(10 Apr 2016, 3:40 pm)MurdnunoC wrote Irrespective of start-date, the current system still applies. What the article sets out are the proposals to chase loanees who choose to avoid paying their loans either by moving abroad; or by somehow disappearing from records held by HMRC.

That's good, the job i want to do, (deputy manager of a nursery) will hopefully get me around 18k a year...don't mind a job in a nursery though, as a nursery nurse/teaching assistant, better than nothing.

Worked in private nurseries before.

On the day Dennis Skinner had a go at Cameron and refused to withdraw the word 'dodgy', I had this put through the door.

Haven't looked to see who is behind it, but I can think of a fair few facts missing from the publication.

What a waste of tax payers money... rather it was spent on people with disabilities or for the families who's struggling!

(11 Apr 2016, 5:38 pm)Michael wrote What a waste of tax payers money... rather it was spent on people with disabilities or for the families who's struggling!

To be honest, I think it's wrong that the civil service is being used to promote a vote. I'm decided on an in vote now, but I think it should be up to political parties to do the campaigning.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

I think tax payers' money should've been used for a completely neutral leaflet, compiled by an independent organisation (not sure what, mind) that gives facts for both sides of the argument.

This s**t should not be allowed as it's completely biased and thus the only thing some people may see who do not use the internet or watch much TV.

(11 Apr 2016, 6:17 pm)Adrian wrote To be honest, I think it's wrong that the civil service is being used to promote a vote. I'm decided on an in vote now, but I think it should be up to political parties to do the campaigning.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

(11 Apr 2016, 9:17 pm)northern156 wrote I think tax payers' money should've been used for a completely neutral leaflet, compiled by an independent organisation (not sure what, mind) that gives facts for both sides of the argument.

This s**t should not be allowed as it's completely biased and thus the only thing some people may see who do not use the internet or watch much TV.

I had just this discussion with Husband, earlier. We're both on the same page about it. If public money is to be spent on what is meant to be a non-party political vote of personal conscience and opinion, then people need to be presented with neutral, non-hysterical arguments for both options. Yes, it will mean that the same facts and figures end up being interpreted to mean different things but it's a complex issue which requires some serious consideration, yet, instead, is being presented in a cloud of selective hyperbole and obfuscation, depending on the view being pushed.

Edit: anyone who even mentions bananas loses my confidence in their opinion.

(11 Apr 2016, 10:21 pm)BusLoverMum wrote I had just this discussion with Husband, earlier. We're both on the same page about it. If public money is to be spent on what is meant to be a non-party political vote of personal conscience and opinion, then people need to be presented with neutral, non-hysterical arguments for both options. Yes, it will mean that the same facts and figures end up being interpreted to mean different things but it's a complex issue which requires some serious consideration, yet, instead, is being presented in a cloud of selective hyperbole and obfuscation, depending on the view being pushed.

Edit: anyone who even mentions bananas loses my confidence in their opinion.

All of this is not helped by the media, also. Their views (BBC seem to be very pro-Tory) are pushed out for all to believe...

(11 Apr 2016, 6:17 pm)Adrian wrote To be honest, I think it's wrong that the civil service is being used to promote a vote. I'm decided on an in vote now, but I think it should be up to political parties to do the campaigning.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

Whilst I agree on the Civil Service not being used - I don't think the parties (as we know them) can be used, if only because there would be a huge split in each of them.

I do think the non-party line that is being used (some campaugn groups including MP's from both sides of the fence) is the way forward.
Hopeully this leads to a decision in June, that isn't based on those traditionally favoured by a political party.

I am out.
Not because I am tory or ukip (the traditional anti-EU parties), but because of my socialist principles - of which many don't tie in with the current EU position.
These include TTIP, austerity, privisation legislation, the whole Greece debacle, anti-trade union laws, the common fisheries policy etc. The list goes on.

However, a number of tories and ukippers want to be out for totally different reasons.
By aligning myself with more public faces (or certainly ones that are in the mainstream), if only because I want the same outcome, I am potentially putting a divide between myself and others socialists who want to stay in.
However, it could be argued that those socialists who want to stop in, are marginalising themselves from groups (and unions), who want to be out.

