Theresa May is a liar ?

Yes, sorry, anniebach. Others did too. One wonders now if it would have made a difference, that we'd have been out by now facing the total chaos that is predicted. Most other predictions have been wrong so far.

It doesn't follow when the base line was lower to begin with, janea. Scotland was poorer than England for a long time and it showed. It needed extra money spending on it.

Englanderish refers to your insulting implication that I can't know about England because I live in Scotland. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

I found your comment about that actually shocking.

Englanderish refers to your insulting implication that I can't know about England because I live in Scotland

If you read my post properly, you’ll see that I implied nothing of the kind.

You might have inferred it, but I didn’t imply it.

Well have just seen a photo of Theresa May today going to church she looks awful, lots of sleepless nights, I think she knows her days as PM are numbered, the sooner the better for most Brexiters I would think.

The implication was that living in Scotland made a difference to my knowledge about the state of affairs in England. As I've said, I have access to the same information as anyone living in England. You know this so bringing up my place of residence as making a difference to that was odd to say the least.

And, no, I don't think eloethan knows more than I do. I think she often has a different point of view, which is not the same thing as knowing more. eloethan has claimed that various things are in chaos in England. She has not provided evidence. My argument is that, while things are far from ideal in many instances, they are not in chaos. I have also asked for more evidence to support certain claims.

nicenanny, I agree. When TM first became Prime Minister I had high hopes. Not any more. The depressing thing is that I'm not sure anyone else would have done a better job.

Just had a conversation with Minibaggs, who got unconditional offers from all the Scottish unis she applied to, about them. It seems once you accept an uncon offer from a Scottish uni that's not the end of it. Your predicted grades in the subjects you'll be examined in during your final school year are given in your application along with your teacher's recommendation (testimonial). The uni can withdraw its offer if you bunk off or have excessively disappointing results (depending on circumstances; allowances might be made if you were ill, for instance). Perhaps English unis could use this method too.

If the bunking off A-levels thing is really a crisis in English schools they and the unis surely know what to do about it. I suspect there has been a little alarmist rubbish in the reporting though and that it's not really much of a problem.

Re unconditional offers, the issue as I understand it is that in England unconditional offers are being made to students who have yet to take their exams, when the universities can't know how the applicant will fare.

In Scotland unconditional offers are only made to students who have already passed their Highers. Even then, for some courses such as medicine, offers are still not unconditional.

My Dd is doing medicine and despite having five Highers at Band One A, her offer was conditional on her getting three B's at Advanced Higher.

Yes, Scottish uni offers are based on results already achieved but most kids do more Highers and Advanced Highers in their final school year after their first set of Highers results.

Aslo, as explained above by Minibaggs, the offers are not completely unconditional; they can be withdrawn. Scottish unis don't want slackers.

Similarly, the past exam results of pupils in English schools and their past general performance in school will be available to the unis they're applying to, just as it is in Scotland. The difference between the approaches to uni applications is not very large when everything is taken into account.

Offers will vary between courses too, with stiffer offers being given for more popular or demanding courses. This too is the same in England and Wales.

Just for the record and to forestall any other wonderings about my knowledge of such things, my elder two daughters started their schooling in Scotland and finished it in England. My youngest started in England and finished in Scotland. I went to school in England but to university in Scotland.

Neither I, nor my husband, or my children went to university so I have no personal experience of the way in which university places are allocated. But I have been reading several articles in which headteachers and other educators have expressed grave concerns about the trend towards offering unconditional places at university.

Earlier this year the I reported:

"Education bosses have called for an urgent rethink on universities offering “unconditional offers” to students......

"Clare Marchant, head of UCAS, said the sector needed to have an “open and honest” debate about the issue after figures showed a 40 per cent rise in unconditional offers received by school-leavers ......

