Reply to: Lib Dems

[SueEllen]

I must admit I have more or less always voted LibDem... I like JC too but labour's position on Brexit disappointed me ...so would like to vote for LibDem again as they are the only party promised a new referendum (I will pretend to forget their previous promises which they broke when they went into coalition power when I voted for them), however, tactical voting advised by Best for Britain I should vote Labour in my area, the idea is not winning but to keep as many seats away from the Tories as we can.

I lost faith in all these opinion polls, during last elections all the polls suggested Tories wont win, come to think of it, I haven't met anyone who admitted they voted Tories.. its a mystery how they win

The polls last election were full of errors due to how they collected their data. They went for the cheaper method of asking people questions online and ignoring the fact that people over 50 should be targeted in person if they want to know the way they are likely to vote.

Oh and last election I knew people who voted Tory to keep UKIP out, or because they didn't like what their Lib Dem MP had done in their area while in government.

[malvolio]

I must admit I have more or less always voted LibDem... I like JC too but labour's position on Brexit disappointed me ...so would like to vote for LibDem again as they are the only party promised a new referendum (I will pretend to forget their previous promises which they broke when they went into coalition power when I voted for them), however, tactical voting advised by Best for Britain I should vote Labour in my area, the idea is not winning but to keep as many seats away from the Tories as we can.

I lost faith in all these opinion polls, during last elections all the polls suggested Tories wont win, come to think of it, I haven't met anyone who admitted they voted Tories.. its a mystery how they win

Why would they? Most people try not to upset the deluded....

[SandyD]

I must admit I have more or less always voted LibDem... I like JC too but labour's position on Brexit disappointed me ...so would like to vote for LibDem again as they are the only party promised a new referendum (I will pretend to forget their previous promises which they broke when they went into coalition power when I voted for them), however, tactical voting advised by Best for Britain I should vote Labour in my area, the idea is not winning but to keep as many seats away from the Tories as we can.

I lost faith in all these opinion polls, during last elections all the polls suggested Tories wont win, come to think of it, I haven't met anyone who admitted they voted Tories.. its a mystery how they win

[TheFaQQer]

Actually it did, surprisingly the lowly paid travellers and the recent arrivals qualified on earnings.

If the child is eligible for FSM (or is in the Ever 6 FSM data) then the school gets PP money (as you've highlighted). However, that is not the same as

you mean extra money if you accept Eastern European & traveller pupils?

I refer you to my comment above:

It has nothing to do with traveller children or any specific racial demographic

[malvolio]

Yeah, it's a fault of mean Lib Dems who are not in the Govt now...

Rational argument really isn't your thing, is it.

[AtW]

Churchill promised a return to the past

And Admin banned him for it...

[AtW]

OK, but a lot of the current war on us contractors wouldn't have happened had Danny Alexander not over-reacted to the SLC case and attacked the wrong target. And St Vince of Cable led the rush to make it easier to outsource our work to the sub-continent. It all levels out. On balance I think the LDs were not a valuable contribution to UK PLC

Yeah, it's a fault of mean Lib Dems who are not in the Govt now...

[Mordac]

Isn't just easier to conclude all politicians are self serving lying opportunistic scum, no matter the political affiliation or leaning?

It probably is. Some are worse than others, but "politics" isn't considered a dirty word (on this forum at least, especially when preceded by "office") for nothing.

[_V_]

Isn't just easier to conclude all politicians are self serving lying opportunistic scum, no matter the political affiliation or leaning?

[SueEllen]

You really are a plum aren't you. We are leaving the EU as the result of a democratic vote. Now, I reckon that's confused you even more...

Actually he's pointing to the mimic of Blair, Camoron's, gamble on saying he was going to hold a referendum. Camoron didn't think he would get an outright majority so could blame the Lib Dems or whoever for not being able to hold a referendum.

[SueEllen]

I'm not suggesting that didn't help her public perception (it doesn't always work though, Churchill "won" WWII, and still got absolutely trounced in 1945). I'm simply challenging the inference that when Argentina invaded British sovereign territory, Maggie thought to herself "hey, if I win this war, I can hold an early election and batter Labour".

