Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

Started by Josquius, February 20, 2016, 07:46:34 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

How would you vote on Britain remaining in the EU?

British- Remain
12 (11.9%)
British - Leave
7 (6.9%)
Other European - Remain
21 (20.8%)
Other European - Leave
6 (5.9%)
ROTW - Remain
35 (34.7%)
ROTW - Leave
20 (19.8%)

Total Members Voted: 99

garbon

Quote from: HVC on July 10, 2025, 01:45:21 AM
Quote from: garbon on July 10, 2025, 01:40:57 AM
Quote from: HVC on July 10, 2025, 01:12:40 AM
Quote from: Syt on July 10, 2025, 01:06:43 AMDuring my time in school I don't recall such things, but generally parents would not just take their kids out of school for going on holiday. :P

Let's just say I'd never win any attendance awards and no truancy cops were banging on my door :lol:

:console:

You saying I wasn't missed? :o

Besides, I had good grades still. It wasn't until university that my bad tendencies bit me :D

No, I was imagining what you could have been.
"I've never been quite sure what the point of a eunuch is, if truth be told. It seems to me they're only men with the useful bits cut off."
I drank because I wanted to drown my sorrows, but now the damned things have learned to swim.

HVC

#30991
Quote from: garbon on July 10, 2025, 02:28:27 AM
Quote from: HVC on July 10, 2025, 01:45:21 AM
Quote from: garbon on July 10, 2025, 01:40:57 AM
Quote from: HVC on July 10, 2025, 01:12:40 AM
Quote from: Syt on July 10, 2025, 01:06:43 AMDuring my time in school I don't recall such things, but generally parents would not just take their kids out of school for going on holiday. :P

Let's just say I'd never win any attendance awards and no truancy cops were banging on my door :lol:

:console:

You saying I wasn't missed? :o

Besides, I had good grades still. It wasn't until university that my bad tendencies bit me :D

No, I was imagining what you could have been.

Too mean  :cry:

I still got my degree and my fancy schmancy designation that allowed me  to be a middle management accountant :lol:
Being lazy is bad; unless you still get what you want, then it's called "patience".
Hubris must be punished. Severely.

garbon

Quote from: HVC on July 10, 2025, 02:36:06 AM
Quote from: garbon on July 10, 2025, 02:28:27 AM
Quote from: HVC on July 10, 2025, 01:45:21 AM
Quote from: garbon on July 10, 2025, 01:40:57 AM
Quote from: HVC on July 10, 2025, 01:12:40 AM
Quote from: Syt on July 10, 2025, 01:06:43 AMDuring my time in school I don't recall such things, but generally parents would not just take their kids out of school for going on holiday. :P

Let's just say I'd never win any attendance awards and no truancy cops were banging on my door :lol:

:console:

You saying I wasn't missed? :o

Besides, I had good grades still. It wasn't until university that my bad tendencies bit me :D

No, I was imagining what you could have been.

Too mean  :cry:

I still got my degree and my fancy schmancy designation that allowed me  to be a middle management accountant :lol:

Hey I was consoling you.

But also, my family was big on term time trips, though I also was always required to get the assignments ahead of time so I could complete my work on leave. :weep:
"I've never been quite sure what the point of a eunuch is, if truth be told. It seems to me they're only men with the useful bits cut off."
I drank because I wanted to drown my sorrows, but now the damned things have learned to swim.

crazy canuck

Quote from: HVC on July 10, 2025, 12:17:08 AMhttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c17wzr1n5xvo.amp

Parents fined for taking kids on vacation during school year. Is this a thing in any other countries? I don't *think* it's a thing here, at least I never heard of anyone being fined for missing school.

Yes, it is a thing here.   


The Brain

Parents doing that has become a thing in Sweden in recent decades. Didn't happen when I was a kid.
Women want me. Men want to be with me.

Tamas

I don't know how large the fines are but seeing price and crowd differences between flying during school holidays and outside of them, paying the fine may be the financially sound solution.

Valmy

Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on July 07, 2025, 12:37:33 AMThat's fair enough Raz and I agree with you. Annoyingly that also means I agree with JD Vance's criticisms on the state of free speech in the UK.


I don't think it is some crazy fringe opinion of just people like JD Vance. The fact that speech in the UK is more controlled is well known. That is also why if celebrities want to sue people for libel, or whatever, they tend to prefer the UK courts if they can swing it. It is very hard to win a case like that in the US.

