BS: Post Brexit life in the UK

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Mar 18 - 07:10 PM

The whistleblower Chris Wylie acquitted himself exceptionally well, I thought, in his interview with the unprincipled-sounding Kirsty Wark on Newsnight tonight. Maybe she was doing her devil's-advocate bit, but she seemed to be persistently suggesting that the cheating wasn't that important because it might not have affected the result anyway. Well that's all right then. So much for principles, so much for democracy. Cheat as much as you like as long as you can convince yourself that you probably won't affect the outcome. Sheesh.

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: DMcG
Date: 27 Mar 18 - 02:13 PM

Sigh. Even for me, the typos in that are excessive.

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: DMcG
Date: 27 Mar 18 - 02:01 PM

I thinl "Just a Minute" would be buzzing away with "deviation"

We are talking about a possible breach of the rules by one section of the Leave campaign.

The Mail is not relevant to the chargw.
The Guardian is not relevant to the charge.

The BBC is not relevant to the charge.
Thw rolw of the EU is not relevant to the charge.

All a smokescreen to hide the potential breach of thw rules by a section of the Leave campaogn.

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Mar 18 - 01:13 PM

I get a free copy of the Mail once a week and I promise you that I force myself to read it. I'm not dissing a source because it's a whatever source, but I've seen enough of it to know what the thing is like.

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Iains
Date: 27 Mar 18 - 12:27 PM

I think you will find the mail offers far more "news" items than any other online paper. For a reasonably comprehensive view of what is going on it takes some beating. Now whether you agree with the editorial slant is another matter entirely. But then the internet offers numerous routes to check, interrogate, or amplify any given article so there is no real excuse to taking anything as fact without cross checking. Even then a cautious person would be suspicious. That is why I find it hilarious that anyone is sucker enough to latch on to the source rather than the content in order to gauge the validity of what is on offer, and we all know who they are!

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Mar 18 - 11:33 AM

I'm not keen on the begging either, though I'm not sure how you know that we're all tree-huggers. As a matter of fact I've just been hacking down a large beech that the birds perch on in order to shit on our washing. The Guardian does not have the luxury of the Mail's circulation and advertising revenues, and, unlike some, is trying to exist without a paywall. Hence the begging. It's voluntary, of course. The Mail may seem to pack in more news, but that's because they pad out their "news" with embedded comment. Try to spot it. Not hard.

Nigel, the EU has nothing to do with our Electoral Commission. Do be told.

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Iains
Date: 27 Mar 18 - 10:46 AM

"And don't pretend that it costs you nowt so to do, unlike the licence fee."
I do not think I have bought a newspaper in over 20 years. I attempt to read them online. That is why I use the mail a lot. They pack more news into their website than any other, unlike the gruniard that is always begging and stuffed full of tree huggers.

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Mar 18 - 10:45 AM

"That's not the same issue as breaking the rules. "
I totally agree
The economic institutions were overwhelmingly against Brexit and the stop-go economy and predictions that Britain will have an unstable economy have proved them right
This referendum was run as a Little Britain HATE CAMPAIGN and a large enough minority ove the British people fell for it, to their shame
Let's hope their children don't regret it
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 27 Mar 18 - 10:10 AM

Nigel Parsons:
As this is an EU matter, maybe the Electoral Commission will be asked to review its considered opinion again, and again, until it gives the answer the EU (and Remainers) would like

Steve Shaw.
Er, the running of the referendum was not in any way an EU matter. It was an internal UK matter. I know you'd like to blame the EU for everything including last week's snowstorms, but let's be sensible about this, Nigel.

The referendum was not run by the EU. They would never have originated the referendum. However the subject matter of the referendum was definitely an EU matter (can we get out of the EU).

It's nice to see that you accept that you're not being sensible. (assuming you don't have your own personal meaning for the contraction "let's")

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Mar 18 - 09:40 AM

Er, the running of the referendum was not in any way an EU matter. It was an internal UK matter. I know you'd like to blame the EU for everything including last week's snowstorms, but let's be sensible about this, Nigel.

