The Labour Party

Nothing wrong with the notion of giving the teachers a bonus etc but I really can’t get my head around the logic of removing VAT breaks on private education.


An entirely non-aspirational policy - the proverbial socialist school race where one kid has a broken leg so we break everyone’s leg to make it “fair”. The argument is it gives kids a head start - so why don’t we aspire to make it easier to get in to (pay for it ahead of income tax to make it more accessible) or aspire to make state schools better if it’s such a benefit? Most parents who sent their kids to private school go without holidays etc to make it happen, just about afford it now - the ones who won’t care will just be able to pay up the next x years of education and beat the tax hike anyway.

I’m excited to see how they differentiate between private school fees and uni school fees. Both paid for education by the individual. Got court cases written all over this if they try and drawer a distinction between the two.

Sam Freedman always writes well about this topic -

 
I agree education needs a rethink and it should be about making children be the best they can be, at whatever it is they’re doing.
On the Oxbridge makes it easier, state schools make up about 70% of Oxbridge entrants which, on the face of it, looks quite good. Then when you see that less than 6% of children go to private schools, it doesn’t look quite so good.
20 Prime Ministers went to Eton and 30 to Oxford whilst we’ve had SIX Labour Prime Ministers ever..
…and three of those went to Oxford.
 
If I were Secretary of State for Education my first actions would be to:

1. Abolish the National Curriculum.
2. Abolish SATs.
3. Abolish Ofsted.

This would save money and would be part of a project to phase national politicians out of routine involvement in education since all they have done is fuck it up at every level.
 
If your old mate Nigel Farage hadn't gone to a public school, I doubt he'd ever have risen to be such a malignant influence on British public life.

Public schools take dog shit human beings (in this case a nazi sympathising teenager) and give them a life-long sense of entitlement so that even the wastrels, school bullies and dunces, have a chance of taking a large steaming dump on society.

Lawrence Fox is another notable ****.

Boris Johnson another.

Without public schools we might actually have leaders who don't have all the worst traits combined.

Bizarrely the business he was in (and where he made his money)… 99.9% of folk in that industry are from state schools - proper east end barrow boys.
 
Bizarrely the business he was in (and where he made his money)… 99.9% of folk in that industry are from state schools - proper east end barrow boys.

I'm confused, are you admitting that his school connections made up for his lack of talent or that he's a glorified conman?

I thought he was telling everyone he was impoverished ("the poorest person in politics")?
 
Last edited:
Is this code for racists?

Socially disenfranchised people are those who suffer structural racism or bigotry from the majority. So your LGBT, religious/ethnics groups such as Jews/Muslims, immigrants, etc. People who get labelled and that.
 
Socially disenfranchised people are those who suffer structural racism or bigotry from the majority. So your LGBT, religious/ethnics groups such as Jews/Muslims, immigrants, etc. People who get labelled and that.

So thick racists with less teeth than GCSEs who get labelled as thick racists, and without opportunities could be included?
 

This seems very similar to the Thangam Debbonaire interview about Rwanda flights, and Labour really need to get their communication sorted.

As with that, it looks like she's trying to say 2 things:
1. That they don't need to repeal legislation, when it's quicker just to stop using it. Just because the police have powers doesn't mean they have to use them - if the Home Secretary says they expect a lighter touch or they will have to legislate then that will happen.
2. That there is limited time in parliament, and a new Labour government will have a list of positive things that it wants to get done first - It won't want to be tied down repealing legislation that it doesn't intend to enforce.

I don't understand why that's so difficult to say, but hopefully they'll get all the shadow ministers in a room and get them reciting the lines like parrots, so that they don't have to gabble on like this.
 
This seems very similar to the Thangam Debbonaire interview about Rwanda flights, and Labour really need to get their communication sorted.

As with that, it looks like she's trying to say 2 things:
1. That they don't need to repeal legislation, when it's quicker just to stop using it. Just because the police have powers doesn't mean they have to use them - if the Home Secretary says they expect a lighter touch or they will have to legislate then that will happen.
2. That there is limited time in parliament, and a new Labour government will have a list of positive things that it wants to get done first - It won't want to be tied down repealing legislation that it doesn't intend to enforce.

I don't understand why that's so difficult to say, but hopefully they'll get all the shadow ministers in a room and get them reciting the lines like parrots, so that they don't have to gabble on like this.
I think they’ve finally got the line straight regarding the NHS, at least.
 
The full interview taking calls from the public


Comes across well but is still a politician I wouldn't trust to take my Dog out for a walk.

We have hit rock bottom in politics in this country,
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top