While not as bad I am also not a big fan of the Canadian limits on speech, though considering how toxic political thought has gotten in the US we will probably be far more authoritarian than them in this regard shortly and sadly.
Quote"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."

Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."

crazy canuck

#30997
Quote from: Tamas on July 10, 2025, 08:28:27 AMI don't know how large the fines are but seeing price and crowd differences between flying during school holidays and outside of them, paying the fine may be the financially sound solution.

The truancy laws in Canada (each province has a truancy law embedded within its legislation which creates the public education system of that province) were originally created to ensure that parents didn't pull their kids out of class to work on the farm during the harvest.  Fines were never increased because parents saw the value in actually keeping their kids in school and ensuring they had a proper education.  That ethic appears to be eroding.

It might be time to revisit the penalty on parents for violations. These days it's mainly a problem with the private schools since wealthy parents seem to think that it's much more important for their child to be on a ski vacation, than learning math.

garbon

I think it makes sense to require kids to have "enough" days each year in school. Allowing for no deviation seems like being held hostage. Especially, if say, it would be down to the whim of a headmaster as to whether there is flexibility.
"I've never been quite sure what the point of a eunuch is, if truth be told. It seems to me they're only men with the useful bits cut off."
I drank because I wanted to drown my sorrows, but now the damned things have learned to swim.

Josquius

Quote from: crazy canuck on July 10, 2025, 09:17:09 AM
Quote from: Tamas on July 10, 2025, 08:28:27 AMI don't know how large the fines are but seeing price and crowd differences between flying during school holidays and outside of them, paying the fine may be the financially sound solution.

The truancy laws in Canada (each province has a truancy law embedded within its legislation which creates the public education system of that province) were originally created to ensure that parents didn't pull their kids out of class to work on the farm during the harvest.  Fines were never increased because parents saw the value in actually keeping their kids in school and ensuring they had a proper education.  That ethic appears to be eroding.

It might be time to revisit the penalty on parents for violations. These days it's mainly a problem with the private schools since wealthy parents seem to think that it's much more important for their child to be on a ski vacation, than learning math.

I can agree with the sentiment broadly... but is there really much educational value in keeping your kid in school in the last week of term after any exams are already complete, the teacher has mentally checked out, and its just watch films and mess around time?


And the more I think about it the more serious I am with my "What about....".
Spending time practicing language skills or visiting a viking museum is good education. Why does it have to be all or nothing home or class room schooled.
██████
██████
██████

crazy canuck

#31000
Quote from: Josquius on July 10, 2025, 10:28:03 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 10, 2025, 09:17:09 AM
Quote from: Tamas on July 10, 2025, 08:28:27 AMI don't know how large the fines are but seeing price and crowd differences between flying during school holidays and outside of them, paying the fine may be the financially sound solution.

The truancy laws in Canada (each province has a truancy law embedded within its legislation which creates the public education system of that province) were originally created to ensure that parents didn't pull their kids out of class to work on the farm during the harvest.  Fines were never increased because parents saw the value in actually keeping their kids in school and ensuring they had a proper education.  That ethic appears to be eroding.

It might be time to revisit the penalty on parents for violations. These days it's mainly a problem with the private schools since wealthy parents seem to think that it's much more important for their child to be on a ski vacation, than learning math.

I can agree with the sentiment broadly... but is there really much educational value in keeping your kid in school in the last week of term after any exams are already complete, the teacher has mentally checked out, and its just watch films and mess around time?


And the more I think about it the more serious I am with my "What about....".
Spending time practicing language skills or visiting a viking museum is good education. Why does it have to be all or nothing home or class room schooled.

There are a minimum number of days of instruction which are required, and so my assumption is that it was not just the one time at the end of term when they pulled their kids from class.

garbon

Quote from: crazy canuck on July 10, 2025, 11:12:12 AM
Quote from: Josquius on July 10, 2025, 10:28:03 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 10, 2025, 09:17:09 AM
Quote from: Tamas on July 10, 2025, 08:28:27 AMI don't know how large the fines are but seeing price and crowd differences between flying during school holidays and outside of them, paying the fine may be the financially sound solution.

The truancy laws in Canada (each province has a truancy law embedded within its legislation which creates the public education system of that province) were originally created to ensure that parents didn't pull their kids out of class to work on the farm during the harvest.  Fines were never increased because parents saw the value in actually keeping their kids in school and ensuring they had a proper education.  That ethic appears to be eroding.