Perceptions can't really trump facts, Iains. If you think the Beeb has revealed any anti-brexit bias, give us an example or two. I've seen a lot of neutrality but little hint of bias one way or the other. Generally, the correspondents try to keep their own predilections to themselves, even those Tories I listed, though Jonathan Dimbleby always gives lefties a hard time in my opinion. Last night, Emily M. was very indulgent towards the appalling Louise Ellman and the charmless Laura K. cut the Corbynistas no slack. We can all pick out nuance like that, but on the whole I don't see too much express bias. And the Question Time audience is routinely infested with braying little Englander brexiteers, usually well-indulged by Dimbleby. If you don't like the Beeb much, seek refuge in the Mail for your confirmation bias. And don't pretend that it costs you nowt so to do, unlike the licence fee. You have to buy the paper and all that advertising makes things much more expensive to buy. AND the editor evades tax. Swings 'n' roundabouts.

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Iains
Date: 27 Mar 18 - 09:02 AM

or as the Eagles elegantly phrased it in Hotel California:

'Relax' said the night man,
'We are programmed to receive.
You can check out any time you like,
But you can never leave!'

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 27 Mar 18 - 08:50 AM

In fact, the Electoral Commission has been obliged to revisit the issue following a juducial review, and, as far as I know, they have yet to report.

As this is an EU matter, maybe the Electoral Commission will be asked to review its considered opinion again, and again, until it gives the answer the EU (and Remainers) would like.
Just like: Denmark on the Maastricht Treaty, Ireland on the Nice Treaty and Ireland on the Lisbon Treaty

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Iains
Date: 27 Mar 18 - 08:41 AM

A yougov poll suggests otherwise.

"People aren’t stupid, by 3 to 1 more people think the BBC is anti – than pro Brexit, when over a quarter of the audience has come to the conclusion the BBC is biased there is a real problem, because if we don’t want to read the most partisan newspapers we don’t buy them. The BBC’s funding forces us all to pay for it and we expect to be impartial as a result. It is manifestly not perceived as a source of impartial information on this polarising issue."

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/s8s93cmvos/InternalResults_180219_NewspapersBrexit.pdf

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Mar 18 - 08:22 AM

And we've been here before with the BBC. It is a decidedly right-wing organisation. Its most influential correspondents are nearly all from solid Tory stock. Paxman fronted Newsnight for many years. A self-confessed Tory. Andrew Neil has been a Tory researcher and was a leading light in the Murdoch empire for many years. Kalil Ahmed was the business editor of the Daily and Sunday Telegraph. Nick Robinson was chairman of the Young Conservatives. And anyone enduring those Dimblebys is never going to exactly tell you what reds under the beds they are.

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Mar 18 - 08:15 AM

That's not the same issue as breaking the rules. We can all have opinions on what constitutes fair expenditure, but if rules are laid down which are then significantly and deliberately breached by one side then that's a totally different issue. I don't necessarily think that this is a question of "minutiae" either. I wouldn't be excusing it even had the leave vote been resounding, but it was not resounding. It was a close-run thing. Anyway, we'll see what transpires today no doubt.

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Iains
Date: 27 Mar 18 - 06:55 AM

If we are going to study the minutiae of election expenditure pre brexit referendum then perhaps the impact of taxpayers money funding a very biased BBC should also be considered. We need to ensure a level playing field for all aspects of expenditure impacting the vote.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/804495/bbc-bias-independent-report-brexit-eu-referendum

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Mar 18 - 06:42 AM

LEAVE BeLEAVE SCAM
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Mar 18 - 05:15 AM

In fact, the Electoral Commission has been obliged to revisit the issue following a juducial review, and, as far as I know, they have yet to report.

