On the topic, I don't believe it. I think the media have fallen, yet again, for Johnson bluster and bullshit about 'oomph'.
Cummings is not going to allow a deal.
btw does anyone else think that this kind of typical Johnson phraseology "bit of oomph" has lost its appeal in the light of the Coronavirus shambles?
Boris doesn't have any oomph, being the problem.
The statues statement at the weekend is a good example. Tories were trying to compare him to Macron, but Macron said that no statue would be taken down by the French Republic, whereas Boris said that he would try awfully hard to leave things broadly as they are.
It really is time for our exit to be accepted and rather than throw 'toys out of the pram' those EU devotees should look to improving any deal over the next few years by campaigning to re-join the single market
The exit has happened. How is it not 'accepted'? The UK is now an external party negotiating with the EU; that doesn't mean that the UK gets everything it wants or even gets a deal.
Just like the decision, we are destined to 'win' lots of principles that will prove worthless (or costly) in practice.
Our wins will be the same as going to Hartlepool job centre and telling them all that following long government negotiations with the car makers they are all allowed to go and buy a Bentley Mulsanne.
I wonder what focus groups are like on food banks and free school meals? I'm not sure this subject plays nearly as well as that story about foreign workers paying to access the NHS, for example.
Dunno. But 20% of any representative focus group of working age people might be looking at unemployment in next twelve months, so that might concentrate minds.
Demonstrating we're ready to go for No Deal if the EU aren't reasonable causes them to start acting like adults and accept we're not going to be their fishing colony, who'd've thunk it.
It's the exact opposite. We caved. We announced the reality that we cannot set up a physical border by the end of the year. That means we cannot diverge from the EU whether we want to or not. Having conceded our major aim they in turn have said they are happy to negotiate access to our waters (from a position of power) rather than keep demanding it so that HOG can save face.
We lost. Because the government are incompetent and stupid.
Your desperate twisting of reality is very funny to observe.
The UK didn't announce that it would leave it's border wide open in the event of no deal?
Whatever they did or did not announce would be temporary. A deal would be permanent. Saying they are going to delay enforcing the border rules until they have the infrastructure in place does not in any way mean we cannot diverge. Your claims are just plain wrong.
Richard, we cannot diverge without the ability to enforce said divergence. And it will take years not months to set up the physical infrastructure, the computer system, the army of bureaucrats etc etc. Nor do we have anything to diverge to - trade deals also take years not months.
Johnson is like Eric Idle in Life of Brian demanding the right to have babies. The EU will accept our absolute sovereign right to diverge. Knowing that having won that right we can't diverge because where's the foetus gonna gestate- in a box?
The silent majority are patriotic and want our culture and heritage respected.
Equal opportunities does not mean ignoring our history
So why is so little of it taught, in the gap between the Tudors and the Twentieth Century ?
The history of the slave trade and empire is pretty well ignored.
I thought the period was glorified not ignored, which is it?
I think our teaching of history has some pretty glaring omissions - I was not once taught at school about the civil wars of the 1640s and 1650s for instance - and I suspect the silent majority are not overly proud or overly condemnatory, they are overly apathetic.
We dont know enough about history in general, which is why we get overly defensive or overly emotional in a negative sense by viewing too much of it through the prism of present politics, shorn of any national or global context.
It takes two sides to fight a culture war, he cannot wage it alone. Therefore I suspect what he wants to do is, while not unimportant, also is not definitive.
I do like 'went out of her way to attack it' rather than just 'attacked it'. Subtlely adding a layer of unreasonableness to her attacks (I cannot speak as to how unreasonable it was).
As I understand it, the trend has been to teach modules of history (schools skip from the Victorians to the Vikings to WW2 etc.) rather than the "gallop through history" whereby history is taught in chronological order. Simon Schama has been very critical of the module approach.
History is also an optional subject at GCSE, so a significant number of pupils will not study it after they are 14. It is expected that most pupils will study at least one humanity (basically geography or history) but even that was met with howls of protest from the creative arts as it reduced the numbers doing Art, music, drama, and so on.
Again, I think 'expectation' is perhaps the wrong word. The government requires History or Geography for the Ebacc, but how much attention to people pay to that?
(It should be added that History and Geography are not the only Humanities subjects either. RS, Sociology and Classics all got screwed over with that one.)
This is not recent. It was exactly the same 40 years ago. At my comprehensive it was timetabled in such a way that it was impossible to study both history and geography.
For us geography was compulsory and we had the option of history or chemistry. A couple of the lads who chose history realised they'd dropped a bollock and did O-level chemistry when they were in 6th form.
So I was taught no history after the age of 14. Until I started reading PB!
Who on earth would do geography instead of history? I like Pratchett's description of the former: physics with some trees stuck in it.
Tried a new Netflix series last night at the suggestion of my wife: Snowpiercer.
There's willing suspension of disbelief, and then there's Snowpiercer.
I have to virtually suspend my whole brain to watch it.
I have an easier time believing the more outlandish fantasies in Star Trek.
Yes we all know about The Wire, Sopranos, Breaking Bad, etc.
But increasingly I am coming to think that The Americans (Amazon Prime) ranks as one of the very best mini-series ever made.
I loved the Americans first time around, but I have to say that I tried to binge watch the first and second series recently, and it isn't as good second time around. Some of the situations are pretty ridiculous.
The silent majority are patriotic and want our culture and heritage respected.
Equal opportunities does not mean ignoring our history
So why is so little of it taught, in the gap between the Tudors and the Twentieth Century ?
The history of the slave trade and empire is pretty well ignored.
I thought the period was glorified not ignored, which is it?
I think our teaching of history has some pretty glaring omissions - I was not once taught at school about the civil wars of the 1640s and 1650s for instance - and I suspect the silent majority are not overly proud or overly condemnatory, they are overly apathetic.
We dont know enough about history in general, which is why we get overly defensive or overly emotional in a negative sense by viewing too much of it through the prism of present politics, shorn of any national or global context.
It takes two sides to fight a culture war, he cannot wage it alone. Therefore I suspect what he wants to do is, while not unimportant, also is not definitive.
I do like 'went out of her way to attack it' rather than just 'attacked it'. Subtlely adding a layer of unreasonableness to her attacks (I cannot speak as to how unreasonable it was).
As I understand it, the trend has been to teach modules of history (schools skip from the Victorians to the Vikings to WW2 etc.) rather than the "gallop through history" whereby history is taught in chronological order. Simon Schama has been very critical of the module approach.
History is also an optional subject at GCSE, so a significant number of pupils will not study it after they are 14. It is expected that most pupils will study at least one humanity (basically geography or history) but even that was met with howls of protest from the creative arts as it reduced the numbers doing Art, music, drama, and so on.
Again, I think 'expectation' is perhaps the wrong word. The government requires History or Geography for the Ebacc, but how much attention to people pay to that?
(It should be added that History and Geography are not the only Humanities subjects either. RS, Sociology and Classics all got screwed over with that one.)
This is not recent. It was exactly the same 40 years ago. At my comprehensive it was timetabled in such a way that it was impossible to study both history and geography.
For us geography was compulsory and we had the option of history or chemistry. A couple of the lads who chose history realised they'd dropped a bollock and did O-level chemistry when they were in 6th form.
So I was taught no history after the age of 14. Until I started reading PB!
Back in the 50's, if you wanted to 'do science' at the Grammar School...... called a High School .... I attended, from the IVth onward one took Biology, Chemistry and Physics, having dropped Latin, History and Geography. And I never heard of anyone realising at 16, post 'O' Level that he'd made a mistake and switching. AFAIK it was 'not allowed' to take at A level a subject that you could have done at O. I believe that the girls school next door operated similarly; I never really enquired, although I had other deep and meaningful conversations with students there as I got older!
On the topic, I don't believe it. I think the media have fallen, yet again, for Johnson bluster and bullshit about 'oomph'.
Cummings is not going to allow a deal.
