Yep, all our political leaders are part of the same elite, along with senior media folk, lawyers, CEOs of big public companies, investors and so on. What state schools cannot offer is the network of contacts and opportunities that you get from private education (except, as you say, in certain parts of London). As we know, on a like for like basis state schools outperform private schools.
You bang this drum with monotonous regularity, but its nonsense. Its like saying the Moon's gravity is the same as the Earth's on a like for like basis, true, but not very useful. Public schools do better because they attract more able children (able parents will on average do well, and on average have more able children), because they attract more able staff, because they have better facilities. Hardly a shock is it. Introduce more mediocre staff, confiscate half the facilities, enrol random students, the school will do less well, I am shocked I tell you, shocked.
I am not disputing they do better - of course they do, for the reasons you cite. But that does not make state schools poor. It just means that the state cannot compete with all the resources that private schools enjoy. The average spend per pupil in a state school is around £4,600 in England (http://www.sec-ed.co.uk/news/how-much-per-pupil-funding-will-your-school-get). The average school fees charged in a private school are around £12,000 (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/ampp3d/average-private-school-fees-now-4168150). But what the OECD study shows is that despite these advantages state schools do still compete. That is actually a remarkable achievement; or, perhaps, it is more about a lot of private schools coasting ion the back of being able to select bright pupils form relatively stable family backgrounds and then put them in small classes with the very best facilities.
I came out of a poverty-stricken village school with very few resources, but everyone who left that school at 11, was very literate and numerate and had a good general knowledge - why does that not happen today?
The result of the most recent Swedish election was 52% for non-left wing parties. But the main centre-right parties allowed the Socialists to take power because they refused to work with the anti-immigrant Swedish Democrats.
You're right about Sweden. At the airport, you can find yourself haggling with taxi drivers, because they liberalised the taxi business.
Amazingly, Sweden is now the only Nordic country with a left-wing government.
The Sweden Democrats are on about 20% in the polls at present compared to 12% at the last election, so the next election could be a repeat of what just happened in Denmark.
The Left in Sweden have learnt nothing and forgotten nothing.
Their policy of open-door encouragement of anyone who wishes to migrate or claim asylum in Sweden is behind that. They accepted 30,000 last year - three time the level the UK did - and now have problems with open begging on the streets of Stockholm and low level public order offences and criminal assaults.
Their response? To criticise David Cameron for his 'language' last week. Ably reported by the BBC as headline news.
It seem's very strange that the future of the Labour Party seem's to hang on the words of voter repellent losers like Kinnock and Brown.
What a strange Party...
Who was your Foreign Secretary? Who is in charge of your fabled £12 billion welfare cuts?
Eh ? Hague was an MP - Gordon isn't. GO isn't a voter repellent.
I have to admit I'd dispute the second, but I think it was a reference to IDS.
It should also be pointed out though that IDS never lost an election (admittedly because he was so bad he never got the chance to) while Kinnock and Brown lost one each with a lower share of the vote than Major in 1997, and Kinnock lost a second one for good measure.
IDS reinvented himself and has been an incredibly effective minister.
I can't think of a Labour big dog who has learned anything and stayed in the game.
The sage commentators - Straw, Blunkett etc have left the stage.
I am not disputing they do better - of course they do, for the reasons you cite. But that does not make state schools poor. It just means that the state cannot compete with all the resources that private schools enjoy. The average spend per pupil in a state school is around £4,600 in England (http://www.sec-ed.co.uk/news/how-much-per-pupil-funding-will-your-school-get). The average school fees charged in a private school are around £12,000 (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/ampp3d/average-private-school-fees-now-4168150). But what the OECD study shows is that despite these advantages state schools do still compete. That is actually a remarkable achievement; or, perhaps, it is more about a lot of private schools coasting ion the back of being able to select bright pupils form relatively stable family backgrounds and then put them in small classes with the very best facilities.
I'm doubtful about the state school figure. I've never worked in a local authority where it was below £6k. Admittedly, it varies widely, but the suggestion it's below £5000 on average is one that caused me to raise my eyebrows. I think they may just have got their sums wrong by excluding some of the extra material that's not included in the official headline budget (e.g. some local authorities budget for back office costs separately, and technology is often paid for out of separate budgets on a pupil ratio).
It's also worth pausing for a moment on private school fees. That needs to be broken down much more carefully. Apart from anything else the Mirror (rather typically) has included boarding fees in that average, which is inevitably going to inflate the price (by 150%, in case anyone asks). On a like for like basis, the average private school spends about £9000 a year on education (again in my experience). This is easily accounted for by (1) higher salaries for staff, to get the best teachers and (2) much smaller class sizes (anywhere from 7 to 20) so the individual students get more attention. In fact, a lot of private schools tend to be quite poorly resourced in terms of capital equipment, classrooms and technology compared to state school counterparts. But because of smaller class sizes, above all, they still do better.
(Before anyone wastes time trying to prove smaller class sizes are irrelevant, I have looked at the studies that "prove" it and they are based on statistical fraud. The authors, unbelievably, forgot to consider that the smallest class sizes are bottom sets and groups with high-level SEND. Of course they make less progress than a top set with 34 children in it. That doesn't mean large class sizes are the way to go!)
What's noticeable about the state schools is that London gets the most funding and produces by far the best results.
As I understand it, Marxism is not a political theory, it is a way of interpreting history that states in the end the workers will inherit the earth. You are a Marxist if you believe in that interpretation. What you then do with that belief can vary - Socialism, Communism, Anarchism, Anarcho-syndicalism, democratic socialism, Trotskyism, Menshivikism and so on. There are so many left-wing groupings precisely because Marxism does not proscribe solutions.
The genius of the British ruling class has always been to adapt, to accept and move on. In the end, it does not matter who is in control, it is what they do with that control that matters. If there is no major impact on entrenched elites then there is no problem.
