|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 12, 2024 9:25:23 GMT
i heard on the radio yesterday that program makers plan to make more of these dramas as its easier to get the stories, scandals etc widespread through good dramas than via a panaorama that gets little coverage the more the better As long as the dramas stick to the facts and don’t get too creative with the truth, I’m all for it.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 12, 2024 8:58:04 GMT
Another thing that annoys me, not central or totally significant, given the destruction of the lives of good people, is Bonuses Why do " we" accept that those people who have very well paid responsible jobs need bonuses to do the job they are paid to do? I know about targets, performance indicators etc etc but , to me, that's just another mechanism for rewarding the rich. Should a school cleaner get an extra £ 250 per week if he or she turns up every day and keeps the school clean, after all that is his / her target, performance indicator. The Amazon delivery driver? The teacher, nurse, police officer?.....bonuses for turning up and doing their jobs? I can understand the private sector asking how they had supposed to get bonuses.....in fact their incentive is more simple.....if you don't do the work, you don't get paid. I think Vennells walked away with £2m bonus....ridiculous in my opinion, even if it was above board. And the argument that bonuses are needed to attract the best is nonsense, that could apply to any job. Absolutely right. The argument for bonuses is the same as the right wing who say “taxing the rich means they won’t come here or those that are here will leave”. It is all rubbish. The problem we have is the government has not passed legislation to make it lawful to claim back bonuses when public money is involved. They need to. Then at least the bonuses could be recouped. The same should be done to legislate to make company dividends subject to clawback. That would help when fat cats like Philip Green took every penny from his businesses leaving a massive debt in the pension fund for the workers when it went bust. An absolute disgrace. But those would be pretty radical moves by government and so will never happen while we have the first past the post system.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 11, 2024 13:01:51 GMT
This shows that Gullis is desperate. He knows he cannot win against a normal candidate so is trying to make it like i’m a celebrity.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 10, 2024 11:10:57 GMT
Starmer should lead with that in PMQs
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 10, 2024 9:05:44 GMT
Or, it shows they are well connected to people with power to award such contracts. Like PPE providers! Someone's been swallowing too much social media I think. You do know the context of the PPE VIP lane scandal don't you, ministers and their families and friends and bypassing the tendering process? Yes, tongue was in cheek. Public procurement processes are very robust and important as we have seen with PPE what happens when they are ignored: corruption.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 10, 2024 9:04:04 GMT
Apparently Sunak is going to announce they will pass legislation to quash all convictions. That’s going further than just pardoning them all and this is unprecedented. It means they see the victims of this scandal as more wronged than homosexuals criminally convicted for being gay, who were only pardoned. Surely this isn’t right and will open a can of worms for others wronged in different scandals who will then demand more. It also risks exonerating the small numbers who did have their hands in the till. Not to mention the huge constitutional problems of the government blanketly overturning decisions by our supposedly independent judiciary. What precedent does this set? It's a very difficult one Oggy. In this case a pardon is not enough. In any case, some of the victims,as U understand it, ate not happy with a blanket pardon , which , in a sense, individually and psychologically is a non- event...they want individual exonerated through the courts.....they have had 20 years of injustice .. to have to it overturned ( disregarded?) over night is not enough. I obviously agree with you on the separation of powers and wider implications but by some means the authorities have got to do the right thing....and as quickly as possible......is the alternative to let the law take its course which would have to be on a case by case basis. Perhaps you do both is the answer, if that's logically possible. I’m not sure what the answer is to be honest. Will the people whose lives have been ruined ever be contented with what is done to rectify? I expect not. That’s because how can you ever really make up for something like this? A heartfelt apology. Real change in process of these things. Pardons for all (save those convicted of fraud who should be dealt with on a case by case basis). And financial compensation. I don’t think they should be put on a pedestal above being criminally convicted of being gay as it sets a precedent. I also think the rule of law and separation of powers should be respected absolutely.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 10, 2024 7:57:47 GMT
Which shows there are good, hard-working people there, producing results that customers want. Just because there was a very small group of charlatans there many years ago, doesn't mean there is now does it ? Or, it shows they are well connected to people with power to award such contracts. Like PPE providers!
