I would like to return to the topic of University fees
Today my Swedish buddy called me from his car. He was on his way to Copenhagen with his daughter, who is following her brother to study there.
Under a pan-Nordic agreement (a sort of mini-EU which includes Norway) the unis of all four countries are open to citizens of all those countries.
Fees? None. Paid by the State from general taxation (and possibly not even re-imbursed from the student's State to the State where the Uni is. He isn't sure).
Living costs? Paid by student from a 0% loan. However State writes off 50% if student successfully graduates.
My buddy's kids are both one year younger than my sister's two kids. My buddy is CEO and chairman of Haki, a big Scandi company in scaffolding. His kids Uni is basically costing him nothing beyond his tax.
My sister's husband is a postman. She herself has worked most of her life too, as a secretary. So not exactly CEO income. Without my financial support she wonders if either of them would have opted for Uni.
Denmark can under no circumstances be described as a "socialist" country, although it does have a relatively high tax base. My buddy says the uni. policy described above is not a political issue in any of the four countries.
How come they are willing to and can afford to invest in the education of their young people from general public budgets and the UK allegedly cannot? And has anyone ever met a Scandi university graduate who didn't appear at least as smart and educated as his or her British counterpart?
Why do we have such a fucked up policy towards Uni fees and why are more of you not seething with anger about it?
Corbyn is right on this one.
It wasn't a political issue in the UK until 1998 when the student paid fees were first introduced.
What I want to know is will we have a CL exit poll?
Here here
Your not upset and angry at the Boris Johnson interview on ITV this morning then? Our forign secretary who sits in the COBRA meetings, Foreign secretary, and didn't know how many people who went out to fight for ISIS returned to UK. As you may know, the last Labour government issued control orders, May watered them down to Tpims. Boris was told the nimber was 400 and was asked how many of these Tpim were applied to these 400. He said he didn't have the number, but these we done on a daily basis by the home secretary. Suzanne Reid came in at the end of the the interview and said we have got the figures and the number is One. I am responding to your post because you seem pretty strong on this subject, but where is that condemnation on here - nowhere to be seen. May was a home secreatry that watered down ant-terror laws, massively cut the police and told them not to cry wolf when they warned her about it, she oversaw record increases in immigration despite pledging to cut it - and on this thread it doesn't bother you. You are more bothered about the party pledging to increase Police numbers and pledging to let the police get on with their jobs. I notice the way anger can be switched on then we can let people who we should be livid with off the hook the next minute.
Have you lost the plot completely? I just said here here to a Charlton life exit poll.
He explains why in his post.
Yeah I read it, read the previous I just agreed that we should have a poll ffs lol
I know you did! Lesson learnt for me here, don't get involved!
I would like to return to the topic of University fees
Today my Swedish buddy called me from his car. He was on his way to Copenhagen with his daughter, who is following her brother to study there.
Under a pan-Nordic agreement (a sort of mini-EU which includes Norway) the unis of all four countries are open to citizens of all those countries.
Fees? None. Paid by the State from general taxation (and possibly not even re-imbursed from the student's State to the State where the Uni is. He isn't sure).
Living costs? Paid by student from a 0% loan. However State writes off 50% if student successfully graduates.
My buddy's kids are both one year younger than my sister's two kids. My buddy is CEO and chairman of Haki, a big Scandi company in scaffolding. His kids Uni is basically costing him nothing beyond his tax.
My sister's husband is a postman. She herself has worked most of her life too, as a secretary. So not exactly CEO income. Without my financial support she wonders if either of them would have opted for Uni.
Denmark can under no circumstances be described as a "socialist" country, although it does have a relatively high tax base. My buddy says the uni. policy described above is not a political issue in any of the four countries.
How come they are willing to and can afford to invest in the education of their young people from general public budgets and the UK allegedly cannot? And has anyone ever met a Scandi university graduate who didn't appear at least as smart and educated as his or her British counterpart?
Why do we have such a fucked up policy towards Uni fees and why are more of you not seething with anger about it?
Corbyn is right on this one.
It wasn't a political issue in the UK until 1998 when the student paid fees were first introduced.
I would like to return to the topic of University fees
Today my Swedish buddy called me from his car. He was on his way to Copenhagen with his daughter, who is following her brother to study there.
Under a pan-Nordic agreement (a sort of mini-EU which includes Norway) the unis of all four countries are open to citizens of all those countries.
Fees? None. Paid by the State from general taxation (and possibly not even re-imbursed from the student's State to the State where the Uni is. He isn't sure).
