Re: term-holidays The reason for this is probably the same as the reason we can't have lots of nice things we'd like: people taking the piss.
Another way of thinking about it: if you want the state to educate your child, you have to abide by the state's rules. Discuss...
And yet they are not going after those taking the piss. They are instead criminalising the otherwise law abiding so it looks like they are doing something. Discuss.
A different judgement would have been a significant indicator that it would be fine to take children out of school during term time. Now, I'm sure the vast majority of parents wouldn't do so because they recognise the damage it might do, but that leaves a significant number of parents who would perceive this as a green light. With the concomitant disruption to both the children taken out of school, and those left behind, that that would entail.
Find me an educator who disagrees with the judgement.
And why is an educator's view more important than the parents'? Hint, it is not. Not even close.
Experts eh! What do we know? Edited to add: would you feel the same about someone who ignores medical advice about their child?
Ah, time to go back over the debate about religious objections to medical treatment I see
He is right. I am already doing something similar and so are some others I know. Startups, lifestyle businesses and location-independent working is playing a bigger part in the economy than ever before.
The downside of being able to work anywhere, anytime, is that some customers expect you to work anywhere and anytime.
Surely parents could get around the law in practice by simply saying their kid is ill. Perhaps a bit more difficult if several are involved - unless claimng to be suffering from measles/chicken pox etc.
Surely parents could get around the law in practice by simply saying their kid is ill. Perhaps a bit more difficult if several are involved - unless claimng to be suffering from measles/chicken pox etc.
I may be out of touch here, but don't you need to take a Dr's letter if you have been off for a week or more ?
The real problem is that Little Jimmy probably has a big mouth and will brag to all his peers, and quite likely his teacher, that he had a great time at Disneyland last week while everyone else had their nose to the grindstone.
"Ryanair has warned it will have to halt flights from the UK for “weeks or months” if Theresa May does not seal an early bilateral Brexit deal on international aviation."
......and there was me thinking that Brexit was going to be an unmitigated disaster.
Michael O'Leary's business model is based on bullying passengers, airports, Governments and regulators into submission through threats and blackmail.
For some reason, he seems to be loved for it.
My guess is that making it more expensive and difficult for Brits to have weekends and weeks away in the sun will not be a popular move. Ryanair gets so many customers because it is cheap and that is what matters to most travellers more than anything else.
Except it isn't. The headline fare is cheaper, but it racks up an awful lot as soon as you add cabin bags, and pre-booked seats.
Easyjet and BA are equivalent and better.
And it's gone up a lot anyway: air passenger duty and other climate change reforms, including fuel prices, as well as changes to the aviation market, mean the days of flying with Ryanair for £1 to a remote airport outside Belgium or Lisbon are long gone.
"Ryanair has warned it will have to halt flights from the UK for “weeks or months” if Theresa May does not seal an early bilateral Brexit deal on international aviation."
......and there was me thinking that Brexit was going to be an unmitigated disaster.
Michael O'Leary's business model is based on bullying passengers, airports, Governments and regulators into submission through threats and blackmail.
For some reason, he seems to be loved for it.
My guess is that making it more expensive and difficult for Brits to have weekends and weeks away in the sun will not be a popular move. Ryanair gets so many customers because it is cheap and that is what matters to most travellers more than anything else.
Except it isn't. The headline fare is cheaper, but it racks up an awful lot as soon as you add cabin bags, and pre-booked seats.
Easyjet and BA are equivalent and better.
And it's gone up a lot anyway: air passenger duty and other climate change reforms, including fuel prices, as well as changes to the aviation market, mean the days of flying with Ryanair for £1 to a remote airport outside Belgium or Lisbon are long gone.
And making sure you use the right card to pay with. A mate of mine organized a specific payment card purely because of Ryan Air.
He is right. I am already doing something similar and so are some others I know. Startups, lifestyle businesses and location-independent working is playing a bigger part in the economy than ever before.
The downside of being able to work anywhere, anytime, is that some customers expect you to work anywhere and anytime.
Not so much 9 to 5 as Sunday to Saturday
"The nine to five is barbaric. I really believe that. I think one day we will look back at nine-to-five employment in a similar way to how we see child labour in the 19th century"
No hyperbole too strong for the Guardian, as always.
The nine to five is very outdated, and based on things like Henry Ford's factory production line shifts, and matching commercial shop opening hours from 100 years ago.
But, it stays because we like it: as a friend of mine says, work is daycare for adults.
He is right. I am already doing something similar and so are some others I know. Startups, lifestyle businesses and location-independent working is playing a bigger part in the economy than ever before.
The downside of being able to work anywhere, anytime, is that some customers expect you to work anywhere and anytime.
Not so much 9 to 5 as Sunday to Saturday
"The nine to five is barbaric. I really believe that. I think one day we will look back at nine-to-five employment in a similar way to how we see child labour in the 19th century"
No hyperbole too strong for the Guardian, as always.
The nine to five is very outdated, and based on things like Henry Ford's factory production line shifts, and matching commercial shop opening hours from 100 years ago.
But, it stays because we like it: as a friend of mine says, work is daycare for adults.
And PB is daycare for nerds and other assorted waifs and strays.
I suspect the reason TSE thinks Reckless is the Cunto De Tutti Cunti is because he is an apostate. From the religion of Dave n George. The wellspring of TSE's very being. Reckless, like Carswell, has not altered his political views about the EU since forever. Under the gimps the Tory party drifted away from the common man and into bed with Clegg and views shared by (shudders) Heseltine, Clark, Ashdown, Mandelson, and god-only-knows what manner of pondlife. When Dave, who got himself elected as party leader on the false prospectus of being a Eurosceptic, basically gave up trying to get EU reform Reckless had had enough and walked. The timing was most unhelpful to project Daveosexualist. The party left Reckless and Carswell really, not the other way around. Post-Brexit and with that nice MrsMay in charge, the party has come right back to where it bloody well should have been all along (and mostly was but in a quiet, resentful sort of way). Simples.
The modernisation project was based on a belief that in order to win a general election outright, the Tory party had to attract middle class Liberal Democrat and Labour voters by becoming more socially liberal, and took its inspiration from Blair and the New Labour Project of 1994-1997.
It was potentially a sensible conclusion to draw in the 2001-2008 period, but looked very out of date by 2014 as a political strategy, even though it probably helped secure a few more Lib Dem seats in the 2015GE.
Nah, the modernisation project was based on a belief, articulated by the sainted Tezza, that the Tory party was n*sty. It was a detoxification programme that they embarked upon.
Yes, and the social attitudes of the Tory party of the time arguably had a big part to play in that perception.
Theresa's view was more that it needed to understand struggling working people better, and be more communitarian, less individualist, and less snooty, to address its perception of being for the rich and not people like me.
The Notting Hill view was that it needed much greater gender and racial diversity, and to talk more about progressive causes such as environmentalism, and feminism, and to demonstrate it was comfortable with a variety of lifestyle choices and sexual preferences.
I suspect the reason TSE thinks Reckless is the Cunto De Tutti Cunti is because he is an apostate. From the religion of Dave n George. The wellspring of TSE's very being. Reckless, like Carswell, has not altered his political views about the EU since forever. Under the gimps the Tory party drifted away from the common man and into bed with Clegg and views shared by (shudders) Heseltine, Clark, Ashdown, Mandelson, and god-only-knows what manner of pondlife. When Dave, who got himself elected as party leader on the false prospectus of being a Eurosceptic, basically gave up trying to get EU reform Reckless had had enough and walked. The timing was most unhelpful to project Daveosexualist. The party left Reckless and Carswell really, not the other way around. Post-Brexit and with that nice MrsMay in charge, the party has come right back to where it bloody well should have been all along (and mostly was but in a quiet, resentful sort of way). Simples.
The modernisation project was based on a belief that in order to win a general election outright, the Tory party had to attract middle class Liberal Democrat and Labour voters by becoming more socially liberal, and took its inspiration from Blair and the New Labour Project of 1994-1997.
It was potentially a sensible conclusion to draw in the 2001-2008 period, but looked very out of date by 2014 as a political strategy, even though it probably helped secure a few more Lib Dem seats in the 2015GE.
Nah, the modernisation project was based on a belief, articulated by the sainted Tezza, that the Tory party was n*sty. It was a detoxification programme that they embarked upon.
Yes, and the social attitudes of the Tory party of the time arguably had a big part to play in that perception.
Theresa's view was more that it needed to understand struggling working people better, and be more communitarian, less individualist, and less snooty, to address its perception of being for the rich and not people like me.