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 10, 2024 7:53:13 GMT
Apparently Sunak is going to announce they will pass legislation to quash all convictions. That’s going further than just pardoning them all and this is unprecedented. It means they see the victims of this scandal as more wronged than homosexuals criminally convicted for being gay, who were only pardoned. Surely this isn’t right and will open a can of worms for others wronged in different scandals who will then demand more.
It also risks exonerating the small numbers who did have their hands in the till. Not to mention the huge constitutional problems of the government blanketly overturning decisions by our supposedly independent judiciary. What precedent does this set?
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 9, 2024 13:29:38 GMT
That’s something. Will any politicians admit wrong doing (for anything, ever)?
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 9, 2024 8:52:16 GMT
Right. But when will we actually see these alleged benefits? When will everyone get richer because in real terms, everyone is a lot poorer (not entirely due to brexit, obviously). Wages have increased quickly, but not in real terms when you account for inflation. Immigration is higher than ever and we have lost lots of the net contributing immigrants (from the EU). Name 5 tangible benefits of brexit. I think it is inappropriate to continue debating Brexit on this thread. I have already answered the question of the benefits brought from Brexit on the Brexit thread many times, for example see page 1,552 on 25th June 2023, when I answered at length. oatcakefanzine.proboards.com/post/7809404/threadRegarding wages; in my last quarterly review on 23rd September (Brexit page 1,562), I posted in section A2 that at 8.2 % UK average wage growth was the highest in the G7, real wage growth after inflation was 0.3% third highest in the G7 (and inflation has dropped since then). Unemployment is the third lowest in the G7 and lower than for decades since leaving the EU. Redundancies are also the lowest for decades since leaving the EU. On all the above counts, the UK is performing better than the other EU members of the G7 as a consequence of leaving the EU and stopping freedom of movement. I think it is self evident that Brexit has brought these tangible benefits, which amount to greater job security for everyone. Immigration is at record levels because of large numbers of dependants and relatives arriving to live in the UK, including many from Europe joining workers who have decided to settle in the UK. Would you deny them access? Record numbers of students are arriving to study bringing substantial revenue to the country. Would you stop them? Large numbers of workers coming to do vacant jobs that need filling such as in the health service, all requiring work permits. Would you stop the NHS bringing in nurses, farmers bringing in crop harvesters, etc. ? And of course there are a large number of refugees fleeing tyranny. Would you stop them? Our economy has a high number of vacancies that needs filling because it is still growing and jobs need doing. Britain has thrived on immigration for thousands of years and immigrants contribute positively to our society and make us the great country that we are. Everyone of us is an immigrant or descended from an immigrant. There is no issue within immigration, provided it is controlled. Oh yes, your infamous “a benefit of brexit is we are not in recession” and “growth is really high” post and, even better, “immigration is now under control” post! Wannabee has obliterated the economic part as complete nonsense on multiple occasions in a more articulate way than I am able to. The main argument to leave the EU was to reduce immigration. That isn’t going well. And so we still are without a single tangible brexit benefit.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 8, 2024 16:30:05 GMT
the whole of London gets tarnished by the numerous "hot spots" London is massive full of lovely places with lovely people but also full of shit areas with scumbags Aren't Manchester and Birmingham much the same? Yes and they both have more violent crime per capita than London. But they don’t have a Muslim mayor.
|
|
|
London
Jan 8, 2024 11:34:25 GMT
via mobile
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 8, 2024 11:34:25 GMT
Knife crime is awful. I have lived in London for about 14 years now. I have never seen anyone pull out a knife. My wife has lived here for 33 years. The same for her. My aunt has lived her for about 75 years. The same for her. There is a problem with knife crime in London but it is a safe city on the whole and not one of the most dangerous in the UK for violent crime according to the statistics. People who don’t live here like to paint it out as very dangerous. I live around the corner from Idris. I doubt he views Barnes as a knife crime hotspot! A cheese knife hotspot perhaps. the whole of London gets tarnished by the numerous "hot spots" London is massive full of lovely places with lovely people but also full of shit areas with scumbags Absolutely
|
|
|
London
Jan 8, 2024 11:34:00 GMT
via mobile
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 8, 2024 11:34:00 GMT
Please provide the quote where I said that. Thank you Also that article is predominantly about illegal vaping and kids fare dodging! Hardly the last days of Rome! Are there many fare dodgers on Stoke’s tube network….oh no wait, there isn’t one. I'm paraphrasing this: On balance, I find Cornwall and London the two most friendly parts of England to non-locals. I don’t have a Stoke accent (I grew up in Cornwall but haven’t lived there for years) and I regularly had Stokies try to fight me and mug me when I lived in Stoke. I found I was constantly having to prove my Stokie-ness to locals in order to get them to treat me decently, from shops, to in bars, to car garages etc. None of that has ever been a problem for me in London and I have absolutely no concerns about crime and bringing up kids in London. I would in Stoke. Air pollution is one of the biggest concerns in London and that is improving thanks to Ulez (trying to bring this back to the original point I was making). Thank you. So I didn’t say it was a “ Utopia, populated by the great and the good”. I said in my experience people in London are friendlier than in Stoke to non-locals. That doesn’t make it utopia unless you think people who live in utopia have concerns about air pollution!?
