I thought this is subject to an on going criminal investigation
It is, but if the alleged behaviour of the Chief Whip is true, it paints him in a pretty damn incompetent light.
If is the word here and as it is subject to a criminal investigation I do not think it is wise to play politics in this case
Who’s playing politics? This is not a Labour vs Tory debate. This is a simple discussion over whether promising to get back to someone about a sexual assault allegation, and then not, is incompetent or totally fine.
It would be incompetence if it was a Labour figure, and it would be incompetence if it was a non-political figure.
Of course Conservative “fans” will defend the alleged behaviour, simply because the man happens to be a part of the HMG.
I defend nobody but it is important the law takes it's course and once the police have made a decision other issues will follow. And I would say the same if it was a labour politician
You’re misunderstanding. Whether or not the rape allegation is true is neither here nor there. It makes no difference to whether promising to get back to a sexual assault complainant, and then “forgetting to” is fine or not.
It obviously isn’t fine. He should either have not promised anything, or got back to her telling her to go through X channel.
I haven't been paying much attention to this but IIRC didn't the Chief Whip initially say the allegations brought to him were about bullying, not the sexual assualt allegation?
I don’t know. To be honest though It’s still pretty incompetent to promise to get back to somebody over workplace bullying, and then not.
Well, probably worth knowing before getting all righteous about what did or did not happen.
Do you still believe that she is just “responding to requests for comment”?
Or is she seeking revenge via media?
Do you think it’s okay to promise to get back to a sexual assault complainant, and then not doing so?
Really?
Do you have factual evidence on what actually happened or newspaper reports
I do believe there are concerns here and I am not commenting further
I await the police decision
Whether or not the rape or sexual assault happened is not what we’re discussing here. We’re discussing the alleged actions of the Chief Whip when informed of the allegation. That is not subject to any police investigation.
Anyone presented with claims such as this should tell them to go to the police.
Exactly - that’s what the Chief Whip should have told this person I imagine, rather than allegedly promising to get back to the complainant, and then not, even when chased.
I thought this is subject to an on going criminal investigation
It is, but if the alleged behaviour of the Chief Whip is true, it paints him in a pretty damn incompetent light.
If is the word here and as it is subject to a criminal investigation I do not think it is wise to play politics in this case
Who’s playing politics? This is not a Labour vs Tory debate. This is a simple discussion over whether promising to get back to someone about a sexual assault allegation, and then not, is incompetent or totally fine.
It would be incompetence if it was a Labour figure, and it would be incompetence if it was a non-political figure.
Of course Conservative “fans” will defend the alleged behaviour, simply because the man happens to be a part of the HMG.
I defend nobody but it is important the law takes it's course and once the police have made a decision other issues will follow. And I would say the same if it was a labour politician
You’re misunderstanding. Whether or not the rape allegation is true is neither here nor there. It makes no difference to whether promising to get back to a sexual assault complainant, and then “forgetting to” is fine or not.
It obviously isn’t fine. He should either have not promised anything, or got back to her telling her to go through X channel.
I haven't been paying much attention to this but IIRC didn't the Chief Whip initially say the allegations brought to him were about bullying, not the sexual assualt allegation?
I don’t know. To be honest though It’s still pretty incompetent to promise to get back to somebody over workplace bullying, and then not.
Well, probably worth knowing before getting all righteous about what did or did not happen.
We’re discussing the Sunday Times report, which alleges they have evidence of the allegation.
I thought this is subject to an on going criminal investigation
It is, but if the alleged behaviour of the Chief Whip is true, it paints him in a pretty damn incompetent light.
If is the word here and as it is subject to a criminal investigation I do not think it is wise to play politics in this case
Who’s playing politics? This is not a Labour vs Tory debate. This is a simple discussion over whether promising to get back to someone about a sexual assault allegation, and then not, is incompetent or totally fine.
It would be incompetence if it was a Labour figure, and it would be incompetence if it was a non-political figure.
Of course Conservative “fans” will defend the alleged behaviour, simply because the man happens to be a part of the HMG.
I defend nobody but it is important the law takes it's course and once the police have made a decision other issues will follow. And I would say the same if it was a labour politician
You’re misunderstanding. Whether or not the rape allegation is true is neither here nor there. It makes no difference to whether promising to get back to a sexual assault complainant, and then “forgetting to” is fine or not.
It obviously isn’t fine. He should either have not promised anything, or got back to her telling her to go through X channel.
I haven't been paying much attention to this but IIRC didn't the Chief Whip initially say the allegations brought to him were about bullying, not the sexual assualt allegation?
I don’t know. To be honest though It’s still pretty incompetent to promise to get back to somebody over workplace bullying, and then not.
You've no idea what happened in the discussions between Spencer and the "victim". It's better to reserve judgement on these issues until you know the facts. You don't.
I thought this is subject to an on going criminal investigation
It is, but if the alleged behaviour of the Chief Whip is true, it paints him in a pretty damn incompetent light.
If is the word here and as it is subject to a criminal investigation I do not think it is wise to play politics in this case
Who’s playing politics? This is not a Labour vs Tory debate. This is a simple discussion over whether promising to get back to someone about a sexual assault allegation, and then not, is incompetent or totally fine.
It would be incompetence if it was a Labour figure, and it would be incompetence if it was a non-political figure.
Of course Conservative “fans” will defend the alleged behaviour, simply because the man happens to be a part of the HMG.
I defend nobody but it is important the law takes it's course and once the police have made a decision other issues will follow. And I would say the same if it was a labour politician
You’re misunderstanding. Whether or not the rape allegation is true is neither here nor there. It makes no difference to whether promising to get back to a sexual assault complainant, and then “forgetting to” is fine or not.
It obviously isn’t fine. He should either have not promised anything, or got back to her telling her to go through X channel.
I haven't been paying much attention to this but IIRC didn't the Chief Whip initially say the allegations brought to him were about bullying, not the sexual assualt allegation?