The Notting Hill view was that it needed much greater gender and racial diversity, and to talk more about progressive causes such as environmentalism, and feminism, and to demonstrate it was comfortable with a variety of lifestyle choices and sexual preferences.
Arguably, the party would not have got a hearing on the former without going through the latter first. I still think the Tory party owes Cameron a debt of gratitude for the things he did on purpose, not just his career-ending mistake.
If I worked in a fee-paying school you would be right: but our bills aren't paid by our pupils' parents, they are paid by the government. They are our client, so we do what they want. Voters tell them (very indirectly) what to do and most parents are voters, but most voters do not have school age children.
Rightly so. And that's why I get annoyed as a taxpayer for having to pay extra for sectarian education, that I don't agree with, and that doesn't help educational outcomes - because the parents want it.
having now read the comments, I'd like to associate myself with TSE's first tweet but fear he's clearly mellowed with age as he should have really ripped fat arse a proper one.
I note TPD rejoined after you said nice things about him during the budget. This is your fault.
If I worked in a fee-paying school you would be right: but our bills aren't paid by our pupils' parents, they are paid by the government. They are our client, so we do what they want. Voters tell them (very indirectly) what to do and most parents are voters, but most voters do not have school age children.
The argument as to who has the responsibility, the authority and the right to decide isn't anything to do with voting or funding. You're an employee, and those who employ you are working on behalf of clients, the parents, who can sack them if they wish. Not by voting, but by writing to the school's proprietor to say that their child will now be educated otherwise than at school and that that particular school, its employees, its funders, its administrators, and its inspectors - they are all now completely out of the picture, with immediate effect, services no longer required, because that's what the clients have decided. (And they don't have to give a reason.)
It is then the local authority's responsibility to ensure that parents are complying with the law which requires their child to be educated.
Surely parents could get around the law in practice by simply saying their kid is ill. Perhaps a bit more difficult if several are involved - unless claimng to be suffering from measles/chicken pox etc.
Is it a really good example to your children to encourage lying and law-breaking. there is a reason why most parents don't break this rule. It is a sensible rule with an appropriate level of discretion to heads to allow exceptions.
If I worked in a fee-paying school you would be right: but our bills aren't paid by our pupils' parents, they are paid by the government. They are our client, so we do what they want. Voters tell them (very indirectly) what to do and most parents are voters, but most voters do not have school age children.
The argument as to who has the responsibility, the authority and the right to decide isn't anything to do with voting or funding. You're an employee, and those who employ you are working on behalf of clients, the parents, who can sack them if they wish. Not by voting, but by writing to the school's proprietor to say that their child will now be educated otherwise than at school and that that particular school, its employees, its funders, its administrators, and its inspectors - they are all now completely out of the picture, with immediate effect, services no longer required, because that's what the clients have decided. (And they don't have to give a reason.)
In that sense yes, you are right. If you don't like how the state wants to educate your child, you are free to go elsewhere.
I've been thinking a bit more about who are clients are. Financially it is the state, but morally (and legally as well in a sense) they are our pupils not the parents. Mostly we want to work with the parents but if push comes to shove we will side with the interests of the child.
He is right. I am already doing something similar and so are some others I know. Startups, lifestyle businesses and location-independent working is playing a bigger part in the economy than ever before.
The downside of being able to work anywhere, anytime, is that some customers expect you to work anywhere and anytime.
Not so much 9 to 5 as Sunday to Saturday
"The nine to five is barbaric. I really believe that. I think one day we will look back at nine-to-five employment in a similar way to how we see child labour in the 19th century"
No hyperbole too strong for the Guardian, as always.
The nine to five is very outdated, and based on things like Henry Ford's factory production line shifts, and matching commercial shop opening hours from 100 years ago.
But, it stays because we like it: as a friend of mine says, work is daycare for adults.
And PB is daycare for nerds and other assorted waifs and strays.
Prior to a) WWII and b) the 1950 Shops Act shops opened much longer than they do now, although rarely on Sunday.
Ukip candidate in Gorton... sounds like a wind up to get the media wasting time checking it all out!!
"Phil, 31, was born in Ashton-under-Lyne, Manchester and spent his early years living in Droylesden, Manchester on a council estate. Later he lived in Droylesden and Oldham and spent most of his time striving to become a professional goalkeeper, having played for Bury FC, Rochdale FC and Oldham Athletic at YTS level. However realising that he would not reach a high enough level of standard in football he decided to concentrate on his studies. He achieved a BSc (Hons) First Class degree after studying Commercial Management and Quantity Surveying at the University of Manchester. He was then approached by Salford University upon graduation to be paid to take his Masters degree in order to continue his dissertation project and research, which he declined to pursue his career. After a total of two years in the construction industry and with the 2008 recession he decided to start up a social care company which he still runs. “I took this decision after having my own experiences of how poor care was being provided in the community and wanted to offer something better,” said Phil. At University he was a member of the Socialist Party and supported the left-wing euro-sceptic NO2EU – Yes to Democracy campaign but his left wing beliefs did not last after starting work. “I joined UKIP in 2013 as I felt no other Party credibly represented what I believed in, exiting the EU, law and order, supporting working people and promoting patriotic values. I am a part-time yoga teacher and a vegetarian,” he said."
I suspect the reason TSE thinks Reckless is the Cunto De Tutti Cunti is because he is an apostate. From the religion of Dave n George. The wellspring of TSE's very being. Reckless, like Carswell, has not altered his political views about the EU since forever. Under the gimps the Tory party drifted away from the common man and into bed with Clegg and views shared by (shudders) Heseltine, Clark, Ashdown, Mandelson, and god-only-knows what manner of pondlife. When Dave, who got himself elected as party leader on the false prospectus of being a Eurosceptic, basically gave up trying to get EU reform Reckless had had enough and walked. The timing was most unhelpful to project Daveosexualist. The party left Reckless and Carswell really, not the other way around. Post-Brexit and with that nice MrsMay in charge, the party has come right back to where it bloody well should have been all along (and mostly was but in a quiet, resentful sort of way). Simples.
The modernisation project was based on a belief that in order to win a general election outright, the Tory party had to attract middle class Liberal Democrat and Labour voters by becoming more socially liberal, and took its inspiration from Blair and the New Labour Project of 1994-1997.
It was potentially a sensible conclusion to draw in the 2001-2008 period, but looked very out of date by 2014 as a political strategy, even though it probably helped secure a few more Lib Dem seats in the 2015GE.
Nah, the modernisation project was based on a belief, articulated by the sainted Tezza, that the Tory party was n*sty. It was a detoxification programme that they embarked upon.
Yes, and the social attitudes of the Tory party of the time arguably had a big part to play in that perception.
Arguably, the party would not have got a hearing on the former without going through the latter first. I still think the Tory party owes Cameron a debt of gratitude for the things he did on purpose, not just his career-ending mistake.
Both were needed: the Tory party needed to show it was comfortable with modern Britain, but also that it understood and sympathised with the concerns of working people.
I would have started with the first, and let the second flow from it.
The latter is good enough to get from the low 30s to the high 30s, and swipe middle-class swing seats, but not enough to get solidly into the mid-40s and win clear majorities.
He is right. I am already doing something similar and so are some others I know. Startups, lifestyle businesses and location-independent working is playing a bigger part in the economy than ever before.
The downside of being able to work anywhere, anytime, is that some customers expect you to work anywhere and anytime.
Not so much 9 to 5 as Sunday to Saturday
"The nine to five is barbaric. I really believe that. I think one day we will look back at nine-to-five employment in a similar way to how we see child labour in the 19th century"
No hyperbole too strong for the Guardian, as always.
The nine to five is very outdated, and based on things like Henry Ford's factory production line shifts, and matching commercial shop opening hours from 100 years ago.
But, it stays because we like it: as a friend of mine says, work is daycare for adults.
And PB is daycare for nerds and other assorted waifs and strays.
"Ryanair has warned it will have to halt flights from the UK for “weeks or months” if Theresa May does not seal an early bilateral Brexit deal on international aviation."
......and there was me thinking that Brexit was going to be an unmitigated disaster.
Michael O'Leary's business model is based on bullying passengers, airports, Governments and regulators into submission through threats and blackmail.
For some reason, he seems to be loved for it.
My guess is that making it more expensive and difficult for Brits to have weekends and weeks away in the sun will not be a popular move. Ryanair gets so many customers because it is cheap and that is what matters to most travellers more than anything else.
Except it isn't. The headline fare is cheaper, but it racks up an awful lot as soon as you add cabin bags, and pre-booked seats.
Easyjet and BA are equivalent and better.
