Says a report by Lucy Powell, Labour education spokesperson, so very objective I assume. If we had a few more grammars in poorer areas which is at the heart of May's policy rather than mainly in wealthier areas as now they would be doing rather more for social mobility
Former Labour Education spokesperson.
More importantly, what is wrong with her analysis?
Exactly as I pointed out, the reason grammars do less for social mobility than they used to is that Labour scrapped most of them leaving the few remaining in leafy Tory areas. Singapore selects at 13 and tops the latest PISA
Quite - in fact we have moved to Grammar-school-by-house-price in most areas. Another effect is that the lower orders feel "not welcome" .... there is "too much homework".... the rules on holidays enforced "aggressively"... so they don't contaminate the posh "comprehensives".
Bang on. The argument for selective education is summed up in two words. House prices.
Says a report by Lucy Powell, Labour education spokesperson, so very objective I assume. If we had a few more grammars in poorer areas which is at the heart of May's policy rather than mainly in wealthier areas as now they would be doing rather more for social mobility
Former Labour Education spokesperson.
More importantly, what is wrong with her analysis?
Exactly as I pointed out, the reason grammars do less for social mobility than they used to is that Labour scrapped most of them leaving the few remaining in leafy Tory areas. Singapore selects at 13 and tops the latest PISA
Quite - in fact we have moved to Grammar-school-by-house-price in most areas. Another effect is that the lower orders feel "not welcome" .... there is "too much homework".... the rules on holidays enforced "aggressively"... so they don't contaminate the posh "comprehensives".
Bang on. The argument for selective education is summed up in two words. House prices.
You mean it is about keeping the riff-raff's away ?
In all seriousness, do the Tories REALLY want to win this? If it endangers Corbyn that is BAD for them. Is it worth gaining one more MP in the Commons, to lose their greatest electoral asset, the Labour leader himself?
I'd say it's a pretty close call, and the Tories will be oddly satisfied with a very close second.
Of course they do as it will give a mandate for Article 50 and a mandate for May for Brexit and shutup all the Remoaners who are still crowing about Richmond Park, given Corbyn has comfortably been re-elected by Labour members he is not going anywhere soon
True. I was speculating too idly perhaps.
But Corbyn really IS the Tories' greatest asset. They really do not want him gone. At some point they will have to start maneuvering to keep him where he is. Give him a few fake but easy victories.
Maybe but it would probably take Labour losing Islington at the moment for party members to even consider electing someone else. Of course there is also the Leigh by-election not long after Copeland which Labour will likely hold even if they lose the latter seat given they got 54% in Leigh at the general election and 42% in Copeland
Hmm. I think Tories have to guard against complacency. The new Labour membership is young, volatile and unpredictable. The Lefty hive mind might suddenly have a fit of common sense, and in the face of a difficult Brexit Labour could do surprisingly well in 2020 under a vaguely sane leader. The sudden shock of seeing a non-nutter taking down Theresa in the Commons would concentrate voter minds.
The Tories, paradoxically, need the polls to improve for Labour, for a year or so.
Starmer will wipe the wooden smile off Theresa's face.
Starmer is far too rightwing for current Labour members
How the hell do you know ? You are a Tory.
you're entitled to a view on god even if you're an atheist
Says a report by Lucy Powell, Labour education spokesperson, so very objective I assume. If we had a few more grammars in poorer areas which is at the heart of May's policy rather than mainly in wealthier areas as now they would be doing rather more for social mobility
Former Labour Education spokesperson.
More importantly, what is wrong with her analysis?
Exactly as I pointed out, the reason grammars do less for social mobility than they used to is that Labour scrapped most of them leaving the few remaining in leafy Tory areas. Singapore selects at 13 and tops the latest PISA
I believe it was Mrs Thatcher who scrapped/merged the most number of grammar schools.
'Twas one of her finest achievements, alongside the Single European Act.
It was Shirley Williams' and Crosland who began the process of closing most of the grammars, Thatcher was Heath's Education Minister and simply had to follow his policy of not opposing local authorities' moves to comprehensives
The news re-the NHS reinforces my sense that -whenever we do have an election – such issues will override views relating to Brexit. We may begin to see some evidence of that in the Copeland by election.
I thought we had an NHS crisis every winter? If you google "nhs crisis 20xx" starting from 2016 and working backwards, there is one every year at least until you get bored with the exercise and lose interest. It is also fully priced in that the blame lies 100% with the tories.
Personally I do not recall claims of a humanitarian crisis in the NHS in earlier winters.
Like I said in a previous comment "NHS Crisis 2017: This time we are super serious!"
In all seriousness, do the Tories REALLY want to win this? If it endangers Corbyn that is BAD for them. Is it worth gaining one more MP in the Commons, to lose their greatest electoral asset, the Labour leader himself?
I'd say it's a pretty close call, and the Tories will be oddly satisfied with a very close second.
Of course they do as it will give a mandate for Article 50 and a mandate for May for Brexit and shutup all the Remoaners who are still crowing about Richmond Park, given Corbyn has comfortably been re-elected by Labour members he is not going anywhere soon
True. I was speculating too idly perhaps.
But Corbyn really IS the Tories' greatest asset. They really do not want him gone. At some point they will have to start maneuvering to keep him where he is. Give him a few fake but easy victories.
Maybe but it would probably take Labour losing Islington at the moment for party members to even consider electing someone else. Of course there is also the Leigh by-election not long after Copeland which Labour will likely hold even if they lose the latter seat given they got 54% in Leigh at the general election and 42% in Copeland
Hmm. I think Tories have to guard against complacency. The new Labour membership is young, volatile and unpredictable. The Lefty hive mind might suddenly have a fit of common sense, and in the face of a difficult Brexit Labour could do surprisingly well in 2020 under a vaguely sane leader. The sudden shock of seeing a non-nutter taking down Theresa in the Commons would concentrate voter minds.
The Tories, paradoxically, need the polls to improve for Labour, for a year or so.
Starmer will wipe the wooden smile off Theresa's face.
Starmer is far too rightwing for current Labour members
How the hell do you know ? You are a Tory.
He is a Burnhamite like Smith who over 60% of Labour members have just rejected in favour of Corbyn
The news re-the NHS reinforces my sense that -whenever we do have an election – such issues will override views relating to Brexit. We may begin to see some evidence of that in the Copeland by election.
I thought we had an NHS crisis every winter? If you google "nhs crisis 20xx" starting from 2016 and working backwards, there is one every year at least until you get bored with the exercise and lose interest. It is also fully priced in that the blame lies 100% with the tories.
Personally I do not recall claims of a humanitarian crisis in the NHS in earlier winters.
Do you think there is a humanitarian crisis in the NHS now?
The news re-the NHS reinforces my sense that -whenever we do have an election – such issues will override views relating to Brexit. We may begin to see some evidence of that in the Copeland by election.
I thought we had an NHS crisis every winter? If you google "nhs crisis 20xx" starting from 2016 and working backwards, there is one every year at least until you get bored with the exercise and lose interest. It is also fully priced in that the blame lies 100% with the tories.
Personally I do not recall claims of a humanitarian crisis in the NHS in earlier winters.
When you've had an NHS Crisis every year for the past 40 years, you have to come up with a new term to get the attention of the media.
The news re-the NHS reinforces my sense that -whenever we do have an election – such issues will override views relating to Brexit. We may begin to see some evidence of that in the Copeland by election.
I thought we had an NHS crisis every winter? If you google "nhs crisis 20xx" starting from 2016 and working backwards, there is one every year at least until you get bored with the exercise and lose interest. It is also fully priced in that the blame lies 100% with the tories.
Personally I do not recall claims of a humanitarian crisis in the NHS in earlier winters.
Like I said in a previous comment "NHS Crisis 2017: This time we are super serious!"
Did you read my link to what happened in Worcs to provoke the comment?
Wouldn't you agree that the service there was sub-optimal?
Since Rogers has not been given a payoff other than the usual one, is he bound by any restrictive clause about what and when he can speak ?
Cammo's fightback has started. We need to know if TSE is involved ? This will upset Sunil even more.
Cameron's fightback?
Hahaha
He was your Prime Minister, remember !
Most Tories backed Cameron with their head when he was an election winner, however after he lost the referendum they happily transferred to May who they see more as one of their own, except Coalition liberal diehards like TSE who will probably still be championing Osborne as Prince across the water even if Leadsom was leading the party in ten years time
Since Rogers has not been given a payoff other than the usual one, is he bound by any restrictive clause about what and when he can speak ?
Cammo's fightback has started. We need to know if TSE is involved ? This will upset Sunil even more.
Cameron's fightback?
Hahaha
He was your Prime Minister, remember !
Most Tories backed Cameron with their head when he was an election winner, however after he lost the referendum they happily transferred to May who they see more as one of their own, except Coalition liberal diehards like TSE who will probably still be championing Osborne as Prince across the water even if Leadsom was leading the party in ten years time
The one who is supremely equipped to be Prime Minister because she has children, Mrs Loathsome.
