A few years ago I took my son out of school one day early before the Christmas break. The school would have closed half day anyway and all he missed was a quiz. Anyway being a good upright citizen (unlike the rest of you hallions on here) I notified the school of my intention. The school said they couldnt approve. Whilst it made me feel like a criminal, I understood their position because if they did condone it then the floodgates would open.
I had a great laugh this morning at Ruane the twit. She wouldnt admit she did wrong, and just repeatedly asked the interviewer not to prise into her family business.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/8056974.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/8056974.stm)
QuoteThe education minister has admitted her 12-year-old daughter missed three days of school when she was taken on a government trip to Cyprus.
Caitriona Ruane confirmed a report in the Irish News which said the trip fell outside holidays in the Republic, where her daughter attends school.
The NI Department of Education says parents should not remove their children from school during term time.
Ms Ruane said it was gutter journalism and a "dreadful attack" on her family.
She said she paid for her daughter to go with her and private matters should not be brought into "political battles".
"I will make decisions in relation to my family," she said. "I'm a mother and I'm a minister."
Ms Ruane said she was in Cyprus on official business, speaking about the peace process and education in Ireland "and the lessons that Cyprus can learn".
In a later statement she added: "My decision was dictated by private and personal matters and in the best interest of my daughter.
"I am happy that my decision was both responsible and correct."
Mervyn Storey, who chairs the education committee at the Northern Ireland Assembly, criticised Ms Ruane.
"I think this is another example of how the minister sets a standard for others, but is not prepared to live by the rules herself," the DUP man said.
Basil McCrea, the Ulster Unionist education spokesman, said as minister, Ms Ruane advised other parents not to take their children out of school during term time.
"There is an issue for people in public life that if you do one thing and say another, it worries people," he said.
The Republic's National Educational Welfare Board "strongly advises" parents not to take their child out of school for holidays during term time.
A document on the Northern Ireland Department of Education's website states that "the majority of family holidays taken during term time should be categorised as unauthorised absence."
The document entitled "School Attendance: Absence Recording by Schools" goes on to state that schools can authorise a family holiday during term time if there are "very exceptional circumstances".
These would include a family holiday "judged to be important to the wellbeing and cohesion of the family, following serious or terminal illness, bereavement or other traumatic events."
Quote from: Orior on May 19, 2009, 12:36:59 PM
A few years ago I took my son out of school one day early before the Christmas break. The school would have closed half day anyway and all he missed was a quiz. Anyway being a good upright citizen (unlike the rest of you hallions on here) I notified the school of my intention. The school said they couldnt approve. Whilst it made me feel like a criminal, I understood their position because if they did condone it then the floodgates would open.
I had a great laugh this morning at Ruane the twit. She wouldnt admit she did wrong, and just repeatedly asked the interviewer not to prise into her family business.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/8056974.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/8056974.stm)
QuoteThe education minister has admitted her 12-year-old daughter missed three days of school when she was taken on a government trip to Cyprus.
Caitriona Ruane confirmed a report in the Irish News which said the trip fell outside holidays in the Republic, where her daughter attends school.
The NI Department of Education says parents should not remove their children from school during term time.
Ms Ruane said it was gutter journalism and a "dreadful attack" on her family.
She said she paid for her daughter to go with her and private matters should not be brought into "political battles".
"I will make decisions in relation to my family," she said. "I'm a mother and I'm a minister."
Ms Ruane said she was in Cyprus on official business, speaking about the peace process and education in Ireland "and the lessons that Cyprus can learn".
In a later statement she added: "My decision was dictated by private and personal matters and in the best interest of my daughter.
"I am happy that my decision was both responsible and correct."
Mervyn Storey, who chairs the education committee at the Northern Ireland Assembly, criticised Ms Ruane.
"I think this is another example of how the minister sets a standard for others, but is not prepared to live by the rules herself," the DUP man said.
Basil McCrea, the Ulster Unionist education spokesman, said as minister, Ms Ruane advised other parents not to take their children out of school during term time.
"There is an issue for people in public life that if you do one thing and say another, it worries people," he said.
The Republic's National Educational Welfare Board "strongly advises" parents not to take their child out of school for holidays during term time.
A document on the Northern Ireland Department of Education's website states that "the majority of family holidays taken during term time should be categorised as unauthorised absence."
The document entitled "School Attendance: Absence Recording by Schools" goes on to state that schools can authorise a family holiday during term time if there are "very exceptional circumstances".
These would include a family holiday "judged to be important to the wellbeing and cohesion of the family, following serious or terminal illness, bereavement or other traumatic events."