I don’t know. To be honest though It’s still pretty incompetent to promise to get back to somebody over workplace bullying, and then not.
You've no idea what happened in the discussions between the Spencer and the "victim". It's better to reserve judgement on these issues until you know the facts. You don't.
Oh get a grip. Next time there’s a newspaper article about anti-semitism in the Labour party or similar, I’m sure you’ll be saying “we don’t know whether this is true or not, let’s not discuss it”.
I thought this is subject to an on going criminal investigation
It is, but if the alleged behaviour of the Chief Whip is true, it paints him in a pretty damn incompetent light.
If is the word here and as it is subject to a criminal investigation I do not think it is wise to play politics in this case
Who’s playing politics? This is not a Labour vs Tory debate. This is a simple discussion over whether promising to get back to someone about a sexual assault allegation, and then not, is incompetent or totally fine.
It would be incompetence if it was a Labour figure, and it would be incompetence if it was a non-political figure.
Of course Conservative “fans” will defend the alleged behaviour, simply because the man happens to be a part of the HMG.
I defend nobody but it is important the law takes it's course and once the police have made a decision other issues will follow. And I would say the same if it was a labour politician
You’re misunderstanding. Whether or not the rape allegation is true is neither here nor there. It makes no difference to whether promising to get back to a sexual assault complainant, and then “forgetting to” is fine or not.
It obviously isn’t fine. He should either have not promised anything, or got back to her telling her to go through X channel.
I haven't been paying much attention to this but IIRC didn't the Chief Whip initially say the allegations brought to him were about bullying, not the sexual assualt allegation?
I don’t know. To be honest though It’s still pretty incompetent to promise to get back to somebody over workplace bullying, and then not.
Well, probably worth knowing before getting all righteous about what did or did not happen.
We’re discussing the Sunday Times report, which alleges they have evidence of the allegation.
Alleges evidence of allegations and this is serious journalism
I thought this is subject to an on going criminal investigation
It is, but if the alleged behaviour of the Chief Whip is true, it paints him in a pretty damn incompetent light.
If is the word here and as it is subject to a criminal investigation I do not think it is wise to play politics in this case
Who’s playing politics? This is not a Labour vs Tory debate. This is a simple discussion over whether promising to get back to someone about a sexual assault allegation, and then not, is incompetent or totally fine.
It would be incompetence if it was a Labour figure, and it would be incompetence if it was a non-political figure.
Of course Conservative “fans” will defend the alleged behaviour, simply because the man happens to be a part of the HMG.
I defend nobody but it is important the law takes it's course and once the police have made a decision other issues will follow. And I would say the same if it was a labour politician
You’re misunderstanding. Whether or not the rape allegation is true is neither here nor there. It makes no difference to whether promising to get back to a sexual assault complainant, and then “forgetting to” is fine or not.
It obviously isn’t fine. He should either have not promised anything, or got back to her telling her to go through X channel.
I haven't been paying much attention to this but IIRC didn't the Chief Whip initially say the allegations brought to him were about bullying, not the sexual assualt allegation?
I don’t know. To be honest though It’s still pretty incompetent to promise to get back to somebody over workplace bullying, and then not.
Well, probably worth knowing before getting all righteous about what did or did not happen.
We’re discussing the Sunday Times report, which alleges they have evidence of the allegation.
Alleges evidence of allegations and this is serious journalism
The Sunday Times says they have evidence that the Chief Whip promised to get back to the complainant and then didn’t, even when chased.
You guys are something else. If the article is true, the Chief Whip has acted in a way that is seriously incompetent. It really is terrible.
You Conservative “fans” will literally defend or sweep away the indefensible. It’s just as bad as the Corbynistas.
The first major test of Labour as an opposition seems likely to hit on Thursday.
A train wreck complete with a jumbo crash is incoming. It was foreseeable and happened because the government are completely useless, and overlooked obviously preferable alternatives.
If Kate Green can get a handle on that...
What happens Thursday?
A-level grades come out.
Having said they will use teacher grades, OFQUAL have now admitted they are judging by past school performance, as the SQA did.
But it's even better than that, because they don't have as good a data set. All the exams are too new. So according to leaks from yesterday, what is going to happen is:
1) School cohorts of below five - teacher assessment alone
2) Cohorts of five to fifteen - mix of teacher assessment and this discredited algorithm
3) Cohorts of 15+ - algorithm alone.
Which means the following:
1) 40% of grades are not going to match teacher predictions. That's far higher than the 10% gap that was leaked earlier.
2) State schools - with large cohorts - get decided by computer modelling based on at most four comparable sets of data (more usually two or three). Private schools will get based on teacher assessment. Guess which one is going to get clobbered for downgrading? Hint - not the private schools.
3) Appeals were previously not allowed. Now they are being allowed. They will only be allowed via schools. However, that may change again.
4) Expect to see this challenged through the courts
5) Expect the exam system in October to implode
6) Expect Dominic Cummings and Michael Gove to be blamed, as they were responsible for setting up both the new exams and the current iteration of OFQUAL and the exam boards.
7) Expect utter chaos as the government tries to blame teachers for providing evidence they decided to ignore.
8) Expect actual student riots and the unions to ballot their members over strike action.
And all this could have been avoided if that brain dead moron we call our PM had thought to ask schools to send in samples of work they had graded at A, B, C, D etc for each subject so some standardisation could have been done on that basis.
This is going to be bad. You thought the SQA was a shambles? This is worse.
TSE pointed this story out. But the implications are absolutely dire. You could easily see every exam board, OFQUAL and the DfE consumed by this.
You'd better hope that English teachers haven't exposed themselves as cheats and liars by vastly over predicting grades as their Scottish counterparts did.
Our local education expert opines that teachers are cheats and liars, you could not make it up. Good old another richardhead
Perhaps you could compare the grades Scottish teachers predicted with what had been achieved in previous years ?
And if you'd thought instead of switching automatically into abuse you would see I have backed the action of the Scottish government in lowering those predicted grades.
