FWIW I've had an on balance positive report from a Labour source who I trust in Batley and Spen. I still think the Tories are favourites, but I wouldn't back them at less than 1.8.
If Labour does hold it, I think it will change the media narrative somewhat.
It just shows what freakish and unpredictable things by-elections are. Like mid-term opinion polls, anoraks like obsessing over them, but they mean absolutely nothing at the next general election.
The polar example of this may be the Ryedale by-election of 1986. The Alliance won it from the Conservatives on a 20 point swing, only slightly less than in C&A. And then, the following year, the Conservatives won it back. It, and its successor seat, have been Conservative ever since.
So transforming the way we are looking at the next election on the basis of one by-election two or three years out is completely crazy.
After reading the thread here I bet on Labour holding Batley and Spen, but I pulled out of the market after I woke up this morning to the headline news that the Education Select Committee believes schools have long neglected white children. This is how the Tories win - by playing the race card. The race card is a trump card. (See what I did there.) Most likely the Tories will gain Batley and Spen and they are value at 1.45. Thumping away with this kind of story - what is essentially a call for "white rights" - could increase the Tories' Commons majority at the next GE too.
Time to emigrate?
What rubbish. There is clearly an issue with underachievement in this demographic, and there has been for a while, and addressing it is exactly what is needed to stop people playing the race card.
Or would you prefer this sector of society was allowed to keep falling behind as long as your comfy worldview wasn’t challenged ?
I just don't understand what their race has to do with this. They're not getting treated badly at school because they're white. In fact I doubt they're getting treated badly at school at all, except to the extent that all state school kids in this country are let down by a lack of money and focus from the government and the establishment, who mostly go private and so have very little skin in the game. Their problems come from a lack of engagement in education, often rooted in their parents' experiences of school, sometimes compounded by other issues that their parents have. Plus poverty, which makes everything harder. (BTW before anyone accuses me of being an out of touch elitist, I went to a comprehensive school that was almost entirely white so the so-called white working class is not some kind of unknown exotic species to me).
I disagree with that and I think a lot has to do with the attitude of teachers. As @RochdalePioneers so helpfully demonstrated a few days back, there is a view on the left, especially amongst let's say the more educated parts including the teaching profession, that WWC kids are essentially thick, racist and therefore not worth saving, and the problems they have in their lives are the faults of them and their ghastly parents. Therefore, why bother trying to do anything with them. That then leads to teachers who view their place as going through the motions rather than trying to inspire or change.
That is the Right's view of the view of the Left. The real one is that our education system is elitist and old fashioned and underfunded and warped by the propensity of the affluent to opt out and purchase advantage via the private sector.
We demand better. We want a more egalitarian approach that will deliver a similar (and high) quality education to everyone regardless of parental bank balance. Increase participation in state schools, proper funding, a real prioritizing of disadvantaged areas.
The biggest beneficiary of such an approach? Yep - white working class children.
But oh no, too difficult. Too disruptive of the status quo that so many are secretly comfortable with. So let's produce this report instead. Let's avoid the hard choices about class and money and push some culture war buttons. Let's waffle on about the term "white privilege". Has sweet FA to do with the problem but let's pretend that it does. Let's stoke some grievance!
I see you, Tories, and Middle England. I see you.
So are you saying Tories invented the term "white privilege"?
The Tories have latched onto it because they have figured out that it is a way of stoking resentment and dividing working class people. White Privilege is a term that is used to describe the advantages in many situations that white people enjoy on account of being the majority group. I'm sorry, but it describes something real, something that I personally have observed, and so I am not going to be bullied into not using it in that specific context. Of course, many white people don't feel very privileged, and so the term grates with them. But I doubt they have ever not had their CV looked at on account of their name, or been racially profiled by the police. White Privilege does not mean that all white people are more privileged than all non-White people.
It would only be a way of stoking resentment if there is a reason for resentment to be stoked.
If you believe that "white privilege" is real then stand up loud and proud and explain why poor white kids struggling at school are privileged. Otherwise maybe your term is flawed and you should stop using it and use something else instead.
We aren't America incidentally. I'd imagine many young white teenagers in hoodies have been profiled by the Police here.
Mr. Boy, a blanket term like white privilege is worse than useless.
It's the kind of thinking the prioritised 'cultural sensitivity' in Rotherham and other places. Reminiscent of the thankfully decreasing view that domestic violence is a thing done by a man to a woman and never the other way around (or in gay relationships, of course).
And lately we've had the magnificent Cressida Dick arguing for the right to explicitly discriminate against white candidates for jobs.
After reading the thread here I bet on Labour holding Batley and Spen, but I pulled out of the market after I woke up this morning to the headline news that the Education Select Committee believes schools have long neglected white children. This is how the Tories win - by playing the race card. The race card is a trump card. (See what I did there.) Most likely the Tories will gain Batley and Spen and they are value at 1.45. Thumping away with this kind of story - what is essentially a call for "white rights" - could increase the Tories' Commons majority at the next GE too.
Time to emigrate?
What rubbish. There is clearly an issue with underachievement in this demographic, and there has been for a while, and addressing it is exactly what is needed to stop people playing the race card.
Or would you prefer this sector of society was allowed to keep falling behind as long as your comfy worldview wasn’t challenged ?
I just don't understand what their race has to do with this. They're not getting treated badly at school because they're white. In fact I doubt they're getting treated badly at school at all, except to the extent that all state school kids in this country are let down by a lack of money and focus from the government and the establishment, who mostly go private and so have very little skin in the game. Their problems come from a lack of engagement in education, often rooted in their parents' experiences of school, sometimes compounded by other issues that their parents have. Plus poverty, which makes everything harder. (BTW before anyone accuses me of being an out of touch elitist, I went to a comprehensive school that was almost entirely white so the so-called white working class is not some kind of unknown exotic species to me).
I disagree with that and I think a lot has to do with the attitude of teachers. As @RochdalePioneers so helpfully demonstrated a few days back, there is a view on the left, especially amongst let's say the more educated parts including the teaching profession, that WWC kids are essentially thick, racist and therefore not worth saving, and the problems they have in their lives are the faults of them and their ghastly parents. Therefore, why bother trying to do anything with them. That then leads to teachers who view their place as going through the motions rather than trying to inspire or change.
I know quite a few teachers, indeed my mum was one. Mostly working-class backgrounds (one's dad was a miner, one's dad worked at power stations) though a couple are more middle-class. They've worked at a range of schools, at quite senior positions. What they generally say is that they prefer teaching in comps, with 'normal' kids, rather than at 'better' schools with more middle class kids.
Like so many things, this report probably views the WWC as a homogenous lump. That isn't true. I'm working class but I've got an MA from a Russell Group University and a nice white collar job and a good salary. A lad I went to school with, again whose dad was a miner, is now a barrister (the way he has expunged his accent is remarkable). Other people I went to school with have been manual labourers all their life and look ready for the scrap heap in their mid-40s.
But there's sometimes a lot of money in manual labour. I know a couple of brothers who have a railway maintenance company who employ loads of local lads, all on good wages. I know a couple of plasterers who could, if they wanted to, work all day every day. They're pulling something like £60k a year.
But undoubtedly there is a section of the WWC who get left behind. But a lot of the heavy industrial jobs that they would've done are long gone. Now, if deindustrialisation is an inevitable side effect of globalisation, then successive governments should have invested in these areas that were denuded of their industry. And it has never happened. So now Johnson promises to level up. I'll believe it when I see it.
After reading the thread here I bet on Labour holding Batley and Spen, but I pulled out of the market after I woke up this morning to the headline news that the Education Select Committee believes schools have long neglected white children. This is how the Tories win - by playing the race card. The race card is a trump card. (See what I did there.) Most likely the Tories will gain Batley and Spen and they are value at 1.45. Thumping away with this kind of story - what is essentially a call for "white rights" - could increase the Tories' Commons majority at the next GE too.
Time to emigrate?
The Education Select Committee are a cross-party group of MPs, and their point is that social class and parental involvement are a larger factor than race in determining educational outcomes.
The people playing the race card in Batley and Spen are the George Galloway supporters, with their homophobic and anti-Semitic attacks on the Labour candidate and party leader.
The Tories are talking about levelling up the area, by investing in infrastructure and encouraging private job creation.
Me, well I emigrated already
Hmmm. A unanimous report, and the committee is 7 Tory, 4 Labour, who include 3 members of the Socialist Campaign Group and Fleur Anderson.
One of the Labour MPs on the committee explicitly rejected the culture war bit though. Kim Johnson said that the references to White Privilege were trying to "stoke the culture war" and said the report avoided talking about the "lack of investment" in education and local communities. It's just classic Tory divide and rule.
White working class kids let down most by:
a) The party that has been in government for the last 11 years
b) the phrase/concept 'white privilege' which only seems to have entered the English consciousness in the last couple of years as far as I can tell
It's a bit of a conundrum, though my psychic superpowers enable me to guess which one the party that has been in government for the last 11 years would plump for.
Boris Johnson’s net approval rating: -32 Rishi Sunak’s net approval rating: -3 Government’s Net Competency Rating: -36 Keir Starmer's net approval rating: -16
After reading the thread here I bet on Labour holding Batley and Spen, but I pulled out of the market after I woke up this morning to the headline news that the Education Select Committee believes schools have long neglected white children. This is how the Tories win - by playing the race card. The race card is a trump card. (See what I did there.) Most likely the Tories will gain Batley and Spen and they are value at 1.45. Thumping away with this kind of story - what is essentially a call for "white rights" - could increase the Tories' Commons majority at the next GE too.
Time to emigrate?
The Education Select Committee are a cross-party group of MPs, and their point is that social class and parental involvement are a larger factor than race in determining educational outcomes.
The people playing the race card in Batley and Spen are the George Galloway supporters, with their homophobic and anti-Semitic attacks on the Labour candidate and party leader.
The Tories are talking about levelling up the area, by investing in infrastructure and encouraging private job creation.
Me, well I emigrated already
Hmmm. A unanimous report, and the committee is 7 Tory, 4 Labour, who include 3 members of the Socialist Campaign Group and Fleur Anderson.
One of the Labour MPs on the committee explicitly rejected the culture war bit though. Kim Johnson said that the references to White Privilege were trying to "stoke the culture war" and said the report avoided talking about the "lack of investment" in education and local communities. It's just classic Tory divide and rule.
White working class kids let down most by:
a) The party that has been in government for the last 11 years
b) the phrase/concept 'white privilege' which only seems to have entered the English consciousness in the last couple of years as far as I can tell
It's a bit of a conundrum, though my psychic superpowers enable me to guess which one the party that has been in government for the last 11 years would plump for.
How is the SNP doing in battling "white privilege"?
After reading the thread here I bet on Labour holding Batley and Spen, but I pulled out of the market after I woke up this morning to the headline news that the Education Select Committee believes schools have long neglected white children. This is how the Tories win - by playing the race card. The race card is a trump card. (See what I did there.) Most likely the Tories will gain Batley and Spen and they are value at 1.45. Thumping away with this kind of story - what is essentially a call for "white rights" - could increase the Tories' Commons majority at the next GE too.
Time to emigrate?
The Education Select Committee are a cross-party group of MPs, and their point is that social class and parental involvement are a larger factor than race in determining educational outcomes.
The people playing the race card in Batley and Spen are the George Galloway supporters, with their homophobic and anti-Semitic attacks on the Labour candidate and party leader.
The Tories are talking about levelling up the area, by investing in infrastructure and encouraging private job creation.
Me, well I emigrated already
Hmmm. A unanimous report, and the committee is 7 Tory, 4 Labour, who include 3 members of the Socialist Campaign Group and Fleur Anderson.
One of the Labour MPs on the committee explicitly rejected the culture war bit though. Kim Johnson said that the references to White Privilege were trying to "stoke the culture war" and said the report avoided talking about the "lack of investment" in education and local communities. It's just classic Tory divide and rule.
White working class kids let down most by:
a) The party that has been in government for the last 11 years
b) the phrase/concept 'white privilege' which only seems to have entered the English consciousness in the last couple of years as far as I can tell
It's a bit of a conundrum, though my psychic superpowers enable me to guess which one the party that has been in government for the last 11 years would plump for.
What about the party that has been in government for the last 14 years?
Do they have any responsibility for kids education in your eyes?
Boris Johnson’s net approval rating: -32 Rishi Sunak’s net approval rating: -3 Government’s Net Competency Rating: -36 Keir Starmer's net approval rating: -16
After reading the thread here I bet on Labour holding Batley and Spen, but I pulled out of the market after I woke up this morning to the headline news that the Education Select Committee believes schools have long neglected white children. This is how the Tories win - by playing the race card. The race card is a trump card. (See what I did there.) Most likely the Tories will gain Batley and Spen and they are value at 1.45. Thumping away with this kind of story - what is essentially a call for "white rights" - could increase the Tories' Commons majority at the next GE too.
Time to emigrate?
The Education Select Committee are a cross-party group of MPs, and their point is that social class and parental involvement are a larger factor than race in determining educational outcomes.
The people playing the race card in Batley and Spen are the George Galloway supporters, with their homophobic and anti-Semitic attacks on the Labour candidate and party leader.
The Tories are talking about levelling up the area, by investing in infrastructure and encouraging private job creation.
Me, well I emigrated already
Hmmm. A unanimous report, and the committee is 7 Tory, 4 Labour, who include 3 members of the Socialist Campaign Group and Fleur Anderson.
One of the Labour MPs on the committee explicitly rejected the culture war bit though. Kim Johnson said that the references to White Privilege were trying to "stoke the culture war" and said the report avoided talking about the "lack of investment" in education and local communities. It's just classic Tory divide and rule.
White working class kids let down most by:
a) The party that has been in government for the last 11 years
b) the phrase/concept 'white privilege' which only seems to have entered the English consciousness in the last couple of years as far as I can tell
It's a bit of a conundrum, though my psychic superpowers enable me to guess which one the party that has been in government for the last 11 years would plump for.
How is the SNP doing in battling "white privilege"?
Ken Clarke on BBC R4 Today absolutely destroying de Pfeffel.
My god, Ken’s good. Royal Yacht = populist nonsense.
The timeline for the Carrie Celeste looks absolutely mad on the face of it. It's a one off design of a type of ship that hasn't been built in the UK for 50+ years. The is no fucking way they are going to cut steel on it in 2022. It's one of those schemes that's so ill considered you can't help but assume The Fireplace Salesman was involved somewhere.
As Ken Clarke pointed out, the cost of the royal yacht itself is not going to break the bank, but it is an indication of a profound lack of judgement at No.10.
That she, like Britannia before her, will generate a massive amount of trade and goodwill from countries and companies around the world, far in excess of the cost of building her.
How do you know? This is just another BoJo vanity project.
After reading the thread here I bet on Labour holding Batley and Spen, but I pulled out of the market after I woke up this morning to the headline news that the Education Select Committee believes schools have long neglected white children. This is how the Tories win - by playing the race card. The race card is a trump card. (See what I did there.) Most likely the Tories will gain Batley and Spen and they are value at 1.45. Thumping away with this kind of story - what is essentially a call for "white rights" - could increase the Tories' Commons majority at the next GE too.
Time to emigrate?
What rubbish. There is clearly an issue with underachievement in this demographic, and there has been for a while, and addressing it is exactly what is needed to stop people playing the race card.
Or would you prefer this sector of society was allowed to keep falling behind as long as your comfy worldview wasn’t challenged ?
I just don't understand what their race has to do with this. They're not getting treated badly at school because they're white. In fact I doubt they're getting treated badly at school at all, except to the extent that all state school kids in this country are let down by a lack of money and focus from the government and the establishment, who mostly go private and so have very little skin in the game. Their problems come from a lack of engagement in education, often rooted in their parents' experiences of school, sometimes compounded by other issues that their parents have. Plus poverty, which makes everything harder. (BTW before anyone accuses me of being an out of touch elitist, I went to a comprehensive school that was almost entirely white so the so-called white working class is not some kind of unknown exotic species to me).
I disagree with that and I think a lot has to do with the attitude of teachers. As @RochdalePioneers so helpfully demonstrated a few days back, there is a view on the left, especially amongst let's say the more educated parts including the teaching profession, that WWC kids are essentially thick, racist and therefore not worth saving, and the problems they have in their lives are the faults of them and their ghastly parents. Therefore, why bother trying to do anything with them. That then leads to teachers who view their place as going through the motions rather than trying to inspire or change.
That is the Right's view of the view of the Left. The real one is that our education system is elitist and old fashioned and underfunded and warped by the propensity of the affluent to opt out and purchase advantage via the private sector.
We demand better. We want a more egalitarian approach that will deliver a similar (and high) quality education to everyone regardless of parental bank balance. Increase participation in state schools, proper funding, a real prioritizing of disadvantaged areas.
The biggest beneficiary of such an approach? Yep - white working class children.
But oh no, too difficult. Too disruptive of the status quo that so many are secretly comfortable with. So let's produce this report instead. Let's avoid the hard choices about class and money and push some culture war buttons. Let's waffle on about the term "white privilege". Has sweet FA to do with the problem but let's pretend that it does. Let's stoke some grievance!
I see you, Tories, and Middle England. I see you.
So are you saying Tories invented the term "white privilege"?
The Tories have latched onto it because they have figured out that it is a way of stoking resentment and dividing working class people. White Privilege is a term that is used to describe the advantages in many situations that white people enjoy on account of being the majority group. I'm sorry, but it describes something real, something that I personally have observed, and so I am not going to be bullied into not using it in that specific context. Of course, many white people don't feel very privileged, and so the term grates with them. But I doubt they have ever not had their CV looked at on account of their name, or been racially profiled by the police. White Privilege does not mean that all white people are more privileged than all non-White people.
It is misnamed therefore. And on your last sentence, that is how many on the radical left, especially in the USA, choose to use it, and what they choose to believe. If that is not what the left as a whole believes when they use the phrase, they need to do significantly more to distance themselves from the nutters who shout the loudest. Or to use a different phrase.
After reading the thread here I bet on Labour holding Batley and Spen, but I pulled out of the market after I woke up this morning to the headline news that the Education Select Committee believes schools have long neglected white children. This is how the Tories win - by playing the race card. The race card is a trump card. (See what I did there.) Most likely the Tories will gain Batley and Spen and they are value at 1.45. Thumping away with this kind of story - what is essentially a call for "white rights" - could increase the Tories' Commons majority at the next GE too.
Time to emigrate?
What rubbish. There is clearly an issue with underachievement in this demographic, and there has been for a while, and addressing it is exactly what is needed to stop people playing the race card.
Or would you prefer this sector of society was allowed to keep falling behind as long as your comfy worldview wasn’t challenged ?
