UK General Discussion: Rishecession

[omar04]

https://twitter.com/itvnews/status/1606286081216991232

[Blair]

https://conservativehome.com/2022/12/23/penny-mordaunt-britain-would-have-paid-a-high-price-for-choosing-chaos-with-ed-miliband/

Would they have initiated a 25-year environment plan focused on the restoration of wildlife rich habitats, planting forests and expanding marine protected areas? Would they be on course to halt species decline by 2030?

Are they still only monitoring five per cent of storm overflows, compared to the near 100 per cent monitored by this government? Did they increase investment in flood defences?

What a rallying cry for Conservatism!

What do we want?

Near to 100% monitoring of storm overflows

When do want it?

Now!

[Torrain]

*sigh*
https://mobile.twitter.com/KieranPAndrews/status/1608439395107090434
Guess Stephen Flynn didn’t object to Blackford’s behaviour after all. What a debacle.

[NewYorkExpress]

Don't know how this didn't come up earlier, but there's scandal brewing involving MP's taking foreign trips to countries with shoddy human rights records.

But there are huge discrepancies in the amount of time different MPs choose to dedicate to this type of overseas travel, with trips frequently taken while parliament is sitting as well as during recess periods.


Analysis by POLITICO found there are currently around 10 “super members” who have signed up for roles with 20 or more different “country APPGs.” Some have accepted dozens of free trips overseas during their time in parliament, paid for by foreign governments or businesses.

Collectively, this small group of backbench politicians have made overseas visits worth more than £453,000 since entering parliament, according to official records. The true figure is likely higher, since MPs were only obliged to start declaring the value of gifts and hospitality in 2009.


The data includes:

Seven trips by Conservative MP Martin Vickers on which he was accompanied by his wife, or by an unnamed member of staff.

Three trips by Labour’s John Spellar of six days or more, including a week-long visit to Singapore.


£70,800 worth of trips by Tory MP Mark Menzies since he entered parliament in 2010, including six different trips in the calendar year 2016 alone.

One trip to Hong Kong by the SNP’s Angus Brendan MacNeil worth £10,359 — the most expensive single trip.

20 trips in 17 years by Daniel Kawczynski, including visits to Morocco, Albania and Mauritania paid for by mining and chemical manufacturing companies.

Thirteen trips over the last seven years by the SNP’s Lisa Cameron, including two trips to New York in the space of three weeks.

Three trips to Sri Lanka and three to the Maldives by the DUP’s Ian Paisley Jr.

£84,680 worth of trips by Tory MP Mark Pritchard since he entered parliament in 2005. He made six foreign trips in 2015 and seven in 2016, and has visited Qatar three times in the last three years.


Sixteen trips to Gibraltar by Andrew Rosindell since he became an MP in 2001, sometimes more than once a year, as well as to a total of 29 other countries.

Ten trips by Conservative MP Sheryll Murray accompanied by an unnamed member of staff.

There is a wider pattern of these MPs traveling frequently to countries known as tax havens, petrochemical producers or luxury destinations — including the Channel Islands, Gulf States, San Marino, and the Norfolk Islands in the Pacific.

Apparently, this includes involvement in sex tourism and excessive drinking.

A number of British lawmakers have been using parliamentary trips abroad as an opportunity for the covert use of sex workers and for raucous, excessive drinking, according to MPs, peers, diplomatic and parliamentary officials who spoke to POLITICO. 

One former Conservative MP, now a member of the House of Lords, asked hosts for directions to the nearest brothel when he traveled to Southeast Asia on a visit with an all-party parliamentary group (APPG), according to another parliamentarian who was present.

Another Tory MP and former minister used to stay on after the MPs’ delegation had returned home in order to pursue his “interest in [local] women,” two former colleagues said.



“He showed an interest in pretty young girls,” said one. “He routinely stayed on after these visits and linked up with young women in the place in question.”

A senior Labour MP displayed a fondness for “Russian girls” during trips overseas, according to a foreign diplomat, who said local officials felt powerless to intervene because they worried about preserving their influence in Westminster.

All of this has drawn Sunak's attention, and he's not happy.

U.K. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has said accusations of drunken and sexual misbehavior by British MPs on overseas visits are “very concerning,” but declined to back reform of the little-known parliamentary groups organizing their trips.

An investigation by POLITICO revealed how parliamentary visits to foreign countries have been exploited by certain MPs and peers on All-Party Parliamentary Groups (APPGs) as an opportunity for the covert use of sex workers and for excessive drinking.

