Labour abandoned the slogan 'The Tories are the real extremists' amid fears it would highlight Jeremy Corbyn's links to groups like Hamas and the IRA, sources have told The Telegraph.
Can't be true, surely?
Corbyn's greatest casualty: we will never see The Thick Of It again.....
I think the relative low key approach so far by the conservatives is good tactics as Corbyn declares all his goodies
Justin, you said she deserved a polonium pill. When last I checked they are invariably fatal. Or do you think her stomach is lead lined?
Can I very strongly urge you to stop defending the indefensible? Saying you wished worse on Tony Blair isn't really a great answer - arguably it makes it worse. Move on from it. Please.
1) Using children in a PPB is usually a bad idea - its cringeworthy in so many ways.
2) "Under the next labour government no child will be in a class of over 30" is a really stupid thing to promise. I know smaller classes are generally a better idea, but even the Infant Class Size limit is far too rigid for the situation, and I doubt a Labour government could resolve the issues so fast to 'promise' that no child would be in a class of over 30.
In an ideal world no child would be in a clas of over 20. It makes a big difference.
However, his policies if enacted by wrecking the private sector and imposing vast additional unfunded costs on the state sector would more or less guarantee no child would be in a class of under 40.
I've taught. From experience I agree with you. Even 25 makes a big difference in terms of workload and how "on top of it" you feel in the classroom, how much attention you can direct at the kids etc. My long-retired mum was a teacher too, and frequently had class-sizes of 40, sometimes 50 (the year they extended the leaving age from 15 to 16 meant schools were seriously underresourced). She reckoned in some ways very big class sizes made you focus on whole-class teaching more effectively and less way-laid by focusing on the attention-hogs.
I taught a class of (highly politically/economically connected) sixth formers who came over from elite high schools in China. They had very big class sizes even there, 40 or so. Everyone paid attention to the teacher. The lesson pace was fast and very demanding. But a different culture of course, with different expectations. They found sixth form here utterly mystifying in terms of the way we taught.
Lots of econometric research seems to suggests class size doesn't make a difference to effectiveness, but highly-trained, well-educated and well-paid teachers do. It doesn't "feel" that way to me in the classroom, and maybe there's cultural confounding here (larger class sizes in countries with greater societal/parental pressure on education?), but this seems to be the direction the evidence points. Something I've always been curious about.
I know I'm banging on about this but Ladbrokes is letting you cover 0-49 LD seat @ 1.10
Can someone formulate the scenario over the next 7 weeks were they get 50+ seats because my imagination isn't strong enough.
Labour collapse entirely, LDs replace them as opposition. Basically 1983 but it works out for the LDs.
Not likely mind, but 1.10 implies 91% chance.
If we get to where we were in 1983, when there was only one week to go, and this time we have three weeks to go, who knows. Unlikely, perhaps, but 10% chance? For sure. It will depend on whether May manages to hide from any meaningful scrutiny for the coming month.
Justin, you said she deserved a polonium pill. When last I checked they are invariably fatal. Or do you think her stomach is lead lined?
Can I very strongly urge you to stop defending the indefensible? Saying you wished worse on Tony Blair isn't really a great answer - arguably it makes it worse. Move on from it. Please.
I don't regret saying that about Blair at all - and view him as pure evil given the deaths caused by his act of wilful unprovoked aggression.
Justin, you said she deserved a polonium pill. When last I checked they are invariably fatal. Or do you think her stomach is lead lined?
Can I very strongly urge you to stop defending the indefensible? Saying you wished worse on Tony Blair isn't really a great answer - arguably it makes it worse. Move on from it. Please.
I don't regret saying that about Blair at all - and view him as pure evil given the deaths caused by his act of wilful unprovoked aggression.
I thought @PBModerator had given you a final warning?
Justin, you said she deserved a polonium pill. When last I checked they are invariably fatal. Or do you think her stomach is lead lined?
Can I very strongly urge you to stop defending the indefensible? Saying you wished worse on Tony Blair isn't really a great answer - arguably it makes it worse. Move on from it. Please.
I don't regret saying that about Blair at all - and view him as pure evil given the deaths caused by his act of wilful unprovoked aggression.
I thought @PBModerator had given you a final warning?
Don't worry, he's being tried by the court of public opinion.
Far too many people here seem absolutely convinced that no unlikely thing can ever happen when, if the last year has taught us nothing else, we ought to know by now that unlikely s**t happens all the time.
< I've taught. From experience I agree with you. Even 25 makes a big difference in terms of workload and how "on top of it" you feel in the classroom, how much attention you can direct at the kids etc. My long-retired mum was a teacher too, and frequently had class-sizes of 40, sometimes 50 (the year they extended the leaving age from 15 to 16 meant schools were seriously underresourced). She reckoned in some ways very big class sizes made you focus on whole-class teaching more effectively and less way-laid by focusing on the attention-hogs.
I taught a class of (highly politically/economically connected) sixth formers who came over from elite high schools in China. They had very big class sizes even there, 40 or so. Everyone paid attention to the teacher. The lesson pace was fast and very demanding. But a different culture of course, with different expectations. They found sixth form here utterly mystifying in terms of the way we taught.
Lots of econometric research seems to suggests class size doesn't make a difference to effectiveness, but highly-trained, well-educated and well-paid teachers do. It doesn't "feel" that way to me in the classroom, and maybe there's cultural confounding here (larger class sizes in countries with greater societal/parental pressure on education?), but this seems to be the direction the evidence points. Something I've always been curious about.
It's because data exists to show small class sizes in the state sector do worse than large ones. Children in a class of 35 allegedly make at least as much progress as children in a class of 15.
Which only goes to show statisticians should be kept away from figures. Which one is the top set with the ones who can pass an Oxbridge exam at 15 and which one the one where you spend time explaining how eating the crayons isn't a great idea? Oh, yes... and yet which group gets the rawer deal?
My grandmother also taught classes of 50 in WWII and she said she managed OK. But even if I conceded on class sizes it's hard to see, all other considerations aside, how we fit classes of these sizes into the classrooms.
Edit - the other key issue linking to your first point is marking. Marking a set of 34 books for an exam class and doing it properly takes a whole day. Which leaves less time for good planning, less time to relax and recuperate, which means lesson quality is down and teachers are more stressed and snappish - which in turn gets the children down.