I just don't understand what their race has to do with this. They're not getting treated badly at school because they're white. In fact I doubt they're getting treated badly at school at all, except to the extent that all state school kids in this country are let down by a lack of money and focus from the government and the establishment, who mostly go private and so have very little skin in the game. Their problems come from a lack of engagement in education, often rooted in their parents' experiences of school, sometimes compounded by other issues that their parents have. Plus poverty, which makes everything harder. (BTW before anyone accuses me of being an out of touch elitist, I went to a comprehensive school that was almost entirely white so the so-called white working class is not some kind of unknown exotic species to me).
I disagree with that and I think a lot has to do with the attitude of teachers. As @RochdalePioneers so helpfully demonstrated a few days back, there is a view on the left, especially amongst let's say the more educated parts including the teaching profession, that WWC kids are essentially thick, racist and therefore not worth saving, and the problems they have in their lives are the faults of them and their ghastly parents. Therefore, why bother trying to do anything with them. That then leads to teachers who view their place as going through the motions rather than trying to inspire or change.
That is the Right's view of the view of the Left. The real one is that our education system is elitist and old fashioned and underfunded and warped by the propensity of the affluent to opt out and purchase advantage via the private sector.
We demand better. We want a more egalitarian approach that will deliver a similar (and high) quality education to everyone regardless of parental bank balance. Increase participation in state schools, proper funding, a real prioritizing of disadvantaged areas.
The biggest beneficiary of such an approach? Yep - white working class children.
But oh no, too difficult. Too disruptive of the status quo that so many are secretly comfortable with. So let's produce this report instead. Let's avoid the hard choices about class and money and push some culture war buttons. Let's waffle on about the term "white privilege". Has sweet FA to do with the problem but let's pretend that it does. Let's stoke some grievance!
I see you, Tories, and Middle England. I see you.
So are you saying Tories invented the term "white privilege"?
The Tories have latched onto it because they have figured out that it is a way of stoking resentment and dividing working class people. White Privilege is a term that is used to describe the advantages in many situations that white people enjoy on account of being the majority group. I'm sorry, but it describes something real, something that I personally have observed, and so I am not going to be bullied into not using it in that specific context. Of course, many white people don't feel very privileged, and so the term grates with them. But I doubt they have ever not had their CV looked at on account of their name, or been racially profiled by the police. White Privilege does not mean that all white people are more privileged than all non-White people.
It would only be a way of stoking resentment if there is a reason for resentment to be stoked.
If you believe that "white privilege" is real then stand up loud and proud and explain why poor white kids struggling at school are privileged. Otherwise maybe your term is flawed and you should stop using it and use something else instead.
We aren't America incidentally. I'd imagine many young white teenagers in hoodies have been profiled by the Police here.
Your poor white kids aren't struggling because they're white, they are struggling because they're poor, and the education system is under-funded by the government you vote for, and perhaps in some cases because of aspects of their upbringing, in many cases linked to their poverty. I've just given you two examples of how they don't face some similar barriers that non-White people do. And I'm not sure there are many places where a white kid in a hoodie will get hassled by the police more than a black kid in a hoodie, but please share statistics to the contrary if you have them.
After reading the thread here I bet on Labour holding Batley and Spen, but I pulled out of the market after I woke up this morning to the headline news that the Education Select Committee believes schools have long neglected white children. This is how the Tories win - by playing the race card. The race card is a trump card. (See what I did there.) Most likely the Tories will gain Batley and Spen and they are value at 1.45. Thumping away with this kind of story - what is essentially a call for "white rights" - could increase the Tories' Commons majority at the next GE too.
Time to emigrate?
What rubbish. There is clearly an issue with underachievement in this demographic, and there has been for a while, and addressing it is exactly what is needed to stop people playing the race card.
Or would you prefer this sector of society was allowed to keep falling behind as long as your comfy worldview wasn’t challenged ?
If this story isn't playing the race card, what is? No "issue with underachievement" would make it into something else.
"Playing the race card" means appealing to people to vote because of feelings they have that are based on their "racial" identity (here, whiteness) and on what they believe is a common experience among those who share that "racial" identity. That's how I use the term anyway. How do you use it?
My daughter was taught in school about a black car that wasn’t allowed to race with the white cars because the “race committee” (consisting of old, male, white cars) was worried he might win.
Is that helpful?
That's so stupid. There is so much actual history relating to these issues that could be taught, why come up with some kind of lame allegory instead? Thankfully I have never come across anything this dumb at our kids' schools, which have a very varied intake across nationalities, races and social classes and I think teach these kind of issues very well. It sounds like your daughter's school is kind of uncomfortable about these issues and has tried to address them in a way that won't offend anyone, and ended up with a mess.
It’s from a book called Race Cars that is a prescribed text in the US system…
(She was also marked down because she chose to write about Alfred the Great when told to write about “a reformer who inspires you”… about dead white European males aren’t on the approved list)
Boris Johnson’s net approval rating: -32 Rishi Sunak’s net approval rating: -3 Government’s Net Competency Rating: -36 Keir Starmer's net approval rating: -16
Ken Clarke on BBC R4 Today absolutely destroying de Pfeffel.
My god, Ken’s good. Royal Yacht = populist nonsense.
The timeline for the Carrie Celeste looks absolutely mad on the face of it. It's a one off design of a type of ship that hasn't been built in the UK for 50+ years. The is no fucking way they are going to cut steel on it in 2022. It's one of those schemes that's so ill considered you can't help but assume The Fireplace Salesman was involved somewhere.
As Ken Clarke pointed out, the cost of the royal yacht itself is not going to break the bank, but it is an indication of a profound lack of judgement at No.10.
We'll add it to the list of many other things that indicate this.
Something its proponents do not seem to have considered in that in its proposed use as a Covid prophylactic, it is very much an experimental, as opposed to well characterised, drug. At the dosages required for an antiviral effect, no one has any good idea what short or long term side effects (hepatic and neurotoxic, for instance) might show up in a large population. To determine that would require some large scale clinical trials at least an order of magnitude, probably a couple, larger than the ones which have been conducted.
(Also, FWIW, its use is contraindicated with dexamethasone.)
COVID-19 and Ivermectin: Potential threats associated with human use https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022286021009418?via=ihub ...Owing to the high lipid solubility, the ivermectin reaches a maximum blood concentration of 20–80 ng/ml, when admistered orally [52, 18]. Therapeutic doses of upto 2000 μg/kg in humans have been well-tolerated [19, 28]. The lower plasma half life of 12 hours also indicates the rapid solubility of the drug in humans [53]. However, the in vitro drug level required against SARS-CoV-2 was found to be in micrograms [54]. Currently, the trials are underway to confirm whether the therapeutic dose of 600-1200 µg/Kg for 5-7 consecutive days may efficiently treat the COVID-19 without adverse effects in the patients [55, 56]. This much difference in the dosage of ivermectin indicates the urgent need of clinically evaluating the pharmacodynamics of this drug, before rapid firing it as a prophylactic candidate for healthcare/front line workers…
Town centre investment has been a sore point for people in Batley after neighbouring Huddersfield and Dewsbury were awarded £250 million and £200 million respectively, for their town centre blueprints.
Batley has recently been given £1.5 million by Kirklees Council for its regeneration.
On town centre investment, Mr [Boris] Johnson said: "I believe that Ryan Stephenson [the Conservative candidate] would be a fantastic champion for Batley and Spen and would help to target the funding that we need whether, through the towns fund, the levelling up fund or the many other funds that we have available." https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/news/west-yorkshire-news/key-things-boris-johnson-said-20851491
After reading the thread here I bet on Labour holding Batley and Spen, but I pulled out of the market after I woke up this morning to the headline news that the Education Select Committee believes schools have long neglected white children. This is how the Tories win - by playing the race card. The race card is a trump card. (See what I did there.) Most likely the Tories will gain Batley and Spen and they are value at 1.45. Thumping away with this kind of story - what is essentially a call for "white rights" - could increase the Tories' Commons majority at the next GE too.
Time to emigrate?
What rubbish. There is clearly an issue with underachievement in this demographic, and there has been for a while, and addressing it is exactly what is needed to stop people playing the race card.
Or would you prefer this sector of society was allowed to keep falling behind as long as your comfy worldview wasn’t challenged ?
I just don't understand what their race has to do with this. They're not getting treated badly at school because they're white. In fact I doubt they're getting treated badly at school at all, except to the extent that all state school kids in this country are let down by a lack of money and focus from the government and the establishment, who mostly go private and so have very little skin in the game. Their problems come from a lack of engagement in education, often rooted in their parents' experiences of school, sometimes compounded by other issues that their parents have. Plus poverty, which makes everything harder. (BTW before anyone accuses me of being an out of touch elitist, I went to a comprehensive school that was almost entirely white so the so-called white working class is not some kind of unknown exotic species to me).
I disagree with that and I think a lot has to do with the attitude of teachers. As @RochdalePioneers so helpfully demonstrated a few days back, there is a view on the left, especially amongst let's say the more educated parts including the teaching profession, that WWC kids are essentially thick, racist and therefore not worth saving, and the problems they have in their lives are the faults of them and their ghastly parents. Therefore, why bother trying to do anything with them. That then leads to teachers who view their place as going through the motions rather than trying to inspire or change.
That is the Right's view of the view of the Left. The real one is that our education system is elitist and old fashioned and underfunded and warped by the propensity of the affluent to opt out and purchase advantage via the private sector.
We demand better. We want a more egalitarian approach that will deliver a similar (and high) quality education to everyone regardless of parental bank balance. Increase participation in state schools, proper funding, a real prioritizing of disadvantaged areas.
The biggest beneficiary of such an approach? Yep - white working class children.
But oh no, too difficult. Too disruptive of the status quo that so many are secretly comfortable with. So let's produce this report instead. Let's avoid the hard choices about class and money and push some culture war buttons. Let's waffle on about the term "white privilege". Has sweet FA to do with the problem but let's pretend that it does. Let's stoke some grievance!
I see you, Tories, and Middle England. I see you.
So are you saying Tories invented the term "white privilege"?
The Tories have latched onto it because they have figured out that it is a way of stoking resentment and dividing working class people. White Privilege is a term that is used to describe the advantages in many situations that white people enjoy on account of being the majority group. I'm sorry, but it describes something real, something that I personally have observed, and so I am not going to be bullied into not using it in that specific context. Of course, many white people don't feel very privileged, and so the term grates with them. But I doubt they have ever not had their CV looked at on account of their name, or been racially profiled by the police. White Privilege does not mean that all white people are more privileged than all non-White people.
It is misnamed therefore. And on your last sentence, that is how many on the radical left, especially in the USA, choose to use it, and what they choose to believe. If that is not what the left as a whole believes when they use the phrase, they need to do significantly more to distance themselves from the nutters who shout the loudest. Or to use a different phrase.
Really? I don't spend much time hanging out with American radical leftists, but I am quite familiar with how the term is used here and in America (I used to live there) and the only people I have ever heard using it in your sense on either side of the Atlantic are right wingers trying to discredit it.
Day 3. On Sunday we reported how Keir Starmer, his family and Labour's candidate in Batley & Spen were being subjected to anti-Semitic and homophobic abuse. As yet there has been no condemnation of the abuse from the Labour Party.
Back to the 50's!!!!!!
Kier Starmer was subjected to homophobic abuse? If I was going to abuse Keir Starmer I wouldn't be calling him gay or Jewish. Because - quite aside from whether or not this should be construed as offensive - he isn't. Or doesn't appear to be.
This was discussed the other day. AIUI certain elements are accused of talking up the fact that Starmer's wife is Jewish, and have been spreading rumours that Labour's candidate is Lesbian. There, of course, being certain sections of society where Jew bashing and gay bashing are both still quite popular.
Ken Clarke on BBC R4 Today absolutely destroying de Pfeffel.
My god, Ken’s good. Royal Yacht = populist nonsense.
The timeline for the Carrie Celeste looks absolutely mad on the face of it. It's a one off design of a type of ship that hasn't been built in the UK for 50+ years. The is no fucking way they are going to cut steel on it in 2022. It's one of those schemes that's so ill considered you can't help but assume The Fireplace Salesman was involved somewhere.
As Ken Clarke pointed out, the cost of the royal yacht itself is not going to break the bank, but it is an indication of a profound lack of judgement at No.10.
That she, like Britannia before her, will generate a massive amount of trade and goodwill from countries and companies around the world, far in excess of the cost of building her.
Well, she won't be like Britannia because she is not a royal yacht. Indeed all the indications which have been given is that the Royal Family want nothing to do with it.
Still let's see what Carrie and a load of gold wallpaper do for our trade, eh!
After reading the thread here I bet on Labour holding Batley and Spen, but I pulled out of the market after I woke up this morning to the headline news that the Education Select Committee believes schools have long neglected white children. This is how the Tories win - by playing the race card. The race card is a trump card. (See what I did there.) Most likely the Tories will gain Batley and Spen and they are value at 1.45. Thumping away with this kind of story - what is essentially a call for "white rights" - could increase the Tories' Commons majority at the next GE too.
Time to emigrate?
What rubbish. There is clearly an issue with underachievement in this demographic, and there has been for a while, and addressing it is exactly what is needed to stop people playing the race card.
Or would you prefer this sector of society was allowed to keep falling behind as long as your comfy worldview wasn’t challenged ?
I just don't understand what their race has to do with this. They're not getting treated badly at school because they're white. In fact I doubt they're getting treated badly at school at all, except to the extent that all state school kids in this country are let down by a lack of money and focus from the government and the establishment, who mostly go private and so have very little skin in the game. Their problems come from a lack of engagement in education, often rooted in their parents' experiences of school, sometimes compounded by other issues that their parents have. Plus poverty, which makes everything harder. (BTW before anyone accuses me of being an out of touch elitist, I went to a comprehensive school that was almost entirely white so the so-called white working class is not some kind of unknown exotic species to me).
I disagree with that and I think a lot has to do with the attitude of teachers. As @RochdalePioneers so helpfully demonstrated a few days back, there is a view on the left, especially amongst let's say the more educated parts including the teaching profession, that WWC kids are essentially thick, racist and therefore not worth saving, and the problems they have in their lives are the faults of them and their ghastly parents. Therefore, why bother trying to do anything with them. That then leads to teachers who view their place as going through the motions rather than trying to inspire or change.
That is the Right's view of the view of the Left. The real one is that our education system is elitist and old fashioned and underfunded and warped by the propensity of the affluent to opt out and purchase advantage via the private sector.
We demand better. We want a more egalitarian approach that will deliver a similar (and high) quality education to everyone regardless of parental bank balance. Increase participation in state schools, proper funding, a real prioritizing of disadvantaged areas.
The biggest beneficiary of such an approach? Yep - white working class children.
But oh no, too difficult. Too disruptive of the status quo that so many are secretly comfortable with. So let's produce this report instead. Let's avoid the hard choices about class and money and push some culture war buttons. Let's waffle on about the term "white privilege". Has sweet FA to do with the problem but let's pretend that it does. Let's stoke some grievance!
I see you, Tories, and Middle England. I see you.
So are you saying Tories invented the term "white privilege"?
The Tories have latched onto it because they have figured out that it is a way of stoking resentment and dividing working class people. White Privilege is a term that is used to describe the advantages in many situations that white people enjoy on account of being the majority group. I'm sorry, but it describes something real, something that I personally have observed, and so I am not going to be bullied into not using it in that specific context. Of course, many white people don't feel very privileged, and so the term grates with them. But I doubt they have ever not had their CV looked at on account of their name, or been racially profiled by the police. White Privilege does not mean that all white people are more privileged than all non-White people.
It would only be a way of stoking resentment if there is a reason for resentment to be stoked.
If you believe that "white privilege" is real then stand up loud and proud and explain why poor white kids struggling at school are privileged. Otherwise maybe your term is flawed and you should stop using it and use something else instead.
We aren't America incidentally. I'd imagine many young white teenagers in hoodies have been profiled by the Police here.
Your poor white kids aren't struggling because they're white, they are struggling because they're poor, and the education system is under-funded by the government you vote for, and perhaps in some cases because of aspects of their upbringing, in many cases linked to their poverty. I've just given you two examples of how they don't face some similar barriers that non-White people do. And I'm not sure there are many places where a white kid in a hoodie will get hassled by the police more than a black kid in a hoodie, but please share statistics to the contrary if you have them.
'Your poor white kids aren't struggling because they're white, they are struggling because they're poor, and the education system is under-funded by the government you vote for, and perhaps in some cases because of aspects of their upbringing, in many cases linked to their poverty.'
Boris Johnson’s net approval rating: -32 Rishi Sunak’s net approval rating: -3 Government’s Net Competency Rating: -36 Keir Starmer's net approval rating: -16
After reading the thread here I bet on Labour holding Batley and Spen, but I pulled out of the market after I woke up this morning to the headline news that the Education Select Committee believes schools have long neglected white children. This is how the Tories win - by playing the race card. The race card is a trump card. (See what I did there.) Most likely the Tories will gain Batley and Spen and they are value at 1.45. Thumping away with this kind of story - what is essentially a call for "white rights" - could increase the Tories' Commons majority at the next GE too.
Time to emigrate?
What rubbish. There is clearly an issue with underachievement in this demographic, and there has been for a while, and addressing it is exactly what is needed to stop people playing the race card.
Or would you prefer this sector of society was allowed to keep falling behind as long as your comfy worldview wasn’t challenged ?
If this story isn't playing the race card, what is? No "issue with underachievement" would make it into something else.
"Playing the race card" means appealing to people to vote because of feelings they have that are based on their "racial" identity (here, whiteness) and on what they believe is a common experience among those who share that "racial" identity. That's how I use the term anyway. How do you use it?
My daughter was taught in school about a black car that wasn’t allowed to race with the white cars because the “race committee” (consisting of old, male, white cars) was worried he might win.
Is that helpful?
That's so stupid. There is so much actual history relating to these issues that could be taught, why come up with some kind of lame allegory instead? Thankfully I have never come across anything this dumb at our kids' schools, which have a very varied intake across nationalities, races and social classes and I think teach these kind of issues very well. It sounds like your daughter's school is kind of uncomfortable about these issues and has tried to address them in a way that won't offend anyone, and ended up with a mess.
Hold on. That allegory of the black car not being allowed to race against white ones sounds American. It makes no sense here. Did @charles's daughter go to school in America or has some idiot imported American teaching materials (or South African, I suppose) and forgotten that Britain never went down the route of banning black cars?
Ken Clarke on BBC R4 Today absolutely destroying de Pfeffel.
My god, Ken’s good. Royal Yacht = populist nonsense.
The timeline for the Carrie Celeste looks absolutely mad on the face of it. It's a one off design of a type of ship that hasn't been built in the UK for 50+ years. The is no fucking way they are going to cut steel on it in 2022. It's one of those schemes that's so ill considered you can't help but assume The Fireplace Salesman was involved somewhere.
As Ken Clarke pointed out, the cost of the royal yacht itself is not going to break the bank, but it is an indication of a profound lack of judgement at No.10.
