The problem is I think (leaving aside the rights and wrongs) that he's seen by teachers as anti-teacher but not really seen by parents as pro-parent, partly perhaps because teachers follow his comments closely while parents are pretty much the general public, who don't in general follow ANYTHING political closely. Indeed I suspect that more than 75% of parents would struggle to name him.
The key educational reform has been Gove's huge expansion of Academies (one of Blair's better ideas, which you were right to support!). It may be a bit early to say, but I suspect these will be popular with parents.
There is no doubting Gove's sincerity. He wants us to have the best education system in the world. But he sends out very mixed messages. He says we have the best teachers we have ever had, but decries the colleges they were taught in as beacons of leftism; he lauds rigour, but plays fast and loose with facts; he applauds transparency, but keeps so much hidden; he tells teachers their job has never been more important, but downgrades their working conditions; he says he believes that teachers should be free to teach, yet places ever greater demands on their time; he preaches autonomy, but never has central control of education been stronger.
In the end, I guess, teachers judge Gove on what he does rather than on what he says. My wife - consistently rated good and outstanding, who I saw work long hours after school, at weekends, during the holidays for year after year- has had enough and left teaching at the end of last month. The presents and plaudits she received bore testament to the job she did. The teaching profession should not be losing people like her.
Why have the Lib Dems lost three times more support from public sector workers than Conservative?
Is it Labour Lite voters who saw Lib Dems as a soft option to Labour?
Can the Lib Dems re-position themselves as capitalists with a heart instead of soft Labour?
Lord Ashcroft's "What are the LDs for?" piece is interesting on the LD>Lab switchers:
"...as far as these voters are concerned, it is the Lib Dems’ fault that the Conservatives are in office at all. For this the party cannot be forgiven "
'"Just about everything he does is seen as a denigration of teachers who loathe him."
So in other words he's doing a great job.
Gove upsetting teachers that would never vote Tory,clearly a disaster.
Yes it is a disaster for the Tories and you don't see it. Think about that for the moment. Yes many were not CON supporters but if they switch from LD to LAB the blues are f**ked.
Why have the Lib Dems lost three times more support from public sector workers than Conservative?
Is it Labour Lite voters who saw Lib Dems as a soft option to Labour?
Can the Lib Dems re-position themselves as capitalists with a heart instead of soft Labour?
Lord Ashcroft's "What are the LDs for?" piece is interesting on the LD>Lab switchers:
"...as far as these voters are concerned, it is the Lib Dems’ fault that the Conservatives are in office at all. For this the party cannot be forgiven "
37.850 out of 392.140 civil servants lives in Westminster Borough. The next local authority is Newcastle with 10.500 civil servants living there
No civil servant is reported as living in Maldon
Is that live or work, Andrea? I am not surprised at the significant number of civil servants in Westminster or Newcastle but I would have thought that the vast majority commute from outside the borough in the former case.
'"Just about everything he does is seen as a denigration of teachers who loathe him."
So in other words he's doing a great job.
Gove upsetting teachers that would never vote Tory,clearly a disaster.
Well if Gove wants to carry what he describes as the best teachers we have ever had with him as he seeks to reform the system, then yes it is a disaster for him. And, of course, a totally demotivated teaching profession is not exactly great news for the country.
You are right....in the Civil Service Employment Survey, the geography information is recorded as follow: "A person is recorded at the location of the establishment or other workplace where they are based."
I can confirm that for Population Survey (my previous post) is the place where they lived though.
37.850 out of 392.140 civil servants lives in Westminster Borough. The next local authority is Newcastle with 10.500 civil servants living there
No civil servant is reported as living in Maldon
Is that live or work, Andrea? I am not surprised at the significant number of civil servants in Westminster or Newcastle but I would have thought that the vast majority commute from outside the borough in the former case.
This is no surprise. Today's highly ideological Tory party can barely disguise its contempt for the public sector.
It's a strange old ideology though. Smaller State at all costs, public bad private good, anti-poor, pro big business corporatist, an authoritarian streak. It bears little resemblance to classic conservatism or even Thatcherism.
I don't know when, where or how the Tory Party went so badly wrong, but a period of modernisation out of power would be good for all concerned, not least the Party itself.
Do you actually believe what you are writing or do you just hate the tory party?
If Thatcher had inherited the financial situation in 2010 that the current government did do you really think she wouldn't have been a bit more right wing than the current leadership of the tory party. After 13 years of an increasingly bloated and often unaccountable public sector where non-jobs were everywhere her axe would have been much harsher.
On this site sometimes its like the financial position this country is in is not relevant.
In my perverted way I sometimes look forward to the next Labour Government to see what a total hash they will make of it just for the fun of the comments on here.
Raising taxes and increasing spending which is what they will do does not work. France is just one of many countries that has demonstrated this.
I watched a TUC women on News24 last night spouting the nonsense that increasing public spending will lead to growth and thereby reduce the deficit. How these people can go unchallenged when making such statements is beyond me. They should be asked for examples of when this has happened. Perhaps the early 2000s?, massive increases in public spending did not lead to growth above normal and the deficit grew. Surely Ireland has demonstrated the way forward. Lower government spending leads to growth not higher government spending. People may not like it, but its a fact and it is repeated worldwide.
'"Just about everything he does is seen as a denigration of teachers who loathe him."
So in other words he's doing a great job.
Gove upsetting teachers that would never vote Tory,clearly a disaster.
Yes it is a disaster for the Tories and you don't see it. Think about that for the moment. Yes many were not CON supporters but if they switch from LD to LAB the blues are f**ked.
It is called FPTP
Don't waste your time Mike, even the election results in 2015 will not convince them of the facts.
Expect to hear a lot about the biased lefty BBC/Guardian/Sky/UKIP conspiracy next year
There is no doubting Gove's sincerity. He wants us to have the best education system in the world. But he sends out very mixed messages. He says we have the best teachers we have ever had, but decries the colleges they were taught in as beacons of leftism; he lauds rigour, but plays fast and loose with facts; he applauds transparency, but keeps so much hidden; he tells teachers their job has never been more important, but downgrades their working conditions; he says he believes that teachers should be free to teach, yet places ever greater demands on their time; he preaches autonomy, but never has central control of education been stronger.
In the end, I guess, teachers judge Gove on what he does rather than on what he says. My wife - consistently rated good and outstanding, who I saw work long hours after school, at weekends, during the holidays for year after year- has had enough and left teaching at the end of last month. The presents and plaudits she received bore testament to the job she did. The teaching profession should not be losing people like her.
A very good post, SO.
I don't have strong views about Gove, one way or the other, but in general I tend to distrust politicians mucking about with education because they all do so for reasons unconnected with education. They all see it as a means to an end rather than as an end in itself. And, while this may seem old-fashioned to some, I do think that all - whatever jobs we do - should be well-educated: the dustbin man just as much as the computer programmer or engineer or lawyer or whoever.
'Yes it is a disaster for the Tories and you don't see it. Think about that for the moment. Yes many were not CON supporters but if they switch from LD to LAB the blues are f**ked.'
You only focus on teachers, there are many more parents than teachers.
Try telling the parents of kids at Free Schools in marginals like Hammersmith that Gove is rubbish,you might not enjoy the response.
Why have the Lib Dems lost three times more support from public sector workers than Conservative? Is it Labour Lite voters who saw Lib Dems as a soft option to Labour?
I'd give them a bit more credit than that.
Today's LibDem->Lab switchers, in my experience, were as much LibDems as the rest of the party's supporters. They were not "Labour Lite" any more than they were "Conservative Lite". They liked what the LibDems stood for, and they voted for it.
In 2010, they may even have been reassured that Cameron seemed all right - "vote blue, get green" is a reassuring message to LibDems. Brown was not appealing. So if a Con/LibDem coalition happened, then it wouldn't be too bad, would it?
They were not expecting Gove and Lansley's continuous revolution. And yet that is what they got; and that is why they won't be voting LibDem again in a hurry.
@john_zims: I would be interested to see the numbers on the number of parents with kids at Free Schools, vs the number of teachers, in key marginals. I suspect the latter is considerably larger - there aren't many Free Schools yet - but could be wrong. I don't think you can assume the parents at Al-Madinah will count in your favourable analysis.
Surely Ireland has demonstrated the way forward. Lower government spending leads to growth not higher government spending. People may not like it, but its a fact and it is repeated worldwide.
The Irish Government scaled back the size of the fiscal adjustment in its latest Budget specifically to foster stronger economic growth so you may want to look elsewhere for your proof.
And, of course, a totally demotivated teaching profession is not exactly great news for the country.
Let's see:
Contrary to most reports, teaching in Britain has never been in better health. That may seem an obtuse observation to make as the government overhauls everything, unions press on with their forlorn strikes and teachers everywhere shelve the suncream and dust off the lesson plans, but it's true.
The quality of recruits is phenomenally high, the pay isn't bad, the profession's status is rising, schools have never been better equipped and teachers' pensions remain generous compared with most. Students have never been more motivated and parents rarely so supportive. Most encouraging of all are the widespread acceptance that a "satisfactory" education isn't really good enough and the determination of schools and teachers to take ownership of their profession, sharing ideas and best practice in ways unknown only a few years ago. .. Some things remain a mystery. I've never properly grasped how teachers, with their instinctive distrust of change, have such a boundless capacity to accommodate it once it's arrived. And why on earth is a profession of natural optimists saddled with such miserable representation?