Cummings has never opposed a deal. Whatever one thinks of him in other areas, as far as Brexit is concerned he was always one of those looking for a softer Brexit rather than a hard WTO result.
Really? I stand corrected if true. I thought he wanted maximum disruption and chaos from which new shoots of change and innovation can emerge?
Most people seem to be talking about Marcus Rashford's letter rather than Brexit. Does anyone really care about Brexit at the moment? I mean, apart from a few old white blokes choking on their false teeth.
Rashford has really lit a fire here ...
Marcus is remarkably mature beyond his years and his letter is inspiring
I cannot understand for one moment why HMG have not provided an instant acceptance of his recommendations.
Just another unnecessary own goal by Boris and let us hope by the end of the day HMG has seen sense
Government helping out the undeserving poor is not a vote winner.
Whenever Johnson was struggling financially,, which I understand over the years was not uncommon. It was particularly difficult to balance the books on an MPs salary, he didn't have to beg for government handouts. Oh no, there was always a benevolent Newspaper Proprietor to bail him out.
I wonder what focus groups are like on food banks and free school meals? I'm not sure this subject plays nearly as well as that story about foreign workers paying to access the NHS, for example.
Dunno. But 20% of any representative focus group of working age people might be looking at unemployment in next twelve months, so that might concentrate minds.
A far bigger grievance, in my opinion, should be from people who are out of work now and are seeing other people receiving far greater benefits from the government. Not that you'll hear any politician making that point.
The silent majority are patriotic and want our culture and heritage respected.
Equal opportunities does not mean ignoring our history
So why is so little of it taught, in the gap between the Tudors and the Twentieth Century ?
The history of the slave trade and empire is pretty well ignored.
I thought the period was glorified not ignored, which is it?
I think our teaching of history has some pretty glaring omissions - I was not once taught at school about the civil wars of the 1640s and 1650s for instance - and I suspect the silent majority are not overly proud or overly condemnatory, they are overly apathetic.
We dont know enough about history in general, which is why we get overly defensive or overly emotional in a negative sense by viewing too much of it through the prism of present politics, shorn of any national or global context.
It takes two sides to fight a culture war, he cannot wage it alone. Therefore I suspect what he wants to do is, while not unimportant, also is not definitive.
I do like 'went out of her way to attack it' rather than just 'attacked it'. Subtlely adding a layer of unreasonableness to her attacks (I cannot speak as to how unreasonable it was).
As I understand it, the trend has been to teach modules of history (schools skip from the Victorians to the Vikings to WW2 etc.) rather than the "gallop through history" whereby history is taught in chronological order. Simon Schama has been very critical of the module approach.
History is also an optional subject at GCSE, so a significant number of pupils will not study it after they are 14. It is expected that most pupils will study at least one humanity (basically geography or history) but even that was met with howls of protest from the creative arts as it reduced the numbers doing Art, music, drama, and so on.
Again, I think 'expectation' is perhaps the wrong word. The government requires History or Geography for the Ebacc, but how much attention to people pay to that?
(It should be added that History and Geography are not the only Humanities subjects either. RS, Sociology and Classics all got screwed over with that one.)
This is not recent. It was exactly the same 40 years ago. At my comprehensive it was timetabled in such a way that it was impossible to study both history and geography.
For us geography was compulsory and we had the option of history or chemistry. A couple of the lads who chose history realised they'd dropped a bollock and did O-level chemistry when they were in 6th form.
So I was taught no history after the age of 14. Until I started reading PB!
Who on earth would do geography instead of history? I like Pratchett's description of the former: physics with some trees stuck in it.
Aren't you curious as to how and why the world is as it is? Geography is a great subject, combining physical and human disciplines and, at some universities, a lot of history thrown in. As well as a good dose of both practical and intellectual skills that are rather more useful in later life than quadratic equations.
The silent majority are patriotic and want our culture and heritage respected.
Equal opportunities does not mean ignoring our history
So why is so little of it taught, in the gap between the Tudors and the Twentieth Century ?
The history of the slave trade and empire is pretty well ignored.
I thought the period was glorified not ignored, which is it?
I think our teaching of history has some pretty glaring omissions - I was not once taught at school about the civil wars of the 1640s and 1650s for instance - and I suspect the silent majority are not overly proud or overly condemnatory, they are overly apathetic.
We dont know enough about history in general, which is why we get overly defensive or overly emotional in a negative sense by viewing too much of it through the prism of present politics, shorn of any national or global context.
It takes two sides to fight a culture war, he cannot wage it alone. Therefore I suspect what he wants to do is, while not unimportant, also is not definitive.
I do like 'went out of her way to attack it' rather than just 'attacked it'. Subtlely adding a layer of unreasonableness to her attacks (I cannot speak as to how unreasonable it was).
As I understand it, the trend has been to teach modules of history (schools skip from the Victorians to the Vikings to WW2 etc.) rather than the "gallop through history" whereby history is taught in chronological order. Simon Schama has been very critical of the module approach.
History is also an optional subject at GCSE, so a significant number of pupils will not study it after they are 14. It is expected that most pupils will study at least one humanity (basically geography or history) but even that was met with howls of protest from the creative arts as it reduced the numbers doing Art, music, drama, and so on.
Again, I think 'expectation' is perhaps the wrong word. The government requires History or Geography for the Ebacc, but how much attention to people pay to that?
(It should be added that History and Geography are not the only Humanities subjects either. RS, Sociology and Classics all got screwed over with that one.)
This is not recent. It was exactly the same 40 years ago. At my comprehensive it was timetabled in such a way that it was impossible to study both history and geography.
For us geography was compulsory and we had the option of history or chemistry. A couple of the lads who chose history realised they'd dropped a bollock and did O-level chemistry when they were in 6th form.
So I was taught no history after the age of 14. Until I started reading PB!
I'm sure @ydoethur can say something about this, but the tricky thing about history as a subject is that there's two parts to it. There's the learning about it for it's own sake and it is quite interesting, though at school I was more interested in Premier League football! But then there's the learning how to be a historian side of it - evaluating sources, etc. etc. That side of it is important for developing academic historians, but I found it a little bit boring to be honest.
One loss is the overview approach, being replaced by a topic approach. So you find that lots of people basically don't know anything about their past or culture at all, but have a specialist knowledge of Peruvian dentistry in the 17th century or Mongolian fireplaces in antiquity.
Lots of them know about Hitler, it's very popular. But while German history can't be understood without him, there is much more to German history.
The rumours from Brussels have for some time been that a skeleton deal will be agreed to avoid total disruption. Fishing is an emotive issue but few voters are actually affected anywhere, so an annual haggle is an easy fudge. I can't see us getting privileged financial market access any time soon, though. Building up EU capacity to reduce City dominance is a nbo-brainer for the EU unless they are being offered something substantial in return.
Tried a new Netflix series last night at the suggestion of my wife: Snowpiercer.
There's willing suspension of disbelief, and then there's Snowpiercer.
I have to virtually suspend my whole brain to watch it.
I have an easier time believing the more outlandish fantasies in Star Trek.
Yes we all know about The Wire, Sopranos, Breaking Bad, etc.
But increasingly I am coming to think that The Americans (Amazon Prime) ranks as one of the very best mini-series ever made.
I loved the Americans first time around, but I have to say that I tried to binge watch the first and second series recently, and it isn't as good second time around. Some of the situations are pretty ridiculous.
Interesting - I find it just gets better...and I suppose as they say, sometimes truth is stranger than fiction.
The silent majority are patriotic and want our culture and heritage respected.
Equal opportunities does not mean ignoring our history
So why is so little of it taught, in the gap between the Tudors and the Twentieth Century ?
The history of the slave trade and empire is pretty well ignored.
I thought the period was glorified not ignored, which is it?
I think our teaching of history has some pretty glaring omissions - I was not once taught at school about the civil wars of the 1640s and 1650s for instance - and I suspect the silent majority are not overly proud or overly condemnatory, they are overly apathetic.
