Eye on Britain
Posted by John Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).
Thursday, August 31, 2006
Piggybacking on terror in Britain: "Two days after British authorities broke up an alleged plot to blow up multiple aircraft over the Atlantic Ocean, the "moderate" Muslim establishment in Britain published an aggressive open letter to Prime Minister Tony Blair. It suggested that Mr. Blair could better fight terrorism if he recognized that the current British government policy, especially on "the debacle of Iraq," provides "ammunition to extremists." The letter writers demanded that the prime minister change his foreign policy to "make us all safer." One prominent signatory, the Labour member of Parliament Sadiq Khan, added that Mr. Blair's reluctance to criticize Israel increased the pool of people whom terrorists can recruit. In other words, Islamists working within the system exploited the thwarted Islamist terror plot to pressure the British government to implement their joint wishes and reverse British policy in the Middle East. Lawful Islamists shamelessly leveraged the near death of thousands to forward their agenda.... "
Australia now educating lots of Brits
That their own government cannot afford to educate
For most British youngsters, Australia and New Zealand are unbeatable places to while away a gap year. But now increasing numbers are being lured Down Under to further their education. Since 2002 the number of British students seeking to study at under and postgraduate level there has risen by more than a third, with more than 6,250 studying there last year alone. This year, as 53,000 students look unlikely to gain places at British universities, five leading antipodean institutions are offering scholarships to encourage them to look farther afield.
Sports sciences, health sciences and Asian studies have attracted British students in the past, but now people who want to study medicine or veterinary science but have failed to gain a place at a university in Britain are considering the move, says Kathleen Devereux, from the Australian Trade Commission. "You'd think of the UK market as being a fairly mature market, but we have had 12 per cent year-on-year growth from 2002 to 2005, which is extraordinary," she said.
With Australian fees averaging between 4,800 and 10,000 pounds a year, payable each term, the courses are more expensive than those in England, which has 3,000 pound fees payable on graduation. Fees for degrees in medicine, dentistry and veterinary sciences are higher still. But with lower living costs, a strong pound, and thirteen Australian and three New Zealand universities in the world top 200 universities, according to the Times Higher Education Supplement, they are a big draw. "Tuition fees bring into parity the cost of going to a British or Australian university at undergraduate level. The fees in Australia are higher, but the living expenses are much less, so it's an attractive alternative," Ms Devereux said.
Of the 3,888 British students in Australia last year, more than half were undergraduates. By June this year 3,328 students had registered.
Source
That their own government cannot afford to educate
For most British youngsters, Australia and New Zealand are unbeatable places to while away a gap year. But now increasing numbers are being lured Down Under to further their education. Since 2002 the number of British students seeking to study at under and postgraduate level there has risen by more than a third, with more than 6,250 studying there last year alone. This year, as 53,000 students look unlikely to gain places at British universities, five leading antipodean institutions are offering scholarships to encourage them to look farther afield.
Sports sciences, health sciences and Asian studies have attracted British students in the past, but now people who want to study medicine or veterinary science but have failed to gain a place at a university in Britain are considering the move, says Kathleen Devereux, from the Australian Trade Commission. "You'd think of the UK market as being a fairly mature market, but we have had 12 per cent year-on-year growth from 2002 to 2005, which is extraordinary," she said.
With Australian fees averaging between 4,800 and 10,000 pounds a year, payable each term, the courses are more expensive than those in England, which has 3,000 pound fees payable on graduation. Fees for degrees in medicine, dentistry and veterinary sciences are higher still. But with lower living costs, a strong pound, and thirteen Australian and three New Zealand universities in the world top 200 universities, according to the Times Higher Education Supplement, they are a big draw. "Tuition fees bring into parity the cost of going to a British or Australian university at undergraduate level. The fees in Australia are higher, but the living expenses are much less, so it's an attractive alternative," Ms Devereux said.
Of the 3,888 British students in Australia last year, more than half were undergraduates. By June this year 3,328 students had registered.
Source
THE GREAT BRITISH COVERUP OF INFORMATION GETS WORSE
The British love of revealing biographies is under threat because of a legal case about a Canadian folk singer determined to keep the public from finding out what lay under the linoleum in her Irish cottage. The ramifications could also affect "kiss-and-tell" stories in print and on television, and could give stars the power to veto photographs taken in public.
Publishers and media organisation are now mounting a legal battle against the "backdoor" assault on freedom of expression. Loreena McKennitt, whose albums including The Book of Secrets and The Mask and Mirror have sold 13m copies worldwide, went to the High Court in London to stop a former friend from publishing a book about her. While the details of the case are not judged to be important, it was what Mr Justice Eady said in his judgment that has exercised legal minds. They fear that the most trivial or anodyne details about a celebrity's life, even ones that are known to the public, could now be hidden under the guise of protecting privacy.
Times Newspapers (publishers of The Sunday Times), other newspaper groups, the Press Association, the BBC, BSkyB and a number of magazine publishers will go to the Court of Appeal on September 4 to seek permission to intervene in the case. They also fear public figures such as politicians and celebrities will use the case in an attempt to muzzle information that has already been made public. One media lawyer said: "It would be like trying to make someone a virgin again."
Literary and other public figures who have fought to block unauthorised biographies include JK Rowling, Bono, Mary Archer and Sir John Mortimer. Eady awarded McKennitt 5,000 pounds damages and an injunction preventing Niema Ash from Hampstead, northwest London, publishing specific passages in her book Travels With Loreena McKennitt: My Life as a Friend. These included such mundane matters as what was under the lino of the house in Ireland, how many bunk beds were put up when visitors came to stay and what happened when McKennitt was aroused from sleep.
But his judgment went much further. For the first time a British court drew on a 2004 ruling at the European Court of Human Rights that said photographs of Princess Caroline of Monaco shopping in a public place or in a swimming costume at a beach club breached her right to privacy. The judge claimed there was a "significant shift" taking place between, on the one hand, the right of freedom of expression and the corresponding interest of the public to receive information and, on the other hand, "the legitimate expectation of citizens to have their private lives protected".
He said information about an affair between two people could be protected even if one of them decided to reveal it to the public; incorrect information could breach someone's right to privacy; and the fact that something was already in the public domain did not always mean it could be published again.
Ash has lodged an appeal and the media organisations are seeking to join in the action when it is heard later this year. McKennitt has said in an interview: "Privacy is integral to people's emotional and psychological wellbeing. It doesn't matter if you are a so-called public figure."
Media lawyers say the case has wider ramifications than the long-running one brought against a tabloid newspaper by Naomi Campbell, the supermodel. She won 3,500 pounds damages from the Daily Mirror after it revealed her fight against drug addiction. The Court of Appeal overturned the award but the House of Lords then allowed the model's appeal against that judgment, saying the newspaper had gone too far in detailing her medical treatment.
Under the Eady judgment, celebrities will be able to sue for breach of privacy over the slightest affront to their feeling of self-importance. They will not have to prove that something is untrue, but just that raising it has invaded their privacy.
A spokesman for the solicitors Farrer & Co said: "This judge has clearly recognised the development of privacy cases in Europe. This judgment will be much quoted in future `kiss-and-tell' actions."
Source
The British love of revealing biographies is under threat because of a legal case about a Canadian folk singer determined to keep the public from finding out what lay under the linoleum in her Irish cottage. The ramifications could also affect "kiss-and-tell" stories in print and on television, and could give stars the power to veto photographs taken in public.
Publishers and media organisation are now mounting a legal battle against the "backdoor" assault on freedom of expression. Loreena McKennitt, whose albums including The Book of Secrets and The Mask and Mirror have sold 13m copies worldwide, went to the High Court in London to stop a former friend from publishing a book about her. While the details of the case are not judged to be important, it was what Mr Justice Eady said in his judgment that has exercised legal minds. They fear that the most trivial or anodyne details about a celebrity's life, even ones that are known to the public, could now be hidden under the guise of protecting privacy.
Times Newspapers (publishers of The Sunday Times), other newspaper groups, the Press Association, the BBC, BSkyB and a number of magazine publishers will go to the Court of Appeal on September 4 to seek permission to intervene in the case. They also fear public figures such as politicians and celebrities will use the case in an attempt to muzzle information that has already been made public. One media lawyer said: "It would be like trying to make someone a virgin again."
Literary and other public figures who have fought to block unauthorised biographies include JK Rowling, Bono, Mary Archer and Sir John Mortimer. Eady awarded McKennitt 5,000 pounds damages and an injunction preventing Niema Ash from Hampstead, northwest London, publishing specific passages in her book Travels With Loreena McKennitt: My Life as a Friend. These included such mundane matters as what was under the lino of the house in Ireland, how many bunk beds were put up when visitors came to stay and what happened when McKennitt was aroused from sleep.
But his judgment went much further. For the first time a British court drew on a 2004 ruling at the European Court of Human Rights that said photographs of Princess Caroline of Monaco shopping in a public place or in a swimming costume at a beach club breached her right to privacy. The judge claimed there was a "significant shift" taking place between, on the one hand, the right of freedom of expression and the corresponding interest of the public to receive information and, on the other hand, "the legitimate expectation of citizens to have their private lives protected".
He said information about an affair between two people could be protected even if one of them decided to reveal it to the public; incorrect information could breach someone's right to privacy; and the fact that something was already in the public domain did not always mean it could be published again.
Ash has lodged an appeal and the media organisations are seeking to join in the action when it is heard later this year. McKennitt has said in an interview: "Privacy is integral to people's emotional and psychological wellbeing. It doesn't matter if you are a so-called public figure."
Media lawyers say the case has wider ramifications than the long-running one brought against a tabloid newspaper by Naomi Campbell, the supermodel. She won 3,500 pounds damages from the Daily Mirror after it revealed her fight against drug addiction. The Court of Appeal overturned the award but the House of Lords then allowed the model's appeal against that judgment, saying the newspaper had gone too far in detailing her medical treatment.
Under the Eady judgment, celebrities will be able to sue for breach of privacy over the slightest affront to their feeling of self-importance. They will not have to prove that something is untrue, but just that raising it has invaded their privacy.
A spokesman for the solicitors Farrer & Co said: "This judge has clearly recognised the development of privacy cases in Europe. This judgment will be much quoted in future `kiss-and-tell' actions."
Source
U.K.: Organic milk controversy: "Organic milk is healthier than standard pasteurised milk, scientists have said in a call on the Government to revise official advice. A letter written by 14 scientists that was received today by the Food Standards Agency (FSA) claims that organic milk has higher levels of Omega 3 essential fatty acids, which are thought to boost health and provide protection from coronary heart disease. The authors of the letter want the FSA to change its stance on organic milk and "recognise that there are differences that exist between organic and nonorganic milk". But the FSA said: "On the basis of current evidence, the agency's assessment is that organic food is not significantly different in terms of food safety and nutrition from food produced conventionally."
Blood worth bottling: "Blood products taken from people who have recovered from bird flu could be useful for treating other patients in the event of a pandemic, research has suggested. An analysis of how such transfusions were used in hospitals during the Spanish flu pandemic of 1918 has indicated that they reduced the risk of death and eased symptoms, raising the prospect that a similar approach could be used against H5N1 influenza. Although vaccines and antiviral drugs such as Tamiflu are likely to be the front line of defence today, blood plasma transfusions could provide a valuable back-up. They could prove a particularly valuable weapon against the H5N1 virus in developing countries with poor access to vaccines and antivirals, scientists said yesterday."
Blood worth bottling: "Blood products taken from people who have recovered from bird flu could be useful for treating other patients in the event of a pandemic, research has suggested. An analysis of how such transfusions were used in hospitals during the Spanish flu pandemic of 1918 has indicated that they reduced the risk of death and eased symptoms, raising the prospect that a similar approach could be used against H5N1 influenza. Although vaccines and antiviral drugs such as Tamiflu are likely to be the front line of defence today, blood plasma transfusions could provide a valuable back-up. They could prove a particularly valuable weapon against the H5N1 virus in developing countries with poor access to vaccines and antivirals, scientists said yesterday."
Wednesday, August 30, 2006
Headteacher who never taught again after daring to criticise multiculturalism
Early yesterday afternoon, Ray Honeyford was listening with unconcealed delight to the radio commentary from the C&G Cup final at Lord's cricket ground as the Sussex batsmen, already 68 for 5, battled to find some form. Lancashire, Mr Honeyford, noted cheerfully, were doing rather well, as he watched through the window while his wife, Angela, and a friend tended to the garden. "My wife does all the gardening," Mr Honeyford says, "partly because I'm too lazy, partly because she doesn't want my help." He motions towards the potted flowers that sit on the polished table in the centre of his living room. He says he cannot name them, this by way of proving his horticultural ignorance.
The plants are Angela's, as are the prints of the Cezanne paintings and the black and white family pictures that line the walls of the living room of their modest house in Bury, Manchester. There are some framed medals of Mr Honeyford's uncle, a "Manchester lad like me", who was killed in the First World War, but nothing that reflects his own career as a teacher. No qualifications behind glass to recall the achievements of the boy from the large impoverished family who had initially failed his 11-plus, but nevertheless managed to become a Bachelor of Arts by correspondence and then a Master of Arts.
There are no photographs of him pictured with his students. But that was all a long time ago now. Mr Honeyford, 72, "retired" more than 20 years ago as the headmaster of a school in Bradford. Or, at least, that was when he was vilified by politically correct race "experts", was sent death threats, and condemned as a racist. Eventually, he was forced to resign and never allowed to teach again.
His crime was to publish an article in The Salisbury Review in 1984 doubting whether the children in his school were best served by the connivance of the educational authorities in such practices as the withdrawal of children from school for months at a time in order to go ''home" to Pakistan, on the grounds that such practices were appropriate to the children's native culture. In language that was sometimes maladroit, he drew attention, at a time when it was still impermissible to do so, to the dangers of ghettoes developing in British cities.
Mr Honeyford thought that schools such as his own, the Drummond Middle School, where 95 per cent of the children were of Pakistani or Bangladeshi origin, were a disaster both for their pupils and for society as a whole. He was a passionate believer in the redemptive power of education, and its ability to integrate people of different backgrounds and weld them into a common society. He then became notorious for, among other things, his insistence that Muslim girls should be educated to the same standard as everyone else.
Last week, 22 years on, he was finally vindicated. The same liberal establishment that had professed outrage at his views quietly accepted that he was, after all, right. Ruth Kelly, the Communities Secretary, made a speech, publicly questioning the multiculturalist orthodoxies that, for so long, have acted almost as a test of virtue among "right-thinking" people. As Miss Kelly told an audience: "There are white Britons who do not feel comfortable with change. They see the shops and restaurants in their town centres changing. They see their neighbourhoods becoming more diverse.
Detached from the benefits of those changes, they begin to believe the stories about ethnic minorities getting special treatment, and to develop a resentment, a sense of grievance. We have moved from a period of uniform consensus on the value of multiculturalism, to one where we can encourage that debate by questioning whether it is encouraging separateness. These are difficult questions and it is important that we don't shy away from them. In our attempt to avoid imposing a single British identity and culture, have we ended up with some communities living in isolation of each other, with no common bonds between them?"
Miss Kelly's speech comes two decades too late to save the career of Mr Honeyford. And asked last week whether the minister's speech would change anything, Mr Honeyford shrugged resignedly and said it was too late for that, too. He remains, understandably, bitter about the whole episode. He had been striving to do his best for very disadvantaged pupils, and was branded racist for doing so, and made to live like a fugitive for many years. Asked whether he was impressed by Miss Kelly's recent speech, he said that she was only a politician, a bird of passage, minister of education one day and minister of communities the next, and like all politicians liable to say whatever was fashionable or useful to her career at the moment.
The fact that we have a Communities Secretary at all, more than 30 years after the Race Relations Act was passed, is testimony to failure, as well as to the bureaucratic instinct for survival. Official attempts to guide our racial and intercultural relations having apparently achieved very little so far - Miss Kelly's speech was made at the launch of yet another quango, this one called the Commission on Integration and Cohesion. For those who want to establish new quangos, nothing succeeds like failure: the more failures, the more quangos.
Her speech comes about a year after that of Trevor Phillips, the chairman of the Commission for Racial Equality, who wondered whether the nostrums of multiculturalism had done more harm than good, and suggested instead that immigrants and children of immigrants needed to be given some means of becoming British. The constant emphasis on the worst possible interpretation of British history would, in the end, lead to a society not merely of separate communities, but of antipathetical ghettoes. In his speech last September, he said: "Residentially, some districts are on their way to becoming fully fledged ghettoes - black holes into which no one goes without fear and trepidation and from which no one ever escapes undamaged. We are sleepwalking our way to segregation."
Around the same time, the man who was then mayor of Bradford, Mohammed Ajeeb, is adamant that he did the right thing in calling for Mr Honeyford's dismissal. Mr Ajeeb recently said: "I had no doubt in my mind that the man was a racist and I insisted he must go." Yesterday, Mr Ajeeb told The Sunday Telegraph that he felt that his decision was the right one at the time, because the tone of Mr Honeyford's article was inflammatory, and showed "an inclination to demonstrate prejudice against certain sections of our community". He was afraid that if Mr Honeyford stayed, there might be riots because the two races in Bradford at the time were very polarised.
Mr Ajeeb's own views of the means by which education might serve to integrate people have changed in the past 20 years. Previously, he was against the idea of dispersing Muslim children throughout other schools (bussing, in effect, such as had been done in the United States), which is now his preferred solution, so that no school in Bradford's inner city should have more than 70 per cent of any one race. He thinks that most of the Muslim parents would approve of this solution, though he concedes that implementation would be fraught with political difficulties. But 20 years ago, wouldn't he have considered such an idea, and anyone who proposed it, as racist?
Mr Ajeeb received death threats at the time of the Honeyford affair. So did Mr Honeyford, who had to live for a time under police protection. His school was constantly picketed by activists, and eventually burnt down in an arson attack. The situation was explosive, though, even to this day, interpretations vary as to who was to blame.
There are slight grounds for optimism for the future, however. An apocalyptic conflict may not happen after all. Manningham, the area in which the Drummond Middle School is situated, has come up in the world in recent years - or, at least, parts of it have. Gentrification is pushing its green shoots into the area; Bradford was once a very grand city, its grandeur ruined as much by the depredations of 1960s and 1970s town planners as by those of economic decline. Manningham is now less segregated, or mono-racial, than it was a few years ago. This is because of an influx of immigrants from other parts of the world, particularly Eastern Europe. One of the benefits of migration from many countries might be the dilution of populations so that ghettoes become less ghetto-like. New immigrants always gravitate to cheaper housing, encouraging the dispersal of previous immigrants. To all appearances, the people of different races rub along well enough in an area that had once been startling by the uniformity of its Muslim population.
Moreover, the people willing to speak - among them Ukrainians, Czechs, Slovakians, people of Pakistani origin - said last week that what they wanted for their children was a British education, so that the children would integrate themselves fully in society and secure good jobs. No one wanted to be Balkanised into competing and antagonistic communities, preserving their customs in pristine perfection, unaffected by the fact that the communities now lived in Britain.
Mr Honeyford's school has been rebuilt at great expense. It is still predominantly Muslim, with a 15 per cent Somalian intake; in an act of what some view as outstanding multicultural political correctness, it has been renamed Iqra, though it is still known locally as the Drummond. Shanaz Anwar-Bleem, the new headmistress, speaking in a personal capacity, said that the withdrawal of children from school to return to Pakistan or Bangladesh for months at a time was still a problem, but the authorities were trying to clamp down on it.
The school is twinned with another in Bradford, which her pupils, who would otherwise grow up solely among their own ethnic and cultural group, visit so that they can learn about the way other children live, and even make friends there. Religious education is not monolithic: the children go to mosques, but also to churches and even to synagogues. Mrs Anwar-Bleem, the daughter of immigrants, says that the parents of the pupils are clear about the essential role of English in the education of her pupils and of knowledge of British culture. She blames Government policies for the de facto segregation that still exists in Bradford.
This does not seem so very different in spirit from what Mr Honeyford said in the mid-1980s. The fact that he published his article in The Salisbury Review, seen as so Right-wing as to be completely off the scale of respectability, was part of the problem; if he had published it in an equivalently Left-wing journal, it would have been very much less objectionable. The article also included asides, not strictly relevant to the subject matter in question, about the political style of the Indian subcontinent, and particularly Pakistan, that could hardly have been pleasing to some of the people in the area, even if true. In so delicate a situation, these asides were perhaps impolitic. Yet those people in Manningham who still remember Mr Honeyford seem to do so with fondness. They do not think of him as a racist, much less a BNP type. Amit Shah, 65, said, "It was all political what happened to him. He was a very nice headmaster, and the children liked him." It is hard not to conclude that a terrible injustice was done him.
Mr Honeyford had made the mistake of espousing anti-multiculturalism before it was socially acceptable to do so, just as it was once wrong to be an anti-communist before everyone became one. He lost his career because his tone was wrong, and he did not subscribe to the then "correct" views of a very thorny subject. Hell hath no fury like a bien pensant contradicted.
So why has the Government finally come round to a point of view that is, at least by implication, a little like Mr Honeyford's? Miss Kelly was forced to act after months of mounting public concern, and increasingly hostile headlines, about the value of multi-culturalism and immigration. The prospect of hundreds of thousands of immigrants from the new EU countries, Bulgaria and Romania, entering Britain on January 1, 2007, has focused minds, as have official figures showing the true extent of the numbers coming to Britain - 427,000 have registered to work here since 2004, it emerged shortly before Miss Kelly's announcement.
The debate has been given added urgency by the shock of the recent alleged terror plots hatched by British citizens to blow up airliners. Miss Kelly is no doubt aware of the deep anxiety and even anger in the country that politicians have hitherto failed to acknowledge, and that threatens one day to erupt through the relatively calm surface of daily life. The recent refusal of passengers to allow an aircraft to fly until two Asian men (who appeared to be speaking Arabic) were taken off the flight was possibly a harbinger of far greater nastiness to come.
As for Mr Honeyford, were he not suffering from the early stages of Parkinson's, he could have been forgiven for celebrating his long-awaited victory with a jig around his Manchester living room yesterday, before leaving to watch his beloved Bury football team achieve a similar resounding result against Grimbsy at Gigg Lane. But neither time, nor Miss Kelly's admission, can heal the scars for this martyr to multiculturalism.
Source
Early yesterday afternoon, Ray Honeyford was listening with unconcealed delight to the radio commentary from the C&G Cup final at Lord's cricket ground as the Sussex batsmen, already 68 for 5, battled to find some form. Lancashire, Mr Honeyford, noted cheerfully, were doing rather well, as he watched through the window while his wife, Angela, and a friend tended to the garden. "My wife does all the gardening," Mr Honeyford says, "partly because I'm too lazy, partly because she doesn't want my help." He motions towards the potted flowers that sit on the polished table in the centre of his living room. He says he cannot name them, this by way of proving his horticultural ignorance.
The plants are Angela's, as are the prints of the Cezanne paintings and the black and white family pictures that line the walls of the living room of their modest house in Bury, Manchester. There are some framed medals of Mr Honeyford's uncle, a "Manchester lad like me", who was killed in the First World War, but nothing that reflects his own career as a teacher. No qualifications behind glass to recall the achievements of the boy from the large impoverished family who had initially failed his 11-plus, but nevertheless managed to become a Bachelor of Arts by correspondence and then a Master of Arts.
There are no photographs of him pictured with his students. But that was all a long time ago now. Mr Honeyford, 72, "retired" more than 20 years ago as the headmaster of a school in Bradford. Or, at least, that was when he was vilified by politically correct race "experts", was sent death threats, and condemned as a racist. Eventually, he was forced to resign and never allowed to teach again.
His crime was to publish an article in The Salisbury Review in 1984 doubting whether the children in his school were best served by the connivance of the educational authorities in such practices as the withdrawal of children from school for months at a time in order to go ''home" to Pakistan, on the grounds that such practices were appropriate to the children's native culture. In language that was sometimes maladroit, he drew attention, at a time when it was still impermissible to do so, to the dangers of ghettoes developing in British cities.
Mr Honeyford thought that schools such as his own, the Drummond Middle School, where 95 per cent of the children were of Pakistani or Bangladeshi origin, were a disaster both for their pupils and for society as a whole. He was a passionate believer in the redemptive power of education, and its ability to integrate people of different backgrounds and weld them into a common society. He then became notorious for, among other things, his insistence that Muslim girls should be educated to the same standard as everyone else.
Last week, 22 years on, he was finally vindicated. The same liberal establishment that had professed outrage at his views quietly accepted that he was, after all, right. Ruth Kelly, the Communities Secretary, made a speech, publicly questioning the multiculturalist orthodoxies that, for so long, have acted almost as a test of virtue among "right-thinking" people. As Miss Kelly told an audience: "There are white Britons who do not feel comfortable with change. They see the shops and restaurants in their town centres changing. They see their neighbourhoods becoming more diverse.
Detached from the benefits of those changes, they begin to believe the stories about ethnic minorities getting special treatment, and to develop a resentment, a sense of grievance. We have moved from a period of uniform consensus on the value of multiculturalism, to one where we can encourage that debate by questioning whether it is encouraging separateness. These are difficult questions and it is important that we don't shy away from them. In our attempt to avoid imposing a single British identity and culture, have we ended up with some communities living in isolation of each other, with no common bonds between them?"
Miss Kelly's speech comes two decades too late to save the career of Mr Honeyford. And asked last week whether the minister's speech would change anything, Mr Honeyford shrugged resignedly and said it was too late for that, too. He remains, understandably, bitter about the whole episode. He had been striving to do his best for very disadvantaged pupils, and was branded racist for doing so, and made to live like a fugitive for many years. Asked whether he was impressed by Miss Kelly's recent speech, he said that she was only a politician, a bird of passage, minister of education one day and minister of communities the next, and like all politicians liable to say whatever was fashionable or useful to her career at the moment.
The fact that we have a Communities Secretary at all, more than 30 years after the Race Relations Act was passed, is testimony to failure, as well as to the bureaucratic instinct for survival. Official attempts to guide our racial and intercultural relations having apparently achieved very little so far - Miss Kelly's speech was made at the launch of yet another quango, this one called the Commission on Integration and Cohesion. For those who want to establish new quangos, nothing succeeds like failure: the more failures, the more quangos.
Her speech comes about a year after that of Trevor Phillips, the chairman of the Commission for Racial Equality, who wondered whether the nostrums of multiculturalism had done more harm than good, and suggested instead that immigrants and children of immigrants needed to be given some means of becoming British. The constant emphasis on the worst possible interpretation of British history would, in the end, lead to a society not merely of separate communities, but of antipathetical ghettoes. In his speech last September, he said: "Residentially, some districts are on their way to becoming fully fledged ghettoes - black holes into which no one goes without fear and trepidation and from which no one ever escapes undamaged. We are sleepwalking our way to segregation."
Around the same time, the man who was then mayor of Bradford, Mohammed Ajeeb, is adamant that he did the right thing in calling for Mr Honeyford's dismissal. Mr Ajeeb recently said: "I had no doubt in my mind that the man was a racist and I insisted he must go." Yesterday, Mr Ajeeb told The Sunday Telegraph that he felt that his decision was the right one at the time, because the tone of Mr Honeyford's article was inflammatory, and showed "an inclination to demonstrate prejudice against certain sections of our community". He was afraid that if Mr Honeyford stayed, there might be riots because the two races in Bradford at the time were very polarised.
Mr Ajeeb's own views of the means by which education might serve to integrate people have changed in the past 20 years. Previously, he was against the idea of dispersing Muslim children throughout other schools (bussing, in effect, such as had been done in the United States), which is now his preferred solution, so that no school in Bradford's inner city should have more than 70 per cent of any one race. He thinks that most of the Muslim parents would approve of this solution, though he concedes that implementation would be fraught with political difficulties. But 20 years ago, wouldn't he have considered such an idea, and anyone who proposed it, as racist?
Mr Ajeeb received death threats at the time of the Honeyford affair. So did Mr Honeyford, who had to live for a time under police protection. His school was constantly picketed by activists, and eventually burnt down in an arson attack. The situation was explosive, though, even to this day, interpretations vary as to who was to blame.
There are slight grounds for optimism for the future, however. An apocalyptic conflict may not happen after all. Manningham, the area in which the Drummond Middle School is situated, has come up in the world in recent years - or, at least, parts of it have. Gentrification is pushing its green shoots into the area; Bradford was once a very grand city, its grandeur ruined as much by the depredations of 1960s and 1970s town planners as by those of economic decline. Manningham is now less segregated, or mono-racial, than it was a few years ago. This is because of an influx of immigrants from other parts of the world, particularly Eastern Europe. One of the benefits of migration from many countries might be the dilution of populations so that ghettoes become less ghetto-like. New immigrants always gravitate to cheaper housing, encouraging the dispersal of previous immigrants. To all appearances, the people of different races rub along well enough in an area that had once been startling by the uniformity of its Muslim population.
Moreover, the people willing to speak - among them Ukrainians, Czechs, Slovakians, people of Pakistani origin - said last week that what they wanted for their children was a British education, so that the children would integrate themselves fully in society and secure good jobs. No one wanted to be Balkanised into competing and antagonistic communities, preserving their customs in pristine perfection, unaffected by the fact that the communities now lived in Britain.
Mr Honeyford's school has been rebuilt at great expense. It is still predominantly Muslim, with a 15 per cent Somalian intake; in an act of what some view as outstanding multicultural political correctness, it has been renamed Iqra, though it is still known locally as the Drummond. Shanaz Anwar-Bleem, the new headmistress, speaking in a personal capacity, said that the withdrawal of children from school to return to Pakistan or Bangladesh for months at a time was still a problem, but the authorities were trying to clamp down on it.
The school is twinned with another in Bradford, which her pupils, who would otherwise grow up solely among their own ethnic and cultural group, visit so that they can learn about the way other children live, and even make friends there. Religious education is not monolithic: the children go to mosques, but also to churches and even to synagogues. Mrs Anwar-Bleem, the daughter of immigrants, says that the parents of the pupils are clear about the essential role of English in the education of her pupils and of knowledge of British culture. She blames Government policies for the de facto segregation that still exists in Bradford.
This does not seem so very different in spirit from what Mr Honeyford said in the mid-1980s. The fact that he published his article in The Salisbury Review, seen as so Right-wing as to be completely off the scale of respectability, was part of the problem; if he had published it in an equivalently Left-wing journal, it would have been very much less objectionable. The article also included asides, not strictly relevant to the subject matter in question, about the political style of the Indian subcontinent, and particularly Pakistan, that could hardly have been pleasing to some of the people in the area, even if true. In so delicate a situation, these asides were perhaps impolitic. Yet those people in Manningham who still remember Mr Honeyford seem to do so with fondness. They do not think of him as a racist, much less a BNP type. Amit Shah, 65, said, "It was all political what happened to him. He was a very nice headmaster, and the children liked him." It is hard not to conclude that a terrible injustice was done him.
Mr Honeyford had made the mistake of espousing anti-multiculturalism before it was socially acceptable to do so, just as it was once wrong to be an anti-communist before everyone became one. He lost his career because his tone was wrong, and he did not subscribe to the then "correct" views of a very thorny subject. Hell hath no fury like a bien pensant contradicted.
So why has the Government finally come round to a point of view that is, at least by implication, a little like Mr Honeyford's? Miss Kelly was forced to act after months of mounting public concern, and increasingly hostile headlines, about the value of multi-culturalism and immigration. The prospect of hundreds of thousands of immigrants from the new EU countries, Bulgaria and Romania, entering Britain on January 1, 2007, has focused minds, as have official figures showing the true extent of the numbers coming to Britain - 427,000 have registered to work here since 2004, it emerged shortly before Miss Kelly's announcement.
The debate has been given added urgency by the shock of the recent alleged terror plots hatched by British citizens to blow up airliners. Miss Kelly is no doubt aware of the deep anxiety and even anger in the country that politicians have hitherto failed to acknowledge, and that threatens one day to erupt through the relatively calm surface of daily life. The recent refusal of passengers to allow an aircraft to fly until two Asian men (who appeared to be speaking Arabic) were taken off the flight was possibly a harbinger of far greater nastiness to come.
As for Mr Honeyford, were he not suffering from the early stages of Parkinson's, he could have been forgiven for celebrating his long-awaited victory with a jig around his Manchester living room yesterday, before leaving to watch his beloved Bury football team achieve a similar resounding result against Grimbsy at Gigg Lane. But neither time, nor Miss Kelly's admission, can heal the scars for this martyr to multiculturalism.
Source
A SENIOR BRIT ATTACKS BRITAIN'S CRAZY LEGAL SYSTEM
The liberal legal establishment has been condemned by the Director of Public Prosecutions for its patronising attitude towards the public and victims of crime. Ken Macdonald, QC, head of the Crown Prosecution Service, said that elitist attitudes had helped to break the bond of trust between the public and the criminal justice system. In an extraordinary warning, he said that the country would enter dangerous territory if the public felt that justice was not being delivered by the courts.
Mr Macdonald also called for a move away from the position held by many lawyers that only the defendants' rights matter. Greater emphasis should be given to the rights of victims and witnesses, he said. "Few sounds are less attractive than well-educated lawyers patronising vulnerable victims of crime with inflexible platitudes."
The speech has been made public as new figures show that while 80 per cent of people think that the justice system is fair to the accused, only 36 per cent are confident that it meets the needs of victims. It also comes after a series of high-profile killings by criminals released from jail on parole.
Mr Macdonald said that in some cases the victims of crime had been treated as "pariahs" by the system and witnesses were handled in an appalling manner. The DPP added: "The perception that no one looks out for them and that it's only defendants whose rights are taken seriously is not wildly wrong." He said that there had to be fairness for both victims of crime and suspects: "The view that only defendants' rights matter, still quite commonly held by many criminal lawyers, appears to me to be a fundamentalist position that we should move away from. "My own view is that liberal commentators need to start by acknowledging that the public have a point. The service given to victims and witnesses has traditionally been appalling."
The speech is Mr Macdonald's most controversial since he became director three years ago. Made in May at a seminar organised by the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies at King's College London, and passed to The Times, it will provide useful ammunition for the Government, which announced plans to rebalance the criminal justice system in favour of the law-abiding majority last month.
Mr Macdonald said that the old-fashioned idea that thecriminal justice system sits above the public and consists of principles and practices beyond popular influence or argument was "elitist and obscurantist".
David Blunkett, the former Home Secretary, had seen the need for a democratic element to criminal justice which, while not slipping into "vigilanteeism, serves to temper an increasingly dangerous disconnect between our people as a whole and the traditional judicial and practitioner establishment", Mr Macdonald said. He added: "If people, including victims, feel they cannot secure justice through the courts, we are entering dangerous territory".
The speech, which was given to an audience of lawyers and criminologists, will provoke anger among many lawyers, particularly those representing suspects, and it will raise suspicions that Mr Macdonald wishes to water down traditional legal safeguards for defendants. But in it he insisted that the principles of jury trial, presumption of innocence, a right to appeal and full disclosure of the state's case were all non-negotiable.
Last night Richard Garside, acting director of the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, said: "It is important that we make a distinction between a legal system treating people with respect and a defendant whose guilt has still to be proved."
John Cooper, a leading criminal law barrister, said: "The fundamental of a trial in the criminal justice system is the analysis of facts and evidence to decide if the prosecution have proved their case. "It is not, and never should be, an arena where victims primarily undertake a cathartic exercise for the allegation that is tested at the trial."
Source
WHAT THE BRITISH PEOPLE THINK ABOUT THEIR COURTS
The Director of Public Prosecutions has given warning that the legal system will stray into "dangerous territory" if people feel justice cannot be achieved through the courts. However, the widespread perception is that the law and the legal profession have already lost the confidence of victims and the general public.
The British Crime Survey 2005-06 reflects this view: 80 per cent of respondents thought the system was fair to the accused, but only 36 per cent were confident that it met the needs of victims. The widely held opinion is that criminals receive soft sentences, paedophiles are pitied, foreign terrorists are given vast sums in legal aid and illegal immigrants who commit crimes are never deported. Ordinary people who stand up for themselves and their families are either punished or become victims. Perhaps worst of all, the rights of such victims are ignored.
Last month a judge was heavily criticised after sentencing a paedophile, who had repeatedly sexually assaulted an 18-month-old baby boy, to four years in jail. Judge Simon Hammond, sitting at Leicester Crown Court, said that Christopher Downes, 24, needed help for his "undoubted problems". Michele Elliott, of the charity Kidscape, said: "There is something wrong when a man could admit to sexually abusing an 18-month-old baby regularly and be out of prison in two years."
The concern of campaigners is outstripped by the anger of the families of victims. Last month the family of Natalie Glasgow described as laughable the sentence imposed on Mark Hambleton, an electrician whose van hit and killed the 17-year-old girl as she walked home from a party. Hambleton was given a 100-hour community service order and banned from driving for a year. The dead girl's father, Paul, said: "The law says it doesn't matter whether you hit a teenage girl or a lamppost in terms of the charge of failing to report an accident. That can't be right. It must be changed."
The apparent downgrading of victims' rights, compared with those of the defendant, also causes anger. The defence of Kamel Bourgass, the Algerian terrorist trained by al-Qaeda who is serving life for murder and conspiring to make ricin toxins, cost the public purse 996,934 pounds in legal aid. The family of DC Stephen Oake, who was stabbed to death by Bourgass in 2003, received only 13,000 pounds from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority.
Judges reply that the legislative straitjacket is the cause of many of the current problems. The case of Craig Sweeney attracted huge attention. Sweeney was jailed for life by Cardiff Crown Court for abducting and indecently assaulting a three-year-old girl but Judge John Griffith Williams cut his minimum tariff in recognition of his guilty plea. It meant that Sweeney could be considered for parole in five years.
As The Times reported last month, John Reid, the Home Secretary, said that this was unduly lenient. Vera Baird, QC, the Constitutional Affairs Minister, had to apologise after saying that the judge was wrong. The judiciary rallied round the judge, saying he had followed the law to the letter.
Both Victim Support and Nacro, the crime reduction charity, say that perceived soft sentencing and the treatment of victims are separate issues. Paul Cavadino, chief executive of Nacro, said: "The sentencing in this country is harsher than most other Western Europe countries. And we have the highest prison population in Western Europe, both in absolute numbers and as a proportion of the population. "I don't accept that you can measure how supportive a criminal justice system is to victims by the sentences given out. "It is not in the interests of victims to pass sentences that don't reduce future offences."
A spokesman for Victim Support said: "Victims want a system whereby we deal with criminals properly and we give out punishments that are an effective deterrent. Our experience is that even if victims are happy with the result in court, the happiness is short-lived because their lives have still been altered."
Liz Jones said that she lost her faith in the criminal justice system when a teenager who smashed her cheekbone avoided a jail sentence last month. Dexter Hungwa, 16, attacked Ms Jones, a headmistress, because she had asked him to shut a door. Ms Jones, 51, said: "At first I was frightened because I thought he could turn up at any time. The experience was horrendous but when I found out that he had been given a referral order, I was really, really angry."
Source
The liberal legal establishment has been condemned by the Director of Public Prosecutions for its patronising attitude towards the public and victims of crime. Ken Macdonald, QC, head of the Crown Prosecution Service, said that elitist attitudes had helped to break the bond of trust between the public and the criminal justice system. In an extraordinary warning, he said that the country would enter dangerous territory if the public felt that justice was not being delivered by the courts.
Mr Macdonald also called for a move away from the position held by many lawyers that only the defendants' rights matter. Greater emphasis should be given to the rights of victims and witnesses, he said. "Few sounds are less attractive than well-educated lawyers patronising vulnerable victims of crime with inflexible platitudes."
The speech has been made public as new figures show that while 80 per cent of people think that the justice system is fair to the accused, only 36 per cent are confident that it meets the needs of victims. It also comes after a series of high-profile killings by criminals released from jail on parole.
Mr Macdonald said that in some cases the victims of crime had been treated as "pariahs" by the system and witnesses were handled in an appalling manner. The DPP added: "The perception that no one looks out for them and that it's only defendants whose rights are taken seriously is not wildly wrong." He said that there had to be fairness for both victims of crime and suspects: "The view that only defendants' rights matter, still quite commonly held by many criminal lawyers, appears to me to be a fundamentalist position that we should move away from. "My own view is that liberal commentators need to start by acknowledging that the public have a point. The service given to victims and witnesses has traditionally been appalling."
The speech is Mr Macdonald's most controversial since he became director three years ago. Made in May at a seminar organised by the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies at King's College London, and passed to The Times, it will provide useful ammunition for the Government, which announced plans to rebalance the criminal justice system in favour of the law-abiding majority last month.
Mr Macdonald said that the old-fashioned idea that thecriminal justice system sits above the public and consists of principles and practices beyond popular influence or argument was "elitist and obscurantist".
David Blunkett, the former Home Secretary, had seen the need for a democratic element to criminal justice which, while not slipping into "vigilanteeism, serves to temper an increasingly dangerous disconnect between our people as a whole and the traditional judicial and practitioner establishment", Mr Macdonald said. He added: "If people, including victims, feel they cannot secure justice through the courts, we are entering dangerous territory".
The speech, which was given to an audience of lawyers and criminologists, will provoke anger among many lawyers, particularly those representing suspects, and it will raise suspicions that Mr Macdonald wishes to water down traditional legal safeguards for defendants. But in it he insisted that the principles of jury trial, presumption of innocence, a right to appeal and full disclosure of the state's case were all non-negotiable.
Last night Richard Garside, acting director of the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, said: "It is important that we make a distinction between a legal system treating people with respect and a defendant whose guilt has still to be proved."
John Cooper, a leading criminal law barrister, said: "The fundamental of a trial in the criminal justice system is the analysis of facts and evidence to decide if the prosecution have proved their case. "It is not, and never should be, an arena where victims primarily undertake a cathartic exercise for the allegation that is tested at the trial."
Source
WHAT THE BRITISH PEOPLE THINK ABOUT THEIR COURTS
The Director of Public Prosecutions has given warning that the legal system will stray into "dangerous territory" if people feel justice cannot be achieved through the courts. However, the widespread perception is that the law and the legal profession have already lost the confidence of victims and the general public.
The British Crime Survey 2005-06 reflects this view: 80 per cent of respondents thought the system was fair to the accused, but only 36 per cent were confident that it met the needs of victims. The widely held opinion is that criminals receive soft sentences, paedophiles are pitied, foreign terrorists are given vast sums in legal aid and illegal immigrants who commit crimes are never deported. Ordinary people who stand up for themselves and their families are either punished or become victims. Perhaps worst of all, the rights of such victims are ignored.
Last month a judge was heavily criticised after sentencing a paedophile, who had repeatedly sexually assaulted an 18-month-old baby boy, to four years in jail. Judge Simon Hammond, sitting at Leicester Crown Court, said that Christopher Downes, 24, needed help for his "undoubted problems". Michele Elliott, of the charity Kidscape, said: "There is something wrong when a man could admit to sexually abusing an 18-month-old baby regularly and be out of prison in two years."
The concern of campaigners is outstripped by the anger of the families of victims. Last month the family of Natalie Glasgow described as laughable the sentence imposed on Mark Hambleton, an electrician whose van hit and killed the 17-year-old girl as she walked home from a party. Hambleton was given a 100-hour community service order and banned from driving for a year. The dead girl's father, Paul, said: "The law says it doesn't matter whether you hit a teenage girl or a lamppost in terms of the charge of failing to report an accident. That can't be right. It must be changed."
The apparent downgrading of victims' rights, compared with those of the defendant, also causes anger. The defence of Kamel Bourgass, the Algerian terrorist trained by al-Qaeda who is serving life for murder and conspiring to make ricin toxins, cost the public purse 996,934 pounds in legal aid. The family of DC Stephen Oake, who was stabbed to death by Bourgass in 2003, received only 13,000 pounds from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority.
Judges reply that the legislative straitjacket is the cause of many of the current problems. The case of Craig Sweeney attracted huge attention. Sweeney was jailed for life by Cardiff Crown Court for abducting and indecently assaulting a three-year-old girl but Judge John Griffith Williams cut his minimum tariff in recognition of his guilty plea. It meant that Sweeney could be considered for parole in five years.
As The Times reported last month, John Reid, the Home Secretary, said that this was unduly lenient. Vera Baird, QC, the Constitutional Affairs Minister, had to apologise after saying that the judge was wrong. The judiciary rallied round the judge, saying he had followed the law to the letter.
Both Victim Support and Nacro, the crime reduction charity, say that perceived soft sentencing and the treatment of victims are separate issues. Paul Cavadino, chief executive of Nacro, said: "The sentencing in this country is harsher than most other Western Europe countries. And we have the highest prison population in Western Europe, both in absolute numbers and as a proportion of the population. "I don't accept that you can measure how supportive a criminal justice system is to victims by the sentences given out. "It is not in the interests of victims to pass sentences that don't reduce future offences."
A spokesman for Victim Support said: "Victims want a system whereby we deal with criminals properly and we give out punishments that are an effective deterrent. Our experience is that even if victims are happy with the result in court, the happiness is short-lived because their lives have still been altered."
Liz Jones said that she lost her faith in the criminal justice system when a teenager who smashed her cheekbone avoided a jail sentence last month. Dexter Hungwa, 16, attacked Ms Jones, a headmistress, because she had asked him to shut a door. Ms Jones, 51, said: "At first I was frightened because I thought he could turn up at any time. The experience was horrendous but when I found out that he had been given a referral order, I was really, really angry."
Source
Tuesday, August 29, 2006
Socialist planners at work
"More than 1 billion pounds has been wasted by the [U.K.] Government on transport projects that have been cancelled or delayed, leaving roads and railways struggling to cope with huge growth in traffic.... The Government has repeatedly claimed that rising costs have made new road links, tram networks and rail upgrades unaffordable. But official figures uncovered by the Conservatives reveal that more than 1 billion has already been spent since 2000 without providing any extra capacity.
The most expensive single scheme on the list of stalled projects is Crossrail, the plan for mainline rail tunnels under Central London to relieve congestion on the Central Line. It has cost 254 million since 2001 without an inch of tunnel being dug. The Government has yet to commit itself to fund the 16 billion project and officials privately admit that, even if it goes ahead, it may not be ready until 2020.
Almost 300 million has been spent preparing for tram schemes in Portsmouth, Leeds, Liverpool and Manchester that have either been cancelled or greatly reduced in scope. In 2000 John Prescott, the Deputy Prime Minister, promised 25 new tram lines by 2010. So far two have opened: in Nottingham and the London City Airport extension of the Docklands Light Railway. The Thameslink 2000 project to upgrade the north-south rail route across London was due to open six years ago but is unlikely to be ready for another decade.
More than 80 million has been spent on preparatory works at St Pancras, including tunnels that will be boarded up and a station that will remain half-empty. Another white elephant is Stratford International Station, in East London, which cost 210 million but might never be used by the Eurostar trains for which it was built."
More here
"More than 1 billion pounds has been wasted by the [U.K.] Government on transport projects that have been cancelled or delayed, leaving roads and railways struggling to cope with huge growth in traffic.... The Government has repeatedly claimed that rising costs have made new road links, tram networks and rail upgrades unaffordable. But official figures uncovered by the Conservatives reveal that more than 1 billion has already been spent since 2000 without providing any extra capacity.
The most expensive single scheme on the list of stalled projects is Crossrail, the plan for mainline rail tunnels under Central London to relieve congestion on the Central Line. It has cost 254 million since 2001 without an inch of tunnel being dug. The Government has yet to commit itself to fund the 16 billion project and officials privately admit that, even if it goes ahead, it may not be ready until 2020.
Almost 300 million has been spent preparing for tram schemes in Portsmouth, Leeds, Liverpool and Manchester that have either been cancelled or greatly reduced in scope. In 2000 John Prescott, the Deputy Prime Minister, promised 25 new tram lines by 2010. So far two have opened: in Nottingham and the London City Airport extension of the Docklands Light Railway. The Thameslink 2000 project to upgrade the north-south rail route across London was due to open six years ago but is unlikely to be ready for another decade.
More than 80 million has been spent on preparatory works at St Pancras, including tunnels that will be boarded up and a station that will remain half-empty. Another white elephant is Stratford International Station, in East London, which cost 210 million but might never be used by the Eurostar trains for which it was built."
More here
BRITISH EDUCATION FAILURE COVERUP
The Government is facing an investigation by the statistics watchdog over claims that it tried to "bury" bad news of poor primary school test results. Figures showed last week that the number of seven-year-olds who were competent in reading, writing and maths had fallen, and all the Government's key targets for 11-year-olds were missed. But the primary school results were published at exactly the same time - 9.30am on Thursday, August 24 - as GCSE results, which dominate news bulletins every year. The timing was a break from tradition. In recent years primary school figures have been released on the Tuesday, two days before GCSEs. The change led to allegations that ministers were trying to bury the damaging story of falling standards in primary schools and missed targets.
The Statistics Commission has now called for a formal explanation from the Department for Education and Skills. A formal investigation could follow. Richard Alldritt, chief executive of the Statistics Commission, said: "A concern was expressed to us that the timing of the release changed for reasons of political advantage or news management. "Having had a verbal assurance from the DfES that that is not true, we have asked them for something in writing. We will consider whether to pursue the matter." It was understood that the commission had received a letter from the head of statistics at the DfES but had not yet been able to consider it.
The code of practice on government statistics states that figures should be released as soon as they become available. Holding back primary school results - even for two days - in an attempt to gain political advantage would risk breaking the spirit of the code, if not the letter, according to sources at the commission. If the commission found against the Government it would revive the damaging charges of "spin" laid against ministers since 1997 and which they have been desperately trying to counter. Perhaps the most damaging example was when Jo Moore, who was a special adviser at the Transport Department, sent an e-mail to colleagues in which she suggested that the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, made it a good day to bury bad news.
David Willetts, the Shadow Education Secretary, told The Times Educational Supplement that people might suspect that ministers were trying to "bury" the bad news of the primary school results. "If so, it would not be the first time the Government has sought to bury bad news in this way," he said. But a spokesman for the Department for Education and Skills rejected the suggestion. "The Statistics Commission has not launched an inquiry and we do not believe there is any reason for them to do so," he said. "The publication of the data was carried out in accordance with the rules governing the publication of national statistics."
Source
The Government is facing an investigation by the statistics watchdog over claims that it tried to "bury" bad news of poor primary school test results. Figures showed last week that the number of seven-year-olds who were competent in reading, writing and maths had fallen, and all the Government's key targets for 11-year-olds were missed. But the primary school results were published at exactly the same time - 9.30am on Thursday, August 24 - as GCSE results, which dominate news bulletins every year. The timing was a break from tradition. In recent years primary school figures have been released on the Tuesday, two days before GCSEs. The change led to allegations that ministers were trying to bury the damaging story of falling standards in primary schools and missed targets.
The Statistics Commission has now called for a formal explanation from the Department for Education and Skills. A formal investigation could follow. Richard Alldritt, chief executive of the Statistics Commission, said: "A concern was expressed to us that the timing of the release changed for reasons of political advantage or news management. "Having had a verbal assurance from the DfES that that is not true, we have asked them for something in writing. We will consider whether to pursue the matter." It was understood that the commission had received a letter from the head of statistics at the DfES but had not yet been able to consider it.
The code of practice on government statistics states that figures should be released as soon as they become available. Holding back primary school results - even for two days - in an attempt to gain political advantage would risk breaking the spirit of the code, if not the letter, according to sources at the commission. If the commission found against the Government it would revive the damaging charges of "spin" laid against ministers since 1997 and which they have been desperately trying to counter. Perhaps the most damaging example was when Jo Moore, who was a special adviser at the Transport Department, sent an e-mail to colleagues in which she suggested that the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, made it a good day to bury bad news.
David Willetts, the Shadow Education Secretary, told The Times Educational Supplement that people might suspect that ministers were trying to "bury" the bad news of the primary school results. "If so, it would not be the first time the Government has sought to bury bad news in this way," he said. But a spokesman for the Department for Education and Skills rejected the suggestion. "The Statistics Commission has not launched an inquiry and we do not believe there is any reason for them to do so," he said. "The publication of the data was carried out in accordance with the rules governing the publication of national statistics."
Source
ANOTHER LIFESAVING DRUG DENIED TO NHS PATIENTS
Three women who met as cancer patients are planning a joint legal action to win access to Velcade, a drug for treating multiple myeloma. The "Velcade Three" - Jacky Pickles, Janice Wrigglesworth and Marie Morton, from Keighley in West Yorkshire - are among hundreds who will be denied access to the drug if the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) sticks to its ruling that it is not cost-effective. Velcade is the first new treatment for multiple myeloma in more than ten years and has been licensed for more than two years for patients who have relapsed.
The drug is available in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and throughout the rest of Europe. Health insurers such as BUPA and PPP pay for it because they believe that it is effective. But primary care trusts in England take their cue from NICE, whose appraisal committee will hold its final meeting next week. Its consultation document, published last month, shocked specialists in the disease.
The International Myeloma Foundation said that the ruling was "ill-informed, unjust and unfair". Eric Low, the chief executive of the British branch, said at the time: "This is an extremely disappointing decision that has sent shockwaves through the myeloma community. Failure to have this preliminary recommendation overturned would represent a catastrophic blow."
Mrs Pickles, 44, said yesterday: "We're waiting for the final guidance from NICE. Hopefully it will change its mind. But if it doesn't, we're going to look to legal action. "We're going to go as far as we can, for each other's lives and for every other myeloma sufferer. Velcade is the best thing for myeloma for four decades. Mrs Pickles, a midwifery sister at Bradford Royal Infirmary, had the disease diagnosed five years ago and has undergone chemotherapy, a bone marrow transplant and a course of thalidomide, the drug that caused birth defects in the 1960s but which has been reborn as a myeloma treatment. All worked for a while before her condition worsened again. Last October she was put on a trial of Velcade, which costs 18,000 pounds for the full eight cycles, and was restored to normal. "That trial did well for me, but I could need the drug again at a later stage," she said. She met Mrs Wrigglesworth, 59, and Mrs Morton, 57, while having treatment and they are giving each other support. "We're in this together," Mrs Pickles said.
The NICE analysis found that the claims made by the drug's manufacturer, Janssen-Cilag Ltd, were not justified by the evidence. One trial showed a 41 per cent reduced risk of death in the first year of treatment. But the NICE view was that the benefits did not meet criteria set for NHS prescription.
Source
Three women who met as cancer patients are planning a joint legal action to win access to Velcade, a drug for treating multiple myeloma. The "Velcade Three" - Jacky Pickles, Janice Wrigglesworth and Marie Morton, from Keighley in West Yorkshire - are among hundreds who will be denied access to the drug if the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) sticks to its ruling that it is not cost-effective. Velcade is the first new treatment for multiple myeloma in more than ten years and has been licensed for more than two years for patients who have relapsed.
The drug is available in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and throughout the rest of Europe. Health insurers such as BUPA and PPP pay for it because they believe that it is effective. But primary care trusts in England take their cue from NICE, whose appraisal committee will hold its final meeting next week. Its consultation document, published last month, shocked specialists in the disease.
The International Myeloma Foundation said that the ruling was "ill-informed, unjust and unfair". Eric Low, the chief executive of the British branch, said at the time: "This is an extremely disappointing decision that has sent shockwaves through the myeloma community. Failure to have this preliminary recommendation overturned would represent a catastrophic blow."
Mrs Pickles, 44, said yesterday: "We're waiting for the final guidance from NICE. Hopefully it will change its mind. But if it doesn't, we're going to look to legal action. "We're going to go as far as we can, for each other's lives and for every other myeloma sufferer. Velcade is the best thing for myeloma for four decades. Mrs Pickles, a midwifery sister at Bradford Royal Infirmary, had the disease diagnosed five years ago and has undergone chemotherapy, a bone marrow transplant and a course of thalidomide, the drug that caused birth defects in the 1960s but which has been reborn as a myeloma treatment. All worked for a while before her condition worsened again. Last October she was put on a trial of Velcade, which costs 18,000 pounds for the full eight cycles, and was restored to normal. "That trial did well for me, but I could need the drug again at a later stage," she said. She met Mrs Wrigglesworth, 59, and Mrs Morton, 57, while having treatment and they are giving each other support. "We're in this together," Mrs Pickles said.
The NICE analysis found that the claims made by the drug's manufacturer, Janssen-Cilag Ltd, were not justified by the evidence. One trial showed a 41 per cent reduced risk of death in the first year of treatment. But the NICE view was that the benefits did not meet criteria set for NHS prescription.
Source
Senior Brit Defends the Sign of the Cross
A player in a Scottish Catholic football team was recently reprimanded by the police for blessing himself with the sign of the cross while on field. It is good to see that one senior member of the British government, Ruth Kelly, has attacked the reprimand on obvious grounds:
A player in a Scottish Catholic football team was recently reprimanded by the police for blessing himself with the sign of the cross while on field. It is good to see that one senior member of the British government, Ruth Kelly, has attacked the reprimand on obvious grounds:
"I am surprised because this has traditionally been a country which has valued religious diversity - and cultural and racial diversity as well - and where there has been freedom of expression, both to express religious symbols but also other cultural symbols as well."
Source
Monday, August 28, 2006
Britain freezes Muslim charity: "A charity at the centre of concerns over the funding of the alleged terrorist plot to attack trans-Atlantic aircraft has had its assets frozen. The Charity Commission is investigating the activities of Crescent Relief, which raised large sums from British Muslims for the humanitarian operation after the earthquake in Kashmir last October. The inquiry follows the revelation that one of the men arrested at High Wycombe, a town near London, in connection with the alleged plot was a fundraiser for the charity. It has also emerged that a co-founder of the charity was Abdul Rauf, from Birmingham, whose son Rashid is in custody in Pakistan, where the authorities claim that he is a "key figure" in the conspiracy".
Brits wanting out: "One in five Britons - nearly 10m adults - is considering leaving the country amid growing disillusionment over the failure of political parties to deliver tax cuts, according to a new poll. The extensive survey conducted by ICM, the polling company, shows that - contrary to the current approach of both Labour and the Tories - an overwhelming majority of voters do want to see cuts in income and inheritance tax. The results will raise alarm in both political camps, but particularly for David Cameron, who has yet to solidify the Conservatives' lead over Labour in the opinion polls. The Tory leader, who has ditched his party's long-standing commitment to tax cuts in favour of "economic stability", has maintained a solid lead over Labour since May in most of the polls, but is still well short of securing a majority. Today's poll shows that many people are highly disillusioned with the British political system"
Brits wanting out: "One in five Britons - nearly 10m adults - is considering leaving the country amid growing disillusionment over the failure of political parties to deliver tax cuts, according to a new poll. The extensive survey conducted by ICM, the polling company, shows that - contrary to the current approach of both Labour and the Tories - an overwhelming majority of voters do want to see cuts in income and inheritance tax. The results will raise alarm in both political camps, but particularly for David Cameron, who has yet to solidify the Conservatives' lead over Labour in the opinion polls. The Tory leader, who has ditched his party's long-standing commitment to tax cuts in favour of "economic stability", has maintained a solid lead over Labour since May in most of the polls, but is still well short of securing a majority. Today's poll shows that many people are highly disillusioned with the British political system"
Top British schools discard dumbed-down government exam system
Some of Britain's most academically successful schools will sink to the bottom of this year's official league tables because they have abandoned "too easy" GCSEs. The schools, including Harrow, Rugby and Manchester grammar, now put their pupils through the international GCSE (IGCSE), which is considered more academically stretching, in subjects such as maths, science and English.
Many experts believe that rather than damage the reputation of the schools, the move will call into question the credibility of the league table system by placing some of the country's best-performing schools near the bottom. The government will this year for the first time publish a national ranking based on the proportion of 16-year-olds gaining five GCSEs at grade C or above that include maths and English.
IGCSEs are not counted as part of the official results because they are not approved by the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA), the government's exam regulator. Many independent schools are dropping the state-approved GCSEs in favour of the international versions because the latter are viewed as more challenging and as a better preparation for A-levels. The exams have mainly been developed for schools overseas and are closer to the former O-levels, scrapped in 1987, rather than to ordinary GCSEs.
Schools offering the IGCSE in maths and English will see steep drops in the number of their pupils getting ordinary GCSEs in these core subjects, pushing them down the rankings. The Department for Education and Skills has no intention of overhauling the league tables to take IGCSEs into account.
Concerns over the academic usefulness of the rankings will be compounded by the high marks given to GNVQs - vocational qualifications. Many state schools have boosted their rankings by encouraging pupils to take GNVQs - vocational qualifications which are rated by the government as equivalent to good GCSE passes.
Ministers have refused to allow IGCSEs to be included in results because the exams do not have official approval. State schools, even the highest achieving, cannot switch to the IGCSE because the government will fund only officially approved courses. The IGCSE is growing in popularity among private schools. Cambridge International Examinations, one of two boards that sets the IGCSE, said that 100 schools offered at least one exam this year.
Independent school heads believe that the decision not to include the IGCSE will make a nonsense of the national school league table. Tim Hands, headmaster of Portsmouth grammar and chairman of the universities committee of the Headmasters' and Headmistresses' Conference (HMC), said: "It is extraordinary that schools like mine will be listed as getting 0% for maths GCSE, yet (the IGCSE) is an exam that is highly rated by universities." The highest take-up of IGCSEs is in maths. It is preferred to the state GCSE because it includes calculus and does not include course work.
More here
EVEN BRITISH EXAMINERS ARE DUMMIES
Teachers have told a bright GCSE student she would have to dumb down in order to pass her exams, prompting concerns that examiners are unqualified to mark some papers. Katie Merchant, 16, was marked down for giving a sophisticated answer in her mock Latin exam. She achieved an A* - the highest mark possible - but lost marks on one question because her answer was too sophisticated. Teachers warned the girl she would be similarly penalised in the real exam, prompting her to express her disappointment in a letter to her Brighton college headteacher, Richard Cairns.
Speaking today, Mr Cairns said examiners often marked papers in subjects they knew little about and that he warned his pupils they would often know more about the subject than the marker. He said: "The very brightest are definitely constrained by the exam marking schemes." He said exam boards awarded the highest marks for prescriptive answers containing key words, meaning a pupil who displayed originality was penalised. Mr Cairns said the problem affected all exam boards. He said markers rewarded children for thinking "mechanistically" rather than "outside of the box". "We're getting very good at teaching children to pass exams but less and less good at teaching them to think laterally," he said.
After consultation with Oxford and Cambridge universities, Brighton college is reducing the maximum number of GCSEs students can take from 10 to nine and making time in the curriculum for critical thinking. Mr Cairns said: "Through league tables, teachers [have] become accountable to their pupils. As a result, [they] want more and more information about how to achieve an A*, which has encouraged exam boards to be more prescriptive and killed off independent thought."
He went on: "I tell my students, 'You must expect the examiner to know less than you. He or she will be working to a rigid marking scheme and they need to look out for key things whether or not they're actually relevant." The independent college was the first school in England to introduce the mandatory study of Mandarin for all Year 9 pupils earlier this year.