Another, later, article in the Mail Online reported headteachers' concerns that unconditional offers were likely to affect A level grades:

"Phil Stock, deputy headteacher of Greenshaw High School in Sutton, southeast London, told the Times: 'If they get their offer in the autumn they still have five or six months of A levels to go. They can miss whole chunks of the course if they ease off. That is knowledge that they really need for their degree.'

These thoughts were reiterated by the head of a Berkshire 6th form college, Richard Endacott, who said that unconditional offers 'absolutely affect performance. I would say students with unconditional offers drop at least a grade.'

"A study from Ucas showed that in 2015 pupils with unconditional offers were 23 per cent more likely to miss their predicted result by two or more grades."

I do not believe universities are making these unconditional offers for altruistic reasons. They are doing it because higher education is rapidly becoming just another business where profits supersede all other concerns. This has, I believe, happened in the US where third rate colleges persuade people to part with a lot of money (and often significant ongoing debt) in order to obtain what then turns out to be a virtually worthless degree.

I do not believe universities are making these unconditional offers for altruistic reasons. They are doing it because higher education is rapidly becoming just another business where profits supersede all other concerns.

I agree and have said so up thread, though less lucidly than this.

When I hear people say there were "predictions of bad things happening but nothing happened" it reminds me of Germany in the 1930s. Some ppl will never see bad things happening to others, they wrap themselves in a cocoon that make their lives tolerable.

Of course bad things have happened since the referendum. Hundreds of thousands have lost their careers now replying on menial zero hour jobs and food banks.
Millions of British children are living in poverty, there are concerns they couldn't get enough to eat during the Summer holidays. Their parents do not earn enough to cover food bills, landlords put up rents, utilities have gone up in price, council tax increases. Even charity shops are closing because ppl cannot afford to buy there, Ditto Poundland. The top down economy doesn't work in modern Britain, the rich won't share their profits with the workers as they did in the last century.

Although the Metropolitan area has been hit with austerity it doesn't show as much as it does outside the M25. But it will after we Brexit because the big financial institutions will move abroad plus all the companies that reply on them. They have said they would, no one can stop them but we do hear brexiteers lying to us "all will be fine" in case we panic. Food , medicine, we have lots of reasons not to believe Theresa May.

I think the only person ever to walk into the Houses of Parliament with honest intentions was Guy Fawkes - at least he did what he said he was going to do!

What exactly is a school in crisis? What does crisis mean in that context?

I completely agree Baggs

Crisis? We are in crisis??? Venezuela is in crisis!

A sense of proportion is needed!

We must be aware that some Remainers are painting the worst possible picture of an island that works well and is one of the fairest places on earth to live.

I hate to mention Project Fear but if enough people keep saying "Oh, we are in crisis - everything is AWFUL" enough gullible people will believe it. Be aware of the game playing from those who don't want Brexit. They cannot let it rest. (Project Fear, a hackneyed phrase now maybe but some Remainers like the idea of of "chaos")

Every single election time we are told schools, hospitals, public services, roads, etc, are in dire straights. It's a political device used frequently. Yes, budgets are being stretched but it's all relative. We have a larger and more aware society now, thanks to social media and every single person can become a political commentator.

Like others, I am quite fed up of all the Brexit wrangling. I speak for those Remainer friends of mine too.

The world WILL keep on turning once we lose the EU shackles. But naturally, according to Remainers still stirring the pot, it's going to be awful <cough>. No surprises there.

Some ppl will never see bad things happening to others, they wrap themselves in a cocoon that make their lives tolerable

And that's akin to the phrase, "Eat up. People are starving in Africa"

No one would deny that, but what do we do?

It is insulting to suggest people are unaware. I'd say some people need a sense of perspective.

The world can be and often is a pretty horrible place for millions of people. There is so much suffering right now.

Leaving the EU is not in the same league. We are signing off a political trading contract which binds us to Brussels and is costing us billions every year.

Most of us would say we are seeing sense and the future is bright. We may invest in development in Africa, an emerging player in commerce. A new trading deal with African countries might be on the cards. I'd say that's a win-win situation.

after Brexit because the big financial institutions will move abroad

More scare mongering. This is just NOT TRUE.
Go and read a few economics/financial pieces.