Says a report by Lucy Powell, Labour education spokesperson, so very objective I assume. If we had a few more grammars in poorer areas which is at the heart of May's policy rather than mainly in wealthier areas as now they would be doing rather more for social mobility
Former Labour Education spokesperson.
More importantly, what is wrong with her analysis?
Exactly as I pointed out, the reason grammars do less for social mobility than they used to is that Labour scrapped most of them leaving the few remaining in leafy Tory areas. Singapore selects at 13 and tops the latest PISA
I believe it was Mrs Thatcher who scrapped/merged the most number of grammar schools.
'Twas one of her finest achievements, alongside the Single European Act.
It was Shirley Williams' and Crosland who began the process of closing most of the grammars, Thatcher was Heath's Education Minister and simply had to follow his policy of not opposing local authorities' moves to comprehensives
TSE was too thick to pass his 11+!!
I blame his lack of grammar school education for his lack of historical knowledge!
The news re-the NHS reinforces my sense that -whenever we do have an election – such issues will override views relating to Brexit. We may begin to see some evidence of that in the Copeland by election.
I thought we had an NHS crisis every winter? If you google "nhs crisis 20xx" starting from 2016 and working backwards, there is one every year at least until you get bored with the exercise and lose interest. It is also fully priced in that the blame lies 100% with the tories.
Personally I do not recall claims of a humanitarian crisis in the NHS in earlier winters.
Like I said in a previous comment "NHS Crisis 2017: This time we are super serious!"
Did you read my link to what happened in Worcs to provoke the comment?
Wouldn't you agree that the service there was sub-optimal?
Yes, but can't you also find examples from previous years, years in which a humanitarian crisis wasn't declared?
Says a report by Lucy Powell, Labour education spokesperson, so very objective I assume. If we had a few more grammars in poorer areas which is at the heart of May's policy rather than mainly in wealthier areas as now they would be doing rather more for social mobility
Former Labour Education spokesperson.
More importantly, what is wrong with her analysis?
Exactly as I pointed out, the reason grammars do less for social mobility than they used to is that Labour scrapped most of them leaving the few remaining in leafy Tory areas. Singapore selects at 13 and tops the latest PISA
Quite - in fact we have moved to Grammar-school-by-house-price in most areas. Another effect is that the lower orders feel "not welcome" .... there is "too much homework".... the rules on holidays enforced "aggressively"... so they don't contaminate the posh "comprehensives".
Bang on. The argument for selective education is summed up in two words. House prices.
Though if you want to deal with the problem of poor achievement in education for those at the bottom, you will have to deal with the later.
To give an example. I live in the catchment area of 2 primary schools. One performs as well as a private school. People have been convicted, in court, of fraud to get their children into this school. The other is a disaster, a real failed school.
Very nearly no-one from the local housing estates goes to the good school. The few that do describe the reasons that their friends and neighbours don't apply in the terms I use above.
They think of school as somewhere where they drop the kids at 9 and pick them up at 3:30. They think that the children will get all the education they need between those hours. Homework is an imposition. They do not read books to their children.
In all seriousness, do the Tories REALLY want to win this? If it endangers Corbyn that is BAD for them. Is it worth gaining one more MP in the Commons, to lose their greatest electoral asset, the Labour leader himself?
I'd say it's a pretty close call, and the Tories will be oddly satisfied with a very close second.
Of course they do as it will give a mandate for Article 50 and a mandate for May for Brexit and shutup all the Remoaners who are still crowing about Richmond Park, given Corbyn has comfortably been re-elected by Labour members he is not going anywhere soon
True. I was speculating too idly perhaps.
But Corbyn really IS the Tories' greatest asset. They really do not want him gone. At some point they will have to start maneuvering to keep him where he is. Give him a few fake but easy victories.
Maybe but it would probably take Labour losing Islington at the moment for party members to even consider electing someone else. Of course there is also the Leigh by-election not long after Copeland which Labour will likely hold even if they lose the latter seat given they got 54% in Leigh at the general election and 42% in Copeland
Hmm. I think Tories have to guard against complacency. The new Labour membership is young, volatile and unpredictable. The Lefty hive mind might suddenly have a fit of common sense, and in the face of a difficult Brexit Labour could do surprisingly well in 2020 under a vaguely sane leader. The sudden shock of seeing a non-nutter taking down Theresa in the Commons would concentrate voter minds.
The Tories, paradoxically, need the polls to improve for Labour, for a year or so.
Starmer will wipe the wooden smile off Theresa's face.
Starmer is far too rightwing for current Labour members
How the hell do you know ? You are a Tory.
you're entitled to a view on god even if you're an atheist
Though it is not likely to be a well informed view!
Says a report by Lucy Powell, Labour education spokesperson, so very objective I assume. If we had a few more grammars in poorer areas which is at the heart of May's policy rather than mainly in wealthier areas as now they would be doing rather more for social mobility
Former Labour Education spokesperson.
More importantly, what is wrong with her analysis?
Exactly as I pointed out, the reason grammars do less for social mobility than they used to is that Labour scrapped most of them leaving the few remaining in leafy Tory areas. Singapore selects at 13 and tops the latest PISA
Quite - in fact we have moved to Grammar-school-by-house-price in most areas. Another effect is that the lower orders feel "not welcome" .... there is "too much homework".... the rules on holidays enforced "aggressively"... so they don't contaminate the posh "comprehensives".
Says a report by Lucy Powell, Labour education spokesperson, so very objective I assume. If we had a few more grammars in poorer areas which is at the heart of May's policy rather than mainly in wealthier areas as now they would be doing rather more for social mobility
Former Labour Education spokesperson.
More importantly, what is wrong with her analysis?
Exactly as I pointed out, the reason grammars do less for social mobility than they used to is that Labour scrapped most of them leaving the few remaining in leafy Tory areas. Singapore selects at 13 and tops the latest PISA
Quite - in fact we have moved to Grammar-school-by-house-price in most areas. Another effect is that the lower orders feel "not welcome" .... there is "too much homework".... the rules on holidays enforced "aggressively"... so they don't contaminate the posh "comprehensives".
Bang on. The argument for selective education is summed up in two words. House prices.
You mean it is about keeping the riff-raff's away ?
"riff raff's" ? Riff-raff's what? Surely that should be riff-raff? Where were you brung up?
Seems to me that the most insightful comments posted here in 2017 are by those (however they voted) who have come to terms with the result of last June.
You mean you like peoples posts who agree with you? how profound!
Nah. I mean I respect the opinions of those who respect the opinions of others.
I'd love to see some opinion polling on the lines of 'Do you accept the result of the referendum on Brexit?'.
How about "Do you accept the result of the last General Election"? Most people will say "Yes it was legal - there wasn't vote tampering". But that doesn't mean they would accept Tory policies. Many will try to frustrate them at every opportunity. It is the same with the EU referendum.
The news re-the NHS reinforces my sense that -whenever we do have an election – such issues will override views relating to Brexit. We may begin to see some evidence of that in the Copeland by election.
I thought we had an NHS crisis every winter? If you google "nhs crisis 20xx" starting from 2016 and working backwards, there is one every year at least until you get bored with the exercise and lose interest. It is also fully priced in that the blame lies 100% with the tories.
Personally I do not recall claims of a humanitarian crisis in the NHS in earlier winters.
When you've had an NHS Crisis every year for the past 40 years, you have to come up with a new term to get the attention of the media.
So Sean, Hunt's management is all going tickety-boo is it?
We've never had more beds? We've never had a greater proportion of GDP going to health? We've never had such a low rate of delayed transfers of care? No-one waits more than 4 hours in A&E? We have the highest proportion of doctors per capita in Europe? etc.
Says a report by Lucy Powell, Labour education spokesperson, so very objective I assume. If we had a few more grammars in poorer areas which is at the heart of May's policy rather than mainly in wealthier areas as now they would be doing rather more for social mobility
If they were to be schools of excellence, house prices would soon start to rise in those areas.
The news re-the NHS reinforces my sense that -whenever we do have an election – such issues will override views relating to Brexit. We may begin to see some evidence of that in the Copeland by election.
I thought we had an NHS crisis every winter? If you google "nhs crisis 20xx" starting from 2016 and working backwards, there is one every year at least until you get bored with the exercise and lose interest. It is also fully priced in that the blame lies 100% with the tories.
Personally I do not recall claims of a humanitarian crisis in the NHS in earlier winters.
When you've had an NHS Crisis every year for the past 40 years, you have to come up with a new term to get the attention of the media.
So Sean, Hunt's management is all going tickety-boo is it?
We've never had more beds? We've never had a greater proportion of GDP going to health? We've never had such a low rate of delayed transfers of care? No-one waits more than 4 hours in A&E? We have the highest proportion of doctors per capita in Europe? etc.
There's a range of outcomes between "going all tickety boo" and "humanitarian crisis".
Says a report by Lucy Powell, Labour education spokesperson, so very objective I assume. If we had a few more grammars in poorer areas which is at the heart of May's policy rather than mainly in wealthier areas as now they would be doing rather more for social mobility
Former Labour Education spokesperson.
