Eye on Britain
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Israel is Right to Defend Its People
Comment from Britain
Hamas are a bunch of murderous thugs. Over the past few years they have fired 5,000 rockets on Israel from residential parts of the Gaza strip, killing and injuring dozens of innocent Israelis. Israel has done its best not to react, but in the end their patience has snapped - and understandably so. They have acted using the only kind of force Hamas can understand.
According to Conservative Friends of Israel, over the past week more than 300 rockets, missiles and mortar rounds have been fired from Gaza by Hamas and other militants at Israeli villages and towns. More than 560 have been fired since Hamas escalated rocket firing on 4 November. This is on top of the 5,000 which have been fired from Gaza this year. The media seem to think these rockets are fairly harmless. They are not. They are weapons of terror.
BBC reports suggest that in recent days none of these rockets has resulted in any Israeli deaths or injuries. Not true. CFI report today that: "An Israeli man was killed and four others were seriously wounded when a missile hit a house in Netivot. Another man was seriously wounded when a rocket struck at the community of Mivtahim later this afternoon." Over the last four years, 92% of Sderot residents (a town of 20,000 people) have experienced a Qassam rocket falling on their or an adjacent street. Sixteen Israelis have been killed by Qassam rockets and hundreds have been injured and maimed.
Israel should have dealt with this situation long before now. Instead, it allowed itself to be persuaded to call a truce with Hamas. It may have gone down well in the international community, but all it achieved was to allow Hamas time to regroup and rearm. According to CFI:
Hamas broke the ceasefire by firing more rockets into Israel. Imagine if this had happened here. Imagine if France fired rockets onto Dover from Calais. Would the British people expect its government to stand idly by and do nothing? Of course not.
British politicians are calling on both sides to act with restraint. Fine words, which are totally hollow. It is not right to treat both sides equally. Israel is a democratic ally, while Hamas are nothing more than an Iranian backed terror group, which is subjugating the people of Gaza in order to radicalise them. Once they have done that they intend to repeat the experience on the West Bank. The Palestinian Authority, led by Fatah's Mahmoud Abbas are well aware of this and their condemnation of the Israeli action is notable for its reticence. It's easy to understand why. They know full well what Hamas is like, and what its endgame is. This report is from the Press Association...
The US ambassador to the US Zalmay Khalilzad has suggested Hamas held the key to restoring calm. "We believe the way forward from here is for rocket attacks against Israel to stop, for all violence to end," he said. CFI reports that Khalilzad was "implicitly backed up from Cairo by Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas who claimed the current situation could have been avoided had Hamas renewed the ceasefire before it lapsed and ceased all violence towards Israel."
If you doubt my interpretation of Hamas's motives and are deluded enough to think that they are genuine freedom fighters, just click HERE. To the horror of the Egyptians Hamas are not even allowing ambulances in to Gaza to treat the injured.
And we shouldn't forget who funds Hamas - the Iranians. Without their money and weapons Hamas wouldn't be half the force it is today, either in Gaza or in the Lebanon. Hamas is classified as a terror organisation by the UN. Virtually every Middle East country won't have any dealings with Hamas, yet in this country they seem to be treated by many as a legitimate organisation with whom the Israelis should negotiate. The only country which exalts Hamas is the one to whose President Channel 4 disgracefully gave a platform on Christmas Day.
People blame Israel for the terrible state of living standards in the Gaza Strip. They are wrong. Hamas is to blame for keeping its people in abject poverty. Israel handed over the governmental administration of the Gaza Strip in 2005 to the Palestinian Authority. They had an opportunity to run it themselves. Instead, since Hamas took power, they have done everything in their power to keep their people in poverty and use it as an excuse to radicalise those who are inclined to believe their propaganda. But even despite this, Israel was providing huge amounts of humanitarian aid to Gaza - more than 4,000 truck loads a month as well as fuel and electricity (despite the ongoing rocket attacks). Conditions were by no means good, but there was no humanitarian crisis, according to Khaled Abdel Shaafi, director the United Nations Development Programme in Gaza. He said this month that "this is not a humanitarian crisis... It's an economic crisis, a political crisis, but it's not a humanitarian crisis. People aren't starving."
It is highly regrettable that more than 250 people have been killed over the last few days. If Hamas hadn't been firing their rockets from residential areas the death toll would have been much lower. But Hamas have sited them there deliberately, so they can portray any Israeli response as heartless and disproportionate.
Gordon Brown was absolutely bang on with his response to what's happening in Gaza. He said: "I call on Gazan militants to cease all rocket attacks on Israel immediately. These attacks are designed to cause random destruction and to undermine the prospects of peace talks led by president Abbas. I understand the Israeli government's sense of obligation to its population."
William Hague, though, was perhaps a little less unequivocal, which I think is a shame. He said: "We deeply regret the loss of civilian life in Gaza today. We call on the Israeli government to show restraint. At the same time we call on Hamas to stop the rocket attacks which are an unacceptable threat to Israel's security, so that the ceasefire, which Hamas failed to renew, can be urgently restored."
The trouble is that any Hamas backed ceasefire isn't worth the paper it is written on. If we have learned nothing from recent history, surely we have learned that. Israel will only be able to restore open borders with Gaza and cease its military action when it is clear that no further rockets are being fired. In the meantime they should have the backing of every right thinking democrat in destroying the sites from which rockets are being fired and the tunnels through which Hamas are smuggling arms from Egypt.
As you can tell, I support Israel 100% in their actions in Gaza. But I fully recognise that there is an opposing viewpoint, which others are espousing on other blogs - mostly on the left. Whenever I write about Israel or the Middle East it provokes the loonies to come out of hiding. Let's keep the debate moderate and insult free in the comments please.
UPDATE: Courtesy of Dizzy...
Quote of the Day by the Egyptian Foreign Minister, Ahmed Aboul Gheit
Source
British council disregards objections to gypsy camp from 3,000 residents -- as 'they are racist'
When residents were asked to provide feedback on council plans to build traveller camps on their doorstep they dutifully responded. More than 3,000 homeowners filled in forms outlining their views, many raising concerns over a possible increase in noise, traffic, rubbish and a detrimental effect on property prices. However, such objections were not appreciated by Mid-Bedfordshire District Council, which partially or fully rejected nearly nine in ten of the replies for including comments 'of a racist nature'.
Weeks after asking for residents' views earlier this year, the council posted an article on its website entitled 'Racist Comments Not Welcome'. It claimed the council's 'duty of community leadership' meant it had to crack down on the use of racial stereotypes, and revealed that while 400 responses would be considered, 3,100 were in some way racist and would be rejected. The council even sent letters to objectors telling them their views had been deemed offensive and would not be taken account of.
Retired company secretary Lucy Clarke from Stotfold - one of the six small towns and villages mooted as sites for the 25 traveller families - was astounded to receive her letter. Mrs Clarke, a grandmother of three, said: 'As far as I am aware I objected to the camp for entirely reasonable grounds. And yet I then get this letter from the council. 'They even accused me of incitement to racial hatred. It's ridiculous - like putting me on a par with Abu Hamza.' She added: 'I am not racist, but I am concerned about what one of these camps could do to our town.'
Even the local town council could not avoid falling foul of the censors. Brian Collier, chairman of Stotfold council said: 'We wrote a detailed response in which we summarised locals' concerns. 'There is another gipsy site not far from here that has a well-known crime problem. 'As part of our response we echoed people's worries that the same may happen here. 'We were totally shocked when we then received a letter from the district council saying that was racist. There are lots of people here who have had the same treatment.'
The district council's attitude has been criticised by local campaigners, politicians and civil liberties groups. Tory communities spokesman Eric Pickles said yesterday: 'I hope that they write a letter of apology to everyone they have accused of being racist. Otherwise, people simply aren't going to feel able to object to these camps without the fear of being branded racist.'
When contacted by the Daily Mail, a spokesman for Mid-Bedfordshire council admitted that it had been 'somewhat overzealous'. He said: 'We were worried that many of the letters contained racist slurs and objectionable comments that we felt could not be published under current race relations legislation. 'We had no intention of offending those who took the time to respond to the consultation and certainly were not trying to label residents as racist. 'Only a small proportion (around 5 per cent) of the comments were actually discounted in their entirety. The remainder were taken into consideration, either in whole or in part.'
Source
British children banned from carrying candles in church - it may be safer, but isn't life supposed to be fun?
You may be sick of health and safety stories, but I am going to tell you a new one anyway. And this one is particularly monstrous. There is a very pretty disused estate church in Northamptonshire where an annual carol service is held on Christmas Eve, attended by some 250 people. Everybody holds aloft a candle, which makes a lovely sight. This year, however, this little event was blighted by a decree from the church commissioners that no child under the age of 15 could be allowed to hold a lighted candle: the safety risk was deemed unacceptable. As if that wasn't enough, the service then started with the reading of formal instructions about exits in the event of fire, a completely potty notion in a tiny old church with only one door.
And here's another story just as farcical. A few months ago, an engineer called at our house to correct a telephone line fault. He eventually announced that he must go away and return another day because the job would require a long ladder. I told him he could use our ladder. Sorry, he said, he would need another man to hold it while he climbed. I volunteered. 'Sorry,' he said again. 'You're not trained.'
Trained? To hold a ladder? This is madness, but a madness which all of us experience almost every day. It is sometimes claimed, not least by that iniquitous Stalinist body the Health & Safety Executive, that stories such as these are invented or exaggerated. They are not. Such things are happening all around us. Visiting the Army in Afghanistan in October, I was dismayed to hear that even on the battlefield, the spectre of health and safety rears its head, adding severely to the burden of commanders trying to conduct an exceptionally rough campaign.
The Oxfordshire coroner who conducts most of the inquests into British soldiers killed in action, and often delivers fierce criticisms of the Ministry of Defence in his judgments, thinks that he speaks and acts in the interests of our soldiers and their families. In reality, however, he often makes pronouncements that reflect his own ignorance of the realities of war. And in so doing, he makes the task of fighting the Taliban that much harder.
Let me give you an example. Weighed down with body armour, helmet, pack and rifle, it is hard to run for any distance in the intense Afghan heat - especially when under fire. Earlier this year, commanding officers discussed whether, in special circumstances, men might be allowed to discard their body armour for short periods to enable them to move faster against a lightly-clad and nimble enemy. The final verdict was that this was unacceptable. They decided that if a soldier should be killed when not wearing full protective gear, the Oxfordshire coroner would have a field day. He would almost certainly denounce the irresponsibility of officers who had failed in their duty of care.
It is hard to fight battles under such constraints. Air Marshal Lord Tedder, Eisenhower's deputy in World War II, said wisely: 'War is organised confusion.' And he was right. British officers care passionately about the welfare and survival of their men. The pain of losing a comrade is very great. It is harsh to superimpose upon this the prospect of being denounced in a coroner's court by a civilian who has never heard a shot fired in anger. And it is absurd to apply to the circumstances of the battlefield the same sort of criteria that are applied to a factory accident.
But wars aside, we must keep exposing and denouncing such follies as a ban on children carrying candles at a carol service. If we allow them to pass unremarked, the excesses of health and safety will go on and on, each day squeezing some new little moment of pleasure out of our existences. What is at stake is common sense. We must be allowed to live our lives without constant interruptions from an officialdom obsessed with the belief that every detail of the domestic round needs regulation.
Much of the trouble lies with the courts. If, for example, my telephone engineer falls off his ladder, he will almost certainly sue his employer and anybody else in sight. If regulations are found to have been breached, if there is the smallest hint that anybody in a position of responsibility was negligent, massive compensation will be awarded. Judges often seem willing to strike bold attitudes, for instance in sticking up for the rights of Muslim extremists to preach jihad, who then escape deportation, and receive generous cheques from social services into the bargain. Yet those same judges, together with tribunals which adjudicate in many compensation cases, lack the courage to fight for common sense.
Many claims deserve to be kicked straight into the long grass. But the view prevails that cash paid out by public bodies or insurance companies is not real money. It can be distributed with reckless abandon to victims of misfortunes, often in amounts larger than they could have earned in a lifetime of labour. Thus fear of litigation causes public bodies and private companies alike to impose ever sillier and more draconian restrictions on people's daily behaviour. They are terrified of being held responsible if somebody trips over a paving stone on their patch.
We, the British, often claim to take pride in our warrior heritage. Yet we are making ourselves ever more timid and cowardly. Many of us in our teens did Outward Bound courses - I myself once ran one at school. They were tremendously popular with the young because they fed our enthusiasm for adventure. I tremble to imagine what today's Outward Bound courses are like.
After a fatal canoeing accident at a school in the John Major era, new legislation was introduced. And such activities are now hedged by thick entanglements of rules designed to strip out any of the risk which we so loved. One day when, as a newspaper editor, I met the Prime Minister, I suggested that the new law was too restrictive. He responded: 'Can you imagine what everybody would have said if there had been another Outward Bound accident and we had done nothing?'
For once, I sympathised with Major. The blame culture was not invented by governments, but they feel compelled to respond to its reality. I suppose it is a sign of retarded adolescence, that even at my advanced age I still love taking risks, a joy enhanced by the feeling that I am striking back at the Health & Safety Executive. I relish ladders and chainsaws, working on the roof, and bicycling without one of those hideous helmets.
When my children were younger, I hope that I was not an irresponsible parent. But I encouraged them to climb trees, bungee jump - and carry candles at carol services. Life is supposed to be fun. In any sensible society, learning to accept responsibility for our own actions, and sometimes for painful consequences, is an essential part of growing up. Unless we fight every new manifestation of the health and safety brigade's excesses, we may become a fractionally safer society - but we shall also evolve into an unbearably dull one.
Source
The welfare system is a monster that is slowly destroying Britain...
The year that lies ahead threatens to be one of the most grim in all British history. Hundreds of thousands of us look certain to lose our jobs, most through absolutely no fault of our own. According to some estimates, that figure may even reach a million. For some of us, the prospect is grimmer still. We will not be able to keep up our mortgage payments, and so lose our homes, as well.
This series of disasters, however, is likely to befall only those who have made the mistake of working in the private sector. Those employed in Britain's bloated public sector are pretty well immune from the effects of the economic downturn. The same applies to that section of the population-an estimated 4.8 million people-who are already dependent on out-of-work benefits.
Some of these, of course, live in genuine poverty and deserve all the help they get. But others enjoy a surprising level of affluence. As the Daily Mail revealed yesterday, an amazing 140,000 households collect more from the benefit system than they would if they earned the national average wage. Each of these families receives state handouts worth 20,000 pounds a year, or even more. However, they are not taxed on this income, meaning that their real take-home pay is worth the equivalent of someone bringing home the national average salary of 25,100 before tax-and in some cases it is considerably higher even than that.
This is obscene. Nobody-apart from a handful of deranged free-marketeers who yearn for a return to the brutality of the Victorian era-is opposed to state benefits. Our modern welfare state, drawn up by William Beveridge during World War II, is the mark of a truly civilised society. Its purpose is to ensure that Britain should never return to the horrifying levels of poverty and suffering that were part of ordinary life during the Great Depression of the 1930s. Indeed, we have rarely needed Beveridge's system of social protection as much as we do today, facing as we do the greatest economic catastrophe for three- quarters of a century.
However, it has been clear for some time that something has gone desperately wrong with William Beveridge's system. During the years immediately following World War II it admirably performed the task it was supposed to do-and gave temporary protection to those workers who, through no fault of their own, were made unemployed. Instead of being forced into the workhouse, as might have happened in the 1930s, they were allowed to maintain their human dignity. But, slowly, the system was distorted.
Partly, this was the fault of politicians. National insurance payments, for example, were soon debased so that it ceased to be a pool of money set aside for a rainy day, and instead became just another form of income tax. And, inevitably, idle and feckless workers started to take full advantage of the benefits system. Rather than use it as a system of social insurance, they started to regard it as a well-paid alternative to going out to work.
A good example is the British system of disability benefit. This was set up from the most noble and splendid of motives-so that people who were unable to work for health reasons should not suffer financially because of their disability. Unfortunately, the work-shy soon spotted that disability benefit was also the perfect excuse for idleness, while being paid for staying at home-and often doing a little extra on the black market. Today, an astonishing 2.7 million men and women are claiming incapacity benefit-equivalent to one in 15 people of working age in Britain. Many of these disability claims are obviously fake.
Indeed, David Freud, the former banker who advises the Government on welfare issues, reckons that approximately two-thirds of those claiming incapacity benefit are capable of going out to work. Freud estimates that a staggering number-he reckons about 185,000-work illegally while on benefit. Tragically, no government has ever tried to make them go out to work legally. Some ministers have actually preferred to collude with a system which effectively defrauds the public. The reason is utterly shameful-people who are claiming incapacity benefit do not register as unemployed. They therefore keep the jobless figures down, enabling governments to boast about their economic success.
Another scam is housing benefit. Once again, no decent person would ever complain about the idea behind housing benefit-namely to keep people who cannot fend for themselves off the streets. Yet, once again, the system has been milked by the feckless and greedy, often with the collaboration of incompetent or corrupt local councils-consider the recent case in West London where an immigrant family lives in a large townhouse worth approximately 2,000 pounds in rent a week.
Last week a report by the Institute Of Fiscal Studies concluded (unsurprisingly) that the over-generous benefits system has created a baby boom. It estimated that an extra 45,000 children a year have been born to young mothers since the 'unprecedented rise' in child benefits, free housing and family tax credits made it 'economically attractive' to have more and more babies.
This complex situation of benefits has created a situation which was the exact opposite of what Beveridge intended. He aimed to create a system which would enable men and woman to get by while they looked for another job. But the modern British benefits system is now so complex, so incompetently administered, so corrupt and, in some cases, so generous that it is actually a disincentive to people going out to look for work. The rewards for staying idle are so great that, perversely, men and women on benefits can be better off staying at home.
A recent study showed that around 60,000 poorly paid workers offered the choice of working more hours would effectively be taxed by an extra 90 per cent on the extra income. In other words, the welfare system Britain has devised today rewards idleness and punishes hard work. The effects of this are already being felt. It is scarcely 60 years since the end of World War II, and yet there are already housing estates where practically no one goes to work. The only source of income is the State, and there are generations of families none of whom have ever had experience of the workplace.
This is not merely immensely damaging to the British economy. It is also desperately unfair. Those people who have always worked hard and paid their taxes find themselves being heavily penalised for their efforts-while those who cheat and skive get rewarded. In the long term, this is a very dangerous situation. It brings the British system of social insurance-one of the greatest achievements of the 20th century-into disrepute. Ordinary, decent, hardworking people will start to ask whether they can support a system which so blatantly rewards the workshy and the idle.
Eleven years ago, when Labour first came to power, Tony Blair claimed that only Labour could reform the welfare system-and he promised to do so. But he never had the guts. He and his Chancellor Gordon Brown preferred to keep the blatant sham of disability benefit because it so conveniently hid the true level of unemployment. It is a tragic wasted opportunity. It would have been fairly easy to prune the bloated welfare state when jobs were plentiful over the past decade-but next to impossible now that that the job losses mount.
Writing more than 2,000 years ago, a Roman politician made the following observation: 'The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed lest Rome become bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance.' These words were uttered by Cicero in 55BC. Today they are every bit as apposite.
Source
Ahmadinejad Christmas message on Britain's Channel 4
The Left are always banging on about the importance of sensitivity and making people feel "comfortable" but display precious little of any of that themselves
Channel 4 has long revelled in its puerile desire to shock but now it has plumbed new depths of indecency, perpetrating an act of sickening and gratuitous -offen-siveness. On the most -significant day in the Christian calendar it broadcast a so-called "alternative Christmas message" by Iran President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, an -Islamic fundamentalist whose regime is notorious for oppression, cruelty and anti-Semitism.
C4 has displayed utter contempt for the values of our Judaeo-Christian civilisation, treating a precious moment in our religious heritage as an opportunity for the usual anti-Western, Marxist point-scoring which passes for thinking in Left-wing circles. In the context of issuing a Christmas broadcast it is hard to imagine a less appropriate figure than President -Ahmadinejad, whose vicious theo-cracy has never shown the slightest inclination towards peace and goodwill.
To hear him last night preaching about justice and the need to fight tyranny was nauseating in the extreme. His government has promoted a brutal form of militant Islam, persecuted women, hounded Christians, and sponsored terrorism. - Despite presiding over mass poverty it has sought to build its own deadly nuclear arsenal, creating permanent tension in the Middle East. Ahmadinejad, himself drenched in the crudest form of anti-Semitism, has called for Israel to be "wiped off the face of the earth" and questioned whether the Nazi Holocaust against the Jews ever took place.
Others accused of Holocaust denial, such as historian David Irving, end up in prison. Ahmadinejad is given a prime-time Christmas Day slot on C4.
The station has an -unedifying track record of deliberately stirring up rows, particularly through the psychological freak show known as Big Brother. It has also frequently used Christmas Day as a chance to parade its disdain for the traditional -values of our culture. Two years ago the Christmas message came from a Muslim woman trumpeting her right to wear the full veil. But the -Ahmadinejad broadcast is a desperate new low. The -channel has moved from mere controversy into a sneering, treacherous rejection of all that decent Britons hold dear at this time of year.
Only in the warped mindset of an ultra-trendy, oh-so--progressive TV executive would it be deemed suitable to allow one of world's most dangerous and fanatical leaders to spout his deceitful nonsense about peace. What do C4 have lined up for next Christmas? Robert Mugabe on compassion? Kim Jong Il of North Korea on -freedom and democracy? One can imagine the excited conversations which must have taken place within C4's management before the decision was made to invite the Iranian President. "What can we do for a real outrage this year? -Ahmadinejad?
The Holocaust denier, talking on the day of -Jesus's birth? Brilliant. That'll really make a stir." The -station's executives are like a bunch of adolescent, Left-wing students, titillated by the justifiable -anger they provoke, revelling in their self-created image as -daring iconoclasts who -challenge the establishment. The absurdity of their stance is that they are an integral part of the establishment. After all, C4 is a public corporation, owned by the Government. But instead of receiving a genuine public service we have these continual displays of immature rebellion by over-paid attention seekers who think there is something original about their predictable anti-British dogma.
In 1940 George Orwell wrote of the classic Left-wing intellectuals who felt "that there is something slightly disgraceful in being an Englishman and that it is a duty to snigger at every English institution." He -described these anti-patriots as occupying "a sort of island of dissident thought". Tragically, they are no longer dissidents but are running C4.
What is equally repulsive is their epic hypocrisy. They delight in undermining Christianity and Judaism but then display a fawning reverence for Islam. They would not dream of -allowing a Muslim holy day to be hijacked by a message from a Christian fundamentalist. The same appalling double standards are just as clear in the utterings of Ahmadinejad. While lecturing us about spiritual faith, he would not tolerate for a moment an address from an Israeli rabbi about Iran's -duties to the world.
Moreover, he had the nerve to claim that if Jesus were alive today he would be campaigning against supposed Western imperialism. Yet no one in Britain can utter a squeak about Prophet -Mohammed without the threat of riots, mayhem and jihads.
It is grotesque to be hectored about peace by the world's most outspoken political advocate of a violent creed that has brought such terrible carnage over the past decade. "Love thy neighbour," the central message of the Christian gospel, is an idea -entirely alien to Islamic hardliners bent on the global -triumph of their dogma. There is an alarming parallel between the Nazis of the Thirties and today's Islamist zealots.
Morbidly anti-Semitic, stuck in a mentality of grievance, wallowing in manufactured victimhood, obsessed with submission to dictatorial authority, wailing about the iniquities of American-led capitalism, consumed by superstition and brutish -ritual, Nazism was as much a menace as Islamism is today. Like Ahmadinejad, Adolf Hitler ranted about his desire for peace but warned this could never be achieved until the "Jewish problem" was resolved.
For C4 to broadcast a message of "peace" from Ahmadinejad is the modern equivalent of the Thirties BBC giving a Christmas Day slot to Hitler. The morality of broadcasting in Britain has been sinking rapidly in recent years, as reflected in the scandal over Russell Brand and Jonathan Ross. But it has never before reached such levels of soullessness as C4 did last night.
Source
British schools too much for British teachers
Negligible disciplinary options means high stress
Teachers are calling in sick at the rate of 15,000 a day. Almost three million working days were lost last year, up from 2.5million in 1999. Some 311,000 teachers took at least one day off.
Tories called the official figures 'very worrying', linking them with mounting bureaucracy and disruptive classroom behaviour.
The Government's school workforce statistics, which cover full and part-time teachers and classroom assistants, show the average number of sick days has risen from 5.1 a head in 1999 to 5.4 in 2007. The overall number of days lost was 2.9million. This equates to almost 15,000 teachers off sick on each school day. The total of 311,770 who took sickness absence is well over half the number working in English schools.
The rising levels of sick leave mean more pupils have to be taught by unfamiliar supply teachers who may not be specialists in the subjects they are teaching.
Tory children's spokesman Michael Gove said the cost of teacher absence could run into hundreds of millions. Schools have to pay œ103 to œ210 a day for supply teachers.
Teaching unions said stress was 'endemic' to teaching in Britain. NUT acting general secretary Christine Blower said: 'Given the enormous pressures teachers are under, it is remarkable they have so little sick leave. 'The vast majority of teachers, sometimes unwisely, go into school, even though they may be ill, because of their commitment to the children. 'Unfortunately, too much stress is endemic to the job and it is the responsibility of not only the Government but the Conservative Party and the Liberal Democrats to explore ways of reducing the excessive numbers of initiatives faced weekly by schools.'
Despite record education spending under Labour, teaching vacancies have risen by a quarter in the past year - with four in ten new teachers quitting within a year. Critics say they are weighed down with too many initiatives, too much form-filling and too much bad behaviour.
Mr Gove said: 'It's very worrying that the number of sick days has risen so dramatically. 'The Government needs to investigate the reasons so we can make sure there is as much stability as possible in every child's education.'
According to the General Teaching Council for England, there are 465,672 registered teachers currently working in England's schools. The figure does not include classroom assistants. The highest sickness rate was in London, where 50,840 full and part-time teachers took leave. The lowest rate was in the North East of England, with 13,360 teachers taking sickness absence.
Mark Wallace, from the TaxPayers' Alliance, said last night: 'Taxpayers and pupils are the real victims of this epidemic. Teachers clearly need firmer rules and better management to both reduce stress and stop people getting away with taking sickies.'
But the Department for Children, Schools and Families said: 'Teacher sickness levels remain low and stable and well within industry norms. 'Of course, teaching is an incredibly rewarding but also very challenging role and we have worked hard to reduce the pressures on teachers. 'We have employed record numbers of support staff, given teachers a half-day a week outside the classroom to plan and prepare lessons, given teachers the full support of the law in dealing with unruly pupils and removed admin tasks from the list of activities which they can be asked to do.'
A spokesman for the largest teaching union, the National Association of Schoolmasters Union of Women Teachers, said: 'Teachers are highly dedicated to their jobs and to the children they teach. 'We would question the release of these statistics if their intended purpose is to seek to undermine or call into question the hard work of teachers, who on a daily basis raise attainment and help children reach their full potential.'
Source
Gravely ill man goes to NHS emergency room. Not attended to until 6 hours later. Dies
Individuals don't matter in socialized medicine
A hospital trust is facing questions after a man died having waited more than six hours to be seen in an accident and emergency department. Medway NHS Foundation Trust said it was saddened to hear of the death of Stewart Fleming but said that its emergency ward was experiencing long waits because of a high number of admissions.
Mr Fleming, 37, of Rainham, Kent was taken to the Medway Maritime Hospital in Gillingham on December 12 by his wife Sarah. He had a note from his GP requesting immediate admission after a suspected viral infection failed to clear with antibiotics but, the father of two faced a reported six-hour wait before he was assessed again.
By this time his condition had deteriorated. He was eventually admitted and transferred a week later to the Harefield Hospital in West London but died last Saturday. Mrs Fleming said: "Why wait three hours for a triage when a doctor had already done it and put it in writing what was going on?"
A spokeswoman for Medway NHS Foundation Trust said: "The trust is saddened to hear of the death of Stewart Fleming. Due to patient confidentiality we are unable to discuss any details."
Source
Scrooge was a people hater
That phrase--surplus population--is what first tipped me off to Dickens' philosophical agenda. He's taking aim at the father of the zero-growth philosophy, Thomas Malthus. Malthus' ideas were still current in British intellectual life at the time A Christmas Carol was written. Malthus, himself, had joined the surplus generation only nine years before. But his ideas have proved more durable.
Malthus taught the world to fear new people. An amateur economist, he created a theoretical model which allegedly proved that mass starvation was an inevitable result of population growth. Populations grow, he said, geometrically, but wealth only grows arithmetically. In other words, new people create more new people, but new food doesn't create new food.
Malthus' influence, unfortunately, grew geometrically and not arithmetically. His ideas provided fodder for Darwin, and Darwin's lesser mutations used the model to argue for the value of mass human extinction.
Hitler's hard eugenics and Sanger's (founder of Planned Parenthood) softer one, both owed a great debt of gratitude to Thomas Malthus. So do the zero-growth, sustainable-growth, right-to-die, duty-to-die, life boat bio-ethicists who dominate so much of our intellectual discussion. Malthus turned out to be, ironically, right in some sense. His prediction of mass death has taken place; not because he was right, but because he was believed.
Dickens, I think, saw it first. Ebenezer Scrooge was clearly a Malthusian. When he turns away an opportunity for alms giving, he uses the zero growth rationale. When he meets the Ghost of Christmas Present, he reiterates it:
At this, the Ghost rose in what I presume is indignation. Scrooge cowers and submits. Then the ghost raises his torch (in the shape of a cornucopia) and leads Scrooge to the public market, brimming with food from all around the world. Dickens especially emphasizes the fruits of trade: almonds, Spanish onions and oranges (in winter, no less). The message is clear: The dirge-ists of the day are wrong. England, even with its poor classes, is a prosperous society. The world is abundant. Rest is possible. So is generosity.
Scrooge's philosophy is not one based on the evidence; he ignores the evidence. He keeps setting aside the evidence of his senses with reference to the secular philosophy of his time. When he sees a spirit, he says that it's just a piece of undigested beef causing him to hallucinate. He denies the realm of the spirit until it becomes simply undeniable.
Scrooge is not following reason; he's following trauma. His mother died when he was young. He was sent to a boarding home where he and the other children were poorly fed. By the time he was brought back from exile to his home (which his sister said is 'like heaven'), the damage to his core personality was done.
Dickens' message is clear enough: The Malthusians of his day did not need evidence (which they ignored every day in the marketplace) or reason. They needed conversion. They needed healing. They needed to be reminded on the day where the world celebrates the birth of a child whom Rome and Herod try to assign to the role of 'surplus population,' that the frightened men who rule the world in the name of scarcity should not be followed, but saved.
Source
Britain to censor ADULT access to porn
The do-gooders usually say that censorship of porn is "for the children" but Left-run Britain seems to feel no need for that pretence.
There was a time when Leftists were vigorous defenders of porn but when some of that lovely CONTROL is within their reach all that is forgotten
The Church of England turns the Bible on its head: "The Church of England has reached an historic agreement on the consecration of women bishops. After years of struggle to avoid schism, bishops have agreed a formula that enshrines the principle of equality for male and female bishops while appeasing opponents of women's ordination. The first women bishops could take their place in the Church of England within three years. The deal, published in a new report yesterday, provides for a class of "complementary" traditionalist bishop for parishes that refuse to accept a woman diocesan bishop. Such "flying" bishops would have to abide by the authority of the woman bishop, according to the accompanying code of practice." [Maybe they should get themselves a new holy book. "Das Kapital", perhaps]
British airport security. The expected efficiency: "Security at one of the UK's biggest airports has been branded 'a total failure' after a man flew to Pakistan using his little sister's passport. Businessman Kasim Raja went unchallenged through three security checks at Birmingham International Airport using his sister Samina Raja's ID. He then boarded a Pakistan International Airlines flight to Islamabad, where he was finally spotted. He said the wrong passport was checked at the first desk and also at the boarding gate before he was waved through. It was only when the 26-year-old finally reached the Pakistani capital that border control staff there noticed the mistake and ordered him home. Despite pleading with them to contact the British Embassy to try to sort out the mix-up, they bundled him on to a flight back to the UK because he had no valid passport. Mr Raja said he had been staggered Birmingham International Airport had not noticed he was carrying his sister's ID, which he had picked up by mistake. The local businessman questioned how many others had slipped through the net. He said: 'It's frightening. It is a total failure in security and I could have been anyone trying to escape the country."
Comment from Britain
Hamas are a bunch of murderous thugs. Over the past few years they have fired 5,000 rockets on Israel from residential parts of the Gaza strip, killing and injuring dozens of innocent Israelis. Israel has done its best not to react, but in the end their patience has snapped - and understandably so. They have acted using the only kind of force Hamas can understand.
According to Conservative Friends of Israel, over the past week more than 300 rockets, missiles and mortar rounds have been fired from Gaza by Hamas and other militants at Israeli villages and towns. More than 560 have been fired since Hamas escalated rocket firing on 4 November. This is on top of the 5,000 which have been fired from Gaza this year. The media seem to think these rockets are fairly harmless. They are not. They are weapons of terror.
BBC reports suggest that in recent days none of these rockets has resulted in any Israeli deaths or injuries. Not true. CFI report today that: "An Israeli man was killed and four others were seriously wounded when a missile hit a house in Netivot. Another man was seriously wounded when a rocket struck at the community of Mivtahim later this afternoon." Over the last four years, 92% of Sderot residents (a town of 20,000 people) have experienced a Qassam rocket falling on their or an adjacent street. Sixteen Israelis have been killed by Qassam rockets and hundreds have been injured and maimed.
Israel should have dealt with this situation long before now. Instead, it allowed itself to be persuaded to call a truce with Hamas. It may have gone down well in the international community, but all it achieved was to allow Hamas time to regroup and rearm. According to CFI:
Under cover of the truce, Hamas engaged in a major campaign to upgrade its terrorist capabilities, manufacturing and smuggling massive quantities of weapons into Gaza - including rockets, explosive charges and machine guns - and constructing a network of underground tunnels for combat purposes. Israel cannot acquiesce to the presence of a Hizbullah-like organization on its southern border.
Hamas broke the ceasefire by firing more rockets into Israel. Imagine if this had happened here. Imagine if France fired rockets onto Dover from Calais. Would the British people expect its government to stand idly by and do nothing? Of course not.
British politicians are calling on both sides to act with restraint. Fine words, which are totally hollow. It is not right to treat both sides equally. Israel is a democratic ally, while Hamas are nothing more than an Iranian backed terror group, which is subjugating the people of Gaza in order to radicalise them. Once they have done that they intend to repeat the experience on the West Bank. The Palestinian Authority, led by Fatah's Mahmoud Abbas are well aware of this and their condemnation of the Israeli action is notable for its reticence. It's easy to understand why. They know full well what Hamas is like, and what its endgame is. This report is from the Press Association...
In a news conference today from Cairo, Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas placed the blame for the violence in the Gaza Strip squarely on the shoulders of Hamas. He described how he repeatedly made contact with Hamas and implored them not to break the ceasefire. He lamented that the violence in the Gaza Strip could have been avoided had Hamas not broken the ceasefire. The following is Mahmoud Abbas's statement at a joint press conference with Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmad Abu al-Gheit.
"I say in all honesty, we made contact with leaders of the Hamas movement in the Gaza Strip. We spoke with them in all honesty and directly, and after that we spoke with them indirectly, through more than one Arab and non-Arab side... We spoke with them on the telephone and we said to them: We ask of you, don't stop the ceasefire, the ceasefire must continue and not stop, in order to avoid what has happened, and if only we had avoided it."
The US ambassador to the US Zalmay Khalilzad has suggested Hamas held the key to restoring calm. "We believe the way forward from here is for rocket attacks against Israel to stop, for all violence to end," he said. CFI reports that Khalilzad was "implicitly backed up from Cairo by Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas who claimed the current situation could have been avoided had Hamas renewed the ceasefire before it lapsed and ceased all violence towards Israel."
If you doubt my interpretation of Hamas's motives and are deluded enough to think that they are genuine freedom fighters, just click HERE. To the horror of the Egyptians Hamas are not even allowing ambulances in to Gaza to treat the injured.
Egypt's Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit said the wounded were "barred from crossing" and he blamed "those in control of Gaza" for putting the lives of the injured at risk.
And we shouldn't forget who funds Hamas - the Iranians. Without their money and weapons Hamas wouldn't be half the force it is today, either in Gaza or in the Lebanon. Hamas is classified as a terror organisation by the UN. Virtually every Middle East country won't have any dealings with Hamas, yet in this country they seem to be treated by many as a legitimate organisation with whom the Israelis should negotiate. The only country which exalts Hamas is the one to whose President Channel 4 disgracefully gave a platform on Christmas Day.
People blame Israel for the terrible state of living standards in the Gaza Strip. They are wrong. Hamas is to blame for keeping its people in abject poverty. Israel handed over the governmental administration of the Gaza Strip in 2005 to the Palestinian Authority. They had an opportunity to run it themselves. Instead, since Hamas took power, they have done everything in their power to keep their people in poverty and use it as an excuse to radicalise those who are inclined to believe their propaganda. But even despite this, Israel was providing huge amounts of humanitarian aid to Gaza - more than 4,000 truck loads a month as well as fuel and electricity (despite the ongoing rocket attacks). Conditions were by no means good, but there was no humanitarian crisis, according to Khaled Abdel Shaafi, director the United Nations Development Programme in Gaza. He said this month that "this is not a humanitarian crisis... It's an economic crisis, a political crisis, but it's not a humanitarian crisis. People aren't starving."
It is highly regrettable that more than 250 people have been killed over the last few days. If Hamas hadn't been firing their rockets from residential areas the death toll would have been much lower. But Hamas have sited them there deliberately, so they can portray any Israeli response as heartless and disproportionate.
Gordon Brown was absolutely bang on with his response to what's happening in Gaza. He said: "I call on Gazan militants to cease all rocket attacks on Israel immediately. These attacks are designed to cause random destruction and to undermine the prospects of peace talks led by president Abbas. I understand the Israeli government's sense of obligation to its population."
William Hague, though, was perhaps a little less unequivocal, which I think is a shame. He said: "We deeply regret the loss of civilian life in Gaza today. We call on the Israeli government to show restraint. At the same time we call on Hamas to stop the rocket attacks which are an unacceptable threat to Israel's security, so that the ceasefire, which Hamas failed to renew, can be urgently restored."
The trouble is that any Hamas backed ceasefire isn't worth the paper it is written on. If we have learned nothing from recent history, surely we have learned that. Israel will only be able to restore open borders with Gaza and cease its military action when it is clear that no further rockets are being fired. In the meantime they should have the backing of every right thinking democrat in destroying the sites from which rockets are being fired and the tunnels through which Hamas are smuggling arms from Egypt.
As you can tell, I support Israel 100% in their actions in Gaza. But I fully recognise that there is an opposing viewpoint, which others are espousing on other blogs - mostly on the left. Whenever I write about Israel or the Middle East it provokes the loonies to come out of hiding. Let's keep the debate moderate and insult free in the comments please.
UPDATE: Courtesy of Dizzy...
Quote of the Day by the Egyptian Foreign Minister, Ahmed Aboul Gheit
The Israelis have been warning you that this was coming if you continue your cross border rocket attacks. Egypt has been imploring you to stop firing rockets into Israel, but you ignored our words. We have been urging you to renew the cease-fire with Israel, but you refused. You have brought this upon yourselves. You are responsible for what is happening to the people of Gaza.
Source
British council disregards objections to gypsy camp from 3,000 residents -- as 'they are racist'
When residents were asked to provide feedback on council plans to build traveller camps on their doorstep they dutifully responded. More than 3,000 homeowners filled in forms outlining their views, many raising concerns over a possible increase in noise, traffic, rubbish and a detrimental effect on property prices. However, such objections were not appreciated by Mid-Bedfordshire District Council, which partially or fully rejected nearly nine in ten of the replies for including comments 'of a racist nature'.
Weeks after asking for residents' views earlier this year, the council posted an article on its website entitled 'Racist Comments Not Welcome'. It claimed the council's 'duty of community leadership' meant it had to crack down on the use of racial stereotypes, and revealed that while 400 responses would be considered, 3,100 were in some way racist and would be rejected. The council even sent letters to objectors telling them their views had been deemed offensive and would not be taken account of.
Retired company secretary Lucy Clarke from Stotfold - one of the six small towns and villages mooted as sites for the 25 traveller families - was astounded to receive her letter. Mrs Clarke, a grandmother of three, said: 'As far as I am aware I objected to the camp for entirely reasonable grounds. And yet I then get this letter from the council. 'They even accused me of incitement to racial hatred. It's ridiculous - like putting me on a par with Abu Hamza.' She added: 'I am not racist, but I am concerned about what one of these camps could do to our town.'
Even the local town council could not avoid falling foul of the censors. Brian Collier, chairman of Stotfold council said: 'We wrote a detailed response in which we summarised locals' concerns. 'There is another gipsy site not far from here that has a well-known crime problem. 'As part of our response we echoed people's worries that the same may happen here. 'We were totally shocked when we then received a letter from the district council saying that was racist. There are lots of people here who have had the same treatment.'
The district council's attitude has been criticised by local campaigners, politicians and civil liberties groups. Tory communities spokesman Eric Pickles said yesterday: 'I hope that they write a letter of apology to everyone they have accused of being racist. Otherwise, people simply aren't going to feel able to object to these camps without the fear of being branded racist.'
When contacted by the Daily Mail, a spokesman for Mid-Bedfordshire council admitted that it had been 'somewhat overzealous'. He said: 'We were worried that many of the letters contained racist slurs and objectionable comments that we felt could not be published under current race relations legislation. 'We had no intention of offending those who took the time to respond to the consultation and certainly were not trying to label residents as racist. 'Only a small proportion (around 5 per cent) of the comments were actually discounted in their entirety. The remainder were taken into consideration, either in whole or in part.'
Source
British children banned from carrying candles in church - it may be safer, but isn't life supposed to be fun?
You may be sick of health and safety stories, but I am going to tell you a new one anyway. And this one is particularly monstrous. There is a very pretty disused estate church in Northamptonshire where an annual carol service is held on Christmas Eve, attended by some 250 people. Everybody holds aloft a candle, which makes a lovely sight. This year, however, this little event was blighted by a decree from the church commissioners that no child under the age of 15 could be allowed to hold a lighted candle: the safety risk was deemed unacceptable. As if that wasn't enough, the service then started with the reading of formal instructions about exits in the event of fire, a completely potty notion in a tiny old church with only one door.
And here's another story just as farcical. A few months ago, an engineer called at our house to correct a telephone line fault. He eventually announced that he must go away and return another day because the job would require a long ladder. I told him he could use our ladder. Sorry, he said, he would need another man to hold it while he climbed. I volunteered. 'Sorry,' he said again. 'You're not trained.'
Trained? To hold a ladder? This is madness, but a madness which all of us experience almost every day. It is sometimes claimed, not least by that iniquitous Stalinist body the Health & Safety Executive, that stories such as these are invented or exaggerated. They are not. Such things are happening all around us. Visiting the Army in Afghanistan in October, I was dismayed to hear that even on the battlefield, the spectre of health and safety rears its head, adding severely to the burden of commanders trying to conduct an exceptionally rough campaign.
The Oxfordshire coroner who conducts most of the inquests into British soldiers killed in action, and often delivers fierce criticisms of the Ministry of Defence in his judgments, thinks that he speaks and acts in the interests of our soldiers and their families. In reality, however, he often makes pronouncements that reflect his own ignorance of the realities of war. And in so doing, he makes the task of fighting the Taliban that much harder.
Let me give you an example. Weighed down with body armour, helmet, pack and rifle, it is hard to run for any distance in the intense Afghan heat - especially when under fire. Earlier this year, commanding officers discussed whether, in special circumstances, men might be allowed to discard their body armour for short periods to enable them to move faster against a lightly-clad and nimble enemy. The final verdict was that this was unacceptable. They decided that if a soldier should be killed when not wearing full protective gear, the Oxfordshire coroner would have a field day. He would almost certainly denounce the irresponsibility of officers who had failed in their duty of care.
It is hard to fight battles under such constraints. Air Marshal Lord Tedder, Eisenhower's deputy in World War II, said wisely: 'War is organised confusion.' And he was right. British officers care passionately about the welfare and survival of their men. The pain of losing a comrade is very great. It is harsh to superimpose upon this the prospect of being denounced in a coroner's court by a civilian who has never heard a shot fired in anger. And it is absurd to apply to the circumstances of the battlefield the same sort of criteria that are applied to a factory accident.
But wars aside, we must keep exposing and denouncing such follies as a ban on children carrying candles at a carol service. If we allow them to pass unremarked, the excesses of health and safety will go on and on, each day squeezing some new little moment of pleasure out of our existences. What is at stake is common sense. We must be allowed to live our lives without constant interruptions from an officialdom obsessed with the belief that every detail of the domestic round needs regulation.
Much of the trouble lies with the courts. If, for example, my telephone engineer falls off his ladder, he will almost certainly sue his employer and anybody else in sight. If regulations are found to have been breached, if there is the smallest hint that anybody in a position of responsibility was negligent, massive compensation will be awarded. Judges often seem willing to strike bold attitudes, for instance in sticking up for the rights of Muslim extremists to preach jihad, who then escape deportation, and receive generous cheques from social services into the bargain. Yet those same judges, together with tribunals which adjudicate in many compensation cases, lack the courage to fight for common sense.
Many claims deserve to be kicked straight into the long grass. But the view prevails that cash paid out by public bodies or insurance companies is not real money. It can be distributed with reckless abandon to victims of misfortunes, often in amounts larger than they could have earned in a lifetime of labour. Thus fear of litigation causes public bodies and private companies alike to impose ever sillier and more draconian restrictions on people's daily behaviour. They are terrified of being held responsible if somebody trips over a paving stone on their patch.
We, the British, often claim to take pride in our warrior heritage. Yet we are making ourselves ever more timid and cowardly. Many of us in our teens did Outward Bound courses - I myself once ran one at school. They were tremendously popular with the young because they fed our enthusiasm for adventure. I tremble to imagine what today's Outward Bound courses are like.
After a fatal canoeing accident at a school in the John Major era, new legislation was introduced. And such activities are now hedged by thick entanglements of rules designed to strip out any of the risk which we so loved. One day when, as a newspaper editor, I met the Prime Minister, I suggested that the new law was too restrictive. He responded: 'Can you imagine what everybody would have said if there had been another Outward Bound accident and we had done nothing?'
For once, I sympathised with Major. The blame culture was not invented by governments, but they feel compelled to respond to its reality. I suppose it is a sign of retarded adolescence, that even at my advanced age I still love taking risks, a joy enhanced by the feeling that I am striking back at the Health & Safety Executive. I relish ladders and chainsaws, working on the roof, and bicycling without one of those hideous helmets.
When my children were younger, I hope that I was not an irresponsible parent. But I encouraged them to climb trees, bungee jump - and carry candles at carol services. Life is supposed to be fun. In any sensible society, learning to accept responsibility for our own actions, and sometimes for painful consequences, is an essential part of growing up. Unless we fight every new manifestation of the health and safety brigade's excesses, we may become a fractionally safer society - but we shall also evolve into an unbearably dull one.
Source
The welfare system is a monster that is slowly destroying Britain...
The year that lies ahead threatens to be one of the most grim in all British history. Hundreds of thousands of us look certain to lose our jobs, most through absolutely no fault of our own. According to some estimates, that figure may even reach a million. For some of us, the prospect is grimmer still. We will not be able to keep up our mortgage payments, and so lose our homes, as well.
This series of disasters, however, is likely to befall only those who have made the mistake of working in the private sector. Those employed in Britain's bloated public sector are pretty well immune from the effects of the economic downturn. The same applies to that section of the population-an estimated 4.8 million people-who are already dependent on out-of-work benefits.
Some of these, of course, live in genuine poverty and deserve all the help they get. But others enjoy a surprising level of affluence. As the Daily Mail revealed yesterday, an amazing 140,000 households collect more from the benefit system than they would if they earned the national average wage. Each of these families receives state handouts worth 20,000 pounds a year, or even more. However, they are not taxed on this income, meaning that their real take-home pay is worth the equivalent of someone bringing home the national average salary of 25,100 before tax-and in some cases it is considerably higher even than that.
This is obscene. Nobody-apart from a handful of deranged free-marketeers who yearn for a return to the brutality of the Victorian era-is opposed to state benefits. Our modern welfare state, drawn up by William Beveridge during World War II, is the mark of a truly civilised society. Its purpose is to ensure that Britain should never return to the horrifying levels of poverty and suffering that were part of ordinary life during the Great Depression of the 1930s. Indeed, we have rarely needed Beveridge's system of social protection as much as we do today, facing as we do the greatest economic catastrophe for three- quarters of a century.
However, it has been clear for some time that something has gone desperately wrong with William Beveridge's system. During the years immediately following World War II it admirably performed the task it was supposed to do-and gave temporary protection to those workers who, through no fault of their own, were made unemployed. Instead of being forced into the workhouse, as might have happened in the 1930s, they were allowed to maintain their human dignity. But, slowly, the system was distorted.
Partly, this was the fault of politicians. National insurance payments, for example, were soon debased so that it ceased to be a pool of money set aside for a rainy day, and instead became just another form of income tax. And, inevitably, idle and feckless workers started to take full advantage of the benefits system. Rather than use it as a system of social insurance, they started to regard it as a well-paid alternative to going out to work.
A good example is the British system of disability benefit. This was set up from the most noble and splendid of motives-so that people who were unable to work for health reasons should not suffer financially because of their disability. Unfortunately, the work-shy soon spotted that disability benefit was also the perfect excuse for idleness, while being paid for staying at home-and often doing a little extra on the black market. Today, an astonishing 2.7 million men and women are claiming incapacity benefit-equivalent to one in 15 people of working age in Britain. Many of these disability claims are obviously fake.
Indeed, David Freud, the former banker who advises the Government on welfare issues, reckons that approximately two-thirds of those claiming incapacity benefit are capable of going out to work. Freud estimates that a staggering number-he reckons about 185,000-work illegally while on benefit. Tragically, no government has ever tried to make them go out to work legally. Some ministers have actually preferred to collude with a system which effectively defrauds the public. The reason is utterly shameful-people who are claiming incapacity benefit do not register as unemployed. They therefore keep the jobless figures down, enabling governments to boast about their economic success.
Another scam is housing benefit. Once again, no decent person would ever complain about the idea behind housing benefit-namely to keep people who cannot fend for themselves off the streets. Yet, once again, the system has been milked by the feckless and greedy, often with the collaboration of incompetent or corrupt local councils-consider the recent case in West London where an immigrant family lives in a large townhouse worth approximately 2,000 pounds in rent a week.
Last week a report by the Institute Of Fiscal Studies concluded (unsurprisingly) that the over-generous benefits system has created a baby boom. It estimated that an extra 45,000 children a year have been born to young mothers since the 'unprecedented rise' in child benefits, free housing and family tax credits made it 'economically attractive' to have more and more babies.
This complex situation of benefits has created a situation which was the exact opposite of what Beveridge intended. He aimed to create a system which would enable men and woman to get by while they looked for another job. But the modern British benefits system is now so complex, so incompetently administered, so corrupt and, in some cases, so generous that it is actually a disincentive to people going out to look for work. The rewards for staying idle are so great that, perversely, men and women on benefits can be better off staying at home.
A recent study showed that around 60,000 poorly paid workers offered the choice of working more hours would effectively be taxed by an extra 90 per cent on the extra income. In other words, the welfare system Britain has devised today rewards idleness and punishes hard work. The effects of this are already being felt. It is scarcely 60 years since the end of World War II, and yet there are already housing estates where practically no one goes to work. The only source of income is the State, and there are generations of families none of whom have ever had experience of the workplace.
This is not merely immensely damaging to the British economy. It is also desperately unfair. Those people who have always worked hard and paid their taxes find themselves being heavily penalised for their efforts-while those who cheat and skive get rewarded. In the long term, this is a very dangerous situation. It brings the British system of social insurance-one of the greatest achievements of the 20th century-into disrepute. Ordinary, decent, hardworking people will start to ask whether they can support a system which so blatantly rewards the workshy and the idle.
Eleven years ago, when Labour first came to power, Tony Blair claimed that only Labour could reform the welfare system-and he promised to do so. But he never had the guts. He and his Chancellor Gordon Brown preferred to keep the blatant sham of disability benefit because it so conveniently hid the true level of unemployment. It is a tragic wasted opportunity. It would have been fairly easy to prune the bloated welfare state when jobs were plentiful over the past decade-but next to impossible now that that the job losses mount.
Writing more than 2,000 years ago, a Roman politician made the following observation: 'The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed lest Rome become bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance.' These words were uttered by Cicero in 55BC. Today they are every bit as apposite.
Source
Ahmadinejad Christmas message on Britain's Channel 4
The Left are always banging on about the importance of sensitivity and making people feel "comfortable" but display precious little of any of that themselves
Channel 4 has long revelled in its puerile desire to shock but now it has plumbed new depths of indecency, perpetrating an act of sickening and gratuitous -offen-siveness. On the most -significant day in the Christian calendar it broadcast a so-called "alternative Christmas message" by Iran President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, an -Islamic fundamentalist whose regime is notorious for oppression, cruelty and anti-Semitism.
C4 has displayed utter contempt for the values of our Judaeo-Christian civilisation, treating a precious moment in our religious heritage as an opportunity for the usual anti-Western, Marxist point-scoring which passes for thinking in Left-wing circles. In the context of issuing a Christmas broadcast it is hard to imagine a less appropriate figure than President -Ahmadinejad, whose vicious theo-cracy has never shown the slightest inclination towards peace and goodwill.
To hear him last night preaching about justice and the need to fight tyranny was nauseating in the extreme. His government has promoted a brutal form of militant Islam, persecuted women, hounded Christians, and sponsored terrorism. - Despite presiding over mass poverty it has sought to build its own deadly nuclear arsenal, creating permanent tension in the Middle East. Ahmadinejad, himself drenched in the crudest form of anti-Semitism, has called for Israel to be "wiped off the face of the earth" and questioned whether the Nazi Holocaust against the Jews ever took place.
Others accused of Holocaust denial, such as historian David Irving, end up in prison. Ahmadinejad is given a prime-time Christmas Day slot on C4.
The station has an -unedifying track record of deliberately stirring up rows, particularly through the psychological freak show known as Big Brother. It has also frequently used Christmas Day as a chance to parade its disdain for the traditional -values of our culture. Two years ago the Christmas message came from a Muslim woman trumpeting her right to wear the full veil. But the -Ahmadinejad broadcast is a desperate new low. The -channel has moved from mere controversy into a sneering, treacherous rejection of all that decent Britons hold dear at this time of year.
Only in the warped mindset of an ultra-trendy, oh-so--progressive TV executive would it be deemed suitable to allow one of world's most dangerous and fanatical leaders to spout his deceitful nonsense about peace. What do C4 have lined up for next Christmas? Robert Mugabe on compassion? Kim Jong Il of North Korea on -freedom and democracy? One can imagine the excited conversations which must have taken place within C4's management before the decision was made to invite the Iranian President. "What can we do for a real outrage this year? -Ahmadinejad?
The Holocaust denier, talking on the day of -Jesus's birth? Brilliant. That'll really make a stir." The -station's executives are like a bunch of adolescent, Left-wing students, titillated by the justifiable -anger they provoke, revelling in their self-created image as -daring iconoclasts who -challenge the establishment. The absurdity of their stance is that they are an integral part of the establishment. After all, C4 is a public corporation, owned by the Government. But instead of receiving a genuine public service we have these continual displays of immature rebellion by over-paid attention seekers who think there is something original about their predictable anti-British dogma.
In 1940 George Orwell wrote of the classic Left-wing intellectuals who felt "that there is something slightly disgraceful in being an Englishman and that it is a duty to snigger at every English institution." He -described these anti-patriots as occupying "a sort of island of dissident thought". Tragically, they are no longer dissidents but are running C4.
What is equally repulsive is their epic hypocrisy. They delight in undermining Christianity and Judaism but then display a fawning reverence for Islam. They would not dream of -allowing a Muslim holy day to be hijacked by a message from a Christian fundamentalist. The same appalling double standards are just as clear in the utterings of Ahmadinejad. While lecturing us about spiritual faith, he would not tolerate for a moment an address from an Israeli rabbi about Iran's -duties to the world.
Moreover, he had the nerve to claim that if Jesus were alive today he would be campaigning against supposed Western imperialism. Yet no one in Britain can utter a squeak about Prophet -Mohammed without the threat of riots, mayhem and jihads.
It is grotesque to be hectored about peace by the world's most outspoken political advocate of a violent creed that has brought such terrible carnage over the past decade. "Love thy neighbour," the central message of the Christian gospel, is an idea -entirely alien to Islamic hardliners bent on the global -triumph of their dogma. There is an alarming parallel between the Nazis of the Thirties and today's Islamist zealots.
Morbidly anti-Semitic, stuck in a mentality of grievance, wallowing in manufactured victimhood, obsessed with submission to dictatorial authority, wailing about the iniquities of American-led capitalism, consumed by superstition and brutish -ritual, Nazism was as much a menace as Islamism is today. Like Ahmadinejad, Adolf Hitler ranted about his desire for peace but warned this could never be achieved until the "Jewish problem" was resolved.
For C4 to broadcast a message of "peace" from Ahmadinejad is the modern equivalent of the Thirties BBC giving a Christmas Day slot to Hitler. The morality of broadcasting in Britain has been sinking rapidly in recent years, as reflected in the scandal over Russell Brand and Jonathan Ross. But it has never before reached such levels of soullessness as C4 did last night.
Source
British schools too much for British teachers
Negligible disciplinary options means high stress
Teachers are calling in sick at the rate of 15,000 a day. Almost three million working days were lost last year, up from 2.5million in 1999. Some 311,000 teachers took at least one day off.
Tories called the official figures 'very worrying', linking them with mounting bureaucracy and disruptive classroom behaviour.
The Government's school workforce statistics, which cover full and part-time teachers and classroom assistants, show the average number of sick days has risen from 5.1 a head in 1999 to 5.4 in 2007. The overall number of days lost was 2.9million. This equates to almost 15,000 teachers off sick on each school day. The total of 311,770 who took sickness absence is well over half the number working in English schools.
The rising levels of sick leave mean more pupils have to be taught by unfamiliar supply teachers who may not be specialists in the subjects they are teaching.
Tory children's spokesman Michael Gove said the cost of teacher absence could run into hundreds of millions. Schools have to pay œ103 to œ210 a day for supply teachers.
Teaching unions said stress was 'endemic' to teaching in Britain. NUT acting general secretary Christine Blower said: 'Given the enormous pressures teachers are under, it is remarkable they have so little sick leave. 'The vast majority of teachers, sometimes unwisely, go into school, even though they may be ill, because of their commitment to the children. 'Unfortunately, too much stress is endemic to the job and it is the responsibility of not only the Government but the Conservative Party and the Liberal Democrats to explore ways of reducing the excessive numbers of initiatives faced weekly by schools.'
Despite record education spending under Labour, teaching vacancies have risen by a quarter in the past year - with four in ten new teachers quitting within a year. Critics say they are weighed down with too many initiatives, too much form-filling and too much bad behaviour.
Mr Gove said: 'It's very worrying that the number of sick days has risen so dramatically. 'The Government needs to investigate the reasons so we can make sure there is as much stability as possible in every child's education.'
According to the General Teaching Council for England, there are 465,672 registered teachers currently working in England's schools. The figure does not include classroom assistants. The highest sickness rate was in London, where 50,840 full and part-time teachers took leave. The lowest rate was in the North East of England, with 13,360 teachers taking sickness absence.
Mark Wallace, from the TaxPayers' Alliance, said last night: 'Taxpayers and pupils are the real victims of this epidemic. Teachers clearly need firmer rules and better management to both reduce stress and stop people getting away with taking sickies.'
But the Department for Children, Schools and Families said: 'Teacher sickness levels remain low and stable and well within industry norms. 'Of course, teaching is an incredibly rewarding but also very challenging role and we have worked hard to reduce the pressures on teachers. 'We have employed record numbers of support staff, given teachers a half-day a week outside the classroom to plan and prepare lessons, given teachers the full support of the law in dealing with unruly pupils and removed admin tasks from the list of activities which they can be asked to do.'
A spokesman for the largest teaching union, the National Association of Schoolmasters Union of Women Teachers, said: 'Teachers are highly dedicated to their jobs and to the children they teach. 'We would question the release of these statistics if their intended purpose is to seek to undermine or call into question the hard work of teachers, who on a daily basis raise attainment and help children reach their full potential.'
Source
Gravely ill man goes to NHS emergency room. Not attended to until 6 hours later. Dies
Individuals don't matter in socialized medicine
A hospital trust is facing questions after a man died having waited more than six hours to be seen in an accident and emergency department. Medway NHS Foundation Trust said it was saddened to hear of the death of Stewart Fleming but said that its emergency ward was experiencing long waits because of a high number of admissions.
Mr Fleming, 37, of Rainham, Kent was taken to the Medway Maritime Hospital in Gillingham on December 12 by his wife Sarah. He had a note from his GP requesting immediate admission after a suspected viral infection failed to clear with antibiotics but, the father of two faced a reported six-hour wait before he was assessed again.
By this time his condition had deteriorated. He was eventually admitted and transferred a week later to the Harefield Hospital in West London but died last Saturday. Mrs Fleming said: "Why wait three hours for a triage when a doctor had already done it and put it in writing what was going on?"
A spokeswoman for Medway NHS Foundation Trust said: "The trust is saddened to hear of the death of Stewart Fleming. Due to patient confidentiality we are unable to discuss any details."
Source
Scrooge was a people hater
"Since you ask me what I wish, gentlemen, that is my answer. I don't make merry myself at Christmas and I can't afford to make idle people merry. I help to support the establishments I have mentioned: they cost enough: and those who are badly off must go there.'' "Many can't go there; and many would rather die.'' "If they would rather die,'' said Scrooge, "they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population."
That phrase--surplus population--is what first tipped me off to Dickens' philosophical agenda. He's taking aim at the father of the zero-growth philosophy, Thomas Malthus. Malthus' ideas were still current in British intellectual life at the time A Christmas Carol was written. Malthus, himself, had joined the surplus generation only nine years before. But his ideas have proved more durable.
Malthus taught the world to fear new people. An amateur economist, he created a theoretical model which allegedly proved that mass starvation was an inevitable result of population growth. Populations grow, he said, geometrically, but wealth only grows arithmetically. In other words, new people create more new people, but new food doesn't create new food.
Malthus' influence, unfortunately, grew geometrically and not arithmetically. His ideas provided fodder for Darwin, and Darwin's lesser mutations used the model to argue for the value of mass human extinction.
Hitler's hard eugenics and Sanger's (founder of Planned Parenthood) softer one, both owed a great debt of gratitude to Thomas Malthus. So do the zero-growth, sustainable-growth, right-to-die, duty-to-die, life boat bio-ethicists who dominate so much of our intellectual discussion. Malthus turned out to be, ironically, right in some sense. His prediction of mass death has taken place; not because he was right, but because he was believed.
Dickens, I think, saw it first. Ebenezer Scrooge was clearly a Malthusian. When he turns away an opportunity for alms giving, he uses the zero growth rationale. When he meets the Ghost of Christmas Present, he reiterates it:
"You have never seen the like of me before!'' exclaimed the Spirit.
"Never,'' Scrooge made answer to it.
"Have never walked forth with the younger members of my family; meaning (for I am very young) my elder brothers born in these later years?'' pursued the Phantom.
"I don't think I have,'' said Scrooge. "I am afraid I have not. Have you had many brothers, Spirit?''
"More than eighteen hundred,'' said the Ghost.
"A tremendous family to provide for!'' muttered Scrooge.
At this, the Ghost rose in what I presume is indignation. Scrooge cowers and submits. Then the ghost raises his torch (in the shape of a cornucopia) and leads Scrooge to the public market, brimming with food from all around the world. Dickens especially emphasizes the fruits of trade: almonds, Spanish onions and oranges (in winter, no less). The message is clear: The dirge-ists of the day are wrong. England, even with its poor classes, is a prosperous society. The world is abundant. Rest is possible. So is generosity.
Scrooge's philosophy is not one based on the evidence; he ignores the evidence. He keeps setting aside the evidence of his senses with reference to the secular philosophy of his time. When he sees a spirit, he says that it's just a piece of undigested beef causing him to hallucinate. He denies the realm of the spirit until it becomes simply undeniable.
Scrooge is not following reason; he's following trauma. His mother died when he was young. He was sent to a boarding home where he and the other children were poorly fed. By the time he was brought back from exile to his home (which his sister said is 'like heaven'), the damage to his core personality was done.
Dickens' message is clear enough: The Malthusians of his day did not need evidence (which they ignored every day in the marketplace) or reason. They needed conversion. They needed healing. They needed to be reminded on the day where the world celebrates the birth of a child whom Rome and Herod try to assign to the role of 'surplus population,' that the frightened men who rule the world in the name of scarcity should not be followed, but saved.
Source
Britain to censor ADULT access to porn
The do-gooders usually say that censorship of porn is "for the children" but Left-run Britain seems to feel no need for that pretence.
"To some people it is exactly the kind of protective legislation that Britain needs in a world where access to a vast array of pornography is available at the click of a mouse. To others, a new law banning "extreme" pornography gives the Government unprecedented powers to police bedrooms (and basements).
Critics, including at least two lords, say that legislation coming into force next month forbidding the possession of "an extreme pornographic image" will criminalise thousands of previously law-abiding people who have a harmless taste for unconventional sex."
Source
There was a time when Leftists were vigorous defenders of porn but when some of that lovely CONTROL is within their reach all that is forgotten
The Church of England turns the Bible on its head: "The Church of England has reached an historic agreement on the consecration of women bishops. After years of struggle to avoid schism, bishops have agreed a formula that enshrines the principle of equality for male and female bishops while appeasing opponents of women's ordination. The first women bishops could take their place in the Church of England within three years. The deal, published in a new report yesterday, provides for a class of "complementary" traditionalist bishop for parishes that refuse to accept a woman diocesan bishop. Such "flying" bishops would have to abide by the authority of the woman bishop, according to the accompanying code of practice." [Maybe they should get themselves a new holy book. "Das Kapital", perhaps]
British airport security. The expected efficiency: "Security at one of the UK's biggest airports has been branded 'a total failure' after a man flew to Pakistan using his little sister's passport. Businessman Kasim Raja went unchallenged through three security checks at Birmingham International Airport using his sister Samina Raja's ID. He then boarded a Pakistan International Airlines flight to Islamabad, where he was finally spotted. He said the wrong passport was checked at the first desk and also at the boarding gate before he was waved through. It was only when the 26-year-old finally reached the Pakistani capital that border control staff there noticed the mistake and ordered him home. Despite pleading with them to contact the British Embassy to try to sort out the mix-up, they bundled him on to a flight back to the UK because he had no valid passport. Mr Raja said he had been staggered Birmingham International Airport had not noticed he was carrying his sister's ID, which he had picked up by mistake. The local businessman questioned how many others had slipped through the net. He said: 'It's frightening. It is a total failure in security and I could have been anyone trying to escape the country."
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Global cooling bites Britain: 'set for shockingly cold weather'
It's time to get out the thermal underwear and thickest pullovers - Britain is set for shockingly cold weather for at least the next couple of weeks. After a glorious Christmas, with not a hint of a snowflake, temperatures have been slipping steadily downwards, with minus 11C (12F) recorded in Aviemore, in the Highlands, on Saturday night. The plunge into a Siberian blast of cold will worsen in the coming week as raw easterlies freeze the country. "This coming week, maximum daytime temperatures will be between 2C (36F) and 4C (39F) but temperatures at night could be well below zero for many places," said Stephen Holman, forecaster at the Met Office.
The freezing conditions are being swept down from a strong high-pressure system anchored close to Scandinavia. Like a boulder firmly stuck in a river, this anticyclone is refusing to budge and sending our usual wet and windy winter weather on a wide detour, a system known as a blocking weather pattern.
Although it will feel bitterly cold, conditions will also largely be dry, at least for the next few days, and no significant snowfall is expected, although northern and eastern regions could experience some snow. Exactly how cold it will become largely depends on where the high pressure sits and how much cloud it drags off the North Sea. And cloudy skies are needed, because they act like a duvet cover, helping to prevent some of the heat loss from the ground. If the nights turn clear and winds are light, though, temperatures could plummet as low as minus 10C (14F) even in the South of England in the next fortnight.
In winter, low pressure tends to dominate over Iceland and high pressure to the south, over the Azores. These two pressure systems dance in tune with each other and drive our winter weather, in what is known as the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO). When the Icelandic low and Azores high are strong, they steer wet and mild weather over the UK; but when they slacken off in a negative phase, that turns the UK bitterly cold. At present the NAO is turning negative, sending a powerful signal that the weather is set to continue cold.
How bad could this winter sink? The weather maps are a chilling reminder of some our most savage winters, such as the notorious 1962-63 winter, the coldest for 180 years. This was when the sea froze around the coast of southeast England and crops were dug out of frozen ground with pneumatic drills and blizzards paralysed the nation. Even if next month is freezing, the Met's long-range forecast predicts that the winter will melt away into warmer conditions in February.
Source
Skeptical scientist profile: Dr. John Brignell
I've been wanting to do this for sometime, because I've linked to Dr. Brignell's warmlist page a countless number of times. From his CV:
What Dr. Brignell has done is simple genius--keep a linked list of actual media stories and articles that purport to show the horrors--both past, present, and future--associated with manmade global warming and climate change. Simply reading the mass of links is mind-boggling; in my opinion, visiting this one page is all that one needs to do to understand how stupid this global warming hoax is.
Dr. Brignell goes further with his entire Number Watch site--he's showing us how the media can misbehave when using numbers and statistics. Thank you, Dr. Brignell, for being brave enough to stick your neck out in this politically correct environment. As he says: Number Watch - All about the scares, scams, junk, panics, and flummery cooked up by the media, politicians, bureaucrats, so-called scientists and others who try to confuse you with wrong numbers.
Source
British schools reject assistance from parents
New theory-based and union-supported guidance discourages parents from going on school trips. For some schools it may mean no trips at all. But having parents present might dilute that wonderful CONTROL that Leftists get off on
Imagine the scenario. You're a mother who has volunteered to accompany your seven-year-old son's class on a trip to the Science Museum in west London and are in charge of a group of five boys, including your son. On the journey home, there's a problem. As you are waiting to board the Tube, the fire alarm sounds and there is an order to evacuate the station. What do you do? According to new government health and safety guidelines, there's a risk you'll snatch up your son and make a dash for the nearest emergency exit, neglecting the four other boys in the process. As a spokesman for the Department for Children, Families and Schools put it: "There is the potential for divided interest in the case of an emergency." By contrast, a teacher would try to look after the entire group.
Understandably, parents are outraged that they can no longer accompany their own children on school trips. "I loved taking my eldest daughter and her class on a school trip because it gave me a chance to see how the children interact together," says Tessa Park, a mother of two, who has accompanied class excursions to the London Aquarium in the past. Now, with parental involvement being scaled back, her volunteering days are in jeopardy. Just as ministers have published a manifesto calling for more "learning outside the classroom", Park has received a letter dissuading mothers and fathers from accompanying their own children on trips. "It's a very odd attitude," she says. "I'd like to see the evidence to support this claim that schoolchildren are less safe when they are looked after by a parent. Quite frankly, in the event of an accident I would feel safer if my children were in the hands of a mum who knows their names."
Park, whose children attend Bute House prep school in west London, is not alone in believing the government has taken a wrong turn. Another parent at the same school, who wished to remain anonymous, is even more vociferous. "Statistically, how many pupils have died on school trips because a parent has saved their child first?" she asks. "There is a greater chance of my child dying crossing Hammersmith Broadway. There are quite a few parents who think this is just the nanny state gone mad." She added: "Parents have been going on school trips since time immemorial. If you are a responsible parent, you will manage. This isn't white-water rafting down the Zambezi; it's a walk to a museum."
Bute House was one of several prep schools that attended a course on the issue run earlier this year by Roger Smith, a consultant who is a member of the government's outdoor education advisers panel. So far Smith has briefed about 600 private schools on the updated guidance. He says that while it is not yet statutory, it is already considered "best practice" not to include parents as supervisors on trips involving their children. "If a trip did go pear-shaped, a school would be asked why it had not complied with this advice," he says. Indeed, the consequences can be severe.
Fines and even manslaughter charges have been brought in the past against schools, councils and teachers who have failed to protect pupils on trips. In 2002 a teacher was jailed for manslaughter after an accident in Cumbria when a boy of 10 drowned in a river. In 2003 Leeds council was fined 30,000 pounds after admitting to flawed safety measures on a trip during which two teenage schoolgirls drowned. The turning point, however, was a tragedy more than a decade ago. In 1993 four sixth-formers died on a canoeing trip in Lyme Bay, in the West Country, in one of Britain's worst canoeing disasters. Peter Kite, the director of the outdoor centre responsible for the trip, was convicted of manslaughter and jailed for three years. After this, one teaching union, the NASUWT, told members to be wary of supervising trips for fear of being sued, and nationally the number of excursions fell drastically.
The union has now changed its stance, but insists that children be accompanied by teachers rather than parents. Longstanding guidelines suggest that one adult should be in charge of six seven-to-nine-year-olds on an outing; the ratio is one adult to three for children aged under five. Chris Keates, general secretary of the union, explains. "We have long had serious reservations about school trips. More and more schools were counting parents in the ratio of adults to children required for a trip, when they should really only be including trained staff. "While parents can be helpful, it can be hard for staff to get them to understand the safety aspects. Schools are taking a risk if they don't use qualified staff." Even on a trip to Kew gardens? To a museum? "On any outing," she says. Keates acknowledges that "some people might say that not counting parents as part of the adult-pupil ratio will jeopardise trips going ahead but we say that if you can't get enough qualified staff to accompany them, you shouldn't be going in the first place". [Translation: "We want more jobs for teachers"]
Several head teachers spoke out against the guidance last week. Dilys Hoffman, head of Beckford primary school, in north London, said: "I don't think it's okay for the government to be interfering with schools' practice. Sometimes it's quite a good thing for a parent to accompany their own child, especially if the child has special needs or behavioural issues. Children love having them there. "Provided parents are given guidance and have had police checks, I don't think it's a problem." Karen Coulthard, head of Berger primary school, in east London, agrees. "Today our nursery children are going to a pantomime and the ratio is 1:1, so we ask for one parent to accompany their child," she said. "It's very important to get the youngest children out and accessing the wealth of resources on our doorstep". For decades parents have helped schools to do just that.
Source
The NHS will look after you -- as long as you are not a patient
Public money totalling 1.6 million pounds has been paid out in redundancy settlements to seven senior employees following a merger of NHS trusts in Staffordshire. South Staffordshire Primary Care Trust (PCT), which took over the functions of four previous trusts, has given the money to two chief executives, three directors, a deputy director and a senior manager during the shake-up. Had the money been given to support frontline services, it would be enough to pay the wages of 50 nurses at the average NHS nursing salary of 31,600 including overtime.
Stuart Poyner, chief executive of South Staffordshire PCT, said the payouts, revealed in a Freedom of Information request, were a legal requirement. Other health organisations making big payouts to former employees including NHS West Midlands, the strategic health authority which manages a budget of 7 billion. It spent 2.2 million paying off 97 staff in the two years to August 2008.
Health chiefs are spending 360,000 of public money in an attempt to reduce the high level of sickness and absenteeism among NHS workers in Scotland, where absence rates are 60 per cent higher than in the private sector and are still on the rise. Sick leave in the NHS in Scotland currently costs the taxpayer 222 million a year. However, critics said there was no guarantee that the campaign to combat the problem would produce results, and claimed that managers should be tackling absenteeism in the normal course of their work without incurring extra costs in doing so.
Mark Wallace, of the TaxPayers' Alliance, said: "Spending even more money on the problem is not a solution. If so many staff are taking sick leave, it is a sign that either people are getting away with sickies or they are being mismanaged to the point of illness." Nicola Sturgeon, the Scottish health minister, said the funding of 360,000 from the government at Holyrood would help health boards to meet a target of reducing sickness rates to four per cent by April 2009.
Figures show that in 2007-08 there was a sickness absence rate of 5.28 per cent in the NHS in Scotland - equivalent to 12 days off a year per person - compared to a private sector average of 3.3 per cent, or seven and a half days. Low morale and overwork has been blamed for the problem, which cost the taxpayer 10m more than the previous year. The figures cover all NHS staff, from doctors and nurses to cleaners and porters.
Source
A woman on every fire engine ... the latest demand from the British PC brigade
Fire chiefs will have to put at least one woman on each fire engine to meet diversity guidelines. New targets say that at least 15 per cent of those in operational roles should be female. That means they will fill one of the five or six places for crew on each engine. Officials at the Local Government Association, which is pressing the quotas on fire authorities, said that an increased number of women firemen is necessary 'to meet the needs of local people'.
But critics warn that they are placing their targets above the need for fitness and strength. Susie Squire, of the Taxpayers' Alliance, said: 'Introducing this sort of quota to the fire service is a big mistake. If ever there was a job that should be awarded on merit and physical fitness, it is that of a firefighter. 'It is ludicrous that political correctness is being put above the ability to save lives.' She added: 'This quota system will not only cost taxpayers money by introducing additional and unnecessary administration, but could risk the safety of all of us in the long run.'
At present fewer than one in ten firemen are women even in the brigades with the highest proportion of females in operational jobs. Those with the least women employ proportions of around 3 per cent. In an attempt to address this, local councillors who are appointed to serve on the fire authorities will be asked to sign up to the 'diversity charter'. One of the pledges they are expected to make is to 'work to achieve recruitment targets of at least 15 per cent for women in operational roles'. They are also asked to work towards minority ethnic representation at the same level as that in the working age population of the area. At present just over 3 per cent of firemen are from ethnic minority groups.
Anthony Duggan, head of fire services at the Local Government Association, said: 'The fire service needs to be representative of the area it serves. It is important that the fire service attracts more women and ethnic minorities so that it can work more effectively in partnership with local authorities and other organisations to meet the needs of local people.' Mr Duggan called for a 'culture change' and said that asking authority members to sign the diversity charter 'will show that those who are making the strategic decisions are serious about getting a greater mix of people working in the service'.
Source
Morally corrupt: Britain's bishops deplore Labour's scandalous rule
There is no denying the reality of what the Bishops describe
Leading Church of England bishops have accused the British Government of being "morally corrupt" and delivered a damning verdict on Labour's rule. Five of the church's most senior figures said the Government presided over a country suffering family breakdown, an unhealthy reliance on debt and a growing financial divide. The bishops of Durham, Winchester, Manchester, Carlisle and Hulme said government ministers had squandered their opportunity to transform society, introducing policies that exacerbated inequality and hardship. Labour had sacrificed principled politics and long-term solutions to win votes, they argued, describing the Government as tired and its policies as scandalous.
Meanwhile, the Opposition Leader, David Cameron, accused the Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, of leading the country to the brink of bankruptcy, saying the "debt crisis", which he blamed solely on the Government, would serve as Mr Brown's political epitaph.
Although speaking independently in a series of newspaper interviews, the bishops' common criticisms reflect the deepening rift between the Government and the church on social and moral issues. Relations have become increasingly fractious following condemnation of Mr Brown's spending plans by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, and a report accusing the Government of marginalising the church.
The Bishop of Durham, the Right Reverend Tom Wright, said ministers had not done enough to help the poor. "When a big bank or car company goes bankrupt, it gets bailed out, but no one seems to be bailing out the ordinary people who are losing their jobs and seeing their savings diminished."
Source
A new twist on the free-radical craze
Trying to quash free radicals with vitamins turned out to be more counter-productive than anything else so I think the whole theory is flawed. This application of it should therefore fail
In a back room of New Scientist's offices in London, I sit down at a table with the Russian biochemist Mikhail Shchepinov. In front of us are two teaspoons and a brown glass bottle. Shchepinov opens the bottle, pours out a teaspoon of clear liquid and drinks it down. He smiles. It's my turn. I put a spoonful of the liquid in my mouth and swallow. It tastes slightly sweet, which is a surprise. I was expecting it to be exactly like water since that, in fact, is what it is - heavy water to be precise, chemical formula D2O. The D stands for deuterium, an isotope of hydrogen with an atomic mass of 2 instead of 1. Deuterium is what puts the heavy in heavy water. An ice cube made out of it would sink in normal water.
My sip of heavy water is the culmination of a long journey trying to get to the bottom of a remarkable claim that Shchepinov first made around 18 months ago. He believes he has discovered an elixir of youth, a way to drink (or more likely eat) your way to a longer life. You may think that makes Shchepinov sound like a snake-oil salesman. I thought so too, but the more I found out about his idea, the more it began to make sense.
The story began two years ago, while Shchepinov was working at a biotechology company in Oxford, UK, and using his spare time to read up on the latest ideas about what causes us to age. The most widely accepted idea is the free-radical theory. This holds that our slide into decrepitude is the result of irreversible damage to the biomolecules that make up our bodies. The main agents of this destruction are oxygen free radicals, aggressive chemical compounds that are an unavoidable by-product of metabolism.
The reason oxygen radicals are so dangerous is that they have a voracious appetite for electrons, which they rip out of anything they can lay their hands on - water, proteins, fats, DNA - leaving a trail of destruction in their wake. This damage gradually builds up over a lifetime and eventually leads the body's basic biochemical processes to fail.
One of the worst types of damage is something called protein carbonylation, in which an oxygen radical attacks vulnerable carbon-hydrogen bonds in a protein (see diagram). This has been linked to many of the worst diseases of old age, including Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, cancer, chronic renal failure and diabetes (The EMBO Journal, vol 24, p 1311). Other important targets of free-radical attack are DNA and the fatty acids in cell membranes. The human body produces legions of antioxidants, including vitamins and enzymes, that quench free radicals before they can do any harm. But over a lifetime these defence systems eventually fall victim to oxidative attack too, leading to an inevitable decline. Many anti-ageing medications are based on supplementing the body's own defences with antioxidant compounds such as vitamin C and beta-carotene, though there is scant evidence that this does any good (New Scientist, 5 August 2006, p 40).
Shchepinov realised there was another way to defeat free radicals. While he was familiarising himself with research on ageing, his day job involved a well-established - if slightly obscure - bit of chemistry called the isotope effect. On Christmas day 2006, it dawned on him that putting the two together could lead to a new way of postponing the ravages of time. The basic concept of the isotope effect is that the presence of heavy isotopes in a molecule can slow down its chemical reactions. This is because heavy isotopes form stronger covalent bonds than their lighter counterparts; for example, a carbon-deuterium bond is stronger than a carbon-hydrogen bond. While the effect applies to all heavy isotopes, including carbon-13, nitrogen-15 and oxygen-18 (see chart), it is most marked with deuterium as it is proportionally so much heavier than hydrogen. Deuterated bonds can be up to 80 times stronger than those containing hydrogen.
All of this is conventional chemistry: the isotope effect was discovered back in the 1930s and its mechanism explained in the 1940s. The effect has a long pedigree as a research tool in basic chemistry for probing the mechanisms of complex reactions.
Shchepinov, however, is the first researcher to link the effect with ageing. It dawned on him that if ageing is caused by free radicals trashing covalent bonds, and if those same bonds can be strengthened using the isotope effect, why not use it to make vulnerable biomolecules more resistant to attack? All you would have to do is judiciously place deuterium or carbon-13 in the bonds that are most vulnerable to attack, and chemistry should take care of the rest.
In early 2007 Shchepinov wrote up his idea and submitted it to a journal called Rejuvenation Research. Unbeknown to him, the journal's editor is controversial gerontologist Aubrey de Grey of the Methuselah Foundation in Lorton, Virginia, who is well known for supporting ideas other gerontologists consider outlandish. De Grey sent the paper out for review and eventually accepted it (Rejuvenation Research, vol 10, p 47).
In the paper, Shchepinov points out that there is masses of existing science backing up his ideas. Dozens of experiments have proved that proteins, fatty acids and DNA can be helped to resist oxidative damage using the isotope effect. Shchepinov's paper brought the idea to a wider audience, including successful biotechnology entrepreneurs Charles Cantor and Robert Molinari. Impressed, they teamed up with Shchepinov to set up a company called Retrotope, with de Grey as a scientific advisor.
It was around this time that I first got in touch with Shchepinov. I'd never heard of the isotope effect, and de Grey's involvement made me cautious. But there was something in the idea that intrigued me, and I kept on coming back to it. There were obvious objections to the idea. For one, how do you get the isotopes to exactly the sites where you want them? After all, the human body contains trillions upon trillions of chemical bonds, but relatively few are vulnerable to free-radical damage. And what about safety - swallowing mouthfuls of heavy isotopes surely can't be good for you, can it? That, of course, is how I ended up sharing a teaspoon of heavy water with Shchepinov.