Not much of a Holiday from one divided island to a other . Now that the Tamil Tigers have been defeated I guess she'll have to cancel next years planned trip to Sri Lanka. ;)
Hang on a sec, the education minister sends her child to school in another jurisdiction, managed by a seperate educational body? Is she ashamed of her own schools?
Not for the first time the Irish News has crossed the line. What are we going to hear next - the Minister's cousin twice removed is a suspected paedophile? Opps that's right they've already done that one on the front page.
She may or may not be stephenite but as she lives in Louth thats probably why her kids go to school there.
Quote from: Donagh on May 19, 2009, 12:47:41 PM
Not for the first time the Irish News has crossed the line. What are we going to hear next - the Minister's cousin twice removed is a suspected paedophile? Opps that's right they've already done that one on the front page.
Its a non story really and there is no need to be bringing her child into it. The Irish News is becoming more and more like the red tops in England. Pretty slow news day if that is their top story.
I honestly couldn't give a monkeys if she took her daughter out early - I'm sure the 12-year old learned a lot more in Cyprus than she would have in three days in Louth (no offence).
I heard the interview this morning - old Seamus wouldn't give over about it.
Hmmm, not sure if I agree with her actions.
Shouldn't she be leading by example?
Has she or her Department ever issued advice to parents advising them not to take pupils on holiday during term time?
If she hasn't then it's fair enough. If she has, she should abide by the same rules every other parent is expected to abide by.
Quote from: Orior on May 19, 2009, 01:20:58 PM
Hmmm, not sure if I agree with her actions.
Shouldn't she be leading by example?
Maybe there were good (personal) reasons for her to take the child e.g. I once took one of our girls out of school for a few days away after a death in family. Did the Irish News take the time to ask her?
Quote from: Donagh on May 19, 2009, 01:26:34 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 19, 2009, 01:20:58 PM
Hmmm, not sure if I agree with her actions.
Shouldn't she be leading by example?
Maybe there were good (personal) reasons for her to take the child e.g. I once took one of our girls out of school for a few days away after a death in family. Did the Irish News take the time to ask her?
You're probably right donagh. The personal reasons are called a junket (sp)
She has made a right pigs ear of the transfer system and her whispering annie voice on the radio gets on my wick.
Quote from: Bensars on May 19, 2009, 01:32:09 PM
You're probably right donagh. The personal reasons are called a junket (sp)
She has made a right pigs ear of the transfer system and her whispering porn star voice on the radio gets on my wick.
She said on the radio this morning she paid for it herself. Do you know different Bensars?
whispering annie?
Quote from: Donagh on May 19, 2009, 01:26:34 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 19, 2009, 01:20:58 PM
Hmmm, not sure if I agree with her actions.
Shouldn't she be leading by example?
Maybe there were good (personal) reasons for her to take the child e.g. I once took one of our girls out of school for a few days away after a death in family. Did the Irish News take the time to ask her?
Well she has been on the radio this morning - did she give any good reason? I think she pretty much said it was nobody's business but hers. If she had a defence, i'd be pretty sure she'd use it.
It's not much of a story, but she's made herself an easy target for a slow news day.
I remember the local priest would come in regularly to get a few of the boys out of class to help him move sheep. We were handsomely rewarded with a choc-ice on the way back and were the envy of the school.
Before anyone asks, no sexual grooming or acs of paedophilia occurred.
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 19, 2009, 01:43:52 PM
Well she has been on the radio this morning - did she give any good reason? I think she pretty much said it was nobody's business but hers. If she had a defence, i'd be pretty sure she'd use it.
It's not much of a story, but she's made herself an easy target for a slow news day.
She said it was a private matter, which it is. No one else would be expected to reveal such private matters in public and neither should she, regardless of your opinion on her or her politics. Complete gutter journalism from the Irish News and only confirms my long term boycott of the rag.
Firstly if she was there on official business, why the need to take a 12 yr old daughter ?
Whilst she was conducting the offical business, who was looking after the 12 year old ?
I have heard no mention of a childminder being brought along.
Quote from: Bensars on May 19, 2009, 02:05:46 PM
Firstly if she was there on official business, why the need to take a 12 yr old daughter ?
What's makes you think you have a right to know. If your 12 year old was wetting the bed would you want it published in the papers and across the radio?
I dont really need to know.
IMO you cant carry out offical business in another country with a 12 yr old child in tow.
