Jump to content
blandy

The banker loving, baby-eating Tory party thread (regenerated)

Recommended Posts

Quote

. It was the will of the people, those who voted, to elect a Tory Government does that mean the opposing parties should shut the f up and sit on their hands for 5 years.

Suddenly it's clear that Corbyn is the only opposition leader to ever understand democracy. ;) 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

Suddenly it's clear that Corbyn is the only opposition leader to ever understand democracy. ;) 

You know what I thought as I was typing that I was leaving an open goal and it wouldn't be long before someone came along and stuck the ball in the onion bag :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, markavfc40 said:

 

I am bewildered by what is going on here. We voted out, fine, but this will of the people and anyone anti Brexit should now pipe down and toe the line is a load of bollocks. It was the will of the people, those who voted, to elect a Tory Government does that mean the opposing parties should shut the f up and sit on their hands for 5 years.

Ironically that is pretty much what they are doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, chrisp65 said:

Yep, I get all that, we'll soon be funding education as poorly as we were ten or twelve years ago. I'm not arguing in favour of government spending plans, I'm arguing that historically schools are still relatively well funded, better funded in real terms than at any time other than during the last 10 years.

Better funded in real terms than in the 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's and the start of the 2000's.

Overall, education is substantially better funded than it ever was. Better funded than many other european countries.

In very crude terms, the UK is about 8th for education spending and 15th for educational attainment. If we are relatively high up the spending league table and relatively lower down the achievement league table, then budgets surely aren't the resigning issue? Make red tape or performance tables or the curriculum or whatever your resigning issue.

I dunno, perhaps I just expected a head teacher to be able to explain themselves with facts and numbers. I'm probably being hyper critical, we should just give them more money. 

Your expectations are right and it's so important to have an active head.
But then funding is a farce too, for example IT budgets being hurriedly spent on iPads is just one of many wasteful activities that heads and educational policy has little defence for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, itdoesntmatterwhatthissay said:

Your expectations are right and it's so important to have an active head.
But then funding is a farce too, for example IT budgets being hurriedly spent on iPads is just one of many wasteful activities that heads and educational policy has little defence for.

I'm unsure what the basis is for the above but obviously it goes without saying that some money is wasted in any budget. 

That being a given, then what is perhaps needed is better control of schools spending, more oversight, more direction, more accountability. Who could do this role?  I hear nobody in particular ask... Well how about, oh I don't know... a local authority perhaps. They could have overall responsibility for school budgets and spending and hold them accountable....

Oh no. I forgot through the Tories are currently dismantling local authority involvement in education through the Academy agenda. Handing more and more control to schools and removing accountability, still saves a few quid.

So what to do... I guess the only answer is to cut pupil premium funding, a funding designed to help educate the most needy out of poverty. Makes sense.

Who cares about the education of children, we must stop head teachers who are working 50 or 60 hour weeks purchasing IT equipment to assist them.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Public spending has more than doubled since 2000, a period of low inflation.

To quote the Institute of Fiscal Studies "Healthcare and education were the relative winners from Labour’s largesse ".

But while both Education and Health got substantial increases of 4.7% a year productivity fell by 10.8% and value for money fell with it.

You can only conclude that if health and education are still in crisis after doubling their budgets, then increasing their budgets produces a diminishing return.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When it comes to healthcare, I'm not sure that diminishing returns is necessarily a bad thing. We could achieve fantastic value for money by getting rid of all of the expensive surgery and treatments, and just chucking out painkillers and antibiotics for the easy stuff. 

Edited by Davkaus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, MakemineVanilla said:

while both Education and Health got substantial increases of 4.7% a year productivity fell by 10.8% and value for money fell with it.

You can only conclude that if health and education are still in crisis after doubling their budgets, then increasing their budgets produces a diminishing return.

How is productivity measured in Education and in Health?

