Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Glasgow schools occupied against closure

Spare us the pager-speak. Council of all stripes are letting schools fall into disrepair. One of the main functions of local authorities is education. One of the main priorities of the population is education. So, yes: not good enough. Must try harder.

Pager speak? Glasgow is full of bright, shiny, and very expensive new schools, all since the Council was formed in 1996 and Labour got in in 1997 and during the time Labour was in power at Holyrood. There's a sustainable programme to make sure all schools are in top condition. I think the City Council has something to be really proud of in this.
 
This is what I said. You are the one who called them stupid. I think you're beindg dishonest, rather than stupid.

but rather one made using them to attack Labour politically and advance the interest of another party. I put it on pause when the narrator used the words cost-cutting.


Pretty clear, your words. They're being used, no ifs or buts. You make it clear your certain they're being used. Not a bit of evidence to back it up or prove your point. You dishonest loathsome patronising hack.
 
Pretty clear, your words. They're being used, no ifs or buts. You make it clear your certain they're being used. Not a bit of evidence to back it up or prove your point. You dishonest loathsome patronising hack.
The fact that they agreed to be filmed for a particular political party's propaganda, if the SSP was upfront about it, is their choice.

Note my emphasis. If they are being used, I assume that they are doing so knowingly.
 
This is what I said. You are the one who called them stupid. I think you're beindg dishonest, rather than stupid.

Yeah that's right, these stupid women who can't think for themselves. Well the difference is i've met them. Like many many women, they're not stupid, they're not anyones dupes as you so patronisingly imply.... But hey why bother with them, they are of no concern to your life so just label tham dupes and grin smugly.

Read it again, pretty clear what i'm saying here. I don't think they're stupid at all. I, unlike you, have met them. Read the third sentence, pretty cleasr you utter clown. You're the one making the claim they were used. You are the one implying they couldn't posssible have known who the bloke in the video is. You're the one implying their stupidity by their being used, as you claimed, by the fella introducing the film and asking the women their concerns and view of the possible closures.
 
Yup,

pager-speak: of or like the kind of thing that comes from party HQ and is used by politico hacks on Newsnight.

You over-estimate the sophistication of the Scottish Labour Party! And you under-estimate my own ability to identify the significant achievement of the City Council in building loads of new schools and improving the rest.
 
No, he was saying that I was calling them stupid. Dishonestly.

You, without a shred of evidence made the claim they were being used. Now either put up your evidence that they were being used? Care to show us how they're being used? Come on....
 
You over-estimate the sophistication of the Scottish Labour Party! And you under-estimate my own ability to identify the significant achievement of the City Council in building loads of new schools and improving the rest.
Of or like.

It was a description, not an accusation.
 
Read it again, pretty clear what i'm saying here. I don't think they're stupid at all. I, unlike you, have met them. Read the third sentence, pretty cleasr you utter clown. You're the one making the claim they were used. You are the one implying they couldn't posssible have known who the bloke in the video is. You're the one implying their stupidity by their being used, as you claimed, by the fella introducing the film and asking the women their concerns and view of the possible closures.

That is complete mince. As I've said, not implied, repeatedly. And I'm not going to repeat myself again. For some reason you have taken it upon yourself to alienate potential supporters of these people. You must have some idea why you're doing it.
 
That is complete mince. As I've said, not implied, repeatedly. And I'm not going to repeat myself again. For some reason you have taken it upon yourself to alienate potential supporters of these people. You must have some idea why you're doing it.

No one is alienating anyone. You're not a potential supporter at all. You made an assertion/claim. You made it clear why you made that claim.
You can repeat yourself ad nauseum, it's quoted on here what you said. They were being used. Don't try and clim you din't say it, it's quoted.

Originally Posted by Fullyplumped
but rather one made using them to attack Labour politically and advance the interest of another party. I put it on pause when the narrator used the words cost-cutting.
 
Except for the ones falling apart in working class areas, so badly so that they use it a reason for closure?

Every child in secondary now has an A class school to attend. The plan is to extend this to all children attending a primary. That will take ten years to complete. I doubt if any other Scottish councils can say that, or that they even have a plan to achieve it.
 
