Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Rebels without a get-out clause. Why you shouldn’t expect many

1246

Comments

  • What is the point of this 'debate'? It's not a debate, it's a rehash of the same nonsense MPs have said many times, with everyone in Transmit Only mode.
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,223
    I prefer to spell it vonk. Then it looks more fun, like honk or bonk.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,747

    DavidL said:

    With a No Deal we can then start negotiating a Trade Deal in parallel with a Withdrawal Agreement. That also allows us an extra bargaining chip of EU payments to get a good trade deal.

    This really is the weirdest of all the weird suggestions floating around, given that the vast bulk of the economic damage from No Deal will arise from the immediate chaos of crashing out with no transition.
    I think that the word you are looking for may be imbecilic.
    I was trying to be (relatively) polite!
    I think I have done being polite. The morons in the ERG are a public menace. How they can think that we will have any kind of working relationship with the EU after spending 2 years agreeing what our liabilities are and then refusing to pay them, agreeing the framework of a trade deal and then telling them we want to start again and how it somehow doesn't matter that their government (on paper at least) doesn't have even the beginnings of a statutory framework or preparatory work done for no deal but we should somehow barge ahead anyway.

    I mean, seriously, how do they think that is going to go for us or for our relations with the EU?Idiots.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,670
    kinabalu said:

    Not convinced if that. She made two fatal errors which have put her in the position she is in - not going for a trade deal and not making the £ 39bn continent on it coming into effect. With a trade deal the backstop wouldn’t be necessary.

    She wanted a special relationship with the EU that the EU weren’t interested in and made too many concessions too quickly.

    Could have been a bit more hardball on the moolah, perhaps, but the EU were adamant about the sequencing - leave first then we talk trade, cannot negotiate a trade deal while you are still a member of the club. I did not get the impression that was anything but a statement of fact.
    Then they should have given them the bird and started planning
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,544
    Anorak said:

    Nigelb said:

    Anorak said:

    Anazina said:

    Anazina said:

    ERG & DUP are opposing all amendments to the MV, including the Swire and Murrison amendments.

    I do not think that is a surprise to be honest
    It is vonc not vnoc – a weird tic on PB!
    It is indeed - vonc
    Knowing Jezza, he will probably put down a vnoc...then complain the deep state is blocking him.
    It's VONC not VNOC!!!!!

    FFS!!!!
    Vote of NO Confidence. Much easier to remember what it means with a "NO" in the middle.
    VONOC.
    Now you're just being silly.

    Anyway VOTOFNOC, as it sounds like a Russian poison.
    And there was I, thinking I'd found an acceptable compromise.

    Extremist ideologue !
  • eekeek Posts: 24,797

    You know it's a slow day when the most pressing subject on pb is the correct acronym etiquette.

    There, I've even given you a new subject as you can all debate what an acronym is.

    An initialisation that is pronounceable....
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840
    edited January 2019
    I'm going with VONC, VNOC is the result you are hoping for if you call the VONC.
  • DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    With a No Deal we can then start negotiating a Trade Deal in parallel with a Withdrawal Agreement. That also allows us an extra bargaining chip of EU payments to get a good trade deal.

    This really is the weirdest of all the weird suggestions floating around, given that the vast bulk of the economic damage from No Deal will arise from the immediate chaos of crashing out with no transition.
    I think that the word you are looking for may be imbecilic.
    I was trying to be (relatively) polite!
    I think I have done being polite. The morons in the ERG are a public menace. How they can think that we will have any kind of working relationship with the EU after spending 2 years agreeing what our liabilities are and then refusing to pay them, agreeing the framework of a trade deal and then telling them we want to start again and how it somehow doesn't matter that their government (on paper at least) doesn't have even the beginnings of a statutory framework or preparatory work done for no deal but we should somehow barge ahead anyway.

    I mean, seriously, how do they think that is going to go for us or for our relations with the EU?Idiots.
    Very well said
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,544

    What is the point of this 'debate'? It's not a debate, it's a rehash of the same nonsense MPs have said many times, with everyone in Transmit Only mode.

    But acronyms are important...
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,755
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    With a No Deal we can then start negotiating a Trade Deal in parallel with a Withdrawal Agreement. That also allows us an extra bargaining chip of EU payments to get a good trade deal.

    This really is the weirdest of all the weird suggestions floating around, given that the vast bulk of the economic damage from No Deal will arise from the immediate chaos of crashing out with no transition.
    I think that the word you are looking for may be imbecilic.
    I was trying to be (relatively) polite!
    I think I have done being polite. The morons in the ERG are a public menace. How they can think that we will have any kind of working relationship with the EU after spending 2 years agreeing what our liabilities are and then refusing to pay them, agreeing the framework of a trade deal and then telling them we want to start again and how it somehow doesn't matter that their government (on paper at least) doesn't have even the beginnings of a statutory framework or preparatory work done for no deal but we should somehow barge ahead anyway.

    I mean, seriously, how do they think that is going to go for us or for our relations with the EU?Idiots.
    Why is this so obvious to you, I, a lot of people who post here, but not them?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,835
    edited January 2019
    kinabalu said:

    Sean_F said:

    I don't think there's a wave of enthusiasm for the Deal. More that there a lot of people who think it's okay, not bad, can live with it, and feel some sympathy for the PM.

    Serious question:

    What percentage of the public do you think have a good understanding of the Withdrawal Treaty, the Political Declaration, the legal status of each, and how the one relates to the other?

    (a) More than 50%
    (b) Between 10% and 50%
    (c) Less than 10%
    You can pretty much list them out

    Theresa May, Geoffrey Cox, one or both of Arlene Foster or Nigel Dodds, Dominic Grieve, Keir Starmer, Olly Robbins & some senior members of his team, lawyers who deal with the EU and have too much time on their hands.

    Almost everyone else is bluffing to some degree.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,836

    But leavers told us we hold all the cards. Easiest trade deal in history. And EU industry would insist on giving us everything we wanted so they could continue us to sell us prosecco and BMWs.

    They did, that is true. And with the exception of John Redwood they said it in firm authoritative voices whilst maintaining a suitably sober expression. It was not at all clear that they were joking, and one cannot blame the public for assuming that they weren't.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    Anorak said:

    Anazina said:

    Anorak said:

    Anazina said:

    Anazina said:

    ERG & DUP are opposing all amendments to the MV, including the Swire and Murrison amendments.

    I do not think that is a surprise to be honest
    It is vonc not vnoc – a weird tic on PB!
    It is indeed - vonc
    Knowing Jezza, he will probably put down a vnoc...then complain the deep state is blocking him.
    It's VONC not VNOC!!!!!

    FFS!!!!
    Vote of NO Confidence. Much easier to remember what it means with a "NO" in the middle.
    Yeah, like anyone on this forum doesn't know what vonc means!
    You mean vnoc? Funny that you're doing it now.
    No, I mean VONC, as I wrote.