Far too many people here seem absolutely convinced that no unlikely thing can ever happen when, if the last year at has taught us nothing else, we ought to know that unlikely s**t happens all the time.
The Tories getting 50% in the election is quite unlikely...
If the government get rid of the tax lock then I'll probably reconsider the donation I've been pondering. Not impressed by the government so far.
The tax lock is far too restrictive, it needs to be modified. It boxes the government in and they may need additional wiggle room.
It should be restrictive. I want the government to work within a straght jacket and have a very tight spending envelope. If they start to increase taxes to pay for day to day spending then when does the Tory party stop being the Tory party and start being the Labour party?
I think an overall tax burden lock is fine but not allowing yourself to shift the balance of tax is crackers. It was insane at the last election and would be even more insane to not take the opportunity to liberate the government from it.
So what do we, as a party, stand for if we start raising taxes to fund government spending? No thanks. Bring back the posh boys, all is forgiven.
George Osborne raised taxes a plenty. VAT for instance. I've never been the type of Tory that doesn't accept that occasionally raising tax is essential. I think reconfirming the tax lock as it stands would be crackers especially if the economy stutters.
Then take the axe to spending. The economy is out of intensive care, we don't need to raise taxes to balance the books, the chancellor just needs the balls to cut in working benefits and housing benefit paid to working people.
Next up for Jeremy - abolish University fees at a cost of 10 billion
That's surely a given he is going to announce that.
Followed by Nationalisation of Railways
Just the railways? As a true socialist, surely will do BT, leccy and water as well.
Successive ToryGovernments felt it was very much in the national interest to have the Railways, Gas , Electricity and Water in the Public Secor. Were they all deluded Marxists too?
Yes,
Hayek dedicated his book 'The Road To Serfdom' to the Socialists in ALL parties for a reason, Marxist/socialist/authoritarian tendency's exist everywhere, not just in the Labour Party.
Far too many people here seem absolutely convinced that no unlikely thing can ever happen when, if the last year at has taught us nothing else, we ought to know that unlikely s**t happens all the time.
The Tories getting 50% in the election is quite unlikely...
One possibility, for sure.
Any post based on supposed past precedent as to what 'cannot' happen should be regarded with a good degree of healthy criticism....
Justin, you said she deserved a polonium pill. When last I checked they are invariably fatal. Or do you think her stomach is lead lined?
Can I very strongly urge you to stop defending the indefensible? Saying you wished worse on Tony Blair isn't really a great answer - arguably it makes it worse. Move on from it. Please.
I don't regret saying that about Blair at all - and view him as pure evil given the deaths caused by his act of wilful unprovoked aggression.
I thought @PBModerator had given you a final warning?
Re-Blair -it is a widely held view given the lack of any alternative means of having him hauled before a Criminal Court. The Establishment are currently seeking to impede a Private Prosecution. Why should he not be treated like Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein?
Far too many people here seem absolutely convinced that no unlikely thing can ever happen when, if the last year at has taught us nothing else, we ought to know that unlikely s**t happens all the time.
The Tories getting 50% in the election is quite unlikely...
About the only polls that would make me sit up and take notice at the moment are a Tory lead in the mid single figures - or a Curtis James Jackson III.
Justin, you said she deserved a polonium pill. When last I checked they are invariably fatal. Or do you think her stomach is lead lined?
Can I very strongly urge you to stop defending the indefensible? Saying you wished worse on Tony Blair isn't really a great answer - arguably it makes it worse. Move on from it. Please.
I don't regret saying that about Blair at all - and view him as pure evil given the deaths caused by his act of wilful unprovoked aggression.
I thought @PBModerator had given you a final warning?
Re-Blair -it is a widely held view given the lack of any alternative means of having him hauled before a Criminal Court. The Establishment are currently seeking to impede a Private Prosecution. Why should he not be treated like Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein?
They were treated differently. Saddam was tried, found guilty and executed. Bin Laden was assassinated in a rare example of aggression from Obama.
Can I please urge you again to drop this? It doesn't show you in a good light, and I would really miss our arguments if you were banned from PB.
Far too many people here seem absolutely convinced that no unlikely thing can ever happen when, if the last year at has taught us nothing else, we ought to know that unlikely s**t happens all the time.
The Tories getting 50% in the election is quite unlikely...
It is entirely possible the Tories get 50% plus in England if they are polling 48% GB wide.
If the government get rid of the tax lock then I'll probably reconsider the donation I've been pondering. Not impressed by the government so far.
The tax lock is far too restrictive, it needs to be modified. It boxes the government in and they may need additional wiggle room.
It should be restrictive. I want the government to work within a straght jacket and have a very tight spending envelope. If they start to increase taxes to pay for day to day spending then when does the Tory party stop being the Tory party and start being the Labour party?
I think an overall tax burden lock is fine but not allowing yourself to shift the balance of tax is crackers. It was insane at the last election and would be even more insane to not take the opportunity to liberate the government from it.
So what do we, as a party, stand for if we start raising taxes to fund government spending? No thanks. Bring back the posh boys, all is forgiven.
George Osborne raised taxes a plenty. VAT for instance. I've never been the type of Tory that doesn't accept that occasionally raising tax is essential. I think reconfirming the tax lock as it stands would be crackers especially if the economy stutters.
Then take the axe to spending. The economy is out of intensive care, we don't need to raise taxes to balance the books, the chancellor just needs the balls to cut in working benefits and housing benefit paid to working people.
Let's deal in the realm of political reality. We are at the limits of politically acceptable spending retrenchment. We shouldn't need to raise taxes but it's insane to hem yourself in on that score unnecessarily.
This is an absolutely bloody fantastic long read, agree with it or no. Read it. It's about globalisation, social/economic/cultural trends, and the disintegration in French political system that has made the rise of the FN possible - even inevitable. It applies just as well to Brexit or Trump.
Justin, you said she deserved a polonium pill. When last I checked they are invariably fatal. Or do you think her stomach is lead lined?
Can I very strongly urge you to stop defending the indefensible? Saying you wished worse on Tony Blair isn't really a great answer - arguably it makes it worse. Move on from it. Please.
I don't regret saying that about Blair at all - and view him as pure evil given the deaths caused by his act of wilful unprovoked aggression.
I thought @PBModerator had given you a final warning?