On the issue of the government's spending on the referendum campaign, you're opening a moral question, not one of rule-breaking. I'd argue against your point on the grounds that, in a democracy, the elected government of the day generally takes partisan stances in formulating policy and, in many cases, will legitimately spend money on publicising its policies. I can't see the brexit issue as being any different. The Cameron administration was always openly pro-EU/pro-remain and was, yes, spending taxpayer money in promoting that idea. No rules were broken, but an opposition party could conceivably have used that spending decision to criticise the government, either straight away or in a subsequent election campaign. Holding governments to account apropos of even their legal spending is part of our democracy. The difference is that no rules were broken. We don't quite yet live in the Wild West. If rules were broken in significant and deliberate ways, then the referendum was not valid. We're human beings and we can generally ignore minor and/or accidental breaches that can be shown not to have have had a significant impact on the outcome. We are not in that territory here, possibly.

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 27 Mar 18 - 04:07 AM

From Here
A freedom of information response last month revealed the Electoral Commission found “no reasonable grounds to suspect that any breaches” of the spending rules had occurred.
The watchdog has defended its decision in an email to InFacts, citing the EU Referendum Act, arguing a “common plan or arrangement” between Vote Leave and BeLeave had to be in place for joint spending rules to apply, and that it was fine for separate campaign groups to “liaise and discuss campaigning approaches”. What’s more, Vote Leave’s payment directly to AggregateIQ on behalf of BeLeave was also “acceptable under the law”.
The Good Law Project say this misses the point. The main issue is not whether the two groups had a “common plan”, and therefore whether the donations count as joint spending and should have been registered by Vote Leave (although it seems clear they were working together). Rather the Good Law Project argues that these payments are not donations at all, but straightforward referendum spending by Vote Leave. To deny this is to undermine the purpose of the law, which is in place to stop wealthy campaigners spending potentially unlimited sums of money by, for example, buying services for others who are known to be campaigning for the same result.
The Electoral Commission told InFacts it had no further comment to make on this point.
The Good Law Project is also demanding answers from the Electoral Commission. In particular, have there been other investigations into similar arrangements with other groups? Vote Leave are known to have also given £100,000 to Veterans For Britain for AggregateIQ’s services.
If the case is successful, the Electoral Commission’s decision to accept the Leave campaign’s spending will be quashed. It will then have to reopen its investigation into Vote Leave and maybe prosecute it. Ultimately the validity of the referendum could be brought into question.
Pro-Europeans in Parliament and across civil society must make a noise about this, and demand those responsible brought to account. Otherwise Britain might have been dragged out of Europe on the basis of a potentially illegal campaign.
You can make a contribution to the Good Law Project’s work on this case via their Crowd Justice page.

Even if the payment was illegal (and the Electoral Commission say it wasn't) it is dwarfed by the Nine Million Pounds spent by the government issuing Remain propaganda to every household in Britain.

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Mar 18 - 09:16 PM

We live in interesting times. If the Vote Leave campaign broke the spending rules, the referendum result is invalid. The vote was close enough for the argument to be made that unfair shenanigans by one side could have tipped the result. Of course, the establishment will, as I type, be frantically scuttling around trying to find a veil to throw over this. But what if they can't? It could be the end of Brexit. I wouldn't mind betting that the lawyers are sharpening their claws. There won't be a rerun. We've gone past that. This could be the opportunity for all sane politicians to seize the day and tell us once for all that we mustn't go any further. For our children's sake if nothing else.

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: DMcG
Date: 26 Mar 18 - 01:26 PM

Tongue in cheek, my daughter has just texted that she thinks she now supports Brexit ....



She is in Paris and wants to protect France from us!

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Mar 18 - 09:50 AM

Well I don't want them to implement that extremely unwise decision. I want them, by which I mean all the main party leaders, to make a joint declaration that as there is no prospect of brexit ever being in the interests of this country they are abandoning the project, on condition that the EU agrees to a programme of fundamental reform. That would be bloody unpopular but I'd rather they did something bloody unpopular than take this country to hell in a handcart, which is clearly what's happening right now.

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Mar 18 - 08:27 AM

By the way, Nigel, the 1975 referendum was not a mirror of the last one. We were already in the EEC. The 67% vote was to retain the status quo, not to change anything. Your point falls, I'm afraid.