And it's gone up a lot anyway: air passenger duty and other climate change reforms, including fuel prices, as well as changes to the aviation market, mean the days of flying with Ryanair for £1 to a remote airport outside Belgium or Lisbon are long gone.
And making sure you use the right card to pay with. A mate of mine organized a specific payment card purely because of Ryan Air.
I don't, partly because I can't stand O'Leary, and I don't like how he runs his firm.
"Ryanair has warned it will have to halt flights from the UK for “weeks or months” if Theresa May does not seal an early bilateral Brexit deal on international aviation."
......and there was me thinking that Brexit was going to be an unmitigated disaster.
Michael O'Leary's business model is based on bullying passengers, airports, Governments and regulators into submission through threats and blackmail.
For some reason, he seems to be loved for it.
My guess is that making it more expensive and difficult for Brits to have weekends and weeks away in the sun will not be a popular move. Ryanair gets so many customers because it is cheap and that is what matters to most travellers more than anything else.
Except it isn't. The headline fare is cheaper, but it racks up an awful lot as soon as you add cabin bags, and pre-booked seats.
Easyjet and BA are equivalent and better.
And it's gone up a lot anyway: air passenger duty and other climate change reforms, including fuel prices, as well as changes to the aviation market, mean the days of flying with Ryanair for £1 to a remote airport outside Belgium or Lisbon are long gone.
And making sure you use the right card to pay with. A mate of mine organized a specific payment card purely because of Ryan Air.
I don't, partly because I can't stand O'Leary, and I don't like how he runs his firm.
On the subject of school holidays, I've had lots of years where my shift plan didn't fit in with the school holidays, and my wife works in private education which had longer holidays than the state schools, so it's been difficult to get a break as a family together. Luckily, we've had headteachers who were normal, and once I explained the situation, it was never a problem to get a week or so in the sun somewhere. I'd have taken the kids out even if the head had played up, though!
Parents that take pupils out during term time cause teachers to have to spend valuable time catching these slacker pupils up when they return from 2 weeks on the beach in Malaga.
Other more conscientious children who have actually attended then miss out on teacher time.
A foreign holiday is not a human right - you can either afford one in the school holidays or you can't - end of.
I suspect the reason TSE thinks Reckless is the Cunto De Tutti Cunti is because he is an apostate. From the religion of Dave n George. The wellspring of TSE's very being. Reckless, like Carswell, has not altered his political views about the EU since forever. Under the gimps the Tory party drifted away from the common man and into bed with Clegg and views shared by (shudders) Heseltine, Clark, Ashdown, Mandelson, and god-only-knows what manner of pondlife. Post-Brexit and with that nice MrsMay in charge, the party has come right back to where it bloody well should have been all along (and mostly was but in a quiet, resentful sort of way). Simples.
The modernisation project was based on a belief that in order to win a general election outright, the Tory party had to attract middle class Liberal Democrat and Labour voters by becoming more socially liberal, and took its inspiration from Blair and the New Labour Project of 1994-1997.
It was potentially a sensible conclusion to draw in the 2001-2008 period, but looked very out of date by 2014 as a political strategy, even though it probably helped secure a few more Lib Dem seats in the 2015GE.
Nah, the modernisation project was based on a belief, articulated by the sainted Tezza, that the Tory party was n*sty. It was a detoxification programme that they embarked upon.
Yes, and the social attitudes of the Tory party of the time arguably had a big part to play in that perception.
Arguably, the party would not have got a hearing on the former without going through the latter first. I still think the Tory party owes Cameron a debt of gratitude for the things he did on purpose, not just his career-ending mistake.
Both were needed: the Tory party needed to show it was comfortable with modern Britain, but also that it understood and sympathised with the concerns of working people.
I would have started with the first, and let the second flow from it.
The latter is good enough to get from the low 30s to the high 30s, and swipe middle-class swing seats, but not enough to get solidly into the mid-40s and win clear majorities.
I don't think it could have been done the other way round - until the Tories demonstrated they'd come to terms with the 21st century, trying to persuade people they understood them would have failed the basic plausibility test. They had to prove they had changed, first (as uncomfortable as that was).
Parents that take pupils out during term time cause teachers to have to spend valuable time catching these slacker pupils up when they return from 2 weeks on the beach in Malaga.
Other more conscientious children who have actually attended then miss out on teacher time.
A foreign holiday is not a human right - you can either afford one in the school holidays or you can't - end of.
It was never about cost for me. That's a numpty argument.
If I worked in a fee-paying school you would be right: but our bills aren't paid by our pupils' parents, they are paid by the government. They are our client, so we do what they want. Voters tell them (very indirectly) what to do and most parents are voters, but most voters do not have school age children.
The argument as to who has the responsibility, the authority and the right to decide isn't anything to do with voting or funding. You're an employee, and those who employ you are working on behalf of clients, the parents, who can sack them if they wish. Not by voting, but by writing to the school's proprietor to say that their child will now be educated otherwise than at school and that that particular school, its employees, its funders, its administrators, and its inspectors - they are all now completely out of the picture, with immediate effect, services no longer required, because that's what the clients have decided. (And they don't have to give a reason.)
In that sense yes, you are right. If you don't like how the state wants to educate your child, you are free to go elsewhere.
I've been thinking a bit more about who are clients are. Financially it is the state, but morally (and legally as well in a sense) they are our pupils not the parents. Mostly we want to work with the parents but if push comes to shove we will side with the interests of the child.
If push comes to shove the parent can pull the child out of the school regardless of who the teacher sides with, the child can't. The client is the one with the power to walk away.
"Ryanair has warned it will have to halt flights from the UK for “weeks or months” if Theresa May does not seal an early bilateral Brexit deal on international aviation."
......and there was me thinking that Brexit was going to be an unmitigated disaster.
Michael O'Leary's business model is based on bullying passengers, airports, Governments and regulators into submission through threats and blackmail.
For some reason, he seems to be loved for it.
My guess is that making it more expensive and difficult for Brits to have weekends and weeks away in the sun will not be a popular move. Ryanair gets so many customers because it is cheap and that is what matters to most travellers more than anything else.
Except it isn't. The headline fare is cheaper, but it racks up an awful lot as soon as you add cabin bags, and pre-booked seats.
Easyjet and BA are equivalent and better.
And it's gone up a lot anyway: air passenger duty and other climate change reforms, including fuel prices, as well as changes to the aviation market, mean the days of flying with Ryanair for £1 to a remote airport outside Belgium or Lisbon are long gone.
And making sure you use the right card to pay with. A mate of mine organized a specific payment card purely because of Ryan Air.
I don't, partly because I can't stand O'Leary, and I don't like how he runs his firm.
I usually fly Easyjet.
With Ryanair you get what it says on the tin.
The days are long gone when people thought that when any low-cost airline offered fares for, say £20, that £20 would be the actual fare.
They are usually there or thereabouts with the main airlines but can be significantly cheaper when booked ahead.
Surely parents could get around the law in practice by simply saying their kid is ill. Perhaps a bit more difficult if several are involved - unless claimng to be suffering from measles/chicken pox etc.
I may be out of touch here, but don't you need to take a Dr's letter if you have been off for a week or more ?
The real problem is that Little Jimmy probably has a big mouth and will brag to all his peers, and quite likely his teacher, that he had a great time at Disneyland last week while everyone else had their nose to the grindstone.
I have never heard of that. It certainly was not the case when I was at school. All that was required was a note from a parent explaining the absence.
Both were needed: the Tory party needed to show it was comfortable with modern Britain, but also that it understood and sympathised with the concerns of working people.
The party certainly needed to do both. Cameron and Osborne were extremely successful on the first. On the second, they were trying hard, but were not perhaps conspicuously well-suited to it in terms of image! They tried to compensate, for example by hiring Andy Coulson and taking a lot of notice of his advice. Unfortunately that hire had an unexpected downside....
The key thing, though, is that this has to be a permanent revolution. You have to keep modernising, and you have to keep working hard at listening to all sections of the population. Theresa May is very obviously aware of this, and she's not abandoning the good modernisation work done during the Cameron years. She is however, in tone, better at the second part.
Parents that take pupils out during term time cause teachers to have to spend valuable time catching these slacker pupils up when they return from 2 weeks on the beach in Malaga.
Other more conscientious children who have actually attended then miss out on teacher time.
A foreign holiday is not a human right - you can either afford one in the school holidays or you can't - end of.
It was never about cost for me. That's a numpty argument.
Schools hate term time absences because they are judged on results - by taking the kids out you are putting that at risk too.