    Vote Of No Confidence
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,747
    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    With a No Deal we can then start negotiating a Trade Deal in parallel with a Withdrawal Agreement. That also allows us an extra bargaining chip of EU payments to get a good trade deal.

    This really is the weirdest of all the weird suggestions floating around, given that the vast bulk of the economic damage from No Deal will arise from the immediate chaos of crashing out with no transition.
    I think that the word you are looking for may be imbecilic.
    I was trying to be (relatively) polite!
    I think I have done being polite. The morons in the ERG are a public menace. How they can think that we will have any kind of working relationship with the EU after spending 2 years agreeing what our liabilities are and then refusing to pay them, agreeing the framework of a trade deal and then telling them we want to start again and how it somehow doesn't matter that their government (on paper at least) doesn't have even the beginnings of a statutory framework or preparatory work done for no deal but we should somehow barge ahead anyway.

    I mean, seriously, how do they think that is going to go for us or for our relations with the EU?Idiots.
    Why is this so obvious to you, I, a lot of people who post here, but not them?
    I really don't know Sean. I can only think that they have spent decades in hermetically sealed echo chambers where every problem is wished away by wanting it hard enough and that it has rotted their brains.
  • Pulpstar said:

    kinabalu said:

    Sean_F said:

    I don't think there's a wave of enthusiasm for the Deal. More that there a lot of people who think it's okay, not bad, can live with it, and feel some sympathy for the PM.

    Serious question:

    What percentage of the public do you think have a good understanding of the Withdrawal Treaty, the Political Declaration, the legal status of each, and how the one relates to the other?

    (a) More than 50%
    (b) Between 10% and 50%
    (c) Less than 10%
    You can pretty much list them out

    Theresa May, Geoffrey Cox, one or both of Arlene Foster or Nigel Dodds, Dominic Grieve, Keir Starmer, Olly Robbins & some senior members of his team, lawyers who deal with the EU and have too much time on their hands.

    Almost everyone else is bluffing to some degree.
    Especially Corbyn
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,544
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    With a No Deal we can then start negotiating a Trade Deal in parallel with a Withdrawal Agreement. That also allows us an extra bargaining chip of EU payments to get a good trade deal.

    This really is the weirdest of all the weird suggestions floating around, given that the vast bulk of the economic damage from No Deal will arise from the immediate chaos of crashing out with no transition.
    I think that the word you are looking for may be imbecilic.
    I was trying to be (relatively) polite!
    I think I have done being polite. The morons in the ERG are a public menace. How they can think that we will have any kind of working relationship with the EU after spending 2 years agreeing what our liabilities are and then refusing to pay them, agreeing the framework of a trade deal and then telling them we want to start again and how it somehow doesn't matter that their government (on paper at least) doesn't have even the beginnings of a statutory framework or preparatory work done for no deal but we should somehow barge ahead anyway.

    I mean, seriously, how do they think that is going to go for us or for our relations with the EU?Idiots.
    Why is this so obvious to you, I, a lot of people who post here, but not them?
    His last word was the clue. Idiots. Morons. Ideologues with the IQ of a cheese plant.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,544
    Pulpstar said:

    kinabalu said:

    Sean_F said:

    I don't think there's a wave of enthusiasm for the Deal. More that there a lot of people who think it's okay, not bad, can live with it, and feel some sympathy for the PM.

    Serious question:

    What percentage of the public do you think have a good understanding of the Withdrawal Treaty, the Political Declaration, the legal status of each, and how the one relates to the other?

    (a) More than 50%
    (b) Between 10% and 50%
    (c) Less than 10%
    You can pretty much list them out

    Theresa May, Geoffrey Cox, one or both of Arlene Foster or Nigel Dodds, Dominic Grieve, Keir Starmer, Olly Robbins & some senior members of his team, lawyers who deal with the EU and have too much time on their hands.

    Almost everyone else is bluffing to some degree.
    You forgot the one that went mad, and the other that has forgotten...
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487

    You know it's a slow day when the most pressing subject on pb is the correct acronym etiquette.

    There, I've even given you a new subject as you can all debate what an acronym is.

    I think it is an acronym because it is pronounced as a word.

    VNOC is a (quasi) initialism.

    Glad we got that all sorted.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    Anazina said:

    Anorak said:

    Anazina said:

    Anorak said:

    Anazina said:

    Anazina said:

    ERG & DUP are opposing all amendments to the MV, including the Swire and Murrison amendments.

    I do not think that is a surprise to be honest
    It is vonc not vnoc – a weird tic on PB!
    It is indeed - vonc
    Knowing Jezza, he will probably put down a vnoc...then complain the deep state is blocking him.
    It's VONC not VNOC!!!!!

    FFS!!!!
    Vote of NO Confidence. Much easier to remember what it means with a "NO" in the middle.
    Yeah, like anyone on this forum doesn't know what vonc means!
    You mean vnoc? Funny that you're doing it now.
    No, I mean VONC, as I wrote.

    Vote Of No Confidence
    HA HA HA you've done it again. Brilliant.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,951
    Pulpstar said:

    kinabalu said:

    Sean_F said:

    I don't think there's a wave of enthusiasm for the Deal. More that there a lot of people who think it's okay, not bad, can live with it, and feel some sympathy for the PM.

    Serious question:

    What percentage of the public do you think have a good understanding of the Withdrawal Treaty, the Political Declaration, the legal status of each, and how the one relates to the other?

    (a) More than 50%
    (b) Between 10% and 50%
    (c) Less than 10%
    You can pretty much list them out

    Theresa May, Geoffrey Cox, one or both of Arlene Foster or Nigel Dodds, Dominic Grieve, Keir Starmer, Olly Robbins & some senior members of his team, lawyers who deal with the EU and have too much time on their hands.

    Almost everyone else is bluffing to some degree.
    Time for May to go and be replaced by Geoffrey Cox. He understands it, isn't going to be bullshitted, the EU know he won't be bullshitted and the voters will trust him not to bullshit them.

    Maybe.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786
    May isn't making any progress with public opinion.

    Support the deal: 23%
    Oppose the deal: 49%

    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/4ovmboa1iw/Internal_190108_Brexit_web.pdf
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,038
    https://twitter.com/iainjwatson/status/1084862453945696258

    You gotta give her points for putting in their work.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,080

    https://twitter.com/iainjwatson/status/1084862453945696258

    You gotta give her points for putting in their work.

    At the end, but not from the outset
  • Pulpstar said:

    kinabalu said:

    Sean_F said:

    I don't think there's a wave of enthusiasm for the Deal. More that there a lot of people who think it's okay, not bad, can live with it, and feel some sympathy for the PM.

    Serious question:

    What percentage of the public do you think have a good understanding of the Withdrawal Treaty, the Political Declaration, the legal status of each, and how the one relates to the other?

