Bolitics The New Condem Government

[Risso]

but hey that is not allowed now as we can only say it about Labour?

Why pretend like that is the case? Every day you’re on here dripping with rage and posting comments that border on the demagoguery over you hatred/outrage at the Conservatives. You’re free to criticise and you do and nobody has once ever stopped you from doing it.

I have to agree, the lack of any sort of tempt to have a discussion makes your posts on here unreadable the majority of the time, sorry Ian. Not everything the Conservatives or Labour do is 100% right or wrong, but the lack of any sort of shade of grey in your posts makes it impossible to have any sort of reasonable debate.

[markavfc40]

but hey that is not allowed now as we can only say it about Labour?

Why pretend like that is the case? Every day you’re on here dripping with rage and posting comments that border on the demagoguery over you hatred/outrage at the Conservatives. You’re free to criticise and you do and nobody has once ever stopped you from doing it.

I have to agree, the lack of any sort of tempt to have a discussion makes your posts on here unreadable the majority of the time, sorry Ian. Not everything the Conservatives or Labour do is 100% right or wrong, but the lack of any sort of shade of grey in your posts makes it impossible to have any sort of reasonable debate.

Doesn't just apply to Ian though and Labour supporters. The Tory supporters are just as bad. In actual fact compared to a a couple of the blue boys on here Ian is far from blinkered.

[jonno_2004]

but hey that is not allowed now as we can only say it about Labour?

Why pretend like that is the case? Every day you’re on here dripping with rage and posting comments that border on the demagoguery over you hatred/outrage at the Conservatives. You’re free to criticise and you do and nobody has once ever stopped you from doing it.

I have to agree, the lack of any sort of tempt to have a discussion makes your posts on here unreadable the majority of the time, sorry Ian. Not everything the Conservatives or Labour do is 100% right or wrong, but the lack of any sort of shade of grey in your posts makes it impossible to have any sort of reasonable debate.

Doesn't just apply to Ian though and Labour supporters. The Tory supporters are just as bad. In actual fact compared to a a couple of the blue boys on here Ian is far from blinkered.

Who are the 'blue boys' posting equivalent bile on here?

[drat01]

That's the problem - after reading the rants and hypocrisy of certain posters for the past few years, when I point out things I object to and have an opinion on regarding this abortion of a Gvmt, it is seemingly against the "rules. Strange that

Anyway I suppose the news tonight that the LibDem part of this Gvmt saying that they are dropping plans for a graduate Tax and are now in favor of doubling fees to around 7000 is not to be debated.

link

I suppose it doesn't count that it should be talked about nor should the lies and hypocrisy of the Libdems especially as that would make things a bit wrong.

I wonder how many of the students on VT and those parents with kids going to Uni feel about this? Especially as Clegg had signed up to the pledge against it before the election. Surely if this was supposed to be a Gvmt of two parties like some claim then they would not support this?

[Awol]

Two things Ian:

1) Why in every other post do you reference these mythical "rules"? Other than abiding by the site rules people can and do say as they please.

2) Instead of these snidey references to "certain posters" at least have the front to name them and what you think they have done/said that you feel is wrong. Otherwise it's possible to think that you want to imply things about other posters without accountability and having to actually engage with those you are accusing - which is a bit weak really.

[drat01]

I await with interest some defence or comment on the latest broken promise

[drat01]

I wonder how many of the students on VT and those parents with kids going to Uni feel about this? Especially as Clegg had signed up to the pledge against it before the election. Surely if this was supposed to be a Gvmt of two parties like some claim then they would not support this?

[peterms]

I wonder how many of the students on VT and those parents with kids going to Uni feel about this? Especially as Clegg had signed up to the pledge against it before the election. Surely if this was supposed to be a Gvmt of two parties like some claim then they would not support this?

I like this bit in the linked story:

Mr Cable will want to dampen worries within his own party that the coalition government is about to move directly against a key election promise.

Of course any such policy would be a direct and unarguable abandonment of a key election pledge. I will be fascinated to see how Mr Cable will manage to effect such a change in policy while at the same time "dampening worries" in his party that they have changed position. Hypnosis, perhaps?

[snowychap]

Hypnosis, perhaps?