A Downing Street spokesman said Wednesday that U.K. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak was aware of the “concerning” reports, and urged lawmakers to focus on working for the public good.

“We’ve seen some of the reports over the Christmas period and just before, and some of the behavior reported is clearly very concerning,” the No. 10 spokesman said.


“The prime minister believes MPs should be working hard for the public, and the broad majority have focused on trying to solve our shared challenges, whether that be supporting the most vulnerable or working to make our schools better and our streets safer,” he added.

[Cassius]

I mean, take away the taxpayer funded foreign jollies for MPs and what incentive remains for members of the public to stand for election?

[Blair]

If you follow things closely enough you can always guess which MPs will jump up during parliamentary questions to defend certain countries.

[CumbrianLefty]

https://conservativehome.com/2022/12/23/penny-mordaunt-britain-would-have-paid-a-high-price-for-choosing-chaos-with-ed-miliband/

Would they have initiated a 25-year environment plan focused on the restoration of wildlife rich habitats, planting forests and expanding marine protected areas? Would they be on course to halt species decline by 2030?

Are they still only monitoring five per cent of storm overflows, compared to the near 100 per cent monitored by this government? Did they increase investment in flood defences?

What a rallying cry for Conservatism!

What do we want?

Near to 100% monitoring of storm overflows

When do want it?

Now!

I still have just about enough regard for Penny Dreadful to think she doesn't *really* believe all this. But given the current mental collapse of the Tory party generally, who knows really.

[Conservatopia]

If you follow things closely enough you can always guess which MPs will jump up during parliamentary questions to defend certain countries.

I was explaining this to someone the other day, using the not-so-Honourable Member for Sri Lanka as an example. They didn't believe me but it really is that stark. You can basically take all the bribes you want as long as you declare them all.

[EastAnglianLefty]

Don't know how this didn't come up earlier, but there's scandal brewing involving MP's taking foreign trips to countries with shoddy human rights records.

But there are huge discrepancies in the amount of time different MPs choose to dedicate to this type of overseas travel, with trips frequently taken while parliament is sitting as well as during recess periods.


Analysis by POLITICO found there are currently around 10 “super members” who have signed up for roles with 20 or more different “country APPGs.” Some have accepted dozens of free trips overseas during their time in parliament, paid for by foreign governments or businesses.

Collectively, this small group of backbench politicians have made overseas visits worth more than £453,000 since entering parliament, according to official records. The true figure is likely higher, since MPs were only obliged to start declaring the value of gifts and hospitality in 2009.


The data includes:

Seven trips by Conservative MP Martin Vickers on which he was accompanied by his wife, or by an unnamed member of staff.

Three trips by Labour’s John Spellar of six days or more, including a week-long visit to Singapore.


£70,800 worth of trips by Tory MP Mark Menzies since he entered parliament in 2010, including six different trips in the calendar year 2016 alone.

One trip to Hong Kong by the SNP’s Angus Brendan MacNeil worth £10,359 — the most expensive single trip.

20 trips in 17 years by Daniel Kawczynski, including visits to Morocco, Albania and Mauritania paid for by mining and chemical manufacturing companies.

Thirteen trips over the last seven years by the SNP’s Lisa Cameron, including two trips to New York in the space of three weeks.

Three trips to Sri Lanka and three to the Maldives by the DUP’s Ian Paisley Jr.

£84,680 worth of trips by Tory MP Mark Pritchard since he entered parliament in 2005. He made six foreign trips in 2015 and seven in 2016, and has visited Qatar three times in the last three years.


Sixteen trips to Gibraltar by Andrew Rosindell since he became an MP in 2001, sometimes more than once a year, as well as to a total of 29 other countries.

Ten trips by Conservative MP Sheryll Murray accompanied by an unnamed member of staff.

There is a wider pattern of these MPs traveling frequently to countries known as tax havens, petrochemical producers or luxury destinations — including the Channel Islands, Gulf States, San Marino, and the Norfolk Islands in the Pacific.

Apparently, this includes involvement in sex tourism and excessive drinking.

A number of British lawmakers have been using parliamentary trips abroad as an opportunity for the covert use of sex workers and for raucous, excessive drinking, according to MPs, peers, diplomatic and parliamentary officials who spoke to POLITICO. 

