Undefined discussion subject.
Options
Comments
-
Good god every toilet paper manufacturer in Scotland and the State Propaganda unit.IshmaelZ said:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-46427990malcolmg said:
You thick half wit, more bollox , I would not wipe your arse with the daily retard. When you have no clue what you are talking about best to keep it to yourself.IshmaelZ said:
Never seen so much point-missing. The victims of the Scottish policy aren't wannabe English students who have more than enough perfectly good English universities to go to. It's the Scots, who are discriminated against by quotas on free places. So if you're English your 9 grand gets you a place to read physics or history or modern languages, but if you're Scottish you had better be o.k. with basket-weaving and applied theology, or soap opera studies. A quite unbelievable policy of self inflicted apartheid.malcolmg said:FPT
DougSeal said:
» show previous quotes
FFS read the post and calm down you angry little troll. I’m not saying there is discrimination, indeed down thread I say there isn’t, but there is a point to be answered beyond your usual hyperbolic “Little Englander” bullshit.
I’m throwing it out as a discussion point. “Bollox” is not an answer. Neither is “well, it can’t be discriminatory if YOU’RE doing it too.” In any event “we’re” not - the argument stems from the fact that English Unis charge the same wherever you reside on these islands. That the Scots don’t is probably justified a justified policy but there is an argument both ways that can’t be shut down by your direly repetitive, and frankly increasingly hysterical, insults.
Wah Wah Wah , you really are a big jessie, I am perfectly calm thank you very much , despite the rubbish I read on here about Scotland.. Bollox describes it perfectly. It is 100% fair, there can be NO argument whatsoever that it is in any way discriminatory.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/heartache-straight-students-rejected-top-13674608
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/01/01/15000-scots-miss-university-place-snp-government-cap-criticised/
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/scottish-students-squeezed-out-of-university-places-59p7wvcnh
https://www.ed.ac.uk/student-recruitment/admissions-advice/admissions-statistics
https://www.scotsman.com/news/scottish-news/scottish-youngsters-losing-out-english-counterparts-university-places-1410778
https://www.pressreader.com/uk/scottish-daily-mail/20200102/281552292780675
And so on...
0 -
Bloody conspiracies.malcolmg said:
Good god every toilet paper manufacturer in Scotland and the State Propaganda unit.IshmaelZ said:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-46427990malcolmg said:
You thick half wit, more bollox , I would not wipe your arse with the daily retard. When you have no clue what you are talking about best to keep it to yourself.IshmaelZ said:
Never seen so much point-missing. The victims of the Scottish policy aren't wannabe English students who have more than enough perfectly good English universities to go to. It's the Scots, who are discriminated against by quotas on free places. So if you're English your 9 grand gets you a place to read physics or history or modern languages, but if you're Scottish you had better be o.k. with basket-weaving and applied theology, or soap opera studies. A quite unbelievable policy of self inflicted apartheid.malcolmg said:FPT
DougSeal said:
» show previous quotes
FFS read the post and calm down you angry little troll. I’m not saying there is discrimination, indeed down thread I say there isn’t, but there is a point to be answered beyond your usual hyperbolic “Little Englander” bullshit.
I’m throwing it out as a discussion point. “Bollox” is not an answer. Neither is “well, it can’t be discriminatory if YOU’RE doing it too.” In any event “we’re” not - the argument stems from the fact that English Unis charge the same wherever you reside on these islands. That the Scots don’t is probably justified a justified policy but there is an argument both ways that can’t be shut down by your direly repetitive, and frankly increasingly hysterical, insults.
Wah Wah Wah , you really are a big jessie, I am perfectly calm thank you very much , despite the rubbish I read on here about Scotland.. Bollox describes it perfectly. It is 100% fair, there can be NO argument whatsoever that it is in any way discriminatory.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/heartache-straight-students-rejected-top-13674608
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/01/01/15000-scots-miss-university-place-snp-government-cap-criticised/
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/scottish-students-squeezed-out-of-university-places-59p7wvcnh
https://www.ed.ac.uk/student-recruitment/admissions-advice/admissions-statistics
https://www.scotsman.com/news/scottish-news/scottish-youngsters-losing-out-english-counterparts-university-places-1410778
https://www.pressreader.com/uk/scottish-daily-mail/20200102/281552292780675
And so on...
Enjoy the bbq.0 -
Hello, Malc. Actually the BBC piece first on the list wasn't too bad, it did explore some of the pros and cons.malcolmg said:
Good god every toilet paper manufacturer in Scotland and the State Propaganda unit.IshmaelZ said:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-46427990malcolmg said:
You thick half wit, more bollox , I would not wipe your arse with the daily retard. When you have no clue what you are talking about best to keep it to yourself.IshmaelZ said:
Never seen so much point-missing. The victims of the Scottish policy aren't wannabe English students who have more than enough perfectly good English universities to go to. It's the Scots, who are discriminated against by quotas on free places. So if you're English your 9 grand gets you a place to read physics or history or modern languages, but if you're Scottish you had better be o.k. with basket-weaving and applied theology, or soap opera studies. A quite unbelievable policy of self inflicted apartheid.malcolmg said:FPT
DougSeal said:
» show previous quotes
FFS read the post and calm down you angry little troll. I’m not saying there is discrimination, indeed down thread I say there isn’t, but there is a point to be answered beyond your usual hyperbolic “Little Englander” bullshit.
I’m throwing it out as a discussion point. “Bollox” is not an answer. Neither is “well, it can’t be discriminatory if YOU’RE doing it too.” In any event “we’re” not - the argument stems from the fact that English Unis charge the same wherever you reside on these islands. That the Scots don’t is probably justified a justified policy but there is an argument both ways that can’t be shut down by your direly repetitive, and frankly increasingly hysterical, insults.
Wah Wah Wah , you really are a big jessie, I am perfectly calm thank you very much , despite the rubbish I read on here about Scotland.. Bollox describes it perfectly. It is 100% fair, there can be NO argument whatsoever that it is in any way discriminatory.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/heartache-straight-students-rejected-top-13674608
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/01/01/15000-scots-miss-university-place-snp-government-cap-criticised/
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/scottish-students-squeezed-out-of-university-places-59p7wvcnh
https://www.ed.ac.uk/student-recruitment/admissions-advice/admissions-statistics
https://www.scotsman.com/news/scottish-news/scottish-youngsters-losing-out-english-counterparts-university-places-1410778
https://www.pressreader.com/uk/scottish-daily-mail/20200102/281552292780675
And so on...
I do wonder how many on PB would consider it discriminatory per se to have a quota on university places - especially as the numbers of non-Scottish, non-EU students recruited have no impact on that quota anyway.0 -
Disturbing.
"The “Boogaloo Bois” expect, even hope, that the warmer weather will bring armed confrontations with law enforcement, and will build momentum towards a new civil war in the United States."
https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2020/05/27/the-boogaloo-movement-is-not-what-you-think/0 -
Betting shops not yet open though so our gambling resolution will still be tested.HYUFD said:
To be honest, anyone betting on Monday is mad. The French resumption threw up some very odd results.0 -
In 1985, my first year of secondary school, our music teacher told us none of us would have a very good sense of rhythm because none of us were black.tlg86 said:
They sound more serious to me. The second one did make me snigger:ydoethur said:
That would be difficult, as it’s a new offence. Some idea of how strict these people can be may be found here:tlg86 said:
I find that hard to believe. If you can provide an example of a teacher being sacked for similar offences, I'll retract that.ydoethur said:
If I had done what any of them had done, I would undoubtedly have been sacked and very probably banned from teaching for two years, for bringing the school and the profession into disrepute. There are clauses in my contract and in Teachers’ Standards that set this out.tlg86 said:
If so, do you not think that is incredibly harsh? I know you think Cummings is as thick as mince, but I assume Ferguson and Calderwood are competent and good at what they do. It seems ridiculous that these indiscretions should end their professional careers.ydoethur said:
I would assume so. It depends on whether they held the positions on secondment from another place of work or were employed directly by the government.tlg86 said:
Here's something I've been wondering about. Are Ferguson and the woman in Scotland now unemployed?ydoethur said:
OK, so any three of the above along with tlg86 and Square Root, plus presumably the ghost of Harry Flashman (if they have phone lines to wherever such spirits go).tlg86 said:
If I was asked whether he should go I would say "no", even though I'd have sacked him if I had been the PM.ydoethur said:
I agree.MaxPB said:I think the poll is going to be more or less evens within the MoE.
The 3% who say Cummings should stay may just be because they happened to ring Lord Wakefield, Matt Hancock and Bluest Blue.
So no, I do not think it is harsh. They broke their own rules for their own benefit. Are people so selfish and lacking in judgement fit to hold high public office?
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/854798/OFFICIAL_SENSITIVE_-_SOS_WEB_Decision_Chester__Mark_Robert.pdf (banned from teaching for lying in court to try and avoid a driving penalty - admittedly he did go to prison)
Or here:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/874272/OFFICIAL_SENSITIVE_Turner_Philip_SoS_Decision_REDACTED__007_.pdf (again, though, this did partly involve conduct in a school).
The relevant standards are here:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/665520/Teachers__Standards.pdf
Page 14, which is the key part, talks about not undermining the rule of law. My contract also says I must not engage in any conduct that would bring the school into any form of disrepute (which this certainly would) or I am subject to summary dismissal.
So you may find it hard to believe, but I’m pretty confident it would happen.
2. During one or more lessons with pupils he expressed inappropriate views and/or
discussed inappropriate topics leading to one or more pupils suggesting that:
a. on or around 13 July 2018, “All Mexicans were criminals and/or bad” or
words to that effect;
b. on or around 4 September 2018, if a person of an ethnic minority is
unhappy with a country’s policies they should “leave the country”.
I used to have fantastic arguments with my RE teacher who was from Ghana. She was a big fan of Robert Mugabe and thought what he was doing in 2002-03 was fantastic. Now, I obviously wasn't a snowflake about it, but I'm guessing an education panel wouldn't have too much of a problem with her giving those opinions.0 -
Abolish the scrum and lineouts, which rarely result in a change of possession anyway. In the long term, this would mean rugby would be played by 15 sprinters a side, which might not be a good thing, but right now short term fixes are needed.OldKingCole said:
Behind closed doors, admittedly. How can you get anywhere near social distancing in Rugby?ydoethur said:0 -
Monday might be a good day for in-running betting, since the on-course players won't be there with their customary five seconds advantage. (I shan't be risking it though!)stodge said:
Betting shops not yet open though so our gambling resolution will still be tested.HYUFD said:
To be honest, anyone betting on Monday is mad. The French resumption threw up some very odd results.0 -
He's right. Swing voters in the suburbs of Minneapolis are likely to react to riots on the horizon by moving right in the polling booth.Stark_Dawning said:
How does the Hodge work that out? Mass social unrest is normally the thing politicians fear the most.rottenborough said:0 -
The big potential group for Starmer are GE19 CON Remainers 41% of whom say they approve of him compared with 21% who don't - last Opinium pollHYUFD said:
I agree Starmer is unlikely to win over Tory voters on anything like the scale Blair did in 1997.Gary_Burton said:The Tories probably have a rock solid 40% in polling and will get at least that at the next election regardless of whatever happens with Cummings/Covid/economy due to the way voting is split across Brexit and generational lines.
Really difficult too see how Labour gets much more than 38% and ~250 seats like 2017 as a best case scenario.
