UK Politics

[Honey Honey]

5 hours ago, Stan said:

this is fucking weird and quite frankly, pointless, as well (if true)

It's not the skin of a goat apparently, that redheaded historian was on BBC news saying it's a vegan product, lol.

Whilst we are on animal issues, not all Tory's are prehistoric...

 

[Fairy In Boots]

3 hours ago, RandoEFC said:

Oh dear oh dear, how much do you actually think you know about this? Last week the school I work in laid off five teaching assistants because they can't afford to pay them any more. That's five peoples' jobs just gone but oh well, who cares because they haven't 'made something of themselves' because the only way you can do that is going into business ownership/private sector apparently. 

I will again refer you to the website https://www.schoolcuts.org.uk/#!/ go and look up a couple of your local schools on there. We aren't talking about a handful of teachers missing out on their pay rises, we're talking about schools suffering such heavy cuts that they're having to lay off swathes of teachers nationwide. 

As an aside, if teachers are complaining about pay conditions though it's probably justified in light of the 60+ hour weeks most of them are working to try and pick up the slack needed to give the kids the same level of education while the manpower continues to be decimated.

I get that your fond of the school cuts website I glanced at it last time you mentioned it, but it's created by the national teachers union, it's hardly unbiased and predictably it's painting a picture of huge cuts. In reality there's a potential real term cut due to expected rises. The government is increasing spending, it has since 2010 although the increase hasn't risen with inflation but education has been relatively protected when Compared with other departments. We're still running at a deficit btw as we discussed a few days ago. 

The biggest expected rise in costs for schools by 2020 is wages & pensions. The state pension is still generous as is the average wage which is about £28-29k for a secondary school teacher, that's quite high by international standards. You say most work 60 hours but studies show that it's 1 in 5 as the average is 48 hours, I'm confused as to how that's "most". 

It also doesn't seem to take into account that funding process will be changed, it's now going to be distributed to the local authorities from 18/19 who in turn distribute this onto schools individually. How can the school cuts website say this is the figure when the councils who're distributing it base it off performance and class size which is a variable they can't know yet? 

Labour took on something like 200k teaching assistants this has accounted for the a significant portion of cost increases. These teaching assistants are paid shit money on term only contracts. This is where the jobs are going to be shed, not really teachers themselves. It means their rises won't be 3% but more likely 1%. 

Thats why I said what I said, as much as austerity isn't helping there's also an awful lot of civil service bed wetting going on to. 

I agree education is an investment but spending on per pupil and spending per teacher are different things in my opinion. I think there's no easy fix for British education  by throwing cash at it either, but broadly speaking I'm in favour of spending on state education if it's warranted. I'm also in favour of grammar schools which again is social mobility, something Labour don't like. 

 

[RandoEFC+]

5 minutes ago, Fairy In Boots said:

I get that your fond of the school cuts website I glanced at it last time you mentioned it, but it's created by the national teachers union, it's hardly unbiased and predictably it's painting a picture of huge cuts. In reality there's a potential real term cut due to expected rises. The government is increasing spending, it has since 2010 although the increase hasn't risen with inflation but education has been relatively protected when Compared with other departments. We're still running at a deficit btw as we discussed a few days ago. 

The biggest expected rise in costs for schools by 2020 is wages & pensions. The state pension is still generous as is the average wage which is about £28-29k for a secondary school teacher, that's quite high by international standards. You say most work 60 hours but studies show that it's 1 in 5 as the average is 48 hours, I'm confused as to how that's "most". 

It also doesn't seem to take into account that funding process will be changed, it's now going to be distributed to the local authorities from 18/19 who in turn distribute this onto schools individually. How can the school cuts website say this is the figure when the councils who're distributing it base it off performance and class size which is a variable they can't know yet? 

Labour took on something like 200k teaching assistants this has accounted for the a significant portion of cost increases. These teaching assistants are paid shit money on term only contracts. This is where the jobs are going to be shed, not really teachers themselves. It means their rises won't be 3% but more likely 1%. 

