Dear God, talk about hyperbole.

Anyway

http://ec.europa.eu/youreurope/nav/en/citizens/education-study/eu-legislation/index.html

"1) The fundamental principle of non-discrimination on grounds of nationality between students studying in a foreign country and national students applies as regards admission to an educational or training establishment. This includes enrolment fee requirements and the conditions governing the award of a grant to cover such fees. In this respect, any Community citizen must be treated in the same way as national citizens."

In principle, I think that this goes down even to Primary level though having browsed the site, the criteria aren't exactly clear. The argument for advantaging Northern students could be made on grounds of payment: RoI residents do not pay into the Social Security and taxes, but this could be complicated by parents who work North but live South (like, incidentally, one Ms Ruane). I think in court there could be a case made, anyway.

I would suggest that this is something that is best sorted by sensible cross border education - the quality of schools either side fo the border will vary locally.

Three other points:

1. Ruane has yet to do anything so has yet to "destroy" anything
2. Our schools are not the best in the world and disadvantage a lot of people
3. I don't generally mind swearing, but I really dislike that one when directed at a woman

Kensei, the important bits you quote are: "grounds of nationality" and "any Community citizen must be treated in the same way as national citizens."

And yes, and a citizen of the Republic resident in Northern Ireland would be treated the exact same way as any other Community citizen.

As I said, the law concerns nationality (or citizenship), not residence. Don't comprehensive schools in England have catchment areas based on post code or something? How is this different?

"1. Ruane has yet to do anything so has yet to "destroy" anything"
She hasn't done anything but she has made her plans to abolish grammar schools known.

"2. Our schools are not the best in the world and disadvantage a lot of people"
Of course not, but they're bloody good. Some kind of comprehensive system will disadvantage a lot more.

"3. I don't generally mind swearing, but I really dislike that one when directed at a woman"
I try to limit my swearing on this blog as it can detract from the point being made, but this woman deserves it. See the link on the offending word.

"And yes, and a citizen of the Republic resident in Northern Ireland would be treated the exact same way as any other Community citizen."

No, I don't think this follows necessarily. I don't think Cambridge or Oxford can discriminate against EU citizens applying there on grounds they are not resident in the country, for example.

"As I said, the law concerns nationality (or citizenship), not residence. Don't comprehensive schools in England have catchment areas based on post code or something? How is this different?"

England doesn't have any borders where it would matter, and is essentially immune from possible legal challenge. You might be right here, but I think given the EU principle as laid out, it is not at all clear. Certainly not clear enough to be bandying "liar" about.

And in any case, I think she is right to look at it, but only as long as she gets reciprocal arrangements with the Republic.

"She hasn't done anything but she has made her plans to abolish grammar schools known."

Ah, so this will apparently destroy the universe. Like in all those other countries that don't use selection.

"Of course not, but they're bloody good. Some kind of comprehensive system will disadvantage a lot more."

Look at outcomes. Too many failures and people without qualifications to make claims lie this. Some of the best systems in the world are comprehensive and it is more complicated than that.

Objectively you can't make those claims.

"I try to limit my swearing on this blog as it can detract from the point being made, but this woman deserves it. See the link on the offending word."

No, she doesn't, and you just let yourself and the whole post down.

She forfeited her right to civil treatment when she joined Sinn Fein. The fact that she's one of the biggest cunts in a party of cunts makes Beano's use of the word particularly appropriate.

Beano,

Yet again, a missed opportunity. The removal of the 11+ is a serious error and you could have blogged on that. Instead you choose to concentrate on the appalling vista of...er...children crossing the border to go to school.

I'll not even comment on your use of the "c" word. It's poor form and you know it.