Neither, it turns out, is a big problem. Some heavy isotopes are radioactive so are obviously ruled out on safety grounds - hydrogen-3 (tritium) and carbon-14, for example. Others, notably deuterium and carbon-13, are just as stable as hydrogen and carbon-12. Both occur in small amounts in nature and are a natural component of some biomolecules in our bodies (see "Heavy babies"). Deuterium and carbon-13 also appear to be essentially non-toxic. Baby mice weaned on a highly enriched carbon-13 diet are completely normal, even when 60 per cent of the carbon atoms in their body are carbon-13. Deuterium also has a clean bill of health as long as you don't go overboard. Decades of experiments in which animals were fed heavy water suggest that up to a fifth of the water in your body can be replaced with heavy water with no ill effects.
Similar experiments have been done on humans, albeit with lower levels of deuterium. One recent experiment kept humans on a low-level heavy-water diet for 10 weeks, during which their heavy-water levels were raised to around 2.5 per cent of body water, with no adverse effects (Biochimica et Biophysica Acta, vol 1760, p 730). The researchers also found that some deuterium became incorporated into proteins.
Heavy water, however, isn't completely safe. In mammals, toxic effects start to kick in around the 20 per cent mark, and at 35 per cent it is lethal. This is largely down to the isotope effect itself: any protein in your body has the potential to take up deuterium atoms from heavy water, and eventually this radically alters your entire biochemistry. You'd have to drink a vast amount to suffer any ill effects - my 5 millilitres did me no harm whatsoever - but even so, Retrotope is not advocating heavy water as an elixir of youth.
Instead, it wants to package up heavy isotopes in what Shchepinov calls "iFood". This method has huge advantages, not least because it allows the heavy isotopes to be targeted to the most vulnerable carbon-hydrogen bonds. Of the 20 amino acids used by humans, 10 cannot be made by the body and must be present in the diet. That means if you supplement your diet with essential amino acids that have already had their vulnerable bonds strengthened, your body's proteins will have these reinforced amino acids incorporated into them. Some of the building blocks of fats and DNA can also only be acquired via your diet, which means they too can be targeted using the iFood approach.
What's more, this approach ought to be completely safe, says Shchepinov. Deuterium atoms bound to carbon in amino acids are "non-exchangeable" and so don't leak into body water. Another possibility is to produce meat, eggs or milk enriched with deuterium or carbon-13 by feeding deuterated water or isotope-enriched amino acids to farm animals. For now, though, iFood remains on the drawing board as nobody manufactures the right compounds. To solve that problem, Retrotope has signed up the Institute of Bio-organic Chemistry in Moscow, Russia and Minsk State University in Belarus to make customised amino acids and fatty acids. "There are a lot of good isotope chemists in Russia," says Cantor.
Another hurdle Retrotope will have to overcome is cost. At current prices, a litre of heavy water will set you back $300. "Isotopes are expensive," says Shchepinov. "But there's no need for them to be. Methods are there to extract them, but nobody wants them." Unless demand rises, there is no incentive to produce them in bulk, and this keeps the price high.
These obstacles haven't stopped Retrotope launching a research programme to test Shchepinov's big idea. A team at the Institute for the Biology of Ageing in Moscow recently fed various amounts of heavy water to fruit flies to see if it had any effect on longevity. Though large amounts were deadly, smaller quantities increased lifespans by up to 30 per cent. It's a promising start, but it's too early to say whether the human lifespan can also be extended in this way, or how much deuterium-enriched food you would have to eat to get a beneficial effect. "This is preliminary and needs to be reproduced under a variety of conditions," says Shchepinov. "It's possible that the flies don't like the diet, and what we're seeing is the effects of caloric restriction [the only proven strategy for extending lifespan in experimental animals]. We need to do a lot more experiments. But still..."
Retrotope has signed up some heavyweight gerontologists to join de Grey as scientific advisors, including Jan Vijg of the Albert Einstein College Of Medicine in New York and Cynthia Kenyon of the University of California, San Francisco. Kenyon recently started work on Retrotope's second round of experiments, giving a deuterium-enriched diet to nematode worms. "It's a beautiful idea," says Vijg. "It gives us a serious chance of retarding ageing." He cautions, however, that Shchepinov's ideas hinge on free radicals being at the root of ageing. While this is still the leading theory in the field, many researchers argue that free-radical damage alone cannot account for all the biological changes that happen as we get old (Nature, vol 451, p 644).
Source
UK: Web sites could be given "cinema-style age ratings"
The first step to government control and censorship?
Pornography is already being used by the Australian government as an excuse for a proposed new internet censorship system. Looks like the Brits are following suit.
Another reason why NOBODY should trust the British government with personal information: "More than one Government computer goes missing every day, ministers have admitted. Since the start of 2002 nearly 3,000 computers have been lost or stolen across Whitehall, which equates to eight every week. In total 1,774 laptop computers and 1,035 desktop computers have been lost or stolen, a rate of nearly five a week and three a week respectively. This year alone 238 laptops and 40 desktops have gone missing. The past seven years have also seen 676 mobile phones, 202 hard drives and 195 memory sticks lost or stolen. The worst offender is the Ministry of Defence, which handles some of the most sensitive information in Government. It has had 866 laptops stolen and has lost 178 - more than half the total of missing laptops. The MoD is losing laptops at a rate of nearly three a week and has also had 157 desktops stolen and lost seven. The Department of Work and Pensions, which processes details of millions of bank accounts, national insurance contributions and benefit and pension payments, is not far behind. The DWP has had 828 desktops mislaid or stolen - 80 per cent of all those lost to the Government since 2002 - as well as 271 laptops."
It's time to get out the thermal underwear and thickest pullovers - Britain is set for shockingly cold weather for at least the next couple of weeks. After a glorious Christmas, with not a hint of a snowflake, temperatures have been slipping steadily downwards, with minus 11C (12F) recorded in Aviemore, in the Highlands, on Saturday night. The plunge into a Siberian blast of cold will worsen in the coming week as raw easterlies freeze the country. "This coming week, maximum daytime temperatures will be between 2C (36F) and 4C (39F) but temperatures at night could be well below zero for many places," said Stephen Holman, forecaster at the Met Office.
The freezing conditions are being swept down from a strong high-pressure system anchored close to Scandinavia. Like a boulder firmly stuck in a river, this anticyclone is refusing to budge and sending our usual wet and windy winter weather on a wide detour, a system known as a blocking weather pattern.
Although it will feel bitterly cold, conditions will also largely be dry, at least for the next few days, and no significant snowfall is expected, although northern and eastern regions could experience some snow. Exactly how cold it will become largely depends on where the high pressure sits and how much cloud it drags off the North Sea. And cloudy skies are needed, because they act like a duvet cover, helping to prevent some of the heat loss from the ground. If the nights turn clear and winds are light, though, temperatures could plummet as low as minus 10C (14F) even in the South of England in the next fortnight.
In winter, low pressure tends to dominate over Iceland and high pressure to the south, over the Azores. These two pressure systems dance in tune with each other and drive our winter weather, in what is known as the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO). When the Icelandic low and Azores high are strong, they steer wet and mild weather over the UK; but when they slacken off in a negative phase, that turns the UK bitterly cold. At present the NAO is turning negative, sending a powerful signal that the weather is set to continue cold.
How bad could this winter sink? The weather maps are a chilling reminder of some our most savage winters, such as the notorious 1962-63 winter, the coldest for 180 years. This was when the sea froze around the coast of southeast England and crops were dug out of frozen ground with pneumatic drills and blizzards paralysed the nation. Even if next month is freezing, the Met's long-range forecast predicts that the winter will melt away into warmer conditions in February.
Source
Skeptical scientist profile: Dr. John Brignell
I've been wanting to do this for sometime, because I've linked to Dr. Brignell's warmlist page a countless number of times. From his CV:
Professor Emeritus (ESD) John Brignell was educated at Stationers' Company's School and began his career as an apprentice at STC. He studied at Northampton Engineering College (which became The City University, London) and took the degrees of BSc(Eng) and PhD of London University. He joined the staff at Northampton and was successively Research Assistant, Research Fellow and Lecturer. He worked in a number of areas including dielectric liquids and computer aided measurement, co-authoring a book "Laboratory on-line computing" in 1975.
He was for ten years Reader in Electronics at The City University and held the Chair in Industrial Instrumentation at Southampton for twenty years from 1980. He has researched and written extensively in the area of sensors and their applications, and in 1994 co-authored a book with Neil White on "Intelligent sensor systems". He had an extensive private consultancy practice for many years and has advised some of the larger international companies, as well as many small ones in the UK, on all aspects of industrial instrumentation. He pioneered the use of a number of technologies in sensing, such as thick film, and latterly turned his attention to the considerable possibilities of micro-engineering.
He was elected Fellow of IOP, InstMC, IEE and RSA. In 1994 he was awarded the Callendar Silver Medal by InstMC. He served on the ISAT Committee of IoP from its inception and was the founding chairman of the first joint professional group of the IEE (J1), having served on both its predecessors (E1 and C11).
What Dr. Brignell has done is simple genius--keep a linked list of actual media stories and articles that purport to show the horrors--both past, present, and future--associated with manmade global warming and climate change. Simply reading the mass of links is mind-boggling; in my opinion, visiting this one page is all that one needs to do to understand how stupid this global warming hoax is.
Dr. Brignell goes further with his entire Number Watch site--he's showing us how the media can misbehave when using numbers and statistics. Thank you, Dr. Brignell, for being brave enough to stick your neck out in this politically correct environment. As he says: Number Watch - All about the scares, scams, junk, panics, and flummery cooked up by the media, politicians, bureaucrats, so-called scientists and others who try to confuse you with wrong numbers.
Source
British schools reject assistance from parents
New theory-based and union-supported guidance discourages parents from going on school trips. For some schools it may mean no trips at all. But having parents present might dilute that wonderful CONTROL that Leftists get off on
Imagine the scenario. You're a mother who has volunteered to accompany your seven-year-old son's class on a trip to the Science Museum in west London and are in charge of a group of five boys, including your son. On the journey home, there's a problem. As you are waiting to board the Tube, the fire alarm sounds and there is an order to evacuate the station. What do you do? According to new government health and safety guidelines, there's a risk you'll snatch up your son and make a dash for the nearest emergency exit, neglecting the four other boys in the process. As a spokesman for the Department for Children, Families and Schools put it: "There is the potential for divided interest in the case of an emergency." By contrast, a teacher would try to look after the entire group.
Understandably, parents are outraged that they can no longer accompany their own children on school trips. "I loved taking my eldest daughter and her class on a school trip because it gave me a chance to see how the children interact together," says Tessa Park, a mother of two, who has accompanied class excursions to the London Aquarium in the past. Now, with parental involvement being scaled back, her volunteering days are in jeopardy. Just as ministers have published a manifesto calling for more "learning outside the classroom", Park has received a letter dissuading mothers and fathers from accompanying their own children on trips. "It's a very odd attitude," she says. "I'd like to see the evidence to support this claim that schoolchildren are less safe when they are looked after by a parent. Quite frankly, in the event of an accident I would feel safer if my children were in the hands of a mum who knows their names."
Park, whose children attend Bute House prep school in west London, is not alone in believing the government has taken a wrong turn. Another parent at the same school, who wished to remain anonymous, is even more vociferous. "Statistically, how many pupils have died on school trips because a parent has saved their child first?" she asks. "There is a greater chance of my child dying crossing Hammersmith Broadway. There are quite a few parents who think this is just the nanny state gone mad." She added: "Parents have been going on school trips since time immemorial. If you are a responsible parent, you will manage. This isn't white-water rafting down the Zambezi; it's a walk to a museum."
Bute House was one of several prep schools that attended a course on the issue run earlier this year by Roger Smith, a consultant who is a member of the government's outdoor education advisers panel. So far Smith has briefed about 600 private schools on the updated guidance. He says that while it is not yet statutory, it is already considered "best practice" not to include parents as supervisors on trips involving their children. "If a trip did go pear-shaped, a school would be asked why it had not complied with this advice," he says. Indeed, the consequences can be severe.
Fines and even manslaughter charges have been brought in the past against schools, councils and teachers who have failed to protect pupils on trips. In 2002 a teacher was jailed for manslaughter after an accident in Cumbria when a boy of 10 drowned in a river. In 2003 Leeds council was fined 30,000 pounds after admitting to flawed safety measures on a trip during which two teenage schoolgirls drowned. The turning point, however, was a tragedy more than a decade ago. In 1993 four sixth-formers died on a canoeing trip in Lyme Bay, in the West Country, in one of Britain's worst canoeing disasters. Peter Kite, the director of the outdoor centre responsible for the trip, was convicted of manslaughter and jailed for three years. After this, one teaching union, the NASUWT, told members to be wary of supervising trips for fear of being sued, and nationally the number of excursions fell drastically.
The union has now changed its stance, but insists that children be accompanied by teachers rather than parents. Longstanding guidelines suggest that one adult should be in charge of six seven-to-nine-year-olds on an outing; the ratio is one adult to three for children aged under five. Chris Keates, general secretary of the union, explains. "We have long had serious reservations about school trips. More and more schools were counting parents in the ratio of adults to children required for a trip, when they should really only be including trained staff. "While parents can be helpful, it can be hard for staff to get them to understand the safety aspects. Schools are taking a risk if they don't use qualified staff." Even on a trip to Kew gardens? To a museum? "On any outing," she says. Keates acknowledges that "some people might say that not counting parents as part of the adult-pupil ratio will jeopardise trips going ahead but we say that if you can't get enough qualified staff to accompany them, you shouldn't be going in the first place". [Translation: "We want more jobs for teachers"]
Several head teachers spoke out against the guidance last week. Dilys Hoffman, head of Beckford primary school, in north London, said: "I don't think it's okay for the government to be interfering with schools' practice. Sometimes it's quite a good thing for a parent to accompany their own child, especially if the child has special needs or behavioural issues. Children love having them there. "Provided parents are given guidance and have had police checks, I don't think it's a problem." Karen Coulthard, head of Berger primary school, in east London, agrees. "Today our nursery children are going to a pantomime and the ratio is 1:1, so we ask for one parent to accompany their child," she said. "It's very important to get the youngest children out and accessing the wealth of resources on our doorstep". For decades parents have helped schools to do just that.
Source
The NHS will look after you -- as long as you are not a patient
Public money totalling 1.6 million pounds has been paid out in redundancy settlements to seven senior employees following a merger of NHS trusts in Staffordshire. South Staffordshire Primary Care Trust (PCT), which took over the functions of four previous trusts, has given the money to two chief executives, three directors, a deputy director and a senior manager during the shake-up. Had the money been given to support frontline services, it would be enough to pay the wages of 50 nurses at the average NHS nursing salary of 31,600 including overtime.
Stuart Poyner, chief executive of South Staffordshire PCT, said the payouts, revealed in a Freedom of Information request, were a legal requirement. Other health organisations making big payouts to former employees including NHS West Midlands, the strategic health authority which manages a budget of 7 billion. It spent 2.2 million paying off 97 staff in the two years to August 2008.
Health chiefs are spending 360,000 of public money in an attempt to reduce the high level of sickness and absenteeism among NHS workers in Scotland, where absence rates are 60 per cent higher than in the private sector and are still on the rise. Sick leave in the NHS in Scotland currently costs the taxpayer 222 million a year. However, critics said there was no guarantee that the campaign to combat the problem would produce results, and claimed that managers should be tackling absenteeism in the normal course of their work without incurring extra costs in doing so.
Mark Wallace, of the TaxPayers' Alliance, said: "Spending even more money on the problem is not a solution. If so many staff are taking sick leave, it is a sign that either people are getting away with sickies or they are being mismanaged to the point of illness." Nicola Sturgeon, the Scottish health minister, said the funding of 360,000 from the government at Holyrood would help health boards to meet a target of reducing sickness rates to four per cent by April 2009.
Figures show that in 2007-08 there was a sickness absence rate of 5.28 per cent in the NHS in Scotland - equivalent to 12 days off a year per person - compared to a private sector average of 3.3 per cent, or seven and a half days. Low morale and overwork has been blamed for the problem, which cost the taxpayer 10m more than the previous year. The figures cover all NHS staff, from doctors and nurses to cleaners and porters.
Source
A woman on every fire engine ... the latest demand from the British PC brigade
Fire chiefs will have to put at least one woman on each fire engine to meet diversity guidelines. New targets say that at least 15 per cent of those in operational roles should be female. That means they will fill one of the five or six places for crew on each engine. Officials at the Local Government Association, which is pressing the quotas on fire authorities, said that an increased number of women firemen is necessary 'to meet the needs of local people'.
But critics warn that they are placing their targets above the need for fitness and strength. Susie Squire, of the Taxpayers' Alliance, said: 'Introducing this sort of quota to the fire service is a big mistake. If ever there was a job that should be awarded on merit and physical fitness, it is that of a firefighter. 'It is ludicrous that political correctness is being put above the ability to save lives.' She added: 'This quota system will not only cost taxpayers money by introducing additional and unnecessary administration, but could risk the safety of all of us in the long run.'
At present fewer than one in ten firemen are women even in the brigades with the highest proportion of females in operational jobs. Those with the least women employ proportions of around 3 per cent. In an attempt to address this, local councillors who are appointed to serve on the fire authorities will be asked to sign up to the 'diversity charter'. One of the pledges they are expected to make is to 'work to achieve recruitment targets of at least 15 per cent for women in operational roles'. They are also asked to work towards minority ethnic representation at the same level as that in the working age population of the area. At present just over 3 per cent of firemen are from ethnic minority groups.
Anthony Duggan, head of fire services at the Local Government Association, said: 'The fire service needs to be representative of the area it serves. It is important that the fire service attracts more women and ethnic minorities so that it can work more effectively in partnership with local authorities and other organisations to meet the needs of local people.' Mr Duggan called for a 'culture change' and said that asking authority members to sign the diversity charter 'will show that those who are making the strategic decisions are serious about getting a greater mix of people working in the service'.
Source
Morally corrupt: Britain's bishops deplore Labour's scandalous rule
There is no denying the reality of what the Bishops describe
Leading Church of England bishops have accused the British Government of being "morally corrupt" and delivered a damning verdict on Labour's rule. Five of the church's most senior figures said the Government presided over a country suffering family breakdown, an unhealthy reliance on debt and a growing financial divide. The bishops of Durham, Winchester, Manchester, Carlisle and Hulme said government ministers had squandered their opportunity to transform society, introducing policies that exacerbated inequality and hardship. Labour had sacrificed principled politics and long-term solutions to win votes, they argued, describing the Government as tired and its policies as scandalous.
Meanwhile, the Opposition Leader, David Cameron, accused the Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, of leading the country to the brink of bankruptcy, saying the "debt crisis", which he blamed solely on the Government, would serve as Mr Brown's political epitaph.
Although speaking independently in a series of newspaper interviews, the bishops' common criticisms reflect the deepening rift between the Government and the church on social and moral issues. Relations have become increasingly fractious following condemnation of Mr Brown's spending plans by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, and a report accusing the Government of marginalising the church.
The Bishop of Durham, the Right Reverend Tom Wright, said ministers had not done enough to help the poor. "When a big bank or car company goes bankrupt, it gets bailed out, but no one seems to be bailing out the ordinary people who are losing their jobs and seeing their savings diminished."
Source
A new twist on the free-radical craze
Trying to quash free radicals with vitamins turned out to be more counter-productive than anything else so I think the whole theory is flawed. This application of it should therefore fail
In a back room of New Scientist's offices in London, I sit down at a table with the Russian biochemist Mikhail Shchepinov. In front of us are two teaspoons and a brown glass bottle. Shchepinov opens the bottle, pours out a teaspoon of clear liquid and drinks it down. He smiles. It's my turn. I put a spoonful of the liquid in my mouth and swallow. It tastes slightly sweet, which is a surprise. I was expecting it to be exactly like water since that, in fact, is what it is - heavy water to be precise, chemical formula D2O. The D stands for deuterium, an isotope of hydrogen with an atomic mass of 2 instead of 1. Deuterium is what puts the heavy in heavy water. An ice cube made out of it would sink in normal water.
My sip of heavy water is the culmination of a long journey trying to get to the bottom of a remarkable claim that Shchepinov first made around 18 months ago. He believes he has discovered an elixir of youth, a way to drink (or more likely eat) your way to a longer life. You may think that makes Shchepinov sound like a snake-oil salesman. I thought so too, but the more I found out about his idea, the more it began to make sense.
The story began two years ago, while Shchepinov was working at a biotechology company in Oxford, UK, and using his spare time to read up on the latest ideas about what causes us to age. The most widely accepted idea is the free-radical theory. This holds that our slide into decrepitude is the result of irreversible damage to the biomolecules that make up our bodies. The main agents of this destruction are oxygen free radicals, aggressive chemical compounds that are an unavoidable by-product of metabolism.
The reason oxygen radicals are so dangerous is that they have a voracious appetite for electrons, which they rip out of anything they can lay their hands on - water, proteins, fats, DNA - leaving a trail of destruction in their wake. This damage gradually builds up over a lifetime and eventually leads the body's basic biochemical processes to fail.
One of the worst types of damage is something called protein carbonylation, in which an oxygen radical attacks vulnerable carbon-hydrogen bonds in a protein (see diagram). This has been linked to many of the worst diseases of old age, including Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, cancer, chronic renal failure and diabetes (The EMBO Journal, vol 24, p 1311). Other important targets of free-radical attack are DNA and the fatty acids in cell membranes. The human body produces legions of antioxidants, including vitamins and enzymes, that quench free radicals before they can do any harm. But over a lifetime these defence systems eventually fall victim to oxidative attack too, leading to an inevitable decline. Many anti-ageing medications are based on supplementing the body's own defences with antioxidant compounds such as vitamin C and beta-carotene, though there is scant evidence that this does any good (New Scientist, 5 August 2006, p 40).
Shchepinov realised there was another way to defeat free radicals. While he was familiarising himself with research on ageing, his day job involved a well-established - if slightly obscure - bit of chemistry called the isotope effect. On Christmas day 2006, it dawned on him that putting the two together could lead to a new way of postponing the ravages of time. The basic concept of the isotope effect is that the presence of heavy isotopes in a molecule can slow down its chemical reactions. This is because heavy isotopes form stronger covalent bonds than their lighter counterparts; for example, a carbon-deuterium bond is stronger than a carbon-hydrogen bond. While the effect applies to all heavy isotopes, including carbon-13, nitrogen-15 and oxygen-18 (see chart), it is most marked with deuterium as it is proportionally so much heavier than hydrogen. Deuterated bonds can be up to 80 times stronger than those containing hydrogen.
All of this is conventional chemistry: the isotope effect was discovered back in the 1930s and its mechanism explained in the 1940s. The effect has a long pedigree as a research tool in basic chemistry for probing the mechanisms of complex reactions.
Shchepinov, however, is the first researcher to link the effect with ageing. It dawned on him that if ageing is caused by free radicals trashing covalent bonds, and if those same bonds can be strengthened using the isotope effect, why not use it to make vulnerable biomolecules more resistant to attack? All you would have to do is judiciously place deuterium or carbon-13 in the bonds that are most vulnerable to attack, and chemistry should take care of the rest.
In early 2007 Shchepinov wrote up his idea and submitted it to a journal called Rejuvenation Research. Unbeknown to him, the journal's editor is controversial gerontologist Aubrey de Grey of the Methuselah Foundation in Lorton, Virginia, who is well known for supporting ideas other gerontologists consider outlandish. De Grey sent the paper out for review and eventually accepted it (Rejuvenation Research, vol 10, p 47).
In the paper, Shchepinov points out that there is masses of existing science backing up his ideas. Dozens of experiments have proved that proteins, fatty acids and DNA can be helped to resist oxidative damage using the isotope effect. Shchepinov's paper brought the idea to a wider audience, including successful biotechnology entrepreneurs Charles Cantor and Robert Molinari. Impressed, they teamed up with Shchepinov to set up a company called Retrotope, with de Grey as a scientific advisor.
It was around this time that I first got in touch with Shchepinov. I'd never heard of the isotope effect, and de Grey's involvement made me cautious. But there was something in the idea that intrigued me, and I kept on coming back to it. There were obvious objections to the idea. For one, how do you get the isotopes to exactly the sites where you want them? After all, the human body contains trillions upon trillions of chemical bonds, but relatively few are vulnerable to free-radical damage. And what about safety - swallowing mouthfuls of heavy isotopes surely can't be good for you, can it? That, of course, is how I ended up sharing a teaspoon of heavy water with Shchepinov.
Neither, it turns out, is a big problem. Some heavy isotopes are radioactive so are obviously ruled out on safety grounds - hydrogen-3 (tritium) and carbon-14, for example. Others, notably deuterium and carbon-13, are just as stable as hydrogen and carbon-12. Both occur in small amounts in nature and are a natural component of some biomolecules in our bodies (see "Heavy babies"). Deuterium and carbon-13 also appear to be essentially non-toxic. Baby mice weaned on a highly enriched carbon-13 diet are completely normal, even when 60 per cent of the carbon atoms in their body are carbon-13. Deuterium also has a clean bill of health as long as you don't go overboard. Decades of experiments in which animals were fed heavy water suggest that up to a fifth of the water in your body can be replaced with heavy water with no ill effects.
Similar experiments have been done on humans, albeit with lower levels of deuterium. One recent experiment kept humans on a low-level heavy-water diet for 10 weeks, during which their heavy-water levels were raised to around 2.5 per cent of body water, with no adverse effects (Biochimica et Biophysica Acta, vol 1760, p 730). The researchers also found that some deuterium became incorporated into proteins.
Heavy water, however, isn't completely safe. In mammals, toxic effects start to kick in around the 20 per cent mark, and at 35 per cent it is lethal. This is largely down to the isotope effect itself: any protein in your body has the potential to take up deuterium atoms from heavy water, and eventually this radically alters your entire biochemistry. You'd have to drink a vast amount to suffer any ill effects - my 5 millilitres did me no harm whatsoever - but even so, Retrotope is not advocating heavy water as an elixir of youth.
Instead, it wants to package up heavy isotopes in what Shchepinov calls "iFood". This method has huge advantages, not least because it allows the heavy isotopes to be targeted to the most vulnerable carbon-hydrogen bonds. Of the 20 amino acids used by humans, 10 cannot be made by the body and must be present in the diet. That means if you supplement your diet with essential amino acids that have already had their vulnerable bonds strengthened, your body's proteins will have these reinforced amino acids incorporated into them. Some of the building blocks of fats and DNA can also only be acquired via your diet, which means they too can be targeted using the iFood approach.
What's more, this approach ought to be completely safe, says Shchepinov. Deuterium atoms bound to carbon in amino acids are "non-exchangeable" and so don't leak into body water. Another possibility is to produce meat, eggs or milk enriched with deuterium or carbon-13 by feeding deuterated water or isotope-enriched amino acids to farm animals. For now, though, iFood remains on the drawing board as nobody manufactures the right compounds. To solve that problem, Retrotope has signed up the Institute of Bio-organic Chemistry in Moscow, Russia and Minsk State University in Belarus to make customised amino acids and fatty acids. "There are a lot of good isotope chemists in Russia," says Cantor.
Another hurdle Retrotope will have to overcome is cost. At current prices, a litre of heavy water will set you back $300. "Isotopes are expensive," says Shchepinov. "But there's no need for them to be. Methods are there to extract them, but nobody wants them." Unless demand rises, there is no incentive to produce them in bulk, and this keeps the price high.
These obstacles haven't stopped Retrotope launching a research programme to test Shchepinov's big idea. A team at the Institute for the Biology of Ageing in Moscow recently fed various amounts of heavy water to fruit flies to see if it had any effect on longevity. Though large amounts were deadly, smaller quantities increased lifespans by up to 30 per cent. It's a promising start, but it's too early to say whether the human lifespan can also be extended in this way, or how much deuterium-enriched food you would have to eat to get a beneficial effect. "This is preliminary and needs to be reproduced under a variety of conditions," says Shchepinov. "It's possible that the flies don't like the diet, and what we're seeing is the effects of caloric restriction [the only proven strategy for extending lifespan in experimental animals]. We need to do a lot more experiments. But still..."
Retrotope has signed up some heavyweight gerontologists to join de Grey as scientific advisors, including Jan Vijg of the Albert Einstein College Of Medicine in New York and Cynthia Kenyon of the University of California, San Francisco. Kenyon recently started work on Retrotope's second round of experiments, giving a deuterium-enriched diet to nematode worms. "It's a beautiful idea," says Vijg. "It gives us a serious chance of retarding ageing." He cautions, however, that Shchepinov's ideas hinge on free radicals being at the root of ageing. While this is still the leading theory in the field, many researchers argue that free-radical damage alone cannot account for all the biological changes that happen as we get old (Nature, vol 451, p 644).
Source
UK: Web sites could be given "cinema-style age ratings"
The first step to government control and censorship?
"In an interview with The Daily Telegraph, Andy Burnham says he believes that new standards of decency need to be applied to the web. He is planning to negotiate with Barack Obama's incoming American administration to draw up new international rules for English language websites. The Cabinet minister describes the internet as `quite a dangerous place' and says he wants internet-service providers (ISPs) to offer parents `child-safe' web services."
Source
Pornography is already being used by the Australian government as an excuse for a proposed new internet censorship system. Looks like the Brits are following suit.
Another reason why NOBODY should trust the British government with personal information: "More than one Government computer goes missing every day, ministers have admitted. Since the start of 2002 nearly 3,000 computers have been lost or stolen across Whitehall, which equates to eight every week. In total 1,774 laptop computers and 1,035 desktop computers have been lost or stolen, a rate of nearly five a week and three a week respectively. This year alone 238 laptops and 40 desktops have gone missing. The past seven years have also seen 676 mobile phones, 202 hard drives and 195 memory sticks lost or stolen. The worst offender is the Ministry of Defence, which handles some of the most sensitive information in Government. It has had 866 laptops stolen and has lost 178 - more than half the total of missing laptops. The MoD is losing laptops at a rate of nearly three a week and has also had 157 desktops stolen and lost seven. The Department of Work and Pensions, which processes details of millions of bank accounts, national insurance contributions and benefit and pension payments, is not far behind. The DWP has had 828 desktops mislaid or stolen - 80 per cent of all those lost to the Government since 2002 - as well as 271 laptops."
Monday, December 29, 2008
British dogs must not chase sticks
And balls are suspect too. The British safety mania never lets up
Fetch, doggy – but not before listening to some vital safety information. One of Britain’s most eminent vets has warned that dogs suffer as many injuries chasing and catching sticks as they do on Britain’s roads. Owners are being advised that to protect their pets from accidental stabbing or choking, they should never throw sticks. Instead they should use rubber throwing toys or a suitably sized ball.
Dan Brockman, professor of small animal surgery at the Royal Veterinary College, has catalogued dozens of serious injuries and infections, almost all the result of animals being stabbed as they rushed after a sharp stick. “When I see people throwing sticks for their dogs in the park I just get so frustrated,” said Brockman. “I want to go and tell them to stop.” His new study, co-authored with Zoe Halfacree, a fellow small-animal expert at the college, will detail some of the injuries suffered by pets when a game of fetch goes wrong. They include:
— Dogs left paralysed after being stabbed in the back of the throat by a stick that then enters the spinal cord.
— Animals left with serious internal injuries when a spinning stick jams between the foreleg and chest as they try to catch it on the move.
— Dogs who suffer a slow death as infection spreads from tiny fragments of wood left lodged in a wound.
His advice will surprise many of the nation’s 7m dog owners. Even the Kennel Club includes pictures of dogs carrying sticks on its website. Many veterinary practices say they have become familiar with the risks because of the number of dogs they treat.
Brockman said that for owners there is another problem with throwing sticks for dogs – the huge cost of treating injuries. “I have seen injuries that have cost up to 5,000 pounds in treatment fees – but where the dog has still died in the end,” he said. Brockman added that people who get their pets to chase after balls may also be behaving irresponsibly. “You must make sure the size of ball is right for the dog,” said Brockman. “I have had to operate on dogs that have swallowed tennis balls too.”
Source
Peek inside Britain's schools and shudder
If you want to know how bad the future will be, take a look at our schools, and shudder. We know that they are nurseries of ignorance, which is why we have to import disciplined, hard-working, competent young Poles to do so much of the work in this country. We should also be concerned that they are places of fear and violence, where authority is nothing but a joke.
The police have admitted (under Freedom of Information laws) that they were called to violent incidents at least 7,000 times in English schools last year. Since FoI disclosures are about the only Government statistics we can trust, I think we should take this seriously, though - since not all police forces replied - the figure is probably much higher. There is no reason to think that things are much better in Scotland or Wales.
The Sixties revolution, which destroyed the authority of parents and teachers alike, will soon reach its long-cherished goal. Everything stuffy, traditional, repressive, old-fashioned and boring has been swept away in the world of the young. They are all free now. The trouble is that they do not know how to be free, because they have also been taught that morals are `judgmental', religion is `outdated' and that adults are just obsolete ex-teenagers groping their way to the grave, a nuisance to be ignored or violently shoved aside.
They have discovered that the law is not just feeble (though it is) but that it frequently punishes those who try to uphold what used to be the rules of civilisation. And that, while we now have armed policemen licensed to kill virtually at will, our authorities recoil in horror at the very idea of an adult smacking a child. Listen to this slightly edited account of a day in a supposedly reputable school in a prosperous and middle-class area of one of the Home Counties. It is written by a highly experienced teacher, returning to work after a few years away.
The result of this was that the teacher concerned was accused, by another pupil, of the heinous crime of `smacking'. Thanks to this, the person involved has given up teaching and is - quite reasonably - worried in case the Useless Police and the CPS are called in and mount one of the zealous life-ruining prosecutions of innocent teachers that they so much enjoy.
Now, listen carefully, to see if you can hear any Sixties liberals admitting that they were wrong to dismantle adult authority. And listen even more carefully to see if you can discover a `Conservative' politician with the courage to say that this must be put right, that marriage is miles better than non-marriage, that a man without a conscience is wilder than any beast, that fathers should be respected, that parents must be allowed to smack, that teachers should be able to cane.
All you will hear is silence, mingled with the sound of boots kicking a human head as if it were a football, the head of another poor fool who tried to stand up for what was right, and thought he could appeal to the better natures of people who have been brought up feral, and have no better natures.
Source
Home for retired British missionaries loses grant - because it won't ask residents if they are lesbians
Apparently, respecting the privacy of elderly ladies is not included in socialist "caring"
A care home where elderly Christian residents refused to answer ‘intrusive’ questions about their sexuality is at the centre of a bitter legal battle after its council grant was axed. Brighton & Hove Council told the home to ask pensioners four times a year about their sexual orientation under its ‘fair access and diversity’ policies, which stem from New Labour equality laws. Council chiefs also accused the charity that runs the home of ‘institutional discrimination’, before cutting a 13,000 pound grant towards warden services.
Pilgrim Homes, which operates ten schemes for elderly Christians across the UK, says it has never breached the law and is now suing the council, accusing it of religious discrimination. Andrew Jessop, the charity’s chief executive, said: ‘The council has taken overzealousness to the extreme. People in their 90s are very vulnerable and shouldn’t be treated in this way.’
Tensions began last year when the council imposed stricter criteria on organisations it supported to ‘comply’ with the Equality Act 2006 and the Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2007. It circulated a questionnaire to the Pilgrim Home in Egremont Place, Brighton, which houses 39 single Christians aged over 80, including former missionaries and a minister. Phil Wainwright, director of human resources for Pilgrim Homes, said he was told by the council the home had to ask residents if they were lesbian, gay, bisexual, heterosexual or ‘unsure’, even if they objected. Many of the elderly rebelled, however, and the home wrote to the council saying residents did not want to participate. Mr Wainwright said: ‘There was a strong feeling among people in the home that the questions were inappropriate and intrusive. They felt they had come to Pilgrim Homes because of its Christian ethos and were upset they were not protected from such intrusions.’
But Brighton & Hove Council complained about the home’s ‘negative response’ and argued that because the home had a Christian ethos, gay people might be deterred from applying. It cited the ‘resistance’ to using images of elderly gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender people in the home’s leaflets, saying this meant gays and lesbians ‘would not feel comfortable’ applying for a place. The council then announced it was axeing the grant because there had been ‘limited progress’ in making the home accessible to the homosexual community.
Mr Wainwright said the charity was open to anyone with orthodox beliefs. He said: ‘We have every reason to believe that we have given places to gay Christians, and no questions were ever asked. The council hasn’t demonstrated any discrimination on our part. We believe it is Brighton Council that is institutionally discriminatory.’
MPs last night backed the charity, which fears other councils that provide it with grants totalling more than 100,000, could follow Brighton’s lead. Ann Widdecombe, former Tory Home Office Minister, said: ‘The equality law does not oblige anyone to ask intrusive questions. This sort of thing needs to be nipped in the bud.’ David Davies, Tory MP for Monmouth, said: ‘It is absolutely disgraceful that the council has tried to get 90-year-olds, from a generation that wasn’t obsessed with sex, to put intimate information on to one of its forms.’
But Brighton & Hove Council said: ‘We have never expected any residents to answer questions about their sexuality if they preferred not to do so. ‘The Government specifically states the home must be open to the gay and lesbian community and that it must demonstrate this to qualify for funding. In the absence of any willingness to do this, funding has been withdrawn.’
Source
Patient safety at risk as NHS repairs ignored
Patients are being put in danger because of a backlog of hundreds of millions of pounds of urgent repairs at hospitals
More than half of hospital trusts have a backlog of repairs which the NHS says need to be urgently completed to ensure patient safety. The NHS defines the work is so pressing that it "must be addressed with urgent priority in order to prevent catastrophic failure, major disruption to clinical services or deficiencies in safety liable to cause serious injury and/or prosecution". Yet despite the urgency of the work, the new figures show that the level of outstanding urgent repairs rose last year, by 11 million to 310 million pounds.
Crumbling buildings and failings in the infrastructure of hospitals have been repeatedly linked to risks to patient safety. Last year, the official investigation into Britain's deadliest outbreak of the infection Clostridium Difficile, which killed more than 90 patients at Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells hospitals cited its high maintenance backlog as a contributing factor in the spread of the disease.
The figures obtained by the Conservatives reveal that more than 120 of England's 210 hospital trusts admitted to a backlog of urgent repairs in the financial year which ended in April 2008. Imperial College Healthcare trust, which runs Hammersmith and St Marys Hospitals, had an urgent repair backlog of 27 million pounds, a figure which was almost matched by the bill at Guys and St Thomas foundation trust. Hospitals in North West London, Worthing and Southlands and Nottingham also reported an urgent backlog of more than 10 million.
Eight years ago, the Government pledged to reduce the total NHS maintenance bill, which then stood at 3.1 billion, by one quarter. The new figures show in fact the total bill has soared to more than 4 billion, including a 29 per cent increase in the last two years. The only category of repairs where the bill fell during 2007/2008 was among those defined as carrying the lowest risk to patients and services.
Shadow health secretary Andrew Lansley described the findings as "very disturbing". He said: "Over the last eight years the Government has done nothing to address this problem and things are going from bad to worse. The Government has no excuse for needlessly putting patients and NHS staff at risk like this." Mr Lansley said the Government could not pretend it was unaware of the issue, since hospitals reported their figures to the Department of Health each year.
A spokesperson for the Department of Health said hospital trusts were responsible for prioritising their investment decisions, and said the Government had invested 12bn in NHS buildings since 2000.
Source
Illegal immigration and soft-touch Britain
They know that once they set foot in Britain they are there to stay. Britain finds heaps of reasons why it cannot deport them. It might violate their right to a good family life, for instance. I'm not joking! Google "Chindamo" if you doubt it
Britain was last night warned to brace itself for a new wave of illegal immigrants from France as thousands prepared to cross the channel. More than 2,000 are in and around Calais and the surrounding area and all are determined to claim asylum in the UK. And only a change in Britain’s open door immigration and asylum policies will stop more coming, the French charity C’Sur claims. Spokesman Father Jean-Pierre Boutoille told the Daily Express: “There are more than 2,000 migrants in the Calais region and they are all determined to get to Britain. “They will keep coming for as long as Britain maintains its strange asylum and immigration systems. He added: “Many are ill with tuberculosis and scabies.”
And last night the Immigration Minister Phil Woolas was urged to make good his promise to crackdown on illegal migrants. UKIP Leader Nigel Farage said: “We will now see if Phil Woolas is serious about getting tough on illegal migrants.” He added: “What is France doing allowing these camps to be set up in northern France. "There is no reason for them to be there other than for the facilitation of migrants into the UK illegally.” Matthew Elliott from the TaxPayers’ Alliance said: “The British immigration system needs urgent reform – at present it is costly, inefficient and badly administered.
“Returning asylum seekers in a speedier and more efficient way would be better for everyone – fairer to taxpayers, who foot the bill and fairer to genuine asylum seekers who want a speedy resolution to their claim and more effective at deterring false claimants who will be removed quickly. Without reform our immigration system will buckle as new waves of illegal immigrants seek to exploit the system.”
Small camps have sprung up close to the ferry ports of Calais and Dunkirk, but also next to important road transport routes to Britain. There are also groups in Cherbourg and in Ostend, Belgium. Yesterday the Daily Express found migrants from Iraq and Afghanistan at the new camps close to the main Brussels to Calais motorway at Grande Synthe and Teteghem and migrants from Ethiopia and Eritrea at a new camp close to the main Lille to Calais motorway at Steenvoorde.
All told how they had spent thousands of pounds getting so far and who they were determined to start a new life in Britain. In Dunkirk Afghan Iqbal said: “I was a soldier for the Northern Alliance in the war against the Taliban. Now I must get to Britain. I cannot go back to Afghanistan.” In Grande Synthe Iraqi Mahmed said: “I had to leave my home in northern Iraq because my life was in danger. I will go to England. I have spent a lot of money getting this far and I will not stop until I get there.”
Last night the Home Office said the immigration services were working to stop illegal immigrants getting into the country. A UK Border Agency spokesman said: “We already have one of the toughest borders in the world and we are determined to ensure it stays that way.”
Source
2008 was the year man-made global warming was disproved
Looking back over my columns of the past 12 months, one of their major themes was neatly encapsulated by two recent items from The Daily Telegraph. The first, on May 21, headed Climate change threat to Alpine ski resorts, reported that the entire Alpine "winter sports industry" could soon "grind to a halt for lack of snow". The second, on December 19, headed The Alps have best snow conditions in a generation, reported that this winter's Alpine snowfalls "look set to beat all records by New Year's Day".
Easily one of the most important stories of 2008 has been all the evidence suggesting that this may be looked back on as the year when there was a turning point in the great worldwide panic over man-made global warming. Just when politicians in Europe and America have been adopting the most costly and damaging measures politicians have ever proposed, to combat this supposed menace, the tide has turned in three significant respects.
First, all over the world, temperatures have been dropping in a way wholly unpredicted by all those computer models which have been used as the main drivers of the scare. Last winter, as temperatures plummeted, many parts of the world had snowfalls on a scale not seen for decades. This winter, with the whole of Canada and half the US under snow, looks likely to be even worse. After several years flatlining, global temperatures have dropped sharply enough to cancel out much of their net rise in the 20th century.
Ever shriller and more frantic has become the insistence of the warmists, cheered on by their army of media groupies such as the BBC, that the last 10 years have been the "hottest in history" and that the North Pole would soon be ice-free - as the poles remain defiantly icebound and those polar bears fail to drown. All those hysterical predictions that we are seeing more droughts and hurricanes than ever before have infuriatingly failed to materialise.
Even the more cautious scientific acolytes of the official orthodoxy now admit that, thanks to "natural factors" such as ocean currents, temperatures have failed to rise as predicted (although they plaintively assure us that this cooling effect is merely "masking the underlying warming trend", and that the temperature rise will resume worse than ever by the middle of the next decade).
Secondly, 2008 was the year when any pretence that there was a "scientific consensus" in favour of man-made global warming collapsed. At long last, as in the Manhattan Declaration last March, hundreds of proper scientists, including many of the world's most eminent climate experts, have been rallying to pour scorn on that "consensus" which was only a politically engineered artefact, based on ever more blatantly manipulated data and computer models programmed to produce no more than convenient fictions.
Thirdly, as banks collapsed and the global economy plunged into its worst recession for decades, harsh reality at last began to break in on those self-deluding dreams which have for so long possessed almost every politician in the western world. As we saw in this month's Poznan conference, when 10,000 politicians, officials and "environmentalists" gathered to plan next year's "son of Kyoto" treaty in Copenhagen, panicking politicians are waking up to the fact that the world can no longer afford all those quixotic schemes for "combating climate change" with which they were so happy to indulge themselves in more comfortable times.
Suddenly it has become rather less appealing that we should divert trillions of dollars, pounds and euros into the fantasy that we could reduce emissions of carbon dioxide by 80 per cent. All those grandiose projects for "emissions trading", "carbon capture", building tens of thousands more useless wind turbines, switching vast areas of farmland from producing food to "biofuels", are being exposed as no more than enormously damaging and futile gestures, costing astronomic sums we no longer possess.
As 2009 dawns, it is time we in Britain faced up to the genuine crisis now fast approaching from the fact that - unless we get on very soon with building enough proper power stations to fill our looming "energy gap" - within a few years our lights will go out and what remains of our economy will judder to a halt. After years of infantile displacement activity, it is high time our politicians - along with those of the EU and President Obama's US - were brought back with a mighty jolt into contact with the real world.
Source
And balls are suspect too. The British safety mania never lets up
Fetch, doggy – but not before listening to some vital safety information. One of Britain’s most eminent vets has warned that dogs suffer as many injuries chasing and catching sticks as they do on Britain’s roads. Owners are being advised that to protect their pets from accidental stabbing or choking, they should never throw sticks. Instead they should use rubber throwing toys or a suitably sized ball.
Dan Brockman, professor of small animal surgery at the Royal Veterinary College, has catalogued dozens of serious injuries and infections, almost all the result of animals being stabbed as they rushed after a sharp stick. “When I see people throwing sticks for their dogs in the park I just get so frustrated,” said Brockman. “I want to go and tell them to stop.” His new study, co-authored with Zoe Halfacree, a fellow small-animal expert at the college, will detail some of the injuries suffered by pets when a game of fetch goes wrong. They include:
— Dogs left paralysed after being stabbed in the back of the throat by a stick that then enters the spinal cord.
— Animals left with serious internal injuries when a spinning stick jams between the foreleg and chest as they try to catch it on the move.
— Dogs who suffer a slow death as infection spreads from tiny fragments of wood left lodged in a wound.
His advice will surprise many of the nation’s 7m dog owners. Even the Kennel Club includes pictures of dogs carrying sticks on its website. Many veterinary practices say they have become familiar with the risks because of the number of dogs they treat.
Brockman said that for owners there is another problem with throwing sticks for dogs – the huge cost of treating injuries. “I have seen injuries that have cost up to 5,000 pounds in treatment fees – but where the dog has still died in the end,” he said. Brockman added that people who get their pets to chase after balls may also be behaving irresponsibly. “You must make sure the size of ball is right for the dog,” said Brockman. “I have had to operate on dogs that have swallowed tennis balls too.”
Source
Peek inside Britain's schools and shudder
If you want to know how bad the future will be, take a look at our schools, and shudder. We know that they are nurseries of ignorance, which is why we have to import disciplined, hard-working, competent young Poles to do so much of the work in this country. We should also be concerned that they are places of fear and violence, where authority is nothing but a joke.
The police have admitted (under Freedom of Information laws) that they were called to violent incidents at least 7,000 times in English schools last year. Since FoI disclosures are about the only Government statistics we can trust, I think we should take this seriously, though - since not all police forces replied - the figure is probably much higher. There is no reason to think that things are much better in Scotland or Wales.
The Sixties revolution, which destroyed the authority of parents and teachers alike, will soon reach its long-cherished goal. Everything stuffy, traditional, repressive, old-fashioned and boring has been swept away in the world of the young. They are all free now. The trouble is that they do not know how to be free, because they have also been taught that morals are `judgmental', religion is `outdated' and that adults are just obsolete ex-teenagers groping their way to the grave, a nuisance to be ignored or violently shoved aside.
They have discovered that the law is not just feeble (though it is) but that it frequently punishes those who try to uphold what used to be the rules of civilisation. And that, while we now have armed policemen licensed to kill virtually at will, our authorities recoil in horror at the very idea of an adult smacking a child. Listen to this slightly edited account of a day in a supposedly reputable school in a prosperous and middle-class area of one of the Home Counties. It is written by a highly experienced teacher, returning to work after a few years away.
`The class turned up totally out of control... it was similar to controlling a riot ... it took about 15 minutes to sit them down and make them do some work. `A boy in the front row turned his back on me and decided that he would try to wind the class back up into a frenzy, by calling out, waving his arms and by completely disregarding my presence. 'I thought he was going to mount the desks in front of him and cause other pupils - or himself - some damage. I had no intention of smacking him, but to restrain him from his own actions I went to grab him.'
The result of this was that the teacher concerned was accused, by another pupil, of the heinous crime of `smacking'. Thanks to this, the person involved has given up teaching and is - quite reasonably - worried in case the Useless Police and the CPS are called in and mount one of the zealous life-ruining prosecutions of innocent teachers that they so much enjoy.
Now, listen carefully, to see if you can hear any Sixties liberals admitting that they were wrong to dismantle adult authority. And listen even more carefully to see if you can discover a `Conservative' politician with the courage to say that this must be put right, that marriage is miles better than non-marriage, that a man without a conscience is wilder than any beast, that fathers should be respected, that parents must be allowed to smack, that teachers should be able to cane.
All you will hear is silence, mingled with the sound of boots kicking a human head as if it were a football, the head of another poor fool who tried to stand up for what was right, and thought he could appeal to the better natures of people who have been brought up feral, and have no better natures.
Source
Home for retired British missionaries loses grant - because it won't ask residents if they are lesbians
Apparently, respecting the privacy of elderly ladies is not included in socialist "caring"
A care home where elderly Christian residents refused to answer ‘intrusive’ questions about their sexuality is at the centre of a bitter legal battle after its council grant was axed. Brighton & Hove Council told the home to ask pensioners four times a year about their sexual orientation under its ‘fair access and diversity’ policies, which stem from New Labour equality laws. Council chiefs also accused the charity that runs the home of ‘institutional discrimination’, before cutting a 13,000 pound grant towards warden services.
Pilgrim Homes, which operates ten schemes for elderly Christians across the UK, says it has never breached the law and is now suing the council, accusing it of religious discrimination. Andrew Jessop, the charity’s chief executive, said: ‘The council has taken overzealousness to the extreme. People in their 90s are very vulnerable and shouldn’t be treated in this way.’
Tensions began last year when the council imposed stricter criteria on organisations it supported to ‘comply’ with the Equality Act 2006 and the Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2007. It circulated a questionnaire to the Pilgrim Home in Egremont Place, Brighton, which houses 39 single Christians aged over 80, including former missionaries and a minister. Phil Wainwright, director of human resources for Pilgrim Homes, said he was told by the council the home had to ask residents if they were lesbian, gay, bisexual, heterosexual or ‘unsure’, even if they objected. Many of the elderly rebelled, however, and the home wrote to the council saying residents did not want to participate. Mr Wainwright said: ‘There was a strong feeling among people in the home that the questions were inappropriate and intrusive. They felt they had come to Pilgrim Homes because of its Christian ethos and were upset they were not protected from such intrusions.’
But Brighton & Hove Council complained about the home’s ‘negative response’ and argued that because the home had a Christian ethos, gay people might be deterred from applying. It cited the ‘resistance’ to using images of elderly gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender people in the home’s leaflets, saying this meant gays and lesbians ‘would not feel comfortable’ applying for a place. The council then announced it was axeing the grant because there had been ‘limited progress’ in making the home accessible to the homosexual community.
Mr Wainwright said the charity was open to anyone with orthodox beliefs. He said: ‘We have every reason to believe that we have given places to gay Christians, and no questions were ever asked. The council hasn’t demonstrated any discrimination on our part. We believe it is Brighton Council that is institutionally discriminatory.’
MPs last night backed the charity, which fears other councils that provide it with grants totalling more than 100,000, could follow Brighton’s lead. Ann Widdecombe, former Tory Home Office Minister, said: ‘The equality law does not oblige anyone to ask intrusive questions. This sort of thing needs to be nipped in the bud.’ David Davies, Tory MP for Monmouth, said: ‘It is absolutely disgraceful that the council has tried to get 90-year-olds, from a generation that wasn’t obsessed with sex, to put intimate information on to one of its forms.’
But Brighton & Hove Council said: ‘We have never expected any residents to answer questions about their sexuality if they preferred not to do so. ‘The Government specifically states the home must be open to the gay and lesbian community and that it must demonstrate this to qualify for funding. In the absence of any willingness to do this, funding has been withdrawn.’
Source
Patient safety at risk as NHS repairs ignored
Patients are being put in danger because of a backlog of hundreds of millions of pounds of urgent repairs at hospitals
More than half of hospital trusts have a backlog of repairs which the NHS says need to be urgently completed to ensure patient safety. The NHS defines the work is so pressing that it "must be addressed with urgent priority in order to prevent catastrophic failure, major disruption to clinical services or deficiencies in safety liable to cause serious injury and/or prosecution". Yet despite the urgency of the work, the new figures show that the level of outstanding urgent repairs rose last year, by 11 million to 310 million pounds.
Crumbling buildings and failings in the infrastructure of hospitals have been repeatedly linked to risks to patient safety. Last year, the official investigation into Britain's deadliest outbreak of the infection Clostridium Difficile, which killed more than 90 patients at Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells hospitals cited its high maintenance backlog as a contributing factor in the spread of the disease.
The figures obtained by the Conservatives reveal that more than 120 of England's 210 hospital trusts admitted to a backlog of urgent repairs in the financial year which ended in April 2008. Imperial College Healthcare trust, which runs Hammersmith and St Marys Hospitals, had an urgent repair backlog of 27 million pounds, a figure which was almost matched by the bill at Guys and St Thomas foundation trust. Hospitals in North West London, Worthing and Southlands and Nottingham also reported an urgent backlog of more than 10 million.
Eight years ago, the Government pledged to reduce the total NHS maintenance bill, which then stood at 3.1 billion, by one quarter. The new figures show in fact the total bill has soared to more than 4 billion, including a 29 per cent increase in the last two years. The only category of repairs where the bill fell during 2007/2008 was among those defined as carrying the lowest risk to patients and services.
Shadow health secretary Andrew Lansley described the findings as "very disturbing". He said: "Over the last eight years the Government has done nothing to address this problem and things are going from bad to worse. The Government has no excuse for needlessly putting patients and NHS staff at risk like this." Mr Lansley said the Government could not pretend it was unaware of the issue, since hospitals reported their figures to the Department of Health each year.
A spokesperson for the Department of Health said hospital trusts were responsible for prioritising their investment decisions, and said the Government had invested 12bn in NHS buildings since 2000.
Source
Illegal immigration and soft-touch Britain
They know that once they set foot in Britain they are there to stay. Britain finds heaps of reasons why it cannot deport them. It might violate their right to a good family life, for instance. I'm not joking! Google "Chindamo" if you doubt it
Britain was last night warned to brace itself for a new wave of illegal immigrants from France as thousands prepared to cross the channel. More than 2,000 are in and around Calais and the surrounding area and all are determined to claim asylum in the UK. And only a change in Britain’s open door immigration and asylum policies will stop more coming, the French charity C’Sur claims. Spokesman Father Jean-Pierre Boutoille told the Daily Express: “There are more than 2,000 migrants in the Calais region and they are all determined to get to Britain. “They will keep coming for as long as Britain maintains its strange asylum and immigration systems. He added: “Many are ill with tuberculosis and scabies.”
And last night the Immigration Minister Phil Woolas was urged to make good his promise to crackdown on illegal migrants. UKIP Leader Nigel Farage said: “We will now see if Phil Woolas is serious about getting tough on illegal migrants.” He added: “What is France doing allowing these camps to be set up in northern France. "There is no reason for them to be there other than for the facilitation of migrants into the UK illegally.” Matthew Elliott from the TaxPayers’ Alliance said: “The British immigration system needs urgent reform – at present it is costly, inefficient and badly administered.
“Returning asylum seekers in a speedier and more efficient way would be better for everyone – fairer to taxpayers, who foot the bill and fairer to genuine asylum seekers who want a speedy resolution to their claim and more effective at deterring false claimants who will be removed quickly. Without reform our immigration system will buckle as new waves of illegal immigrants seek to exploit the system.”
Small camps have sprung up close to the ferry ports of Calais and Dunkirk, but also next to important road transport routes to Britain. There are also groups in Cherbourg and in Ostend, Belgium. Yesterday the Daily Express found migrants from Iraq and Afghanistan at the new camps close to the main Brussels to Calais motorway at Grande Synthe and Teteghem and migrants from Ethiopia and Eritrea at a new camp close to the main Lille to Calais motorway at Steenvoorde.
All told how they had spent thousands of pounds getting so far and who they were determined to start a new life in Britain. In Dunkirk Afghan Iqbal said: “I was a soldier for the Northern Alliance in the war against the Taliban. Now I must get to Britain. I cannot go back to Afghanistan.” In Grande Synthe Iraqi Mahmed said: “I had to leave my home in northern Iraq because my life was in danger. I will go to England. I have spent a lot of money getting this far and I will not stop until I get there.”
Last night the Home Office said the immigration services were working to stop illegal immigrants getting into the country. A UK Border Agency spokesman said: “We already have one of the toughest borders in the world and we are determined to ensure it stays that way.”
Source
2008 was the year man-made global warming was disproved
Looking back over my columns of the past 12 months, one of their major themes was neatly encapsulated by two recent items from The Daily Telegraph. The first, on May 21, headed Climate change threat to Alpine ski resorts, reported that the entire Alpine "winter sports industry" could soon "grind to a halt for lack of snow". The second, on December 19, headed The Alps have best snow conditions in a generation, reported that this winter's Alpine snowfalls "look set to beat all records by New Year's Day".
Easily one of the most important stories of 2008 has been all the evidence suggesting that this may be looked back on as the year when there was a turning point in the great worldwide panic over man-made global warming. Just when politicians in Europe and America have been adopting the most costly and damaging measures politicians have ever proposed, to combat this supposed menace, the tide has turned in three significant respects.
First, all over the world, temperatures have been dropping in a way wholly unpredicted by all those computer models which have been used as the main drivers of the scare. Last winter, as temperatures plummeted, many parts of the world had snowfalls on a scale not seen for decades. This winter, with the whole of Canada and half the US under snow, looks likely to be even worse. After several years flatlining, global temperatures have dropped sharply enough to cancel out much of their net rise in the 20th century.
Ever shriller and more frantic has become the insistence of the warmists, cheered on by their army of media groupies such as the BBC, that the last 10 years have been the "hottest in history" and that the North Pole would soon be ice-free - as the poles remain defiantly icebound and those polar bears fail to drown. All those hysterical predictions that we are seeing more droughts and hurricanes than ever before have infuriatingly failed to materialise.
Even the more cautious scientific acolytes of the official orthodoxy now admit that, thanks to "natural factors" such as ocean currents, temperatures have failed to rise as predicted (although they plaintively assure us that this cooling effect is merely "masking the underlying warming trend", and that the temperature rise will resume worse than ever by the middle of the next decade).
Secondly, 2008 was the year when any pretence that there was a "scientific consensus" in favour of man-made global warming collapsed. At long last, as in the Manhattan Declaration last March, hundreds of proper scientists, including many of the world's most eminent climate experts, have been rallying to pour scorn on that "consensus" which was only a politically engineered artefact, based on ever more blatantly manipulated data and computer models programmed to produce no more than convenient fictions.
Thirdly, as banks collapsed and the global economy plunged into its worst recession for decades, harsh reality at last began to break in on those self-deluding dreams which have for so long possessed almost every politician in the western world. As we saw in this month's Poznan conference, when 10,000 politicians, officials and "environmentalists" gathered to plan next year's "son of Kyoto" treaty in Copenhagen, panicking politicians are waking up to the fact that the world can no longer afford all those quixotic schemes for "combating climate change" with which they were so happy to indulge themselves in more comfortable times.
Suddenly it has become rather less appealing that we should divert trillions of dollars, pounds and euros into the fantasy that we could reduce emissions of carbon dioxide by 80 per cent. All those grandiose projects for "emissions trading", "carbon capture", building tens of thousands more useless wind turbines, switching vast areas of farmland from producing food to "biofuels", are being exposed as no more than enormously damaging and futile gestures, costing astronomic sums we no longer possess.
As 2009 dawns, it is time we in Britain faced up to the genuine crisis now fast approaching from the fact that - unless we get on very soon with building enough proper power stations to fill our looming "energy gap" - within a few years our lights will go out and what remains of our economy will judder to a halt. After years of infantile displacement activity, it is high time our politicians - along with those of the EU and President Obama's US - were brought back with a mighty jolt into contact with the real world.
Source
Sunday, December 28, 2008
British police uninterested in car theft
But say anything critical about homosexuality and they will be there like a shot
When Keith Harding found his son's stolen car, he thought he had done all the hard work for the police. He phoned and told them it was parked outside a nearby block of flats, and waited for action. But to his astonishment officers said all they could do was send someone to pick up the car at a cost of 125 pounds. They said they did not have the resources to investigate the case.
Mr Harding, 51, a construction manager, said: `When they told me they couldn't do anything but charge me to tow the car away, I just couldn't believe it. `The officer apologised because he was embarrassed and I was furious. The culprits were probably inside that block of flats and they were going to get away with it.'
The case follows the Daily Mail's revelation earlier this week that officers are routinely failing to investigate crimes reported by the public. Nearly four in every ten offences are `screened out' by officers who claim they have little chance of catching the culprit.
The BMW was stolen on November 21 from the Harding family's home in Rayleigh, Essex, by thieves who broke into the house and took the keys and other items, including a purse belonging to Mr Harding's wife's. The purse was found by a member of the public only ten minutes' drive away, so Mr Harding decided to play detective. He drove around nearby roads until he spotted his son's car in a private car park for a block of flats. Mr Harding immediately called the police, who took an hour to arrive. The officer then called CID to see if a detective was available to investigate how the car ended up parked in the block of flats. But after another hour, CID rang back to say that `no resources' were available.
Mr Harding then drove the car home after a friend dropped off a spare key, rather than pay the 125 pound tow fee. Forensic tests were carried out on the car the next day. Mr Harding said: `We were still scared that the thieves would come back for the car because they had the keys and knew our address, so I had to park it at a friend's house. `I think the police are just worried about statistics and making sure they are seen rather than actually solving crimes.'
A spokesman for Essex Police said the officer's advice on retrieving Mr Harding's car was `usual' and forces across the country charge 125 for this service. He added: `Investigations continue, including the review of other intelligence available to police.'
Source
Teacher criticises British 'can't touch' culture after being throttled by pupil as colleagues looked on
A teacher who won 250,000 pounds compensation after a pupil tried to strangle him has criticised a 'can't touch' culture in schools after other staff initially refused to intervene. Colin Adams, 50, was attacked by a 12- year- old boy, who knocked him to the floor before punching and kicking him, and grabbing his neck. But despite other teachers yelling at the boy to stop, no one stepped in to help. Mr Adams's ordeal ended only after another teacher eventually came to his aid by forcing the boy's thumbs back to release his hold. Later, the unnamed teacher admitted to Mr Adams that he was afraid the boy, who cannot be named for legal reasons, would accuse him of assault.
It later emerged the boy had a history of violence, having previously attacked pupils and a security guard at a library opposite Kingsford Community School in East London. However, he was not properly disciplined over the assaults and staff were not warned about his past.
Mr Adams yesterday criticised Government-backed 'inclusion' policies, which he claimed had led to pupils with severe behavioural problems being taught in schools where staff are not trained to cope with them. His comments come only days after figures released under the Freedom of Information Act revealed police were called to schools 10,000 times last year to deal with violent incidents.
Mr Adams's attacker was expelled after the assault in 2004 and given a referral order by the courts, which involved him being supervised for six months. It is rumoured he was sent on a holiday as 'a reward' for completing it.
As a result of the attack, which lasted for several minutes, Mr Adams, of Ockendon, Essex, was forced to give up work after suffering severe stress and back problems. His distress was further compounded by a lengthy court battle to win compensation, charted by his wife Sharon, 47, in a diary she started after the assault. Four-and-a-half years later, he secured 250,000 in an out-of-court settlement from Newham Council.
Writing in her diary, Mrs Adams said the boy had been misbehaving in another teacher's class and Mr Adams, as head of department, had gone to his aid. He ordered the boy to leave but the pupil refused. Mr Adams then left the room and was attacked by the boy from behind. She wrote: 'He came around to find the boy strangling him. The teachers told the boy to let go, but he did not. 'Teachers are very wary of touching children these days as children all know their rights and they can take a teacher to court. 'It only came to an end when a male teacher grabbed hold of one of the boy's thumbs and caused him pain and made the boy let go. 'This teacher didn't want to admit what he'd done for fear of being accused of assault.
'The police informed the school they could have kicked the boy in his back to make him let go, but I am not sure there is any teacher anywhere who would be willing to do that for fear of repercussions.' Mr Adams, who has two grown-up children, added: 'The whole thing has left a bitter taste. We are trying our best to move forward but it's a slow process.'
A Newham Council spokesman said: 'Our staff have the right to work without fear of assault or harassment. 'In this particular case, an appropriate financial settlement was agreed following advice from our insurers, which was based on Mr Adams's loss of salary, future loss of earnings and damages for the injury he suffered.'
Source
The British Labor Party government loves its criminals
Almost 2,200 foreign prisoners have been released from jail early with up to 168 pounds each of taxpayers' cash to compensate them for the loss of bed and board. The criminals were released back on to the streets despite a promise by Gordon Brown that they would all be deported. The total cost of funding the handouts for the foreign inmates could be as much as 370,000 pounds.
The revelations will overshadow today's announcement by the Home Office that it removed a record 5,000 foreign criminals last year. Ministers said they were fulfilling a commitment by the Prime Minister, made in July 2007, to take tougher action in the wake of the foreign prisoners scandal. Those removed last year included 50 killers and attempted killers, more than 200 sex offenders and more than 1,500 drug offenders. But the Tories pointed out that Mr Brown had said all overseas criminals would be removed when he declared: 'If you commit a crime you will be deported. You play by the rules or you face the consequences.'
Research by the Tories discovered that not only did 2,196 foreign criminals escape removal, but they were allowed to leave jail 18 days before their sentence reached even the halfway point to ease overcrowding. To compensate them for the loss of accommodation and food they would have received in prison during this 18-day period, they were given up to 7 pounds a day from public funds, up to a maximum of 168.24 each.
In a dossier released last night, the Tories revealed that an estimated 3,000 foreign criminals were released without being deported last year, including those who were set free 18 days early. And the total number of foreign inmates has actually increased by 1,000 since the foreign prisoner fiasco, which led to the sacking of Charles Clarke as Home Secretary in 2006. The scandal prompted a review of deportation procedures after 1,000 inmates were mistakenly released without being even considered for removal. But despite a series of measures being put in place to speed up removals - including the introduction of 3,000 pound bribes for those who go home voluntarily - there are currently 11,168 overseas inmates, an increase of 11 per cent since 2006. The Government is also holding 543 foreign prisoners under immigration powers, because they finished their sentences before measures could be taken to deport them. With each place costing around 40,000 a year, this 'bed blocking' is costing the taxpayer œ22million per year, according to the Tories.
Shadow Justice Secretary Nick Herbert said: 'The Government want to create the impression that they're successfully deporting foreign national criminals, but the truth is that for every three prisoners they remove, two more are released on to the streets. 'Far from paying the price as Gordon Brown promised, foreign national offenders are being rewarded by serving less than half of their jail sentence and with taxpayers' cash in their back pockets.'
Many of them cannot be deported because of a combination of EU law and the Human Rights Act. The End of Custody Licence scheme was introduced in June 2007 primarily for British inmates, to free space in the chronically overcrowded prison system. But foreign nationals - who now have three jails dedicated exclusively to their detention - have been unexpected beneficiaries.
Source
NHS lost patient details 135 times in two years
The NHS has lost the confidential medical records and personal details of thousands of patients in a “catalogue of errors” uncovered by an investigation into how the health service handles data. A “fundamental re-examination” of how the NHS deals with personal data was demanded last night after research showed that a series of losses and thefts had potentially exposed the private details of 10,000 patients around the country. A total of 135 cases were reported, including the loss or theft of diaries, briefcases, CDs, laptops, memory sticks and, in one case, a vehicle containing patient records.
A back-up tape of an entire system was stolen from a general practice in the East of England this year. In another case, a laptop containing the records of 5,123 patients was stolen from the outpatients’ department of a hospital in the West Midlands.
The revelations will cast renewed doubt over the Government’s ability to handle personal data after a series of high-profile losses by Revenue & Customs and the ministries of Justice and Defence in the past year, and will raise further questions about the scheme to create a computerised national patient database to allow easier communication between GPs and hospitals. The Liberal Democrats, who carried out the series of Freedom of Information requests, called for the Government to scrap its plans for a national computerised database. Norman Lamb, the party’s health spokesman, has also written to Alan Johnson, the Health Secretary, with four other recommendations, including prohibiting the use of mobile devices to store patient records and publishing a set of minimum data protection standards.
Mr Lamb said: “These reports show utterly shocking lapses in security. Patients have a right to expect their personal information to be treated with the utmost care. “The degree of negligence in some cases is breathtaking, given the absolute sensitivity of patient data. There must be a fundamental re-examination of how the NHS deals with personal data. The NHS should regard lapses of standards of care as potential serious misconduct.”
The details, obtained through requests made to strategic health authorities, revealed incidents of data loss dating back as far as 2006. In some cases, private patient notes were found in public places or deserted buildings, or had been dumped in bins and skips. One loss of records was so serious that police and an NHS manager became involved. The incident occurred in January, when a district nurse took home activity sheets with patients’ names and addresses, which were stolen during a burglary.
Source
But say anything critical about homosexuality and they will be there like a shot
When Keith Harding found his son's stolen car, he thought he had done all the hard work for the police. He phoned and told them it was parked outside a nearby block of flats, and waited for action. But to his astonishment officers said all they could do was send someone to pick up the car at a cost of 125 pounds. They said they did not have the resources to investigate the case.
Mr Harding, 51, a construction manager, said: `When they told me they couldn't do anything but charge me to tow the car away, I just couldn't believe it. `The officer apologised because he was embarrassed and I was furious. The culprits were probably inside that block of flats and they were going to get away with it.'
The case follows the Daily Mail's revelation earlier this week that officers are routinely failing to investigate crimes reported by the public. Nearly four in every ten offences are `screened out' by officers who claim they have little chance of catching the culprit.
The BMW was stolen on November 21 from the Harding family's home in Rayleigh, Essex, by thieves who broke into the house and took the keys and other items, including a purse belonging to Mr Harding's wife's. The purse was found by a member of the public only ten minutes' drive away, so Mr Harding decided to play detective. He drove around nearby roads until he spotted his son's car in a private car park for a block of flats. Mr Harding immediately called the police, who took an hour to arrive. The officer then called CID to see if a detective was available to investigate how the car ended up parked in the block of flats. But after another hour, CID rang back to say that `no resources' were available.
Mr Harding then drove the car home after a friend dropped off a spare key, rather than pay the 125 pound tow fee. Forensic tests were carried out on the car the next day. Mr Harding said: `We were still scared that the thieves would come back for the car because they had the keys and knew our address, so I had to park it at a friend's house. `I think the police are just worried about statistics and making sure they are seen rather than actually solving crimes.'
A spokesman for Essex Police said the officer's advice on retrieving Mr Harding's car was `usual' and forces across the country charge 125 for this service. He added: `Investigations continue, including the review of other intelligence available to police.'
Source
Teacher criticises British 'can't touch' culture after being throttled by pupil as colleagues looked on
A teacher who won 250,000 pounds compensation after a pupil tried to strangle him has criticised a 'can't touch' culture in schools after other staff initially refused to intervene. Colin Adams, 50, was attacked by a 12- year- old boy, who knocked him to the floor before punching and kicking him, and grabbing his neck. But despite other teachers yelling at the boy to stop, no one stepped in to help. Mr Adams's ordeal ended only after another teacher eventually came to his aid by forcing the boy's thumbs back to release his hold. Later, the unnamed teacher admitted to Mr Adams that he was afraid the boy, who cannot be named for legal reasons, would accuse him of assault.
It later emerged the boy had a history of violence, having previously attacked pupils and a security guard at a library opposite Kingsford Community School in East London. However, he was not properly disciplined over the assaults and staff were not warned about his past.
Mr Adams yesterday criticised Government-backed 'inclusion' policies, which he claimed had led to pupils with severe behavioural problems being taught in schools where staff are not trained to cope with them. His comments come only days after figures released under the Freedom of Information Act revealed police were called to schools 10,000 times last year to deal with violent incidents.
Mr Adams's attacker was expelled after the assault in 2004 and given a referral order by the courts, which involved him being supervised for six months. It is rumoured he was sent on a holiday as 'a reward' for completing it.
As a result of the attack, which lasted for several minutes, Mr Adams, of Ockendon, Essex, was forced to give up work after suffering severe stress and back problems. His distress was further compounded by a lengthy court battle to win compensation, charted by his wife Sharon, 47, in a diary she started after the assault. Four-and-a-half years later, he secured 250,000 in an out-of-court settlement from Newham Council.
Writing in her diary, Mrs Adams said the boy had been misbehaving in another teacher's class and Mr Adams, as head of department, had gone to his aid. He ordered the boy to leave but the pupil refused. Mr Adams then left the room and was attacked by the boy from behind. She wrote: 'He came around to find the boy strangling him. The teachers told the boy to let go, but he did not. 'Teachers are very wary of touching children these days as children all know their rights and they can take a teacher to court. 'It only came to an end when a male teacher grabbed hold of one of the boy's thumbs and caused him pain and made the boy let go. 'This teacher didn't want to admit what he'd done for fear of being accused of assault.
'The police informed the school they could have kicked the boy in his back to make him let go, but I am not sure there is any teacher anywhere who would be willing to do that for fear of repercussions.' Mr Adams, who has two grown-up children, added: 'The whole thing has left a bitter taste. We are trying our best to move forward but it's a slow process.'
A Newham Council spokesman said: 'Our staff have the right to work without fear of assault or harassment. 'In this particular case, an appropriate financial settlement was agreed following advice from our insurers, which was based on Mr Adams's loss of salary, future loss of earnings and damages for the injury he suffered.'
Source
The British Labor Party government loves its criminals
Almost 2,200 foreign prisoners have been released from jail early with up to 168 pounds each of taxpayers' cash to compensate them for the loss of bed and board. The criminals were released back on to the streets despite a promise by Gordon Brown that they would all be deported. The total cost of funding the handouts for the foreign inmates could be as much as 370,000 pounds.
The revelations will overshadow today's announcement by the Home Office that it removed a record 5,000 foreign criminals last year. Ministers said they were fulfilling a commitment by the Prime Minister, made in July 2007, to take tougher action in the wake of the foreign prisoners scandal. Those removed last year included 50 killers and attempted killers, more than 200 sex offenders and more than 1,500 drug offenders. But the Tories pointed out that Mr Brown had said all overseas criminals would be removed when he declared: 'If you commit a crime you will be deported. You play by the rules or you face the consequences.'
Research by the Tories discovered that not only did 2,196 foreign criminals escape removal, but they were allowed to leave jail 18 days before their sentence reached even the halfway point to ease overcrowding. To compensate them for the loss of accommodation and food they would have received in prison during this 18-day period, they were given up to 7 pounds a day from public funds, up to a maximum of 168.24 each.
In a dossier released last night, the Tories revealed that an estimated 3,000 foreign criminals were released without being deported last year, including those who were set free 18 days early. And the total number of foreign inmates has actually increased by 1,000 since the foreign prisoner fiasco, which led to the sacking of Charles Clarke as Home Secretary in 2006. The scandal prompted a review of deportation procedures after 1,000 inmates were mistakenly released without being even considered for removal. But despite a series of measures being put in place to speed up removals - including the introduction of 3,000 pound bribes for those who go home voluntarily - there are currently 11,168 overseas inmates, an increase of 11 per cent since 2006. The Government is also holding 543 foreign prisoners under immigration powers, because they finished their sentences before measures could be taken to deport them. With each place costing around 40,000 a year, this 'bed blocking' is costing the taxpayer œ22million per year, according to the Tories.
Shadow Justice Secretary Nick Herbert said: 'The Government want to create the impression that they're successfully deporting foreign national criminals, but the truth is that for every three prisoners they remove, two more are released on to the streets. 'Far from paying the price as Gordon Brown promised, foreign national offenders are being rewarded by serving less than half of their jail sentence and with taxpayers' cash in their back pockets.'
Many of them cannot be deported because of a combination of EU law and the Human Rights Act. The End of Custody Licence scheme was introduced in June 2007 primarily for British inmates, to free space in the chronically overcrowded prison system. But foreign nationals - who now have three jails dedicated exclusively to their detention - have been unexpected beneficiaries.
Source
NHS lost patient details 135 times in two years
The NHS has lost the confidential medical records and personal details of thousands of patients in a “catalogue of errors” uncovered by an investigation into how the health service handles data. A “fundamental re-examination” of how the NHS deals with personal data was demanded last night after research showed that a series of losses and thefts had potentially exposed the private details of 10,000 patients around the country. A total of 135 cases were reported, including the loss or theft of diaries, briefcases, CDs, laptops, memory sticks and, in one case, a vehicle containing patient records.
A back-up tape of an entire system was stolen from a general practice in the East of England this year. In another case, a laptop containing the records of 5,123 patients was stolen from the outpatients’ department of a hospital in the West Midlands.
The revelations will cast renewed doubt over the Government’s ability to handle personal data after a series of high-profile losses by Revenue & Customs and the ministries of Justice and Defence in the past year, and will raise further questions about the scheme to create a computerised national patient database to allow easier communication between GPs and hospitals. The Liberal Democrats, who carried out the series of Freedom of Information requests, called for the Government to scrap its plans for a national computerised database. Norman Lamb, the party’s health spokesman, has also written to Alan Johnson, the Health Secretary, with four other recommendations, including prohibiting the use of mobile devices to store patient records and publishing a set of minimum data protection standards.
Mr Lamb said: “These reports show utterly shocking lapses in security. Patients have a right to expect their personal information to be treated with the utmost care. “The degree of negligence in some cases is breathtaking, given the absolute sensitivity of patient data. There must be a fundamental re-examination of how the NHS deals with personal data. The NHS should regard lapses of standards of care as potential serious misconduct.”
The details, obtained through requests made to strategic health authorities, revealed incidents of data loss dating back as far as 2006. In some cases, private patient notes were found in public places or deserted buildings, or had been dumped in bins and skips. One loss of records was so serious that police and an NHS manager became involved. The incident occurred in January, when a district nurse took home activity sheets with patients’ names and addresses, which were stolen during a burglary.
Source
Saturday, December 27, 2008
Standards for teachers: How amazing
Any standards at all have to be welcomed these days. Similar standards for students are too much to expect, of course. Do I sense a double standard there? Do teachers recognize what is needed to gain respect but not convey that to those they teach? "Everything is relative" certainly seems to be often taught. Traditional Leftist double standards, it would seem. Story from Britain below
Teachers must behave as pillars of the community and be role models to their pupils, the industry’s professional body said yesterday. Those who drink heavily and disgrace themselves - even outside school hours – face disciplinary action for bringing the profession into disrepute, whether or not they have broken the law. Some teachers have had to undergo counselling or provide medical proof of abstinence from alcohol to remain on the teaching register, the General Teaching Council admitted.
Yesterday the teaching council presented a draft of its new code of conduct for teachers, on which it is consulting. The wellbeing of children is the main thrust of the code, with an even higher billing than learning. Teachers could be disciplined if they fail to cooperate with social workers or do everything in their power to protect children, the draft code says. They should pick up on and address problems at the earliest possible stage. They must also report colleagues if they have concerns that their practice puts children at risk.
The draft code says that teachers have to demonstrate high standards of honesty and integrity, and uphold public trust and confidence in the teaching profession. This includes teachers “maintaining standards of behaviour both inside and outside school that are appropriate given their membership of an important and responsible profession”.
Keith Bartley, the chief executive of the General Teaching Council, admitted that expectations of teachers had increased significantly in the past few years. He said: “The new code will have to reflect the fact that teachers are working more closely with other professionals. Some of the cases that have had national prominence recently show that, if a teacher has concerns, they have a duty to raise and pass on those concerns.”
Whereas the previous code, drawn up in 2004, set out what teachers should not do, the 2008 draft describes in unambiguous terms how teachers are expected to behave. Sarah Stephens, director of policy at the teaching council, said: “It gives greater clarity about what it means to act as a role model, and about a teacher’s conduct outside the classroom.” Mr Bartley added that, at some of the organisation’s professional misconduct hearings, teachers had been required to agree to undergo therapy. He added that teachers could be found guilty of unacceptable conduct without breaking the law – for example by belonging to a party that held racist views. “We’re saying to teachers that, as individuals, they have to consider their place in society,” he said. “There’s a sense that this [code] has to reflect society’s expectations of the people to whom we commit our children.”
David James, the teaching council’s head of professional regulation, said: “We have the ability to apply conditions to a teacher’s registration. We can say to people, ‘You can remain a teacher but you must undertake retraining, or counselling, or provide evidence of abstinence from drinking’. That happens quite frequently.”
The draft code requires teachers to forge links with parents, and consider their views. It also says they must keep up to date with technology and social changes. The organisation is investigating what schools and local authorities are doing to tackle the problem of incompetent teachers. It will report the findings of its research next year.
Source
NHS hospital apologises after baby was born on floor
A pregnant woman was left unattended for hours and had to give birth on a hospital floor despite her desperate appeals for a bed. Health board officials have apologised to Lynne Neilson, 36, whose baby started to arrive as she stood, still clothed, in a cold assessment room after hours of waiting to be admitted to the labour ward. As the head appeared, a midwife ran in just in time to put a paper mat on the floor and catch the baby, who had the umbilical cord around her neck.
Mrs Neilson and her husband, Gavin, made an official complaint to the hospital and to Nicola Sturgeon, the Health Minister, after the incident at Edinburgh Royal Infirmary. NHS Lothian announced on Christmas Eve that it had begun an investigation and had apologised.
The couple had arrived at the Simpson Memorial Maternity Pavilion early on December 5, but went home when the labour slowed. They returned at 7pm and were told to sit in the waiting room. Contractions quickened and Mr Neilson asked repeatedly for help until his wife, in pain and barely able to walk, was finally moved to an assessment room and examined by a midwife. Mrs Neilson said: “She said she’d come back in 20 minutes and that’s when it all really went wrong, because she didn’t come back. She was seeing other patients.”
Two and a half hours after they had arrived, their baby, Orla, was born. Mrs Neilson said: “The room we were in was cold. There was a narrow trolley – not a bed – which I couldn’t get up on to. I was shouting out – it was so undignified, because everybody in the waiting room would have been able to hear us. I felt a huge pressure and at that point I knew that the baby was going to be born.” A midwife arrived just in time to find Orla’s head emerging. Mrs Neilson said: “She took control and put down a disposable mat on the floor. She caught the baby – I was standing up and she was born on to the floor. I was very relieved that the midwife had come, because we were panicking.”
After the birth, Mrs Neilson was helped on to the trolley, but the family waited another hour before being transferred upstairs to a labour ward. They said they were told that the room they were placed in had been vacant throughout Mrs Neilson’s labour.
The couple have three older children, who were born in Glasgow, Hong Kong and at Edinburgh Royal, but said that this was the worst experience they have had in a maternity unit. David Farquharson, clinical director of women’s services in NHS Lothian, said: “This is not the experience we would want any mother or family to have.”
Source
Genetic screening ends fears of breast cancer for British couple
A baby genetically screened to be breast cancer free is due to be born within days. In what is believed to be the first publicised case in the world, a British couple underwent pre-implantation genetic testing to free their children from the disease. At the same time, IVF Australia has announced it will start the genetic testing for the aggressive breast cancer gene BRACA 1 next year.
Testing for the breast cancer gene has been available in Australia for about five years. Very few IVF clinics offer it due to the ethical dilemma involved. Pre-implantation genetic testing is used to screen for hereditary diseases such as cystic fibrosis. But screening for breast cancer is considered controversial by pro-life groups because there is a chance not all embryos will develop the gene mutation and could have led a healthy life.
