Wednesday 25th November 2015

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 10:37 pm

ohsocynical wrote:We'd arrived at the hospital just as George was talking about funding for mental health...I've not seen much comment on it on Twitter. Anyone know what the figures he was throwing around actually mean?

They are putting money in for talking therapies. Translated this means CBT delivered by phone or computer, six sessions per person.

What it won't do is provide the inpatient beds needed for people in reafl meltdown who usually wind up in the prison system, or with family who are unsure of how to care for them, and unable to get medical treatment for them because unless they volunteer for treatment as adults and get themselves to a surgery no one will look at them. Unless they get violent, then they may be sectioned. Or wind up on a charge.

It also is no substitute for proper expert long term psychological counselling, or a proper diagnosis and medical treatment where needed.

discordantharmony · Post by **discordantharmony** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 10:38 pm

HindleA wrote:Dear Osborne and associated patronising barely human beings.You have a skewed view of your own imaginations.As much as the "vulnerable"(ie those you deliberately made so ,to prove you right)are grateful for a two second non mention of "support" in lieu of adequate,cost saving income to attend to assessed sickness/disability needs.;conditional support,predicated on penalisation,first,ask questions later(100 a week visitations I believe was the McVey figure to ascertain whether the penalisation should stand),it would be more honest(I understand your difficulty with such a concept)to outline that you are to lop off a third off the income of the sick/disabled.Inveterate deceitful coward that you are you avoided that.Nor indeed the parents of pre school children,regardless of situation,similarly conditionally supported with,as yet,non agreed or indeed adequately evident in any way,childcare.1.3 million is your figure,are there any others,that we should know about?

THIS, THIS and thrice THIS

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 10:43 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
seeingclearly wrote:
rebeccariots2 wrote: How depressing.
Is this true though? GO made a big thing of it so unless they weren't paying sttention at all I don't see how they could have missed it.
Well there's a longish thread under Alex Andreou's tweet with Isabel Hardman and others participating. She and a couple of other journalists are saying it was Blairite MPs bringing it to their attention - and one of them saying the story, as far as they are concerned, is the 'moderates' reaction to McDonnell and subsequent briefing to journalists ... i.e. it's a story because of the 'moderates' reaction. That's what I find so depressing.

That is really depressing. I've just been btl on an article about it, and there was a fairly even split between those who found it funny, and those who didn't get it at all.

I don't think its a story at all, it is not really newsworthy. I'd have been more concerned about the note the tories are said to have put out and whether the subject of the exchange will say their felings are hurt. Do these journos have to make a story of it because blairites want themto?

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 10:45 pm

@discordantharmony

"Typing rapid fire riposte Therapy"

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 10:54 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
James Lyons Retweeted
Conor Pope ‏@Conorpope 5h5 hours ago
Conor Pope Retweeted Alex Andreou
Having sat in the press gallery, can confirm no journos had noticed the Mao bit until Blairite MPs started briefing.

Alex Andreou
‏@sturdyAlex
If Blairite MPs don't want the Mao gaffe to be the story - and this is JUST AN IDEA - perhaps stop briefing the right wing press about it.

Isabel Hardman ‏@IsabelHardman 5h5 hours ago
@sturdyAlex we hadn’t noticed it until the Blairites told us about it
How depressing.

Worth considering this "Blairites" thing is over hyped. Lots of people have interest in exaggerating the discord. They include people like Rentoul and Hodges as Blairites.

It was quite a moment. No way the Tories and media would have let that go.

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 10:55 pm

HindleA wrote:"investing an additional £600 million in mental health services. Additional investment will mean that significantly more people will have access to talking therapies every year by 2020. NHS England’s Mental Health Taskforce will report in early 2016 and the government will work with them to set out transformative plans, including for perinatal mental health and coverage of crisis care"

I don't believe they could deliver anything transformative in that budget. It is a drop in the ocean considering the amount of people with severely neglected mental health conditions, some have waited years for something appropriate, others now addicted to medications that have never been properly prescribed and which have long term damaging effects.

The ones who may benefit are the ones people might have sympathy for, those with post natal depression, and the very young.