It is entirely fitting that the country's most curmudgeonly union has the world's most unmelodious acronym: NASUWT. The union behaves less like a voice of the profession and more like some vast grumble of janitors, constantly preoccupied with the temperature of rooms but unconcerned by what actually happens in them - this teaching malarkey.
The fact is that teaching, for all its bureaucratic indignities, petty frustrations and ceaseless initiatives, is a more respected profession and a more attractive graduate destination than it has been for many years
Gerard Kelly, retiring editor of the Times Educational Supplement, 30 Aug 2013
'"Just about everything he does is seen as a denigration of teachers who loathe him."
So in other words he's doing a great job.
Gove upsetting teachers that would never vote Tory,clearly a disaster.
Well if Gove wants to carry what he describes as the best teachers we have ever had with him as he seeks to reform the system, then yes it is a disaster for him. And, of course, a totally demotivated teaching profession is not exactly great news for the country.
It is virtually impossible as a teacher to get the sack. They are a peculiarly protected profession so any change or demands for improvements are going to be hated. Being a teacher has been a job for life no matter how bad you are at it. No wonder they hate Gove. Teachers want an education secretary who doesn't rock the boat, outcomes for children are not at the forefront of their thinking.
Surely Ireland has demonstrated the way forward. Lower government spending leads to growth not higher government spending. People may not like it, but its a fact and it is repeated worldwide.
The Irish Government scaled back the size of the fiscal adjustment in its latest Budget specifically to foster stronger economic growth so you may want to look elsewhere for your proof.
So is Irish Government spending been falling or rising over the past 5 years.
'"Just about everything he does is seen as a denigration of teachers who loathe him."
So in other words he's doing a great job.
Gove upsetting teachers that would never vote Tory,clearly a disaster.
Well if Gove wants to carry what he describes as the best teachers we have ever had with him as he seeks to reform the system, then yes it is a disaster for him. And, of course, a totally demotivated teaching profession is not exactly great news for the country.
It is virtually impossible as a teacher to get the sack. They are a peculiarly protected profession so any change or demands for improvements are going to be hated. Being a teacher has been a job for life no matter how bad you are at it. No wonder they hate Gove. Teachers want an education secretary who doesn't rock the boat, outcomes for children are not at the forefront of their thinking.
So Gove is wrong about them then?
I think you'll find that teachers would like it to be easier for their poorly performing colleagues to be dealt with, as they have to cover up for them by taking their classes, doing their marking and planning, and so on.
And, of course, a totally demotivated teaching profession is not exactly great news for the country.
Let's see:
Contrary to most reports, teaching in Britain has never been in better health. That may seem an obtuse observation to make as the government overhauls everything, unions press on with their forlorn strikes and teachers everywhere shelve the suncream and dust off the lesson plans, but it's true.
The quality of recruits is phenomenally high, the pay isn't bad, the profession's status is rising, schools have never been better equipped and teachers' pensions remain generous compared with most. Students have never been more motivated and parents rarely so supportive. Most encouraging of all are the widespread acceptance that a "satisfactory" education isn't really good enough and the determination of schools and teachers to take ownership of their profession, sharing ideas and best practice in ways unknown only a few years ago. .. Some things remain a mystery. I've never properly grasped how teachers, with their instinctive distrust of change, have such a boundless capacity to accommodate it once it's arrived. And why on earth is a profession of natural optimists saddled with such miserable representation?
It is entirely fitting that the country's most curmudgeonly union has the world's most unmelodious acronym: NASUWT. The union behaves less like a voice of the profession and more like some vast grumble of janitors, constantly preoccupied with the temperature of rooms but unconcerned by what actually happens in them - this teaching malarkey.
The fact is that teaching, for all its bureaucratic indignities, petty frustrations and ceaseless initiatives, is a more respected profession and a more attractive graduate destination than it has been for many years
Gerard Kelly, retiring editor of the Times Educational Supplement, 30 Aug 2013
A lot of truth in that. But it would be a big mistake to ignore what effect the "bureaucratic indignities, petty frustrations and ceaseless initiatives" have on teachers who consistently find the goalposts being changed - in terms of what they are being told to teach, how they are managed and the ways in which they are assessed.
Public Employment in Italy at 31 December 2012 (official data by Annual Count by Treasury)
permanent contracts (also called "jobs for life" in the public stereotype): 3,036,712
Biggest sectors: Schools 873,19; NHS 672,051; Local Government 574,394; Central Government Departments 160,778; Armed Forces 148,032; Universities 101,056
Adding fixed term contracts, interim staff, etc: 3,381,442
Obviously problem for international comparisons is what is considered public employment For ex English colleges not being considered it anymore. In Italy we have railways, post offices, electricity company which have shareholders now and so they are not public sector for a statistical point of view...even if the state holds the majority of the shares....
Gove is one of those politicians who entrenches existing views/ prejudices. He's loved by true blues, but to the rest of us - fairly, or unfairly - he comes across as irredeemably smug and self-satisfied. It's for that reason he's so many people's pick for the politican whose face you'd most like to punch. And I think that's more significant than the particular rights/wrongs of his education policy.
A lot of truth in that. But it would be a big mistake to ignore what effect the "bureaucratic indignities, petty frustrations and ceaseless initiatives" have on teachers who consistently find the goalposts being changed - in terms of what they are being told to teach, how they are managed and the ways in which they are assessed.
I agree with that, but it's not new: the last government did a massive amount of meddling. I would hope that Gove and Sir Michael Wilshaw are beginning to make some progress in reducing burdensome bureaucracy whilst at the same time focusing on intervening where it is necessary. That's not an easy balance to get right.
'"Just about everything he does is seen as a denigration of teachers who loathe him."
So in other words he's doing a great job.
Gove upsetting teachers that would never vote Tory,clearly a disaster.
Yes it is a disaster for the Tories and you don't see it. Think about that for the moment. Yes many were not CON supporters but if they switch from LD to LAB the blues are f**ked.
It is called FPTP
But the chances are that Gove is not the reason they are switching and to be honest I doubt there is anything that he can do to stop them switching.
The loss of support for the Lib Dems is all down to how the Lib Dems have behaved in Government not because of what Gove is doing. I very much doubt that most of the switch is tactical voting. People are voting Labour instead of Lib Dem because they prefer Labour to the Lib Dems. It is that simple.
And yes this is probably a very bad thing for the Tories. But to try and claim this is Gove's fault is simply a reflection of your own dislike of the man rather than accepting it is down to the sense of betrayal felt by many Lib Dems.
A lot of truth in that. But it would be a big mistake to ignore what effect the "bureaucratic indignities, petty frustrations and ceaseless initiatives" have on teachers who consistently find the goalposts being changed - in terms of what they are being told to teach, how they are managed and the ways in which they are assessed.
I agree with that, but it's not new: the last government did a massive amount of meddling. I would hope that Gove and Sir Michael Wilshaw are beginning to make some progress in reducing burdensome bureaucracy whilst at the same time focusing on intervening where it is necessary. That's not an easy balance to get right.
The bureaucracy has been ridiculous for 20 years and continues to be so. The most annoying thing about it is that the requirements keep changing. My original post was in response to this line from john_zims: "Gove upsetting teachers that would never vote Tory, clearly a disaster". What a stupid thing to say.
' I would be interested to see the numbers on the number of parents with kids at Free Schools, vs the number of teachers, in key marginals. I suspect the latter is considerably larger - there aren't many Free Schools yet -'
You may well be right,but if you take Hammersmith as an example it's now had 4 years of student intake,whereas as most of the teachers don't live in the borough.
If Gove's Free schools are such a disaster ,someone needs to explain why most are so massively oversubscribed.
Labour's record was to massively spend & at the same time push English schools down the international league tables and of course we have and even bigger car crash in Wales.
'"Just about everything he does is seen as a denigration of teachers who loathe him."
So in other words he's doing a great job.
Gove upsetting teachers that would never vote Tory,clearly a disaster.
Yes it is a disaster for the Tories and you don't see it. Think about that for the moment. Yes many were not CON supporters but if they switch from LD to LAB the blues are f**ked.
It is called FPTP
But the chances are that Gove is not the reason they are switching and to be honest I doubt there is anything that he can do to stop them switching.
The loss of support for the Lib Dems is all down to how the Lib Dems have behaved in Government not because of what Gove is doing. I very much doubt that most of the switch is tactical voting. People are voting Labour instead of Lib Dem because they prefer Labour to the Lib Dems. It is that simple.
And yes this is probably a very bad thing for the Tories. But to try and claim this is Gove's fault is simply a reflection of your own dislike of the man rather than accepting it is down to the sense of betrayal felt by many Lib Dems.
I'd basically agree with that. Though Michael Gove does make a convenient hate figure for this section of the electorate.
The loss of support for the Lib Dems is all down to how the Lib Dems have behaved in Government not because of what Gove is doing.
Really? UK Polling Report shows an almost constant level of support for them from January 2011 which suggests that their behaviour in Government hasnt really had a significant impact one way or another.
'"Just about everything he does is seen as a denigration of teachers who loathe him."
So in other words he's doing a great job.
Gove upsetting teachers that would never vote Tory,clearly a disaster.
Yes it is a disaster for the Tories and you don't see it. Think about that for the moment. Yes many were not CON supporters but if they switch from LD to LAB the blues are f**ked.
It is called FPTP
But the chances are that Gove is not the reason they are switching and to be honest I doubt there is anything that he can do to stop them switching.
The loss of support for the Lib Dems is all down to how the Lib Dems have behaved in Government not because of what Gove is doing. I very much doubt that most of the switch is tactical voting. People are voting Labour instead of Lib Dem because they prefer Labour to the Lib Dems. It is that simple.