More importantly, what is wrong with her analysis?
Exactly as I pointed out, the reason grammars do less for social mobility than they used to is that Labour scrapped most of them leaving the few remaining in leafy Tory areas. Singapore selects at 13 and tops the latest PISA
I believe it was Mrs Thatcher who scrapped/merged the most number of grammar schools.
'Twas one of her finest achievements, alongside the Single European Act.
It was Shirley Williams' and Crosland who began the process of closing most of the grammars, Thatcher was Heath's Education Minister and simply had to follow his policy of not opposing local authorities' moves to comprehensives
TSE was too thick to pass his 11+!!
I blame his lack of grammar school education for his lack of historical knowledge!
I imagine TSE will happily champion comprehensives but if he ever has children their names will be first down on the waiting list for the top private school in Sheffield
In all seriousness, do the Tories REALLY want to win this? If it endangers Corbyn that is BAD for them. Is it worth gaining one more MP in the Commons, to lose their greatest electoral asset, the Labour leader himself?
I'd say it's a pretty close call, and the Tories will be oddly satisfied with a very close second.
Of course they do as it will give a mandate for Article 50 and a mandate for May for Brexit and shutup all the Remoaners who are still crowing about Richmond Park, given Corbyn has comfortably been re-elected by Labour members he is not going anywhere soon
True. I was speculating too idly perhaps.
But Corbyn really IS the Tories' greatest asset. They really do not want him gone. At some point they will have to start maneuvering to keep him where he is. Give him a few fake but easy victories.
Maybe but it would probably take Labour losing Islington at the moment for party members to even consider electing someone else. Of course there is also the Leigh by-election not long after Copeland which Labour will likely hold even if they lose the latter seat given they got 54% in Leigh at the general election and 42% in Copeland
Hmm. I think Tories have to guard against complacency. The new Labour membership is young, volatile and unpredictable. The Lefty hive mind might suddenly have a fit of common sense, and in the face of a difficult Brexit Labour could do surprisingly well in 2020 under a vaguely sane leader. The sudden shock of seeing a non-nutter taking down Theresa in the Commons would concentrate voter minds.
The Tories, paradoxically, need the polls to improve for Labour, for a year or so.
Starmer will wipe the wooden smile off Theresa's face.
Starmer is far too rightwing for current Labour members
How the hell do you know ? You are a Tory.
you're entitled to a view on god even if you're an atheist
Though it is not likely to be a well informed view!
In all seriousness, do the Tories REALLY want to win this? If it endangers Corbyn that is BAD for them. Is it worth gaining one more MP in the Commons, to lose their greatest electoral asset, the Labour leader himself?
I'd say it's a pretty close call, and the Tories will be oddly satisfied with a very close second.
Of course they do as it will give a mandate for Article 50 and a mandate for May for Brexit and shutup all the Remoaners who are still crowing about Richmond Park, given Corbyn has comfortably been re-elected by Labour members he is not going anywhere soon
True. I was speculating too idly perhaps.
But Corbyn really IS the Tories' greatest asset. They really do not want him gone. At some point they will have to start maneuvering to keep him where he is. Give him a few fake but easy victories.
Maybe but it would probably take Labour losing Islington at the moment for party members to even consider electing someone else. Of course there is also the Leigh by-election not long after Copeland which Labour will likely hold even if they lose the latter seat given they got 54% in Leigh at the general election and 42% in Copeland
Hmm. I think Tories have to guard against complacency. The new Labour membership is young, volatile and unpredictable. The Lefty hive mind might suddenly have a fit of common sense, and in the face of a difficult Brexit Labour could do surprisingly well in 2020 under a vaguely sane leader. The sudden shock of seeing a non-nutter taking down Theresa in the Commons would concentrate voter minds.
The Tories, paradoxically, need the polls to improve for Labour, for a year or so.
Starmer will wipe the wooden smile off Theresa's face.
Starmer is far too rightwing for current Labour members
How the hell do you know ? You are a Tory.
you're entitled to a view on god even if you're an atheist
Though it is not likely to be a well informed view!
I think it's possible to have an informed view on something without actually being it.
Says a report by Lucy Powell, Labour education spokesperson, so very objective I assume. If we had a few more grammars in poorer areas which is at the heart of May's policy rather than mainly in wealthier areas as now they would be doing rather more for social mobility
If they were to be schools of excellence, house prices would soon start to rise in those areas.
Indeed and that would help some of the inequality problems too
Says a report by Lucy Powell, Labour education spokesperson, so very objective I assume. If we had a few more grammars in poorer areas which is at the heart of May's policy rather than mainly in wealthier areas as now they would be doing rather more for social mobility
Former Labour Education spokesperson.
More importantly, what is wrong with her analysis?
Exactly as I pointed out, the reason grammars do less for social mobility than they used to is that Labour scrapped most of them leaving the few remaining in leafy Tory areas. Singapore selects at 13 and tops the latest PISA
Quite - in fact we have moved to Grammar-school-by-house-price in most areas. Another effect is that the lower orders feel "not welcome" .... there is "too much homework".... the rules on holidays enforced "aggressively"... so they don't contaminate the posh "comprehensives".
Do you agree with my figures in my post of 9.54PM, that the number of poor children in Grammar schools is about 1/5 of that in the County as a whole?
It sounds to me that selective education is at least as good as house prices in keeping out the "riff raff". Presumably this is why so many Tories support it.
The news re-the NHS reinforces my sense that -whenever we do have an election – such issues will override views relating to Brexit. We may begin to see some evidence of that in the Copeland by election.
I thought we had an NHS crisis every winter? If you google "nhs crisis 20xx" starting from 2016 and working backwards, there is one every year at least until you get bored with the exercise and lose interest. It is also fully priced in that the blame lies 100% with the tories.
Personally I do not recall claims of a humanitarian crisis in the NHS in earlier winters.
When you've had an NHS Crisis every year for the past 40 years, you have to come up with a new term to get the attention of the media.
So Sean, Hunt's management is all going tickety-boo is it?
We've never had more beds? We've never had a greater proportion of GDP going to health? We've never had such a low rate of delayed transfers of care? No-one waits more than 4 hours in A&E? We have the highest proportion of doctors per capita in Europe? etc.
There's a range of outcomes between "going all tickety boo" and "humanitarian crisis".
In all seriousness, do the Tories REALLY want to win this? If it endangers Corbyn that is BAD for them. Is it worth gaining one more MP in the Commons, to lose their greatest electoral asset, the Labour leader himself?
I'd say it's a pretty close call, and the Tories will be oddly satisfied with a very close second.
Of course they do as it will give a mandate for Article 50 and a mandate for May for Brexit and shutup all the Remoaners who are still crowing about Richmond Park, given Corbyn has comfortably been re-elected by Labour members he is not going anywhere soon
True. I was speculating too idly perhaps.
But Corbyn really IS the Tories' greatest asset. They really do not want him gone. At some point they will have to start maneuvering to keep him where he is. Give him a few fake but easy victories.
Maybe but it would probably take Labour losing Islington at the moment for party members to even consider electing someone else. Of course there is also the Leigh by-election not long after Copeland which Labour will likely hold even if they lose the latter seat given they got 54% in Leigh at the general election and 42% in Copeland
Hmm. I think Tories have to guard against complacency. The new Labour membership is young, volatile and unpredictable. The Lefty hive mind might suddenly have a fit of common sense, and in the face of a difficult Brexit Labour could do surprisingly well in 2020 under a vaguely sane leader. The sudden shock of seeing a non-nutter taking down Theresa in the Commons would concentrate voter minds.
The Tories, paradoxically, need the polls to improve for Labour, for a year or so.
Starmer will wipe the wooden smile off Theresa's face.
Starmer is far too rightwing for current Labour members
How the hell do you know ? You are a Tory.
you're entitled to a view on god even if you're an atheist
Though it is not likely to be a well informed view!
Says a report by Lucy Powell, Labour education spokesperson, so very objective I assume. If we had a few more grammars in poorer areas which is at the heart of May's policy rather than mainly in wealthier areas as now they would be doing rather more for social mobility
Former Labour Education spokesperson.
More importantly, what is wrong with her analysis?
Exactly as I pointed out, the reason grammars do less for social mobility than they used to is that Labour scrapped most of them leaving the few remaining in leafy Tory areas. Singapore selects at 13 and tops the latest PISA
Quite - in fact we have moved to Grammar-school-by-house-price in most areas. Another effect is that the lower orders feel "not welcome" .... there is "too much homework".... the rules on holidays enforced "aggressively"... so they don't contaminate the posh "comprehensives".
Do you agree with my figures in my post of 9.54PM, that the number of poor children in Grammar schools is about 1/5 of that in the County as a whole?
It sounds to me that selective education is at least as good as house prices in keeping out the "riff raff". Presumably this is why so many Tories support it.
Nah, us Tories support the expansion of Sainsburys. They help keep out the riff raff out of Waitrose.
Seems to me that the most insightful comments posted here in 2017 are by those (however they voted) who have come to terms with the result of last June.
You mean you like peoples posts who agree with you? how profound!
