SNP nonsense

[Moulin Yarns]

The day job was to deliver Brexit! The people voted for it!!!

The people of Scotland rejected Independence that should have been the trigger for the SNP to concentrate on the day job.

Wrong. The day job of any government is to govern. Brexit is the sideshow they have chosen to do instead because a minority of the population were conned into voting for it in a referendum that was clearly indicated as being advisory and not legally binding. But don't let that get in the way of your anti snp opinions.

[Slavers]

Wrong. The day job of any government is to govern. Brexit is the sideshow they have chosen to do instead because a minority of the population were conned into voting for it in a referendum that was clearly indicated as being advisory and not legally binding. But don't let that get in the way of your anti snp opinions.

You got it wrong the majority of people voted for Brexit not the minority.

[Ozyhibby]

Let's get into specifics.

What EXACTLY would you like to see them do to improve education?

What EXACTLY would you like to see them do with their time - currently spent putting forward the case for Scottish independence - to improve education levels?

Remember that their position is a strange one. Their raison d'être is that they only think they can do well on subjects such as education to a certain level whilst Scotland is not an independent nation.

FWIW I think they should be doing better on education, even with the powers they have. Anecdotally only, I am often quite appalled at the levels of basic literacy of people emerging from the Scottish education system. I'm talking about people who I have employed, people who I know are talented and hardworking and that with a bit of encouragement and a nudge in the right direction come on leaps and bounds in a very short space of time. Whilst I accept a certain amount of responsibility for the development of my workforce, developing a basic grasp of written and spoken English is not something that I think I should be having to do so much of. We're talking about smart, intelligent and motivated people here whose employment prospects are poorer as a result of being let down by a system.

Dare I say that some of the reforms brought in by Michael Gove down south which have saw standards rise down there?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

You got it wrong the majority of people voted for Brexit not the minority.

Read my post again.

[Smartie]

The day job was to deliver Brexit! The people voted for it!!!

The people of Scotland rejected Independence that should have been the trigger for the SNP to concentrate on the day job.

Even as a remainer I accept the result of the EU referendum. We went into limbo for years because of the lack of a detailed vision by the Leave side and because all of the people who could have delivered Brexit chose to hide when they could have delivered on their vision, if they had actually had one.

Even after all of that, it is impossible to ignore the mandate that Johnson now has to deliver Brexit following the last general election.

After all of that, do you not feel that the SNP have any sort of mandate at all to spend at least a bit of their time advancing the case of independence based on the various Westminster, Holyrood and European elections since the referendum of 2014?

[Moulin Yarns]

This could be the result of a poll on this thread.



https://amp-theguardian-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/feb/21/gordon-brown-scotland-risks-west-most-divided-countries?amp_js_v=a3&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQCKAE%3D#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.goo gle.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com%2***-news%2F2020%2Ffeb%2F21%2Fgordon-brown-scotland-risks-west-most-divided-countries

[Ozyhibby]

This could be the result of a poll on this thread.



https://amp-theguardian-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/feb/21/gordon-brown-scotland-risks-west-most-divided-countries?amp_js_v=a3&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQCKAE%3D#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.goo gle.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com%2***-news%2F2020%2Ffeb%2F21%2Fgordon-brown-scotland-risks-west-most-divided-countries

It’s easy to see why Brown couldn’t survive without Tony Blair. That article is just complete drivel. It’s pretty much him just whining that nobody wants to do what he wants without saying what he wants. In 2014 he jumped into bed with the Tories and now he doesn’t like the consequences.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

You got it wrong the majority of people voted for Brexit not the minority.

OK, I'll repeat what I said.


A minority of the population voted for Brexit

Indeed, a minority of the electorate voted for Brexit.

If you want I would go as far as suggesting that if another advisory referendum were to be held next week then a minority of votes would be cast for Brexit.

[Slavers]

OK, I'll repeat what I said.


A minority of the population voted for Brexit

Indeed, a minority of the electorate voted for Brexit.

If you want I would go as far as suggesting that if another advisory referendum were to be held next week then a minority of votes would be cast for Brexit.

Yet we recently had a general election that seen remain MPs booted out by the voters?

[Peevemor]

Yet we recently had a general election that seen remain MPs booted out by the voters?In Scotland?

[JeMeSouviens]

Yet we recently had a general election that seen remain MPs booted out by the voters?

In total votes:

SNP+Lab+Lib+Green > Tory+Brex

Remain would have won a ref#2

[JeMeSouviens]

Even as a remainer I accept the result of the EU referendum. We went into limbo for years because of the lack of a detailed vision by the Leave side and because all of the people who could have delivered Brexit chose to hide when they could have delivered on their vision, if they had actually had one.

Even after all of that, it is impossible to ignore the mandate that Johnson now has to deliver Brexit following the last general election.

After all of that, do you not feel that the SNP have any sort of mandate at all to spend at least a bit of their time advancing the case of independence based on the various Westminster, Holyrood and European elections since the referendum of 2014?

They didn't just hide. They actively undermined May's government and Brex deal to get into power and then caved on all the substantive issues including the border in the Irish sea that was so unacceptable. Shameless *******s, basically.

[Slavers]

In Scotland?

Scotland did not have a EU membership the UK did.

[Moulin Yarns]

Yet we recently had a general election that seen remain MPs booted out by the voters?

I'll give you that, but it more to do with no effective clear and concise opposition to the tories in England. Which is another positive reason to support an independent Scotland.

[Peevemor]

Scotland did not have a EU membership the UK did.This is a thread about the SNP.

[Slavers]

This is a thread about the SNP.

Well I know I did comment that the SNP should be focusing
On the education system instead of Independence.

[Moulin Yarns]

Well I know I did comment that the SNP should be focusing
On the education system instead of Independence.

It appears that you can't do or think of more than one thing at a time, but thankfully, you are not the Scottish government because they are more than capable of multi tasking, so you can be rest assured that they will be focused on education, the NHS, the environment, social care and maybe even independence.

[Slavers]

It appears that you can't do or think of more than one thing at a time, but thankfully, you are not the Scottish government because they are more than capable of multi tasking, so you can be rest assured that they will be focused on education, the NHS, the environment, social care and maybe even independence.

I don't mean to sound rude but they obviously can't multitask if standards of education are falling at an alarming rate.

[The Modfather]

I don't mean to sound rude but they obviously can't multitask if standards of education are falling at an alarming rate.

It would be a better and more learned debate if you were to actually engage rather than just keep repeating “education”. Smartie asked you some specifics on the previous page about what the education issue is and about solutions. I notice you avoided that post but responded to everyone else.

[Mibbes Aye]

Not read the whole report but there is a rise in passes in some subjects and a drop in others. A mixed bag. The headlines makes good reading for opposition parties and there is definitely room for improvement.

Maybe pupils are just getting thicker? 😉

There is a drop overall, and a drop in English and Maths. Not a good news day for a party that asjed to be judged on education. Especially not when the figures only seem to have been released because of an FOI.

In fact it's not been a good week for the SNP, given they were shamed into backing Lennon's period poverty bill after claiming they couldn't support it. Once all the other parties agreed to support it, they couldn't have changed their tune quick enough.

One fears that the day job is slipping away from their attention. Educational attainment worsening and most of the Scottish population's Health Boards are in special measures due to failing performance. It's not really great, is it?

[Ozyhibby]

There is a drop overall, and a drop in English and Maths. Not a good news day for a party that asjed to be judged on education. Especially not when the figures only seem to have been released because of an FOI.

In fact it's not been a good week for the SNP, given they were shamed into backing Lennon's period poverty bill after claiming they couldn't support it. Once all the other parties agreed to support it, they couldn't have changed their tune quick enough.

One fears that the day job is slipping away from their attention. Educational attainment worsening and most of the Scottish population's Health Boards are in special measures due to failing performance. It's not really great, is it?

I agree that they need to get education sorted. There are solutions there that have proven to work down south that won’t cost money. Only ideology and an unwillingness to upset failing teachers.
On Health I think there needs to be an increase in funding but I don’t see them getting the blame for that not arriving. People know that Westminster control that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[degenerated]

Dare I say that some of the reforms brought in by Michael Gove down south which have saw standards rise down there?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk*seen* :greengrin

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

*seen* :greengrin

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

I was educated here. Probably should have went to one of Gove’s free schools.[emoji6]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mibbes Aye]

I agree that they need to get education sorted. There are solutions there that have proven to work down south that won’t cost money. Only ideology and an unwillingness to upset failing teachers.
On Health I think there needs to be an increase in funding but I don’t see them getting the blame for that not arriving. People know that Westminster control that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hmmn, were you not saying the PISA findings were misleading? :greengrin

On health, as has been said many, many times, the SNP administration have been reluctant to use their income tax powers to any great degree. And the council tax freeze ultimately led to higher Health costs because it ate away at all the non-statutory council spend on services that provided early intervention and prevention, and helped limit unscheduled hospital admissions, or allowed social care to better be able to avoid delayed discharges.

That's nothing to do with Westminster, that is everything to do with short-term tactical politics at Holyrood. Not exactly putting health and education at the forefront whatsoever - as the performance data shows.

[Callum_62]

Must be hard to be a non snp voter though

None of the other countries of the UK are exactly a leading light in health or education

Who do you vote for?

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Frankhfc]

Must be hard to be a non snp voter though

None of the other countries of the UK are exactly a leading light in health or education

Who do you vote for?

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

To be fair, you're argument is completely irrelevant as to what currently occurs without hearing the alternatives from the snp as they're a one policy party.

Would we have the same GDP and fiscal spending numbers after leaving the UK and going independent?

Its important to set out the alternatives as by now the snp must have a fair idea of what leaving the UK would actually mean in terms of GDP and all of the other consequences that would occur.

Its only fair to the Scots that the alternatives are also quoted.

[Callum_62]

To be fair, you're argument is completely irrelevant as to what currently occurs without hearing the alternatives from the snp as they're a one policy party.

Would we have the same GDP and fiscal spending numbers after leaving the UK and going independent?

Its important to set out the alternatives as by now the snp must have a fair idea of what leaving the UK would actually mean in terms of GDP and all of the other consequences that would occur.

Its only fair to the Scots that the alternatives are also quoted.Who mentioned anything about leaving the UK?

I'm talking the status quo.

None of the opposition are exactly dragging voters away with there sterling record in other countries within the UK

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Frankhfc]

Who mentioned anything about leaving the UK?

I'm talking the status quo.

None of the opposition are exactly dragging voters away with there sterling record in other countries within the UK

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

My apologies. You have every right to either praise or condemn the Snp on its record within the confines of the UK budgets and fiscal policies. In my defense its become so commonplace for independence supporters to manufacture discontent in absence of setting out the alternatives.

:aok:

[Mibbes Aye]

Must be hard to be a non snp voter though

None of the other countries of the UK are exactly a leading light in health or education

Who do you vote for?

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

That’s the weakest argument I ever read on here, and maybe reflects something about a Nat viewpoint.

Scotland is failing on health, by the targets that the SNP government set for itself. Pure and simple, that’s all. They weren’t particularly demanding targets in my view and I am happy to debate that point with anyone, but they are consistently failing to meet them.

They are failing, but slightly less failing than the other home nations. That is not a success story. It is like comparing Bertie Auld, Terry Butcher and Colin Calderwood and saying who is the best Hibs manager.

Are you really suggesting we measure how well health services are delivered in Scotland by saying, yes they are failing, but hey, it’s worse in England? How about just taking some responsibility for the fact that services are failing, instead of some petty comparison to England? And as has been pointed out on numerous occasions, social care cuts are two years ahead in England and they impact massively on how the health boards or trusts meet their targets.

I imagine it is worse in Syria too but no one seems to say that Scotland is doing so much better than them. But then, it wouldn’t be the same as saying we were better then England, would it :wink:

[lapsedhibee]

It is like comparing Bertie Auld, Terry Butcher and Colin Calderwood and saying who is the best Hibs manager.

Don't think it is really. To be effective, this remark relies on us knowing that there have been other, actual, better managers, such as Tony Mowbray, Neil Lennon and John Collins. We're not hearing, however, about any other, actual, better-run comparable health services. You would need to list a few of those, that everyone could agree on, before your analogy really worked.

[Callum_62]

That’s the weakest argument I ever read on here, and maybe reflects something about a Nat viewpoint.

Scotland is failing on health, by the targets that the SNP government set for itself. Pure and simple, that’s all. They weren’t particularly demanding targets in my view and I am happy to debate that point with anyone, but they are consistently failing to meet them.

They are failing, but slightly less failing than the other home nations. That is not a success story. It is like comparing Bertie Auld, Terry Butcher and Colin Calderwood and saying who is the best Hibs manager.

Are you really suggesting we measure how well health services are delivered in Scotland by saying, yes they are failing, but hey, it’s worse in England? How about just taking some responsibility for the fact that services are failing, instead of some petty comparison to England? And as has been pointed out on numerous occasions, social care cuts are two years ahead in England and they impact massively on how the health boards or trusts meet their targets.

I imagine it is worse in Syria too but no one seems to say that Scotland is doing so much better than them. But then, it wouldn’t be the same as saying we were better then England, would it :wink:

In which case we end up with a party running the country who's performance elsewhere is worse?

Ofcourse that argument is valid

Yes, the SNP could and should do better - but what driver is there ito install someone else?

Speaking of weak arguments - Syria. Last time I checked we couldn't vote for whomever is now in charge there

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[allmodcons]

That’s the weakest argument I ever read on here, and maybe reflects something about a Nat viewpoint.

Scotland is failing on health, by the targets that the SNP government set for itself. Pure and simple, that’s all. They weren’t particularly demanding targets in my view and I am happy to debate that point with anyone, but they are consistently failing to meet them.

They are failing, but slightly less failing than the other home nations. That is not a success story. It is like comparing Bertie Auld, Terry Butcher and Colin Calderwood and saying who is the best Hibs manager.

Are you really suggesting we measure how well health services are delivered in Scotland by saying, yes they are failing, but hey, it’s worse in England? How about just taking some responsibility for the fact that services are failing, instead of some petty comparison to England? And as has been pointed out on numerous occasions, social care cuts are two years ahead in England and they impact massively on how the health boards or trusts meet their targets.

I imagine it is worse in Syria too but no one seems to say that Scotland is doing so much better than them. But then, it wouldn’t be the same as saying we were better then England, would it :wink:

Your analogy here is a very poor one. Nobody including SNP supporters think everything is perfect within the NHS in Scotland, I suspect the Government know that too.

When has this organisation ever been run perfectly? Realistically, what other countries worldwide have a fair and more effective health service?

You spend a lot of time on here criticising the SNP on their health record and, in fairness to you, point to lots of examples where they are failing but, of course, it's no all bad news is it?

It's easy to be critical all the time but unless you have a viable alternative, what is the point? It's like saying you can do better but I'm sure how!

Give us an example of how any of the the other parties in Scotland are proposing to improve the NHS and how they'd improve it? Give us some examples of countries where the health service operates fairly and more efficiently than in Scotland?

How else can you gauge a Government's performance?

If I get 75% in a Maths exam when everybody else is scoring less am I not doing well despite getting 25% of the exams questions wrong?

If you're looking for perfection in an organisation the size of the NHS good luck to you.

[Ozyhibby]

I don’t think there ever has been a time where people did not think the govt should be doing better and I very much doubt there ever will be. In fact probably 100% of us here probably think they should be doing better at something or other. The problem is than in a democracy we have a choice of parties and we have to choose who we think would be best at running the place, or at least, the least worst at running the place. I haven’t seen a single soul stand up and say on here that we should vote for anyone but the SNP?
Where are the people who say that Jackson Carlaw is the man to take our NHS forward? What about the people who say that Richard Leonard is the man with the solutions for our education system? Willie Rennie?
Who is standing up for these guys and saying it’s time for change?
It’s easy to say that the govt is rubbish all the time but it appears that it’s a lot harder to say what the alternatives are?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

Hmmn, were you not saying the PISA findings were misleading? :greengrin

On health, as has been said many, many times, the SNP administration have been reluctant to use their income tax powers to any great degree. And the council tax freeze ultimately led to higher Health costs because it ate away at all the non-statutory council spend on services that provided early intervention and prevention, and helped limit unscheduled hospital admissions, or allowed social care to better be able to avoid delayed discharges.

That's nothing to do with Westminster, that is everything to do with short-term tactical politics at Holyrood. Not exactly putting health and education at the forefront whatsoever - as the performance data shows.

