Wasn't Clegg a big cheese in the EU at one point? I do believe he gets a very good pension from them as well. Anyway to your point about Cleggs 2nd paper.....
In return for which pension he has an oath or similar of loyalty to the EU not the Queen if their interests diverge, like all retired eu servants, and which pension he will forfeit if he breaks that 'oath'
This is an area where there should be no argument, no discussion and no debate. There should certainly be no recycling of anecdote.
Instead, this is where evidence based policymaking should be used. Let's choose an LEA - perhaps two or three - and have an experiment. Decide on the terms of success: the proportion of pupils achieving very good marks, an improvement in social mobility; and also the terms of failure - i.e. do we have a very detrimental effect on the 80% of pupils who don't go to the grammar school.
Then run the tests. You decide on the criteria ahead of time, and you test the hypothesis of whether it works. We should probably test MaxPB's suggestion too, and maybe one or two others.
All the arguments and discussion and analysis in the world is no substitute for hard data. Let's get the data.
Experiments such as this are usually ruled out on ethics grounds. What happens to the kids whose futures get screwed if the experiment turns out to be a disaster? This isn't experimenting on mice
We have a bit of a natural experiment already- places like Kent, Linconshire, Buckinghamshire and Trafford. Accepting that it's not a perfect sample of the UK as a whole, we can still look at the current outcomes.
The signs aren't good; there's not much sign that having grammar schools in an area improves overall results, and the good outcomes get skewed towards a very small number of people right at the top. Kent and Linconshire in particular have problems with struggling non-grammar schools which are very hard to turn round. Furthermore, it's very hard to make a school middle-class parent proof.
No dog in this hunt, so don't care about grammar schools.
I see Fox is living up to my low expectations. However, as the story is based on reportage, I can't see it living beyond a couple of news cycles. If the story is true, then it's probably based on businesses not cartwheeling with joy at the prospect of hard Brexit.
As scandals go, it’s pretty tame, claiming British companies have grown fat and lazy should be regarded as a wakeup call, and to say managers are more concerned with playing golf is no more than what has been repeated on PB for years. - That said, I have no idea what talent he has shown in the past that warrants his return to a ministerial position, perhaps his appointment really was based on clearing up the mess he helped create. Personally I’d prefer a competent individual less prone to gaffs in his place, but MummaMaya obviously has her own plans.
Education is one of those areas I don't quite understand why ut needs to be so very complicated. But leaving that aside, apparently not all conservatives will like the plan, the opposition parties will love this fight and so apparently with the educational establishment, so if it happens at all it will probably be a fudge.
So as figurehead policies go to define the tone of her premiership it doesn't seem that amazing for May, but the early options might be limited and she needs something to inspire the troops for more awkward times to come.
Its likely to be very good politically for May.
It's a popular policy to the public and I suspect especially so to people who might vote Conservative.
Its opposed by Labour and Tory posh boys.
So it should gain May support from the anti-establishment mood which is so strong at present.
Totally bonkers.
There is no great demand in the country to bring back grammars. This is pure Tory nostalgism - see also national service.
It is opposed by everyone in the reality-based community, which includes the mainstream media.
With disquiet in her own party, this seems like a major mis-step. Don't see she can get a majority in parliament, and certainly not in the Lords. And hardly good reason to call a general election on.
What's more, she's personally taken this on. Her own Ed Sec is unconvinced.
May is marking her cards as someone who takes a very long time to make a decision - and then ignores all the evidence in favour of a policy last seriously debated twenty years ago.
I fully expect the next big announcement to be the return of the cones hotline.
When you used the phrase 'reality-based community' you lost the argument in all those areas which were blue on the referendum map.
And that's why this issue is good for May politically.
"reality based community" is what people think of themselves as in areas that voted Yes to AV.
Wasn't Clegg a big cheese in the EU at one point? I do believe he gets a very good pension from them as well. Anyway to your point about Cleggs 2nd paper.....
Clegg was secretary to Leon Brittan, when he was EU TRADE commissioner. So he might know what he is talking about.
Nick Clegg has rather a history of NOT knowing what he's talking about.
Education is one of those areas I don't quite understand why ut needs to be so very complicated. But leaving that aside, apparently not all conservatives will like the plan, the opposition parties will love this fight and so apparently with the educational establishment, so if it happens at all it will probably be a fudge.
So as figurehead policies go to define the tone of her premiership it doesn't seem that amazing for May, but the early options might be limited and she needs something to inspire the troops for more awkward times to come.
Its likely to be very good politically for May.
It's a popular policy to the public and I suspect especially so to people who might vote Conservative.
Its opposed by Labour and Tory posh boys.
So it should gain May support from the anti-establishment mood which is so strong at present.
Totally bonkers.
There is no great demand in the country to bring back grammars. This is pure Tory nostalgism - see also national service.
It is opposed by everyone in the reality-based community, which includes the mainstream media.
With disquiet in her own party, this seems like a major mis-step. Don't see she can get a majority in parliament, and certainly not in the Lords. And hardly good reason to call a general election on.
What's more, she's personally taken this on. Her own Ed Sec is unconvinced.
May is marking her cards as someone who takes a very long time to make a decision - and then ignores all the evidence in favour of a policy last seriously debated twenty years ago.
I fully expect the next big announcement to be the return of the cones hotline.
When you used the phrase 'reality-based community' you lost the argument in all those areas which were blue on the referendum map.
And that's why this issue is good for May politically.
If the debate comes down to fact versus superstition, then it is no real debate.
Where's your evidence that the grammar system supports improved outcomes and/or improved social mobility?
Education is one of those areas I don't quite understand why ut needs to be so very complicated. But leaving that aside, apparently not all conservatives will like the plan, the opposition parties will love this fight and so apparently with the educational establishment, so if it happens at all it will probably be a fudge.
So as figurehead policies go to define the tone of her premiership it doesn't seem that amazing for May, but the early options might be limited and she needs something to inspire the troops for more awkward times to come.
Its likely to be very good politically for May.
It's a popular policy to the public and I suspect especially so to people who might vote Conservative.
Its opposed by Labour and Tory posh boys.
So it should gain May support from the anti-establishment mood which is so strong at present.
Totally bonkers.
There is no great demand in the country to bring back grammars. This is pure Tory nostalgism - see also national service.
It is opposed by everyone in the reality-based community, which includes the mainstream media.
With disquiet in her own party, this seems like a major mis-step. Don't see she can get a majority in parliament, and certainly not in the Lords. And hardly good reason to call a general election on.
What's more, she's personally taken this on. Her own Ed Sec is unconvinced.
May is marking her cards as someone who takes a very long time to make a decision - and then ignores all the evidence in favour of a policy last seriously debated twenty years ago.
I fully expect the next big announcement to be the return of the cones hotline.
When you used the phrase 'reality-based community' you lost the argument in all those areas which were blue on the referendum map.
And that's why this issue is good for May politically.
If the debate comes down to fact versus superstition, then it is no real debate.
Where's your evidence that the grammar system supports improved outcomes and/or improved social mobility?
Political debate generally involves rival forms of superstition.
No dog in this hunt, so don't care about grammar schools.
I see Fox is living up to my low expectations. However, as the story is based on reportage, I can't see it living beyond a couple of news cycles. If the story is true, then it's probably based on businesses not cartwheeling with joy at the prospect of hard Brexit.
As scandals go, it’s pretty tame, claiming British companies have grown fat and lazy should be regarded as a wakeup call, and to say managers are more concerned with playing golf is no more than what has been repeated on PB for years. - That said, I have no idea what talent he has shown in the past that warrants his return to a ministerial position, perhaps his appointment really was based on clearing up the mess he helped create. Personally I’d prefer a competent individual less prone to gaffs in his place, but MummaMaya obviously has her own plans.
I think May's cabinet appointments were made to show that she 'got' the Brexit vote. Personally, I don't think she needed to - people are more phlegmatic than they're given credit for, and squawking on Twitter does not an insurrection make.
It's a smear story, so no legs, but I also absolutely believe its the kind of bumptious remark Fox would make i.e. it's a kind of Platonic smear.
No dog in this hunt, so don't care about grammar schools.
I see Fox is living up to my low expectations. However, as the story is based on reportage, I can't see it living beyond a couple of news cycles. If the story is true, then it's probably based on businesses not cartwheeling with joy at the prospect of hard Brexit.
As scandals go, it’s pretty tame, claiming British companies have grown fat and lazy should be regarded as a wakeup call, and to say managers are more concerned with playing golf is no more than what has been repeated on PB for years. - That said, I have no idea what talent he has shown in the past that warrants his return to a ministerial position, perhaps his appointment really was based on clearing up the mess he helped create. Personally I’d prefer a competent individual less prone to gaffs in his place, but MummaMaya obviously has her own plans.
The fat and lazy part, you can pass off as banter. More worrying is the bit where he complains about FDI.
He clearly has no understanding of the dynamics and economics of trade.
Do I take it that those Conservative supporters here who oppose creating new grammar schools are also in favour in abolishing the existing grammar schools ?
And if not why not ?
The government has more important things to do than to muck about with educational structures once again. There has been too much of that already and a significant period of settling in is called for.
Governments meddle.
Do I take it you're opposed to City Region Mayors, HS2, Hinckley C and all the other detritus of Osborne's meddling mania ?
If this government's educational meddling is restricted to new grammar schools - probably no more than a dozen nationwide - then you should be very satisfied.
How is Hinckley C meddling? It is another very difficult decision to be sure, one that will impact on our competitiveness as a nation for several decades one way or another. Will we have too little base load without it or will we have too expensive power with it?
There are too many serious questions in the intray to waste time and political energy on frivolities.
Hinckley C is clearly government meddling as the government has set the price its output would be charged at.
And there are always too many serious questions in the intray to waste time and political energy on frivolities.
Yet frivolities are what governments concentrate on because they're easier and quicker or someone's vanity project.
The problem with Hinkley C was that it was designed at specified at a time when there was virtually no LNG in the world, the UK's natural gas output was declining (and no one had heard of shale gas), and before solar became a viable power source.
Education is one of those areas I don't quite understand why ut needs to be so very complicated. But leaving that aside, apparently not all conservatives will like the plan, the opposition parties will love this fight and so apparently with the educational establishment, so if it happens at all it will probably be a fudge.
So as figurehead policies go to define the tone of her premiership it doesn't seem that amazing for May, but the early options might be limited and she needs something to inspire the troops for more awkward times to come.
Its likely to be very good politically for May.
It's a popular policy to the public and I suspect especially so to people who might vote Conservative.
Its opposed by Labour and Tory posh boys.
So it should gain May support from the anti-establishment mood which is so strong at present.
Totally bonkers.
There is no great demand in the country to bring back grammars. This is pure Tory nostalgism - see also national service.
It is opposed by everyone in the reality-based community, which includes the mainstream media.
With disquiet in her own party, this seems like a major mis-step. Don't see she can get a majority in parliament, and certainly not in the Lords. And hardly good reason to call a general election on.
What's more, she's personally taken this on. Her own Ed Sec is unconvinced.
May is marking her cards as someone who takes a very long time to make a decision - and then ignores all the evidence in favour of a policy last seriously debated twenty years ago.
I fully expect the next big announcement to be the return of the cones hotline.
When you used the phrase 'reality-based community' you lost the argument in all those areas which were blue on the referendum map.
And that's why this issue is good for May politically.
"reality based community" is what people think of themselves as in areas that voted Yes to AV.
And they're also the 'progressive majority'.
I wonder if the 'reality based community' of Camden, Islington, Lambeth etc still think that after having been defeated in two general elections and two referendums in the last six years.
Education is one of those areas I don't quite understand why ut needs to be so very complicated. But leaving that aside, apparently not all conservatives will like the plan, the opposition parties will love this fight and so apparently with the educational establishment, so if it happens at all it will probably be a fudge.
So as figurehead policies go to define the tone of her premiership it doesn't seem that amazing for May, but the early options might be limited and she needs something to inspire the troops for more awkward times to come.
Its likely to be very good politically for May.
It's a popular policy to the public and I suspect especially so to people who might vote Conservative.
Its opposed by Labour and Tory posh boys.
So it should gain May support from the anti-establishment mood which is so strong at present.
Totally bonkers.
There is no great demand in the country to bring back grammars. This is pure Tory nostalgism - see also national service.
