The Political Thread

[IndigoPrime]

Then watch your mobile bill soar upwards in two years time, when  EU price regulations no longer apply!

As I recall, this was a major problem for people on the coast, because phones would flick between networks without them realising. The EU regulations basically fix this. So they have two years of relative calm before the shit hits the fan again. A pity they're not all leave voters, really.

Still, at least the way things are going most Brits won't have to worry about roaming charges, given that most of us won't be able to afford to fly when the UK's participation in open skies ends. Sad to see such vitriol hurled at Ryanair on making perfectly reasonable points regarding aviation and forward planning. Naturally, this was brushed aside, by various parties, as "Ryanair is rubbish anyway" (ignoring the problem affecting all carriers), "Irish bloke should piss off" (ah, more lovely xenophobia), "they want our tourism money" (probably true, but not really relevant, given how open skies works), and the usual Brexit head-in-the-sand of "it won't happen anyway", as backed by David Davis practically simultaneously saying no work's been done on this, but the UK will get the "best possible solution" regarding aviation.

Actually, the government's saying that a lot recently regarding everything from the economy to Gibraltar. You know what would give us the best possible solution? STAYING IN THE EU. Gah.

[TordelBack]

You know what would give us the best possible solution? STAYING IN THE EU. Gah.

I'm trying to cut way down on my Brexit griping, since it brings out the ever-present churl in me, but THIS^^^ hacks me off more than any one aspect of current government cant (on the subject). It's as if Brexit is some terrible natural disaster, or rather more apposite, a Nazi takeover of Europe, and the Great British People must stiffen their lips, dig for victory, keep calm and carry on: this is no time for the politics of appeasement, fight Godzilla on the beaches and your way of life will endure.  But it isn't some implcacble external horror that must be embraced and accepted in order to overcome, is it?

No, it's the result of a stupid failed gamble on Tory internal party politics, and the bizarre decision to have to have at least one Kipper on Any Questions/ Question Time / Newsnight FOREVER. Just STOP HITTING YOURSELF.

See? Insta-churl.

[The Legendary Shark]

So now it's illegal to take your own children out of school in term-time because it's inconvenient for schools? Get the f*ck.

Note to teachers: You work for society, not the other way around.

[Definitely Not Mister Pops]

So now it's illegal to take your own children out of school in term-time because it's inconvenient for schools? Get the f*ck.

Note to teachers: You work for society, not the other way around.

So certain people have to work for society but you don't?

[Tjm86]

So now it's illegal to take your own children out of school in term-time because it's inconvenient for schools? Get the f*ck.

Note to teachers: You work for society, not the other way around.

Sharky.  Firstly, absolutely we do.  I don't know a single one of my colleagues that thinks any other way.  I think the problem is that do not always agree on what it is that we are supposed to be doing.  Or more to the point, society is not sure what we should be doing.  I am at one at the same time a Maths teacher, a social worker, a counsellor, a life coach, an entertainer, a results generator, a child minder and so on.  This is the perspective that society has on my role.

Secondly, it is not schools / teachers that have made this decision, it is society / government.  Up until a few years ago schools would apply common sense and the 'up to 10 days in term time' rule.  This was generally interpreted as a right but it allowed the flexibility that families needed to manage family holidays in a way that allowed for the constraints of work demands / financial resources.  Although a handful in any school abused this, it was the exception rather than the rule.

On the point of the impact that family holidays in term time have on teachers lives, to be honest it is negligible.  It might be a little awkward reintegrating a child that has returned in the middle of teaching a sequence of lessons that needs to be brought up to sped but it usually only lasts a lesson or two.  It is also the same as if a child is ill. There is also the issue of a child having difficulty mid way through a set of lessons with the work that needs to be addressed.   None of this is insurmountable and is generally managed without any major or lasting problems.

What appears to have been conflated is the issue of the link between attendance and attainment (as measured by a very narrow set of criteria) and the issue of term time holidays.  There is data to show a correlation between attendance and attainment but little analysis of the types of absence and attainment.  The data is being used in a very crude way to drive a policy that is affecting a disproportionate number of people that it wasn't designed to affect.  There is a difference between a family that takes children out of school once a year at the point of least impact for a family holiday that will benefit the child's growth and a family that allows irregular absences for spurious reasons that has a massive cumulative impact over the year.  Unfortunately, to quote James T Kirk "Like a poor marksman, you keep missing the target!"

I think that it is fair to say that your views regarding our current political arrangements are well documented and personally I fully respect them, even though I don't always agree with them.  I think this is one of those cases where the decision the government has made gives ammunition to your views.  That said, it is worth remembering that state schools are an option that parents do not have to avail themselves of.  All the law says is that children need to be provided with an appropriate education.  This includes home schooling or private schooling.  Plenty of parents take advantage of this.  A lot of them because it is 'convenient' for them in terms of the time and financial resources that it frees up.  For me this is one of the times where your view on the coercive nature of political power is accurate.  A more consensual approach would have avoided this furore but then I'm not sure that British politics is in a mature enough place for that at the present point in time.

[The Legendary Shark]

Lovely post, TJM, thanks.

Mr Pops, who says I don't work for society? Isn't that a large part of what every job is about? The mistake I made was forgetting to take my earphones to work yesterday and getting sucked into listening to all the piffle-mongers on the Jeremy Vine show. I should have written, "Note to government, teachers work for society..." Then again, so do MPs and that authoritarian judge who made this ridiculous decision; but you wouldn't think so by the way they act. If the education system they provide can't cope with flexibility (and TJM says it largely can cope well enough) then they need to organise and fund it better, not expect the people it's supposed to service to adapt to its shortcomings. Why not, for example, take on more educators and support staff and keep the schools open all year? If we can afford nuclear missiles and all crap like that, we can afford the kind of education system suitable for a free country, surely?