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 26 Mar 18 - 08:25 AM

Steve:
I don't want another referendum either. I just want them to get on with implementing the decision of the last one.

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Mar 18 - 08:22 AM

"bogtrotter"
Apart from tha fact I am a Brit, do we really have to put up from this racist shite from an obvious BNP plant ?
Where are the mods when this racists serial insulting takes place?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Mar 18 - 08:20 AM

No, Nigel. At risk of repeating myself, the bar should be set high for making major irreversible changes to the direction of a country, not for simply retaining the status quo. If you don't set that bar high the referendum is seriously skewed. Once we leave there's no way back. If we vote to stay we can easily revise that decision in the future, and there's no doubt in my mind that, had you lost, that's precisely what you'd be campaigning for right now. And, again at risk of repeating myself, I don't want another referendum.

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Mar 18 - 08:16 AM

"There is no other way to describe it."]
Then why not try instead of vomiting your stream of racist "bogtrotter"
abuse?
it really is time the moderated took a grip of BNP trolls on this forum
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 26 Mar 18 - 08:10 AM

From: Steve Shaw -
Date: 25 Mar 18 - 08:05 PM

The referendum was severely skewed. I'm not going to keep going over that, Nigel. It should always be much harder to bring about a fundamental and permanent change, irrevocable, than to vote for the status quo, which is always subject to fairly easy revision. If you can't see that well I'm afraid it makes you a crowing triumphalist, and people like that, like you, find it all too easy to set democracy aside when it suits you to do so. Had you lost the referendum by a similarly narrow margin you would definitely, DEFINITELY, be campaigning for a rerun. I'm not even doing that, am I. Just a reminder, Nigel: you got 38% of the electorate. Just thought I'd mention it.

While 'Remain' got less than 38%.
However you read it, number of voters, percentage of the electorate, percentage of those who actually voted, or percentage of total population of the UK, the result will always show a preference for Brexit and against Remain of 52 to 48.

If a second referendum was required would you be insisting that the 'current' status quo (that we are leaving the EU) could only be overturned if Remain get 66% of the vote with a 75% turnover? Or does that only apply to votes where you disagree with the outcome? (Keeping in mind that the 1975 referendum was based on 67% of a 64% turnout)

And he's also dead right about the bar being set far too low, a point I've made here again and again - the referendum's alternative answers, in or out, were way too skewed for them to be able to be properly subjected to a simple majority of the turnout. Vote to remain and we can easily try again and again to turn it around, just as we do in general elections every few years. Vote to leave (assuming we do leave as the politicians fail to see the light) and it's irrevocable by every practical consideration. Two-thirds of a minimum 75% turnout vote to leave, or even better, no referendum at all, would have been a far better way to go. The quality of the brexiteers' attitude is betrayed by their idiotic "people-have-spoken" crowing over this disastrous state of affairs (38%, remember?) and their calling US undemocratic for continuing to complain and campaign.

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Iains
Date: 26 Mar 18 - 07:13 AM

Jim. Bollocks. You spout absolute shit at times. There is no other way to describe it. You do not even understand what is being stated before wading in with your bogtrotter drivelling. Either keep up, or keep out.

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Mar 18 - 07:05 AM

"The impact of family income largely depends on what part of the educational cycle is being considered. "
No it doesn't - one of the major stumbling blocks in educating away from home is the predatory nature of student accommodation
Industry education grants are more about keeping kids in their place rather than meeting aspiration
The appalling state and lack of a future for British industry (what industry??) is an incentive to get out and try something else - out of the question for lower income families
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Iains
Date: 26 Mar 18 - 06:29 AM

The impact of family income largely depends on what part of the educational cycle is being considered. This really only applies to secondary level education, where there is a proven link between income and attainment. However family income is only a suitable measure, it hides a far more complex relationship.
For tertiary education a loan system is open to all and repayment rates are coupled to subsequent income level. So family income should have a negligible impact for most.
For post graduate degrees the availability of funding largely depends on the subject matter. The more industry orientated the degree, the greater availability of funding
If you are at the bottom of the heap on a sink estate you face some severe challenges trying   to obtain a good education. Breaking that relationship requires political will and serious investment. Unfortunately life is not fair and never has been. Lip service has been paid to keeping such kids healthy, fed and clothed but little has been done to offer opportunity and hope for them. There is a token acceptance of their rights, but nothing concrete to guarantee them.
We abuse pensioners in care   and deny basic rights to many impoverished children. So much for a caring society!