In the unlikely event it comes to pass it's going to be a security nightmare. It's the size of a Type 45 and is going to have lots of classified equipment on board so it will be very limited in the locations in which it can be docked. Embassies are secured by dint of being in a static location around which a persistent intelligence picture can be generated. The Carrie Celeste will need an expensive and time consuming security assessment at every new berth.
Nobody gives a fuck what anything costs these days but this thing has doubled in price since Johnson started dribbling on about it and will probably double again before it gets off the slipway.
Meanwhile there's no torpedoes on our shiny new ASW frigates to save money. If the ship is out of limits for aviation or the helicopter's broken (spoiler: helicopters break A LOT) then it's case of; pack 'er up boys, we're not sub hunting today.
On educational performance. The SC Report is telling us nothing new. Ever since meaningful educational performance data started being collected, around 30 years ago, the group that has underachieved the most has been white kids from a poor background - i.e. on free school meals (FSM). The only group who does worse is those who have been in care. Other underachieving groups have (and still do) included Afro-Caribbean boys, and poorer kids from Pakistani and Bangladeshi origin.
Various efforts have been made to improve the performance of kids on FSM (from all backgrounds). The London Challenge was the most successful. The jury is still out on how successful the Pupil Premium funding has been; where it's been well targetted, it's had an impact, but too many schools have just merged it into their general funding.
Given this brief overview of historical underachievement dating back decades (and, if we had the data, probably ever since compulsory education started), the idea that the fashionable concept of 'white privilege' is a factor is ludicrous. As is the insulting suggestion by one poster that 'leftie' teachers don't try to raise the aspirations of w/c kids.
Somebody asked about Bomber Harris a couple of days ago. I didn’t respond as the topic is very easy to research, and the evidence against Harris is overwhelming. Then happened to spot this story. It’s behind a paywall, but seems indicative of the more balanced way public bodies are going to have to deal with controversial figures, eg blokes who order the mass murder of civilians.
After reading the thread here I bet on Labour holding Batley and Spen, but I pulled out of the market after I woke up this morning to the headline news that the Education Select Committee believes schools have long neglected white children. This is how the Tories win - by playing the race card. The race card is a trump card. (See what I did there.) Most likely the Tories will gain Batley and Spen and they are value at 1.45. Thumping away with this kind of story - what is essentially a call for "white rights" - could increase the Tories' Commons majority at the next GE too.
Time to emigrate?
What rubbish. There is clearly an issue with underachievement in this demographic, and there has been for a while, and addressing it is exactly what is needed to stop people playing the race card.
Or would you prefer this sector of society was allowed to keep falling behind as long as your comfy worldview wasn’t challenged ?
I just don't understand what their race has to do with this. They're not getting treated badly at school because they're white. In fact I doubt they're getting treated badly at school at all, except to the extent that all state school kids in this country are let down by a lack of money and focus from the government and the establishment, who mostly go private and so have very little skin in the game. Their problems come from a lack of engagement in education, often rooted in their parents' experiences of school, sometimes compounded by other issues that their parents have. Plus poverty, which makes everything harder. (BTW before anyone accuses me of being an out of touch elitist, I went to a comprehensive school that was almost entirely white so the so-called white working class is not some kind of unknown exotic species to me).
I disagree with that and I think a lot has to do with the attitude of teachers. As @RochdalePioneers so helpfully demonstrated a few days back, there is a view on the left, especially amongst let's say the more educated parts including the teaching profession, that WWC kids are essentially thick, racist and therefore not worth saving, and the problems they have in their lives are the faults of them and their ghastly parents. Therefore, why bother trying to do anything with them. That then leads to teachers who view their place as going through the motions rather than trying to inspire or change.
That is the Right's view of the view of the Left. The real one is that our education system is elitist and old fashioned and underfunded and warped by the propensity of the affluent to opt out and purchase advantage via the private sector.
We demand better. We want a more egalitarian approach that will deliver a similar (and high) quality education to everyone regardless of parental bank balance. Increase participation in state schools, proper funding, a real prioritizing of disadvantaged areas.
The biggest beneficiary of such an approach? Yep - white working class children.
But oh no, too difficult. Too disruptive of the status quo that so many are secretly comfortable with. So let's produce this report instead. Let's avoid the hard choices about class and money and push some culture war buttons. Let's waffle on about the term "white privilege". Has sweet FA to do with the problem but let's pretend that it does. Let's stoke some grievance!
I see you, Tories, and Middle England. I see you.
So are you saying Tories invented the term "white privilege"?
The Tories have latched onto it because they have figured out that it is a way of stoking resentment and dividing working class people. White Privilege is a term that is used to describe the advantages in many situations that white people enjoy on account of being the majority group. I'm sorry, but it describes something real, something that I personally have observed, and so I am not going to be bullied into not using it in that specific context. Of course, many white people don't feel very privileged, and so the term grates with them. But I doubt they have ever not had their CV looked at on account of their name, or been racially profiled by the police. White Privilege does not mean that all white people are more privileged than all non-White people.
It would only be a way of stoking resentment if there is a reason for resentment to be stoked.
If you believe that "white privilege" is real then stand up loud and proud and explain why poor white kids struggling at school are privileged. Otherwise maybe your term is flawed and you should stop using it and use something else instead.
We aren't America incidentally. I'd imagine many young white teenagers in hoodies have been profiled by the Police here.
Your poor white kids aren't struggling because they're white, they are struggling because they're poor, and the education system is under-funded by the government you vote for, and perhaps in some cases because of aspects of their upbringing, in many cases linked to their poverty. I've just given you two examples of how they don't face some similar barriers that non-White people do. And I'm not sure there are many places where a white kid in a hoodie will get hassled by the police more than a black kid in a hoodie, but please share statistics to the contrary if you have them.
'Your poor white kids aren't struggling because they're white, they are struggling because they're poor, and the education system is under-funded by the government you vote for, and perhaps in some cases because of aspects of their upbringing, in many cases linked to their poverty.'
Precisely.
I agree. There is no institutional racism in this country.
After reading the thread here I bet on Labour holding Batley and Spen, but I pulled out of the market after I woke up this morning to the headline news that the Education Select Committee believes schools have long neglected white children. This is how the Tories win - by playing the race card. The race card is a trump card. (See what I did there.) Most likely the Tories will gain Batley and Spen and they are value at 1.45. Thumping away with this kind of story - what is essentially a call for "white rights" - could increase the Tories' Commons majority at the next GE too.
Time to emigrate?
What rubbish. There is clearly an issue with underachievement in this demographic, and there has been for a while, and addressing it is exactly what is needed to stop people playing the race card.
Or would you prefer this sector of society was allowed to keep falling behind as long as your comfy worldview wasn’t challenged ?
I just don't understand what their race has to do with this. They're not getting treated badly at school because they're white. In fact I doubt they're getting treated badly at school at all, except to the extent that all state school kids in this country are let down by a lack of money and focus from the government and the establishment, who mostly go private and so have very little skin in the game. Their problems come from a lack of engagement in education, often rooted in their parents' experiences of school, sometimes compounded by other issues that their parents have. Plus poverty, which makes everything harder. (BTW before anyone accuses me of being an out of touch elitist, I went to a comprehensive school that was almost entirely white so the so-called white working class is not some kind of unknown exotic species to me).
I disagree with that and I think a lot has to do with the attitude of teachers. As @RochdalePioneers so helpfully demonstrated a few days back, there is a view on the left, especially amongst let's say the more educated parts including the teaching profession, that WWC kids are essentially thick, racist and therefore not worth saving, and the problems they have in their lives are the faults of them and their ghastly parents. Therefore, why bother trying to do anything with them. That then leads to teachers who view their place as going through the motions rather than trying to inspire or change.
That is the Right's view of the view of the Left. The real one is that our education system is elitist and old fashioned and underfunded and warped by the propensity of the affluent to opt out and purchase advantage via the private sector.
We demand better. We want a more egalitarian approach that will deliver a similar (and high) quality education to everyone regardless of parental bank balance. Increase participation in state schools, proper funding, a real prioritizing of disadvantaged areas.
The biggest beneficiary of such an approach? Yep - white working class children.
But oh no, too difficult. Too disruptive of the status quo that so many are secretly comfortable with. So let's produce this report instead. Let's avoid the hard choices about class and money and push some culture war buttons. Let's waffle on about the term "white privilege". Has sweet FA to do with the problem but let's pretend that it does. Let's stoke some grievance!
I see you, Tories, and Middle England. I see you.
So are you saying Tories invented the term "white privilege"?
The Tories have latched onto it because they have figured out that it is a way of stoking resentment and dividing working class people. White Privilege is a term that is used to describe the advantages in many situations that white people enjoy on account of being the majority group. I'm sorry, but it describes something real, something that I personally have observed, and so I am not going to be bullied into not using it in that specific context. Of course, many white people don't feel very privileged, and so the term grates with them. But I doubt they have ever not had their CV looked at on account of their name, or been racially profiled by the police. White Privilege does not mean that all white people are more privileged than all non-White people.
It would only be a way of stoking resentment if there is a reason for resentment to be stoked.
If you believe that "white privilege" is real then stand up loud and proud and explain why poor white kids struggling at school are privileged. Otherwise maybe your term is flawed and you should stop using it and use something else instead.
We aren't America incidentally. I'd imagine many young white teenagers in hoodies have been profiled by the Police here.
Your poor white kids aren't struggling because they're white, they are struggling because they're poor, and the education system is under-funded by the government you vote for, and perhaps in some cases because of aspects of their upbringing, in many cases linked to their poverty. I've just given you two examples of how they don't face some similar barriers that non-White people do. And I'm not sure there are many places where a white kid in a hoodie will get hassled by the police more than a black kid in a hoodie, but please share statistics to the contrary if you have them.
Not getting your name judged isn't a privilege, its basic common decency. If someone is getting judged for racist reasons then that's racism and argue against racism. There's no need to invent a new term about privilege, just fight racism. Though its worth noting that names aren't only judged on racial terms. Who is more likely to be taken seriously at first glance from their name: a Susan, Elizabeth or Helen . . . or a Peace, Rain or Cloud.
As for kids being harassed again this isn't America. A poor inner city white kid in a hoodie probably gets harassed more than a well off, smartly dressed suburban black kid.
If you are unlucky enough to be born to scummy parents, it damages your life chances. Without, expectations, aspirations and boundaries, the kids follow in the footsteps of their parents. It is a tough ask of schools to undo the damage done in the home.
I am WWC, but my parents did have expectations, aspirations and boundaries for me. I worked hard and was fortunate to be bright enough to do well. But without the right home life I might have squandered the opportunities available to me, not passed my exams, not gone to Uni and perhaps not even have signed up to PB.
On educational performance. The SC Report is telling us nothing new. Ever since meaningful educational performance data started being collected, around 30 years ago, the group that has underachieved the most has been white kids from a poor background - i.e. on free school meals (FSM). The only group who does worse is those who have been in care. Other underachieving groups have (and still do) included Afro-Caribbean boys, and poorer kids from Pakistani and Bangladeshi origin.
Various efforts have been made to improve the performance of kids on FSM (from all backgrounds). The London Challenge was the most successful. The jury is still out on how successful the Pupil Premium funding has been; where it's been well targetted, it's had an impact, but too many schools have just merged it into their general funding.
Given this brief overview of historical underachievement dating back decades (and, if we had the data, probably ever since compulsory education started), the idea that the fashionable concept of 'white privilege' is a factor is ludicrous. As is the insulting suggestion by one poster that 'leftie' teachers don't try to raise the aspirations of w/c kids.
It's classic Conservative divide and conquer, tactics that sadly work for them again and again.
Instead of making sure everyone can access a good education, including vocational education, they prefer to stoke racial divisions. Giving simple answers to complex, hard (and expensive) to resolve questions.
Ken Clarke on BBC R4 Today absolutely destroying de Pfeffel.
My god, Ken’s good. Royal Yacht = populist nonsense.
The timeline for the Carrie Celeste looks absolutely mad on the face of it. It's a one off design of a type of ship that hasn't been built in the UK for 50+ years. The is no fucking way they are going to cut steel on it in 2022. It's one of those schemes that's so ill considered you can't help but assume The Fireplace Salesman was involved somewhere.
As Ken Clarke pointed out, the cost of the royal yacht itself is not going to break the bank, but it is an indication of a profound lack of judgement at No.10.
In the unlikely event it comes to pass it's going to be a security nightmare. It's the size of a Type 45 and is going to have lots of classified equipment on board so it will be very limited in the locations in which it can be docked. Embassies are secured by dint of being in a static location around which a persistent intelligence picture can be generated. The Carrie Celeste will need an expensive and time consuming security assessment at every new berth.
Nobody gives a fuck what anything costs these days but this thing has doubled in price since Johnson started dribbling on about it and will probably double again before it gets off the slipway.
Meanwhile there's no torpedoes on our shiny new ASW frigates to save money. If the ship is out of limits for aviation or the helicopter's broken (spoiler: helicopters break A LOT) then it's case of; pack 'er up boys, we're not sub hunting today.
Boris Johnson’s net approval rating: -32 Rishi Sunak’s net approval rating: -3 Government’s Net Competency Rating: -36 Keir Starmer's net approval rating: -16
After reading the thread here I bet on Labour holding Batley and Spen, but I pulled out of the market after I woke up this morning to the headline news that the Education Select Committee believes schools have long neglected white children. This is how the Tories win - by playing the race card. The race card is a trump card. (See what I did there.) Most likely the Tories will gain Batley and Spen and they are value at 1.45. Thumping away with this kind of story - what is essentially a call for "white rights" - could increase the Tories' Commons majority at the next GE too.
Time to emigrate?
What rubbish. There is clearly an issue with underachievement in this demographic, and there has been for a while, and addressing it is exactly what is needed to stop people playing the race card.
Or would you prefer this sector of society was allowed to keep falling behind as long as your comfy worldview wasn’t challenged ?
If this story isn't playing the race card, what is? No "issue with underachievement" would make it into something else.
"Playing the race card" means appealing to people to vote because of feelings they have that are based on their "racial" identity (here, whiteness) and on what they believe is a common experience among those who share that "racial" identity. That's how I use the term anyway. How do you use it?
My daughter was taught in school about a black car that wasn’t allowed to race with the white cars because the “race committee” (consisting of old, male, white cars) was worried he might win.
Is that helpful?
That's so stupid. There is so much actual history relating to these issues that could be taught, why come up with some kind of lame allegory instead? Thankfully I have never come across anything this dumb at our kids' schools, which have a very varied intake across nationalities, races and social classes and I think teach these kind of issues very well. It sounds like your daughter's school is kind of uncomfortable about these issues and has tried to address them in a way that won't offend anyone, and ended up with a mess.
It’s from a book called Race Cars that is a prescribed text in the US system…
(She was also marked down because she chose to write about Alfred the Great when told to write about “a reformer who inspires you”… about dead white European males aren’t on the approved list)
After reading the thread here I bet on Labour holding Batley and Spen, but I pulled out of the market after I woke up this morning to the headline news that the Education Select Committee believes schools have long neglected white children. This is how the Tories win - by playing the race card. The race card is a trump card. (See what I did there.) Most likely the Tories will gain Batley and Spen and they are value at 1.45. Thumping away with this kind of story - what is essentially a call for "white rights" - could increase the Tories' Commons majority at the next GE too.
Time to emigrate?
What rubbish. There is clearly an issue with underachievement in this demographic, and there has been for a while, and addressing it is exactly what is needed to stop people playing the race card.
Or would you prefer this sector of society was allowed to keep falling behind as long as your comfy worldview wasn’t challenged ?
I just don't understand what their race has to do with this. They're not getting treated badly at school because they're white. In fact I doubt they're getting treated badly at school at all, except to the extent that all state school kids in this country are let down by a lack of money and focus from the government and the establishment, who mostly go private and so have very little skin in the game. Their problems come from a lack of engagement in education, often rooted in their parents' experiences of school, sometimes compounded by other issues that their parents have. Plus poverty, which makes everything harder. (BTW before anyone accuses me of being an out of touch elitist, I went to a comprehensive school that was almost entirely white so the so-called white working class is not some kind of unknown exotic species to me).
I disagree with that and I think a lot has to do with the attitude of teachers. As @RochdalePioneers so helpfully demonstrated a few days back, there is a view on the left, especially amongst let's say the more educated parts including the teaching profession, that WWC kids are essentially thick, racist and therefore not worth saving, and the problems they have in their lives are the faults of them and their ghastly parents. Therefore, why bother trying to do anything with them. That then leads to teachers who view their place as going through the motions rather than trying to inspire or change.
That is the Right's view of the view of the Left. The real one is that our education system is elitist and old fashioned and underfunded and warped by the propensity of the affluent to opt out and purchase advantage via the private sector.
We demand better. We want a more egalitarian approach that will deliver a similar (and high) quality education to everyone regardless of parental bank balance. Increase participation in state schools, proper funding, a real prioritizing of disadvantaged areas.
The biggest beneficiary of such an approach? Yep - white working class children.
But oh no, too difficult. Too disruptive of the status quo that so many are secretly comfortable with. So let's produce this report instead. Let's avoid the hard choices about class and money and push some culture war buttons. Let's waffle on about the term "white privilege". Has sweet FA to do with the problem but let's pretend that it does. Let's stoke some grievance!
I see you, Tories, and Middle England. I see you.
So are you saying Tories invented the term "white privilege"?
The Tories have latched onto it because they have figured out that it is a way of stoking resentment and dividing working class people. White Privilege is a term that is used to describe the advantages in many situations that white people enjoy on account of being the majority group. I'm sorry, but it describes something real, something that I personally have observed, and so I am not going to be bullied into not using it in that specific context. Of course, many white people don't feel very privileged, and so the term grates with them. But I doubt they have ever not had their CV looked at on account of their name, or been racially profiled by the police. White Privilege does not mean that all white people are more privileged than all non-White people.
It is misnamed therefore. And on your last sentence, that is how many on the radical left, especially in the USA, choose to use it, and what they choose to believe. If that is not what the left as a whole believes when they use the phrase, they need to do significantly more to distance themselves from the nutters who shout the loudest. Or to use a different phrase.
Really? I don't spend much time hanging out with American radical leftists, but I am quite familiar with how the term is used here and in America (I used to live there) and the only people I have ever heard using it in your sense on either side of the Atlantic are right wingers trying to discredit it.
In all fairness, OLB, I've never heard anyone use it in real life at all. My impressions are based purely on x said y on the internet - that is, the nutters who shout the loudest.
Ken Clarke on BBC R4 Today absolutely destroying de Pfeffel.
My god, Ken’s good. Royal Yacht = populist nonsense.