Churchill promised a return to the past while Labour promised a bright new future with a welfare state including the NHS so it isn't surprising he lost.

Anyway Maggie was intelligent enough to always take advantage of circumstances until the late 80s. She also polished her image and was clever enough to choose a wardrobe that matched photo opportunities which is why Blair was her heir.

Mister Bates seems to have forgotten that Labour was led by Michael Foot (very much the Corbyn of his day, nice chap but you wouldn't want him in charge of the tombola at your local village fete, let alone the whole bloody country). The Labour Manifesto in 1983 was famously described as "the longest suicide note in history" by the late Gerald Kaufman. He was right. Labour were completely unelectable - how times have changed...not.

Unfortunately politicians haven't learnt - " Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

[Mordac]

....and the best is one is leaving the EU was an election gag as well.

That's the icing on the cake.

You really are a plum aren't you. We are leaving the EU as the result of a democratic vote. Now, I reckon that's confused you even more...

[Mordac]

Maggie did get re-elected due to the Falklands.

I'm not suggesting that didn't help her public perception (it doesn't always work though, Churchill "won" WWII, and still got absolutely trounced in 1945). I'm simply challenging the inference that when Argentina invaded British sovereign territory, Maggie thought to herself "hey, if I win this war, I can hold an early election and batter Labour".
Mister Bates seems to have forgotten that Labour was led by Michael Foot (very much the Corbyn of his day, nice chap but you wouldn't want him in charge of the tombola at your local village fete, let alone the whole bloody country). The Labour Manifesto in 1983 was famously described as "the longest suicide note in history" by the late Gerald Kaufman. He was right. Labour were completely unelectable - how times have changed...not.

[vetran]

They aren't the only groups you get extra money for.

Oh and around my way immigrant children help boast a schools results. Schools without sufficient immigrants do badly as it seems certain more established groups have lazy parents.

Not the only ones but in our area they are a significant proportion.

Some cultures do really well but not all but a nice broad race based swipe is always welcome.

The issue here was one school who manged it incorrectly, over did the intake then went into special measures. The only change in an established school was the Intake. The travellers dragged down the attendance and the English as a secondary language meant the teaching suffered.

4 years later after a complete change of management and turning into an Academy its back up.


Now if they had taken 10% of special children then they would probably have been fine.

[vetran]

No - I mean the Pupil Premium grant which gives money to the school for children who are eligible for free school meals, or are looked after children, or who have parents in the armed forces or have done in previous years.

So, the school gets £1320 per pupil in R-Y6 who have been recorded as eligible for FSM in the past six years (the so-called Ever FSM measure), £935 per pupil in year 7-11 that matches that criteria, £1900 for a LAC, and £300 per child in R-Y11 recorded as an Ever 6 Service child.

It has nothing to do with traveller children or any specific racial demographic, so probably has nothing to do with whatever you're talking about happening at that school - you will be able to read what they spent their PP money on on their website, though.

Actually it did, surprisingly the lowly paid travellers and the recent arrivals qualified on earnings.

The Coalition Government introduced the Pupil Premium in 2011 to provide additional
school funding for those children classed as having deprived backgrounds, and also those
who had been looked after (by a local authority) for more than six months. In addition,
the Service Premium was introduced for children whose parent(s) are, or have since 2011,
served in the armed forces.
Since their introduction, changes have been made to the eligibility criteria and the funding
levels of the premiums. The Pupil Premium has increased from £430 per pupil in 2011–12,
to £1,320 per primary pupil and £935 per secondary pupil in 2016-17 (in 2014-15 the
Government introduced different Pupil Premium rates for primary and secondary pupils).
In addition, while eligible looked after children previously attracted the same Pupil
Premium as deprived children, in 2014-15 the “Pupil Premium Plus” was introduced. For
2014-15 and 2015-16 current or certain previously looked after children each attracted
£1,900 of funding. The eligibility criteria for the Service Premium have been broadened
since 2011-12 and the rate has increased from £200 to £300.