Labour 50% (+2) Conservative 28% (-3) Reform UK 8% (+1) Liberal Democrat 7% (–) Green 4% (–) Plaid Cymru 1% (–) Other 2% (+1)
Changes +/- 28 May
What were the percentages in these seats at GE2019?
In the forty ‘Red Wall’ seats that we poll, the Conservatives won all in 2019 but Hartlepool (which was won in a subsequent parliamentary by-election) with 46.7% of the vote to Labour’s 37.9%. Reform UK, previously known as the Brexit Party, came third in these seats with 6.5% of the vote.
“A mother has lost a legal battle to force a school to share sex education materials used in her daughter’s lesson.
“A judge ruled that the commercial interests of the third-party sex education provider outweighed the public interest in forcing the school to release the lesson plan under freedom of information laws.
“Clare Page, 47, began her campaign after her 15-year-old daughter came home from school and said she had been taught that “heteronormativity” was a “bad thing” and that she should be “sex positive” towards relationships.
“Her daughter’s lesson at Hatcham College, a state school in New Cross, south-east London, had been taught by the School of Sexuality Education, a charity that is understood to have worked with more than 300 schools.”
Why doesn't she just ask her daughter?
I was also wondering if any of this was set on a home learning platform.
If not, possibly it was an outside group giving a presentation.
In which case, wouldn't the request be better addressed to them?
Edit - the way the report is worded suggests it was: Her daughter’s lesson at Hatcham College, a state school in New Cross, south-east London, had been taught by the School of Sexuality Education,
So the school may not even have the materials.
Which sounds weird all by itself. Imagine the fun OFSTED would have with asking the head what goes on in lessons. "I don't know. That's contacted out and I don't even know what they are teaching."
Rather a lot of schools do that, through the Oak National Academy Programme.
Run by Ark Academies Trust and in my experience providing lessons of pretty poor quality.
The Ark Academies Trust was founded by, inter alia (checks notes) the current Head of OFSTED...
So I can't imagine she'd get that bent out by it.
But in this case it sounds as though:
1) A meeting was requested and the materials were shared;
2) The parent requested a copy of them to circulate among other parents, which was refused on copyright grounds;
3) She then made an FOI request which was refused on those same grounds;
4) She's now bitching about that.
Well, if she's unhappy, how about she contact the organisation and offer to buy a set for her campaign?
Of more import:
1) Why are schools contracting with these external organisations in the first place?
2) Why does the public sector sign contracts that favour commercial confidentiality over freedom of information?
(1) because teachers won't teach them because of all the guidelines in place
2) Because that's the way the law works. Do you suppose the MoD put the details of our much more expensive purchased weapons systems into public domain? Or indeed the DoH puts the formulae for various drugs on its website?
Two other points for point 1.
First, this stuff needs experience to do well, and it's not efficient to have a SRE specialist in every school. Getting an external in a couple of days a year is more efficient.
Next, I've had to teach the plumbing aspects as a science teacher. It's awkward, and we don't have to touch the tricky bits (ooer missus). Having someone external to do these topics is way more fruitful.
Apparently the Privileges committee received further information from Johnson last night .
Why on earth would you wait till after the report was finalized and then send this . Surely the committee aren’t now going to re-write their conclusions.
If the report doesn’t come out tomorrow then that would be very fishy .
The £2.3bn from the sale of Chelsea which was pledged to Ukraine war victims is in limbo after the European Union made demands about how the money should be spent.
When Roman Abramovich sold the football club almost 13 months ago, he agreed with the Government that the money would be used for “all victims of the war in Ukraine”, as well as supporting the “long-term work of recovery”.
Mr Abramovich is under sanctions after ministers accused him of having “clear connections” to Vladimir Putin’s regime and being among a group of businessmen of having “blood on their hands”.
However, the huge sum remains unused in a frozen account. Telegraph Sport investigations have now established that a significant cause for the delay is Government consultations with the EU. The bloc is insisting the money be spent in Ukraine directly, rather than on those affected by the conflict as agreed with Abramovich.
The independent foundation set up to administer the funds, which is being established by Mike Penrose, a former Unicef UK chief executive, is understood to be at a loss to explain why the Government has changed its position in line with the EU’s demands.
The charity is ready to get to work quickly once the funds are released, with Ukraine’s humanitarian crisis dramatically worsening in recent days after the destruction of the Nova Kakhovka dam caused a long-term environmental catastrophe affecting drinking water and food supplies.
‘Politics standing in the way of urgent humanitarian need’
The Prime Minister is expected to come under pressure from MPs to solve the impasse amid mounting frustration that a potentially “world-changing” independent charity cannot start work.
In a post-Brexit landscape, it has come as a surprise to some close to talks that the Government is so readily siding with the demands from Brussels. One source described current inertia as “politics standing in the way of urgent humanitarian need”. It is unclear whether Abramovich may now need to become involved in the process to break the deadlock.
Wasn't there an issue with "all victims of the war in Ukraine” potentially meaning money would be spent to Russians who had fought in the war, or separatists?
The £2.3bn from the sale of Chelsea which was pledged to Ukraine war victims is in limbo after the European Union made demands about how the money should be spent.
When Roman Abramovich sold the football club almost 13 months ago, he agreed with the Government that the money would be used for “all victims of the war in Ukraine”, as well as supporting the “long-term work of recovery”.
Mr Abramovich is under sanctions after ministers accused him of having “clear connections” to Vladimir Putin’s regime and being among a group of businessmen of having “blood on their hands”.
However, the huge sum remains unused in a frozen account. Telegraph Sport investigations have now established that a significant cause for the delay is Government consultations with the EU. The bloc is insisting the money be spent in Ukraine directly, rather than on those affected by the conflict as agreed with Abramovich.
The independent foundation set up to administer the funds, which is being established by Mike Penrose, a former Unicef UK chief executive, is understood to be at a loss to explain why the Government has changed its position in line with the EU’s demands.
The charity is ready to get to work quickly once the funds are released, with Ukraine’s humanitarian crisis dramatically worsening in recent days after the destruction of the Nova Kakhovka dam caused a long-term environmental catastrophe affecting drinking water and food supplies.
‘Politics standing in the way of urgent humanitarian need’
The Prime Minister is expected to come under pressure from MPs to solve the impasse amid mounting frustration that a potentially “world-changing” independent charity cannot start work.
In a post-Brexit landscape, it has come as a surprise to some close to talks that the Government is so readily siding with the demands from Brussels. One source described current inertia as “politics standing in the way of urgent humanitarian need”. It is unclear whether Abramovich may now need to become involved in the process to break the deadlock.
Wasn't there an issue with "all victims of the war in Ukraine” potentially meaning money would be spent to Russians who had fought in the war, or separatists?
Wasn’t the wider issue that the British government wanted to spend the money in Britain, looking after the Ukranian refugees?
You’ll still need to get me to understand why it anything to do with the EU.
The £2.3bn from the sale of Chelsea which was pledged to Ukraine war victims is in limbo after the European Union made demands about how the money should be spent.
When Roman Abramovich sold the football club almost 13 months ago, he agreed with the Government that the money would be used for “all victims of the war in Ukraine”, as well as supporting the “long-term work of recovery”.
Mr Abramovich is under sanctions after ministers accused him of having “clear connections” to Vladimir Putin’s regime and being among a group of businessmen of having “blood on their hands”.
However, the huge sum remains unused in a frozen account. Telegraph Sport investigations have now established that a significant cause for the delay is Government consultations with the EU. The bloc is insisting the money be spent in Ukraine directly, rather than on those affected by the conflict as agreed with Abramovich.
The independent foundation set up to administer the funds, which is being established by Mike Penrose, a former Unicef UK chief executive, is understood to be at a loss to explain why the Government has changed its position in line with the EU’s demands.
The charity is ready to get to work quickly once the funds are released, with Ukraine’s humanitarian crisis dramatically worsening in recent days after the destruction of the Nova Kakhovka dam caused a long-term environmental catastrophe affecting drinking water and food supplies.
‘Politics standing in the way of urgent humanitarian need’
The Prime Minister is expected to come under pressure from MPs to solve the impasse amid mounting frustration that a potentially “world-changing” independent charity cannot start work.
In a post-Brexit landscape, it has come as a surprise to some close to talks that the Government is so readily siding with the demands from Brussels. One source described current inertia as “politics standing in the way of urgent humanitarian need”. It is unclear whether Abramovich may now need to become involved in the process to break the deadlock.
Wasn't there an issue with "all victims of the war in Ukraine” potentially meaning money would be spent to Russians who had fought in the war, or separatists?
You'd like to think that was just the party line to stop Abamovich being window-ed?
Nicola Sturgeon and Donald Trump arrested in 48 hours.
WHAT A TIME TO BE ALIVE!
It's weird. The 45th President of the United States, as played by Brian Cox, has just been arrested on federal charges. And we are so desensitized to it I had to put a "Succession" reference in to get people to read it. This man could have ended all life on Earth, and we're going "meh". We are bad, bad people...
“A mother has lost a legal battle to force a school to share sex education materials used in her daughter’s lesson.
“A judge ruled that the commercial interests of the third-party sex education provider outweighed the public interest in forcing the school to release the lesson plan under freedom of information laws.
“Clare Page, 47, began her campaign after her 15-year-old daughter came home from school and said she had been taught that “heteronormativity” was a “bad thing” and that she should be “sex positive” towards relationships.
“Her daughter’s lesson at Hatcham College, a state school in New Cross, south-east London, had been taught by the School of Sexuality Education, a charity that is understood to have worked with more than 300 schools.”
Why doesn't she just ask her daughter?
I was also wondering if any of this was set on a home learning platform.
If not, possibly it was an outside group giving a presentation.
In which case, wouldn't the request be better addressed to them?
Edit - the way the report is worded suggests it was: Her daughter’s lesson at Hatcham College, a state school in New Cross, south-east London, had been taught by the School of Sexuality Education,
So the school may not even have the materials.
Which sounds weird all by itself. Imagine the fun OFSTED would have with asking the head what goes on in lessons. "I don't know. That's contacted out and I don't even know what they are teaching."
Rather a lot of schools do that, through the Oak National Academy Programme.
Run by Ark Academies Trust and in my experience providing lessons of pretty poor quality.
The Ark Academies Trust was founded by, inter alia (checks notes) the current Head of OFSTED...
So I can't imagine she'd get that bent out by it.
But in this case it sounds as though:
1) A meeting was requested and the materials were shared;
2) The parent requested a copy of them to circulate among other parents, which was refused on copyright grounds;
3) She then made an FOI request which was refused on those same grounds;
4) She's now bitching about that.
Well, if she's unhappy, how about she contact the organisation and offer to buy a set for her campaign?
Of more import:
1) Why are schools contracting with these external organisations in the first place?
