A vision for the future.

Casdon

Glorianny

DaisyAnneReturns

Some are back to just voicing opinions. I'm sorry this thread lost its way but I think forward thinking is not everyone's thing. I am greatfull to the Institute for making the talks available. They are certainly food for thought.

I'll leave those who only want a regurgitation of their own opinions to enjoy this space.

Sorry but forward thinking is not just looking at the status quo and making tweaks. It is looking at the whole picture, where and how our economy has massively failed and looking at radical solutions which will improve the lives of ordinary people.

Not in my opinion it’s not, it’s about recognising the current position, how we got to where we are, having a long term plan to get to where we want to be, and then planning and cautiously taking the steps to get you where you want to go PDSA at it’s finest. Radical steps are ill conceived and usually disastrous, as history proves.
I thought Blair and Starmer recognised change processes well and had a sensible step by step approach planned. As for their suits - I’d have expected no less. We don’t want a PM who looks like an unmade bed.

Thank you Casdon. That is a much more comfortable end to the morning.

Glorianny

DaisyAnneReturns

Some are back to just voicing opinions. I'm sorry this thread lost its way but I think forward thinking is not everyone's thing. I am greatfull to the Institute for making the talks available. They are certainly food for thought.

I'll leave those who only want a regurgitation of their own opinions to enjoy this space.

Sorry but forward thinking is not just looking at the status quo and making tweaks. It is looking at the whole picture, where and how our economy has massively failed and looking at radical solutions which will improve the lives of ordinary people.

And you are entitled to that opinion Glorianny.

Casdon we’ve already had the unmade bed PM😂
Radical steps if needed don’t have to be disastrous, I imagine the NHS concept would have been thought radical in it’s day.
I think the time could be right for doing things really differently next time around, and hope Labour will be thinking what’s best for the majority in this country. People who work hard, want to get on the housing ladder and be able to pay bills while having a holiday now and then.Also to take good care of the disabled and disadvantaged.
It doesn’t need all policies to be radical but one or two if it will make a big difference would be welcome.
I liked Tony Blair and a lot of what he says still makes sense, especially what he says about climate change and the UK not rushing ahead and badly affecting citizens, that whatever the UK does on green issues ( we should still try) will not effect the outcome unless China the US and India also do it.I think I read that what China has put out recently is more than we have put out harmfully, since the Industrial Revolution began.

Glorianny

DaisyAnneReturns

Some are back to just voicing opinions. I'm sorry this thread lost its way but I think forward thinking is not everyone's thing. I am greatfull to the Institute for making the talks available. They are certainly food for thought.

I'll leave those who only want a regurgitation of their own opinions to enjoy this space.

Sorry but forward thinking is not just looking at the status quo and making tweaks. It is looking at the whole picture, where and how our economy has massively failed and looking at radical solutions which will improve the lives of ordinary people.

Not in my opinion it’s not, it’s about recognising the current position, how we got to where we are, having a long term plan to get to where we want to be, and then planning and cautiously taking the steps to get you where you want to go PDSA at it’s finest. Radical steps are ill conceived and usually disastrous, as history proves.
I thought Blair and Starmer recognised change processes well and had a sensible step by step approach planned. As for their suits - I’d have expected no less. We don’t want a PM who looks like an unmade bed.

DaisyAnneReturns

Some are back to just voicing opinions. I'm sorry this thread lost its way but I think forward thinking is not everyone's thing. I am greatfull to the Institute for making the talks available. They are certainly food for thought.

I'll leave those who only want a regurgitation of their own opinions to enjoy this space.

Sorry but forward thinking is not just looking at the status quo and making tweaks. It is looking at the whole picture, where and how our economy has massively failed and looking at radical solutions which will improve the lives of ordinary people.

There's nothing wrong in wearing a good suit if the man can afford it. And Labour benefits from donations from rich socialists. I like good champagne but I doubt there would ever be enough to go round.

Blair's three governments had many achievements - lists of about 30 to 50 have been compiled. Despite the attacks of the hard Left he was comfortably re-elected for the third time after the Iraq war.

In retrospect I think he made three mistakes - devolution, Iraq and continuing PFI but the achievements outweighed those in the minds of voters.

He was one of the outstanding PMs of the post-WW2 era and we would be foolish not to listen to what he has to say whether agreeing or not. I doubt we would be in the mess we are now if he had continued as PM, changing the succession so we missed out on the last batch of truly awful Tory PMs.

Some are back to just voicing opinions. I'm sorry this thread lost its way but I think forward thinking is not everyone's thing. I am greatfull to the Institute for making the talks available. They are certainly food for thought.

