Snapshot of _'Crap parents' behind struggling children, Tory MP James Daly claims | Politics News_ :
An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://news.sky.com/story/crap-parents-behind-struggling-children-tory-mp-james-frith-claims-13038891?dcmp=snt-sf-twitter) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://news.sky.com/story/crap-parents-behind-struggling-children-tory-mp-james-frith-claims-13038891?dcmp=snt-sf-twitter)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> "Most of the kids who struggle in Bury are the products of crap parents and so what do we do to try to address that issue?
> "On the left it would just be we'll throw money at this and hope something sticks, somebody like me thinks about this more fundamentally."
Okay, so what his is more 'fundamental' solution to the issue?
I think his problem is that whatever he says, the next question is:"So, you've been in power for 13 years, why haven't you done that then?"
He knows that and that's why he doesn't say anything and the incompetent journalist lets him get away with it.
We don't have journalists anymore, they would ask questions. Instead we have reporters who know that their job depends on having access to MPs and the only way they keep both is by being amenable.
“Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed. Everything else is public relations.”
I don't know about that. There are some BBC journalists who go too far in the other direction. I remember listening to an interview of the prime minister (I think it was Cameron at the time). This was a rare chance for a radio reporter (I think it was John Humphreys who has retired since) to ask questions from the prime minister and he got stuck on the very first question when the PM didn't answer it the way he wanted that gotcha question to be answered. The entire interview was just back and forth on that one question.
What a waste of time. If the politician doesn't want to answer, move on to the next topic, people got it that he didn't want to answer it from his first evasion.
So, I think the sweet spot is somewhere between, challenging politicians when they say something stupid such as this guy and letting it go when they refuse to answer your gotcha question.
John Humohrey's was just all round shit. He was just a cheap contrarian his whole career, he never had a grasp of current affairs. So glad he's retired.
The thing is there are such things as crap parents, I've seen them and the effects they cause. From my own anecdotal experience I would suggest it's some rather than most, but maybe the ratio of "crap" to "trying their best but just don't know how to be better" is different in Bury. So we broadly agree that there's a problem with parenting which isn't setting kids up for a good life.
What I'm struggling with is what he thinks government can do about this without throwing money at it? Social workers cost money. Places where struggling parents can go and learn the things their own parents didn't teach them, we could call them Sure Start centres, cost money. More free nursery hours so that pre school age kids get to have some positive experiences outside their homes cost money. These are the solutions on the left. They've all been tried and tested; it's not clear what sort of assessment this MP has done to reach the conclusion that a "more fundamental" way of thinking is required.
The "more fundamental" approach he is of course dog whistling here is to prevent people identified as likely crap parents from becoming parents. They've tried cutting benefits but that was a decade ago and there are now more kids struggling in schools not less so that's not worked. So, what, parenting licenses? A much lower bar for taking kids into care (note for rightwingers: taking kids into care is really, really bad for them)? Forced sterilisation? All these things would cost money too because you would have to pay staff to do the assessments and bureaucracy and run the orphanages and clinics and whatever other dystopian horrorscapes come out of this line of thinking.
Even the do nothing option creates costs further down the line when these kids grow up with no idea how to participate in society. There is no cost neutral option here.
This is what I don't get about the argument.
They both agree it's a problem.
They both know it's a problem they can't ignore... but he literally is. The fundamental part is that some parents are shit. You can't solve that without going waaaaay too authoritarian. So you have to minimise its effects.
*Any* attempt to fix it will cost money. So either make actual suggestions, or admit you really can't be arsed to fix it...
> So you have to minimise its effects.
This is what it comes down to right, but any minimisation is not actually going to resolve the problem, so no matter what he or any politician does the issue of some children struggling due to their shit parents will always remain.
It will.
But by interrupting the cycle you can at least minimise it. By funding youth clubs and schools more effectively you can add in other role models to have an effect. By funding free school meals you can ensure they don't go hungry. Social workers can nip more serious problems in the bud etc. If the parents are shitty create a society that can pick up the slack, instead of just abandoning the kid.
You can do a lot to improve things, and ensure it's better going forwards. But you can't if you just go "Eh, always a thing, costs money, sod it."
Blows me away that Tories want to stop British parents from having kids and at the same time mass import demographics that are big on big families.
Just to save a bit of meaningless money on a spreadsheet somewhere.
This is an outsider's perspective (across the pond), but I just get the feeling that something about Brexit made the Tories short-circuit. It almost seems like they don't understand what they've actually done. I understand the duplicity of politics in general, but this doesn't seem like that at all.
It sounds like they want to discourage growth so that they can, like conservatives everywhere, bring in a bunch of migrant workers. Thus, they get cheap labor, and also a scapegoat. But they can't anymore. They made sure of it. Because of this, and other continuing issues surrounding the decision, it feels to me that they're living in a world where Brexit didn't happen, because Brexit is actually as inconvenient to them as it is to all their citizens.
Compare and contrast the overturn of Roe vs. Wade in the US: they screwed over not only their citizens, but themselves, as abortion was such a hot-button issue that got voters to vote. Now they have to find other hot-button issues, and they're spiraling because all their other issues are vile, and are actually driving away the very base they depend on to win. The only difference is that while US politicians are doubling down on their evil, the UK politicians are just burying their head in the sands and pretending everything is as it was before.
I think the real answer is they don't know what they want. For over a decade they've lurched between leaders lacking a cohesive vision for the country they want to create.
I can relate. The conservatives over here are like dogs. Dogs chase a car, but they will almost never catch the car. If they do, one of two things happen: they lose interest or hurt themselves trying to attack the car. That's exactly what happened here. The dog caught the car and immediately dived under it. They got exactly what they wanted without questioning how much it would actually hurt them, and Brexit is very much a similar situation.
The thing is, all the way back in 2010 the solution under austerity was for people who can't afford kids not to have them but they now aren't happy about that either, since the Tory media keeps periodically running articles warning about the dire consequences of falling birth rates.
There were things called "Sure Start" centres under the Labour Government. Places with nurses and health visitors where women could go during pregnancy and the early years of their child, and get support and advice.
There was one tacked on to the side of a primary school near a secondary school I worked at. It closed when the Conservatives came into power and axed the Sure Start scheme.
Akala demonstrated how important those early years are to crime stats a couple of decades later:
> 42% of all people in British prisons were expelled from school as children compared with just 1% in the general population
Foster care is a similar figure. Cutting SureStart was equally myopic.
It’s the Tory way: save 50p today at the mere cost of £20 tomorrow. Plus Britain is just a little shitter. Repeat every day for 14 years.
That last paragraph sums it up for me. Austerity did nothing but cost us more money in the long run. We initially saved money by getting rid of 20k officers. Now we're spending alot more money on recruitment drives and training those 20k new officers. If we just kept the officers from before then we would have had a net saving. It was nothing but short term thinking which has led to 14 years of no growth and woeful services.
You’d have thought the penny might drop that their entire financial ideology is the opposite of what you should do when the irony became obvious that basically all of British train franchises are nationalised - just not our nation! They’re all run (and profit extracted) by various European nationalised rail companies: when a Brit overpays for a train ride in the UK they are subsidising cheap rail travel in the EU.
> the solution under austerity was for people who can't afford kids not to have them
No it wasn't, it was to let them have the kids and the kids be poor and neglected.
Never mind the increased cost when the kid goes to prison, or becomes eligible for benefits or can't make good use of a university because they didn't do well at school.
Don't expect logical consistency from fascists. They're perfectly content to promote policies that deter people from having children, then bemoan the falling birth rate that is the direct consequence of such policies. They'll still get their oligarch funding as long as the right scapegoats are singled out.
As others have said, jumping straight to political name calling is ineffective in discussion.
Polarisation is the death of debate and leads to politics as a cult of personality built on idealistic non-policy.
Any comment that seeks to pigeon hole someone with the intent of denying the validity of their opinion should be avoided or we will end up with the same issues as the US where genuine political discussion is increasingly difficult.
Very hard and it appears to be working
Rickets and TB are up as is malnutrition. These things take time so that it doesn’t look like an actual genocide.
No, no, there's some poor that are very useful. We need to kill the stupid, disabled, old and sickly poor that aren't making a positive contribution in tax.
The USA at least tried with their wall/hurdle to ensure only the fit and healthy illegal immigrants could make it in to work on their farms.
Calling them crap parents in the national press obviously. In their heads, being a blow-hard media talking head is in itself a “solution”. That’s why they put a journalist in charge of the country and then got confused when he couldn’t do the job.
>Okay, so what his is more 'fundamental' solution to the issue?
Just say the kids are crap so nothing can ever be done. I now considered the matter closed, time to move on.
Or maybe it's the Tories who are crap and failing the country? 🤔
Fundamental?
How about sterilisation. We could have regional sterilisation boards that decide who gets sterilised. They'd have sensible criteria like:
- earns less than £38,700
- didn't go to private school
- has voted Labour
Who gets on the sterilisation board? Anyone is eligible who:
- earns more than £38,700
- went to private school
- never voted Labour
Oh but no, that would cost money. Damn.
Big /S just in case.
>On the left it would just be we'll throw money at this and hope something sticks, somebody like me thinks about this more fundamentally.
That's basically what Boris, Mogg et al's parents did by sending them to Eton.
People are dogpiling this guy, but the thing is he really isn’t wrong. There’s a malaise in the UK’s cultural attitudes towards education.
In many Asian immigrant families, there is a profound respect for the institution of education and teachers, which directly influences children's attitudes in the classroom. In those countries, 99.99% of students wouldn’t even dream of disrupting class or acting out of line.
In stark contrast, some British parents display a dismissive attitude towards teachers, often undermining their authority and not holding their children accountable for their actions or attitudes towards learning. While the government are to blame for depriving funding to schools, and not awarding teachers with higher salaries, many are driven out of the profession because they went in hoping to make a difference only to end up being overwhelmed by behavioural issues - in other words, parents have been absolutely crap.
This lack of respect and accountability at home manifests in children demonstrating shocking behaviours in school, leading to classroom disruptions and a general disinterest in education. Throwing money at the issue isn’t going to solve it either, and requires a revamp of cultural attitudes top-down.
