ohsocynical wrote:Labour Whips @labourwhips 1m1 minute ago
8 Tory MPs vote not to exempt carers from #BedroomTax: Blackman, Bone, Hollobone, McCartney, Offord, Pritchard, Rees-Mogg & Stevenson
Ah cheers.Twunts.
ohsocynical wrote:Labour Whips @labourwhips 1m1 minute ago
8 Tory MPs vote not to exempt carers from #BedroomTax: Blackman, Bone, Hollobone, McCartney, Offord, Pritchard, Rees-Mogg & Stevenson
Usual suspects. Offord was one of the dissenters last night, he was interrupted by Sir Edward Leigh, hardly a model of enlightenment himself, sho skewered him with the line that he suspected Offord was "… reading at great speed from an Israeli Government hand out…" .....bazinga!!ohsocynical wrote:Labour Whips @labourwhips 1m1 minute ago
8 Tory MPs vote not to exempt carers from #BedroomTax: Blackman, Bone, Hollobone, McCartney, Offord, Pritchard, Rees-Mogg & Stevenson
What lies did Hunt accept, I don't understand?mikems wrote:What is to stop the tories/media coming up with new trojan horse stories pre-election? If they do, Tristram will be in a poor position to fend them off, because he has accepted lies as truth and they will denounce him for 'being weak' against radical islam or whatever.
To me you can't maintain a comprehensive strategy if you are constantly making tactical retreats on ground you could not only easily defend but could also use to go on the offensive i.e. 'why is the DofE pushing lies into the media?'
Instead, in a tactical retreat, the lies are accepted.
Thanks Paul.PaulfromYorkshire wrote:I think it was by Ken ClarkeStephenDolan wrote:If I recall correctly this Government has already commissioned a report into examining how UK v English voting can be amended but the conclusion was it's not straightforward at all. Does anyone more organised than myself remember and have a link please?
I read through that report, and apart from some choice text messages between a couple of teachers there wasn't anything that gave me any more concern than I have at the creeping "Christianisation" of my kids' junior school - hymns in assembly, learning about crucifixion, visits to local churches and Nativity plays!Tubby Isaacs wrote:What lies did Hunt accept, I don't understand?mikems wrote:What is to stop the tories/media coming up with new trojan horse stories pre-election? If they do, Tristram will be in a poor position to fend them off, because he has accepted lies as truth and they will denounce him for 'being weak' against radical islam or whatever.
To me you can't maintain a comprehensive strategy if you are constantly making tactical retreats on ground you could not only easily defend but could also use to go on the offensive i.e. 'why is the DofE pushing lies into the media?'
Instead, in a tactical retreat, the lies are accepted.
The plot and letter were a fake, but two reports found evidence of "Islamism" at at least some of the schools, and the local Labour MP thought there were serious problems with some individuals too.
What are you saying is nonsense?mikems wrote:Tubby,
Hunt is treating the trojan horse nonsense as if it was true. He could have attacked the DofE for its behaviour, but hasn't.
I agree that it is Gove's system that has failed, but that is not being attacked, it is the 'failure' of the govt to take its own fabricated nonsense 'seriously' that is being attacked. Why would they take it 'seriously' when they made it up in the first place? Why doesn't Hunt understand that? It seems pretty basic to me.
Kershaw Report summary.DonutHingeParty wrote:I read through that report, and apart from some choice text messages between a couple of teachers there wasn't anything that gave me any more concern than I have at the creeping "Christianisation" of my kids' junior school - hymns in assembly, learning about crucifixion, visits to local churches and Nativity plays!Tubby Isaacs wrote:What lies did Hunt accept, I don't understand?mikems wrote:What is to stop the tories/media coming up with new trojan horse stories pre-election? If they do, Tristram will be in a poor position to fend them off, because he has accepted lies as truth and they will denounce him for 'being weak' against radical islam or whatever.
To me you can't maintain a comprehensive strategy if you are constantly making tactical retreats on ground you could not only easily defend but could also use to go on the offensive i.e. 'why is the DofE pushing lies into the media?'