    (a) More than 50%
    (b) Between 10% and 50%
    (c) Less than 10%
    You can pretty much list them out

    Theresa May, Geoffrey Cox, one or both of Arlene Foster or Nigel Dodds, Dominic Grieve, Keir Starmer, Olly Robbins & some senior members of his team, lawyers who deal with the EU and have too much time on their hands.

    Almost everyone else is bluffing to some degree.
    Time for May to go and be replaced by Geoffrey Cox. He understands it, isn't going to be bullshitted, the EU know he won't be bullshitted and the voters will trust him not to bullshit them.

    Maybe.
    I think you may have quite a wait
  • AmpfieldAndyAmpfieldAndy Posts: 1,445
    edited January 2019
    kinabalu said:

    Not convinced if that. She made two fatal errors which have put her in the position she is in - not going for a trade deal and not making the £ 39bn continent on it coming into effect. With a trade deal the backstop wouldn’t be necessary.

    She wanted a special relationship with the EU that the EU weren’t interested in and made too many concessions too quickly.

    Could have been a bit more hardball on the moolah, perhaps, but the EU were adamant about the sequencing - leave first then we talk trade, cannot negotiate a trade deal while you are still a member of the club. I did not get the impression that was anything but a statement of fact.
    Doesn’t take much to negotiate them both simultaneously and simply sign one and then the other in the EU’s desired sequencing with the effectiveness of the first conditional on signing the second.

    It’s fine for the EU to be play hardball. It’s a pity we didn’t do the same. As I said, May conceded too much too soon for no quid pro quo of any value.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,747
    And what part of 6 pieces of primary legislation and over 200 pieces of secondary legislation, much of it requiring affirmative approval, needing to be passed did he miss?

  • May isn't making any progress with public opinion.

    Support the deal: 23%
    Oppose the deal: 49%

    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/4ovmboa1iw/Internal_190108_Brexit_web.pdf

    Interesting that other surveys that ask ho whtye think MPs should vote are much more favourable. I guess people are individually happier to risk the good for the better (or the bad for the good), but not when the vote is actually happening.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786

    May isn't making any progress with public opinion.

    Support the deal: 23%
    Oppose the deal: 49%

    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/4ovmboa1iw/Internal_190108_Brexit_web.pdf

    Interesting that other surveys that ask ho whtye think MPs should vote are much more favourable. I guess people are individually happier to risk the good for the better (or the bad for the good), but not when the vote is actually happening.
    The questions on how people view the different outcomes as good or bad are interesting too. There's much more opposition to both the deal and no deal than there is to no Brexit.
  • You might get a majority in favour of this in a People's Vote.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,951
    DavidL said:

    And what part of 6 pieces of primary legislation and over 200 pieces of secondary legislation, much of it requiring affirmative approval, needing to be passed did he miss?

    May uses the Civil Contingencies Act - on the pretext of securing food supplies.

    Simples.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,836
    kinabalu said:

    What percentage of the public do you think have a good understanding of the Withdrawal Treaty, the Political Declaration, the legal status of each, and how the one relates to the other?

    (a) More than 50%
    (b) Between 10% and 50%
    (c) Less than 10%

    Thanks a lot for the various answers to my question above.

    Not various answers, strictly speaking, since (c) is unanimous. Which, for the record, is my very confident answer too.

    I have many objections to another EU referendum but this is my biggest one. Of course the % would go up a little given a referendum campaign but I don't think it would reach the heights of (b) let alone (a).

    This is why, colours to the mast, I actually prefer all other outcomes to another referendum, including No Deal.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    edited January 2019

    kinabalu said:

    Not convinced if that. She made two fatal errors which have put her in the position she is in - not going for a trade deal and not making the £ 39bn continent on it coming into effect. With a trade deal the backstop wouldn’t be necessary.

    She wanted a special relationship with the EU that the EU weren’t interested in and made too many concessions too quickly.

    Could have been a bit more hardball on the moolah, perhaps, but the EU were adamant about the sequencing - leave first then we talk trade, cannot negotiate a trade deal while you are still a member of the club. I did not get the impression that was anything but a statement of fact.
    Doesn’t take much to negotiate them both simultaneously and simply sign one and then the other in the EU’s desired sequencing with the effectiveness of the first conditional on signing the second.

    It’s fine for the EU to be play hardball. It’s a pity we didn’t do the same. As I said, May conceded too much too soon for no quid pro quo of any value.
    Parody. Must be.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,755

    May isn't making any progress with public opinion.

    Support the deal: 23%
    Oppose the deal: 49%

    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/4ovmboa1iw/Internal_190108_Brexit_web.pdf

    Well, both Survation and BMG have suggested substantially greater levels of support.

    However, if you look in detail at Yougov's numbers, all options, No Deal, Remain, Deal, Norway find majorities or pluralities against them., and overall, those surveyed favour going ahead with Brexit by 47% to 39%, and reject a second referendum by 49% to 36%.

    As so often, the result you get depends on the question you ask.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,724
    edited January 2019
    DavidL said:

    And what part of 6 pieces of primary legislation and over 200 pieces of secondary legislation, much of it requiring affirmative approval, needing to be passed did he miss?

    Surely they don't need to be passed? We leave on the 29th unless a conscious decision is taken by Parliament to revoke. These other things just need to be passed to ameliorate or avoid catastrophic consequences.

    I'm not totally convinced this is at the top of the ERG's agenda right now. As you noted above, they seem to have lost what few marbles they ever had. They sound almost as deranged as Lord Adonis.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,724
    edited January 2019

    You might get a majority in favour of this in a People's Vote.
    I think you'd get a majority in favour of suspending every last one of our MPs in a vote, up until the moment you explained that 'suspended' didn't mean 'hanged on the nearest lamp post.'

    Yet another reason why referendums are a reckless idea.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,747
    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    And what part of 6 pieces of primary legislation and over 200 pieces of secondary legislation, much of it requiring affirmative approval, needing to be passed did he miss?

    Surely they don't need to be passed? We leave on the 29th unless a conscious decision is taken by Parliament to revoke. These other things just need to be passed to ameliorate or avoid catastrophic consequences.

    I'm not totally convinced this is at the top of the ERG's agenda right now. As you noted above, they seem to have lost what few marbles they ever had. They sound almost as deranged as Lord Adonis.
    Wow, and I thought I was being harsh.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,836
    edited January 2019
    malcolmg said:

    Then they should have given them the bird and started planning

    But the planning would have been for a scenario of big job losses and a border in Ireland.

    Would have taken nerves of steel!
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,724
    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    And what part of 6 pieces of primary legislation and over 200 pieces of secondary legislation, much of it requiring affirmative approval, needing to be passed did he miss?

    Surely they don't need to be passed? We leave on the 29th unless a conscious decision is taken by Parliament to revoke. These other things just need to be passed to ameliorate or avoid catastrophic consequences.

