- Aug 2, 2013
- 443
- 454
On the face of it it appears to be fully costed.
But compare it to its rivals - such as Hals at the top of Castle Hill - it a bloody lot more expensive than and probably not as good value.
See some analogy in this?
General Election 2017
- Thread starter Andy
- Start date
But compare it to its rivals - such as Hals at the top of Castle Hill - it a bloody lot more expensive than and probably not as good value.
See some analogy in this?
- Aug 2, 2013
- 443
- 454
Strange day.
In just a few hours I find myself agreeing with Donald Trump and Andy!
I also work in Engineering and one of the best achievements in my career was persuading my employer to re-introduce the apprentice scheme in 2011 after a 10 years gap when the economy and our business was close to being meltdown.
It was bloody hard work but we eventually built up a compelling business case that they found hard to argue against. Six years on we have reaped the reward of this by having highly skilled people working for us who have a real commitment to the company due to the faith we showed in the at the age of 16 and the high quality training we have given them since.
But coming to your point Andy, yes, there is far too much emphasis placed on getting people through Uni in Degrees of 'questionable' value ('Bum' is a bit pejorative methinks) rather than encouraging the majority to follow equally vital and valid vocational or technical studies.
It is for this reason why we find ourselves having to rely so much on skilled people from outside the UK - sparks, brickies, technicians, et al - I know this from the sector I work in. If we didn't have this resource, we would be in a very sticky situation, particularly when the UK construction sector is so buoyant.
And this is why the Brexit negotiations need to be undertaken with a high degree of pragmatism and less jingoism.
Taking a 'hard' line and making it difficult for these skilled people from remaining or coming to the UK will only help to damage our economy and all our jobs and livelihoods.
- Jul 28, 2013
- 3,005
- 2,329
- Thread starter
- #503
Over the last 6 years, the government has opened over 70 UTC's.
In an attempt to win votes, Corbyn has promised free University Tuition. The worry is, this money could well be taken from Vocational schools/ colleges. At the very least, it will drive interest away from them, resulting in closures. Then we're back to every child getting the same education, getting the same qualifications, and leaving many bright kids behind in an overcrowded field - and even leaving gaping skill gaps.
Free University might sound nice and win votes - but is it really giving people the best chance in life?
In an attempt to win votes, Corbyn has promised free University Tuition. The worry is, this money could well be taken from Vocational schools/ colleges. At the very least, it will drive interest away from them, resulting in closures. Then we're back to every child getting the same education, getting the same qualifications, and leaving many bright kids behind in an overcrowded field - and even leaving gaping skill gaps.
Free University might sound nice and win votes - but is it really giving people the best chance in life?
- Jun 24, 2013
- 868
- 1,090
Andy - you've done way too much worrying on this thread!
Can I suggest, for any topic that crops up, write down on a piece of paper the first scenario you think of that could apply if Labour wins the election (that will be a negative scenario). Then, screw that piece of paper into a ball and throw it into the bin. Write down some alternative, more positive scenarios, and you'll instantly see that a Labour government mightn't be so bad after all!
The guy with 2 A-Level grade Es or the woman with the BA from Oxford? I think I know who I'd trust more to look after those who want something more than the University route to a successful career. It's not the Oxford graduate.
I see the gap in the forum poll between the Tories and Labour is narrowing. The Tories now only have a three point lead. Noticeably, Labour have gained ground overall in the national polls, after May's latest debacle on social care and pensions. Let's hope this welcome trend continues.
- Jul 28, 2013
- 3,005
- 2,329
- Thread starter
- #506
As Corbyn is currently trying to use the tragic events on Monday to score political points, shall we just take a look at his record on Anti Terror Laws?
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/10133/jeremy_corbyn/islington_north/divisions?policy=1053
17 times (13 of which during a Labour Government) has Jeremy Corbyn voted AGAINST anti-terror laws.
Do you really trust this man with the safety of you and your family?
You can see it now, Jeremy Corbyns "Hug a Jihadi day"
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/10133/jeremy_corbyn/islington_north/divisions?policy=1053
17 times (13 of which during a Labour Government) has Jeremy Corbyn voted AGAINST anti-terror laws.
Do you really trust this man with the safety of you and your family?
You can see it now, Jeremy Corbyns "Hug a Jihadi day"
- Jun 24, 2013
- 868
- 1,090
Yes.