Living costs? Paid by student from a 0% loan. However State writes off 50% if student successfully graduates.
My buddy's kids are both one year younger than my sister's two kids. My buddy is CEO and chairman of Haki, a big Scandi company in scaffolding. His kids Uni is basically costing him nothing beyond his tax.
My sister's husband is a postman. She herself has worked most of her life too, as a secretary. So not exactly CEO income. Without my financial support she wonders if either of them would have opted for Uni.
Denmark can under no circumstances be described as a "socialist" country, although it does have a relatively high tax base. My buddy says the uni. policy described above is not a political issue in any of the four countries.
How come they are willing to and can afford to invest in the education of their young people from general public budgets and the UK allegedly cannot? And has anyone ever met a Scandi university graduate who didn't appear at least as smart and educated as his or her British counterpart?
Why do we have such a fucked up policy towards Uni fees and why are more of you not seething with anger about it?
Corbyn is right on this one.
You always provide so much prologue to your stories - " today I was driving in my car, it was late morning but not yet lunchtime. I took a call from my friend Sven from Sweden who was born in Malmo, or possibly Gothenburg, to a family of talented weavers...".
You've missed your calling !
You mean to say "Precis, mate, precis" ? :-)
I kind of hoped it was context rather than prologue, but I will take that on board. @Greenie would call it narcissism, but he and I are on the same side at the moment it seems.
I think that the conclusion we can all draw is that both Abbot and Johnson are total liabilities for their respective parties, however it does seem to me that the Tories seem to inundated with incompetence at the moment. Cameron started the ball rolling in recent times calling for an EU referendum with the view that the remainers would walk it, it cost him his job and his integrity, Johnson then tried to become PM, but was stabbed in the back by other members of his party, so we are we left with May, who lets face it, is not fit to hold Thatchers handbag (and I thought Thatch was an appalling piece of work), she called this election thinking, again they would walk it but they are finding it tough again. They just dont seem to understand or care about how the general public think outside London.
I would like to return to the topic of University fees
Today my Swedish buddy called me from his car. He was on his way to Copenhagen with his daughter, who is following her brother to study there.
Under a pan-Nordic agreement (a sort of mini-EU which includes Norway) the unis of all four countries are open to citizens of all those countries.
Fees? None. Paid by the State from general taxation (and possibly not even re-imbursed from the student's State to the State where the Uni is. He isn't sure).
Living costs? Paid by student from a 0% loan. However State writes off 50% if student successfully graduates.
My buddy's kids are both one year younger than my sister's two kids. My buddy is CEO and chairman of Haki, a big Scandi company in scaffolding. His kids Uni is basically costing him nothing beyond his tax.
My sister's husband is a postman. She herself has worked most of her life too, as a secretary. So not exactly CEO income. Without my financial support she wonders if either of them would have opted for Uni.
Denmark can under no circumstances be described as a "socialist" country, although it does have a relatively high tax base. My buddy says the uni. policy described above is not a political issue in any of the four countries.
How come they are willing to and can afford to invest in the education of their young people from general public budgets and the UK allegedly cannot? And has anyone ever met a Scandi university graduate who didn't appear at least as smart and educated as his or her British counterpart?
Why do we have such a fucked up policy towards Uni fees and why are more of you not seething with anger about it?
Corbyn is right on this one.
You always provide so much prologue to your stories - " today I was driving in my car, it was late morning but not yet lunchtime. I took a call from my friend Sven from Sweden who was born in Malmo, or possibly Gothenburg, to a family of talented weavers...".
You've missed your calling !
You mean to say "Precis, mate, precis" ? :-)
I kind of hoped it was context rather than prologue, but I will take that on board. @Greenie would call it narcissism, but he and I are on the same side at the moment it seems.
I would like to return to the topic of University fees
Today my Swedish buddy called me from his car. He was on his way to Copenhagen with his daughter, who is following her brother to study there.
Under a pan-Nordic agreement (a sort of mini-EU which includes Norway) the unis of all four countries are open to citizens of all those countries.
Fees? None. Paid by the State from general taxation (and possibly not even re-imbursed from the student's State to the State where the Uni is. He isn't sure).
Living costs? Paid by student from a 0% loan. However State writes off 50% if student successfully graduates.
My buddy's kids are both one year younger than my sister's two kids. My buddy is CEO and chairman of Haki, a big Scandi company in scaffolding. His kids Uni is basically costing him nothing beyond his tax.