Source
Some of Britain's most academically successful schools will sink to the bottom of this year's official league tables because they have abandoned "too easy" GCSEs. The schools, including Harrow, Rugby and Manchester grammar, now put their pupils through the international GCSE (IGCSE), which is considered more academically stretching, in subjects such as maths, science and English.
Many experts believe that rather than damage the reputation of the schools, the move will call into question the credibility of the league table system by placing some of the country's best-performing schools near the bottom. The government will this year for the first time publish a national ranking based on the proportion of 16-year-olds gaining five GCSEs at grade C or above that include maths and English.
IGCSEs are not counted as part of the official results because they are not approved by the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA), the government's exam regulator. Many independent schools are dropping the state-approved GCSEs in favour of the international versions because the latter are viewed as more challenging and as a better preparation for A-levels. The exams have mainly been developed for schools overseas and are closer to the former O-levels, scrapped in 1987, rather than to ordinary GCSEs.
Schools offering the IGCSE in maths and English will see steep drops in the number of their pupils getting ordinary GCSEs in these core subjects, pushing them down the rankings. The Department for Education and Skills has no intention of overhauling the league tables to take IGCSEs into account.
Concerns over the academic usefulness of the rankings will be compounded by the high marks given to GNVQs - vocational qualifications. Many state schools have boosted their rankings by encouraging pupils to take GNVQs - vocational qualifications which are rated by the government as equivalent to good GCSE passes.
Ministers have refused to allow IGCSEs to be included in results because the exams do not have official approval. State schools, even the highest achieving, cannot switch to the IGCSE because the government will fund only officially approved courses. The IGCSE is growing in popularity among private schools. Cambridge International Examinations, one of two boards that sets the IGCSE, said that 100 schools offered at least one exam this year.
Independent school heads believe that the decision not to include the IGCSE will make a nonsense of the national school league table. Tim Hands, headmaster of Portsmouth grammar and chairman of the universities committee of the Headmasters' and Headmistresses' Conference (HMC), said: "It is extraordinary that schools like mine will be listed as getting 0% for maths GCSE, yet (the IGCSE) is an exam that is highly rated by universities." The highest take-up of IGCSEs is in maths. It is preferred to the state GCSE because it includes calculus and does not include course work.
More here
EVEN BRITISH EXAMINERS ARE DUMMIES
Teachers have told a bright GCSE student she would have to dumb down in order to pass her exams, prompting concerns that examiners are unqualified to mark some papers. Katie Merchant, 16, was marked down for giving a sophisticated answer in her mock Latin exam. She achieved an A* - the highest mark possible - but lost marks on one question because her answer was too sophisticated. Teachers warned the girl she would be similarly penalised in the real exam, prompting her to express her disappointment in a letter to her Brighton college headteacher, Richard Cairns.
Speaking today, Mr Cairns said examiners often marked papers in subjects they knew little about and that he warned his pupils they would often know more about the subject than the marker. He said: "The very brightest are definitely constrained by the exam marking schemes." He said exam boards awarded the highest marks for prescriptive answers containing key words, meaning a pupil who displayed originality was penalised. Mr Cairns said the problem affected all exam boards. He said markers rewarded children for thinking "mechanistically" rather than "outside of the box". "We're getting very good at teaching children to pass exams but less and less good at teaching them to think laterally," he said.
After consultation with Oxford and Cambridge universities, Brighton college is reducing the maximum number of GCSEs students can take from 10 to nine and making time in the curriculum for critical thinking. Mr Cairns said: "Through league tables, teachers [have] become accountable to their pupils. As a result, [they] want more and more information about how to achieve an A*, which has encouraged exam boards to be more prescriptive and killed off independent thought."
He went on: "I tell my students, 'You must expect the examiner to know less than you. He or she will be working to a rigid marking scheme and they need to look out for key things whether or not they're actually relevant." The independent college was the first school in England to introduce the mandatory study of Mandarin for all Year 9 pupils earlier this year.
Source
NHS: NOW IT'S OBSTETRICS THAT GRIEVOUSLY DAMAGES THE BABIES
More than 300 babies a year are being left with brain damage because of oxygen starvation caused by lack of proper care at birth. The National Health Service litigation authority, which handles damages claims from hospital patients, has for the first time released data from every hospital in England showing the number of babies damaged by botched deliveries. The accidents are being blamed on staff shortages leading to inadequate monitoring.
In the 12 months to April more than 300 families began legal action for severe injuries suffered by their babies. In most cases the damage means children are unable to walk, talk, feed themselves or have any hope of independent life. In the same period medical staff reported a further 174 incidents through a system to help budget for legal claims.
Legal costs and damages for victims reached a high of nearly 175m pounds in the last financial year, but the real costs are said to be much higher because special education, nursing care, continuing health problems and social services are not included. In the five years covered by the data there were 2,763 claims. Of the total, 6%-10% are estimated to be from mothers whose reproductive organs were damaged. Another small group relates to failures to diagnose conditions such as Down's syndrome. Most are children whose brain damage was caused because hospital staff did not deliver them fast enough when the babies were suffering oxygen deprivation.
The figures, released under the Freedom of Information Act, come days after a report condemned childbirth services at Northwick Park hospital near Harrow, northwest London, for failures that led to 10 new mothers dying between 2002 and 2005. The new figures show the Northwick tragedies are not an isolated problem.
Jane Rodrigues, 34, from Dartford, Kent, blames the damage suffered by her two-year-old son Louis on the fact that midwives had failed to recognise that her 4ft 10in frame would have difficulty delivering the 10lb baby she was about to produce. She almost bled to death when her uterus ruptured. Her baby was classed as stillborn but was resuscitated.
He has been left mentally handicapped, unable to walk or talk. "I am sad and angry for him," she said. "He is going to be dependent on other people for the rest of his life." She is pursuing a complaint against Darent Valley hospital in Dartford. The trust has apologised but denies liability.
The cost of such accidents is exemplified by cases such as that of Nathan Hughes. In May he was finally awarded 1.65m pounds, plus 315,000 pounds a year for life, to pay for his needs because the medical team delivering him 14 years ago at Rush Green hospital, northeast London, failed to notice he was being strangled by his umbilical cord. "These disasters happen again and again," said Eve, his mother. "I found out later that the hospital where he was born was known by doctors as the `spastics factory' because of the number of birth injuries."
Others believe the real number of children affected is even higher than the statistics show. "I have certainly met people with damaged babies who have said they don't have the strength to take on the NHS," said Karita Massara, whose son Jack, 9, was awarded 850,000 pounds this year for injuries suffered during a botched delivery at the Chelsea and Westminster hospital, London. "When you are looking after a disabled child, it is physically and emotionally exhausting."
Scope, the charity that works for cerebral palsy sufferers, estimates that up to 13,000 people or 10% of Britons affected by this form of brain damage suffered avoidable birth trauma.
More here
More than 300 babies a year are being left with brain damage because of oxygen starvation caused by lack of proper care at birth. The National Health Service litigation authority, which handles damages claims from hospital patients, has for the first time released data from every hospital in England showing the number of babies damaged by botched deliveries. The accidents are being blamed on staff shortages leading to inadequate monitoring.
In the 12 months to April more than 300 families began legal action for severe injuries suffered by their babies. In most cases the damage means children are unable to walk, talk, feed themselves or have any hope of independent life. In the same period medical staff reported a further 174 incidents through a system to help budget for legal claims.
Legal costs and damages for victims reached a high of nearly 175m pounds in the last financial year, but the real costs are said to be much higher because special education, nursing care, continuing health problems and social services are not included. In the five years covered by the data there were 2,763 claims. Of the total, 6%-10% are estimated to be from mothers whose reproductive organs were damaged. Another small group relates to failures to diagnose conditions such as Down's syndrome. Most are children whose brain damage was caused because hospital staff did not deliver them fast enough when the babies were suffering oxygen deprivation.
The figures, released under the Freedom of Information Act, come days after a report condemned childbirth services at Northwick Park hospital near Harrow, northwest London, for failures that led to 10 new mothers dying between 2002 and 2005. The new figures show the Northwick tragedies are not an isolated problem.
Jane Rodrigues, 34, from Dartford, Kent, blames the damage suffered by her two-year-old son Louis on the fact that midwives had failed to recognise that her 4ft 10in frame would have difficulty delivering the 10lb baby she was about to produce. She almost bled to death when her uterus ruptured. Her baby was classed as stillborn but was resuscitated.
He has been left mentally handicapped, unable to walk or talk. "I am sad and angry for him," she said. "He is going to be dependent on other people for the rest of his life." She is pursuing a complaint against Darent Valley hospital in Dartford. The trust has apologised but denies liability.
The cost of such accidents is exemplified by cases such as that of Nathan Hughes. In May he was finally awarded 1.65m pounds, plus 315,000 pounds a year for life, to pay for his needs because the medical team delivering him 14 years ago at Rush Green hospital, northeast London, failed to notice he was being strangled by his umbilical cord. "These disasters happen again and again," said Eve, his mother. "I found out later that the hospital where he was born was known by doctors as the `spastics factory' because of the number of birth injuries."
Others believe the real number of children affected is even higher than the statistics show. "I have certainly met people with damaged babies who have said they don't have the strength to take on the NHS," said Karita Massara, whose son Jack, 9, was awarded 850,000 pounds this year for injuries suffered during a botched delivery at the Chelsea and Westminster hospital, London. "When you are looking after a disabled child, it is physically and emotionally exhausting."
Scope, the charity that works for cerebral palsy sufferers, estimates that up to 13,000 people or 10% of Britons affected by this form of brain damage suffered avoidable birth trauma.
More here
BRITAIN'S LEFTIST "NANNIES" ARE PISSING INTO THE WIND
Last week’s appointment of Caroline Flint as Britain’s first “minister for fitness”, charged with combating the alarming rise in obesity, is just the latest of the middle class’s perennial — and doomed — attempts to reform the lower orders. Political correctness forbids Flint from admitting her campaign is primarily aimed at the underclass, but the statistics for London tell their own story: the lowest rates are in posh Kensington and Chelsea, while downmarket Barking and Dagenham show the highest.
Source
Conservatives were right after all (as usual)
Quick, somebody buy a wreath. Last week marked the passing of multiculturalism as official government doctrine. No longer will opponents of this corrosive and divisive creed be silenced simply by the massed Pavlovian ovine accusation: "Racist!" Better still, the very people who foisted multiculturalism upon the country are the ones who have decided that it has now outlived its usefulness - that is, the political left.
It is amazing how a few by-election shocks and some madmen with explosive backpacks can concentrate the mind. At any rate, British citizens, black and white, can move onwards together - towards a sunlit upland of monoculturalism, or maybe zeroculturalism, whatever takes your fancy....
It has all been a long time coming. Some 22 years ago Ray Honeyford, the previously obscure headmaster of Drummond middle school in Bradford, suggested, in the low-circulation right-wing periodical The Salisbury Review, that his Asian pupils should really be better integrated into British society. They should learn English, for a start, and a bit of British history and a sense of what the country is about; further, Asian (Muslim) girls should be allowed to learn to swim despite the objections of their parents (who did not like them stripping down even in front of each other). Muslim kids should be treated like every other pupil, in other words.
For these mild contentions, Honeyford was investigated by the government, vilified as a racist by the press, ridiculed every day by leftie demonstrators outside his office and was eventually hounded from his job. He has not worked since. Perhaps it will be a consolation to him, as he sits idly in his neat, small, semi-detached house in Bury, Lancashire, that he has now been comprehensively outflanked on the far right by a whole bunch of Labour politicians, including at least one minister, and indeed the chairman of the Commission for Racial Equality. Then again, perhaps it won't.
It is impossible to overstate the magnitude of this shift. To give you an example of the lunacy that prevailed back in Honeyford's time: then, the Commission for Racial Equality was happy to instruct Britain's journalists that Chinese people were henceforth to be described as "black" because that, objectively, was their subjective political experience at the hands of the oppressive white hegemony.
I don't suppose they asked the Chinese if they minded this appellation or derogation - the question would not even have occurred. By definition, people who were "not-white" - from Beijing to Barbados - were banded together in their oppression and implacable opposition to the prevailing white culture and thus united in their political aspirations. People from Baluchistan, Tobago and Bangladesh were defined solely by their lack of whiteness. This was, when you think about it, a quintessentially racist assumption, as well as being authoritarian and - as the writer Kenan Malik puts it - "anti-human".
We are not born with a gene that insists we become Muslim or Christian or Rastafarian. We are born, all of us, with a tabula rasa; we are not defined by the nationality or religion or cultural assumptions of our parents. But that was the mindset which, at that time, prevailed.
This is how far we have come in the past year or so. When an ICM poll of Britain's Muslims in February this year revealed that some 40% (that is, about 800,000 people) wished to see Islamic law introduced in parts of Britain, the chairman of the Commission for Racial Equality responded by saying that they should therefore pack their bags and clear off. Sir Trevor Phillips's exact words were these: "If you want to have laws decided in another way, you have to live somewhere else."
My guess is this: if such a statement had been made by a member of the Tory party's Monday Club in 1984 - or, for that matter, 1994 - he would have been excoriated and quite probably would have been kicked out of the party. "If you don't like it here then go somewhere else" was once considered the apogee of "racism".
More here
Last week’s appointment of Caroline Flint as Britain’s first “minister for fitness”, charged with combating the alarming rise in obesity, is just the latest of the middle class’s perennial — and doomed — attempts to reform the lower orders. Political correctness forbids Flint from admitting her campaign is primarily aimed at the underclass, but the statistics for London tell their own story: the lowest rates are in posh Kensington and Chelsea, while downmarket Barking and Dagenham show the highest.
Throughout its 600-year history, the middle class has looked askance at the underclass: the great unwashed, hooligans and now hoodies. Sherlock Holmes always carried a revolver “east of Aldgate” — and the inhabitants of our dingier streets and estates have ever brought forth admonitions from the nanny state.
More recently, Jack Straw promised that new Labour would purge the streets of “aggressive begging, of winos, addicts and squeegee merchants” so that the “law-abiding citizen” could walk abroad undisturbed.
Middle-class to the tips of his toes, Tony Blair believes access to education will convert underclass youth into biddable, ambitious and hard-working citizens. But we have been here before; a middle-class visitor to the Oxford Industrial school in 1879 was comforted by the sight of children from “the dregs of the population” undergoing instruction that would halt their slide into “the criminal and dangerous classes”.
United by its dread of the underclass, the middle class has always disagreed about the reasons for its existence, and how it might be tamed and admitted into civilised society. But the underclass has manfully resisted attempt at reform: Victorian licensing laws and legislation outlawing bull-baiting and cock-fighting were seen as “them” telling “us” what not to do.
At every stage of its existence, including today, the middle class has been united in believing that reasoned and well-informed debate offers the best solution for all human problems. Its flattering image of itself has always been as industrious, prudent, self- disciplined and sometimes godly. When the 1832 Reform Act gave the middle class political dominance, it projected itself as the “intelligence” of the nation and the banner-bearer of progress.
Arrogant perhaps, but this description was accurate insofar as the middle classes have always been brain workers. An Elizabethan social analyst defined the middle orders as those who lived solely through the exercise of their wits. They practised law and medicine, managed estates, were schoolmasters, creative artists, merchants, shopkeepers and financiers. The industrial revolution provided new jobs for what, from about 1800, was called the middle class.
In 1900 it was calculated that the middle classes comprised a tenth of the population; by 2000 it was nearly two-thirds. A form of classlessness now exists, although what it means is that we live in a society that frowns on the idea of judging individuals simply because of their birth, education or possessions.
But egalitarianism is a recent phenomenon. For most of our history, class differences and deference have been taken for granted and religiously observed. Until the 19th century the middle classes existed within a hierarchical order, positioned between the landed aristocracy and gentry on one hand and the broad base of artisans and manual labourers on the other.
This tripartite society represented God’s will and it was accepted that those in the uppermost strata possessed a superior wisdom which entitled them to guide and discipline their inferiors. But as it began to expand, the middle class accumulated power. Its magistrates enforced laws framed to control the underclass and its excesses. The astringents of the statute books were supplemented by the gentler therapies of charity and persuasion.
This urge to rescue and reform runs like a thread through the history of the middle classes. It was nannyism before its time and, like its modern counterpart, it rested on the premise that the middle class knew what was best for everyone.
A medieval cleric deplored the habitual drunkenness of the poor, their addiction to “idle plays and japes” and, most alarming of all, their “sturdiness against men of higher estate”. In 1717 a Cumbrian tenant farmer invited his landlord’s steward to “kiss my arse” when taken to task in court. It’s reminiscent of the Wiltshire “chavette” who recently swore at a magistrate and boasted of her vices.
Defiance was understandable, given that middle-class programmes for the regeneration of the poor always rested on that Cromwellian axiom: “what is for their good and not what pleaseth them”.
However, it was not unknown for the middle class to kick over the traces — just usually well hidden. In RS Surtees’s Handley Cross (1843) a formal dinner for foxhunters and hare coursers ends in a drunken fight that spills onto the streets.
Victorian Britain is often — wrongly — cited as a golden age of civil tranquillity when the laws of God and the Queen were universally respected and obeyed. But at the beginning of the Queen’s reign, a public hanging at Devizes was marked by “disgraceful and indecent behaviour” and “beastly drunkenness and debauchery”.
At its end, hooligans including “pistol gangs” of teenagers rampaged through the inner-London suburbs, scaring the middle classes and prompting editorials about the nation’s terminal moral decline.
The Victorian middle classes may have civilised industrial, urban Britain with street lights, sewers, museums, art galleries and public baths, but they never curbed the violent instincts of the underclass. Hooligans were followed by teddy boys, mods and rockers, skinheads and hoodies. We have been here before, although it may be no comfort for today’s middle class to know that their experience and fears of street crime and abuse were shared by their ancestors.
Modern correctives may ultimately become redundant if future miscreants can be identified at birth. Spotted in their cradles, they will receive treatment and grow into responsible and maybe huggable members of society.
The brave new world of the bar-coded baby is at hand — the government is considering a plan to track the progress of every child born in Britain — and, its architects hope, it will be one where the middle classes will finally enjoy that peace of mind which has eluded them for so long.
Yet perhaps some humility is now required and we should concede that human nature cannot be changed completely, either by compulsion, lectures about diet or even the scientific monitoring of toddlers. But such an admission would have been and perhaps still is unthinkable to a class which has inherited its predecessors’ assumption that the world would be a better place if everyone behaved and thought as they did.
Source
Conservatives were right after all (as usual)
Quick, somebody buy a wreath. Last week marked the passing of multiculturalism as official government doctrine. No longer will opponents of this corrosive and divisive creed be silenced simply by the massed Pavlovian ovine accusation: "Racist!" Better still, the very people who foisted multiculturalism upon the country are the ones who have decided that it has now outlived its usefulness - that is, the political left.
It is amazing how a few by-election shocks and some madmen with explosive backpacks can concentrate the mind. At any rate, British citizens, black and white, can move onwards together - towards a sunlit upland of monoculturalism, or maybe zeroculturalism, whatever takes your fancy....
It has all been a long time coming. Some 22 years ago Ray Honeyford, the previously obscure headmaster of Drummond middle school in Bradford, suggested, in the low-circulation right-wing periodical The Salisbury Review, that his Asian pupils should really be better integrated into British society. They should learn English, for a start, and a bit of British history and a sense of what the country is about; further, Asian (Muslim) girls should be allowed to learn to swim despite the objections of their parents (who did not like them stripping down even in front of each other). Muslim kids should be treated like every other pupil, in other words.
For these mild contentions, Honeyford was investigated by the government, vilified as a racist by the press, ridiculed every day by leftie demonstrators outside his office and was eventually hounded from his job. He has not worked since. Perhaps it will be a consolation to him, as he sits idly in his neat, small, semi-detached house in Bury, Lancashire, that he has now been comprehensively outflanked on the far right by a whole bunch of Labour politicians, including at least one minister, and indeed the chairman of the Commission for Racial Equality. Then again, perhaps it won't.
It is impossible to overstate the magnitude of this shift. To give you an example of the lunacy that prevailed back in Honeyford's time: then, the Commission for Racial Equality was happy to instruct Britain's journalists that Chinese people were henceforth to be described as "black" because that, objectively, was their subjective political experience at the hands of the oppressive white hegemony.
I don't suppose they asked the Chinese if they minded this appellation or derogation - the question would not even have occurred. By definition, people who were "not-white" - from Beijing to Barbados - were banded together in their oppression and implacable opposition to the prevailing white culture and thus united in their political aspirations. People from Baluchistan, Tobago and Bangladesh were defined solely by their lack of whiteness. This was, when you think about it, a quintessentially racist assumption, as well as being authoritarian and - as the writer Kenan Malik puts it - "anti-human".
We are not born with a gene that insists we become Muslim or Christian or Rastafarian. We are born, all of us, with a tabula rasa; we are not defined by the nationality or religion or cultural assumptions of our parents. But that was the mindset which, at that time, prevailed.
This is how far we have come in the past year or so. When an ICM poll of Britain's Muslims in February this year revealed that some 40% (that is, about 800,000 people) wished to see Islamic law introduced in parts of Britain, the chairman of the Commission for Racial Equality responded by saying that they should therefore pack their bags and clear off. Sir Trevor Phillips's exact words were these: "If you want to have laws decided in another way, you have to live somewhere else."
My guess is this: if such a statement had been made by a member of the Tory party's Monday Club in 1984 - or, for that matter, 1994 - he would have been excoriated and quite probably would have been kicked out of the party. "If you don't like it here then go somewhere else" was once considered the apogee of "racism".
More here
Tea healthier than a glass of water: "The belief that drinking tea leads to loss of fluids and possibly dehydration has been quashed by scientists. They say drinking four cups a day can be beneficial - and better than plain water. Tea not only rehydrates but also protects against heart disease and cancer - as well as cutting tooth decay and possibly improving bone strength. The key component is a group of antioxidants called flavonoids which help prevent cell damage. Like fruit and vegetables, tea is a good source of flavonoids - three cups contain eight times the capacity of an apple. "You don't find these antioxidants in pure water," chief scientist Carrie Ruxton said. The British research was published in the European Journal of Clinical Nutrition."
U.K.: "Organic" is "in": "As celebrity crazes go, this latest one is reasonably harmless: not hard-core drinking, drug-taking or even excessive slimming. No, the current fad for celebs who make a living out of appearing on the covers of Heat magazine is nothing other than knobbly vegetables. And free-range pigs. Fried up, that is, with some organic onion rings. "Green" food, grown without pesticides or hormones, is so hot at the moment that no right-minded member of Soho House would dare to throw a dinner party without a slab of organic fare on the menu... Being green is now accepted as being rather chic; a straightforwardly good idea worth signing up to, rather than something outwardly virtuous which requires a keen commitment to body hair and a vegan diet... Yet probably the single most crucial factor in helping to encourage this cultural sea-change is the celebrity take-up of green zeal. Liz Hurley, whose adoration of an organically reared (and very hairy) Gloucester Old Spot ended up in most of the papers last week, is said to be converting her 400-acre Cotswolds farm to organic production and launching a brand of organic baby foods (whether the labels will be designed by Donatella Versace is, as yet, unknown)".
Sunday, August 27, 2006
BRITISH SCHOOLS TO RETURN TO REAL EDUCATION?
GCSE exams in English and maths are to be made harder as part of a major government crackdown on schools that are failing to teach basic educational skills. Jim Knight, the Schools Minister, has introduced the tough new measures in one of the biggest shake-ups of the exam system in a decade. 'Every single young person must have a good grasp of the basics,' Knight told The Observer. 'We are changing the way we measure performance and toughening up the English and maths GCSEs to ensure that young people master the three Rs.' In addition, coursework, which counts towards GCSE grades, will be overhauled in a bid to eradicate pupils cheating by using the internet, helping each other or receiving parental help. More work will be done under exam conditions at school.
Knight said the main change to exams would be to build in 'the functional' skills in English and maths that employers required. There would be more rigorous testing of grammar, for instance in the context of writing a clear, coherently presented letter, and of mathematical concepts like percentages in the context of real-life problems. While the present system allows pupils to get a pass in English or maths without mastering such skills as long as an overall points total is reached, that will no longer be the case. 'In the future, employers will have a guarantee of the quality of the school-leavers they are taking on. A good pass will mean that young people are equipped with the basics. That means being able to write and speak fluently, carry out mental arithmetic, give presentations and tally up a till at the end of the day', Knight said.
The tougher new courses will be piloted this autumn. The move has been announced before Thursday's publication of this year's GCSE results, which are expected to show a further sharp rise in the number of pupils achieving an overall 'benchmark' pass. The existing system requires at least one C-grade in any five GCSE subjects. Under the new measures, an overall pass will require at least a C in both English and maths.
There has been a growing clamour in recent years from education experts and businesses against what they see as the poor standard of literacy and maths skills of many school-leavers. In a report to be released tomorrow, the Confederation of British Industry will warn of widespread levels of dissatisfaction among employers. The CBI says the economy is losing up to 10 billion pounds bn a year through staff not being able to read, write or perform basic arithmetical exercises to a sufficient standard.
In today's Observer, the philosopher and educationist Baroness Warnock issues a scathing critique of the government's education policies for having left many school-leavers 'unable to write intelligibly, read critically or think analytically'. She predicted that one result would be that the country could soon find itself without any world-class universities.
As well as tougher exams, league tables of GCSE results are to be overhauled to include separate rankings based on English and maths, in the hope of bringing pressure on schools to raise their game. 'Alongside the usual five good GCSEs measure, every parent will be able to see how well their school is doing in securing the basics of English and maths', Knight said.
Ministers will receive fresh evidence this week of problems among pupils when results of standard assessment tasks (SATs) taken by 11-year-olds in English, maths and science are published. Sources say these will show that the government has failed to reach its self-imposed target that 85 per cent of the pupils should have demonstrated competence in the subjects by 2006. But the proportion attaining the required standard has risen from 60 per cent to more than 75 per cent since 1996. This year's GCSE results are also likely to show a drop in the number of pupils taking French and German, after the government two years ago abandoned the requirement for 14- and 15-year-olds to study a foreign language.
Meanwhile, the Conservatives have indicated they may scrap AS-levels, which pupils take at the end of their lower-sixth form year, in order to relieve the pressure of repeatedly preparing for and sitting exams throughout pupils' careers. Students now spend so much time concentrating on exams that their basic education is suffering, said David Willetts, the Tories' education spokesman. He said there was a 'very strong argument' for scrapping AS-levels and restoring the break from having to take exams in the year between GCSEs and A-levels. The current system, whereby teenagers take SATs at 14, GCSEs at 16, AS-levels at 17 and then A-levels a year later, was leading to a situation in which schools 'teach to the test'. 'The whole process of examining is in danger of getting in the way of real education,' said Willetts.
Source
GCSE exams in English and maths are to be made harder as part of a major government crackdown on schools that are failing to teach basic educational skills. Jim Knight, the Schools Minister, has introduced the tough new measures in one of the biggest shake-ups of the exam system in a decade. 'Every single young person must have a good grasp of the basics,' Knight told The Observer. 'We are changing the way we measure performance and toughening up the English and maths GCSEs to ensure that young people master the three Rs.' In addition, coursework, which counts towards GCSE grades, will be overhauled in a bid to eradicate pupils cheating by using the internet, helping each other or receiving parental help. More work will be done under exam conditions at school.
Knight said the main change to exams would be to build in 'the functional' skills in English and maths that employers required. There would be more rigorous testing of grammar, for instance in the context of writing a clear, coherently presented letter, and of mathematical concepts like percentages in the context of real-life problems. While the present system allows pupils to get a pass in English or maths without mastering such skills as long as an overall points total is reached, that will no longer be the case. 'In the future, employers will have a guarantee of the quality of the school-leavers they are taking on. A good pass will mean that young people are equipped with the basics. That means being able to write and speak fluently, carry out mental arithmetic, give presentations and tally up a till at the end of the day', Knight said.
The tougher new courses will be piloted this autumn. The move has been announced before Thursday's publication of this year's GCSE results, which are expected to show a further sharp rise in the number of pupils achieving an overall 'benchmark' pass. The existing system requires at least one C-grade in any five GCSE subjects. Under the new measures, an overall pass will require at least a C in both English and maths.
There has been a growing clamour in recent years from education experts and businesses against what they see as the poor standard of literacy and maths skills of many school-leavers. In a report to be released tomorrow, the Confederation of British Industry will warn of widespread levels of dissatisfaction among employers. The CBI says the economy is losing up to 10 billion pounds bn a year through staff not being able to read, write or perform basic arithmetical exercises to a sufficient standard.
In today's Observer, the philosopher and educationist Baroness Warnock issues a scathing critique of the government's education policies for having left many school-leavers 'unable to write intelligibly, read critically or think analytically'. She predicted that one result would be that the country could soon find itself without any world-class universities.
As well as tougher exams, league tables of GCSE results are to be overhauled to include separate rankings based on English and maths, in the hope of bringing pressure on schools to raise their game. 'Alongside the usual five good GCSEs measure, every parent will be able to see how well their school is doing in securing the basics of English and maths', Knight said.
Ministers will receive fresh evidence this week of problems among pupils when results of standard assessment tasks (SATs) taken by 11-year-olds in English, maths and science are published. Sources say these will show that the government has failed to reach its self-imposed target that 85 per cent of the pupils should have demonstrated competence in the subjects by 2006. But the proportion attaining the required standard has risen from 60 per cent to more than 75 per cent since 1996. This year's GCSE results are also likely to show a drop in the number of pupils taking French and German, after the government two years ago abandoned the requirement for 14- and 15-year-olds to study a foreign language.
Meanwhile, the Conservatives have indicated they may scrap AS-levels, which pupils take at the end of their lower-sixth form year, in order to relieve the pressure of repeatedly preparing for and sitting exams throughout pupils' careers. Students now spend so much time concentrating on exams that their basic education is suffering, said David Willetts, the Tories' education spokesman. He said there was a 'very strong argument' for scrapping AS-levels and restoring the break from having to take exams in the year between GCSEs and A-levels. The current system, whereby teenagers take SATs at 14, GCSEs at 16, AS-levels at 17 and then A-levels a year later, was leading to a situation in which schools 'teach to the test'. 'The whole process of examining is in danger of getting in the way of real education,' said Willetts.
Source
NHS KILLS MOTHERS TOO
They're not fussy: Mothers, kids, who cares? Everybody still gets their salary and nobody is ever penalized significantly
Ten women died during childbirth or shortly afterwards in a hospital that suffered from a lack of clinical leadership, a poor working culture and an overloaded maternity unit. The deaths, at Northwick Park Hospital in northwest London, occurred between April 2002 and April 2005, and involved women giving birth or within 42 days of birth. The Healthcare Commission publishes a detailed account today of each of the deaths.
In April 2005 the commission recommended "special measures" to restore good standards at the hospital, which included calling in an outside team to safeguard women. In today's report it says that these measures are working. But the report lays out in painful detail what can happen in a maternity unit that has inadequate systems. In nine out of the ten cases, the report says, there are grounds for criticism. It summarises these as:
* Insufficient input from a consultant or a senior midwife (in five cases), with difficult decisions often left to junior staff.
* Failure to recognise and respond quickly when a woman's condition changed unexpectedly.
* Inadequate resources to deal with high-risk cases: there were too few consultant obstetricians and midwives; not enough dedicated theatre staff; a reliance on agency and locum staff without adequate support; and a lack of a dedicated high-dependency unit.
* A culture that led to poor working practices.
* Failure to learn lessons on the unit, leading to mistakes being repeated.
* Failure by the North West London Hospitals NHS Trust board to appreciate the seriousness of the situation. It was aware of the number of deaths, and should have acted sooner.
Two aspects of the service are singled out for praise. The report says the anaesthetists and the haematology department, which provided blood for the patients, responded well under difficult circumstances.
Of the women who died, six were Asian, two African, one Afro-Caribbean and one European. The hospital serves half a million people in Brent and Harrow, two boroughs with large black and minority ethnic populations.
The causes of death varied. Strokes following pre-eclampsia (very high blood pressure) were the cause in three cases, with bleeding after giving birth in four other cases. One women died of viral encephalitis, one of a cardiac arrest.
The hospital investigated the deaths from a predominantly legal point of view, as if seeking to defend itself, the report says. Common factors were not found, but the commission says that they did exist and should have been identified.
Marcia Fry, the commission's head of operational development, said: "We hope this report gives some answers to the families involved. "We expect trusts across the country to read this report. Most women give birth safely. But there are risks and the NHS must ensure it does all it can to reduce them. There can be no excuse for failing to learn the lessons from tragedies of this kind." Since April 2005 three additional consultants and 20 more midwives have been recruited. The inspectorate also believes there is a better team working among consultants, obstetric staff and midwives.
Source
They're not fussy: Mothers, kids, who cares? Everybody still gets their salary and nobody is ever penalized significantly
Ten women died during childbirth or shortly afterwards in a hospital that suffered from a lack of clinical leadership, a poor working culture and an overloaded maternity unit. The deaths, at Northwick Park Hospital in northwest London, occurred between April 2002 and April 2005, and involved women giving birth or within 42 days of birth. The Healthcare Commission publishes a detailed account today of each of the deaths.
In April 2005 the commission recommended "special measures" to restore good standards at the hospital, which included calling in an outside team to safeguard women. In today's report it says that these measures are working. But the report lays out in painful detail what can happen in a maternity unit that has inadequate systems. In nine out of the ten cases, the report says, there are grounds for criticism. It summarises these as:
* Insufficient input from a consultant or a senior midwife (in five cases), with difficult decisions often left to junior staff.
* Failure to recognise and respond quickly when a woman's condition changed unexpectedly.
* Inadequate resources to deal with high-risk cases: there were too few consultant obstetricians and midwives; not enough dedicated theatre staff; a reliance on agency and locum staff without adequate support; and a lack of a dedicated high-dependency unit.
* A culture that led to poor working practices.
* Failure to learn lessons on the unit, leading to mistakes being repeated.
* Failure by the North West London Hospitals NHS Trust board to appreciate the seriousness of the situation. It was aware of the number of deaths, and should have acted sooner.
Two aspects of the service are singled out for praise. The report says the anaesthetists and the haematology department, which provided blood for the patients, responded well under difficult circumstances.
Of the women who died, six were Asian, two African, one Afro-Caribbean and one European. The hospital serves half a million people in Brent and Harrow, two boroughs with large black and minority ethnic populations.
The causes of death varied. Strokes following pre-eclampsia (very high blood pressure) were the cause in three cases, with bleeding after giving birth in four other cases. One women died of viral encephalitis, one of a cardiac arrest.
The hospital investigated the deaths from a predominantly legal point of view, as if seeking to defend itself, the report says. Common factors were not found, but the commission says that they did exist and should have been identified.
Marcia Fry, the commission's head of operational development, said: "We hope this report gives some answers to the families involved. "We expect trusts across the country to read this report. Most women give birth safely. But there are risks and the NHS must ensure it does all it can to reduce them. There can be no excuse for failing to learn the lessons from tragedies of this kind." Since April 2005 three additional consultants and 20 more midwives have been recruited. The inspectorate also believes there is a better team working among consultants, obstetric staff and midwives.
Source
BRITISH LEFTIST WAKES UP TO THE PERILS OF MULTICULTURALISM
Ruth Kelly broke with decades of Labour support for multiculturalism as she admitted the Government's failure to impose a single British identity could have led to communities living in 'isolation'. The Communities Secretary became the first Cabinet minister to question the idea that different faiths and races should not be forced to integrate but should be allowed to maintain their own culture. In an extraordinary volte face, she appeared to concede that Government policies had contributed to communities drifting into segregation. 'In our attempt to avoid imposing a single British identity and culture, have we ended up with some communities living in isolation of each other, with no common bonds between them?' she said.
In a keynote speech launching a new commission on community cohesion, Miss Kelly said: 'We have moved from a period of near uniform consensus on the value of multiculturalism, to one where we can encourage that debate by questioning whether it is encouraging separateness.'
Tony Blair and other senior Labour ministers have repeatedly underlined their commitment to multiculturalism and its doctrines over their nine years in power, insisting it allows different communities to promote their own cultures while co-existing happily. But Miss Kelly conceded that its central planks were now being challenged by a series of Britain's leading ethnic minority figures. Trevor Phillips, head of the Commission for Racial Equality, Dr John Sentamu, the Archbishop of York, and most recently, BBC newsreader George Alagiah have expressed serious doubts.
Miss Kelly called for a 'new, honest debate' about the dangers of segregation. She signalled a series of possible policy rethinks about the way different cultures and religions are treated in Britain. She suggested wider teaching of English to immigrants as a way of encouraging them to integrate better into British communities. And she said young children from segregated communities should be made to mix with other cultures. Miss Kelly proposed 'twinning' schools with different ethnic and faith profiles and student exchanges between them.
In West Yorkshire, Spring Grove, a majority Asian primary school in urban Huddersfield is already twinned with Netherhong, a majority white primary school in the rural Holmfirth Valley. Pupils aged between six and ten are matched with pupils with similar interests and encouraged to correspond and interact. The policy is reminiscent of an experiment in the 1970s which involved transporting Asian children from Bradford's city centre to schools on the outskirts.
In 1975, the Race Relations Board decided that 'bussing' ethnic minority children into white communities contravened the Race Relations Act. The board argued it was being done on the basis of racial or ethnic identity rather than educational need.
Miss Kelly said the question was more urgent because patterns of immigration into Britain were far 'more complex' today than they were when the Empire Windrush arrived in 1948, carrying 492 Jamaicans who wanted to start a new life here. 'Our new residents are not the Windrush generation,' she said. 'They are more diverse, coming from countries ranging from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe, from South Africa to Somalia.'
Miss Kelly admitted global tensions were increasingly reflected on the streets of Britain's communities as a result. 'New migrants fell the fierce loyalties developed in war-torn parts of Europe. Muslims feel the reverberations from the Middle East,' she said.
She said some white Britons 'do not feel comfortable with change'. 'They see the shops and restaurants in their town centres changing. They see their neighbourhoods becoming more diverse,' she said. 'Detached from the benefits of those changes, they begin to believe the stories about ethnic minorities getting special treatment, and to develop a resentment, a sense of grievance.'
Miss Kelly adopted former Tory leader Michael Howard's slogan from last year's election campaign, insisting it was 'not racist' to have concerns about immigration and asylum. 'We must not be censored by political correctness and we can't tiptoe around the issues,' she said. 'For example, it's clear that we need a controlled, well-managed system of immigration that has clear rules and integrity to counter exploitation from the far right.' She said Government policies would not be based on special treatment for minority ethnic faith communities. 'That would only exacerbate division rather than help build cohesion,' she said. 'And as a society, we should have the confidence to say "no" to certain suggestions from particular ethnic groups but, at the same time, to make sure everyone can be treated equally, there are some programmes that will need to treat groups differently.' Miss Kelly said the new commission, charged with improving community cohesion and tackle extremism, would be more than another 'talking shop'.
But critics pointed out that a series of official reports dating back to 2001 had warned of dangerous segregation between communities. And the idea of a cohesion commission was first floated by the Government last July in the wake of the London bombings. For the Tories, shadow immigration minister Damian Green said: 'Previous Government initiatives have proved to be more about grabbing a day's headlines than working on the roots of the problem. This time, it must make a proper long-term commitment to solving the problems. 'There is a huge and vital challenge to be met in helping Britain's new communities integrate fully with the mainstream values of British society.'
Source
Ruth Kelly broke with decades of Labour support for multiculturalism as she admitted the Government's failure to impose a single British identity could have led to communities living in 'isolation'. The Communities Secretary became the first Cabinet minister to question the idea that different faiths and races should not be forced to integrate but should be allowed to maintain their own culture. In an extraordinary volte face, she appeared to concede that Government policies had contributed to communities drifting into segregation. 'In our attempt to avoid imposing a single British identity and culture, have we ended up with some communities living in isolation of each other, with no common bonds between them?' she said.
In a keynote speech launching a new commission on community cohesion, Miss Kelly said: 'We have moved from a period of near uniform consensus on the value of multiculturalism, to one where we can encourage that debate by questioning whether it is encouraging separateness.'
Tony Blair and other senior Labour ministers have repeatedly underlined their commitment to multiculturalism and its doctrines over their nine years in power, insisting it allows different communities to promote their own cultures while co-existing happily. But Miss Kelly conceded that its central planks were now being challenged by a series of Britain's leading ethnic minority figures. Trevor Phillips, head of the Commission for Racial Equality, Dr John Sentamu, the Archbishop of York, and most recently, BBC newsreader George Alagiah have expressed serious doubts.
Miss Kelly called for a 'new, honest debate' about the dangers of segregation. She signalled a series of possible policy rethinks about the way different cultures and religions are treated in Britain. She suggested wider teaching of English to immigrants as a way of encouraging them to integrate better into British communities. And she said young children from segregated communities should be made to mix with other cultures. Miss Kelly proposed 'twinning' schools with different ethnic and faith profiles and student exchanges between them.
In West Yorkshire, Spring Grove, a majority Asian primary school in urban Huddersfield is already twinned with Netherhong, a majority white primary school in the rural Holmfirth Valley. Pupils aged between six and ten are matched with pupils with similar interests and encouraged to correspond and interact. The policy is reminiscent of an experiment in the 1970s which involved transporting Asian children from Bradford's city centre to schools on the outskirts.
In 1975, the Race Relations Board decided that 'bussing' ethnic minority children into white communities contravened the Race Relations Act. The board argued it was being done on the basis of racial or ethnic identity rather than educational need.
Miss Kelly said the question was more urgent because patterns of immigration into Britain were far 'more complex' today than they were when the Empire Windrush arrived in 1948, carrying 492 Jamaicans who wanted to start a new life here. 'Our new residents are not the Windrush generation,' she said. 'They are more diverse, coming from countries ranging from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe, from South Africa to Somalia.'
Miss Kelly admitted global tensions were increasingly reflected on the streets of Britain's communities as a result. 'New migrants fell the fierce loyalties developed in war-torn parts of Europe. Muslims feel the reverberations from the Middle East,' she said.
She said some white Britons 'do not feel comfortable with change'. 'They see the shops and restaurants in their town centres changing. They see their neighbourhoods becoming more diverse,' she said. 'Detached from the benefits of those changes, they begin to believe the stories about ethnic minorities getting special treatment, and to develop a resentment, a sense of grievance.'
Miss Kelly adopted former Tory leader Michael Howard's slogan from last year's election campaign, insisting it was 'not racist' to have concerns about immigration and asylum. 'We must not be censored by political correctness and we can't tiptoe around the issues,' she said. 'For example, it's clear that we need a controlled, well-managed system of immigration that has clear rules and integrity to counter exploitation from the far right.' She said Government policies would not be based on special treatment for minority ethnic faith communities. 'That would only exacerbate division rather than help build cohesion,' she said. 'And as a society, we should have the confidence to say "no" to certain suggestions from particular ethnic groups but, at the same time, to make sure everyone can be treated equally, there are some programmes that will need to treat groups differently.' Miss Kelly said the new commission, charged with improving community cohesion and tackle extremism, would be more than another 'talking shop'.
But critics pointed out that a series of official reports dating back to 2001 had warned of dangerous segregation between communities. And the idea of a cohesion commission was first floated by the Government last July in the wake of the London bombings. For the Tories, shadow immigration minister Damian Green said: 'Previous Government initiatives have proved to be more about grabbing a day's headlines than working on the roots of the problem. This time, it must make a proper long-term commitment to solving the problems. 'There is a huge and vital challenge to be met in helping Britain's new communities integrate fully with the mainstream values of British society.'
Source
Another stupid straight-line projection: "More than 12m adults and one million children will be obese by 2010 if no action is taken, a report by the Department of Health is predicting. The Health Survey for England also warns 19% of boys and 22% of girls aged two to 15 will be obese. The figures would mean the government would fail to meet its target to halt the rise in childhood obesity... The report warns that, based on current trends, 33% of men and 28% of women will be obese by 2010. The government says it is the "most accurate estimate so far" of future obesity rates. The data is published just days after a "minister for fitness" was appointed."
Saturday, August 26, 2006
British government stumped by illiteracy and innumeracy
Labour's record on improving standards of literacy and numeracy came under attack last night after the publication of results for GCSE examinations and primary school tests. Pass rates at GCSE rose for the eighteenth successive year but achievement in English and mathematics at primary school level has stalled well below the Government's targets. Almost half of 16-year-olds failed to achieve at least a C grade in GCSE maths and four out of ten were below this standard in English. Employers said that the education system was "failing to deliver".
The proportion of GCSEs awarded grades A* to C rose by 1.2 percentage points to 62.4 per cent this year. But English increased by only 0.7 points to 61.6 per cent and maths by 0.9 to 54.3 per cent. At age 11, the proportion reaching level 4 in the national curriculum English test was unchanged at 79 per cent. It rose one percentage point in maths and science to 76 per cent and 87 per cent respectively.
The results left primary schools far off the Government's target of 85 per cent for both English and maths by this year and still trailing its 2002 target of 80 per cent in English. The proportions achieving the expected standard at age 7 in reading, writing and maths also fell across the board this year. Alan Johnson, the Education Secretary, defended the Government's record. "The attainment of young people at the end of their primary years has vastly improved on what it was in 1997 and is higher than ever before for those reaching the end of compulsory education," he said.
But David Willetts, the Shadow Education Secretary, said that the primary school results showed that the Government's strategy had "run out of steam". He added: "If you go back to 1997 and what Tony Blair said about the importance of education, it is clear that missing the targets on literacy and numeracy is a big thing. "Forty per cent of pupils are still leaving primary school without having mastered the basic skills in the three Rs. This is letting down the nation's children, who then spend their lives playing catch-up."
Richard Lambert, the CBI's Director-General, said: "We must not lose sight of the severe problems which exist. Ministers must step up their efforts - they have made the right noises, but will be judged on delivery."
Professor Alan Smithers, director of the Centre for Education and Employment Research at the University of Buckingham, said that the pass rate in maths was lower than for all other major subjects. He said that standards in many schools would be exposed by changes to performance tables this year, which will rank them for the first time by the percentage of pupils passing five good GCSEs including English and maths.
Professor David Jesson, of York University, said that the primary school results showed that "the concept of continually improving performance for ever has to be questioned". Sarah Teather, the Liberal Democrats' Shadow Education Secretary, said: "There are holes appearing all over the Government's strategy for secondary education, illustrated by the drop in teens studying languages and the shocking number quitting school altogether after GCSEs. "Too many young pupils are leaving primary school without the basic skills they need to successfully tackle the secondary curriculum."
Source
Labour's record on improving standards of literacy and numeracy came under attack last night after the publication of results for GCSE examinations and primary school tests. Pass rates at GCSE rose for the eighteenth successive year but achievement in English and mathematics at primary school level has stalled well below the Government's targets. Almost half of 16-year-olds failed to achieve at least a C grade in GCSE maths and four out of ten were below this standard in English. Employers said that the education system was "failing to deliver".
The proportion of GCSEs awarded grades A* to C rose by 1.2 percentage points to 62.4 per cent this year. But English increased by only 0.7 points to 61.6 per cent and maths by 0.9 to 54.3 per cent. At age 11, the proportion reaching level 4 in the national curriculum English test was unchanged at 79 per cent. It rose one percentage point in maths and science to 76 per cent and 87 per cent respectively.
The results left primary schools far off the Government's target of 85 per cent for both English and maths by this year and still trailing its 2002 target of 80 per cent in English. The proportions achieving the expected standard at age 7 in reading, writing and maths also fell across the board this year. Alan Johnson, the Education Secretary, defended the Government's record. "The attainment of young people at the end of their primary years has vastly improved on what it was in 1997 and is higher than ever before for those reaching the end of compulsory education," he said.
But David Willetts, the Shadow Education Secretary, said that the primary school results showed that the Government's strategy had "run out of steam". He added: "If you go back to 1997 and what Tony Blair said about the importance of education, it is clear that missing the targets on literacy and numeracy is a big thing. "Forty per cent of pupils are still leaving primary school without having mastered the basic skills in the three Rs. This is letting down the nation's children, who then spend their lives playing catch-up."
Richard Lambert, the CBI's Director-General, said: "We must not lose sight of the severe problems which exist. Ministers must step up their efforts - they have made the right noises, but will be judged on delivery."
Professor Alan Smithers, director of the Centre for Education and Employment Research at the University of Buckingham, said that the pass rate in maths was lower than for all other major subjects. He said that standards in many schools would be exposed by changes to performance tables this year, which will rank them for the first time by the percentage of pupils passing five good GCSEs including English and maths.
Professor David Jesson, of York University, said that the primary school results showed that "the concept of continually improving performance for ever has to be questioned". Sarah Teather, the Liberal Democrats' Shadow Education Secretary, said: "There are holes appearing all over the Government's strategy for secondary education, illustrated by the drop in teens studying languages and the shocking number quitting school altogether after GCSEs. "Too many young pupils are leaving primary school without the basic skills they need to successfully tackle the secondary curriculum."
Source
NHS APPROVES LIFESAVING DRUG ONLY UNDER VAST PRESSURE FROM LAWSUITS AND PUBLICITY
Final clearance has been given for women in England and Wales to be given Herceptin for early-stage breast cancer. NICE, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, dismissed an objection to its draft guidance from Newbury and Community Primary Care Trust. As a result, all PCTs will be expected to provide Herceptin.
Several women have gone to court to establish their right to a drug that trials have shown can cut their risk of a recurrence of cancer by up to 50 per cent. Draft guidance was issued by NICE in June, but Newbury PCT said that it was a perverse interpretation of the data. Today's ruling dismisses the PCT's case and reiterates the advice that women should get the drug if they have the type of breast cancer against which it is effective, and their heart function is monitored.
Andrew Dillon, chief executive of NICE, said: "Our assessment of Herceptin shows that it is clinically and cost effective for women with HER2-positive early breast cancer. The guidance has been issued rapidly to ensure consistent use across the NHS." Newbury PCT said that it had wanted NICE to consider whether shorter courses of Herceptin could be as effective as the 12 months recommended. The PCT also raised questions about exactly who should be chosen for treatment.
Source
Final clearance has been given for women in England and Wales to be given Herceptin for early-stage breast cancer. NICE, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, dismissed an objection to its draft guidance from Newbury and Community Primary Care Trust. As a result, all PCTs will be expected to provide Herceptin.
Several women have gone to court to establish their right to a drug that trials have shown can cut their risk of a recurrence of cancer by up to 50 per cent. Draft guidance was issued by NICE in June, but Newbury PCT said that it was a perverse interpretation of the data. Today's ruling dismisses the PCT's case and reiterates the advice that women should get the drug if they have the type of breast cancer against which it is effective, and their heart function is monitored.
Andrew Dillon, chief executive of NICE, said: "Our assessment of Herceptin shows that it is clinically and cost effective for women with HER2-positive early breast cancer. The guidance has been issued rapidly to ensure consistent use across the NHS." Newbury PCT said that it had wanted NICE to consider whether shorter courses of Herceptin could be as effective as the 12 months recommended. The PCT also raised questions about exactly who should be chosen for treatment.
Source
THE BRITISH POLICE DON'T CARE ABOUT REAL CRIMINALS
But say something derogatory about homosexuals or Muslims and they will be on your doorstep in no time
A father has been shot dead in front of his fiancee and young son by a gang of young men after being terrorised for months. Peter Woodhams, 22, staggered to his front door in Canning Town, East London, after being shot in the chest and collapsed onto the ground. His fiancee, Jane Bowden, 23, who rushed out with their three-year-old son, Sam, to see what was happening, claimed that the same gang had stabbed Mr Woodhams in the neck in January, narrowly missing his jugular vein. She said that she gave the names and addresses of his alleged attackers to the police but no-one had been arrested and officers had not even taken a statement from her.
Speaking about the fatal attack she said that Mr Woodhams had come home from a trip to the shops on Monday and had said that there had been some trouble before going back out. When she heard shooting she ran out with her son in her arms. "Peter turned to me and walked a few steps. I could see blood on his clothes," she said. "Then he just collapsed into some bushes and I started screaming. He managed to drag himself up and walk over to the front door and then fell on to his front. He had been shot in the chest and a bullet had gone through his hand where he had tried to protect himself. Peter was still conscious and talking to me. He kept saying that he couldn't breathe, he was panicking."
Mr Woodhams, a television satellite engineer, had been to the local shops in his car where there is believed to have been an altercation with some youths. Ms Bowden told the Evening Standard how Mr Woodhams had been held down and stabbed in the neck several times at the beginning of the year after he confronted them for throwing a stone at his car. "They wrestled him to the ground and one said, `Hold him down'. Three held him while one slashed his face and stabbed him in the neck. They knew what they were doing - they tried to kill him. "I phoned the police every day for five weeks and they never even came to take a statement from me."
She said that since then the gang of youths, believed to be aged between 14 and 18, had mounted a campaign of intimidation against them. "They knew they had stabbed Peter and got away with it. They thought they were untouchable. He was traumatised by it, but he was determined not to let them win. He wanted to stand up to them and protect me and Sam - that's the way he was." Shopkeepers and residents in the area said that the gang terrorised everyone and regularly stole from cars and shops.
A spokeswoman for Scotland Yard said that "a full review" would take place into the initial stabbing inquiry to make sure the "correct police procedure" was followed. She said that at the time a full statement was taken from the victim and officers were given a list of names and addresses of possible suspects but no arrests had been made in connection with the stabbing.
The spokeswoman said: "Following the tragic murder of Peter Woodhams, officers from the Specialist Crime Directorate were made aware of a serious stabbing incident involving the victim in January 2006. Officers from the SCD have been liaising with the senior officers from Newham borough to establish the outcome of this incident; as a result a full review is currently being conducted to ensure correct standards of police procedure were initially taken." A 14-year-old has been arrested in connection with the murder.
Source
But say something derogatory about homosexuals or Muslims and they will be on your doorstep in no time
A father has been shot dead in front of his fiancee and young son by a gang of young men after being terrorised for months. Peter Woodhams, 22, staggered to his front door in Canning Town, East London, after being shot in the chest and collapsed onto the ground. His fiancee, Jane Bowden, 23, who rushed out with their three-year-old son, Sam, to see what was happening, claimed that the same gang had stabbed Mr Woodhams in the neck in January, narrowly missing his jugular vein. She said that she gave the names and addresses of his alleged attackers to the police but no-one had been arrested and officers had not even taken a statement from her.
Speaking about the fatal attack she said that Mr Woodhams had come home from a trip to the shops on Monday and had said that there had been some trouble before going back out. When she heard shooting she ran out with her son in her arms. "Peter turned to me and walked a few steps. I could see blood on his clothes," she said. "Then he just collapsed into some bushes and I started screaming. He managed to drag himself up and walk over to the front door and then fell on to his front. He had been shot in the chest and a bullet had gone through his hand where he had tried to protect himself. Peter was still conscious and talking to me. He kept saying that he couldn't breathe, he was panicking."
Mr Woodhams, a television satellite engineer, had been to the local shops in his car where there is believed to have been an altercation with some youths. Ms Bowden told the Evening Standard how Mr Woodhams had been held down and stabbed in the neck several times at the beginning of the year after he confronted them for throwing a stone at his car. "They wrestled him to the ground and one said, `Hold him down'. Three held him while one slashed his face and stabbed him in the neck. They knew what they were doing - they tried to kill him. "I phoned the police every day for five weeks and they never even came to take a statement from me."
She said that since then the gang of youths, believed to be aged between 14 and 18, had mounted a campaign of intimidation against them. "They knew they had stabbed Peter and got away with it. They thought they were untouchable. He was traumatised by it, but he was determined not to let them win. He wanted to stand up to them and protect me and Sam - that's the way he was." Shopkeepers and residents in the area said that the gang terrorised everyone and regularly stole from cars and shops.
A spokeswoman for Scotland Yard said that "a full review" would take place into the initial stabbing inquiry to make sure the "correct police procedure" was followed. She said that at the time a full statement was taken from the victim and officers were given a list of names and addresses of possible suspects but no arrests had been made in connection with the stabbing.
The spokeswoman said: "Following the tragic murder of Peter Woodhams, officers from the Specialist Crime Directorate were made aware of a serious stabbing incident involving the victim in January 2006. Officers from the SCD have been liaising with the senior officers from Newham borough to establish the outcome of this incident; as a result a full review is currently being conducted to ensure correct standards of police procedure were initially taken." A 14-year-old has been arrested in connection with the murder.
Source
Friday, August 25, 2006
THE SCOTTISH OPTION
What the article below does not mention is that the role of alcohol in Scottish university life would be a shock to many Americans
At an age when most toddlers were singing along to Raffi, Zarya Rathe got hooked on Celtic music. She listened with her mom-a violinist-and played herself. So when the time came for college, Rathe applied to four schools in Scotland, ending up at the University of Edinburgh. "I wanted to do something different," she says. Except that when Rathe arrived in Gaelic 101, she was hardly alone. "It was all Americans."
Rathe is one of a growing number of U.S. students heading to kilt country for college. The main attraction: a quartet of medieval universities-Edinburgh, Aberdeen, Glasgow and St. Andrews-known as the Scottish Ivies. Since 2000-01, American participation in study-abroad programs has increased by 20 percent; England and Canada still attract students looking to attend a foreign school. But U.S. enrollment in Scottish colleges is up 80 percent in the past decade; at Edinburgh, it's tripled since 2003, and more than a tenth of St. Andrews' students are American.
Part of the appeal is esthetic. For Americans taken with the looks of an Ivy League campus, Scotland's ancient universities can hold an ever-richer store of history. Aberdeen was founded in 1495, 141 years before Harvard; St. Andrews has stood on the cliffs of Fife for nearly six centuries. Stephanie Gorton got into Columbia-her dream school-but that dream faded after a weekend visit to Edinburgh, the youngest of the lot. Compared with better-known British schools like Cambridge or Oxford, the Scottish colleges offer a curriculum that strikes a nice balance between the foreign and the familiar. An English undergrad education lasts only three years, and students must specialize in a single subject from day one. Scottish schools, while offering far fewer electives than their U.S. counterparts, still boast a four-year program that allows undergrads to study several subjects before settling on a major.
The Scottish Ivies are selective-but not nearly as competitive as the American elites. The typical student admitted to Harvard, Yale or Princeton scores about 750 on each section (Math, Verbal and Writing) of the SAT; Edinburgh requires 600. Top Ivies accept about 10 percent of applicants, but St. Andrews takes 20 percent of the 500 Americans who apply annually. One drawback: cost. Due to subsidies, Scottish natives pay only $4,000 in tuition, but foreigners pay $15,000. With room, board and travel, Americans can expect to fork over about $25,000 a year-and there's no financial aid available to ease the burden. Yet some find the cultural immersion priceless. Rathe, now a junior, recalls an evening on the Black Isle when she dined on haggis and watched neighbors recite Scottish poetry. "You got shivers down your spine." It's a far cry from toga parties at Delta House-but for a certain kind of student, that's precisely the point.
Source
SOFT HIGH-SCHOOL OPTIONS UNDER FIRE IN BRITAIN
Leading universities are warning teenagers that they will not gain admission if they study "soft" A levels in the sixth form. The universities are insisting that pupils take traditional subjects if they want to be considered for degree courses. Those applying with A levels in subjects such as media studies or health and social care would rule themselves out. Up to one in six students took A levels this summer in at least one of 20 subjects listed by Cambridge as "less effective preparation" for entry. In what will come as a surprise to some schools and students, the list includes business studies, information and communication studies, and design and technology.
The move to spell out "unacceptable" A levels emerged after the pass rate rose for the 24th successive year to a record 96.6 per cent. The rise in the proportion of A grades awarded was the second largest in 40 years. In a backlash against the growing popularity of subjects such as sports studies, and tourism and dance, institutions such as Cambridge, the LSE and Manchester are telling applicants to concentrate on the more academic A levels. Admissions tutors insist that a lower grade in an academic subject, such as history or mathematics, will be of more use than a high grade in an apparently easier alternative. However, they believe that thousands of working-class pupils are losing out when they choose their A-level courses, because schools are failing to give them the best guidance. The proportion of state school pupils and those from low-income families attending university dropped to its lowest level for three years in 2004-05.
Tomorrow more than 700,000 teenagers will receive their GCSE results. Cambridge has posted a notice on its website telling youngsters: "Your choice of AS and A-level subjects can have a significant impact on the course options available to you at university. "To be a realistic applicant, a student will normally need to be offering two traditional academic subjects. For example, mathematics, history and business studies would be an acceptable combination," Cambridge's online prospectus states. "However, history, business studies and media studies would not."
Geoff Parks, the admissions tutor for Cambridge, said that a significant number of students were given no advice on what options might be closed to them if they chose a poor combination of A levels. Last week it emerged that just 42 per cent of 18 to 30-year-olds in England were attending university in 2004-05, the second successive drop in two years. Few, including the Government, now expect to meet the target of half that age group attending university by 2010.
Generous bursaries for the worst-off and outreach programmes appear to be making little headway in encouraging students from poorer backgrounds to apply. Universities are baffled and the Government has ordered an audit. Tessa Stone, director of the Sutton Trust education charity, which provides summer schools to encourage more underprivileged children to apply to university, believes that poor A-level guidance could be one reason. Dr Stone says that Cambridge's direct approach may appear hard, but it is fairer to candidates in the long run because they are less likely to drop out if they have studied the right subjects.
While many universities do not explicitly exclude subjects, Dr Stone says, in reality they do. At Bristol, few A levels are explicitly discouraged, but for a BA in English, the prospectus states that GCSEs and A levels "in classical or foreign languages" are an advantage. In the same way, law A level is "acceptable but does not give any advantage". Malcolm Grant, Provost of University College London and chairman of the Russell group of research universities, said that students must not be put off learning, however. "I do think universities must be more explicit than implicit in guidance, but they must also widen participation. There are also so many things that switch kids off and being advised to do subjects that don't match their aspirations could be a disaster."
Source
What the article below does not mention is that the role of alcohol in Scottish university life would be a shock to many Americans
At an age when most toddlers were singing along to Raffi, Zarya Rathe got hooked on Celtic music. She listened with her mom-a violinist-and played herself. So when the time came for college, Rathe applied to four schools in Scotland, ending up at the University of Edinburgh. "I wanted to do something different," she says. Except that when Rathe arrived in Gaelic 101, she was hardly alone. "It was all Americans."
Rathe is one of a growing number of U.S. students heading to kilt country for college. The main attraction: a quartet of medieval universities-Edinburgh, Aberdeen, Glasgow and St. Andrews-known as the Scottish Ivies. Since 2000-01, American participation in study-abroad programs has increased by 20 percent; England and Canada still attract students looking to attend a foreign school. But U.S. enrollment in Scottish colleges is up 80 percent in the past decade; at Edinburgh, it's tripled since 2003, and more than a tenth of St. Andrews' students are American.