Quote from: Donagh on May 19, 2009, 02:08:39 PM
Quote from: Bensars on May 19, 2009, 02:05:46 PM
Firstly if she was there on official business, why the need to take a 12 yr old daughter ?
What's makes you think you have a right to know. If your 12 year old was wetting the bed would you want it published in the papers and across the radio?
Come on, that's a complete red herring of a comparison. Ruane knows she's in the public eye as Education minister so I really can't understand why she did this. Surely she must have known that there was a chance it would get out and how bad it would look. And if there was a reasonable explanation, why didn't she just give it?
Quote from: TacadoirArdMhacha on May 19, 2009, 02:16:43 PM
Come on, that's a complete red herring of a comparison. Ruane knows she's in the public eye as Education minister so I really can't understand why she did this. Surely she must have known that there was a chance it would get out and how bad it would look. And if there was a reasonable explanation, why didn't she just give it?
Why is it a red herring? Where I work I deal with students and parents all the time who will reveal certain personal circumstances, but they would be mortified if I passed that information on to someone else. So long as they are not breaking the law, I am not compelled to pass that information on anyone and my word is enough to allow discretion in the application of the normal rules and guidelines. The only thing that matters here is that Ruane consulted with the childs teacher - it's no one elses business why she took her child from the school.
Quote from: Bensars on May 19, 2009, 02:05:46 PM
Firstly if she was there on official business, why the need to take a 12 yr old daughter ?
Whilst she was conducting the offical business, who was looking after the 12 year old ?
I have heard no mention of a childminder being brought along.
According to the Irish News her husband was also present.
f**k sake who gives a shite.
Has the Irish news nothing else to write about and do people not have enough to worry about without worrying about this.
I'm sure there arent many here who, at some stage, were taken out of school by their parents, maybe for a good reason or maybe for just a day out if they were heading somewhere - I'm sure plenty of those with children have done the same.
Get a grip.
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 19, 2009, 07:21:29 PM
I'm sure there arent many here who, at some stage, were taken out of school by their parents, maybe for a good reason or maybe for just a day out if they were heading somewhere - I'm sure plenty of those with children have done the same.
Maybe. It's not a big deal. But the point is surely that other parents aren't Education Ministers who dictate that parents shouldn't do what she has done. As i've said, it's hardly a big deal - it was clearly a slow news day - but i doubt it would have been raised had she not been the
Education Minister.
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 19, 2009, 07:34:05 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 19, 2009, 07:21:29 PM
I'm sure there arent many here who, at some stage, were taken out of school by their parents, maybe for a good reason or maybe for just a day out if they were heading somewhere - I'm sure plenty of those with children have done the same.
Maybe. It's not a big deal. But the point is surely that other parents aren't Education Ministers who dictate that parents shouldn't do what she has done. As i've said, it's hardly a big deal - it was clearly a slow news day - but i doubt it would have been raised had she not been the Education Minister.
The point wouldnt have been raised if she'd to leave the 11+ alone!
Whatever the views about her ability as a minister, and I'd have doubts myself, bringing a 12 year old child in to it is down right pathetic.
people being put out of work, losing homes etc and people are worrying about a child being taken out of school for a couple of days ::)
Quote from: Donagh on May 19, 2009, 01:51:16 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 19, 2009, 01:43:52 PM
Well she has been on the radio this morning - did she give any good reason? I think she pretty much said it was nobody's business but hers. If she had a defence, i'd be pretty sure she'd use it.
It's not much of a story, but she's made herself an easy target for a slow news day.
She said it was a private matter, which it is. No one else would be expected to reveal such private matters in public and neither should she, regardless of your opinion on her or her politics. Complete gutter journalism from the Irish News and only confirms my long term boycott of the rag.
It's not a private matter when elected representatives tell the people to do one thing, yet reserve the right to do something different in their own 'private' life. So MPs at Westminster berate the benefit cheats and the dole fraudsters and the greedy bankers, while at the same time milking the taxpayer for every penny they can get to support their own lavish 'private' life. We've had instances of high ranking members of the Labour government (Blair, Harman) who insist the plebs should send their kids to the local comprehensive school while they, meanwhile, arrange for their kids to attend fee paying Catholic schools at the other side of London. Now we have Ruane taking her child out of school in term time, while ordinary Joes are threatened with dire consequences if they do the same. Nor is this Ruane's first offence. While living in Louth, she apparently sent one of her kids across the border to a grammar school in the north. Yep. That would be one of the same grammar schools Ruane is insisting should be abolished because selection is such an unfair system which penalises kids from poorer backgrounds. But that's her private life, right?