2) Why does the public sector sign contracts that favour commercial confidentiality over freedom of information?
(1) because teachers won't teach them because of all the guidelines in place
2) Because that's the way the law works. Do you suppose the MoD put the details of our much more expensive purchased weapons systems into public domain? Or indeed the DoH puts the formulae for various drugs on its website?
1) If teachers won’t teach lessons on certain subjects ‘because of the guidelines in place’, is that not indicative of a much wider problem in these areas?
2) a)No, there are national security issues with publishing military plans. b)Drug formulae are very much in the public domain already, as part of the patent process.
You are calling for is for *all* educational resources to be in the public domain. This will immediately hurt all private companies, organisations and charities that provide resources to schools. Their work will have to be taken over by the state, where necessary.
You should perhaps try to find a factory that builds flare guns that weigh little and are illumined by powerful spotlights. Then you could be at the very lit very light Very Lights.
“A mother has lost a legal battle to force a school to share sex education materials used in her daughter’s lesson.
“A judge ruled that the commercial interests of the third-party sex education provider outweighed the public interest in forcing the school to release the lesson plan under freedom of information laws.
“Clare Page, 47, began her campaign after her 15-year-old daughter came home from school and said she had been taught that “heteronormativity” was a “bad thing” and that she should be “sex positive” towards relationships.
“Her daughter’s lesson at Hatcham College, a state school in New Cross, south-east London, had been taught by the School of Sexuality Education, a charity that is understood to have worked with more than 300 schools.”
Why doesn't she just ask her daughter?
I was also wondering if any of this was set on a home learning platform.
If not, possibly it was an outside group giving a presentation.
In which case, wouldn't the request be better addressed to them?
Edit - the way the report is worded suggests it was: Her daughter’s lesson at Hatcham College, a state school in New Cross, south-east London, had been taught by the School of Sexuality Education,
So the school may not even have the materials.
Which sounds weird all by itself. Imagine the fun OFSTED would have with asking the head what goes on in lessons. "I don't know. That's contacted out and I don't even know what they are teaching."
Rather a lot of schools do that, through the Oak National Academy Programme.
Run by Ark Academies Trust and in my experience providing lessons of pretty poor quality.
The Ark Academies Trust was founded by, inter alia (checks notes) the current Head of OFSTED...
So I can't imagine she'd get that bent out by it.
But in this case it sounds as though:
1) A meeting was requested and the materials were shared;
2) The parent requested a copy of them to circulate among other parents, which was refused on copyright grounds;
3) She then made an FOI request which was refused on those same grounds;
4) She's now bitching about that.
Well, if she's unhappy, how about she contact the organisation and offer to buy a set for her campaign?
Of more import:
1) Why are schools contracting with these external organisations in the first place?
2) Why does the public sector sign contracts that favour commercial confidentiality over freedom of information?
(1) because teachers won't teach them because of all the guidelines in place
2) Because that's the way the law works. Do you suppose the MoD put the details of our much more expensive purchased weapons systems into public domain? Or indeed the DoH puts the formulae for various drugs on its website?
Two other points for point 1.
First, this stuff needs experience to do well, and it's not efficient to have a SRE specialist in every school. Getting an external in a couple of days a year is more efficient.
Next, I've had to teach the plumbing aspects as a science teacher. It's awkward, and we don't have to touch the tricky bits (ooer missus). Having someone external to do these topics is way more fruitful.
To add to this. I've had to teach the other bits as part of my therapies role. It's the sciencey bit that I don't understand. It is totally cross curriculum. Needing me one week and @Stuartinromford the next in the same class would be a timetabling and planning nightmare. So. It gets bought in.
This is what our Russian trolls try and do when they're not banging on about the gays and BA pilots.
France says uncovers major disinformation campaign by Russia
France on Tuesday said it had uncovered a major Russian disinformation campaign which involved posting false news items disguised as articles by prominent media, in a "hybrid" war waged by Moscow for its invasion of Ukraine.
It is actually getting quite boring, TBH (no offence intended to the mods who have to find new subjects so often). And the Boris-haters are doing their best to keep this story going just as much as the Boris-defenders
ENOUGH!
Agreed. We should 'move on' and we'll be able to when every PBer signs up to the correct and final assessment of him as a total clownfuck and pisstake with not a single redeeming feature who should never have been allowed near a UK government let alone at the head of it.
You can help by here and now resiling from what unless I've missed something (unlikely but possible) was your most recent take on him as a 'flawed colossus' whose downfall was a tragedy of Shakespearean proportions because it was self-inflicted and he 'could have been great'.
Why? - the essence of the Boris tragedy lies in his extraordinary ability to win coupled with no idea whatsoever what to do next.
I beg to differ.
Boris knew exactly what he wanted to do. Sit in the big chair, live in the big house, be famous and hand out just enough baubles to keep the Stooges loyal.
The essence of Borisism has always been "you can't tell me what to do, unlike those beaks at Eton." Hence everything he has ever done.
Oh, you ment policy ideas to make Britain better for all those people who aren't Boris? Why bother with them?
He's quite an unusual character, I think, combining the need to dominate people with the need to be liked, which aren't that usual a combination. The moral aspect of him is pretty weak.
And he also has quite a lot of misdirected creativity, which should be used in literature or entertainment somewhere, not for being employed instead in conning people in politics and his amoral, pantomime version of it.
Labour 50% (+2) Conservative 28% (-3) Reform UK 8% (+1) Liberal Democrat 7% (–) Green 4% (–) Plaid Cymru 1% (–) Other 2% (+1)
Changes +/- 28 May
Broken, sleazy Tories on the slide!
Psephological Probings reveal
It’s still only 61 v 36 like the National polling.
No sign of a Dutch Salute we are getting in National polls, because in Red Wall is the one place the theory is actually working if it doesn’t pick up evidence it is looking for.
+2 and - 3 = 5 divided by 2 for swing = 2.5, Wall or Region polling tend to produce bigger swings from poll to poll than National ones - possibly because once you get above L42 and C29 the sample can vary wildly from constituency to constituency and town to town, because MRP and other similar polling point out Labour are doing okay where they need to.
“A mother has lost a legal battle to force a school to share sex education materials used in her daughter’s lesson.
“A judge ruled that the commercial interests of the third-party sex education provider outweighed the public interest in forcing the school to release the lesson plan under freedom of information laws.
“Clare Page, 47, began her campaign after her 15-year-old daughter came home from school and said she had been taught that “heteronormativity” was a “bad thing” and that she should be “sex positive” towards relationships.
“Her daughter’s lesson at Hatcham College, a state school in New Cross, south-east London, had been taught by the School of Sexuality Education, a charity that is understood to have worked with more than 300 schools.”
Why doesn't she just ask her daughter?
I was also wondering if any of this was set on a home learning platform.
If not, possibly it was an outside group giving a presentation.
In which case, wouldn't the request be better addressed to them?
Edit - the way the report is worded suggests it was: Her daughter’s lesson at Hatcham College, a state school in New Cross, south-east London, had been taught by the School of Sexuality Education,
So the school may not even have the materials.
Which sounds weird all by itself. Imagine the fun OFSTED would have with asking the head what goes on in lessons. "I don't know. That's contacted out and I don't even know what they are teaching."
Rather a lot of schools do that, through the Oak National Academy Programme.
Run by Ark Academies Trust and in my experience providing lessons of pretty poor quality.
The Ark Academies Trust was founded by, inter alia (checks notes) the current Head of OFSTED...
So I can't imagine she'd get that bent out by it.
But in this case it sounds as though:
1) A meeting was requested and the materials were shared;
2) The parent requested a copy of them to circulate among other parents, which was refused on copyright grounds;
3) She then made an FOI request which was refused on those same grounds;
4) She's now bitching about that.
Well, if she's unhappy, how about she contact the organisation and offer to buy a set for her campaign?
Of more import:
1) Why are schools contracting with these external organisations in the first place?
2) Why does the public sector sign contracts that favour commercial confidentiality over freedom of information?
(1) because teachers won't teach them because of all the guidelines in place
2) Because that's the way the law works. Do you suppose the MoD put the details of our much more expensive purchased weapons systems into public domain? Or indeed the DoH puts the formulae for various drugs on its website?
1) If teachers won’t teach lessons on certain subjects ‘because of the guidelines in place’, is that not indicative of a much wider problem in these areas?
2) a)No, there are national security issues with publishing military plans. b)Drug formulae are very much in the public domain already, as part of the patent process.
You are calling for is for *all* educational resources to be in the public domain. This will immediately hurt all private companies, organisations and charities that provide resources to schools. Their work will have to be taken over by the state, where necessary.
I never took you to be a communist...
Obviously I’m not a communist, I go along with the American idea, that work paid for with public money should be the property of the public. See nasa.gov for details.
Pay a company to develop lesson plans, but on the basis that the lesson plans are then public. It’s a job of work, rather than a perpetual revenue stream for the provider, that’s before we get on to the specific problems with sex ed.
“A mother has lost a legal battle to force a school to share sex education materials used in her daughter’s lesson.
“A judge ruled that the commercial interests of the third-party sex education provider outweighed the public interest in forcing the school to release the lesson plan under freedom of information laws.
“Clare Page, 47, began her campaign after her 15-year-old daughter came home from school and said she had been taught that “heteronormativity” was a “bad thing” and that she should be “sex positive” towards relationships.
“Her daughter’s lesson at Hatcham College, a state school in New Cross, south-east London, had been taught by the School of Sexuality Education, a charity that is understood to have worked with more than 300 schools.”
Why doesn't she just ask her daughter?
I was also wondering if any of this was set on a home learning platform.
If not, possibly it was an outside group giving a presentation.
In which case, wouldn't the request be better addressed to them?
Edit - the way the report is worded suggests it was: Her daughter’s lesson at Hatcham College, a state school in New Cross, south-east London, had been taught by the School of Sexuality Education,
So the school may not even have the materials.
Which sounds weird all by itself. Imagine the fun OFSTED would have with asking the head what goes on in lessons. "I don't know. That's contacted out and I don't even know what they are teaching."
Rather a lot of schools do that, through the Oak National Academy Programme.
Run by Ark Academies Trust and in my experience providing lessons of pretty poor quality.
The Ark Academies Trust was founded by, inter alia (checks notes) the current Head of OFSTED...
So I can't imagine she'd get that bent out by it.
But in this case it sounds as though:
1) A meeting was requested and the materials were shared;
2) The parent requested a copy of them to circulate among other parents, which was refused on copyright grounds;
3) She then made an FOI request which was refused on those same grounds;
4) She's now bitching about that.
Well, if she's unhappy, how about she contact the organisation and offer to buy a set for her campaign?
Of more import:
1) Why are schools contracting with these external organisations in the first place?
