Ian Duncan Smith

[Feck]

Since he has decided to divert from the Torry party and blame all the other bastards for what he was happy to claim were his own policies I think it is only fair that he should not be lynched by the neck from a lamppost ........
He should be strung up by his bollocks IF they can find them !

[mistermack]

He's history already.

He was news for a day. Now he's yesterday's news.

Now it's up to the referendum on the EU. He might get his reward if we vote for out.

[pErvinalia]

Has this had any negative affect on the Tories? He was one of the top cunts in the shower of cunts that is the Tories. And he sunk the boot into two of the toppest cunts (Cameron and Osbourne) on his way out. Pretty big party upheaval, I would have thought.

[JimC]

Has this had any negative affect on the Tories? He was one of the top cunts in the shower of cunts that is the Tories. And he sunk the boot into two of the toppest cunts (Cameron and Osbourne) on his way out. Pretty big party upheaval, I would have thought.

Just like in Oz, conservative in-fighting only means anything if there is an alternative that a serious number of people will vote for...

[Rum]

With bit of luck they are going to get into trouble with their ideologically driven Academies policy too. The rest of the UK parties have united against it (even many conservatives in local government) an the teaching unions are threatening to strike.

[Exi5tentialist]

The Tories thrive on conflict. They love to agitate, revolutionize, radicalize, bully, cajole and manipulate. Controversy is their stock in trade. Ultimately the Poll Tax didn't hurt them much for example. They got rid of a leader who had become a embarrassment but they went on to rule for seven more years and then we got Blair: was that so much of a change?

[Rum]

Well I think Blair was a bigger change than people acknowledge these days, but as far as the Tories go right now they can't afford too much conflict because they have a pretty small majority and what with Europe creating factions they could easily find themselves splitting along those lines for the purposes of other policies.

[Brian Peacock]

With bit of luck they are going to get into trouble with their ideologically driven Academies policy too. The rest of the UK parties have united against it (even many conservatives in local government) an the teaching unions are threatening to strike.

A strike might be a handy let off for the Tories if they could harness people's ire at being inconvenienced.

[Rum]

As a rule I don't have a lot of time for teaching unions. In my last job I was on the receiving on of a fair bit of resistance to change, self seeking practices and protectionism - some of which in my view held back standards for children.

However the Academies policy is very bad indeed. I saw the end results in the last couple of years before I retired and they were not good. I would support them if they go on strike over 'enforced' academies.

[pErvinalia]

What's the policy?

[Brian Peacock]

To place the administration of all schools in England and Wales in the hands of the private sector (so-called 'Academy Chains': businesses that bid to pool administration for a number of schools - not necessarily in the same area), remove the role of local authorities in overseeing school provision and place that in the hands of 8 Regional Schools Commissioners (appointed by the government), and dismantle the system which has seen schools run in conjunction with independent school governors elected by parents from the local community (usually parents with children at the school). The spin is that this is necessary to drive up standards, even though the Academy schools are exempt from school inspections and are not obliged to provide performance figures (exam pass rates, attendance, staffing etc). No performance data means that schools looking to join an academy chain have next to nothing on which to base their decision, and yet all schools (from primary to secondary) will be obliged to make such a choice. So while this spin is about 'standards' it's pretty clear to everyone that the policy is about moving schools from the public to the private sector and abandoning education to the free market.

http://www.theguardian.com/education/academies

[pErvinalia]

God conservatives are a pox on society.

[Rum]

To place the administration of all schools in England and Wales in the hands of the private sector (so-called 'Academy Chains': businesses that bid to pool administration for a number of schools - not necessarily in the same area), remove the role of local authorities in overseeing school provision and place that in the hands of 8 Regional Schools Commissioners (appointed by the government), and dismantle the system which has seen schools run in conjunction with independent school governors elected by parents from the local community (usually parents with children at the school). The spin is that this is necessary to drive up standards, even though the Academy schools are exempt from school inspections and are not obliged to provide performance figures (exam pass rates, attendance, staffing etc). No performance data means that schools looking to join an academy chain have next to nothing on which to base their decision, and yet all schools (from primary to secondary) will be obliged to make such a choice. So while this spin is about 'standards' it's pretty clear to everyone that the policy is about moving schools from the public to the private sector and abandoning education to the free market.

http://www.theguardian.com/education/academies

Performance data is reported as it happens (I was involved in spinning off three of my old LA schools into academies and have followed their progress, or otherwise, since then). Other than that Brian is right - though they will also be responsible to central government. They will in fact be centralising the system, which is supposedly contrary to Tory broad strategy.

The new academies do OK to begin with. This is because they get a clean sheet. Failing schools, which were the first lot to be picked on, often have large financial deficits. These are wiped clean. Often a new physical school is built - all shiny and modern. Teacher contracts are torn up and can be renegotiated and unqualified people can be employed as teachers too (not as bad an idea as that may sound at first in my view). The new academies have so far followed a pattern of dumping all their problematic kids - those with behaviour issues and even kids with special needs at times and so their exam results get a boost. This lasts a couple of years and then their standards typically start to fall. Within four years here in my area the two academies were doing worse than the three schools they replaced.