I hear a lot about this British ruling class.
Who are they? ...
If there is a group that predominates it is one that went to Oxbridge, lives in London, is financially comfortable and mixes socially in the capital.
That's a failing of our state education system and a reflection of how London now inhabits a totally different planet to the rest of the country.
Wow -it seems that I might be a member of the British ruling class. I went to Oxbridge and live in London. I'm financially comfortable and mix socially in the capital.
But I'm also wearing sandals today (it's warm) so does that disqualify me?
Much more of a ring than the dull old "ites" we've had for years.
You can't patent a word. You can try to get a trademark, but you'd struggle with that one as ones based on surnames are generally not protectable unless the mark is already well-known.
Bah. I was going to charge £1 every time a journo used it.
As I understand it, Marxism is not a political theory, it is a way of interpreting history that states in the end the workers will inherit the earth. You are a Marxist if you believe in that interpretation. What you then do with that belief can vary - Socialism, Communism, Anarchism, Anarcho-syndicalism, democratic socialism, Trotskyism, Menshivikism and so on. There are so many left-wing groupings precisely because Marxism does not proscribe solutions.
The genius of the British ruling class has always been to adapt, to accept and move on. In the end, it does not matter who is in control, it is what they do with that control that matters. If there is no major impact on entrenched elites then there is no problem.
I hear a lot about this British ruling class.
Who are they? ...
If there is a group that predominates it is one that went to Oxbridge, lives in London, is financially comfortable and mixes socially in the capital.
That's a failing of our state education system and a reflection of how London now inhabits a totally different planet to the rest of the country.
Wow -it seems that I might be a member of the British ruling class. I went to Oxbridge and live in London. I'm financially comfortable and mix socially in the capital.
But I'm also wearing sandals today (it's warm) so does that disqualify me?
What's noticeable about the state schools is that London gets the most funding and produces by far the best results.
Except I think (I could be wrong) you will find that the greatest amount of funding in London goes to the areas where the results are poorest, and once the higher staffing costs are factored in the areas of London that achieve most highly are actually a bit below the national average.
There must be a logical explanation for this, and I wonder if it is the ready availability of a large number of tutors in a wide range of subjects? Because that is where public/private models tend to become rather blurred.
One of the weaknesses of PB comments can be its bias toward a Conservative view of history, that leads to self-confirmation of one's own ideas, and a vocal intolerance of other views of history, that discourages other people and their ideas, apparently prioritising maintaining the harmony of a small cohesive group over promoting an interesting range of views.
e.g. Gordon Brown had 0 per cent responsibility for the No vote in 2014, while the economy (i.e. George Osborne) had nearly 100 per cent. All left-wing governments are wrong or evil while all right-wing governments are praiseworthy (even the ones, like Denmark and Sweden, which would be regarded as unacceptable Socialism if their policies were implemented in the UK).
We also have people on thread basing their critiques of the OP on a 1977 opinion poll, and the word of a KGB officer, which for some reason is acceptable as evidence when used against figures connected to the Labour Party like Michael Foot and Jack Jones.
A bit of pluralism in one's way of thinking about history would probably lead to more interesting and profitable analyses. For one thing, it would be easier to rationalise why 97 per cent of people don't vote Conservative, which isn't always clear from reading here.
I'm doubtful about the state school figure. I've never worked in a local authority where it was below £6k. Admittedly, it varies widely, but the suggestion it's below £5000 on average is one that caused me to raise my eyebrows. I think they may just have got their sums wrong by excluding some of the extra material that's not included in the official headline budget (e.g. some local authorities budget for back office costs separately, and technology is often paid for out of separate budgets on a pupil ratio).
It's also worth pausing for a moment on private school fees. That needs to be broken down much more carefully. Apart from anything else the Mirror (rather typically) has included boarding fees in that average, which is inevitably going to inflate the price (by 150%, in case anyone asks). On a like for like basis, the average private school spends about £9000 a year on education (again in my experience). This is easily accounted for by (1) higher salaries for staff, to get the best teachers and (2) much smaller class sizes (anywhere from 7 to 20) so the individual students get more attention. In fact, a lot of private schools tend to be quite poorly resourced in terms of capital equipment, classrooms and technology compared to state school counterparts. But because of smaller class sizes, above all, they still do better.
(Before anyone wastes time trying to prove smaller class sizes are irrelevant, I have looked at the studies that "prove" it and they are based on statistical fraud. The authors, unbelievably, forgot to consider that the smallest class sizes are bottom sets and groups with high-level SEND. Of course they make less progress than a top set with 34 children in it. That doesn't mean large class sizes are the way to go!)
What's noticeable about the state schools is that London gets the most funding and produces by far the best results.
Yes, but isn't that due to the number of hard working foreign pupils?
As I understand it, Marxism is not a political theory, it is a way of interpreting history that states in the end the workers will inherit the earth. You are a Marxist if you believe in that interpretation. What you then do with that belief can vary - Socialism, Communism, Anarchism, Anarcho-syndicalism, democratic socialism, Trotskyism, Menshivikism and so on. There are so many left-wing groupings precisely because Marxism does not proscribe solutions.
The genius of the British ruling class has always been to adapt, to accept and move on. In the end, it does not matter who is in control, it is what they do with that control that matters. If there is no major impact on entrenched elites then there is no problem.
I hear a lot about this British ruling class.
Who are they? ...
If there is a group that predominates it is one that went to Oxbridge, lives in London, is financially comfortable and mixes socially in the capital.
That's a failing of our state education system and a reflection of how London now inhabits a totally different planet to the rest of the country.
Wow -it seems that I might be a member of the British ruling class. I went to Oxbridge and live in London. I'm financially comfortable and mix socially in the capital.
But I'm also wearing sandals today (it's warm) so does that disqualify me?