It might be time to revisit the penalty on parents for violations. These days it's mainly a problem with the private schools since wealthy parents seem to think that it's much more important for their child to be on a ski vacation, than learning math.

I can agree with the sentiment broadly... but is there really much educational value in keeping your kid in school in the last week of term after any exams are already complete, the teacher has mentally checked out, and its just watch films and mess around time?


And the more I think about it the more serious I am with my "What about....".
Spending time practicing language skills or visiting a viking museum is good education. Why does it have to be all or nothing home or class room schooled.

There are a minimum number of days of instruction which are required, and so my assumption is that it was not just the one time at the end of term when they pulled their kids from class.

As far as I have heard from parents, the UK will fine from the jump.
"I've never been quite sure what the point of a eunuch is, if truth be told. It seems to me they're only men with the useful bits cut off."
I drank because I wanted to drown my sorrows, but now the damned things have learned to swim.

crazy canuck

I looked up the UK education statute. The requirement is that the student attend "regularly" and there is a defence if the reason for the absence is "reasonable".  There is also a provision for obtaining permission from the school for an absence. Sickness is expressly set out as a reason for not attending.

So very similar to the way it works here.  And so Garbon, if the parents you know have no reasonable justification for pulling their kids out so that they are not "regularly" attending classes, they should expect to get fined.


Josquius

This isn't being reported at all amidst the minor boats stuff.
But good news today

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2025/jul/10/keir-starmer-emmanuel-macron-tories-migration-france-kemi-badenoch-uk-politics-live-news?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with%3Ablock-686fd4df8f08a1ce6226f8c0#block-686fd4df8f08a1ce6226f8c0



QuoteCEST
Rayner to scrap first-past-the-post for mayoral and PCC elections in England, reverting to supplementary vote
Labour is going to bring back the supplementary vote (SV) for mayoral and police and crime commissioner (PCC) elections in England.

The provision is included in the English devolution and community empowerment bill, which has been published today. It is clause 59 of the bill.

Extract from bill
View image in fullscreen
Extract from bill Photograph: Parliament.uk
These elections always used to be held under the supplementary vote system, which gives voters the chance to select a first preference and a second preference and means that, if no candidate gets more than 50% when first preference votes are counted, the top two candidates go into a run-off, with the second preference votes for candidates who are eliminated being taken into account.

But in 2022 the last government changed the voting system for mayoral and PCC elections to first past the post (FPTP) – the system used in UK parliamentary elections.

The Tories argued that FPTP is easier to understand. But the move was widely seen as an attempt to boost the chances of Conservative candidates, and a Constitution Unit analysis of how the system operated in 2024 confirmed this. It said that, although none of the mayoral election results that year were affected by the switch to FPTP, at least four, and potentially up to 12, PCC election results were affected. It went on:

Because the left in British politics is currently more fragmented than the right, the switch from SV to FPTP favoured the Conservatives over Labour and other left or centre-left parties. By changing the voting system, the Conservatives significantly reduced their losses.

Many Labour figures believe that a switch from FTPT to SV will help their party beat Reform UK in mayoral contests.

Curiously, Angela Rayner, the deputy PM and housing secretary, has not mentioned this aspect of the bill in her press release about it.


Why government says it is getting rid of FPTP for mayoral and PCC elections in England
Here is an extract from a briefing note being circulated within government explaining why FTPT is being abandoned for mayoral and PCC elections. (See 4.16pm.)

Mayors serve many millions of people and manage multi-million pound budgets yet can be elected by just a fraction of the vote, under recent changes by the previous government. This is despite the supplementary vote system working effectively for over a decade previously, providing a strong, personal mandate for regional mayors.

While FPTP is a simple voting system, on a vast geographic scale it can lead to individuals being elected with only a small proportion of the total votes cast. Given the large population that regional mayors and PCCs represent - far exceeding that of parliamentarians - the government believes that they should be elected with a greater consensus among their electors. The bill will therefore change the voting system for these types of elections to the supplementary vote system.