Nah. I mean I respect the opinions of those who respect the opinions of others.
I'd love to see some opinion polling on the lines of 'Do you accept the result of the referendum on Brexit?'.
How about "Do you accept the result of the last General Election"? Most people will say "Yes it was legal - there wasn't vote tampering". But that doesn't mean they would accept Tory policies. Many will try to frustrate them at every opportunity. It is the same with the EU referendum.
Generally, the losing side in an election goes away and comes up with a new manifesto, their previous version having been rejected by the voters. Your position is, hell, the voters rejected us, but we are still going to force this failed and rejected manifesto down their throats.
That's ignoring that Referenda are much more clearly an on-off switch. Your attitude is that the voters chose to turn the switch to on, but hell, they can wait - and maybe we will never turn the switch to on. Fvck 'em. We know better about how switches work.
Seems to me that the most insightful comments posted here in 2017 are by those (however they voted) who have come to terms with the result of last June.
You mean you like peoples posts who agree with you? how profound!
Nah. I mean I respect the opinions of those who respect the opinions of others.
I'd love to see some opinion polling on the lines of 'Do you accept the result of the referendum on Brexit?'.
How about "Do you accept the result of the last General Election"? Most people will say "Yes it was legal - there wasn't vote tampering". But that doesn't mean they would accept Tory policies. Many will try to frustrate them at every opportunity. It is the same with the EU referendum.
I'd wager a decent bottle of Burgundy that more people would answer Yes to accepting the last GE than would answer Yes to accepting the referendum result.
I've heard several anecdotes this weekend at a trade fair of Remainers ejecting toys from prams over Christmas....
Says a report by Lucy Powell, Labour education spokesperson, so very objective I assume. If we had a few more grammars in poorer areas which is at the heart of May's policy rather than mainly in wealthier areas as now they would be doing rather more for social mobility
If they were to be schools of excellence, house prices would soon start to rise in those areas.
Which is exactly what Powell proposes to do in Parliament, to ensure that any new Grammars are located in the poorest parts of the education authority as a binding obligation.
The news re-the NHS reinforces my sense that -whenever we do have an election – such issues will override views relating to Brexit. We may begin to see some evidence of that in the Copeland by election.
I thought we had an NHS crisis every winter? If you google "nhs crisis 20xx" starting from 2016 and working backwards, there is one every year at least until you get bored with the exercise and lose interest. It is also fully priced in that the blame lies 100% with the tories.
Personally I do not recall claims of a humanitarian crisis in the NHS in earlier winters.
When you've had an NHS Crisis every year for the past 40 years, you have to come up with a new term to get the attention of the media.
So Sean, Hunt's management is all going tickety-boo is it?
We've never had more beds? We've never had a greater proportion of GDP going to health? We've never had such a low rate of delayed transfers of care? No-one waits more than 4 hours in A&E? We have the highest proportion of doctors per capita in Europe? etc.
There's a range of outcomes between "going all tickety boo" and "humanitarian crisis".
The news re-the NHS reinforces my sense that -whenever we do have an election – such issues will override views relating to Brexit. We may begin to see some evidence of that in the Copeland by election.
I thought we had an NHS crisis every winter? If you google "nhs crisis 20xx" starting from 2016 and working backwards, there is one every year at least until you get bored with the exercise and lose interest. It is also fully priced in that the blame lies 100% with the tories.
Personally I do not recall claims of a humanitarian crisis in the NHS in earlier winters.
When you've had an NHS Crisis every year for the past 40 years, you have to come up with a new term to get the attention of the media.
So Sean, Hunt's management is all going tickety-boo is it?
We've never had more beds? We've never had a greater proportion of GDP going to health? We've never had such a low rate of delayed transfers of care? No-one waits more than 4 hours in A&E? We have the highest proportion of doctors per capita in Europe? etc.
There's a range of outcomes between "going all tickety boo" and "humanitarian crisis".
The news re-the NHS reinforces my sense that -whenever we do have an election – such issues will override views relating to Brexit. We may begin to see some evidence of that in the Copeland by election.
I thought we had an NHS crisis every winter? If you google "nhs crisis 20xx" starting from 2016 and working backwards, there is one every year at least until you get bored with the exercise and lose interest. It is also fully priced in that the blame lies 100% with the tories.
Personally I do not recall claims of a humanitarian crisis in the NHS in earlier winters.
When you've had an NHS Crisis every year for the past 40 years, you have to come up with a new term to get the attention of the media.
So Sean, Hunt's management is all going tickety-boo is it?
We've never had more beds? We've never had a greater proportion of GDP going to health? We've never had such a low rate of delayed transfers of care? No-one waits more than 4 hours in A&E? We have the highest proportion of doctors per capita in Europe? etc.
There's a range of outcomes between "going all tickety boo" and "humanitarian crisis".
Says a report by Lucy Powell, Labour education spokesperson, so very objective I assume. If we had a few more grammars in poorer areas which is at the heart of May's policy rather than mainly in wealthier areas as now they would be doing rather more for social mobility
I love the fact that a bloke whose family had enough money to send him to private school wants to take opportunities away from other less fortunate kids.
Yes, I had the benefit of going to a grammar school and it certainly helped me get on in life.
Says a report by Lucy Powell, Labour education spokesperson, so very objective I assume. If we had a few more grammars in poorer areas which is at the heart of May's policy rather than mainly in wealthier areas as now they would be doing rather more for social mobility
I love the fact that a bloke whose family had enough money to send him to private school wants to take opportunities away from other less fortunate kids.
Yes, I had the benefit of going to a grammar school and it certainly helped me get on in life.
But your success came on the backs of those who ended up secondary moderns. Does that make you feel good?
The news re-the NHS reinforces my sense that -whenever we do have an election – such issues will override views relating to Brexit. We may begin to see some evidence of that in the Copeland by election.
I thought we had an NHS crisis every winter? If you google "nhs crisis 20xx" starting from 2016 and working backwards, there is one every year at least until you get bored with the exercise and lose interest. It is also fully priced in that the blame lies 100% with the tories.
Personally I do not recall claims of a humanitarian crisis in the NHS in earlier winters.
When you've had an NHS Crisis every year for the past 40 years, you have to come up with a new term to get the attention of the media.
So Sean, Hunt's management is all going tickety-boo is it?
We've never had more beds? We've never had a greater proportion of GDP going to health? We've never had such a low rate of delayed transfers of care? No-one waits more than 4 hours in A&E? We have the highest proportion of doctors per capita in Europe? etc.
There's a range of outcomes between "going all tickety boo" and "humanitarian crisis".
So what is then?
The NHS is under pressure, as it always has been, because demand for it's services is unlimited.
Says a report by Lucy Powell, Labour education spokesperson, so very objective I assume. If we had a few more grammars in poorer areas which is at the heart of May's policy rather than mainly in wealthier areas as now they would be doing rather more for social mobility
Former Labour Education spokesperson.
More importantly, what is wrong with her analysis?
Exactly as I pointed out, the reason grammars do less for social mobility than they used to is that Labour scrapped most of them leaving the few remaining in leafy Tory areas. Singapore selects at 13 and tops the latest PISA
Quite - in fact we have moved to Grammar-school-by-house-price in most areas. Another effect is that the lower orders feel "not welcome" .... there is "too much homework".... the rules on holidays enforced "aggressively"... so they don't contaminate the posh "comprehensives".
Do you agree with my figures in my post of 9.54PM, that the number of poor children in Grammar schools is about 1/5 of that in the County as a whole?
It sounds to me that selective education is at least as good as house prices in keeping out the "riff raff". Presumably this is why so many Tories support it.
In 2009 only 232 students on FSM got 3 As at A Level, at 16 only 36.8% of those on FSM nationwide get at least a C grade in English and Maths at GCSE, on that basis grammars are doing well to get the numbers of FSM pupils they do get http://www.russell-group.ac.uk/news/free-school-meals/
Says a report by Lucy Powell, Labour education spokesperson, so very objective I assume. If we had a few more grammars in poorer areas which is at the heart of May's policy rather than mainly in wealthier areas as now they would be doing rather more for social mobility
I love the fact that a bloke whose family had enough money to send him to private school wants to take opportunities away from other less fortunate kids.
Yes, I had the benefit of going to a grammar school and it certainly helped me get on in life.
But your success came on the backs of those who ended up secondary moderns. Does that make you feel good?
People like me needed grammar schools so that we could cry 'rubbish' at bogus points like that made by private schooled* people like TSE.....
Full disclosure: *Logic slightly falls down since I was at a private prep
TSE's opposition to Grammar Schools has nothing to do with their merits, it's purely because Mrs May proposed an expansion of them. If Cameron and Osborne had advocated them he'd be their most enthusiastic advocate. As for his puerile comment to Floater, pathetic.
In all seriousness, do the Tories REALLY want to win this? If it endangers Corbyn that is BAD for them. Is it worth gaining one more MP in the Commons, to lose their greatest electoral asset, the Labour leader himself?
I'd say it's a pretty close call, and the Tories will be oddly satisfied with a very close second.