2) Why does the public sector sign contracts that favour commercial confidentiality over freedom of information?
(1) because teachers won't teach them because of all the guidelines in place
2) Because that's the way the law works. Do you suppose the MoD put the details of our much more expensive purchased weapons systems into public domain? Or indeed the DoH puts the formulae for various drugs on its website?
Two other points for point 1.
First, this stuff needs experience to do well, and it's not efficient to have a SRE specialist in every school. Getting an external in a couple of days a year is more efficient.
Next, I've had to teach the plumbing aspects as a science teacher. It's awkward, and we don't have to touch the tricky bits (ooer missus). Having someone external to do these topics is way more fruitful.
To add to this. I've had to teach the other bits as part of my therapies role. It's the sciencey bit that I don't understand. It is totally cross curriculum. Needing me one week and @Stuartinromford the next in the same class would be a timetabling and planning nightmare. So. It gets bought in.
Is it worth noting the girl is 15 so the lesson is unlikely to be about plumbing which would surely have been covered years earlier, unless we are trapped in a remake of Carrie?
It should be almost heaven according to John Denver.
I know. Turns out he’s wrong. It’s pleasant. It ain’t the Dolomites. In fact, so far, it’s not even the Malverns (which have beautiful churches and history etc)
I’m gonna give it an hour but if it remains merely pleasant I’m going to veer away to some shite Virginian toilet town to buy Tranq
It is actually getting quite boring, TBH (no offence intended to the mods who have to find new subjects so often). And the Boris-haters are doing their best to keep this story going just as much as the Boris-defenders
ENOUGH!
Agreed. We should 'move on' and we'll be able to when every PBer signs up to the correct and final assessment of him as a total clownfuck and pisstake with not a single redeeming feature who should never have been allowed near a UK government let alone at the head of it.
You can help by here and now resiling from what unless I've missed something (unlikely but possible) was your most recent take on him as a 'flawed colossus' whose downfall was a tragedy of Shakespearean proportions because it was self-inflicted and he 'could have been great'.
Why? - the essence of the Boris tragedy lies in his extraordinary ability to win coupled with no idea whatsoever what to do next.
I beg to differ.
Boris knew exactly what he wanted to do. Sit in the big chair, live in the big house, be famous and hand out just enough baubles to keep the Stooges loyal.
The essence of Borisism has always been "you can't tell me what to do, unlike those beaks at Eton." Hence everything he has ever done.
Oh, you ment policy ideas to make Britain better for all those people who aren't Boris? Why bother with them?
He's quite an unusual character, I think, combining the need to dominate people with the need to be liked, which aren't that usual a combination. The moral aspect of him is pretty weak.
And he also has quite a lot of misdirected creativity, which should be used in literature or entertainment somewhere, not for being employed instead in conning people in politics and his amoral, pantomime version of it.
Would be an excellent QI host
IMV Boris is very good when he has time to write a prepared script to read out, even if he varies it on delivery. He is far less good - in fact, terrible at times - when he has to utterly ad lib.
The latter is a *really* useful skill for a politician to have. And he doesn't.
It is actually getting quite boring, TBH (no offence intended to the mods who have to find new subjects so often). And the Boris-haters are doing their best to keep this story going just as much as the Boris-defenders
ENOUGH!
Agreed. We should 'move on' and we'll be able to when every PBer signs up to the correct and final assessment of him as a total clownfuck and pisstake with not a single redeeming feature who should never have been allowed near a UK government let alone at the head of it.
You can help by here and now resiling from what unless I've missed something (unlikely but possible) was your most recent take on him as a 'flawed colossus' whose downfall was a tragedy of Shakespearean proportions because it was self-inflicted and he 'could have been great'.
Why? - the essence of the Boris tragedy lies in his extraordinary ability to win coupled with no idea whatsoever what to do next.
I beg to differ.
Boris knew exactly what he wanted to do. Sit in the big chair, live in the big house, be famous and hand out just enough baubles to keep the Stooges loyal.
The essence of Borisism has always been "you can't tell me what to do, unlike those beaks at Eton." Hence everything he has ever done.
Oh, you ment policy ideas to make Britain better for all those people who aren't Boris? Why bother with them?
He's quite an unusual character, I think, combining the need to dominate people with the need to be liked, which aren't that usual a combination. The moral aspect of him is pretty weak.
And he also has quite a lot of misdirected creativity, which should be used in literature or entertainment somewhere, not for being employed instead in conning people in politics and his amoral, pantomime version of it.
Would be an excellent QI host
The premise of QI is, however, little known facts.
Having listened to much of this today, it’s fair to point out that most of the day consisted of groups providing their narrative of what they believe happened and posing questions. So this is is someone’s view, not the conclusion of the three year process (obviously, but needs saying as there was a lot of anger and attacks on all U.K. governments today).
“A mother has lost a legal battle to force a school to share sex education materials used in her daughter’s lesson.
“A judge ruled that the commercial interests of the third-party sex education provider outweighed the public interest in forcing the school to release the lesson plan under freedom of information laws.
“Clare Page, 47, began her campaign after her 15-year-old daughter came home from school and said she had been taught that “heteronormativity” was a “bad thing” and that she should be “sex positive” towards relationships.
“Her daughter’s lesson at Hatcham College, a state school in New Cross, south-east London, had been taught by the School of Sexuality Education, a charity that is understood to have worked with more than 300 schools.”
Why doesn't she just ask her daughter?
I was also wondering if any of this was set on a home learning platform.
If not, possibly it was an outside group giving a presentation.
In which case, wouldn't the request be better addressed to them?
Edit - the way the report is worded suggests it was: Her daughter’s lesson at Hatcham College, a state school in New Cross, south-east London, had been taught by the School of Sexuality Education,
So the school may not even have the materials.
Which sounds weird all by itself. Imagine the fun OFSTED would have with asking the head what goes on in lessons. "I don't know. That's contacted out and I don't even know what they are teaching."
Rather a lot of schools do that, through the Oak National Academy Programme.
Run by Ark Academies Trust and in my experience providing lessons of pretty poor quality.
The Ark Academies Trust was founded by, inter alia (checks notes) the current Head of OFSTED...
So I can't imagine she'd get that bent out by it.
But in this case it sounds as though:
1) A meeting was requested and the materials were shared;
2) The parent requested a copy of them to circulate among other parents, which was refused on copyright grounds;
3) She then made an FOI request which was refused on those same grounds;
4) She's now bitching about that.
Well, if she's unhappy, how about she contact the organisation and offer to buy a set for her campaign?
Of more import:
1) Why are schools contracting with these external organisations in the first place?
2) Why does the public sector sign contracts that favour commercial confidentiality over freedom of information?
(1) because teachers won't teach them because of all the guidelines in place
2) Because that's the way the law works. Do you suppose the MoD put the details of our much more expensive purchased weapons systems into public domain? Or indeed the DoH puts the formulae for various drugs on its website?
Two other points for point 1.
First, this stuff needs experience to do well, and it's not efficient to have a SRE specialist in every school. Getting an external in a couple of days a year is more efficient.
Next, I've had to teach the plumbing aspects as a science teacher. It's awkward, and we don't have to touch the tricky bits (ooer missus). Having someone external to do these topics is way more fruitful.
To add to this. I've had to teach the other bits as part of my therapies role. It's the sciencey bit that I don't understand. It is totally cross curriculum. Needing me one week and @Stuartinromford the next in the same class would be a timetabling and planning nightmare. So. It gets bought in.
Can I invest in a PB.com educational company that contracts with schools to provide valuable education on political betting, sex education (specialising in transgender issues) and UFOs?
Re Nottingham, if it had been a white, right-wing extremist, I'm sure we would have been told by now. The fact we haven't suggests it's not.
We were told it was a middle-aged black guy with dreadlocks and mental health issues. How reliably we were told that, I'm not sure but it does not sound like terrorism or drugs gangs, or anything else really. And that might be the real reason we are not being told: it just does not make sense on any level.
In fact, I’ll let PB-ers decide. Here’s my view right now at the “lookout”
I am a jaded over traveller and this is actually stunning? Or is it merely pleasant as I say?
The word 'stunning' is preposterously overused. A nice kitchen or a moderately well turned out female are routinely described as 'stunning'. This is more stunning than at least 85% of things described as 'stunning' on any given day. I personally wouldn't describe it as stunning. But I have a very, very high bar for using the word.
I think he also seems to have decided that this is key to his legacy, credibility or reputation, or whether he can come back. So it seems to have become an enormous point of principle for him, even though he in the past has himself obviously mocked the idea of acting out of principle anyway, many times.
So the public is jaded, and no one really cares any more, or seriously thinks that doesn't routinely lie. He needs some sort of self-reflection check, which would be much more likely to revive his career than any of this associated nonsense, also.
Is Uxbridge full of voters in ten-year-old diesels? Most newish cars are exempt. Before betting, maybe look at the cars parked behind reporters on the spot.
Is Labour in danger of being too afraid of making spending commitments ?
The right wing press will trash them regardless of what they do . And surely after the Truss debacle a simple “we won’t be lectured to by the Tories” would suffice .
I do fear that in an effort to look fiscally sound they’re going too far the other way .
“A mother has lost a legal battle to force a school to share sex education materials used in her daughter’s lesson.
“A judge ruled that the commercial interests of the third-party sex education provider outweighed the public interest in forcing the school to release the lesson plan under freedom of information laws.
“Clare Page, 47, began her campaign after her 15-year-old daughter came home from school and said she had been taught that “heteronormativity” was a “bad thing” and that she should be “sex positive” towards relationships.
“Her daughter’s lesson at Hatcham College, a state school in New Cross, south-east London, had been taught by the School of Sexuality Education, a charity that is understood to have worked with more than 300 schools.”
Why doesn't she just ask her daughter?
I was also wondering if any of this was set on a home learning platform.
If not, possibly it was an outside group giving a presentation.
In which case, wouldn't the request be better addressed to them?
Edit - the way the report is worded suggests it was: Her daughter’s lesson at Hatcham College, a state school in New Cross, south-east London, had been taught by the School of Sexuality Education,
So the school may not even have the materials.
Which sounds weird all by itself. Imagine the fun OFSTED would have with asking the head what goes on in lessons. "I don't know. That's contacted out and I don't even know what they are teaching."
Rather a lot of schools do that, through the Oak National Academy Programme.
Run by Ark Academies Trust and in my experience providing lessons of pretty poor quality.
The Ark Academies Trust was founded by, inter alia (checks notes) the current Head of OFSTED...
So I can't imagine she'd get that bent out by it.
But in this case it sounds as though:
1) A meeting was requested and the materials were shared;
2) The parent requested a copy of them to circulate among other parents, which was refused on copyright grounds;
3) She then made an FOI request which was refused on those same grounds;
4) She's now bitching about that.