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: DMcG
Date: 26 Mar 18 - 05:55 AM

Ah, it seems student loans are being introduced for the first time in the UK for PhDs from 1 August 2018.

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Mar 18 - 04:37 AM

Hanging a price-tag on education

HERE

HERE

AND HERE
Lower fincome families get it all ways - largely excluded from higher education, saddled with a huge debt at a time when they are finding their feet in life and forced to take work the can' live on and are nor suited to
A total waste of humanity
In this situation, the quality of education is meaningless
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: DMcG
Date: 26 Mar 18 - 02:09 AM

What is often missed in the "further education" arguments is that the student loan system applies for the Batchelor degrees but not for Masters or PhDs (unless it has changed in the last 5 years or so). So you don't have to be from a low oncome family to be priced out of these higher degrees.

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Mar 18 - 08:20 PM

"Do you honestly think standards have gone up?"
One of the greatest changes in education in latter years ifs that no matter how well they do at school, kids from LOW INCOME FAMILIES can no longer afford to participate in further education - a total waste of humanity
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Mar 18 - 08:12 PM

99.999% of sensible people, bobad.

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Mar 18 - 08:11 PM

Nothing at all wrong with that construction, Nigel. I advise you to not try to pick me up on my use of English. I've refrained from doing that to you out of the goodness of my heart on a number of occasions and I'm more than capable of making a fool of you if you persist in that line of enquiry. I suggest you stick to the topic. There's a good lad.

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: bobad
Date: 25 Mar 18 - 08:08 PM

Nigel: you got 38% of the electorate.

And how much did you get?

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Mar 18 - 08:05 PM

The referendum was severely skewed. I'm not going to keep going over that, Nigel. It should always be much harder to bring about a fundamental and permanent change, irrevocable, than to vote for the status quo, which is always subject to fairly easy revision. If you can't see that well I'm afraid it makes you a crowing triumphalist, and people like that, like you, find it all too easy to set democracy aside when it suits you to do so. Had you lost the referendum by a similarly narrow margin you would definitely, DEFINITELY, be campaigning for a rerun. I'm not even doing that, am I. Just a reminder, Nigel: you got 38% of the electorate. Just thought I'd mention it.

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 25 Mar 18 - 08:00 PM

rom: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Mar 18 - 07:43 PM

Quite so. When I was teaching in Walthamstow in the early 80s we had teams of advisory teachers, appointed by the local authority, specific to your subject area, people who had proved their mettle in both classroom and management, whose goal was to get us to see what best practice was and to give us us strategies for achieving it. They didn't pull their punches, they'd tell on you to the headteacher if needed be and they were in no way a part of any cosy in-crowd. They were supportive. They would judge if needed be, and I was certainly judged meself more than once. But the sole aim was to improve teaching in the interests of the kids. The aim of Ofsted has always been political. There is not a scintilla of support in the system. It's one hundred percent judgemental. I think that's very sad, it isn't what classroom teachers need and it does nothing to raise standards. We've had Ofsted for thirty years now. Do you honestly think standards have gone up? You can never do it by being repressive. Don't take my word for it, ask any classroom teacher.

"If needed be". Is this a new construction, intended solely for use by 'well educated' school teachers? The usual usage is "if need be".

Of course, Steve Shaw may well know better than everyone else!

