Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If Bercow does stand down then Lindsay Hoyle, surely, will be

13»

Comments

  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    Can i just say that it has become virtually impossible to log in via ipad last week or so...
  • RogerRoger Posts: 12,698
    Sean_F said:

    Re private schools, I do think " why bother"? If you can afford £40,000 p.a. Out of after-tax income to educate three children, you can afford to move to wherever the best State schools are, and pay for the best private tuition.

    A lot of the fees just go on ever more elaborate facilities.

    But will the best state schools teach you not to eat peas with your knife?
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 7,655
    Sean_F said:

    Re private schools, I do think " why bother"? If you can afford £40,000 p.a. Out of after-tax income to educate three children, you can afford to move to wherever the best State schools are, and pay for the best private tuition.

    A lot of the fees just go on ever more elaborate facilities.

    "The best private tuition" is a lot more problematic than it sounds; not a lot of it about outside London and the proper university cities; and doing a full school day and then more isn't great for children. And most of the "facilities" are worth paying for, unless you want your children to have no interests whatever outside the A level curriculum.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 27,851
    Bless. A thread full of people claiming there’s no evidence of the damage that grammar schools do:

    http://ig-legacy.ft.com/content/cb1e02f4-7461-3fd1-ac5d-9fd9befb20dd
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293

    Pulpstar said:

    IanB2 said:

    The Tories' problem, in a single statistic:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43504015

    Swing to/against the Tories vs housing affordability would be an interesting scatter plot.
    I'll have a guess that Copeland, Derbyshire NE, Mansfield, Middlesbrough South, Stoke South and Walsall N do not have expensive housing.
    And Carlisle. A Tory marginal that picked up support in every single ward contested this year, and pinched a seat direct from Labour.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 29,166
    Sadiq Khan to ban all junk food advertising throughout London's transport network.

    So how does he replace the lost income - increased fares !!!
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 20,191

    Mortimer said:

    Barnesian said:


    I wouldn't rely on that report in the Sun.

    I suspect that a majority in the Commons is in favour of some sort of customs union and this "customs partnership" might be a way to get Commons approval and possibly EU approval. The Max Dev MPs are in a minority in the Commons and in Cabinet.

    Mrs May future is indeed in the hands of the largest party in the elected chamber of the Commons but I think she is secure. I can't see a majority of Tory MPs preferring either Boris or Moggsy over Mrs May. Can you?

    I'm not relying on the report; I'm relying on my own critical faculties. It won't work, and it isn't supported by the people who have the ability to veto it.

    I don't think there are the numbers for a customs union in the commons myself; there have been two votes on it already and the Govt have won both. But it is frankly irrelevant what there is a majority in the commons for, when the executive negotiates international treaties.
    Finally, someone who gets it!
    Neither of you get that it is open to Parliament to set the negotiating boundaries for the executive, were it so to choose. Given the government has been so contemptuous of Parliament when losing non-binding votes, it is unsurprising that it is now running into trouble on this front.
    No it is not. The only thing Parliament can do is refuse to ratify any final agreement. Constitutionally they have absolutely no right to dictate or limit the Executive in conducting negotiations and concluding treaties.

    It is wrong but at the moment it is the law. I would be very happy if they changed it but at the moment that is a whole other constitutional argument that no one in the party leaderships seems to want to have.
    Parliament can change the law. It has the opportunity to do so now in relation to the Brexit negotiations. It might take it.
    So you would (rightly) rail against those calling for the removal of the Lords as a knee jerk reaction to their stance over Brexit but would advocate a major constitutional change because you can't get your own way over Brexit. Not exactly consistent.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 28,388

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    The Tories' problem, in a single statistic:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43504015

    Yes but even on that chart there are still almost 4 million families who are home owners or home buyers compared to 1.8 million privately renting so still about double the number of owners to renters even if the gap has narrowed, hence outside London where a small majority do now rent the Tories do generally still have a clear lead

    It should also be noted the biggest proponents of NIMYBISM and opponents of building new houses are the LDs and not the Tories
    The Tories legislating against divorce would be a big step towards helping the housing crisis amongst the middle aged.. Could bring it in retrospectively.
    Reversing the 19th century legalisation of divorce would certainly stop the need for a new house to be found for mother and children and a new flat for father and would keep them all under the same roof though of course in practical terms will never happen
    The government could set up frat houses for the divorced men to share. Beer, Sky Sports and porn 24/7. Problem solved.
    That idea is......brilliant.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 28,388
    Roger said:

    Sean_F said:

    Re private schools, I do think " why bother"? If you can afford £40,000 p.a. Out of after-tax income to educate three children, you can afford to move to wherever the best State schools are, and pay for the best private tuition.

