Friday 10th February 2017

Post by **refitman** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 7:10 am

Morning all.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 7:26 am

Morning all.

For those that missed QT, here's a summary.
http://m.torquayheraldexpress.co.uk/bbc ... story.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Shows that the foreigners will continue to be blamed for the NHS etc by some.

I'm reminded of a scene in Airplane! where there's a queue in the aisle...

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 7:54 am

Morning.

Another good night for the Lib Dems.
One of the by elections was in Fairford North, in the Cotswolds near the village I used to live in, so no surprise to see Labour not standing. Lib Dems up 40 points to 68%, Tories down 20.9 to 30%.
Greens 1.8%, didn't stand last time, thankfully no Kipper stood.

I haven't kept in touch with local politics since moving away from the area, but do remember the ongoing Tory corruption scandal involving development in the Cotswold Water Park. If remembering correctly someone eventually went to prison for it.

Lib Dems also gained from the Tories in Norfolk. Another big gain for the Libs +19.8%, Labour down to fourth place and were the only party to lose %, and Ukip newly in at third.
The previous Conservative incumbent was disqualified, hence the need for the by election.

Good news for Labour, they held Kingswood and Hazel Leys in Corby, + 10.3, the Tories also increased their vote, no Kipper stood thankfully.
Some nice pics of the successful Labour candidate and happy team on Twitter. Well done folks.

Ukip gained Great & Little Oakley. Previous Independent.

Sorry if that isn't up to Anatoly's standard.
But thought we might not get a roundup this week after feelings running high on Brexit TwasNA for Labour v. There was an alternative for Labour.

tinybgoat · Post by **tinybgoat** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 8:09 am

yahyah wrote:Morning.

Another good night for the Lib Dems.
One of the by elections was in Fairford North, in the Cotswolds near the village I used to live in, so no surprise to see Labour not standing. Lib Dems up 40 points to 68%, Tories down 20.9 to 30%.
Greens 1.8%, didn't stand last time, thankfully no Kipper stood.

I haven't kept in touch with local politics since moving away from the area, but do remember the ongoing Tory corruption scandal involving development in the Cotswold Water Park. If remembering correctly someone eventually went to prison for it.

Lib Dems also gained from the Tories in Norfolk. Another big gain for the Libs +19.8%, Labour down to fourth place and were the only party to lose %, and Ukip newly in at third.
The previous Conservative incumbent was disqualified, hence the need for the by election.

Good news for Labour, they held Kingswood and Hazel Leys in Corby, + 10.3, the Tories also increased their vote, no Kipper stood thankfully.
Some nice pics of the successful Labour candidate and happy team on Twitter. Well done folks.

Ukip gained Great & Little Oakley. Previous Independent.

Sorry if that isn't up to Anatoly's standard.
But thought we might not get a roundup this week after feelings running high on Brexit TwasNA for Labour v. There was an alternative for Labour.

How about twaaaflbiwago?
There was an alternative for labour, but it wasn't a good one.
(I would add imho on to the end, but that would make it less snappy )

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 8:12 am

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... are_btn_tw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Councils 'at breaking point' due to budget cuts and rising social care bills
Millions of residents face council tax rises, as thinktank finds just 6% of local authorities expect to not have to increase rates

Moving more of the burden of local government funding from central taxation to council tax will be regressive. It will almost certainly combine with rising prices due to a weak pound to reduce the purchasing power of those on low incomes. How this won't negatively effect the economy is beyond me. The Tories do know the only thing propping up our economy right now is consumer spending? Perhaps they were hoping councils would just stop providing services. That was after all Cameron and Osbourne's stated goal, wasn't it, to shrink the state to 1930s levels?

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 8:50 am

Morning all.

Gove has written an article behind the paywall at The Times admitting that UTCS have failed, This comment is interesting though.

Sam Freedman ‏@Samfr 41m41 minutes ago

Michael never much liked UTCs. They were forced on him by the PM. An "I told you so" dressed up as admitting error.