It is opposed by everyone in the reality-based community, which includes the mainstream media.
With disquiet in her own party, this seems like a major mis-step. Don't see she can get a majority in parliament, and certainly not in the Lords. And hardly good reason to call a general election on.
What's more, she's personally taken this on. Her own Ed Sec is unconvinced.
May is marking her cards as someone who takes a very long time to make a decision - and then ignores all the evidence in favour of a policy last seriously debated twenty years ago.
I fully expect the next big announcement to be the return of the cones hotline.
When you used the phrase 'reality-based community' you lost the argument in all those areas which were blue on the referendum map.
And that's why this issue is good for May politically.
If the debate comes down to fact versus superstition, then it is no real debate.
Where's your evidence that the grammar system supports improved outcomes and/or improved social mobility?
Political debate generally involves rival forms of superstition.
Education is one of those areas I don't quite understand why ut needs to be so very complicated. But leaving that aside, apparently not all conservatives will like the plan, the opposition parties will love this fight and so apparently with the educational establishment, so if it happens at all it will probably be a fudge.
So as figurehead policies go to define the tone of her premiership it doesn't seem that amazing for May, but the early options might be limited and she needs something to inspire the troops for more awkward times to come.
Its likely to be very good politically for May.
It's a popular policy to the public and I suspect especially so to people who might vote Conservative.
Its opposed by Labour and Tory posh boys.
So it should gain May support from the anti-establishment mood which is so strong at present.
Totally bonkers.
There is no great demand in the country to bring back grammars. This is pure Tory nostalgism - see also national service.
It is opposed by everyone in the reality-based community, which includes the mainstream media.
With disquiet in her own party, this seems like a major mis-step. Don't see she can get a majority in parliament, and certainly not in the Lords. And hardly good reason to call a general election on.
What's more, she's personally taken this on. Her own Ed Sec is unconvinced.
May is marking her cards as someone who takes a very long time to make a decision - and then ignores all the evidence in favour of a policy last seriously debated twenty years ago.
I fully expect the next big announcement to be the return of the cones hotline.
When you used the phrase 'reality-based community' you lost the argument in all those areas which were blue on the referendum map.
And that's why this issue is good for May politically.
"reality based community" is what people think of themselves as in areas that voted Yes to AV.
Yes, whatever. I'm just a centrist Conservative. No need to win over people like me. No sir.
Do I take it that those Conservative supporters here who oppose creating new grammar schools are also in favour in abolishing the existing grammar schools ?
And if not why not ?
The government has more important things to do than to muck about with educational structures once again. There has been too much of that already and a significant period of settling in is called for.
Governments meddle.
Do I take it you're opposed to City Region Mayors, HS2, Hinckley C and all the other detritus of Osborne's meddling mania ?
If this government's educational meddling is restricted to new grammar schools - probably no more than a dozen nationwide - then you should be very satisfied.
How is Hinckley C meddling? It is another very difficult decision to be sure, one that will impact on our competitiveness as a nation for several decades one way or another. Will we have too little base load without it or will we have too expensive power with it?
There are too many serious questions in the intray to waste time and political energy on frivolities.
Hinckley C is clearly government meddling as the government has set the price its output would be charged at.
And there are always too many serious questions in the intray to waste time and political energy on frivolities.
Yet frivolities are what governments concentrate on because they're easier and quicker or someone's vanity project.
The problem with Hinkley C was that it was designed at specified at a time when there was virtually no LNG in the world, the UK's natural gas output was declining (and no one had heard of shale gas), and before solar became a viable power source.
Its clearly now the wrong project from the wrong time period.
And the only thing which has stopped Hinkley C from been cancelled has been government meddling.
Education is one of those areas I don't quite understand why ut needs to be so very complicated. But leaving that aside, apparently not all conservatives will like the plan, the opposition parties will love this fight and so apparently with the educational establishment, so if it happens at all it will probably be a fudge.
So as figurehead policies go to define the tone of her premiership it doesn't seem that amazing for May, but the early options might be limited and she needs something to inspire the troops for more awkward times to come.
Its likely to be very good politically for May.
It's a popular policy to the public and I suspect especially so to people who might vote Conservative.
Its opposed by Labour and Tory posh boys.
So it should gain May support from the anti-establishment mood which is so strong at present.
Totally bonkers.
There is no great demand in the country to bring back grammars. This is pure Tory nostalgism - see also national service.
It is opposed by everyone in the reality-based community, which includes the mainstream media.
With disquiet in her own party, this seems like a major mis-step. Don't see she can get a majority in parliament, and certainly not in the Lords. And hardly good reason to call a general election on.
What's more, she's personally taken this on. Her own Ed Sec is unconvinced.
May is marking her cards as someone who takes a very long time to make a decision - and then ignores all the evidence in favour of a policy last seriously debated twenty years ago.
I fully expect the next big announcement to be the return of the cones hotline.
When you used the phrase 'reality-based community' you lost the argument in all those areas which were blue on the referendum map.
And that's why this issue is good for May politically.
"reality based community" is what people think of themselves as in areas that voted Yes to AV.
Yes, whatever. I'm just a centrist Conservative. No need to win over people like me. No sir.
Really? I thought you were a LD or soft Labour from your posts.
Education is one of those areas I don't quite understand why ut needs to be so very complicated. But leaving that aside, apparently not all conservatives will like the plan, the opposition parties will love this fight and so apparently with the educational establishment, so if it happens at all it will probably be a fudge.
So as figurehead policies go to define the tone of her premiership it doesn't seem that amazing for May, but the early options might be limited and she needs something to inspire the troops for more awkward times to come.
Its likely to be very good politically for May.
It's a popular policy to the public and I suspect especially so to people who might vote Conservative.
Its opposed by Labour and Tory posh boys.
So it should gain May support from the anti-establishment mood which is so strong at present.
Totally bonkers.
There is no great demand in the country to bring back grammars. This is pure Tory nostalgism - see also national service.
It is opposed by everyone in the reality-based community, which includes the mainstream media.
With disquiet in her own party, this seems like a major mis-step. Don't see she can get a majority in parliament, and certainly not in the Lords. And hardly good reason to call a general election on.
What's more, she's personally taken this on. Her own Ed Sec is unconvinced.
May is marking her cards as someone who takes a very long time to make a decision - and then ignores all the evidence in favour of a policy last seriously debated twenty years ago.
I fully expect the next big announcement to be the return of the cones hotline.
When you used the phrase 'reality-based community' you lost the argument in all those areas which were blue on the referendum map.
And that's why this issue is good for May politically.
"reality based community" is what people think of themselves as in areas that voted Yes to AV.
Yes, whatever. I'm just a centrist Conservative. No need to win over people like me. No sir.
Really? I thought you were a LD or soft Labour from your posts.
Guess it depends which angle you're looking from. I identify right, but live in a very left liberal area. This perhaps reinforces my own sense of identity, but subtly drags me leftwards.
Education is one of those areas I don't quite understand why ut needs to be so very complicated. But leaving that aside, apparently not all conservatives will like the plan, the opposition parties will love this fight and so apparently with the educational establishment, so if it happens at all it will probably be a fudge.
So as figurehead policies go to define the tone of her premiership it doesn't seem that amazing for May, but the early options might be limited and she needs something to inspire the troops for more awkward times to come.
Its likely to be very good politically for May.
It's a popular policy to the public and I suspect especially so to people who might vote Conservative.
Its opposed by Labour and Tory posh boys.
So it should gain May support from the anti-establishment mood which is so strong at present.
Totally bonkers.
There is no great demand in the country to bring back grammars. This is pure Tory nostalgism - see also national service.
It is opposed by everyone in the reality-based community, which includes the mainstream media.
With disquiet in her own party, this seems like a major mis-step. Don't see she can get a majority in parliament, and certainly not in the Lords. And hardly good reason to call a general election on.
What's more, she's personally taken this on. Her own Ed Sec is unconvinced.
May is marking her cards as someone who takes a very long time to make a decision - and then ignores all the evidence in favour of a policy last seriously debated twenty years ago.
I fully expect the next big announcement to be the return of the cones hotline.
When you used the phrase 'reality-based community' you lost the argument in all those areas which were blue on the referendum map.
And that's why this issue is good for May politically.
"reality based community" is what people think of themselves as in areas that voted Yes to AV.
Yes, whatever. I'm just a centrist Conservative. No need to win over people like me. No sir.
Actually May doesn't need to win you over, as (from your point of view) there's no alternative to the Conservatives.
For those who now are claiming that immediate job losses weren't promised if Leave won here's something from the day AFTER the referendum:
‘ If you perchance thought that your London banking job would be safe with Britain outside the European Union, you were seemingly wrong. Consultants working for leading strategy firms in London say banks have activated their contingency plans and that the London job cuts are about to come thick and fast.
“You’re looking at anything from 50,000 to 70,000 London finance jobs being moved overseas in the next 12 months,” predicts one consultant working with one of the top finance strategy firms in the City. “Jobs are going to be cut, and those cuts are going to start next week.” ‘
Eleven full weeks after the Leave vote and do we have any announcements of 'those cuts are going to start next week' ?
If that article is correct there should have been 10-15,000 job cuts already.
I was not a doom and gloom monger, and think the rot will take a while to be visible, but wasn't the above projection predicated on A50 being invoked the next day as promised by the PM?
Education is one of those areas I don't quite understand why ut needs to be so very complicated. But leaving that aside, apparently not all conservatives will like the plan, the opposition parties will love this fight and so apparently with the educational establishment, so if it happens at all it will probably be a fudge.
So as figurehead policies go to define the tone of her premiership it doesn't seem that amazing for May, but the early options might be limited and she needs something to inspire the troops for more awkward times to come.
Its likely to be very good politically for May.
It's a popular policy to the public and I suspect especially so to people who might vote Conservative.
Its opposed by Labour and Tory posh boys.
So it should gain May support from the anti-establishment mood which is so strong at present.
Totally bonkers.
There is no great demand in the country to bring back grammars. This is pure Tory nostalgism - see also national service.
It is opposed by everyone in the reality-based community, which includes the mainstream media.
With disquiet in her own party, this seems like a major mis-step. Don't see she can get a majority in parliament, and certainly not in the Lords. And hardly good reason to call a general election on.
What's more, she's personally taken this on. Her own Ed Sec is unconvinced.
May is marking her cards as someone who takes a very long time to make a decision - and then ignores all the evidence in favour of a policy last seriously debated twenty years ago.
I fully expect the next big announcement to be the return of the cones hotline.
When you used the phrase 'reality-based community' you lost the argument in all those areas which were blue on the referendum map.
And that's why this issue is good for May politically.
"reality based community" is what people think of themselves as in areas that voted Yes to AV.
Yes, whatever. I'm just a centrist Conservative. No need to win over people like me. No sir.
Actually May doesn't need to win you over, as (from your point of view) there's no alternative to the Conservatives.
Sadly true. But if she advocates policy on no evidence she'll quickly lose the immense goodwill she has as the seemingly last sane one standing, and get caught up in internal bunfighting.
She has fantastic political capital right now and my hope is that she uses it to address some of our systemic challenges as a nation.
Do I take it that those Conservative supporters here who oppose creating new grammar schools are also in favour in abolishing the existing grammar schools ?
And if not why not ?
The government has more important things to do than to muck about with educational structures once again. There has been too much of that already and a significant period of settling in is called for.
Governments meddle.
Do I take it you're opposed to City Region Mayors, HS2, Hinckley C and all the other detritus of Osborne's meddling mania ?
If this government's educational meddling is restricted to new grammar schools - probably no more than a dozen nationwide - then you should be very satisfied.
How is Hinckley C meddling? It is another very difficult decision to be sure, one that will impact on our competitiveness as a nation for several decades one way or another. Will we have too little base load without it or will we have too expensive power with it?
There are too many serious questions in the intray to waste time and political energy on frivolities.
Hinckley C is clearly government meddling as the government has set the price its output would be charged at.
And there are always too many serious questions in the intray to waste time and political energy on frivolities.
Yet frivolities are what governments concentrate on because they're easier and quicker or someone's vanity project.
The problem with Hinkley C was that it was designed at specified at a time when there was virtually no LNG in the world, the UK's natural gas output was declining (and no one had heard of shale gas), and before solar became a viable power source.
Its clearly now the wrong project from the wrong time period.