The timeline for the Carrie Celeste looks absolutely mad on the face of it. It's a one off design of a type of ship that hasn't been built in the UK for 50+ years. The is no fucking way they are going to cut steel on it in 2022. It's one of those schemes that's so ill considered you can't help but assume The Fireplace Salesman was involved somewhere.
As Ken Clarke pointed out, the cost of the royal yacht itself is not going to break the bank, but it is an indication of a profound lack of judgement at No.10.
In the unlikely event it comes to pass it's going to be a security nightmare. It's the size of a Type 45 and is going to have lots of classified equipment on board so it will be very limited in the locations in which it can be docked. Embassies are secured by dint of being in a static location around which a persistent intelligence picture can be generated. The Carrie Celeste will need an expensive and time consuming security assessment at every new berth.
Nobody gives a fuck what anything costs these days but this thing has doubled in price since Johnson started dribbling on about it and will probably double again before it gets off the slipway.
Meanwhile there's no torpedoes on our shiny new ASW frigates to save money. If the ship is out of limits for aviation or the helicopter's broken (spoiler: helicopters break A LOT) then it's case of; pack 'er up boys, we're not sub hunting today.
Ken Clarke on BBC R4 Today absolutely destroying de Pfeffel.
My god, Ken’s good. Royal Yacht = populist nonsense.
The timeline for the Carrie Celeste looks absolutely mad on the face of it. It's a one off design of a type of ship that hasn't been built in the UK for 50+ years. The is no fucking way they are going to cut steel on it in 2022. It's one of those schemes that's so ill considered you can't help but assume The Fireplace Salesman was involved somewhere.
As Ken Clarke pointed out, the cost of the royal yacht itself is not going to break the bank, but it is an indication of a profound lack of judgement at No.10.
That she, like Britannia before her, will generate a massive amount of trade and goodwill from countries and companies around the world, far in excess of the cost of building her.
Well, she won't be like Britannia because she is not a royal yacht. Indeed all the indications which have been given is that the Royal Family want nothing to do with it.
Still let's see what Carrie and a load of gold wallpaper do for our trade, eh!
The modern incarnation of the Conservative Party - de facto English Nationalist Party - view the royal family as their party playthings. This will have long-term negative consequences for both the ENP and for the monarchy.
Throwing William into the forefront of de Pfeffel’s “muscular Unionism” (sic) campaign was profoundly ill-judged, and quite unfair on the man.
After reading the thread here I bet on Labour holding Batley and Spen, but I pulled out of the market after I woke up this morning to the headline news that the Education Select Committee believes schools have long neglected white children. This is how the Tories win - by playing the race card. The race card is a trump card. (See what I did there.) Most likely the Tories will gain Batley and Spen and they are value at 1.45. Thumping away with this kind of story - what is essentially a call for "white rights" - could increase the Tories' Commons majority at the next GE too.
Time to emigrate?
What rubbish. There is clearly an issue with underachievement in this demographic, and there has been for a while, and addressing it is exactly what is needed to stop people playing the race card.
Or would you prefer this sector of society was allowed to keep falling behind as long as your comfy worldview wasn’t challenged ?
I just don't understand what their race has to do with this. They're not getting treated badly at school because they're white. In fact I doubt they're getting treated badly at school at all, except to the extent that all state school kids in this country are let down by a lack of money and focus from the government and the establishment, who mostly go private and so have very little skin in the game. Their problems come from a lack of engagement in education, often rooted in their parents' experiences of school, sometimes compounded by other issues that their parents have. Plus poverty, which makes everything harder. (BTW before anyone accuses me of being an out of touch elitist, I went to a comprehensive school that was almost entirely white so the so-called white working class is not some kind of unknown exotic species to me).
I disagree with that and I think a lot has to do with the attitude of teachers. As @RochdalePioneers so helpfully demonstrated a few days back, there is a view on the left, especially amongst let's say the more educated parts including the teaching profession, that WWC kids are essentially thick, racist and therefore not worth saving, and the problems they have in their lives are the faults of them and their ghastly parents. Therefore, why bother trying to do anything with them. That then leads to teachers who view their place as going through the motions rather than trying to inspire or change.
That is the Right's view of the view of the Left. The real one is that our education system is elitist and old fashioned and underfunded and warped by the propensity of the affluent to opt out and purchase advantage via the private sector.
We demand better. We want a more egalitarian approach that will deliver a similar (and high) quality education to everyone regardless of parental bank balance. Increase participation in state schools, proper funding, a real prioritizing of disadvantaged areas.
The biggest beneficiary of such an approach? Yep - white working class children.
But oh no, too difficult. Too disruptive of the status quo that so many are secretly comfortable with. So let's produce this report instead. Let's avoid the hard choices about class and money and push some culture war buttons. Let's waffle on about the term "white privilege". Has sweet FA to do with the problem but let's pretend that it does. Let's stoke some grievance!
I see you, Tories, and Middle England. I see you.
So are you saying Tories invented the term "white privilege"?
The Tories have latched onto it because they have figured out that it is a way of stoking resentment and dividing working class people. White Privilege is a term that is used to describe the advantages in many situations that white people enjoy on account of being the majority group. I'm sorry, but it describes something real, something that I personally have observed, and so I am not going to be bullied into not using it in that specific context. Of course, many white people don't feel very privileged, and so the term grates with them. But I doubt they have ever not had their CV looked at on account of their name, or been racially profiled by the police. White Privilege does not mean that all white people are more privileged than all non-White people.
It would only be a way of stoking resentment if there is a reason for resentment to be stoked.
If you believe that "white privilege" is real then stand up loud and proud and explain why poor white kids struggling at school are privileged. Otherwise maybe your term is flawed and you should stop using it and use something else instead.
We aren't America incidentally. I'd imagine many young white teenagers in hoodies have been profiled by the Police here.
Your poor white kids aren't struggling because they're white, they are struggling because they're poor, and the education system is under-funded by the government you vote for, and perhaps in some cases because of aspects of their upbringing, in many cases linked to their poverty. I've just given you two examples of how they don't face some similar barriers that non-White people do. And I'm not sure there are many places where a white kid in a hoodie will get hassled by the police more than a black kid in a hoodie, but please share statistics to the contrary if you have them.
It’s divisive and unhelpful as it perpetrates the perception that people are homogenous blocs based on skin colour.
On educational performance. The SC Report is telling us nothing new. Ever since meaningful educational performance data started being collected, around 30 years ago, the group that has underachieved the most has been white kids from a poor background - i.e. on free school meals (FSM). The only group who does worse is those who have been in care. Other underachieving groups have (and still do) included Afro-Caribbean boys, and poorer kids from Pakistani and Bangladeshi origin.
Various efforts have been made to improve the performance of kids on FSM (from all backgrounds). The London Challenge was the most successful. The jury is still out on how successful the Pupil Premium funding has been; where it's been well targetted, it's had an impact, but too many schools have just merged it into their general funding.
Given this brief overview of historical underachievement dating back decades (and, if we had the data, probably ever since compulsory education started), the idea that the fashionable concept of 'white privilege' is a factor is ludicrous. As is the insulting suggestion by one poster that 'leftie' teachers don't try to raise the aspirations of w/c kids.
It's classic Conservative divide and conquer, tactics that sadly work for them again and again.
Instead of making sure everyone can access a good education, including vocational education, they prefer to stoke racial divisions. Giving simple answers to complex, hard (and expensive) to resolve questions.
The Conservatives are just responding to divisions others are stoking.
If people like @OnlyLivingBoy want to bang on about how poor white kids are privileged then why shouldn't the Tories respond to that?
Or do you think you deserve a safe space where you can make your points but nobody gets to reply or respond to them?
Ken Clarke on BBC R4 Today absolutely destroying de Pfeffel.
My god, Ken’s good. Royal Yacht = populist nonsense.
The timeline for the Carrie Celeste looks absolutely mad on the face of it. It's a one off design of a type of ship that hasn't been built in the UK for 50+ years. The is no fucking way they are going to cut steel on it in 2022. It's one of those schemes that's so ill considered you can't help but assume The Fireplace Salesman was involved somewhere.
As Ken Clarke pointed out, the cost of the royal yacht itself is not going to break the bank, but it is an indication of a profound lack of judgement at No.10.
That she, like Britannia before her, will generate a massive amount of trade and goodwill from countries and companies around the world, far in excess of the cost of building her.
Well, she won't be like Britannia because she is not a royal yacht. Indeed all the indications which have been given is that the Royal Family want nothing to do with it.
Still let's see what Carrie and a load of gold wallpaper do for our trade, eh!
Hopefully, by the time it comes into being, Carrie will be nowhere near being invited onto it.
On the more substantive point, Britannia really did do a great job for UK trade and soft power. Businessmen framed their invitations from HMQ, even if they only ever got to meet Michael Hesetine and AirMiles Andy.
After reading the thread here I bet on Labour holding Batley and Spen, but I pulled out of the market after I woke up this morning to the headline news that the Education Select Committee believes schools have long neglected white children. This is how the Tories win - by playing the race card. The race card is a trump card. (See what I did there.) Most likely the Tories will gain Batley and Spen and they are value at 1.45. Thumping away with this kind of story - what is essentially a call for "white rights" - could increase the Tories' Commons majority at the next GE too.
Time to emigrate?
What rubbish. There is clearly an issue with underachievement in this demographic, and there has been for a while, and addressing it is exactly what is needed to stop people playing the race card.
Or would you prefer this sector of society was allowed to keep falling behind as long as your comfy worldview wasn’t challenged ?
If this story isn't playing the race card, what is? No "issue with underachievement" would make it into something else.
"Playing the race card" means appealing to people to vote because of feelings they have that are based on their "racial" identity (here, whiteness) and on what they believe is a common experience among those who share that "racial" identity. That's how I use the term anyway. How do you use it?
My daughter was taught in school about a black car that wasn’t allowed to race with the white cars because the “race committee” (consisting of old, male, white cars) was worried he might win.
Is that helpful?
Yes, I see Labour is already coming out and saying that it is "divisive" and adding fuel to the culture war by mentioning white privilege. A bit rich coming from the side that pours petrol liberally onto the flames when it is anything to do with non-white people
The Report identifies the term as potentially problematic, especially around white kids not having the same support infrastructure as other 'identity' groups. Challenging under the Equalities Act is quite robust.
29. Schools should consider whether the promotion of politically controversial terminology, including White Privilege, is consistent with their duties under the Equality Act 2010. The Department should take steps to ensure that young people are not inadvertently being inducted into political movements when what is required is balanced, age-appropriate discussion and a curriculum that equips young people to thrive in diverse and multi-cultural communities throughout their lives and work. The Department should issue clear guidance for schools and other Department-affiliated organisations receiving grants from the Department on how to deliver teaching on these complex issues in a balanced, impartial and age-appropriate way
My wife teaches in a primary school with a large percentage of the intake on FSM. I can assure you that this guidance is pretty well irrelevant to current or future student outcomes.
My point is why for some that may have touched a nerve.
For some, "white privilege" is a dogma justifying their opinions.
Walked past a vaccine centre on the way to a meeting just now, I was very early so I decided to chance it and asked if they'd give me a second dose. They said yes as long as I had my vaccine card with me! Just got my second Pfizer done!
My wife is going to be so jealous.
Can you bring your second jab forward if you're on AZ? Or is it still best to leave it the 12 weeks?
Ken Clarke on BBC R4 Today absolutely destroying de Pfeffel.
My god, Ken’s good. Royal Yacht = populist nonsense.
The timeline for the Carrie Celeste looks absolutely mad on the face of it. It's a one off design of a type of ship that hasn't been built in the UK for 50+ years. The is no fucking way they are going to cut steel on it in 2022. It's one of those schemes that's so ill considered you can't help but assume The Fireplace Salesman was involved somewhere.
As Ken Clarke pointed out, the cost of the royal yacht itself is not going to break the bank, but it is an indication of a profound lack of judgement at No.10.
That she, like Britannia before her, will generate a massive amount of trade and goodwill from countries and companies around the world, far in excess of the cost of building her.
How do you know? This is just another BoJo vanity project.
Boris Johnson’s net approval rating: -32 Rishi Sunak’s net approval rating: -3 Government’s Net Competency Rating: -36 Keir Starmer's net approval rating: -16
Walked past a vaccine centre on the way to a meeting just now, I was very early so I decided to chance it and asked if they'd give me a second dose. They said yes as long as I had my vaccine card with me! Just got my second Pfizer done!
After reading the thread here I bet on Labour holding Batley and Spen, but I pulled out of the market after I woke up this morning to the headline news that the Education Select Committee believes schools have long neglected white children. This is how the Tories win - by playing the race card. The race card is a trump card. (See what I did there.) Most likely the Tories will gain Batley and Spen and they are value at 1.45. Thumping away with this kind of story - what is essentially a call for "white rights" - could increase the Tories' Commons majority at the next GE too.
Time to emigrate?
What rubbish. There is clearly an issue with underachievement in this demographic, and there has been for a while, and addressing it is exactly what is needed to stop people playing the race card.
Or would you prefer this sector of society was allowed to keep falling behind as long as your comfy worldview wasn’t challenged ?
I just don't understand what their race has to do with this. They're not getting treated badly at school because they're white. In fact I doubt they're getting treated badly at school at all, except to the extent that all state school kids in this country are let down by a lack of money and focus from the government and the establishment, who mostly go private and so have very little skin in the game. Their problems come from a lack of engagement in education, often rooted in their parents' experiences of school, sometimes compounded by other issues that their parents have. Plus poverty, which makes everything harder. (BTW before anyone accuses me of being an out of touch elitist, I went to a comprehensive school that was almost entirely white so the so-called white working class is not some kind of unknown exotic species to me).
I disagree with that and I think a lot has to do with the attitude of teachers. As @RochdalePioneers so helpfully demonstrated a few days back, there is a view on the left, especially amongst let's say the more educated parts including the teaching profession, that WWC kids are essentially thick, racist and therefore not worth saving, and the problems they have in their lives are the faults of them and their ghastly parents. Therefore, why bother trying to do anything with them. That then leads to teachers who view their place as going through the motions rather than trying to inspire or change.
That is the Right's view of the view of the Left. The real one is that our education system is elitist and old fashioned and underfunded and warped by the propensity of the affluent to opt out and purchase advantage via the private sector.
We demand better. We want a more egalitarian approach that will deliver a similar (and high) quality education to everyone regardless of parental bank balance. Increase participation in state schools, proper funding, a real prioritizing of disadvantaged areas.
The biggest beneficiary of such an approach? Yep - white working class children.
But oh no, too difficult. Too disruptive of the status quo that so many are secretly comfortable with. So let's produce this report instead. Let's avoid the hard choices about class and money and push some culture war buttons. Let's waffle on about the term "white privilege". Has sweet FA to do with the problem but let's pretend that it does. Let's stoke some grievance!
I see you, Tories, and Middle England. I see you.
So are you saying Tories invented the term "white privilege"?
The Tories have latched onto it because they have figured out that it is a way of stoking resentment and dividing working class people. White Privilege is a term that is used to describe the advantages in many situations that white people enjoy on account of being the majority group. I'm sorry, but it describes something real, something that I personally have observed, and so I am not going to be bullied into not using it in that specific context. Of course, many white people don't feel very privileged, and so the term grates with them. But I doubt they have ever not had their CV looked at on account of their name, or been racially profiled by the police. White Privilege does not mean that all white people are more privileged than all non-White people.
It would only be a way of stoking resentment if there is a reason for resentment to be stoked.
If you believe that "white privilege" is real then stand up loud and proud and explain why poor white kids struggling at school are privileged. Otherwise maybe your term is flawed and you should stop using it and use something else instead.
We aren't America incidentally. I'd imagine many young white teenagers in hoodies have been profiled by the Police here.
Your poor white kids aren't struggling because they're white, they are struggling because they're poor, and the education system is under-funded by the government you vote for, and perhaps in some cases because of aspects of their upbringing, in many cases linked to their poverty. I've just given you two examples of how they don't face some similar barriers that non-White people do. And I'm not sure there are many places where a white kid in a hoodie will get hassled by the police more than a black kid in a hoodie, but please share statistics to the contrary if you have them.
'Your poor white kids aren't struggling because they're white, they are struggling because they're poor, and the education system is under-funded by the government you vote for, and perhaps in some cases because of aspects of their upbringing, in many cases linked to their poverty.'
Precisely.
I agree. There is no institutional racism in this country.
Ken Clarke on BBC R4 Today absolutely destroying de Pfeffel.
My god, Ken’s good. Royal Yacht = populist nonsense.
The timeline for the Carrie Celeste looks absolutely mad on the face of it. It's a one off design of a type of ship that hasn't been built in the UK for 50+ years. The is no fucking way they are going to cut steel on it in 2022. It's one of those schemes that's so ill considered you can't help but assume The Fireplace Salesman was involved somewhere.
As Ken Clarke pointed out, the cost of the royal yacht itself is not going to break the bank, but it is an indication of a profound lack of judgement at No.10.
That she, like Britannia before her, will generate a massive amount of trade and goodwill from countries and companies around the world, far in excess of the cost of building her.
Well, she won't be like Britannia because she is not a royal yacht. Indeed all the indications which have been given is that the Royal Family want nothing to do with it.
Still let's see what Carrie and a load of gold wallpaper do for our trade, eh!
Hopefully, by the time it comes into being, Carrie will be nowhere near being invited onto it.
On the more substantive point, Britannia really did do a great job for UK trade and soft power. Businessmen framed their invitations from HMQ, even if they only ever got to meet Michael Hesetine and AirMiles Andy.
That’s exactly it. The feedback from the Ambassadors was that people who they could never get to come to the Embassy would jump at the chance for a drink on the Royal Yacht
If you are unlucky enough to be born to scummy parents, it damages your life chances. Without, expectations, aspirations and boundaries, the kids follow in the footsteps of their parents. It is a tough ask of schools to undo the damage done in the home.
I am WWC, but my parents did have expectations, aspirations and boundaries for me. I worked hard and was fortunate to be bright enough to do well. But without the right home life I might have squandered the opportunities available to me, not passed my exams, not gone to Uni and perhaps not even have signed up to PB.
'Twas, I suspect, ever thus. My maternal grandparents had 11 children. The girls all had cut-glass accents, as their parents hoped they would 'marry well' and sent them to a school where the local accent could be removed. The boys were all taken out of school as soon as and put to work on the family farm, including the two who wanted to go one and 'get educated', and all sounded 'rural'.
Walked past a vaccine centre on the way to a meeting just now, I was very early so I decided to chance it and asked if they'd give me a second dose. They said yes as long as I had my vaccine card with me! Just got my second Pfizer done!
My wife is going to be so jealous.
Can you bring your second jab forward if you're on AZ? Or is it still best to leave it the 12 weeks?
The problem, of course, is that if at the next election the Conservatives somehow drop to (say) 315-318 seats is who ELSE could form a government?
