Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

B1239 - Educational Indoctrination Bill 2017 Watch

Announcements
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saunders16)
    It makes me a terrorist to believe that the holocaust was real?

    That's not an argument against this bill.
    Section 3b forbids the promotion of partisan principles and opinions- while the holocaust example may not fall underneath this (arguably does, impossible to objectively prove it was systematic, and you can get into an argument about the validity of sources etc.), the Stalin example certainly does. It is definitely a reason for opposing the bill.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LifeIsFine)
    Section 3b forbids the promotion of partisan principles and opinions- while the holocaust example may not fall underneath this (arguably does, impossible to objectively prove it was systematic, and you can get into an argument about the validity of sources etc.), the Stalin example certainly does. It is definitely a reason for opposing the bill.
    That is not what this bill does.

    3 - Indoctrination
    (1) The local education authority, governing body, head teacher and all members of staff in their individual capacity, are duly obliged to:-
    (a) forbid the pursuit of partisan principles, opinions, points of view, ideals, attitudes, cognitive strategies or professional methodologies by educational staff that have tangible links to proscribed organisation;
    (b) forbid the promotion of partisan principles, opinions, points of view, ideals, attitudes, cognitive strategies or professional methodologies in the teaching of any subject in the school
    that have tangible links to proscribed organisation;

    This section makes it clear that the bill only refers to views that link to proscribed organisations, rendering that cause for opposition incorrect, if you forgive my original tone.
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ns_2)
    May I make clear that this bill ONLY punishes those with 'tangible links to proscribed groups or organisations'... how is not fair to tackle 'extremist indoctrination'? how is not fair to tackle the spread of terrorism of all forms? how is not fair to punish those who advocate cowardly organisations like the Islamic State?
    May I make it clear that (and if you read my words you will already know this) I have not said you punish teachers with this bill. I have said that you have made a heavy punishment behind them. Teachers now have to work all hours sent to them and in the knowledge (if this bill passes) that they are perilously close to serious implications on their career if they're misinterpreted or express their opinions, are reported and disbelieved for instance? You will argue that this bill provides a full and judicial and fair procedure for this to be avoided but anything like that is never watertight. If you do not appreciate the pressure that this bill puts teachers under to conform then I cannot see where this conversation will end.

    To be clear I HAVE NOT SAID you are punishing teachers. I HAVE SAID you place a punishment next to teachers, and that adds pressure to their job. Pressure that they don't need or deserve.

    If you continue to have problems understanding me I suggest you try reading my words.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saunders16)
    That is not what this bill does.

    3 - Indoctrination
    (1) The local education authority, governing body, head teacher and all members of staff in their individual capacity, are duly obliged to:-
    (a) forbid the pursuit of partisan principles, opinions, points of view, ideals, attitudes, cognitive strategies or professional methodologies by educational staff that have tangible links to proscribed organisation;
    (b) forbid the promotion of partisan principles, opinions, points of view, ideals, attitudes, cognitive strategies or professional methodologies in the teaching of any subject in the school that have tangible links to proscribed organisation;

    This section makes it clear that the bill only refers to views that link to proscribed organisations, rendering that cause for opposition incorrect, if you forgive my original tone.
    Ok, then I'm a teacher that happens to be part of the Green Party. I teach my students that global warming is a real issue, and that climate change has real and damaging effects to our planet. This is prohibited?
    I'm a teacher that's a part of unite against fascism. I teach my students that Mussolini was a power hungry, greedy despot, and that fascism is a terrible ideology.
    Prohibited under this act?
    Edit: sigh, I have indeed misread the bill. However it is not hard to find pro global warming exists proscribed groups, or anti Hitler proscribed groups, so the point stands.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LifeIsFine)
    Ok, then I'm a teacher that happens to be part of the Green Party. I teach my students that global warming is a real issue, and that climate change has real and damaging effects to our planet. This is prohibited?
    I'm a teacher that's a part of unite against fascism. I teach my students that Mussolini was a power hungry, greedy despot, and that fascism is a terrible ideology.
    Prohibited under this act?
    Edit: sigh, I have indeed misread the bill. However it is not hard to find pro global warming exists proscribed groups, or anti Hitler proscribed groups, so the point stands.
    I presume in your edit you are referring to Unite Against Fascism and Greenpeace, which to the best of my knowledge - whilst strongly disliked - are not classed as proscribed groups. Even if they were, I am quite certain it would be the endorsement or sympathy towards those certain groups that would be the issue, rather than denouncing terrorism or supporting the idea of global warming. I do not believe the point stands.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saunders16)
    I presume in your edit you are referring to Unite Against Fascism and Greenpeace, which to the best of my knowledge - whilst strongly disliked - are not classed as proscribed groups. Even if they were, I am quite certain it would be the endorsement or sympathy towards those certain groups that would be the issue, rather than denouncing terrorism or supporting the idea of global warming. I do not believe the point stands.
    I was not referring to those groups in particular- the scope is wide open as that point of view appeals to many, including terrorist groups.
    If they were however, it would vlearly not be the endorsements of the groups- that isn't what the bill says. An principle or opinion with any tangible link is clearly not the same as an endorsement, and thus the point stands.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LifeIsFine)
    I was not referring to those groups in particular- the scope is wide open as that point of view appeals to many, including terrorist groups.
    If they were however, it would vlearly not be the endorsements of the groups- that isn't what the bill says. An principle or opinion with any tangible link is clearly not the same as an endorsement, and thus the point stands.
    The term 'tangible link' shows that it must relate to the group.