And the only thing which has stopped Hinkley C from been cancelled has been government meddling.
... and Osborne running things. Now that he has gone there is an opportunity to take sensible decisions on Hinkley. But Mrs May and her people have misshandled the communication.
No dog in this hunt, so don't care about grammar schools.
I see Fox is living up to my low expectations. However, as the story is based on reportage, I can't see it living beyond a couple of news cycles. If the story is true, then it's probably based on businesses not cartwheeling with joy at the prospect of hard Brexit.
As scandals go, it’s pretty tame, claiming British companies have grown fat and lazy should be regarded as a wakeup call, and to say managers are more concerned with playing golf is no more than what has been repeated on PB for years. - That said, I have no idea what talent he has shown in the past that warrants his return to a ministerial position, perhaps his appointment really was based on clearing up the mess he helped create. Personally I’d prefer a competent individual less prone to gaffs in his place, but MummaMaya obviously has her own plans.
The fat and lazy part, you can pass off as banter. More worrying is the bit where he complains about FDI.
He clearly has no understanding of the dynamics and economics of trade.
Wasn't Clegg a big cheese in the EU at one point? I do believe he gets a very good pension from them as well. Anyway to your point about Cleggs 2nd paper.....
Clegg was secretary to Leon Brittan, when he was EU TRADE commissioner. So he might know what he is talking about.
If he's right, it's good that we are leaving now as it would only be more difficult to leave in the future.
For those who now are claiming that immediate job losses weren't promised if Leave won here's something from the day AFTER the referendum:
‘ If you perchance thought that your London banking job would be safe with Britain outside the European Union, you were seemingly wrong. Consultants working for leading strategy firms in London say banks have activated their contingency plans and that the London job cuts are about to come thick and fast.
“You’re looking at anything from 50,000 to 70,000 London finance jobs being moved overseas in the next 12 months,” predicts one consultant working with one of the top finance strategy firms in the City. “Jobs are going to be cut, and those cuts are going to start next week.” ‘
Eleven full weeks after the Leave vote and do we have any announcements of 'those cuts are going to start next week' ?
If that article is correct there should have been 10-15,000 job cuts already.
I was not a doom and gloom monger, and think the rot will take a while to be visible, but wasn't the above projection predicated on A50 being invoked the next day as promised by the PM?
I'm sure we're due a recession at some point between now and 2020, simply because we've had six years of growth.
Education is one of those areas I don't quite understand why ut needs to be so very complicated. But leaving that aside, apparently not all conservatives will like the plan, the opposition parties will love this fight and so apparently with the educational establishment, so if it happens at all it will probably be a fudge.
So as figurehead policies go to define the tone of her premiership it doesn't seem that amazing for May, but the early options might be limited and she needs something to inspire the troops for more awkward times to come.
Its likely to be very good politically for May.
It's a popular policy to the public and I suspect especially so to people who might vote Conservative.
Its opposed by Labour and Tory posh boys.
So it should gain May support from the anti-establishment mood which is so strong at present.
Totally bonkers.
There is no great demand in the country to bring back grammars. This is pure Tory nostalgism - see also national service.
It is opposed by everyone in the reality-based community, which includes the mainstream media.
With disquiet in her own party, this seems like a major mis-step. Don't see she can get a majority in parliament, and certainly not in the Lords. And hardly good reason to call a general election on.
What's more, she's personally taken this on. Her own Ed Sec is unconvinced.
May is marking her cards as someone who takes a very long time to make a decision - and then ignores all the evidence in favour of a policy last seriously debated twenty years ago.
I fully expect the next big announcement to be the return of the cones hotline.
When you used the phrase 'reality-based community' you lost the argument in all those areas which were blue on the referendum map.
And that's why this issue is good for May politically.
"reality based community" is what people think of themselves as in areas that voted Yes to AV.
Yes, whatever. I'm just a centrist Conservative. No need to win over people like me. No sir.
Really? I thought you were a LD or soft Labour from your posts.
To be fair, it's possible to sound like an LD and yet lead the Conservative Party for 11 years.
Education is one of those areas I don't quite understand why ut needs to be so very complicated. But leaving that aside, apparently not all conservatives will like the plan, the opposition parties will love this fight and so apparently with the educational establishment, so if it happens at all it will probably be a fudge.
So as figurehead policies go to define the tone of her premiership it doesn't seem that amazing for May, but the early options might be limited and she needs something to inspire the troops for more awkward times to come.
Its likely to be very good politically for May.
It's a popular policy to the public and I suspect especially so to people who might vote Conservative.
Its opposed by Labour and Tory posh boys.
So it should gain May support from the anti-establishment mood which is so strong at present.
Totally bonkers.
There is no great demand in the country to bring back grammars. This is pure Tory nostalgism - see also national service.
It is opposed by everyone in the reality-based community, which includes the mainstream media.
With disquiet in her own party, this seems like a major mis-step. Don't see she can get a majority in parliament, and certainly not in the Lords. And hardly good reason to call a general election on.
What's more, she's personally taken this on. Her own Ed Sec is unconvinced.
May is marking her cards as someone who takes a very long time to make a decision - and then ignores all the evidence in favour of a policy last seriously debated twenty years ago.
I fully expect the next big announcement to be the return of the cones hotline.
When you used the phrase 'reality-based community' you lost the argument in all those areas which were blue on the referendum map.
And that's why this issue is good for May politically.
"reality based community" is what people think of themselves as in areas that voted Yes to AV.
Yes, whatever. I'm just a centrist Conservative. No need to win over people like me. No sir.
Really? I thought you were a LD or soft Labour from your posts.
To be fair, it's possible to sound like an LD and yet lead the Conservative Party for 11 years.
No dog in this hunt, so don't care about grammar schools.
I see Fox is living up to my low expectations. However, as the story is based on reportage, I can't see it living beyond a couple of news cycles. If the story is true, then it's probably based on businesses not cartwheeling with joy at the prospect of hard Brexit.
As scandals go, it’s pretty tame, claiming British companies have grown fat and lazy should be regarded as a wakeup call, and to say managers are more concerned with playing golf is no more than what has been repeated on PB for years. - That said, I have no idea what talent he has shown in the past that warrants his return to a ministerial position, perhaps his appointment really was based on clearing up the mess he helped create. Personally I’d prefer a competent individual less prone to gaffs in his place, but MummaMaya obviously has her own plans.
The fat and lazy part, you can pass off as banter. More worrying is the bit where he complains about FDI.
He clearly has no understanding of the dynamics and economics of trade.
Florida: Trump +9 North Carolina: Trump +9 Iowa: Clinton +6 Arizona: Tie New Hampshire: Clinton +14 New Mexico: Trump +3 Nevada: Clinton +1 Ohio: Trump +6 Kansas : Clinton +2 Pennsylvania: Trump +2
For those who now are claiming that immediate job losses weren't promised if Leave won here's something from the day AFTER the referendum:
‘ If you perchance thought that your London banking job would be safe with Britain outside the European Union, you were seemingly wrong. Consultants working for leading strategy firms in London say banks have activated their contingency plans and that the London job cuts are about to come thick and fast.
“You’re looking at anything from 50,000 to 70,000 London finance jobs being moved overseas in the next 12 months,” predicts one consultant working with one of the top finance strategy firms in the City. “Jobs are going to be cut, and those cuts are going to start next week.” ‘
Eleven full weeks after the Leave vote and do we have any announcements of 'those cuts are going to start next week' ?
If that article is correct there should have been 10-15,000 job cuts already.
I was not a doom and gloom monger, and think the rot will take a while to be visible, but wasn't the above projection predicated on A50 being invoked the next day as promised by the PM?
I'm sure we're due a recession at some point between now and 2020, simply because we've had six years of growth.
Commentators always ignore the counterfactual - as the former Governor of the Bank of England would say.
For those who now are claiming that immediate job losses weren't promised if Leave won here's something from the day AFTER the referendum:
‘ If you perchance thought that your London banking job would be safe with Britain outside the European Union, you were seemingly wrong. Consultants working for leading strategy firms in London say banks have activated their contingency plans and that the London job cuts are about to come thick and fast.
“You’re looking at anything from 50,000 to 70,000 London finance jobs being moved overseas in the next 12 months,” predicts one consultant working with one of the top finance strategy firms in the City. “Jobs are going to be cut, and those cuts are going to start next week.” ‘
Eleven full weeks after the Leave vote and do we have any announcements of 'those cuts are going to start next week' ?
If that article is correct there should have been 10-15,000 job cuts already.
I was not a doom and gloom monger, and think the rot will take a while to be visible, but wasn't the above projection predicated on A50 being invoked the next day as promised by the PM?
I'm sure we're due a recession at some point between now and 2020, simply because we've had six years of growth.
Commentators always ignore the counterfactual - as the former Governor of the Bank of England would say.
Any economic bad news will be Brexit bad news from now until eternity. It's the 21st century 'Fatcha'.
No dog in this hunt, so don't care about grammar schools.
I see Fox is living up to my low expectations. However, as the story is based on reportage, I can't see it living beyond a couple of news cycles. If the story is true, then it's probably based on businesses not cartwheeling with joy at the prospect of hard Brexit.
As scandals go, it’s pretty tame, claiming British companies have grown fat and lazy should be regarded as a wakeup call, and to say managers are more concerned with playing golf is no more than what has been repeated on PB for years. - That said, I have no idea what talent he has shown in the past that warrants his return to a ministerial position, perhaps his appointment really was based on clearing up the mess he helped create. Personally I’d prefer a competent individual less prone to gaffs in his place, but MummaMaya obviously has her own plans.
The fat and lazy part, you can pass off as banter. More worrying is the bit where he complains about FDI.
He clearly has no understanding of the dynamics and economics of trade.
Education is one of those areas I don't quite understand why ut needs to be so very complicated. But leaving that aside, apparently not all conservatives will like the plan, the opposition parties will love this fight and so apparently with the educational establishment, so if it happens at all it will probably be a fudge.
So as figurehead policies go to define the tone of her premiership it doesn't seem that amazing for May, but the early options might be limited and she needs something to inspire the troops for more awkward times to come.
Its likely to be very good politically for May.
It's a popular policy to the public and I suspect especially so to people who might vote Conservative.
Its opposed by Labour and Tory posh boys.
So it should gain May support from the anti-establishment mood which is so strong at present.
Totally bonkers.
There is no great demand in the country to bring back grammars. This is pure Tory nostalgism - see also national service.
It is opposed by everyone in the reality-based community, which includes the mainstream media.
With disquiet in her own party, this seems like a major mis-step. Don't see she can get a majority in parliament, and certainly not in the Lords. And hardly good reason to call a general election on.
What's more, she's personally taken this on. Her own Ed Sec is unconvinced.
May is marking her cards as someone who takes a very long time to make a decision - and then ignores all the evidence in favour of a policy last seriously debated twenty years ago.
I fully expect the next big announcement to be the return of the cones hotline.
When you used the phrase 'reality-based community' you lost the argument in all those areas which were blue on the referendum map.
And that's why this issue is good for May politically.
If the debate comes down to fact versus superstition, then it is no real debate.
Where's your evidence that the grammar system supports improved outcomes and/or improved social mobility?
One person's fact is another person's superstition.
This year's fact is the past's and/or future's superstition.
This area's superstition is that area's fact.
In reality any new grammar schools are likely to be in a handful of Conservative controlled areas.
Now they might be beneficial or they might not be.
But some people - almost all of whom don't live in the areas that would be affected - are very opposed to finding out whether they would be beneficial or not.
And its the opposition of such people which is so politically advantageous to May.
Do I take it that those Conservative supporters here who oppose creating new grammar schools are also in favour in abolishing the existing grammar schools ?
And if not why not ?
The government has more important things to do than to muck about with educational structures once again. There has been too much of that already and a significant period of settling in is called for.
Governments meddle.
Do I take it you're opposed to City Region Mayors, HS2, Hinckley C and all the other detritus of Osborne's meddling mania ?
If this government's educational meddling is restricted to new grammar schools - probably no more than a dozen nationwide - then you should be very satisfied.
How is Hinckley C meddling? It is another very difficult decision to be sure, one that will impact on our competitiveness as a nation for several decades one way or another. Will we have too little base load without it or will we have too expensive power with it?
There are too many serious questions in the intray to waste time and political energy on frivolities.