Yep, all our political leaders are part of the same elite, along with senior media folk, lawyers, CEOs of big public companies, investors and so on. What state schools cannot offer is the network of contacts and opportunities that you get from private education (except, as you say, in certain parts of London). As we know, on a like for like basis state schools outperform private schools.
You bang this drum with monotonous regularity, but its nonsense. Its like saying the Moon's gravity is the same as the Earth's on a like for like basis, true, but not very useful. Public schools do better because they attract more able children (able parents will on average do well, and on average have more able children), because they attract more able staff, because they have better facilities. Hardly a shock is it. Introduce more mediocre staff, confiscate half the facilities, enrol random students, the school will do less well, I am shocked I tell you, shocked.
I am not disputing they do better - of course they do, for the reasons you cite. But that does not make state schools poor. It just means that the state cannot compete with all the resources that private schools enjoy. The average spend per pupil in a state school is around £4,600 in England (http://www.sec-ed.co.uk/news/how-much-per-pupil-funding-will-your-school-get). The average school fees charged in a private school are around £12,000 (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/ampp3d/average-private-school-fees-now-4168150). But what the OECD study shows is that despite these advantages state schools do still compete. That is actually a remarkable achievement; or, perhaps, it is more about a lot of private schools coasting ion the back of being able to select bright pupils form relatively stable family backgrounds and then put them in small classes with the very best facilities.
I came out of a poverty-stricken village school with very few resources, but everyone who left that school at 11, was very literate and numerate and had a good general knowledge - why does that not happen today?
A bit of pluralism in one's way of thinking about history would probably lead to more interesting and profitable analyses. For one thing, it would be easier to rationalise why 97 per cent of people don't vote Conservative, which isn't always clear from reading here.
Not even 97% didn't vote Green, a fair few less than 97% must have not voted Conservative
I came out of a poverty-stricken village school with very few resources, but everyone who left that school at 11, was very literate and numerate and had a good general knowledge - why does that not happen today?
It does.
And is of course why small village schools are so very popular. My old primary school, in a small town surrounded by such village schools, is actually in serious danger of closing because it can't recruit pupils - in a town of eight thousand people where it is officially the only primary school!
I came out of a poverty-stricken village school with very few resources, but everyone who left that school at 11, was very literate and numerate and had a good general knowledge - why does that not happen today?
It does.
And is of course why small village schools are so very popular. My old primary school, in a small town surrounded by such village schools, is actually in serious danger of closing because it can't recruit pupils - in a town of eight thousand people where it is officially the only primary school!
I went to that sort of primary school. I learned far more there than I ever did at secondary school.
I'm doubtful about the state school figure. I've never worked in a local authority where it was below £6k. Admittedly, it varies widely, but the suggestion it's below £5000 on average is one that caused me to raise my eyebrows. I think they may just have got their sums wrong by excluding some of the extra material that's not included in the official headline budget (e.g. some local authorities budget for back office costs separately, and technology is often paid for out of separate budgets on a pupil ratio).
It's also worth pausing for a moment on private school fees. That needs to be broken down much more carefully. Apart from anything else the Mirror (rather typically) has included boarding fees in that average, which is inevitably going to inflate the price (by 150%, in case anyone asks). On a like for like basis, the average private school spends about £9000 a year on education (again in my experience). This is easily accounted for by (1) higher salaries for staff, to get the best teachers and (2) much smaller class sizes (anywhere from 7 to 20) so the individual students get more attention. In fact, a lot of private schools tend to be quite poorly resourced in terms of capital equipment, classrooms and technology compared to state school counterparts. But because of smaller class sizes, above all, they still do better.
(Before anyone wastes time trying to prove smaller class sizes are irrelevant, I have looked at the studies that "prove" it and they are based on statistical fraud. The authors, unbelievably, forgot to consider that the smallest class sizes are bottom sets and groups with high-level SEND. Of course they make less progress than a top set with 34 children in it. That doesn't mean large class sizes are the way to go!)
What's noticeable about the state schools is that London gets the most funding and produces by far the best results.
Yes, but isn't that due to the number of hard working foreign pupils?
Probably more to do with the fact that teachers in London work very long hours compared to their counterparts elsewhere.
Yep, all our political leaders are part of the same elite, along with senior media folk, lawyers, CEOs of big public companies, investors and so on. What state schools cannot offer is the network of contacts and opportunities that you get from private education (except, as you say, in certain parts of London). As we know, on a like for like basis state schools outperform private schools.
You bang this drum with monotonous regularity, but its nonsense. Its like saying the Moon's gravity is the same as the Earth's on a like for like basis, true, but not very useful. Public schools do better because they attract more able children (able parents will on average do well, and on average have more able children), because they attract more able staff, because they have better facilities. Hardly a shock is it. Introduce more mediocre staff, confiscate half the facilities, enrol random students, the school will do less well, I am shocked I tell you, shocked.
I am not disputing they do better - of course they do, for the reasons you cite. But that does not make state schools poor. It just means that the state cannot compete with all the resources that private schools enjoy. The average spend per pupil in a state school is around £4,600 in England (http://www.sec-ed.co.uk/news/how-much-per-pupil-funding-will-your-school-get). The average school fees charged in a private school are around £12,000 (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/ampp3d/average-private-school-fees-now-4168150). But what the OECD study shows is that despite these advantages state schools do still compete. That is actually a remarkable achievement; or, perhaps, it is more about a lot of private schools coasting ion the back of being able to select bright pupils form relatively stable family backgrounds and then put them in small classes with the very best facilities.
I came out of a poverty-stricken village school with very few resources, but everyone who left that school at 11, was very literate and numerate and had a good general knowledge - why does that not happen today?
It does.
I used the word everyone, and I do not think that applies today. It certainly applied to all the schools in the surrounding villages as well.