Re-Blair -it is a widely held view given the lack of any alternative means of having him hauled before a Criminal Court. The Establishment are currently seeking to impede a Private Prosecution. Why should he not be treated like Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein?
They were treated differently. Saddam was tried, found guilty and executed. Bin Laden was assassinated in a rare example of aggression from Obama.
Can I please urge you again to drop this? It doesn't show you in a good light, and I would really miss our arguments if you were banned from PB.
Many people have expressed strong comments about Blair. Why should I be banned for that?
If the government get rid of the tax lock then I'll probably reconsider the donation I've been pondering. Not impressed by the government so far.
The tax lock is far too restrictive, it needs to be modified. It boxes the government in and they may need additional wiggle room.
It should be restrictive. I want the government to work within a straght jacket and have a very tight spending envelope. If they start to increase taxes to pay for day to day spending then when does the Tory party stop being the Tory party and start being the Labour party?
I think an overall tax burden lock is fine but not allowing yourself to shift the balance of tax is crackers. It was insane at the last election and would be even more insane to not take the opportunity to liberate the government from it.
So what do we, as a party, stand for if we start raising taxes to fund government spending? No thanks. Bring back the posh boys, all is forgiven.
George Osborne raised taxes a plenty. VAT for instance. I've never been the type of Tory that doesn't accept that occasionally raising tax is essential. I think reconfirming the tax lock as it stands would be crackers especially if the economy stutters.
Then take the axe to spending. The economy is out of intensive care, we don't need to raise taxes to balance the books, the chancellor just needs the balls to cut in working benefits and housing benefit paid to working people.
Let's deal in the realm of political reality. We are at the limits of politically acceptable spending retrenchment. We shouldn't need to raise taxes but it's insane to hem yourself in on that score unnecessarily.
Tax reliefs will be the first to go. Any higher rate taxpayers wanting to make additional pension contributions would be advised to do so before this autumn.
I know I'm banging on about this but Ladbrokes is letting you cover 0-49 LD seat @ 1.10
Can someone formulate the scenario over the next 7 weeks were they get 50+ seats because my imagination isn't strong enough.
Just go through the seats they lost in 2015, discard 10 and then add 10. You end up with 58.
The error made in estimating LD seats in 2015 revolved around the belief that the 8% or so national poll rating might translate into 30 - 40 seats because LDs were so very good at campaigning and targeting and that their vote distribution was quite efficient. These advantages they do have, but they do not confer the ability to defy gravity. On present national poll ratings it is inconceivable that the LDs will win 58 seats. 20 - 25 is where it's at IMO.
Far too many people here seem absolutely convinced that no unlikely thing can ever happen when, if the last year at has taught us nothing else, we ought to know that unlikely s**t happens all the time.
The Tories getting 50% in the election is quite unlikely...
Far too many people here seem absolutely convinced that no unlikely thing can ever happen when, if the last year has taught us nothing else, we ought to know by now that unlikely s**t happens all the time.
Indeed - back in 2015 I seem to recall many people on here saying No Overall Majority was free money at about 1.05.
Well now, in the 2017 GE, Con Most Seats is 1.07.
So, per Betfair, Con Most Seats in this GE is LESS likely than No Overall Majority was in 2015.
Who knows what happens? Maybe the week before the GE the CPS announces they are prosecuting a stack of Con MPs, all of whom are standing in 2017? What happens then?
I would also be wary of all hell breaking loose on the subject of the pensions triple lock or on the subject of tax.
Of course Con are hot favourites but anything could happen.
I know I'm banging on about this but Ladbrokes is letting you cover 0-49 LD seat @ 1.10
Can someone formulate the scenario over the next 7 weeks were they get 50+ seats because my imagination isn't strong enough.
Just go through the seats they lost in 2015, discard 10 and then add 10. You end up with 58.
The error made in estimating LD seats in 2015 revolved around the belief that the 8% or so national poll rating might translate into 30 - 40 seats because LDs were so very good a campaigning and targeting and that their vote distribution was quite efficient. These advantages they do have but they do not confer the ability to defy gravity. On present national poll ratings it is inconceivable that the LDs will win 58 seats. 20 - 25 is where its at IMO.
If the poll ratings are right, but it is not inconceivable that they are wrong, in which case it is not inconceivable that they will win 58 seats.
Last time the pollsters were struggling to find enough Lib Dem past voters so were weighting differently. This time the pollsters are finding too many Lib Dem past voters so are weighting the opposite way. If the pollsters ratings are wrong, the party share could be wrong - as the Tory share was last time.
In 2015 a Tory majority seemed inconceivable based on the polls. In 2017 >50 LD seats seems inconceivable based on the polls. Its unlikely but not impossible.
Far too many people here seem absolutely convinced that no unlikely thing can ever happen when, if the last year at has taught us nothing else, we ought to know that unlikely s**t happens all the time.
The Tories getting 50% in the election is quite unlikely...
Justin, you said she deserved a polonium pill. When last I checked they are invariably fatal. Or do you think her stomach is lead lined?
Can I very strongly urge you to stop defending the indefensible? Saying you wished worse on Tony Blair isn't really a great answer - arguably it makes it worse. Move on from it. Please.
I don't regret saying that about Blair at all - and view him as pure evil given the deaths caused by his act of wilful unprovoked aggression.
I thought @PBModerator had given you a final warning?
Re-Blair -it is a widely held view given the lack of any alternative means of having him hauled before a Criminal Court. The Establishment are currently seeking to impede a Private Prosecution. Why should he not be treated like Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein?
They were treated differently. Saddam was tried, found guilty and executed. Bin Laden was assassinated in a rare example of aggression from Obama.
Can I please urge you again to drop this? It doesn't show you in a good light, and I would really miss our arguments if you were banned from PB.
Preposterous bollocks (just like the Daily Express stories that claim the opposite). Trump is a narcissist with the attention span of his handbag designing daughter. The USA will pursue free trade agreements with whoever it can, and whoever it benefits, as and when.
The Times is morphing, rather sadly, into the contrary, broadsheet version of the Daily Mail, in its anti-Brexit positioning.
To get a decent objective view of Brexit one is forced to read the more boring, business pages of the FT. Incredibly.
Isn't The Times "your" paper? You'll be going the same way as Kelvin Mackenzie if you aren't careful!