Hinckley C is clearly government meddling as the government has set the price its output would be charged at.
And there are always too many serious questions in the intray to waste time and political energy on frivolities.
Yet frivolities are what governments concentrate on because they're easier and quicker or someone's vanity project.
The problem with Hinkley C was that it was designed at specified at a time when there was virtually no LNG in the world, the UK's natural gas output was declining (and no one had heard of shale gas), and before solar became a viable power source.
Its clearly now the wrong project from the wrong time period.
And the only thing which has stopped Hinkley C from been cancelled has been government meddling.
Hinkley was most recently supported by Amber Rudd and Ledsom when they were at the Dept of Energy. Both now moved away from Energy matters.
Education is one of those areas I don't quite understand why ut needs to be so very complicated. But leaving that aside, apparently not all conservatives will like the plan, the opposition parties will love this fight and so apparently with the educational establishment, so if it happens at all it will probably be a fudge.
So as figurehead policies go to define the tone of her premiership it doesn't seem that amazing for May, but the early options might be limited and she needs something to inspire the troops for more awkward times to come.
Its likely to be very good politically for May.
It's a popular policy to the public and I suspect especially so to people who might vote Conservative.
Its opposed by Labour and Tory posh boys.
So it should gain May support from the anti-establishment mood which is so strong at present.
Totally bonkers.
There is no great demand in the country to bring back grammars. This is pure Tory nostalgism - see also national service.
It is opposed by everyone in the reality-based community, which includes the mainstream media.
With disquiet in her own party, this seems like a major mis-step. Don't see she can get a majority in parliament, and certainly not in the Lords. And hardly good reason to call a general election on.
What's more, she's personally taken this on. Her own Ed Sec is unconvinced.
May is marking her cards as someone who takes a very long time to make a decision - and then ignores all the evidence in favour of a policy last seriously debated twenty years ago.
I fully expect the next big announcement to be the return of the cones hotline.
When you used the phrase 'reality-based community' you lost the argument in all those areas which were blue on the referendum map.
And that's why this issue is good for May politically.
If the debate comes down to fact versus superstition, then it is no real debate.
Where's your evidence that the grammar system supports improved outcomes and/or improved social mobility?
Political debate generally involves rival forms of superstition.
When you believe in things that you don't understand / Then you suffer / Superstition ain't the way…
I'm quite sure that in other circumstances (eg talking down to dreadful Euro w*gs) Fox would be happy to crow about those stats.
Something doesn't compute about those figures. Using this source, the UK exports less as a percentage of its GDP outside of the EU than Eurozone countries, even when Germany is excluded, and much less when you consider all exports including to elsewhere in the EU. There is no reason to exclude Germany or exports to the EU, of course
Liam Fox, who says "If you want to share in the prosperity of our country, you have a duty to contribute to the prosperity of our country." while promoting a Brexit that will directly lead to LESS prosperity, is an idiot. He does have a point however. We are not as good as we could be at exporting. It doesn't have much to do with the EU. Being members of the EU and the Euro doesn't stop our competitors being better at exporting than we are.
I believe leaving the EU is a mistake, but it's going ahead and we have to make the best of it. I also believe in making the most of a good crisis. This is stuff we should be dealing with anyway. Maybe Brexit will galvanise us into action. The problem, though, is that the Leave camp think Brexit is the sunlit uplands and there isn't a crisis to make the most of.
Shorthand from an arch europhile that whatever we do it will be worse than being in the EU and it will be impossible to get any meaningful agreement from these spiteful Europeans.
Clegg's obviously bitter that his EU job prospects are zero.
Education is one of those areas I don't quite understand why ut needs to be so very complicated. But leaving that aside, apparently not all conservatives will like the plan, the opposition parties will love this fight and so apparently with the educational establishment, so if it happens at all it will probably be a fudge.
So as figurehead policies go to define the tone of her premiership it doesn't seem that amazing for May, but the early options might be limited and she needs something to inspire the troops for more awkward times to come.
Its likely to be very good politically for May.
It's a popular policy to the public and I suspect especially so to people who might vote Conservative.
Its opposed by Labour and Tory posh boys.
So it should gain May support from the anti-establishment mood which is so strong at present.
Totally bonkers.
There is no great demand in the country to bring back grammars. This is pure Tory nostalgism - see also national service.
It is opposed by everyone in the reality-based community, which includes the mainstream media.
With disquiet in her own party, this seems like a major mis-step. Don't see she can get a majority in parliament, and certainly not in the Lords. And hardly good reason to call a general election on.
What's more, she's personally taken this on. Her own Ed Sec is unconvinced.
May is marking her cards as someone who takes a very long time to make a decision - and then ignores all the evidence in favour of a policy last seriously debated twenty years ago.
I fully expect the next big announcement to be the return of the cones hotline.
When you used the phrase 'reality-based community' you lost the argument in all those areas which were blue on the referendum map.
And that's why this issue is good for May politically.
If the debate comes down to fact versus superstition, then it is no real debate.
Where's your evidence that the grammar system supports improved outcomes and/or improved social mobility?
The evidence is those of us who went to grammar school.
However, I was the only child to go to the grammar from my junior school and I don't think anyone had ever gone before, although there was a rumour that one child had previously passed the 11 plus but chose to stay with his mates at a church school.
What is needed is for proper coaching of children in school for the 11 plus test so as to equal their opportunities against those privately coached.
Wasn't Clegg a big cheese in the EU at one point? I do believe he gets a very good pension from them as well. Anyway to your point about Cleggs 2nd paper.....
Clegg was secretary to Leon Brittan, when he was EU TRADE commissioner. So he might know what he is talking about.
Nick Clegg has rather a history of NOT knowing what he's talking about.
There is no great demand in the country to bring back grammars. This is pure Tory nostalgism - see also national service.
It is opposed by everyone in the reality-based community, which includes the mainstream media.
With disquiet in her own party, this seems like a major mis-step. Don't see she can get a majority in parliament, and certainly not in the Lords. And hardly good reason to call a general election on.
What's more, she's personally taken this on. Her own Ed Sec is unconvinced.
May is marking her cards as someone who takes a very long time to make a decision - and then ignores all the evidence in favour of a policy last seriously debated twenty years ago.
I fully expect the next big announcement to be the return of the cones hotline.
When you used the phrase 'reality-based community' you lost the argument in all those areas which were blue on the referendum map.
And that's why this issue is good for May politically.
If the debate comes down to fact versus superstition, then it is no real debate.
Where's your evidence that the grammar system supports improved outcomes and/or improved social mobility?
One person's fact is another person's superstition.
This year's fact is the past's and/or future's superstition.
This area's superstition is that area's fact.
In reality any new grammar schools are likely to be in a handful of Conservative controlled areas.
Now they might be beneficial or they might not be.
But some people - almost all of whom don't live in the areas that would be affected - are very opposed to finding out whether they would be beneficial or not.
And its the opposition of such people which is so politically advantageous to May.
I take your point on the likely limited scope of any new grammars.
But I don't get why it is politically advantageous for May to generate opposition of this sort. If this is to be a government against the London metro chattering classes - fine, and long overdue - but I'm not convinced that hostility to grammars really does divide the country so neatly.
The anti-grammarians are not all public school educated snooty lefties a la Harman. There's a lot of us, including many with a working class/lower middle class background.
Do I take it that those Conservative supporters here who oppose creating new grammar schools are also in favour in abolishing the existing grammar schools ?
And if not why not ?
Grammar schools are not my specialist subject. Study after study have found they don't do what they are trumpeted as doing. @Richard_Tyndall mentioned a Sutton Trust report which said they do indeed aid social mobility (I think, he might have been making a related point). Having turbo googled a bit I can't find it. Although there are plenty like this Grammar Schools widen the gap betwen rich and poor
So would I seek to abolish existing grammar schools? It seems even with their imperfections it might be too disruptive to do so, but if they don't do what they are supposed to do, then I wouldn't be against making them into free schools or somesuch.
The simple problem is that eceryone discusses grammar schools in isolation. If course dividing people into "bright" and "not bright" is divisive and unhelpful especially if the split is perceived as arbitrary/unjust
however as part of a well thought out system - academically selective schools, techical/STEM schools, schools for kids with specific talents (e.g. music), etc it can play an important role.
There is no great demand in the country to bring back grammars. This is pure Tory nostalgism - see also national service.
It is opposed by everyone in the reality-based community, which includes the mainstream media.
With disquiet in her own party, this seems like a major mis-step. Don't see she can get a majority in parliament, and certainly not in the Lords. And hardly good reason to call a general election on.
What's more, she's personally taken this on. Her own Ed Sec is unconvinced.
May is marking her cards as someone who takes a very long time to make a decision - and then ignores all the evidence in favour of a policy last seriously debated twenty years ago.
I fully expect the next big announcement to be the return of the cones hotline.
When you used the phrase 'reality-based community' you lost the argument in all those areas which were blue on the referendum map.
And that's why this issue is good for May politically.
If the debate comes down to fact versus superstition, then it is no real debate.
Where's your evidence that the grammar system supports improved outcomes and/or improved social mobility?
One person's fact is another person's superstition.
This year's fact is the past's and/or future's superstition.
This area's superstition is that area's fact.
In reality any new grammar schools are likely to be in a handful of Conservative controlled areas.
Now they might be beneficial or they might not be.
But some people - almost all of whom don't live in the areas that would be affected - are very opposed to finding out whether they would be beneficial or not.
And its the opposition of such people which is so politically advantageous to May.
I take your point on the likely limited scope of any new grammars.
But I don't get why it is politically advantageous for May to generate opposition of this sort. If this is to be a government against the London metro chattering classes - fine, and long overdue - but I'm not convinced that hostility to grammars really does divide the country so neatly.
The anti-grammarians are not all public school educated snooty lefties a la Harman. There's a lot of us, including many with a working class/lower middle class background.
The people for whom the grammar school policy is a vote changing issue either will change to Tory because of it or were not going to vote Tory anyway.
Re. Grammers. The Sun is happy, the left are in uproar and reaction on PB is "mixed". This policy (which MIGHT be voted down by Commons but certainly WILL be voted down by the Lords) might also also give Theresa the cover she needs to have an "emergency" election if she desires it.
I's say job done.
Re. Dr Fox. There is of course some merit in what he's said about UK business leaders (remember the vast majority of these CEO's were lined up against Brexit) but this probably isn't the time to voice it.
That said, a well aimed kick up the ARSE now and again never hurt anyone... I'm sure these CEO's dish it out to their staff on a regular basis after all...
Shorthand from an arch europhile that whatever we do it will be worse than being in the EU and it will be impossible to get any meaningful agreement from these spiteful Europeans.
Clegg's obviously bitter that his EU job prospects are zero.
Actually, I think that he is looking more statesman like with time.
Increasingly the Coalition looks like a golden age of mostly sane government, Clegg is young and well presented. If Farron fails to make progress then in 2020 Clegg could easily return as Leader.
"It is absolutely crucial the PM does not overlook those for whom a grammar isn’t right."
"Grammar Schools" was a small part of a wide ranging speech yesterday. The way people have focused on this single element suggests an astute politician behind it...
"When you believe in things that you don't understand / Then you suffer / Superstition ain't the way… Stevie Wonder."
A wise man.
Yet we believe in quantum theory even though Feynman said. "If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don't understand quantum mechanics", and no one has ever claimed to really understand it.
Multiverses, the nature of time, and what exactly is contained in a vacuum? As the Copenhagen interpretation hints at ... "Shut up and do the maths."
Infinities? Cantor had a mathematical go but no one has tamed them really, even mathematics.
I always had doubts about field theory. Is everything entangled and does space really exist?
Science gets along by saying we're just a species that evolved on an odd planet with special characteristics. So our brain can't grasp these difficult concepts. Isn't it good we have maths that can hint at eleven dimensions - concepts we'll never understand.
I'm quite sure that in other circumstances (eg talking down to dreadful Euro w*gs) Fox would be happy to crow about those stats.
Something doesn't compute about those figures. Using this source, the UK exports less as a percentage of its GDP outside of the EU than Eurozone countries, even when Germany is excluded, and much less when you consider all exports including to elsewhere in the EU. There is no reason to exclude Germany or exports to the EU, of course
Liam Fox, who says "If you want to share in the prosperity of our country, you have a duty to contribute to the prosperity of our country." while promoting a Brexit that will directly lead to LESS prosperity, is an idiot. He does have a point however. We are not as good as we could be at exporting. It doesn't have much to do with the EU. Being members of the EU and the Euro doesn't stop our competitors being better at exporting than we are.