This was the same situation in 2017. With Sinn Fein and the Speaker, the effective majority required is about 322. If the Conservatives are on 315, then it follows that everyone else (including the DUP) are on 327 (Speaker and Sinn Fein make up the remaining 8 seats).
The Conservatives might not be able to form a majority government, but who could oppose them? Just for the Lolz, we could say the seats are: CON 315; LAB 247; SNP 45; LD 20; DUP 8; SF 7; Plaid 4; SDLP 1; Alliance 1; Green 1; Speaker (Hoyle) 1. Majority required due to Speaker and SF: 322 (642/2 + 1).
Form a government that doesn't involve the Conservative party please. LAB + SNP + LD (plus SDLP and Alliance) doesn't make 315. It's 314. In fact, you couldn't make a majority even using everyone else except the DUP. Adding Plaid and the Greens only gets you to 318.
I know in the bad old days, in two party politics, if you were on 315, it was because the other lot had a majority. But these days with multiple parties and multiple MPs from those parties, if the Conservatives get 315 they're in government. As a busted minority administration that won't last a year, but that's what you'll get.
Because the alternative, a LAB/SNP/LD/Green/Plaid pact with SDLP and Alliance support, with the DUP bought off as 'neutrals' isn't going to last more than twenty minutes.
I've been going on about how the UK vaccination programme is slowing to a crawl without anyone noticing. *At least three people* have asked me why I think it's happening. Briefly: Not supply. Demand, perhaps a little. But mostly this: (1/4)
After reading the thread here I bet on Labour holding Batley and Spen, but I pulled out of the market after I woke up this morning to the headline news that the Education Select Committee believes schools have long neglected white children. This is how the Tories win - by playing the race card. The race card is a trump card. (See what I did there.) Most likely the Tories will gain Batley and Spen and they are value at 1.45. Thumping away with this kind of story - what is essentially a call for "white rights" - could increase the Tories' Commons majority at the next GE too.
Time to emigrate?
What rubbish. There is clearly an issue with underachievement in this demographic, and there has been for a while, and addressing it is exactly what is needed to stop people playing the race card.
Or would you prefer this sector of society was allowed to keep falling behind as long as your comfy worldview wasn’t challenged ?
I just don't understand what their race has to do with this. They're not getting treated badly at school because they're white. In fact I doubt they're getting treated badly at school at all, except to the extent that all state school kids in this country are let down by a lack of money and focus from the government and the establishment, who mostly go private and so have very little skin in the game. Their problems come from a lack of engagement in education, often rooted in their parents' experiences of school, sometimes compounded by other issues that their parents have. Plus poverty, which makes everything harder. (BTW before anyone accuses me of being an out of touch elitist, I went to a comprehensive school that was almost entirely white so the so-called white working class is not some kind of unknown exotic species to me).
I disagree with that and I think a lot has to do with the attitude of teachers. As @RochdalePioneers so helpfully demonstrated a few days back, there is a view on the left, especially amongst let's say the more educated parts including the teaching profession, that WWC kids are essentially thick, racist and therefore not worth saving, and the problems they have in their lives are the faults of them and their ghastly parents. Therefore, why bother trying to do anything with them. That then leads to teachers who view their place as going through the motions rather than trying to inspire or change.
That is the Right's view of the view of the Left. The real one is that our education system is elitist and old fashioned and underfunded and warped by the propensity of the affluent to opt out and purchase advantage via the private sector.
We demand better. We want a more egalitarian approach that will deliver a similar (and high) quality education to everyone regardless of parental bank balance. Increase participation in state schools, proper funding, a real prioritizing of disadvantaged areas.
The biggest beneficiary of such an approach? Yep - white working class children.
But oh no, too difficult. Too disruptive of the status quo that so many are secretly comfortable with. So let's produce this report instead. Let's avoid the hard choices about class and money and push some culture war buttons. Let's waffle on about the term "white privilege". Has sweet FA to do with the problem but let's pretend that it does. Let's stoke some grievance!
I see you, Tories, and Middle England. I see you.
So are you saying Tories invented the term "white privilege"?
I would back 1/3 that in a random conversation on here where it drifts onto white privilege it is a Tory voter who first uses the phrase here, and be a comfortable winner in the long run.
I would also back at odds on, that if someone starts a conversation about increasing education spending, they did not vote Tory at the last election.
I think the phrase is tactically unhelpful to the point of being counter productive, but does exist to an extent, as do many other privileges especially class and in many societies gender.
On educational performance. The SC Report is telling us nothing new. Ever since meaningful educational performance data started being collected, around 30 years ago, the group that has underachieved the most has been white kids from a poor background - i.e. on free school meals (FSM). The only group who does worse is those who have been in care. Other underachieving groups have (and still do) included Afro-Caribbean boys, and poorer kids from Pakistani and Bangladeshi origin.
Various efforts have been made to improve the performance of kids on FSM (from all backgrounds). The London Challenge was the most successful. The jury is still out on how successful the Pupil Premium funding has been; where it's been well targetted, it's had an impact, but too many schools have just merged it into their general funding.
Given this brief overview of historical underachievement dating back decades (and, if we had the data, probably ever since compulsory education started), the idea that the fashionable concept of 'white privilege' is a factor is ludicrous. As is the insulting suggestion by one poster that 'leftie' teachers don't try to raise the aspirations of w/c kids.
Anecodotally (ie my wife's experience) there does seem to be a very significant difference in parental educational engagement between poor families of asian and white British backgrounds. Whether that is anything more than a local effect, I can't say, but it certainly makes for a difference in outcomes locally. Lockdown has, of course, exacerbated that - though also had a big effect on ESL kids whose parents don't speak English at home.
Ken Clarke on BBC R4 Today absolutely destroying de Pfeffel.
My god, Ken’s good. Royal Yacht = populist nonsense.
The timeline for the Carrie Celeste looks absolutely mad on the face of it. It's a one off design of a type of ship that hasn't been built in the UK for 50+ years. The is no fucking way they are going to cut steel on it in 2022. It's one of those schemes that's so ill considered you can't help but assume The Fireplace Salesman was involved somewhere.
As Ken Clarke pointed out, the cost of the royal yacht itself is not going to break the bank, but it is an indication of a profound lack of judgement at No.10.
That she, like Britannia before her, will generate a massive amount of trade and goodwill from countries and companies around the world, far in excess of the cost of building her.
Well, she won't be like Britannia because she is not a royal yacht. Indeed all the indications which have been given is that the Royal Family want nothing to do with it.
Still let's see what Carrie and a load of gold wallpaper do for our trade, eh!
Hopefully, by the time it comes into being, Carrie will be nowhere near being invited onto it.
On the more substantive point, Britannia really did do a great job for UK trade and soft power. Businessmen framed their invitations from HMQ, even if they only ever got to meet Michael Hesetine and AirMiles Andy.
Well, that's all very lovely I'm sure. How much trade that would not otherwise have happened did all this jollity generate?
Does anyone know? Or is it one of those things that we're supposed to believe just because everyone always repeats it?
And since this new yacht is not a royal one why would anyone care two hoots about being invited onto it?
Ken Clarke on BBC R4 Today absolutely destroying de Pfeffel.
My god, Ken’s good. Royal Yacht = populist nonsense.
The timeline for the Carrie Celeste looks absolutely mad on the face of it. It's a one off design of a type of ship that hasn't been built in the UK for 50+ years. The is no fucking way they are going to cut steel on it in 2022. It's one of those schemes that's so ill considered you can't help but assume The Fireplace Salesman was involved somewhere.
As Ken Clarke pointed out, the cost of the royal yacht itself is not going to break the bank, but it is an indication of a profound lack of judgement at No.10.
That she, like Britannia before her, will generate a massive amount of trade and goodwill from countries and companies around the world, far in excess of the cost of building her.
Well, she won't be like Britannia because she is not a royal yacht. Indeed all the indications which have been given is that the Royal Family want nothing to do with it.
Still let's see what Carrie and a load of gold wallpaper do for our trade, eh!
Hopefully, by the time it comes into being, Carrie will be nowhere near being invited onto it.
On the more substantive point, Britannia really did do a great job for UK trade and soft power. Businessmen framed their invitations from HMQ, even if they only ever got to meet Michael Hesetine and AirMiles Andy.
Well, that's all very lovely I'm sure. How much trade that would not otherwise have happened did all this jollity generate?
Does anyone know? Or is it one of those things that we're supposed to believe just because everyone always repeats it?
And since this new yacht is not a royal one why would anyone care two hoots about being invited onto it?
No danger of meeting Air Miles Andy may now be a net increaser of hoots.
Boris Johnson’s net approval rating: -32 Rishi Sunak’s net approval rating: -3 Government’s Net Competency Rating: -36 Keir Starmer's net approval rating: -16
If you lot want better scores then the solution is hardly beyond the wit of man: offer Scottish voters some intelligent, pleasant, hard-working, competent and sympathetic politicians. Boris, Rishi, Keir, Anas and Douglas just don’t cut it.
After reading the thread here I bet on Labour holding Batley and Spen, but I pulled out of the market after I woke up this morning to the headline news that the Education Select Committee believes schools have long neglected white children. This is how the Tories win - by playing the race card. The race card is a trump card. (See what I did there.) Most likely the Tories will gain Batley and Spen and they are value at 1.45. Thumping away with this kind of story - what is essentially a call for "white rights" - could increase the Tories' Commons majority at the next GE too.
Time to emigrate?
What rubbish. There is clearly an issue with underachievement in this demographic, and there has been for a while, and addressing it is exactly what is needed to stop people playing the race card.
Or would you prefer this sector of society was allowed to keep falling behind as long as your comfy worldview wasn’t challenged ?
I just don't understand what their race has to do with this. They're not getting treated badly at school because they're white. In fact I doubt they're getting treated badly at school at all, except to the extent that all state school kids in this country are let down by a lack of money and focus from the government and the establishment, who mostly go private and so have very little skin in the game. Their problems come from a lack of engagement in education, often rooted in their parents' experiences of school, sometimes compounded by other issues that their parents have. Plus poverty, which makes everything harder. (BTW before anyone accuses me of being an out of touch elitist, I went to a comprehensive school that was almost entirely white so the so-called white working class is not some kind of unknown exotic species to me).
I disagree with that and I think a lot has to do with the attitude of teachers. As @RochdalePioneers so helpfully demonstrated a few days back, there is a view on the left, especially amongst let's say the more educated parts including the teaching profession, that WWC kids are essentially thick, racist and therefore not worth saving, and the problems they have in their lives are the faults of them and their ghastly parents. Therefore, why bother trying to do anything with them. That then leads to teachers who view their place as going through the motions rather than trying to inspire or change.
That is the Right's view of the view of the Left. The real one is that our education system is elitist and old fashioned and underfunded and warped by the propensity of the affluent to opt out and purchase advantage via the private sector.
We demand better. We want a more egalitarian approach that will deliver a similar (and high) quality education to everyone regardless of parental bank balance. Increase participation in state schools, proper funding, a real prioritizing of disadvantaged areas.
The biggest beneficiary of such an approach? Yep - white working class children.
But oh no, too difficult. Too disruptive of the status quo that so many are secretly comfortable with. So let's produce this report instead. Let's avoid the hard choices about class and money and push some culture war buttons. Let's waffle on about the term "white privilege". Has sweet FA to do with the problem but let's pretend that it does. Let's stoke some grievance!
I see you, Tories, and Middle England. I see you.
So are you saying Tories invented the term "white privilege"?
The Tories have latched onto it because they have figured out that it is a way of stoking resentment and dividing working class people. White Privilege is a term that is used to describe the advantages in many situations that white people enjoy on account of being the majority group. I'm sorry, but it describes something real, something that I personally have observed, and so I am not going to be bullied into not using it in that specific context. Of course, many white people don't feel very privileged, and so the term grates with them. But I doubt they have ever not had their CV looked at on account of their name, or been racially profiled by the police. White Privilege does not mean that all white people are more privileged than all non-White people.
It would only be a way of stoking resentment if there is a reason for resentment to be stoked.
If you believe that "white privilege" is real then stand up loud and proud and explain why poor white kids struggling at school are privileged. Otherwise maybe your term is flawed and you should stop using it and use something else instead.
We aren't America incidentally. I'd imagine many young white teenagers in hoodies have been profiled by the Police here.
Your poor white kids aren't struggling because they're white, they are struggling because they're poor, and the education system is under-funded by the government you vote for, and perhaps in some cases because of aspects of their upbringing, in many cases linked to their poverty. I've just given you two examples of how they don't face some similar barriers that non-White people do. And I'm not sure there are many places where a white kid in a hoodie will get hassled by the police more than a black kid in a hoodie, but please share statistics to the contrary if you have them.
'Your poor white kids aren't struggling because they're white, they are struggling because they're poor, and the education system is under-funded by the government you vote for, and perhaps in some cases because of aspects of their upbringing, in many cases linked to their poverty.'
Precisely.
I agree. There is no institutional racism in this country.
They're not mutually exclusive.
Indeed, and in the bad old days there very much was institutional racism in this country. But I don't think there is any more.
If you are unlucky enough to be born to scummy parents, it damages your life chances. Without, expectations, aspirations and boundaries, the kids follow in the footsteps of their parents. It is a tough ask of schools to undo the damage done in the home.
I am WWC, but my parents did have expectations, aspirations and boundaries for me. I worked hard and was fortunate to be bright enough to do well. But without the right home life I might have squandered the opportunities available to me, not passed my exams, not gone to Uni and perhaps not even have signed up to PB.
Not having both parents present also seems to be an issue that harms people’s life chances.
After reading the thread here I bet on Labour holding Batley and Spen, but I pulled out of the market after I woke up this morning to the headline news that the Education Select Committee believes schools have long neglected white children. This is how the Tories win - by playing the race card. The race card is a trump card. (See what I did there.) Most likely the Tories will gain Batley and Spen and they are value at 1.45. Thumping away with this kind of story - what is essentially a call for "white rights" - could increase the Tories' Commons majority at the next GE too.
Time to emigrate?
What rubbish. There is clearly an issue with underachievement in this demographic, and there has been for a while, and addressing it is exactly what is needed to stop people playing the race card.
Or would you prefer this sector of society was allowed to keep falling behind as long as your comfy worldview wasn’t challenged ?
I just don't understand what their race has to do with this. They're not getting treated badly at school because they're white. In fact I doubt they're getting treated badly at school at all, except to the extent that all state school kids in this country are let down by a lack of money and focus from the government and the establishment, who mostly go private and so have very little skin in the game. Their problems come from a lack of engagement in education, often rooted in their parents' experiences of school, sometimes compounded by other issues that their parents have. Plus poverty, which makes everything harder. (BTW before anyone accuses me of being an out of touch elitist, I went to a comprehensive school that was almost entirely white so the so-called white working class is not some kind of unknown exotic species to me).
I disagree with that and I think a lot has to do with the attitude of teachers. As @RochdalePioneers so helpfully demonstrated a few days back, there is a view on the left, especially amongst let's say the more educated parts including the teaching profession, that WWC kids are essentially thick, racist and therefore not worth saving, and the problems they have in their lives are the faults of them and their ghastly parents. Therefore, why bother trying to do anything with them. That then leads to teachers who view their place as going through the motions rather than trying to inspire or change.
That is the Right's view of the view of the Left. The real one is that our education system is elitist and old fashioned and underfunded and warped by the propensity of the affluent to opt out and purchase advantage via the private sector.
We demand better. We want a more egalitarian approach that will deliver a similar (and high) quality education to everyone regardless of parental bank balance. Increase participation in state schools, proper funding, a real prioritizing of disadvantaged areas.
The biggest beneficiary of such an approach? Yep - white working class children.
But oh no, too difficult. Too disruptive of the status quo that so many are secretly comfortable with. So let's produce this report instead. Let's avoid the hard choices about class and money and push some culture war buttons. Let's waffle on about the term "white privilege". Has sweet FA to do with the problem but let's pretend that it does. Let's stoke some grievance!
I see you, Tories, and Middle England. I see you.
So are you saying Tories invented the term "white privilege"?
No course not. What I'm saying is that it looks like a tag on here to generate some culture war spat and divert the responsibility for a problem in schools to that oh so convenient amorphous blob which is to blame for all the defects of 11 years of Tory government - the woke left.
It's getting stale. It's getting very stale indeed.
After reading the thread here I bet on Labour holding Batley and Spen, but I pulled out of the market after I woke up this morning to the headline news that the Education Select Committee believes schools have long neglected white children. This is how the Tories win - by playing the race card. The race card is a trump card. (See what I did there.) Most likely the Tories will gain Batley and Spen and they are value at 1.45. Thumping away with this kind of story - what is essentially a call for "white rights" - could increase the Tories' Commons majority at the next GE too.
Time to emigrate?
What rubbish. There is clearly an issue with underachievement in this demographic, and there has been for a while, and addressing it is exactly what is needed to stop people playing the race card.
Or would you prefer this sector of society was allowed to keep falling behind as long as your comfy worldview wasn’t challenged ?
If this story isn't playing the race card, what is? No "issue with underachievement" would make it into something else.
"Playing the race card" means appealing to people to vote because of feelings they have that are based on their "racial" identity (here, whiteness) and on what they believe is a common experience among those who share that "racial" identity. That's how I use the term anyway. How do you use it?
My daughter was taught in school about a black car that wasn’t allowed to race with the white cars because the “race committee” (consisting of old, male, white cars) was worried he might win.
Is that helpful?
Yes, I see Labour is already coming out and saying that it is "divisive" and adding fuel to the culture war by mentioning white privilege. A bit rich coming from the side that pours petrol liberally onto the flames when it is anything to do with non-white people
The Report identifies the term as potentially problematic, especially around white kids not having the same support infrastructure as other 'identity' groups. Challenging under the Equalities Act is quite robust.
29. Schools should consider whether the promotion of politically controversial terminology, including White Privilege, is consistent with their duties under the Equality Act 2010. The Department should take steps to ensure that young people are not inadvertently being inducted into political movements when what is required is balanced, age-appropriate discussion and a curriculum that equips young people to thrive in diverse and multi-cultural communities throughout their lives and work. The Department should issue clear guidance for schools and other Department-affiliated organisations receiving grants from the Department on how to deliver teaching on these complex issues in a balanced, impartial and age-appropriate way
My wife teaches in a primary school with a large percentage of the intake on FSM. I can assure you that this guidance is pretty well irrelevant to current or future student outcomes.
My point is why for some that may have touched a nerve.
For some, "white privilege" is a dogma justifying their opinions.
Ken Clarke on BBC R4 Today absolutely destroying de Pfeffel.
My god, Ken’s good. Royal Yacht = populist nonsense.
The timeline for the Carrie Celeste looks absolutely mad on the face of it. It's a one off design of a type of ship that hasn't been built in the UK for 50+ years. The is no fucking way they are going to cut steel on it in 2022. It's one of those schemes that's so ill considered you can't help but assume The Fireplace Salesman was involved somewhere.