Irrespective of the individual involved this is an issue that actually really bugs me. We were heading back up to the North last Christmas and went to the head master to say to him that we were looking to take the young lad out 2 days early. I get on very well with him and have been on the PTA before so like Orior I was doing the right thing in my view. He informed me that he couldn't obviously stop me but that they were coming under increasing pressure from the Dept of Education over "holiday time" absenteeism. He said that although it was never wriiten down there was a reading between the lines attitude whenever funding was being requested that a school with poor attendance was less likely to get its funding as requested. I don't know if that is across the board but he said to me that he was getting the same families every Easter and June time taking their kids out for the last few days of the term to take holidays and consequently the Board of Management had to send an official letter to all parents about it.
I do not see this as a non story, I see it as a very relevant story where the Minister of Education is thumbing her nose to the establishment she is designated to represent. It may only be 3 days for her, but it is still breaking the spirit and probably the letter of the attendance regulations.
The sick part is she is in Cyprus to impart her "wisdom" on the education system here. If they want someone to advise on attempting to f**k up an education system through incompetence and intransigence to suit a particular political ethos then she's yer woman.
QuoteNow we have Ruane taking her child out of school in term time, while ordinary Joes are threatened with dire consequences if they do the same.
What consquences?
Jaysus this is a great nanny state we live in.
If I go to the pub, the one that I have to leave to have a smoke, I can't risk driving the kids to school the next morning in case I'm over the new low limit. So by not going to the school I can't get permission to keep the kids at home unless the school decides there is a good enough reason such as my death (note the family don't get to decide). But I wouldn't get the permission anyway because the State has decided not to give money (which it doesn't give anyway) for poor attendance.
Thank God Hitler and Stalin didn't win, imagine what it would have been like.
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 19, 2009, 08:52:02 PM
QuoteNow we have Ruane taking her child out of school in term time, while ordinary Joes are threatened with dire consequences if they do the same.
What consquences?
http://www.thisisscunthorpe.co.uk/barton/news/fined-taking-kids-class/article-981715-detail/article.html
One random example.
Quote from: Myles Na G. on May 19, 2009, 09:13:02 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 19, 2009, 08:52:02 PM
QuoteNow we have Ruane taking her child out of school in term time, while ordinary Joes are threatened with dire consequences if they do the same.
What consquences?
http://www.thisisscunthorpe.co.uk/barton/news/fined-taking-kids-class/article-981715-detail/article.html
One random example.
Quote
Parents of regular absentees are given a 15 school-day penalty notice warning period if school attendance does not improve.
If their children play truant during those 15 days, the parents must pay a £50 fine within 28 days. But if that deadline is not met, the fine doubles to £100.
Prosecutions for parents could range from fines up to £2,500 to community orders and sometimes even the jailing of parents.
That's not quite what we're talking about now is it?
Nice try though ::)
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 19, 2009, 09:26:29 PM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on May 19, 2009, 09:13:02 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 19, 2009, 08:52:02 PM
QuoteNow we have Ruane taking her child out of school in term time, while ordinary Joes are threatened with dire consequences if they do the same.
What consquences?
http://www.thisisscunthorpe.co.uk/barton/news/fined-taking-kids-class/article-981715-detail/article.html
One random example.
Quote
Parents of regular absentees are given a 15 school-day penalty notice warning period if school attendance does not improve.
If their children play truant during those 15 days, the parents must pay a £50 fine within 28 days. But if that deadline is not met, the fine doubles to £100.
Prosecutions for parents could range from fines up to £2,500 to community orders and sometimes even the jailing of parents.
That's not quite what we're talking about now is it?
Nice try though ::)
You must've missed the first three lines in your rush to select your quote from further down the article. I've copied them for you here:
'PARENTS are being urged not to take their children on holiday during term time following a rise in prosecutions as part of a crackdown on truancy and absenteeism.
Since September 2008, the council has issued 158 penalty notices to parents for taking their children out of school during term-time without special permission to do so.
In 2007, 99 parents were prosecuted and in 2006, there were 75 prosecutions.'
Nice try though. ;)
Any eejit can see they're talking about children who are never at school.
How long were you googling before you found that article anyway ::)
I'm glad all you have to worry about is that someone else took their 12 year old out of school for a couple of days ::)
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 19, 2009, 09:39:24 PM
Any eejit can see they're talking about children who are never at school.