    I'm not totally convinced this is at the top of the ERG's agenda right now. As you noted above, they seem to have lost what few marbles they ever had. They sound almost as deranged as Lord Adonis.
    Wow, and I thought I was being harsh.
    Could have been worse. At least I said Adonis not Williamson.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786
    edited January 2019
    Sean_F said:

    May isn't making any progress with public opinion.

    Support the deal: 23%
    Oppose the deal: 49%

    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/4ovmboa1iw/Internal_190108_Brexit_web.pdf

    Well, both Survation and BMG have suggested substantially greater levels of support.

    However, if you look in detail at Yougov's numbers, all options, No Deal, Remain, Deal, Norway find majorities or pluralities against them., and overall, those surveyed favour going ahead with Brexit by 47% to 39%, and reject a second referendum by 49% to 36%.

    As so often, the result you get depends on the question you ask.
    Deal:
    Good - 12%, Acceptable - 23%, Bad - 43%

    No deal:
    Good - 17%, Acceptable - 15%, Bad - 52%

    Stay in single market/customs union:
    Good - 24%, Acceptable - 24%, Bad - 27%
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,747

    DavidL said:

    And what part of 6 pieces of primary legislation and over 200 pieces of secondary legislation, much of it requiring affirmative approval, needing to be passed did he miss?

    May uses the Civil Contingencies Act - on the pretext of securing food supplies.

    Simples.
    Actually s21 of the Civil Contingencies Act provides:
    21Conditions for making emergency regulations
    (1)This section specifies the conditions mentioned in section 20.
    (2)The first condition is that an emergency has occurred, is occurring or is about to occur.
    (3)The second condition is that it is necessary to make provision for the purpose of preventing, controlling or mitigating an aspect or effect of the emergency.
    (4)The third condition is that the need for provision referred to in subsection (3) is urgent.
    (5)For the purpose of subsection (3) provision which is the same as an enactment (“the existing legislation”) is necessary if, in particular—
    (a)the existing legislation cannot be relied upon without the risk of serious delay,
    (b)it is not possible without the risk of serious delay to ascertain whether the existing legislation can be relied upon, or
    (c)the existing legislation might be insufficiently effective.
    (6)For the purpose of subsection (3) provision which could be made under an enactment other than section 20 (“the existing legislation”) is necessary if, in particular—
    (a)the provision cannot be made under the existing legislation without the risk of serious delay,
    (b)it is not possible without the risk of serious delay to ascertain whether the provision can be made under the existing legislation, or
    (c)the provision might be insufficiently effective if made under the existing legislation.

    I think it is arguable that all of these conditions would be met.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited January 2019
    I think I have been advocating for this as long as I have been posting on PB...disadvantaged kids would be far better off under this approach then the current “fair access” silliness.

    https://amp.theguardian.com/education/2019/jan/14/universities-should-give-offers-after-results-day-says-study
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392

    What is the point of this 'debate'? It's not a debate, it's a rehash of the same nonsense MPs have said many times, with everyone in Transmit Only mode.

    Virtue signalling?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,755
    edited January 2019

    Sean_F said:

    May isn't making any progress with public opinion.

    Support the deal: 23%
    Oppose the deal: 49%

    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/4ovmboa1iw/Internal_190108_Brexit_web.pdf

    Well, both Survation and BMG have suggested substantially greater levels of support.

    However, if you look in detail at Yougov's numbers, all options, No Deal, Remain, Deal, Norway find majorities or pluralities against them., and overall, those surveyed favour going ahead with Brexit by 47% to 39%, and reject a second referendum by 49% to 36%.

    As so often, the result you get depends on the question you ask.
    That's not true. The No Brexit option has a plurality in favour of it.

    Deal:
    Good - 12%, Acceptable - 23%, Bad - 43%

    No deal:
    Good - 17%, Acceptable - 15%, Bad - 52%

    No Brexit:
    Good - 24%, Acceptable - 24%, Bad - 27%
    No Brexit is 36% Good, 41% Bad. If you add acceptable to it, then you get to 45%, but that's not much greater than the number accepting Deal.
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,223
    DavidL said:

    And what part of 6 pieces of primary legislation and over 200 pieces of secondary legislation, much of it requiring affirmative approval, needing to be passed did he miss?

    We only need to pass that if we don’t want the population to experience severe disruption that could affect a small minority very badly indeed. Only weak-willed traitors like us care about such things.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,747
    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    And what part of 6 pieces of primary legislation and over 200 pieces of secondary legislation, much of it requiring affirmative approval, needing to be passed did he miss?

    Surely they don't need to be passed? We leave on the 29th unless a conscious decision is taken by Parliament to revoke. These other things just need to be passed to ameliorate or avoid catastrophic consequences.

    I'm not totally convinced this is at the top of the ERG's agenda right now. As you noted above, they seem to have lost what few marbles they ever had. They sound almost as deranged as Lord Adonis.
    Wow, and I thought I was being harsh.
    Could have been worse. At least I said Adonis not Williamson.
    How the hell are we in this mess? Why were all these Acts not passed months ago simply waiting on SIs to bring them into force when and if required? The incompetence of this government is simply mind blowing.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,670
    kinabalu said:

    malcolmg said:

    Then they should have given them the bird and started planning

    But the planning would have been for a scenario of big job losses and a border in Ireland.

    Would have taken nerves of steel!
    Hence the result the wobbling jellies managed. It may have focused a few minds in EU.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,747
    RoyalBlue said:

    DavidL said:

    And what part of 6 pieces of primary legislation and over 200 pieces of secondary legislation, much of it requiring affirmative approval, needing to be passed did he miss?

    We only need to pass that if we don’t want the population to experience severe disruption that could affect a small minority very badly indeed. Only weak-willed traitors like us care about such things.
    Sorry, my mistake. I thought we still wanted to have an economy afterwards.
  • Sean_F said:

    May isn't making any progress with public opinion.

    Support the deal: 23%
    Oppose the deal: 49%

    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/4ovmboa1iw/Internal_190108_Brexit_web.pdf

    Well, both Survation and BMG have suggested substantially greater levels of support.

    However, if you look in detail at Yougov's numbers, all options, No Deal, Remain, Deal, Norway find majorities or pluralities against them., and overall, those surveyed favour going ahead with Brexit by 47% to 39%, and reject a second referendum by 49% to 36%.

    As so often, the result you get depends on the question you ask.
    That's not true. The No Brexit option has a plurality in favour of it.

    Deal:
    Good - 12%, Acceptable - 23%, Bad - 43%

    No deal:
    Good - 17%, Acceptable - 15%, Bad - 52%

    No Brexit:
    Good - 24%, Acceptable - 24%, Bad - 27%
    Hardly a ringing endorsement! And you ignore this question:

    Imagine that the final outcome of Brexit was Britain having a new referendum and voting to remain in the EU after all. Would you consider this to be:

    A very good outcome 28%
    A fairly good outcome 8%
    An acceptable compromise 9%
    A fairly bad outcome 7%
    A very bad outcome 34%

    Total good outcome: 36%, Total bad outcome: 41%


    Interesting also that it is so polarised, usually you expect the middle options to be the ones people go for,
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    On initialisms, surely we need something in place of LGBTIQ+? It was not pronounceable back when it was only 4 letters, but much more than that and it is clunky to sound out each character.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786
    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    May isn't making any progress with public opinion.