Well, if she's unhappy, how about she contact the organisation and offer to buy a set for her campaign?
Of more import:
1) Why are schools contracting with these external organisations in the first place?
2) Why does the public sector sign contracts that favour commercial confidentiality over freedom of information?
(1) because teachers won't teach them because of all the guidelines in place
2) Because that's the way the law works. Do you suppose the MoD put the details of our much more expensive purchased weapons systems into public domain? Or indeed the DoH puts the formulae for various drugs on its website?
1) If teachers won’t teach lessons on certain subjects ‘because of the guidelines in place’, is that not indicative of a much wider problem in these areas?
2) a)No, there are national security issues with publishing military plans. b)Drug formulae are very much in the public domain already, as part of the patent process.
You are calling for is for *all* educational resources to be in the public domain. This will immediately hurt all private companies, organisations and charities that provide resources to schools. Their work will have to be taken over by the state, where necessary.
I never took you to be a communist...
Obviously I’m not a communist, I go along with the American idea, that work paid for with public money should be the property of the public. See nasa.gov for details.
Pay a company to develop lesson plans, but on the basis that the lesson plans are then public. It’s a job of work, rather than a perpetual revenue stream for the provider, that’s before we get on to the specific problems with sex ed.
Do you have any children in the UK public schools system? In which case, why are you so worked up about UK sex ed?
IME my son's school's been getting it right. Certainly better than back in my day.
Labour 50% (+2) Conservative 28% (-3) Reform UK 8% (+1) Liberal Democrat 7% (–) Green 4% (–) Plaid Cymru 1% (–) Other 2% (+1)
Changes +/- 28 May
Broken, sleazy Tories on the slide!
Psephological Probings reveal
It’s still only 61 v 36 like the National polling.
No sign of a Dutch Salute we are getting in National polls, because in Red Wall is the one place the theory is actually working if it doesn’t pick up evidence it is looking for.
+2 and - 3 = 5 divided by 2 for swing = 2.5, Wall or Region polling tend to produce bigger swings from poll to poll than National ones - possibly because once you get above L42 and C29 the sample can vary wildly from constituency to constituency and town to town, because MRP and other similar polling point out Labour are doing okay where they need to.
“A mother has lost a legal battle to force a school to share sex education materials used in her daughter’s lesson.
“A judge ruled that the commercial interests of the third-party sex education provider outweighed the public interest in forcing the school to release the lesson plan under freedom of information laws.
“Clare Page, 47, began her campaign after her 15-year-old daughter came home from school and said she had been taught that “heteronormativity” was a “bad thing” and that she should be “sex positive” towards relationships.
“Her daughter’s lesson at Hatcham College, a state school in New Cross, south-east London, had been taught by the School of Sexuality Education, a charity that is understood to have worked with more than 300 schools.”
Why doesn't she just ask her daughter?
I was also wondering if any of this was set on a home learning platform.
If not, possibly it was an outside group giving a presentation.
In which case, wouldn't the request be better addressed to them?
Edit - the way the report is worded suggests it was: Her daughter’s lesson at Hatcham College, a state school in New Cross, south-east London, had been taught by the School of Sexuality Education,
So the school may not even have the materials.
Which sounds weird all by itself. Imagine the fun OFSTED would have with asking the head what goes on in lessons. "I don't know. That's contacted out and I don't even know what they are teaching."
Rather a lot of schools do that, through the Oak National Academy Programme.
Run by Ark Academies Trust and in my experience providing lessons of pretty poor quality.
The Ark Academies Trust was founded by, inter alia (checks notes) the current Head of OFSTED...
So I can't imagine she'd get that bent out by it.
But in this case it sounds as though:
1) A meeting was requested and the materials were shared;
2) The parent requested a copy of them to circulate among other parents, which was refused on copyright grounds;
3) She then made an FOI request which was refused on those same grounds;
4) She's now bitching about that.
Well, if she's unhappy, how about she contact the organisation and offer to buy a set for her campaign?
Of more import:
1) Why are schools contracting with these external organisations in the first place?
2) Why does the public sector sign contracts that favour commercial confidentiality over freedom of information?
(1) because teachers won't teach them because of all the guidelines in place
2) Because that's the way the law works. Do you suppose the MoD put the details of our much more expensive purchased weapons systems into public domain? Or indeed the DoH puts the formulae for various drugs on its website?
1) If teachers won’t teach lessons on certain subjects ‘because of the guidelines in place’, is that not indicative of a much wider problem in these areas?
2) a)No, there are national security issues with publishing military plans. b)Drug formulae are very much in the public domain already, as part of the patent process.
On (1) I would agree with you. It's one of many problems.
On 2, if you don't like that, here's a better one. If I publish research from the National Archives using materials generated by Civil Servants in the course of their work, technically I have to get the permission of whatever HMSO is calling itself this week. Why should education materials be different?
In fact, I’ll let PB-ers decide. Here’s my view right now at the “lookout”
I am a jaded over traveller and this is actually stunning? Or is it merely pleasant as I say?
The word 'stunning' is preposterously overused. A nice kitchen or a moderately well turned out female are routinely described as 'stunning'. This is more stunning than at least 85% of things described as 'stunning' on any given day. I personally wouldn't describe it as stunning. But I have a very, very high bar for using the word.
Yes. I’d say it is impressively scenic, with hints of grandeur
I’m at another slightly better overlook
Again, definitely not stunning
On the other hand my expectations are high. This is an American National Park. Some of America’s National Parks are outstandingly beautiful and awesome. And definitely stunning
A line-by-line rebuttal sooooooooo good that he didn’t trust either the Commons or his constituency to decide his fate.
Hmm. I detest Johnson and wish he would just go away. And I agree with you about his constituency. But do you really think he would get a fair decision from the Commons? Everyone outside the Tory party would vote against him as a point of principle no matter what the facts and it only needs 40 of his fellow MPs to vote against him and he is sunk. Just think of how many people he has pissed off in his own party who will leap at the chance to sink him.
This is absolutely not to criticise the committee, nor to express any sort of dismay about him being gone. But the idea he would get a fair judgement from the Commons themselves is for the birds. This is politics and this is also personal. No matter how good his defence, on the floor of the House he would be toast.
Is Uxbridge full of voters in ten-year-old diesels? Most newish cars are exempt. Before betting, maybe look at the cars parked behind reporters on the spot.
There's also the fact that MPs have nothing to do with it, but I get that by-elections are often used for things that they can't do anything about (as are General Elections).
In fact, I’ll let PB-ers decide. Here’s my view right now at the “lookout”
I am a jaded over traveller and this is actually stunning? Or is it merely pleasant as I say?
The word 'stunning' is preposterously overused. A nice kitchen or a moderately well turned out female are routinely described as 'stunning'. This is more stunning than at least 85% of things described as 'stunning' on any given day. I personally wouldn't describe it as stunning. But I have a very, very high bar for using the word.
Yes. I’d say it is impressively scenic, with hints of grandeur
I’m at another slightly better overlook
Again, definitely not stunning
On the other hand my expectations are high. This is an American National Park. Some of America’s National Parks are outstandingly beautiful and awesome. And definitely stunning
There are lots of great views from places around the world that easily match this. My first thought was how similar it looks to the view from the top of the Grampians in Victoria. Just in that case you are looking out over genuine eucalyptus wilderness rather than farmland.
As a case study in why you shouldn't speak while angry (it will be the greatest speech you ever regret making) it's grimly fascinating. And not over yet.
In fact, I’ll let PB-ers decide. Here’s my view right now at the “lookout”
I am a jaded over traveller and this is actually stunning? Or is it merely pleasant as I say?
The word 'stunning' is preposterously overused. A nice kitchen or a moderately well turned out female are routinely described as 'stunning'. This is more stunning than at least 85% of things described as 'stunning' on any given day. I personally wouldn't describe it as stunning. But I have a very, very high bar for using the word.
Yes. I’d say it is impressively scenic, with hints of grandeur
I’m at another slightly better overlook
Again, definitely not stunning
On the other hand my expectations are high. This is an American National Park. Some of America’s National Parks are outstandingly beautiful and awesome. And definitely stunning
Possibly it is the history of the place that makes it important? There was a lot of bitter fighting up and down it in the American Civil War.
In fact, I’ll let PB-ers decide. Here’s my view right now at the “lookout”
I am a jaded over traveller and this is actually stunning? Or is it merely pleasant as I say?
The word 'stunning' is preposterously overused. A nice kitchen or a moderately well turned out female are routinely described as 'stunning'. This is more stunning than at least 85% of things described as 'stunning' on any given day. I personally wouldn't describe it as stunning. But I have a very, very high bar for using the word.
Yes. I’d say it is impressively scenic, with hints of grandeur
I’m at another slightly better overlook
Again, definitely not stunning
On the other hand my expectations are high. This is an American National Park. Some of America’s National Parks are outstandingly beautiful and awesome. And definitely stunning
I know that UvdL was "elected" to her position (through a fucking odd "election" that seems to basically wave through the selection of the leading party in the MEP elections)
But wasn't she just selected as a mate by Merkel, much like Boris's HoL picks?
President of the European Commission is the most powerful position in the EU, not one that should be filled by a Prescott or a Dorries
A line-by-line rebuttal sooooooooo good that he didn’t trust either the Commons or his constituency to decide his fate.
Hmm. I detest Johnson and wish he would just go away. And I agree with you about his constituency. But do you really think he would get a fair decision from the Commons? Everyone outside the Tory party would vote against him as a point of principle no matter what the facts and it only needs 40 of his fellow MPs to vote against him and he is sunk. Just think of how many people he has pissed off in his own party who will leap at the chance to sink him.
This is absolutely not to criticise the committee, nor to express any sort of dismay about him being gone. But the idea he would get a fair judgement from the Commons themselves is for the birds. This is politics and this is also personal. No matter how good his defence, on the floor of the House he would be toast.
Yes and no. I take your point that the Commons vote would be political, but I also think MPs do have and would apply a sense of justice. If these were entirely trumped up (unfortunate phrase) charges, I think even the opposition would balk at voting for them. If they were slam dunk charges, even his supporters wouldn’t back him. I think voting in the Commons is swayed, to a degree, by the merits of the case. Look at the Owen Paterson case.
In fact, I’ll let PB-ers decide. Here’s my view right now at the “lookout”
I am a jaded over traveller and this is actually stunning? Or is it merely pleasant as I say?
The word 'stunning' is preposterously overused. A nice kitchen or a moderately well turned out female are routinely described as 'stunning'. This is more stunning than at least 85% of things described as 'stunning' on any given day. I personally wouldn't describe it as stunning. But I have a very, very high bar for using the word.