How long were you googling before you found that article anyway ::)
I'm glad all you have to worry about is that someone else took their 12 year old out of school for a couple of days ::)
That might be what you're talking about - I'm talking about the 'one law for us and and one for the rest of you' attitude of so many elected representatives, Ruane being a particularly crass example. The Department of Education NI, in one of its documents, strongly recommends that parents do not remove kids from school during term time. How does that square with Ruane's actions? How does sending your own child to a grammar school square with lecturing the rest of us on the unfairness of the grammar school system? But what do you care, eh? You think it's about a 12 year old getting off school for a couple of days. Ruane thinks it's a 'private' matter. You're both wrong in a big way.
I'm just glad you've nothing else to worry about ::) ::) ::)
Quote from: muppet on May 19, 2009, 09:03:52 PM
Jaysus this is a great nanny state we live in.
If I go to the pub, the one that I have to leave to have a smoke, I can't risk driving the kids to school the next morning in case I'm over the new low limit. So by not going to the school I can't get permission to keep the kids at home unless the school decides there is a good enough reason such as my death (note the family don't get to decide). But I wouldn't get the permission anyway because the State has decided not to give money (which it doesn't give anyway) for poor attendance.
Thank God Hitler and Stalin didn't win, imagine what it would have been like.
It says something that the only worry when driving your children whilst under the influence, is whether or not you're breaking the law.
Load of nonsense this story.
This morning I sent a child down a mile to the bakery to get me a sausage roll for my breakfast. 10 mins later I sent another fella out to get the Irish News and a packet of Monster Munch. He returned saying the first fella was nowhere to be seen. I then sent another fella out to look for the first fella and to buy me a suasage roll in case the first one had eaten it. Two hours later they both returned but with no sausage rolls. They'd been lifted for defacing SDLP posters and ate the sausage rolls in the police car. No one batted an eyelid.
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 19, 2009, 10:34:09 PM
Quote from: muppet on May 19, 2009, 09:03:52 PM
Jaysus this is a great nanny state we live in.
If I go to the pub, the one that I have to leave to have a smoke, I can't risk driving the kids to school the next morning in case I'm over the new low limit. So by not going to the school I can't get permission to keep the kids at home unless the school decides there is a good enough reason such as my death (note the family don't get to decide). But I wouldn't get the permission anyway because the State has decided not to give money (which it doesn't give anyway) for poor attendance.
Thank God Hitler and Stalin didn't win, imagine what it would have been like.
It says something that the only worry when driving your children whilst under the influence, is whether or not you're breaking the law.
It says something when you read an anonymous tongue in cheek post and decide that it is bad parenting. Gobshite.
Will someone please think of the children!
Quote from: brokencrossbar1 on May 19, 2009, 08:22:11 PM
Irrespective of the individual involved this is an issue that actually really bugs me. We were heading back up to the North last Christmas and went to the head master to say to him that we were looking to take the young lad out 2 days early. I get on very well with him and have been on the PTA before so like Orior I was doing the right thing in my view. He informed me that he couldn't obviously stop me but that they were coming under increasing pressure from the Dept of Education over "holiday time" absenteeism. He said that although it was never wriiten down there was a reading between the lines attitude whenever funding was being requested that a school with poor attendance was less likely to get its funding as requested. I don't know if that is across the board but he said to me that he was getting the same families every Easter and June time taking their kids out for the last few days of the term to take holidays and consequently the Board of Management had to send an official letter to all parents about it.
I do not see this as a non story, I see it as a very relevant story where the Minister of Education is thumbing her nose to the establishment she is designated to represent. It may only be 3 days for her, but it is still breaking the spirit and probably the letter of the attendance regulations.
In a nutshell :)
Quote from: hardstation on May 19, 2009, 11:18:05 PM
Quote from: ONeill on May 19, 2009, 11:05:07 PM
Load of nonsense this story.
This morning I sent a child down a mile to the bakery to get me a sausage roll for my breakfast. 10 mins later I sent another fella out to get the Irish News and a packet of Monster Munch. He returned saying the first fella was nowhere to be seen. I then sent another fella out to look for the first fella and to buy me a suasage roll in case the first one had eaten it. Two hours later they both returned but with no sausage rolls. They'd been lifted for defacing SDLP posters and ate the sausage rolls in the police car. No one batted an eyelid.
Did they name any Antrim or Celtic players?
Oh yes, must write that on my hand tonight.
Quote from: muppet on May 19, 2009, 11:06:39 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 19, 2009, 10:34:09 PM
Quote from: muppet on May 19, 2009, 09:03:52 PM
Jaysus this is a great nanny state we live in.