HYUFD has been more accurate on a lot of things than other posters but it's hard to see how Labour can do well enough to cobble together a rainbow coalition let alone become largest party etc as long as Brexit is such a divisive/salient issue.
However remember in 1964 Labour scraped in with barely any increase in its voteshare at all and in February 1974 got in despite losing votes as Tory voters went Liberal.
I think that is a possibility if we go to WTO terms Brexit and Tory Remainers go LD, I cannot see Labour getting over 40% with Starmer, agreed0 -
I agree, they are the key swing voters who mainly need to go Labour or LD next time for Starmer to become PM.MikeSmithson said:
The big potential group for Starmer are GE19 CON Remainers 41% of whom say they approve of him compared with 21% who don't - last Opinium pollHYUFD said:
I agree Starmer is unlikely to win over Tory voters on anything like the scale Blair did in 1997.Gary_Burton said:The Tories probably have a rock solid 40% in polling and will get at least that at the next election regardless of whatever happens with Cummings/Covid/economy due to the way voting is split across Brexit and generational lines.
Really difficult too see how Labour gets much more than 38% and ~250 seats like 2017 as a best case scenario.
HYUFD has been more accurate on a lot of things than other posters but it's hard to see how Labour can do well enough to cobble together a rainbow coalition let alone become largest party etc as long as Brexit is such a divisive/salient issue.
However remember in 1964 Labour scraped in with barely any increase in its voteshare at all and in February 1974 got in despite losing votes as Tory voters went Liberal.
I think that is a possibility if we go to WTO terms Brexit and Tory Remainers go LD, I cannot see Labour getting over 40% with Starmer, agreed
Despite falling in that group I will still be Tory regardless however0 -
A friend's boys' school went co-ed and let girls in; this was back in the 70s or 80s. He was a bit miffed his favourite maths teacher left. Turns out said teacher had previously been sacked for shagging the sixth form girls in a previous job, and my friend's school did not want to risk the bromide not working. These days teachers would be looking at a couple of years in prison, not just being asked to move on.DougSeal said:
In 1985, my first year of secondary school, our music teacher told us none of us would have a very good sense of rhythm because none of us were black.tlg86 said:
They sound more serious to me. The second one did make me snigger:ydoethur said:
That would be difficult, as it’s a new offence. Some idea of how strict these people can be may be found here:tlg86 said:
I find that hard to believe. If you can provide an example of a teacher being sacked for similar offences, I'll retract that.ydoethur said:
If I had done what any of them had done, I would undoubtedly have been sacked and very probably banned from teaching for two years, for bringing the school and the profession into disrepute. There are clauses in my contract and in Teachers’ Standards that set this out.tlg86 said:
If so, do you not think that is incredibly harsh? I know you think Cummings is as thick as mince, but I assume Ferguson and Calderwood are competent and good at what they do. It seems ridiculous that these indiscretions should end their professional careers.ydoethur said:
I would assume so. It depends on whether they held the positions on secondment from another place of work or were employed directly by the government.tlg86 said:
Here's something I've been wondering about. Are Ferguson and the woman in Scotland now unemployed?ydoethur said:
OK, so any three of the above along with tlg86 and Square Root, plus presumably the ghost of Harry Flashman (if they have phone lines to wherever such spirits go).tlg86 said:
If I was asked whether he should go I would say "no", even though I'd have sacked him if I had been the PM.ydoethur said:
I agree.MaxPB said:I think the poll is going to be more or less evens within the MoE.
The 3% who say Cummings should stay may just be because they happened to ring Lord Wakefield, Matt Hancock and Bluest Blue.
So no, I do not think it is harsh. They broke their own rules for their own benefit. Are people so selfish and lacking in judgement fit to hold high public office?
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/854798/OFFICIAL_SENSITIVE_-_SOS_WEB_Decision_Chester__Mark_Robert.pdf (banned from teaching for lying in court to try and avoid a driving penalty - admittedly he did go to prison)
Or here:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/874272/OFFICIAL_SENSITIVE_Turner_Philip_SoS_Decision_REDACTED__007_.pdf (again, though, this did partly involve conduct in a school).
The relevant standards are here:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/665520/Teachers__Standards.pdf
Page 14, which is the key part, talks about not undermining the rule of law. My contract also says I must not engage in any conduct that would bring the school into any form of disrepute (which this certainly would) or I am subject to summary dismissal.
So you may find it hard to believe, but I’m pretty confident it would happen.
2. During one or more lessons with pupils he expressed inappropriate views and/or
discussed inappropriate topics leading to one or more pupils suggesting that:
a. on or around 13 July 2018, “All Mexicans were criminals and/or bad” or
words to that effect;
b. on or around 4 September 2018, if a person of an ethnic minority is
unhappy with a country’s policies they should “leave the country”.
I used to have fantastic arguments with my RE teacher who was from Ghana. She was a big fan of Robert Mugabe and thought what he was doing in 2002-03 was fantastic. Now, I obviously wasn't a snowflake about it, but I'm guessing an education panel wouldn't have too much of a problem with her giving those opinions.0 -
Prediction for tonight's poll: Con 43%, Lab 40%, LD 5%. Labour continuing to squeeze the LDs who are rather invisible at the moment. (Tories only slightly down on the GE when they polled 44.7%).0
-
One of them committed a driving offence, lied about it and got caught.tlg86 said:
They sound more serious to me.ydoethur said:
That would be difficult, as it’s a new offence. Some idea of how strict these people can be may be found here:tlg86 said:
I find that hard to believe. If you can provide an example of a teacher being sacked for similar offences, I'll retract that.ydoethur said:
If I had done what any of them had done, I would undoubtedly have been sacked and very probably banned from teaching for two years, for bringing the school and the profession into disrepute. There are clauses in my contract and in Teachers’ Standards that set this out.tlg86 said:
If so, do you not think that is incredibly harsh? I know you think Cummings is as thick as mince, but I assume Ferguson and Calderwood are competent and good at what they do. It seems ridiculous that these indiscretions should end their professional careers.ydoethur said:
I would assume so. It depends on whether they held the positions on secondment from another place of work or were employed directly by the government.tlg86 said:
Here's something I've been wondering about. Are Ferguson and the woman in Scotland now unemployed?ydoethur said:
OK, so any three of the above along with tlg86 and Square Root, plus presumably the ghost of Harry Flashman (if they have phone lines to wherever such spirits go).tlg86 said:
If I was asked whether he should go I would say "no", even though I'd have sacked him if I had been the PM.ydoethur said:
I agree.MaxPB said:I think the poll is going to be more or less evens within the MoE.
The 3% who say Cummings should stay may just be because they happened to ring Lord Wakefield, Matt Hancock and Bluest Blue.
So no, I do not think it is harsh. They broke their own rules for their own benefit. Are people so selfish and lacking in judgement fit to hold high public office?
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/854798/OFFICIAL_SENSITIVE_-_SOS_WEB_Decision_Chester__Mark_Robert.pdf (banned from teaching for lying in court to try and avoid a driving penalty - admittedly he did go to prison)
Or here:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/874272/OFFICIAL_SENSITIVE_Turner_Philip_SoS_Decision_REDACTED__007_.pdf (again, though, this did partly involve conduct in a school).
The relevant standards are here:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/665520/Teachers__Standards.pdf
Page 14, which is the key part, talks about not undermining the rule of law. My contract also says I must not engage in any conduct that would bring the school into any form of disrepute (which this certainly would) or I am subject to summary dismissal.
So you may find it hard to believe, but I’m pretty confident it would happen.
The other one, of course...0 -
And what politician is on offer who is going to do a single thing about widespread police murder of black people? There's no electoral fix for this, the only option is to take direct action to strike fear into the cowardly hearts of the police.Andy_JS said:
He's right. Swing voters in the suburbs of Minneapolis are likely to react to riots on the horizon by moving right in the polling booth.Stark_Dawning said:
How does the Hodge work that out? Mass social unrest is normally the thing politicians fear the most.rottenborough said:1 -
A former colleague of mine (not in Staffordshire) was banned from teaching for two years for having an affair with a student, even though it began six years after they had both left the school.DecrepiterJohnL said:
A friend's boys' school went co-ed and let girls in; this was back in the 70s or 80s. He was a bit miffed his favourite maths teacher left. Turns out said teacher had previously been sacked for shagging the sixth form girls in a previous job, and my friend's school did not want to risk the bromide not working. These days teachers would be looking at a couple of years in prison, not just being asked to move on.DougSeal said:
In 1985, my first year of secondary school, our music teacher told us none of us would have a very good sense of rhythm because none of us were black.tlg86 said:
They sound more serious to me. The second one did make me snigger:ydoethur said:
That would be difficult, as it’s a new offence. Some idea of how strict these people can be may be found here:tlg86 said:
I find that hard to believe. If you can provide an example of a teacher being sacked for similar offences, I'll retract that.ydoethur said:
If I had done what any of them had done, I would undoubtedly have been sacked and very probably banned from teaching for two years, for bringing the school and the profession into disrepute. There are clauses in my contract and in Teachers’ Standards that set this out.tlg86 said:
If so, do you not think that is incredibly harsh? I know you think Cummings is as thick as mince, but I assume Ferguson and Calderwood are competent and good at what they do. It seems ridiculous that these indiscretions should end their professional careers.ydoethur said:
I would assume so. It depends on whether they held the positions on secondment from another place of work or were employed directly by the government.tlg86 said:
Here's something I've been wondering about. Are Ferguson and the woman in Scotland now unemployed?ydoethur said:
OK, so any three of the above along with tlg86 and Square Root, plus presumably the ghost of Harry Flashman (if they have phone lines to wherever such spirits go).tlg86 said:
If I was asked whether he should go I would say "no", even though I'd have sacked him if I had been the PM.ydoethur said:
I agree.MaxPB said:I think the poll is going to be more or less evens within the MoE.
The 3% who say Cummings should stay may just be because they happened to ring Lord Wakefield, Matt Hancock and Bluest Blue.
So no, I do not think it is harsh. They broke their own rules for their own benefit. Are people so selfish and lacking in judgement fit to hold high public office?
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/854798/OFFICIAL_SENSITIVE_-_SOS_WEB_Decision_Chester__Mark_Robert.pdf (banned from teaching for lying in court to try and avoid a driving penalty - admittedly he did go to prison)
Or here:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/874272/OFFICIAL_SENSITIVE_Turner_Philip_SoS_Decision_REDACTED__007_.pdf (again, though, this did partly involve conduct in a school).
The relevant standards are here:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/665520/Teachers__Standards.pdf
Page 14, which is the key part, talks about not undermining the rule of law. My contract also says I must not engage in any conduct that would bring the school into any form of disrepute (which this certainly would) or I am subject to summary dismissal.
So you may find it hard to believe, but I’m pretty confident it would happen.
2. During one or more lessons with pupils he expressed inappropriate views and/or
discussed inappropriate topics leading to one or more pupils suggesting that:
a. on or around 13 July 2018, “All Mexicans were criminals and/or bad” or
words to that effect;
b. on or around 4 September 2018, if a person of an ethnic minority is
unhappy with a country’s policies they should “leave the country”.