I know what you mean, but there are times when the *experience* makes something stunning, in a way a shared picture cannot capture. Walking up a hill and getting an expansive vision as the clouds break. Seeing a brocken spectre and glory (sadly only once in my case). The photos (or mine, at least), never capture the experience.
Perhaps one of the skills of a professional photographer is trying to capture that, in a picture form?
A line-by-line rebuttal sooooooooo good that he didn’t trust either the Commons or his constituency to decide his fate.
Hmm. I detest Johnson and wish he would just go away. And I agree with you about his constituency. But do you really think he would get a fair decision from the Commons? Everyone outside the Tory party would vote against him as a point of principle no matter what the facts and it only needs 40 of his fellow MPs to vote against him and he is sunk. Just think of how many people he has pissed off in his own party who will leap at the chance to sink him.
This is absolutely not to criticise the committee, nor to express any sort of dismay about him being gone. But the idea he would get a fair judgement from the Commons themselves is for the birds. This is politics and this is also personal. No matter how good his defence, on the floor of the House he would be toast.
Agreed but:
IF he'd had a good defence, he'd still be party leader and PM. So the question would be somewhat less acute.
How often are MPs investigated for allegedly misleading parliament? Very seldom. Was Blair over Iraq? I don't believe so.
The mere fact the enquiry had to be held at all shows how shambolic his premiership was.
Is Uxbridge full of voters in ten-year-old diesels? Most newish cars are exempt. Before betting, maybe look at the cars parked behind reporters on the spot.
London Conservatives seem to have decided that being the driver's friend is their role. It didn't really work in 2022, though Hillingdon (and/or Havering) might be the strategy's best hope.
My hunch is that, even there, they have confused vocal opposition to ULEZ for widespread opposition.
“A mother has lost a legal battle to force a school to share sex education materials used in her daughter’s lesson.
“A judge ruled that the commercial interests of the third-party sex education provider outweighed the public interest in forcing the school to release the lesson plan under freedom of information laws.
“Clare Page, 47, began her campaign after her 15-year-old daughter came home from school and said she had been taught that “heteronormativity” was a “bad thing” and that she should be “sex positive” towards relationships.
“Her daughter’s lesson at Hatcham College, a state school in New Cross, south-east London, had been taught by the School of Sexuality Education, a charity that is understood to have worked with more than 300 schools.”
Why doesn't she just ask her daughter?
I was also wondering if any of this was set on a home learning platform.
If not, possibly it was an outside group giving a presentation.
In which case, wouldn't the request be better addressed to them?
Edit - the way the report is worded suggests it was: Her daughter’s lesson at Hatcham College, a state school in New Cross, south-east London, had been taught by the School of Sexuality Education,
So the school may not even have the materials.
Which sounds weird all by itself. Imagine the fun OFSTED would have with asking the head what goes on in lessons. "I don't know. That's contacted out and I don't even know what they are teaching."
Rather a lot of schools do that, through the Oak National Academy Programme.
Run by Ark Academies Trust and in my experience providing lessons of pretty poor quality.
The Ark Academies Trust was founded by, inter alia (checks notes) the current Head of OFSTED...
So I can't imagine she'd get that bent out by it.
But in this case it sounds as though:
1) A meeting was requested and the materials were shared;
2) The parent requested a copy of them to circulate among other parents, which was refused on copyright grounds;
3) She then made an FOI request which was refused on those same grounds;
4) She's now bitching about that.
Well, if she's unhappy, how about she contact the organisation and offer to buy a set for her campaign?
Of more import:
1) Why are schools contracting with these external organisations in the first place?
2) Why does the public sector sign contracts that favour commercial confidentiality over freedom of information?
(1) because teachers won't teach them because of all the guidelines in place
2) Because that's the way the law works. Do you suppose the MoD put the details of our much more expensive purchased weapons systems into public domain? Or indeed the DoH puts the formulae for various drugs on its website?
1) If teachers won’t teach lessons on certain subjects ‘because of the guidelines in place’, is that not indicative of a much wider problem in these areas?
2) a)No, there are national security issues with publishing military plans. b)Drug formulae are very much in the public domain already, as part of the patent process.
You are calling for is for *all* educational resources to be in the public domain. This will immediately hurt all private companies, organisations and charities that provide resources to schools. Their work will have to be taken over by the state, where necessary.
I never took you to be a communist...
Obviously I’m not a communist, I go along with the American idea, that work paid for with public money should be the property of the public. See nasa.gov for details.
Pay a company to develop lesson plans, but on the basis that the lesson plans are then public. It’s a job of work, rather than a perpetual revenue stream for the provider, that’s before we get on to the specific problems with sex ed.
Do you have any children in the UK public schools system? In which case, why are you so worked up about UK sex ed?
IME my son's school's been getting it right. Certainly better than back in my day.
Okay, I’ll give you that my immediate friend circle has a disproportionate number of parents who have removed their kids from the UK state education system.
My wider concern, is that the Western obsession with the woke gender stuff, at the expense of gaining knowledge and developing technology, is going to lead to Chinese (and possibly Indian) domination in the next few decades. We see this sometimes in the AI debates, but it’s a much wider cultural problem.
Labour 50% (+2) Conservative 28% (-3) Reform UK 8% (+1) Liberal Democrat 7% (–) Green 4% (–) Plaid Cymru 1% (–) Other 2% (+1)
Changes +/- 28 May
Must have polled only posh ABC's though.
If that was the case they should in theory be doing better under Rishi.
It was Boris who won the Redwall and the working class vote strongly in 2019 to beat Corbyn and get Brexit done.
Rishi was always going to lose the redwall worse than Boris did, the whole point of Rishi was he would limit the damage in the bluewall which remains to be seen. Rishi still leads as preferred PM in the bluewall unlike the redwall but Labour leads on voting intention in both, with the LDs also still high in the bluewall
Labour 50% (+2) Conservative 28% (-3) Reform UK 8% (+1) Liberal Democrat 7% (–) Green 4% (–) Plaid Cymru 1% (–) Other 2% (+1)
Changes +/- 28 May
Reford third? Oooooffffff
I was going to say what tosh that poll is and I wonder how many residents of Stoke know much about what Reform stand for. But then I went to Reform's website and their top headline is "Broken Britain - Britain needs Net Zero Immigration". So yes they could get 8%+ in the part of the country that years ago was the "red wall". Tory strategists will look for a way to make sure they start taking votes from Labour too. "Brexit" was code for many of its supporters, denoting something they haven't received yet.
Is Uxbridge full of voters in ten-year-old diesels? Most newish cars are exempt. Before betting, maybe look at the cars parked behind reporters on the spot.
London Conservatives seem to have decided that being the driver's friend is their role. It didn't really work in 2022, though Hillingdon (and/or Havering) might be the strategy's best hope.
My hunch is that, even there, they have confused vocal opposition to ULEZ for widespread opposition.
An Evening Standard poll last month found 35% of Londoners opposed to ULEZ, 39% in favour.
I know that UvdL was "elected" to her position (through a fucking odd "election" that seems to basically wave through the selection of the leading party in the MEP elections)
But wasn't she just selected as a mate by Merkel, much like Boris's HoL picks?
President of the European Commission is the most powerful position in the EU, not one that should be filled by a Prescott or a Dorries
UvdL I think has been pretty good overall and it’s amazing what can happen when the EU feel they’re negotiating with adults and not pathetic whiny children .
The EU would never have agreed any changes to the NI protocol if the fat lying oaf was still in charge .
You certainly wouldn't catch me writing a lesson plan that would go up on a public website for anyone to nick.
Oddly enough, the government used to fund a web site where primary teachers did just that, but they were posted for free, to be shared. It was a very useful resource, and not particularly expensive to run.
“A mother has lost a legal battle to force a school to share sex education materials used in her daughter’s lesson.
“A judge ruled that the commercial interests of the third-party sex education provider outweighed the public interest in forcing the school to release the lesson plan under freedom of information laws.
“Clare Page, 47, began her campaign after her 15-year-old daughter came home from school and said she had been taught that “heteronormativity” was a “bad thing” and that she should be “sex positive” towards relationships.
“Her daughter’s lesson at Hatcham College, a state school in New Cross, south-east London, had been taught by the School of Sexuality Education, a charity that is understood to have worked with more than 300 schools.”
Why doesn't she just ask her daughter?
I was also wondering if any of this was set on a home learning platform.
If not, possibly it was an outside group giving a presentation.
In which case, wouldn't the request be better addressed to them?
Edit - the way the report is worded suggests it was: Her daughter’s lesson at Hatcham College, a state school in New Cross, south-east London, had been taught by the School of Sexuality Education,
So the school may not even have the materials.
Which sounds weird all by itself. Imagine the fun OFSTED would have with asking the head what goes on in lessons. "I don't know. That's contacted out and I don't even know what they are teaching."
Rather a lot of schools do that, through the Oak National Academy Programme.
Run by Ark Academies Trust and in my experience providing lessons of pretty poor quality.
The Ark Academies Trust was founded by, inter alia (checks notes) the current Head of OFSTED...
So I can't imagine she'd get that bent out by it.
But in this case it sounds as though:
1) A meeting was requested and the materials were shared;
2) The parent requested a copy of them to circulate among other parents, which was refused on copyright grounds;
3) She then made an FOI request which was refused on those same grounds;
4) She's now bitching about that.
Well, if she's unhappy, how about she contact the organisation and offer to buy a set for her campaign?
Of more import:
1) Why are schools contracting with these external organisations in the first place?
2) Why does the public sector sign contracts that favour commercial confidentiality over freedom of information?
(1) because teachers won't teach them because of all the guidelines in place
2) Because that's the way the law works. Do you suppose the MoD put the details of our much more expensive purchased weapons systems into public domain? Or indeed the DoH puts the formulae for various drugs on its website?
1) If teachers won’t teach lessons on certain subjects ‘because of the guidelines in place’, is that not indicative of a much wider problem in these areas?
2) a)No, there are national security issues with publishing military plans. b)Drug formulae are very much in the public domain already, as part of the patent process.
You are calling for is for *all* educational resources to be in the public domain. This will immediately hurt all private companies, organisations and charities that provide resources to schools. Their work will have to be taken over by the state, where necessary.
I never took you to be a communist...
Obviously I’m not a communist, I go along with the American idea, that work paid for with public money should be the property of the public. See nasa.gov for details.
Pay a company to develop lesson plans, but on the basis that the lesson plans are then public. It’s a job of work, rather than a perpetual revenue stream for the provider, that’s before we get on to the specific problems with sex ed.
Do you have any children in the UK public schools system? In which case, why are you so worked up about UK sex ed?
IME my son's school's been getting it right. Certainly better than back in my day.
Okay, I’ll give you that my immediate friend circle has a disproportionate number of parents who have removed their kids from the UK state education system.