If Labour as an example said that they have a party line. Imagine the infighting? Imagine those unions who want to stay in and their public spats with those who want to be out?

The decision (in my opinion), must be made away from the traditional 'tow the party line', for those reasons.

Not here but:

Czech Republic's Leaders Agree On New Name

http://news.sky.com/story/1679404/czech-...n-new-name

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/ttip...10121.html

Just another reason why I am wanting out of the EU.

(04 May 2016, 8:44 am)Andreos1 wrote http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/ttip...10121.html

Just another reason why I am wanting out of the EU.

From my point of view only being 11 years old I feel that we should leave the EU as that is how I have been brought up. My family supports the Conservatives and in my opinion (many people will disagree) I think UKIP makes most sense

Did not we had local elections today.

(05 May 2016, 6:27 am)Michael wrote Did not we had local elections today.

Yep, local elections and police & crime commissioner elections today.  We're postal, so much easier.

(05 May 2016, 11:13 am)Chris wrote Yep, local elections and police & crime commissioner elections today.  We're postal, so much easier.

Cheers, wish i knew earlier!

(05 May 2016, 12:23 pm)Michael wrote Cheers, wish i knew earlier!

Did you not get voting paperwork through the door?
Not much change with the councillors (although a Lib Dem has been elected in Sunderland apparently) and PCC's are as they were.

(06 May 2016, 3:27 pm)Andreos1 wrote Did you not get voting paperwork through the door?
Not much change with the councillors (although a Lib Dem has been elected in Sunderland apparently) and PCC's are as they were.

Don't think so which is a surprise as i thought i would of!.

Plans to force all of England's schools to become academies are being abandoned in a government climbdown.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-36227570


Really happy its getting stopped.

(06 May 2016, 4:05 pm)Michael wrote Plans to force all of England's schools to become academies are being abandoned in a government climbdown.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-36227570


Really happy its getting stopped.

Both my parents work in education as head either head teachers or head of a number of schools
They are thrilled

(06 May 2016, 4:08 pm)NK53 TKT wrote Both my parents work in education as head either head teachers or head of a number of schools
They are thrilled

I bet they are, i know a few people who work in education and they are thrilled with this U-turn.

It was a disgrace anyway, to me it should of never of been proposed, Nicky Morgan should resign.


Is this how you can afford all these holidays?

Saw this earlier. Very pleased.

It is yet another tory u-turn. They're almost going in circles now!

One additional thing that I am pleased about is the end of the free land grab.
Each of these academies would have been given potentially hundreds of thousands of pounds worth of local authority land, given to them for nothing.
Of course what would have stopped them selling off portions in the future?Over the

(06 May 2016, 4:18 pm)Andreos1 wrote Saw this earlier. Very pleased.

It is yet another tory u-turn. They're almost going in circles now!

One additional thing that I am pleased about is the end of the free land grab.
Each of these academies would have been given potentially hundreds of thousands of pounds worth of local authority land, given to them for nothing.
Of course what would have stopped them selling off portions in the future?Over the

Ye, wonder if its to do with the upcoming EU vote.... no doubt it'll come back up again.

(06 May 2016, 4:11 pm)Michael wrote I bet they are, i know a few people who work in education and they are thrilled with this U-turn.

It was a disgrace anyway, to me it should of never of been proposed, Nicky Morgan should resign.


Is this how you can afford all these holidays?

Probably, I don't pay though with me only being 11  
I am just lucky, normally I choose them as well.

As far Nicky Morgan I agree, my parents think only a former teacher should be the education secretary

(06 May 2016, 4:33 pm)NK53 TKT wrote Probably, I don't pay though with me only being 11  
I am just lucky, normally I choose them as well.

As far Nicky Morgan I agree, my parents think only a former teacher should be the education secretary

I agree, said it a long time but its always someone who has money, who gets the job and has no idea!

(06 May 2016, 4:18 pm)Andreos1 wrote Saw this earlier. Very pleased.

It is yet another tory u-turn. They're almost going in circles now!

