International Skeptics Forum

International Skeptics Forum (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumindex.php)
-   Non-USA & General Politics (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=98)
-   -   General UK politics (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=346868)

Nessie 17th November 2020 10:49 AM

I just worked out my old school fees as if had just finished there now, having arrived in Primary 3 and left in 6th Year. £97,467.

Vixen 17th November 2020 11:11 AM

1 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim (Post 13297629)
I mean, it's happening to Kent, so why not?


From being the Garden of England...

Mojo 17th November 2020 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vixen (Post 13297868)
From being the Garden of England...


“If England is a garden, we ought to have more manure.” - Noel Coward.

Mojo 17th November 2020 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vixen (Post 13296781)
Cummings himself went on to study Ancient History at Exeter (another Uni teeming with ex-public school) a totally useless subject for running the country as is Johnson's Classics. At least people like Hancock did PPE which is relevant to his job.


It wasn’t the sort of PPE that’s relevant to his current job.

Carrot Flower King 18th November 2020 05:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vixen (Post 13297523)
The fees look quite steep to me. Surely no wealthy parent would send their kid there without a view of their little Dom eventually getting a place at a redbrick uni?



Dominic Cummings has gone but don't imagine he is cloth cap and braces for a second.

ETA: This seems to hint that most pupils get a scholarship because of academic ability, as Johnson did at Eton.

As I said before, but I'll say it again more plainly: I was at primary school with kids who could not pass Durham's equivalent of the 11+ to get into the local state grammar school (the one I went to) and were sent to Durham School as they could pass the one entry requirement, which is the size of their parents' bank balance - no entry exams, 'cos the little Herberts couldn't have passed them anyway. And some of the parents didn't want their precious little Sebastians associating with lower middle class scum like me (parents are physios? How uncouth!), let alone the bairns who came from the surrounding pit villages, but were bright enough to get in. Yes, that sort of snobbery was (still is for all I know) rampant in Durham then. And the state grammars still got more bairns into universities...

I know exactly where Cummings grew up (go south on the old Great North Road, past where the Cock of the North used to be, but don't go as far as Sunderland Bridge; if you hit Croxdale, you've definitely gone too far): next to no-one from Durham City was "belt and braces", 'cos it's always been a pretty middle class city, dominated by the cathedral, the university, hospitals and county council...

Captain_Swoop 18th November 2020 08:49 AM

Durham City has quite a bit of the Oxbridge 'Town and Gown' about it.
Most of the centre is student accommodation and pubs and bars catering to them. Surrounding the centre are council and housing association estates.
There is quite a lot of poverty and unemployment in the area.

Lothian 18th November 2020 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RolandRat (Post 13297842)
Bit harsh.

Yes you are right, sorry. I was having a dig at Dominic who famously advertised for an unusual set of people, weirdos, misfits, true wild cards". Not everyone at Durham School is like him. However, Durham does tend to attract sporty people and people who would struggle in mainstream education. Academically the local comps are better/ just as good.

Garrison 19th November 2020 06:19 AM

So after a couple of weeks ago explaining how they just couldn't go spending money feeding children the government announces this:

Defence funding boost 'extends British influence'

Quote:

The prime minister told MPs the four-year deal was worth £16.5bn and would help protect "hundreds of thousands" of jobs and create 40,000 new ones.

It will "end the era of retreat, transform our armed forces and bolster our global influence", he said.
Of course the figures are being disputed but even so its a lot of money, which will probably be spent on cntracts every bit as iffy as those for PPE.

Captain_Swoop 19th November 2020 06:38 AM

Seems everyone wants it to be spent on 'Cyber'.

I suppose that's the best way to make sure it gets funnelled to a company owned by your brother in law/wife/uncle/ pal from Eton etc.

catsmate 19th November 2020 06:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop (Post 13299804)
Seems everyone wants it to be spent on 'Cyber'.

I suppose that's the best way to make sure it gets funnelled to a company owned by your brother in law/wife/uncle/ pal from Eton etc.

It's also easier for the funds to disappear without actual result.