The British couple, who do not wish to be identified, are one of two in the UK who have publicly decided to undergo the test after their families had been afflicted with breast cancer. Without screening, any daughter of the couples would have an 80 per cent chance of developing the fast-spreading form of breast cancer. "I thought this was something I had to try because if we had a daughter with this gene, and she was ill, I couldn't look her in the face and say I didn't try," the 27-year-old expectant mum said.
Men can be carriers of the rogue gene. Had the couple conceived naturally, any child would have a 50 per cent chance of also carrying the gene. "We had been through his sister being ill, so it was something we had seen first hand," the woman said.
Another couple, known as Matthew and Helen, have also undergone the screening to try to eradicate the hereditary breast cancer gene. "I've lived much of my life with cancer and death, and fear that I might have to face it and might pass on the risk to my children," Helen said. "This gives us the chance to make sure our daughters won't have the same experience."
Genetic testing involves using IVF to create a selection of embyros. Scientists then select the ones without the rogue gene and implant them in the woman. Several clinics, including Sydney IVF, offer screening for BRACA 1 and 2 genes. "What is significant about this case is that normally genetic testing is done for things that affect the baby, not adult diseases," said Peter Illingworth, IVF Australia's medical director.
Breast cancer survivor Ayda Soydash, 29, may never be able to have children after her treatment, using Herceptin, brought on early menopause. But yesterday Miss Soydash said she supported genetic testing for hereditary breast cancer. "Definitely, definitely it is something I would do," she said.
Source
That three-letter word offensive?
We read:
The word is not normally censored and it is extremely widely used elsewhere. So is this a sign of a new forbidden word?
Hate-filled Leftist dies: "Nobel Prize-winning British playwright Harold Pinter, one of theatre's biggest names for nearly half a century, has died aged 78, his wife Lady Antonia Fraser and agent said Thursday. Pinter , who won the Nobel Prize for Literature in 2005, had been suffering from cancer. Fraser told the Guardian newspaper: "He was a great, and it was a privilege to live with him for over 33 years. He will never be forgotten." Pinter's plays included "The Birthday Party", "The Dumb Waiter" and "The Homecoming". His first play, "The Room," appeared in 1957 and his breakthrough came with "The Caretaker" in 1960. They often featured the slang language of his native east London as well as his trademark menacing pauses. The adjective "Pinteresque", referring to such characteristics, is included in the Oxford English Dictionary.... In Pinter's Nobel acceptance speech, he launched a lengthy and strong attack on US foreign policy, particularly over the Iraq war. "The crimes of the United States have been systematic, constant, vicious, remorseless, but very few people have actually talked about them," he said. [He must have been stone deaf!!] "You have to hand it to America. It has exercised a quite clinical manipulation of power worldwide while masquerading as a force for universal good. It's a brilliant, even witty, highly successful act of hypnosis." [More political background here]
Ford CAN still make good cars -- in England (No UAW there): "Take a bow, the Ford Fiesta – our Car Of The Year. I presented the gong to Ford’s UK boss Roelant De Waard and in an outstanding year for new models it was always going to be an extra-special car that won Sun Motors’ Top Award – and that’s what the new Fiesta is. The Fiesta has become part of the British motoring scene but this version takes small cars to a new level of sophistication. It’s the car that proves great things can come in small packages. Its sensational looks are backed up by an even more dramatic interior, with quality levels and equipment you’d expect on cars a class above. And, best of all, the Fiesta delivers a first-class driving experience, making the Ford a great all-round package. The public clearly agree because more than 11,500 have been sold since the car hit showrooms in October, despite the launch coinciding with the biggest sales slump in 15 years."
Any standards at all have to be welcomed these days. Similar standards for students are too much to expect, of course. Do I sense a double standard there? Do teachers recognize what is needed to gain respect but not convey that to those they teach? "Everything is relative" certainly seems to be often taught. Traditional Leftist double standards, it would seem. Story from Britain below
Teachers must behave as pillars of the community and be role models to their pupils, the industry’s professional body said yesterday. Those who drink heavily and disgrace themselves - even outside school hours – face disciplinary action for bringing the profession into disrepute, whether or not they have broken the law. Some teachers have had to undergo counselling or provide medical proof of abstinence from alcohol to remain on the teaching register, the General Teaching Council admitted.
Yesterday the teaching council presented a draft of its new code of conduct for teachers, on which it is consulting. The wellbeing of children is the main thrust of the code, with an even higher billing than learning. Teachers could be disciplined if they fail to cooperate with social workers or do everything in their power to protect children, the draft code says. They should pick up on and address problems at the earliest possible stage. They must also report colleagues if they have concerns that their practice puts children at risk.
The draft code says that teachers have to demonstrate high standards of honesty and integrity, and uphold public trust and confidence in the teaching profession. This includes teachers “maintaining standards of behaviour both inside and outside school that are appropriate given their membership of an important and responsible profession”.
Keith Bartley, the chief executive of the General Teaching Council, admitted that expectations of teachers had increased significantly in the past few years. He said: “The new code will have to reflect the fact that teachers are working more closely with other professionals. Some of the cases that have had national prominence recently show that, if a teacher has concerns, they have a duty to raise and pass on those concerns.”
Whereas the previous code, drawn up in 2004, set out what teachers should not do, the 2008 draft describes in unambiguous terms how teachers are expected to behave. Sarah Stephens, director of policy at the teaching council, said: “It gives greater clarity about what it means to act as a role model, and about a teacher’s conduct outside the classroom.” Mr Bartley added that, at some of the organisation’s professional misconduct hearings, teachers had been required to agree to undergo therapy. He added that teachers could be found guilty of unacceptable conduct without breaking the law – for example by belonging to a party that held racist views. “We’re saying to teachers that, as individuals, they have to consider their place in society,” he said. “There’s a sense that this [code] has to reflect society’s expectations of the people to whom we commit our children.”
David James, the teaching council’s head of professional regulation, said: “We have the ability to apply conditions to a teacher’s registration. We can say to people, ‘You can remain a teacher but you must undertake retraining, or counselling, or provide evidence of abstinence from drinking’. That happens quite frequently.”
The draft code requires teachers to forge links with parents, and consider their views. It also says they must keep up to date with technology and social changes. The organisation is investigating what schools and local authorities are doing to tackle the problem of incompetent teachers. It will report the findings of its research next year.
Source
NHS hospital apologises after baby was born on floor
A pregnant woman was left unattended for hours and had to give birth on a hospital floor despite her desperate appeals for a bed. Health board officials have apologised to Lynne Neilson, 36, whose baby started to arrive as she stood, still clothed, in a cold assessment room after hours of waiting to be admitted to the labour ward. As the head appeared, a midwife ran in just in time to put a paper mat on the floor and catch the baby, who had the umbilical cord around her neck.
Mrs Neilson and her husband, Gavin, made an official complaint to the hospital and to Nicola Sturgeon, the Health Minister, after the incident at Edinburgh Royal Infirmary. NHS Lothian announced on Christmas Eve that it had begun an investigation and had apologised.
The couple had arrived at the Simpson Memorial Maternity Pavilion early on December 5, but went home when the labour slowed. They returned at 7pm and were told to sit in the waiting room. Contractions quickened and Mr Neilson asked repeatedly for help until his wife, in pain and barely able to walk, was finally moved to an assessment room and examined by a midwife. Mrs Neilson said: “She said she’d come back in 20 minutes and that’s when it all really went wrong, because she didn’t come back. She was seeing other patients.”
Two and a half hours after they had arrived, their baby, Orla, was born. Mrs Neilson said: “The room we were in was cold. There was a narrow trolley – not a bed – which I couldn’t get up on to. I was shouting out – it was so undignified, because everybody in the waiting room would have been able to hear us. I felt a huge pressure and at that point I knew that the baby was going to be born.” A midwife arrived just in time to find Orla’s head emerging. Mrs Neilson said: “She took control and put down a disposable mat on the floor. She caught the baby – I was standing up and she was born on to the floor. I was very relieved that the midwife had come, because we were panicking.”
After the birth, Mrs Neilson was helped on to the trolley, but the family waited another hour before being transferred upstairs to a labour ward. They said they were told that the room they were placed in had been vacant throughout Mrs Neilson’s labour.
The couple have three older children, who were born in Glasgow, Hong Kong and at Edinburgh Royal, but said that this was the worst experience they have had in a maternity unit. David Farquharson, clinical director of women’s services in NHS Lothian, said: “This is not the experience we would want any mother or family to have.”
Source
Genetic screening ends fears of breast cancer for British couple
A baby genetically screened to be breast cancer free is due to be born within days. In what is believed to be the first publicised case in the world, a British couple underwent pre-implantation genetic testing to free their children from the disease. At the same time, IVF Australia has announced it will start the genetic testing for the aggressive breast cancer gene BRACA 1 next year.
Testing for the breast cancer gene has been available in Australia for about five years. Very few IVF clinics offer it due to the ethical dilemma involved. Pre-implantation genetic testing is used to screen for hereditary diseases such as cystic fibrosis. But screening for breast cancer is considered controversial by pro-life groups because there is a chance not all embryos will develop the gene mutation and could have led a healthy life.
The British couple, who do not wish to be identified, are one of two in the UK who have publicly decided to undergo the test after their families had been afflicted with breast cancer. Without screening, any daughter of the couples would have an 80 per cent chance of developing the fast-spreading form of breast cancer. "I thought this was something I had to try because if we had a daughter with this gene, and she was ill, I couldn't look her in the face and say I didn't try," the 27-year-old expectant mum said.
Men can be carriers of the rogue gene. Had the couple conceived naturally, any child would have a 50 per cent chance of also carrying the gene. "We had been through his sister being ill, so it was something we had seen first hand," the woman said.
Another couple, known as Matthew and Helen, have also undergone the screening to try to eradicate the hereditary breast cancer gene. "I've lived much of my life with cancer and death, and fear that I might have to face it and might pass on the risk to my children," Helen said. "This gives us the chance to make sure our daughters won't have the same experience."
Genetic testing involves using IVF to create a selection of embyros. Scientists then select the ones without the rogue gene and implant them in the woman. Several clinics, including Sydney IVF, offer screening for BRACA 1 and 2 genes. "What is significant about this case is that normally genetic testing is done for things that affect the baby, not adult diseases," said Peter Illingworth, IVF Australia's medical director.
Breast cancer survivor Ayda Soydash, 29, may never be able to have children after her treatment, using Herceptin, brought on early menopause. But yesterday Miss Soydash said she supported genetic testing for hereditary breast cancer. "Definitely, definitely it is something I would do," she said.
Source
That three-letter word offensive?
We read:
"An advertising billboard that screams 'Want Longer Lasting Sex?' has prompted a barrage of complaints. Almost 200 hoardings in bold red on yellow print have appeared in and around London. One, with the word 'sex' in lettering twice as high as the rest of the advert, is within a few hundred metres of a large supermarket. The adverts will soon be rolled out across the UK.
Last night the Advertising Standards Authority said it had launched a formal investigation into the campaign, which has provoked 249 complaints in eight days. A large number of parents are said to be among those who have taken offence to the 196 billboards from the company - which treats erectile dysfunction and premature ejaculation.
Despite the watchdog investigation, AMI, which has only recently opened a clinic in London, has not been ordered to take the billboards down. The result of the probe will not be known until the New Year. On its website, the company boasts of having treated 'well over 300,000 men'.
Source
The word is not normally censored and it is extremely widely used elsewhere. So is this a sign of a new forbidden word?
Hate-filled Leftist dies: "Nobel Prize-winning British playwright Harold Pinter, one of theatre's biggest names for nearly half a century, has died aged 78, his wife Lady Antonia Fraser and agent said Thursday. Pinter , who won the Nobel Prize for Literature in 2005, had been suffering from cancer. Fraser told the Guardian newspaper: "He was a great, and it was a privilege to live with him for over 33 years. He will never be forgotten." Pinter's plays included "The Birthday Party", "The Dumb Waiter" and "The Homecoming". His first play, "The Room," appeared in 1957 and his breakthrough came with "The Caretaker" in 1960. They often featured the slang language of his native east London as well as his trademark menacing pauses. The adjective "Pinteresque", referring to such characteristics, is included in the Oxford English Dictionary.... In Pinter's Nobel acceptance speech, he launched a lengthy and strong attack on US foreign policy, particularly over the Iraq war. "The crimes of the United States have been systematic, constant, vicious, remorseless, but very few people have actually talked about them," he said. [He must have been stone deaf!!] "You have to hand it to America. It has exercised a quite clinical manipulation of power worldwide while masquerading as a force for universal good. It's a brilliant, even witty, highly successful act of hypnosis." [More political background here]
Ford CAN still make good cars -- in England (No UAW there): "Take a bow, the Ford Fiesta – our Car Of The Year. I presented the gong to Ford’s UK boss Roelant De Waard and in an outstanding year for new models it was always going to be an extra-special car that won Sun Motors’ Top Award – and that’s what the new Fiesta is. The Fiesta has become part of the British motoring scene but this version takes small cars to a new level of sophistication. It’s the car that proves great things can come in small packages. Its sensational looks are backed up by an even more dramatic interior, with quality levels and equipment you’d expect on cars a class above. And, best of all, the Fiesta delivers a first-class driving experience, making the Ford a great all-round package. The public clearly agree because more than 11,500 have been sold since the car hit showrooms in October, despite the launch coinciding with the biggest sales slump in 15 years."
Friday, December 26, 2008
What a disgrace: More UK immigration delays for Gurkhas
Brits love the Gurkhas. It is just their horrible Leftist government which sees no virtue in a warrior people
The Gurkha Justice Campaign Team has another fight on its hands after having heard that Gurkhas who retired before 1997 may have to face a further three month delay to find out if they will be able move to the UK. The government is expected to apply to the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal for a further three months in which to consider the cases. The visa application is expected to be made on 7 January 2009. The cases were initially expected to be settled by the end of the year, after the High Court ruled that policies used to exclude Gurkhas who retired before 1997 from settling in the UK, were unlawful.
Following the High Court ruling the government has stated, "we have taken the judgment on board and are determined to get the amended guidance right to ensure it is fair to all Gurkhas. This has involved consultation across Government...once we have published the guidance we will review the cases as soon as possible."
The Gurkha Justice Campiagn Team, headed by actress Joanna Lumley, whose father was a Gurkha, has received huge public support for their campaign to allow all Gurkhas the automatic right to a UK visa. They say the extra three months is an `"unacceptable" delay.
Source
Damages win for British couple falsely suspected of abusing their children
A couple whose three children spent two years in care because social workers wrongly believed that they were at risk of abuse have been awarded a "six-figure" sum in compensation. Tim and Gina Williams's son and two daughters were taken from them and placed with separate foster families. The couple, from Newport, South Wales, received an undisclosed sum yesterday in an agreed settlement at the High Court in Cardiff and were given a full written apology from Newport City Council.
The court was told that there had never been any evidence that the children, now aged 14, 11 and 9, had been abused. As a result of the social workers' actions, the Williams missed their children's birthdays, Christmases and their first days in new schools. A judge completely exonerated them at the High Court in October 2006 and the children were returned to them.
The couple, who waived their right to anonymity, began a compensation claim against Newport City Council and Royal Gwent Healthcare NHS Trust soon after. Robin Tolson, QC, for the couple, said: "This settlement brings closure, at least of a kind, for Tim and Gina Williams and their children. The effect of what happened will continue to be felt for a long time but at least this now marks the end of four years spent fighting for their children and their rights before the court." Mr Williams, 39, and two of his children sat at the back of the court during the brief hearing.
In August 2004 Mr Williams called the police after finding his youngest daughter naked from the waist down with an 11-year-old friend. The girl was taken to hospital for a precautionary check-up and the doctor who carried out the examination claimed to have found evidence of longstanding abuse but by an adult, not an 11-year-old.
Mr Williams and his wife were told that they were under suspicion and the children were taken into care. A second doctor confirmed the evidence of abuse and the couple were restricted to supervised weekly visits to their children. There were exonerated after a US expert in child abuse examined the evidence and disputed the claims by the British doctors, who subsequently accepted that they had been mistaken. The council conceded that the children should never have been taken from their parents on the basis of the evidence.
Giving his judgment, Judge Crispin Masterman said that the children's names were never put on the child protection register and it was simply decided to remove them from the family home. He said that the criticisms were coupled with an acknowledgment that all professionals involved were acting for the good of the children. "It is undoubtedly true that social services departments have in recent years operated with inadequate resources and under immense stress and run the risk of attracting equal criticism whether they remove a child or whether they do not."
A Newport council representative said: "A settlement has now been reached which will support the children's future. The wellbeing of the children has remained paramount throughout this case. While the local authority has offered sincere apologies to the family, our priority was always the safety of the children. The court concluded that the council acted in good faith given the strength of the medical evidence presented. "The council, together with other members of Newport safeguarding children board, has embraced the recommendations of the multi-agency review." Under the terms of the settlement, the family are banned from talking about it.
Source
British social workers ignore REAL abuse victims
Picking on harmless middle class families is so much easier and much more Marxist
Jake Pierce was beaten almost daily as a child. His parents left him naked outside for hours at a time and attacked him with cutlery, favoured by his mother for scratching his eyes. He was not allowed to mix with other children and was warned that, if he told people of the abuse, he "would be killed". Mr Pierce's testimony in his case against Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council included details of how, when only six months old, he was admitted to hospital for "failure to thrive". Although a doctor advised that he should go into foster care, he was sent home after only a short stint.
Burns to his buttocks and feet were detected when an aunt took him to hospital when he was aged 3, but again the warnings were not heeded. Mr Pierce's evidence, given last year at the High Court, culminated with his decision to run away from home at the age of 14, the night that his father pushed him against the wall and held a knife to his throat. He spent months on the streets before being tracked down and taken into care.
Mr Pierce was awarded 25,000 pounds over the failings of social workers and this month saw off the council's challenge in the Court of Appeal. His victory will have profound implications for dozens of local authorities across the country that now face a welter of compensation claims. Mr Pierce's test case was backed with legal aid from the Legal Services Commission as part of its policy of pursuing cases that will clarify the developing area of law on negligence.
David Keegan, director of high-cost cases at the commission, said that the ruling would have "great implications not only for Mr Pierce but for many others who have suffered as a result of their local authority's negligent failure to exercise their child-protection duties". He said that the commission had funded this, and would fund similar cases, as a development of its policy stemming back to a House of Lords ruling in 2004, which established that local authorities had a common-law duty to children in their care.
A further important development came in January this year, in the so-called Lotto rapist case, when law lords swept away the current bar on historic claims for sexual assault. Until then, child abuse victims could not bring a claim more than six years after reaching 18. This month's decision in Mr Pierce's case establishes the liability of councils if they fail to act and take children away from abusive parents.
Chris Gore, the commission's senior case manager, said that theoretically the potential number of cases was "vast" and every set of care proceedings where there was delay "could give rise to one of these claims". But there would be a filter because the commission had to prioritise: it would back cases that would be "economically viable and legally strong enough". He added: "We are interested in test cases like that of Mr Pierce which sharpen focus on the law."
He said that in a significant proportion of the 200 to 300 cases, a local authority's failings resulted in years of delay rather than the immediate seeking of a court order or other steps. As a result, children will have suffered anything from neglect to verbal or physical abuse.
Many cases may now settle in the wake of the Court of Appeal ruling, with likely compensation in the region of 50,000 to 100,000 pounds for serious abuse where there was a clear breach of duty by the council concerned. But many will be much lower - nearer to 15,000.
A second test case, which has been brought against a local authority over abuse, is being backed by the commission in the Court of Appeal. Judgment is due next month. This involves an adult disabled couple, known only as X and Y, who have won - subject to the appeal - 100,000 in damages. The High Court ruled in May that councils have a duty to protect vulnerable adults, as well as vulnerable children, and found their local authority negligent. The couple, who were living in unsuitable council housing with their two young children, suffered prolonged harassment culminating in a weekend of sexual abuse, assault and imprisonment in their own home.
Source
British extremists face long jail sentences after blackmail conviction
Four animal rights extremists involved in a six-year hate campaign against people and companies linked to Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS) each face up to 14 years in jail after being convicted of conspiracy to blackmail. The two men and two women were found guilty yesterday of orchestrating the campaign designed to shut down HLS, one of the world's largest contract research companies.
The convictions follow a two-year, 3.5 million pound police investigation into Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC), an international campaign against the company, which has an animal testing laboratory in Cambridgeshire. The campaign was funded in large part by public donations collected on the high streets. Two founding members, Gregg Avery, 41, and his wife Natasha, 39, along with fellow activist Daniel Amos, 22, pleaded guilty earlier this year to conspiracy to blackmail. Prosecutors believe that among these members of SHAC's hierarchy were some of the key figures in the Animal Liberation Front, the movement that acts as an umbrella for much animal rights extremism worldwide.
Yesterday, after a three-month trial at Winchester Crown Court, Heather Nicholson, 41, Avery's former wife and fellow SHAC founder, was found guilty of the same offence, as were three further conspirators, Daniel Wadham, 21, Gerrah Selby, 20, and Gavin Medd-Hall, 45. All will be sentenced next month. An eighth defendant, Trevor Holmes, 51, from Newcastle, was acquitted.
HLS, which tests pharmaceutical and other products for clients around the globe, became a focal point for anti-vivisection campaigners partly because of the scale of its operation. SHAC's victims, who worked for companies that did business directly or indirectly with HLS, received threatening letters, hoax bombs and sanitary towels allegedly contaminated with the HIV virus, while their neighbours were sent anonymous letters warning them that they lived near a paedophile.
The managing director of one targeted company received a letter in December 2006 that threatened: "We will attack your property, your family or you, whichever we see fit. . . The screams of the animals are in our heads. We will not fail them. You will pay for their agony." Nocturnal "home visits" from extremists left cars covered in acid, menacing messages painted on houses and ALF slogans daubed on nearby roads. Victims were targeted after they were listed as "collaborators" on SHAC's website, a process that involved detailed research and was co-ordinated by the Averys and their fellow conspirators, who knew what the likely result of that listing would be.
Michael Bowes, QC, for the prosecution, said that although the darker part of the campaign was labelled ALF, the attacks that followed a victim's appearance on the SHAC website were "all part and parcel of the conspiracy". SHAC still lists "targets" on its website, although it claims to engage only in legal activity. A spokeswoman told The Times: "We have absolutely no control over what happens to that information."
Operation Achilles, a two-year investigation that included bugging SHAC's Hampshire headquarters, culminated in the arrests of 32 people in a series of raids involving 700 police officers across Britain and in Belgium and the Netherlands in May last year. Detective Chief Inspector Andy Robbins, of Kent Police, who led the operation, said: "The public should be aware that money donated in good faith to SHAC was in fact being used to finance this criminal conduct."
Source
Teenage thief who stole $50,000 of lead from a British cathedral is ordered to repay only $2
A teenage thief who stole 25,000 pounds worth of lead from a cathedral has been ordered to pay back just one pound. Mark Knight, 19, spent hours ripping lead from the roof of St Nicholas Church, part of Rochester Cathedral, built in 604AD. He took it to a scrap metal dealer and, unaware of how much the metal was worth, accepted just 90 for it. Knight, who is unemployed, was jailed for two years earlier this year after admitting burglary, theft, criminal damage and 28 other offences. But on December 19, he appeared before Maidstone Crown Court for a confiscation hearing.
The court heard how Knight sold the lead to Medway Metals in his hometown of Strood, with 'no questions asked'. Trevor Wright, defending, said his client was homeless and had never received any money from the state. Judge James O'Mahony said that the court was obliged to put a figure on the confiscation, before settling on the sum of 1 pound. Mr Wright said that Knight would struggle to even pay back this amount, as he had no money to his name at all. He told the court: 'This man has never had a job - he was thrown out of his home when he was 16 and has never received any benefits. He doesn't even have 1 pound.'
A church worker, who did not want to be named, said: 'The simple fact is that it will cost us a fortune to replace the lead and for this thief to be told to pay back just 1 pound is an insult to everyone.' He added: 'We all know that he will never be able to pay back the full amount, but the message this sends out is not the right one.'
A spokesman for Medway Metals confirmed it had 'paid a sum of money' to Knight. He said: 'All we are legally obliged to ask when someone approaches us with scrap is their name, address and vehicle registration number, if they have one. We don't ask them where they got it.' They should be charged with stealing stolen goods
Source
Brits love the Gurkhas. It is just their horrible Leftist government which sees no virtue in a warrior people
The Gurkha Justice Campaign Team has another fight on its hands after having heard that Gurkhas who retired before 1997 may have to face a further three month delay to find out if they will be able move to the UK. The government is expected to apply to the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal for a further three months in which to consider the cases. The visa application is expected to be made on 7 January 2009. The cases were initially expected to be settled by the end of the year, after the High Court ruled that policies used to exclude Gurkhas who retired before 1997 from settling in the UK, were unlawful.
Following the High Court ruling the government has stated, "we have taken the judgment on board and are determined to get the amended guidance right to ensure it is fair to all Gurkhas. This has involved consultation across Government...once we have published the guidance we will review the cases as soon as possible."
The Gurkha Justice Campiagn Team, headed by actress Joanna Lumley, whose father was a Gurkha, has received huge public support for their campaign to allow all Gurkhas the automatic right to a UK visa. They say the extra three months is an `"unacceptable" delay.
Source
Damages win for British couple falsely suspected of abusing their children
A couple whose three children spent two years in care because social workers wrongly believed that they were at risk of abuse have been awarded a "six-figure" sum in compensation. Tim and Gina Williams's son and two daughters were taken from them and placed with separate foster families. The couple, from Newport, South Wales, received an undisclosed sum yesterday in an agreed settlement at the High Court in Cardiff and were given a full written apology from Newport City Council.
The court was told that there had never been any evidence that the children, now aged 14, 11 and 9, had been abused. As a result of the social workers' actions, the Williams missed their children's birthdays, Christmases and their first days in new schools. A judge completely exonerated them at the High Court in October 2006 and the children were returned to them.
The couple, who waived their right to anonymity, began a compensation claim against Newport City Council and Royal Gwent Healthcare NHS Trust soon after. Robin Tolson, QC, for the couple, said: "This settlement brings closure, at least of a kind, for Tim and Gina Williams and their children. The effect of what happened will continue to be felt for a long time but at least this now marks the end of four years spent fighting for their children and their rights before the court." Mr Williams, 39, and two of his children sat at the back of the court during the brief hearing.
In August 2004 Mr Williams called the police after finding his youngest daughter naked from the waist down with an 11-year-old friend. The girl was taken to hospital for a precautionary check-up and the doctor who carried out the examination claimed to have found evidence of longstanding abuse but by an adult, not an 11-year-old.
Mr Williams and his wife were told that they were under suspicion and the children were taken into care. A second doctor confirmed the evidence of abuse and the couple were restricted to supervised weekly visits to their children. There were exonerated after a US expert in child abuse examined the evidence and disputed the claims by the British doctors, who subsequently accepted that they had been mistaken. The council conceded that the children should never have been taken from their parents on the basis of the evidence.
Giving his judgment, Judge Crispin Masterman said that the children's names were never put on the child protection register and it was simply decided to remove them from the family home. He said that the criticisms were coupled with an acknowledgment that all professionals involved were acting for the good of the children. "It is undoubtedly true that social services departments have in recent years operated with inadequate resources and under immense stress and run the risk of attracting equal criticism whether they remove a child or whether they do not."
A Newport council representative said: "A settlement has now been reached which will support the children's future. The wellbeing of the children has remained paramount throughout this case. While the local authority has offered sincere apologies to the family, our priority was always the safety of the children. The court concluded that the council acted in good faith given the strength of the medical evidence presented. "The council, together with other members of Newport safeguarding children board, has embraced the recommendations of the multi-agency review." Under the terms of the settlement, the family are banned from talking about it.
Source
British social workers ignore REAL abuse victims
Picking on harmless middle class families is so much easier and much more Marxist
Jake Pierce was beaten almost daily as a child. His parents left him naked outside for hours at a time and attacked him with cutlery, favoured by his mother for scratching his eyes. He was not allowed to mix with other children and was warned that, if he told people of the abuse, he "would be killed". Mr Pierce's testimony in his case against Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council included details of how, when only six months old, he was admitted to hospital for "failure to thrive". Although a doctor advised that he should go into foster care, he was sent home after only a short stint.
Burns to his buttocks and feet were detected when an aunt took him to hospital when he was aged 3, but again the warnings were not heeded. Mr Pierce's evidence, given last year at the High Court, culminated with his decision to run away from home at the age of 14, the night that his father pushed him against the wall and held a knife to his throat. He spent months on the streets before being tracked down and taken into care.
Mr Pierce was awarded 25,000 pounds over the failings of social workers and this month saw off the council's challenge in the Court of Appeal. His victory will have profound implications for dozens of local authorities across the country that now face a welter of compensation claims. Mr Pierce's test case was backed with legal aid from the Legal Services Commission as part of its policy of pursuing cases that will clarify the developing area of law on negligence.
David Keegan, director of high-cost cases at the commission, said that the ruling would have "great implications not only for Mr Pierce but for many others who have suffered as a result of their local authority's negligent failure to exercise their child-protection duties". He said that the commission had funded this, and would fund similar cases, as a development of its policy stemming back to a House of Lords ruling in 2004, which established that local authorities had a common-law duty to children in their care.
A further important development came in January this year, in the so-called Lotto rapist case, when law lords swept away the current bar on historic claims for sexual assault. Until then, child abuse victims could not bring a claim more than six years after reaching 18. This month's decision in Mr Pierce's case establishes the liability of councils if they fail to act and take children away from abusive parents.
Chris Gore, the commission's senior case manager, said that theoretically the potential number of cases was "vast" and every set of care proceedings where there was delay "could give rise to one of these claims". But there would be a filter because the commission had to prioritise: it would back cases that would be "economically viable and legally strong enough". He added: "We are interested in test cases like that of Mr Pierce which sharpen focus on the law."
He said that in a significant proportion of the 200 to 300 cases, a local authority's failings resulted in years of delay rather than the immediate seeking of a court order or other steps. As a result, children will have suffered anything from neglect to verbal or physical abuse.
Many cases may now settle in the wake of the Court of Appeal ruling, with likely compensation in the region of 50,000 to 100,000 pounds for serious abuse where there was a clear breach of duty by the council concerned. But many will be much lower - nearer to 15,000.
A second test case, which has been brought against a local authority over abuse, is being backed by the commission in the Court of Appeal. Judgment is due next month. This involves an adult disabled couple, known only as X and Y, who have won - subject to the appeal - 100,000 in damages. The High Court ruled in May that councils have a duty to protect vulnerable adults, as well as vulnerable children, and found their local authority negligent. The couple, who were living in unsuitable council housing with their two young children, suffered prolonged harassment culminating in a weekend of sexual abuse, assault and imprisonment in their own home.
Source
British extremists face long jail sentences after blackmail conviction
Four animal rights extremists involved in a six-year hate campaign against people and companies linked to Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS) each face up to 14 years in jail after being convicted of conspiracy to blackmail. The two men and two women were found guilty yesterday of orchestrating the campaign designed to shut down HLS, one of the world's largest contract research companies.
The convictions follow a two-year, 3.5 million pound police investigation into Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC), an international campaign against the company, which has an animal testing laboratory in Cambridgeshire. The campaign was funded in large part by public donations collected on the high streets. Two founding members, Gregg Avery, 41, and his wife Natasha, 39, along with fellow activist Daniel Amos, 22, pleaded guilty earlier this year to conspiracy to blackmail. Prosecutors believe that among these members of SHAC's hierarchy were some of the key figures in the Animal Liberation Front, the movement that acts as an umbrella for much animal rights extremism worldwide.
Yesterday, after a three-month trial at Winchester Crown Court, Heather Nicholson, 41, Avery's former wife and fellow SHAC founder, was found guilty of the same offence, as were three further conspirators, Daniel Wadham, 21, Gerrah Selby, 20, and Gavin Medd-Hall, 45. All will be sentenced next month. An eighth defendant, Trevor Holmes, 51, from Newcastle, was acquitted.
HLS, which tests pharmaceutical and other products for clients around the globe, became a focal point for anti-vivisection campaigners partly because of the scale of its operation. SHAC's victims, who worked for companies that did business directly or indirectly with HLS, received threatening letters, hoax bombs and sanitary towels allegedly contaminated with the HIV virus, while their neighbours were sent anonymous letters warning them that they lived near a paedophile.
The managing director of one targeted company received a letter in December 2006 that threatened: "We will attack your property, your family or you, whichever we see fit. . . The screams of the animals are in our heads. We will not fail them. You will pay for their agony." Nocturnal "home visits" from extremists left cars covered in acid, menacing messages painted on houses and ALF slogans daubed on nearby roads. Victims were targeted after they were listed as "collaborators" on SHAC's website, a process that involved detailed research and was co-ordinated by the Averys and their fellow conspirators, who knew what the likely result of that listing would be.
Michael Bowes, QC, for the prosecution, said that although the darker part of the campaign was labelled ALF, the attacks that followed a victim's appearance on the SHAC website were "all part and parcel of the conspiracy". SHAC still lists "targets" on its website, although it claims to engage only in legal activity. A spokeswoman told The Times: "We have absolutely no control over what happens to that information."
Operation Achilles, a two-year investigation that included bugging SHAC's Hampshire headquarters, culminated in the arrests of 32 people in a series of raids involving 700 police officers across Britain and in Belgium and the Netherlands in May last year. Detective Chief Inspector Andy Robbins, of Kent Police, who led the operation, said: "The public should be aware that money donated in good faith to SHAC was in fact being used to finance this criminal conduct."
Source
Teenage thief who stole $50,000 of lead from a British cathedral is ordered to repay only $2
A teenage thief who stole 25,000 pounds worth of lead from a cathedral has been ordered to pay back just one pound. Mark Knight, 19, spent hours ripping lead from the roof of St Nicholas Church, part of Rochester Cathedral, built in 604AD. He took it to a scrap metal dealer and, unaware of how much the metal was worth, accepted just 90 for it. Knight, who is unemployed, was jailed for two years earlier this year after admitting burglary, theft, criminal damage and 28 other offences. But on December 19, he appeared before Maidstone Crown Court for a confiscation hearing.
The court heard how Knight sold the lead to Medway Metals in his hometown of Strood, with 'no questions asked'. Trevor Wright, defending, said his client was homeless and had never received any money from the state. Judge James O'Mahony said that the court was obliged to put a figure on the confiscation, before settling on the sum of 1 pound. Mr Wright said that Knight would struggle to even pay back this amount, as he had no money to his name at all. He told the court: 'This man has never had a job - he was thrown out of his home when he was 16 and has never received any benefits. He doesn't even have 1 pound.'
A church worker, who did not want to be named, said: 'The simple fact is that it will cost us a fortune to replace the lead and for this thief to be told to pay back just 1 pound is an insult to everyone.' He added: 'We all know that he will never be able to pay back the full amount, but the message this sends out is not the right one.'
A spokesman for Medway Metals confirmed it had 'paid a sum of money' to Knight. He said: 'All we are legally obliged to ask when someone approaches us with scrap is their name, address and vehicle registration number, if they have one. We don't ask them where they got it.' They should be charged with stealing stolen goods
Source
Thursday, December 25, 2008
False rape accuser who wasted 7,000 police hours and cost British taxpayers $600,000 is finally jailed
This doesn't happen, of course. Ask any feminist
A 'dangerous fantasist' who wasted 316,000 pounds of public money by falsely claiming to have been raped, kidnapped and blackmailed was jailed for four years yesterday. Police spent 7,000 hours investigating bizarre allegations made over six months in 2006 by Michaela Britton, a court heard. She tied herself up and slashed herself with a blade to make her stories seem more credible and arranged for her car to be shot at. Her 'whopping lies' included claiming she was being blackmailed for 10,000 pounds over a pornographic video stolen from her home which was made with an ex-boyfriend said to be a Metropolitan Police anti-terrorist officer.
Chelmsford Crown Court heard that police wasted hundreds of thousands of pounds investigating her complaints. Britton, a senior loss adjuster, also claimed her line manager at Churchill Insurance in Romford put a gun to her head after she spurned his advances. Eventually, detectives became suspicious of Britton and began tracking her movements by installing CCTV outside her partner, Mick Murray's, house in Chelmsford, Essex, where she often visited.
The 40-year-old mother of one, from Chelmsford, was found guilty of perverting the course of justice. Judge David Turner told her at Chelmsford Crown Court: 'You are a dangerous fantasist. 'Your conduct has been pathological and profoundly and protractedly wasteful of police resources.'
It is alleged that throughout the allegations, Britton had the help of a former partner, Paul Hendle. Ramiz Gursoy, prosecuting, said she was motivated by financial gain after falsely putting in an insurance claim for about 40,000 pounds following a burglary. The court heard how Britton had a previous conviction from 1990 for obtaining property by deception when 61 offences were taken into account.
Source
British Police banned from climbing a 3ft ladder without training
Police officers have been forced to attend a health and safety seminar to learn how to climb a ladder. The officers had been installing roadside electronic speed indicators for months, using a 3ft ladder, without injury or incident. But when health and safety officials learnt of the scheme they ordered the special training. Officers were then banned from moving the signs between locations until they had completed the course. Around 45 officers and more than 80 civilian volunteers have now had the training, organised by the police, Lancashire County Council and Lancashire Fire and Rescue.
Last night MPs reacted with disbelief, saying the scheme was a waste of taxpayer money and police time. Ben Wallace MP, for Lancaster and Wyre, said: 'It's another example of the tail wagging the dog, of bureaucracy gone mad. It beggars belief that bureaucracy stands in the way of common sense, even when it concerns our police force.' A senior police officer said: 'It is a preposterous waste of police time and taxpayers' money and it is time the health and safety Gestapo had their wings clipped so that people can go about their jobs using their own common sense.'
As part of the seminar, police officers and civilian workers were warned they must wear high-visibility jackets and leggings and cone off the area when installing signs in bad weather just in case pedestrians bump into their ladder. The signs, which are erected as part of a road safety initiative, flash a smiley face if the driver is within the speed limit, and a sad one if they are breaking it.
A spokesman for Lancashire Police said: 'It would appear that, although working at less than one metre above ground level, staff should have been on a ladder training course. 'It is fair to say that risks associated with deployment of a Spid (speed indicator) sign have not changed, but the risks associated with working at height were not fully appreciated initially.' Lancashire police said proper training courses had also been introduced because some of the signs had not been mounted correctly and could not detect all oncoming traffic. Local authorities say the course does not cost anything, apart from staff time. Nine seminars have been held so far.
Source
Police called to 10,000 violent cases in British schools annually
Police officers have had to deal with 10,000 violent incidents at schools in a year. Teachers were forced to call them in to deal with attacks on staff and pupils - some involving knives or other weapons. Figures from 25 out of 39 English forces showed that officers were called to deal with school violence more than 7,000 times in a year. Extending the numbers across all forces gives almost 10,000.
The extent of police involvement in school incidents emerged as increasing numbers of heads ask for officers to be permanently stationed on the premises. Official figures suggest at least 450 schools have an officer on site. But increased liaison with police has prompted warnings by children's groups that pupils are being criminalised for playground spats. In one case, an 11-year-old boy spent three hours in a cell after he brandished a plastic toy gun at a schoolmate.
The Tories asked forces how many times they had been called to school premises to deal with an attempted or actual violent crime in the year from September 2007. There were 7,311 incidents tackled by the forces that responded. The Metropolitan Police reported the most call-outs, with 2,698. This was followed by Thames Valley with 697 calls and Kent with 425.
Violent incidents mainly involve offences against the person by pupils, parents or intruders, including threats, physical attacks, sex crimes and robbery. The figures emerged in the wake of a series of school attacks. Shaquille Clarke-Adams, 14, was stabbed three times in the chest and stomach in front of pupils at Allerton Grange High in Leeds. Carrington Mgbeanulu, 15, was knifed just inches from his heart at the gates of Cardinal Wiseman School in Greenford, West London. Meanwhile prefect Darcey Menezes, 16, was stabbed five times in the back while trying to protect younger children from a gang that was terrorising them with a pitbull terrier at Salesian College in Battersea, South London. These incidents follow the killing of Luke Walmsley, 14, in 2003. He was knifed through the heart by Alan Pennell, 16, at Birkbeck School, North Somercotes, Lincolnshire, in front of pupils.
Official figures show that 344 secondary school pupils are suspended from school every day for assaulting other children. Despite this, just 1,350 pupils were expelled in the school year from September 2006 for assaults on students, while 980 were thrown out for attacking teachers. Tory children's spokesman Michael Gove said: 'The number of violent incidents in schools that lead to police being called is very worrying. There will always be the odd occasion when teachers need to call on the police for support but at the moment they do not have sufficient powers to nip discipline problems in the bud.'
The Association of Teachers and Lecturers says nearly a third of state school teachers are punched, kicked or bitten by a pupil and one in ten is injured by students. The Department for Children, Schools and Families said: 'The overwhelming majority of schools are safe and behaviour is very good. Head teachers have more powers than ever to deal with discipline problems.'
Source
Smart kids are more likely to be heavy drinkers
There's a link between a high IQ and developing alcohol problems. Being highly intelligent in a world built around average people can be frustrating and alcohol is one solvent for frustration
The Colony Club in Soho has been a watering hole for hard-drinking creative types since it was founded by Muriel Belcher in the late 1940s. It is a reasonable bet that her confidants - Francis Bacon, Lucian Freud, Jeffrey and Bruce Bernard, Michael Andrews, Eduardo Paolozzi and other regulars from the art and entertainment world - would have had high IQs. Some members may have been nightmare clients for their bank managers, exasperating husbands, wives or lovers, but no one would doubt their talents, originality and intellectual ability. Research has now shown a link between high childhood IQ and an adult enthusiasm for alcohol that leads in some cases to problem drinking.
Parents may be aware that the easiest children to have around the house, and those who are also the most likely to have a predictable, comfortable lifestyle when adults, are those with a slightly aboveaverage intelligence, neither too clever, nor stupid. Most parents would be proud to be told by a teacher that their child has a higher IQ than his or her peers. It would not occur to anybody that there might be an association between that high IQ at the age of 10 and an enthusiasm for the drinking culture, leading occasionally to a problematic excessive alcohol intake.
This association is even stronger among women than among men. Research by Dr G. David Batty and colleagues at the University of Glasgow, published in the American Journal of Public Health, compared the mental ability scores of 8,170 British boys and girls at the age of 10 with their alcohol intake and any alcohol problems when they were 30.
Whereas most of the clever children grew up to drink as most people do, reasonably and moderately, the likelihood of developing a drinking problem if one were unusually bright increased 1.38 times in women and 1.17 times in men. Could this account for the importance of Oxford wine cellars in college life and, possibly, the tendency of intelligent heavy drinkers to start the habit while at university?
As most of us begin to look forward to and prepare for a convivial Christmas, it is as well to review thinking on alcohol. Nobody denies that excessive or binge drinking presents a danger to the drinker and those around them, but modest drinking is still life-preserving rather than life-limiting.
More women than ever are drinking to excess, and it is hard to know who will suffer liver damage and what level of alcohol consumption is liable to cause it. Nor can anyone condone Friday or Saturday night binge drinking. This represents a hazard to a young drinker's liver, even if most get away with it. It is also true that problem drinking by clubbers causes a considerable nuisance in the neighbourhood and contributes to petty crime.
The evidence that alcohol is a possible cause of breast cancer in women is now accepted, as alcohol increases the level of oestrogen and this is known to be carcinogenic. However, women can comfort themselves as they enjoy a glass of wine at Christmas that, statistically, those who drink in moderation are likely to live rather longer than their teetotal contemporaries.
Only 6 per cent of women and 8 per cent of men drink at what even the strict Department of Health considers a hazardous level. For the other 90 per cent-plus of the population, moderate drinkers as well as teetotallers, alcohol doesn't represent a health problem. Moderate drinkers even have a small but significant advantage over the teetotallers in the longevity stakes.
A surprising statistic is that, in the majority of the population, damaging patterns of drinking are falling. However, alcohol-related hospital admissions still show an increase. This may be because more medical conditions are now included under this category, and because more women are now drinking more than 20 years ago.
Although many common forms of heart disease are less likely in moderate drinkers, there is one adverse effect of alcohol on the heart. Up to 10 per cent of patients over 75 suffer from atrial fibrillation, an irregularity of the heart's rhythm. In 45 per cent of the cases in which a patient has suffered the most common form of stroke, it has been preceded by atrial fibrillation. Recent research, reviewed this month in the British Journal of Cardiology, suggests a strong association between atrial fibrillation and alcohol intake.
Source
One in 20 British midwife positions unfilled
One in 20 midwife positions in NHS hospitals are unfilled despite a Government promise to would recruit 1,000 more midwives
Figures show that 583 midwife posts in NHS hospitals are vacant and 276 maternity support worker jobs are unfilled. Barking, Havering and Redbridge Hospitals NHS Trust has the higest vacancy rate, 39 per cent. If its 76 full time midwife positions, 29 posts need to be filled. One in five maternity units (22 per cent) across the country have cut midwife numbers in the past year and some have reported that their maternity unit has been cut in half. Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust has 101 full time midwives last year but this year has 47 which is a 54 per cent drop. The figures were obtained using the Freedom of Information Act by the Conservatives.
This week, Professor Cathy Warwick, general secretary of the Royal College of Midwives, said tens of millions of pounds that were meant to increase the number of midwives have not been received by hospitals. "On the very busy labour wards that are struggling to cope with the rising birth rate, midwives are having to look after sometimes two or three women in labour and that's when the woman ends up being left alone. That's not only unacceptable, that's not safe," she said.
The failure to pass on the money, part of a drive to improve maternity services, means the NHS will not be able to honour promises by ministers to give women a single dedicated midwife during pregnancy and labour. Alan Johnson, the health secretary, in February pledged 330m pounds of extra funding over the next three years to implement the Maternity Matters strategy whose guarantees include giving women the choice of whether to give birth at home instead of at hospital. He also promised that he would recruit 1,000 more midwives to the NHS by 2009.
Health Minister Ann Keen said: "Claims that midwife numbers are falling are complete and utter nonsense. "Validated figures from the latest NHS workforce census show the number of midwives has surpassed 25,000 for the first time and we know there is continuing growth towards recruiting an additional 1,000 midwives by September 2009, rising to 4,000 in 2012. There has also been a 25 % increase in the number of students entering midwifery training since 1997."
Source
This doesn't happen, of course. Ask any feminist
A 'dangerous fantasist' who wasted 316,000 pounds of public money by falsely claiming to have been raped, kidnapped and blackmailed was jailed for four years yesterday. Police spent 7,000 hours investigating bizarre allegations made over six months in 2006 by Michaela Britton, a court heard. She tied herself up and slashed herself with a blade to make her stories seem more credible and arranged for her car to be shot at. Her 'whopping lies' included claiming she was being blackmailed for 10,000 pounds over a pornographic video stolen from her home which was made with an ex-boyfriend said to be a Metropolitan Police anti-terrorist officer.
Chelmsford Crown Court heard that police wasted hundreds of thousands of pounds investigating her complaints. Britton, a senior loss adjuster, also claimed her line manager at Churchill Insurance in Romford put a gun to her head after she spurned his advances. Eventually, detectives became suspicious of Britton and began tracking her movements by installing CCTV outside her partner, Mick Murray's, house in Chelmsford, Essex, where she often visited.
The 40-year-old mother of one, from Chelmsford, was found guilty of perverting the course of justice. Judge David Turner told her at Chelmsford Crown Court: 'You are a dangerous fantasist. 'Your conduct has been pathological and profoundly and protractedly wasteful of police resources.'
It is alleged that throughout the allegations, Britton had the help of a former partner, Paul Hendle. Ramiz Gursoy, prosecuting, said she was motivated by financial gain after falsely putting in an insurance claim for about 40,000 pounds following a burglary. The court heard how Britton had a previous conviction from 1990 for obtaining property by deception when 61 offences were taken into account.
Source
British Police banned from climbing a 3ft ladder without training
Police officers have been forced to attend a health and safety seminar to learn how to climb a ladder. The officers had been installing roadside electronic speed indicators for months, using a 3ft ladder, without injury or incident. But when health and safety officials learnt of the scheme they ordered the special training. Officers were then banned from moving the signs between locations until they had completed the course. Around 45 officers and more than 80 civilian volunteers have now had the training, organised by the police, Lancashire County Council and Lancashire Fire and Rescue.
Last night MPs reacted with disbelief, saying the scheme was a waste of taxpayer money and police time. Ben Wallace MP, for Lancaster and Wyre, said: 'It's another example of the tail wagging the dog, of bureaucracy gone mad. It beggars belief that bureaucracy stands in the way of common sense, even when it concerns our police force.' A senior police officer said: 'It is a preposterous waste of police time and taxpayers' money and it is time the health and safety Gestapo had their wings clipped so that people can go about their jobs using their own common sense.'
As part of the seminar, police officers and civilian workers were warned they must wear high-visibility jackets and leggings and cone off the area when installing signs in bad weather just in case pedestrians bump into their ladder. The signs, which are erected as part of a road safety initiative, flash a smiley face if the driver is within the speed limit, and a sad one if they are breaking it.
A spokesman for Lancashire Police said: 'It would appear that, although working at less than one metre above ground level, staff should have been on a ladder training course. 'It is fair to say that risks associated with deployment of a Spid (speed indicator) sign have not changed, but the risks associated with working at height were not fully appreciated initially.' Lancashire police said proper training courses had also been introduced because some of the signs had not been mounted correctly and could not detect all oncoming traffic. Local authorities say the course does not cost anything, apart from staff time. Nine seminars have been held so far.
Source
Police called to 10,000 violent cases in British schools annually
Police officers have had to deal with 10,000 violent incidents at schools in a year. Teachers were forced to call them in to deal with attacks on staff and pupils - some involving knives or other weapons. Figures from 25 out of 39 English forces showed that officers were called to deal with school violence more than 7,000 times in a year. Extending the numbers across all forces gives almost 10,000.
The extent of police involvement in school incidents emerged as increasing numbers of heads ask for officers to be permanently stationed on the premises. Official figures suggest at least 450 schools have an officer on site. But increased liaison with police has prompted warnings by children's groups that pupils are being criminalised for playground spats. In one case, an 11-year-old boy spent three hours in a cell after he brandished a plastic toy gun at a schoolmate.
The Tories asked forces how many times they had been called to school premises to deal with an attempted or actual violent crime in the year from September 2007. There were 7,311 incidents tackled by the forces that responded. The Metropolitan Police reported the most call-outs, with 2,698. This was followed by Thames Valley with 697 calls and Kent with 425.
Violent incidents mainly involve offences against the person by pupils, parents or intruders, including threats, physical attacks, sex crimes and robbery. The figures emerged in the wake of a series of school attacks. Shaquille Clarke-Adams, 14, was stabbed three times in the chest and stomach in front of pupils at Allerton Grange High in Leeds. Carrington Mgbeanulu, 15, was knifed just inches from his heart at the gates of Cardinal Wiseman School in Greenford, West London. Meanwhile prefect Darcey Menezes, 16, was stabbed five times in the back while trying to protect younger children from a gang that was terrorising them with a pitbull terrier at Salesian College in Battersea, South London. These incidents follow the killing of Luke Walmsley, 14, in 2003. He was knifed through the heart by Alan Pennell, 16, at Birkbeck School, North Somercotes, Lincolnshire, in front of pupils.
Official figures show that 344 secondary school pupils are suspended from school every day for assaulting other children. Despite this, just 1,350 pupils were expelled in the school year from September 2006 for assaults on students, while 980 were thrown out for attacking teachers. Tory children's spokesman Michael Gove said: 'The number of violent incidents in schools that lead to police being called is very worrying. There will always be the odd occasion when teachers need to call on the police for support but at the moment they do not have sufficient powers to nip discipline problems in the bud.'
The Association of Teachers and Lecturers says nearly a third of state school teachers are punched, kicked or bitten by a pupil and one in ten is injured by students. The Department for Children, Schools and Families said: 'The overwhelming majority of schools are safe and behaviour is very good. Head teachers have more powers than ever to deal with discipline problems.'
Source
Smart kids are more likely to be heavy drinkers
There's a link between a high IQ and developing alcohol problems. Being highly intelligent in a world built around average people can be frustrating and alcohol is one solvent for frustration
The Colony Club in Soho has been a watering hole for hard-drinking creative types since it was founded by Muriel Belcher in the late 1940s. It is a reasonable bet that her confidants - Francis Bacon, Lucian Freud, Jeffrey and Bruce Bernard, Michael Andrews, Eduardo Paolozzi and other regulars from the art and entertainment world - would have had high IQs. Some members may have been nightmare clients for their bank managers, exasperating husbands, wives or lovers, but no one would doubt their talents, originality and intellectual ability. Research has now shown a link between high childhood IQ and an adult enthusiasm for alcohol that leads in some cases to problem drinking.
Parents may be aware that the easiest children to have around the house, and those who are also the most likely to have a predictable, comfortable lifestyle when adults, are those with a slightly aboveaverage intelligence, neither too clever, nor stupid. Most parents would be proud to be told by a teacher that their child has a higher IQ than his or her peers. It would not occur to anybody that there might be an association between that high IQ at the age of 10 and an enthusiasm for the drinking culture, leading occasionally to a problematic excessive alcohol intake.
This association is even stronger among women than among men. Research by Dr G. David Batty and colleagues at the University of Glasgow, published in the American Journal of Public Health, compared the mental ability scores of 8,170 British boys and girls at the age of 10 with their alcohol intake and any alcohol problems when they were 30.
Whereas most of the clever children grew up to drink as most people do, reasonably and moderately, the likelihood of developing a drinking problem if one were unusually bright increased 1.38 times in women and 1.17 times in men. Could this account for the importance of Oxford wine cellars in college life and, possibly, the tendency of intelligent heavy drinkers to start the habit while at university?
As most of us begin to look forward to and prepare for a convivial Christmas, it is as well to review thinking on alcohol. Nobody denies that excessive or binge drinking presents a danger to the drinker and those around them, but modest drinking is still life-preserving rather than life-limiting.
More women than ever are drinking to excess, and it is hard to know who will suffer liver damage and what level of alcohol consumption is liable to cause it. Nor can anyone condone Friday or Saturday night binge drinking. This represents a hazard to a young drinker's liver, even if most get away with it. It is also true that problem drinking by clubbers causes a considerable nuisance in the neighbourhood and contributes to petty crime.
The evidence that alcohol is a possible cause of breast cancer in women is now accepted, as alcohol increases the level of oestrogen and this is known to be carcinogenic. However, women can comfort themselves as they enjoy a glass of wine at Christmas that, statistically, those who drink in moderation are likely to live rather longer than their teetotal contemporaries.
Only 6 per cent of women and 8 per cent of men drink at what even the strict Department of Health considers a hazardous level. For the other 90 per cent-plus of the population, moderate drinkers as well as teetotallers, alcohol doesn't represent a health problem. Moderate drinkers even have a small but significant advantage over the teetotallers in the longevity stakes.
A surprising statistic is that, in the majority of the population, damaging patterns of drinking are falling. However, alcohol-related hospital admissions still show an increase. This may be because more medical conditions are now included under this category, and because more women are now drinking more than 20 years ago.
Although many common forms of heart disease are less likely in moderate drinkers, there is one adverse effect of alcohol on the heart. Up to 10 per cent of patients over 75 suffer from atrial fibrillation, an irregularity of the heart's rhythm. In 45 per cent of the cases in which a patient has suffered the most common form of stroke, it has been preceded by atrial fibrillation. Recent research, reviewed this month in the British Journal of Cardiology, suggests a strong association between atrial fibrillation and alcohol intake.
Source
One in 20 British midwife positions unfilled
One in 20 midwife positions in NHS hospitals are unfilled despite a Government promise to would recruit 1,000 more midwives
Figures show that 583 midwife posts in NHS hospitals are vacant and 276 maternity support worker jobs are unfilled. Barking, Havering and Redbridge Hospitals NHS Trust has the higest vacancy rate, 39 per cent. If its 76 full time midwife positions, 29 posts need to be filled. One in five maternity units (22 per cent) across the country have cut midwife numbers in the past year and some have reported that their maternity unit has been cut in half. Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust has 101 full time midwives last year but this year has 47 which is a 54 per cent drop. The figures were obtained using the Freedom of Information Act by the Conservatives.
This week, Professor Cathy Warwick, general secretary of the Royal College of Midwives, said tens of millions of pounds that were meant to increase the number of midwives have not been received by hospitals. "On the very busy labour wards that are struggling to cope with the rising birth rate, midwives are having to look after sometimes two or three women in labour and that's when the woman ends up being left alone. That's not only unacceptable, that's not safe," she said.
The failure to pass on the money, part of a drive to improve maternity services, means the NHS will not be able to honour promises by ministers to give women a single dedicated midwife during pregnancy and labour. Alan Johnson, the health secretary, in February pledged 330m pounds of extra funding over the next three years to implement the Maternity Matters strategy whose guarantees include giving women the choice of whether to give birth at home instead of at hospital. He also promised that he would recruit 1,000 more midwives to the NHS by 2009.
Health Minister Ann Keen said: "Claims that midwife numbers are falling are complete and utter nonsense. "Validated figures from the latest NHS workforce census show the number of midwives has surpassed 25,000 for the first time and we know there is continuing growth towards recruiting an additional 1,000 midwives by September 2009, rising to 4,000 in 2012. There has also been a 25 % increase in the number of students entering midwifery training since 1997."
Source
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
'Sex chip' will have us wired, Oxford University researcher says
Forget Viagra: scientists are working on an electronic "sex chip" that will be able to stimulate pleasure centres in the brain, The Australian reports. The prospect of the chip is emerging from progress in deep brain stimulation, in which tiny shocks from implanted electrodes are given to the brain. It has already been used to treat symptoms of Parkinson's disease.
In recent months, scientists have been focusing on an area of the brain just behind the eyes known as the orbitofrontal cortex. This is associated with feelings of pleasure derived from eating and sex. A research survey conducted by Morten Kringelbach, senior fellow at Oxford University's department of psychiatry, and reported in the Nature Reviews Neuroscience journal, found the orbitofrontal cortex could be a "new stimulation target" to help people suffering from anhedonia, an inability to experience pleasure from such activities. Stimulating this area can produce pleasure as intense as "devouring a delicious pastry", he said.
His colleague Tipu Aziz, a professor of neurosurgery at the John Radcliffe hospital in Oxford, predicted a significant breakthrough in the science behind a "sex chip" within 10 years. "There is evidence that this chip will work," Dr Aziz said. "A few years ago, a scientist implanted such a device into the brain of a woman with a low sex drive and turned her into a very sexually active woman. She didn't like the sudden change, so the wiring in her head was removed."
The wiring remains a hurdle: Dr Aziz says current technology, which requires surgery to connect a wire from a heart pacemaker into the brain, causes bleeding in some patients and is "intrusive and crude". By 2015, he predicts, micro-computers in the brain with a range of applications could be self-powered and controlled by hand-held transmitters.
Source
British government leaflets advise on the dangers of baubles and the terror of tinsel
Whatever you do this Christmas, don't let the children into the kitchen while you are cooking the turkey. Always finish your drink to avoid a youngster having a taste and ending up with alcohol poisoning. And, of course, never hang baubles on the tree. They might break and give someone a nasty cut.
These 'tips', from a list of gratuitous health and safety advice issued yesterday, came not from a misguided town hall jobsworth, but with the authority of Children's Secretary Ed Balls. Mr Balls's officials have printed 150,000 leaflets designed to look like advent calendars, to be distributed through shopping malls and children's centres 'to help make the festive season safe'. The leaflets from the Department for Children, Schools and Families warn of common accidents that can happen at Christmas.
They alert families to the dangers of tinsel. A thousand people each year, the leaflets declare, are 'hurt by trimmings or when decorating their homes'. Another 1,000 people a year have to go to hospital after accidents with Christmas trees, according to the publication. Among the risks families are told to bear in mind are tipsy guests 'crashing to the floor when they miss their seat at the dinner table'.
Parents may stab themselves with scissors should they try to use them as screwdrivers when building children's toys, the leaflets advise. They may cut themselves with knives used to prize open presents quickly. Children could be hurt if they fall off rocking horses or ride their new bikes into walls. Cooks may spill hot fat over themselves or get 'nasty cuts when chopping piles of vegetables'.
Children's minister Delyth Morgan said the leaflet would remind parents of safeguards-around the home so they can 'make sure Christmas is a time for fun and laughter but not tears'. The advice leaflet, titled 'Tis the Season to be Careful, ran into trouble with critics who pointed out that Mr Balls's department is in charge of the 'safeguarding children' system that failed to prevent the death of Baby P.
Tory junior Children's spokesman Tim Loughton said: 'This is yet more evidence that the DCSF really stands for the Department that Can't Stop Fiddling. 'It is ironic that a Government Department which has become accident prone for messing up test results, pouring millions into databases that don't work and failing to protect our most vulnerable children is now spending thousands on producing leaflets to state the blindingly obvious.'
The leaflet, published as part of Mr Balls' Children's Plan which pledges to keep every child safe from harm, has 11 tips for parents.
Source
Another case of abusive homosexuals
California is not alone:
Abuse them and it is homophobia. So is this heterophobia?
Welfare booms under Britain's Labour government
The number of people who have been on benefits for more than five years has increased nearly 30% under Labour. Official statistics show that since 1999 the number of long-term claimants has grown from 1.84m to 2.34m, a 27% rise, despite a fall in the overall number of those claiming from 5.4m to 5.1m. The increase has taken place despite Labour's pledge when it came to power in 1997 to make cutting benefit dependency a priority. Tony Blair, the former prime minister, said: "We want to encourage work, not dependency."
Benefit dependency is highest in former industrial areas. Easington, in Co Durham, has the highest number on long-term benefits relative to population; other hot spots include Swansea and Merthyr Tydfil in south Wales.
Ministers are also increasingly alarmed by fraud. Earlier this year David Freud, a pensions expert and government adviser, published a report which said that fewer than one in three of the 2.7m people on incapacity benefit was entitled to claim it.
Source
The destructive British welfare state: "To most people, I imagine, welfare seems an obviously good thing. But in fact the corrosive and iniquitous side of welfare has been evident for many decades. It's only now that people are poking their heads out of the trench and daring to say so. You can see the devastating effects of welfare in Britain, for example, in the exponential rise in single motherhood. The figures are astonishing. In the 1950s almost all children in Britain were brought up by their natural parents. Today, only around half the children in Britain are brought up by their natural parents. Half! To see why that happened, let me paint you a picture. In the 1950s, the typical working man and his wife In Britain lived in an income-tax free existence. They kept every penny they earned. For an unmarried teenager, there was no council flat (the `projects' I think you call them), no rent rebate, no rate rebate, no housing benefit or anything else. The burden of looking after her and the child fell on her family, friends or charity. Parents who discovered their daughters were pregnant were understandably furious - because they had to pick up the tab. That's why Dad stomped round to the family of the boy responsible, to call him to account. They boy's family understood the full economic implications of making babies and came down on him like a ton of bricks. From the real economic relationships there arose a real moral code - the value and the cost of things were clear. The growth of welfare benefits has been huge since that time. And within that system a pregnant girl gets special treatment (top of the state housing list etc). The fear has gone. The old idea, "Don't, for heaven's sake, get pregnant. It would be a disaster" has gone."
Forget Viagra: scientists are working on an electronic "sex chip" that will be able to stimulate pleasure centres in the brain, The Australian reports. The prospect of the chip is emerging from progress in deep brain stimulation, in which tiny shocks from implanted electrodes are given to the brain. It has already been used to treat symptoms of Parkinson's disease.
In recent months, scientists have been focusing on an area of the brain just behind the eyes known as the orbitofrontal cortex. This is associated with feelings of pleasure derived from eating and sex. A research survey conducted by Morten Kringelbach, senior fellow at Oxford University's department of psychiatry, and reported in the Nature Reviews Neuroscience journal, found the orbitofrontal cortex could be a "new stimulation target" to help people suffering from anhedonia, an inability to experience pleasure from such activities. Stimulating this area can produce pleasure as intense as "devouring a delicious pastry", he said.
His colleague Tipu Aziz, a professor of neurosurgery at the John Radcliffe hospital in Oxford, predicted a significant breakthrough in the science behind a "sex chip" within 10 years. "There is evidence that this chip will work," Dr Aziz said. "A few years ago, a scientist implanted such a device into the brain of a woman with a low sex drive and turned her into a very sexually active woman. She didn't like the sudden change, so the wiring in her head was removed."
The wiring remains a hurdle: Dr Aziz says current technology, which requires surgery to connect a wire from a heart pacemaker into the brain, causes bleeding in some patients and is "intrusive and crude". By 2015, he predicts, micro-computers in the brain with a range of applications could be self-powered and controlled by hand-held transmitters.
Source
British government leaflets advise on the dangers of baubles and the terror of tinsel
Whatever you do this Christmas, don't let the children into the kitchen while you are cooking the turkey. Always finish your drink to avoid a youngster having a taste and ending up with alcohol poisoning. And, of course, never hang baubles on the tree. They might break and give someone a nasty cut.
These 'tips', from a list of gratuitous health and safety advice issued yesterday, came not from a misguided town hall jobsworth, but with the authority of Children's Secretary Ed Balls. Mr Balls's officials have printed 150,000 leaflets designed to look like advent calendars, to be distributed through shopping malls and children's centres 'to help make the festive season safe'. The leaflets from the Department for Children, Schools and Families warn of common accidents that can happen at Christmas.
They alert families to the dangers of tinsel. A thousand people each year, the leaflets declare, are 'hurt by trimmings or when decorating their homes'. Another 1,000 people a year have to go to hospital after accidents with Christmas trees, according to the publication. Among the risks families are told to bear in mind are tipsy guests 'crashing to the floor when they miss their seat at the dinner table'.
Parents may stab themselves with scissors should they try to use them as screwdrivers when building children's toys, the leaflets advise. They may cut themselves with knives used to prize open presents quickly. Children could be hurt if they fall off rocking horses or ride their new bikes into walls. Cooks may spill hot fat over themselves or get 'nasty cuts when chopping piles of vegetables'.
Children's minister Delyth Morgan said the leaflet would remind parents of safeguards-around the home so they can 'make sure Christmas is a time for fun and laughter but not tears'. The advice leaflet, titled 'Tis the Season to be Careful, ran into trouble with critics who pointed out that Mr Balls's department is in charge of the 'safeguarding children' system that failed to prevent the death of Baby P.
Tory junior Children's spokesman Tim Loughton said: 'This is yet more evidence that the DCSF really stands for the Department that Can't Stop Fiddling. 'It is ironic that a Government Department which has become accident prone for messing up test results, pouring millions into databases that don't work and failing to protect our most vulnerable children is now spending thousands on producing leaflets to state the blindingly obvious.'
The leaflet, published as part of Mr Balls' Children's Plan which pledges to keep every child safe from harm, has 11 tips for parents.
Source
Another case of abusive homosexuals
California is not alone:
"An aide to the Archbishop of Canterbury has been sacked after writing an insult to a senior bishop into an official document. The Lambeth Palace staff member made an offensive reference to the Bishop of Rochester, the Right Reverend Michael Nazir-Ali, who has been at odds with the Archbishop over the issue of homosexuality. The document in the affair, a list of candidates for job vacancies, included a reference to 'the a***hole Bishop of Rochester'. It was copied to all 43 of the Church of England's diocesan bishops and to Downing Street. The rogue word was noticed only after the paper had been circulated.
A Church of England spokesman yesterday confirmed the Lambeth Palace aide responsible had been sacked. He said: 'When this came to light there was an immediate investigation. The person responsible admitted to it and was summarily dismissed.' The culprit is widely assumed to have been someone who sympathises with the Church of England's gay lobby. The Church has declined to name him or her.
Source
Abuse them and it is homophobia. So is this heterophobia?
Welfare booms under Britain's Labour government
The number of people who have been on benefits for more than five years has increased nearly 30% under Labour. Official statistics show that since 1999 the number of long-term claimants has grown from 1.84m to 2.34m, a 27% rise, despite a fall in the overall number of those claiming from 5.4m to 5.1m. The increase has taken place despite Labour's pledge when it came to power in 1997 to make cutting benefit dependency a priority. Tony Blair, the former prime minister, said: "We want to encourage work, not dependency."
Benefit dependency is highest in former industrial areas. Easington, in Co Durham, has the highest number on long-term benefits relative to population; other hot spots include Swansea and Merthyr Tydfil in south Wales.
Ministers are also increasingly alarmed by fraud. Earlier this year David Freud, a pensions expert and government adviser, published a report which said that fewer than one in three of the 2.7m people on incapacity benefit was entitled to claim it.
Source
The destructive British welfare state: "To most people, I imagine, welfare seems an obviously good thing. But in fact the corrosive and iniquitous side of welfare has been evident for many decades. It's only now that people are poking their heads out of the trench and daring to say so. You can see the devastating effects of welfare in Britain, for example, in the exponential rise in single motherhood. The figures are astonishing. In the 1950s almost all children in Britain were brought up by their natural parents. Today, only around half the children in Britain are brought up by their natural parents. Half! To see why that happened, let me paint you a picture. In the 1950s, the typical working man and his wife In Britain lived in an income-tax free existence. They kept every penny they earned. For an unmarried teenager, there was no council flat (the `projects' I think you call them), no rent rebate, no rate rebate, no housing benefit or anything else. The burden of looking after her and the child fell on her family, friends or charity. Parents who discovered their daughters were pregnant were understandably furious - because they had to pick up the tab. That's why Dad stomped round to the family of the boy responsible, to call him to account. They boy's family understood the full economic implications of making babies and came down on him like a ton of bricks. From the real economic relationships there arose a real moral code - the value and the cost of things were clear. The growth of welfare benefits has been huge since that time. And within that system a pregnant girl gets special treatment (top of the state housing list etc). The fear has gone. The old idea, "Don't, for heaven's sake, get pregnant. It would be a disaster" has gone."
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
British police think bad jokes are more dangerous than assaults and robbery
Bad news for comedians; the police are now vetting jokes. Anyone who tells a joke which isn't on the police's list of acceptable jokes faces the threat of arrest. No Joke. Shop keeper Bob Singh runs 2 shops in Port Talbot. He regularly suffers crime, shopliftings & assaults, the normal stuff shopkeepers have to put up with. He reckons the average delay between reporting a crime & the Old Bill turning up is between 24 and 48 hours. (That's not bad, in my force I'd say that was pretty prompt, lots of our victims have to wait a week or more)
Mr Singh has hit on a great way to get the police on his doorstep much quicker though; he simply puts a few jokes on his Christmas Special Offers flyer & officers turned up in a big van quicker than he could shout "I think it's a racist incident".
Bob has put jokes on his festive flyers for the last 10 years. He gets the jokes off the internet. He did the same this year and was warned that some of his jokes might be offensive. Presumably someone complained, either that or the SO25 Anti Joke Squad had a lucky break. He has been told to withdraw the leaflet by police officers. As a result he put up a sign in his shops saying: "We would like to apologise to anyone who may have been offended by the contents of our xmas leaflet. In future we will be more politically correct. Sorry"
Examples of the now banned jokes were:
South Wales Police said one officer, along with a support officer and a trainee support officer had attended. "The content of the promotional material which has been distributed has been brought to our attention as being potentially inflammatory and offensive," said the force. "The distributor has been appropriately advised and instructed to withdraw the leaflets from circulation."
Tory MP for Shipley Philip Davies, a patron of the Campaign Against Political Correctness, said: `I just think it's absolutely mindless that police are wasting time on this kind of stuff when there are so many violent offences being carried out in the country. `The police officer would have been better off telling the person who complained to develop a better sense of humour rather than going to call on a shopkeeper. `The jokes may not be very good, but that's a long way from being a criminal offence.'
Mr Singh said, "I couldn't believe my ears. I thought they were joking - but they were deadly serious. This proves the world has gone completely crazy. Why are the police getting involved in something like this?" Bob, I couldn't agree more.
Source
Follow-up:
A store boss whose joke- filled festive advertising leaflet led to a visit from the police has had the last laugh on whoever shopped him. Not only is Bob Singh's Landmark store in Port Talbot even busier than usual for Christmas but the leaflets themselves are almost becoming collector's items. Last week the Post reported on Mr Singh's unusual run-in with the law after he decided to give customers something to smile about by sprinkling jokes on his Christmas promotions leaflets.
Although he admitted one or two might be near the knuckle, he insisted the majority were inoffensive. But a mystery shopper thought otherwise and drew the matter to the attention of the police, claiming some of the gags were potentially offensive and inflammatory. Officers called to give advice to Mr Singh following which he withdrew the leaflets from circulation and put an apology in the window of the Water Street store in Aberavon. He also opened a special book which customers could sign to declare they were not offended by the jokes.
Since the Post ran the story, Mr Singh's tale has hit the national headlines in Britain and abroad. He admitted: "The publicity has definitely helped. "Trade was already doing well anyway. We did a massive price cut campaign for Christmas, but it's fair to say all this publicity has helped us somewhat more."
And it seems the problem leaflets are almost as much in demand as the bargains they are advertising. "We've had people travel here to ask if they can have one of the leaflets," said Mr Singh. "We have explained there have been issues with them, and that certain people said they were not happy. "But, with the proviso they sign the book to state they are in favour of the leaflets, we have been able to let them have a copy. "I don't know if they are collector's items but there is definitely quite a bit of interest in them."
Aberavon councillor Tony Taylor said Mr Singh had done the right thing by withdrawing the leaflets from general circulation. "He's a popular and respected businessman. I think he probably did make a mistake, realised that and made amends. "What is inoffensive to some people is offensive to others. This leaflet could have gone into old people's homes or been picked up children, so you do have to be careful." [Old people can't take a joke?? That sounds offensive to old people to me!]
Source
The fate of the Jews -- continued
I trod on thin ice recently in my reflections about the history and fate of Jews. But despite my reflections getting a couple of thousand hits, I got only one really hostile response -- so I am encouraged to continue the discussion. I am however going to let one of my regular Jewish readers do most of the work initially. I reproduce his email in full below:
Said with proper passion.
He misses my point a bit, however and I admit that I should have spelled it out more. The thrust of my remarks was not at all that Jews should always have sought allies. I agree that allies would have been rarely available. My point is that Jews should be cultivating their allies NOW -- while such allies (American fundamentalist Christians) are available. Fundamentalist Christians are strong people in the face of the hostility of the world and have therefore remained supportive of Israel despite the scornful attitude that many Jews seem to have towards them -- but changing churches is an American tradition and church doctrines themselves have undergone a lot of changes even in my lifetime. My old Presbyterian church is still an oasis for the old gospel but many other churches are not. So nobody should take fundamentalist Christians for granted. Their support might not always be available. Note that already outside America fundamentalist Christians are often little focused on Israel. So from a British perspective it is stupid of Jews not to value, support and encourage American fundamentalist Christians.
And the reason I mentioned Britain was to point out that even a great and powerful nation has always seen a pressing need for allies. So if the Brits have always thought that they needed allies, might not people who are in a much weaker position also need them?
My comments on the Biblical description of Jews as "stiff-necked" as an explanation for Jewish political folly could probably also be expanded. I did note that I myself probably deserve that description. My point, however, was that obstinacy and defiance has both strengths and weaknesses. And I think that Jews are a good example of that. It gives Jews an independence of mind but also generates hostility towards them. Even The Lord himself did not like it! And I have NO expectation that it will ever change much. If Moses and the Hebrew prophets could not change it, who could?
Again, however, I think the British offer a safer example -- a way of handling others that any target of hostility should find thought-provoking. The Brits are experts at deflecting hostility. They don't succeed entirely at it of course but their historic civility and their ability to find allies shows that they are pretty good at it nonetheless. And their way is what outsiders often condemn as "British hypocrisy". But it is not really hypocrisy. It is just an attempt to respect the sensitivities of others. And the tools for doing that are compromise and the "fudge". You almost have to be British to understand what a fudge is and probably the best way of finding out is to Google "British fudge" and read some examples of it. It it is basically a partial retreat or concession that is disguised as not being a retreat or a concession. So it means something like "an evasive compromise", "handling a dilemma by vagueness" or "concealing what is really going on by vague or misleading words". It might not be too unkind to describe the whole of British politics as one big fudge. I doubt that the word is capable of precise definition but precision is, after all, anathema to it. There are some good examples of it here (Scroll down a little).
And I did make the point that the relatively small population of Jews in the world is essentially the result of persecution. That was really my starting point. I went on to ask WHY Jews have been so persecuted. And given their present demonstrable unwisdom politically, I suspect that they have always lacked political wisdom -- with "stiff-neckedness" being a major fount of that unwisdom. But my British heritage means that I speak as someone who not only respects compromise but also understands the "fudge". Nobody respects the "fudge" -- but they do it rather than perpetuate hostility.
Illegal immigrant tries to flee Britain SIX times... and costs taxpayers $500,000 to keep him there
More British bureaucratic insanity
Like thousands of others arriving here, Rashid Ali dreamt Britain would be a land of opportunity. But when he failed to gain asylum, he just wanted to go home to Morocco. With no money, job or passport, the illegal immigrant resolved to flee Britain by stowing away on cargo ships. Yet after six failed attempts he is still there - because the UK authorities have forced him to stay. He was supposed to have been deported in 2005 after he was caught stowing away for the fifth time and was jailed for stealing a coat and some food. But instead the 30-year-old was then held at an immigration detention centre for three years - at a cost to the taxpayer of $500,000.
Now he could be jailed again after being caught hiding on another boat two days after being released. Yesterday a judge said it beggared belief that the Home Office had failed to repatriate him. At Bristol Crown Court, Judge Michael Hubbard, QC, vowed to 'kick some backsides', saying: 'The sooner he gets back to Morocco, the better for everybody. 'We will write to the minister for the relevant office and see if we can have a senior civil servant here to explain the situation.' Ali arrived in Britain in 2004 claiming to be Algerian, because he thought he would have a better chance of gaining asylum. When his claim was rejected, he was unable to go home because he had torn up the identity documents proving he was Moroccan.
Desperate to get back, he squatted in an abandoned factory by the docks at Avonmouth, Bristol, and tried to find a passage home on ships. But four times his stowaway attempts were thwarted - the furthest he got was Ireland - and he found himself back in Bristol. After being returned to Avonmouth for a fifth time, he stole some food and a coat to keep warm. He was jailed for nine months and a magistrate ordered that he be deported after serving his sentence. Instead, on his release he was sent to a detention centre for almost three years.
In October this year he was finally freed - and two days later police found him hiding on a sixth boat leaving Bristol. He was charged with stealing a mobile phone and jacket and damaging a door at the docks, which he admitted. Judge Hubbard adjourned sentencing and remanded Ali in custody until January 31 in the hope of getting an explanation from immigration officials. The judge said: 'It beggars belief that during that time in detention it wasn't sorted out for him to return home. Can we not use this court to kick some backsides and have something done?'
Source
Healthy pay: NHS doctor gets $500,000
A hospital doctor is earning more than 290,000 pounds from his National Health Service salary and a series of bonuses, including a 40,000 supplement to be on call. Figures obtained by The Sunday Times under the Freedom of Information Act suggest hundreds of NHS consultants earned more than 190,000 in the financial year ending in March – more than Gordon Brown – putting them in the top 1% of earners. By contrast with highly paid workers in the private sector, who now face widespread unemployment, they also enjoy full job security.
Previously NHS consultants turned to private work for extra income. The figures show they can now more than double their basic salaries by sticking with the health service, thanks to bonuses inflated by incentives to meet government targets to cut waiting lists.
The generosity of the NHS towards its senior staff may anger patients who have recently been deprived of modern cancer or osteoporosis treatments because they have been deemed too expensive. The consultant who earned more than 290,000 in the last financial year is a breast surgeon at University Hospitals of Morecambe Bay NHS Trust in Lancashire and Cumbria. On top of his 120,000 basic salary he is paid an annual bonus of 90,000 as a “merit award” or “clinical excellence award”. These extras, given for exceptional contributions, are paid to thousands of consultants every year. The surgeon was also paid 40,000 for overtime shifts and a 40,000 supplement for being on call.
A doctor at the Royal Devon & Exeter NHS Foundation Trust earned about 130,000 in extra payments, including 50,000-55,000 to run a regional service and 35,000-40,000 to bring down waiting lists.
Another consultant, working for Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust, was paid a supplement of 77,000 in the last financial year for carrying out extra shifts to meet a target of giving all patients treatment within 18 weeks.
Katherine Murphy, director of the Patients Association, said: “It is unethical for the medical profession to line their pockets in this way knowing that NHS trusts are being forced to cut services. Patients are being left in pain. “Doctors are always complaining about how underpaid they are. The reverse is the case. They are being given bonuses for what should be part of their day jobs.”
A spokesman for the Morecambe Bay NHS trust said: “The consultant is highly productive and provides a high quality of care. The trust is fortunate to have his skills, knowledge and experience.”
Last month The Sunday Times reported that an NHS nurse had broken the 100,000 barrier for the first time. The nurse consultant in Rotherham, South Yorkshire, doubled her basic salary of 50,000 by working overtime to bring down waiting lists.
The health department has already been accused of awarding unduly generous new contracts to NHS employees without achieving better treatments for patients. A report by the public accounts committee found that a contract for consultants boosted their pay by 27% without any measurable improvement in productivity.
Source
British cop behind arrest of politician issues grovelling apology for attack on Conservatives
The head of Scotland Yard's counter-terrorism command was forced to issue a grovelling apology tonight after accusing the Tories of corruption. Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick had sensationally suggested David Cameron was trying to undermine his investigation into Damian Green. Mr Quick was the senior officer who ordered the controversial operation to arrest the Tory frontbench MP last month.
His attack on the Tory leadership came after it emerged that Mr Quick's wife operates a luxury wedding car hire business from their home, raising questions about a possible security risk. The revelations in The Mail on Sunday prompted an extraordinary outburst from Mr Quick, who recently failed to make the final shortlist to succeed Sir Ian Blair as Metropolitan Police Commissioner. He said: 'The Tory machinery and their Press friends are mobilised against this investigation in a wholly corrupt way, and I feel very disappointed in the country I am living in.' He added: 'I think it is a very spiteful act, possibly to intimidate me away from investigating Mr Green, and I feel it has put my family at risk.'
His suggestion the Tories were responsible for the revelation of his wife Judith's business interests caused amazement at Westminster. It is unusual to have a senior police officer issue such politically charged accusations. A party spokesman called on Mr Quick to retract the claims. He said: 'The Conservative Party played no part whatsoever in the publication of this story. Assistant Commissioner Quick's claims of corruption and intimidation are absurd and wholly untrue. 'As the officer leading the inquiry into the arrest of Damian Green, Assistant Commissioner Quick should display objective professionalism and not make baseless, political attacks.'
Minutes later Mr Quick issued a statement from Scotland Yard. He said: 'I regret and wish to retract my comment regarding corruption. 'The comment was made as I was in the act of having to move my family out of our home to a place of safety following the article in the Mail on Sunday.'
Detectives have asked the Crown Prosecution Service whether the inquiry into Mr Green should continue. Lawyers at the CPS are considering a highly critical report into the MP's arrest to decide whether it would be in the public interest to investigate further or bring charges. The move was interpreted in legal circles last night as a potential exit strategy for the Met.
Source
Bad news for comedians; the police are now vetting jokes. Anyone who tells a joke which isn't on the police's list of acceptable jokes faces the threat of arrest. No Joke. Shop keeper Bob Singh runs 2 shops in Port Talbot. He regularly suffers crime, shopliftings & assaults, the normal stuff shopkeepers have to put up with. He reckons the average delay between reporting a crime & the Old Bill turning up is between 24 and 48 hours. (That's not bad, in my force I'd say that was pretty prompt, lots of our victims have to wait a week or more)
Mr Singh has hit on a great way to get the police on his doorstep much quicker though; he simply puts a few jokes on his Christmas Special Offers flyer & officers turned up in a big van quicker than he could shout "I think it's a racist incident".
Bob has put jokes on his festive flyers for the last 10 years. He gets the jokes off the internet. He did the same this year and was warned that some of his jokes might be offensive. Presumably someone complained, either that or the SO25 Anti Joke Squad had a lucky break. He has been told to withdraw the leaflet by police officers. As a result he put up a sign in his shops saying: "We would like to apologise to anyone who may have been offended by the contents of our xmas leaflet. In future we will be more politically correct. Sorry"
Examples of the now banned jokes were:
What's the difference between a Welsh woman and a Welsh goddess? - An eight pack of Stella from Bob's
Why is it dangerous to let a bloke's mind wander? - It's too little to be out on its own
What is the technical name for three days of horrendous weather followed by bright sunshine? A Welsh bank holiday
What's the difference between a woman with PMT and a Pitbull? Lipstick.
How do you measure a blonde's intelligence? Stick a tyre gauge in her ear!
What do you call a sheep with no legs? A Cloud!
What do you get when you cross an elephant with a rhino? El-if-i-no!