My sister's husband is a postman. She herself has worked most of her life too, as a secretary. So not exactly CEO income. Without my financial support she wonders if either of them would have opted for Uni.
Denmark can under no circumstances be described as a "socialist" country, although it does have a relatively high tax base. My buddy says the uni. policy described above is not a political issue in any of the four countries.
How come they are willing to and can afford to invest in the education of their young people from general public budgets and the UK allegedly cannot? And has anyone ever met a Scandi university graduate who didn't appear at least as smart and educated as his or her British counterpart?
Why do we have such a fucked up policy towards Uni fees and why are more of you not seething with anger about it?
Corbyn is right on this one.
It wasn't a political issue in the UK until 1998 when the student paid fees were first introduced.
By the Labour party
Yes - responding to the outcome of the Dearing inquiry set up by Gillian Shepherd, Conservative Education Secretary in 1996.
Just watchIng Diane 'abacus' Abbott getting ripped to shreds by Dermot Murnaghan on Sky News. She's embarrassing!!
And I have just listened to a bloke called Richard Bircham on R4 Today. He is apparently Shadow Justice Minister. He was presented with an open goal to rip May to pieces on the withdrawal of police resources. He fluffed it because he was inarticulate and frankly a bit dim. Really, I felt I could have answered better and I hesitate to say that because I know how tricky it can be in front of cameras and mikes.
Had that been Yvette Cooper or one of the Eagles, that ball would have been in the net in 20 seconds. He was in his way as bad as Abbott.
And that friends is where stupid tribal politica gets you. Bereft of serious intelligent politicians just when the country needs them most.
But by who? I bet there is more than one member of the PLP that has looked at the polls and regretted acting in the manner they have. No matter the result, I'm hoping some of them come in from the cold and we can form a real opposition for the next parliament.
Corbyn will be 73 and doesn't particularly like being party leader, so I can't see him being around at the next election. Milliband or some new figure on a social democrat platform as a shoe-in in 2022 after the consequences of Brexit are fully realised?
Diane Abbott on Sky News has surely just lost Labour the election
What did she do/say this time?
It was more what she didn't say
I freely admit that I am highly unlikely to ever vote Labour as things stand so it is up to you how you interpret my comment. I'm not fussed either way.
However I genuinely believe that Diane Abbott should be left alone as I think she could be in the early stages of serious illness.
The one thing that's struck me above all else during this grim election campaign is the total lack of talent available on all sides. Its depressing that so many no-mark idiots ascend to positions of power. Ability or competence is irrelevant . Politicking, back-biting and schmoozing is what's required to get on.
I'll be glad when it's all over and my facebook goes back to being full of funny cat videos again!
I think that the conclusion we can all draw is that both Abbot and Johnson are total liabilities for their respective parties, however it does seem to me that the Tories seem to inundated with incompetence at the moment. Cameron started the ball rolling in recent times calling for an EU referendum with the view that the remainers would walk it, it cost him his job and his integrity, Johnson then tried to become PM, but was stabbed in the back by other members of his party, so we are we left with May, who lets face it, is not fit to hold Thatchers handbag (and I thought Thatch was an appalling piece of work), she called this election thinking, again they would walk it but they are finding it tough again. They just dont seem to understand or care about how the general public think outside London.
Ironically it is going to be the areas outside of London that return them a majority. Great swathes of the North have swallowed the lie that immigration was the cause of poor regional economic activity, rather than a lack of investment outside of London (QE £585 billion pumped in to economy, nearly all of that through London and the service industry). There was polling out recently that showed that immigration rather than sovereignty was the number one reason people voted to leave.
Todays fox is Dianne Abbot (again). Bear in mind she is a Cambridge University graduate and has been a MP for more than 20 years, has something happened to her that has made her such a liability in this election? We need more black/multi racial MP's in all parties to make Westminster more representative of the nation but Abbot is seriously letting her side down, not just Labour but the black community.
Diane Abbott on Sky News has surely just lost Labour the election
What did she do/say this time?
It was more what she didn't say
I freely admit that I am highly unlikely to ever vote Labour as things stand so it is up to you how you interpret my comment. I'm not fussed either way.
However I genuinely believe that Diane Abbott should be left alone as I think she could be in the early stages of serious illness.