I used to have fantastic arguments with my RE teacher who was from Ghana. She was a big fan of Robert Mugabe and thought what he was doing in 2002-03 was fantastic. Now, I obviously wasn't a snowflake about it, but I'm guessing an education panel wouldn't have too much of a problem with her giving those opinions.0 -
To be boring, evidence for large-scale riots hurting a candidate's chances seems mixed. Humphrey only lost by half a million votes to Nixon in 1968. Lincoln got reelected after the New York draft riots of 1864.DougSeal said:
The last time this happened in an election year, the LA Riots of May 1992, similarly triggered by police brutality on a black man, the Republican incumbent failed to be re-elected.rottenborough said:0 -
Now that is harsh.ydoethur said:
A former colleague of mine (not in Staffordshire) was banned from teaching for two years for having an affair with a student, even though it began six years after they had both left the school.DecrepiterJohnL said:
A friend's boys' school went co-ed and let girls in; this was back in the 70s or 80s. He was a bit miffed his favourite maths teacher left. Turns out said teacher had previously been sacked for shagging the sixth form girls in a previous job, and my friend's school did not want to risk the bromide not working. These days teachers would be looking at a couple of years in prison, not just being asked to move on.DougSeal said:
In 1985, my first year of secondary school, our music teacher told us none of us would have a very good sense of rhythm because none of us were black.tlg86 said:
They sound more serious to me. The second one did make me snigger:ydoethur said:
That would be difficult, as it’s a new offence. Some idea of how strict these people can be may be found here:tlg86 said:
I find that hard to believe. If you can provide an example of a teacher being sacked for similar offences, I'll retract that.ydoethur said:
If I had done what any of them had done, I would undoubtedly have been sacked and very probably banned from teaching for two years, for bringing the school and the profession into disrepute. There are clauses in my contract and in Teachers’ Standards that set this out.tlg86 said:
If so, do you not think that is incredibly harsh? I know you think Cummings is as thick as mince, but I assume Ferguson and Calderwood are competent and good at what they do. It seems ridiculous that these indiscretions should end their professional careers.ydoethur said:
I would assume so. It depends on whether they held the positions on secondment from another place of work or were employed directly by the government.tlg86 said:
Here's something I've been wondering about. Are Ferguson and the woman in Scotland now unemployed?ydoethur said:
OK, so any three of the above along with tlg86 and Square Root, plus presumably the ghost of Harry Flashman (if they have phone lines to wherever such spirits go).tlg86 said:
If I was asked whether he should go I would say "no", even though I'd have sacked him if I had been the PM.ydoethur said:
I agree.MaxPB said:I think the poll is going to be more or less evens within the MoE.
The 3% who say Cummings should stay may just be because they happened to ring Lord Wakefield, Matt Hancock and Bluest Blue.
So no, I do not think it is harsh. They broke their own rules for their own benefit. Are people so selfish and lacking in judgement fit to hold high public office?
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/854798/OFFICIAL_SENSITIVE_-_SOS_WEB_Decision_Chester__Mark_Robert.pdf (banned from teaching for lying in court to try and avoid a driving penalty - admittedly he did go to prison)
Or here:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/874272/OFFICIAL_SENSITIVE_Turner_Philip_SoS_Decision_REDACTED__007_.pdf (again, though, this did partly involve conduct in a school).
The relevant standards are here:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/665520/Teachers__Standards.pdf
Page 14, which is the key part, talks about not undermining the rule of law. My contract also says I must not engage in any conduct that would bring the school into any form of disrepute (which this certainly would) or I am subject to summary dismissal.
So you may find it hard to believe, but I’m pretty confident it would happen.
2. During one or more lessons with pupils he expressed inappropriate views and/or
discussed inappropriate topics leading to one or more pupils suggesting that:
a. on or around 13 July 2018, “All Mexicans were criminals and/or bad” or
words to that effect;
b. on or around 4 September 2018, if a person of an ethnic minority is
unhappy with a country’s policies they should “leave the country”.
I used to have fantastic arguments with my RE teacher who was from Ghana. She was a big fan of Robert Mugabe and thought what he was doing in 2002-03 was fantastic. Now, I obviously wasn't a snowflake about it, but I'm guessing an education panel wouldn't have too much of a problem with her giving those opinions.0 -
The reasoning was that as the two had been in continuous contact since they left, they had still been in a professional relationship.tlg86 said:
Now that is harsh.ydoethur said:
A former colleague of mine (not in Staffordshire) was banned from teaching for two years for having an affair with a student, even though it began six years after they had both left the school.DecrepiterJohnL said:
A friend's boys' school went co-ed and let girls in; this was back in the 70s or 80s. He was a bit miffed his favourite maths teacher left. Turns out said teacher had previously been sacked for shagging the sixth form girls in a previous job, and my friend's school did not want to risk the bromide not working. These days teachers would be looking at a couple of years in prison, not just being asked to move on.DougSeal said:
In 1985, my first year of secondary school, our music teacher told us none of us would have a very good sense of rhythm because none of us were black.tlg86 said:
They sound more serious to me. The second one did make me snigger:ydoethur said:
That would be difficult, as it’s a new offence. Some idea of how strict these people can be may be found here:tlg86 said:
I find that hard to believe. If you can provide an example of a teacher being sacked for similar offences, I'll retract that.ydoethur said:
If I had done what any of them had done, I would undoubtedly have been sacked and very probably banned from teaching for two years, for bringing the school and the profession into disrepute. There are clauses in my contract and in Teachers’ Standards that set this out.tlg86 said:
If so, do you not think that is incredibly harsh? I know you think Cummings is as thick as mince, but I assume Ferguson and Calderwood are competent and good at what they do. It seems ridiculous that these indiscretions should end their professional careers.ydoethur said:
I would assume so. It depends on whether they held the positions on secondment from another place of work or were employed directly by the government.tlg86 said:
Here's something I've been wondering about. Are Ferguson and the woman in Scotland now unemployed?ydoethur said:
OK, so any three of the above along with tlg86 and Square Root, plus presumably the ghost of Harry Flashman (if they have phone lines to wherever such spirits go).tlg86 said:
If I was asked whether he should go I would say "no", even though I'd have sacked him if I had been the PM.ydoethur said:
I agree.MaxPB said:I think the poll is going to be more or less evens within the MoE.
The 3% who say Cummings should stay may just be because they happened to ring Lord Wakefield, Matt Hancock and Bluest Blue.
So no, I do not think it is harsh. They broke their own rules for their own benefit. Are people so selfish and lacking in judgement fit to hold high public office?
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/854798/OFFICIAL_SENSITIVE_-_SOS_WEB_Decision_Chester__Mark_Robert.pdf (banned from teaching for lying in court to try and avoid a driving penalty - admittedly he did go to prison)
Or here:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/874272/OFFICIAL_SENSITIVE_Turner_Philip_SoS_Decision_REDACTED__007_.pdf (again, though, this did partly involve conduct in a school).
The relevant standards are here:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/665520/Teachers__Standards.pdf
Page 14, which is the key part, talks about not undermining the rule of law. My contract also says I must not engage in any conduct that would bring the school into any form of disrepute (which this certainly would) or I am subject to summary dismissal.
So you may find it hard to believe, but I’m pretty confident it would happen.
2. During one or more lessons with pupils he expressed inappropriate views and/or
discussed inappropriate topics leading to one or more pupils suggesting that:
a. on or around 13 July 2018, “All Mexicans were criminals and/or bad” or
words to that effect;
b. on or around 4 September 2018, if a person of an ethnic minority is
unhappy with a country’s policies they should “leave the country”.
I used to have fantastic arguments with my RE teacher who was from Ghana. She was a big fan of Robert Mugabe and thought what he was doing in 2002-03 was fantastic. Now, I obviously wasn't a snowflake about it, but I'm guessing an education panel wouldn't have too much of a problem with her giving those opinions.
And therefore, it was misconduct.0 -
Against that, Black voters who stayed home last time are likely to be fired up to vote.Andy_JS said:
He's right. Swing voters in the suburbs of Minneapolis are likely to react to riots on the horizon by moving right in the polling booth.Stark_Dawning said:
How does the Hodge work that out? Mass social unrest is normally the thing politicians fear the most.rottenborough said:0 -
Because there is no better way to honour the memory of someone who died as a result of state sanctioned violence than unleashing more state sanctioned violence.
https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/12667812013621903411 -
Times change. When I was at school a teacher was having a relationship with a six-former. They publicly announced their engagement the moment she left.ydoethur said:
The reasoning was that as the two had been in continuous contact since they left, they had still been in a professional relationship.tlg86 said:
Now that is harsh.ydoethur said:
A former colleague of mine (not in Staffordshire) was banned from teaching for two years for having an affair with a student, even though it began six years after they had both left the school.DecrepiterJohnL said:
A friend's boys' school went co-ed and let girls in; this was back in the 70s or 80s. He was a bit miffed his favourite maths teacher left. Turns out said teacher had previously been sacked for shagging the sixth form girls in a previous job, and my friend's school did not want to risk the bromide not working. These days teachers would be looking at a couple of years in prison, not just being asked to move on.DougSeal said:
In 1985, my first year of secondary school, our music teacher told us none of us would have a very good sense of rhythm because none of us were black.tlg86 said:
They sound more serious to me. The second one did make me snigger:ydoethur said:
That would be difficult, as it’s a new offence. Some idea of how strict these people can be may be found here:tlg86 said:
I find that hard to believe. If you can provide an example of a teacher being sacked for similar offences, I'll retract that.ydoethur said:
If I had done what any of them had done, I would undoubtedly have been sacked and very probably banned from teaching for two years, for bringing the school and the profession into disrepute. There are clauses in my contract and in Teachers’ Standards that set this out.tlg86 said:
If so, do you not think that is incredibly harsh? I know you think Cummings is as thick as mince, but I assume Ferguson and Calderwood are competent and good at what they do. It seems ridiculous that these indiscretions should end their professional careers.ydoethur said:
I would assume so. It depends on whether they held the positions on secondment from another place of work or were employed directly by the government.tlg86 said:
Here's something I've been wondering about. Are Ferguson and the woman in Scotland now unemployed?ydoethur said:
OK, so any three of the above along with tlg86 and Square Root, plus presumably the ghost of Harry Flashman (if they have phone lines to wherever such spirits go).tlg86 said:
If I was asked whether he should go I would say "no", even though I'd have sacked him if I had been the PM.ydoethur said:
I agree.MaxPB said:I think the poll is going to be more or less evens within the MoE.
The 3% who say Cummings should stay may just be because they happened to ring Lord Wakefield, Matt Hancock and Bluest Blue.
So no, I do not think it is harsh. They broke their own rules for their own benefit. Are people so selfish and lacking in judgement fit to hold high public office?
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/854798/OFFICIAL_SENSITIVE_-_SOS_WEB_Decision_Chester__Mark_Robert.pdf (banned from teaching for lying in court to try and avoid a driving penalty - admittedly he did go to prison)
Or here:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/874272/OFFICIAL_SENSITIVE_Turner_Philip_SoS_Decision_REDACTED__007_.pdf (again, though, this did partly involve conduct in a school).
The relevant standards are here:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/665520/Teachers__Standards.pdf
Page 14, which is the key part, talks about not undermining the rule of law. My contract also says I must not engage in any conduct that would bring the school into any form of disrepute (which this certainly would) or I am subject to summary dismissal.
So you may find it hard to believe, but I’m pretty confident it would happen.
2. During one or more lessons with pupils he expressed inappropriate views and/or
discussed inappropriate topics leading to one or more pupils suggesting that:
a. on or around 13 July 2018, “All Mexicans were criminals and/or bad” or
words to that effect;
b. on or around 4 September 2018, if a person of an ethnic minority is
unhappy with a country’s policies they should “leave the country”.
