AlmightyWalrus wrote:
strangle any reasoned debate and increase polarization in US society through outright lies.

 whembly wrote:
So...what's the story with this Tommy Robinson reporter? Do I have this right? No one is allowed to report in that grooming gang rape trial??

o.O

 Da Boss wrote:
I flew over to Dublin for the abortion vote, I'm absolutely thrilled. I didn't think we would win by that much. I hope the US evangelicals spent LOTS of money on this campaign

Anne Milton hasn’t met the IfA’s apprentice panel in its first year

The skills minister has still not met with the Institute for Apprenticeships’ panel of apprentices – more than 12 months after it was established.

The panel, which first met last April, is made up of current or recent apprentices who discuss issues from the learner’s perspective and raise with the main IfA board.

Shadow skills minister Gordon Marsden lodged a written parliamentary question on April 16 asking about meetings Anne Milton had held.

“I am hoping to meet with the panel of apprentices in the near future,” replied the minister yesterday, who claimed she had attended a meeting of the full IfA board “by telephone” last December.

“The panel of apprentices is particularly important to help the IfA improve the quality of apprenticeships, as it reflects the importance of apprentices’ experiences across a broad range of different occupational routes.”

Mr Marsden was not impressed.

“It’s frankly ludicrous that this reply – which finally came after DfE officials had clearly struggled with how to answer my question – admits that not only has the minister not met the apprentices’ panel, but also she wasn’t at the IfA’s last board meeting other than ‘by telephone’,” he said.

“With the IfA just having taken on a daunting set of new responsibilities for technical skills, isn’t it crucial that the minister does get face to face personal feedback rapidly, both from the apprentices panel and its board?”

IfA responsibilities include overseeing development and approval of new apprenticeship standards and assessment plans, advising employers on government funding for standards, and quality-assuring the delivery of apprenticeship end-point assessments.

It will also oversee T-levels, the government’s new technical qualifications, which will appear starting from 2020.

Ms Milton’s predecessor as minister Robert Halfon was an advocate of the panel of apprentices’ potential to allow learners to exert a positive influence on decisions affecting them.

There were initially fears that the IfA may not have any apprentice representation at all during the early stages of its development.

Mr Marsden and the NUS president Shakira Martin, who was then the union’s vice-president for FE, wanted apprentices to take up places on the board itself – but the government would not commit to the idea.

However, in December 2016, Mr Halfon confirmed that the IfA would “invite apprentices to establish an apprentice panel, which would report directly to the board”.

The National Society of Apprentices expressed fears last summer that his successor Ms Milton was less interested in the panel.

“We heard Anne Milton talk about wanting to listen to as many voices as possible so we hope that she backs her words up with action,” a spokesperson said at the time.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 whembly wrote:
So...what's the story with this Tommy Robinson reporter? Do I have this right? No one is allowed to report in that grooming gang rape trial??

o.O

Tommy Robinson isn't a reporter. He's the ex leader of the EDL, a group that drapes the english flag over itself, gets drunk and wanders around shouting at muslims.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/tommy-robinson-arrested-leeds-court-child-grooming-trial-edl-founder-latest-a8368821.html

 reds8n wrote:

Spoiler:

... cannot wait to have them working in all those hospitals and care homes...


a cynical person might think they're, I dunno, making this stuff up as they go along !

 Kilkrazy wrote:
This bodes well for the government's plan to establish "T Levels" for technical training, which as far as I can see is a plan to re-establish the day release technical training for City & Guilds, etc which apprentices used to have.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 whembly wrote:
So...what's the story with this Tommy Robinson reporter? Do I have this right? No one is allowed to report in that grooming gang rape trial??

o.O

Tommy Robinson isn't a reporter. He's the ex leader of the EDL, a group that drapes the english flag over itself, gets drunk and wanders around shouting at muslims.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/tommy-robinson-arrested-leeds-court-child-grooming-trial-edl-founder-latest-a8368821.html

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
They don’t like it when Russians and other foreigners get involved in their elections. But a referendum in a country that has nothing to do with them? That’s fair game to pour money into one campaign and bombard social media with propaganda.

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Yeah I thought the idea was to rehabilitate people? Why’s that a problem?