I think that the conclusion we can all draw is that both Abbot and Johnson are total liabilities for their respective parties, however it does seem to me that the Tories seem to inundated with incompetence at the moment. Cameron started the ball rolling in recent times calling for an EU referendum with the view that the remainers would walk it, it cost him his job and his integrity, Johnson then tried to become PM, but was stabbed in the back by other members of his party, so we are we left with May, who lets face it, is not fit to hold Thatchers handbag (and I thought Thatch was an appalling piece of work), she called this election thinking, again they would walk it but they are finding it tough again. They just dont seem to understand or care about how the general public think outside London.
Regrettably, I can't agree. I think Hammond at least is competent, especially in his current role, which is an important one.
The trouble with Labour is that they have deliberately sidelined several of their most competent politicians (or others such as Burnham, D. Milliband or Alan Johnson sideline themselves) because of the Momentum putsch.
Honestly mate, try to listen to the shadow justice secretary on R4 today. I got his name wrong, it's Richard Burgon. On the running order at 07.10. Has anyone heard of him before? Absolutely effing useless, he was. Reminded me of Joe Piggott's cameo against Millwall. Not just not ready, but obviously never would be.
Yet I am voting Labour and my vote will be taken as a vindication of this team of clowns. What a mess.
I think that the conclusion we can all draw is that both Abbot and Johnson are total liabilities for their respective parties, however it does seem to me that the Tories seem to inundated with incompetence at the moment. Cameron started the ball rolling in recent times calling for an EU referendum with the view that the remainers would walk it, it cost him his job and his integrity, Johnson then tried to become PM, but was stabbed in the back by other members of his party, so we are we left with May, who lets face it, is not fit to hold Thatchers handbag (and I thought Thatch was an appalling piece of work), she called this election thinking, again they would walk it but they are finding it tough again. They just dont seem to understand or care about how the general public think outside London.
Regrettably, I can't agree. I think Hammond at least is competent, especially in his current role, which is an important one.
The trouble with Labour is that they have deliberately sidelined several of their most competent politicians (or others such as Burnham, D. Milliband or Alan Johnson sideline themselves) because of the Momentum putsch.
Honestly mate, try to listen to the shadow justice secretary on R4 today. I got his name wrong, it's Richard Burgon. On the running order at 07.10. Has anyone heard of him before? Absolutely effing useless, he was. Reminded me of Joe Piggott's cameo against Millwall. Not just not ready, but obviously never would be.
Yet I am voting Labour and my vote will be taken as a vindication of this team of clowns. What a mess.
I understand why you feel the way you do having gone through Benn/Kinnock, but calling it a momentum putsch is a complete rewriting of history. Corbyn did have an inclusive cabinet that had some heavy hitters, they all resigned and launched a stalking horse a la John Redwood. For instance Abbot was only appointed Shadow Home secretary in October 2016 after the second leadership contest, up until then it had been Burnham.
@PragueAddick on university fees, see earlier pages in this post. In short, my argument is that if you accept that some of the benefits of a university education accrue to the overall country and some accrue to the individual, why should 100% of the burden be borne by the taxpayer?
Moreover if the taxpayer pays for 100%, how does one control the supply of university places so that only those who are truly bright enough go (thus providing at least some benefit to the country)?
We need to get away from this idea that something is 'free' just because it isn't paid for at source.
I think that the conclusion we can all draw is that both Abbot and Johnson are total liabilities for their respective parties, however it does seem to me that the Tories seem to inundated with incompetence at the moment. Cameron started the ball rolling in recent times calling for an EU referendum with the view that the remainers would walk it, it cost him his job and his integrity, Johnson then tried to become PM, but was stabbed in the back by other members of his party, so we are we left with May, who lets face it, is not fit to hold Thatchers handbag (and I thought Thatch was an appalling piece of work), she called this election thinking, again they would walk it but they are finding it tough again. They just dont seem to understand or care about how the general public think outside London.
So far we have:
May Corbyn Abbott Johnson
all being called liabilities. These are 4 of our main politicians from the 2 Party leadership race!
The one thing that's struck me above all else during this grim election campaign is the total lack of talent available on all sides. Its depressing that so many no-mark idiots ascend to positions of power. Ability or competence is irrelevant . Politicking, back-biting and schmoozing is what's required to get on.
I'll be glad when it's all over and my facebook goes back to being full of funny cat videos again!
Both parties have had all their real talent sidelined. Anyone with more than one brain cell in the Tory party can recognise the absolute disaster that Brexit will be and therefore are allowed no where near the cabinet. Anyone with more than one brain cell in the Labour Party can recognised the absolute disaster that Corbyn will be and therefore are allowed no where near the shadow cabinet.