Well I don't support them , why ask teachers to do it and then make them out to be cheats and liars by making up another system to trash the teachers opinions. I would be less than happy if I was a teacher for sure and you calling Scottish teachers liars and cheats deserves abuse that I would get banned for.
Nation 5 2016-2019 average 78.6% 2020 actual after lowering 81.1% 2020 teacher predicted 88.6%
Higher 2016-2019 average 76.5% 2020 actual after lowering 78.9% 2020 teacher predicted 88.8%
Advanced Higher 2016-2019 average 80.4% 2020 actual after lowering 84.9% 2020 teacher predicted 92.8%
Its the Scottish government who has done a better job than the teachers.
You can’t conclude more than teachers are over optimistic based on that data set. It may be that they overestimate performance by 10pp+ each year
Indeed.
Which is why I've also said that it such over predicting is usual then it is itself worthy of investigation.
Given that many teachers will predict accurately and others will under-predict in order to prompt their pupils to study harder if there is a regular over-prediction of grades then it would suggest a massive over prediction by a minority of teachers.
Which predictions? I have to produce three sets in a normal year: Target grades: these are an indication to the student of the level they should be working towards and are “aspirational”. A student who gets their target grade has done well. UCAS predictions: normally the benefit of the doubt is given here. Over-predicting does the students no favours, but sometimes it is difficult for them to accept that. Predictions after mocks: these have to be carefully weighted as if they are too high students may feel they are already home and not bother working any more, while if they are too low they can demoralise students into giving up. Making it clear that the prediction is dependent on the usual level of progress is one of the skills of teaching exam groups.
The ones which will likely see the wailing when some are downgraded.
You do realise that grades are not normally awarded like this don’t you? So talk of “regular over-prediction” makes no sense.
The country is watching and Starmer has an absolute open goal to make Labour electable again and show the public it has really changed. Expelling Corbyn and others would frankly be the best thing to do, if indeed they are implicated by the EHRC.
Expelling Corbyn would be damn stupid. It's not Corbyn or even the Corbynites who are the problem. It's the Scouse SWP tankies Neil Kinnock threw out who were readmitted by Ed Miliband.
Corbyn is 100% the problem. A political mantra that is based on 19th century ideas isn't going to work.
Blair's New Labour is the only future Labour have. Not because of him or anyone else, but simply that they can't bang on with the ideas of well over a hundred years ago. They weren't good ideas then, and they're rubbish now.
Starmer has, I think, worked this out. He's trying to stop Labour being crap, and is biding his time with regards to positive moves.
Labour's immediate problem is that Boris shot so many of their foxes, when he won in 2019 on Labour's 2017 platform. Boris won by being a better Corbyn, not by being a better Cameron or May.
He was perhaps a better EdM. Boris is not and I don't imagine can be anything like Corbyn.
Write down all the things you do not like about Corbyn, and then see how easy it is to apply the same criticisms of Boris.
Just read your comment from yesterday re- experience of the cane as a result of the cricket ball incident. Rather amusing! Corporal punishment remained lawful in state schools until Autumn 1987 - in private schools it was permitted until Autumn 1999.
That was another irony. It was Mrs Thatcher who'd done all the things the Tory backwoodsmen used to complain about in education: closed grammars; ended corporal punishment; abolished O-levels.
It was actually Tony Crosland and Shirley Williams who pushed for closing most of the grammars and ending corporal punishment. When Thatcher became PM secondary education was already mainly comprehensive but by 1997 there were more pupils in grammars than there were in 1979
Mrs T as Ed Sec under Heath closed most of the grammars. As Prime Minister, her government abolished O-levels by combining them with CSEs to form GCSEs. Her government ended corporal punishment after a European Court ruling.
It was Labour councils who closed them, Heath just ordered Thatcher not to block them. Some Tory councils like Kent and Bucks kept them.
Now we are out of the EU we could even see schools allowed to restore corporal punishment, Gove has toughened up GCSEs
The country is watching and Starmer has an absolute open goal to make Labour electable again and show the public it has really changed. Expelling Corbyn and others would frankly be the best thing to do, if indeed they are implicated by the EHRC.
Expelling Corbyn would be damn stupid. It's not Corbyn or even the Corbynites who are the problem. It's the Scouse SWP tankies Neil Kinnock threw out who were readmitted by Ed Miliband.
Corbyn is 100% the problem. A political mantra that is based on 19th century ideas isn't going to work.
Blair's New Labour is the only future Labour have. Not because of him or anyone else, but simply that they can't bang on with the ideas of well over a hundred years ago. They weren't good ideas then, and they're rubbish now.
Starmer has, I think, worked this out. He's trying to stop Labour being crap, and is biding his time with regards to positive moves.
Labour's immediate problem is that Boris shot so many of their foxes, when he won in 2019 on Labour's 2017 platform. Boris won by being a better Corbyn, not by being a better Cameron or May.
He was perhaps a better EdM. Boris is not and I don't imagine can be anything like Corbyn.
Write down all the things you do not like about Corbyn, and then see how easy it is to apply the same criticisms of Boris.
Just read your comment from yesterday re- experience of the cane as a result of the cricket ball incident. Rather amusing! Corporal punishment remained lawful in state schools until Autumn 1987 - in private schools it was permitted until Autumn 1999.
That was another irony. It was Mrs Thatcher who'd done all the things the Tory backwoodsmen used to complain about in education: closed grammars; ended corporal punishment; abolished O-levels.
It was actually Tony Crosland and Shirley Williams who pushed for closing most of the grammars and ending corporal punishment. When Thatcher became PM secondary education was already mainly comprehensive but by 1997 there were more pupils in grammars than there were in 1979
Mrs T as Ed Sec under Heath closed most of the grammars. As Prime Minister, her government abolished O-levels by combining them with CSEs to form GCSEs. Her government ended corporal punishment after a European Court ruling.
It was Labour councils who closed them, Heath just ordered Thatcher not to block them. Some Tory councils like Kent and Essex kept them.
