Gransnet forums

News & politics

Do the Conservatives think we are stupid?

(71 Posts)
Gracesgran Wed 03-Jun-15 13:20:27

The answer is obviously yes. I have just watched another Tory MP refuse to put forward any facts to prove that failing schools becoming Academies works and then denying the this is just for ideological reasons while saying they "believed" it would be best for the schools.

Sadly, there is probably nothing we can do about this centralisation and privatisation that is being put through in the name of raising standards.

Mishap Wed 03-Jun-15 13:48:31

Our nearest secondary academy (with whom our primary school was briefly linked) was and is a total disaster. We got out asap!

The head was a complete law unto himself and totally useless and the governors (or board of whatever if they are an academy) were too weak to do anything about it. Too much responsibility now lies in the hands of volunteers.

I had to laugh at N Morris talking about giving academies freedom from LA control - "what LA?" is the question I would ask. Our LA education department is virtually non-existent now due to the cuts. We are given money which we then have to spend buying in services that used to come from the LA from a weird private conglomerate that is constantly teetering on the brink of bankruptcy.

Sometimes it makes me despair, but we fight on.

whitewave Wed 03-Jun-15 14:46:30

Wait for the budget in July and then we will realize how stupid they think we are.

Gracesgran Wed 03-Jun-15 18:47:31

Oh whitewave I have a horrible feeling you will be proved right. sad

soontobe Wed 03-Jun-15 20:00:28

If parents took their children out of academies, or refused to let them be a pupil at an academy, then the academy idea would begin to crumble.

From what little I know of them, I dont like them.

Education always seems to be changing ever since I was born.
I used to wonder, in the 90's, where it was going to next. And guessed, that since LAs had control, and education had become standardized, that the next "step" would be to start to unravel it in some way.
I didnt guess that it would be unravelled so sharply and quickly.

mcem Wed 03-Jun-15 20:23:38

The academy I attended in the 60's was the Scottish equivalent of an English grammar school and when the comprehensive system was put in place the name was retained for most of them. However they remained within the control of the LEA and certainly are not suffering as their namesakes are in England.
We still work with the catchment area organisation and frankly most parents would agree 'If it ain't broke don't fix it'. Of course the existing system is less than perfect but I don't think we suffer the same stress as south of the border.
I was taken aback this morning when Ms Morris was asked on bbc breakfast news programme, how many academies are rated as less than good or outstanding and couldn't or wouldn't answer.
As I really don't understand your system I wonder how easy it is for parents to remove children from academies and find places elsewhere?
Also, at the transition stage whether families have the choice to place children in academies, comprehensives or any other type of school?

whitewave Wed 03-Jun-15 20:28:50

Ms Morris always looks to me like a frightened rabbit. I know nothing about academies - my GS's school is still under the LEA, but what I couldn't understand is that if the academy is failing the parents do not seem to be able to hold anyone to account - how can that be?

Teetime Wed 03-Jun-15 21:00:51

No they don't think we are stupid just inferior!

Ana Wed 03-Jun-15 21:05:14

Inferior to whom?

And who are the 'we' in the OP? Everyone who didn't vote for the conservatives, presumably...hmm

absent Wed 03-Jun-15 21:08:29

I suspect that most politicians consider the electorate inferior – so-called ordinary people, as opposed to what, I wonder.

Gracesgran Wed 03-Jun-15 22:06:10

"We" are all those who find the Conservatives making this attempt to privatise education and break the power of the teaching unions while telling "us", with absolutely no facts to back it up, that this is a "better way".

"We" is generally self-selecting and can be a group of any size. Someone may deselect themselves from any group. In this case they could deselect themselves because they voted Conservative and feel they must support all that the Tory's put forward or they could consider this to be just ideological manoeuvring and wish the party they had supported was not following this path. Equally a none Conservative voter might think this a good idea or they might not. I think you have made a very big assumption when you say that I am saying"we" is Everyone who didn't vote for the conservatives, presumably. Jumping to conclusions without proof is, in my opinion, rather what the Tory's are doing with this policy.

Gracesgran Wed 03-Jun-15 22:06:52

Sorry, that was in reply to Ana of course.

Ana Wed 03-Jun-15 22:14:06


Yes, I see, Gracesgran.

Gracesgran Wed 03-Jun-15 22:52:55

What on earth is wrong with the word "Tories" Ana?

The Conservative Party was founded in 1834 from the Tory Party—giving rise to the Conservatives' colloquial name of Tories—and was one of two dominant parties in the 19th century, along with the Liberal Party.

It is in common usage as another word - and a shorter one when it comes to typing - for Conservatives.

Do I spy a large "everyone gets at Conservative voters" chip on a shoulder? To be honest I couldn't care less how anyone voted but I do mind an ideological Bill being pushed through with no proof that it will work while trying to kid us that this is not purely on an unproved belief, especially when such a blatantly political move could damage our children.

If you believe there is good reason for doing this then please give me the facts. I am only to happy to read all points of view. That would have to be better and a more reasoned discussion than picking at who I mean by "we" and why I use the perfectly acceptable word "Tory".

Ana Wed 03-Jun-15 22:56:30

Nothing wrong with the word Tories at all when it's spelled correctly.

Ana Wed 03-Jun-15 23:00:30

Which was the only point I was making, perhaps tactlessly.

durhamjen Wed 03-Jun-15 23:01:11

On the news tonight the OECD are telling Osborne to reign back on his policies as he will harm the poor and the homeless, telling him to smooth out the cuts over the full five years. It was remarked on News 24 that that was exactly Ed Balls policy.
Hunt is also doing a u-turn on the NHS competition policies, as they are what is making the NHS unaffordable.
So who have the Tories conned? Tory voters voted for more austerity, not a weakening of policies. IDS has already been told he cannot go through with his plans to cut child benefit.

Eloethan Wed 03-Jun-15 23:03:47

The Conservative know we're stupid because we voted for them.

Gracesgran Wed 03-Jun-15 23:11:19

Not tactless Ana but certainly pointless when Tories is perfectly acceptable. You seem to be using the politicians trick to avoid any discussion on the actual topic.

Definition of Tory in English: noun (plural Tories)
1(In the UK) a member or supporter of the Conservative Party:
eg: a poll showed the Tories thirteen points behind Labour


I shall now ignore this nonsense and get back to the discussion where, I am sure, some people, with views from all sides of the argument, will actually put forward some facts.

Ana Wed 03-Jun-15 23:22:16

Oh, fgs Gracesgran - your post of 22.06 was littered with references to 'Tory's'.

You might find the grocer's/grocers' apostrophe acceptable but it annoys me when someone with obvious intelligence uses it.

durhamjen Wed 03-Jun-15 23:24:10

Is twice littered with? Being pedantic, I know.

Ana Wed 03-Jun-15 23:25:23

I'm actually quite amazed at how posts can be completely misconstrued by some people! confused

Ana Wed 03-Jun-15 23:26:59

Good to see you back, durhamjen smile

Gracesgran Wed 03-Jun-15 23:45:41

Then why Ana did you not put "tory's?" and I would have realised just how small minded you were being?

Gracesgran Wed 03-Jun-15 23:47:37

Just out of interest does everyone mark everyone else's posts on here?