The schools are doing what needs to be done to keep their stats up - them's the rules.
Both were needed: the Tory party needed to show it was comfortable with modern Britain, but also that it understood and sympathised with the concerns of working people.
The party certainly needed to do both. Cameron and Osborne were extremely successful on the first. On the second, they were trying hard, but were not perhaps conspicuously well-suited to it in terms of image! They tried to compensate, for example by hiring Andy Coulson and taking a lot of notice of his advice. Unfortunately that hire had an unexpected downside....
The key thing, though, is that this has to be a permanent revolution. You have to keep modernising, and you have to keep working hard at listening to all sections of the population. Theresa May is very obviously aware of this, and she's not abandoning the good modernisation work done during the Cameron years. She is however, in tone, better at the second part.
Parents that take pupils out during term time cause teachers to have to spend valuable time catching these slacker pupils up when they return from 2 weeks on the beach in Malaga.
Other more conscientious children who have actually attended then miss out on teacher time.
A foreign holiday is not a human right - you can either afford one in the school holidays or you can't - end of.
It was never about cost for me. That's a numpty argument.
Schools hate term time absences because they are judged on results - by taking the kids out you are putting that at risk too.
The schools are doing what needs to be done to keep their stats up - them's the rules.
I don't disagree, I'm just pointing out that there are lots of jobs where you don't get a say in when you get your main leave block off. I'd have never taken the kids out of school to save a bit of money, it was just that some years, my leave didn't match up with the school holidays.
"Ryanair has warned it will have to halt flights from the UK for “weeks or months” if Theresa May does not seal an early bilateral Brexit deal on international aviation."
......and there was me thinking that Brexit was going to be an unmitigated disaster.
Michael O'Leary's business model is based on bullying passengers, airports, Governments and regulators into submission through threats and blackmail.
For some reason, he seems to be loved for it.
My guess is that making it more expensive and difficult for Brits to have weekends and weeks away in the sun will not be a popular move. Ryanair gets so many customers because it is cheap and that is what matters to most travellers more than anything else.
Except it isn't. The headline fare is cheaper, but it racks up an awful lot as soon as you add cabin bags, and pre-booked seats.
Easyjet and BA are equivalent and better.
And it's gone up a lot anyway: air passenger duty and other climate change reforms, including fuel prices, as well as changes to the aviation market, mean the days of flying with Ryanair for £1 to a remote airport outside Belgium or Lisbon are long gone.
And making sure you use the right card to pay with. A mate of mine organized a specific payment card purely because of Ryan Air.
I don't, partly because I can't stand O'Leary, and I don't like how he runs his firm.
Both were needed: the Tory party needed to show it was comfortable with modern Britain, but also that it understood and sympathised with the concerns of working people.
The party certainly needed to do both. Cameron and Osborne were extremely successful on the first. On the second, they were trying hard, but were not perhaps conspicuously well-suited to it in terms of image! They tried to compensate, for example by hiring Andy Coulson and taking a lot of notice of his advice. Unfortunately that hire had an unexpected downside....
The key thing, though, is that this has to be a permanent revolution. You have to keep modernising, and you have to keep working hard at listening to all sections of the population. Theresa May is very obviously aware of this, and she's not abandoning the good modernisation work done during the Cameron years. She is however, in tone, better at the second part.
A very fair post.
Agreed.
Conclusion: Blair fundamentally changed and continues to change the Tory party. Quite a legacy.
I suspect the reason TSE thinks Reckless is the Cunto De Tutti Cunti is because he is an apostate. From the religion of Dave n George. The wellspring of TSE's very being. Reckless, like Carswell, has not altered his political views about the EU since forever. Under the gimps the Tory party drifted away from the common man and into bed with Clegg and views shared by (shudders) Heseltine, Clark, Ashdown, Mandelson, and god-only-knows what manner of pondlife. Post-Brexit and with that nice MrsMay in charge, the party has come right back to where it bloody well should have been all along (and mostly was but in a quiet, resentful sort of way). Simples.
The
Nah.
Yes, and the social attitudes of the Tory party of the time arguably had a big part to play in that perception.
Arguably, the party would not have got a hearing on the former without going through the latter first. I still think the Tory party owes Cameron a debt of gratitude for the things he did on purpose, not just his career-ending mistake.
Both were needed: the Tory party needed to show it was comfortable with modern Britain, but also that it understood and sympathised with the concerns of working people.
I would have started with the first, and let the second flow from it.
The latter is good enough to get from the low 30s to the high 30s, and swipe middle-class swing seats, but not enough to get solidly into the mid-40s and win clear majorities.
I don't think it could have been done the other way round - until the Tories demonstrated they'd come to terms with the 21st century, trying to persuade people they understood them would have failed the basic plausibility test. They had to prove they had changed, first (as uncomfortable as that was).
I disagree. And, of course, that depends on what your view of the 21st Century is, or should be. It is very different in London to the rest of the country, as we now know.
Playing to the political fashions of the London media, art, business and political elites was certainly a way to get airtime in opposition, but it's Theresa May who's really doing the root-and-branch form of modernisation.
I think if it had been about decontaminating the Tories as the party of the rich first, they'd have clocked into the 40s, and won a solid majority in GE2010.
Parents that take pupils out during term time cause teachers to have to spend valuable time catching these slacker pupils up when they return from 2 weeks on the beach in Malaga.
Other more conscientious children who have actually attended then miss out on teacher time.
A foreign holiday is not a human right - you can either afford one in the school holidays or you can't - end of.
It was never about cost for me. That's a numpty argument.
Schools hate term time absences because they are judged on results - by taking the kids out you are putting that at risk too.
The schools are doing what needs to be done to keep their stats up - them's the rules.
I don't disagree, I'm just pointing out that there are lots of jobs where you don't get a say in when you get your main leave block off. I'd have never taken the kids out of school to save a bit of money, it was just that some years, my leave didn't match up with the school holidays.
You have my sympathies - the only way round it appears to be to pay the fine.
Parents that take pupils out during term time cause teachers to have to spend valuable time catching these slacker pupils up when they return from 2 weeks on the beach in Malaga.
Other more conscientious children who have actually attended then miss out on teacher time.
A foreign holiday is not a human right - you can either afford one in the school holidays or you can't - end of.
It was never about cost for me. That's a numpty argument.
Schools hate term time absences because they are judged on results - by taking the kids out you are putting that at risk too.
The schools are doing what needs to be done to keep their stats up - them's the rules.
I don't disagree, I'm just pointing out that there are lots of jobs where you don't get a say in when you get your main leave block off. I'd have never taken the kids out of school to save a bit of money, it was just that some years, my leave didn't match up with the school holidays.
If you were in the Forces then you'd be treated more favourably.
What a silly system where you can get elected through the list system and then decide to become an independent, even though no one voted for you. It just encourages parties to fill their list with party loyalists over talented individuals.
I have always said that anyone elected by FPTP should not feel it necessary to seek reelection if they leave their party - though I admired Carswell and Reckless for choosing to do so.
But anyone elected by a PR system that assigns seats based on party votes should surrender their seat to the p[arty when they leave. That goes for MEPs and assembly members as well. It was not Reckless's seat.
Quite. I really don't understand this. If UKIP still has tuppence to rub together there is surely going to be a legal challenge to him remaining in the Welsh Assembly.
He is right. I am already doing something similar and so are some others I know. Startups, lifestyle businesses and location-independent working is playing a bigger part in the economy than ever before.
The downside of being able to work anywhere, anytime, is that some customers expect you to work anywhere and anytime.
Not so much 9 to 5 as Sunday to Saturday
"The nine to five is barbaric. I really believe that. I think one day we will look back at nine-to-five employment in a similar way to how we see child labour in the 19th century"
No hyperbole too strong for the Guardian, as always.
The nine to five is very outdated, and based on things like Henry Ford's factory production line shifts, and matching commercial shop opening hours from 100 years ago.
But, it stays because we like it: as a friend of mine says, work is daycare for adults.
I used to refer to school as the National Childminding Service
Parents that take pupils out during term time cause teachers to have to spend valuable time catching these slacker pupils up when they return from 2 weeks on the beach in Malaga.
Other more conscientious children who have actually attended then miss out on teacher time.
A foreign holiday is not a human right - you can either afford one in the school holidays or you can't - end of.
It was never about cost for me. That's a numpty argument.
Schools hate term time absences because they are judged on results - by taking the kids out you are putting that at risk too.
The schools are doing what needs to be done to keep their stats up - them's the rules.