Part of the appeal is esthetic. For Americans taken with the looks of an Ivy League campus, Scotland's ancient universities can hold an ever-richer store of history. Aberdeen was founded in 1495, 141 years before Harvard; St. Andrews has stood on the cliffs of Fife for nearly six centuries. Stephanie Gorton got into Columbia-her dream school-but that dream faded after a weekend visit to Edinburgh, the youngest of the lot. Compared with better-known British schools like Cambridge or Oxford, the Scottish colleges offer a curriculum that strikes a nice balance between the foreign and the familiar. An English undergrad education lasts only three years, and students must specialize in a single subject from day one. Scottish schools, while offering far fewer electives than their U.S. counterparts, still boast a four-year program that allows undergrads to study several subjects before settling on a major.
The Scottish Ivies are selective-but not nearly as competitive as the American elites. The typical student admitted to Harvard, Yale or Princeton scores about 750 on each section (Math, Verbal and Writing) of the SAT; Edinburgh requires 600. Top Ivies accept about 10 percent of applicants, but St. Andrews takes 20 percent of the 500 Americans who apply annually. One drawback: cost. Due to subsidies, Scottish natives pay only $4,000 in tuition, but foreigners pay $15,000. With room, board and travel, Americans can expect to fork over about $25,000 a year-and there's no financial aid available to ease the burden. Yet some find the cultural immersion priceless. Rathe, now a junior, recalls an evening on the Black Isle when she dined on haggis and watched neighbors recite Scottish poetry. "You got shivers down your spine." It's a far cry from toga parties at Delta House-but for a certain kind of student, that's precisely the point.
Source
SOFT HIGH-SCHOOL OPTIONS UNDER FIRE IN BRITAIN
Leading universities are warning teenagers that they will not gain admission if they study "soft" A levels in the sixth form. The universities are insisting that pupils take traditional subjects if they want to be considered for degree courses. Those applying with A levels in subjects such as media studies or health and social care would rule themselves out. Up to one in six students took A levels this summer in at least one of 20 subjects listed by Cambridge as "less effective preparation" for entry. In what will come as a surprise to some schools and students, the list includes business studies, information and communication studies, and design and technology.
The move to spell out "unacceptable" A levels emerged after the pass rate rose for the 24th successive year to a record 96.6 per cent. The rise in the proportion of A grades awarded was the second largest in 40 years. In a backlash against the growing popularity of subjects such as sports studies, and tourism and dance, institutions such as Cambridge, the LSE and Manchester are telling applicants to concentrate on the more academic A levels. Admissions tutors insist that a lower grade in an academic subject, such as history or mathematics, will be of more use than a high grade in an apparently easier alternative. However, they believe that thousands of working-class pupils are losing out when they choose their A-level courses, because schools are failing to give them the best guidance. The proportion of state school pupils and those from low-income families attending university dropped to its lowest level for three years in 2004-05.
Tomorrow more than 700,000 teenagers will receive their GCSE results. Cambridge has posted a notice on its website telling youngsters: "Your choice of AS and A-level subjects can have a significant impact on the course options available to you at university. "To be a realistic applicant, a student will normally need to be offering two traditional academic subjects. For example, mathematics, history and business studies would be an acceptable combination," Cambridge's online prospectus states. "However, history, business studies and media studies would not."
Geoff Parks, the admissions tutor for Cambridge, said that a significant number of students were given no advice on what options might be closed to them if they chose a poor combination of A levels. Last week it emerged that just 42 per cent of 18 to 30-year-olds in England were attending university in 2004-05, the second successive drop in two years. Few, including the Government, now expect to meet the target of half that age group attending university by 2010.
Generous bursaries for the worst-off and outreach programmes appear to be making little headway in encouraging students from poorer backgrounds to apply. Universities are baffled and the Government has ordered an audit. Tessa Stone, director of the Sutton Trust education charity, which provides summer schools to encourage more underprivileged children to apply to university, believes that poor A-level guidance could be one reason. Dr Stone says that Cambridge's direct approach may appear hard, but it is fairer to candidates in the long run because they are less likely to drop out if they have studied the right subjects.
While many universities do not explicitly exclude subjects, Dr Stone says, in reality they do. At Bristol, few A levels are explicitly discouraged, but for a BA in English, the prospectus states that GCSEs and A levels "in classical or foreign languages" are an advantage. In the same way, law A level is "acceptable but does not give any advantage". Malcolm Grant, Provost of University College London and chairman of the Russell group of research universities, said that students must not be put off learning, however. "I do think universities must be more explicit than implicit in guidance, but they must also widen participation. There are also so many things that switch kids off and being advised to do subjects that don't match their aspirations could be a disaster."
Source
Long service awards are 'ageist'
Council bosses in Norfolk are planning to axe long service awards for staff - in case they are accused of being ageist. New laws that come into force in October will make it illegal to discriminate against someone on the grounds of how old or young they are. Bosses at Broadland Council say they are "reviewing" their policy of handing out awards to employees, in case they breach the rules.
According to The Sun an insider said: "The council officers are terrified of contravening the new legislation. "Officially they are saying the axing of long service awards is just one of a number of options being considered. But the word here is that they've already taken the decision."
Stuart Beadle is leader of the Liberal Democrat group on the council, which serves the Norfolk Broads and out-lying areas of Norwich. He said: "I think we ought to have a bit of common sense. If people have served councils or business for a very long time it should be recognised."
Local Age Concern worker Luis Santos added: "This is totally outrageous - absolute madness. If a person is 60 or 70 and going to get an accolade they wouldn't see it as being branded old. "It is very good for people when their contribution and achievements are recognised." A council spokeswoman said: "We are looking at all processes in terms of age, gender and race."
Source
Council bosses in Norfolk are planning to axe long service awards for staff - in case they are accused of being ageist. New laws that come into force in October will make it illegal to discriminate against someone on the grounds of how old or young they are. Bosses at Broadland Council say they are "reviewing" their policy of handing out awards to employees, in case they breach the rules.
According to The Sun an insider said: "The council officers are terrified of contravening the new legislation. "Officially they are saying the axing of long service awards is just one of a number of options being considered. But the word here is that they've already taken the decision."
Stuart Beadle is leader of the Liberal Democrat group on the council, which serves the Norfolk Broads and out-lying areas of Norwich. He said: "I think we ought to have a bit of common sense. If people have served councils or business for a very long time it should be recognised."
Local Age Concern worker Luis Santos added: "This is totally outrageous - absolute madness. If a person is 60 or 70 and going to get an accolade they wouldn't see it as being branded old. "It is very good for people when their contribution and achievements are recognised." A council spokeswoman said: "We are looking at all processes in terms of age, gender and race."
Source
BBC Goes to Water over Comedy Programs
Those cartoon troubles again:
Rolf Harris is probably Britain's most famous childrens' entertainer and is famed for his lightning-quick sketches.
Those cartoon troubles again:
"A radio comedy show containing a joke about Rolf Harris drawing a cartoon of the Prophet Muhammad has been pulled by the BBC because it was deemed too controversial..."
Source
Rolf Harris is probably Britain's most famous childrens' entertainer and is famed for his lightning-quick sketches.
Hotel Manager Cleared
When a British hotel manager sacked a black she caught stealing, he accused her of racism and was taken seriously enough for the matter to go to court. Happily, the manager has now been cleared of wrongdoing:
I originally covered this story on 7th..
When a British hotel manager sacked a black she caught stealing, he accused her of racism and was taken seriously enough for the matter to go to court. Happily, the manager has now been cleared of wrongdoing:
"The tribunal panel said it was satisfied anyone in Mr Coke's position would have been suspended by Mrs Downey, given she believed he was guilty of an offence.
Source
I originally covered this story on 7th..
Thursday, August 24, 2006
BRITAIN'S FAILING POLITICALLY CORRECT JUSTICE
When the chairman of the Youth Justice Board for England and Wales reveals that the number of youngsters being sent to court each year has risen by up to 40,000 over the past decade, two conclusions must be drawn. First, the chronic overcrowding in young offender institutions, announced by the YJB last week, should have been foreseen long ago. Secondly, the system designed to identify "at risk" teenagers and keep them out of trouble is not working.
The problem is partly procedural. The official response to most youthful antisocial (but not criminal) behaviour used to be a police caution, with no limit to the number of cautions an individual could amass. That patently inadequate system has been replaced with a highly prescriptive one. Young repeat offenders, however trivial their offences, receive an official reprimand, then a final warning, then a summons to a magistrate's court.
It is no surprise that magistrates are swamped with cases that they do not believe merit their attention. But how to handle them if not via the courts is a question with, literally, life and death implications. It emerged yesterday that Danny Preddie, who was convicted this month of the manslaughter in 2000 of Damilola Taylor, was routinely able to flout curfew orders at his care home in South London because he, and the other teenagers living there, knew staff were banned from using force to stop them leaving.
This does not constitute an argument for a general return to the lash. Rather, as Professor Rod Morgan, chairman of the YJB, tells The Times today, staff in schools and care homes need far greater latitude to sanction their charges as they see fit. Police and the courts should be a last resort.
Freedom from box-ticking will help teachers and carers only if they know what to do with it, however. Professor Morgan is also, rightly, concerned that many who confront violent and disruptive youngsters on a daily basis have lost the confidence to insist on decent behaviour for its own sake. When instilling basic discipline does not come naturally, specialist training has been shown to help. This is true not only in care homes, but also in the most important, most neglected institution in the youth justice debate - the family. Even though parenting is a less instinctive skill than many would-be parents think, the unwritten taboo on "teaching" parenting is only now being broken. When help is offered, however, especially to young, single parents of children at risk of sliding into truancy and crime, it is often gratefully received.
In schools, as in single-parent families, a shortage of suitable male role models may be fuelling delinquency. Professor Morgan calls this issue "tricky". For him, it may be. But policymakers must grapple with it. Vital lessons in acceptable behaviour are being missed by children who then graduate to "criminality". This is a failure of parenting and education, but also of an inflexible youth justice system. The Government's role should not be to micromanage the adults involved, but to empower them to be adults
Source
Hunt saboteurs revealed in their true colours
It could have been a scene from a film set in a future in which law and order has broken down, and Britain is ravaged by marauding gangs. This week, a group of anglers were set on by a posse of 30 masked hunt saboteurs, who emerged from the woods next to a Lancashire lake armed with baseball bats. The "sabs" assaulted and threatened several anglers, including women: a 36-year-old nurse had her expensive rod smashed and was told that, if she did not get out of the way, she would end up in the lake. She described the gang, accurately, as cowards, and intends to return to the lake - at Bank House Fly Fishery near Lancaster - as soon as possible.
How did this grotesque incident come about? The saboteurs had apparently been thwarted in their plan to disrupt a grouse shoot, so picked an easier target. But can these activists seriously expect that their campaign will lead to the banning of an activity in which about three million Britons take part?
The Government has no plans to ban this most unassuming and democratic of field sports, pursued by so many of its natural supporters: indeed, its social engineers are currently trying to thrust rods into the hands of women and ethnic minorities, spending the revenue from fishing licences on - among other things - teaching Muslim women to fish. (The idea that adults should be chivvied into healthy leisure activities, like recalcitrant schoolboys being pushed on to a rugby field in the middle of winter, is dear to New Labour's heart.)
Perhaps the "sabs" are too stupid to have worked out that this is a battle they will not win: after all, they might reason, their guerilla warfare against foxhunting paid off in the end. Then again, perhaps they do not much care. Many of the young people who attached themselves to hunt saboteur gangs in the 1980s and 1990s were misguided idealists (who, after a couple of early morning outings, quickly lost interest).
But there was also another element present in the movement, made up of fanatics and thugs who modelled themselves on Northern Irish paramilitaries (hence the balaclavas and baseball bats). At the time, we suspected that these people were not motivated by distress at the death of foxes, but were instead class warriors of a particularly intolerant variety. The attack on angling - a sport with a strong working-class base - strips away even that ideological fig leaf.
The outrage at Bank House Fly Fishery shows the hard-core "sabs" in their true colours. Like the masked "animal rights" activists who terrorise scientists and their families, these thugs are sociopaths: not animal-lovers, but people-haters.
Source
When the chairman of the Youth Justice Board for England and Wales reveals that the number of youngsters being sent to court each year has risen by up to 40,000 over the past decade, two conclusions must be drawn. First, the chronic overcrowding in young offender institutions, announced by the YJB last week, should have been foreseen long ago. Secondly, the system designed to identify "at risk" teenagers and keep them out of trouble is not working.
The problem is partly procedural. The official response to most youthful antisocial (but not criminal) behaviour used to be a police caution, with no limit to the number of cautions an individual could amass. That patently inadequate system has been replaced with a highly prescriptive one. Young repeat offenders, however trivial their offences, receive an official reprimand, then a final warning, then a summons to a magistrate's court.
It is no surprise that magistrates are swamped with cases that they do not believe merit their attention. But how to handle them if not via the courts is a question with, literally, life and death implications. It emerged yesterday that Danny Preddie, who was convicted this month of the manslaughter in 2000 of Damilola Taylor, was routinely able to flout curfew orders at his care home in South London because he, and the other teenagers living there, knew staff were banned from using force to stop them leaving.
This does not constitute an argument for a general return to the lash. Rather, as Professor Rod Morgan, chairman of the YJB, tells The Times today, staff in schools and care homes need far greater latitude to sanction their charges as they see fit. Police and the courts should be a last resort.
Freedom from box-ticking will help teachers and carers only if they know what to do with it, however. Professor Morgan is also, rightly, concerned that many who confront violent and disruptive youngsters on a daily basis have lost the confidence to insist on decent behaviour for its own sake. When instilling basic discipline does not come naturally, specialist training has been shown to help. This is true not only in care homes, but also in the most important, most neglected institution in the youth justice debate - the family. Even though parenting is a less instinctive skill than many would-be parents think, the unwritten taboo on "teaching" parenting is only now being broken. When help is offered, however, especially to young, single parents of children at risk of sliding into truancy and crime, it is often gratefully received.
In schools, as in single-parent families, a shortage of suitable male role models may be fuelling delinquency. Professor Morgan calls this issue "tricky". For him, it may be. But policymakers must grapple with it. Vital lessons in acceptable behaviour are being missed by children who then graduate to "criminality". This is a failure of parenting and education, but also of an inflexible youth justice system. The Government's role should not be to micromanage the adults involved, but to empower them to be adults
Source
Hunt saboteurs revealed in their true colours
It could have been a scene from a film set in a future in which law and order has broken down, and Britain is ravaged by marauding gangs. This week, a group of anglers were set on by a posse of 30 masked hunt saboteurs, who emerged from the woods next to a Lancashire lake armed with baseball bats. The "sabs" assaulted and threatened several anglers, including women: a 36-year-old nurse had her expensive rod smashed and was told that, if she did not get out of the way, she would end up in the lake. She described the gang, accurately, as cowards, and intends to return to the lake - at Bank House Fly Fishery near Lancaster - as soon as possible.
How did this grotesque incident come about? The saboteurs had apparently been thwarted in their plan to disrupt a grouse shoot, so picked an easier target. But can these activists seriously expect that their campaign will lead to the banning of an activity in which about three million Britons take part?
The Government has no plans to ban this most unassuming and democratic of field sports, pursued by so many of its natural supporters: indeed, its social engineers are currently trying to thrust rods into the hands of women and ethnic minorities, spending the revenue from fishing licences on - among other things - teaching Muslim women to fish. (The idea that adults should be chivvied into healthy leisure activities, like recalcitrant schoolboys being pushed on to a rugby field in the middle of winter, is dear to New Labour's heart.)
Perhaps the "sabs" are too stupid to have worked out that this is a battle they will not win: after all, they might reason, their guerilla warfare against foxhunting paid off in the end. Then again, perhaps they do not much care. Many of the young people who attached themselves to hunt saboteur gangs in the 1980s and 1990s were misguided idealists (who, after a couple of early morning outings, quickly lost interest).
But there was also another element present in the movement, made up of fanatics and thugs who modelled themselves on Northern Irish paramilitaries (hence the balaclavas and baseball bats). At the time, we suspected that these people were not motivated by distress at the death of foxes, but were instead class warriors of a particularly intolerant variety. The attack on angling - a sport with a strong working-class base - strips away even that ideological fig leaf.
The outrage at Bank House Fly Fishery shows the hard-core "sabs" in their true colours. Like the masked "animal rights" activists who terrorise scientists and their families, these thugs are sociopaths: not animal-lovers, but people-haters.
Source
Odd bans: "Britain's main airport operator, BAA, has banned all cosmetics and liquids from passengers' hand luggage at the country's biggest airports, unless the items were bought at duty-free shops in the departure lounge. Under the new Department of Transport restrictions imposed at Heathrow, Gatwick, Stansted and four other major airports from yesterday, all make-up - including items previously exempted such as lipstick, eyeliner and mascara - will be confiscated at security control. Travellers bound for the US will not be allowed to take liquids or cosmetics on board, regardless of where they were purchased. However, there remains concern that airport employees are able to evade this security and may be able to get contraband goods on to planes, which could include the types of raw materials required for the alleged bomb plot foiled by the August 10 arrests in Britain. One of the 23 people arrested, Amin Asmin Tariq, is an airline employee who has a 24-hour, all-areas pass at Heathrow airport".
Huge increase in migration to Britain: "More than a million foreigners have been given the right to settle in Britain since Labour came to power, after a sudden surge in numbers last year, according to figures published yesterday. Foreign settlement is three times the rate it was when Tony Blair entered Downing Street, and the number soared by almost 30 per cent last year... The number of migrants given settlement last year increased by 40,000 to a record figure of 179,120, compared with 58,700 in 1997. The figures do not include arrivals from the EU. More than 70 per cent of those given settlement rights were from Africa, Asia and the Indian sub-continent, with a further 20 per cent from North and South America and European states outside the European Economic Area. Sudden increases of people being granted settlement were recorded from a number of areas, including a rise of almost 100 per cent in citizens of Asian countries outside the Indian sub-continent, a 37 per cent rise in nationals from African countries and a 20 per cent increase in nationals from the Indian sub-continent. In contrast, there was a decline of 22 per cent in settlement by citizens from European countries and a 2 per cent drop in those from North and South America."
Huge increase in migration to Britain: "More than a million foreigners have been given the right to settle in Britain since Labour came to power, after a sudden surge in numbers last year, according to figures published yesterday. Foreign settlement is three times the rate it was when Tony Blair entered Downing Street, and the number soared by almost 30 per cent last year... The number of migrants given settlement last year increased by 40,000 to a record figure of 179,120, compared with 58,700 in 1997. The figures do not include arrivals from the EU. More than 70 per cent of those given settlement rights were from Africa, Asia and the Indian sub-continent, with a further 20 per cent from North and South America and European states outside the European Economic Area. Sudden increases of people being granted settlement were recorded from a number of areas, including a rise of almost 100 per cent in citizens of Asian countries outside the Indian sub-continent, a 37 per cent rise in nationals from African countries and a 20 per cent increase in nationals from the Indian sub-continent. In contrast, there was a decline of 22 per cent in settlement by citizens from European countries and a 2 per cent drop in those from North and South America."
THE DEADLY NHS
Equipment rule-breaking plus anaesthetist incompetence kill a healthy kid. And why did a cut finger need a general anyway? I have often had plastic surgery on my face done under a local! And no-one was penalized of course -- AND the abuses continue
Earlier this month, leading orthopaedic surgeon Simon Moyes, who put patients at risk of infections by re-using surgical equipment, escaped punishment after it was claimed such practices are widespread in the NHS due to cost cutting. It was news that shattered the Clowes family, whose nine-year-old son Tony died exactly five years ago this month after breathing apparatus was reused in what should have been a minor operation. Here, Tony's father George Clowes, 49, who works for a pharmaceutical company and lives in Dagenham with his wife Carol, a housewife and children Dion, 22 and Andrew, 13, explains why it's vital that lessons are learned.
He says: "After reading about Simon Moyes in the newspaper last week, I was left feeling as though I'd been run over by a truck. July is always a difficult month for my family and I because it marks the end of another year without our son Tony. And to hear at the same time that the very practices that killed our son are still going on was shattering. After Tony's death, we were promised that lessons would be learned, which, given this latest investigation, we find difficult to believe.
One of the consultants who gave evidence in support of Mr Moyes said it was common practice to reuse equipment because the NHS is so short of funds. To us, the thought of doctors still risking people's lives for the sake of a little penny pinching feels like a slur on Tony's memory. All fathers dote on their eldest son, and Tony was the apple of my eye. He was a caring boy, who enjoyed things like cooking and playing on his bike. He also had a thirst for knowledge, and I'd forever be finding him curled up on his bed with a book. At the time of his death, he was in perfect health. He wouldn't have ended up in hospital at all had he not lacerated his right index finger while trying to repair the chain of his bike.
I remember him coming rushing in from the garden that afternoon, in tears and covered in blood. After running his finger under the tap and seeing how deep the gash was, I decided to take him to our local A&E department at the King George hospital in Goodmayes, Essex. Tony cried all the way there but soon perked up at the sight of the hospital and the doctors. Because his wound was bleeding so heavily, we were rushed straight through to see a doctor and Tony was given a painkilling injection. When the doctors said they wanted to transfer Tony to the a specialist reconstructive department at the nearby Broomfield hospital in Chelmsford in an ambulance, he could barely contain his excitement and forgot all about his cut. He'd always wanted to go in an ambulance and thought the whole thing was a fantastic adventure. We arrived at Broomfield at about 5.30pm. At that point, I was expecting they'd stitch Tony's finger back up and we'd be home in time for dinner.
But because there was no surgeon on duty, it was decided Tony would stay the night and be operated on the following morning. I offered to stay with him, but he'd spotted he had a computer and toys in his room, and confidently told me he'd be fine on his own. The next morning, I returned to the hospital while Carol stayed at home and looked after our grandson. Of course she would have been there too had we imagined anything serious would happen but we thought it was just a case of a Tony needing a few routine stitches. By the time I got there at around 8am, Tony was his usual chatty self, sitting up in bed and asking the doctor lots of questions about the anaesthetic. Then he asked me if I'd buy him the latest CD by Shaggy, to which I said yes. Tony went off for his operation at 9.30. I stayed with him in the theatre holding his hand until he was given the anaesthetic.
I said to him "See you in a hour son", kissed him on the forehead, then went off to get a cup of tea. Sitting on the chair next to Tony's bed in the ward, I had no idea that almost as soon as I'd left the room, he had encountered difficulties. I had no idea that as I flicked casually through magazines, doctors were struggling to save Tony's life. I thought in a couple of hours, Tony would be ready to go home and would be chatting away about the welcome back dinner his mother was making him. The first I knew anything was wrong was about an hour later, when a doctor and his assistant came and found me and ushered me into a side room. He looked at me and said "I don't know how to tell you this but there's been an absolute disaster."
Then he said that Tony had died. It was impossible to take in what they told me next. I listened in total disbelief as they told me that they'd discovered Tony wasn't getting any oxygen through the breathing tube they'd put down his throat while he was under the general anaesthetic. At first, after checking the breathing equipment and discovering it was all fine, they'd thought he'd had an allergic reaction to the anaesthetic drug. So they'd started injecting him with a cocktail of other drugs, including adrenaline, in order to counter the anaesthetic.
It was only after other senior anaesthetists had rushed in to examine Tony, that one of the doctors finally lifted Tony's mask and discovered one of the connectors inside it had slipped into the tubing and was blocking the airflow. Tony had suffocated to death.
I can't even begin to describe how I felt in that moment. For a start, I couldn't take it in. How could he have died as a result of a simple operation to put a few stitches in his finger? How was it possible that just an hour ago, Tony was his usual chatty and relaxed self and now he was dead? And how could they have not noticed a tube was blocked and suffocating? I don't know whether I screamed or shouted or cried. But I do remember struggling to breathe. All I wanted to do at first was see Tony. The doctors wanted to phone Carol, but I told them I'd go home and tell her myself after I'd seen my son. I remember walking along a corridor in a total haze.
I felt like pushing aside all the doctors and nurses we passed on the way so I could just get to my son, but everyone stood aside to let me walk through. I think they all already knew what had happened. Looking at Tony lying on the bed, it was impossible to believe he was gone. He looked as though he was just asleep. I half expected him to jump up, put his arms around my neck and tell me it the whole thing was some sort of joke. But it was obvious from the way the two doctors were acting, staying right by my side the entire time, ushering me up back stairs away from all the other patients and not even giving me a moment alone to gather my thoughts, that this wasn't a joke.
I could tell straight away that they knew they'd done something terribly wrong. Looking back on it, I think they were worried I'd run into the wards screaming "These two have killed my boy!" which is why they were keeping such a close eye on me. They senior doctor and his administrator even came in the taxi with me home, and stood right by my side as I walked into the house and told Carol what had happened. Like me, she also struggled to believe anything had gone so wrong. When I said to her that something awful had happened, her first thought was that they'd cut Tony's finger off, not that he was dead. Stunned, Carol and I returned to the hospital, taking Andrew and Dion with us too. We went to see Tony again. We were all too shocked to even cry and just felt totally numb.
I was also taken to see the hospital coroner, who explained to me that the police had already sealed off the operating theatre and started an investigation. His words were a blur to me though - it was far too soon for me to start thinking about a possible medical negligence case. That night, after telling the rest of our family, we sat at home and sobbed. Tony should have been back there with us chatting away about his bike and his books as usual. Instead, we were now thinking about burying him. Tony's funeral took place two weeks after his death. There was a great turn out - everyone from his headmaster to his shocked school friends and we played two tunes from the Shaggy CD Tony had asked for just before his death.
As well as grief, I think everyone there was united by a total sense of disbelief. Tony's death led to a major police operation, Operation Orcadian, during which detectives looked at 13 similar but non-fatal cases all over the country involving blocked oxygen tubes. Three members of hospital staff were arrested over the incident and a file was submitted to the Crown Prosecution Service, but in July 2002 detectives said the boy's death was not the result of a criminal act. Instead they blamed sloppy working practises by NHS staff.
In each of these 14 cases including Tony's, a tiny piece of plastic used to connect anaesthetic tubing to a patient's face mask had become wedged inside the point where the two connect where it was difficult to see. Apparently this resulted from the equipment being washed and then left jumbled up in drawers. This is despite strict guidelines issued in 2000 by the Medical Devices Agency (MDA) that breathing equipment should be used only once and then binned.
In May 2003, a jury inquest at Chelmsford Coroner's Court returned a verdict of `accident contributed to by system neglect'. The foreman of the jury cited factors including `inadequate guidelines, failure to ensure the patency of all ancillary equipment and failure to follow guidelines concerning single-use medical devices' as causes. David Scott, the consultant anaesthetist who investigated the case, told the inquest that Tony would probably have lived if doctors had disconnected the equipment and given him mouth-to-mouth resuscitation. It devastated us that his life could have been saved so easily.
Although the inquest did condemn the hospital, both Carol and I would have been happier had the individuals who attended to Tony on the day been held accountable. We still can't believe not only did they break guidelines but they didn't do something as basic as mouth-to-mouth which would have saved his life. And no verdict could really offer us consolation for Tony's death. At the time, we were told by spokes people from the hospitals concerned that changes would be put in place and equipment would no longer be reused. It was the hope that lessons had been learned that gave us some comfort and consolation during those dark days and months that followed Tony's death. That is why the recent case matters to me so much. If doctors continue to get away with such behaviour, then there will be little incentive for them to change their ways and more people will die as a result of NHS budgetary constraints.
Even five years on, we still miss Tony desperately. There is still a gaping hole in this family and although we have days now when we're able to laugh, we will never be as happy as we once were. That is why I will carry on the fight to see doctors give up their shoddy cost-cutting ways. If I don't, then Tony's death will have been in vain and he'll become just another statistic."
Source. (HT Bizzy Blog).
Update
Below is an email received from a reader who is an anaesthiologist in a U.S. public hospital:
Local anesthesia can also be dangerous, or fatal, in the wrong hands. This boy was in the wrong hands. We have separate "ambu bags" to ventilate patients. If the machine malfunctions, we reach for the ambu bag, ventilate the patient, and then troubleshoot the machine. We have "pulse oximeters" to measure oxygen in the skin, and "end tidal carbon dioxide" to measure ventilation. Alarms are set to go offf if these become abnormal, as would occur if the ventilation circuit was blocked. In addition, the anesthetist should be observing the patient - obviously not the case here. The time of neglect must have been significant. A healthy patient has enough "reserve" oxygen that it would take a number of minutes to die even if the oxygen supply was cut off. In the USA, this would be negligence - plain and simple - and a multi million dollar out of court settlement.
Equipment rule-breaking plus anaesthetist incompetence kill a healthy kid. And why did a cut finger need a general anyway? I have often had plastic surgery on my face done under a local! And no-one was penalized of course -- AND the abuses continue
Earlier this month, leading orthopaedic surgeon Simon Moyes, who put patients at risk of infections by re-using surgical equipment, escaped punishment after it was claimed such practices are widespread in the NHS due to cost cutting. It was news that shattered the Clowes family, whose nine-year-old son Tony died exactly five years ago this month after breathing apparatus was reused in what should have been a minor operation. Here, Tony's father George Clowes, 49, who works for a pharmaceutical company and lives in Dagenham with his wife Carol, a housewife and children Dion, 22 and Andrew, 13, explains why it's vital that lessons are learned.
He says: "After reading about Simon Moyes in the newspaper last week, I was left feeling as though I'd been run over by a truck. July is always a difficult month for my family and I because it marks the end of another year without our son Tony. And to hear at the same time that the very practices that killed our son are still going on was shattering. After Tony's death, we were promised that lessons would be learned, which, given this latest investigation, we find difficult to believe.
One of the consultants who gave evidence in support of Mr Moyes said it was common practice to reuse equipment because the NHS is so short of funds. To us, the thought of doctors still risking people's lives for the sake of a little penny pinching feels like a slur on Tony's memory. All fathers dote on their eldest son, and Tony was the apple of my eye. He was a caring boy, who enjoyed things like cooking and playing on his bike. He also had a thirst for knowledge, and I'd forever be finding him curled up on his bed with a book. At the time of his death, he was in perfect health. He wouldn't have ended up in hospital at all had he not lacerated his right index finger while trying to repair the chain of his bike.
I remember him coming rushing in from the garden that afternoon, in tears and covered in blood. After running his finger under the tap and seeing how deep the gash was, I decided to take him to our local A&E department at the King George hospital in Goodmayes, Essex. Tony cried all the way there but soon perked up at the sight of the hospital and the doctors. Because his wound was bleeding so heavily, we were rushed straight through to see a doctor and Tony was given a painkilling injection. When the doctors said they wanted to transfer Tony to the a specialist reconstructive department at the nearby Broomfield hospital in Chelmsford in an ambulance, he could barely contain his excitement and forgot all about his cut. He'd always wanted to go in an ambulance and thought the whole thing was a fantastic adventure. We arrived at Broomfield at about 5.30pm. At that point, I was expecting they'd stitch Tony's finger back up and we'd be home in time for dinner.
But because there was no surgeon on duty, it was decided Tony would stay the night and be operated on the following morning. I offered to stay with him, but he'd spotted he had a computer and toys in his room, and confidently told me he'd be fine on his own. The next morning, I returned to the hospital while Carol stayed at home and looked after our grandson. Of course she would have been there too had we imagined anything serious would happen but we thought it was just a case of a Tony needing a few routine stitches. By the time I got there at around 8am, Tony was his usual chatty self, sitting up in bed and asking the doctor lots of questions about the anaesthetic. Then he asked me if I'd buy him the latest CD by Shaggy, to which I said yes. Tony went off for his operation at 9.30. I stayed with him in the theatre holding his hand until he was given the anaesthetic.
I said to him "See you in a hour son", kissed him on the forehead, then went off to get a cup of tea. Sitting on the chair next to Tony's bed in the ward, I had no idea that almost as soon as I'd left the room, he had encountered difficulties. I had no idea that as I flicked casually through magazines, doctors were struggling to save Tony's life. I thought in a couple of hours, Tony would be ready to go home and would be chatting away about the welcome back dinner his mother was making him. The first I knew anything was wrong was about an hour later, when a doctor and his assistant came and found me and ushered me into a side room. He looked at me and said "I don't know how to tell you this but there's been an absolute disaster."
Then he said that Tony had died. It was impossible to take in what they told me next. I listened in total disbelief as they told me that they'd discovered Tony wasn't getting any oxygen through the breathing tube they'd put down his throat while he was under the general anaesthetic. At first, after checking the breathing equipment and discovering it was all fine, they'd thought he'd had an allergic reaction to the anaesthetic drug. So they'd started injecting him with a cocktail of other drugs, including adrenaline, in order to counter the anaesthetic.
It was only after other senior anaesthetists had rushed in to examine Tony, that one of the doctors finally lifted Tony's mask and discovered one of the connectors inside it had slipped into the tubing and was blocking the airflow. Tony had suffocated to death.
I can't even begin to describe how I felt in that moment. For a start, I couldn't take it in. How could he have died as a result of a simple operation to put a few stitches in his finger? How was it possible that just an hour ago, Tony was his usual chatty and relaxed self and now he was dead? And how could they have not noticed a tube was blocked and suffocating? I don't know whether I screamed or shouted or cried. But I do remember struggling to breathe. All I wanted to do at first was see Tony. The doctors wanted to phone Carol, but I told them I'd go home and tell her myself after I'd seen my son. I remember walking along a corridor in a total haze.
I felt like pushing aside all the doctors and nurses we passed on the way so I could just get to my son, but everyone stood aside to let me walk through. I think they all already knew what had happened. Looking at Tony lying on the bed, it was impossible to believe he was gone. He looked as though he was just asleep. I half expected him to jump up, put his arms around my neck and tell me it the whole thing was some sort of joke. But it was obvious from the way the two doctors were acting, staying right by my side the entire time, ushering me up back stairs away from all the other patients and not even giving me a moment alone to gather my thoughts, that this wasn't a joke.
I could tell straight away that they knew they'd done something terribly wrong. Looking back on it, I think they were worried I'd run into the wards screaming "These two have killed my boy!" which is why they were keeping such a close eye on me. They senior doctor and his administrator even came in the taxi with me home, and stood right by my side as I walked into the house and told Carol what had happened. Like me, she also struggled to believe anything had gone so wrong. When I said to her that something awful had happened, her first thought was that they'd cut Tony's finger off, not that he was dead. Stunned, Carol and I returned to the hospital, taking Andrew and Dion with us too. We went to see Tony again. We were all too shocked to even cry and just felt totally numb.
I was also taken to see the hospital coroner, who explained to me that the police had already sealed off the operating theatre and started an investigation. His words were a blur to me though - it was far too soon for me to start thinking about a possible medical negligence case. That night, after telling the rest of our family, we sat at home and sobbed. Tony should have been back there with us chatting away about his bike and his books as usual. Instead, we were now thinking about burying him. Tony's funeral took place two weeks after his death. There was a great turn out - everyone from his headmaster to his shocked school friends and we played two tunes from the Shaggy CD Tony had asked for just before his death.
As well as grief, I think everyone there was united by a total sense of disbelief. Tony's death led to a major police operation, Operation Orcadian, during which detectives looked at 13 similar but non-fatal cases all over the country involving blocked oxygen tubes. Three members of hospital staff were arrested over the incident and a file was submitted to the Crown Prosecution Service, but in July 2002 detectives said the boy's death was not the result of a criminal act. Instead they blamed sloppy working practises by NHS staff.
In each of these 14 cases including Tony's, a tiny piece of plastic used to connect anaesthetic tubing to a patient's face mask had become wedged inside the point where the two connect where it was difficult to see. Apparently this resulted from the equipment being washed and then left jumbled up in drawers. This is despite strict guidelines issued in 2000 by the Medical Devices Agency (MDA) that breathing equipment should be used only once and then binned.
In May 2003, a jury inquest at Chelmsford Coroner's Court returned a verdict of `accident contributed to by system neglect'. The foreman of the jury cited factors including `inadequate guidelines, failure to ensure the patency of all ancillary equipment and failure to follow guidelines concerning single-use medical devices' as causes. David Scott, the consultant anaesthetist who investigated the case, told the inquest that Tony would probably have lived if doctors had disconnected the equipment and given him mouth-to-mouth resuscitation. It devastated us that his life could have been saved so easily.
Although the inquest did condemn the hospital, both Carol and I would have been happier had the individuals who attended to Tony on the day been held accountable. We still can't believe not only did they break guidelines but they didn't do something as basic as mouth-to-mouth which would have saved his life. And no verdict could really offer us consolation for Tony's death. At the time, we were told by spokes people from the hospitals concerned that changes would be put in place and equipment would no longer be reused. It was the hope that lessons had been learned that gave us some comfort and consolation during those dark days and months that followed Tony's death. That is why the recent case matters to me so much. If doctors continue to get away with such behaviour, then there will be little incentive for them to change their ways and more people will die as a result of NHS budgetary constraints.
Even five years on, we still miss Tony desperately. There is still a gaping hole in this family and although we have days now when we're able to laugh, we will never be as happy as we once were. That is why I will carry on the fight to see doctors give up their shoddy cost-cutting ways. If I don't, then Tony's death will have been in vain and he'll become just another statistic."
Source. (HT Bizzy Blog).
Update
Below is an email received from a reader who is an anaesthiologist in a U.S. public hospital:
Local anesthesia can also be dangerous, or fatal, in the wrong hands. This boy was in the wrong hands. We have separate "ambu bags" to ventilate patients. If the machine malfunctions, we reach for the ambu bag, ventilate the patient, and then troubleshoot the machine. We have "pulse oximeters" to measure oxygen in the skin, and "end tidal carbon dioxide" to measure ventilation. Alarms are set to go offf if these become abnormal, as would occur if the ventilation circuit was blocked. In addition, the anesthetist should be observing the patient - obviously not the case here. The time of neglect must have been significant. A healthy patient has enough "reserve" oxygen that it would take a number of minutes to die even if the oxygen supply was cut off. In the USA, this would be negligence - plain and simple - and a multi million dollar out of court settlement.
Top British Cop Rejects Racism Charge
Still some realism in the British police
We read:
Still some realism in the British police
We read:
"The claim that Muslims are discriminated against by the police is undermining the fight against terrorism, a senior Scotland Yard officer has said. Chief Superintendent Simon Humphrey said it is 'wholly unacceptable' to paint Asians as victims and accused police chiefs who do so of undermining the efforts of their colleagues....
Mr Humphrey's sharp rebuke carries particular weight because he speaks on behalf of 330 Met superintendents. His comments appeared to show the majority of senior officers agree with public support for profiling... He told the Daily Mail: ' Unfortunately a small, extremely vocal and potentially very influential minority are trying to hijack the terrorism issue and turn it into a debate on racism. 'They are undermining the objectives of the organisation and rank and file officers who are doing their utmost to police fairly...
'It is wholly unacceptable to continue to portray the Asian community as victims.... 'What is essentially an operational policing issue should not be turned into a debate about race and religion. Although these feature as part of a complex backdrop, let's not lose sight of the fact that this is about criminality and mass murder.'
Source
Wednesday, August 23, 2006
COMPULSORY WOMEN'S FOOTBALL IN SCOTLAND
Ministers are putting pressure on the Scottish Football Association to penalise Scotland's top football clubs if they do not form women's teams. The Scottish executive has reacted to suggestions that important teams are "living in the dark ages" by calling for the development of the women's game to be a condition of the club being licensed by the game's ruling body.
Films such as Bend it Like Beckham, which starred Keira Knightley and ER's Parminder Nagra, have helped to make the sport one of the fastest growing in the country, with 4,000 registered players in youth and senior teams. The Scotland women's squad has risen to 17th in Europe and 29th in the world, but only a handful of clubs, including Aberdeen and Kilmarnock, provide support for the game. Julie Fleeting, the Scotland women's captain, played professional football in the USA women's league before joining Arsenal because there was little scope in Scotland.
Ministers say Scotland's male-dominated senior clubs must support moves to create teams for women or face disciplinary action. Sanctions could include a ban on clubs taking part in European competitions or a refusal to issue grants to the clubs. Their intervention follows a warning earlier this month from a top women's football official, who accused SPL clubs of "living in the dark ages". Maureen McGonigle, the executive administrator of Scottish Women's Football (SWF), said moves to get the top clubs in Scotland to form female teams, mirroring successful efforts south of the border, had so far failed. "A bomb needs to be put under these archaic men. There are clubs who have empty seats week in and week out and they have to start encouraging women to be there," she said recently. "How do you do that? You can start a women's team and show that you are not living in the dark ages . . . There are mothers, daughters, sisters who want to play football."
In England, clubs including Chelsea, Everton and Fulham, have established women's sides which compete in FA-backed league and cup competition. Patricia Ferguson, minister for culture, sport and tourism, claims senior Scottish clubs have a crucial role in promoting wider access and involvement for women. Asked whether the SFA should force clubs to integrate girls' and women's soccer into their community football and player development structures, she said: "Yes. We would also wish to have as soon as practicable a demonstrable commitment to women and girls' football as a condition in the performance club grant scheme". Ferguson wants the requirement added to a list of conditions clubs must abide by under the SFA licensing system.
Making a commitment to women's football mandatory is expected to be resisted by some clubs whose resources for the game are already stretched. Bill Aitken, a Scottish Tory MSP, branded the idea "ridiculous". He said: "I would encourage football clubs to form women football teams and support women's football generally. But this is totally over the top and it appears that Scotland is rapidly becoming a country where compulsion replaces encouragement."
Source
Ministers are putting pressure on the Scottish Football Association to penalise Scotland's top football clubs if they do not form women's teams. The Scottish executive has reacted to suggestions that important teams are "living in the dark ages" by calling for the development of the women's game to be a condition of the club being licensed by the game's ruling body.
Films such as Bend it Like Beckham, which starred Keira Knightley and ER's Parminder Nagra, have helped to make the sport one of the fastest growing in the country, with 4,000 registered players in youth and senior teams. The Scotland women's squad has risen to 17th in Europe and 29th in the world, but only a handful of clubs, including Aberdeen and Kilmarnock, provide support for the game. Julie Fleeting, the Scotland women's captain, played professional football in the USA women's league before joining Arsenal because there was little scope in Scotland.
Ministers say Scotland's male-dominated senior clubs must support moves to create teams for women or face disciplinary action. Sanctions could include a ban on clubs taking part in European competitions or a refusal to issue grants to the clubs. Their intervention follows a warning earlier this month from a top women's football official, who accused SPL clubs of "living in the dark ages". Maureen McGonigle, the executive administrator of Scottish Women's Football (SWF), said moves to get the top clubs in Scotland to form female teams, mirroring successful efforts south of the border, had so far failed. "A bomb needs to be put under these archaic men. There are clubs who have empty seats week in and week out and they have to start encouraging women to be there," she said recently. "How do you do that? You can start a women's team and show that you are not living in the dark ages . . . There are mothers, daughters, sisters who want to play football."
In England, clubs including Chelsea, Everton and Fulham, have established women's sides which compete in FA-backed league and cup competition. Patricia Ferguson, minister for culture, sport and tourism, claims senior Scottish clubs have a crucial role in promoting wider access and involvement for women. Asked whether the SFA should force clubs to integrate girls' and women's soccer into their community football and player development structures, she said: "Yes. We would also wish to have as soon as practicable a demonstrable commitment to women and girls' football as a condition in the performance club grant scheme". Ferguson wants the requirement added to a list of conditions clubs must abide by under the SFA licensing system.
Making a commitment to women's football mandatory is expected to be resisted by some clubs whose resources for the game are already stretched. Bill Aitken, a Scottish Tory MSP, branded the idea "ridiculous". He said: "I would encourage football clubs to form women football teams and support women's football generally. But this is totally over the top and it appears that Scotland is rapidly becoming a country where compulsion replaces encouragement."
Source
BRITISH SCIENCE EDUCATION DUMBED DOWN
Recently, the Belfast newspaper the Irish News, not renowned for its education coverage, devoted three pages to the decline of traditional science in schools. The piece echoed fears already voiced on this side of the Irish Sea that two of the examination boards offering the new GCSE courses starting next month will use multiple-choice tests to account for between 75 and 60 per cent of the marks awarded. There is little support for this move. According to Jonathan Osborne, professor of science education at King's College London: `They are doing this to save money because computers can mark the papers.'
Boris Johnson, the Conservative MP, became an unlikely protagonist in the debate over school science when he wrote an article in the Observer mourning the decline of the `crunchier subjects such as the sciences, maths and languages'. This was followed by a rapid stream of cogent replies posted on the Observer website. I counted 76 pages of postings from a wide range of people. It seems that Johnson's claim that `some testing academic subjects are being ghettoised in the independent sector and grammar schools' touched a nerve.
On the face of it, the problem facing science education is simple: how do we get more young people interested in studying science at school and university? The trouble is, the answers being offered are poles apart - and there is too little emphasis on valuing specialist science subjects as a distinct body of knowledge worth teaching to a new generation.
In Science and Innovation Framework 2004-2014: Next Steps, published in March 2006, the New Labour government put the case for more specialist science teachers and a turn away from integrated science teaching to the teaching of separate science subjects. The Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA), on the other hand, has just introduced a new framework for teaching integrated science at GCSE level, which takes us even further away from teaching the sciences as distinct disciplines: physics, chemistry and biology. It would seem the government has a difference of opinion with its own educational authority on how to go about solving this problem.
It was something of a relief, then, to read the latest report by Professor Alan Smithers and Dr Pamela Robinson of Buckingham University. This is their second of three reports tracking the decline of physics as a school subject. They have carried out this survey to show that it is `important that policies should be grounded in the numerical picture'. Their report highlights the decline of both student uptake of physics at school (A-level entries down 35 per cent since 1990) and university (17 major physics departments closed between 1994 and 2004). It also flags up the problem of supplying enough specialist teachers to sustain physics as a school subject - only 1 in 8 science teacher trainees have a physics degree.
Their account of the decline of physics has come at a time when the government seems to have recognised the need to promote the hard sciences. The government has laid down ambitious targets for the recruitment of specialist subject teachers and encouragement of more students to study A-levels in physics, chemistry and mathematics. This is tied to efforts to promote the subjects at university. Part of the government's agenda is to promise every pupil the entitlement to study three separate sciences at GCSE if they achieve level 6 at Key Stage 3 from 2008. This represents a substantial extension of current provision; currently only eight per cent of students sit the separate science examinations, and even fewer within the state sector. GCSE physics teaching is now very much the preserve of the grammar schools and the independent sector. It is unclear how the government intends to increase separate science provision.
Bizarrely, at the same time as the government is prioritising separate science teaching in schools, the QCA is doing the opposite, introducing a new science programme of study at GCSE which dictates that all science GCSE courses from September 2006 must include an emphasis on `scientific literacy' for at least the equivalent of one GCSE or 50 per cent of a typical double-science GCSE course.
This shift towards citizen science goes much further than the current double-science integrated course in distancing itself from traditional physics, chemistry and biology teaching. Teaching `scientific literacy' looks at science in the news, especially in relation to controversies about the use of science and technology. This approach places a big emphasis on debate and discussion about the ethics of using science. Rather than teaching through laboratory experiments, the new science is more like media studies, with an emphasis on textual analysis and the identification of bias in the accounting of stories about science. The aim is to create a `critically aware' consumer rather than a future scientist.
The two approaches to science education could not be more dissimilar. Both claim to be able to promote a wider take-up of school science and to counter the decline in the study of the physical sciences at university. But it's difficult to see how we can go in both directions at once.
Smithers and Robinson, in looking at the historic decline of physics, may have given us enough ammunition to make up our own minds about which approach makes most sense - more separate science teaching or a new integrated science approach. As they explain, the decline in physics massively accelerated in the period after the introduction of the present combined science GCSEs or double-science course. Between 1990 and 1996 the decline in A-level physics entries was on average 2.5 times the current decline. This occurred mainly in the state sector outside the grammar and independent schools. Physics as a separate subject was even more popular under the old O-level system. At its peak there were nearly four times the number doing O-level physics than the current number doing GCSE physics. The introduction of double-science GCSE was meant to encourage the take up of physics, especially among girls. However, physics is still predominantly a male discipline with only 22.4 per cent of the total taking A-level physics being female.
So, the introduction of integrated science did nothing to halt the decline in physics as a school subject; it in fact accelerated that decline. This does not bode well for the introduction of the new science GCSE courses that are being promoted as a way of encouraging the take-up of science post-16.
The truth is that well-qualified and enthusiastic subject teachers make a massive difference to the chances of students doing well at school. As Smithers and Robinson argued in their first report: `Teachers' expertise in physics.is the second most powerful predictor of pupil achievement in GCSE and A-level physics.'
Concentrating on introducing a `scientific literacy' course can only be a distraction from what we really need - which is to encourage subject specialist teachers into the profession and value them for what they can teach young people. At my school, we have taken the decision to enter all our pupils for separate science GCSEs in physics, chemistry and biology. We hope that by valuing the subjects we teach as distinct and coherent bodies of knowledge, we can give subject specialist teachers the chance to really enthuse the pupils in the subject they studied. If we want to encourage young people to take up the sciences, surely this is a risk worth taking?
Source
MALE TEACHER DROUGHT IN BRITAIN TOO
Any guy who becomes a teacher these days is taking a big risk from false accusations etc. Prof. Rod Morgan, the British government's senior advisor on youth crime, is chairman of the Youth Justice Board
The decline in the number of male primary school teachers is aggravating the problem posed by the growing proportion of children who have no father figure to influence them at home, Rod Morgan told The Times.
The percentage of male teachers in primary schools in England and Wales fell from 25 per cent in 1970 to 15.7 per cent in 2004.
Mr Morgan said: "I think this is tricky territory and I have not come to any conclusion, but if an increasing proportion of young children are growing up in a single- parent household where there is an absence of a father figure, and if they are going to schools where there is a sing-ular absence of male figures, that does strike me as being a rather ill-balanced framework. "One of the things that magistrates complain to me about is that if children and young people come before the youth court it is rare to see a father present."
Source
Recently, the Belfast newspaper the Irish News, not renowned for its education coverage, devoted three pages to the decline of traditional science in schools. The piece echoed fears already voiced on this side of the Irish Sea that two of the examination boards offering the new GCSE courses starting next month will use multiple-choice tests to account for between 75 and 60 per cent of the marks awarded. There is little support for this move. According to Jonathan Osborne, professor of science education at King's College London: `They are doing this to save money because computers can mark the papers.'
Boris Johnson, the Conservative MP, became an unlikely protagonist in the debate over school science when he wrote an article in the Observer mourning the decline of the `crunchier subjects such as the sciences, maths and languages'. This was followed by a rapid stream of cogent replies posted on the Observer website. I counted 76 pages of postings from a wide range of people. It seems that Johnson's claim that `some testing academic subjects are being ghettoised in the independent sector and grammar schools' touched a nerve.
On the face of it, the problem facing science education is simple: how do we get more young people interested in studying science at school and university? The trouble is, the answers being offered are poles apart - and there is too little emphasis on valuing specialist science subjects as a distinct body of knowledge worth teaching to a new generation.
In Science and Innovation Framework 2004-2014: Next Steps, published in March 2006, the New Labour government put the case for more specialist science teachers and a turn away from integrated science teaching to the teaching of separate science subjects. The Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA), on the other hand, has just introduced a new framework for teaching integrated science at GCSE level, which takes us even further away from teaching the sciences as distinct disciplines: physics, chemistry and biology. It would seem the government has a difference of opinion with its own educational authority on how to go about solving this problem.
It was something of a relief, then, to read the latest report by Professor Alan Smithers and Dr Pamela Robinson of Buckingham University. This is their second of three reports tracking the decline of physics as a school subject. They have carried out this survey to show that it is `important that policies should be grounded in the numerical picture'. Their report highlights the decline of both student uptake of physics at school (A-level entries down 35 per cent since 1990) and university (17 major physics departments closed between 1994 and 2004). It also flags up the problem of supplying enough specialist teachers to sustain physics as a school subject - only 1 in 8 science teacher trainees have a physics degree.
Their account of the decline of physics has come at a time when the government seems to have recognised the need to promote the hard sciences. The government has laid down ambitious targets for the recruitment of specialist subject teachers and encouragement of more students to study A-levels in physics, chemistry and mathematics. This is tied to efforts to promote the subjects at university. Part of the government's agenda is to promise every pupil the entitlement to study three separate sciences at GCSE if they achieve level 6 at Key Stage 3 from 2008. This represents a substantial extension of current provision; currently only eight per cent of students sit the separate science examinations, and even fewer within the state sector. GCSE physics teaching is now very much the preserve of the grammar schools and the independent sector. It is unclear how the government intends to increase separate science provision.
Bizarrely, at the same time as the government is prioritising separate science teaching in schools, the QCA is doing the opposite, introducing a new science programme of study at GCSE which dictates that all science GCSE courses from September 2006 must include an emphasis on `scientific literacy' for at least the equivalent of one GCSE or 50 per cent of a typical double-science GCSE course.
This shift towards citizen science goes much further than the current double-science integrated course in distancing itself from traditional physics, chemistry and biology teaching. Teaching `scientific literacy' looks at science in the news, especially in relation to controversies about the use of science and technology. This approach places a big emphasis on debate and discussion about the ethics of using science. Rather than teaching through laboratory experiments, the new science is more like media studies, with an emphasis on textual analysis and the identification of bias in the accounting of stories about science. The aim is to create a `critically aware' consumer rather than a future scientist.
The two approaches to science education could not be more dissimilar. Both claim to be able to promote a wider take-up of school science and to counter the decline in the study of the physical sciences at university. But it's difficult to see how we can go in both directions at once.
Smithers and Robinson, in looking at the historic decline of physics, may have given us enough ammunition to make up our own minds about which approach makes most sense - more separate science teaching or a new integrated science approach. As they explain, the decline in physics massively accelerated in the period after the introduction of the present combined science GCSEs or double-science course. Between 1990 and 1996 the decline in A-level physics entries was on average 2.5 times the current decline. This occurred mainly in the state sector outside the grammar and independent schools. Physics as a separate subject was even more popular under the old O-level system. At its peak there were nearly four times the number doing O-level physics than the current number doing GCSE physics. The introduction of double-science GCSE was meant to encourage the take up of physics, especially among girls. However, physics is still predominantly a male discipline with only 22.4 per cent of the total taking A-level physics being female.
So, the introduction of integrated science did nothing to halt the decline in physics as a school subject; it in fact accelerated that decline. This does not bode well for the introduction of the new science GCSE courses that are being promoted as a way of encouraging the take-up of science post-16.
The truth is that well-qualified and enthusiastic subject teachers make a massive difference to the chances of students doing well at school. As Smithers and Robinson argued in their first report: `Teachers' expertise in physics.is the second most powerful predictor of pupil achievement in GCSE and A-level physics.'
Concentrating on introducing a `scientific literacy' course can only be a distraction from what we really need - which is to encourage subject specialist teachers into the profession and value them for what they can teach young people. At my school, we have taken the decision to enter all our pupils for separate science GCSEs in physics, chemistry and biology. We hope that by valuing the subjects we teach as distinct and coherent bodies of knowledge, we can give subject specialist teachers the chance to really enthuse the pupils in the subject they studied. If we want to encourage young people to take up the sciences, surely this is a risk worth taking?
Source
MALE TEACHER DROUGHT IN BRITAIN TOO
Any guy who becomes a teacher these days is taking a big risk from false accusations etc. Prof. Rod Morgan, the British government's senior advisor on youth crime, is chairman of the Youth Justice Board
The decline in the number of male primary school teachers is aggravating the problem posed by the growing proportion of children who have no father figure to influence them at home, Rod Morgan told The Times.
The percentage of male teachers in primary schools in England and Wales fell from 25 per cent in 1970 to 15.7 per cent in 2004.
Mr Morgan said: "I think this is tricky territory and I have not come to any conclusion, but if an increasing proportion of young children are growing up in a single- parent household where there is an absence of a father figure, and if they are going to schools where there is a sing-ular absence of male figures, that does strike me as being a rather ill-balanced framework. "One of the things that magistrates complain to me about is that if children and young people come before the youth court it is rare to see a father present."
Source
SADLY MISDIAGNOSED BRITS
And an arrogant government doesn't care
For more than two decades, John Simper was resigned to a slow and painful death from multiple sclerosis. Unable to work or drive, plagued by recurrent headaches, bouts of confusion, short-term memory loss and weakness in his limbs, he feared that he would end up paralysed and in a wheelchair. Today he feels mentally and physically stronger than he has in years, after being told that MS was almost certainly misdiagnosed. Instead he has an illness that can be treated with an aspirin a day.
He is one of hundreds who may have had MS, the progressive disease of the nervous system, misdiagnosed. At least 5 per cent of those told that they have MS are believed instead to have Hughes syndrome, which results in the blood becoming thick and sticky and liable to clot dangerously. Patients in whom MS was diagnosed - the disease affects about 85,000 people in Britain - have experienced seemingly miraculous recoveries on learning the true cause of their illness, in some cases after decades of ignorance. Paralysed patients have regained the ability to walk and others have overcome debilitation, headaches, confusion and short-term memory loss with treatments involving blood-thinning drugs such as aspirin and warfarin.
Mr Simper, 60, from Ipswich, a former motorcycle racer and mechanic, went to his GP after reading about Hughes syndrome in a magazine. Recognising his symptoms in the article, he asked his GP for extra tests. They showed that he had Hughes. He is campaigning to increase awareness of the condition. "I've got used to the idea of MS over the last 26 years. I've always been someone who wants what I want when I want it and I have not let my condition get in the way of that," he said. "But people are needlessly suffering because they don't know the truth about their illnesses, and the Government has to take notice of that." An estimated 150,000 people in Britain suffer from the syndrome, first reported by Graham Hughes in the British Medical Journal in 1983. It has since been confirmed as the cause of one in five recurrent miscarriages, one in five strokes in younger people and one in five deep vein thromboses.
Yet Dr Hughes, now a professor at the London Lupus Centre, says that few GPs are alert to the condition and lives are still being ruined because simple tests are not offered as a matter of routine. "It is still totally under-recognised. People have been told they have MS and treated as such yet received no benefit, and the true cause has been under our nose the whole time," he said.
Hazel Edwards, 48, a mother of two from Wrexham, North Wales, was paralysed from the neck down and received no benefit from chemotherapy and intravenous steroids after MS was diagnosed in 2001. She can now walk again, after a diagnosis from Dr Hughes. "As soon as I started warfarin, my memory improved and I found I could walk," she said. "Professor Hughes and his team gave me back my life." She first suffered repeated miscarriages, memory loss, confusion and a loss of coordination 28 years ago.
The Department of Health was "not aware of any evidence that population screening would be beneficial". Yet a survey at the lupus centre indicated as many as 32 per cent of patients suffering from Hughes syndrome had been diagnosed wrongly or treated for MS. "The indications of MS and Hughes syndrome are extremely similar, even down to the MRI scans," Professor Hughes said. "They can be extremely difficult to diagnose, but a simple blood test can make all the difference." He recommends that two blood tests be offered routinely to any MS patient who has suffered recurrent headaches, problems with clots, a family history of autoimmune diseases, or who has had recurrent miscarriages
Source
And an arrogant government doesn't care
For more than two decades, John Simper was resigned to a slow and painful death from multiple sclerosis. Unable to work or drive, plagued by recurrent headaches, bouts of confusion, short-term memory loss and weakness in his limbs, he feared that he would end up paralysed and in a wheelchair. Today he feels mentally and physically stronger than he has in years, after being told that MS was almost certainly misdiagnosed. Instead he has an illness that can be treated with an aspirin a day.
He is one of hundreds who may have had MS, the progressive disease of the nervous system, misdiagnosed. At least 5 per cent of those told that they have MS are believed instead to have Hughes syndrome, which results in the blood becoming thick and sticky and liable to clot dangerously. Patients in whom MS was diagnosed - the disease affects about 85,000 people in Britain - have experienced seemingly miraculous recoveries on learning the true cause of their illness, in some cases after decades of ignorance. Paralysed patients have regained the ability to walk and others have overcome debilitation, headaches, confusion and short-term memory loss with treatments involving blood-thinning drugs such as aspirin and warfarin.
Mr Simper, 60, from Ipswich, a former motorcycle racer and mechanic, went to his GP after reading about Hughes syndrome in a magazine. Recognising his symptoms in the article, he asked his GP for extra tests. They showed that he had Hughes. He is campaigning to increase awareness of the condition. "I've got used to the idea of MS over the last 26 years. I've always been someone who wants what I want when I want it and I have not let my condition get in the way of that," he said. "But people are needlessly suffering because they don't know the truth about their illnesses, and the Government has to take notice of that." An estimated 150,000 people in Britain suffer from the syndrome, first reported by Graham Hughes in the British Medical Journal in 1983. It has since been confirmed as the cause of one in five recurrent miscarriages, one in five strokes in younger people and one in five deep vein thromboses.
Yet Dr Hughes, now a professor at the London Lupus Centre, says that few GPs are alert to the condition and lives are still being ruined because simple tests are not offered as a matter of routine. "It is still totally under-recognised. People have been told they have MS and treated as such yet received no benefit, and the true cause has been under our nose the whole time," he said.
Hazel Edwards, 48, a mother of two from Wrexham, North Wales, was paralysed from the neck down and received no benefit from chemotherapy and intravenous steroids after MS was diagnosed in 2001. She can now walk again, after a diagnosis from Dr Hughes. "As soon as I started warfarin, my memory improved and I found I could walk," she said. "Professor Hughes and his team gave me back my life." She first suffered repeated miscarriages, memory loss, confusion and a loss of coordination 28 years ago.
The Department of Health was "not aware of any evidence that population screening would be beneficial". Yet a survey at the lupus centre indicated as many as 32 per cent of patients suffering from Hughes syndrome had been diagnosed wrongly or treated for MS. "The indications of MS and Hughes syndrome are extremely similar, even down to the MRI scans," Professor Hughes said. "They can be extremely difficult to diagnose, but a simple blood test can make all the difference." He recommends that two blood tests be offered routinely to any MS patient who has suffered recurrent headaches, problems with clots, a family history of autoimmune diseases, or who has had recurrent miscarriages
Source
Curry good for headaches: "Eating curry may be a better cure for headaches than aspirin, according to research. A study funded by the Scottish Executive has found that salicylic acid, the active ingredient in aspirin, occurs naturally in Indian food and that curry could help to treat migraines and prevent colon cancers. Spices such as cumin, turmeric and paprika, all of which are used in curries, are particularly rich sources of salicylic acid, the study said. Neither does Indian food cause some side-effects sometimes associated with long-term aspirin use, such as internal bleeding and ulcers, the study, conducted by the Rowett Research Institute, found. "One portion of vindaloo we examined contained 95mg of salicylic acid, more than the amount in an aspirin tablet. A low-dose aspirin tablet contains about 65mg of the acid." Professor Garry Duthie, one of the study's co-authors, said: "The dietary level of salicylic acid in curry is exceptionally high. I wouldn't recommend a curry a day for headaches, but it is possible that someone with a headache who is a very good absorber of salicylic acid might find it went away if they had a vindaloo. "The hotter the curry is, the greater the possible benefits. A korma, with relatively low levels of spices, would be less effective than a vindaloo or a phal, the hottest curry widely available in Britain." It is thought that curcumin, the component of turmeric that gives curry its distinctive yellow colour, is primarily responsible for its healthy effect."