What's noticeable about the state schools is that London gets the most funding and produces by far the best results.
Except I think (I could be wrong) you will find that the greatest amount of funding in London goes to the areas where the results are poorest, and once the higher staffing costs are factored in the areas of London that achieve most highly are actually a bit below the national average.
There must be a logical explanation for this, and I wonder if it is the ready availability of a large number of tutors in a wide range of subjects? Because that is where public/private models tend to become rather blurred.
I see Chris Leslie is the current 'virus' within the labour party this morning.
I think he's only stating the obvious though. I mean, can anyone see him actually being kept in a Labour shadow cabinet? Really?
He was promoted in a panic because he was more or less the only economics spokesman who survived the election and Harman didn't want to do a drastic reshuffle in the middle of a leadership fight as the stand in leader (unlike Howard). Since then, he has done very little. Whoever wins would be wise to quietly reshuffle him away again. Shadow Minister of Sport looks about his level.
Chris Leslie is good.
Strawberry cheesecake is good but I wouldn't make it shadow chancellor.
So why did you make it chancellor?
You keep underestimating George. In retrospect, that Omnishambles budget was the best thing that happened to him. On the one hand, it knocked some sense into him and reduced his Brownite game-playing tactics; on the other, it made Labour think he was a useless toff.
I don't underestimate him for a second, quite the opposite. But neither do I think he walks on water, which is roughly the current state of Tory thinking. He is beatable.
Maybe. But who in Labour is going to lead the elephants over the Alps?
Exploiting African workers for their own glory? That isn't really Labour's thing...
Probably more to do with the fact that teachers in London work very long hours compared to their counterparts elsewhere.
No they don't, JEO. In fact, the longest hours are worked by teachers in the North of England, because there are comparatively few of them. In Sheffield, 96 hour weeks are standard. In Cannock, last year, I was working 91 hour weeks.
It might be called, ironically, a 'lazy' assumption that people in London work hard - that's not my experience of them!
We need to get a grip, and badly. Why can't we deploy the army on the UK side, and simply refuse to accept asylum requests from anyone we stop? They're coming from a safe country, so they should not be applying here.
I used the word everyone, and I do not think that applies today. It certainly applied to all the schools in the surrounding villages as well.
No, I do not think that everyone coming out schools today at aged eleven is very literate, numerate and with a good general knowledge. But I don't think that has ever been the case - especially in cities. That's why so many kids left school aged 15 having wasted four or five years at secondary moderns. What we do know is that, overall, the literacy and numeracy rates of those leaving primary schools has improved considerably since the mid-90s. Here's a table for the first decade of this century:
We need to get a grip, and badly. Why can't we deploy the army on the UK side, and simply refuse to accept asylum requests from anyone we stop? They're coming from a safe country, so they should not be applying here.
This is precisely the sort of 'event' that could fracture the Conservative support base and give a cardiatic boost to UKIP, even this early in the Parliament.
Cameron needs to really show he's got this under control, and very quickly. The government is starting to look incompetent.
We need to get a grip, and badly. Why can't we deploy the army on the UK side, and simply refuse to accept asylum requests from anyone we stop? They're coming from a safe country, so they should not be applying here.
This is precisely the sort of 'event' that could fracture the Conservative support base and give a cardiatic boost to UKIP, even this early in the Parliament.
Cameron needs to really show he's got this under control, and very quickly. The government is starting to look incompetent.
It's manna from heaven for the Out side in the EU referendum. Not that us leaving would change anything very much. This is a problem that can only be solved at the international level.
I have never read a thread Leader which is so wrong on so many counts - has its author not studied history at all - or just limited himself to authors of one political belief?
Blair/Brown were somewhat heirs of Jack Jones in their destructiveness and together with Mandelson and Campbell tried to control the British press so that only Labour-favourable stories were printed and really infected a lot of the public sector with PC - which still exists to today.
@Plato Good for you! Excellent effort, I'm guessing. I got as far as "Donald Brind says..." in the headline and skipped straight to the Comments.
You're right about Sweden. At the airport, you can find yourself haggling with taxi drivers, because they liberalised the taxi business.
Amazingly, Sweden is now the only Nordic country with a left-wing government.
The Sweden Democrats are on about 20% in the polls at present compared to 12% at the last election, so the next election could be a repeat of what just happened in Denmark.
The Left in Sweden have learnt nothing and forgotten nothing. Their policy of open-door encouragement of anyone who wishes to migrate or claim asylum in Sweden is behind that. They accepted 30,000 last year - three time the level the UK did - and now have problems with open begging on the streets of Stockholm and low level public order offences and criminal assaults. Their response? To criticise David Cameron for his 'language' last week. Ably reported by the BBC as headline news.
You make good points. The left want to avoid the issue. Swarms of BBC news reporters, articles and headlines are keen ignore reality and comment on linguistics.
The danger we face from this wave of illegal immigration is the opportunity it presents to people like the EDF who were out protesting the other day.
Re the education debate - this series is on BBC2 2100 Tuesday.
Rude, bone idle... and cosseted by the welfare state! Chinese teachers' damning verdict on British children after spending a month in UK classrooms
Five Chinese teachers spent four weeks in a school in Hampshire They were analysing the strictness of teaching methods in the UK Chinese teachers blamed a lack of motivation on poor performances
I have no real antipathy for Brown, and it's important to have different viewpoints, so while I do not know if his interventions re Scotland really were decisive - certainly some people not only on the Labour side thought it might have been at the time, but then there was a lot of panic going around about how bad things were for No at the time - or his intervention would be helpful, I think they'd be useful, one way or another. Rightly or wrongly, for a lot of people currently in Labour Blair has nothing to say they want to hear, and it would be interesting to see if that is the case with Brown.
Never believe anything you read in newspaper headlines. Never believe anything you read in newspaper headlines. Never believe anything you read in newspaper headlines.