I don't disagree, I'm just pointing out that there are lots of jobs where you don't get a say in when you get your main leave block off. I'd have never taken the kids out of school to save a bit of money, it was just that some years, my leave didn't match up with the school holidays.
Indeed. The same will be true of parents that work for example in hotels, tourism, entertainment, and indeed all the professions that are needs most in holiday time to service the rest of the world as they go on holiday.
"Ryanair has warned it will have to halt flights from the UK for “weeks or months” if Theresa May does not seal an early bilateral Brexit deal on international aviation."
......and there was me thinking that Brexit was going to be an unmitigated disaster.
Michael O'Leary's business model is based on bullying passengers, airports, Governments and regulators into submission through threats and blackmail.
For some reason, he seems to be loved for it.
My guess is that making it more expensive and difficult for Brits to have weekends and weeks away in the sun will not be a popular move. Ryanair gets so many customers because it is cheap and that is what matters to most travellers more than anything else.
Except it isn't. The headline fare is cheaper, but it racks up an awful lot as soon as you add cabin bags, and pre-booked seats.
Easyjet and BA are equivalent and better.
And it's gone up a lot anyway: air passenger duty and other climate change reforms, including fuel prices, as well as changes to the aviation market, mean the days of flying with Ryanair for £1 to a remote airport outside Belgium or Lisbon are long gone.
And making sure you use the right card to pay with. A mate of mine organized a specific payment card purely because of Ryan Air.
I don't, partly because I can't stand O'Leary, and I don't like how he runs his firm.
I usually fly Easyjet.
With Ryanair you get what it says on the tin.
I don't like what it says on the tin.
And too often you buy the tin, based upon what it says on the tin, then open the tin and find that what's actually in there isn't what's on the tin.. unless you pay more.
Conclusion: Blair fundamentally changed and continues to change the Tory party. Quite a legacy.
Not really. The Tory party has, famously, always reinvented itself as circumstances changed. The period during the Major and Blair years, when it got stuck in a dead-end, was an historical aberration. It wasn't so much that Blair changed the Tory party, as that time had moved on.
Now it's Labour's turn to get stuck in a dead-end.
If I worked in a fee-paying school you would be right: but our bills aren't paid by our pupils' parents, they are paid by the government. They are our client, so we do what they want. Voters tell them (very indirectly) what to do and most parents are voters, but most voters do not have school age children.
The argument as to who has the responsibility, the authority and the right to decide isn't anything to do with voting or funding. You're an employee, and those who employ you are working on behalf of clients, the parents, who can sack them if they wish. Not by voting, but by writing to the school's proprietor to say that their child will now be educated otherwise than at school and that that particular school, its employees, its funders, its administrators, and its inspectors - they are all now completely out of the picture, with immediate effect, services no longer required, because that's what the clients have decided. (And they don't have to give a reason.)
In that sense yes, you are right. If you don't like how the state wants to educate your child, you are free to go elsewhere.
I've been thinking a bit more about who are clients are. Financially it is the state, but morally (and legally as well in a sense) they are our pupils not the parents. Mostly we want to work with the parents but if push comes to shove we will side with the interests of the child.
If push comes to shove the parent can pull the child out of the school regardless of who the teacher sides with, the child can't. The client is the one with the power to walk away.
Only legally if they send them to another school, state or private or home tutor
All this talk of school attendance is academic. After Brexit we will return to the time honoured practice of sending the kids out into the fields to harvest the crops. It will be hard at first and they will need a smattering of an eastern European language, but they will get used to it and enjoy it.
If I worked in a fee-paying school you would be right: but our bills aren't paid by our pupils' parents, they are paid by the government. They are our client, so we do what they want. Voters tell them (very indirectly) what to do and most parents are voters, but most voters do not have school age children.
The argument as to who has the responsibility, the authority and the right to decide isn't anything to do with voting or funding. You're an employee, and those who employ you are working on behalf of clients, the parents, who can sack them if they wish. Not by voting, but by writing to the school's proprietor to say that their child will now be educated otherwise than at school and that that particular school, its employees, its funders, its administrators, and its inspectors - they are all now completely out of the picture, with immediate effect, services no longer required, because that's what the clients have decided. (And they don't have to give a reason.)
In that sense yes, you are right. If you don't like how the state wants to educate your child, you are free to go elsewhere.
I've been thinking a bit more about who are clients are. Financially it is the state, but morally (and legally as well in a sense) they are our pupils not the parents. Mostly we want to work with the parents but if push comes to shove we will side with the interests of the child.
If push comes to shove the parent can pull the child out of the school regardless of who the teacher sides with, the child can't. The client is the one with the power to walk away.
Only legally if they send them to another school, state or private or home tutor
Obviously, but it doesn't change the point. All sorts of rights have legal boundaries, but remain rights none the less.
And too often you buy the tin, based upon what it says on the tin, then open the tin and find that what's actually in there isn't what's on the tin.. unless you pay more.
I disagree. Ryanair is a well-run airline with modern planes that mostly get you there on time. More so than British Airways short haul. To some extent, you have to play along with the system on baggage and so on, but they have removed a lot of the nickel and diming they were notorious for. You are on your own, to the maximum extent allowed by the law, if something goes wrong. But they don't pretend otherwise. Prices are usually a chunk less than the competition.
If Ryanair does pull out because of Brexit (and I don't really expect it will), it will massively reduce connectivity to Scotland where I live
All this talk of school attendance is academic. After Brexit we will returned to the time honoured practice of sending the kids out into the fields to harvest the crops. It will be hard at first and they will need a smattering of an eastern European language, but they will get used to it and enjoy it.
And the ones that don't enjoy it will have a promising alternative career sweeping chimneys
All this talk of school attendance is academic. After Brexit we will returned to the time honoured practice of sending the kids out into the fields to harvest the crops. It will be hard at first and they will need a smattering of an eastern European language, but they will get used to it and enjoy it.
Several asian countries still keep their main school holiday as April until June so that rural teenagers can help their parents with the rice harvest... I don't believe eastern European languages are a big factor so far
"Ryanair has warned it will have to halt flights from the UK for “weeks or months” if Theresa May does not seal an early bilateral Brexit deal on international aviation."
......and there was me thinking that Brexit was going to be an unmitigated disaster.
Michael O'Leary's business model is based on bullying passengers, airports, Governments and regulators into submission through threats and blackmail.
For some reason, he seems to be loved for it.
My guess is that making it more expensive and difficult for Brits to have weekends and weeks away in the sun will not be a popular move. Ryanair gets so many customers because it is cheap and that is what matters to most travellers more than anything else.
Except it isn't. The headline fare is cheaper, but it racks up an awful lot as soon as you add cabin bags, and pre-booked seats.
Easyjet and BA are equivalent and better.
And it's gone up a lot anyway: air passenger duty and other climate change reforms, including fuel prices, as well as changes to the aviation market, mean the days of flying with Ryanair for £1 to a remote airport outside Belgium or Lisbon are long gone.
BA seems to be going massively downhill of late. I do not fly business every time I do long haul so there are gaps between journeys - and it is noticeable just how much has been taken away from the package over the last few years. Even First - which I have done a couple of times - is not the luxurious trip you'd expect. Economy in Europe is getting harder to tell apart from the Budget airlines now you have to pay for all drinks and snacks, and to put your luggage in the hold. Ryanair has no pretences to be anything other than price-focused, but the BA brand has always been about more than that. If the company is not careful it will do itself some damage. It's going the way of the American carriers, which are uniformly appalling in my experience.
Did UK plc not used to get this guy for about £140K a year, 7 days a week? Maybe we were getting a bit of a bargain.
Don't... you will get keepers of the Blair flame telling us how much more of a bargain he was... oh, wait, maybe not, they tend to be a bit coy about how he has been earning his corn since leaving office.
If I worked in a fee-paying school you would be right: but our bills aren't paid by our pupils' parents, they are paid by the government. They are our client, so we do what they want. Voters tell them (very indirectly) what to do and most parents are voters, but most voters do not have school age children.
The argument as to who has the responsibility, the authority and the right to decide isn't anything to do with voting or funding. You're an employee, and those who employ you are working on behalf of clients, the parents, who can sack them if they wish. Not by voting, but by writing to the school's proprietor to say that their child will now be educated otherwise than at school and that that particular school, its employees, its funders, its administrators, and its inspectors - they are all now completely out of the picture, with immediate effect, services no longer required, because that's what the clients have decided. (And they don't have to give a reason.)
In that sense yes, you are right. If you don't like how the state wants to educate your child, you are free to go elsewhere.
