ChatterBank5 mins ago
Another Lib/Dem brainless scheme, or is it the answer?
16 Answers
/// The Lib Dem leader, in his keynote speech to his party conference, is expected to say that lawless thugs went on the rampage as a result of hopelessness about their future rather than criminality and greed.///
http://www.express.co...t-thugs-summer-school
/// And he will unveil a £50million summer school initiative designed to give youngsters who struggle two weeks of extra classes to prepare them for secondary school. ///
Has he put this before the PM or does he hold the purse strings and also makes the decisions?
His he correct in assuming that it was because of the hopelessness about their future, rather than their greed for 50" TVs and free trainers that made those thugs to go on the rampage?
http://www.express.co...t-thugs-summer-school
/// And he will unveil a £50million summer school initiative designed to give youngsters who struggle two weeks of extra classes to prepare them for secondary school. ///
Has he put this before the PM or does he hold the purse strings and also makes the decisions?
His he correct in assuming that it was because of the hopelessness about their future, rather than their greed for 50" TVs and free trainers that made those thugs to go on the rampage?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
No I don't think that is the answer. Some people don't want to learn, they dont have the aptitude to take anything in, on the other hand there are some who never had a chance to learn much because of disruption in class. The road to the 50"TVs and free trainers etc. is a much easier one to follow. They will have to be weaned away from all that by a swift smack on the head or breaking rocks somewhere. But because of PC ninnies they will most likely be given some more money and taken on holiday.
I haven't seen these proposals in detail, but not all children "who struggle" do so because they are disruptive.
They may be very willing to learn but are held back through disruptive class mates or more likely because they simply need extra help.
So actually giving them extra help sounds like a good idea, however you do it.
A "smack on the head" is likely to encourage disrputive pupils to follow that example and embrace violence I'd have thought.
They may be very willing to learn but are held back through disruptive class mates or more likely because they simply need extra help.
So actually giving them extra help sounds like a good idea, however you do it.
A "smack on the head" is likely to encourage disrputive pupils to follow that example and embrace violence I'd have thought.
If it makes the yobs realise we are not all namby pamby willing to give in to their disgraceful behaviour jake, Yes. Lessons should be learned the hard way if thats how they want to play it. Hopelessness about their future will not be solved by spending all that money for two weeks extra classes to put the numpties into secondary school. Something akin to 6months in a Borstal like institution sounds more like it.
Ichkeria the 'smack on the head' was actully meant metaphorically speaking. Tougher measures should be employed to put the young tearaways in place. I believe I mentioned in my earlier response that some children have not been able to learn at school because of disruption in class. Those children should be given a chance to redeem themselves.
I'm only going by a snippet from the Daily Express article, admittedly a dangerous, possibly reckless thing to do given the entire article is weighted heavily to give the (laughable) impression the the Libdems are a bunch of dangerous commie subversives), but it says:
"he will unveil a £50million summer school initiative designed to give youngsters who struggle two weeks of extra classes to prepare them for secondary school."
If that's the most damning thing they can say about it then I would guess it isn't that controversial. In other words it doesn't say that this is a summer school for "thugs" but for hopefully willing pupils in genuine need
"he will unveil a £50million summer school initiative designed to give youngsters who struggle two weeks of extra classes to prepare them for secondary school."
If that's the most damning thing they can say about it then I would guess it isn't that controversial. In other words it doesn't say that this is a summer school for "thugs" but for hopefully willing pupils in genuine need
My attention was divided between the computer and the TV but, the way I heard it, Cleggers said that the riots _were_ caused by sheer greed and not a sense of hopelessness about the future.
Hopelessness tends to make a person listless, lazy and disinclined to go past the front door. Those rioters all looked to be in perfect health to me.
Hopelessness tends to make a person listless, lazy and disinclined to go past the front door. Those rioters all looked to be in perfect health to me.
(replying to em10)
The gist of the speech that you linked to was that 60% of the offenders apprehended, so far, had a history of criminality already. No attempt, on that occasion, to attribute the behaviour to any causative circumstances.
It seems that he and his advisors have had a little think amongst themselves and come up with this scheme, since then.
Now, you can call me entirely lacking in imagination, if you like, but I can't see the demand for extra lessons (during treasured summer holiday time, no less!) coming from these kids themselves ("mum, I'm falling behind in class and need help"). Pride in their offspring might prevent the parents from acknowledging the problem, let alone applying for a place so, at a guess, it will have to be the schools who identify the needy and enforce their attendence.
If the kids are unwilling participants from the start, they'll be even less engaged in their special lessons than they are during term-time, will they not?
Every time a politician announces a new scheme, my first thought is "OK, show us the piles of constituency letters demanding this thing be implemented". Anything else is just a shameless PR exercise.
The gist of the speech that you linked to was that 60% of the offenders apprehended, so far, had a history of criminality already. No attempt, on that occasion, to attribute the behaviour to any causative circumstances.
It seems that he and his advisors have had a little think amongst themselves and come up with this scheme, since then.
Now, you can call me entirely lacking in imagination, if you like, but I can't see the demand for extra lessons (during treasured summer holiday time, no less!) coming from these kids themselves ("mum, I'm falling behind in class and need help"). Pride in their offspring might prevent the parents from acknowledging the problem, let alone applying for a place so, at a guess, it will have to be the schools who identify the needy and enforce their attendence.
If the kids are unwilling participants from the start, they'll be even less engaged in their special lessons than they are during term-time, will they not?
Every time a politician announces a new scheme, my first thought is "OK, show us the piles of constituency letters demanding this thing be implemented". Anything else is just a shameless PR exercise.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.