Comment posted School Meals saga: Council distorts facts and blocks Martha’s blog by newsroom.
Mairi – this is the Pathfinder North superfast (in parts) broadband network the taxpayer – and Argyll and Bute Council Tax payers – paid for.
A public promise was given at a meeting in Campbeltown that commercial subscriptions for business and domestic users would follow through a third party commercial provider, making best use of this more advanced network,
That has not happened. We have persistently chased it and all we get are blocking replies giving the clear sense that it will never happen.
The Pathfinder North network in Argyll and Bute serves all council premises and staff – and the raft of public services delivered through the council – like schools, libraries etc.
Third sector organisations are also given access to it.
It is a very large and capable network.
newsroom also commented
- Calum – can you tell us who – not names but roles – is blaming the dinner ladies?
- No such criticism has been made on For Argyll, either in articles by us or in any comments.
Everyone is aware that school kitchens cook what they are told with what products are delivered to them.
They do not make the contracting decisions.
We have become aware of a different Argyll and Bute primary school, with its own kitchen, where the cook claims to have been instructed previously by a council employee to cut £10 a week off the spend, specifically on fruit and vegetables.
It is worth noting that the overall cost per meal to Argyll and Bute is higher than many.
The question is how much of that overall cost actually goes on the raw materials for the meals – and how does that figure compare with the same cost element in other local authorities.
Parents and taxpayers need to be sure that the headline price per meal is not seeing more creamed off it for profit by contractors – with no difference for the average elsewhere in the cost of the food itself.
- Well spotted. We have decided to leave this latest typo in place as a tribute to your sense of humour and as a lighter moment.
- We have absolutely no trouble in accepting that good staff can be sent out to defend the indefensible where their well paid seniors, who are the responsible and policy setting officers, prefer to stand back.
On the same tack, you might like to think more sensitively about a nine year old child and parents who are patently doing their level best to create for her the context of accounting for and standing up for herself.
- Of course it would. What do they expect to find when they arrive by invitation? A piece of deep fried pizza, a croquette and an ice lolly?
Recent comments by newsroom
- Here’s how the ‘BT Broadband Security’ scam works – a victim’s narrative
If only it were, Jake.
- Supreme Court finds for appellants on Named Persons
Not in my control and hadn’t noticed this myself [so thanks] – and will pass on your concerns.
This us likely to be one of the consequences of recovery from recent outages which were beyond our control.
- Supreme Court finds for appellants on Named Persons
It is worth noting that in its judgment the Supreme Court said:
‘“The first thing that a totalitarian regime tries to do is to get to the children, to distance them from the subversive, varied influences of their families, and indoctrinate them in their rulers’ view of the world. Within limits, families must be left to bring up their children in their own way.’
- Bute refugees suffer from inadequately considered placement
Eveything you say above applies justly to those who radicalise – but not necessarily to those who are vulnerable to be radicalised.
When you are young, everything in life is understood in simple binary oppositions. It is only time and broad experience that introduces and embeds the tonalities of understanding.
Many of the young everywhere, from the need to belong and from the acceleration of peer pressure, are also prone to follow the accepted behavioural norms or fashions of their peers.
This is why radicalisation is most easily effected in cities and amongst the large cultural enclaves that can form there.
The young, in their uncluttered understanding, are also idealist – and extremism is a form of idealism perverted.
What you say about the safety and security that relocated refugees now possess is also correct – but is amended by two considerations.
One is the automatic perception of all refugees as having the education to hold such an understanding of their situation. Many will be educated – some very highly indeed – but by no means all will have had the opportunity of education.
The second is that, as may be the case with some of the Bute families, if they feel and look ‘different’ from everyone around them and if they cannot communicate, some will feel uncomfortable and vulnerable, even intimidated – and it is unrealistic to assume that refugees will be universally made welcome in any locality.
We had assumed that the acceptance of such refugees here would mean the automatic employment of those qualified to teach English as a foreign language and that such classes would be taught in a regular and compulsory schedule.
This would be a responsible and necessary provision if integration is to be a realistic achievement.
We do not know if such provision has been made and there seems to be no mention of it.
- Turkey’s military coup raises issues to be confronted here in Britain
This is another issue – a procedural one – and one which clearly needs to be resolved while the need can be immediately understood.
It remains a mystery why, when political party leadership elections require set percentages well above 50% to secure a win, politicians would not have reason and wit to see that decisions taking a member of a significant political union out of that union, changing the nature of the larger union [helpless to prevent that] as well as the nature of the departing member, that decisions of such weight and permanence cannot sensibly be taken by 50% + 1 single vote of an electorate.
The opportunity for due revision was not taken following the Scottish Referendum, which was run under this rule.
Something like a 60% threshold would guard decisions against the percentage of transient whim – and/or of misunderstanding and/or of misinformedness – in any vote; and these are the things that that can help to create very narrow majorities on very profound issues.
Opinion polls declare that their results are subject to a 3% margin for error.
In the EU Referendum, a 2% change of mind would have produced an even tinier – but legally acceptable – majority in the opposite direction.
powered by SEO Super Comments