My wider concern, is that the Western obsession with the woke gender stuff, at the expense of gaining knowledge and developing technology, is going to lead to Chinese (and possibly Indian) domination in the next few decades. We see this sometimes in the AI debates, but it’s a much wider cultural problem.
My concern is that it's a bloody weird thing to be telling children. Creepily weird. Jimmy Savile weird.
Thinking back to my teaching days, I suspect that if all my lessons had been in the public domain my career would have been rather short.
I was looking at the Academy Board of my old Comp. It was an excellent school back in the day but presumably now, not so much. The newest Director registers his career as School Improvement Consultant. WTAF? A Laurence Llewellyn -Bowen for education.
It seems that if one has the gift of 24carat bullshine the world is their oyster.
Labour 50% (+2) Conservative 28% (-3) Reform UK 8% (+1) Liberal Democrat 7% (–) Green 4% (–) Plaid Cymru 1% (–) Other 2% (+1)
Changes +/- 28 May
Must have polled only posh ABC's though.
If that was the case they should in theory be doing better under Rishi.
It was Boris who won the Redwall and the working class vote strongly in 2019 to beat Corbyn and get Brexit done.
Rishi was always going to lose the redwall worse than Boris did, the whole point of Rishi was he would limit the damage in the bluewall which remains to be seen. Rishi still leads as preferred PM in the bluewall unlike the redwall but Labour leads on voting intention in both, with the LDs also still high in the bluewall
Boris did not win the red wall to get Brexit done; he won it to get levelling up done. That's why the Brexiteer Rishi Sunak will be in trouble.
Apparently the Privileges committee received further information from Johnson last night .
Why on earth would you wait till after the report was finalized and then send this . Surely the committee aren’t now going to re-write their conclusions.
If the report doesn’t come out tomorrow then that would be very fishy .
To be awkward. His submission was at three minutes to midnight - the deadline beyond which the committee would not have been obliged to consider his submission.
So yes, they’ll quite likely have to at least mention it in the report.
I know that UvdL was "elected" to her position (through a fucking odd "election" that seems to basically wave through the selection of the leading party in the MEP elections)
But wasn't she just selected as a mate by Merkel, much like Boris's HoL picks?
President of the European Commission is the most powerful position in the EU, not one that should be filled by a Prescott or a Dorries
UvdL I think has been pretty good overall and it’s amazing what can happen when the EU feel they’re negotiating with adults and not pathetic whiny children .
The EU would never have agreed any changes to the NI protocol if the fat lying oaf was still in charge .
She closed the Irish border because we beat them on vaccine delivery
“A mother has lost a legal battle to force a school to share sex education materials used in her daughter’s lesson.
“A judge ruled that the commercial interests of the third-party sex education provider outweighed the public interest in forcing the school to release the lesson plan under freedom of information laws.
“Clare Page, 47, began her campaign after her 15-year-old daughter came home from school and said she had been taught that “heteronormativity” was a “bad thing” and that she should be “sex positive” towards relationships.
“Her daughter’s lesson at Hatcham College, a state school in New Cross, south-east London, had been taught by the School of Sexuality Education, a charity that is understood to have worked with more than 300 schools.”
Why doesn't she just ask her daughter?
I was also wondering if any of this was set on a home learning platform.
If not, possibly it was an outside group giving a presentation.
In which case, wouldn't the request be better addressed to them?
Edit - the way the report is worded suggests it was: Her daughter’s lesson at Hatcham College, a state school in New Cross, south-east London, had been taught by the School of Sexuality Education,
So the school may not even have the materials.
Which sounds weird all by itself. Imagine the fun OFSTED would have with asking the head what goes on in lessons. "I don't know. That's contacted out and I don't even know what they are teaching."
Rather a lot of schools do that, through the Oak National Academy Programme.
Run by Ark Academies Trust and in my experience providing lessons of pretty poor quality.
The Ark Academies Trust was founded by, inter alia (checks notes) the current Head of OFSTED...
So I can't imagine she'd get that bent out by it.
But in this case it sounds as though:
1) A meeting was requested and the materials were shared;
2) The parent requested a copy of them to circulate among other parents, which was refused on copyright grounds;
3) She then made an FOI request which was refused on those same grounds;
4) She's now bitching about that.
Well, if she's unhappy, how about she contact the organisation and offer to buy a set for her campaign?
Of more import:
1) Why are schools contracting with these external organisations in the first place?
2) Why does the public sector sign contracts that favour commercial confidentiality over freedom of information?
(1) because teachers won't teach them because of all the guidelines in place
2) Because that's the way the law works. Do you suppose the MoD put the details of our much more expensive purchased weapons systems into public domain? Or indeed the DoH puts the formulae for various drugs on its website?
1) If teachers won’t teach lessons on certain subjects ‘because of the guidelines in place’, is that not indicative of a much wider problem in these areas?
2) a)No, there are national security issues with publishing military plans. b)Drug formulae are very much in the public domain already, as part of the patent process.
You are calling for is for *all* educational resources to be in the public domain. This will immediately hurt all private companies, organisations and charities that provide resources to schools. Their work will have to be taken over by the state, where necessary.
I never took you to be a communist...
Obviously I’m not a communist, I go along with the American idea, that work paid for with public money should be the property of the public. See nasa.gov for details.
Pay a company to develop lesson plans, but on the basis that the lesson plans are then public. It’s a job of work, rather than a perpetual revenue stream for the provider, that’s before we get on to the specific problems with sex ed.
Do you have any children in the UK public schools system? In which case, why are you so worked up about UK sex ed?
IME my son's school's been getting it right. Certainly better than back in my day.
Okay, I’ll give you that my immediate friend circle has a disproportionate number of parents who have removed their kids from the UK state education system.
My wider concern, is that the Western obsession with the woke gender stuff, at the expense of gaining knowledge and developing technology, is going to lead to Chinese (and possibly Indian) domination in the next few decades. We see this sometimes in the AI debates, but it’s a much wider cultural problem.
Albeit China has a below even Western average birthrate.
India however under Modi has an at least replacement level birthrate, couldn't care less about Woke and has strong National pride at all age levels unlike increasing Western self hatred, especially amongst the young. Indians are also increasingly educated and hard working and it is a democracy.
India is the nation to watch this century and has a fast growing economy too
Interesting to see how many are really suffering with hay fever currently. This horrible weather pattern isn't happening - we need a return to the cool NE'lies of a few weeks back but I recognise that won't be a popular idea.
Even though I apparently know nothing about polls, I'm going to go on commenting on them - the Red Wall polling tonight from R&W has a 16.5% swing from Conservative to Labour but I note from some analysis of the May local elections Labour are broadly doing best where they need to/- to be fair a 15% swing where you need a 12% swing to win is more helpful than a 15% swing where you need a 30% swing.
The sheer size of some of the 2019 Conservative majorities in the Midlands and North combined with the local election results showing a few continuing islands of Conservative strength means the journey to a majority remains far from obvious for Labour.
Conversely, the LDs are doing no worse than 2019 in Con-LD marginals where the Labour vote is rising about as much as the Conservative vote is falling. That suggests little or no tactical voting but I think we'll see a lot of it at the next election.
R&W treat "Home Owners" as a single group but in 2019 unmortaged home owners backed the Conservatives over Labour by 57 to 22 while mortgage holders backed the Conservatives 43 to 33.
As a combined group, this group was more for the Conservatives until the coming of Liz Truss and by her departure the gap was 25 points but with the coming of Sunak the gap has closed (more through Labour support falling than Conservative support rising) to the two main parties bring tied at 35 (and the LDs improving to 16, their best level since the departure of Boris Johnson).
"Home Owners" (whether mortgage free or not) remain a critical demographic and polls of this group should, I think, be watched with interest.
Is Labour in danger of being too afraid of making spending commitments ?
The right wing press will trash them regardless of what they do . And surely after the Truss debacle a simple “we won’t be lectured to by the Tories” would suffice .
I do fear that in an effort to look fiscally sound they’re going too far the other way .
The Labour agenda does look worryingly like "we will manage the current shitshow a bit less irresponsibly" with a tiny smearing of greenwash - and it really is tiny, the fiscal responsibility excuse being used to pare back much of the planned spending even on a central plank of Starmer's nascent programme for government.
There will be a lot of people who are so desperate to be rid of the current Government that they'll troop to the polls to vote it out regardless, but many of the less enthusiastic voters that are harder to motivate (younger people being notorious for this) aren't being given very much reason to haul off their arses.
This also ties into another point that I've made before. If you offer voters a choice between real Tories and fake, pale pink Tories, then you ought not to be surprised if people - especially wealthier, older voters who are better disposed towards Conservatism to begin with - decide to stick with the enthusiastic right-wingers, rather than dishonest social democrats attempting to triangulate.
If the economy is shit enough come the next election then all of this probably won't make much difference, but if it improves then an unconvincing Labour manifesto could help the Tories to achieve a Hung Parliament and avoid a proper shellacking.
Apparently the Privileges committee received further information from Johnson last night .
Why on earth would you wait till after the report was finalized and then send this . Surely the committee aren’t now going to re-write their conclusions.
If the report doesn’t come out tomorrow then that would be very fishy .
To be awkward. His submission was at three minutes to midnight - the deadline beyond which the committee would not have been obliged to consider his submission.
So yes, they’ll quite likely have to at least mention it in the report.
If the last minute intervention was another tirade then they should just get on and publish the report .
Interesting to see how many are really suffering with hay fever currently. This horrible weather pattern isn't happening - we need a return to the cool NE'lies of a few weeks back but I recognise that won't be a popular idea.
Even though I apparently know nothing about polls, I'm going to go on commenting on them - the Red Wall polling tonight from R&W has a 16.5% swing from Conservative to Labour but I note from some analysis of the May local elections Labour are broadly doing best where they need to/- to be fair a 15% swing where you need a 12% swing to win is more helpful than a 15% swing where you need a 30% swing.
The sheer size of some of the 2019 Conservative majorities in the Midlands and North combined with the local election results showing a few continuing islands of Conservative strength means the journey to a majority remains far from obvious for Labour.
Conversely, the LDs are doing no worse than 2019 in Con-LD marginals where the Labour vote is rising about as much as the Conservative vote is falling. That suggests little or no tactical voting but I think we'll see a lot of it at the next election.
R&W treat "Home Owners" as a single group but in 2019 unmortaged home owners backed the Conservatives over Labour by 57 to 22 while mortgage holders backed the Conservatives 43 to 33.
As a combined group, this group was more for the Conservatives until the coming of Liz Truss and by her departure the gap was 25 points but with the coming of Sunak the gap has closed (more through Labour support falling than Conservative support rising) to the two main parties bring tied at 35 (and the LDs improving to 16, their best level since the departure of Boris Johnson).
"Home Owners" (whether mortgage free or not) remain a critical demographic and polls of this group should, I think, be watched with interest.