One additional thing that I am pleased about is the end of the free land grab.
Each of these academies would have been given potentially hundreds of thousands of pounds worth of local authority land, given to them for nothing.
Of course what would have stopped them selling off portions in the future?Over the

Not just the land, but the playing fields too. There's no obligation to keep them as playing fields either...

(06 May 2016, 4:44 pm)Adrian wrote Not just the land, but the playing fields too. There's no obligation to keep them as playing fields either...

There's also the question of access to playing fields as well. When schools become academies there is a tendency to take away historic facility for the wider community to use playing fields for recreation.

My former school used to have playing fields which were open to all to use free of charge outside of school hours. They now have a large fence around them and a no admittance policy.

The academy my partner's son attends has excellent modern sporting facilities. However these are only available to clubs by prior arrangement at a weekend on a fee paying basis. I feel this is wrong, facilities should be made available for all to use. Also the academy is surrounded by high fences and electronic gates. My partner has to buzz the intercom if she wants to visit. It's meant to be a school not a bloody prison.

Charles

(07 May 2016, 8:23 am)Charles41 wrote There's also the question of access to playing fields as well. When schools become academies there is a tendency to take away historic facility for the wider community to use playing fields for recreation.

My former school used to have playing fields which were open to all to use free of charge outside of school hours. They now have a large fence around them and a no admittance policy.

The academy my partner's son attends has excellent modern sporting facilities. However these are only available to clubs by prior arrangement at a weekend on a fee paying basis. I feel this is wrong, facilities should be made available for all to use. Also the academy is surrounded by high fences and electronic gates. My partner has to buzz the intercom if she wants to visit. It's meant to be a school not a bloody prison.

Charles

Most school playing fields (at least the ones in Sunderland) have always been private property, and access to such has always been considered trespass. I recall Sunderland schools having sign posts up about it, and that's going back to the mid-90s?

The majority of schools stepped up their security post Dunblane.

I remember the waist high wooden fences (mine didn't have any), being replaced with the 6ft metal ones with a spike on the top.A

(07 May 2016, 8:23 am)Charles41 wrote There's also the question of access to playing fields as well. When schools become academies there is a tendency to take away historic facility for the wider community to use playing fields for recreation.

My former school used to have playing fields which were open to all to use free of charge outside of school hours. They now have a large fence around them and a no admittance policy.

The academy my partner's son attends has excellent modern sporting facilities. However these are only available to clubs by prior arrangement at a weekend on a fee paying basis. I feel this is wrong, facilities should be made available for all to use. Also the academy is surrounded by high fences and electronic gates. My partner has to buzz the intercom if she wants to visit. It's meant to be a school not a bloody prison.

Charles

Local primary has high fences and intercom. Pretty standard. From my POV, it means that Littl'un can't just take himself for walks. He'd not be able to attend his local school, otherwise. It also means that parents with a grudge to bear can't just march in and that pupils can spend their school day safe from adults in their life who aren't supposed to have any contact with them, for good reason.

Also has the added bonus that the (many) local scrappies have to make the effort to throw stuff over a very high, extremely prickly hedge if they want to fly tip. The field isn't as well protected as the school yards.

(07 May 2016, 7:31 pm)BusLoverMum wrote Local primary has high fences and intercom. Pretty standard. From my POV, it means that Littl'un can't just take himself for walks. He'd not be able to attend his local school, otherwise. It also means that parents with a grudge to bear can't just march in and that pupils can spend their school day safe from adults in their life who aren't supposed to have any contact with them, for good reason.

Also has the added bonus that the (many) local scrappies have to make the effort to throw stuff over a very high, extremely prickly hedge if they want to fly tip. The field isn't as well protected as the school yards.

...and it all makes sense really.

When I was in primary school, we had a huge field attached to the school, with one of those waist height wooden fences. I remember it, as everyone used to sit on it. You were told not to go past the trees at the top, but there'd be nothing stopping you leaving the field at the top, or even worse, someone taking you from it.

As Andreos1 mentioned above, it'll have been around the time of Dunblane, where we upgraded to one of the big metal fences. I recall it being locked during the school day, and only opened again at 3pm.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36242312

Pleased to see progress with this at long last.
It begs the question though - who else was complicit?