I believe leaving the EU is a mistake, but it's going ahead and we have to make the best of it. I also believe in making the most of a good crisis. This is stuff we should be dealing with anyway. Maybe Brexit will galvanise us into action. The problem, though, is that the Leave camp think Brexit is the sunlit uplands and there isn't a crisis to make the most of.
I'm not sure that this is entirely fair. If not amongst the politicians, then certainly amongst the media commentariat there has been a fair share of admissions of both surprise and relief that the Brexit shock has not - so far - been greater than it has. Many were expecting worse.
Most Leavers are aware that success outside of the EU is not guaranteed, that it requires hard work and the right policies, and that there are liable to be setbacks along the way. The fact that they regard Brexit as an upheaval, but above all as both an opportunity and a source of relief, rather than as some epoch-making crisis, should not automatically be construed as a blind, Panglossian faith in the future.
The British population does not consist entirely of weeping, grief-stricken Europhiles and tub-thumping hardline nationalists. Most of us are in various places in between the two extremes, are we not?
Do I take it that those Conservative supporters here who oppose creating new grammar schools are also in favour in abolishing the existing grammar schools ?
And if not why not ?
Grammar schools are not my specialist subject. Study after study have found they don't do what they are trumpeted as doing. @Richard_Tyndall mentioned a Sutton Trust report which said they do indeed aid social mobility (I think, he might have been making a related point). Having turbo googled a bit I can't find it. Although there are plenty like this Grammar Schools widen the gap betwen rich and poor
So would I seek to abolish existing grammar schools? It seems even with their imperfections it might be too disruptive to do so, but if they don't do what they are supposed to do, then I wouldn't be against making them into free schools or somesuch.
The simple problem is that eceryone discusses grammar schools in isolation. If course dividing people into "bright" and "not bright" is divisive and unhelpful especially if the split is perceived as arbitrary/unjust
however as part of a well thought out system - academically selective schools, techical/STEM schools, schools for kids with specific talents (e.g. music), etc it can play an important role.
Yes but apart from cursory nods it seems that those announcing the policy make the same mistake.
Whole new integrated education system? I get it albeit it's more tinkering.
I take your point on the likely limited scope of any new grammars.
But I don't get why it is politically advantageous for May to generate opposition of this sort. If this is to be a government against the London metro chattering classes - fine, and long overdue - but I'm not convinced that hostility to grammars really does divide the country so neatly.
The anti-grammarians are not all public school educated snooty lefties a la Harman. There's a lot of us, including many with a working class/lower middle class background.
The people for whom the grammar school policy is a vote changing issue either will change to Tory because of it or were not going to vote Tory anyway.
It is a win:no lose policy.
Centrists don't have anywhere to go, it's true. But we can sit on our hands.
The great opp. for May right now is to park her tanks on Labour's lawn, on behalf of the left behind - the hard working families and those outside London and its hinterland.
As she said:
It means taking on some big challenges, tackling some vested interests. Overcoming barriers that have been constructed over many years.
A pro-grammar position, valuable maybe as a dog-whistle to Ukippers, alienates more than it attracts. If May really is to take on the big challenges, she needs to do so with the centrists behind her.
Shorthand from an arch europhile that whatever we do it will be worse than being in the EU and it will be impossible to get any meaningful agreement from these spiteful Europeans.
Clegg's obviously bitter that his EU job prospects are zero.
Actually, I think that he is looking more statesman like with time.
Increasingly the Coalition looks like a golden age of mostly sane government, Clegg is young and well presented. If Farron fails to make progress then in 2020 Clegg could easily return as Leader.
Seems highly unlikely. And even if he did then whom, outside of the circles of politics and of political anoraks, would very much notice or care?
The Lib Dems are a minor party again. Like the Greens, outside of the handful of places where they are still influential in local government, they matter not a jot.
Shorthand from an arch europhile that whatever we do it will be worse than being in the EU and it will be impossible to get any meaningful agreement from these spiteful Europeans.
Clegg's obviously bitter that his EU job prospects are zero.
Actually, I think that he is looking more statesman like with time.
Increasingly the Coalition looks like a golden age of mostly sane government, Clegg is young and well presented. If Farron fails to make progress then in 2020 Clegg could easily return as Leader.
Seems highly unlikely. And even if he did then whom, outside of the circles of politics and of political anoraks, would very much notice or care?
The Lib Dems are a minor party again. Like the Greens, outside of the handful of places where they are still influential in local government, they matter not a jot.
Did you read any of Clegg's memoir extracts? He comes across as embarrassingly naive.
On the other hand, imagine having Cable and Huhne as your conniving deputies.
Shorthand from an arch europhile that whatever we do it will be worse than being in the EU and it will be impossible to get any meaningful agreement from these spiteful Europeans.
Clegg's obviously bitter that his EU job prospects are zero.
Actually, I think that he is looking more statesman like with time.
Increasingly the Coalition looks like a golden age of mostly sane government, Clegg is young and well presented. If Farron fails to make progress then in 2020 Clegg could easily return as Leader.
Seems highly unlikely. And even if he did then whom, outside of the circles of politics and of political anoraks, would very much notice or care?
The Lib Dems are a minor party again. Like the Greens, outside of the handful of places where they are still influential in local government, they matter not a jot.
Except they have enormous potential, given the vacuum that is opening up for a non-Tory alternative as Labour self-immolate.
"It is absolutely crucial the PM does not overlook those for whom a grammar isn’t right."
"Grammar Schools" was a small part of a wide ranging speech yesterday. The way people have focused on this single element suggests an astute politician behind it...
And way more people will read the very positive Sun leader today, than saw the speech yesterday.
The new PM has got the biggest selling newspaper very much on side, in the first week back. Job done.
Do I take it that those Conservative supporters here who oppose creating new grammar schools are also in favour in abolishing the existing grammar schools ?
And if not why not ?
Grammar schools are not my specialist subject. Study after study have found they don't do what they are trumpeted as doing. @Richard_Tyndall mentioned a Sutton Trust report which said they do indeed aid social mobility (I think, he might have been making a related point). Having turbo googled a bit I can't find it. Although there are plenty like this Grammar Schools widen the gap betwen rich and poor
So would I seek to abolish existing grammar schools? It seems even with their imperfections it might be too disruptive to do so, but if they don't do what they are supposed to do, then I wouldn't be against making them into free schools or somesuch.
The simple problem is that eceryone discusses grammar schools in isolation. If course dividing people into "bright" and "not bright" is divisive and unhelpful especially if the split is perceived as arbitrary/unjust
however as part of a well thought out system - academically selective schools, techical/STEM schools, schools for kids with specific talents (e.g. music), etc it can play an important role.
Yes but apart from cursory nods it seems that those announcing the policy make the same mistake.
Whole new integrated education system? I get it albeit it's more tinkering.
But May just announced the grammar school bit.
If selection is to have a scheme for non academic selection then it does need a positive option for these children. Possibly education aimed at apprenticeships or technical skills as in Germany (where the Bismarkean system looks much better than our welfare state).
In practice though it sounds as if there is little planning of this, and these children will be left to their own feral devices. That may well suit their parents as no hassle involved but is probably not good for society.
Secondary Moderns did not work before and are probably going to be worse in the future. The nature of the job market has changed over the last 50 years.
I certainly valued my own grammar school in the late '50s. But the 11+ didn't do a lot for those of my family who didn't "pass".
I know little of secondary education now, although there is a Comprehensive with Sixth form, fed by a Middle School structure, in Dorset which seems to be performing rather well.
But the real danger to education, in the broadest sense, is the destruction of libraries.
I take your point on the likely limited scope of any new grammars.
But I don't get why it is politically advantageous for May to generate opposition of this sort. If this is to be a government against the London metro chattering classes - fine, and long overdue - but I'm not convinced that hostility to grammars really does divide the country so neatly.
The anti-grammarians are not all public school educated snooty lefties a la Harman. There's a lot of us, including many with a working class/lower middle class background.
The people for whom the grammar school policy is a vote changing issue either will change to Tory because of it or were not going to vote Tory anyway.
It is a win:no lose policy.
Centrists don't have anywhere to go, it's true. But we can sit on our hands.
The great opp. for May right now is to park her tanks on Labour's lawn, on behalf of the left behind - the hard working families and those outside London and its hinterland.
As she said:
It means taking on some big challenges, tackling some vested interests. Overcoming barriers that have been constructed over many years.
A pro-grammar position, valuable maybe as a dog-whistle to Ukippers, alienates more than it attracts. If May really is to take on the big challenges, she needs to do so with the centrists behind her.
I guess you missed the vox pops with people in poorer areas on the school run yesterday. And the you gov 25-39 subsamples.
Both areas in which us Tories can improve our vote. May has rightly spotted that in the wake of the Brexit vote, tilting to the democratic social liberals gets no votes. Grammar schools firmly put May on the lawn of aspirational C1s and C2s.
Shorthand from an arch europhile that whatever we do it will be worse than being in the EU and it will be impossible to get any meaningful agreement from these spiteful Europeans.
Clegg's obviously bitter that his EU job prospects are zero.
Actually, I think that he is looking more statesman like with time.
Increasingly the Coalition looks like a golden age of mostly sane government, Clegg is young and well presented. If Farron fails to make progress then in 2020 Clegg could easily return as Leader.
Seems highly unlikely. And even if he did then whom, outside of the circles of politics and of political anoraks, would very much notice or care?
The Lib Dems are a minor party again. Like the Greens, outside of the handful of places where they are still influential in local government, they matter not a jot.
I don't think Clegg will ever overcome his unfavourables. Mostly because they are likely highest with those who have ever voted LD.
I certainly valued my own grammar school in the late '50s. But the 11+ didn't do a lot for those of my family who didn't "pass".
I know little of secondary education now, although there is a Comprehensive with Sixth form, fed by a Middle School structure, in Dorset which seems to be performing rather well.
But the real danger to education, in the broadest sense, is the destruction of libraries.
Labour councils cutting libraries mostly, isn't it?
The internet really supersedes central libraries. The sadness was the closure of branch libraries.
Do I take it that those Conservative supporters here who oppose creating new grammar schools are also in favour in abolishing the existing grammar schools ?
And if not why not ?
The government has more important things to do than to muck about with educational structures once again. There has been too much of that already and a significant period of settling in is called for.
Governments meddle.
Do I take it you're opposed to City Region Mayors, HS2, Hinckley C and all the other detritus of Osborne's meddling mania ?
If this government's educational meddling is restricted to new grammar schools - probably no more than a dozen nationwide - then you should be very satisfied.
How is Hinckley C meddling? It is another very difficult decision to be sure, one that will impact on our competitiveness as a nation for several decades one way or another. Will we have too little base load without it or will we have too expensive power with it?
There are too many serious questions in the intray to waste time and political energy on frivolities.
Hinckley C is clearly government meddling as the government has set the price its output would be charged at.
And there are always too many serious questions in the intray to waste time and political energy on frivolities.
Yet frivolities are what governments concentrate on because they're easier and quicker or someone's vanity project.
The problem with Hinkley C was that it was designed at specified at a time when there was virtually no LNG in the world, the UK's natural gas output was declining (and no one had heard of shale gas), and before solar became a viable power source.
Its clearly now the wrong project from the wrong time period.
And the only thing which has stopped Hinkley C from been cancelled has been government meddling.
I take your point on the likely limited scope of any new grammars.
But I don't get why it is politically advantageous for May to generate opposition of this sort. If this is to be a government against the London metro chattering classes - fine, and long overdue - but I'm not convinced that hostility to grammars really does divide the country so neatly.
The anti-grammarians are not all public school educated snooty lefties a la Harman. There's a lot of us, including many with a working class/lower middle class background.
The people for whom the grammar school policy is a vote changing issue either will change to Tory because of it or were not going to vote Tory anyway.
It is a win:no lose policy.
Centrists don't have anywhere to go, it's true. But we can sit on our hands.
The great opp. for May right now is to park her tanks on Labour's lawn, on behalf of the left behind - the hard working families and those outside London and its hinterland.