    A lot of the fees just go on ever more elaborate facilities.

    But will the best state schools teach you not to eat peas with your knife?
    You don't need a school for that.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 27,851

    Mortimer said:

    Barnesian said:


    I wouldn't rely on that report in the Sun.

    I suspect that a majority in the Commons is in favour of some sort of customs union and this "customs partnership" might be a way to get Commons approval and possibly EU approval. The Max Dev MPs are in a minority in the Commons and in Cabinet.

    Mrs May future is indeed in the hands of the largest party in the elected chamber of the Commons but I think she is secure. I can't see a majority of Tory MPs preferring either Boris or Moggsy over Mrs May. Can you?

    I'm not relying on the report; I'm relying on my own critical faculties. It won't work, and it isn't supported by the people who have the ability to veto it.

    I don't think there are the numbers for a customs union in the commons myself; there have been two votes on it already and the Govt have won both. But it is frankly irrelevant what there is a majority in the commons for, when the executive negotiates international treaties.
    Finally, someone who gets it!
    Neither of you get that it is open to Parliament to set the negotiating boundaries for the executive, were it so to choose. Given the government has been so contemptuous of Parliament when losing non-binding votes, it is unsurprising that it is now running into trouble on this front.
    No it is not. The only thing Parliament can do is refuse to ratify any final agreement. Constitutionally they have absolutely no right to dictate or limit the Executive in conducting negotiations and concluding treaties.

    It is wrong but at the moment it is the law. I would be very happy if they changed it but at the moment that is a whole other constitutional argument that no one in the party leaderships seems to want to have.
    Parliament can change the law. It has the opportunity to do so now in relation to the Brexit negotiations. It might take it.
    So you would (rightly) rail against those calling for the removal of the Lords as a knee jerk reaction to their stance over Brexit but would advocate a major constitutional change because you can't get your own way over Brexit. Not exactly consistent.
    This isn’t a major constitutional change. Parliament has always had the right to have its say should the circumstance arise. On this occasion it has a clear opportunity to do so. Why shouldn’t it take it, especially when the government has set its face against it? You could hardly have a more deserving occasion: major change with decades-long significance and no consensus in a government, a minority government, as to how to proceed.
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 3,596

    Sadiq Khan to ban all junk food advertising throughout London's transport network.

    So how does he replace the lost income - increased fares !!!

    Or non-junk food advertising?
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 3,603

    Bless. A thread full of people claiming there’s no evidence of the damage that grammar schools do:

    http://ig-legacy.ft.com/content/cb1e02f4-7461-3fd1-ac5d-9fd9befb20dd

    Whenever you need a break from explaining to us why those who voted Leave are slavering racists, then you could tell us what you have done to improve social mobility some time.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 20,191

    Bless. A thread full of people claiming there’s no evidence of the damage that grammar schools do:

    http://ig-legacy.ft.com/content/cb1e02f4-7461-3fd1-ac5d-9fd9befb20dd

    Bless. Someone who chooses to ignore the in depth studies that have been done by recognised authorities on the subject and instead believe a political journalist because their back of a fag packet calculations support their own bias.
  • ExiledInScotlandExiledInScotland Posts: 1,012
    Roger said:

    Sean_F said:

    Re private schools, I do think " why bother"? If you can afford £40,000 p.a. Out of after-tax income to educate three children, you can afford to move to wherever the best State schools are, and pay for the best private tuition.

    A lot of the fees just go on ever more elaborate facilities.

    But will the best state schools teach you not to eat peas with your knife?
    At least with private schools you don't have to bring your own knife
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 36,364
    Why do the Brits keep banging on about immigration? nasty little xenophobes.....

    https://stateoftheunion.eui.eu/what-europe-thinks/

    One guess which is the top issue across the EU.....
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 51,905
    Mr. NorthWales, Khan banned images of healthy women in bikinis from Tube ads. Now he's banning images of unhealthy food from Tube ads.

    Dopey sod. Maybe Ladbrokes should run a market on what he'll ban next.
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 2,377
    The Tories don't explicitly appeal to class based politics. Labour do, now more so than ever and have far more reason to be concerned at the corollary of that trend as a consequence.



    Putting that in perspective, here is the difference between Labour support amongst C2DEs in each election and the overall difference with the Conservatives (e.g. Oct 1972 + 29% amongst C2DEs, +4% lead overall = net +25%)

    Oct 74 +25
    79 +15
    83 +15
    87 +18
    92 +18
    97 +19
    01 +16
    05 +12
    10 +8
    15 +13
    17 +5

    In terms of appeal to working class voters, relative to the appeal of the Conservatives, Corbyn is the least successful Labour leader in history.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 7,655

    On grammar schools, I think I’d trust Peter Lampl over (i) politicians and (ii) random nutters on the internet.