If the government get rid of the tax lock then I'll probably reconsider the donation I've been pondering. Not impressed by the government so far.
The tax lock is far too restrictive, it needs to be modified. It boxes the government in and they may need additional wiggle room.
It should be restrictive. I want the government to work within a straght jacket and have a very tight spending envelope. If they start to increase taxes to pay for day to day spending then when does the Tory party stop being the Tory party and start being the Labour party?
I think an overall tax burden lock is fine but not allowing yourself to shift the balance of tax is crackers. It was insane at the last election and would be even more insane to not take the opportunity to liberate the government from it.
So what do we, as a party, stand for if we start raising taxes to fund government spending? No thanks. Bring back the posh boys, all is forgiven.
George Osborne raised taxes a plenty. VAT for instance. I've never been the type of Tory that doesn't accept that occasionally raising tax is essential. I think reconfirming the tax lock as it stands would be crackers especially if the economy stutters.
Then take the axe to spending. The economy is out of intensive care, we don't need to raise taxes to balance the books, the chancellor just needs the balls to cut in working benefits and housing benefit paid to working people.
Let's deal in the realm of political reality. We are at the limits of politically acceptable spending retrenchment. We shouldn't need to raise taxes but it's insane to hem yourself in on that score unnecessarily.
You may think that we are at the 'limits of politically acceptable speeding retrenchment' I disagree, I think there are Billions being spent inefficiently, or on things for which where are not priorities or for which there is no real need. There may be a political squeal at the point that the cuts/privatisations are made. as the government employees face the loss of there jobs, but 2 years latter they will have new jobs and very few will notice the difference, depending on the area of spending, some may even prefer whatever privet company or charity emerges to replace it.
Who (apart from the employees) would really miss the 320 million a year spent of the UK space agency? how many of us are cheering on Elon Musk as SpaceX heads to mars?
Weirdly it's one year tomorrow since Barry made his #BackOfTheQueue comment...
So much is based on British politeness and willingness to wait our turn.
I still think hardball is the way to go.
Slash corporation tax to 10% and deregulate the city. Be the thorn in the EU's side if they refuse to give us an equitable deal.
If the USA don't respect the special relationship end special treatment for intelligence, no more extraordinary rendition, no more bending the rules UK side so no constitutional rights aren't breached. If that doesn't work, eff off out of NATO and hand over every file we've got to the russians. What are the US going to do, nuke us?
If the government get rid of the tax lock then I'll probably reconsider the donation I've been pondering. Not impressed by the government so far.
The tax lock is far too restrictive, it needs to be modified. It boxes the government in and they may need additional wiggle room.
It should be restrictive. I want the government to work within a straght jacket and have a very tight spending envelope. If they start to increase taxes to pay for day to day spending then when does the Tory party stop being the Tory party and start being the Labour party?
I think an overall tax burden lock is fine but not allowing yourself to shift the balance of tax is crackers. It was insane at the last election and would be even more insane to not take the opportunity to liberate the government from it.
So what do we, as a party, stand for if we start raising taxes to fund government spending? No thanks. Bring back the posh boys, all is forgiven.
George Osborne raised taxes a plenty. VAT for instance. I've never been the type of Tory that doesn't accept that occasionally raising tax is essential. I think reconfirming the tax lock as it stands would be crackers especially if the economy stutters.
Then take the axe to spending. The economy is out of intensive care, we don't need to raise taxes to balance the books, the chancellor just needs the balls to cut in working benefits and housing benefit paid to working people.
Let's deal in the realm of political reality. We are at the limits of politically acceptable spending retrenchment. We shouldn't need to raise taxes but it's insane to hem yourself in on that score unnecessarily.
Tax reliefs will be the first to go. Any higher rate taxpayers wanting to make additional pension contributions would be advised to do so before this autumn.
Higher rate pension tax relief is the likely target
More importantly, The Sun is not happy with TMay. That WILL worry her
twitter.com/AllieHBNews/status/855524532182036482
The Sun is quite right. FFS exclude students from the migration stats, forget the tens of thousands shit, concentrate on what is right for the UK, not an abstract figure. And give up the 0.7% aid crap.
Is Tessie going to make the same mistake as Cameron and Osborne did in 2010?
The Sun is quite right. FFS exclude students from the migration stats, forget the tens of thousands shit, concentrate on what is right for the UK, not an abstract figure. And give up the 0.7% aid crap.
If the government get rid of the tax lock then I'll probably reconsider the donation I've been pondering. Not impressed by the government so far.
The tax lock is far too restrictive, it needs to be modified. It boxes the government in and they may need additional wiggle room.
It should be restrictive. I want the government to work within a straght jacket and have a very tight spending envelope. If they start to increase taxes to pay for day to day spending then when does the Tory party stop being the Tory party and start being the Labour party?
I think an overall tax burden lock is fine but not allowing yourself to shift the balance of tax is crackers. It was insane at the last election and would be even more insane to not take the opportunity to liberate the government from it.
So what do we, as a party, stand for if we start raising taxes to fund government spending? No thanks. Bring back the posh boys, all is forgiven.
George Osborne raised taxes a plenty. VAT for instance. I've never been the type of Tory that doesn't accept that occasionally raising tax is essential. I think reconfirming the tax lock as it stands would be crackers especially if the economy stutters.
Then take the axe to spending. The economy is out of intensive care, we don't need to raise taxes to balance the books, the chancellor just needs the balls to cut in working benefits and housing benefit paid to working people.
Let's deal in the realm of political reality. We are at the limits of politically acceptable spending retrenchment. We shouldn't need to raise taxes but it's insane to hem yourself in on that score unnecessarily.
Tax reliefs will be the first to go. Any higher rate taxpayers wanting to make additional pension contributions would be advised to do so before this autumn.
Higher rate pension tax relief is the likely target
...thus causing even more doctors, senor police officers and head teachers to take early retirement......
Preposterous bollocks (just like the Daily Express stories that claim the opposite). Trump is a narcissist with the attention span of his handbag designing daughter. The USA will pursue free trade agreements with whoever it can, and whoever it benefits, as and when.
The Times is morphing, rather sadly, into the contrary, broadsheet version of the Daily Mail, in its anti-Brexit positioning.
To get a decent objective view of Brexit one is forced to read the more boring, business pages of the FT. Incredibly.