And yes this is probably a very bad thing for the Tories. But to try and claim this is Gove's fault is simply a reflection of your own dislike of the man rather than accepting it is down to the sense of betrayal felt by many Lib Dems.
I'd basically agree with that. Though Michael Gove does make a convenient hate figure for this section of the electorate.
Interestingly the other part of Mike's equation that he often mentions is the need for the Tories to attract back those supporters they have lost to UKIP. If we do accept that the Tories are unlikely to be able to do anything about the LD - Lab switchers then actually Gove, as one of the ministers most appealing to the UKIP tendency, is probably more likely to help than hinder the Tories if he can draw back some of the UKIP support.
I regret to say @MikeSmithson that you're becoming a wee bit OCD with Gove.
Gove will no more cost the Tories the general election than will the front page of today's "Daily Mirror". Education ministers very rarely influence the course of election campaigns and 2015 will be no different.
There is no doubting Gove's sincerity. He wants us to have the best education system in the world. But he sends out very mixed messages. He says we have the best teachers we have ever had, but decries the colleges they were taught in as beacons of leftism; he lauds rigour, but plays fast and loose with facts; he applauds transparency, but keeps so much hidden; he tells teachers their job has never been more important, but downgrades their working conditions; he says he believes that teachers should be free to teach, yet places ever greater demands on their time; he preaches autonomy, but never has central control of education been stronger.
In the end, I guess, teachers judge Gove on what he does rather than on what he says. My wife - consistently rated good and outstanding, who I saw work long hours after school, at weekends, during the holidays for year after year- has had enough and left teaching at the end of last month. The presents and plaudits she received bore testament to the job she did. The teaching profession should not be losing people like her.
A very good post, SO.
I don't have strong views about Gove, one way or the other, but in general I tend to distrust politicians mucking about with education because they all do so for reasons unconnected with education. They all see it as a means to an end rather than as an end in itself. And, while this may seem old-fashioned to some, I do think that all - whatever jobs we do - should be well-educated: the dustbin man just as much as the computer programmer or engineer or lawyer or whoever.
I agree , I think we should all go back to slates and chalk, and 6 of the best for cheeking your teacher .. oh and no talking in class. It was much better in the old days..
"I think you'll find that teachers would like it to be easier for their poorly performing colleagues to be dealt with, as they have to cover up for them by taking their classes, doing their marking and planning, and so on."
You are probably correct in that, but I struggle to recall a campaign by the teaching unions to make it easier to get rid of sub-standard teachers.
A few posts ago you made a comment about the teaching profession becoming as a whole demoralised with the hint that this was because of current policies. Well, it is not a new phenomena. It wasn't that long ago that teachers were leaving the profession because of the new ideas that were then being introduced.
Personally, I think until we can get politics out of education (and that means forgetting about trying to use schools and universities as agents of social engineering) the cycle is just going to repeat. Regrettably, the vested interests from politicians and the educational establishment are just too strong for that to happen. So we will carry on with re-organisations and strife and all the time standards will continue to slip.
All Gove has done is fail to make excuses for an education system that, despite being amongst the best funded in the world, is way down the global league table at a time when education has never been more important.
Rubbish, Gove has zero interest in education - his one concern is to be well placed to take over from Dave in 2015 when he steps down a CON leader after failing at the election.
Just popped in - I fear someone's account has been hacked looking at this unexpected source of rabid gibberish...
Why have the Lib Dems lost three times more support from public sector workers than Conservative?
Is it Labour Lite voters who saw Lib Dems as a soft option to Labour?
Can the Lib Dems re-position themselves as capitalists with a heart instead of soft Labour?
Lord Ashcroft's "What are the LDs for?" piece is interesting on the LD>Lab switchers:
"...as far as these voters are concerned, it is the Lib Dems’ fault that the Conservatives are in office at all. For this the party cannot be forgiven "
There is nothing that the Conservative Party can do to influence people who (a) see the Lib Dems as the rural wing of the Labour Party (b) regard a non-left wing government as somehow illegitimate, and (c) whose only complaint about Labour is that they aren't left wing enough.
The Lib Dems and Greens may influence such voters, but it would be as much of a waste of time for the Conservatives to try to do so as it would be for Labour to try to win my support.
The Conservatives have to focus on those Lib Dem voters who've shifted rightwards, and UKIP supporters.
Regardless of ones own views about Gove (I met him once, he seemed very pleasant) that he is hated by teachers is beyond doubt. What I didn't realise was just how many teachers there are in each seat. So regardless of the rights and wrongs, annoying teachers is unwise as they'll just desert to Labour as MikeSmithson's graph above shows.
"I think you'll find that teachers would like it to be easier for their poorly performing colleagues to be dealt with, as they have to cover up for them by taking their classes, doing their marking and planning, and so on."
You are probably correct in that, but I struggle to recall a campaign by the teaching unions to make it easier to get rid of sub-standard teachers.
A few posts ago you made a comment about the teaching profession becoming as a whole demoralised with the hint that this was because of current policies. Well, it is not a new phenomena. It wasn't that long ago that teachers were leaving the profession because of the new ideas that were then being introduced.
Personally, I think until we can get politics out of education (and that means forgetting about trying to use schools and universities as agents of social engineering) the cycle is just going to repeat. Regrettably, the vested interests from politicians and the educational establishment are just too strong for that to happen. So we will carry on with re-organisations and strife and all the time standards will continue to slip.
I was responding to a post from john_zims which stated that Gove should not worry about pissing off teachers because they do not vote Tory. The danger is that if Gove thinks like that he will end up demoralising the very people he needs on side if he wants his reforms to work. In the same way, if he wants to make the heads of teaching unions less important, he should think carefully about how his own actions and decisions have increased the importance of union membership for many teachers.
''Try telling the parents of kids at Free Schools in marginals like Hammersmith that Gove is rubbish,you might not enjoy the response.''
But this the crux though, isn't it? is anybody asking parents?
What are you going to tell the parents of kids where no places are bein ceared because his ideological stand was that money should only go to create free school irrespective of whether extra places are needed in the area. This is a national scandal that Gove personally has created and which he is coming under fire for.
The one and perhaps only thing Labour did do on the budget deficit was to support or more accurately not fight a public sector pay freeze on the basis this would help preserve the amount of public sector jobs...
'"Just about everything he does is seen as a denigration of teachers who loathe him."
So in other words he's doing a great job.
Gove upsetting teachers that would never vote Tory,clearly a disaster.
Yes it is a disaster for the Tories and you don't see it. Think about that for the moment. Yes many were not CON supporters but if they switch from LD to LAB the blues are f**ked.
It is called FPTP
But the chances are that Gove is not the reason they are switching and to be honest I doubt there is anything that he can do to stop them switching.
The loss of support for the Lib Dems is all down to how the Lib Dems have behaved in Government not because of what Gove is doing. I very much doubt that most of the switch is tactical voting. People are voting Labour instead of Lib Dem because they prefer Labour to the Lib Dems. It is that simple.
And yes this is probably a very bad thing for the Tories. But to try and claim this is Gove's fault is simply a reflection of your own dislike of the man rather than accepting it is down to the sense of betrayal felt by many Lib Dems.
I'd basically agree with that. Though Michael Gove does make a convenient hate figure for this section of the electorate.
Interestingly the other part of Mike's equation that he often mentions is the need for the Tories to attract back those supporters they have lost to UKIP. If we do accept that the Tories are unlikely to be able to do anything about the LD - Lab switchers then actually Gove, as one of the ministers most appealing to the UKIP tendency, is probably more likely to help than hinder the Tories if he can draw back some of the UKIP support.
A point Tim Montgomerie made the other day, is that the Conservatives should be able to attract _all_ of UKIP's supporters, not just the Con>UKIP switchers.
''Try telling the parents of kids at Free Schools in marginals like Hammersmith that Gove is rubbish,you might not enjoy the response.''
But this the crux though, isn't it? is anybody asking parents?
What are you going to tell the parents of kids where no places are bein ceared because his ideological stand was that money should only go to create free school irrespective of whether extra places are needed in the area. This is a national scandal that Gove personally has created and which he is coming under fire for.
Gove is a twit. Always was, always will be.
The PB Romneys are always wrong. The PB Romneys never learn.
Surely Ireland has demonstrated the way forward. Lower government spending leads to growth not higher government spending. People may not like it, but its a fact and it is repeated worldwide.
The Irish Government scaled back the size of the fiscal adjustment in its latest Budget specifically to foster stronger economic growth so you may want to look elsewhere for your proof.
While that may be true, you need to remember that in 2010, the Irish government cut civil servants salaries by 8%.
Overall, monthly government spend fell from €7.4bn/quarter to under €6bn. That's a 20% reduction in government spending, in the teeth of a recession. (Normally in recessions, government spending naturally rises as payouts for unemployment increase.)
That is real austerity. This is the austerity that Paul Krugman said would not work.
And it's the real austerity that is - actually - working.
I'm starting to wonder if the mere existence of Michael Gove might lead, not only to a Labour government, but to Britain's first successful communist insurrection. Just the way his surname is spelt, so horribly reminiscent of Hove, will lead to inner city riots of a scale we have never witnessed hitherto.
A very good point.
"Gove" would be the way a Russian would pronounce "Hove".
The loss of support for the Lib Dems is all down to how the Lib Dems have behaved in Government not because of what Gove is doing.
Really? UK Polling Report shows an almost constant level of support for them from January 2011 which suggests that their behaviour in Government hasnt really had a significant impact one way or another.