We dont know enough about history in general, which is why we get overly defensive or overly emotional in a negative sense by viewing too much of it through the prism of present politics, shorn of any national or global context.
It takes two sides to fight a culture war, he cannot wage it alone. Therefore I suspect what he wants to do is, while not unimportant, also is not definitive.
I do like 'went out of her way to attack it' rather than just 'attacked it'. Subtlely adding a layer of unreasonableness to her attacks (I cannot speak as to how unreasonable it was).
As I understand it, the trend has been to teach modules of history (schools skip from the Victorians to the Vikings to WW2 etc.) rather than the "gallop through history" whereby history is taught in chronological order. Simon Schama has been very critical of the module approach.
Why is everyone talking about 'schools' as though they are some kind of homogenous grouping? They're not. What is taught varies very widely.
That said, in all five schools I have worked in slavery...
Most people seem to be talking about Marcus Rashford's letter rather than Brexit. Does anyone really care about Brexit at the moment? I mean, apart from a few old white blokes choking on their false teeth.
Well, she's right to point out statements that might actively scare people who have just been plunged into the shit thanks to mass jobloss.
But God knows why Cummings thinks taking on Rashford is worth the candle. Maybe he hasn't switch his Big Data algorithms from statue war to dinner lady war.
Possibly because after all is said and done the government is going to have to try and balance the books, so the more special interest groups that get paid out now, the more difficult choices there are to make in the future.
Making easy decisions is easy. Making tough decisions is not.
Scottish fishing industry about to be shafted. Again.
The Scottish fishing industry sold its quotas making a few ex fishermen very wealthy indeed. That might well have shafted the next generation of fishermen but that was the decision of those who held the quota in a common market. Now they want the quota back without paying for it. Which we can do but some compromise is not out of order.
Personally I am more focused on the onshore jobs that have been lost. I would make it a condition of fishing in UK waters that your catch is landed and processed in a UK port. That would have a lot more long term benefit to the north east (and the south west) than making a few captains rich once again.
From what I understand of the dynamics (not a huge amount) wouldn't that mean that the type of fish caught in UK waters would be landed in the UK and then immediately re-exported because we don't eat our local fish?
Doesn't seem super-efficient...?
Yes it would. I don't care about the super-efficiency of it. I want UK plc to see the benefit of its fish in terms of jobs and business activity here. Factory fishing vessels hoovering the sea and then returning to Spain with a largely foreign crew do absolutely nothing for us. Before the CFP places like the Neuk of Fife, Arbroath, Aberdeen and Peterhead had thousands of onshore jobs cleaning, smoking and processing the fish. My understanding is that the south west was similar. They won't come back the same way, the cottage industry of the past has gone, but I would like to see some benefit from this harvest.
Why not just get those people to dig holes and then fill them in again?
The rumours from Brussels have for some time been that a skeleton deal will be agreed to avoid total disruption. Fishing is an emotive issue but few voters are actually affected anywhere, so an annual haggle is an easy fudge. I can't see us getting privileged financial market access any time soon, though. Building up EU capacity to reduce City dominance is a nbo-brainer for the EU unless they are being offered something substantial in return.
Access to our powerful financial market is something substantial.
It really is time for our exit to be accepted and rather than throw 'toys out of the pram' those EU devotees should look to improving any deal over the next few years by campaigning to re-join the single market
The exit has happened. How is it not 'accepted'? The UK is now an external party negotiating with the EU; that doesn't mean that the UK gets everything it wants or even gets a deal.
Just like the decision, we are destined to 'win' lots of principles that will prove worthless (or costly) in practice.
Our wins will be the same as going to Hartlepool job centre and telling them all that following long government negotiations with the car makers they are all allowed to go and buy a Bentley Mulsanne.
That minority of Hartlepool residents than can read will have to be thumbing Autotrader as the Mulsanne has just gone out of production. The Six and Three Quarter/L410 motor can no longer meet EU emission standards.
The silent majority are patriotic and want our culture and heritage respected.
Equal opportunities does not mean ignoring our history
So why is so little of it taught, in the gap between the Tudors and the Twentieth Century ?
The history of the slave trade and empire is pretty well ignored.
I thought the period was glorified not ignored, which is it?
I think our teaching of history has some pretty glaring omissions - I was not once taught at school about the civil wars of the 1640s and 1650s for instance - and I suspect the silent majority are not overly proud or overly condemnatory, they are overly apathetic.
We dont know enough about history in general, which is why we get overly defensive or overly emotional in a negative sense by viewing too much of it through the prism of present politics, shorn of any national or global context.
It takes two sides to fight a culture war, he cannot wage it alone. Therefore I suspect what he wants to do is, while not unimportant, also is not definitive.
I do like 'went out of her way to attack it' rather than just 'attacked it'. Subtlely adding a layer of unreasonableness to her attacks (I cannot speak as to how unreasonable it was).
As I understand it, the trend has been to teach modules of history (schools skip from the Victorians to the Vikings to WW2 etc.) rather than the "gallop through history" whereby history is taught in chronological order. Simon Schama has been very critical of the module approach.
History is also an optional subject at GCSE, so a significant number of pupils will not study it after they are 14. It is expected that most pupils will study at least one humanity (basically geography or history) but even that was met with howls of protest from the creative arts as it reduced the numbers doing Art, music, drama, and so on.
Again, I think 'expectation' is perhaps the wrong word. The government requires History or Geography for the Ebacc, but how much attention to people pay to that?
(It should be added that History and Geography are not the only Humanities subjects either. RS, Sociology and Classics all got screwed over with that one.)
This is not recent. It was exactly the same 40 years ago. At my comprehensive it was timetabled in such a way that it was impossible to study both history and geography.
For us geography was compulsory and we had the option of history or chemistry. A couple of the lads who chose history realised they'd dropped a bollock and did O-level chemistry when they were in 6th form.
So I was taught no history after the age of 14. Until I started reading PB!
Back in the 50's, if you wanted to 'do science' at the Grammar School...... called a High School .... I attended, from the IVth onward one took Biology, Chemistry and Physics, having dropped Latin, History and Geography. And I never heard of anyone realising at 16, post 'O' Level that he'd made a mistake and switching. AFAIK it was 'not allowed' to take at A level a subject that you could have done at O. I believe that the girls school next door operated similarly; I never really enquired, although I had other deep and meaningful conversations with students there as I got older!
A different type of topography was on the syllabus?
Tactically how might Trump's opponents, or for that matter disinterested journalists if you can find any, respond to this kind of obvious lie?
a) Call it an obvious lie? b) Ask for a breakdown by state, by gender or (taking the piss even more) by party affiliation? c) Ask how he will allot tickets when 50 times as many people have requested them as can fit in the venue?
It really is time for our exit to be accepted and rather than throw 'toys out of the pram' those EU devotees should look to improving any deal over the next few years by campaigning to re-join the single market
The exit has happened. How is it not 'accepted'? The UK is now an external party negotiating with the EU; that doesn't mean that the UK gets everything it wants or even gets a deal.
Just like the decision, we are destined to 'win' lots of principles that will prove worthless (or costly) in practice.
Our wins will be the same as going to Hartlepool job centre and telling them all that following long government negotiations with the car makers they are all allowed to go and buy a Bentley Mulsanne.
That minority of Hartlepool residents than can read will have to be thumbing Autotrader as the Mulsanne has just gone out of production. The Six and Three Quarter/L410 motor can no longer meet EU emission standards.
Not really. 16% has been fairly typical of SLab support in recent years.
But they ought to be worried. Why no Starmer effect? He has great approval ratings, even in Scotland.
Westminster polls in Scotland are irrelevant to his chances of becoming PM anyway as the SNP will always vote to make Starmer PM over Boris or any other Tory.