I used to have fantastic arguments with my RE teacher who was from Ghana. She was a big fan of Robert Mugabe and thought what he was doing in 2002-03 was fantastic. Now, I obviously wasn't a snowflake about it, but I'm guessing an education panel wouldn't have too much of a problem with her giving those opinions.
And therefore, it was misconduct.0 -
Yes. Frankly I am not sure it will matter one way or the other. While the suburbs of Minneapolis may go Trump equally this may bring out the black vote for Biden that Clinton failed to secure.Kevin_McCandless said:
To be boring, evidence for large-scale riots hurting a candidate's chances seems mixed. Humphrey only lost by half a million votes to Nixon in 1968. Lincoln got reelected after the New York draft riots of 1864.DougSeal said:
The last time this happened in an election year, the LA Riots of May 1992, similarly triggered by police brutality on a black man, the Republican incumbent failed to be re-elected.rottenborough said:0 -
Out of curiosity, do you know if that relationship lasted?Stark_Dawning said:
Times change. When I was at school a teacher was having a relationship with a six-former. They publicly announced their engagement the moment she left.ydoethur said:
The reasoning was that as the two had been in continuous contact since they left, they had still been in a professional relationship.tlg86 said:
Now that is harsh.ydoethur said:
A former colleague of mine (not in Staffordshire) was banned from teaching for two years for having an affair with a student, even though it began six years after they had both left the school.DecrepiterJohnL said:
A friend's boys' school went co-ed and let girls in; this was back in the 70s or 80s. He was a bit miffed his favourite maths teacher left. Turns out said teacher had previously been sacked for shagging the sixth form girls in a previous job, and my friend's school did not want to risk the bromide not working. These days teachers would be looking at a couple of years in prison, not just being asked to move on.DougSeal said:
In 1985, my first year of secondary school, our music teacher told us none of us would have a very good sense of rhythm because none of us were black.tlg86 said:
They sound more serious to me. The second one did make me snigger:ydoethur said:
That would be difficult, as it’s a new offence. Some idea of how strict these people can be may be found here:tlg86 said:
I find that hard to believe. If you can provide an example of a teacher being sacked for similar offences, I'll retract that.ydoethur said:
If I had done what any of them had done, I would undoubtedly have been sacked and very probably banned from teaching for two years, for bringing the school and the profession into disrepute. There are clauses in my contract and in Teachers’ Standards that set this out.tlg86 said:
If so, do you not think that is incredibly harsh? I know you think Cummings is as thick as mince, but I assume Ferguson and Calderwood are competent and good at what they do. It seems ridiculous that these indiscretions should end their professional careers.ydoethur said:
I would assume so. It depends on whether they held the positions on secondment from another place of work or were employed directly by the government.tlg86 said:
Here's something I've been wondering about. Are Ferguson and the woman in Scotland now unemployed?ydoethur said:
OK, so any three of the above along with tlg86 and Square Root, plus presumably the ghost of Harry Flashman (if they have phone lines to wherever such spirits go).tlg86 said:
If I was asked whether he should go I would say "no", even though I'd have sacked him if I had been the PM.ydoethur said:
I agree.MaxPB said:I think the poll is going to be more or less evens within the MoE.
The 3% who say Cummings should stay may just be because they happened to ring Lord Wakefield, Matt Hancock and Bluest Blue.
So no, I do not think it is harsh. They broke their own rules for their own benefit. Are people so selfish and lacking in judgement fit to hold high public office?
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/854798/OFFICIAL_SENSITIVE_-_SOS_WEB_Decision_Chester__Mark_Robert.pdf (banned from teaching for lying in court to try and avoid a driving penalty - admittedly he did go to prison)
Or here:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/874272/OFFICIAL_SENSITIVE_Turner_Philip_SoS_Decision_REDACTED__007_.pdf (again, though, this did partly involve conduct in a school).
The relevant standards are here:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/665520/Teachers__Standards.pdf
Page 14, which is the key part, talks about not undermining the rule of law. My contract also says I must not engage in any conduct that would bring the school into any form of disrepute (which this certainly would) or I am subject to summary dismissal.
So you may find it hard to believe, but I’m pretty confident it would happen.
2. During one or more lessons with pupils he expressed inappropriate views and/or
discussed inappropriate topics leading to one or more pupils suggesting that:
a. on or around 13 July 2018, “All Mexicans were criminals and/or bad” or
words to that effect;
b. on or around 4 September 2018, if a person of an ethnic minority is
unhappy with a country’s policies they should “leave the country”.
I used to have fantastic arguments with my RE teacher who was from Ghana. She was a big fan of Robert Mugabe and thought what he was doing in 2002-03 was fantastic. Now, I obviously wasn't a snowflake about it, but I'm guessing an education panel wouldn't have too much of a problem with her giving those opinions.
And therefore, it was misconduct.0 -
Back in the 1970s my mother was teaching in a school where the police arrived to investigate allegations that a 16-year-old girl was in a relationship with her English teacher. They were met by the girl’s father, who after hearing their concerns, said that both he and the girl’s mother were fully aware of the relationship and quite happy about it, so would the police now kindly go away? (Incidentally the two of them later married and remained married until he died a few years ago.)Stark_Dawning said:
Times change. When I was at school a teacher was having a relationship with a six-former. They publicly announced their engagement the moment she left.ydoethur said:
The reasoning was that as the two had been in continuous contact since they left, they had still been in a professional relationship.tlg86 said:
Now that is harsh.ydoethur said:
A former colleague of mine (not in Staffordshire) was banned from teaching for two years for having an affair with a student, even though it began six years after they had both left the school.DecrepiterJohnL said:
A friend's boys' school went co-ed and let girls in; this was back in the 70s or 80s. He was a bit miffed his favourite maths teacher left. Turns out said teacher had previously been sacked for shagging the sixth form girls in a previous job, and my friend's school did not want to risk the bromide not working. These days teachers would be looking at a couple of years in prison, not just being asked to move on.DougSeal said:
In 1985, my first year of secondary school, our music teacher told us none of us would have a very good sense of rhythm because none of us were black.tlg86 said:
They sound more serious to me. The second one did make me snigger:ydoethur said:
That would be difficult, as it’s a new offence. Some idea of how strict these people can be may be found here:tlg86 said:
I find that hard to believe. If you can provide an example of a teacher being sacked for similar offences, I'll retract that.ydoethur said:
If I had done what any of them had done, I would undoubtedly have been sacked and very probably banned from teaching for two years, for bringing the school and the profession into disrepute. There are clauses in my contract and in Teachers’ Standards that set this out.tlg86 said:
If so, do you not think that is incredibly harsh? I know you think Cummings is as thick as mince, but I assume Ferguson and Calderwood are competent and good at what they do. It seems ridiculous that these indiscretions should end their professional careers.ydoethur said:
I would assume so. It depends on whether they held the positions on secondment from another place of work or were employed directly by the government.tlg86 said:
Here's something I've been wondering about. Are Ferguson and the woman in Scotland now unemployed?ydoethur said:
OK, so any three of the above along with tlg86 and Square Root, plus presumably the ghost of Harry Flashman (if they have phone lines to wherever such spirits go).tlg86 said:
If I was asked whether he should go I would say "no", even though I'd have sacked him if I had been the PM.ydoethur said:
I agree.MaxPB said:I think the poll is going to be more or less evens within the MoE.
The 3% who say Cummings should stay may just be because they happened to ring Lord Wakefield, Matt Hancock and Bluest Blue.
So no, I do not think it is harsh. They broke their own rules for their own benefit. Are people so selfish and lacking in judgement fit to hold high public office?
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/854798/OFFICIAL_SENSITIVE_-_SOS_WEB_Decision_Chester__Mark_Robert.pdf (banned from teaching for lying in court to try and avoid a driving penalty - admittedly he did go to prison)
Or here:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/874272/OFFICIAL_SENSITIVE_Turner_Philip_SoS_Decision_REDACTED__007_.pdf (again, though, this did partly involve conduct in a school).
The relevant standards are here:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/665520/Teachers__Standards.pdf
Page 14, which is the key part, talks about not undermining the rule of law. My contract also says I must not engage in any conduct that would bring the school into any form of disrepute (which this certainly would) or I am subject to summary dismissal.
So you may find it hard to believe, but I’m pretty confident it would happen.
2. During one or more lessons with pupils he expressed inappropriate views and/or
discussed inappropriate topics leading to one or more pupils suggesting that:
a. on or around 13 July 2018, “All Mexicans were criminals and/or bad” or
words to that effect;
b. on or around 4 September 2018, if a person of an ethnic minority is
unhappy with a country’s policies they should “leave the country”.
I used to have fantastic arguments with my RE teacher who was from Ghana. She was a big fan of Robert Mugabe and thought what he was doing in 2002-03 was fantastic. Now, I obviously wasn't a snowflake about it, but I'm guessing an education panel wouldn't have too much of a problem with her giving those opinions.
And therefore, it was misconduct.
THe punchline is:
The girl’s father was the Headmaster.0 -
https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1266781861742854145?s=20
Alan Duncan also called newly elected female New Labour MPs 'unsophisticated'0 -
It's wishful thinking from Hodges.DougSeal said:
The last time this happened in an election year, the LA Riots of May 1992, similarly triggered by police brutality on a black man, the Republican incumbent failed to be re-elected.rottenborough said:0 -
Why would you think the Tories have a rock solid 40%?Gary_Burton said:The Tories probably have a rock solid 40% in polling and will get at least that at the next election regardless of whatever happens with Cummings/Covid/economy due to the way voting is split across Brexit and generational lines.
Really difficult too see how Labour gets much more than 38% and ~250 seats like 2017 as a best case scenario.
HYUFD has been more accurate on a lot of things than other posters but it's hard to see how Labour can do well enough to cobble together a rainbow coalition let alone become largest party etc as long as Brexit is such a divisive/salient issue.
Between 1997 and 2015 they didn't even reach 37%, while they got 41.9% in the election before Blair's landslide.
Given how volatile politics has become over the last few years, and how we're in the middle of probably the biggest event of the last fifty years (and with Brexit still not fully played out), I'd be wary about predicting anything as rock solid.