I would suggest the damage was done in those first 6 or 8 months. They lost a good portion of their support simply for agreeing to join the coalition and then subsequently lost more by ditching certain key policies early on in Government. I am not using this to criticise them, simply pointing out that Lib Dem to Labour switching is due to actions by the Lib Dems, not those of the Tories as Mike seems to think.
''Try telling the parents of kids at Free Schools in marginals like Hammersmith that Gove is rubbish,you might not enjoy the response.''
But this the crux though, isn't it? is anybody asking parents?
What are you going to tell the parents of kids where no places are bein ceared because his ideological stand was that money should only go to create free school irrespective of whether extra places are needed in the area. This is a national scandal that Gove personally has created and which he is coming under fire for.
Gove is a twit. Always was, always will be.
The PB Romneys are always wrong. The PB Romneys never learn.
Mick, once upon a time you made useful and logical comments on this site. Now you are morphing into a Scottish Tim (or should that be Tam) with your silly little catchphrases.
A point Tim Montgomerie made the other day, is that the Conservatives should be able to attract _all_ of UKIP's supporters, not just the Con>UKIP switchers.
If that's true, then the New Conservatives could be on 45%. But I suspect it is not. The Conservative party has always been an uneasy alliance between all those who believe in small 'c' conservatism - that is the owners of capital, and the countryside, and all those who a vested interest in the system continuing.
The Conservative Party's modernisation kept the owners of capital (the metropolitan elite, if you like) on-board, but at the expense of losing other parts of the coalition. It is naive to think that adopting UKIP's policies wholesale would not involve losing the support of those who supported the 'modernisation' of the Conservative Party.
If the Liberal Democrats lost their left wing to Labour Party, then their right wing (c. 10% of the electorate) could join with the Conservative modernisers (c. 15%-20% of the electorate). You'd then have three roughly equal sized voting blocks, and a pretty much guaranteed Labour hegemony.
I know perfectly well Gove is a shallow, vapid Blair wannabe with almost as big a talent for alienating ordinary voters as your inept spinning, Seth O Logue.
It's love. "I love A Journey," Michael Gove has confessed to this newspaper. Tony Blair's memoirs are like no other book he has ever read, he declared. And Gove's passion is shared by many in the cabinet. David Cameron has admitted how much he enjoyed the book; George Osborne is said to have an audio version, which allows him to hear the author telling his story in his own voice. At No 10 and No 11 Blair is known as "The Master".
The chumocracy is full of these second rate Blair impersonators, quite possibly because they think it flatters the most inept and shallow Blair clone of all, Cammie Blair himself.
Good Evening. Glad to see that UKIP and Farage are grabbing todays headlines and leading the immigration debate.
From being the invisible party only a year ago, UKIP are not only visible, but vocal. At last the voters are beginning to understand and agree with the main UKIP policy, that we would be a better country, a stronger country and a more united country, without the Yoke of the EU round our collective necks.
The loss of support for the Lib Dems is all down to how the Lib Dems have behaved in Government not because of what Gove is doing.
Really? UK Polling Report shows an almost constant level of support for them from January 2011 which suggests that their behaviour in Government hasnt really had a significant impact one way or another.
I would suggest the damage was done in those first 6 or 8 months. They lost a good portion of their support simply for agreeing to join the coalition and then subsequently lost more by ditching certain key policies early on in Government. I am not using this to criticise them, simply pointing out that Lib Dem to Labour switching is due to actions by the Lib Dems, not those of the Tories as Mike seems to think.
Indeed. Ashcroft suggests that it's the very existence of this government which they object to, far more than what this government actually does.
That is real austerity. This is the austerity that Paul Krugman said would not work.
And it's the real austerity that is - actually - working.
It's definitely real austerity - given the position in relation to the banks Ireland had no alternative really. And it's true that an economic recovery appears to be on the horizon though those bank debts remain. But without a counterfactual can we really claim that austerity produced the economic recovery? If, for example, Ireland had been allowed to have a bail-in of bank creditors so that it didnt have to inject so much capital into the banking system and therefore could have gotten away with less austerity, do you think the economic recovery would not have happened? I have my doubts. When the Irish government finally had a tiny amount of wiggle room they opted for less rather than more austerity, I find that telling.
''Try telling the parents of kids at Free Schools in marginals like Hammersmith that Gove is rubbish,you might not enjoy the response.''
But this the crux though, isn't it? is anybody asking parents?
What are you going to tell the parents of kids where no places are bein ceared because his ideological stand was that money should only go to create free school irrespective of whether extra places are needed in the area. This is a national scandal that Gove personally has created and which he is coming under fire for.
Gove is a twit. Always was, always will be.
The PB Romneys are always wrong. The PB Romneys never learn.
Mick, once upon a time you made useful and logical comments on this site. Now you are morphing into a Scottish Tim (or should that be Tam) with your silly little catchphrases.
Why waste time explaining the polling to those who refuse to believe it? Hence PB Romneys. We know Gove has terrible personal polling and we know public sector workers are not some evil cadre of crypto-communists but ordinary voters who's vote matters hugely and who will obviously will use that vote with a close eye on how policies and politicians effect and treat their own chosen profession. As Mike points out UKIP are likely to benefit from that disaffection so I'm surprised you don't seem to understand their concerns or the value of policies which do not needlessly antagonise them just for the sake of posturing, which is precisely what Gove does.
As for tim, noticed just how many regular betting posts are on here now? I valued and praised that aspect of this site even though my expertise in the area was nowhere near that of the most prominent posters on the subject. Without that betting aspect this place becomes just another right wing blog comments section with a few dissenting voices.
A point Tim Montgomerie made the other day, is that the Conservatives should be able to attract _all_ of UKIP's supporters, not just the Con>UKIP switchers.
If that's true, then the New Conservatives could be on 45%. But I suspect it is not. The Conservative party has always been an uneasy alliance between all those who believe in small 'c' conservatism - that is the owners of capital, and the countryside, and all those who a vested interest in the system continuing.
The Conservative Party's modernisation kept the owners of capital (the metropolitan elite, if you like) on-board, but at the expense of losing other parts of the coalition. It is naive to think that adopting UKIP's policies wholesale would not involve losing the support of those who supported the 'modernisation' of the Conservative Party.
If the Liberal Democrats lost their left wing to Labour Party, then their right wing (c. 10% of the electorate) could join with the Conservative modernisers (c. 15%-20% of the electorate). You'd then have three roughly equal sized voting blocks, and a pretty much guaranteed Labour hegemony.
A good reason for the Right to support PR.
UKIP have boosted the right wing vote share to 45%, compared to 40% in 2010.
I would suggest the damage was done in those first 6 or 8 months. They lost a good portion of their support simply for agreeing to join the coalition and then subsequently lost more by ditching certain key policies early on in Government. I am not using this to criticise them, simply pointing out that Lib Dem to Labour switching is due to actions by the Lib Dems, not those of the Tories as Mike seems to think.
There's another problem, which is that the LibDems have not figured out how to differentiate themselves from the Tories in government without attacking the coalition. Too often they end up attacking themselves. After all, if the message is 'aren't those Tories dreadful?', then they are inviting the response from leftish former supporters: 'Yes, so why are you keeping them in government?'
Admittedly this is not an easy thing to get right - it's perhaps an inevitable problem for a junior coalition partner in a country used to adversarial politics. Only Danny Alexander (and sometimes Nick Clegg himself) seems to me to strike the right tone, not that it seems to help much even if they do.
Still, that's what they wanted: the New Politics, parties working together, etc etc.
There is no doubting Gove's sincerity. He wants us to have the best education system in the world. But he sends out very mixed messages. He says we have the best teachers we have ever had, but decries the colleges they were taught in as beacons of leftism; he lauds rigour, but plays fast and loose with facts; he applauds transparency, but keeps so much hidden; he tells teachers their job has never been more important, but downgrades their working conditions; he says he believes that teachers should be free to teach, yet places ever greater demands on their time; he preaches autonomy, but never has central control of education been stronger.
In the end, I guess, teachers judge Gove on what he does rather than on what he says. My wife - consistently rated good and outstanding, who I saw work long hours after school, at weekends, during the holidays for year after year- has had enough and left teaching at the end of last month. The presents and plaudits she received bore testament to the job she did. The teaching profession should not be losing people like her.
A very good post, SO.
I don't have strong views about Gove, one way or the other, but in general I tend to distrust politicians mucking about with education because they all do so for reasons unconnected with education. They all see it as a means to an end rather than as an end in itself. And, while this may seem old-fashioned to some, I do think that all - whatever jobs we do - should be well-educated: the dustbin man just as much as the computer programmer or engineer or lawyer or whoever.
My Great Great Great Uncle was the scientist John Tyndall - the bloke that discovered why the sky is blue and worked out the basic maths for what would later become fibre optics. He and a group of other scientists including Huxley and Faraday would deliver lectures to the Royal Society in London. They would then go out and deliver those same lectures to audiences of thousands of dockers or steel workers in halls around London. They believed that any man was capable of appreciating and understanding what they were teaching if they were given the opportunity.
Not entirely sure how many of the audience grasped the detail but I think it is absolutely right that we should strive for everyone to be as well educated as possible.
I still believe one of the greatest achievements of the Wilson government was the establishment of the Open University.
I would suggest the damage was done in those first 6 or 8 months. They lost a good portion of their support simply for agreeing to join the coalition and then subsequently lost more by ditching certain key policies early on in Government. I am not using this to criticise them, simply pointing out that Lib Dem to Labour switching is due to actions by the Lib Dems, not those of the Tories as Mike seems to think.