Me too!
Yes. I'm fed up of the manner in which the right-wing press continually dig dirt at Corbyn's 'past' whether it's the IRA or what he said about Army funding. After all, what else have they got to go on to attack Corbyn, as their dearest leader stumbles on social care and pensions and in the polls?
I also feel safer with a man who isn't a war-monger at every opportunity. We've all seen how far that has got us in Afghanistan, Iraq etc...! It's also Labour-party policy to support Trident, so again that is irrelevant. As for him voting against anti-terror laws, yes of course it's important to have strong and effective laws and security to protect us against terrorism, but then should these laws (already amongst the toughest in the EU) be used to infringe on people's civil liberties as the likes of Edward Snowden exposed? No, I don't think so, and that is the message Corbyn is trying to get across.
- Mar 12, 2014
- 293
- 174
Trust Corbyn more then may with safety of my family how many police officers been cut under the conservative government lets see 20000 how many firefighter lets see 3000 and the NHS is on arse let June be the end of may
- Mar 12, 2014
- 293
- 174
Don't forget she feed all primary school children breakfast for 7p a head she as not got a clue
- May 16, 2014
- 993
- 617
Mr Corbyn, the Labour Party and their manifesto get my vote.
(Its not about one man)
(Its not about one man)
Plus Labour will "Legislate to ban letting agency fees for tenants." '
I've recently moved house and I've paid £1,350 just for the move to rent it out, that's on top of a car, so I've been very short of money. How many young people trying to find their feet and get on is this affecting? It's extortionate. This has to stop and Labour are saying they will stop it. I personally can't see any reason why a young person would vote Tory.
I've recently moved house and I've paid £1,350 just for the move to rent it out, that's on top of a car, so I've been very short of money. How many young people trying to find their feet and get on is this affecting? It's extortionate. This has to stop and Labour are saying they will stop it. I personally can't see any reason why a young person would vote Tory.
- Jun 24, 2013
- 3,399
- 2,345
I listened to today's speech and didn't hear any political point scoring. Instead I heard someone trying to make people see that we have to consider the wider picture particularly where the "war on terror" doesn't seem to be succeeding in its aims. You cannot debate the rise of extreme ideologues and their crazed acolytes without including a look at how foreign policy affects those trends. It is eminently sensible to state that no plan for military action is of value unless there is a plan for the peace which will at some point follow. Look at Libya. Look at Afghanistan. Etc. That does not mean that you somehow support the terrorists' viewpoint (or rather the viewpoint of their puppet masters), and the Tories coming out today to suggest Corbyn was calling for some sort of capitulation were at best totally misrepresenting his words. They conveniently skated over his condemnation of the bombing and his declaration that the blame lay fair and square with the person who committed the atrocity, nobody else.
That UK military action has consequences within these shores is widely accepted across the military and security community, so Corbyn was stating nothing new or radical. Indeed, even May conceded this much when she spoke to the UN some months ago.
As for pointing out that cuts in police numbers etc need to be addressed, you'd think the "party of law and order" would be all for that, but of course it doesn't fit with their austerity agenda. One of the reasons we are reduced to using troops on the streets is the cuts in police firearms officers.
That UK military action has consequences within these shores is widely accepted across the military and security community, so Corbyn was stating nothing new or radical. Indeed, even May conceded this much when she spoke to the UN some months ago.
As for pointing out that cuts in police numbers etc need to be addressed, you'd think the "party of law and order" would be all for that, but of course it doesn't fit with their austerity agenda. One of the reasons we are reduced to using troops on the streets is the cuts in police firearms officers.
- Jul 28, 2013
- 3,005
- 2,329
- Thread starter
- #515
It's rare I agree with Paddy Ashdown, but he's right.
Corbyns attitude is exactly what the extremists want.
Corbyns attitude of "its britains fault" is exactly what they want. Corbyns statement is almost justifying these barbaric acts.
When you justify these acts, how can we ever defeat it?
Corbyns attitude is exactly what the extremists want.
Corbyns attitude of "its britains fault" is exactly what they want. Corbyns statement is almost justifying these barbaric acts.
When you justify these acts, how can we ever defeat it?
- on here it's more like an 8 point lead (points are percentages)
- Jun 24, 2013
- 3,399
- 2,345
I am always amazed how many people fail to understand the difference between "justification" and "explanation".