Instead, in a tactical retreat, the lies are accepted.
The plot and letter were a fake, but two reports found evidence of "Islamism" at at least some of the schools, and the local Labour MP thought there were serious problems with some individuals too.
Hang, on there've been 3 reports that have shown something like a plot.mikems wrote:Tubby,
It seems to me that Hunt is opening himself up to the accusation that he too is playing politics with islamic radicalism and trying to portray the govt as 'weak' just as they are him. It's that childish and dishonest discourse that I object to.
There was no trojan horse plot in reality. There was a collusion between Gove and the media to pretend there was. That's what we should be attacking - the politicisation of education in a very nasty and unpleasant manner. Instead Labour have moved onto tory ground - as muddy as Ypres and clouded in tabloid fog - to fight them on their terms.
List here.HindleA wrote:Apparently seven Tories went against the whip and voted for the bill.
The letter (forged) certainly prompted them, but doesn't mean there's not quite a lot to be concerned about.mikems wrote:Those reports are subsequent to the 'trojan horse' bollocks, are they not? It's a post-hoc justification, if that is the term I am looking for.
I’m sitting in the staff room of an imaginary inner city comprehensive school. It seems amazing that until I lost my job I used to have so much in common with these people.
Although I really knew the truth all the time. All around the imaginary staff room there are the inevitable posters for the teaching unions peddling their frightful ideologies. They set
the tone for the imaginary conversation that we are about to have.
“But why did you do it
Katherine ?”says one long haired bearded chap with a Karl Marx lapel badge. “But why did you betray us? Look what happened to the school you used to work at”
Whaat? I try to point out that my comments had nothing to do with the school’s closure. “Much the same as Gerald Ratner’s comments had nothing to do with the collapse of his business!” he sneers.
I’m stumped
A kindly lady (I’ll call her Mrs. Clapped Out Led Down The Garden Path by Cultural Marxists for Years) says. “But Katherine, if the freedoms that you say are so wonderful then why not simply apply them to all schools?”
I try patiently to explain that schools will be free from the dictates of the Local Authority.
“But Katherine, how do the Local Authority impact on us? Its OFSTED, and the National Curriculum a new education bill every year and the constant raft of new initiatives from both parties that have left me clapped out. Anyway there’s been LMS for 23 years.”
I’m stumped
A young teacher, Miss Just Like I Used To Be Before I Stopped Reading Marxism Today says: ”What have you got against the unions, I could have lost my job last year if had not been for
them defending me just because I had an unsatisfactory in a twenty minute observation with bottom set Year 9 last year during OFSTED."
I explain that unions all have a frightful marxist ideological agenda and have blocked all attempts at reform over the years.
“So what government policies have they actually stopped?” says Mrs. Clapped Out.
I’m stumped.
I try to be reasonable “Look” , I say gaily, “Just take a look at Shiny Academy down the road. Look how well they’ve done, wouldn’t you rather work in a school like that? Can’t
you see that the progressives want to hold you back and not let you have the freedoms that the teachers there have?”
“’l’ll tell you what freedoms they had” says Mr. Low Expectations who has just sauntered into the room with his top button undone. "They were free to choose their catchment expel any children they liked, which we can’t and as a result we have had to
take a load of troublemakers. 6 years ago both schools had good ratings from OFSTED, now they are outstanding and we are in special measures. What’s the point in having special rules and secret funding deals for one school, why not have us all on a level playing field?”
I’m stumped
As I sadly walk away I see the children playing in the yard and I remember how much I loved teaching inner city kids. I try to think of a way of getting these dear dear former colleagues of mine to understand that their opposition to Conservative reforms
is based on crude manipulation by the leftist educational establishment and the progressives who want to keep them in chains. But I’m stumped.