There's another problem, which is that the LibDems have not figured out how to differentiate themselves from the Tories in government without attacking the coalition. Too often they end up attacking themselves. After all, if the message is 'aren't those Tories dreadful?', then they are inviting the response from leftish former supporters: 'Yes, so why are you keeping them in government?'
Admittedly this is not an easy thing to get right - it's perhaps an inevitable problem for a junior coalition partner in a country used to adversarial politics. Only Danny Alexander (and sometimes Nick Clegg himself) seems to me to strike the right tone, not that it seems to help much even if they do.
Still, that's what they wanted: the New Politics, parties working together, etc etc.
The Liberals may as well pull the plug this year, from my reading of it they are getting no dividend from being in government. Quite the opposite in fact. They might pick up some extra Labour tactical votes for putting the Conservatives out on their behinds.
The Liberals may as well pull the plug this year, from my reading of it they are getting no dividend from being in government. Quite the opposite in fact. They might pick up some extra Labour tactical votes for putting the Conservatives out on their behinds.
That really would be the ultimate self-inflicted wound, killing off the one remaining argument in their favour, pleasing no-one, looking petulant, throwing away any hope of a dividend from an improving economy, and implictly accepting that they were wrong to join the coalition in the first place.
No, I think (as I've always thought) that they'll remain bound in the coalition until the GE.
That is real austerity. This is the austerity that Paul Krugman said would not work.
And it's the real austerity that is - actually - working.
It's definitely real austerity - given the position in relation to the banks Ireland had no alternative really. And it's true that an economic recovery appears to be on the horizon though those bank debts remain. But without a counterfactual can we really claim that austerity produced the economic recovery? If, for example, Ireland had been allowed to have a bail-in of bank creditors so that it didnt have to inject so much capital into the banking system and therefore could have gotten away with less austerity, do you think the economic recovery would not have happened? I have my doubts. When the Irish government finally had a tiny amount of wiggle room they opted for less rather than more austerity, I find that telling.
A bail-in would have made a return to the markets to secure funding that much more difficult, expensive and delayed.
Today you should be celebrating:
Ireland raised 3.75 billion euros ($5.11 billion) in a bond sale, exceeding its minimum target, as the nation returned to debt markets a month after exiting its international bailout.
The bonds were sold via banks to yield 3.543 percent, the National Treasury Management Agency in Dublin said today, down from a rate of 4.15 percent at a similar sale in March. The record-low yield for a 10-year debt auction was 4.21 percent set in August 2003, according to data compiled by Bloomberg going back to 2000. Ireland’s existing 10-year bond yield fell to the lowest for a benchmark security since January 2006.
And deployment of "stabilisers" to promote growth where public finances allow or external conditions force is an accepted tool of fiscal management. It should not be interpreted as a rejection of 'austerity economics' or a reversal of government plans.
Even St George planned a real terms increase in public spending this fiscal year to respond to doubts about growth at the time of the budget, as well as pressure from the IMF and EU.
''Try telling the parents of kids at Free Schools in marginals like Hammersmith that Gove is rubbish,you might not enjoy the response.''
But this the crux though, isn't it? is anybody asking parents?
What are you going to tell the parents of kids where no places are bein ceared because his ideological stand was that money should only go to create free school irrespective of whether extra places are needed in the area. This is a national scandal that Gove personally has created and which he is coming under fire for.
Gove is a twit. Always was, always will be.
The PB Romneys are always wrong. The PB Romneys never learn.
Mick, once upon a time you made useful and logical comments on this site. Now you are morphing into a Scottish Tim (or should that be Tam) with your silly little catchphrases.
Why waste time explaining the polling to those who refuse to believe it? Hence PB Romneys. We know Gove has terrible personal polling and we know public sector workers are not some evil cadre of crypto-communists but ordinary voters who's vote matters hugely and who will obviously will use that vote with a close eye on how policies and politicians effect and treat their own chosen profession. As Mike points out UKIP are likely to benefit from that disaffection so I'm surprised you don't seem to understand their concerns or the value of policies which do not needlessly antagonise them just for the sake of posturing, which is precisely what Gove does.
As for tim, noticed just how many regular betting posts are on here now? I valued and praised that aspect of this site even though my expertise in the area was nowhere near that of the most prominent posters on the subject. Without that betting aspect this place becomes just another right wing blog comments section with a few dissenting voices.
Most of Tim's betting posts involved making completely ludicrously worded challenges that no one in their right mind would accept. And on the odd occasion people did try to pin him down to a proper bet he would run a mile. The fact we have had two long term posters now return to PB after he left is a great thing as far as I am concerned.
On the question of UKIP and Gove, I am far more interested in whether what Gove is doing is right or not for our education system than what impact it has upon UKIP. Given that I believe his educational reforms are both necessary and right then I would rather see UKIP lose a few votes than Gove be diverted from his good work.
@Richard_Tyndall "My Great Great Great Uncle was the scientist John Tyndall - the bloke that discovered why the sky is blue..."
Great stuff. I am not familiar with the full history of it, but I will check it out. I learned that the sky is blue, and sunsets red, owing to Rayleigh scattering together with Einstein's observations on random thermal motion (so that molecules scatter essentially incoherently). At Bristol the physicists are located at the Royal Fort, Tyndall Avenue. Maybe there's a connection?
There is no doubting Gove's sincerity. He wants us to have the best education system in the world. But he sends out very mixed messages. He says we have the best teachers we have ever had, but decries the colleges they were taught in as beacons of leftism; he lauds rigour, but plays fast and loose with facts; he applauds transparency, but keeps so much hidden; he tells teachers their job has never been more important, but downgrades their working conditions; he says he believes that teachers should be free to teach, yet places ever greater demands on their time; he preaches autonomy, but never has central control of education been stronger.
In the end, I guess, teachers judge Gove on what he does rather than on what he says. My wife - consistently rated good and outstanding, who I saw work long hours after school, at weekends, during the holidays for year after year- has had enough and left teaching at the end of last month. The presents and plaudits she received bore testament to the job she did. The teaching profession should not be losing people like her.
A very good post, SO.
I don't have strong views about Gove, one way or the other, but in general I tend to distrust politicians mucking about with education because they all do so for reasons unconnected with education. They all see it as a means to an end rather than as an end in itself. And, while this may seem old-fashioned to some, I do think that all - whatever jobs we do - should be well-educated: the dustbin man just as much as the computer programmer or engineer or lawyer or whoever.
My Great Great Great Uncle was the scientist John Tyndall - the bloke that discovered why the sky is blue and worked out the basic maths for what would later become fibre optics. He and a group of other scientists including Huxley and Faraday would deliver lectures to the Royal Society in London. They would then go out and deliver those same lectures to audiences of thousands of dockers or steel workers in halls around London. They believed that any man was capable of appreciating and understanding what they were teaching if they were given the opportunity.
Not entirely sure how many of the audience grasped the detail but I think it is absolutely right that we should strive for everyone to be as well educated as possible.
I still believe one of the greatest achievements of the Wilson government was the establishment of the Open University.
One of the saddest features of recent years has been the (apparently) Governmental requirement on the OU to increase fees. Another has been the reduction in funding for Evening Classes in other than "technical" subjects.
"I still believe one of the greatest achievements of the Wilson government was the establishment of the Open University."
Mr. Tyndall,
Spot on. And what a shame it is now turning itself into just another Uni and pricing out working folk (£2562 for an humanities course, how many people can afford that out of taxed income?).
There is still the Gresham College in the City of London. Superb lectures, generally free for all comers, but it don't provide recognised courses of study or qualifications and not everyone is in striking distance of the City.
I would suggest the damage was done in those first 6 or 8 months. They lost a good portion of their support simply for agreeing to join the coalition and then subsequently lost more by ditching certain key policies early on in Government. I am not using this to criticise them, simply pointing out that Lib Dem to Labour switching is due to actions by the Lib Dems, not those of the Tories as Mike seems to think.
There's another problem, which is that the LibDems have not figured out how to differentiate themselves from the Tories in government without attacking the coalition. Too often they end up attacking themselves. After all, if the message is 'aren't those Tories dreadful?', then they are inviting the response from leftish former supporters: 'Yes, so why are you keeping them in government?'
Admittedly this is not an easy thing to get right - it's perhaps an inevitable problem for a junior coalition partner in a country used to adversarial politics. Only Danny Alexander (and sometimes Nick Clegg himself) seems to me to strike the right tone, not that it seems to help much even if they do.
Still, that's what they wanted: the New Politics, parties working together, etc etc.
The Liberals may as well pull the plug this year, from my reading of it they are getting no dividend from being in government. Quite the opposite in fact. They might pick up some extra Labour tactical votes for putting the Conservatives out on their behinds.
They might also lose some of the remaining support they have now.
If there was any obvious way for the LDs to increase their support, I think they'd have done it by now.
I'm starting to wonder if the mere existence of Michael Gove might lead, not only to a Labour government, but to Britain's first successful communist insurrection. Just the way his surname is spelt, so horribly reminiscent of Hove, will lead to inner city riots of a scale we have never witnessed hitherto.
Indeed - Gove should be made illegal at the first convenient moment. For now, slapping an ASBO on him will suffice.
As for those saying "well what about parents" - Labour have a considerable lead over the Conservatives on the issue of Education. So that's that settled yeah?
Most of Tim's betting posts involved making completely ludicrously worded challenges that no one in their right mind would accept. And on the odd occasion people did try to pin him down to a proper bet he would run a mile.