However beyond that he just needs to wait for the SNP civil war when either the Nationalists win another majority at Holyrood and Sturgeon refused to hold indyref2 without Westminster consent when Boris vetoes it, or there is a Unionist majority and in which case SLab will be up anyway
Are you seriously trying to tell us that Starmer considers Scotland to be “irrelevant”? That is classic psychological projection. Just because you and your tawdry party have given up on Scotland does not mean that everyone else has.
It is also pretty gobsmacking that a Tory, of all people, should accuse other parties of having civil wars. Your own civil wars have been ongoing ever since the days of “Wets” and “Bastards”, and don’t look like they are going to end any time soon.
The silent majority are patriotic and want our culture and heritage respected.
Equal opportunities does not mean ignoring our history
So why is so little of it taught, in the gap between the Tudors and the Twentieth Century ?
The history of the slave trade and empire is pretty well ignored.
I thought the period was glorified not ignored, which is it?
I think our teaching of history has some pretty glaring omissions - I was not once taught at school about the civil wars of the 1640s and 1650s for instance - and I suspect the silent majority are not overly proud or overly condemnatory, they are overly apathetic.
We dont know enough about history in general, which is why we get overly defensive or overly emotional in a negative sense by viewing too much of it through the prism of present politics, shorn of any national or global context.
It takes two sides to fight a culture war, he cannot wage it alone. Therefore I suspect what he wants to do is, while not unimportant, also is not definitive.
I do like 'went out of her way to attack it' rather than just 'attacked it'. Subtlely adding a layer of unreasonableness to her attacks (I cannot speak as to how unreasonable it was).
As I understand it, the trend has been to teach modules of history (schools skip from the Victorians to the Vikings to WW2 etc.) rather than the "gallop through history" whereby history is taught in chronological order. Simon Schama has been very critical of the module approach.
History is also an optional subject at GCSE, so a significant number of pupils will not study it after they are 14. It is expected that most pupils will study at least one humanity (basically geography or history) but even that was met with howls of protest from the creative arts as it reduced the numbers doing Art, music, drama, and so on.
Again, I think 'expectation' is perhaps the wrong word. The government requires History or Geography for the Ebacc, but how much attention to people pay to that?
(It should be added that History and Geography are not the only Humanities subjects either. RS, Sociology and Classics all got screwed over with that one.)
This is not recent. It was exactly the same 40 years ago. At my comprehensive it was timetabled in such a way that it was impossible to study both history and geography.
For us geography was compulsory and we had the option of history or chemistry. A couple of the lads who chose history realised they'd dropped a bollock and did O-level chemistry when they were in 6th form.
So I was taught no history after the age of 14. Until I started reading PB!
Who on earth would do geography instead of history? I like Pratchett's description of the former: physics with some trees stuck in it.
Aren't you curious as to how and why the world is as it is? Geography is a great subject, combining physical and human disciplines and, at some universities, a lot of history thrown in. As well as a good dose of both practical and intellectual skills that are rather more useful in later life than quadratic equations.
In fairness the video that was linked to on here recently about the mud flats suddenly liquifying and falling into the sea in a nordic country was fantastic. If there had been more of that I might have taken a different view.
Tried a new Netflix series last night at the suggestion of my wife: Snowpiercer.
There's willing suspension of disbelief, and then there's Snowpiercer.
I have to virtually suspend my whole brain to watch it.
I have an easier time believing the more outlandish fantasies in Star Trek.
The film was flawed, but entertaining. The series has been widely panned by reviewers, and I haven't bothered.
If you're into crime drama, Cardinal (on iPlayer) is good, if a bit gory.
A BIT GORY???!!
Started to watch S1 and have not returned to it following the ***** *** ****** **** scene which as you know follows a lot of gore to start with. Not Coronavirus viewing imo!!
The silent majority are patriotic and want our culture and heritage respected.
Equal opportunities does not mean ignoring our history
So why is so little of it taught, in the gap between the Tudors and the Twentieth Century ?
The history of the slave trade and empire is pretty well ignored.
I thought the period was glorified not ignored, which is it?
I think our teaching of history has some pretty glaring omissions - I was not once taught at school about the civil wars of the 1640s and 1650s for instance - and I suspect the silent majority are not overly proud or overly condemnatory, they are overly apathetic.
We dont know enough about history in general, which is why we get overly defensive or overly emotional in a negative sense by viewing too much of it through the prism of present politics, shorn of any national or global context.
It takes two sides to fight a culture war, he cannot wage it alone. Therefore I suspect what he wants to do is, while not unimportant, also is not definitive.
I do like 'went out of her way to attack it' rather than just 'attacked it'. Subtlely adding a layer of unreasonableness to her attacks (I cannot speak as to how unreasonable it was).
As I understand it, the trend has been to teach modules of history (schools skip from the Victorians to the Vikings to WW2 etc.) rather than the "gallop through history" whereby history is taught in chronological order. Simon Schama has been very critical of the module approach.
History is also an optional subject at GCSE, so a significant number of pupils will not study it after they are 14. It is expected that most pupils will study at least one humanity (basically geography or history) but even that was met with howls of protest from the creative arts as it reduced the numbers doing Art, music, drama, and so on.
Again, I think 'expectation' is perhaps the wrong word. The government requires History or Geography for the Ebacc, but how much attention to people pay to that?
(It should be added that History and Geography are not the only Humanities subjects either. RS, Sociology and Classics all got screwed over with that one.)
This is not recent. It was exactly the same 40 years ago. At my comprehensive it was timetabled in such a way that it was impossible to study both history and geography.
For us geography was compulsory and we had the option of history or chemistry. A couple of the lads who chose history realised they'd dropped a bollock and did O-level chemistry when they were in 6th form.
So I was taught no history after the age of 14. Until I started reading PB!
Back in the 50's, if you wanted to 'do science' at the Grammar School...... called a High School .... I attended, from the IVth onward one took Biology, Chemistry and Physics, having dropped Latin, History and Geography. And I never heard of anyone realising at 16, post 'O' Level that he'd made a mistake and switching. AFAIK it was 'not allowed' to take at A level a subject that you could have done at O. I believe that the girls school next door operated similarly; I never really enquired, although I had other deep and meaningful conversations with students there as I got older!
A different type of topography was on the syllabus?
I wonder what focus groups are like on food banks and free school meals? I'm not sure this subject plays nearly as well as that story about foreign workers paying to access the NHS, for example.
I doesn't exactly sit with the new line about 'government wrapping its arms around us', which seems to be trotted out at every press conference and interview.
Sorry to pour cold water on the header, but no amount of "oomph" can close the position. Fisheries may be of small economic consequence, but it isnt just an important constituency in Cornwall and NE Scotland, but also for a number of EU states. All of which have to ratify whatever Deal is produced. Continuing fishing access is not just going to be dropped.
Personally, I think WTO is on the cards for 31 Dec. Reason has long since left the building.
The Commission would not have made this "concession" without the authority of the Member States. Of course it is not a concession at all, just a recognition of reality. Once we are an independent coastal state the EU have no right to fish in our waters. That is the default position and they want to seek something better but in the knowledge that if the deal is not done then they lose it all. In the overall scheme of things that is not particularly important on an economic basis but as you point out there are a number of EU countries who are very anxious to avoid such a scenario.
Indeed and this is why both parties need to negotiate down to the wire and why it is not possible to request an extension.
Time pressure from the ticking clock will cause both parties to crystallise what actually matters and what they can concede on.
In this instance for fishing it is clear that the EU by compromising get a better deal than if they refused to compromise and ended up not getting anything. So they've blinked. We will in other areas too. That is the nature of compromise.
I think the government is making a mistake here but even putting that aside Rashford is one seriously impressive young man. His mother should be very proud.
Perhaps if kids were going to school, then free school meals would be happening.
Free school meals are happening now. The problem is the imminent summer holidays. Read the Marcus Rashford letter; lobby your MP; prepare to be unshocked when Boris extends the programme.