    Support the deal: 23%
    Oppose the deal: 49%

    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/4ovmboa1iw/Internal_190108_Brexit_web.pdf

    Well, both Survation and BMG have suggested substantially greater levels of support.

    However, if you look in detail at Yougov's numbers, all options, No Deal, Remain, Deal, Norway find majorities or pluralities against them., and overall, those surveyed favour going ahead with Brexit by 47% to 39%, and reject a second referendum by 49% to 36%.

    As so often, the result you get depends on the question you ask.
    That's not true. The No Brexit option has a plurality in favour of it.

    Deal:
    Good - 12%, Acceptable - 23%, Bad - 43%

    No deal:
    Good - 17%, Acceptable - 15%, Bad - 52%

    No Brexit:
    Good - 24%, Acceptable - 24%, Bad - 27%
    No Brexit is 36% Good, 41% Bad. If you add acceptable to it, then you get to 45%, but that's not much greater than the number accepting Deal.
    That's no Brexit via a second referendum. I've edited my post as I misread the stay in single market/customs union option as no Brexit at all.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,755

    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    May isn't making any progress with public opinion.

    Support the deal: 23%
    Oppose the deal: 49%

    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/4ovmboa1iw/Internal_190108_Brexit_web.pdf

    Well, both Survation and BMG have suggested substantially greater levels of support.

    However, if you look in detail at Yougov's numbers, all options, No Deal, Remain, Deal, Norway find majorities or pluralities against them., and overall, those surveyed favour going ahead with Brexit by 47% to 39%, and reject a second referendum by 49% to 36%.

    As so often, the result you get depends on the question you ask.
    That's not true. The No Brexit option has a plurality in favour of it.

    Deal:
    Good - 12%, Acceptable - 23%, Bad - 43%

    No deal:
    Good - 17%, Acceptable - 15%, Bad - 52%

    No Brexit:
    Good - 24%, Acceptable - 24%, Bad - 27%
    No Brexit is 36% Good, 41% Bad. If you add acceptable to it, then you get to 45%, but that's not much greater than the number accepting Deal.
    That's no Brexit via a second referendum. I've edited my post as I misread the stay in single market/customs union option as no Brexit at all.
    You also get 37% favouring No Deal or Deal v 36% favouring cancel Brexit or a second referendum.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. L, May's not over-encumbered with talent.

    Mr. kle4, that would be sensible. So it may well not happen.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,835
    kle4 said:

    On initialisms, surely we need something in place of LGBTIQ+? It was not pronounceable back when it was only 4 letters, but much more than that and it is clunky to sound out each character.

    In academic circles GRSD is popular. Gender, Relationship and Sexual Diversity.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,724
    edited January 2019

    I think I have been advocating for this as long as I have been posting on PB...disadvantaged kids would be far better off under this approach and the all the “fair access” silliness.

    https://amp.theguardian.com/education/2019/jan/14/universities-should-give-offers-after-results-day-says-study

    Unfortunately thanks to Mr Gove's reforms it will not be possible to bring forward A-level exams, as they are far too content heavy. It's 50/50 whether I will finish the course this year, and mine (AQA) is the lightest in terms of content. History, as a whole, is much lighter than say Maths or Physics. In fact, to complicate matters they could only be brought forward three weeks, which isn't enough time for what's proposed.

    There are other issues as well. First of all, UCAS isn't especially user friendly and as one of the Heads of Faculty and a Year 13 tutor I spend half my life trying to help bewildered students navigate it. The finance system is even worse (remember, the SLC has a senior manager so dense he doesn't know July is the month before August). So cutting out school support is a recipe for chaos.

    There are, however, alternatives. I agree, for a start, that knowing results in advance would be better. It would also ease the time pressure on remarks (I once had a student who lost a place at uni because the marker didn't know the Duke of Suffolk was murdered in 1450, and it took two months to disentangle what had happened). And there is no reason why universities could not start in January.

    However, a more practicable approach would be to allow students to take up foundation years at designated universities or sixth form colleges after A-level (which most universities have at the start anyway) and switch at the end of them to a different university if they perform well - in effect cutting the Russell Group (where contrary to popular belief the teaching is often of a shockingly poor standard) out of the first stage of the admissions process. They could hthen be taken on their A-level results and at least one semester of university results.

    And because the Russell Group will never allow such a sensible system, it will never happen.
  • kle4 said:

    On initialisms, surely we need something in place of LGBTIQ+? It was not pronounceable back when it was only 4 letters, but much more than that and it is clunky to sound out each character.

    Playing with fire there son...you miss off any of that and somebody loses their shit and calls you transphobic etc.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,755
    DavidL said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    DavidL said:

    And what part of 6 pieces of primary legislation and over 200 pieces of secondary legislation, much of it requiring affirmative approval, needing to be passed did he miss?

    We only need to pass that if we don’t want the population to experience severe disruption that could affect a small minority very badly indeed. Only weak-willed traitors like us care about such things.
    Sorry, my mistake. I thought we still wanted to have an economy afterwards.
    An economy is for wimps.
  • Rexel56Rexel56 Posts: 807
    ydoethur said:

    I think I have been advocating for this as long as I have been posting on PB...disadvantaged kids would be far better off under this approach and the all the “fair access” silliness.

    https://amp.theguardian.com/education/2019/jan/14/universities-should-give-offers-after-results-day-says-study

    Unfortunately thanks to Mr Gove's reforms it will not be possible to bring forward A-level exams, as they are far too content heavy. It's 50/50 whether I will finish the course this year, and mine (AQA) is the lightest in terms of content. History, as a whole, is much lighter than say Maths or Physics. In fact, to complicate matters they could only be brought forward three weeks, which isn't enough time for what's proposed.

    There are other issues as well. First of all, UCAS isn't especially user friendly and as one of the Heads of Faculty and a Year 13 tutor I spend half my life trying to help bewildered students navigate it. The finance system is even worse (remember, the SLC has a senior manager so dense he doesn't know July is the month before August). So cutting out school support is a recipe for chaos.

    There are, however, alternatives. I agree, for a start, that knowing results in advance would be better. It would also ease the time pressure on remarks (I once had a student who lost a place at uni because the marker didn't know the Duke of Suffolk was murdered in 1450, and it took two months to disentangle what had happened). And there is no reason why universities could not start in January.

    However, a more practicable approach would be to allow students to take up foundation years at designated universities or sixth form colleges after A-level (which most universities have at the start anyway) and switch at the end of them to a different university if they perform well - in effect cutting the Russell Group (where contrary to popular belief the teaching is often of a shockingly poor standard) out of the first stage of the admissions process. They could hthen be taken on their A-level results and at least one semester of university results.