I ask because we know for example, that more people than ever are being treated by the Health service. We know that new drugs are being used, we know that under Labour in particular, School and Hospitals which were suffering from leaking roofs and torn and tatty books and so on had their infrastucture repaired, and new books bought and so on. So how is spending money on fixing a school gym roof measured in the productivity calculations, say?

Productivity (as I understand it) is a measure of economic activity - what you get out in value terms against what you put in to get it - so how do you measure healthcare and educational outcomes in an economic way to do the calculations, in the light of new drugs,and building repairs and more people treated and waiting times and exam results and all that? How do you measure value for money?

And if you can't answer those questions clearly and without contradiction, then how can the conclusions drawn be taken to be valid?

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, blandy said:

How is productivity measured in Education and in Health?

It actually can't be measured very well at all, since there is no market in the conventional sense for these 'sectors'. If there is no market then there is no price, if there's no price then you cannot value the output, so 'quantity' of output is probably used (how that is defined is a mystery). Productivity is often measured as output per hour so this output is very hard to both define and value.

What the IFS probably does is, in a far from robust way, find a measure output adjusted for the cost of provision/ spend, therefore giving you a measure of 'cost effectiveness'. The output measures probably come from the ONS and again are 'measured' with a lot of assumptions. In fact output is impossible to measure for some services (how would you do it for policing?).   

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Dr_Pangloss said:

how would you do it for policing?

'Falls down the stairs' per thousand arrests? :)

Edited by snowychap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TrentVilla said:

I'm unsure what the basis is for the above but obviously it goes without saying that some money is wasted in any budget. 

That being a given, then what is perhaps needed is better control of schools spending, more oversight, more direction, more accountability. Who could do this role?  I hear nobody in particular ask... Well how about, oh I don't know... a local authority perhaps. They could have overall responsibility for school budgets and spending and hold them accountable....

Oh no. I forgot through the Tories are currently dismantling local authority involvement in education through the Academy agenda. Handing more and more control to schools and removing accountability, still saves a few quid.

So what to do... I guess the only answer is to cut pupil premium funding, a funding designed to help educate the most needy out of poverty. Makes sense.

Who cares about the education of children, we must stop head teachers who are working 50 or 60 hour weeks purchasing IT equipment to assist them.

 

I know a head who had to spend 56k in 2 hours so they could keep the IT budget the year after. It went on Mac's and iPads that they already didn't use/think were improving education. 
Another head has been given a few 100k for schools building, they don't need to build but they need to spend the money so they will!

As I understand it, it has been that way for many many years (budgets not reflecting need) so while I do agree the Tories are dismantling education the biggest positive change to the education end game has been apprenticeships, which are vital. Perhaps the Tories they should have invested millions upon millions on some sort of pointless youth advice service and called it Connexions? 
Also do you actually believe the concept of Academies are that much different from Free Schools? 

So think of it this way, 56k is an NQT and fully qualified teacher, so yeah, if you want to make it about Heads YOU can, but I'LL make it about the 56k that should be going on teachers to improve actual education. By standing together Heads can draw attention to the real problems, but heck ,it's easier for them and the entrenched public to just attack a party.

You're falling into the trap of thinking it's all because of the Tories. While there are party differences, if you truly believe education as a whole was much improved under Labour then you're sorely mistaken...or still trying to justify the money you spent learning for your Home Information Pack qualification........

Edited by itdoesntmatterwhatthissay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, itdoesntmatterwhatthissay said:

I know a head who had to spend 56k in 2 hours so they could keep the IT budget the year after. It went on Mac's and iPads that they already didn't use/think were improving education. 
Another head has been given a few 100k for schools building, they don't need to build but they need to spend the money so they will!

As we approach the end of the financial year, all the roads will be dug up. It's a mysterious money worship ritual that most of the public find vexatious, yet no government sees fit to change.

44 minutes ago, itdoesntmatterwhatthissay said:

You're falling into the trap of thinking it's all because of the Tories. While there are party differences, if you truly believe education as a whole was much improved under Labour then you're sorely mistaken...or still trying to justify the money you spent learning for your Home Information Pack qualification........

