Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » MPs’ proxy voting can and should go further

SystemSystem Posts: 5,841
edited March 10 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » MPs’ proxy voting can and should go further

Parliament took another small step towards the 21st Century last month, when it voted without opposition to allow MPs who are new parents to nominate a colleague to cast proxy votes on their behalf, meaning that they can more meaningfully take maternity or paternity leave without having to worry too much about the effect that doing so would have on the government’s majority.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • CD13CD13 Posts: 4,346
    "It’s not unreasonable, however, for the voters to expect their voice to be heard in Westminster."

    Not for some Remainers. And Brexit happens when they ignore that voice. Do I win the competition to get Brexit into the thread?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,826
    edited March 10
    Second?

    One MP voting for another is clearly not ideal and potentially open to abuse. It would have been better to leave the MP responsible for their own decision and allow them an absentee vote (which is effectively what is happening anyway, aside from the transfer in responsibility).
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,611
    How much of a problem has it been in practice though, with "pairing" having been part of the Westminster wallpaper as long as I can recall?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,611
    And I'd just add that these "proxy" votes need to be properly recorded against the voting record of that MP giving the proxy, so that we can know their true voting stand whilst an MP.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 32,266
    IanB2 said:

    Second?

    One MP voting for another is clearly not ideal and potentially open to abuse. It would have been better to leave the MP responsible for their own decision and allow them an absentee vote (which is effectively what is happening anyway, aside from the transfer in responsibility).

    Agreed. The example of O'Mara is an interesting one. If a member is to ashamed to show their face in Parliament, their party should not be able to rely on their vote via a proxy.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,535
    Hmm. In theory I can see a lot of merit in this. In practice I can imagine whips gathering proxies into their own hands to avoid awkward rebellions.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 8,023
    edited March 10
    First ... to go off-topic. There's been a coup at the BBC's news site and the Hinds education story has been removed from the front page in the last few minutes.

    Ed Sec Hinds was recently given a big up by JRM, according to one pb poster.

    The education secretary will promise to cut teachers' workload in an attempt to resolve a recruitment crisis in England's schools.

    Damian Hinds will tell head teachers that there will be no more new changes to primary tests, GCSEs or A-levels.

    For five successive years, recruitment targets for teaching have been missed


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-43345857

    We did try to tell Gove's pb fan club that while he was arguing about the history syllabus with actual historians, he'd taken his eye off the ball. No-one was doing the day job so he left behind a shortage of teachers and a shortage of school places.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,483
    Good morning, everyone.

    Interesting article, Mr. Herdson, but I vehemently disagree with one implication. The notion a parliament should be demographically representative of the electorate is daft. Do we want half of our legislators to have below average intelligence? Are there sufficient numbers of the obese to accurately represent modern Britain?
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 10,344
    I think absentee voting for health reasons certified by a doctor would be widely accepted as reasonable. The MP could watch the debate from home if desired, and frankly MPs can't watch most debates that they vote on anyway. Havbing a deputy seems to me more risky, unless specifically elected in that capacity - i.e. people would stand as a team.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 11,036

    Good morning, everyone.

    Interesting article,Do we want half of our legislators to have below average intelligence? ?


    Err;I thought some at least of our posters thought that was already the case!

  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 11,036

    First ... to go off-topic. There's been a coup at the BBC's news site and the Hinds education story has been removed from the front page in the last few minutes.

    Ed Sec Hinds was recently given a big up by JRM, according to one pb poster.

    The education secretary will promise to cut teachers' workload in an attempt to resolve a recruitment crisis in England's schools.

    Damian Hinds will tell head teachers that there will be no more new changes to primary tests, GCSEs or A-levels.

    For five successive years, recruitment targets for teaching have been missed


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-43345857

    We did try to tell Gove's pb fan club that while he was arguing about the history syllabus with actual historians, he'd taken his eye off the ball. No-one was doing the day job so he left behind a shortage of teachers and a shortage of school places.

    Mr L, I can still access that story.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 17,648
    We want ideas not identities to be the focus of policy.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 13,789

    Good morning, everyone.

    Interesting article, Mr. Herdson, but I vehemently disagree with one implication. The notion a parliament should be demographically representative of the electorate is daft. Do we want half of our legislators to have below average intelligence? Are there sufficient numbers of the obese to accurately represent modern Britain?

    No, obviously not - but there should be some. Not all intelligence is intellectual and it's likely that people with a lower-than-average intelligence will have had a very different life-story from an Oxbridge-educated lawyer. They might not be a great legislative draftsman (or woman) but parliament employs people to help out with that sort of thing. Sometimes, people like that are the ones who cut through to the nub of an argument and don't get tied down with the details or hung up on ironing out logical inconsistencies in what is an imperfect and illogical world.

    There is a considerable benefit to having a parliament that includes many voices from people with many different experiences. While we shouldn't fetishise, for example, a 50/50 male-female split, nor would it be healthy to have it 80/20, say.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 17,648
    Look at these utter crackpots - Mr Palmer must surely be embarrassed by this Ludditery ? Wait until Corbyn sees an amazon warehouse...

  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 13,789

    I think absentee voting for health reasons certified by a doctor would be widely accepted as reasonable. The MP could watch the debate from home if desired, and frankly MPs can't watch most debates that they vote on anyway. Havbing a deputy seems to me more risky, unless specifically elected in that capacity - i.e. people would stand as a team.

    But as you know Nick, there's a lot more to an MPs job than voting.

    I agree that appointing a deputy would be an inherently risky thing: there'd need to be clear and robust safeguards. That's why I suggested a confirmatory vote in the Commons and time-limits. But I've not given those things deep thought and I'm sure the safeguards could be improved upon.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,826

    Good morning, everyone.

    Interesting article,Do we want half of our legislators to have below average intelligence? ?


    Err;I thought some at least of our posters thought that was already the case!

    Surely we should aim for a bigger improvement than that......?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,867

    We did try to tell Gove's pb fan club that while he was arguing about the history syllabus with actual historians, he'd taken his eye off the ball. No-one was doing the day job so he left behind a shortage of teachers and a shortage of school places.

    And perhaps if he had listened to these people rather than assuming he was right and everyone else was wrong the exams would not be the monumental clusterfuck they have turned into.

    Maybe two months before the exams start I would have the marking criteria, for example. Instead we have OFQUAL frantically rewriting it after they realised that their former chief was so thick she had actually made it easier to get a top grade than a pass.

    And the thickhead in question is now head of OFSTED - a non-teacher and cataclysmically incompetent administrator. What could possibly go wrong?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,867

    Do we want half of our legislators to have below average intelligence? Are there sufficient numbers of the obese to accurately represent modern Britain?

    Clearly we do not want proportionate representation by fat and stupid MPs. If that were the case we would vote for far fewer of them.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    An interesting development, and a thought-provoking thread as usual from David on a Saturday morning.