Yes it was the Truss disaster budget seeing interest rates surge which lost home owners for the Tories and with it probably the election. Home owners with a mortgage are generally aged 39-60/65 and decide elections
“A mother has lost a legal battle to force a school to share sex education materials used in her daughter’s lesson.
“A judge ruled that the commercial interests of the third-party sex education provider outweighed the public interest in forcing the school to release the lesson plan under freedom of information laws.
“Clare Page, 47, began her campaign after her 15-year-old daughter came home from school and said she had been taught that “heteronormativity” was a “bad thing” and that she should be “sex positive” towards relationships.
“Her daughter’s lesson at Hatcham College, a state school in New Cross, south-east London, had been taught by the School of Sexuality Education, a charity that is understood to have worked with more than 300 schools.”
Why doesn't she just ask her daughter?
I was also wondering if any of this was set on a home learning platform.
If not, possibly it was an outside group giving a presentation.
In which case, wouldn't the request be better addressed to them?
Edit - the way the report is worded suggests it was: Her daughter’s lesson at Hatcham College, a state school in New Cross, south-east London, had been taught by the School of Sexuality Education,
So the school may not even have the materials.
Which sounds weird all by itself. Imagine the fun OFSTED would have with asking the head what goes on in lessons. "I don't know. That's contacted out and I don't even know what they are teaching."
Rather a lot of schools do that, through the Oak National Academy Programme.
Run by Ark Academies Trust and in my experience providing lessons of pretty poor quality.
The Ark Academies Trust was founded by, inter alia (checks notes) the current Head of OFSTED...
So I can't imagine she'd get that bent out by it.
But in this case it sounds as though:
1) A meeting was requested and the materials were shared;
2) The parent requested a copy of them to circulate among other parents, which was refused on copyright grounds;
3) She then made an FOI request which was refused on those same grounds;
4) She's now bitching about that.
Well, if she's unhappy, how about she contact the organisation and offer to buy a set for her campaign?
Of more import:
1) Why are schools contracting with these external organisations in the first place?
2) Why does the public sector sign contracts that favour commercial confidentiality over freedom of information?
(1) because teachers won't teach them because of all the guidelines in place
2) Because that's the way the law works. Do you suppose the MoD put the details of our much more expensive purchased weapons systems into public domain? Or indeed the DoH puts the formulae for various drugs on its website?
1) If teachers won’t teach lessons on certain subjects ‘because of the guidelines in place’, is that not indicative of a much wider problem in these areas?
2) a)No, there are national security issues with publishing military plans. b)Drug formulae are very much in the public domain already, as part of the patent process.
You are calling for is for *all* educational resources to be in the public domain. This will immediately hurt all private companies, organisations and charities that provide resources to schools. Their work will have to be taken over by the state, where necessary.
I never took you to be a communist...
Obviously I’m not a communist, I go along with the American idea, that work paid for with public money should be the property of the public. See nasa.gov for details.
Pay a company to develop lesson plans, but on the basis that the lesson plans are then public. It’s a job of work, rather than a perpetual revenue stream for the provider, that’s before we get on to the specific problems with sex ed.
Do you have any children in the UK public schools system? In which case, why are you so worked up about UK sex ed?
IME my son's school's been getting it right. Certainly better than back in my day.
Can you view what they are being taught? If not how do you know. Now I accept the woman might have an agenda but the crux seems to be they are being secretive about what is in the lessons
I know that UvdL was "elected" to her position (through a fucking odd "election" that seems to basically wave through the selection of the leading party in the MEP elections)
But wasn't she just selected as a mate by Merkel, much like Boris's HoL picks?
President of the European Commission is the most powerful position in the EU, not one that should be filled by a Prescott or a Dorries
UvdL I think has been pretty good overall and it’s amazing what can happen when the EU feel they’re negotiating with adults and not pathetic whiny children .
The EU would never have agreed any changes to the NI protocol if the fat lying oaf was still in charge .
She closed the Irish border because we beat them on vaccine delivery
Pretty good like my fat shiny arse
It didn’t actually happen but nice try . UvdL has a much better relationship with Sunak because the EU feel that he will honour what he signs.
As for the vaccine drama you need to stop peddling DE sound bites . If the situation was reversed the UK government and press would have been outraged .
“A mother has lost a legal battle to force a school to share sex education materials used in her daughter’s lesson.
“A judge ruled that the commercial interests of the third-party sex education provider outweighed the public interest in forcing the school to release the lesson plan under freedom of information laws.
“Clare Page, 47, began her campaign after her 15-year-old daughter came home from school and said she had been taught that “heteronormativity” was a “bad thing” and that she should be “sex positive” towards relationships.
“Her daughter’s lesson at Hatcham College, a state school in New Cross, south-east London, had been taught by the School of Sexuality Education, a charity that is understood to have worked with more than 300 schools.”
Why doesn't she just ask her daughter?
I was also wondering if any of this was set on a home learning platform.
If not, possibly it was an outside group giving a presentation.
In which case, wouldn't the request be better addressed to them?
Edit - the way the report is worded suggests it was: Her daughter’s lesson at Hatcham College, a state school in New Cross, south-east London, had been taught by the School of Sexuality Education,
So the school may not even have the materials.
Which sounds weird all by itself. Imagine the fun OFSTED would have with asking the head what goes on in lessons. "I don't know. That's contacted out and I don't even know what they are teaching."
Rather a lot of schools do that, through the Oak National Academy Programme.
Run by Ark Academies Trust and in my experience providing lessons of pretty poor quality.
The Ark Academies Trust was founded by, inter alia (checks notes) the current Head of OFSTED...
So I can't imagine she'd get that bent out by it.
But in this case it sounds as though:
1) A meeting was requested and the materials were shared;
2) The parent requested a copy of them to circulate among other parents, which was refused on copyright grounds;
3) She then made an FOI request which was refused on those same grounds;
4) She's now bitching about that.
Well, if she's unhappy, how about she contact the organisation and offer to buy a set for her campaign?
Of more import:
1) Why are schools contracting with these external organisations in the first place?
2) Why does the public sector sign contracts that favour commercial confidentiality over freedom of information?
(1) because teachers won't teach them because of all the guidelines in place
2) Because that's the way the law works. Do you suppose the MoD put the details of our much more expensive purchased weapons systems into public domain? Or indeed the DoH puts the formulae for various drugs on its website?
1) If teachers won’t teach lessons on certain subjects ‘because of the guidelines in place’, is that not indicative of a much wider problem in these areas?
2) a)No, there are national security issues with publishing military plans. b)Drug formulae are very much in the public domain already, as part of the patent process.
You are calling for is for *all* educational resources to be in the public domain. This will immediately hurt all private companies, organisations and charities that provide resources to schools. Their work will have to be taken over by the state, where necessary.
I never took you to be a communist...
Obviously I’m not a communist, I go along with the American idea, that work paid for with public money should be the property of the public. See nasa.gov for details.
Pay a company to develop lesson plans, but on the basis that the lesson plans are then public. It’s a job of work, rather than a perpetual revenue stream for the provider, that’s before we get on to the specific problems with sex ed.
Do you have any children in the UK public schools system? In which case, why are you so worked up about UK sex ed?
IME my son's school's been getting it right. Certainly better than back in my day.
Okay, I’ll give you that my immediate friend circle has a disproportionate number of parents who have removed their kids from the UK state education system.
My wider concern, is that the Western obsession with the woke gender stuff, at the expense of gaining knowledge and developing technology, is going to lead to Chinese (and possibly Indian) domination in the next few decades. We see this sometimes in the AI debates, but it’s a much wider cultural problem.
My concern is that it's a bloody weird thing to be telling children. Creepily weird. Jimmy Savile weird.
The problem is, some people see teaching about homosexuality to *any* age as being 'creepily weird'. Hence Section 28 and some of the new anti-LGBT laws in the US (1).
Now, I bet all of us on PB are good parents. We can see our kids, both younger and older siblings, and work out *exactly* when to teach them this stuff at a perfect level for them. Because we are all awesome and brilliant parents.
But what about those parents who don't care about their kids, who cannot be arsed to teach them any sex ed? The schools have to be a fallback for such kids, and it needs to be taught before they've learnt everything wrong from their classmates and friends.
As I say, I think my school (following the national curriculum) is getting it about right.
“A mother has lost a legal battle to force a school to share sex education materials used in her daughter’s lesson.
“A judge ruled that the commercial interests of the third-party sex education provider outweighed the public interest in forcing the school to release the lesson plan under freedom of information laws.
“Clare Page, 47, began her campaign after her 15-year-old daughter came home from school and said she had been taught that “heteronormativity” was a “bad thing” and that she should be “sex positive” towards relationships.
“Her daughter’s lesson at Hatcham College, a state school in New Cross, south-east London, had been taught by the School of Sexuality Education, a charity that is understood to have worked with more than 300 schools.”
Why doesn't she just ask her daughter?
I was also wondering if any of this was set on a home learning platform.
If not, possibly it was an outside group giving a presentation.
In which case, wouldn't the request be better addressed to them?
Edit - the way the report is worded suggests it was: Her daughter’s lesson at Hatcham College, a state school in New Cross, south-east London, had been taught by the School of Sexuality Education,
So the school may not even have the materials.
Which sounds weird all by itself. Imagine the fun OFSTED would have with asking the head what goes on in lessons. "I don't know. That's contacted out and I don't even know what they are teaching."
Rather a lot of schools do that, through the Oak National Academy Programme.
Run by Ark Academies Trust and in my experience providing lessons of pretty poor quality.
The Ark Academies Trust was founded by, inter alia (checks notes) the current Head of OFSTED...
So I can't imagine she'd get that bent out by it.
But in this case it sounds as though:
1) A meeting was requested and the materials were shared;
2) The parent requested a copy of them to circulate among other parents, which was refused on copyright grounds;
3) She then made an FOI request which was refused on those same grounds;
4) She's now bitching about that.
Well, if she's unhappy, how about she contact the organisation and offer to buy a set for her campaign?
Of more import:
1) Why are schools contracting with these external organisations in the first place?
2) Why does the public sector sign contracts that favour commercial confidentiality over freedom of information?
(1) because teachers won't teach them because of all the guidelines in place
2) Because that's the way the law works. Do you suppose the MoD put the details of our much more expensive purchased weapons systems into public domain? Or indeed the DoH puts the formulae for various drugs on its website?
1) If teachers won’t teach lessons on certain subjects ‘because of the guidelines in place’, is that not indicative of a much wider problem in these areas?
2) a)No, there are national security issues with publishing military plans. b)Drug formulae are very much in the public domain already, as part of the patent process.
You are calling for is for *all* educational resources to be in the public domain. This will immediately hurt all private companies, organisations and charities that provide resources to schools. Their work will have to be taken over by the state, where necessary.