The Times, seems to have, moved to a more anti US/ left wing position, since the independent stopped printing. most of the reads of the pint edition seem to have moved to the Times, and the times seems keen to accommodate them.
It's because data exists to show small class sizes in the state sector do worse than large ones. Children in a class of 35 allegedly make at least as much progress as children in a class of 15.
Which only goes to show statisticians should be kept away from figures. Which one is the top set with the ones who can pass an Oxbridge exam at 15 and which one the one where you spend time explaining how eating the crayons isn't a great idea? Oh, yes... and yet which group gets the rawer deal?
My grandmother also taught classes of 50 in WWII and she said she managed OK. But even if I conceded on class sizes it's hard to see, all other considerations aside, how we fit classes of these sizes into the classrooms.
Edit - the other key issue linking to your first point is marking. Marking a set of 34 books for an exam class and doing it properly takes a whole day. Which leaves less time for good planning, less time to relax and recuperate, which means lesson quality is down and teachers are more stressed and snappish - which in turn gets the children down.
Overall, I don't think the international weight of evidence on the issue comes down to a "lies, damned lies and statistics" thing where statisticians have cocked up abysmally (as in your example). This is one of those issues where the evidence points strongly one way, common sense and anecdotal experience another. I've always found such intersections fascinating - but also infuriating, in that I really don't know what the "right" answer is, and whether my head or heart is right.
Yes, marking is a huge point. And there is evidence that high quality assessment is important. Although there is a trade-off here at a national policy level: a country that maintains high class size can, ceteris paribus, afford to give teachers substantially more planning & preparation time, as well as more continuing professional development. This is apparently one of the strengths of the Chinese system, and often overlooked by people who focus on what's going on in the classroom (and in students' homes) without looking at what teachers are doing out of the classroom. To be fair, this isn't a trade-off we're unlikely to see explored in the UK - large classes are generally a cost-cutting measure here, and our infrastructure isn't designed to support such large classes anyway. But it's interesting how things can cut both ways.
Theresa May is calculating that large numbers of voters (and the press) have nowhere else to go, so is seeking as free a hand as possible. She is prepared to sacrifice some seats to give herself the power to do more without having made inconvenient commitments.
To get a decent objective view of Brexit one is forced to read the more boring, business pages of the FT. Incredibly.
The quality of the editorial content of the FT on Brexit has been going downhill. They recently suggested that May could win goodwill by proposing an EFTA style court to oversee any transition deal, ignoring the fact that Tusk had already said the transition would need to be under current ECJ processes, so goodwill would be the last thing that would achieve.
But I suspect a small bunch of the editorial team have been seized by Remoaner madness.
Or they are right, and you just haven't figured it out yet.
Paul Ryan said only yesterday that the US is ready to do a deal with the UK as soon as it is in a position to do so. That won't be for at least 23 months.
Preposterous bollocks (just like the Daily Express stories that claim the opposite). Trump is a narcissist with the attention span of his handbag designing daughter. The USA will pursue free trade agreements with whoever it can, and whoever it benefits, as and when.
The Times is morphing, rather sadly, into the contrary, broadsheet version of the Daily Mail, in its anti-Brexit positioning.
To get a decent objective view of Brexit one is forced to read the more boring, business pages of the FT. Incredibly.
The Times, seems to have, moved to a more anti US/ left wing position, since the independent stopped printing. most of the reads of the pint edition seem to have moved to the Times, and the times seems keen to accommodate them.
Maybe I'm just being cynical?
The Times backed Remain - though in fairness, they are carrying the story about the UK being unhappy wth the inferior standards of animal welfare within the EU with a potential ban on exports for slaughter in the offing.
It looks like EU religious exemptions for slaughter might be in the UK's firing line as well.
Theresa May is calculating that large numbers of voters (and the press) have nowhere else to go, so is seeking as free a hand as possible. She is prepared to sacrifice some seats to give herself the power to do more without having made inconvenient commitments.
The Sun is quite right. FFS exclude students from the migration stats, forget the tens of thousands shit, concentrate on what is right for the UK, not an abstract figure. And give up the 0.7% aid crap.
The problem isn't students coming in for 2-3 years, and leaving again. Tourists do that each year for 2-3 weeks, in their millions, and leave again. And we don't count them.
The problem is the "students" who come in under the pretence of a temporary education visa, and then settle here either illegally or via a much easier legal route subsequently.
Those are the ones we need to know about, and count.
Momentum have just emailed me to say "Let's make June the end of May", which I thought was a rather good pun.
They're trying to drum their membership up into taking to the campaign trail or making a donation (suggested amounts £10, £20, or £50). They've got the fighting talk. I remain sceptical this will result in feet pounding streets.
Theresa May is calculating that large numbers of voters (and the press) have nowhere else to go, so is seeking as free a hand as possible. She is prepared to sacrifice some seats to give herself the power to do more without having made inconvenient commitments.
Good strategy.
Inclined to agree.
I don't like what's being said, but the opposition are unlikely to tackle her on it unless Farage stands.
Theresa May is calculating that large numbers of voters (and the press) have nowhere else to go, so is seeking as free a hand as possible. She is prepared to sacrifice some seats to give herself the power to do more without having made inconvenient commitments.
Good strategy.
She might be being together.
If I were her, I'd stand pat until I had a cohesive manifesto out closer to the election, with something for everyone.
Friendly papers (like The Sun, Telegraph and Mail) would view it in the round, and highlight what they liked.
Making pledges (or not) on the hoof like this over the next 7 weeks risks a war of voter attrition.
The Sun is quite right. FFS exclude students from the migration stats, forget the tens of thousands shit, concentrate on what is right for the UK, not an abstract figure. And give up the 0.7% aid crap.
Hammond is a disaster.
I continually fail to understand this attitude - May surely signs off on anything her Chancellor proposes, if you think he is a disaster, you think she is a disaster.
The papers will not be happy unless we pay no taxes at all while seeing no reduction in any service or investment, sooner or later a prime minister has to suck it up and either cut spending drastically, or tell their own supporters to deal with the rises already if they want to keep their own godsdamned spending, which you bet they do, since they moan like absolute babies whenever anything other than the foreign aid is proposed to be cut, and if any tax is proposed.