Not sure I was? I’m a long term critic of the way our schools are run here which is why I took my eldest out of the state system ( an option very few can afford and I know I’m very fortunate). I would prefer schools to have more autonomy and be able to compete with each other for students (I know this wouldn’t really work in rural areas). I prefer the Swedish model where money follows the student in a voucher type system. I have no problem with the academy model they have in England, or with free schools for that matter. I think that schools up here focus far too much on the needs of the teachers and not on the needs of the pupils. The Tories in England have introduced reforms that are working and delivering results. IMO they would be delivering better results if they had left Gove at education. The teacher in England opposed him all the way and he was vilified. But England now has the best education system in the UK.
So surely I should be looking at the Scottish tories? Well no because they are a spineless bunch and are afraid to say they will bring in any of those policies up here because they have become a one issue party, unionism. They are afraid of alienating any of their core vote. We now have a situation in Scotland where the Tories are against testing where they are for it everywhere else. Mental.
Making changes in education is hard. Teachers will fight it all the way. The media will also row in behind the teachers. I’ve seen panorama programmes about failing academies but never about local authority controlled schools? I’ve never seen a documentary about how well some free schools are doing in very deprived areas? How they are sending more kids to uni than the national average while more than half their kids are in free school meals.
So yes, I think education could be better run and yes there is a model we could copy but amazingly the party who are doing it elsewhere won’t do it here.
So I guess I’ll just have to vote SNP again because I think they are the most competent of the 4 parties in Scotland.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hibrandenburg]

I imagine it is worse in Syria too but no one seems to say that Scotland is doing so much better than them. But then, it wouldn’t be the same as saying we were better then England, would it :wink:

It's perfectly acceptable to compare apples with apples but you're comparing orchards with locust ravaged farmland here. I can only presume you've been testing your liver function when you thought up this little gem MA.

[Callum_62]

I think that schools up here focus far too much on the needs of the teachers and not on the needs of the pupils.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Im not sure what gives you that idea. I'm married to a teacher and Im very surprised at how poorly they are treated

I naively assumed the council would be 100 percent on it and by the book, look after there professional staff really well etc

Its not like that at all

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Hibrandenburg]

Your analogy here is a very poor one. Nobody including SNP supporters think everything is perfect within the NHS in Scotland, I suspect the Government know that too.

When has this organisation ever been run perfectly? Realistically, what other countries worldwide have a fair and more effective health service?

You spend a lot of time on here criticising the SNP on their health record and, in fairness to you, point to lots of examples where they are failing but, of course, it's no all bad news is it?

It's easy to be critical all the time but unless you have a viable alternative, what is the point? It's like saying you can do better but I'm sure how!

Give us an example of how any of the the other parties in Scotland are proposing to improve the NHS and how they'd improve it? Give us some examples of countries where the health service operates fairly and more efficiently than in Scotland?

How else can you gauge a Government's performance?

If I get 75% in a Maths exam when everybody else is scoring less am I not doing well despite getting 25% of the exams questions wrong?

If you're looking for perfection in an organisation the size of the NHS good luck to you.

What are the alternatives? The basis for the discussion on this thread is basically about Independence. That puts only 3 options regarding health in Scotland on the table.

1. The status quo where Scotland runs its health service with funds given to the Scottish government by the UK. That's what we have and Scotland outperforms the rest of the UK at present.

2. An independent Scotland where Scotland decides what funding and philosophy it uses to provide a health service for the population, having already proven it can provide a better service than the rest of the UK under the current system.

3. The NHS is no longer a devolved power and is incorporated into a UK wide NHS. Not unthinkable in the current political climate.

I know which one of those options I'd prefer, which one I could live with and which one is an absolute no go.

[Mibbes Aye]

Don't think it is really. To be effective, this remark relies on us knowing that there have been other, actual, better managers, such as Tony Mowbray, Neil Lennon and John Collins. We're not hearing, however, about any other, actual, better-run comparable health services. You would need to list a few of those, that everyone could agree on, before your analogy really worked.

You have become quite the defender of the SNP in recent times, where were you before? :greengrin

My analogy is fine, thank you very much. The point made by Nats is that, hey, it's great, look how much better we are doing than Wales or England. But hey, let's not forget that we are doing far worse than we are meant to be doing, and they are just tanking even worse. Hence, it is a bit like defending 'really bad' by saying it isn't 'extremely bad' or 'criminally bad'. And hence the comparison to Messrs Auld, Calderwood and Butcher.

Scottish health services are failing by the standards set by the SNP government, on their watch, for a good many years now. That is all.

If you want to do comparisons with other nations, feel free. You will find it a struggle because comparing the four UK health services is problematic, even before you start looking abroad, where there are different funding systems, different delivery systems and quite frankly, different cultures and expectations. But do feel free - it gets a bit tiresome here reading Nat posters saying "Oooh, we are better than England". Maybe them fronting up and saying "Oooh, we are better than Sweden or Japan" and demonstrating why, would be refreshing.

[Mibbes Aye]

In which case we end up with a party running the country who's performance elsewhere is worse?

Ofcourse that argument is valid

Yes, the SNP could and should do better - but what driver is there ito install someone else?

Speaking of weak arguments - Syria. Last time I checked we couldn't vote for whomever is now in charge there

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

Health is a devolved matter. Decision-making in Scotland is made in Scotland. I'm just amused by how Nats choose to portray performance against England, when the systems are actually quite different and England is two years in front on cuts to local government. It is almost like they don't like England or want to portray England negatively.......

I'm sure that's not the case because it would just smack of bitterness, grievance and resentment

[Mibbes Aye]

Your analogy here is a very poor one. Nobody including SNP supporters think everything is perfect within the NHS in Scotland, I suspect the Government know that too.

When has this organisation ever been run perfectly? Realistically, what other countries worldwide have a fair and more effective health service?

You spend a lot of time on here criticising the SNP on their health record and, in fairness to you, point to lots of examples where they are failing but, of course, it's no all bad news is it?

It's easy to be critical all the time but unless you have a viable alternative, what is the point? It's like saying you can do better but I'm sure how!

Give us an example of how any of the the other parties in Scotland are proposing to improve the NHS and how they'd improve it? Give us some examples of countries where the health service operates fairly and more efficiently than in Scotland?

How else can you gauge a Government's performance?

If I get 75% in a Maths exam when everybody else is scoring less am I not doing well despite getting 25% of the exams questions wrong?

If you're looking for perfection in an organisation the size of the NHS good luck to you.

You are trying to put a lot of words in my mouth there, things I never suggested. Shame on you.

My analogy is fine, thank you. If you can make a decent refutal then I will take it on board.

I am not sure why you are asking me for other parties' proposals on health, you are as capable as me of checking out what the Lib Dems or whoever want to do. I know my own thoughts and will put them in a post replying to someone else who quoted me. Not saying I am right or wrong, but I am happy to say what I think should happen, because you are right, it is easy to criticise, without offering ideas.

But to be honest, in a democracry, I suspect we should be able to criticise without feeling required to say how it should be fixed. But those of us who have ideas for fixing it probably have a responsibility to make their case.

And my word, there is no small amount of criticism for how this government is managing health services.

[Mibbes Aye]

It's perfectly acceptable to compare apples with apples but you're comparing orchards with locust ravaged farmland here. I can only presume you've been testing your liver function when you thought up this little gem MA.

I'm sure that felt witty when you sent it, but you aren't really offering any reasoned argument against me, just a petty jibe. As I say, I am sure you thought it humorous :wink:

[Mibbes Aye]

What are the alternatives? The basis for the discussion on this thread is basically about Independence. That puts only 3 options regarding health in Scotland on the table.

1. The status quo where Scotland runs its health service with funds given to the Scottish government by the UK. That's what we have and Scotland outperforms the rest of the UK at present.

2. An independent Scotland where Scotland decides what funding and philosophy it uses to provide a health service for the population, having already proven it can provide a better service than the rest of the UK under the current system.

3. The NHS is no longer a devolved power and is incorporated into a UK wide NHS. Not unthinkable in the current political climate.

I know which one of those options I'd prefer, which one I could live with and which one is an absolute no go.

There was a sort of indirect challenge to me in AMC's post about what could be done differently.

As it stands, most of the Scottish population live in a Health Board where there are special measures in place - that means there are failures, often sytemic and significant failures. Often it means there have been patient deaths that could and should have been prevented. A number of Health Boards are unable to balance their budget and have to be bailed out every financial year by Scottish Government. All Health Boards are failing to meet their prescribed targets for treatment time, waiting times etc etc. And these targets aren' exactly stretching - I think if you surveyed Joe Public they wouldn't say the targets were that strict. But they aren't being met. Again and again and again and again.

I would abolish territorial Health Boards. Move all the acute hospitals - RIE, St John's, BGH, PRI etc directly under the control of Scottish Government and ensure civil servants had oversight. Every other aspect of the Health Boards (essentially anything that doesn't occur in bright, shiny hospitals - like district nurses, community psychiatric nurses etc etc) gets disaggregated to the integration authorities, which are basically partnerships between health services and social work, based on local authority areas. The integration legislation in 2016 was meant to achieve this but it hasn't.

In practice this means dismantling the NHS in Scotland as we know it. NHS staff on the whole will hate the idea, at least to begin with. But the board system is not working for Scotland's population.

I've posted before about why Holyrood doesn't work for Scotland and why a more federalist and regionalist model would. This might sit a little contradictory to that but I have always believed in pragmatism over dogma, and for health I think this is a better way forward.

[Ozyhibby]

There was a sort of indirect challenge to me in AMC's post about what could be done differently.

As it stands, most of the Scottish population live in a Health Board where there are special measures in place - that means there are failures, often sytemic and significant failures. Often it means there have been patient deaths that could and should have been prevented. A number of Health Boards are unable to balance their budget and have to be bailed out every financial year by Scottish Government. All Health Boards are failing to meet their prescribed targets for treatment time, waiting times etc etc. And these targets aren' exactly stretching - I think if you surveyed Joe Public they wouldn't say the targets were that strict. But they aren't being met. Again and again and again and again.

I would abolish territorial Health Boards. Move all the acute hospitals - RIE, St John's, BGH, PRI etc directly under the control of Scottish Government and ensure civil servants had oversight. Every other aspect of the Health Boards (essentially anything that doesn't occur in bright, shiny hospitals - like district nurses, community psychiatric nurses etc etc) gets disaggregated to the integration authorities, which are basically partnerships between health services and social work, based on local authority areas. The integration legislation in 2016 was meant to achieve this but it hasn't.

In practice this means dismantling the NHS in Scotland as we know it. NHS staff on the whole will hate the idea, at least to begin with. But the board system is not working for Scotland's population.

I've posted before about why Holyrood doesn't work for Scotland and why a more federalist and regionalist model would. This might sit a little contradictory to that but I have always believed in pragmatism over dogma, and for health I think this is a better way forward.

NHS staff hating the idea is crucial. What politician of any party wants to go up against Nurses and Doctors?
I agree that there should definitely be scope for reform in the NHS. Any organisation that size would be the same. But there is little chance of it happening when they can’t even charge for use of a car park without there being a full throated campaign against from NHS staff.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CloudSquall]

Angus Robertson and Joanna Cherry going head to head for the SNP nomination for Edinburgh Central's Holyrood seat, Ruth Davidson's current seat.

Quite a surprise to see them going for the same seat, also interesting to see what the dynamic will be within the SNP at Holyrood if Cherry eventually gets elected, many see her as the next leader.

[Mibbes Aye]

NHS staff hating the idea is crucial. What politician of any party wants to go up against Nurses and Doctors?
I agree that there should definitely be scope for reform in the NHS. Any organisation that size would be the same. But there is little chance of it happening when they can’t even charge for use of a car park without there being a full throated campaign against from NHS staff.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No leadership ever has had the balls to challenge GPs. We only got the NHS because they were guaranteed their private contractor status.


You made a thoughtful post on education previously. Not responded but will try to, making dinner for extended family just now

[Cataplana]

NHS staff hating the idea is crucial. What politician of any party wants to go up against Nurses and Doctors?
I agree that there should definitely be scope for reform in the NHS. Any organisation that size would be the same. But there is little chance of it happening when they can’t even charge for use of a car park without there being a full throated campaign against from NHS staff.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As far as parking goes, the answer is simple. There is never any difficulty finding a space outside office hours, or at the weekend . Make parking free for clinical staff only.

Secondly, ask the public to play their part. Organise family visits so that 15 people don't turn up at the same time. Frees up parking spaces, and reduces chaos on the wards.

[lapsedhibee]

If you want to do comparisons with other nations, feel free. You will find it a struggle because comparing the four UK health services is problematic, even before you start looking abroad, where there are different funding systems, different delivery systems and quite frankly, different cultures and expectations. But do feel free - it gets a bit tiresome here reading Nat posters saying "Oooh, we are better than England". Maybe them fronting up and saying "Oooh, we are better than Sweden or Japan" and demonstrating why, would be refreshing.

You have become quite the defender of the SNP in recent times, where were you before? :greengrin


Why would you say that comparisons between the 4 UK nations is problematic, and then suggest making comparisons with Sweden or Japan? :tsk tsk:

I'm not that keen on the SNP but the ****show that's developed dan sarf since mid-June 2016 calls for summin to change, and I'm not sure that the populace is ready for any redrawing of administrative boundaries as radical as you would like to see ...

[Mibbes Aye]

Why would you say that comparisons between the 4 UK nations is problematic, and then suggest making comparisons with Sweden or Japan? :tsk tsk:

I'm not that keen on the SNP but the ****show that's developed dan sarf since mid-June 2016 calls for summin to change, and I'm not sure that the populace is ready for any redrawing of administrative boundaries as radical as you would like to see ...

So you are not really offering anything. Keep voting, caller.

[Andy Bee]

I'm genuinely interested here, which party will you vote for in the next election MA? You frequently run down the SNP on their running of the NHS and rightly so (I'm posting as someone who had a close relative in Braemore Care Home recently, now comfortable in an alternative placement), they aint exactly setting the heather alight IMO but who do you vote for? For the radical change you mentioned earlier in this thread it would only happen with independence so who would you vote for?

[lapsedhibee]

So you are not really offering anything. Keep voting, caller.
But you're not really offering anything that will actually happen, are you? :dunno:

[Cataplana]

I'm genuinely interested here, which party will you vote for in the next election MA? You frequently run down the SNP on their running of the NHS and rightly so (I'm posting as someone who had a close relative in Braemore Care Home recently, now comfortable in an alternative placement), they aint exactly setting the heather alight IMO but who do you vote for? For the radical change you mentioned earlier in this thread it would only happen with independence so who would you vote for?

Do you mean Drumbrae Care Home? It was run by City of Edinburgh Council, not the NHS.

[SHODAN]

Angus Robertson and Joanna Cherry going head to head for the SNP nomination for Edinburgh Central's Holyrood seat, Ruth Davidson's current seat.

Quite a surprise to see them going for the same seat, also interesting to see what the dynamic will be within the SNP at Holyrood if Cherry eventually gets elected, many see her as the next leader.

Cherry is clearly going for next leader.

[Ozyhibby]

Cherry is clearly going for next leader.

That’s one of the reasons the SNP are strong. Since 1999 they have been sending their best talent to Holyrood rather than Westminster. The other parties politicians saw it as a lesser Parliament than Westminster.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hibrandenburg]

I'm sure that felt witty when you sent it, but you aren't really offering any reasoned argument against me, just a petty jibe. As I say, I am sure you thought it humorous :wink:

My petty jibe was aimed at your petty jibe where you try and insinuate that comparisons between the Scottish NHS and the English NHS are somehow based on xenophobic oneupmanship. The comparison is legitimate because both systems are closely linked and have the same origin, but you know that, even if you doth protest too much, methinks.

[Andy Bee]

Do you mean Drumbrae Care Home? It was run by City of Edinburgh Council, not the NHS.

Apologies I did mean Drumbrae, I'm getting care homes mixed up with letting agents :greengrin and I know it was run by the council but it's all the same to me, it's just another let down in health in this country.

[Cataplana]

Apologies I did mean Drumbrae, I'm getting care homes mixed up with letting agents :greengrin and I know it was run by the council but it's all the same to me, it's just another let down in health in this country.

Sorry to hear of your relatives experience. Not being arsey but the home wasn't a health facility, but a social care one.

It highlights the stupidity of the Social Work department thinking they can do jobs they are not suited for.

[Andy Bee]

Sorry to hear of your relatives experience. Not being arsey but the home wasn't a health facility, but a social care one.

It highlights the stupidity of the Social Work department thinking they can do jobs they are not suited for.


And there lies the problem, I view it as a health facility and personally think it should be. The fact that these places can be setup when their sole motivation is making profit doesn't sit right with me, you shouldn't be profiting on the care of our elderly, next they'll be selling franchising opportunities in the same way as Mcdonald's or KFC if they don't already. Anyway that's for another thread.