No they weren't and you know they weren't. They are the kind of posts he made to those who regularly attacked him and his betting stances and were always outnumbered by the tips and just the general raising of the betting aspects of one political story or another.
The fact we have had two long term posters now return to PB after he left is a great thing as far as I am concerned.
Who didn't leave because of tim no matter what their pitiful excuses are now. I remember why they left in detail and could quite probably find their posts on the subject.
On the question of UKIP and Gove, I am far more interested in whether what Gove is doing is right or not for our education system than what impact it has upon UKIP. Given that I believe his educational reforms are both necessary and right then I would rather see UKIP lose a few votes than Gove be diverted from his good work.
Someone obsessed with posturing is hugely unlikely to have the best interests of the ministry he currently represents in mind. Currently that's the education system. Gove would be no different in his peculiar stances in any other department. If he were Foreign Sec he would adopt a pretty rabid NeoCon line and go out of his way to antagonise those who disagreed with that. A fact which was underlined by his massive hissy fit against tory rebels after Cameron's Syria debacle. He's just not very good and his team of rabid spads are an extension of his pointlessly antagonistic persona.
There's another problem, which is that the LibDems have not figured out how to differentiate themselves from the Tories in government without attacking the coalition. Too often they end up attacking themselves. After all, if the message is 'aren't those Tories dreadful?', then they are inviting the response from leftish former supporters: 'Yes, so why are you keeping them in government?'
Admittedly this is not an easy thing to get right - it's perhaps an inevitable problem for a junior coalition partner in a country used to adversarial politics. Only Danny Alexander (and sometimes Nick Clegg himself) seems to me to strike the right tone, not that it seems to help much even if they do.
Still, that's what they wanted: the New Politics, parties working together, etc etc.
To be honest, I think the country has done well from the Coalition but the intra-party tensions (rather than the inter-party tensions) have been more problematic. Never forget it was Cameron rather than Clegg who made the Coalition on the Friday afternoon but it was easy to take a Conservative Party desperate for office after more than a decade in Opposition into a new arrangement.
As OGH has pointed out, there were and have been casualties - opportunities for advancement are limited in a Government where another party holds junior Ministerial posts. That has, I think, caused problems within the Conservative ranks while there has always been a minority of Tories who have been diametrically opposed to the Coalition and have wanted it to fail. Perversely, again as OGH has pointed out, the more unpopular the Government became, the less likely it was to split as hanging tgether is always better than hanging separately.
The Party is not what it was but is more in the liberal tradition than at any time since Jo Grimond. As a pro-EU liberal party it has a narrow niche at present but as others have pointed out as the only truly pro-EU party in town it has scope to broaden its appeal. As for the future post-2015, I can't see another Coalition in its current form though I do think the Lab-LD relationship is interesting and one to watch.
Most of Tim's betting posts involved making completely ludicrously worded challenges that no one in their right mind would accept. And on the odd occasion people did try to pin him down to a proper bet he would run a mile.
No they weren't and you know they weren't. They are the kind of posts he made to those who regularly attacked him and his betting stances and were always outnumbered by the tips and just the general raising of the betting aspects of one political story or another.
The fact we have had two long term posters now return to PB after he left is a great thing as far as I am concerned.
Who didn't leave because of tim no matter what their pitiful excuses are now. I remember why they left in detail and could quite probably find their posts on the subject.
On the question of UKIP and Gove, I am far more interested in whether what Gove is doing is right or not for our education system than what impact it has upon UKIP. Given that I believe his educational reforms are both necessary and right then I would rather see UKIP lose a few votes than Gove be diverted from his good work.
Someone obsessed with posturing is hugely unlikely to have the best interests of the ministry he currently represents in mind. Currently that's the education system. Gove would be no different in his peculiar stances in any other department. If he were Foreign Sec he would adopt a pretty rabid NeoCon line and go out of his way to antagonise those who disagreed with that. A fact which was underlined by his massive hissy fit against tory rebels after Cameron's Syria debacle. He's just not very good and his team of rabid spads are an extension of his pointlessly antagonistic persona.
Nope, your revisionism is very sad to see. Tim would make those kind of bets with anyone he disagreed with whether he was being attacked or not. He used them as an attempt to shut down arguments where he was out of his depth so he could later claim that people didn't have the courage of their convictions even though no one in their right mind would ever accept on of his bets on the terms he framed them.
As for your views on Gove, clearly they are based upon your own political views of education and say far more about you than they do about him.
There's another problem, which is that the LibDems have not figured out how to differentiate themselves from the Tories in government without attacking the coalition. Too often they end up attacking themselves. After all, if the message is 'aren't those Tories dreadful?', then they are inviting the response from leftish former supporters: 'Yes, so why are you keeping them in government?'
Admittedly this is not an easy thing to get right - it's perhaps an inevitable problem for a junior coalition partner in a country used to adversarial politics. Only Danny Alexander (and sometimes Nick Clegg himself) seems to me to strike the right tone, not that it seems to help much even if they do.
Still, that's what they wanted: the New Politics, parties working together, etc etc.
As a pro-EU liberal party it has a narrow niche at present but as others have pointed out as the only truly pro-EU party in town it has scope to broaden its appeal.
Unless I've missed something, Labour are also pro-EU, and the Conservatives opposition to the EU seems to be purely rhetorical.
How many people could pick Gove out as a Cabinet Minister in recent surveys. I would be surprised if he he is more recognised than Boris.
Surprised?????!!!!!
I would be absolutely astonished!
Show a pic of Gove and Boris to 100 members of the public and I reckon it would be 70/20 Boris over Gove... and I think I have underestimated Boris and overestimated Gove!
(ie 30 wouldnt recognise Boris & 80 wouldn't know Gove)
He used them as an attempt to shut down arguments where he was out of his depth so he could later claim that people didn't have the courage of their convictions even though no one in their right mind would ever accept on of his bets on the terms he framed them.
That's just not true. Afaicr the people on here who do bet are unanimous about tim's straightness on betting matters, and to bet with him. I have a couple of bets with him myself, the framing of which I'm entirely happy with.
Most of Tim's betting posts involved making completely ludicrously worded challenges that no one in their right mind would accept. And on the odd occasion people did try to pin him down to a proper bet he would run a mile.
No they weren't and you know they weren't. They are the kind of posts he made to those who regularly attacked him and his betting stances and were always outnumbered by the tips and just the general raising of the betting aspects of one political story or another.
The fact we have had two long term posters now return to PB after he left is a great thing as far as I am concerned.
Who didn't leave because of tim no matter what their pitiful excuses are now. I remember why they left in detail and could quite probably find their posts on the subject.
On the question of UKIP and Gove, I am far more interested in whether what Gove is doing is right or not for our education system than what impact it has upon UKIP. Given that I believe his educational reforms are both necessary and right then I would rather see UKIP lose a few votes than Gove be diverted from his good work.
Someone obsessed with posturing is hugely unlikely to have the best interests of the ministry he currently represents in mind. Currently that's the education system. Gove would be no different in his peculiar stances in any other department. If he were Foreign Sec he would adopt a pretty rabid NeoCon line and go out of his way to antagonise those who disagreed with that. A fact which was underlined by his massive hissy fit against tory rebels after Cameron's Syria debacle. He's just not very good and his team of rabid spads are an extension of his pointlessly antagonistic persona.
I didn't hate tim although we sometimes argued, but I reckon you are wrong about Socrates (if he is one of the returnees you are talking about)
Just as a general comment, I think pb gets a bit boring when we start to debate each others' reprehensible characters. I do it too from time to time but always wish I hadn't. I'm sure it alienates lurkers from posting when we do.
A point Tim Montgomerie made the other day, is that the Conservatives should be able to attract _all_ of UKIP's supporters, not just the Con>UKIP switchers.
If that's true, then the New Conservatives could be on 45%. But I suspect it is not. The Conservative party has always been an uneasy alliance between all those who believe in small 'c' conservatism - that is the owners of capital, and the countryside, and all those who a vested interest in the system continuing.
The Conservative Party's modernisation kept the owners of capital (the metropolitan elite, if you like) on-board, but at the expense of losing other parts of the coalition. It is naive to think that adopting UKIP's policies wholesale would not involve losing the support of those who supported the 'modernisation' of the Conservative Party.
If the Liberal Democrats lost their left wing to Labour Party, then their right wing (c. 10% of the electorate) could join with the Conservative modernisers (c. 15%-20% of the electorate). You'd then have three roughly equal sized voting blocks, and a pretty much guaranteed Labour hegemony.
The full Montgomerie quote was:
"Ignore people saying UKIP winning non-Tory voters. Completely misses point. An anti-establishment Tory Party would win many of those votes."
Most of Tim's betting posts involved making completely ludicrously worded challenges that no one in their right mind would accept. And on the odd occasion people did try to pin him down to a proper bet he would run a mile.
No they weren't and you know they weren't. They are the kind of posts he made to those who regularly attacked him and his betting stances and were always outnumbered by the tips and just the general raising of the betting aspects of one political story or another.
The fact we have had two long term posters now return to PB after he left is a great thing as far as I am concerned.
Who didn't leave because of tim no matter what their pitiful excuses are now. I remember why they left in detail and could quite probably find their posts on the subject.
On the question of UKIP and Gove, I am far more interested in whether what Gove is doing is right or not for our education system than what impact it has upon UKIP. Given that I believe his educational reforms are both necessary and right then I would rather see UKIP lose a few votes than Gove be diverted from his good work.