You have to establish the services and then multidisciplinary teams are needed for crisis care, they barely exist these days.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 10:57 pm

seeingclearly wrote:
rebeccariots2 wrote:
James Lyons Retweeted
Conor Pope ‏@Conorpope 5h5 hours ago
Conor Pope Retweeted Alex Andreou
Having sat in the press gallery, can confirm no journos had noticed the Mao bit until Blairite MPs started briefing.

Alex Andreou
‏@sturdyAlex
If Blairite MPs don't want the Mao gaffe to be the story - and this is JUST AN IDEA - perhaps stop briefing the right wing press about it.

Isabel Hardman ‏@IsabelHardman 5h5 hours ago
@sturdyAlex we hadn’t noticed it until the Blairites told us about it
How depressing.
Is this true though? GO made a big thing of it so unless they weren't paying sttention at all I don't see how they could have missed it.

Yeah, exactly.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 10:59 pm

Oh dear, this isn't going away is it?

Ignoring a written allegation for a year?

Awful.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 11:08 pm

George Eaton ‏@georgeeaton 5h5 hours ago
Shadow cabinet member tells me increasing expectation of a free vote on Syria.

George Eaton ‏@georgeeaton 5h5 hours ago
"We can't rush to war in Syria without a plan for peace" - @LiamByrneMP sounds a sceptical note: http://bit.ly/1NtaByU" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

discordantharmony · Post by **discordantharmony** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 11:12 pm

HindleA wrote:@discordantharmony

"Typing rapid fire riposte Therapy"

Sure is better than being raped from the age of 4 and then passed on as a sexual plaything till the age of 11. But Hey-ho........

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 11:19 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
George Eaton ‏@georgeeaton 5h5 hours ago
Shadow cabinet member tells me increasing expectation of a free vote on Syria.

George Eaton ‏@georgeeaton 5h5 hours ago
"We can't rush to war in Syria without a plan for peace" - @LiamByrneMP sounds a sceptical note: http://bit.ly/1NtaByU" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Just reading about the complexity of the Russia/Turkey situation and which forces werre where in just that small part of Syria, and how more troops/airpower etc. could create even more confusion makes me think it would be much wiser to not rush in. Hoever some have compelling reasons for wanting to, not in the least to do with saving lives or doing anything humanitarian atall. Theres some good background in the Canary.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 11:19 pm

Wow. There's been some rumblings about the utter chaos that is teacher training and the way that the Gove/Morgan model of wanting schools to prevail instead of through universities...but this...unviable apparently according to a tweet further down.

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 11:19 pm

Goodnight, everyone.
love,
cJA

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 11:20 pm

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015 ... opposition" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

However, heroic assumptions also have to be made about the numbers that will be on UC by the end of the parliament. Tucked away on p137 of the OBR report is a table showing seven successive forecasts to the numbers on UC. In March 2013, the caseload was forecast to be 7.5m by 2018-19, and now that forecast for the same year is 2.5m.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 11:24 pm

Long day,spent far roo much time on here,and thus neglecting the Quotations from Chairman Mao Tse-Tuna.good night petty bourgeios imperialist reactionary running dogs.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 11:30 pm

HindleA wrote:Therefore Osborne utteration pure bollox.

Possibly comment of the day there HindleA.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 11:31 pm

I have just changed it!

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 11:37 pm

HindleA wrote:http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015 ... opposition

However, heroic assumptions also have to be made about the numbers that will be on UC by the end of the parliament. Tucked away on p137 of the OBR report is a table showing seven successive forecasts to the numbers on UC. In March 2013, the caseload was forecast to be 7.5m by 2018-19, and now that forecast for the same year is 2.5m.

The big savings seem to come with single parents with kids. I assume they get housing benefit as well in lots of cases.

What's the chance that many of those will be on UC?

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 11:38 pm

If people haven't been,I do recommend visiting the Terracotta Army at Xian.We supposedly met one of the peasants that discovered them and got his signature,of course it could have been anybody,but perhaps delusion in this case acceptable.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 11:39 pm

So basically Oxbridge out, Lord Harris in, as far of training teachers goes?

How does that square with the Gove view of Oxbridge being the summit?

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 11:42 pm

http://schoolsweek.co.uk/universities-c ... er-pe-ban/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

More on training. History PGCEs are 75% full.