What do you call a deer with no eyes? I have No-I-Dear.
What do you do if your wife staggers? Shoot her again.
South Wales Police said one officer, along with a support officer and a trainee support officer had attended. "The content of the promotional material which has been distributed has been brought to our attention as being potentially inflammatory and offensive," said the force. "The distributor has been appropriately advised and instructed to withdraw the leaflets from circulation."
Tory MP for Shipley Philip Davies, a patron of the Campaign Against Political Correctness, said: `I just think it's absolutely mindless that police are wasting time on this kind of stuff when there are so many violent offences being carried out in the country. `The police officer would have been better off telling the person who complained to develop a better sense of humour rather than going to call on a shopkeeper. `The jokes may not be very good, but that's a long way from being a criminal offence.'
Mr Singh said, "I couldn't believe my ears. I thought they were joking - but they were deadly serious. This proves the world has gone completely crazy. Why are the police getting involved in something like this?" Bob, I couldn't agree more.
Source
Follow-up:
A store boss whose joke- filled festive advertising leaflet led to a visit from the police has had the last laugh on whoever shopped him. Not only is Bob Singh's Landmark store in Port Talbot even busier than usual for Christmas but the leaflets themselves are almost becoming collector's items. Last week the Post reported on Mr Singh's unusual run-in with the law after he decided to give customers something to smile about by sprinkling jokes on his Christmas promotions leaflets.
Although he admitted one or two might be near the knuckle, he insisted the majority were inoffensive. But a mystery shopper thought otherwise and drew the matter to the attention of the police, claiming some of the gags were potentially offensive and inflammatory. Officers called to give advice to Mr Singh following which he withdrew the leaflets from circulation and put an apology in the window of the Water Street store in Aberavon. He also opened a special book which customers could sign to declare they were not offended by the jokes.
Since the Post ran the story, Mr Singh's tale has hit the national headlines in Britain and abroad. He admitted: "The publicity has definitely helped. "Trade was already doing well anyway. We did a massive price cut campaign for Christmas, but it's fair to say all this publicity has helped us somewhat more."
And it seems the problem leaflets are almost as much in demand as the bargains they are advertising. "We've had people travel here to ask if they can have one of the leaflets," said Mr Singh. "We have explained there have been issues with them, and that certain people said they were not happy. "But, with the proviso they sign the book to state they are in favour of the leaflets, we have been able to let them have a copy. "I don't know if they are collector's items but there is definitely quite a bit of interest in them."
Aberavon councillor Tony Taylor said Mr Singh had done the right thing by withdrawing the leaflets from general circulation. "He's a popular and respected businessman. I think he probably did make a mistake, realised that and made amends. "What is inoffensive to some people is offensive to others. This leaflet could have gone into old people's homes or been picked up children, so you do have to be careful." [Old people can't take a joke?? That sounds offensive to old people to me!]
Source
The fate of the Jews -- continued
I trod on thin ice recently in my reflections about the history and fate of Jews. But despite my reflections getting a couple of thousand hits, I got only one really hostile response -- so I am encouraged to continue the discussion. I am however going to let one of my regular Jewish readers do most of the work initially. I reproduce his email in full below:
A few disagreements or notes on what you wrote about Jews:
What would our numbers be without 6 million murdered..and of the remainder that survived Europe, how many were yet again dysfunctional, would not have children, committed suicide later on? Ok, we'd still be small in number, but not QUITE so small, given the one or two generations that would have survived and possibly thrived.
Religious Jews, the most "stiff-necked" of the bunch in terms of holding onto their Judaism, (and the most politically conservative), are the ones with big families. The problem is that the base is so small, that the overall numbers remain low, but in percentage terms, the one group of Jews growing is the Orthodox.
It is difficult to compare Britain, an island nation, with the stateless-until-a-short-time-ago "nation" of Israel. We were and remain an anomaly in history, a people that were interspersed among the nations. That made us the "stranger", always, and we were often forced into professions that were not looked upon in a god light, e.g. moneylending. We certainly see right now that financiers are heroes when times are flush, but even the honest ones are anathema when times go bad. And we certainly had no nation to hold onto, remained the great scapegoat of the nations. Was that because we were politically stupid?
NO. That's because we were weak and easy targets, and yes, we refused to fit in and go along with the rest of the population. We refused the easy terms of Christianity, so were reviled by Christians. We refused the paganism of Rome and Greece, and suffered accordingly. We refused to go along with the insane Mohammed, and now our no. 1 enemy in the world is Islam. Ok, so yes, we're stiffnecked, but to say it's because we were politically stupid....or should we just given in and lost our identity, should we have become Christians or pagans or Muslims, and just let Judaism go by the wayside of history?
So yes, our numbers are puny. But we outlasted the Third Reich, Stalin's Soviet Union, Torquemada's Inquisition Spain, ancient Rome and Greece, ancient Egypt..and all others who've tried to destroy us.
Now, I would agree that in the current day, and maybe ever since the Enlightenment, when we decided to "reform" and not be SO weird and stiff-necked, when we tried to blend in...we've become more and more leftist, and that HAS resulted in terrible problems for us. We don't even need to worry about Iran as we are fading away on our own, as the less stiff-necked amongst us don't care if their kids leave Judaism and marry others, or cheapen the religion in any number of ways; right now, I would agree that leftism is our dominant "religion" and it drives me crazy, as you know. It has caused us much grief and we are committing, I would also agree, our own suicide. But it is the strange people in the black hats, and the rabid "settlers' on the West Bank, and the families with the 10 kids, and those who worry about the picayune and strange rules of Halakhah, the religous, Orthodox "form" of Judaism, the form that is derived from the Rabbinic Judaism, that has the only real chance of keeping Judaism alive. THAT is not a new phenomenon, and was always thus.
Allies? Who should we have made allies with, without losing who we were? It's a valid question, but the answer is that we had no one to ally with. We had nothing or little to give...no lands, no titles...occasionally money and know-how to make money, for which we became court Jews and influential...but money, as it is wont to do, as often corrupted these Jews, as it does most people. Should we have allied with those who blamed us for killing their Lord, and who blamed us for poisoning the wells of Europe to bring about the Black Plague, which we often missed because of our rules of sanitation? Should we have allied with the Muslims who gave us dhimmi status at best, if not actively persecuting us for our lack of intelligence to convert to Islam?
I WILL be willing to grant we are not always smart as we are given credit for. I know a lot of Jews that irritate the hell out of me, and that I don't find so bright...but what percentage of science Nobels (not the meaningless and political ones like "peace" or "literature") are from Jews? That's another story and I know you know it.
So being alone and defenseless and insular and strange...it is a blessing and a curse. I'm well aware of the curse, but more need to understand the blessing. And what hurdles we've had to face. That we've overcome them is the miracle we'll celebrate, in part, tonight, the first night of Chanukkah. It is the anti-assimilation holiday, totally perverted by the reformed Jews, but the holiday is purely about maintaining our identity, our stiff-necked and crazy and insular persona, even in the face of hate and abuse.
And so it is 65 years since my grandparents were murdered by the animals, the Nazis, in Auschwitz. My 2 kids are religious, my sister's 5 kids and 7 grandchildren (I'm the slow one of the two!) are all religious or being raised religious. We haven't disappeared yet. But Hitler and his henchmen are gone, the Reich is gone. Yes, new enemies have arisen, and anti-Semitism doesn't go out-of-fashion, and yes, we can be total idiots...but we persevere, because we believe in what we are and who we are...not better than anyone, but maintaining who we are and what we do is important, EVEN IF WE DON'T EVEN ALWAYS UNDERSTAND WHY...: we are the group that gave the world the premier book about theodicy, the book of Job. It is who we are. We maintain faith though at times it seems absurd to do so. It is not always or maybe it is NEVER rational. But we've outlasted all the other folks who tried to do us in, and we believe that we'll outlast the Iranis and Hamas and Islam and all the rest of the murderers.
Said with proper passion.
He misses my point a bit, however and I admit that I should have spelled it out more. The thrust of my remarks was not at all that Jews should always have sought allies. I agree that allies would have been rarely available. My point is that Jews should be cultivating their allies NOW -- while such allies (American fundamentalist Christians) are available. Fundamentalist Christians are strong people in the face of the hostility of the world and have therefore remained supportive of Israel despite the scornful attitude that many Jews seem to have towards them -- but changing churches is an American tradition and church doctrines themselves have undergone a lot of changes even in my lifetime. My old Presbyterian church is still an oasis for the old gospel but many other churches are not. So nobody should take fundamentalist Christians for granted. Their support might not always be available. Note that already outside America fundamentalist Christians are often little focused on Israel. So from a British perspective it is stupid of Jews not to value, support and encourage American fundamentalist Christians.
And the reason I mentioned Britain was to point out that even a great and powerful nation has always seen a pressing need for allies. So if the Brits have always thought that they needed allies, might not people who are in a much weaker position also need them?
My comments on the Biblical description of Jews as "stiff-necked" as an explanation for Jewish political folly could probably also be expanded. I did note that I myself probably deserve that description. My point, however, was that obstinacy and defiance has both strengths and weaknesses. And I think that Jews are a good example of that. It gives Jews an independence of mind but also generates hostility towards them. Even The Lord himself did not like it! And I have NO expectation that it will ever change much. If Moses and the Hebrew prophets could not change it, who could?
Again, however, I think the British offer a safer example -- a way of handling others that any target of hostility should find thought-provoking. The Brits are experts at deflecting hostility. They don't succeed entirely at it of course but their historic civility and their ability to find allies shows that they are pretty good at it nonetheless. And their way is what outsiders often condemn as "British hypocrisy". But it is not really hypocrisy. It is just an attempt to respect the sensitivities of others. And the tools for doing that are compromise and the "fudge". You almost have to be British to understand what a fudge is and probably the best way of finding out is to Google "British fudge" and read some examples of it. It it is basically a partial retreat or concession that is disguised as not being a retreat or a concession. So it means something like "an evasive compromise", "handling a dilemma by vagueness" or "concealing what is really going on by vague or misleading words". It might not be too unkind to describe the whole of British politics as one big fudge. I doubt that the word is capable of precise definition but precision is, after all, anathema to it. There are some good examples of it here (Scroll down a little).
And I did make the point that the relatively small population of Jews in the world is essentially the result of persecution. That was really my starting point. I went on to ask WHY Jews have been so persecuted. And given their present demonstrable unwisdom politically, I suspect that they have always lacked political wisdom -- with "stiff-neckedness" being a major fount of that unwisdom. But my British heritage means that I speak as someone who not only respects compromise but also understands the "fudge". Nobody respects the "fudge" -- but they do it rather than perpetuate hostility.
Illegal immigrant tries to flee Britain SIX times... and costs taxpayers $500,000 to keep him there
More British bureaucratic insanity
Like thousands of others arriving here, Rashid Ali dreamt Britain would be a land of opportunity. But when he failed to gain asylum, he just wanted to go home to Morocco. With no money, job or passport, the illegal immigrant resolved to flee Britain by stowing away on cargo ships. Yet after six failed attempts he is still there - because the UK authorities have forced him to stay. He was supposed to have been deported in 2005 after he was caught stowing away for the fifth time and was jailed for stealing a coat and some food. But instead the 30-year-old was then held at an immigration detention centre for three years - at a cost to the taxpayer of $500,000.
Now he could be jailed again after being caught hiding on another boat two days after being released. Yesterday a judge said it beggared belief that the Home Office had failed to repatriate him. At Bristol Crown Court, Judge Michael Hubbard, QC, vowed to 'kick some backsides', saying: 'The sooner he gets back to Morocco, the better for everybody. 'We will write to the minister for the relevant office and see if we can have a senior civil servant here to explain the situation.' Ali arrived in Britain in 2004 claiming to be Algerian, because he thought he would have a better chance of gaining asylum. When his claim was rejected, he was unable to go home because he had torn up the identity documents proving he was Moroccan.
Desperate to get back, he squatted in an abandoned factory by the docks at Avonmouth, Bristol, and tried to find a passage home on ships. But four times his stowaway attempts were thwarted - the furthest he got was Ireland - and he found himself back in Bristol. After being returned to Avonmouth for a fifth time, he stole some food and a coat to keep warm. He was jailed for nine months and a magistrate ordered that he be deported after serving his sentence. Instead, on his release he was sent to a detention centre for almost three years.
In October this year he was finally freed - and two days later police found him hiding on a sixth boat leaving Bristol. He was charged with stealing a mobile phone and jacket and damaging a door at the docks, which he admitted. Judge Hubbard adjourned sentencing and remanded Ali in custody until January 31 in the hope of getting an explanation from immigration officials. The judge said: 'It beggars belief that during that time in detention it wasn't sorted out for him to return home. Can we not use this court to kick some backsides and have something done?'
Source
Healthy pay: NHS doctor gets $500,000
A hospital doctor is earning more than 290,000 pounds from his National Health Service salary and a series of bonuses, including a 40,000 supplement to be on call. Figures obtained by The Sunday Times under the Freedom of Information Act suggest hundreds of NHS consultants earned more than 190,000 in the financial year ending in March – more than Gordon Brown – putting them in the top 1% of earners. By contrast with highly paid workers in the private sector, who now face widespread unemployment, they also enjoy full job security.
Previously NHS consultants turned to private work for extra income. The figures show they can now more than double their basic salaries by sticking with the health service, thanks to bonuses inflated by incentives to meet government targets to cut waiting lists.
The generosity of the NHS towards its senior staff may anger patients who have recently been deprived of modern cancer or osteoporosis treatments because they have been deemed too expensive. The consultant who earned more than 290,000 in the last financial year is a breast surgeon at University Hospitals of Morecambe Bay NHS Trust in Lancashire and Cumbria. On top of his 120,000 basic salary he is paid an annual bonus of 90,000 as a “merit award” or “clinical excellence award”. These extras, given for exceptional contributions, are paid to thousands of consultants every year. The surgeon was also paid 40,000 for overtime shifts and a 40,000 supplement for being on call.
A doctor at the Royal Devon & Exeter NHS Foundation Trust earned about 130,000 in extra payments, including 50,000-55,000 to run a regional service and 35,000-40,000 to bring down waiting lists.
Another consultant, working for Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust, was paid a supplement of 77,000 in the last financial year for carrying out extra shifts to meet a target of giving all patients treatment within 18 weeks.
Katherine Murphy, director of the Patients Association, said: “It is unethical for the medical profession to line their pockets in this way knowing that NHS trusts are being forced to cut services. Patients are being left in pain. “Doctors are always complaining about how underpaid they are. The reverse is the case. They are being given bonuses for what should be part of their day jobs.”
A spokesman for the Morecambe Bay NHS trust said: “The consultant is highly productive and provides a high quality of care. The trust is fortunate to have his skills, knowledge and experience.”
Last month The Sunday Times reported that an NHS nurse had broken the 100,000 barrier for the first time. The nurse consultant in Rotherham, South Yorkshire, doubled her basic salary of 50,000 by working overtime to bring down waiting lists.
The health department has already been accused of awarding unduly generous new contracts to NHS employees without achieving better treatments for patients. A report by the public accounts committee found that a contract for consultants boosted their pay by 27% without any measurable improvement in productivity.
Source
British cop behind arrest of politician issues grovelling apology for attack on Conservatives
The head of Scotland Yard's counter-terrorism command was forced to issue a grovelling apology tonight after accusing the Tories of corruption. Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick had sensationally suggested David Cameron was trying to undermine his investigation into Damian Green. Mr Quick was the senior officer who ordered the controversial operation to arrest the Tory frontbench MP last month.
His attack on the Tory leadership came after it emerged that Mr Quick's wife operates a luxury wedding car hire business from their home, raising questions about a possible security risk. The revelations in The Mail on Sunday prompted an extraordinary outburst from Mr Quick, who recently failed to make the final shortlist to succeed Sir Ian Blair as Metropolitan Police Commissioner. He said: 'The Tory machinery and their Press friends are mobilised against this investigation in a wholly corrupt way, and I feel very disappointed in the country I am living in.' He added: 'I think it is a very spiteful act, possibly to intimidate me away from investigating Mr Green, and I feel it has put my family at risk.'
His suggestion the Tories were responsible for the revelation of his wife Judith's business interests caused amazement at Westminster. It is unusual to have a senior police officer issue such politically charged accusations. A party spokesman called on Mr Quick to retract the claims. He said: 'The Conservative Party played no part whatsoever in the publication of this story. Assistant Commissioner Quick's claims of corruption and intimidation are absurd and wholly untrue. 'As the officer leading the inquiry into the arrest of Damian Green, Assistant Commissioner Quick should display objective professionalism and not make baseless, political attacks.'
Minutes later Mr Quick issued a statement from Scotland Yard. He said: 'I regret and wish to retract my comment regarding corruption. 'The comment was made as I was in the act of having to move my family out of our home to a place of safety following the article in the Mail on Sunday.'
Detectives have asked the Crown Prosecution Service whether the inquiry into Mr Green should continue. Lawyers at the CPS are considering a highly critical report into the MP's arrest to decide whether it would be in the public interest to investigate further or bring charges. The move was interpreted in legal circles last night as a potential exit strategy for the Met.
Source
Monday, December 22, 2008
NHS bosses to limit doctors’ hours -- by hiring more bureaucrats!
This must be a high-point of socialist stupidity. They are hiring more bureaucrats in order to reduce the hours that doctors work. As if the person making up the rosters at the moment cannot simply make them up differently! It is more doctors, not more bureaucrats that are needed. So how about spending the money instead on hiring more doctors?
The NHS is appointing a new layer of managers to ensure that doctors do not work too hard. Hospitals say the bureaucrats are needed to ensure compliance with European legislation which says that, from August next year, no doctors will be allowed to work more than 48 hours a week. At the moment, junior doctors can work up to 56 hours.
Scarborough and North East Yorkshire Trust appointed a “working time directive project manager” in 2006-7. Mid Essex Hospital Services NHS Trust is advertising for one at a salary of up to 44,527 pounds. A spokeswoman said the purpose was to “redesign roles and rotas in preparation for compliance next year”.
Last week the European parliament voted to end Britain’s opt-out. Unless a compromise is reached in the European Union’s council of ministers, this will mean doctors cannot work longer hours even if they want to. The Royal College of Surgeons has issued a warning that the NHS will not be able to cope when hours are cut next year.
Source
WIND POWER TARGET UNREALISTIC, SAY CRITICS
Claims in a Government-commissioned report that wind power can supply a third of Britain's electricity have been condemned as wildly optimistic by leading experts. Researchers and parliamentarians warned that a heavy reliance on wind energy would place Britain's energy supplies at risk.
A report by the Committee on Climate Change (CCC), published last week, maintained that wind farms could play a major role in helping Britain cut its harmful carbon emissions by 34 per cent in 2020 and 80 per cent by 2050. It stated: "Despite the inherent intermittency of wind power supply, wind generation could make a significant contribution to total global electricity generation and be a major source of electricity in the UK (eg 30 per cent by 2020 and more beyond)."
The CCC, chaired by Lord Turner, the former director general of the Confederation of British Industry, said that new techniques of energy storage would overcome the problem of maintaining a regular supply when the wind is not blowing. But sceptics say this is far too ambitious because experts have not yet been able to devise effective ways of capturing and storing electricity generated by wind. That means a backup system, in the form of nuclear or coal- or gas-fired power stations, would always be needed.
John Constable, director of policy and research at the Renewable Energy Foundation, a think tank, said: "To generate 30 or 40 per cent of our electrical energy from wind power would present unmanageable and unaffordable difficulties at the present. "The CCC's assertion to the contrary is simply out of step with the state of theoretical and empirical knowledge in the field. Betting on very heavy commitment to wind for carbon reduction is irrational and will result in the inevitable failure of our climate change policy. Wind has a role, but this role will be modest in scale."
A report by the House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee, published last month, also cast doubt on the merits of wind turbines.
More here
Human rights fear delayed trial of British killer
And how many other such cases are there?
The prosecution of Rachel Nickell's killer was delayed by almost two years because of human rights concerns about obtaining a sample of his DNA, a senior government official said yesterday. Prosecutors were concerned that Robert Napper's lawyers might claim a violation of his human rights if his DNA were taken without his proper consent while he was a mental patient, according to the legal official. In 2006 Lord Goldsmith, then attorney-general, was informed of the debate about Napper's rights. Lawyers finally concluded that a DNA sample could lawfully be taken. The official said: "Human rights was one of the arguments that stopped them getting his DNA. The Crown Prosecution Service and the police decided they had to resolve it because it could have been a technicality that could have collapsed the trial."
At the Old Bailey last week Napper admitted killing Nickell, a part-time model, on Wimbledon Common in 1992. He was returned to Broadmoor where he was already serving an indefinite sentence for the horrific killing of Samantha Bissett, 27, and her four-year-old daughter Jazmine in 1993. The Metropolitan police admitted both women and the child might still be alive were it not for a series of failings by detectives. The Met issued an unprecedented apology to the families of all three victims.
Police initially ignored the trail to Napper, focusing instead on Colin Stagg, who was acquitted in 1994. It was to be 10 years before a break-though in forensic techniques meant scientists were able to isolate a tiny fragment of DNA taken from Nickell's body. Within weeks scientists had established that it matched a sample from Napper which had been taken in the 1990s and held on the DNA database.
Napper has been linked to a total of 109 sex offences and 86 possible victims. He is also likely to be quizzed by police about the killings of at least three other women: Claire Tiltman, who was stabbed 40 times in Greenhithe, Kent, in 1993; Penny Bell, 43, who was knifed 50 times in Greenford, west London, in 1991; and Jean Bradley, 47, who was stabbed in Acton, west London.
Source
British faith school pupils 'outperforming others at every age'
Pupils in England's religious state schools scored significantly better examination results at seven, 11 and 16 than those in community schools, figures show. On average, 85 per cent of children at Anglican, Roman Catholic, Jewish and Muslim schools left primary school with a decent grasp of the basics - compared to 79 per cent elsewhere. Muslim schools performed best overall, although they constitute only a fraction of the country's 7,000 faith schools.
Critics claim that higher scores are achieved because faith schools use admissions policies to cream off middle-class pupils. Last year, the Catholic Church reported a surge in late baptisms as parents attempted to boost their children's chances of getting into the much sought-after schools. And a recent report by the Runnymede Trust - a multi-cultural think-tank - said they should be stripped of their power to select along religious lines to prevent distortion.
But faith leaders insist schools do well because of their religious ethos and a focus on traditional discipline and teaching methods. Oona Stannard, director of the Catholic Education Service, said: "Our success comes from fulfilling our mission, which is so much more than what Ofsted or the Government says a school must do. When I was a teacher, I remembered that I was not just seeing a child, but was seeing God in that child, and that creates expectations in teachers. "We are charged with developing the whole child."
Faith schools currently make up a third of all state-funded schools in England. Some 4,657 are Anglican, 2,053 are Roman Catholic and 82 belong to other Christian denominations. Another 36 schools are Jewish, eight Muslim, two Sikh and one is Hindu. Most use religion - often gauged by attendance at weekly worship or references from local faith leaders - as a tiebreaker when over-subscribed.
An analysis of GCSE results from 2007 reveals pupils in these schools make more progress at every stage of the education system. Some 51 per cent of pupils in Church of England schools and 52 per cent in Catholic schools gained five or more good GCSEs, including the subjects of English and maths. Scores increased to 63 per cent in Muslim schools but soared to 77 per cent in Jewish secondaries. By comparison, only 43 per cent of pupils made the grade in England's non-religious schools last year.
Faith schools also outperformed the rest based on the Government's favoured "value-added" measure, which compares performance at 16 to results when pupils started secondary school at 11. Scores are also weighted to take account of the number of pupils speaking English and second language and those on free meals - ensuring schools with large numbers of middle-class children do not gain unfair advantage. On this measure, Muslim pupils made the most progress, followed by those at Jewish schools, other Christian schools, Catholic schools and Anglican schools. Again they outstripped secular schools. It suggests that claims faith schools are dominated by children from rich backgrounds may be exaggerated.
Last month, a report by the schools adjudicator found that two-thirds of schools controlling their own entrance policies - most of which are faith schools - failed to follow the code on admissions. A large number were found to have asked for extra information from applicants, prompting critics to accuse them of seeking to discover parents' incomes and marital statuses in order to "cream off" middle-class pupils who tend to do better academically.
Source
This must be a high-point of socialist stupidity. They are hiring more bureaucrats in order to reduce the hours that doctors work. As if the person making up the rosters at the moment cannot simply make them up differently! It is more doctors, not more bureaucrats that are needed. So how about spending the money instead on hiring more doctors?
The NHS is appointing a new layer of managers to ensure that doctors do not work too hard. Hospitals say the bureaucrats are needed to ensure compliance with European legislation which says that, from August next year, no doctors will be allowed to work more than 48 hours a week. At the moment, junior doctors can work up to 56 hours.
Scarborough and North East Yorkshire Trust appointed a “working time directive project manager” in 2006-7. Mid Essex Hospital Services NHS Trust is advertising for one at a salary of up to 44,527 pounds. A spokeswoman said the purpose was to “redesign roles and rotas in preparation for compliance next year”.
Last week the European parliament voted to end Britain’s opt-out. Unless a compromise is reached in the European Union’s council of ministers, this will mean doctors cannot work longer hours even if they want to. The Royal College of Surgeons has issued a warning that the NHS will not be able to cope when hours are cut next year.
Source
WIND POWER TARGET UNREALISTIC, SAY CRITICS
Claims in a Government-commissioned report that wind power can supply a third of Britain's electricity have been condemned as wildly optimistic by leading experts. Researchers and parliamentarians warned that a heavy reliance on wind energy would place Britain's energy supplies at risk.
A report by the Committee on Climate Change (CCC), published last week, maintained that wind farms could play a major role in helping Britain cut its harmful carbon emissions by 34 per cent in 2020 and 80 per cent by 2050. It stated: "Despite the inherent intermittency of wind power supply, wind generation could make a significant contribution to total global electricity generation and be a major source of electricity in the UK (eg 30 per cent by 2020 and more beyond)."
The CCC, chaired by Lord Turner, the former director general of the Confederation of British Industry, said that new techniques of energy storage would overcome the problem of maintaining a regular supply when the wind is not blowing. But sceptics say this is far too ambitious because experts have not yet been able to devise effective ways of capturing and storing electricity generated by wind. That means a backup system, in the form of nuclear or coal- or gas-fired power stations, would always be needed.
John Constable, director of policy and research at the Renewable Energy Foundation, a think tank, said: "To generate 30 or 40 per cent of our electrical energy from wind power would present unmanageable and unaffordable difficulties at the present. "The CCC's assertion to the contrary is simply out of step with the state of theoretical and empirical knowledge in the field. Betting on very heavy commitment to wind for carbon reduction is irrational and will result in the inevitable failure of our climate change policy. Wind has a role, but this role will be modest in scale."
A report by the House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee, published last month, also cast doubt on the merits of wind turbines.
More here
Human rights fear delayed trial of British killer
And how many other such cases are there?
The prosecution of Rachel Nickell's killer was delayed by almost two years because of human rights concerns about obtaining a sample of his DNA, a senior government official said yesterday. Prosecutors were concerned that Robert Napper's lawyers might claim a violation of his human rights if his DNA were taken without his proper consent while he was a mental patient, according to the legal official. In 2006 Lord Goldsmith, then attorney-general, was informed of the debate about Napper's rights. Lawyers finally concluded that a DNA sample could lawfully be taken. The official said: "Human rights was one of the arguments that stopped them getting his DNA. The Crown Prosecution Service and the police decided they had to resolve it because it could have been a technicality that could have collapsed the trial."
At the Old Bailey last week Napper admitted killing Nickell, a part-time model, on Wimbledon Common in 1992. He was returned to Broadmoor where he was already serving an indefinite sentence for the horrific killing of Samantha Bissett, 27, and her four-year-old daughter Jazmine in 1993. The Metropolitan police admitted both women and the child might still be alive were it not for a series of failings by detectives. The Met issued an unprecedented apology to the families of all three victims.
Police initially ignored the trail to Napper, focusing instead on Colin Stagg, who was acquitted in 1994. It was to be 10 years before a break-though in forensic techniques meant scientists were able to isolate a tiny fragment of DNA taken from Nickell's body. Within weeks scientists had established that it matched a sample from Napper which had been taken in the 1990s and held on the DNA database.
Napper has been linked to a total of 109 sex offences and 86 possible victims. He is also likely to be quizzed by police about the killings of at least three other women: Claire Tiltman, who was stabbed 40 times in Greenhithe, Kent, in 1993; Penny Bell, 43, who was knifed 50 times in Greenford, west London, in 1991; and Jean Bradley, 47, who was stabbed in Acton, west London.
Source
British faith school pupils 'outperforming others at every age'
Pupils in England's religious state schools scored significantly better examination results at seven, 11 and 16 than those in community schools, figures show. On average, 85 per cent of children at Anglican, Roman Catholic, Jewish and Muslim schools left primary school with a decent grasp of the basics - compared to 79 per cent elsewhere. Muslim schools performed best overall, although they constitute only a fraction of the country's 7,000 faith schools.
Critics claim that higher scores are achieved because faith schools use admissions policies to cream off middle-class pupils. Last year, the Catholic Church reported a surge in late baptisms as parents attempted to boost their children's chances of getting into the much sought-after schools. And a recent report by the Runnymede Trust - a multi-cultural think-tank - said they should be stripped of their power to select along religious lines to prevent distortion.
But faith leaders insist schools do well because of their religious ethos and a focus on traditional discipline and teaching methods. Oona Stannard, director of the Catholic Education Service, said: "Our success comes from fulfilling our mission, which is so much more than what Ofsted or the Government says a school must do. When I was a teacher, I remembered that I was not just seeing a child, but was seeing God in that child, and that creates expectations in teachers. "We are charged with developing the whole child."
Faith schools currently make up a third of all state-funded schools in England. Some 4,657 are Anglican, 2,053 are Roman Catholic and 82 belong to other Christian denominations. Another 36 schools are Jewish, eight Muslim, two Sikh and one is Hindu. Most use religion - often gauged by attendance at weekly worship or references from local faith leaders - as a tiebreaker when over-subscribed.
An analysis of GCSE results from 2007 reveals pupils in these schools make more progress at every stage of the education system. Some 51 per cent of pupils in Church of England schools and 52 per cent in Catholic schools gained five or more good GCSEs, including the subjects of English and maths. Scores increased to 63 per cent in Muslim schools but soared to 77 per cent in Jewish secondaries. By comparison, only 43 per cent of pupils made the grade in England's non-religious schools last year.
Faith schools also outperformed the rest based on the Government's favoured "value-added" measure, which compares performance at 16 to results when pupils started secondary school at 11. Scores are also weighted to take account of the number of pupils speaking English and second language and those on free meals - ensuring schools with large numbers of middle-class children do not gain unfair advantage. On this measure, Muslim pupils made the most progress, followed by those at Jewish schools, other Christian schools, Catholic schools and Anglican schools. Again they outstripped secular schools. It suggests that claims faith schools are dominated by children from rich backgrounds may be exaggerated.
Last month, a report by the schools adjudicator found that two-thirds of schools controlling their own entrance policies - most of which are faith schools - failed to follow the code on admissions. A large number were found to have asked for extra information from applicants, prompting critics to accuse them of seeking to discover parents' incomes and marital statuses in order to "cream off" middle-class pupils who tend to do better academically.
Source
Sunday, December 21, 2008
Give us the money
An insightful email from a British reader below:
After forty years of listening to greenie scare stories, (even believing some of them at one time) I think I am starting to see a pattern emerging. It seems to start as:
Plan A: The Scam
We have identified an ecological disaster and HUMANS ARE TO BLAME. But if you pay us lots of money and do exactly what we say, we may be able to fix it in time.
For some inexplicable reason, this does not convince everyone, so we need:
Plan B: The Precautionary Principle
Well, even if we're wrong, you still ought to pay us lots of money and do exactly what we say.
For some inexplicable reason, this also does not convince everyone, so we need:
Plan C: The Tipping Point
OK. So nothing is happening and there isn't any evidence, but there will be soon if you don't PAY US THE MONEY!
This method seems to be a limp-wristed version of that used by Ronnie and Reggie in the East End of London many years ago, and was known then as extortion, or, "demanding money with menaces." (but now it is called "environmentalism." I suppose at least we have a longer word.) Although the Kray's methods seem to have been:
a. less verbose
b. arguably more cost-effective, and
c. they had the balls to do their own dirty work.
The greenie extortionists, having failed at plan C, exhort the legal authorities to silence the dissenters. And if that doesn't work they incite young, idealistic and naive people into acquiring a criminal record on their behalf. Maybe we should just say "BOO" to the greenies for a change. Being polite only lets them get away with it.
Direct attack on tumour works
Spontaneous remissions are not uncommon with some cancers so the recovery below proves nothing. It is however an interesting straw in the wind. There have been some controlled trials that have indicated substantial benefit from the procedure
A woman given just months to live after developing cancer two years ago is looking forward to a 'miracle' Christmas with her family. Debbie Brewer was diagnosed in November 2006 with mesothelioma, a lung cancer caused by exposure to asbestos, but has beaten the odds thank to pioneering treatment in Germany.
The 49-year-old was awarded a six-figure compensation payment by the Ministry of Defence after she said the illness was caused by hugging her father, Phillip Northmore, when he worked as an asbestos lagger at Devonport Dockyard in Plymouth in the 1960s.
She was told by doctors that she had between six and nine months to live but refused chemotherapy and instead travelled to The University Clinic in Frankfurt. A doctor had told her of an experimental treatment being carried out by Professor Thomas Vogl and Mrs Brewer used her compensation to pay for six sessions at the clinic. Now specialists have told her the tumour has shrunk by more than half, is in remission and will not come back. Mrs Brewer, who has three children - Siobhan, 22, Richard, 19, and Kieran, 11 - said it is a 'miracle'.
Now Mrs Brewer, from Plymouth, has started a campaign to have the treatment, which costs 3,500 pounds a session, brought to the UK for trials. She said: 'I want to give people hope. 'I was told for mesothelioma there is little out there but the results in Germany are fantastic - it's about a 60 per cent success rate. 'I didn't think I would see my youngest go to senior school, now I'm going to be enjoying Christmas with them.'
The treatment is known as chemoembolisation and is more commonly used to fight liver cancer. It introduces chemotherapy drugs directly to the tumour area through a catheter into the lung. Mrs Brewer said: 'They are able to directly attack the tumour through an artery so it targets just the tumour and not the nervous system as well.' She started the treatment in May and had her last of six chemoembolisation sessions this week. Mrs Brewer now hopes she has beaten the cancer for good and said if it does start to come back 'there is help available'.
Source
I quit, says British magistrate fed up with seeing criminals walk free after a quarter of their sentences
A senior magistrate has resigned in protest at Government policies that impose soft punishments and undermine the courts. Dr Dick Soper says criminals are walking free from prison after serving just a quarter of the sentences he and his colleagues impose. Others are being handed fixed fines or police cautions - taking justice out of the hands of the courts and away from public scrutiny.
Dr Soper, 64, a GP, has served 26 years on the bench at Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk. He used his final session yesterday to deliver an angry broadside, saying: 'Although I could serve for another five years I no longer feel my time is being usefully spent in court. 'I feel that this long-standing system which has served the public well for centuries has, in recent years, been more and more interfered with by politicians.'
He told how he recently jailed an offender for six months but saw him walking about the town just six weeks later. Dr Soper said: 'My greatest frustration and that of my colleagues is the very early release of prisoners.' He said virtually all offenders are released automatically halfway through their sentences, while emergency measures to tackle prison overcrowding means many have another 18 days knocked off their sentences. Yet the judges and magistrates who heard their cases have no say over their early release.
Dr Soper said magistrates considered 'very hard' how to punish criminals, and added: 'It is frustrating when that careful thought seems to be undermined. It has certainly reduced my confidence in the system.' He also complained that sentencing guidelines appear to be increasingly influenced by Whitehall. Dr Soper said: 'The heavy hand of the executive seems to run through them and you get the feeling that greater central control is being exerted over this previously independent organisation.'
Community service and unpaid work have been trumpeted by ministers as punishments to help ease jail overcrowding, but Dr Soper said his own research locally showed only 60-65 per cent of offenders bothered to turn up. Police were increasingly preferring to deal with offenders through cautions and on-the-spot fines rather than charging them and sending them to court, he said - undermining the principle of public and media scrutiny of justice. Dr Soper said: 'It is not just minor cases they deal with - theft and violence are included and this court recently had a violent offender who had previously been cautioned by the police for causing grievous bodily harm.'
In his years as a JP, Dr Soper said, the number of courts in West Suffolk had dropped from six to three - and will soon be cut to just one. 'The idea of local justice, one of the strengths of the system, is disappearing fast,' he said. 'Now I hear that the courts budget is to be cut further, so what next?'
Tory spokesman Nick Herbert said: 'Labour's appalling mismanagement of our jails has seen sentences shortened and violent prisoners released early. 'It is no wonder both public and professional confidence in the criminal justice system is being undermined.' The Daily Mail revealed recently how some magistrates' courts are cancelling sessions because the massive rise in the use of onthespot fines means thousands of cases now never reach court.
Source
The politically corrupted British police force bungle basic police work
The restraint and dignity shown by the parents of Rachel Nickell, as they thanked all those who had supported their long quest for justice, was as moving as it was surprising, given the circumstances. Yes, Robert Napper, the man who murdered their darling daughter, has now been forced to admit his guilt. But for 16 years, their grief has been compounded by one of the most incompetent police investigations in living memory.
Sadly, such bungling has become an all-too familiar theme in recent weeks. Whether it's the Stockwell shooting, the death of Baby P or the hideous case of the father who raped his own daughters, police incompetence has never been far from the headlines.
Of course, there are thousands of magnificent, dedicated policemen and women out there who work in dangerous situations and are still driven by an overriding sense of civic duty. But a generation of political correctness, government-enforced targets and police chiefs toadying to New Labour has led to a collapse in morale. Even good officers have lost the will for old-fashioned policing and instead take the soft option of pushing paper around their desks. Lacking strong leadership and blighted by a target-obsessed culture, bobbies have become more interested in chasing statistics than criminals. And that can have devastating consequences.
The mistakes made in the Rachel Nickell case were down to sheer sloppiness. As one insider put it: 'No one at the Yard was interested in the theory that Napper had killed Rachel.' As far as they were concerned, they'd already got their man. Colin Stagg had been put away. Job done. Another crime 'solved'. Another box ticked.
That error enabled Napper to continue his depraved crime spree, just as other casual oversights meant that police failed to follow up the tip-offs that might have saved Baby P and the girls who were being raped by their father.
The police are supposed to be at the centre of our communities - figures we can respect and rely on. But only when they are taken out of their offices, out of their PC comfort zones, and put back into the heart of our broken societies will we once again have a police force we can be proud of.
The only request from Rachel's parents was that, now her killer was behind bars, the media should stop using film footage of Rachel, as it was unbearably painful for them to watch. The BBC's response was to illustrate the news package right after that statement with a home video of Rachel frolicking in the park. Is no one listening?
Source
An insightful email from a British reader below:
After forty years of listening to greenie scare stories, (even believing some of them at one time) I think I am starting to see a pattern emerging. It seems to start as:
Plan A: The Scam
We have identified an ecological disaster and HUMANS ARE TO BLAME. But if you pay us lots of money and do exactly what we say, we may be able to fix it in time.
For some inexplicable reason, this does not convince everyone, so we need:
Plan B: The Precautionary Principle
Well, even if we're wrong, you still ought to pay us lots of money and do exactly what we say.
For some inexplicable reason, this also does not convince everyone, so we need:
Plan C: The Tipping Point
OK. So nothing is happening and there isn't any evidence, but there will be soon if you don't PAY US THE MONEY!
This method seems to be a limp-wristed version of that used by Ronnie and Reggie in the East End of London many years ago, and was known then as extortion, or, "demanding money with menaces." (but now it is called "environmentalism." I suppose at least we have a longer word.) Although the Kray's methods seem to have been:
a. less verbose
b. arguably more cost-effective, and
c. they had the balls to do their own dirty work.
The greenie extortionists, having failed at plan C, exhort the legal authorities to silence the dissenters. And if that doesn't work they incite young, idealistic and naive people into acquiring a criminal record on their behalf. Maybe we should just say "BOO" to the greenies for a change. Being polite only lets them get away with it.
Direct attack on tumour works
Spontaneous remissions are not uncommon with some cancers so the recovery below proves nothing. It is however an interesting straw in the wind. There have been some controlled trials that have indicated substantial benefit from the procedure
A woman given just months to live after developing cancer two years ago is looking forward to a 'miracle' Christmas with her family. Debbie Brewer was diagnosed in November 2006 with mesothelioma, a lung cancer caused by exposure to asbestos, but has beaten the odds thank to pioneering treatment in Germany.
The 49-year-old was awarded a six-figure compensation payment by the Ministry of Defence after she said the illness was caused by hugging her father, Phillip Northmore, when he worked as an asbestos lagger at Devonport Dockyard in Plymouth in the 1960s.
She was told by doctors that she had between six and nine months to live but refused chemotherapy and instead travelled to The University Clinic in Frankfurt. A doctor had told her of an experimental treatment being carried out by Professor Thomas Vogl and Mrs Brewer used her compensation to pay for six sessions at the clinic. Now specialists have told her the tumour has shrunk by more than half, is in remission and will not come back. Mrs Brewer, who has three children - Siobhan, 22, Richard, 19, and Kieran, 11 - said it is a 'miracle'.
Now Mrs Brewer, from Plymouth, has started a campaign to have the treatment, which costs 3,500 pounds a session, brought to the UK for trials. She said: 'I want to give people hope. 'I was told for mesothelioma there is little out there but the results in Germany are fantastic - it's about a 60 per cent success rate. 'I didn't think I would see my youngest go to senior school, now I'm going to be enjoying Christmas with them.'
The treatment is known as chemoembolisation and is more commonly used to fight liver cancer. It introduces chemotherapy drugs directly to the tumour area through a catheter into the lung. Mrs Brewer said: 'They are able to directly attack the tumour through an artery so it targets just the tumour and not the nervous system as well.' She started the treatment in May and had her last of six chemoembolisation sessions this week. Mrs Brewer now hopes she has beaten the cancer for good and said if it does start to come back 'there is help available'.
Source
I quit, says British magistrate fed up with seeing criminals walk free after a quarter of their sentences
A senior magistrate has resigned in protest at Government policies that impose soft punishments and undermine the courts. Dr Dick Soper says criminals are walking free from prison after serving just a quarter of the sentences he and his colleagues impose. Others are being handed fixed fines or police cautions - taking justice out of the hands of the courts and away from public scrutiny.
Dr Soper, 64, a GP, has served 26 years on the bench at Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk. He used his final session yesterday to deliver an angry broadside, saying: 'Although I could serve for another five years I no longer feel my time is being usefully spent in court. 'I feel that this long-standing system which has served the public well for centuries has, in recent years, been more and more interfered with by politicians.'
He told how he recently jailed an offender for six months but saw him walking about the town just six weeks later. Dr Soper said: 'My greatest frustration and that of my colleagues is the very early release of prisoners.' He said virtually all offenders are released automatically halfway through their sentences, while emergency measures to tackle prison overcrowding means many have another 18 days knocked off their sentences. Yet the judges and magistrates who heard their cases have no say over their early release.
Dr Soper said magistrates considered 'very hard' how to punish criminals, and added: 'It is frustrating when that careful thought seems to be undermined. It has certainly reduced my confidence in the system.' He also complained that sentencing guidelines appear to be increasingly influenced by Whitehall. Dr Soper said: 'The heavy hand of the executive seems to run through them and you get the feeling that greater central control is being exerted over this previously independent organisation.'
Community service and unpaid work have been trumpeted by ministers as punishments to help ease jail overcrowding, but Dr Soper said his own research locally showed only 60-65 per cent of offenders bothered to turn up. Police were increasingly preferring to deal with offenders through cautions and on-the-spot fines rather than charging them and sending them to court, he said - undermining the principle of public and media scrutiny of justice. Dr Soper said: 'It is not just minor cases they deal with - theft and violence are included and this court recently had a violent offender who had previously been cautioned by the police for causing grievous bodily harm.'
In his years as a JP, Dr Soper said, the number of courts in West Suffolk had dropped from six to three - and will soon be cut to just one. 'The idea of local justice, one of the strengths of the system, is disappearing fast,' he said. 'Now I hear that the courts budget is to be cut further, so what next?'
Tory spokesman Nick Herbert said: 'Labour's appalling mismanagement of our jails has seen sentences shortened and violent prisoners released early. 'It is no wonder both public and professional confidence in the criminal justice system is being undermined.' The Daily Mail revealed recently how some magistrates' courts are cancelling sessions because the massive rise in the use of onthespot fines means thousands of cases now never reach court.
Source
The politically corrupted British police force bungle basic police work
The restraint and dignity shown by the parents of Rachel Nickell, as they thanked all those who had supported their long quest for justice, was as moving as it was surprising, given the circumstances. Yes, Robert Napper, the man who murdered their darling daughter, has now been forced to admit his guilt. But for 16 years, their grief has been compounded by one of the most incompetent police investigations in living memory.
Sadly, such bungling has become an all-too familiar theme in recent weeks. Whether it's the Stockwell shooting, the death of Baby P or the hideous case of the father who raped his own daughters, police incompetence has never been far from the headlines.
Of course, there are thousands of magnificent, dedicated policemen and women out there who work in dangerous situations and are still driven by an overriding sense of civic duty. But a generation of political correctness, government-enforced targets and police chiefs toadying to New Labour has led to a collapse in morale. Even good officers have lost the will for old-fashioned policing and instead take the soft option of pushing paper around their desks. Lacking strong leadership and blighted by a target-obsessed culture, bobbies have become more interested in chasing statistics than criminals. And that can have devastating consequences.
The mistakes made in the Rachel Nickell case were down to sheer sloppiness. As one insider put it: 'No one at the Yard was interested in the theory that Napper had killed Rachel.' As far as they were concerned, they'd already got their man. Colin Stagg had been put away. Job done. Another crime 'solved'. Another box ticked.
That error enabled Napper to continue his depraved crime spree, just as other casual oversights meant that police failed to follow up the tip-offs that might have saved Baby P and the girls who were being raped by their father.
The police are supposed to be at the centre of our communities - figures we can respect and rely on. But only when they are taken out of their offices, out of their PC comfort zones, and put back into the heart of our broken societies will we once again have a police force we can be proud of.
The only request from Rachel's parents was that, now her killer was behind bars, the media should stop using film footage of Rachel, as it was unbearably painful for them to watch. The BBC's response was to illustrate the news package right after that statement with a home video of Rachel frolicking in the park. Is no one listening?
Source
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Oliver Twist's life not so gruelling
DOCTORS say they have uncovered the gruel truth of the Victorian workhouse. Charles Dickens, they contend, was exaggerating when he portrayed Oliver Twist and other orphans driven to the brink of starvation by a miserly diet of watery porridge. In fact, food provided under 1834 Poor Law Act, which set up workhouses for the destitute in mid-19th-century Britain, was dreary but there was plenty of it and the diet was nutritious enough for children of Oliver's age, their British Medical Journal paper says.
In Oliver Twist, Dickens wrote that the orphans were given "three meals of thin gruel a day, with an onion twice a week and half a roll on Sunday". On feast days, they received an extra 2 1/4 ounces (64 grams) of bread.
Four medical experts say in the report such a diet would have killed or crippled children, inflicting anaemia, scurvy, rickets and other diseases linked to vitamin deficiency. They sifted through contemporary documents and even replicated the gruel that workhouse children most likely had. Using a recipe for water gruel taken from a 17th-century English cookbook, the authors calculate Oliver would have had around three pints (1.76 litres) of gruel per day, comprising 3.75 ounces (106 grams) of top-quality oatmeal from Berwick, Scotland. Far from being thin, the gruel would have been "substantial", the authors say.
"Considerable amounts" of beef and mutton also went to London workhouses. The authors added a caveat, saying that their assumptions were made on the basis that inmates actually received the quantity and quality of food prescribed.
Source
NHS patients are cheated by 100m pounds a year extra for their dental work
Patients are being ripped off by more than 100million a year thanks to the Government's 'botched' reforms to NHS dentistry, figures suggest. Loopholes in a new contract for dentists are being exploited so that patients are effectively being charged twice for what should be one course of treatment, critics say. Dentists are accused of recalling healthy patients for checkups and splitting up courses of treatment unnecessarily. The Department of Health admits there is evidence that the tactic has become widespread since the introduction of the contract in April 2006.
Now data obtained from every primary care trust shows patients could have saved up to 109million in incorrect charges - almost a quarter of the 475million paid every year. And without the loophole, up to 6.5million appointments could have been freed up for people who currently do not have a Health Service dentist.
The Tories have calculated that the overcharging works out at an average of 7.77 pounds a year per patient, almost a quarter of the average annual charge of 33.80.
A deal drawn up by the Government means dentists can claim twice as much by spreading treatments across different appointments or calling patients back for unnecessary check-ups. NHS guidance, stating that no patients should be called back to their dentist for a check-up or have courses of treatment split up within a three-month period, appears to be being widely ignored.
Shadow Health Secretary Andrew Lansley, who obtained the figures, said: 'Labour's management of NHS dentistry has been appalling. Not only have millions been left without a dentist, but now we learn that those who do have one are often being charged more money than they should be. 'The blame here lies with Labour's botched dental contract, which incentivises dentists to increase the number of charges to patients and has led to such drastic cuts in the number of people being able to find an NHS dentist. 'The Government urgently needs to admit that the dental contract has been a monumental failure, get a grip and put an end to these practices immediately.' Dentists' leaders insist there is no evidence that anyone is playing the system.
But last week, the Government effectively admitted that its reforms have backfired when it announced an independent review of access to treatment. Health Secretary Alan Johnson appointed a team to investigate why 1.2million people have lost their NHS dentist since the changes were implemented.
Average dentists' earnings stood at just over 96,000 in the first year of the deal - a rise from 87,000 from the year before. For the top-earning dentists who own their own practice, income rose by a third to 172,494.
A decade ago, the Government pledged that all patients would have access to treatment on the Health Service within two years. But surveys suggest one in 20 patients is resorting to DIY treatment, in some cases pulling out their own teeth. And one in five says they have gone without treatment because they could not meet the cost.
Source
The diet aid delusion: Low-fat labels and pills don't deliver, says British watchdog
Those who over-indulge this Christmas may think the solution is to add some weight-loss products to their shopping basket. The idea that the festive flab can be banished by switching to `lite' versions of favourite brands or by taking a supplement certainly sounds tempting. But research by the consumer group Which? claims that the only pounds that many diet aids help you shed are the ones in your wallet.
The report, published today in the group's magazine, raises questions about the slimming claims of some leading brands and weightloss supplements. It points out that Kellogg's Special K, marketed as a low-fat cereal, has the same calories (171 per 30g) as Kellogg's Corn Flakes and more than Kellogg's Bran Flakes (157 per 30g). Weight Watchers thick-sliced white bread (68 calories per 29g slice) is nutritionally so similar to Warburtons Toastie sliced white (69 per 29g slice) and Asda Danish white bread (63 per 25g slice) that Which? recommends buying the one you think tastes best.
McVitie's light digestive biscuits have less fat than McVitie's original digestives, but more sugar (2.9g rather than 2.5g per 15g biscuit), meaning the difference between the biscuits is only four calories. M&S's Count On Us lasagne has 440 calories, far less than the M&S standard range, which has 620, but only a little less than the standard Morrisons lasagne which has 464. None of the seven over-the-counter weight-loss supplements examined could prove they offer long lasting beneficial effects, Which? experts said.
The consumer group's head of services research, Nikki Ratcliff, said: `If you're looking for a New Year quick fix to shed a few pounds, weight-loss products aren't the answer. The harsh reality is that exercise coupled with a healthy balanced diet is the only effective way to lose weight. `Just because foods are labelled as light or advertised as diet brands, it doesn't mean they're the lowest calorie option. Look at other similar products on the shelf - you might find some that don't brand themselves as light actually have fewer calories or less fat or less sugar, so you'd be better off buying them instead.'
But Dr Pamela Mason, an expert in herbal remedies and spokesman for the Health Supplements Information Service, insisted such products can help dieters lose weight. `Once someone has decided they need to lose weight, these products can play a good supportive role. Of course, anybody looking to lose weight needs to focus on diet and exercise,' she said.
The Food & Drink Federation, which represents food manufacturers, said: `The improved labelling that now appears on all major brands is helping consumers to quickly spot whether or not a particular product meets their needs.'
A spokesman for Kellogg's defended Special K, saying: `There are very few products that offer you really tasty food and help you manage your shape and Special K absolutely delivers on both counts. `Consumers aren't stupid. The reason Special K is one of the UK's biggest selling cereals is because it works.'
Source
Immigration to Britain 'must be slashed' to keep population below 70m
Net immigration in to the UK has to be slashed by 80 per cent if the Government wants to keep the population below 70 million, the official statistician has warned. The balance of those settling here over those leaving must be cut to just 50,000 a year if the population is not to pass the landmark total. But that would require an enormous reduction from the current net level of 237,000 a year and makes a mockery of immigration minister Phil Woolas' pledge to keep numbers under control.
Karen Dunnell, the National Statistician, has revealed for the first time the dramatic changes required to keep population growth in check. It comes as the Home Office will today announce it is keeping restrictions in place for at least another year on low-skilled workers from Romania and Bulgaria.
Sir Andrew Green, chairman of Migrationwatch, said "This is a stunning admission which we have had to wring out of the statisticians. "The Government claims that they can hold the population of the UK under 70 million by means of their new points based system is blown completely out of the water.
Mr Woolas vowed in October that the Government would not let the population go above 70 million but on current projections it will pass that within two decades. But in a letter to MPs, Ms Dunnell said, assuming fertility and mortality projections remain the same, annual net migration would have to drop to 50,000 if the population is to stay below that level by 2081. But she added: "In practice, this may not be a realistic scenario."
Current long term projections have net migration at 190,000 a year, which would see numbers pass 70 million by 2028. But even that could be an overestimate as net migration last year stood at 237,000 - the second highest level on record.
Labour MP Frank Field, co-chairmen of the Cross Party Group for Balanced Migration, said: "This shows the huge scale of the task required to get our population back under control. These figures show that Ministers have yet to start taking decisive action".
Mr Woolas, said: "We have made it clear that the points based system will allow us to manage immigration which in turn will help contribute to future population projections and control. "The points system means only those with the skills Britain needs can come - and no more. If the new rules had been in place last year there would have been 12 per cent fewer people coming in through the equivalent route."
Source
DOCTORS say they have uncovered the gruel truth of the Victorian workhouse. Charles Dickens, they contend, was exaggerating when he portrayed Oliver Twist and other orphans driven to the brink of starvation by a miserly diet of watery porridge. In fact, food provided under 1834 Poor Law Act, which set up workhouses for the destitute in mid-19th-century Britain, was dreary but there was plenty of it and the diet was nutritious enough for children of Oliver's age, their British Medical Journal paper says.
In Oliver Twist, Dickens wrote that the orphans were given "three meals of thin gruel a day, with an onion twice a week and half a roll on Sunday". On feast days, they received an extra 2 1/4 ounces (64 grams) of bread.
Four medical experts say in the report such a diet would have killed or crippled children, inflicting anaemia, scurvy, rickets and other diseases linked to vitamin deficiency. They sifted through contemporary documents and even replicated the gruel that workhouse children most likely had. Using a recipe for water gruel taken from a 17th-century English cookbook, the authors calculate Oliver would have had around three pints (1.76 litres) of gruel per day, comprising 3.75 ounces (106 grams) of top-quality oatmeal from Berwick, Scotland. Far from being thin, the gruel would have been "substantial", the authors say.
"Considerable amounts" of beef and mutton also went to London workhouses. The authors added a caveat, saying that their assumptions were made on the basis that inmates actually received the quantity and quality of food prescribed.
Source
NHS patients are cheated by 100m pounds a year extra for their dental work
Patients are being ripped off by more than 100million a year thanks to the Government's 'botched' reforms to NHS dentistry, figures suggest. Loopholes in a new contract for dentists are being exploited so that patients are effectively being charged twice for what should be one course of treatment, critics say. Dentists are accused of recalling healthy patients for checkups and splitting up courses of treatment unnecessarily. The Department of Health admits there is evidence that the tactic has become widespread since the introduction of the contract in April 2006.
Now data obtained from every primary care trust shows patients could have saved up to 109million in incorrect charges - almost a quarter of the 475million paid every year. And without the loophole, up to 6.5million appointments could have been freed up for people who currently do not have a Health Service dentist.
The Tories have calculated that the overcharging works out at an average of 7.77 pounds a year per patient, almost a quarter of the average annual charge of 33.80.
A deal drawn up by the Government means dentists can claim twice as much by spreading treatments across different appointments or calling patients back for unnecessary check-ups. NHS guidance, stating that no patients should be called back to their dentist for a check-up or have courses of treatment split up within a three-month period, appears to be being widely ignored.
Shadow Health Secretary Andrew Lansley, who obtained the figures, said: 'Labour's management of NHS dentistry has been appalling. Not only have millions been left without a dentist, but now we learn that those who do have one are often being charged more money than they should be. 'The blame here lies with Labour's botched dental contract, which incentivises dentists to increase the number of charges to patients and has led to such drastic cuts in the number of people being able to find an NHS dentist. 'The Government urgently needs to admit that the dental contract has been a monumental failure, get a grip and put an end to these practices immediately.' Dentists' leaders insist there is no evidence that anyone is playing the system.
But last week, the Government effectively admitted that its reforms have backfired when it announced an independent review of access to treatment. Health Secretary Alan Johnson appointed a team to investigate why 1.2million people have lost their NHS dentist since the changes were implemented.
Average dentists' earnings stood at just over 96,000 in the first year of the deal - a rise from 87,000 from the year before. For the top-earning dentists who own their own practice, income rose by a third to 172,494.
A decade ago, the Government pledged that all patients would have access to treatment on the Health Service within two years. But surveys suggest one in 20 patients is resorting to DIY treatment, in some cases pulling out their own teeth. And one in five says they have gone without treatment because they could not meet the cost.
Source
The diet aid delusion: Low-fat labels and pills don't deliver, says British watchdog
Those who over-indulge this Christmas may think the solution is to add some weight-loss products to their shopping basket. The idea that the festive flab can be banished by switching to `lite' versions of favourite brands or by taking a supplement certainly sounds tempting. But research by the consumer group Which? claims that the only pounds that many diet aids help you shed are the ones in your wallet.
The report, published today in the group's magazine, raises questions about the slimming claims of some leading brands and weightloss supplements. It points out that Kellogg's Special K, marketed as a low-fat cereal, has the same calories (171 per 30g) as Kellogg's Corn Flakes and more than Kellogg's Bran Flakes (157 per 30g). Weight Watchers thick-sliced white bread (68 calories per 29g slice) is nutritionally so similar to Warburtons Toastie sliced white (69 per 29g slice) and Asda Danish white bread (63 per 25g slice) that Which? recommends buying the one you think tastes best.
McVitie's light digestive biscuits have less fat than McVitie's original digestives, but more sugar (2.9g rather than 2.5g per 15g biscuit), meaning the difference between the biscuits is only four calories. M&S's Count On Us lasagne has 440 calories, far less than the M&S standard range, which has 620, but only a little less than the standard Morrisons lasagne which has 464. None of the seven over-the-counter weight-loss supplements examined could prove they offer long lasting beneficial effects, Which? experts said.
The consumer group's head of services research, Nikki Ratcliff, said: `If you're looking for a New Year quick fix to shed a few pounds, weight-loss products aren't the answer. The harsh reality is that exercise coupled with a healthy balanced diet is the only effective way to lose weight. `Just because foods are labelled as light or advertised as diet brands, it doesn't mean they're the lowest calorie option. Look at other similar products on the shelf - you might find some that don't brand themselves as light actually have fewer calories or less fat or less sugar, so you'd be better off buying them instead.'
But Dr Pamela Mason, an expert in herbal remedies and spokesman for the Health Supplements Information Service, insisted such products can help dieters lose weight. `Once someone has decided they need to lose weight, these products can play a good supportive role. Of course, anybody looking to lose weight needs to focus on diet and exercise,' she said.
The Food & Drink Federation, which represents food manufacturers, said: `The improved labelling that now appears on all major brands is helping consumers to quickly spot whether or not a particular product meets their needs.'
A spokesman for Kellogg's defended Special K, saying: `There are very few products that offer you really tasty food and help you manage your shape and Special K absolutely delivers on both counts. `Consumers aren't stupid. The reason Special K is one of the UK's biggest selling cereals is because it works.'
Source
Immigration to Britain 'must be slashed' to keep population below 70m
Net immigration in to the UK has to be slashed by 80 per cent if the Government wants to keep the population below 70 million, the official statistician has warned. The balance of those settling here over those leaving must be cut to just 50,000 a year if the population is not to pass the landmark total. But that would require an enormous reduction from the current net level of 237,000 a year and makes a mockery of immigration minister Phil Woolas' pledge to keep numbers under control.
Karen Dunnell, the National Statistician, has revealed for the first time the dramatic changes required to keep population growth in check. It comes as the Home Office will today announce it is keeping restrictions in place for at least another year on low-skilled workers from Romania and Bulgaria.
Sir Andrew Green, chairman of Migrationwatch, said "This is a stunning admission which we have had to wring out of the statisticians. "The Government claims that they can hold the population of the UK under 70 million by means of their new points based system is blown completely out of the water.
Mr Woolas vowed in October that the Government would not let the population go above 70 million but on current projections it will pass that within two decades. But in a letter to MPs, Ms Dunnell said, assuming fertility and mortality projections remain the same, annual net migration would have to drop to 50,000 if the population is to stay below that level by 2081. But she added: "In practice, this may not be a realistic scenario."
Current long term projections have net migration at 190,000 a year, which would see numbers pass 70 million by 2028. But even that could be an overestimate as net migration last year stood at 237,000 - the second highest level on record.
Labour MP Frank Field, co-chairmen of the Cross Party Group for Balanced Migration, said: "This shows the huge scale of the task required to get our population back under control. These figures show that Ministers have yet to start taking decisive action".
Mr Woolas, said: "We have made it clear that the points based system will allow us to manage immigration which in turn will help contribute to future population projections and control. "The points system means only those with the skills Britain needs can come - and no more. If the new rules had been in place last year there would have been 12 per cent fewer people coming in through the equivalent route."
Source
Friday, December 19, 2008
At last: Britain's evil secret courts opened up
The secrecy of the family courts - in which nearly 95,000 cases are heard in private each year - is to end under reforms announced yesterday that will allow the media access to all levels of the system. The move could mean that social workers and expert witnesses who fail children, and now enjoy the protection of anonymity, will in future be named publicly when criticised by judges. Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, said that from April the media would be permitted access to all family cases in all courts - from celebrity divorces to hearings over domestic violence or children being removed from families. "A really important veil is being lifted on what happens in these courts," he said.
Crucially, media reporting of the cases will be subject to tight restrictions to protect the welfare and privacy of the children and families involved. The people involved in such cases will also be able to apply to a judge to have the media excluded. Mr Straw indicated that judges were not expected to grant such requests often and, when they did, the cases would be closely monitored. "If it is not working, we will actively consider changes or primary legislation."
The moves follow a campaign by The Times, begun this year, to reform the family justice system and open up the courts amid accusations that they are operating under a "conspiracy of silence".
Mr Straw said yesterday: "My view is that public confidence depends crucially on the system being as open as possible - so the case for restrictions has to be a very strong one." As for the anonymity given to professionals such as social workers and expert witnesses, he indicated that his view, although the change is not finalised, was that this should be removed. Professional experts such as structural engineers whose competence is questioned - perhaps because someone has been injured - have no anonymity protection. "I see no reason why other professionals should be immune from public examination unless there are overwhelming arguments in an individual case," Mr Straw said.
He said that the long-awaited measures, which have been more than two years in consultation and revision, struck a balance between openness and the need to protect the privacy of children and vulnerable adults. Ministers would also consider how adoption proceedings could be opened up. The change is partly in response to pressure from the media and fathers' groups to open the family courts so that justice can be seen to be done.
Britain's most senior family judge, Sir Mark Potter, the President of the Family Division of the High Court, welcomed the announcement but said that judicial discretion to exclude the media should be used where necessary. "I have for some time made clear the support of the senior judiciary for media access to the family courts in the interests of transparency and public confidence in the family justice system," he said. But he criticised Mr Straw's proposal to review the question of whether privacy should remain the rule for adoption proceedings. He said that the judiciary was united in opposing that.
The Family Justice Council, a forum of lawyers and other users of the family courts, condemned the change and said that it was "disappointed to learn that the Government is planning to allow the media into family courts as of right. In doing so, they have disregarded the views of children, young people and the organisations which protect, support and represent them." At present the media is allowed access only to the Court of Appeal and magistrates' family proceedings courts.
In the dark
- A couple whose baby daughter was placed in foster care this year were refused information by the authorities on the ground of confidentiality. Tim Yeo, the couple's MP in Suffolk South, said that his efforts to help the couple had been thwarted by a system that "prevents natural justice"
- Matthew, a professional in his fifties, was fighting a custody case for several months before he became aware of damaging allegations against him on his court file. A supporter of his former partner had written to the judge, making spurious claims, including one that said Matthew was not to be trusted with his children. Matthew only became aware of the allegations when he requested other correspondence from his file
- A month before Curtis, 17, was born, his sister was placed in foster care and then adopted, after social services expressed concern about a bruise on the child. He was only reunited recently with his sister after she tracked down her family. He found that social services had also tried to place him in foster care despite no evidence against his mother
Source
Below is another example of the horrors that Left-trained British social workers inflict on innocent families
They put the Christmas decorations up a couple of days ago but no one in the Smith family feels much like celebrating. Despite the tinsel over their sons' photographs, there are no excited children racing around the flat. Instead, Patrick, 6, and Donald, 2 - not their real names - will spend the holiday in foster care.
It started two years ago with a nosebleed. Robert Smith wiped his stepson Patrick's nose and took him to school. A teacher spotted some dried blood, and asked Patrick what had happened. "Robert," he said, and made a wiping motion. She went to social services, who called the police. That afternoon Mr Smith was arrested for assault and had to move out of the flat. "We thought, it will all get sorted and go away. We knew we'd done nothing wrong," he said. A criminal court threw out the charges after the prosecution admitted that it had no evidence. But social services would not let Mr Smith move back home. Stacks of legal paper under the Christmas tree chronicle the Smiths' struggle in the family courts, where the case is still being heard.
Because reporters have been unable to cover such proceedings, their story would have remained untold had Mr Smith's parents not read about The Times's campaign and contacted the paper. Even so, The Times is unable to report details of the case against them.
For several months, Mr Smith could see Donald only twice a week under supervision. Social services did provide some help, and last spring the Smiths were reunited in an assessment centre. They thought everything was going well. But after eight weeks the children were taken into foster care because the parents showed "inconsistent emotional warmth". The Smiths now see their sons for three supervised hour-long visits a week. The worst days are the ones in between. "You want to press fast forward on the world for the day," Mr Smith said.
His parents have submitted a complaint about the way that social services have handled the proceedings. They also welcome greater transparency in the system: "If we were all allowed to put this in the paper from day one, social services could look more closely at what was going on in each case."
For their family, time is running out. A preadoption hearing will take place in the spring. A tea towel pinned up on the kitchen wall spells out an encouraging "Don't Quit". The Smiths find it increasingly hard, however. "Life has been on hold for the last two years. The tape is paused," Mr Smith said. They hope that Mr Straw's proposals will wind it on enough for them: "This is a step in the right direction, certainly. But everything starts slow. It always has to."
Source
NHS Cancer patient given less than two months to live is told she must wait 25 days for drugs
A cancer patient given less than two months to live has been refused a life-prolonging drug until an NHS trust finishes a month-long investigation. Margaret Jones hopes to be treated with Revlimid for myeloma, an incurable cancer of the bone marrow. Her consultant says the drug, which costs around 4,300 pounds for each cycle, could extend the 72-year-old's life without debilitating side effects. But bosses at her primary care trust ruled they would not pay for Revlimid because it was not 'cost effective', even though other PCTs prescribe it for myeloma sufferers.
Mother-of-three Mrs Jones - backed by her family, MP, doctor and cancer charities - appealed on the grounds that another patient living nearby successfully overturned the trust's decision to block the same drug treatment in September. But on December 5 Anne Walker, chief executive of East and North Hertfordshire PCT, said her case was still being investigated and said a response would be sent 'within 25 working days' - about half of Mrs Jones's life expectancy.
The case reignites the controversy over the 'postcode lottery' for NHS care and the time taken by the Government's rationing body to approve new cancer drugs. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice) ruled last month that it would deny Revlimid to patients with myeloma despite admitting that it could extend life by up to three years.
Mrs Jones, of Welwyn, Hertfordshire, was diagnosed with myeloma just before Easter 2006. She had been using the controversial drug thalidomide to fight the cancer but recently began to suffer damaging side-effects, including loss of feeling in her hands and feet, and excruciating pain elsewhere in her body. Following advice from her consultant-haematologist at the Queen Elizabeth II Hospital in Welwyn Garden City, backed by the charity Myeloma UK, she applied to the trust to use Revlimid - but was declined.
Yesterday she said: 'It seems wrong that there is a drug that can help people and yet the authorities put it beyond the reach of them. It is like being in a cage and somebody putting a piece of bread just out of reach. It is cruel.' Her son Jon Jones, 37, said: 'The concerning aspect of this case is that decisions on whether to provide a treatment are being made on the basis of total cost and do not consider the clinical effectiveness of those therapies. 'Elsewhere in the country, Revlimid is being provided. The PCT making this particular decision is located in one of the wealthiest counties in the country. The issue of a postcode lottery for health care is not going away and is still a heart-breaking issue for many people and their families.'
The 37-year-old former RAF pilot, who lives in Wiltshire, added that the PCT's decision to spend up to 25 days investigating his mother's appeal was 'upsetting'. He said: 'If you have got someone who has got a matter of weeks to live then 25 days is too long. It should become a matter of urgency. 'I am not saying that those responsible at the trust are off playing golf. I accept they are busy people. But when a decision needs making very quickly, they need to act quickly.'
Mrs Jones's Tory MP, Grant Shapps, said: 'The PCT should be utterly ashamed of itself. They have a woman's life in their hands and they should overturn their original decision immediately.'
Source
British Christmas concert cancelled over fears audience member might 'fall over in the dark'
A night-time Christmas concert in a rural church has been scrapped in case one of the congregation fell in the dark and sued. The 16-strong Collegium Vocale choir has spent weeks practising Handel's Messiah for the festive performance at tiny St Stephen Church. But organisers have cancelled the event claiming the quaint countryside church could be 'dangerous' on a winter's night.
Although the 100-year-old building has electric lighting they feared that in the event of a power cut a member of the audience could come a cropper in the darkness. Choirmaster Ian Davis carried out a risk assessment of the venue and also found there was an unlit tree-lined avenue leading up to it which also presented a concern. Mr Davis, 43, feared his voluntary choir could have faced legal action due to the 'absurd' health and safety laws and so decided to pull the concert.
He said: 'The law states that a dark church is dangerous if it does not have relevant health and safety procedures in place. 'The church is only small and is right in the middle of the countryside so could, according to the law, lead to slipping and tripping in the dark. 'If there was to be an incident and the lights went out, someone could fall over and hurt themselves. The walk up to the building is in darkness at night and the law states that we need lighting outside in case there are potholes and rocks.
'I understand why the law is in place but it does highlight the absurdity of how far it has gone - I am sure we are not alone. Clearly for an amateur performance you can't take the risk of it coming back on us or the vicar if someone does injure themselves. 'Luckily I had been to do a risk assessment before we started selling the tickets so nobody has been left out of pocket by it.'
St Stephen Church is located in the grounds of the Kingston Lacy Estate near Wimborne, Dorset. The historic building was constructed in 1906 at the top of a long tree-lined avenue and can seat up to 120 people. The vicar, Reverend Dr Alistair Stewart-Sykes, has liability insurance in the event of an accident but the policy does not cover paid-for events, like the concert. In order to be protected, either Rev Stewart-Sykes or Mr Davis would have to take out another costly policy or install emergency lighting inside and out.
Mr Davis said: 'The church itself does have electric lighting but it does not have emergency lighting which is also required. 'There is no way we can provide the funding to put things like emergency lighting in place so we have had to cancel the performance. 'Following a consultation with the vicar we together decided that it was just not worth it.' Mr Davis said his choir, which has performed in Westminster Abbey and Chichester Cathedral in the past, was now planning an Easter and summer concert at the church.
Rev Dr Stewart-Sykes said: 'We regret having to cancel the concert but we must be mindful of the requirements needed to conform with the law. 'I have liability insurance for services but we believe it only covers volunteers so may not apply to a paying concert. Rather than take a risk, we have regretfully decided that the best option is to cancel. 'I do however intend to explore other options with regards to insurance so we can present a full programme of concerts and performances in the future.'
Source
The O word: The word 'obese' is banned in Britain
We read:
The word is deliberately used by fat-warriors in a derogatory way. Strictly, it refers only to grossly overweight people but has come to be used to refer to any degree of being overweight. So we now have the amusing situation where people will hear all these furious condemnations of obesity in the media but then will all be told that it does not apply to their kid -- a very confused and confusing message. One arm of officialdom is being defeated by another arm of officialdom!
Obesity is determined 'by the time a child is five'
So the tots are now in line for harassment. The results are ENTIRELY in line with genetically-determined overeating. That the kids were the same as earlier at birth means nothing. They had not by the time of birth had any influence on their nutritional intake
Child obesity is determined before the age of five, ministers were told yesterday. Scientists found that the majority of weight gain in children happens before they have started school, raising doubts over Government policies which target fatter children only when they start primary education. They urged ministers to launch more pre-school obesity initiatives. A quarter of children aged four and five in England are overweight, and around 10 per cent are classified as obese - so fat that their health is in danger.
Experts blame diets rich in fat, salt, sugar and processed foods, and say that bad dietary examples set by their parents could also be to blame. The findings, published in the journal Paediatrics, came from the EarlyBird study of 233 children from birth to puberty which were presented to ministers today. At birth, children in the study were the same weight as children born 25 years ago, the study found.
But by puberty they had gained more fat compared to children of the same age in the 1980s. Most of the excess weight gain was put on before the age of five, they found. Although the weight of a five-year-old bore no relation to his or her weight at birth, it closely predicted the weight the child would be at nine, indicating that the child's path to obesity began before school age but was not connected with birth weight. They found that before a girl gets to school, she will have gained 90 per cent of the excess weight she will have at puberty. Boys will have piled on an extra 70 per cent.
Lead researcher Professor Terry Wilkin, of Plymouth's Peninsula Medical School, said: 'When they reach five, the die seems to be cast, at least until the age of puberty.' He said he believed a poor diet probably had more effect than lack of physical exercise. 'It is entirely possible that the calorie density of food and portion sizes could be higher,' he said.
Professor Wilkin criticised Government policy which focuses on school age children, with initiatives to make school meals healthier and get children to play fewer computer games. Professor Liam Donaldson, England's chief medical officer, said soaring rates of obesity amounted to an 'impending crisis'. He told the BBC: 'It is never too late. Obesity is one of the few serious medical problems that can be reversed very, very quickly.'
The Department of Health said: 'We have made obesity prevention, nutrition and physical activity a priority in the updated Child Health Promotion Programme. 'In addition, the Healthy Start scheme provides vouchers to put towards the cost of milk, fresh fruit and vegetables or infant formula to around half a million pregnant women and children under four in low income and disadvantaged families.'
Source
The secrecy of the family courts - in which nearly 95,000 cases are heard in private each year - is to end under reforms announced yesterday that will allow the media access to all levels of the system. The move could mean that social workers and expert witnesses who fail children, and now enjoy the protection of anonymity, will in future be named publicly when criticised by judges. Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, said that from April the media would be permitted access to all family cases in all courts - from celebrity divorces to hearings over domestic violence or children being removed from families. "A really important veil is being lifted on what happens in these courts," he said.
Crucially, media reporting of the cases will be subject to tight restrictions to protect the welfare and privacy of the children and families involved. The people involved in such cases will also be able to apply to a judge to have the media excluded. Mr Straw indicated that judges were not expected to grant such requests often and, when they did, the cases would be closely monitored. "If it is not working, we will actively consider changes or primary legislation."
The moves follow a campaign by The Times, begun this year, to reform the family justice system and open up the courts amid accusations that they are operating under a "conspiracy of silence".
Mr Straw said yesterday: "My view is that public confidence depends crucially on the system being as open as possible - so the case for restrictions has to be a very strong one." As for the anonymity given to professionals such as social workers and expert witnesses, he indicated that his view, although the change is not finalised, was that this should be removed. Professional experts such as structural engineers whose competence is questioned - perhaps because someone has been injured - have no anonymity protection. "I see no reason why other professionals should be immune from public examination unless there are overwhelming arguments in an individual case," Mr Straw said.
He said that the long-awaited measures, which have been more than two years in consultation and revision, struck a balance between openness and the need to protect the privacy of children and vulnerable adults. Ministers would also consider how adoption proceedings could be opened up. The change is partly in response to pressure from the media and fathers' groups to open the family courts so that justice can be seen to be done.
Britain's most senior family judge, Sir Mark Potter, the President of the Family Division of the High Court, welcomed the announcement but said that judicial discretion to exclude the media should be used where necessary. "I have for some time made clear the support of the senior judiciary for media access to the family courts in the interests of transparency and public confidence in the family justice system," he said. But he criticised Mr Straw's proposal to review the question of whether privacy should remain the rule for adoption proceedings. He said that the judiciary was united in opposing that.
The Family Justice Council, a forum of lawyers and other users of the family courts, condemned the change and said that it was "disappointed to learn that the Government is planning to allow the media into family courts as of right. In doing so, they have disregarded the views of children, young people and the organisations which protect, support and represent them." At present the media is allowed access only to the Court of Appeal and magistrates' family proceedings courts.
In the dark
- A couple whose baby daughter was placed in foster care this year were refused information by the authorities on the ground of confidentiality. Tim Yeo, the couple's MP in Suffolk South, said that his efforts to help the couple had been thwarted by a system that "prevents natural justice"
- Matthew, a professional in his fifties, was fighting a custody case for several months before he became aware of damaging allegations against him on his court file. A supporter of his former partner had written to the judge, making spurious claims, including one that said Matthew was not to be trusted with his children. Matthew only became aware of the allegations when he requested other correspondence from his file
- A month before Curtis, 17, was born, his sister was placed in foster care and then adopted, after social services expressed concern about a bruise on the child. He was only reunited recently with his sister after she tracked down her family. He found that social services had also tried to place him in foster care despite no evidence against his mother
Source
Below is another example of the horrors that Left-trained British social workers inflict on innocent families
They put the Christmas decorations up a couple of days ago but no one in the Smith family feels much like celebrating. Despite the tinsel over their sons' photographs, there are no excited children racing around the flat. Instead, Patrick, 6, and Donald, 2 - not their real names - will spend the holiday in foster care.
It started two years ago with a nosebleed. Robert Smith wiped his stepson Patrick's nose and took him to school. A teacher spotted some dried blood, and asked Patrick what had happened. "Robert," he said, and made a wiping motion. She went to social services, who called the police. That afternoon Mr Smith was arrested for assault and had to move out of the flat. "We thought, it will all get sorted and go away. We knew we'd done nothing wrong," he said. A criminal court threw out the charges after the prosecution admitted that it had no evidence. But social services would not let Mr Smith move back home. Stacks of legal paper under the Christmas tree chronicle the Smiths' struggle in the family courts, where the case is still being heard.
Because reporters have been unable to cover such proceedings, their story would have remained untold had Mr Smith's parents not read about The Times's campaign and contacted the paper. Even so, The Times is unable to report details of the case against them.
For several months, Mr Smith could see Donald only twice a week under supervision. Social services did provide some help, and last spring the Smiths were reunited in an assessment centre. They thought everything was going well. But after eight weeks the children were taken into foster care because the parents showed "inconsistent emotional warmth". The Smiths now see their sons for three supervised hour-long visits a week. The worst days are the ones in between. "You want to press fast forward on the world for the day," Mr Smith said.
His parents have submitted a complaint about the way that social services have handled the proceedings. They also welcome greater transparency in the system: "If we were all allowed to put this in the paper from day one, social services could look more closely at what was going on in each case."
For their family, time is running out. A preadoption hearing will take place in the spring. A tea towel pinned up on the kitchen wall spells out an encouraging "Don't Quit". The Smiths find it increasingly hard, however. "Life has been on hold for the last two years. The tape is paused," Mr Smith said. They hope that Mr Straw's proposals will wind it on enough for them: "This is a step in the right direction, certainly. But everything starts slow. It always has to."
Source
NHS Cancer patient given less than two months to live is told she must wait 25 days for drugs
A cancer patient given less than two months to live has been refused a life-prolonging drug until an NHS trust finishes a month-long investigation. Margaret Jones hopes to be treated with Revlimid for myeloma, an incurable cancer of the bone marrow. Her consultant says the drug, which costs around 4,300 pounds for each cycle, could extend the 72-year-old's life without debilitating side effects. But bosses at her primary care trust ruled they would not pay for Revlimid because it was not 'cost effective', even though other PCTs prescribe it for myeloma sufferers.
Mother-of-three Mrs Jones - backed by her family, MP, doctor and cancer charities - appealed on the grounds that another patient living nearby successfully overturned the trust's decision to block the same drug treatment in September. But on December 5 Anne Walker, chief executive of East and North Hertfordshire PCT, said her case was still being investigated and said a response would be sent 'within 25 working days' - about half of Mrs Jones's life expectancy.
The case reignites the controversy over the 'postcode lottery' for NHS care and the time taken by the Government's rationing body to approve new cancer drugs. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice) ruled last month that it would deny Revlimid to patients with myeloma despite admitting that it could extend life by up to three years.
Mrs Jones, of Welwyn, Hertfordshire, was diagnosed with myeloma just before Easter 2006. She had been using the controversial drug thalidomide to fight the cancer but recently began to suffer damaging side-effects, including loss of feeling in her hands and feet, and excruciating pain elsewhere in her body. Following advice from her consultant-haematologist at the Queen Elizabeth II Hospital in Welwyn Garden City, backed by the charity Myeloma UK, she applied to the trust to use Revlimid - but was declined.
Yesterday she said: 'It seems wrong that there is a drug that can help people and yet the authorities put it beyond the reach of them. It is like being in a cage and somebody putting a piece of bread just out of reach. It is cruel.' Her son Jon Jones, 37, said: 'The concerning aspect of this case is that decisions on whether to provide a treatment are being made on the basis of total cost and do not consider the clinical effectiveness of those therapies. 'Elsewhere in the country, Revlimid is being provided. The PCT making this particular decision is located in one of the wealthiest counties in the country. The issue of a postcode lottery for health care is not going away and is still a heart-breaking issue for many people and their families.'
The 37-year-old former RAF pilot, who lives in Wiltshire, added that the PCT's decision to spend up to 25 days investigating his mother's appeal was 'upsetting'. He said: 'If you have got someone who has got a matter of weeks to live then 25 days is too long. It should become a matter of urgency. 'I am not saying that those responsible at the trust are off playing golf. I accept they are busy people. But when a decision needs making very quickly, they need to act quickly.'
Mrs Jones's Tory MP, Grant Shapps, said: 'The PCT should be utterly ashamed of itself. They have a woman's life in their hands and they should overturn their original decision immediately.'
Source
British Christmas concert cancelled over fears audience member might 'fall over in the dark'
A night-time Christmas concert in a rural church has been scrapped in case one of the congregation fell in the dark and sued. The 16-strong Collegium Vocale choir has spent weeks practising Handel's Messiah for the festive performance at tiny St Stephen Church. But organisers have cancelled the event claiming the quaint countryside church could be 'dangerous' on a winter's night.
Although the 100-year-old building has electric lighting they feared that in the event of a power cut a member of the audience could come a cropper in the darkness. Choirmaster Ian Davis carried out a risk assessment of the venue and also found there was an unlit tree-lined avenue leading up to it which also presented a concern. Mr Davis, 43, feared his voluntary choir could have faced legal action due to the 'absurd' health and safety laws and so decided to pull the concert.
He said: 'The law states that a dark church is dangerous if it does not have relevant health and safety procedures in place. 'The church is only small and is right in the middle of the countryside so could, according to the law, lead to slipping and tripping in the dark. 'If there was to be an incident and the lights went out, someone could fall over and hurt themselves. The walk up to the building is in darkness at night and the law states that we need lighting outside in case there are potholes and rocks.