How many edu policies - or any other for that matter - get forced upon the department because No 10 thinks it's a good idea and the department can't refuse?

Universal Infant Free School means is another classic - bounced into it by Clegg and Laws and now can't take it away despite the evidence that says money would be far better spent in breakfast clubs.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 8:51 am

tinybgoat wrote:
yahyah wrote:Morning.

Another good night for the Lib Dems.
One of the by elections was in Fairford North, in the Cotswolds near the village I used to live in, so no surprise to see Labour not standing. Lib Dems up 40 points to 68%, Tories down 20.9 to 30%.
Greens 1.8%, didn't stand last time, thankfully no Kipper stood.

I haven't kept in touch with local politics since moving away from the area, but do remember the ongoing Tory corruption scandal involving development in the Cotswold Water Park. If remembering correctly someone eventually went to prison for it.

Lib Dems also gained from the Tories in Norfolk. Another big gain for the Libs +19.8%, Labour down to fourth place and were the only party to lose %, and Ukip newly in at third.
The previous Conservative incumbent was disqualified, hence the need for the by election.

Good news for Labour, they held Kingswood and Hazel Leys in Corby, + 10.3, the Tories also increased their vote, no Kipper stood thankfully.
Some nice pics of the successful Labour candidate and happy team on Twitter. Well done folks.

Ukip gained Great & Little Oakley. Previous Independent.

Sorry if that isn't up to Anatoly's standard.
But thought we might not get a roundup this week after feelings running high on Brexit TwasNA for Labour v. There was an alternative for Labour.
How about twaaaflbiwago?
There was an alternative for labour, but it wasn't a good one.
(I would add imho on to the end, but that would make it less snappy )

Depends whether you mean electorally or morally.

I'd agree that in electoral terms, Labour had no good options.

Is there any explanation anywhere why the Lib Dems are doing so well in council by-elections, but still barely above 10% in polling?

FT good this morning

https://www.ft.com/content/1fd4dc56-eec ... 9a44939bb6" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"zombified inertness"

Failure to try and delay the programme motion a pretty clear indication of what the leader of the Labour party thinks is in his interests with regard to Hard Brexit.

ADD

Perhaps this FT link is better?

https://t.co/jUHShS3Eg8" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 9:06 am

I find I can access FT articles if I Google the title and find them that way, rather than via a link which just asks for a subscription. You just have to answer a marketing question to access it, if you do it that way. Not sure the article linked above is worth the effort, though. It doesn't really say anything new.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 9:25 am

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... acceptable" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Jeremy Hunt: NHS problems completely unacceptable

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 9:34 am

HindleA wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... acceptable

Jeremy Hunt: NHS problems completely unacceptable

NHS : Jeremy Hunt completely unacceptable.

Post by **adam** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 9:42 am

On the appeal court decision in the US overnight - Trump's plans are now in more trouble in the short term at least, and it would suggest that they are in more trouble in the long term, because to overturn at the Supreme Court he needs a majority - a tie would uphold the decision of the lower court. To get a majority, he would need one of the four 'liberal' justices - Ginsberg, Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan - to vote to overturn the lower court's decision, which seems unlikely - more likely that Kennedy or even Roberts would 'switch' and vote to uphold (Kennedy has been a swing voter, Roberts voted with the AAC to uphold 'obamacare' when Kennedy voted against). Although it's far from clear, the comments of the appeal court judges on Trump's wider case do at least suggest that the ban is in trouble legally.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 9:56 am

adam wrote:On the appeal court decision in the US overnight - Trump's plans are now in more trouble in the short term at least, and it would suggest that they are in more trouble in the long term, because to overturn at the Supreme Court he needs a majority - a tie would uphold the decision of the lower court. To get a majority, he would need one of the four 'liberal' justices - Ginsberg, Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan - to vote to overturn the lower court's decision, which seems unlikely - more likely that Kennedy or even Roberts would 'switch' and vote to uphold (Kennedy has been a swing voter, Roberts voted with the AAC to uphold 'obamacare' when Kennedy voted against). Although it's far from clear, the comments of the appeal court judges on Trump's wider case do at least suggest that the ban is in trouble legally.