But that's all by the by. The real outrage here is in fining parents for taking their children away from school during term time, as if it's on a par with being AWOL from the armed forces or escaping from prison. Do MPs get fined for taking holidays during "term time," I wonder? (I honestly don't know - but it seems only fair that they should if they believe in fines for non-attendance.) And what good does the fine do, anyway? Where does the money go? Does it go into funding catch-up lessons for the effected pupils? Or is it just used to bolster a local council's general revenue stream? Is it just another government money-making scam?  And what's the message it sends - you're not allowed to take your own children out of school during term time unless you can afford to pay for it?

I think this ruling is monstrous in what is supposed to be a free society. What's next? Fines for being off work or missing doctor's appointments?

[TordelBack]

And what's the message it sends - you're not allowed to take your own children out of school during term time unless you can afford to pay for it?

I think this ruling is monstrous in what is supposed to be a free society. What's next? Fines for being off work or missing doctor's appointments?

As always I feel slightly discombulated when I find myself agreeing with the Shark.   Obviously I understand the idea of ensuring that kids get a decent education by encouraging parents to take responsibility for keeping attendance up, and I do (sort of) appreciate the problem of teachers having to re-cover work from lessons missed, but addressing all this through an agreed system of flexibility seems far more likely to produce the desired results rather than what seems to be the current British vogue for applying sanctions that only hurt the proles. 

Both of our kids used to repeatedly win an end of year prize for Best Attendance, which I once felt a surge of parental self-satisfaction over, until I realised it was because the other kids were heading off on term-time holidays that we simply couldn't afford, and not just because of the inherent cost of a trip: we were treating school as a source of free childcare (and free food), and we needed all we could get. 

Since the financial situation has improved somewhat, and in particular my long blocks of nightshift work made childcare less oppressive, we've tried to squeeze in at least a couple of cheap off-season nights every year down the country, usually to either side of a weekend, and I don't regret it one bit: some of the best memories of my life, and hopefully theirs.  I can't emphasise enough that this wouldn't have been possible during school holidays or public holidays, when prices more than treble.

[The Legendary Shark]

There's no need to feel too bad, Tordels, I am allowed to be right occasionally. If it helps, try thinking of me as the proverbial broken clock

[JayzusB.Christ]

There's no need to feel too bad, Tordels, I am allowed to be right occasionally. If it helps, try thinking of me as the proverbial broken clock

That will always be Withnail for me, I'm afraid. But it's that special time of year again when i agree with you.

[Hawkmumbler]

There's no need to feel too bad, Tordels, I am allowed to be right occasionally. If it helps, try thinking of me as the proverbial broken clock

That will always be Withnail for me, I'm afraid. But it's that special time of year again when i agree with you.

I always saw Shark as more of an uncle Monty myself...

After all, "Shat on by the Tories, shovelled up by Labour" is such a Sharkism!

[IndigoPrime]

Comes down to money again, too. If all parents are going to get is a 60-quid fine, like a parking ticket, those who can afford to will take the hit. (Things become more complicated if this ends up with criminal convictions. But at that point, the local authorities have jumped the shark.)

[Tjm86]

The fine is small beer compared to the increased costs of taking kids on holiday in school holidays.  Unfortunately it is very much a case of market forces at work.  I was thinking about the increase to costs for Legoland last week compared to this week.  Then I thought about it from their point of view.  In term time the visitor numbers are lower so staffing is lower so costs are lower.  All of a sudden there is a significant increase in demand and you need to massively increase your staffing levels.  That has to be paid for from somewhere.  It's the same as with off peak rail tickets.  The prices are reduced later in the day to encourage people who really don't need to to make their journeys later.

The number of parents that have been prosecuted for failing to ensure their children attend school / some form of education is miniscule.  Those that do get prosecuted have really extracted the urine.  I think that as Indigo says, the moment we go down the road of criminalising parents for the odd holiday, the authorities have seriously lost the plot.

And as I've mentioned previously Tordels, the 'inconvenience' of kids missing a few lessons for a holiday is a complete non-starter  I've lost count of the number of times I've had to go over things with some kids even when they are physically present.  Family time is waaaaaay more important.

[The Legendary Shark]

Uncle Monty? Nooooooo!

[JayzusB.Christ]

Sharky, you terrible ... Never mind.

[sheridan]

The fine is small beer compared to the increased costs of taking kids on holiday in school holidays.  Unfortunately it is very much a case of market forces at work.  I was thinking about the increase to costs for Legoland last week compared to this week.  Then I thought about it from their point of view.  In term time the visitor numbers are lower so staffing is lower so costs are lower.  All of a sudden there is a significant increase in demand and you need to massively increase your staffing levels.  That has to be paid for from somewhere.  It's the same as with off peak rail tickets.  The prices are reduced later in the day to encourage people who really don't need to to make their journeys later.

I was going to say that a £60 fine would be more than swallowed up by money saved by booking off-season.

The Legoland argument doesn't make sense - they can easily pay for the extra staff by the extra money that is brought in.  Same principle as shops which bring in Christmas staff - when you make three quarters of your annual earnings through one month's sales, the cost of those staff is negligible.