'I understand why the law is in place but it does highlight the absurdity of how far it has gone - I am sure we are not alone. Clearly for an amateur performance you can't take the risk of it coming back on us or the vicar if someone does injure themselves. 'Luckily I had been to do a risk assessment before we started selling the tickets so nobody has been left out of pocket by it.'
St Stephen Church is located in the grounds of the Kingston Lacy Estate near Wimborne, Dorset. The historic building was constructed in 1906 at the top of a long tree-lined avenue and can seat up to 120 people. The vicar, Reverend Dr Alistair Stewart-Sykes, has liability insurance in the event of an accident but the policy does not cover paid-for events, like the concert. In order to be protected, either Rev Stewart-Sykes or Mr Davis would have to take out another costly policy or install emergency lighting inside and out.
Mr Davis said: 'The church itself does have electric lighting but it does not have emergency lighting which is also required. 'There is no way we can provide the funding to put things like emergency lighting in place so we have had to cancel the performance. 'Following a consultation with the vicar we together decided that it was just not worth it.' Mr Davis said his choir, which has performed in Westminster Abbey and Chichester Cathedral in the past, was now planning an Easter and summer concert at the church.
Rev Dr Stewart-Sykes said: 'We regret having to cancel the concert but we must be mindful of the requirements needed to conform with the law. 'I have liability insurance for services but we believe it only covers volunteers so may not apply to a paying concert. Rather than take a risk, we have regretfully decided that the best option is to cancel. 'I do however intend to explore other options with regards to insurance so we can present a full programme of concerts and performances in the future.'
Source
The O word: The word 'obese' is banned in Britain
We read:
"Ministers banned the word 'obese' on letters to the parents of fat children - because focus groups did not like it, England's chief medical officer said today. Professor Liam Donaldson revealed that the term was replaced on letters to parents by 'very overweight' over fears it would upset and stigmatise fat children. Writing on the BBC News website he said obesity had become a taboo word or an 'O word'.
The Department of Health announced in August that for the first time parents would be routinely informed if their child was clinically overweight. Children are weighed on entering primary school (at age four or five) and in their final year (aged 10 or 11) as part of the National Child Measurement Programme.
Letters are then sent out to make parents aware of potential problems with their child's weight so they go and see their doctor about it if needed. But Professor Donaldson said that in the planning stage, a 'stumbling block' was the wording of the feedback letter. 'The majority of these parents felt that using the term "very overweight" in combination with the associated health risks was a better approach. Suddenly, we had stepped on eggshells.' He added: 'Obesity has become the new cancer. A word that is taboo, that intimidates, strikes fear, that promoted softer euphemisms. In effect it has become an "O" word.
At the time, the National Obesity Forum described the Government's decision not to use the word obese as 'prissy and namby pamby'.
Source
The word is deliberately used by fat-warriors in a derogatory way. Strictly, it refers only to grossly overweight people but has come to be used to refer to any degree of being overweight. So we now have the amusing situation where people will hear all these furious condemnations of obesity in the media but then will all be told that it does not apply to their kid -- a very confused and confusing message. One arm of officialdom is being defeated by another arm of officialdom!
Obesity is determined 'by the time a child is five'
So the tots are now in line for harassment. The results are ENTIRELY in line with genetically-determined overeating. That the kids were the same as earlier at birth means nothing. They had not by the time of birth had any influence on their nutritional intake
Child obesity is determined before the age of five, ministers were told yesterday. Scientists found that the majority of weight gain in children happens before they have started school, raising doubts over Government policies which target fatter children only when they start primary education. They urged ministers to launch more pre-school obesity initiatives. A quarter of children aged four and five in England are overweight, and around 10 per cent are classified as obese - so fat that their health is in danger.
Experts blame diets rich in fat, salt, sugar and processed foods, and say that bad dietary examples set by their parents could also be to blame. The findings, published in the journal Paediatrics, came from the EarlyBird study of 233 children from birth to puberty which were presented to ministers today. At birth, children in the study were the same weight as children born 25 years ago, the study found.
But by puberty they had gained more fat compared to children of the same age in the 1980s. Most of the excess weight gain was put on before the age of five, they found. Although the weight of a five-year-old bore no relation to his or her weight at birth, it closely predicted the weight the child would be at nine, indicating that the child's path to obesity began before school age but was not connected with birth weight. They found that before a girl gets to school, she will have gained 90 per cent of the excess weight she will have at puberty. Boys will have piled on an extra 70 per cent.
Lead researcher Professor Terry Wilkin, of Plymouth's Peninsula Medical School, said: 'When they reach five, the die seems to be cast, at least until the age of puberty.' He said he believed a poor diet probably had more effect than lack of physical exercise. 'It is entirely possible that the calorie density of food and portion sizes could be higher,' he said.
Professor Wilkin criticised Government policy which focuses on school age children, with initiatives to make school meals healthier and get children to play fewer computer games. Professor Liam Donaldson, England's chief medical officer, said soaring rates of obesity amounted to an 'impending crisis'. He told the BBC: 'It is never too late. Obesity is one of the few serious medical problems that can be reversed very, very quickly.'
The Department of Health said: 'We have made obesity prevention, nutrition and physical activity a priority in the updated Child Health Promotion Programme. 'In addition, the Healthy Start scheme provides vouchers to put towards the cost of milk, fresh fruit and vegetables or infant formula to around half a million pregnant women and children under four in low income and disadvantaged families.'
Source
Thursday, December 18, 2008
Again: Britain's politicized police useless at normal law enforcement
Killing of Good Samaritan 'could have been avoided' after police blunder
A teenager who kicked a Good Samaritan to death had carried out a similar brutal street attack two months earlier but police failed to deal with the initial crime properly, a court has heard. Joseph Thomas, 18, was convicted of killing Nick Baty, 48, in a shopping centre car park by kicking and stamping on him in an unprovoked attack. Print worker Mr Baty, a trained first-aider, had stepped in to help a boy who had collapsed after drinking but was then attacked by Thomas. The father-of-one went into a coma after the attack in January and died a month later when his life support machine was turned off.
Two months before killing Mr Baty, Thomas had attacked Mark Bridgeman, 20, near the same car park in Brackla, Bridgend, Wales. Mr Bridgeman was left with fractures to both sides of his jaw and had to have three metal plates and 12 screws inserted. But two police officers, a sergeant and a Pc, failed to investigate properly. The attack on Mr Bridgeman was not even recorded by the Pc until March, two months after the fatal assault on Mr Baty. The conduct of the police officers was investigated by the Independent Police Complaints Commission and both have been given official warnings.
Thomas, of Brackla, was cleared of murdering Mr Baty but convicted of manslaughter at Cardiff Crown Court. He was sentenced to eight years for manslaughter and another two years for the earlier assault. Prosecutor Roger Thomas QC said: "This was a vicious attack. Mr Baty was only concerned about the welfare of the teenager unconscious on the floor. "Mr Baty moved towards the unconscious teenager when, suddenly and without warning, Thomas ran at him from behind shouting `Leave him alone'. "He grabbed him by the shoulder and threw him to ground. Mr Baty's head struck the ground with a thud but Thomas didn't leave him, he attacked him as he lay defenceless on the ground." The court heard Thomas left Mr Baty lying in a pool of blood and bragged to a friend about what he had done.
His friend called 999 and police found Mr Baty lying next to the unconscious teenager he had tried to help. The court heard that, in the earlier attack, Mr Bridgeman had simply been "in the wrong place at the wrong time". Mr Thomas said: "Mr Bridgeman was the victim of an unprovoked, unnecessary and quite vicious attack by Thomas. He was repeatedly punched and kicked to the face and hit while still on the ground. "Unfortunately, the police investigation did not proceed in the manner it should have."
John Charles Rees QC, defending, said: "It may be the offence of manslaughter may not have been committed if Thomas had been arrested when he should have been for the first attack." Judge John Curran said: "This offence was committed for no better reason than you were drunk. "The first matter was not properly investigated by the police for reasons I find inexplicable. This has caused grief and devastation to the victim of a violent crime."
Mr Baty's father John Baty, 80, said: "His absence has deeply affected us. The feeling of grief is immense."
IPCC Commissioner for Wales Tom Davies said: "The public expect the police to take proper action when reporting crimes and especially when it is in connection with a serious assault. "The officer and his supervising sergeant have been both been issued with written warnings for their failures." [Big deal!] The South Wales Police professional standards department found "no positive enquiries were actioned or completed by the two officers".
Source
Blind man's guide dog barred from restaurant in Britain for offending Muslims
A blind man has been turned away from a fashionable Indian restaurant because his guide dog offended Muslim staff
Alun Elder-Brown, a recruitment executive, said he was left feeling "like a piece of dirt" after being barred from bringing the animal into Kirthon Restaurant in Tunbridge Wells, Kent, on religious grounds. The Guide Dogs for the Blind Association said the decision was illegal under the Disability Discrimination Act and Mr Elder-Brown, 51, is now considering suing the establishment in The Pantiles. It follows a series of successful prosecutions of Muslim taxi drivers who refused to carry guide dogs in their cars because they considered them unclean on religious grounds.
Mr Elder-Brown was taking his girlfriend out to celebrate her birthday with her five year-old daughter last week when he was told he would have to leave his dog, Finn, tied up outside. He showed a card issued by the Institute of Environmental Health Officers certifying he and his dog were allowed into any premises but an argument ensued and the owners threatened to call the police if he did not leave. "It was humiliating and degrading, especially as there were a lot of people around me," he said. "I was made to feel like a piece of dirt. They told me I couldn't come in because it was against their religious beliefs to have a dog in the restaurant. "They then said I could leave Finn tied up outside. I stayed calm but when they threatened to call police I left." He added: "It was horrible. It put a dampener on the whole celebration."
Under the Disability Discrimination Act it is illegal to refuse to serve a disabled person of give them a diminished level of service because of their disability. Chris Dyson of Guide Dogs for the Blind said: "We are extremely concerned and disappointed that Alun was refused access to this restaurant. "We very much hope that this restaurant will reconsider its decision and get in touch with the charity so that we can give them a better understanding of their requirements under the law and explain the important role that the guide dog plays for Alun."
The restaurant's owner, Amenur Abdussamad, was not immediately available for comment. But Shamin Ahmed, a partner in the restaurant, said that he had written to Guide Dogs for the Blind to apologise for the incident. He said that although the owners of the venue are Muslim, he insisted religion was not a factor in the decision to refuse Mr Elder-Brown. "We were worried about the hygiene, that is what happened, it was a mistake," he said. "I have had a letter from Guide Dogs for the Blind, I have sent a reply apologising about that.... we found out afterwards that guide dogs are allowed, I didn't know that."
Source
Migrants account for almost all new British jobs
Virtually all the growth in new jobs in the last seven years has been accounted for by migrants, a study revealed. There are 1.34 million more people in work now than in 2001 but the number of UK-born workers in employment has actually fallen by 62,000 over the same period. In contrast there has been a significant surge in the number of migrant workers in employment - including almost half a million more Eastern Europeans, the study from Migrationwatch UK shows.
Critics said the latest figures make a mockery of Gordon Brown's pledge of "British jobs for British workers". Sir Andrew Green, chairman of Migrationwatch, said: "From an immigration point of view this means that migration from Eastern Europe is moving into balance as we have been predicting but, from the point of view of British born workers, the damage to their prospects has already been done - at a time when jobs of almost all kinds are at a premium.
"This must have been staring the government in the face for a long time yet even last month they described the East European migrants as "helping to fill gaps in the labour market". Rather than come clean about the effect of massive immigration on the prospects of British born workers they have been spinning the statistics and camouflaging the true position with "tough talk" about immigration. 'Now that the cat is out of the bag they cannot possibly lift such restrictions as now exist on Romanian and Bulgarian workers."
In an analysis of the Government's own figures, the study showed between 2001 and 2008, employment in the UK grew by 1.342 million - made up of 253,000 more UK nationals in work and 1,087,000 more foreign workers in jobs. But the UK nationals figure includes migrants who hold British citizenship. When they are removed, the number of UK-born workers in employment actually fell by 62,000 over the period.
Of the growth in non-UK nationals in jobs, some 469,000 were from the so-called A8 Eastern European countries, including Poland and Slovakia, who joined the EU in 2004 and were granted full access to the British labour market. Romania and Bulgaria joined the EU in 2007 but the Government imposed restrictions on low-skilled workers. The effective quota is up for review at the end of the year and ministers are expected to announce on Thursday that it will remain in place. It comes as the Government is this week expected to say it is maintaining restrictions on migrant workers from Romania and Bulgaria which have been in place since the pair join the EU in 2007.
Source
Pervasive NHS inadequacies
When Florence King's husband was admitted to hospital for a major brain operation, she discovered how, while the National Health Service is superb at matters of life and death, it often fails badly at the smaller touches that mean so much to patients . . . She explains: 'Over the past few months, my husband has had a major operation on the NHS and half-a-dozen follow-up stays in hospital. 'The medical treatment has been beyond reproach. He is making a good recovery and we can only express our gratitude. 'But so close and extended an experience of hospitals - not just of the one where he had his operation, but other hospitals where he underwent tests - highlighted a whole range of areas where a little thought would have improved the experience for patient and visitor alike.
'Many of the faults would cost little or nothing to remedy: it is more a matter of attitude than money. The overwhelming impression was of a system - as years of almost permanent revolution come to an end - that is expensively over-managed at the top and grievously undermanaged at the patient level. 'Most of those involved, including nurses and ancillary staff, are so wrapped up in the system that they fail to appreciate how it looks and feels to the people in their care - the people who are, after all, the whole reason the hospital is there.
'Before his operation, my husband could barely walk. He needed door-to-door transport, which meant the car. And when the hospital is out of town, a car makes visiting more flexible, which is how I encountered that most vilified of "hidden" NHS costs: parking charges. 'Now, I completely understand why hospitals in urban areas or on small sites levy charges: they don't want parking spaces that their staff need clogged up with visitors' cars and they don't want commuters squatting there for free. 'And if you have a disabled sticker, as my husband does, you do not have to pay to park. No complaints there.
'As an able-bodied visitor, though, I stuck to the rules, which meant shelling out more than 30 pounds for each of the first two weeks, until I discovered that, as a regular, you could buy a weekly season ticket for 12. 'I would not say, though, that they were exactly advertising that fact. The aggressively worded instruction boards at the car parks warned - among other things - that it was an offence not to display a valid ticket; that the machine dispensed no change; that the charge had recently gone up to 2 pounds for three hours; that charging operated 24 hours a day, seven days a week; and that there were regular checks. 'Oh yes, and they warned that thieves were about - so the patrols were about money, not security. Thanks.
'I discovered the good news about season tickets by chance, from the small print of a leaflet in the hospital coffee shop. But not before learning how more experienced visitors coped. Dozens park on surrounding roads, which creates traffic jams at visiting times. 'There was also what seemed a well established practice of passing your ticket (with its unused time) to a new arrival as you left, or leaving it on the machine for the next person to pick up. That seems fair enough. 'The 2 pounds-for-three-hours charge particularly grated because official visiting hours are two separate sessions of two hours. This means you have to pay at least 4 pounds if you visit both times.
RECEPTION
'As an arriving in-patient, my husband would have an official letter and a window of time allocated for his arrival. Invariably, there was no one manning the central reception desk or the entrance to the ward. 'Despite all the stories you hear about poor hospital security (from petty crime to stolen babies), I have entered and got lost wandering around every hospital my husband has been in. Invariably, no one has challenged me. 'Signposting is absolutely hopeless: non-existent, inconsistent; or in such impenetrable jargon that no outsider has a clue.
'Some reception desks, it turns out, are staffed only at certain times or particular days of the week, and the staffed hours bear no relation to when new patients actually arrive. For whose benefit, you ask, are they manned at all? 'Sometimes I had to winkle semi-willing staff out of adjacent side rooms where they were on a break.
'One newer hospital of my acquaintance, a positive paean to the Private Finance Initiative, has an atrium that rivals any major airport with ranks of reception desks to match, except that only the central desk is staffed - so there are muddled queues. 'It is too expensive to staff the other desk said a grumpy porter. All this public space - which has to be cleaned, heated and lit, if not actually staffed - is an extravagance. 'It is also intimidating for semi-mobile patients, who find themselves having to hobble enormous distances, even if lifts and automatic doors make it a great deal easier than in older hospitals. 'Why was the money spent on a lavish atrium rather than separate wards rather than separate bathroom facilities for men and women?
DOCTORS
'The doctors I dealt with were, without exception, informative and calming. It was almost as though they had graduated from a course in "dealing with patients and their relatives as intelligent people and how not to alarm them". Perhaps they had. 'I didn't feel at any time that the top specialists were patronising me or my husband, and they seemed to make conscious efforts to avoid using impenetrable technicalities.
'I do not doubt, though, that having doctors in the family and long familiarity with the medical minutiae of my husband's illness probably helped communication. In general, the junior doctors seemed more off-hand.
'If I have a complaint, it is the general invisibility of doctors outside the ward round. Of course, they have other places to be: in the operating theatre, seeing acute patients, lecturing. 'But they seem to inhabit a planet from which they occasionally descend, with a certain delay for effect, at the behest of ever-changing teams of nurses. The continuing, and glaring, doctor-nurse divide left me feeling that some doctors found it easier to talk to me than to the nursing staff.
VISITORS
'As visitor, you would go into the ward - sometimes you had to ring to be admitted, sometimes not - and want to announce yourself to someone. 'I felt that someone should know I was there; that it would be better not to wander around the beds looking for my husband (sometimes he was in a side ward, sometimes not); and it would be useful to know before I saw him how he was. 'No one, even at official visiting times, routinely met the visitors. Official visiting times existed, and there were rules discouraging young children and more than two visitors per patient. But hospitals seem to make a virtue of permissiveness. 'When my husband was very ill, I was grateful for the flexibility. But permissive visiting makes for a lot of coming and going. 'Not enforcing the rule about young children and multiple visitors made for more noise and bustle than my husband easily tolerated. It was, frankly, an imposition.
NURSES
'WHEN my husband was admitted to the hospital ward, I saw a notice on the wall behind the nurses' desk team saying: We operate a team nursing system." I soon discovered that this meant that no one individual was in charge - everyone was equal. 'The combination of having no one visibly in cahrge and incomprehensible shift patterns meant neither patients nor visitors had any obvious continuity.
'My husband seemed to receive his medication with punctilious regularity, and was duly recorded, along with any problems, in the handover log. 'But there were slips and times when the log was completed with a delay: "Whoops, I forgot, but I know I gave him his dose . . ." 'Every individual seemed to have a high sense of personal responsibility. Yet the fact no one demonstrably in charge left doubts. It all seemed a bit haphazard.
'I was not made to feel unwelcome. On the contrary, at mealtimes I was cheerfully called up for feeding duty. I just felt that a single, obvious contact point every day would have been desirable. The counter-argument, of course, is that everyone is too busy and hierarchies belong in the ark.
NOISE
'Thank goodness: with the introduction of individual screens, the age of the blaring TV at the end of the ward is over in many hospitals. 'But it was not only the visiting times, as my husband told me, that could be noisy. Nights were also noisy, and only partly because some patients became agitated. 'My husband's biggest complaint, though, was about the nurses and their chatter and laughter. He was on a ward for patients who'd had brain operations or suffered brain injuries. They really needed quiet. Again, who is a hospital for?
HYGIENE
Ward hygiene was good. The hand-washing and disinfectant messages have got through to the staff. I have to say, though, that I didn't like seeing nurses arrive and leave in uniform.
'I was surprised that most patients, except the very ill, were encouraged to wear their own clothes, which meant I had a pile of dirty laundry to take home a couple of times a week. I have a car and washing machine, but some relatives might not.
'What I found shocking was how often nurses seemed to prefer the patient to soil himself rather than help him to the commode. 'At one point, my husband was well enough to be detached from a catheter, but still too ill or slow to get up or reach for the urinal in time. A more considerate attitude by the nurses, not necessarily more of them, could have reduced the number of 'accidents'.
'In two hospitals, I complained several times about the lack of loo paper and general filth of the lavatory facilities for visitors. Nurses and ward staff say it is nothing to do with them and I could never find anyone who'd admit to having responsibility.
FOOD
'Meal service was separated from nursing everywhere and seemed to have a life of its own. 'The times were generally not too uncivilised, and the quality and choice were better than both of us had feared. 'My husband could also ask for toast or an ice-cream at almost any time if he had missed a meal or felt peckish. He lost a lot of weight while recovering from his operation and enjoyed these little extras.
'But, oh, the service! OK, so you don't expect restaurant standard or even charm. But I think you could expect to have the plates set down somewhere where you might be able to reach them in the order you might want to eat what is on them. 'And the amount of time allotted for eating was minimal, so the hungry patient feels pressured to gobble, and anyone who has difficulty eating simply gives up. Those who made a fuss generally got fed, but often had to wait so long that the food was cold.
'Expectations about patients' ability to eat when in bed were unrealistic. While nurses and meal staff equipped themselves with disposable plastic aprons off a big roll, patients had to make do with a tiny paper napkin. 'A disposable plastic bib or a cloak like the ones you have at the hairdresser's would be a vast improvement.
'It would also be a good idea for someone to review all the menus for ' eatability'. Roast chicken came in joints and was clearly popular, but my husband could not have begun to tackle his if I hadn't been there to cut it up; he could not even lift it! 'Anything that cannot be picked up easily by hand, fork or spoon is a nightmare. Even boneless meat, if it is in one piece or drowned in gravy, is a challenge. I especially dreaded 'pea' days - they ended up all over the bed.'
TELEPHONES
'A lot of people complain about the tariff for hospital phones. All the hospitals my husband has been in, though, allowed patients to use their mobiles, which most did with discretion. That's good.
TELEVISION
'I know that if I were in hospital and reasonably conscious, I would love to have my own TV and radio. The arrival of bedside TV and games consoles - a bit like those in passenger planes - is a great advance.
'Aha, but the NHS has news for you. It is not as simple as it seems. First of all, you need to pay, and while I would be happy to do so, the system seemed expressly designed to extract the maximum amount of money in a rather deceptive way. 'You could pay for a day, three days or a week. But the time was consecutive. So, if you had an operation on day two and were incapable of watching TV that day, you lost that day. To pay for just one day, though, was much more expensive.
'The method of payment left much to be desired. All right, you can't expect nurses to collect TV fees. But you have to buy a card at a slot machine that says it gives change and accepts notes, but doesn't, or pay by credit card on-screen. 'For me, able-bodied and equipped with a mobile phone and credit card, this was complicated, didn't work initially and necessitated two frustrated calls to the inquiry desk.
'For my husband, with fingers that didn't work well, problems with his voice and difficulties sitting up (before the operation), setting up the TV payments would have been impossible. In the week after the operation, it was even worse. 'Plus, his bed was moved first to a different ward and then to various positions in the ward. Each move meant having to re-start the TV, using a long ID number. Mostly, he gave up. 'And a head operation meant wearing a headset was not just uncomfortable but impossible, yet no earpiece was on offer.
Source
Killing of Good Samaritan 'could have been avoided' after police blunder
A teenager who kicked a Good Samaritan to death had carried out a similar brutal street attack two months earlier but police failed to deal with the initial crime properly, a court has heard. Joseph Thomas, 18, was convicted of killing Nick Baty, 48, in a shopping centre car park by kicking and stamping on him in an unprovoked attack. Print worker Mr Baty, a trained first-aider, had stepped in to help a boy who had collapsed after drinking but was then attacked by Thomas. The father-of-one went into a coma after the attack in January and died a month later when his life support machine was turned off.
Two months before killing Mr Baty, Thomas had attacked Mark Bridgeman, 20, near the same car park in Brackla, Bridgend, Wales. Mr Bridgeman was left with fractures to both sides of his jaw and had to have three metal plates and 12 screws inserted. But two police officers, a sergeant and a Pc, failed to investigate properly. The attack on Mr Bridgeman was not even recorded by the Pc until March, two months after the fatal assault on Mr Baty. The conduct of the police officers was investigated by the Independent Police Complaints Commission and both have been given official warnings.
Thomas, of Brackla, was cleared of murdering Mr Baty but convicted of manslaughter at Cardiff Crown Court. He was sentenced to eight years for manslaughter and another two years for the earlier assault. Prosecutor Roger Thomas QC said: "This was a vicious attack. Mr Baty was only concerned about the welfare of the teenager unconscious on the floor. "Mr Baty moved towards the unconscious teenager when, suddenly and without warning, Thomas ran at him from behind shouting `Leave him alone'. "He grabbed him by the shoulder and threw him to ground. Mr Baty's head struck the ground with a thud but Thomas didn't leave him, he attacked him as he lay defenceless on the ground." The court heard Thomas left Mr Baty lying in a pool of blood and bragged to a friend about what he had done.
His friend called 999 and police found Mr Baty lying next to the unconscious teenager he had tried to help. The court heard that, in the earlier attack, Mr Bridgeman had simply been "in the wrong place at the wrong time". Mr Thomas said: "Mr Bridgeman was the victim of an unprovoked, unnecessary and quite vicious attack by Thomas. He was repeatedly punched and kicked to the face and hit while still on the ground. "Unfortunately, the police investigation did not proceed in the manner it should have."
John Charles Rees QC, defending, said: "It may be the offence of manslaughter may not have been committed if Thomas had been arrested when he should have been for the first attack." Judge John Curran said: "This offence was committed for no better reason than you were drunk. "The first matter was not properly investigated by the police for reasons I find inexplicable. This has caused grief and devastation to the victim of a violent crime."
Mr Baty's father John Baty, 80, said: "His absence has deeply affected us. The feeling of grief is immense."
IPCC Commissioner for Wales Tom Davies said: "The public expect the police to take proper action when reporting crimes and especially when it is in connection with a serious assault. "The officer and his supervising sergeant have been both been issued with written warnings for their failures." [Big deal!] The South Wales Police professional standards department found "no positive enquiries were actioned or completed by the two officers".
Source
Blind man's guide dog barred from restaurant in Britain for offending Muslims
A blind man has been turned away from a fashionable Indian restaurant because his guide dog offended Muslim staff
Alun Elder-Brown, a recruitment executive, said he was left feeling "like a piece of dirt" after being barred from bringing the animal into Kirthon Restaurant in Tunbridge Wells, Kent, on religious grounds. The Guide Dogs for the Blind Association said the decision was illegal under the Disability Discrimination Act and Mr Elder-Brown, 51, is now considering suing the establishment in The Pantiles. It follows a series of successful prosecutions of Muslim taxi drivers who refused to carry guide dogs in their cars because they considered them unclean on religious grounds.
Mr Elder-Brown was taking his girlfriend out to celebrate her birthday with her five year-old daughter last week when he was told he would have to leave his dog, Finn, tied up outside. He showed a card issued by the Institute of Environmental Health Officers certifying he and his dog were allowed into any premises but an argument ensued and the owners threatened to call the police if he did not leave. "It was humiliating and degrading, especially as there were a lot of people around me," he said. "I was made to feel like a piece of dirt. They told me I couldn't come in because it was against their religious beliefs to have a dog in the restaurant. "They then said I could leave Finn tied up outside. I stayed calm but when they threatened to call police I left." He added: "It was horrible. It put a dampener on the whole celebration."
Under the Disability Discrimination Act it is illegal to refuse to serve a disabled person of give them a diminished level of service because of their disability. Chris Dyson of Guide Dogs for the Blind said: "We are extremely concerned and disappointed that Alun was refused access to this restaurant. "We very much hope that this restaurant will reconsider its decision and get in touch with the charity so that we can give them a better understanding of their requirements under the law and explain the important role that the guide dog plays for Alun."
The restaurant's owner, Amenur Abdussamad, was not immediately available for comment. But Shamin Ahmed, a partner in the restaurant, said that he had written to Guide Dogs for the Blind to apologise for the incident. He said that although the owners of the venue are Muslim, he insisted religion was not a factor in the decision to refuse Mr Elder-Brown. "We were worried about the hygiene, that is what happened, it was a mistake," he said. "I have had a letter from Guide Dogs for the Blind, I have sent a reply apologising about that.... we found out afterwards that guide dogs are allowed, I didn't know that."
Source
Migrants account for almost all new British jobs
Virtually all the growth in new jobs in the last seven years has been accounted for by migrants, a study revealed. There are 1.34 million more people in work now than in 2001 but the number of UK-born workers in employment has actually fallen by 62,000 over the same period. In contrast there has been a significant surge in the number of migrant workers in employment - including almost half a million more Eastern Europeans, the study from Migrationwatch UK shows.
Critics said the latest figures make a mockery of Gordon Brown's pledge of "British jobs for British workers". Sir Andrew Green, chairman of Migrationwatch, said: "From an immigration point of view this means that migration from Eastern Europe is moving into balance as we have been predicting but, from the point of view of British born workers, the damage to their prospects has already been done - at a time when jobs of almost all kinds are at a premium.
"This must have been staring the government in the face for a long time yet even last month they described the East European migrants as "helping to fill gaps in the labour market". Rather than come clean about the effect of massive immigration on the prospects of British born workers they have been spinning the statistics and camouflaging the true position with "tough talk" about immigration. 'Now that the cat is out of the bag they cannot possibly lift such restrictions as now exist on Romanian and Bulgarian workers."
In an analysis of the Government's own figures, the study showed between 2001 and 2008, employment in the UK grew by 1.342 million - made up of 253,000 more UK nationals in work and 1,087,000 more foreign workers in jobs. But the UK nationals figure includes migrants who hold British citizenship. When they are removed, the number of UK-born workers in employment actually fell by 62,000 over the period.
Of the growth in non-UK nationals in jobs, some 469,000 were from the so-called A8 Eastern European countries, including Poland and Slovakia, who joined the EU in 2004 and were granted full access to the British labour market. Romania and Bulgaria joined the EU in 2007 but the Government imposed restrictions on low-skilled workers. The effective quota is up for review at the end of the year and ministers are expected to announce on Thursday that it will remain in place. It comes as the Government is this week expected to say it is maintaining restrictions on migrant workers from Romania and Bulgaria which have been in place since the pair join the EU in 2007.
Source
Pervasive NHS inadequacies
When Florence King's husband was admitted to hospital for a major brain operation, she discovered how, while the National Health Service is superb at matters of life and death, it often fails badly at the smaller touches that mean so much to patients . . . She explains: 'Over the past few months, my husband has had a major operation on the NHS and half-a-dozen follow-up stays in hospital. 'The medical treatment has been beyond reproach. He is making a good recovery and we can only express our gratitude. 'But so close and extended an experience of hospitals - not just of the one where he had his operation, but other hospitals where he underwent tests - highlighted a whole range of areas where a little thought would have improved the experience for patient and visitor alike.
'Many of the faults would cost little or nothing to remedy: it is more a matter of attitude than money. The overwhelming impression was of a system - as years of almost permanent revolution come to an end - that is expensively over-managed at the top and grievously undermanaged at the patient level. 'Most of those involved, including nurses and ancillary staff, are so wrapped up in the system that they fail to appreciate how it looks and feels to the people in their care - the people who are, after all, the whole reason the hospital is there.
'Before his operation, my husband could barely walk. He needed door-to-door transport, which meant the car. And when the hospital is out of town, a car makes visiting more flexible, which is how I encountered that most vilified of "hidden" NHS costs: parking charges. 'Now, I completely understand why hospitals in urban areas or on small sites levy charges: they don't want parking spaces that their staff need clogged up with visitors' cars and they don't want commuters squatting there for free. 'And if you have a disabled sticker, as my husband does, you do not have to pay to park. No complaints there.
'As an able-bodied visitor, though, I stuck to the rules, which meant shelling out more than 30 pounds for each of the first two weeks, until I discovered that, as a regular, you could buy a weekly season ticket for 12. 'I would not say, though, that they were exactly advertising that fact. The aggressively worded instruction boards at the car parks warned - among other things - that it was an offence not to display a valid ticket; that the machine dispensed no change; that the charge had recently gone up to 2 pounds for three hours; that charging operated 24 hours a day, seven days a week; and that there were regular checks. 'Oh yes, and they warned that thieves were about - so the patrols were about money, not security. Thanks.
'I discovered the good news about season tickets by chance, from the small print of a leaflet in the hospital coffee shop. But not before learning how more experienced visitors coped. Dozens park on surrounding roads, which creates traffic jams at visiting times. 'There was also what seemed a well established practice of passing your ticket (with its unused time) to a new arrival as you left, or leaving it on the machine for the next person to pick up. That seems fair enough. 'The 2 pounds-for-three-hours charge particularly grated because official visiting hours are two separate sessions of two hours. This means you have to pay at least 4 pounds if you visit both times.
RECEPTION
'As an arriving in-patient, my husband would have an official letter and a window of time allocated for his arrival. Invariably, there was no one manning the central reception desk or the entrance to the ward. 'Despite all the stories you hear about poor hospital security (from petty crime to stolen babies), I have entered and got lost wandering around every hospital my husband has been in. Invariably, no one has challenged me. 'Signposting is absolutely hopeless: non-existent, inconsistent; or in such impenetrable jargon that no outsider has a clue.
'Some reception desks, it turns out, are staffed only at certain times or particular days of the week, and the staffed hours bear no relation to when new patients actually arrive. For whose benefit, you ask, are they manned at all? 'Sometimes I had to winkle semi-willing staff out of adjacent side rooms where they were on a break.
'One newer hospital of my acquaintance, a positive paean to the Private Finance Initiative, has an atrium that rivals any major airport with ranks of reception desks to match, except that only the central desk is staffed - so there are muddled queues. 'It is too expensive to staff the other desk said a grumpy porter. All this public space - which has to be cleaned, heated and lit, if not actually staffed - is an extravagance. 'It is also intimidating for semi-mobile patients, who find themselves having to hobble enormous distances, even if lifts and automatic doors make it a great deal easier than in older hospitals. 'Why was the money spent on a lavish atrium rather than separate wards rather than separate bathroom facilities for men and women?
DOCTORS
'The doctors I dealt with were, without exception, informative and calming. It was almost as though they had graduated from a course in "dealing with patients and their relatives as intelligent people and how not to alarm them". Perhaps they had. 'I didn't feel at any time that the top specialists were patronising me or my husband, and they seemed to make conscious efforts to avoid using impenetrable technicalities.
'I do not doubt, though, that having doctors in the family and long familiarity with the medical minutiae of my husband's illness probably helped communication. In general, the junior doctors seemed more off-hand.
'If I have a complaint, it is the general invisibility of doctors outside the ward round. Of course, they have other places to be: in the operating theatre, seeing acute patients, lecturing. 'But they seem to inhabit a planet from which they occasionally descend, with a certain delay for effect, at the behest of ever-changing teams of nurses. The continuing, and glaring, doctor-nurse divide left me feeling that some doctors found it easier to talk to me than to the nursing staff.
VISITORS
'As visitor, you would go into the ward - sometimes you had to ring to be admitted, sometimes not - and want to announce yourself to someone. 'I felt that someone should know I was there; that it would be better not to wander around the beds looking for my husband (sometimes he was in a side ward, sometimes not); and it would be useful to know before I saw him how he was. 'No one, even at official visiting times, routinely met the visitors. Official visiting times existed, and there were rules discouraging young children and more than two visitors per patient. But hospitals seem to make a virtue of permissiveness. 'When my husband was very ill, I was grateful for the flexibility. But permissive visiting makes for a lot of coming and going. 'Not enforcing the rule about young children and multiple visitors made for more noise and bustle than my husband easily tolerated. It was, frankly, an imposition.
NURSES
'WHEN my husband was admitted to the hospital ward, I saw a notice on the wall behind the nurses' desk team saying: We operate a team nursing system." I soon discovered that this meant that no one individual was in charge - everyone was equal. 'The combination of having no one visibly in cahrge and incomprehensible shift patterns meant neither patients nor visitors had any obvious continuity.
'My husband seemed to receive his medication with punctilious regularity, and was duly recorded, along with any problems, in the handover log. 'But there were slips and times when the log was completed with a delay: "Whoops, I forgot, but I know I gave him his dose . . ." 'Every individual seemed to have a high sense of personal responsibility. Yet the fact no one demonstrably in charge left doubts. It all seemed a bit haphazard.
'I was not made to feel unwelcome. On the contrary, at mealtimes I was cheerfully called up for feeding duty. I just felt that a single, obvious contact point every day would have been desirable. The counter-argument, of course, is that everyone is too busy and hierarchies belong in the ark.
NOISE
'Thank goodness: with the introduction of individual screens, the age of the blaring TV at the end of the ward is over in many hospitals. 'But it was not only the visiting times, as my husband told me, that could be noisy. Nights were also noisy, and only partly because some patients became agitated. 'My husband's biggest complaint, though, was about the nurses and their chatter and laughter. He was on a ward for patients who'd had brain operations or suffered brain injuries. They really needed quiet. Again, who is a hospital for?
HYGIENE
Ward hygiene was good. The hand-washing and disinfectant messages have got through to the staff. I have to say, though, that I didn't like seeing nurses arrive and leave in uniform.
'I was surprised that most patients, except the very ill, were encouraged to wear their own clothes, which meant I had a pile of dirty laundry to take home a couple of times a week. I have a car and washing machine, but some relatives might not.
'What I found shocking was how often nurses seemed to prefer the patient to soil himself rather than help him to the commode. 'At one point, my husband was well enough to be detached from a catheter, but still too ill or slow to get up or reach for the urinal in time. A more considerate attitude by the nurses, not necessarily more of them, could have reduced the number of 'accidents'.
'In two hospitals, I complained several times about the lack of loo paper and general filth of the lavatory facilities for visitors. Nurses and ward staff say it is nothing to do with them and I could never find anyone who'd admit to having responsibility.
FOOD
'Meal service was separated from nursing everywhere and seemed to have a life of its own. 'The times were generally not too uncivilised, and the quality and choice were better than both of us had feared. 'My husband could also ask for toast or an ice-cream at almost any time if he had missed a meal or felt peckish. He lost a lot of weight while recovering from his operation and enjoyed these little extras.
'But, oh, the service! OK, so you don't expect restaurant standard or even charm. But I think you could expect to have the plates set down somewhere where you might be able to reach them in the order you might want to eat what is on them. 'And the amount of time allotted for eating was minimal, so the hungry patient feels pressured to gobble, and anyone who has difficulty eating simply gives up. Those who made a fuss generally got fed, but often had to wait so long that the food was cold.
'Expectations about patients' ability to eat when in bed were unrealistic. While nurses and meal staff equipped themselves with disposable plastic aprons off a big roll, patients had to make do with a tiny paper napkin. 'A disposable plastic bib or a cloak like the ones you have at the hairdresser's would be a vast improvement.
'It would also be a good idea for someone to review all the menus for ' eatability'. Roast chicken came in joints and was clearly popular, but my husband could not have begun to tackle his if I hadn't been there to cut it up; he could not even lift it! 'Anything that cannot be picked up easily by hand, fork or spoon is a nightmare. Even boneless meat, if it is in one piece or drowned in gravy, is a challenge. I especially dreaded 'pea' days - they ended up all over the bed.'
TELEPHONES
'A lot of people complain about the tariff for hospital phones. All the hospitals my husband has been in, though, allowed patients to use their mobiles, which most did with discretion. That's good.
TELEVISION
'I know that if I were in hospital and reasonably conscious, I would love to have my own TV and radio. The arrival of bedside TV and games consoles - a bit like those in passenger planes - is a great advance.
'Aha, but the NHS has news for you. It is not as simple as it seems. First of all, you need to pay, and while I would be happy to do so, the system seemed expressly designed to extract the maximum amount of money in a rather deceptive way. 'You could pay for a day, three days or a week. But the time was consecutive. So, if you had an operation on day two and were incapable of watching TV that day, you lost that day. To pay for just one day, though, was much more expensive.
'The method of payment left much to be desired. All right, you can't expect nurses to collect TV fees. But you have to buy a card at a slot machine that says it gives change and accepts notes, but doesn't, or pay by credit card on-screen. 'For me, able-bodied and equipped with a mobile phone and credit card, this was complicated, didn't work initially and necessitated two frustrated calls to the inquiry desk.
'For my husband, with fingers that didn't work well, problems with his voice and difficulties sitting up (before the operation), setting up the TV payments would have been impossible. In the week after the operation, it was even worse. 'Plus, his bed was moved first to a different ward and then to various positions in the ward. Each move meant having to re-start the TV, using a long ID number. Mostly, he gave up. 'And a head operation meant wearing a headset was not just uncomfortable but impossible, yet no earpiece was on offer.
Source
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Parent fury at anti-Christmas talk in school
I note that a number of conservatives have been peeved by this but I see no problem. It is a good fundamentalist Christian teaching that Christmas is a commercialized pagan holiday. Does any serious Christian believe that Father Christmas, reindeer, Christmas trees and Frosty the snowman are in the Bible? JWs just put their money where their mouth is. The only anniversary that Christ commanded his followers to observe was Passover. Should a school censor the Bible?
A school has come under fire for allowing Jehovah's Witnesses to tell pupils why they choose not to celebrate Christmas. But today leaders at Kirkby's Westvale primary said the talk was just part of its commitment to promote tolerance among all faiths, which is clearly stated to parents in its official brochure. The row surrounds a 30-minute religious education lesson at the Melverley Road school.
On Wednesday, parents were invited in to discuss why they were Jehovah's Witnesses and what their faith entails. This included the fact the religion does not celebrate Christmas - believing it and Easter are based on, or largely influenced by, paganism.
The school hoped the visit would mean students would be more understanding as to why the Jehovah's Witnesses' children were "being excused from coming in for Christmas nativity". However, the fact parents at the 250-pupil school were not asked for formal consent prior to the talk has sparked anger. One man whose eight-year-old daughter attends the school said: "How can it be that pupils who are Jehovah's Witnesses can be excused from lessons, yet the first thing I knew about this talk is when my daughter came home? "We should have been consulted. I am livid and would not have allowed my child to take part. To say I'm furious with the school is an understatement."
But headteacher Gillian Holland said the talk was the latest in a number by visitors of different faiths as part of a government expectation that schools tackle community cohesion. The school brochure made it clear RE lessons would explore all faiths and parents could make use of its "open door" policy to raise concern. "We are a Christian school but have a duty to promote tolerance and understanding of other faiths. "We encourage parents of all faiths to come in all the time. "They are accompanied by teachers and teaching assistants and will just talk about their traditions and what it is based on. "When pupils see their children not coming in for Christmas nativity they have more of an understanding why."
Source
British woman driven 200 miles to give Caesarian birth to premature twins and then finds after delivery that the hospital has only one incubator available!
Vast lack of facilities. Even a Caesarian was too hard for three hospitals. And as for incubators for premmies! What do you think you are? In the 21st century? And this is in London, not on some remote island!
A new mother was sent to four different hospitals in four days to give birth only to have her premature twins separated after they were born. Angela Breeds, 30, was forced to make a 200 mile trip because surgeons were unable to perform a necessary caesarian section at the first three hospitals she was sent to. And when she finally gave birth to Suzie and Sonny, the twins were separated after just five minutes because of a lack of cots.
Ms Breeds, a self employed hairdresser from Stanford-le-Hope said: "I'm just so angry about being pushed around everywhere. "Then when I found out they had to be separated I was completely gutted."
The mother's ordeal started on December 3 when doctors at King's College Hospital in south east London told Miss Breeds she needed a caesarian section because one of the twins was not getting enough nutrition. She was transferred 31 miles away to Basildon Hospital in Essex that night for the operation. But after she arrived, she was told the hospital did not have the right facilities for the procedure so she was sent to Peterborough Hospital in Cambridgeshire, 96 miles away.
She waited in the hospital for three days before being told surgeons at the facility could not perform the operation either. So she was again transferred to Whipps Cross Hospital in east London, another 86 miles away, on Sunday December 7 where she gave birth the following day. But there were not enough incubator cots for both tots and within five minutes of giving birth, Sonny was taken away from his mother and sister to Royal London Hospital in Whitechapel.
Katrina Coulson, an NHS East of England spokeswoman said the NHS in the region was hoping to increase the number of special and intensive care cots
Source
British Prison Bans Crucifix From New Chapel to Avoid Offending Muslim Inmates
A British prison has decided not to include a crucifix in the decor of its new chapel for fear of offending Muslim inmates.
The `multi-faith space' at HMP Lewes is divided in two sections, according to the Daily Mail. One half-features heated footbaths for Muslim worshipers; the other side, dedicated to Christian prayer, features a removable altar and a plain wooden cross - also removable.
Plans to include the traditional Christian crucifix were erased from the chapel's blueprints on the advice of a Muslim imam, the Daily Mail reported. "We see this as a vastly improved facility and very much welcome the fact that the prison has an imam." Amanda Hamblin, chair of the prison's Independent Monitoring Board told the Mail."
A source from the prison disagreed, reportedly telling the Mail, "It's just the normal PC brigade poking its nose in when it isn't needed."
Source
MAKE SHARIA PART OF UK LAW, SAYS TOP BRITISH LAWYER
SHARIA law will "inevitably" become part of the legal system and work should begin now to incorporate it into British law, a leading barrister said last night. Stephen Hockman, QC, former chairman of the Bar Council, spoke at a meeting organised by the website Islam4UK, where another speaker was Anjem Choudary, former head of banned fanatical group al-Muhajiroun.
Sharia law has become associated with executions, stonings and hands being cut off. But Mr Hockman told the Daily Express: "Given our substantial Muslim population, it is vital that we look at ways to integrate Muslim culture into our traditions. "Otherwise we will find that there is a significant section of our society which is increasingly alienated, with very dangerous results. "There should perhaps be a standing committee comprising Parliamentarians, lawyers and religious leaders to consider how this could be achieved and what legal changes might be framed."
The meeting was held at the National Liberal Club in Whitehall. Mr Hockman added of Sharia law: "The position of women is one area where the emphasis is, to say the least, rather different. "I am also sometimes confronted by those who point out that there are elements within the Muslim community who pose a threat to our very security. "My answer is not to dispute them but to suggest that it is for those of us forming part of the majority community to take active steps to address such problems."
Source
Anglicans give Christmas a multicultural makeover
The Church of England has backed plans to turn Christmas into a more multicultural event
It may have become traditional for angels, three wise men and the baby Jesus to play a starring role in the festive season. But now Hindu snowmen, a Chinese dragon and a Jewish temple are also to be included in an attempt to make the celebrations more inclusive of Britain's diverse communities. Westminster Abbey will unveil life-size snowmen that Anglican clergy hope will help to improve relations and dialogue between other faiths. Dressed in turbans, with bindi dots on their foreheads, they are intended to demonstrate that Christmas should not be exclusively for Christians.
The Rev Jane Hedges, a canon at the abbey, said that it was important to encourage people from other faiths to join in the celebrations. "We've done this as it creates a good opportunity for Christians to meet and hear about the stories of people of other faiths," she said. "Christmas is an opportunity for everyone to stop and think and is a great opportunity for the different faiths to talk to one another. "Wherever you're coming from there should be something to celebrate at Christmas."
She pointed out that for Muslims they can appreciate the story of Christ's birth because it is included in the Koran, adding that the Hindu snowmen were not an attempt to dumb down. "Strictly speaking, the message of Christmas is about the birth of Christ, but it has a much broader message of peace and goodwill."
Meanwhile in the diocese of Liverpool, a nativity is being staged that features a Chinese dragon and lantern procession. It has been backed by the Archbishop of York, Dr John Sentamu, who is taking part in the event via a big screen. The nativity, which is being performed in Scouse, marks the end of Liverpool's year as the capital of culture. Annie Spiers, who co-ordinated the event, said that the nativity aimed to give "a fresh slant" to a familiar story.
However, some traditionalists warned that making Christmas multicultural and multi-faith threatened to undermine the Christian message. Alison Ruoff, a General Synod member, said: "Christmas is a time for everyone, but the Church needs to be confident in its message, which is that Christ came to save people of all faiths and none." She added: "Why are they putting such a ridiculous spin on Christmas? It's a nonsense and makes me really quite cross."
The Rev Rod Thomas, chair of Reform - a leading evangelical group, also expressed concern. "People want Christians to celebrate Christmas without compromise," he said. "It's only by doing this that people of other faiths respect what we stand for, not by attempting to introduce something that is sub-Christian. "This all seems very bizarre."
Source
Britain and computers just don't get on: "One of the worst blunders ever seen on Whitehall saw a 'cost-cutting' computer system end up spouting answers in German and leaving taxpayers with a bill of more than 80million pounds. A damning report from MPs today accuses the Department for Transport of 'stupendous incompetence' in its management of a multi-million pound efficiency drive. Workers were left struggling with an IT system that issued messages in German, wrongly recorded that staff were off sick and randomly confiscated staff holidays. Edward Leigh, the Conservative MP who chairs the public accounts committee, said: 'The Department for Transport planned and implemented its shared corporate services project with stupendous incompetence. 'Department for Transport staff do not trust the system, which is hardly surprising when we hear that on occasion it took to issuing messages in German.' Tory MP Richard Bacon, another member of the committee, said: 'We saw the failure to test computer systems adequately with tax credits and with the Passport Agency. 'These were well-known bear-traps but the Department for Transport blundered straight into them. It is way past time that Whitehall learned to stop making the same old mistakes again and again.' "
I note that a number of conservatives have been peeved by this but I see no problem. It is a good fundamentalist Christian teaching that Christmas is a commercialized pagan holiday. Does any serious Christian believe that Father Christmas, reindeer, Christmas trees and Frosty the snowman are in the Bible? JWs just put their money where their mouth is. The only anniversary that Christ commanded his followers to observe was Passover. Should a school censor the Bible?
A school has come under fire for allowing Jehovah's Witnesses to tell pupils why they choose not to celebrate Christmas. But today leaders at Kirkby's Westvale primary said the talk was just part of its commitment to promote tolerance among all faiths, which is clearly stated to parents in its official brochure. The row surrounds a 30-minute religious education lesson at the Melverley Road school.
On Wednesday, parents were invited in to discuss why they were Jehovah's Witnesses and what their faith entails. This included the fact the religion does not celebrate Christmas - believing it and Easter are based on, or largely influenced by, paganism.
The school hoped the visit would mean students would be more understanding as to why the Jehovah's Witnesses' children were "being excused from coming in for Christmas nativity". However, the fact parents at the 250-pupil school were not asked for formal consent prior to the talk has sparked anger. One man whose eight-year-old daughter attends the school said: "How can it be that pupils who are Jehovah's Witnesses can be excused from lessons, yet the first thing I knew about this talk is when my daughter came home? "We should have been consulted. I am livid and would not have allowed my child to take part. To say I'm furious with the school is an understatement."
But headteacher Gillian Holland said the talk was the latest in a number by visitors of different faiths as part of a government expectation that schools tackle community cohesion. The school brochure made it clear RE lessons would explore all faiths and parents could make use of its "open door" policy to raise concern. "We are a Christian school but have a duty to promote tolerance and understanding of other faiths. "We encourage parents of all faiths to come in all the time. "They are accompanied by teachers and teaching assistants and will just talk about their traditions and what it is based on. "When pupils see their children not coming in for Christmas nativity they have more of an understanding why."
Source
British woman driven 200 miles to give Caesarian birth to premature twins and then finds after delivery that the hospital has only one incubator available!
Vast lack of facilities. Even a Caesarian was too hard for three hospitals. And as for incubators for premmies! What do you think you are? In the 21st century? And this is in London, not on some remote island!
A new mother was sent to four different hospitals in four days to give birth only to have her premature twins separated after they were born. Angela Breeds, 30, was forced to make a 200 mile trip because surgeons were unable to perform a necessary caesarian section at the first three hospitals she was sent to. And when she finally gave birth to Suzie and Sonny, the twins were separated after just five minutes because of a lack of cots.
Ms Breeds, a self employed hairdresser from Stanford-le-Hope said: "I'm just so angry about being pushed around everywhere. "Then when I found out they had to be separated I was completely gutted."
The mother's ordeal started on December 3 when doctors at King's College Hospital in south east London told Miss Breeds she needed a caesarian section because one of the twins was not getting enough nutrition. She was transferred 31 miles away to Basildon Hospital in Essex that night for the operation. But after she arrived, she was told the hospital did not have the right facilities for the procedure so she was sent to Peterborough Hospital in Cambridgeshire, 96 miles away.
She waited in the hospital for three days before being told surgeons at the facility could not perform the operation either. So she was again transferred to Whipps Cross Hospital in east London, another 86 miles away, on Sunday December 7 where she gave birth the following day. But there were not enough incubator cots for both tots and within five minutes of giving birth, Sonny was taken away from his mother and sister to Royal London Hospital in Whitechapel.
Katrina Coulson, an NHS East of England spokeswoman said the NHS in the region was hoping to increase the number of special and intensive care cots
Source
British Prison Bans Crucifix From New Chapel to Avoid Offending Muslim Inmates
A British prison has decided not to include a crucifix in the decor of its new chapel for fear of offending Muslim inmates.
The `multi-faith space' at HMP Lewes is divided in two sections, according to the Daily Mail. One half-features heated footbaths for Muslim worshipers; the other side, dedicated to Christian prayer, features a removable altar and a plain wooden cross - also removable.
Plans to include the traditional Christian crucifix were erased from the chapel's blueprints on the advice of a Muslim imam, the Daily Mail reported. "We see this as a vastly improved facility and very much welcome the fact that the prison has an imam." Amanda Hamblin, chair of the prison's Independent Monitoring Board told the Mail."
A source from the prison disagreed, reportedly telling the Mail, "It's just the normal PC brigade poking its nose in when it isn't needed."
Source
MAKE SHARIA PART OF UK LAW, SAYS TOP BRITISH LAWYER
SHARIA law will "inevitably" become part of the legal system and work should begin now to incorporate it into British law, a leading barrister said last night. Stephen Hockman, QC, former chairman of the Bar Council, spoke at a meeting organised by the website Islam4UK, where another speaker was Anjem Choudary, former head of banned fanatical group al-Muhajiroun.
Sharia law has become associated with executions, stonings and hands being cut off. But Mr Hockman told the Daily Express: "Given our substantial Muslim population, it is vital that we look at ways to integrate Muslim culture into our traditions. "Otherwise we will find that there is a significant section of our society which is increasingly alienated, with very dangerous results. "There should perhaps be a standing committee comprising Parliamentarians, lawyers and religious leaders to consider how this could be achieved and what legal changes might be framed."
The meeting was held at the National Liberal Club in Whitehall. Mr Hockman added of Sharia law: "The position of women is one area where the emphasis is, to say the least, rather different. "I am also sometimes confronted by those who point out that there are elements within the Muslim community who pose a threat to our very security. "My answer is not to dispute them but to suggest that it is for those of us forming part of the majority community to take active steps to address such problems."
Source
Anglicans give Christmas a multicultural makeover
The Church of England has backed plans to turn Christmas into a more multicultural event
It may have become traditional for angels, three wise men and the baby Jesus to play a starring role in the festive season. But now Hindu snowmen, a Chinese dragon and a Jewish temple are also to be included in an attempt to make the celebrations more inclusive of Britain's diverse communities. Westminster Abbey will unveil life-size snowmen that Anglican clergy hope will help to improve relations and dialogue between other faiths. Dressed in turbans, with bindi dots on their foreheads, they are intended to demonstrate that Christmas should not be exclusively for Christians.
The Rev Jane Hedges, a canon at the abbey, said that it was important to encourage people from other faiths to join in the celebrations. "We've done this as it creates a good opportunity for Christians to meet and hear about the stories of people of other faiths," she said. "Christmas is an opportunity for everyone to stop and think and is a great opportunity for the different faiths to talk to one another. "Wherever you're coming from there should be something to celebrate at Christmas."
She pointed out that for Muslims they can appreciate the story of Christ's birth because it is included in the Koran, adding that the Hindu snowmen were not an attempt to dumb down. "Strictly speaking, the message of Christmas is about the birth of Christ, but it has a much broader message of peace and goodwill."
Meanwhile in the diocese of Liverpool, a nativity is being staged that features a Chinese dragon and lantern procession. It has been backed by the Archbishop of York, Dr John Sentamu, who is taking part in the event via a big screen. The nativity, which is being performed in Scouse, marks the end of Liverpool's year as the capital of culture. Annie Spiers, who co-ordinated the event, said that the nativity aimed to give "a fresh slant" to a familiar story.
However, some traditionalists warned that making Christmas multicultural and multi-faith threatened to undermine the Christian message. Alison Ruoff, a General Synod member, said: "Christmas is a time for everyone, but the Church needs to be confident in its message, which is that Christ came to save people of all faiths and none." She added: "Why are they putting such a ridiculous spin on Christmas? It's a nonsense and makes me really quite cross."
The Rev Rod Thomas, chair of Reform - a leading evangelical group, also expressed concern. "People want Christians to celebrate Christmas without compromise," he said. "It's only by doing this that people of other faiths respect what we stand for, not by attempting to introduce something that is sub-Christian. "This all seems very bizarre."
Source
Britain and computers just don't get on: "One of the worst blunders ever seen on Whitehall saw a 'cost-cutting' computer system end up spouting answers in German and leaving taxpayers with a bill of more than 80million pounds. A damning report from MPs today accuses the Department for Transport of 'stupendous incompetence' in its management of a multi-million pound efficiency drive. Workers were left struggling with an IT system that issued messages in German, wrongly recorded that staff were off sick and randomly confiscated staff holidays. Edward Leigh, the Conservative MP who chairs the public accounts committee, said: 'The Department for Transport planned and implemented its shared corporate services project with stupendous incompetence. 'Department for Transport staff do not trust the system, which is hardly surprising when we hear that on occasion it took to issuing messages in German.' Tory MP Richard Bacon, another member of the committee, said: 'We saw the failure to test computer systems adequately with tax credits and with the Passport Agency. 'These were well-known bear-traps but the Department for Transport blundered straight into them. It is way past time that Whitehall learned to stop making the same old mistakes again and again.' "
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Utter nonsense: After 130 years of fundraising, British Salvationists told to stop rattling collecting tins because it might 'offend other religions'
For 130 years they have been part of Christmas, filling the air in towns across the land with music and carols. But one thing is missing from the repertoire of Salvation Army bands this year - the percussion of rattling tins. Members have been forbidden to shake their charity tins - even if it's done in time to the music - in case it harasses or intimidates people. One said she had been told it might also offend other religions. Guidelines for branches organising public collections say tinholders should simply keep the tin still.
It means that when the brass bands start up they can rock and roll all they want - but if they shake and rattle, it could put them in conflict with the law. Councils and police can enforce the no-rattle rule and have powers to prosecute or ban offenders. The restriction was branded 'bonkers' yesterday both by donors and longserving Salvation Army volunteers. One collector told the Daily Mail: 'I've been doing this for more than 40 years and I fail to see how rattling a tin could cause offence. If I was shaking a tambourine I could do it all day - if I shake my tin, I could end up in court.'
The 'Silent Night' rattle ban manifested itself at the weekend in Uxbridge, West London, when musicians from two local branches performed outside a shopping mall. (They were outside because traders complained last year they were too loud to play inside). Tony Keywood, shopping with his wife Sheila, was among a crowd enjoying the carols and stepped forward to make a donation. 'I jokingly told them off for not shaking their tins,' said Mr Keywood, 78, a retired telecoms executive. 'They said they weren't allowed to do that in case it caused offence to other religions. They said they'd been told rattling a tin was considered to be intimidating. 'I don't know who makes up these rules but I suspect it will have something to do with human rights. I do feel Britain has lost its way on things like this.'
Laws on public collections are long-established, but until the recent proliferation of so-called 'charity muggers' were not widely utilised. Fundraisers have to be licensed, usually by the local authority, police or landowner. Councils and police can decide whom to license and how the rules are enforced. The Salvation Army relies heavily on public generosity and believes street collections help to foster good relations.
Guidance now, however, is that members should not shake their tins. A Salvation Army source said: 'We don't have a formal policy of "You Shall Not Rattle" but we always act within the law. 'Some authorities specifically ask us not to shake our tins. It is seen as harassment, or making people feel uncomfortable. I don't think it's to do with other religions. But it can make people feel we're putting them under pressure to give.' A spokesman added: 'We want people to donate from the best of motives, so we advise collectors to avoid rattling their tins or asking people directly for money when stood on the high street.'
Source
`Forced marriage' doctor, Humayra Abedin, freed by Bangladesh court
Under the glare of international publicity
An NHS doctor who was held captive by her family in Bangladesh for four months while they plotted a forced marriage is expected to return to Britain in the next few days after a court ruling in Dhaka. Humayra Abedin, 33, who is training to become a GP at Whipps Cross Hospital in East London, was allegedly beaten, drugged and held against her will after being duped into flying to Bangladesh on August 3 when family members claimed that her mother was seriously ill.
Dr Abedin has a Hindu boyfriend in London, which angered her Muslim family, according to reports. They were preparing to marry her to a Muslim stranger, it is claimed. A friend of Dr Abedin, who had lived with her in East Ham, sounded the alarm after receiving a text on August 11. "Please help me. My life is in danger. They have locked me in house. My job is at stake. They are making my life hell," the message said.
Yesterday, Judge Syed Mahmod Hossain ordered Dr Abedin's parents to return her passport, driver's licence and credit card. "It perplexes me as to why the parents kept her confined and interfered with her personal life. I am shocked," he said. Dr Abedin told Sky News last night: "I'm relieved that I'm free, I'm happy. I just want to say thank you to all those who supported and helped me. I'm fine and I'm feeling happy. I don't have any bad feelings towards them. They are my parents so I don't have any bad feelings." Dr Abedin's father cried out on hearing the verdict and had to be assisted as he left the courtroom. He said that he and his wife had done nothing wrong. "She has not been held captive. These allegations are all false," he said.
Dr Abedin's lawyer, Sara Hossain, said: "Our courts have shown that we can guarantee the liberty of our citizens. This is quite a precedent."
The doctor's boyfriend, a 44-year-old Bangladeshi software engineer, had alleged that Dr Abedin's Muslim parents had bound and gagged her, held her captive in a house in Dhaka, and pleaded with her to marry a Muslim. He said that death threats had been issued against his family in Bangladesh. "They told her they'd prefer her to die than return to London," he said.
A Metropolitan Police investigation began in June after allegations that the doctor's mother and uncle tried to hold her captive in London. Last week, the High Court issued an injunction under the new Forced Marriage Act, demanding that Dr Abedin be allowed to return to Britain. Though the Act is not enforceable in Bangladesh it was hoped that it would place pressure on the Bangladeshi authorities.
Dr Abedin trained in Bangladesh before coming to Britain in 2002, when she studied for a master's degree in public health at Leeds University. She was to start in a GP surgery in August. In the first nine months of this year, the Government's Forced Marriage Unit was contacted by 1,308 callers sounding the alert over suspected cases.
Source
Changes to "incorrect" lyrics of Christmas carols
We read:
10,000 Polish women get NHS abortions
Ten thousand Polish women had abortions in Britain last year, it has been reported, in procedures which are thought to have cost the NHS between 5million and 10m pounds. Thousands of the women are thought to have come to Britain specifically for the procedure, which is illegal in Poland. People coming to Britain as temporary workers are given a National Insurance number, which allows them to register with a doctor and have NHS treatment.
Britain is thought to be a particularly popular destination as terminations can be carried out as late as 24 weeks into a pregnancy. In several other EU countries, abortions can not be carried out after 12 weeks. A pill given to women under nine weeks pregnant costs the NHS about 500 pounds while an operation necessary for those further into pregnancy costs about 1,600 including after-care.
The figures were reportedly disclosed by the Polish Federation for Women and Family Planning. Aleksandra Jozefowska, a spokesman for the Federation, told The Sun: "On Polish internet sites you can find lots of information on how to obtain an abortion in Britain. And every week I have two or three phone calls from women who want to know about abortion in England."
One unnamed London doctor was reported to have told the newspaper: "As long as they get an NHS number, they haven't got a problem. They can say: 'I didn't know I was pregnant until I got here, I'm in an impossible situation and need help'."
Source
British Headteachers told to 'high-five' pupils to improve exam results
This is just more of the feelgood approach that has already failed
Trainee head teachers are being told to give pupils in tough areas high-fives in an effort to improve exam results. A Government-backed training scheme is urging would-be heads to give pupils the U.S-style welcome to help forge 'positive relationships'.
Sir Iain Hall, training director for the scheme called Future Leaders, is passing on the advice at intensive residential courses after visiting schools in the U.S. He is also recommending a technique which involves pupils gathering in a circle and applauding one of their number, with the head saying the pupils name and 'we appreciate you' and the children cheering that child.
But his suggestions brought claims that heads were being asked to 'ingratiate' themselves with pupils, undermining their authority. Under Sir Iain's approach, heads would greet children at classroom doors by giving them high-fives - slapping their palms with arms extended - or shaking their hands. 'When your children come into the classroom, how do you greet them?' he asked a meeting of prospective heads, the Times Educational Supplement reported.
'Whether it is a high-five, it is touching a child's hand, it is shaking their hands, we teach our Future Leaders to stand at the classroom door and greet every kid who comes through it. It's about establishing positive relationships all the time, shaking the hands of kids that go past, giving those high-fives.'
Sir Iain, a 'superhead' who was knighted in 2002 for services to education, revealed he had been inspired by visits to schools in tough parts of America. He was recommending the circle and applauding technique after seeing it at a New York school. 'It is getting that positive relationship where children can relax and think "somebody believes in me",' he said. Asked whether English pupils would respond to high-fives, he said: 'If I believe it will work with every student, then it will.'
But Anastasia de Waal, of the social policy think-tank Civitas, warned that high-fiving by senior staff could hamper attempts to impose discipline. 'We are struggling to assert authority in schools. 'I fear this is just going to look ridiculous and actually some pupils are going to be moderately insulted by it. 'I don't think they will see it as cool and in fact will see it as deeply uncool so it will backfire.'
She added: 'This is characteristic of much about secondary schools these days, that everything should be relevant to pupils and fun,' she added. 'But what makes things relevant is when children understand their work and can apply it to the real world.' She said some primary schools in Finland invited pupils to shake hands with teachers at the end of lessons. 'This is more about showing teachers respect,' she said.
'We are approaching this completely the wrong way round. We should be trying to generate respect for teachers rather than encouraging them to ingratiate themselves with pupils.'
The Future Leaders scheme aims to tackle a growing shortage of heads in inner-city areas. It is part-funded by the Government, through the National College of School Leadership and Specialist Schools and Academies Trust, and the charity ARK (Absolute Return for Kids), which was set up by millionaire financier Arpad Busson, fiance of actress Uma Thurman.
Andrew Day, deputy head of Greenford High in Ealing, West London, has taken part in the Future Leaders training scheme and is an advocate for the high-fives approach, claiming that pupils can relate to it. 'It is what they do. It is all about how they perceive you. The moment you start working with them, they know you care,' he said.
High-fiving is thought to have originated in the U.S. in 1970s, probably during basketball or baseball games.
Source
Extra judges drafted in to hear British immigration appeals
Extra judges are being drafted in to deal with more than 8,000 asylum and immigration appeals a year that threaten to overload the courts. The move is one of a series of steps to tackle the rise in appeals that have delayed other cases for a year or more. Lord Justice May, the President of the Queen's Bench Division, told The Times that as well as drafting in extra High Court judges, senior barristers and circuit judges had been appointed to sit as deputy High Court judges, doubling the normal number of judges on this work to 15.
The extra judicial manpower, which has already reduced delays, is an interim measure pending more drastic action by the Government. Ministers are expected to announce plans to move the bulk of immigration work out of the High Court altogether and into the new Tribunals Service, probably by next June. That will lead to High Court judges being relieved of thousands of cases a year, which will instead be heard by senior immigration judges and only occasionally, where absolutely necessary, by a High Court judge.
The rise in immigration work is partly because of the increased volume of immigration decisions made by the UK Border Agency, which is dealing with record numbers of applications. In 2006 it removed 16,330 failed asylum seekers, excluding dependants, and in 2007 deported more than 4,000 foreign prisoners. Another factor is the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants) Act 2004, which replaced a two-tier system of appeals with a single-tier system. The High Court therefore became the only place of appeal from a tribunal. The volume of cases reflects that people do not accept the decision of the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal and seek to have the decision reconsidered or apply for judicial review.
A previous attempt by the Government to end the right of judicial review in immigration cases prompted widespread criticism and was thrown out of Parliament. But this move to devolve the work to the Tribunals Service could achieve the same result, although in a way that Lord Justice May, who took up his post in October, hopes will not be "controversial". He said: "This was a problem in terms of work overload because important cases were not being heard promptly and we had delays of up to a year."
The emergency measures have been in place for a few months, with judges being found from other areas to tackle the backlog, he said. "It was a matter of concern but it has improved." Between December 2007 and last month, the tally of cases waiting to be dealt with was cut by about 1,100 to 3,500, although that figure does not include hundreds not yet on the list as they are awaiting final decisions.
Philip Havers, QC, a leading specialist in judicial review challenges, said: "I had one case that was waiting nearly two years, involving a challenge by a doctor to the Health Service Commission. The Administrative Court was completely snowed under by immigration and asylum cases." But the delays have improved, he said. Now he was being offered a date next month or in February for a one-day case; or from February on for a two-day case. "That's as it should be - it has completely transformed." Steps would need to be taken to ensure that the problem did not arise again, he said.
Four regional administrative courts will be set up next year in Cardiff, Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds. Although driven by a wish to move work outside London, it will also relieve immigration cases. Senior judges have described the pressure on the High Court's Administrative Court, which hears the asylum and immigration cases, as "intense" and given warning that it is causing "unacceptable delays to the court's work".
The appeals backlog is adding to pressure on the Court of Appeal. Sir Anthony Clarke, Master of the Rolls, has said that since 2005 the Court of Appeal has had a 77 per cent rise in applications to appeal in asylum and immigration cases. The increase has put "significant pressure" on the resources of the Court of Appeal both in terms of numbers of staff and lawyers who prepare the cases and in terms of judicial time, he said. It was "wholly disproportionate" for "such cases to be considered by the most senior judges who sit in the Court of Appeal," Sir Anthony said.
The Lord Chief Justice, then Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, first flagged up the "unacceptable delays" because of the pressure of asylum and immigration work in April. In 2007, the Administrative Court received 6,694 claims for judicial review - challenges to decisions by government or other public bodies. Asylum and immigration cases made up two thirds.
In addition, the court has to deal with another nearly 4,000 "reconsideration" cases, where asylum seekers are appealing against a refusal first by the UK Borders Agency and then by a senior immigration judge to have their case reconsidered. In all, that makes more than 8,000 cases, or two thirds of the workload of the Administrative Court. The vast majority, Lord Phillips said, "were found to have no merit in law" and failed.
The crisis prompted a threat last year by the Public Law Project, a group that brings judicial review cases, to ponder legal action against Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, stating that the delays amounted to a breach of article six of the European Convention on Human Rights which guarantees an effective court system. `What message does it send?'
Source
Another big British bureaucratic bungle: "A group of MPs has called on the Government to apologise to Equitable Life policyholders and to pay them compensation, thus turning up the heat on Gordon Brown before a formal decision early next year. The Public Administration Select Committee said that it "strongly supports" the findings of a report into the near-collapse of Europe's oldest mutual published by Ann Abraham, the Parliamentary Ombudsman, in July. Ms Abraham found three government departments guilty of ten counts of maladministration over Equitable, berating their failure to spot signs that it was in trouble. She said that the Government should say sorry and set up a compensation fund within six months."
For 130 years they have been part of Christmas, filling the air in towns across the land with music and carols. But one thing is missing from the repertoire of Salvation Army bands this year - the percussion of rattling tins. Members have been forbidden to shake their charity tins - even if it's done in time to the music - in case it harasses or intimidates people. One said she had been told it might also offend other religions. Guidelines for branches organising public collections say tinholders should simply keep the tin still.
It means that when the brass bands start up they can rock and roll all they want - but if they shake and rattle, it could put them in conflict with the law. Councils and police can enforce the no-rattle rule and have powers to prosecute or ban offenders. The restriction was branded 'bonkers' yesterday both by donors and longserving Salvation Army volunteers. One collector told the Daily Mail: 'I've been doing this for more than 40 years and I fail to see how rattling a tin could cause offence. If I was shaking a tambourine I could do it all day - if I shake my tin, I could end up in court.'
The 'Silent Night' rattle ban manifested itself at the weekend in Uxbridge, West London, when musicians from two local branches performed outside a shopping mall. (They were outside because traders complained last year they were too loud to play inside). Tony Keywood, shopping with his wife Sheila, was among a crowd enjoying the carols and stepped forward to make a donation. 'I jokingly told them off for not shaking their tins,' said Mr Keywood, 78, a retired telecoms executive. 'They said they weren't allowed to do that in case it caused offence to other religions. They said they'd been told rattling a tin was considered to be intimidating. 'I don't know who makes up these rules but I suspect it will have something to do with human rights. I do feel Britain has lost its way on things like this.'
Laws on public collections are long-established, but until the recent proliferation of so-called 'charity muggers' were not widely utilised. Fundraisers have to be licensed, usually by the local authority, police or landowner. Councils and police can decide whom to license and how the rules are enforced. The Salvation Army relies heavily on public generosity and believes street collections help to foster good relations.
Guidance now, however, is that members should not shake their tins. A Salvation Army source said: 'We don't have a formal policy of "You Shall Not Rattle" but we always act within the law. 'Some authorities specifically ask us not to shake our tins. It is seen as harassment, or making people feel uncomfortable. I don't think it's to do with other religions. But it can make people feel we're putting them under pressure to give.' A spokesman added: 'We want people to donate from the best of motives, so we advise collectors to avoid rattling their tins or asking people directly for money when stood on the high street.'
Source
`Forced marriage' doctor, Humayra Abedin, freed by Bangladesh court
Under the glare of international publicity
An NHS doctor who was held captive by her family in Bangladesh for four months while they plotted a forced marriage is expected to return to Britain in the next few days after a court ruling in Dhaka. Humayra Abedin, 33, who is training to become a GP at Whipps Cross Hospital in East London, was allegedly beaten, drugged and held against her will after being duped into flying to Bangladesh on August 3 when family members claimed that her mother was seriously ill.
Dr Abedin has a Hindu boyfriend in London, which angered her Muslim family, according to reports. They were preparing to marry her to a Muslim stranger, it is claimed. A friend of Dr Abedin, who had lived with her in East Ham, sounded the alarm after receiving a text on August 11. "Please help me. My life is in danger. They have locked me in house. My job is at stake. They are making my life hell," the message said.
Yesterday, Judge Syed Mahmod Hossain ordered Dr Abedin's parents to return her passport, driver's licence and credit card. "It perplexes me as to why the parents kept her confined and interfered with her personal life. I am shocked," he said. Dr Abedin told Sky News last night: "I'm relieved that I'm free, I'm happy. I just want to say thank you to all those who supported and helped me. I'm fine and I'm feeling happy. I don't have any bad feelings towards them. They are my parents so I don't have any bad feelings." Dr Abedin's father cried out on hearing the verdict and had to be assisted as he left the courtroom. He said that he and his wife had done nothing wrong. "She has not been held captive. These allegations are all false," he said.
Dr Abedin's lawyer, Sara Hossain, said: "Our courts have shown that we can guarantee the liberty of our citizens. This is quite a precedent."
The doctor's boyfriend, a 44-year-old Bangladeshi software engineer, had alleged that Dr Abedin's Muslim parents had bound and gagged her, held her captive in a house in Dhaka, and pleaded with her to marry a Muslim. He said that death threats had been issued against his family in Bangladesh. "They told her they'd prefer her to die than return to London," he said.
A Metropolitan Police investigation began in June after allegations that the doctor's mother and uncle tried to hold her captive in London. Last week, the High Court issued an injunction under the new Forced Marriage Act, demanding that Dr Abedin be allowed to return to Britain. Though the Act is not enforceable in Bangladesh it was hoped that it would place pressure on the Bangladeshi authorities.
Dr Abedin trained in Bangladesh before coming to Britain in 2002, when she studied for a master's degree in public health at Leeds University. She was to start in a GP surgery in August. In the first nine months of this year, the Government's Forced Marriage Unit was contacted by 1,308 callers sounding the alert over suspected cases.
Source
Changes to "incorrect" lyrics of Christmas carols
We read:
"Enduring favourites such as Hark the Herald Angels Sing and God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen are being altered by British clergy to make them more "modern and inclusive". But churchgoers say there is no need to change the popular carols and complain that the result is a "festive car crash" if not everyone is singing from the same hymn sheet....
Among the "theologically modified, politically corrected" carols encountered by visitors to the website are Hark the Herald Angels Sing in which the line "Glory to the newborn King" has been replaced by "Glory to the Christ child, bring".
The well-known refrain of O Come All Ye Faithful - "O come let us adore Him" - has also been changed in one church to "O come in adoration", both changes apparently made for fear that the original was sexist. "(One reader) wrote in asking if the original line was considered too gender-specific," Mr Goddard said. "But as he rightly pointed out, Jesus wasn't hermaphrodite, neither was he a girl."
Churchgoers at one carol service will not be allowed to sing the words "all in white" during Once in Royal David's City in case they appear racist, while another cleric has removed the word "virgin" from God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen.
Source
10,000 Polish women get NHS abortions
Ten thousand Polish women had abortions in Britain last year, it has been reported, in procedures which are thought to have cost the NHS between 5million and 10m pounds. Thousands of the women are thought to have come to Britain specifically for the procedure, which is illegal in Poland. People coming to Britain as temporary workers are given a National Insurance number, which allows them to register with a doctor and have NHS treatment.
Britain is thought to be a particularly popular destination as terminations can be carried out as late as 24 weeks into a pregnancy. In several other EU countries, abortions can not be carried out after 12 weeks. A pill given to women under nine weeks pregnant costs the NHS about 500 pounds while an operation necessary for those further into pregnancy costs about 1,600 including after-care.
The figures were reportedly disclosed by the Polish Federation for Women and Family Planning. Aleksandra Jozefowska, a spokesman for the Federation, told The Sun: "On Polish internet sites you can find lots of information on how to obtain an abortion in Britain. And every week I have two or three phone calls from women who want to know about abortion in England."
One unnamed London doctor was reported to have told the newspaper: "As long as they get an NHS number, they haven't got a problem. They can say: 'I didn't know I was pregnant until I got here, I'm in an impossible situation and need help'."
Source
British Headteachers told to 'high-five' pupils to improve exam results
This is just more of the feelgood approach that has already failed
Trainee head teachers are being told to give pupils in tough areas high-fives in an effort to improve exam results. A Government-backed training scheme is urging would-be heads to give pupils the U.S-style welcome to help forge 'positive relationships'.
Sir Iain Hall, training director for the scheme called Future Leaders, is passing on the advice at intensive residential courses after visiting schools in the U.S. He is also recommending a technique which involves pupils gathering in a circle and applauding one of their number, with the head saying the pupils name and 'we appreciate you' and the children cheering that child.
But his suggestions brought claims that heads were being asked to 'ingratiate' themselves with pupils, undermining their authority. Under Sir Iain's approach, heads would greet children at classroom doors by giving them high-fives - slapping their palms with arms extended - or shaking their hands. 'When your children come into the classroom, how do you greet them?' he asked a meeting of prospective heads, the Times Educational Supplement reported.
'Whether it is a high-five, it is touching a child's hand, it is shaking their hands, we teach our Future Leaders to stand at the classroom door and greet every kid who comes through it. It's about establishing positive relationships all the time, shaking the hands of kids that go past, giving those high-fives.'
Sir Iain, a 'superhead' who was knighted in 2002 for services to education, revealed he had been inspired by visits to schools in tough parts of America. He was recommending the circle and applauding technique after seeing it at a New York school. 'It is getting that positive relationship where children can relax and think "somebody believes in me",' he said. Asked whether English pupils would respond to high-fives, he said: 'If I believe it will work with every student, then it will.'
But Anastasia de Waal, of the social policy think-tank Civitas, warned that high-fiving by senior staff could hamper attempts to impose discipline. 'We are struggling to assert authority in schools. 'I fear this is just going to look ridiculous and actually some pupils are going to be moderately insulted by it. 'I don't think they will see it as cool and in fact will see it as deeply uncool so it will backfire.'
She added: 'This is characteristic of much about secondary schools these days, that everything should be relevant to pupils and fun,' she added. 'But what makes things relevant is when children understand their work and can apply it to the real world.' She said some primary schools in Finland invited pupils to shake hands with teachers at the end of lessons. 'This is more about showing teachers respect,' she said.
'We are approaching this completely the wrong way round. We should be trying to generate respect for teachers rather than encouraging them to ingratiate themselves with pupils.'
The Future Leaders scheme aims to tackle a growing shortage of heads in inner-city areas. It is part-funded by the Government, through the National College of School Leadership and Specialist Schools and Academies Trust, and the charity ARK (Absolute Return for Kids), which was set up by millionaire financier Arpad Busson, fiance of actress Uma Thurman.
Andrew Day, deputy head of Greenford High in Ealing, West London, has taken part in the Future Leaders training scheme and is an advocate for the high-fives approach, claiming that pupils can relate to it. 'It is what they do. It is all about how they perceive you. The moment you start working with them, they know you care,' he said.
High-fiving is thought to have originated in the U.S. in 1970s, probably during basketball or baseball games.
Source
Extra judges drafted in to hear British immigration appeals
Extra judges are being drafted in to deal with more than 8,000 asylum and immigration appeals a year that threaten to overload the courts. The move is one of a series of steps to tackle the rise in appeals that have delayed other cases for a year or more. Lord Justice May, the President of the Queen's Bench Division, told The Times that as well as drafting in extra High Court judges, senior barristers and circuit judges had been appointed to sit as deputy High Court judges, doubling the normal number of judges on this work to 15.
The extra judicial manpower, which has already reduced delays, is an interim measure pending more drastic action by the Government. Ministers are expected to announce plans to move the bulk of immigration work out of the High Court altogether and into the new Tribunals Service, probably by next June. That will lead to High Court judges being relieved of thousands of cases a year, which will instead be heard by senior immigration judges and only occasionally, where absolutely necessary, by a High Court judge.
The rise in immigration work is partly because of the increased volume of immigration decisions made by the UK Border Agency, which is dealing with record numbers of applications. In 2006 it removed 16,330 failed asylum seekers, excluding dependants, and in 2007 deported more than 4,000 foreign prisoners. Another factor is the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants) Act 2004, which replaced a two-tier system of appeals with a single-tier system. The High Court therefore became the only place of appeal from a tribunal. The volume of cases reflects that people do not accept the decision of the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal and seek to have the decision reconsidered or apply for judicial review.
A previous attempt by the Government to end the right of judicial review in immigration cases prompted widespread criticism and was thrown out of Parliament. But this move to devolve the work to the Tribunals Service could achieve the same result, although in a way that Lord Justice May, who took up his post in October, hopes will not be "controversial". He said: "This was a problem in terms of work overload because important cases were not being heard promptly and we had delays of up to a year."
The emergency measures have been in place for a few months, with judges being found from other areas to tackle the backlog, he said. "It was a matter of concern but it has improved." Between December 2007 and last month, the tally of cases waiting to be dealt with was cut by about 1,100 to 3,500, although that figure does not include hundreds not yet on the list as they are awaiting final decisions.
Philip Havers, QC, a leading specialist in judicial review challenges, said: "I had one case that was waiting nearly two years, involving a challenge by a doctor to the Health Service Commission. The Administrative Court was completely snowed under by immigration and asylum cases." But the delays have improved, he said. Now he was being offered a date next month or in February for a one-day case; or from February on for a two-day case. "That's as it should be - it has completely transformed." Steps would need to be taken to ensure that the problem did not arise again, he said.
Four regional administrative courts will be set up next year in Cardiff, Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds. Although driven by a wish to move work outside London, it will also relieve immigration cases. Senior judges have described the pressure on the High Court's Administrative Court, which hears the asylum and immigration cases, as "intense" and given warning that it is causing "unacceptable delays to the court's work".
The appeals backlog is adding to pressure on the Court of Appeal. Sir Anthony Clarke, Master of the Rolls, has said that since 2005 the Court of Appeal has had a 77 per cent rise in applications to appeal in asylum and immigration cases. The increase has put "significant pressure" on the resources of the Court of Appeal both in terms of numbers of staff and lawyers who prepare the cases and in terms of judicial time, he said. It was "wholly disproportionate" for "such cases to be considered by the most senior judges who sit in the Court of Appeal," Sir Anthony said.
The Lord Chief Justice, then Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, first flagged up the "unacceptable delays" because of the pressure of asylum and immigration work in April. In 2007, the Administrative Court received 6,694 claims for judicial review - challenges to decisions by government or other public bodies. Asylum and immigration cases made up two thirds.
In addition, the court has to deal with another nearly 4,000 "reconsideration" cases, where asylum seekers are appealing against a refusal first by the UK Borders Agency and then by a senior immigration judge to have their case reconsidered. In all, that makes more than 8,000 cases, or two thirds of the workload of the Administrative Court. The vast majority, Lord Phillips said, "were found to have no merit in law" and failed.
