Should people who attend Nazi conferences get government funding?

[noblegiraffe]

Ok, provocative title, but it's hard to distil this situation into a few words. Yes it's about Toby Young.

News has come out about a secret conference held for the last few years at UCL. Invite-only, secret and small, it has apparently been attended by a neo-nazi and a paedophilia supporter. The conference is apparently about the inheritability of intelligence but has also looked at race and intelligence and eugenics.
The Telegraph details the conference here: www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2018/01/10/ucl-launches-eugenics-probe-emerges-academic-held-controversial/

It appears that Toby Young was one of the invitees to this secret invite-only conference. Aside from writing misogynistic tweets, he has also written an article supporting 'progressive eugenics'. The Guardian talks about Toby Young's involvement here:

www.theguardian.com/education/2018/jan/10/ucl-to-investigate-secret-eugenics-conference-held-on-campus

Given that the attendees were aware of the unacceptable nature of their discussions so held them in secret and that the fact that the conferences are now banned and are being investigated, it's clear that something pretty unsavoury has been going on.

Toby Young has resigned from his position on the board of the Office for Students, and it appears his resignation may be linked to these revelations. Toby Young also pulls in a fat salary as Director of the New Schools Network. The New Schools Network is a charity, but it receives the majority of its funding from the DfE. Surely his position there is also untenable?

It's clear in DfE guidance that schools cannot insist upon seeing a passport, but they're saying in their admissions policy that parents must provide evidence of age in the suggested form of a passport (not suggesting a birth certificate, which is more universal/free). Convenient how that means they'll be able to see whether a child is of a different ethnicity or is No Recourse to Public Funds/has Refugee status - and it puts off poorer families who might not have the money to obtain one.

Only 45 places for children eligible for FSM and out of those, they need to be a sibling of a child already at the school and live within two miles to have a chance (the and/or is the detail that makes it possible to narrow it down to a very small group - if they want somebody's sibling, it's 'and' first, 'or' second, if they don't, they could rearrange it to either)

Random allocation is always an interesting decision, too. It's hard to prove that random is truly random if you aren't able to view the code - how many 'independent' people would be able to spot it being presented as such but under the bonnet, it's already been preselected? It's very hard to argue at appeal it's not truly random if they say 35, 2, 59, 72, 4, 6 were generated automatically without actually getting into the gubbins.

I've presented at many Admissions meetings. There is a lot of trust placed in the applications being dealt with fairly, as it's impossible to have a committee examine every single application - they'll take a selection and the ones that are 'different' in some way. Their policy makes it easier to select out children they might not want - particularly those from overseas, are poorer or whose parents have lower levels of literacy/English skills - whilst appearing to be reasonable. They could be dealt with entirely fairly, but I can see the scope is there. And the policy won't have come from the school up, it'll be from the executive level down.

Not just Toby. Therese Coffey is in there too.
So if you want to be in the lords: accept gifts and hospitality from the tobacco industry then consistently vote against measures to restrict smoking.
She was also campaign manager and deputy PM for Liz Truss. And was found by the lords to be be complacent in dealing with the water companies. Hard to think of someone who is more responsible for the sea of shit - both metaphorical and literal - that now marinades the nation.

I'm used to shit and corrupt politicians being elevated to the Lords, that's internal party back-scratching. But Toby Young lost all the jobs the government inexplicably gave him, due to being objectively a horrible person, and then they reward him with a peerage?