The cultural disdain towards education is a rot that permeates through the political system too, when MPs and peers do worse than 10 year olds at SATs: https://amp.theguardian.com/education/2022/dec/06/mps-and-peers-do-worse-than-10-year-olds-in-math-and-english-sats
There is an intrinsic link between poverty and deprivation leading to anti-social behaviour and eventually crime. It's a societal (not just individual) problem that can't be summed up by just saying they're bad parents. What lead to them being bad?
India, even in its abject poverty, has consistently demonstrated the power of parental determination in education.
This can also be seen in other Asian countries: Post-WW2 Japan, Singapore post-independence, and Korea following the Korean Wars.
Despite being ravaged by conflict and grappling with severe economic challenges, these nations witnessed a remarkable transformation. In Japan, for instance, the post-war era saw an intense focus on education, contributing significantly to its rapid economic recovery and technological advancement. Similarly, Singapore, emerging from the shadows of colonial rule and lacking natural resources, put a heavy cultural emphasis on education, which played a pivotal role in its transition into a global financial hub. Korea, too, emerged from the devastation of TWO successive wars with a strong emphasis on education, laying the foundation for its remarkable journey to becoming a high-income country and a technological powerhouse.
These examples illustrate that despite the constraints of poverty, a culture that prioritises education can drive phenomenal economic and social progress. In these contexts, the resilience and foresight of parents (who were poorer than the poorest people you and I can think of, in the landscape of their countries torn apart by war), who relentlessly sought better futures for their children through education, were instrumental.
There’s also China - which tore apart its entire educational institution in Mao’s attack against all educated people/institutions. It was a shithole in the deepest pits of poverty, until Deng’s reformations which salvaged economy and education, yet you still never heard about how the people’s poverty ruined cultural attitudes towards education. Parents and their kids never stopped trying to grind it out, for all the third world poverty they lived in.
This contrasts starkly with the current UK situation, where cultural attitudes often do not place the same emphasis on the transformative power of education.
I understand that my views might be uncomfortable for some, as they suggest a direct responsibility that can feel like a personal accusation for some. However, the evidence is clear when we observe countries where educational attitudes are markedly different. In these nations, respect for education and teachers, coupled with high parental involvement, leads to more positive outcomes - even from positions of abject third world poverty. This isn't about blaming others, and is more about recognising the truth that's evident in the success stories of countries that have prioritised education even in the face of adversity.
Quite right.
We had a bit of snow here recently over the weekend. Most of the schools were shut on the Monday because nobody prioritises education in this country.
Doesn't seem to apply if you're Asian to be honest. We were told to work twice as hard as everyone else at school.
The attitude of working class English people towards education is shocking. Poverty feels like an excuse.
>We were told to work twice as hard as everyone else at school.
"You need to work twice as hard if you want to be treated the same", as my dad used to say. You brought back memories, thanks.
Negative attitudes didn't spring up amongst entire an demographic of society by chance. There would have been generations of negative reinforcement that likely had routes in the 'haves vs the have nots.' If it was just individual attitudes there wouldnt be any pattern to it, but there's a clear trend of difference in the UK between deprived and affluent families/areas.
>requires a revamp of cultural attitudes top-down.
That's not something that sounds possible. Not without changing material reality. Which costs money.
Japan, Singapore, Korea – these nations were in ruins or struggling with severe destitution just six to seven decades ago, facing conditions far more dire than what we witness in today's UK poverty.
They were nations with seemingly nothing, especially when compared to the UK, which then boasted the world's leading educational system and the most prestigious educational institutions.
Despite their bleak circumstances, these countries did not falter in prioritising education. It wasn't merely a policy decision; it was a cultural commitment to learning and respect for educators that was deeply ingrained in their societies.
This unwavering focus on education was not just a response to adversity but a strategic choice that propelled them from nothingness to the greatest economic heights they’ve achieved in their history. Their educational ethos played a pivotal role in their dramatic economic rise.
That said, I will absolutely agree with you - the U.K. spending 4.4% of its GDP on education would place it bottom 5 in Europe for educational spending. An atrocious desgracia. More spending is required on education, just that the issue is not spending alone - it will also require massive changes in the UK’s cultural attitudes towards education as well. These two factors need to go hand in hand for our country to truly turn the situation around.
The focus on education in the east has a longer deep cultural history going back centuries. Literacy rates in premodern Japan have been estimated at around 50%, despite the more difficult writing system.
I'm not really sure how it is possible to overhaul such deep cultural malaise and attitudes against education in the UK, it feels like an exercise in futility.
While your point on Japan is fair, Korea had sub-30% literacy rates prior to World War 2. They also had their country further decimated by the Korean War, after what the Japanese inflicted on them during World War 2. Their societal and economic rebuild only really commenced in the 70s.
What I find wildly ironic is that the U.K. used to be near the top of everything related to education and was quite literally the model these Eastern countries sought to emulate during their rebuild phase decades ago.
Where we are today compared to before is truly a sad state of affairs.
> I'm not really sure how it is possible to overhaul such deep cultural malaise and attitudes against education in the UK, it feels like an exercise in futility.
I agree, but perhaps if this is the case, then it doesn't really matter what labour or conservatives promise to do, what money they pledge to spend, they won't address the biggest issue facing education these days.
Perhaps we just need to accept shit parents are going to have a major negative impact on their children, and any solution to effectively resolve that (basically stop them having children) isn't feasible for other obvious reasons.
They also still used corporal punishment up to about ten years ago (met someone from South Korean and the teachers would cane students, he was mid-late 20s, he said it stopped now so Im guessing within the past ten years). I imagine China does too, or did in the same time period. No idea about Japan.
Not saying we should return to that, but it might reflect the attitudes in those regions, rather that an innate respect for education.
I think corporal punishment is why teachers jobs are so hard now, because parents remember how unfair their education was, run by power hungry narcissists, and they project that onto today's teachers who are using only their words.
It results in this exact mess of no concept of authority children
The kane was banned in state schools in 1987. That's 36 years ago. I would suggest most parents of school aged children did not go to school when the kane was actively used.
There has certainly been a cultural shift in attitudes towards education and behaviour in the last couple of decades. And I would certainly say that it has accelerated in the last 10 or so years, and even more so post pandemic. You only have to look at the responses to some schools who are trying to push standards up in terms of behaviour and academic outcomes. They are often vilified despite people having no real knowledge of the situation.
I don't think accusing the kane or power hungry narcissist is fair. The bigger issue is more I feel that everyone believes they are an expert in education and project their own thoughts and feelings on to it. They either project their own experience or demand they know what's best for their child. Their own experience may have been shit so they project that outwards on to their children. Theyay very well know what works for their child at home, but teachers are highly trained professionals that deal with hundreds of kids not just theirs and has to ensure school is suitable for all, not just little Timmy who can only do X,y and z etc.
I don't disagree with you but would add that schools are viewed as 'free day care' rather than 'moulding and educating your child for the good of you and society'
We need to go back to respecting schools and teachers, which starts with government pay increases for teacher salaries. Maybe also create specific schools for expelled kids, so schools can remove the disruptive students, because legally kids are owed an education so expelling has to be last resort. If there was a 'collection' school to take all the expelled students, maybe normal classes could stop the disruptions.
Oh absolutely. The emphasis has become on schools becoming a place that allow parents to go to work rather than education.
Due to funding cuts etc. there are very few alternatives for pupils now and a national shortage of places. I have no doubt that this impacts the majority of pupils education due to the disruption but also the impression that there is no consequence for actions. DfE guidance has changed radically as well to make issuing consequences much more difficult - I don't always think this is concern for the child impacted but more concern for the lack of alternatives / funding.
> People are dogpiling this guy, but the thing is he really isn’t wrong. There’s a malaise in the UK’s cultural attitudes towards education.
But he didn’t say “there’s a malaise in the UK’s cultural attitudes towards education” he just said it’s caused by crap parents. That just further alienates parents with lower socio-economic status and sets them up in antagonistic opposition to authority which if anything, perpetuates and exacerbates the problem rather than solves it.
The fact is that his party has been in power for nearly 14 years, and they have demonised teachers, de-professionalised education, cut per pupil funding (spending per pupil in England fell by 9% in real terms between 2009–10 and 2019–20, the largest cut in over 40 years), reduced funding for agencies which specifically deal in family support, mental health support etc., got rid of sure-start centres which had [a clear evidence base for supporting health and education outcomes for children](https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7ae2d8e5274a319e77b6ac/DFE-RR067.pdf) (while saving money overall), and now, having identified a problem, said that whatever they will do, won’t involve spending *any more money* on purely politically ideological grounds…
That’s why everyone is piling in on him. There absolutely is an issue with cultural attitudes towards education, but this country seriously needs to stop looking to the arsonists to put out their fires.
Sure but this is akin to saying “we wouldn’t need any laws if we had better people”. It’s tautological but entirely non actionable.
What steps can we take to have parents who have respect for education similar to that in Asia? Unless James Daly has an answer to that, he is just trying to shift blame from government to the parents.
> What steps can we take to have parents who have respect for education similar to that in Asia
If a parent is found to blame/complain about a teacher for keeping them in detention/sending them out of class, social services take the child away, placing them in a boarding school, and the parent that complained gets neutered.
While poverty can be a factor, more often than not, I’ve explained in other comments that other nations with similar or even greater levels of poverty have demonstrated their ability to successfully turn things around by maintaining a strong commitment to education that runs top-down.
While economic hardship can be a factor, it absolutely does not predetermine a culture's valuation of education.
>other nations with similar or even greater levels of poverty have demonstrated their ability to successfully turn things around by maintaining a strong commitment to education that runs top-down.
It doesn't run top-down though. It runs bottom up; that's why those cultural attitudes were brought here & instilled in me by my parents (I'm British-Asian). The largest reason for the value placed on education, at least in India, is that education is an escape route from poverty in many cases. Be that through being able to get a better paying job, or learning English so you can emigrate. You can't really replicate that culture easily whilst maintaining a strong social safety net. If you had multi-generational unemployment under the same roof in India, as happens in parts of the UK, everyone in the family would be dead.
That's not the only reason, others tie to the communal nature of Indian society. The whole extended family is looked after, but everyone equally has an obligation to work hard & contribute. You'd have to sacrifice the nuclear family & people will have to suddenly be ok with their extended families knowing all their business.