|
|
|
London
Jan 8, 2024 11:30:29 GMT
via mobile
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 8, 2024 11:30:29 GMT
Knife crime is awful. I have lived in London for about 14 years now. I have never seen anyone pull out a knife. My wife has lived here for 33 years. The same for her. My aunt has lived her for about 75 years. The same for her. There is a problem with knife crime in London but it is a safe city on the whole and not one of the most dangerous in the UK for violent crime according to the statistics. People who don’t live here like to paint it out as very dangerous. I live around the corner from Idris. I doubt he views Barnes as a knife crime hotspot! A cheese knife hotspot perhaps. Barnes. Hardly Barking, Newham or East Ham is it? That’s like comparing Wichwood Park with Fenton. Those living in the posh parts of London need a reality check they may as well be living in Inverness. I know a lot of social workers and Police in London and they tell a different story. So are posh parts of London not London? After reading this thread I thought there were knife wielding maniacs on every street in London? Or, is it that actually whilst London has a problem with knife crime (as most capital cities and major cities do), it is confined to an extremely small minority. Like London has less violent crime per capita than Manchester and Birmingham, but it suits the narrative of some on here to focus just on London (ignoring all the posh bits of course).
|
|
|
London
Jan 8, 2024 9:01:00 GMT
via mobile
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 8, 2024 9:01:00 GMT
Knife crime is awful. I have lived in London for about 14 years now. I have never seen anyone pull out a knife. My wife has lived here for 33 years. The same for her. My aunt has lived her for about 75 years. The same for her. There is a problem with knife crime in London but it is a safe city on the whole and not one of the most dangerous in the UK for violent crime according to the statistics. People who don’t live here like to paint it out as very dangerous. I live around the corner from Idris. I doubt he views Barnes as a knife crime hotspot! A cheese knife hotspot perhaps.
|
|
|
London
Jan 8, 2024 8:56:10 GMT
via mobile
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 8, 2024 8:56:10 GMT
Please provide the quote where I said that. Thank you Also that article is predominantly about illegal vaping and kids fare dodging! Hardly the last days of Rome! Are there many fare dodgers on Stoke’s tube network….oh no wait, there isn’t one.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 6, 2024 14:16:12 GMT
Since Thatcher came into power, the EU has always been more left wing than our government (I cannot speak with enough knowledge about what cane before then). Brexit was championed and fought for by the most right wing parts of the tory party. The referendum taking place was due to right wing tories. They led the leave campaigns. They have pushed it through. The reason being they hate the restrictions on businesses from the EU. In other words, they hate the restrictions on free market capitalism put in place by the EU for the benefit of workers and consumers. The EU is capitalist but has the tightest control of capitalism on earth in terms of giving the greatest amount of rights to individuals and workers over businesses and employers. A left wing brexit never existed and no left win brexit plans have ever been promoted or raised as a possible outcome of brexit by Corbyn or anyone on the left wing. Brexit is about making rich people richer and giving them more opportunities to do so by reducing regulations on businesses and reducing rights for workers and employees. Brexit is firstly about sovereignty, but it also about making everyone richer. Our economy will grow faster, workers wages are increasing faster than for decades due to stopping freedom of movement. All foreigners are treated equally apart from those with special rights like Hongkongers. Government can invest in the UK instead of handing payments to the EU. We are free to negotiate our own trade deals and join trade agreements with the world's faster growing economies. We are free for UK governments to introduce what legislation is necessary to control business. No workers rights need be lost. If the country votes in a right wing government that's democracy. tradingeconomics.com/country-list/wage-growthwww.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/bulletins/averageweeklyearningsingreatbritain/december2023#:~:text=Annual%20growth%20in%20regular%20earnings,in%20August%20to%20October%202023. Right. But when will we actually see these alleged benefits? When will everyone get richer because in real terms, everyone is a lot poorer (not entirely due to brexit, obviously). Wages have increased quickly, but not in real terms when you account for inflation. Immigration is higher than ever and we have lost lots of the net contributing immigrants (from the EU). Name 5 tangible benefits of brexit.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 6, 2024 11:48:55 GMT