Thats why I said what I said, as much as austerity isn't helping there's also an awful lot of civil service bed wetting going on to. 

I agree education is an investment but spending on per pupil and spending per teacher are different things in my opinion. I think there's no easy fix for British education  by throwing cash at it either, but broadly speaking I'm in favour of spending on state education if it's warranted. I'm also in favour of grammar schools which again is social mobility, something Labour don't like. 

 

I don't know where you're getting half of this information but I've been very clear on this before. Teaching assistants getting made redundant is only a part of it. The school has been asked to shed around £70K of staff salaries at the end of my first year here and we've not been given a number this year but further cuts to the staffing budget for this September. Then you've got the headteacher retiring and the school going into a partnership with another school rather than employing a new headteacher because that'll save a bit of cash too. The situation is a bit worse than there being a "real term cost" just because funding isn't quite matching inflation.

The school cuts website, while I obviously can't be sure on the number crunching for each school in the country, is bob on for the schools I have any knowledge of. I don't know where you're getting your information from re: real budget increases and those working hours but my information comes first hand from working in an increasingly under funded school and however other sources choose to spin the numbers, in the real world it's becoming unmanageable. 

[Dr. Gonzo]

7 hours ago, Fairy In Boots said:

The core tenant of British Conservativism is Country first above all else, they make mistakes sure but they act with what they believe is Britain's best interests at heart. I've not seen an example of Labour doing anything like this in fact they almost seem ashamed of Britishness. 

Sorry I'm not having that. It's part ideological purity - that Tories put Country above all else. Then next is partisan bullshit. If you don't believe Labour has ever done anything for British interests, I don't know what to tell you. They've shown a serious commitment to the NHS and education. You say they don't like social mobility... but the minimum wage provided greater social mobility to the working class and protected them from exploitative wages. I can imagine the cries of "but think of the small business owners who had to pay more!" but my dad was (and is still) a small business owner who was largely not impacted by it. And I imagine most of the more exploitative employers were not your small local businesses.

Now I do believe that some Tories (mostly in the past) believed that they were making decisions for the good of Britain's public interest. I am no fan of Maggie Thatcher, but I think some of her mistakes were done with Britain's best interests at heart... and there was short-term benefit to abandoning British manufacturing. We had a growing middle class and generated a huge amount of wealth. But it was short term... and a problem for those of us in the present are now having to deal with. But I don't see that from modern Tories.

Like it or lump it, it is in Britain's best interests to have: 1.) a strong education system, 2.) a healthy population, 3.) a responsive and effective police force. Especially as we face an uncertain time in where Britain will stand in the global economy. Now you say that austerity might not be the best way to handle it, but it's better than throwing money at the problem. I think throwing money at our problems with no plan is, yes, probably going to lead to us spending more with little benefit. I also think that austerity for austerities sake is going to lead to a lot of Brits needlessly having a worse quality of life.

To realistically solve these problems, we'll be counting on people to abandon ideological purity and work for practical solutions to get it done. Perhaps in generations past, I could have been more confident of this happening. But I think our current crop of Tories and Labour will be completely unable to do this.

I also think it's a bit disingenuous to say that the site is presenting skewed information because it's paid for by Teachers Unions. Yes, that may indicate some bias. But they also explain the methodology and how they've come up with their calculations: https://www.schoolcuts.org.uk/#!/method - it's not as though they're making claims without presenting any reasoning or rationale and just trying to protect their wallets. For England it was:

Methodology for England

We used analysis of the three main parties' spending commitments published by the Institute of Fiscal Studies to calculate the impact of those spending commitments on schools in England.

We used the GDP deflator published by HM Treasury to estimate general inflation over the period 2015-16 to 2021-22.

Figures for 2021/22 have been calculated from a dataset provided by the Department for Education through the COLLECT system. The dataset contains sensitive information which is why it is not generally available. We were able to make accurate calculations for 2021/22. All the figures are in 2017/18 prices.