    Peter Lampl’s motivation for founding the Trust:

    "When I came back from the States," he recalls, " I went to dinner at my old college, Corpus Christi, which used to have lots of ordinary Welsh kids, many of them my best friends. I was told they weren’t coming through any more."

    I have had interactions with the Sutton Trust and I think it is a genuinely impressive organisation that is willing to cross political boundaries (whether right or left) to try and improve social mobility.

    Estelle Morris wrote : "Given a free hand, he’d re-create the grammar schools. He wants to repeat for others what worked for him. I admire that. “

    Estelle Morris diagnosis is right -- Lampl believes grammar schools work and is essentially trying to recreate them.

    Of course, if those dismissing grammar schools had done as much work as Peter Lampl in driving forward social mobility, I might have some respect for them.

    For example, returning to the matter of Welsh students, Lampl has done far more to get Welsh students to Oxbridge than anything by the vacuous Welsh Government (which has presided over a fall in Welsh education as measured by international organisations).

    So what about the lots x 1,000s of even more ordinary Welsh kids who didn't get to live the dream of attending Corpus (boring little college) with Mr Lampl? Chap who personally profited from going to Grammar schools is pro-Grammar schools is not much of a story.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 20,191


    This isn’t a major constitutional change. Parliament has always had the right to have its say should the circumstance arise. On this occasion it has a clear opportunity to do so. Why shouldn’t it take it, especially when the government has set its face against it? You could hardly have a more deserving occasion: major change with decades-long significance and no consensus in a government, a minority government, as to how to proceed.

    It is indeed a major constitutional change which redefines the balance between Parliament and the Executive. And it should not be rushed through in a knee jerk manner just because doing so supports your particular cause. It is exactly the same as the issue with the House of Lords. In both instances there is a need for reform but it needs to be properly considered and legislated for, not just rammed through because one side or the other doesn't like the way it might impact on Brexit.

  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 3,603

    Bless. A thread full of people claiming there’s no evidence of the damage that grammar schools do:

    http://ig-legacy.ft.com/content/cb1e02f4-7461-3fd1-ac5d-9fd9befb20dd

    Bless. Someone who chooses to ignore the in depth studies that have been done by recognised authorities on the subject and instead believe a political journalist because their back of a fag packet calculations support their own bias.
    Well spoken ...

    Who to trust: Sir Peter Lampl ..... or Random Nutter Journalist who has no statistical qualifications and can carry out a bonkers calculation to get the answer he wants.

    Who has done more for social mobility: Sir Peter Lampl or Random Nutter Journalist?

    Only Meeks would conclude it is Random Nutter.
  • NEW THREAD

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 65,272
    FF43 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    tlg86 said:

    @TheScreamingEagles - I don't recall grammar schools being a central part of last year's GE.

    Grammar schools are actually quite popular I think, it was the fox hunting and 'dementia tax' that did the Tories in.
    Edit: Their merits are debateable (In the truest sense of the word), but I think they're popular - particularly amongst the sort of demographic the Conservatives are targetting.
    The Conservatives' problem is that grammar schools are popular with the older demographic that largely vote for them. They are not popular with the parent demographic that they need to win over.
    Wrong. A plurality of all voters want more grammar schools and a majority of voters want to keep existing ones
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 3,603
    Ishmael_Z said:

    On grammar schools, I think I’d trust Peter Lampl over (i) politicians and (ii) random nutters on the internet.

    Peter Lampl’s motivation for founding the Trust:

    "When I came back from the States," he recalls, " I went to dinner at my old college, Corpus Christi, which used to have lots of ordinary Welsh kids, many of them my best friends. I was told they weren’t coming through any more."

    I have had interactions with the Sutton Trust and I think it is a genuinely impressive organisation that is willing to cross political boundaries (whether right or left) to try and improve social mobility.

    Estelle Morris wrote : "Given a free hand, he’d re-create the grammar schools. He wants to repeat for others what worked for him. I admire that. “

    Estelle Morris diagnosis is right -- Lampl believes grammar schools work and is essentially trying to recreate them.

    Of course, if those dismissing grammar schools had done as much work as Peter Lampl in driving forward social mobility, I might have some respect for them.

    For example, returning to the matter of Welsh students, Lampl has done far more to get Welsh students to Oxbridge than anything by the vacuous Welsh Government (which has presided over a fall in Welsh education as measured by international organisations).

    So what about the lots x 1,000s of even more ordinary Welsh kids who didn't get to live the dream of attending Corpus (boring little college) with Mr Lampl? Chap who personally profited from going to Grammar schools is pro-Grammar schools is not much of a story.
    Plot the fraction of state-school educated Welsh students attending Oxbridge (or Russell Group) universities versus time.