A dance off.

[Awol]

Just for Ian's personal entertainment, the hypocrisy story of the week:

Why is atheist Nick Clegg considering sending his son to the same exclusive Catholic school as the Blairs?

Nick Clegg is considering sending his eldest son to one of Britain’s leading Catholic state schools – despite both his atheism and his party’s opposition to faith schools.

The Deputy Prime Minister faces accusations of ­hypocrisy after he and his Catholic wife Miriam were given a private tour of the London Oratory, where Tony Blair controversially sent his sons. Headmaster David McFadden told The Mail on Sunday that he believed his school would be a ‘natural choice’ for the couple, who were ‘happy with what they saw’ ­during their tour last week.

The news that the Liberal Democrat leader is ‘very keen’ on the elite school for his nine-year-old son will dismay many within his party, which has repeatedly made clear its opposition to faith schools.

In a manifesto pledge that was widely seen as a commitment to dismantling faith schools in their current form, the party vowed to ‘ensure that all faith schools develop an inclusive admissions policy and end unfair discrimin­ation on grounds of faith when recruiting staff’.

Elsewhere, the Lib Dems have said the party would halt ‘the establishment of new schools which select by ability, aptitude or faith’ and said it would introduce ‘policies to reduce radically all existing forms of selection’.

The Cleggs live in Putney, South-West London, where their three sons attend Catholic primary schools. Their nearest Catholic secondary school, less than a mile from their home, is John Paul II in Wimbledon.

A high percentage of its students are from deprived areas and many have English as a second language. Ofsted ranks the school ‘satisfactory’. However, the London Oratory was classed as outstanding – Ofsted’s highest grade – in its most recent inspection.

In the 2009 examinations, 94.5 per cent of pupils attained five or more GCSEs, at Grade C or above, including English and maths. This compared with 50 per cent at John Paul II and a national average of 46.7 per cent.

The school also has a strong record in ­sciences, with 86 per cent of pupils securing at least two GCSEs, Grade C or above, in science subjects.

But it is more than twice as far away from Mr Clegg’s home as John Paul II school.

Mr Clegg revealed his atheism in a radio interview in December 2007. Asked directly on BBC Radio 5 Live ‘Do you believe in God?’, Mr Clegg replied simply: ‘No.’

Later, he said he had ‘enormous respect’ for people with faith and added: ‘I’m married to a Catholic and am committed to bringing my children up as Catholics. ‘However, I myself am not an active believer, but the last thing I would do when talking or thinking about religion is approach it with a closed heart or a closed mind.’

Earlier this year Mr Clegg was accused of discovering religion just in time for the General Election when he claimed that Christian values were central to his party’s policies.

And during the campaign he was photographed attending Sunday worship at an Anglican church in New Malden, Surrey. A few days later he was spotted at his local Catholic church, Our Lady of Pity And St Simon Stock in Putney, for his eldest son’s first communion.

It later emerged that the boy was recorded on the list of children receiving the sacrament under his Spanish-born mother’s maiden name.

Mr Clegg’s interest in the Oratory will also surprise many within his party, given his recent insistence that faith schools should teach that homosexuality is ‘normal and harmless’.

It prompted a furious response from the Family Education Trust, which accused him of showing a ‘woeful lack of respect for faith schools and totally dis­regarding the deeply held views of parents’. It added: ‘The vast majority of ­parents do not want their children’s schools to be turned into vehicles to promote positive images of homosexual relationships.’

The London Oratory is linked to one of the most conservative Catholic churches in Britain, the Church of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, popularly known as the Brompton Oratory and controlled by a group of fathers known as Oratorians.

Three years ago the school cancelled plans to raise money for the Terrence Higgins Trust, one of Eur­ope’s most respected Aids charities, because it did not consider it a suitable recipient of charity from a Catholic institution.

Mr McFadden said yesterday that the Cleggs’ eldest son would be ­considered for entry in two years’ time if his parents decide to submit an application.

‘We don’t admit children on the jobs of their parents, but I think most parents who apply to the school do so on the basis of the Catholic nature of the school more than anything else,’ he said. ‘I think his wife seems to be the driving force.’ He added that he believed the ­couple would look at other schools in the area but said: ‘I think it would be a natural choice for them [to come here], yes.