I agree that we lacked a left wing pro brexit view and I think alot of that comes back to the two horse race we have become accustomed to too. Whereby if there is a divisive issue with a fairly even split and one of the big two parties goes one side then the other tends to go the other side. I guess in doing so it helps keep them both as the two largest parties too. As Cameron won the 2015 election off the back of promising a referendum it sort of setup the conservatives to back brexit because they were voted in on the back of a promise to have a referendum and people wouldn't vote for them, for a referendum, unless they wanted to vote for change. So in some ways I think Corbyns position was decided for him because had he also been pro brexit then there would be 49% (or whatever voted to remain) of those who voted who would be disillusioned by both tory and Labour. And I'm not sure if being pro brexit would have won him over much of the leave vote or enough to put up a challenge. I am bias though towards corbyn so I know my views are probably a bit blinded and impartial. And I can understand why people didn't like him or have confidence in him but for me he gave hope. Like I said before though things could easily have turned out worse under his leadership too. Just because it's unknown doesn't mean it would have been better. But my bias part of me thinks it would have been. The ship has sailed for now though and so I must move on. As for labour I agree in the sense about not being in the game in terms of significant change. Starmer at times has given trinkets of hope such as pledging to scrap the house of Lords before then back tracking on his commitment or when he will action it. And my greatest worry is he gets in power and doesn't have any radical or breath of fresh air changes which are much needed because if that happens then it very much backs up the whole "all politicians are the same" rhetoric we often hear. In terms of statistics, again, I'm probably cherry picking a bit myself to back up my point. I'm not doing it to be disingenuous though, it's just more that I don't believe it's a working class voted brexit and middle class voted against it sort of thing. Older people are wealthier but then they've also worked longer and own assets which have substantially increased in value so you expect them to be wealthier. So me using this comparison can maybe be debunked a bit and scrutinised too. At the same time though 73% of 18-24 year olds voted to remain and there's certainly no way that only a quarter of that age group is working class. So I just don't think it's clear cut. Anyway it's always much easier to scrutinise a government or referendum when you're in opposition and its not what you voted for. All those on the left blaming brexit voters could very well find themselves on the receiving end in 4 or 5 years themselves whereby a labour government they backed may be involved in scandals and oversee worsening public services and standards of living. Anyway been a very long day and I'm rambling off on a tangent here. I think once/if things begin to improve then brexit will become less and less significant. But while things have got worse some see it as a potential factor what's contributed to thst. So fingers crossed whoever comes in next actually gets a New PM bounce if such a thing exists. There is no true left wing pro Brexit view. All true left wingers are against being ruled by a capitalist organization that is there to support the interests of large German and French corporate interests. Corbyn could not be trusted. He claimed to be socialist once, but then sold out to left wing academics, who have no genuine interest in the interests of the working class. I voted leave because I don't believe in politicians handing over sovereignty to Brussels. The government should be accountable to the people and be capable of being removed by the people when it messes up. Both leave and remain campaigns misled the public, that's what politicians do! What was posted on the side of red buses went out the window in 2020 with the COVID19 pandemic which has changed the whole NHS situation, with patient backlog, staff burn out, etc. being made far worse than it already was due to austerity measures. I supported EEC membership in the 1970s, when the present