    A more general leave-of-absence rule is likely to be one of those things that sounds like a good idea in theory, but could work differently in practice as party management get involved in things. How would an independent MP be replaced, for example?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    Jared O’Mara probably wasn’t expecting to be elected, and should really have stood aside if he wasn’t interested in turning up. A proper recall process would be useful in such situations.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 8,023
    TGOHF said:

    Look at these utter crackpots - Mr Palmer must surely be embarrassed by this Ludditery ? Wait until Corbyn sees an amazon warehouse...

    Microsoft founder Bill Gates floated the idea of taxing robots, which is probably where Corbyn heard it.
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,180
    TGOHF said:

    Look at these utter crackpots - Mr Palmer must surely be embarrassed by this Ludditery ? Wait until Corbyn sees an amazon warehouse...

    Has he considered taxing looms to restore work to the weavers? Or cash machines to return employment to bank clerks?
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 8,082
    edited March 10

    TGOHF said:

    Look at these utter crackpots - Mr Palmer must surely be embarrassed by this Ludditery ? Wait until Corbyn sees an amazon warehouse...

    Microsoft founder Bill Gates floated the idea of taxing robots, which is probably where Corbyn heard it.
    Indeed, it's not as silly as you think, especially when you consider that humans are taxed for the same job and that warps the market.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,483
    Mr. Herdson, other demographics are iffy too. The notion of all-women shortlists (or the mooted all-black shortlists) are discriminatory against one group and patronising towards another. It's why gender quotas for boards are a dumb idea, because then you'd never know which women were there on merit and which because they'd ticked the right demographic box.

    I absolutely do not buy the concept that demographic representation is good or bad in and of itself, and it is not something we should aim for. Merit should be the only factor. Politically correct box-ticking leads to idiots like Sayeeda "militant secularists" Warsi getting promoted beyond reason.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,611
    Elliot said:

    TGOHF said:

    Look at these utter crackpots - Mr Palmer must surely be embarrassed by this Ludditery ? Wait until Corbyn sees an amazon warehouse...

    Has he considered taxing looms to restore work to the weavers? Or cash machines to return employment to bank clerks?
    Surely he should simply urge all his supporters not to use them?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    edited March 10
    Elliot said:

    TGOHF said:

    Look at these utter crackpots - Mr Palmer must surely be embarrassed by this Ludditery ? Wait until Corbyn sees an amazon warehouse...

    Has he considered taxing looms to restore work to the weavers? Or cash machines to return employment to bank clerks?
    Taxing self service tills will simply speed up the development of the next generation technology that makes them redundant. Amazon just opened an experimental store with no tills at all.
    http://money.cnn.com/2018/01/26/technology/amazon-go-store/index.html
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,441
    Elliot said:

    TGOHF said:

    Look at these utter crackpots - Mr Palmer must surely be embarrassed by this Ludditery ? Wait until Corbyn sees an amazon warehouse...

    Has he considered taxing looms to restore work to the weavers? Or cash machines to return employment to bank clerks?
    To be fair to Corbyn....

    This was a motion passed by St Ives CLP and will be “put to the leadership”
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,441
    Jonathan said:

    TGOHF said:

    Look at these utter crackpots - Mr Palmer must surely be embarrassed by this Ludditery ? Wait until Corbyn sees an amazon warehouse...

    Microsoft founder Bill Gates floated the idea of taxing robots, which is probably where Corbyn heard it.
    Indeed, it's not as silly as you think, especially when you consider that humans are taxed for the same job and that warps the market.
    How about we stop taxing jobs?
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 1,840
    ‪Just been watching Macron in India. He has both Tricolour and EU flag behind him. Good visual demo of how EU membership enhances a country's international status.‬
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,441

    ‪Just been watching Macron in India. He has both Tricolour and EU flag behind him. Good visual demo of how EU membership enhances a country's international status.‬

    I’ve got lots of cool flags you can use if you put that much store by them
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,535
    At a time when employment levels are at record highs but productivity languishes, encouraging inefficiencies by taxing the use of labour-saving machinery looks very odd.

    Instead, Britain needs to give much greater incentives for employers to train staff, particularly those with lower levels of education. Governments of all stripes have tried solving inequality by bunging money at the poorest - and that’s no bad thing - but the best long term fix for the poorest is to make them more valuable. Helping them get more valuable skills would assist with that.
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 3,402
    Jonathan said:

    TGOHF said:

    Look at these utter crackpots - Mr Palmer must surely be embarrassed by this Ludditery ? Wait until Corbyn sees an amazon warehouse...

    Microsoft founder Bill Gates floated the idea of taxing robots, which is probably where Corbyn heard it.
    Indeed, it's not as silly as you think, especially when you consider that humans are taxed for the same job and that warps the market.
    You don’t know how silly I think it is. Very very very is the answer. He’d have banned electric trains because it put the firemen out of a job, or the bloke with a red flag walking in front of cars, the list is endless.

    It’s crackpottery pure and simple.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 18,485
    Charles said:

    ‪Just been watching Macron in India. He has both Tricolour and EU flag behind him. Good visual demo of how EU membership enhances a country's international status.‬

    I’ve got lots of cool flags you can use if you put that much store by them
    It’s what they symbolise that matters. Any European country that does not have the self-confidence to fly the EU flag is making a choice to diminish itself.
  • ‪Just been watching Macron in India. He has both Tricolour and EU flag behind him. Good visual demo of how EU membership enhances a country's international status.‬

    I thought flag waving was only for racist nationalistic xenophobes?
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 8,082
    welshowl said:

    Jonathan said:

    TGOHF said:

    Look at these utter crackpots - Mr Palmer must surely be embarrassed by this Ludditery ? Wait until Corbyn sees an amazon warehouse...

    Microsoft founder Bill Gates floated the idea of taxing robots, which is probably where Corbyn heard it.
    Indeed, it's not as silly as you think, especially when you consider that humans are taxed for the same job and that warps the market.
    You don’t know how silly I think it is. Very very very is the answer. He’d have banned electric trains because it put the firemen out of a job, or the bloke with a red flag walking in front of cars, the list is endless.

    It’s crackpottery pure and simple.
    Firstly, Corbyn has nothing to do with this, as Charles said it's a motion from a single CLP.
    Secondly, some very clever people are talking about this idea wrt AI.

    It's more interesting that you think.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,483
    Mr. Glenn, ha, reminds me of the line about needing self-confidence to be willing to let yourself be bound in S&M.

    Except, of course, the average domme doesn't charge £10bn a year.

    Putting together a pre-season ramble. I may have one more, depending how markets etc look ahead of the season's start, then it'll be the three articles per weekend format you all know and love/despise/ignore.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,535
    Jonathan said:

    welshowl said:

    Jonathan said:

    TGOHF said:

    Look at these utter crackpots - Mr Palmer must surely be embarrassed by this Ludditery ? Wait until Corbyn sees an amazon warehouse...