Good news. What's been the response from Ryan, Graham, McCain, McConnell etc like?

Post by **adam** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 10:05 am

StephenDolan wrote:
adam wrote:On the appeal court decision in the US overnight - Trump's plans are now in more trouble in the short term at least, and it would suggest that they are in more trouble in the long term, because to overturn at the Supreme Court he needs a majority - a tie would uphold the decision of the lower court. To get a majority, he would need one of the four 'liberal' justices - Ginsberg, Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan - to vote to overturn the lower court's decision, which seems unlikely - more likely that Kennedy or even Roberts would 'switch' and vote to uphold (Kennedy has been a swing voter, Roberts voted with the AAC to uphold 'obamacare' when Kennedy voted against). Although it's far from clear, the comments of the appeal court judges on Trump's wider case do at least suggest that the ban is in trouble legally.
Good news. What's been the response from Ryan, Graham, McCain, McConnell etc like?

Can't find anything other than a GOP senator from Arkansas parroting the Trump line about no justice and an emergency of national security. In more general terms, the Washington Post has this

In Congress, Republicans are quiet and meek as mice

Imagine how Republicans would have reacted if President Barack Obama had attacked a retailer for dropping his daughter’s product line. Or asked senators to confirm a Cabinet pick who said guns are needed in schools to defend against grizzly bears. Or tried to undermine the independence of the federal judiciary. Or equated the United States’ moral standing with that of Vladimir Putin’s Russia.

There would have been howls of outrage, of course, and multiple investigations, and even calls for impeachment. But it’s President Trump doing all those things, so Republicans in Congress are as meek and quiet as mice.

So no surprises there.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 10:22 am

My detached hunch is that the republicans want to get ACA and the supreme court nomination tied up, taxation changed and then it doesn't matter if Trump crashes and burns. Get as much done pre midterms before they lose a house or two.

When on the media and 538 did their pre-election tours of the states, there was a lot of traditional republicans willing to focus solely on the supreme court implications of the election. Roe v Wade mentioned quite a few times.

Edit from Adam - I just edited this post instead of replying to it. I'm not used to this moderator business and I'm likely to do this again. Sorry.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 10:31 am

Shaun Lintern ‏@ShaunLintern 12h12 hours ago

Exclusive: Sir Robert Francis warns NHS pressures make another Mid Staffs 'inevitable' in interview with HSJ https://www.hsj.co.uk/topics/quality-an ... LY.twitter" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

So if that happened whose fault would that be?

Because if Mid-Staffs was all down to Andy Burnham then this time round it would be...?

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 10:34 am

RogerOThornhill wrote:
Shaun Lintern ‏@ShaunLintern 12h12 hours ago

Exclusive: Sir Robert Francis warns NHS pressures make another Mid Staffs 'inevitable' in interview with HSJ https://www.hsj.co.uk/topics/quality-an ... LY.twitter" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …
So if that happened whose fault would that be?

Because if Mid-Staffs was all down to Andy Burnham then this time round it would be...?

Andy Burnham silly.

Post by **adam** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 10:36 am

StephenDolan wrote: My detached hunch is that the republicans want to get ACA and the supreme court nomination tied up, taxation changed and then it doesn't matter if Trump crashes and burns. Get as much done pre midterms before they lose a house or two.

When on the media and 538 did their pre-election tours of the states, there was a lot of traditional republicans willing to focus solely on the supreme court implications of the election. Roe v Wade mentioned quite a few times.

I agree with a lot of that. I think it's worth remembering what the Democrats face in the Senate vote in 2018 - they hold 23 of the 33 seats up, with 2 held by independents who caucus with them and only 8 republicans, most of whom are sitting on enormous majority votes even from 2012, one of the Dems best years ever when they were last fought. It's very unlikely indeed that the republicans will lose any of those 8. The democrats are sitting on seats that voted overwhelmingly for Trump last year - West Virginia, Montana, Missouri - and it's more likely that the republicans will gain a few seats than lose any.

