Renton

These are just the Policy headlines behind detail such as Restore discipline and order to the classroom . We will give teachers the tools and powers they need to keep order in the classroom. We will abolish the legal requirement of 24 hours’ notice for detentions; reform the exclusion process; and give headteachers the power to ban, search for, and confiscate any items they think may cause violence or disruption. Raise the status of the teaching profession. Move to a high quality system of teacher recruitment and training by raising entry requirements, expanding Teach First and incentivising top maths and science graduates. Raise standards. We will take urgent action to reverse the decline in standards. We will reform the National Curriculum, remove political interference from GCSEs and A-levels, and allow state schools to do the same high quality exams as private schools. We will replace Key Stage 1 Sats with a simple reading test, reform Key Stage 2 Sats, and make Ofsted report on schools’ setting policies and reading schemes. Bottom line is education will not be improved for normal kids because he is going to cut funding. For instance, it's easy to say you're going to get better teachers in - and it's a good idea in science in particular - but how are you going to do it if you don't pay for them? As for giving teachers the power' and 'tools' to detain kids etc - good luck with that Dave. Meaningless rhetoric to appease the gullible.

From a professional viewpoint I'd absolutely love to chat with him about this pledge.

Which of those policies do you not agree with? There's very few specific policies in that, it's pure propaganda, gimmicks and rhetoric. Like the last 3 weeks when he has been going on and on about cutting public sector waste - it's a load of bollocks man. On his point about changing politics, why won't he agree to real change and a move towards PR, and an end to hereditary peerage? Because its the same old tories, that's why - a 5% cut in pay for a tory with another 6 or 7 figure income is irrelevant to them. And no, I don't want less MPs, I'd actually prefer more so they can do more for their constituents. The expense of National govenment in this country is something like 0.008% of GDP so savings at Westminster are irrelevant in any case, but hangs well with the deluded voters I guess. Also, why hasn't Dave made more of his inheritance tax cuts to the super rich, including himself and his mate George? For a man so short on actual policies you'd think he could advertise that one a bit more.

Do fuck off Christmas Tree your tory propaganda. It's making me feel ill.

I fancy it but it's quite expensive to get to I think despite its proximity. Plus it'll be one of those dodgy SAS airline fokkers no doubt. Didn't Slartibartfast design the Fjords as well?

Finland is really nice as well, been 3 times. http://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/country...pe/fitravel.htm Colleague of mine had to drive back from Helsinki last week because of the ash cloud. Not recommended.

The only issue I can see would be whether we negotiate with countries on an individual basis or with the EU as a whole. If it was the EU as a whole then we'd still have the same situation with EU immigration as we currently do. The problem we have is that Labour got its figures wrong. Virtually every other country saw the risk and limited numbers.....Not Us tho I think the limits were only for a limited time (which may have now expired anyway) though. What limits were these then? Never heard of them before, I was under the impression intra-euro immigration was higher in many countires than it was here, happy to find out more about it if someone has a link (not to UKIP or similar though). Iirc, for a period (4 or 5 years?) existing EU could limit the number of people they'd admit from the new members (Poland, Romania, etc.) Right, sounds like we fucked up a bit then. Just wait till Turkey gain admission. That's what the guy from UKIP said. And I happen to agree with him. So do I but it might never happen. Especially after Greece.

Why aren't they swamped with immigrants then? Is it because it is too cold or the beer is too expensive? http://www.mynorway.co.uk/ That link wasn't useful. Doing a quick search it appears you need to have worked continuously in Norway for 5 years before you can apply for residency. Not exactly the same free movement as for the EU then.

Why aren't they swamped with immigrants then? Is it because it is too cold or the beer is too expensive?

The only issue I can see would be whether we negotiate with countries on an individual basis or with the EU as a whole. If it was the EU as a whole then we'd still have the same situation with EU immigration as we currently do. The problem we have is that Labour got its figures wrong. Virtually every other country saw the risk and limited numbers.....Not Us tho I think the limits were only for a limited time (which may have now expired anyway) though. What limits were these then? Never heard of them before, I was under the impression intra-euro immigration was higher in many countires than it was here, happy to find out more about it if someone has a link (not to UKIP or similar though). Iirc, for a period (4 or 5 years?) existing EU could limit the number of people they'd admit from the new members (Poland, Romania, etc.) Right, sounds like we fucked up a bit then.