Now we are out of the EU we could even see schools allowed to restore corporal punishment, Gove has toughened up GCSEs
What has toughening up GCSEs have to do whether teachers should be allowed to hit children?
I doubt any teachers will hit children, even if the Government “allowed it”. What a ridiculous thing to say.
I can't really respect a speaker of English as a second language who uses the American spellings. It's like me learning French and using some sort Senegalese dialect. It's a sort of absurd affectation.
I thought this is subject to an on going criminal investigation
It is, but if the alleged behaviour of the Chief Whip is true, it paints him in a pretty damn incompetent light.
If is the word here and as it is subject to a criminal investigation I do not think it is wise to play politics in this case
Who’s playing politics? This is not a Labour vs Tory debate. This is a simple discussion over whether promising to get back to someone about a sexual assault allegation, and then not, is incompetent or totally fine.
It would be incompetence if it was a Labour figure, and it would be incompetence if it was a non-political figure.
Of course Conservative “fans” will defend the alleged behaviour, simply because the man happens to be a part of the HMG.
I defend nobody but it is important the law takes it's course and once the police have made a decision other issues will follow. And I would say the same if it was a labour politician
You’re misunderstanding. Whether or not the rape allegation is true is neither here nor there. It makes no difference to whether promising to get back to a sexual assault complainant, and then “forgetting to” is fine or not.
It obviously isn’t fine. He should either have not promised anything, or got back to her telling her to go through X channel.
I haven't been paying much attention to this but IIRC didn't the Chief Whip initially say the allegations brought to him were about bullying, not the sexual assualt allegation?
I don’t know. To be honest though It’s still pretty incompetent to promise to get back to somebody over workplace bullying, and then not.
Well, probably worth knowing before getting all righteous about what did or did not happen.
We’re discussing the Sunday Times report, which alleges they have evidence of the allegation.
Alleges evidence of allegations and this is serious journalism
The Sunday Times says they have evidence that the Chief Whip promised to get back to the complainant and then didn’t, even when chased.
You guys are something else. If the article is true, the Chief Whip has acted in a way that is seriously incompetent. It really is terrible.
You Conservative “fans” will literally defend or sweep away the indefensible. It’s just as bad as the Corbynistas.
Sorry but we really do not know the details other than newspaper allegations
This is not about party loyalty but facts leading up to very serious allegations
I thought this is subject to an on going criminal investigation
It is, but if the alleged behaviour of the Chief Whip is true, it paints him in a pretty damn incompetent light.
If is the word here and as it is subject to a criminal investigation I do not think it is wise to play politics in this case
Who’s playing politics? This is not a Labour vs Tory debate. This is a simple discussion over whether promising to get back to someone about a sexual assault allegation, and then not, is incompetent or totally fine.
It would be incompetence if it was a Labour figure, and it would be incompetence if it was a non-political figure.
Of course Conservative “fans” will defend the alleged behaviour, simply because the man happens to be a part of the HMG.
I defend nobody but it is important the law takes it's course and once the police have made a decision other issues will follow. And I would say the same if it was a labour politician
You’re misunderstanding. Whether or not the rape allegation is true is neither here nor there. It makes no difference to whether promising to get back to a sexual assault complainant, and then “forgetting to” is fine or not.
It obviously isn’t fine. He should either have not promised anything, or got back to her telling her to go through X channel.
I haven't been paying much attention to this but IIRC didn't the Chief Whip initially say the allegations brought to him were about bullying, not the sexual assualt allegation?
I don’t know. To be honest though It’s still pretty incompetent to promise to get back to somebody over workplace bullying, and then not.
Well, probably worth knowing before getting all righteous about what did or did not happen.
We’re discussing the Sunday Times report, which alleges they have evidence of the allegation.
Alleges evidence of allegations and this is serious journalism
The Sunday Times says they have evidence that the Chief Whip promised to get back to the complainant and then didn’t, even when chased.
You guys are something else. If the article is true, the Chief Whip has acted in a way that is seriously incompetent. It really is terrible.
You Conservative “fans” will literally defend or sweep away the indefensible. It’s just as bad as the Corbynistas.
Sorry but we really do not know the details other than newspaper allegations
This is not about party loyalty but facts leading up to very serious allegations
A respectable person would say “if true, the Chief Whip has serious questions to answer”. That’s literally all I’ve said.
I can't really respect a speaker of English as a second language who uses the American spellings. It's like me learning French and using some sort Senegalese dialect. It's a sort of absurd affectation.
That doesn't make sense as a headline. Obese people aren't any likelier to pass the disease on, just to suffer badly if they get it.
Add the above and this and it's pretty obvious. There is no plan to stop any second wave, it is to propagate it, with children as the conduit. Everyone else who might be at risk had better get out of the way and, if they don't they were warned.
The country is watching and Starmer has an absolute open goal to make Labour electable again and show the public it has really changed. Expelling Corbyn and others would frankly be the best thing to do, if indeed they are implicated by the EHRC.
Expelling Corbyn would be damn stupid. It's not Corbyn or even the Corbynites who are the problem. It's the Scouse SWP tankies Neil Kinnock threw out who were readmitted by Ed Miliband.
Corbyn is 100% the problem. A political mantra that is based on 19th century ideas isn't going to work.
Blair's New Labour is the only future Labour have. Not because of him or anyone else, but simply that they can't bang on with the ideas of well over a hundred years ago. They weren't good ideas then, and they're rubbish now.
Starmer has, I think, worked this out. He's trying to stop Labour being crap, and is biding his time with regards to positive moves.
Labour's immediate problem is that Boris shot so many of their foxes, when he won in 2019 on Labour's 2017 platform. Boris won by being a better Corbyn, not by being a better Cameron or May.
He was perhaps a better EdM. Boris is not and I don't imagine can be anything like Corbyn.
Write down all the things you do not like about Corbyn, and then see how easy it is to apply the same criticisms of Boris.
Just read your comment from yesterday re- experience of the cane as a result of the cricket ball incident. Rather amusing! Corporal punishment remained lawful in state schools until Autumn 1987 - in private schools it was permitted until Autumn 1999.