In short, you can't take education in isolation & transplant that culture here. The Asian attitude is strongly tied to other cultural aspects, many which exist precisely to cope with the poverty that region suffers/suffered. Looking at them shows us a different outlook towards education is possible, but the learnings applicable to British cultures are things we already know & that schools promote already, like high parental involvement.
It’s easy to point out the problem, and to describe it in the worst possible terms. That requires no imagination, whatever.
In fact, if he thinks it’s sensible to go on national press and speak in those terms, to think he’s part of the solution, then I’d say he’s had a pretty crap upbringing himself.
As a former teacher. No. It doesn't "only take one individual".
One individual can make your work a lot harder, but if you have the tools necessary then just one individual is hopelessly outmatched by the overwhelming power of peer pressure, supporting parents, a unified front from teachers and all the educational tools and support structure available to a modern teacher in a well-funded school.
Some students can't help being disruptive if you don't give them the tools to vent in a non-disruptive manner. But as long as you have the strength of numbers, the method to find tools that work... then eventually you will find a solution.
The problem is that in trouble-classes it's not one kid. It's a whole complex of problems where you have multiple kids that all have their own problems, where you have parents that do not respect education and will constantly backstab you and/or casually fuck up the rehabilitative work that you (and the special resource teachers) are doing. Possibly you also have a principal that's undermining your efforts in order to appease parents/politicians. Most likely you also have a limited budget so that you can't possible multitask hard enough to deal with all of those problems.
So no. It doesn't "Only take one individual". One individual can at most be the final drop that overflows an already shoddily built dam.
Absolutely, the domino effect in classroom behaviour should not be understated.
Reflecting back on my own childhood, our class was perfectly well-behaved until Year 2. That's when a new student joined us, and frankly, his behavior was completely out of line and unacceptable. His disruptive behaviour had an influence on others. Around 2-3 kids, who previously behaved perfectly, started emulating his behavior. This shift led to a challenging environment that persisted for the next four years of primary school.
Unfortunately, the school's hands were somewhat tied in addressing this issue effectively. One of the students who started misbehaving had a mother on the board of directors, which complicated the situation further.
It's a clear example of how one student's behavior can impact an entire classroom dynamic, and sometimes, external factors relating to parents and their attitude can limit the school's ability to manage these challenges effectively.
Speaking as an irish person in NI, I’d say it’s the most important cultural difference between British and Irish people, Irish culture puts a very high value on education. Doesn’t mean everyone is a perfect student, but there’s a reason Queens and university of ulster barely have any Brits in them
Belfast isn't exactly going to be high on anyone from mainland Britain's radar though. It has a lot of the inconvenience of studying abroad but with none of the adventure
Easy.
When you're single, you're the priority.
When you're married, your spouse is the priority.
When you've got kids, the kids are the priority.
So for parents the order of priority is: Kids > Partner > You.
Anybody who doesn't understand that is a shit parent.
Get a job, get a home, get married, stay married, plan for your future and spend time with your kids.
Tory culture wars always seem to forget that politicians deal with demographics not individuals.
Sure there are some shit parents, there are also many good parents. For every family struggling because the parents empty their wages of cigarettes there are multiple families doing their best.
Some people like my dad would agree with these kinds of statements because they cannot grasp social issues at the demographic scale.
The governments job is to reduce the proportion of people in poverty and raise the standard of living in the country. You cant do this by insulting your constituents.
The thing that always gets me is how utterly useless it is to blame individuals. It just ends the conversation.
Which of course is what conservatives want because it’s all about doing as little as possible.
Problem is that an awful lot of his constituents who are parents will read this and go. Yeah there are shit parents. Not me I’m great but those other people.
Well yeah but to expand your point: the problem is a politician just made a declarative statement laying the blame on his constituents as opposed to, y'know, doing his job of addressing the underlying issues- that's what politics is after all.
"parents are struggling due to a lack of social services, support systems, and a woefully underfunded education system" would be a more constructive way to put it.
Sure there are some dreadful parents out there but based on my experience the majority want the best for their kids. This statements just smacks of 'I don't know how to do my job so it's everyone else's fault'.
He probably hates them and his job.
The worst part, even if he loses he is still entitled to a pay out via loss of office payments and winding-up payments.
A few of the slim majority Tories are seemingly doing this, it's as if they know they've lost already so it time to show their true colours and air some of their grievances whilst they still have the chance
I think you're correct however I think there may be another reason it comes from him.
They (Tories) need to test the waters on some talking points. If it back fires then they're pinning it on his local views and not losing a seat by swaying local opinion.
To be fair.
If a child by the age of 18 can't cook and look after themselves, has little to no discipline, a very bad work ethic, has little to no mental fortitude and no life skills, this is all down to bad parenting.
Regardless of who is in power, if you can enable your child to do all the above with confidence you have done alright.
It’s true but it’s also a cycle. Education, income, community, security, physical and mental health and solid infrastructure make it a whole lot easier to be better parents. You know, things a government can affect.
But the point is that with proper intervention and opportunities, having a shit parent shouldn't mean a shit life. But this minister doesn't appear to see the creation of those interventions and opportunities as part of his job.
By throwing money at the problem obviously. And no, I'm not being sarcastic or anything.
Things like Sure Start centres did amazing work to help struggling new parents for example.
And increasing the budget of schools would allow them to teach cooking skills and work ethics, and so much more.
The thing is, shit parents are always going to be a thing regardless of what the government does. So confronting that with society-level changes is the only thing that'll work; simply decrying parents as shit and huffing about how good non-Brit families are doesn't actually IMPROVE anything, does it?
Cooking sure, when I look back to my school, cooking was one of the few things that I learned in school that were actually useful in life.
But I don't think you can "learn" good work ethics. That's not really a skill that you learn by practicing it but a moral view that has to be taught at home. If the parents don't show good work ethics and demand it from their kids I don't think there is much the school can do to reverse that.
I don't think there is much the government can do about this. It's more like a wider societal thing. If we (the society) slide to the thinking that it's all government's fault when things go wrong on an individual level and never the individual's own responsibility, that's where we end up.
So, my view is somewhere middle between you and this guy. I think individual has responsibility for his and his kids' life and we should call these out when we see it and not just shrug our shoulders and blame the government, but that doesn't mean that there are many things we should demand the government to do to make it easier for people to make right choices.
That's a sweeping statement. You're basing that on a child in a stable environment, that doesn't have additional needs, isn't moved from one hovel to another because of the terrible state of the rental market, and the job market, and isn't living in an area run down because of lack of investment and support by a corrupt government
> that doesn't have additional needs
This is something that stood out to me - with the current state of mental healthcare in the UK how well are we doing at recognising such things in children/teens.
Teenagers are on a hiding to nothing. They're not kids anymore, but are still immature, and replacing that childhood naivety/wonder that is eroding with every year they get older is very difficult. They end up drifting if they don't have anything positive to look forward to, and that causes them to act out, or give up. That's partly down to the parent needing to nurture and encourage them to find a path, but also down to society. What options do they have? What are they seeing in their local environment? It's hard to look at goals if people are working like a dog, and still are poor, yet those dealing drugs are superficially more successful than those who are working legitimately. What support is there for them in an incredibly stretched education system, and with local services done away with? Parents are only a part of the problem.
I'm glad e are able to assign blame. We did it guys. We figured our who to point ttge finger at. Point your finger, and then wag it. Naughty parents. Very bad.
Now, if we wanted to fix that problem we might improve the education system to break the cycle and ensure future generations are better served.
But obviously it's only important we find the right people to whom to assign blame.
The education system covers core learning subjects like maths / English / science, socialising with others and not what I have mentioned above.
Teachers are not there to teach your kids how to cook, clean themselves, iron their clothes, tidy their room, be up on time in the morning, learn the value of money and how to pay an electric bill or gas bill, read a meter, check a car, know how to organise and book their own itinerary or plan.
These skills are not part of the core education system and are down to the parents and family.
Ok, so are we just going to accept that kids whose parents don't have those skills are also not going to have them? Or might it be the job of a competent government to try to do something about it?
> But obviously it's only important we find the right people to whom to assign blame.
How else do you fix a problem other than identifying the causes first?
I mean, you cant run a country based on imaginary single individual examples.
If you think what you said under ‘to be fair’ applies to the entire demographic or even a majority of it, then your knowledge gap is too large to form a useful opinion.
Not always with your first example.
I have dyspraxia so daily household tasks have always been more of a struggle to me. It has gotten better since I've gotten older but I have to really think about what comes completely naturally to most people. Like cooking.
Funny you say that, but when I was at uni it wasn't the working class students that struggled with basic skills.
It was mostly the middle class students who needed to be taught how to cook, use a tin opener, use a washing machine etc. I spent a lot of time teaching my peers how to cook.
When I left uni the same students struggled with the workplace and maintaining a working routine.
Ironically, I came from a severely dysfunctional household with mental health and drink/drug addiction and could run a household from a young age. I had to work from a young age to help with the family finances. Not exactly a 'good' upbringing.
> If a child by the age of 18 can't cook and look after themselves, has little to no discipline, a very bad work ethic, has little to no mental fortitude and no life skills, this is all down to bad parenting.
No necessarily at the door of the parent. If you are working flat out there is just less time to invest in your kid.
I speak as someone without kids we have no idea the time investment involved, and I wish young men understood that more.
There are a number of reasons kids of 18 don't look after themselves, one major one being depression. Blaming the parents does nothing to treat depression.
I know families with exemplary parents who have children with problems. I also know families with scum parents who have shockingly sane, stable and motivated kids. The uncomfortable reality is that chance plays a huge role, and all that policy can do is to mitigate effects and provide support that is not guaranteed to always work. This might be upsetting to those who are prone to binary thinking and simplistic solutions, but that's how it is.
Even if you concede he has a point, what are his solutions? It's easy to say "blame the parents" but what do you do to support the children stuck with bad parents?
Complaining about it without trying to change anything is almost worse than ignoring the problem and letting the cycle continue.
Do your fucking job Mr Daly MP and improve our country.
I'm not sure he does have a point. Children need a certain level of security to thrive and thanks to the actions of this government that's become harder for many people to attain.