[Cataplana]

And there lies the problem, I view it as a health facility and personally think it should be. The fact that these places can be setup when their sole motivation is making profit doesn't sit right with me, you shouldn't be profiting on the care of our elderly, next they'll be selling franchising opportunities in the same way as Mcdonald's or KFC if they don't already. Anyway that's for another thread.

I don't think a council run facility would be set up to make profit. My point was that people with no health care experience shouldn't be running such a place, and it's unfair to criticise the NHS for something that isn't their fault.

From my experience, you'll get the best level of care if you are in an NHS facility. Like you say, the role of the private sector is dubious, they cherry pick patients/clients and are allowed to discharge them if they become too much work.

It really needs some joined up thinking.

[RyeSloan]

Apologies I did mean Drumbrae, I'm getting care homes mixed up with letting agents :greengrin and I know it was run by the council but it's all the same to me, it's just another let down in health in this country.

Just had a quick browse of the care inspectorate report in 2018. That was about as damning a report that could be produced I think.

Then I see a headline from this year that suggests it’s been threatened with closure due to continued failings. So in other words the council did zip to implement the required changes...changes that were all marked against the care requirements.

Still it’s reassuring that years after the initial report this was the comment from the powers that be:

A spokeswoman for the Edinburgh Health and Social Care Partnership (HPSC), which combines NHS Lothian's community health services and City of Edinburgh Council's health and social care provision, said: "We take the care, safety and support of our care home residents very seriously”

So seriously it seems that years can go by and the poor folk in there have still to receive the care they need.

I’m glad you have got something else sorted after reading that!

[allmodcons]

Health is a devolved matter. Decision-making in Scotland is made in Scotland. I'm just amused by how Nats choose to portray performance against England, when the systems are actually quite different and England is two years in front on cuts to local government. It is almost like they don't like England or want to portray England negatively.......

I'm sure that's not the case because it would just smack of bitterness, grievance and resentment

You complain about petty jibes by other posters but appear quite happy to indulge when it suits you. Been here before and have to say it's not at all surprising to see you attempt to link support for the SNP with xenophobia or anti Englishness. To be frank, it's rather tiresome. Would be like me continually calling you a quisling because you don't support Independence.

I really don't see what the problem is in drawing comparisons with the English or Welsh NHS. We have the Conservatives and Labour at Holyrood complaining about how the SNP Government are running the NHS so I think it fair to ask them what their respective parties are doing in England and Wales with the NHS in these countries there that is working so well!

It's got nothing to do with disliking England or Wales and, to be frank, your comments regarding bitterness, grievance and resentment, whilst predictable, are piss poor.



You are trying to put a lot of words in my mouth there, things I never suggested. Shame on you.

My analogy is fine, thank you. If you can make a decent refutal then I will take it on board.

I am not sure why you are asking me for other parties' proposals on health, you are as capable as me of checking out what the Lib Dems or whoever want to do. I know my own thoughts and will put them in a post replying to someone else who quoted me. Not saying I am right or wrong, but I am happy to say what I think should happen, because you are right, it is easy to criticise, without offering ideas.

But to be honest, in a democracry, I suspect we should be able to criticise without feeling required to say how it should be fixed. But those of us who have ideas for fixing it probably have a responsibility to make their case.

And my word, there is no small amount of criticism for how this government is managing health services.

As if! No shame on my part for challenging your position on the NHS under the SNP.

Your analogy is poor because the vast majority of NHS users (i.e. - 83% of respondents) are happy with the service they receive. In basic terms nothing like the majority of Hibs fans were happy with Auld, Calderwood or Butcher. Just because you don't agree with the way the SNP Government is running the NHS doesn't mean everybody else does too. The majority appear to think they are doing a decent job in difficult circumstances. There does not appear to be any acceptance on your part that running the NHS is extremely difficult and with an ageing population is harder now than it has ever been before.

I agree you should have the right to criticise. I am not having a go at you as an individual but do find it hard to swallow when opposition parties who are in Government elsewhere in the UK and making harder work of running the NHS in England and Wales than this SNP Government is in Scotland criticise without having any answers themselves.

[Mibbes Aye]

You complain about petty jibes by other posters but appear quite happy to indulge when it suits you. Been here before and have to say it's not at all surprising to see you attempt to link support for the SNP with xenophobia or anti Englishness. To be frank, it's rather tiresome. Would be like me continually calling you a quisling because you don't support Independence.

I really don't see what the problem is in drawing comparisons with the English or Welsh NHS. We have the Conservatives and Labour at Holyrood complaining about how the SNP Government are running the NHS so I think it fair to ask them what their respective parties are doing in England and Wales with the NHS in these countries there that is working so well!

It's got nothing to do with disliking England or Wales and, to be frank, your comments regarding bitterness, grievance and resentment, whilst predictable, are piss poor.




As if! No shame on my part for challenging your position on the NHS under the SNP.

Your analogy is poor because the vast majority of NHS users (i.e. - 83% of respondents) are happy with the service they receive. In basic terms nothing like the majority of Hibs fans were happy with Auld, Calderwood or Butcher. Just because you don't agree with the way the SNP Government is running the NHS doesn't mean everybody else does too. The majority appear to think they are doing a decent job in difficult circumstances. There does not appear to be any acceptance on your part that running the NHS is extremely difficult and with an ageing population is harder now than it has ever been before.

I agree you should have the right to criticise. I am not having a go at you as an individual but do find it hard to swallow when opposition parties who are in Government elsewhere in the UK and making harder work of running the NHS in England and Wales than this SNP Government is in Scotland criticise without having any answers themselves.

The SNP is failing on health by targets it set for itself and enshrined in law. That’s all that needs said really.

And I will quite happily call out posters who make snidey comparisons to English performance, while not acknowledging that Scotland is failing, and in your own words, not having any answers themselves.

[greenlex]

The SNP is failing on health by targets it set for itself and enshrined in law. That’s all that needs said really.

And I will quite happily call out posters who make snidey comparisons to English performance, while not acknowledging that Scotland is failing, and in your own words, not having any answers themselves.
It’s easy fixed. Lower the targets to achievable ones. That make you happy?

[Moulin Yarns]

It’s easy fixed. Lower the targets to achievable ones. That make you happy?

Can't do that, it's an English thing 😉

[Mibbes Aye]

It’s easy fixed. Lower the targets to achievable ones. That make you happy?

Is that not completely missing the point?

The targets were set as the benchmark the government thought we should be achieving, in order to deliver a health service that worked for the Scottish population.

Lowering the targets says that either the government was wrong to set them in law in the first place, or it is failing to ensure the targets are being met.

Either way, a bit of honesty with the public would go a long way. Instead we have most health boards in special measures, a number of health boards unable to balance their books, almost all health boards missing their key targets.

Lowering the targets? Can you tell me why they should be lowered, what would be an acceptable level, and what you would tell the hundreds of thousands of people who had to wait longer for treatment than they are already waiting for?

[Cataplana]

Is that not completely missing the point?

The targets were set as the benchmark the government thought we should be achieving, in order to deliver a health service that worked for the Scottish population.

Lowering the targets says that either the government was wrong to set them in law in the first place, or it is failing to ensure the targets are being met.

Either way, a bit of honesty with the public would go a long way. Instead we have most health boards in special measures, a number of health boards unable to balance their books, almost all health boards missing their key targets.

Lowering the targets? Can you tell me why they should be lowered, what would be an acceptable level, and what you would tell the hundreds of thousands of people who had to wait longer for treatment than they are already waiting for?

The amount of bullying and compromising patient outcomes that happens because of these targets is maybe a good enough reason to scrap them.

[greenlex]

Is that not completely missing the point?

The targets were set as the benchmark the government thought we should be achieving, in order to deliver a health service that worked for the Scottish population.

Lowering the targets says that either the government was wrong to set them in law in the first place, or it is failing to ensure the targets are being met.

Either way, a bit of honesty with the public would go a long way. Instead we have most health boards in special measures, a number of health boards unable to balance their books, almost all health boards missing their key targets.

Lowering the targets? Can you tell me why they should be lowered, what would be an acceptable level, and what you would tell the hundreds of thousands of people who had to wait longer for treatment than they are already waiting for?
You said all that needs said is they are missing their targets. Announce they got it wrong as the targets are unachievable on current budgets. The choice is up the budgets or at very least maintain them and lower the targets. Bear in mind 83 % are happy with current provision. Damned if they do and damned if they don’t. NHS as always a political football. Government opponents trotting out missed targets when perhaps the targets are too high is stupid IMO. I’m no government fan but I’m a big fan if the NHS by the way. I don’t have the answers to your questions but instead of kicking that football around for political gain prefer to shine the light on the positive comparisons.

[Mibbes Aye]

The amount of bullying and compromising patient outcomes that happens because of these targets is maybe a good enough reason to scrap them.

NHS has never got its head around qualitative outcomes rather than quantitative outcomes. That generates toxic cultures, like you say, which lead to bullying within boards.

[Mibbes Aye]

You said all that needs said is they are missing their targets. Announce they got it wrong as the targets are unachievable on current budgets. The choice is up the budgets or at very least maintain them and lower the targets. Bear in mind 83 % are happy with current provision. Damned if they do and damned if they don’t. NHS as always a political football. Government opponents trotting out missed targets when perhaps the targets are too high is stupid IMO. I’m no government fan but I’m a big fan if the NHS by the way. I don’t have the answers to your questions but instead of kicking that football around for political gain prefer to shine the light on the positive comparisons.

I think they don’t need to change targets. From memory, they are respectable and probably fair and relevant. And actually I don’t think it needs increased funding as an instant response. While it is clear the system is failing and while it is clear there are pressures that won’t go away, in itself it doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be trying to achieve what we want to achieve, within the money available.

The NHS is a consuming beast. We could pour millions more in and bring the 18-week treatment time target. (that isn’t being met anyway) down to 14 weeks or 10 weeks. When does it stop? The reality is that the expectation of the population far exceeds the capacity of the system.

It isn’t really a football, it is people’s lives, but those in government, on all sides, skirt the issue.

[G B Young]

That’s one of the reasons the SNP are strong. Since 1999 they have been sending their best talent to Holyrood rather than Westminster. The other parties politicians saw it as a lesser Parliament than Westminster.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The late Donald Dewar was a very high profile Labour figure when he became the inaugural First Minister of Scotland, but yes there's been a steady decline in the calibre of Holyrood Labour leaders since then, to the point where I'd be surprised if the average Scottish voter could tell you who Scottish Labour's current leader is. Ditto the other opposition parties. As I've said numerous times, I felt the only one who came across as personable and savvy enough to loosen the SNP stranglehold was Ruth Davidson.

Holyrood. as a devolved parliament, will never really function the way it was intended while a stifling, UK-wide issue like independence remains front and centre.

[Mibbes Aye]

The late Donald Dewar was a very high profile Labour figure when he became the inaugural First Minister of Scotland, but yes there's been a steady decline in the calibre of Holyrood Labour leaders since then, to the point where I'd be surprised if the average Scottish voter could tell you who Scottish Labour's current leader is. Ditto the other opposition parties. As I've said numerous times, I felt the only one who came across as personable and savvy enough to loosen the SNP stranglehold was Ruth Davidson.

Holyrood. as a devolved parliament, will never really function the way it was intended while a stifling, UK-wide issue like independence remains front and centre.

I would argue that Annabel Goldie always had the runaround of Salmond.

Don’t like either of their beliefs and politics but she seemed to show him up frequently.

[Cataplana]

NHS has never got its head around qualitative outcomes rather than quantitative outcomes. That generates toxic cultures, like you say, which lead to bullying within boards.

The same thing probably applies in other environments. All it takes is a bean counter to demand that costs do not exceed a certain figure.

[Mibbes Aye]

The late Donald Dewar was a very high profile Labour figure when he became the inaugural First Minister of Scotland, but yes there's been a steady decline in the calibre of Holyrood Labour leaders since then, to the point where I'd be surprised if the average Scottish voter could tell you who Scottish Labour's current leader is. Ditto the other opposition parties. As I've said numerous times, I felt the only one who came across as personable and savvy enough to loosen the SNP stranglehold was Ruth Davidson.

Holyrood. as a devolved parliament, will never really function the way it was intended while a stifling, UK-wide issue like independence remains front and centre.

I would argue that Annabel Goldie always had the runaround of Salmond.

Don’t like either of their beliefs and politics but she seemed to show him up frequently.

[Ozyhibby]

I would argue that Annabel Goldie always had the runaround of Salmond.

Don’t like either of their beliefs and politics but she seemed to show him up frequently.

Hague had Tony Blair’s number in the commons as well but couldn’t lay a glove on him anywhere else.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CloudSquall]

I would argue that Annabel Goldie always had the runaround of Salmond.


Annabel was decent and Salmond defintely respected her but to say she always had the runaround of Salmond is revisionism that would embarass Pyongyang.

[Ozyhibby]

I think they don’t need to change targets. From memory, they are respectable and probably fair and relevant. And actually I don’t think it needs increased funding as an instant response. While it is clear the system is failing and while it is clear there are pressures that won’t go away, in itself it doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be trying to achieve what we want to achieve, within the money available.

The NHS is a consuming beast. We could pour millions more in and bring the 18-week treatment time target. (that isn’t being met anyway) down to 14 weeks or 10 weeks. When does it stop? The reality is that the expectation of the population far exceeds the capacity of the system.

It isn’t really a football, it is people’s lives, but those in government, on all sides, skirt the issue.

Waiting 18 weeks on treatment is mental. I can’t think of any other part of the economy where I would wait 18 weeks on anything? If I want to buy something then I can usually get it within a week or two. This is where I would let private providers in to the system. If I need a hip operation and the NHS has to pay for it then they should be able to sub contract that out to whoever can do the work as quick as it needs done.
Massive waiting times only ever happen in state monopolies. Before they privatised opticians it was the same, you had to wait weeks on appointments to be given to you, no matter how inconvenient the time, then you waited weeks on your standard issue NHS spec arriving. Now if you phone up an optician, they ask you when you would like to come in and they have your specs within two days.
The NHS should just be the purchaser of services and private companies should be in competing for our custom.
Never happen though. We’ll continue waiting months like a Russian farmer waiting on his new tractor arriving in the old USSR.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[greenlex]

Waiting 18 weeks on treatment is mental. I can’t think of any other part of the economy where I would wait 18 weeks on anything? If I want to buy something then I can usually get it within a week or two. This is where I would let private providers in to the system. If I need a hip operation and the NHS has to pay for it then they should be able to sub contract that out to whoever can do the work as quick as it needs done.
Massive waiting times only ever happen in state monopolies. Before they privatised opticians it was the same, you had to wait weeks on appointments to be given to you, no matter how inconvenient the time, then you waited weeks on your standard issue NHS spec arriving. Now if you phone up an optician, they ask you when you would like to come in and they have your specs within two days.
The NHS should just be the purchaser of services and private companies should be in competing for our custom.
Never happen though. We’ll continue waiting months like a Russian farmer waiting on his new tractor arriving in the old USSR.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Your first paragraph happens at the moment. Has done for years.

[Moulin Yarns]

Your first paragraph happens at the moment. Has done for years.

Just as well the 18 week referral is for non urgent treatment like ingrown toenails. Might be uncomfortable or inconvenient but not life threatening.

More serious conditions such as diagnosed cancer treatment is within 31 days. And guess what, the targets are being met across SNHS.

[Ozyhibby]

Just as well the 18 week referral is for non urgent treatment like ingrown toenails. Might be uncomfortable or inconvenient but not life threatening.

More serious conditions such as diagnosed cancer treatment is within 31 days. And guess what, the targets are being met across SNHS.

Even more reason to sub contract them out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[greenlex]

Even more reason to sub contract them out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Even if it’s two or three times the cost of waiting more than the targeted time?

[RyeSloan]

Waiting 18 weeks on treatment is mental. I can’t think of any other part of the economy where I would wait 18 weeks on anything? If I want to buy something then I can usually get it within a week or two. This is where I would let private providers in to the system. If I need a hip operation and the NHS has to pay for it then they should be able to sub contract that out to whoever can do the work as quick as it needs done.
Massive waiting times only ever happen in state monopolies. Before they privatised opticians it was the same, you had to wait weeks on appointments to be given to you, no matter how inconvenient the time, then you waited weeks on your standard issue NHS spec arriving. Now if you phone up an optician, they ask you when you would like to come in and they have your specs within two days.
The NHS should just be the purchaser of services and private companies should be in competing for our custom.
Never happen though. We’ll continue waiting months like a Russian farmer waiting on his new tractor arriving in the old USSR.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There is many insurance style health services around the world that work like that. The Europeans tend to have a blend led approach, Germany I think is one such example.

But in the simplest interpretation of your suggestion the providers would need to make a profit on the provision of said services.