Someone obsessed with posturing is hugely unlikely to have the best interests of the ministry he currently represents in mind. Currently that's the education system. Gove would be no different in his peculiar stances in any other department. If he were Foreign Sec he would adopt a pretty rabid NeoCon line and go out of his way to antagonise those who disagreed with that. A fact which was underlined by his massive hissy fit against tory rebels after Cameron's Syria debacle. He's just not very good and his team of rabid spads are an extension of his pointlessly antagonistic persona.
I didn't hate tim although we sometimes argued, but I reckon you are wrong about Socrates (if he is one of the returnees you are talking about)
He left because of tim, no doubt..
Has Socrates returned? That's good news.
He left when tim compared him to a child molester.
I hope neither of his pigs (that he so wittily named Anne and Frank) are involved.
There's something intrinsically abhorrent about nationalists and their parties.
You're not usually so harsh on your pin-up boy.
'UK Nationalist Farage Threatens Cameron on Migrants
British nationalist UKIP leader Nigel Farage has stated his party will cause "an earthquake" in politics if the UK government does not stop Bulgarian and Romanian migrants from entering the country.'
I hope neither of his pigs (that he so wittily named Anne and Frank) are involved.
There's something intrinsically abhorrent about nationalists and their parties.
You're not usually so harsh on your pin-up boy.
'UK Nationalist Farage Threatens Cameron on Migrants
British nationalist UKIP leader Nigel Farage has stated his party will cause "an earthquake" in politics if the UK government does not stop Bulgarian and Romanian migrants from entering the country.'
No word yet on whether Gerry himself will face charges for failing to report these crimes to the police. Gerry is a gift to the Irish Labour Party (and my 16/1 bet on Sinn Fein coming 4th at the next Irish GE!).
@Richard_Tyndall "My Great Great Great Uncle was the scientist John Tyndall - the bloke that discovered why the sky is blue..."
Great stuff. I am not familiar with the full history of it, but I will check it out. I learned that the sky is blue, and sunsets red, owing to Rayleigh scattering together with Einstein's observations on random thermal motion (so that molecules scatter essentially incoherently). At Bristol the physicists are located at the Royal Fort, Tyndall Avenue. Maybe there's a connection?
Yes. Interesting. Rayleigh scattering is simpler than Tyndall scattering in that the former applies to small particles (eg air molecules), for which a simple (Rayleigh) formula exists. The latter applies to much larger colloidal particles the scattering from which general properties can be stated but not in detail, for each case may be different. The general frequency dependence is similar in both cases so the "sky is blue" explanation works for both, together with Einstein's thermal randomness contribution .
Comments
'"Just about everything he does is seen as a denigration of teachers who loathe him."
So in other words he's doing a great job.
Gove upsetting teachers that would never vote Tory,clearly a disaster.
In the end, I guess, teachers judge Gove on what he does rather than on what he says. My wife - consistently rated good and outstanding, who I saw work long hours after school, at weekends, during the holidays for year after year- has had enough and left teaching at the end of last month. The presents and plaudits she received bore testament to the job she did. The teaching profession should not be losing people like her.
It is called FPTP
No civil servant is reported as living in Maldon
It is confusing, this politics malarkey.
I can confirm that for Population Survey (my previous post) is the place where they lived though.
If Thatcher had inherited the financial situation in 2010 that the current government did do you really think she wouldn't have been a bit more right wing than the current leadership of the tory party. After 13 years of an increasingly bloated and often unaccountable public sector where non-jobs were everywhere her axe would have been much harsher.
On this site sometimes its like the financial position this country is in is not relevant.
In my perverted way I sometimes look forward to the next Labour Government to see what a total hash they will make of it just for the fun of the comments on here.
Raising taxes and increasing spending which is what they will do does not work. France is just one of many countries that has demonstrated this.
I watched a TUC women on News24 last night spouting the nonsense that increasing public spending will lead to growth and thereby reduce the deficit. How these people can go unchallenged when making such statements is beyond me. They should be asked for examples of when this has happened. Perhaps the early 2000s?, massive increases in public spending did not lead to growth above normal and the deficit grew. Surely Ireland has demonstrated the way forward. Lower government spending leads to growth not higher government spending. People may not like it, but its a fact and it is repeated worldwide.
Expect to hear a lot about the biased lefty BBC/Guardian/Sky/UKIP conspiracy next year
I don't have strong views about Gove, one way or the other, but in general I tend to distrust politicians mucking about with education because they all do so for reasons unconnected with education. They all see it as a means to an end rather than as an end in itself. And, while this may seem old-fashioned to some, I do think that all - whatever jobs we do - should be well-educated: the dustbin man just as much as the computer programmer or engineer or lawyer or whoever.
'Yes it is a disaster for the Tories and you don't see it. Think about that for the moment. Yes many were not CON supporters but if they switch from LD to LAB the blues are f**ked.'
You only focus on teachers, there are many more parents than teachers.
Try telling the parents of kids at Free Schools in marginals like Hammersmith that Gove is rubbish,you might not enjoy the response.
Today's LibDem->Lab switchers, in my experience, were as much LibDems as the rest of the party's supporters. They were not "Labour Lite" any more than they were "Conservative Lite". They liked what the LibDems stood for, and they voted for it.
In 2010, they may even have been reassured that Cameron seemed all right - "vote blue, get green" is a reassuring message to LibDems. Brown was not appealing. So if a Con/LibDem coalition happened, then it wouldn't be too bad, would it?
They were not expecting Gove and Lansley's continuous revolution. And yet that is what they got; and that is why they won't be voting LibDem again in a hurry.
@john_zims: I would be interested to see the numbers on the number of parents with kids at Free Schools, vs the number of teachers, in key marginals. I suspect the latter is considerably larger - there aren't many Free Schools yet - but could be wrong. I don't think you can assume the parents at Al-Madinah will count in your favourable analysis.
But this the crux though, isn't it? is anybody asking parents?
Contrary to most reports, teaching in Britain has never been in better health. That may seem an obtuse observation to make as the government overhauls everything, unions press on with their forlorn strikes and teachers everywhere shelve the suncream and dust off the lesson plans, but it's true.
The quality of recruits is phenomenally high, the pay isn't bad, the profession's status is rising, schools have never been better equipped and teachers' pensions remain generous compared with most. Students have never been more motivated and parents rarely so supportive. Most encouraging of all are the widespread acceptance that a "satisfactory" education isn't really good enough and the determination of schools and teachers to take ownership of their profession, sharing ideas and best practice in ways unknown only a few years ago.
..
Some things remain a mystery. I've never properly grasped how teachers, with their instinctive distrust of change, have such a boundless capacity to accommodate it once it's arrived. And why on earth is a profession of natural optimists saddled with such miserable representation?
It is entirely fitting that the country's most curmudgeonly union has the world's most unmelodious acronym: NASUWT. The union behaves less like a voice of the profession and more like some vast grumble of janitors, constantly preoccupied with the temperature of rooms but unconcerned by what actually happens in them - this teaching malarkey.
The fact is that teaching, for all its bureaucratic indignities, petty frustrations and ceaseless initiatives, is a more respected profession and a more attractive graduate destination than it has been for many years
Gerard Kelly, retiring editor of the Times Educational Supplement, 30 Aug 2013
http://www.tes.co.uk/article.aspx?storycode=6352731
What has happened to their growth?
Did higher Government spending do them any good?
I think you'll find that teachers would like it to be easier for their poorly performing colleagues to be dealt with, as they have to cover up for them by taking their classes, doing their marking and planning, and so on.
permanent contracts (also called "jobs for life" in the public stereotype):
3,036,712
Biggest sectors: Schools 873,19; NHS 672,051; Local Government 574,394; Central Government Departments 160,778; Armed Forces 148,032; Universities 101,056
Adding fixed term contracts, interim staff, etc:
3,381,442
Obviously problem for international comparisons is what is considered public employment For ex English colleges not being considered it anymore. In Italy we have railways, post offices, electricity company which have shareholders now and so they are not public sector for a statistical point of view...even if the state holds the majority of the shares....
The loss of support for the Lib Dems is all down to how the Lib Dems have behaved in Government not because of what Gove is doing. I very much doubt that most of the switch is tactical voting. People are voting Labour instead of Lib Dem because they prefer Labour to the Lib Dems. It is that simple.
And yes this is probably a very bad thing for the Tories. But to try and claim this is Gove's fault is simply a reflection of your own dislike of the man rather than accepting it is down to the sense of betrayal felt by many Lib Dems.
The top 1% of earners pay 30% of all the tax paid.
How much would you like it to be?
40%?
50%?
' I would be interested to see the numbers on the number of parents with kids at Free Schools, vs the number of teachers, in key marginals. I suspect the latter is considerably larger - there aren't many Free Schools yet -'
You may well be right,but if you take Hammersmith as an example it's now had 4 years of student intake,whereas as most of the teachers don't live in the borough.
If Gove's Free schools are such a disaster ,someone needs to explain why most are so massively oversubscribed.
Labour's record was to massively spend & at the same time push English schools down the international league tables and of course we have and even bigger car crash in Wales.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/voting-intention-2
I don;t know. My point is that asking teachers is not the only way to gauge how voters feel about education under the coalition.
We should be asking parents.
Gove will no more cost the Tories the general election than will the front page of today's "Daily Mirror". Education ministers very rarely influence the course of election campaigns and 2015 will be no different.
You are probably correct in that, but I struggle to recall a campaign by the teaching unions to make it easier to get rid of sub-standard teachers.