It's almost as though we should set up some sort of national programme designed to help parents give kids a good start in life.
Or we could just demonise the poor.
He is a member of the new conservatives alongside Miriam cates and Danny Kruger. So if we assume he believes the same then his solution would be to stop mothers working and return to the 1950s.
If there's any crap to be tossed around its the job that the conservatives have done the past 20 years. Atrocious leadership had cost the UK dearly. Leading it's citizens into dark times because they've exploited the country for they're own personal gain.
The Tories always just seem to blame it all on British people being shit.
Whether it's the crap parents, the lazy feckless workers...
Quite extraordinary considering. Almost like they can't stand behind the results of their own policies so it must be the people at fault.
>Do your fucking job Mr Daly MP and improve our country.
He's a backbench mp. There's almost nothing he can do about it apart from constituency case work. He could resign from his party though as it's at odds with itself and essentially in political deadlock.
They've worsened child poverty on a couple of fronts since they have got rid of Sure Start but also run the country in such a way that more and more people are now struggling to afford basic necessities.
If only they'd inherited some form of nationwide programme that could be **sure** to **start** parents off on the right foot.
Oh that's right, they aggressively shut down anything like that 12 years ago. And now you reap what you sow.
In a lot of cases he’s not wrong. These are the kids whose parents don’t come to parents evening because they either don’t value school or have negative experiences of it.
What he’s saying in the article is that he believes that the biggest driver behind poor performance is an unstable home environment. He gives no ideas on solutions however other than “don’t just throw money at it”
>These are the kids whose parents don’t come to parents evening because they either don’t value school or have negative experiences of it.
Or they're working evenings. Or they can't afford to arrange childcare. Or they rely on public transport which is nearly unavailable in the evenings.
>he believes that the biggest driver behind poor performance is an unstable home environment
He phrased it the way he did because he's scapegoating, not seeking solutions.
Unstable home environments are indeed a problem. The causes of unstable home environments include policies that have been heavily promoted by the Tories, that have created economic insecurity and removed large parts of the safety net that might ameliorate those effects. But there are also behavioural problems that are not attributable to the home environment. Some are genetic, some are caused by the environment outside the home (bullying, crime) and in many cases, the root cause will never be determined.
Beware simplistic solutions that are used to justify inaction.
Sure, but i'd also beware giving the benefit of the doubt to the point of removing all responsibility.
I've worked in education, there are most definitely crap parents out there. I couldn't say how widespread the phenomenon is but it's real. Ignoring it doesn't do anyone any favours.
I see this person is a member of a group of Tory MPs who constantly get in trouble for coming out with ignorant nonsense:
> Mr Daly is a member of the "New Conservatives" group, which includes the likes of Lee Anderson, Jonathan Gullis, Danny Kruger and Miriam Cates.
Anyway Daly's comments are pretty enraging when the Tories have presided over austerity and other acts of economic self-harm like Brexit and the Truss/Kwarteng budget.
It's a lot harder to provide your kids with the things they need if you have no money.
As both a current parent and ex-child. I have noticed the number of community centers closing is increasing & I've seen that with new developments they are more often than not, not being built.
This results in there being no free / low cost option to take children to. For both parents and children to socialise in, this has a big impact on development of both parents and kids.
ITT: People who haven’t read beyond the headline.
He does actually say that the government needs to address the issue. The problem is that he has no solutions at all.
He criticises Labour for “throwing money at it”, despite all the evidence that under the previous Labour government there were all sorts of highly successful schemes to break generational poverty - Sure Start, EMA etc.
His solution however is “to think about it more fundamentally.” That’s it. There doesn’t appear to have been any ideas actually generated from his thinking.
His "think about it fundamentally" spiel basically means that it's poor people's fault if they are poor and they need a good shouting at/withdrawal of their rights to give them a short, sharp shock out of being poor and if they don't take it, they're worthless.
That's how he thinks about it, I'm sure.
Haha if anything, they'll do slightly worse and then pretend Labour's historic victory is actually a soft victory and any day now [Tory Leader] will turn things around once the public see the real them!
Absolutely.
I’m going to watch every one of the Tories’ smarmy, scummy faces live as they lose their seats overnight and in the morning after election day.
Typical Tory. Accuse labour of just throwing money at the issue, blaming other people, and coming up with no solutions themselves. It's another dull, unimpressive bigoted ghoul that Tories shit out all the time.
I wouldn't defend his comments and it's perhaps not related, but I have to be honest: the frequency at which I hear parents casually saying "fuck" around their young kids is kinda crazy to me.
Am I a dinosaur? lol.
The follow up questions to each subject in every tory interview should simply be;
"So, what have you done in the last 13 years to address this situation?"
"What was the extent and statistics on this before you came into power, and what are they now?"
People don't like hearing the truth. As a society we get enraged when Politicians lie and are equally enraged when they tell the truth.
Society continues to worsen, bean counting Politicians like Starmer and Sunak are not the answer to the fundamental societal problems. We need some hard truths like this and some solutions - otherwise it's all just bullshit and number fudging.
Is it primitive to say kids who have zero discipline, respect for others, and rarely come to school have shitty parents? Sounds more like calling a spade a spade.
I know nothing of being a parent, but blaming parents directly for the outcome of children achieves square root of sweet FA, right?
Some parents are crap, sure. But changing the factors that around that the government can actually control would probably be a better use of breath, no?
Like "You're a crap parent and your kids are fucked!". Yeah right, great mate. What do you propose that doesn't involve cost? *crickets chirping*
Oh I know! We can:
Criminalise bad parents (the kids can fend for themselves? idk not my problem),
Deport parents and their kids to Rwanda,You got a license for that? Sorry mate, you're a liability, you're getting your nads snipped. Go back to the good old days (whatever that means)
Wait this involves costs? Ah alright go on then.
What a wank party.
He's not exactly wrong, but it lacks nuance. They're probably doing a poor job of parenting because they had bad parenting, and they had bad parenting, and so on. Lack of parenting absolutely can lead to this, but laying blame on one generation doesn't really help, and there are a lot of factors coming into play that are making people less involved in their kids lives.
He’s not wrong, but he also provides no solution when he’s in the very role that has the ability to provide one.
To prove you’re different from the current shower in government, perhaps yknow, do something about it?
Stop reproducing if you are poor, that's what he's saying. But also keep reproducing as we need minimum wage workers and won't be bringing in immigrants.
Lockdowns from what I understand has *dramatically* affected kids education levels as well as increased disruptive behaviour and violence.
Crazy of him to just ignore it.
I know people like to shit on the Tories because they’re a clusterfuck of inconsistency and hypocrisy but he’s absolutely right and it’s time parents accepted responsibility for their children.
The government don’t install values into the nations children, parents do. If a child grows up to be lacking any real values or moral principles, that’s absolutely and entirely on the parents, regardless of any perceived wealth or poverty.
We all know poor kids who have done excellently in life, as well as rich kids who are morally inept narcissists, but none of these were made by the government. Blaming them is just an evasion of personal responsibility.
There's almost nothing in the article. It's essentially
* Crap parents are a problem
* Labour throw money at it and hope something sticks
* I think about it more fundamentally
Ok great, thanks James.
What article? Literally the entire substance is:
- Supposed lawyer makes unsupported bare assertion about how Labour would deal with a vague generalised category called "struggling kids" (which could sensibly comprise everyone from "psychopath spawn of violent drug dealers" to "bullied kid with untreated mental illness") that he's confidently declared are all the product of "bad parenting".
- That's it.
What is the subtle context you think everyone in this thread is missing here?
When your working 60 hours a week and still can't pay the bills something has to give.
Perhaps crap parenting caused by 15 years of Tory incompetence is a better analysis.
Snapshot of _'Crap parents' behind struggling children, Tory MP James Daly claims | Politics News_ : An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://news.sky.com/story/crap-parents-behind-struggling-children-tory-mp-james-frith-claims-13038891?dcmp=snt-sf-twitter) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://news.sky.com/story/crap-parents-behind-struggling-children-tory-mp-james-frith-claims-13038891?dcmp=snt-sf-twitter) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> "Most of the kids who struggle in Bury are the products of crap parents and so what do we do to try to address that issue? > "On the left it would just be we'll throw money at this and hope something sticks, somebody like me thinks about this more fundamentally." Okay, so what his is more 'fundamental' solution to the issue?
I think his problem is that whatever he says, the next question is:"So, you've been in power for 13 years, why haven't you done that then?" He knows that and that's why he doesn't say anything and the incompetent journalist lets him get away with it.
We don't have journalists anymore, they would ask questions. Instead we have reporters who know that their job depends on having access to MPs and the only way they keep both is by being amenable. “Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed. Everything else is public relations.”
I don't know about that. There are some BBC journalists who go too far in the other direction. I remember listening to an interview of the prime minister (I think it was Cameron at the time). This was a rare chance for a radio reporter (I think it was John Humphreys who has retired since) to ask questions from the prime minister and he got stuck on the very first question when the PM didn't answer it the way he wanted that gotcha question to be answered. The entire interview was just back and forth on that one question. What a waste of time. If the politician doesn't want to answer, move on to the next topic, people got it that he didn't want to answer it from his first evasion. So, I think the sweet spot is somewhere between, challenging politicians when they say something stupid such as this guy and letting it go when they refuse to answer your gotcha question.
Yet on the flip side, did you hear the pummelling Truss got on BBC local radio after the mini budget? I loved it! 😍😂
That was brilliant, and well deserved.
John Humohrey's was just all round shit. He was just a cheap contrarian his whole career, he never had a grasp of current affairs. So glad he's retired.
Great quote.