The crisis prompted a threat last year by the Public Law Project, a group that brings judicial review cases, to ponder legal action against Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, stating that the delays amounted to a breach of article six of the European Convention on Human Rights which guarantees an effective court system. `What message does it send?'
Source
Another big British bureaucratic bungle: "A group of MPs has called on the Government to apologise to Equitable Life policyholders and to pay them compensation, thus turning up the heat on Gordon Brown before a formal decision early next year. The Public Administration Select Committee said that it "strongly supports" the findings of a report into the near-collapse of Europe's oldest mutual published by Ann Abraham, the Parliamentary Ombudsman, in July. Ms Abraham found three government departments guilty of ten counts of maladministration over Equitable, berating their failure to spot signs that it was in trouble. She said that the Government should say sorry and set up a compensation fund within six months."
Monday, December 15, 2008
Gross incompetence: NHS hospitals forced to close wards as winter bug spreads
They can't even handle a predictable flu outbreak
Hospitals are facing a winter crisis as a sharp rise in cases of flu and other viruses forces some to close wards to new patients. Several hospitals are already struggling to cope with a sudden rise in admissions and the spread of a virulent winter vomiting bug. Figures from NHS Direct's telephone help line show that the number of calls about colds, flu, coughs and fever has trebled in the past three months.
The figure tends to rise as winter draws in, but in the same period last year the increase was only two-fold, not three-fold. NHS Direct received 10,512 calls between September and December this year, compared to 3,435 calls for the previous three months, while more than 25,000 people have visited NHS Direct's flu symptom checker website.
The vomiting bug norovirus - the most common gastrointestinal illness in the UK, affecting up to a million people every year - is causing particular problems, with NHS chiefs forced to warn sufferers to stay away from doctors' surgeries and hospitals for fear of spreading it further. Affected hospitals include Addenbrooke's in Cambridge, Norfolk and Norwich Hospital, Worcestershire Royal Hospital and York Hospital. Several trusts said the knock-on effect was making it difficult to meet the Government's target of admitting, or dealing with, 98 per cent of emergency patients within four hours.
One of London's three major trauma centres, St George's in Tooting, was issued a 'black alert' and closed its doors to emergencies for a number of hours on Monday after experiencing a 14 per cent surge in demand compared to the same period last year. Staff at St George's reported that up to 20 patients requiring urgent admission had to be kept on beds in A&E as wards were full. Some were diverted to neighbouring hospitals, including Mayday in Croydon, Kingston Hospital and St Helier in Sutton, all of which reported pressure on their own capacity.
The Royal Devon & Exeter Hospital closed its doors to all visitors last week after 12 of its 49 wards were infected, forcing it to postpone about 60 non-urgent operations. It faced extra pressure from emergency admissions caused by falls on ice, with nearly 100 people going into the emergency department with ice-related injuries on Monday alone.
In Carlisle, two elderly care wards at the Cumberland Infirmary were closed last week in a bid to isolate the norovirus bug. Nearby Wigton cottage hospital was closed to all admissions and non-emergency transfers for the second time in a fortnight.
Two wards at East Surrey Hospital closed, while five at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital in King's Lynn were shut or under observation.
At the University Hospital of North Staffordshire, six wards were closed, reducing the number of beds available to patients by 130. Sarah Byrom, the chief nurse, said: "While norovirus is common for this time of year, we have seen a big increase in the number of people coming into the hospital with symptoms."
Affected wards can usually be reopened after a few days, following routine disinfecting. But campaigners claim that cuts in bed capacity have left hospitals ill-equipped to cope with seasonal flu, accidents and respiratory complaints at the same time as having to close wards to cope with norovirus. Geoff Martin, head of campaigns at Health Emergency, called the situation at St George's "deeply worrying" and said: "We are calling on the Government to make cash available to open additional beds and draft in extra staff to cope with the growing crisis on the wards."
Norman Lamb MP, Liberal Democrat spokesman for health, said too many hospitals where operating at 90 to 95 per cent capacity, despite experts recommending no higher than 85 per cent in order to allow hospitals to cope with a sudden influx of patients or an emergency. He said: "There is a minority of hospitals around the country already operating under impossible pressure and when you add to that winter viruses such as norovirus you get a crisis. It has an impossible impact on staff, putting them under enormous strain, and it clearly affects patient care."
A spokesman for the Department of Health said: "Winter crises used to bedevil the NHS. Thanks to record investment and better organisation we have not had a major winter crisis for several years. However, we constantly update our contingency plans in the light of events." [Translation: Reality does not exist]
Source
Porkie pies about the dioxin threat
The recall of Irish pork products exposes the opportunism and hysteria of Ireland and Britain's food standards bodies. ("Pork pies" is Cockney rhyming slang for "lies")
If there's no problem that panicked authorities cannot turn into a crisis, then there's no crisis that indecision cannot exacerbate. So it was on Saturday afternoon that the Food Safety Authority of Ireland (FSAI) discovered it had just such a problem on its hands. Dioxins - the synthesis of chlorinated organic compounds formed, in this case, as a by-product of a manufacturing process - had been found at 80 to 200 times the safe `maximum level' in Irish pork products. This sounds a lot, but, as countless experts have stated, the risk to the public is virtually nil. Not only that, the culprit - an oil used by a particular animal feed producer in a machine used to dry animal feed - affected just 49 out of the Irish Republic's 400 pig farms. And of the nine linked in Northern Ireland, none currently, it has since emerged, have any pigs.
Such facts were not about to inhibit the FSAI, however. Any pork product, it decided - be it bacon, ham, sausages, white pudding or certain pizzas produced since 1 September - was to be recalled and destroyed. Whatever the response lacked in good sense it more than made up for in haste. And with the cost to the Republic's pig industry likely to be in the region of _100million, it is a decision that is likely to have a disastrous effect on Ireland's already ailing pig industry.
The response of the Food Standards Agency in the UK - a country that is the biggest single importer of Irish pork, taking around 68,000 tonnes a year - has been far more ambiguous. Its knee has certainly jerked with the same alacrity as its Irish counterpart: `The FSA is currently advising consumers not to eat pork, or products where pork is the main ingredient, that are labelled as being from the Irish Republic or Northern Ireland.' (1) But despite that message, it has taken no action, leaving it to the supermarkets themselves to decide whether to keep Irish pork produce on the shelves. So while the FSA echoes FSAI's fears, it then shirks all responsibility.
The result has been sheer confusion. Newspapers have been quick to follow the authorities' panic-stricken suit. `Deadly contaminant found in Irish pork', said The Times. `Shoppers told: don't eat toxic Irish pork', informed the Daily Mail. If bald statements such as these weren't frightening enough, the Guardian went a step further by helpfully highlighting the most famous individual case of dioxin poisoning: `The scarred face of Ukranian president Viktor Yushchenko.' (2) The implication seems to be that everyone is but a string of Irish sausages away from a complexion like the surface of the moon.
But while some sections of the press have been more than happy to stoke toxic nightmares, the FSA's unwillingness to do anything drastic betrays its underlying reticence about the reality of the risks posed. So just last night, Tesco announced that it will continue stocking Irish and Northern Irish pork products regardless of the FSA's advice to consumers. This is not surprising given the FSA's own scientific experts have been at pains to emphasise just how negligible is the health risk. Professor Alan Boobis, a toxicologist at Imperial College London and an adviser to the FSA, said: `Even the levels detected in these pigs are extremely low and present no immediate cause for concern.' (3)
So just what is the health risk? The key thing to emphasise here is that the risk posed depends above all on long-term exposure. Dioxins, getting into our system through our food, are stored in body fat, and, with only a small percentage of this excreted each day, the amount gradually builds up over many, many years. The Tolerable Daily Intake, according to which the maximum level of dioxins is determined, is calculated in terms of the amount of a dioxin that experts recommend can be eaten every day over a whole lifetime without causing harm. Or as Alan Reilly of the FSAI put it, `you'd have to be eating these products containing these levels for 40 years before you'd show any signs of illness' (4). And when you take into account that the average British citizen's dioxin intake has fallen by 85 per cent since 1982, the difference some relatively dioxin-heavy pork will make right now is tiny (5).
It is unhelpful, then, that instead of keeping their heads when the FSAI were culling theirs, the FSA decided it was best to appear similarly vigilant. Far from calming anxieties, the FSA's back-covering advice merely heightened them. And if FSA officials thought the precautionary pose would appease those, like Labour MP Michael Meacher, who are intent on waging war against anything that looks like a chemical in the food chain, their inaction just confirms the food-safety zealots' worst suspicions (6). But that is what happens when you foster a climate in which porkies about Irish pork can appear perfectly plausible.
Source
Turn the heat on a cold: Warmed-up fruit cordial really does ease your sniffles
Granny was right. A nice hot fruit drink really can help you overcome the misery of colds, claim researchers. It turns out the tender loving care traditionally dispensed to relieve sniffles and sore throats has its basis in science. A steaming mug of fruit cordial not only tastes nice but actually helps reduce the symptoms of common colds and flu, compared with a cooler drink.
The common cold strikes 930,000 Britons, on average, on any day in winter, with levels of sickness already starting to climb rapidly as Christmas approaches. Experts at Cardiff University's Common Cold Centre carried out what they believe is the first scientific research of its kind into non-medical remedies. They compared the effects of a commercially produced apple and blackcurrant cordial drunk either hot or at room temperature by 30 volunteers with common cold symptoms. And they found that the hot version provided 'immediate and sustained relief from symptoms of runny nose, cough, sneezing, sore throat, chilliness and tiredness'.
The study was published in the December edition of the clinical journal Rhinology. Centre director Professor Ron Eccles said: 'With temperatures falling, cold viruses love this time of year. A bottle of fruit cordial in the cupboard could help fight off the symptoms. The big advantage of this type of treatment is that it is cheap as well as safe and effective.' He said the advantage of hot fluids is a soothing effect.
Little research has been carried out into 'old wives' remedies' for colds, but research last year showed the herbal remedy echinacea is effective. Taking supplements of the plant also known as purple coneflower cut the chances of catching a cold by more than half and when used as a treatment reduced the length of a cold by one and a half days on average, according to the journal Lancet Infectious Diseases. Zinc lozenges can also help shorten the duration of symptoms, says the Common Cold Centre, but most people will not benefit from large doses of vitamin C to ward off colds.
Professor Eccles said it was worth trying to reduce the impact of a cold by eating more fresh fruit and vegetables, taking exercise and smiling to cut stress levels.
Source
Class hatred at Stansted Airport
Posh Plane Stupid insists that it is not picking on poor people. So why is it so madly obsessed with cheap flights?
The contrast between the protesters at Stansted Airport and the people who were delayed by their protest could not have been more stark. On one side there were the well-to-do moaners of Plane Stupid, a campaign group that counts the grandson of a peer, the granddaughter of a baronet, and numerous privately educated young people amongst its most visible cadre. On the other side, the `cheap flyers' hoping to fly abroad from an airport that specialises in no-frills flights, and which has been labelled by snooty observers as Britain's `chief chav airport' because its main airlines include Ryanair and easyJet (1). On one side, eco-elitists; on the other, everyday holidaymakers.
The protest - which forced Stansted to close for five hours and delayed more than 50 flights - provided a striking snapshot of the snobbish, masses-attacking streak in environmentalism. Plane Stupid and other anti-flying groups insist that they're not only concerned with `poor people' who take `cheap flights'; in response to an article I wrote in 2007, Joss Garman, the founder of Plane Stupid, said `cheap flights haven't made it easier for poorer people to travel for the first time; they've just made it easier for the wealthy to travel more often'. So, he said, laying into cheap flights is actually a way of laying into `the privileged' (2). Yet no amount of fact-twisting can disguise the fact that, again and again, the eco-worthies of the anti-flying lobby are drawn towards attacking and delaying those flights taken by the lowest-income communities; by `cheap people'. Why?
It is no accident that the Plane Stupid protesters chose Stansted for their biggest demo yet. They said their aim was to `draw attention to CO2 emissions from the aviation industry'. Yet Stansted, being the smallest of London's major airports, does not emit nearly as much CO2 as a Heathrow or a Gatwick. In Heathrow there are 481,476 aircraft movements a year, and 68million passengers. Gatwick has 266,550 aircraft movements a year, and 35million passengers. Stansted comes a low third, with 208,462 aircraft movements a year and 24million passengers (the New Labour government has now given the go-ahead for the expansion of passenger numbers at Stansted). Even Manchester Airport, far away from the Big Three airports in London, has more annual aircraft movements than Stansted: 222,703 (3).
The Plane Stupid protesters targeted Stansted not because it is particularly polluting, but because it is the home of that apparently most reckless and pointless and destructive form of flying: the no-frills variety. Stansted is, as one website puts it, the `hub for Europe's low-cost carriers' (4). Ryanair, the bete noire of anti-flying groups, flies to 109 destinations from Stansted; easyJet flies to 23. It is not surprising that Ryanair, which is described by Plane Stupid as `Lying-Air', its Irish bosses mocked by the well-to-do, well-educated anti-flying activists for not attending university and being `clearly very stupid' (5), suffered most as a result of yesterday's protest: it had to cancel 52 flights. And because it is the least frilliest airline of all, its stranded passengers were not offered hotel or meal vouchers; they squeezed themselves into uncomfortable chairs and tried to get some shut-eye as their better-educated peers on the runway kept Stansted in shutdown.
Indeed, Stansted is a gleaming symbol of the opening up of flight to lower-income communities. Stansted has been used as a commercial airport since 1966, but its business has grown exponentially over the past 10 years as a direct result of the rise and rise of low-cost airlines. As one government report says, `Stansted has grown very rapidly in recent years, particularly in the leisure market'. In 1998, Stansted was handling seven million passengers a year; in 2003, that rose to 19million passengers; today it handles 24million passengers. This `rapid expansion of passenger numbers' has come `on the back of the boom in low cost air travel' (6). If the growth of Heathrow and Gatwick in the 1960s and 70s spoke to the expansion of air travel for the middle classes, then the growth of Stansted since the 1990s is a result of the expansion of air travel even to the lower middle classes, working-class families, young single people, and others. This is the main reason why Stansted, more than any other British airport, riles the anti-flying lobby: because it symbolises the expansion of flight to nearly all members of British society.
Largely in response to spiked's critique of their eco-misanthropy, and of their seemingly unshakeable focus on `cheap flights', the anti-flying lobby argues that targeting Stansted and Ryanair is not about targeting `poorer people'. `The average income of people using Stansted Airport is 47,000 pounds per year - and it's supposed to be a budget airport!' scoffs Plane Stupid. In an article attacking me for being a Gap jacket-wearing Marxist (the Gap? Oh please.), Joss Garman added a few extra thousand quid to this estimate, arguing that `the Civil Aviation Authority's own data shows that the average person flying in or out of Stansted, a budget airport, earns in excess of 50k' (7).
These bandied-about figures are highly disingenuous. The CAA did not find that the `average person' who uses Stansted earns 50,000 a year - it found that the average household income of people who use Stansted as leisure passengers is 47,000 a year. This includes the earnings of everyone living in a single household before it is taxed and squeezed by various other outgoings. This hardly makes them wealthy, and certainly not part of `the privileged'. They could not, for example, afford to send their children to schools such as Westminster (26,000 a year), as attended by leading Plane Stupid activist Tamsin Omond, or Godolphin and Latymer (15,000 a year), as attended by Plane Stupid's spokesperson on yesterday's demo, Lily Kember. [Two posh protesters in the pic below. Kember on the right]
In their rush to mock the supposedly `privileged' people who take cheap flights from Stansted, Plane Stupid neglects to point out that, according to the CAA's figures, the average household income of 47,000 at Stansted is the lowest for London's major airports. At London City airport, the average household income of leisure passengers is 78,000 a year; at Heathrow it is 58,000; at Gatwick it is 54,000; and at Luton it is 48,000 (9). So, no, those who take cheap flights from Stansted are not `poor' (what the aloof, ivory-tower activists of Plane Stupid fail to realise is that most working-class families, while far less well-off than the public-school crowd, are not `poor' in absolute terms; they frequently earn fairly decent wages, would never define themselves as `poverty-stricken', and like to spend their disposable income on enjoyable things); however, in terms of average household income, Stansted is the `poorest' of London's major airports. However much Plane Stupid tries to comfort itself with the delusion that it is attacking `the privileged', in truth it continually targets the least wealthy of Britain's flyers.
Again and again, almost despite themselves, despite their defensiveness about coming across as wealthy snobs - the real privileged - attacking those chavs and slags who fly abroad on the cheap, Plane Stupid and its supporters return to the `scandal' of cheap flights. They cannot help themselves. It really is cheap flights that they find most foul and offensive. Before yesterday's closure of Britain's `chief chav airport', Plane Stupid forced the HQ of easyJet in London to shut down, on the basis that `binge-flying' - a phrase that sounds deliciously like `binge-drinking', that other famous pastime of `cheap people' - is `choking the planet to death' (10).
Plane Stupid has also spent thousands of pounds taking out a newspaper ad attacking Ryanair; it was a spoof advert with Ryanair boss Michael O'Leary saying: `Let's beat the climate to death. Book Ryanair today to ensure a real climate disaster.' (11) The dripping snobbery of Plane Stupid's campaign comes through in its attacks on the kind of uncultured oiks who take Ryanair and easyJet flights from Stansted: `There's been an enormous growth in binge-flying with the proliferation of stag and hen nights to Eastern European destinations chosen not for their architecture or culture but because people can fly there for 99p and get loaded for a tenner.' (12)
When you consider that aviation contributes only five per cent to Britain's total carbon emissions, and that a tiny proportion of that five per cent is caused by Ryanair, easyJet or Stansted itself, it becomes clear that there is something seriously skewed about Plane Stupid's focus on cheap flights. This is not about reining in CO2 per se; it's about reining in the slovenly, destructive behaviour of the lower orders. The shutting down of Stansted and the relentless attacks on Ryanair and easyJet are driven by the most pernicious snobbery, by a view of `cheap flyers' as ultimately destructive, noxious, wanton and foul. These posh activisits, descended from baronets, lords, inventors and aristocrats (13), are keeping up a long tradition in which `mass tourism' has attracted the `class-contempt of killjoys who conceived themselves superior by reason of intellect, education, curiosity and spirit' (14). What we saw at Stansted yesterday was not remotely radical or edgy - it was unabashed, undiluted, unattractive class hatred.
Source
Global cooling hits Britain
Raw Arctic winds have left Britain shivering in its coldest start to winter for three decades. According to the Met Office, the average temperature for the first third of December has been 1.7C (35F), well down on the long-term average for this time of 4.7C (40.5F). The bitter cold is a rude reminder of what winter used to be like and in stark contrast to the recent run of remarkably mild winters, when trees hung on to their leaves well into December and frogs were seen spawning in ponds. An early taste of winter came with the freakish snows of October, and this month could prove to be the worst month of the year for underpar temperatures. The last time that the country suffered such an outrageous early winter bout of cold was in December 1976, when the average temperature was a bonechilling 0.8C (33.4F).
Much of the driving force behind this recent cold is the jetstream, a ribbon of winds a few miles high that blow eastwards around the globe and are generated by a battle between Arctic air col-liding with warm subtropical air. Because the jetstream has swung south around the UK, it has left the country under a mass of frigid air.This pattern has been locked in for some time, and although there will be some respite this weekend, with an intrusion of milder, wetter Atlantic air, the cold is expected to return next week. The jetstream is believed to be behaving like this because of events thousands of miles away, in the Pacific Ocean. For more than two years, the tropical waters of the Pacific have turned unusually cool, a phenomenon called La Ni¤a. This has upset the pressure systems across the Pacific and knocked the jetstream off course.
Like a wave rolling around the world, the jetstream was shunted farther south than usual around Britain. This gave us the past two soaking-wet summers. The same jetstream pattern tends to produce a cold, dry start to the winter but ends much milder and wetter in late winter and early spring. Hence the Met Office is sticking by its seasonal forecast, which predicted the cold start to the winter, followed by milder conditions during January and February, although interspersed with cold snaps at times. And for the past two years its winter long-range forecasts have proved correct.
"This has been an unusually long episode of La Nina, and could last well into spring," Adam Scaife, of the Met Office, explained. "It pushes the probabilities towards a drier, colder early winter and a warmer, wetter end to winter - but can't guarantee it because all these signals can be outweighed by atmospheric chaos." In other words, the day-to-day weather throughout winter can still blow hot and cold.
Source
Road congestion scheme knocked on the head
It was the "Green" alternative to road improvement. It had already failed in London
Road pricing, the Government's favoured policy for dealing with congestion, has been roundly rejected in a referendum in Manchester. There now appears little chance of any pay-as-you-drive schemes being introduced for the next decade at least. Manchester's proposal for peak-time tolls of up to 5 pounds a day was defeated by 4 to 1. The scheme was rejected in separate votes held in all ten Greater Manchester boroughs. Just over a million people voted, 53 per cent of the 1.9 million balloted. Electors were not persuaded by the promise of 1.5 billion of government money for public transport and 10,000 extra jobs.
The result is undoubtedly a severe embarrassment for the Government, which has created a 2 billion Transport Innovation Fund to reward councils that introduce pricing schemes to reduce congestion. The Department for Transport said last night that the rules of the fund would remain. They state that any council bidding for a share of the fund would have to introduce a form of "demand management", such as congestion charging or a levy on workplace parking spaces. Other authorities that had been considering charging schemes distanced themselves from the policy after hearing the Manchester result.
Andrew Carter, leader of Leeds City Council, said: "We are doing a survey but we are a million miles from having any recommendations. I don't like the blackmail and the bullying. The Government must rethink its policy of making the funding conditional on demand management."
Cambridgeshire County Council, which has proposed a charge of up to 5 pounds to drive into Cambridge in the morning at peak times, also retreated.Matt Bradney, the council's cabinet member for infrastructure, said: "Now that congestion charging has been proven so unpopular, we think the Government should not be putting the handcuffs on us. We are urging it to change the rules of the fund." The West of England Partnership, representing four councils in the Bristol area, said it was still considering a charging scheme but the Manchester result "highlights certain challenges we might have".
Labour politicians in Manchester, working closely with the DfT, had tried everything they could to make the congestion charge attractive to the majority. Charging would not have started until 2013, by which time 80 per cent of the public transport improvements would have been completed. There would have been discounts for the low-paid and exemptions for areas that would have to wait longer for improved public transport. Only one in ten people would have paid the charge and no drivers would have been affected in two thirds of households. A spokesman for the "yes" campaign blamed the downturn in the economy for the strength of the "no" vote. "People were not willing to embrace an additional charge when they were worried about their jobs," he said, "even though only a small minority would have paid."
Source
Mediocre teachers + jargon = low standards
Huge numbers of British 11-year-olds can't read, write or do basic sums. The latest curriculum rehash will not help in the least
But what about the teachers? I feel like the child who had to point out that the emperor isn't wearing any clothes. What we got this week, from the Government's primary schools adviser, was a rehashed curriculum in fine new garb, and a rather verbose way of setting out what good teachers do already - but not a word about what really matters: the quality of the teachers.
Sir Jim Rose's report is a tragic missed opportunity. If this is the limit of ministers' ambition for primary schools then they might as well go home early, clutching those little prizes which schools award the slower pupils for "effort". There certainly won't be any progress. Sir Jim is in danger of giving bad and mediocre teachers even more jargon and curricular complexity to hide behind. The Independent Review of the Primary Curriculum is itself smothered in it. Sir Jim sums up his ideas: "The report explores a curriculum design based on a clear set of culturally derived aims and values, which promote challenging subject teaching alongside equally challenging cross-curricular studies." You what?
This sort of jargon filters down through teachers to the classroom, with lessons wrapped in equally incomprehensible verbiage. "Are we doing reading now?" I asked one primary school teacher recently. "Oh no", she replied, "this isn't reading - this is literacy." Er...
There is something wrong with the teaching profession. Not all of it, but some of it - and presumably the part that curriculum reviews are intended to reach. The teachers have turned insular and defensive; even their language has become alien. It's as if they inhabit a different world.
So spelling isn't spelling any more (there is but one mention of "spelling" in Sir Jim's 73-page report): it has become "decoding" and "encoding". Is it really necessary for an educational adviser to write out the following: "Children may know how to decode and encode print but must then apply that knowledge and skill to understanding the words on the page." You mean, children should be taught to read, sir? Good teachers - even barely competent teachers - do not need to be told that. Good teachers will already apply the best of the ideas in Sir Jim's report, while good schools will do some of what he recommends already, such as using specialised teachers in certain subjects. Good teachers do not hide behind jargon.
The problem is with the bad schools and the bad teachers, who rigorously apply the rules handed down by ministers and officials to groups of baffled children. Like the chilling Ofsted official who described Baby P as a collection of data last week, they can talk the strange talk, but they cannot walk the walk.
So children unable to write their alphabet sit in circles parroting the definitions of "phoneme" and "grapheme": "sound" and "letter" to you and me. "It's in the curriculum," shrugs a teacher. "Silly, isn't it?"
Incompetent teachers, or those lacking in confidence, and afraid of the authorities, stick rigidly to any script they are given, carefully ticking all the little boxes. And Sir Jim is about to hand them quite a script. Take the idea of a "theme" uniting all the primary subjects. This could be done well, so that a Second World War theme for the term incorporates European geography as well as a spot of French, and the mathematics of how many planes in a squadron returned if seven were shot down - that sort of thing. But it could be done badly, like the early-years teacher I saw writing down "a" for "aeroplane" in a child's first reading lesson - "because the theme this term is travel".
It's all very well trying to make the curriculum "relevant" but the fundamental purpose of education must be that the basic building blocks are taught well first. "Relevance" can crowd out education. Take mathematics: Sir Jim issues a familiar warning that children are not being taught how to apply their mathematics skills to the real world. Teachers have heard this complaint many times before. So keen are they to listen that many have overcorrected, asking a child, for instance, how he would hand out 12 chocolate bars among four children, but not teaching him that 12 divided by 4 is 3.
"What is that?" a six-year-old asked me the other day, pointing to a minus sign. He knew how to "count back two from five" (although he couldn't read the words; they had to be read to him) but he was unable to decipher 5 - 2 = 3. A seven-year-old state school child taking a maths exam for private school entry asked his mother of the multiplication questions: "Why were there kisses all over the paper?"
There will be many teachers who insist this does not matter; that children are picking up the concepts or themes, or developing understanding, or some such. But it does matter. So hard are educationists trying to keep the attention of every child with "varied and matched learning", to use some more jargon, that education has become frighteningly dumbed down. Middle-class flight from state schools is directly attributable to this happy-clappy, thematic, lowest-common-denominator, "entire planned learning experience" approach. Some kids enjoy learning times tables.
Listen to this terrifying sentence in the Rose report: "The teacher who once said: `If children leave my school and can't paint, that's a pity but if they leave and can't read, that's a disaster' was perhaps exaggerating to make a point." Exaggerating? It's appalling that the man reviewing the primary curriculum considers that an exaggeration.
Children are leaving primary schools unable to read and write and do basic sums - a fifth failed English this year, a fifth maths and almost four in ten failed in combined reading, writing and arithmetic - and they tip into the secondary system already five years behind their peers, too late for many ever to catch up. It is absolutely essential to get this right. Yet nowhere in Sir Jim's report (because it wasn't in his remit drawn up by the Schools Secretary Ed Balls) is there anything about improving the quality of teachers.
A McKinsey study last year, conducted by Tony Blair's former policy adviser Sir Michael Barber, examined school systems around the world to see what made the difference in the best. The absolutely key element, beyond new buildings and class sizes, the curriculum or the structure of the system, was the quality of teachers. Yet Britain is still stuck in a rule-bound, jobs-for-life education system that rewards laziness and mediocrity as highly as real talent and drive. The gulf between the public and private sectors gets wider and wider. Sir Jim is in danger of pulling up the drawbridge.
Source
They can't even handle a predictable flu outbreak
Hospitals are facing a winter crisis as a sharp rise in cases of flu and other viruses forces some to close wards to new patients. Several hospitals are already struggling to cope with a sudden rise in admissions and the spread of a virulent winter vomiting bug. Figures from NHS Direct's telephone help line show that the number of calls about colds, flu, coughs and fever has trebled in the past three months.
The figure tends to rise as winter draws in, but in the same period last year the increase was only two-fold, not three-fold. NHS Direct received 10,512 calls between September and December this year, compared to 3,435 calls for the previous three months, while more than 25,000 people have visited NHS Direct's flu symptom checker website.
The vomiting bug norovirus - the most common gastrointestinal illness in the UK, affecting up to a million people every year - is causing particular problems, with NHS chiefs forced to warn sufferers to stay away from doctors' surgeries and hospitals for fear of spreading it further. Affected hospitals include Addenbrooke's in Cambridge, Norfolk and Norwich Hospital, Worcestershire Royal Hospital and York Hospital. Several trusts said the knock-on effect was making it difficult to meet the Government's target of admitting, or dealing with, 98 per cent of emergency patients within four hours.
One of London's three major trauma centres, St George's in Tooting, was issued a 'black alert' and closed its doors to emergencies for a number of hours on Monday after experiencing a 14 per cent surge in demand compared to the same period last year. Staff at St George's reported that up to 20 patients requiring urgent admission had to be kept on beds in A&E as wards were full. Some were diverted to neighbouring hospitals, including Mayday in Croydon, Kingston Hospital and St Helier in Sutton, all of which reported pressure on their own capacity.
The Royal Devon & Exeter Hospital closed its doors to all visitors last week after 12 of its 49 wards were infected, forcing it to postpone about 60 non-urgent operations. It faced extra pressure from emergency admissions caused by falls on ice, with nearly 100 people going into the emergency department with ice-related injuries on Monday alone.
In Carlisle, two elderly care wards at the Cumberland Infirmary were closed last week in a bid to isolate the norovirus bug. Nearby Wigton cottage hospital was closed to all admissions and non-emergency transfers for the second time in a fortnight.
Two wards at East Surrey Hospital closed, while five at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital in King's Lynn were shut or under observation.
At the University Hospital of North Staffordshire, six wards were closed, reducing the number of beds available to patients by 130. Sarah Byrom, the chief nurse, said: "While norovirus is common for this time of year, we have seen a big increase in the number of people coming into the hospital with symptoms."
Affected wards can usually be reopened after a few days, following routine disinfecting. But campaigners claim that cuts in bed capacity have left hospitals ill-equipped to cope with seasonal flu, accidents and respiratory complaints at the same time as having to close wards to cope with norovirus. Geoff Martin, head of campaigns at Health Emergency, called the situation at St George's "deeply worrying" and said: "We are calling on the Government to make cash available to open additional beds and draft in extra staff to cope with the growing crisis on the wards."
Norman Lamb MP, Liberal Democrat spokesman for health, said too many hospitals where operating at 90 to 95 per cent capacity, despite experts recommending no higher than 85 per cent in order to allow hospitals to cope with a sudden influx of patients or an emergency. He said: "There is a minority of hospitals around the country already operating under impossible pressure and when you add to that winter viruses such as norovirus you get a crisis. It has an impossible impact on staff, putting them under enormous strain, and it clearly affects patient care."
A spokesman for the Department of Health said: "Winter crises used to bedevil the NHS. Thanks to record investment and better organisation we have not had a major winter crisis for several years. However, we constantly update our contingency plans in the light of events." [Translation: Reality does not exist]
Source
Porkie pies about the dioxin threat
The recall of Irish pork products exposes the opportunism and hysteria of Ireland and Britain's food standards bodies. ("Pork pies" is Cockney rhyming slang for "lies")
If there's no problem that panicked authorities cannot turn into a crisis, then there's no crisis that indecision cannot exacerbate. So it was on Saturday afternoon that the Food Safety Authority of Ireland (FSAI) discovered it had just such a problem on its hands. Dioxins - the synthesis of chlorinated organic compounds formed, in this case, as a by-product of a manufacturing process - had been found at 80 to 200 times the safe `maximum level' in Irish pork products. This sounds a lot, but, as countless experts have stated, the risk to the public is virtually nil. Not only that, the culprit - an oil used by a particular animal feed producer in a machine used to dry animal feed - affected just 49 out of the Irish Republic's 400 pig farms. And of the nine linked in Northern Ireland, none currently, it has since emerged, have any pigs.
Such facts were not about to inhibit the FSAI, however. Any pork product, it decided - be it bacon, ham, sausages, white pudding or certain pizzas produced since 1 September - was to be recalled and destroyed. Whatever the response lacked in good sense it more than made up for in haste. And with the cost to the Republic's pig industry likely to be in the region of _100million, it is a decision that is likely to have a disastrous effect on Ireland's already ailing pig industry.
The response of the Food Standards Agency in the UK - a country that is the biggest single importer of Irish pork, taking around 68,000 tonnes a year - has been far more ambiguous. Its knee has certainly jerked with the same alacrity as its Irish counterpart: `The FSA is currently advising consumers not to eat pork, or products where pork is the main ingredient, that are labelled as being from the Irish Republic or Northern Ireland.' (1) But despite that message, it has taken no action, leaving it to the supermarkets themselves to decide whether to keep Irish pork produce on the shelves. So while the FSA echoes FSAI's fears, it then shirks all responsibility.
The result has been sheer confusion. Newspapers have been quick to follow the authorities' panic-stricken suit. `Deadly contaminant found in Irish pork', said The Times. `Shoppers told: don't eat toxic Irish pork', informed the Daily Mail. If bald statements such as these weren't frightening enough, the Guardian went a step further by helpfully highlighting the most famous individual case of dioxin poisoning: `The scarred face of Ukranian president Viktor Yushchenko.' (2) The implication seems to be that everyone is but a string of Irish sausages away from a complexion like the surface of the moon.
But while some sections of the press have been more than happy to stoke toxic nightmares, the FSA's unwillingness to do anything drastic betrays its underlying reticence about the reality of the risks posed. So just last night, Tesco announced that it will continue stocking Irish and Northern Irish pork products regardless of the FSA's advice to consumers. This is not surprising given the FSA's own scientific experts have been at pains to emphasise just how negligible is the health risk. Professor Alan Boobis, a toxicologist at Imperial College London and an adviser to the FSA, said: `Even the levels detected in these pigs are extremely low and present no immediate cause for concern.' (3)
So just what is the health risk? The key thing to emphasise here is that the risk posed depends above all on long-term exposure. Dioxins, getting into our system through our food, are stored in body fat, and, with only a small percentage of this excreted each day, the amount gradually builds up over many, many years. The Tolerable Daily Intake, according to which the maximum level of dioxins is determined, is calculated in terms of the amount of a dioxin that experts recommend can be eaten every day over a whole lifetime without causing harm. Or as Alan Reilly of the FSAI put it, `you'd have to be eating these products containing these levels for 40 years before you'd show any signs of illness' (4). And when you take into account that the average British citizen's dioxin intake has fallen by 85 per cent since 1982, the difference some relatively dioxin-heavy pork will make right now is tiny (5).
It is unhelpful, then, that instead of keeping their heads when the FSAI were culling theirs, the FSA decided it was best to appear similarly vigilant. Far from calming anxieties, the FSA's back-covering advice merely heightened them. And if FSA officials thought the precautionary pose would appease those, like Labour MP Michael Meacher, who are intent on waging war against anything that looks like a chemical in the food chain, their inaction just confirms the food-safety zealots' worst suspicions (6). But that is what happens when you foster a climate in which porkies about Irish pork can appear perfectly plausible.
Source
Turn the heat on a cold: Warmed-up fruit cordial really does ease your sniffles
Granny was right. A nice hot fruit drink really can help you overcome the misery of colds, claim researchers. It turns out the tender loving care traditionally dispensed to relieve sniffles and sore throats has its basis in science. A steaming mug of fruit cordial not only tastes nice but actually helps reduce the symptoms of common colds and flu, compared with a cooler drink.
The common cold strikes 930,000 Britons, on average, on any day in winter, with levels of sickness already starting to climb rapidly as Christmas approaches. Experts at Cardiff University's Common Cold Centre carried out what they believe is the first scientific research of its kind into non-medical remedies. They compared the effects of a commercially produced apple and blackcurrant cordial drunk either hot or at room temperature by 30 volunteers with common cold symptoms. And they found that the hot version provided 'immediate and sustained relief from symptoms of runny nose, cough, sneezing, sore throat, chilliness and tiredness'.
The study was published in the December edition of the clinical journal Rhinology. Centre director Professor Ron Eccles said: 'With temperatures falling, cold viruses love this time of year. A bottle of fruit cordial in the cupboard could help fight off the symptoms. The big advantage of this type of treatment is that it is cheap as well as safe and effective.' He said the advantage of hot fluids is a soothing effect.
Little research has been carried out into 'old wives' remedies' for colds, but research last year showed the herbal remedy echinacea is effective. Taking supplements of the plant also known as purple coneflower cut the chances of catching a cold by more than half and when used as a treatment reduced the length of a cold by one and a half days on average, according to the journal Lancet Infectious Diseases. Zinc lozenges can also help shorten the duration of symptoms, says the Common Cold Centre, but most people will not benefit from large doses of vitamin C to ward off colds.
Professor Eccles said it was worth trying to reduce the impact of a cold by eating more fresh fruit and vegetables, taking exercise and smiling to cut stress levels.
Source
Class hatred at Stansted Airport
Posh Plane Stupid insists that it is not picking on poor people. So why is it so madly obsessed with cheap flights?
The contrast between the protesters at Stansted Airport and the people who were delayed by their protest could not have been more stark. On one side there were the well-to-do moaners of Plane Stupid, a campaign group that counts the grandson of a peer, the granddaughter of a baronet, and numerous privately educated young people amongst its most visible cadre. On the other side, the `cheap flyers' hoping to fly abroad from an airport that specialises in no-frills flights, and which has been labelled by snooty observers as Britain's `chief chav airport' because its main airlines include Ryanair and easyJet (1). On one side, eco-elitists; on the other, everyday holidaymakers.
The protest - which forced Stansted to close for five hours and delayed more than 50 flights - provided a striking snapshot of the snobbish, masses-attacking streak in environmentalism. Plane Stupid and other anti-flying groups insist that they're not only concerned with `poor people' who take `cheap flights'; in response to an article I wrote in 2007, Joss Garman, the founder of Plane Stupid, said `cheap flights haven't made it easier for poorer people to travel for the first time; they've just made it easier for the wealthy to travel more often'. So, he said, laying into cheap flights is actually a way of laying into `the privileged' (2). Yet no amount of fact-twisting can disguise the fact that, again and again, the eco-worthies of the anti-flying lobby are drawn towards attacking and delaying those flights taken by the lowest-income communities; by `cheap people'. Why?
It is no accident that the Plane Stupid protesters chose Stansted for their biggest demo yet. They said their aim was to `draw attention to CO2 emissions from the aviation industry'. Yet Stansted, being the smallest of London's major airports, does not emit nearly as much CO2 as a Heathrow or a Gatwick. In Heathrow there are 481,476 aircraft movements a year, and 68million passengers. Gatwick has 266,550 aircraft movements a year, and 35million passengers. Stansted comes a low third, with 208,462 aircraft movements a year and 24million passengers (the New Labour government has now given the go-ahead for the expansion of passenger numbers at Stansted). Even Manchester Airport, far away from the Big Three airports in London, has more annual aircraft movements than Stansted: 222,703 (3).
The Plane Stupid protesters targeted Stansted not because it is particularly polluting, but because it is the home of that apparently most reckless and pointless and destructive form of flying: the no-frills variety. Stansted is, as one website puts it, the `hub for Europe's low-cost carriers' (4). Ryanair, the bete noire of anti-flying groups, flies to 109 destinations from Stansted; easyJet flies to 23. It is not surprising that Ryanair, which is described by Plane Stupid as `Lying-Air', its Irish bosses mocked by the well-to-do, well-educated anti-flying activists for not attending university and being `clearly very stupid' (5), suffered most as a result of yesterday's protest: it had to cancel 52 flights. And because it is the least frilliest airline of all, its stranded passengers were not offered hotel or meal vouchers; they squeezed themselves into uncomfortable chairs and tried to get some shut-eye as their better-educated peers on the runway kept Stansted in shutdown.
Indeed, Stansted is a gleaming symbol of the opening up of flight to lower-income communities. Stansted has been used as a commercial airport since 1966, but its business has grown exponentially over the past 10 years as a direct result of the rise and rise of low-cost airlines. As one government report says, `Stansted has grown very rapidly in recent years, particularly in the leisure market'. In 1998, Stansted was handling seven million passengers a year; in 2003, that rose to 19million passengers; today it handles 24million passengers. This `rapid expansion of passenger numbers' has come `on the back of the boom in low cost air travel' (6). If the growth of Heathrow and Gatwick in the 1960s and 70s spoke to the expansion of air travel for the middle classes, then the growth of Stansted since the 1990s is a result of the expansion of air travel even to the lower middle classes, working-class families, young single people, and others. This is the main reason why Stansted, more than any other British airport, riles the anti-flying lobby: because it symbolises the expansion of flight to nearly all members of British society.
Largely in response to spiked's critique of their eco-misanthropy, and of their seemingly unshakeable focus on `cheap flights', the anti-flying lobby argues that targeting Stansted and Ryanair is not about targeting `poorer people'. `The average income of people using Stansted Airport is 47,000 pounds per year - and it's supposed to be a budget airport!' scoffs Plane Stupid. In an article attacking me for being a Gap jacket-wearing Marxist (the Gap? Oh please.), Joss Garman added a few extra thousand quid to this estimate, arguing that `the Civil Aviation Authority's own data shows that the average person flying in or out of Stansted, a budget airport, earns in excess of 50k' (7).
These bandied-about figures are highly disingenuous. The CAA did not find that the `average person' who uses Stansted earns 50,000 a year - it found that the average household income of people who use Stansted as leisure passengers is 47,000 a year. This includes the earnings of everyone living in a single household before it is taxed and squeezed by various other outgoings. This hardly makes them wealthy, and certainly not part of `the privileged'. They could not, for example, afford to send their children to schools such as Westminster (26,000 a year), as attended by leading Plane Stupid activist Tamsin Omond, or Godolphin and Latymer (15,000 a year), as attended by Plane Stupid's spokesperson on yesterday's demo, Lily Kember. [Two posh protesters in the pic below. Kember on the right]
In their rush to mock the supposedly `privileged' people who take cheap flights from Stansted, Plane Stupid neglects to point out that, according to the CAA's figures, the average household income of 47,000 at Stansted is the lowest for London's major airports. At London City airport, the average household income of leisure passengers is 78,000 a year; at Heathrow it is 58,000; at Gatwick it is 54,000; and at Luton it is 48,000 (9). So, no, those who take cheap flights from Stansted are not `poor' (what the aloof, ivory-tower activists of Plane Stupid fail to realise is that most working-class families, while far less well-off than the public-school crowd, are not `poor' in absolute terms; they frequently earn fairly decent wages, would never define themselves as `poverty-stricken', and like to spend their disposable income on enjoyable things); however, in terms of average household income, Stansted is the `poorest' of London's major airports. However much Plane Stupid tries to comfort itself with the delusion that it is attacking `the privileged', in truth it continually targets the least wealthy of Britain's flyers.
Again and again, almost despite themselves, despite their defensiveness about coming across as wealthy snobs - the real privileged - attacking those chavs and slags who fly abroad on the cheap, Plane Stupid and its supporters return to the `scandal' of cheap flights. They cannot help themselves. It really is cheap flights that they find most foul and offensive. Before yesterday's closure of Britain's `chief chav airport', Plane Stupid forced the HQ of easyJet in London to shut down, on the basis that `binge-flying' - a phrase that sounds deliciously like `binge-drinking', that other famous pastime of `cheap people' - is `choking the planet to death' (10).
Plane Stupid has also spent thousands of pounds taking out a newspaper ad attacking Ryanair; it was a spoof advert with Ryanair boss Michael O'Leary saying: `Let's beat the climate to death. Book Ryanair today to ensure a real climate disaster.' (11) The dripping snobbery of Plane Stupid's campaign comes through in its attacks on the kind of uncultured oiks who take Ryanair and easyJet flights from Stansted: `There's been an enormous growth in binge-flying with the proliferation of stag and hen nights to Eastern European destinations chosen not for their architecture or culture but because people can fly there for 99p and get loaded for a tenner.' (12)
When you consider that aviation contributes only five per cent to Britain's total carbon emissions, and that a tiny proportion of that five per cent is caused by Ryanair, easyJet or Stansted itself, it becomes clear that there is something seriously skewed about Plane Stupid's focus on cheap flights. This is not about reining in CO2 per se; it's about reining in the slovenly, destructive behaviour of the lower orders. The shutting down of Stansted and the relentless attacks on Ryanair and easyJet are driven by the most pernicious snobbery, by a view of `cheap flyers' as ultimately destructive, noxious, wanton and foul. These posh activisits, descended from baronets, lords, inventors and aristocrats (13), are keeping up a long tradition in which `mass tourism' has attracted the `class-contempt of killjoys who conceived themselves superior by reason of intellect, education, curiosity and spirit' (14). What we saw at Stansted yesterday was not remotely radical or edgy - it was unabashed, undiluted, unattractive class hatred.
Source
Global cooling hits Britain
Raw Arctic winds have left Britain shivering in its coldest start to winter for three decades. According to the Met Office, the average temperature for the first third of December has been 1.7C (35F), well down on the long-term average for this time of 4.7C (40.5F). The bitter cold is a rude reminder of what winter used to be like and in stark contrast to the recent run of remarkably mild winters, when trees hung on to their leaves well into December and frogs were seen spawning in ponds. An early taste of winter came with the freakish snows of October, and this month could prove to be the worst month of the year for underpar temperatures. The last time that the country suffered such an outrageous early winter bout of cold was in December 1976, when the average temperature was a bonechilling 0.8C (33.4F).
Much of the driving force behind this recent cold is the jetstream, a ribbon of winds a few miles high that blow eastwards around the globe and are generated by a battle between Arctic air col-liding with warm subtropical air. Because the jetstream has swung south around the UK, it has left the country under a mass of frigid air.This pattern has been locked in for some time, and although there will be some respite this weekend, with an intrusion of milder, wetter Atlantic air, the cold is expected to return next week. The jetstream is believed to be behaving like this because of events thousands of miles away, in the Pacific Ocean. For more than two years, the tropical waters of the Pacific have turned unusually cool, a phenomenon called La Ni¤a. This has upset the pressure systems across the Pacific and knocked the jetstream off course.
Like a wave rolling around the world, the jetstream was shunted farther south than usual around Britain. This gave us the past two soaking-wet summers. The same jetstream pattern tends to produce a cold, dry start to the winter but ends much milder and wetter in late winter and early spring. Hence the Met Office is sticking by its seasonal forecast, which predicted the cold start to the winter, followed by milder conditions during January and February, although interspersed with cold snaps at times. And for the past two years its winter long-range forecasts have proved correct.
"This has been an unusually long episode of La Nina, and could last well into spring," Adam Scaife, of the Met Office, explained. "It pushes the probabilities towards a drier, colder early winter and a warmer, wetter end to winter - but can't guarantee it because all these signals can be outweighed by atmospheric chaos." In other words, the day-to-day weather throughout winter can still blow hot and cold.
Source
Road congestion scheme knocked on the head
It was the "Green" alternative to road improvement. It had already failed in London
Road pricing, the Government's favoured policy for dealing with congestion, has been roundly rejected in a referendum in Manchester. There now appears little chance of any pay-as-you-drive schemes being introduced for the next decade at least. Manchester's proposal for peak-time tolls of up to 5 pounds a day was defeated by 4 to 1. The scheme was rejected in separate votes held in all ten Greater Manchester boroughs. Just over a million people voted, 53 per cent of the 1.9 million balloted. Electors were not persuaded by the promise of 1.5 billion of government money for public transport and 10,000 extra jobs.
The result is undoubtedly a severe embarrassment for the Government, which has created a 2 billion Transport Innovation Fund to reward councils that introduce pricing schemes to reduce congestion. The Department for Transport said last night that the rules of the fund would remain. They state that any council bidding for a share of the fund would have to introduce a form of "demand management", such as congestion charging or a levy on workplace parking spaces. Other authorities that had been considering charging schemes distanced themselves from the policy after hearing the Manchester result.
Andrew Carter, leader of Leeds City Council, said: "We are doing a survey but we are a million miles from having any recommendations. I don't like the blackmail and the bullying. The Government must rethink its policy of making the funding conditional on demand management."
Cambridgeshire County Council, which has proposed a charge of up to 5 pounds to drive into Cambridge in the morning at peak times, also retreated.Matt Bradney, the council's cabinet member for infrastructure, said: "Now that congestion charging has been proven so unpopular, we think the Government should not be putting the handcuffs on us. We are urging it to change the rules of the fund." The West of England Partnership, representing four councils in the Bristol area, said it was still considering a charging scheme but the Manchester result "highlights certain challenges we might have".
Labour politicians in Manchester, working closely with the DfT, had tried everything they could to make the congestion charge attractive to the majority. Charging would not have started until 2013, by which time 80 per cent of the public transport improvements would have been completed. There would have been discounts for the low-paid and exemptions for areas that would have to wait longer for improved public transport. Only one in ten people would have paid the charge and no drivers would have been affected in two thirds of households. A spokesman for the "yes" campaign blamed the downturn in the economy for the strength of the "no" vote. "People were not willing to embrace an additional charge when they were worried about their jobs," he said, "even though only a small minority would have paid."
Source
Mediocre teachers + jargon = low standards
Huge numbers of British 11-year-olds can't read, write or do basic sums. The latest curriculum rehash will not help in the least
But what about the teachers? I feel like the child who had to point out that the emperor isn't wearing any clothes. What we got this week, from the Government's primary schools adviser, was a rehashed curriculum in fine new garb, and a rather verbose way of setting out what good teachers do already - but not a word about what really matters: the quality of the teachers.
Sir Jim Rose's report is a tragic missed opportunity. If this is the limit of ministers' ambition for primary schools then they might as well go home early, clutching those little prizes which schools award the slower pupils for "effort". There certainly won't be any progress. Sir Jim is in danger of giving bad and mediocre teachers even more jargon and curricular complexity to hide behind. The Independent Review of the Primary Curriculum is itself smothered in it. Sir Jim sums up his ideas: "The report explores a curriculum design based on a clear set of culturally derived aims and values, which promote challenging subject teaching alongside equally challenging cross-curricular studies." You what?
This sort of jargon filters down through teachers to the classroom, with lessons wrapped in equally incomprehensible verbiage. "Are we doing reading now?" I asked one primary school teacher recently. "Oh no", she replied, "this isn't reading - this is literacy." Er...
There is something wrong with the teaching profession. Not all of it, but some of it - and presumably the part that curriculum reviews are intended to reach. The teachers have turned insular and defensive; even their language has become alien. It's as if they inhabit a different world.
So spelling isn't spelling any more (there is but one mention of "spelling" in Sir Jim's 73-page report): it has become "decoding" and "encoding". Is it really necessary for an educational adviser to write out the following: "Children may know how to decode and encode print but must then apply that knowledge and skill to understanding the words on the page." You mean, children should be taught to read, sir? Good teachers - even barely competent teachers - do not need to be told that. Good teachers will already apply the best of the ideas in Sir Jim's report, while good schools will do some of what he recommends already, such as using specialised teachers in certain subjects. Good teachers do not hide behind jargon.
The problem is with the bad schools and the bad teachers, who rigorously apply the rules handed down by ministers and officials to groups of baffled children. Like the chilling Ofsted official who described Baby P as a collection of data last week, they can talk the strange talk, but they cannot walk the walk.
So children unable to write their alphabet sit in circles parroting the definitions of "phoneme" and "grapheme": "sound" and "letter" to you and me. "It's in the curriculum," shrugs a teacher. "Silly, isn't it?"
Incompetent teachers, or those lacking in confidence, and afraid of the authorities, stick rigidly to any script they are given, carefully ticking all the little boxes. And Sir Jim is about to hand them quite a script. Take the idea of a "theme" uniting all the primary subjects. This could be done well, so that a Second World War theme for the term incorporates European geography as well as a spot of French, and the mathematics of how many planes in a squadron returned if seven were shot down - that sort of thing. But it could be done badly, like the early-years teacher I saw writing down "a" for "aeroplane" in a child's first reading lesson - "because the theme this term is travel".
It's all very well trying to make the curriculum "relevant" but the fundamental purpose of education must be that the basic building blocks are taught well first. "Relevance" can crowd out education. Take mathematics: Sir Jim issues a familiar warning that children are not being taught how to apply their mathematics skills to the real world. Teachers have heard this complaint many times before. So keen are they to listen that many have overcorrected, asking a child, for instance, how he would hand out 12 chocolate bars among four children, but not teaching him that 12 divided by 4 is 3.
"What is that?" a six-year-old asked me the other day, pointing to a minus sign. He knew how to "count back two from five" (although he couldn't read the words; they had to be read to him) but he was unable to decipher 5 - 2 = 3. A seven-year-old state school child taking a maths exam for private school entry asked his mother of the multiplication questions: "Why were there kisses all over the paper?"
There will be many teachers who insist this does not matter; that children are picking up the concepts or themes, or developing understanding, or some such. But it does matter. So hard are educationists trying to keep the attention of every child with "varied and matched learning", to use some more jargon, that education has become frighteningly dumbed down. Middle-class flight from state schools is directly attributable to this happy-clappy, thematic, lowest-common-denominator, "entire planned learning experience" approach. Some kids enjoy learning times tables.
Listen to this terrifying sentence in the Rose report: "The teacher who once said: `If children leave my school and can't paint, that's a pity but if they leave and can't read, that's a disaster' was perhaps exaggerating to make a point." Exaggerating? It's appalling that the man reviewing the primary curriculum considers that an exaggeration.
Children are leaving primary schools unable to read and write and do basic sums - a fifth failed English this year, a fifth maths and almost four in ten failed in combined reading, writing and arithmetic - and they tip into the secondary system already five years behind their peers, too late for many ever to catch up. It is absolutely essential to get this right. Yet nowhere in Sir Jim's report (because it wasn't in his remit drawn up by the Schools Secretary Ed Balls) is there anything about improving the quality of teachers.
A McKinsey study last year, conducted by Tony Blair's former policy adviser Sir Michael Barber, examined school systems around the world to see what made the difference in the best. The absolutely key element, beyond new buildings and class sizes, the curriculum or the structure of the system, was the quality of teachers. Yet Britain is still stuck in a rule-bound, jobs-for-life education system that rewards laziness and mediocrity as highly as real talent and drive. The gulf between the public and private sectors gets wider and wider. Sir Jim is in danger of pulling up the drawbridge.
Source
Sunday, December 14, 2008
2011 British census to gauge the scope of immigration
Almost 500 million pounds will be spent on the biggest and most expensive census in an attempt to measure Britain's true immigrant population. Questions have been added to try to establish how long people have been living here, what passports they hold and their nationality. Ministers have been forced to admit that they have no idea how many immigrants are in Britain, which means that public services in areas of high migrant populations are often stretched because spending decisions are made using inaccurate data. For the 2011 Census, millions of pounds will be spent on a new mailing list to make sure that every property is included.
The Office for National Statistics (ONS) will also hire about 35,000 temporary staff to track down people who fail to fill out their form. The full cost of the operation will be 480 million compared with 210 million in 2001.
Critics were unconvinced, however, that the extra money would make any difference. They say that the census is simply outdated as a vehicle for gathering comprehensive and up-to-date information, and unpublished data already held by government departments should be used instead.
Announcing plans for the census, which will take place on March 27, 2011, officials said they would devote considerable resources to getting back as many returns as possible. "Everyone who does not fill in the census will receive a knock on the door. We will have teams of 12-15 people who will visit households who have not returned their form and help them fill it in," said Glen Watson, the census director. Mr Watson said it was an offence punishable by a 1,000 pound fine not to fill in a census and hundreds of people have been taken to court in the past for refusing to complete the form.
However, a bigger problem is the far larger group who cannot be traced. In 2001 the ONS failed to find about one million people and were forced to extrapolate information from other returns. In addition, the first data is not published until about 18 months after census day, making it already out of date.
James Hulme, a spokesman for the New Local Government Network (NLGN), an independent think-tank, said: "We calculated that the Government could save about 250 million by drawing on records from existing public services, such as GP surgery lists and the electoral roll which is updated each year, rather than every ten years. At a time when the public finances are stretched, this is an ideal way of saving money."
Councils said that they did not want spending decisions to be made on the basis of the census. They were furious at being short-changed because resources were allocated on the basis of the 2001 Census.The Local Government Association said that improving alternative sources of information such as national insurance numbers would give a much clearer picture.
Source
The junk food gene: DNA flaw means two-thirds of us can't stop eating
Genetics again
Slimmer souls have always maintained that a sweet tooth can be banished with a big helping of will-power. But perhaps those who always succumb to the lure of the biscuit tin and the creamcake shop shouldn't feel so guilty about their weakness. The ability to resist or otherwise, it seems, may be built into your DNA.
Researchers say that almost two-thirds of us carry 'junk food genes' making us crave fatty and sugary foods. Those with this genetic flaw eat 100 calories more per meal - the equivalent of a small Kit Kat or a bag of Wotsits. It may not sound much, but over a week, this amounts to an extra 2,100 calories - an entire day's food. The research helps explain why some men and women find it hard to resist fast food, and why some diets are doomed to fail. But it may also lead to ways of treating obesity, which blights the lives of almost a quarter of us.
The scientists, from Dundee University, pinned down the effect of a rogue version of a gene called FTO, they explained in the respected New England Journal of Medicine. The flaw, carried by almost twothirds of Britons, was first linked to obesity last year. Up to 14 per cent of Britons carry two rogue copies of the gene, increasing their risk of obesity by 70 per cent and diabetes by 50 per cent. These people are on average almost half a stone heavier. The 49 per cent who have inherited just one flawed FTO gene are 30 per cent more likely to be obese than those with two normal copies of the gene and 25 per cent more likely to develop diabetes.
It wasn't clear if the flaw led to weight gain by increasing appetite, slowing down metabolism, cutting exercise levels or by making men and women take longer to feel full. But the latest research shows that it drives us to eat calorie-laden foods. Scientists tested the DNA of 100 primary pupils and looked at what they ate for lunch. Although those with the rogue gene didn't eat more, they were drawn to fatty and sugary foods, so took in 100 calories more per meal. The gene did not affect their metabolic rate, exercise levels or how full they felt.
Researcher Professor Colin Palmer said: 'The increase in obesity-seen in children may be largely attributable to the widespread availability of inexpensive and energy-dense foods.' These may be more attractive to those with the genetic variant, he explained. 'One hundred calories in a single sitting is half a Mars Bar. It doesn't seem like a lot but in terms of an increased risk of obesity, it is enough.'
But the effects of the gene are not overpowering, he added. So the 63 per cent of us with the 'junk food gene' should not feel that losing weight is out of our control. 'The advice is the same - you will not become overweight if you do not overeat.'
In an accompanying editorial, Dr Rudolph Leibel, of Columbia University in New York, predicted the advent of genetic tests to give early warning of those at risk of putting on weight.
Source
Elite British universities discriminate against academic merit
More than half of leading universities discriminate in favour of students from deprived backgrounds, sparking a fresh row over "social engineering". An official report reveals the majority of institutions belonging to the elite Russell Group show favour to sixth-formers from poor-performing schools. One in five give priority to applicants' whose parents missed out on higher education. And 53 per cent of universities take students' "family problems" into account as an admissions tiebreaker.
According to the report, Nottingham - which traditionally attracts more applicants than any other university - said students' A-level grades "may be valued more highly" if applicants were refugees or came from the traveller community, poor homes or a family without a history of going to university.
Last night, it prompted claims that children were being "punished" for attending a good school. Alan Smithers, professor of education at Buckingham University, said: "This will inevitable lead to someone with great potential, who doesn't tick all these boxes, being deprived of his or her rightful place. Social engineering like this can only weaken the university system and leave a sour taste in the mouth of many parents who see their bright and hard-working children denied places on social grounds."
The disclosure was made in a Government-backed study published four years after a landmark commission on fair access to university. The 2004 report, led by Professor Steven Schwartz, the former vice-chancellor of Brunel University, said institutions had to take a "wider view" of an applicant's potential to close the gap between the number of students admitted from professional and unskilled homes.
In the latest study, the Supporting Professionalism in Admissions unit, based at Sheffield Hallam University, said many "positive changes" had been made by universities in light of the Schwartz Report. It surveyed almost three-quarters of universities and colleges. Four in 10 vice-chancellors and principals said "should choose students partly in order to achieve a social mix".
The report said the 20-strong Russell Group - which includes Oxford, Cambridge, Imperial College London, University College London, Nottingham and St Andrews - were most likely to use admissions procedures to achieve a mixed student body. More than half of all universities - 51 per cent - said it was fair to make lower-grade offers to sixth formers from poor-performing schools and deprived homes.
Among Russell Group members, 53 per cent considered whether students attended a "low-achieving school" or had family problems, 40 per cent marked-up students in local authority care, 40 per cent favoured candidates with disabilities and 20 per cent looked favourably on those without university-educated parents.
Earlier this year, an investigation by the Telegraph found the London School of Economics, Bristol, Nottingham, Newcastle, and Edinburgh were among those allowing staff to admit students from poor-performing comprehensives with worse A-levels than those from top schools.
Dr Wendy Piatt, Russell Group director general, said: "A-level qualifications are a key source of information about academic ability but we do not just rely on exam grades. Russell Group universities take a range of factors and information into account to ensure that we can identify the candidates with the most potential to excel on our courses - whatever their social or educational background."
David Lammy, Higher Education Minister, said: "Creating a transparent and open admissions process is crucial to ensuring fair access and maintaining public confidence in our universities and colleges."
Source
The BBC hates Christmas -- as usual
As a much-loved fairytale, a sumptuous new version of Hansel and Gretel might seem like perfect family viewing for Christmas Day. But a new staging of the Brothers Grimm classic, featuring children's corpses hanging in an abattoir-like larder, has proved so terrifying that the Royal Opera House recommends it is not suitable for children under the age of eight. Which has left critics questioning why the BBC has chosen to screen the production at 3pm on Christmas Day - a prime-time family viewing slot.
Media watchdogs and the children's charity Kidscape have called on BBC2 to pull the controversial opera from its Christmas schedule over fears it could traumatise children. The two-hour fairytale features lust-crazed parents, a knife-wielding wicked witch who hangs children in her larder before baking them in a giant oven and a final scene of cannibalism in which children feast on her flesh. It has been marketed by the Royal Opera House as 'perfect family fare for everyone at holiday time'.
But opera critics have called it 'profoundly unpleasant' and said children in the audience on opening night were 'genuinely terrified'. Officials have now conceded the staging is unsuitable for younger children. But a BBC2 spokeswoman insisted it would still be screened on Christmas Day, but said there would be a parental warning about the opera's content.
Michele Elliott, founder of the children's charity Kidscape, said: 'Children could be really scared or even traumatised by watching this. Parents should write to the BBC to ask them not to show it.' John Beyer, of Mediawatch UK, said: 'What on earth are they thinking of? It beggars belief that they could contemplate showing that sort of barbarity on Christmas Day of all days.'
Like many Brothers Grimm fairytales, the story of Hansel and Gretel has an undeniably dark tone. Two children born to a poor woodcutter are abandoned in a forest and are captured by a witch who intends eat Hansel. She locks Hansel in a cage and forces Gretel to become her servant, but the children eventually outwit her and trap her in her own oven before escaping back to their father.
A Royal Opera House spokeman said: 'We haven't banned young children from coming to see it, but we felt eight might be an appropriate age to suggest. Children today grow up watching Doctor Who, they have seen far worse. I don't think there would be many kids having nightmares.' A BBC spokeswoman said the screening of the opera will be presented by newsreader Katie Derham, who will also give a warning about the production's content. She said: 'There are scary elements in the story which are reflected in the Royal Opera House's production, but these are given a comic and pantomime-like treatment.'
Source
The importance of family
From almost the first moment of recorded history, one set of relationships has been at the heart of the human experience and the basis of civilisation itself: a mother and father who depend on each other; the children who rely on them both; a supportive network of grandparents, aunts, uncles and cousins. Without the loyalties and obligations of the committed family, our ancestors would certainly have struggled to survive in a dangerous and frightening world. How else but with the help of kin could they have coped with the critical moments in life: birth, sickness, old age, the need to educate and train their young? Without such help from the very beginning, it may be asked whether humankind would ever have developed the capacity to build an advanced civilisation.
This week a report from Unicef, the UN's child welfare agency, warned that working mothers take a massive risk when they put their offspring into low quality childcare. Experts at the world body said such toddlers could suffer psychological harm and fare poorly later at school. Aggressive behaviour learned by children at some nurseries might contribute later to classroom disruption.
The study for is the first major international report to warn of the dangers of the drive, pushed again by the Government this week, to get mothers back to work early. But the family has a significance that goes way beyond the practicalities of day-to-day existence. From the very beginning, it has also given a special meaning to our human notions of past, present and future. Human beings could have regarded themselves as isolated individuals whose meaningless lives were snuffed out and forgotten after a brief span. Instead - a hugely important factor in driving social development - we have always tended to see ourselves as part of a great chain of existence, binding us to our forebears and to generations yet unborn. 'To forget your ancestors is to be a brook without a source, a tree without a root,' says the old Chinese proverb. That undoubtedly reflects one of our deepest human instincts.
In Britain, G. K. Chesterton summed it up strikingly more than 100 years ago when he described the family as 'this frail cord, flung from the forgotten hills of yesterday to the invisible mountains of tomorrow'. To modern ears, those words may sound somewhat romantic, or even a trifle overblown. But back in 1900, his view would have been shared by the overwhelming majority of MPs, lawyers, academics and the wider public. Until very recently, in fact, the importance of the family was taken for granted, not only as the basis of society, but as the foundation of our human identity.
Today? In western societies - and especially in the English-speaking world - we think we know better. Forget the wisdom of the ages. Forget our deep-rooted instincts. Forget precepts that have governed every society in every era of history. The importance of the 'traditional' family is being challenged as never before. The idea has taken root that human families can be constructed in any way people want. The message is that biology counts for nothing. Biological mothers don't matter to their children. Biological fathers don't matter either. All that matters is what adults want - and children must adapt to it, whether they like it or not.
The sheer speed of what is happening is quite astonishing. In less than 50 years, the old values have been stood on their head. Today, legislators don't hesitate to plunge into 'reforms' that tear up the rights, duties and obligations that have underpinned the family for millennia. They rush into new ' postmodernist' concepts of family, partnering and parenthood. Indeed, they are even attempting to banish the word 'marriage' from the statute books.
Everywhere in the West, the liberal consensus is on the march. In Britain, for example, a Labour Government has discouraged the use of the 'm' word in official documents, while in the U.S., the American Law Institute recommends that marriage should be ' deprivileged' and not be given a status above any other relationship.
Yet on any rational analysis, this reckless embrace of a brave new world is simply perverse, since there is no doubt whatever that the traditional family, underpinned by marriage, is the best way of bringing up secure, happy children and maintaining social stability. You don't have to be a religious believer or a Victorian moralist to take this view. The evidence speaks for itself (despite the strenuous efforts of the liberal establishment to ignore it). Fact: one in two unmarried couples splits up before their first child is five years old. The figure for married couples is just one in 12.
Fact: children from broken homes are 75 per cent more likely than their classmates to fail at school, 70 per cent more likely to be involved with drugs and 50 per cent more likely to have alcohol problems. They are also more likely to run away from home, find themselves in the care system and end up in jail.
At the very least, those bleak statistics should give us pause. The truth is that some of the most intractable problems facing Britain today - from our tragically high rate of teenage pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases to petty crime, gang membership and welfare dependency - have their roots in family breakdown.
That's not to say that all families are perfect. Sometimes, sadly, it can be for the best that a child is removed from its parents. Sometimes, it is for the best when couples separate. And it is certainly true that many, many children are brought up wonderfully in lone-parent households. All credit to the mothers - and sometimes fathers - who manage to do so. But that doesn't invalidate the general principle. By ignoring the real benefits that marriage brings to children and wider society, our legislators are making a profound error of judgment - perhaps the most serious mistake of the past half-century.
So how have we come to this? As I outline in my new book, there are a whole range of complex reasons - not least the hatred of the family that some shallow-thinking but influential intellectuals feel. They continue to promote the message that traditional family structures have no place in a world of gender equality.
Our elected representatives have played their part, too, by demoting marriage as an institution, weakening its contractual aspects and promoting the dogma that 'family' is just a legal and social convention. Take the shabby way successive governments have treated marriage in this country, even though they know perfectly well that it is one of the great foundations of society.
It was a Tory Chancellor, Kenneth Clarke, who dismissed the married couples' tax allowance as 'an anomaly'. And it was former Home Secretary Jack Straw who proclaimed: 'This Government will not preach about marriage.'
The result? In Britain today it just doesn't pay to get married. Our tax and benefits system is so arranged that if lower-income couples who are living together get married, they will significantly increase their tax payments and lower their benefits. Perhaps it's no wonder that this country has a higher percentage of lone-parent families than any other country in Europe, apart from Sweden. The system is designed to create family instability. And the costs, both social and financial, are huge.
How to explain this bizarre discouragement of an institution so important to the happiness, stability and financial health of the country? Politicians are terrified of being thought 'judgmental' about the way citizens live. And they obviously take the defeatist view that nothing can be done to improve matters anyway. Isn't it curious, then, that those same politicians feel no compunction at all about bossing us around to tell us to stop smoking, cut down our drinking and eat five portions of fruit and veg a day?
The same aversion to moralising applies increasingly to the laws on marriage and divorce. Not only are we witnessing ever easier divorce - whatever the children may need or want - and same-sex marriages, but there is also growing pressure to remove the words 'father' and 'mother' from birth certificates and replace them by 'Progenitor A' and 'Progenitor B' (as is already happening in Spain).
Whatever the motivation behind such trends, the ' traditional' family structure is being badly eroded. All this reminds me of the grim ideas floated in ancient Athens 2,500 years ago. In the vision sketched out in Plato's Republic - a philosophical treatise on the most fundamental principles of the conduct of human society - mating would be random. Children would be raised by the state. Neither mothers nor fathers could claim their biological offspring as their own. Nor could they raise their children. In Plato's bleak prescription, men and women would join together briefly, then separate. Fathers had children by many mothers. Mothers bore children by different men. A disturbing scenario indeed.
But isn't Plato's view now triumphant? In a few brief decades, the western world has so altered the traditional concept of the family that it's possible to recognise the basic elements of the Platonic blueprint. Ideas which once seemed just a speculative nightmare now appear to be an emerging reality.
And yet the family in its traditional form is crucial to us all - not simply because it underpins social stability or because it connects us to the past and the future, but because it's also a bulwark of freedom itself. Why? Because the invisible bonds it creates between its members generate loyalties and affections capable of resisting any tyranny. That's what, in the end, makes the family not just a conserving institution, but also the engine of liberty and progress.
Yes, the family can sometimes fail. When it does, the consequences can be appalling. But at its best, it provides an anchor for individuals who would otherwise have no inspiration or support in an uncertain world.
For these reasons we should think long and hard about where we are being taken by some of the fashionable dogmas of our day: the belief that divorce or separation doesn't hurt; that what adults do can't seriously harm their children; that cohabiting is at least as good as marrying; that genetic relationships don't matter; and that 'family' can mean whatever we want it to mean. All of these dogmas are false. All are deeply damaging. Every day we can see the consequences in broken families and broken lives. In allowing matters to come to this, the liberal establishment has made arguably the most profound mistake of the past half-century. Dare we allow it to continue?
Source
Almost 500 million pounds will be spent on the biggest and most expensive census in an attempt to measure Britain's true immigrant population. Questions have been added to try to establish how long people have been living here, what passports they hold and their nationality. Ministers have been forced to admit that they have no idea how many immigrants are in Britain, which means that public services in areas of high migrant populations are often stretched because spending decisions are made using inaccurate data. For the 2011 Census, millions of pounds will be spent on a new mailing list to make sure that every property is included.
The Office for National Statistics (ONS) will also hire about 35,000 temporary staff to track down people who fail to fill out their form. The full cost of the operation will be 480 million compared with 210 million in 2001.
Critics were unconvinced, however, that the extra money would make any difference. They say that the census is simply outdated as a vehicle for gathering comprehensive and up-to-date information, and unpublished data already held by government departments should be used instead.
Announcing plans for the census, which will take place on March 27, 2011, officials said they would devote considerable resources to getting back as many returns as possible. "Everyone who does not fill in the census will receive a knock on the door. We will have teams of 12-15 people who will visit households who have not returned their form and help them fill it in," said Glen Watson, the census director. Mr Watson said it was an offence punishable by a 1,000 pound fine not to fill in a census and hundreds of people have been taken to court in the past for refusing to complete the form.
However, a bigger problem is the far larger group who cannot be traced. In 2001 the ONS failed to find about one million people and were forced to extrapolate information from other returns. In addition, the first data is not published until about 18 months after census day, making it already out of date.
James Hulme, a spokesman for the New Local Government Network (NLGN), an independent think-tank, said: "We calculated that the Government could save about 250 million by drawing on records from existing public services, such as GP surgery lists and the electoral roll which is updated each year, rather than every ten years. At a time when the public finances are stretched, this is an ideal way of saving money."
Councils said that they did not want spending decisions to be made on the basis of the census. They were furious at being short-changed because resources were allocated on the basis of the 2001 Census.The Local Government Association said that improving alternative sources of information such as national insurance numbers would give a much clearer picture.
Source
The junk food gene: DNA flaw means two-thirds of us can't stop eating
Genetics again
Slimmer souls have always maintained that a sweet tooth can be banished with a big helping of will-power. But perhaps those who always succumb to the lure of the biscuit tin and the creamcake shop shouldn't feel so guilty about their weakness. The ability to resist or otherwise, it seems, may be built into your DNA.
Researchers say that almost two-thirds of us carry 'junk food genes' making us crave fatty and sugary foods. Those with this genetic flaw eat 100 calories more per meal - the equivalent of a small Kit Kat or a bag of Wotsits. It may not sound much, but over a week, this amounts to an extra 2,100 calories - an entire day's food. The research helps explain why some men and women find it hard to resist fast food, and why some diets are doomed to fail. But it may also lead to ways of treating obesity, which blights the lives of almost a quarter of us.
The scientists, from Dundee University, pinned down the effect of a rogue version of a gene called FTO, they explained in the respected New England Journal of Medicine. The flaw, carried by almost twothirds of Britons, was first linked to obesity last year. Up to 14 per cent of Britons carry two rogue copies of the gene, increasing their risk of obesity by 70 per cent and diabetes by 50 per cent. These people are on average almost half a stone heavier. The 49 per cent who have inherited just one flawed FTO gene are 30 per cent more likely to be obese than those with two normal copies of the gene and 25 per cent more likely to develop diabetes.
It wasn't clear if the flaw led to weight gain by increasing appetite, slowing down metabolism, cutting exercise levels or by making men and women take longer to feel full. But the latest research shows that it drives us to eat calorie-laden foods. Scientists tested the DNA of 100 primary pupils and looked at what they ate for lunch. Although those with the rogue gene didn't eat more, they were drawn to fatty and sugary foods, so took in 100 calories more per meal. The gene did not affect their metabolic rate, exercise levels or how full they felt.
Researcher Professor Colin Palmer said: 'The increase in obesity-seen in children may be largely attributable to the widespread availability of inexpensive and energy-dense foods.' These may be more attractive to those with the genetic variant, he explained. 'One hundred calories in a single sitting is half a Mars Bar. It doesn't seem like a lot but in terms of an increased risk of obesity, it is enough.'
But the effects of the gene are not overpowering, he added. So the 63 per cent of us with the 'junk food gene' should not feel that losing weight is out of our control. 'The advice is the same - you will not become overweight if you do not overeat.'
In an accompanying editorial, Dr Rudolph Leibel, of Columbia University in New York, predicted the advent of genetic tests to give early warning of those at risk of putting on weight.
Source
Elite British universities discriminate against academic merit
More than half of leading universities discriminate in favour of students from deprived backgrounds, sparking a fresh row over "social engineering". An official report reveals the majority of institutions belonging to the elite Russell Group show favour to sixth-formers from poor-performing schools. One in five give priority to applicants' whose parents missed out on higher education. And 53 per cent of universities take students' "family problems" into account as an admissions tiebreaker.
According to the report, Nottingham - which traditionally attracts more applicants than any other university - said students' A-level grades "may be valued more highly" if applicants were refugees or came from the traveller community, poor homes or a family without a history of going to university.
Last night, it prompted claims that children were being "punished" for attending a good school. Alan Smithers, professor of education at Buckingham University, said: "This will inevitable lead to someone with great potential, who doesn't tick all these boxes, being deprived of his or her rightful place. Social engineering like this can only weaken the university system and leave a sour taste in the mouth of many parents who see their bright and hard-working children denied places on social grounds."
The disclosure was made in a Government-backed study published four years after a landmark commission on fair access to university. The 2004 report, led by Professor Steven Schwartz, the former vice-chancellor of Brunel University, said institutions had to take a "wider view" of an applicant's potential to close the gap between the number of students admitted from professional and unskilled homes.
In the latest study, the Supporting Professionalism in Admissions unit, based at Sheffield Hallam University, said many "positive changes" had been made by universities in light of the Schwartz Report. It surveyed almost three-quarters of universities and colleges. Four in 10 vice-chancellors and principals said "should choose students partly in order to achieve a social mix".
The report said the 20-strong Russell Group - which includes Oxford, Cambridge, Imperial College London, University College London, Nottingham and St Andrews - were most likely to use admissions procedures to achieve a mixed student body. More than half of all universities - 51 per cent - said it was fair to make lower-grade offers to sixth formers from poor-performing schools and deprived homes.
Among Russell Group members, 53 per cent considered whether students attended a "low-achieving school" or had family problems, 40 per cent marked-up students in local authority care, 40 per cent favoured candidates with disabilities and 20 per cent looked favourably on those without university-educated parents.
Earlier this year, an investigation by the Telegraph found the London School of Economics, Bristol, Nottingham, Newcastle, and Edinburgh were among those allowing staff to admit students from poor-performing comprehensives with worse A-levels than those from top schools.
Dr Wendy Piatt, Russell Group director general, said: "A-level qualifications are a key source of information about academic ability but we do not just rely on exam grades. Russell Group universities take a range of factors and information into account to ensure that we can identify the candidates with the most potential to excel on our courses - whatever their social or educational background."
David Lammy, Higher Education Minister, said: "Creating a transparent and open admissions process is crucial to ensuring fair access and maintaining public confidence in our universities and colleges."
Source
The BBC hates Christmas -- as usual
As a much-loved fairytale, a sumptuous new version of Hansel and Gretel might seem like perfect family viewing for Christmas Day. But a new staging of the Brothers Grimm classic, featuring children's corpses hanging in an abattoir-like larder, has proved so terrifying that the Royal Opera House recommends it is not suitable for children under the age of eight. Which has left critics questioning why the BBC has chosen to screen the production at 3pm on Christmas Day - a prime-time family viewing slot.
Media watchdogs and the children's charity Kidscape have called on BBC2 to pull the controversial opera from its Christmas schedule over fears it could traumatise children. The two-hour fairytale features lust-crazed parents, a knife-wielding wicked witch who hangs children in her larder before baking them in a giant oven and a final scene of cannibalism in which children feast on her flesh. It has been marketed by the Royal Opera House as 'perfect family fare for everyone at holiday time'.
But opera critics have called it 'profoundly unpleasant' and said children in the audience on opening night were 'genuinely terrified'. Officials have now conceded the staging is unsuitable for younger children. But a BBC2 spokeswoman insisted it would still be screened on Christmas Day, but said there would be a parental warning about the opera's content.
Michele Elliott, founder of the children's charity Kidscape, said: 'Children could be really scared or even traumatised by watching this. Parents should write to the BBC to ask them not to show it.' John Beyer, of Mediawatch UK, said: 'What on earth are they thinking of? It beggars belief that they could contemplate showing that sort of barbarity on Christmas Day of all days.'
Like many Brothers Grimm fairytales, the story of Hansel and Gretel has an undeniably dark tone. Two children born to a poor woodcutter are abandoned in a forest and are captured by a witch who intends eat Hansel. She locks Hansel in a cage and forces Gretel to become her servant, but the children eventually outwit her and trap her in her own oven before escaping back to their father.
A Royal Opera House spokeman said: 'We haven't banned young children from coming to see it, but we felt eight might be an appropriate age to suggest. Children today grow up watching Doctor Who, they have seen far worse. I don't think there would be many kids having nightmares.' A BBC spokeswoman said the screening of the opera will be presented by newsreader Katie Derham, who will also give a warning about the production's content. She said: 'There are scary elements in the story which are reflected in the Royal Opera House's production, but these are given a comic and pantomime-like treatment.'
Source
The importance of family
From almost the first moment of recorded history, one set of relationships has been at the heart of the human experience and the basis of civilisation itself: a mother and father who depend on each other; the children who rely on them both; a supportive network of grandparents, aunts, uncles and cousins. Without the loyalties and obligations of the committed family, our ancestors would certainly have struggled to survive in a dangerous and frightening world. How else but with the help of kin could they have coped with the critical moments in life: birth, sickness, old age, the need to educate and train their young? Without such help from the very beginning, it may be asked whether humankind would ever have developed the capacity to build an advanced civilisation.
This week a report from Unicef, the UN's child welfare agency, warned that working mothers take a massive risk when they put their offspring into low quality childcare. Experts at the world body said such toddlers could suffer psychological harm and fare poorly later at school. Aggressive behaviour learned by children at some nurseries might contribute later to classroom disruption.
The study for is the first major international report to warn of the dangers of the drive, pushed again by the Government this week, to get mothers back to work early. But the family has a significance that goes way beyond the practicalities of day-to-day existence. From the very beginning, it has also given a special meaning to our human notions of past, present and future. Human beings could have regarded themselves as isolated individuals whose meaningless lives were snuffed out and forgotten after a brief span. Instead - a hugely important factor in driving social development - we have always tended to see ourselves as part of a great chain of existence, binding us to our forebears and to generations yet unborn. 'To forget your ancestors is to be a brook without a source, a tree without a root,' says the old Chinese proverb. That undoubtedly reflects one of our deepest human instincts.
In Britain, G. K. Chesterton summed it up strikingly more than 100 years ago when he described the family as 'this frail cord, flung from the forgotten hills of yesterday to the invisible mountains of tomorrow'. To modern ears, those words may sound somewhat romantic, or even a trifle overblown. But back in 1900, his view would have been shared by the overwhelming majority of MPs, lawyers, academics and the wider public. Until very recently, in fact, the importance of the family was taken for granted, not only as the basis of society, but as the foundation of our human identity.
Today? In western societies - and especially in the English-speaking world - we think we know better. Forget the wisdom of the ages. Forget our deep-rooted instincts. Forget precepts that have governed every society in every era of history. The importance of the 'traditional' family is being challenged as never before. The idea has taken root that human families can be constructed in any way people want. The message is that biology counts for nothing. Biological mothers don't matter to their children. Biological fathers don't matter either. All that matters is what adults want - and children must adapt to it, whether they like it or not.
The sheer speed of what is happening is quite astonishing. In less than 50 years, the old values have been stood on their head. Today, legislators don't hesitate to plunge into 'reforms' that tear up the rights, duties and obligations that have underpinned the family for millennia. They rush into new ' postmodernist' concepts of family, partnering and parenthood. Indeed, they are even attempting to banish the word 'marriage' from the statute books.
Everywhere in the West, the liberal consensus is on the march. In Britain, for example, a Labour Government has discouraged the use of the 'm' word in official documents, while in the U.S., the American Law Institute recommends that marriage should be ' deprivileged' and not be given a status above any other relationship.
Yet on any rational analysis, this reckless embrace of a brave new world is simply perverse, since there is no doubt whatever that the traditional family, underpinned by marriage, is the best way of bringing up secure, happy children and maintaining social stability. You don't have to be a religious believer or a Victorian moralist to take this view. The evidence speaks for itself (despite the strenuous efforts of the liberal establishment to ignore it). Fact: one in two unmarried couples splits up before their first child is five years old. The figure for married couples is just one in 12.
Fact: children from broken homes are 75 per cent more likely than their classmates to fail at school, 70 per cent more likely to be involved with drugs and 50 per cent more likely to have alcohol problems. They are also more likely to run away from home, find themselves in the care system and end up in jail.
At the very least, those bleak statistics should give us pause. The truth is that some of the most intractable problems facing Britain today - from our tragically high rate of teenage pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases to petty crime, gang membership and welfare dependency - have their roots in family breakdown.