I'm part convinced the 0.7% is only kept as a sort of lightning rod. That its some kind of conjuring trick, as people are so angry about it they don't notice other things to be angry about.
Regardless, whinging about the 0.7% has become the right's version of 'NHS, NHS, NHS' to me - I can concede issues about it that may well need addressing, but I am just so sick and tired of the moaning.
Theresa May is calculating that large numbers of voters (and the press) have nowhere else to go, so is seeking as free a hand as possible. She is prepared to sacrifice some seats to give herself the power to do more without having made inconvenient commitments.
Good strategy.
Making pledges (or not) on the hoof like this over the next 7 weeks risks a war of voter attrition.
If the government get rid of the tax lock then I'll probably reconsider the donation I've been pondering. Not impressed by the government so far.
The tax lock is far too restrictive, it needs to be modified. It boxes the government in and they may need additional wiggle room.
It should be restrictive. I want the government to work within a straght jacket and have a very tight spending envelope. If they start to increase taxes to pay for day to day spending then when does the Tory party stop being the Tory party and start being the Labour party?
I think an overall tax burden lock is fine but not allowing yourself to shift the balance of tax is crackers. It was insane at the last election and would be even more insane to not take the opportunity to liberate the government from it.
So what do we, as a party, stand for if we start raising taxes to fund government spending? No thanks. Bring back the posh boys, all is forgiven.
George Osborne raised taxes a plenty. VAT for instance. I've never been the type of Tory that doesn't accept that occasionally raising tax is essential. I think reconfirming the tax lock as it stands would be crackers especially if the economy stutters.
Then take the axe to spending. The economy is out of intensive care, we don't need to raise taxes to balance the books, the chancellor just needs the balls to cut in working benefits and housing benefit paid to working people.
Let's deal in the realm of political reality. We are at the limits of politically acceptable spending retrenchment. We shouldn't need to raise taxes but it's insane to hem yourself in on that score unnecessarily.
Tax reliefs will be the first to go. Any higher rate taxpayers wanting to make additional pension contributions would be advised to do so before this autumn.
Higher rate pension tax relief is the likely target
...thus causing even more doctors, senor police officers and head teachers to take early retirement......
Overall, I don't think the international weight of evidence on the issue comes down to a "lies, damned lies and statistics" thing where statisticians have cocked up abysmally (as in your example). This is one of those issues where the evidence points strongly one way, common sense and anecdotal experience another. I've always found such intersections fascinating - but also infuriating, in that I really don't know what the "right" answer is, and whether my head or heart is right.
Yes, marking is a huge point. And there is evidence that high quality assessment is important. Although there is a trade-off here at a national policy level: a country that maintains high class size can, ceteris paribus, afford to give teachers substantially more planning & preparation time, as well as more continuing professional development. This is apparently one of the strengths of the Chinese system, and often overlooked by people who focus on what's going on in the classroom (and in students' homes) without looking at what teachers are doing out of the classroom. To be fair, this isn't a trade-off we're unlikely to see explored in the UK - large classes are generally a cost-cutting measure here, and our infrastructure isn't designed to support such large classes anyway. But it's interesting how things can cut both ways.
There is little reason why information transfer needs to happen in a classroom at all these days. The best method, particularly for High School onwards, is to use class-time for discussion, engagement and selection of interesting problems to address, and let the kids research the information on their own (individually or in study groups) outside. Presentations of their work can then be used to assess the quality of their information sources, if that is a worry, but still with more emphasis on critiquing and improving their ability to manipulate data and present it in useful ways, rather than simply proof of data acquisition.
Theresa May is calculating that large numbers of voters (and the press) have nowhere else to go, so is seeking as free a hand as possible. She is prepared to sacrifice some seats to give herself the power to do more without having made inconvenient commitments.
Good strategy.
Making pledges (or not) on the hoof like this over the next 7 weeks risks a war of voter attrition.
I continually fail to understand this attitude - May surely signs off on anything her Chancellor proposes, if you think he is a disaster, you think she is a disaster.
I continually fail to understand this attitude - May surely signs off on anything her Chancellor proposes, if you think he is a disaster, you think she is a disaster.
I think he has the wrong kind of demeanour. Funereal.
That has, of course, been part of his appeal to date. Serious, grim even, for serious and grim times.
I'm on the fence about him, but the 'gaffes' he has made so far are policy announcements which surely don't take May by surprise, so the worst thing that would be said of him is that he persuaded her they were good ideas when they weren't, which doesn't really excuse her.
TMay is a serious woman, I am sure she would agree the buck stops with her.
Theresa May is calculating that large numbers of voters (and the press) have nowhere else to go, so is seeking as free a hand as possible. She is prepared to sacrifice some seats to give herself the power to do more without having made inconvenient commitments.
Good strategy.
Dave went for that strategy in 2010.
Should we start bracing ourselves for Tim Farron as Deputy PM?
The spread-betting seat markets for the three main parties are currently as follows ;
Sporting:
Tories ........ 372 - 378
Labour ....... 168 - 174
LibDems ...... 28 - 31
Spreadex:
Tories ........ 372 - 378
Labour ....... 170 - 176
LibDems ...... 28 - 31
It's encouraging to note that both firms are quoting on the basis of a 6 seat spread. In the 2015 GE, IIRC both firms had a 10 seat spread in operation.
It will be interesting to hear what OGH makes of these seat spreads!
Theresa May is calculating that large numbers of voters (and the press) have nowhere else to go, so is seeking as free a hand as possible. She is prepared to sacrifice some seats to give herself the power to do more without having made inconvenient commitments.
Good strategy.
Dave went for that strategy in 2010.
Should we start bracing ourselves for Tim Farron as Deputy PM?
I am not going to sleep tonight now.....
Not because I particularly dislike Farron, but the chaos will be insane, hokey cokey-ing over Brexit.
The spread-betting seat markets for the three main parties are currently as follows ;
Sporting:
Tories ........ 372 - 378
Labour ....... 168 - 174
LibDems ...... 28 - 31
Spreadex:
Tories ........ 372 - 378
Labour ....... 170 - 176
LibDems ...... 28 - 31
It's encouraging to note that both firms are quoting on the basis of a 6 seat spread. In the 2015 GE, IIRC both firms had a 10 seat spread in operation.
It will be interesting to hear what OGH makes of these seat spreads!