I hope he sees it as an Opportunity not a ThreatPaulfromYorkshire wrote:George Eaton @georgeeaton 1m1 minute ago
Exclusive: Sadiq Khan appointed to lead Labour unit on Green Party threat http://bit.ly/1w6jrro" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
LOL, another surge in Green membership here we come then.PaulfromYorkshire wrote:George Eaton @georgeeaton 1m1 minute ago
Exclusive: Sadiq Khan appointed to lead Labour unit on Green Party threat http://bit.ly/1w6jrro" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Primary head teachers in England are being cold-called by "brokers", urging them to convert to academy status, a teacher's union leader has told MPs.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-296 ... witterfeed
These goons have been around for a couple of years. Some were on £1k a day, paid by the DfE.ohsocynical wrote:Primary head teachers in England are being cold-called by "brokers", urging them to convert to academy status, a teacher's union leader has told MPs.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-296 ... witterfeed
Though of course Stroud is a long standing Green hotspot and it isn't realistic to expect them not to stand there.Tubby Isaacs wrote:Khan seems reasonably smart.
I think it would be a good move to give that "wake up with x" a wide berth. It too much implies ownership of votes.
Except when there are relatively small differences- like when Greens run against Labour leftwingers, as they did v David Drew last time in Stroud. It would be absurd for some Blairite goon to patronise Green voters like that.
I'd definitely go along with all of this. He's by no means infallible, as the last article shows, but then, who is? I think it's fair to say Ed M's conference speech wasn't at all his best - it's just that the reasons it wasn't his best aren't the ones picked up on by most of the media.AnatolyKasparov wrote:Re the Owen Jones discussion here, I know this isn't a universal line amongst Labour loyalists but I have always had quite a lot of time for him.
So his latest piece being pretty much boilerplate Labour/Ed bashing was rather disappointing.
I just hope he doesn't go full-on John Harris and start burbling about UKIP's "authenticity"
I think he generally does, and I'd hope he continues to do so - when the support is merited. Certainly, off telly, he fiercely advocates getting involved with Labour. And as far as Labour's critics go, he's hardly Damian McBride, either (I have a soft spot for McBride, even though he's quite a piece of work, but today's piece was again overegging a tired Ed M. point). Maybe I'm giving Owen too much of an easy time because I, too, have become more disillusioned of late. I'd be saddened if he did turn into as cosy a member of the media as those he also criticises.I sincerely hope you are right, and that I'm just being oversensitive about the nuances of tone and that he'll come out all guns blazing in support of Ed and Labour.
Let's hope that the tone isn't as patronising as you expect. No matter who the other party is, it's always wise to accord them respect as you never know when you might find yourself allying to them (unless they're batshit crazy like UKIP in which case all bets are off).Temulkar wrote:LOL, another surge in Green membership here we come then.PaulfromYorkshire wrote:George Eaton @georgeeaton 1m1 minute ago
Exclusive: Sadiq Khan appointed to lead Labour unit on Green Party threat http://bit.ly/1w6jrro" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I expect the usual incoherent insults first, tree huggers and anti-science jibes that don't stack up, followed by faux empathy and concern trolling, all topped off with a 'If you go to bed with Natalie you will wake up with Dave' mantra endlessly repeated by PPE drones.
Hmm going on the opinions voiced here it will be a load of 'betraying the left and letting the tories in' what other tactics do you have? You can't out-green the greens and unlike UKIP we actually have costed policies that are undeniably left wing. You cant even take our policies and try and claim only you can deliver them, because your party doesnt believe in our policies.AnatolyKasparov wrote:Though of course Stroud is a long standing Green hotspot and it isn't realistic to expect them not to stand there.Tubby Isaacs wrote:Khan seems reasonably smart.
I think it would be a good move to give that "wake up with x" a wide berth. It too much implies ownership of votes.
Except when there are relatively small differences- like when Greens run against Labour leftwingers, as they did v David Drew last time in Stroud. It would be absurd for some Blairite goon to patronise Green voters like that.