    Microsoft founder Bill Gates floated the idea of taxing robots, which is probably where Corbyn heard it.
    Indeed, it's not as silly as you think, especially when you consider that humans are taxed for the same job and that warps the market.
    You don’t know how silly I think it is. Very very very is the answer. He’d have banned electric trains because it put the firemen out of a job, or the bloke with a red flag walking in front of cars, the list is endless.

    It’s crackpottery pure and simple.
    Firstly, Corbyn has nothing to do with this, as Charles said it's a motion from a single CLP.
    Secondly, some very clever people are talking about this idea wrt AI.

    It's more interesting that you think.
    There might be something in the idea if there were mass unemployment. There isn’t, at least not in Britain.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,611
    While we are on tricolour flags....I never knew all those Scots with an Alba car sticker were signalling their allegiance to a republic that lasted all of two days! There's a lesson from history there.....

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_Alba
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,434
    welshowl said:

    Jonathan said:

    TGOHF said:

    Look at these utter crackpots - Mr Palmer must surely be embarrassed by this Ludditery ? Wait until Corbyn sees an amazon warehouse...

    Microsoft founder Bill Gates floated the idea of taxing robots, which is probably where Corbyn heard it.
    Indeed, it's not as silly as you think, especially when you consider that humans are taxed for the same job and that warps the market.
    You don’t know how silly I think it is. Very very very is the answer. He’d have banned electric trains because it put the firemen out of a job, or the bloke with a red flag walking in front of cars, the list is endless.

    It’s crackpottery pure and simple.
    Do you get The Week magazine? the long bit on the last 2 pages is an excerpt from a book by James Bloodworth, about working in an Amazon warehouse, and makes you think automation can't come quick enough. I am seriously thinking it isn't morally right to buy stuff from Amazon.

    Incidentally, pretty much all 1200 workers at the warehouse are East European, to the extent a Romanian asks him what an English bloke is doing working there.
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,180
    Jonathan said:

    welshowl said:

    Jonathan said:

    TGOHF said:

    Look at these utter crackpots - Mr Palmer must surely be embarrassed by this Ludditery ? Wait until Corbyn sees an amazon warehouse...

    Microsoft founder Bill Gates floated the idea of taxing robots, which is probably where Corbyn heard it.
    Indeed, it's not as silly as you think, especially when you consider that humans are taxed for the same job and that warps the market.
    You don’t know how silly I think it is. Very very very is the answer. He’d have banned electric trains because it put the firemen out of a job, or the bloke with a red flag walking in front of cars, the list is endless.

    It’s crackpottery pure and simple.
    Firstly, Corbyn has nothing to do with this, as Charles said it's a motion from a single CLP.
    Secondly, some very clever people are talking about this idea wrt AI.

    It's more interesting that you think.
    We should probably be limiting email use to protect postal workers. And banning JCBs to help hole diggers.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 9,930

    Charles said:

    ‪Just been watching Macron in India. He has both Tricolour and EU flag behind him. Good visual demo of how EU membership enhances a country's international status.‬

    I’ve got lots of cool flags you can use if you put that much store by them
    It’s what they symbolise that matters. Any European country that does not have the self-confidence to fly the EU flag is making a choice to diminish itself.
    Why?

    Countries belonging to Nato don’t routinely put up a flag or Nato sign next to their national flag. Does that diminish them?

    If the EU made a rule that only the EU flag could be flown when a member state’s PM went abroad, do you think that (a) countries like France would agree and (b) having the EU flag only would diminish or enhance a country’s stature?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,611
    Charles said:

    Elliot said:

    TGOHF said:

    Look at these utter crackpots - Mr Palmer must surely be embarrassed by this Ludditery ? Wait until Corbyn sees an amazon warehouse...

    Has he considered taxing looms to restore work to the weavers? Or cash machines to return employment to bank clerks?
    To be fair to Corbyn....

    This was a motion passed by St Ives CLP and will be “put to the leadership”
    Do we think Corbyn will:

    a) point and laugh at St Ives CLP or

    b) say, with a wink "Wait for the next Manifesto, comrades..."
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 8,324

    At a time when employment levels are at record highs but productivity languishes, encouraging inefficiencies by taxing the use of labour-saving machinery looks very odd.

    I agree, there are many areas of the economy that need to be more efficient. Agriculture for one.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 14,817

    Charles said:

    ‪Just been watching Macron in India. He has both Tricolour and EU flag behind him. Good visual demo of how EU membership enhances a country's international status.‬

    I’ve got lots of cool flags you can use if you put that much store by them
    It’s what they symbolise that matters. Any European country that does not have the self-confidence to fly the EU flag is making a choice to diminish itself.
    Nope. All they are doing is advertising the fact that they are not actually worth talking to and that the real power lies with the EU. Of course when it comes to trade deals this is the reality.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,434

    Charles said:

    Elliot said:

    TGOHF said:

    Look at these utter crackpots - Mr Palmer must surely be embarrassed by this Ludditery ? Wait until Corbyn sees an amazon warehouse...

    Has he considered taxing looms to restore work to the weavers? Or cash machines to return employment to bank clerks?
    To be fair to Corbyn....

    This was a motion passed by St Ives CLP and will be “put to the leadership”
    Do we think Corbyn will:

    a) point and laugh at St Ives CLP or

    b) say, with a wink "Wait for the next Manifesto, comrades..."
    c) say "Change is coming" - a brilliant all-purpose phrase; it should be the standard greeting between Corbynites, replacing "Good morning."
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,180
    Just to be clear, it's the same people arguing we need to continue high unskilled immigration to fill shortages in jobs Brits won't do that are proposing automation taxes to stop mass unemployment in a migrant filled profession?
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,535
    Elliot said:

    Just to be clear, it's the same people arguing we need to continue high unskilled immigration to fill shortages in jobs Brits won't do that are proposing automation taxes to stop mass unemployment in a migrant filled profession?

    No. It isn’t.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,434
    tlg86 said:

    At a time when employment levels are at record highs but productivity languishes, encouraging inefficiencies by taxing the use of labour-saving machinery looks very odd.

    I agree, there are many areas of the economy that need to be more efficient. Agriculture for one.
    U sure? Farmers are generally not shy about investing £100 000s in combines, etc. I was sort of thinking that stuff is only still hand picked because no one's invented the right machine yet.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,553
    Sandpit said:

    Elliot said:

    TGOHF said:

    Look at these utter crackpots - Mr Palmer must surely be embarrassed by this Ludditery ? Wait until Corbyn sees an amazon warehouse...

    Has he considered taxing looms to restore work to the weavers? Or cash machines to return employment to bank clerks?
    Taxing self service tills will simply speed up the development of the next generation technology that makes them redundant. Amazon just opened an experimental store with no tills at all.
    http://money.cnn.com/2018/01/26/technology/amazon-go-store/index.html
    Leaving aside the personnel issues that Labour are concentrating on, there are significant issues with such automation.

    For one thing, they are hardly infallible. Our local store has them (admittedly, it's a Morrisons), and tills are often out-of-order - very annoying when there's a queue. Or if you are buying a bottle of wine, and you have to wait for the one member of staff dealing with eight tills to come and do an age-check. Or worse, if it's alcohol or something else with a security tab that has to be taken away to be removed.