Of course they do as it will give a mandate for Article 50 and a mandate for May for Brexit and shutup all the Remoaners who are still crowing about Richmond Park, given Corbyn has comfortably been re-elected by Labour members he is not going anywhere soon
True. I was speculating too idly perhaps.
But Corbyn really IS the Tories' greatest asset. They really do not want him gone. At some point they will have to start maneuvering to keep him where he is. Give him a few fake but easy victories.
Maybe but it would
Hmm. I think Tories have to guard against complacency. The new Labour membership is young, volatile and unpredictable. The Lefty hive mind might suddenly have a fit of common sense, and in the face of a difficult Brexit Labour could do surprisingly well in 2020 under a vaguely sane leader. The sudden shock of seeing a non-nutter taking down Theresa in the Commons would concentrate voter minds.
The Tories, paradoxically, need the polls to improve for Labour, for a year or so.
Starmer will wipe the wooden smile off Theresa's face.
Starmer is far too rightwing for current Labour members
How the hell do you know ? You are a Tory.
you're entitled to a view on god even if you're an atheist
Though it is not likely to be a well informed view!
will god be the judge of that?
All the evidence of the Gospels is that ignorance of God is not a bar to winding up in the right place. I would cite the parable of the Good Samaritan, and of the Romsn Centurion as examples. Excellent knowledge of theology would not save the Pharisees or Sanhedrin.
In summary, much of Jesus's teaching can be conensed to: Intellectual knowledge of God is no substitute for the heartfelt internal experience, and indeed is often an obstacle to be overcome.
Says a report by Lucy Powell, Labour education spokesperson, so very objective I assume. If we had a few more grammars in poorer areas which is at the heart of May's policy rather than mainly in wealthier areas as now they would be doing rather more for social mobility
I love the fact that a bloke whose family had enough money to send him to private school wants to take opportunities away from other less fortunate kids.
Yes, I had the benefit of going to a grammar school and it certainly helped me get on in life.
But your success came on the backs of those who ended up secondary moderns. Does that make you feel good?
People like me needed grammar schools so that we could cry 'rubbish' at bogus points like that made by private schooled* people like TSE.....
Full disclosure: *Logic slightly falls down since I was at a private prep
Logic failure from a grammar school supporting Leaver, say it ain't so?
Says a report by Lucy Powell, Labour education spokesperson, so very objective I assume. If we had a few more grammars in poorer areas which is at the heart of May's policy rather than mainly in wealthier areas as now they would be doing rather more for social mobility
I love the fact that a bloke whose family had enough money to send him to private school wants to take opportunities away from other less fortunate kids.
Yes, I had the benefit of going to a grammar school and it certainly helped me get on in life.
But your success came on the backs of those who ended up secondary moderns. Does that make you feel good?
I'm unclear as to whether that means you think secondary moderns are inferior to grammars
TSE's opposition to Grammar Schools has nothing to do with their merits, it's purely because Mrs May proposed an expansion of them. If Cameron and Osborne had advocated them he'd be their most enthusiastic advocate. As for his puerile comment to Floater, pathetic.
Bollocks.
All the evidence is that grammar schools screw and fail to help the poor.
Le Pen says Russia, France and the US should form an alliance.
What position should Britgov take?
1) Support her, so as to help put an end to the EU?
Even an alliance between France and Germany or Prussia was traditionally viewed as anathema; their ever closer union must be even less desirable. Someone could call Nigel Farage and ask him to appear at Le Pen rallies in the same way that he helped Trump.
The news re-the NHS reinforces my sense that -whenever we do have an election – such issues will override views relating to Brexit. We may begin to see some evidence of that in the Copeland by election.
I thought we had an NHS crisis every winter? If you google "nhs crisis 20xx" starting from 2016 and working backwards, there is one every year at least until you get bored with the exercise and lose interest. It is also fully priced in that the blame lies 100% with the tories.
Personally I do not recall claims of a humanitarian crisis in the NHS in earlier winters.
When you've had an NHS Crisis every year for the past 40 years, you have to come up with a new term to get the attention of the media.
So Sean, Hunt's management is all going tickety-boo is it?
We've never had more beds? We've never had a greater proportion of GDP going to health? We've never had such a low rate of delayed transfers of care? No-one waits more than 4 hours in A&E? We have the highest proportion of doctors per capita in Europe? etc.
There's a range of outcomes between "going all tickety boo" and "humanitarian crisis".
So what is then?
You think it's a binary choice between the two?
No. I'd just like a Tory view on how well the NHS is doing and what is currently wrong with it?
I'm sorry if you found my comment offensive but I'm in the South of France and I've just arrived back from a dizzying walk along the seafront to be greeted by the sound of the Nobel prize winner for literature singing one of his finest love songs 'To Ramona' and then to be faced with that disgusting philistine Guido's thoughts on the Red Cross was more than I could bear.
Says a report by Lucy Powell, Labour education spokesperson, so very objective I assume. If we had a few more grammars in poorer areas which is at the heart of May's policy rather than mainly in wealthier areas as now they would be doing rather more for social mobility
Former Labour Education spokesperson.
More importantly, what is wrong with her analysis?
Exactly as I pointed out, the reason grammars do less for social mobility than they used to is that Labour scrapped most of them leaving the few remaining in leafy Tory areas. Singapore selects at 13 and tops the latest PISA
Quite - in fact we have moved to Grammar-school-by-house-price in most areas. Another effect is that the lower orders feel "not welcome" .... there is "too much homework".... the rules on holidays enforced "aggressively"... so they don't contaminate the posh "comprehensives".
Do you agree with my figures in my post of 9.54PM, that the number of poor children in Grammar schools is about 1/5 of that in the County as a whole?
It sounds to me that selective education is at least as good as house prices in keeping out the "riff raff". Presumably this is why so many Tories support it.
In 2009 only 232 students on FSM got 3 As at A Level, at 16 only 36.8% of those on FSM nationwide get at least a C grade in English and Maths at GCSE, on that basis grammars are doing well to get the numbers of FSM pupils they do get http://www.russell-group.ac.uk/news/free-school-meals/
I agree that pupils on FSM do poorly across the board, the difference is that you seem to see Grammar schools as the solution, when they are at best a distraction.
TSE's opposition to Grammar Schools has nothing to do with their merits, it's purely because Mrs May proposed an expansion of them. If Cameron and Osborne had advocated them he'd be their most enthusiastic advocate. As for his puerile comment to Floater, pathetic.
Bollocks.
All the evidence is that grammar schools screw and fail to help the poor.
The news re-the NHS reinforces my sense that -whenever we do have an election – such issues will override views relating to Brexit. We may begin to see some evidence of that in the Copeland by election.
I thought we had an NHS crisis every winter? If you google "nhs crisis 20xx" starting from 2016 and working backwards, there is one every year at least until you get bored with the exercise and lose interest. It is also fully priced in that the blame lies 100% with the tories.
Personally I do not recall claims of a humanitarian crisis in the NHS in earlier winters.
When you've had an NHS Crisis every year for the past 40 years, you have to come up with a new term to get the attention of the media.
So Sean, Hunt's management is all going tickety-boo is it?
We've never had more beds? We've never had a greater proportion of GDP going to health? We've never had such a low rate of delayed transfers of care? No-one waits more than 4 hours in A&E? We have the highest proportion of doctors per capita in Europe? etc.
There's a range of outcomes between "going all tickety boo" and "humanitarian crisis".
So what is then?
The NHS is under pressure, as it always has been, because demand for it's services is unlimited.
But is the pressure worse now than it has been? And has Hunt and Lansley's management helped or hindered?
TSE's opposition to Grammar Schools has nothing to do with their merits, it's purely because Mrs May proposed an expansion of them. If Cameron and Osborne had advocated them he'd be their most enthusiastic advocate. As for his puerile comment to Floater, pathetic.
Bollocks.
All the evidence is that grammar schools screw and fail to help the poor.
Not my fault you ignore the plethora of evidence.
More free schools, Michael Gove had it right.
Bit touchy TSE.
Touchy? Nah, I'm having tremendous fun with people like you tonight.
In all seriousness, do the Tories REALLY want to win this? If it endangers Corbyn that is BAD for them. Is it worth gaining one more MP in the Commons, to lose their greatest electoral asset, the Labour leader himself?
I'd say it's a pretty close call, and the Tories will be oddly satisfied with a very close second.
Of course they do as it will give a mandate for Article 50 and a mandate for May for Brexit and shutup all the Remoaners who are still crowing about Richmond Park, given Corbyn has comfortably been re-elected by Labour members he is not going anywhere soon
True. I was speculating too idly perhaps.
But Corbyn really IS the Tories' greatest asset. They really do not want him gone. At some point they will have to start maneuvering to keep him where he is. Give him a few fake but easy victories.
Maybe but it would
Hmm. I think Tories have to guard against complacency. The new Labour membership is young, volatile and unpredictable. The Lefty hive mind might suddenly have a fit of common sense, and in the face of a difficult Brexit Labour could do surprisingly well in 2020 under a vaguely sane leader. The sudden shock of seeing a non-nutter taking down Theresa in the Commons would concentrate voter minds.