GlennB 19th November 2020 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Garrison (Post 13299792)
So after a couple of weeks ago explaining how they just couldn't go spending money feeding children the government announces this:

Defence funding boost 'extends British influence'


Of course the figures are being disputed but even so its a lot of money, which will probably be spent on cntracts every bit as iffy as those for PPE.

Very iffy, I reckon -

"He said the armed forces would be able to order “a swarm attack by drones paralysing the enemy with the weapons”, and that British warships and combat vehicles “will carry directed energy weapons” – a reference to emerging laser and radio frequency weapons. It is unclear how effective they are."

Captain_Swoop 19th November 2020 03:47 PM

We are at least getting some extra frigates which is good news

Garrison 19th November 2020 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GlennB (Post 13300116)
Very iffy, I reckon -

"He said the armed forces would be able to order “a swarm attack by drones paralysing the enemy with the weapons”, and that British warships and combat vehicles “will carry directed energy weapons” – a reference to emerging laser and radio frequency weapons. It is unclear how effective they are."

Oh great, slaughterbots:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HipTO_7mUOw

The Don 20th November 2020 04:45 AM

Another case of "one rule for us and another for them".

Priti Patel broke ministerial code on behaviour. She should have resigned but has received Boris Johnson's full backing so standards advisor has resigned instead. :mad:

Quote:

Boris Johnson's adviser on ministerial code resigns after the PM backs Home Secretary Priti Patel after bullying inquiry.

The government's standards adviser Sir Alex Allan found Ms Patel's approach "amounted to behaviour that can be described as bullying".
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-55016076

Carrot Flower King 20th November 2020 05:00 AM

^Yup, shows neither Johnson nor Patel actually understand how bullying works...

Lemme see, why might that be?

Captain_Swoop 20th November 2020 05:04 AM

Why is it a surprise that the man who didn't sack Dominic Cummings for driving to Barnard Castle and didn't sack Dido Harding for pissing £12BN up the wall hasn't sacked Priti Patel for her reign of terror across multiple departments?

Darat 20th November 2020 05:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carrot Flower King (Post 13300872)
^Yup, shows neither Johnson nor Patel actually understand how bullying works...

Lemme see, why might that be?

Disagree, they know exactly how bullying works....

Carrot Flower King 20th November 2020 05:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop (Post 13300874)
Why is it a surprise that the man who didn't sack Dominic Cummings for driving to Barnard Castle and didn't sack Dido Harding for pissing £12BN up the wall hasn't sacked Priti Patel for her reign of terror across multiple departments?

Not to mention not sacking himself for repeatedly breaching Covid safety guidelines...

Carrot Flower King 20th November 2020 05:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darat (Post 13300876)
Disagree, they know exactly how bullying works....

Sorry, I took them at face value when they said she wasn't bullying: I forgot I was referring to lying, dishonest, untrustworthy, bordering on psychopathic, twisting folk.

I blame my Methodist up-bringing and all that stuff about the improvability of Man (or Woman or Whoever...), which still, despite various of my life experiences, leaves a little core of optimism that sneaks out at times.

I shall now go and give myself a good talking to, in order to avoid such a rookie error again.

Garrison 20th November 2020 06:36 AM

Question is how will the media respond? If they take Johnson's lead and bury the story Patel will survive. if they decide to go full outrage mode about Patel and ignoring the report then I suspect Patel will be gone shortly.

Carrot Flower King 20th November 2020 11:12 AM

Oh, look!

Patel has apologised...Well, I say apologised, but it was another one of those politician non-apologies and you can bet she had her fingers crossed and then mouthed "No, I don't!"

The Don 20th November 2020 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carrot Flower King (Post 13301186)
Oh, look!

Patel has apologised...Well, I say apologised, but it was another one of those politician non-apologies and you can bet she had her fingers crossed and then mouthed "No, I don't!"

Yeah it was an " I'm sorry you're such a wuss that you were upset by my words and actions" kind of apology. :rolleyes:

Darat 20th November 2020 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Garrison (Post 13300939)
Question is how will the media respond? If they take Johnson's lead and bury the story Patel will survive. if they decide to go full outrage mode about Patel and ignoring the report then I suspect Patel will be gone shortly.

Cummings didn’t go even though it caused I think irrecoverable damage to our attempts to deal with the pandemic.

They know the media can whistle as much as they want.