What the actual story says is that 70% of the people they process in Calais in any given four-month period aren't there next time. This doesn't mean 70% are in the UK, because there are a number of other places in the world, apart from Calais and the UK.
Re the education debate - this series is on BBC2 2100 Tuesday.
Rude, bone idle... and cosseted by the welfare state! Chinese teachers' damning verdict on British children after spending a month in UK classrooms
Five Chinese teachers spent four weeks in a school in Hampshire They were analysing the strictness of teaching methods in the UK Chinese teachers blamed a lack of motivation on poor performances
''Cameron needs to really show he's got this under control, and very quickly. The government is starting to look incompetent.''
Really???
The most remarkable thing about this is to me is how little reaction it has provoked in the UK. The UKIP bounce is totally conspicuous by its absence. EDL and Britain First protests involve tiny handfuls of people.
Never believe anything you read in newspaper headlines. Never believe anything you read in newspaper headlines. Never believe anything you read in newspaper headlines.
What the actual story says is that 70% of the people they process in Calais in any given four-month period aren't there next time. This doesn't mean 70% are in the UK, because there are a number of other places in the world, apart from Calais and the UK.
Don't assume that all migrants in Calais are 'processed'. The numbers getting to the UK could be even higher.
None of Labour's candidates inspire confidence in their abilities. Jeremy Corbyn has the potential to damage Labour's prospects for multiple electoral cycles. Don Brind's excellent article shows just how much the Labour establishment are struggling to overcome his appeal to the committed.
I always find it interesting that many Conservative politicians say they love a part of marxist ideology namely the NHS. Obviously they are pragmatists for electoral reasons.
The same applies to Labour politicians with their love of the monarchy.
''Cameron needs to really show he's got this under control, and very quickly. The government is starting to look incompetent.''
Really???
The most remarkable thing about this is to me is how little reaction it has provoked in the UK. The UKIP bounce is totally conspicuous by its absence. EDL and Britain First protests involve tiny handfuls of people.
I don't detect any groundswell whatsoever.
I think the Gov't is reacting OK to the situation, albeit a tad slowly (twas ever thus) - electrify the fencing next tbh though.
Never believe anything you read in newspaper headlines. Never believe anything you read in newspaper headlines. Never believe anything you read in newspaper headlines.
What the actual story says is that 70% of the people they process in Calais in any given four-month period aren't there next time. This doesn't mean 70% are in the UK, because there are a number of other places in the world, apart from Calais and the UK.
Don't assume that all migrants in Calais are 'processed'. The numbers getting to the UK could be even higher.
All kinds of things could be true, but we're talking about an actual, specific claim about reality, and what we're seeing here is people uncritically repeating a totally bogus headline, refuted just by reading the article underneath it.
None of Labour's candidates inspire confidence in their abilities. Jeremy Corbyn has the potential to damage Labour's prospects for multiple electoral cycles. Don Brind's excellent article shows just how much the Labour establishment are struggling to overcome his appeal to the committed.
This might be a York centric out look but all my friends who are Labour members and registered Supporters are split between Burnham Cooper and Kendall. None are even putting Corbyn on the ballot. The York CLP has chosen Burnham. My London friends this weekend who stated they were supporting Corbyn previously are now not as sure. I have registered to vote and will put my first preference as Burnham or Cooper.
Never believe anything you read in newspaper headlines. Never believe anything you read in newspaper headlines. Never believe anything you read in newspaper headlines.
What the actual story says is that 70% of the people they process in Calais in any given four-month period aren't there next time. This doesn't mean 70% are in the UK, because there are a number of other places in the world, apart from Calais and the UK.
Don't assume that all migrants in Calais are 'processed'. The numbers getting to the UK could be even higher.
All kinds of things could be true, but we're talking about an actual, specific claim about reality, and what we're seeing here is people uncritically repeating a totally bogus headline, refuted just by reading the article underneath it.
You're asking a lot to expect people to actually read the articles they forward.
I have no real antipathy for Brown, and it's important to have different viewpoints, so while I do not know if his interventions re Scotland really were decisive - certainly some people not only on the Labour side thought it might have been at the time, but then there was a lot of panic going around about how bad things were for No at the time - or his intervention would be helpful, I think they'd be useful, one way or another. Rightly or wrongly, for a lot of people currently in Labour Blair has nothing to say they want to hear, and it would be interesting to see if that is the case with Brown.
I think Brown's intervention did help make a difference in the last week of the Indyref campaign, his tub thumping speeches round the various working men social clubs with good TV coverage no doubt helped get the older traditional voted Labour all their lives on side. Interestingly Alistair Darling played very little part in this effort.
None of Labour's candidates inspire confidence in their abilities. Jeremy Corbyn has the potential to damage Labour's prospects for multiple electoral cycles. Don Brind's excellent article shows just how much the Labour establishment are struggling to overcome his appeal to the committed.
Yes - it is an excellent article.
The most interesting part of the Brown intervention (surely there will be one) will be whether he endorses any specific candidate or not.
There's a LOT of literature and analysis on the sensitivity of results to funding levels, the upshot of which is that beyond a certain level (about a third of state school funding), it's pretty much invariant.
On class sizes, the sweet spot seems to be the range 18-30 pupils per class. Bigger means insufficient attention from the teacher; smaller means that pupils never spark off of each other in classroom discussion. Parents, however, tend to prefer even smaller class sizes anyway.
The key benefits of independent schools are that they're more independent of state control, more responsive to parents (higher direct incentive!), and parents tend to be more involved in their child's education.
I was saying this last week,I saw in a report that up to 150 to 200 getting in each night,so couple of months the five thousand backlog would be cleared and the next ten thousand in the queue.
It's a bloody disgrace that this country doesn't deport the illegal migrants straight back to France,get a grip Cameron.