The Tories, paradoxically, need the polls to improve for Labour, for a year or so.
Starmer will wipe the wooden smile off Theresa's face.
Starmer is far too rightwing for current Labour members
How the hell do you know ? You are a Tory.
you're entitled to a view on god even if you're an atheist
Though it is not likely to be a well informed view!
will god be the judge of that?
All the evidence of the Gospels is that ignorance of God is not a bar to winding up in the right place. I would cite the parable of the Good Samaritan, and of the Romsn Centurion as examples. Excellent knowledge of theology would not save the Pharisees or Sanhedrin.
In summary, much of Jesus's teaching can be conensed to: Intellectual knowledge of God is no substitute for the heartfelt internal experience, and indeed is often an obstacle to be overcome.
Here endeth tonights Bible study!
On the other hand, the theological types tend to be rubbish at philosophy. The current incumbent of Canterbury is a particularly painful example.
I've just remembered...it was an article for the Telegraph about the EU. I actually laughed out loud. As it was 12 years ago you must worry your best years are behind you?
Ah. My article on the EU Constitution.
No, I don't worry about peaking, given that my annual income right now is roughly twenty times what it was then, and indeed is, of this week, higher than it has ever been (perhaps you missed my vulgar boasting last night).
I WILL peak, at some point, maybe soon..... but not yet. Not yet.
TSE's opposition to Grammar Schools has nothing to do with their merits, it's purely because Mrs May proposed an expansion of them. If Cameron and Osborne had advocated them he'd be their most enthusiastic advocate. As for his puerile comment to Floater, pathetic.
Bollocks.
All the evidence is that grammar schools screw and fail to help the poor.
Not my fault you ignore the plethora of evidence.
More free schools, Michael Gove had it right.
No reason cannot have more grammars and more free schools and more academies
Says a report by Lucy Powell, Labour education spokesperson, so very objective I assume. If we had a few more grammars in poorer areas which is at the heart of May's policy rather than mainly in wealthier areas as now they would be doing rather more for social mobility
Former Labour Education spokesperson.
More importantly, what is wrong with her analysis?
Exactly as I pointed out, the reason grammars do less for social mobility than they used to is that Labour scrapped most of them leaving the few remaining in leafy Tory areas. Singapore selects at 13 and tops the latest PISA
Quite - in fact we have moved to Grammar-school-by-house-price in most areas. Another effect is that the lower orders feel "not welcome" .... there is "too much homework".... the rules on holidays enforced "aggressively"... so they don't contaminate the posh "comprehensives".
Do you agree with my figures in my post of 9.54PM, that the number of poor children in Grammar schools is about 1/5 of that in the County as a whole?
It sounds to me that selective education is at least as good as house prices in keeping out the "riff raff". Presumably this is why so many Tories support it.
In 2009 only 232 students on FSM got 3 As at A Level, at 16 only 36.8% of those on FSM nationwide get at least a C grade in English and Maths at GCSE, on that basis grammars are doing well to get the numbers of FSM pupils they do get http://www.russell-group.ac.uk/news/free-school-meals/
I agree that pupils on FSM do poorly across the board, the difference is that you seem to see Grammar schools as the solution, when they are at best a distraction.
I don't think the Tory Right's position on Grammar Schools has anything to do with education. It is more to do with ideplogy
TSE's opposition to Grammar Schools has nothing to do with their merits, it's purely because Mrs May proposed an expansion of them. If Cameron and Osborne had advocated them he'd be their most enthusiastic advocate. As for his puerile comment to Floater, pathetic.
Bollocks.
All the evidence is that grammar schools screw and fail to help the poor.
Not my fault you ignore the plethora of evidence.
More free schools, Michael Gove had it right.
Bit touchy TSE.
Touchy? Nah, I'm having tremendous fun with people like you tonight.
People like me are educated at secondary moderns in Hull. Which bit are you having fun with me?
The news re-the NHS reinforces my sense that -whenever we do have an election – such issues will override views relating to Brexit. We may begin to see some evidence of that in the Copeland by election.
I thought we had an NHS crisis every winter? If you google "nhs crisis 20xx" starting from 2016 and working backwards, there is one every year at least until you get bored with the exercise and lose interest. It is also fully priced in that the blame lies 100% with the tories.
Personally I do not recall claims of a humanitarian crisis in the NHS in earlier winters.
When you've had an NHS Crisis every year for the past 40 years, you have to come up with a new term to get the attention of the media.
So Sean, Hunt's management is all going tickety-boo is it?
We've never had more beds? We've never had a greater proportion of GDP going to health? We've never had such a low rate of delayed transfers of care? No-one waits more than 4 hours in A&E? We have the highest proportion of doctors per capita in Europe? etc.
There's a range of outcomes between "going all tickety boo" and "humanitarian crisis".
So what is then?
The NHS is under pressure, as it always has been, because demand for it's services is unlimited.
Its difficulty is that it is trying to apply a 1940s solution to what is now a 2017 problem. We really need to stop treating it as a political football and find some way forward based on an apolitical consensus. There .... how easy is that?
Says a report by Lucy Powell, Labour education spokesperson, so very objective I assume. If we had a few more grammars in poorer areas which is at the heart of May's policy rather than mainly in wealthier areas as now they would be doing rather more for social mobility
I love the fact that a bloke whose family had enough money to send him to private school wants to take opportunities away from other less fortunate kids.
Yes, I had the benefit of going to a grammar school and it certainly helped me get on in life.
But your success came on the backs of those who ended up secondary moderns. Does that make you feel good?
People like me needed grammar schools so that we could cry 'rubbish' at bogus points like that made by private schooled* people like TSE.....
Full disclosure: *Logic slightly falls down since I was at a private prep
Logic failure from a grammar school supporting Leaver, say it ain't so?
Rather rich of a Public School Thicko accusing others of logical failure, no?
TSE's opposition to Grammar Schools has nothing to do with their merits, it's purely because Mrs May proposed an expansion of them. If Cameron and Osborne had advocated them he'd be their most enthusiastic advocate. As for his puerile comment to Floater, pathetic.
Bollocks.
All the evidence is that grammar schools screw and fail to help the poor.
Not my fault you ignore the plethora of evidence.
More free schools, Michael Gove had it right.
No reason cannot have more grammars and more free schools and more academies
Says a report by Lucy Powell, Labour education spokesperson, so very objective I assume. If we had a few more grammars in poorer areas which is at the heart of May's policy rather than mainly in wealthier areas as now they would be doing rather more for social mobility
Former Labour Education spokesperson.
More importantly, what is wrong with her analysis?
Exactly as I pointed out, the reason grammars do less for social mobility than they used to is that Labour scrapped most of them leaving the few remaining in leafy Tory areas. Singapore selects at 13 and tops the latest PISA
Quite - in fact we have moved to Grammar-school-by-house-price in most areas. Another effect is that the lower orders feel "not welcome" .... there is "too much homework".... the rules on holidays enforced "aggressively"... so they don't contaminate the posh "comprehensives".
Do you agree with my figures in my post of 9.54PM, that the number of poor children in Grammar schools is about 1/5 of that in the County as a whole?
It sounds to me that selective education is at least as good as house prices in keeping out the "riff raff". Presumably this is why so many Tories support it.
In 2009 only 232 students on FSM got 3 As at A Level, at 16 only 36.8% of those on FSM nationwide get at least a C grade in English and Maths at GCSE, on that basis grammars are doing well to get the numbers of FSM pupils they do get http://www.russell-group.ac.uk/news/free-school-meals/
I agree that pupils on FSM do poorly across the board, the difference is that you seem to see Grammar schools as the solution, when they are at best a distraction.
I agree grammar schools are not enough on their own, they need to go in conjunction with other education reforms
The news re-the NHS reinforces my sense that -whenever we do have an election – such issues will override views relating to Brexit. We may begin to see some evidence of that in the Copeland by election.
I thought we had an NHS crisis every winter? If you google "nhs crisis 20xx" starting from 2016 and working backwards, there is one every year at least until you get bored with the exercise and lose interest. It is also fully priced in that the blame lies 100% with the tories.
Personally I do not recall claims of a humanitarian crisis in the NHS in earlier winters.
How would a crisis in the NHS not be an humanitarian crisis? This is meet the new crisis, same as the old crisis but now with added flounce.
The news re-the NHS reinforces my sense that -whenever we do have an election – such issues will override views relating to Brexit. We may begin to see some evidence of that in the Copeland by election.
I thought we had an NHS crisis every winter? If you google "nhs crisis 20xx" starting from 2016 and working backwards, there is one every year at least until you get bored with the exercise and lose interest. It is also fully priced in that the blame lies 100% with the tories.
Personally I do not recall claims of a humanitarian crisis in the NHS in earlier winters.
When you've had an NHS Crisis every year for the past 40 years, you have to come up with a new term to get the attention of the media.
So Sean, Hunt's management is all going tickety-boo is it?