Even if that actually proved cheaper and more effective in the long run you are not going to be able to persuade many very easily that ‘the privatisation’ of the NHS’ in the UK is a good idea...the last election and the many many comments on here to that effect shows you that!

[Ozyhibby]

There is many insurance style health services around the world that work like that. The Europeans tend to have a blend led approach, Germany I think is one such example.

But in the simplest interpretation of your suggestion the providers would need to make a profit on the provision of said services.

Even if that actually proved cheaper and more effective in the long run you are not going to be able to persuade many very easily that ‘the privatisation’ of the NHS’ in the UK is a good idea...the last election and the many many comments on here to that effect shows you that!

I absolutely know it’s a non starter. The health unions are very well organised. Even though it would not be privatisation it would be totally portrayed as such.
There are thousands of profitable companies who provide services to the NHS but the minute it comes to employing doctors and nurses people lose it.
It’s a shame that patients interests can’t be put before employee’s interests.
The NHS has been built up as the best in the world but actually performs worse than most other OECD countries. And we just accept it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Frankhfc]

I absolutely know it’s a non starter. The health unions are very well organised. Even though it would not be privatisation it would be totally portrayed as such.
There are thousands of profitable companies who provide services to the NHS but the minute it comes to employing doctors and nurses people lose it.
It’s a shame that patients interests can’t be put before employee’s interests.
The NHS has been built up as the best in the world but actually performs worse than most other OECD countries. And we just accept it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You sound like a Blairite. Tory lite.

[The Modfather]

You sound like a Blairite. Tory lite.

What a constructive reply to add to the debate....

[JeMeSouviens]

There is many insurance style health services around the world that work like that. The Europeans tend to have a blend led approach, Germany I think is one such example.

But in the simplest interpretation of your suggestion the providers would need to make a profit on the provision of said services.

Even if that actually proved cheaper and more effective in the long run you are not going to be able to persuade many very easily that ‘the privatisation’ of the NHS’ in the UK is a good idea...the last election and the many many comments on here to that effect shows you that!

Could it be done with not-for-profit enterprises? I think a lot of people have a gut moral squeamishness at people making a profit out of others' misfortunes and that's where the politics gets difficult.

[Ozyhibby]

Could it be done with not-for-profit enterprises? I think a lot of people have a gut moral squeamishness at people making a profit out of others' misfortunes and that's where the politics gets difficult.

That squeamishness is crazy. We have private funeral directors and nobody bats an eyelid. If I’m sick I want to be well again and I don’t care who makes the money so long as they get me well again. And bringing in private providers will drive down price.
As far as not for profits go, they should be allowed to compete but they would struggle the same way they do in other industries. I can’t think of a single not for profit that is an industry leader?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[allmodcons]

The SNP is failing on health by targets it set for itself and enshrined in law. That’s all that needs said really.

And I will quite happily call out posters who make snidey comparisons to English performance, while not acknowledging that Scotland is failing, and in your own words, not having any answers themselves.

Given the pressure on the NHS, particularly that of an ageing population, I think it is fair to say that the targets of 90% and 95% were ambitious. Enshrining them in law was just plain stupid and a bad call by Nicola Sturgeon when she was responsible for Health.

Like most SNP voters, I accept that only achieving 2 out of 8 key national waiting times is disappointing but there is a bigger picture than simply setting and meeting targets. Audit Scotland themselves state:-

"Despite the existing pressures, patient safety and experience of hospital care continue to improve. Drugs costs have stabilised, and we have seen examples of new and innovative ways of delivering healthcare that involve a range of partners. These aim to increase the care provided in the community and expand multidisciplinary working, to improve access to care and treatment".

In addition to this, 86% of people in hospital reported a positive experience.

Why you would view comparisons with the English or Welsh NHS as "snidey" I simply don't know? Why can't they be taken at face value for what they are (i.e. - another poster simply arguing his or her case and using what figures they have available to them to do so). To call this anti Englishness is poor.

The SNP may be failing targets they themselves set but the vast majority of hospital users report a good experience using the NHS under their stewardship. Whilst you may think that failing to meet targets is "all that needs said" the wider public do not appear to concur with your viewpoint.

[JeMeSouviens]

Hmmn, were you not saying the PISA findings were misleading? :greengrin

On health, as has been said many, many times, the SNP administration have been reluctant to use their income tax powers to any great degree. And the council tax freeze ultimately led to higher Health costs because it ate away at all the non-statutory council spend on services that provided early intervention and prevention, and helped limit unscheduled hospital admissions, or allowed social care to better be able to avoid delayed discharges.

That's nothing to do with Westminster, that is everything to do with short-term tactical politics at Holyrood. Not exactly putting health and education at the forefront whatsoever - as the performance data shows.

Sorry, haven't been keeping up. That was me I think.

I don't think PISA scores are an adequate measure of a good education system for reasons that aren't hard to google for, and indeed the rationale runs pretty much contrary to the c of ex ethos.

However, this sudden qualification level drop is alarming and a much bigger red flag, imo, although I obviously have no idea what the reasons for it are.

btw, I think the day-job stuff is particularly funny in education because it's ironically the one area where the SNP government has meddled a lot and actually been quite radical. *Not* getting on with the day job and adopting their usual over cautious don't-rock-the-boat-this-side-of-indy stance might have been a much better bet for them. :wink:

[Peevemor]

There is many insurance style health services around the world that work like that. The Europeans tend to have a blend led approach, Germany I think is one such example.

But in the simplest interpretation of your suggestion the providers would need to make a profit on the provision of said services.

Even if that actually proved cheaper and more effective in the long run you are not going to be able to persuade many very easily that ‘the privatisation’ of the NHS’ in the UK is a good idea...the last election and the many many comments on here to that effect shows you that!

I can only comment on the French system, though I don't understand exactly how it works (I've only been here 15+ years).

I'm oblged to have private health insurance, split approximately 50/50 between myself and my employer - that costs me about 35€/month. My 2 daughters are on the same scheme which costs me an additional 70€/month. My wife has her own scheme with her premiums currently paid by the state as she's on/off unemployed. The 105€/month I pay isn't really noticeable as we don't have the same NI contributions to pay as the UK. In fact the whole system is completely different so a direct comparison is difficult - with that said I feel like I'm better off here than in the UK.

In terms of healthcare, here's my own experience and how it's covered by the state + private health insurance & how much I've stumped up myself.

GP consultations - reimbursed 100%, including my MOT - a full set of blood tests once a year.
Prescriptions - reimbursed 100% - the French government oblige chemists to distribute generic medecines when available
Specs - I change my specs every 2 years. Most of the time I pay nothing (apart from 1€ for a 2nd pair). 3 years ago I had to pay 200€ toward a pair of specs which cost about 950€ (nearly 700€ for the lenses), however last year I had nothing to pay for much the same thing - I've no idea why.
Dentist - Generally reimbursed 100%, although as I posted elsewhere recently, I'm about to get 7725€ worth of work done, of which I have to pay 700€ - I'm not complaining.


Other stuff

I have a hiatal hernia. This happened when I was a teenager due to my playing bagpipes. I first went to the doctor in Edinburgh about acid/indigestion when I was about 20 - he told me to take rennies or whatever. It was only once I moved to France that I was sent for an endoscopy and they confirmed the hernia. I am sent for an endoscopy every 2 years - 100 reimbursed.

I have problems with my joints and have been sent a few times for xrays, ultrasounds & MRI scans - all reimbursed 100%. For info, the private practitioner takes about 80€ for an MRI scan of my shoulder - less than 10% of what it would cost in the USA.

3 years ago I broke my wrist. They put in a steel plate and I was in hospital 2 nights. Every 2 days for a fortnight afterward a nurse came to my house to check the scar and change the dressing (I was on holiday for a week during this time so a local nurse came to where I was staying). Afterward I had 20 physio sessions prescribed but only used about a dozen. Total cost to me for the lot - zero.

So although I'm a great defender of the NHS, I have to say that the French private/mutualised system is pretty impressive.

And before anyone asks, I honestly don't know how it works for (for example) long term unemployed.

[Hibrandenburg]

I can only comment on the French system, though I don't understand exactly how it works (I've only been here 15+ years).

I'm oblged to have private health insurance, split approximately 50/50 between myself and my employer - that costs me about 35€/month. My 2 daughters are on the same scheme wich costs me an additional 70€/month. My wife has her own scheme with her premiums currently paid by the state as she's on/off unemployed. The 105€/month I pay isn't really noticeable as we don't have the same NI contributions to pay as the UK. In fact the whole system is completely different so a direct comparison is difficult - with that said I feel like I'm better off here than in the UK.

In terms of healthcare, here's my own experience and how is covered by the state + private health insurance & how much I've stumped up myself.

GP consultations - reimbursed 100%, including my MOT - a full set of blood tests once a year.
Prescriptions - reimbursed 100% - the French government oblige chemists to distribute generic medecines when available
Specs - I change my specs every 2 years. Most of the time I pay nothing (apart from 1€ for a 2nd pair). 3 years ago I had to pay 200€ toward a pair of specs which cost about 950€ (nearly 700€ for the lenses), however last year I had nothing to pay for much the same thing - I've no idea why.
Dentist - Generally reimbursed 100%, although as I posted elsewhere recently, I'm about to get 7725€ worth of work done, of which I have to pay 700€ - I'm not complaining
Other stuff

I have a hiatal hernia. This happened when I was a teenager due to my playing bagpipes. I first went to the doctor in Edinburgh about acid/indigestion when I was about 20 - he told me to take rennies or whatever. It was only once I moved to France that I was sent for an endoscopy and they confirmed the hernia. I am sent for an endoscopy every 2 years - 100 reimbursed.

I have problems with my joints and have been sent a few times for xrays, ultrasounds & MRI scans - all reimbursed 100%. For info, the private practitioner takes about 80€ for an MRI scan of my shoulder - less than 10% of what it would cost in the USA.

3 years ago I broke my wrist. They put in a steel plate and I was in hospital 2 nights. Every 2 days for a fortnight afterward a nurse came to my house to check the scar and change the dressing (I was on holiday for a week during this time so a local nurse came to where I was staying). Afterward I had 20 physio sessions prescribed but only used about a dozen. Total cost to me for the lot - zero.

So although I'm a great defender of the NHS, I have to say that the French private/mutualised system is pretty impressive.

And before anyone asks, I honeslt don't know how it works for (for example) long term unemployed.

It's similar in Germany, although it costs me a lot more than €35. I pay a €5 fee for all prescriptions and my son is insured free of charge. I've never had to wait for any appointments except once I waited 2 weeks to see a chiropractor. Everyone working here is required to pay into one of the government approved health insurance companies and their employer pays the same amount. There is an exception for civil servants and people who earn above a certain threshold, they can go 100% private and it costs a lot less but only until a certain age where the fees increase dramatically. I've stayed in the government approved system because it's complicated moving back to that system if you've been 100% privately insured previously. Same day appointments with a GP are the norm here and I believe that is the main reason why hospitals, especially emergency rooms aren't over full and at breaking point like I'm reading about in the UK. There's also a 24/7 home GP on call where you can call up and get the GP to visit you at home, it normally takes about 2-3 hours for them to arrive. I've no complaints about the system over here, there's obviously advantages to the 100% private system over the state sponsored system but I've no problem paying a couple of hundred Euros every month if it means I get decent health care.

[Ozyhibby]

Sounds like both the French and German systems offer a lot more coverage than the UK system and their results are a lot better than ours as well. And yet we keep hearing ours is the best in the world?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Peevemor]

Sounds like both the French and German systems offer a lot more coverage than the UK system and their results are a lot better than ours as well. And yet we keep hearing ours is the best in the world?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It seems to me that something between the UK & the US systems seems to work well.

[Ozyhibby]

It seems to me that something between the UK & the US systems seems to work well.

But if any politician in the UK even suggested that they would be branded ‘Tory ****’ for wanting to privatise our precious NHS.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Peevemor]

But if any politician in the UK even suggested that they would be branded ‘Tory ****’ for wanting to privatise our precious NHS.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think people in the UK are rightly afraid of jumping into bed with the USA.

As I pointed out in my post, in France generic medicines must be used where available and other costs are nothing like the US.

I've seen the breakdown of the costs for the little I've been hospitalised and it's a fraction of the equivalent in the USA.

[Ozyhibby]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Europe

There is a good comparison table here for European healthcare systems. The NHS doesn’t come out of it well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[goosano]

Just as well the 18 week referral is for non urgent treatment like ingrown toenails. Might be uncomfortable or inconvenient but not life threatening.

More serious conditions such as diagnosed cancer treatment is within 31 days. And guess what, the targets are being met across SNHS.

They aren't and the situation is getting gradually worse

The standard is to achieve 95% of patients diagnosed with cancer starting treatment within 62 days if urgently referred with a suspicion of cancer, referred through A&E, or referred from one of the national cancer screening programmes.

In the quarter ending September 2019, 83.3% of patients urgently referred with a suspicion of cancer began treatment within 62 days of their referral.

[goosano]

I absolutely know it’s a non starter. The health unions are very well organised. Even though it would not be privatisation it would be totally portrayed as such.
There are thousands of profitable companies who provide services to the NHS but the minute it comes to employing doctors and nurses people lose it.
It’s a shame that patients interests can’t be put before employee’s interests.
The NHS has been built up as the best in the world but actually performs worse than most other OECD countries. And we just accept it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Primary care is rated best because of integrated multidisciplinary care, secondary care is another story

[Smartie]

Is there not a saying about judging a country by the way it treats the most vulnerable members of its society? I doubt there can be much doubt that we are better at that here than in many countries, but what cost does that come at and to whom?

This is a field that is of interest to me - being involved in the healthcare sector and only very minimally involved in the NHS. It's been a real eye-opener and the opinions and values I held as an optimistic (and delusional) teenager have been battered into something very different after trying to provide adequate services to patients at various establishments and via various payment systems over the years. You get to see the sheer cynicism of statistical manipulation by political parties to make it appear that they are doing a good job, you get to see top notch government initiatives that actually yield results and prevent disease and suffering, you get to hear all sorts of nonsense from "the man in the pub" who knows f all about anything but as a taxpayer is entitled to his opinion.

Do I, as a clinician, work better with time pressure and clinical freedom hampered by government policy whilst several layers of inspectorate, bureaucracy and parasitism are allowed to thrive protected by political correctness, or am I better working out what I need to do a job to the best of my ability, work out how much that costs me to provide and hope someone will pay that plus something for my expertise? At the end of the day, does anyone not appreciate that clinicians need paid and that it takes money to run everything in life?

As regards taking advantage of the ill to make a profit, do we disapprove of people who sell food for preying on the hungry or builders for preying on those who don't want to be without shelter?

It's very interesting to see who will pay for treatment (sometimes very large amounts) and who won't and it's not how you might expect it to be - quite often the opposite, in fact. Folk who want something done and need it done at a time that suits them on their terms will find the money to pay. Often, you will have highly educated people who have certain political beliefs who are happy to make decisions which lead to far poorer clinical outcomes. It's also interesting to see how efficiently places can run when someone's livelihood depends on it - without compromising clinical standards.

The problem we have is mainly political opportunism - it is too easy to outflank anyone that suggests any alternative that might be better by promising a whole load of free stuff. The NHS is our national religion and must not be criticised.

I just cannot believe we cannot do better - much better. It is interesting to see the "dental implants" thread to see how many people are prepared to travel to Budapest and spend decent sums of money and time to get the results they want, but because the "market" works the way it does in this country either the NHS doesn't offer an alternative or the private one here ends up being too expensive.

+1 for a sensible national conversation about how we might do things better, even if that means I'm now more of a Tory than I ever thought I'd be.

The way folk slavishly defend a service with waits of months for basic appointments. I mean, really? Are we scared of getting sent to gulag if we say we can't and shouldn't be doing better than that?

Time to re-read my first paragraph once more. Because whilst we may argue about this all day, I know where in the world I would most like to be down on my luck and ill - right here. And whilst some of us probably end up with poorer services than we might feel we deserve, that is a state of affairs that we should all be proud of, really.

[Ozyhibby]

Is there not a saying about judging a country by the way it treats the most vulnerable members of its society? I doubt there can be much doubt that we are better at that here than in many countries, but what cost does that come at and to whom?

This is a field that is of interest to me - being involved in the healthcare sector and only very minimally involved in the NHS. It's been a real eye-opener and the opinions and values I held as an optimistic (and delusional) teenager have been battered into something very different after trying to provide adequate services to patients at various establishments and via various payment systems over the years. You get to see the sheer cynicism of statistical manipulation by political parties to make it appear that they are doing a good job, you get to see top notch government initiatives that actually yield results and prevent disease and suffering, you get to hear all sorts of nonsense from "the man in the pub" who knows f all about anything but as a taxpayer is entitled to his opinion.