That was another irony. It was Mrs Thatcher who'd done all the things the Tory backwoodsmen used to complain about in education: closed grammars; ended corporal punishment; abolished O-levels.
It was actually Tony Crosland and Shirley Williams who pushed for closing most of the grammars and ending corporal punishment. When Thatcher became PM secondary education was already mainly comprehensive but by 1997 there were more pupils in grammars than there were in 1979
Mrs T as Ed Sec under Heath closed most of the grammars. As Prime Minister, her government abolished O-levels by combining them with CSEs to form GCSEs. Her government ended corporal punishment after a European Court ruling.
It was Labour councils who closed them, Heath just ordered Thatcher not to block them. Some Tory councils like Kent and Essex kept them.
Now we are out of the EU we could even see schools allowed to restore corporal punishment, Gove has toughened up GCSEs
No teacher I know teaching now would want to go back to the days of corporal punishment.
Some of those who were teaching when I started, perhaps. There was one school I knew where there was a cane in a glass case outside the head’s office well into the nineties. It didn’t actually have a sign on it saying ‘in case of emergency break glass’, but the implication was certainly there.
In what sense is the pavement outside a London pub anyone's "workplace"? Also, it doesn't seem good journalism to go out looking for "inoffensive" vox pops; it's surely prejudging the issue of the mood of the pop.
2010 is objectively the best election Labour has had in the last 10 years, it's the only one where it was physically possible for Labour to form any Government.
I am so utterly fed up with this narrative we were going to win in 2017, at best we might have formed an unstable minority Government. We were miles away from winning.
As long as we stick by this narrative, we will never win again.
In what sense is the pavement outside a London pub anyone's "workplace"? Also, it doesn't seem good journalism to go out looking for "inoffensive" vox pops; it's surely prejudging the issue of the mood of the pop.
Indeed. What a pathetic ultra-snowflake. He's a Sky Journalist interviewing members of the Great British Public during a pandemic that is decimating the economy. If he's offended by people telling him to Fuck Off he should maybe reconsider a new life as a librarian in the outer Orkneys.
France are obliged to take them back under dublin. If they want paying then we put two fingers up and drop off illegal crossers on french beaches by rib.
In what sense is the pavement outside a London pub anyone's "workplace"? Also, it doesn't seem good journalism to go out looking for "inoffensive" vox pops; it's surely prejudging the issue of the mood of the pop.
Indeed. What a pathetic ultra-snowflake. He's a Sky Journalist interviewing members of the Great British Public during a pandemic that is decimating the economy. If he's offended by people telling him to Fuck Off he should maybe reconsider a new life as a librarian in the outer Orkneys.
If he can't take the "le mot de Cambronne"... well I don't think he should head to the Orkneys.... They are a bit forthright there.....
France are obliged to take them back under dublin. If they want paying then we put two fingers up and drop off illegal crossers on french beaches by rib.
Any agreements we made expire at the end of this year
Maybe I am being stupid, but this leading Telegraph piece seems to be a rewrite of last Sunday's Times story that there had been a major wargame around what to do next which had involved plans for telling over 50s to lockdown and/or more sophisticated shielding rules.
Yet the briefing was hard and swift on Monday that this story was not accurate and did not reflect the wargaming discussions and there were no plans to segregate in this way.
Maybe I am being stupid, but this leading Telegraph piece seems to be a rewrite of last Sunday's Times story that there had been a major wargame around what to do next which had involved plans for telling over 50s to lockdown and/or more sophisticated shielding rules.
Yet the briefing was fast and swift on Monday that this story was not accurate and did not reflect the wargaming discussions and there were no plans to segregate in this way.
WTF is going on? Briefing wars?
They're seeing what the public want?
My view is they put out these stories so they can announce something slightly less bad
Maybe I am being stupid, but this leading Telegraph piece seems to be a rewrite of last Sunday's Times story that there had been a major wargame around what to do next which had involved plans for telling over 50s to lockdown and/or more sophisticated shielding rules.
Yet the briefing was fast and swift on Monday that this story was not accurate and did not reflect the wargaming discussions and there were no plans to segregate in this way.
WTF is going on? Briefing wars?
Desperate journalism.
Take a different story, change a few details and attribute it to vague sources.
As Telegraph readers are unlikely to have read the Times last week, or remember what they read even if they did, they don't realise they're reading reheated leftovers.
There really is only one solution for these boats. We need to eliminate the pull factor. If people wish to seek asylum in the UK, our processing centres should be in Africa and probably India or similar. People would apply there. Easier for genuine seekers of asylum to get there.
In what sense is the pavement outside a London pub anyone's "workplace"? Also, it doesn't seem good journalism to go out looking for "inoffensive" vox pops; it's surely prejudging the issue of the mood of the pop.
I don't swear but I think even I would be tempted to if my quiet drink was disturbed by a camera crew disrupting people and asking pointless questions
I'm unclear who you are laughing at here. Them for making the demand, or us for being faced with the demand? Either way, I still don't get the joke.
Not because it is a serious issue - never let that get in the way of a good laugh - but what is LoLworthy about them either making an unreasonable demand, or a reasonable one, and us either not complying with an unreasonable one or complying with a reasonable one?
There really is only one solution for these boats. We need to eliminate the pull factor. If people wish to seek asylum in the UK, our processing centres should be in Africa and probably India or similar. People would apply there. Easier for genuine seekers of asylum to get there.
I've had a similar idea that over-crowding in British prisons should be solved by building prisons in Africa and shipping the criminals out there.
Would also be a boost to the local economies and so could be done via the the foreign aid budget.
There really is only one solution for these boats. We need to eliminate the pull factor. If people wish to seek asylum in the UK, our processing centres should be in Africa and probably India or similar. People would apply there. Easier for genuine seekers of asylum to get there.
I've had a similar idea that over-crowding in British prisons should be solved by building prisons in Africa and shipping the criminals out there.