The house isn't impossible but is very difficult for the dems to win because of the nature of district drawing - there is an inherent majority for the republicans there. Off the back of that brilliant year in the Senate in 2012, the Dems gained 8 seats in the house. They are currently 28 short of a majority.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 10:38 am

And for the muppets calling for reform of the NHS, you've had nearly 7 years and reformed it once already.

So now what?

Ah right...change the funding model. The simplistic right wing answer to every problem with the NHS.

Bonnylad · Post by **Bonnylad** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 10:43 am

Tea?"
"OK, go on."
"There's no kettle so I'm burning the house down to heat water."
"Now wait a…"
"Shut up, I've a clear mandate for tea."

27 replies . 1,493 retweets 1,643 likes

 Reply

27

 Retweet

1.5K

Like
1

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 10:47 am

RogerOThornhill wrote:And for the muppets calling for reform of the NHS, you've had nearly 7 years and reformed it once already.

So now what?

Ah right...change the funding model. The simplistic right wing answer to every problem with the NHS.

it is however very revealing that the pinch point has become social care and not the NHS itself (despite the A&E crisis).

The Tory strategy for the last 7 year has been clear. Ringfence the NHS, keep it steady state where possible and cut everything else. Lansley's reforms were more ambitious than Cameron realised, but much less significant than those who campaigned against them claimed. The Health and Social Care Act 2012 should have left the NHS a smoking ruin if the critics had been right. it was misguided managerialism, but not a disaster. Indeed some of it was probably right (eg in allowing some trusts to operate commercially like a university, and thereby cross-subsidise its core activities).

Social care isn't ringfenced. Like much else in the public sector (justice - see legal aid, local government. disability benefits) it has been much harder hit than the NHS, and it is the consequences for the NHS of that that have then caused the uproar.

it was a major failing of the opposition 2010-2015 to focus so heavily on the NHS. Corbyn has been a bit better on this (he is positively good on justice) but not much as he isn't able enough to carry forward a different strategy.

Let us hope Long-Bailey proves better once installed.

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 10:51 am

Last night I saw a tweet blaming Corbyn for the state of the NHS, no opposition blah blah blah.

Am I right in saying that it wasn't the opposition who brought down Thatcher over the poll tax, it was the people?

Too many don't seem to care any more than the govt does.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 10:52 am

RogerOThornhill wrote:
Shaun Lintern ‏@ShaunLintern 12h12 hours ago

Exclusive: Sir Robert Francis warns NHS pressures make another Mid Staffs 'inevitable' in interview with HSJ https://www.hsj.co.uk/topics/quality-an ... LY.twitter" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …
So if that happened whose fault would that be?

Because if Mid-Staffs was all down to Andy Burnham then this time round it would be...?

ANDY BURNHAM OF COURSE!
The rule is, if it's good the Tory's/UKIP did it; if it's bad Labour did it. This is the law according to the UK-press-including-BBC

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 10:53 am

Nearly all of the big finance people who infested the DfE have gone but one remains. Unfortunately he's a minister...

Exclusive: DfE held talks with Bridge International Academies to discuss controversial low-cost model

https://www.tes.com/news/school-news/br ... es-discuss

Schools minister Lord Nash invited the controversial Bridge International Academies into the Department for Education to discuss its low-cost model of education, TES can reveal.

Last year’s meeting has been confirmed by the American for-profit company. Co-founder Shannon May told TES that the firm had been “asked by various parties” to open schools in the UK.

Bridge International currently educates more than 100,000 children in over 400 nursery and primary schools in India, Kenya, Liberia, Nigeria and Uganda, but it has ambitious expansion plans.
Scripted lessons

Ms May told TES that Lord Nash “asked us to meet with him to understand better the situation in the UK”. Bridge uses smartphones and tablets to allow staff to give identical, scripted lessons, with data being sent back to the US for analysis to ensure the teachers are turning up and delivering the classes, and to check how children are learning.