A few posts ago you made a comment about the teaching profession becoming as a whole demoralised with the hint that this was because of current policies. Well, it is not a new phenomena. It wasn't that long ago that teachers were leaving the profession because of the new ideas that were then being introduced.
Personally, I think until we can get politics out of education (and that means forgetting about trying to use schools and universities as agents of social engineering) the cycle is just going to repeat. Regrettably, the vested interests from politicians and the educational establishment are just too strong for that to happen. So we will carry on with re-organisations and strife and all the time standards will continue to slip.
The Lib Dems and Greens may influence such voters, but it would be as much of a waste of time for the Conservatives to try to do so as it would be for Labour to try to win my support.
The Conservatives have to focus on those Lib Dem voters who've shifted rightwards, and UKIP supporters.
'How many of the Free Schools' parents live in Hammersmith?
At least 50% from Hammersmith & Fulham.
Repeat x100.
The PB Romneys are always wrong. The PB Romneys never learn.
Overall, monthly government spend fell from €7.4bn/quarter to under €6bn. That's a 20% reduction in government spending, in the teeth of a recession. (Normally in recessions, government spending naturally rises as payouts for unemployment increase.)
That is real austerity. This is the austerity that Paul Krugman said would not work.
And it's the real austerity that is - actually - working.
"Gove" would be the way a Russian would pronounce "Hove".
I don't think Pork has thought of that.
The Conservative Party's modernisation kept the owners of capital (the metropolitan elite, if you like) on-board, but at the expense of losing other parts of the coalition. It is naive to think that adopting UKIP's policies wholesale would not involve losing the support of those who supported the 'modernisation' of the Conservative Party.
If the Liberal Democrats lost their left wing to Labour Party, then their right wing (c. 10% of the electorate) could join with the Conservative modernisers (c. 15%-20% of the electorate). You'd then have three roughly equal sized voting blocks, and a pretty much guaranteed Labour hegemony.
Nick Griffin showing how to eat on the cheap when times get tough...
http://youtu.be/K8_HThEYP2o
Glad to see that UKIP and Farage are grabbing todays headlines and leading the immigration debate.
From being the invisible party only a year ago, UKIP are not only visible, but vocal. At last the voters are beginning to understand and agree with the main UKIP policy, that we would be a better country, a stronger country and a more united country, without the Yoke of the EU round our collective necks.
Why waste time explaining the polling to those who refuse to believe it? Hence PB Romneys. We know Gove has terrible personal polling and we know public sector workers are not some evil cadre of crypto-communists but ordinary voters who's vote matters hugely and who will obviously will use that vote with a close eye on how policies and politicians effect and treat their own chosen profession. As Mike points out UKIP are likely to benefit from that disaffection so I'm surprised you don't seem to understand their concerns or the value of policies which do not needlessly antagonise them just for the sake of posturing, which is precisely what Gove does.
As for tim, noticed just how many regular betting posts are on here now? I valued and praised that aspect of this site even though my expertise in the area was nowhere near that of the most prominent posters on the subject. Without that betting aspect this place becomes just another right wing blog comments section with a few dissenting voices.
UKIP have boosted the right wing vote share to 45%, compared to 40% in 2010.
Admittedly this is not an easy thing to get right - it's perhaps an inevitable problem for a junior coalition partner in a country used to adversarial politics. Only Danny Alexander (and sometimes Nick Clegg himself) seems to me to strike the right tone, not that it seems to help much even if they do.
Still, that's what they wanted: the New Politics, parties working together, etc etc.
Not entirely sure how many of the audience grasped the detail but I think it is absolutely right that we should strive for everyone to be as well educated as possible.
I still believe one of the greatest achievements of the Wilson government was the establishment of the Open University.
No, I think (as I've always thought) that they'll remain bound in the coalition until the GE.
Today you should be celebrating:
Ireland raised 3.75 billion euros ($5.11 billion) in a bond sale, exceeding its minimum target, as the nation returned to debt markets a month after exiting its international bailout.
The bonds were sold via banks to yield 3.543 percent, the National Treasury Management Agency in Dublin said today, down from a rate of 4.15 percent at a similar sale in March. The record-low yield for a 10-year debt auction was 4.21 percent set in August 2003, according to data compiled by Bloomberg going back to 2000. Ireland’s existing 10-year bond yield fell to the lowest for a benchmark security since January 2006.
And deployment of "stabilisers" to promote growth where public finances allow or external conditions force is an accepted tool of fiscal management. It should not be interpreted as a rejection of 'austerity economics' or a reversal of government plans.
Even St George planned a real terms increase in public spending this fiscal year to respond to doubts about growth at the time of the budget, as well as pressure from the IMF and EU.
On the question of UKIP and Gove, I am far more interested in whether what Gove is doing is right or not for our education system than what impact it has upon UKIP. Given that I believe his educational reforms are both necessary and right then I would rather see UKIP lose a few votes than Gove be diverted from his good work.
"My Great Great Great Uncle was the scientist John Tyndall - the bloke that discovered why the sky is blue..."
Great stuff. I am not familiar with the full history of it, but I will check it out. I learned that the sky is blue, and sunsets red, owing to Rayleigh scattering together with Einstein's observations on random thermal motion (so that molecules scatter essentially incoherently).
At Bristol the physicists are located at the Royal Fort, Tyndall Avenue. Maybe there's a connection?
Another has been the reduction in funding for Evening Classes in other than "technical" subjects.
We're getting some regional Scottish polling on the Indy ref.
ComRes polling for ITV Border..
Asked the question voters will be asked on 18th September this year, of those who said they were likely to vote:
24% of South of Scotland voters said they would vote YES
59% of South of Scotland voters said they would vote NO
17% of South of Scotland voters said they did not know how they would vote
http://www.itv.com/news/border/2014-01-07/59-of-south-of-scotland-voters-would-vote-no-to-independence/
ComRes Data tables up here
http://comres.co.uk/poll/1072/itv-border-scottish-independence-poll.htm
Mr. Tyndall,
Spot on. And what a shame it is now turning itself into just another Uni and pricing out working folk (£2562 for an humanities course, how many people can afford that out of taxed income?).
There is still the Gresham College in the City of London. Superb lectures, generally free for all comers, but it don't provide recognised courses of study or qualifications and not everyone is in striking distance of the City.
If there was any obvious way for the LDs to increase their support, I think they'd have done it by now.
As for those saying "well what about parents" - Labour have a considerable lead over the Conservatives on the issue of Education. So that's that settled yeah?
No they weren't and you know they weren't. They are the kind of posts he made to those who regularly attacked him and his betting stances and were always outnumbered by the tips and just the general raising of the betting aspects of one political story or another.
Who didn't leave because of tim no matter what their pitiful excuses are now. I remember why they left in detail and could quite probably find their posts on the subject. Someone obsessed with posturing is hugely unlikely to have the best interests of the ministry he currently represents in mind. Currently that's the education system. Gove would be no different in his peculiar stances in any other department. If he were Foreign Sec he would adopt a pretty rabid NeoCon line and go out of his way to antagonise those who disagreed with that. A fact which was underlined by his massive hissy fit against tory rebels after Cameron's Syria debacle. He's just not very good and his team of rabid spads are an extension of his pointlessly antagonistic persona.
As OGH has pointed out, there were and have been casualties - opportunities for advancement are limited in a Government where another party holds junior Ministerial posts. That has, I think, caused problems within the Conservative ranks while there has always been a minority of Tories who have been diametrically opposed to the Coalition and have wanted it to fail. Perversely, again as OGH has pointed out, the more unpopular the Government became, the less likely it was to split as hanging tgether is always better than hanging separately.
The Party is not what it was but is more in the liberal tradition than at any time since Jo Grimond. As a pro-EU liberal party it has a narrow niche at present but as others have pointed out as the only truly pro-EU party in town it has scope to broaden its appeal. As for the future post-2015, I can't see another Coalition in its current form though I do think the Lab-LD relationship is interesting and one to watch.
As for your views on Gove, clearly they are based upon your own political views of education and say far more about you than they do about him.
I would be absolutely astonished!
Show a pic of Gove and Boris to 100 members of the public and I reckon it would be 70/20 Boris over Gove... and I think I have underestimated Boris and overestimated Gove!
(ie 30 wouldnt recognise Boris & 80 wouldn't know Gove)
Go on then, Mr. P. Find mine, oh, and tell me in detail why I abjured this site for so long.
He left because of tim, no doubt..
"Ignore people saying UKIP winning non-Tory voters. Completely misses point. An anti-establishment Tory Party would win many of those votes."
twitter.com/TimMontgomerie/status/419596498293501952
He thinks the Conservative Party's problem is that they are seen as the party of the rich.
"Cameron pursued the wrong kind of modernisation and we ended up as a party of white-collar liberalism rather than blue-collar conservatism."
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/apr/12/david-cameron-no-alternative-yet
Be honest, you love it really
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TytGOeiW0aE
He left when tim compared him to a child molester.
It's a Gove bashing thread.
'UK Nationalist Farage Threatens Cameron on Migrants
British nationalist UKIP leader Nigel Farage has stated his party will cause "an earthquake" in politics if the UK government does not stop Bulgarian and Romanian migrants from entering the country.'
http://tinyurl.com/qagbeta
Still, they could be eating their stripy blazers come May 2015, as we head deeper into Europe.
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/liam-adams-appeals-conviction-for-raping-daughter-1.1647402
No word yet on whether Gerry himself will face charges for failing to report these crimes to the police. Gerry is a gift to the Irish Labour Party (and my 16/1 bet on Sinn Fein coming 4th at the next Irish GE!).