I've been thinking a bit more about who are clients are. Financially it is the state, but morally (and legally as well in a sense) they are our pupils not the parents. Mostly we want to work with the parents but if push comes to shove we will side with the interests of the child.
If push comes to shove the parent can pull the child out of the school regardless of who the teacher sides with, the child can't. The client is the one with the power to walk away.
Only legally if they send them to another school, state or private or home tutor
Obviously, but it doesn't change the point. All sorts of rights have legal boundaries, but remain rights none the less.
Private schools also generally require attendance in term time and while you can home school the council can legally inspect your tutoring and impose a compulsory school attendance order if they deem it required
All this talk of school attendance is academic. After Brexit we will returned to the time honoured practice of sending the kids out into the fields to harvest the crops. It will be hard at first and they will need a smattering of an eastern European language, but they will get used to it and enjoy it.
Several asian countries still keep their main school holiday as April until June so that rural teenagers can help their parents with the rice harvest... I don't believe eastern European languages are a big factor so far
When I were a lad in t'Lancashire there was a week holiday from primary school which was universally referred to as "potato picking" - I wasn't aware of pupil actually picking potatoes.
If I worked in a fee-paying school you would be right: but our bills aren't paid by our pupils' parents, they are paid by the government. They are our client, so we do what they want. Voters tell them (very indirectly) what to do and most parents are voters, but most voters do not have school age children.
The argument as to who has the responsibility, the authority and the right to decide isn't anything to do with voting or funding. You're an employee, and those who employ you are working on behalf of clients, the parents, who can sack them if they wish. Not by voting, but by writing to the school's proprietor to say that their child will now be educated otherwise than at school and that that particular school, its employees, its funders, its administrators, and its inspectors - they are all now completely out of the picture, with immediate effect, services no longer required, because that's what the clients have decided. (And they don't have to give a reason.)
In that sense yes, you are right. If you don't like how the state wants to educate your child, you are free to go elsewhere.
I've been thinking a bit more about who are clients are. Financially it is the state, but morally (and legally as well in a sense) they are our pupils not the parents. Mostly we want to work with the parents but if push comes to shove we will side with the interests of the child.
If push comes to shove the parent can pull the child out of the school regardless of who the teacher sides with, the child can't. The client is the one with the power to walk away.
Only legally if they send them to another school, state or private or home tutor
Obviously, but it doesn't change the point. All sorts of rights have legal boundaries, but remain rights none the less.
Private schools also generally require attendance in term time and while you can home school the council can legally inspect your tutoring and impose a compulsory school attendance order if they deem it required
The government can legally inspect your car, and impose an order requiring you to take it off the road, it remains your car.
All this talk of school attendance is academic. After Brexit we will returned to the time honoured practice of sending the kids out into the fields to harvest the crops. It will be hard at first and they will need a smattering of an eastern European language, but they will get used to it and enjoy it.
Several asian countries still keep their main school holiday as April until June so that rural teenagers can help their parents with the rice harvest... I don't believe eastern European languages are a big factor so far
When I were a lad in t'Lancashire there was a week holiday from primary school which was universally referred to as "potato picking" - I wasn't aware of pupil actually picking potatoes.
I am sure. Living in the rural Philippines I can assure you that family participation is pretty common
If I worked in a fee-paying school you would be right: but our bills aren't paid by our pupils' parents, they are paid by the government. They are our client, so we do what they want. Voters tell them (very indirectly) what to do and most parents are voters, but most voters do not have school age children.
The argument as to who has the responsibility, the authority and the right to decide isn't anything to do with voting or funding. You're an employee, and those who employ you are working on behalf of clients, the parents, who can sack them if they wish. Not by voting, but by writing to the school's proprietor to say that their child will now be educated otherwise than at school and that that particular school, its employees, its funders, its administrators, and its inspectors - they are all now completely out of the picture, with immediate effect, services no longer required, because that's what the clients have decided. (And they don't have to give a reason.)
In that sense yes, you are right. If you don't like how the state wants to educate your child, you are free to go elsewhere.
I've been thinking a bit more about who are clients are. Financially it is the state, but morally (and legally as well in a sense) they are our pupils not the parents. Mostly we want to work with the parents but if push comes to shove we will side with the interests of the child.
If push comes to shove the parent can pull the child out of the school regardless of who the teacher sides with, the child can't. The client is the one with the power to walk away.
Only legally if they send them to another school, state or private or home tutor
Obviously, but it doesn't change the point. All sorts of rights have legal boundaries, but remain rights none the less.
Private schools also generally require attendance in term time and while you can home school the council can legally inspect your tutoring and impose a compulsory school attendance order if they deem it required
The government can legally inspect your car, and impose an order requiring you to take it off the road, it remains your car.
Well if parents want term time holidays to be the norm for their children and have the time and knowledge to home school then fine
What a silly system where you can get elected through the list system and then decide to become an independent, even though no one voted for you. It just encourages parties to fill their list with party loyalists over talented individuals.
I have always said that anyone elected by FPTP should not feel it necessary to seek reelection if they leave their party - though I admired Carswell and Reckless for choosing to do so.
But anyone elected by a PR system that assigns seats based on party votes should surrender their seat to the p[arty when they leave. That goes for MEPs and assembly members as well. It was not Reckless's seat.
Quite. I really don't understand this. If UKIP still has tuppence to rub together there is surely going to be a legal challenge to him remaining in the Welsh Assembly.
Well if parents want term time holidays to be the norm for their children and have the time and knowledge to home school then fine
If enough parents are annoyed by it, and make a fuss about it, it will change, they don't need to be a majority of voters, they just need to make enough organised noise (see UKIP). The reality is clearly that at the moment nothing close to enough are sufficiently annoyed to make more than a token grumble.
"Ryanair has warned it will have to halt flights from the UK for “weeks or months” if Theresa May does not seal an early bilateral Brexit deal on international aviation."
......and there was me thinking that Brexit was going to be an unmitigated disaster.
Michael O'Leary's business model is based on bullying passengers, airports, Governments and regulators into submission through threats and blackmail.
For some reason, he seems to be loved for it.
My guess is that making it more expensive and difficult for Brits to have weekends and weeks away in the sun will not be a popular move
Certainly not with the Spanish tourism industry, no.
May I ask what jobs prevent one organising a holiday out of term time?
Farming for a start. My parents were self-employed (with no employees) dairy and arable farmers when I was at school. The only opportunity for going on summer holiday was that small window between the end of 1st crop silage cutting time and the beginning of 2nd crop silage and the main summer grain harvest. Basically just some bits of June... If these present rules had been in place during my childhood then I would never have had any holidays and, more crucially, neither would my parents either. I never missed school for any other reasons aside from illness and I turned out fine with GCSEs, A-Levels and a university degree.
Both were needed: the Tory party needed to show it was comfortable with modern Britain, but also that it understood and sympathised with the concerns of working people.
The party certainly needed to do both. Cameron and Osborne were extremely successful on the first. On the second, they were trying hard, but were not perhaps conspicuously well-suited to it in terms of image! They tried to compensate, for example by hiring Andy Coulson and taking a lot of notice of his advice. Unfortunately that hire had an unexpected downside....
The key thing, though, is that this has to be a permanent revolution. You have to keep modernising, and you have to keep working hard at listening to all sections of the population. Theresa May is very obviously aware of this, and she's not abandoning the good modernisation work done during the Cameron years. She is however, in tone, better at the second part.
A very fair post.
Agreed.
Conclusion: Blair fundamentally changed and continues to change the Tory party. Quite a legacy.
And the country: Blair is responsible for us Leaving the EU.
Well if parents want term time holidays to be the norm for their children and have the time and knowledge to home school then fine
If enough parents are annoyed by it, and make a fuss about it, it will change, they don't need to be a majority of voters, they just need to make enough organised noise (see UKIP). The reality is clearly that at the moment nothing close to enough are sufficiently annoyed to make more than a token grumble.
As only a small minority cannot take leave in school holidays and are educated enough to home school and have the time to do it
"Ryanair has warned it will have to halt flights from the UK for “weeks or months” if Theresa May does not seal an early bilateral Brexit deal on international aviation."
......and there was me thinking that Brexit was going to be an unmitigated disaster.
Michael O'Leary's business model is based on bullying passengers, airports, Governments and regulators into submission through threats and blackmail.
For some reason, he seems to be loved for it.
My guess is that making it more expensive and difficult for Brits to have weekends and weeks away in the sun will not be a popular move. Ryanair gets so many customers because it is cheap and that is what matters to most travellers more than anything else.
Except it isn't. The headline fare is cheaper, but it racks up an awful lot as soon as you add cabin bags, and pre-booked seats.