I noticed Beano has failed to provide an alternative system. We all know the 11+ is bollocks. We need to replace it. I agree that scrapping academic selection is a bad move. But I don’t see you or unionist politicans providing an alternative.
I also notice your lack of criticism for other Ministers. McGimpsey only seems to know how to whinge. Arlene Foster only seems to know how to give money to Ian Og’s homosexual lover Sweeney. But then again, Caitríona Ruane is a Catholic. And that probably makes her bad in Beano’s eyes.
Also, it was mentioned that Border area nationalists will lose out on this. Considering that the majority of Border area nationalists consider Donegal, Cavan and all of down south to be part of their country. So they probably don’t give a fuck about people from the Republic going to school in the North.

Kensei
"You might be right here, but I think given the EU principle as laid out, it is not at all clear."

Under the EU Race Equality Directive of 2000, I don't think there is case to answer for here, the kids are not being discriminated against on grounds of "race or ethnicity" ...but I'll agree it's not clear-cut, which is why Ruane should be trying to get a definitive answer from the EU, *if* this was her real motive for bringing the question up.

“And in any case, I think she is right to look at it, but only as long as she gets reciprocal arrangements with the Republic”.

But read the article again, she's not simply "looking at" the situation, this is what she said:

"It would be my intention to review the current legislation, with a view to changing it," she said.

"In doing so it is also my intention to work closely with my counterpart in the South.""

Breath-taking arrogance on her part there and anyway I suspect under Assembly rules she cannot single-handedly change the regulations.

Beano,
Worst ever minister? Have we forgotten Edwin Poots already????!!!!

"We all know the 11+ is bollocks."

A bit harsh, Seamus. The 11+ is deeply flawed but academic selection is preferable to financial selection or the disastrous comprehensive system in England/Wales.

Possibly raising the age of selection? Basing it on annual performance rather than two pressurised exams?

I agree with all your other points though.

"She forfeited her right to civil treatment when she joined Sinn Fein. The fact that she's one of the biggest cunts in a party of cunts makes Beano's use of the word particularly appropriate."

Yeah, thanks for that incisive contibution to the debate.

I'll assume that the quarter of the population ere they reprsent are also "cunts".

"Under the EU Race Equality Directive of 2000, I don't think there is case to answer for here, the kids are not being discriminated against on grounds of "race or ethnicity" ...but I'll agree it's not clear-cut, which is why Ruane should be trying to get a definitive answer from the EU, *if* this was her real motive for bringing the question up."

It isn't a matter of race or ethnicity. That is a complete an utter red herring. This is the crux:

"As a citizen of the European Union you have rights which you may not always be familiar with. For example, you can go to any other EU country (1) to study, work, pursue a transnational youth activity or retire, while enjoying the same rights as nationals of that country."

As I said, I don't think that Oxbridge could refuse a place to an EU citizen based on residency ; an employer certainly can't. The question is how far the principle extends and how much discretion is available at this level.

As I said, you might well be right. But the available advice is by no means clear cut.

"Breath-taking arrogance on her part there and anyway I suspect under Assembly rules she cannot single-handedly change the regulations."

Yes, breath taking arrogance to deal with an issue that might infringe EU law. Breath taking arrogance to consult with her Southern colleague, with whom she could negotiate reciprocal rights and who faces the exact same issue. Breath taking arrogance that she hasn't actually done anything yet and so there is nothing to judge her own.

Suppose she negotiates a fair deal with the South on the issue that will help families living on both sides of the border. Unionism would veto a measure that affects a relatively small number of people and probably helps out border families on an ideological crusade? Fantastic.

And in any case, if you are getting your knickers in a twist over nationalist politicians advancing an All ireland agenda, life is going to be painful for you.

"Caitríona Ruane is a Catholic. And that probably makes her bad in Beano’s eyes."

The fact that you'd come off with that kind of remark says more about your own prejudice than it does mine.

"Considering that the majority of Border area nationalists consider Donegal, Cavan and all of down south to be part of their country. So they probably don’t give a fuck about people from the Republic going to school in the North."