None of Labour's candidates inspire confidence in their abilities. Jeremy Corbyn has the potential to damage Labour's prospects for multiple electoral cycles. Don Brind's excellent article shows just how much the Labour establishment are struggling to overcome his appeal to the committed.
Yes - it is an excellent article.
The most interesting part of the Brown intervention (surely there will be one) will be whether he endorses any specific candidate or not.
If he was going to endorse anyone it must surely be the wife of his long time consigliere.
There's a LOT of literature and analysis on the sensitivity of results to funding levels, the upshot of which is that beyond a certain level (about a third of state school funding), it's pretty much invariant.
On class sizes, the sweet spot seems to be the range 18-30 pupils per class. Bigger means insufficient attention from the teacher; smaller means that pupils never spark off of each other in classroom discussion. Parents, however, tend to prefer even smaller class sizes anyway.
The key benefits of independent schools are that they're more independent of state control, more responsive to parents (higher direct incentive!), and parents tend to be more involved in their child's education.
When I was at school (admittedly a while ago) they had a pretty strong view that the optimal size for a class was about 20. They'd hire additional staff to keep the ratio at that level.
Fees are so much higher in the independent sector because of the facilities 'arms race' for things like swimming pools, music centres, dedicated arts blocks, etc. These are all worthwhile, but to some extent, tangential to the core business of education so you need to be careful when comparing independent school spending vs state spending. Additionally - at least at my school where a third of the pupils were subsidised - a very significant proportion of the fees went on funding bursaries and scholarships as the school ethos was strongly supportive of being means-blind to the extent possible, but the Foundation that backed the school was limited by statute as to what it could fund.
I was saying this last week,I saw in a report that up to 150 to 200 getting in each night,so couple of months the five thousand backlog would be cleared and the next ten thousand in the queue.
It's a bloody disgrace that this country doesn't deport the illegal migrants straight back to France,get a grip Cameron.
It is the judiciary that is stopping fast repatriation.
I was saying this last week,I saw in a report that up to 150 to 200 getting in each night,so couple of months the five thousand backlog would be cleared and the next ten thousand in the queue.
It's a bloody disgrace that this country doesn't deport the illegal migrants straight back to France,get a grip Cameron.
None of Labour's candidates inspire confidence in their abilities. Jeremy Corbyn has the potential to damage Labour's prospects for multiple electoral cycles. Don Brind's excellent article shows just how much the Labour establishment are struggling to overcome his appeal to the committed.
Yes - it is an excellent article.
The most interesting part of the Brown intervention (surely there will be one) will be whether he endorses any specific candidate or not.
If he was going to endorse anyone it must surely be the wife of his long time consigliere.
Re the education debate - this series is on BBC2 2100 Tuesday.
Rude, bone idle... and cosseted by the welfare state! Chinese teachers' damning verdict on British children after spending a month in UK classrooms
Five Chinese teachers spent four weeks in a school in Hampshire They were analysing the strictness of teaching methods in the UK Chinese teachers blamed a lack of motivation on poor performances
The producers knew what the answers were going to be, they were setting it all up to get tht result.
The fact is, the UK is remarkably average in the PISA rankings. A point (out of 500) behind France in Maths, well above Denmark in reading and ahead of most major economies at science. It's not a world-leading performance, nor a trailing one.
LOOK.. Lets get real about Brown.. why are there none of the Ministers who were in Blairs Govts still around, or virtually none? If you think it doesn't have anything to do with Brown and the dark arts seeing off any opposition to him, then you are welcome to Corbyn.
The reason why Labour are where they are is BECAUSE of Brown, why his intervention should be helpful is open to serious question.
Re the education debate - this series is on BBC2 2100 Tuesday.
Rude, bone idle... and cosseted by the welfare state! Chinese teachers' damning verdict on British children after spending a month in UK classrooms
Five Chinese teachers spent four weeks in a school in Hampshire They were analysing the strictness of teaching methods in the UK Chinese teachers blamed a lack of motivation on poor performances
The producers knew what the answers were going to be, they were setting it all up to get tht result.
The fact is, the UK is remarkably average in the PISA rankings. A point (out of 500) behind France in Maths, well above Denmark in reading and ahead of most major economies at science. It's not a world-leading performance, nor a trailing one.
Does seem ironic that members of a Communist party criticise the concept of a welfare state though.
Is there any talk of a return visit to China? Now that WOULD be fun...
''Cameron needs to really show he's got this under control, and very quickly. The government is starting to look incompetent.''
Really???
The most remarkable thing about this is to me is how little reaction it has provoked in the UK. The UKIP bounce is totally conspicuous by its absence. EDL and Britain First protests involve tiny handfuls of people.
I don't detect any groundswell whatsoever.
I don't think this is true,look at the newspapers and the forums for people to post,people are angry ,sending some into outright racism in they posting.
I only don't detect any groudswell movement is from our soft political elite ,your right there.
You're right about Sweden. At the airport, you can find yourself haggling with taxi drivers, because they liberalised the taxi business.
Amazingly, Sweden is now the only Nordic country with a left-wing government.
The Sweden Democrats are on about 20% in the polls at present compared to 12% at the last election, so the next election could be a repeat of what just happened in Denmark.
The Left in Sweden have learnt nothing and forgotten nothing.
Their policy of open-door encouragement of anyone who wishes to migrate or claim asylum in Sweden is behind that. They accepted 30,000 last year - three time the level the UK did - and now have problems with open begging on the streets of Stockholm and low level public order offences and criminal assaults.
Their response? To criticise David Cameron for his 'language' last week. Ably reported by the BBC as headline news.
Not to mention the well-documented problems in Malmo for the Jewish community there.
None of Labour's candidates inspire confidence in their abilities. Jeremy Corbyn has the potential to damage Labour's prospects for multiple electoral cycles. Don Brind's excellent article shows just how much the Labour establishment are struggling to overcome his appeal to the committed.