If you think the Tories aren't detrimental to the quality of state education? It is you that is mistaken my friend.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, blandy said:

How is productivity measured in Education and in Health?

I ask because we know for example, that more people than ever are being treated by the Health service. We know that new drugs are being used, we know that under Labour in particular, School and Hospitals which were suffering from leaking roofs and torn and tatty books and so on had their infrastucture repaired, and new books bought and so on. So how is spending money on fixing a school gym roof measured in the productivity calculations, say?

Productivity (as I understand it) is a measure of economic activity - what you get out in value terms against what you put in to get it - so how do you measure healthcare and educational outcomes in an economic way to do the calculations, in the light of new drugs,and building repairs and more people treated and waiting times and exam results and all that? How do you measure value for money?

And if you can't answer those questions clearly and without contradiction, then how can the conclusions drawn be taken to be valid?

 

I don't know but presumed the the office of fiscal wotsits do. 

Even so I do think the 8 million functionally illiterate people in the UK is not much of a recommendation for our educational system.

If I am wrong and you are right, the logical conclusion would be to keep doubling the budget and see if the complaining stops.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, MakemineVanilla said:

If I am wrong and you are right, the logical conclusion would be to keep doubling the budget and see if the complaining stops.

 

I can't be right (or wrong) - all I did was ask questions. I don't know enough about it to have a view, but as you'd posted a view, I thought you might be able to explain how the facts and methodology supported your conclusion.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, itdoesntmatterwhatthissay said:

I know a head who had to spend 56k in 2 hours so they could keep the IT budget the year after. It went on Mac's and iPads that they already didn't use/think were improving education. 
Another head has been given a few 100k for schools building, they don't need to build but they need to spend the money so they will!

As I understand it, it has been that way for many many years (budgets not reflecting need) so while I do agree the Tories are dismantling education the biggest positive change to the education end game has been apprenticeships, which are vital. Perhaps the Tories they should have invested millions upon millions on some sort of pointless youth advice service and called it Connexions? 
Also do you actually believe the concept of Academies are that much different from Free Schools? 

So think of it this way, 56k is an NQT and fully qualified teacher, so yeah, if you want to make it about Heads YOU can, but I'LL make it about the 56k that should be going on teachers to improve actual education. By standing together Heads can draw attention to the real problems, but heck ,it's easier for them and the entrenched public to just attack a party.

You're falling into the trap of thinking it's all because of the Tories. While there are party differences, if you truly believe education as a whole was much improved under Labour then you're sorely mistaken...or still trying to justify the money you spent learning for your Home Information Pack qualification........

On the first point, if that occurred (and in my experience that is an exception and not the rule that a school would have that sort of budget surplus) then it is wrong that the money was spent in that way. However I'd also argue that there is a flaw in the system itself when a school is forced to spend its budget to ensure it isn't reduced the following year, it seems fairly comment sense to think that spend on items like IT will go through peaks and dips over an extended period of time.

In regards a head being given a few 100k for school buildings that they don't need but need to spend. Sorry but that just doesn't stand up. That is the one area of a school budget in which they can have carry over from one year to the next, that is why most heads will ensure that surplus budget finds its way into that particular pot. So please don't read this as me calling you a liar, but I don't accept this to be true.

Connections really has nothing to do with education and the cutting of the pupil premium calculations so I'll move past that.

I think there is a danger in making assumptions on the funding of hundreds of schools on what I consider to be an extremely rare example, its just not representative and in no way is sufficient sample. My company supplies hundreds of schools on a weekly basis, we speak to HT's on a daily basis, I can tell you that it is just not an accurate representation.

I'm not sure how you conclude I'm making anything about heads, I'm not, if anyone is that is yourself with your critique of how heads you know are using their budgets.

My anger is directed at the Government for the cuts they are making and the impact that has on the education of children. My partners school is going to be looking at staff redundancies to deal with the budget cuts, so forgive me if I don't think 56K on Ipads for the sake of it is very representative of the situation on the ground.