We've never had more beds? We've never had a greater proportion of GDP going to health? We've never had such a low rate of delayed transfers of care? No-one waits more than 4 hours in A&E? We have the highest proportion of doctors per capita in Europe? etc.
There's a range of outcomes between "going all tickety boo" and "humanitarian crisis".
So what is then?
The NHS is under pressure, as it always has been, because demand for it's services is unlimited.
Its difficulty is that it is trying to apply a 1940s solution to what is now a 2017 problem. We really need to stop treating it as a political football and find some way forward based on an apolitical consensus. There .... how easy is that?
Which is what Dr Wollaston is proposing. Will the government take notice?
TSE's opposition to Grammar Schools has nothing to do with their merits, it's purely because Mrs May proposed an expansion of them. If Cameron and Osborne had advocated them he'd be their most enthusiastic advocate. As for his puerile comment to Floater, pathetic.
Bollocks.
All the evidence is that grammar schools screw and fail to help the poor.
Not my fault you ignore the plethora of evidence.
More free schools, Michael Gove had it right.
No reason cannot have more grammars and more free schools and more academies
....and, of course, lower taxation !
Eventually yes but got a lot to sort out at the moment
All work and no play make TSE a public school thicko All work and no play make TSE a public school thicko All work and no play make TSE a public school thicko All work and no play make TSE a public school thicko
All work and no play make TSE a public school thicko All work and no play make TSE a public school thicko All work and no play make TSE a public school thicko
All work and no play make TSE a public school thicko All work and no play make TSE a public school thicko All work and no play make TSE a public school thicko
In all seriousness, do the Tories REALLY want to win this? If it endangers Corbyn that is BAD for them. Is it worth gaining one more MP in the Commons, to lose their greatest electoral asset, the Labour leader himself?
I'd say it's a pretty close call, and the Tories will be oddly satisfied with a very close second.
Of course they do as it will give a mandate for Article 50 and a mandate for May for Brexit and shutup all the Remoaners who are still crowing about Richmond Park, given Corbyn has comfortably been re-elected by Labour members he is not going anywhere soon
True. I was speculating too idly perhaps.
But Corbyn really IS the Tories' greatest asset. They really do not want him gone. At some point they will have to start maneuvering to keep him where he is. Give him a few fake but easy victories.
Maybe but it would
Hmm. I think Tories have to guard against complacency. The new Labour membership is young, volatile and unpredictable. The Lefty hive mind might suddenly have a fit of common sense, and in the face of a difficult Brexit Labour could do surprisingly well in 2020 under a vaguely sane leader. The sudden shock of seeing a non-nutter taking down Theresa in the Commons would concentrate voter minds.
The Tories, paradoxically, need the polls to improve for Labour, for a year or so.
Starmer will wipe the wooden smile off Theresa's face.
Starmer is far too rightwing for current Labour members
How the hell do you know ? You are a Tory.
you're entitled to a view on god even if you're an atheist
Though it is not likely to be a well informed view!
will god be the judge of that?
All the evidence of the Gospels is that ignorance of God is not a bar to winding up in the right place. I would cite the parable of the Good Samaritan, and of the Romsn Centurion as examples. Excellent knowledge of theology would not save the Pharisees or Sanhedrin.
In summary, much of Jesus's teaching can be conensed to: Intellectual knowledge of God is no substitute for the heartfelt internal experience, and indeed is often an obstacle to be overcome.
TSE's opposition to Grammar Schools has nothing to do with their merits, it's purely because Mrs May proposed an expansion of them. If Cameron and Osborne had advocated them he'd be their most enthusiastic advocate. As for his puerile comment to Floater, pathetic.
Bollocks.
All the evidence is that grammar schools screw and fail to help the poor.
Not my fault you ignore the plethora of evidence.
More free schools, Michael Gove had it right.
Bit touchy TSE.
Touchy? Nah, I'm having tremendous fun with people like you tonight.
People like me are educated at secondary moderns in Hull. Which bit are you having fun with me?
This bit, where you wrote 'TSE's opposition to Grammar Schools has nothing to do with their merits, it's purely because Mrs May proposed an expansion of them. If Cameron and Osborne had advocated them he'd be their most enthusiastic advocate.'
Long before Cameron was leader I wrote and spoke about the flaws of grammar schools, citing Mrs Thatcher's legacy as Education Secretary.
I think in 2003 elsewhere I wrote 'The return of grammar schools is to the Tory party what banning fox hunting is to the Labour party'
TSE's opposition to Grammar Schools has nothing to do with their merits, it's purely because Mrs May proposed an expansion of them. If Cameron and Osborne had advocated them he'd be their most enthusiastic advocate. As for his puerile comment to Floater, pathetic.
Bollocks.
All the evidence is that grammar schools screw and fail to help the poor.
Not my fault you ignore the plethora of evidence.
More free schools, Michael Gove had it right.
Actually, more support for early years intervention even before primary school is the best solution.
Not easy to implement, able to produce quick results nor popular with Tory voters, but very much what the LDs support. Also incidentally also very likely to bring savings in both social care and criminal justice systems in the long run too.
Says a report by Lucy Powell, Labour education spokesperson, so very objective I assume. If we had a few more grammars in poorer areas which is at the heart of May's policy rather than mainly in wealthier areas as now they would be doing rather more for social mobility
I love the fact that a bloke whose family had enough money to send him to private school wants to take opportunities away from other less fortunate kids.
Yes, I had the benefit of going to a grammar school and it certainly helped me get on in life.
But your success came on the backs of those who ended up secondary moderns. Does that make you feel good?
People like me needed grammar schools so that we could cry 'rubbish' at bogus points like that made by private schooled* people like TSE.....
Full disclosure: *Logic slightly falls down since I was at a private prep
Logic failure from a grammar school supporting Leaver, say it ain't so?
Rather rich of a Public School Thicko accusing others of logical failure, no?
TSE's opposition to Grammar Schools has nothing to do with their merits, it's purely because Mrs May proposed an expansion of them. If Cameron and Osborne had advocated them he'd be their most enthusiastic advocate. As for his puerile comment to Floater, pathetic.
Bollocks.
All the evidence is that grammar schools screw and fail to help the poor.
Not my fault you ignore the plethora of evidence.
More free schools, Michael Gove had it right.
Grammar school worked to help me.
My mum brought up my sister and I on four quid a week, in the 60's. I think that qualifies as poor.
In all seriousness, do the Tories REALLY want to win this? If it endangers Corbyn that is BAD for them. Is it worth gaining one more MP in the Commons, to lose their greatest electoral asset, the Labour leader himself?
I'd say it's a pretty close call, and the Tories will be oddly satisfied with a very close second.
Of course they do as it will give a mandate for Article 50 and a mandate for May for Brexit and shutup all the Remoaners who are still crowing about Richmond Park, given Corbyn has comfortably been re-elected by Labour members he is not going anywhere soon
True. I was speculating too idly perhaps.
But Corbyn really IS the Tories' greatest asset. They really do not want him gone. At some point they will have to start maneuvering to keep him where he is. Give him a few fake but easy victories.
Maybe but it would
Hmm. I think Tories have to guard against complacency. The new Labour membership is young, volatile and unpredictable. The Lefty hive mind might suddenly have a fit of common sense, and in the face of a difficult Brexit Labour could do surprisingly well in 2020 under a vaguely sane leader. The sudden shock of seeing a non-nutter taking down Theresa in the Commons would concentrate voter minds.
The Tories, paradoxically, need the polls to improve for Labour, for a year or so.
Starmer will wipe the wooden smile off Theresa's face.
Starmer is far too rightwing for current Labour members
How the hell do you know ? You are a Tory.
you're entitled to a view on god even if you're an atheist
Though it is not likely to be a well informed view!
will god be the judge of that?
All the evidence of the Gospels is that ignorance of God is not a bar to winding up in the right place. I would cite the parable of the Good Samaritan, and of the Romsn Centurion as examples. Excellent knowledge of theology would not save the Pharisees or Sanhedrin.
In summary, much of Jesus's teaching can be conensed to: Intellectual knowledge of God is no substitute for the heartfelt internal experience, and indeed is often an obstacle to be overcome.
The news re-the NHS reinforces my sense that -whenever we do have an election – such issues will override views relating to Brexit. We may begin to see some evidence of that in the Copeland by election.
I thought we had an NHS crisis every winter? If you google "nhs crisis 20xx" starting from 2016 and working backwards, there is one every year at least until you get bored with the exercise and lose interest. It is also fully priced in that the blame lies 100% with the tories.
Personally I do not recall claims of a humanitarian crisis in the NHS in earlier winters.
When you've had an NHS Crisis every year for the past 40 years, you have to come up with a new term to get the attention of the media.
So Sean, Hunt's management is all going tickety-boo is it?
We've never had more beds? We've never had a greater proportion of GDP going to health? We've never had such a low rate of delayed transfers of care? No-one waits more than 4 hours in A&E? We have the highest proportion of doctors per capita in Europe? etc.
There's a range of outcomes between "going all tickety boo" and "humanitarian crisis".
So what is then?