Do I, as a clinician, work better with time pressure and clinical freedom hampered by government policy whilst several layers of inspectorate, bureaucracy and parasitism are allowed to thrive protected by political correctness, or am I better working out what I need to do a job to the best of my ability, work out how much that costs me to provide and hope someone will pay that plus something for my expertise? At the end of the day, does anyone not appreciate that clinicians need paid and that it takes money to run everything in life?

As regards taking advantage of the ill to make a profit, do we disapprove of people who sell food for preying on the hungry or builders for preying on those who don't want to be without shelter?

It's very interesting to see who will pay for treatment (sometimes very large amounts) and who won't and it's not how you might expect it to be - quite often the opposite, in fact. Folk who want something done and need it done at a time that suits them on their terms will find the money to pay. Often, you will have highly educated people who have certain political beliefs who are happy to make decisions which lead to far poorer clinical outcomes. It's also interesting to see how efficiently places can run when someone's livelihood depends on it - without compromising clinical standards.

The problem we have is mainly political opportunism - it is too easy to outflank anyone that suggests any alternative that might be better by promising a whole load of free stuff. The NHS is our national religion and must not be criticised.

I just cannot believe we cannot do better - much better. It is interesting to see the "dental implants" thread to see how many people are prepared to travel to Budapest and spend decent sums of money and time to get the results they want, but because the "market" works the way it does in this country either the NHS doesn't offer an alternative or the private one here ends up being too expensive.

+1 for a sensible national conversation about how we might do things better, even if that means I'm now more of a Tory than I ever thought I'd be.

The way folk slavishly defend a service with waits of months for basic appointments. I mean, really? Are we scared of getting sent to gulag if we say we can't and shouldn't be doing better than that?

Time to re-read my first paragraph once more. Because whilst we may argue about this all day, I know where in the world I would most like to be down on my luck and ill - right here. And whilst some of us probably end up with poorer services than we might feel we deserve, that is a state of affairs that we should all be proud of, really.

On your last paragraph, Germany and France both have universal coverage as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

They aren't and the situation is getting gradually worse

The standard is to achieve 95% of patients diagnosed with cancer starting treatment within 62 days if urgently referred with a suspicion of cancer, referred through A&E, or referred from one of the national cancer screening programmes.

In the quarter ending September 2019, 83.3% of patients urgently referred with a suspicion of cancer began treatment within 62 days of their referral.


I stand by my statistics.

https://www.gov.scot/publications/nhsscotland-performance-against-ldp-standards/pages/cancer-waiting-times/

[goosano]

I stand by my statistics.

https://www.gov.scot/publications/nhsscotland-performance-against-ldp-standards/pages/cancer-waiting-times/

I'm sure you do. 2 HB's don't hit the target though. The statistics we quote come from the same source, one reasonable, one not so good. Better to paint the whole picture instead of being selective

[Moulin Yarns]

I'm sure you do. 2 HB's don't hit the target though. The statistics we quote come from the same source, one reasonable, one not so good. Better to paint the whole picture instead of being selective

Says the man who was also selective. 😉

[Alex Trager]

There is def room for improvement in the school system. This is far more fertile territory for criticism of the SNP than the NHS.
I have experienced both the private and the state sector now and I know for a fact that the private schools are doing a lot more homework every night. That and the fact that there appears to be no such thing as a failing teacher in the state sector (aye right) means that it is under performing.
Curriculum for excellence probably sounded like a good idea in the Woolly focus groups of teachers but the reality is it not rigorous enough and kids are failing exams.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The approach in schools nowadays sounds totally bonkers to me.

It’s all about restorative conversation rather than punishment.

My wife works in the school I went to and left in 2010.
As far as I am aware the performance of the school, grades wise, was rising year on year when we were coming through school.

Prior to me attending it was absolutely trashed in a report from the inspectors, a new head was brought in and by the time I started, the discipline levels were high.

I was told a story by my wife recently that would have left me shocked beyond belief had it not been the case that stories like this from the school are common place these days.

The highest form of in school punishment a pupil can receive is being sent to the ‘assignment room’. This means you are taken out of your class and work in one of the deputy head or head teacher’s room for the rest of the lesson. It is then followed by a ‘central detention’ which is the most severe detention you can receive.

A pupil was sent to the AR before entering class by a teacher, for punching the walls and being way over the top rowdy.

About ten minutes into the class the deputy head turned up to the class and pulled my wife out, asking if X could get another chance because he doesn’t work very well in her room.

My wife obviously had no option but to say yes, she could not say no and undermine the deputy with the child stood next to them. There was no room for discussion the way it played out.

I cannot begin to explain how unthinkable this scenario would have been when I was at school.

It is insane that this happened.

The pupil returned and made the lesson hell.

There is now a police officer in the school to try and help police behaviour.

Coming from teachers, the SNP have failed spectacularly in educational terms.

There is absolutely no respect for teaching staff.

It is against the law to smoke on school grounds. My wife’s old classroom was beside a place that pupils smoke all the time.
She was heavily pregnant before the head teacher showed face to chase the children for a few days before allowing it to return.

I could go on and on.

The people who come up with these ideas, according to the teachers, sit on panels and are have never been in a classroom since they were at school.

It’s madness

[grunt]

I was told a story by my wife recently that would have left me shocked beyond belief had it not been the case that stories like this from the school are common place these days.
This is surely one of the weirdest SNP-bad stories we've seen on this thread. Seems more like the deputy head you should be "shocked beyond belief" at.

[Alex Trager]

This is surely one of the weirdest SNP-bad stories we've seen on this thread. Seems more like the deputy head you should be "shocked beyond belief" at.

It all comes down from the government.

They are all about restorative discussions rather than discipline.

This is a symptom of such.

[JeMeSouviens]

It all comes down from the government.

They are all about restorative discussions rather than discipline.

This is a symptom of such.

It comes from Educationalists commissioned by the government. In this case, the work on gathering evidence started in 1994, so if you want to attribute political blame it's a Tory-bad, Lab/Lib-bad, SNP-bad story.

https://www.ed.ac.uk/education/rke/making-a-difference/improving-behaviour-in-scottish-schools

You can read a report on the pilot study here - https://www.webarchive.org.uk/wayback/archive/20170701074158/http://www.gov.scot/Publications/2007/08/24093135/0

Again, it's pre-SNP, but I'm sure if anything was wrong it was their fault anyway. :wink:

As an aside though, any discipline policy in a school is only as good as the school management implementing it.

[grunt]

As an aside though, any discipline policy in a school is only as good as the school management implementing it.:agree: Which certainly seems to be the case here.

[JeMeSouviens]

Interesting snippet from Danny Dorling, an Oxford academic.

https://twitter.com/erikgeddes/status/1232963249206943744

Notable also is the stunned silence from the BBC presenters at not hearing what they expected to hear. :wink:

[Mr Grieves]

Interesting snippet from Danny Dorling, an Oxford academic.

https://twitter.com/erikgeddes/status/1232963249206943744

Notable also is the stunned silence from the BBC presenters at not hearing what they expected to hear. :wink:

Here are the numbers -
https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/resource/infant-and-neonatal-mortality#background

So interesting :wink:

[Ozyhibby]

This will be because of the baby boxes.[emoji6]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[makaveli1875]

This will be because of the baby boxes.[emoji6]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Got 1 of those recently, didn't need any of it, would rather have had the cash. Had to laugh at the packet of Johnny's they threw in though.

[danhibees1875]

Got 1 of those recently, didn't need any of it, would rather have had the cash. Had to laugh at the packet of Johnny's they threw in though.

Do you not have to go out of your way to register for it? :confused:

[JeMeSouviens]

Do you not have to go out of your way to register for it? :confused:

I think your midwife is supposed to give you the chance to opt out if you want?

[danhibees1875]

I think your midwife is supposed to give you the chance to opt out if you want?

Ah okay, if it's opt out I can kind of see how you'd end up with one without really thinking too much about it.

I think it should be a readily available opt-in, at least partly so. I guess some of the things that come with it will always be useful but it all comes in a box which I guess a lot of families won't need.

[Future17]

Ah okay, if it's opt out I can kind of see how you'd end up with one without really thinking too much about it.

I think it should be a readily available opt-in, at least partly so. I guess some of the things that come with it will always be useful but it all comes in a box which I guess a lot of families won't need.

I know there's always a debate to be had about "need" in these kinds of circumstances but even if some families don't need it, could they not use it and save themselves some money on an alternative?

Also, you have to apply for a box.

[JeMeSouviens]

I know there's always a debate to be had about "need" in these kinds of circumstances but even if some families don't need it, could they not use it and save themselves some money on an alternative?

Also, you have to apply for a box.

Technically yes, but aiui, the midwives operate on the presumption that you will be applying and they do the form filling, unless you ask them not to.


https://www.mygov.scot/baby-box/


How you get your baby box
The baby box is free and your midwife will help you register for it.

During your 20 to 24 week antenatal appointment your midwife will:

explain the baby box to you and ask if you would like one
fill in a baby box registration card with you
arrange delivery
You don't need to do anything else. You'll get the baby box between weeks 32 to 36 of pregnancy.

[Future17]

Technically yes, but aiui, the midwives operate on the presumption that you will be applying and they do the form filling, unless you ask them not to.


https://www.mygov.scot/baby-box/

Agreed, but it's still a choice so not an opt-out in my opinion. In any event, if someone doesn't want it or need it, they have the chance to say "no" rather than "yes".

[JeMeSouviens]

Agreed, but it's still a choice so not an opt-out in my opinion. In any event, if someone doesn't want it or need it, they have the chance to say "no" rather than "yes".

Yes, they do, sort of like they can opt out. :greengrin

I concede you are correcter than me though. :wink:

[Future17]

Yes, they do, sort of like they can opt out. :greengrin

I concede you are correcter than me though. :wink:

Does an opt-out not mean you are in rather than opting-in? Or should I just opt-out of this discussion? :greengrin

[danhibees1875]

I know there's always a debate to be had about "need" in these kinds of circumstances but even if some families don't need it, could they not use it and save themselves some money on an alternative?

Also, you have to apply for a box.

When I said "need" I didn't quite mean it like that.

I meant for the families who upon becoming pregnant got themselves a cot or whatever as an alternative to needing a box - they don't need them.

I didn't mean it in a "he's got some savings, he can buy one" sort of way.

:aok:

At that point, fair enough a few bits and pieces for the child - consumables especially - are still helpful but they can save money elsewhere.

I should add, I say that with no idea of the costings involved and it might be that the box itself is very cheap to get and makes no difference.

[allmodcons]

Got 1 of those recently, didn't need any of it, would rather have had the cash. Had to laugh at the packet of Johnny's they threw in though.

You've just had a baby and didn't need anything in the baby box? Sounds to me like you have a lot to learn.

https://www.scotland.org/about-scotland/scotlands-stories/baby-box

[allmodcons]

Interesting snippet from Danny Dorling, an Oxford academic.

https://twitter.com/erikgeddes/status/1232963249206943744

Notable also is the stunned silence from the BBC presenters at not hearing what they expected to hear. :wink:

A good news Scottish NHS story, surely not! I thought it was supposed to be all bad news.

Never mind, we can turn the good news story in to a complaint about baby boxes :yawn:

[Peevemor]

I'm astonished that anyone can criticise the baby box initiative.

[allmodcons]

I'm astonished that anyone can criticise the baby box initiative.

It never surprises me what people moan about, so so easy to be critical all the time.

[Sergio sledge]

Got 1 of those recently, didn't need any of it, would rather have had the cash. Had to laugh at the packet of Johnny's they threw in though.

If you didn't need it then you shouldn't have applied for it.

It is definitely an "opt-in" service (in the Highlands anyway) our midwife asked if we wanted it and then went through the process of filling in the form with us. It wasn't automatically sent out to us.

[Mibbes Aye]

I'm astonished that anyone can criticise the baby box initiative.


It never surprises me what people moan about, so so easy to be critical all the time.

It has maybe passed me by, but I can’t recall seeing anyone criticising the initiative as such.

I do see a regular couple of Nat supporters suggesting that people are criticising it though, without much real evidence? :greengrin

Said it before, will say it again, you don’t win Soft No’s with grievance and resentment.

[Mr Grieves]

It has maybe passed me by, but I can’t recall seeing anyone criticising the initiative as such.

I do see a regular couple of Nat supporters suggesting that people are criticising it though, without much real evidence? :greengrin

Said it before, will say it again, you don’t win Soft No’s with grievance and resentment.

You are a soft no, right enough.

It's going to be increasingly depressing watching you ignore a hard right government because SNP

[allmodcons]

Got 1 of those recently, didn't need any of it, would rather have had the cash. Had to laugh at the packet of Johnny's they threw in though.


It has maybe passed me by, but I can’t recall seeing anyone criticising the initiative as such.

I do see a regular couple of Nat supporters suggesting that people are criticising it though, without much real evidence? :greengrin

Said it before, will say it again, you don’t win Soft No’s with grievance and resentment.

This isn't a veiled criticism from makaveli1875? Must have passed you by?

What the hell have any of these comments got to do with your favourite phrase (i.e. - grievance and resentment).

[Kato]

It has maybe passed me by, but I can’t recall seeing anyone criticising the initiative as such.

I do see a regular couple of Nat supporters suggesting that people are criticising it though, without much real evidence? :greengrin

Said it before, will say it again, you don’t win Soft No’s with grievance and resentment.

So you didn't read the thread.

[CloudSquall]

https://mobile.twitter.com/WingsPartyScot


Stuart Campbell of Wings Over Scotland has started a Twitter page for the political party he plans to have contest the regional vote next year, cat amongst the pigeons time :greengrin

[SHODAN]

https://mobile.twitter.com/WingsPartyScot


Stuart Campbell of Wings Over Scotland has started a Twitter page for the political party he plans to have contest the regional vote next year, cat amongst the pigeons time :greengrin

It's already been suspended.

[CloudSquall]

It's already been suspended.

That's my entire Monday now lost to Twitter to follow this :greengrin

[JeMeSouviens]

https://mobile.twitter.com/WingsPartyScot


Stuart Campbell of Wings Over Scotland has started a Twitter page for the political party he plans to have contest the regional vote next year, cat amongst the pigeons time :greengrin

Arse. It'll cause a load of infighting and embarrassment, win over precisely nobody and if it's still going in 2021, get less than 1% of the vote. What a knob.

Edit - on a brighter note, I am heartened by being allowed to use both arse and knob. :greengrin

Can I take this opportunity to say that that arse Steven Naismith is a right knob?

[CloudSquall]

Arse. It'll cause a load of infighting and embarrassment, win over precisely nobody and if it's still going in 2021, get less than 1% of the vote. What a knob.



As much as I like the idea of another party playing the regional vote system and increasing the overall indy representation in the parliament I think the most likely scenario is that the Twitter bubble will think they are on course for 6, 7, 8 seats and then in the real world they poll RISE levels of support, i.e pretty much F all.

[JeMeSouviens]

As much as I like the idea of another party playing the regional vote system and increasing the overall indy representation in the parliament I think the most likely scenario is that the Twitter bubble will think they are on course for 6, 7, 8 seats and then in the real world they poll RISE levels of support, i.e pretty much F all.

There's zero point anyway. We won't win indy by gaming the system. We'll win by having majority support. And if we have majority support then we don't need to game the system. Simples.

A split in the SNP and Yes infighting more generally is what Unionists have been praying for.

[Ozyhibby]

Having the SNP as the sole Independence Party is what gives them their strength. Any new party would be a gift to unionism.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[heretoday]

Sturgeon's had it. She doesn't look well. Forbes is a shoe-in. She's a Cambridge grad as well so she's seen a bit of the world outside Irvine Ice-rink.

[xyz23jc]

Sturgeon's had it. She doesn't look well. Forbes is a shoe-in. She's a Cambridge grad as well so she's seen a bit of the world outside Irvine Ice-rink.

Wishful thinking perhaps, from someone who maybe hasn't seen much of the world outside Murrayfield Ice Rink!:greengrin

[CloudSquall]

Sturgeon does however have a job on her hands at not having the Gender Recognition Act cause deeper divisions within the SNP.

There are divisions already between the likes of Cherry, McAlpine and the likes of Mhairi Black, and now Alyn Smith is defending his absolute rocket of a partner who has decided to try to be a candidate in next year's election after branding McAlpine a "top rate ********" and telling her to f off last year in relation to this GRA.


https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/5355127/snp-holyrood-abuse-trans-rights-activist-election/

[JeMeSouviens]

Sturgeon's had it. She doesn't look well. Forbes is a shoe-in. She's a Cambridge grad as well so she's seen a bit of the world outside Irvine Ice-rink.