I'd expect Labour to be 15-20 higher, and LDs 15-20 less, personally.
The Sun is quite right. FFS exclude students from the migration stats, forget the tens of thousands shit, concentrate on what is right for the UK, not an abstract figure. And give up the 0.7% aid crap.
The problem isn't students coming in for 2-3 years, and leaving again. Tourists do that each year for 2-3 weeks, in their millions, and leave again. And we don't count them.
The problem is the "students" who come in under the pretence of a temporary education visa, and then settle here either illegally or via a much easier legal route subsequently.
Those are the ones we need to know about, and count.
SO COUNT THEM. And their dependants. AS THEY LEAVE.
But in the meantime take them out of the stats: miraculously reducing net migration by 130,000. Job done.
Trouble is that an awful lot of them stay.
If they don't, then they aren't net immigrants even if you do include them, but the in/out figures will have a 2-4 year lag.
There is little reason why information transfer needs to happen in a classroom at all these days. The best method, particularly for High School onwards, is to use class-time for discussion, engagement and selection of interesting problems to address, and let the kids research the information on their own (individually or in study groups) outside. Presentations of their work can then be used to assess the quality of their information sources, if that is a worry, but still with more emphasis on critiquing and improving their ability to manipulate data and present it in useful ways, rather than simply proof of data acquisition.
"The Blob" in the UK is essentially conservative, but in 15-25 years time I can imagine that the learning experience here will be completely transformed - and the teaching profession with it.
Another interesting factor is big online learning providers (likely to be tied in with existing educational publishers, and/or exam boards) using AI/Machine Learning perhaps supplemented with cheap, well-educated English-speaking online tutors from developing countries like India to make internet-based learning far more interactive than current offerings allow. (We are talking a world of difference beyond Khan Academy or MyMaths and the likes, certainly within the next 10 years. May suit some subjects more than others, of course.)
I understand your daughter did very well essentially working for herself (in a carefully structured environment). I imagine she found the transition to independent learning at college much easier to boot.
Preposterous bollocks (just like the Daily Express stories that claim the opposite). Trump is a narcissist with the attention span of his handbag designing daughter. The USA will pursue free trade agreements with whoever it can, and whoever it benefits, as and when.
The Times is morphing, rather sadly, into the contrary, broadsheet version of the Daily Mail, in its anti-Brexit positioning.
To get a decent objective view of Brexit one is forced to read the more boring, business pages of the FT. Incredibly.
Isn't The Times "your" paper? You'll be going the same way as Kelvin Mackenzie if you aren't careful!
Please don't quote me (really). I love my paper and honour my employer, Mr Rupert Murdoch (PBUH). And I absolutely love saying I WRITE FOR THE TIMES. Yes. THE TIMES OF LONDON. All over the world, this opens doors and eyes. Fab.
But I suspect a small bunch of the editorial team have been seized by Remoaner madness.
Hopefully they will revert to sanity soon.
Times increasing its cover price by 20p from tomorrow
TSE correct unless he loses to Fish Finger CON no chance now all about giving the money to the spongers worst government ever. Why do decent people have to pay 45% tax and not be allowed reasonable £1.5m pension pot? Alastair you are pension expert, why is this government anti pension?
May surely cannot go into a GE with Labour promising to keep the pensions triple lock and not raise taxes (up to a certain level of income) and yet the Conservatives not making the same commitments.
Theresa May is calculating that large numbers of voters (and the press) have nowhere else to go, so is seeking as free a hand as possible. She is prepared to sacrifice some seats to give herself the power to do more without having made inconvenient commitments.
Good strategy.
Dave went for that strategy in 2010.
Should we start bracing ourselves for Tim Farron as Deputy PM?
Sky just reported on UKIP in Dagenham and UKIP voters are going conservative. Indeed over the last few days Sky and BBC live reports from across the Country show a huge move to Theresa May - the last time I witnessed anything like this was Tony Blair in 1997
Comments
Can I very strongly urge you to stop defending the indefensible? Saying you wished worse on Tony Blair isn't really a great answer - arguably it makes it worse. Move on from it. Please.
I taught a class of (highly politically/economically connected) sixth formers who came over from elite high schools in China. They had very big class sizes even there, 40 or so. Everyone paid attention to the teacher. The lesson pace was fast and very demanding. But a different culture of course, with different expectations. They found sixth form here utterly mystifying in terms of the way we taught.
Lots of econometric research seems to suggests class size doesn't make a difference to effectiveness, but highly-trained, well-educated and well-paid teachers do. It doesn't "feel" that way to me in the classroom, and maybe there's cultural confounding here (larger class sizes in countries with greater societal/parental pressure on education?), but this seems to be the direction the evidence points. Something I've always been curious about.
Which only goes to show statisticians should be kept away from figures. Which one is the top set with the ones who can pass an Oxbridge exam at 15 and which one the one where you spend time explaining how eating the crayons isn't a great idea? Oh, yes... and yet which group gets the rawer deal?
My grandmother also taught classes of 50 in WWII and she said she managed OK. But even if I conceded on class sizes it's hard to see, all other considerations aside, how we fit classes of these sizes into the classrooms.
Edit - the other key issue linking to your first point is marking. Marking a set of 34 books for an exam class and doing it properly takes a whole day. Which leaves less time for good planning, less time to relax and recuperate, which means lesson quality is down and teachers are more stressed and snappish - which in turn gets the children down.
Hayek dedicated his book 'The Road To Serfdom' to the Socialists in ALL parties for a reason, Marxist/socialist/authoritarian tendency's exist everywhere, not just in the Labour Party.
Any post based on supposed past precedent as to what 'cannot' happen should be regarded with a good degree of healthy criticism....
https://twitter.com/AllieHBNews/status/855518447668776960
Can I please urge you again to drop this? It doesn't show you in a good light, and I would really miss our arguments if you were banned from PB.
Magnificent, magnificent article.
Worth it just for: “We may have done nothing for the poor, but we did appoint the first disabled lesbian parking commissioner”.
Well now, in the 2017 GE, Con Most Seats is 1.07.
So, per Betfair, Con Most Seats in this GE is LESS likely than No Overall Majority was in 2015.
Who knows what happens? Maybe the week before the GE the CPS announces they are prosecuting a stack of Con MPs, all of whom are standing in 2017? What happens then?