I never took you to be a communist...
Obviously I’m not a communist, I go along with the American idea, that work paid for with public money should be the property of the public. See nasa.gov for details.
Pay a company to develop lesson plans, but on the basis that the lesson plans are then public. It’s a job of work, rather than a perpetual revenue stream for the provider, that’s before we get on to the specific problems with sex ed.
Do you have any children in the UK public schools system? In which case, why are you so worked up about UK sex ed?
IME my son's school's been getting it right. Certainly better than back in my day.
Can you view what they are being taught? If not how do you know. Now I accept the woman might have an agenda but the crux seems to be they are being secretive about what is in the lessons
No. But I (shock, horror) talk to my son. He asks me questions about things as well, which I try to answer truthfully (even if I gloss over certain messy details). But if he asks me about the messy details, we'll talk about it.
Comments
(I think I've got that song on vinyl somewhere)
WHAT A TIME TO BE ALIVE!
First, this stuff needs experience to do well, and it's not efficient to have a SRE specialist in every school. Getting an external in a couple of days a year is more efficient.
Next, I've had to teach the plumbing aspects as a science teacher. It's awkward, and we don't have to touch the tricky bits (ooer missus). Having someone external to do these topics is way more fruitful.
Why on earth would you wait till after the report was finalized and then send this . Surely the committee aren’t now going to re-write their conclusions.
If the report doesn’t come out tomorrow then that would be very fishy .
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/06/13/backlash-against-scheme-predicted-in-by-election/
You’ll still need to get me to understand why it anything to do with the EU.
It is less exciting than it sounds
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1668596900008808449?s=20
I never took you to be a communist...
Needing me one week and @Stuartinromford the next in the same class would be a timetabling and planning nightmare.
So. It gets bought in.
People in general, are always in favour of other people paying higher taxes. Much less so, when those taxes fall on themselves.
France says uncovers major disinformation campaign by Russia
France on Tuesday said it had uncovered a major Russian disinformation campaign which involved posting false news items disguised as articles by prominent media, in a "hybrid" war waged by Moscow for its invasion of Ukraine.
https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20230613-france-says-uncovers-major-disinformation-campaign-by-russia
Blue Ridge Mountains,
Shenandoah River...
It always sounded even more exagerrated than most travel pufferey.
It’s still only 61 v 36 like the National polling.
No sign of a Dutch Salute we are getting in National polls, because in Red Wall is the one place the theory is actually working if it doesn’t pick up evidence it is looking for.
+2 and - 3 = 5 divided by 2 for swing = 2.5, Wall or Region polling tend to produce bigger swings from poll to poll than National ones - possibly because once you get above L42 and C29 the sample can vary wildly from constituency to constituency and town to town, because MRP and other similar polling point out Labour are doing okay where they need to.
Pay a company to develop lesson plans, but on the basis that the lesson plans are then public. It’s a job of work, rather than a perpetual revenue stream for the provider, that’s before we get on to the specific problems with sex ed.
I’m gonna give it an hour but if it remains merely pleasant I’m going to veer away to some shite Virginian toilet town to buy Tranq
Have the French Secret Service picked up one of our tabloids?
The latter is a *really* useful skill for a politician to have. And he doesn't.
I am a jaded over traveller and this is actually stunning? Or is it merely pleasant as I say?
N2
It looks ordinary, but it's a huge perspective.
There are always a proportion of people like this, both in the male sex too.
Boris Johnson goes on offensive again
He says Privileges Committee should publish report ‘and let the world judge their nonsense’
‘They have no excuse for delay. Their absurdly unfair rules do not even allow any criticism of their findings’
Johnson confirms he has written to the committee to make his views clear
He says he will ‘do so more widely when they finally publish’
Boris Johnson is preparing a line-by-like rebuttal of the Privileges Committee’s report
He intends to publish it when the report is made public
He and his lawyers have been working on it since he received the draft findings last week
https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1668683463191306248
Meanwhile, two women were stabbed in Wembley.
I personally wouldn't describe it as stunning. But I have a very, very high bar for using the word.
Edit, or the beallach in the Eildon Hills, looking north, I think.
So the public is jaded, and no one really cares any more, or seriously thinks that doesn't routinely lie. He needs some sort of self-reflection check, which would be much more likely to revive his career than any of this associated nonsense, also.
The right wing press will trash them regardless of what they do . And surely after the Truss debacle a simple “we won’t be lectured to by the Tories” would suffice .
I do fear that in an effort to look fiscally sound they’re going too far the other way .
IME my son's school's been getting it right. Certainly better than back in my day.
On 2, if you don't like that, here's a better one. If I publish research from the National Archives using materials generated by Civil Servants in the course of their work, technically I have to get the permission of whatever HMSO is calling itself this week. Why should education materials be different?
I’m at another slightly better overlook
Again, definitely not stunning
On the other hand my expectations are high. This is an American National Park. Some of America’s National Parks are outstandingly beautiful and awesome. And definitely stunning
This is absolutely not to criticise the committee, nor to express any sort of dismay about him being gone. But the idea he would get a fair judgement from the Commons themselves is for the birds. This is politics and this is also personal. No matter how good his defence, on the floor of the House he would be toast.
In Europe you’d find them no question. America? Hmm
Many happy hours I've spent over the years in one of these , with an Amstel in hand, or more recently a Mythos.
But wasn't she just selected as a mate by Merkel, much like Boris's HoL picks?
President of the European Commission is the most powerful position in the EU, not one that should be filled by a Prescott or a Dorries
Boris in a tracksuit, of course.
Perhaps one of the skills of a professional photographer is trying to capture that, in a picture form?
IF he'd had a good defence, he'd still be party leader and PM. So the question would be somewhat less acute.
How often are MPs investigated for allegedly misleading parliament? Very seldom. Was Blair over Iraq? I don't believe so.
The mere fact the enquiry had to be held at all shows how shambolic his premiership was.
My hunch is that, even there, they have confused vocal opposition to ULEZ for widespread opposition.
My wider concern, is that the Western obsession with the woke gender stuff, at the expense of gaining knowledge and developing technology, is going to lead to Chinese (and possibly Indian) domination in the next few decades. We see this sometimes in the AI debates, but it’s a much wider cultural problem.
It was Boris who won the Redwall and the working class vote strongly in 2019 to beat Corbyn and get Brexit done.
Rishi was always going to lose the redwall worse than Boris did, the whole point of Rishi was he would limit the damage in the bluewall which remains to be seen. Rishi still leads as preferred PM in the bluewall unlike the redwall but Labour leads on voting intention in both, with the LDs also still high in the bluewall
55% of 2019 Conservative voters however opposed the ULEZ, just 25% in favour and the Tories held Uxbridge in 2019. 33% of 2019 Labour voters also opposed the ULEZ. Hillingdon also has the 3rd highest car ownership level in London
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/ulez-poll-more-in-common-majority-londoners-support-political-leaning-tory-voters-sadiq-khan-b1082273.html
The EU would never have agreed any changes to the NI protocol if the fat lying oaf was still in charge .
It was a very useful resource, and not particularly expensive to run.
Gove pulled the plug.
It seems that if one has the gift of 24carat bullshine the world is their oyster.
His submission was at three minutes to midnight - the deadline beyond which the committee would not have been obliged to consider his submission.
So yes, they’ll quite likely have to at least mention it in the report.
Pretty good like my fat shiny arse
India however under Modi has an at least replacement level birthrate, couldn't care less about Woke and has strong National pride at all age levels unlike increasing Western self hatred, especially amongst the young. Indians are also increasingly educated and hard working and it is a democracy.
India is the nation to watch this century and has a fast growing economy too
Interesting to see how many are really suffering with hay fever currently. This horrible weather pattern isn't happening - we need a return to the cool NE'lies of a few weeks back but I recognise that won't be a popular idea.
Even though I apparently know nothing about polls, I'm going to go on commenting on them - the Red Wall polling tonight from R&W has a 16.5% swing from Conservative to Labour but I note from some analysis of the May local elections Labour are broadly doing best where they need to/- to be fair a 15% swing where you need a 12% swing to win is more helpful than a 15% swing where you need a 30% swing.
The sheer size of some of the 2019 Conservative majorities in the Midlands and North combined with the local election results showing a few continuing islands of Conservative strength means the journey to a majority remains far from obvious for Labour.
Conversely, the LDs are doing no worse than 2019 in Con-LD marginals where the Labour vote is rising about as much as the Conservative vote is falling. That suggests little or no tactical voting but I think we'll see a lot of it at the next election.
I'm also interested in this piece:
https://redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/britons-who-own-their-homes-are-turning-on-the-conservatives/
R&W treat "Home Owners" as a single group but in 2019 unmortaged home owners backed the Conservatives over Labour by 57 to 22 while mortgage holders backed the Conservatives 43 to 33.
As a combined group, this group was more for the Conservatives until the coming of Liz Truss and by her departure the gap was 25 points but with the coming of Sunak the gap has closed (more through Labour support falling than Conservative support rising) to the two main parties bring tied at 35 (and the LDs improving to 16, their best level since the departure of Boris Johnson).
"Home Owners" (whether mortgage free or not) remain a critical demographic and polls of this group should, I think, be watched with interest.
There will be a lot of people who are so desperate to be rid of the current Government that they'll troop to the polls to vote it out regardless, but many of the less enthusiastic voters that are harder to motivate (younger people being notorious for this) aren't being given very much reason to haul off their arses.
This also ties into another point that I've made before. If you offer voters a choice between real Tories and fake, pale pink Tories, then you ought not to be surprised if people - especially wealthier, older voters who are better disposed towards Conservatism to begin with - decide to stick with the enthusiastic right-wingers, rather than dishonest social democrats attempting to triangulate.
If the economy is shit enough come the next election then all of this probably won't make much difference, but if it improves then an unconvincing Labour manifesto could help the Tories to achieve a Hung Parliament and avoid a proper shellacking.
As for the vaccine drama you need to stop peddling DE sound bites . If the situation was reversed the UK government and press would have been outraged .
Now, I bet all of us on PB are good parents. We can see our kids, both younger and older siblings, and work out *exactly* when to teach them this stuff at a perfect level for them. Because we are all awesome and brilliant parents.
But what about those parents who don't care about their kids, who cannot be arsed to teach them any sex ed? The schools have to be a fallback for such kids, and it needs to be taught before they've learnt everything wrong from their classmates and friends.
As I say, I think my school (following the national curriculum) is getting it about right.
(1): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-LGBT_curriculum_laws_in_the_United_States
According to Twitter :
HOC Hearing update - Spoke with a staffer for Rep Luna
*estimated HOC Hearing date -end of July
*multiple witness along very likely Grusch
* full committee