Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Democorruptcy

Coalition School Cuts Are Illegal

Recommended Posts

Labour 1 - 0 Coalition

Gove loses court battle over cancelled school building projectsJudge rules cancellation of school building programme an 'abuse of power'

Friday 11 February 2011 11.55 GMT Article history

Michael Gove has lost a high court case against councils protesting cancelled school building projects. Photograph: Sang Tan/AP

Education secretary Michael Gove has lost a high court case against six councils protesting at his decision to cancel hundreds of multimillion-pound school rebuilding projects.

The result is a major embarrassment for Gove, whose decision, the judge said, was "an abuse of power" and may result in the government having to pay compensation costs.

Lawyers said Gove had failed to consult properly and had not given good enough reasons for stopping the projects when he scrapped the Building Schools for the Future scheme last July.

Under the £55bn scheme introduced by Labour, every secondary school in England was to be either rebuilt or refurbished. More than 700 schools' building projects were cancelled when the scheme was scrapped.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2011/feb/11/gove-school-building-court

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In america they call our MPs 'lawmakers'

Not sure why. Evidently they dont make laws, they just accept them, no matter how absurd.

Funny how its legal to pass on £5 trillion of debt to those same youngsters, but illegal to stop exhobitant building projects that have no bearing on education quality, but are simply a scheme to enrich lieobour supporting construction firms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another gaffe for Gove………….

:lol:

Let’s hope the coalition’s sick and perverted attempt to stop CB checks for children workers gets the same treatment in the courts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are really in a bad state in this country now.

UNELECTED JUDGES rule us.

Or protect/uphold the public interest against knee jerk and illegal governmental policy!!

You'd love life in Iran.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another gaffe for Gove………….

:lol:

Let’s hope the coalition’s sick and perverted attempt to stop CB checks for children workers gets the same treatment in the courts.

Do they actually work?

Numerical evidence?

Road to hell is paved with good intentions and all that.

They tell us we needed new anti-gun laws after Dunblane. Despite an overall fall in crime since then, gun crime has risen from 5000 offences in 1998 to 11,000 in 2006.

Just because laws exist to do something good, it doesnt mean they actually do something good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do they actually work?

Hardly fool proof, but better than nothing.

Numerical evidence?

I'll ask Uncle google

Just because laws exist to do something good, it doesnt mean they actually do something good.

Quite, but i wonder how you'd feel if your son/daughter was exposed to a serial child abuser!?

Whether safeguarding and/or criminal bureau checks work is one thing, but chucking them all out of the window for whatever pathetic political excuse is currently invogue is meek surrender.

There's plenty of meaningless counter productive legislation/laws out there that can be done away with. The protection of children however isn't one of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote}

The judge, Mr Justice Holman, asked Gove to reconsider his decision "with an open mind". "The final decision on any project still rests with him and ... no one should gain false hope from this decision".

Andy Burnham, Labour's shadow education secretary, said the ruling was a victory "for all the communities and children betrayed by Michael Gove". He said the ruling was a "damning verdict on [Gove's] competence as a minister".

"School building and repair is in complete chaos thanks to Mr Gove. He condemns many children to crumbling classrooms and Portakabins whilst waving his cheque book to try to force through more free schools, which will be irrelevant for the majority of parents," said Burnham.

Surely the problem is tax income is only £550bn compared to spending of £700bn. It would be great to build 700 new schools and a lot of other public projects. How are they going to be paid for though, something else will have to be cut instead. We don't have infinite money to spend unfortunately

Labour created the deficit through spending and public job and salary increase based on boom time taxation levels. Now this problem is being dealt with they criticize at every turn knowing full well they would have to make the exact same decisions. Very dishonest political point scoring.

I would welcome a credible socialist alternative, but current labour policy is not based on reality nor is there any remorse for having created the situation in the first place. If Labour are meant to represent the working class they need to have a good hard look at the damage they have done to the poorest in society over the last decade.

Perhaps putting forward some polices as a credible alternative to solve the £150bn hole would be more useful than this dishonest approach to every spending decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite, but i wonder how you'd feel if your son/daughter was exposed to a serial child abuser!?

Whether safeguarding and/or criminal bureau checks work is one thing, but chucking them all out of the window for whatever pathetic political excuse is currently invogue is meek surrender.

There's plenty of meaningless counter productive legislation/laws out there that can be done away with. The protection of children however isn't one of them.