As she said:
It means taking on some big challenges, tackling some vested interests. Overcoming barriers that have been constructed over many years.
A pro-grammar position, valuable maybe as a dog-whistle to Ukippers, alienates more than it attracts. If May really is to take on the big challenges, she needs to do so with the centrists behind her.
I rather think the opposite. Grammars are likely to attract more voters than they repel.
And the Conservatives are in the perfect position not to have to worry about the fluid, politically uncommitted floating vote. It's not merely that they have nowhere to go, it's that the moderate (i.e. non left-liberal) majority of the middle class have an active incentive to vote for the Conservatives. It's why the Yellow Tory vote deserted the Lib Dems en masse in 2015 and ruined them.
Moderate voters need to keep backing the Tories to ensure that Labour can never return to power at the head of a coalition of the defeated, and a coalition in which Scottish Nationalism would be pulling the strings at that. The imperative has only increased hugely since the last election, with the replacement of Miliband with Corbyn.
Nothing short of a zombie apocalypse is likely to drive the 37% of voters who backed Cameron out of the Tory camp before the next election, whenever that is. That alone would be enough to win narrowly now, or comfortably after the boundary reforms. And nobody thinks it likely that Corbyn will attract enough voters to match even the 31% that Miliband managed last time.
For May, capturing voters from Ukip and what's left of the Labour core is not about winning the next election, it's about winning the one after that. A Tory landslide would practically guarantee the party another ten years in office.
Shorthand from an arch europhile that whatever we do it will be worse than being in the EU and it will be impossible to get any meaningful agreement from these spiteful Europeans.
Clegg's obviously bitter that his EU job prospects are zero.
Clegg's wife is a lawyer in trade matters so would also have been able to provide input to the article. Maybe they will end up as trade advisors to the government.
However, the article is somewhat biased by including in the EU figures trade deals under negotiation (eg with the USA) along with those in place.
Do I take it that those Conservative supporters here who oppose creating new grammar schools are also in favour in abolishing the existing grammar schools ?
And if not why not ?
The government has more important things to do than to muck about with educational structures once again. There has been too much of that already and a significant period of settling in is called for.
Governments meddle.
Do I take it you're opposed to City Region Mayors, HS2, Hinckley C and all the other detritus of Osborne's meddling mania ?
If this government's educational meddling is restricted to new grammar schools - probably no more than a dozen nationwide - then you should be very satisfied.
How is Hinckley C meddling? It is another very difficult decision to be sure, one that will impact on our competitiveness as a nation for several decades one way or another. Will we have too little base load without it or will we have too expensive power with it?
There are too many serious questions in the intray to waste time and political energy on frivolities.
Hinckley C is clearly government meddling as the government has set the price its output would be charged at.
And there are always too many serious questions in the intray to waste time and political energy on frivolities.
Yet frivolities are what governments concentrate on because they're easier and quicker or someone's vanity project.
The problem with Hinkley C was that it was designed at specified at a time when there was virtually no LNG in the world, the UK's natural gas output was declining (and no one had heard of shale gas), and before solar became a viable power source.
Its clearly now the wrong project from the wrong time period.
And the only thing which has stopped Hinkley C from been cancelled has been government meddling.
Agreed 100%
The decision of May to call a halt to it was brave - not in the Hackeresque sense, but truly, actually brave. I am most impressed.
Do I take it that those Conservative supporters here who oppose creating new grammar schools are also in favour in abolishing the existing grammar schools ?
And if not why not ?
The government has more important things to do than to muck about with educational structures once again. There has been too much of that already and a significant period of settling in is called for.
Governments meddle.
Do I take it you're opposed to City Region Mayors, HS2, Hinckley C and all the other detritus of Osborne's meddling mania ?
If this government's educational meddling is restricted to new grammar schools - probably no more than a dozen nationwide - then you should be very satisfied.
How is Hinckley C meddling? It is another very difficult decision to be sure, one that will impact on our competitiveness as a nation for several decades one way or another. Will we have too little base load without it or will we have too expensive power with it?
There are too many serious questions in the intray to waste time and political energy on frivolities.
Hinckley C is clearly government meddling as the government has set the price its output would be charged at.
And there are always too many serious questions in the intray to waste time and political energy on frivolities.
Yet frivolities are what governments concentrate on because they're easier and quicker or someone's vanity project.
The problem with Hinkley C was that it was designed at specified at a time when there was virtually no LNG in the world, the UK's natural gas output was declining (and no one had heard of shale gas), and before solar became a viable power source.
Its clearly now the wrong project from the wrong time period.
And the only thing which has stopped Hinkley C from been cancelled has been government meddling.
But I don't get why it is politically advantageous for May to generate opposition of this sort. If this is to be a government against the London metro chattering classes - fine, and long overdue - but I'm not convinced that hostility to grammars really does divide the country so neatly.
The anti-grammarians are not all public school educated snooty lefties a la Harman. There's a lot of us, including many with a working class/lower middle class background.
The people for whom the grammar school policy is a vote changing issue either will change to Tory because of it or were not going to vote Tory anyway.
It is a win:no lose policy.
Centrists don't have anywhere to go, it's true. But we can sit on our hands.
The great opp. for May right now is to park her tanks on Labour's lawn, on behalf of the left behind - the hard working families and those outside London and its hinterland.
As she said:
It means taking on some big challenges, tackling some vested interests. Overcoming barriers that have been constructed over many years.
A pro-grammar position, valuable maybe as a dog-whistle to Ukippers, alienates more than it attracts. If May really is to take on the big challenges, she needs to do so with the centrists behind her.
I rather think the opposite. Grammars are likely to attract more voters than they repel.
And the Conservatives are in the perfect position not to have to worry about the fluid, politically uncommitted floating vote. It's not merely that they have nowhere to go, it's that the moderate (i.e. non left-liberal) majority of the middle class have an active incentive to vote for the Conservatives. It's why the Yellow Tory vote deserted the Lib Dems en masse in 2015 and ruined them.
Moderate voters need to keep backing the Tories to ensure that Labour can never return to power at the head of a coalition of the defeated, and a coalition in which Scottish Nationalism would be pulling the strings at that. The imperative has only increased hugely since the last election, with the replacement of Miliband with Corbyn.
Nothing short of a zombie apocalypse is likely to drive the 37% of voters who backed Cameron out of the Tory camp before the next election, whenever that is. That alone would be enough to win narrowly now, or comfortably after the boundary reforms. And nobody thinks it likely that Corbyn will attract enough voters to match even the 31% that Miliband managed last time.
For May, capturing voters from Ukip and what's left of the Labour core is not about winning the next election, it's about winning the one after that. A Tory landslide would practically guarantee the party another ten years in office.
But the real danger to education, in the broadest sense, is the destruction of libraries.
Nonsense. The Victorian idea of a place with a massive load of books where one goes to educate one self is totally outdated. We now have this thing called the internet, which can provide more information in many different ways. For kids, something like Khan academy is a far superior resource than a massive pile of GCSE textbooks.
Even university libraries are massively reducing the amount of physical books they carry, instead their job is often managing the wide ranging subscriptions for journals and e-versions of texts, while academics don't actually set foot in the physical location because they access all this information via their pc.
LOL presumably the author doesn't eat pizzas or other "culturally appropriated" foods. Or clothes that originated in other countries. Perhaps she should drop using idioms and expressions that are actually other peoples. Mind you that wouldn't leave her with much language she could use. Hmm not a bad idea.
The poor dear, she certainly doesn’t take kindly to reality, piercing her safe-space existence.
She reminds me of a PB regular who appears never to have experience a differing opinion in her life and gets in a huff when others question her dogmata.
Shorthand from an arch europhile that whatever we do it will be worse than being in the EU and it will be impossible to get any meaningful agreement from these spiteful Europeans.
Clegg's obviously bitter that his EU job prospects are zero.
Actually, I think that he is looking more statesman like with time.
Increasingly the Coalition looks like a golden age of mostly sane government, Clegg is young and well presented. If Farron fails to make progress then in 2020 Clegg could easily return as Leader.
Have you already forgotten how the LDs spent half the time pretending to be in opposition?
Shorthand from an arch europhile that whatever we do it will be worse than being in the EU and it will be impossible to get any meaningful agreement from these spiteful Europeans.
Clegg's obviously bitter that his EU job prospects are zero.
Actually, I think that he is looking more statesman like with time.
Increasingly the Coalition looks like a golden age of mostly sane government, Clegg is young and well presented. If Farron fails to make progress then in 2020 Clegg could easily return as Leader.
Seems highly unlikely. And even if he did then whom, outside of the circles of politics and of political anoraks, would very much notice or care?
The Lib Dems are a minor party again. Like the Greens, outside of the handful of places where they are still influential in local government, they matter not a jot.
Did you read any of Clegg's memoir extracts? He comes across as embarrassingly naive.
On the other hand, imagine having Cable and Huhne as your conniving deputies.
I'm tempted to say that I'd rather have my eyes gouged out with a blunt stick, but I'm sure that they can't have been that bad. But no, I much prefer reading about history than modern politics. Make of that what you will.
I don't think that the man deserves most of the vilification that has been heaped upon him by the screaming lefties, though. Almost everyone was in a panic about the Great Recession back in 2010, a stable administration was called for, and the only Government made viable by the election result was the Con/Lib Coalition. Clegg had no real choice, after all those years that his party spent extoling the virtues of coalitions and balanced parliaments, but as soon as he made the pact with the devil he was doomed. A salutary lesson about the pratfalls of PR.
I rather think the opposite. Grammars are likely to attract more voters than they repel.
And the Conservatives are in the perfect position not to have to worry about the fluid, politically uncommitted floating vote. It's not merely that they have nowhere to go, it's that the moderate (i.e. non left-liberal) majority of the middle class have an active incentive to vote for the Conservatives. It's why the Yellow Tory vote deserted the Lib Dems en masse in 2015 and ruined them.
Moderate voters need to keep backing the Tories to ensure that Labour can never return to power at the head of a coalition of the defeated, and a coalition in which Scottish Nationalism would be pulling the strings at that. The imperative has only increased hugely since the last election, with the replacement of Miliband with Corbyn.
Nothing short of a zombie apocalypse is likely to drive the 37% of voters who backed Cameron out of the Tory camp before the next election, whenever that is. That alone would be enough to win narrowly now, or comfortably after the boundary reforms. And nobody thinks it likely that Corbyn will attract enough voters to match even the 31% that Miliband managed last time.
For May, capturing voters from Ukip and what's left of the Labour core is not about winning the next election, it's about winning the one after that. A Tory landslide would practically guarantee the party another ten years in office.
Could not have put it better. Absolutely this.
Ditto.
Regarding grammars - it's all about the brand. They're associated with discipline, good grades, keen pupils with parents who care about education, teachers who rarely go on strike or take politically correct stances. Kids are expected to do their homework and parents care that they do. They'll also support the enforcement of uniform/haircut policy.
That's the attraction. Now of course there are lots of comprehensive schools who share these characteristics - but it's not what their brand is associated with. Academies are a halfway house between the two. Academies/Free Schools are for parents who actually wanted a grammar type environment but couldn't get it before and/or are ideologically opposed to the 11+ as was.
The aim is obviously to make all types of schools *good* - how a parent defines *good* is the real issue. Some want academic success, others a wide variety of social backgrounds mixing, or a particular strength in certain areas or whatever. More the merrier I say provided they meet national standards set by HMG.
Do I take it that those Conservative supporters here who oppose creating new grammar schools are also in favour in abolishing the existing grammar schools ?
And if not why not ?
The government has more important things to do than to muck about with educational structures once again. There has been too much of that already and a significant period of settling in is called for.
Governments meddle.
Do I take it you're opposed to City Region Mayors, HS2, Hinckley C and all the other detritus of Osborne's meddling mania ?
If this government's educational meddling is restricted to new grammar schools - probably no more than a dozen nationwide - then you should be very satisfied.
How is Hinckley C meddling? It is another very difficult decision to be sure, one that will impact on our competitiveness as a nation for several decades one way or another. Will we have too little base load without it or will we have too expensive power with it?
There are too many serious questions in the intray to waste time and political energy on frivolities.
Hinckley C is clearly government meddling as the government has set the price its output would be charged at.
And there are always too many serious questions in the intray to waste time and political energy on frivolities.