Would also be a boost to the local economies and so could be done via the the foreign aid budget.
In what sense is the pavement outside a London pub anyone's "workplace"? Also, it doesn't seem good journalism to go out looking for "inoffensive" vox pops; it's surely prejudging the issue of the mood of the pop.
I don't swear but I think even I would be tempted to if my quiet drink was disturbed by a camera crew disrupting people and asking pointless questions
Thinking about it, and some of the traders I worked with at the LIFFE exchange, he was really rather lucky.
Some were very, very basic people - anyone interrupting after the sixth pint....
I’m watching the highlights of England v Pakistan and England are now 117-5. I assume I might as well stop here, or do we end up getting close?
Keep watching
One of the best endings to a Test match I have seen in a long time.
Test cricket is suddenly very appealing. The lack of crowd noise is a damn shame, but it's not crucial (unlike football, where the silence makes the sport unwatchable). Test cricket was always quieter and more cerebral.
And the sheer length of a Test match/series is a joyful maze in which you can lose yourself for days, a very welcome distraction during the Wuhan Death
And it's not just me feeling this. Apparently the viewing figures for Sky's broadcast of the latest England-Windies series were the best they've ever had. People are bored and want a massive and endless distraction.
Test cricket is perfect for this. Pure and prolonged escapism. Like a major series of Fantasy novels. The Hunger Games with bat and willow. Game of Thrones with spinners and googlies. Test cricket may be about to enjoy an unlikely revival
2010 is objectively the best election Labour has had in the last 10 years, it's the only one where it was physically possible for Labour to form any Government.
I am so utterly fed up with this narrative we were going to win in 2017, at best we might have formed an unstable minority Government. We were miles away from winning.
As long as we stick by this narrative, we will never win again.
Moreover, why figuring out why they lost is important*, I get the tiniest hint that they are less concerned with learning lessons about why they lost than assigning blame for why they lost, or rather avoiding any of it hitting them. Or, gods forbid, recognising who is ultimately responsible - the public. Most explanations are just ways of avoiding blaming the electorate for making the 'wrong' choice even though that is clearly what people want to do, hence stuff about people being fooled, not knowing what they were voting for and so on.
*though I don't know that parties ever really do learn why they lost and take appropriate action, and it is more just the passage of time, natural ebb and flow of party direction and weakening of their opponents that does it.
If kids spread this like there is no tomorrow (a completely unproven hypothesis - see for example Swedish primary schools) then within three or four weeks of reopening in September we would start to see a serious uptick.
Then we can discuss shutting them down again until Xmas.
I'm unclear who you are laughing at here. Them for making the demand, or us for being faced with the demand? Either way, I still don't get the joke.
Not because it is a serious issue - never let that get in the way of a good laugh - but what is LoLworthy about them either making an unreasonable demand, or a reasonable one, and us either not complying with an unreasonable one or complying with a reasonable one?
Turkey made a similar demand, give us cash or we let syrians flood over the borders. The people supporting the french stance now were the same ones decrying turkey for doing it.
I'm unclear who you are laughing at here. Them for making the demand, or us for being faced with the demand? Either way, I still don't get the joke.
Not because it is a serious issue - never let that get in the way of a good laugh - but what is LoLworthy about them either making an unreasonable demand, or a reasonable one, and us either not complying with an unreasonable one or complying with a reasonable one?
Turkey made a similar demand, give us cash or we let syrians flood over the borders. The people supporting the french stance now were the same ones decrying turkey for doing it.
You’re making things up again. You have a habit of doing this.
There really is only one solution for these boats. We need to eliminate the pull factor. If people wish to seek asylum in the UK, our processing centres should be in Africa and probably India or similar. People would apply there. Easier for genuine seekers of asylum to get there.
I've had a similar idea that over-crowding in British prisons should be solved by building prisons in Africa and shipping the criminals out there.
Would also be a boost to the local economies and so could be done via the the foreign aid budget.
Moralities aside, if this were a serious suggestion do you think even cash strapped nations will be clamouring for the chance to host such prisons?
To be fair to the Government, they’re right, schools need to open. They are just as important as the health service.
If teachers need visors and masks, give them visors and masks. Give them whatever they need - an open cheque book - but schools must open.
That's the (apparent) category error the government are making. Once you accept that there are lots of problems with trying to run schools as normal, starting with getting staff and pupils to school, then you can work out what to do, what compromises do you need to make and what the fallback might need to be. (What happens in a local lockdown? What if the teacher is locked down and the pupils aren't?)
The denial of some of the complexities, and the absurdly low quality of some of the DfE guidance, have held that process up. Instead we get front page bluster from our glorious leader.
But blustering newspaper articles are BoJo's happy place. And even if they don't do much good for effective government, they're apparently quite good politics.
I'm unclear who you are laughing at here. Them for making the demand, or us for being faced with the demand? Either way, I still don't get the joke.
Not because it is a serious issue - never let that get in the way of a good laugh - but what is LoLworthy about them either making an unreasonable demand, or a reasonable one, and us either not complying with an unreasonable one or complying with a reasonable one?
Turkey made a similar demand, give us cash or we let syrians flood over the borders. The people supporting the french stance now were the same ones decrying turkey for doing it.
You’re making things up again. You have a habit of doing this.
The eu ended up paying turkey a couple of billions the fact you dont remember it being in the news doesnt make it false it just means you are joe biden
I'm unclear who you are laughing at here. Them for making the demand, or us for being faced with the demand? Either way, I still don't get the joke.
Not because it is a serious issue - never let that get in the way of a good laugh - but what is LoLworthy about them either making an unreasonable demand, or a reasonable one, and us either not complying with an unreasonable one or complying with a reasonable one?
Turkey made a similar demand, give us cash or we let syrians flood over the borders. The people supporting the french stance now were the same ones decrying turkey for doing it.
You’re making things up again. You have a habit of doing this.