Sorry to pour cold water on the header, but no amount of "oomph" can close the position. Fisheries may be of small economic consequence, but it isnt just an important constituency in Cornwall and NE Scotland, but also for a number of EU states. All of which have to ratify whatever Deal is produced. Continuing fishing access is not just going to be dropped.
Personally, I think WTO is on the cards for 31 Dec. Reason has long since left the building.
One of Johnson's genuine talents is selling failure as success.
The expectation of a non WTO trade arrangement seems so unlikely that when government capitulated and an arrangement not quite as sub optimal for the UK as WTO is reached it will be hailed as a victory.
The rumours from Brussels have for some time been that a skeleton deal will be agreed to avoid total disruption. Fishing is an emotive issue but few voters are actually affected anywhere, so an annual haggle is an easy fudge. I can't see us getting privileged financial market access any time soon, though. Building up EU capacity to reduce City dominance is a nbo-brainer for the EU unless they are being offered something substantial in return.
Access to our powerful financial market is something substantial.
I think you will find that unless directed to by Cummings, the FCA will follow to the letter anything coming out of Brussels and will, as always, seek to goldplate it as a special challenge to UK firms.
Our hope should be that we get a seat at the table for MiFID III discussions. We might not, however, which would be a Bad Thing for reasons stated above.
Most people seem to be talking about Marcus Rashford's letter rather than Brexit. Does anyone really care about Brexit at the moment? I mean, apart from a few old white blokes choking on their false teeth.
This is an old article, from 2007, but I'm inclined to suspect that Rashford has heard stories of similar being threatened more recently. It's not exactly easy for families without enough money to pay the water bill to enforce the law.
"Water companies are permitted to disconnect the supply in certain circumstances - say, if the property is unoccupied. And Citizens Advice says that, increasingly, firms chasing bills are threatening disconnection on the grounds that the house has become empty when they know - or should know - it is occupied."
Has Johnson explained why giving food to children is a bad idea? I though it was just his own kids he ignored.
The government (ie Cummings) will have poll sampled and decided that denying food to hungry children (or maybe opposing an articulate black man) plays well with the base.
On a related note, the Mail, to give it credit, denounced Churchill statue "thugs" at the weekend. The huge number of comments to the article made it very clear they were on the side of the thugs.
Perhaps if kids were going to school, then free school meals would be happening.
Free school meals are happening now. The problem is the imminent summer holidays. Read the Marcus Rashford letter; lobby your MP; prepare to be unshocked when Boris extends the programme.
Is it free school meals if kids aren't in school ?
Tactically how might Trump's opponents, or for that matter disinterested journalists if you can find any, respond to this kind of obvious lie?
a) Call it an obvious lie? b) Ask for a breakdown by state, by gender or (taking the piss even more) by party affiliation? c) Ask how he will allot tickets when 50 times as many people have requested them as can fit in the venue?
Or just ignore it and wait to see how they edit an empty(ish) hall into looking 100% full...
Perhaps if kids were going to school, then free school meals would be happening.
Free school meals are happening now. The problem is the imminent summer holidays. Read the Marcus Rashford letter; lobby your MP; prepare to be unshocked when Boris extends the programme.
But what's happening now that's different to any normal school holiday that means they need to continue through the holiday?
Sorry to pour cold water on the header, but no amount of "oomph" can close the position. Fisheries may be of small economic consequence, but it isnt just an important constituency in Cornwall and NE Scotland, but also for a number of EU states. All of which have to ratify whatever Deal is produced. Continuing fishing access is not just going to be dropped.
Personally, I think WTO is on the cards for 31 Dec. Reason has long since left the building.
I concur.
The main flaw with the header, and most coverage of a Deal, is that it only considers HMG and the European Commission. Those bodies are only two out of twenty-nine organisations that have to unanimously support a Deal.
It is inconceivable that a deal agreed with the commission, Angela Merkel in her role over the next six months, and HMG is going to be rejected and the hope seems to be the last throw of a losing hand as we progress to a new relationship with the EU on the 1st January 2021
It really is time for our exit to be accepted and rather than throw 'toys out of the pram' those EU devotees should look to improving any deal over the next few years by campaigning to re-join the single market
It is not “EU Devotees” that you need to worry about. There are plenty of European governments that are dischuffed with HMG and/or the European Commision. Hungary and Italy spring to mind.
One of the ironies of Brexit is that it was caused by a supposed over-centralisation of sovereignty, but it will fail because EU decision-making is not centralised enough.
Tactically how might Trump's opponents, or for that matter disinterested journalists if you can find any, respond to this kind of obvious lie?
a) Call it an obvious lie? b) Ask for a breakdown by state, by gender or (taking the piss even more) by party affiliation? c) Ask how he will allot tickets when 50 times as many people have requested them as can fit in the venue?
They should ignore it. Whatever decides the next US election, it will not be the number of tickets sold in Tulsa. The Democrats need to keep the focus where it matters and not turn this into a dead cat.
Perhaps if kids were going to school, then free school meals would be happening.
Free school meals are happening now. The problem is the imminent summer holidays. Read the Marcus Rashford letter; lobby your MP; prepare to be unshocked when Boris extends the programme.
But what's happening now that's different to any normal school holiday that means they need to continue through the holiday?
Its a lot harder to find work? Might not be able to work because of childcare with fewer summer clubs etc. Of course its different.
I think the government is making a mistake here but even putting that aside Rashford is one seriously impressive young man. His mother should be very proud.
Without looking at the issue has Rashford put any of his own considerable money into funding such a scheme.
If he has then he is to be applauded if he hasn't then perhaps he should.
Demonstrating we're ready to go for No Deal if the EU aren't reasonable causes them to start acting like adults and accept we're not going to be their fishing colony, who'd've thunk it.
It's the exact opposite. We caved. We announced the reality that we cannot set up a physical border by the end of the year. That means we cannot diverge from the EU whether we want to or not. Having conceded our major aim they in turn have said they are happy to negotiate access to our waters (from a position of power) rather than keep demanding it so that HOG can save face.
We lost. Because the government are incompetent and stupid.
@Philip_Thompson refused to take my £10 charity bet yesterday when I offered it. I said the govt would cave on at least two red lines. He didn't see them caving on red lines as caving, rather he saw it as a desirable outcome. The fact that it was the EU's preferred outcome and an outcome that the UK had said it didn't want, didn't seem to register or trouble him.
And from a logical perspective I get it. He wants the optimum outcome. The fact that for him the optimum outcome coincides with what the EU wants, begs the question why the fuck did he want to leave the EU in the first place.
Black really is white and white is black.
No, I think compromise involves movement from both sides.
Would you be happy to define it as the EU caving on at least two red lines?
The eventual deal will be neither the UK's preferred outcome, nor the EU's preferred outcome, it will be a compromise that both parties are happy to live with even if they don't get everything they wanted.
Sorry to pour cold water on the header, but no amount of "oomph" can close the position. Fisheries may be of small economic consequence, but it isnt just an important constituency in Cornwall and NE Scotland, but also for a number of EU states. All of which have to ratify whatever Deal is produced. Continuing fishing access is not just going to be dropped.
Personally, I think WTO is on the cards for 31 Dec. Reason has long since left the building.
The fishing industry altogether employs fewer people than Harrods.
I expect the deal will be along the lines of the EU conceding the principle that we can negotiate who has access to our waters in return for our conceding an initial negotiated position that looks remarkably like what happens currently.
That’s what I just said up-post: the Scottish fishing industry is about to get shafted. Again.
Love your Harrods > Scotland + Cornwall. Very insightful.
We don't have much leverage, because most of the fish we catch is sold to EU countries and most of the fish we eat is bought from them.
Getting all the cod, haddock and bass to relocate into UK waters and driving away all the crab, herring and mackerel might be difficult.
International trade is important for economic welfare. Who knew?
Perhaps if kids were going to school, then free school meals would be happening.
Free school meals are happening now. The problem is the imminent summer holidays. Read the Marcus Rashford letter; lobby your MP; prepare to be unshocked when Boris extends the programme.