The calculations were made on the basis that the National Funding Formula (NFF) due to be introduced in April 2018 will be that proposed by the Secretary of State on Wednesday 14 December 2016. The calculations were made using the following evidence.

• a. The Liberal Democrat and Conservative manifesto commitments to ensure no school loses out in cash terms from NFF.
• b. The Labour manifesto commitment to ensure that no school loses out in real terms from NFF.
• c. That the Liberal Democrat and Conservative manifesto commitments would result in caps to gains under the NFF of 3% in 2018-19, then 2.5% in 2019-20, 2% in 2020-21 and 2% in 2021-22.
• d. That the Labour manifesto commitments would result in schools gaining funding under the NFF having those gains capped at 1% above inflation

All the data is available at www.bit.ly/school_cuts_data_2017

For our politicians to make the tough choices re: education, the NHS, and our safety... I'm imagining we'd need to rely less on the ideological purity of both parties and actually listen to some fucking experts. Although I've been told by a Tory politician that Britain is tired of experts. So more ideological bullshit that isn't grounded in reality for us, JOY!

[Fairy In Boots]

26 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

I don't know where you're getting half of this information but I've been very clear on this before. Teaching assistants getting made redundant is only a part of it. The school has been asked to shed around £70K of staff salaries at the end of my first year here and we've not been given a number this year but further cuts to the staffing budget for this September. Then you've got the headteacher retiring and the school going into a partnership with another school rather than employing a new headteacher because that'll save a bit of cash too. The situation is a bit worse than there being a "real term cost" just because funding isn't quite matching inflation.

The school cuts website, while I obviously can't be sure on the number crunching for each school in the country, is bob on for the schools I have any knowledge of. I don't know where you're getting your information from re: real budget increases and those working hours but my information comes first hand from working in an increasingly under funded school and however other sources choose to spin the numbers, in the real world it's becoming unmanageable. 

https://fullfact.org/education/schools-will-have-less-spend-pupil-2020/

Above link for the bits about real time government spending, Hours come from the education policy institue, wages from payscale.com. I'm not completely disputing what you're saying, just the way it's being presented. For example working hours average is 48, would this be the case if most worked 60 hours? 

9 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Sorry I'm not having that. It's part ideological purity - that Tories put Country above all else. Then next is partisan bullshit. If you don't believe Labour has ever done anything for British interests, I don't know what to tell you. They've shown a serious commitment to the NHS and education. You say they don't like social mobility... but the minimum wage provided greater social mobility to the working class and protected them from exploitative wages. I can imagine the cries of "but think of the small business owners who had to pay more!" but my dad was (and is still) a small business owner who was largely not impacted by it. And I imagine most of the more exploitative employers were not your small local businesses.

Now I do believe that some Tories (mostly in the past) believed that they were making decisions for the good of Britain's public interest. I am no fan of Maggie Thatcher, but I think some of her mistakes were done with Britain's best interests at heart... and there was short-term benefit to abandoning British manufacturing. We had a growing middle class and generated a huge amount of wealth. But it was short term... and a problem for those of us in the present are now having to deal with. But I don't see that from modern Tories.

Like it or lump it, it is in Britain's best interests to have: 1.) a strong education system, 2.) a healthy population, 3.) a responsive and effective police force. Especially as we face an uncertain time in where Britain will stand in the global economy. Now you say that austerity might not be the best way to handle it, but it's better than throwing money at the problem. I think throwing money at our problems with no plan is, yes, probably going to lead to us spending more with little benefit. I also think that austerity for austerities sake is going to lead to a lot of Brits needlessly having a worse quality of life.

To realistically solve these problems, we'll be counting on people to abandon ideological purity and work for practical solutions to get it done. Perhaps in generations past, I could have been more confident of this happening. But I think our current crop of Tories and Labour will be completely unable to do this.

I also think it's a bit disingenuous to say that the site is presenting skewed information because it's paid for by Teachers Unions. Yes, that may indicate some bias. But they also explain the methodology and how they've come up with their calculations: https://www.schoolcuts.org.uk/#!/method - it's not as though they're making claims without presenting any reasoning or rationale and just trying to protect their wallets. For England it was:

Methodology for England

We used analysis of the three main parties' spending commitments published by the Institute of Fiscal Studies to calculate the impact of those spending commitments on schools in England.