    And because the Russell Group will never allow such a sensible system, it will never happen.
    Surprised on the time pressure to finish the curriculum. How many hours per fortnight are you timetabled?
  • grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,234
    edited January 2019
    Wherein we learn that for at least one Brexiteer, taking back control means a dictatorship

    https://twitter.com/AdamBienkov/status/1084861993318793219
  • eekeek Posts: 24,797
    Rexel56 said:

    ydoethur said:

    I think I have been advocating for this as long as I have been posting on PB...disadvantaged kids would be far better off under this approach and the all the “fair access” silliness.

    https://amp.theguardian.com/education/2019/jan/14/universities-should-give-offers-after-results-day-says-study

    Unfortunately thanks to Mr Gove's reforms it will not be possible to bring forward A-level exams, as they are far too content heavy. It's 50/50 whether I will finish the course this year, and mine (AQA) is the lightest in terms of content. History, as a whole, is much lighter than say Maths or Physics. In fact, to complicate matters they could only be brought forward three weeks, which isn't enough time for what's proposed.

    There are other issues as well. First of all, UCAS isn't especially user friendly and as one of the Heads of Faculty and a Year 13 tutor I spend half my life trying to help bewildered students navigate it. The finance system is even worse (remember, the SLC has a senior manager so dense he doesn't know July is the month before August). So cutting out school support is a recipe for chaos.

    There are, however, alternatives. I agree, for a start, that knowing results in advance would be better. It would also ease the time pressure on remarks (I once had a student who lost a place at uni because the marker didn't know the Duke of Suffolk was murdered in 1450, and it took two months to disentangle what had happened). And there is no reason why universities could not start in January.

    However, a more practicable approach would be to allow students to take up foundation years at designated universities or sixth form colleges after A-level (which most universities have at the start anyway) and switch at the end of them to a different university if they perform well - in effect cutting the Russell Group (where contrary to popular belief the teaching is often of a shockingly poor standard) out of the first stage of the admissions process. They could hthen be taken on their A-level results and at least one semester of university results.

    And because the Russell Group will never allow such a sensible system, it will never happen.
    Surprised on the time pressure to finish the curriculum. How many hours per fortnight are you timetabled?
    I'm not I've seen what my daughter (Year 12 / lower 6) has for Maths...
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    eek said:
    If the government opposed such an amendment you can be sure he'd accept it! The actual nick boles should do it.
  • PaulyPauly Posts: 897

    Wherein we learn that for at least one Brexiteer, taking back control means a dictatorship

    https://twitter.com/AdamBienkov/status/1084861993318793219

    What nonsense - the FTPA would still be law even if they prorogue parliament.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited January 2019
    When will these media companies learn...

    https://m.sfgate.com/business/technology/article/Netflix-and-chill-no-more-streaming-is-getting-13510694.php

    If they turn it into a spaghetti system all that happens is people use pirate systems. There are already numerous apps that make Netflix catalogue look tiny and everybody now can get fast enough internet.

    The reason Spotify is so popular is you basically get everything on one service.
  • grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,234
    eek said:
    Gavin Williamson has signed it 22 times.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,049
    edited January 2019

    I think I have been advocating for this as long as I have been posting on PB...disadvantaged kids would be far better off under this approach then the current “fair access” silliness.

    https://amp.theguardian.com/education/2019/jan/14/universities-should-give-offers-after-results-day-says-study

    My medical school has had this policy for some years, for undergraduate Medical Degrees. It has had an effect as private schools often over egg their predictions and state schools under do them. The extra year of maturity helps too.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,724
    Rexel56 said:

    ydoethur said:

    I think I have been advocating for this as long as I have been posting on PB...disadvantaged kids would be far better off under this approach and the all the “fair access” silliness.

    https://amp.theguardian.com/education/2019/jan/14/universities-should-give-offers-after-results-day-says-study

    Unfortunately thanks to Mr Gove's reforms it will not be possible to bring forward A-level exams, as they are far too content heavy. It's 50/50 whether I will finish the course this year, and mine (AQA) is the lightest in terms of content. History, as a whole, is much lighter than say Maths or Physics. In fact, to complicate matters they could only be brought forward three weeks, which isn't enough time for what's proposed.

    There are other issues as well. First of all, UCAS isn't especially user friendly and as one of the Heads of Faculty and a Year 13 tutor I spend half my life trying to help bewildered students navigate it. The finance system is even worse (remember, the SLC has a senior manager so dense he doesn't know July is the month before August). So cutting out school support is a recipe for chaos.

    There are, however, alternatives. I agree, for a start, that knowing results in advance would be better. It would also ease the time pressure on remarks (I once had a student who lost a place at uni because the marker didn't know the Duke of Suffolk was murdered in 1450, and it took two months to disentangle what had happened). And there is no reason why universities could not start in January.

    However, a more practicable approach would be to allow students to take up foundation years at designated universities or sixth form colleges after A-level (which most universities have at the start anyway) and switch at the end of them to a different university if they perform well - in effect cutting the Russell Group (where contrary to popular belief the teaching is often of a shockingly poor standard) out of the first stage of the admissions process. They could hthen be taken on their A-level results and at least one semester of university results.

    And because the Russell Group will never allow such a sensible system, it will never happen.
    Surprised on the time pressure to finish the curriculum. How many hours per fortnight are you timetabled?
    Ten.

    Maths has twenty, and it still isn't enough.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,049
    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    DavidL said:

    And what part of 6 pieces of primary legislation and over 200 pieces of secondary legislation, much of it requiring affirmative approval, needing to be passed did he miss?

    We only need to pass that if we don’t want the population to experience severe disruption that could affect a small minority very badly indeed. Only weak-willed traitors like us care about such things.
    Sorry, my mistake. I thought we still wanted to have an economy afterwards.
    An economy is for wimps.
    F*** Business!
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,042
    If Parliament rejects the withdrawal agreement, why on earth would we pay the calculation of our liabilities given as part of that agreement? Perhaps PB's self-appointed arbiters of common sense can tell me this?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited January 2019
    Foxy said:

    I think I have been advocating for this as long as I have been posting on PB...disadvantaged kids would be far better off under this approach then the current “fair access” silliness.

    https://amp.theguardian.com/education/2019/jan/14/universities-should-give-offers-after-results-day-says-study

    My medical school has had this policy for some years, for undergraduate Medical Degrees. It has had an effect as private schools often over egg their predictions and state schools under do them. The extra year of maturity helps too.
    Even if they are over-egging / under doing it, given past performance I can imagine there is also plenty of conscious and subconscious bias of well that’s a good school they have had loads of kids come here with top grades vs we don’t get many / any from there, could be a bit risky if they will actually get that.
  • grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,234
    kle4 said:

    On initialisms, surely we need something in place of LGBTIQ+? It was not pronounceable back when it was only 4 letters, but much more than that and it is clunky to sound out each character.