But what's happening now that's different to any normal school holiday that means they need to continue through the holiday?
Tried a new Netflix series last night at the suggestion of my wife: Snowpiercer.
There's willing suspension of disbelief, and then there's Snowpiercer.
I have to virtually suspend my whole brain to watch it.
I have an easier time believing the more outlandish fantasies in Star Trek.
The film was flawed, but entertaining. The series has been widely panned by reviewers, and I haven't bothered.
If you're into crime drama, Cardinal (on iPlayer) is good, if a bit gory.
A BIT GORY???!!
Started to watch S1 and have not returned to it following the ***** *** ****** **** scene which as you know follows a lot of gore to start with. Not Coronavirus viewing imo!!
Yes, I wouldn't recommend it to viewers of a nervous disposition. It is intelligently made, though.
I think the government is making a mistake here but even putting that aside Rashford is one seriously impressive young man. His mother should be very proud.
He should challenge Coffey to a penalty shoot-out and if she wins he'll drop the matter.
Perhaps if kids were going to school, then free school meals would be happening.
Free school meals are happening now. The problem is the imminent summer holidays. Read the Marcus Rashford letter; lobby your MP; prepare to be unshocked when Boris extends the programme.
But what's happening now that's different to any normal school holiday that means they need to continue through the holiday?
Do free school meals (Or payments for the equivalent) normally continue through the holidays ?
Perhaps if kids were going to school, then free school meals would be happening.
Free school meals are happening now. The problem is the imminent summer holidays. Read the Marcus Rashford letter; lobby your MP; prepare to be unshocked when Boris extends the programme.
But what's happening now that's different to any normal school holiday that means they need to continue through the holiday?
Its a lot harder to find work? Might not be able to work because of childcare with fewer summer clubs etc. Of course its different.
Who qualifies for free school meals:
For your child to qualify for free school meals you must get one of the following benefits:
Universal Credit and your household income after tax is less than £7,400 per year (not including any benefits you get) Child Tax Credit, as long as you are not getting Working Tax Credit and have an annual income of less than £16,190 income-related Employment and Support Allowance Income Support Income-based Jobseeker's Allowance The guarantee part of Pension Credit Asylum seeker support
Perhaps if kids were going to school, then free school meals would be happening.
Free school meals are happening now. The problem is the imminent summer holidays. Read the Marcus Rashford letter; lobby your MP; prepare to be unshocked when Boris extends the programme.
But what's happening now that's different to any normal school holiday that means they need to continue through the holiday?
Exactly. These kids are used to starving and having to fend for themselves in the summer. It's good for them...
I think the government is making a mistake here but even putting that aside Rashford is one seriously impressive young man. His mother should be very proud.
He should challenge Coffey to a penalty shoot-out and if she wins he'll drop the matter.
Perhaps if kids were going to school, then free school meals would be happening.
Free school meals are happening now. The problem is the imminent summer holidays. Read the Marcus Rashford letter; lobby your MP; prepare to be unshocked when Boris extends the programme.
But what's happening now that's different to any normal school holiday that means they need to continue through the holiday?
Do free school meals (Or payments for the equivalent) normally continue through the holidays ?
No, but I believe a precedent was set when they were paid during Easter and Whitsun.
Not really. 16% has been fairly typical of SLab support in recent years.
But they ought to be worried. Why no Starmer effect? He has great approval ratings, even in Scotland.
Westminster polls in Scotland are irrelevant to his chances of becoming PM anyway as the SNP will always vote to make Starmer PM over Boris or any other Tory.
However beyond that he just needs to wait for the SNP civil war when either the Nationalists win another majority at Holyrood and Sturgeon refused to hold indyref2 without Westminster consent when Boris vetoes it, or there is a Unionist majority and in which case SLab will be up anyway
Are you seriously trying to tell us that Starmer considers Scotland to be “irrelevant”? That is classic psychological projection. Just because you and your tawdry party have given up on Scotland does not mean that everyone else has.
It is also pretty gobsmacking that a Tory, of all people, should accuse other parties of having civil wars. Your own civil wars have been ongoing ever since the days of “Wets” and “Bastards”, and don’t look like they are going to end any time soon.
At Westminster level yes, an SNP or Labour MP will both vote to make Starmer PM, a Tory MP from England or Wales will not.
The Tories MPs are now united behind getting Brexit done which they delivered in January, SNP MPs and MSPs are split down the middle on transgender rights and in Sturgeon and Salmond camps now
I think the government is making a mistake here but even putting that aside Rashford is one seriously impressive young man. His mother should be very proud.
Without looking at the issue has Rashford put any of his own considerable money into funding such a scheme.
If he has then he is to be applauded if he hasn't then perhaps he should.
He did, he also managed to convince all the Supermarkets to contribute without the usual publicity quid pro quo they require. But hey why actual check things before being snarky...
Demonstrating we're ready to go for No Deal if the EU aren't reasonable causes them to start acting like adults and accept we're not going to be their fishing colony, who'd've thunk it.
It's the exact opposite. We caved. We announced the reality that we cannot set up a physical border by the end of the year. That means we cannot diverge from the EU whether we want to or not. Having conceded our major aim they in turn have said they are happy to negotiate access to our waters (from a position of power) rather than keep demanding it so that HOG can save face.
We lost. Because the government are incompetent and stupid.
@Philip_Thompson refused to take my £10 charity bet yesterday when I offered it. I said the govt would cave on at least two red lines. He didn't see them caving on red lines as caving, rather he saw it as a desirable outcome. The fact that it was the EU's preferred outcome and an outcome that the UK had said it didn't want, didn't seem to register or trouble him.
And from a logical perspective I get it. He wants the optimum outcome. The fact that for him the optimum outcome coincides with what the EU wants, begs the question why the fuck did he want to leave the EU in the first place.
Black really is white and white is black.
No, I think compromise involves movement from both sides.
Would you be happy to define it as the EU caving on at least two red lines?
The eventual deal will be neither the UK's preferred outcome, nor the EU's preferred outcome, it will be a compromise that both parties are happy to live with even if they don't get everything they wanted.
As we have seen with the new Irish border and customs checks, my concern is that it will be more the EU's preferred outcome than the UK's preferred outcome. In other words, we will get the worse end of the deal although we will no doubt achieve some successes although if pushed I can't think of any that would be worthwhile in practice (there will be enough wins in theory for Johnson to trumpet them for his less diligent fans).
So you would probably want an end to ECJ oversight. I can see that that would be something that we achieve. I am also interested, not to say apprehensive about what that might mean in practice.
Tried a new Netflix series last night at the suggestion of my wife: Snowpiercer.
There's willing suspension of disbelief, and then there's Snowpiercer.
I have to virtually suspend my whole brain to watch it.
I have an easier time believing the more outlandish fantasies in Star Trek.
Yes, it's more than a little ridiculous.
Very similar to the equally barmy Ascension. I wonder whether there's a tendency towards setting stories in isolated settings as a narrative device to escape the hyper-connected reality?
Most people seem to be talking about Marcus Rashford's letter rather than Brexit. Does anyone really care about Brexit at the moment? I mean, apart from a few old white blokes choking on their false teeth.
This is an old article, from 2007, but I'm inclined to suspect that Rashford has heard stories of similar being threatened more recently. It's not exactly easy for families without enough money to pay the water bill to enforce the law.
"Water companies are permitted to disconnect the supply in certain circumstances - say, if the property is unoccupied. And Citizens Advice says that, increasingly, firms chasing bills are threatening disconnection on the grounds that the house has become empty when they know - or should know - it is occupied."
Theresa Coffey should be sacked for that comment alone
Although I had read last week she is one of the ministers on the way out in the July shuffle
Thing about fishing for the Brexit negotiations. Access to UK waters is one of the few good cards the UK holds. ie it's something we have that the other side wants. But cards don't have value unless you play them. In other words, the UK either uses fishing quotas as a bargaining chip or it gives the waters to UK fisherman. It can't do both.