Easyjet and BA are equivalent and better.
And it's gone up a lot anyway: air passenger duty and other climate change reforms, including fuel prices, as well as changes to the aviation market, mean the days of flying with Ryanair for £1 to a remote airport outside Belgium or Lisbon are long gone.
And making sure you use the right card to pay with. A mate of mine organized a specific payment card purely because of Ryan Air.
I don't, partly because I can't stand O'Leary, and I don't like how he runs his firm.
Both were needed: the Tory party needed to show it was comfortable with modern Britain, but also that it understood and sympathised with the concerns of working people.
The party certainly needed to do both. Cameron and Osborne were extremely successful on the first. On the second, they were trying hard, but were not perhaps conspicuously well-suited to it in terms of image! They tried to compensate, for example by hiring Andy Coulson and taking a lot of notice of his advice. Unfortunately that hire had an unexpected downside....
The key thing, though, is that this has to be a permanent revolution. You have to keep modernising, and you have to keep working hard at listening to all sections of the population. Theresa May is very obviously aware of this, and she's not abandoning the good modernisation work done during the Cameron years. She is however, in tone, better at the second part.
A very fair post.
Agreed.
Conclusion: Blair fundamentally changed and continues to change the Tory party. Quite a legacy.
And the country: Blair is responsible for us voting to Leave the EU.
I suspect the reason TSE thinks Reckless is the Cunto De Tutti Cunti is because he is an apostate. From the religion of Dave n George. Post-Brexit and with that nice MrsMay in charge, the party has come right back to where it bloody well should have been all along (and mostly was but in a quiet, resentful sort of way). Simples.
The
Nah.
Yes, and the social attitudes of the Tory party of the time arguably had a big part to play in that perception.
Arguably, the party would not have got a hearing on the former without going through the latter first. I still think the Tory party owes Cameron a debt of gratitude for the things he did on purpose, not just his career-ending mistake.
Both were needed: the Tory party needed to show it was comfortable with modern Britain, but also that it understood and sympathised with the concerns of working people.
I would have started with the first, and let the second flow from it.
The latter is good enough to get from the low 30s to the high 30s, and swipe middle-class swing seats, but not enough to get solidly into the mid-40s and win clear majorities.
I don't think it could have been done the other way round - until the Tories demonstrated they'd come to terms with the 21st century, trying to persuade people they understood them would have failed the basic plausibility test. They had to prove they had changed, first (as uncomfortable as that was).
I disagree. And, of course, that depends on what your view of the 21st Century is, or should be. It is very different in London to the rest of the country, as we now know.
Playing to the political fashions of the London media, art, business and political elites was certainly a way to get airtime in opposition, but it's Theresa May who's really doing the root-and-branch form of modernisation.
I think if it had been about decontaminating the Tories as the party of the rich first, they'd have clocked into the 40s, and won a solid majority in GE2010.
The problem was, though, that we'd lost the culture wars of the 90's. We thought that because we were right on the economics, that was all that mattered; like the butt hurt Remainers that witter away on this site right now, we ignored the fact that we'd lost.
We needed to reinvent ourselves (as Richard notes above) to make ourself relevant *culturally*, and you can't do that simply by changing policy pronouncements. The Tories had to *feel* different, even if our core beliefs were unchanged.
Weirdly, the bulletpoints opposite the Month/Year on the right hand side are separated, with the bulletpoints being on the left hand side. It's most peculiar.
45 years ago my dad got malaria whilst on duty in the Army. We lived in Singapore at the time and he was very ill. The Army sent him to the Cameron Highlands in Malaysia because the climate was much cooler and it was possible for him to take walks to rebuild his strength.
We all went. It was probably the most remarkable holiday in the most interesting place I have had in my life. I don't really recall what I was studying in School that year, maybe something to do with the Vikings, but I vividly recall the amazing bus journey up some incredible roads to get there, the extraordinary climate, the jungle walks, the truly weird animal life, particularly insects, visiting tea plantations and traditional villages and the different cultures. I also recall how annoyed my dad used to get when he got beat at putting and cream teas in the afternoons. We spent a lot of time together which was unusual and really special.
One of my regrets in life is that so far I have never been able to go back. The school I missed? Not so much.
Weirdly, the bulletpoints opposite the Month/Year on the right hand side are separated, with the bulletpoints being on the left hand side. It's most peculiar.
Why r the Tories letting Reckless back in. I guess Wales is a backwater, but as TSE says he is TPD and he should be refused re-admission (pour encourager les autres)
Why r the Tories letting Reckless back in. I guess Wales is a backwater, but as TSE says he is TPD and he should be refused re-admission (pour encourager les autres)
They let Churchill back in from the Liberals albeit he is a slightly different case, Emma Nicholson too and David Campbell Bannermann MEP went Tory to UKIP to Tory
Weirdly, the bulletpoints opposite the Month/Year on the right hand side are separated, with the bulletpoints being on the left hand side. It's most peculiar.
Why r the Tories letting Reckless back in. I guess Wales is a backwater, but as TSE says he is TPD and he should be refused re-admission (pour encourager les autres)
Are they ? I though he was an independent that had chosen to caucus with the Tories.
"Ryanair has warned it will have to halt flights from the UK for “weeks or months” if Theresa May does not seal an early bilateral Brexit deal on international aviation."
......and there was me thinking that Brexit was going to be an unmitigated disaster.
Michael O'Leary's business model is based on bullying passengers, airports, Governments and regulators into submission through threats and blackmail.
For some reason, he seems to be loved for it.
My guess is that making it more expensive and difficult for Brits to have weekends and weeks away in the sun will not be a popular move. Ryanair gets so many customers because it is cheap and that is what matters to most travellers more than anything else.
Except it isn't. The headline fare is cheaper, but it racks up an awful lot as soon as you add cabin bags, and pre-booked seats.
Easyjet and BA are equivalent and better.
And it's gone up a lot anyway: air passenger duty and other climate change reforms, including fuel prices, as well as changes to the aviation market, mean the days of flying with Ryanair for £1 to a remote airport outside Belgium or Lisbon are long gone.
And making sure you use the right card to pay with. A mate of mine organized a specific payment card purely because of Ryan Air.
I don't, partly because I can't stand O'Leary, and I don't like how he runs his firm.
I usually fly Easyjet.
With Ryanair you get what it says on the tin.
Easyjet is better though if a bit more expensive.
The most fun is watching the "speedy boarders" getting on first. Do they think the plane will depart early just for them?
having now read the comments, I'd like to associate myself with TSE's first tweet but fear he's clearly mellowed with age as he should have really ripped fat arse a proper one.
I note TPD rejoined after you said nice things about him during the budget. This is your fault.
thing - one thing - one tiny little thing - wafer thin in its strength of endorsement... and on a blindingly obvious stupid own-goal by the chancellor which was swiftly ditched.
"Ryanair has warned it will have to halt flights from the UK for “weeks or months” if Theresa May does not seal an early bilateral Brexit deal on international aviation."
......and there was me thinking that Brexit was going to be an unmitigated disaster.
Michael O'Leary's business model is based on bullying passengers, airports, Governments and regulators into submission through threats and blackmail.
For some reason, he seems to be loved for it.
My guess is that making it more expensive and difficult for Brits to have weekends and weeks away in the sun will not be a popular move. Ryanair gets so many customers because it is cheap and that is what matters to most travellers more than anything else.
Except it isn't. The headline fare is cheaper, but it racks up an awful lot as soon as you add cabin bags, and pre-booked seats.
Easyjet and BA are equivalent and better.
And it's gone up a lot anyway: air passenger duty and other climate change reforms, including fuel prices, as well as changes to the aviation market, mean the days of flying with Ryanair for £1 to a remote airport outside Belgium or Lisbon are long gone.
And making sure you use the right card to pay with. A mate of mine organized a specific payment card purely because of Ryan Air.
I don't, partly because I can't stand O'Leary, and I don't like how he runs his firm.
I usually fly Easyjet.
With Ryanair you get what it says on the tin.
Easyjet is better though if a bit more expensive.
The most fun is watching the "speedy boarders" getting on first. Do they think the plane will depart early just for them?
They have a cut off point for accepting small suitcases in the cabin so there is a minor benefit from being guaranteed to be first in line.
Why r the Tories letting Reckless back in. I guess Wales is a backwater, but as TSE says he is TPD and he should be refused re-admission (pour encourager les autres)
Can the Tory party refuse to allow an independent AM into the Tory Assembly group?
......and there was me thinking that Brexit was going to be an unmitigated disaster.