Yes - it is an excellent article.
The most interesting part of the Brown intervention (surely there will be one) will be whether he endorses any specific candidate or not.
If he was going to endorse anyone it must surely be the wife of his long time consigliere.
You would have thought so. 4.3 on Betfair still.
Astonishing.
I think people forget this election is being conducted under AV and she has the considerable advantage of not being a latter day Michael Foot, nor is she Ed Miliband with a Scouse accent nor is she the Blairite cuckoo in the nest.
None of Labour's candidates inspire confidence in their abilities. Jeremy Corbyn has the potential to damage Labour's prospects for multiple electoral cycles. Don Brind's excellent article shows just how much the Labour establishment are struggling to overcome his appeal to the committed.
Yes - it is an excellent article.
The most interesting part of the Brown intervention (surely there will be one) will be whether he endorses any specific candidate or not.
If he was going to endorse anyone it must surely be the wife of his long time consigliere.
You would have thought so. 4.3 on Betfair still.
Astonishing.
I think people forget this election is being conducted under AV and she has the considerable advantage of not being a latter day Michael Foot, nor is she Ed Miliband with a Scouse accent nor is she the Blairite cuckoo in the nest.
Absolutely. Surely Brown will come out for Yvette. I may put more her at these prices.
Just walking back from getting lunch for the office, heard two parents admonishing a 3-5 year old boy, that if he was naughty again they would take away his i-pad and other electronic toys/things.
My mental reaction was, why give a child that age an i-pad in the first place. As the child was playing off one parent against the other, it would appear that they might use electronic toys to amuse the child on his own rather than engage him with a book or a physical game.
Perhaps I am a bit old-fashioned, but all my Christmas presents to younger grandchildren (real and honorary) are either books, physical games or science experiments. Each year now I get a request list for similar items as it awakens their interest and builds their knowledge. Children over 10 get an experience trip which can include a friend.
Have we now got to the ridiculous stage of "keeping up with the Jones's?"
Just walking back from getting lunch for the office, heard two parents admonishing a 3-5 year old boy, that if he was naughty again they would take away his i-pad and other electronic toys/things.
My mental reaction was, why give a child that age an i-pad in the first place. As the child was playing off one parent against the other, it would appear that they might use electronic toys to amuse the child on his own rather than engage him with a book or a physical game.
Perhaps I am a bit old-fashioned, but all my Christmas presents to younger grandchildren (real and honorary) are either books, physical games or science experiments. Each year now I get a request list for similar items as it awakens their interest and builds their knowledge. Children over 10 get an experience trip which can include a friend.
Have we now got to the ridiculous stage of "keeping up with the Jones's?"
There's a balance - our similarly aged daughter uses our ipad... there are some very good maths games that she is remarkably good at (although I suspect she is just remembering the order of the answers as she often answers before the question is finished!)
"Many school leaders, politicians and commentators enthuse about the success of a major policy of the time, the London Challenge, and view it as unambiguously improving schools in London. This unanimity carries weight – and no doubt London schools have improved in a number of ways. But so far, at least, catching a reflection of this improvement in the data is proving to be difficult.
It sounds somehow uninspiring and disappointing that the London attainment premium is largely “accounted for by demographic composition” rather than wholly caused by a clever policy. I disagree. It can be seen as a story of aspiration and ambition. There is nothing inherently different about the ability of pupils from different ethnic backgrounds, but the children of immigrants typically have high aspirations and ambitions, and might place greater hopes in the education system."
I can well see Corbyn joining and fighting with the International Brigade in the Spanish Civil War as Jack Jones did. Burnham no chance. Jones would have backed Corbyn 100%.
Comments
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_general_election,_2014#Results
I can't think of a Labour big dog who has learned anything and stayed in the game.
The sage commentators - Straw, Blunkett etc have left the stage.
But I'm also wearing sandals today (it's warm) so does that disqualify me?
There must be a logical explanation for this, and I wonder if it is the ready availability of a large number of tutors in a wide range of subjects? Because that is where public/private models tend to become rather blurred.
e.g. Gordon Brown had 0 per cent responsibility for the No vote in 2014, while the economy (i.e. George Osborne) had nearly 100 per cent. All left-wing governments are wrong or evil while all right-wing governments are praiseworthy (even the ones, like Denmark and Sweden, which would be regarded as unacceptable Socialism if their policies were implemented in the UK).
We also have people on thread basing their critiques of the OP on a 1977 opinion poll, and the word of a KGB officer, which for some reason is acceptable as evidence when used against figures connected to the Labour Party like Michael Foot and Jack Jones.
A bit of pluralism in one's way of thinking about history would probably lead to more interesting and profitable analyses. For one thing, it would be easier to rationalise why 97 per cent of people don't vote Conservative, which isn't always clear from reading here.
It would be easier to rationalise why the Conservatives are not on 97 per cent!
We shall see!
http://www.theguardian.com/education/2012/jan/20/top-local-authorities-schools-london
http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2013/dec/11/educational-lottery-best-performing-schools-england-ofsted
If the PISA tests covered just London (as they cover just Shanghai in China) there would be a very different view of education in England and Wales.
It might be called, ironically, a 'lazy' assumption that people in London work hard - that's not my experience of them!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33757402
We need to get a grip, and badly. Why can't we deploy the army on the UK side, and simply refuse to accept asylum requests from anyone we stop? They're coming from a safe country, so they should not be applying here.
Close the tunnel if necessary.
No, I do not think that everyone coming out schools today at aged eleven is very literate, numerate and with a good general knowledge. But I don't think that has ever been the case - especially in cities. That's why so many kids left school aged 15 having wasted four or five years at secondary moderns. What we do know is that, overall, the literacy and numeracy rates of those leaving primary schools has improved considerably since the mid-90s. Here's a table for the first decade of this century:
http://www.poverty.org.uk/25/index.shtml
Cameron needs to really show he's got this under control, and very quickly. The government is starting to look incompetent.