So we'll get to know exactly what went on in a meeting involving a government minister?

The DfE declined to comment on what it said was a private meeting.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 10:53 am

By the way, has anyone seen my hanging basket?

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 10:54 am

Sorry STephenDolan for repeating your point.
Didn't read the rest of the posts first.

(Irritating fuckwit clanger emoticon)

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 10:55 am

It was 27 years ago,let it go.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 10:56 am

Yes - democracy can't work if people not engaged (or engaged only on basis of hatred of other/unknown/new)

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 11:03 am

tinyclanger2 wrote:Yes - democracy can't work if people not engaged (or engaged only on basis of hatred of other/unknown/new)

A very profound thought for the morning (and I agree)

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 11:12 am

I wonder how this will play out, any thoughts?

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/201 ... ary-switch" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 11:15 am

gilsey wrote:Last night I saw a tweet blaming Corbyn for the state of the NHS, no opposition blah blah blah.

Am I right in saying that it wasn't the opposition who brought down Thatcher over the poll tax, it was the people?

Too many don't seem to care any more than the govt does.

Thatcher was removed because Tory MPs feared for their seats in the 1992 election. So they ruthlessly removed her. Major, difficult to believe, proved very popular and beat Kinnock in an election Labour should have won.

Tories are not sentimental. It is their great strength.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 11:17 am

RogerOThornhill wrote:Nearly all of the big finance people who infested the DfE have gone but one remains. Unfortunately he's a minister...

Exclusive: DfE held talks with Bridge International Academies to discuss controversial low-cost model

https://www.tes.com/news/school-news/br ... es-discuss

Schools minister Lord Nash invited the controversial Bridge International Academies into the Department for Education to discuss its low-cost model of education, TES can reveal.

Last year’s meeting has been confirmed by the American for-profit company. Co-founder Shannon May told TES that the firm had been “asked by various parties” to open schools in the UK.

Bridge International currently educates more than 100,000 children in over 400 nursery and primary schools in India, Kenya, Liberia, Nigeria and Uganda, but it has ambitious expansion plans.
Scripted lessons

Ms May told TES that Lord Nash “asked us to meet with him to understand better the situation in the UK”. Bridge uses smartphones and tablets to allow staff to give identical, scripted lessons, with data being sent back to the US for analysis to ensure the teachers are turning up and delivering the classes, and to check how children are learning.
So we'll get to know exactly what went on in a meeting involving a government minister?

The DfE declined to comment on what it said was a private meeting.

Granddaughter is off to Uganda in the summer for 6 weeks "volunteering" (will cost her £900!) teaching in primary schools. She's a TA, not a teacher.
Wonder if there's any connection with Bridge International ? India, Kenya, Liberia & Nigeria are the other countries she could have chosen to go to.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 11:19 am

Are you after my job, yahyah?

It is worth noting that Labour increased their share in 2 of the 4 contests where they stood, and the "resurgent" LibDems didn't stand in 2 of the 5 and came last in another (though their vote was up there too) Labour's decline in the other two can at least partly be put down to the classic tactical "squeeze".

So I wouldn't rush to make judgements about the impact (if any) of recent events myself.

(btw the circumstances of the Fylde byelection are interesting, worth a google if you haven't heard already)

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 11:21 am

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38931211" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Plumber wins workers' rights battle against Pimlico Plumbers

Eric_WLothian · Post by **Eric_WLothian** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 11:34 am

tinyclanger2 wrote:Yes - democracy can't work if people not engaged (or engaged only on basis of hatred of other/unknown/new)

You mean like this Tory (although his membership may not be entirely hatred-based)?

The Scottish Government has denied a Cambridge student who burnt a £20 in front of a homeless man is a “direct” relative of First Minister Nicola Sturgeon.
Student Ronald Coyne was allegedly caught on film setting fire to the banknote whilst wearing a white bow toe and tails in Cambridge. He was kicked out of the Cambridge University Conservative Association where he was the communications officer.