(I expect Drew may be more pi**ed off with UKIP standing last time, after they had publicly stated they wouldn't and would back him instead)
Agree about Khan, though - Temulkar may want him to behave in the way he describes, but I suspect he will be rather more nuanced
Ofsted: Trojan Horse schools 'still failing to promote British values'
Ofsted says that five schools at the centre of the Trojan Horse affair in Birmingham are failing to improve, with teachers struggling to promote religious 'tolerance'
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/ed ... alues.html
I've no interest in an EU referendum, but the rest of those look pretty good to me. But you know as well as I do that Labour's response to the Greens - if it deserves the term response - is pretty much exactly the same as the Tories was to UKIP before UKIP were given the free airtime and publicity to become an electoral threat. It boils down to: "if you vote Green, you'll get Cameron. Don't waste your vote." All that's changed are two proper nouns.Temulkar wrote:I mean are Labrou going to argue against or adopt these policies? If they argue against will you blindly go on supporting them?
- £10 minimum wage
- Basic income
- Increase of the state pension from £97/week to £170/week
- Renationalisation of the railways and energy sector
- Abolition of tuition fees
- EU referendum
- Against TTIP
- Close up tax loopholes
- House of Lords reform
- 'Robin Hood tax' (Google it)
- Donations from corporations/tax avoiders etc are not accepted
- Monetary/banking reform
- Free home insulation programme
- Save the NHS from privatisation and cuts
- More liberal drug laws
- restorative/rehabilitative justice to reduce crime and re-offending
- End fractional reserve banking
- Free home insulation scheme to keep energy bills down
- Investment in public services
- No more counter-productive austerity
Well, it maybe helps that Khan is one of those who *would* like Labour to be a bit less right wing......Temulkar wrote:Hmm going on the opinions voiced here it will be a load of 'betraying the left and letting the tories in' what other tactics do you have? You can't out-green the greens and unlike UKIP we actually have costed policies that are undeniably left wing. You cant even take our policies and try and claim only you can deliver them, because your party doesnt believe in our policies.AnatolyKasparov wrote:Though of course Stroud is a long standing Green hotspot and it isn't realistic to expect them not to stand there.Tubby Isaacs wrote:Khan seems reasonably smart.
I think it would be a good move to give that "wake up with x" a wide berth. It too much implies ownership of votes.
Except when there are relatively small differences- like when Greens run against Labour leftwingers, as they did v David Drew last time in Stroud. It would be absurd for some Blairite goon to patronise Green voters like that.
(I expect Drew may be more pi**ed off with UKIP standing last time, after they had publicly stated they wouldn't and would back him instead)
Agree about Khan, though - Temulkar may want him to behave in the way he describes, but I suspect he will be rather more nuanced
A policy debate with the Greens will merely expose just how appallingly right wing Labour is, so Sadiq has to avoid that at all costs. All he has left are insults and smears.
And every insult and smear, every patronising dismissal of green voters or there concerns, and most especially every time the traitor label is thrown out will just build our popularity.
Not on the scale, and ideas like removing the VAT on insulation costs are an anathema to Labour.letsskiptotheleft wrote:I don't think free home insulation is purely a Green policy, I have had it done under Labour and this shower?
ErnstRemarx wrote:Incidentally, what (apart from the obvious) prompted the David Nuttall insight earlier? Has he been more obnoxious than usual?
I nearly missed this....
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 92465.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Oh how we laughed. UKIP are too PC for him? In what universe, etc, etc...
So, is he going to argue against his party's established position? That isn't going to work is it. The token left winger sent out to defend the rest? LOL.AnatolyKasparov wrote:Well, it maybe helps that Khan is one of those who *would* like Labour to be a bit less right wing......Temulkar wrote:Hmm going on the opinions voiced here it will be a load of 'betraying the left and letting the tories in' what other tactics do you have? You can't out-green the greens and unlike UKIP we actually have costed policies that are undeniably left wing. You cant even take our policies and try and claim only you can deliver them, because your party doesnt believe in our policies.AnatolyKasparov wrote: Though of course Stroud is a long standing Green hotspot and it isn't realistic to expect them not to stand there.