I think it's just the feeling that deep down, once things got serious, Burnham would overtake Corbyn.
Are Eurotunnel's financial backers party donors?
He's neck and neck with Cooper at the moment !
I got as far as "Donald Brind says..." in the headline and skipped straight to the Comments.
I deliberately follow one or two Twitterers with whom I almost always disagree.
That said, one of them blocked me for no apparent reason... [I don't even tweet much about politics, focusing on F1/writing].
The danger we face from this wave of illegal immigration is the opportunity it presents to people like the EDF who were out protesting the other day.
http://news.sky.com/story/1529362/clampdown-as-70-percent-of-calais-migrants-reach-uk
Oh dear, oh dear. We're still paying for it. In more ways than just financial ones. And will be for years yet.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-foyle-west-33755785
Never believe anything you read in newspaper headlines.
Never believe anything you read in newspaper headlines.
What the actual story says is that 70% of the people they process in Calais in any given four-month period aren't there next time. This doesn't mean 70% are in the UK, because there are a number of other places in the world, apart from Calais and the UK.
Really???
The most remarkable thing about this is to me is how little reaction it has provoked in the UK. The UKIP bounce is totally conspicuous by its absence. EDL and Britain First protests involve tiny handfuls of people.
I don't detect any groundswell whatsoever.
How much mileage would there be in a programme where a bunch of Chinese teachers said British schools are OK and most of the kids are alright'...??
Obviously they are pragmatists for electoral reasons.
The same applies to Labour politicians with their love of the monarchy.
None are even putting Corbyn on the ballot.
The York CLP has chosen Burnham.
My London friends this weekend who stated they were supporting Corbyn previously are now not as sure.
I have registered to vote and will put my first preference as Burnham or Cooper.
The most interesting part of the Brown intervention (surely there will be one) will be whether he endorses any specific candidate or not.
There's a LOT of literature and analysis on the sensitivity of results to funding levels, the upshot of which is that beyond a certain level (about a third of state school funding), it's pretty much invariant.
On class sizes, the sweet spot seems to be the range 18-30 pupils per class. Bigger means insufficient attention from the teacher; smaller means that pupils never spark off of each other in classroom discussion. Parents, however, tend to prefer even smaller class sizes anyway.
The key benefits of independent schools are that they're more independent of state control, more responsive to parents (higher direct incentive!), and parents tend to be more involved in their child's education.
It's a bloody disgrace that this country doesn't deport the illegal migrants straight back to France,get a grip Cameron.
Fees are so much higher in the independent sector because of the facilities 'arms race' for things like swimming pools, music centres, dedicated arts blocks, etc. These are all worthwhile, but to some extent, tangential to the core business of education so you need to be careful when comparing independent school spending vs state spending. Additionally - at least at my school where a third of the pupils were subsidised - a very significant proportion of the fees went on funding bursaries and scholarships as the school ethos was strongly supportive of being means-blind to the extent possible, but the Foundation that backed the school was limited by statute as to what it could fund.
They don't have to, you know.
That turned out to be nonsense on stilts.
Four weeks and they're experts.
The producers knew what the answers were going to be, they were setting it all up to get tht result.
The fact is, the UK is remarkably average in the PISA rankings. A point (out of 500) behind France in Maths, well above Denmark in reading and ahead of most major economies at science. It's not a world-leading performance, nor a trailing one.
The reason why Labour are where they are is BECAUSE of Brown, why his intervention should be helpful is open to serious question.
The producers knew what the answers were going to be, they were setting it all up to get tht result.
The fact is, the UK is remarkably average in the PISA rankings. A point (out of 500) behind France in Maths, well above Denmark in reading and ahead of most major economies at science. It's not a world-leading performance, nor a trailing one.
Does seem ironic that members of a Communist party criticise the concept of a welfare state though.
Is there any talk of a return visit to China? Now that WOULD be fun...
I only don't detect any groudswell movement is from our soft political elite ,your right there.
I think people forget this election is being conducted under AV and she has the considerable advantage of not being a latter day Michael Foot, nor is she Ed Miliband with a Scouse accent nor is she the Blairite cuckoo in the nest.
My mental reaction was, why give a child that age an i-pad in the first place. As the child was playing off one parent against the other, it would appear that they might use electronic toys to amuse the child on his own rather than engage him with a book or a physical game.
Perhaps I am a bit old-fashioned, but all my Christmas presents to younger grandchildren (real and honorary) are either books, physical games or science experiments. Each year now I get a request list for similar items as it awakens their interest and builds their knowledge. Children over 10 get an experience trip which can include a friend.
Have we now got to the ridiculous stage of "keeping up with the Jones's?"
Goodness. Potentially huge story.
#desperation
It sounds somehow uninspiring and disappointing that the London attainment premium is largely “accounted for by demographic composition” rather than wholly caused by a clever policy. I disagree. It can be seen as a story of aspiration and ambition. There is nothing inherently different about the ability of pupils from different ethnic backgrounds, but the children of immigrants typically have high aspirations and ambitions, and might place greater hopes in the education system."
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/nov/14/london-schools-immigration-children-education
I've set up a Political Betting league on the free fantasy league game from the premier league.
http://fantasy.premierleague.com/
The code to join this private league is 1336513-316355
You can join up anonymously if you wish by choosing first and second names as I did - scrap and heap...
The more the merrier as we ensure TSE finishes as close to Watford as possible this season.
https://twitter.com/NCPoliticsUK/status/628180617373597700
Jones would have backed Corbyn 100%.
It might be especially bad if it looks like Labour have no chance of winning the next election.
I've joined your fantasy football league as Weedol. I fully expect to get relegated.