    For another, it can make fraud and shoplifting easier.

    And another: in our local store, it actually takes longer to purchase things early in the morning (say before 07.30) as they often do not have any non self-service tills open, and that makes things difficult if you are not just buying a pack of sandwiches and crisps.

    Going into the personnel issues: AIUI staff are already fairly flexible; they do not always work on tills, and are often stocking shelves, moving baskets, dealing with customers etc at slack times. reducing the amount of staff reduces the amount available to do these tasks.

    Some of these are implementation issues; however most are fundamental to such automated systems. This does not mean that they cannot be made to work; just that it is not simple, and often not to the customers' advantage.

    (As an aside, a shop assistant in a local co-op told me that the most shoplifted items are alcohol and baby formula, often at the same time. I can only hope that they do not mix them.)
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,441

    Charles said:

    ‪Just been watching Macron in India. He has both Tricolour and EU flag behind him. Good visual demo of how EU membership enhances a country's international status.‬

    I’ve got lots of cool flags you can use if you put that much store by them
    It’s what they symbolise that matters. Any European country that does not have the self-confidence to fly the EU flag is making a choice to diminish itself.
    Only if you are an advocate of Strength in Unity
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 8,023
    Elliot said:

    Jonathan said:

    welshowl said:

    Jonathan said:

    TGOHF said:

    Look at these utter crackpots - Mr Palmer must surely be embarrassed by this Ludditery ? Wait until Corbyn sees an amazon warehouse...

    Microsoft founder Bill Gates floated the idea of taxing robots, which is probably where Corbyn heard it.
    Indeed, it's not as silly as you think, especially when you consider that humans are taxed for the same job and that warps the market.
    You don’t know how silly I think it is. Very very very is the answer. He’d have banned electric trains because it put the firemen out of a job, or the bloke with a red flag walking in front of cars, the list is endless.

    It’s crackpottery pure and simple.
    Firstly, Corbyn has nothing to do with this, as Charles said it's a motion from a single CLP.
    Secondly, some very clever people are talking about this idea wrt AI.

    It's more interesting that you think.
    We should probably be limiting email use to protect postal workers. And banning JCBs to help hole diggers.
    The proposal is not to ban robots but to tax them. It is quite different. We tax sedan chair carrier robots (cars). We tax electricity, which drives robots.

    But if we do not tax robots, should we subsidise them instead?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,611
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Charles said:

    Elliot said:

    TGOHF said:

    Look at these utter crackpots - Mr Palmer must surely be embarrassed by this Ludditery ? Wait until Corbyn sees an amazon warehouse...

    Has he considered taxing looms to restore work to the weavers? Or cash machines to return employment to bank clerks?
    To be fair to Corbyn....

    This was a motion passed by St Ives CLP and will be “put to the leadership”
    Do we think Corbyn will:

    a) point and laugh at St Ives CLP or

    b) say, with a wink "Wait for the next Manifesto, comrades..."
    c) say "Change is coming" - a brilliant all-purpose phrase; it should be the standard greeting between Corbynites, replacing "Good morning."
    It also contains an all-purpose ongoing menace - very suitable for an entity riven by division....
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 13,789

    Mr. Herdson, other demographics are iffy too. The notion of all-women shortlists (or the mooted all-black shortlists) are discriminatory against one group and patronising towards another. It's why gender quotas for boards are a dumb idea, because then you'd never know which women were there on merit and which because they'd ticked the right demographic box.

    I absolutely do not buy the concept that demographic representation is good or bad in and of itself, and it is not something we should aim for. Merit should be the only factor. Politically correct box-ticking leads to idiots like Sayeeda "militant secularists" Warsi getting promoted beyond reason.

    If it's done in the wrong way, then yes. But I think you're underplaying the structural barriers to some demographics being represented - and (a timely argument given the women's vote centenary), where a group is not represented, there's a good chance that its interests will not be advanced. The right way to deal with the problem is to aim to remove the barriers and to ensure that the quality candidates not currently coming forward are able to do so.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 17,648
    These aren’t robots - they are computers with a couple of scanners.

    Is Bill Gates suggesting we tax computers ?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,441
    Jonathan said:

    welshowl said:

    Jonathan said:

    TGOHF said:

    Look at these utter crackpots - Mr Palmer must surely be embarrassed by this Ludditery ? Wait until Corbyn sees an amazon warehouse...

    Microsoft founder Bill Gates floated the idea of taxing robots, which is probably where Corbyn heard it.
    Indeed, it's not as silly as you think, especially when you consider that humans are taxed for the same job and that warps the market.
    You don’t know how silly I think it is. Very very very is the answer. He’d have banned electric trains because it put the firemen out of a job, or the bloke with a red flag walking in front of cars, the list is endless.

    It’s crackpottery pure and simple.
    Firstly, Corbyn has nothing to do with this, as Charles said it's a motion from a single CLP.
    Secondly, some very clever people are talking about this idea wrt AI.

    It's more interesting that you think.
    What’s most interesting is Labour’s knee jerk reaction is to tax.

    Technological shifts and the impact on employment are clearly an issue that needs consideration. Increasing the running cost of (presumably) more productive capital is rarely the right answer
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,611
    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    ‪Just been watching Macron in India. He has both Tricolour and EU flag behind him. Good visual demo of how EU membership enhances a country's international status.‬

    I’ve got lots of cool flags you can use if you put that much store by them
    It’s what they symbolise that matters. Any European country that does not have the self-confidence to fly the EU flag is making a choice to diminish itself.
    Only if you are an advocate of Strength in Unity
    Naughty!
  • OchEyeOchEye Posts: 1,087
    Elliot said:

    TGOHF said:

    Look at these utter crackpots - Mr Palmer must surely be embarrassed by this Ludditery ? Wait until Corbyn sees an amazon warehouse...

    Has he considered taxing looms to restore work to the weavers? Or cash machines to return employment to bank clerks?
    So, let's see now, a CLP puts forward a motion to be discussed at Conference, which may or may not be discussed (but has interesting consequences for other technologies and outcomes), which the leadership can cheerfully ignore, and the Scum tries to infer that is a policy of Corbyn. Hm! Wonder why the natural readership of the paper no longer reads or buys the newspaper, sales of which is in steep decline. Perhaps Murdoch will be taking a look at the editorial line and management of the paper soon to try and get the readers, and advertisers back, or not... .
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 17,648
    OchEye said:

    Elliot said:

    TGOHF said:

    Look at these utter crackpots - Mr Palmer must surely be embarrassed by this Ludditery ? Wait until Corbyn sees an amazon warehouse...