It has been rumoured that burning a £50 note in front of a homeless person is one of the initiation ceremonies of Oxford’s notorious Bullingdon club.

...his dad is the brother of the ex-husband of the sister of the First Minster’s husband

At this point my brain went into meltdown.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/n ... -1-4362987

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 11:43 am

Good-morning, everyone.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 11:44 am

Eric_WLothian wrote:
tinyclanger2 wrote:Yes - democracy can't work if people not engaged (or engaged only on basis of hatred of other/unknown/new)
You mean like this Tory (although his membership may not be entirely hatred-based)?
The Scottish Government has denied a Cambridge student who burnt a £20 in front of a homeless man is a “direct” relative of First Minister Nicola Sturgeon.
Student Ronald Coyne was allegedly caught on film setting fire to the banknote whilst wearing a white bow toe and tails in Cambridge. He was kicked out of the Cambridge University Conservative Association where he was the communications officer.

It has been rumoured that burning a £50 note in front of a homeless person is one of the initiation ceremonies of Oxford’s notorious Bullingdon club.

...his dad is the brother of the ex-husband of the sister of the First Minster’s husband
At this point my brain went into meltdown.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/n ... -1-4362987

There's tenuous. Then there's that.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 11:57 am

Stephen Bush is really very good indeed

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/st ... -reshuffle" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Eric_WLothian · Post by **Eric_WLothian** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 12:00 pm

Something to add to the 'alternative facts' list:

The frontrunner to become President Donald Trump’s ambassador to the European Union claims to have served as the head of a Scottish educational institution, despite the fact there is no record of its existence. Ted Malloch, a political scientist and author who has been widely tipped to secure the prestigious position in Brussels, wrote in his autobiography that his CV includes a period serving as “president of the Ancient Scottish Universities Trust”...

...He wrote that as part of the position, “my charge was to bring them into the twenty-first century financially.” However, there is no record of an Ancient Scottish Universities Trust. A spokeswoman for Universities Scotland, the representative body of Scotland’s 19 higher education institutions, told The Scotsman it had no knowledge of an organisation by that name.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/trump-s-eu ... -1-4362740

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 12:06 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:Stephen Bush is really very good indeed

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/st ... -reshuffle" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

May has shown what it takes to become leader. Or, what it doesn't take. The qualities you don't need to have.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 12:09 pm

Eric_WLothian wrote:
tinyclanger2 wrote:Yes - democracy can't work if people not engaged (or engaged only on basis of hatred of other/unknown/new)
You mean like this Tory (although his membership may not be entirely hatred-based)?
The Scottish Government has denied a Cambridge student who burnt a £20 in front of a homeless man is a “direct” relative of First Minister Nicola Sturgeon.
Student Ronald Coyne was allegedly caught on film setting fire to the banknote whilst wearing a white bow toe and tails in Cambridge. He was kicked out of the Cambridge University Conservative Association where he was the communications officer.

It has been rumoured that burning a £50 note in front of a homeless person is one of the initiation ceremonies of Oxford’s notorious Bullingdon club.

...his dad is the brother of the ex-husband of the sister of the First Minster’s husband
At this point my brain went into meltdown.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/n ... -1-4362987

Have heard the Bullingdon claim before - if true it's clearly sociopathic. People doing this kind of stuff cannot possibly represent our best interests in government. It's a basic fact (not an alternative one).

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 12:11 pm

StephenDolan wrote:
Eric_WLothian wrote:
tinyclanger2 wrote:Yes - democracy can't work if people not engaged (or engaged only on basis of hatred of other/unknown/new)
You mean like this Tory (although his membership may not be entirely hatred-based)?
The Scottish Government has denied a Cambridge student who burnt a £20 in front of a homeless man is a “direct” relative of First Minister Nicola Sturgeon.
Student Ronald Coyne was allegedly caught on film setting fire to the banknote whilst wearing a white bow toe and tails in Cambridge. He was kicked out of the Cambridge University Conservative Association where he was the communications officer.