London is thriving. Huge financial concerns would have gone by now if they feared dealing from London was going to collapse. It's a huge financial centre for much of the world.

London still world's top financial centre despite Brexit, says survey - the Guardian (2018)

Financial Firms Commit to London Despite Brexit - Wall Street Journal (2018)

Europe’s post-Brexit financial capital will be ....London
- Politico.

The City owes its success to many factors, not just membership in the EU

I could go on......

And the Road Haulage Industry Day6, how will that fare in your book with no customs agreement through the ports.

The UK economy is likely to grow this year at its weakest rate since 2012, but only if the government achieves a “soft Brexit scenario”, a leading economic institute has said. The National Institute of Economic and Social Research said that it had not changed its forecasts from its previous report in May, with the economy expected to rise by 1.4 per cent this year and by 1.7 per cent in 2019.

This would be a slowdown from growth of 1.7 per cent last year and a 1.8 per cent expansion in 2016. The economy fell sharply behind other advanced nations last year. It was the only one in the G7 to slow, with all other countries picking-up appreciably. Having experienced the second fastest rate of growth in 2016, the UK was only the joint fifth fastest growing economy in the G7 last year, ahead of Italy, which expanded by 1.6 per cent. However, the institute said that its forecast of 1.4 per cent growth assumed that Britain achieved nearly full access to the European Union market for its goods and services and that the trade dispute between the United States and other countries remained “contained”.

The institute was founded 80 years ago to research the economic and social forces that affect people’s lives and its forecasts are closely monitored by the Treasury and the Bank of England. It warned that it was “particularly difficult to be confident about any forecast of the UK economy” because of the uncertainty around Brexit. It estimates that the economy would grow by only 0.6 per cent in 2019 if there was a “no deal” Brexit. The loss in output on that basis would cost about £800 per person a year compared with a soft Brexit deal, an agreed exit “where planes continue to fly and other extreme possibilities are avoided”.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/bad-brexit-would-mean-even-worse-uk-growth-bcws38bpm

MPs could be denied a full analysis of the economic damage from crashing out of the EU without a deal when they vote later this year, No 10 says. Parliament may only be given an assessment of the impact of the agreement that Theresa May expects to strike, her spokesman said – despite her insistence that rejecting it will mean leaving with no deal.

The stance comes despite the prime minister describing the Treasury’s current analysis – predicting a 7.7 per cent hit to GDP and an £80bn hole in the public finances – as a “work in progress”, implying it would be completed. Asked what advice would be given to MPs, the spokesman said refused, multiple times, to confirm it would include an up-to-date impact report on a no deal Brexit. "Once a deal has been negotiated, then the government will provide parliament with meaningful analysis on the deal ahead of the vote,” he said.

When asked if that meant an analysis would be provided “just on the deal” – rather than on a no deal exit – the spokesman replied: “On the deal – yes.”

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-no-deal-economic-damage-mps-denied-analysis-vote-theresa-may-a8511306.html

How on earth can MPs have a "meaningful vote" if they are only given an analysis of the consequences of voting for "the deal", but are not allowed to see the analysis of the consequenses of a "no deal" vote????

Theresa May has come under fire for claiming to have secured the UK’s first post-Brexit trade deal as it is merely a “rollover” of an existing EU agreement.

Critics said the announcement – to replicate a deal with six southern African nations – fell far short of boasts, before the referendum, of a new free trade area much larger than the EU.

They also pointed out that it came amid doubts about whether the UK will be able to retain deals the EU has struck recently with Canada and Japan – which are far bigger economies.

Last year, Britain exported £2.4bn worth of goods to the six African countries included in Ms May’s deal - just 0.7 per cent of the value of its exports to the EU and the rest of the world combined, which were worth £339bn.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/uk-trade-deal-africa-theresa-may-trip-post-brexit-eu-rollover-a8511871.html