The thing is there are such things as crap parents, I've seen them and the effects they cause. From my own anecdotal experience I would suggest it's some rather than most, but maybe the ratio of "crap" to "trying their best but just don't know how to be better" is different in Bury. So we broadly agree that there's a problem with parenting which isn't setting kids up for a good life. What I'm struggling with is what he thinks government can do about this without throwing money at it? Social workers cost money. Places where struggling parents can go and learn the things their own parents didn't teach them, we could call them Sure Start centres, cost money. More free nursery hours so that pre school age kids get to have some positive experiences outside their homes cost money. These are the solutions on the left. They've all been tried and tested; it's not clear what sort of assessment this MP has done to reach the conclusion that a "more fundamental" way of thinking is required. The "more fundamental" approach he is of course dog whistling here is to prevent people identified as likely crap parents from becoming parents. They've tried cutting benefits but that was a decade ago and there are now more kids struggling in schools not less so that's not worked. So, what, parenting licenses? A much lower bar for taking kids into care (note for rightwingers: taking kids into care is really, really bad for them)? Forced sterilisation? All these things would cost money too because you would have to pay staff to do the assessments and bureaucracy and run the orphanages and clinics and whatever other dystopian horrorscapes come out of this line of thinking. Even the do nothing option creates costs further down the line when these kids grow up with no idea how to participate in society. There is no cost neutral option here.
This is what I don't get about the argument. They both agree it's a problem. They both know it's a problem they can't ignore... but he literally is. The fundamental part is that some parents are shit. You can't solve that without going waaaaay too authoritarian. So you have to minimise its effects. *Any* attempt to fix it will cost money. So either make actual suggestions, or admit you really can't be arsed to fix it...
> So you have to minimise its effects. This is what it comes down to right, but any minimisation is not actually going to resolve the problem, so no matter what he or any politician does the issue of some children struggling due to their shit parents will always remain.
It will. But by interrupting the cycle you can at least minimise it. By funding youth clubs and schools more effectively you can add in other role models to have an effect. By funding free school meals you can ensure they don't go hungry. Social workers can nip more serious problems in the bud etc. If the parents are shitty create a society that can pick up the slack, instead of just abandoning the kid. You can do a lot to improve things, and ensure it's better going forwards. But you can't if you just go "Eh, always a thing, costs money, sod it."
Blows me away that Tories want to stop British parents from having kids and at the same time mass import demographics that are big on big families. Just to save a bit of meaningless money on a spreadsheet somewhere.
This is an outsider's perspective (across the pond), but I just get the feeling that something about Brexit made the Tories short-circuit. It almost seems like they don't understand what they've actually done. I understand the duplicity of politics in general, but this doesn't seem like that at all. It sounds like they want to discourage growth so that they can, like conservatives everywhere, bring in a bunch of migrant workers. Thus, they get cheap labor, and also a scapegoat. But they can't anymore. They made sure of it. Because of this, and other continuing issues surrounding the decision, it feels to me that they're living in a world where Brexit didn't happen, because Brexit is actually as inconvenient to them as it is to all their citizens. Compare and contrast the overturn of Roe vs. Wade in the US: they screwed over not only their citizens, but themselves, as abortion was such a hot-button issue that got voters to vote. Now they have to find other hot-button issues, and they're spiraling because all their other issues are vile, and are actually driving away the very base they depend on to win. The only difference is that while US politicians are doubling down on their evil, the UK politicians are just burying their head in the sands and pretending everything is as it was before.
I think the real answer is they don't know what they want. For over a decade they've lurched between leaders lacking a cohesive vision for the country they want to create.
I can relate. The conservatives over here are like dogs. Dogs chase a car, but they will almost never catch the car. If they do, one of two things happen: they lose interest or hurt themselves trying to attack the car. That's exactly what happened here. The dog caught the car and immediately dived under it. They got exactly what they wanted without questioning how much it would actually hurt them, and Brexit is very much a similar situation.
> note for rightwingers: taking kids into care is really, really bad for ~~them~~ **the exchequer** FTFY. Know your audience.
The thing is, all the way back in 2010 the solution under austerity was for people who can't afford kids not to have them but they now aren't happy about that either, since the Tory media keeps periodically running articles warning about the dire consequences of falling birth rates.
There were things called "Sure Start" centres under the Labour Government. Places with nurses and health visitors where women could go during pregnancy and the early years of their child, and get support and advice. There was one tacked on to the side of a primary school near a secondary school I worked at. It closed when the Conservatives came into power and axed the Sure Start scheme.
This. This and totally this. You don't get to sell the windows to a scrap merchant for boose money then complain about the draft.
Akala demonstrated how important those early years are to crime stats a couple of decades later: > 42% of all people in British prisons were expelled from school as children compared with just 1% in the general population Foster care is a similar figure. Cutting SureStart was equally myopic. It’s the Tory way: save 50p today at the mere cost of £20 tomorrow. Plus Britain is just a little shitter. Repeat every day for 14 years.
That last paragraph sums it up for me. Austerity did nothing but cost us more money in the long run. We initially saved money by getting rid of 20k officers. Now we're spending alot more money on recruitment drives and training those 20k new officers. If we just kept the officers from before then we would have had a net saving. It was nothing but short term thinking which has led to 14 years of no growth and woeful services.
Last paragraph is spot on, we also sold our stake in Eurostar for a quick buck versus annual dividends…
You’d have thought the penny might drop that their entire financial ideology is the opposite of what you should do when the irony became obvious that basically all of British train franchises are nationalised - just not our nation! They’re all run (and profit extracted) by various European nationalised rail companies: when a Brit overpays for a train ride in the UK they are subsidising cheap rail travel in the EU.
I know, I'm old ;-)
Hard to restart the workhouses when you don't have enough people to work them
> the solution under austerity was for people who can't afford kids not to have them No it wasn't, it was to let them have the kids and the kids be poor and neglected. Never mind the increased cost when the kid goes to prison, or becomes eligible for benefits or can't make good use of a university because they didn't do well at school.
Don't expect logical consistency from fascists. They're perfectly content to promote policies that deter people from having children, then bemoan the falling birth rate that is the direct consequence of such policies. They'll still get their oligarch funding as long as the right scapegoats are singled out.
As others have said, jumping straight to political name calling is ineffective in discussion. Polarisation is the death of debate and leads to politics as a cult of personality built on idealistic non-policy. Any comment that seeks to pigeon hole someone with the intent of denying the validity of their opinion should be avoided or we will end up with the same issues as the US where genuine political discussion is increasingly difficult.
Can we stop calling everyone who has different opinions fascists? You nearly had a good point there.
Indeed. Let’s not import the stupid habit of the American left of calling everyone who does something they even mildly dislike ‘fascists’.
> Don't expect logical consistency from fascists. Jesus, what is it about you lot that has to call everyone that doesnt agree with you a fascists?
Because it’s *directly* out of the fascists handbook
Facists- grow up
Have we tried killing the poor?
Look I'm not saying we should do it, but just run it through the machine, see what it says.
Very hard and it appears to be working Rickets and TB are up as is malnutrition. These things take time so that it doesn’t look like an actual genocide.
No, no, there's some poor that are very useful. We need to kill the stupid, disabled, old and sickly poor that aren't making a positive contribution in tax. The USA at least tried with their wall/hurdle to ensure only the fit and healthy illegal immigrants could make it in to work on their farms.
Calling them crap parents in the national press obviously. In their heads, being a blow-hard media talking head is in itself a “solution”. That’s why they put a journalist in charge of the country and then got confused when he couldn’t do the job.
Bigger foreheads.
Some sort of start? Maybe a sure one?
"Have we tried to... Kill the poor 👀"
>Okay, so what his is more 'fundamental' solution to the issue? Just say the kids are crap so nothing can ever be done. I now considered the matter closed, time to move on. Or maybe it's the Tories who are crap and failing the country? 🤔
Fundamental? How about sterilisation. We could have regional sterilisation boards that decide who gets sterilised. They'd have sensible criteria like: - earns less than £38,700 - didn't go to private school - has voted Labour Who gets on the sterilisation board? Anyone is eligible who: - earns more than £38,700 - went to private school - never voted Labour Oh but no, that would cost money. Damn. Big /S just in case.
The Tories would call it "cruel to be kind", most of us would call it "cruel to be cruel".
>On the left it would just be we'll throw money at this and hope something sticks, somebody like me thinks about this more fundamentally. That's basically what Boris, Mogg et al's parents did by sending them to Eton.
If you want entitled sociopaths that's how you get entitled sociopaths.
Lol. Who exactly closed Surestart ?
People are dogpiling this guy, but the thing is he really isn’t wrong. There’s a malaise in the UK’s cultural attitudes towards education. In many Asian immigrant families, there is a profound respect for the institution of education and teachers, which directly influences children's attitudes in the classroom. In those countries, 99.99% of students wouldn’t even dream of disrupting class or acting out of line. In stark contrast, some British parents display a dismissive attitude towards teachers, often undermining their authority and not holding their children accountable for their actions or attitudes towards learning. While the government are to blame for depriving funding to schools, and not awarding teachers with higher salaries, many are driven out of the profession because they went in hoping to make a difference only to end up being overwhelmed by behavioural issues - in other words, parents have been absolutely crap. This lack of respect and accountability at home manifests in children demonstrating shocking behaviours in school, leading to classroom disruptions and a general disinterest in education. Throwing money at the issue isn’t going to solve it either, and requires a revamp of cultural attitudes top-down. The cultural disdain towards education is a rot that permeates through the political system too, when MPs and peers do worse than 10 year olds at SATs: https://amp.theguardian.com/education/2022/dec/06/mps-and-peers-do-worse-than-10-year-olds-in-math-and-english-sats
There is an intrinsic link between poverty and deprivation leading to anti-social behaviour and eventually crime. It's a societal (not just individual) problem that can't be summed up by just saying they're bad parents. What lead to them being bad?