The GOv't should stand firm on this. Remember Hammond backing down over equalisation of tax plans for the self employed. Was the beginning of the end.
See my post below - I believe a precedent was set when money was paid for Easter and Whitsun. What the Government should be doing is compromising - we will do this for this summer and that's it. Instead the Government have screwed this up and are going to end up doing paying this on a permanent basis.
I think the government is making a mistake here but even putting that aside Rashford is one seriously impressive young man. His mother should be very proud.
Without looking at the issue has Rashford put any of his own considerable money into funding such a scheme.
If he has then he is to be applauded if he hasn't then perhaps he should.
He did, he also managed to convince all the Supermarkets to contribute without the usual publicity quid pro quo they require. But hey why actual check things before being snarky...
I said I hadn't checked things and I said he should be applauded if he had contributed himself.
But hey why actually read things before being snarky...
Anyone saying something like "staggering lack of abilitiy to deliver anything" given some of the things that have happened in recent months, like the furlough scheme for one example, is a bloody idiot. You might not agree with what has been done, but some absolutely huge changes have taken place recently, and some of them have been delivered at a scale and speed that is unprecedented.
Tried a new Netflix series last night at the suggestion of my wife: Snowpiercer.
There's willing suspension of disbelief, and then there's Snowpiercer.
I have to virtually suspend my whole brain to watch it.
I have an easier time believing the more outlandish fantasies in Star Trek.
The film was flawed, but entertaining. The series has been widely panned by reviewers, and I haven't bothered.
If you're into crime drama, Cardinal (on iPlayer) is good, if a bit gory.
Flawed is an understatement.
The idea that someone would build a global-spanning railway to deal with an ecological disaster (which would take centuries to build and cost trillions, if it were even possible) and then require careful maintenance as it could be easily severed or damaged at any time (which isn't covered) and then have a train that seemingly powers itself (eh?) doesn't stay in one place (why?) and has aquariums, diving pools, hydroponic labs, spas..
It's utterly ludicrous. It makes The Core look scientific.
Sorry to pour cold water on the header, but no amount of "oomph" can close the position. Fisheries may be of small economic consequence, but it isnt just an important constituency in Cornwall and NE Scotland, but also for a number of EU states. All of which have to ratify whatever Deal is produced. Continuing fishing access is not just going to be dropped.
Personally, I think WTO is on the cards for 31 Dec. Reason has long since left the building.
I concur.
The main flaw with the header, and most coverage of a Deal, is that it only considers HMG and the European Commission. Those bodies are only two out of twenty-nine organisations that have to unanimously support a Deal.
It is inconceivable that a deal agreed with the commission, Angela Merkel in her role over the next six months, and HMG is going to be rejected and the hope seems to be the last throw of a losing hand as we progress to a new relationship with the EU on the 1st January 2021
It really is time for our exit to be accepted and rather than throw 'toys out of the pram' those EU devotees should look to improving any deal over the next few years by campaigning to re-join the single market
It is not “EU Devotees” that you need to worry about. There are plenty of European governments that are dischuffed with HMG and/or the European Commision. Hungary and Italy spring to mind.
One of the ironies of Brexit is that it was caused by a supposed over-centralisation of sovereignty, but it will fail because EU decision-making is not centralised enough.
To be honest I am not worried.
Have you any idea how the EU would look if they rejected an agreement in these circumstances
I don't think there'll be a huge rebellion over this one. Also paging @Davidl just managed a sub 4 min km as part of a 6:37 mile. That's me for the day
Perhaps if kids were going to school, then free school meals would be happening.
Free school meals are happening now. The problem is the imminent summer holidays. Read the Marcus Rashford letter; lobby your MP; prepare to be unshocked when Boris extends the programme.
But what's happening now that's different to any normal school holiday that means they need to continue through the holiday?
Exactly. These kids are used to starving and having to fend for themselves in the summer. It's good for them...
I've always wondered what happens to the poor buggers in the summer.
It probably wouldn't actually cost that much to do, so perhaps the government should just agree to it. But as I've just said, I'd be tempted to go nuclear and introduce UBI paid for by the chattering middle classes.
If a Brexit trade Deal can be done that ends free movement and respects UK fishing waters then certainly it is possible
I can't see how there isn't a massive trade off for the EU relinquishing FOM. No, I just can't see that on the table, otherwise what's left for the remaining 27 states? We will have had our cake and eaten it.
Although, I understand we still hold all the cards. Lol
Thing about fishing for the Brexit negotiations. Access to UK waters is one of the few good cards the UK holds. ie it's something we have that the other side wants. But cards don't have value unless you play them. In other words, the UK either uses fishing quotas as a bargaining chip or it gives the waters to UK fisherman. It can't do both.
On the contrary, what we need are markets into which to sell our fish.
The GOv't should stand firm on this. Remember Hammond backing down over equalisation of tax plans for the self employed. Was the beginning of the end.
See my post below - I believe a precedent was set when money was paid for Easter and Whitsun. What the Government should be doing is compromising - we will do this for this summer and that's it. Instead the Government have screwed this up and are going to end up doing paying this on a permanent basis.
Why does the Gov't have to compromise on this ? It's the very definition of a big story this week, forgotten into the general anti-Tory memes the next.
Perhaps if kids were going to school, then free school meals would be happening.
Free school meals are happening now. The problem is the imminent summer holidays. Read the Marcus Rashford letter; lobby your MP; prepare to be unshocked when Boris extends the programme.
But what's happening now that's different to any normal school holiday that means they need to continue through the holiday?
Do free school meals (Or payments for the equivalent) normally continue through the holidays ?
No, but I believe a precedent was set when they were paid during Easter and Whitsun.
Anyway, the key aim of this government is Populism, pure and simple. The People's Priorities and all that.
The downside of being a sunny populist is that you end up being forced by the People to spend money on things you might not find optimally efficient (and in the grand scheme of things, FSM in holiday times has been rumbling under the radar for years, but the issues are more stark this year.)
The surprise is that, for populists, the government are being surprisingly cloth-eared and leaden-footed. In part, that's because there's nobody who is instinctively in touch with either the public as a whole or the Conservative Party. It was Maggie's greatest talent, and even Major and May were pretty good. This lot have to outsource it to focus groups, and they're just too slow to respond to events in a sure-footed way.
Perhaps if kids were going to school, then free school meals would be happening.
Free school meals are happening now. The problem is the imminent summer holidays. Read the Marcus Rashford letter; lobby your MP; prepare to be unshocked when Boris extends the programme.
But what's happening now that's different to any normal school holiday that means they need to continue through the holiday?
Exactly. These kids are used to starving and having to fend for themselves in the summer. It's good for them...
I've always wondered what happens to the poor buggers in the summer.
It probably wouldn't actually cost that much to do, so perhaps the government should just agree to it. But as I've just said, I'd be tempted to go nuclear and introduce UBI paid for by the chattering middle classes.
While I would love a universal basic income, how do you actually pull it off.
Perhaps if kids were going to school, then free school meals would be happening.
Free school meals are happening now. The problem is the imminent summer holidays. Read the Marcus Rashford letter; lobby your MP; prepare to be unshocked when Boris extends the programme.
But what's happening now that's different to any normal school holiday that means they need to continue through the holiday?
Exactly. These kids are used to starving and having to fend for themselves in the summer. It's good for them...
I've always wondered what happens to the poor buggers in the summer.
It probably wouldn't actually cost that much to do, so perhaps the government should just agree to it. But as I've just said, I'd be tempted to go nuclear and introduce UBI paid for by the chattering middle classes.
The GOv't should stand firm on this. Remember Hammond backing down over equalisation of tax plans for the self employed. Was the beginning of the end.
See my post below - I believe a precedent was set when money was paid for Easter and Whitsun. What the Government should be doing is compromising - we will do this for this summer and that's it. Instead the Government have screwed this up and are going to end up doing paying this on a permanent basis.