She’ll go when she personally upsets Johnson or his current partner, before then she is as safe as houses.

zooterkin 20th November 2020 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darat (Post 13301198)
Cummings didn’t go even though it caused I think irrecoverable damage to our attempts to deal with the pandemic.

They know the media can whistle as much as they want.

She’ll go when she personally upsets Johnson or his current partner, before then she is as safe as houses.

Has Cummings gone, even now? There was a lot of theatrics with a cardboard box, but isn’t he working from home now?

Captain_Swoop 20th November 2020 04:08 PM

John Redwood tweets

Well done the PM. Back your Home Secretary. Help her cut through to take control of our borders and battle crime. Why hasn’t the Home Office done more to stop people trafficking across the Channel as the Home Secretary wishes?

zooterkin 20th November 2020 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop (Post 13301492)
John Redwood tweets

Well done the PM. Back your Home Secretary. Help her cut through to take control of our borders and battle crime. Why hasn’t the Home Office done more to stop people trafficking across the Channel as the Home Secretary wishes?

My caring and compassionate MP.

MarkCorrigan 20th November 2020 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zooterkin (Post 13301495)
My caring and compassionate MP.

You poor bastard. Fortunately mine is, while still a tory, new and thus no longer the colossal waste of oxygen the previous moron was.

dudalb 20th November 2020 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darat (Post 13300876)
Disagree, they know exactly how bullying works....

But they seem to be not very good at it.

PPL 20th November 2020 05:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zooterkin (Post 13301307)
Has Cummings gone, even now? There was a lot of theatrics with a cardboard box, but isn’t he working from home now?

I've been wondering the same, due to the somewhat contrived display that suggested 'Boris is strong and in charge. See how he sent him packing?' kind of thing.

Squeegee Beckenheim 21st November 2020 03:09 AM

I'm sure Priti Patel is a pussycat, really. That's why the DWP had to pay £25,000 to a former staffer in compensation after her treatment by Patel caused her to attempt suicide.

Carrot Flower King 21st November 2020 05:20 AM

So, we now know that shouting and swearing at people isn't bullying and is actually OK and that anyone who's offended by that is some class of weakling...

All round to the House of Commons to shout and swear at as many members of the Cabinet as we can, 'cos it's obviously OK to do so and in no way bullying or offensive or insulting?

Captain_Swoop 21st November 2020 05:49 AM

Boris considers the matter 'closed'.

Staff that were bullied have gone, the man in charge of investigating and reporting on Ministerial conduct is gone.

So lets move on and put it all behind us.

Nessie 21st November 2020 06:01 AM

Our PM Boris Johnson has

- backed virus reg breaking Dominic Cummings
- voted to break international law over Brexit
- voted not to feed vulnerable children during school holidays
- backed a MP who has consistently bullied her staff whilst a minister in various departments.

He has no moral compass and no legitimacy. He is scum.

Carrot Flower King 21st November 2020 10:45 AM

Steady on there, Nessie! That's a bit harsh on decent hard-working scum...

Squeegee Beckenheim 22nd November 2020 02:22 AM

Sir Alex Allan was prevented by the government from interviewing a key witness in his probe into Patel's behaviour

Nessie 22nd November 2020 02:53 AM

It is odd how people get sucked into Johnson's chumocracy, not realising that it is unlikely to last. Look at how Cummings has gone and he seemed totally secure. His record with wives and partners should tell everyone he is fickle and a user.

Captain_Swoop 22nd November 2020 05:33 AM

The message is clear, as long as you’re loyal to the leader you can do what you want and not fear being sacked.

That’s how Britain now works.

Carrot Flower King 22nd November 2020 05:44 AM

It's SOP in this country for complaints made about bullying bosses: I and at least one other senior colleague made complaints about one particular manager of ours, who habitually bullied and harassed staff; the "investigations" did not show any sign of interviewing most of the staff who could corroborate the substance of the complaints and so did not find anything...

It's straight out of the standard English (is the same true in Scotland, Wales or NI? I've never worked in anyof those) HR playbook. Close ranks around the bosses, leave as much out of the "investigation" as you can, spin the findings your way.