As Ken Clarke pointed out, the cost of the royal yacht itself is not going to break the bank, but it is an indication of a profound lack of judgement at No.10.
That she, like Britannia before her, will generate a massive amount of trade and goodwill from countries and companies around the world, far in excess of the cost of building her.
Well, she won't be like Britannia because she is not a royal yacht. Indeed all the indications which have been given is that the Royal Family want nothing to do with it.
Still let's see what Carrie and a load of gold wallpaper do for our trade, eh!
Hopefully, by the time it comes into being, Carrie will be nowhere near being invited onto it.
On the more substantive point, Britannia really did do a great job for UK trade and soft power. Businessmen framed their invitations from HMQ, even if they only ever got to meet Michael Hesetine and AirMiles Andy.
Well, that's all very lovely I'm sure. How much trade that would not otherwise have happened did all this jollity generate?
Does anyone know? Or is it one of those things that we're supposed to believe just because everyone always repeats it?
And since this new yacht is not a royal one why would anyone care two hoots about being invited onto it?
This article has an estimate of £3bn of value from trade missions by Britannia between 1991 & 1995. Not quite what you asked as very difficult to demonstrate how much would have happened without Britannia but enough that it seems there is a positive case to at least investigate
Your last point, about it not being a “royal” yacht is much more important
Walked past a vaccine centre on the way to a meeting just now, I was very early so I decided to chance it and asked if they'd give me a second dose. They said yes as long as I had my vaccine card with me! Just got my second Pfizer done!
My wife is going to be so jealous.
Can you bring your second jab forward if you're on AZ? Or is it still best to leave it the 12 weeks?
I brought mine forward, AZ. Think the sooner you get the second dose the better.
Boris Johnson’s net approval rating: -32 Rishi Sunak’s net approval rating: -3 Government’s Net Competency Rating: -36 Keir Starmer's net approval rating: -16
If you lot want better scores then the solution is hardly beyond the wit of man: offer Scottish voters some intelligent, pleasant, hard-working, competent and sympathetic politicians. Boris, Rishi, Keir, Anas and Douglas just don’t cut it.
After reading the thread here I bet on Labour holding Batley and Spen, but I pulled out of the market after I woke up this morning to the headline news that the Education Select Committee believes schools have long neglected white children. This is how the Tories win - by playing the race card. The race card is a trump card. (See what I did there.) Most likely the Tories will gain Batley and Spen and they are value at 1.45. Thumping away with this kind of story - what is essentially a call for "white rights" - could increase the Tories' Commons majority at the next GE too.
Time to emigrate?
What rubbish. There is clearly an issue with underachievement in this demographic, and there has been for a while, and addressing it is exactly what is needed to stop people playing the race card.
Or would you prefer this sector of society was allowed to keep falling behind as long as your comfy worldview wasn’t challenged ?
I just don't understand what their race has to do with this. They're not getting treated badly at school because they're white. In fact I doubt they're getting treated badly at school at all, except to the extent that all state school kids in this country are let down by a lack of money and focus from the government and the establishment, who mostly go private and so have very little skin in the game. Their problems come from a lack of engagement in education, often rooted in their parents' experiences of school, sometimes compounded by other issues that their parents have. Plus poverty, which makes everything harder. (BTW before anyone accuses me of being an out of touch elitist, I went to a comprehensive school that was almost entirely white so the so-called white working class is not some kind of unknown exotic species to me).
I disagree with that and I think a lot has to do with the attitude of teachers. As @RochdalePioneers so helpfully demonstrated a few days back, there is a view on the left, especially amongst let's say the more educated parts including the teaching profession, that WWC kids are essentially thick, racist and therefore not worth saving, and the problems they have in their lives are the faults of them and their ghastly parents. Therefore, why bother trying to do anything with them. That then leads to teachers who view their place as going through the motions rather than trying to inspire or change.
That is the Right's view of the view of the Left. The real one is that our education system is elitist and old fashioned and underfunded and warped by the propensity of the affluent to opt out and purchase advantage via the private sector.
We demand better. We want a more egalitarian approach that will deliver a similar (and high) quality education to everyone regardless of parental bank balance. Increase participation in state schools, proper funding, a real prioritizing of disadvantaged areas.
The biggest beneficiary of such an approach? Yep - white working class children.
But oh no, too difficult. Too disruptive of the status quo that so many are secretly comfortable with. So let's produce this report instead. Let's avoid the hard choices about class and money and push some culture war buttons. Let's waffle on about the term "white privilege". Has sweet FA to do with the problem but let's pretend that it does. Let's stoke some grievance!
I see you, Tories, and Middle England. I see you.
So are you saying Tories invented the term "white privilege"?
I would back 1/3 that in a random conversation on here where it drifts onto white privilege it is a Tory voter who first uses the phrase here, and be a comfortable winner in the long run.
I would also back at odds on, that if someone starts a conversation about increasing education spending, they did not vote Tory at the last election.
I think the phrase is tactically unhelpful to the point of being counter productive, but does exist to an extent, as do many other privileges especially class and in many societies gender.
If a Tory voter on here quotes someone who uses the term (and means it), like Charles in his example above, then is that a leftwinger initiating that or a right winger?
You seem to think that the far left ought to be able to say whatever they want in a safe space and never be quoted or responded to.
If the phrase is unhelpful to the point of being counter productive then don't use it and condemn those who do.
If you are unlucky enough to be born to scummy parents, it damages your life chances. Without, expectations, aspirations and boundaries, the kids follow in the footsteps of their parents. It is a tough ask of schools to undo the damage done in the home.
I am WWC, but my parents did have expectations, aspirations and boundaries for me. I worked hard and was fortunate to be bright enough to do well. But without the right home life I might have squandered the opportunities available to me, not passed my exams, not gone to Uni and perhaps not even have signed up to PB.
It's tough, but it is possible. And it takes remarkably few determined aspirational kids in a class to lift the tone for the whole class. Similarly, remarkably few determined horrible families can easily spoil things for everyone.
Northern Al mentioned London Challenge upthread. And that was a remarkable programme, though the jury is out on how much the improvements in London schools were down to what schools did, and how much they were due to aspirational immigration to London- whether internal or international.
What's undoubtedly true is that it's much easier to sell "education is the path to the world being your oyster" if the view out of the classroom window is the London skyline, rather than the ruins of an abandoned factory which nobody can even afford to clean up. The teachers at the northern WWC school where I was a governor flogged their guts out on a daily basis, as did many of the parents, but they were always running up a down escalator.
So we come back to the fundamental problem. London is the milch-cow that funds everywhere else, but is also the overgrown tree that stops anything growing in its shadow. And solving that problem is going to be tricky. Finger-pointing about white privilege (either way) isn't going to do it.
After reading the thread here I bet on Labour holding Batley and Spen, but I pulled out of the market after I woke up this morning to the headline news that the Education Select Committee believes schools have long neglected white children. This is how the Tories win - by playing the race card. The race card is a trump card. (See what I did there.) Most likely the Tories will gain Batley and Spen and they are value at 1.45. Thumping away with this kind of story - what is essentially a call for "white rights" - could increase the Tories' Commons majority at the next GE too.
Time to emigrate?
What rubbish. There is clearly an issue with underachievement in this demographic, and there has been for a while, and addressing it is exactly what is needed to stop people playing the race card.
Or would you prefer this sector of society was allowed to keep falling behind as long as your comfy worldview wasn’t challenged ?
I just don't understand what their race has to do with this. They're not getting treated badly at school because they're white. In fact I doubt they're getting treated badly at school at all, except to the extent that all state school kids in this country are let down by a lack of money and focus from the government and the establishment, who mostly go private and so have very little skin in the game. Their problems come from a lack of engagement in education, often rooted in their parents' experiences of school, sometimes compounded by other issues that their parents have. Plus poverty, which makes everything harder. (BTW before anyone accuses me of being an out of touch elitist, I went to a comprehensive school that was almost entirely white so the so-called white working class is not some kind of unknown exotic species to me).
I disagree with that and I think a lot has to do with the attitude of teachers. As @RochdalePioneers so helpfully demonstrated a few days back, there is a view on the left, especially amongst let's say the more educated parts including the teaching profession, that WWC kids are essentially thick, racist and therefore not worth saving, and the problems they have in their lives are the faults of them and their ghastly parents. Therefore, why bother trying to do anything with them. That then leads to teachers who view their place as going through the motions rather than trying to inspire or change.
That is the Right's view of the view of the Left. The real one is that our education system is elitist and old fashioned and underfunded and warped by the propensity of the affluent to opt out and purchase advantage via the private sector.
We demand better. We want a more egalitarian approach that will deliver a similar (and high) quality education to everyone regardless of parental bank balance. Increase participation in state schools, proper funding, a real prioritizing of disadvantaged areas.
The biggest beneficiary of such an approach? Yep - white working class children.
But oh no, too difficult. Too disruptive of the status quo that so many are secretly comfortable with. So let's produce this report instead. Let's avoid the hard choices about class and money and push some culture war buttons. Let's waffle on about the term "white privilege". Has sweet FA to do with the problem but let's pretend that it does. Let's stoke some grievance!
I see you, Tories, and Middle England. I see you.
So are you saying Tories invented the term "white privilege"?
No course not. What I'm saying is that it looks like a tag on here to generate some culture war spat and divert the responsibility for a problem in schools to that oh so convenient amorphous blob which is to blame for all the defects of 11 years of Tory government - the woke left.
It's getting stale. It's getting very stale indeed.
If its stale then maybe everyone using the term should stop using it? Then they wouldn't be getting quoted using it and responded to?
Otherwise if they're still using it, then that's fresh not stale.
Ken Clarke on BBC R4 Today absolutely destroying de Pfeffel.
My god, Ken’s good. Royal Yacht = populist nonsense.
The timeline for the Carrie Celeste looks absolutely mad on the face of it. It's a one off design of a type of ship that hasn't been built in the UK for 50+ years. The is no fucking way they are going to cut steel on it in 2022. It's one of those schemes that's so ill considered you can't help but assume The Fireplace Salesman was involved somewhere.
As Ken Clarke pointed out, the cost of the royal yacht itself is not going to break the bank, but it is an indication of a profound lack of judgement at No.10.
That she, like Britannia before her, will generate a massive amount of trade and goodwill from countries and companies around the world, far in excess of the cost of building her.
Well, she won't be like Britannia because she is not a royal yacht. Indeed all the indications which have been given is that the Royal Family want nothing to do with it.
Still let's see what Carrie and a load of gold wallpaper do for our trade, eh!
Hopefully, by the time it comes into being, Carrie will be nowhere near being invited onto it.
On the more substantive point, Britannia really did do a great job for UK trade and soft power. Businessmen framed their invitations from HMQ, even if they only ever got to meet Michael Hesetine and AirMiles Andy.
Well, that's all very lovely I'm sure. How much trade that would not otherwise have happened did all this jollity generate?
Does anyone know? Or is it one of those things that we're supposed to believe just because everyone always repeats it?
And since this new yacht is not a royal one why would anyone care two hoots about being invited onto it?
In fairness, the British royalty do command a certain mystique abroad, so I can imagine a few deals being swayed. This is just going to be a propaganda tool for Brexit (global Britain ruling the waves) and Boris's floating love nest, so the benefits will be microscopic if that.
Ken Clarke on BBC R4 Today absolutely destroying de Pfeffel.
My god, Ken’s good. Royal Yacht = populist nonsense.
The timeline for the Carrie Celeste looks absolutely mad on the face of it. It's a one off design of a type of ship that hasn't been built in the UK for 50+ years. The is no fucking way they are going to cut steel on it in 2022. It's one of those schemes that's so ill considered you can't help but assume The Fireplace Salesman was involved somewhere.
As Ken Clarke pointed out, the cost of the royal yacht itself is not going to break the bank, but it is an indication of a profound lack of judgement at No.10.
That she, like Britannia before her, will generate a massive amount of trade and goodwill from countries and companies around the world, far in excess of the cost of building her.
Well, she won't be like Britannia because she is not a royal yacht. Indeed all the indications which have been given is that the Royal Family want nothing to do with it.
Still let's see what Carrie and a load of gold wallpaper do for our trade, eh!
Hopefully, by the time it comes into being, Carrie will be nowhere near being invited onto it.
On the more substantive point, Britannia really did do a great job for UK trade and soft power. Businessmen framed their invitations from HMQ, even if they only ever got to meet Michael Hesetine and AirMiles Andy.
Well, that's all very lovely I'm sure. How much trade that would not otherwise have happened did all this jollity generate?
Does anyone know? Or is it one of those things that we're supposed to believe just because everyone always repeats it?
And since this new yacht is not a royal one why would anyone care two hoots about being invited onto it?
This article has an estimate of £3bn of value from trade missions by Britannia between 1991 & 1995. Not quite what you asked as very difficult to demonstrate how much would have happened without Britannia but enough that it seems there is a positive case to at least investigate
Your last point, about it not being a “royal” yacht is much more important
My view is that of all the things that need spending on, this is way way down the list of priorities. Indeed, should not be on a list of priorities at all.
Re the discussion about the composition of parliament and who governs if the Tories fall a bit short, the likelihood is a rapid fresh election following a VONC and short delay under the FTPA, or even quicker if FTPA has been replaced. Both centre right and centre will fancy their chances of a decisive win, and it might even lead the centre left out of its current Lab/LD/Green split.
Ken Clarke on BBC R4 Today absolutely destroying de Pfeffel.
My god, Ken’s good. Royal Yacht = populist nonsense.
The timeline for the Carrie Celeste looks absolutely mad on the face of it. It's a one off design of a type of ship that hasn't been built in the UK for 50+ years. The is no fucking way they are going to cut steel on it in 2022. It's one of those schemes that's so ill considered you can't help but assume The Fireplace Salesman was involved somewhere.
As Ken Clarke pointed out, the cost of the royal yacht itself is not going to break the bank, but it is an indication of a profound lack of judgement at No.10.
That she, like Britannia before her, will generate a massive amount of trade and goodwill from countries and companies around the world, far in excess of the cost of building her.
Well, she won't be like Britannia because she is not a royal yacht. Indeed all the indications which have been given is that the Royal Family want nothing to do with it.
Still let's see what Carrie and a load of gold wallpaper do for our trade, eh!
Hopefully, by the time it comes into being, Carrie will be nowhere near being invited onto it.
On the more substantive point, Britannia really did do a great job for UK trade and soft power. Businessmen framed their invitations from HMQ, even if they only ever got to meet Michael Hesetine and AirMiles Andy.
Well, that's all very lovely I'm sure. How much trade that would not otherwise have happened did all this jollity generate?
Does anyone know? Or is it one of those things that we're supposed to believe just because everyone always repeats it?
And since this new yacht is not a royal one why would anyone care two hoots about being invited onto it?
This article has an estimate of £3bn of value from trade missions by Britannia between 1991 & 1995. Not quite what you asked as very difficult to demonstrate how much would have happened without Britannia but enough that it seems there is a positive case to at least investigate
Your last point, about it not being a “royal” yacht is much more important
My view is that of all the things that need spending on, this is way way down the list of priorities. Indeed, should not be on a list of priorities at all.
Even if it brings in billions of trade which generates more taxes in order to fund other priorities?
Re: Hancock's comments this morning on 19 July looking good based on the data. I'll believe it only when I see it. Plenty of time for Sage and the government to find new reasons to delay yet again.
Ken Clarke on BBC R4 Today absolutely destroying de Pfeffel.
My god, Ken’s good. Royal Yacht = populist nonsense.
The timeline for the Carrie Celeste looks absolutely mad on the face of it. It's a one off design of a type of ship that hasn't been built in the UK for 50+ years. The is no fucking way they are going to cut steel on it in 2022. It's one of those schemes that's so ill considered you can't help but assume The Fireplace Salesman was involved somewhere.
As Ken Clarke pointed out, the cost of the royal yacht itself is not going to break the bank, but it is an indication of a profound lack of judgement at No.10.
That she, like Britannia before her, will generate a massive amount of trade and goodwill from countries and companies around the world, far in excess of the cost of building her.
Well, she won't be like Britannia because she is not a royal yacht. Indeed all the indications which have been given is that the Royal Family want nothing to do with it.
Still let's see what Carrie and a load of gold wallpaper do for our trade, eh!
Hopefully, by the time it comes into being, Carrie will be nowhere near being invited onto it.
On the more substantive point, Britannia really did do a great job for UK trade and soft power. Businessmen framed their invitations from HMQ, even if they only ever got to meet Michael Hesetine and AirMiles Andy.
Well, that's all very lovely I'm sure. How much trade that would not otherwise have happened did all this jollity generate?
Does anyone know? Or is it one of those things that we're supposed to believe just because everyone always repeats it?
And since this new yacht is not a royal one why would anyone care two hoots about being invited onto it?
This article has an estimate of £3bn of value from trade missions by Britannia between 1991 & 1995. Not quite what you asked as very difficult to demonstrate how much would have happened without Britannia but enough that it seems there is a positive case to at least investigate
Your last point, about it not being a “royal” yacht is much more important
My view is that of all the things that need spending on, this is way way down the list of priorities. Indeed, should not be on a list of priorities at all.
If it’s £250m to build and £20m a year to run that’s peanuts in the scheme of things. Not going to limit any other spending choices. Provided it generates a positive return on capital then just do it.
Boris Johnson’s net approval rating: -32 Rishi Sunak’s net approval rating: -3 Government’s Net Competency Rating: -36 Keir Starmer's net approval rating: -16
If you lot want better scores then the solution is hardly beyond the wit of man: offer Scottish voters some intelligent, pleasant, hard-working, competent and sympathetic politicians. Boris, Rishi, Keir, Anas and Douglas just don’t cut it.
Walked past a vaccine centre on the way to a meeting just now, I was very early so I decided to chance it and asked if they'd give me a second dose. They said yes as long as I had my vaccine card with me! Just got my second Pfizer done!
My wife is going to be so jealous.
Can you bring your second jab forward if you're on AZ? Or is it still best to leave it the 12 weeks?
I brought mine forward, AZ. Think the sooner you get the second dose the better.
Thanks (and thanks to @Charles too). I've brought my jab two and a bit weeks forward to this coming Sunday, thereby a) doing my bit to get the double-jabbed numbers up by the end of July, and b) doing my bit to cheer those who jeer at the vaccination figures on Mondays.
Somebody asked about Bomber Harris a couple of days ago. I didn’t respond as the topic is very easy to research, and the evidence against Harris is overwhelming. Then happened to spot this story. It’s behind a paywall, but seems indicative of the more balanced way public bodies are going to have to deal with controversial figures, eg blokes who order the mass murder of civilians.
The only way to win WW2 was to be completely ruthless. Our present ease and comfort and freedom depends on the decisions made by Harris, Le May, FDR, Truman, Churchill, and their Soviet counterparts.