1 -
No idea, I'm afraid. I only dimly remember them, but was told about their relationship and subsequent marriage by another teacher a few years later. Presumably it had raised a few eyebrows in the staff room even back then.tlg86 said:
Out of curiosity, do you know if that relationship lasted?Stark_Dawning said:
Times change. When I was at school a teacher was having a relationship with a six-former. They publicly announced their engagement the moment she left.ydoethur said:
The reasoning was that as the two had been in continuous contact since they left, they had still been in a professional relationship.tlg86 said:
Now that is harsh.ydoethur said:
A former colleague of mine (not in Staffordshire) was banned from teaching for two years for having an affair with a student, even though it began six years after they had both left the school.DecrepiterJohnL said:
A friend's boys' school went co-ed and let girls in; this was back in the 70s or 80s. He was a bit miffed his favourite maths teacher left. Turns out said teacher had previously been sacked for shagging the sixth form girls in a previous job, and my friend's school did not want to risk the bromide not working. These days teachers would be looking at a couple of years in prison, not just being asked to move on.DougSeal said:
In 1985, my first year of secondary school, our music teacher told us none of us would have a very good sense of rhythm because none of us were black.tlg86 said:
They sound more serious to me. The second one did make me snigger:ydoethur said:
That would be difficult, as it’s a new offence. Some idea of how strict these people can be may be found here:tlg86 said:
I find that hard to believe. If you can provide an example of a teacher being sacked for similar offences, I'll retract that.ydoethur said:
If I had done what any of them had done, I would undoubtedly have been sacked and very probably banned from teaching for two years, for bringing the school and the profession into disrepute. There are clauses in my contract and in Teachers’ Standards that set this out.tlg86 said:
If so, do you not think that is incredibly harsh? I know you think Cummings is as thick as mince, but I assume Ferguson and Calderwood are competent and good at what they do. It seems ridiculous that these indiscretions should end their professional careers.ydoethur said:
I would assume so. It depends on whether they held the positions on secondment from another place of work or were employed directly by the government.tlg86 said:
Here's something I've been wondering about. Are Ferguson and the woman in Scotland now unemployed?ydoethur said:
OK, so any three of the above along with tlg86 and Square Root, plus presumably the ghost of Harry Flashman (if they have phone lines to wherever such spirits go).tlg86 said:
If I was asked whether he should go I would say "no", even though I'd have sacked him if I had been the PM.ydoethur said:
I agree.MaxPB said:I think the poll is going to be more or less evens within the MoE.
The 3% who say Cummings should stay may just be because they happened to ring Lord Wakefield, Matt Hancock and Bluest Blue.
So no, I do not think it is harsh. They broke their own rules for their own benefit. Are people so selfish and lacking in judgement fit to hold high public office?
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/854798/OFFICIAL_SENSITIVE_-_SOS_WEB_Decision_Chester__Mark_Robert.pdf (banned from teaching for lying in court to try and avoid a driving penalty - admittedly he did go to prison)
Or here:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/874272/OFFICIAL_SENSITIVE_Turner_Philip_SoS_Decision_REDACTED__007_.pdf (again, though, this did partly involve conduct in a school).
The relevant standards are here:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/665520/Teachers__Standards.pdf
Page 14, which is the key part, talks about not undermining the rule of law. My contract also says I must not engage in any conduct that would bring the school into any form of disrepute (which this certainly would) or I am subject to summary dismissal.
So you may find it hard to believe, but I’m pretty confident it would happen.
2. During one or more lessons with pupils he expressed inappropriate views and/or
discussed inappropriate topics leading to one or more pupils suggesting that:
a. on or around 13 July 2018, “All Mexicans were criminals and/or bad” or
words to that effect;
b. on or around 4 September 2018, if a person of an ethnic minority is
unhappy with a country’s policies they should “leave the country”.
I used to have fantastic arguments with my RE teacher who was from Ghana. She was a big fan of Robert Mugabe and thought what he was doing in 2002-03 was fantastic. Now, I obviously wasn't a snowflake about it, but I'm guessing an education panel wouldn't have too much of a problem with her giving those opinions.
And therefore, it was misconduct.0 -
The man that says the public are wrong about Dom is bound to have his finger on the pulse of voters 3000 miles away.kinabalu said:
It's wishful thinking from Hodges.DougSeal said:
The last time this happened in an election year, the LA Riots of May 1992, similarly triggered by police brutality on a black man, the Republican incumbent failed to be re-elected.rottenborough said:3 -
Vote Trump for a more peaceful life?Andy_JS said:
He's right. Swing voters in the suburbs of Minneapolis are likely to react to riots on the horizon by moving right in the polling booth.Stark_Dawning said:
How does the Hodge work that out? Mass social unrest is normally the thing politicians fear the most.rottenborough said:
Hmm. Dunno about that.0 -
Just play League...DecrepiterJohnL said:
Abolish the scrum and lineouts, which rarely result in a change of possession anyway. In the long term, this would mean rugby would be played by 15 sprinters a side, which might not be a good thing, but right now short term fixes are needed.OldKingCole said:
Behind closed doors, admittedly. How can you get anywhere near social distancing in Rugby?ydoethur said:0 -
The NRL is back up and runningFoxy said:
Just play League...DecrepiterJohnL said:
Abolish the scrum and lineouts, which rarely result in a change of possession anyway. In the long term, this would mean rugby would be played by 15 sprinters a side, which might not be a good thing, but right now short term fixes are needed.OldKingCole said:
Behind closed doors, admittedly. How can you get anywhere near social distancing in Rugby?ydoethur said:0 -
Didn't Chris Woodhead do much the same?Stark_Dawning said:
No idea, I'm afraid. I only dimly remember them, but was told about their relationship and subsequent marriage by another teacher a few years later. Presumably it had raised a few eyebrows in the staff room even back then.tlg86 said:
Out of curiosity, do you know if that relationship lasted?Stark_Dawning said:
Times change. When I was at school a teacher was having a relationship with a six-former. They publicly announced their engagement the moment she left.ydoethur said:
The reasoning was that as the two had been in continuous contact since they left, they had still been in a professional relationship.tlg86 said:
Now that is harsh.ydoethur said:
A former colleague of mine (not in Staffordshire) was banned from teaching for two years for having an affair with a student, even though it began six years after they had both left the school.DecrepiterJohnL said:
A friend's boys' school went co-ed and let girls in; this was back in the 70s or 80s. He was a bit miffed his favourite maths teacher left. Turns out said teacher had previously been sacked for shagging the sixth form girls in a previous job, and my friend's school did not want to risk the bromide not working. These days teachers would be looking at a couple of years in prison, not just being asked to move on.DougSeal said:
In 1985, my first year of secondary school, our music teacher told us none of us would have a very good sense of rhythm because none of us were black.tlg86 said:
They sound more serious to me. The second one did make me snigger:ydoethur said:
That would be difficult, as it’s a new offence. Some idea of how strict these people can be may be found here:tlg86 said:
I find that hard to believe. If you can provide an example of a teacher being sacked for similar offences, I'll retract that.ydoethur said:
If I had done what any of them had done, I would undoubtedly have been sacked and very probably banned from teaching for two years, for bringing the school and the profession into disrepute. There are clauses in my contract and in Teachers’ Standards that set this out.tlg86 said:
If so, do you not think that is incredibly harsh? I know you think Cummings is as thick as mince, but I assume Ferguson and Calderwood are competent and good at what they do. It seems ridiculous that these indiscretions should end their professional careers.ydoethur said:
I would assume so. It depends on whether they held the positions on secondment from another place of work or were employed directly by the government.tlg86 said:
Here's something I've been wondering about. Are Ferguson and the woman in Scotland now unemployed?ydoethur said:
OK, so any three of the above along with tlg86 and Square Root, plus presumably the ghost of Harry Flashman (if they have phone lines to wherever such spirits go).tlg86 said:
If I was asked whether he should go I would say "no", even though I'd have sacked him if I had been the PM.ydoethur said:
I agree.MaxPB said:I think the poll is going to be more or less evens within the MoE.
The 3% who say Cummings should stay may just be because they happened to ring Lord Wakefield, Matt Hancock and Bluest Blue.
So no, I do not think it is harsh. They broke their own rules for their own benefit. Are people so selfish and lacking in judgement fit to hold high public office?
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/854798/OFFICIAL_SENSITIVE_-_SOS_WEB_Decision_Chester__Mark_Robert.pdf (banned from teaching for lying in court to try and avoid a driving penalty - admittedly he did go to prison)
Or here:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/874272/OFFICIAL_SENSITIVE_Turner_Philip_SoS_Decision_REDACTED__007_.pdf (again, though, this did partly involve conduct in a school).
The relevant standards are here:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/665520/Teachers__Standards.pdf
Page 14, which is the key part, talks about not undermining the rule of law. My contract also says I must not engage in any conduct that would bring the school into any form of disrepute (which this certainly would) or I am subject to summary dismissal.
So you may find it hard to believe, but I’m pretty confident it would happen.
2. During one or more lessons with pupils he expressed inappropriate views and/or
discussed inappropriate topics leading to one or more pupils suggesting that:
a. on or around 13 July 2018, “All Mexicans were criminals and/or bad” or
words to that effect;
b. on or around 4 September 2018, if a person of an ethnic minority is
unhappy with a country’s policies they should “leave the country”.
I used to have fantastic arguments with my RE teacher who was from Ghana. She was a big fan of Robert Mugabe and thought what he was doing in 2002-03 was fantastic. Now, I obviously wasn't a snowflake about it, but I'm guessing an education panel wouldn't have too much of a problem with her giving those opinions.
And therefore, it was misconduct.0 -
-
Whisper is they’ve found somebody who thinks Boris Johnson’s hairdresser is doing a good job.CorrectHorseBattery said:1 -
Bit quieter on here then it was this time last week...
Apols if posted already, a view from inside our world-beating track and trace programme:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/may/30/boris-johnsons-test-and-tracing-system-britain-lockdown0 -
Also, hello all, hope you're well.
Any runners around here? I've been running tonnes in lockdown, I'm up to 40K a week0 -
Hello CHB hope you are wellCorrectHorseBattery said:Also, hello all, hope you're well.
Any runners around here? I've been running tonnes in lockdown, I'm up to 40K a week
I do some walking, more with the lockdown
Are you looking forward to tonight's poll?0 -
So the 2017 GE result then.Andy_JS said:Prediction for tonight's poll: Con 43%, Lab 40%, LD 5%. Labour continuing to squeeze the LDs who are rather invisible at the moment. (Tories only slightly down on the GE when they polled 44.7%).
0 -
I can’t see the Tories losing a 12 point lead . Also the fieldwork would include Johnson’s announcements on freedom next week !CorrectHorseBattery said:
So some of the DC damage might have been repaired . Anyway we’ll know soon .0 -
Whatever happened to @JosiasJessop?CorrectHorseBattery said:Also, hello all, hope you're well.
Any runners around here? I've been running tonnes in lockdown, I'm up to 40K a week
Didn't he make you look like an amateur?0 -
No change? "A stunning result after Dom"?CorrectHorseBattery said:0 -
-
One of the things I've been pondering the last couple days is first time incumbency bonus. I watched the 2001 GE yesterday and Labour actually gained Dorset South from the Tories:CorrectHorseBattery said:
So the 2017 GE result then.Andy_JS said:Prediction for tonight's poll: Con 43%, Lab 40%, LD 5%. Labour continuing to squeeze the LDs who are rather invisible at the moment. (Tories only slightly down on the GE when they polled 44.7%).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dorset_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2000s
They won it with a majority of 153 votes in 2001. On a uniform swing that should have been an easy gain for the Tories in 2005, but Jim Knight increased his majority to 1,812 in that election.
Obviously incumbency counts for very little when there's a tidal wave such as in 1997 or what the Lib Dems experienced in 2015. But I think it is worth a fair amount.0 -
On sport. You think news journalists are ill-informed?
Well 606 is on now.
I have not missed that particular level of inanity.0 -
If the poll doesn't say LAB 50% then it's all over Starmer!0
-
At this point if you haven't yet figured out that Donald Trump is a racist there really is no hope for you.DougSeal said:0 -
An eminent person on here posted about the incumbency benefit and iirc it proved to be a fallacy.tlg86 said:
One of the things I've been pondering the last couple days is first time incumbency bonus. I watched the 2001 GE yesterday and Labour actually gained Dorset South from the Tories:CorrectHorseBattery said:
So the 2017 GE result then.Andy_JS said:Prediction for tonight's poll: Con 43%, Lab 40%, LD 5%. Labour continuing to squeeze the LDs who are rather invisible at the moment. (Tories only slightly down on the GE when they polled 44.7%).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dorset_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2000s
They won it with a majority of 153 votes in 2001. On a uniform swing that should have been an easy gain for the Tories in 2005, but Jim Knight increased his majority to 1,812 in that election.
