Jeff2 wrote: » Today we had liveline and Joe couldn't control the caller who kept talking over people now we have CB not able to tell someone to shout up and sing what she said she would.
Mervyn Skidmore wrote: »
sheroman01 wrote: » Wtf. They went to a break then came back on for 10 seconds just to say g'luck? Must have went to a break because of yer one. Classic Irish TV.
RabbleRouser2k wrote: » People asking serious questions about Christina Noble's health after that interview. Seemed like she was either drunk, or on meds. Definitely didn't look well.
NIMAN wrote: » People asking serious questions about Healy Rae's intelligence level after that interview.
alan partridge aha wrote: » I'm rural and I'd like the limit increased, I'd like to be able to get 2 or 3 pints drive home without fear. Most people who drink in my local would have no issue with that. It's never going to happen though.
RabbleRouser2k wrote: » Because so much has been done to try and curb the problem, even allowing a slight 'allowance' would easily become problematic, and be abused. Considering how they messed up the breathalyzers, doing something like this is ridiculous. My bro is often the designated driver, he'll give people a lift home, easy. But if he wants a night out with friends, he books a cab. He's rural, he has no issue with it. And people in my local plan ways to get home, be it cab or relative. It's not hard-even the loner in my home place has a plan.
alan partridge aha wrote: » Most regulars in my local who would live more than 1km from the pub would drive after a few pints. It's not an age thing either.
RobertKK wrote: » Kate O'Connell is annoying to listen to, she is too PC.
FrancieBrady wrote: » That was just weird.
RabbleRouser2k wrote: » Starting to feel like this show is Claire Byrne's show is an audition tape for the Late Late Show. Like, it's meant to be political, but it's a bit mental. Also, can someone clarify-what is sexist about calling a woman 'a lady'. Like, Kate O'Connell called a man a gentleman a few seconds later. Calling a woman a 'gentlewoman' is odder than her haircut. (It ages her, it makes her older than her years). Gentleman's sports are usually reserved to cricket and golf.
AnneFrank wrote: » yes i really don't get that at all, i mean calling a lady is respectful no ? Can any ladies/girls/women explain this i'm confused !
FrancieBrady wrote: » https://debuk.wordpress.com/2015/05/16/call-me-woman/
CatFromHue wrote: » @ Horseburger that's one of the reasons I don't watch the show anymore. People who did have good points to make were interrupted, by Claire tying to take them on a different tangent which made no sense, or cut off early.
horseburger wrote: » I'd prefer if there was more time given to each item, rather than having four or five items discussed on the show and only giving around 10 minutes, often less, per item. Often, because there is less time given to each item discussed, people in the audience who have been invited on, because they have a particular interest in an item for discussion, don't get time to make their observations and they get cut off by the presenter before they have finished making their point. For example, earlier this year, on the issue of enrolment of students in schools with a religious ethos, and schools with no religious ethos, the school principal from a Catholic school and Susie Hall from the Church of Ireland schools Board of Education, who were in the audience, did not get a chance to fully make their points detailing their enrolment policies, in circumstances where there are not enough places available, to accommodate all the applications. In this particular episode, the speakers in the audience, from both Catholic and Church of Ireland schools, did not get a chance to fully detail their perspectives on the topic, on the issue of enrolment policies and schools being over subscribed. Both were making the point that the issue was that successive governments were not making available the resources to build more schools, with no religious ethos, to accommodate parents who didn't want their children attending schools with a religious ethos. They were interrupted by Claire Byrne, before they had a chance to fully detail how they accept applications for places, in cases where there are more applications than places. The issue of how schools with no religious ethos prioritize applications, where there is more applications than places, was not discussed. As an example, a parent in the audience mentioned that her child was enrolled on a waiting list for a place in an Educate Together school, when her child was a few weeks old, and had not been accepted. She said "we never got a place just because our name never got to the top of the list". She didn't get to finish what she had intended to say fully, either, because time was running out on the show. The priorities of selection, of applications to Educate Together schools, was not detailed, in situations where there are less places than applications. I mean, say three neighbouring families apply at the same time. and there aren't enough spaces to accommodate each application, how does an Educate Together school decide which family is accepted. For example, if two of the families applications are accepted because they have older brothers or sisters in the school, the third family who might not have other children in the school, will be disappointed, for the child, not getting a place in the school. This third family might also feel excluded, simply because the child they hoped would attend that school, might be their first child to attend school, and through no fault of their own, they don't have older children, already in attendance at that school. My guess is that any type of prioritization of acceptance of applications, will leave families disappointed, in cases where places are limited, no matter if it's a school with a religious ethos, or one that does not have a religious ethos. The priorities of enrolment of Educate Together schools, in situations where there are more applications made, than places available, wasn't discussed, even though Paul Rowe of Educate Together, was in the audience. He said there were far more applications made to Educate Together schools than places available, but he didn't detail how they prioritize applications where there are less places available than applications made. It would have been interesting to hear details on this. If it is done with regard to how near a family lives from a school, there's still going to be a difficulty deciding who is accepted, if for example, neighbouring families have made applications for their children to attend a school, and there aren't enough places for each family's child. If, on the show, they had, maybe one, or at most, two items per show, I think they could have a more detailed discussion. And forget about the polls, as the questions are usually framed in such a way that don't consider other aspects of the issue related, to the question being asked.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w8.vanillicon.com/v2/892f365931e5cb4ba5c9d4ce2c7da299.svg)