 Kilkrazy wrote:
This bodes well for the government's plan to establish "T Levels" for technical training, which as far as I can see is a plan to re-establish the day release technical training for City & Guilds, etc which apprentices used to have.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Yeah I thought the idea was to rehabilitate people? Why’s that a problem?

It's called 'slave labor' and generally does not turn out a quality product.

 amanita wrote:
I found the Tommy Robinson arrest curious because there was nothing about it all on the BBC.
A court ordered lock-down on information about his case is a very curious thing to me as an American.

 Riquende wrote:
God I hate that guy. He's from the town where I live and made a video once where he drove through Bury Park, one of the streets notable for a strong Asian/Muslim community to highlight how dangerous it was ("I couldn't walk down here, I'd get battered. I'd never make it out again"). Thing is, at the time the gaming club I went to was at one end of that road, and we used to walk down it weekly to get food, never had any issues. But there he is, telling the world we've got dangerous 'no-go areas'.

But yeah, he's not a reporter. Former leader of a far-right group of thugs who hides behind a pseudonym (his real name is Stephen Lennon) and tries to stoke divisions in society and make sure it's all captured on camera and online, trying to make it seem like it's some massive injustice when he's stopped.

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Yeah I thought the idea was to rehabilitate people? Why’s that a problem?

As for Tommy Robinson, what specifically did he do to be locked up for breach of the peace?

 Jadenim wrote:

 amanita wrote:
I found the Tommy Robinson arrest curious because there was nothing about it all on the BBC.
A court ordered lock-down on information about his case is a very curious thing to me as an American.

That’s because we try to avoid trial by media.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
All about the risk of prejudicing the jury.

When a Gammon feth knuckle like Tommy ‘not his real name, not that the prick has something to hide’ Robinson rocks up, spewing their pathetic vitriol, it risks a trial collapsing - even when the evidence is solid.

But the prick that Tommy ‘Free Speech Is Only For Me’ Robinson’s clearly racist reporting endangered said fair trial.

 Jadenim wrote:

 amanita wrote:
I found the Tommy Robinson arrest curious because there was nothing about it all on the BBC.
A court ordered lock-down on information about his case is a very curious thing to me as an American.

That’s because we try to avoid trial by media.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
All about the risk of prejudicing the jury.

When a Gammon feth knuckle like Tommy ‘not his real name, not that the prick has something to hide’ Robinson rocks up, spewing their pathetic vitriol, it risks a trial collapsing - even when the evidence is solid.

But the prick that Tommy ‘Free Speech Is Only For Me’ Robinson’s clearly racist reporting endangered said fair trial.

No it didn't. He was reporting on the sentencing.

You can't prejudice a jury when the defendants have already been convicted.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
No it didn't. He was reporting on the sentencing.

You can't prejudice a jury when the defendants have already been convicted.

 Jadenim wrote:

 Jadenim wrote:

 amanita wrote:
I found the Tommy Robinson arrest curious because there was nothing about it all on the BBC.
A court ordered lock-down on information about his case is a very curious thing to me as an American.

That’s because we try to avoid trial by media.

Apologies if I caused any confusion, I wasn’t trying to comment on the specific case (I don’t know anything about it), but this kind of lock down is fairly common in the UK for controversial cases and I was just trying to explain why, as it might seem strange to non-British. We don’t have televised courts and anything involving underage suspects, particularly gruesome or inflammatory crimes, etc. tends to have further restrictions, to prevent influencing the jury and/or protect the identity of those involved (i.e. innocent until proven guilty, which can become difficult if the media are reporting every detail of a case).

The UK government’s preparations for a “no deal” Brexit in March 2019 have largely ground to a halt, making it almost impossible for Theresa May to walk out of negotiations with the EU in the next 10 months, according to people with close knowledge of the situation.

As the prime minister prepares for what is arguably the trickiest phase of the Brexit talks, the government’s official position is that it can reach an accord with the EU — but that it is also preparing contingencies for “no deal” if Brussels tries to strike too hard a bargain.

However, Whitehall officials are privately conceding that preparations for a “cliff edge” Brexit next March are nowhere near the level they need to be if a threat by Mrs May to walk away from the talks were to be credible.