Vixen 22nd November 2020 05:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carrot Flower King (Post 13301871)
So, we now know that shouting and swearing at people isn't bullying and is actually OK and that anyone who's offended by that is some class of weakling...

All round to the House of Commons to shout and swear at as many members of the Cabinet as we can, 'cos it's obviously OK to do so and in no way bullying or offensive or insulting?

Come, come. Let's all form a square around the Pritster.

Planigale 22nd November 2020 06:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Don (Post 13300863)
Another case of "one rule for us and another for them".

Priti Patel broke ministerial code on behaviour. She should have resigned but has received Boris Johnson's full backing so standards advisor has resigned instead. :mad:



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-55016076

Yes in the public sector bullying is one of the things that one can be instantly suspended for. Certainly her behaviour should have been addressed when she was earlier in her career. But I wonder if there is a racist element to this? How much do you think this is because as an Asian woman she is expected to behave in a submissive way and if she swears and shouts this has more of an impact and is less forgiven than if a man behaved this way. Mo Mowlam, a labour minister shouted and swore but this was 'endearing'. John Reid was regarded as blunt spoken. Both were white working class, was bad language and shouting culturally acceptable for them but not her? There is a phenomenon that white men get away with things that ethnic minorities are disciplined for. was her behaviour that unusual? How many ministers rant and rave at times? It took me ten seconds to find blunt spoken John Reid, and I know from having a friend who worked for MM that multiple complaints were made by her civil servants to Tony Blair about her behaviour.

Wudang 22nd November 2020 06:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carrot Flower King (Post 13302649)
It's SOP in this country for complaints made about bullying bosses: I and at least one other senior colleague made complaints about one particular manager of ours, who habitually bullied and harassed staff; the "investigations" did not show any sign of interviewing most of the staff who could corroborate the substance of the complaints and so did not find anything...

It's straight out of the standard English (is the same true in Scotland, Wales or NI? I've never worked in anyof those) HR playbook. Close ranks around the bosses, leave as much out of the "investigation" as you can, spin the findings your way.


The purpose of HR, as explained by head of HR in one company, is to prevent the company being sued for breaches of employment law. Everything else is window dressing.

Darat 22nd November 2020 06:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Planigale (Post 13302658)
Yes in the public sector bullying is one of the things that one can be instantly suspended for. Certainly her behaviour should have been addressed when she was earlier in her career. But I wonder if there is a racist element to this? How much do you think this is because as an Asian woman she is expected to behave in a submissive way and if she swears and shouts this has more of an impact and is less forgiven than if a man behaved this way. Mo Mowlam, a labour minister shouted and swore but this was 'endearing'. John Reid was regarded as blunt spoken. Both were white working class, was bad language and shouting culturally acceptable for them but not her? There is a phenomenon that white men get away with things that ethnic minorities are disciplined for. was her behaviour that unusual? How many ministers rant and rave at times? It took me ten seconds to find blunt spoken John Reid, and I know from having a friend who worked for MM that multiple complaints were made by her civil servants to Tony Blair about her behaviour.

Nah, she's just a nasty piece of work.

Squeegee Beckenheim 22nd November 2020 07:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Planigale (Post 13302658)
Yes in the public sector bullying is one of the things that one can be instantly suspended for. Certainly her behaviour should have been addressed when she was earlier in her career. But I wonder if there is a racist element to this? How much do you think this is because as an Asian woman she is expected to behave in a submissive way and if she swears and shouts this has more of an impact and is less forgiven than if a man behaved this way. Mo Mowlam, a labour minister shouted and swore but this was 'endearing'. John Reid was regarded as blunt spoken. Both were white working class, was bad language and shouting culturally acceptable for them but not her? There is a phenomenon that white men get away with things that ethnic minorities are disciplined for. was her behaviour that unusual? How many ministers rant and rave at times? It took me ten seconds to find blunt spoken John Reid, and I know from having a friend who worked for MM that multiple complaints were made by her civil servants to Tony Blair about her behaviour.

I tend to think that the conclusion drawn from "other people do it, too" should be "therefore they should [have] suffer[ed] consequences, too", rather than "therefore nobody should suffer any consequences".

Priti Patel allegedly drove someone to attempt suicide. That's not okay, no matter how sharp a tongue other people may or may not have.