There really is only one solution for these boats. We need to eliminate the pull factor. If people wish to seek asylum in the UK, our processing centres should be in Africa and probably India or similar. People would apply there. Easier for genuine seekers of asylum to get there.
I've had a similar idea that over-crowding in British prisons should be solved by building prisons in Africa and shipping the criminals out there.
Would also be a boost to the local economies and so could be done via the the foreign aid budget.
Vile.
Who to the criminals or the third world countries ?
I don't have much experience of the first group but I suspect a spell in an African jail with an HMP sign on might be more of a deterrent than those in this country.
And for the third world countries they would get properly paid, at much better rates than what we currently exploit them for.
I’m watching the highlights of England v Pakistan and England are now 117-5. I assume I might as well stop here, or do we end up getting close?
Keep watching
One of the best endings to a Test match I have seen in a long time.
Test cricket is suddenly very appealing. The lack of crowd noise is a damn shame, but it's not crucial (unlike football, where the silence makes the sport unwatchable). Test cricket was always quieter and more cerebral.
And the sheer length of a Test match/series is a joyful maze in which you can lose yourself for days, a very welcome distraction during the Wuhan Death
And it's not just me feeling this. Apparently the viewing figures for Sky's broadcast of the latest England-Windies series were the best they've ever had. People are bored and want a massive and endless distraction.
Test cricket is perfect for this. Pure and prolonged escapism. Like a major series of Fantasy novels. The Hunger Games with bat and willow. Game of Thrones with spinners and googlies. Test cricket may be about to enjoy an unlikely revival
There's no better sport for building a narrative, for individuals and teams, for raising such tension in the teams as it all comes down to a few moments. I hope it is revived. I hope Ireland and Afganistan get a lot more games too.
Plus you can watch it while you're at work as there's gaps every few seconds.
I'm unclear who you are laughing at here. Them for making the demand, or us for being faced with the demand? Either way, I still don't get the joke.
Not because it is a serious issue - never let that get in the way of a good laugh - but what is LoLworthy about them either making an unreasonable demand, or a reasonable one, and us either not complying with an unreasonable one or complying with a reasonable one?
Turkey made a similar demand, give us cash or we let syrians flood over the borders. The people supporting the french stance now were the same ones decrying turkey for doing it.
You’re making things up again. You have a habit of doing this.
The eu ended up paying turkey a couple of billions the fact you dont remember it being in the news doesnt make it false it just means you are joe biden
I'm unclear who you are laughing at here. Them for making the demand, or us for being faced with the demand? Either way, I still don't get the joke.
Not because it is a serious issue - never let that get in the way of a good laugh - but what is LoLworthy about them either making an unreasonable demand, or a reasonable one, and us either not complying with an unreasonable one or complying with a reasonable one?
Turkey made a similar demand, give us cash or we let syrians flood over the borders. The people supporting the french stance now were the same ones decrying turkey for doing it.
You’re making things up again. You have a habit of doing this.
The eu ended up paying turkey a couple of billions the fact you dont remember it being in the news doesnt make it false it just means you are joe biden
I mean you’re making up that “the same people supporting the french stance now were the same ones decrying turkey for doing it”.
I'm unclear who you are laughing at here. Them for making the demand, or us for being faced with the demand? Either way, I still don't get the joke.
Not because it is a serious issue - never let that get in the way of a good laugh - but what is LoLworthy about them either making an unreasonable demand, or a reasonable one, and us either not complying with an unreasonable one or complying with a reasonable one?
Turkey made a similar demand, give us cash or we let syrians flood over the borders. The people supporting the french stance now were the same ones decrying turkey for doing it.
You’re making things up again. You have a habit of doing this.
The eu ended up paying turkey a couple of billions the fact you dont remember it being in the news doesnt make it false it just means you are joe biden
I mean you’re making up that “the same people supporting the french stance now were the same ones decrying turkey for doing it”.
It’s the usual bollocks from you.
No people like scott xp and other remainers were fulminating about turkey holding the eu at ransom at the time go back to the 2016 threads and look
I know little of Lebanese politics other than that it is apparently highly divisive even at the best of times, so I hope my scepticism that early elections will be a way out of their latest crisis is wrong
I'm unclear who you are laughing at here. Them for making the demand, or us for being faced with the demand? Either way, I still don't get the joke.
Not because it is a serious issue - never let that get in the way of a good laugh - but what is LoLworthy about them either making an unreasonable demand, or a reasonable one, and us either not complying with an unreasonable one or complying with a reasonable one?
Turkey made a similar demand, give us cash or we let syrians flood over the borders. The people supporting the french stance now were the same ones decrying turkey for doing it.
You’re making things up again. You have a habit of doing this.
The eu ended up paying turkey a couple of billions the fact you dont remember it being in the news doesnt make it false it just means you are joe biden
I mean you’re making up that “the same people supporting the french stance now were the same ones decrying turkey for doing it”.
It’s the usual bollocks from you.
No people like scott xp and other remainers were fulminating about turkey holding the eu at ransom at the time go back to the 2016 threads and look
There really is only one solution for these boats. We need to eliminate the pull factor. If people wish to seek asylum in the UK, our processing centres should be in Africa and probably India or similar. People would apply there. Easier for genuine seekers of asylum to get there.
I've had a similar idea that over-crowding in British prisons should be solved by building prisons in Africa and shipping the criminals out there.
Would also be a boost to the local economies and so could be done via the the foreign aid budget.
Moralities aside, if this were a serious suggestion do you think even cash strapped nations will be clamouring for the chance to host such prisons?
I would say you would get a queue round the block at the Home Office, of ambassadors.
Real billions of pounds on a on-going basis? To lock up some white people*?
There really is only one solution for these boats. We need to eliminate the pull factor. If people wish to seek asylum in the UK, our processing centres should be in Africa and probably India or similar. People would apply there. Easier for genuine seekers of asylum to get there.
I've had a similar idea that over-crowding in British prisons should be solved by building prisons in Africa and shipping the criminals out there.
Would also be a boost to the local economies and so could be done via the the foreign aid budget.