The NHS is under pressure, as it always has been, because demand for it's services is unlimited.
Its difficulty is that it is trying to apply a 1940s solution to what is now a 2017 problem. We really need to stop treating it as a political football and find some way forward based on an apolitical consensus. There .... how easy is that?
Which is what Dr Wollaston is proposing. Will the government take notice?
That's your idea of apolitical - what's the government going to do about it?
TSE's opposition to Grammar Schools has nothing to do with their merits, it's purely because Mrs May proposed an expansion of them. If Cameron and Osborne had advocated them he'd be their most enthusiastic advocate. As for his puerile comment to Floater, pathetic.
Bollocks.
All the evidence is that grammar schools screw and fail to help the poor.
Not my fault you ignore the plethora of evidence.
More free schools, Michael Gove had it right.
Grammar school worked to help me.
My mum brought up my sister and I on four quid a week, in the 60's. I think that qualifies as poor.
Just caught up with your wife's encounter with Benedict Cumberbatch, this should cheer her up.
My friend bumped into Benedict Cumberbatch last year, and she was wearing the 'I don't shave for Sherlock' t shirt I had bought for her.
He smiled/smirked at her, my friend went red and didn't know what to say.
TSE's opposition to Grammar Schools has nothing to do with their merits, it's purely because Mrs May proposed an expansion of them. If Cameron and Osborne had advocated them he'd be their most enthusiastic advocate. As for his puerile comment to Floater, pathetic.
Bollocks.
All the evidence is that grammar schools screw and fail to help the poor.
Not my fault you ignore the plethora of evidence.
More free schools, Michael Gove had it right.
Grammar school worked to help me.
My mum brought up my sister and I on four quid a week, in the 60's. I think that qualifies as poor.
Shouldn't that be "my mum brought up my sister and me"?
TSE's opposition to Grammar Schools has nothing to do with their merits, it's purely because Mrs May proposed an expansion of them. If Cameron and Osborne had advocated them he'd be their most enthusiastic advocate. As for his puerile comment to Floater, pathetic.
Bollocks.
All the evidence is that grammar schools screw and fail to help the poor.
Not my fault you ignore the plethora of evidence.
More free schools, Michael Gove had it right.
Grammar school worked to help me.
My mum brought up my sister and I on four quid a week, in the 60's. I think that qualifies as poor.
TSE's opposition to Grammar Schools has nothing to do with their merits, it's purely because Mrs May proposed an expansion of them. If Cameron and Osborne had advocated them he'd be their most enthusiastic advocate. As for his puerile comment to Floater, pathetic.
Bollocks.
All the evidence is that grammar schools screw and fail to help the poor.
Not my fault you ignore the plethora of evidence.
More free schools, Michael Gove had it right.
Grammar school worked to help me.
My mum brought up my sister and I on four quid a week, in the 60's. I think that qualifies as poor.
Just caught up with your wife's encounter with Benedict Cumberbatch, this should cheer her up.
My friend bumped into Benedict Cumberbatch last year, and she was wearing the 'I don't shave for Sherlock' t shirt I had bought for her.
He smiled/smirked at her, my friend went red and didn't know what to say.
TSE's opposition to Grammar Schools has nothing to do with their merits, it's purely because Mrs May proposed an expansion of them. If Cameron and Osborne had advocated them he'd be their most enthusiastic advocate. As for his puerile comment to Floater, pathetic.
Bollocks.
All the evidence is that grammar schools screw and fail to help the poor.
Not my fault you ignore the plethora of evidence.
More free schools, Michael Gove had it right.
Grammar school worked to help me.
My mum brought up my sister and I on four quid a week, in the 60's. I think that qualifies as poor.
you don't come from Yorkshire do you?
Yorkshire? We used to DREAM of coming from Yorkshire....
But I had FSM. And I went to a Grammar school. And I was the first in my family to go to University.
In all seriousness, do the Tories REALLY want to win this? If it endangers Corbyn that is BAD for them. Is it worth gaining one more MP in the Commons, to lose their greatest electoral asset, the Labour leader himself?
I'd say it's a pretty close call, and the Tories will be oddly satisfied with a very close second.
Of course they do as it will give a mandate for Article 50 and a mandate for May for Brexit and shutup all the Remoaners who are still crowing about Richmond Park, given Corbyn has comfortably been re-elected by Labour members he is not going anywhere soon
True. I was speculating too idly perhaps.
But Corbyn really IS the Tories' greatest asset. They really do not want him gone. At some point they will have to start maneuvering to keep him where he is. Give him a few fake but easy victories.
Maybe but it would
Hmm. I think Tories have to guard against complacency. The new Labour membership is young, volatile and unpredictable. The Lefty hive mind might suddenly have a fit of common sense, and in the face of a difficult Brexit Labour could do surprisingly well in 2020 under a vaguely sane leader. The sudden shock of seeing a non-nutter taking down Theresa in the Commons would concentrate voter minds.
The Tories, paradoxically, need the polls to improve for Labour, for a year or so.
Starmer will wipe the wooden smile off Theresa's face.
Starmer is far too rightwing for current Labour members
How the hell do you know ? You are a Tory.
you're entitled to a view on god even if you're an atheist
Though it is not likely to be a well informed view!
will god be the judge of that?
All the evidence of the Gospels is that ignorance of God is not a bar to winding up in the right place. I would cite the parable of the Good Samaritan, and of the Romsn Centurion as examples. Excellent knowledge of theology would not save the Pharisees or Sanhedrin.
In summary, much of Jesus's teaching can be conensed to: Intellectual knowledge of God is no substitute for the heartfelt internal experience, and indeed is often an obstacle to be overcome.
Comments
Thanks Dave!
REMAIN 48%
Wouldn't you agree that the service there was sub-optimal?
I blame his lack of grammar school education for his lack of historical knowledge!
To give an example. I live in the catchment area of 2 primary schools. One performs as well as a private school. People have been convicted, in court, of fraud to get their children into this school. The other is a disaster, a real failed school.
Very nearly no-one from the local housing estates goes to the good school. The few that do describe the reasons that their friends and neighbours don't apply in the terms I use above.
They think of school as somewhere where they drop the kids at 9 and pick them up at 3:30. They think that the children will get all the education they need between those hours. Homework is an imposition. They do not read books to their children.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/1999/sep/24/marktran
We've never had more beds?
We've never had a greater proportion of GDP going to health?
We've never had such a low rate of delayed transfers of care?
No-one waits more than 4 hours in A&E?
We have the highest proportion of doctors per capita in Europe?
etc.
It sounds to me that selective education is at least as good as house prices in keeping out the "riff raff". Presumably this is why so many Tories support it.
That's ignoring that Referenda are much more clearly an on-off switch. Your attitude is that the voters chose to turn the switch to on, but hell, they can wait - and maybe we will never turn the switch to on. Fvck 'em. We know better about how switches work.
I've heard several anecdotes this weekend at a trade fair of Remainers ejecting toys from prams over Christmas....
It'll be worth the wait.
No 2 AV 68%
Yes 2 AV 32%
http://www.russell-group.ac.uk/news/free-school-meals/
More so.
Full disclosure: *Logic slightly falls down since I was at a private prep
In summary, much of Jesus's teaching can be conensed to: Intellectual knowledge of God is no substitute for the heartfelt internal experience, and indeed is often an obstacle to be overcome.
Here endeth tonights Bible study!
All the evidence is that grammar schools screw and fail to help the poor.
Not my fault you ignore the plethora of evidence.
More free schools, Michael Gove had it right.
What position should Britgov take?
1) Support her, so as to help put an end to the EU?
Even an alliance between France and Germany or Prussia was traditionally viewed as anathema; their ever closer union must be even less desirable. Someone could call Nigel Farage and ask him to appear at Le Pen rallies in the same way that he helped Trump.
2) Undermine her?
Form a rival alliance with China, maybe?
3) Try to join?
4) Insert heads in sand?
All work and no play make TSE a public school thicko
All work and no play make TSE a public school thicko
All work and no play make TSE a public school thicko
All work and no play
make TSE a public school thicko
All work and no play
make TSE a public school thicko
All work and no play
make TSE a public school thicko
All work and no play make TSE a public school thicko
All work and no play make TSE a public school thicko
All work and no play make TSE a public school thicko
Long before Cameron was leader I wrote and spoke about the flaws of grammar schools, citing Mrs Thatcher's legacy as Education Secretary.
I think in 2003 elsewhere I wrote 'The return of grammar schools is to the Tory party what banning fox hunting is to the Labour party'
Not easy to implement, able to produce quick results nor popular with Tory voters, but very much what the LDs support. Also incidentally also very likely to bring savings in both social care and criminal justice systems in the long run too.
My mum brought up my sister and I on four quid a week, in the 60's. I think that qualifies as poor.
My friend bumped into Benedict Cumberbatch last year, and she was wearing the 'I don't shave for Sherlock' t shirt I had bought for her.
He smiled/smirked at her, my friend went red and didn't know what to say.
#GrammarNazi
But I had FSM. And I went to a Grammar school. And I was the first in my family to go to University.