They might not; at least not until it's their son or daughter, or neice or nephew, denied a place at the local grammar school because some border-hopper has decided to send their own child there. Real-life concerns have a habit of overruling ones dogmatic constitutional opinions at times like that.

O'Neill, thank you for pointing that out. If the mopey bastard up there (sorry but I've had enough of that bigoted shite from Belfastman recently) would care to do a quick search for "Edwin Poots" on this site he'd take all of aout 3 seconds to find a couple of links to:
Bully Boys Bury Bad News on Stadium
DUP - No 'Fair Deal' For Football.
They're in addition the other examples I mentioned in a comment on another post by the way.

McGimpsey hasn't done anything that interests me (then again politics SHOULD be boring) and the whole Causeway thing is covered more than adequately by Slugger and the BBC (again, the technical details bore me a bit). Of course I didn't say anything about Margaret Ritchie and the CTI funding either, but then again I have a job to be getting on with and can't spend 24 hours a day writing on here.

All that said I don't know why I'm justifying myself to someone who only crawled out from under their rock to sling unfounded accusations at me in the first place.

Kensei
Load of "mights" there and that's the crux of the matter, is the "EU equality" reason given a red-herring? Could be and until she or someone else confirms the clear EU position on the matter, then we are quite right to doubt her motives on this whole thing.

"Breath-taking arrogance" or perhaps, let's be kind and say, total incompetence because under Assembly procedures it will not be her sole right to change such a guideline. She can yak to her "southern" counterpart all she likes but in the end she is still going to have to sell it to sammy and the rest of her Education committee.

And regarding getting my yfronts in a twist, it's more of a question of honesty and integrity, if this is part of an overall tactic of pushing an all-Ireland agenda then she should be at least honest about it. She still might be able to sell it, after all Dodds was waxing lyrical about the benefits of all-island fuel provision or something similar, the other day wasn't he?

Fantastic and colourful use of the English language yourself Beano. Out of interest did you pass or fail the 11 plus??

You cunt... ;-)

"Load of "mights" there and that's the crux of the matter, is the "EU equality" reason given a red-herring? Could be and until she or someone else confirms the clear EU position on the matter, then we are quite right to doubt her motives on this whole thing."

There's this thing where people are innocent until proven guilty. Stick with it, it's a good idea. Beano has presented as totally out of this world beyond reason. I think I have demonstrated that at least there is at least pause for thought.

" "Breath-taking arrogance" or perhaps, let's be kind and say, total incompetence because under Assembly procedures it will not be her sole right to change such a guideline. She can yak to her "southern" counterpart all she likes but in the end she is still going to have to sell it to sammy and the rest of her Education committee."

She can make the decision and take the consequences. Personally, I'd prefer it to getting nothing down. I might be wrong, but I think it would take an Assembly vote to overturn the decision, rather than simply the committee?

And as minister, she is the one who should be talking to her Southern counterpart. It'd be a dereliction of duty if she wasn't on this issue. And I seem to recall over ministers being "minded" to take decisions. Perhaps they all like to burnish their position?

But this is SF, so all sense goes out the window, obviously.

"And regarding getting my yfronts in a twist, it's more of a question of honesty and integrity, if this is part of an overall tactic of pushing an all-Ireland agenda then she should be at least honest about it. She still might be able to sell it, after all Dodds was waxing lyrical about the benefits of all-island fuel provision or something similar, the other day wasn't he?"

Why, if that it makes it less likely for the move to go ahead, regardless of its costs and benefits? All parties spin to try and get what they want done.

Dan, I got a top grade (don't want to concede my age by saying if it was a 1 or an A!) thanks to which I received an education my parents could probably not have paid for had we lived under the English system (or any other where the best schools were private). I was not privately tutored.

Actually there is something of a serious point here. Those 25% certainly vote for contemptible scum. They vote for a group which a short time ago pursued a campaign of sectarian murder against their neighbours.