    I've always had a penchant for plain old 'queer'.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXOkXDfUvGM
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,755

    If Parliament rejects the withdrawal agreement, why on earth would we pay the calculation of our liabilities given as part of that agreement? Perhaps PB's self-appointed arbiters of common sense can tell me this?

    The alternative would be years of litigation over the liabilities. .
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,724
    eek said:

    I'm not I've seen what my daughter (Year 12 / lower 6) has for Maths...

    If she's doing Furher Maths as well I'm amazed she's still upright and breathing frankly.

    One of the more bizarre features of the new qualifications is in the manic drive to 'add rigour' they seem to have rather lost sight of the fact that a course so rigorous that nobody can do it is of no value whatsoever. It would be better to have a less complicated course that more people could be encouraged to do so we widen the skills base, than a course that even the very ablest struggle with.

    Already we've banned anyone who gets less than a 7 from doing Maths A-level, and strongly intimated that Further Maths GCSE will be needed to go beyond AS.
  • eekeek Posts: 24,797

    When will these media companies learn...

    https://m.sfgate.com/business/technology/article/Netflix-and-chill-no-more-streaming-is-getting-13510694.php

    If they turn it into a spaghetti system all that happens is people use pirate systems. There are already numerous apps that make Netflix catalogue look tiny and everybody now can get fast enough internet.

    The reason Spotify is so popular is you basically get everything on one service.

    The Warner one is stupid - you can see how Disney could pull off such a deal for scheme focussing on Children and Amazon does it as TV is just an added part of Prime...
  • Nigelb said:

    What is the point of this 'debate'? It's not a debate, it's a rehash of the same nonsense MPs have said many times, with everyone in Transmit Only mode.

    But acronyms are important...
    YMTTICPC
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,042
    Sean_F said:

    If Parliament rejects the withdrawal agreement, why on earth would we pay the calculation of our liabilities given as part of that agreement? Perhaps PB's self-appointed arbiters of common sense can tell me this?

    The alternative would be years of litigation over the liabilities. .
    Which is surely to be amply preferred than spunking the whole lot away immediately with literally no benefit. Unless you subscribe to the Theresa May/David Cameron concept of negotiation.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    edited January 2019
    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    I'm not I've seen what my daughter (Year 12 / lower 6) has for Maths...

    If she's doing Furher Maths as well I'm amazed she's still upright and breathing frankly.
    I thought that was "Fuhrer maths" there for a second, and I too was amazed.
  • eekeek Posts: 24,797
    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    I'm not I've seen what my daughter (Year 12 / lower 6) has for Maths...

    If she's doing Furher Maths as well I'm amazed she's still upright and breathing frankly.

    One of the more bizarre features of the new qualifications is in the manic drive to 'add rigour' they seem to have rather lost sight of the fact that a course so rigorous that nobody can do it is of no value whatsoever. It would be better to have a less complicated course that more people could be encouraged to do so we widen the skills base, than a course that even the very ablest struggle with.

    Already we've banned anyone who gets less than a 7 from doing Maths A-level, and strongly intimated that Further Maths GCSE will be needed to go beyond AS.
    No just normal A level Maths. Further maths in her school has a grand total of 1 child still doing it and I can see the point of requiring a 7 from what I'm hearing a lot of children are struggling and GCSE maths had already sorted out a lot of the "chuff"...
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786

    Sean_F said:

    If Parliament rejects the withdrawal agreement, why on earth would we pay the calculation of our liabilities given as part of that agreement? Perhaps PB's self-appointed arbiters of common sense can tell me this?

    The alternative would be years of litigation over the liabilities. .
    Which is surely to be amply preferred than spunking the whole lot away immediately with literally no benefit. Unless you subscribe to the Theresa May/David Cameron concept of negotiation.
    If you regard economic continuity as being of "no benefit", you are either incompetent or mad.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,042

    Sean_F said:

    If Parliament rejects the withdrawal agreement, why on earth would we pay the calculation of our liabilities given as part of that agreement? Perhaps PB's self-appointed arbiters of common sense can tell me this?

    The alternative would be years of litigation over the liabilities. .
    Which is surely to be amply preferred than spunking the whole lot away immediately with literally no benefit. Unless you subscribe to the Theresa May/David Cameron concept of negotiation.
    If you regard economic continuity as being of "no benefit", you are either incompetent or mad.
    If there isn't a deal, there is no economic continuity anyway. That is what your lot has been saying all along isn't it?
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,223

    kle4 said:

    On initialisms, surely we need something in place of LGBTIQ+? It was not pronounceable back when it was only 4 letters, but much more than that and it is clunky to sound out each character.

    I've always had a penchant for plain old 'queer'.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXOkXDfUvGM
    Not my favourite. Let’s reclaim deviant.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,724
    edited January 2019
    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    I'm not I've seen what my daughter (Year 12 / lower 6) has for Maths...

    If she's doing Furher Maths as well I'm amazed she's still upright and breathing frankly.
    I thought that was "Fuhrer maths" there for a second, and I too was amazed.
    I blame autocorrect!

    As I said to a maths teacher earlier today, I don't know what we blamed for our mistakes before we had computers.
    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    I'm not I've seen what my daughter (Year 12 / lower 6) has for Maths...

    If she's doing Furher Maths as well I'm amazed she's still upright and breathing frankly.

    One of the more bizarre features of the new qualifications is in the manic drive to 'add rigour' they seem to have rather lost sight of the fact that a course so rigorous that nobody can do it is of no value whatsoever. It would be better to have a less complicated course that more people could be encouraged to do so we widen the skills base, than a course that even the very ablest struggle with.

    Already we've banned anyone who gets less than a 7 from doing Maths A-level, and strongly intimated that Further Maths GCSE will be needed to go beyond AS.
    No just normal A level Maths. Further maths in her school has a grand total of 1 child still doing it and I can see the point of requiring a 7 from what I'm hearing a lot of children are struggling and GCSE maths had already sorted out a lot of the "chuff"...
    I've had 40% of the cohort who started it drop history already this year. All very bright, all very keen, all very hardworking, all successful at GCSE despite the epic shambles over the mark scheme that saw the average mark for their combination dip to 27%. They just found it too hard.

    I wouldn't mind it being hard - I've taught postgrads FFS - but it's not even a good preparation for a university degree.

    Something is badly wrong.

    Edit - and at a time we as a country badly need more mathematicians in every field, should we really be saying 1 candidate per school should be doing it? Really? Actually?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    edited January 2019
    ydoethur said:


    I blame autocorrect!

    As I said to a maths teacher earlier today, I don't know what we blamed for our mistakes before we had computers.

    Those who taught us :)
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,724
    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:


    I blame autocorrect!

    As I said to a maths teacher earlier today, I don't know what we blamed for our mistakes before we had computers.