members represented a third of the world's economy. I thought giving up some sovereignty for the benefits of a large "home market" was good for Britain. But over half a century the world has completely changed. The EU now represents only 15% of the world economy and that fraction is declining fast. Conversely Maastricht handed of the supremacy of sovereignty to the EU. The balance has shifted far too far for me. Furthermore the balance has shifted even more since the UK left the EU. The trade benefits of joining the EEC have turned into a massive trade deficit with the EU. The UK will be far better off economically in the long term concentrating on trade with RoW and being a member of other trade groups. www.socialistparty.org.uk/articles/7292/20-05-2009/why-socialists-oppose-the-eu/monthlyreview.org/2019/10/01/socialist-internationalism-against-the-european-union/www.politicshome.com/thehouse/article/socialism-can-never-be-delivered-while-we-remain-in-the-eus-capitalist-clubwww.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-corbyns-changing-brexit-stanceI'll conclude by saying there is no going back to the EU. People need to realise that as Starmer does. Germany's net contribution is now over £20 billion pa. which isn't so bad when you enjoy a huge trade benefit with the rest of the EU. The EU is set on a path to total fiscal union and ultimately total political union of things like foreign policy. Not all countries will agree to everything so qualified majority voting will take precedence over individual country's interests on everything, which means more loss of sovereignty. Since leaving the EU, the rules have changed on EU debt. The EU Commission have now started to take on huge amounts of debt "on behalf of" members countries. www.bruegel.org/policy-brief/rising-cost-european-union-borrowing-and-what-do-about-it#:~:text=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.europarl.europa,%2FIPOL_IDA(2023)7494%E2%80%A6&text=Debt%20issuance%20by%20the%20European,arisen%20from%20borrowing%20since%202020. Since Thatcher came into power, the EU has always been more left wing than our government (I cannot speak with enough knowledge about what cane before then). Brexit was championed and fought for by the most right wing parts of the tory party. The referendum taking place was due to right wing tories. They led the leave campaigns. They have pushed it through. The reason being they hate the restrictions on businesses from the EU. In other words, they hate the restrictions on free market capitalism put in place by the EU for the benefit of workers and consumers. The EU is capitalist but has the tightest control of capitalism on earth in terms of giving the greatest amount of rights to individuals and workers over businesses and employers. A left wing brexit never existed and no left win brexit plans have ever been promoted or raised as a possible outcome of brexit by Corbyn or anyone on the left wing. Brexit is about making rich people richer and giving them more opportunities to do so by reducing regulations on businesses and reducing rights for workers and employees.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 5, 2024 15:21:26 GMT
Lying (more money for the NHS for example) is not the same as over estimating how bad it would be (negative economic consequences were right, just not to the extent that the remain campaign said they would be - at least they got the trend right). Both campaigns were awful though. The vote leave leaders were in government and got to implement brexit. They utterly failed. They had a big majority and total power to seize the mythical brexit opportunities. Then reality hit because there aren’t really any. The biggest irony is that the leave vote won because of immigration. Since the vote, the numbers of migrants coming here is off the scale. lying is lying the electorate is not responsible for the failure of government or parliment. The majority government were hampered by a majority remain mentality of parliment collectively doing its best to thwart it. there was no real effort to get brexit done Lying is lying. Turkey have never been about to join the EU and flood the EU with Turks. Predictions are not lies, unless when the remain campaign predicted project fear they didn’t really believe in their own prediction. Project fear largely became reality just not to the extent of the negative’s consequences predicted. And what about when the leader of vote leave was elected with a big majority, with his top team all taken from vote leave, and his cabinet of leavers. Why couldn’t they seize the brexit benefits they lied about to win the vote? What’s your excuse for them not making brexit work?