Obviously incumbency counts for very little when there's a tidal wave such as in 1997 or what the Lib Dems experienced in 2015. But I think it is worth a fair amount.0 -
There was a huge swing in Mansfield at this election, well above the ordinary. If I remember correctly it was about 15 points.tlg86 said:
One of the things I've been pondering the last couple days is first time incumbency bonus. I watched the 2001 GE yesterday and Labour actually gained Dorset South from the Tories:CorrectHorseBattery said:
So the 2017 GE result then.Andy_JS said:Prediction for tonight's poll: Con 43%, Lab 40%, LD 5%. Labour continuing to squeeze the LDs who are rather invisible at the moment. (Tories only slightly down on the GE when they polled 44.7%).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dorset_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2000s
They won it with a majority of 153 votes in 2001. On a uniform swing that should have been an easy gain for the Tories in 2005, but Jim Knight increased his majority to 1,812 in that election.
Obviously incumbency counts for very little when there's a tidal wave such as in 1997 or what the Lib Dems experienced in 2015. But I think it is worth a fair amount.
But that’s in it’s own way rather curious as from all I hear Ben Bradley is not an impressive MP. So I hesitate to say it’s an incumbency bonus.0 -
Really? It seems pretty obvious to me that incumbents get a benefit. Arguably it is more noticeable on the other side. Look what happened to Dr Richard Taylor's vote when he tried to win back Wyre Forest in 2015:squareroot2 said:
An eminent person on here posted about the incumbency benefit and iirc it oroved to be a fallacy.tlg86 said:
One of the things I've been pondering the last couple days is first time incumbency bonus. I watched the 2001 GE yesterday and Labour actually gained Dorset South from the Tories:CorrectHorseBattery said:
So the 2017 GE result then.Andy_JS said:Prediction for tonight's poll: Con 43%, Lab 40%, LD 5%. Labour continuing to squeeze the LDs who are rather invisible at the moment. (Tories only slightly down on the GE when they polled 44.7%).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dorset_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2000s
They won it with a majority of 153 votes in 2001. On a uniform swing that should have been an easy gain for the Tories in 2005, but Jim Knight increased his majority to 1,812 in that election.
Obviously incumbency counts for very little when there's a tidal wave such as in 1997 or what the Lib Dems experienced in 2015. But I think it is worth a fair amount.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyre_Forest_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2010s0 -
I have gone into the kitchen, to make a coffee to spill over my laptop.ydoethur said:
Back in the 1970s my mother was teaching in a school where the police arrived to investigate allegations that a 16-year-old girl was in a relationship with her English teacher. They were met by the girl’s father, who after hearing their concerns, said that both he and the girl’s mother were fully aware of the relationship and quite happy about it, so would the police now kindly go away? (Incidentally the two of them later married and remained married until he died a few years ago.)Stark_Dawning said:
Times change. When I was at school a teacher was having a relationship with a six-former. They publicly announced their engagement the moment she left.ydoethur said:
The reasoning was that as the two had been in continuous contact since they left, they had still been in a professional relationship.tlg86 said:
Now that is harsh.ydoethur said:
A former colleague of mine (not in Staffordshire) was banned from teaching for two years for having an affair with a student, even though it began six years after they had both left the school.DecrepiterJohnL said:
A friend's boys' school went co-ed and let girls in; this was back in the 70s or 80s. He was a bit miffed his favourite maths teacher left. Turns out said teacher had previously been sacked for shagging the sixth form girls in a previous job, and my friend's school did not want to risk the bromide not working. These days teachers would be looking at a couple of years in prison, not just being asked to move on.DougSeal said:
In 1985, my first year of secondary school, our music teacher told us none of us would have a very good sense of rhythm because none of us were black.tlg86 said:
They sound more serious to me. The second one did make me snigger:ydoethur said:
That would be difficult, as it’s a new offence. Some idea of how strict these people can be may be found here:tlg86 said:
I find that hard to believe. If you can provide an example of a teacher being sacked for similar offences, I'll retract that.ydoethur said:
If I had done what any of them had done, I would undoubtedly have been sacked and very probably banned from teaching for two years, for bringing the school and the profession into disrepute. There are clauses in my contract and in Teachers’ Standards that set this out.tlg86 said:
If so, do you not think that is incredibly harsh? I know you think Cummings is as thick as mince, but I assume Ferguson and Calderwood are competent and good at what they do. It seems ridiculous that these indiscretions should end their professional careers.ydoethur said:
I would assume so. It depends on whether they held the positions on secondment from another place of work or were employed directly by the government.tlg86 said:
Here's something I've been wondering about. Are Ferguson and the woman in Scotland now unemployed?ydoethur said:
OK, so any three of the above along with tlg86 and Square Root, plus presumably the ghost of Harry Flashman (if they have phone lines to wherever such spirits go).tlg86 said:
If I was asked whether he should go I would say "no", even though I'd have sacked him if I had been the PM.ydoethur said:
I agree.MaxPB said:I think the poll is going to be more or less evens within the MoE.
The 3% who say Cummings should stay may just be because they happened to ring Lord Wakefield, Matt Hancock and Bluest Blue.
So no, I do not think it is harsh. They broke their own rules for their own benefit. Are people so selfish and lacking in judgement fit to hold high public office?
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/854798/OFFICIAL_SENSITIVE_-_SOS_WEB_Decision_Chester__Mark_Robert.pdf (banned from teaching for lying in court to try and avoid a driving penalty - admittedly he did go to prison)
Or here:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/874272/OFFICIAL_SENSITIVE_Turner_Philip_SoS_Decision_REDACTED__007_.pdf (again, though, this did partly involve conduct in a school).
The relevant standards are here:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/665520/Teachers__Standards.pdf
Page 14, which is the key part, talks about not undermining the rule of law. My contract also says I must not engage in any conduct that would bring the school into any form of disrepute (which this certainly would) or I am subject to summary dismissal.
So you may find it hard to believe, but I’m pretty confident it would happen.
2. During one or more lessons with pupils he expressed inappropriate views and/or
discussed inappropriate topics leading to one or more pupils suggesting that:
a. on or around 13 July 2018, “All Mexicans were criminals and/or bad” or
words to that effect;
b. on or around 4 September 2018, if a person of an ethnic minority is
unhappy with a country’s policies they should “leave the country”.
I used to have fantastic arguments with my RE teacher who was from Ghana. She was a big fan of Robert Mugabe and thought what he was doing in 2002-03 was fantastic. Now, I obviously wasn't a snowflake about it, but I'm guessing an education panel wouldn't have too much of a problem with her giving those opinions.
And therefore, it was misconduct.
THe punchline is:
The girl’s father was the Headmaster.
Loco parentis had its limits.0 -
deletedsquareroot2 said:
An eminent person on here posted about the incumbency benefit and iirc it oroved to be a fallacy.tlg86 said:
One of the things I've been pondering the last couple days is first time incumbency bonus. I watched the 2001 GE yesterday and Labour actually gained Dorset South from the Tories:CorrectHorseBattery said:
So the 2017 GE result then.Andy_JS said:Prediction for tonight's poll: Con 43%, Lab 40%, LD 5%. Labour continuing to squeeze the LDs who are rather invisible at the moment. (Tories only slightly down on the GE when they polled 44.7%).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dorset_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2000s
They won it with a majority of 153 votes in 2001. On a uniform swing that should have been an easy gain for the Tories in 2005, but Jim Knight increased his majority to 1,812 in that election.
Obviously incumbency counts for very little when there's a tidal wave such as in 1997 or what the Lib Dems experienced in 2015. But I think it is worth a fair amount.0 -
I think there's a difference between a benefit for the incumbent party and a personal vote for the MP.ydoethur said:
There was a huge swing in Mansfield at this election, well above the ordinary. If I remember correctly it was about 15 points.tlg86 said:
One of the things I've been pondering the last couple days is first time incumbency bonus. I watched the 2001 GE yesterday and Labour actually gained Dorset South from the Tories:CorrectHorseBattery said:
So the 2017 GE result then.Andy_JS said:Prediction for tonight's poll: Con 43%, Lab 40%, LD 5%. Labour continuing to squeeze the LDs who are rather invisible at the moment. (Tories only slightly down on the GE when they polled 44.7%).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dorset_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2000s
They won it with a majority of 153 votes in 2001. On a uniform swing that should have been an easy gain for the Tories in 2005, but Jim Knight increased his majority to 1,812 in that election.
Obviously incumbency counts for very little when there's a tidal wave such as in 1997 or what the Lib Dems experienced in 2015. But I think it is worth a fair amount.
But that’s in it’s own way rather curious as from all I hear Ben Bradley is not an impressive MP. So I hesitate to say it’s an incumbency bonus.0 -
The loss of parliamentary resources to keep name recognition up may have been a factor.tlg86 said:
Really? It seems pretty obvious to me that incumbents get a benefit. Arguably it is more noticeable on the other side. Look what happened to Dr Richard Taylor's vote when he tried to win back Wyre Forest in 2015:squareroot2 said:
An eminent person on here posted about the incumbency benefit and iirc it oroved to be a fallacy.tlg86 said:
One of the things I've been pondering the last couple days is first time incumbency bonus. I watched the 2001 GE yesterday and Labour actually gained Dorset South from the Tories:CorrectHorseBattery said:
So the 2017 GE result then.Andy_JS said:Prediction for tonight's poll: Con 43%, Lab 40%, LD 5%. Labour continuing to squeeze the LDs who are rather invisible at the moment. (Tories only slightly down on the GE when they polled 44.7%).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dorset_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2000s
They won it with a majority of 153 votes in 2001. On a uniform swing that should have been an easy gain for the Tories in 2005, but Jim Knight increased his majority to 1,812 in that election.
Obviously incumbency counts for very little when there's a tidal wave such as in 1997 or what the Lib Dems experienced in 2015. But I think it is worth a fair amount.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyre_Forest_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2010s
But I wonder if his age (76) plus the reduction in salience of the one issue he was fighting on were not factors too.0 -
I may be incorrect but I feel sure there was a complete thread on the subject. its quite possible I have misremembered the thread and indeed its conclusion..tlg86 said:
Really? It seems pretty obvious to me that incumbents get a benefit. Arguably it is more noticeable on the other side. Look what happened to Dr Richard Taylor's vote when he tried to win back Wyre Forest in 2015:squareroot2 said:
An eminent person on here posted about the incumbency benefit and iirc it oroved to be a fallacy.tlg86 said:
One of the things I've been pondering the last couple days is first time incumbency bonus. I watched the 2001 GE yesterday and Labour actually gained Dorset South from the Tories:CorrectHorseBattery said:
So the 2017 GE result then.Andy_JS said:Prediction for tonight's poll: Con 43%, Lab 40%, LD 5%. Labour continuing to squeeze the LDs who are rather invisible at the moment. (Tories only slightly down on the GE when they polled 44.7%).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dorset_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2000s
They won it with a majority of 153 votes in 2001. On a uniform swing that should have been an easy gain for the Tories in 2005, but Jim Knight increased his majority to 1,812 in that election.