I'm not falling into any trap. I'm speaking from a position of quite considerable knowledge and experience within the sector over a prolonged period of time. And yes, education as a profession and the education provided to pupils was better under Labour. Frankly I don't care if you think I'm mistaken based on your frankly implausible examples.

As for your parting line, blimey, it is like being back at school. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, MakemineVanilla said:

I don't know but presumed the the office of fiscal wotsits do. 

Even so I do think the 8 million functionally illiterate people in the UK is not much of a recommendation for our educational system.

If I am wrong and you are right, the logical conclusion would be to keep doubling the budget and see if the complaining stops.

 

8 million illiterate people in the UK you say? Oh in that case it makes perfect sense to cut budgets for the schools in some of the most deprived areas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, TrentVilla said:

On the first point, if that occurred (and in my experience that is an exception and not the rule that a school would have that sort of budget surplus) then it is wrong that the money was spent in that way. However I'd also argue that there is a flaw in the system itself when a school is forced to spend its budget to ensure it isn't reduced the following year, it seems fairly comment sense to think that spend on items like IT will go through peaks and dips over an extended period of time.

 

I might be able to add something to this point but my knowledge could be out of date now - having retired some years ago from the Public Sector. Local Govt used CIPFA qualified accountants who, in my day were considered very second rate behind the 'big 3 ' Chartered , Certified and Cost and Management. They always worked on the principle that if you underspent your budget you had it reduced next year; so you were not rewarded for prudence. This applied across all L.A's not just Education. Madness I thought - but I was only a 'mere clerk or servant' !

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Xann said:

As we approach the end of the financial year, all the roads will be dug up. It's a mysterious money worship ritual that most of the public find vexatious, yet no government sees fit to change.

If you think the Tories aren't detrimental to the quality of state education? It is you that is mistaken my friend.

They are and they have been detrimental, but I'm saying I'm not entrenched enough to act as though they are wholly to blame.

I have criticised the academy system like i criticised free schools. Moving toward exam heavy degrees is wholly wrong. Forced academisation is terrible. Using OFSTED to drive an agenda is disgraceful. Pupil premium is bloody vital! Paying teaching tuition fees for postgrads with 1st's misses the point. etc.

However there's no way you're telling me Ruth Kelly et al were any better with education? (I'll spare you a list.....I know I go on) Even their micro edu/employment projects were a farce, Future Jobs Fund for example.
And that's surely the real point, education offers so much to the individual but all said and done it is used to shape employment potential. I saw Labour do so little about the problem apart from throwing their and others cash around. However if you take something like industry driven apprenticeships you can't help but feel there is a part of state education that has been offering career potential.

Oh and I know how far from perfect apprenticeships are, but heck, someone in government finally got something partly right!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, MakemineVanilla said:

Public spending has more than doubled since 2000, a period of low inflation.

To quote the Institute of Fiscal Studies "Healthcare and education were the relative winners from Labour’s largesse ".

But while both Education and Health got substantial increases of 4.7% a year productivity fell by 10.8% and value for money fell with it.

You can only conclude that if health and education are still in crisis after doubling their budgets, then increasing their budgets produces a diminishing return.

I thought Randy Lerner would stop posting on here when he sold the Villa

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, itdoesntmatterwhatthissay said:

However there's no way you're telling me Ruth Kelly et al were any better with education?

Oh yes. She was fecking awful. So bad in fact, Cameron told her the Tories would be voting with her changes, because they mirrored Tory policy.

Now that's proper shit.

 

You don't have to take my word that the Tories are unsuitable custodians of our public services.  I don't work in education, I just socialize with teachers and academics from time to time.

Perhaps you should ask those that are in the system?

@StefanAVFC - Care to recommend a teacher's site? Obviously one than isn't politically affiliated. The NUT or NAS boards would be unsuitable.

I'll ask one of my Mates if you can't think of one.

A floating voter like IDMWIS should get his info straight from the horse's mouths.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â