It has been rumoured that burning a £50 note in front of a homeless person is one of the initiation ceremonies of Oxford’s notorious Bullingdon club.

...his dad is the brother of the ex-husband of the sister of the First Minster’s husband
At this point my brain went into meltdown.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/n ... -1-4362987
There's tenuous. Then there's that.

Charlemagne?

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 12:18 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:And for the muppets calling for reform of the NHS, you've had nearly 7 years and reformed it once already.

(cJA edit)

'We don't accept that'

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 12:29 pm

We've had the Renaissance.
The Age of Sail.
The Age of Reason.
The Industrial Revolution.

And now:
The Age of the Alternative Fact

Any cultural theory to cover this backward shift?

Lost Soul · Post by **Lost Soul** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 12:34 pm

tinyclanger2 wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:
Eric_WLothian wrote: You mean like this Tory (although his membership may not be entirely hatred-based)? At this point my brain went into meltdown.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/n ... -1-4362987
There's tenuous. Then there's that.
Charlemagne?

Kid ?

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 1:02 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Are you after my job, yahyah?

It is worth noting that Labour increased their share in 2 of the 4 contests where they stood, and the "resurgent" LibDems didn't stand in 2 of the 5 and came last in another (though their vote was up there too) Labour's decline in the other two can at least partly be put down to the classic tactical "squeeze".

So I wouldn't rush to make judgements about the impact (if any) of recent events myself.

(btw the circumstances of the Fylde byelection are interesting, worth a google if you haven't heard already)

Glad to see you, and am happy to be unemployed.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 1:27 pm

Ed M getting a lot of praise for his letter to Ofcom about Murdoch's BSkyb bid.
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 1:39 pm

Here's the Schools week take on the Gove column about UTCs.

Michael Gove: UTCs have failed

http://schoolsweek.co.uk/michael-gove-utcs-have-failed/

Gove said UTCs were the “biggest institutional innovation in vocational education” made by David Cameron’s government.

“Technical schools that recruited students at 14 and educated them until 19, each was meant to have a specialism, such as engineering… and a mission to inspire students who didn’t want to follow an academic path,” he said.

But he admitted that twice as many UTCs were now inadequate as outstanding, and pupils at the institutions “have lower GCSE scores, make less progress academically and acquire fewer qualifications than their contemporaries in comprehensives”.

He also warned that other schools had seen them as “destinations for underperforming children”.

That last bit has been suspected for a long while but as has been reported today, there's a problem when UTCs close - the pupils end up going back again. And sometimes pupils go back because they didn't think much of them.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 1:44 pm

I see Guido has picked on that Reform report which suggests that public sector staff could be replaced by robots.

That'll be the report that came out, reported by Schools Week, and noted on here...on Monday.

On the ball as usual I see...

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 1:55 pm

And following Gove's admission that UTCs were a mistake what do we get?

Exclusive: Government to force councils to publicise UTCs as Gove admits policy has gone "Pete Tong"

https://www.tes.com/news/school-news/br ... its-policy

The government has decided to ignore the results of its own consultation and force councils to tell parents about university technical colleges and studio schools in their area.

The plan comes as former education secretary Michael Gove has written an article setting out why he thinks the decision to set up UTCs was a mistake.

One can imagine the reaction within the DfE to Gove's intervention...

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Fri 10 Feb, 2017 2:14 pm

Mr Steel.

That’s it, sorted. Parliament has voted, so we’ve got our country back, now we’re free from Europe and at last we can do whatever we want – as long as America allows it.

We’re so much at liberty that we can appeal to a newly elected American President, “please give us some sort of agreement; anything, take a couple of toasters, we’ll mow one of your Rocky Mountains for a dollar, go on, otherwise we’re shafted”. Luckily this strong negotiating position takes place at an ideal time in history when the President is especially reasonable, calm and measured. This is how it must have felt to be in France when it was liberated in 1944.
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/bre ... 72031.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;