Every child in secondary now has an A class school to attend. The plan is to extend this to all children attending a primary. That will take ten years to complete.
By closing down primary schools so that the "A class school" they have to attend is only local because the local one was closed.

You do see how you sound, don't you?
 
No one is alienating anyone. You're not a potential supporter at all. You made an assertion/claim. You made it clear why you made that claim.
You can repeat yourself ad nauseum, it's quoted on here what you said. They were being used. Don't try and clim you din't say it, it's quoted.
You have twisted quotes and are trying to make a bizarre point, to benefit God knows who.

I have already said I support what the parents at those two schools are trying to achieve for themselves. If some individuals choose to knowingly endorse a wider political campaign, and to endorse an up front attack on the Labour Party, that is their decision. I wouldn't support that. I think it would be very unwise for the wider campaign to allow itself to be associated with that, and up to now I've admired the apparent sagacity of the campaign.

Was that clear? Or are you going to try and twist that too?
 
You have twisted quotes and are trying to make a bizarre point, to benefit God knows who.

I have already said I support what the parents at those two schools are trying to achieve for themselves. If some individuals choose to knowingly endorse a wider political campaign, and to endorse an up front attack on the Labour Party, that is their decision. I wouldn't support that. I think it would be very unwise for the wider campaign to allow itself to be associated with that, and up to now I've admired the apparent sagacity of the campaign.

Was that clear? Or are you going to try and twist that too?

All that's happened is that you opened your 'gob' and posted something you're now trying to claim you didn't mean. No 'twisting' necessary you said it clear as day. You're attempts to backtrack and lessen the snide accusation you made won't wash.

You see, I know the parents opinion of the bloke introducing the video you don't. Some of the parents used to be LP supporters. Some Labour councillors have been trying to curry favour with the very same parents..... But of course that's ok..... Some Labour MP's and MSP's have been trying to invite them to wee meetings to get on their side. But that's ok.... :rolleyes:

Of course it's an attack on the Labour Party, it's the Labour council who are advocating the two schools closure. Who should they criticise Plaid Cymru? Jesus, you're a fucking idiot.
 
Some Labour councillors have been trying to curry favour with the very same parents..... But of course that's ok..... Some Labour MP's and MSP's have been trying to invite them to wee meetings to get on their side. But that's ok.... :rolleyes:

I'm sure that local ward councillors will try to help them win their case - perfectly reasonable - but they will be expected to support the closure programme once agreed by the Council. I'm also sure that the local constituency MP and constituency MSP - there are no Labour list MSPs in Glasgow - will be on their side and actively want to helpthem but it's not their decision, it's the Council's.

If anyone is seriously advising them to attack Labour at this stage, when they will need to persuade the Labour group of their case, then that is just stupid. I don't think the SSP have the interests of these people at heart.


Oh God, Fedayn will now claim that I've called the parents of these children "stupid". Look - there are the words!
 
I'm sure that local ward councillors will try to help them win their case - perfectly reasonable - but they will be expected to support the closure programme once agreed by the Council. I'm also sure that the local constituency MP and constituency MSP - there are no Labour list MSPs in Glasgow - will be on their side and actively want to helpthem but it's not their decision, it's the Council's.

If anyone is seriously advising them to attack Labour at this stage, when they will need to persuade the Labour group of their case, then that is just stupid. I don't think the SSP have the interests of these people at heart.


Oh God, Fedayn will now claim that I've called the parents of these children "stupid". Look - there are the words!

Funnily enough, these parents don't think that Labour have their interests at heart..... I wonder why? As you clearly state, even if their voters are against the closures they will ignore them and vote for closures if they're told to. As such your claims of these very councillors helping them is a lie because they will listen keenly to look like they're helping but in reality they won't listen to their constituents/voters but will simply vote the way the Labour council decides. As such fuck the parents they don't matter, the Labour Party matters more. Thanks for confirming that FP.

Btw, there's SSP members live on that estate, they live there, funny that. But carry on with your ill-informed remarks, it's what you're evidently very good at.
 