That's not to say that all families are perfect. Sometimes, sadly, it can be for the best that a child is removed from its parents. Sometimes, it is for the best when couples separate. And it is certainly true that many, many children are brought up wonderfully in lone-parent households. All credit to the mothers - and sometimes fathers - who manage to do so. But that doesn't invalidate the general principle. By ignoring the real benefits that marriage brings to children and wider society, our legislators are making a profound error of judgment - perhaps the most serious mistake of the past half-century.
So how have we come to this? As I outline in my new book, there are a whole range of complex reasons - not least the hatred of the family that some shallow-thinking but influential intellectuals feel. They continue to promote the message that traditional family structures have no place in a world of gender equality.
Our elected representatives have played their part, too, by demoting marriage as an institution, weakening its contractual aspects and promoting the dogma that 'family' is just a legal and social convention. Take the shabby way successive governments have treated marriage in this country, even though they know perfectly well that it is one of the great foundations of society.
It was a Tory Chancellor, Kenneth Clarke, who dismissed the married couples' tax allowance as 'an anomaly'. And it was former Home Secretary Jack Straw who proclaimed: 'This Government will not preach about marriage.'
The result? In Britain today it just doesn't pay to get married. Our tax and benefits system is so arranged that if lower-income couples who are living together get married, they will significantly increase their tax payments and lower their benefits. Perhaps it's no wonder that this country has a higher percentage of lone-parent families than any other country in Europe, apart from Sweden. The system is designed to create family instability. And the costs, both social and financial, are huge.
How to explain this bizarre discouragement of an institution so important to the happiness, stability and financial health of the country? Politicians are terrified of being thought 'judgmental' about the way citizens live. And they obviously take the defeatist view that nothing can be done to improve matters anyway. Isn't it curious, then, that those same politicians feel no compunction at all about bossing us around to tell us to stop smoking, cut down our drinking and eat five portions of fruit and veg a day?
The same aversion to moralising applies increasingly to the laws on marriage and divorce. Not only are we witnessing ever easier divorce - whatever the children may need or want - and same-sex marriages, but there is also growing pressure to remove the words 'father' and 'mother' from birth certificates and replace them by 'Progenitor A' and 'Progenitor B' (as is already happening in Spain).
Whatever the motivation behind such trends, the ' traditional' family structure is being badly eroded. All this reminds me of the grim ideas floated in ancient Athens 2,500 years ago. In the vision sketched out in Plato's Republic - a philosophical treatise on the most fundamental principles of the conduct of human society - mating would be random. Children would be raised by the state. Neither mothers nor fathers could claim their biological offspring as their own. Nor could they raise their children. In Plato's bleak prescription, men and women would join together briefly, then separate. Fathers had children by many mothers. Mothers bore children by different men. A disturbing scenario indeed.
But isn't Plato's view now triumphant? In a few brief decades, the western world has so altered the traditional concept of the family that it's possible to recognise the basic elements of the Platonic blueprint. Ideas which once seemed just a speculative nightmare now appear to be an emerging reality.
And yet the family in its traditional form is crucial to us all - not simply because it underpins social stability or because it connects us to the past and the future, but because it's also a bulwark of freedom itself. Why? Because the invisible bonds it creates between its members generate loyalties and affections capable of resisting any tyranny. That's what, in the end, makes the family not just a conserving institution, but also the engine of liberty and progress.
Yes, the family can sometimes fail. When it does, the consequences can be appalling. But at its best, it provides an anchor for individuals who would otherwise have no inspiration or support in an uncertain world.
For these reasons we should think long and hard about where we are being taken by some of the fashionable dogmas of our day: the belief that divorce or separation doesn't hurt; that what adults do can't seriously harm their children; that cohabiting is at least as good as marrying; that genetic relationships don't matter; and that 'family' can mean whatever we want it to mean. All of these dogmas are false. All are deeply damaging. Every day we can see the consequences in broken families and broken lives. In allowing matters to come to this, the liberal establishment has made arguably the most profound mistake of the past half-century. Dare we allow it to continue?
Source
Saturday, December 13, 2008
British school choir forced to pull out of Christmas concert as carols were 'too religious'
A school choir was forced to withdraw from a Christmas event because organisers branded its carols 'too religious'. Around 60 children aged between seven and 11 had spent six weeks practising favourites including Once In Royal David's City and Silent Night for the Corringham Winter Festival. But they were let down at the last minute when their headteacher was informed their programme did not 'dovetail' with the festival's theme. The event ended up going ahead last week with non-religious music and displays from an Irish school of dancing and performing arts students.
The snub was widely criticised by furious parents and religious leaders who accused the organisers of pandering to the politically correct brigade. Nicola Hales, 36, whose nine-year-old daughter Rhiannon goes to Arthur Bugler County Junior School in Stanford-le-Hope, Essex, said: 'They must have been practising for about six weeks. 'All the programmes had gone out with the school's name on it but we got a newsletter home saying sorry for the confusion. I heard it was because the songs were too religious. 'It's ridiculous that you can't sing religious songs. It's Christmas - when can you sing them?'
Another parent, who delined to be named, said: 'The school was advised by the organisers that the carols they had chosen were not suitable because they were deemed to have a religious theme. The kids were really disappointed. 'I can't see how the Christmas carols they were going to sing would have been offensive to anyone.'
The Prayer Book Society, said 'winter festivals' were threatening traditional Christmas celebrations. Chairman Prudence Dailey added: 'These politically correct winter festivals seek to make Christmas part of a 'multi-faith' mix and hark back to pagan winter solstice observance. 'They see Christmas as merely a local seasonal event and miss its central religious significance at the heart of national identity. 'Perhaps organisers would benefit from reading the Book of Common Prayer and discovering what winter festivities are in fact about.'
Father David Rollins, of St John the Evangelist Church in Corringham, added: 'It's rather disappointing. Christmas is a major Christian event.' The school's headteacher, Sue Morris, said pupils had taken part in 'a great deal of rehearsal' before they were informed the songs 'would not have dovetailed into the event's theme'. 'There was no time to reorganise the choir's planned programme and we thought it best we did not take part,' she added.
The non-religious event was planned by Corringham Town Festival Partnership, even though the area is in Thurrock, where 75 per cent of the population described themselves as Christian in the 2001 census. The next biggest religious group was Muslims, who make up one per cent of the population, followed by Sikhs, who account for barely half of one per cent of residents. A spokesman for Thurrock Islamic Education and Cultural Association said: 'I don't think any Muslims would be offended by carols.'
There has been growing concern in recent years at the burgeoning politically correct attitude to Christmas because of concerns that people of other faiths will be offended or feel excluded. Councils have started celebrating winter festivals or wintervals, businesses are banning staff from putting up Christmas decorations and there is a thriving industry for cards with non-religious themes.
Last year the Bishop of St David's in Pembrokeshire, the Rt Rev Carl Cooper, warned political correctness was destroying the meaning of Christmas. 'Teachers and other public servants have become paralysed with fear and political correctness. They need to regain confidence in our culture and traditions,' he said.
The chairman of the Corringham Town Festival Partnership yesterday made the bizarre claim carols had been dumped because the winter festival was meant to be 'upbeat'. 'It was nothing to do with being politically correct or anti-Christian, it was a Christian celebration,' he said.
Source
Nasty British teacher tells little kids that Father Christmas isn't real
A primary school teacher left a class of 25 pupils in tears when she told them Father Christmas does not exist.
The supply teacher blurted out: "it's your parents who leave out presents on Chrsitmas Day" when excited youngsters got rowdy as they talked about Christmas. The class of seven-year-olds at Blackshaw Lane Primary School, Royton, near Oldham, Greater Manchester burst into tears and told their parents when they got home. The parents then complained about the incident and were sent a letter by the school saying the teacher has been disciplined over the gaffe.
One father said: "My son came home and said that his substitute teacher had told the class that Santa doesn't exist and it's your mum and dad that put out presents for them. "Apparently, they were all talking about Christmas and being a bit rowdy. She just came straight out with it. "My lad was nearly in tears and so was everyone else in the class - especially as it was so close to Christmas. I thought it was wrong. "He was distraught about it. He's only seven-years-old and it's part of the magic of Christmas to him. "We told him that she did not believe in Father Christmas because of her religion and he's fine now. "I found it shocking. She has done it maliciously. "A lot of parents were disgusted and complained to the school. If she was a regular teacher then I think a lot more would have been done."
Angela McCormick, the headteacher, refused to comment on the incident. Oldham Council's service director for children, young people and families, Janet Doherty, said: "This is a matter for the individual school to resolve. "We have every confidence that the head will deal with it sensitively and appropriately."
Source
Children suffer as mothers forced to return to work
Young children in Britain could be suffering because their mothers are forced to return to work too soon, according to Unicef
The United Nations Children's Fund also says that today's babies and toddlers are the first generation in history to spend much of their early childhoods in formal child care rather than being looked after at home. A Unicef report claims the majority of British babies spend most of the day in nurseries or with childminders, despite a growing body of research showing that under-threes benefit emotionally and behaviourally if they are looked after at home.
The study, by Unicef's Innocenti Research Centre in Florence, raises concerns about the development of children who go into formal care outside their homes so early. Part of this change is down to greater equality and opportunities for women, Unicef says. But the study also says the fact that two-thirds of women in developed countries now work is a "cause for concern", as it reflects the fact that most families need two incomes to make ends meet.
In addition, it quotes scientific research that has found a lack of contact with parents can lead to children becoming depressed and withdrawn, perform less well at school and develop behavioural problems. "The younger the child and the longer the hours spend in child care, the greater the risk," it warns. The study says that in the UK, a "majority" of babies less than 12 months old spend most of the working day in child care. It recommends that babies should be looked after by their parents for the first year of their lives, and that Governments should ensure 12 months of paid parental leave is available at 50 per cent of salary.
But the report says that maternity leave provision in the UK is "inadequate" and less generous than in many other countries including Slovenia and Iceland. Currently new mothers in Britain get 39 weeks of paid maternity leave, receiving 90 per cent of their average pay for the first six weeks and a fixed sum of œ117.18 a week for the other 33. Fathers are only entitled to two weeks' paternity leave at a maximum of 117.18 pounds a week. Government plans to give millions of parents greater rights to request flexible working arrangements to accommodate childcare arrangements last week triggered a backlash from business groups. Some companies fear that more red tape will make it harder for them to survive the recession. Overall, England is only meeting half of a set of 10 UN "benchmarks" for the care and education of young children, and is lagging behind many other developed countries.
In addition to failing to provide a full year of parental leave at 50 per cent of salary, England does not spend 1 per cent of GDP on early childhood services; has high child poverty levels; does not have near-universal health services for children; and allows more than 15 pre-school children to be looked after by one member of staff.
David Bull, the executive director of Unicef UK, said: "The report is clear that expenditure in England on pre-school education has quadrupled in the last 10 years. "However, despite the Government's undoubted commitment, the UK still has three million children living in poverty and higher rates of infant death and low birth weight than many comparable countries. "High quality child care is not yet available to all, and parental leave provisions remain inadequate. "This Government has taken great strides in advancing child wellbeing since our 2007 report, but much more still needs to be done. "These changes will require investment, but there is none better than investing in the prospects of our youngest children."
Unicef rates parental leave in the UK as less generous than in 14 other countries, with the list headed by Norway where the mother and father can divide 44 weeks' leave at full pay between them.
Source
Forcing Britain to sober up
The proposed ban on pub `happy hours' is a metaphor for the government's miserabilist disgust with fun.
The economic downturn, and the UK government's tax-juggling efforts to resolve the crisis, has led some to proclaim that `macro' politics and economic management are back. Surely the financial turmoil means that the government will be too preoccupied to meddle in our day-to-day lives via hectoring advice and heinous bans? Surely politicians will now be forced to concentrate on bigger issues than what parents put in their kids' lunch boxes or how many units of alcohol Brits drink on a Saturday night? Dream on. It's business as usual for New Labour.
This week, the government will announce a new set of bans and regulations that will do nothing to stimulate the free market but will help to stifle a free society. Once again, the government's determination to demonise alcohol and drinkers is at the top of the agenda. As the `season to be jolly' approaches, the government's response is to crank up the spirit of Ebenezer Scrooge even higher this year. Even though cash is tight for many people, politicians have decided to add to our fiscal woes by banning `happy hours' in pubs - those rather misnamed sessions where punters can drown their sorrows at a discount, usually for a couple of hours or more. From this week, pub landlords and club owners will no longer be allowed to sell alcohol at reduced prices at any time. So pubs and clubs can no longer attract punters with promotional offers, such as two-for-one or half-price drinks.
This policy comes after the UK chancellor of the exchequer, Alastair Darling, recently announced tax and spending changes to provide a boost to the ailing economy. While UK sales tax - value added tax (VAT) - would be cut from 17.5 to 15 per cent for a period of 13 months starting on 1 December, Darling said he would raise duty on alcohol further, in order to keep it at the same price despite the drop in VAT. This blow for the pub industry follows the nine per cent increase in beer duty announced in the last Budget in March with a promise of rises at two per cent above inflation for the next four years. The proposed ban on `happy hours' is yet another device to keep the price of alcohol artificially high with the hope of curbing `anti-social behaviour'.
Gerry Sutcliffe, the licensing minister, told the Commons Culture Select Committee last week: `If it [happy hour] is a promotion causing people to get drunk and causing problems then it is right that we should act.' (1) If Sutcliffe is worried about disorderly conduct, such as punch-ups at pub closing time, then there already exist enough laws to deal with such aggravations. It seems the government's real concern is that people choose to go to pubs with the full intention of getting drunk. For the government, unhealthily preoccupied with its citizens' personal conduct, such outrageous behaviour simply won't do.
Under the proposed codes, brewers will be forced to print warnings on drink labels and pubs will have to display the number of units of alcohol in each type of drink served, just in case pub patrons are too dim to realise that whisky is pretty strong compared with beer. The new rules would be enforced by local government trading standards officers and the police, who will have the power to place conditions on the issue of licences and to remove licences where premises breach the code.
On top of all this reprehensible pettiness, the government is considering forcing brewers to reduce alcohol content in drink, while suggesting that tax on alcohol should be linked to the strength of alcohol content. Furthermore, the government is seeking to reduce the drink-drive limit to zero for drivers who are under 21 years of age - if a blood or breath test shows any alcohol in their bodies, that will be an offence.
Officialdom always likes to justify such restrictive measures in the only way petty officials know how - through soulless and dry statistics. Apparently alcohol `misuse' costs the National Health Service more than 2.7billion a year, while the economy suffers a 25billion blow every year through lost working days.
Well, here are some other figures that the government conveniently ignores: major brewers in the UK saw their profits slump by 78 per cent between 2004 and 2006, suggesting we're not quite a nation of public lager guzzlers. Thirty-six pubs close every week, on average, due to the smoking ban and the relentless hikes on the price of alcohol. The Campaign For Real Ale (Camra) estimates that such closures have cost 44,000 jobs over the past five years, and 43,000 are projected to be lost over the next five. There have been 37 major brewery closures, accounting for 25 per cent of all brewery employees. This year alone, 13 pub operators, operating 960 pubs, have gone into administration (3).
No doubt the economic downturn has affected pub sales of food and drink, but it is the government's war on alcohol that is ultimately to blame for destroying the livelihoods of tens of thousands of people. For the government, it seems, forcing landowners and brewery employees into penury is a price worth paying if it gets citizens to behave in a sanitised and soberly manner on Saturday nights. After all, the new measures that will be introduced this week will only further increase pub closures and redundancies. So much for trying to kickstart the economy.
Indeed, all of this proves that far from New Labour returning to old-style social democracy and economic management, its obsession with micro-managing our lives continues at an alarming pace. Although some of these new measures, such as the drink-driving ban for under-21s, won't have a direct impact on most drinkers, they do help soften up public opinion for more wide-ranging bans and controls in the future. The government admitted over the weekend that some of its proposals, such as stopping cigarettes from being displayed in newsagents or vending machines, won't have any impact on public health and these initiatives have now been dropped at the last minute.
Nevertheless, the sheer relentlessness of these measures and proposals helps legitimise the notion that it is perfectly acceptable for government to restrict public space and personal freedom. That assumption is also based on the poisonous and corrosive notion that British citizens are inherently problematic, especially when we've had a few drinks. It is this genuine fear and barely concealed disgust for us that propels New Labour to carry on restricting our autonomy at every opportunity.
That fear and loathing is itself a product of New Labour's peculiar development in British politics, as a self-referencing clique of managers and technocrats with no genuine roots or connections in wider society. As such, their isolation from ordinary people has generated a succession of Labour ministers who are, at best, embarrassingly unworldly about adult life or absolutely petrified of the city they live and work in. One minister, Caroline Flint, said she `couldn't believe that people actually go out to get drunk'; Harriet Harman couldn't face touring the London district of Peckham - an area she has represented in parliament for 26 years - without wearing a stab-proof vest. This would be funny if New Labour's jittery nerves didn't have such destructive consequences on our freedoms and our lifestyles.
Anyone hoping for a return to `macro politics' and the end of New Labour petty meddling will be sorely disappointed. Although the government realises that Britain's economy is in a dire state, it still thinks most of us are sinking even lower in our personal lives. Having uncorked the sour whine of micro-management, it seems this government hasn't tired of pouring out strong regulation measures just yet.
Source
A New York rebellion against libel imperialism
Brendan O'Neill meets the writers and publishers who have launched a war of independence from England's `notorious, repulsive' libel laws.
Rachel Ehrenfeld doesn't look like a fugitive. Petite, demure, and clad in the black skirt and blouse that is the uniform of New York's working women, she sits on a leather swivel chair in her twenty-fourth-floor apartment on the Upper West Side. Her living-room window offers a picture-postcard view of New York City in all its towering, light-flickering glory. She serves chai tea and a plate of oatmeal cookies. She asks how I am coping with the cold weather. You'd never think that this woman is effectively on the run from the English legal system.
`I cannot go to England. It's too risky. I once visited Holloway Prison when I was researching correctional facilities, and I do not want to visit it as an inmate.' She takes a sip of tea. Her crime? In 2004, she wrote a book called Funding Evil: How Terrorism is Financed and How to Stop It, in which she made allegations about a Saudi billionaire. The Saudi sued her, not in New York - where she lives and works and where her book was published - but in London, on the basis that 23 copies of Funding Evil were sold to residents of the UK via an online bookseller, and thus it was `published' in Britain, too (1).
Ehrenfeld refused to show up for the court case, and even refused to recognise the London High Court's jurisdiction over her (uppity New York broad that she is), and therefore lost by default. The judge ordered her and her publishers to stump up 30,000 pounds plus costs to the Saudi. Yet while Ehrenfeld might have a twenty-fourth floor apartment in the Upper West Side, she is still a mere writer and researcher by profession (`I don't have a private bank or oil fields, or any friends with a private bank or oil fields', she says), of whom the unworldly, wig-wearing lords of the English legal system might as well have demanded 30million as much as 30,000.
Now, she is legitimately concerned that if she goes to Britain she will be `seized', or at least treated as `persona non grata, the libel defendant who refused to grovel'. She is no ordinary fugitive, then. She is a `free speech fugitive', a victim of what she describes as England's `libel imperialism' and its `reach across the Atlantic'. Yet she is not accepting the ruling against her lying down. Instead she has spearheaded an American rebellion against English libel law - a war of independence, if you like, from English illiberalism and reaction - which has won the support of writers, publishers and senators, and which might soon get the nod from future-president of America Barack Obama himself. The end result could well be the completion of the American Revolution launched 230 years ago: full freedom from the yoke of British tyranny.
Ehrenfeld, born in Israel, has been writing about terrorism for 20 years. She is an expert on the cash trails behind terror groups, as her cluttered apartment attests: everywhere I look, book spines bearing the words `JIHAD' and `MONEY' and `EVIL' and `OSAMA' stare back at me. She has been a consultant to both the US Department of Defense's Threat Reduction Agency and the CIA.
After 9/11, which she witnessed from this apartment in midtown Manhattan, Ehrenfeld wrote the book that would land her in boiling water: Funding Evil. She says her experience - sued in London for something she said in New York - shows the dangers of `libel tourism'. Judy Platt of the prestigious Association of American Publishers, which is backing to the hilt Ehrenfeld's resistance of England's libel laws, tells me that `libel tourism' involves `wealthy individuals' using `plaintiff-friendly foreign libel laws in an attempt to silence US-based writers'. And it isn't only Saudis. In 2005, Roman Polanski, the Polish film director who lives in France, and who is literally a fugitive from the US after allegedly committing statutory rape in 1977, sued an American publication, Vanity Fair, in London. And won. In 2006, Britney Spears, the all-American celebrity, sued National Enquirer, the all-American tabloid, in Belfast (2).
It isn't hard to see the attraction of England's (and Ireland's) libel laws to plaintiffs who want to challenge or upbraid or punish American publications that have dented their reputations: our libel laws are far more claimant-friendly, stringent and severe than America's. Under English libel law, the claimant doesn't have to prove that the allegedly defamatory statement was false, only that it was potentially damaging to his or her reputation; under American law, claimants do have to prove falsity. In America, following the ruling in New York Times v Sullivan in 1964, there is a `public figure defence', which makes it difficult indeed for people in the public eye to sue for libel. In order to succeed, claimants would have to show not only that the allegations were false but that they were made maliciously or with reckless disregard for truth. In England, in an undiluted bastardisation of natural justice, the claimant doesn't have to prove very much at all; instead the burden of proof falls on the defendant to prove his own innocence.
Where England's libel laws are weighted in favour of the claimant and his almost sacred reputation, American laws of defamation err on the side of defending writers' and publishers' First Amendment right to free speech. So when English libel courts issue a ruling on a book or an article written by an American and published in America - when an English judge labels American-uttered words as outrageous, scandalous, Beyond Acceptable Debate - they do far more than cause an outbreak of headaches among the writers and publishers being sued; they also implicitly interfere in America's internal affairs, undermining from afar the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of speech and freedom of the press.
English rulings, routinely enforced by American courts on behalf of English courts, subject Americans to a kind of colonial censorship, gagging by foreign lords. Even when English rulings are not directly enforced, simply their existence can have a `chilling effect' on open debate in the US. `Such judgements can - and do - chill the kind of reporting that US laws are designed to encourage and protect', says Judy Platt. Ehrenfeld knows two American authors who have had contracted books cancelled because publishers feared there would be libel cases in London (A Town Called Sue). `Just the prospect of expensive lawsuits and international humiliation can kill the kind of investigation we need [and] the investigative spirit itself', she says.
Not for much longer. Thanks to Ehrenfeld, New York has become the first city in America to reject fully England's `repugnant' libel rulings.
After the London High Court judgement against her in 2005, Ehrenfeld, with the support of a veritable army of the great and the good of NYC - the Authors Guild, Forbes Inc, the American Society of Newspaper Editors, Amazon - launched a counterclaim in a New York court. The memorandum filed by Ehrenfeld's lawyers said that writers should be free `to ferret out and publish the facts without fear of expensive lawsuits and huge judgments in foreign countries whose defamation laws and commitment to freedom of expression and public discourse are "repugnant" and antithetical and "contrary" to our fundamental public policy'. The use of the word `repugnant' comes from an earlier rebellion against English libel law. In 1997, the US Maryland State Appeals Court had been asked to enforce an English libel ruling against an American citizen. But in this instance the court refused, arguing that `the principles of English libel law fail to measure up to the basic human rights standards and are repugnant to public policy and the constitutional ideal of free speech'.
After months and months of legal wrangling, Ehrenfeld's counterclaim led to the introduction of the Libel Terrorism Protection Act by the New York state legislature in April this year. The Act is an enormous, historic kick in the teeth to English libel. Firstly, it forbids New York courts from enforcing a foreign libel judgement `unless the country where it was decided grants the same or better protection as US standards for freedom of speech'. And second, it `expands an individual's ability to have a court declare a foreign libel judgement invalid in New York' (3). This effectively means English libel rulings can no longer be enforced against anything said or written by a New Yorker or published in New York. NYC has made itself a no-go zone for English libel rulings; it has freed itself from the whack of the former colonial power's hammer.
`New Yorkers must be able to speak out on issues of public concern without living in fear that they will be sued outside the United States, under legal standards inconsistent with our First Amendment rights', said New York governor David A Paterson as he signed on the dotted line on what has become known as `Rachel's Law', after Ehrenfeld (4). Illinois has followed NYC's lead and passed its own Rachel's Law. More recently, a `Rachel-inspired' federal law - the Libel Tourism Bill - was passed in the House of Representatives in September. There is also a Free Speech Protection Bill being debated in the Senate, which would bar all US courts from enforcing libel rulings that are `antithetical' to the First Amendment. One of the great ironies of the recent outbreak of British gushing about `our' new, liberal, European-style president-elect Barack Obama is that one of Obama's first acts might be to sign in a new law that will label English libel rulings as `repugnant to our Nation's fundamental constitutional values, in particular its strong protection of the right to freedom of speech' (5). Obama may have to teach us backward Brits a lesson about what it means to be liberal.
It is fitting that New York should have led this American uprising against English libel. New York is, in Ehrenfeld's words, `the capital of American publishing'. It is a city that rattles and shakes with conversation and debate, from its numerous daily newspapers to its world-famous magazines (New York and New Yorker); from the garish, head-spinning advertising in Times Square to the 9/11 Truthers I saw loitering around the World Trade Center memorial site trying to engage passers-by in debates about `disappearing aeroplanes' and the density of steel. A cab driver taking me through Brooklyn pointed to a sign that said `Non-horn zone - $350 fine' and said: `Can you believe that shit?' Earlier this year, when some states discussed banning youth from letting their pants sag too low, NY-based lawyers and activists for the American Civil Liberties Union defended sagging pants on the basis that they are a form of expression. A city that publishes thousands of books a year and sells newspapers on every street corner, where restrictions on horn-honking (the most basic form of communication) are seen as an affront to individual liberty and where even showing your Calvin Kleins to the world can become a free speech issue, is no place for England's severe, repugnant and punishing libel laws.
The American rebellion against English libel law has been barely discussed in Britain. Perhaps it's just too embarrassing for us. Yet sitting in the flat where this all began, where Ehrenfeld's refusal to kowtow to English libel law and her decision to fight back were born, it is hard not to feel part of an historic moment. `I was determined not to have my rights undermined', says Ehrenfeld. `The American ideal of free speech and liberty emerged from the fight against British oppression more than 200 years ago. Now we find ourselves fighting against them again.'
Source
Confusion as British watchdog U-turns and says you CAN eat nuts during pregnancy
Once again the official wisdom goes into reverse. It did more harm than good. What a surprise! (NOT)
Advice to parents worried about children developing a peanut allergy is to be withdrawn by food safety chiefs. Women have been advised to avoid eating peanuts during pregnancy and while breast-feeding if they or the father had a family history of allergic conditions. Parents were also recommended not to give peanuts to children until they are at least three years old to avoid sensitisation. The advice has been in place since 1998 and has been partly blamed for the rise of 'nut hysteria', with parents and children becoming increasingly anxious about exposure to peanuts.
But the Food Safety Agency says it is no longer backing the advice because 'current evidence' does not support it. It is recommending to government ministers that the advice is dropped. However, it will not be replaced by any guidance on what parents should do to reduce the risk of their children developing a peanut allergy. Instead the FSA is saying those at higher risk should not change their diets while emphasising that this is not a green light for peanuts to be included in meals for young children and pregnant women.
The change comes amid a growing change of view among scientists, medics and policy-makers, who believe avoiding peanuts in early life may be making the problem worse. In the past 20 years the number of British children.with a peanut allergy has nearly doubled, with one in 55 being diagnosed with it.
A spokesman for the FSA said the existing advice had been reviewed by the independent Committee on Toxicity. She said: 'Previously, there were concerns that children could develop a peanut allergy as a result of their mother eating peanuts during pregnancy or while breast-feeding. 'When COT last reviewed this subject there was some evidence to support this concern and this was the basis of their precautionary advice issued in 1998. 'The new review by the COT does not suggest this current advice is harmful. 'However, the FSA board has agreed that the balance of evidence now available does not support continuing to follow this current advice.'
But she said this did not mean 'higher-risk' parents should start feeding their children peanuts. 'Where there is a family history of allergy, parents might want to discuss their individual case with their GP or health professional if they are concerned,' she added.
An influential House of Lords committee last year recommended that pregnant women no longer be warned to avoid peanuts, saying there is scant evidence it helps their children avoid nut allergies and may even be 'counter productive'. Some doctors believe exposure to peanuts early in life could save children from developing an allergy by priming their immune system.
Among studies suggesting this could work was research into the eating habits of 8,000 children in Britain and Israel, where the incidence of peanut allergy is less than two in 1,000. From eight months old the average Israeli child eats seven grams of peanuts a month - most British children eat none.
Source
The little-known dangers of heavy water-drinking kill slimmer
A mother of five died after drinking too much water three weeks after she had begun a water-based diet in an attempt to lose weight, an inquest was told. Jacqueline Henson, 40, was determined to slim down from 14st (89kg) and was "over the moon" after losing nearly 12lb (5.4kg) in one week after starting the LighterLife diet plan, Huddersfield Coroner's Court was told yesterday.
The LighterLife diet, which has been linked with water poisoning, hair loss and disrupting the menstrual cycle, suggests that only 530 calories should be consumed a day - a quarter of a woman's recommended daily intake - for a period of 12 weeks, and drinking four litres of water per day.
Mrs Henson drank four litres of water in less than two hours on November 14, which caused her brain to swell. She collapsed in the bathroom of her home in Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, and was pronounced dead the next day. Her husband, Brian, 40, said that he was devastated, and told the inquest how she had been "over the moon at losing weight". He said: "The more water she drank, the more weight she would lose." Mrs Henson had arrived home at 5pm and had drunk two large bottles of water before settling in front of the television, drinking from a pint glass of water she had poured herself.
Mr Henson said: "At 11pm she stood up and said her stomach was solid. She was walking across the room and was sick. "At 11.15pm she said she had a headache and went upstairs to the toilet. My 18-year-old daughter Chantelle went upstairs and I heard her saying, `Mum, mum'. I knew something was wrong. Her eyes were closed and she didn't appear to be breathing."
Joanna Neville, of LighterLife, was asked by the coroner, Roger Whittaker, about the potentially dangerous regime, but she explained that the diet, which is aimed at people who are 3st or more overweight, recommended drinking four litres of water over the course of a day in small amounts. Asked if the company conveyed that message to dieters, Ms Neville said: "We are doing that quite clearly and will continue to do so."
The court was told that on October 18 Mrs Henson had visited her GP, who had given her a check-up before allowing her to go on the diet. Recording a verdict of accidental death, the coroner said: "No one should drink water in the quantity that Mrs Henson did over that short a period. Little and often."
The National Institute for Clinical Excellence recommends that very low-calorie diets should be followed for a maximum of 12 weeks, and states that any diet of less than 600 calories should be used only under medical supervision.
LighterLife, which has an annual turnover of 18 million pounds and charges 66 per week for its specially tailored "food packs", claims to have helped 60,000 people to lose weight, despite the controversy surrounding its recommendations. The diet sets a target of losing 3st over 14 weeks. A spokesman for LighterLife said: "Our programme gives clear guidance that water should be consumed regularly over the course of the day, and the coroner confirmed the events were a tragic accident."
Source
Newer breast cancer drug cuts risk of death by a fifth compared to NHS treatment, research shows
A drug for breast cancer has been found to cut the risk of dying by almost a fifth compared with the Health Service's standard treatment. The research by an international team is the first to show that women with early breast cancer taking the aromatase inhibitor (AI) Femara for five years after surgery live longer without the disease, compared with those taking tamoxifen.
AIs were approved two years ago for NHS use in postmenopausal women after studies showed they cut disease recurrence and improve survival. But patients usually take tamoxifen initially and switch to an AI drug within two to three years. The study said women using the AI drug Femara, also known as letrozole, for the entire five-year period are more likely to survive.
Risk of death was reduced by 19 per cent, according to data presented to the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium in the U.S. by the International Breast Cancer Study Group. The trial studied 8,000 women in 27 countries, including the UK, of whom 5,000 were assigned to either Femara or tamoxifen without being switched. For the rest, who were switched to Femara halfway through, the survival benefit was 13 per cent.
Nigel Bundred, Professor of Surgical Oncology at South Manchester University Hospitals Trust, said: 'These data represent an important milestone in the treatment of women with breast cancer. 'For the first time we are seeing suggested survival benefit with upfront aromatase inhibitor letrozole therapy for five years compared with tamoxifen for the same time period.'
Henning-T Mouridsen, professor of oncology-at Copenhagen University Hospital-and one of the trial investigators, said the drug produces an 'early and sustained reduction' in recurrence of disease in the breast and its spread into the body. Around 44,000 British women develop breast cancer a year including 33,000 after the menopause.
AI drugs shut down the body's supply of oestrogen altogether, while tamoxifen works by blocking oestrogen's effects on cancer cells. These drugs work in women only after the menopause and where breast cells are sensitive to oestrogen - up to four in five cases.
The Government's rationing watchdog has approved three aromatase inhibitors (AI) - Aromasin, Arimidex and Femara - alongside tamoxifen. Primary care trusts are expected to fund them, but the annual cost of an AI is 900 pounds, compared with less than 300 for tamoxifen. A survey last year found only a fifth of Britain's biggest breast cancer hospital units were definitely following guidance to switch patients after initial treatment with tamoxifen.
Professor Jeffrey Tobias, Professor of Cancer Medicine at University College and Middlesex School of Medicine, said the latest findings mean AI drugs should now be used in preference to tamoxifen. He added that osteoporosis sufferers may still be better off on tamoxifen as AIs cause bone problems, but tamoxifen has a fourfold higher risk of causing womb disorders
Source
A school choir was forced to withdraw from a Christmas event because organisers branded its carols 'too religious'. Around 60 children aged between seven and 11 had spent six weeks practising favourites including Once In Royal David's City and Silent Night for the Corringham Winter Festival. But they were let down at the last minute when their headteacher was informed their programme did not 'dovetail' with the festival's theme. The event ended up going ahead last week with non-religious music and displays from an Irish school of dancing and performing arts students.
The snub was widely criticised by furious parents and religious leaders who accused the organisers of pandering to the politically correct brigade. Nicola Hales, 36, whose nine-year-old daughter Rhiannon goes to Arthur Bugler County Junior School in Stanford-le-Hope, Essex, said: 'They must have been practising for about six weeks. 'All the programmes had gone out with the school's name on it but we got a newsletter home saying sorry for the confusion. I heard it was because the songs were too religious. 'It's ridiculous that you can't sing religious songs. It's Christmas - when can you sing them?'
Another parent, who delined to be named, said: 'The school was advised by the organisers that the carols they had chosen were not suitable because they were deemed to have a religious theme. The kids were really disappointed. 'I can't see how the Christmas carols they were going to sing would have been offensive to anyone.'
The Prayer Book Society, said 'winter festivals' were threatening traditional Christmas celebrations. Chairman Prudence Dailey added: 'These politically correct winter festivals seek to make Christmas part of a 'multi-faith' mix and hark back to pagan winter solstice observance. 'They see Christmas as merely a local seasonal event and miss its central religious significance at the heart of national identity. 'Perhaps organisers would benefit from reading the Book of Common Prayer and discovering what winter festivities are in fact about.'
Father David Rollins, of St John the Evangelist Church in Corringham, added: 'It's rather disappointing. Christmas is a major Christian event.' The school's headteacher, Sue Morris, said pupils had taken part in 'a great deal of rehearsal' before they were informed the songs 'would not have dovetailed into the event's theme'. 'There was no time to reorganise the choir's planned programme and we thought it best we did not take part,' she added.
The non-religious event was planned by Corringham Town Festival Partnership, even though the area is in Thurrock, where 75 per cent of the population described themselves as Christian in the 2001 census. The next biggest religious group was Muslims, who make up one per cent of the population, followed by Sikhs, who account for barely half of one per cent of residents. A spokesman for Thurrock Islamic Education and Cultural Association said: 'I don't think any Muslims would be offended by carols.'
There has been growing concern in recent years at the burgeoning politically correct attitude to Christmas because of concerns that people of other faiths will be offended or feel excluded. Councils have started celebrating winter festivals or wintervals, businesses are banning staff from putting up Christmas decorations and there is a thriving industry for cards with non-religious themes.
Last year the Bishop of St David's in Pembrokeshire, the Rt Rev Carl Cooper, warned political correctness was destroying the meaning of Christmas. 'Teachers and other public servants have become paralysed with fear and political correctness. They need to regain confidence in our culture and traditions,' he said.
The chairman of the Corringham Town Festival Partnership yesterday made the bizarre claim carols had been dumped because the winter festival was meant to be 'upbeat'. 'It was nothing to do with being politically correct or anti-Christian, it was a Christian celebration,' he said.
Source
Nasty British teacher tells little kids that Father Christmas isn't real
A primary school teacher left a class of 25 pupils in tears when she told them Father Christmas does not exist.
The supply teacher blurted out: "it's your parents who leave out presents on Chrsitmas Day" when excited youngsters got rowdy as they talked about Christmas. The class of seven-year-olds at Blackshaw Lane Primary School, Royton, near Oldham, Greater Manchester burst into tears and told their parents when they got home. The parents then complained about the incident and were sent a letter by the school saying the teacher has been disciplined over the gaffe.
One father said: "My son came home and said that his substitute teacher had told the class that Santa doesn't exist and it's your mum and dad that put out presents for them. "Apparently, they were all talking about Christmas and being a bit rowdy. She just came straight out with it. "My lad was nearly in tears and so was everyone else in the class - especially as it was so close to Christmas. I thought it was wrong. "He was distraught about it. He's only seven-years-old and it's part of the magic of Christmas to him. "We told him that she did not believe in Father Christmas because of her religion and he's fine now. "I found it shocking. She has done it maliciously. "A lot of parents were disgusted and complained to the school. If she was a regular teacher then I think a lot more would have been done."
Angela McCormick, the headteacher, refused to comment on the incident. Oldham Council's service director for children, young people and families, Janet Doherty, said: "This is a matter for the individual school to resolve. "We have every confidence that the head will deal with it sensitively and appropriately."
Source
Children suffer as mothers forced to return to work
Young children in Britain could be suffering because their mothers are forced to return to work too soon, according to Unicef
The United Nations Children's Fund also says that today's babies and toddlers are the first generation in history to spend much of their early childhoods in formal child care rather than being looked after at home. A Unicef report claims the majority of British babies spend most of the day in nurseries or with childminders, despite a growing body of research showing that under-threes benefit emotionally and behaviourally if they are looked after at home.
The study, by Unicef's Innocenti Research Centre in Florence, raises concerns about the development of children who go into formal care outside their homes so early. Part of this change is down to greater equality and opportunities for women, Unicef says. But the study also says the fact that two-thirds of women in developed countries now work is a "cause for concern", as it reflects the fact that most families need two incomes to make ends meet.
In addition, it quotes scientific research that has found a lack of contact with parents can lead to children becoming depressed and withdrawn, perform less well at school and develop behavioural problems. "The younger the child and the longer the hours spend in child care, the greater the risk," it warns. The study says that in the UK, a "majority" of babies less than 12 months old spend most of the working day in child care. It recommends that babies should be looked after by their parents for the first year of their lives, and that Governments should ensure 12 months of paid parental leave is available at 50 per cent of salary.
But the report says that maternity leave provision in the UK is "inadequate" and less generous than in many other countries including Slovenia and Iceland. Currently new mothers in Britain get 39 weeks of paid maternity leave, receiving 90 per cent of their average pay for the first six weeks and a fixed sum of œ117.18 a week for the other 33. Fathers are only entitled to two weeks' paternity leave at a maximum of 117.18 pounds a week. Government plans to give millions of parents greater rights to request flexible working arrangements to accommodate childcare arrangements last week triggered a backlash from business groups. Some companies fear that more red tape will make it harder for them to survive the recession. Overall, England is only meeting half of a set of 10 UN "benchmarks" for the care and education of young children, and is lagging behind many other developed countries.
In addition to failing to provide a full year of parental leave at 50 per cent of salary, England does not spend 1 per cent of GDP on early childhood services; has high child poverty levels; does not have near-universal health services for children; and allows more than 15 pre-school children to be looked after by one member of staff.
David Bull, the executive director of Unicef UK, said: "The report is clear that expenditure in England on pre-school education has quadrupled in the last 10 years. "However, despite the Government's undoubted commitment, the UK still has three million children living in poverty and higher rates of infant death and low birth weight than many comparable countries. "High quality child care is not yet available to all, and parental leave provisions remain inadequate. "This Government has taken great strides in advancing child wellbeing since our 2007 report, but much more still needs to be done. "These changes will require investment, but there is none better than investing in the prospects of our youngest children."
Unicef rates parental leave in the UK as less generous than in 14 other countries, with the list headed by Norway where the mother and father can divide 44 weeks' leave at full pay between them.
Source
Forcing Britain to sober up
The proposed ban on pub `happy hours' is a metaphor for the government's miserabilist disgust with fun.
The economic downturn, and the UK government's tax-juggling efforts to resolve the crisis, has led some to proclaim that `macro' politics and economic management are back. Surely the financial turmoil means that the government will be too preoccupied to meddle in our day-to-day lives via hectoring advice and heinous bans? Surely politicians will now be forced to concentrate on bigger issues than what parents put in their kids' lunch boxes or how many units of alcohol Brits drink on a Saturday night? Dream on. It's business as usual for New Labour.
This week, the government will announce a new set of bans and regulations that will do nothing to stimulate the free market but will help to stifle a free society. Once again, the government's determination to demonise alcohol and drinkers is at the top of the agenda. As the `season to be jolly' approaches, the government's response is to crank up the spirit of Ebenezer Scrooge even higher this year. Even though cash is tight for many people, politicians have decided to add to our fiscal woes by banning `happy hours' in pubs - those rather misnamed sessions where punters can drown their sorrows at a discount, usually for a couple of hours or more. From this week, pub landlords and club owners will no longer be allowed to sell alcohol at reduced prices at any time. So pubs and clubs can no longer attract punters with promotional offers, such as two-for-one or half-price drinks.
This policy comes after the UK chancellor of the exchequer, Alastair Darling, recently announced tax and spending changes to provide a boost to the ailing economy. While UK sales tax - value added tax (VAT) - would be cut from 17.5 to 15 per cent for a period of 13 months starting on 1 December, Darling said he would raise duty on alcohol further, in order to keep it at the same price despite the drop in VAT. This blow for the pub industry follows the nine per cent increase in beer duty announced in the last Budget in March with a promise of rises at two per cent above inflation for the next four years. The proposed ban on `happy hours' is yet another device to keep the price of alcohol artificially high with the hope of curbing `anti-social behaviour'.
Gerry Sutcliffe, the licensing minister, told the Commons Culture Select Committee last week: `If it [happy hour] is a promotion causing people to get drunk and causing problems then it is right that we should act.' (1) If Sutcliffe is worried about disorderly conduct, such as punch-ups at pub closing time, then there already exist enough laws to deal with such aggravations. It seems the government's real concern is that people choose to go to pubs with the full intention of getting drunk. For the government, unhealthily preoccupied with its citizens' personal conduct, such outrageous behaviour simply won't do.
Under the proposed codes, brewers will be forced to print warnings on drink labels and pubs will have to display the number of units of alcohol in each type of drink served, just in case pub patrons are too dim to realise that whisky is pretty strong compared with beer. The new rules would be enforced by local government trading standards officers and the police, who will have the power to place conditions on the issue of licences and to remove licences where premises breach the code.
On top of all this reprehensible pettiness, the government is considering forcing brewers to reduce alcohol content in drink, while suggesting that tax on alcohol should be linked to the strength of alcohol content. Furthermore, the government is seeking to reduce the drink-drive limit to zero for drivers who are under 21 years of age - if a blood or breath test shows any alcohol in their bodies, that will be an offence.
Officialdom always likes to justify such restrictive measures in the only way petty officials know how - through soulless and dry statistics. Apparently alcohol `misuse' costs the National Health Service more than 2.7billion a year, while the economy suffers a 25billion blow every year through lost working days.
Well, here are some other figures that the government conveniently ignores: major brewers in the UK saw their profits slump by 78 per cent between 2004 and 2006, suggesting we're not quite a nation of public lager guzzlers. Thirty-six pubs close every week, on average, due to the smoking ban and the relentless hikes on the price of alcohol. The Campaign For Real Ale (Camra) estimates that such closures have cost 44,000 jobs over the past five years, and 43,000 are projected to be lost over the next five. There have been 37 major brewery closures, accounting for 25 per cent of all brewery employees. This year alone, 13 pub operators, operating 960 pubs, have gone into administration (3).
No doubt the economic downturn has affected pub sales of food and drink, but it is the government's war on alcohol that is ultimately to blame for destroying the livelihoods of tens of thousands of people. For the government, it seems, forcing landowners and brewery employees into penury is a price worth paying if it gets citizens to behave in a sanitised and soberly manner on Saturday nights. After all, the new measures that will be introduced this week will only further increase pub closures and redundancies. So much for trying to kickstart the economy.
Indeed, all of this proves that far from New Labour returning to old-style social democracy and economic management, its obsession with micro-managing our lives continues at an alarming pace. Although some of these new measures, such as the drink-driving ban for under-21s, won't have a direct impact on most drinkers, they do help soften up public opinion for more wide-ranging bans and controls in the future. The government admitted over the weekend that some of its proposals, such as stopping cigarettes from being displayed in newsagents or vending machines, won't have any impact on public health and these initiatives have now been dropped at the last minute.
Nevertheless, the sheer relentlessness of these measures and proposals helps legitimise the notion that it is perfectly acceptable for government to restrict public space and personal freedom. That assumption is also based on the poisonous and corrosive notion that British citizens are inherently problematic, especially when we've had a few drinks. It is this genuine fear and barely concealed disgust for us that propels New Labour to carry on restricting our autonomy at every opportunity.
That fear and loathing is itself a product of New Labour's peculiar development in British politics, as a self-referencing clique of managers and technocrats with no genuine roots or connections in wider society. As such, their isolation from ordinary people has generated a succession of Labour ministers who are, at best, embarrassingly unworldly about adult life or absolutely petrified of the city they live and work in. One minister, Caroline Flint, said she `couldn't believe that people actually go out to get drunk'; Harriet Harman couldn't face touring the London district of Peckham - an area she has represented in parliament for 26 years - without wearing a stab-proof vest. This would be funny if New Labour's jittery nerves didn't have such destructive consequences on our freedoms and our lifestyles.
Anyone hoping for a return to `macro politics' and the end of New Labour petty meddling will be sorely disappointed. Although the government realises that Britain's economy is in a dire state, it still thinks most of us are sinking even lower in our personal lives. Having uncorked the sour whine of micro-management, it seems this government hasn't tired of pouring out strong regulation measures just yet.
Source
A New York rebellion against libel imperialism
Brendan O'Neill meets the writers and publishers who have launched a war of independence from England's `notorious, repulsive' libel laws.
Rachel Ehrenfeld doesn't look like a fugitive. Petite, demure, and clad in the black skirt and blouse that is the uniform of New York's working women, she sits on a leather swivel chair in her twenty-fourth-floor apartment on the Upper West Side. Her living-room window offers a picture-postcard view of New York City in all its towering, light-flickering glory. She serves chai tea and a plate of oatmeal cookies. She asks how I am coping with the cold weather. You'd never think that this woman is effectively on the run from the English legal system.
`I cannot go to England. It's too risky. I once visited Holloway Prison when I was researching correctional facilities, and I do not want to visit it as an inmate.' She takes a sip of tea. Her crime? In 2004, she wrote a book called Funding Evil: How Terrorism is Financed and How to Stop It, in which she made allegations about a Saudi billionaire. The Saudi sued her, not in New York - where she lives and works and where her book was published - but in London, on the basis that 23 copies of Funding Evil were sold to residents of the UK via an online bookseller, and thus it was `published' in Britain, too (1).
Ehrenfeld refused to show up for the court case, and even refused to recognise the London High Court's jurisdiction over her (uppity New York broad that she is), and therefore lost by default. The judge ordered her and her publishers to stump up 30,000 pounds plus costs to the Saudi. Yet while Ehrenfeld might have a twenty-fourth floor apartment in the Upper West Side, she is still a mere writer and researcher by profession (`I don't have a private bank or oil fields, or any friends with a private bank or oil fields', she says), of whom the unworldly, wig-wearing lords of the English legal system might as well have demanded 30million as much as 30,000.
Now, she is legitimately concerned that if she goes to Britain she will be `seized', or at least treated as `persona non grata, the libel defendant who refused to grovel'. She is no ordinary fugitive, then. She is a `free speech fugitive', a victim of what she describes as England's `libel imperialism' and its `reach across the Atlantic'. Yet she is not accepting the ruling against her lying down. Instead she has spearheaded an American rebellion against English libel law - a war of independence, if you like, from English illiberalism and reaction - which has won the support of writers, publishers and senators, and which might soon get the nod from future-president of America Barack Obama himself. The end result could well be the completion of the American Revolution launched 230 years ago: full freedom from the yoke of British tyranny.
Ehrenfeld, born in Israel, has been writing about terrorism for 20 years. She is an expert on the cash trails behind terror groups, as her cluttered apartment attests: everywhere I look, book spines bearing the words `JIHAD' and `MONEY' and `EVIL' and `OSAMA' stare back at me. She has been a consultant to both the US Department of Defense's Threat Reduction Agency and the CIA.
After 9/11, which she witnessed from this apartment in midtown Manhattan, Ehrenfeld wrote the book that would land her in boiling water: Funding Evil. She says her experience - sued in London for something she said in New York - shows the dangers of `libel tourism'. Judy Platt of the prestigious Association of American Publishers, which is backing to the hilt Ehrenfeld's resistance of England's libel laws, tells me that `libel tourism' involves `wealthy individuals' using `plaintiff-friendly foreign libel laws in an attempt to silence US-based writers'. And it isn't only Saudis. In 2005, Roman Polanski, the Polish film director who lives in France, and who is literally a fugitive from the US after allegedly committing statutory rape in 1977, sued an American publication, Vanity Fair, in London. And won. In 2006, Britney Spears, the all-American celebrity, sued National Enquirer, the all-American tabloid, in Belfast (2).
It isn't hard to see the attraction of England's (and Ireland's) libel laws to plaintiffs who want to challenge or upbraid or punish American publications that have dented their reputations: our libel laws are far more claimant-friendly, stringent and severe than America's. Under English libel law, the claimant doesn't have to prove that the allegedly defamatory statement was false, only that it was potentially damaging to his or her reputation; under American law, claimants do have to prove falsity. In America, following the ruling in New York Times v Sullivan in 1964, there is a `public figure defence', which makes it difficult indeed for people in the public eye to sue for libel. In order to succeed, claimants would have to show not only that the allegations were false but that they were made maliciously or with reckless disregard for truth. In England, in an undiluted bastardisation of natural justice, the claimant doesn't have to prove very much at all; instead the burden of proof falls on the defendant to prove his own innocence.
Where England's libel laws are weighted in favour of the claimant and his almost sacred reputation, American laws of defamation err on the side of defending writers' and publishers' First Amendment right to free speech. So when English libel courts issue a ruling on a book or an article written by an American and published in America - when an English judge labels American-uttered words as outrageous, scandalous, Beyond Acceptable Debate - they do far more than cause an outbreak of headaches among the writers and publishers being sued; they also implicitly interfere in America's internal affairs, undermining from afar the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of speech and freedom of the press.
English rulings, routinely enforced by American courts on behalf of English courts, subject Americans to a kind of colonial censorship, gagging by foreign lords. Even when English rulings are not directly enforced, simply their existence can have a `chilling effect' on open debate in the US. `Such judgements can - and do - chill the kind of reporting that US laws are designed to encourage and protect', says Judy Platt. Ehrenfeld knows two American authors who have had contracted books cancelled because publishers feared there would be libel cases in London (A Town Called Sue). `Just the prospect of expensive lawsuits and international humiliation can kill the kind of investigation we need [and] the investigative spirit itself', she says.
Not for much longer. Thanks to Ehrenfeld, New York has become the first city in America to reject fully England's `repugnant' libel rulings.
After the London High Court judgement against her in 2005, Ehrenfeld, with the support of a veritable army of the great and the good of NYC - the Authors Guild, Forbes Inc, the American Society of Newspaper Editors, Amazon - launched a counterclaim in a New York court. The memorandum filed by Ehrenfeld's lawyers said that writers should be free `to ferret out and publish the facts without fear of expensive lawsuits and huge judgments in foreign countries whose defamation laws and commitment to freedom of expression and public discourse are "repugnant" and antithetical and "contrary" to our fundamental public policy'. The use of the word `repugnant' comes from an earlier rebellion against English libel law. In 1997, the US Maryland State Appeals Court had been asked to enforce an English libel ruling against an American citizen. But in this instance the court refused, arguing that `the principles of English libel law fail to measure up to the basic human rights standards and are repugnant to public policy and the constitutional ideal of free speech'.
After months and months of legal wrangling, Ehrenfeld's counterclaim led to the introduction of the Libel Terrorism Protection Act by the New York state legislature in April this year. The Act is an enormous, historic kick in the teeth to English libel. Firstly, it forbids New York courts from enforcing a foreign libel judgement `unless the country where it was decided grants the same or better protection as US standards for freedom of speech'. And second, it `expands an individual's ability to have a court declare a foreign libel judgement invalid in New York' (3). This effectively means English libel rulings can no longer be enforced against anything said or written by a New Yorker or published in New York. NYC has made itself a no-go zone for English libel rulings; it has freed itself from the whack of the former colonial power's hammer.
`New Yorkers must be able to speak out on issues of public concern without living in fear that they will be sued outside the United States, under legal standards inconsistent with our First Amendment rights', said New York governor David A Paterson as he signed on the dotted line on what has become known as `Rachel's Law', after Ehrenfeld (4). Illinois has followed NYC's lead and passed its own Rachel's Law. More recently, a `Rachel-inspired' federal law - the Libel Tourism Bill - was passed in the House of Representatives in September. There is also a Free Speech Protection Bill being debated in the Senate, which would bar all US courts from enforcing libel rulings that are `antithetical' to the First Amendment. One of the great ironies of the recent outbreak of British gushing about `our' new, liberal, European-style president-elect Barack Obama is that one of Obama's first acts might be to sign in a new law that will label English libel rulings as `repugnant to our Nation's fundamental constitutional values, in particular its strong protection of the right to freedom of speech' (5). Obama may have to teach us backward Brits a lesson about what it means to be liberal.
It is fitting that New York should have led this American uprising against English libel. New York is, in Ehrenfeld's words, `the capital of American publishing'. It is a city that rattles and shakes with conversation and debate, from its numerous daily newspapers to its world-famous magazines (New York and New Yorker); from the garish, head-spinning advertising in Times Square to the 9/11 Truthers I saw loitering around the World Trade Center memorial site trying to engage passers-by in debates about `disappearing aeroplanes' and the density of steel. A cab driver taking me through Brooklyn pointed to a sign that said `Non-horn zone - $350 fine' and said: `Can you believe that shit?' Earlier this year, when some states discussed banning youth from letting their pants sag too low, NY-based lawyers and activists for the American Civil Liberties Union defended sagging pants on the basis that they are a form of expression. A city that publishes thousands of books a year and sells newspapers on every street corner, where restrictions on horn-honking (the most basic form of communication) are seen as an affront to individual liberty and where even showing your Calvin Kleins to the world can become a free speech issue, is no place for England's severe, repugnant and punishing libel laws.
The American rebellion against English libel law has been barely discussed in Britain. Perhaps it's just too embarrassing for us. Yet sitting in the flat where this all began, where Ehrenfeld's refusal to kowtow to English libel law and her decision to fight back were born, it is hard not to feel part of an historic moment. `I was determined not to have my rights undermined', says Ehrenfeld. `The American ideal of free speech and liberty emerged from the fight against British oppression more than 200 years ago. Now we find ourselves fighting against them again.'
Source
Confusion as British watchdog U-turns and says you CAN eat nuts during pregnancy
Once again the official wisdom goes into reverse. It did more harm than good. What a surprise! (NOT)
Advice to parents worried about children developing a peanut allergy is to be withdrawn by food safety chiefs. Women have been advised to avoid eating peanuts during pregnancy and while breast-feeding if they or the father had a family history of allergic conditions. Parents were also recommended not to give peanuts to children until they are at least three years old to avoid sensitisation. The advice has been in place since 1998 and has been partly blamed for the rise of 'nut hysteria', with parents and children becoming increasingly anxious about exposure to peanuts.
But the Food Safety Agency says it is no longer backing the advice because 'current evidence' does not support it. It is recommending to government ministers that the advice is dropped. However, it will not be replaced by any guidance on what parents should do to reduce the risk of their children developing a peanut allergy. Instead the FSA is saying those at higher risk should not change their diets while emphasising that this is not a green light for peanuts to be included in meals for young children and pregnant women.
The change comes amid a growing change of view among scientists, medics and policy-makers, who believe avoiding peanuts in early life may be making the problem worse. In the past 20 years the number of British children.with a peanut allergy has nearly doubled, with one in 55 being diagnosed with it.
A spokesman for the FSA said the existing advice had been reviewed by the independent Committee on Toxicity. She said: 'Previously, there were concerns that children could develop a peanut allergy as a result of their mother eating peanuts during pregnancy or while breast-feeding. 'When COT last reviewed this subject there was some evidence to support this concern and this was the basis of their precautionary advice issued in 1998. 'The new review by the COT does not suggest this current advice is harmful. 'However, the FSA board has agreed that the balance of evidence now available does not support continuing to follow this current advice.'
But she said this did not mean 'higher-risk' parents should start feeding their children peanuts. 'Where there is a family history of allergy, parents might want to discuss their individual case with their GP or health professional if they are concerned,' she added.
An influential House of Lords committee last year recommended that pregnant women no longer be warned to avoid peanuts, saying there is scant evidence it helps their children avoid nut allergies and may even be 'counter productive'. Some doctors believe exposure to peanuts early in life could save children from developing an allergy by priming their immune system.
Among studies suggesting this could work was research into the eating habits of 8,000 children in Britain and Israel, where the incidence of peanut allergy is less than two in 1,000. From eight months old the average Israeli child eats seven grams of peanuts a month - most British children eat none.
Source
The little-known dangers of heavy water-drinking kill slimmer
A mother of five died after drinking too much water three weeks after she had begun a water-based diet in an attempt to lose weight, an inquest was told. Jacqueline Henson, 40, was determined to slim down from 14st (89kg) and was "over the moon" after losing nearly 12lb (5.4kg) in one week after starting the LighterLife diet plan, Huddersfield Coroner's Court was told yesterday.
The LighterLife diet, which has been linked with water poisoning, hair loss and disrupting the menstrual cycle, suggests that only 530 calories should be consumed a day - a quarter of a woman's recommended daily intake - for a period of 12 weeks, and drinking four litres of water per day.
Mrs Henson drank four litres of water in less than two hours on November 14, which caused her brain to swell. She collapsed in the bathroom of her home in Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, and was pronounced dead the next day. Her husband, Brian, 40, said that he was devastated, and told the inquest how she had been "over the moon at losing weight". He said: "The more water she drank, the more weight she would lose." Mrs Henson had arrived home at 5pm and had drunk two large bottles of water before settling in front of the television, drinking from a pint glass of water she had poured herself.
Mr Henson said: "At 11pm she stood up and said her stomach was solid. She was walking across the room and was sick. "At 11.15pm she said she had a headache and went upstairs to the toilet. My 18-year-old daughter Chantelle went upstairs and I heard her saying, `Mum, mum'. I knew something was wrong. Her eyes were closed and she didn't appear to be breathing."
Joanna Neville, of LighterLife, was asked by the coroner, Roger Whittaker, about the potentially dangerous regime, but she explained that the diet, which is aimed at people who are 3st or more overweight, recommended drinking four litres of water over the course of a day in small amounts. Asked if the company conveyed that message to dieters, Ms Neville said: "We are doing that quite clearly and will continue to do so."
The court was told that on October 18 Mrs Henson had visited her GP, who had given her a check-up before allowing her to go on the diet. Recording a verdict of accidental death, the coroner said: "No one should drink water in the quantity that Mrs Henson did over that short a period. Little and often."
The National Institute for Clinical Excellence recommends that very low-calorie diets should be followed for a maximum of 12 weeks, and states that any diet of less than 600 calories should be used only under medical supervision.
LighterLife, which has an annual turnover of 18 million pounds and charges 66 per week for its specially tailored "food packs", claims to have helped 60,000 people to lose weight, despite the controversy surrounding its recommendations. The diet sets a target of losing 3st over 14 weeks. A spokesman for LighterLife said: "Our programme gives clear guidance that water should be consumed regularly over the course of the day, and the coroner confirmed the events were a tragic accident."
Source
Newer breast cancer drug cuts risk of death by a fifth compared to NHS treatment, research shows
A drug for breast cancer has been found to cut the risk of dying by almost a fifth compared with the Health Service's standard treatment. The research by an international team is the first to show that women with early breast cancer taking the aromatase inhibitor (AI) Femara for five years after surgery live longer without the disease, compared with those taking tamoxifen.
AIs were approved two years ago for NHS use in postmenopausal women after studies showed they cut disease recurrence and improve survival. But patients usually take tamoxifen initially and switch to an AI drug within two to three years. The study said women using the AI drug Femara, also known as letrozole, for the entire five-year period are more likely to survive.
Risk of death was reduced by 19 per cent, according to data presented to the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium in the U.S. by the International Breast Cancer Study Group. The trial studied 8,000 women in 27 countries, including the UK, of whom 5,000 were assigned to either Femara or tamoxifen without being switched. For the rest, who were switched to Femara halfway through, the survival benefit was 13 per cent.
Nigel Bundred, Professor of Surgical Oncology at South Manchester University Hospitals Trust, said: 'These data represent an important milestone in the treatment of women with breast cancer. 'For the first time we are seeing suggested survival benefit with upfront aromatase inhibitor letrozole therapy for five years compared with tamoxifen for the same time period.'
Henning-T Mouridsen, professor of oncology-at Copenhagen University Hospital-and one of the trial investigators, said the drug produces an 'early and sustained reduction' in recurrence of disease in the breast and its spread into the body. Around 44,000 British women develop breast cancer a year including 33,000 after the menopause.
AI drugs shut down the body's supply of oestrogen altogether, while tamoxifen works by blocking oestrogen's effects on cancer cells. These drugs work in women only after the menopause and where breast cells are sensitive to oestrogen - up to four in five cases.
The Government's rationing watchdog has approved three aromatase inhibitors (AI) - Aromasin, Arimidex and Femara - alongside tamoxifen. Primary care trusts are expected to fund them, but the annual cost of an AI is 900 pounds, compared with less than 300 for tamoxifen. A survey last year found only a fifth of Britain's biggest breast cancer hospital units were definitely following guidance to switch patients after initial treatment with tamoxifen.
Professor Jeffrey Tobias, Professor of Cancer Medicine at University College and Middlesex School of Medicine, said the latest findings mean AI drugs should now be used in preference to tamoxifen. He added that osteoporosis sufferers may still be better off on tamoxifen as AIs cause bone problems, but tamoxifen has a fourfold higher risk of causing womb disorders
Source
Friday, December 12, 2008
ON THOSE PESKY TEMPERATURES IN THE REAL WORLD
An email from David Whitehouse [me@davidwhitehouse.com] to Benny Peiser
I speculated on Dec 1 about the ways that some in the media would react to the forthcoming data that will likely show that 2008 will be the coldest year since 2001. One would have thought that any dispassionate and scientifically rigorous look at the general temperature standstill since 2001, and now a slight fall in the average annual global temperature record would provide pause for thought about what is really going on, and, whatever side of the fence you sit, perhaps a humble appreciation that we do not by any means know as much about the complexities of the climate as some say we do.
And so it happened. The headline in the Guardian said:
If I may quote from the article;
Overinterpret? Is that a new way of saying don't look at all the relevant data because it might be inconvenient?
As I pointed out, this is not telling the whole story, nor even putting it into a proper context. The important point evaded is not that 2008 would have been hot for Dickens but how hot is it with respect to the current warming spell. Nobody is arguing that the past decade is not warmer than previous ones and that the world1s glaciers and ecosystems are not reacting to it. If 2008 is the coldest year since 2001 and the global average temperature didn't change at all between 2001 - 2007 one should ask why! Talking about 2008 on its own and comparing it to Victorian times is misleading.
Then a few days later in the Guardian the environmental campaigner George Monbiot wrote, in response to the first article that "In the physical world global warming appears to be spilling over into runaway feedback."
Really? What a load of nonsense. It's statements like these that make me wonder if I am either living in the same physical world and if we need real world data at all?
It is said in that article that it's all right because the Met Office predicted that 2008 would be cool because of the la Nina effect. What it didn't say is that the previous year was predicted by the Met Office to be the warmest ever and it wasn't. la Ninas come along regularly and it's no great scientific achievement to say that when one occurs the world will cool. A failed prediction of warming however is highly significant especially given the faith put in computer modelling.
Also this supposed explanation is not in itself adequate. If the predicted cooling by la Nina had not occurred then 2008 would probably have been the same temperature (given the uncertainties) as every year since 2001 and that in itself would require explanation.
Later on in the Monbiot article we have, as I predicted, the tired old cliche about "professional deniers employed by fossil fuel companies." Where I wonder are their counterparts, the professional campaigners whose vested interests make them see a runaway warming world despite what the real world the data says?
I am broadly in favour of the global warming -CO2 hypothesis but I know it is just that, a hypothesis - and that needs testing against real observations in the physical world. If it isn't, then it's not science.
No independent minds in official Britain
An email from David Henderson [pdhenderson18@googlemail.com] to Benny Peiser
See the text that I used as the basis for a recent invited lecture in Edinburgh at Heriot-Watt University. Most of the ideas are in earlier publications of mine, but the following excerpts are new thoughts (for me)
" ... economists, here as elsewhere, are not agreed. Some of our differences on climate change relate to already familiar issues which arise in other areas of policy: a leading instance, and an important one in this context where distant possibilities are in question, is the choice of an appropriate rate of interest for discounting projected future costs and benefits. But the dividing line between upholders and dissenters in economics falls outside the accepted bounds of our subject. It concerns the choice of a point of departure; and this choice depends on a judgement as to what conclusions it is appropriate to draw from arguments and evidence that are scientific rather than economic. Received opinion among economists takes as given what it sees as firm scientific conclusions. Thus the Stern Review says at the start that 'The scientific evidence that climate change is a serious and urgent issue is now compelling', while the Garnaut Report take a similar line. For me, such unqualified assertions presume too much."
"Where so much remains uncertain, unsettled or unknown, policies should be evolutionary and adaptive, rather than presumptive; and their evolution should be linked to a process of inquiry and review which is more thorough, balanced, open and objective than is now the case.
As things are, there is little or no chance that such a new framework could emerge in Britain. Policy and research alike are almost entirely in the hands of institutions that appear as firmly committed to currently received opinion. The list of those involved in the advisory and policy process, and spending public money accordingly, includes the new Department of Energy and Climate Change and the relevant segments of some other departments of state, the Office of Climate Change, the Committee on Climate Change, the Hadley Centre, the Tyndall Centre, the National Environment Research Council, the Energy Research Centre, the Carbon Trust, the Environment Agency, and the Sustainable Development Commission.
I do not offer the above list as exclusive; and indeed, sad to say, Her Majesty's Treasury has to be added to it. When I started work on climate change issues, I argued that it was high time for the Treasury to become seriously involved with them. Subsequent events, including the Stern Review, have brought home to me the old adage, 'Be careful what you wish for'.
In all these official bodies, as also in the growing number of non-governmental research centres that have been set up in Britain to work on issues relating to climate change, a common way of thinking prevails. I doubt whether among them there is today, or could ever be as things now are, a single professional staff member who could be identified as even a mild dissenter or non-subscriber: there is no place for such minority thoughts, and no point in voicing them. Her Majesty's Government, with a good deal of unofficial backing, have created and financed a dominant culture of conformity. Other OECD member governments, and the European Commission, have taken much the same path.
Britain gives 'back door' amnesty for 180,000 asylum seekers who slipped through the net
Up to 180,000 asylum seekers are to be granted a 'back door' amnesty to live in Britain. They include failed refugees who should have been deported, and migrants whose claims were never even concluded by the Home Office. Instead, their files were lost or left unfinished as the asylum system went into meltdown.
Now officials are finally wading through the backlog, and have already granted more than 50,000 approvals. Based on the current rate at which cases are being rubber-stamped, the total number to benefit from the amnesty will be around 180,000. The approval rate is 40 per cent and rising, with all those who are successful gaining access to housing and other benefits. Local councils will be expected to find homes for many of them.
The major reason why so many of the claims are being approved is the Human Rights Act. Under it, those who have been here for many years can claim Britain is now their home and that they no longer have links to their country of origin. If their claims had been considered when they were first submitted, many might have been sent home.
The HRA, passed by Labour a decade ago, also prevents the removal of asylum seekers to countries where they could face torture or persecution, which is likely to apply to thousands of cases in the backlog.
Shadow Home Secretary Dominic Grieve said: 'Whilst the Minister for Immigration tries to talk tough, the reality is that the Government is prepared to grant what amounts to an effective amnesty just to get the figures down. 'Despite all the spin, it is clear that Labour is no closer to getting a grip on illegal immigration.'
The 450,000 so-called 'legacy' cases were unearthed by former Home Secretary John Reid during a clean-up of the department he described as 'not fit for purpose'. He said he wanted all the cases - some of which date back to the mid-1990s - resolved by around 2011. Lin Homer, chief executive of the UK Border Agency, said that of nearly 130,000 cases concluded so far, 51,000 - or 40 per cent - had been approved. A further 53,000 had been closed because, for example, the claimant could not be contacted. Only 23,500 applicants have been removed.
Town halls have been warned to make the migrants a priority for council housing. They have been given a 'transitional grant' of 1.1million of taxpayers' money to help towards the cost, but the final bill is likely to be far higher. It is expected to be passed on in council tax rises.
The list of countries with most beneficiaries of the 'legacy' policy is headed by Turkey, with 2,400 successful claimants.
Sir Andrew Green, chairman of the pressure group Migrationwatch UK, said: 'We are only now getting the measure of the disaster that befell the asylum system in recent years. 'It is frankly absurd that tens of thousands of people should be given full access to the welfare state for no other reason than the administrative chaos that ruled in the Home Office.'
It also emerged yesterday that seven of the most dangerous criminals involved in the foreign prisoner scandal have been given permission to stay in Britain. They are rapists, killers and paedophiles. One of the main reasons for being allowed to stay is that under human rights law they have a right to a family life. In total, out of 1,000 offenders involved in the Home Office fiasco, only 336 have been deported to date.
Tory MP James Clappison said: 'The fact that even the most serious criminals have been allowed to stay makes a mockery of Labour's original promise that they would be found and deported.'
The revelations, made in a letter to Parliament's home affairs committee, came as a study showed that allowing every illegal immigrant living in the UK to stay would cost 2billion a year. Migrationwatch estimated the cost of a full immigrant amnesty could rise to 4billion once newcomers started families. The think-tank also released results of a poll which found that 70 per cent of those questioned opposed a blanket amnesty for all the estimated 700,000 illegal migrants.
A UK Border Agency spokesman said: 'We have improved our performance and are now resolving several thousand old asylum cases every month. We are well on track to complete all 450,000 cases by 2011. 'We will continue to prioritise those who may pose a risk to the public, and then focus on those who can more easily be removed, those receiving support, and those who may be granted leave. 'We will no longer pay to support to those who have had their cases concluded. Those who are granted the right to stay should seek work and those who have been refused will be removed.'
Source
Incorrect newspaper clippings in Britain
We read:
It's legal for the newspapers to publish it but you must not pin it up on your walls???? I'm guessing that the clippings were mainly reports of immigrant crimes.
Thousands of NHS patients suffer avoidable medical errors, says Healthcare Commission
Thousands of patients are the victims of medical errors that could have been avoided if safety was given a higher priority in the NHS, the health watchdog has warned. Incidents where patients were harmed or so called near-misses are not being reported meaning lessons cannot be learned and future problems avoided, the Healthcare Commission said in its annual State of Healthcare report. One in ten patients admitted to hospitals will suffer from an error and around half of these could have been avoided, it warns.
The report said only half of NHS trusts comply with all safety standards and there has been little improvement. Errors that have led to patients being harmed include incorrect diagnosis, wrong doses of medication, surgeons operating on the wrong part of the body and paperwork going missing.
The wide ranging report covers all aspects of healthcare in England and highlights a number of areas of significant improvement in the NHS, particularly around deaths from cancer and heart disease and huge reductions in waiting times.
Demand for healthcare has increased dramatically, the NHS has higher levels of funding than ever before, and the health of the nation is improving, the report said. However, the last annual report before the Healthcare Commission is subsumed by the Care Quality Commission, the report focuses on patient safety and the lack of progress in the last five years. The report said too few incidents are reported to the National Patient Safety Agency with particular problems in primary care where doctors and nurses report almost no errors although the majority of patient care is delivered by GPs.
The report said there are 'up to 600 errors a day in primary care' but this was disputed by the Department of Health and the British Medical Association as based on research in other countries. The NPSA received 959,000 incidents of errors in 2007/8 but "worryingly" the report said seven per cent of hospital trusts and 13 per cent of primary care trusts did not report any incidents.
Prof Sir Ian Kennedy, chairman of the Healthcare Commission, said: "In my view the NHS is really only just out of the starting blocks. "There is a lot more we can do before we can be confident that the care patients receive is as safe as it reasonably can be. "What must change and change quickly is that we don't know very much about how safe care is in primary care. Information about missed diagnoses and late diagnoses won't show up on anyone's register of incidents of untoward events. "Safe care is what patients expect and what they are entitled to. "The real responsibility for the safety of care lies with those who provide care locally, namely the trusts and the boards responsible for trusts." He said unless safety is "internalised in their DNA" then nothing can change.
The Healthcare Commission called for one national database of serious incidents as the recording of errors is currently spread across different organisations. And hospital trusts and primary care trusts should also be measured on their serious untoward incidents and how they learn from them.
Dr Hamish Meldrum, Chairman of Council at the British Medical Association said: "The overall picture in this report is of major improvements to standards of care. We applaud the efforts of NHS staff in reducing the amount of time patients have to wait, and improving the quality of the care they receive. "Any errors are regrettable but there are millions of contacts between the NHS and patients every day. It is inevitable that, in a very small proportion of these, care falls below the highest standards. Doctors want to get rid of unacceptable variations in quality, but we need to be careful to analyse and learn from the causes of low performance rather than jumping to conclusions or simply adopting a blame culture."
Martin Fletcher, Chief Executive at the National Patient Safety Agency, said: "Good reporting is the cornerstone of patient safety. Safety cannot be improved without a range of valid reporting, analytical and investigative tools that identify the sources and causes of risk in a way that leads to preventative action. The National Reporting and Learning System has a vital role to play in supporting NHS organisations to identify risks to safe patient care. Patient safety needs to be everyone's responsibility."
Health Minister Lord Darzi said: "The NHS sees a million people every 36 hours. Unfortunately, as in any modern health service, mistakes and unforeseen incidents will happen. Only a very small number of errors put patients at serious risk. "We know there's more work to be done and are leading the way worldwide, having set up the National Patient Safety Agency and established a reporting and learning system to encourage open reporting. The introduction of quality quality accounts will refocus the attention of the boards of NHS bodies on the quality and safety."
Source
Oh Come All Ye Tasteless
'Chav' is a derogatory British term most frequently used to describe white working class teenagers or young people who misbehave. The burberry cap on the figure below is a chav hallmark
A British school has asked kids to learn a "chav" nativity play - where Jesus turns water into lager instead of wine.
Mary and Joseph break into a garage instead of finding shelter in a stable. She is told she will get extra benefits for having Jesus - and the Wise Men are asked for gifts of Adidas and Burberry. When a character says Mary is a virgin, another replies: "Wossat then? A train?" The script was thought to have been found on the internet.
Michelle Taylor, 35, has a relative at Oakwood School for 11to-16 year olds with emotional and behavioural difficulties in Bexley, Kent. She said: "I couldn't believe it. You encourage children to speak properly, then they get this at school." Bexley Council said the script was used in a drama lesson for kids of 14, but the school would still stage a traditional nativity.
Source. Fuller details here
School results are a poor predictor of future success
John Lennon left school without any qualifications, Damien Hirst did marginally better and was awarded an E for his art A-Level whilst Bill Gates dropped out of college on his way to becoming the world's richest man. They are hardly shining examples of those who achieved all they did because of success in the classroom.
But according to intriguing new research, school tests are by no means a measure of true ability - nor can they be used as a tool to predict future success or abject failure. The study, by the Chartered Institute of Educational Assessors (CIEA), found that as many as 77 per cent of people believe that formal examinations fail to reflect their true intelligence.
Sour grapes? Perhaps, but there are those who have successfully bucked the trend. They include Gordon Ramsay, Ralph Lauren (who quit college to sell ties in a New York men's store) and degree-less business knights, Richard Branson, Philip Green and Alan Sugar. Then there's fashion designer Vivienne Westwood, Radio Four's interrogator-in-chief John Humphrys, the BBC's Terry Wogan, chat show legend Michael Parkinson and finally the X-Factor's Simon Cowell. Not one of them made it to university.
Not surprisingly then, just three out of 10 people associate exams with 'a sense of pride', according to the CIEA study which was based on the responses from 2,000 adults. The research also found that 62 per cent spoke of feeling 'butterflies in the stomach' moments before they were due to sit an exam. Other reactions included headaches, insomnia and vomiting.
Pupils in England currently sit an average of 70 formal examinations, whilst primary school children are now subjected to more tests than their international counterparts. Yet, 60 per cent of teachers who responded to a separate online poll for the CIEA said they did not think exams were necessarily the best indicators of a pupil's ability and were not reflective of their future success in a job.
'Exams don't suit everybody,' said Graham Herbert, deputy head of the CIEA, which aims to improve senior examiners, moderators and markers. 'They don't tell the full picture. Most adults agree that their performance in exams does not reflect their true abilities. 'That is not to say we should get rid of exams. What we need is a supplement to the exam system, a supplement that can be relied upon. And that supplement could be teacher assessment.' The CIEA is training qualified assessors through its Chartered Educational Assessor (CEA) initiative and aims to place 3,000 of them in schools across England by 2011. Already 33 are in place, with a further 70 in training.
Mr Herbert said the reliance on exams meant that many schools were now focusing on teaching for tests. 'If you say the purpose is to put a school in a rank order, then it becomes a high-stakes test,' he added. 'People get really nervous about it because their reputation is at risk, so they tend to teach to the test. 'That means that their learners jump through the hoops put there by the exam, rather than testing their ability and their knowledge.
'Take Richard Branson and Winston Churchill. They are two very famous, highly skilled individuals who were both poor exam performers. So exams don't necessarily on their own bring out the best in individuals. 'And they become stigmatised by that. A lot of adults feel that. From our survey, the majority, it seems.'
Source
Kids need nonsense
Comment from Britain on British humour and entertainment -- reflections on the recent death of much-loved TV animator Oliver Postgate
Before my brothers had children of their own, one of them would be co-opted as Duty Uncle on Christmas Day, so that we could get lunch ready while he amused the children. Our son was 4 when he pronounced, one Christmas morning after an exhilaratingly failed session with a balloon-rocket: "I like Uncle Mike the best because he is the most silly uncle".
There was a profound truth in that, although for the sake of family harmony I should stress that Mike has always had hot competition in that area, and that when not in the company of under-fives all three brothers are sober citizens. But the fact is that all children have a strong urge towards nonsense, silliness, absurdity. And for all our desire to offer them educational or reassuring stories, they will always have an eye for goonery and an ear for silly rhymes.
I thought of this yesterday morning as the nation mourned Oliver Postgate, creator of such benign absurdities as Ivor the Engine, Bagpuss, Noggin the Nog and The Clangers.
Grown-ups like to present children with stories about being brave and sensible, or loaded with facts about the wide world. There is a place for this, whether in the old world of Arthur Mee's Encyclopaedia and The Railway Children or the modern equivalents of educational DVDs and books about children in tower blocks coming to terms with divorce and knife gangs.
But they need nonsense too. We all do. As soon as a baby can focus, it longs for jokes. Silly jokes. You can make a two-month- old grin and giggle by putting a wastepaper basket over your head and taking it off again: I demonstrated this once to a scornful academic who had been claiming that babies could not perceive incongruity because their range of experience was too short. His baby thought differently.
As a child grows it learns plenty of serious stuff - like language and how to use the potty - and immediately subverts it with daft rhymes, shouting "smelly jelly fatty belly". Any character calling himself Noggin the Nog or Bagpuss is halfway there already; and silly noises are gratefully received, so Postgate's Clangers with their mad slide-whistling were ideal. This does not indicate shallowness of understanding - the same child who learns keenly about steam engines and pistons can be charmed by Ivor the Engine's ambition to sing in a choir.
Nonsense, at its best, takes us into the realm of the impossible, and when your world is circumscribed by your size and strength and by living under authority (we can all feel that way, even as adults), nonsense is a blessed relief. It is an adventure, a romance, an escape. The horrors of the plague can become a ring o'roses, the fear of Napoleon a game (taught to my children by an old Suffolk lady) of Chasing Bony Party.
So prosy old Postman Pat is all very well, and so is the tediously responsible Thomas the Tank Engine (Fat Controller's pet that he is, always saving the day). But there are moments when you need something sillier. You need Oliver Postgate's Clangers eating some blue string pudding and green soup. Or a verse or two of Jabberwocky, a dose of Edward Lear, or Bill and Ben saying nothing more taxing than "flubalub". Or the Christopher Isherwood poem that starts: "The common cormorant or shag/ lays eggs inside a paper bag..."
And the more serious-minded and curriculum-conscious the adults around you, the more you need nonsense. It is particularly galling when they cheat by trying to sneak lessons into everything: I had high hopes of the Teletubbies, rolling around in coloured fat-suits and squeaking "eh-oh!" at each other on green mounds. But just as this psychedelic landscape became engagingly mad, one of them would stare at its telly-belly and give birth to an educational little film about canals, or baking a cake. Pshaw!
There is a long and lovely tradition of nonsense literature in English, and we would do well to remember and respect it rather than grey everything down into social realism, Barbie-fied celebrity or factual automatism. Dulling rationalism threatens at all levels: even James Bond has lost his edge of fantastico-technical nonsense (gondolas on wheels! cars with fish fins!) and turned, with the arrival of Daniel Craig, into a dour, sub-le Carre chronicle of tediously wicked villains and an angsty 007 who never cracks a smile.
The nonsense tradition must go on: it embraces everything from Anglo-Saxon riddles to T.S. Eliot's Jellicle cats dancing under a Jellicle moon, to The Goon Show and the various heirs of Monty Python. It is always best marked by a certain amorality, as in Lewis Carroll's The Walrus and the Carpenter, in which the neat little oysters are eventually eaten.
Even the most kindly child likes that: in the realm of nonsense there is little morality. Perhaps that is why it provides such needful, happy release to those who worry a lot about right and wrong - such as dutiful children or, indeed, our own Prince of Wales. Why else, do you think, does the heir to the throne - who literally worries for England - find such lifelong joy in the adventures of Bluebottle, Grytpype-Thynne and Moriarty in The Goon Show? Why else, indeed, did those troubled men Sellers and Milligan invent it all in the first place? Not to push back the boundaries of art but to create a parallel universe where nothing is wrong and everything is daft. And why, one might equally ask, was John Cleese only ever funny in the days before he went to see a series of shrinks, worked out all his issues and lost the gift of nonsense?
You can divide nonsense into two streams, though. There is full-on nonsense, detached from reality and floating free, far above us on pink-and-magenta-striped clouds, up there in the sky with Lucy and her diamonds. And then there is what I would call anti-sense. Lewis Carroll is the best example of the latter: he was a logician and his world is a looking-glass with everything backwards and therefore absurd, but mostly with clear references to reality: the Duchess's baby may well be a pig, but she is a recognisable, satirised character; Alice herself is grounded, always able to say "You're nothing but a pack of playing-cards!" or help the dormouse out of the teapot. Many of his best-loved poems are satires on the improving literature of the day - How Doth the Little Crocodile is a straight adaptation of an Isaac Watts verse. Yet sometimes Carroll can fly beyond the tugging threads of leftover 18th-century Oxford rationalism that still held him captive: The Hunting of the Snark is the most powerfully surreal and therefore beautiful of his works, the Snark itself a "Boojum", which is to say, nothing. And the crew's behaviour is satisfyingly mad:
Here he moves closer to Lear, though nobody before or since has matched Lear's gentle, romantic blurred vision. I have met at least one teacher who won't use his verse on the ground that it is wrong to let children think there is any such thing as a Pobble, or that there is any help in Aunt Jobiska's remedy of "lavender water tinged with pink". I excoriate that teacher and all her dreary works! Nonsense it all may be, but I learnt much of what I know - really know - about life and love from Lear's poems: yearningly romantic, a Platonic ideal of a world where Owl and Pussycat may sink their natural differences, fall in love to the sound of a small guitar and buy a pig's nose-ring for a shilling. Every enterprise of my life has been fortified by the spirit of the Jumblies, who quixotically defied sense and prudence to follow their dream:
They faced storms with pink blotting paper and a coppery gong, and knew themselves to be wise:
Well, as Lear himself says with that melancholy inseparable from true romanticism, far and few are the lands where the Jumblies live. But when their message crackles through to us via Postgate or Carroll, Eliot or Milligan, we should rejoice. Recession is coming. Sail in a sieve, take plenty of honey, rely on your Aunt Jobiska and listen for the distant singing of Ivor the Engine in the heavenly choir. A little insanity keeps you sane.