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 5, 2024 14:10:34 GMT
You are right. I am embarrassed. How can you not be after vote leave won based on lies which have since been totally exposed. It makes our nation a joke and it is embarrassing. Like Americans are often embarrassed that Trump was President (and may be once more again). The fact not one person on here has yet named a tangible benefit of brexit 7 years on is conclusive of how much of a mistake it was. It doesn’t mean those who voted for Brexit should be persecuted. there is no benefits of brexit because parliment dragged its feet and fucked it up. That has nothing to do with the electorate remember when all the vote leave people continually told us be careful how you vote. out means out and we will honour it please dont try and tell me only one side was lying Lying (more money for the NHS for example) is not the same as over estimating how bad it would be (negative economic consequences were right, just not to the extent that the remain campaign said they would be - at least they got the trend right). Both campaigns were awful though. The vote leave leaders were in government and got to implement brexit. They utterly failed. They had a big majority and total power to seize the mythical brexit opportunities. Then reality hit because there aren’t really any. The biggest irony is that the leave vote won because of immigration. Since the vote, the numbers of migrants coming here is off the scale.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 5, 2024 13:56:22 GMT
So 17,410,742 voters, largely traditional working class voters, not at all embarrassed, but frustrated(as most people on the Oatcake seem to be), should stay at home and leave it to the others who of course know best. That will help and sums up the new arrogant lefties or rather those who think they are on the left.....but don't actually listen any more, just judge and preach. spot on John this constant persecution of brexit voters is embarrassing. I believe its because the remainers are embarrassed they lost, have sour grapes so this is the best excuse to explain their defeat You are right. I am embarrassed. How can you not be after vote leave won based on lies which have since been totally exposed. It makes our nation a joke and it is embarrassing. Like Americans are often embarrassed that Trump was President (and may be once more again). The fact not one person on here has yet named a tangible benefit of brexit 7 years on is conclusive of how much of a mistake it was. It doesn’t mean those who voted for Brexit should be persecuted.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 4, 2024 14:53:53 GMT
Yes terrible errors were made. At least Davey admits mistakes which is better than most MPs. I think you are harsh to blame this squarely on the lib dems. Of course they are partly to blame, but so are the governing party who were the tories, as well as senior officials in the post office at the time. Massive mistakes all round and it is innocent hard working people who suffer as a result. yep blame the tories for everything. Considering the time frame labour have their hands all over this as well. its not a party problem its an establishment problem In 1999, Post Office Counters Ltd[17] introduced a computer accounting system called Horizon,[18] developed by ICL (which in 2002 rebranded under the name of its Japanese owner, Fujitsu). From 2001,[19] the Post Office company (by then renamed Post Office Limited) was a subsidiary of Royal Mail Group.[20] On 1 April 2012, Post Office Ltd became independent of Royal Mail Group and was reorganised to become a subsidiary of Royal Mail Holdings,[21] with a separate management and board of directors.[22] By 2013, Horizon was used by at least 11,500 branches and was processing some six million transactions every day.[23][24] From 1999, sub-postmasters (SPMs) began reporting unexplained discrepancies and losses. The Post Office maintained that Horizon was "robust" and that none of the discrepancies was due to Horizon.[25] Some sub-postmasters unwilling or unable to make good the shortfalls were prosecuted by the Post Office for theft, false accounting and fraud. Between 1991 (prior to Horizon) and 2015, there were 918 successful prosecutions.[26][27] These were largely private prosecutions by the Post Office relying on IT evidence alone, without proof of criminal intent. Public prosecutions also occurred in Scotland, Northern Ireland and in the Crown Court. Some SPMs were persuaded by their own solicitors to plead guilty to false accounting, on being told the Post Office would drop theft charges. Once the Post Office had a criminal conviction, it would attempt to secure a Proceeds of Crime Act order against convicted sub-postmasters, allowing it to seize their assets and bankrupt them.[28] According to press reports, these actions by the Post Office caused the loss of dozens of jobs, bankruptcy, divorce, unwarranted prison sentences and one suicide.[29][30] Forensic accountant Second Sight's report of 2014 described the Horizon computer system as not fit for purpose, whilst the Post Office stated that "there is absolutely no evidence of any systemic issues with the computer system". The Post Office terminated the Initial Complaint Review and Mediation Scheme in 2015 and published a report clearing itself of any wrongdoing.[31] here is a decent overview of the whole affair en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Post_Office_scandal#:~:text=Crown%20Court,-R%20v%20Christopher&text=The%20cases%20were%20from%20magistrates,data%20was%20used%20in%20evidence.%22 Perhaps reread what I wrote. I blame the lib dems and the tories and the post office officials. I don’t know enough of the history of this but from what you have written above, you are absolutely right that labour are also to blame. Certainly I do not blame the tories alone for this and I have never said that.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 4, 2024 14:34:11 GMT
Just an example of how utterly inept the Lib Dems were when they had a whiff of power during the coalition..... Yes terrible errors were made. At least Davey admits mistakes which is better than most MPs. I think you are harsh to blame this squarely on the lib dems. Of course they are partly to blame, but so are the governing party who were the tories, as well as senior officials in the post office at the time. Massive mistakes all round and it is innocent hard working people who suffer as a result.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 4, 2024 13:40:58 GMT
Sunak confirms the election isn’t going to be until later in the year. It is ridiculous that we must put up with this failed administration for an additional 6 months. I wonder how much money they will extract from the general tax paying population to the rich friends and family members of the tory party during that time?