Only 238 out 816 of history training places to be done via universities. Twice as many people have so far applied for university training as schools training.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 11:43 pm

Load more academies coming.

Sixth form colleges. If they do so, they get better VAT treatment.

Incredible. Not even the pretence of choice.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 11:44 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:So basically Oxbridge out, Lord Harris in, as far of training teachers goes?

How does that square with the Gove view of Oxbridge being the summit?

Maybe he assumed that all teachers were trained at teacher training colleges and didn't actually know that at they hadn't existed for a few decades.

Pure ideology. I wish some of those who thought that Gove was so wonderful might actually look at where at where his policies have led and pause for thought. they won't though I know.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 11:45 pm

£23bn will be spent on opening new free schools and maintaining existing schools

Osborne announced £23bn capital investment over the course of the Parliament to open 500 free schools and rebuild and refurbish over 500 more.

That's £23m a school, isn't it? And only half of them new builds.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 11:49 pm

晚安

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 11:49 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:http://schoolsweek.co.uk/universities-c ... er-pe-ban/

More on training. History PGCEs are 75% full.

Only 238 out 816 of history training places to be done via universities. Twice as many people have so far applied for university training as schools training.

"What do universities have anyway? Well apart from world-renowned academic experts in their speciality. Apart from that. Oh, and apart from education experts. What else? Nothing. Schools clearly better then for teacher training."

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 11:49 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:So basically Oxbridge out, Lord Harris in, as far of training teachers goes?

How does that square with the Gove view of Oxbridge being the summit?
Maybe he assumed that all teachers were trained at teacher training colleges and didn't actually know that at they hadn't existed for a few decades.

Pure ideology. I wish some of those who thought that Gove was so wonderful might actually look at where at where his policies have led and pause for thought. they won't though I know.

I'd have thought too that universities doing it was good for recruitment. Undergraduates can get to know people training as teachers very easily, and will have confidence in the institution. I'd find that more reassuring than having to take a punt on some academy chain.

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 11:51 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
HindleA wrote:http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015 ... opposition

However, heroic assumptions also have to be made about the numbers that will be on UC by the end of the parliament. Tucked away on p137 of the OBR report is a table showing seven successive forecasts to the numbers on UC. In March 2013, the caseload was forecast to be 7.5m by 2018-19, and now that forecast for the same year is 2.5m.
The big savings seem to come with single parents with kids. I assume they get housing benefit as well in lots of cases.

What's the chance that many of those will be on UC?

I don't yhink they've migrated many with complex claims yet, mostly single people still with small complex cohorts to test the system, they are still allowed a choice to return to old style benefits if it isn't eorking out for them. But yes, sungle parents are an easy target, they have to be in good jobs to even stand a chance of a mortgage. It has been rolled out to quite a lot of benefit offices, but they aren't moving fast on it, I doubt they will make much headway thus parliament, they havent really got the tax thing sorted out yet, and there will be lots of tax workers (what is left of them) to train. 2.5 million looks optimistic. But hey. IDS still gets to play. sh

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 11:51 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:http://schoolsweek.co.uk/universities-c ... er-pe-ban/

More on training. History PGCEs are 75% full.

Only 238 out 816 of history training places to be done via universities. Twice as many people have so far applied for university training as schools training.
"What do universities have anyway? Well apart from world-renowned academic experts in their speciality. Apart from that. Oh, and apart from education experts. What else? Nothing. Schools clearly better then for teacher training."

I can't see that it's in a school's interest to do anything but sweat as much out of you in the training year.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 11:56 pm

seeingclearly wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
HindleA wrote:http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015 ... opposition

However, heroic assumptions also have to be made about the numbers that will be on UC by the end of the parliament. Tucked away on p137 of the OBR report is a table showing seven successive forecasts to the numbers on UC. In March 2013, the caseload was forecast to be 7.5m by 2018-19, and now that forecast for the same year is 2.5m.
The big savings seem to come with single parents with kids. I assume they get housing benefit as well in lots of cases.