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 25 Mar 18 - 07:48 PM

From: Steve Shaw
Date: 24 Mar 18 - 12:59 PM

The whole point of elections is that the wishes of the minority bloc of voters can be "disregarded." That's how it works. I just gave you a little list of the kinds of things that governments do, or don't do, which probably go against the wishes of the majority. When's the last time you "wished" that the tax on petrol, or your council tax, would go up? We elect governments to run the country in the general interest, not kowtow to the whims of the populace which would often be predicated on self-interest or prejudice. In the case of the referendum the wishes of sixteen million voters have been "disregarded." And false equivalence indeed, Keith. The decision to hold the referendum was a dereliction of the duties of an elected parliament. It was a terrible decision which effectively held hundreds of MPs hostage. Had they voted against they'd have been toast. It put the future of the country in the hands of an uninformed electorate. And the disgraceful referendum campaign did nothing to inform them. The opposite, in fact. Brainless slogans aimed at the feeble-minded and gullible ruled the roost.

No.
The whole point was that elections were giving us the choice between a Conservative party, and a Labour party. Both of which wished to remain part of the EU.
UKIP were making gains in voting, and the Conservatives (risking being split on the subject) gave the public a vote on whether to leave the EU.
Although the vote didn't go the way they expected, they are now committed to leaving the EU.
The electorate (by majority vote) have now made their wishes clear.
No matter how you attempt to re-write the history of the vote, we have voted to leave the EU.

Arguing that we should remain part of the EU is going against the wishes of the majority of the voting UK electorate.

The wishes of 16 million voters have NOT been disregarded, but they do not have the same force of opinion as the wishes of 17 million voters who voted to leave!

The electorate was not 'uninformed'. The facts were available to everyone. The fact that you came to one decision does not negate the decision that I, and others, came to.

This was not a matter of looking at the views of a 'minority bloc'. Everyone had a say, and the result was clear cut. When (if ever) will you accept that this was democracy?

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Mar 18 - 07:43 PM

Quite so. When I was teaching in Walthamstow in the early 80s we had teams of advisory teachers, appointed by the local authority, specific to your subject area, people who had proved their mettle in both classroom and management, whose goal was to get us to see what best practice was and to give us us strategies for achieving it. They didn't pull their punches, they'd tell on you to the headteacher if needed be and they were in no way a part of any cosy in-crowd. They were supportive. They would judge if needed be, and I was certainly judged meself more than once. But the sole aim was to improve teaching in the interests of the kids. The aim of Ofsted has always been political. There is not a scintilla of support in the system. It's one hundred percent judgemental. I think that's very sad, it isn't what classroom teachers need and it does nothing to raise standards. We've had Ofsted for thirty years now. Do you honestly think standards have gone up? You can never do it by being repressive. Don't take my word for it, ask any classroom teacher.

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Iains
Date: 25 Mar 18 - 06:31 PM

Sadly the story you relate agrees, almost word for word, with the tale of woe repeated by a couple of recently retired teachers that I know.
The world has changed significantly since I left school. My view is that the present curriculum falls significantly short in attempting to modernise, to reflect those changes. I do not foresee the political will to carry out a fundamental review to make it fit for purpose. Are we trying to educate children/young adults or create pretty pictures for statisticians to place in front of endless committees so we can have an endless game of snakes and ladders playing the league tables.
When I was at school teachers taught, there were no training days, and I remember an inspector in the class once in my entire school career.
Are all the subsequent changes of benefit to the students? What is the point of a permanent inspectorate, surely rotating senior teachers in and out of the inspectorate would benefit all?

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Mar 18 - 04:56 PM

Well I was a specialist teacher, being a well-educated scientist, ;-) and I'm not up for pontificating about, for example, early-years education. You don't really want to know what I think about content-stuffed curricula, the terrorising of classroom teachers by a pig-ignorant and ill-trained inspectorate who are there to judge, not support, and a draconian testing regime that pins teachers to the floor and robs them almost entirely of using their imagination and of occasionally going with the flow, the meat and drink of great teaching. Sorry about the one-sentence rant! Unfortunately, what goes on in schools has always been a delicious political football. Everybody has an opinion. Some of those opinions are valuable and valued and some come from the teacher-bashing right-wing press. Getting effective political education into our schools is a vain hope. In fact, to my mind what's far more urgent is the need to address the lack of good education for relationships (not just sex) in the face of online porn and social media. You can put as much muscle as you like into the three Rs, and so you should, but it counts for little if you don't show children how to respect both themselves and others. My view is that schools are seriously lagging behind the real world in those aspects of the education of the young.