If I go to the pub, the one that I have to leave to have a smoke, I can't risk driving the kids to school the next morning in case I'm over the new low limit. So by not going to the school I can't get permission to keep the kids at home unless the school decides there is a good enough reason such as my death (note the family don't get to decide). But I wouldn't get the permission anyway because the State has decided not to give money (which it doesn't give anyway) for poor attendance.
Thank God Hitler and Stalin didn't win, imagine what it would have been like.
It says something that the only worry when driving your children whilst under the influence, is whether or not you're breaking the law.
It says something when you read an anonymous tongue in cheek post and decide that it is bad parenting. Gobshite.
Now now, no need to stoop to name calling!
I was merely pointing out that there's a valid reason for drink driving limits, regardless of 'nanny state' claims.
I think Ruane was completely correct this morning when she said that as well as being a minister, she is first and foremost a mother. Her job would undoubtedly dictate for her to be away from home alot, and sometimes trying to balance work and family life is an impossible task. So she took her daughter from school to spend time with her when she was away and maybe giving her a different experience in the process. Have we come so far in society that we fail to see that family is becoming a bit of a non-entity when it comes to fulfilling job roles? She cannot stop being that child's mother because she is a minister and it makes me laugh that a mother taking her child from school for three days got exactly the same coverage as the swiss family robinson spending £30000 of our money to eat out - would yis wise yourselves up and put a bit of perspective on things!!!
Also the Department does not dictate, it merely recommends that parents take their children on holiday outside school time and I've yet to hear of any repercussions taken for parents who do so! I took my children away two years ago for two weeks in september. My children, my responsibility and nothing said. Gutter journalism at its best. Irish News is getting worse, you just have to look at some of the columnists to get an idea of where their headed - "Sexy GAA player of the week", FFS, my eyes bleed on Fridays!!!
I think in the south, if your child misses 20 days or more school during the year, the school must report it and you can expect some kind of communication which may lead to an investigation.
But I dont think anyone would bat an eyelid over 3 days...
And the IN is still running with the story.
Contacted the hotel that Ruane stayed in trying to find out how the bill was paid during the stay.
Didn t get an answer though.
Quote from: Aoise on May 20, 2009, 02:19:28 AM
Irish News is getting worse, you just have to look at some of the columnists to get an idea of where their headed
Indeed. We already have a thread devoted to Mickey's ramblings. :P
Have just bought todays IN and am disgusted at the trash that the're trying to peddle as journalism - "Ruane and daughter stayed in five-star Cyprus Hilton" shocker!
No mention as headline news of:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/8058867.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8058224.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/foyle_and_west/8058907.stm
Will be reconsidering ever buying the IN again (it's bought 6 days a week in our house).
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 20, 2009, 12:48:21 PM
Have just bought todays IN and am disgusted at the trash that the're trying to peddle as journalism - "Ruane and daughter stayed in five-star Cyprus Hilton" shocker!
No mention as headline news of:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/8058867.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8058224.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/foyle_and_west/8058907.stm
Will be reconsidering ever buying the IN again (it's bought 6 days a week in our house).
In fairness GDA the first two stories there are "todays news", Irish News have to have the stories by last night. I stopped buying the Irish News ages ago. This is the kind of treatment politicians can expect from now on as they do in England.
Just checked the Hilton website there and you can get a room for 144.00 EUR per night B&B. Anyway did she not say yesterday that the organisers of the conference paid for everything other than the flights?That wouldn't even cover the food bill for the Robinson's. I think it's poor form that the Irish News are allowing their line on academic selection to cloud their approach to Ruane.
I wouldn't let any of the St Teresa's lads know you buy that rag six days a week GDA.
Edit: just had a gander at it there in the coffee room. The article is written by Simon Doyle (Education Correspondent). ::)
While it may not be right, politicians should know that almost every aspect of their life will be under the microscope in the current climate.
It comes with the territory
Quote from: Donagh on May 20, 2009, 01:08:01 PM
Just checked the Hilton website there and you can get a room for 144.00 EUR per night B&B. Anyway did she not say yesterday that the organisers of the conference paid for everything other than the flights?That wouldn't even cover the food bill for the Robinson's. I think it's poor form that the Irish News are allowing their line on academic selection to cloud their approach to Ruane.
I wouldn't let any of the St Teresa's lads know you buy that rag six days a week GDA.
Edit: just had a gander at it there in the coffee room. The article is written by Simon Doyle (Education Correspondent). ::)
In fairness I only buy it for the good lady wife Donagh.
Minder granted the first story broke today, but the second story has been known about first months and I'm sure that they could have mentioned it.
