hypochondriac

I think that potentially the costs for childcare may be slightly lower but what it would mean is that the children who need childcare most would be denied it. Funded two year olds are funded for a reason and it does make a genuine difference to their lives.

If you say so. If you doubt me though I suggest talking to the people involved with this stuff.

That's the whole point though, no subsidy will be forthcoming. If they can provide proper financing to compensate nurseries for the money they lose then fair enough. Isn't going to happen though and the consequences coukd be quite serious for childcare provision in this country. Policies need to be properly financed and thought out, not cooked up in response to the opposition during an election and then pushed through with no thought to the consequences. The public aren't going to consider it such a great policy when nurseries close and there won't be enough to cater for the free places.

It's totally unfunded. Currently funded two year olds are subsidised by fee paying parents because the government pays about half the amount a regular fee paying child would. This will continue with 3 year old funded so that there will be a big reduction accross the board and less parents paying fees (so there will be no opportunity to raise fees to cover the shortfall.) Add to this the living wage increase abd the fact that there will be nowhere near enough spaces to fulfill the demand of this policy and nurseries will be closing around the country because it isn't financially viable. The head of ofsted's solution is to stick pre schoolers in schools but this sidesteps the fact that schools are not equipped for it and they don't want it. In principle 30 hours isn't a bad thing but in practice it hasn't been thought out at all (I'm fact when the bill went before the commons last week they remarked that it amounted to about six lines and was the worst written bill they had seen in years which suggests it was tacked on at the last minute) and was a populist policy designed to get votes.

It's an idiotic and unfunded policy that both parties championed.

Since when has the criteria on the banner been who has contributed the most?

Always thought of the banner to be composed of players who defined an era and in that respect I think they are all appropriate.

That's pretty much true.

Potentially the starting lineup for next week there.

You need an old free version like I have. Much simpler interface imo and makes it easier to browse.

We won't be doing that as it would. Be moronic. By all means play some of the kids in the cups but you don't bung them straight in the deep end.

Sadly I doubt many people will take pity on us

I'm begging! If anyone has any tickets spare (2 ideally) then I'd be grateful if someone took pity on me. We can discuss finer details via PM I have booked hotels and flights for four of us so a bit stuffed if we can't get tickets! I'm happy to negotiate with people about it regarding price. More than happy to pay a premium.

I'll be hitting up Dutch forums.

Looks like I'll be buying a Vitesse shirt then. What's Dutch for "tickets please"?

Yep.

Everyone 6 and above will get one for sure. Below that and it will be a lottery.

Mido was also cracking.

All I remember was people not being sure about him when he had a really poor spell in his first year (and it was poor.) It later transpired that this had partly to do with the Kenyan shootings which he said affected him mentally. Other than that I can't really remember him splitting opinions. He had his weaknesses but from what I recall it was generally agreed that his positives far outweighed the negatives.

Can't remember any people slagging off Wanyama.

Thanks goodness he is here to let us know where he got his useful information from. I can sleep better at night.

I'm home Sunday night.

Is Alexander farnerud still around?

I did that for two mates today. They better pay me back!

Girl at ticket office today said they hoped to hear something tonight.