Funnily enough, these parents don't think that Labour have their interests at heart..... I wonder why? As you clearly state, even if their voters are against the closures they will ignore them and vote for closures if they're told to. As such your claims of these very councillors helping them is a lie because they will listen keenly to look like they're helping but in reality they won't listen to their constituents/voters but will simply vote the way the Labour council decides. As such fuck the parents they don't matter, the Labour Party matters more. Thanks for confirming that FP.

Btw, there's SSP members live on that estate, they live there, funny that. But carry on with your ill-informed remarks, it's what you're evidently very good at.

The most the parents with children at those schools can hope for is that their schools will not be among those to be closed, and that is what the parent's campaign seems to aimed at achieving. The council runs the whole city, not just a bit of Maryhill, and the strategy is about providing grade A schools for all Glasgow's children. I suppose the SSP will be trying to tell the parents that it's different. Not even T Sheridan could pull that one off.
 
The most the parents with children at those schools can hope for is that their schools will not be among those to be closed, and that is what the parent's campaign seems to aimed at achieving. The council runs the whole city, not just a bit of Maryhill, and the strategy is about providing grade A schools for all Glasgow's children. I suppose the SSP will be trying to tell the parents that it's different. Not even T Sheridan could pull that one off.


The council runs thw whole city? Well I never? I am surprised.... Is that what Glasgow City Council does?.....

The cost-cutting exercise is exactly that, close local schools, cut costs, and claim that the new school, with larger classes, further away, and not what poarents want is the way forward. That's blackmail not a policy... And they have presided over the deterioration of Glasgow schools for decades, so less of this bollocks about wanting good schools, they have allowed schools to get into this state.

Who cares what Sheridan wants or tries to do.
 
TThe cost-cutting exercise is exactly that, close local schools, cut costs, and claim that the new school, with larger classes, further away, and not what poarents want is the way forward. That's blackmail not a policy... And they have presided over the deterioration of Glasgow schools for decades, so less of this bollocks about wanting good schools, they have allowed schools to get into this state.

If you're right that ultimately parents, and voters, want lots of half empty poorly maintained primary schools, as opposed to slightly fewer but grade-A condition schools for the city's primary kids, then Labour will pay the price at the next election, which is only two years or so away. On the other hand, if they want to see primaries brought up to the excellent standard of the city's new secondaries, then we'll see.

Labour has turned the city's secondaries around in recent years, boldly ending the decades of decline you mention, and kept in power in Glasgow under a PR system when councils all over Scotland fell into the hands of SNP-led coalitions where schools continue to fall apart - see Renfrewshire and particularly see Edinburgh where they're making a big fuss about maybe replacing Portobello High. It is now doing the same for the primaries.
 
If you're right that ultimately parents, and voters, want lots of half empty poorly maintained primary schools, as opposed to slightly fewer but grade-A condition schools for the city's primary kids, then Labour will pay the price at the next election, which is only two years or so away. On the other hand, if they want to see primaries brought up to the excellent standard of the city's new secondaries, then we'll see.

No, they want their local schools, kept open, refurbished and improved. Not too difficult to grasp I would have thought? But it seems it is for you...
 
No, they want their local schools, kept open, refurbished and improved. Not too difficult to grasp I would have thought? But it seems it is for you...

Then some will be disappointed. If Labour was just interested in being popular they'd say were going to give them that and fail to deliver. Maybe there's an opportunity here for the SSP (Continuing)?
 
Then some will be disappointed. If Labour was just interested in being popular they'd say were going to give them that and fail to deliver. Maybe there's an opportunity here for the SSP (Continuing)?

Oh the Labour Party is desperate to be popular, with business, bankers and their millionaire pals. Not to mention Deutsche Post who they wanna flog off part of Royal Mail too. They don't give a fuck about being popular with ordinary people. They have an agenda and fuck whoever gets caught up in the aftermath.

As for the SSP, well they're not closing schools, they're not asking people to accept worsening T&C's at work, they're not handing over billions to bankers, but cutting the money to education..... Now i'm a member of neither party, but I know which one is shafting people, and guess what, it's not the SSP.
 
Back
Top Bottom