What about other stories such as the collapse of the Autism centre, the brutal rape of a pensioner in North Belfast, the tragic deaths on the roads recently or the Hamill inquiry!
Nah lets just give over our front page and ALL of pages 4 and 5 to this non-story. ::)
The hotel issue is neither here nor there, just sensational journalism. However I think there is a real point about the education minister taking her duties seriously enough to be seen to follow best practice. If you choose to take that particular job you should accept that you have to be careful in matters relating to education.
As a daily reader of the IN I am very disappointed in their coverage of this story. Even the picture on the front fo todays paper is like something you would see in the Daily Star. Catriona Ruane stated that it was fror private & personal reasons her daughter went with her and I think that should be respected. I don't want to be speculating on here but just an example of a reason Ruane may have would be if the young girl was getting bullied at school, and her mother was worried to leave her. WHere children are concerned the IN should display a bit more courtesy in future.
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 20, 2009, 12:26:08 AM
Quote from: muppet on May 19, 2009, 11:06:39 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 19, 2009, 10:34:09 PM
Quote from: muppet on May 19, 2009, 09:03:52 PM
Jaysus this is a great nanny state we live in.
If I go to the pub, the one that I have to leave to have a smoke, I can't risk driving the kids to school the next morning in case I'm over the new low limit. So by not going to the school I can't get permission to keep the kids at home unless the school decides there is a good enough reason such as my death (note the family don't get to decide). But I wouldn't get the permission anyway because the State has decided not to give money (which it doesn't give anyway) for poor attendance.
Thank God Hitler and Stalin didn't win, imagine what it would have been like.
It says something that the only worry when driving your children whilst under the influence, is whether or not you're breaking the law.
It says something when you read an anonymous tongue in cheek post and decide that it is bad parenting. Gobshite.
Now now, no need to stoop to name calling!
I was merely pointing out that there's a valid reason for drink driving limits, regardless of 'nanny state' claims.
You are the one who personalised it. You used the words 'your' and 'you're' in a sentence that could have read 'there are valid reasons for drink driving limits'. You attacked my attitude towards the safety of my kid which I take as an insult of the highest order.
Quote from: muppet on May 20, 2009, 03:03:14 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 20, 2009, 12:26:08 AM
Quote from: muppet on May 19, 2009, 11:06:39 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 19, 2009, 10:34:09 PM
Quote from: muppet on May 19, 2009, 09:03:52 PM
Jaysus this is a great nanny state we live in.
If I go to the pub, the one that I have to leave to have a smoke, I can't risk driving the kids to school the next morning in case I'm over the new low limit. So by not going to the school I can't get permission to keep the kids at home unless the school decides there is a good enough reason such as my death (note the family don't get to decide). But I wouldn't get the permission anyway because the State has decided not to give money (which it doesn't give anyway) for poor attendance.
Thank God Hitler and Stalin didn't win, imagine what it would have been like.
It says something that the only worry when driving your children whilst under the influence, is whether or not you're breaking the law.
It says something when you read an anonymous tongue in cheek post and decide that it is bad parenting. Gobshite.
Now now, no need to stoop to name calling!
I was merely pointing out that there's a valid reason for drink driving limits, regardless of 'nanny state' claims.
You are the one who personalised it. You used the words 'your' and 'you're' in a sentence that could have read 'there are valid reasons for drink driving limits'. You attacked my attitude towards the safety of my kid which I take as an insult of the highest order.
Cry me a river - I never personalised anything. As you quite rightly pointed out yourself, you're anonymous, so it can't be personal - i don't even know if you have children.
Also, sarcasm doesn't always come across in type - it's difficult to know when genuine 'nanny state' gripes end, and tongue in cheek comments begin.
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 20, 2009, 03:19:56 PM
Quote from: muppet on May 20, 2009, 03:03:14 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 20, 2009, 12:26:08 AM
Quote from: muppet on May 19, 2009, 11:06:39 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 19, 2009, 10:34:09 PM
Quote from: muppet on May 19, 2009, 09:03:52 PM
Jaysus this is a great nanny state we live in.
If I go to the pub, the one that I have to leave to have a smoke, I can't risk driving the kids to school the next morning in case I'm over the new low limit. So by not going to the school I can't get permission to keep the kids at home unless the school decides there is a good enough reason such as my death (note the family don't get to decide). But I wouldn't get the permission anyway because the State has decided not to give money (which it doesn't give anyway) for poor attendance.
Thank God Hitler and Stalin didn't win, imagine what it would have been like.