The Incorrect BBC
In a rare departure from form, the BBC is screening a movie called "Shoot the Messenger" that gives an apparently realistic picture of black British life -- with mention of black crime being prominent. It has therefore been accused of "stereotyping" blacks. But "stereotyping" implies that the picture given is fase -- when it clearly is not. The extraordinary high crime rate among people of African ancestry is incontrovertible. But apparently, you still must avoid mentioning it, even though the drama concerned was in fact written by a black writer. Details here
In a rare departure from form, the BBC is screening a movie called "Shoot the Messenger" that gives an apparently realistic picture of black British life -- with mention of black crime being prominent. It has therefore been accused of "stereotyping" blacks. But "stereotyping" implies that the picture given is fase -- when it clearly is not. The extraordinary high crime rate among people of African ancestry is incontrovertible. But apparently, you still must avoid mentioning it, even though the drama concerned was in fact written by a black writer. Details here
Tuesday, August 22, 2006
SUPER-CORRECT BRITISH COP TALKS THROUGH HIS ANUS AGAIN
London is returning to an era of neighbourliness and low crime in which people are happy to leave their front doors open, according to the country's most senior policeman. Sir Ian Blair, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, said the work of community-based Safer Neighbourhood Teams was making people feel as safe as they did 25 years ago.
He cited a recent visit to Haringey, North London, where he met two officers who had "adopted" a 19-storey tower block. "How long is it since police patrolled the corridors of a tower block?" Sir Ian asked. "It's as if, when the slums they replaced were flattened, the police stopped patrolling. People are opening their doors, leaving their doors open now, or leaving them unlocked, certainly, in a way they haven't done for 25 years."
In an interview with the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, published today, Sir Ian likened the leaders of the neighbourhood police teams to "the sheriff" keeping the peace on his patch. But the gaffe-prone commissioner's claims appear to be contradicted by local crime figures and his own force's crime prevention advice. In the year to July, Haringey police dealt with 2,834 burglaries of people's homes (54 per week) and 6,399 incidents of violence against the person. Crime in the borough, which includes the Broadwater Farm estate where a police officer died in rioting in 1985, is falling but there were still 33,138 incidents in the past year.
Far from telling people to leave their doors open, the Metropolitan Police website carries a wealth of information on how to make your front door more secure. The commissioner's comments provoked some surprise in Haringey, where his most recent visit, in July, was to inspect the work of a robbery squad. Local officers said they did not know which tower block Sir Ian was referring to. Damian Hockney, a member of the Metropolitan Police Authority, said that the commissioner's remarks were "truly extraordinary".
Neil Williams, Liberal Democrat leader on Haringey council, was also surprised by Sir Ian's remarks. "Community policing has brought enormous benefits in making people safer and encouraging them to report crime. But we shouldn't throw the baby out with the bath water, people still need to take sensible precautions with their home security and I'm sure the police officers in that area would say that, too."
Sir Ian, who is on holiday, has kept a relatively low profile in recent months after widespread criticism. He said recently that reports of his demise were premature.
Sir Ian's record:
February 2005
With street crime rising, Sir Ian Blair announces crackdown on dinner-party drug scene
July
Declares Met "gold standard" for anti-terrorism hours before 7/7 bombings. Later says shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes directly linked to anti-terrorist operation
November
Accused of politicising police in lobbying MPs for anti-terrorism Bill
January 2006
Forced to apologise after saying he could not understand why the Soham murders were such a big story
March
Apologises again after admitting taping phone call to the Attorney-General, and five other calls, without consent
June
Another apology for Forest Gate anti-terror raid in which man was shot, no evidence of terrorism found
Source
Some grassroots comments on Sir Ian's thoughts below:
The doors of Ermine House were firmly closed yesterday. Some of the flats had metal gates in front of them, others had cloth over the front door window to prevent prying. Lilian Heseltine, 69, has lived in the tower block in Tottenham, North London, for 30 years. "No way would I leave the door open, and I have never seen police patrolling inside the building," she said. "I'm not really happy here, but home is what you make of it and it is better than it was. I don't want to move."
The picture was similar at Stellar House, farther down the high road. A bored guard sat in reception monitoring his closed-circuit television screens and an entry phone had been installed to exclude non-residents. But it does not work, according to Sarah Elgar, 21. "You can get in if you don't live here," she said. "I see people smoking crack in the corridors and on the stairs. "I would never leave my door unlocked. Nobody that I know of does. The police don't patrol the building. The only time you see them they run past looking for someone. I was born in this area and the crime has got worse."
Laura Barrett, 38, a nurse whose motorbike was stolen recently, laughed at the suggestion that she would leave her door open or unlocked. "No way," she said.
Source
AMAZING! HOMOSEXUALS CAN DO WRONG IN BRITAIN?
At least their blatant hatred of Christians is being investigated
A criminal investigation has been started by Scotland Yard into an advertisement from the Gay Police Association (GPA) that blamed religion for a 74 per cent increase in homophobic crime. The Times has learnt that the inquiry into the advertisement, which was carried in The Independent, was ordered by the unit set up to counter hate crimes such as homophobia.
The advertisement depicted a Bible beside a pool of blood under the heading "In the name of the Father". It appeared in the newspaper's diversity supplement to coincide with the Europride event in London. It stated: "In the last 12 months the Gay Police Association has recorded a 74 per cent increase in homophobic incidents, where the sole or primary motivating factor was the religious belief of the perpetrator."
Scotland Yard has rejected the 74 per cent figure, which it said did not reflect its statistics. Detective Chief Inspector Gerry Campbell, who leads the domestic violence and hate crime unit, disclosed the investigation in a letter to Ann Widdecombe, the Conservative MP. He wrote: "The original advertisement has been recorded as a religiously aggravated hate crime incident following a crime allegation by a member of the public. "This crime is now the subject of a proportionate effective and objective criminal investigation. The police senior investigating officer is in consultation with the Crown Prosecution Service. Any decision to prosecute is the sole decision of the CPS."
The unit has referred the advertisement to the Directorate of Professional Standards at the Metropolitan Police. The Independent Police Complaints Commission has also been consulted.
Miss Widdecombe, a Christian who converted to Roman Catholicism in 1993, was angered by the advertisement. "It seems a deliberate attempt to stir up hate against Christians," she said. By using that famous line of worship, In The Name of the Father, the association is effectively alleging that Christians are solely responsible for hate crime. "The implication of this advertisement is that Christians stir up assault and abuse against homosexuals. "This is not true, as Christians are specifically taught not to hate; not just to refrain from acts or expressions of hatred, but not to give in to hate itself. "Imagine the outcry if the Koran rather than the Bible had been featured. Yet the teaching of both faiths is against homosexual acts. Why single out Christianity?"
Bernard McEldowney, the deputy chairman of the association, which is an independent body, said: "We wanted to focus on what we regard as a problem of faith-based homophobia, not just Christianity. "But when most people think about religion they think of the Bible which is why we agreed to illustrate the advert pictorially with a Bible. "In hindsight maybe we should not have used the Bible but we wanted to highlight serious homophobic incidents on the grounds and justification of religious belief." He said that they took out the advertisement in protest at the failure of the police service and its associated organisations to respond adequately to the problem. "We have highlighted a real problem by taking out the advertisement," he said.
The rise of 74 per cent was calculated by comparing the number of incidents reported to the association in 2004 that were either exclusively or primarily faith-based with those reported in 2005. The number of calls it received last year was about 250. "They were all serious," he added.
Source
London is returning to an era of neighbourliness and low crime in which people are happy to leave their front doors open, according to the country's most senior policeman. Sir Ian Blair, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, said the work of community-based Safer Neighbourhood Teams was making people feel as safe as they did 25 years ago.
He cited a recent visit to Haringey, North London, where he met two officers who had "adopted" a 19-storey tower block. "How long is it since police patrolled the corridors of a tower block?" Sir Ian asked. "It's as if, when the slums they replaced were flattened, the police stopped patrolling. People are opening their doors, leaving their doors open now, or leaving them unlocked, certainly, in a way they haven't done for 25 years."
In an interview with the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, published today, Sir Ian likened the leaders of the neighbourhood police teams to "the sheriff" keeping the peace on his patch. But the gaffe-prone commissioner's claims appear to be contradicted by local crime figures and his own force's crime prevention advice. In the year to July, Haringey police dealt with 2,834 burglaries of people's homes (54 per week) and 6,399 incidents of violence against the person. Crime in the borough, which includes the Broadwater Farm estate where a police officer died in rioting in 1985, is falling but there were still 33,138 incidents in the past year.
Far from telling people to leave their doors open, the Metropolitan Police website carries a wealth of information on how to make your front door more secure. The commissioner's comments provoked some surprise in Haringey, where his most recent visit, in July, was to inspect the work of a robbery squad. Local officers said they did not know which tower block Sir Ian was referring to. Damian Hockney, a member of the Metropolitan Police Authority, said that the commissioner's remarks were "truly extraordinary".
Neil Williams, Liberal Democrat leader on Haringey council, was also surprised by Sir Ian's remarks. "Community policing has brought enormous benefits in making people safer and encouraging them to report crime. But we shouldn't throw the baby out with the bath water, people still need to take sensible precautions with their home security and I'm sure the police officers in that area would say that, too."
Sir Ian, who is on holiday, has kept a relatively low profile in recent months after widespread criticism. He said recently that reports of his demise were premature.
Sir Ian's record:
February 2005
With street crime rising, Sir Ian Blair announces crackdown on dinner-party drug scene
July
Declares Met "gold standard" for anti-terrorism hours before 7/7 bombings. Later says shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes directly linked to anti-terrorist operation
November
Accused of politicising police in lobbying MPs for anti-terrorism Bill
January 2006
Forced to apologise after saying he could not understand why the Soham murders were such a big story
March
Apologises again after admitting taping phone call to the Attorney-General, and five other calls, without consent
June
Another apology for Forest Gate anti-terror raid in which man was shot, no evidence of terrorism found
Source
Some grassroots comments on Sir Ian's thoughts below:
The doors of Ermine House were firmly closed yesterday. Some of the flats had metal gates in front of them, others had cloth over the front door window to prevent prying. Lilian Heseltine, 69, has lived in the tower block in Tottenham, North London, for 30 years. "No way would I leave the door open, and I have never seen police patrolling inside the building," she said. "I'm not really happy here, but home is what you make of it and it is better than it was. I don't want to move."
The picture was similar at Stellar House, farther down the high road. A bored guard sat in reception monitoring his closed-circuit television screens and an entry phone had been installed to exclude non-residents. But it does not work, according to Sarah Elgar, 21. "You can get in if you don't live here," she said. "I see people smoking crack in the corridors and on the stairs. "I would never leave my door unlocked. Nobody that I know of does. The police don't patrol the building. The only time you see them they run past looking for someone. I was born in this area and the crime has got worse."
Laura Barrett, 38, a nurse whose motorbike was stolen recently, laughed at the suggestion that she would leave her door open or unlocked. "No way," she said.
Source
AMAZING! HOMOSEXUALS CAN DO WRONG IN BRITAIN?
At least their blatant hatred of Christians is being investigated
A criminal investigation has been started by Scotland Yard into an advertisement from the Gay Police Association (GPA) that blamed religion for a 74 per cent increase in homophobic crime. The Times has learnt that the inquiry into the advertisement, which was carried in The Independent, was ordered by the unit set up to counter hate crimes such as homophobia.
The advertisement depicted a Bible beside a pool of blood under the heading "In the name of the Father". It appeared in the newspaper's diversity supplement to coincide with the Europride event in London. It stated: "In the last 12 months the Gay Police Association has recorded a 74 per cent increase in homophobic incidents, where the sole or primary motivating factor was the religious belief of the perpetrator."
Scotland Yard has rejected the 74 per cent figure, which it said did not reflect its statistics. Detective Chief Inspector Gerry Campbell, who leads the domestic violence and hate crime unit, disclosed the investigation in a letter to Ann Widdecombe, the Conservative MP. He wrote: "The original advertisement has been recorded as a religiously aggravated hate crime incident following a crime allegation by a member of the public. "This crime is now the subject of a proportionate effective and objective criminal investigation. The police senior investigating officer is in consultation with the Crown Prosecution Service. Any decision to prosecute is the sole decision of the CPS."
The unit has referred the advertisement to the Directorate of Professional Standards at the Metropolitan Police. The Independent Police Complaints Commission has also been consulted.
Miss Widdecombe, a Christian who converted to Roman Catholicism in 1993, was angered by the advertisement. "It seems a deliberate attempt to stir up hate against Christians," she said. By using that famous line of worship, In The Name of the Father, the association is effectively alleging that Christians are solely responsible for hate crime. "The implication of this advertisement is that Christians stir up assault and abuse against homosexuals. "This is not true, as Christians are specifically taught not to hate; not just to refrain from acts or expressions of hatred, but not to give in to hate itself. "Imagine the outcry if the Koran rather than the Bible had been featured. Yet the teaching of both faiths is against homosexual acts. Why single out Christianity?"
Bernard McEldowney, the deputy chairman of the association, which is an independent body, said: "We wanted to focus on what we regard as a problem of faith-based homophobia, not just Christianity. "But when most people think about religion they think of the Bible which is why we agreed to illustrate the advert pictorially with a Bible. "In hindsight maybe we should not have used the Bible but we wanted to highlight serious homophobic incidents on the grounds and justification of religious belief." He said that they took out the advertisement in protest at the failure of the police service and its associated organisations to respond adequately to the problem. "We have highlighted a real problem by taking out the advertisement," he said.
The rise of 74 per cent was calculated by comparing the number of incidents reported to the association in 2004 that were either exclusively or primarily faith-based with those reported in 2005. The number of calls it received last year was about 250. "They were all serious," he added.
Source
UNEDUCATED SCHOOL LEAVERS IN BRITAIN
Novice caterers may not need to know the value of pi, but business leaders are becoming increasingly concerned that growing numbers of raw recruits are incapable of dividing a real pie into eight equal slices. Caterers who cannot work out portion sizes are just one side of a growing problem for the economy. Foremen who cannot calculate the right amount of building materials for a task and supervisors who have to get their spouses to write their reports provide other dire examples of the shortage of basic literacy and numeracy skills among many school and university leavers.
A report from the Confederation of British Industry says the problem is so bad that one in three employers is having to send staff for remedial training to learn the English and maths they did not learn at school. As pupils prepare to receive their GCSE results this week, Richard Lambert, director-general of the CBI, said that too many are let down by an education system that is failing to teach essential life skills. "We must raise our game on basic skills. Britain simply can't match the low labour costs of China and India. We have to compete on quality, and that means improving our skills base, starting with the basics. "Employers' views on numeracy and literacy are clear - people must read and write fluently and be able to carry out basic mental arithmetic," he said.
The CBI report, Working on the Three Rs, which was sponsored by the Department for Education, found that poor literacy was a problem in all sectors, while poor numeracy was of particular concern in the manufacturing and construction sector. One catering company manager complained of a "total lack of knowledge of times tables" among staff, which meant many were unable to carry out simple calculations.
A personnel manager for a construction firm said that many applicants were unable to construct a sentence and that grammar, handwriting and spelling were often "awful". A manager at a building company noted that many foremen "don't have the skills to work out the areas of squares and rectangles, let alone other shape".
One personnel development manager cited the case of an employee who became very adept at hiding his lack of literacy by getting his wife to write his reports for him. The problems are not confined to school-leavers, but extend to higher levels of the education system, the CBI said.
Source
FLEXIBLE SCIENCE TEACHING COMING IN BRITAIN?
All schools would be allowed to offer single science subjects at GCSE under a Conservative government to halt the falling number of physical science graduates, David Willetts has told The Times. As more than 700,000 teenagers await their GCSE results this week, the Shadow Education Secretary said that a system that refused all pupils the same rights of study was indefensible.
Only pupils at independent schools may currently take a single science. At leading state schools pupils can take all three subjects separately; but most take the combined science course.
The Tories' call to put state schools on the same footing as fee-paying schools comes as the Government pledges to "toughen up" the exams in English and maths, so that all young people have mastered the three Rs by the time they leave school. Last year nearly 60 per cent of all state-educated pupils failed to earn a grade C or better in either subject at GCSE, in spite of a record improvement in exam results.
As part of a rethink of GCSEs and A levels, Mr Willetts said that the rules governing the national curriculum must now be changed. All children must be allowed to study any combination of individual science subjects. "There are very distinctive scientific disciplines here and part of the excitement of studying science at school is that you shouldn't just have a general introduction," he said. "So I feel very strongly that the three real sciences should be available to all schoolchildren. It's absolutely indefensible to have such restrictive legislation, which specifically bans state schools from offering certain courses."
Concerns have been raised since the combined science award was made compulsory at GCSE in 1988. The change was intended to improve scientific literacy among school-leavers. But since then a study by Buckingham University has found that the number of A-level entries in physics had fallen by a third - most often "in those schools that do not offer GCSE physics".
The Government has stated that from 2008 all pupils who achieve level 6 at age 14 should be entitled to study the three sciences with the co-operation of schools and colleges which would be encouraged to share resources. It will also introduce two new GCSE exams to replace existing awards, one of which will be mainly multiple choice.
But Alan Smithers, who carried out the Buckingham study, said that young people would not start taking up engineering, physics and chemistry again unless more specialist teachers were employed. "We often find that many of those with a physics background don't continue teaching because they find that they're teaching biology," he said. "So if more are allowed to specialise, we will attract more specialists in."
Mr Willetts said the Tories had no intention of abolishing the GCSE, which was still "very valuable" in establishing the level of teenagers' achievement in English, maths and science at school-leaving age.
From Thursday league tables will include a measure by which schools are judged on the number of pupils achieving five A*-C grades at GCSE, including English and maths. Last year all the Government's flagship academies were in the bottom 200 on this measure.
The results come as employers are again decrying the poor standards of literacy and numeracy among school-leavers. Today a report by the CBI shows that one in three employers is having to give its employees remedial education in the three Rs.
Jim Knight, the Schools Minister, said that new courses to be piloted this autumn would also lead to exams changing to address the "functional" skills demanded by employers. "In the future, employers will have a guarantee of the quality of the school-leavers they are taking on," he said. [In the future?? He might more accurately have said "In the past"]
"A good pass will mean that young people are equipped with the basics. That means being able to write and speak fluently, carry out mental arithmetic, give presentations and tally up a till at the end of the day."
In February, however, London University's Institute of Education found that under the new maths GCSE course all the candidates, not just the brightest, would be likely to get higher grades. The new structure will make it possible for every student to achieve a grade C in theory, and an A without tackling the toughest questions.
Source
Novice caterers may not need to know the value of pi, but business leaders are becoming increasingly concerned that growing numbers of raw recruits are incapable of dividing a real pie into eight equal slices. Caterers who cannot work out portion sizes are just one side of a growing problem for the economy. Foremen who cannot calculate the right amount of building materials for a task and supervisors who have to get their spouses to write their reports provide other dire examples of the shortage of basic literacy and numeracy skills among many school and university leavers.
A report from the Confederation of British Industry says the problem is so bad that one in three employers is having to send staff for remedial training to learn the English and maths they did not learn at school. As pupils prepare to receive their GCSE results this week, Richard Lambert, director-general of the CBI, said that too many are let down by an education system that is failing to teach essential life skills. "We must raise our game on basic skills. Britain simply can't match the low labour costs of China and India. We have to compete on quality, and that means improving our skills base, starting with the basics. "Employers' views on numeracy and literacy are clear - people must read and write fluently and be able to carry out basic mental arithmetic," he said.
The CBI report, Working on the Three Rs, which was sponsored by the Department for Education, found that poor literacy was a problem in all sectors, while poor numeracy was of particular concern in the manufacturing and construction sector. One catering company manager complained of a "total lack of knowledge of times tables" among staff, which meant many were unable to carry out simple calculations.
A personnel manager for a construction firm said that many applicants were unable to construct a sentence and that grammar, handwriting and spelling were often "awful". A manager at a building company noted that many foremen "don't have the skills to work out the areas of squares and rectangles, let alone other shape".
One personnel development manager cited the case of an employee who became very adept at hiding his lack of literacy by getting his wife to write his reports for him. The problems are not confined to school-leavers, but extend to higher levels of the education system, the CBI said.
Source
FLEXIBLE SCIENCE TEACHING COMING IN BRITAIN?
All schools would be allowed to offer single science subjects at GCSE under a Conservative government to halt the falling number of physical science graduates, David Willetts has told The Times. As more than 700,000 teenagers await their GCSE results this week, the Shadow Education Secretary said that a system that refused all pupils the same rights of study was indefensible.
Only pupils at independent schools may currently take a single science. At leading state schools pupils can take all three subjects separately; but most take the combined science course.
The Tories' call to put state schools on the same footing as fee-paying schools comes as the Government pledges to "toughen up" the exams in English and maths, so that all young people have mastered the three Rs by the time they leave school. Last year nearly 60 per cent of all state-educated pupils failed to earn a grade C or better in either subject at GCSE, in spite of a record improvement in exam results.
As part of a rethink of GCSEs and A levels, Mr Willetts said that the rules governing the national curriculum must now be changed. All children must be allowed to study any combination of individual science subjects. "There are very distinctive scientific disciplines here and part of the excitement of studying science at school is that you shouldn't just have a general introduction," he said. "So I feel very strongly that the three real sciences should be available to all schoolchildren. It's absolutely indefensible to have such restrictive legislation, which specifically bans state schools from offering certain courses."
Concerns have been raised since the combined science award was made compulsory at GCSE in 1988. The change was intended to improve scientific literacy among school-leavers. But since then a study by Buckingham University has found that the number of A-level entries in physics had fallen by a third - most often "in those schools that do not offer GCSE physics".
The Government has stated that from 2008 all pupils who achieve level 6 at age 14 should be entitled to study the three sciences with the co-operation of schools and colleges which would be encouraged to share resources. It will also introduce two new GCSE exams to replace existing awards, one of which will be mainly multiple choice.
But Alan Smithers, who carried out the Buckingham study, said that young people would not start taking up engineering, physics and chemistry again unless more specialist teachers were employed. "We often find that many of those with a physics background don't continue teaching because they find that they're teaching biology," he said. "So if more are allowed to specialise, we will attract more specialists in."
Mr Willetts said the Tories had no intention of abolishing the GCSE, which was still "very valuable" in establishing the level of teenagers' achievement in English, maths and science at school-leaving age.
From Thursday league tables will include a measure by which schools are judged on the number of pupils achieving five A*-C grades at GCSE, including English and maths. Last year all the Government's flagship academies were in the bottom 200 on this measure.
The results come as employers are again decrying the poor standards of literacy and numeracy among school-leavers. Today a report by the CBI shows that one in three employers is having to give its employees remedial education in the three Rs.
Jim Knight, the Schools Minister, said that new courses to be piloted this autumn would also lead to exams changing to address the "functional" skills demanded by employers. "In the future, employers will have a guarantee of the quality of the school-leavers they are taking on," he said. [In the future?? He might more accurately have said "In the past"]
"A good pass will mean that young people are equipped with the basics. That means being able to write and speak fluently, carry out mental arithmetic, give presentations and tally up a till at the end of the day."
In February, however, London University's Institute of Education found that under the new maths GCSE course all the candidates, not just the brightest, would be likely to get higher grades. The new structure will make it possible for every student to achieve a grade C in theory, and an A without tackling the toughest questions.
Source
DON'T GET BOWEL CANCER IN BRITAIN
The Government's value- for-money watchdog is set to refuse approval for two new bowel cancer drugs, to the fury of patients and cancer charities. Nice, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice), will recommend today that Avastin and Erbitux are not sufficiently good value to justify NHS prescription. Andrea Sutcliffe, deputy chief executive, said: "Although bevacizumab [Avastin] does show some increased benefit over standard treatment, the [Nice] Appraisal Committee was not persuaded that it was cost-effective in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. "The evidence available on cetuximab [Erbitux] does not compare it to current standard treatment and we are not able to assess whether it is any better than existing treatments."
The judgment is not final and is open to appeal before guidance is issued in November. But cancer charities are preparing a challenge. They argue that the two drugs work, shrinking tumours and extending life in patients with advanced colon cancer, even if they are not a cure. They are widely available elsewhere, including across most of Europe. Hilary Whittaker, chief executive of Beating Bowel Cancer, said: "We urge Nice to reconsider. Why should patients in the UK be worse off than patients in the rest of Europe?" Michael Wickham, the chief executive of Bowel Cancer UK, said: "The NHS of 2006 is, it seems, content to fund a 10 billion pound overspend on information technology but not to give patients treatments that can help them live longer." Denise Richard, of Merck Pharmaceuticals, which makes Erbitux, said: "The UK is the only country in Europe where Erbitux has been licensed but is not routinely available to patients because the NHS will not fund it."
Bowel cancer is the third-commonest cancer in the UK, with 35,000 new cases every year and 16,000 deaths. More than half the patients will develop cancers that spread, for which the five-year survival rate is only 12 per cent. Avastin and Erbitux are new medicines that work by targeting a growth factor that stimulates the growth of blood vessels needed by tumours to grow. Both are licensed and in trials have shown effectiveness in tumours that are resistant to chemotherapy. Erbitux, used with the traditional drug irinotecan, shrank tumours by half in a quarter of patients and slowed progression of the disease by four months in half of patients. Avastin had similar effects on survival when used with other drugs.
However, the question that Nice has to answer is whether the drugs are cost-effective. Nice measures the cost per life-year saved, with a threshold of effectiveness of about 30,000 pounds. Neither passes this test: Avastin costs between 83,000 and 107,000 pounds, and Erbitux between 39,000 and 69,000. One patient who is taking Erbitux is David Taylor, 54, a journalist who lives in North London. He had colorectal cancer diagnosed in 2004. Treatment with conventional drugs began in January 2005. But the disease progressed and his consultant warned him: "We're running out of drugs."
Source
The Government's value- for-money watchdog is set to refuse approval for two new bowel cancer drugs, to the fury of patients and cancer charities. Nice, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice), will recommend today that Avastin and Erbitux are not sufficiently good value to justify NHS prescription. Andrea Sutcliffe, deputy chief executive, said: "Although bevacizumab [Avastin] does show some increased benefit over standard treatment, the [Nice] Appraisal Committee was not persuaded that it was cost-effective in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. "The evidence available on cetuximab [Erbitux] does not compare it to current standard treatment and we are not able to assess whether it is any better than existing treatments."
The judgment is not final and is open to appeal before guidance is issued in November. But cancer charities are preparing a challenge. They argue that the two drugs work, shrinking tumours and extending life in patients with advanced colon cancer, even if they are not a cure. They are widely available elsewhere, including across most of Europe. Hilary Whittaker, chief executive of Beating Bowel Cancer, said: "We urge Nice to reconsider. Why should patients in the UK be worse off than patients in the rest of Europe?" Michael Wickham, the chief executive of Bowel Cancer UK, said: "The NHS of 2006 is, it seems, content to fund a 10 billion pound overspend on information technology but not to give patients treatments that can help them live longer." Denise Richard, of Merck Pharmaceuticals, which makes Erbitux, said: "The UK is the only country in Europe where Erbitux has been licensed but is not routinely available to patients because the NHS will not fund it."
Bowel cancer is the third-commonest cancer in the UK, with 35,000 new cases every year and 16,000 deaths. More than half the patients will develop cancers that spread, for which the five-year survival rate is only 12 per cent. Avastin and Erbitux are new medicines that work by targeting a growth factor that stimulates the growth of blood vessels needed by tumours to grow. Both are licensed and in trials have shown effectiveness in tumours that are resistant to chemotherapy. Erbitux, used with the traditional drug irinotecan, shrank tumours by half in a quarter of patients and slowed progression of the disease by four months in half of patients. Avastin had similar effects on survival when used with other drugs.
However, the question that Nice has to answer is whether the drugs are cost-effective. Nice measures the cost per life-year saved, with a threshold of effectiveness of about 30,000 pounds. Neither passes this test: Avastin costs between 83,000 and 107,000 pounds, and Erbitux between 39,000 and 69,000. One patient who is taking Erbitux is David Taylor, 54, a journalist who lives in North London. He had colorectal cancer diagnosed in 2004. Treatment with conventional drugs began in January 2005. But the disease progressed and his consultant warned him: "We're running out of drugs."
Source
Tough Umpire a "Racist"
Trouble at "The Oval"
There would hardly be a sports fan alive who has not at some time felt that an umpire or referee has been unfair and biased against his team. And it certainly happens in the world's most popular bat-and-ball game -- cricket.
An Australian umpire, Darrell Hair, well-known for strict adherence to the rules, has however now been called a "racist" for his actions. He made the mistake of suspecting a cheating incident by a Pakistan cricket team:
"Criticizing the Ref" has always been regarded as poor sportsmanship but this time it is being taken seriously. Darrell Hair looks like he will be doing no more international umpiring.
It may be noted that a past brown-skinned victim (Muralitharan) of Darrell Hair's strict umpiring says the ump is OK. There is an update here and there is a supportive comment about Hair here.
Trouble at "The Oval"
There would hardly be a sports fan alive who has not at some time felt that an umpire or referee has been unfair and biased against his team. And it certainly happens in the world's most popular bat-and-ball game -- cricket.
An Australian umpire, Darrell Hair, well-known for strict adherence to the rules, has however now been called a "racist" for his actions. He made the mistake of suspecting a cheating incident by a Pakistan cricket team:
"Pakistan captain Imran Khan ripped into the controversial umpire... Under the headline "Hair the Hitler does it again", Imran continued: "Hair is one of those characters when he wears the white umpires' coat, he metamorphoses into a mini-Hitler."
Ramiz Raja, another former Pakistan captain who was commentating on the Test, was also scathing of Hair. "The players from the sub-continent universally feel that he is biased, even to the extent of being a racist," he claimed."
Source
"Criticizing the Ref" has always been regarded as poor sportsmanship but this time it is being taken seriously. Darrell Hair looks like he will be doing no more international umpiring.
It may be noted that a past brown-skinned victim (Muralitharan) of Darrell Hair's strict umpiring says the ump is OK. There is an update here and there is a supportive comment about Hair here.
Monday, August 21, 2006
Passengers do their own profiling: British holidaymakers staged an unprecedented mutiny - refusing to allow their flight to take off until two men they feared were terrorists were forcibly removed. The extraordinary scenes happened after some of the 150 passengers on a Malaga-Manchester flight overheard two men of Asian appearance apparently talking Arabic. Passengers told cabin crew they feared for their safety and demanded police action. Some stormed off the Monarch Airlines Airbus A320 minutes before it was due to leave the Costa del Sol at 3am. Others waiting for Flight ZB 613 in the departure lounge refused to board it. The incident fuels the row over airport security following the arrest of more than 20 people allegedly planning the suicide-bombing of transatlantic jets from the UK to America. It comes amid growing demands for passenger-profiling and selective security checks. It also raised fears that more travellers will take the law into their own hands - effectively conducting their own 'passenger profiles'. The Tories said the Government's failure to reassure travellers had led the Malaga passengers to 'behave irrationally' and 'hand a victory to terrorists'. Websites used by pilots and cabin crew were yesterday reporting further incidents.
NHS COVERUP
Labour faces allegations of trying to undermine the independence of the National Audit Office after it successfully toned down the findings of an inquiry into the 12 billion pound NHS computer system. Documents released last week show how key passages in the NAO report were changed after interventions by Department of Health officials. These included removing warnings about the difficulties of creating computerised records for every patient in the country. The Connecting for Health scheme is intended to create centralised medical record systems for 50m patients. Critics fear it could threaten patient confidentiality and make the NHS more vulnerable to damage from computer failures.
The NAO report on the scheme, published in June, was welcomed by NHS officials for its broad support of the programme. However, a draft of the report, dated January 26, 2006 and obtained by The Sunday Times under the Freedom of Information Act, warned of potential problems. It said: The Department of Health had failed to demonstrate "clear and effective leadership" to staff implementing the programme.
NHS workers were worried "the confidentiality of patient information may be at risk". The NHS lacked sufficient skills to support the delivery of the programme. Although there had been "substantial progress", the programme faced "significant challenges".
When the report was published six month later, the warning over departmental leadership had been removed; the paragraph highlighting doctors' worries over confidentiality was also missing and the claim that the NHS did not have the required skills to deliver the programme had been dropped.
Instead, headings of the report were changed which gave more emphasis to what the project "has achieved". Even the projected costs of the programme were cut from o13.4 billion in the draft report to o12.4 billion in the final version. The key conclusion on the challenges was unchanged. One source who has worked closely with the NAO said: "It's pretty clear the NAO were bullied into changing this report."
An NAO spokesman said: "Like any report it went through a process to ensure the presentation was fair and the facts were accurate. The overall conclusions are the same in the final report as in the provisional report. The o1 billion fall in cost followed new information."
The health department said: "We co-operated fully with the NAO to ensure the publication of a balanced and accurate report."
Source
Labour faces allegations of trying to undermine the independence of the National Audit Office after it successfully toned down the findings of an inquiry into the 12 billion pound NHS computer system. Documents released last week show how key passages in the NAO report were changed after interventions by Department of Health officials. These included removing warnings about the difficulties of creating computerised records for every patient in the country. The Connecting for Health scheme is intended to create centralised medical record systems for 50m patients. Critics fear it could threaten patient confidentiality and make the NHS more vulnerable to damage from computer failures.
The NAO report on the scheme, published in June, was welcomed by NHS officials for its broad support of the programme. However, a draft of the report, dated January 26, 2006 and obtained by The Sunday Times under the Freedom of Information Act, warned of potential problems. It said: The Department of Health had failed to demonstrate "clear and effective leadership" to staff implementing the programme.
NHS workers were worried "the confidentiality of patient information may be at risk". The NHS lacked sufficient skills to support the delivery of the programme. Although there had been "substantial progress", the programme faced "significant challenges".
When the report was published six month later, the warning over departmental leadership had been removed; the paragraph highlighting doctors' worries over confidentiality was also missing and the claim that the NHS did not have the required skills to deliver the programme had been dropped.
Instead, headings of the report were changed which gave more emphasis to what the project "has achieved". Even the projected costs of the programme were cut from o13.4 billion in the draft report to o12.4 billion in the final version. The key conclusion on the challenges was unchanged. One source who has worked closely with the NAO said: "It's pretty clear the NAO were bullied into changing this report."
An NAO spokesman said: "Like any report it went through a process to ensure the presentation was fair and the facts were accurate. The overall conclusions are the same in the final report as in the provisional report. The o1 billion fall in cost followed new information."
The health department said: "We co-operated fully with the NAO to ensure the publication of a balanced and accurate report."
Source
Government food mania misleading and bad for kids
Ofcom - the UK Office of Communications, which monitors and regulates the British broadcasting industry - has put forward proposals to ban or heavily regulate adverts for fizzy drinks, crisps and sweets during children's TV programmes or during shows popular among children. Whichever of the proposals is finally accepted, the fact is that all of them amount to a serious clampdown on TV ads, and this is likely to cause serious problems for commercial broadcasting. One question is how channels other than the BBC (Britain's state-funded broadcasting corporation) will continue funding children's television without the lucrative revenue raised from such adverts.
There can be little doubt that ITV's recent decision to pull the rug on Granada Kids Production was influenced by Ofcom's heavy-handedness. For the record, I deplore ITV's decision; it was a cowardly and retrograde step for British creative talent. It was also a real abdication of a commitment to giving the young quality programmes, regardless of bottom-line profits. However, I would also like to say that I don't support any ban on advertising of so-called `unhealthy' foods to children - and unfortunately, there has not been enough opposition to Ofcom's proposals from the industry as a whole.
One reason for such a lukewarm opposition to such heavy-handed proposals is that many people feel queasy about appearing to back the likes of Coca Cola, McDonald's and Cadbury's. Many working in TV accept the popular prejudice that foods high in sugar, salt and other additives are indeed a threat to the health of the nation's children, and they believe that promoting such evil foods is a real `no, no' in today's climate of strict health correctness. More broadly, there seems to be what I would call a `fashionable queasiness' about corporate interests influencing children's lifestyles and diets.
However, I am queasy about something else - and that is the new phenomenon of children's broadcasters themselves seeking to influence the very same lifestyles and diets of the nation's kids. Last year, for example, Nickelodeon launched `Nicktrition', a series of programmes and live events accompanied by a website, all aimed at encouraging healthy lifestyles among children. This style of positive messaging seems to be seeping into children's programmes without any furore from within the industry.
But surely this is a major compromise of editorial independence? The story goes something like this: The government declares that there is an obesity epidemic (although note that many researchers believe this to be over-hyped scaremongering). The government then tells its regulators to declare war on junk food (although note that some experts point out there is no such thing as `junk' or unhealthy food. Our digestive systems do not distinguish between fish fingers and caviar.)
Then, following this political diktat that we should all obsess over healthy diets and panic about childhood obesity, children's broadcasters generate programme content that advertises the `correct' messages. This is best illustrated by proposals to ban celebrities like Gary Lineker, Britney Spears and even Thomas the Tank Engine from peddling crisps, Coke and fatty foods. Such celeb-led adverts are seen as a shocking manipulation of children's minds. But somehow it is not manipulative when the government quango, the Food Standards Agency, advocates that broadcasters use - guess what? - celebrities and cartoon characters to encourage children to eat healthier foods and to peddle the five-a-day message (where we are encouraged to eat five portions of fruit and veg every day).
So now Nickelodeon has the Olympic champion Sally Gunnell fronting its healthy lifestyle guide, and no one raises any problems with that. Meanwhile, BBC Worldwide uses CBBC characters such as the Teletubbies and the Frimbles to brand food products deemed nutritionally sound. One report says that, `By controlling the use of branded children's characters, the BBC is taking a positive leadership role in influencing the diet of children and encouraging healthy eating.'
It is worth noting a key difference here: the issue is not about using cartoon characters or celebrities to influence diet or lifestyle, but rather making sure that they endorse the right diet and lifestyle. And who dictates what is the `right' diet and lifestyle? It strikes me that what is `right' is increasingly dictated by the government and its agencies. So while everyone worries about the big bad corporate messages influencing the young through TV, no one seems worried about the government's `positive messaging' now sneaking into the schedules.
Programmes may reiterate government messages because TV generally reflects the zeitgeist. But my fear is that, too frequently, broadcasters seem to have become the unwitting dupes of current official orthodoxies. Traditionally broadcasters prided themselves on their editorial independence. When ITV's head Charles Allen (since resigned) and New Labour broadcasting minister James Purnell debated whether to relax rules on product placement - when programmes promote, either explicitly or implicitly, a certain product on behalf of the business or corporation that makes said product - a key concern was `preserving programmes' editorial integrity'. However, there is no debate - and I think there should be - about a new phenomenon: that is policy placement through positive messaging, which really does compromise programmes' editorial integrity. `Policy placement' is now widespread on TV....
Many of us argue against the authoritarian consequences of the growth of a `nanny state' pushing something like a smoking ban apparently for the good of the nation's health. Many of these health promotion orthodoxies have far-reaching political consequences, particularly in relation to personal freedom, and as such they should not be accepted uncritically.
Yet somehow, TV-land seems oblivious to these tensions, and it too often repeats government messages with little thought about the political consequences. I know that celebrity chef and school dinners campaigner Jamie Oliver has been virtually canonised in broadcasting circles. But his Channel 4 show Jamie's School Dinners, and his campaigner for `better' grub in schools more broadly, have had political consequences in the real world - and some of them are far from saintly. A number of draconian measures have been brought in by politicians, all of whom cite Oliver's series as an inspiration. For example, the government has introduced controversial `fat charts' into schools, involving the mass weighing and measuring of children from the age of four. Meanwhile, local authorities are piloting schemes involving the compulsory finger-printing of children as they queue up for their school dinners. One of the justifications for this is that it allows school authorities to monitor children's nutritional intake. And guess what, both the FSA and Ofcom have cited Oliver in their proposals to regulate or ban certain kinds of food advertising....
Both the BBC and ITV have fully embraced the government's policy for mass behaviour modification in relation to health....
How does all of this impact on children's programmes? Well, in terms of factual content, the healthy lifestyle agenda is everywhere. I do feel sorry for kids these days: nutritional awareness and fitness quotas are now cross-curricula priorities. Back in September 2004, the Department for Education and Skills (DfES) produced the report Healthy Living Blueprint for Schools, in which it said that one key objective was `to use the full capacity and flexibility of the curriculum to achieve a healthy lifestyle' - that is, by incorporating the mantra of healthy eating into science, geography, maths, religious education and history.
So history lessons include modules on `insights into changes in our ancestors' diets and how some now familiar foods were introduced into this country', while in science lessons students are taught how to measure their BMI index. And that's before they get preached at in Personal and Social Health Education classes. They then go home and try to relax in front of the TV, but there they only get more of the same...
Another problem with policy placement is the danger that it might compromise journalistic integrity. Too often, policies and political positions - which should be open to challenge - are passed off as facts. When policy or political issues are the focus of current affairs programmes or documentaries, they are supposed to adhere to strict guidelines of veracity and balance. But when policy messages are delivered through entertainment formats and popular dramas, they are less susceptible to challenges when it comes to factual accuracy. When the BBC declares that it is `working to keep the problems of obesity in the public arena through incorporating the issue into its programming' and that `by including the issues as part of a drama, the BBC continues to involve its audience in the debate', one has to ask how the public can debate the facts when they are dressed up as fiction? While news reporters keep a rein on politicians' wild claims in news programmes, in other, softer forms of programming little scrutiny exists when claims are presented by celebrities or reality TV `experts'.
When erstwhile poster boy for Sainsbury's, Jamie Oliver, tells children that there is evidence to show that their diet affects their behaviour, their physical and mental development, and their ability to learn, he does not provide any hard evidence (of which there is little, as it happens). His assertions are in fact hotly debated and doubted in educational and scientific circles. But how does one confront a celebrity chef with this lack of evidence when he is fronting a show as a campaigning hero?...
Likewise, when Oliver proclaims to the nation's children that processed food is bad and organic food is good, are children fully informed that the evidence for this claim comes from the Soil Association, the main advocacy group for organic farming in the UK? This raises a serious problem with policy placement: it is inadvertently eroding the difference between advocacy and factual accuracy in children's broadcasting.
More here
Ofcom - the UK Office of Communications, which monitors and regulates the British broadcasting industry - has put forward proposals to ban or heavily regulate adverts for fizzy drinks, crisps and sweets during children's TV programmes or during shows popular among children. Whichever of the proposals is finally accepted, the fact is that all of them amount to a serious clampdown on TV ads, and this is likely to cause serious problems for commercial broadcasting. One question is how channels other than the BBC (Britain's state-funded broadcasting corporation) will continue funding children's television without the lucrative revenue raised from such adverts.
There can be little doubt that ITV's recent decision to pull the rug on Granada Kids Production was influenced by Ofcom's heavy-handedness. For the record, I deplore ITV's decision; it was a cowardly and retrograde step for British creative talent. It was also a real abdication of a commitment to giving the young quality programmes, regardless of bottom-line profits. However, I would also like to say that I don't support any ban on advertising of so-called `unhealthy' foods to children - and unfortunately, there has not been enough opposition to Ofcom's proposals from the industry as a whole.
One reason for such a lukewarm opposition to such heavy-handed proposals is that many people feel queasy about appearing to back the likes of Coca Cola, McDonald's and Cadbury's. Many working in TV accept the popular prejudice that foods high in sugar, salt and other additives are indeed a threat to the health of the nation's children, and they believe that promoting such evil foods is a real `no, no' in today's climate of strict health correctness. More broadly, there seems to be what I would call a `fashionable queasiness' about corporate interests influencing children's lifestyles and diets.
However, I am queasy about something else - and that is the new phenomenon of children's broadcasters themselves seeking to influence the very same lifestyles and diets of the nation's kids. Last year, for example, Nickelodeon launched `Nicktrition', a series of programmes and live events accompanied by a website, all aimed at encouraging healthy lifestyles among children. This style of positive messaging seems to be seeping into children's programmes without any furore from within the industry.
But surely this is a major compromise of editorial independence? The story goes something like this: The government declares that there is an obesity epidemic (although note that many researchers believe this to be over-hyped scaremongering). The government then tells its regulators to declare war on junk food (although note that some experts point out there is no such thing as `junk' or unhealthy food. Our digestive systems do not distinguish between fish fingers and caviar.)
Then, following this political diktat that we should all obsess over healthy diets and panic about childhood obesity, children's broadcasters generate programme content that advertises the `correct' messages. This is best illustrated by proposals to ban celebrities like Gary Lineker, Britney Spears and even Thomas the Tank Engine from peddling crisps, Coke and fatty foods. Such celeb-led adverts are seen as a shocking manipulation of children's minds. But somehow it is not manipulative when the government quango, the Food Standards Agency, advocates that broadcasters use - guess what? - celebrities and cartoon characters to encourage children to eat healthier foods and to peddle the five-a-day message (where we are encouraged to eat five portions of fruit and veg every day).
So now Nickelodeon has the Olympic champion Sally Gunnell fronting its healthy lifestyle guide, and no one raises any problems with that. Meanwhile, BBC Worldwide uses CBBC characters such as the Teletubbies and the Frimbles to brand food products deemed nutritionally sound. One report says that, `By controlling the use of branded children's characters, the BBC is taking a positive leadership role in influencing the diet of children and encouraging healthy eating.'
It is worth noting a key difference here: the issue is not about using cartoon characters or celebrities to influence diet or lifestyle, but rather making sure that they endorse the right diet and lifestyle. And who dictates what is the `right' diet and lifestyle? It strikes me that what is `right' is increasingly dictated by the government and its agencies. So while everyone worries about the big bad corporate messages influencing the young through TV, no one seems worried about the government's `positive messaging' now sneaking into the schedules.
Programmes may reiterate government messages because TV generally reflects the zeitgeist. But my fear is that, too frequently, broadcasters seem to have become the unwitting dupes of current official orthodoxies. Traditionally broadcasters prided themselves on their editorial independence. When ITV's head Charles Allen (since resigned) and New Labour broadcasting minister James Purnell debated whether to relax rules on product placement - when programmes promote, either explicitly or implicitly, a certain product on behalf of the business or corporation that makes said product - a key concern was `preserving programmes' editorial integrity'. However, there is no debate - and I think there should be - about a new phenomenon: that is policy placement through positive messaging, which really does compromise programmes' editorial integrity. `Policy placement' is now widespread on TV....
Many of us argue against the authoritarian consequences of the growth of a `nanny state' pushing something like a smoking ban apparently for the good of the nation's health. Many of these health promotion orthodoxies have far-reaching political consequences, particularly in relation to personal freedom, and as such they should not be accepted uncritically.
Yet somehow, TV-land seems oblivious to these tensions, and it too often repeats government messages with little thought about the political consequences. I know that celebrity chef and school dinners campaigner Jamie Oliver has been virtually canonised in broadcasting circles. But his Channel 4 show Jamie's School Dinners, and his campaigner for `better' grub in schools more broadly, have had political consequences in the real world - and some of them are far from saintly. A number of draconian measures have been brought in by politicians, all of whom cite Oliver's series as an inspiration. For example, the government has introduced controversial `fat charts' into schools, involving the mass weighing and measuring of children from the age of four. Meanwhile, local authorities are piloting schemes involving the compulsory finger-printing of children as they queue up for their school dinners. One of the justifications for this is that it allows school authorities to monitor children's nutritional intake. And guess what, both the FSA and Ofcom have cited Oliver in their proposals to regulate or ban certain kinds of food advertising....
Both the BBC and ITV have fully embraced the government's policy for mass behaviour modification in relation to health....
How does all of this impact on children's programmes? Well, in terms of factual content, the healthy lifestyle agenda is everywhere. I do feel sorry for kids these days: nutritional awareness and fitness quotas are now cross-curricula priorities. Back in September 2004, the Department for Education and Skills (DfES) produced the report Healthy Living Blueprint for Schools, in which it said that one key objective was `to use the full capacity and flexibility of the curriculum to achieve a healthy lifestyle' - that is, by incorporating the mantra of healthy eating into science, geography, maths, religious education and history.
So history lessons include modules on `insights into changes in our ancestors' diets and how some now familiar foods were introduced into this country', while in science lessons students are taught how to measure their BMI index. And that's before they get preached at in Personal and Social Health Education classes. They then go home and try to relax in front of the TV, but there they only get more of the same...
Another problem with policy placement is the danger that it might compromise journalistic integrity. Too often, policies and political positions - which should be open to challenge - are passed off as facts. When policy or political issues are the focus of current affairs programmes or documentaries, they are supposed to adhere to strict guidelines of veracity and balance. But when policy messages are delivered through entertainment formats and popular dramas, they are less susceptible to challenges when it comes to factual accuracy. When the BBC declares that it is `working to keep the problems of obesity in the public arena through incorporating the issue into its programming' and that `by including the issues as part of a drama, the BBC continues to involve its audience in the debate', one has to ask how the public can debate the facts when they are dressed up as fiction? While news reporters keep a rein on politicians' wild claims in news programmes, in other, softer forms of programming little scrutiny exists when claims are presented by celebrities or reality TV `experts'.
When erstwhile poster boy for Sainsbury's, Jamie Oliver, tells children that there is evidence to show that their diet affects their behaviour, their physical and mental development, and their ability to learn, he does not provide any hard evidence (of which there is little, as it happens). His assertions are in fact hotly debated and doubted in educational and scientific circles. But how does one confront a celebrity chef with this lack of evidence when he is fronting a show as a campaigning hero?...
Likewise, when Oliver proclaims to the nation's children that processed food is bad and organic food is good, are children fully informed that the evidence for this claim comes from the Soil Association, the main advocacy group for organic farming in the UK? This raises a serious problem with policy placement: it is inadvertently eroding the difference between advocacy and factual accuracy in children's broadcasting.
More here
Sunday, August 20, 2006
Britain's cultural cowardice
Britain's loss of nerve is one of the main reasons it has become a global centre of Islamic extremism. For decades, successive British governments have regarded multiculturalism as an article of faith. The idea that Britain should become a joyous melting pot of different cultures and religions living side by side in mutual toleration and respect is a noble vision. But it's not working out that way. Instead, the benefits of immigration are being lost through a failure to control numbers and a reluctance to pursue policies that might promote integration. As a result, Britain has a huge Muslim population, much of which is increasingly alienated from mainstream society. "Londonistan" is no longer just a safe haven for foreign extremists. Today, it nurtures home-grown terrorists, many born in Britain, educated at British schools and attending British universities.
The July 7 bombers were British. So was Richard Reid, the shoe bomber. Zacarias Moussaoui, convicted for his role in the 9/11 attacks, was a student in London. Some of those arrested last week converted to Islam in the past year. That suggests the problem is escalating.... why do young Muslims embrace terrorism rather than democratic politics? How can people born and educated in Britain feel so alienated from its culture and values? The snag is that many never fully engage with British culture and values. Muslims make up the majority in many towns and in most big cities there are large Muslim enclaves. Even if the multiculturalists were to change their minds on the need for integration, it would be too late. Muslim leaders are demanding more separation from mainstream society, not less.
They want bank holidays for Muslim festivals and sharia law courts to rule on family matters. They may well get it. They are helped by the remarkable ambivalence of the liberal Left towards British culture and values: to Christianity, British history, free markets and free trade. Above all, the Left is deeply suspicious of the institutions in which those values are embedded, starting with the family and extending via churches, schools, businesses, clubs, right through to parliament and the monarchy. To the Left, Britain's social institutions are bastions of privilege that must be remodelled or destroyed to make way for multiculturalism. The resulting cultural war has left British society brutalised and infantilised, and wide open to attack. Why should British Muslims respect a culture that has no respect for itself?
More here
Britain's loss of nerve is one of the main reasons it has become a global centre of Islamic extremism. For decades, successive British governments have regarded multiculturalism as an article of faith. The idea that Britain should become a joyous melting pot of different cultures and religions living side by side in mutual toleration and respect is a noble vision. But it's not working out that way. Instead, the benefits of immigration are being lost through a failure to control numbers and a reluctance to pursue policies that might promote integration. As a result, Britain has a huge Muslim population, much of which is increasingly alienated from mainstream society. "Londonistan" is no longer just a safe haven for foreign extremists. Today, it nurtures home-grown terrorists, many born in Britain, educated at British schools and attending British universities.
The July 7 bombers were British. So was Richard Reid, the shoe bomber. Zacarias Moussaoui, convicted for his role in the 9/11 attacks, was a student in London. Some of those arrested last week converted to Islam in the past year. That suggests the problem is escalating.... why do young Muslims embrace terrorism rather than democratic politics? How can people born and educated in Britain feel so alienated from its culture and values? The snag is that many never fully engage with British culture and values. Muslims make up the majority in many towns and in most big cities there are large Muslim enclaves. Even if the multiculturalists were to change their minds on the need for integration, it would be too late. Muslim leaders are demanding more separation from mainstream society, not less.
They want bank holidays for Muslim festivals and sharia law courts to rule on family matters. They may well get it. They are helped by the remarkable ambivalence of the liberal Left towards British culture and values: to Christianity, British history, free markets and free trade. Above all, the Left is deeply suspicious of the institutions in which those values are embedded, starting with the family and extending via churches, schools, businesses, clubs, right through to parliament and the monarchy. To the Left, Britain's social institutions are bastions of privilege that must be remodelled or destroyed to make way for multiculturalism. The resulting cultural war has left British society brutalised and infantilised, and wide open to attack. Why should British Muslims respect a culture that has no respect for itself?
More here
BRITISH GRADE INFLATION AT HIGH-SCHOOL EXIT
One in ten A-level students achieved at least three grade As this summer, increasing pressure for reform of the examination. The record haul of almost 200,000 A grades prompted complaints from leading universities that they were increasingly unable to distinguish the brightest candidates.
The Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats both called for an overhaul of A levels and there were growing demands for the introduction of an A* grade similar to that at GCSE. Nearly a quarter of the 800,000 A-level grades awarded yesterday were grade As, with the proportion of top grades rising by 1.3 percentage points to 24.1 per cent, one of the largest increases in 40 years.
The bunching effect among top grades was most pronounced for girls, who inched further head of boys. One in four girls (25.3 per cent) achieved at least one grade A, compared with 22.7 per cent of boys. Girls now outperform boys at grade A in every main A-level subject, apart from modern languages.
In subjects such as modern languages and further maths, between a third and half of all candidates got an A grade. Politicians and teachers' unions praised the pupils' results and hard work. But, with so many students gaining three or more A grades, Professor Malcolm Grant, Provost of University College London and chairman of the Russell Group of 19 leading universities, said that the most popular universities were increasingly relying on interviews and tests to find the most promising students. "It means that we can now regard A levels only as a starting point in measuring aptitude and achievement. We are then relying on other measures, such as interviews and aptitude tests for law and medicine," he said.
Andrew Halls, headmaster of Magdalen College School in Oxford, where one pupil, Julian Lopez-Portillo, achieved eight grade As, said: "It is statistically easy to get an A. You can't deny that and universities find it hard to discriminate between top pupils. It probably should not be possible to get eight As."
The Department for Education has ruled out any big changes to A levels until 2008, but said it was exploring the possibility of introducing an A* grade, together with more difficult exam questions, for pupils starting A levels that year. Jim Knight, the Schools Minister, has set himself against a return to grade quotas or norm referencing, in which a fixed proportion are awarded each grade. "We need an education system that is about merit, not quotas," he said.
The University of Cambridge backed the introduction of an A* grade that would be reserved for a fixed proportion. Geoff Parks, Cambridge's admissions tutor, said that he would welcome any steps that would help to differentiate between students with three grade As. "If the A* grade was norm-referenced for the top 7 per cent or a higher overall performance, that would also potentially help," he said.
David Willetts, the Shadow Education Secretary, agreed that grade quotas would be helpful. "You could give A* grades to the top 10 per cent of students and you could allow universities to know the numerical grade that each student got. That would allow differentiation to occur using existing information," he said. Sarah Teather, the Liberal Democrat education spokeswoman, called for reform and said that A levels did not stretch the brightest pupils. The National Union of Students called for an open debate. Ellie Russell, its vice-president, said: "Times have changed and the A-level system is in need of review." However, John Dunford, the general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, urged the Government not to devalue A grades with an A*. "[This will] increase stress and anorexia among bright 17 and 18-year-olds," he said.
More here
One in ten A-level students achieved at least three grade As this summer, increasing pressure for reform of the examination. The record haul of almost 200,000 A grades prompted complaints from leading universities that they were increasingly unable to distinguish the brightest candidates.
The Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats both called for an overhaul of A levels and there were growing demands for the introduction of an A* grade similar to that at GCSE. Nearly a quarter of the 800,000 A-level grades awarded yesterday were grade As, with the proportion of top grades rising by 1.3 percentage points to 24.1 per cent, one of the largest increases in 40 years.
The bunching effect among top grades was most pronounced for girls, who inched further head of boys. One in four girls (25.3 per cent) achieved at least one grade A, compared with 22.7 per cent of boys. Girls now outperform boys at grade A in every main A-level subject, apart from modern languages.
In subjects such as modern languages and further maths, between a third and half of all candidates got an A grade. Politicians and teachers' unions praised the pupils' results and hard work. But, with so many students gaining three or more A grades, Professor Malcolm Grant, Provost of University College London and chairman of the Russell Group of 19 leading universities, said that the most popular universities were increasingly relying on interviews and tests to find the most promising students. "It means that we can now regard A levels only as a starting point in measuring aptitude and achievement. We are then relying on other measures, such as interviews and aptitude tests for law and medicine," he said.
Andrew Halls, headmaster of Magdalen College School in Oxford, where one pupil, Julian Lopez-Portillo, achieved eight grade As, said: "It is statistically easy to get an A. You can't deny that and universities find it hard to discriminate between top pupils. It probably should not be possible to get eight As."
The Department for Education has ruled out any big changes to A levels until 2008, but said it was exploring the possibility of introducing an A* grade, together with more difficult exam questions, for pupils starting A levels that year. Jim Knight, the Schools Minister, has set himself against a return to grade quotas or norm referencing, in which a fixed proportion are awarded each grade. "We need an education system that is about merit, not quotas," he said.
The University of Cambridge backed the introduction of an A* grade that would be reserved for a fixed proportion. Geoff Parks, Cambridge's admissions tutor, said that he would welcome any steps that would help to differentiate between students with three grade As. "If the A* grade was norm-referenced for the top 7 per cent or a higher overall performance, that would also potentially help," he said.
David Willetts, the Shadow Education Secretary, agreed that grade quotas would be helpful. "You could give A* grades to the top 10 per cent of students and you could allow universities to know the numerical grade that each student got. That would allow differentiation to occur using existing information," he said. Sarah Teather, the Liberal Democrat education spokeswoman, called for reform and said that A levels did not stretch the brightest pupils. The National Union of Students called for an open debate. Ellie Russell, its vice-president, said: "Times have changed and the A-level system is in need of review." However, John Dunford, the general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, urged the Government not to devalue A grades with an A*. "[This will] increase stress and anorexia among bright 17 and 18-year-olds," he said.
More here
MORE FINANCIAL INSANITY IN THE NHS
They can't fund the hospitals they have so what do they do? Build new ones! Unbelievable
Six new Private Finance Initiative hospitals will be approved by the Government today, signalling its commitment to continue what it claims to be the largest hospital building programme in the history of the NHS. But the optimistic message will meet with fury from public health specialists and training hospitals, which have been told to cut their budgets to hold down NHS deficits. Under the plans, Guy's and St Thomas' will lose 4.7 million pounds , Bart's and the London 3.7 million, the Royal Free 2.1 million and St George's 2.2 million, for example.
The money will come from budgets set aside for education and training for this year, which is already half over. "Lord knows how we are going to make these kinds of cuts when the money is already committed," one hospital manager said yesterday. "What a way to run a business!" said another in an exchange of e-mails across the network of London teaching hospitals. The impression being given was that the hospitals would not take the cuts lying down.
Public health spending has also been targeted, according to Health Service Journal, which reported that the department's plan is to set aside a 350 million "contingency fund" to help to bring the NHS back into financial balance. This will come from money devolved to strategic health authorities (SHAs) this year from central funds that were devoted to public health, medical education and training, clinical excellence awards, performance-related pay for GPs and services such as walk-in centres, out-of-hours services, and NHS Direct.
Public health specialists are furious. Professor Rod Griffiths, the president of the Faculty of Public Health, told Health Service Journal: "I'm very disappointed that something as important as this has been so clumsily managed. "The overspends have not been caused by community medicine. It is poor commissioning and poor management of acute services." The department is projecting a gross deficit for the NHS in this financial year of 883 million, against 1.2 billion last year. It plans to offset this against a 135 million surplus from primary care and acute trusts, 415 million from savings by SHAs, and the 350 million contingency fund. That should achieve a net surplus of 17 million.
But these problems will be brushed aside by ministers as they announce another 1.5 billion for six new PFI hospitals to be built for University Hospitals North Staffordshire, Tameside and Glossop NHS Trust, Salford Royal Hospitals, Walsall Hospitals, South Devon Healthcare, and University Hospitals Leicester. Andy Burnham, the Health Minister, said: "We are delighted to be able to give the go-ahead for these new hospitals. This is great news for the hundreds of thousands of patients who will benefit from the modern, bright new buildings. "The new facilities will not only be the best in terms of design and quality, but they will be affordable well into the future."
The six hospitals will have far more single rooms than traditional NHS hospitals, with up to half the beds in single rooms. The standard of accommodation and facilities will be a big leap forward, the department said. The first of the new hospitals will open in 2010. The announcement means that since 1997, more than 10 billion will have been committed to hospital building. A total of 76 schemes are open - 58 PFI and 18 built using public capital - and another 30 are under construction. Andrew Lansley, the Shadow Health Secretary, said: "The reality is that the NHS financial crisis has resulted in over 20,000 job losses in NHS hospitals, and has raised the spectre of some of these hospitals closing."
Source
They can't fund the hospitals they have so what do they do? Build new ones! Unbelievable
Six new Private Finance Initiative hospitals will be approved by the Government today, signalling its commitment to continue what it claims to be the largest hospital building programme in the history of the NHS. But the optimistic message will meet with fury from public health specialists and training hospitals, which have been told to cut their budgets to hold down NHS deficits. Under the plans, Guy's and St Thomas' will lose 4.7 million pounds , Bart's and the London 3.7 million, the Royal Free 2.1 million and St George's 2.2 million, for example.