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Iains
Date: 25 Mar 18 - 03:11 PM

Repetition does not transform a lie into a truth.

Franklin D. Roosevel

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Iains
Date: 25 Mar 18 - 02:02 PM

Steve I suspect for the majority of voters their voting intent is solidified months before the vote. The last minute megaburger diet of propaganda probably has as much impact on the outcome as exit polls have on predicting the winners.
When I was at school lessons on life skills were nonexistant. A curriculum that covered such things as personal finance, diet, healthy lifestyles, civics, the role of government etc. etc.... should be part of the birthright of the citizen and your profession should have demanded it. Only a fool would advocate the rationing of education. The openings for the unskilled are becoming fewer by the day. Is there not a reason illiteracy rates in the prison population are sky high. We have developed a society that demands basic literacy and numeracy skills, yet are failing many black and white males. Why is the same not true of Indian and Chinese scholars? Nothing to do with respect, aspirations and fully functional family life of course.
This failure is not labour or tory, it is a complete failure of all governments for decades. I am not a teacher ( I have only taught in house courses) but it seems clear to me that a radical overhaul is required especially to help those that have been failed. Modern society cannot afford the complete waste of a totally disfunctional alienated segment of society.
You know far more about the problem that I do, what do you propose doing about it? offering carrots for attending remedial classes? insisting on a minimum qualification in order to quit fulltime education? creating a volunteer force to help backward kids?
I know a few young adults that have been totally failed by the educational system so I would be very interested in seeing some potential solutions for the future.

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Mar 18 - 01:33 PM

"More hallucinations!"#Miore no answers - if that is not a contradiction in terms
Not very good at this - are you?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Mar 18 - 01:33 PM

"More hallucinations!"#Miore no answers - if that is not a contradiction in terms
Not very good at this - are you?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 24 Mar 18 - 04:26 PM

"The space between the ears is supposedly for critical thinking, not a mechanism for enabling obesity."

Well yes, so it is, but my feeling from talking to most people I know is that their transaction with politics is tangential and casual at best. We morons who chew the political fat here are in the very small minority. We watch the ten o'clock news, Newsnight and Question Time (not that the latter helps much). We read the op-eds and the leaders in the non-tabloids and bore the arses off our spouses ranting on about brexit and Boris and Russia. You may not think we "get it," but, hell's teeth, we "get it" more than most of our compatriots, don't we? But look at the figures. About one adult in twenty watches Question Time. The viewing figures for the news are rock-bottom. Sales of the Sun and the Mail and the Mirror outstrip papers with serious journalism almost out of existence. The brain space may be made for critical thinking but the evidence from all that is that most people reserve their critical thinking for matters other than politics. The people who propose solutions for that are not people like you, Iains. The people who propose good political education (not citizenship lip-service crap) are almost exclusively lefties like me. But of course we are subversives, reds under the bed, revolutionary commies when we so much as suggest it. Been there, done it, got the Che t-shirt. It's no use you Tories and other ragbag right-wingers moaning about people voting but not getting it and telling us that they deserve what they get for not using their noddle. It's not only entirely your fault that things are that way, it suits you just fine. There's nothing easier than manipulating the kept-ignorant. My working-class grandad worked on Salford docks all his life and often had to choose between a few pints of a Saturday night and paying the rent. Voted Tory all his life.

Subject: RE: BS: Post Brexit life in the UK
From: Iains
Date: 24 Mar 18 - 03:29 PM

" by blaming immigrants for the state of Britain (Hitler chose the Jews as scapegoats"

More hallucinations!