I'll leave those who only want a regurgitation of their own opinions to enjoy this space.

Glorianny

I started to watch Starmer and Blair, but I couldn't stand it. Two men in expensive suits telling us how hard it is going to be to grow the economy, just after the energy companies have announced the highest profits ever, and water companies are paying out huge dividends, whilst dumping live sewage in the sea, was too much for me.
It isn't radical thinking, it is just promoting the status quo.

👏🏻👏🏻
I do have a few doubts about Keir Starmer and there’s no sense at all in promoting the status quo as you say.Will there be any radical thinking from Labour?

It might be a possibility but I very much doubt that enough will be invested to provide the level of support necessary.

I found the presenters lack of logic and understanding of language a bit much.
"Who is the most important person in the room?"
"The teacher" I thought
"The pupil" she said. And I thought she was right for a minute because pupils are important.
But then clarity kicked in. There are often 30+ pupils in a room -they can't all be "the most important". If one or more pupils are missing the lesson will still go ahead. If the teacher is missing it might, or it might not.
So who is the most important?

Glorianny

I've only listened to the one on AI in education, but it struck me on several points as being somewhat inaccurate.
It's fairly obvious why the system is being taken up by private schools and it isn't as is claimed because staff in state schools fear it. It's because private schools have the money and state schools don't. If you can't afford to pay the salaries of TAs, or to have basic maintenance done you obviously can't invest in AI
The second that saving 6 hours a week would substantial alter a teacher's workload. Basically that's half your weekend off. It isn't a huge difference.
There is no concept of the huge discipline problem in UK schools over 6,000 children were permanently excluded last year and over 500,000 had temporary exclusions. Work out how much teacher time each of those took up. AI won't change that.
It's a bit like a Rolls Royce salesman berating mini drivers because they aren't driving Rolls.

I take your point about discipline because it is the only reason that one of mine went to Public School. I do wonder though, how many children are excluded because they can't cope with the education they receive which isn't designed for them so they struggle. Also, many have concentration problems which a teacher may be aware of but hasn't the time to assess, design work for, etc. AI could resolve some of these problems if their education programme is suited to them. I think that if a teacher didn't have to deal with discipline problems they would have much more time. I felt I spent far more time dealing with those problems than educating, it was so frustrating. A one size fits all education system based on age just doesn't work. I don't see it as a magical bullet but I don't think it should be ruled out and can see how it could be revolutionary. .

I started to watch Starmer and Blair, but I couldn't stand it. Two men in expensive suits telling us how hard it is going to be to grow the economy, just after the energy companies have announced the highest profits ever, and water companies are paying out huge dividends, whilst dumping live sewage in the sea, was too much for me.
It isn't radical thinking, it is just promoting the status quo.

I've only listened to the one on AI in education, but it struck me on several points as being somewhat inaccurate.
It's fairly obvious why the system is being taken up by private schools and it isn't as is claimed because staff in state schools fear it. It's because private schools have the money and state schools don't. If you can't afford to pay the salaries of TAs, or to have basic maintenance done you obviously can't invest in AI
The second that saving 6 hours a week would substantial alter a teacher's workload. Basically that's half your weekend off. It isn't a huge difference.
There is no concept of the huge discipline problem in UK schools over 6,000 children were permanently excluded last year and over 500,000 had temporary exclusions. Work out how much teacher time each of those took up. AI won't change that.
It's a bit like a Rolls Royce salesman berating mini drivers because they aren't driving Rolls.

X post Maisie. I write so slowly! I think we are in agreement

But Granny the theme of this thread (see OP) was information sharing and discussion of the speeches at the "Best for Britain 2023" Conference. That is a legitimate discussion; people were enjoying the thread. Not many, just a few of us, enjoying a harmonious conversation.

It was pleasant, moving along nicely. Until people came on who seemed to want only to disrupt it. Why do that? Why not start another thread where you can abuse Tony Blair?

This thread was not about party politics. It was about the very varied speeches at the conference. It's like small groups in a large hall, all having different conversations on topics obvious to those wandering around. Suddenly, a few people try to break that conversation and impose their own controversy on the group.

Such disruption, spoiling it for those discussing an item of news, would be considered bad manners in real life. It would feel very coercive to people who didn't want to stop their discussion to join in a different and argumentative conversation.

Yes, we were small in number, but I imagine those talking about Aaron Bastani, a Corbynista who uses his publication to discuss extremist left-wing views, are also only a few. They too, can start their own thread.