The money will come from budgets set aside for education and training for this year, which is already half over. "Lord knows how we are going to make these kinds of cuts when the money is already committed," one hospital manager said yesterday. "What a way to run a business!" said another in an exchange of e-mails across the network of London teaching hospitals. The impression being given was that the hospitals would not take the cuts lying down.
Public health spending has also been targeted, according to Health Service Journal, which reported that the department's plan is to set aside a 350 million "contingency fund" to help to bring the NHS back into financial balance. This will come from money devolved to strategic health authorities (SHAs) this year from central funds that were devoted to public health, medical education and training, clinical excellence awards, performance-related pay for GPs and services such as walk-in centres, out-of-hours services, and NHS Direct.
Public health specialists are furious. Professor Rod Griffiths, the president of the Faculty of Public Health, told Health Service Journal: "I'm very disappointed that something as important as this has been so clumsily managed. "The overspends have not been caused by community medicine. It is poor commissioning and poor management of acute services." The department is projecting a gross deficit for the NHS in this financial year of 883 million, against 1.2 billion last year. It plans to offset this against a 135 million surplus from primary care and acute trusts, 415 million from savings by SHAs, and the 350 million contingency fund. That should achieve a net surplus of 17 million.
But these problems will be brushed aside by ministers as they announce another 1.5 billion for six new PFI hospitals to be built for University Hospitals North Staffordshire, Tameside and Glossop NHS Trust, Salford Royal Hospitals, Walsall Hospitals, South Devon Healthcare, and University Hospitals Leicester. Andy Burnham, the Health Minister, said: "We are delighted to be able to give the go-ahead for these new hospitals. This is great news for the hundreds of thousands of patients who will benefit from the modern, bright new buildings. "The new facilities will not only be the best in terms of design and quality, but they will be affordable well into the future."
The six hospitals will have far more single rooms than traditional NHS hospitals, with up to half the beds in single rooms. The standard of accommodation and facilities will be a big leap forward, the department said. The first of the new hospitals will open in 2010. The announcement means that since 1997, more than 10 billion will have been committed to hospital building. A total of 76 schemes are open - 58 PFI and 18 built using public capital - and another 30 are under construction. Andrew Lansley, the Shadow Health Secretary, said: "The reality is that the NHS financial crisis has resulted in over 20,000 job losses in NHS hospitals, and has raised the spectre of some of these hospitals closing."
Source
Gold and silver are good medicine: "Scientists have developed a new 'golden bullet' to help in the fight against deadly cancers. Adding tiny particles of gold to an existing cancer drug boosts its power by 50 per cent, they have found. This then helps the medicine kill off more malignant cells while leaving healthy tissue unharmed... The new study by a team at the University of East Anglia is based on a system which uses a light sensitive drug to target cancer cells. The drug homes in on the the tumour and when exposed to light, it starts to produce an active form of oxygen. This oxygen is toxic to the cancer cells so makes them die off. Dr David Russell and his team wanted to see if there was any way of boosting the effectiveness of the system, officially called photo-dynamic therapy. They attached gold nanoparticles to the drug and used it on cervical cancer cells in the laboratory. It emerged that the gold led to 50 per cent more of the active oxygen, known as 'singlet oxygen', being produced. As expected this then led to more cells taking up the drug and dying off... Professor David Philips, an expert in photo-dynamic therapy from Imperial College London said results so far bode well for the future studies. It is also not the first time that scientists have turned to precious metals to help fight disease. Experts have long known silver can tackle the superbug and can be highly toxic to other bacteria. Silver's antibacterial properties were used by sailors in the past, who put silver coins in barrels of water to purify it. The metal is still used today in water purification and is also used in some plasters and hospital dressings to try to prevent infections with MRSA."
Saturday, August 19, 2006
UK: A new law a day for nine years: "Tony Blair's government has created more than 3,000 new criminal offences during its nine-year tenure, one for almost every day it has been in power. The astonishing tally brought accusations last night of a 'frenzied approach to law-making' that contrasts with falling detection rates and climbing levels of violent crime. The figures emerged as police chiefs disclosed they were considering asking ministers for a set of new measures to allow them to impose 'instant justice' for antisocial behaviour."
BRITISH UNIVERSITIES SCORN GOVERNMENT EXAMS
Fresh concerns were raised about the 'gold standard' of A-levels yesterday after it emerged that more than 10,000 straight-A students have been rejected by Oxbridge. The bright sixth-formers did not receive offers from Oxford and Cambridge despite the fact they are predicted to achieve at least three grade As tomorrow. They were turned down as a surfeit of teenagers are emerging with a clutch of top qualifications, making it increasingly difficult for universities to distinguish between them.
The figures will fuel concern that A-levels are becoming increasingly meaningless, with pass rates expected to nudge 100 per cent as they rise for the 24th consecutive year. Last year, pass rates increased to more than 96 per cent while the number of A grades also rose to more than 22 per cent, leaving many teenagers celebrating with at least five top A-levels. This compares to less than 12 per cent a decade ago. The government has pledged to toughen up A-levels by introducing harder questions to help stretch the brightest by 2008. A trial is being launched later this year. And a new supergrade of A* will be introduced as a result to provide better differentiation between top achieving students.
Dr Geoff Parks, director of admissions at Cambridge University, said: 'There will be students with very good A-level results that haven't got offers this year. 'It's now recognised that there needs to be more stretch and challenge to test the more able students better and the grading system needs to provide better differentiation. 'There are plans afoot to deal with this and it's not a question of beating on the door. It's more a case of waiting for the reforms which are being piloted to come through. 'Although it's frustrating, it's going to take a couple of years before these reforms are actually tried out, it's better than rushing the reforms without them being properly piloted.'
Referring to A-levels, he added: 'The reliability of assessment has improved but at the expense of making the exams more predictable. 'That has reduced the opportunity to test some of those sorts of more advanced skills that the universities are looking for and limits the opportunity for students with those skills to demonstrate them.'
More here
Fresh concerns were raised about the 'gold standard' of A-levels yesterday after it emerged that more than 10,000 straight-A students have been rejected by Oxbridge. The bright sixth-formers did not receive offers from Oxford and Cambridge despite the fact they are predicted to achieve at least three grade As tomorrow. They were turned down as a surfeit of teenagers are emerging with a clutch of top qualifications, making it increasingly difficult for universities to distinguish between them.
The figures will fuel concern that A-levels are becoming increasingly meaningless, with pass rates expected to nudge 100 per cent as they rise for the 24th consecutive year. Last year, pass rates increased to more than 96 per cent while the number of A grades also rose to more than 22 per cent, leaving many teenagers celebrating with at least five top A-levels. This compares to less than 12 per cent a decade ago. The government has pledged to toughen up A-levels by introducing harder questions to help stretch the brightest by 2008. A trial is being launched later this year. And a new supergrade of A* will be introduced as a result to provide better differentiation between top achieving students.
Dr Geoff Parks, director of admissions at Cambridge University, said: 'There will be students with very good A-level results that haven't got offers this year. 'It's now recognised that there needs to be more stretch and challenge to test the more able students better and the grading system needs to provide better differentiation. 'There are plans afoot to deal with this and it's not a question of beating on the door. It's more a case of waiting for the reforms which are being piloted to come through. 'Although it's frustrating, it's going to take a couple of years before these reforms are actually tried out, it's better than rushing the reforms without them being properly piloted.'
Referring to A-levels, he added: 'The reliability of assessment has improved but at the expense of making the exams more predictable. 'That has reduced the opportunity to test some of those sorts of more advanced skills that the universities are looking for and limits the opportunity for students with those skills to demonstrate them.'
More here
We wuz wrong! -- again: "Doctors have cast doubt on the standard way of measuring whether people are obese or overweight. New research suggests shortcomings in the system of Body Mass Index (BMI) in identifying whether someone is at risk of dying prematurely. Studies show that heart patients identified as 'overweight' by BMI actually survived longer than those judged to have a 'normal' weight. This is because the system fails to identify if a person's excess weight is muscle rather than fat. If someone is heavy because of muscle, they are less likely to die younger - and should not be classed as overweight - compared to someone whose excess weight is mostly fat. According to the BMI, which has formed the basis of defining healthy and abnormal weight for more than 100 years, more than half the UK population is overweight and a further 20 per cent obese".
Thursday, August 17, 2006
Wimmin at War
It is 25 years since the Greenham Common protests began. Sarah Baxter was there, but now asks why feminist ideals have become twisted into support for groups like Hezbollah
When Ann Pettitt, the mother of two young children, and her friends set off in August 25 years ago on a 120-mile trek from Cardiff to the little known American air base at Greenham Common in Berkshire, they gave themselves the ambitious name of “Women for Life on Earth”. Their numbers were tiny but the stakes, they felt, were dauntingly high.
It is 25 years since the Greenham Common protests began. Sarah Baxter was there, but now asks why feminist ideals have become twisted into support for groups like Hezbollah
When Ann Pettitt, the mother of two young children, and her friends set off in August 25 years ago on a 120-mile trek from Cardiff to the little known American air base at Greenham Common in Berkshire, they gave themselves the ambitious name of “Women for Life on Earth”. Their numbers were tiny but the stakes, they felt, were dauntingly high.
The cold war world was bristling with Soviet and American nuclear weapons, posing the threat of mutual assured destruction (Mad). In a dramatic escalation of the arms race between the superpowers, shiny new cruise missiles were due to be delivered to Greenham, placing Britain’s green and pleasant land in the bull’s eye for targeting by the Soviet Union.
The modest peace march was largely ignored by the media, so on arrival at the base the women decided to borrow the eye-catching tactics of the suffragette movement. They chained themselves to the gates of Greenham and dared the police to remove them. Sympathisers began to turn up bearing makeshift tents, clothing and pots and pans. Many came and went but others stayed. Thus was the women’s peace camp born a quarter of a century ago this month and a new chapter in the history of feminism opened.
“I was motivated by fear and terror,” Pettitt recalled last week. “I was the mother of a two-year-old and a four-year-old and weapons of mass destruction were the ultimate denial of the fact that I’d created life. There was such brinkmanship, I really thought that nuclear weapons might be used.”
Mercifully, they weren’t. President Ronald Reagan once blurted out in front of a live microphone that the bombing of Russia was going to begin in 15 minutes, but it was nothing more than a tasteless joke. In hindsight Reagan’s hardline negotiating stance helped to bring about the collapse of the Soviet Union. By the end of the 1980s the Berlin Wall was down and the velvet revolutions in eastern Europe were under way.
The peace movement lost a foe in Reagan but has gone on to find new friends in today’s Stop the War movement. Women pushing their children in buggies bearing the familiar symbol of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament marched last weekend alongside banners proclaiming “We are all Hezbollah now” and Muslim extremists chanting “Oh Jew, the army of Muhammad will return.”
For Linda Grant, the novelist, who says that “feminism” is the one “ism” she has not given up on, it was a shocking sight: “What you’re seeing is an alliance of what used to be the far left with various Muslim groups and that poses real problems. Saturday’s march was not a peace march in the way that the Ban the Bomb marches were. Seeing young and old white women holding Hezbollah placards showed that it’s a very different anti-war movement to Greenham. Part of it feels the wrong side is winning.”
As a supporter of the peace movement in the 1980s, I could never have imagined that many of the same crowd I hung out with then would today be standing shoulder-to-shoulder with militantly anti-feminist Islamic fundamentalist groups, whose views on women make western patriarchy look like a Greenham peace picnic. Nor would I have predicted that today’s feminists would be so indulgent towards Iran, a theocratic nation where it is an act of resistance to show an inch or two of female hair beneath the veil and whose president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is not joking about his murderous intentions towards Israel and the Jews.
On the defining issue of our times, the rise of Islamic extremism, what is left of the sisterhood has almost nothing to say. Instead of “I am woman, hear me roar”, there is a loud silence, punctuated only by remonstrations against Tony Blair and George Bush — “the world’s number one terrorist” as the marchers would have it.
Women are perfectly entitled to oppose the war in Iraq or to feel that Israel is brutally overreacting to Hezbollah’s provocation. But where is the parallel, equally vital debate about how to combat Islamic fundamentalism? And why don’t more peace-loving feminists regard it as a threat? Kira Cochrane, 29, is the new editor of The Guardian women’s page, the bible of the Greenham years, where so many women writers made their names by staking out positions on the peace movement. She has noticed that today’s feminists are inclined to keep quiet about the march of radical Islam. “There’s a great fear of tackling the subject because of cultural relativism. People are scared of being called racist,” Cochrane observes.
Whatever the merits of unilateral nuclear disarmament, women were a lot braver a quarter of a century ago. Pettitt remembers how “we tried to crash the top table at Greenham. You had to be rude to interrupt because you’re never going to be invited to speak”.
I had just left university in the early 1980s when I got swept up in the peace movement. My Saturday afternoons were often spent marching from Hyde Park to Trafalgar Square and on the day when cruise missiles arrived in Britain, I rushed to a protest outside the Houses of Parliament, was arrested by the police, dragged into a black maria van and shoved overnight into a south London police cell. It was nothing compared to what the women of Greenham Common endured, but I felt like a heroine when the next day my male boss at Penguin Books, where I worked as a junior copywriter, paid my fine.
I was a bit sniffy about the all-women’s peace camp because I was partial to men and disliked much of the mumbo-jumbo surrounding it. In her forthcoming memoir, Walking to Greenham (published by Honno), Pettitt writes about the “delightful irony” of liberated women using “emblems of conformist democracy” such as knitting needles and wool to protest against war, but I used to see the ghastly spider webs and children’s mittens tied to the razor wire on the perimeter fence and shudder.
Nevertheless, I attended several “embrace the base” demonstrations in support of the women who had put the issue of nuclear disarmament so defiantly on the map. I went on to get a job at Virago, the feminist publisher, and marvelled at the way the “peace wimmin” had energised the brand new field of women’s studies, sparking lively debates on the virtues and vices of separatism from men and the extent to which nuclear weapons were “boys’ toys” (a tricky one in the age of Margaret Thatcher, Britain’s first woman prime minister).
Later, as a journalist, I broke into the base with a group of Greenham women, stood somewhat pointlessly on top of the silos where the cruise missiles were stored and went on to become friends with one of the peace campers, who had been abused as a child and had found comfort in the new “family” she had made living in the rough and ready “benders” constructed of branches and plastic sheeting.
Source
BRITISH RETHINK ON IMMIGRATION?
Sitting in his two- bedroom house just outside Bucharest, the Romanian capital, last week, Irinel Spatara, 42, was dreaming of a better life. He is one of the tens of thousands planning to travel to Britain when Romania and Bulgaria join the European Union.... However, it emerged yesterday that the ambitions of Spatara and others may be thwarted. John Reid, the home secretary, is said to be lobbying for possible restrictions on arrivals from the two countries seeking work. His rethink follows internal estimates by the government that 60,000-140,000 Romanians and Bulgarians could arrive in Britain in the first year after accession. A leaked government report warned last month of the increasing strain on schools, housing and the National Health Service.
Reid's move comes after one of the most significant changes in immigration policy since Labour came to power. After years of the government insisting that immigration was an unqualified good for the economy and there was "no obvious limit" to the numbers the country could hold, Reid suddenly announced last week that it was time for the country to discuss possible quotas. This has delighted the government's critics. They say previous attempts to encourage a "mature debate" about immigration levels have often been quashed with accusations of racism.
Bob Rowthorn, professor of economics at Cambridge University, said: "Most people coming into the country have a good reason: they're either running from somewhere or they want a job. You can't but be sympathetic and it's a natural reaction to think `let's let them all in'. The difficulty is that there is such a gigantic supply that it's not a practical policy. The government has, however, been in denial that there is any need for a debate." Michael Howard, the former Conservative leader, was left bruised in last year's election campaign election when he raised the issue. Charles Clarke, then home secretary, accused the Tories of trying to "mobilise prejudice and bigotry".
More than a year later, with constituents in some of Labour's heartlands complaining that their wages are being undercut and local services are under strain, Labour is suddenly starting to discuss immigration.
There is opposition in the government to Reid's proposal to consider denying Romanians and Bulgarians full rights to work in the EU. The Foreign Office and Geoff Hoon, the Europe minister, are said to oppose any ban. Frank Field, the Labour MP who has campaigned for stricter immigration controls, said: "We can't continue with an open-door policy. People are starting to complain they can't find jobs."
More here
Britain's young Muslim problem: "According to the NOP poll, 22 percent of the Muslims surveyed agreed that the July 2005 rush-hour bombings of London's transit system, which killed 52 subway and bus riders, were justified because of Britain's support for the war on terror. Young Muslims -- 31 percent, compared with 14 percent of those 45 and older -- were most likely to say the attack was justified. About 1.6 million Muslims live in Britain. Most come from India, Pakistan and Bangladesh and live in communities with ties that are stronger to their home countries than to Britain, said Marshall Sana of the British-based Barnabas Fund. "You have whole communities that are sort of self-governing, who are not acculturating to the community but are becoming more distant," said Mr. Sana, whose organization works to protect Christians around the world. "One major exchange is religious leaders coming into Britain -- they are not home-grown and educated in Western madrassas," but rather have strong Islamist ideals, said Mr. Sana."
Sitting in his two- bedroom house just outside Bucharest, the Romanian capital, last week, Irinel Spatara, 42, was dreaming of a better life. He is one of the tens of thousands planning to travel to Britain when Romania and Bulgaria join the European Union.... However, it emerged yesterday that the ambitions of Spatara and others may be thwarted. John Reid, the home secretary, is said to be lobbying for possible restrictions on arrivals from the two countries seeking work. His rethink follows internal estimates by the government that 60,000-140,000 Romanians and Bulgarians could arrive in Britain in the first year after accession. A leaked government report warned last month of the increasing strain on schools, housing and the National Health Service.
Reid's move comes after one of the most significant changes in immigration policy since Labour came to power. After years of the government insisting that immigration was an unqualified good for the economy and there was "no obvious limit" to the numbers the country could hold, Reid suddenly announced last week that it was time for the country to discuss possible quotas. This has delighted the government's critics. They say previous attempts to encourage a "mature debate" about immigration levels have often been quashed with accusations of racism.
Bob Rowthorn, professor of economics at Cambridge University, said: "Most people coming into the country have a good reason: they're either running from somewhere or they want a job. You can't but be sympathetic and it's a natural reaction to think `let's let them all in'. The difficulty is that there is such a gigantic supply that it's not a practical policy. The government has, however, been in denial that there is any need for a debate." Michael Howard, the former Conservative leader, was left bruised in last year's election campaign election when he raised the issue. Charles Clarke, then home secretary, accused the Tories of trying to "mobilise prejudice and bigotry".
More than a year later, with constituents in some of Labour's heartlands complaining that their wages are being undercut and local services are under strain, Labour is suddenly starting to discuss immigration.
There is opposition in the government to Reid's proposal to consider denying Romanians and Bulgarians full rights to work in the EU. The Foreign Office and Geoff Hoon, the Europe minister, are said to oppose any ban. Frank Field, the Labour MP who has campaigned for stricter immigration controls, said: "We can't continue with an open-door policy. People are starting to complain they can't find jobs."
More here
Britain's young Muslim problem: "According to the NOP poll, 22 percent of the Muslims surveyed agreed that the July 2005 rush-hour bombings of London's transit system, which killed 52 subway and bus riders, were justified because of Britain's support for the war on terror. Young Muslims -- 31 percent, compared with 14 percent of those 45 and older -- were most likely to say the attack was justified. About 1.6 million Muslims live in Britain. Most come from India, Pakistan and Bangladesh and live in communities with ties that are stronger to their home countries than to Britain, said Marshall Sana of the British-based Barnabas Fund. "You have whole communities that are sort of self-governing, who are not acculturating to the community but are becoming more distant," said Mr. Sana, whose organization works to protect Christians around the world. "One major exchange is religious leaders coming into Britain -- they are not home-grown and educated in Western madrassas," but rather have strong Islamist ideals, said Mr. Sana."
UK Telegraph vs. The Washington Post on roots of jihad
Post lifted from Jihad Watch
The Unalienable Right blog (thanks to the Constantinopolitan Irredentist) makes an important point by comparing a story from the Washington Post to one from the Telegraph:
So which is it? Are they poor and uneducated, or relatively well-off university students? As the Unalienable Right blog goes on to point out, the Post is simply repeating the old poverty-causes-jihad myth, and if the facts are otherwise, so much the worse for the facts.
Bungling British bureaucracy again: "Police are investigating how a 12-year-old boy with neither a passport nor a boarding pass was able to walk on to an international flight at Gatwick at a time when security staff were supposed to be on high alert. The child, who had run away from a care home, boarded a plane bound for Portugal early on Monday, even though security had been raised amid fears of a terrorist attack".
Post lifted from Jihad Watch
The Unalienable Right blog (thanks to the Constantinopolitan Irredentist) makes an important point by comparing a story from the Washington Post to one from the Telegraph:
From the Washington Post:Young Muslim Rage Takes Root in Britain, Unemployment, Foreign Policy Fuel Extremism
"...Britain has become an incubator for violent Islamic extremism, fueled by disenchantment at home and growing rage about events abroad, including the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan." .... In one of Europe's largest Muslim communities, young men face a lack of jobs, poor educational achievement and discrimination in a highly class-oriented culture. Prime Minister Tony Blair is the most outspoken ally of President Bush, and their policies in Iraq and Afghanistan are seen by many Muslims as aimed at Islam.
But from the UK Telegraph, contrast the article headlined "University students at centre of terror plots":The recruitment of Muslim students at British universities to take part in terrorist attacks is at the heart of the alleged plot to blow up passenger jets, it is feared. A dossier of extremist Islamic literature has been uncovered by The Sunday Telegraph on the campus of a north London university, one of whose students has suspected links to the alleged terrorist attack. Waheed Zaman, 22, a bio-chemistry student and the president of the Islamic Society at London Metropolitan University, was one of 24 people arrested last week. Material found at two portable buildings used by the society includes documents advocating jihad and a pamphlet on how to deal with approaches from the security services....
Extremist Muslim groups had been detected at more than 20 institutions, both former polytechnics and long-established universities, over the past 15 years, Prof Glees said.... According to security sources, "several" of the 23 people still in custody over the alleged plot last week are suspected of links to universities, appearing to confirm growing fears that campuses are providing Britain's biggest security threat.
So which is it? Are they poor and uneducated, or relatively well-off university students? As the Unalienable Right blog goes on to point out, the Post is simply repeating the old poverty-causes-jihad myth, and if the facts are otherwise, so much the worse for the facts.
Bungling British bureaucracy again: "Police are investigating how a 12-year-old boy with neither a passport nor a boarding pass was able to walk on to an international flight at Gatwick at a time when security staff were supposed to be on high alert. The child, who had run away from a care home, boarded a plane bound for Portugal early on Monday, even though security had been raised amid fears of a terrorist attack".
UK: Physics in downward spiral
The study of physics in schools and universities is spiralling into decline as many teenagers believe it is too difficult, academics warn in a damning report today. Just days away from the publication of A-level results in England and Wales next Thursday, the analysis by researchers from the University of Buckingham shows that the number of A-level exam entries in the subject has halved since 1982.
One in four universities which had significant numbers studying physics have stopped teaching the subject since 1994, they say. Even in the 26 top universities with the highest ratings for research, the trend has been downwards.
The authors, Alan Smithers and Pamela Robinson of the university's centre for education, warned the situation could get worse as fewer physics graduates were training to teach the subject in schools. Professor Smithers said: "Physics is in the grip of a long-term downward spiral. Not enough young people ... take physics degrees, which means the pool from which to recruit teachers is not large enough. Many young people do not get sufficient opportunity to discover if they are good at physics and they are naturally disinclined to take what they believe is a difficult subject at A-level."
But the report found that while the number of A-level entries had fallen to 28,119 last year from 55,728 in 1982, pupils have been scoring better grades. The number of A-grades awarded increased by 27.2% from 6,323 in 1990 to 8,042 in 2005. The report also claims that attempts to encourage more girls to take up the subject had stalled. "The introduction of combined science GCSE has meant that many more pupils are taking some physics up to the age of 16," Dr Robinson said. "It might have been expected that this would have led to substantial increases in A-level entries and a narrowing of the gender gap. In fact, neither has occurred."
Source
The study of physics in schools and universities is spiralling into decline as many teenagers believe it is too difficult, academics warn in a damning report today. Just days away from the publication of A-level results in England and Wales next Thursday, the analysis by researchers from the University of Buckingham shows that the number of A-level exam entries in the subject has halved since 1982.
One in four universities which had significant numbers studying physics have stopped teaching the subject since 1994, they say. Even in the 26 top universities with the highest ratings for research, the trend has been downwards.
The authors, Alan Smithers and Pamela Robinson of the university's centre for education, warned the situation could get worse as fewer physics graduates were training to teach the subject in schools. Professor Smithers said: "Physics is in the grip of a long-term downward spiral. Not enough young people ... take physics degrees, which means the pool from which to recruit teachers is not large enough. Many young people do not get sufficient opportunity to discover if they are good at physics and they are naturally disinclined to take what they believe is a difficult subject at A-level."
But the report found that while the number of A-level entries had fallen to 28,119 last year from 55,728 in 1982, pupils have been scoring better grades. The number of A-grades awarded increased by 27.2% from 6,323 in 1990 to 8,042 in 2005. The report also claims that attempts to encourage more girls to take up the subject had stalled. "The introduction of combined science GCSE has meant that many more pupils are taking some physics up to the age of 16," Dr Robinson said. "It might have been expected that this would have led to substantial increases in A-level entries and a narrowing of the gender gap. In fact, neither has occurred."
Source
Obesity pill: "A drug which treats obesity by reducing the desire to eat has been launched in the UK. But NHS chiefs warned people not to expect it to become widely available straight away as the cost-effectiveness of the pill needed to be assessed. Rimonabant is the first drug to target factors governing the body's appetite, metabolism and energy use. Trials showed it can reduce weight by a tenth. UK experts said it could not replace healthy food and regular exercise. In the UK, it is estimated that one in five men and a quarter of women are obese. But at a cost of over 55 pounds for a month's treatment, it could end up costing the NHS billions of pounds of money. The drug still has to be assessed by NHS advisers the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. The review is not expected for another two years and NHS bosses warned the public not to expect its widespread use immediately".
Muslim Hate Speech OK
We read:
So is his talk going to be cancelled? No way!
We read:
"A political storm blew up last night as it emerged a controversial Islamic preacher with radical views is due to speak at one of the most prestigious concert halls in Wales.
Dr Zakir Naik's publicly-expressed views include calling for the execution of Muslims who reject their faith and portraying Americans as people who eat and behave like pigs.
His scheduled appearance at Cardiff's St David's Hall this Saturday has provoked outrage from a Welsh MP who has urged the event be cancelled, particularly at a time of such international tension.
Source
So is his talk going to be cancelled? No way!
Wednesday, August 16, 2006
Passport photograph of girl's bare shoulders rejected 'as it may offend'
But British officialdom is now backpedalling
A five-year-old girl's passport application was rejected because her photograph showed her bare shoulders. Hannah Edwards's mother, Jane, was told that the exposed skin might be considered offensive in a Muslim country. The photograph was taken at a photo-booth at a local post office for a family trip to the south of France. Because of the way the camera was set up, the picture came out showing Hannah's shoulders.
The family had it signed and presented it at a post office with the completed form but were told that it would not be accepted by the Passport Office. A woman behind the counter informed them that she was aware of at least two other cases where applications had been rejected because a person's shoulders were not covered.
Mrs Edwards, a Sheffield GP, said: "I was incensed. I went back home and checked the form. Nowhere did it say anything about covering up shoulders. If it had, I would have done so, but it all seems so unnecessary. "This is quite ridiculous, I followed the instructions on the passport form to the letter and it was still rejected. It is just officialdom pandering to political correctness. "It is a total over-reaction. How can the shoulders of a five-year-old girl offend anyone? It's not as if anything else was showing, the dress she wore was sleeveless, but it has a high neck."
Hannah had her first passport when she was three months old. Her mother and her father, Martin, realised that it was due to expire during their holiday later this month and decided to renew it advance. They aimed to complete the application on Saturday, the same day that Hannah was to be Sheffield Wednesday football team's mascot at Hillsborough stadium. Mrs Edwards was also on call from her surgery. After the rejection at the post office, Mrs Edwards spent two hours taking Hannah for new pictures, filling in a new form and finding the necessary "responsible citizens" to endorse the photos. "The people who had signed the original application were not available," Mrs Edwards said. "I had to chase around and eventually found a neighbour who was a teacher to sign the pictures. "The Passport Office should set this sort of thing out in its forms if it is going to be so pedantic."
A spokesman for the Identity and Passport Service said it was not its policy to reject applications with bare shoulders. "The guidance set out on the application form doesn't include it, this picture should have been absolutely fine," she said. "If people follow those rules there should be no problem. "The Post Office obviously has its rules and we can't comment on that. We are aware of a case in the past where an error was made involving similar circumstances, although I don't know the exact details. Staff should be aware of the rules."
A Post Office spokesman said: "Our offices have a Passport Office template which says what the photograph should and shouldn't be. "Bare shoulders don't come into that at all. We can't see any instruction to that effect so all we can do is apologise to Mrs Edwards. It was clearly a mistake made by the clerk at the post office. "It is the first time we have heard of such a rejection and we will take it up with that particular office. "We do around three million passport applications a year. It is one of our most popular services and it is normally extremely effective. "We have a much lower rejection rate compared to applications submitted directly to the Passport Office."
Source
But British officialdom is now backpedalling
A five-year-old girl's passport application was rejected because her photograph showed her bare shoulders. Hannah Edwards's mother, Jane, was told that the exposed skin might be considered offensive in a Muslim country. The photograph was taken at a photo-booth at a local post office for a family trip to the south of France. Because of the way the camera was set up, the picture came out showing Hannah's shoulders.
The family had it signed and presented it at a post office with the completed form but were told that it would not be accepted by the Passport Office. A woman behind the counter informed them that she was aware of at least two other cases where applications had been rejected because a person's shoulders were not covered.
Mrs Edwards, a Sheffield GP, said: "I was incensed. I went back home and checked the form. Nowhere did it say anything about covering up shoulders. If it had, I would have done so, but it all seems so unnecessary. "This is quite ridiculous, I followed the instructions on the passport form to the letter and it was still rejected. It is just officialdom pandering to political correctness. "It is a total over-reaction. How can the shoulders of a five-year-old girl offend anyone? It's not as if anything else was showing, the dress she wore was sleeveless, but it has a high neck."
Hannah had her first passport when she was three months old. Her mother and her father, Martin, realised that it was due to expire during their holiday later this month and decided to renew it advance. They aimed to complete the application on Saturday, the same day that Hannah was to be Sheffield Wednesday football team's mascot at Hillsborough stadium. Mrs Edwards was also on call from her surgery. After the rejection at the post office, Mrs Edwards spent two hours taking Hannah for new pictures, filling in a new form and finding the necessary "responsible citizens" to endorse the photos. "The people who had signed the original application were not available," Mrs Edwards said. "I had to chase around and eventually found a neighbour who was a teacher to sign the pictures. "The Passport Office should set this sort of thing out in its forms if it is going to be so pedantic."
A spokesman for the Identity and Passport Service said it was not its policy to reject applications with bare shoulders. "The guidance set out on the application form doesn't include it, this picture should have been absolutely fine," she said. "If people follow those rules there should be no problem. "The Post Office obviously has its rules and we can't comment on that. We are aware of a case in the past where an error was made involving similar circumstances, although I don't know the exact details. Staff should be aware of the rules."
A Post Office spokesman said: "Our offices have a Passport Office template which says what the photograph should and shouldn't be. "Bare shoulders don't come into that at all. We can't see any instruction to that effect so all we can do is apologise to Mrs Edwards. It was clearly a mistake made by the clerk at the post office. "It is the first time we have heard of such a rejection and we will take it up with that particular office. "We do around three million passport applications a year. It is one of our most popular services and it is normally extremely effective. "We have a much lower rejection rate compared to applications submitted directly to the Passport Office."
Source
Tuesday, August 15, 2006
Quality of students is 'pretty dire' warn British companies
The "dire" quality of many school-leavers threatens to undermine Britain's future success in manufacturing and science, leading business figures have warned. The CBI said thousands of teenagers were turning their backs on studying science because of inadequate teaching and a belief that they can get better A-level grades in easier subjects.
Bosses warned that science and technology firms could abandon British graduates in future and look abroad to economic rivals such as India and China for new staff. Flanked by the UK heads of electronics giant Siemens and pharmaceuticals firm Sanofi- Aventis, CBI director-general Richard Lambert told reporters the Government must act immediately to avert a crisis. "The UK risks being knocked off its perch as a world-leader in science, engineering and technology," he said. "We cannot afford for this to happen."
The call came just days before 250,000 teenagers receive their A-level results. Last week academics warned that physics in particular is in long-term decline in schools and universities as many students pick "easier" courses. Alan Wood, chief executive of Siemens UK, said "embarrassingly large numbers of people" leave secondary school unable even to read and write properly.
Siemens struggles to find well-trained school leavers to work in manufacturing and take up apprenticeships, he said. "We find the quality of people coming out of the secondary education system is pretty dire on the whole," he said. "Naturally the ones who achieve greater success tend to go on to tertiary education and the quality of those coming out of school to an industry like ours leaves an enormous amount to be desired." There is a "very real threat" that firms will look overseas to India and China for new skilled recruits in future unless action is taken, he said. "If we just give up then as a society we are going to degenerate to become a developing country for the second 50 years of this century."
Nigel Brooksby, managing director of Sanofi-Aventis UK, called for reform of the school science curriculum. He said, "We employ just over 3,000 people in the UK. It is not the quantity of graduates, it is the quality. We are having to retrain graduates in laboratory skills. "If we are to continue to be a powerhouse of discovery for innovative new medicines, then we need to address not just graduates but getting science taught differently at school."
The CBI called on ministers to do more to recruit more specialist science teachers to inspire children to study the subjects. The new combined "double science" GCSE, which many pupils now opt for, does not provide the grounding they need to take sciences at A-level, the group said.
One possible solution would be to give all state pupils the right to study physics, chemistry or biology as separate subjects at GCSE - as is the case in many independent schools - rather than the combined science courses, the CBI said.
Demand for newly-qualified chemists, physicists, engineers and lab technicians has been rising consistently. Over the next eight years the UK will need to have found 2.4 million new staff with these skills, the CBI said.
Schools minister Jim Knight insisted the Government was addressing the issue. "Increasing the number of scientists is a priority for this Government," he said. "We are already making significant progress on delivering the actions being called for by the CBI. "Since 1997 there has been a 57% increase in the number of science, technology, engineering and maths graduates, outstripping increases in graduates in other subjects. "Chemistry and physics graduate numbers alone have increased by 24% and 20% respectively. "Science remains a popular subject at A-level, and there has been a 30% increase in the numbers training to teach science since 1997."
Source
The "dire" quality of many school-leavers threatens to undermine Britain's future success in manufacturing and science, leading business figures have warned. The CBI said thousands of teenagers were turning their backs on studying science because of inadequate teaching and a belief that they can get better A-level grades in easier subjects.
Bosses warned that science and technology firms could abandon British graduates in future and look abroad to economic rivals such as India and China for new staff. Flanked by the UK heads of electronics giant Siemens and pharmaceuticals firm Sanofi- Aventis, CBI director-general Richard Lambert told reporters the Government must act immediately to avert a crisis. "The UK risks being knocked off its perch as a world-leader in science, engineering and technology," he said. "We cannot afford for this to happen."
The call came just days before 250,000 teenagers receive their A-level results. Last week academics warned that physics in particular is in long-term decline in schools and universities as many students pick "easier" courses. Alan Wood, chief executive of Siemens UK, said "embarrassingly large numbers of people" leave secondary school unable even to read and write properly.
Siemens struggles to find well-trained school leavers to work in manufacturing and take up apprenticeships, he said. "We find the quality of people coming out of the secondary education system is pretty dire on the whole," he said. "Naturally the ones who achieve greater success tend to go on to tertiary education and the quality of those coming out of school to an industry like ours leaves an enormous amount to be desired." There is a "very real threat" that firms will look overseas to India and China for new skilled recruits in future unless action is taken, he said. "If we just give up then as a society we are going to degenerate to become a developing country for the second 50 years of this century."
Nigel Brooksby, managing director of Sanofi-Aventis UK, called for reform of the school science curriculum. He said, "We employ just over 3,000 people in the UK. It is not the quantity of graduates, it is the quality. We are having to retrain graduates in laboratory skills. "If we are to continue to be a powerhouse of discovery for innovative new medicines, then we need to address not just graduates but getting science taught differently at school."
The CBI called on ministers to do more to recruit more specialist science teachers to inspire children to study the subjects. The new combined "double science" GCSE, which many pupils now opt for, does not provide the grounding they need to take sciences at A-level, the group said.
One possible solution would be to give all state pupils the right to study physics, chemistry or biology as separate subjects at GCSE - as is the case in many independent schools - rather than the combined science courses, the CBI said.
Demand for newly-qualified chemists, physicists, engineers and lab technicians has been rising consistently. Over the next eight years the UK will need to have found 2.4 million new staff with these skills, the CBI said.
Schools minister Jim Knight insisted the Government was addressing the issue. "Increasing the number of scientists is a priority for this Government," he said. "We are already making significant progress on delivering the actions being called for by the CBI. "Since 1997 there has been a 57% increase in the number of science, technology, engineering and maths graduates, outstripping increases in graduates in other subjects. "Chemistry and physics graduate numbers alone have increased by 24% and 20% respectively. "Science remains a popular subject at A-level, and there has been a 30% increase in the numbers training to teach science since 1997."
Source
NHS BILLIONS SQUANDERED
The tens of billions of extra cash poured into the National Health Service by Labour has been "largely wasted", according to a study by the think tank Civitas to be published this week. It says that while the government has mainly succeeded in meeting its NHS targets, the underlying picture is one of "little or no evidence of improvement in NHS performance, which ranks among the worst in the developed world". Most damningly, the Civitas report finds that any improvements in healthcare in Britain have lagged behind other countries, despite the fact that money has been injected into health in Britain at a much faster rate than elsewhere. "In the vast majority of areas improvements in the NHS have in no way increased in proportion to the vast sums of money ploughed into its coffers," said James Gubb, the report's author.
The study shows that spending on the NHS has almost doubled from o44.9 billion six years ago. Even allowing for inflation, the increase is still one-third. Ministers boast that the extra spending means key targets have been met on improved facilities, waiting times, cancer care and coronary heart disease. But the emphasis on targets has resulted in what the report calls "gaming" - other services being neglected in order to achieve targets. In some NHS trusts patients have been kept waiting in ambulances until managers were confident they could meet the four-hour waiting-time target inside the hospital.
The policy has also been accompanied by inefficiency. Official figures show NHS productivity has been declining by up to 0.5% a year, implying that a significant proportion of the extra funds injected have not led to improved patient care. The report also highlights the continued poor performance of the NHS compared with other countries. Britain is virtually the only advanced country not to have recorded an improvement in mortality rates from strokes in recent years, and fatalities are twice the level recorded in Australia, Canada, Japan, Sweden, Switzerland and America. Britain ranks 24th out of 27 countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development with comparable data in terms of the number of practising doctors per 1,000 population.
Source
The tens of billions of extra cash poured into the National Health Service by Labour has been "largely wasted", according to a study by the think tank Civitas to be published this week. It says that while the government has mainly succeeded in meeting its NHS targets, the underlying picture is one of "little or no evidence of improvement in NHS performance, which ranks among the worst in the developed world". Most damningly, the Civitas report finds that any improvements in healthcare in Britain have lagged behind other countries, despite the fact that money has been injected into health in Britain at a much faster rate than elsewhere. "In the vast majority of areas improvements in the NHS have in no way increased in proportion to the vast sums of money ploughed into its coffers," said James Gubb, the report's author.
The study shows that spending on the NHS has almost doubled from o44.9 billion six years ago. Even allowing for inflation, the increase is still one-third. Ministers boast that the extra spending means key targets have been met on improved facilities, waiting times, cancer care and coronary heart disease. But the emphasis on targets has resulted in what the report calls "gaming" - other services being neglected in order to achieve targets. In some NHS trusts patients have been kept waiting in ambulances until managers were confident they could meet the four-hour waiting-time target inside the hospital.
The policy has also been accompanied by inefficiency. Official figures show NHS productivity has been declining by up to 0.5% a year, implying that a significant proportion of the extra funds injected have not led to improved patient care. The report also highlights the continued poor performance of the NHS compared with other countries. Britain is virtually the only advanced country not to have recorded an improvement in mortality rates from strokes in recent years, and fatalities are twice the level recorded in Australia, Canada, Japan, Sweden, Switzerland and America. Britain ranks 24th out of 27 countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development with comparable data in terms of the number of practising doctors per 1,000 population.
Source
Woad is good for you: "Woad, the plant that was used by Ancient Britons and Celts to make their striking blue warpaint, has been found to be one of the most potent natural sources of a compound used to fight cancer. A team of Italian scientists found that it contains 20 times more of the cancer-fighting chemical glucobrassicin than broccoli, a plant prized for its powers to combat the disease. The researchers, led by Stefania Galletti, of the University of Bologna, found that the glucobrassicin levels could be further enhanced to nearly 65 times. They hope that the discovery may advance research of disease treatments, particularly for breast cancer. The study, published in the Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, showed that the compound plays a defensive role in plants, with levels increasing by 30 per cent if a leaf is damaged. Derivatives of glucobrassicin can kill some plant pests, such as insects, and also appear to have antitumour properties, and are particularly effective against breast cancer."
White Reporters to be Muzzled by the BBC
If you are a white reporter for the BBC, it looks like you don't have a big future. The BBC's "diversity" Tsar doesn't think you can report accurately:
Gerald Hartup has some good comments and background (Scroll down).
If you are a white reporter for the BBC, it looks like you don't have a big future. The BBC's "diversity" Tsar doesn't think you can report accurately:
"Mary Fitzpatrick, who is consulted on all decisions about television content at the BBC, said the 'cultural accuracy' among reporting staff was on her hitlist. She said there were too many white reporters reporting from non-white nations, particularly in Africa."
Source
Gerald Hartup has some good comments and background (Scroll down).
Monday, August 14, 2006
"Londonistan" does not work
Few can have failed to shudder at the thought of a plot to blow up nine passenger planes and the intended mass murder of thousands of innocent people over the Atlantic. Whatever the outcome of the police investigation into a conspiracy that seems to have been stopped just in time, we should praise the alertness of Britain's often criticised and overstretched intelligence services. Peter Clarke, deputy assistant commissioner at Scotland Yard, says at least three other serious plots by home-grown terrorists have been disrupted since last year's July 7 attacks on the London Underground. The danger seems ever present.
It is now self-evident that there is an enemy within Britain who wants to destroy our way of life. Most of this relatively small group of fanatics are British-born Muslims who have been educated here and brought up within our tolerant democracy. Those looking for the outward signs that identify them as full of hatred would be hard-pressed to find them. Many seem all too ordinary, perhaps enthusiastic about football and cricket and living "normal" westernised existences in neat terraced houses. They work, study or run small businesses. Most show little indication that they have signed up to the distorted ideology of radical Islam, with its millennial ideology of bringing destruction to the corrupt West. As "sleepers", they are perfect.
Why is Britain such a breeding ground for these young men, for that is what most of them are? Much can be ascribed to timidity on behalf of the authorities, wedded as they are to a multiculturalism that isolates many young men in ghettos and a reluctance to espouse British values through our schools and institutions. That appeasement was epitomised by the sanctuary offered to extremist Islamic groups in Britain - "Londonistan" - in the pathetic hope that it might offer some form of immunity from violence. The United States, with its intolerant attitude to those preaching hate, has been far more successful in integrating its Muslim citizens, offering them the ideals of patriotism and progress. Even France, which has a bigger Muslim population than Britain and has had its share of troubles with disaffected youth, has not seen the scale of Islamist treachery that we are experiencing here. MI5 believes up to 400,000 people in Britain are sympathetic to violent "jihad" around the world and that as many as 1,200 are involved in terrorist networks.
These extremists are drawn both from our educated classes and the Muslim underclass. The first alienated group seems susceptible to radical recruiters on university campuses, the latter to firebrands they meet in mosques or in prison. There they are fed the lines that the West is evil and corrupt. They are urged to look at a culture of binge drinking, reckless hedonism, moral laxity and materialism. They see little of the advantages to our society of freedom of choice, of religion, of individualism and of equality. Nor is it good enough to claim that extremism is fostered by poverty. Although Pakistanis and Bangladeshis are struggling to do as well as some other second or third-generation immigrant groups, many of the recruits are from relatively privileged backgrounds. It is more a matter of a battle for minds rather than pockets. Add to this the internet, the finishing school of global terror, and a legal system that appears to be inflexible about deporting foreign jihadists, and you have the ingredients for an explosive clash of cultures.
When an undercover reporter from The Sunday Times visited Beeston in Nottinghamshire, where three of the July 7 bombers came from, he found either a denial that they had been involved or, perhaps more alarmingly, respect for them as Muslim martyrs. It is this potent mix of self- delusion - witness all the absurd theories about 9/11 and 7/7 - and a sneaking admiration for jihad even among seemingly sensible Muslims.
The great challenge for Britain is how to stop this and minimise the future risks. Nobody should underestimate the scale of the problem or the time needed. We already have a generation of disaffected Muslims who see any excuse, whether it is war in Iraq, Afghanistan or Lebanon, as a reason for killing their fellow citizens. The government has commissioned studies on combatting the problem, so far with little tangible impact. Tony Blair has been wooing Muslim leaders, too often the radicals rather than the moderates, although this policy seems to lie in shreds as they moan about wars in the Middle East inflaming Islamic youth. They are perfectly entitled to be angry about these conflicts, but that anger should be expressed through the democratic processes of demonstrations and elections.
That is not to say that the government is not right to try to win over Muslim opinion. If terror is to be defeated, you have first to drain the swamp. Muslims have to be persuaded that we are on the same side, that there is no witch-hunt against Islam and that the wars involving British troops are about stopping Islamists and the corruption of their religion. This means Muslims being alert to extremists in their ranks and being prepared to identify them to the police. It means Muslims becoming intolerant of radical mullahs and hounding them out of their mosques. Equally the authorities have a responsibility to crack down on extremists in universities and in prisons, to close internet sites and bookshops that spread hatred and violence, and to take all reasonable measures to protect their citizens.
At times this may seem unjust. Muslims who visit Pakistan will have to be more closely scrutinised and it may seem that they are being systematically targeted. But Muslims will have to understand that it is their co-religionists who are bent on bombing trains and planes and that requires extraordinary measures. A mature Muslim response will be to co-operate and help to eradicate extremists in their midst. It requires the vast majority of Muslims to believe that their future is tied to Britain, a country in which their religion can be respected and freely practised. If the radicals succeed, it will foster only hatred and intolerance.
This low-level war is going to take a huge effort of will and courage. It is going to mean applying what may seem illiberal measures in order to save lives. In return, the state must exercise massive restraint and not abuse that responsibility. But the real key is for Muslims to realise that their future lies here and to embrace British values and reject violent Islamist theology. The country may indeed be in its greatest danger since the second world war, as John Reid, the home secretary, said last week. But as Britain prevailed then, so it will again.
Source
A hairy moment for free speech
Tommy Sheridan’s libel win over the News of the World was no ‘victory’ for the working class. It was a victory for an archaic law over open debate.
On Friday last week, by a majority of 7-4, a jury of six men and five women found in favour of Tommy Sheridan, former Scottish Socialist Party leader and MSP, in his defamation action against News Group Newspapers, publisher of the News of the World. Sheridan sued the tabloid for printing articles in 2004 and 2005 claiming he was an adulterer, had visited Cupids swingers’ club in Manchester, and had taken part in orgies. He was awarded £200,000 in damages.
Celebrating his victory outside the Court of Session in Edinburgh, Sheridan said: ‘I have over the last five weeks taken on one of the biggest organisations on the planet…. What today’s verdict proves is that working-class people, when they listen to the arguments, can identify the truth from the muck.’
But there has been no shortage of muck thrown by Sheridan himself – during and after the trial. He accused the News of the World’s 18 witnesses of perjury and branded the 11 members of the SSP who spoke against him in court as ‘scabs’. Apparently, they’ve been orchestrating a witch-hunt against Sheridan in order to bring about his political downfall.
These are the same 11 members of the SSP who refused to hand over to the court the minutes of the meeting where Sheridan allegedly admitted he had attended a swingers’ club but said he would deny it publicly because the News of the World would never be able to prove it. It was only after a former comrade and friend of Sheridan’s, Alan McCombes, was jailed for contempt that the minutes were produced.
McCombes has since issued a statement, with the backing of the SSP national executive, likening Sheridan to Jeffrey Archer and claiming he would bring down the SSP.
As commentator Magnus Linklater reminds us in an article in Scotland on Sunday, Scottish hero Robert Louis Stevenson thought there was nothing uglier than a court of law: ‘Hither come envy, malice, and all uncharitableness to wrestle it out in public tourney.’ To add insult to injury, some members of the SSP are apparently considering legal action against Sheridan over comments he made following his victory. Also, MSP Carolyn Leckie says that those whose reputations had been tarnished would welcome perjury charges as a chance to clear their names. Lothian and Borders Police yesterday confirmed they are considering whether to launch a perjury investigation.
It is hard to see who the winners are in this sorry state of affairs. Sheridan has won £200,000 in damages, subject to appeal, but whether suing has in any way helped to restore his reputation (let’s not forget that he told the court he is a hairy ape and offered to disrobe ‘if my lord will allow me’) remains to be seen.
Some members of the jury may not have been impressed with the News of the World’s defence, but then again the tabloid newspapers’ practice of ‘chequebook journalism’ rarely elicits much sympathy from members of the public today. The fact that Sheridan won the case, despite 18 witnesses testifying against him, indicates how low the media have sunk in the eyes of the public.
Sheridan is not the only famous permatanned Scottish socialist to use the UK’s libel laws in recent years. In December 2004 George Galloway, ex-Labour MP, and now an MP for the anti-war, anti-Blair party RESPECT, successfully won his libel battle against the Daily Telegraph. The paper published allegations that Galloway was in the secret pay of Saddam Hussein. After the ruling, Galloway declared: ‘I am glad and somewhat humbled to discover that there is at least one corner of the English field which remains uncorrupted and independent, and that corner is in this courtroom.’
Galloway’s uncorrupted and independent ‘corner of the English field’ has won London the reputation as the libel capital of the world. The capital is often dubbed ‘a town called Sue’. Everybody knows that the UK libel courts are used by chancers, from around the world, to launder their reputation.
Court 13 – where Galloway’s case was heard - is the place where in July 1987 the now disgraced peer Jeffrey Archer won his £500,000 libel damages from the Daily Star over allegations that he had had sex with a prostitute. Later convicted of perjury and perverting the course of justice, Archer was forced to pay the money back to the Star. It was also in Court 13 that high drama and farce were played out between Harrod’s owner Mohamed al-Fayed and former Tory MP Neil Hamilton - described during the proceedings as the meeting of a ‘habitual liar’ and a ‘politician on the make’.
Galloway and Sheridan have unfortunately given the UK’s anachronistic libel law - a law that grew out of a dissatisfaction with the old aristocratic ways of dealing with defamation through duels - a new lease of life. (The Scottish libel law is based in large part on England’s libel law, though with some minor differences.)
They, of course, see things differently, depicting themselves as brave working-class heroes fighting against the mighty media empire. Sheridan even accused the News of the World of endangering his unborn baby’s life with its lies. But it is far from brave to sue newspapers for libel. As claimants, the odds are clearly stacked in their favour, whether or not what was said about them was true - which is why the vast majority of claimants win their libel cases.
Under libel law, claimants do not need to prove that what was said about them was untrue (although Sheridan’s wife, Gail, did her bit to sow seeds of doubt in the minds of the jury by pointing out that none of the women who allegedly had affairs with Sheridan referred to his unusually hairy body). Rather, in libel law the assumption is that the defamatory statement is false, and the burden falls on the defendant to prove it is true. This reversal of the burden of proof – with the defendant pretty much guilty until he proves his innocence – is almost unique to UK libel law.
Libel laws are censorious and have a chilling effect on the whole of the media. The law does not only affect those journalists, broadcasters, editors and publishers who are faced with libel writs. If authors, editors or publishers have the smallest inkling that the truth of a proposition cannot be proven in court (even when made in good faith), the knowledge that they will have a less than a one-in-five chance of success in a libel trial means the story is most likely to be dropped.
Newspapers should have the right to publish abusive articles about politicians and celebrities, who, after all, are at the centre of public life, and who have recourse, more than anybody else, publicly to dispute unfair allegations made against them.
Some may argue that a law curtailing the freedom to publish titillating revelations about the allegedly sordid sex lives of politicians is not much of a threat to free speech. Of course, it would not be much of a loss to society if the claims about what went on between Sheridan and various women - including in Cupid’s - were never published. But as long as society is preoccupied with celebrities, whose private lives are – most often willingly – continually paraded before our eyes, we will have a media constantly searching for ever more salacious stories.
The way to deal with the dire state of public debate today is to fight for more speech and debate, not less. That means scrapping the UK’s censorious libel laws, for a start. Sheridan and Galloway’s cases are a further nail in the coffin of press freedom.
Source
Few can have failed to shudder at the thought of a plot to blow up nine passenger planes and the intended mass murder of thousands of innocent people over the Atlantic. Whatever the outcome of the police investigation into a conspiracy that seems to have been stopped just in time, we should praise the alertness of Britain's often criticised and overstretched intelligence services. Peter Clarke, deputy assistant commissioner at Scotland Yard, says at least three other serious plots by home-grown terrorists have been disrupted since last year's July 7 attacks on the London Underground. The danger seems ever present.
It is now self-evident that there is an enemy within Britain who wants to destroy our way of life. Most of this relatively small group of fanatics are British-born Muslims who have been educated here and brought up within our tolerant democracy. Those looking for the outward signs that identify them as full of hatred would be hard-pressed to find them. Many seem all too ordinary, perhaps enthusiastic about football and cricket and living "normal" westernised existences in neat terraced houses. They work, study or run small businesses. Most show little indication that they have signed up to the distorted ideology of radical Islam, with its millennial ideology of bringing destruction to the corrupt West. As "sleepers", they are perfect.
Why is Britain such a breeding ground for these young men, for that is what most of them are? Much can be ascribed to timidity on behalf of the authorities, wedded as they are to a multiculturalism that isolates many young men in ghettos and a reluctance to espouse British values through our schools and institutions. That appeasement was epitomised by the sanctuary offered to extremist Islamic groups in Britain - "Londonistan" - in the pathetic hope that it might offer some form of immunity from violence. The United States, with its intolerant attitude to those preaching hate, has been far more successful in integrating its Muslim citizens, offering them the ideals of patriotism and progress. Even France, which has a bigger Muslim population than Britain and has had its share of troubles with disaffected youth, has not seen the scale of Islamist treachery that we are experiencing here. MI5 believes up to 400,000 people in Britain are sympathetic to violent "jihad" around the world and that as many as 1,200 are involved in terrorist networks.
These extremists are drawn both from our educated classes and the Muslim underclass. The first alienated group seems susceptible to radical recruiters on university campuses, the latter to firebrands they meet in mosques or in prison. There they are fed the lines that the West is evil and corrupt. They are urged to look at a culture of binge drinking, reckless hedonism, moral laxity and materialism. They see little of the advantages to our society of freedom of choice, of religion, of individualism and of equality. Nor is it good enough to claim that extremism is fostered by poverty. Although Pakistanis and Bangladeshis are struggling to do as well as some other second or third-generation immigrant groups, many of the recruits are from relatively privileged backgrounds. It is more a matter of a battle for minds rather than pockets. Add to this the internet, the finishing school of global terror, and a legal system that appears to be inflexible about deporting foreign jihadists, and you have the ingredients for an explosive clash of cultures.
When an undercover reporter from The Sunday Times visited Beeston in Nottinghamshire, where three of the July 7 bombers came from, he found either a denial that they had been involved or, perhaps more alarmingly, respect for them as Muslim martyrs. It is this potent mix of self- delusion - witness all the absurd theories about 9/11 and 7/7 - and a sneaking admiration for jihad even among seemingly sensible Muslims.
The great challenge for Britain is how to stop this and minimise the future risks. Nobody should underestimate the scale of the problem or the time needed. We already have a generation of disaffected Muslims who see any excuse, whether it is war in Iraq, Afghanistan or Lebanon, as a reason for killing their fellow citizens. The government has commissioned studies on combatting the problem, so far with little tangible impact. Tony Blair has been wooing Muslim leaders, too often the radicals rather than the moderates, although this policy seems to lie in shreds as they moan about wars in the Middle East inflaming Islamic youth. They are perfectly entitled to be angry about these conflicts, but that anger should be expressed through the democratic processes of demonstrations and elections.
That is not to say that the government is not right to try to win over Muslim opinion. If terror is to be defeated, you have first to drain the swamp. Muslims have to be persuaded that we are on the same side, that there is no witch-hunt against Islam and that the wars involving British troops are about stopping Islamists and the corruption of their religion. This means Muslims being alert to extremists in their ranks and being prepared to identify them to the police. It means Muslims becoming intolerant of radical mullahs and hounding them out of their mosques. Equally the authorities have a responsibility to crack down on extremists in universities and in prisons, to close internet sites and bookshops that spread hatred and violence, and to take all reasonable measures to protect their citizens.
At times this may seem unjust. Muslims who visit Pakistan will have to be more closely scrutinised and it may seem that they are being systematically targeted. But Muslims will have to understand that it is their co-religionists who are bent on bombing trains and planes and that requires extraordinary measures. A mature Muslim response will be to co-operate and help to eradicate extremists in their midst. It requires the vast majority of Muslims to believe that their future is tied to Britain, a country in which their religion can be respected and freely practised. If the radicals succeed, it will foster only hatred and intolerance.
This low-level war is going to take a huge effort of will and courage. It is going to mean applying what may seem illiberal measures in order to save lives. In return, the state must exercise massive restraint and not abuse that responsibility. But the real key is for Muslims to realise that their future lies here and to embrace British values and reject violent Islamist theology. The country may indeed be in its greatest danger since the second world war, as John Reid, the home secretary, said last week. But as Britain prevailed then, so it will again.
Source
A hairy moment for free speech
Tommy Sheridan’s libel win over the News of the World was no ‘victory’ for the working class. It was a victory for an archaic law over open debate.
On Friday last week, by a majority of 7-4, a jury of six men and five women found in favour of Tommy Sheridan, former Scottish Socialist Party leader and MSP, in his defamation action against News Group Newspapers, publisher of the News of the World. Sheridan sued the tabloid for printing articles in 2004 and 2005 claiming he was an adulterer, had visited Cupids swingers’ club in Manchester, and had taken part in orgies. He was awarded £200,000 in damages.
Celebrating his victory outside the Court of Session in Edinburgh, Sheridan said: ‘I have over the last five weeks taken on one of the biggest organisations on the planet…. What today’s verdict proves is that working-class people, when they listen to the arguments, can identify the truth from the muck.’
But there has been no shortage of muck thrown by Sheridan himself – during and after the trial. He accused the News of the World’s 18 witnesses of perjury and branded the 11 members of the SSP who spoke against him in court as ‘scabs’. Apparently, they’ve been orchestrating a witch-hunt against Sheridan in order to bring about his political downfall.
These are the same 11 members of the SSP who refused to hand over to the court the minutes of the meeting where Sheridan allegedly admitted he had attended a swingers’ club but said he would deny it publicly because the News of the World would never be able to prove it. It was only after a former comrade and friend of Sheridan’s, Alan McCombes, was jailed for contempt that the minutes were produced.
McCombes has since issued a statement, with the backing of the SSP national executive, likening Sheridan to Jeffrey Archer and claiming he would bring down the SSP.
As commentator Magnus Linklater reminds us in an article in Scotland on Sunday, Scottish hero Robert Louis Stevenson thought there was nothing uglier than a court of law: ‘Hither come envy, malice, and all uncharitableness to wrestle it out in public tourney.’ To add insult to injury, some members of the SSP are apparently considering legal action against Sheridan over comments he made following his victory. Also, MSP Carolyn Leckie says that those whose reputations had been tarnished would welcome perjury charges as a chance to clear their names. Lothian and Borders Police yesterday confirmed they are considering whether to launch a perjury investigation.
It is hard to see who the winners are in this sorry state of affairs. Sheridan has won £200,000 in damages, subject to appeal, but whether suing has in any way helped to restore his reputation (let’s not forget that he told the court he is a hairy ape and offered to disrobe ‘if my lord will allow me’) remains to be seen.
Some members of the jury may not have been impressed with the News of the World’s defence, but then again the tabloid newspapers’ practice of ‘chequebook journalism’ rarely elicits much sympathy from members of the public today. The fact that Sheridan won the case, despite 18 witnesses testifying against him, indicates how low the media have sunk in the eyes of the public.
Sheridan is not the only famous permatanned Scottish socialist to use the UK’s libel laws in recent years. In December 2004 George Galloway, ex-Labour MP, and now an MP for the anti-war, anti-Blair party RESPECT, successfully won his libel battle against the Daily Telegraph. The paper published allegations that Galloway was in the secret pay of Saddam Hussein. After the ruling, Galloway declared: ‘I am glad and somewhat humbled to discover that there is at least one corner of the English field which remains uncorrupted and independent, and that corner is in this courtroom.’
Galloway’s uncorrupted and independent ‘corner of the English field’ has won London the reputation as the libel capital of the world. The capital is often dubbed ‘a town called Sue’. Everybody knows that the UK libel courts are used by chancers, from around the world, to launder their reputation.
Court 13 – where Galloway’s case was heard - is the place where in July 1987 the now disgraced peer Jeffrey Archer won his £500,000 libel damages from the Daily Star over allegations that he had had sex with a prostitute. Later convicted of perjury and perverting the course of justice, Archer was forced to pay the money back to the Star. It was also in Court 13 that high drama and farce were played out between Harrod’s owner Mohamed al-Fayed and former Tory MP Neil Hamilton - described during the proceedings as the meeting of a ‘habitual liar’ and a ‘politician on the make’.
Galloway and Sheridan have unfortunately given the UK’s anachronistic libel law - a law that grew out of a dissatisfaction with the old aristocratic ways of dealing with defamation through duels - a new lease of life. (The Scottish libel law is based in large part on England’s libel law, though with some minor differences.)
They, of course, see things differently, depicting themselves as brave working-class heroes fighting against the mighty media empire. Sheridan even accused the News of the World of endangering his unborn baby’s life with its lies. But it is far from brave to sue newspapers for libel. As claimants, the odds are clearly stacked in their favour, whether or not what was said about them was true - which is why the vast majority of claimants win their libel cases.