One former Conservative MP, now a member of the House of Lords, asked hosts for directions to the nearest brothel when he traveled to Southeast Asia on a visit with an all-party parliamentary group (APPG), according to another parliamentarian who was present.

Another Tory MP and former minister used to stay on after the MPs’ delegation had returned home in order to pursue his “interest in [local] women,” two former colleagues said.



“He showed an interest in pretty young girls,” said one. “He routinely stayed on after these visits and linked up with young women in the place in question.”

A senior Labour MP displayed a fondness for “Russian girls” during trips overseas, according to a foreign diplomat, who said local officials felt powerless to intervene because they worried about preserving their influence in Westminster.

All of this has drawn Sunak's attention, and he's not happy.

U.K. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has said accusations of drunken and sexual misbehavior by British MPs on overseas visits are “very concerning,” but declined to back reform of the little-known parliamentary groups organizing their trips.

An investigation by POLITICO revealed how parliamentary visits to foreign countries have been exploited by certain MPs and peers on All-Party Parliamentary Groups (APPGs) as an opportunity for the covert use of sex workers and for excessive drinking.

A Downing Street spokesman said Wednesday that U.K. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak was aware of the “concerning” reports, and urged lawmakers to focus on working for the public good.

“We’ve seen some of the reports over the Christmas period and just before, and some of the behavior reported is clearly very concerning,” the No. 10 spokesman said.


“The prime minister believes MPs should be working hard for the public, and the broad majority have focused on trying to solve our shared challenges, whether that be supporting the most vulnerable or working to make our schools better and our streets safer,” he added.

A lot of names there that are unsurprising in this context.

[Blair]

We also can't pretend this is a new situation- the late Bob Wareing was nicknamed the honourable member for Belgrade & made such appalling and bigoted comments that he really should have been deselected before '97.

[Silent Hunter]

George Galloway had similar nicknames.

Anyway, the Honours List has dropped:

BBC News report

[TheTide]

George Galloway had similar nicknames.

Anyway, the Honours List has dropped:

BBC News report

Brian May is more worthy than Theresa May.

Leah Williamson is more worthy than Gavin Williamson.

[CumbrianLefty]

Leah Williamson is more worthy than Gavin Williamson.

Isn't almost everyone?

[Cassius]

Leah Williamson is more worthy than Gavin Williamson.

Isn't almost everyone?

Chris Williamson?

[Torrain]

First poll of the new year:
https://mobile.twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1610320080713179138

[Blair]

Sunaks grand new policy is to make everyone study maths until their 18.

This is one of those things which might be a good policy but as someone who despised maths and hated having to do it till I was 16 I can’t really be rationale…

[Torrain]

Not impressed by the new “maths until 18” thing. Feels very much like Sunak (a man who reportedly studied the epidemiological formula included in the appendices of the COVID reports out of enthusiastic curiosity) pushing his own academic interests on everyone else.

Taking maths right up until the end seems like something the guy “feels” is right, rather than has solid evidence for. I only took Maths to the Scottish Higher level, and dropped it for my final year of high school, so I could focus on biology and chemistry - which has been enough to see me through 2 and a 1/2 STEM degrees so far. If that’s the case in STEM subject like my rather technical corner of biology, what benefit will it have for the majority of students focused on a career outside of STEM?

But it’s fairly toothless as a policy. According to the Telegraph’s write up, it won’t take place until the next Parliament (so is likely to be ditched before getting started, assuming the next PM arrives some point in 2024), won’t require students to take a Maths A-level (will somehow be separate), and won’t happen anywhere other than England, thanks to devolution.

[Alcibiades]

It’s a policy which definitely has some merits, but that I can obviously see both sides to (not to mention it’s a rather tone-deaf announcement considering everything else going on at the moment). I suppose, like Blair, I should declare my own biases here as being someone who took both maths and further maths at A-level!

It’s true that the UK is a real outlier in being one of the very few countries in the world where pupils don’t have to study maths in some form until 18 (the same is also true for their native language). More broadly, this is an illustration of how our educational system makes pupils specialise absurdly early - 16 is really very young for subject choices that inevitably end up restricting a lot of what you can study at uni, at which age a lot of people really have no idea what they want to do later on. An example relevant here is that I’ve known several people who have discovered a passion for economics while taking the subject at A-level, only to find themselves unable to study it at many unis because they don’t have maths A-level. And as well as these practical arguments, there are more philosophical ones about the importance of a well-rounded, ‘liberal’ education.

