Should I vote Labour

This is why you should vote Labour.

" Fund the NHS properly and stop it being sold off
Make sure there are always safe nurse/patient numbers so people don’t die unnecessarily
Pay nurses while they train because we bloody well need nurses
Fund education properly and create a National Education Service to match the NHS – free at the point of need for everyone
Scrap the university tuition fees that have our kids manacled to debt for thirty years, before they even think about trying to buy a home.
Pay people enough to live on – so they don’t need to claim benefits.
Don’t send our servicemen and women to be killed abroad unless there’s no other option
Pay carers a bit – they save us a fortune
Give all kids free school meals so those with poor parents aren’t humiliated and nobody’s unable to study because they’re too hungry
Stop making relatives pay to park when they’re with their sick loved ones – they have enough on their plate
Build homes, so we don’t watch our kids live at the mercy of landlords all their lives
Pay public sector workers properly – it’s fantastic for the economy and makes us all richer, as well as improving the quality of life for everyone
No tax increases if you earn less than £80,000 a year – that’s 95% of us!
Make firms that want to profit from government contracts actually pay their bloody taxes on those profits
Make big firms pay little firms promptly, so little firms – the vast majority of employers in this country – don’t go bust for lack of cashflow
Renationalise public transport – so we don’t all get ripped off for being treated like cattle. "

Jen,you are avoiding questions. Did all children have free music lesson ten years ago? Can schools afford to buy instruments and employ music teachers for different instruments , if , as I did, buy the instruments will all parents want to or be able to do this.

The promises are too much other side of the rainbow , yes I would like all children to have music lesson, free, but will this really be possible?

Apart for more power for the unions I would like these rainbow promises to happen but where is all the money coming From? Squeaze businesses to much and unemployment will rise

My eldest son was a head of music until his school became an academy and he lost his job.
All the boys who want to study music have to learn privately now. Do we want schools to go back to that?

If the government wants to save money on education, get rid of free schools and academy chains, for a start!

In real terms, schools have lost £16 billion funding since 2010.

No, because not all children will want music lessons.

I was on my way out when I made that claim. Delete 10 and substitute 15, 20 or whatever. The fact is that schools and education have had their budgets cut and parents are increasingly being asked for donations. Class sizes are increasing and jobs are being lost.

In any case, music lessons don't have to be one-to-one and many schools (especially secondary) already own many instruments. Hertfordshire offered free music lessons through the Local Authority, which has now almost been abolished.

It really isn't a crazy idea, especially as some of the most over-subscribed secondary schools reserve places for talented musicians, which isn't fair, when only wealthier parents can afford music lessons. Some primary schools use their £1,300 per child pupil premium funding to ensure poorer pupils are offered music lessons.

Why should music be considered any different to any other area of the curriculum? Anyone who wants to study should be able to.

Jen you said your sons had free lessons too. We are discussing Daphne's claim that these were free for all ten years ago. Yes all children should have free music lessons but who pays for the thousands of instruments, and will all schools hsve music teachers for all,instruments. I found it a struggle to buy a flute and cello , can all parents afford to buy the instruments ?

Like many ideas,there follows the who is paying and how

That's PQE, Maizie, the house building. Such a reasonable idea. What's the betting May pinches it for her manifesto.

They don't necessarily need a tax source to pay for them,*Annie*.

The biggest expenditure I can see in that list is for house building. It's a Keynesian strategy, government investment giving rise to employment, demand for building resources, and demand for fixtures, fittings and furnishings for the new homes, supports associated businesses. Return on government investment by way of income tax, business taxes, VAT (or whatever replaces it post Brexit).

Somebody tell me if I've missed a vital flaw?

Yes, some stuff in the list is a bit daft, why, when productivity is low, do we need 4 more Bank Holidays?

Really I'm indulging in a bit of blue sky thinking here; I'm a bit tired of trying to be sensible. People were mad enough to vote for Brexit; this is my bit of madness...

My two eldest granddaughters have had music lessons paid for through the education system. They are 24 and 17.
Even though their dad is a music teacher, he could not play the violin, so they had lessons at school using peripatetic teachers up to GCSE level. No moey changed hands.
Why should music be the prerogative of those who can afford it? Why shouldn't music lessons be free?

Thanks Maizie. In those days, £1000pa was often paid upfront by parents and grandparents.

They're now £9,250 per year with no means-tested living grants, so students take out repayable loans. My son took out a loan for about £17,500 for his first year. They're aren't many parents who can afford to pay that for at least three years.