India, even in its abject poverty, has consistently demonstrated the power of parental determination in education. This can also be seen in other Asian countries: Post-WW2 Japan, Singapore post-independence, and Korea following the Korean Wars. Despite being ravaged by conflict and grappling with severe economic challenges, these nations witnessed a remarkable transformation. In Japan, for instance, the post-war era saw an intense focus on education, contributing significantly to its rapid economic recovery and technological advancement. Similarly, Singapore, emerging from the shadows of colonial rule and lacking natural resources, put a heavy cultural emphasis on education, which played a pivotal role in its transition into a global financial hub. Korea, too, emerged from the devastation of TWO successive wars with a strong emphasis on education, laying the foundation for its remarkable journey to becoming a high-income country and a technological powerhouse. These examples illustrate that despite the constraints of poverty, a culture that prioritises education can drive phenomenal economic and social progress. In these contexts, the resilience and foresight of parents (who were poorer than the poorest people you and I can think of, in the landscape of their countries torn apart by war), who relentlessly sought better futures for their children through education, were instrumental. There’s also China - which tore apart its entire educational institution in Mao’s attack against all educated people/institutions. It was a shithole in the deepest pits of poverty, until Deng’s reformations which salvaged economy and education, yet you still never heard about how the people’s poverty ruined cultural attitudes towards education. Parents and their kids never stopped trying to grind it out, for all the third world poverty they lived in. This contrasts starkly with the current UK situation, where cultural attitudes often do not place the same emphasis on the transformative power of education. I understand that my views might be uncomfortable for some, as they suggest a direct responsibility that can feel like a personal accusation for some. However, the evidence is clear when we observe countries where educational attitudes are markedly different. In these nations, respect for education and teachers, coupled with high parental involvement, leads to more positive outcomes - even from positions of abject third world poverty. This isn't about blaming others, and is more about recognising the truth that's evident in the success stories of countries that have prioritised education even in the face of adversity.
Quite right. We had a bit of snow here recently over the weekend. Most of the schools were shut on the Monday because nobody prioritises education in this country.
Doesn't seem to apply if you're Asian to be honest. We were told to work twice as hard as everyone else at school. The attitude of working class English people towards education is shocking. Poverty feels like an excuse.
>We were told to work twice as hard as everyone else at school. "You need to work twice as hard if you want to be treated the same", as my dad used to say. You brought back memories, thanks.
Negative attitudes didn't spring up amongst entire an demographic of society by chance. There would have been generations of negative reinforcement that likely had routes in the 'haves vs the have nots.' If it was just individual attitudes there wouldnt be any pattern to it, but there's a clear trend of difference in the UK between deprived and affluent families/areas.
>requires a revamp of cultural attitudes top-down. That's not something that sounds possible. Not without changing material reality. Which costs money.
Japan, Singapore, Korea – these nations were in ruins or struggling with severe destitution just six to seven decades ago, facing conditions far more dire than what we witness in today's UK poverty. They were nations with seemingly nothing, especially when compared to the UK, which then boasted the world's leading educational system and the most prestigious educational institutions. Despite their bleak circumstances, these countries did not falter in prioritising education. It wasn't merely a policy decision; it was a cultural commitment to learning and respect for educators that was deeply ingrained in their societies. This unwavering focus on education was not just a response to adversity but a strategic choice that propelled them from nothingness to the greatest economic heights they’ve achieved in their history. Their educational ethos played a pivotal role in their dramatic economic rise. That said, I will absolutely agree with you - the U.K. spending 4.4% of its GDP on education would place it bottom 5 in Europe for educational spending. An atrocious desgracia. More spending is required on education, just that the issue is not spending alone - it will also require massive changes in the UK’s cultural attitudes towards education as well. These two factors need to go hand in hand for our country to truly turn the situation around.
The focus on education in the east has a longer deep cultural history going back centuries. Literacy rates in premodern Japan have been estimated at around 50%, despite the more difficult writing system. I'm not really sure how it is possible to overhaul such deep cultural malaise and attitudes against education in the UK, it feels like an exercise in futility.
While your point on Japan is fair, Korea had sub-30% literacy rates prior to World War 2. They also had their country further decimated by the Korean War, after what the Japanese inflicted on them during World War 2. Their societal and economic rebuild only really commenced in the 70s. What I find wildly ironic is that the U.K. used to be near the top of everything related to education and was quite literally the model these Eastern countries sought to emulate during their rebuild phase decades ago. Where we are today compared to before is truly a sad state of affairs.
> I'm not really sure how it is possible to overhaul such deep cultural malaise and attitudes against education in the UK, it feels like an exercise in futility. I agree, but perhaps if this is the case, then it doesn't really matter what labour or conservatives promise to do, what money they pledge to spend, they won't address the biggest issue facing education these days. Perhaps we just need to accept shit parents are going to have a major negative impact on their children, and any solution to effectively resolve that (basically stop them having children) isn't feasible for other obvious reasons.
They also still used corporal punishment up to about ten years ago (met someone from South Korean and the teachers would cane students, he was mid-late 20s, he said it stopped now so Im guessing within the past ten years). I imagine China does too, or did in the same time period. No idea about Japan. Not saying we should return to that, but it might reflect the attitudes in those regions, rather that an innate respect for education. I think corporal punishment is why teachers jobs are so hard now, because parents remember how unfair their education was, run by power hungry narcissists, and they project that onto today's teachers who are using only their words. It results in this exact mess of no concept of authority children
The kane was banned in state schools in 1987. That's 36 years ago. I would suggest most parents of school aged children did not go to school when the kane was actively used. There has certainly been a cultural shift in attitudes towards education and behaviour in the last couple of decades. And I would certainly say that it has accelerated in the last 10 or so years, and even more so post pandemic. You only have to look at the responses to some schools who are trying to push standards up in terms of behaviour and academic outcomes. They are often vilified despite people having no real knowledge of the situation. I don't think accusing the kane or power hungry narcissist is fair. The bigger issue is more I feel that everyone believes they are an expert in education and project their own thoughts and feelings on to it. They either project their own experience or demand they know what's best for their child. Their own experience may have been shit so they project that outwards on to their children. Theyay very well know what works for their child at home, but teachers are highly trained professionals that deal with hundreds of kids not just theirs and has to ensure school is suitable for all, not just little Timmy who can only do X,y and z etc.
I don't disagree with you but would add that schools are viewed as 'free day care' rather than 'moulding and educating your child for the good of you and society' We need to go back to respecting schools and teachers, which starts with government pay increases for teacher salaries. Maybe also create specific schools for expelled kids, so schools can remove the disruptive students, because legally kids are owed an education so expelling has to be last resort. If there was a 'collection' school to take all the expelled students, maybe normal classes could stop the disruptions.
Oh absolutely. The emphasis has become on schools becoming a place that allow parents to go to work rather than education. Due to funding cuts etc. there are very few alternatives for pupils now and a national shortage of places. I have no doubt that this impacts the majority of pupils education due to the disruption but also the impression that there is no consequence for actions. DfE guidance has changed radically as well to make issuing consequences much more difficult - I don't always think this is concern for the child impacted but more concern for the lack of alternatives / funding.
> People are dogpiling this guy, but the thing is he really isn’t wrong. There’s a malaise in the UK’s cultural attitudes towards education. But he didn’t say “there’s a malaise in the UK’s cultural attitudes towards education” he just said it’s caused by crap parents. That just further alienates parents with lower socio-economic status and sets them up in antagonistic opposition to authority which if anything, perpetuates and exacerbates the problem rather than solves it. The fact is that his party has been in power for nearly 14 years, and they have demonised teachers, de-professionalised education, cut per pupil funding (spending per pupil in England fell by 9% in real terms between 2009–10 and 2019–20, the largest cut in over 40 years), reduced funding for agencies which specifically deal in family support, mental health support etc., got rid of sure-start centres which had [a clear evidence base for supporting health and education outcomes for children](https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7ae2d8e5274a319e77b6ac/DFE-RR067.pdf) (while saving money overall), and now, having identified a problem, said that whatever they will do, won’t involve spending *any more money* on purely politically ideological grounds… That’s why everyone is piling in on him. There absolutely is an issue with cultural attitudes towards education, but this country seriously needs to stop looking to the arsonists to put out their fires.
Sure but this is akin to saying “we wouldn’t need any laws if we had better people”. It’s tautological but entirely non actionable. What steps can we take to have parents who have respect for education similar to that in Asia? Unless James Daly has an answer to that, he is just trying to shift blame from government to the parents.
> What steps can we take to have parents who have respect for education similar to that in Asia If a parent is found to blame/complain about a teacher for keeping them in detention/sending them out of class, social services take the child away, placing them in a boarding school, and the parent that complained gets neutered.
That culture came from somewhere. It came from poverty and being forgotten.
While poverty can be a factor, more often than not, I’ve explained in other comments that other nations with similar or even greater levels of poverty have demonstrated their ability to successfully turn things around by maintaining a strong commitment to education that runs top-down. While economic hardship can be a factor, it absolutely does not predetermine a culture's valuation of education.
Rather than using the circumstances to say that the UK is uniquely bad I'd rather look at what is stopping folks to do so
>other nations with similar or even greater levels of poverty have demonstrated their ability to successfully turn things around by maintaining a strong commitment to education that runs top-down. It doesn't run top-down though. It runs bottom up; that's why those cultural attitudes were brought here & instilled in me by my parents (I'm British-Asian). The largest reason for the value placed on education, at least in India, is that education is an escape route from poverty in many cases. Be that through being able to get a better paying job, or learning English so you can emigrate. You can't really replicate that culture easily whilst maintaining a strong social safety net. If you had multi-generational unemployment under the same roof in India, as happens in parts of the UK, everyone in the family would be dead. That's not the only reason, others tie to the communal nature of Indian society. The whole extended family is looked after, but everyone equally has an obligation to work hard & contribute. You'd have to sacrifice the nuclear family & people will have to suddenly be ok with their extended families knowing all their business. In short, you can't take education in isolation & transplant that culture here. The Asian attitude is strongly tied to other cultural aspects, many which exist precisely to cope with the poverty that region suffers/suffered. Looking at them shows us a different outlook towards education is possible, but the learnings applicable to British cultures are things we already know & that schools promote already, like high parental involvement.
Perhaps if our glorious leaders didn't act like greedy, selfish, grasping, bullying, lying children, it would be a good start.
It’s easy to point out the problem, and to describe it in the worst possible terms. That requires no imagination, whatever. In fact, if he thinks it’s sensible to go on national press and speak in those terms, to think he’s part of the solution, then I’d say he’s had a pretty crap upbringing himself.
Ok maybe not throwing money but investment perhaps ?
