Angela Rayner skewered by Nick Ferrari

[Otispunkmeyer]

Greg_D said:

With the recent history of getting pulled up on basic facts, you'd think there would be some sort of memo going around labour HQ to actually write down all variations of the key numbers and how it was going to be funded if you are going on LBC, wouldn't you....

it's all a function of labour operating in some sort of a weird echo chamber, you see it with corbyn only standing in front of cheering crowds of acolytes and not a mixed bunch of general voters, he's just not interested in hearing dissenting voices.

their ideologically driven agenda is simply not thought through or costed on any level, it's terrifying to think that anyone thinks that they are fit for public office

Quite

My facebook seems to have a lot of "nasty tory" this and "fk the tories" that and a lot of thumbs up for Corbyn and his policies. Thing is, some of those polices are actually quite nice. For instance I'd be happy to have 10k more bobbies. Some of them, on face value are things that could stir me to vote Labour. However, you only need to move your thoughts along one step... to see the ability of the people who will administer them, to see their lack of preparedness and to see their poor numeracy and you realise that it'll be a complete fuster cluck.

[Europa1]

Otispunkmeyer said:

Quite

My facebook seems to have a lot of "nasty tory" this and "fk the tories" that and a lot of thumbs up for Corbyn and his policies. Thing is, some of those polices are actually quite nice. For instance I'd be happy to have 10k more bobbies. Some of them, on face value are things that could stir me to vote Labour. However, you only need to move your thoughts along one step... to see the ability of the people who will administer them, to see their lack of preparedness and to see their poor numeracy and you realise that it'll be a complete fuster cluck.

You only need to move your thoughts onto the man who they would put in charge of paying for their promises, John McDonnell - one gets the impression he would get as much if not more satisfaction from "punishing the well off/successful/big business" than from any improvement in public safety from having another 10,000 police.

[crankedup]

Eric Mc said:

dazwalsh said:

Exactly, no one needed precise figures but "a decent chunk" is hard to quantify. Even a "500k+" would have been more than acceptable and prevent her looking like a pillock

Also the rest of her dribble failed to address how they are going to acheive the lower class sizes, more schools?

Edited by dazwalsh on Wednesday 10th May 13:54

Instead of actual numbers or figures, all Labour spokespeople have been told they must only use the following less precise terms -

decent chunk
smidgin
loads more
more than enough
a tad
carefully researched
fully costed
I don't do numbers

I find it frustrating being constantly told that ' you will have to wait until we release our manifesto'.

Edited by crankedup on Wednesday 10th May 17:40

[anonymous-user]

Shadow Education Secretary, with no education. I'm not sure what's worse; getting no qualifications at all or going to one of the best schools in the country and getting 2 E' s like her boss.

[Ayahuasca]

There are a couple of things I rather like about Angela Rayner.














One is her northern accent and the other is her honesty about not knowing the numbers. No inane blustering like with the loathsome Dianne.

[Smiler.]

Ayahuasca said:

There are a couple of things I rather like about Angela Rayner.














One is her northern accent and the other is her honesty about not knowing the numbers. No inane blustering like with the loathsome Dianne.

I put it to you that your pants are in fact, smouldering.

[Rovinghawk]

Ayahuasca said:

There are a couple of things I rather like about Angela Rayner.

If anyone notices JC in the picture, please tell me why he always comes across as a scruffy git.

[bitchstewie]

Rovinghawk said:

If anyone notices JC in the picture, please tell me why he always comes across as a scruffy git.

I wouldn't overthink it, it's because he is.

[Pesty]

Roy Lime said:

Good grief, I wish I hadn't posted it. I was taking the piss. Google Angela Rayner and shoes.

Jesus titty fking Christ

[anonymous-user]

Likes Fast Cars said:

Waste of space.

Pretty soon the Labour Party will; ban any of their MP's from going on air.

Sadly not. Rayner displaying her stupidity and ignorance will appeal to millions of feckless chavs in a way no one presenting serious, sensible, costed proposals ever will. She's one of us. Innit.

[Troubleatmill]

Pesty said:

Roy Lime said:

Good grief, I wish I hadn't posted it. I was taking the piss. Google Angela Rayner and shoes.

Jesus titty fking Christ

And this is the person who could be responsible for our children' education in 4 weeks time!!

Vote winner!!!!

[audidoody]

If Ferrari had the exact figures to hand there's pretty much no excuse for her or her SPADs not to have them.

I tried to engage with her on Twitter. She said evil Tory cuts were causing malnutrition in children returning to school after their holidays. I politely pointed out that it may be because the parents were feeding them junk food. BLOCKED.