“Our preparedness for no deal is virtually non-existent,” said one senior British official working on Brexit. “Our ability to deliver a ‘no deal’ outcome recedes with every week that passes.”

Other officials preparing for the possibility of Britain leaving the EU without a deal say they are being discouraged from taking on projects that might only be needed should there be no agreement on customs and regulatory co-operation by next March.

Sir Ivan Rogers, the UK’s former ambassador to the EU, observed in a speech in Glasgow last week that the UK had still not set up the independent regulatory bodies that would be needed in the event of a “no deal” Brexit next year.



“If we want . . . genuinely to go it alone . . . then we have to be going full tilt in developing that regulatory capability at huge speed,” he said. “The fact that, in so many areas, we are obviously not doing that . . . is yet another reason why the EU side has long since concluded that the UK would not walk out.”

Another former mandarin indicated that the failure to set up independent regulatory bodies in the event of a “no deal” next year was causing most concern.

“How many years does it take to set up a medicines agency?” he said. “Or chemicals approval? Or civil nuclear-safety standards? Or a new state aid policy? Where is the legislation? Where are the skilled staff coming from?”

In last December’s Budget, Philip Hammond, the chancellor, allocated £1.5bn for “Brexit preparedness”, which covers all aspects of Brexit planning, including a “no deal” scenario.”

However, government officials concede that the new money only became available in the financial year starting in April and that it is still too early to make a judgment on how it might be spent.

A further £1.5bn has been set aside by Mr Hammond but this is only being earmarked for the financial year after March 2019 when the UK is formally due to leave the EU.



On Sunday, Jacob Rees-Mogg, the leading Conservative Brexiter, urged Mrs May to revive her threat to leave the EU without a deal if Brussels takes an uncompromising approach in the Brexit negotiations.

He told the BBC that Mrs May should threaten not to pay the £40bn “divorce bill” agreed with the EU in December. “We should say quite clearly: ‘If we don’t get the trade deal we want, you don’t get the money.’ That’s a very strong negotiating position.”

But hardline Brexiters, both in cabinet and on the Conservative backbenches, claim that Mrs May, Mr Hammond, cabinet secretary Sir Jeremy Heywood and Olly Robbins, the chief Brexit negotiator, have conspired to avoid serious “no deal” planning for next March to such an extent that it is no longer a realistic option.




Dominic Cummings, one of the masterminds of the pro-Brexit referendum campaign, wrote last week: “The Treasury argues . . . that given the actual outcome of the negotiations will be abject surrender, it is pointless wasting more money to prepare for a policy that has no future and therefore even the Potemkin preparations now under way should be abandoned.”

A Number 10 spokesman said: “The prime minister is committed to getting the best possible Brexit deal, one that works for the UK and the EU. The government is committing extensive resources as part of our preparations for leaving the EU — whether in the event of a deal or not, and at the autumn Budget the chancellor allocated £3bn specifically for our exit preparations.”

Spoiler:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Really the situation in NI is an embarrassment upon the UK, that we’ve allowed them a situation where they can maintain such backward laws.

However, Whitehall officials are privately conceding that preparations for a “cliff edge” Brexit next March are nowhere near the level they need to be if a threat by Mrs May to walk away from the talks were to be credible.

“Our preparedness for no deal is virtually non-existent,” said one senior British official working on Brexit. “Our ability to deliver a ‘no deal’ outcome recedes with every week that passes.”

 Kilkrazy wrote:
To flip the view, we Brits are often astonished at the amount of reporting around US trials which could be highly prejudicial to the jury's verdict.

To get back to UK politics, a new analysis says that if a referendum on EU membership were to be held now, Remain would win because of the demographic changes since the first one. That is, the fact that old people voted Leave and are dying, while young people voted Remain and there are more of them now.

I don't 100% agree because I think it will take a couple more years to create a decisive gap, but this study also points to 14 recent opinion surveys out of which 13 gave Remain the win.

Nay-sayers will point to the opinion polls that preceded the actual referendum, which gave Remain a good gap. I would point out that the polls moved in the
last couple of weeks before voting day, and started to predict a much closer result.