Luckily criminals don't lie and adhere to the law.

Checking 9m people is clear insanity, you might as well insist everyone has one. Think of the income which could be generated from it.

http://www.crb.homeoffice.gov.uk/media/news/standard_crb_checks_price_cut.aspx

The Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) can announce that it is proposing to reduce its fee for Standard Disclosures by £5.00 from 1 October 2009 [1]. The fee for Enhanced Disclosures is unchanged at the 2006/07 level.

From 1 October, the following Fee levels will apply throughout the remainder of 2009/10.

- Standard CRB check £26.00 (reduced from £31.00)

- Enhanced CRB check £36.00

- POVAFirst check £6.00

The cost of a CRB check now represents even greater value for money given the protection and assurance that such checks provide.

Make them valid for 12 months and every year you have to renew to prove your a safe and sound individual. £26 a pop, 60m think of the revenue. It's work like this that will keep everyone safe, overnight we'll stop child abuse.

In fact we should make it compulsory for everyone to carry the CRB check just in case you get a asked a question in the street by a child.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh well its "only" £55BN laugh.gif

Offer that Egyptian prime minister bloke political asylum in exchange for 100% of his wealth.

There you go. A whole country gets what they want and we have all those school repairs paid for, with change. ;)

However to offer some political balance to this debate, I'd be inclined to ask the opposition bench why (after 13 years of unprecedented education spending) Schools are in such a state, that they still require another £55bn to bring them up to standard!?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Whether safeguarding and/or criminal bureau checks work is one thing, but chucking them all out of the window for whatever pathetic political excuse is currently in vogue is meek surrender.

They aren't all being chucked out of the window, just scaled back to a common sense level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or protect/uphold the public interest against knee jerk and illegal governmental policy!!

You'd love life in Iran.

So seeing as you are down on the coalition, who would you have govern? The labour party? And just what did they vie for?

90 day control orders

Biggest concentration of CCTV cameras in the western world

Indefininite retention of DNA profiles for the non-convicted

Kettling

ID cards

RIPA

Give me a break!

Bet you also favour scrapping the military.

Cos let's face it, it's people in the country (citizens) who are the enemy, whilst the rest of the world are all cuddly. Until they see we have no defences, invade and own your CCTV'd, ID-carded, DNA databased @rse. Short-sighted?

Edited by Sledgehead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My understanding was that this was only a "judicial review" and the order from the courts to the Govt is that they have to consider each scheme on its individual merits before scrapping them. It doesn't mean they have to go ahead.

And for the record, the £55bn quoted is for the entire BSF project covering 3,500 schools, not the budget for these 6 or so schemes.

Edited by tommyweaves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would welcome a credible socialist alternative, but current labour policy is not based on reality nor is there any remorse for having created the situation in the first place. If Labour are meant to represent the working class they need to have a good hard look at the damage they have done to the poorest in society over the last decade.

Perhaps putting forward some polices as a credible alternative to solve the £150bn hole would be more useful than this dishonest approach to every spending decision.

Despite what others may think, I'm no socialist. However instead of attacking the education and personal safety of our children (who are blameless for anything) why don't we save money in other areas first?!?

Ending the wars on drugs, terror and bringing our troops home from the middle east would be a good start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would welcome a credible socialist alternative, but current labour policy is not based on reality nor is there any remorse for having created the situation in the first place. If Labour are meant to represent the working class they need to have a good hard look at the damage they have done to the poorest in society over the last decade.

Perhaps putting forward some polices as a credible alternative to solve the £150bn hole would be more useful than this dishonest approach to every spending decision.

New Labour did not represent the working class, they were in the hip pockets of big business, as are the ConDems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sick and perverted attempt to stop CB checks

Any troll incapable of making an argument beyond utter hyperbole and slander doesn't deserve the courtesy of a measured response.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd have been more impressed with the ruling if the judge stated where the money was going to come from to pay for all of these projects.

The judge said some relevant things

1) no amount of words about the state of the economy allows you to ignore the legal requirement to consult.

2) consulting would not have required significant delay so the need of the economy is no excuse for not doing so.

3) while the ruling requires Gove to review and consult there is nothing in the ruling to say that the decision should be different after he has done so

Third point most significant. No money will be required in practice. Purely a reminder to a minister that he is not above the law. Seems reasonable to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 312 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.