Obviously incumbency counts for very little when there's a tidal wave such as in 1997 or what the Lib Dems experienced in 2015. But I think it is worth a fair amount.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyre_Forest_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2010s0 -
I wasn't campaigning there until 2010, but 2005 was a pretty awful election for the Tories in Dorset.tlg86 said:
One of the things I've been pondering the last couple days is first time incumbency bonus. I watched the 2001 GE yesterday and Labour actually gained Dorset South from the Tories:CorrectHorseBattery said:
So the 2017 GE result then.Andy_JS said:Prediction for tonight's poll: Con 43%, Lab 40%, LD 5%. Labour continuing to squeeze the LDs who are rather invisible at the moment. (Tories only slightly down on the GE when they polled 44.7%).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dorset_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2000s
They won it with a majority of 153 votes in 2001. On a uniform swing that should have been an easy gain for the Tories in 2005, but Jim Knight increased his majority to 1,812 in that election.
Obviously incumbency counts for very little when there's a tidal wave such as in 1997 or what the Lib Dems experienced in 2015. But I think it is worth a fair amount.
Poole - lowest Tory vote in universal suffrage
Bournemouth West - lowest Tory vote since creation of the seat
Mid Dorset - lowest Tory vote share since creation of the seat
Only election in Dorset where I've ever had a door slammed in my face (Mid Dorset).
Incidentally, anyone interested in why Lib Dems are now doing so badly would do well to look at their votes in places like the West Country, where they used to have strong showings and in some places decent majorities.
They were Eurosceptic and campaigned on local issues, their candidates opened every fete etc. They struck a lot of voters down here as decentralised and independent. Becoming stuck on European issues has really been their undoing down these parts...2 -
Perhaps, but Burnley is another example of where this happened:ydoethur said:
The loss of parliamentary resources to keep name recognition up may have been a factor.tlg86 said:
Really? It seems pretty obvious to me that incumbents get a benefit. Arguably it is more noticeable on the other side. Look what happened to Dr Richard Taylor's vote when he tried to win back Wyre Forest in 2015:squareroot2 said:
An eminent person on here posted about the incumbency benefit and iirc it oroved to be a fallacy.tlg86 said:
One of the things I've been pondering the last couple days is first time incumbency bonus. I watched the 2001 GE yesterday and Labour actually gained Dorset South from the Tories:CorrectHorseBattery said:
So the 2017 GE result then.Andy_JS said:Prediction for tonight's poll: Con 43%, Lab 40%, LD 5%. Labour continuing to squeeze the LDs who are rather invisible at the moment. (Tories only slightly down on the GE when they polled 44.7%).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dorset_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2000s
They won it with a majority of 153 votes in 2001. On a uniform swing that should have been an easy gain for the Tories in 2005, but Jim Knight increased his majority to 1,812 in that election.
Obviously incumbency counts for very little when there's a tidal wave such as in 1997 or what the Lib Dems experienced in 2015. But I think it is worth a fair amount.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyre_Forest_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2010s
But I wonder if his age (76) plus the reduction in salience of the one issue he was fighting on were not factors too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burnley_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2010s0 -
In from the garden to catch up on the news...
Van Tam is The Man!
0 -
I've been doing quite a lot myself, but I've done my right Achilles a mischief and am resting up at the moment. Reckon it's probably over-exercise - I was doing (at a guess) about 40K a week myself, but I may be getting a bit past it to be putting myself through those kinds of distances, alas.CorrectHorseBattery said:Also, hello all, hope you're well.
Any runners around here? I've been running tonnes in lockdown, I'm up to 40K a week
Going to give myself another week of just walking and then try to build up again from scratch, but even if I don't break down again I doubt I'll be doing more than 5K at a time at a leisurely pace for a little while. It's very frustrating but such is life.1 -
https://twitter.com/SteveHarrisDJ/status/1266785549689532416
Two helicopters land to take away casualties who had jumped off cliffs.0 -
As a counter, I offer you David Drew in Stroud. Lost in 2010, regained in 2017, lost again In 2019.tlg86 said:
Perhaps, but Burnley is another example of where this happened:ydoethur said:
The loss of parliamentary resources to keep name recognition up may have been a factor.tlg86 said:
Really? It seems pretty obvious to me that incumbents get a benefit. Arguably it is more noticeable on the other side. Look what happened to Dr Richard Taylor's vote when he tried to win back Wyre Forest in 2015:squareroot2 said:
An eminent person on here posted about the incumbency benefit and iirc it oroved to be a fallacy.tlg86 said:
One of the things I've been pondering the last couple days is first time incumbency bonus. I watched the 2001 GE yesterday and Labour actually gained Dorset South from the Tories:CorrectHorseBattery said:
So the 2017 GE result then.Andy_JS said:Prediction for tonight's poll: Con 43%, Lab 40%, LD 5%. Labour continuing to squeeze the LDs who are rather invisible at the moment. (Tories only slightly down on the GE when they polled 44.7%).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dorset_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2000s
They won it with a majority of 153 votes in 2001. On a uniform swing that should have been an easy gain for the Tories in 2005, but Jim Knight increased his majority to 1,812 in that election.
Obviously incumbency counts for very little when there's a tidal wave such as in 1997 or what the Lib Dems experienced in 2015. But I think it is worth a fair amount.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyre_Forest_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2010s
But I wonder if his age (76) plus the reduction in salience of the one issue he was fighting on were not factors too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burnley_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2010s-1 -
I (honestly) think the British people are generally sensible and caring.dr_spyn said:https://twitter.com/SteveHarrisDJ/status/1266785549689532416
Two helicopters land to take away casualties who had jumped off cliffs.
Photos like this shock my very belief system.
I have NEVER seen it that busy and I have been on bank holiday/summer weekends for decades....0 -
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8372351/Jeremy-Corbyns-activist-brother-Piers-arrested-AGAIN.html
Almost as bonkers as his brother.0 -
A crap runner. Have switched to biking - 100k a weekCorrectHorseBattery said:Also, hello all, hope you're well.
Any runners around here? I've been running tonnes in lockdown, I'm up to 40K a week0 -
Blimey, what’s it made of if it costs that much?RochdalePioneers said:
A crap runner. Have switched to biking - 100k a weekCorrectHorseBattery said:Also, hello all, hope you're well.
Any runners around here? I've been running tonnes in lockdown, I'm up to 40K a week0 -
Haven’t they all moved out of the way of the two helicopters either end of the beach? That’s what makes it look so crowded.Mortimer said:
I (honestly) think the British people are generally sensible and caring.dr_spyn said:https://twitter.com/SteveHarrisDJ/status/1266785549689532416
Two helicopters land to take away casualties who had jumped off cliffs.
Photos like this shock my very belief system.
I have NEVER seen it that busy and I have been on bank holiday/summer weekends for decades....0 -
Won't shake a hand but too macho to wear a mask. What a festering mess of insecurity and fear he is.
https://twitter.com/Lawrence/status/1266782104186060800?s=200 -
Two feet bad, two wheels better...CorrectHorseBattery said:Also, hello all, hope you're well.
Any runners around here? I've been running tonnes in lockdown, I'm up to 40K a week0 -
That’s an image that might be used once or twiceTheuniondivvie said:Won't shake a hand but too macho to wear a mask. What a festering mess of insecurity and fear he is.
https://twitter.com/Lawrence/status/1266782104186060800?s=200 -
That's a cracking pay packet for a cycle courier!RochdalePioneers said:
A crap runner. Have switched to biking - 100k a weekCorrectHorseBattery said:Also, hello all, hope you're well.
Any runners around here? I've been running tonnes in lockdown, I'm up to 40K a week0 -
I think they call it peleton....ydoethur said:
Blimey, what’s it made of if it costs that much?RochdalePioneers said:
A crap runner. Have switched to biking - 100k a weekCorrectHorseBattery said:Also, hello all, hope you're well.
Any runners around here? I've been running tonnes in lockdown, I'm up to 40K a week0 -
Trump looks like the guy with the medal ribbons has just squeezed his nads.Theuniondivvie said:Won't shake a hand but too macho to wear a mask. What a festering mess of insecurity and fear he is.
https://twitter.com/Lawrence/status/1266782104186060800?s=200 -
I do run a bit and love watching it (at all levels from track to local cross country) . I think its because its probably the most basic and natural sport there is . You do not need any equipment bar trainers and a course can be made anywhere outdoors. i prefer to do and watch "pure " sports . swimming is anotherRochdalePioneers said:
A crap runner. Have switched to biking - 100k a weekCorrectHorseBattery said:Also, hello all, hope you're well.
Any runners around here? I've been running tonnes in lockdown, I'm up to 40K a week1 -
With the fuss about performance enhancing swimwear I did hope that the governing body would ban swimsuits altogether.state_go_away said:
I do run a bit and love watching it (at all levels from track to local cross country) . I think its because its probably the most basic and natural sport there is . You do not need any equipment bar trainers and a course can be made anywhere outdoors. i prefer to do and watch "pure " sports . swimming is anotherRochdalePioneers said:
A crap runner. Have switched to biking - 100k a weekCorrectHorseBattery said:Also, hello all, hope you're well.
Any runners around here? I've been running tonnes in lockdown, I'm up to 40K a week0 -
That depends on what part of Iran they are in.eadric said:in terms of cases, there is a definite second wave in Iran.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/iran/
The wave began on May 2, and is picking up speed
If its a different part to where the cases were in March then its a delayed first wave rather than any second wave.0 -
yes so do I - The closer sport can be to the natural element of it the better .SandyRentool said:
With the fuss about performance enhancing swimwear I did hope that the governing body would ban swimsuits altogether.state_go_away said:
I do run a bit and love watching it (at all levels from track to local cross country) . I think its because its probably the most basic and natural sport there is . You do not need any equipment bar trainers and a course can be made anywhere outdoors. i prefer to do and watch "pure " sports . swimming is anotherRochdalePioneers said:
A crap runner. Have switched to biking - 100k a weekCorrectHorseBattery said:Also, hello all, hope you're well.
Any runners around here? I've been running tonnes in lockdown, I'm up to 40K a week0 -
That looks to support my view. In 2015 the Tory vote went up and the Labour vote went down. What happened in 2017 and 2019 was driven by big swings to and then against Labour.ydoethur said:
As a counter, I offer you David Drew in Stroud. Lost in 2010, regained in 2017, lost again In 2019.tlg86 said:
Perhaps, but Burnley is another example of where this happened:ydoethur said:
The loss of parliamentary resources to keep name recognition up may have been a factor.tlg86 said:
Really? It seems pretty obvious to me that incumbents get a benefit. Arguably it is more noticeable on the other side. Look what happened to Dr Richard Taylor's vote when he tried to win back Wyre Forest in 2015:squareroot2 said:
An eminent person on here posted about the incumbency benefit and iirc it oroved to be a fallacy.tlg86 said:
One of the things I've been pondering the last couple days is first time incumbency bonus. I watched the 2001 GE yesterday and Labour actually gained Dorset South from the Tories:CorrectHorseBattery said:
So the 2017 GE result then.Andy_JS said:Prediction for tonight's poll: Con 43%, Lab 40%, LD 5%. Labour continuing to squeeze the LDs who are rather invisible at the moment. (Tories only slightly down on the GE when they polled 44.7%).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dorset_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2000s
They won it with a majority of 153 votes in 2001. On a uniform swing that should have been an easy gain for the Tories in 2005, but Jim Knight increased his majority to 1,812 in that election.