Yet frivolities are what governments concentrate on because they're easier and quicker or someone's vanity project.
The problem with Hinkley C was that it was designed at specified at a time when there was virtually no LNG in the world, the UK's natural gas output was declining (and no one had heard of shale gas), and before solar became a viable power source.
Its clearly now the wrong project from the wrong time period.
And the only thing which has stopped Hinkley C from been cancelled has been government meddling.
Agreed 100%
The decision of May to call a halt to it was brave - not in the Hackeresque sense, but truly, actually brave. I am most impressed.
Though she's only paused it, not cancelled it. We wait to see the actual outcome.
Shorthand from an arch europhile that whatever we do it will be worse than being in the EU and it will be impossible to get any meaningful agreement from these spiteful Europeans.
Clegg's obviously bitter that his EU job prospects are zero.
Actually, I think that he is looking more statesman like with time.
Increasingly the Coalition looks like a golden age of mostly sane government, Clegg is young and well presented. If Farron fails to make progress then in 2020 Clegg could easily return as Leader.
Seems highly unlikely. And even if he did then whom, outside of the circles of politics and of political anoraks, would very much notice or care?
The Lib Dems are a minor party again. Like the Greens, outside of the handful of places where they are still influential in local government, they matter not a jot.
Did you read any of Clegg's memoir extracts? He comes across as embarrassingly naive.
On the other hand, imagine having Cable and Huhne as your conniving deputies.
I'm tempted to say that I'd rather have my eyes gouged out with a blunt stick, but I'm sure that they can't have been that bad. But no, I much prefer reading about history than modern politics. Make of that what you will.
I don't think that the man deserves most of the vilification that has been heaped upon him by the screaming lefties, though. Almost everyone was in a panic about the Great Recession back in 2010, a stable administration was called for, and the only Government made viable by the election result was the Con/Lib Coalition. Clegg had no real choice, after all those years that his party spent extoling the virtues of coalitions and balanced parliaments, but as soon as he made the pact with the devil he was doomed. A salutary lesson about the pratfalls of PR.
Agreed. More sinned against than sinning.
But the LDs are finished, and this took place on Clegg's watch. It's clear that even if optimally positioned between Corbyn's Kool-Aiders and the headbanging Brexiteers, they have neither the intellectual chops, the political talent, or the balls, to actually achieve anything.
Shorthand from an arch europhile that whatever we do it will be worse than being in the EU and it will be impossible to get any meaningful agreement from these spiteful Europeans.
Clegg's obviously bitter that his EU job prospects are zero.
Actually, I think that he is looking more statesman like with time.
Increasingly the Coalition looks like a golden age of mostly sane government, Clegg is young and well presented. If Farron fails to make progress then in 2020 Clegg could easily return as Leader.
Seems highly unlikely. And even if he did then whom, outside of the circles of politics and of political anoraks, would very much notice or care?
The Lib Dems are a minor party again. Like the Greens, outside of the handful of places where they are still influential in local government, they matter not a jot.
Did you read any of Clegg's memoir extracts? He comes across as embarrassingly naive.
On the other hand, imagine having Cable and Huhne as your conniving deputies.
I'm tempted to say that I'd rather have my eyes gouged out with a blunt stick, but I'm sure that they can't have been that bad. But no, I much prefer reading about history than modern politics. Make of that what you will.
I don't think that the man deserves most of the vilification that has been heaped upon him by the screaming lefties, though. Almost everyone was in a panic about the Great Recession back in 2010, a stable administration was called for, and the only Government made viable by the election result was the Con/Lib Coalition. Clegg had no real choice, after all those years that his party spent extoling the virtues of coalitions and balanced parliaments, but as soon as he made the pact with the devil he was doomed. A salutary lesson about the pratfalls of PR.
Maybe Clegg will become a national treasure - at which point he could emerge as Lib Dem leader again.
Did Grimmond and Paddy Ashdown ever reach the heights of being a national treasure?
But the real danger to education, in the broadest sense, is the destruction of libraries.
Nonsense. The Victorian idea of a place with a massive load of books where one goes to educate one self is totally outdated. We now have this thing called the internet, which can provide more information in many different ways. For kids, something like Khan academy is a far superior resource than a massive pile of GCSE textbooks.
Even university libraries are massively reducing the amount of physical books they carry, instead their job is often managing the wide ranging subscriptions for journals and e-versions of texts, while academics don't actually set foot in the physical location because they access all this information via their pc.
Pew did some research on public library use in the USA - IIRC only about 25% used it to read books, the rest were college kids surfing with free Wifi/homework in a quiet environment - and a small % of refuge types enjoying the central heating.
Shorthand from an arch europhile that whatever we do it will be worse than being in the EU and it will be impossible to get any meaningful agreement from these spiteful Europeans.
Clegg's obviously bitter that his EU job prospects are zero.
Actually, I think that he is looking more statesman like with time.
Increasingly the Coalition looks like a golden age of mostly sane government, Clegg is young and well presented. If Farron fails to make progress then in 2020 Clegg could easily return as Leader.
Have you already forgotten how the LDs spent half the time pretending to be in opposition?
The Coalition was not perfect, but we are now seeing what an unrestrained Tory government is like for the first time in decades. Many of the best ministers were LD, perhaps because most came via local government rather than the SPADocracy (Clegg being a rare exception).
But the real danger to education, in the broadest sense, is the destruction of libraries.
Nonsense. The Victorian idea of a place with a massive load of books where one goes to educate one self is totally outdated. We now have this thing called the internet, which can provide more information in many different ways. For kids, something like Khan academy is a far superior resource than a massive pile of GCSE textbooks.
Even university libraries are massively reducing the amount of physical books they carry, instead their job is often managing the wide ranging subscriptions for journals and e-versions of texts, while academics don't actually set foot in the physical location because they access all this information via their pc.
Pew did some research on public library use in the USA - IIRC only about 25% used it to read books, the rest were college kids surfing with free Wifi/homework in a quiet environment - and a small % of refuge types enjoying the central heating.
As a child I met my grandmother in the library once. She said she had gone in to get warm, not read books.
I don't know why so many are angry at Fox, it's the first thing he's said that I agree with. There is far too much truth in his comments to ignore. British businesses and managers have become lazy in chasing opportunity. We've seen some improvements in the last few years, but overall attitudes towards exporting in smaller and medium sized companies are still poor.
As for dropping tariffs, doing so on a bilateral basis with certain countries who we know aren't interested in industrial subsidies would be a good step forwards, but I'm not in favour of unilateral trade disarmament.
But the real danger to education, in the broadest sense, is the destruction of libraries.
Nonsense. The Victorian idea of a place with a massive load of books where one goes to educate one self is totally outdated. We now have this thing called the internet, which can provide more information in many different ways. For kids, something like Khan academy is a far superior resource than a massive pile of GCSE textbooks.
Even university libraries are massively reducing the amount of physical books they carry, instead their job is often managing the wide ranging subscriptions for journals and e-versions of texts, while academics don't actually set foot in the physical location because they access all this information via their pc.
Pew did some research on public library use in the USA - IIRC only about 25% used it to read books, the rest were college kids surfing with free Wifi/homework in a quiet environment - and a small % of refuge types enjoying the central heating.
I did some consulting with Birmingham Central Library about 15 years ago. The library seemed only to be used by the long term unemployed, refugees etc. In turn, Birmingham increasingly focused towards the needs of this group, further alienating a mainstream audience.
Things may have changed since they built the new library.
In the Internet age of course we need far fewer libraries, but they still have a role. Nothing beats a well stocked and curated library for the discovery of new worlds.
The book trade is finally getting this too, hence improvements in Waterstones since Daunt took charge.
Shorthand from an arch europhile that whatever we do it will be worse than being in the EU and it will be impossible to get any meaningful agreement from these spiteful Europeans.
Clegg's obviously bitter that his EU job prospects are zero.
Actually, I think that he is looking more statesman like with time.
Increasingly the Coalition looks like a golden age of mostly sane government, Clegg is young and well presented. If Farron fails to make progress then in 2020 Clegg could easily return as Leader.
Have you already forgotten how the LDs spent half the time pretending to be in opposition?
I'm not sure that's true: it's more fair to say that Vince Cable and Tim Farron pretended to be in opposition. And there are a fair number of Conservative backbenchers who seem to be permanently in opposition too.
But the real danger to education, in the broadest sense, is the destruction of libraries.
Nonsense. The Victorian idea of a place with a massive load of books where one goes to educate one self is totally outdated. We now have this thing called the internet, which can provide more information in many different ways. For kids, something like Khan academy is a far superior resource than a massive pile of GCSE textbooks.
Even university libraries are massively reducing the amount of physical books they carry, instead their job is often managing the wide ranging subscriptions for journals and e-versions of texts, while academics don't actually set foot in the physical location because they access all this information via their pc.
Pew did some research on public library use in the USA - IIRC only about 25% used it to read books, the rest were college kids surfing with free Wifi/homework in a quiet environment - and a small % of refuge types enjoying the central heating.
Poor kids with chaotic or overcrowded homes, disruptive siblings or parents, and nowhere to stdy in peace benefit from libraries. Not only do they allow a decent shot at academic subjects, but also they normalise tranquility, diligence and study. Often it is the only place where they can find this. They also meet like-minded people and learn that they are not as weird as they feel. I spent a lot of time in libraries, and still do.
I don't know why so many are angry at Fox, it's the first thing he's said that I agree with. There is far too much truth in his comments to ignore. British businesses and managers have become lazy in chasing opportunity. We've seen some improvements in the last few years, but overall attitudes towards exporting in smaller and medium sized companies are still poor.
As for dropping tariffs, doing so on a bilateral basis with certain countries who we know aren't interested in industrial subsidies would be a good step forwards, but I'm not in favour of unilateral trade disarmament.
Interested to hear people's thoughts on just why UK managers are lazy in chasing these opportunities.
I don't have a view on this, but you do hear it a lot.
But the real danger to education, in the broadest sense, is the destruction of libraries.
Nonsense. The Victorian idea of a place with a massive load of books where one goes to educate one self is totally outdated. We now have this thing called the internet, which can provide more information in many different ways. For kids, something like Khan academy is a far superior resource than a massive pile of GCSE textbooks.
Even university libraries are massively reducing the amount of physical books they carry, instead their job is often managing the wide ranging subscriptions for journals and e-versions of texts, while academics don't actually set foot in the physical location because they access all this information via their pc.
Pew did some research on public library use in the USA - IIRC only about 25% used it to read books, the rest were college kids surfing with free Wifi/homework in a quiet environment - and a small % of refuge types enjoying the central heating.
I did some consulting with Birmingham Central Library about 15 years ago. The library seemed only to be used by the long term unemployed, refugees etc. In turn, Birmingham increasingly focused towards the needs of this group, further alienating a mainstream audience.
Things may have changed since they built the new library.
In the Internet age of course we need far fewer libraries, but they still have a role. Nothing beats a well stocked and curated library for the discovery of new worlds.
The book trade is finally getting this too, hence improvements in Waterstones since Daunt took charge.
We need more libraries in the Internet age. So people can be reminded what a book is. I am only half joking.
* There were rumours of privately commissioned (hedge-fund?) polls on or near polling day on June 23rd. Did anybody ever track these down, or can point to a link? * has anybody got a primary source for the Leave.eu poll[1] of 22-23rd June?
If anybody can help (as CarlottaVance pointed out, the poll is not on Leave.eu's website) I'd be grateful
[1] h ttps://twitter.com/jimwaterson/status/746086000514969604/photo/1
The poor dear, she certainly doesn’t take kindly to reality, piercing her safe-space existence.
She reminds me of a PB regular who appears never to have experience a differing opinion in her life and gets in a huff when others question her dogmata.
I've never been to Aussie but I gather that as a culture it is not renowned for a safe space type experience. Sledging for example.
It's unravelling. Fox's appalling slander on Britain's movers and shakers has made him look like the most ill-informed, snarling-at-the-modern-world, Trumpite blowhard. One more gaffe like that and he's out.
Comments
We have a bit of a natural experiment already- places like Kent, Linconshire, Buckinghamshire and Trafford. Accepting that it's not a perfect sample of the UK as a whole, we can still look at the current outcomes.