Under libel law, claimants do not need to prove that what was said about them was untrue (although Sheridan’s wife, Gail, did her bit to sow seeds of doubt in the minds of the jury by pointing out that none of the women who allegedly had affairs with Sheridan referred to his unusually hairy body). Rather, in libel law the assumption is that the defamatory statement is false, and the burden falls on the defendant to prove it is true. This reversal of the burden of proof – with the defendant pretty much guilty until he proves his innocence – is almost unique to UK libel law.
Libel laws are censorious and have a chilling effect on the whole of the media. The law does not only affect those journalists, broadcasters, editors and publishers who are faced with libel writs. If authors, editors or publishers have the smallest inkling that the truth of a proposition cannot be proven in court (even when made in good faith), the knowledge that they will have a less than a one-in-five chance of success in a libel trial means the story is most likely to be dropped.
Newspapers should have the right to publish abusive articles about politicians and celebrities, who, after all, are at the centre of public life, and who have recourse, more than anybody else, publicly to dispute unfair allegations made against them.
Some may argue that a law curtailing the freedom to publish titillating revelations about the allegedly sordid sex lives of politicians is not much of a threat to free speech. Of course, it would not be much of a loss to society if the claims about what went on between Sheridan and various women - including in Cupid’s - were never published. But as long as society is preoccupied with celebrities, whose private lives are – most often willingly – continually paraded before our eyes, we will have a media constantly searching for ever more salacious stories.
The way to deal with the dire state of public debate today is to fight for more speech and debate, not less. That means scrapping the UK’s censorious libel laws, for a start. Sheridan and Galloway’s cases are a further nail in the coffin of press freedom.
Source
EVEN SOME STATE SCHOOLS ARE FLEEING MEANINGLESS BRITISH GOVERNMENT EXAMS
Leading state schools have joined a growing defection by the independent sector away from the official exam system amid worries over the declining quality of A-levels. The schools have decided to enter pupils for the International Baccalaureate (IB), a Swiss-run qualification seen by many as more broadly based and challenging than British exams. More than 100 British schools will offer the baccalaureate in the next academic year, almost three times more than in 2000. Its growing popularity comes as results to be published this week are expected to show a rise in the A-level pass rate for the 24th year in succession.
Examiners expect the results, which will be released to schools on Thursday, to show a pass rate of more than 96%. The results will fuel criticism that the system fails to stretch or identify the brightest pupils. Universities have complained there are so many students with A grades they can no longer judge ability from exam results.
Leading state schools already offering the baccalaureate include Kingshurst city technology college in Birmingham, which has scrapped A-levels. Most of the 50 state schools that offer the qualification do so alongside A-levels. Six state schools that will offer the IB for the first time from September include Thomas Hardye school in Dorchester, Dorset, which has exam results above the national average, and Norton Knatchbull boys' grammar school in Ashford, Kent.
Two independent schools - Sevenoaks, in Kent, and King's College, Wimbledon, London - have abandoned A-levels for the baccalaureate. Independent schools offering the option of the baccalaureate include Fettes College in Edinburgh, Tony Blair's old school, and North London Collegiate, one of the academically most successful schools.
Pupils who opt for the IB are required to study the humanities and sciences. They typically study six subjects, including English and maths, a language, a science, a social science, such as history or geography, and a creative subject such as drama or art. Pupils also have to write a 4,000-word essay, study the theory of knowledge and undertake community work.
The temptation of the IB will be increased by new figures suggesting further deterioration in the reputation of A-levels. There were steep falls in the numbers studying difficult subjects such as maths and physics between 2000 and 2005, but in media studies and religious studies, candidates grew by more than 80%. In an attempt to counter criticism of "dumbed down" exams, Jim Knight, the schools minister, said last week the government intended to trial harder questions in A-level papers and would experiment with a long essay or extended project. Ministers are also considering introducing a new A* grade that would be given to the top 7% of candidates.
From next year universities will be able to specify the grade they require for all six units that make up each A-level, rather than the one overall grade they currently demand for each. The traditional two-year "gold standard" A-level was scrapped in 2000 when David Blunkett was education secretary. Replacement A-levels have been split into two halves - AS-level and A2. Each subject in turn is split into six units, with pupils allowed an unlimited number of retakes
More here
Leading state schools have joined a growing defection by the independent sector away from the official exam system amid worries over the declining quality of A-levels. The schools have decided to enter pupils for the International Baccalaureate (IB), a Swiss-run qualification seen by many as more broadly based and challenging than British exams. More than 100 British schools will offer the baccalaureate in the next academic year, almost three times more than in 2000. Its growing popularity comes as results to be published this week are expected to show a rise in the A-level pass rate for the 24th year in succession.
Examiners expect the results, which will be released to schools on Thursday, to show a pass rate of more than 96%. The results will fuel criticism that the system fails to stretch or identify the brightest pupils. Universities have complained there are so many students with A grades they can no longer judge ability from exam results.
Leading state schools already offering the baccalaureate include Kingshurst city technology college in Birmingham, which has scrapped A-levels. Most of the 50 state schools that offer the qualification do so alongside A-levels. Six state schools that will offer the IB for the first time from September include Thomas Hardye school in Dorchester, Dorset, which has exam results above the national average, and Norton Knatchbull boys' grammar school in Ashford, Kent.
Two independent schools - Sevenoaks, in Kent, and King's College, Wimbledon, London - have abandoned A-levels for the baccalaureate. Independent schools offering the option of the baccalaureate include Fettes College in Edinburgh, Tony Blair's old school, and North London Collegiate, one of the academically most successful schools.
Pupils who opt for the IB are required to study the humanities and sciences. They typically study six subjects, including English and maths, a language, a science, a social science, such as history or geography, and a creative subject such as drama or art. Pupils also have to write a 4,000-word essay, study the theory of knowledge and undertake community work.
The temptation of the IB will be increased by new figures suggesting further deterioration in the reputation of A-levels. There were steep falls in the numbers studying difficult subjects such as maths and physics between 2000 and 2005, but in media studies and religious studies, candidates grew by more than 80%. In an attempt to counter criticism of "dumbed down" exams, Jim Knight, the schools minister, said last week the government intended to trial harder questions in A-level papers and would experiment with a long essay or extended project. Ministers are also considering introducing a new A* grade that would be given to the top 7% of candidates.
From next year universities will be able to specify the grade they require for all six units that make up each A-level, rather than the one overall grade they currently demand for each. The traditional two-year "gold standard" A-level was scrapped in 2000 when David Blunkett was education secretary. Replacement A-levels have been split into two halves - AS-level and A2. Each subject in turn is split into six units, with pupils allowed an unlimited number of retakes
More here
DEADLY NHS TARGETS
If New Labour will be remembered for anything, it will be for targets - the key to its endless so-called reforms of public services. It is easy to see why the party is so addicted to them: setting targets reproduces the sense of control that its leaders experienced during those heady years when they reformed their own party and became electable. But, in the case of the NHS, target-mania is not only damaging in the long term, but also a direct threat to patient safety.
Last month's report by the Healthcare Commission on the outbreaks of infectious diarrhoea in Stoke Mandeville hospital, in which 334 patients fell ill and at least 33 died, makes instructive reading. Managers, we learnt, overrode the advice of the expert clinicians on their own staff and thus failed to isolate infected patients to control the outbreak. This active mismanagement was driven by a need to meet targets, in particular the requirement to clear patients from the accident and emergency department within four hours. Patients in A&E with infections were admitted to open wards rather than isolation facilities, which were in short supply.
Almost equally disturbing is the sharp rise in hospital readmission rates - by nearly a quarter since 2002, according to government figures released this week. The most likely explanation is premature discharge of patients by hospital trusts under pressure of targets.
Will this kind of evidence be the death knell for targets and, more importantly, for the arrogance - political power mistaking itself for technical expertise - that lies behind them? Like many bad ideas, targets are intuitively attractive. Surely, it is argued, they enable public services to direct their efforts where need is greatest and to determine whether those needs are being met. The service can be proactive rather than merely reactive. Measurable outcomes mean that reality can be separated from rhetoric; in short, a better deal all round.
So much for the theory. In practice, the impact of targets has been damaging and must bear some of the blame for the failure of the vast and welcome increase in NHS funding to deliver a proportionate increase in care. Yes, waiting lists for operations have been dramatically reduced, but the hidden costs of targets have not been measured and their impact on overall activity have been costly and in some respects malign.
It is sometimes forgotten that if one kind of activity is prioritised then all others are "posteriorised". For example, the initial focus on coronary heart disease meant that development of services for cardiac arrhythmias andnon-cardiac conditions was held back. Conditions that are not prioritised still have to be treated. Secondly, priorities determined by the discomfort of a minister at the dispatch box may not match clinical priorities. Thirdly, meeting targets will itself become the overall priority: resources are commandered for this even if it is not cost-effective. The collateral damage to the care of patients with non-targeted conditions will be all the greater.
The greatest damage will be to aspects of care that cannot be measured - human kindness, listening and talking that patients value enormously and that are so important in chronic disease. When targets are set the measurable always displaces the immeasurable.
There are other less obvious, but no less serious, adverse effects of centrally determined targets. The implicit contempt for the competence and motivation of the professionals in the service is profoundly demoralising. A recent study by Frank Blackler, of Lancaster University, confirmed what one might have expected - that the target culture has led to poor leadership and paralysis among hospital trust managers. And it is not difficult to imagine the impact on clinicians who are at the receiving end of its puerile simplifications, remote from the complex realities of clinical care.
The assumption that clinicians will not try to improve their services without political "incentivisation" - carrots and Semtex - is profoundly irritating, not to say exasperating, for those who have being trying to improve their services for many years and found the experience to be rather like riding a bicycle up a sand dune. To be finger-wagged into doing something that one has been endeavouring to do without support is almost as bad for morale as being forced to act on priorities determined by political rather than clinical need.
And then there is the dangerously distracting effect of changing targets - one aspect of the unending "redisorganisation" of healthcare. The Healthcare Commission criticised the management of Stoke Mandeville for "taking their eye off the ball". More likely they were transfixed by a particular ball - the political agenda - that was in constant, unpredictable motion.
Targets are also corrupting, creating a parallel world of delivery that is remote from the real world. In the Soviet Union, when targets for screw production were set in terms of the numbers of screws produced, factories manufactured millions of screws the size of iron filings. Target met. When targets were set according to weight, the factory workers produced one massive screw. Target met. It is hardly necessary to say that this did not add to the wealth of the country.
Will the Stoke Mandeville outbreak be the beginning of the end of the micro-mismanagement of public services that has been such a feature of new Labour? It is devoutly to be wished. Though it may require the unfolding fiasco of NHS information technology - brewed in No 10, constantly exposed to political interference and rarely reality-checked with professionals expected to use the systems - to reach a climax before arrogance-inspired "reforms" come to an end. By then, I fear, the damage done may be irreversible.
Source
If New Labour will be remembered for anything, it will be for targets - the key to its endless so-called reforms of public services. It is easy to see why the party is so addicted to them: setting targets reproduces the sense of control that its leaders experienced during those heady years when they reformed their own party and became electable. But, in the case of the NHS, target-mania is not only damaging in the long term, but also a direct threat to patient safety.
Last month's report by the Healthcare Commission on the outbreaks of infectious diarrhoea in Stoke Mandeville hospital, in which 334 patients fell ill and at least 33 died, makes instructive reading. Managers, we learnt, overrode the advice of the expert clinicians on their own staff and thus failed to isolate infected patients to control the outbreak. This active mismanagement was driven by a need to meet targets, in particular the requirement to clear patients from the accident and emergency department within four hours. Patients in A&E with infections were admitted to open wards rather than isolation facilities, which were in short supply.
Almost equally disturbing is the sharp rise in hospital readmission rates - by nearly a quarter since 2002, according to government figures released this week. The most likely explanation is premature discharge of patients by hospital trusts under pressure of targets.
Will this kind of evidence be the death knell for targets and, more importantly, for the arrogance - political power mistaking itself for technical expertise - that lies behind them? Like many bad ideas, targets are intuitively attractive. Surely, it is argued, they enable public services to direct their efforts where need is greatest and to determine whether those needs are being met. The service can be proactive rather than merely reactive. Measurable outcomes mean that reality can be separated from rhetoric; in short, a better deal all round.
So much for the theory. In practice, the impact of targets has been damaging and must bear some of the blame for the failure of the vast and welcome increase in NHS funding to deliver a proportionate increase in care. Yes, waiting lists for operations have been dramatically reduced, but the hidden costs of targets have not been measured and their impact on overall activity have been costly and in some respects malign.
It is sometimes forgotten that if one kind of activity is prioritised then all others are "posteriorised". For example, the initial focus on coronary heart disease meant that development of services for cardiac arrhythmias andnon-cardiac conditions was held back. Conditions that are not prioritised still have to be treated. Secondly, priorities determined by the discomfort of a minister at the dispatch box may not match clinical priorities. Thirdly, meeting targets will itself become the overall priority: resources are commandered for this even if it is not cost-effective. The collateral damage to the care of patients with non-targeted conditions will be all the greater.
The greatest damage will be to aspects of care that cannot be measured - human kindness, listening and talking that patients value enormously and that are so important in chronic disease. When targets are set the measurable always displaces the immeasurable.
There are other less obvious, but no less serious, adverse effects of centrally determined targets. The implicit contempt for the competence and motivation of the professionals in the service is profoundly demoralising. A recent study by Frank Blackler, of Lancaster University, confirmed what one might have expected - that the target culture has led to poor leadership and paralysis among hospital trust managers. And it is not difficult to imagine the impact on clinicians who are at the receiving end of its puerile simplifications, remote from the complex realities of clinical care.
The assumption that clinicians will not try to improve their services without political "incentivisation" - carrots and Semtex - is profoundly irritating, not to say exasperating, for those who have being trying to improve their services for many years and found the experience to be rather like riding a bicycle up a sand dune. To be finger-wagged into doing something that one has been endeavouring to do without support is almost as bad for morale as being forced to act on priorities determined by political rather than clinical need.
And then there is the dangerously distracting effect of changing targets - one aspect of the unending "redisorganisation" of healthcare. The Healthcare Commission criticised the management of Stoke Mandeville for "taking their eye off the ball". More likely they were transfixed by a particular ball - the political agenda - that was in constant, unpredictable motion.
Targets are also corrupting, creating a parallel world of delivery that is remote from the real world. In the Soviet Union, when targets for screw production were set in terms of the numbers of screws produced, factories manufactured millions of screws the size of iron filings. Target met. When targets were set according to weight, the factory workers produced one massive screw. Target met. It is hardly necessary to say that this did not add to the wealth of the country.
Will the Stoke Mandeville outbreak be the beginning of the end of the micro-mismanagement of public services that has been such a feature of new Labour? It is devoutly to be wished. Though it may require the unfolding fiasco of NHS information technology - brewed in No 10, constantly exposed to political interference and rarely reality-checked with professionals expected to use the systems - to reach a climax before arrogance-inspired "reforms" come to an end. By then, I fear, the damage done may be irreversible.
Source
Still One Honest Cop Left in Britain
A retired police chief has at last spoken the unvarnished truth but is said to have "inflamed" the debate by doing so:
Everything he said was simple common sense but we know how rare that is these days. In the Army, we would have said that the truth of what he said "stood out like dog's balls", but truth is apparently unimportant in these matters.
A retired police chief has at last spoken the unvarnished truth but is said to have "inflamed" the debate by doing so:
"As leaders of Britain's Muslims appealed to Prime Minister Tony Blair to reduce tensions after last week's terror alert, a former London police chief has inflamed the debate by blaming Muslims for terrorist networks in the country.
Source
Everything he said was simple common sense but we know how rare that is these days. In the Army, we would have said that the truth of what he said "stood out like dog's balls", but truth is apparently unimportant in these matters.
Sunday, August 13, 2006
Not-so-positive discrimination
The UK government’s plan to monitor the number of black and Asian people employed by private companies is an affront to meritocracy, universalism and genuine equality.
The UK government is considering denying multimillion-pound contracts to companies that fail to employ enough black and Asian workers, it emerged this week. The Department of Work and Pensions confirmed that three pilot schemes have been approved which will see companies questioned on their workforce diversity before the government decides on the winning bid.
As in race-torn America in the Sixties and Seventies, the idea of ‘affirmative action’ – or positive discrimination – is being put forward as social policy. At a time when culture always appears to be the solution to New Labour’s bugbear, ‘social exclusion’, it’s rather surprising to see economic issues being raised at all. It is all the more surprising when there aren’t any campaigns from ethnic minorities demanding preferential treatment for jobs in Britain.
The idea to monitor companies seeking big government contracts was first proposed by an organisation called the Ethnic Minority Advisory Group (Emag). As an indication of how unrepresentative these ‘governmental advisers’ appear to be, Emag was only launched last month. Already their recommendations for ‘affirmative measures’ – to bring black and minority ethnic employment rates in line with the national population rate - have been backed all the way by powerful sections of the state and government, such as Jobcentre Plus, the Identity and Passport Agency and the Department for Education and Skills.
Under these plans, firms could be asked to provide figures showing the numbers of black and Asian employees on their payroll. This would then be compared with the proportion of people living in a surrounding area. But how feasible are such initiatives? The idea of job quotas based on physical appearance, rather than on skills and experience, goes against how the labour market operates. For example, is it possible to ensure that ‘correct’ percentages of ethnic minorities in a company correlates with allocation of job roles? Would particular sectors that have higher percentages of black and Asian employees, such as the London Underground or the postal service, be replacing them with, say, Chinese or Polish workers? Will Premiership football teams be forced to sign Asian footballers in order to fit in with the national rate of employment elsewhere?
There is no doubt that some companies in the UK discriminate against job applicants on racial grounds. But it’s also true to say that PR-savvy companies, such as, say, the Halifax building society, will promote their ‘multicultural’ workforce as a selling point, a signifier that a staid company isn’t quite as conservative or behind-the-times as you thought. Besides, when there are clear cases of racial or sexual discrimination, there is already existing legislation in place to deal with it. So apart from introducing even more bureaucratic red tape for private companies, what will these proposals actually achieve?
First of all, the ‘affirmative action’ proposals are less about tackling racial discrimination per se than they are a mechanism to bring the private sector within government control. This doesn’t mean a return to state-owned or state-run industries as such; rather the interference will attempt to bring public sector etiquette and codes of conduct into the private sector. As pointed out previously on spiked, the atomised character of British society compels the political class to use bureaucratic mechanisms to compensate for the weakening of social ties and social institutions. In the past, the existence of active trade unions provided mediating links between Whitehall and the world of work. Now, at a time when even union officials don’t have much connection with workplaces, the political class feels its sense of isolation even more acutely – especially in relation to the private sector.
In this context, official ‘anti-racism’ and ‘diversity’ quotas provide the political justification for strong-armed points of connection at every level in British society. As racism is now the equivalent of original sin, no individual, no institution and certainly no private company can afford to be tarred with the racist brush. In an insightful episode of The Office, employees who wanted to put David Brent on the back foot implied he was racist due to the lack of black and Asian faces at Wernham Hogg. In the real world, it seems the government wants to do the same with private companies. So while hardboiled businesspeople may publicly baulk at the government’s race quotas, the pressures to conform will undoubtedly give way.
Even without the contemporary use of ‘affirmative action’, such measures have always been bad news – particularly for racial minorities. During anti-racist struggles in Britain in the Seventies and Eighties, it was equality rather than ‘special treatment’ that campaigners fought for. To accept notions of ‘positive discrimination’ was to accept that blacks and Asians didn’t really have the aptitude to hold down skilled jobs and thus needed the patronage of white do-gooders. In America, no matter how many black lawyers and doctors could be recruited, such policies only reinforced ideas of innate superiority and inferiority through the backdoor. The American comedian Larry David played on this duality in Curb Your Enthusiasm, when he jested that he didn’t trust a black doctor’s opinion because of ‘the whole affirmative action thing’. David was making a joke, but the serious point was that affirmative action enforces rather than overcomes notions of unequal racial abilities.
In today’s climate, though, it’s a different matter. While there is no longer an old racial hierarchy to maintain, the promotion of affirmative action will inevitably exacerbate all kinds of tensions and divisions in British society. It will arouse suspicions that black and Asian workers are only employed to ‘keep the quotas up’, while any such mutterings will be used by officials as examples of ‘racism in Britain’s workforce’, and thus used to justify even more diversity-training days. So while affirmative action creates new divisions and nurtures new grievances, it also invites officialdom to act as benign referees between the potentially warring factions.
Affirmative action is problematic on a bigger scale, too. It systematically attacks a key tenet of modernity: universalism. Whereas in tradition-based societies individuals were judged on particularistic criteria, such as family background and family networks, the expansion of a social division of labour meant that only a universal standard could effectively allocate employment roles and positions. For the French sociologist Emile Durkheim, such a meritocratic system was a sign of modernity’s historically progressive character. Of course, the maintenance of class privilege and racial discrimination called into question such claims of equality and meritocracy. Nevertheless the solution was always to argue for consistent universal treatment - for equality, not difference.
Forcing private contractors to monitor ethnic quotas will be an affront to meritocracy, universalism and, above all, genuine equality. Far from affirmative action being one of those ‘well-meaning but misguided’ attempts at racial integration, in this instance it will not only fuel tensions and foster divisions, but also legitimise even more official control of workplaces every inch of the way.
Source
The UK government’s plan to monitor the number of black and Asian people employed by private companies is an affront to meritocracy, universalism and genuine equality.
The UK government is considering denying multimillion-pound contracts to companies that fail to employ enough black and Asian workers, it emerged this week. The Department of Work and Pensions confirmed that three pilot schemes have been approved which will see companies questioned on their workforce diversity before the government decides on the winning bid.
As in race-torn America in the Sixties and Seventies, the idea of ‘affirmative action’ – or positive discrimination – is being put forward as social policy. At a time when culture always appears to be the solution to New Labour’s bugbear, ‘social exclusion’, it’s rather surprising to see economic issues being raised at all. It is all the more surprising when there aren’t any campaigns from ethnic minorities demanding preferential treatment for jobs in Britain.
The idea to monitor companies seeking big government contracts was first proposed by an organisation called the Ethnic Minority Advisory Group (Emag). As an indication of how unrepresentative these ‘governmental advisers’ appear to be, Emag was only launched last month. Already their recommendations for ‘affirmative measures’ – to bring black and minority ethnic employment rates in line with the national population rate - have been backed all the way by powerful sections of the state and government, such as Jobcentre Plus, the Identity and Passport Agency and the Department for Education and Skills.
Under these plans, firms could be asked to provide figures showing the numbers of black and Asian employees on their payroll. This would then be compared with the proportion of people living in a surrounding area. But how feasible are such initiatives? The idea of job quotas based on physical appearance, rather than on skills and experience, goes against how the labour market operates. For example, is it possible to ensure that ‘correct’ percentages of ethnic minorities in a company correlates with allocation of job roles? Would particular sectors that have higher percentages of black and Asian employees, such as the London Underground or the postal service, be replacing them with, say, Chinese or Polish workers? Will Premiership football teams be forced to sign Asian footballers in order to fit in with the national rate of employment elsewhere?
There is no doubt that some companies in the UK discriminate against job applicants on racial grounds. But it’s also true to say that PR-savvy companies, such as, say, the Halifax building society, will promote their ‘multicultural’ workforce as a selling point, a signifier that a staid company isn’t quite as conservative or behind-the-times as you thought. Besides, when there are clear cases of racial or sexual discrimination, there is already existing legislation in place to deal with it. So apart from introducing even more bureaucratic red tape for private companies, what will these proposals actually achieve?
First of all, the ‘affirmative action’ proposals are less about tackling racial discrimination per se than they are a mechanism to bring the private sector within government control. This doesn’t mean a return to state-owned or state-run industries as such; rather the interference will attempt to bring public sector etiquette and codes of conduct into the private sector. As pointed out previously on spiked, the atomised character of British society compels the political class to use bureaucratic mechanisms to compensate for the weakening of social ties and social institutions. In the past, the existence of active trade unions provided mediating links between Whitehall and the world of work. Now, at a time when even union officials don’t have much connection with workplaces, the political class feels its sense of isolation even more acutely – especially in relation to the private sector.
In this context, official ‘anti-racism’ and ‘diversity’ quotas provide the political justification for strong-armed points of connection at every level in British society. As racism is now the equivalent of original sin, no individual, no institution and certainly no private company can afford to be tarred with the racist brush. In an insightful episode of The Office, employees who wanted to put David Brent on the back foot implied he was racist due to the lack of black and Asian faces at Wernham Hogg. In the real world, it seems the government wants to do the same with private companies. So while hardboiled businesspeople may publicly baulk at the government’s race quotas, the pressures to conform will undoubtedly give way.
Even without the contemporary use of ‘affirmative action’, such measures have always been bad news – particularly for racial minorities. During anti-racist struggles in Britain in the Seventies and Eighties, it was equality rather than ‘special treatment’ that campaigners fought for. To accept notions of ‘positive discrimination’ was to accept that blacks and Asians didn’t really have the aptitude to hold down skilled jobs and thus needed the patronage of white do-gooders. In America, no matter how many black lawyers and doctors could be recruited, such policies only reinforced ideas of innate superiority and inferiority through the backdoor. The American comedian Larry David played on this duality in Curb Your Enthusiasm, when he jested that he didn’t trust a black doctor’s opinion because of ‘the whole affirmative action thing’. David was making a joke, but the serious point was that affirmative action enforces rather than overcomes notions of unequal racial abilities.
In today’s climate, though, it’s a different matter. While there is no longer an old racial hierarchy to maintain, the promotion of affirmative action will inevitably exacerbate all kinds of tensions and divisions in British society. It will arouse suspicions that black and Asian workers are only employed to ‘keep the quotas up’, while any such mutterings will be used by officials as examples of ‘racism in Britain’s workforce’, and thus used to justify even more diversity-training days. So while affirmative action creates new divisions and nurtures new grievances, it also invites officialdom to act as benign referees between the potentially warring factions.
Affirmative action is problematic on a bigger scale, too. It systematically attacks a key tenet of modernity: universalism. Whereas in tradition-based societies individuals were judged on particularistic criteria, such as family background and family networks, the expansion of a social division of labour meant that only a universal standard could effectively allocate employment roles and positions. For the French sociologist Emile Durkheim, such a meritocratic system was a sign of modernity’s historically progressive character. Of course, the maintenance of class privilege and racial discrimination called into question such claims of equality and meritocracy. Nevertheless the solution was always to argue for consistent universal treatment - for equality, not difference.
Forcing private contractors to monitor ethnic quotas will be an affront to meritocracy, universalism and, above all, genuine equality. Far from affirmative action being one of those ‘well-meaning but misguided’ attempts at racial integration, in this instance it will not only fuel tensions and foster divisions, but also legitimise even more official control of workplaces every inch of the way.
Source
Lax security again: "British police have arrested seven anti-war activists after three of them boarded a US military transport plane at an airport in Scotland to check if it was carrying weapons to Israel, a peace group says. Anti-nuclear campaign group Trident Ploughshares said its activists had cut through a perimeter fence at Prestwick Airport, near Glasgow, on Monday and boarded a US plane to search for evidence of arms shipments to Israel. David Mackenzie, a spokesman for the group said 'security was lax' at the airport, making it easy for Trident Ploughshares' 'war crimes detectives' to board the aircraft in the early hours. The group said the airport has been used by chartered cargo planes to carry US-made bunker-busting bombs to Israel as the war in Lebanon continues."
"3Rs" still weak in Britain
Ruth Kelly promised a relentless effort to improve standards of literacy and numeracy when she became Education Secretary almost a year ago. The national curriculum test results at age 11 show that plenty remains to be done, though pass rates edged up again this year. The proportion of pupils achieving level 4, the expected standard, rose by 1 per cent to 79 per cent in English and 75 per cent in maths, while science was unchanged at 86 per cent. However, the Department for Education and Skills (DfES) has acknowledged that only 56 per cent of those who started secondary school in the autumn had reached level 4 in each of the reading, writing and maths tests.
Doubts were raised last month about the degree of improvement in standards. Sir Cyril Taylor, an adviser to Kelly and chairman of the Specialist Schools and Academies Trust, says secondary heads are sceptical about the true reading ability of some children who arrive with level 4 in English. A report from academics at Durham University last week found that schools routinely drilled 11-year-olds to pass the tests. It questioned whether such "teaching to the test" had led to sustainable improvements in pupils' understanding of English and maths. "Without question, national tests dominated classroom teaching of both subjects in these schools for a large part of year six," the report said.
Schools are under pressure to do well in league tables of results, so it is not surprising that teachers devote so much attention to the tests. Parents use the results as a guide to the reputation of schools, reasoning that those with high standards in the "three Rs" are likely to teach other subjects well.
But concerns are growing that the focus in many schools is becoming too narrow, as teachers concentrate on literacy and numeracy to the exclusion of subjects such as art, music and geography. David Bell, the head of Ofsted, complained in his annual report last month that many schools "are not sufficiently inventive in developing links between subjects" although they had the freedom to tailor the curriculum to pupils' needs.
Kelly wants schools to offer a "personalised" curriculum, tailored to the abilities and interests of individual pupils. She has told parents that they can expect their children to receive small-group or even one to one tuition for part of the week, although teachers have expressed scepticism that the funding will be available to support this initiative.
Government efforts so far to persuade schools to be more creative with the curriculum appear to have foundered despite evidence that primaries with the best results adopt such an approach. Ministers are setting fewer targets, perhaps sensitive to complaints from teachers about a "target-drive culture" or simply embarrassed at missing so many. Schools finally hit the 2002 maths target this year, although they are shy of the 80 per cent for English.
Jacqui Smith, School Standards Minister, insists that the targets for 2006 of 85 per cent in both subjects still stand. But they look unattainable without a suspiciously large rise in results next summer. This supplement shows the results for 2005 in English, maths and science tests for 11-year-olds at nearly 14,000 primaries in England, compiled by the DfES. Schools in Wales no longer have to take the tests. Schools are ranked by the aggregate of the percentage of pupils that achieved level 4 in each of the three tests. The national average aggregate score this year is 240.
A record 229 schools got the perfect score of 300 by getting 100 per cent of their pupils to the expected standard. About 1,200 schools with ten or fewer pupils eligible for the tests have been excluded from the main tables, as have 760 special schools. Private prep schools are not listed because they are not required to take national curriculum tests. The London Borough of Richmond upon Thames remains the local authority with the best overall primary results (see page 4), a position it has maintained since 1998. Hackney, North London, whose schools are managed by a not-for-profit trust, came bottom of the national league for the third successive year.
Source
Ruth Kelly promised a relentless effort to improve standards of literacy and numeracy when she became Education Secretary almost a year ago. The national curriculum test results at age 11 show that plenty remains to be done, though pass rates edged up again this year. The proportion of pupils achieving level 4, the expected standard, rose by 1 per cent to 79 per cent in English and 75 per cent in maths, while science was unchanged at 86 per cent. However, the Department for Education and Skills (DfES) has acknowledged that only 56 per cent of those who started secondary school in the autumn had reached level 4 in each of the reading, writing and maths tests.
Doubts were raised last month about the degree of improvement in standards. Sir Cyril Taylor, an adviser to Kelly and chairman of the Specialist Schools and Academies Trust, says secondary heads are sceptical about the true reading ability of some children who arrive with level 4 in English. A report from academics at Durham University last week found that schools routinely drilled 11-year-olds to pass the tests. It questioned whether such "teaching to the test" had led to sustainable improvements in pupils' understanding of English and maths. "Without question, national tests dominated classroom teaching of both subjects in these schools for a large part of year six," the report said.
Schools are under pressure to do well in league tables of results, so it is not surprising that teachers devote so much attention to the tests. Parents use the results as a guide to the reputation of schools, reasoning that those with high standards in the "three Rs" are likely to teach other subjects well.
But concerns are growing that the focus in many schools is becoming too narrow, as teachers concentrate on literacy and numeracy to the exclusion of subjects such as art, music and geography. David Bell, the head of Ofsted, complained in his annual report last month that many schools "are not sufficiently inventive in developing links between subjects" although they had the freedom to tailor the curriculum to pupils' needs.
Kelly wants schools to offer a "personalised" curriculum, tailored to the abilities and interests of individual pupils. She has told parents that they can expect their children to receive small-group or even one to one tuition for part of the week, although teachers have expressed scepticism that the funding will be available to support this initiative.
Government efforts so far to persuade schools to be more creative with the curriculum appear to have foundered despite evidence that primaries with the best results adopt such an approach. Ministers are setting fewer targets, perhaps sensitive to complaints from teachers about a "target-drive culture" or simply embarrassed at missing so many. Schools finally hit the 2002 maths target this year, although they are shy of the 80 per cent for English.
Jacqui Smith, School Standards Minister, insists that the targets for 2006 of 85 per cent in both subjects still stand. But they look unattainable without a suspiciously large rise in results next summer. This supplement shows the results for 2005 in English, maths and science tests for 11-year-olds at nearly 14,000 primaries in England, compiled by the DfES. Schools in Wales no longer have to take the tests. Schools are ranked by the aggregate of the percentage of pupils that achieved level 4 in each of the three tests. The national average aggregate score this year is 240.
A record 229 schools got the perfect score of 300 by getting 100 per cent of their pupils to the expected standard. About 1,200 schools with ten or fewer pupils eligible for the tests have been excluded from the main tables, as have 760 special schools. Private prep schools are not listed because they are not required to take national curriculum tests. The London Borough of Richmond upon Thames remains the local authority with the best overall primary results (see page 4), a position it has maintained since 1998. Hackney, North London, whose schools are managed by a not-for-profit trust, came bottom of the national league for the third successive year.
Source
NHS drug error 'crackdown' urged
Hospitals have been told to do more to cut out medication errors after figures showed 40,000 mistakes a year are made. Most errors caused no harm, but 2,000 led to moderate or severe harm, or death, as in 36 cases. The Healthcare Commission urged the NHS to improve how it prescribed and dispensed drugs as it published ratings for all 173 hospital trusts in England. The watchdog classed 85 trusts as fair or weak. NHS chiefs said hospitals needed to be honest about the problems.
The medication errors figures, given to the Healthcare Commission by the National Patient Safety Agency, cover incidents in England and Wales the 12 months to July. They showed about 80% caused no harm, 15% low harm and 5% moderate or severe harm. Only 18 trusts in the watchdog's review of medicines management were rated as excellent, while 70 were good, 73 fair and 12 weak. The Healthcare Commission said more needed to be done to discuss side effects with patients, to give out written information as required by law, and to minimise risks from injected drugs.
Trusts were measured in 21 areas, including whether patients had had a comprehensive medicines review and if they had a complete medicine record for their stay in hospital. The review did find areas of good performance, including 40% of trusts prudently using antibiotics to help cut MRSA rates. But the watchdog said there was a need for improvement, including making sure patients understand the purpose and potential side effects of medicines.
The report said pharmacists also needed to spend more time on the wards to minimise errors, with 11 of the 12 trusts that scored weak overall performing poorly in this area. Other areas needing attention included hospital patients not being given control of their medicines, even though they managed perfectly well at home - 69% of trusts said this was not possible on a fifth of their wards.
Parkinson's disease patients were cited as a group who often preferred managing their medication as timing of dosing is vital. Commission chief executive Anna Walker said while many trusts were getting the basics right, there was still "some way to go when it comes to involving patients in decisions about medicine". "Trusts need to do more talking to patients about their medicines and their potential side effects. "They need to make sure patients feel empowered to discuss any concerns."
Steve Ford, chief executive of the Parkinson's Disease Society, added: "Difficulties could be avoided if ward staff had a better understanding of the condition and of why the timing of Parkinson's drugs is crucial."
Maria Nyberg, policy manager at the NHS Confederation, which represents NHS trusts, said there were some examples of good practice, but the publication was a positive as "identifying weaknesses or problems" helped to tackle them. "The only way the service will achieve real improvements for patients is by being frank about the problems and challenges that it faces." And a Department of Health spokeswoman added: "Hospitals are working very hard to ensure that patients are getting the most from their medicines. "There is, however, room for improvement in some areas."
Source
Hospitals have been told to do more to cut out medication errors after figures showed 40,000 mistakes a year are made. Most errors caused no harm, but 2,000 led to moderate or severe harm, or death, as in 36 cases. The Healthcare Commission urged the NHS to improve how it prescribed and dispensed drugs as it published ratings for all 173 hospital trusts in England. The watchdog classed 85 trusts as fair or weak. NHS chiefs said hospitals needed to be honest about the problems.
The medication errors figures, given to the Healthcare Commission by the National Patient Safety Agency, cover incidents in England and Wales the 12 months to July. They showed about 80% caused no harm, 15% low harm and 5% moderate or severe harm. Only 18 trusts in the watchdog's review of medicines management were rated as excellent, while 70 were good, 73 fair and 12 weak. The Healthcare Commission said more needed to be done to discuss side effects with patients, to give out written information as required by law, and to minimise risks from injected drugs.
Trusts were measured in 21 areas, including whether patients had had a comprehensive medicines review and if they had a complete medicine record for their stay in hospital. The review did find areas of good performance, including 40% of trusts prudently using antibiotics to help cut MRSA rates. But the watchdog said there was a need for improvement, including making sure patients understand the purpose and potential side effects of medicines.
The report said pharmacists also needed to spend more time on the wards to minimise errors, with 11 of the 12 trusts that scored weak overall performing poorly in this area. Other areas needing attention included hospital patients not being given control of their medicines, even though they managed perfectly well at home - 69% of trusts said this was not possible on a fifth of their wards.
Parkinson's disease patients were cited as a group who often preferred managing their medication as timing of dosing is vital. Commission chief executive Anna Walker said while many trusts were getting the basics right, there was still "some way to go when it comes to involving patients in decisions about medicine". "Trusts need to do more talking to patients about their medicines and their potential side effects. "They need to make sure patients feel empowered to discuss any concerns."
Steve Ford, chief executive of the Parkinson's Disease Society, added: "Difficulties could be avoided if ward staff had a better understanding of the condition and of why the timing of Parkinson's drugs is crucial."
Maria Nyberg, policy manager at the NHS Confederation, which represents NHS trusts, said there were some examples of good practice, but the publication was a positive as "identifying weaknesses or problems" helped to tackle them. "The only way the service will achieve real improvements for patients is by being frank about the problems and challenges that it faces." And a Department of Health spokeswoman added: "Hospitals are working very hard to ensure that patients are getting the most from their medicines. "There is, however, room for improvement in some areas."
Source
Commuting good for you? "Thank heavens for commuting - without it we might all be much more stressed. Contrary to most people's experience, an hour a day in a cramped rail carriage is a "gift" for which we should be grateful, according to a study. A survey of 26,000 rail passengers suggests that train travel offers commuters vital "transition time" to adjust to their different roles at home and at work. Sensible travellers make the most of their journey by unwinding with a good book, playing games on a mobile phone, listening to music or watching a DVD on a laptop. At peak times, when passengers are packed in so tightly that staring out of the window is the only way to pass the time, they should rejoice. This is priceless "quality thinking" time. Glenn Lyons, who led the research, said: "Travel is assumed to be the price paid for reaching the destination. However, this apparent burden of travel can be viewed quite differently: as a gift."
Eat yourself beautiful? "The old saying "You are what you eat" could be rewritten as "You'll look like your last meal" if a big global trend finally takes off in Britain. Across Japan, America and continental Europe, customers are already buying expensive yoghurts, drinks, marshmallows, jams and even sweets on the promise that they contain special "scientific" ingredients, such as collagen, enzymes and even Botox that could make consumers look younger and more beautiful, simply by ingesting them. It's called the beauty-food revolution but, in Britain, the trend for "cosmeceutical" ingredients (cosmetic plus pharmaceutical) is in its infancy. Rufflets Country House Hotel, in St Andrews, Scotland, last month launched a new "wrinkle-free lunch", which it claims contains "ingredients known for their anti-ageing properties to help diners to have longer, more youthful lives". The range of lunches and dinners includes roast Gressingham duck with an acai berry sauce: duck is a good source of selenium, an antioxidant claimed to improve skin tone. The acai berry is one of the latest "superfoods" to hit the UK. Grown in Brazil, the purple wonder berry contains a remarkable concentration of anthocyanins, antioxidants that lower the risk of heart disease"
Eat yourself beautiful? "The old saying "You are what you eat" could be rewritten as "You'll look like your last meal" if a big global trend finally takes off in Britain. Across Japan, America and continental Europe, customers are already buying expensive yoghurts, drinks, marshmallows, jams and even sweets on the promise that they contain special "scientific" ingredients, such as collagen, enzymes and even Botox that could make consumers look younger and more beautiful, simply by ingesting them. It's called the beauty-food revolution but, in Britain, the trend for "cosmeceutical" ingredients (cosmetic plus pharmaceutical) is in its infancy. Rufflets Country House Hotel, in St Andrews, Scotland, last month launched a new "wrinkle-free lunch", which it claims contains "ingredients known for their anti-ageing properties to help diners to have longer, more youthful lives". The range of lunches and dinners includes roast Gressingham duck with an acai berry sauce: duck is a good source of selenium, an antioxidant claimed to improve skin tone. The acai berry is one of the latest "superfoods" to hit the UK. Grown in Brazil, the purple wonder berry contains a remarkable concentration of anthocyanins, antioxidants that lower the risk of heart disease"
Prominent British Politician says Immigration Talk not Racist
John Reid is Britain's Home Secretary, one of the most important figures in Britain's center-Left government. So, given Britain's often ludicrous degree of political correctness, it was refreshing to read that he recently said:
"We have to get away from this daft so-called politically correct notion that anybody who wants to talk about immigration is somehow a racist. That isn't the case.".
He is obviously aware that the high rate of immigration into Britain by low-skilled people is very unpopular with many Britons and is clearing the way for more immigration restrictions.
John Reid is Britain's Home Secretary, one of the most important figures in Britain's center-Left government. So, given Britain's often ludicrous degree of political correctness, it was refreshing to read that he recently said:
"We have to get away from this daft so-called politically correct notion that anybody who wants to talk about immigration is somehow a racist. That isn't the case.".
He is obviously aware that the high rate of immigration into Britain by low-skilled people is very unpopular with many Britons and is clearing the way for more immigration restrictions.
Saturday, August 12, 2006
BRITISH SCHOOL TO ABANDON AGE EQUALITY
Desperation-driven
A secondary school in England is to abolish all year groups in an effort to raise its academic performance. Pupils aged 11 to 16 at Bridgemary School in Gosport, Hampshire, will be mixed according to ability, with the brightest taking exams years early. Only a quarter of its children get five A* to C grades at GCSE or equivalent, less than half the national average. Head teacher Cheryl Heron said a new approach was needed to overcome "unacceptably" low achievement. She told BBC News: "This is about making sure the bright kids are pushed and that those with less academic ability are not left behind. "Children will be able to work according to their own needs and raise their expectations."
From September, pupils will study at one of five levels, depending on their ability. These are worked out from teachers' asessments and final primary school test performances. The levels range from basic literacy and numeracy skills to A-level standard. The hope is that brighter children can get ahead, while those of lesser ability are not allowed to become bored and frustrated if they fall behind.
Each pupil will be assessed in each subject every half-term to decide whether they should be moved within a system of "personalised learning". So it would be possible for a 13-year-old to study maths at the standard of the average 15-year-old, while doing "normal" level English. Less developed pupils will get extra "catch-up" coaching. The plan is a radical departure from the common system of "streaming" or "banding" within year groups, where children are grouped according to ability.
Mrs Heron, who has already tried some mixed-age group teaching at the school, said: "A child might be good at all subjects or one subject. "It's not just academic. We offer every level of qualification from the basics upwards, in vocational subjects too. "Everything a child does will be accredited." Bridgemary, set in an economically deprived area, is working in "challenging circumstances", according to the schools watchdog Ofsted. Two fifths of its 1,200 pupils have special educational needs, while just 1.4% of parents have any experience of higher education.
Mrs Heron is encouraging older pupils to become "mentors" to their younger counterparts. She said: "A lot of people think that bullying will happen if you mix ages. There is bullying in school anyway. "The work so far had aided social interaction big time. It's given younger children the confidence to speak to older ones. "The $64,000 question is how we raise expectations and standards. We are trying to do this all the time.
"This is a template for our school. I don't know if it will work elsewhere. We've got to do what we feel is right. "I know I'm a maverick but we must try something new because the current situation is unacceptable." ....
More here
U.K.: "Setting" (i.e. streaming according to ability) makes thick pupils feel thick
Secondary school pupils placed in low-ability sets often feel stigmatised as "thick", a study suggests. Researchers at London University's Institute of Education said the system had to change to ensure these children did not lose motivation. A survey of 5,000 pupils found they largely backed setting, but those in lower groups were more likely to prefer mixed-ability classes. The government said "effective" setting raised overall academic standards.
The researchers found 62% of pupils preferred to be in sets, while 24% wanted mixed-ability classes. But children's feelings were linked to their position in the hierarchy. A greater proportion of those in the lower sets for mathematics, for example, preferred mixed-ability classes compared with those in the middle or top sets. This was reversed when they were asked about setting, with 79% of pupils in the highest sets preferring setting, 67% of those in the middle sets, and 44% of those in the lowest sets.
The pattern was similar in English and science, though in those cases there were small majorities in favour of setting even in the low ability groups (55% and 54%). Pupils who preferred setting said it meant they could work at an appropriate level. This was more important than being in a class with their friends. But those who preferred mixed-ability teaching said it helped develop social skills and co-operation between pupils. Setting made children in the bottom groups feel like giving up, they said.
Professor Susan Hallam, who co-wrote the report with Professor Judith Ireson, said: "The research demonstrates that young people are mainly concerned with being able to learn. "This is more important to them than being with their friends. If work is too easy or too difficult, the extent to which learning can take place is limited. "Schools need to find ways to ensure that work is set at the appropriate level."
The report suggests bringing in more mixed-ability classes but with pupils working at different levels within them. Alternatively, it proposes a "modular" system, with pupils being grouped by academic progress rather than age. This is already in place at Bridgemary School, a comprehensive in Gosport, Hampshire. Conservative leader David Cameron has hinted that his party might adopt such a system as its policy.
A Department for Education and Skills spokesman said: "Effective grouping of pupils by ability can raise standards and better engage pupils in their own learning. "We have encouraged schools to use setting since 1997, and will continue to do so. "Of course it is for individual schools to decide how and when to group and set pupils according to their pupils' needs." He added: "Massive investment in personalised learning, as well as reforms to 14-to-19 education will deliver catch-up classes, challenge for gifted and talented pupils, and a new curriculum to keep all pupils engaged and excelling in learning."
The study involved pupils in 45 mixed gender comprehensive schools in London and the southern counties of England, East Anglia and South Yorkshire. The report - Secondary School Pupils' Preferences for Different Kinds of Structured Grouping Practices - is published in the British Educational Research Review.
Source
Desperation-driven
A secondary school in England is to abolish all year groups in an effort to raise its academic performance. Pupils aged 11 to 16 at Bridgemary School in Gosport, Hampshire, will be mixed according to ability, with the brightest taking exams years early. Only a quarter of its children get five A* to C grades at GCSE or equivalent, less than half the national average. Head teacher Cheryl Heron said a new approach was needed to overcome "unacceptably" low achievement. She told BBC News: "This is about making sure the bright kids are pushed and that those with less academic ability are not left behind. "Children will be able to work according to their own needs and raise their expectations."
From September, pupils will study at one of five levels, depending on their ability. These are worked out from teachers' asessments and final primary school test performances. The levels range from basic literacy and numeracy skills to A-level standard. The hope is that brighter children can get ahead, while those of lesser ability are not allowed to become bored and frustrated if they fall behind.
Each pupil will be assessed in each subject every half-term to decide whether they should be moved within a system of "personalised learning". So it would be possible for a 13-year-old to study maths at the standard of the average 15-year-old, while doing "normal" level English. Less developed pupils will get extra "catch-up" coaching. The plan is a radical departure from the common system of "streaming" or "banding" within year groups, where children are grouped according to ability.
Mrs Heron, who has already tried some mixed-age group teaching at the school, said: "A child might be good at all subjects or one subject. "It's not just academic. We offer every level of qualification from the basics upwards, in vocational subjects too. "Everything a child does will be accredited." Bridgemary, set in an economically deprived area, is working in "challenging circumstances", according to the schools watchdog Ofsted. Two fifths of its 1,200 pupils have special educational needs, while just 1.4% of parents have any experience of higher education.
Mrs Heron is encouraging older pupils to become "mentors" to their younger counterparts. She said: "A lot of people think that bullying will happen if you mix ages. There is bullying in school anyway. "The work so far had aided social interaction big time. It's given younger children the confidence to speak to older ones. "The $64,000 question is how we raise expectations and standards. We are trying to do this all the time.
"This is a template for our school. I don't know if it will work elsewhere. We've got to do what we feel is right. "I know I'm a maverick but we must try something new because the current situation is unacceptable." ....
More here
U.K.: "Setting" (i.e. streaming according to ability) makes thick pupils feel thick
Secondary school pupils placed in low-ability sets often feel stigmatised as "thick", a study suggests. Researchers at London University's Institute of Education said the system had to change to ensure these children did not lose motivation. A survey of 5,000 pupils found they largely backed setting, but those in lower groups were more likely to prefer mixed-ability classes. The government said "effective" setting raised overall academic standards.
The researchers found 62% of pupils preferred to be in sets, while 24% wanted mixed-ability classes. But children's feelings were linked to their position in the hierarchy. A greater proportion of those in the lower sets for mathematics, for example, preferred mixed-ability classes compared with those in the middle or top sets. This was reversed when they were asked about setting, with 79% of pupils in the highest sets preferring setting, 67% of those in the middle sets, and 44% of those in the lowest sets.
The pattern was similar in English and science, though in those cases there were small majorities in favour of setting even in the low ability groups (55% and 54%). Pupils who preferred setting said it meant they could work at an appropriate level. This was more important than being in a class with their friends. But those who preferred mixed-ability teaching said it helped develop social skills and co-operation between pupils. Setting made children in the bottom groups feel like giving up, they said.
Professor Susan Hallam, who co-wrote the report with Professor Judith Ireson, said: "The research demonstrates that young people are mainly concerned with being able to learn. "This is more important to them than being with their friends. If work is too easy or too difficult, the extent to which learning can take place is limited. "Schools need to find ways to ensure that work is set at the appropriate level."
The report suggests bringing in more mixed-ability classes but with pupils working at different levels within them. Alternatively, it proposes a "modular" system, with pupils being grouped by academic progress rather than age. This is already in place at Bridgemary School, a comprehensive in Gosport, Hampshire. Conservative leader David Cameron has hinted that his party might adopt such a system as its policy.
A Department for Education and Skills spokesman said: "Effective grouping of pupils by ability can raise standards and better engage pupils in their own learning. "We have encouraged schools to use setting since 1997, and will continue to do so. "Of course it is for individual schools to decide how and when to group and set pupils according to their pupils' needs." He added: "Massive investment in personalised learning, as well as reforms to 14-to-19 education will deliver catch-up classes, challenge for gifted and talented pupils, and a new curriculum to keep all pupils engaged and excelling in learning."
The study involved pupils in 45 mixed gender comprehensive schools in London and the southern counties of England, East Anglia and South Yorkshire. The report - Secondary School Pupils' Preferences for Different Kinds of Structured Grouping Practices - is published in the British Educational Research Review.
Source
Friday, August 11, 2006
THE INCREDIBLE BRITISH POLICE AGAIN
The usual heavy bias in favour of wrongdoers
After months of being taunted by a gang of yobs, grandmother Diane Bond finally stood up to them when she was abused while walking her pet dog. During a torrent of foul-mouthed abuse, the frail 64-year-old prodded the teenager ringleader gently in the stomach when he urged her to "Hit me, if you dare". Moments later, the 5ft 1ins pensioner found herself flat on her back and nursing a broken arm after the 15-year-old boy, who was 7 inches taller, pushed her to the ground. But to add insult to injury, police officers arrested her for assaulting a child after his mother moaned he had been attacked.
Now Mrs Bond must report to a police station 30 miles from her home in Llandrindod Wells, Powys, Wales, at the end of the month to find out if she will be charged. Last night the retired lab technician spoke of her distress. "I am in shock and very, very teary," she said. "I have never been in any trouble before. I just want to enjoy my evenings walking my dog in peace. I am being treated like a criminal because a gang of yobs have nothing better to do than pick on an old lady."
Residents of her quiet street have complained to the police and council for several months about youths causing anti-social behaviour. In the latest letter to Powys County Council in June, residents said they had suffered an "endless stream" of damage to property and cars, intimidation, vandalism, noise and rubbish being hurled into gardens by up to 30 youths aged 11 to 17. Signed by 35 fed-up people, it added: "Collectively, we are sick and tired of the situation and our frustration is now close to boiling over."
Things finally came to a head when Mrs Bond, who has two children and five grandchildren, took her terrier Hettie for a walk on parkland near her home. She said a group of about 20 teenagers were loitering on the grass. Three others were standing on a path, deliberately blocking her way. "As I approached they started shouting abuse at me," she said. "They were taunting me and crowding round me and I was quite frightened because they are big kids. "After a while one of them, whose name is Billy, spread his arms out wide to show his stomach, and said, Come on, old lady, hit me, if you dare." "I gave him three prods, almost like playful punches, not hard at all, and next thing I knew I was lying on the ground and I had broken my arm. One youth said I had been pushed. "I went back home, shaking and crying."
Soon after, two police officers knocked on Mrs Bond's door and arrested her on suspicion of assaulting a minor. "It seemed the lad had told his mum what had happened and she had immediately lodged a complaint of assault," she said. Mrs Bond, who lives alone, was cautioned and interviewed for nearly three hours by police officers before she was released on bail at about 1.30am. She has now made a counter-allegation to the police of assault against the youth. But she added: "This sends out the message that if you stand up for yourself, if you try to take action to stop anti-social behaviour, you are likely to end up being arrested."
Earlier this year, Prime Minister Tony Blair said communities had to stand up to yobs in the fight against nuisance behaviour. Mrs Bond's neighbour Steve Simmons, who co-ordinates the Nelson Street - An End To Anti-Social Behaviour campaign group, said: "Diane is a reasonable law-abiding citizen and she has been treated like a criminal for standing up to yobs when the authorities would not. "It is bewildering. The Government says communities should look after themselves and take a stance against anti-social behaviour. But when we do try to take action, what is the first thing that happens? The blame is put on us."
In May, grandmother Brenda Robinson, 66, of Bournemouth, spent a night in a police cell after being arrested for alleged assault when she gave a rowdy youth a "clip round the ear". She acted after being abused, pushed and threatened with a plank of wood. Roger Williams, Liberal Democrat MP for Brecon and Radnorshire, said: "I would have expected the police to have acted slightly more proportionately than arresting Mrs Bond over this. "It must have been a frightening situation for an elderly lady to be confronted by a gang of yobs, especially in an area with a history of anti-social behaviour, without the police compounding the problem."
Chief Inspector Steve Hughson, of Dyfed-Powys Police, said: "We are aware of the problems in Nelson Street and associated anti-social behaviour. "Recent patrols in the area by the neighbourhood policing team have greatly reduced incidents of crime and anti social behaviour, to the extent that positive comments have been received by local residents. Therefore patrols will continue." The force declined to comment on Mrs Bond's arrest.
Source
The usual heavy bias in favour of wrongdoers
After months of being taunted by a gang of yobs, grandmother Diane Bond finally stood up to them when she was abused while walking her pet dog. During a torrent of foul-mouthed abuse, the frail 64-year-old prodded the teenager ringleader gently in the stomach when he urged her to "Hit me, if you dare". Moments later, the 5ft 1ins pensioner found herself flat on her back and nursing a broken arm after the 15-year-old boy, who was 7 inches taller, pushed her to the ground. But to add insult to injury, police officers arrested her for assaulting a child after his mother moaned he had been attacked.
Now Mrs Bond must report to a police station 30 miles from her home in Llandrindod Wells, Powys, Wales, at the end of the month to find out if she will be charged. Last night the retired lab technician spoke of her distress. "I am in shock and very, very teary," she said. "I have never been in any trouble before. I just want to enjoy my evenings walking my dog in peace. I am being treated like a criminal because a gang of yobs have nothing better to do than pick on an old lady."
Residents of her quiet street have complained to the police and council for several months about youths causing anti-social behaviour. In the latest letter to Powys County Council in June, residents said they had suffered an "endless stream" of damage to property and cars, intimidation, vandalism, noise and rubbish being hurled into gardens by up to 30 youths aged 11 to 17. Signed by 35 fed-up people, it added: "Collectively, we are sick and tired of the situation and our frustration is now close to boiling over."
Things finally came to a head when Mrs Bond, who has two children and five grandchildren, took her terrier Hettie for a walk on parkland near her home. She said a group of about 20 teenagers were loitering on the grass. Three others were standing on a path, deliberately blocking her way. "As I approached they started shouting abuse at me," she said. "They were taunting me and crowding round me and I was quite frightened because they are big kids. "After a while one of them, whose name is Billy, spread his arms out wide to show his stomach, and said, Come on, old lady, hit me, if you dare." "I gave him three prods, almost like playful punches, not hard at all, and next thing I knew I was lying on the ground and I had broken my arm. One youth said I had been pushed. "I went back home, shaking and crying."
Soon after, two police officers knocked on Mrs Bond's door and arrested her on suspicion of assaulting a minor. "It seemed the lad had told his mum what had happened and she had immediately lodged a complaint of assault," she said. Mrs Bond, who lives alone, was cautioned and interviewed for nearly three hours by police officers before she was released on bail at about 1.30am. She has now made a counter-allegation to the police of assault against the youth. But she added: "This sends out the message that if you stand up for yourself, if you try to take action to stop anti-social behaviour, you are likely to end up being arrested."
Earlier this year, Prime Minister Tony Blair said communities had to stand up to yobs in the fight against nuisance behaviour. Mrs Bond's neighbour Steve Simmons, who co-ordinates the Nelson Street - An End To Anti-Social Behaviour campaign group, said: "Diane is a reasonable law-abiding citizen and she has been treated like a criminal for standing up to yobs when the authorities would not. "It is bewildering. The Government says communities should look after themselves and take a stance against anti-social behaviour. But when we do try to take action, what is the first thing that happens? The blame is put on us."
In May, grandmother Brenda Robinson, 66, of Bournemouth, spent a night in a police cell after being arrested for alleged assault when she gave a rowdy youth a "clip round the ear". She acted after being abused, pushed and threatened with a plank of wood. Roger Williams, Liberal Democrat MP for Brecon and Radnorshire, said: "I would have expected the police to have acted slightly more proportionately than arresting Mrs Bond over this. "It must have been a frightening situation for an elderly lady to be confronted by a gang of yobs, especially in an area with a history of anti-social behaviour, without the police compounding the problem."
Chief Inspector Steve Hughson, of Dyfed-Powys Police, said: "We are aware of the problems in Nelson Street and associated anti-social behaviour. "Recent patrols in the area by the neighbourhood policing team have greatly reduced incidents of crime and anti social behaviour, to the extent that positive comments have been received by local residents. Therefore patrols will continue." The force declined to comment on Mrs Bond's arrest.
Source
Some justice at last: "After six years and three trials, Gloria and Richard Taylor finally saw justice done for their son Damilola yesterday when two brothers were convicted of killing the ten-year-old boy. The couple walked from the Old Bailey leaving Danny and Ricky Preddie, two teenage street robbers with a long history of violence, facing possible life sentences after being found guilty of manslaughter. The jury took little more than six hours to reach their verdict. Damilola bled to death after being stabbed in the thigh with a broken bottle on a South London street in November 2000... The case has cost an estimated 16 million pounds and left question marks over the efficiency of the once highly respected Forensic Science Service. Within an hour of the verdicts the Home Office announced a review by a QC into the service and how key bloodstains, which should have convicted the two brothers five years ago, were missed"
INCREDIBLE NHS BUNGLE
But what an incredible survivor the baby is!
A health board has launched an investigation after a mother underwent an operation to remove her "dead" unborn baby only to be told three weeks later that she was still pregnant. Julie Brown, 28, is considering legal action against hospital directors after she was informed wrongly that her baby had died and was given an operation under general anaesthetic to remove the child.
Mrs Brown, from Livingston in West Lothian, said yesterday that she was given a scan five and a half weeks into her pregnancy after suffering from stomach pains. She was told by medical staff that the baby's heartbeat could not be found and that the child had died inside her. The next day she checked into St John's Hospital, in Livingston, for dilation and curettage treatment to remove the dead child, a highly invasive procedure that involves scraping the uterus lining.
She said that her husband and two children had been devastated when they were told that the baby had died, especially her eight-year-old daughter. Mrs Brown, who had already suffered two miscarriages, said: "I had to explain to my two kids and my husband that the baby had died and they were in floods of tears. "Sarah was distraught because she was so much looking forward to having a baby brother or sister to look after."
However, last week Mrs Brown went to see her GP because she was still suffering from sickness and other symptoms of pregnancy. Blood tests showed that pregnancy hormone levels were still very high and she was sent to hospital for a scan this week. She said: "A scan on Monday showed my baby was still intact and growing healthily. I was confused, angry, worried and elated all at the same time." Mrs Brown, who is now nine weeks pregnant, said that she was considering legal action against NHS Lothian. "The hospital has given me no reasons or answers, they have told me absolutely nothing. I don't know how it has happened," she said. She added that she was worried because pregnant women should not be given a general anaesthetic or undergo surgery that could damage the foetus. "I will be constantly worrying until I give birth to the baby and see that it is all right because I have been given a general anesthetic, painkillers and antibiotics," she said.
Mrs Brown's husband, Dan, 28, said: "It's ridiculous that something like this can happen. It's going to be a difficult time but I'm sure we will get through it." He added: "I just don't know how this could have happened with such a violent and intrusive operation."
NHS Lothian apologised to Mrs Brown over the mistake yesterday and said that it had started an investigation. Mike Grieve, the director of operations at St John's Hospital, said: "I immediately wish to apologise for any distress to Mrs Brown and her family. "We have not yet received a formal complaint but an informal investigation was launched as soon as her case was brought to my attention." He added: "It would be inappropriate of me to comment on the specific circumstances while this is taking place."
Source
But what an incredible survivor the baby is!
A health board has launched an investigation after a mother underwent an operation to remove her "dead" unborn baby only to be told three weeks later that she was still pregnant. Julie Brown, 28, is considering legal action against hospital directors after she was informed wrongly that her baby had died and was given an operation under general anaesthetic to remove the child.
Mrs Brown, from Livingston in West Lothian, said yesterday that she was given a scan five and a half weeks into her pregnancy after suffering from stomach pains. She was told by medical staff that the baby's heartbeat could not be found and that the child had died inside her. The next day she checked into St John's Hospital, in Livingston, for dilation and curettage treatment to remove the dead child, a highly invasive procedure that involves scraping the uterus lining.