    That tells us all you need to know about how Welsh education has fared over the last 50 years.

    I do think Lampl has tried to do something about social mobility, and so he has earned the right to be taken seriously.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 27,646
    The service provided by private schools is, at least in Scotland, markedly superior to what the State sector offers.

    To give a few examples my son's school is the only one in Dundee that now offers economics.
    It is the only school in Dundee that allows you to take 3 sciences to Higher in 5th year, something that is very important if you wish to pursue medicine, veterinary sciences, dentistry etc. For the last several years it has had more passes in science than all of the Dundee State schools put together. It has more children getting 5 A's at higher than any school in Dundee has getting 5 passes.

    It really is not just a question of having better sports facilities (and they do). It gives the children lucky enough to attend a vastly better chance of getting into a Russell Group University. That is what I pay for.

    The disgrace, of course, is not that some children get such an advantage but that the provision of education in the State sector is so poor and deteriorating. Many schools in the Dundee area can no longer get enough science or maths teachers. Children are consistently being entered into exams without having covered the whole curriculum, finding questions they simply cannot answer. Exams are being made easier to hide this.

  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 4,933

    Sadiq Khan to ban all junk food advertising throughout London's transport network.

    So how does he replace the lost income - increased fares !!!

    At last, a Khan policy I can sign up to.

    Why should the publicly owned transport network should be used to advertise the food that is making us obese.
  • VerulamiusVerulamius Posts: 1,077
    The Education Policy Institute has recently undertaken some very good research into grammar schools:

    https://epi.org.uk/publications-and-research/11-plus-access-grammar-schools/

    https://epi.org.uk/publications-and-research/grammar-schools-social-mobility/

    https://epi.org.uk/publications-and-research/grammar-schools-social-mobility-analysis-policy-options/

    This suggests that expanding existing grammar schools is more likely to adversely impact non grammar school pupils in those areas than setting up a new grammar school in a region where there are no grammar schools.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 4,933

    Bless. A thread full of people claiming there’s no evidence of the damage that grammar schools do:

    http://ig-legacy.ft.com/content/cb1e02f4-7461-3fd1-ac5d-9fd9befb20dd

    Bless. Someone who chooses to ignore the in depth studies that have been done by recognised authorities on the subject and instead believe a political journalist because their back of a fag packet calculations support their own bias.
    Well spoken ...

    Who to trust: Sir Peter Lampl ..... or Random Nutter Journalist who has no statistical qualifications and can carry out a bonkers calculation to get the answer he wants.

    Who has done more for social mobility: Sir Peter Lampl or Random Nutter Journalist?

    Only Meeks would conclude it is Random Nutter.
    Since when is Chris Cook a random nutter?
    To be honest, your ad hominem attacks just cast doubt on your central claims.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 65,272

    The Education Policy Institute has recently undertaken some very good research into grammar schools:

    https://epi.org.uk/publications-and-research/11-plus-access-grammar-schools/

    https://epi.org.uk/publications-and-research/grammar-schools-social-mobility/

    https://epi.org.uk/publications-and-research/grammar-schools-social-mobility-analysis-policy-options/

    This suggests that expanding existing grammar schools is more likely to adversely impact non grammar school pupils in those areas than setting up a new grammar school in a region where there are no grammar schools.

    Certainly we could do with a few more grammar schools in seaside coastal towns and working class industrial areas
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 1,515
    edited May 2018
    HYUFD said:

    The Education Policy Institute has recently undertaken some very good research into grammar schools:

    https://epi.org.uk/publications-and-research/11-plus-access-grammar-schools/

    https://epi.org.uk/publications-and-research/grammar-schools-social-mobility/

    https://epi.org.uk/publications-and-research/grammar-schools-social-mobility-analysis-policy-options/

    This suggests that expanding existing grammar schools is more likely to adversely impact non grammar school pupils in those areas than setting up a new grammar school in a region where there are no grammar schools.

    Certainly we could do with a few more grammar schools in seaside coastal towns and working class industrial areas
    This is the nub for me. Any expansion of Grammar schools needs to retain a grammar / comprehensive style system rather than expanding too far and heralding the de facto return of the secondary modern: I am favourably inclined to grammars, but opposed to secondary moderns. I am also open to specialisation at 14 as an alternative, but that is a much more fundamental reform.

    If going down the grammar route though, I would require LEAs to provide between around 3-6% of age 11 places at grammars, and refuse expansion in LEAs already over that limit. I might consider a slightly higher limit at age 13/14, and permit transfers in at that point.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 12,698
    OT On top of £390,000 a week Sanchez gets an extra £70,000 for every game he starts.

    Not a bad salary for a donkey.
This discussion has been closed.