Town centre investment has been a sore point for people in Batley after neighbouring Huddersfield and Dewsbury were awarded £250 million and £200 million respectively, for their town centre blueprints.
Batley has recently been given £1.5 million by Kirklees Council for its regeneration.
On town centre investment, Mr [Boris] Johnson said: "I believe that Ryan Stephenson [the Conservative candidate] would be a fantastic champion for Batley and Spen and would help to target the funding that we need whether, through the towns fund, the levelling up fund or the many other funds that we have available." https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/news/west-yorkshire-news/key-things-boris-johnson-said-20851491
Where do those numbers come from?
Town Centre Funds are up to £25m if I recall.
If they are dishing out hundreds of millions, I'll tell my Council.
After reading the thread here I bet on Labour holding Batley and Spen, but I pulled out of the market after I woke up this morning to the headline news that the Education Select Committee believes schools have long neglected white children. This is how the Tories win - by playing the race card. The race card is a trump card. (See what I did there.) Most likely the Tories will gain Batley and Spen and they are value at 1.45. Thumping away with this kind of story - what is essentially a call for "white rights" - could increase the Tories' Commons majority at the next GE too.
Time to emigrate?
What rubbish. There is clearly an issue with underachievement in this demographic, and there has been for a while, and addressing it is exactly what is needed to stop people playing the race card.
Or would you prefer this sector of society was allowed to keep falling behind as long as your comfy worldview wasn’t challenged ?
I just don't understand what their race has to do with this. They're not getting treated badly at school because they're white. In fact I doubt they're getting treated badly at school at all, except to the extent that all state school kids in this country are let down by a lack of money and focus from the government and the establishment, who mostly go private and so have very little skin in the game. Their problems come from a lack of engagement in education, often rooted in their parents' experiences of school, sometimes compounded by other issues that their parents have. Plus poverty, which makes everything harder. (BTW before anyone accuses me of being an out of touch elitist, I went to a comprehensive school that was almost entirely white so the so-called white working class is not some kind of unknown exotic species to me).
I disagree with that and I think a lot has to do with the attitude of teachers. As @RochdalePioneers so helpfully demonstrated a few days back, there is a view on the left, especially amongst let's say the more educated parts including the teaching profession, that WWC kids are essentially thick, racist and therefore not worth saving, and the problems they have in their lives are the faults of them and their ghastly parents. Therefore, why bother trying to do anything with them. That then leads to teachers who view their place as going through the motions rather than trying to inspire or change.
That is the Right's view of the view of the Left. The real one is that our education system is elitist and old fashioned and underfunded and warped by the propensity of the affluent to opt out and purchase advantage via the private sector.
We demand better. We want a more egalitarian approach that will deliver a similar (and high) quality education to everyone regardless of parental bank balance. Increase participation in state schools, proper funding, a real prioritizing of disadvantaged areas.
The biggest beneficiary of such an approach? Yep - white working class children.
But oh no, too difficult. Too disruptive of the status quo that so many are secretly comfortable with. So let's produce this report instead. Let's avoid the hard choices about class and money and push some culture war buttons. Let's waffle on about the term "white privilege". Has sweet FA to do with the problem but let's pretend that it does. Let's stoke some grievance!
I see you, Tories, and Middle England. I see you.
So are you saying Tories invented the term "white privilege"?
I would back 1/3 that in a random conversation on here where it drifts onto white privilege it is a Tory voter who first uses the phrase here, and be a comfortable winner in the long run.
I would also back at odds on, that if someone starts a conversation about increasing education spending, they did not vote Tory at the last election.
I think the phrase is tactically unhelpful to the point of being counter productive, but does exist to an extent, as do many other privileges especially class and in many societies gender.
If a Tory voter on here quotes someone who uses the term (and means it), like Charles in his example above, then is that a leftwinger initiating that or a right winger?
You seem to think that the far left ought to be able to say whatever they want in a safe space and never be quoted or responded to.
If the phrase is unhelpful to the point of being counter productive then don't use it and condemn those who do.
I would never initiate a conversation about it so only use it when it is already being discussed anyway.
Like most of wokeism, it is a tiny minority on the left who probably do start it, but a much bigger minority on the right who amplify, publicise and politicise it into the mainstream.
Re the discussion about the composition of parliament and who governs if the Tories fall a bit short, the likelihood is a rapid fresh election following a VONC and short delay under the FTPA, or even quicker if FTPA has been replaced. Both centre right and centre will fancy their chances of a decisive win, and it might even lead the centre left out of its current Lab/LD/Green split.
After reading the thread here I bet on Labour holding Batley and Spen, but I pulled out of the market after I woke up this morning to the headline news that the Education Select Committee believes schools have long neglected white children. This is how the Tories win - by playing the race card. The race card is a trump card. (See what I did there.) Most likely the Tories will gain Batley and Spen and they are value at 1.45. Thumping away with this kind of story - what is essentially a call for "white rights" - could increase the Tories' Commons majority at the next GE too.
Time to emigrate?
What rubbish. There is clearly an issue with underachievement in this demographic, and there has been for a while, and addressing it is exactly what is needed to stop people playing the race card.
Or would you prefer this sector of society was allowed to keep falling behind as long as your comfy worldview wasn’t challenged ?
I just don't understand what their race has to do with this. They're not getting treated badly at school because they're white. In fact I doubt they're getting treated badly at school at all, except to the extent that all state school kids in this country are let down by a lack of money and focus from the government and the establishment, who mostly go private and so have very little skin in the game. Their problems come from a lack of engagement in education, often rooted in their parents' experiences of school, sometimes compounded by other issues that their parents have. Plus poverty, which makes everything harder. (BTW before anyone accuses me of being an out of touch elitist, I went to a comprehensive school that was almost entirely white so the so-called white working class is not some kind of unknown exotic species to me).
I disagree with that and I think a lot has to do with the attitude of teachers. As @RochdalePioneers so helpfully demonstrated a few days back, there is a view on the left, especially amongst let's say the more educated parts including the teaching profession, that WWC kids are essentially thick, racist and therefore not worth saving, and the problems they have in their lives are the faults of them and their ghastly parents. Therefore, why bother trying to do anything with them. That then leads to teachers who view their place as going through the motions rather than trying to inspire or change.
That is the Right's view of the view of the Left. The real one is that our education system is elitist and old fashioned and underfunded and warped by the propensity of the affluent to opt out and purchase advantage via the private sector.
We demand better. We want a more egalitarian approach that will deliver a similar (and high) quality education to everyone regardless of parental bank balance. Increase participation in state schools, proper funding, a real prioritizing of disadvantaged areas.
The biggest beneficiary of such an approach? Yep - white working class children.
But oh no, too difficult. Too disruptive of the status quo that so many are secretly comfortable with. So let's produce this report instead. Let's avoid the hard choices about class and money and push some culture war buttons. Let's waffle on about the term "white privilege". Has sweet FA to do with the problem but let's pretend that it does. Let's stoke some grievance!
I see you, Tories, and Middle England. I see you.
So are you saying Tories invented the term "white privilege"?
I would back 1/3 that in a random conversation on here where it drifts onto white privilege it is a Tory voter who first uses the phrase here, and be a comfortable winner in the long run.
I would also back at odds on, that if someone starts a conversation about increasing education spending, they did not vote Tory at the last election.
I think the phrase is tactically unhelpful to the point of being counter productive, but does exist to an extent, as do many other privileges especially class and in many societies gender.
If a Tory voter on here quotes someone who uses the term (and means it), like Charles in his example above, then is that a leftwinger initiating that or a right winger?
You seem to think that the far left ought to be able to say whatever they want in a safe space and never be quoted or responded to.
If the phrase is unhelpful to the point of being counter productive then don't use it and condemn those who do.
I would never initiate a conversation about it so only use it when it is already being discussed anyway.
Like most of wokeism, it is a tiny minority on the left who probably do start it, but a much bigger minority on the right who amplify, publicise and politicise it into the mainstream.
In which case its the left that started it, not the right. Publicising what your opponents are up to is just politics and quite right to do.
If you find the left embarrassing then you can join in with the right in rejecting it and criticising it yourself. In which case it loses all potency.
Re: Hancock's comments this morning on 19 July looking good based on the data. I'll believe it only when I see it. Plenty of time for Sage and the government to find new reasons to delay yet again.
Yup, until the moment they weren't the government was saying (correctly) there's nothing in the data to push back June 21st. SAGE will find some new angle to delay unlockdown and our useless politicians will either encourage them like Hancock or just go along with it like Boris.
Somebody asked about Bomber Harris a couple of days ago. I didn’t respond as the topic is very easy to research, and the evidence against Harris is overwhelming. Then happened to spot this story. It’s behind a paywall, but seems indicative of the more balanced way public bodies are going to have to deal with controversial figures, eg blokes who order the mass murder of civilians.
The only way to win WW2 was to be completely ruthless. Our present ease and comfort and freedom depends on the decisions made by Harris, Le May, FDR, Truman, Churchill, and their Soviet counterparts.
The “only way” to win wars is by the mass murder of women, children and civilians? That’ll explain Trident and why Greater Glasgow is a sacrifice worth making.
Mr. Boy, a blanket term like white privilege is worse than useless.
It's the kind of thinking the prioritised 'cultural sensitivity' in Rotherham and other places. Reminiscent of the thankfully decreasing view that domestic violence is a thing done by a man to a woman and never the other way around (or in gay relationships, of course).
And lately we've had the magnificent Cressida Dick arguing for the right to explicitly discriminate against white candidates for jobs.
If we can't use a term that although true on the whole is not true for every particular and in every context we will need a bonfire of terms. But I'm up for it if you are. Interesting little experiment. Let's see how we get on.
Town centre investment has been a sore point for people in Batley after neighbouring Huddersfield and Dewsbury were awarded £250 million and £200 million respectively, for their town centre blueprints.
Batley has recently been given £1.5 million by Kirklees Council for its regeneration.
On town centre investment, Mr [Boris] Johnson said: "I believe that Ryan Stephenson [the Conservative candidate] would be a fantastic champion for Batley and Spen and would help to target the funding that we need whether, through the towns fund, the levelling up fund or the many other funds that we have available." https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/news/west-yorkshire-news/key-things-boris-johnson-said-20851491
Where do those numbers come from?
Town Centre Funds are up to £25m if I recall.
If they are dishing out hundreds of millions, I'll tell my Council.
I believe the £250m is the total value of the project not the grant. Multiple bits coming from all over the place.
Walked past a vaccine centre on the way to a meeting just now, I was very early so I decided to chance it and asked if they'd give me a second dose. They said yes as long as I had my vaccine card with me! Just got my second Pfizer done!
My wife is going to be so jealous.
Can you bring your second jab forward if you're on AZ? Or is it still best to leave it the 12 weeks?
I brought mine forward, AZ. Think the sooner you get the second dose the better.
Thanks (and thanks to @Charles too). I've brought my jab two and a bit weeks forward to this coming Sunday, thereby a) doing my bit to get the double-jabbed numbers up by the end of July, and b) doing my bit to cheer those who jeer at the vaccination figures on Mondays.
Ken Clarke on BBC R4 Today absolutely destroying de Pfeffel.
My god, Ken’s good. Royal Yacht = populist nonsense.
The timeline for the Carrie Celeste looks absolutely mad on the face of it. It's a one off design of a type of ship that hasn't been built in the UK for 50+ years. The is no fucking way they are going to cut steel on it in 2022. It's one of those schemes that's so ill considered you can't help but assume The Fireplace Salesman was involved somewhere.
As Ken Clarke pointed out, the cost of the royal yacht itself is not going to break the bank, but it is an indication of a profound lack of judgement at No.10.
That she, like Britannia before her, will generate a massive amount of trade and goodwill from countries and companies around the world, far in excess of the cost of building her.
Well, she won't be like Britannia because she is not a royal yacht. Indeed all the indications which have been given is that the Royal Family want nothing to do with it.
Still let's see what Carrie and a load of gold wallpaper do for our trade, eh!
Hopefully, by the time it comes into being, Carrie will be nowhere near being invited onto it.
On the more substantive point, Britannia really did do a great job for UK trade and soft power. Businessmen framed their invitations from HMQ, even if they only ever got to meet Michael Hesetine and AirMiles Andy.
Well, that's all very lovely I'm sure. How much trade that would not otherwise have happened did all this jollity generate?
Does anyone know? Or is it one of those things that we're supposed to believe just because everyone always repeats it?
And since this new yacht is not a royal one why would anyone care two hoots about being invited onto it?
This article has an estimate of £3bn of value from trade missions by Britannia between 1991 & 1995. Not quite what you asked as very difficult to demonstrate how much would have happened without Britannia but enough that it seems there is a positive case to at least investigate
Your last point, about it not being a “royal” yacht is much more important
My view is that of all the things that need spending on, this is way way down the list of priorities. Indeed, should not be on a list of priorities at all.
If it’s £250m to build and £20m a year to run that’s peanuts in the scheme of things. Not going to limit any other spending choices. Provided it generates a positive return on capital then just do it.
Plus of course such a yacht can engage in 'grey zone' politics that more formally military vessels can't as that article you linked to explains.
Somebody asked about Bomber Harris a couple of days ago. I didn’t respond as the topic is very easy to research, and the evidence against Harris is overwhelming. Then happened to spot this story. It’s behind a paywall, but seems indicative of the more balanced way public bodies are going to have to deal with controversial figures, eg blokes who order the mass murder of civilians.
The only way to win WW2 was to be completely ruthless. Our present ease and comfort and freedom depends on the decisions made by Harris, Le May, FDR, Truman, Churchill, and their Soviet counterparts.
The “only way” to win wars is by the mass murder of women, children and civilians? That’ll explain Trident and why Greater Glasgow is a sacrifice worth making.
I find it hugely preferable to the alternative, namely losing. I expect you would have, too, had you been around at the time.
After reading the thread here I bet on Labour holding Batley and Spen, but I pulled out of the market after I woke up this morning to the headline news that the Education Select Committee believes schools have long neglected white children. This is how the Tories win - by playing the race card. The race card is a trump card. (See what I did there.) Most likely the Tories will gain Batley and Spen and they are value at 1.45. Thumping away with this kind of story - what is essentially a call for "white rights" - could increase the Tories' Commons majority at the next GE too.
Time to emigrate?
What rubbish. There is clearly an issue with underachievement in this demographic, and there has been for a while, and addressing it is exactly what is needed to stop people playing the race card.
Or would you prefer this sector of society was allowed to keep falling behind as long as your comfy worldview wasn’t challenged ?
I just don't understand what their race has to do with this. They're not getting treated badly at school because they're white. In fact I doubt they're getting treated badly at school at all, except to the extent that all state school kids in this country are let down by a lack of money and focus from the government and the establishment, who mostly go private and so have very little skin in the game. Their problems come from a lack of engagement in education, often rooted in their parents' experiences of school, sometimes compounded by other issues that their parents have. Plus poverty, which makes everything harder. (BTW before anyone accuses me of being an out of touch elitist, I went to a comprehensive school that was almost entirely white so the so-called white working class is not some kind of unknown exotic species to me).
I disagree with that and I think a lot has to do with the attitude of teachers. As @RochdalePioneers so helpfully demonstrated a few days back, there is a view on the left, especially amongst let's say the more educated parts including the teaching profession, that WWC kids are essentially thick, racist and therefore not worth saving, and the problems they have in their lives are the faults of them and their ghastly parents. Therefore, why bother trying to do anything with them. That then leads to teachers who view their place as going through the motions rather than trying to inspire or change.
That is the Right's view of the view of the Left. The real one is that our education system is elitist and old fashioned and underfunded and warped by the propensity of the affluent to opt out and purchase advantage via the private sector.
We demand better. We want a more egalitarian approach that will deliver a similar (and high) quality education to everyone regardless of parental bank balance. Increase participation in state schools, proper funding, a real prioritizing of disadvantaged areas.
The biggest beneficiary of such an approach? Yep - white working class children.
But oh no, too difficult. Too disruptive of the status quo that so many are secretly comfortable with. So let's produce this report instead. Let's avoid the hard choices about class and money and push some culture war buttons. Let's waffle on about the term "white privilege". Has sweet FA to do with the problem but let's pretend that it does. Let's stoke some grievance!
I see you, Tories, and Middle England. I see you.
So are you saying Tories invented the term "white privilege"?
I would back 1/3 that in a random conversation on here where it drifts onto white privilege it is a Tory voter who first uses the phrase here, and be a comfortable winner in the long run.
I would also back at odds on, that if someone starts a conversation about increasing education spending, they did not vote Tory at the last election.
I think the phrase is tactically unhelpful to the point of being counter productive, but does exist to an extent, as do many other privileges especially class and in many societies gender.
If a Tory voter on here quotes someone who uses the term (and means it), like Charles in his example above, then is that a leftwinger initiating that or a right winger?
You seem to think that the far left ought to be able to say whatever they want in a safe space and never be quoted or responded to.
If the phrase is unhelpful to the point of being counter productive then don't use it and condemn those who do.
I would never initiate a conversation about it so only use it when it is already being discussed anyway.
Like most of wokeism, it is a tiny minority on the left who probably do start it, but a much bigger minority on the right who amplify, publicise and politicise it into the mainstream.
In which case its the left that started it, not the right. Publicising what your opponents are up to is just politics and quite right to do.
If you find the left embarrassing then you can join in with the right in rejecting it and criticising it yourself. In which case it loses all potency.
I see politics differently, it is not about them vs us and beating opponents, but about collectively finding the best solutions for the country. Ignoring and dampening down the culture war rather inflaming it is better for all.
I can't outright reject it as non existent because it does exist in a limited way, even if it is open to misinterpretation and therefore ends up being counter productive.
Boris Johnson’s net approval rating: -32 Rishi Sunak’s net approval rating: -3 Government’s Net Competency Rating: -36 Keir Starmer's net approval rating: -16
If you lot want better scores then the solution is hardly beyond the wit of man: offer Scottish voters some intelligent, pleasant, hard-working, competent and sympathetic politicians. Boris, Rishi, Keir, Anas and Douglas just don’t cut it.
Wouldn't make a difference to anything. The fundamental problem with Scotland is that it simultaneously wants to break away but a crucial group of middle class voters won't vote for it because they're afraid it will be expensive. That leaves the more committed nationalists feeling permanently thwarted and angry, and the waverers loathing their choices because, deep down, they know that they are dependent on handouts for being kept in the manner to which they have become accustomed.
Selling the Union and being popular are, therefore, two mutually exclusive propositions. How could it be otherwise?
Somebody asked about Bomber Harris a couple of days ago. I didn’t respond as the topic is very easy to research, and the evidence against Harris is overwhelming. Then happened to spot this story. It’s behind a paywall, but seems indicative of the more balanced way public bodies are going to have to deal with controversial figures, eg blokes who order the mass murder of civilians.