She said that her husband and two children had been devastated when they were told that the baby had died, especially her eight-year-old daughter. Mrs Brown, who had already suffered two miscarriages, said: "I had to explain to my two kids and my husband that the baby had died and they were in floods of tears. "Sarah was distraught because she was so much looking forward to having a baby brother or sister to look after."
However, last week Mrs Brown went to see her GP because she was still suffering from sickness and other symptoms of pregnancy. Blood tests showed that pregnancy hormone levels were still very high and she was sent to hospital for a scan this week. She said: "A scan on Monday showed my baby was still intact and growing healthily. I was confused, angry, worried and elated all at the same time." Mrs Brown, who is now nine weeks pregnant, said that she was considering legal action against NHS Lothian. "The hospital has given me no reasons or answers, they have told me absolutely nothing. I don't know how it has happened," she said. She added that she was worried because pregnant women should not be given a general anaesthetic or undergo surgery that could damage the foetus. "I will be constantly worrying until I give birth to the baby and see that it is all right because I have been given a general anesthetic, painkillers and antibiotics," she said.
Mrs Brown's husband, Dan, 28, said: "It's ridiculous that something like this can happen. It's going to be a difficult time but I'm sure we will get through it." He added: "I just don't know how this could have happened with such a violent and intrusive operation."
NHS Lothian apologised to Mrs Brown over the mistake yesterday and said that it had started an investigation. Mike Grieve, the director of operations at St John's Hospital, said: "I immediately wish to apologise for any distress to Mrs Brown and her family. "We have not yet received a formal complaint but an informal investigation was launched as soon as her case was brought to my attention." He added: "It would be inappropriate of me to comment on the specific circumstances while this is taking place."
Source
Thursday, August 10, 2006
U.K.: Closing the front door while the back door is open: "Home Secretary John Reid yesterday proposed slapping quotas on immigration for the first time. He said an advisory body would recommend "optimum" levels for the number of foreigners allowed to settle in the country. And he called for a "mature discussion" on action to stem the flood of illegal workers coming here. He said there must be an end to the "daft so-called politically correct notion that anybody who wants to talk about immigration is somehow a racist".
BRITISH GOVERNMENT DEFENDS THE CLASSICS
There is "no danger" that schools in England will be forced to ditch classic novels to make way for modern works, the education secretary has insisted. Alan Johnson was seeking to end speculation that some "great" books would disappear from reading lists. The Qualifications and Curriculum Authority is reviewing the modern authors recommended to schools. But Mr Johnson said writers such as Charles Dickens and George Eliot would continue to be studied. These were "a crucial part of our national heritage", he added.
Mr Johnson said: "We must encourage children to read English classics which have stood the test of time and for which there should always be time to test. "Young people need to also read books by dynamic modern authors which fire their imagination, inform their love of language and extend their knowledge."
The QCA is looking at reading lists as part of a wider review of the curriculum for 11 to 14-year-olds and is due to report back to ministers at the end of September.
Mr Johnson said the most important thing was for teachers to instil a love of reading which could benefit young people throughout their life. "Greater flexibility will allow teachers to use their professional judgement to tailor their teaching and open up the rich world of English literature for every pupil to treasure." He said he was currently reading Thomas Hardy's Jude the Obscure as well as Jeff Brown's Flat Stanley with his son and added: "Harold MacMillan said reading Jane Austen helped him relax when he was prime minister - so it can even be therapeutic for those who lead stressful lives too."
Shadow minister for schools, Nick Gibb, said he welcomed the government's comments. He said: "It is important that the classic texts, including Shakespeare and Jane Austen, are studied by our children before the end of compulsory education. "For many children exposure to the great classics of English literature occurs only at school. "Any move by the QCA or others to limit this opportunity would have been a huge mistake and would have added to the general concern that our education system is being dumbed down."
Source
BOOZY SCOTTISH UNIVERSITY LIFE ALIENATES MUSLIMS
University students from ethnic minorities in Scotland find it hard to mix with others, a study has found. The research carried out by the universities of Stirling and St Andrews said institutions could do more to get students to socialise. The study also revealed that ethnic minorities youngsters in Scotland feel more Scottish than white young people.
The work, funded by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, involved youngsters sharing their experiences. The report, entitled Young people's experience of transitions: A study of minority ethnic and white young people, was compiled by Dr Clare Cassidy and Dr Rory O'Connor of the universities of St Andrews and Stirling respectively.
They interviewed two groups of 15 to 18 year olds, once when they were still at school and then a year later when they had left. Dr Cassidy said relatively little was known about how children from ethnic minorities in Scotland made the transition from school pupil to adult.
Those taking part in the study were asked for their views on education, home and family life, social networks, access to information, ethnicity, identity and aspirations. The researchers found that the majority of youngsters from ethnic minority backgrounds entering higher education were keen to pursue a career in medical sciences. Their decisions were more likely to be influenced by family or community expectations, the study said.
Young Pakistanis were the least likely to move away from home to study and were more likely to complain about distractions during their studies. Dr Cassidy said: "For some participants, the drinking alcohol, pub and club culture of university life conflicted with their cultural and religious beliefs. "As a result they found the transition to the social side of university more of a challenge than did their white counterparts. "This raises questions as to whether universities should be providing ways of socialising and support suitable for the particular needs of young people from minority ethnic groups."
Dr Cassidy said the findings suggested a need to gain a better understanding of both structural and psychological factors which may contribute to a lack of ethnic mixing in higher education.
Source
There is "no danger" that schools in England will be forced to ditch classic novels to make way for modern works, the education secretary has insisted. Alan Johnson was seeking to end speculation that some "great" books would disappear from reading lists. The Qualifications and Curriculum Authority is reviewing the modern authors recommended to schools. But Mr Johnson said writers such as Charles Dickens and George Eliot would continue to be studied. These were "a crucial part of our national heritage", he added.
Mr Johnson said: "We must encourage children to read English classics which have stood the test of time and for which there should always be time to test. "Young people need to also read books by dynamic modern authors which fire their imagination, inform their love of language and extend their knowledge."
The QCA is looking at reading lists as part of a wider review of the curriculum for 11 to 14-year-olds and is due to report back to ministers at the end of September.
Mr Johnson said the most important thing was for teachers to instil a love of reading which could benefit young people throughout their life. "Greater flexibility will allow teachers to use their professional judgement to tailor their teaching and open up the rich world of English literature for every pupil to treasure." He said he was currently reading Thomas Hardy's Jude the Obscure as well as Jeff Brown's Flat Stanley with his son and added: "Harold MacMillan said reading Jane Austen helped him relax when he was prime minister - so it can even be therapeutic for those who lead stressful lives too."
Shadow minister for schools, Nick Gibb, said he welcomed the government's comments. He said: "It is important that the classic texts, including Shakespeare and Jane Austen, are studied by our children before the end of compulsory education. "For many children exposure to the great classics of English literature occurs only at school. "Any move by the QCA or others to limit this opportunity would have been a huge mistake and would have added to the general concern that our education system is being dumbed down."
Source
BOOZY SCOTTISH UNIVERSITY LIFE ALIENATES MUSLIMS
University students from ethnic minorities in Scotland find it hard to mix with others, a study has found. The research carried out by the universities of Stirling and St Andrews said institutions could do more to get students to socialise. The study also revealed that ethnic minorities youngsters in Scotland feel more Scottish than white young people.
The work, funded by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, involved youngsters sharing their experiences. The report, entitled Young people's experience of transitions: A study of minority ethnic and white young people, was compiled by Dr Clare Cassidy and Dr Rory O'Connor of the universities of St Andrews and Stirling respectively.
They interviewed two groups of 15 to 18 year olds, once when they were still at school and then a year later when they had left. Dr Cassidy said relatively little was known about how children from ethnic minorities in Scotland made the transition from school pupil to adult.
Those taking part in the study were asked for their views on education, home and family life, social networks, access to information, ethnicity, identity and aspirations. The researchers found that the majority of youngsters from ethnic minority backgrounds entering higher education were keen to pursue a career in medical sciences. Their decisions were more likely to be influenced by family or community expectations, the study said.
Young Pakistanis were the least likely to move away from home to study and were more likely to complain about distractions during their studies. Dr Cassidy said: "For some participants, the drinking alcohol, pub and club culture of university life conflicted with their cultural and religious beliefs. "As a result they found the transition to the social side of university more of a challenge than did their white counterparts. "This raises questions as to whether universities should be providing ways of socialising and support suitable for the particular needs of young people from minority ethnic groups."
Dr Cassidy said the findings suggested a need to gain a better understanding of both structural and psychological factors which may contribute to a lack of ethnic mixing in higher education.
Source
THE NHS "LOTTERY"
Patients are being denied fair access to drugs and treatment because of wide variations in NHS spending, with some trusts providing nearly four times the amount of money for mental health and cancer care as others. A report published today by the King's Fund, the independent think-tank, highlights "serious questions" about the postcode lottery of care across England, health economists said. Even when the socio- economic needs of local people are taken into account, there is still wide variation in primary care trust (PCT) spending on mental health, cancer and circulatory problems. After adjusting for such factors, Islington PCT spends 259 pounds a head on mental health - about four times the 66 pounds spent by Bracknell Forest PCT.
The proportion of PCT budgets spent on cancer also varies widely across England - from 3 per cent to more than 10 per cent of the overall budget.... But the report noted that higher spending PCTs would not necessarily offer the best quality of care, depending on how efficiently money is spent. PCTs are in charge of about 80 per cent of England's NHS budget, about 58 billion a year.
The report, Local Variations in NHS Spending Priorities, said that the three government priority areas of heart disease, cancer and mental health consumed the largest share of PCT spending. The analysis focuses on data from 2003-04 to 2004-05 and highlighted a two-fold difference in spending on mental health a head across 90 per cent of PCTs. Mental health absorbed 7 billion - about 11 per cent of PCT spending - which was twice the amount spent on cancer care.
The report found differences in spending that appeared to be only partially explained by the different needs of their local populations, raising questions about why PCTs made different decisions about spending priorities, and whether spending variations had adverse effects on equity and efficiency. John Appleby, chief economist at the King's Fund, said: "This new data is very revealing, and raises serious questions about the consistency of decisions PCTs make about how much they spend on different diseases. "However, a proportion of the variation in PCT spending will not be a result of deliberate choices by PCTs. "Variations in clinical decisions about who and when to treat, and what treatment to provide, and differences in the efficiency of hospitals, contribute to the variations in PCT spending."
Nigel Edwards, director of policy at the NHS Confederation, said that the problems highlighted were common across the health systems of most developed countries. "The Department of Health's programme budgeting initiative is one of the first times that this data has been made available and primary care trusts will need to investigate it further before it is clear what the appropriate action is. "It is right that local health services meet the needs of local patients and, therefore, important to understand that a consequence of this will always be variations in spending."
Source
Patients are being denied fair access to drugs and treatment because of wide variations in NHS spending, with some trusts providing nearly four times the amount of money for mental health and cancer care as others. A report published today by the King's Fund, the independent think-tank, highlights "serious questions" about the postcode lottery of care across England, health economists said. Even when the socio- economic needs of local people are taken into account, there is still wide variation in primary care trust (PCT) spending on mental health, cancer and circulatory problems. After adjusting for such factors, Islington PCT spends 259 pounds a head on mental health - about four times the 66 pounds spent by Bracknell Forest PCT.
The proportion of PCT budgets spent on cancer also varies widely across England - from 3 per cent to more than 10 per cent of the overall budget.... But the report noted that higher spending PCTs would not necessarily offer the best quality of care, depending on how efficiently money is spent. PCTs are in charge of about 80 per cent of England's NHS budget, about 58 billion a year.
The report, Local Variations in NHS Spending Priorities, said that the three government priority areas of heart disease, cancer and mental health consumed the largest share of PCT spending. The analysis focuses on data from 2003-04 to 2004-05 and highlighted a two-fold difference in spending on mental health a head across 90 per cent of PCTs. Mental health absorbed 7 billion - about 11 per cent of PCT spending - which was twice the amount spent on cancer care.
The report found differences in spending that appeared to be only partially explained by the different needs of their local populations, raising questions about why PCTs made different decisions about spending priorities, and whether spending variations had adverse effects on equity and efficiency. John Appleby, chief economist at the King's Fund, said: "This new data is very revealing, and raises serious questions about the consistency of decisions PCTs make about how much they spend on different diseases. "However, a proportion of the variation in PCT spending will not be a result of deliberate choices by PCTs. "Variations in clinical decisions about who and when to treat, and what treatment to provide, and differences in the efficiency of hospitals, contribute to the variations in PCT spending."
Nigel Edwards, director of policy at the NHS Confederation, said that the problems highlighted were common across the health systems of most developed countries. "The Department of Health's programme budgeting initiative is one of the first times that this data has been made available and primary care trusts will need to investigate it further before it is clear what the appropriate action is. "It is right that local health services meet the needs of local patients and, therefore, important to understand that a consequence of this will always be variations in spending."
Source
Wednesday, August 09, 2006
BUSINESS MASQUERADING AS LEFTISTS
Last weekend some friends suggested going to a music-festival, Summer Sundae, put on by the American ice-cream makers, Ben and Jerry, at Clapham Common in London. ...
For starters, since when did ice-cream sellers, or for that matter a fruit drinks company such as Innocent, become involved in nominally `rock'n'roll' events? Isn't that supposed to be the job of flat and rubbish lager brands? On one level, of course, Summer Sundae and Innocent's Fruitstock - which takes place this coming weekend - aren't meant to impress the likes of Lemmy, Tommy Lee or Tommy Saxondale. On another level, though, they do play on hippie countercultural `vibes' and thus make vague claims to some form of `radicalism'. But in today's context, all that really means is not being McDonald's.
As a shrewd and cynical marketing ploy, Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield understand this all too well. That is why in America and Europe they are seen to actively push ethical concerns regarding the environment or the arms trade: it's a way of saying, `hey, we're the good guys'. What could be a better approach to business? So last Saturday, Mr Greenfield made a speech informing us that Ben and Jerry are doing their bit to tackle global warming. An exasperated friend of mine quickly retorted: `Why on Earth would an ice cream company be against warmer weather?' Good point. But it is precisely such displays of `selflessness' that are taken as good coin - both figuratively and literally. Which is why so many other ethical capitalists are getting in on the act, too.
During a stroll around Summer Sundae it was notable that every food and drink stall was organic, wholesome or `real' (as if other food is somehow illusionary). What they all had in common was an earnest but transparent attempt to look like small-cottage industries rather than subsidiaries of multinational companies. In reality, Ben and Jerry's was taken over by the Anglo-Dutch consumer goods giants Unilever six years ago - hardly the type of company to make ice-cream in someone's small kitchen.
In the Guardian, Jacques Peretti called this process `kooky capitalism', wherein huge companies simply brand themselves as `ethical, people-orientated cottage businesses rather than faceless behemoths driven by profit'. Peretti is right to note that this is often accompanied by faux-naive slogans and childlike scrawl over delivery vans and other company symbols. Even when `kooky capitalists' don't go as Innocent or Ocado, subtler brand designs still appear to be modelled on children's alphabet books - all blaring primary colours and bold Arial fonts.
In the past, parental responsibility, rather than how much ale you could handle, was the true measure of adulthood. Today it seems that having children is an excuse to join them in the safety playpen, away from the bullyboys of greedy multinationals and the gormless masses. Summer Sundae, with its notably high fences and high security, appeared like a gated community for ethical Peter Pans....
At Summer Sundae, the ethical and infantile collided in a queasy way. World Wildlife Fund volunteers, for instance, dressed up as pandas, held hands round the common and fundraised with all the pushy hustling skills of a two-day old kitten. Then again, given the inflated prices of the `real' food and drink on offer, not many of the revelers appeared charitably inclined. For sure, the burgers were a cut above standard festival fare, but not that much better than, say, Burger King's finest. So what, exactly, do you get for your cash at events like these? For ethical liberals it has two important selling points: a) it shows you're a concerned, planet-saving citizen, and b) you can avoid paunchy blokes in Arsenal football tops.
More here
Last weekend some friends suggested going to a music-festival, Summer Sundae, put on by the American ice-cream makers, Ben and Jerry, at Clapham Common in London. ...
For starters, since when did ice-cream sellers, or for that matter a fruit drinks company such as Innocent, become involved in nominally `rock'n'roll' events? Isn't that supposed to be the job of flat and rubbish lager brands? On one level, of course, Summer Sundae and Innocent's Fruitstock - which takes place this coming weekend - aren't meant to impress the likes of Lemmy, Tommy Lee or Tommy Saxondale. On another level, though, they do play on hippie countercultural `vibes' and thus make vague claims to some form of `radicalism'. But in today's context, all that really means is not being McDonald's.
As a shrewd and cynical marketing ploy, Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield understand this all too well. That is why in America and Europe they are seen to actively push ethical concerns regarding the environment or the arms trade: it's a way of saying, `hey, we're the good guys'. What could be a better approach to business? So last Saturday, Mr Greenfield made a speech informing us that Ben and Jerry are doing their bit to tackle global warming. An exasperated friend of mine quickly retorted: `Why on Earth would an ice cream company be against warmer weather?' Good point. But it is precisely such displays of `selflessness' that are taken as good coin - both figuratively and literally. Which is why so many other ethical capitalists are getting in on the act, too.
During a stroll around Summer Sundae it was notable that every food and drink stall was organic, wholesome or `real' (as if other food is somehow illusionary). What they all had in common was an earnest but transparent attempt to look like small-cottage industries rather than subsidiaries of multinational companies. In reality, Ben and Jerry's was taken over by the Anglo-Dutch consumer goods giants Unilever six years ago - hardly the type of company to make ice-cream in someone's small kitchen.
In the Guardian, Jacques Peretti called this process `kooky capitalism', wherein huge companies simply brand themselves as `ethical, people-orientated cottage businesses rather than faceless behemoths driven by profit'. Peretti is right to note that this is often accompanied by faux-naive slogans and childlike scrawl over delivery vans and other company symbols. Even when `kooky capitalists' don't go as Innocent or Ocado, subtler brand designs still appear to be modelled on children's alphabet books - all blaring primary colours and bold Arial fonts.
In the past, parental responsibility, rather than how much ale you could handle, was the true measure of adulthood. Today it seems that having children is an excuse to join them in the safety playpen, away from the bullyboys of greedy multinationals and the gormless masses. Summer Sundae, with its notably high fences and high security, appeared like a gated community for ethical Peter Pans....
At Summer Sundae, the ethical and infantile collided in a queasy way. World Wildlife Fund volunteers, for instance, dressed up as pandas, held hands round the common and fundraised with all the pushy hustling skills of a two-day old kitten. Then again, given the inflated prices of the `real' food and drink on offer, not many of the revelers appeared charitably inclined. For sure, the burgers were a cut above standard festival fare, but not that much better than, say, Burger King's finest. So what, exactly, do you get for your cash at events like these? For ethical liberals it has two important selling points: a) it shows you're a concerned, planet-saving citizen, and b) you can avoid paunchy blokes in Arsenal football tops.
More here
Scots kids dodging food fascists too: "Entrepreneurial pupils are cashing in on a ban on unhealthy foods in schools. Youngsters are setting up businesses and doing a roaring trade selling forbidden sweets such as chocolate, fizzy drinks and crisps to schoolmates. Such plots were highlighted in the newsletter of the Scottish Parent Teacher Council. Judith Gillespie, the group's development manager, said: "Kids are kids. If you put a rule in place, they will find a way round it. "It's certainly enterprising, although not what the Scottish Executive would regard as enterprise - they would have a rather more po-faced take on it, I'm sure." Ms Gillespie stressed that she was in favour of children having a healthy and nutritious diet. But she added: "It's brilliant that kids are seeing a gap in the market. They are tremendous entrepreneurs.""
Tuesday, August 08, 2006
Picture of gun incorrect in Britain
Luxury shoemaker Jeffery-West Shoes has had an advertising campaign banned by watchdogs for irresponsibly glamorising the use of guns. The firm, which has stores in locations including Piccadilly and the City of London, ran an ad in fashion magazine Ology depicting a woman dressed in a fur coat at the wheel of a car with a gun and a pair of men's boots on the seat next to her. The Advertising Standards Authority received a complaint that the use of the gun was offensive and also questioned whether the ad glamorised the use of guns.
Jeffery-West said the ad was an old promotional shot it had used in-store to promote its footwear, but added that it had no plans to use the ad again and apologised for any offence caused. Gazette Media Company, owner of Ology magazine, said that the image supplied was heavily Americanised with the car and the woman implying a gangster's moll and was clearly fictional and slightly surreal. It also believed the image was appropriate for the product and said the image had been used before and was on Jeffrey-West's website.
The ASA said that the image went beyond being surreal and implied a fashionable lifestyle. Furthermore, the watchdog said that the gun was not related to the product and appeared solely as a glamorous fashion accessory and promoted a lifestyle that condoned violence
Source
Luxury shoemaker Jeffery-West Shoes has had an advertising campaign banned by watchdogs for irresponsibly glamorising the use of guns. The firm, which has stores in locations including Piccadilly and the City of London, ran an ad in fashion magazine Ology depicting a woman dressed in a fur coat at the wheel of a car with a gun and a pair of men's boots on the seat next to her. The Advertising Standards Authority received a complaint that the use of the gun was offensive and also questioned whether the ad glamorised the use of guns.
Jeffery-West said the ad was an old promotional shot it had used in-store to promote its footwear, but added that it had no plans to use the ad again and apologised for any offence caused. Gazette Media Company, owner of Ology magazine, said that the image supplied was heavily Americanised with the car and the woman implying a gangster's moll and was clearly fictional and slightly surreal. It also believed the image was appropriate for the product and said the image had been used before and was on Jeffrey-West's website.
The ASA said that the image went beyond being surreal and implied a fashionable lifestyle. Furthermore, the watchdog said that the gun was not related to the product and appeared solely as a glamorous fashion accessory and promoted a lifestyle that condoned violence
Source
Official discrimination against whites in Britain: "Companies that bid for multimillion-pound Government contracts will be rejected if they do not employ enough black and Asian workers, under new proposals seen by The Times. A powerful committee that includes seven ministers has drawn up plans to question competing companies about their attitudes to race before choosing which to employ. Firms will be asked to provide figures showing the numbers of their black and Asian employees. This figure will be compared with the proportion of people from ethnic minorities living near the company's offices and will be a factor when deciding the winning bid.... A spokesman for the British Chambers of Commerce said that the plans would hinder the competitive tendering process and make it more difficult and expensive. "Public tenders are already complicated enough," he said. "Lengthening the applications will only further dissuade businesses from applying for public work. "This will do nothing to ensure that government contracts go to the firms with the most competitive bids."
ANOTHER DEATH FROM THIRST IN A NHS HOSPITAL
For many of the frail elderly, the doctors give them heroin (diamorphine) to knock them out and then leave them to die
A coroner investigating the death of a woman allegedly starved and deprived of fluids in hospital has been asked to hold an inquest into the death of a patient on the same ward. Relatives of Harold Speed believe that he died of dehydration, not pneumonia as his death certificate says. The 84-year-old former music teacher had been examined by the same doctor who treated Olive Nockels, who died after her drips were removed. "The whole of my husband's stay in hospital was a nightmare," Kate Speed said. "They put bronchopneumonia on the death certificate, but I believe his death was from the effects of dehydration." She has asked William Armstrong, the coroner, to examine her husband's death. Mr Speed and Mrs Nockels were patients on Kimberley ward at Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital.
Last month David Maisey, a consultant physician, astonished the inquest into Mrs Nockels's death when he said that he saw people die of dehydration "all the time - two or three times a week". The hospital has offered Mrs Speed compensation over her husband's death. "They asked me for a figure but I was afraid it was tactical and that they would then not have to answer questions. Just pay, and I would never know the truth of what happened," she said. She wants Mr Armstrong to investigate how many other complaints might have been lodged by patients' families over the withdrawal of fluid and food.
Mr Speed was admitted to hospital on October 16, 2004, after suffering a heart attack. While there he developed pulmonary oedema and was given diuretic therapy to rid him of the fluid on his lungs, and marked "nil by mouth". Mrs Speed said that when she visited her husband on October 24 his condition had deteriorated. She said that she threw "an absolute wobbly", accused the hospital of dereliction of duty and demanded to see a doctor. "His eyes were dry, sore, flat and sunken. I tried to moisten his mouth. I asked why he was so drowsy and was told it was perhaps due to the diamorphine he had been given. The doctor said he was very dry and picked up the flesh from his neck. It was like picking up a sheet. His veins were flat and there was an absence of mucous . . . these were classic signs of dehydration. I was in tears for him. There had been such a decline from the time he was admitted, but the doctor told me he could not have an intravenous drip because it would be too painful."
The hospital agreed on October 25 to give Mr Speed a subcutaneous infusion, where fluids are administered under the skin, and to lift the nil-by-mouth order. This was reversed on October 30 on the ground that he had aspirated liquid. Mr Speed died on November 2. Mrs Speed told the coroner in a statement that she saw Dr Maisey the day before her husband died. "I had a very terse conversation with Dr Maisey, who came to see my husband only when I dragged him out of reception. He did not physically examine my husband . . . he just turned my husband's softly playing radio off, returned to the foot of my husband's bed and told me Harold had had `the beginnings of a heart attack' way back on October 16, and he was going to give my husband some potassium in an IV, and went. We trusted, and he trusted, that the hospital would treat him well, instead of which there was a catalogue of error and apathy that led to his death, unless of course, there had been a decision, which I had no share in, that his life should no longer be preserved."
Mr Armstrong has adjourned his inquest into Mrs Nockels's death. Chris West, her grandson, said in a statement to the inquest: "I said I wouldn't treat my dog like that and [Dr Maisey] said it was easier for vets because they had alternative means and can `put animals to sleep'." Gillian Craig, vice-chairman of the Medical Ethics Alliance, said: "Any hospital or ward where patients are said to die of dehydration `all the time - two or three times a week' should be the subject of a police inquiry."
In his evidence to the inquest, Dr Maisey said: "The prognosis was very poor. Mrs Nockels was almost certain to die . . . within the next few weeks. To have put any food or liquid in her mouth would have led possibly to asphyxiation."
Yesterday the Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital NHS Trust denied that Mr Speed was dehydrated when he died. It had previously been said that he had been dehydrated after his five days without fluids. Andrew Stronach, a spokesman for the hospital, said: "Part of his treatment involved diuretic therapy to address his subsequent cardiac failure. This was necessary as fluid overload can trigger further cardiac failure. This did lead to moderate dehydration that was addressed by giving him fluids and suspending diuretic therapy. "He remained well hydrated and was being intravenously given fluids and antibiotics for his chest infection when he died. Dehydration did not contribute to his death. The cause of death was bronchopneumonia with cerebrovascular disease and [heart attack]."
Source
For many of the frail elderly, the doctors give them heroin (diamorphine) to knock them out and then leave them to die
A coroner investigating the death of a woman allegedly starved and deprived of fluids in hospital has been asked to hold an inquest into the death of a patient on the same ward. Relatives of Harold Speed believe that he died of dehydration, not pneumonia as his death certificate says. The 84-year-old former music teacher had been examined by the same doctor who treated Olive Nockels, who died after her drips were removed. "The whole of my husband's stay in hospital was a nightmare," Kate Speed said. "They put bronchopneumonia on the death certificate, but I believe his death was from the effects of dehydration." She has asked William Armstrong, the coroner, to examine her husband's death. Mr Speed and Mrs Nockels were patients on Kimberley ward at Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital.
Last month David Maisey, a consultant physician, astonished the inquest into Mrs Nockels's death when he said that he saw people die of dehydration "all the time - two or three times a week". The hospital has offered Mrs Speed compensation over her husband's death. "They asked me for a figure but I was afraid it was tactical and that they would then not have to answer questions. Just pay, and I would never know the truth of what happened," she said. She wants Mr Armstrong to investigate how many other complaints might have been lodged by patients' families over the withdrawal of fluid and food.
Mr Speed was admitted to hospital on October 16, 2004, after suffering a heart attack. While there he developed pulmonary oedema and was given diuretic therapy to rid him of the fluid on his lungs, and marked "nil by mouth". Mrs Speed said that when she visited her husband on October 24 his condition had deteriorated. She said that she threw "an absolute wobbly", accused the hospital of dereliction of duty and demanded to see a doctor. "His eyes were dry, sore, flat and sunken. I tried to moisten his mouth. I asked why he was so drowsy and was told it was perhaps due to the diamorphine he had been given. The doctor said he was very dry and picked up the flesh from his neck. It was like picking up a sheet. His veins were flat and there was an absence of mucous . . . these were classic signs of dehydration. I was in tears for him. There had been such a decline from the time he was admitted, but the doctor told me he could not have an intravenous drip because it would be too painful."
The hospital agreed on October 25 to give Mr Speed a subcutaneous infusion, where fluids are administered under the skin, and to lift the nil-by-mouth order. This was reversed on October 30 on the ground that he had aspirated liquid. Mr Speed died on November 2. Mrs Speed told the coroner in a statement that she saw Dr Maisey the day before her husband died. "I had a very terse conversation with Dr Maisey, who came to see my husband only when I dragged him out of reception. He did not physically examine my husband . . . he just turned my husband's softly playing radio off, returned to the foot of my husband's bed and told me Harold had had `the beginnings of a heart attack' way back on October 16, and he was going to give my husband some potassium in an IV, and went. We trusted, and he trusted, that the hospital would treat him well, instead of which there was a catalogue of error and apathy that led to his death, unless of course, there had been a decision, which I had no share in, that his life should no longer be preserved."
Mr Armstrong has adjourned his inquest into Mrs Nockels's death. Chris West, her grandson, said in a statement to the inquest: "I said I wouldn't treat my dog like that and [Dr Maisey] said it was easier for vets because they had alternative means and can `put animals to sleep'." Gillian Craig, vice-chairman of the Medical Ethics Alliance, said: "Any hospital or ward where patients are said to die of dehydration `all the time - two or three times a week' should be the subject of a police inquiry."
In his evidence to the inquest, Dr Maisey said: "The prognosis was very poor. Mrs Nockels was almost certain to die . . . within the next few weeks. To have put any food or liquid in her mouth would have led possibly to asphyxiation."
Yesterday the Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital NHS Trust denied that Mr Speed was dehydrated when he died. It had previously been said that he had been dehydrated after his five days without fluids. Andrew Stronach, a spokesman for the hospital, said: "Part of his treatment involved diuretic therapy to address his subsequent cardiac failure. This was necessary as fluid overload can trigger further cardiac failure. This did lead to moderate dehydration that was addressed by giving him fluids and suspending diuretic therapy. "He remained well hydrated and was being intravenously given fluids and antibiotics for his chest infection when he died. Dehydration did not contribute to his death. The cause of death was bronchopneumonia with cerebrovascular disease and [heart attack]."
Source
Monday, August 07, 2006
NAMBY PAMBY BRITAIN AGAIN
Firemen are blazing mad after bosses banned them from sliding down poles - on safety grounds. Brave crews risk their lives fighting fires - but experts have ruled they could be in danger when using the pole to answer 999 calls.
Firefighters could suffer repetitive stress injuries, bad backs, sprained ankles and even chaffing to their hands and thighs, health and safety bosses claimed. Now a new o2.4million station has been built MINUS the traditional pole, forcing firemen to run down stairs instead.
Designers of the building in Greenbank, Plymouth, say they are following safety guidelines. But crews are furious. Station officer Ken Mulville said: "In 30 years in the brigade, I've seen one or two accidents on poles compared to tens of accidents with people on stairs. It takes about a second and a half to slide down a pole as opposed to 15 or 20 seconds to run down two flights of stairs. "Seconds could be critical when responding to a 999 call."
Plymouth's Fire Brigades Union spokesman Trevor French said: "Firemen are more likely to get hurt tripping down the stairs then sliding down a pole." One firefighter at Greenbank said: "It's crazy - they pay you to plunge into burning buildings but won't risk you on a pole."
But Bernard Hughes, chairman of Devon Fire and Rescue Authority, said: "There have been a number of injuries to firefighters on poles. "A risk assessment was taken and the decision has been made not to put poles in." He denied the risk to the public would be increased by using the stairs. He said: "It's only a matter of seconds. That is not important when you consider we have a response time of 20 minutes to some emergencies."
Devon's chief fire officer Paul Young said: "The evidence is there has been no increase in response times as a consequence of not having a traditional pole. "The design of each station is determined by a host of issues. This does not mean there will never be poles at fire stations."
John Midgley, of the Campaign Against Political Correctness, said: "This is a completely disproportionate response. If they were so concerned, they should have built the station on one level."
Source
Another photo ban
Grandmother Suzanne Hansford has blasted 'politically correct' authorities after she was banned from taking photos of her granddaughter in a paddling pool. Mrs Hansford was prevented from taking pictures of four-year-old Amber as she took her first dip in a pool. As she pressed the button, a park attendant on Southampton Common, Hants, told Mrs Hansford she could not take snaps of the family day out because of council regulations. Southampton City Council insists no photos are taken at its pools and leisure facilities due to fears paedophiles might obtain illicit snaps of young children.
Upset Mrs Hansford, who lives in the city and works at a print company, said: "Are we now to be denied having photographic memories of our children and grandchildren? "I was so annoyed. "There are thousands of law-abiding people out there, just trying to enjoy the summer and take happy family pictures. "Why should we be penalised for the degenerates in our society?" The 52 year old, who had enjoyed the day out with her daughter-in-law Chrissie, argued the regulations should not apply to people who are obviously mothers and grandmothers.
Southampton City Council, which runs the pool, said exceptions could only be made for groups, such as Brownies or Cubs. And even then an application has to be made in writing to the council and parental permission sought from each child to be photographed. Paul Shearman, Southampton City Council's outdoor sports manager, said: "Health and safety is paramount in making each customer experience a positive one when visiting our pool. "As a preventative safety and comfort measure we do run a policy of restricting the use of cameras, including camera phones. "We would ask for understanding of this policy but do appreciate and accept that this may disappoint a minority of customers."
A week ago New Forest District Council chiefs ordered a father in Pennington, Hants, to remove an inflated paddling pool on health and safety grounds. Richard Cole was told by the council that someone walking through the communal courtyard in front of the flats could trip over the pool and fall into the water. New Forest District Council said: "Inflatable swimming pools are not suitable for any council-owned communal areas on health and safety grounds."
Parents have previously been prevented from taking photographs of their children in an attempt to stop pictures ending up in the hands of paedophiles. A Church minister was furious when he was banned from taking a photograph of his 16-year-old son playing in a school orchestra because of an anti-paedophile rule in 2001. The Rev Richard Burkitt, 51, claimed staff at a Scottish theatre stopped him taking a snap of his youngest son Frank for the family album. Eden Court Theatre defended its decision, insisting he was halted for 'child protection' reasons.
A year later parents of children performing in a nativity play at Sundon Lower School near Luton were banned from taking photos or videos of the performance. The headmistress wrote to parents after governors decided images of the youngsters could be inappropriately used on the Internet. Then last year an influential parents' group called on heads to ban cameras and video equipment from school events unless all families have given prior consent for their children to be filmed. The National Confederation of Parent Teacher Associations believed the move could help prevent images of children reaching paedophiles.
Source
Firemen are blazing mad after bosses banned them from sliding down poles - on safety grounds. Brave crews risk their lives fighting fires - but experts have ruled they could be in danger when using the pole to answer 999 calls.
Firefighters could suffer repetitive stress injuries, bad backs, sprained ankles and even chaffing to their hands and thighs, health and safety bosses claimed. Now a new o2.4million station has been built MINUS the traditional pole, forcing firemen to run down stairs instead.
Designers of the building in Greenbank, Plymouth, say they are following safety guidelines. But crews are furious. Station officer Ken Mulville said: "In 30 years in the brigade, I've seen one or two accidents on poles compared to tens of accidents with people on stairs. It takes about a second and a half to slide down a pole as opposed to 15 or 20 seconds to run down two flights of stairs. "Seconds could be critical when responding to a 999 call."
Plymouth's Fire Brigades Union spokesman Trevor French said: "Firemen are more likely to get hurt tripping down the stairs then sliding down a pole." One firefighter at Greenbank said: "It's crazy - they pay you to plunge into burning buildings but won't risk you on a pole."
But Bernard Hughes, chairman of Devon Fire and Rescue Authority, said: "There have been a number of injuries to firefighters on poles. "A risk assessment was taken and the decision has been made not to put poles in." He denied the risk to the public would be increased by using the stairs. He said: "It's only a matter of seconds. That is not important when you consider we have a response time of 20 minutes to some emergencies."
Devon's chief fire officer Paul Young said: "The evidence is there has been no increase in response times as a consequence of not having a traditional pole. "The design of each station is determined by a host of issues. This does not mean there will never be poles at fire stations."
John Midgley, of the Campaign Against Political Correctness, said: "This is a completely disproportionate response. If they were so concerned, they should have built the station on one level."
Source
Another photo ban
Grandmother Suzanne Hansford has blasted 'politically correct' authorities after she was banned from taking photos of her granddaughter in a paddling pool. Mrs Hansford was prevented from taking pictures of four-year-old Amber as she took her first dip in a pool. As she pressed the button, a park attendant on Southampton Common, Hants, told Mrs Hansford she could not take snaps of the family day out because of council regulations. Southampton City Council insists no photos are taken at its pools and leisure facilities due to fears paedophiles might obtain illicit snaps of young children.
Upset Mrs Hansford, who lives in the city and works at a print company, said: "Are we now to be denied having photographic memories of our children and grandchildren? "I was so annoyed. "There are thousands of law-abiding people out there, just trying to enjoy the summer and take happy family pictures. "Why should we be penalised for the degenerates in our society?" The 52 year old, who had enjoyed the day out with her daughter-in-law Chrissie, argued the regulations should not apply to people who are obviously mothers and grandmothers.
Southampton City Council, which runs the pool, said exceptions could only be made for groups, such as Brownies or Cubs. And even then an application has to be made in writing to the council and parental permission sought from each child to be photographed. Paul Shearman, Southampton City Council's outdoor sports manager, said: "Health and safety is paramount in making each customer experience a positive one when visiting our pool. "As a preventative safety and comfort measure we do run a policy of restricting the use of cameras, including camera phones. "We would ask for understanding of this policy but do appreciate and accept that this may disappoint a minority of customers."
A week ago New Forest District Council chiefs ordered a father in Pennington, Hants, to remove an inflated paddling pool on health and safety grounds. Richard Cole was told by the council that someone walking through the communal courtyard in front of the flats could trip over the pool and fall into the water. New Forest District Council said: "Inflatable swimming pools are not suitable for any council-owned communal areas on health and safety grounds."
Parents have previously been prevented from taking photographs of their children in an attempt to stop pictures ending up in the hands of paedophiles. A Church minister was furious when he was banned from taking a photograph of his 16-year-old son playing in a school orchestra because of an anti-paedophile rule in 2001. The Rev Richard Burkitt, 51, claimed staff at a Scottish theatre stopped him taking a snap of his youngest son Frank for the family album. Eden Court Theatre defended its decision, insisting he was halted for 'child protection' reasons.
A year later parents of children performing in a nativity play at Sundon Lower School near Luton were banned from taking photos or videos of the performance. The headmistress wrote to parents after governors decided images of the youngsters could be inappropriately used on the Internet. Then last year an influential parents' group called on heads to ban cameras and video equipment from school events unless all families have given prior consent for their children to be filmed. The National Confederation of Parent Teacher Associations believed the move could help prevent images of children reaching paedophiles.
Source
UK: It's not cool to be clever
Teachers are being urged to stop using the word clever and talk about successful children to curb school bullying. Union leaders said hundreds of children were being targeted because they were considered clever, and some bright students were refusing school prizes for fear of being picked on by classmates.
Simon Smith, a teacher from Essex, told the Professional Association of Teachers conference in Oxford that being clever was simply not cool among today's children. "I have talked to various pupils ... and being clever meant that you were boring, lacked personality, were a teacher's pet and other things not polite enough to mention."
Wesley Paxton from Yorkshire told the conference that celebrity role models meant children no longer aspired to academic success. He said self-made men like Alan Sugar were proud of their poor academic achievements and others like David Beckham "do not give the impression of eloquence and intellectual capacity".
Ann Nuckley, an administrator from Southwark, south London, said many pupils in her school refused to come up on stage to receive awards. "I am ending up sending book tokens through the post because children won't come up and get them, which I think is extremely sad."
The PAT, which has 34,000 members, passed a motion that stated: "Conference regrets that it does not appear to be cool to be clever." Last year the conference heard calls from members to delete the word "failure" from the educational vocabulary and replace it with the concept of "deferred success".
Source
Britain updates an old Soviet and Nazi system
Anonymous and baseless alegations by disgruntled and envious people will be dealt with how? No mention. Let's hope there is some consciousness of that problem anyway
A new scheme to tackle bullying and racism is being piloted in 20 Salford schools. The web-based project will enable staff and pupils to log in to a database and confidentially report any incidents of bullying - including the names of bullies. If the scheme is successful it will be extended to all schools and children's services and possibly social services and primary care trusts.
The Sentinel Anti-Bullying software being used will enable children to report incidents more easily and will alert appropriate staff so that the relevant support and action can be taken. This approach eliminates duplication and provides a single reporting base. It is aimed at encouraging more children to report any bullying or racism and giving staff and officials a truer picture as to the extent of the problem which will help them to combat it. The project is part of a national pilot and will run until the end of the academic year 2007.
Councillor John Warmisham, lead member for children's services, said: "Sentinel will enable Salford to meet national requirements in reporting racial incidents, but will go beyond this, combating all forms of bullying within schools and children's services, including gender and homophobic bullying. It was particularly important for us to have a mechanism that was specifically designed for children to be able to report bullying safely and easily. "The web-based access is secure and universal and is a medium which will appeal to children, which will help us to get a truer picture of the issues."
Source
Teachers are being urged to stop using the word clever and talk about successful children to curb school bullying. Union leaders said hundreds of children were being targeted because they were considered clever, and some bright students were refusing school prizes for fear of being picked on by classmates.
Simon Smith, a teacher from Essex, told the Professional Association of Teachers conference in Oxford that being clever was simply not cool among today's children. "I have talked to various pupils ... and being clever meant that you were boring, lacked personality, were a teacher's pet and other things not polite enough to mention."
Wesley Paxton from Yorkshire told the conference that celebrity role models meant children no longer aspired to academic success. He said self-made men like Alan Sugar were proud of their poor academic achievements and others like David Beckham "do not give the impression of eloquence and intellectual capacity".
Ann Nuckley, an administrator from Southwark, south London, said many pupils in her school refused to come up on stage to receive awards. "I am ending up sending book tokens through the post because children won't come up and get them, which I think is extremely sad."
The PAT, which has 34,000 members, passed a motion that stated: "Conference regrets that it does not appear to be cool to be clever." Last year the conference heard calls from members to delete the word "failure" from the educational vocabulary and replace it with the concept of "deferred success".
Source
Britain updates an old Soviet and Nazi system
Anonymous and baseless alegations by disgruntled and envious people will be dealt with how? No mention. Let's hope there is some consciousness of that problem anyway
A new scheme to tackle bullying and racism is being piloted in 20 Salford schools. The web-based project will enable staff and pupils to log in to a database and confidentially report any incidents of bullying - including the names of bullies. If the scheme is successful it will be extended to all schools and children's services and possibly social services and primary care trusts.
The Sentinel Anti-Bullying software being used will enable children to report incidents more easily and will alert appropriate staff so that the relevant support and action can be taken. This approach eliminates duplication and provides a single reporting base. It is aimed at encouraging more children to report any bullying or racism and giving staff and officials a truer picture as to the extent of the problem which will help them to combat it. The project is part of a national pilot and will run until the end of the academic year 2007.
Councillor John Warmisham, lead member for children's services, said: "Sentinel will enable Salford to meet national requirements in reporting racial incidents, but will go beyond this, combating all forms of bullying within schools and children's services, including gender and homophobic bullying. It was particularly important for us to have a mechanism that was specifically designed for children to be able to report bullying safely and easily. "The web-based access is secure and universal and is a medium which will appeal to children, which will help us to get a truer picture of the issues."
Source
Heart patients get fake drugs supplied to NHS pharmacies
Counterfeit copies of Lipitor, a drug taken by more than a million Britons for cardiovascular conditions, have entered the NHS supply chain. Drug regulators are attempting to track how fake versions of the statin were supplied to chemists and reached "patient level". It is not known how many people may have taken the fakes, although the drugs in question are not thought to pose a serious risk to health.
A total of 320 fake packets, marked with an authentic Lipitor batch number - 004405K1 - have been discovered since the arrest in June of two men who are the focus of a criminal investigation. The same batch was subject to a national recall a year ago when 73 packets were discovered - the first time that counterfeits of a drug used for conditions as serious as heart disease had been detected in the legitimate supply chain.
The Times understands that there are broader concerns about the criminal network linked to the men arrested, and attempts to exploit other areas of the statin supply chain. The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), which issued a second recall in the past fortnight after the discovery, is to adopt a national strategy next month to combat the trade in counterfeit medicines. Estimates from regulators in the United States suggest that 15 per cent of imported pharmaceuticals contain unapproved substances. Thousands of patients in developing countries are thought to have died as a result of medicine counterfeiting in recent years.
The Lipitor discovery is the fourth time in ten years that fakes have been detected in the drug supply chain in Britain. Experts are becoming increasingly concerned that criminal networks are exploiting the market in statins, which are taken by millions of people to lower cholesterol. The two Lipitor incidents involved the counterfeiting of a batch of 120,000 packets. Each packet contained 28 Lipitor pills of 20mg and were worth about 28 pounds. The fakes were found to contain a statin not marketed in Britain. Mick Deats, the head of enforcement and intelligence for the MHRA, said: "Our testing of the counterfeit product indicates that there is no immediate risk to patients, but we cannot guarantee its quality."
The latest recall was sent to 20,000 chemists and shops. The two men who were arrested in June are on police bail. The discovery of paperwork at premises used by the men led investigators to a wholesaler in North London, and to pharmacy clients. Neither the wholesaler nor the pharmacists are accused of wrongdoing In a business plan published last week by the MHRA, Kent Woods, its chief executive, outlined significant concerns about counterfeit products and internet sales. Describing the "increased threat across the world", he said that international relationships needed to be developed and "as much disruption as possible created to illegal and unsafe trade". The report says that an anti-counterfeiting strategy will be in place by September aimed at criminals importing, distributing and supplying fake drugs. Market surveillance, co-operation among regulators, increased public awareness and more forceful prosecution are the main plans of attack.
Pfizer, which makes Lipitor, said that it was working with regulators to determine how the criminals were operating and to help to thwart them. "Pfizer's first concern is for patient safety and takes counterfeiting of medicines extremely seriously," it said. "[The company] has introduced a number of policies and technologies to protect the integrity of its medicines, including the phased introduction of tamper-evident packaging, and is aggressively addressing this issue to ensure that patients can remain confident that they are taking genuine Pfizer medicines. "This discovery serves as a strong reminder of the vulner-ability of the medicines supply chain in much of Europe. Patient safety can only be maintained with a secure and safe medicines supply chain, which requires anti-counterfeiting efforts by all stakeholders."
More here
Counterfeit copies of Lipitor, a drug taken by more than a million Britons for cardiovascular conditions, have entered the NHS supply chain. Drug regulators are attempting to track how fake versions of the statin were supplied to chemists and reached "patient level". It is not known how many people may have taken the fakes, although the drugs in question are not thought to pose a serious risk to health.
A total of 320 fake packets, marked with an authentic Lipitor batch number - 004405K1 - have been discovered since the arrest in June of two men who are the focus of a criminal investigation. The same batch was subject to a national recall a year ago when 73 packets were discovered - the first time that counterfeits of a drug used for conditions as serious as heart disease had been detected in the legitimate supply chain.
The Times understands that there are broader concerns about the criminal network linked to the men arrested, and attempts to exploit other areas of the statin supply chain. The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), which issued a second recall in the past fortnight after the discovery, is to adopt a national strategy next month to combat the trade in counterfeit medicines. Estimates from regulators in the United States suggest that 15 per cent of imported pharmaceuticals contain unapproved substances. Thousands of patients in developing countries are thought to have died as a result of medicine counterfeiting in recent years.
The Lipitor discovery is the fourth time in ten years that fakes have been detected in the drug supply chain in Britain. Experts are becoming increasingly concerned that criminal networks are exploiting the market in statins, which are taken by millions of people to lower cholesterol. The two Lipitor incidents involved the counterfeiting of a batch of 120,000 packets. Each packet contained 28 Lipitor pills of 20mg and were worth about 28 pounds. The fakes were found to contain a statin not marketed in Britain. Mick Deats, the head of enforcement and intelligence for the MHRA, said: "Our testing of the counterfeit product indicates that there is no immediate risk to patients, but we cannot guarantee its quality."
The latest recall was sent to 20,000 chemists and shops. The two men who were arrested in June are on police bail. The discovery of paperwork at premises used by the men led investigators to a wholesaler in North London, and to pharmacy clients. Neither the wholesaler nor the pharmacists are accused of wrongdoing In a business plan published last week by the MHRA, Kent Woods, its chief executive, outlined significant concerns about counterfeit products and internet sales. Describing the "increased threat across the world", he said that international relationships needed to be developed and "as much disruption as possible created to illegal and unsafe trade". The report says that an anti-counterfeiting strategy will be in place by September aimed at criminals importing, distributing and supplying fake drugs. Market surveillance, co-operation among regulators, increased public awareness and more forceful prosecution are the main plans of attack.
Pfizer, which makes Lipitor, said that it was working with regulators to determine how the criminals were operating and to help to thwart them. "Pfizer's first concern is for patient safety and takes counterfeiting of medicines extremely seriously," it said. "[The company] has introduced a number of policies and technologies to protect the integrity of its medicines, including the phased introduction of tamper-evident packaging, and is aggressively addressing this issue to ensure that patients can remain confident that they are taking genuine Pfizer medicines. "This discovery serves as a strong reminder of the vulner-ability of the medicines supply chain in much of Europe. Patient safety can only be maintained with a secure and safe medicines supply chain, which requires anti-counterfeiting efforts by all stakeholders."
More here
"Racist" for Manager to Fire Black Thief
Another nutty story from Britain: A hotel manager watched a black employee stealing money -- on a videotape from a security camera. She showed him the tape and fired him for what he did.
Now he is claiming that his firing was "racism" and a British government tribunal appears to be taking the claim seriously. Details here
Another nutty story from Britain: A hotel manager watched a black employee stealing money -- on a videotape from a security camera. She showed him the tape and fired him for what he did.
Now he is claiming that his firing was "racism" and a British government tribunal appears to be taking the claim seriously. Details here
Sunday, August 06, 2006
SICK BRITAIN
Public masturbation used to be associated with sad old men wearing dirty raincoats. Now it is no longer seen as a sordid exhibition, but rather as an exercise in raising awareness about safe sex. So hold on to your hats - the public masturbation exhibition is coming to London on 5 August! We are all invited to `come for good causes' by the organisers of Europe's very first `Masturbate-a-Thon' event.
Masturbation is about to be rebranded as the ultimate expression of responsible sexual behaviour. Get rid of your dirty raincoat: exhibitionism has been given a clean bill of health by sexologists, sex educationalists and the media. With great fanfare, this weekend's public display of narcissism - ostensibly performed to raise money for charity - will be promoted as an act of civic virtue. Willing masturbators will gather at a converted photographic studio in Clerkenwell, London, on Saturday, to pleasure themselves for the cameras and a charitable cause. Predictably, Channel 4, whose commitment to the highest standard of public service broadcasting is well known, has enthusiastically embraced this opportunity to transmit yet another of its `brave', `pioneering', `agenda-setting' and `taboo-breaking' reality shows: it will be filming and televising the Masturbate-a-Thon. Since Channel 4 has courageously invested its reputation in this venture, it is guaranteed to be conducted in the best possible taste. Which is why, according to the organisers, `fully clothed people will not be allowed into rooms set aside for masturbation'.
The organisers of this spectacle claim the objective is to encourage people to `explore safe sex' and `talk about masturbation and lift the taboos that still surround the subject by coming to a public place and coming in a public place'. I have always suspected that sexologists love to talk `dirty' - that is why they attach such significance to `vagina monologues' and talking about wanking. They claim that openly discussing masturbation is an important part of an overall enlightened sexual etiquette. According to a leaflet produced by the Family Planning Association, Masturbation - Support Notes, talking about it `encourages safe and non-judgmental environments in which people can explore their sexuality'.
This weekend's event should provide suitably wholesome entertainment, if the literature promoting it is anything to go by. The Masturbate-a-Thon crew clearly enjoys a laugh, never missing an opportunity to crack a crude double entendre and continually using the word `come' in different, apparently witty ways. `Who can come?' ask the organisers, before pointedly imploring: `So come on.don't be shy.' Why? Because `you can come for good causes'. This is playground humour, and it sounds forced and more than a little vulgar. The organisers of this initiative have turned otherwise unexceptional words - exhilaration, pleasure, relaxation, liberation - into salacious and crude terms.
But there are rules. The event sponsors, who clearly buy in to today's health-obsessed ideology, forbid participants from doing drugs, drinking alcohol or smoking. Though you can bring your own toys, you are asked not to `share them or to offer them to anyone else after you', since `this constitutes a clear risk to others'. And no cheating! There will be monitors on hand - sort of - to clock the duration of your contribution and count your orgasms. With a hint of self-parody, participants are warned that `monitors shall carry a clipboard to keep notes on time and consistency of self-pleasuring'.
And while taking pleasure in yourself, you are obliged to take pleasure in diversity, too. Apparently anyone demonstrating `prejudice, disrespect and intolerance of other people' will be asked to leave straight after the critical moment has been reached. This is clearly an inclusive event fully committed to the ethos of diversity. You'll be pleased to know that `people of both genders and sexual orientations' will masturbate in this inclusive performance.
Masturbation and the new moralism
Pornographers frequently flatter themselves by labelling their work as `erotic art'. Now, with the Masturbate-a-Thon, narcissistic voyeurism is represented as an exercise in public service; a low-life show for Peeping Toms masquerades as a public health initiative. The Masturbate-a-Thon aims to `raise awareness of, and dispel the shame and taboos that persist around, this most commonplace, natural and safe form of sexual activity'. Are we supposed to believe that the public is totally unfamiliar with the practice of masturbation?
The idea that talking about masturbation is a powerful taboo is a self-serving myth peddled by solo-sex crusaders who never resist the temptation to discuss their obsession. As any school child will confirm, masturbation is hardly a taboo topic. There is a veritable industry devoted to praising its virtues and `raising awareness' about it. In case you're desperate for information, you can consult Martha Cornag's The Big Book of Masturbation, which addresses `the myths and questions that have plagued society for centuries', according to its publisher. Cornag also respects diversity and `presents masturbation from a variety of perspectives'. If you are feeling a tiny bit unsure about the experience, then flick through Edward L Rowan's The Joy of Self-Pleasuring: Why Feel Guilty About Feeling Good? Then there is Walter O Bocking's Masturbation As a Means of Achieving Sexual Health or Betty Dodson's Sex for One: The Joy of Self-Loving, both of which claim to do a bit of taboo-busting.
Some old-fashioned critics of Saturday's voyeuristic event may view it as a sign of our unhealthy hedonistic culture. But the advocacy of masturbation today has little to do with a hedonistic desire to validate sexual pleasure. Rather, the solo-sex crusade can be profoundly puritanical and moralistic. The moral entrepreneurs who dreamt up Masturbate-a-Thon promote a dogma that regards passion itself as a disease. Old-fashioned moralists told people to `just say no' and left it at that. Their target was promiscuity, homosexuality and extramarital sex. Today's sex education establishment is far more prescriptive. It demands that we `say no' to all passionate relationships that carry risks and consequences. The new lobby of moralists are not just wary of sex but of all forms of passionate relations. Yes they talk about pleasure, but according to their ideology it must be an experience that is robbed of passionate emotions.
The two most highly stigmatised words in the lexicon of the sex education lobby are `risk' and `consequence'. They are not simply concerned with the risk of catching a sexually transmitted disease, but also with the risk of emotional pain that invariably accompanies relationships. Traditional moralists sought to discourage people from having pre-marital affairs; today's sex education lobby hopes to divest sex from passion. Why? Because when you have passionate sex, anything can happen. You might forget to take your pill; you might get too emotionally involved with your partner.
Marie Stopes International, one of the sponsors of Masturbate-a Thon, warns that `in our work all over the world, every day we see the consequences of fertile orgasms'. The denigration of the experience of a fertile orgasm expresses a profound sense of unease with human passion, particularly when it has life-creating consequences. Here, traditional prudishness is displaced by a far more lifeless dread of acting on spontaneous desire....
More here
BRITISH LIBEL LAW ATTACKS FREE SPEECH
By Mick Hume
The verdict is expected today in the Tommy Sheridan defamation trial, in which the MSP and former leader of the Scottish Socialist Party is suing the News of the World over allegations of extramarital sex, orgies and swinging parties. But the verdict on Britain's libel laws should have been clear long ago. They are the most atrocious, unjust pieces of legislation on our statute books -- a title won in the face of some stiff competition. Nobody in his right mind, or who is still mad enough to believe in freedom of speech, should surely ever sue under these laws. Indeed, a society that considers itself free should abolish them.
English libel law commits crimes against natural justice (Scotland's defamation laws are not much different). Forget the presumption of innocence; libel law presumes that the defendant has published lies and demands that he prove the contrary. The claimant has to prove nothing and can simply assert that his reputation has been damaged -- in Scotland the claimant must show some damage, not necessarily financial. The vast majority of cases brought to court end in the claimant' s favour. Most never get that far, because nervous publications settle beforehand, while the spectre of defamation law has a chilling effect on what gets published in the first place. No wonder "libel tourists" from Britney Spears to Russian businessmen sue foreign publications in UK courts.
And what of the winners? Last week Paul McKenna, the TV hypnotist, won a libel case against the Daily Mirror, which had described his PhD as "bogus" in a long-forgotten article. Mr McKenna said that the trial had made him "a laughing stock". The judge ruled in his favour, but concluded that it would have been fair comment to say that Mr McKenna had received his qualification from an "obscure, degrees-by-post establishment", and that " hypnotherapy was not a suitable subject for a PhD". What a triumph!
Mr Sheridan's defamation case has turned into a media circus of colourful accusations and denials, during which he has wept, sacked his lawyers, paraded his personal life and offered to parade his hirsute body before the world, admitted being "a source of ridicule" and effectively accused 18 witnesses of lying. It has certainly altered the staid reputation of the SSP. What impact suing has on Mr Sheridan's reputation remains to be seen.
A few years ago, I was sued for libel. The case left Living Marxism, the independent left-wing magazine that I edited, facing closure, and me facing a million-pound bill for costs and damages. I said on the steps of the Royal Courts of Justice that the only thing the trial had proved beyond reasonable doubt was that the libel laws were a menace to free speech and a disgrace to democracy. Then, libel law was considered a rich man's charter. Now, however, the rise of "no win, no fee" lawyers has "democratised" censorship and opened the doors of the defamation courts to others. Fashionable though it is to bash American tyranny, it is worth recalling that many of these high-profile cases would never come to trial there because the law makes it hard for public figures to sue. In 1997, a US court refused to enforce a judgment made in London, on the ground that UK libel law was "repugnant" to the principle of free speech. A good word, repugnant. And that was long before any discussion of Mr Sheridan's body hair.
Source
Public masturbation used to be associated with sad old men wearing dirty raincoats. Now it is no longer seen as a sordid exhibition, but rather as an exercise in raising awareness about safe sex. So hold on to your hats - the public masturbation exhibition is coming to London on 5 August! We are all invited to `come for good causes' by the organisers of Europe's very first `Masturbate-a-Thon' event.
Masturbation is about to be rebranded as the ultimate expression of responsible sexual behaviour. Get rid of your dirty raincoat: exhibitionism has been given a clean bill of health by sexologists, sex educationalists and the media. With great fanfare, this weekend's public display of narcissism - ostensibly performed to raise money for charity - will be promoted as an act of civic virtue. Willing masturbators will gather at a converted photographic studio in Clerkenwell, London, on Saturday, to pleasure themselves for the cameras and a charitable cause. Predictably, Channel 4, whose commitment to the highest standard of public service broadcasting is well known, has enthusiastically embraced this opportunity to transmit yet another of its `brave', `pioneering', `agenda-setting' and `taboo-breaking' reality shows: it will be filming and televising the Masturbate-a-Thon. Since Channel 4 has courageously invested its reputation in this venture, it is guaranteed to be conducted in the best possible taste. Which is why, according to the organisers, `fully clothed people will not be allowed into rooms set aside for masturbation'.
The organisers of this spectacle claim the objective is to encourage people to `explore safe sex' and `talk about masturbation and lift the taboos that still surround the subject by coming to a public place and coming in a public place'. I have always suspected that sexologists love to talk `dirty' - that is why they attach such significance to `vagina monologues' and talking about wanking. They claim that openly discussing masturbation is an important part of an overall enlightened sexual etiquette. According to a leaflet produced by the Family Planning Association, Masturbation - Support Notes, talking about it `encourages safe and non-judgmental environments in which people can explore their sexuality'.
This weekend's event should provide suitably wholesome entertainment, if the literature promoting it is anything to go by. The Masturbate-a-Thon crew clearly enjoys a laugh, never missing an opportunity to crack a crude double entendre and continually using the word `come' in different, apparently witty ways. `Who can come?' ask the organisers, before pointedly imploring: `So come on.don't be shy.' Why? Because `you can come for good causes'. This is playground humour, and it sounds forced and more than a little vulgar. The organisers of this initiative have turned otherwise unexceptional words - exhilaration, pleasure, relaxation, liberation - into salacious and crude terms.
But there are rules. The event sponsors, who clearly buy in to today's health-obsessed ideology, forbid participants from doing drugs, drinking alcohol or smoking. Though you can bring your own toys, you are asked not to `share them or to offer them to anyone else after you', since `this constitutes a clear risk to others'. And no cheating! There will be monitors on hand - sort of - to clock the duration of your contribution and count your orgasms. With a hint of self-parody, participants are warned that `monitors shall carry a clipboard to keep notes on time and consistency of self-pleasuring'.
And while taking pleasure in yourself, you are obliged to take pleasure in diversity, too. Apparently anyone demonstrating `prejudice, disrespect and intolerance of other people' will be asked to leave straight after the critical moment has been reached. This is clearly an inclusive event fully committed to the ethos of diversity. You'll be pleased to know that `people of both genders and sexual orientations' will masturbate in this inclusive performance.
Masturbation and the new moralism
Pornographers frequently flatter themselves by labelling their work as `erotic art'. Now, with the Masturbate-a-Thon, narcissistic voyeurism is represented as an exercise in public service; a low-life show for Peeping Toms masquerades as a public health initiative. The Masturbate-a-Thon aims to `raise awareness of, and dispel the shame and taboos that persist around, this most commonplace, natural and safe form of sexual activity'. Are we supposed to believe that the public is totally unfamiliar with the practice of masturbation?