(I expect Drew may be more pi**ed off with UKIP standing last time, after they had publicly stated they wouldn't and would back him instead)
Agree about Khan, though - Temulkar may want him to behave in the way he describes, but I suspect he will be rather more nuanced
A policy debate with the Greens will merely expose just how appallingly right wing Labour is, so Sadiq has to avoid that at all costs. All he has left are insults and smears.
And every insult and smear, every patronising dismissal of green voters or there concerns, and most especially every time the traitor label is thrown out will just build our popularity.
They just don't like the idea of all the homes being insulated?Temulkar wrote:Not on the scale, and ideas like removing the VAT on insulation costs are an anathema to Labour.letsskiptotheleft wrote:I don't think free home insulation is purely a Green policy, I have had it done under Labour and this shower?
An EU referendum is pub bore stuff. Leaving the EU doesn't achieve anything that's claimed for it- pay in dues, obey the red tape, same access to foreign workers. Plus get hammered by the other 27 in renegotiations. And doubtless TTIP too.You wont offer an EU referendum
Offering a referendum isnt arguing for a Brexit. It's allowing the public to decide. I'm pro EU and am pretty sure the nation would vote to stay in by a considerable margin.Tubby Isaacs wrote:An EU referendum is pub bore stuff. Leaving the EU doesn't achieve anything that's claimed for it- pay in dues, obey the red tape, same access to foreign workers. Plus get hammered by the other 27 in renegotiations. And doubtless TTIP too.You wont offer an EU referendum
Isn't there a difference between arguing a minimum wage is bad in principle (Tory position, 98) and saying there's a problem with it being too high?How does he argue against a £10 minimum wage? by saying it will hurt business? by employing tory arguments a la 98?
The politically educated might see that there are nuances, but the public will just see you defending business interest, since it also isn't too high that argument is a win win for us.Tubby Isaacs wrote:Isn't there a difference between arguing a minimum wage is bad in principle (Tory position, 98) and saying there's a problem with it being too high?How does he argue against a £10 minimum wage? by saying it will hurt business? by employing tory arguments a la 98?
You know there is.
What's the betting that we'll get another change to the Ofsted guidelines when they realise that maybe they've gone slightly too far given that a Catholic school complained the other day.A group representing Orthodox Jewish schools has said Ofsted created a “climate of hostility” during visits by inspectors, with pupils interrogated about sex, relationships and lifestyle during a snap inspection carried out recently.
The National Association of Jewish Orthodox Schools (Najos) has written to the education secretary, Nicky Morgan, and to Ofsted in protest at the questioning. Ofsted said its staff were following national guidelines, some of which were introduced in the wake of the Trojan Horse scandal involving Islamic influence in schools in Birmingham.
Not sure why you are being so aggressive ? Is it really not possible for Greens and Labour to work closer together?Temulkar wrote:I mean are Labrou going to argue against or adopt these policies? If they argue against will you blindly go on supporting them?
- £10 minimum wage
The minimum wage offered by Labour is tied to the medium wage so would rise as that does - will yours be tied ?
- Basic income
Nice idea but before I would vote for that I'd like to know how it would/could be paid for.
- Increase of the state pension from £97/week to £170/week
See above
- Renationalisation of the railways and energy sector
See above
- Abolition of tuition fees
I understand during first term it will be dropped to 6k than reduced as finances allow
- EU referendum
I don't want one
- Against TTIP
The trade agreement TTIP id just that, a trade agreement. The controversial part, investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS), has already been "red lined" by the EU Social Democrat group, of which Labour are a member, the rest of the agreement is still under negotiation (have put some links at end about it) http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/ttip-labour-wi ... ds-1453082" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
- Close up tax loopholes
That is on everyone's mind including Labour
- House of Lords reform
Not that bothered at the moment - more important things to get sorted
- 'Robin Hood tax' (Google it)
I don't have to "google it" thanks.
- Donations from corporations/tax avoiders etc are not accepted
Don't know Labour position on that but seems fair enough to me.
- Monetary/banking reform
Banking reform is being discussed with small regional bank proposed - more to it than that, but not an area I know a lot about.