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 4, 2024 11:27:24 GMT
The government's description of Turing sounds good. Was it illegal pre-Brexit to fund people from disadvantaged backgrounds to go abroad? The reality is (according to the report) many people have to pay upfront as the funding from the Turing scheme comes through after they must pay. So not so good for those from disadvantaged backgrounds who do not have the cash upfront unfortunately. No, it wasn’t illegal pre brexit. There are and were many schemes with the wider world universities and UK universities.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 4, 2024 11:25:22 GMT
It wasn’t a comparison. I am comparing. Erasmus didn’t have the same problems as Turing. Therefore Erasmus is better. Turing might be better in the future. It might get worse. Right now it is worse because, for example: four out of five universities (79%) had difficulties with the application process, which was overly complex, repetitive and “tedious” The window for applications has been too short Delivery issues has disproportionately impacted people from disadvantaged backgrounds because funded is often paid after the event instead of before or directly and funding is inadequate The polls still show that most people think Brexit as a whole is a failure amp.theguardian.com/politics/2023/dec/30/britons-brexit-bad-uk-poll-eu-finances-nhsOne in 10 believe leaving the EU has helped their personal financial situation, against 35% who say it has been bad for their finances, while just 9% say it has been good for the NHS, against 47% who say it has had a negative effect. Only 7% of people think it has helped keep down prices in UK shops, against 63% who think Brexit has been a factor in fuelling inflation and the cost of living crisis. 22% of voters believe it has been good for the UK in general. We are 7 and a half years since the vote. You and I argued extensively on here pre and post referendum about Brexit. You were adamant it would be good and me the opposite. We are yet to see any real tangible benefits so far (or if we have seen the benefits then what an absolute disaster/waste of time and resources!). When do you think we will see the benefits and all the things you argued for: eg less corruption and cronyism, more say in the world, more accountability for our elected and unelected law makers etc. When will we start seeing the mythical left wing arguments for brexit that you argued many times with me about? When will workers benefit more? So far they have had rights reduced or they have stayed the same and although all their problems were blamed on immigrants, since brexit, far, far greater numbers are coming here and it has not solved that “problem”. Many brexiteers will literally never say they were wrong. Almost all the leading figures of vote leave have been in government and have utterly failed in delivery of anything they promised. When will you be even prepared to consider that leaving the EU wasn’t the best of the two options available? Or will you continue regardless with your faith in brexit? You cited the report to support your argument, which it doesn't. I'll leave your agenda and echo chamber to you then Oggy, as long as it makes you feel better. The report leads me and others to the logical conclusion that Turing is not as good as Erasmus. The rest of your reply is classic BJR. You cannot back up your opinions or beliefs on brexit when they come under any scrutiny. Unless you are in agreement with me on brexit, this is no echo chamber.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 4, 2024 9:08:24 GMT
You’d defend brexit regardless of what happens. The Turing scheme is one of many examples of it being not as good as what we had. You admit you would have preferred to stay in Erasmus! But you won’t admit that the report on the Turing scheme shows it is not as good as Erasmus. One day it might be. But right now, British students have lost out. That’s on leave voters. You and the Guardian disingenuously misquoted the report . Just your usual agenda.I am in favour of cooperating with the EU and European countries, I hope they are equally up for cooperating with us....the report on the shortcomings of Erasmus that I posted did mention the necessity of cooperating with third nations and I quote " At this stage, universities hope for a bigger budget and enhanced cooperation with third-country institutions. International mobility and cooperation were first introduced to the programme in 2015 and have since brought many improvements, but there’s room for better integration and links to the EU’s higher education and research policy aspirations, universities say." As Wannabee says, it wasn't a comparison between Erasmus and Turing. It wasn’t a comparison. I am comparing. Erasmus didn’t have the same problems as Turing. Therefore Erasmus is better. Turing might be better in the future. It might get worse. Right now it is worse because, for example: four out of five universities (79%) had difficulties with the application process, which was overly complex, repetitive and “tedious” The window for applications has been too short Delivery issues has disproportionately impacted people from disadvantaged backgrounds because funded is often paid after the event instead of before or directly and funding is inadequate The polls still show that most people think Brexit as a whole is a failure amp.theguardian.com/politics/2023/dec/30/britons-brexit-bad-uk-poll-eu-finances-nhsOne in 10 believe leaving the EU has helped their personal financial situation, against 35% who say it has been bad for their finances, while just 9% say it has been good for the NHS, against 47% who say it has had a negative effect. Only 7% of people think it has helped keep down prices in UK shops, against 63% who think Brexit has been a factor in fuelling inflation and the cost of living crisis. 