Temporary schemes have a habit of becoming permanent.
The silent majority are patriotic and want our culture and heritage respected.
Equal opportunities does not mean ignoring our history
So why is so little of it taught, in the gap between the Tudors and the Twentieth Century ?
The history of the slave trade and empire is pretty well ignored.
I thought the period was glorified not ignored, which is it?
I think our teaching of history has some pretty glaring omissions - I was not once taught at school about the civil wars of the 1640s and 1650s for instance - and I suspect the silent majority are not overly proud or overly condemnatory, they are overly apathetic.
We dont know enough about history in general, which is why we get overly defensive or overly emotional in a negative sense by viewing too much of it through the prism of present politics, shorn of any national or global context.
It takes two sides to fight a culture war, he cannot wage it alone. Therefore I suspect what he wants to do is, while not unimportant, also is not definitive.
I do like 'went out of her way to attack it' rather than just 'attacked it'. Subtlely adding a layer of unreasonableness to her attacks (I cannot speak as to how unreasonable it was).
As I understand it, the trend has been to teach modules of history (schools skip from the Victorians to the Vikings to WW2 etc.) rather than the "gallop through history" whereby history is taught in chronological order. Simon Schama has been very critical of the module approach.
History is also an optional subject at GCSE, so a significant number of pupils will not study it after they are 14. It is expected that most pupils will study at least one humanity (basically geography or history) but even that was met with howls of protest from the creative arts as it reduced the numbers doing Art, music, drama, and so on.
From 7 to 14 all schools will have covered the history curriculum from the Greeks and Romans, the Vikings and Saxons to the Middle Ages, the Tories and Stuarts, the British Empire and slavery up to the 20th century.
Whether you then decide to continue to GCSE and A Level or not you will still have studied the full chronological spectrum
Comments
But increasingly I am coming to think that The Americans (Amazon Prime) ranks as one of the very best mini-series ever made.
The statues statement at the weekend is a good example. Tories were trying to compare him to Macron, but Macron said that no statue would be taken down by the French Republic, whereas Boris said that he would try awfully hard to leave things broadly as they are.
Did somebody say few would bother turning up? The greatest and healthiest president in all possible universes sounds as though he is "doubling down".
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1272521253136498690
Johnson is like Eric Idle in Life of Brian demanding the right to have babies. The EU will accept our absolute sovereign right to diverge. Knowing that having won that right we can't diverge because where's the foetus gonna gestate- in a box?
The problem with that is that it's Tuesday!
Hence the frictions
I believe that the girls school next door operated similarly; I never really enquired, although I had other deep and meaningful conversations with students there as I got older!
Whenever Johnson was struggling financially,, which I understand over the years was not uncommon. It was particularly difficult to balance the books on an MPs salary, he didn't have to beg for government handouts. Oh no, there was always a benevolent Newspaper Proprietor to bail him out.
Lots of them know about Hitler, it's very popular. But while German history can't be understood without him, there is much more to German history.
FPT - please tell me those were plastic or rubber bullets?
Making easy decisions is easy. Making tough decisions is not.
a) Call it an obvious lie?
b) Ask for a breakdown by state, by gender or (taking the piss even more) by party affiliation?
c) Ask how he will allot tickets when 50 times as many people have requested them as can fit in the venue?
The series has been widely panned by reviewers, and I haven't bothered.
If you're into crime drama, Cardinal (on iPlayer) is good, if a bit gory.
It is also pretty gobsmacking that a Tory, of all people, should accuse other parties of having civil wars. Your own civil wars have been ongoing ever since the days of “Wets” and “Bastards”, and don’t look like they are going to end any time soon.
Started to watch S1 and have not returned to it following the ***** *** ****** **** scene which as you know follows a lot of gore to start with. Not Coronavirus viewing imo!!
Time pressure from the ticking clock will cause both parties to crystallise what actually matters and what they can concede on.
In this instance for fishing it is clear that the EU by compromising get a better deal than if they refused to compromise and ended up not getting anything. So they've blinked. We will in other areas too. That is the nature of compromise.
The expectation of a non WTO trade arrangement seems so unlikely that when government capitulated and an arrangement not quite as sub optimal for the UK as WTO is reached it will be hailed as a victory.
Our hope should be that we get a seat at the table for MiFID III discussions. We might not, however, which would be a Bad Thing for reasons stated above.
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2007/sep/29/moneysupplement3
"Water companies are permitted to disconnect the supply in certain circumstances - say, if the property is unoccupied. And Citizens Advice says that, increasingly, firms chasing bills are threatening disconnection on the grounds that the house has become empty when they know - or should know - it is occupied."
On a related note, the Mail, to give it credit, denounced Churchill statue "thugs" at the weekend. The huge number of comments to the article made it very clear they were on the side of the thugs.
One of the ironies of Brexit is that it was caused by a supposed over-centralisation of sovereignty, but it will fail because EU decision-making is not centralised enough.
If he has then he is to be applauded if he hasn't then perhaps he should.
Would you be happy to define it as the EU caving on at least two red lines?
The eventual deal will be neither the UK's preferred outcome, nor the EU's preferred outcome, it will be a compromise that both parties are happy to live with even if they don't get everything they wanted.
It is intelligently made, though.
For your child to qualify for free school meals you must get one of the following benefits:
Universal Credit and your household income after tax is less than £7,400 per year (not including any benefits you get)
Child Tax Credit, as long as you are not getting Working Tax Credit and have an annual income of less than £16,190
income-related Employment and Support Allowance
Income Support
Income-based Jobseeker's Allowance
The guarantee part of Pension Credit
Asylum seeker support
https://www.turn2us.org.uk/Your-Situation/Bringing-up-a-child/Free-school-meals
The Tories MPs are now united behind getting Brexit done which they delivered in January, SNP MPs and MSPs are split down the middle on transgender rights and in Sturgeon and Salmond camps now
So you would probably want an end to ECJ oversight. I can see that that would be something that we achieve. I am also interested, not to say apprehensive about what that might mean in practice.
Burn through any amount of political capital before admitting a single error?
Very similar to the equally barmy Ascension. I wonder whether there's a tendency towards setting stories in isolated settings as a narrative device to escape the hyper-connected reality?
Although I had read last week she is one of the ministers on the way out in the July shuffle
But hey why actually read things before being snarky...
The idea that someone would build a global-spanning railway to deal with an ecological disaster (which would take centuries to build and cost trillions, if it were even possible) and then require careful maintenance as it could be easily severed or damaged at any time (which isn't covered) and then have a train that seemingly powers itself (eh?) doesn't stay in one place (why?) and has aquariums, diving pools, hydroponic labs, spas..
It's utterly ludicrous. It makes The Core look scientific.
Have you any idea how the EU would look if they rejected an agreement in these circumstances
It is not going to happen
It probably wouldn't actually cost that much to do, so perhaps the government should just agree to it. But as I've just said, I'd be tempted to go nuclear and introduce UBI paid for by the chattering middle classes.
Although, I understand we still hold all the cards. Lol
It's the very definition of a big story this week, forgotten into the general anti-Tory memes the next.
The downside of being a sunny populist is that you end up being forced by the People to spend money on things you might not find optimally efficient (and in the grand scheme of things, FSM in holiday times has been rumbling under the radar for years, but the issues are more stark this year.)
The surprise is that, for populists, the government are being surprisingly cloth-eared and leaden-footed. In part, that's because there's nobody who is instinctively in touch with either the public as a whole or the Conservative Party. It was Maggie's greatest talent, and even Major and May were pretty good. This lot have to outsource it to focus groups, and they're just too slow to respond to events in a sure-footed way.
https://schoolsweek.co.uk/extend-free-school-meal-vouchers-over-summer-holiday-says-senior-tory-mp/
Whether you then decide to continue to GCSE and A Level or not you will still have studied the full chronological spectrum