    Admittedly, this should be defined in less questionable terms by the bill.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Aye, but you should consider specifying that the teaching of evolutionary theory, climate change and similar issues that are controversial only because of idiots is protected
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saunders16)
    That is not what this bill does.

    3 - Indoctrination
    (1) The local education authority, governing body, head teacher and all members of staff in their individual capacity, are duly obliged to:-
    (a) forbid the pursuit of partisan principles, opinions, points of view, ideals, attitudes, cognitive strategies or professional methodologies by educational staff that have tangible links to proscribed organisation;
    (b) forbid the promotion of partisan principles, opinions, points of view, ideals, attitudes, cognitive strategies or professional methodologies in the teaching of any subject in the school that have tangible links to proscribed organisation;

    This section makes it clear that the bill only refers to views that link to proscribed organisations, rendering that cause for opposition incorrect, if you forgive my original tone.
    The flat-earth society exists, so does the anti-vax group. Plus wouldn't this bill also ban religious studies? It's not like they have reliable sources to back up their logic.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    What I want to point out is, however, I expect most schools where terrorism were to be encouraged etc etc will be supported by the head teacher, so the likelihood of said head teacher taking a record of this indoctrination will be very small. Otherwise, good bill Aye
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Section 5 is absolutely disastrous and way over the top. A prank phone call could end a career.

    And seeing as it is almost certainly already illegal for a teacher to do that, if not under RL law then under TSR law (see V859) then Section 5 and Section 6 add little value even if they weren't wholly unnecessary.
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    • Welcome Squad
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    A fine bill, aye.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Please could the author of the Bill explain how this goes beyond existing safeguarding obligations that schools have to pupils? Two more things:
    1) I'd like to see higher education excluded from the definition of 'school'.
    2) I'd like it to be made clear that the opinions excluded are only those of the proscribed organisations which are also the reasons they are proscribed. Teaching RE would arguably be pretty much totally illegal as written.
    CoffeeGeek, tagging you as I'm not sure who the actual author is. It's a nice idea in principle but needs refining.
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    • Welcome Squad
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    Please could the author of the Bill explain how this goes beyond existing safeguarding obligations that schools have to pupils? Two more things:
    1) I'd like to see higher education excluded from the definition of 'school'.
    2) I'd like it to be made clear that the opinions excluded are only those of the proscribed organisations which are also the reasons they are proscribed. Teaching RE would arguably be pretty much totally illegal as written.
    CoffeeGeek, tagging you as I'm not sure who the actual author is. It's a nice idea in principle but needs refining.
    The author is ns_2, he is slightly occupied at the moment.
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    • Welcome Squad
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by That Bearded Man)
    I'd actually prefer my kids learn about global warming thanks.
    I'd prefer if my kids were taught the truth - which global warming undoubtedly is not.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CoffeeGeek)
    I'd prefer if my kids were taught the truth - which global warming undoubtedly is not.
    I find this a very worrying statement to hear from the leader of the TSR Conservative Party.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CoffeeGeek)
    I'd prefer if my kids were taught the truth - which global warming undoubtedly is not.
    Disputing that global warming is caused by human activity is clearly wrong but just about defensible.
    Disputing that it is happening is unbelievably stupid.
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    • Welcome Squad
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saunders16)
    I find this a very worrying statement to hear from the leader of the TSR Conservative Party.
    There is no reason to be worried about my statement at all. A lot of scientists say global warming is not real. However, I do believe climate change is real - you should know that climate change and global warming is not the same thing.
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Order! This bill is in cessation.
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Speakership mixup, nothing to see here.
 
 
 
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: August 7, 2017
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Should Spain allow Catalonia to declare independence?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.