[Wobbegong]

BoRED S2upid said:

jonah35 said:

Left school at 16 due to being pregnant.
No further education.
Worked for a union.
Husband works for a union.

They are facts, im not saying that it is good or bad.

I'd expect an education secretary to have a little more experience in education. How do they decide on who gets the top jobs? Names in a hat?

Maybe it is a good idea? Education at present is pretty much a choochoo train to university. What about those who are not academic and have no desire/need/the ability to go beyond high school education like Angela Rayner?
I'm no fan of Labour, but perhaps someone who can see beyond the need for everyone to go to uni could be a good option for education secretary and open opportunities for young non-academics.

[anonymous-user]

Wobbegong said:

...perhaps someone who can see beyond the need for everyone to go to uni could be a good option for education secretary and open opportunities for young non-academics.

Quite right but surely there are enough completely uneducated, innumerate, semi-literate fvckwits around without putting one of them in charge of the entire education system? There wasn't a single better person in the PLP? She didn't choose not to do 6th form or Uni, a perfectly reasonable choice; she chose not to do GCSE's!

[Ganglandboss]

fblm said:

Wobbegong said:

...perhaps someone who can see beyond the need for everyone to go to uni could be a good option for education secretary and open opportunities for young non-academics.

Quite right but surely there are enough completely uneducated, innumerate, semi-literate fvckwits around without putting one of them in charge of the entire education system? There wasn't a single better person in the PLP? She didn't choose not to do 6th form or Uni, a perfectly reasonable choice; she chose not to do GCSE's!

She did sit her GCSEs, but got sh*t grades, because in her words, “School wasn’t about education, but about larking around with my pals”.

Personally, I would welcome an Education Secretary who can see beyond the need to go to university, but I would expect them to have experience / understanding of vocational qualifications, as well as an appreciation of academic options. Rayner is just a thick chavess with neither, and the intellect of a lobster.

[Funky Panda]

After hearing the lack of data presented by the shadow education secretary this morning, my Dad and I thought we would have a go at it on her behalf after dinner.

Here are our findings after about 30 mins:

Number of children in oversize classes in England (Ferrari figure) 520,000

Number of primary school children in England 4443120 Figure from Guardian article https://www.theguardian.com/education/2012/jul/26/...

Therefore 11.7% of children are in classes of over 30

If we assume on average a child in an oversize class is in a class of 32 (worst case scenario from this article: https://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/jun/11/... then 1/16 of the children need a new class.

So therefore 32500 children require a new class. If they are placed in an 'acceptable' class size of 30 we can estimate that 1083 new classes are needed.

Based upon 1.5 teachers per class to cover sickness, absence, maternity leave and other factors this policy would need around 1625 new primary teachers presuming none of the extra classes could be taken by current staff

Therefore the cost in salaries alone based on an average starting salary of £20000 and a 25% overheads for pension, NI etc. would leave a cost of £25000 per teacher in the 1st year excluding training costs.

Total cost of new teachers from education budget = £40.6 million

The total budget for primary education is around £21.7 billion (£4900 per pupil)
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/feb/27/...

An increase of 0.18% in Primary school budget.

However in the 1st year the cost of creating the extra classrooms will mean this is considerable more, I can't find the figures to give an accurate estimate of these.

[IanH755]

It's a good job Labour don't employ anyone competent like yourself, they might actually stand a chance of getting in Power if they did god forbid!

[Jonmx]

Ganglandboss said:

Rayner is just a thick chavess with neither, and the intellect of a lobster.

Actually Lobsters have an intelligence on a par with Cephalopods like Octopuses, so you may be overrating her intellect there.

[anonymous-user]

Funky Panda said:

So therefore 32500 children require a new class. If they are placed in an 'acceptable' class size of 30 we can estimate that 1083 new classes are needed.

The maths might work but you haven't thought it through. You can't take 15 schools with a classroom of 32 and say the extra 2 from each school make up just 1 new class of 30... The new classes need to be in the same school or town as each of the oversized classes for the 'extra' kids to be able to actually attend. More or less every school (or couple of neighbouring schools) with a class over 30 will need a new class even if they are just over, they'll need new class rooms(!) and a new teacher or two. It's an absolutely massive commitment at least 1 if not 2 orders of magnitude bigger than your estimate! That said I think it's probably their only policy that makes sense. 30 kids is too much IMO

Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 11th May 02:40

[anonymous-user]

Ganglandboss said:

She did sit her GCSEs, but got sh*t grades

Ah you're right. Teach me to read wiki. Not a single A-C at GCSE according to the Guardian, so confirmed dumb as a rock then. As if you couldn't tell when she opens her fat gob.