I am less amazed when people pick on one issue mentioned as a factor and twist it to mean that that issue is the sole reason.
I am less amazed when people pick on one issue mentioned as a factor and twist it to mean that that issue is the sole reason.
- Jul 28, 2013
- 3,005
- 2,329
- Thread starter
- #518
You can't blame Germanys foreign policy on the attacks they've been victim to.
You can't blame swedens foreign policy on the attacks they've been victim to.
You can't blame Belgiums foreign policy on the attacks they have faced.
And even, the attack that started this all off, 9/11, can that really be blamed on foreign policy?? That's before the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq!
This is an evil ideology, an ideology that wishes to see the end of western culture, regardless of their prior involvement in middle eastern affairs.
This evil ideology is not only attacking the west, but attacking innocent Muslims in the Middle East everyday.
Don't justify these attacks as Corbyn is.
You can't blame swedens foreign policy on the attacks they've been victim to.
You can't blame Belgiums foreign policy on the attacks they have faced.
And even, the attack that started this all off, 9/11, can that really be blamed on foreign policy?? That's before the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq!
This is an evil ideology, an ideology that wishes to see the end of western culture, regardless of their prior involvement in middle eastern affairs.
This evil ideology is not only attacking the west, but attacking innocent Muslims in the Middle East everyday.
Don't justify these attacks as Corbyn is.
- Jun 24, 2013
- 3,399
- 2,345
See above - justify v explain.
Clearly, Andy, you have a greater knowledge of world affairs and how everything interlinks than the Joint Intelligence Committee, who reported to government before the Iraq war that intervention in Iraq would increase the likelihood of terrorist attacks against western countries.
Nobody is saying there is one single issue which underlies all the various attacks (also see above), but the radicalisation of individuals, often home-grown and often internet-based, will I fear not be stopped by bombing or even by sending in armies. In fact, reducing the area of land under eg IS "political" control in Iraq/Syria is seen by many in intelligence and military circles as leading to an increase in their attempts to strike back using these very methods.
I don't have any answers, partly because the whole situation is so incredibly complex, even stretching back way before IS and Al Qaeda into the days where western European nations were plying their trade in empire-building. Remember Suez? IS will be defeated, but whether it will be eradicated is another matter entirely, and even then no doubt something will spring up in its place.
Clearly, Andy, you have a greater knowledge of world affairs and how everything interlinks than the Joint Intelligence Committee, who reported to government before the Iraq war that intervention in Iraq would increase the likelihood of terrorist attacks against western countries.
Nobody is saying there is one single issue which underlies all the various attacks (also see above), but the radicalisation of individuals, often home-grown and often internet-based, will I fear not be stopped by bombing or even by sending in armies. In fact, reducing the area of land under eg IS "political" control in Iraq/Syria is seen by many in intelligence and military circles as leading to an increase in their attempts to strike back using these very methods.
I don't have any answers, partly because the whole situation is so incredibly complex, even stretching back way before IS and Al Qaeda into the days where western European nations were plying their trade in empire-building. Remember Suez? IS will be defeated, but whether it will be eradicated is another matter entirely, and even then no doubt something will spring up in its place.
- Jun 24, 2013
- 3,399
- 2,345
Incidentally -
why Germany? Because they are seen by IS as an integral part of the coalition against them
why Sweden? It was a failed Uzbek asylum seeker in hiding, with IS sympathies. Where else was he supposed to carry out his attack?
why Belgium? That's a complex one, but here's a detailed explanation (not justification)
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/17/terrorists-belgium-paris-attacks
The most worrying aspect, to me at least, is the prevalence of home-grown attacks, whichever country it happens to be, because that also suggests an alarming level of dissatisfaction with "normal life". And yes, I know that is a crass way of expressing it.
why Germany? Because they are seen by IS as an integral part of the coalition against them
why Sweden? It was a failed Uzbek asylum seeker in hiding, with IS sympathies. Where else was he supposed to carry out his attack?
why Belgium? That's a complex one, but here's a detailed explanation (not justification)
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/17/terrorists-belgium-paris-attacks
The most worrying aspect, to me at least, is the prevalence of home-grown attacks, whichever country it happens to be, because that also suggests an alarming level of dissatisfaction with "normal life". And yes, I know that is a crass way of expressing it.