Surely, it is only polite to leave a small group who are chatting about a subject you are not interested in to get on with that chat in peace, and without deliberate disruption. Just think what fun you could have, on another thread, all agreeing that Tony Blair is a terrible person - or not. Why not start that and discuss it with those who are interested?

Grany

Aaron Bastani
@AaronBastani

Jul 19
Yesterday we saw, in real time, policy capture of the likely next government & PM by a shadowy organisation with 850 staff which has received millions from overseas. It’s called the Tony Blair Institute
@InstituteGC

Nobody in the media seems to think this is an issue.

The problem is, Grany, that if you don't like what is being offered you have to produce a viable alternative and convince sufficient people that it is the way to go to enhance the greatest number of lives in a way compatible with freedom of choice and free speech.

Your biggest problem is that the socialism you, and many others, dream of is irrevocably associated with repressive authoritarian (even murderous) regimes in the UK public consciousness. Despite the fact that the current right wing regime under which we are living is becoming progressively (and rapidly) equally repressive and authoritarian (though not yet deliberately murderous.

Because of this I don't see a left wing party springing up that will have sufficient electoral appeal to influence the future.

twitter.com/AaronBastani/status/1681776502914920453?s=20

It is genuinely extraordinary that Tony Blair, who is now the godfather of the opposition, is saying we spend too much on public services.

The British working class doesn’t have a party championing its interests.

Aaron Bastani
@AaronBastani

Jul 19
Yesterday we saw, in real time, policy capture of the likely next government & PM by a shadowy organisation with 850 staff which has received millions from overseas. It’s called the Tony Blair Institute
@InstituteGC

Nobody in the media seems to think this is an issue.

You might find this interesting Grany.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jgx47D_EqhY&t=629s

Labour Move Closer to Voting Reform

Interesting, Grany

We need to do something to break the ancient stranglehold of the two party system which produces such badly skewed results and makes people feel that voting is a waste of time.

@GeorgeMonbiot
How to beat the Tories, Keir Starmer and our grossly unfair electoral system – all in one go. My column on the brilliant new strategy enabling voters to take back control.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jul/26/totnes-election-democracy-change

Casdon

Grany

Nobody with any sense would listen to a word TB says on anything least of all healthcare

A million dead Iraq’s

An advisor to dictatorships
Made £100 million

Given that the NHS was in its best state, with the best waiting times, before or since when you take account of demand, when Labour left office in 2010, that is a stupid statement. Whatever Blair did wrong, managing the NHS badly was not one of his failings. I agree PFI was a bad thing to continue after John Major started it, but otherwise Labour did a good job.

A Short History of PFI
It was introduced by the Conservatives in 1992. This was after a 1962 Hospital Plan brought in by Enoch Powell was found to be financially unviable.

PFI was then continued by Labour when they came to power in 1997.

PFI continued under the Conservatives in 2010.

It was replaced in 2012 with PF2 in response to concerns about value for money.

Mark Hellowell, the author of a report which looked into how PF2 would affect the healthcare sector, wrote that, far from avoiding the ‘PFI mess the government is taking a route that may lead to another'.

It was announced in 2018 that PF2 would no longer be used, although contracts already in progress still continue.

PFI has been used in 10 countries across the world,

Various sources.

Of course people voted for Blair 3 times people wanted change and he was doing many good things. But he brought in many more PFI into the NHS which saddled hospitals with billions £ of debt that hospitals are still paying for instead of money going to health care. He gave with one hand and took away with the other I can't see the sense in that, that did no good. People didn't know hoping things were getting better. So there is no lasting change. Then an illegal war. People are wiser now. Many told him not to bring more PFI into the NHS people protested about going to war with Iraq
Now he and Mandelson are advising Starmer

The NHS should be re nationalised.

Anniebach

Tony Blair, the only Labour leader to win 3 consecutive general
elections, many people without any sense voted ?

(smile)

JPB123

DaisyAnneReturns

Do watch them when you have time icanhandthemback, there are two on the future of education.

I find it inspiring when someone in the thick of it explains, but very saddening to hear private education in various countries is well ahead. However, once state/public education expands on those who have already adopted it, it could be a great leveller.

The idea of personalised "gap filling" particularly appeals to me as someone who changed schools often, at a time when the curriculum was not the "across the board" set one it is now.

The Future of Health Care ones are also enlightening.

Who are you to tell us what to watch?

I'd already said I was going to watch them when I had time and I didn't feel that there was anything adverse in DaisyAnneReturns' post. They were very interesting video's too.