If it happens it will not be as good as that. It is already getting pushed further into the distance.
I think the plan is to wait for the baby-boomers to die off in sufficient quantities to deplete the Leavers and then fall back on the old EU tactic of another referendum so that the correct result can be achieved. Rather like the SNP's strategy - keeping voting until the voters get it right
Will be outside on worse deal for 5 -10 years with all hte bits they wanted out of and then rejoin at much higher cost as second class citizens.
Decoding the typos - probably yes
When we go back we lose the Pound and we will be in Schengen too.
Why r the Tories letting Reckless back in. I guess Wales is a backwater, but as TSE says he is TPD and he should be refused re-admission (pour encourager les autres)
Can the Tory party refuse to allow an independent AM into the Tory Assembly group?
"Ryanair has warned it will have to halt flights from the UK for “weeks or months” if Theresa May does not seal an early bilateral Brexit deal on international aviation."
......and there was me thinking that Brexit was going to be an unmitigated disaster.
Michael O'Leary's business model is based on bullying passengers, airports, Governments and regulators into submission through threats and blackmail.
For some reason, he seems to be loved for it.
My guess is that making it more expensive and difficult for Brits to have weekends and weeks away in the sun will not be a popular move. Ryanair gets so many customers because it is cheap and that is what matters to most travellers more than anything else.
Except it isn't. The headline fare is cheaper, but it racks up an awful lot as soon as you add cabin bags, and pre-booked seats.
Easyjet and BA are equivalent and better.
And it's gone up a lot anyway: air passenger duty and other climate change reforms, including fuel prices, as well as changes to the aviation market, mean the days of flying with Ryanair for £1 to a remote airport outside Belgium or Lisbon are long gone.
And making sure you use the right card to pay with. A mate of mine organized a specific payment card purely because of Ryan Air.
I don't, partly because I can't stand O'Leary, and I don't like how he runs his firm.
I usually fly Easyjet.
With Ryanair you get what it says on the tin.
Easyjet is better though if a bit more expensive.
The most fun is watching the "speedy boarders" getting on first. Do they think the plane will depart early just for them?
When you got it, flaunt it. Plus it's thrown in if you reserve a slightly more comfortable seat, which is worthwhile.
Ah bless. The naivety on display here is rather touching in a strange way. We want 30 pages. You do loads of issues, one a week, so 30 pages wont be problem surely?
"Ryanair has warned it will have to halt flights from the UK for “weeks or months” if Theresa May does not seal an early bilateral Brexit deal on international aviation."
......and there was me thinking that Brexit was going to be an unmitigated disaster.
Michael O'Leary's business model is based on bullying passengers, airports, Governments and regulators into submission through threats and blackmail.
For some reason, he seems to be loved for it.
My guess is that making it more expensive and difficult for Brits to have weekends and weeks away in the sun will not be a popular move. Ryanair gets so many customers because it is cheap and that is what matters to most travellers more than anything else.
Except it isn't. The headline fare is cheaper, but it racks up an awful lot as soon as you add cabin bags, and pre-booked seats.
Easyjet and BA are equivalent and better.
And it's gone up a lot anyway: air passenger duty and other climate change reforms, including fuel prices, as well as changes to the aviation market, mean the days of flying with Ryanair for £1 to a remote airport outside Belgium or Lisbon are long gone.
And making sure you use the right card to pay with. A mate of mine organized a specific payment card purely because of Ryan Air.
I don't, partly because I can't stand O'Leary, and I don't like how he runs his firm.
I usually fly Easyjet.
With Ryanair you get what it says on the tin.
Easyjet is better though if a bit more expensive.
I think I might have to go for a lie down....I agree with Nick malcomg....
Comments
Ummariyat Mirza and Zainub Mirza from Birmingham were arrested last week on suspicion of preparing for terrorist acts."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/39509329
The downside of being able to work anywhere, anytime, is that some customers expect you to work anywhere and anytime.
Not so much 9 to 5 as Sunday to Saturday
The real problem is that Little Jimmy probably has a big mouth and will brag to all his peers, and quite likely his teacher, that he had a great time at Disneyland last week while everyone else had their nose to the grindstone.
Easyjet and BA are equivalent and better.
And it's gone up a lot anyway: air passenger duty and other climate change reforms, including fuel prices, as well as changes to the aviation market, mean the days of flying with Ryanair for £1 to a remote airport outside Belgium or Lisbon are long gone.
A mate of mine organized a specific payment card purely because of Ryan Air.
No hyperbole too strong for the Guardian, as always.
The nine to five is very outdated, and based on things like Henry Ford's factory production line shifts, and matching commercial shop opening hours from 100 years ago.
But, it stays because we like it: as a friend of mine says, work is daycare for adults.
https://twitter.com/standardnews/status/849996596137926663
Theresa's view was more that it needed to understand struggling working people better, and be more communitarian, less individualist, and less snooty, to address its perception of being for the rich and not people like me.
The Notting Hill view was that it needed much greater gender and racial diversity, and to talk more about progressive causes such as environmentalism, and feminism, and to demonstrate it was comfortable with a variety of lifestyle choices and sexual preferences.
Are we sure it isn't April 1st still?
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/row-erupts-over-unisex-toilets-at-east-london-primary-school-a3405681.html
I've been thinking a bit more about who are clients are. Financially it is the state, but morally (and legally as well in a sense) they are our pupils not the parents. Mostly we want to work with the parents but if push comes to shove we will side with the interests of the child.
"Phil, 31, was born in Ashton-under-Lyne, Manchester and spent his early years living in Droylesden, Manchester on a council estate. Later he lived in Droylesden and Oldham and spent most of his time striving to become a professional goalkeeper, having played for Bury FC, Rochdale FC and Oldham Athletic at YTS level.
However realising that he would not reach a high enough level of standard in football he decided to concentrate on his studies. He achieved a BSc (Hons) First Class degree after studying Commercial Management and Quantity Surveying at the University of Manchester.
He was then approached by Salford University upon graduation to be paid to take his Masters degree in order to continue his dissertation project and research, which he declined to pursue his career. After a total of two years in the construction industry and with the 2008 recession he decided to start up a social care company which he still runs.
“I took this decision after having my own experiences of how poor care was being provided in the community and wanted to offer something better,” said Phil.
At University he was a member of the Socialist Party and supported the left-wing euro-sceptic NO2EU – Yes to Democracy campaign but his left wing beliefs did not last after starting work.
“I joined UKIP in 2013 as I felt no other Party credibly represented what I believed in, exiting the EU, law and order, supporting working people and promoting patriotic values. I am a part-time yoga teacher and a vegetarian,” he said."
I would have started with the first, and let the second flow from it.
The latter is good enough to get from the low 30s to the high 30s, and swipe middle-class swing seats, but not enough to get solidly into the mid-40s and win clear majorities.
I usually fly Easyjet.
Other more conscientious children who have actually attended then miss out on teacher time.
A foreign holiday is not a human right - you can either afford one in the school holidays or you can't - end of.
They are usually there or thereabouts with the main airlines but can be significantly cheaper when booked ahead.
The key thing, though, is that this has to be a permanent revolution. You have to keep modernising, and you have to keep working hard at listening to all sections of the population. Theresa May is very obviously aware of this, and she's not abandoning the good modernisation work done during the Cameron years. She is however, in tone, better at the second part.
The schools are doing what needs to be done to keep their stats up - them's the rules.
Agreed.
And too often you buy the tin, based upon what it says on the tin, then open the tin and find that what's actually in there isn't what's on the tin.. unless you pay more.
Now it's Labour's turn to get stuck in a dead-end.
If Ryanair does pull out because of Brexit (and I don't really expect it will), it will massively reduce connectivity to Scotland where I live
https://twitter.com/danabashcnn/status/850014923690319872
Weirdly, the bulletpoints opposite the Month/Year on the right hand side are separated, with the bulletpoints being on the left hand side. It's most peculiar.
We all went. It was probably the most remarkable holiday in the most interesting place I have had in my life. I don't really recall what I was studying in School that year, maybe something to do with the Vikings, but I vividly recall the amazing bus journey up some incredible roads to get there, the extraordinary climate, the jungle walks, the truly weird animal life, particularly insects, visiting tea plantations and traditional villages and the different cultures. I also recall how annoyed my dad used to get when he got beat at putting and cream teas in the afternoons. We spent a lot of time together which was unusual and really special.
One of my regrets in life is that so far I have never been able to go back. The school I missed? Not so much.
https://twitter.com/jimwaterson/status/850023319361531904
Nickmalcomg....