I would also be wary of all hell breaking loose on the subject of the pensions triple lock or on the subject of tax.
Of course Con are hot favourites but anything could happen.
Last time the pollsters were struggling to find enough Lib Dem past voters so were weighting differently. This time the pollsters are finding too many Lib Dem past voters so are weighting the opposite way. If the pollsters ratings are wrong, the party share could be wrong - as the Tory share was last time.
In 2015 a Tory majority seemed inconceivable based on the polls. In 2017 >50 LD seats seems inconceivable based on the polls. Its unlikely but not impossible.
You may think that we are at the 'limits of politically acceptable speeding retrenchment' I disagree, I think there are Billions being spent inefficiently, or on things for which where are not priorities or for which there is no real need. There may be a political squeal at the point that the cuts/privatisations are made. as the government employees face the loss of there jobs, but 2 years latter they will have new jobs and very few will notice the difference, depending on the area of spending, some may even prefer whatever privet company or charity emerges to replace it.
Who (apart from the employees) would really miss the 320 million a year spent of the UK space agency? how many of us are cheering on Elon Musk as SpaceX heads to mars?
I still think hardball is the way to go.
Slash corporation tax to 10% and deregulate the city. Be the thorn in the EU's side if they refuse to give us an equitable deal.
If the USA don't respect the special relationship end special treatment for intelligence, no more extraordinary rendition, no more bending the rules UK side so no constitutional rights aren't breached. If that doesn't work, eff off out of NATO and hand over every file we've got to the russians. What are the US going to do, nuke us?
Maybe I'm just being cynical?
Yes, marking is a huge point. And there is evidence that high quality assessment is important. Although there is a trade-off here at a national policy level: a country that maintains high class size can, ceteris paribus, afford to give teachers substantially more planning & preparation time, as well as more continuing professional development. This is apparently one of the strengths of the Chinese system, and often overlooked by people who focus on what's going on in the classroom (and in students' homes) without looking at what teachers are doing out of the classroom. To be fair, this isn't a trade-off we're unlikely to see explored in the UK - large classes are generally a cost-cutting measure here, and our infrastructure isn't designed to support such large classes anyway. But it's interesting how things can cut both ways.
Good strategy.
The EU is an position to do so now.
It looks like EU religious exemptions for slaughter might be in the UK's firing line as well.
The problem is the "students" who come in under the pretence of a temporary education visa, and then settle here either illegally or via a much easier legal route subsequently.
Those are the ones we need to know about, and count.
They're trying to drum their membership up into taking to the campaign trail or making a donation (suggested amounts £10, £20, or £50). They've got the fighting talk. I remain sceptical this will result in feet pounding streets.
I don't like what's being said, but the opposition are unlikely to tackle her on it unless Farage stands.
If I were her, I'd stand pat until I had a cohesive manifesto out closer to the election, with something for everyone.
Friendly papers (like The Sun, Telegraph and Mail) would view it in the round, and highlight what they liked.
Making pledges (or not) on the hoof like this over the next 7 weeks risks a war of voter attrition.
The papers will not be happy unless we pay no taxes at all while seeing no reduction in any service or investment, sooner or later a prime minister has to suck it up and either cut spending drastically, or tell their own supporters to deal with the rises already if they want to keep their own godsdamned spending, which you bet they do, since they moan like absolute babies whenever anything other than the foreign aid is proposed to be cut, and if any tax is proposed.
I'm part convinced the 0.7% is only kept as a sort of lightning rod. That its some kind of conjuring trick, as people are so angry about it they don't notice other things to be angry about.
Regardless, whinging about the 0.7% has become the right's version of 'NHS, NHS, NHS' to me - I can concede issues about it that may well need addressing, but I am just so sick and tired of the moaning.
Leave/Remain by major party 2015 Results
Leave/Remain current poll average.
Cheers
Fair enough.
Yet.
Foreign aid policy a disaster!
Looks like may and Hammond will turn against hard working successful people and increase handouts!!!
May will prioritise British soft power and the integrity of the Union over a few extra squids, I think.
https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/855528862712832000
I'm on the fence about him, but the 'gaffes' he has made so far are policy announcements which surely don't take May by surprise, so the worst thing that would be said of him is that he persuaded her they were good ideas when they weren't, which doesn't really excuse her.
TMay is a serious woman, I am sure she would agree the buck stops with her.
Should we start bracing ourselves for Tim Farron as Deputy PM?
Sporting:
Tories ........ 372 - 378
Labour ....... 168 - 174
LibDems ...... 28 - 31
Spreadex:
Tories ........ 372 - 378
Labour ....... 170 - 176
LibDems ...... 28 - 31
It's encouraging to note that both firms are quoting on the basis of a 6 seat spread. In the 2015 GE, IIRC both firms had a 10 seat spread in operation.
It will be interesting to hear what OGH makes of these seat spreads!
Not because I particularly dislike Farron, but the chaos will be insane, hokey cokey-ing over Brexit.
If they don't, then they aren't net immigrants even if you do include them, but the in/out figures will have a 2-4 year lag.
"The Blob" in the UK is essentially conservative, but in 15-25 years time I can imagine that the learning experience here will be completely transformed - and the teaching profession with it.
Another interesting factor is big online learning providers (likely to be tied in with existing educational publishers, and/or exam boards) using AI/Machine Learning perhaps supplemented with cheap, well-educated English-speaking online tutors from developing countries like India to make internet-based learning far more interactive than current offerings allow. (We are talking a world of difference beyond Khan Academy or MyMaths and the likes, certainly within the next 10 years. May suit some subjects more than others, of course.)
I understand your daughter did very well essentially working for herself (in a carefully structured environment). I imagine she found the transition to independent learning at college much easier to boot.
CON no chance now all about giving the money to the spongers worst government ever. Why do decent people have to pay 45% tax and not be allowed reasonable £1.5m pension pot? Alastair you are pension expert, why is this government anti pension?
I like that she doesn't talk, she just 'does'.
People say she doesn't act. Day after appointment - Osborne - here's your P45.
"A50 will be done by 31 March." Delivered.
I have pretty strong faith in her that WTO will not be an arduous issue if it happens. She just seems determined, eminently sensible and pragmatic.
Twitter is so public.
If she does, she'll be attacked relentlessly.
Anything could happen.