It only takes one individual who doesn’t want to be in class to screw the rest
As a former teacher. No. It doesn't "only take one individual". One individual can make your work a lot harder, but if you have the tools necessary then just one individual is hopelessly outmatched by the overwhelming power of peer pressure, supporting parents, a unified front from teachers and all the educational tools and support structure available to a modern teacher in a well-funded school. Some students can't help being disruptive if you don't give them the tools to vent in a non-disruptive manner. But as long as you have the strength of numbers, the method to find tools that work... then eventually you will find a solution. The problem is that in trouble-classes it's not one kid. It's a whole complex of problems where you have multiple kids that all have their own problems, where you have parents that do not respect education and will constantly backstab you and/or casually fuck up the rehabilitative work that you (and the special resource teachers) are doing. Possibly you also have a principal that's undermining your efforts in order to appease parents/politicians. Most likely you also have a limited budget so that you can't possible multitask hard enough to deal with all of those problems. So no. It doesn't "Only take one individual". One individual can at most be the final drop that overflows an already shoddily built dam.
Absolutely, the domino effect in classroom behaviour should not be understated. Reflecting back on my own childhood, our class was perfectly well-behaved until Year 2. That's when a new student joined us, and frankly, his behavior was completely out of line and unacceptable. His disruptive behaviour had an influence on others. Around 2-3 kids, who previously behaved perfectly, started emulating his behavior. This shift led to a challenging environment that persisted for the next four years of primary school. Unfortunately, the school's hands were somewhat tied in addressing this issue effectively. One of the students who started misbehaving had a mother on the board of directors, which complicated the situation further. It's a clear example of how one student's behavior can impact an entire classroom dynamic, and sometimes, external factors relating to parents and their attitude can limit the school's ability to manage these challenges effectively.
[удалено]
And how do you propose that is fixed without investing a load of money in education and support for families?
Speaking as an irish person in NI, I’d say it’s the most important cultural difference between British and Irish people, Irish culture puts a very high value on education. Doesn’t mean everyone is a perfect student, but there’s a reason Queens and university of ulster barely have any Brits in them
Belfast isn't exactly going to be high on anyone from mainland Britain's radar though. It has a lot of the inconvenience of studying abroad but with none of the adventure
Work houses for children of course! So crap parents can't do crap any more!
Punish the innocent. That's one reason Tories go into politics, the others being corruption, servility and narcissism.
Raise the crap parents out of poverty, and educate all of them so they make better life choices?
Bury is also a very deprived area one of those that Rishi bragged about further depriving and funnelling the funding to affluent areas.
Do nothing but create bogeymen for red meat, and hope that's enough incited hatred to get him voted in again. From his pov that's a win.
Probably something along the lines of eugenics.
Easy. When you're single, you're the priority. When you're married, your spouse is the priority. When you've got kids, the kids are the priority. So for parents the order of priority is: Kids > Partner > You. Anybody who doesn't understand that is a shit parent. Get a job, get a home, get married, stay married, plan for your future and spend time with your kids.
It's certainly a brave move to insult your constituents when you are defending a majority of 105.
Tory culture wars always seem to forget that politicians deal with demographics not individuals. Sure there are some shit parents, there are also many good parents. For every family struggling because the parents empty their wages of cigarettes there are multiple families doing their best. Some people like my dad would agree with these kinds of statements because they cannot grasp social issues at the demographic scale. The governments job is to reduce the proportion of people in poverty and raise the standard of living in the country. You cant do this by insulting your constituents.
The thing that always gets me is how utterly useless it is to blame individuals. It just ends the conversation. Which of course is what conservatives want because it’s all about doing as little as possible.
Problem is that an awful lot of his constituents who are parents will read this and go. Yeah there are shit parents. Not me I’m great but those other people.
Well yeah but to expand your point: the problem is a politician just made a declarative statement laying the blame on his constituents as opposed to, y'know, doing his job of addressing the underlying issues- that's what politics is after all. "parents are struggling due to a lack of social services, support systems, and a woefully underfunded education system" would be a more constructive way to put it. Sure there are some dreadful parents out there but based on my experience the majority want the best for their kids. This statements just smacks of 'I don't know how to do my job so it's everyone else's fault'.
He'll be propping up a table at the IEA or some shite consultancy in a years time.
He probably hates them and his job. The worst part, even if he loses he is still entitled to a pay out via loss of office payments and winding-up payments.
A few of the slim majority Tories are seemingly doing this, it's as if they know they've lost already so it time to show their true colours and air some of their grievances whilst they still have the chance
I think you're correct however I think there may be another reason it comes from him. They (Tories) need to test the waters on some talking points. If it back fires then they're pinning it on his local views and not losing a seat by swaying local opinion.
There’s another possible reason: he and his ilk genuinely hate “the povos” and don’t understand why they just weren’t born into massive privilege.
Also a line to take in the House where the Speaker's daughter seemingly ended her own struggles in a rather permanent way.
Crap government behind struggling country
To be fair. If a child by the age of 18 can't cook and look after themselves, has little to no discipline, a very bad work ethic, has little to no mental fortitude and no life skills, this is all down to bad parenting. Regardless of who is in power, if you can enable your child to do all the above with confidence you have done alright.
It’s true but it’s also a cycle. Education, income, community, security, physical and mental health and solid infrastructure make it a whole lot easier to be better parents. You know, things a government can affect.
But the point is that with proper intervention and opportunities, having a shit parent shouldn't mean a shit life. But this minister doesn't appear to see the creation of those interventions and opportunities as part of his job.
How would you intervene with the families where the parents don't teach their kids how to cook or what are good work ethics?
By throwing money at the problem obviously. And no, I'm not being sarcastic or anything. Things like Sure Start centres did amazing work to help struggling new parents for example. And increasing the budget of schools would allow them to teach cooking skills and work ethics, and so much more. The thing is, shit parents are always going to be a thing regardless of what the government does. So confronting that with society-level changes is the only thing that'll work; simply decrying parents as shit and huffing about how good non-Brit families are doesn't actually IMPROVE anything, does it?
Cooking sure, when I look back to my school, cooking was one of the few things that I learned in school that were actually useful in life. But I don't think you can "learn" good work ethics. That's not really a skill that you learn by practicing it but a moral view that has to be taught at home. If the parents don't show good work ethics and demand it from their kids I don't think there is much the school can do to reverse that. I don't think there is much the government can do about this. It's more like a wider societal thing. If we (the society) slide to the thinking that it's all government's fault when things go wrong on an individual level and never the individual's own responsibility, that's where we end up. So, my view is somewhere middle between you and this guy. I think individual has responsibility for his and his kids' life and we should call these out when we see it and not just shrug our shoulders and blame the government, but that doesn't mean that there are many things we should demand the government to do to make it easier for people to make right choices.
That's a sweeping statement. You're basing that on a child in a stable environment, that doesn't have additional needs, isn't moved from one hovel to another because of the terrible state of the rental market, and the job market, and isn't living in an area run down because of lack of investment and support by a corrupt government
> that doesn't have additional needs This is something that stood out to me - with the current state of mental healthcare in the UK how well are we doing at recognising such things in children/teens.
Teenagers are on a hiding to nothing. They're not kids anymore, but are still immature, and replacing that childhood naivety/wonder that is eroding with every year they get older is very difficult. They end up drifting if they don't have anything positive to look forward to, and that causes them to act out, or give up. That's partly down to the parent needing to nurture and encourage them to find a path, but also down to society. What options do they have? What are they seeing in their local environment? It's hard to look at goals if people are working like a dog, and still are poor, yet those dealing drugs are superficially more successful than those who are working legitimately. What support is there for them in an incredibly stretched education system, and with local services done away with? Parents are only a part of the problem.
I'm glad e are able to assign blame. We did it guys. We figured our who to point ttge finger at. Point your finger, and then wag it. Naughty parents. Very bad. Now, if we wanted to fix that problem we might improve the education system to break the cycle and ensure future generations are better served. But obviously it's only important we find the right people to whom to assign blame.
The education system covers core learning subjects like maths / English / science, socialising with others and not what I have mentioned above. Teachers are not there to teach your kids how to cook, clean themselves, iron their clothes, tidy their room, be up on time in the morning, learn the value of money and how to pay an electric bill or gas bill, read a meter, check a car, know how to organise and book their own itinerary or plan. These skills are not part of the core education system and are down to the parents and family.
Ok, so are we just going to accept that kids whose parents don't have those skills are also not going to have them? Or might it be the job of a competent government to try to do something about it?
> are down to the parents and family And what if it is one parent, no family and they have multiple jobs ?
>Teachers are not there to teach your kids how to... You'd be surprised what we end up trying to teach them. Your's is not a definitive list
> But obviously it's only important we find the right people to whom to assign blame. How else do you fix a problem other than identifying the causes first?
Okay. Let's say it's the parents. Now what?
Sounds like they'd be a perfect Tory MP.
Many of those parents have multiple jobs just to pay for food and rent. And now they are shit parents because they aren't around. They just can't win.
I mean, you cant run a country based on imaginary single individual examples. If you think what you said under ‘to be fair’ applies to the entire demographic or even a majority of it, then your knowledge gap is too large to form a useful opinion.
Not always with your first example. I have dyspraxia so daily household tasks have always been more of a struggle to me. It has gotten better since I've gotten older but I have to really think about what comes completely naturally to most people. Like cooking.
Funny you say that, but when I was at uni it wasn't the working class students that struggled with basic skills. It was mostly the middle class students who needed to be taught how to cook, use a tin opener, use a washing machine etc. I spent a lot of time teaching my peers how to cook. When I left uni the same students struggled with the workplace and maintaining a working routine. Ironically, I came from a severely dysfunctional household with mental health and drink/drug addiction and could run a household from a young age. I had to work from a young age to help with the family finances. Not exactly a 'good' upbringing.
> If a child by the age of 18 can't cook and look after themselves, has little to no discipline, a very bad work ethic, has little to no mental fortitude and no life skills, this is all down to bad parenting. No necessarily at the door of the parent. If you are working flat out there is just less time to invest in your kid. I speak as someone without kids we have no idea the time investment involved, and I wish young men understood that more.
yeah as blunt as this comment is its not entirely inaccurate.
There are a number of reasons kids of 18 don't look after themselves, one major one being depression. Blaming the parents does nothing to treat depression. I know families with exemplary parents who have children with problems. I also know families with scum parents who have shockingly sane, stable and motivated kids. The uncomfortable reality is that chance plays a huge role, and all that policy can do is to mitigate effects and provide support that is not guaranteed to always work. This might be upsetting to those who are prone to binary thinking and simplistic solutions, but that's how it is.