Obviously incumbency counts for very little when there's a tidal wave such as in 1997 or what the Lib Dems experienced in 2015. But I think it is worth a fair amount.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyre_Forest_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2010s
But I wonder if his age (76) plus the reduction in salience of the one issue he was fighting on were not factors too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burnley_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2010s0 -
I'd have thought in more or less normal times it's an advantage, you can get stuff done for the area (even if it's hardly a lot in the great scheme of things) and mitigate or boost whatever the national picture is doing. However, in recent times we've seen such changes in party loyalty over national issues - Brexit and the Tories shift away from social liberalism, the Lib Dem collapse due to coalition, Scotland, etc., and who knows what with the pandemic and its political aftereffects will be (what, for example happens with Brexit, does it reduce its salience or kick it all off again by reducing the time to produce workable final exit plans), it would, I'd have thought, reduced the value being the tolerable local MP held in the old stick with us/change elections along party lines.squareroot2 said:
An eminent person on here posted about the incumbency benefit and iirc it proved to be a fallacy.tlg86 said:
One of the things I've been pondering the last couple days is first time incumbency bonus. I watched the 2001 GE yesterday and Labour actually gained Dorset South from the Tories:CorrectHorseBattery said:
So the 2017 GE result then.Andy_JS said:Prediction for tonight's poll: Con 43%, Lab 40%, LD 5%. Labour continuing to squeeze the LDs who are rather invisible at the moment. (Tories only slightly down on the GE when they polled 44.7%).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dorset_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2000s
They won it with a majority of 153 votes in 2001. On a uniform swing that should have been an easy gain for the Tories in 2005, but Jim Knight increased his majority to 1,812 in that election.
Obviously incumbency counts for very little when there's a tidal wave such as in 1997 or what the Lib Dems experienced in 2015. But I think it is worth a fair amount.0 -
ydoethur said:
As a counter, I offer you David Drew in Stroud. Lost in 2010, regained in 2017, lost again In 2019.tlg86 said:
Perhaps, but Burnley is another example of where this happened:ydoethur said:
The loss of parliamentary resources to keep name recognition up may have been a factor.tlg86 said:
Really? It seems pretty obvious to me that incumbents get a benefit. Arguably it is more noticeable on the other side. Look what happened to Dr Richard Taylor's vote when he tried to win back Wyre Forest in 2015:squareroot2 said:
An eminent person on here posted about the incumbency benefit and iirc it oroved to be a fallacy.tlg86 said:
One of the things I've been pondering the last couple days is first time incumbency bonus. I watched the 2001 GE yesterday and Labour actually gained Dorset South from the Tories:CorrectHorseBattery said:
So the 2017 GE result then.Andy_JS said:Prediction for tonight's poll: Con 43%, Lab 40%, LD 5%. Labour continuing to squeeze the LDs who are rather invisible at the moment. (Tories only slightly down on the GE when they polled 44.7%).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dorset_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2000s
They won it with a majority of 153 votes in 2001. On a uniform swing that should have been an easy gain for the Tories in 2005, but Jim Knight increased his majority to 1,812 in that election.
Obviously incumbency counts for very little when there's a tidal wave such as in 1997 or what the Lib Dems experienced in 2015. But I think it is worth a fair amount.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyre_Forest_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2010s
But I wonder if his age (76) plus the reduction in salience of the one issue he was fighting on were not factors too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burnley_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2010s
David Drew fought Neil Carmichael at five consecutive GEs, 2001-2017 winning 3 losing 2.ydoethur said:
As a counter, I offer you David Drew in Stroud. Lost in 2010, regained in 2017, lost again In 2019.tlg86 said:
Perhaps, but Burnley is another example of where this happened:ydoethur said:
The loss of parliamentary resources to keep name recognition up may have been a factor.tlg86 said:
Really? It seems pretty obvious to me that incumbents get a benefit. Arguably it is more noticeable on the other side. Look what happened to Dr Richard Taylor's vote when he tried to win back Wyre Forest in 2015:squareroot2 said:
An eminent person on here posted about the incumbency benefit and iirc it oroved to be a fallacy.tlg86 said:
One of the things I've been pondering the last couple days is first time incumbency bonus. I watched the 2001 GE yesterday and Labour actually gained Dorset South from the Tories:CorrectHorseBattery said:
So the 2017 GE result then.Andy_JS said:Prediction for tonight's poll: Con 43%, Lab 40%, LD 5%. Labour continuing to squeeze the LDs who are rather invisible at the moment. (Tories only slightly down on the GE when they polled 44.7%).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dorset_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2000s
They won it with a majority of 153 votes in 2001. On a uniform swing that should have been an easy gain for the Tories in 2005, but Jim Knight increased his majority to 1,812 in that election.
Obviously incumbency counts for very little when there's a tidal wave such as in 1997 or what the Lib Dems experienced in 2015. But I think it is worth a fair amount.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyre_Forest_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2010s
But I wonder if his age (76) plus the reduction in salience of the one issue he was fighting on were not factors too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burnley_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2010s
He also was candidate in 92,97 And last year. Overall won 4 lost 4 over 27 years.
Not sure about incumbency bonus for him.0 -
Yet none of those countries are even in the top 10 for deaths globallyeadric said:New cases piling up in all corners of the world today
4,220 in Chile
1,618 in Saudi Arabia
2,355 in Qatar (!!)
1,784 in Bangladesh
1,727 in South Africa
1,367 in Egypt
Egypt apart, those are all higher figures than the UK.
This damn virus is accelerating, and warm sunny weather does not seem to be very important.0 -
-
Reports on VoteUK forum that Opinium has Con and Lab both on 40%.2
-
Is he even a member?TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
My bold prediction for the next few days.
Everyone will be an expert on the Posse Comitatus Act.0 -
Hmm. The Labour tally went down by exactly 433 votes in 2015. Even in losing in 2019, Drew got more votes than in winning in 1997. Although admittedly, the electorate was bigger.tlg86 said:
That looks to support my view. In 2015 the Tory vote went up and the Labour vote went down. What happened in 2017 and 2019 was driven by big swings to and then against Labour.ydoethur said:
As a counter, I offer you David Drew in Stroud. Lost in 2010, regained in 2017, lost again In 2019.tlg86 said:
Perhaps, but Burnley is another example of where this happened:ydoethur said:
The loss of parliamentary resources to keep name recognition up may have been a factor.tlg86 said:
Really? It seems pretty obvious to me that incumbents get a benefit. Arguably it is more noticeable on the other side. Look what happened to Dr Richard Taylor's vote when he tried to win back Wyre Forest in 2015:squareroot2 said:
An eminent person on here posted about the incumbency benefit and iirc it oroved to be a fallacy.tlg86 said:
One of the things I've been pondering the last couple days is first time incumbency bonus. I watched the 2001 GE yesterday and Labour actually gained Dorset South from the Tories:CorrectHorseBattery said:
So the 2017 GE result then.Andy_JS said:Prediction for tonight's poll: Con 43%, Lab 40%, LD 5%. Labour continuing to squeeze the LDs who are rather invisible at the moment. (Tories only slightly down on the GE when they polled 44.7%).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dorset_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2000s
They won it with a majority of 153 votes in 2001. On a uniform swing that should have been an easy gain for the Tories in 2005, but Jim Knight increased his majority to 1,812 in that election.
Obviously incumbency counts for very little when there's a tidal wave such as in 1997 or what the Lib Dems experienced in 2015. But I think it is worth a fair amount.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyre_Forest_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2010s
But I wonder if his age (76) plus the reduction in salience of the one issue he was fighting on were not factors too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burnley_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2010s
That said, it’s only one example. I can’t point to others.
Cannock Chase occurs to me as a possible focus for research too, as Aidan Burley did not stand again in 2015 having won it on a higher than average swing in 2010 (before his issues with fancy dress). I confidently expected Janos Toth to win the seat as a result. But I think the swing to the Tories was above average in 2015 as well. And now, of course, it’s a very safe Tory seat.0 -
What Trump has come to watch: Liftoff at 19:22GMT (half an hour away) and all looking good so far...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIZsnKGV8TE0 -
You are (also) SeanT and I claim my £5.SandyRentool said:
With the fuss about performance enhancing swimwear I did hope that the governing body would ban swimsuits altogether.state_go_away said:
I do run a bit and love watching it (at all levels from track to local cross country) . I think its because its probably the most basic and natural sport there is . You do not need any equipment bar trainers and a course can be made anywhere outdoors. i prefer to do and watch "pure " sports . swimming is anotherRochdalePioneers said:
A crap runner. Have switched to biking - 100k a weekCorrectHorseBattery said:Also, hello all, hope you're well.
Any runners around here? I've been running tonnes in lockdown, I'm up to 40K a week0 -
That picture has already been uploaded onto the PB server for future threads.DougSeal said:
That’s an image that might be used once or twiceTheuniondivvie said:Won't shake a hand but too macho to wear a mask. What a festering mess of insecurity and fear he is.
https://twitter.com/Lawrence/status/1266782104186060800?s=200 -
Why? Is Trump trying to grab a posse?TheScreamingEagles said:My bold prediction for the next few days.
Everyone will be an expert on the Posse Comitatus Act.0 -
Dorset Police believe that some people had jumped from the arch at Durdle Door.
https://twitter.com/PA/status/1266800598864867329
IRC there is only one way up and down to the beach. I suppose that many people there would have preferred to keep their social distance when the 2 helicopters landed, but they may not have had the option to do so.0 -
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1266796670609588225ydoethur said:
Why? Is Trump trying to grab a posse?TheScreamingEagles said:My bold prediction for the next few days.
Everyone will be an expert on the Posse Comitatus Act.0 -
Big comeback from "30th February" for Van Tam today0
-
I'm not a dribbling Star Wars fan but this is good.
https://twitter.com/cyptoon/status/1266802209506942976?s=200 -
Does that include the weather ?Sandpit said:What Trump has come to watch: Liftoff at 19:22GMT (half an hour away) and all looking good so far...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIZsnKGV8TE0 -
Blimey.TheScreamingEagles said:
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1266796670609588225ydoethur said:
Why? Is Trump trying to grab a posse?TheScreamingEagles said:My bold prediction for the next few days.
Everyone will be an expert on the Posse Comitatus Act.
This guy is madder than mad Jock McMad, winner of last year’s Mr Madman competition.
Come on Mr Pence, it’s time for the 25th.0 -
If you want a good example of incumbency, look at what happened in North Norfolk after Norman Lamb retired.0
-
Another thing about running is that to win a race (or sometimes to even complete it) you are always at your edge of fitness and knackered ,from elite to beginner. Football /Rugby even tennis rely on skill most of the time wheras you can guarantee if you run you will be knackered at the end of it . To watch someone goign through that is inspiring to me - Just look up Jo Pavey winning the 10,000m at the Euro champs on Youtube at the age of 40 and I defy anyone not to admire that and perhaps have a tear in the eye. As Steve Cram commented - " The arms are going the teeth are gritted c/mon Jo !"0
-
Looking okay so far. T minus 24'Pulpstar said:
Does that include the weather ?Sandpit said:What Trump has come to watch: Liftoff at 19:22GMT (half an hour away) and all looking good so far...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIZsnKGV8TE
(They scrubbed at T-16'on Wednesday)0 -
Now there's a politician who probably did have a personal vote (and quite right too).GarethoftheVale2 said:If you want a good example of incumbency, look at what happened in North Norfolk after Norman Lamb retired.
0
This discussion has been closed.