The idea that talking about masturbation is a powerful taboo is a self-serving myth peddled by solo-sex crusaders who never resist the temptation to discuss their obsession. As any school child will confirm, masturbation is hardly a taboo topic. There is a veritable industry devoted to praising its virtues and `raising awareness' about it. In case you're desperate for information, you can consult Martha Cornag's The Big Book of Masturbation, which addresses `the myths and questions that have plagued society for centuries', according to its publisher. Cornag also respects diversity and `presents masturbation from a variety of perspectives'. If you are feeling a tiny bit unsure about the experience, then flick through Edward L Rowan's The Joy of Self-Pleasuring: Why Feel Guilty About Feeling Good? Then there is Walter O Bocking's Masturbation As a Means of Achieving Sexual Health or Betty Dodson's Sex for One: The Joy of Self-Loving, both of which claim to do a bit of taboo-busting.
Some old-fashioned critics of Saturday's voyeuristic event may view it as a sign of our unhealthy hedonistic culture. But the advocacy of masturbation today has little to do with a hedonistic desire to validate sexual pleasure. Rather, the solo-sex crusade can be profoundly puritanical and moralistic. The moral entrepreneurs who dreamt up Masturbate-a-Thon promote a dogma that regards passion itself as a disease. Old-fashioned moralists told people to `just say no' and left it at that. Their target was promiscuity, homosexuality and extramarital sex. Today's sex education establishment is far more prescriptive. It demands that we `say no' to all passionate relationships that carry risks and consequences. The new lobby of moralists are not just wary of sex but of all forms of passionate relations. Yes they talk about pleasure, but according to their ideology it must be an experience that is robbed of passionate emotions.
The two most highly stigmatised words in the lexicon of the sex education lobby are `risk' and `consequence'. They are not simply concerned with the risk of catching a sexually transmitted disease, but also with the risk of emotional pain that invariably accompanies relationships. Traditional moralists sought to discourage people from having pre-marital affairs; today's sex education lobby hopes to divest sex from passion. Why? Because when you have passionate sex, anything can happen. You might forget to take your pill; you might get too emotionally involved with your partner.
Marie Stopes International, one of the sponsors of Masturbate-a Thon, warns that `in our work all over the world, every day we see the consequences of fertile orgasms'. The denigration of the experience of a fertile orgasm expresses a profound sense of unease with human passion, particularly when it has life-creating consequences. Here, traditional prudishness is displaced by a far more lifeless dread of acting on spontaneous desire....
More here
BRITISH LIBEL LAW ATTACKS FREE SPEECH
By Mick Hume
The verdict is expected today in the Tommy Sheridan defamation trial, in which the MSP and former leader of the Scottish Socialist Party is suing the News of the World over allegations of extramarital sex, orgies and swinging parties. But the verdict on Britain's libel laws should have been clear long ago. They are the most atrocious, unjust pieces of legislation on our statute books -- a title won in the face of some stiff competition. Nobody in his right mind, or who is still mad enough to believe in freedom of speech, should surely ever sue under these laws. Indeed, a society that considers itself free should abolish them.
English libel law commits crimes against natural justice (Scotland's defamation laws are not much different). Forget the presumption of innocence; libel law presumes that the defendant has published lies and demands that he prove the contrary. The claimant has to prove nothing and can simply assert that his reputation has been damaged -- in Scotland the claimant must show some damage, not necessarily financial. The vast majority of cases brought to court end in the claimant' s favour. Most never get that far, because nervous publications settle beforehand, while the spectre of defamation law has a chilling effect on what gets published in the first place. No wonder "libel tourists" from Britney Spears to Russian businessmen sue foreign publications in UK courts.
And what of the winners? Last week Paul McKenna, the TV hypnotist, won a libel case against the Daily Mirror, which had described his PhD as "bogus" in a long-forgotten article. Mr McKenna said that the trial had made him "a laughing stock". The judge ruled in his favour, but concluded that it would have been fair comment to say that Mr McKenna had received his qualification from an "obscure, degrees-by-post establishment", and that " hypnotherapy was not a suitable subject for a PhD". What a triumph!
Mr Sheridan's defamation case has turned into a media circus of colourful accusations and denials, during which he has wept, sacked his lawyers, paraded his personal life and offered to parade his hirsute body before the world, admitted being "a source of ridicule" and effectively accused 18 witnesses of lying. It has certainly altered the staid reputation of the SSP. What impact suing has on Mr Sheridan's reputation remains to be seen.
A few years ago, I was sued for libel. The case left Living Marxism, the independent left-wing magazine that I edited, facing closure, and me facing a million-pound bill for costs and damages. I said on the steps of the Royal Courts of Justice that the only thing the trial had proved beyond reasonable doubt was that the libel laws were a menace to free speech and a disgrace to democracy. Then, libel law was considered a rich man's charter. Now, however, the rise of "no win, no fee" lawyers has "democratised" censorship and opened the doors of the defamation courts to others. Fashionable though it is to bash American tyranny, it is worth recalling that many of these high-profile cases would never come to trial there because the law makes it hard for public figures to sue. In 1997, a US court refused to enforce a judgment made in London, on the ground that UK libel law was "repugnant" to the principle of free speech. A good word, repugnant. And that was long before any discussion of Mr Sheridan's body hair.
Source
British ID card in trouble: "MPs attacked plans for identity cards as inconsistent and lacking clarity yesterday and called for a rethink of the technology to be used. The Commons Science and Technology Committee published a report expressing incredulity that the Home Office claimed to be able to produce firm estimates of the costs of running ID cards when fundamental technical decisions were still unclear. The Home Office has said that running costs would be 584 million pounds a year, whereas the London School of Economics, in a controversial report, has put the total costs of setting up and running ID cards at between 10.6 billion and 19.2 billion. The report called on the Government to disclose more information about how the scheme would operate, particularly the database on which personal details would eventually be held. The criticism comes after the admission by the Home Office last month that the introduction of identity cards as a voluntary measure was likely to be delayed past the target date of 2008 because of practical difficulties in implementing a scheme of that size".
Saturday, August 05, 2006
DUMBING DOWN IN SCOTLAND'S UNIVERSITIES TOO
Scotland's law schools were yesterday charged by a leading lawyer with turning out sub-standard graduates. He also accused universities of putting profits before standards. Professor Alastair Bonnington claimed legal education was being dumbed down and accused law schools of making the subject an easy option to increase their profits with boosted student numbers. In a scathing article in the current issue of the Law Society Journal, written to reflect on his retirement after 25 years' teaching, Prof Bonnington said that studying law had become much easier than it was 30 years ago and that law schools hand out 2:1 honours degrees almost as a matter of course. He also complained there was a paucity of teachers who had actually practised law employed at Scottish law schools.
The article, which the Law Society of Scotland was quick to point out was Prof Bonnington's "personal opinion", provoked outrage at Scotland's university law schools. Professor David Carey-Miller, head of the law school at Aberdeen University, said: "I would vehemently disagree with almost everything Alastair is saying." He said that in a recent survey five out of the top 20 law schools in the whole of the UK were Scottish. "The fundamental reason for these schools appearing in this list is high standards," said Prof Carey-Miller.
Professor Colin Reid, Dean of the Faculty of Law and Accountancy at Dundee University, said: "It is hardly surprising that many students are achieving good honours results since well-qualified students enter the law schools where more thought is being given to teaching and learning than ever before. "Moreover Dundee is unique in offering qualifying law degrees for Scotland, England and Wales and Northern Ireland. We are, therefore, very conscious of the differences between the various legal systems."
Prof Bonnington, solicitor to BBC Scotland and a visiting professor at Glasgow Law School, said he had major concerns that students today did not understand Scottish law as "it is taught little and seldom" by academics who lack "necessary practical skills". And lamenting the lack of intellectual rigour and vocational training, he noted that 2:1 degrees are dished out to "almost everyone", while university administrations milk law schools as "cash cows". Prof Bonnington said: "Today, Scottish law schools admit almost everyone to study honours and award almost everyone a 2:1 degree. It appears that Scots law is taught little and seldom in some law schools."
Source
Scotland's law schools were yesterday charged by a leading lawyer with turning out sub-standard graduates. He also accused universities of putting profits before standards. Professor Alastair Bonnington claimed legal education was being dumbed down and accused law schools of making the subject an easy option to increase their profits with boosted student numbers. In a scathing article in the current issue of the Law Society Journal, written to reflect on his retirement after 25 years' teaching, Prof Bonnington said that studying law had become much easier than it was 30 years ago and that law schools hand out 2:1 honours degrees almost as a matter of course. He also complained there was a paucity of teachers who had actually practised law employed at Scottish law schools.
The article, which the Law Society of Scotland was quick to point out was Prof Bonnington's "personal opinion", provoked outrage at Scotland's university law schools. Professor David Carey-Miller, head of the law school at Aberdeen University, said: "I would vehemently disagree with almost everything Alastair is saying." He said that in a recent survey five out of the top 20 law schools in the whole of the UK were Scottish. "The fundamental reason for these schools appearing in this list is high standards," said Prof Carey-Miller.
Professor Colin Reid, Dean of the Faculty of Law and Accountancy at Dundee University, said: "It is hardly surprising that many students are achieving good honours results since well-qualified students enter the law schools where more thought is being given to teaching and learning than ever before. "Moreover Dundee is unique in offering qualifying law degrees for Scotland, England and Wales and Northern Ireland. We are, therefore, very conscious of the differences between the various legal systems."
Prof Bonnington, solicitor to BBC Scotland and a visiting professor at Glasgow Law School, said he had major concerns that students today did not understand Scottish law as "it is taught little and seldom" by academics who lack "necessary practical skills". And lamenting the lack of intellectual rigour and vocational training, he noted that 2:1 degrees are dished out to "almost everyone", while university administrations milk law schools as "cash cows". Prof Bonnington said: "Today, Scottish law schools admit almost everyone to study honours and award almost everyone a 2:1 degree. It appears that Scots law is taught little and seldom in some law schools."
Source
HOSPITAL "TOO EFFICIENT" IN BUREAUCRATIZED BRITAIN
An NHS hospital has been penalised for treating people too quickly after its local trusts refused to pay the 2.5m pound cost of clearing a backlog of patients. Ipswich Hospital had been so successful in reducing its waiting lists that it was able to meet current demand for treatment almost immediately. However, the acceleration of treatment breached rules set by the Suffolk East Primary Care Trusts (PCTs), which stated that patients must wait at least 122 days, to ensure that its own resources were not exhausted too quickly.
The Government has set tough national targets in an attempt to get hospitals to cut long waiting lists, and the Department of Health rules state that no patient should wait for more than six months for an operation.
However, hospital staff are outraged that strict adherence to budget targets means that they are being effectively penalised for putting patients first.
A union leader said: "The PCTs have been very unreasonable. They wanted the work done, we did it, and now they should pay for it. If a hospital performs the operation before the 122 days are up, primary care trusts [who pay the hospital to provide operations] are within their rights not to stump up the cash."
A report by external auditors into Ipswich Hospital's 16.7m pound debt crisis found that the trust had lost 2.4m pounds because it performed operations that the PCT would not pay it for. It states: "The trust had spare capacity and, therefore, to ensure its resources were utilised, treated a number of patients in advance of the 122-day rule." The report shows that in 2004-05 the early treatments cost the hospital 240,000 pounds. In 2005-06 the figure increased to 2.4 million pounds. The 122-day guideline was introduced by the three Suffolk East PCTs and is believed to be used by other PCTs in the country, but it is not Government policy.
Jan Rowsell, a spokeswoman for Ipswich Hospital, said: "Anyone who is deemed to be clinically urgent would be seen earlier. This rule is there for people who are waiting for planned surgery." She admitted that the hospital had effectively breached its agreement with the Suffolk East PCTs by treating people more quickly, although she added that the reasons why it had done so were understandable.
Carole Taylor-Brown, chief executive of the Suffolk East PCTs, said: "The whole principle of it is to make sure that patients are seen in turn as they go through the system and to level out waiting times. "It is also about making best use of the money that we have available throughout the year. It would be great if we were fully resourced to do everything. But we are given a certain amount for the year and it's about making sure that were using it efficiently.
More here
An NHS hospital has been penalised for treating people too quickly after its local trusts refused to pay the 2.5m pound cost of clearing a backlog of patients. Ipswich Hospital had been so successful in reducing its waiting lists that it was able to meet current demand for treatment almost immediately. However, the acceleration of treatment breached rules set by the Suffolk East Primary Care Trusts (PCTs), which stated that patients must wait at least 122 days, to ensure that its own resources were not exhausted too quickly.
The Government has set tough national targets in an attempt to get hospitals to cut long waiting lists, and the Department of Health rules state that no patient should wait for more than six months for an operation.
However, hospital staff are outraged that strict adherence to budget targets means that they are being effectively penalised for putting patients first.
A union leader said: "The PCTs have been very unreasonable. They wanted the work done, we did it, and now they should pay for it. If a hospital performs the operation before the 122 days are up, primary care trusts [who pay the hospital to provide operations] are within their rights not to stump up the cash."
A report by external auditors into Ipswich Hospital's 16.7m pound debt crisis found that the trust had lost 2.4m pounds because it performed operations that the PCT would not pay it for. It states: "The trust had spare capacity and, therefore, to ensure its resources were utilised, treated a number of patients in advance of the 122-day rule." The report shows that in 2004-05 the early treatments cost the hospital 240,000 pounds. In 2005-06 the figure increased to 2.4 million pounds. The 122-day guideline was introduced by the three Suffolk East PCTs and is believed to be used by other PCTs in the country, but it is not Government policy.
Jan Rowsell, a spokeswoman for Ipswich Hospital, said: "Anyone who is deemed to be clinically urgent would be seen earlier. This rule is there for people who are waiting for planned surgery." She admitted that the hospital had effectively breached its agreement with the Suffolk East PCTs by treating people more quickly, although she added that the reasons why it had done so were understandable.
Carole Taylor-Brown, chief executive of the Suffolk East PCTs, said: "The whole principle of it is to make sure that patients are seen in turn as they go through the system and to level out waiting times. "It is also about making best use of the money that we have available throughout the year. It would be great if we were fully resourced to do everything. But we are given a certain amount for the year and it's about making sure that were using it efficiently.
More here
Friday, August 04, 2006
Scotland: Ex-pupils 'break teacher's leg after attacking him in street'
A teacher required surgery to "shocking" injuries after he was set upon by former pupils in the latest in a string of attacks on school staff to provoke warnings teaching is becoming "a dangerous profession". The supply teacher had to have six steel screws inserted in his shattered leg during surgery after he was assaulted in Edinburgh by a gang of between four and six youths, believed to be former pupils of Liberton High School. He also suffered facial injuries during the attack in which the gang kicked and punched him in the head and body as he lay defenceless on the ground.
Last night the head of Scotland's biggest teaching union warned the incident highlighted the increasing violence faced by teachers both in and outside the classroom. The 42-year-old teacher, who did not want to be identified, was attacked as he walked across North Bridge in Edinburgh last Sunday. He said: "I was stopped in the street by the kids - I still call them kids because they were my pupils - but they were young men now. They called me by my name and I recognised some of their faces. "We started talking and I asked them how they were getting on and what they were doing with their lives. Then one of them threw some water on me from a bottle. The next thing I knew someone punched me in the face. Another kicked me in the leg and I heard it snap. I fell to the ground and they started kicking and punching me in the head." He went on: "Being a teacher can be quite stressful, so I look forward to my holidays to relax, but now that's ruined. I'm just shocked that they could have done this."
Ronnie Smith, the general secretary of the Educational Institute of Scotland (EIS), the country's biggest teachers' union, said violence in and out of the classroom was at risk of making teaching a "dangerous profession" - a label that would deter students from training to join it. Last year, a survey found at least 36 teachers in Scottish schools had to have hospital treatment after being assaulted by pupils. Mr Smith said the EIS recognised that violence towards teachers was a growing problem, and increasing numbers of teachers were leaving the profession due to stress. "It is a pretty grim state of affairs if a teacher cannot go out in his or her leisure time without looking over their shoulder," Mr Smith said. "If the job of teaching is seen as not only being pressurised in the classroom but also dangerous on the streets, it will put off people from becoming teachers and that is something we cannot allow to happen."
A police spokeswoman said: "Three men aged 20, 21 and 22 were arrested in connection with an assault." The growing number of attacks on teachers are leading local authorities to take increasingly extreme measures. In the Borders, staff have been issued with panic alarms as classroom violence spirals out of control. The "safe school alert" system works by sending pager alerts to key staff, giving the precise location so they can rush to the scene.
Source
A teacher required surgery to "shocking" injuries after he was set upon by former pupils in the latest in a string of attacks on school staff to provoke warnings teaching is becoming "a dangerous profession". The supply teacher had to have six steel screws inserted in his shattered leg during surgery after he was assaulted in Edinburgh by a gang of between four and six youths, believed to be former pupils of Liberton High School. He also suffered facial injuries during the attack in which the gang kicked and punched him in the head and body as he lay defenceless on the ground.
Last night the head of Scotland's biggest teaching union warned the incident highlighted the increasing violence faced by teachers both in and outside the classroom. The 42-year-old teacher, who did not want to be identified, was attacked as he walked across North Bridge in Edinburgh last Sunday. He said: "I was stopped in the street by the kids - I still call them kids because they were my pupils - but they were young men now. They called me by my name and I recognised some of their faces. "We started talking and I asked them how they were getting on and what they were doing with their lives. Then one of them threw some water on me from a bottle. The next thing I knew someone punched me in the face. Another kicked me in the leg and I heard it snap. I fell to the ground and they started kicking and punching me in the head." He went on: "Being a teacher can be quite stressful, so I look forward to my holidays to relax, but now that's ruined. I'm just shocked that they could have done this."
Ronnie Smith, the general secretary of the Educational Institute of Scotland (EIS), the country's biggest teachers' union, said violence in and out of the classroom was at risk of making teaching a "dangerous profession" - a label that would deter students from training to join it. Last year, a survey found at least 36 teachers in Scottish schools had to have hospital treatment after being assaulted by pupils. Mr Smith said the EIS recognised that violence towards teachers was a growing problem, and increasing numbers of teachers were leaving the profession due to stress. "It is a pretty grim state of affairs if a teacher cannot go out in his or her leisure time without looking over their shoulder," Mr Smith said. "If the job of teaching is seen as not only being pressurised in the classroom but also dangerous on the streets, it will put off people from becoming teachers and that is something we cannot allow to happen."
A police spokeswoman said: "Three men aged 20, 21 and 22 were arrested in connection with an assault." The growing number of attacks on teachers are leading local authorities to take increasingly extreme measures. In the Borders, staff have been issued with panic alarms as classroom violence spirals out of control. The "safe school alert" system works by sending pager alerts to key staff, giving the precise location so they can rush to the scene.
Source
HEARTLESS NHS PENNYPINCHING AGAIN
All those bureaucrat salaries have to be paid!
The parents of a toddler who has become deaf in both ears were told by NHS bosses that he could have the hearing restored in one ear, but not in both. However, after The Times asked North Dorset Primary Care Trust (PCT) to justify the decision, it relented and agreed to operate on both ears. The trust denied that the call from The Times had any influence on the decision, which it says it had been considering carefully for some time.
Kirsten and James Harvey, from Stalbridge, Dorset, were relieved that they would not have to spend 8,000 pounds of their own money so that Matthew, who is 2, could hear in both ears. The trust had argued that one cochlear implant would meet Matthew's clinical needs, but that two was a matter of parental choice, for which it was not prepared to pay.
"The benefits of having both implants done together are immense," Mrs Harvey said. "They do this in other countries in Europe, but not universally in the UK. "Matthew's whole development depends on him being able to hear and we think the money should have been available in the first place." Yesterday she said that she was delighted by the latest decision, and said that it should be an example to other trusts around the country, many of which are unwilling to pay for both implants.
Julie Brinton, head of the South of England Cochlear Implant Centre at Southampton University, where Matthew will have his operation, said: "Cochlear implants are a wonderful, amazing technology. They transform people's lives. They're unbelievably important. And having two, rather than one, is an advantage. "They can hear where sound is coming from better, which can be important in things like crossing the road. And they can distinguish voices better against background noise. "Adults who have had two implants say that it's like being back in a three-dimensional world. If a child were simply hard of hearing, you wouldn't dream of just fitting one hearing aid. You would fit two. "We would very much like to give Matthew two implants - it's the right way to go. But we understand the PCT's position. They have difficult decisions to make and they argue that if the money is spent giving one child two implants, another may not get an implant at all."
The procedure is expensive - 36,750 pounds for one implant, of which 15,500 goes on the hardware, and the rest on the operation and diagnostic and follow-up care. If a second implant is fitted at the same time, the extra cost is about 8,000. But if it is fitted later, during a second operation, the cost is much higher.
Ms Brinton said that research in Britain had shown that adults with two implants were better able to locate the source of sounds, and had improved sound perception. The data on children came mainly from research conducted in the United States. This indicated that children given two implants before the age of 3 achieved normal language levels, whereas in the past they would have had to use sign language to communicate.
Source
All those bureaucrat salaries have to be paid!
The parents of a toddler who has become deaf in both ears were told by NHS bosses that he could have the hearing restored in one ear, but not in both. However, after The Times asked North Dorset Primary Care Trust (PCT) to justify the decision, it relented and agreed to operate on both ears. The trust denied that the call from The Times had any influence on the decision, which it says it had been considering carefully for some time.
Kirsten and James Harvey, from Stalbridge, Dorset, were relieved that they would not have to spend 8,000 pounds of their own money so that Matthew, who is 2, could hear in both ears. The trust had argued that one cochlear implant would meet Matthew's clinical needs, but that two was a matter of parental choice, for which it was not prepared to pay.
"The benefits of having both implants done together are immense," Mrs Harvey said. "They do this in other countries in Europe, but not universally in the UK. "Matthew's whole development depends on him being able to hear and we think the money should have been available in the first place." Yesterday she said that she was delighted by the latest decision, and said that it should be an example to other trusts around the country, many of which are unwilling to pay for both implants.
Julie Brinton, head of the South of England Cochlear Implant Centre at Southampton University, where Matthew will have his operation, said: "Cochlear implants are a wonderful, amazing technology. They transform people's lives. They're unbelievably important. And having two, rather than one, is an advantage. "They can hear where sound is coming from better, which can be important in things like crossing the road. And they can distinguish voices better against background noise. "Adults who have had two implants say that it's like being back in a three-dimensional world. If a child were simply hard of hearing, you wouldn't dream of just fitting one hearing aid. You would fit two. "We would very much like to give Matthew two implants - it's the right way to go. But we understand the PCT's position. They have difficult decisions to make and they argue that if the money is spent giving one child two implants, another may not get an implant at all."
The procedure is expensive - 36,750 pounds for one implant, of which 15,500 goes on the hardware, and the rest on the operation and diagnostic and follow-up care. If a second implant is fitted at the same time, the extra cost is about 8,000. But if it is fitted later, during a second operation, the cost is much higher.
Ms Brinton said that research in Britain had shown that adults with two implants were better able to locate the source of sounds, and had improved sound perception. The data on children came mainly from research conducted in the United States. This indicated that children given two implants before the age of 3 achieved normal language levels, whereas in the past they would have had to use sign language to communicate.
Source
Thursday, August 03, 2006
USELESS POLITICALLY CORRECT BRITISH POLICE PICK ON KIDS
While real criminals run riot
To the 12-year-old friends planning to build themselves a den, the cherry tree seemed an inviting source of material. But the afternoon adventure turned into a frightening ordeal for Sam Cannon, Amy Higgins and Katy Smith after they climbed into the 20ft tree - then found themselves hauled into a police station and locked in cells for up to two hours. Their shoes were removed and mugshots, DNA samples and mouth swabs were taken.
Officers told the children they had been seen damaging the tree which is in a wooded area of public land near their homes. Questioned by police, the scared friends admitted they had broken some loose branches because they had wanted to build a tree house, but said they did not realise what they had done was wrong. Officers considered charging the children with criminal damage but eventually decided a reprimand - the equivalent of a caution for juveniles - was sufficient. Although the reprimand does not amount to court action and the children do not have a criminal record, their details will be kept on file for up to five years.
The parents of the children, who all live in Halesowen, West Midlands, say they are angry with police for treating their children as hardened criminals and accused officers of over-reacting. The three, who have never been in trouble with the police before, were described as well-behaved and placid by their parents. Amy's mother, Jacqueline, said her daughter was left so traumatised by the police action last month she refused to sleep in her bed for a week. Miss Higgins, 37, an office manager, added: 'Amy was scared bucketloads to be locked up in a cell knowing murderers and rapists have been sat in the same cells. The police action was completely unbalanced. These were children playing in a tree. 'The information taken by the police will be held on record for five years and Amy is worried it could affect her going to college or university.'
Sam's father, Nicholas, 52, said: 'The children did not deserve to be treated in the way they were. A simple ticking-off by officers would have been sufficient. 'The children didn't realise they were doing anything wrong, they didn't deliberately set out to damage the tree. 'Sam's eyes were swollen and red when they let him out of the cell as he had been crying. He is a placid child and has never been in trouble before. 'When I got the phone call from the police to say Sam was in custody I thought he'd done something-like steal something from a shop. I couldn't believe it when he said all he had done was break some loose branches off a tree. 'To detain them, DNA them and treat them that way was simply cruel and an over-reaction by the police. Generations of children have played in that tree and my son and his friends won't be the first to have thought of building a tree den.' Mr Cannon, who said Sam had difficulty sleeping shortly after the incident, has written to the police to complain about the action taken.
Superintendent Stuart Johnson, operations manager at Halesowen police station, said: 'I support the actions of my officers who responded to complaints from the public about "kids destroying" an ornamental cherry tree by stripping every branch from it, in an area where there have been reports of anti-social behaviour. 'A boy and two girls were arrested and received a police reprimand for their behaviour. 'West Midlands Police deals robustly with anti-social behaviour. By targeting what may seem relatively low-level crime we aim to prevent it developing into more serious matters.'
Rod Morgan, chairman of the Youth Justice Board for England and Wales, said the police action appeared to be unnecessary. 'It's my opinion that too many children are being criminalised for behaviour that could be dealt with informally by ticking them off and speaking to their parents.'
Source
While real criminals run riot
To the 12-year-old friends planning to build themselves a den, the cherry tree seemed an inviting source of material. But the afternoon adventure turned into a frightening ordeal for Sam Cannon, Amy Higgins and Katy Smith after they climbed into the 20ft tree - then found themselves hauled into a police station and locked in cells for up to two hours. Their shoes were removed and mugshots, DNA samples and mouth swabs were taken.
Officers told the children they had been seen damaging the tree which is in a wooded area of public land near their homes. Questioned by police, the scared friends admitted they had broken some loose branches because they had wanted to build a tree house, but said they did not realise what they had done was wrong. Officers considered charging the children with criminal damage but eventually decided a reprimand - the equivalent of a caution for juveniles - was sufficient. Although the reprimand does not amount to court action and the children do not have a criminal record, their details will be kept on file for up to five years.
The parents of the children, who all live in Halesowen, West Midlands, say they are angry with police for treating their children as hardened criminals and accused officers of over-reacting. The three, who have never been in trouble with the police before, were described as well-behaved and placid by their parents. Amy's mother, Jacqueline, said her daughter was left so traumatised by the police action last month she refused to sleep in her bed for a week. Miss Higgins, 37, an office manager, added: 'Amy was scared bucketloads to be locked up in a cell knowing murderers and rapists have been sat in the same cells. The police action was completely unbalanced. These were children playing in a tree. 'The information taken by the police will be held on record for five years and Amy is worried it could affect her going to college or university.'
Sam's father, Nicholas, 52, said: 'The children did not deserve to be treated in the way they were. A simple ticking-off by officers would have been sufficient. 'The children didn't realise they were doing anything wrong, they didn't deliberately set out to damage the tree. 'Sam's eyes were swollen and red when they let him out of the cell as he had been crying. He is a placid child and has never been in trouble before. 'When I got the phone call from the police to say Sam was in custody I thought he'd done something-like steal something from a shop. I couldn't believe it when he said all he had done was break some loose branches off a tree. 'To detain them, DNA them and treat them that way was simply cruel and an over-reaction by the police. Generations of children have played in that tree and my son and his friends won't be the first to have thought of building a tree den.' Mr Cannon, who said Sam had difficulty sleeping shortly after the incident, has written to the police to complain about the action taken.
Superintendent Stuart Johnson, operations manager at Halesowen police station, said: 'I support the actions of my officers who responded to complaints from the public about "kids destroying" an ornamental cherry tree by stripping every branch from it, in an area where there have been reports of anti-social behaviour. 'A boy and two girls were arrested and received a police reprimand for their behaviour. 'West Midlands Police deals robustly with anti-social behaviour. By targeting what may seem relatively low-level crime we aim to prevent it developing into more serious matters.'
Rod Morgan, chairman of the Youth Justice Board for England and Wales, said the police action appeared to be unnecessary. 'It's my opinion that too many children are being criminalised for behaviour that could be dealt with informally by ticking them off and speaking to their parents.'
Source
Scotland: Free Church plea for Presbyterian schools
The "Wee Frees" are more fundamentalist than the Church of Scotland
Free Kirk ministers are calling for Presbyterian schools to be set up to combat "the sustained attack" on Scotland's Christian heritage. The Free Church of Scotland, which fears that children are being fed a secular agenda, is examining whether state funding would be possible or whether the schools would have to be set up privately.
A resolution adopted by the church's General Assembly ordered the review, saying: "The General Assembly express their concern at the sustained attack upon and continual erosion of the Christian ethos and foundation of Scotland's nondenominational schools. "They note with particular concern that the Scottish Executive now deems it appropriate to use schools to further a secular social and cultural agenda."
The Rev David Robertson, the Free Kirk minister in Dundee - who proposed the resolution - said: "We're concerned that the schools are being used, in some parts of Scotland at least, to advance a secular agenda and so we need to look at the possibility of having to set up Christian-based schools. "Ideally we would want Scotland's school system to return to its Christian foundations. Both the Free Church and the Church of Scotland established complete systems of schools in the 19th century which they later handed over to the state."
Robertson admitted that the 12,000-strong Free Church would struggle to set up such schools on its own resources and that it would have to seek out like-minded church-goers from other groups, such as Baptists, the Church of Scotland or other Evangelical believers. He added: "The schools could be set up privately, which would be costly, or there is an case for state funding. We see the current emphasis on faith-based schools, and if we have state-funded Muslim schools, Church of England schools, and Catholic schools, then it's hard to resist the argument for Presbyterian schools, or whatever you would call them."
In recent years some in the Church of Scotland have called for Kirk schools to stem the decline in organised religion.
Source
The "Wee Frees" are more fundamentalist than the Church of Scotland
Free Kirk ministers are calling for Presbyterian schools to be set up to combat "the sustained attack" on Scotland's Christian heritage. The Free Church of Scotland, which fears that children are being fed a secular agenda, is examining whether state funding would be possible or whether the schools would have to be set up privately.
A resolution adopted by the church's General Assembly ordered the review, saying: "The General Assembly express their concern at the sustained attack upon and continual erosion of the Christian ethos and foundation of Scotland's nondenominational schools. "They note with particular concern that the Scottish Executive now deems it appropriate to use schools to further a secular social and cultural agenda."
The Rev David Robertson, the Free Kirk minister in Dundee - who proposed the resolution - said: "We're concerned that the schools are being used, in some parts of Scotland at least, to advance a secular agenda and so we need to look at the possibility of having to set up Christian-based schools. "Ideally we would want Scotland's school system to return to its Christian foundations. Both the Free Church and the Church of Scotland established complete systems of schools in the 19th century which they later handed over to the state."
Robertson admitted that the 12,000-strong Free Church would struggle to set up such schools on its own resources and that it would have to seek out like-minded church-goers from other groups, such as Baptists, the Church of Scotland or other Evangelical believers. He added: "The schools could be set up privately, which would be costly, or there is an case for state funding. We see the current emphasis on faith-based schools, and if we have state-funded Muslim schools, Church of England schools, and Catholic schools, then it's hard to resist the argument for Presbyterian schools, or whatever you would call them."
In recent years some in the Church of Scotland have called for Kirk schools to stem the decline in organised religion.
Source
FUNNY MONEY IN THE NHS
Millions of pounds intended for improving sexual health services are being diverted to pay off debts, a government advisory group said yesterday. The Independent Advisory Group on Sexual Health and HIV said that a substantial part of the 300 million pounds set aside had been absorbed by primary care trusts (PCTs).
A survey for the group found that cash set out in the Choosing Health White Paper is reaching frontline services in only 30 of the 191 PCTs questioned. Fifty-one said that they had absorbed their entire allocation into the general budget, and 33 had withheld some or most of the sexual health funding. A further 40 said that funding had not reached contraceptive services.
Baroness Gould of Potternewton, the group's chairman, said that many trusts were experiencing financial difficulties and that sexual health services were suffering problems such as recruitment freezes and clinics closing. Nick Partridge, the chief executive of the Terrence Higgins Trust, said: "It would be a great disappointment if sexual health was sacrificed on the altar of financial balance in the NHS." The Department of Health said that trusts were responsible for sexual health. "We have provided . . . more sexual health funding than ever before."
Three PCTs in Lincolnshire have closed all family planning clinics and a network of teenage advice centres to help to tackle a 13.5 million pound budget deficit. Jim Moss, of East Lincolnshire PCT, one of the trusts that is making the cuts, defended the decision. "Family planning services are available at pharmacies and GP surgeries," he said.
Source
Millions of pounds intended for improving sexual health services are being diverted to pay off debts, a government advisory group said yesterday. The Independent Advisory Group on Sexual Health and HIV said that a substantial part of the 300 million pounds set aside had been absorbed by primary care trusts (PCTs).
A survey for the group found that cash set out in the Choosing Health White Paper is reaching frontline services in only 30 of the 191 PCTs questioned. Fifty-one said that they had absorbed their entire allocation into the general budget, and 33 had withheld some or most of the sexual health funding. A further 40 said that funding had not reached contraceptive services.
Baroness Gould of Potternewton, the group's chairman, said that many trusts were experiencing financial difficulties and that sexual health services were suffering problems such as recruitment freezes and clinics closing. Nick Partridge, the chief executive of the Terrence Higgins Trust, said: "It would be a great disappointment if sexual health was sacrificed on the altar of financial balance in the NHS." The Department of Health said that trusts were responsible for sexual health. "We have provided . . . more sexual health funding than ever before."
Three PCTs in Lincolnshire have closed all family planning clinics and a network of teenage advice centres to help to tackle a 13.5 million pound budget deficit. Jim Moss, of East Lincolnshire PCT, one of the trusts that is making the cuts, defended the decision. "Family planning services are available at pharmacies and GP surgeries," he said.
Source
Wednesday, August 02, 2006
British Judge Dismisses Bid for Recognition of Same-Sex Marriage
A British judge on Monday dismissed a bid by two female professors to have their same-sex wedding in Canada recognized as a marriage in Britain. Judge Mark Potter, head of Britain's High Court Family Division, dismissed the claim by Sue Wilkinson and Celia Kitzinger that in defining their relationship as a civil partnership - rather than a marriage - Britain had violated their human rights.
Granting their request would risk undermining the time-honored institution of marriage, he said. "To accord a same-sex relationship the title and status of marriage would be to fly in the face of the (European) Convention (on Human Rights) as well as to fail to recognize physical reality," Potter wrote in his ruling. Potter said there was a "long-standing definition and acceptance" that the term marriage referred to a relationship between a man and a woman, primarily designed for producing and rearing children.
Wilkinson, 49, and Kitzinger, 52, wed in Vancouver, British Columbia, after the province ushered in laws allowing same-sex marriages in 2003, but said the judge on Monday had effectively stripped away the legitimacy of their union. "We are deeply disappointed by the judgment, not just for ourselves but for other gay couples and families," Wilkinson said after walking from the courtroom hand in hand with her partner. "It perpetuates discrimination and it sends out the message that lesbian and gay marriages are inferior." [Since they cannot produce children, they are]
Potter said he believed people across Europe would acknowledge the importance of upholding a traditional concept of marriage. "The belief that this form of relationship is the one which best encourages stability in a well-regulated society is not a disreputable or outmoded notion based upon ideas of exclusivity, marginalization, disapproval or discrimination against homosexuals," Potter said.
Wilkinson and Kitzinger were told by Potter they have the right to challenge the ruling at Britain's Court of Appeal. But Kitzinger said their life savings have been exhausted by the court's decision that they must pay the government's legal costs of 25,000 pounds (US$46,590; euro36,500). "We are hopeful we will be able to appeal but need help to fund the cost, which will likely be the same amount again," Kitzinger told The Associated Press. "Though we're disappointed, we are sure there will be a day - within our lifetimes - when there will be equality for same-sex marriage. This judgment will not stand the test of time."
Joanne Sawyer, a legal officer with civil liberties group Liberty, who represented the couple, said she also believed the ruling would in future be seen as out-of-step with contemporary values. The Netherlands, Canada, Belgium and Spain have legalized same-sex marriage, while several other European countries have laws similar to Britain -where same-sex couples have the right to form legally binding civil partnerships, entitling them to most of the same tax and pension rights as married couples. In the United States, only the state of Massachusetts allows gay marriage, while Vermont and Connecticut permit civil unions.
Source
THE BRITISH NANNY STATE MARCHES ON
UK prime minister Tony Blair delivered a much-trailed public lecture this week on the future of `public health'. Actually, it was really a speech about the relationship between the state and society. Blair told his audience in Nottingham: `For a hundred years or more the defining division in politics, in Britain and elsewhere, was about the role of the state. Essentially, progressives believed in its ability to improve society; conservatives feared its interference stifled personal liberty. The division became caricatured as between those who favoured a "big" state and those who favoured a "minimalist" one.. Underlying the formation of New Labour was really an attempt to consign such a division to the past.'
The immediate reaction of many was to condemn creeping privatisation of public services. As an editorial in the Guardian put it: `If the strategy is replacing state services with private facilities, ministers must explain the practical justification as they see it. If they are silent, or have no robust case, they will pay the political price.' The lack of faith in public bodies to run public services is striking. While privatisation is usually promoted as a cost-saving measure, in reality the government happily pays more for the private sector to run services in many instances. However, all that was only one small part of Blair's speech. What underlies his vision (for want of a better word) is the feeling that society is running increasingly out of control, and that new ways must be found to control the organisations and people within it.
Blair's measures have come about as a result of the decline of the myriad institutions that used to glue society together, most notably the church, the monarchy, political parties, trade unions and the family. While these various institutions had competing interests in many respects, the existence of a relatively small number of bodies that could exercise influence over the mass of the population meant that governments always knew who to talk to, which loyalties to appeal to, and how to get things done. Now, even though the status quo is less threatened than at any time in well over a century, governments feel they have less control over society than before - and to some extent, they're right.
It is no coincidence that the subject of Blair's speech was public health, even though he was really talking about the state and society. That is because the provision of health - and the exercise of influence through health messages - has become central to the reformulation of the state's relationship to society and the individual. Blair said he will increase both choice and responsibility for individuals: `A state that sees its role as empowering the individual, not trying to make their choices for them, can only work on the basis of a different relationship between citizen and state. Government can't be the only one with the responsibility if it's not the only one with the power. The responsibility must be shared and the individual helped, but with an obligation also to help themselves.'
Bizarrely, even as he claims to be bringing the `nanny state' to an end, it's quite clear that Blair believes government should formulate what is good for us - and then, whether by persuasion or heavy-handed legislation, get us to do it. So on climate change, he said: `Government can give people the information, legislate and regulate to encourage sustainable living, help business to function in a more environmentally responsible way, work with other nations to develop the right international framework. But it can't "do it" by itself. "Doing it" will depend on the decisions and choices of millions of individuals and companies. Our task is to empower them to make the right ones.'
This is a good deal more authoritarian than Blair would have us believe. Couched in the language of empowerment, in practice it means forcing through unpopular rules and regulations on recycling; banning smoking in public places; giving mothers the third degree if they can't or won't breastfeed; demanding that overweight people eat the right foods and do sufficient exercise; and various other measures through which the authorities will actually micro-manage our lives.
In the process, every aspect of daily life is instrumentalised, from getting our kids to play in order to meet an exercise target to the neighbourhood project that gets turned into a social inclusion exercise. Ask anyone who has ever tried to apply for funding from a local authority or a quango and they will give you chapter and verse on the ways in which your activity is transformed into a means for the authorities to meet various social, health or political targets.
It isn't just individuals who should worry. Businesses are increasingly buried under a mountain of regulation, which shows that while the government has little faith in the public sector it is equally keen to keep the private sector on a tight leash, too. Blair wants to encourage greater participation by business in health initiatives, but if business doesn't play ball, legislation will follow.
Blair argues that these interventions are no big deal. After all, he asks, didn't people complain when governments decided to intervene to clean up big cities in the nineteenth century? `The role for government was clear. This required collective action. It meant property rights needed to be disregarded and land compulsorily purchased, both big issues for a laissez-faire time.' But the comparison is a false one. Cleaning up a river, or building a sewage network, is beyond the capabilities of any individual and requires an organising body - which has become part of the state's remit. Telling me how to live my life and to balance the (small, if any) risk of an early death versus the pleasure of a few vices is not the job of government.
What we need is not an `enabling' government, if we're only enabled to do what the authorities want. As Mick Hume has argued before on spiked, we need the power to make real choices, even if they're the `wrong' choices (see The more they talk about `choice', the less we get, by Mick Hume). New Labour has launched numerous attacks on our freedoms, both big and small. Now Blair says he wants government to be even `tougher, more active in setting standards and enforcing them'. The rest of us need to make a choice of our own: are we prepared to allow our lives to be run by others, or do we want the freedom to decide for ourselves how to live?
Source
A British judge on Monday dismissed a bid by two female professors to have their same-sex wedding in Canada recognized as a marriage in Britain. Judge Mark Potter, head of Britain's High Court Family Division, dismissed the claim by Sue Wilkinson and Celia Kitzinger that in defining their relationship as a civil partnership - rather than a marriage - Britain had violated their human rights.
Granting their request would risk undermining the time-honored institution of marriage, he said. "To accord a same-sex relationship the title and status of marriage would be to fly in the face of the (European) Convention (on Human Rights) as well as to fail to recognize physical reality," Potter wrote in his ruling. Potter said there was a "long-standing definition and acceptance" that the term marriage referred to a relationship between a man and a woman, primarily designed for producing and rearing children.
Wilkinson, 49, and Kitzinger, 52, wed in Vancouver, British Columbia, after the province ushered in laws allowing same-sex marriages in 2003, but said the judge on Monday had effectively stripped away the legitimacy of their union. "We are deeply disappointed by the judgment, not just for ourselves but for other gay couples and families," Wilkinson said after walking from the courtroom hand in hand with her partner. "It perpetuates discrimination and it sends out the message that lesbian and gay marriages are inferior." [Since they cannot produce children, they are]
Potter said he believed people across Europe would acknowledge the importance of upholding a traditional concept of marriage. "The belief that this form of relationship is the one which best encourages stability in a well-regulated society is not a disreputable or outmoded notion based upon ideas of exclusivity, marginalization, disapproval or discrimination against homosexuals," Potter said.
Wilkinson and Kitzinger were told by Potter they have the right to challenge the ruling at Britain's Court of Appeal. But Kitzinger said their life savings have been exhausted by the court's decision that they must pay the government's legal costs of 25,000 pounds (US$46,590; euro36,500). "We are hopeful we will be able to appeal but need help to fund the cost, which will likely be the same amount again," Kitzinger told The Associated Press. "Though we're disappointed, we are sure there will be a day - within our lifetimes - when there will be equality for same-sex marriage. This judgment will not stand the test of time."
Joanne Sawyer, a legal officer with civil liberties group Liberty, who represented the couple, said she also believed the ruling would in future be seen as out-of-step with contemporary values. The Netherlands, Canada, Belgium and Spain have legalized same-sex marriage, while several other European countries have laws similar to Britain -where same-sex couples have the right to form legally binding civil partnerships, entitling them to most of the same tax and pension rights as married couples. In the United States, only the state of Massachusetts allows gay marriage, while Vermont and Connecticut permit civil unions.
Source
THE BRITISH NANNY STATE MARCHES ON
UK prime minister Tony Blair delivered a much-trailed public lecture this week on the future of `public health'. Actually, it was really a speech about the relationship between the state and society. Blair told his audience in Nottingham: `For a hundred years or more the defining division in politics, in Britain and elsewhere, was about the role of the state. Essentially, progressives believed in its ability to improve society; conservatives feared its interference stifled personal liberty. The division became caricatured as between those who favoured a "big" state and those who favoured a "minimalist" one.. Underlying the formation of New Labour was really an attempt to consign such a division to the past.'
The immediate reaction of many was to condemn creeping privatisation of public services. As an editorial in the Guardian put it: `If the strategy is replacing state services with private facilities, ministers must explain the practical justification as they see it. If they are silent, or have no robust case, they will pay the political price.' The lack of faith in public bodies to run public services is striking. While privatisation is usually promoted as a cost-saving measure, in reality the government happily pays more for the private sector to run services in many instances. However, all that was only one small part of Blair's speech. What underlies his vision (for want of a better word) is the feeling that society is running increasingly out of control, and that new ways must be found to control the organisations and people within it.
Blair's measures have come about as a result of the decline of the myriad institutions that used to glue society together, most notably the church, the monarchy, political parties, trade unions and the family. While these various institutions had competing interests in many respects, the existence of a relatively small number of bodies that could exercise influence over the mass of the population meant that governments always knew who to talk to, which loyalties to appeal to, and how to get things done. Now, even though the status quo is less threatened than at any time in well over a century, governments feel they have less control over society than before - and to some extent, they're right.
It is no coincidence that the subject of Blair's speech was public health, even though he was really talking about the state and society. That is because the provision of health - and the exercise of influence through health messages - has become central to the reformulation of the state's relationship to society and the individual. Blair said he will increase both choice and responsibility for individuals: `A state that sees its role as empowering the individual, not trying to make their choices for them, can only work on the basis of a different relationship between citizen and state. Government can't be the only one with the responsibility if it's not the only one with the power. The responsibility must be shared and the individual helped, but with an obligation also to help themselves.'
Bizarrely, even as he claims to be bringing the `nanny state' to an end, it's quite clear that Blair believes government should formulate what is good for us - and then, whether by persuasion or heavy-handed legislation, get us to do it. So on climate change, he said: `Government can give people the information, legislate and regulate to encourage sustainable living, help business to function in a more environmentally responsible way, work with other nations to develop the right international framework. But it can't "do it" by itself. "Doing it" will depend on the decisions and choices of millions of individuals and companies. Our task is to empower them to make the right ones.'
This is a good deal more authoritarian than Blair would have us believe. Couched in the language of empowerment, in practice it means forcing through unpopular rules and regulations on recycling; banning smoking in public places; giving mothers the third degree if they can't or won't breastfeed; demanding that overweight people eat the right foods and do sufficient exercise; and various other measures through which the authorities will actually micro-manage our lives.
In the process, every aspect of daily life is instrumentalised, from getting our kids to play in order to meet an exercise target to the neighbourhood project that gets turned into a social inclusion exercise. Ask anyone who has ever tried to apply for funding from a local authority or a quango and they will give you chapter and verse on the ways in which your activity is transformed into a means for the authorities to meet various social, health or political targets.
It isn't just individuals who should worry. Businesses are increasingly buried under a mountain of regulation, which shows that while the government has little faith in the public sector it is equally keen to keep the private sector on a tight leash, too. Blair wants to encourage greater participation by business in health initiatives, but if business doesn't play ball, legislation will follow.
Blair argues that these interventions are no big deal. After all, he asks, didn't people complain when governments decided to intervene to clean up big cities in the nineteenth century? `The role for government was clear. This required collective action. It meant property rights needed to be disregarded and land compulsorily purchased, both big issues for a laissez-faire time.' But the comparison is a false one. Cleaning up a river, or building a sewage network, is beyond the capabilities of any individual and requires an organising body - which has become part of the state's remit. Telling me how to live my life and to balance the (small, if any) risk of an early death versus the pleasure of a few vices is not the job of government.
What we need is not an `enabling' government, if we're only enabled to do what the authorities want. As Mick Hume has argued before on spiked, we need the power to make real choices, even if they're the `wrong' choices (see The more they talk about `choice', the less we get, by Mick Hume). New Labour has launched numerous attacks on our freedoms, both big and small. Now Blair says he wants government to be even `tougher, more active in setting standards and enforcing them'. The rest of us need to make a choice of our own: are we prepared to allow our lives to be run by others, or do we want the freedom to decide for ourselves how to live?
Source
U.K.: THE "COURSEWORK" PENNY FINALLY DROPS
Coursework in GCSE maths is likely to be scrapped, and pupils will no longer be allowed to take most of their projects home under plans by the exams watchdog to stamp out cheating. The proposals have been made to try to end the problem of internet plagiarism among teenagers and the desire of parents to "help" with their children's work.
The Government demanded a review of coursework in A levels and GCSEs last November, after the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority found evidence of widespread cheating. One in 20 parents admitted doing their children's coursework at GCSE level. Coursework counts for between 20 per cent and 60 per cent of the overall marks allocated at GCSE and A level. Critics of coursework in maths, in particular, suggest that it does not help a pupil to understand the fundamental elements of the subject.
The latest suggestions were made by Ken Boston, the chief executive of the authority, in a newly released letter to Ruth Kelly, then the Education Secretary. In it he wrote: "We recognise that the practice of students carrying out coursework at home and the wide availability of the internet have created greater opportunities for malpractice. "This gives problems with ensuring authenticity - the extent to which we can be confident that internally assessed work is solely that of the candidate concerned. This is a threat to the fairness of GCSE." Dr Boston advised that the public examinations might be tightened up with a more rigorous assessment of the marking system, coursework being completed in the classroom, as well as by placing a greater emphasis on examinations.
"The consequence of these changes would be that in subjects that involve such activities as creating a physical product, carrying out investigations or performing with others, internal assessment is likely to continue, but under conditions that maximise fairness," he wrote. "Greater use of controlled conditions would also help reduce the assessment burden on students as they would normally take less time to complete their task under controlled conditions than otherwise."
But the chief executive said that tightening the rules must not stop children acquiring the important analytical and research skills that coursework projects can help to develop. "During its initial development, internal assessment in GCSE was seen as a way of enriching the curriculum and ensuring that all aspects of a subject that were important were taught and assessed," he wrote. "We want to ensure that a new approach to internal assessment, including increasing the use of controlled conditions, will not prevent students achieving important educational aims or developing valuable life and work skills."
One subject likely to see coursework axed at GCSE altogether, however, is maths, after the authority's review suggested that teachers had questioned its value. Several public schools, including Harrow, have adopted the maths IGCSE, similar to the scrapped O level, after deciding that the compulsory GCSE coursework, which counts for up to one fifth of marks, was not contributing to the pupils' understanding. Dr Boston said that the authority was drawing up plans for the future of GCSE maths for 2007-10. "If consultation confirms the views expressed in the report, we will take action to reduce or remove coursework from GCSE mathematics and assess the skills involved, where feasible, within the examination," Dr Boston said.
In March the watchdog issued a guide to plagiarism for teachers and gave warning that staff would be guilty of professional misconduct if they let students present plagiarised material as their own. Nick Gibb, the Shadow Schools Minister, welcomed the recommendations. But he called on the watchdog to consider whether coursework was necessary in a range of subjects, including maths and English. "The international GCSE has no requirement for assessed coursework, which is a principal reason why the independent sector is increasingly adopting the IGCSE in maths, English and the three sciences," he said.
Source
Coursework in GCSE maths is likely to be scrapped, and pupils will no longer be allowed to take most of their projects home under plans by the exams watchdog to stamp out cheating. The proposals have been made to try to end the problem of internet plagiarism among teenagers and the desire of parents to "help" with their children's work.
The Government demanded a review of coursework in A levels and GCSEs last November, after the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority found evidence of widespread cheating. One in 20 parents admitted doing their children's coursework at GCSE level. Coursework counts for between 20 per cent and 60 per cent of the overall marks allocated at GCSE and A level. Critics of coursework in maths, in particular, suggest that it does not help a pupil to understand the fundamental elements of the subject.
The latest suggestions were made by Ken Boston, the chief executive of the authority, in a newly released letter to Ruth Kelly, then the Education Secretary. In it he wrote: "We recognise that the practice of students carrying out coursework at home and the wide availability of the internet have created greater opportunities for malpractice. "This gives problems with ensuring authenticity - the extent to which we can be confident that internally assessed work is solely that of the candidate concerned. This is a threat to the fairness of GCSE." Dr Boston advised that the public examinations might be tightened up with a more rigorous assessment of the marking system, coursework being completed in the classroom, as well as by placing a greater emphasis on examinations.
"The consequence of these changes would be that in subjects that involve such activities as creating a physical product, carrying out investigations or performing with others, internal assessment is likely to continue, but under conditions that maximise fairness," he wrote. "Greater use of controlled conditions would also help reduce the assessment burden on students as they would normally take less time to complete their task under controlled conditions than otherwise."
But the chief executive said that tightening the rules must not stop children acquiring the important analytical and research skills that coursework projects can help to develop. "During its initial development, internal assessment in GCSE was seen as a way of enriching the curriculum and ensuring that all aspects of a subject that were important were taught and assessed," he wrote. "We want to ensure that a new approach to internal assessment, including increasing the use of controlled conditions, will not prevent students achieving important educational aims or developing valuable life and work skills."
One subject likely to see coursework axed at GCSE altogether, however, is maths, after the authority's review suggested that teachers had questioned its value. Several public schools, including Harrow, have adopted the maths IGCSE, similar to the scrapped O level, after deciding that the compulsory GCSE coursework, which counts for up to one fifth of marks, was not contributing to the pupils' understanding. Dr Boston said that the authority was drawing up plans for the future of GCSE maths for 2007-10. "If consultation confirms the views expressed in the report, we will take action to reduce or remove coursework from GCSE mathematics and assess the skills involved, where feasible, within the examination," Dr Boston said.
In March the watchdog issued a guide to plagiarism for teachers and gave warning that staff would be guilty of professional misconduct if they let students present plagiarised material as their own. Nick Gibb, the Shadow Schools Minister, welcomed the recommendations. But he called on the watchdog to consider whether coursework was necessary in a range of subjects, including maths and English. "The international GCSE has no requirement for assessed coursework, which is a principal reason why the independent sector is increasingly adopting the IGCSE in maths, English and the three sciences," he said.
Source
BRITAIN'S NHS MAKES PEOPLE SO DESPERATE THAT THEY TURN TO DISHONESTY TO SURVIVE
For Roy Thayers, a pensioner in need of a life-saving heart operation, it was an easy decision to make. Either the 77-year-old could languish on the NHS waiting list, even though doctors had cautioned that he was unlikely to survive the nine-month wait. Or he could write a cheque for an 8,000 pound private treatment that he could not afford. The retired painter and decorater opted for the latter, and within three days had undergone a succesful angioplasty at Hammersmith Hospital.
The cheque bounced. After negotiations with the hospital, Mr Thayers is repaying his debt at a rate of 25 pounds a week. "Life is a great thing and you do whatever you can to survive," he said. "I've never been a debtor in my life, but it was either that, or rigor mortis - I would have been a dead man. I think every man or woman would have done the same."
Mr Thayers, who is divorced and lives in Hounslow, west London, said that he had watched his first wife die of cancer more than thirty years ago, and was determined to survive at any cost. After suffering severe chest pains, he went to a specialist who told him that two valves had become blocked, and that he was at risk of a fatal heart attack unless he had surgery.
Mr Thayers said that those on lower incomes were being deprived of the benefits of the national health service. "I've worked hard all my life," he said. "The NHS is a marvellous thing, but it is being ruined. I would recommend anybody to do what I did. Life is great and when you have got it, you hang on to it."
Source
For Roy Thayers, a pensioner in need of a life-saving heart operation, it was an easy decision to make. Either the 77-year-old could languish on the NHS waiting list, even though doctors had cautioned that he was unlikely to survive the nine-month wait. Or he could write a cheque for an 8,000 pound private treatment that he could not afford. The retired painter and decorater opted for the latter, and within three days had undergone a succesful angioplasty at Hammersmith Hospital.
The cheque bounced. After negotiations with the hospital, Mr Thayers is repaying his debt at a rate of 25 pounds a week. "Life is a great thing and you do whatever you can to survive," he said. "I've never been a debtor in my life, but it was either that, or rigor mortis - I would have been a dead man. I think every man or woman would have done the same."
Mr Thayers, who is divorced and lives in Hounslow, west London, said that he had watched his first wife die of cancer more than thirty years ago, and was determined to survive at any cost. After suffering severe chest pains, he went to a specialist who told him that two valves had become blocked, and that he was at risk of a fatal heart attack unless he had surgery.
Mr Thayers said that those on lower incomes were being deprived of the benefits of the national health service. "I've worked hard all my life," he said. "The NHS is a marvellous thing, but it is being ruined. I would recommend anybody to do what I did. Life is great and when you have got it, you hang on to it."
Source
Tuesday, August 01, 2006
Chaos looming in British public services: "A huge rise in immigration from Eastern Europe next year could cause chaos in schools and hospitals and spark a public backlash, according to a leaked government report. It also gives warning that ministers may be forced to abandon their refusal to grant housing and welfare benefits, creating what it describes as an extra "pull factor", attracting further immigrants. The arrival of hundreds of thousands from abroad is already forcing down wages for low-paid workers with "serious implications" for social discord, the report insists. A "step change" in the level of immigration when Romania and Bulgaria join the EU next year could make things worse, it says."
NO MORE RIGHT AND WRONG IN BRITISH SCHOOLS?
Schools would no longer be required to teach children the difference between right and wrong under plans to revise the core aims of the National Curriculum. Instead, under a new wording that reflects a world of relative rather than absolute values, teachers would be asked to encourage pupils to develop "secure values and beliefs". [Like "crime is good if you can get away with it", presumably]
The draft also purges references to promoting leadership skills and deletes the requirement to teach children about Britain's cultural heritage. Ministers have asked for the curriculum's aims to be slimmed down to give schools more flexibility in the way they teach pupils aged 11 to 14. Ken Boston, the chief executive of the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA), set out the proposed new aims in a letter to Ruth Kelly, when she was the Education Secretary.
The present aims for Stage 3 pupils state: "The school curriculum should pass on enduring values. It should develop principles for distinguishing between right and wrong." The QCA's proposals will see these phrases replaced to simply say that pupils should "have secure values and beliefs".
The existing aims state that the curriculum should develop children's "ability to relate to others and work for the common good". The proposed changes would remove all references to "the common good".
The requirement to teach Britain's "cultural heritage" will also be removed. The present version states: "The school curriculum should contribute to the development of pupils' sense of identity through knowledge and understanding of the spiritual, moral, social and cultural heritages of Britain's diverse society." The proposals say that individuals should be helped to "understand different cultures and traditions and have a strong sense of their own place in the world".
References to developing leadership in pupils have also been removed. One of the present aims is to give pupils "the opportunity to become creative, innovative, enterprising and capable of leadership". This is due to be replaced by the aim of ensuring that pupils "are enterprising".
Professor Alan Smithers, of the University of Buckingham's centre for education and employment research, said: "The idea that they think it is appropriate to dispense with right and wrong is a bit alarming." Teachers' leaders said that they did not need to be told to teach children to distinguish between right and wrong. A spokeswoman for the National Union of Teachers said: "Teachers always resented being told that one of the aims of the school was to teach the difference between right and wrong. That is inherent in the way teachers operate. Removing it from the National Curriculum will make no difference."
But she insisted that it was important for children to understand about their cultural heritage. "To remove that requirement can undermine children's feelings of security in the country where they are living," she said.
A spokesman for the QCA said: "The proposed new wording of the curriculum aims is a draft which will be consulted on formally next year as part of the ongoing review of Key Stage 3. One aim of the review is that there should be more flexibility and personalisation that focuses on practical advice for teachers. "The new wording states clearly that young people should become "responsible citizens who make a positive contribution to society". It also identifies the need for young people who challenge injustice, are committed to human rights and strive to live peaceably with others."
Source
Schools would no longer be required to teach children the difference between right and wrong under plans to revise the core aims of the National Curriculum. Instead, under a new wording that reflects a world of relative rather than absolute values, teachers would be asked to encourage pupils to develop "secure values and beliefs". [Like "crime is good if you can get away with it", presumably]
The draft also purges references to promoting leadership skills and deletes the requirement to teach children about Britain's cultural heritage. Ministers have asked for the curriculum's aims to be slimmed down to give schools more flexibility in the way they teach pupils aged 11 to 14. Ken Boston, the chief executive of the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA), set out the proposed new aims in a letter to Ruth Kelly, when she was the Education Secretary.
The present aims for Stage 3 pupils state: "The school curriculum should pass on enduring values. It should develop principles for distinguishing between right and wrong." The QCA's proposals will see these phrases replaced to simply say that pupils should "have secure values and beliefs".
The existing aims state that the curriculum should develop children's "ability to relate to others and work for the common good". The proposed changes would remove all references to "the common good".
The requirement to teach Britain's "cultural heritage" will also be removed. The present version states: "The school curriculum should contribute to the development of pupils' sense of identity through knowledge and understanding of the spiritual, moral, social and cultural heritages of Britain's diverse society." The proposals say that individuals should be helped to "understand different cultures and traditions and have a strong sense of their own place in the world".
References to developing leadership in pupils have also been removed. One of the present aims is to give pupils "the opportunity to become creative, innovative, enterprising and capable of leadership". This is due to be replaced by the aim of ensuring that pupils "are enterprising".
Professor Alan Smithers, of the University of Buckingham's centre for education and employment research, said: "The idea that they think it is appropriate to dispense with right and wrong is a bit alarming." Teachers' leaders said that they did not need to be told to teach children to distinguish between right and wrong. A spokeswoman for the National Union of Teachers said: "Teachers always resented being told that one of the aims of the school was to teach the difference between right and wrong. That is inherent in the way teachers operate. Removing it from the National Curriculum will make no difference."
But she insisted that it was important for children to understand about their cultural heritage. "To remove that requirement can undermine children's feelings of security in the country where they are living," she said.
A spokesman for the QCA said: "The proposed new wording of the curriculum aims is a draft which will be consulted on formally next year as part of the ongoing review of Key Stage 3. One aim of the review is that there should be more flexibility and personalisation that focuses on practical advice for teachers. "The new wording states clearly that young people should become "responsible citizens who make a positive contribution to society". It also identifies the need for young people who challenge injustice, are committed to human rights and strive to live peaceably with others."
Source