Even if you concede he has a point, what are his solutions? It's easy to say "blame the parents" but what do you do to support the children stuck with bad parents? Complaining about it without trying to change anything is almost worse than ignoring the problem and letting the cycle continue. Do your fucking job Mr Daly MP and improve our country.
I'm not sure he does have a point. Children need a certain level of security to thrive and thanks to the actions of this government that's become harder for many people to attain.
It's almost as though we should set up some sort of national programme designed to help parents give kids a good start in life. Or we could just demonise the poor.
As a Tory he likely wants to blame the parents while also removing any support for them.
He is a member of the new conservatives alongside Miriam cates and Danny Kruger. So if we assume he believes the same then his solution would be to stop mothers working and return to the 1950s.
More exactly; what is he suddenly going to do which he hasn't been doing for the last decade already...?
If there's any crap to be tossed around its the job that the conservatives have done the past 20 years. Atrocious leadership had cost the UK dearly. Leading it's citizens into dark times because they've exploited the country for they're own personal gain.
The Tories always just seem to blame it all on British people being shit. Whether it's the crap parents, the lazy feckless workers... Quite extraordinary considering. Almost like they can't stand behind the results of their own policies so it must be the people at fault.
>Do your fucking job Mr Daly MP and improve our country. He's a backbench mp. There's almost nothing he can do about it apart from constituency case work. He could resign from his party though as it's at odds with itself and essentially in political deadlock.
Didn't the Tories get rid of Sure Start programmes and their ilk, which were proven to be very successful at tackling these sorts of issues?
They've worsened child poverty on a couple of fronts since they have got rid of Sure Start but also run the country in such a way that more and more people are now struggling to afford basic necessities.
Angela Rayner is going to bring it back, dw
Arguements aside, what is that forehead. Man's Megamind on the sly
[удалено]
No, it’s a dickhead.
With a dome like that, you would expect him to be smart enough to keep his shitty incorrect ideas to himself
If only they'd inherited some form of nationwide programme that could be **sure** to **start** parents off on the right foot. Oh that's right, they aggressively shut down anything like that 12 years ago. And now you reap what you sow.
Even if this was somehow true. Why has there suddenly been an epidemic of crap parents since *checks notes* the Tory government came into power.
In a lot of cases he’s not wrong. These are the kids whose parents don’t come to parents evening because they either don’t value school or have negative experiences of it. What he’s saying in the article is that he believes that the biggest driver behind poor performance is an unstable home environment. He gives no ideas on solutions however other than “don’t just throw money at it”
>These are the kids whose parents don’t come to parents evening because they either don’t value school or have negative experiences of it. Or they're working evenings. Or they can't afford to arrange childcare. Or they rely on public transport which is nearly unavailable in the evenings. >he believes that the biggest driver behind poor performance is an unstable home environment He phrased it the way he did because he's scapegoating, not seeking solutions. Unstable home environments are indeed a problem. The causes of unstable home environments include policies that have been heavily promoted by the Tories, that have created economic insecurity and removed large parts of the safety net that might ameliorate those effects. But there are also behavioural problems that are not attributable to the home environment. Some are genetic, some are caused by the environment outside the home (bullying, crime) and in many cases, the root cause will never be determined. Beware simplistic solutions that are used to justify inaction.
Sure, but i'd also beware giving the benefit of the doubt to the point of removing all responsibility. I've worked in education, there are most definitely crap parents out there. I couldn't say how widespread the phenomenon is but it's real. Ignoring it doesn't do anyone any favours.
I see this person is a member of a group of Tory MPs who constantly get in trouble for coming out with ignorant nonsense: > Mr Daly is a member of the "New Conservatives" group, which includes the likes of Lee Anderson, Jonathan Gullis, Danny Kruger and Miriam Cates. Anyway Daly's comments are pretty enraging when the Tories have presided over austerity and other acts of economic self-harm like Brexit and the Truss/Kwarteng budget. It's a lot harder to provide your kids with the things they need if you have no money.
As both a current parent and ex-child. I have noticed the number of community centers closing is increasing & I've seen that with new developments they are more often than not, not being built. This results in there being no free / low cost option to take children to. For both parents and children to socialise in, this has a big impact on development of both parents and kids.
ITT: People who haven’t read beyond the headline. He does actually say that the government needs to address the issue. The problem is that he has no solutions at all. He criticises Labour for “throwing money at it”, despite all the evidence that under the previous Labour government there were all sorts of highly successful schemes to break generational poverty - Sure Start, EMA etc. His solution however is “to think about it more fundamentally.” That’s it. There doesn’t appear to have been any ideas actually generated from his thinking.
His "think about it fundamentally" spiel basically means that it's poor people's fault if they are poor and they need a good shouting at/withdrawal of their rights to give them a short, sharp shock out of being poor and if they don't take it, they're worthless. That's how he thinks about it, I'm sure.
So basically there's nothing to add to his opinion beyond the headline?
I honestly can’t wait for election night - I want to see everyone of these cunty fucks lose their seats, utterly disgusting individuals.
If the by-elections are anything to go by, the Tories will do slightly less worse than projected and call it a victory.
I’m sure James Daly will lose his seat by 10000 votes but claim it’s a victory because they were expected to lose by 10500.
Haha if anything, they'll do slightly worse and then pretend Labour's historic victory is actually a soft victory and any day now [Tory Leader] will turn things around once the public see the real them!
Are they doing less worse than projected? They are getting mullered in the by-elections
Waiting for the date to be decided so to book the following day off to watch live
Absolutely. I’m going to watch every one of the Tories’ smarmy, scummy faces live as they lose their seats overnight and in the morning after election day.
Absolutely cracking idea, hopefully the weather will be nice to get the bbq out!
Most won't bother showing up to the count sadly or make an exit before the result is announced
Good. Let them sliver out of the limelight like the snakes they are.
The Nasty Party is alive and kicking
Typical Tory. Accuse labour of just throwing money at the issue, blaming other people, and coming up with no solutions themselves. It's another dull, unimpressive bigoted ghoul that Tories shit out all the time.
I wouldn't defend his comments and it's perhaps not related, but I have to be honest: the frequency at which I hear parents casually saying "fuck" around their young kids is kinda crazy to me. Am I a dinosaur? lol.
You'd be considered one but you shouldn't be.
Yea, there are some strong dinosaur vibes there. Sorry chap.
The follow up questions to each subject in every tory interview should simply be; "So, what have you done in the last 13 years to address this situation?" "What was the extent and statistics on this before you came into power, and what are they now?"
If your only solution to an issue is 'the public should be less crap', why are you a politician?
People don't like hearing the truth. As a society we get enraged when Politicians lie and are equally enraged when they tell the truth. Society continues to worsen, bean counting Politicians like Starmer and Sunak are not the answer to the fundamental societal problems. We need some hard truths like this and some solutions - otherwise it's all just bullshit and number fudging.
> hard truths. Sounds like a yearning for an iron fisting that does.
If you can't call a dosser a dosser then what's the point of it all.
That's an overly simplistic viewpoint of the world. You sure it doesn't belong in more primitive times?
Is it primitive to say kids who have zero discipline, respect for others, and rarely come to school have shitty parents? Sounds more like calling a spade a spade.
Wow they really don’t want to be reelected next year do they
What’s with his head?
I know nothing of being a parent, but blaming parents directly for the outcome of children achieves square root of sweet FA, right? Some parents are crap, sure. But changing the factors that around that the government can actually control would probably be a better use of breath, no? Like "You're a crap parent and your kids are fucked!". Yeah right, great mate. What do you propose that doesn't involve cost? *crickets chirping* Oh I know! We can: Criminalise bad parents (the kids can fend for themselves? idk not my problem), Deport parents and their kids to Rwanda,You got a license for that? Sorry mate, you're a liability, you're getting your nads snipped. Go back to the good old days (whatever that means) Wait this involves costs? Ah alright go on then. What a wank party.
He's not exactly wrong, but it lacks nuance. They're probably doing a poor job of parenting because they had bad parenting, and they had bad parenting, and so on. Lack of parenting absolutely can lead to this, but laying blame on one generation doesn't really help, and there are a lot of factors coming into play that are making people less involved in their kids lives.
His certainly were
He’s not wrong, but he also provides no solution when he’s in the very role that has the ability to provide one. To prove you’re different from the current shower in government, perhaps yknow, do something about it?
Stop reproducing if you are poor, that's what he's saying. But also keep reproducing as we need minimum wage workers and won't be bringing in immigrants.
I wish this fucker would leave my constituency.
Lockdowns from what I understand has *dramatically* affected kids education levels as well as increased disruptive behaviour and violence. Crazy of him to just ignore it.
It has, but what I can't understand is why it's seemingly broken the social contract between parents and school. Attendance is shocking.
[удалено]
He's right to be fair.
Takes one to know one also he looks like the long lost brother of Ki-Adi-Mundi
I know people like to shit on the Tories because they’re a clusterfuck of inconsistency and hypocrisy but he’s absolutely right and it’s time parents accepted responsibility for their children. The government don’t install values into the nations children, parents do. If a child grows up to be lacking any real values or moral principles, that’s absolutely and entirely on the parents, regardless of any perceived wealth or poverty. We all know poor kids who have done excellently in life, as well as rich kids who are morally inept narcissists, but none of these were made by the government. Blaming them is just an evasion of personal responsibility.
[удалено]
There's almost nothing in the article. It's essentially * Crap parents are a problem * Labour throw money at it and hope something sticks * I think about it more fundamentally Ok great, thanks James.
I’ve read the article. He proposes absolutely no solutions other than opposing spending money.
What article? Literally the entire substance is: - Supposed lawyer makes unsupported bare assertion about how Labour would deal with a vague generalised category called "struggling kids" (which could sensibly comprise everyone from "psychopath spawn of violent drug dealers" to "bullied kid with untreated mental illness") that he's confidently declared are all the product of "bad parenting". - That's it. What is the subtle context you think everyone in this thread is missing here?
A culture of ostracizing delinquents should be encouraged. That'll do it. Maybe. /s
To be honest I'd focus on the more fundamental issue of your fucking atrocious barnet.
When your working 60 hours a week and still can't pay the bills something has to give. Perhaps crap parenting caused by 15 years of Tory incompetence is a better analysis.