full-time journalism. I don't think there's any way back for him to office.
    Well, we'll see..

    If David Davis can come back, anything is possible.
  • Options
    Essexit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Wow, that polling is, umm, pretty conclusive on the issue. Mrs May is clearly parking her tanks on the lawn of populist middle Britain.

    It depends on the question. Do you think 80% of children should be denied the opportunity to attend the best state schools might get a different response. This is the issue.

    Yes it would, but people appreciate that 80% not going isn't the same as 80% being denied the opportunity to go.

    In the abstract, perhaps. But the parents of 80% of children, their relations and their friends would then react in a real world way to having their kids told aged 10 or 11 they could not go to the best school in the area.

  • Options
    PClippPClipp Posts: 2,138

    How on earth can the Lib Dems really justify having over 100 Lords?

    How can the Conservatives really justify their criminal irresponsibility at the last election, and ending up with a majority government while receiving the support of under 25% of the electorate?
This discussion has been closed.