On the other hand, I doubt this move would be at all popular among those actually affected - in my experience, most pupils tend to like the freedom afforded to them by being able to pick exactly what they want to study at A-level. Similarly, the fact that A-levels encourage depth rather than breadth means that British undergraduate degrees start off at a much more advanced level than in many other countries.

But, regardless of the merits of this maths policy specifically, I think it does raise an important point that seems to have received very little attention; many aspects of the core structure of our curriculum and public exam system have remained unchanged for a very, very long time. A-levels were introduced in 1951, and their fundamental structure - 3/4 subjects of pupils’ free choosing - has never been changed. A somewhat bizarre thought that my grandfather went through a very similar system to me!

[Torrain]

https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1610590521595928577
I'm sure the response from the minister who wrote the initial policy will be... measured

[Battista Minola 1616]

It’s true that the UK is a real outlier in being one of the very few countries in the world where pupils don’t have to study maths in some form until 18 (the same is also true for their native language). More broadly, this is an illustration of how our educational system makes pupils specialise absurdly early - 16 is really very young for subject choices that inevitably end up restricting a lot of what you can study at uni, at which age a lot of people really have no idea what they want to do later on.

As an example, here in Italy as you know students are effectively asked to (partially) specialize at 14, but the 'core' subjects, which of course include Maths and Italian, are part of the curriculum of every type of high school in every year. It feels pretty odd, although I suppose this is all relative. And of course if you're going to ask the students themselves, I bet majorities in most other countries would happily vote to take two or three years less of mandatory Maths classes...

[CumbrianLefty]

I'm a bit of a traditionalist as far as education is concerned, and do see aiming that everyone should have at least a basic level of numeracy as a good thing.

Does that mean making it compulsory until age 18 though? Not convinced.

[TheTide]

Truly bizarre. Maths until the age of 18 isn't something on the minds of most of the population at present and it's surely not even a hot-button issue for the base. If he had made some pledge regarding the boats with the latter in mind then it would be more understandable in a political sense.

[bore]

A couple of points from the perspective of an actual maths teacher:

1. No one in the department thinks this is a good idea. A post 16 resit class, where the pupils theoretically want to be there is challenging enough, one where they have no choice in the matter would be cruel on both them and the peers whose education they'll disrupt.

2. In Scotland we already have a National 5 (which is our GCSE) equivalent maths qualification called Applications of Maths. This strips out almost all of the algebra and has even more emphasis on the practical stuff like best value, interest and stats which people who have long since left education are so fond of wrongly saying they were not taught. The distribution of students entered for this is bimodal, firstly there are the high flying top set pupils who sail to another A with very little work because the course is similar enough to the pure Maths that they only have to learn a few things, and then there are the marginal cases who are deemed very unlikely to have been able to get the normal maths qualification so are entered on the off chance. This is mostly a mistake, because for the vast majority of pupils its actually harder, and the underlying motivations for that mistake are also present in some of the discourse today.

To see why this might occur think about the type of people who get involved in this debate. They are broadly literate  (hence they are capable of getting involved) but have mostly forgotten the pure maths they did at school for the obvious reason that they don't use it in their day to day life. However they are confident enough with things like taxes and graphs because they have to do them regularly, and so practice them. This leads to the assumption that that applied maths is easy (because they know how to do it) but the pure maths isn't (because its been long forgotten). Further, they assume that it is inherently easier to motivate, because they know they need to be able to do it. Neither of these things are true for 15 year olds, who do not tend to pay taxes or have mortgages. They do not use most of the applied stuff outside of school, and they have not forgotten more of the pure stuff. In actual fact one of the biggest barriers (and thus the real challenge in teaching numeracy courses is outside of maths domain) for weaker students in maths is literacy. If you ask an S1 bottom set to add 18 and 23 they will mostly manage, if you tell them you have 18 bananas and then buy 23 more and ask how many you now have they will really struggle.

That is obviously not to say that we shouldn't teach the applications of numeracy, it is incredibly worthwhile. But it is not easier than algebra, and a greater focus on it is not going to lead to more motivated students.

[Blair]

Am I the only one who can’t understand the Tories weird ‘people’s priorities’ line?

It’s been used for a while and you assume they’ve tested it, but it just sounds vague. I say this as someone who hated labours ‘we’re the political wing of the British people’ line.

[TheTide]

https://twitter.com/alicia_fitzg/status/1610652667092807687?s=20&t=NvmFeZi1P...