It says something that the only worry when driving your children whilst under the influence, is whether or not you're breaking the law.
It says something when you read an anonymous tongue in cheek post and decide that it is bad parenting. Gobshite.
Now now, no need to stoop to name calling!
I was merely pointing out that there's a valid reason for drink driving limits, regardless of 'nanny state' claims.
You are the one who personalised it. You used the words 'your' and 'you're' in a sentence that could have read 'there are valid reasons for drink driving limits'. You attacked my attitude towards the safety of my kid which I take as an insult of the highest order.
Cry me a river - I never personalised anything. As you quite rightly pointed out yourself, you're anonymous, so it can't be personal - i don't even know if you have children.
Also, sarcasm doesn't always come across in type - it's difficult to know when genuine 'nanny state' gripes end, and tongue in cheek comments begin.
Cry me a river? ::)
I just think it's wonderful that we live in times when the worst crime we can catch the provos committing is breaching the school attendance guidelines. We've all come a long way in eleven years.
The other burning question that this discussion raises for me is when did people start asking the school's permission to take their children out for a day?
Quote from: Hardy on May 20, 2009, 09:42:36 PM
The other burning question that this discussion raises for me is when did people start asking the school's permission to take their children out for a day?
I assume from the above that you have no kids Hardy?
Quote from: Hardy on May 20, 2009, 09:42:36 PM
I just think it's wonderful that we live in times when the worst crime we can catch the provos committing is breaching the school attendance guidelines. We've all come a long way in eleven years.
The other burning question that this discussion raises for me is when did people start asking the school's permission to take their children out for a day?
I wondered about that too.
Children in our school are allowed up to two weeks authorised absences over the entire school year (These are as well as any sick days they have). Most use these days to go on holidays. One of my pupils is currently in the Caribbean this week and next week.
When I was at school there was no issue of pupils going away on holidays for 1 or 2 weeks. Whats the difference in a pupil going on a family holiday for a week than going on a school holiday for 1 week? Most schools now offer ski trips and that has nothing to do with education. At my school when I was in U6th, around Easter time the senior camogie team went to America for over a week and it wasnt the slightest bit to do with education. And this was in the build up to GCSE/AS/A-Level exams.
Quote from: Orior on May 20, 2009, 09:51:08 PM
Quote from: Hardy on May 20, 2009, 09:42:36 PM
The other burning question that this discussion raises for me is when did people start asking the school's permission to take their children out for a day?
I assume from the above that you have no kids Hardy?
You assume correctly. I have sons, but they are no longer kids. When they were, it was our decision, not the school's, if we needed them to be somewhere other than in school on a particular day. That was provided you didn't do the dog on it and invoke the wrath of the school attendance officer. Not that we were in the habit of taking them out when they should have been in school.
Is it different now?
Bit of a farce of a non-story today. Thought the first paragraph saying the most expensive rooms cost £1,450 definitely revealed this as a bit of a smear attempt at Ruane. I don't mind hearing criticism for her performance as minister, but a piss-poor attempt at insinuating she put a 7grand bill for the President suite or something on her expenses... insulting to the intelligence of their readers somewhat. Really don't care if it was about Jim Allister and his kid or whatever it reflects poorly on Simon Doyle.
If it turns out there were good personal grounds for the child being taken out, then Simon and the editors should be embarrassed, 4 pages and an editorial ::)
The Irish News is getting worse, only glance through the GAA these days.
The Irish News has totally pissed me off this past couple of days! What annoys me even more is that it seems that they've picked a completely easy target for a smear campaign. Ruane has hardly had time to breath this past few months and it just seems that they've jumped on the bandwagon. I've lost all respect for the IN and will stop buying it. Its not that I'm a defender for Catriona Ruane as I've had issue with some of her policies in the past but I just think this is a low swipe and theres something completely un-Irish about this whole situation. When did we start using English tabloid heading styles in condemnation? Stinks!!! >:(
Yeah, the thing I take from this is to ignore anything they say in future about Ruanes family life. Its not nice to see that writers for the paper have decided to pursue an agenda against her personally, never mind how poorly she has performed as minister. Real tabloid behaviour the way they arranged and blew up figures and the story in general.
Last Irish News bought by me anyway, sorry Paddy Heaney and 'odds and ends' Micheal McWilliams :P
Whilst I haven't been following this all that close I must say it is a bit excessive, usually and in my experience
when you see a nothing story such as this making front page and the 6 o'clock news, it's nothing more than
a smoke screen for some other agenda being pushed through whilst the focus is else where.....