Source
More British welfare reform: Benefits to be paid only to those who show they are looking hard for work
Unemployed people will have to prove that they are taking practical steps to return to work in return for state benefits, under changes to the welfare state to be announced by ministers today. The only exceptions will be carers, parents of very young children and anyone who is severely disabled. All other claimants will have to show that they are preparing for work with activities ranging from updating a CV or finding out about childcare through to full-time training or work experience.
The conditions for claiming benefits will be set out in a statement to MPs and a White Paper by James Purnell, the Work and Pensions Secretary. Most controversially, the paper will suggest that single parents with young children, possibly from the age of 1, should start work-related activities. They are currently not expected to attend work-focused interviews until their eldest child is 12, although this will be reduced to 7 next year.
Incapacity benefit and income support will be scrapped. Only the most seriously ill and disabled will be able to claim a new employment support allowance. Everyone else will be moved to jobseeker's allowance, with conditions attached requiring work- related activity. The plans mean that the controversial recommendations made by David Freud, Tony Blair's welfare reform adviser, will be implemented in full.
Gordon Brown initially rejected Mr Freud's findings when he became Prime Minister, but had second thoughts and now wants them to be enforced. Writing in The Times today, Mr Freud seeks to defend his proposals against criticism that they amount to a dismantling of the welfare state. He says that the roots lie in the Beveridge postwar settlement.
Mr Freud said that it was also important to make the changes now, despite the economic downturn.
Source
An email from David Whitehouse [me@davidwhitehouse.com] to Benny Peiser
I speculated on Dec 1 about the ways that some in the media would react to the forthcoming data that will likely show that 2008 will be the coldest year since 2001. One would have thought that any dispassionate and scientifically rigorous look at the general temperature standstill since 2001, and now a slight fall in the average annual global temperature record would provide pause for thought about what is really going on, and, whatever side of the fence you sit, perhaps a humble appreciation that we do not by any means know as much about the complexities of the climate as some say we do.
And so it happened. The headline in the Guardian said:
"2008 will be coolest year of the decade; Global average for 2008 should come in close to 14.3C, but cooler temperature is not evidence that global warming is slowing, say climate scientists"
If I may quote from the article;
"Prof Myles Allen at Oxford University who runs the climateprediction.net website, said he feared climate sceptics would overinterpret the figure. 'You can bet your life there will be a lot of fuss about what a cold year it is. Actually no, its not been that cold a year, but the human memory is not very long, we are used to warm years,' he said, 'Even in the 80s [this year] would have felt like a warm year.'
And 2008 would have been a scorcher in Charles Dickens's time - without human-induced warming there would have been a one in a hundred chance of getting a year this hot. 'For Dickens this would have been an extremely warm year,' he said. On the flip side, in the current climate there is a roughly one in 10 chance of having a year this cool."
Overinterpret? Is that a new way of saying don't look at all the relevant data because it might be inconvenient?
As I pointed out, this is not telling the whole story, nor even putting it into a proper context. The important point evaded is not that 2008 would have been hot for Dickens but how hot is it with respect to the current warming spell. Nobody is arguing that the past decade is not warmer than previous ones and that the world1s glaciers and ecosystems are not reacting to it. If 2008 is the coldest year since 2001 and the global average temperature didn't change at all between 2001 - 2007 one should ask why! Talking about 2008 on its own and comparing it to Victorian times is misleading.
Then a few days later in the Guardian the environmental campaigner George Monbiot wrote, in response to the first article that "In the physical world global warming appears to be spilling over into runaway feedback."
Really? What a load of nonsense. It's statements like these that make me wonder if I am either living in the same physical world and if we need real world data at all?
It is said in that article that it's all right because the Met Office predicted that 2008 would be cool because of the la Nina effect. What it didn't say is that the previous year was predicted by the Met Office to be the warmest ever and it wasn't. la Ninas come along regularly and it's no great scientific achievement to say that when one occurs the world will cool. A failed prediction of warming however is highly significant especially given the faith put in computer modelling.
Also this supposed explanation is not in itself adequate. If the predicted cooling by la Nina had not occurred then 2008 would probably have been the same temperature (given the uncertainties) as every year since 2001 and that in itself would require explanation.
Later on in the Monbiot article we have, as I predicted, the tired old cliche about "professional deniers employed by fossil fuel companies." Where I wonder are their counterparts, the professional campaigners whose vested interests make them see a runaway warming world despite what the real world the data says?
I am broadly in favour of the global warming -CO2 hypothesis but I know it is just that, a hypothesis - and that needs testing against real observations in the physical world. If it isn't, then it's not science.
No independent minds in official Britain
An email from David Henderson [pdhenderson18@googlemail.com] to Benny Peiser
See the text that I used as the basis for a recent invited lecture in Edinburgh at Heriot-Watt University. Most of the ideas are in earlier publications of mine, but the following excerpts are new thoughts (for me)
" ... economists, here as elsewhere, are not agreed. Some of our differences on climate change relate to already familiar issues which arise in other areas of policy: a leading instance, and an important one in this context where distant possibilities are in question, is the choice of an appropriate rate of interest for discounting projected future costs and benefits. But the dividing line between upholders and dissenters in economics falls outside the accepted bounds of our subject. It concerns the choice of a point of departure; and this choice depends on a judgement as to what conclusions it is appropriate to draw from arguments and evidence that are scientific rather than economic. Received opinion among economists takes as given what it sees as firm scientific conclusions. Thus the Stern Review says at the start that 'The scientific evidence that climate change is a serious and urgent issue is now compelling', while the Garnaut Report take a similar line. For me, such unqualified assertions presume too much."
"Where so much remains uncertain, unsettled or unknown, policies should be evolutionary and adaptive, rather than presumptive; and their evolution should be linked to a process of inquiry and review which is more thorough, balanced, open and objective than is now the case.
As things are, there is little or no chance that such a new framework could emerge in Britain. Policy and research alike are almost entirely in the hands of institutions that appear as firmly committed to currently received opinion. The list of those involved in the advisory and policy process, and spending public money accordingly, includes the new Department of Energy and Climate Change and the relevant segments of some other departments of state, the Office of Climate Change, the Committee on Climate Change, the Hadley Centre, the Tyndall Centre, the National Environment Research Council, the Energy Research Centre, the Carbon Trust, the Environment Agency, and the Sustainable Development Commission.
I do not offer the above list as exclusive; and indeed, sad to say, Her Majesty's Treasury has to be added to it. When I started work on climate change issues, I argued that it was high time for the Treasury to become seriously involved with them. Subsequent events, including the Stern Review, have brought home to me the old adage, 'Be careful what you wish for'.
In all these official bodies, as also in the growing number of non-governmental research centres that have been set up in Britain to work on issues relating to climate change, a common way of thinking prevails. I doubt whether among them there is today, or could ever be as things now are, a single professional staff member who could be identified as even a mild dissenter or non-subscriber: there is no place for such minority thoughts, and no point in voicing them. Her Majesty's Government, with a good deal of unofficial backing, have created and financed a dominant culture of conformity. Other OECD member governments, and the European Commission, have taken much the same path.
Britain gives 'back door' amnesty for 180,000 asylum seekers who slipped through the net
Up to 180,000 asylum seekers are to be granted a 'back door' amnesty to live in Britain. They include failed refugees who should have been deported, and migrants whose claims were never even concluded by the Home Office. Instead, their files were lost or left unfinished as the asylum system went into meltdown.
Now officials are finally wading through the backlog, and have already granted more than 50,000 approvals. Based on the current rate at which cases are being rubber-stamped, the total number to benefit from the amnesty will be around 180,000. The approval rate is 40 per cent and rising, with all those who are successful gaining access to housing and other benefits. Local councils will be expected to find homes for many of them.
The major reason why so many of the claims are being approved is the Human Rights Act. Under it, those who have been here for many years can claim Britain is now their home and that they no longer have links to their country of origin. If their claims had been considered when they were first submitted, many might have been sent home.
The HRA, passed by Labour a decade ago, also prevents the removal of asylum seekers to countries where they could face torture or persecution, which is likely to apply to thousands of cases in the backlog.
Shadow Home Secretary Dominic Grieve said: 'Whilst the Minister for Immigration tries to talk tough, the reality is that the Government is prepared to grant what amounts to an effective amnesty just to get the figures down. 'Despite all the spin, it is clear that Labour is no closer to getting a grip on illegal immigration.'
The 450,000 so-called 'legacy' cases were unearthed by former Home Secretary John Reid during a clean-up of the department he described as 'not fit for purpose'. He said he wanted all the cases - some of which date back to the mid-1990s - resolved by around 2011. Lin Homer, chief executive of the UK Border Agency, said that of nearly 130,000 cases concluded so far, 51,000 - or 40 per cent - had been approved. A further 53,000 had been closed because, for example, the claimant could not be contacted. Only 23,500 applicants have been removed.
Town halls have been warned to make the migrants a priority for council housing. They have been given a 'transitional grant' of 1.1million of taxpayers' money to help towards the cost, but the final bill is likely to be far higher. It is expected to be passed on in council tax rises.
The list of countries with most beneficiaries of the 'legacy' policy is headed by Turkey, with 2,400 successful claimants.
Sir Andrew Green, chairman of the pressure group Migrationwatch UK, said: 'We are only now getting the measure of the disaster that befell the asylum system in recent years. 'It is frankly absurd that tens of thousands of people should be given full access to the welfare state for no other reason than the administrative chaos that ruled in the Home Office.'
It also emerged yesterday that seven of the most dangerous criminals involved in the foreign prisoner scandal have been given permission to stay in Britain. They are rapists, killers and paedophiles. One of the main reasons for being allowed to stay is that under human rights law they have a right to a family life. In total, out of 1,000 offenders involved in the Home Office fiasco, only 336 have been deported to date.
Tory MP James Clappison said: 'The fact that even the most serious criminals have been allowed to stay makes a mockery of Labour's original promise that they would be found and deported.'
The revelations, made in a letter to Parliament's home affairs committee, came as a study showed that allowing every illegal immigrant living in the UK to stay would cost 2billion a year. Migrationwatch estimated the cost of a full immigrant amnesty could rise to 4billion once newcomers started families. The think-tank also released results of a poll which found that 70 per cent of those questioned opposed a blanket amnesty for all the estimated 700,000 illegal migrants.
A UK Border Agency spokesman said: 'We have improved our performance and are now resolving several thousand old asylum cases every month. We are well on track to complete all 450,000 cases by 2011. 'We will continue to prioritise those who may pose a risk to the public, and then focus on those who can more easily be removed, those receiving support, and those who may be granted leave. 'We will no longer pay to support to those who have had their cases concluded. Those who are granted the right to stay should seek work and those who have been refused will be removed.'
Source
Incorrect newspaper clippings in Britain
We read:
"A pub landlord [bar owner] has hit out after being arrested on suspicion of committing a racially-aggravated public order offence. Police swooped on Peter Mailer's premises, the Black Bull Hotel in Warkworth, last Tuesday, following a formal complaint over newspaper clippings, political cartoons and other items displayed on his bar-room walls.
Mr Mailer, who admits he is an active supporter of the British National Party, was hauled into Alnwick Police Station, along with the cuttings, where he provided a taped interview under caution. He has now been bailed to return to the station on December 23, when he will learn whether or not the Crown Prosecution Service will charge him.
But the 52-year-old publican said he was stunned to learn that the complaint had been made by an off-duty senior police officer from Nottinghamshire, who was on holiday in the region when he paid a visit to the Black Bull the previous Friday night. "There was absolutely nothing said about the so-called racist items on my wall. About 90 per cent of them were clippings taken directly from national newspapers. "On Tuesday two Northumbria officers turned up and arrested me, took everything off the walls and I had to go to the station to give a taped interview."
He added: "It seems that this senior officer had to justify his fat salary by rocking the boat in a sleepy little village hundreds of miles away from where he lives. "I've had this pub three years, it's full of regulars of all political persuasions who don't have an issue with what I put on my walls."....
A spokeswoman for Northumbria Police said: "A 52-year-old man from the Alnwick area was arrested on Tuesday, November 25, on suspicion of committing a racially-aggravated public order offence, and has been bailed."
Source
It's legal for the newspapers to publish it but you must not pin it up on your walls???? I'm guessing that the clippings were mainly reports of immigrant crimes.
Thousands of NHS patients suffer avoidable medical errors, says Healthcare Commission
Thousands of patients are the victims of medical errors that could have been avoided if safety was given a higher priority in the NHS, the health watchdog has warned. Incidents where patients were harmed or so called near-misses are not being reported meaning lessons cannot be learned and future problems avoided, the Healthcare Commission said in its annual State of Healthcare report. One in ten patients admitted to hospitals will suffer from an error and around half of these could have been avoided, it warns.
The report said only half of NHS trusts comply with all safety standards and there has been little improvement. Errors that have led to patients being harmed include incorrect diagnosis, wrong doses of medication, surgeons operating on the wrong part of the body and paperwork going missing.
The wide ranging report covers all aspects of healthcare in England and highlights a number of areas of significant improvement in the NHS, particularly around deaths from cancer and heart disease and huge reductions in waiting times.
Demand for healthcare has increased dramatically, the NHS has higher levels of funding than ever before, and the health of the nation is improving, the report said. However, the last annual report before the Healthcare Commission is subsumed by the Care Quality Commission, the report focuses on patient safety and the lack of progress in the last five years. The report said too few incidents are reported to the National Patient Safety Agency with particular problems in primary care where doctors and nurses report almost no errors although the majority of patient care is delivered by GPs.
The report said there are 'up to 600 errors a day in primary care' but this was disputed by the Department of Health and the British Medical Association as based on research in other countries. The NPSA received 959,000 incidents of errors in 2007/8 but "worryingly" the report said seven per cent of hospital trusts and 13 per cent of primary care trusts did not report any incidents.
Prof Sir Ian Kennedy, chairman of the Healthcare Commission, said: "In my view the NHS is really only just out of the starting blocks. "There is a lot more we can do before we can be confident that the care patients receive is as safe as it reasonably can be. "What must change and change quickly is that we don't know very much about how safe care is in primary care. Information about missed diagnoses and late diagnoses won't show up on anyone's register of incidents of untoward events. "Safe care is what patients expect and what they are entitled to. "The real responsibility for the safety of care lies with those who provide care locally, namely the trusts and the boards responsible for trusts." He said unless safety is "internalised in their DNA" then nothing can change.
The Healthcare Commission called for one national database of serious incidents as the recording of errors is currently spread across different organisations. And hospital trusts and primary care trusts should also be measured on their serious untoward incidents and how they learn from them.
Dr Hamish Meldrum, Chairman of Council at the British Medical Association said: "The overall picture in this report is of major improvements to standards of care. We applaud the efforts of NHS staff in reducing the amount of time patients have to wait, and improving the quality of the care they receive. "Any errors are regrettable but there are millions of contacts between the NHS and patients every day. It is inevitable that, in a very small proportion of these, care falls below the highest standards. Doctors want to get rid of unacceptable variations in quality, but we need to be careful to analyse and learn from the causes of low performance rather than jumping to conclusions or simply adopting a blame culture."
Martin Fletcher, Chief Executive at the National Patient Safety Agency, said: "Good reporting is the cornerstone of patient safety. Safety cannot be improved without a range of valid reporting, analytical and investigative tools that identify the sources and causes of risk in a way that leads to preventative action. The National Reporting and Learning System has a vital role to play in supporting NHS organisations to identify risks to safe patient care. Patient safety needs to be everyone's responsibility."
Health Minister Lord Darzi said: "The NHS sees a million people every 36 hours. Unfortunately, as in any modern health service, mistakes and unforeseen incidents will happen. Only a very small number of errors put patients at serious risk. "We know there's more work to be done and are leading the way worldwide, having set up the National Patient Safety Agency and established a reporting and learning system to encourage open reporting. The introduction of quality quality accounts will refocus the attention of the boards of NHS bodies on the quality and safety."
Source
Oh Come All Ye Tasteless
'Chav' is a derogatory British term most frequently used to describe white working class teenagers or young people who misbehave. The burberry cap on the figure below is a chav hallmark
A British school has asked kids to learn a "chav" nativity play - where Jesus turns water into lager instead of wine.
Mary and Joseph break into a garage instead of finding shelter in a stable. She is told she will get extra benefits for having Jesus - and the Wise Men are asked for gifts of Adidas and Burberry. When a character says Mary is a virgin, another replies: "Wossat then? A train?" The script was thought to have been found on the internet.
Michelle Taylor, 35, has a relative at Oakwood School for 11to-16 year olds with emotional and behavioural difficulties in Bexley, Kent. She said: "I couldn't believe it. You encourage children to speak properly, then they get this at school." Bexley Council said the script was used in a drama lesson for kids of 14, but the school would still stage a traditional nativity.
Source. Fuller details here
School results are a poor predictor of future success
John Lennon left school without any qualifications, Damien Hirst did marginally better and was awarded an E for his art A-Level whilst Bill Gates dropped out of college on his way to becoming the world's richest man. They are hardly shining examples of those who achieved all they did because of success in the classroom.
But according to intriguing new research, school tests are by no means a measure of true ability - nor can they be used as a tool to predict future success or abject failure. The study, by the Chartered Institute of Educational Assessors (CIEA), found that as many as 77 per cent of people believe that formal examinations fail to reflect their true intelligence.
Sour grapes? Perhaps, but there are those who have successfully bucked the trend. They include Gordon Ramsay, Ralph Lauren (who quit college to sell ties in a New York men's store) and degree-less business knights, Richard Branson, Philip Green and Alan Sugar. Then there's fashion designer Vivienne Westwood, Radio Four's interrogator-in-chief John Humphrys, the BBC's Terry Wogan, chat show legend Michael Parkinson and finally the X-Factor's Simon Cowell. Not one of them made it to university.
Not surprisingly then, just three out of 10 people associate exams with 'a sense of pride', according to the CIEA study which was based on the responses from 2,000 adults. The research also found that 62 per cent spoke of feeling 'butterflies in the stomach' moments before they were due to sit an exam. Other reactions included headaches, insomnia and vomiting.
Pupils in England currently sit an average of 70 formal examinations, whilst primary school children are now subjected to more tests than their international counterparts. Yet, 60 per cent of teachers who responded to a separate online poll for the CIEA said they did not think exams were necessarily the best indicators of a pupil's ability and were not reflective of their future success in a job.
'Exams don't suit everybody,' said Graham Herbert, deputy head of the CIEA, which aims to improve senior examiners, moderators and markers. 'They don't tell the full picture. Most adults agree that their performance in exams does not reflect their true abilities. 'That is not to say we should get rid of exams. What we need is a supplement to the exam system, a supplement that can be relied upon. And that supplement could be teacher assessment.' The CIEA is training qualified assessors through its Chartered Educational Assessor (CEA) initiative and aims to place 3,000 of them in schools across England by 2011. Already 33 are in place, with a further 70 in training.
Mr Herbert said the reliance on exams meant that many schools were now focusing on teaching for tests. 'If you say the purpose is to put a school in a rank order, then it becomes a high-stakes test,' he added. 'People get really nervous about it because their reputation is at risk, so they tend to teach to the test. 'That means that their learners jump through the hoops put there by the exam, rather than testing their ability and their knowledge.
'Take Richard Branson and Winston Churchill. They are two very famous, highly skilled individuals who were both poor exam performers. So exams don't necessarily on their own bring out the best in individuals. 'And they become stigmatised by that. A lot of adults feel that. From our survey, the majority, it seems.'
Source
Kids need nonsense
Comment from Britain on British humour and entertainment -- reflections on the recent death of much-loved TV animator Oliver Postgate
Before my brothers had children of their own, one of them would be co-opted as Duty Uncle on Christmas Day, so that we could get lunch ready while he amused the children. Our son was 4 when he pronounced, one Christmas morning after an exhilaratingly failed session with a balloon-rocket: "I like Uncle Mike the best because he is the most silly uncle".
There was a profound truth in that, although for the sake of family harmony I should stress that Mike has always had hot competition in that area, and that when not in the company of under-fives all three brothers are sober citizens. But the fact is that all children have a strong urge towards nonsense, silliness, absurdity. And for all our desire to offer them educational or reassuring stories, they will always have an eye for goonery and an ear for silly rhymes.
I thought of this yesterday morning as the nation mourned Oliver Postgate, creator of such benign absurdities as Ivor the Engine, Bagpuss, Noggin the Nog and The Clangers.
Grown-ups like to present children with stories about being brave and sensible, or loaded with facts about the wide world. There is a place for this, whether in the old world of Arthur Mee's Encyclopaedia and The Railway Children or the modern equivalents of educational DVDs and books about children in tower blocks coming to terms with divorce and knife gangs.
But they need nonsense too. We all do. As soon as a baby can focus, it longs for jokes. Silly jokes. You can make a two-month- old grin and giggle by putting a wastepaper basket over your head and taking it off again: I demonstrated this once to a scornful academic who had been claiming that babies could not perceive incongruity because their range of experience was too short. His baby thought differently.
As a child grows it learns plenty of serious stuff - like language and how to use the potty - and immediately subverts it with daft rhymes, shouting "smelly jelly fatty belly". Any character calling himself Noggin the Nog or Bagpuss is halfway there already; and silly noises are gratefully received, so Postgate's Clangers with their mad slide-whistling were ideal. This does not indicate shallowness of understanding - the same child who learns keenly about steam engines and pistons can be charmed by Ivor the Engine's ambition to sing in a choir.
Nonsense, at its best, takes us into the realm of the impossible, and when your world is circumscribed by your size and strength and by living under authority (we can all feel that way, even as adults), nonsense is a blessed relief. It is an adventure, a romance, an escape. The horrors of the plague can become a ring o'roses, the fear of Napoleon a game (taught to my children by an old Suffolk lady) of Chasing Bony Party.
So prosy old Postman Pat is all very well, and so is the tediously responsible Thomas the Tank Engine (Fat Controller's pet that he is, always saving the day). But there are moments when you need something sillier. You need Oliver Postgate's Clangers eating some blue string pudding and green soup. Or a verse or two of Jabberwocky, a dose of Edward Lear, or Bill and Ben saying nothing more taxing than "flubalub". Or the Christopher Isherwood poem that starts: "The common cormorant or shag/ lays eggs inside a paper bag..."
And the more serious-minded and curriculum-conscious the adults around you, the more you need nonsense. It is particularly galling when they cheat by trying to sneak lessons into everything: I had high hopes of the Teletubbies, rolling around in coloured fat-suits and squeaking "eh-oh!" at each other on green mounds. But just as this psychedelic landscape became engagingly mad, one of them would stare at its telly-belly and give birth to an educational little film about canals, or baking a cake. Pshaw!
There is a long and lovely tradition of nonsense literature in English, and we would do well to remember and respect it rather than grey everything down into social realism, Barbie-fied celebrity or factual automatism. Dulling rationalism threatens at all levels: even James Bond has lost his edge of fantastico-technical nonsense (gondolas on wheels! cars with fish fins!) and turned, with the arrival of Daniel Craig, into a dour, sub-le Carre chronicle of tediously wicked villains and an angsty 007 who never cracks a smile.
The nonsense tradition must go on: it embraces everything from Anglo-Saxon riddles to T.S. Eliot's Jellicle cats dancing under a Jellicle moon, to The Goon Show and the various heirs of Monty Python. It is always best marked by a certain amorality, as in Lewis Carroll's The Walrus and the Carpenter, in which the neat little oysters are eventually eaten.
Even the most kindly child likes that: in the realm of nonsense there is little morality. Perhaps that is why it provides such needful, happy release to those who worry a lot about right and wrong - such as dutiful children or, indeed, our own Prince of Wales. Why else, do you think, does the heir to the throne - who literally worries for England - find such lifelong joy in the adventures of Bluebottle, Grytpype-Thynne and Moriarty in The Goon Show? Why else, indeed, did those troubled men Sellers and Milligan invent it all in the first place? Not to push back the boundaries of art but to create a parallel universe where nothing is wrong and everything is daft. And why, one might equally ask, was John Cleese only ever funny in the days before he went to see a series of shrinks, worked out all his issues and lost the gift of nonsense?
You can divide nonsense into two streams, though. There is full-on nonsense, detached from reality and floating free, far above us on pink-and-magenta-striped clouds, up there in the sky with Lucy and her diamonds. And then there is what I would call anti-sense. Lewis Carroll is the best example of the latter: he was a logician and his world is a looking-glass with everything backwards and therefore absurd, but mostly with clear references to reality: the Duchess's baby may well be a pig, but she is a recognisable, satirised character; Alice herself is grounded, always able to say "You're nothing but a pack of playing-cards!" or help the dormouse out of the teapot. Many of his best-loved poems are satires on the improving literature of the day - How Doth the Little Crocodile is a straight adaptation of an Isaac Watts verse. Yet sometimes Carroll can fly beyond the tugging threads of leftover 18th-century Oxford rationalism that still held him captive: The Hunting of the Snark is the most powerfully surreal and therefore beautiful of his works, the Snark itself a "Boojum", which is to say, nothing. And the crew's behaviour is satisfyingly mad:
They roused him with muffins, they roused him with ice
They roused him with mustard-and-cress;
They roused him with jam and judicious advice,
They set him conundrums to guess...
Here he moves closer to Lear, though nobody before or since has matched Lear's gentle, romantic blurred vision. I have met at least one teacher who won't use his verse on the ground that it is wrong to let children think there is any such thing as a Pobble, or that there is any help in Aunt Jobiska's remedy of "lavender water tinged with pink". I excoriate that teacher and all her dreary works! Nonsense it all may be, but I learnt much of what I know - really know - about life and love from Lear's poems: yearningly romantic, a Platonic ideal of a world where Owl and Pussycat may sink their natural differences, fall in love to the sound of a small guitar and buy a pig's nose-ring for a shilling. Every enterprise of my life has been fortified by the spirit of the Jumblies, who quixotically defied sense and prudence to follow their dream:
They went to sea in a sieve, they did;
In a sieve they went to sea;
In spite of all their friends could say,
On a winter's morn, on a stormy day,
In a sieve they went to sea!
They faced storms with pink blotting paper and a coppery gong, and knew themselves to be wise:
Though the sky be dark, and the voyage be long,
Yet we never can think we were rash or wrong...
O Timballo! How happy we are
When we live in a sieve and a crockery-jar!
Well, as Lear himself says with that melancholy inseparable from true romanticism, far and few are the lands where the Jumblies live. But when their message crackles through to us via Postgate or Carroll, Eliot or Milligan, we should rejoice. Recession is coming. Sail in a sieve, take plenty of honey, rely on your Aunt Jobiska and listen for the distant singing of Ivor the Engine in the heavenly choir. A little insanity keeps you sane.
Source
More British welfare reform: Benefits to be paid only to those who show they are looking hard for work
Unemployed people will have to prove that they are taking practical steps to return to work in return for state benefits, under changes to the welfare state to be announced by ministers today. The only exceptions will be carers, parents of very young children and anyone who is severely disabled. All other claimants will have to show that they are preparing for work with activities ranging from updating a CV or finding out about childcare through to full-time training or work experience.
The conditions for claiming benefits will be set out in a statement to MPs and a White Paper by James Purnell, the Work and Pensions Secretary. Most controversially, the paper will suggest that single parents with young children, possibly from the age of 1, should start work-related activities. They are currently not expected to attend work-focused interviews until their eldest child is 12, although this will be reduced to 7 next year.
Incapacity benefit and income support will be scrapped. Only the most seriously ill and disabled will be able to claim a new employment support allowance. Everyone else will be moved to jobseeker's allowance, with conditions attached requiring work- related activity. The plans mean that the controversial recommendations made by David Freud, Tony Blair's welfare reform adviser, will be implemented in full.
Gordon Brown initially rejected Mr Freud's findings when he became Prime Minister, but had second thoughts and now wants them to be enforced. Writing in The Times today, Mr Freud seeks to defend his proposals against criticism that they amount to a dismantling of the welfare state. He says that the roots lie in the Beveridge postwar settlement.
"The central proposition in the White Paper is that virtually everyone will be expected to set entering the world of work as their goal, including many of the people who have languished on incapacity benefit for years," he says. "Substantial support for individuals in achieving this objective is being developed, and should be ready in time for the next economic upswing. Beveridge would have approved - he wrote, `Most men who have once gained the habit of work would rather work ... than be idle ... But getting work ... may involve a change of habits, doing something that is unfamiliar or leaving one's friends or making a painful effort of some kind'."
Mr Freud said that it was also important to make the changes now, despite the economic downturn.
Source
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Wikipedia victory in censorship row
We read:
Jeremy Clarkson cleared by Ofcom over joke about truck drivers and prostitutes
Some sense of proportion left in Britain:
Clarkson is one of the funniest men in Britain -- but not in the foul-mouthed way that is now so common among British comedians.
Upper crust arrogance in Britain
Thousands of ordinary families faced airport hell yesterday - as well-heeled youngsters blockaded Stansted's runway in a demo over climate change. The protesters - whose Plane Stupid campaign counts sons and daughters of peers among activists - chained themselves together to halt flights.
Armed police took five hours to clear them as more than 150 take-offs and landings were delayed or cancelled at the Essex airport - Britain's third-busiest. Fuming passengers almost came to blows in the scramble to check in for alternative flights - as gun cops battled to keep order amid chaos.
Last night the campaigners - 57 of whom were arrested - were blasted for causing planes to be diverted . . . putting MORE carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
Adam May, 24, from Clapham, South London, whose flight to meet his girlfriend in Berlin was scuppered, raged: "It makes no sense. They should be banged up." [i.e. put in jail]
Demonstrators held by cops included Olivia Chessell, 20, whose family hails from posh East Dulwich in South East London. She took part in a demo on the roof of the Commons in February against a new runway at Heathrow. Tamsin Omond, 23 - a baronet's grandaughter - was also part of that protest, along with Leo Murray, 31, who is the grandson of the late Labour peer Anthony Greenwood. Another arrested was campaigner Liz Snook, 30, from Harlow, Essex. [Snook on the left in the pic below. Kember on the right]
In yesterday's demo, chained protesters surrounded themselves with a "cage" of fencing. As police cut them out, Plane Stupid's Lily Kember, 21, defended her group's protest about greenhouse gas emissions, insisting: "It's a strong message." She was taught at 15,000 pounds-a-year Godolphin and Latymer school in Hammersmith, West London.
More than 3,500 Ryanair passengers were among those hit as the budget carrier cancelled 56 flights. The airline blasted Stansted's security after the protesters breached the airport's 5ft perimeter fence with wire-cutters at 3am. Among those forced to scrap holiday plans were 20 excited pupils aged 11 to 12 heading for Hamburg. Teacher Vanessa Lamb said: "The children are obviously upset."
Source
Britain: More police funding but FEWER frontline officers to deal with street crime
The Leftist infatuation with bureaucracy again
The number of police available to deal with crime on the streets is falling, a high-powered academic report revealed yesterday. It said the ranks of fully-trained police constables have been thinned out in favour of more community support officers, middle management and civilian back-up staff. The findings challenge the longstanding Labour claim that police numbers have been greatly increased and that crime has fallen partly as a result. Researchers said Government crime policy was 'mired in contradiction'.
The report from the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies at King's College London said details of police numbers show 'the way in which the Home Office has relied on the recruitment of less qualified and lower paid auxiliary staff to boost the visible policing presence'. And it revealed that the number of police constables dropped by nearly 1,500 - more than 1 per cent - between 2006 and 2007. The past five years has seen the number of superintendents increase by 16 per cent and the ranks of chief inspectors swell by almost 20 per cent. Over the same period the amount of taxpayers' money used to fund police forces has risen 20 per cent.
The report's findings are borne out by Home Office figures on police numbers published earlier this year. These show that the number of constables peaked at 109,037 in 2005, dropping by nearly 2,000 to 107,048 in March this year. In the same timescale the number of community support officers leapt from 6,201 to 15,883.
The figures drew an alarmed reaction from opposition politicians. Shadow Home Secretary Dominic Grieve said: 'This undermines all Labour's rhetoric about record police numbers. The fact is that because of Labour's target culture our police spend just 14 per cent of their time where the public want them,which is on the streets.'
Liberal Democrat justice spokesman David Howarth said: 'The report rightly points out how incoherent policy from a Government obsessed with looking tough has left staff at the sharp end of the criminal justice system confused and overworked.'
But the Home Office insisted that spending on additional staff has meant fully-qualified officers can spend more time combating crime. A spokesman said: 'Time spent by officers on frontline duties has increased each year since 2003 - equivalent to 5,340 more police officers. Additional police staff are freeing officers to return to the front line.'
Source
British minister demands 'radical' reform on training of social workers in the wake of Baby P tragedy
Now THIS is long overdue
The training of social workers and their working methods needs a root-and-branch overhaul, Children's Secretary Ed Balls said yesterday. He called for more on-the-job training and less theory for students, who get their qualifications to become social workers largely in university classrooms. And he said he had commissioned a `taskforce' to shake up training schemes and to examine `how professional social workers are deploying their time'.
The pressure for sweeping reform of social work follows the Baby P and Shannon Matthews cases, in which two social work departments boasting high official ratings failed to prevent the most serious abuse of children in families under their supervision. In the Baby P case social workers from Haringey, London, were said to have spent much of their time form-filling while failing to notice the child's mother was living with a vicious boyfriend and lodger. The baby died despite 60 contacts between his mother and social workers, police and health staff.
A report - promised to be independent - is being drawn up on the actions of Kirklees, Yorkshire, social workers in the Matthews case. There are suspicions that the kidnapped girl's family was removed from the child protection register to help achieve Government targets.
Mr Balls told BBC One's Politics Show: 'This needs to be a very radical review. It needs to ask some very hard questions. In my view the training of social workers is too theoretical. 'There isn't enough on-the-job training, there isn't enough challenge and supervision through the early years. We need our schools and social workers to work more closely together, we need to boost leadership.' He added: 'There's lots to be done. And of course I wish that it could have happened earlier but in the end, in the Baby P case I don't think it would in the end have changed it, because that was a particular and harrowing tragedy.'
Mr Balls said that the standing of the teaching profession has been transformed over the past 10 years and the same must now be done for social work. A 'taskforce' to examine training and practice is to be set up, headed by Moira Gibb, who is currently the chief executive of Camden council. Miss Gibb, a former social services director, is one of the great and good of social work, who has headed the social services directors' association and been appointed by the Government as a member of the UK Statistics Authority. Proposals it will examine include rules to ensure that children's services directors have experience in social work.
Children's services departments replaced the old town hall social services departments after the scandal that followed the murder of eight-year-old Victoria Climbie in Haringey in 2000. They brought together education officials in charge of schools and colleges and social workers dealing with children and their families. Haringey children's services director Sharon Shoesmith - now shifted from her job on the orders of Mr Balls - was a former education chief with no experience as a social worker.
Miss Gibb's review will also why 'social workers prioritise their time in the way they do' and 'what actions by professional social workers make the most difference to vulnerable children and adults'. There will also be a new requirement for social work training to include a year's practical work. At present students qualify to become social workers through a three-year degree course - or a two-year course for graduates in other subjects - which is heavily theoretical. One typical university course calls for students to learn to 'manage change and deliver required outcomes' and tests their 'knowledge of social work theory and how it can be applied in practice'.
Source
Are we too afraid of touch?
Our aversion to innocent physical contact has gone a touch too far
Look around you, there are notices everywhere: "Be careful: keep your eye on your possessions", "Swim at your own risk - no lifeguard on duty". We are told by government to be alert to the risk of terrorists. And we are watched by CCTV wherever we go. But all this advice to be watchful makes us fearful. It makes us shrink into ourselves. We become unkind, unconcerned for others, and our children become terrified of the outside world.
These days, you have to have a Criminal Records Bureau check before you volunteer to work with anyone described as vulnerable - children, anyone over 65, and a whole lot of others besides. That makes many young men, especially, nervous about volunteering at all, and others deeply irritated that they are being asked for a CRB check to work, say, in hospital radio.
If a young man has a criminal record, but now wants to help others who are younger still - just getting into trouble with the police and at risk of worse - he has to be incredibly determined not to be put off by the marathon of bureaucracy.
Hospital staff are often told not to put an arm round patients to comfort them lest it be viewed as assault. So it tends to be the porters and care assistants who give a bit of comfort, while the nurses only touch the patients when they have to carry out some kind of intervention. Many people, especially older people, don't want too many interventions. What they want is human contact, a bit of tender loving care.
We are all so terrified of child sexual abuse that we have outlawed taking photographs of children at nursery school without parental consent. And adults are terrified that their motives will be suspected if they talk to a child or, even worse, hug one. So, a few years ago, when Clive Peachy, a bricklayer, saw two-year-old Abigail Rae walking down the road after she had escaped from her nursery school in Warwickshire, he did not stop and help her because he thought people would think he was trying to abduct her. The result? She drowned in a pond.
Young male volunteers in primary schools describe feeling like pariahs, viewed with suspicion by many staff - when all they are doing is trying to help. And children want comfort if they fall over in the playground, yet teachers have been told never to touch the children in their care. So you get 12-year-olds with broken legs crying for their mothers, with staff unable to give them a hug, and five-year-olds putting sunscreen on each other because the teachers have been instructed not to touch them. The mess that ensues, and the visits to hospital because cream gets in their eyes, would be funny were it not so ridiculous. Equally absurd are the letters informing parents that children should not bring home-made birthday cakes into school in case of food poisoning - a position that results in children being less likely to share.
So what is all this about? First, there is a real fear of being sued, far greater than the actual numbers of cases would warrant. Second, there is a fear of what others might think. We have begun to internalise the messages that people might think we are abusers when we are not. Third, we are fearful of our children being injured, being killed, being abducted. Yet, in terms of ordinary accidents happening to children, the numbers have gone down dramatically rather than up over the last 30 years.
Nevertheless, our children are frightened to go outside because, as the think-tank Demos and the Green Alliance demonstrated a few years ago, they fear the outside world. They think the streets are full of terrorists, murderers and child-abductors. Worse, they think they know what they look like. They are white, male, middle-aged, wear horrible clothes and have a funny look in their eyes.
But children would not feel like this if adults did not encourage them. It is adult fear, stoked by government and insurers, by risk assessors and hospital and school managers. If we aren't careful, the next generation will consist entirely of wimps. They will go off on adventure holidays abroad, but they will not walk down the street or get on the Tube alone for fear of attackers. The net result will be not only a lack of life skills, but overwhelming fear: of predators, of accidents, of life itself.
Meanwhile, the sexual predators will carry on just as before - largely in the family - because no system of checks will root them out completely. And we will have created a whole generation of unhappy people. We need to be sensible, not risk-averse; we need to look out to see where we can help others. And, sometimes, we may even need to touch them.
Source
Do the dim die young?
Scots psychologist Ian Deary claims that clever people live longer than thickheads. Sure, some bright people die young and many thickheads live into old age but if you measure a large bunch of people the statistics point that way. Dr Deary and his team looked at more than 2000 Scottish children given IQ tests in 1932 when they were 11 years old. He traced most of these people again in 1997 and found that those still living at age 76 had average IQs of 102 but those who had died had average IQs of 98.
Dr Deary says more evidence comes from IQ tests on large numbers of young men recruited into the Australian Army at the time of the Vietnam War and nearly a million 19-year-olds inducted into the Swedish Army. Twenty years after the tests, those who had died in the meantime had lower average IQs than those who remained alive. Several other surveys point in the same direction.
Some critics find Dr Deary's claims insulting. "So, you're saying that the thick die quick?" "Anyway", they challenge, "haven't IQ tests been discredited"? "Well, no," says Dr Deary. IQ tests have a predictive value unequalled in psychology. Hundreds of data sets since 1904 show that IQ remains almost unchanged over a lifetime, can predict educational achievement, occupational success, propensity to sickness and age of death with some confidence. It's a better predictor of life expectancy than body mass index, total cholesterol, blood pressure or blood glucose.
But why IQ should be a good predictor of life expectancy remains a mystery. Some epidemiologists suggest that intelligent people get the easy jobs, leaving the heavier, dangerous, life-threatening work to dumber people. Or, they suggest, most people with high IQs behave better. In early life people with higher IQs are more likely to have better diets, do more exercise, avoid accidents, give up smoking, do less binge drinking and put on less weight in adulthood.
But Dr Deary has checked all that stuff, and finds it does not wash. Rather, he thinks, intelligence causes the association between education, social class and health. He favours the theory that IQ tests in youth reveal a well-wired body better able to respond effectively to environmental insults.
Some supporting evidence comes from the finding that simple reaction speed - the time taken to press a button when a stimulus appears - can replace IQ test scores as an even better predictor of an earlier death. Reaction-time tasks don't demand complex reasoning, so are unlikely to improve by education. Dr Deary hopes his findings will explain the connection between childhood IQ, sickness and earlier deaths and help to tackle problems of health inequalities.
In Christchurch, David Fergusson leads a team studying the behaviour and fates of 1265 children born there in 1977. He has already shown that those with higher IQs did better at school. If his study continues long enough, it may throw light on the connection between IQ and life expectancy of Christchurch kids.
Source
We read:
"An anti-child abuse watchdog has reversed its decision to blacklist a Wikipedia page showing a controversial 1976 album cover after protests over censorship. Most British internet service providers had blocked users from accessing the image of a prepubescent naked girl on the cover of the Virgin Killer album by the Scorpions, a German band, after the Internet Watch Foundation ruled it was a "potentially illegal indecent image".
But the picture was accessible on many other sites and some argued that, while provocative, it was an artistic historical artefact and should not be banned. Last night the IWF accepted that its ban had been counter-productive after the controversy had prompted millions to view the image. It said in a statement: "The IWF Board has considered these findings and the contextual issues involved in this specific case and, in light of the length of time the image has existed and its wide availability, the decision has been taken to remove this webpage from our list.
"IWF's overriding objective is to minimise the availability of indecent images of children on the internet, however, on this occasion our efforts have had the opposite effect. We regret the unintended consequences for Wikipedia and its users. Wikipedia have been informed of the outcome of this procedure and IWF Board's subsequent decision." .......
Wikipedia had sharply criticised the IWF decision which had the side-effect of leaving many British internet users unable to edit Wikipedia entries and affected the website's performance......
The Wikimedia Foundation behind Wikipedia had protested that the IWF had gone too far. "The IWF didn't just block the image; it blocked access to the article itself, which discusses the image in a neutral, encyclopedic fashion," said Wikimedia Foundation head Sue Gardner from San Francisco.
Source
Jeremy Clarkson cleared by Ofcom over joke about truck drivers and prostitutes
Some sense of proportion left in Britain:
"Jeremy Clarkson [pic above] has been cleared by the broadcasting watchdog Ofcom of causing offence after making a joke about lorry drivers murdering prostitutes. Ofcom received 339 complaints after the Top Gear presenter made the remarks during a pre-recorded episode of the BBC Two motoring show last month.
Clarkson and his co-presenters James May, the Daily Telegraph columnist, and Richard Hammond, were taking part in a stunt for the show that involved driving lorries around an obstacle course. Climbing behind the wheel, Clarkson mused: "What matters to lorry drivers? Murdering prostitutes? Fuel economy?" He went on: "This is a hard job, and I'm not just saying this to win favour with lorry drivers. It's a hard job - change gear, change gear, change gear, check your mirrors, murder a prostitute, change gear, change gear, murder. That's a lot of effort in a day."
His comments provoked a furious reaction from victim support groups and road hauliers who demanded that the presenter make a public apology.
Ofcom accepted that the remarks "could shock some viewers" but ruled that Clarkson was "clearly using exaggeration to make a joke, albeit not to everyone's taste. "The comments should therefore have been seen in that context," it said. "It is often the case that humour can cause offence. To restrict humour only to material which does not cause offence would be an unnecessary restriction of freedom of expression."
Ofcom also cleared an episode of the BBC One sitcom Harry and Paul, which featured an upper-class character, played by Harry Enfield, encouraging his Northern friend to mate with his neighbour's Filipino maid. The sketch prompted the Philippine ambassador in London, Edgardo B Espiritu, to write to the chair of the BBC Trust, Sir Michael Lyons, accusing the pair of racism.
However, Ofcom ruled that there was "no intention" to ridicule women or the Filipino community. "The target of the humour was very clearly the upper-class character played by Harry Enfield who holds such a deluded view of his social superiority that he treats individuals with lower social status with ridiculous disdain," it ruled.
Source
Clarkson is one of the funniest men in Britain -- but not in the foul-mouthed way that is now so common among British comedians.
Upper crust arrogance in Britain
Thousands of ordinary families faced airport hell yesterday - as well-heeled youngsters blockaded Stansted's runway in a demo over climate change. The protesters - whose Plane Stupid campaign counts sons and daughters of peers among activists - chained themselves together to halt flights.
Armed police took five hours to clear them as more than 150 take-offs and landings were delayed or cancelled at the Essex airport - Britain's third-busiest. Fuming passengers almost came to blows in the scramble to check in for alternative flights - as gun cops battled to keep order amid chaos.
Last night the campaigners - 57 of whom were arrested - were blasted for causing planes to be diverted . . . putting MORE carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
Adam May, 24, from Clapham, South London, whose flight to meet his girlfriend in Berlin was scuppered, raged: "It makes no sense. They should be banged up." [i.e. put in jail]
Demonstrators held by cops included Olivia Chessell, 20, whose family hails from posh East Dulwich in South East London. She took part in a demo on the roof of the Commons in February against a new runway at Heathrow. Tamsin Omond, 23 - a baronet's grandaughter - was also part of that protest, along with Leo Murray, 31, who is the grandson of the late Labour peer Anthony Greenwood. Another arrested was campaigner Liz Snook, 30, from Harlow, Essex. [Snook on the left in the pic below. Kember on the right]
In yesterday's demo, chained protesters surrounded themselves with a "cage" of fencing. As police cut them out, Plane Stupid's Lily Kember, 21, defended her group's protest about greenhouse gas emissions, insisting: "It's a strong message." She was taught at 15,000 pounds-a-year Godolphin and Latymer school in Hammersmith, West London.
More than 3,500 Ryanair passengers were among those hit as the budget carrier cancelled 56 flights. The airline blasted Stansted's security after the protesters breached the airport's 5ft perimeter fence with wire-cutters at 3am. Among those forced to scrap holiday plans were 20 excited pupils aged 11 to 12 heading for Hamburg. Teacher Vanessa Lamb said: "The children are obviously upset."
Source
Britain: More police funding but FEWER frontline officers to deal with street crime
The Leftist infatuation with bureaucracy again
The number of police available to deal with crime on the streets is falling, a high-powered academic report revealed yesterday. It said the ranks of fully-trained police constables have been thinned out in favour of more community support officers, middle management and civilian back-up staff. The findings challenge the longstanding Labour claim that police numbers have been greatly increased and that crime has fallen partly as a result. Researchers said Government crime policy was 'mired in contradiction'.
The report from the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies at King's College London said details of police numbers show 'the way in which the Home Office has relied on the recruitment of less qualified and lower paid auxiliary staff to boost the visible policing presence'. And it revealed that the number of police constables dropped by nearly 1,500 - more than 1 per cent - between 2006 and 2007. The past five years has seen the number of superintendents increase by 16 per cent and the ranks of chief inspectors swell by almost 20 per cent. Over the same period the amount of taxpayers' money used to fund police forces has risen 20 per cent.
The report's findings are borne out by Home Office figures on police numbers published earlier this year. These show that the number of constables peaked at 109,037 in 2005, dropping by nearly 2,000 to 107,048 in March this year. In the same timescale the number of community support officers leapt from 6,201 to 15,883.
The figures drew an alarmed reaction from opposition politicians. Shadow Home Secretary Dominic Grieve said: 'This undermines all Labour's rhetoric about record police numbers. The fact is that because of Labour's target culture our police spend just 14 per cent of their time where the public want them,which is on the streets.'
Liberal Democrat justice spokesman David Howarth said: 'The report rightly points out how incoherent policy from a Government obsessed with looking tough has left staff at the sharp end of the criminal justice system confused and overworked.'
But the Home Office insisted that spending on additional staff has meant fully-qualified officers can spend more time combating crime. A spokesman said: 'Time spent by officers on frontline duties has increased each year since 2003 - equivalent to 5,340 more police officers. Additional police staff are freeing officers to return to the front line.'
Source
British minister demands 'radical' reform on training of social workers in the wake of Baby P tragedy
Now THIS is long overdue
The training of social workers and their working methods needs a root-and-branch overhaul, Children's Secretary Ed Balls said yesterday. He called for more on-the-job training and less theory for students, who get their qualifications to become social workers largely in university classrooms. And he said he had commissioned a `taskforce' to shake up training schemes and to examine `how professional social workers are deploying their time'.
The pressure for sweeping reform of social work follows the Baby P and Shannon Matthews cases, in which two social work departments boasting high official ratings failed to prevent the most serious abuse of children in families under their supervision. In the Baby P case social workers from Haringey, London, were said to have spent much of their time form-filling while failing to notice the child's mother was living with a vicious boyfriend and lodger. The baby died despite 60 contacts between his mother and social workers, police and health staff.
A report - promised to be independent - is being drawn up on the actions of Kirklees, Yorkshire, social workers in the Matthews case. There are suspicions that the kidnapped girl's family was removed from the child protection register to help achieve Government targets.
Mr Balls told BBC One's Politics Show: 'This needs to be a very radical review. It needs to ask some very hard questions. In my view the training of social workers is too theoretical. 'There isn't enough on-the-job training, there isn't enough challenge and supervision through the early years. We need our schools and social workers to work more closely together, we need to boost leadership.' He added: 'There's lots to be done. And of course I wish that it could have happened earlier but in the end, in the Baby P case I don't think it would in the end have changed it, because that was a particular and harrowing tragedy.'
Mr Balls said that the standing of the teaching profession has been transformed over the past 10 years and the same must now be done for social work. A 'taskforce' to examine training and practice is to be set up, headed by Moira Gibb, who is currently the chief executive of Camden council. Miss Gibb, a former social services director, is one of the great and good of social work, who has headed the social services directors' association and been appointed by the Government as a member of the UK Statistics Authority. Proposals it will examine include rules to ensure that children's services directors have experience in social work.
Children's services departments replaced the old town hall social services departments after the scandal that followed the murder of eight-year-old Victoria Climbie in Haringey in 2000. They brought together education officials in charge of schools and colleges and social workers dealing with children and their families. Haringey children's services director Sharon Shoesmith - now shifted from her job on the orders of Mr Balls - was a former education chief with no experience as a social worker.
Miss Gibb's review will also why 'social workers prioritise their time in the way they do' and 'what actions by professional social workers make the most difference to vulnerable children and adults'. There will also be a new requirement for social work training to include a year's practical work. At present students qualify to become social workers through a three-year degree course - or a two-year course for graduates in other subjects - which is heavily theoretical. One typical university course calls for students to learn to 'manage change and deliver required outcomes' and tests their 'knowledge of social work theory and how it can be applied in practice'.
Source
Are we too afraid of touch?
Our aversion to innocent physical contact has gone a touch too far
Look around you, there are notices everywhere: "Be careful: keep your eye on your possessions", "Swim at your own risk - no lifeguard on duty". We are told by government to be alert to the risk of terrorists. And we are watched by CCTV wherever we go. But all this advice to be watchful makes us fearful. It makes us shrink into ourselves. We become unkind, unconcerned for others, and our children become terrified of the outside world.
These days, you have to have a Criminal Records Bureau check before you volunteer to work with anyone described as vulnerable - children, anyone over 65, and a whole lot of others besides. That makes many young men, especially, nervous about volunteering at all, and others deeply irritated that they are being asked for a CRB check to work, say, in hospital radio.
If a young man has a criminal record, but now wants to help others who are younger still - just getting into trouble with the police and at risk of worse - he has to be incredibly determined not to be put off by the marathon of bureaucracy.
Hospital staff are often told not to put an arm round patients to comfort them lest it be viewed as assault. So it tends to be the porters and care assistants who give a bit of comfort, while the nurses only touch the patients when they have to carry out some kind of intervention. Many people, especially older people, don't want too many interventions. What they want is human contact, a bit of tender loving care.
We are all so terrified of child sexual abuse that we have outlawed taking photographs of children at nursery school without parental consent. And adults are terrified that their motives will be suspected if they talk to a child or, even worse, hug one. So, a few years ago, when Clive Peachy, a bricklayer, saw two-year-old Abigail Rae walking down the road after she had escaped from her nursery school in Warwickshire, he did not stop and help her because he thought people would think he was trying to abduct her. The result? She drowned in a pond.
Young male volunteers in primary schools describe feeling like pariahs, viewed with suspicion by many staff - when all they are doing is trying to help. And children want comfort if they fall over in the playground, yet teachers have been told never to touch the children in their care. So you get 12-year-olds with broken legs crying for their mothers, with staff unable to give them a hug, and five-year-olds putting sunscreen on each other because the teachers have been instructed not to touch them. The mess that ensues, and the visits to hospital because cream gets in their eyes, would be funny were it not so ridiculous. Equally absurd are the letters informing parents that children should not bring home-made birthday cakes into school in case of food poisoning - a position that results in children being less likely to share.
So what is all this about? First, there is a real fear of being sued, far greater than the actual numbers of cases would warrant. Second, there is a fear of what others might think. We have begun to internalise the messages that people might think we are abusers when we are not. Third, we are fearful of our children being injured, being killed, being abducted. Yet, in terms of ordinary accidents happening to children, the numbers have gone down dramatically rather than up over the last 30 years.
Nevertheless, our children are frightened to go outside because, as the think-tank Demos and the Green Alliance demonstrated a few years ago, they fear the outside world. They think the streets are full of terrorists, murderers and child-abductors. Worse, they think they know what they look like. They are white, male, middle-aged, wear horrible clothes and have a funny look in their eyes.
But children would not feel like this if adults did not encourage them. It is adult fear, stoked by government and insurers, by risk assessors and hospital and school managers. If we aren't careful, the next generation will consist entirely of wimps. They will go off on adventure holidays abroad, but they will not walk down the street or get on the Tube alone for fear of attackers. The net result will be not only a lack of life skills, but overwhelming fear: of predators, of accidents, of life itself.
Meanwhile, the sexual predators will carry on just as before - largely in the family - because no system of checks will root them out completely. And we will have created a whole generation of unhappy people. We need to be sensible, not risk-averse; we need to look out to see where we can help others. And, sometimes, we may even need to touch them.
Source
Do the dim die young?
Scots psychologist Ian Deary claims that clever people live longer than thickheads. Sure, some bright people die young and many thickheads live into old age but if you measure a large bunch of people the statistics point that way. Dr Deary and his team looked at more than 2000 Scottish children given IQ tests in 1932 when they were 11 years old. He traced most of these people again in 1997 and found that those still living at age 76 had average IQs of 102 but those who had died had average IQs of 98.
Dr Deary says more evidence comes from IQ tests on large numbers of young men recruited into the Australian Army at the time of the Vietnam War and nearly a million 19-year-olds inducted into the Swedish Army. Twenty years after the tests, those who had died in the meantime had lower average IQs than those who remained alive. Several other surveys point in the same direction.
Some critics find Dr Deary's claims insulting. "So, you're saying that the thick die quick?" "Anyway", they challenge, "haven't IQ tests been discredited"? "Well, no," says Dr Deary. IQ tests have a predictive value unequalled in psychology. Hundreds of data sets since 1904 show that IQ remains almost unchanged over a lifetime, can predict educational achievement, occupational success, propensity to sickness and age of death with some confidence. It's a better predictor of life expectancy than body mass index, total cholesterol, blood pressure or blood glucose.
But why IQ should be a good predictor of life expectancy remains a mystery. Some epidemiologists suggest that intelligent people get the easy jobs, leaving the heavier, dangerous, life-threatening work to dumber people. Or, they suggest, most people with high IQs behave better. In early life people with higher IQs are more likely to have better diets, do more exercise, avoid accidents, give up smoking, do less binge drinking and put on less weight in adulthood.
But Dr Deary has checked all that stuff, and finds it does not wash. Rather, he thinks, intelligence causes the association between education, social class and health. He favours the theory that IQ tests in youth reveal a well-wired body better able to respond effectively to environmental insults.
Some supporting evidence comes from the finding that simple reaction speed - the time taken to press a button when a stimulus appears - can replace IQ test scores as an even better predictor of an earlier death. Reaction-time tasks don't demand complex reasoning, so are unlikely to improve by education. Dr Deary hopes his findings will explain the connection between childhood IQ, sickness and earlier deaths and help to tackle problems of health inequalities.
In Christchurch, David Fergusson leads a team studying the behaviour and fates of 1265 children born there in 1977. He has already shown that those with higher IQs did better at school. If his study continues long enough, it may throw light on the connection between IQ and life expectancy of Christchurch kids.
Source
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Christian words deleted from influential British dictionary
We read:
Andrew Bolt has more.
Human rights: British government to get tough and reform 'villains charter'
Jack Straw plans to overhaul the Human Rights Act amidst concerns that it has become a charter for criminals. The Justice Secretary wants to reflect complaints that the act protects rights but says nothing about responsibilities. In an exclusive interview with the Daily Mail, he says he is 'frustrated' by the way the legislation he introduced ten years ago has sometimes been interpreted by the courts. He blames 'nervous' judges for refusing to deport extremists and terrorist suspects despite assurances by ministers that their removal is in the national interest. A decade after it was passed at the height of New Labour's enthusiasm for constitutional reform, this is the first explicit acknowledgment of the Human Rights Act's flaws by its chief architect.
In a move which will alarm the civil liberties lobby, Mr Straw reveals that he is studying whether the act can be tightened and has taken legal advice. 'In due course I could envisage that there could be additions made to to work in the issues of responsibilities,' he says. The Justice Secretary sympathises with those who complain that the act has become used by prisoners to avoid punishment or by Islamic extremists to avoid deportation. He tells the Mail that he wants to ' rebalance' the rights set out in the Human Rights Act by adding explicit 'responsibilities', specifically to obey the law and to be loyal to the country. He is also looking at ways of promoting social rights such as access to health care, as well as social responsibilities such staying healthy or the education of children.
He said: 'I fully understand that Mail readers have concerns about the Human Rights Act. There is a sense that it's a villains charter or that it stops terrorists being deported or criminals being properly given publicity. I am greatly frustrated by this, not by the concerns, but by some very few judgments that have thrown up these problems.'
His offer to overhaul the act could form a cornerstone of the next Labour manifesto, making rights and responsibilities a battleground issue at the general election. It will be seen as a calculated attempt to outflank the Tories, who have promised to scrap the act altogether and replace it with their own British Bill of Rights.
Critics of the Human Rights Act say it has been exploited by unscrupulous lawyers to promote a culture of compensation, and to defend those who promote their rights at the expense of others. They complain that it has had a sweeping effect on the legal system by giving protection to spurious compensation claims, demands for privileged treatment and outright abuses. In recent times, it has been cited by travellers [gypsies] and squatters as a defence against the threat of expulsion. There are also concerns that it has put the rights of prisoners and criminals ahead of those of their victims. Last month Home Secretary Jacqui Smith admitted the act has made it difficult to remove terror suspects from the country. Mr Straw echoes her concern, but argues that even without the act it would be difficult to deport them.
In a separate development, he reveals that he has told his officials to fight workplace compensation claims at the Ministry of Justice, prisons, the probation service and any other sections under his control rather than settle out of court. And he urges the private sector to do the same to discourage what he dismisses as 'unscrupulous ambulance chasers'. He has been highly critical of so-called 'no win no fee' agreements, in which lawyers go unpaid but charge heavy costs if they win an action.
The arrangements were introduced a decade ago to make access to justice cheaper for claimants, but the growth of rogue firms which encourage clients to file inappropriate claims, in particular for personal injury, prompted Mr Straw to set up a Government review of charges. He accuses some lawyers of imposing costs which are 'nothing short of scandalous'.
A long-delayed Green Paper is likely in January, which will set out Mr Straw's ambitions for what responsibilities could be set out in a Bill of Rights and Responsibilities, or added to the Human Rights Act. As the act is part of a law passed by Parliament, UK legislators have a perfect right to amend it - although any such move is likely to be subject to furious legal protests.
Source
New ‘Report cards’ on schools to help parents to choose
Parents choosing a state school for their child are to get help in the form of a report card that will award schools a grade from A to F, based on factors such as pupil satisfaction and exam scores. Ed Balls, the Schools Secretary, said that the report cards, modelled on a system used in New York, aimed to cut the “detective work” that parents have to do, by bringing together information on academic achievement as well as other criteria. These may include ratings of pupil and parental satisfaction, child well-being and a measure of how the school is doing in narrowing the achievement gap between children from rich and poor households.
Mr Balls said: “There is lots of useful information out there for parents on how schools are performing – like performance tables and Ofsted reports - but the volume of data can be confusing and difficult to navigate.”
Report cards will grade primary and secondary schools in England on an annual basis, although individual measures could be updated through the year. They will also provide “signposts” to other information, such as Ofsted reports. If successful, the cards are likely to prove a useful alternative to league tables based only on exam results, which have been criticised heavily for providing a crude and partial measure.
Teaching unions gave the report cards a cautious welcome. Mary Bousted, general secretary of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers, said they represented an “interesting opportunity”, but that the measures used to compile the reports needed to be robust.
John Dunford, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said: “The balanced report card has the potential to reflect better the performance of the school than any single set of examination statistics, but it must replace league tables, not be in addition to them.”
Source
IQ in early adulthood and later risk of death by homicide: cohort study of 1 million men
By G. David Batty et al.
Background: Risk factors for homicide are emerging; however, the predictive value of IQ, for which there is a strong prima facie case, has yet to be examined.
Aims: To examine the association between IQ and risk of death by homicide.
Method: A cohort of 968 846 men, aged 18-19 years, were administered an IQ test battery at military conscription and then followed for mortality experience over two decades.
Results: There were 191 deaths due to homicide during follow-up. In age-adjusted analyses, a high total IQ test score was associated with a reduced rate of homicide (hazard ratio (HR) per standard deviation increase in IQ score=0.49, 95% CI 0.42-0.57). A step-wise gradient was apparent across the three IQ groups (P-value for trend <0.001). After adjustment for indicators of socio-economic position and illness at conscription, this gradient was marginally attenuated (HR=0.57, 95% CI 0.49-0.67).
Conclusions: High IQ test scores in early adulthood were associated with a reduced risk of death by homicide.
The British Journal of Psychiatry (2008) 193: 461-465.
In other words, it is dummies who are most likely to get murdered. Not terribly surprising but it shows once again how far-reaching are the effects of IQ. Leftists who try to trivialize IQ have a mountain of evidence against them
How untrained NHS GPs are missing two-thirds of dementia victims
Hundreds of thousands of dementia sufferers remain undiagnosed - largely because of a lack of GP training, it can be revealed. Research shows two-thirds of victims have not been identified by the NHS - meaning they get no drugs, home help or other vital assistance. And a separate survey of family doctors found that their inadequate training, and a shortage of support services for sufferers, is mostly to blame for the health service's failings.
There are at least 700,000 people living with Alzheimer's or a related condition in Britain, with 575,000 of those in England, according to Government-recognised research. GPs are expected to compile lists of all those diagnosed. But according to an analysis of those lists in England by the Liberal Democrats and the Alzheimer's Society, only 220,000 are registered. It means around 355,000 - 62 per cent - of dementia sufferers live without any support from the NHS.
Meanwhile, in the survey of GPs by the Daily Mail, 29 per cent admit they have not had enough training to diagnose and manage dementia. Some 60 per cent said there was a reluctance to diagnose because of a lack of support services, while 40 per cent felt hesitant to make a diagnosis because of the dearth of drug treatments. Worryingly, 10 per cent feel nothing can be done for victims, so do not bother to diagnose at all. Overall, more than two-thirds said funding shortages were to blame for care failures.
Neil Hunt, chief executive of the Alzheimer's Society, said: 'Without a diagnosis, people can't understand frightening symptoms and can't make plans for the future or access support. 'GPs get very little time and we hear cases of people being told they are stupid and sent away. 'Others have a five minute session and are basically told, "good luck, I don't envy you but there's nothing we can do". 'It's no wonder people give in to depression and give up. But the evidence is many can have a reasonable quality of life if the disease is diagnosed early enough.'
The LibDem research into undiagnosed sufferers found 95 per cent of PCTs have fewer than half the registered dementia patients expected. It also unveils a postcode lottery, with some health trusts having far fewer registered patients than others. The worst is Heart of Birmingham PCT, which covers the centre of the city. An estimated 82 per cent of sufferers there are undiagnosed. The best is Islington in North London. But even there, some 32 per cent go undiagnosed.
LibDem health spokesman Norman Lamb said: 'These findings beg the question - why are so many going without the help their GP can offer? 'Too often people assume nothing can be done and it is a part of ageing. 'We must challenge this view, because a great deal can be done to delay the onset and progression of the condition. 'The NHS must do more to ensure people are encouraged to seek early help and that they have access to care from their GP, specialist assessment and accurate diagnosis. 'But the problems go wider with a social care sector under massive pressure. 'The Government has been slow to acknowledge these problems and there's a risk that urgently-required reform will be knocked in the long grass as economic problems grab attention.'
But Care Services Minister Phil Hope promised investment into dementia research will 'continue to grow'. He added: 'We recognise that the key to improving the diagnosis rates is firstly to increase public and professional awareness. 'Secondly, we must ensure professionals involved in diagnosis have the skills and knowledge to do so effectively.'
Source
We read:
"For generations, schoolchildren have been captivated by the magic of nature, gripped by tales from British history and fascinated by learning about our Christian traditions. Today, however, crucial words used to describe these traditional topics have been stripped from an influential children's dictionary in favour of more 'modern' terms. Among the entries which have disappeared from the latest edition of the Oxford Junior Dictionary are disciple, coronation, empire, piglet and acorn. In their place come the likes of MP3 player, broadband, biodegradable, committee and celebrity.
Publishers Oxford University Press say the dictionary needs to evolve to reflect the fact that Britain has become a modern, multicultural, multi-faith society in which fewer children grow up in rural environments. But academics and headteachers said the changes to the 10,000-entry volume - aimed at over-sevens - would deprive a new generation of links with their heritage. The changes were highlighted by a mother-of-four who noticed that words like moss and fern had vanished from the latest edition while helping her son with her homework.
Lisa Saunders, from County Down, Northern Ireland, compared six editions since the 1970s and was horrified to discover that a whole range of words relating to Christianity, nature and British history had been axed over the years. 'The Christian faith still has a strong following,' she said. 'To eradicate so many words associated with Christianity will have a big effect on the numerous primary schools who use it.'....
And Anthony Seldon, the master of Wellington College, a leading private school in Berkshire, said: 'I am stunned that words like "saint", "buttercup", "heather"and "sycamore" have all gone and I grieve it. 'I think as well as being descriptive, the Oxford Junior Dictionary has to be prescriptive too, suggesting not just words that are used but words that should be used.
Source
Andrew Bolt has more.
Human rights: British government to get tough and reform 'villains charter'
Jack Straw plans to overhaul the Human Rights Act amidst concerns that it has become a charter for criminals. The Justice Secretary wants to reflect complaints that the act protects rights but says nothing about responsibilities. In an exclusive interview with the Daily Mail, he says he is 'frustrated' by the way the legislation he introduced ten years ago has sometimes been interpreted by the courts. He blames 'nervous' judges for refusing to deport extremists and terrorist suspects despite assurances by ministers that their removal is in the national interest. A decade after it was passed at the height of New Labour's enthusiasm for constitutional reform, this is the first explicit acknowledgment of the Human Rights Act's flaws by its chief architect.
In a move which will alarm the civil liberties lobby, Mr Straw reveals that he is studying whether the act can be tightened and has taken legal advice. 'In due course I could envisage that there could be additions made to to work in the issues of responsibilities,' he says. The Justice Secretary sympathises with those who complain that the act has become used by prisoners to avoid punishment or by Islamic extremists to avoid deportation. He tells the Mail that he wants to ' rebalance' the rights set out in the Human Rights Act by adding explicit 'responsibilities', specifically to obey the law and to be loyal to the country. He is also looking at ways of promoting social rights such as access to health care, as well as social responsibilities such staying healthy or the education of children.
He said: 'I fully understand that Mail readers have concerns about the Human Rights Act. There is a sense that it's a villains charter or that it stops terrorists being deported or criminals being properly given publicity. I am greatly frustrated by this, not by the concerns, but by some very few judgments that have thrown up these problems.'
His offer to overhaul the act could form a cornerstone of the next Labour manifesto, making rights and responsibilities a battleground issue at the general election. It will be seen as a calculated attempt to outflank the Tories, who have promised to scrap the act altogether and replace it with their own British Bill of Rights.
Critics of the Human Rights Act say it has been exploited by unscrupulous lawyers to promote a culture of compensation, and to defend those who promote their rights at the expense of others. They complain that it has had a sweeping effect on the legal system by giving protection to spurious compensation claims, demands for privileged treatment and outright abuses. In recent times, it has been cited by travellers [gypsies] and squatters as a defence against the threat of expulsion. There are also concerns that it has put the rights of prisoners and criminals ahead of those of their victims. Last month Home Secretary Jacqui Smith admitted the act has made it difficult to remove terror suspects from the country. Mr Straw echoes her concern, but argues that even without the act it would be difficult to deport them.
In a separate development, he reveals that he has told his officials to fight workplace compensation claims at the Ministry of Justice, prisons, the probation service and any other sections under his control rather than settle out of court. And he urges the private sector to do the same to discourage what he dismisses as 'unscrupulous ambulance chasers'. He has been highly critical of so-called 'no win no fee' agreements, in which lawyers go unpaid but charge heavy costs if they win an action.
The arrangements were introduced a decade ago to make access to justice cheaper for claimants, but the growth of rogue firms which encourage clients to file inappropriate claims, in particular for personal injury, prompted Mr Straw to set up a Government review of charges. He accuses some lawyers of imposing costs which are 'nothing short of scandalous'.
A long-delayed Green Paper is likely in January, which will set out Mr Straw's ambitions for what responsibilities could be set out in a Bill of Rights and Responsibilities, or added to the Human Rights Act. As the act is part of a law passed by Parliament, UK legislators have a perfect right to amend it - although any such move is likely to be subject to furious legal protests.
Source
New ‘Report cards’ on schools to help parents to choose
Parents choosing a state school for their child are to get help in the form of a report card that will award schools a grade from A to F, based on factors such as pupil satisfaction and exam scores. Ed Balls, the Schools Secretary, said that the report cards, modelled on a system used in New York, aimed to cut the “detective work” that parents have to do, by bringing together information on academic achievement as well as other criteria. These may include ratings of pupil and parental satisfaction, child well-being and a measure of how the school is doing in narrowing the achievement gap between children from rich and poor households.
Mr Balls said: “There is lots of useful information out there for parents on how schools are performing – like performance tables and Ofsted reports - but the volume of data can be confusing and difficult to navigate.”
Report cards will grade primary and secondary schools in England on an annual basis, although individual measures could be updated through the year. They will also provide “signposts” to other information, such as Ofsted reports. If successful, the cards are likely to prove a useful alternative to league tables based only on exam results, which have been criticised heavily for providing a crude and partial measure.
Teaching unions gave the report cards a cautious welcome. Mary Bousted, general secretary of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers, said they represented an “interesting opportunity”, but that the measures used to compile the reports needed to be robust.
John Dunford, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said: “The balanced report card has the potential to reflect better the performance of the school than any single set of examination statistics, but it must replace league tables, not be in addition to them.”
Source
IQ in early adulthood and later risk of death by homicide: cohort study of 1 million men
By G. David Batty et al.
Background: Risk factors for homicide are emerging; however, the predictive value of IQ, for which there is a strong prima facie case, has yet to be examined.
Aims: To examine the association between IQ and risk of death by homicide.
Method: A cohort of 968 846 men, aged 18-19 years, were administered an IQ test battery at military conscription and then followed for mortality experience over two decades.
Results: There were 191 deaths due to homicide during follow-up. In age-adjusted analyses, a high total IQ test score was associated with a reduced rate of homicide (hazard ratio (HR) per standard deviation increase in IQ score=0.49, 95% CI 0.42-0.57). A step-wise gradient was apparent across the three IQ groups (P-value for trend <0.001). After adjustment for indicators of socio-economic position and illness at conscription, this gradient was marginally attenuated (HR=0.57, 95% CI 0.49-0.67).
Conclusions: High IQ test scores in early adulthood were associated with a reduced risk of death by homicide.
The British Journal of Psychiatry (2008) 193: 461-465.
In other words, it is dummies who are most likely to get murdered. Not terribly surprising but it shows once again how far-reaching are the effects of IQ. Leftists who try to trivialize IQ have a mountain of evidence against them
How untrained NHS GPs are missing two-thirds of dementia victims
Hundreds of thousands of dementia sufferers remain undiagnosed - largely because of a lack of GP training, it can be revealed. Research shows two-thirds of victims have not been identified by the NHS - meaning they get no drugs, home help or other vital assistance. And a separate survey of family doctors found that their inadequate training, and a shortage of support services for sufferers, is mostly to blame for the health service's failings.
There are at least 700,000 people living with Alzheimer's or a related condition in Britain, with 575,000 of those in England, according to Government-recognised research. GPs are expected to compile lists of all those diagnosed. But according to an analysis of those lists in England by the Liberal Democrats and the Alzheimer's Society, only 220,000 are registered. It means around 355,000 - 62 per cent - of dementia sufferers live without any support from the NHS.
Meanwhile, in the survey of GPs by the Daily Mail, 29 per cent admit they have not had enough training to diagnose and manage dementia. Some 60 per cent said there was a reluctance to diagnose because of a lack of support services, while 40 per cent felt hesitant to make a diagnosis because of the dearth of drug treatments. Worryingly, 10 per cent feel nothing can be done for victims, so do not bother to diagnose at all. Overall, more than two-thirds said funding shortages were to blame for care failures.
Neil Hunt, chief executive of the Alzheimer's Society, said: 'Without a diagnosis, people can't understand frightening symptoms and can't make plans for the future or access support. 'GPs get very little time and we hear cases of people being told they are stupid and sent away. 'Others have a five minute session and are basically told, "good luck, I don't envy you but there's nothing we can do". 'It's no wonder people give in to depression and give up. But the evidence is many can have a reasonable quality of life if the disease is diagnosed early enough.'
The LibDem research into undiagnosed sufferers found 95 per cent of PCTs have fewer than half the registered dementia patients expected. It also unveils a postcode lottery, with some health trusts having far fewer registered patients than others. The worst is Heart of Birmingham PCT, which covers the centre of the city. An estimated 82 per cent of sufferers there are undiagnosed. The best is Islington in North London. But even there, some 32 per cent go undiagnosed.
LibDem health spokesman Norman Lamb said: 'These findings beg the question - why are so many going without the help their GP can offer? 'Too often people assume nothing can be done and it is a part of ageing. 'We must challenge this view, because a great deal can be done to delay the onset and progression of the condition. 'The NHS must do more to ensure people are encouraged to seek early help and that they have access to care from their GP, specialist assessment and accurate diagnosis. 'But the problems go wider with a social care sector under massive pressure. 'The Government has been slow to acknowledge these problems and there's a risk that urgently-required reform will be knocked in the long grass as economic problems grab attention.'
But Care Services Minister Phil Hope promised investment into dementia research will 'continue to grow'. He added: 'We recognise that the key to improving the diagnosis rates is firstly to increase public and professional awareness. 'Secondly, we must ensure professionals involved in diagnosis have the skills and knowledge to do so effectively.'
Source
Tuesday, December 09, 2008
Incorrect British jelly to be axed after 144 years on the shelves
We read:
Must not mention Nazi sex?
We read:
BRITAIN'S SUICIDAL CLIMATE POLICY: CHEMICALS BOSS WARNS OF EXODUS
JIM RATCLIFFE, the reclusive billionaire behind Ineos, Britain’s largest private company, has warned Gordon Brown that hundreds of thousands of jobs will be lost if the prime minister commits Britain to tougher EU curbs on carbon emissions.
Ratcliffe issued the warning in a letter last week that was also signed by Paul Thompson, chief executive of GrowHow, the UK’s last remaining fertiliser manufacturer, and Steve Elliott, head of the Chemical Industries Association.
It is part of a feverish, last-ditch effort by the chemicals industry and other big energy users to force changes to the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) ahead of a summit of EU leaders this week in Brussels, where they are expected to sign off on a bloc-wide climate-change package.
The industry argues that the next phase of the ETS — which proposes to incorporate industries now excluded from the programme such as chemicals, cement and glassmakers from 2013 – will lead to “carbon leakage” as companies relocate to countries where they are not forced to pay to pollute. The chemical industry employs, directly and indirectly, 600,000 people in the UK.
In its current form, the ETS will impose carbon-emissions caps on industrial polluters from 2013 and force them to pay for 100% of their permits by 2020. Ratcliffe said that doing so would be “truly horrendous” for the industry and make it uncompetitive. Instead, he says that chemicals manufacturers should be allocated permits for free and agree on less stringent pollution caps because they compete against rivals in countries not subject to such rules.
Ratcliffe, who has been locked in crisis talks with banks after a sharp downturn in business put his company in danger of breaching covenants, said: “We believe there is a significant danger to our 60 billion pound industry if phase three of EU ETS becomes law in its current form. "Chemical businesses situated throughout the UK, especially in the north of England and central Scotland, with 80% of them foreign-owned, will be ‘decimated’, putting almost 200,000 jobs at risk,” he added.
Emissions permits go for 15.49 euros per tonne, but are expected to roughly triple when phase three of the ETS begins in 2013. The energy industry, one of the largest polluters, has already accepted that it will have to pay for 100% of its permits from 2013.
It is thought that EU leaders may have been persuaded by the industry’s arguments and will soften their stance. An increase in free allocations to polluting sectors will bring howls from environmentalists who claim that the industry is overdramatising the threat posed by the ETS.
Ed Miliband, the energy and climate change secretary who met European ministers in Poznan, Poland, for talks on climate change last week, said: “The [climate] package must retain its environmental integrity. This means a commitment to reducing our emissions by 30% following a global deal.
“It means a tough and declining cap in the ETS and an ambitious increase in the auctioning of ETS allowances. It means addressing competitiveness, but only on the basis of firm evidence of sectors at genuine risk of carbon leakage.”
Source
Another feedback mechanism that is not in the climate models
Collapsing antarctic ice sheets, which have become potent symbols of global warming, may actually turn out to help in the battle against climate change and soaring carbon emissions.
Professor Rob Raiswell, a geologist at the University of Leeds, says that as the sheets break off the ice covering the continent, floating icebergs are produced that gouge minerals from the bedrock as they make their way to the sea. Raiswell believes that the accumulated frozen mud could breathe life into the icy waters around Antarctica, triggering a large, natural removal of carbon dioxide from the at mosphere.
And as rising temperatures cause the ice sheets to break up faster, creating more icebergs, the amount of carbon dioxide removed will also rise. Raiswell says: 'It won't solve the problem, but it might buy us some time.'
More here
Traditional subjects go in British schools shake-up
Pr
We read:
"Robertson's jam, a breakfast table fixture for generations and a symbol of controversy over its use of the Golly character, is being axed. The makers of the jam have decided to concentrate on another brand, Hartley's, instead. Robertson's has been part of British life since 1864, when the business was started by Scottish grocer James Robertson behind his shop in Paisley.
The Golly character, a black-faced minstrel doll with colourful clothes, was on the label for the best part of a century. It spawned badge collections and dolls but was condemned by some as an offensive caricature of black people, based on slave dolls. The Golly was axed from TV adverts in 1988, and disappeared from the labels in 2002.
Now Premier Foods, which bought the brand last year, is getting rid of Robertson's jam, although Golden Shred marmalade will survive. A spokesman said: 'We took a decision that Robertson's and Hartley's were similar products and so the focus has been on Hartley's.' Robertson's will go by the end of next year, said the industry magazine The Grocer.
Source
Must not mention Nazi sex?
We read:
"The Oscar aspirations of Kate Winslet, the British star, have been threatened by critics' claims that nudity in her latest film, The Reader, has "trivialised" the story it tells about the Nazi Holocaust.
Winslet, who plays a former concentration camp guard with a voracious sexual appetite, was believed to be a certainty for her sixth Oscar nomination next month until an attack by Charlie Finch, an influential New York critic, spread across the internet and raised doubts among Oscar voters in Hollywood.
The furore began at a private screening last week hosted by Stephen Daldry, the film's British director. Finch, who contributes to several New York newspapers and magazines, accused him of creating a "dishonest and manipulative" vision of Nazi war crimes and postwar Germany which, because of its sex and stars - including Ralph Fiennes - would "crowd out" many better films about the subject.
Source
BRITAIN'S SUICIDAL CLIMATE POLICY: CHEMICALS BOSS WARNS OF EXODUS
JIM RATCLIFFE, the reclusive billionaire behind Ineos, Britain’s largest private company, has warned Gordon Brown that hundreds of thousands of jobs will be lost if the prime minister commits Britain to tougher EU curbs on carbon emissions.
Ratcliffe issued the warning in a letter last week that was also signed by Paul Thompson, chief executive of GrowHow, the UK’s last remaining fertiliser manufacturer, and Steve Elliott, head of the Chemical Industries Association.
It is part of a feverish, last-ditch effort by the chemicals industry and other big energy users to force changes to the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) ahead of a summit of EU leaders this week in Brussels, where they are expected to sign off on a bloc-wide climate-change package.
The industry argues that the next phase of the ETS — which proposes to incorporate industries now excluded from the programme such as chemicals, cement and glassmakers from 2013 – will lead to “carbon leakage” as companies relocate to countries where they are not forced to pay to pollute. The chemical industry employs, directly and indirectly, 600,000 people in the UK.
In its current form, the ETS will impose carbon-emissions caps on industrial polluters from 2013 and force them to pay for 100% of their permits by 2020. Ratcliffe said that doing so would be “truly horrendous” for the industry and make it uncompetitive. Instead, he says that chemicals manufacturers should be allocated permits for free and agree on less stringent pollution caps because they compete against rivals in countries not subject to such rules.
Ratcliffe, who has been locked in crisis talks with banks after a sharp downturn in business put his company in danger of breaching covenants, said: “We believe there is a significant danger to our 60 billion pound industry if phase three of EU ETS becomes law in its current form. "Chemical businesses situated throughout the UK, especially in the north of England and central Scotland, with 80% of them foreign-owned, will be ‘decimated’, putting almost 200,000 jobs at risk,” he added.
Emissions permits go for 15.49 euros per tonne, but are expected to roughly triple when phase three of the ETS begins in 2013. The energy industry, one of the largest polluters, has already accepted that it will have to pay for 100% of its permits from 2013.
It is thought that EU leaders may have been persuaded by the industry’s arguments and will soften their stance. An increase in free allocations to polluting sectors will bring howls from environmentalists who claim that the industry is overdramatising the threat posed by the ETS.
Ed Miliband, the energy and climate change secretary who met European ministers in Poznan, Poland, for talks on climate change last week, said: “The [climate] package must retain its environmental integrity. This means a commitment to reducing our emissions by 30% following a global deal.
“It means a tough and declining cap in the ETS and an ambitious increase in the auctioning of ETS allowances. It means addressing competitiveness, but only on the basis of firm evidence of sectors at genuine risk of carbon leakage.”
Source
Another feedback mechanism that is not in the climate models
Collapsing antarctic ice sheets, which have become potent symbols of global warming, may actually turn out to help in the battle against climate change and soaring carbon emissions.
Professor Rob Raiswell, a geologist at the University of Leeds, says that as the sheets break off the ice covering the continent, floating icebergs are produced that gouge minerals from the bedrock as they make their way to the sea. Raiswell believes that the accumulated frozen mud could breathe life into the icy waters around Antarctica, triggering a large, natural removal of carbon dioxide from the at mosphere.
And as rising temperatures cause the ice sheets to break up faster, creating more icebergs, the amount of carbon dioxide removed will also rise. Raiswell says: 'It won't solve the problem, but it might buy us some time.'
More here
Traditional subjects go in British schools shake-up
Pr