It was from the Telegraph but I knew if I put that in some of the socialists wouldnt have read it. Im not saying its particularly right or wrong, more so that as demonstrated in this thread, a lot of us just take it for granted because its always been that way. I always like the UKIP leader Nigel fer.... when he's on question time. He does quite often talk a lot of sense its just a shame as you say he's in a no win party. I can't stand UKIP. Right wing branch of the Conservative party - basically a bunch of white, middle-aged, xenophobic, misogynist wankers.

The only issue I can see would be whether we negotiate with countries on an individual basis or with the EU as a whole. If it was the EU as a whole then we'd still have the same situation with EU immigration as we currently do. The problem we have is that Labour got its figures wrong. Virtually every other country saw the risk and limited numbers.....Not Us tho I think the limits were only for a limited time (which may have now expired anyway) though. What limits were these then? Never heard of them before, I was under the impression intra-euro immigration was higher in many countires than it was here, happy to find out more about it if someone has a link (not to UKIP or similar though).

Which party was it that signed up to the Maastricht Treaty? It was a serious point not a party point scoring jobby Well being serious then. What do you think the EU will say if we go to them and ask to pull out of everything except the free trade market? And also what do you think it would do for British business? I wouldn't end well. Apparently the EU has free trade agreements with over 50 countries that are not part of the EU. UKIP says on this....... Have they asked the other Commonwealth countries about this? Why on Earth would we want to increase trade with a heterogenous mix of countries that are thousands of miles away based purely on historical reasons. And at the same time cut us off from our Geographical neighbours - the UK-EU Free Trade deal is no replacement for the benefits we get as part of the single market. Once again, why don't you think the tories embrace this if it were remotely feasible - don't you agree it's a vote winner? Trusting UKIP to make policies on Europe is a bit like asking a paedophile to reform child protection laws. Why not try thinking for yourself rather than simply repeating years of what you've heard? Can you explain this sentence? Neither of us are economists, so no, off the top of my head I couldn't list the differences, but they are different, otherwise this wouldn't be an issue. I actually found this wiki article on the European Union, and its subarticles, very enlightening (increasingly I'm growing to respect wiki as a good source of reliable information, better than newspaper articles or political manifestos anyway). It seems to me that it would be hugely detrimental to effectively go it alone, an opinion which is almost universal amongst anlaysts and mainstream politicians - including those from your party. At the end of the day the political parties all agree on keeping the status quo (except the loonys). For largely idealogical reasons, I'd like us to ultimately be in the euro, and I suspect you'd like us out of the it altogether. Fair enough, neither of us will get what we want so we live with the compromise. To be honest im not euro sceptic and like you have really not given it much thought. However having given it some thought today, i seem to be struggling to find a list of benefits for staying v going, particularly given the Norway and Sweden stances. I guess im coming at it from why do we need ANOTHER parliament to make up police and pass laws. As it stands we have less than 10% representation within that parliament anyway. Why do we / you feel a bunch of germans / italians / french etc can make better laws for us than our own politicians. If you do then doesnt that point to a problem with our system. Sweden is a fully paid up memeber of the eurozone isn't it? Can I freely move sticks and live in Norway, benefit from their health and social care? I doubt that somehow, maybe somebody can enlighten me regarding this. I basically agree with what NJS has said about the EU.

Looking at a youtube video, the only thing the HTC looks inferior on to me is scaling, which is pretty much perfect on the iPhone. I'm not going to use my iPhone as a music player mind - the battery life is bad enough as it is and it won't play half my files. The sound on my Sony is better too.

Did anyone else suffer horrendous static shocks in Bainbridge? We used to rub our feet on the carpet and touch an unsuspecting victiom on the ear. It knacked.

You'd have to make a choice whether to join the master race or come back to Brittania's bussom.