Jaysus, so an Oxbridge degree makes you a better FM than a Glasgow one? You're either at it or the cringe is still well and truly with us. :rolleyes:

Even her political opponents (generally) recognise NS as one of the most effective politicians Scotland has produced.

[JeMeSouviens]

Sturgeon does however have a job on her hands at not having the Gender Recognition Act cause deeper divisions within the SNP.

There are divisions already between the likes of Cherry, McAlpine and the likes of Mhairi Black, and now Alyn Smith is defending his absolute rocket of a partner who has decided to try to be a candidate in next year's election after branding McAlpine a "top rate ********" and telling her to f off last year in relation to this GRA.


https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/5355127/snp-holyrood-abuse-trans-rights-activist-election/

tbh, I don't think I really understand all the issues around this but surely common political wisdom would be booting this as far as possible into the long grass?

It actually seems like something Citizens' Assemblies would be really good at exploring potentially?

[Ozyhibby]

tbh, I don't think I really understand all the issues around this but surely common political wisdom would be booting this as far as possible into the long grass?

It actually seems like something Citizens' Assemblies would be really good at exploring potentially?

It’s an issue that the general public could not care less about. I’m not saying it’s not important but I can say that it will not shift any votes come election time. One thing it might do though is if a party starts tearing itself apart over gender pronouns then the public might start to look elsewhere for a party that is more concerned with issues that they care about. A lot of political capital getting spent on what must be an absolutely tiny amount of people.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

It’s an issue that the general public could not care less about. I’m not saying it’s not important but I can say that it will not shift any votes come election time. One thing it might do though is if a party starts tearing itself apart over gender pronouns then the public might start to look elsewhere for a party that is more concerned with issues that they care about. A lot of political capital getting spent on what must be an absolutely tiny amount of people.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Couldn't agree more.

[JeMeSouviens]

It’s an issue that the general public could not care less about. I’m not saying it’s not important but I can say that it will not shift any votes come election time. One thing it might do though is if a party starts tearing itself apart over gender pronouns then the public might start to look elsewhere for a party that is more concerned with issues that they care about. A lot of political capital getting spent on what must be an absolutely tiny amount of people.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Actually, I'm pretty sure most of the general public are completely unaware that it's a live issue at all. I don't think I would be if I didn't follow indy politics. And to be brutally cynical for a second, it's certainly not something that's going to win over the massive population of over-65 indysceptics.

Which isn't to say that nothing should be done, but I think it needs to be build a consensus then legislate rather than the other way round.

[Ozyhibby]

Actually, I'm pretty sure most of the general public are completely unaware that it's a live issue at all. I don't think I would be if I didn't follow indy politics. And to be brutally cynical for a second, it's certainly not something that's going to win over the massive population of over-65 indysceptics.

Which isn't to say that nothing should be done, but I think it needs to be build a consensus then legislate rather than the other way round.

It’s a campaign that appears to be using hate as its main weapon. People who disagree are being bombarded with hatred on social media.
Personally I have little understanding of the issues other than I’m dead against trans people competing in ladies sport. All the other stuff I don’t care about. Go to what bathroom you like for all I care, call yourself whatever sex makes you feel good, I really don’t care. People should be free to live the life they want to live so long as it doesn’t affect other people.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lord bunberry]

It’s a campaign that appears to be using hate as its main weapon. People who disagree are being bombarded with hatred on social media.
Personally I have little understanding of the issues other than I’m dead against trans people competing in ladies sport. All the other stuff I don’t care about. Go to what bathroom you like for all I care, call yourself whatever sex makes you feel good, I really don’t care. People should be free to live the life they want to live so long as it doesn’t affect other people.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think it’s a bigger issue than you think. Lots of women are upset at the thought of trans women using female toilets and changing rooms. Most men aren’t affected in any way by any of these issues so it doesn’t seem as big a problem for us.

[heretoday]

I think it’s a bigger issue than you think. Lots of women are upset at the thought of trans women using female toilets and changing rooms. Most men aren’t affected in any way by any of these issues so it doesn’t seem as big a problem for us.

That's the main thing. Also I've heard mention of equal pay issues.

[Moulin Yarns]

I think it’s a bigger issue than you think. Lots of women are upset at the thought of trans women using female toilets and changing rooms. Most men aren’t affected in any way by any of these issues so it doesn’t seem as big a problem for us.

Changing rooms I understand, but toilets? Is there an outcry where public places, like bars, restaurants, theatres or cafes have unisex toilets? You might be slightly taken aback the first time you enter and find someone of the opposite gender at the wash hand basins, but there's nothing 'on show'.

[lord bunberry]

Changing rooms I understand, but toilets? Is there an outcry where public places, like bars, restaurants, theatres or cafes have unisex toilets? You might be slightly taken aback the first time you enter and find someone of the opposite gender at the wash hand basins, but there's nothing 'on show'.
I think you will find that most men will have the same view as you, but lots of women do have a problem with it. We’re not talking about unisex toilets, we’re talking about men being in a toilet that’s designated for women.

[Ozyhibby]

I think you will find that most men will have the same view as you, but lots of women do have a problem with it. We’re not talking about unisex toilets, we’re talking about men being in a toilet that’s designated for women.

We’ll end up with all toilets getting converted so that there are no shared spaces and we will all pay for it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lord bunberry]

We’ll end up with all toilets getting converted so that there are no shared spaces and we will all pay for it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yeah I think it will go something like that as well or maybe even unisex toilets.

[Just Alf]

Yeah I think it will go something like that as well or maybe even unisex toilets.

Pity the poor women in that case! ..... think what it's like now in a gents, even when we all know that hand cleaning goes a long, long way to preventing the spread of disease many still don't do it and as for lifting (or not!) the seat to pee.....

[Ozyhibby]

Pity the poor women in that case! ..... think what it's like now in a gents, even when we all know that hand cleaning goes a long, long way to preventing the spread of disease many still don't do it and as for lifting (or not!) the seat to pee.....

I do pity them. I think this trans debate is a very small amount of people wishing to impose their will on everyone else.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CloudSquall]

The GRA was confined mostly just to the Twitter bubble but it blew up a bit when Mhairi Black went along with a drag queen (Drag name "FlowJob"...) to a school for a reading session.

Given this guy's Twitter history people along with parents of children at the school questioned it, Black doubled down and pretty much called anyone against it a transphobe..

Didn't help her case when the council then said it was against it and Swinney said he wouldn't have allowed it either.


"FlowJob" was recently outraged because a casino asked him to leave the women's bathroom, until very recently he was a man doing drag, now he is apparently in transition (transition so far is using make up) and believes he should have access to women's bathrooms.


I think outside of the extreme positions on the issue most people wouldn't have an issue with someone that has transitioned from using their preferred bathroom, but they are concerned about the potential Pandora's box if "FlowJob " and co can just rock up into the women's bathroom.

[lapsedhibee]

Coronavirus cases in the UK have increased by only 25% in the last 24 hours, but in by Scotland by almost 50%.

The virus is clearly targeting Scotland, where the SNP have been in control for more than a decade.

[Mibbes Aye]

I saw today that Aileen Campbell, the Cabinet Secretary for Communities and Local Government, will stand down as an MSP at the next election, in pursuit of a better ‘work-life balance’.

She has had a couple of ministerial roles and I thought she made a decent fist of them. One of those MSPs who made Holyrood better and as a minister had challenging briefs but seemed to manage them relatively well.

[Bristolhibby]

Having the SNP as the sole Independence Party is what gives them their strength. Any new party would be a gift to unionism.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Cough Greens

[JeMeSouviens]

Scot Gov announces pause to prep for indyref2 due to coronavirus - "a referendum will not take place this year".

Cynics will say that's a handy get out, but surely the right thing to do.

[Beefster]

Scot Gov announces pause to prep for indyref2 due to coronavirus - "a referendum will not take place this year".

Cynics will say that's a handy get out, but surely the right thing to do.

It's both imho - the right thing to do but also buys the SNP a bit of breathing space from their members' demands.

It's also going to be a handy get out for the UK Government on their 'under no circumstances will we extend the transitional period' rhetoric.

[JeMeSouviens]

It's both imho - the right thing to do but also buys the SNP a bit of breathing space from their members' demands.

It's also going to be a handy get out for the UK Government on their 'under no circumstances will we extend the transitional period' rhetoric.

You would hope so anyway. :agree:

[Callum_62]

Johnson reiterated at presser tonight ghat brexit is done and he has no intention of extending the transition period

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

No police action in Derek McKay investigation.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-51959533

[pacoluna]

No police action in Derek McKay investigation.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-51959533
So the whole grooming nonsense is a load of crap, a lot of slanderous statements have been made including from politicians.

[marinello59]

So the whole grooming nonsense is a load of crap, a lot of slanderous statements have been made including from politicians.

It wasn’t nonsense. It has just been declared non-criminal due to the boy being (just) over 16. It was grooming though.

[Berwickhibby]

It wasn’t nonsense. It has just been declared non-criminal due to the boy being (just) over 16. It was grooming though.

I totally agree, I wonder if people would feel the same if some 42 year old male was grooming their teenage children....regardless of his politics it depraved behaviour

[pacoluna]

It wasn’t nonsense. It has just been declared non-criminal due to the boy being (just) over 16. It was grooming though.

So he was legally grooming 🧐. There's no such thing.

He wasn't grooming,simple.

[marinello59]

So he was legally grooming 🧐. There's no such thing.

He wasn't grooming,simple.

Eh?
You are either trolling or you don’t know what grooming behaviour is.

[greenlex]

Illegal or not it’s creepy as **** behaviour. Best rid of him from public life.

[RyeSloan]

Illegal or not it’s creepy as **** behaviour. Best rid of him from public life.

That sums it up [emoji736]

[G B Young]

So the whole grooming nonsense is a load of crap, a lot of slanderous statements have been made including from politicians.

Does that mean you think what he did was perfectly OK?

The fact he resigned as soon as it came to light indicates he knows he acted inappropriately. His position was unsustainable.

[Beefster]

So the whole grooming nonsense is a load of crap, a lot of slanderous statements have been made including from politicians.

I'm going to guess that if Derek McKay has been a Tory MP in his 40's, you wouldn't have been quite as relaxed about him getting sleazy with a 16 year old schoolboy.

In any event - https://paceuk.info/for-parents/advice-centre/if-your-child-is-over-16-years-of-age/

[pacoluna]

I'm going to guess that if Derek McKay has been a Tory MP in his 40's, you wouldn't have been quite as relaxed about him getting sleazy with a 16 year old schoolboy.

In any event - https://paceuk.info/for-parents/advice-centre/if-your-child-is-over-16-years-of-age/

What's the point in sending links like this? The police just said there was no criminality.

[pacoluna]

Does that mean you think what he did was perfectly OK?

The fact he resigned as soon as it came to light indicates he knows he acted inappropriately. His position was unsustainable.

No I don't..but it wasn't grooming. He has correctly left office. However going forward he should be allowed to persue other careers as he has done nothing illegal.

[Beefster]

What's the point in sending links like this? The police just said there was no criminality.

You seemed to imply that he wasn't grooming based on the fact that's it's been decided it wasn't criminal. I thought you'd like to see some authoritative information showing that to be wrong rather me just telling you that you are wrong.

[pacoluna]

You seemed to imply that he wasn't grooming based on the fact that's it's been decided it wasn't criminal. I thought you'd like to see some authoritative information showing that to be wrong rather me just telling you that you are wrong.

That link is full of criminal references regarding grooming 16/17 year olds.

[JimBHibees]

I'm going to guess that if Derek McKay has been a Tory MP in his 40's, you wouldn't have been quite as relaxed about him getting sleazy with a 16 year old schoolboy.

In any event - https://paceuk.info/for-parents/advice-centre/if-your-child-is-over-16-years-of-age/

Would have thought there would have been a breach of the peace charge if harassing someone especially someone of that age.

Very weird behaviour imo.

[JimBHibees]

Illegal or not it’s creepy as **** behaviour. Best rid of him from public life.

Nail on head.

[James310]

I don't think anyone has said the SNP run along in perfect harmony, but if we're to "believe" John, we're heading for a new leader in 12 months.

Tell you what. I'll put a wager on with both you and, John/James that, Nicola surgeon will be leader of the SNP in 12 months time. £20 each, with the cash going to kicks for kids.

It's only a small amount of your pension pot, so it shouldn't make too much of a dent.

How about it?


£20 donation made as agreed as she is not going anywhere in the next 2 weeks. I would post an attachment as evidence but I don't seem to be able to post any images or attachments for some reason...no permissions?

Happy to email evidence though - PM me and I can send on.

Still think there is some fallout from the Salmond trial to come her way, but as the man himself said, now is not the time for that.

[Hibrandenburg]

£20 donation made as agreed as she is not going anywhere in the next 2 weeks. I would post an attachment as evidence but I don't seem to be able to post any images or attachments for some reason...no permissions?

Happy to email evidence though - PM me and I can send on.

Still think there is some fallout from the Salmond trial to come her way, but as the man himself said, now is not the time for that.

Nice one :thumbsup:

[ronaldo7]

£20 donation made as agreed as she is not going anywhere in the next 2 weeks. I would post an attachment as evidence but I don't seem to be able to post any images or attachments for some reason...no permissions?

Happy to email evidence though - PM me and I can send on.

Still think there is some fallout from the Salmond trial to come her way, but as the man himself said, now is not the time for that.

Good man.

I'll donate the same. :aok:

Done.

[lapsedhibee]

£20 donation made as agreed as she is not going anywhere in the next 2 weeks. I would post an attachment as evidence but I don't seem to be able to post any images or attachments for some reason...no permissions?

Happy to email evidence though - PM me and I can send on.

Still think there is some fallout from the Salmond trial to come her way, but as the man himself said, now is not the time for that.

That's good!

[Future17]

£20 donation made as agreed as she is not going anywhere in the next 2 weeks. I would post an attachment as evidence but I don't seem to be able to post any images or attachments for some reason...no permissions?

Happy to email evidence though - PM me and I can send on.

Still think there is some fallout from the Salmond trial to come her way, but as the man himself said, now is not the time for that.

:aok:

[Hibrandenburg]

Good man.

I'll donate the same. :aok:

Done.

Well done Gents, both of you showing the thread that holds us together despite our political differences.

[Bangkok Hibby]

Well done lads....Hibbies! just decent people :flag:

[Ozyhibby]

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-snp-is-using-covid-to-bury-bad-news/amp?__twitter_impression=true

Good article on an area that I do believe the SG is failing on, education.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Callum_62]

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-snp-is-using-covid-to-bury-bad-news/amp?__twitter_impression=true

Good article on an area that I do believe the SG is failing on, education.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkBeing married to a teacher the whole pay increase was a bit of a red herrrinhbshe feels.
Bringing back a budget for teacher aides was and is far more important than some. Extra dosh in her pocket

BTW, CoE or not the UK lags way behind forward thinking in terms of early tears educatuon. The CoE tried to address some of that but will definately have problems. Being implemented

Part of this IMHO is because, until quite recently we used to take nursery as a day care drop off rather than an education centre

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Future17]

Being married to a teacher the whole pay increase was a bit of a red herrrinhbshe feels.
Bringing back a budget for teacher aides was and is far more important than some. Extra dosh in her pocket

BTW, CoE or not the UK lags way behind forward thinking in terms of early tears educatuon. The CoE tried to address some of that but will definately have problems. Being implemented

Part of this IMHO is because, until quite recently we used to take nursery as a day care drop off rather than an education centre

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

Just being pedantic, but I think you mean CfE...unless you mean the Church of England. :wink:

[Sylar]

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-snp-is-using-covid-to-bury-bad-news/amp?__twitter_impression=true

Good article on an area that I do believe the SG is failing on, education.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm always a little cautious of sources for '[insert party name here] bad' type stories, but isn't The Spectator one of the more Conservative leaning rags?

Having said that, it's no real secret there are concerns in the Scottish Government's record over education. Personally, I'd rather they scrapped one of their manifesto pledges in free tuition for Scottish kids to Scottish Universities, and instead invested that money into the primary and secondary sectors. That way, it'll ensure a better level of competence in the students that CHOOSE to come through the University system as they'll have had a better education programme in earlier years.

[Ozyhibby]

I'm always a little cautious of sources for '[insert party name here] bad' type stories, but isn't The Spectator one of the more Conservative leaning rags?

Having said that, it's no real secret there are concerns in the Scottish Government's record over education. Personally, I'd rather they scrapped one of their manifesto pledges in free tuition for Scottish kids to Scottish Universities, and instead invested that money into the primary and secondary sectors. That way, it'll ensure a better level of competence in the students that CHOOSE to come through the University system as they'll have had a better education programme in earlier years.