The only way to win WW2 was to be completely ruthless. Our present ease and comfort and freedom depends on the decisions made by Harris, Le May, FDR, Truman, Churchill, and their Soviet counterparts.
Yeah this is a tricky one, but on the whole I think I agree that we had to be ruthless. The bombing campaign by 1944 and into '45 was a terrible, terrible beast. Bomber Command and the 8th Air Force were fearsome agents of death and destruction. But Nazi Germany was still stubbornly resisting. Dresden had probably become a legitimate target due to its proximity to the advancing Russians - IIRC I think a lot of logistics went through Dresden.
Somebody asked about Bomber Harris a couple of days ago. I didn’t respond as the topic is very easy to research, and the evidence against Harris is overwhelming. Then happened to spot this story. It’s behind a paywall, but seems indicative of the more balanced way public bodies are going to have to deal with controversial figures, eg blokes who order the mass murder of civilians.
The only way to win WW2 was to be completely ruthless. Our present ease and comfort and freedom depends on the decisions made by Harris, Le May, FDR, Truman, Churchill, and their Soviet counterparts.
Yeah this is a tricky one, but on the whole I think I agree that we had to be ruthless. The bombing campaign by 1944 and into '45 was a terrible, terrible beast. Bomber Command and the 8th Air Force were fearsome agents of death and destruction. But Nazi Germany was still stubbornly resisting. Dresden had probably become a legitimate target due to its proximity to the advancing Russians - IIRC I think a lot of logistics went through Dresden.
War is an evil, but the alternative is sometimes worse.
After reading the thread here I bet on Labour holding Batley and Spen, but I pulled out of the market after I woke up this morning to the headline news that the Education Select Committee believes schools have long neglected white children. This is how the Tories win - by playing the race card. The race card is a trump card. (See what I did there.) Most likely the Tories will gain Batley and Spen and they are value at 1.45. Thumping away with this kind of story - what is essentially a call for "white rights" - could increase the Tories' Commons majority at the next GE too.
Time to emigrate?
What rubbish. There is clearly an issue with underachievement in this demographic, and there has been for a while, and addressing it is exactly what is needed to stop people playing the race card.
Or would you prefer this sector of society was allowed to keep falling behind as long as your comfy worldview wasn’t challenged ?
I just don't understand what their race has to do with this. They're not getting treated badly at school because they're white. In fact I doubt they're getting treated badly at school at all, except to the extent that all state school kids in this country are let down by a lack of money and focus from the government and the establishment, who mostly go private and so have very little skin in the game. Their problems come from a lack of engagement in education, often rooted in their parents' experiences of school, sometimes compounded by other issues that their parents have. Plus poverty, which makes everything harder. (BTW before anyone accuses me of being an out of touch elitist, I went to a comprehensive school that was almost entirely white so the so-called white working class is not some kind of unknown exotic species to me).
I disagree with that and I think a lot has to do with the attitude of teachers. As @RochdalePioneers so helpfully demonstrated a few days back, there is a view on the left, especially amongst let's say the more educated parts including the teaching profession, that WWC kids are essentially thick, racist and therefore not worth saving, and the problems they have in their lives are the faults of them and their ghastly parents. Therefore, why bother trying to do anything with them. That then leads to teachers who view their place as going through the motions rather than trying to inspire or change.
That is the Right's view of the view of the Left. The real one is that our education system is elitist and old fashioned and underfunded and warped by the propensity of the affluent to opt out and purchase advantage via the private sector.
We demand better. We want a more egalitarian approach that will deliver a similar (and high) quality education to everyone regardless of parental bank balance. Increase participation in state schools, proper funding, a real prioritizing of disadvantaged areas.
The biggest beneficiary of such an approach? Yep - white working class children.
But oh no, too difficult. Too disruptive of the status quo that so many are secretly comfortable with. So let's produce this report instead. Let's avoid the hard choices about class and money and push some culture war buttons. Let's waffle on about the term "white privilege". Has sweet FA to do with the problem but let's pretend that it does. Let's stoke some grievance!
I see you, Tories, and Middle England. I see you.
So are you saying Tories invented the term "white privilege"?
The Tories have latched onto it because they have figured out that it is a way of stoking resentment and dividing working class people. White Privilege is a term that is used to describe the advantages in many situations that white people enjoy on account of being the majority group. I'm sorry, but it describes something real, something that I personally have observed, and so I am not going to be bullied into not using it in that specific context. Of course, many white people don't feel very privileged, and so the term grates with them. But I doubt they have ever not had their CV looked at on account of their name, or been racially profiled by the police. White Privilege does not mean that all white people are more privileged than all non-White people.
It would only be a way of stoking resentment if there is a reason for resentment to be stoked.
If you believe that "white privilege" is real then stand up loud and proud and explain why poor white kids struggling at school are privileged. Otherwise maybe your term is flawed and you should stop using it and use something else instead.
We aren't America incidentally. I'd imagine many young white teenagers in hoodies have been profiled by the Police here.
All you need to stoke resentment is to convince people that something is a cause of their problems. Whether it actually is the cause or not is largely irrelevant.
Blaming the EU for everything was a classic example - the likes of the Mail , the Telegraph and Farage milked it for years. They now have to find something else to replace it and explain away the continuing problems of the folk in the red wall seats. Attacks on "Woke" will become the new "EU bendy bananas" mantra.
Boris Johnson’s net approval rating: -32 Rishi Sunak’s net approval rating: -3 Government’s Net Competency Rating: -36 Keir Starmer's net approval rating: -16
If you lot want better scores then the solution is hardly beyond the wit of man: offer Scottish voters some intelligent, pleasant, hard-working, competent and sympathetic politicians. Boris, Rishi, Keir, Anas and Douglas just don’t cut it.
Wouldn't make a difference to anything. The fundamental problem with Scotland is that it simultaneously wants to break away but a crucial group of middle class voters won't vote for it because they're afraid it will be expensive. That leaves the more committed nationalists feeling permanently thwarted and angry, and the waverers loathing their choices because, deep down, they know that they are dependent on handouts for being kept in the manner to which they have become accustomed.
Selling the Union and being popular are, therefore, two mutually exclusive propositions. How could it be otherwise?
There are plenty of working class unionists. Scotland is split down the middle at the moment.
Comments
The polar example of this may be the Ryedale by-election of 1986. The Alliance won it from the Conservatives on a 20 point swing, only slightly less than in C&A. And then, the following year, the Conservatives won it back. It, and its successor seat, have been Conservative ever since.
So transforming the way we are looking at the next election on the basis of one by-election two or three years out is completely crazy.
If you believe that "white privilege" is real then stand up loud and proud and explain why poor white kids struggling at school are privileged. Otherwise maybe your term is flawed and you should stop using it and use something else instead.
We aren't America incidentally. I'd imagine many young white teenagers in hoodies have been profiled by the Police here.
It's the kind of thinking the prioritised 'cultural sensitivity' in Rotherham and other places. Reminiscent of the thankfully decreasing view that domestic violence is a thing done by a man to a woman and never the other way around (or in gay relationships, of course).
And lately we've had the magnificent Cressida Dick arguing for the right to explicitly discriminate against white candidates for jobs.
Like so many things, this report probably views the WWC as a homogenous lump. That isn't true. I'm working class but I've got an MA from a Russell Group University and a nice white collar job and a good salary. A lad I went to school with, again whose dad was a miner, is now a barrister (the way he has expunged his accent is remarkable). Other people I went to school with have been manual labourers all their life and look ready for the scrap heap in their mid-40s.
But there's sometimes a lot of money in manual labour. I know a couple of brothers who have a railway maintenance company who employ loads of local lads, all on good wages. I know a couple of plasterers who could, if they wanted to, work all day every day. They're pulling something like £60k a year.
But undoubtedly there is a section of the WWC who get left behind. But a lot of the heavy industrial jobs that they would've done are long gone. Now, if deindustrialisation is an inevitable side effect of globalisation, then successive governments should have invested in these areas that were denuded of their industry. And it has never happened. So now Johnson promises to level up. I'll believe it when I see it.
a) The party that has been in government for the last 11 years
b) the phrase/concept 'white privilege' which only seems to have entered the English consciousness in the last couple of years as far as I can tell
It's a bit of a conundrum, though my psychic superpowers enable me to guess which one the party that has been in government for the last 11 years would plump for.
Boris Johnson’s net approval rating: -32
Rishi Sunak’s net approval rating: -3
Government’s Net Competency Rating: -36
Keir Starmer's net approval rating: -16
https://redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/latest-gb-voting-intention-21-june-2021/
Do they have any responsibility for kids education in your eyes?
And on your last sentence, that is how many on the radical left, especially in the USA, choose to use it, and what they choose to believe.
If that is not what the left as a whole believes when they use the phrase, they need to do significantly more to distance themselves from the nutters who shout the loudest. Or to use a different phrase.
I've just given you two examples of how they don't face some similar barriers that non-White people do. And I'm not sure there are many places where a white kid in a hoodie will get hassled by the police more than a black kid in a hoodie, but please share statistics to the contrary if you have them.
(She was also marked down because she chose to write about Alfred the Great when told to write about “a reformer who inspires you”… about dead white European males aren’t on the approved list)
We moved schools…
70% think the UK Government is not competent
https://www.progressscotland.org/research/huge-poll-contrast-between-uk-and-scottish-government
Something its proponents do not seem to have considered in that in its proposed use as a Covid prophylactic, it is very much an experimental, as opposed to well characterised, drug.
At the dosages required for an antiviral effect, no one has any good idea what short or long term side effects (hepatic and neurotoxic, for instance) might show up in a large population. To determine that would require some large scale clinical trials at least an order of magnitude, probably a couple, larger than the ones which have been conducted.
(Also, FWIW, its use is contraindicated with dexamethasone.)
COVID-19 and Ivermectin: Potential threats associated with human use
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022286021009418?via=ihub
...Owing to the high lipid solubility, the ivermectin reaches a maximum blood concentration of 20–80 ng/ml, when admistered orally [52, 18]. Therapeutic doses of upto 2000 μg/kg in humans have been well-tolerated [19, 28]. The lower plasma half life of 12 hours also indicates the rapid solubility of the drug in humans [53]. However, the in vitro drug level required against SARS-CoV-2 was found to be in micrograms [54]. Currently, the trials are underway to confirm whether the therapeutic dose of 600-1200 µg/Kg for 5-7 consecutive days may efficiently treat the COVID-19 without adverse effects in the patients [55, 56]. This much difference in the dosage of ivermectin indicates the urgent need of clinically evaluating the pharmacodynamics of this drug, before rapid firing it as a prophylactic candidate for healthcare/front line workers…
Town centre investment has been a sore point for people in Batley after neighbouring Huddersfield and Dewsbury were awarded £250 million and £200 million respectively, for their town centre blueprints.
Batley has recently been given £1.5 million by Kirklees Council for its regeneration.
On town centre investment, Mr [Boris] Johnson said: "I believe that Ryan Stephenson [the Conservative candidate] would be a fantastic champion for Batley and Spen and would help to target the funding that we need whether, through the towns fund, the levelling up fund or the many other funds that we have available."
https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/news/west-yorkshire-news/key-things-boris-johnson-said-20851491
Still let's see what Carrie and a load of gold wallpaper do for our trade, eh!
Precisely.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Race-Cars-childrens-about-privilege/dp/0692786503
Nobody gives a fuck what anything costs these days but this thing has doubled in price since Johnson started dribbling on about it and will probably double again before it gets off the slipway.
Meanwhile there's no torpedoes on our shiny new ASW frigates to save money. If the ship is out of limits for aviation or the helicopter's broken (spoiler: helicopters break A LOT) then it's case of; pack 'er up boys, we're not sub hunting today.
Various efforts have been made to improve the performance of kids on FSM (from all backgrounds). The London Challenge was the most successful. The jury is still out on how successful the Pupil Premium funding has been; where it's been well targetted, it's had an impact, but too many schools have just merged it into their general funding.
Given this brief overview of historical underachievement dating back decades (and, if we had the data, probably ever since compulsory education started), the idea that the fashionable concept of 'white privilege' is a factor is ludicrous. As is the insulting suggestion by one poster that 'leftie' teachers don't try to raise the aspirations of w/c kids.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/06/18/bomber-harris-war-crime-claim-included-new-english-heritage/
The elided text on "stands up for" and "understands problems" is "United Kingdom"
https://redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/latest-gb-voting-intention-21-june-2021/
As for kids being harassed again this isn't America. A poor inner city white kid in a hoodie probably gets harassed more than a well off, smartly dressed suburban black kid.
I am WWC, but my parents did have expectations, aspirations and boundaries for me. I worked hard and was fortunate to be bright enough to do well. But without the right home life I might have squandered the opportunities available to me, not passed my exams, not gone to Uni and perhaps not even have signed up to PB.
Instead of making sure everyone can access a good education, including vocational education, they prefer to stoke racial divisions. Giving simple answers to complex, hard (and expensive) to resolve questions.
Throwing William into the forefront of de Pfeffel’s “muscular Unionism” (sic) campaign was profoundly ill-judged, and quite unfair on the man.
They’re not. People are people.
If people like @OnlyLivingBoy want to bang on about how poor white kids are privileged then why shouldn't the Tories respond to that?
Or do you think you deserve a safe space where you can make your points but nobody gets to reply or respond to them?
On the more substantive point, Britannia really did do a great job for UK trade and soft power. Businessmen framed their invitations from HMQ, even if they only ever got to meet Michael Hesetine and AirMiles Andy.
For some, "white privilege" is a dogma justifying their opinions.
Mike Smithson subsample analysis = word of god
Stuart Dickson subsample analysis = spawn o the deil
2pm: Andy Burnham, mayor of Greater Manchester, holds a press conference.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2021/jun/22/uk-covid-live-hancock-coronavirus-growth-rate-slowing-scotland-sturgeon-latest-updates?page=with:block-60d193fd8f08d468da92f18a#block-60d193fd8f08d468da92f18a
'Twas, I suspect, ever thus.
My maternal grandparents had 11 children. The girls all had cut-glass accents, as their parents hoped they would 'marry well' and sent them to a school where the local accent could be removed. The boys were all taken out of school as soon as and put to work on the family farm, including the two who wanted to go one and 'get educated', and all sounded 'rural'.
This was the same situation in 2017. With Sinn Fein and the Speaker, the effective majority required is about 322. If the Conservatives are on 315, then it follows that everyone else (including the DUP) are on 327 (Speaker and Sinn Fein make up the remaining 8 seats).
The Conservatives might not be able to form a majority government, but who could oppose them? Just for the Lolz, we could say the seats are:
CON 315; LAB 247; SNP 45; LD 20; DUP 8; SF 7; Plaid 4; SDLP 1; Alliance 1; Green 1; Speaker (Hoyle) 1. Majority required due to Speaker and SF: 322 (642/2 + 1).
Form a government that doesn't involve the Conservative party please.
LAB + SNP + LD (plus SDLP and Alliance) doesn't make 315. It's 314.
In fact, you couldn't make a majority even using everyone else except the DUP. Adding Plaid and the Greens only gets you to 318.
I know in the bad old days, in two party politics, if you were on 315, it was because the other lot had a majority. But these days with multiple parties and multiple MPs from those parties, if the Conservatives get 315 they're in government. As a busted minority administration that won't last a year, but that's what you'll get.
Because the alternative, a LAB/SNP/LD/Green/Plaid pact with SDLP and Alliance support, with the DUP bought off as 'neutrals' isn't going to last more than twenty minutes.
I've been going on about how the UK vaccination programme is slowing to a crawl without anyone noticing.
*At least three people* have asked me why I think it's happening.
Briefly: Not supply. Demand, perhaps a little. But mostly this:
(1/4)
https://twitter.com/PaulMainwood/status/1407256437286375425?s=20
I would also back at odds on, that if someone starts a conversation about increasing education spending, they did not vote Tory at the last election.
I think the phrase is tactically unhelpful to the point of being counter productive, but does exist to an extent, as do many other privileges especially class and in many societies gender.
Whether that is anything more than a local effect, I can't say, but it certainly makes for a difference in outcomes locally. Lockdown has, of course, exacerbated that - though also had a big effect on ESL kids whose parents don't speak English at home.
Does anyone know? Or is it one of those things that we're supposed to believe just because everyone always repeats it?
And since this new yacht is not a royal one why would anyone care two hoots about being invited onto it?
It's getting stale. It's getting very stale indeed.
Your last point, about it not being a “royal” yacht is much more important
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/craighooper/2021/04/22/the-grey-zone-case-for-building-new-royal-and-presidential-yachts/amp/
You seem to think that the far left ought to be able to say whatever they want in a safe space and never be quoted or responded to.
If the phrase is unhelpful to the point of being counter productive then don't use it and condemn those who do.
Northern Al mentioned London Challenge upthread. And that was a remarkable programme, though the jury is out on how much the improvements in London schools were down to what schools did, and how much they were due to aspirational immigration to London- whether internal or international.
What's undoubtedly true is that it's much easier to sell "education is the path to the world being your oyster" if the view out of the classroom window is the London skyline, rather than the ruins of an abandoned factory which nobody can even afford to clean up. The teachers at the northern WWC school where I was a governor flogged their guts out on a daily basis, as did many of the parents, but they were always running up a down escalator.
So we come back to the fundamental problem. London is the milch-cow that funds everywhere else, but is also the overgrown tree that stops anything growing in its shadow. And solving that problem is going to be tricky. Finger-pointing about white privilege (either way) isn't going to do it.
Otherwise if they're still using it, then that's fresh not stale.
My view is that of all the things that need spending on, this is way way down the list of priorities. Indeed, should not be on a list of priorities at all.
Why is that?
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/alex-salmond-behind-boris-johnson-23873752
Town Centre Funds are up to £25m if I recall.
If they are dishing out hundreds of millions, I'll tell my Council.
Like most of wokeism, it is a tiny minority on the left who probably do start it, but a much bigger minority on the right who amplify, publicise and politicise it into the mainstream.
If you find the left embarrassing then you can join in with the right in rejecting it and criticising it yourself. In which case it loses all potency.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.examinerlive.co.uk/news/west-yorkshire-news/cash-behind-huddersfields-250m-blueprint-18398597.amp
I was able to pull mine forward by 4 weeks.
Mine was Astrozeneca
I can't outright reject it as non existent because it does exist in a limited way, even if it is open to misinterpretation and therefore ends up being counter productive.
Selling the Union and being popular are, therefore, two mutually exclusive propositions. How could it be otherwise?
Blaming the EU for everything was a classic example - the likes of the Mail , the Telegraph and Farage milked it for years. They now have to find something else to replace it and explain away the continuing problems of the folk in the red wall seats. Attacks on "Woke" will become the new "EU bendy bananas" mantra.