Just because you represent people doesn’t make you acceptable. I think that it what is so repellent about the DUP’s relationship with Sinn Fein. Because someone is mandated and has fulfilled conditions, you must work with them, but that does not mean that you need to strike up a friendly relationship. These people should not be allowed to forget that we have the most profound contempt and distaste for them. That whilst we may have to work with them, that does not make them acceptable. The membership is not yet nearly far away enough from the sectarian murder campaign to make them remotely respectable, whether they engaged in it directly themselves or not. Of course it is easier for Paisley, with his own brand of nationalism and his own ambivalence to violence and sectarianism to enter into the mindset of these people.

For the sake of facilitating political discourse it doesn’t do to enter into such language on a regular basis, but it doesn’t do any harm once in a while to make totally clear the utter derision we hold for these people, and to do it in the strongest possible terms.

The serious point is in relation to Kensei (the cunt). :-)

"Just because you represent people doesn’t make you acceptable. I think that it what is so repellent about the DUP’s relationship with Sinn Fein."

Chekov,

Many nationalists find it abhorrent to be in government with the sectarian extremists of the DUP. That party may not have been linked permanently to a terrorist group but it certainly had intimate relations with Ulster Resistance, Third Force, Ulster Clubs. These groups threatened terrorist violence on a scale much greater than the provos if they didn't get their way. (Not to mention Robbo's own particularly odd flirtation with terror in Clontibret!)

There is also individual DUP members dubious links to active loyalist terror groupings and the ambiguity the party used to show to Catholics murdered by loyalist groups.

"For the sake of facilitating political discourse it doesn’t do to enter into such language on a regular basis, but it doesn’t do any harm once in a while to make totally clear the utter derision we hold for these people, and to do it in the strongest possible terms."

Any contempt you direct at SF is directed at their voters, particularly if you use general terms. It is indivisible, and you probably get a pile of collateral damage with Nationalism even beyond that. If you have any ambitions of converting people or improving relations, you nuke it.

And while you are within your right to say that they are unacceptable to you, I find terms like "scum", "cunt", "these people" have the effect if dehumanising people. I find that an unattractive and aggressive trait, and one I try to avoid. Even for Northern Ireland fans.

So, in the zen of politics, the only person you hurt with it is yourself. I suggest next time you see a debate between a Unionist and SF on the TV, to note the difference in the language used, regardless of whether you think they believe a word of it. And then maybe ponder on why Unionism tends to get a rough ride, and SF a much easier one.

Reg,

I’ve already acknowledged the DUP’s ambivalence to violence. I’m certainly not in the business of defending the DUP. However absolutely unequivocally there is no moral equivalence between ambivalence towards violence and explicitly backing a violent sectarian campaign and actually carrying it out. Members of the DUP may have flirted with violence and on occasions members may even have been involved. For all my distaste for that party, they certainly did not stand on a platform propounding the use of political terror.

So would those terms be more or less aggressive, unattractive and dehumanising than blowing someone up with a carbomb Kensei?

"For all my distaste for that party, they certainly did not stand on a platform propounding the use of political terror."

With respect, they stood on manys a platform (literally) propounding the use of sectarian violence - if they ever felt the need.

"Any contempt you direct at SF is directed at their voters, particularly if you use general terms. "

Ballocks. Why stop at their voters, why not the entire Catholic population of Northern Ireland (or the world for that matter)? Why do SF-supporters try to make out like any criticism directed at The Party is a slight on the whole "community"?

There are many reasons people might vote for SF. They could be:
* misguided socialists
* just misguided
* stupid
* bigoted
* concerned primarily with some local issue which SF reps have worked hard on in the past
* obsessed with the border to the point where it overrides even basic common sense and decency
* determined to stick two-fingers up at unionists (especially those who vote Paisley to stick two up back!)

THAT is contempt for their voters. Do you see the difference?

God I'm in foul form recently!