Trebuchet 22nd November 2020 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop (Post 13300365)
We are at least getting some extra frigates which is good news

Only if they are at least 38's with 18-pounders. 44's would be better.

Sorry, been reading too much historical fiction.

Captain_Swoop 22nd November 2020 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trebuchet (Post 13302910)
Only if they are at least 38's with 18-pounders. 44's would be better.

Sorry, been reading too much historical fiction.

An 88? That would be a bit bigger than a Frigate!
That would be a Third Rate and a Ship of the Line.

A two deck 80 gun 3rd rate was the preferred ship to have in commission in peacetime, most of the 1st and 2nd hulls were laid up. They were too big and crew heavy to be economic.

Some of the big Frigates in service in the 19th c had up to 50 - 24pdr guns but usually a Frigate in RN service was much smaller.

A Frigate in RN usage was a ship with a single gun deck built for speed, scouting, carrying signals and independent operation. Actual size and armament varied widely.

catsmate 22nd November 2020 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darat (Post 13302664)
Nah, she's just a nasty piece of work.

Indeed. The "racism" angle appears to be a smokescreen to cover for her misdeeds and BuBu's unwillingness to deal with them.

Planigale 23rd November 2020 02:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by catsmate (Post 13303095)
Indeed. The "racism" angle appears to be a smokescreen to cover for her misdeeds and BuBu's unwillingness to deal with them.

This is how institutional racism works. White (usually male) people get away with it. Examples are made of ethnic minority people. Disproportionately disciplinary cases are brought against BAME lawyers and doctors. Why is the only senior politician investigated formally for bullying an asian female when many other white politicians have behaved similarly and not suffered the consequences?

Having said that, Ms. Patel should not be exempt from the consequences of her action because she is asian. She should have been disciplined, (in some manner), certainly she should be required to be taking some form of training in personal interactions at minimum. Was this serious enough to be sacked, I am not sure, if there have been previous complaints held up on investigation, then yes. If this is the first time the issue has been raised with her then no.

MarkCorrigan 23rd November 2020 03:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Planigale (Post 13303511)
This is how institutional racism works. White (usually male) people get away with it. Examples are made of ethnic minority people. Disproportionately disciplinary cases are brought against BAME lawyers and doctors. Why is the only senior politician investigated formally for bullying an asian female when many other white politicians have behaved similarly and not suffered the consequences?

Having said that, Ms. Patel should not be exempt from the consequences of her action because she is asian. She should have been disciplined, (in some manner), certainly she should be required to be taking some form of training in personal interactions at minimum. Was this serious enough to be sacked, I am not sure, if there have been previous complaints held up on investigation, then yes. If this is the first time the issue has been raised with her then no.

Someone attempted suicide because of her bullying. I don't care if this was the first or the fifteenth time she was accused she should be sacked and stripped of the conservative whip.

P.J. Denyer 23rd November 2020 03:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zooterkin (Post 13301495)
My caring and compassionate MP.

And he's still miming to other people's words I see.

Darat 23rd November 2020 04:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Planigale (Post 13303511)
This is how institutional racism works. White (usually male) people get away with it. Examples are made of ethnic minority people. Disproportionately disciplinary cases are brought against BAME lawyers and doctors. Why is the only senior politician investigated formally for bullying an asian female when many other white politicians have behaved similarly and not suffered the consequences?

...snip...

You have seemingly equated "plain speaking" with what she did (and not alleged - the report found she had breached the code). Plus you have named politicians that were in power before the "Ministerial Code" was put in place - (which was if memory serves me right the policy of Cameron and Clegg) perhaps the politicians you mentioned were the reason for having a ministerial code in the first place?

I also think we are at best getting what she actually did through the government's spin and that sounds bad enough. If it is true that someone attempted suicide because of how she treated them then it is well beyond any "bullying" I've had to deal with over the last 30 years or so across multiple large international companies and I've had to deal with a lot of these types of complaints over the years.

(Bullying in quotes not to downplay it but to indicate in that past such behaviour would not have been classed as bullying but as harassment/intimidation/sexism or some such variant as bullying as a classification on its own is quite new.)


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:46 AM.

Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2015-22, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.