    Has he considered taxing looms to restore work to the weavers? Or cash machines to return employment to bank clerks?
    So, let's see now, a CLP puts forward a motion to be discussed at Conference, which may or may not be discussed (but has interesting consequences for other technologies and outcomes), which the leadership can cheerfully ignore, and the Scum tries to infer that is a policy of Corbyn. Hm! Wonder why the natural readership of the paper no longer reads or buys the newspaper, sales of which is in steep decline. Perhaps Murdoch will be taking a look at the editorial line and management of the paper soon to try and get the readers, and advertisers back, or not... .
    Labours press office must be pretty slow out of the blocks then.

    Or they like the idea.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,156
    I don't like this suggestion at all. If I vote for an MP, I expect that MP to attend the Commons and vote.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,553

    Mr. Herdson, other demographics are iffy too. The notion of all-women shortlists (or the mooted all-black shortlists) are discriminatory against one group and patronising towards another. It's why gender quotas for boards are a dumb idea, because then you'd never know which women were there on merit and which because they'd ticked the right demographic box.

    I absolutely do not buy the concept that demographic representation is good or bad in and of itself, and it is not something we should aim for. Merit should be the only factor. Politically correct box-ticking leads to idiots like Sayeeda "militant secularists" Warsi getting promoted beyond reason.

    If it's done in the wrong way, then yes. But I think you're underplaying the structural barriers to some demographics being represented - and (a timely argument given the women's vote centenary), where a group is not represented, there's a good chance that its interests will not be advanced. The right way to deal with the problem is to aim to remove the barriers and to ensure that the quality candidates not currently coming forward are able to do so.
    Whilst I agree with you, there is a danger in this: too many people assume that people cannot empathise with, or understand the issues encountered by others if they do not belong to that group. Sadly, they are often correct.

    We need a parliament filled with MPs who not only look after the interests of the group they belong in (or groups, if you believe in intersectionalism) , but who are able to balance them against the interests of others outside that group or groups.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 14,817
    Sean_F said:

    I don't like this suggestion at all. If I vote for an MP, I expect that MP to attend the Commons and vote.

    Yep agreed.

  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,180
    TGOHF said:

    These aren’t robots - they are computers with a couple of scanners.

    Is Bill Gates suggesting we tax computers ?

    That is the issue with the whole idea of robot taxes - it becomes pretty much impossible to define what a single robot is.

    Besides, automation increases productivity and productivity drives wages higher. The fabled mass unemployment is always predicted and never comes.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 18,894
    edited March 10
    TGOHF said:

    Look at these utter crackpots - Mr Palmer must surely be embarrassed by this Ludditery ? Wait until Corbyn sees an amazon warehouse...

    What a bunch of losers, what next ATM's carwashes, coffee machines
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    malcolmg said:

    TGOHF said:

    Look at these utter crackpots - Mr Palmer must surely be embarrassed by this Ludditery ? Wait until Corbyn sees an amazon warehouse...

    What a bunch of losers, what next ATM's carwashes, coffee machines
    Don’t give them ideas!
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,611
    Sandpit said:

    malcolmg said:

    TGOHF said:

    Look at these utter crackpots - Mr Palmer must surely be embarrassed by this Ludditery ? Wait until Corbyn sees an amazon warehouse...

    What a bunch of losers, what next ATM's carwashes, coffee machines
    Don’t give them ideas!
    Those Corbyn "ATM"s:

    1. Insert card.

    2. You are asked in the voice of an adenoidal teenager "How much?"

    3. Hand appears out of "machine", proffering the amount required.

    Vote winner!
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 5,949
    Sean_F said:

    I don't like this suggestion at all. If I vote for an MP, I expect that MP to attend the Commons and vote.

    Also, doesn't this make the debate pointless? If people have already voted in proxy, then we should just cut the sham of having any debate before any vote.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 8,023
    Charles said:

    Jonathan said:

    welshowl said:

    Jonathan said:

    TGOHF said:

    Look at these utter crackpots - Mr Palmer must surely be embarrassed by this Ludditery ? Wait until Corbyn sees an amazon warehouse...

    Microsoft founder Bill Gates floated the idea of taxing robots, which is probably where Corbyn heard it.
    Indeed, it's not as silly as you think, especially when you consider that humans are taxed for the same job and that warps the market.
    You don’t know how silly I think it is. Very very very is the answer. He’d have banned electric trains because it put the firemen out of a job, or the bloke with a red flag walking in front of cars, the list is endless.

    It’s crackpottery pure and simple.
    Firstly, Corbyn has nothing to do with this, as Charles said it's a motion from a single CLP.
    Secondly, some very clever people are talking about this idea wrt AI.

    It's more interesting that you think.
    What’s most interesting is Labour’s knee jerk reaction is to tax.

    Technological shifts and the impact on employment are clearly an issue that needs consideration. Increasing the running cost of (presumably) more productive capital is rarely the right answer
    It is not just the impact on employment that is the problem, but also on the government's finances. People are taxed: their income is taxed; their spending is taxed; their jobs are taxed. Who will pay for schools and lampposts?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,441

    Charles said:

    Jonathan said:

    welshowl said:

    Jonathan said:

    TGOHF said:

    Look at these utter crackpots - Mr Palmer must surely be embarrassed by this Ludditery ? Wait until Corbyn sees an amazon warehouse...

    Microsoft founder Bill Gates floated the idea of taxing robots, which is probably where Corbyn heard it.
    Indeed, it's not as silly as you think, especially when you consider that humans are taxed for the same job and that warps the market.
    You don’t know how silly I think it is. Very very very is the answer. He’d have banned electric trains because it put the firemen out of a job, or the bloke with a red flag walking in front of cars, the list is endless.

    It’s crackpottery pure and simple.
    Firstly, Corbyn has nothing to do with this, as Charles said it's a motion from a single CLP.
    Secondly, some very clever people are talking about this idea wrt AI.

    It's more interesting that you think.
    What’s most interesting is Labour’s knee jerk reaction is to tax.

    Technological shifts and the impact on employment are clearly an issue that needs consideration. Increasing the running cost of (presumably) more productive capital is rarely the right answer
    It is not just the impact on employment that is the problem, but also on the government's finances. People are taxed: their income is taxed; their spending is taxed; their jobs are taxed. Who will pay for schools and lampposts?
    Profits and spending
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 8,502
    edited March 10
    It's kind-of nuts how the British are into doing things by proxy when they could just let the person cast their own vote remotely.

    When I used to have a vote (I was disenfranchized by the Labour Party because they suspected people like me might vote Tory) I had a proxy vote because risked taking too long to snail-mail my ballot to me in Japan. So the ballot would go to my brother, who would scan it and email it to me, and I'd make whatever mark on the ballot paper I wanted and email it back, and he'd attempt to reproduce it and return it. This was functionally identical to me sending a scan of the ballot directly back to the returning officer, except for the fallback position if I failed to return it, which would have been a no-vote, as opposed to the paper being returned marked in some way by a small child with a crayon.

    I know there are a bunch of potential security issues about voting over a communications channel, but having a proxy still preserves all the same security issues, because you have to communicate the vote over the channel to the proxy, plus you have the extra trust issue with the proxy.