‘They’re just normal parents of Form Five boys who are starting to turn their thoughts to secondary schools.’

Last night a spokesman for the Deputy Prime Minister said: ‘Nick Clegg’s sons go to a local school in South-West London.

‘Miriam and Nick have always refused to turn the issue of their children’s education into a political football.

‘He and Miriam are currently considering a number of schools for their eldest son but no decision has yet been made.’

The Oratory, along with other ­voluntary-aided schools, previously conducted interviews with the parents of prospective pupils and their children to determine the depth of the religious faith, which led to accusations of ‘covert selection’.

However, a change in the law ended the practice and the Oratory – which does not require both parents to be Catholics – now asks for references from parish priests and demands that parents complete a stringent ‘religious inquiry form’. The four-page document requests details of how frequently the ­prospective pupils and their parents attend Mass and holy days of obli­gation.

The application form questions how long they have lived in a particular parish and whether they ­worship weekly, fortnightly, monthly, occasionally, rarely or never. It also asks ‘How does your parish priest know your child?’ and ‘How does your parish priest know you?’

Personally I don't care where people choose to send their kids to school - it's their business - but I thought the combination of 'H' and religion would get the outrage bus warmed up nicely this morning, with extra points for anyone who can link this to Osborne being incompetent within five posts.

[drat01]

Tuition fees Jon?

[Awol]

Tuition fees Jon?

I paid them and even went on a "free education" demo in London - although that was somewhat ruined by the Chairman of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transexual Society being in charge of the only megaphone. I've nothing against mincers but 20,000 people being addressed by a bloke who made Graham Norton sound like Clint Eastwood was pretty absurd.

Even when I was at uni they were talking about removing the cap on fees and going down the American route. I take a different view in that university education should be funded by the state, but that far fewer people should go. Raise the educational standards required for acceptance and bin a raft of the frankly useless courses on offer. In short make university more elitist but base that on ability rather than financial means.

[peterms]

It's outrageous. His abandonment of a key plank of his party's professed values is on the same level as the Tories' about-turn on child benefit. He has shown a similar level of ineptitude on this as Osborne's incompetence with regard to the child benefit affair.

[Risso]

I have to say Clegg is going down in my estimation a fair bit lately.

[drat01]

"Tax evasion and avoidance cost the Treasury an estimated £14bn a year"

Priority for this Gvmt? Benefits and the Public Sector!!

[Jon]

I have to say Clegg is going down in my estimation a fair bit lately.

The Lib Dems are, quite simply, signing their own death warrant.

Propping up this Tory government and all it's doings is not what The Lib Dem voters had in mind when entering the voting booth in May.

And it'll hurt them, unless they either get out, or start constraining the Tories. I think they'll stick with it until after the PR vote next year, and then get the hell out of there (especially if they lose the vote).

This Lib Dem political suicide could well benefit Labour, if streams of dissafected Lib Dem voters turn to them, whihc they probably will.

[kidlewis]

if people earning £44k or more (excluding single mothers) can't make do without £80 a week then they need to man up big time.

me and my partner earn between us about £55k a year and we managed to save nearly £1000 per month when our first child came along, not only that if we needed to save another £80 we would work out how to do it.

the funny thing is these stay at home mothers who say they can't cope with losing £80 a month in child benefit.

try paying £540 a month in childcare you lucky bleeders.

[Demitri_C]

exactly lewis, it just seems people like to moan about anything.

its about time they started getting tough on the lazy generation (im refering to those on benefits)

i think its harsh but needs to be done or we will end up like greece

[snowychap]

its about time they started getting tough on the lazy generation (im refering to those on benefits)

Because all those on benefits are lazy, aren't they?

i think its harsh but needs to be done or we will end up like greece

If you believe that we are going to end up like Greece, how will getting 'tough' on this 'lazy generation', that you claim there is, prevent that from occurring (or is just another opportunity to reaffirm your prejudice about people receiving benefits)?

[snowychap]

if people earning £44k or more (excluding single mothers) can't make do without £80 a week then they need to man up big time.

me and my partner earn between us about £55k a year ...

Do either of you earn over the threshold for the 40% tax band?