We used the GDP deflator published by HM Treasury to estimate general inflation over the period 2015-16 to 2021-22.

Figures for 2021/22 have been calculated from a dataset provided by the Department for Education through the COLLECT system. The dataset contains sensitive information which is why it is not generally available. We were able to make accurate calculations for 2021/22. All the figures are in 2017/18 prices.

The calculations were made on the basis that the National Funding Formula (NFF) due to be introduced in April 2018 will be that proposed by the Secretary of State on Wednesday 14 December 2016. The calculations were made using the following evidence.

• a. The Liberal Democrat and Conservative manifesto commitments to ensure no school loses out in cash terms from NFF.
• b. The Labour manifesto commitment to ensure that no school loses out in real terms from NFF.
• c. That the Liberal Democrat and Conservative manifesto commitments would result in caps to gains under the NFF of 3% in 2018-19, then 2.5% in 2019-20, 2% in 2020-21 and 2% in 2021-22.
• d. That the Labour manifesto commitments would result in schools gaining funding under the NFF having those gains capped at 1% above inflation

All the data is available at www.bit.ly/school_cuts_data_2017

For our politicians to make the tough choices re: education, the NHS, and our safety... I'm imagining we'd need to rely less on the ideological purity of both parties and actually listen to some fucking experts. Although I've been told by a Tory politician that Britain is tired of experts. So more ideological bullshit that isn't grounded in reality for us, JOY!

the data sheet doesn't work though, did you check it? it didn't work so I ended up googling it a few days back when school cuts was linked and came across full fact on it.

On Labour not liking Britain, their voters do their politicians call them "bigots" on hot mikes or in the case of Emily Thornberry, a woman that can't add up to 326 tweets condescending pictures of a labour voting house displaying an England flag.

[Dr. Gonzo]

The data sheet works on my end, but it loads really fucking slow.

[Dr. Gonzo]

Another reason why NHS cuts shouldn't really be made: https://www.nursinginpractice.com/article/breaking-96-drop-eu-nurses-coming-uk-2016

The 96% drop in EU nurses coming to the UK since 2016. The NHS relies on EU and international medical staff because the wages and conditions are crap... but they're better than what they'd get at home. People have paraded the NHS as a jewel of diversity - but in fact, it's a part of the low budget race-to-the-bottom we've engaged in. We'll grab anyone who will work long hours for shit wages, and that includes draining poor people of their medical staff. If the NHS is funded properly, we train nurses in the Uk and pay whatever tax increase that entails we at least have a sustainable healthcare system.

But that would require foresight and politicians being able to think for more than a few years at a time. If we don't have long term planning, we will suffer from long term problems.

[SirBalon]

Looks like we're gonna have to make £1,000 Pound notes soon!

[Harry]

11 hours ago, Fairy In Boots said:

https://fullfact.org/education/schools-will-have-less-spend-pupil-2020/

Above link for the bits about real time government spending, Hours come from the education policy institue, wages from payscale.com. I'm not completely disputing what you're saying, just the way it's being presented. For example working hours average is 48, would this be the case if most worked 60 hours? 

the data sheet doesn't work though, did you check it? it didn't work so I ended up googling it a few days back when school cuts was linked and came across full fact on it.

On Labour not liking Britain, their voters do their politicians call them "bigots" on hot mikes or in the case of Emily Thornberry, a woman that can't add up to 326 tweets condescending pictures of a labour voting house displaying an England flag.

Even 48 hours is pretty fucking abominable as as industry average if you ask me. What's the standard work week in the UK? 38 hours for 9 to 5 with a 30 min break? 

48 is 8 till 6. That doesnt resolve for anyone with child care for a start. Its not out of the question nor that different from the 8.30 to 5.30 i do but outs a pretty high average if you ask me. 