Norway gets to protect its fishing stocks as well. I thought you lived in Germany? Do you want free movement rights within Europe or not? Being outside the "political" europe does not restrict free movement. You really should read up on this subject.....If you are interested. I'm sorry but you're wrong. Leaving the EU would restrict free movement, unless negotiated otherwise. Of course, such an arrangement would have to be reciprocal. Don't think free movement would be an issue at all. Because moving to live in the US or Australia is as easy to do as Germany? You haven't thought this through have you - have you actually noticed the seperate queues at the airport?

Which party was it that signed up to the Maastricht Treaty? It was a serious point not a party point scoring jobby Well being serious then. What do you think the EU will say if we go to them and ask to pull out of everything except the free trade market? And also what do you think it would do for British business? I wouldn't end well. Apparently the EU has free trade agreements with over 50 countries that are not part of the EU. UKIP says on this....... Have they asked the other Commonwealth countries about this? Why on Earth would we want to increase trade with a heterogenous mix of countries that are thousands of miles away based purely on historical reasons. And at the same time cut us off from our Geographical neighbours - the UK-EU Free Trade deal is no replacement for the benefits we get as part of the single market. Once again, why don't you think the tories embrace this if it were remotely feasible - don't you agree it's a vote winner? Trusting UKIP to make policies on Europe is a bit like asking a paedophile to reform child protection laws. Why not try thinking for yourself rather than simply repeating years of what you've heard? Can you explain this sentence? Neither of us are economists, so no, off the top of my head I couldn't list the differences, but they are different, otherwise this wouldn't be an issue. I actually found this wiki article on the European Union, and its subarticles, very enlightening (increasingly I'm growing to respect wiki as a good source of reliable information, better than newspaper articles or political manifestos anyway). It seems to me that it would be hugely detrimental to effectively go it alone, an opinion which is almost universal amongst anlaysts and mainstream politicians - including those from your party. At the end of the day the political parties all agree on keeping the status quo (except the loonys). For largely idealogical reasons, I'd like us to ultimately be in the euro, and I suspect you'd like us out of the it altogether. Fair enough, neither of us will get what we want so we live with the compromise.

Norway gets to protect its fishing stocks as well. I thought you lived in Germany? Do you want free movement rights within Europe or not?

Which party was it that signed up to the Maastricht Treaty? It was a serious point not a party point scoring jobby Well being serious then. What do you think the EU will say if we go to them and ask to pull out of everything except the free trade market? And also what do you think it would do for British business? I wouldn't end well. Apparently the EU has free trade agreements with over 50 countries that are not part of the EU. UKIP says on this....... Have they asked the other Commonwealth countries about this? Why on Earth would we want to increase trade with a heterogenous mix of countries that are thousands of miles away based purely on historical reasons. And at the same time cut us off from our Geographical neighbours - the UK-EU Free Trade deal is no replacement for the benefits we get as part of the single market. Once again, why don't you think the tories embrace this if it were remotely feasible - don't you agree it's a vote winner? Trusting UKIP to make policies on Europe is a bit like asking a paedophile to reform child protection laws.

Just outside John Lewis iirc. Aye, at the entrance to Eldon Garden now, although I vaguely remember there may have been two sets..... This thread is brilliant. And the link to Skyscraper city which I daren't click or I'll get no work done today at all.

Any idea what income you'd have to have to be in group 6 or lower? Income decile 6 of 10 that goes up to 100k? 60k. I'd assumed it was cumulative proportion of the population, like in the Lorenz curve. I dont think so, as its a decile grouping up to 100k. It makes sense that way too, tax redistributions will still benefit people on 50, 60k in the UK because everyone benefits from larger tax allowances on the first part of income. The net effects takes account of all changes. Aye, the over 100k bar shows that's right too.

I was referring to him getting lynched actually.

Any idea what income you'd have to have to be in group 6 or lower? Income decile 6 of 10 that goes up to 100k? 60k. I'd assumed it was cumulative proportion of the population, like in the Lorenz curve.

Nice to hear. Makes Brown seem even more of a prick for having a pop at her like. Aye, well done Mrs Duffy for keeping her integrity. I don't think Brown was being malicious but he must feel like a complete tit over this mess.