Rollback the naked tory fix.
██████
██████
██████

Sheilbh

Interesting from Sonia Sodha - I wouldn't bet folding money on it (and I think Tory Party rules make it difficult)....but for the first time, especially with the Carney example, I could see a scenario where both main parties end up going into the next election with a leader who is not currently an MP. Burnham for Labour, as set out below (as a long-term Burnham fan - shameless political opportunist and actually quite effective in power) - and, I suspect, Johnson for the Tories:
QuoteWhy many believe Andy Burnham can harness Manchester's moment and be a better prime minister than Keir Starmer
Productivity is up, the number of young professionals wanting move to the northern city has reached an all-time high, and Manchester mayor's personal ratings are soaring. As Starmer struggles at home, could the King of the North work his magic in Westminster once more? Sonia Sodha weighs up his chances...
Thursday 10 July 2025 06:00 BST

Labour marked its first anniversary in government with its most difficult week yet: a spectacular U-turn on welfare cuts and a chancellor struggling to hold back tears in the Commons, all capped off with Keir Starmer's approval ratings sinking to an all-time low. However well Starmer does on foreign policy, on the home front, he continues to flounder. Little wonder then that, even amidst all the pomp and deal-making coming from a state visit from the French president, the party's MPs are in a low mood.

Compare this to the decidedly upbeat atmosphere to be found 160 miles away in Manchester, which is experiencing the kind of economic boom that has proved elusive to Westminster and Whitehall. Greater Manchester has enjoyed the highest productivity growth of any British region in the last two decades – far outperforming London – and under the leadership of its mayor Andy Burnham's leadership, Manchester has taken back control of the local bus network, improving reliability and passenger numbers.

Last week, a survey of 10,000 people saw Manchester being crowned as the "most desirable place to live in the UK". Almost half of those surveyed believed Manchester should now replace London as the capital. And with the Oasis sell-out tour reminding everyone of the sound of the city, one person surveyed remarked: "Everybody's moving back to Manchester. The youngsters love it."


The turnaround of fortunes for the northern powerhouse can be traced to a number of factors, from investment, renewed transport systems and devolution – with many crediting "King of the North" Burnham for having a Midas touch.

If it sometimes seems as though Starmer can do no right, Greater Manchester's mayor is riding high, prompting the inevitable question: has the northern king morphed into Starmer's prince across the water?

Speculation has been fuelled by two of Burnham's recent interventions. In late May, he set out what can only be described as an alternate governing strategy at a conference convened by soft-left grouping Compass at the Ministry of Sound nightclub in London. He may not have mentioned Starmer by name, but it was clear exactly who his criticism was aimed at when he argued that Labour's mission should be to be a "unifying, popular left" rather than a "divisive, populist right".

This came just a couple of weeks after Starmer was criticised for aping Reform rhetoric on immigration with his warning that the UK could become "an island of strangers", comments he has recently said he "deeply regrets".

Then speaking at Glastonbury, Burnham did not shy away from pressing on a painful wound ahead of a key vote on welfare cuts that was always going to be a test of Starmer's authority. "What's been announced is half a U-turn, a 50 per cent U-turn... I'd still hope MPs vote against the whole bill," he said.

Two days later, the government abandoned the cuts altogether in the face of a parliamentary rebellion that could not be quelled. Not even Starmer's 156-strong majority can insulate him from questions about his future, and Burnham's criticisms have put him in the frame as a potential successor.

Burnham has long been an outspoken critic of Westminster. He first earned his "King in the North" moniker after taking on Boris Johnson over pandemic restrictions; the navy worker's jacket he wore to deliver a defiant speech outside Bridgewater Hall was subsequently displayed by the People's Museum in Manchester.

And although Burnham and Starmer have enjoyed a good working relationship in the past – Starmer became a member of Burnham's shadow home team after his election to parliament, and Burnham voted for him to become Labour leader in 2019 – tensions emerged in the years that followed, with Burnham openly accusing Starmer's aides of briefing against him back in 2023.

Since Labour swept the electoral map last July, Burnham has not refrained from continuing to call out Westminster, where he feels it's not serving his patch well. He's continued to press the government to deliver on its manifesto pledge to introduce a Hillsborough Law, in the face of complaints that ministers have watered down their proposals.

Back in January, he was one of the first Labour figures to break with the leadership to say that the government should hold a national inquiry into grooming gangs. As well as an open and cheerful demeanour, he has an instinct for sniffing out the political mood and an easy communication style, attributes which are missing in more stiff-necked Starmer.

Devolution has created a number of Labour politicians who have power bases quite independent from the national party. But alongside the mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, Burnham is the most visible and successful of them all; he was re-elected for his third mayoral term with an impressive 63 per cent of the Greater Manchester vote. And unlike Khan, who has said he is "not at all" interested in becoming Labour leader, Burnham has refrained from ruling this out.