[RandoEFC+]

The last information I read was from TES: https://www.tes.com/news/school-news/breaking-news/teachers-work-a-54-hour-week-dfe-survey-finds

Admittedly this may be an exaggeration and I was exaggerating saying most people working 60+ hours but that's the way it will be if the cuts continue and the bureaucracy isn't reduced while we're at it.

[Kowabunga]

 

Tory-DUP Government coalition logo. #concept

[Honey Honey]

[Fairy In Boots]

6 hours ago, HoneyNUFC said:

I saw a great one yesterday that said "Chelsea are champions, the title is not going to Spurs because they performed better than expected"

[The Artful Dodger]

Oh come on, even the Toriest of all Tories cannot dent that it is a remarkable election result and Corbyn, against a hostile press, got the highest Labour vote since 1997 is pretty impressive. Of course he's not won, but he's got himself into a good position and with May siding with a paramilitary supporting party the Tories have lost one of their ridiculous sticks to beat Corbyn with. 

Calls for May to resign are silly though, keep her in and let them fall apart.

[RandoEFC+]

It's like if Man Utd played Bolton in the FA Cup final and Man Utd only won on penalties. Both sides need to shut up and get on with it for a while now because the Tories have nothing to brag about and nor do Labour even if they did overachieve in defeat. 

[Honey Honey]

It's just a bit of political satire playing on Corbyn and Thornberry's laughably bad choice of words. No need to get uppity over it.

[Honey Honey]

Breaking now, Tim Farron has resigned.

Great news. Farron and Clegg out the way. Time for a new more electable liberal party.

[RandoEFC+]

Who do we fancy? Got to be honest I was amazed that Vince Cable is still alive on the election night 

[Honey Honey]

A real sorry bunch to choose from so Jo Swinson has it hands down.

Was once drinking outside a pub at Old Street and Vince Cable walked past with his wife. He heard me saying "that's Vince Cable" and he looked over and gave us a wave.

Top bloke just for that in my opinion. 

[RandoEFC+]

I quite like him to be fair. We went on a French trip when I was doing my A levels, we stopped off in Brussels and I can't remember whether it was at the EU building there or somewhere in Paris but we spent a day in some massive lecture theatre with a bunch of people speaking about various things, he was one of them. I also can't remember for the life of me what his talk was about but I remember him coming across as a bit of a dude .

[Honey Honey]

He's one of the smartest economically, although sometimes I strongly disagree with his assumptions.

 

Speaking of econonics and politicians here is the shadow chancellor...

 

Corbyn has also rejected many big hitters trying to get back into the shadow cabinet, including the likes of Milliband, Benn and Cooper. Not sure that is very wise.

[Fairy In Boots]

1 hour ago, HoneyNUFC said:

He's one of the smartest economically, although sometimes I strongly disagree with his assumptions.

 

Speaking of econonics and politicians here is the shadow chancellor...

 

Corbyn has also rejected many big hitters trying to get back into the shadow cabinet, including the likes of Milliband, Benn and Cooper. Not sure that is very wise.

Exactly what we've come to expect from MacDonald really. The Tories are a disaster but let's not forget how bat shit crazy Labours current power clique are

[RandoEFC+]

Corbyn ran a strong campaign and I'm still a fan of the bloke but the coming months are massive for Labour and the way some of them are talking isn't the right way to play it.

Rejecting the chance to get big hitters back into the cabinet is missing an opportunity to show that the party is united. Last thing Corbyn, McDonnell and co need to do is let the relative success of this election go to their heads and assume that the upward trajectory will continue just by doing the same things, especially as this is the mistake that Theresa May made right in front of their faces this time around. People still have major doubts about Corbyn and the Labour party, they've won back a number of voters but to get into power they need to win back an awful lot more, they were still 60 seats behind a Conservative party in disarray last week. 

[Honey Honey]

Owen Smith has been appointed to the shadow cabinet as Northern Ireland secretary.

 Hewitt will be spitting out his Glamorgan sausage

[Fairy In Boots]