    Just let the MPs vote online already.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 5,949
    The entire concept of how we operate our food shopping is inefficient. We go to the shop, we walk around the shop putting stuff in our trolley, we walk to the checkout, we unpack our trolley, someone scans it all individually, we re=pack it, we put it in the car, we drive home, we unpack it, we put it away......sign.

    No wonder self-scan and the like are becoming more common, ;et alone internet shopping and delivery. It's a stupid outdated way of running our lives.
  • Rexel56Rexel56 Posts: 595
    edited March 10
    Rare that I get wound up by posts here... but @Big_G_NorthWales got me going in the overnight thread. Suggesting that the long term interests of the South Wales steelwork are best served by (1) colluding with Trump to dismantle rules based international trade and (2) demonstrating at this critical phase that we will breach our EU Treaty obligations at will... seems to me to be just wrong. Or am I missing something?

    Edited for typo.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 30,378
    Hmm. I'm not opposed in principle to the proposed measure, but unusually for a Herdson piece I don't find the rest of it to be very clear in what its after or compelling, sorry to say.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 5,949

    It's kind-of nuts how the British are into doing things by proxy when they could just let the person cast their own vote remotely.

    When I used to have a vote (I was disenfranchized by the Labour Party because they suspected people like me might vote Tory) I had a proxy vote because risked taking too long to snail-mail my ballot to me in Japan. So the ballot would go to my brother, who would scan it and email it to me, and I'd make whatever mark on the ballot paper I wanted and email it back, and he'd attempt to reproduce it and return it. This was functionally identical to me sending a scan of the ballot directly back to the returning officer, except for the fallback position if I failed to return it, which would have been a no-vote, as opposed to the paper being returned marked in some way by a small child with a crayon.

    I know there are a bunch of potential security issues about voting over a communications channel, but having a proxy still preserves all the same security issues, because you have to communicate the vote over the channel to the proxy, plus you have the extra trust issue with the proxy.

    Just let the MPs vote online already.

    That's a dangerous step to wondering why we need MPs at all....
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,553

    It's kind-of nuts how the British are into doing things by proxy when they could just let the person cast their own vote remotely.

    When I used to have a vote (I was disenfranchized by the Labour Party because they suspected people like me might vote Tory) I had a proxy vote because risked taking too long to snail-mail my ballot to me in Japan. So the ballot would go to my brother, who would scan it and email it to me, and I'd make whatever mark on the ballot paper I wanted and email it back, and he'd attempt to reproduce it and return it. This was functionally identical to me sending a scan of the ballot directly back to the returning officer, except for the fallback position if I failed to return it, which would have been a no-vote, as opposed to the paper being returned marked in some way by a small child with a crayon.

    I know there are a bunch of potential security issues about voting over a communications channel, but having a proxy still preserves all the same security issues, because you have to communicate the vote over the channel to the proxy, plus you have the extra trust issue with the proxy.

    Just let the MPs vote online already.

    In the case of MPs security is simpler, as it is vital we know the way they vote. Whereas in elections, it is vital that the way we vote is kept secret.

    Just have them video a segment saying the proposition and 'aye' or 'nay', and have that put in the official tally as the MPs trudge into the lobbies. ;)
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 5,463
    Rexel56 said:

    Rare that I get wound up by posts here... but @Big_G_NorthWales got me going in the overnight thread. Suggesting that the long term interests of the South Wales steelwork are best served by (1) colluding with Trump to dismantle rules based international trade and (2) demonstrating at this critical phase that we will breach our EU Treaty obligations at will... seems to me to be just wrong. Or am I missing something?

    Edited for typo.

    No, you're not.

  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 9,725

    Sandpit said:

    malcolmg said:

    TGOHF said:

    Look at these utter crackpots - Mr Palmer must surely be embarrassed by this Ludditery ? Wait until Corbyn sees an amazon warehouse...

    What a bunch of losers, what next ATM's carwashes, coffee machines
    Don’t give them ideas!
    Those Corbyn "ATM"s:

    1. Insert card.

    2. You are asked in the voice of an adenoidal teenager "How much?"

    3. Hand appears out of "machine", proffering the amount required.

    Vote winner!
    Tories happy to see banks closing ATMs

    Vote Loser
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 14,487

    The entire concept of how we operate our food shopping is inefficient. We go to the shop, we walk around the shop putting stuff in our trolley, we walk to the checkout, we unpack our trolley, someone scans it all individually, we re=pack it, we put it in the car, we drive home, we unpack it, we put it away......sign.

    No wonder self-scan and the like are becoming more common, ;et alone internet shopping and delivery. It's a stupid outdated way of running our lives.

    The self-scan is probably temporary situation. Supermarket giants are already trialling technology that allows shoppers to just pick stuff and walk out of the store. RFID tags have been mooted for years, but iirc the individual cost is too high so far. But others are experimenting with video of shoppers in action with sufficient AI to work out what they have taken from shelves.
  • calumcalum Posts: 3,041
    edited March 10
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 8,502

    It's kind-of nuts how the British are into doing things by proxy when they could just let the person cast their own vote remotely.

    When I used to have a vote (I was disenfranchized by the Labour Party because they suspected people like me might vote Tory) I had a proxy vote because risked taking too long to snail-mail my ballot to me in Japan. So the ballot would go to my brother, who would scan it and email it to me, and I'd make whatever mark on the ballot paper I wanted and email it back, and he'd attempt to reproduce it and return it. This was functionally identical to me sending a scan of the ballot directly back to the returning officer, except for the fallback position if I failed to return it, which would have been a no-vote, as opposed to the paper being returned marked in some way by a small child with a crayon.

    I know there are a bunch of potential security issues about voting over a communications channel, but having a proxy still preserves all the same security issues, because you have to communicate the vote over the channel to the proxy, plus you have the extra trust issue with the proxy.

    Just let the MPs vote online already.

    That's a dangerous step to wondering why we need MPs at all....
    Well, conventionally the point of the MPs is to consider issues more deeply than the voters would have time to and do something more sensible than we would if we voted directly on everything.

    I think there's obviously something in that - as we know, when you poll voters on specific issues they're quite susceptible to how questions are phrased and easily swayed by obvious lies, so there's clearly a strong case for having some indirection.

    I quite like the idea of replacing that role with Liquid Democracy where people own their own votes until they delegate them to somebody else, so if you end up with someone representing a lot of people as MPs do it emerges from people's preferences rather than being something the system forces on them. But I think it needs to be proved in practice at other levels before you start experimenting with it for nation states.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 8,502

    It's kind-of nuts how the British are into doing things by proxy when they could just let the person cast their own vote remotely.

    When I used to have a vote (I was disenfranchized by the Labour Party because they suspected people like me might vote Tory) I had a proxy vote because risked taking too long to snail-mail my ballot to me in Japan. So the ballot would go to my brother, who would scan it and email it to me, and I'd make whatever mark on the ballot paper I wanted and email it back, and he'd attempt to reproduce it and return it. This was functionally identical to me sending a scan of the ballot directly back to the returning officer, except for the fallback position if I failed to return it, which would have been a no-vote, as opposed to the paper being returned marked in some way by a small child with a crayon.