I think that the conclusion we can all draw is that both Abbot and Johnson are total liabilities for their respective parties, however it does seem to me that the Tories seem to inundated with incompetence at the moment. Cameron started the ball rolling in recent times calling for an EU referendum with the view that the remainers would walk it, it cost him his job and his integrity, Johnson then tried to become PM, but was stabbed in the back by other members of his party, so we are we left with May, who lets face it, is not fit to hold Thatchers handbag (and I thought Thatch was an appalling piece of work), she called this election thinking, again they would walk it but they are finding it tough again. They just dont seem to understand or care about how the general public think outside London.
So far we have:
May Corbyn Abbott Johnson
all being called liabilities. These are 4 of our main politicians from the 2 Party leadership race!
Not Corbyn, look at the support he has now, following the last 3 weeks of electioneering. I think he will be a breath of fresh air from the Tory freeloaders that have wrecked those country. For The Many - Not The Few.
I tell you what though IF Corbyn sacked Abbott now that'd be an amazing sign of intent and that he is listening to the people.
Sure Conservative supporters would say it was a sign of weakness or that they're not strong and stable. But i think sometimes the strong and stable thing to do is get rid of dead wood.
@Greenie my fear with Corbyn is his weakness over terrorism, though May's record is not exactly strong on that either.
With regards to Abbott she reminds me (this sounds horrible, but it is not intended to be nasty) of my Grandma after she had her stroke... She's confused and lost and never sounds confident in what she says. Terrifying.
I think that the conclusion we can all draw is that both Abbot and Johnson are total liabilities for their respective parties, however it does seem to me that the Tories seem to inundated with incompetence at the moment. Cameron started the ball rolling in recent times calling for an EU referendum with the view that the remainers would walk it, it cost him his job and his integrity, Johnson then tried to become PM, but was stabbed in the back by other members of his party, so we are we left with May, who lets face it, is not fit to hold Thatchers handbag (and I thought Thatch was an appalling piece of work), she called this election thinking, again they would walk it but they are finding it tough again. They just dont seem to understand or care about how the general public think outside London.
So far we have:
May Corbyn Abbott Johnson
all being called liabilities. These are 4 of our main politicians from the 2 Party leadership race!
You can add Hunt to that list. I believe him to be the most insidious and Machiavellian politician of the modern age.
@Greenie my fear with Corbyn is his weakness over terrorism, though May's record is not exactly strong on that either.
With regards to Abbott she reminds me (this sounds horrible, but it is not intended to be nasty) of my Grandma after she had her stroke... She's confused and lost and never sounds confident in what she says. Terrifying.
I dont think Corbyn is weak over terrorism mate, I have listened to his speeches from the last couple of days, and he has convinced me. Also he has constantly campaigned for more Police on the streets, particularly community policing, because all the experts say that community policing is the best way to combat homegrown jihadis. But they have been removed due to Mays cuts, and look what happened.
Now re Abbott I cannot disagree with you at all. That said, a very good friend of mine has worked with her, and when I have voiced my concerns, he said that she was 'more than competent'. Take from that what you will.
I think that the conclusion we can all draw is that both Abbot and Johnson are total liabilities for their respective parties, however it does seem to me that the Tories seem to inundated with incompetence at the moment. Cameron started the ball rolling in recent times calling for an EU referendum with the view that the remainers would walk it, it cost him his job and his integrity, Johnson then tried to become PM, but was stabbed in the back by other members of his party, so we are we left with May, who lets face it, is not fit to hold Thatchers handbag (and I thought Thatch was an appalling piece of work), she called this election thinking, again they would walk it but they are finding it tough again. They just dont seem to understand or care about how the general public think outside London.
So far we have:
May Corbyn Abbott Johnson
all being called liabilities. These are 4 of our main politicians from the 2 Party leadership race!
You can add Hunt to that list. I believe him to be the most insidious and Machiavellian politician of the modern age.
How dare you tarnish Niccolo Machiavelli by associating him with Jeremy Hunt - Machiavelli was not only an influential and interesting political philosopher, but also a competent administrator, whilst Hunt is...