Chekov

So would those terms be more or less aggressive, unattractive and dehumanising than blowing someone up with a carbomb Kensei?

Straw man and irrelevant.

beano

"Ballocks. Why stop at their voters, why not the entire Catholic population of Northern Ireland (or the world for that matter)? Why do SF-supporters try to make out like any criticism directed at The Party is a slight on the whole "community"?"

I didn't say the whole community. I said Sinn Fein voters. Attacking SF publicly with terms like "scum", "cunt", "those people" also attacks their voters, because they must also have some of these qualities or be thick to vote for them. Plenty of Catholics (even Nationalists) don't like SF and will be comfortable, even happy about it, but there will be plenty of Catholics (even non SF voters) who you immediately cause antagonism with by doing it.

Just even on a human level, these are ugly terms, and will also tend to alienate neutrals away from you. You know, like Unionism has done.

I'm quite happy for you to do it, because it suits my politics for you to do me large favours in that fashion. You simply may wish to consider it.

Or maybe Beano, they may be... wait for it... Republicans. Maybe Sinn Féin voters actually vote Sinn Féin because they actually support what Sinn Féin stand for. Maybe they support the party willing to stand up to Unionist bullies. Maybe they supported the IRA because they stood up to a discriminate, bigoted state. Everything in the above list, (with the exceptions of the socialist bit) could be applied to most the parties in Northern Ireland. You just love going of on pointless, sectarian rants against Sinn Féin. Well guess what, more people are voting Sinn Féin everyday.

Kensei, I know you didn't claim that, but I've seen it implied before. For the most recent example, see Seamus's comment (number 6) on this post.

"But then again, Caitríona Ruane is a Catholic. And that probably makes her bad in Beano’s eyes."

Well guess what, more people are voting Sinn Féin everyday.
Comment from: Seamus [Member]

Can someone not count! I thought Sinn Fein's vote tumbled in the Republic's General Election - something to do with them not having coherent policies for running a country.

Da, I think you should learn to count. In 2002 Irish General Election, Sinn Féin received over 120,000 First Preference Votes. This was 6.5% of the turnout. In the 2007 General Election Sinn Féin received over 140,000 First Preference votes. This is 6.9% of the turnout. Now Da, I'll go through this slowly, just for slow counters like yourself. That's a gain of 20,000 voters and 0.4%. Not a massive gain, but a gain none the less. Check the facts before throwing insults.

Seamus - I stand corrected - it was only their number of seats that fell.
I notice you didn't challenge the statement about their lack of policies. It's the one thing they share with all of the other local parties. Once they all get past "we want the money for" bit and are given real responsibility, and a budget, it all seems to fall apart.

I disagree. The local parties have been in government for more than six months. They are doing better here than Labour are doing in Britain.

The local parties have been in government for more than six months. They are doing better here than Labour are doing in Britain.

Probably not the best comparison at the minute, but even apart from that, can you name three areas where the Assembly has achieved anything concrete? It's a "government" held together by a piece of string, just waiting to fall apart at any minute.

O'Neill,

What worries me most is their financial management. Remember when the Lagan flooded a while back - they were handing out £1,000 to every Tom, Dick or Harry that claimed their house was flooded (being Belfast - mainly Dicks).

I see last week that the Govt was supposed to spend an amout of money on a Motocross tournament in Derry earlier this year but ended up spending 6 times the amount budgeted.

No doubt they'll give the lazy feckers in the civil service a rise next.

Considering the calibre of our esteemed ministers, I'd say those poor civil-servants have their work cut out to keep the place up and running, deserve every penny they get

Ruane has declined to ban sex offenders working in our schools, I have to use money from the Cheb campaign to campaign against her.

She is the worst minister ever, and the sooner she is gone the better for our kids. To be perfectly honest I'd also like to see her kicked out of SF.

She is imposing pro-sex offender policies originated by Tony Blair. She is a Blairite babe.