Free tuition in university does not hamper our education budget. It’s as good as the rUK. The problem is the SG caved to the teaching unions and abandoned testing and holding schools to account. The CofE is also very poorly implemented. It might be a great idea but if kids start failing exams then it’s not working.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sylar]

Free tuition in university does not hamper our education budget. It’s as good as the rUK. The problem is the SG caved to the teaching unions and abandoned testing and holding schools to account. The CofE is also very poorly implemented. It might be a great idea but if kids start failing exams then it’s not working.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A quick look at the stats suggests that's not the case.

In Scotland, the total budget allocated to education is £2.6 billion (from latest budget), covering 697,989 (ScotGov Summary Statistics, 2019) pupils across all levels of education, equating to £3725 per pupil head.

In England, the current education budget is £50 billion (rising to £52 billion by 2023, latest UKGov budget for local authority areas in England) and covers 8,819,765 pupils (from 2019 Dept of Education Statistics Tables) across all levels of education in England (including Sixth Form), representing £5669 per pupil head.

I'm not suggesting the tuition fee policy is specifically hampering the education budget - rather using it as an example of where money is being invested that may be more beneficially used on these same students before they get to University (again, something that's a choice for many rather than mandatory education levels). I have a few friends that are teachers and they would agree wholeheartedly with your suggestion of the failings of the CfE (sorry, but CofE makes me think of the Church of England too :greengrin) - it quite probably is a part of the problem, but I would suggest (from speaking to these same teacher friends) that poverty levels amongst pupils and a lack of resources in schools to provide equipment for many students from deprived areas, are also key factors.

[danhibees1875]

A quick look at the stats suggests that's not the case.

In Scotland, the total budget allocated to education is £2.6 billion (from latest budget), covering 697,989 (ScotGov Summary Statistics, 2019) pupils across all levels of education, equating to £3725 per pupil head.

In England, the current education budget is £50 billion (rising to £52 billion by 2023, latest UKGov budget for local authority areas in England) and covers 8,819,765 pupils (from 2019 Dept of Education Statistics Tables) across all levels of education in England (including Sixth Form), representing £5669 per pupil head.

I'm not suggesting the tuition fee policy is specifically hampering the education budget - rather using it as an example of where money is being invested that may be more beneficially used on these same students before they get to University (again, something that's a choice for many rather than mandatory education levels). I have a few friends that are teachers and they would agree wholeheartedly with your suggestion of the failings of the CfE (sorry, but CofE makes me think of the Church of England too :greengrin) - it quite probably is a part of the problem, but I would suggest (from speaking to these same teacher friends) that poverty levels amongst pupils and a lack of resources in schools to provide equipment for many students from deprived areas, are also key factors.

So ScotGov spend 1/3rd less per head on education despite tuition being free? So primary and secondary education are underfunded compared to England basically? Or is there more to it?

The 19-20 Scottish budget has "Education and Skills" at £3.448bn (that would be £4,940 per head based on your number of people in education, so still c.10% less).

[Sylar]

So ScotGov spend 1/3rd less per head on education despite tuition being free? So primary and secondary education are underfunded compared to England basically? Or is there more to it?

The 19-20 Scottish budget has "Education and Skills" at £3.448bn (that would be £4,940 per head based on your number of people in education, so still c.10% less).

I would imagine there’s probably more to it than the figures I presented above. I work in the HE sector in Scotland and im less familiar with the intricacies of funding for primary and secondary beyond my quick look earlier and anecdotal experiences from teachers.

I think education and skills together include things like modern apprenticeships, but im happy to be to told im wrong?

[Hiber-nation]

So ScotGov spend 1/3rd less per head on education despite tuition being free? So primary and secondary education are underfunded compared to England basically? Or is there more to it?

The 19-20 Scottish budget has "Education and Skills" at £3.448bn (that would be £4,940 per head based on your number of people in education, so still c.10% less).

Scotland definitely spends more per pupil on education than England.

https://www.ifs.org.uk/election/2019/article/school-spending

[Ozyhibby]

Scotland definitely spends more per pupil on education than England.

https://www.ifs.org.uk/election/2019/article/school-spending

Which makes our poor results harder to bare. SNP get a very easy ride on this subject but they shouldn’t because it’s very important. They need to get back to rigorous testing like they have down south and ditch the woolly CfE.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200501/291023e597c397382bd035969bc85fea.jpg
SNP support rising to new heights.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200501/291023e597c397382bd035969bc85fea.jpg
SNP support rising to new heights.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Westminster intention similarly up to 51% I think.

[ronaldo7]

Some more support for unpaid carers during the Coronavirus pandemic.

Investment of £19.2 million to support 83,000 carers

As part of the next emergency coronavirus legislation, the Scottish Government is proposing an additional £19.2 million investment in Carer’s Allowance Supplement.

This is in recognition of the additional pressure that carers are under as a result of the ongoing pandemic.

If approved by parliament, around 83,000 eligible carers will get an extra £230.10 through a special one-off Coronavirus Carer’s Allowance Supplement in June.

As with the current supplement, they will not need to do anything to get this extra payment as it will be paid automatically to people in receipt of Carer’s Allowance.

This would mean that carers receive an additional £690.30 this year on top of their Carer’s Allowance and any other income. This supplement is not paid in the rest of the UK.

Cabinet Secretary for Social Security and Older People, Shirley-Anne Somerville said:

“We introduced the Carer’s Allowance Supplement to recognise the important contribution unpaid carers play in our society. They provide vital support to family, friends and neighbours. Our collective efforts to slow the spread of coronavirus will see many of these carers experiencing additional pressures, particularly financial, right now.

“The payment will benefit carers who are on low incomes and already have some of the most intense caring roles, providing at least 35 hours unpaid care weekly to a disabled child or adult in receipt of higher level disability benefits.

“This additional payment would be an acknowledgement to carers that we know that they are doing even more right now, and we thank you.”

https://www.gov.scot/news/extra-payment-for-unpaid-carers/

[marinello59]

Some more support for unpaid carers during the Coronavirus pandemic.

Investment of £19.2 million to support 83,000 carers

As part of the next emergency coronavirus legislation, the Scottish Government is proposing an additional £19.2 million investment in Carer’s Allowance Supplement.

This is in recognition of the additional pressure that carers are under as a result of the ongoing pandemic.

If approved by parliament, around 83,000 eligible carers will get an extra £230.10 through a special one-off Coronavirus Carer’s Allowance Supplement in June.

As with the current supplement, they will not need to do anything to get this extra payment as it will be paid automatically to people in receipt of Carer’s Allowance.

This would mean that carers receive an additional £690.30 this year on top of their Carer’s Allowance and any other income. This supplement is not paid in the rest of the UK.

Cabinet Secretary for Social Security and Older People, Shirley-Anne Somerville said:

“We introduced the Carer’s Allowance Supplement to recognise the important contribution unpaid carers play in our society. They provide vital support to family, friends and neighbours. Our collective efforts to slow the spread of coronavirus will see many of these carers experiencing additional pressures, particularly financial, right now.

“The payment will benefit carers who are on low incomes and already have some of the most intense caring roles, providing at least 35 hours unpaid care weekly to a disabled child or adult in receipt of higher level disability benefits.

“This additional payment would be an acknowledgement to carers that we know that they are doing even more right now, and we thank you.”

https://www.gov.scot/news/extra-payment-for-unpaid-carers/

Great news for the unpaid carers. Any idea where they found the cash for that?
Hopefully we also see the £155 million in consequential payments handed over to our cash strapped local authorities soon. Dismissing Cosla concerns as a storm in a teacup displayed Tory levels of arrogance.

[ronaldo7]

Great news for the unpaid carers. Any idea where they found the cash for that?
Hopefully we also see the £155 million in consequential payments handed over to our cash strapped local authorities soon. Dismissing Cosla concerns as a storm in a teacup displayed Tory levels of arrogance.

Emergency coronavirus funds.:dunno: Certainly helps unpaid carers again. That'll be three extra payments this year for them.

On your second point.

Ms Forbes said local government body COSLA is currently undertaking a "cost-gathering" exercise across Scots councils on the impact of COVID-19.


"I think it's only right that we understand fully the cost implications for local authorities and work jointly with them in terms of determining how we deploy those consequentials," she said.

Scottish ministers have already committed an extra £175 million on hardship funding and welfare top-ups, Ms Forbes added, as well as funding free school meals.

The Finance Secretary insisted that she understood the challenges facing local authorities.

But she added: "It seems perfectly reasonable that if COSLA has committed to a cost-gathering exercise, and clearly there are cost implications, that we understand what that funding need is before we come to a settled conclusion on the funding available."


The minister said the Scottish Government is committed to ensuring that all consequentials from the UK Government are "directly delivered" to help councils meet their needs from the Coronavirus impact.

[marinello59]

Emergency coronavirus funds.:dunno: Certainly helps unpaid carers again. That'll be three extra payments this year for them.

On your second point.

Ms Forbes said local government body COSLA is currently undertaking a "cost-gathering" exercise across Scots councils on the impact of COVID-19.


"I think it's only right that we understand fully the cost implications for local authorities and work jointly with them in terms of determining how we deploy those consequentials," she said.

Scottish ministers have already committed an extra £175 million on hardship funding and welfare top-ups, Ms Forbes added, as well as funding free school meals.

The Finance Secretary insisted that she understood the challenges facing local authorities.

But she added: "It seems perfectly reasonable that if COSLA has committed to a cost-gathering exercise, and clearly there are cost implications, that we understand what that funding need is before we come to a settled conclusion on the funding available."


The minister said the Scottish Government is committed to ensuring that all consequentials from the UK Government are "directly delivered" to help councils meet their needs from the Coronavirus impact.

I’d already read all that. :greengrin
Do you know if it went straight out to the councils down south or are Westminster sitting on the earmarked cash as well?

[ronaldo7]

I’d already read all that. :greengrin
Do you know if it went straight out to the councils down south or are Westminster sitting on the earmarked cash as well?

No idea how they're doing it in another country. :wink:

It's all getting passed on, and COSLA are determining how it's done. Surely a good thing.

Storm in a tea cup. :greengrin

[marinello59]

No idea how they're doing it in another country. :wink:

It's all getting passed on, and COSLA are determining how it's done. Surely a good thing.

Storm in a tea cup. :greengrin

I’m just wondering if Westminster are trusting their Councils and have passed the cash straight on so it can be used now instead of in due course. Always interesting to see how devolution works.

[ronaldo7]

I’m just wondering if Westminster are trusting their Councils and have passed the cash straight on so it can be used now instead of in due course. Always interesting to see how devolution works.

I'm sure you could find out, if you wanted to.

Some more info for you from COSLA themselves. :aok: It seems they're all working to the same goals.

Finance
On 29 April the Cabinet Secretary for Finance wrote to COSLA’s Resources Spokesperson Cllr Gail
Macgregor regarding the consequentials of the UK’s funding announcement for Local Government in
Scotland (£155m). The letter indicated that she wished to wait for the outcome of the cost collection
exercise COSLA is currently coordinating and to understand how those costs are being mitigated by the
funding measures which have already been committed. This letter was circulated ahead of Friday (1 May)
Leaders meeting, at which COSLA Leaders rejected the contents of the letter and called for the £155m
consequentials to be passed straight to Local Government without delay, recognising that costs are being
incurred on a daily basis as essential services are delivered to the most vulnerable during the pandemic.
In a positive step yesterday (5 May), the Scottish Government announced they would pass the full
£155 million of consequentials from the UK Government to Local Government. Cllr McGregor will
work with the Cabinet Secretary for Finance to ensure the funding is distributed to councils quickly and
can be used flexibly to meet local need.
In relation to the cost collection exercise, Finance templates have now been received from all 32 Councils
and are being reviewed. The intention is to repeat the exercise as the situation develops and to facilitate
an ongoing dialogue with Scottish Government around the additional costs to Local Government in
relation to the pandemic response.
COSLA's Health and Social Care Spokesperson met with the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Sport on
30 April and as part of that meeting discussed funding associated with health and social care
mobilisation plans. Work is underway to release a proportion of funding w/c 1 May to ensure priority areas
of spend can be progressed, with the remaining portion of the funding to be released once other areas
have been discussed and agreed.

https://www.cosla.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0029/17498/EM-Briefing-06052020-.pdf

[TrinityHibs]

Minor point but what free school meals is she funding right now?


Emergency coronavirus funds.:dunno: Certainly helps unpaid carers again. That'll be three extra payments this year for them.

On your second point.

Ms Forbes said local government body COSLA is currently undertaking a "cost-gathering" exercise across Scots councils on the impact of COVID-19.


"I think it's only right that we understand fully the cost implications for local authorities and work jointly with them in terms of determining how we deploy those consequentials," she said.

Scottish ministers have already committed an extra £175 million on hardship funding and welfare top-ups, Ms Forbes added, as well as funding free school meals.

The Finance Secretary insisted that she understood the challenges facing local authorities.

But she added: "It seems perfectly reasonable that if COSLA has committed to a cost-gathering exercise, and clearly there are cost implications, that we understand what that funding need is before we come to a settled conclusion on the funding available."


The minister said the Scottish Government is committed to ensuring that all consequentials from the UK Government are "directly delivered" to help councils meet their needs from the Coronavirus impact.

[CropleyWasGod]

Minor point but what free school meals is she funding right now?



Presumably for the kids of key workers, who are attending school.

[marinello59]

Minor point but what free school meals is she funding right now?



Minor point. She isn’t, we are. :greengrin
Weren’t we going to fund free lunches for kids who normally get them regardless of whether they are attending school or not?

[ronaldo7]

Minor point but what free school meals is she funding right now?



Those entitled to free school meals are supported financially.(not them all though). It differs in each council location though.

Some councils provide vouchers for Farmfoods, whilst others provide free packed lunches.

https://www.mygov.scot/school-meals/

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/5450725/coronavirus-scotland-glasgow-edinburgh-free-school-covid-19/

[G B Young]

Parliamentary inquiry into the Salmond affair finally gets back under way today:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-53090858

I'm unclear from this article what the potential ramifications are here. Is Sturgeon in a potentially tricky position? And what does Salmond hope to see happen? Is he still thinking of a return to the party, or even to lead it again? He certainly hinted he had a few scores to settle after the court case.

The article also says this is "just one of a number of probes surrounding the affair which are now restarting after the court proceedings". What are the others?

[JeMeSouviens]

Parliamentary inquiry into the Salmond affair finally gets back under way today:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-53090858

I'm unclear from this article what the potential ramifications are here. Is Sturgeon in a potentially tricky position? And what does Salmond hope to see happen? Is he still thinking of a return to the party, or even to lead it again? He certainly hinted he had a few scores to settle after the court case.

The article also says this is "just one of a number of probes surrounding the affair which are now restarting after the court proceedings". What are the others?

All good questions. Salmond certainly isn't going quietly into the night, that's for sure.

[G B Young]

All good questions. Salmond certainly isn't going quietly into the night, that's for sure.

I recall it being reported he's writing a book about it all, though I'm guessing that must face a few legal hurdles (eg identifying witnesses at his trial etc) and may not be published until the latest inquiry is concluded.

[marinello59]

All good questions. Salmond certainly isn't going quietly into the night, that's for sure.#

Was he ever going to slip away quietly? :greengrin

[Ozyhibby]

I think a bigger risk to the SNP right now is the backlash from parents for the blended learning nonsense. Getting the schools back in August is now the number 1 priority if they don’t want to face a setback in next years elections.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lord bunberry]

I think a bigger risk to the SNP right now is the backlash from parents for the blended learning nonsense. Getting the schools back in August is now the number 1 priority if they don’t want to face a setback in next years elections.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If things continue to improve the way they are then schools will be back full time in August. I suspect they’re being over cautious before making an announcement. It’s still 7 weeks away so I suppose the decision doesn’t need to be made yet. What I did find strange was the announcement around blended learning, there was no reason to make that an announcement and it’s backfired.

[G B Young]

I think a bigger risk to the SNP right now is the backlash from parents for the blended learning nonsense. Getting the schools back in August is now the number 1 priority if they don’t want to face a setback in next years elections.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I wasn't really referring to the inquiry in terms of what impact it might have on the SNP's electoral prospects, rather just wondering what the scope of the inquiry will be.

The back to school plans have certainly sparked an understandable backlash from parents but I can't really seem them impacting on the SNP at next year's elections. It's not as though there's a credible opposition plan in place for schools either.

[Ozyhibby]

I wasn't really referring to the inquiry in terms of what impact it might have on the SNP's electoral prospects, rather just wondering what the scope of the inquiry will be.