I think that the conclusion we can all draw is that both Abbot and Johnson are total liabilities for their respective parties, however it does seem to me that the Tories seem to inundated with incompetence at the moment. Cameron started the ball rolling in recent times calling for an EU referendum with the view that the remainers would walk it, it cost him his job and his integrity, Johnson then tried to become PM, but was stabbed in the back by other members of his party, so we are we left with May, who lets face it, is not fit to hold Thatchers handbag (and I thought Thatch was an appalling piece of work), she called this election thinking, again they would walk it but they are finding it tough again. They just dont seem to understand or care about how the general public think outside London.
So far we have:
May Corbyn Abbott Johnson
all being called liabilities. These are 4 of our main politicians from the 2 Party leadership race!
Not Corbyn, look at the support he has now, following the last 3 weeks of electioneering. I think he will be a breath of fresh air from the Tory freeloaders that have wrecked those country. For The Many - Not The Few.
It's votes that count, not vociferous rent-a-mobs at debates/question time.
I think that the conclusion we can all draw is that both Abbot and Johnson are total liabilities for their respective parties, however it does seem to me that the Tories seem to inundated with incompetence at the moment. Cameron started the ball rolling in recent times calling for an EU referendum with the view that the remainers would walk it, it cost him his job and his integrity, Johnson then tried to become PM, but was stabbed in the back by other members of his party, so we are we left with May, who lets face it, is not fit to hold Thatchers handbag (and I thought Thatch was an appalling piece of work), she called this election thinking, again they would walk it but they are finding it tough again. They just dont seem to understand or care about how the general public think outside London.
So far we have:
May Corbyn Abbott Johnson
all being called liabilities. These are 4 of our main politicians from the 2 Party leadership race!
You can add Hunt to that list. I believe him to be the most insidious and Machiavellian politician of the modern age.
How dare you tarnish Niccolo Machiavelli by associating him with Jeremy Hunt - Machiavelli was not only an influential and interesting political philosopher, but also a competent administrator, whuilst Hunts is...
Fair point, but when he up against Gove, Johnson and Truss, he doesn't have to appear too cunning.
Comments
I kind of hoped it was context rather than prologue, but I will take that on board. @Greenie would call it narcissism, but he and I are on the same side at the moment it seems.
Cameron started the ball rolling in recent times calling for an EU referendum with the view that the remainers would walk it, it cost him his job and his integrity, Johnson then tried to become PM, but was stabbed in the back by other members of his party, so we are we left with May, who lets face it, is not fit to hold Thatchers handbag (and I thought Thatch was an appalling piece of work), she called this election thinking, again they would walk it but they are finding it tough again.
They just dont seem to understand or care about how the general public think outside London.
Corbyn will be 73 and doesn't particularly like being party leader, so I can't see him being around at the next election. Milliband or some new figure on a social democrat platform as a shoe-in in 2022 after the consequences of Brexit are fully realised?
However I genuinely believe that Diane Abbott should be left alone as I think she could be in the early stages of serious illness.
I'll be glad when it's all over and my facebook goes back to being full of funny cat videos again!
https://www.facebook.com/JeremyCorbyn4PM/videos/1707133912914014/
The trouble with Labour is that they have deliberately sidelined several of their most competent politicians (or others such as Burnham, D. Milliband or Alan Johnson sideline themselves) because of the Momentum putsch.
Honestly mate, try to listen to the shadow justice secretary on R4 today. I got his name wrong, it's Richard Burgon. On the running order at 07.10. Has anyone heard of him before? Absolutely effing useless, he was. Reminded me of Joe Piggott's cameo against Millwall. Not just not ready, but obviously never would be.
Yet I am voting Labour and my vote will be taken as a vindication of this team of clowns. What a mess.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/06/diane-abbott-pulls-out-of-womans-hour-debate-due-to-illness?CMP=share_btn_tw
Moreover if the taxpayer pays for 100%, how does one control the supply of university places so that only those who are truly bright enough go (thus providing at least some benefit to the country)?
We need to get away from this idea that something is 'free' just because it isn't paid for at source.
May
Corbyn
Abbott
Johnson
all being called liabilities. These are 4 of our main politicians from the 2 Party leadership race!
For The Many - Not The Few.
Sure Conservative supporters would say it was a sign of weakness or that they're not strong and stable. But i think sometimes the strong and stable thing to do is get rid of dead wood.
With regards to Abbott she reminds me (this sounds horrible, but it is not intended to be nasty) of my Grandma after she had her stroke... She's confused and lost and never sounds confident in what she says. Terrifying.
Now re Abbott I cannot disagree with you at all. That said, a very good friend of mine has worked with her, and when I have voiced my concerns, he said that she was 'more than competent'. Take from that what you will.