What's the chance that many of those will be on UC?
I don't yhink they've migrated many with complex claims yet, mostly single people still with small complex cohorts to test the system, they are still allowed a choice to return to old style benefits if it isn't eorking out for them. But yes, sungle parents are an easy target, they have to be in good jobs to even stand a chance of a mortgage. It has been rolled out to quite a lot of benefit offices, but they aren't moving fast on it, I doubt they will make much headway thus parliament, they havent really got the tax thing sorted out yet, and there will be lots of tax workers (what is left of them) to train. 2.5 million looks optimistic. But hey. IDS still gets to play. sh

That's what I suspected. But I didn't know you could back on the old system if it wasn't working out. I thought the point was that it wasn't being rushed in- remember IDS saying that every time he was asked to explain the delays?

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Thu 26 Nov, 2015 12:02 am

Oh the irony...a course where trainee teachers read the very people that Gove and Gibb swear by...and it's closing because of their policies.

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Thu 26 Nov, 2015 12:02 am

HindleA wrote:晚安

wǎn ān to you too

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Thu 26 Nov, 2015 12:04 am

Wait.

The West London Free School? Isn't there someone reasonably well-known connected with that? Someone who is a Gove cheerleader?

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Thu 26 Nov, 2015 12:07 am

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
seeingclearly wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote: The big savings seem to come with single parents with kids. I assume they get housing benefit as well in lots of cases.

What's the chance that many of those will be on UC?
I don't yhink they've migrated many with complex claims yet, mostly single people still with small complex cohorts to test the system, they are still allowed a choice to return to old style benefits if it isn't eorking out for them. But yes, sungle parents are an easy target, they have to be in good jobs to even stand a chance of a mortgage. It has been rolled out to quite a lot of benefit offices, but they aren't moving fast on it, I doubt they will make much headway thus parliament, they havent really got the tax thing sorted out yet, and there will be lots of tax workers (what is left of them) to train. 2.5 million looks optimistic. But hey. IDS still gets to play. sh
That's what I suspected. But I didn't know you could back on the old system if it wasn't working out. I thought the point was that it wasn't being rushed in- remember IDS saying that every time he was asked to explain the delays?

The hardware will be obsolete before they get it running in realtime

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Thu 26 Nov, 2015 12:09 am

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Thu 26 Nov, 2015 12:11 am

Last tweet nails it - bonkers priorities just because it was in the manifesto.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Thu 26 Nov, 2015 12:16 am

HindleA wrote:FWIW I have been signing on weekly for a couple of weeks-JSA contributory (not actually receiving anything ,but that is another story)I don't think that comes under UC.It was announced that UC was available as from last week,I didn't notice anything different.I asked if the computer,ever went down,and she said there was a manual way and if need be a method of paying everybody,regardless if they signed on or not.

So running two systems, even for the simplest benefit?

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Thu 26 Nov, 2015 12:27 am

Not sure if actually running two systems as such,but she just said "fill in form manually "if computer not working and she lost me how to pay everybody due.I am not sure if I come under UC,I claimed JSA a couple of weeks ago and nothings changed,they have only just began,supposedly to accept UC claims.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Thu 26 Nov, 2015 12:31 am

Being as clear as mud,sorry.As far as I know JSA(contributory) doesn't come under UC,but in the limited time I have been there I haven't noticed anything different in the process of others.

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Thu 26 Nov, 2015 1:22 am

HindleA wrote:Not sure if actually running two systems as such,but she just said "fill in form manually "if computer not working and she lost me how to pay everybody due.I am not sure if I come under UC,I claimed JSA a couple of weeks ago and nothings changed,they have only just began,supposedly to accept UC claims.

This echoes what we have been hearing from other places where UC is more advanced, people filling in forms manually and details having to be input later, which indicates some glitches to say the least. As UC is slightly different I would guess any paperwork you get should indicate ehich you are on. At the beginning of the year people were being told before being put on UC, I don't know whether that is still the case. There was recently a quite sudden rollout to a fairly large number of places. You seem to be in one of those areas. I don't think you will see much difference, as the software will be running (if at all) in the background. You might notice a difference in conditionality if you are on UC, the job search criteria are more prescriptive (more hours to record) and your claimant agreement thing will be less flexible.

Your warriors sent me off to the Dunhuang region, I'll never get there now, but wish I could.