You might not think it from the way he talks about London, but Lancashire-born Burnham had a long and distinguished Westminster career before donning the mayoral crown. After graduating from Cambridge, he worked first as a researcher for Tessa Jowell and later as a special adviser to culture secretary Chris Smith.

Elected MP for Leigh in 2001, he quickly climbed the ministerial ranks, progressing through chief secretary to the Treasury, culture secretary and finally health secretary before Labour lost the 2010 election. He ran for the Labour leadership twice, losing first to Ed Miliband in 2010 and then, despite being the early favourite, to Jeremy Corbyn in 2015.

There were those on the right of the party who poked fun at him for seemingly running against Westminster despite his establishment status, but he has stuck to his guns, saying it was all that time in the capital that showed him too many in the civil service don't understand the North and are too quick to write it off.

In many ways, Burnham has had the last laugh. Yes, he may have over-egged his anti-Westminster credentials in the course of his migration back north, but unlike many politicians on the right and the left, he has an easy authenticity and exudes a sense of being comfortable in his own skin.

Like his first political boss, Tessa Jowell, he's hard to dislike. He gives away 15 per cent of his mayoral salary to initiatives to reduce homelessness in Manchester. His likeability shows up where it counts: he regularly tops surveys of Labour members as the most popular candidate to succeed Starmer.

Not only that, a national poll by Lord Ashcroft back in April found Burnham commanded more than twice the level of support of the next candidate, deputy prime minister Angela Rayner, amongst the general public.

In his Compass speech in May, Burnham sketched out a firmly soft left alternative to Rachel Reeves' ironclad fiscal rules, calling for a more radical programme of housebuilding, including more social housing, free travel for teenagers, more emphasis on apprenticeships and technical education as well as reiterating his opposition to cuts to welfare and the winter fuel payment. He also wants to change the tribal culture of Westminster, supporting proportional representation and scrapping the party whipping system altogether.

One of his former ministerial colleagues from the New Labour years expresses scepticism about the workability of such a manifesto. But his track record in Manchester is a different thing altogether: "He's been on quite the journey in the last 20 years and whatever happens, he will go down in Manchester's history as an extraordinary leader," they tell me.

But if Burnham sees the ultimate prize as the premiership, there are some hurdles he needs to clear, unlike in the US, where governors and mayors can make a direct run for the top job. On a practical level, he would need to return to Westminster as an MP. He's previously said he will serve out his third term as mayor, which ends in 2028, which would leave him free to run for parliament in 2029. Were it to look like a prime ministerial vacancy was opening up before then – still unlikely at this stage, though not impossible – that becomes much logistically trickier.

Any candidate running to be leader of the party also needs to be nominated by at least a fifth of, or 81 Labour MPs. Burnham undoubtedly has a supporter base amongst the soft left of the parliamentary party. But he would be competing for support against Rayner, who has similar politics. And MPs who are prioritising stability over talk of a leadership election see his recent critical interventions as a hindrance.

"If he wants to be King of the North, that's fine, but stop sending white walkers to the south to destroy the fragile peace we are trying to build after 14 years of a Tory government," one member of the 2024 intake tells me. "He's deeply unhelpful" is the verdict of another MP.

Perhaps the starkest difference between Starmer and Burnham, though, isn't their politics, but their half-empty/half-full approach to governing. Starmer has been criticised for being too gloomy in the early months, although few would deny him the concession that the challenge facing Labour in 2024 is far tougher than the economically rosy days of the late 1990s.

Apart from Burnham, that is: "I actually feel that the 2024 moment is a more advantageous moment for Labour to be coming into government than in 1997, even though most other people would feel it's the other way round," he said at the end of last year.

The reason? The fact that devolution has created a regional infrastructure that wasn't there in 1997. That's a cheerful take from Manchester's mayor at a time when there isn't much cheer to be found amongst the nation's politicians. Could Burnham carry that optimism all the way to Downing Street? If he does, it could be a winning combination.

The 2024 intake MP with the detailed Game of Thrones reference should be named and shamed.

Total aside but on the "island of strangers" line - after Starmer first said it, then repeated it. Then told his biographer in a lengthy interview that he hadn't read the speech properly beforehand and "deeply regretted it" - he has today insisted that the "sentiment stands" and he doesn't disavow anything, except that single phrase. Looking forward to the future updates we'll no doubt be getting :bleeding:
Let's bomb Russia!