The back to school plans have certainly sparked an understandable backlash from parents but I can't really seem them impacting on the SNP at next year's elections. It's not as though there's a credible opposition plan in place for schools either.

Granted we don’t have any credible opposition in Scotland but there is a danger that people can just stay home on Election Day if the are feeling aggrieved at this failure.
So far all the planning the schools are doing is as if blended learning is plan A. When I asked what the timetable was if the kids were ok to go back full time I was told it hadn’t been made up. Yet we have been told which group my son will be in for his blended learning and what days etc.
There is only one option getting planned for and I think that will cost them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[G B Young]

Granted we don’t have any credible opposition in Scotland but there is a danger that people can just stay home on Election Day if the are feeling aggrieved at this failure.
So far all the planning the schools are doing is as if blended learning is plan A. When I asked what the timetable was if the kids were ok to go back full time I was told it hadn’t been made up. Yet we have been told which group my son will be in for his blended learning and what days etc.
There is only one option getting planned for and I think that will cost them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, fair points. There was a similar response from the schools my kids go to. They said it's all very well the Scottish Government saying that the City of Edinburgh Council plan for a third of pupils going back at one time 'isn't good enough' but at least it's a plan they can work to under the current restrictions.

[Hibrandenburg]

Yes, fair points. There was a similar response from the schools my kids go to. They said it's all very well the Scottish Government saying that the City of Edinburgh Council plan for a third of pupils going back at one time 'isn't good enough' but at least it's a plan they can work to under the current restrictions.

Over here they've split each class into 2 and have them come to school 2 days a week on different days, the kids are getting a massive amount of homework for the days they're not in school. On the 5th day the teachers deal with kids who are falling behind for one reason or another. It seems to be a sensible compromise that means social distancing can be achieved and school staff don't have a large increase in working hours.

[Hibrandenburg]

Granted we don’t have any credible opposition in Scotland but there is a danger that people can just stay home on Election Day if the are feeling aggrieved at this failure.
So far all the planning the schools are doing is as if blended learning is plan A. When I asked what the timetable was if the kids were ok to go back full time I was told it hadn’t been made up. Yet we have been told which group my son will be in for his blended learning and what days etc.
There is only one option getting planned for and I think that will cost them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Surely there's no need to plan for full time schooling, that is the normal after all and normal won't be resumed until it's safe to do so. :dunno:

[Future17]

If things continue to improve the way they are then schools will be back full time in August. I suspect they’re being over cautious before making an announcement. It’s still 7 weeks away so I suppose the decision doesn’t need to be made yet. What I did find strange was the announcement around blended learning, there was no reason to make that an announcement and it’s backfired.

Can I ask what makes you think that? Personally, I think there's absolutely zero chance of that happening.

[bawheid]

Can I ask what makes you think that? Personally, I think there's absolutely zero chance of that happening.

If that’s the case, then I agree that the SNP has a problem. We need the schools back full time, with kids receiving proper teaching by trained teachers in a classroom environment. To do otherwise risks a lost generation of young adults with significant mental health implications. It’s simply not worth it.

I’ve voted SNP solidly since 2005. I’ll think again if my son isn’t given a proper chance to sit his upcoming Higher year. I realise that sounds selfish, but on the balance of everything, that’s where I am.

[lord bunberry]

Can I ask what makes you think that? Personally, I think there's absolutely zero chance of that happening.
We should be in phase 4 of the lockdown easing measures by then and we will most likely have reduced the distancing to 1 meter. If the current trend continues we will be virus free by the time August comes around, there won’t be much point in social distancing if that’s the case. It will all depend on how things go, but we’re already at the stage where deaths are in single figures and new cases are dropping and if that continues then we’ll be in a position to open schools full time.

[greenlex]

We should be in phase 4 of the lockdown easing measures by then and we will most likely have reduced the distancing to 1 meter. If the current trend continues we will be virus free by the time August comes around, there won’t be much point in social distancing if that’s the case. It will all depend on how things go, but we’re already at the stage where deaths are in single figures and new cases are dropping and if that continues then we’ll be in a position to open schools full time.
Add in another two months of information on how and why kids seem to be less susceptible to the virus and I think you are bang in the money.

[Ozyhibby]

Surely there's no need to plan for full time schooling, that is the normal after all and normal won't be resumed until it's safe to do so. :dunno:

There would normally be timetables made up by now though and they appear not to be.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

If that’s the case, then I agree that the SNP has a problem. We need the schools back full time, with kids receiving proper teaching by trained teachers in a classroom environment. To do otherwise risks a lost generation of young adults with significant mental health implications. It’s simply not worth it.

I’ve voted SNP solidly since 2005. I’ll think again if my son isn’t given a proper chance to sit his upcoming Higher year. I realise that sounds selfish, but on the balance of everything, that’s where I am.

That’s a perfectly reasonable position.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sir David Gray]

We should be in phase 4 of the lockdown easing measures by then and we will most likely have reduced the distancing to 1 meter. If the current trend continues we will be virus free by the time August comes around, there won’t be much point in social distancing if that’s the case. It will all depend on how things go, but we’re already at the stage where deaths are in single figures and new cases are dropping and if that continues then we’ll be in a position to open schools full time.

We won't be going into phase 4 until there's;

a) A vaccine is widely available that stops people from getting the virus - No chance by August

b) A life saving drug is widely available that stops people from dying if they get the virus and removes the health risk across the country - Unlikely by August

c) Transmission of the virus is so low that the government are confident that they can control it without the need for the restrictions in phase 3 - Again, based on how cautious things have been so far, I'd say it's also unlikely by August

[James310]

There would normally be timetables made up by now though and they appear not to be.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I got my daughter's today.

School split into 3 groups, she is in Group A and is in 2 days a week in week 1, 1 day a week in week 2 and 1 day a week in week 3.

So 4 days out of 15, works out less than 30%.

You can imagine I am not too happy, but I believe John Swinney has told Edinburgh council to go back and come back with something better.

[lord bunberry]

We won't be going into phase 4 until there's;

a) A vaccine is widely available that stops people from getting the virus - No chance by August

b) A life saving drug is widely available that stops people from dying if they get the virus and removes the health risk across the country - Unlikely by August

c) Transmission of the virus is so low that the government are confident that they can control it without the need for the restrictions in phase 3 - Again, based on how cautious things have been so far, I'd say it's also unlikely by August
Transmission is already quite low, in another 7 weeks I’d hope it was almost at zero. Anyone who’s been out and about in Edinburgh this last week will tell you that a large number of youngsters have decided the lockdown is over anyway, there’s loads of school kids out not worrying about social distancing. The Meadows were absolutely rammed on Saturday and there was large groups of people wandering the streets drinking.

[lord bunberry]

I got my daughter's today.

School split into 3 groups, she is in Group A and is in 2 days a week in week 1, 1 day a week in week 2 and 1 day a week in week 3.

So 4 days out of 15, works out less than 30%.

You can imagine I am not too happy, but I believe John Swinney has told Edinburgh council to go back and come back with something better.
I got mine as well it’s a load of bollocks, there’s no way that can be the plan.

edit I didn’t get a timetable it was just an email saying they were aiming for 50% by August.

[Sir David Gray]

Transmission is already quite low, in another 7 weeks I’d hope it was almost at zero. Anyone who’s been out and about in Edinburgh this last week will tell you that a large number of youngsters have decided the lockdown is over anyway, there’s loads of school kids out not worrying about social distancing. The Meadows were absolutely rammed on Saturday and there was large groups of people wandering the streets drinking.

I'm not disagreeing with you that it should be possible but I'm not sure the person who really matters will share that view.

[lord bunberry]

I'm not disagreeing with you that it should be possible but I'm not sure the person who really matters will share that view.
I hope you’re wrong as two days a week is useless for the kids and useless for parents trying to get back to work. If there’s a second wave then it’s inevitable that the schools stay closed, but if not they need to be back.

[Sir David Gray]

I hope you’re wrong as two days a week is useless for the kids and useless for parents trying to get back to work. If there’s a second wave then it’s inevitable that the schools stay closed, but if not they need to be back.

I agree 2 days a week is a horrendous proposal and even if social distancing is still in force in August, I can't believe that's the best they can come up with.

[lord bunberry]

I agree 2 days a week is a horrendous proposal and even if social distancing is still in force in August, I can't believe that's the best they can come up with.
The email I got said they were working hard to achieve 50%. Obviously they’re not even able to guarantee even 50% yet. I’ve been fairly happy with the way the Scottish government has handled things so far, but this issue has the potential to lose them a lot of that goodwill.

[Ozyhibby]

I hope you’re wrong as two days a week is useless for the kids and useless for parents trying to get back to work. If there’s a second wave then it’s inevitable that the schools stay closed, but if not they need to be back.

What if there is a third and fourth wave? At what point do we learn to live with this and manage the risks without locking ourselves up all the time?
I doubt even the SNP can escape punishment from parents if they don’t get those schools open.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Callum_62]

What if there is a third and fourth wave? At what point do we learn to live with this and manage the risks without locking ourselves up all the time?
I doubt even the SNP can escape punishment from parents if they don’t get those schools open.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkOnly when we have a handle on the virus and and proper track and trace system, or a medicine to stop it being so deadly at the very least

If there's a genuine second wave and 1500+ folk a day are dying, then missing some school will be the least of our concerns

I believe Scotland are trying for the eradication model.... That's get the cases as low as possible to allow any outbreaks to be contained... Like NZ are doing

I get the sense that the UK gov are in danger of just saying sod it, we can't be bothered with the faff anymore - crack on lads

That obviously puts every country that shares a border with England is an interesting position



Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[bawheid]

If there's a genuine second wave and 1500+ folk a day are dying, then missing some school will be the least of our concerns.

No, it’ll be one of our main concerns, alongside 1500 folk dying, wrecking the economy, allowing other diseases to flourish and destroying the nation’s mental health.

It’s not just “missing some school”. If we allow this to carry on into the autumn there will be thousands of Scottish kids put at a serious life disadvantage. This is before you get around to thinking about the mental health harm being caused by lockdown and the various obsessive compulsive disorders that will be caused by social distancing.

We’re in danger of sacrificing one generation to try and protect another. It’s wrong.

[Bishop Hibee]

The problem for schools and nurseries is they can’t predict how prevalent the virus will be come 11th August. I work in the sector and we’ve already expanded the amount of children we can have in each bubble. It’s highly likely the time each child will be allowed in schools/nurseries will be increased by then and will be phased into 100% or as near as is safe as soon as possible.

I’ve a friend who teaches Maths in a secondary school near Coventry and he’s back with classes of 15, half the normal 30.

[Callum_62]

No, it’ll be one of our main concerns, alongside 1500 folk dying, wrecking the economy, allowing other diseases to flourish and destroying the nation’s mental health.

It’s not just “missing some school”. If we allow this to carry on into the autumn there will be thousands of Scottish kids put at a serious life disadvantage. This is before you get around to thinking about the mental health harm being caused by lockdown and the various obsessive compulsive disorders that will be caused by social distancing.

We’re in danger of sacrificing one generation to try and protect another. It’s wrong.OK, Il rephrase

I won't be my main concern, at all.

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[James310]

Breaking: @johnswinney expected to announce preparations to reopen schools 100% without social distancing from 11 August IF virus suppression continues

Not guaranteed. Blended learning to remain as contingency

Via @BBCScotlandNews political editor, Brian Taylor https://t.co/fLXd21HmiK

[Ozyhibby]

Breaking: @johnswinney expected to announce preparations to reopen schools 100% without social distancing from 11 August IF virus suppression continues

Not guaranteed. Blended learning to remain as contingency

Via @BBCScotlandNews political editor, Brian Taylor https://t.co/fLXd21HmiK

Parent power. They were getting a hiding.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[marinello59]

Parent power. They were getting a hiding.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Swinney has had a nightmare with this. Not his best performance.

[Moulin Yarns]

Parent power. They were getting a hiding.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I've already posted this on the coronavirus thread. Last week at the briefing it was clearly stated that the blended learning was a contingency rather than the first choice. We are 3 months into lockdown and schools opening is 2 months away. At least 3 more reviews between now and then.

[JimBHibees]

Parent power. They were getting a hiding.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Or they are waiting until the appropriate time realising it is a fast moving situation. Seems like a sensible approach.

[G B Young]

Parent power. They were getting a hiding.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Think you're right there.

Seems at odds with the announcement just an hour earlier than Scotland's not yet ready to relax the two-metre distancing rule though. Not sure how that squares with such a dramatic change in school policy.

[marinello59]

I've already posted this on the coronavirus thread. Last week at the briefing it was clearly stated that the blended learning was a contingency rather than the first choice. We are 3 months into lockdown and schools opening is 2 months away. At least 3 more reviews between now and then.

It's about as humilating a u-turn as you will see. To believe that he switched from telling us to expect a year of blended learning to this within a week due to us making 'significant progress' in the intervening period is a wee bit of a stretch. This was set in motion the minute Sturgeon had to 'clarify' his original statement. If Westminster had behaved in the same way they would be getting absolute pelters on here for it.
The SNP caved in to pressure from the opposition parties and the public, there is no other way to dress this up.

[Moulin Yarns]

It's about as humilating a u-turn as you will see. To believe that he switched from telling us to expect a year of blended learning to this within a week due to us making 'significant progress' in the intervening period is a wee bit of a stretch. This was set in motion the minute Sturgeon had to 'clarify' his original statement. If Westminster had behaved in the same way they would be getting absolute pelters on here for it.
The SNP caved in to pressure from the opposition parties and the public, there is no other way to dress this up.

To coin a phrase, I will pay more attention to the organ grinder than the monkey.

The FM said it was a contingency plan so I believe it.

Don't get me wrong, JS is my MSP and I have time for him as a human being but don't really rate him as a politician.

[Tomsk]

To coin a phrase, I will pay more attention to the organ grinder than the monkey.

The FM said it was a contingency plan so I believe it.

Don't get me wrong, JS is my MSP and I have time for him as a human being but don't really rate him as a politician.

Wasn't he paraded as Sturgeon's safest pair of hands and ablest lieutenant and hence why he was handed the schools brief because she wanted to be judged on her record on education? Or something?

[Moulin Yarns]

Wasn't he paraded as Sturgeon's safest pair of hands and ablest lieutenant and hence why he was handed the schools brief because she wanted to be judged on her record on education? Or something?

I think he was better in finance. Education was failing so he was given that portfolio and hasn't improved it much, if at all.

[greenlex]

Think you're right there.

Seems at odds with the announcement just an hour earlier than Scotland's not yet ready to relax the two-metre distancing rule though. Not sure how that squares with such a dramatic change in school policy.
We are 8 weeks away from schools returning and the 2 metre rule will be long gone by then. No need to square that particular conundrum. This has been handled dreadfully.

[Sir David Gray]

It's about as humilating a u-turn as you will see. To believe that he switched from telling us to expect a year of blended learning to this within a week due to us making 'significant progress' in the intervening period is a wee bit of a stretch. This was set in motion the minute Sturgeon had to 'clarify' his original statement. If Westminster had behaved in the same way they would be getting absolute pelters on here for it.
The SNP caved in to pressure from the opposition parties and the public, there is no other way to dress this up.

:agree: Yep it would be a 20 page thread on here if this was the UK government.

Pretty embarrassing.

[Callum_62]

:agree: Yep it would be a 20 page thread on here if this was the UK government.

Pretty embarrassing.You reckon? I didn't see a 20 page thread when schools would reopen, eh na actually they won't in england

My partner, always thought the planning they were doing was the contingency rather the rule

Obviously hastened by the approaching holiday period

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[G B Young]

It's about as humilating a u-turn as you will see. To believe that he switched from telling us to expect a year of blended learning to this within a week due to us making 'significant progress' in the intervening period is a wee bit of a stretch. This was set in motion the minute Sturgeon had to 'clarify' his original statement. If Westminster had behaved in the same way they would be getting absolute pelters on here for it.
The SNP caved in to pressure from the opposition parties and the public, there is no other way to dress this up.

Agree with all of that. It's interesting also that after such an ultra-cautious approach throughout, Sturgeon has seen fit to take what must qualify as a bit of a safety gamble here.

I do, however, find it endlessly tiresome that opposition parties take such glee in proclaiming such policy changes as 'u-turns' - and that governments go to such pains to deny they have been influenced by opposition/public demand. I get that it's a kind-of follow-up stick with which to beat a government even when they have changed policy (ie to make them look weak and easily influenced) but for me it's the kind of thing that often makes politics look so childish - and creates a climate unconducive to cross-party co-operation. Is it really so hard for a government to say they've listened and learned (rather than tie themselves in knots trying to deny a policy change, like Swinney did today), or for an opposition to give them credit for doing so?