- Free home insulation programme
They did it last time
- Save the NHS from privatisation and cuts
How many times do they have to say it?
- More liberal drug laws
No thank you
- restorative/rehabilitative justice to reduce crime and re-offending
I think it was Labour brought reforms to restorative/rehabilitative justice
- End fractional reserve banking
See banking reforms above
- Free home insulation scheme to keep energy bills down
Is that for 2nd homes
- Investment in public services
Need to be a bit more specific,
- No more counter-productive austerity
Much as we would like to we can't just "forget" our debts but the proposed house building will help kick start the economy and though growth help limit austerity
I'm sure there are lots of people who would like to see more cooperation between the Greens and Labour, while recognising that some like Temulkar really don't.AngryAsWell wrote:Not sure why you are being so aggressive ? Is it really not possible for Greens and Labour to work closer together?Temulkar wrote:I mean are Labrou going to argue against or adopt these policies? If they argue against will you blindly go on supporting them?
- £10 minimum wage
The minimum wage offered by Labour is tied to the medium wage so would rise as that does - will yours be tied ?
- Basic income
Nice idea but before I would vote for that I'd like to know how it would/could be paid for.
- Increase of the state pension from £97/week to £170/week
See above
- Renationalisation of the railways and energy sector
See above
- Abolition of tuition fees
I understand during first term it will be dropped to 6k than reduced as finances allow
- EU referendum
I don't want one
- Against TTIP
The trade agreement TTIP id just that, a trade agreement. The controversial part, investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS), has already been "red lined" by the EU Social Democrat group, of which Labour are a member, the rest of the agreement is still under negotiation (have put some links at end about it) http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/ttip-labour-wi ... ds-1453082" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
- Close up tax loopholes
That is on everyone's mind including Labour
- House of Lords reform
Not that bothered at the moment - more important things to get sorted
- 'Robin Hood tax' (Google it)
I don't have to "google it" thanks.
- Donations from corporations/tax avoiders etc are not accepted
Don't know Labour position on that but seems fair enough to me.
- Monetary/banking reform
Banking reform is being discussed with small regional bank proposed - more to it than that, but not an area I know a lot about.
- Free home insulation programme
They did it last time
- Save the NHS from privatisation and cuts
How many times do they have to say it?
- More liberal drug laws
No thank you
- restorative/rehabilitative justice to reduce crime and re-offending
I think it was Labour brought reforms to restorative/rehabilitative justice
- End fractional reserve banking
See banking reforms above
- Free home insulation scheme to keep energy bills down
Is that for 2nd homes
- Investment in public services
Need to be a bit more specific,
- No more counter-productive austerity
Much as we would like to we can't just "forget" our debts but the proposed house building will help kick start the economy and though growth help limit austerity
TTIP links
The Regulatory Part http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... 151605.pdf
State of Play of TTIP negotiations after the 6th round1 29 July 2014 http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... 152699.pdf
Trade policy and you http://ec.europa.eu/trade/trade-policy-and-you/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Can't see any virtue in having a referendum for its own sake, unless people can make a serious case for leaving. Better surely just to make the case honestly- which is what Greens are supposed to be about.Temulkar wrote:Offering a referendum isnt arguing for a Brexit. It's allowing the public to decide. I'm pro EU and am pretty sure the nation would vote to stay in by a considerable margin.Tubby Isaacs wrote:An EU referendum is pub bore stuff. Leaving the EU doesn't achieve anything that's claimed for it- pay in dues, obey the red tape, same access to foreign workers. Plus get hammered by the other 27 in renegotiations. And doubtless TTIP too.You wont offer an EU referendum
Not sure if it will be in the manifesto but the proposal to reduce VAT on new build and house extensions to 5% has been discussed in the policy review submissions.Temulkar wrote:Not on the scale, and ideas like removing the VAT on insulation costs are an anathema to Labour.letsskiptotheleft wrote:I don't think free home insulation is purely a Green policy, I have had it done under Labour and this shower?