    Those who taught us :)
    So at least I have an alley-bee now?
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,042
    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    I'm not I've seen what my daughter (Year 12 / lower 6) has for Maths...

    If she's doing Furher Maths as well I'm amazed she's still upright and breathing frankly.
    I thought that was "Fuhrer maths" there for a second, and I too was amazed.
    I shouldn't be imagining what would be on the prospectus of fuhrer maths should I?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,724
    edited January 2019

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    I'm not I've seen what my daughter (Year 12 / lower 6) has for Maths...

    If she's doing Furher Maths as well I'm amazed she's still upright and breathing frankly.
    I thought that was "Fuhrer maths" there for a second, and I too was amazed.
    I shouldn't be imagining what would be on the prospectus of fuhrer maths should I?
    I am going to be very noble and not make a comment on Gove here.

    Although somewhere I do have an example of a German algebra question that involved a plane 'bombing Warsaw, the capital of international Jewry.'

    Edit - and I didn't even mention Corbyn's, ummm, mathematical mishaps with his 'fully costed manifesto'...
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/1084755578436624384

    Is this actually liable to escalate into some kind of crisis or is it just the media hyperventilating? The idea of Salmond and Sturgeon getting into a full-scale catfight with one another seems somewhat improbable, though then again what do I know?
  • Harris_TweedHarris_Tweed Posts: 1,300

    https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/1084755578436624384

    Is this actually liable to escalate into some kind of crisis or is it just the media hyperventilating? The idea of Salmond and Sturgeon getting into a full-scale catfight with one another seems somewhat improbable, though then again what do I know?

    Isn't there some sort of rule in the FTPA against UK and Scottish Elections falling on the same day? :):):)
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,724

    https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/1084755578436624384

    Is this actually liable to escalate into some kind of crisis or is it just the media hyperventilating? The idea of Salmond and Sturgeon getting into a full-scale catfight with one another seems somewhat improbable, though then again what do I know?

    Surely a catfish fight?

    But I think they're just carping at each other.

    Entertaining though it would be to see the SNP implode over a sex scandal, I hope it doesn't happen just yet. Nicola should farm him out to the DUP or something.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392

    https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/1084755578436624384

    Is this actually liable to escalate into some kind of crisis or is it just the media hyperventilating? The idea of Salmond and Sturgeon getting into a full-scale catfight with one another seems somewhat improbable, though then again what do I know?

    I would always assume that unless the SNP prospects started to flag, they would keep a lid on internal tensions.
  • ydoethur said:

    https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/1084755578436624384

    Is this actually liable to escalate into some kind of crisis or is it just the media hyperventilating? The idea of Salmond and Sturgeon getting into a full-scale catfight with one another seems somewhat improbable, though then again what do I know?

    Surely a catfish fight?

    But I think they're just carping at each other.

    Entertaining though it would be to see the SNP implode over a sex scandal, I hope it doesn't happen just yet. Nicola should farm him out to the DUP or something.
    He's already been farmed out to RT!

    https://www.rt.com/shows/alex-salmond-show/
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    Anorak said:

    Anazina said:

    Anorak said:

    Anazina said:

    Anorak said:

    Anazina said:

    Anazina said:

    ERG & DUP are opposing all amendments to the MV, including the Swire and Murrison amendments.

    I do not think that is a surprise to be honest
    It is vonc not vnoc – a weird tic on PB!
    It is indeed - vonc
    Knowing Jezza, he will probably put down a vnoc...then complain the deep state is blocking him.
    It's VONC not VNOC!!!!!

    FFS!!!!
    Vote of NO Confidence. Much easier to remember what it means with a "NO" in the middle.
    Yeah, like anyone on this forum doesn't know what vonc means!
    You mean vnoc? Funny that you're doing it now.
    No, I mean VONC, as I wrote.

    Vote Of No Confidence
    HA HA HA you've done it again. Brilliant.
    No. It should be vonc, as I have written.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,042
    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    I'm not I've seen what my daughter (Year 12 / lower 6) has for Maths...

    If she's doing Furher Maths as well I'm amazed she's still upright and breathing frankly.
    I thought that was "Fuhrer maths" there for a second, and I too was amazed.
    I shouldn't be imagining what would be on the prospectus of fuhrer maths should I?
    I am going to be very noble and not make a comment on Gove here.

    Although somewhere I do have an example of a German algebra question that involved a plane 'bombing Warsaw, the capital of international Jewry.'

    Edit - and I didn't even mention Corbyn's, ummm, mathematical mishaps with his 'fully costed manifesto'...
    If 500,000 people attend a rally in Nuremburg, each with 5 books for the bonfire, how many millimetres should be shaved from the Fuhrer's upper lip to produce a perfectly square moustache?
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    I'm not I've seen what my daughter (Year 12 / lower 6) has for Maths...

    If she's doing Furher Maths as well I'm amazed she's still upright and breathing frankly.
    I thought that was "Fuhrer maths" there for a second, and I too was amazed.
    I shouldn't be imagining what would be on the prospectus of fuhrer maths should I?
    I am going to be very noble and not make a comment on Gove here.

    Although somewhere I do have an example of a German algebra question that involved a plane 'bombing Warsaw, the capital of international Jewry.'

    Edit - and I didn't even mention Corbyn's, ummm, mathematical mishaps with his 'fully costed manifesto'...
    If 500,000 people attend a rally in Nuremburg, each with 5 books for the bonfire, how many millimetres should be shaved from the Fuhrer's upper lip to produce a perfectly square moustache?
    Nein?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,724

    ydoethur said:

    https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/1084755578436624384

    Is this actually liable to escalate into some kind of crisis or is it just the media hyperventilating? The idea of Salmond and Sturgeon getting into a full-scale catfight with one another seems somewhat improbable, though then again what do I know?

    Surely a catfish fight?

    But I think they're just carping at each other.

    Entertaining though it would be to see the SNP implode over a sex scandal, I hope it doesn't happen just yet. Nicola should farm him out to the DUP or something.
    He's already been farmed out to RT!

    https://www.rt.com/shows/alex-salmond-show/
    So the Republican Party then?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,724
    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    I'm not I've seen what my daughter (Year 12 / lower 6) has for Maths...

    If she's doing Furher Maths as well I'm amazed she's still upright and breathing frankly.
    I thought that was "Fuhrer maths" there for a second, and I too was amazed.
    I shouldn't be imagining what would be on the prospectus of fuhrer maths should I?
    I am going to be very noble and not make a comment on Gove here.

    Although somewhere I do have an example of a German algebra question that involved a plane 'bombing Warsaw, the capital of international Jewry.'

    Edit - and I didn't even mention Corbyn's, ummm, mathematical mishaps with his 'fully costed manifesto'...
    If 500,000 people attend a rally in Nuremburg, each with 5 books for the bonfire, how many millimetres should be shaved from the Fuhrer's upper lip to produce a perfectly square moustache?
    Nein?
    I haar you...
This discussion has been closed.