Taking your kids out of school early

[Gaffer]

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.

[Maguire01]

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. 

[Gaoth Dobhair Abu]

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).

[Minder]

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.

[Donagh]

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). 

[full back]

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

[Gaoth Dobhair Abu]

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. 

[armaghniac]

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.

[D4S]

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.

[muppet]

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.

[Maguire01]

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.

[muppet]

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? 

[Hardy]

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?

[Orior]

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?

[pintsofguinness]

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.