Moralities aside, if this were a serious suggestion do you think even cash strapped nations will be clamouring for the chance to host such prisons?
Who knows.
But there's plenty of exploitation in the third world, both from within and from without.
Offer up the opportunity and we would see who was interested.
Comments
Any European rule/law that upsets the country - well, we'll get round to enforcing that.
Slightly after the heat death of the Universe.
And why illustrate the atricle with a person who clearly is not obese - it's not as if there aren't enough obese people around to photograph?
You guys are really something else.
You guys are something else. If the article is true, the Chief Whip has acted in a way that is seriously incompetent. It really is terrible.
You Conservative “fans” will literally defend or sweep away the indefensible. It’s just as bad as the Corbynistas.
Now we are out of the EU we could even see schools allowed to restore corporal punishment, Gove has toughened up GCSEs
I doubt any teachers will hit children, even if the Government “allowed it”. What a ridiculous thing to say.
And while an obese person isn't the person in the picture is.
Bonkers. We cannot do a national lockdown again.
I suppose this is another top epidemiologist with a model that predicts 1.5million will be dead by Xmas or some such.
Meanwhile in Sweden.
This is not about party loyalty but facts leading up to very serious allegations
Instead of the Corbynista-esque “yehhh but...”
LOL
Some of those who were teaching when I started, perhaps. There was one school I knew where there was a cane in a glass case outside the head’s office well into the nineties. It didn’t actually have a sign on it saying ‘in case of emergency break glass’, but the implication was certainly there.
A perfectly sensible agreement between UK and France on a life and death issue
Remember how we were told that 36 areas were to be put into lockdown within days back in June.
Then give them the some rusty AKs, and tell them that if they get x% of France back for us, cash is hand....
It's only traditional, after all......
Jesus Christ.
2010 is objectively the best election Labour has had in the last 10 years, it's the only one where it was physically possible for Labour to form any Government.
I am so utterly fed up with this narrative we were going to win in 2017, at best we might have formed an unstable minority Government. We were miles away from winning.
As long as we stick by this narrative, we will never win again.
Biden closing in on final decision on vice presidential running mate
The presumptive Democratic nominee could announce a final decision by the middle of next week or sooner, although sources say his only real deadline is the convention, which starts Aug. 17.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/biden-closing-final-decision-vice-presidential-running-mate-n1236229
So I hope that's clear. By mid-week. Or sooner. Or later.
If teachers need visors and masks, give them visors and masks. Give them whatever they need - an open cheque book - but schools must open.
If you get what you pay for then its not a problem, if you don't then it is.
That's how business works.
Maybe I am being stupid, but this leading Telegraph piece seems to be a rewrite of last Sunday's Times story that there had been a major wargame around what to do next which had involved plans for telling over 50s to lockdown and/or more sophisticated shielding rules.
Yet the briefing was hard and swift on Monday that this story was not accurate and did not reflect the wargaming discussions and there were no plans to segregate in this way.
WTF is going on? Briefing wars?
Haven't you read Henry V?
My view is they put out these stories so they can announce something slightly less bad
Take a different story, change a few details and attribute it to vague sources.
As Telegraph readers are unlikely to have read the Times last week, or remember what they read even if they did, they don't realise they're reading reheated leftovers.
That's an interesting idea. Perhaps it should be tried.
I'll get my coat. It's the one next to the lorry full of sheep. On fire.
:-)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_de_la_Pole,_3rd_Earl_of_Suffolk
Not because it is a serious issue - never let that get in the way of a good laugh - but what is LoLworthy about them either making an unreasonable demand, or a reasonable one, and us either not complying with an unreasonable one or complying with a reasonable one?
Would also be a boost to the local economies and so could be done via the the foreign aid budget.
Some were very, very basic people - anyone interrupting after the sixth pint....
Test cricket is suddenly very appealing. The lack of crowd noise is a damn shame, but it's not crucial (unlike football, where the silence makes the sport unwatchable). Test cricket was always quieter and more cerebral.
And the sheer length of a Test match/series is a joyful maze in which you can lose yourself for days, a very welcome distraction during the Wuhan Death
And it's not just me feeling this. Apparently the viewing figures for Sky's broadcast of the latest England-Windies series were the best they've ever had. People are bored and want a massive and endless distraction.
Test cricket is perfect for this. Pure and prolonged escapism. Like a major series of Fantasy novels. The Hunger Games with bat and willow. Game of Thrones with spinners and googlies. Test cricket may be about to enjoy an unlikely revival
*though I don't know that parties ever really do learn why they lost and take appropriate action, and it is more just the passage of time, natural ebb and flow of party direction and weakening of their opponents that does it.
If kids spread this like there is no tomorrow (a completely unproven hypothesis - see for example Swedish primary schools) then within three or four weeks of reopening in September we would start to see a serious uptick.
Then we can discuss shutting them down again until Xmas.
PR campaigns not actual proper measures to make things safer.
Peak 2020, just say things in different ways rather than actually doing anything.
The denial of some of the complexities, and the absurdly low quality of some of the DfE guidance, have held that process up. Instead we get front page bluster from our glorious leader.
But blustering newspaper articles are BoJo's happy place. And even if they don't do much good for effective government, they're apparently quite good politics.
https://www.euronews.com/2016/03/07/turkey-demands-more-cash-and-faster-visa-free-travel-for-migrant-help
I don't have much experience of the first group but I suspect a spell in an African jail with an HMP sign on might be more of a deterrent than those in this country.
And for the third world countries they would get properly paid, at much better rates than what we currently exploit them for.
Plus you can watch it while you're at work as there's gaps every few seconds.
for example now when you stop calling people liars for remembering what happened rather than what you in la la leftie remainerland would wish to believe happened I may uncancel you
It’s the usual bollocks from you.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-53704998
Real billions of pounds on a on-going basis? To lock up some white people*?
*Yes, I know.
But there's plenty of exploitation in the third world, both from within and from without.
Offer up the opportunity and we would see who was interested.