    I know there are a bunch of potential security issues about voting over a communications channel, but having a proxy still preserves all the same security issues, because you have to communicate the vote over the channel to the proxy, plus you have the extra trust issue with the proxy.

    Just let the MPs vote online already.

    In the case of MPs security is simpler, as it is vital we know the way they vote. Whereas in elections, it is vital that the way we vote is kept secret.

    Just have them video a segment saying the proposition and 'aye' or 'nay', and have that put in the official tally as the MPs trudge into the lobbies. ;)
    Yup, and if you made the format into like a 3-minute video where they also have some time to explain why they're doing it, that would also give you quite a lot more transparency than the current thing.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,544
    edited March 10

    Elliot said:

    Jonathan said:

    welshowl said:

    Jonathan said:

    TGOHF said:

    Look at these utter crackpots - Mr Palmer must surely be embarrassed by this Ludditery ? Wait until Corbyn sees an amazon warehouse...

    Microsoft founder Bill Gates floated the idea of taxing robots, which is probably where Corbyn heard it.
    Indeed, it's not as silly as you think, especially when you consider that humans are taxed for the same job and that warps the market.
    You don’t know how silly I think it is. Very very very is the answer. He’d have banned electric trains because it put the firemen out of a job, or the bloke with a red flag walking in front of cars, the list is endless.

    It’s crackpottery pure and simple.
    Firstly, Corbyn has nothing to do with this, as Charles said it's a motion from a single CLP.
    Secondly, some very clever people are talking about this idea wrt AI.

    It's more interesting that you think.
    We should probably be limiting email use to protect postal workers. And banning JCBs to help hole diggers.
    The proposal is not to ban robots but to tax them. It is quite different. We tax sedan chair carrier robots (cars). We tax electricity, which drives robots.

    But if we do not tax robots, should we subsidise them instead?
    At the moment with just 4% unemployment there is no need for it, longer term if unemployment starts to rise because of AI and robots and machines and work becomes sporadic and low paid and short term contract based for most bar the most creative and tech savvy a robot tax to fund a universal basic income becomes inevitable
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 5,463
    Regarding the Damian Hinds story which was supposed to have disappeared, but hasn't, just what does he mean by 'red tape' in this context ?
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-43345857
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 6,466
    Rexel56 said:

    Rare that I get wound up by posts here... but @Big_G_NorthWales got me going in the overnight thread. Suggesting that the long term interests of the South Wales steelwork are best served by (1) colluding with Trump to dismantle rules based international trade and (2) demonstrating at this critical phase that we will breach our EU Treaty obligations at will... seems to me to be just wrong. Or am I missing something?

    Edited for typo.

    I think several people got hold of the very wrong end of the stick last night.
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 4,990
    Could the Buckingham constituency have a proxy MP to speak for them, as their MP (John Bercow) is permanentlty barred from representing them in parliamentary votes and debates?
  • Rexel56Rexel56 Posts: 595
    Nigelb said:

    Regarding the Damian Hinds story which was supposed to have disappeared, but hasn't, just what does he mean by 'red tape' in this context ?
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-43345857

    I think “red tape” is being used as shorthand for administration which doesn’t improve teaching and learning. Having a child who qualified as a Physics teacher last year, I can underline the impact of administration on workload, especially during the training and “newly qualified teacher” years when lesson planning has to be done in tremendous detail using elaborate forms that are never used again once qualified.

    At the heart of the problem is the OFSTED based accountability regime which makes school managements paranoid about being caught out with inadequate quality control processes. As a result, too many schools have burdensome target setting, monitoring and reporting systems but with non-existetent analytical skills with which to drive meaningful improvement.

    Plenty of work has been done in this area, both by The DfE (Teachers Workload Challenge) and the Headteachers’ Roundtable:

    https://headteachersroundtable.wordpress.com/alternative-green-paper-2016/

    It just needs OFSTED to issue a very simple inspection guideline to the effect that any school found not to be implementing effectively a workload reduction programme will be rated as “needs improvement”.
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 6,466
    edited March 10
    Nigelb said:

    Regarding the Damian Hinds story which was supposed to have disappeared, but hasn't, just what does he mean by 'red tape' in this context ?
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-43345857

    I'm married to a teacher (HoF: English). They appear to be measured not only on outcomes (which is what I've been used to, both in the public and private sector) but on process compliance. It ain't just what you do, it's the way that you do it.

    The result is system gaming of epic proportions, and I say that having 22 years of sales experience ;).
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,867
    edited March 10
    Rexel56 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Regarding the Damian Hinds story which was supposed to have disappeared, but hasn't, just what does he mean by 'red tape' in this context ?
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-43345857

    I think “red tape” is being used as shorthand for administration which doesn’t improve teaching and learning. Having a child who qualified as a Physics teacher last year, I can underline the impact of administration on workload, especially during the training and “newly qualified teacher” years when lesson planning has to be done in tremendous detail using elaborate forms that are never used again once qualified.

    At the heart of the problem is the OFSTED based accountability regime which makes school managements paranoid about being caught out with inadequate quality control processes. As a result, too many schools have burdensome target setting, monitoring and reporting systems but with non-existetent analytical skills with which to drive meaningful improvement.

    Plenty of work has been done in this area, both by The DfE (Teachers Workload Challenge) and the Headteachers’ Roundtable:

    https://headteachersroundtable.wordpress.com/alternative-green-paper-2016/

    It just needs OFSTED to issue a very simple inspection guideline to the effect that any school found not to be implementing effectively a workload reduction programme will be rated as “needs improvement”.
    Or, in an easier, neater and cheaper solution, abolish OFSTED which has long ceased to be a help in raising standards - if it ever was - and is rapidly becoming a significant barrier to good teaching simply by the vast and unnecessary workload it imposes.

    The problem with your suggestion on OFSTED issuing new guidelines is that it doesn't follow its own guidelines. For example it said it didn't need to see lesson plans - and then criticised any teacher who failed to produce them.

    (Lest this sounds like sour grapes, I should point out I was inspected last year and was rated Outstanding for every one of the three mentions I had in the report.)
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 4,990
    Let's replace MPs with robots controlled by their constituents.

    As each vote takes place the robot electronically seeks constituents views and votes accordingly. True democracy enabled by technology. Vorsprung Durch Technik. Government by the people, for the people.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 9,688
    Wonder if there might be some indication of tax cuts in the spring statement. Given the continued growth of the economy, it would be a good time to make the case for how lowering personal taxation stimulates economic activity.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 8,023
    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Jonathan said:

    welshowl said:

    Jonathan said:

    TGOHF said:

    Look at these utter crackpots - Mr Palmer must surely be embarrassed by this Ludditery ? Wait until Corbyn sees an amazon warehouse...