22% of voters believe it has been good for the UK in general. We are 7 and a half years since the vote. You and I argued extensively on here pre and post referendum about Brexit. You were adamant it would be good and me the opposite. We are yet to see any real tangible benefits so far (or if we have seen the benefits then what an absolute disaster/waste of time and resources!). When do you think we will see the benefits and all the things you argued for: eg less corruption and cronyism, more say in the world, more accountability for our elected and unelected law makers etc. When will we start seeing the mythical left wing arguments for brexit that you argued many times with me about? When will workers benefit more? So far they have had rights reduced or they have stayed the same and although all their problems were blamed on immigrants, since brexit, far, far greater numbers are coming here and it has not solved that “problem”. Many brexiteers will literally never say they were wrong. Almost all the leading figures of vote leave have been in government and have utterly failed in delivery of anything they promised. When will you be even prepared to consider that leaving the EU wasn’t the best of the two options available? Or will you continue regardless with your faith in brexit?
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 4, 2024 8:25:42 GMT
I'm not particularly interested in going through the report Wannabee, if you genuinely want answers, contact the government not me, it is their report. My point was that the Guardian , and therefore those on the " I told you dsi " thread, completely misinterpreted what the report said, but defend that point if you like....you usually try to be good at accurate research, but not this time. Your main point, about it not meant to be a comparison between Turing and Erasmus is absolutely true, I almost posted the same myself, but the Guardian and Oggy, tried to disengenuously make it such, irrespective of the purpose and content of the report. Headlines but hoping no one will actual read it , as long as it feeds the echo chamber. It has happened many times before.Why is that?Perhaps they have an agenda. You’d defend brexit regardless of what happens. The Turing scheme is one of many examples of it being not as good as what we had. You admit you would have preferred to stay in Erasmus! But you won’t admit that the report on the Turing scheme shows it is not as good as Erasmus. One day it might be. But right now, British students have lost out. That’s on leave voters.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 3, 2024 20:08:07 GMT
It also mentions the funding issues students received and the fact it is not as good as Erasmus. But apart from that, a success! Just not as good as what we had… Not bad at all for a first year. Obviously the positives ad I quoted from the actual report don't fit the agenda. Everything could do with improvements, Law and Order, Education, the Democratic process, the Political system,the environment, the transport system, the economy, the Health service.... It depends upon....The government we elect, the performance of our economy and some world factors out of our control. There's no reason thst the party of your choice could not promise to vastly fund Turing, and that the administrative problems cannot be improved. Yes, there is always room for improvement. But improvement isn’t getting rid of what we had and replacing it with something worse. That is the case with an awful lot of Brexit outcomes.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 3, 2024 19:57:53 GMT
The report actually says; Overall, the Turing Scheme has been successful in creating opportunities for international placements. Providers stated that the main motivation for applying to the Turing Scheme was the ability to provide funding for international mobility that would otherwise not have been possible, particularly for participants from a disadvantaged background. On completion of the first year of the Turing Scheme, most providers stated that relationships had been maintained (89% of HE providers, 86% of HE/VET, 83% of schools). Among those who had previously delivered Erasmus(+), around two-fifths (42%) of FE/VET providers and schools and more than half (52%) of HE providers said that they have been able to increase the volume of international placements offered through the Turing Scheme compared to Erasmus(+). Overall, the Turing Scheme has been successful in creating opportunities for international placements. Providers stated that the main motivation for applying to the Turing Scheme was the ability to provide funding for international mobility that would otherwise not have been possible, particularly for participants from a disadvantaged background. It also mentions the funding issues students received and the fact it is not as good as Erasmus. But apart from that, a success! Just not as good as what we had…
|
|