The signs aren't good; there's not much sign that having grammar schools in an area improves overall results, and the good outcomes get skewed towards a very small number of people right at the top. Kent and Linconshire in particular have problems with struggling non-grammar schools which are very hard to turn round. Furthermore, it's very hard to make a school middle-class parent proof.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7620041.stm
Where's your evidence that the grammar system supports improved outcomes and/or improved social mobility?
It's a smear story, so no legs, but I also absolutely believe its the kind of bumptious remark Fox would make i.e. it's a kind of Platonic smear.
He clearly has no understanding of the dynamics and economics of trade.
Thank God he's not the Trade Secretary.
Oh sh*t.
I wonder if the 'reality based community' of Camden, Islington, Lambeth etc still think that after having been defeated in two general elections and two referendums in the last six years.
And the only thing which has stopped Hinkley C from been cancelled has been government meddling.
But if she advocates policy on no evidence she'll quickly lose the immense goodwill she has as the seemingly last sane one standing, and get caught up in internal bunfighting.
She has fantastic political capital right now and my hope is that she uses it to address some of our systemic challenges as a nation.
https://twitter.com/asentance/status/774519460292067329
I'm quite sure that in other circumstances (eg talking down to dreadful Euro w*gs) Fox would be happy to crow about those stats.
At latest exchange rates it looks like we are fourth rather than third out of seven.
This year's fact is the past's and/or future's superstition.
This area's superstition is that area's fact.
In reality any new grammar schools are likely to be in a handful of Conservative controlled areas.
Now they might be beneficial or they might not be.
But some people - almost all of whom don't live in the areas that would be affected - are very opposed to finding out whether they would be beneficial or not.
And its the opposition of such people which is so politically advantageous to May.
ONS
Rates of suicide were highest in Wales and Yorkshire & Humber https://t.co/NllXgNyrJs #WorldSuicidePreventionDay https://t.co/BJbQLRtqMd
When you believe in things that you don't understand / Then you suffer / Superstition ain't the way…
Stevie Wonder
http://exporthelp.europa.eu/thdapp/display.htm?page=st/st_Statistics.html&docType=main&languageId=en
Liam Fox, who says "If you want to share in the prosperity of our country, you have a duty to contribute to the prosperity of our country." while promoting a Brexit that will directly lead to LESS prosperity, is an idiot. He does have a point however. We are not as good as we could be at exporting. It doesn't have much to do with the EU. Being members of the EU and the Euro doesn't stop our competitors being better at exporting than we are.
I believe leaving the EU is a mistake, but it's going ahead and we have to make the best of it. I also believe in making the most of a good crisis. This is stuff we should be dealing with anyway. Maybe Brexit will galvanise us into action. The problem, though, is that the Leave camp think Brexit is the sunlit uplands and there isn't a crisis to make the most of.
Ian Dunt ✔ @IanDunt
Clegg's 2nd paper on Brexit is a brilliant and readable 8-page description of the truck that's about to hit us
http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/libdems/mailings/4093/attachments/original/International_trade.pdf?1473331526'
Shorthand from an arch europhile that whatever we do it will be worse than being in the EU and it will be impossible to get any meaningful agreement from these spiteful Europeans.
Clegg's obviously bitter that his EU job prospects are zero.
ALL top politicians of modern times have made a pitch to Sun readers.
None since Maggie Thatcher has done so as convincingly as Theresa May yesterday.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1759192/theresa-may-promises-brave-new-school-system-to-reshape-britain-for-ordinary-working-class-people/
The evidence is those of us who went to grammar school.
However, I was the only child to go to the grammar from my junior school and I don't think anyone had ever gone before, although there was a rumour that one child had previously passed the 11 plus but chose to stay with his mates at a church school.
What is needed is for proper coaching of children in school for the 11 plus test so as to equal their opportunities against those privately coached.
Clegg has a poor head for figures and frequently struggles with financial numbers - a blind spot.
Strange when he otherwise seems to have a glowing academic record.
"It is absolutely crucial the PM does not overlook those for whom a grammar isn’t right."
But I don't get why it is politically advantageous for May to generate opposition of this sort. If this is to be a government against the London metro chattering classes - fine, and long overdue - but I'm not convinced that hostility to grammars really does divide the country so neatly.
The anti-grammarians are not all public school educated snooty lefties a la Harman. There's a lot of us, including many with a working class/lower middle class background.
however as part of a well thought out system - academically selective schools, techical/STEM schools, schools for kids with specific talents (e.g. music), etc it can play an important role.
It is a win:no lose policy.
I's say job done.
Re. Dr Fox. There is of course some merit in what he's said about UK business leaders (remember the vast majority of these CEO's were lined up against Brexit) but this probably isn't the time to voice it.
That said, a well aimed kick up the ARSE now and again never hurt anyone... I'm sure these CEO's dish it out to their staff on a regular basis after all...
Increasingly the Coalition looks like a golden age of mostly sane government, Clegg is young and well presented. If Farron fails to make progress then in 2020 Clegg could easily return as Leader.
"When you believe in things that you don't understand / Then you suffer / Superstition ain't the way… Stevie Wonder."
A wise man.
Yet we believe in quantum theory even though Feynman said. "If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don't understand quantum mechanics", and no one has ever claimed to really understand it.
Multiverses, the nature of time, and what exactly is contained in a vacuum? As the Copenhagen interpretation hints at ... "Shut up and do the maths."
Infinities? Cantor had a mathematical go but no one has tamed them really, even mathematics.
I always had doubts about field theory. Is everything entangled and does space really exist?
Science gets along by saying we're just a species that evolved on an odd planet with special characteristics. So our brain can't grasp these difficult concepts. Isn't it good we have maths that can hint at eleven dimensions - concepts we'll never understand.
Most Leavers are aware that success outside of the EU is not guaranteed, that it requires hard work and the right policies, and that there are liable to be setbacks along the way. The fact that they regard Brexit as an upheaval, but above all as both an opportunity and a source of relief, rather than as some epoch-making crisis, should not automatically be construed as a blind, Panglossian faith in the future.
The British population does not consist entirely of weeping, grief-stricken Europhiles and tub-thumping hardline nationalists. Most of us are in various places in between the two extremes, are we not?
Whole new integrated education system? I get it albeit it's more tinkering.
But May just announced the grammar school bit.
But we can sit on our hands.
The great opp. for May right now is to park her tanks on Labour's lawn, on behalf of the left behind - the hard working families and those outside London and its hinterland.
As she said:
It means taking on some big challenges, tackling some vested interests. Overcoming barriers that have been constructed over many years.
A pro-grammar position, valuable maybe as a dog-whistle to Ukippers, alienates more than it attracts. If May really is to take on the big challenges, she needs to do so with the centrists behind her.
The Lib Dems are a minor party again. Like the Greens, outside of the handful of places where they are still influential in local government, they matter not a jot.
On the other hand, imagine having Cable and Huhne as your conniving deputies.
The new PM has got the biggest selling newspaper very much on side, in the first week back. Job done.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/10/as-lionel-shriver-made-light-of-identity-i-had-no-choice-but-to-walk-out-on-her
In practice though it sounds as if there is little planning of this, and these children will be left to their own feral devices. That may well suit their parents as no hassle involved but is probably not good for society.
Secondary Moderns did not work before and are probably going to be worse in the future. The nature of the job market has changed over the last 50 years.
I know little of secondary education now, although there is a Comprehensive with Sixth form, fed by a Middle School structure, in Dorset which seems to be performing rather well.
But the real danger to education, in the broadest sense, is the destruction of libraries.
Both areas in which us Tories can improve our vote. May has rightly spotted that in the wake of the Brexit vote, tilting to the democratic social liberals gets no votes. Grammar schools firmly put May on the lawn of aspirational C1s and C2s.
The internet really supersedes central libraries. The sadness was the closure of branch libraries.
And the Conservatives are in the perfect position not to have to worry about the fluid, politically uncommitted floating vote. It's not merely that they have nowhere to go, it's that the moderate (i.e. non left-liberal) majority of the middle class have an active incentive to vote for the Conservatives. It's why the Yellow Tory vote deserted the Lib Dems en masse in 2015 and ruined them.
Moderate voters need to keep backing the Tories to ensure that Labour can never return to power at the head of a coalition of the defeated, and a coalition in which Scottish Nationalism would be pulling the strings at that. The imperative has only increased hugely since the last election, with the replacement of Miliband with Corbyn.
Nothing short of a zombie apocalypse is likely to drive the 37% of voters who backed Cameron out of the Tory camp before the next election, whenever that is. That alone would be enough to win narrowly now, or comfortably after the boundary reforms. And nobody thinks it likely that Corbyn will attract enough voters to match even the 31% that Miliband managed last time.
For May, capturing voters from Ukip and what's left of the Labour core is not about winning the next election, it's about winning the one after that. A Tory landslide would practically guarantee the party another ten years in office.
However, the article is somewhat biased by including in the EU figures trade deals under negotiation (eg with the USA) along with those in place.
(Using French figures).
Should that be the feminine version TINA?
Did Latin words have gender related endings, I can' remember?
Hence "Et tu, Brute?", because the vocative of Brutus is Brute.
Even university libraries are massively reducing the amount of physical books they carry, instead their job is often managing the wide ranging subscriptions for journals and e-versions of texts, while academics don't actually set foot in the physical location because they access all this information via their pc.
LOL presumably the author doesn't eat pizzas or other "culturally appropriated" foods. Or clothes that originated in other countries. Perhaps she should drop using idioms and expressions that are actually other peoples. Mind you that wouldn't leave her with much language she could use. Hmm not a bad idea.
Botched parking attempt leaves car dangling
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/video_and_audio/headlines/37327162
She reminds me of a PB regular who appears never to have experience a differing opinion in her life and gets in a huff when others question her dogmata.
I don't think that the man deserves most of the vilification that has been heaped upon him by the screaming lefties, though. Almost everyone was in a panic about the Great Recession back in 2010, a stable administration was called for, and the only Government made viable by the election result was the Con/Lib Coalition. Clegg had no real choice, after all those years that his party spent extoling the virtues of coalitions and balanced parliaments, but as soon as he made the pact with the devil he was doomed. A salutary lesson about the pratfalls of PR.
Was that Jeremy Corbyn trying to prove the car park was ram-packed?
So why have schools?
Regarding grammars - it's all about the brand. They're associated with discipline, good grades, keen pupils with parents who care about education, teachers who rarely go on strike or take politically correct stances. Kids are expected to do their homework and parents care that they do. They'll also support the enforcement of uniform/haircut policy.
That's the attraction. Now of course there are lots of comprehensive schools who share these characteristics - but it's not what their brand is associated with. Academies are a halfway house between the two. Academies/Free Schools are for parents who actually wanted a grammar type environment but couldn't get it before and/or are ideologically opposed to the 11+ as was.
The aim is obviously to make all types of schools *good* - how a parent defines *good* is the real issue. Some want academic success, others a wide variety of social backgrounds mixing, or a particular strength in certain areas or whatever. More the merrier I say provided they meet national standards set by HMG.
But the LDs are finished, and this took place on Clegg's watch. It's clear that even if optimally positioned between Corbyn's Kool-Aiders and the headbanging Brexiteers, they have neither the intellectual chops, the political talent, or the balls, to actually achieve anything.
Did Grimmond and Paddy Ashdown ever reach the heights of being a national treasure?
As a child I met my grandmother in the library once. She said she had gone in to get warm, not read books.
As for dropping tariffs, doing so on a bilateral basis with certain countries who we know aren't interested in industrial subsidies would be a good step forwards, but I'm not in favour of unilateral trade disarmament.
Things may have changed since they built the new library.
In the Internet age of course we need far fewer libraries, but they still have a role. Nothing beats a well stocked and curated library for the discovery of new worlds.
The book trade is finally getting this too, hence improvements in Waterstones since Daunt took charge.
I don't have a view on this, but you do hear it a lot.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1757272/treasurys-new-cat-gladstone-is-a-cold-blooded-killer-say-sources-close-to-the-chancellor/
* There were rumours of privately commissioned (hedge-fund?) polls on or near polling day on June 23rd. Did anybody ever track these down, or can point to a link?
* has anybody got a primary source for the Leave.eu poll[1] of 22-23rd June?
If anybody can help (as CarlottaVance pointed out, the poll is not on Leave.eu's website) I'd be grateful
[1] h ttps://twitter.com/jimwaterson/status/746086000514969604/photo/1