    Microsoft founder Bill Gates floated the idea of taxing robots, which is probably where Corbyn heard it.
    Indeed, it's not as silly as you think, especially when you consider that humans are taxed for the same job and that warps the market.
    You don’t know how silly I think it is. Very very very is the answer. He’d have banned electric trains because it put the firemen out of a job, or the bloke with a red flag walking in front of cars, the list is endless.

    It’s crackpottery pure and simple.
    Firstly, Corbyn has nothing to do with this, as Charles said it's a motion from a single CLP.
    Secondly, some very clever people are talking about this idea wrt AI.

    It's more interesting that you think.
    What’s most interesting is Labour’s knee jerk reaction is to tax.

    Technological shifts and the impact on employment are clearly an issue that needs consideration. Increasing the running cost of (presumably) more productive capital is rarely the right answer
    It is not just the impact on employment that is the problem, but also on the government's finances. People are taxed: their income is taxed; their spending is taxed; their jobs are taxed. Who will pay for schools and lampposts?
    Profits and spending
    Will there be profits to tax, or will the money taken in Britain all have been "spent" leasing robots from subsidiaries in tax havens?
  • Rexel56Rexel56 Posts: 595
    ydoethur said:

    Rexel56 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Regarding the Damian Hinds story which was supposed to have disappeared, but hasn't, just what does he mean by 'red tape' in this context ?
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-43345857

    I think “red tape” is being used as shorthand for administration which doesn’t improve teaching and learning. Having a child who qualified as a Physics teacher last year, I can underline the impact of administration on workload, especially during the training and “newly qualified teacher” years when lesson planning has to be done in tremendous detail using elaborate forms that are never used again once qualified.

    At the heart of the problem is the OFSTED based accountability regime which makes school managements paranoid about being caught out with inadequate quality control processes. As a result, too many schools have burdensome target setting, monitoring and reporting systems but with non-existetent analytical skills with which to drive meaningful improvement.

    Plenty of work has been done in this area, both by The DfE (Teachers Workload Challenge) and the Headteachers’ Roundtable:

    https://headteachersroundtable.wordpress.com/alternative-green-paper-2016/

    It just needs OFSTED to issue a very simple inspection guideline to the effect that any school found not to be implementing effectively a workload reduction programme will be rated as “needs improvement”.
    Or, in an easier, neater and cheaper solution, abolish OFSTED which has long ceased to be a help in raising standards - if it ever was - and is rapidly becoming a significant barrier to good teaching simply by the vats and unnecessary workload it imposes.

    The problem with your suggestion on OFSTED issuing new guidelines is that it doesn't follow its own guidelines. For example it said it didn't need to see lesson plans - and then criticised any teacher who failed to produce them.

    (Lest this sounds like sour grapes, I should point out I was inspected last year and was rated Outstanding for every one of the three mentions I had in the report.)
    Well, yes. Perhaps one is being naive expecting OFSTED to follow its guidelines. As a Governor, I get tired listening to the so called SLT quoting yet another OFSTED report as justifying yet another addition to teachers’ workload “just in case they look for the same thing here.”

    And I agree that replacing OFSTED with a system whereby best practices are spread under the auspices of a teachers’ professional body is an interesting idea (as suggested in the Headteachers’ Roundtable paper).
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    Sounds reasonable from what we saw in testing. Now the teams have a very busy couple of weeks getting everything together for Australia - where with all cars scrutineered we will get the first opportunity to see the relative performances. Typically over the last few years street circuits haven’t suited Mercedes compared to the faster, more flowing European circuits.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,483
    Mr. Sandpit, agree with that and would add that Mercedes have some doubts over how well they'll do on the softer compounds, which, of course, are more in use at street circuits. Australia won't be a full-blown outlier like Monaco/Singapore, but it may well suit Mercedes' rivals. It's also the sort of track where McLaren have to do well if they're going to achieve anything this year.
  • On topic. I am against proxy voting for MPs.
    If it is to go ahead I suggest that, in order to maintain the MP/constituency link, the proxy should be the runner-up to the MP in the previous GE.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 4,346
    edited March 10
    What is the point of MPs having a debate? Seriously. How often do you see a Labour MP vote against the party after hearing a good argument from the other side. Or a Conservative MP do likewise?

    It's all window dressing for the voters. And how often do you hear of voters actually listening intently and saying "I'm convinced, I'm going to tear up my Socialist Worker card and vote for this Rees-Mogg fella."

    It's a variety show. An audition for the top job. Mrs May never shone in any debate I've ever heard, so it shows how important parliamentary debates are. Michael Foot was a good debater, but it meant little - his scruffy clothes were more telling.

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 5,463
    Rexel56 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Regarding the Damian Hinds story which was supposed to have disappeared, but hasn't, just what does he mean by 'red tape' in this context ?
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-43345857

    I think “red tape” is being used as shorthand for administration which doesn’t improve teaching and learning. Having a child who qualified as a Physics teacher last year, I can underline the impact of administration on workload, especially during the training and “newly qualified teacher” years when lesson planning has to be done in tremendous detail using elaborate forms that are never used again once qualified.

    At the heart of the problem is the OFSTED based accountability regime which makes school managements paranoid about being caught out with inadequate quality control processes. As a result, too many schools have burdensome target setting, monitoring and reporting systems but with non-existetent analytical skills with which to drive meaningful improvement.

    Plenty of work has been done in this area, both by The DfE (Teachers Workload Challenge) and the Headteachers’ Roundtable:

    https://headteachersroundtable.wordpress.com/alternative-green-paper-2016/

    It just needs OFSTED to issue a very simple inspection guideline to the effect that any school found not to be implementing effectively a workload reduction programme will be rated as “needs improvement”.
    I would like to think you are right, but the use of the term makes me suspicious he might have a less than adequate grasp of the issues. We'll see.

    And I agree with much of ydoethur's responses, but with a couple of caveats. OFSTED aren't the whole problem, by any means, and also when it comes to individual school inspections, one has to take into account that there is a considerable variation in the quality of inspectors.

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694

    Mr. Sandpit, agree with that and would add that Mercedes have some doubts over how well they'll do on the softer compounds, which, of course, are more in use at street circuits. Australia won't be a full-blown outlier like Monaco/Singapore, but it may well suit Mercedes' rivals. It's also the sort of track where McLaren have to do well if they're going to achieve anything this year.

    Yes, McLaren seem to have had a few teething problems with the integration of the new Renault PU, but hopefully they’ve worked through them now. Australia is somewhere they’ve traditionally done quite well. Note that the Mercedes wheelbase is slightly shorter this year, and Ferrari slightly longer, so Monaco and Singapore might not be the massive outliers they were in the past - although of course Lewis came in at 22/1 to win in Singapore last year ;)

    If the Mercs win comfortably in Australia, then it’s going to be 2014 all over again this year.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,483
    Mr. Sandpit, indeed, unless the win's due to unusual circumstances (weather, safety car, direct intervention by the Olympians etc). That said, the midfield battle looks like it'll be tasty whatever happens at the sharp end.
This discussion has been closed.