Hertfordshire had free lessons and I believe it was free (or very cheap) to hire instruments. Essex was never free (apart from those studying GCSE music), but it was only a couple of pounds per lesson, as opposed to the £15-20 they cost now.

I assume you mean £403pw. Exactly! If he took out a full loan, he'll never pay it back, unless he's a very high earner.

If he took out £27,000 loan (plus anything for living expenses), his loan will be accruing interest at over £1,500 a year. He'd have to be earning over £36,000 a year even to keep up with the interest.

Means-tested grants were abolished last year, so students have to take out a loan almost twice as much as your grandson did.

Was that ten years ago Jen? My daughters had cello and flute lessons free, nearly forty years ago, I had to buy the instruments

MaizieD It really depends on wage inflation over the next 25 or 30 years, but the vast majority of students will never pay back their loans. Some estimates suggest that about 75% of the loans will need to be written off.

Interest accrues from the day the loan is taken out. The repayment method means that few students will even pay enough to cover their annual interest for many years after they start work.

Student loans actually operate more like a graduate tax than a conventional loan.

Loans are an accounting trick, because the debt doesn't appear on the government's balance sheet, but is transferred as private debt. However, the bottom line is that the government is still paying out the money for the loans in the first place.

It's quite complicated, but some people have estimated that the loans cost more than the old system did, because more students are eligible for loans than were eligible for means-tested grants and it's more expensive to administer.

My sons studied music all through their school careers. We never paid for any lessons for either of them.

My Grandson is paying back his student loan, payments start once earnings of £403 are reached

Ideas may be great but put into practice and being sure of the tax sources to pay for them , this concerns me

anniebach Some local authorities did offer free music lessons to all children who wanted them. In any case, the fees for music lessons were a fraction of today's cost.

I couldn't remember when tuition fees started. Again, they were nothing like they are today and, up until last year, non repayable grants were available for many students.

I don't agree with free school meals for all children, but again some children did have free school meals and I'm open to persuasion that they are cost effective in terms of achievement.

Corbyn's proposals on education really aren't so left-wing nor unaffordable as you seem to think.

It appears a draft copy of the Labour manifesto has been leaked.

Looking at the list of Labour ideas in the OP there are some worthwhile things in it
1 is perfectly feasible, Germany has an effective rate of 30% (3 taxes combined) and doesn't appear to be losing businesses
4 & 5 are reasonable and wouldn't upset the public so long as their services were still good (East Coast rail returned a profit to the treasury)
6 Building council houses to eliminate private landlords profiting from Housing benefit, and more houses should stop house price inflation. Good?

9, 10, 11, 13 & 14 What's to dislike?

(I wish Corbyn hadn't said that stupid thing about memorising poetry being a Bad Thing. It's set all the twitter teachers I follow in a rage! He does have a death wish...)

I just couldn't see a Labour administration being as hell bent on one party dictatorship as the tories (despite all the mutterings about communism).

To be honest, if we're going to go for Brexit and Broke I'd rather do it under a coalition of chaos where the parties display some humanity and concern for ordinary people than under the Tories who really don't care.

Tuition fees introduced in 1998; £1,000 p.a.

dd

You said earlier that tuition fees didn't get paid back (by the students, I presume you mean),implying it was an accounting trick. Can you explain how that works?

Daphne, no idea where you plucked ten years ago from, tuition fees began much earlier, there was not free school dinners for all children , there was not free music lessons for all children

varian, I do not have a problem supporting Labour, I support labour values as I have always done, I do not support Corbyn and have said why - often .

If there was a split the Labour Party would be the party with Corbyn as leader.

I have feared a split for some time , the split of the four in the eighties failed to result in a success . But I really cannot see how we can have a party so split and Corbyn isn't going to resign untill he has a far left member to take over,

It saddens me to see the likes of Abbott and Thornbury so prominent in the shadow cabinet and excellent MP's with experience stuck on the backbenchers .

I believe if we had a centre left leader we would have a chance of winning the election , but we have Corbyn,

I don't want to see the Labour Party split. If the election results are as desperate as some fear and Jeremy refuses to resign, what would you suggest varian?

There has to be a way forward that doesn't involve calling the majority of MPs in the LP "back stabbing ******". I live in a north west former mill town, where unemployment is high, we have high levels of asylum seekers placed in our town because rents are less than those in London. I'm not criticising the asylum seekers of course and I've no problem with the changing face of our town. We have generally easy relationships between other groups of immigrants and I've no reason to believe that won't continue. My point is the lack of housing and employment, the closure of our good Sure Start Family Centres, the cuts to front line social work and mental health staff.
So yes, we should vote Labour or in areas where its a LibDem or conservative victory, vote lib dem.