 |
Focus Updated: 2009.11.01. For general news, refer to the Links below.
For news see: www.telegraph.co.uk www.guardian.co.uk www.theindependent.co.uk www.dailymail.co.uk (excellent images) www.itn.co.uk This page focuses on some aspects of developments in the UK, with particular reference to Health, Education, Social Affairs and Other News. Link to: www.enjoyingenglish.info
Health
Patients died due to 'appalling care' at Staffordshire hospitals - Healthcare Commission. by Rebecca Smith Medical Editor. 2009.03.17.
Appalling standards of care have been exposed at Mid-Staffordshire Hospitals trust, where between 400 and 1,200 more patients died than would be expected in just three years, according to a damning report by the Healthcare Commission.
Sir Bruce Keogh described the failures of 'gross and terrible' breach of trust.
Sir Bruce Keogh, medical director of the NHS, described the failures as a 'gross and terrible breach of trust' of patients. Poor standards of care was uncovered by the Healthcare Commission in one of the most critical reports of NHS treatment.
Related Articles
It is not clear how many patients died as a direct result of the failures but the Commission found that mortality rates in emergency care were between 27 per cent and 45 per cent higher than would be expected, equating to between 400 and 1,200 excess deaths.
Health Secretary Alan Johnson offered his apologies to patients and staff who suffered as a result and the trust chief executive Martin Yeates, and chairman, Toni Brisby, both resigned earlier this year.
Sir Ian Kennedy, chairman of the Healthcare Commission, said the report is a 'shocking story' and that there were failures at almost every stage of care of emergency patients. "There is no doubt that patients will have suffered and some of them will have died as a result," he said.
The investigation of the trust now called the Mid-Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust, found overstretched and poorly trained nurses who turned off equipment because they did not know how to work it, newly qualified doctors left to care for patients recovering from surgery at night, patients left for hours in soiled bedclothes, reception staff expected to judge how seriousness of patients arriving at A&E, patients left without food or drink, others who received the wrong medication or none at all, blood and faeces left on lavatories and floors, and doctors diverted away from seriously ill patients in order to treat minor ones who were in danger of breaching the four hour waiting time target.
When high mortality rates triggered questions, the trust board of directors 'fobbed off' investigators by saying the rates were a result of statistical errors but the Healthcare Commission found this was not that case.
The report said there was a 'reluctance to acknowledge or even consider that the care of patients was poor'. The trust was more concerned with hitting targets, gaining Foundation Trust status and marketing and had 'lost sight' of its responsibilities for patient care, the report said.
Sir Ian said: "The resulting report is a shocking story. Our report tells a story of appalling standards of care and chaotic systems for looking after patients.
Education
From canings to Ofsted: a teacher's view of a lifetime of change in his school
Yorkshire
teacher Alan Hemsworth is retiring after 40 years at the same school,
putting him in a unique position to offer views on an education system
in flux

Teacher Alan Hemsworth began his career at King James’s School in
Knaresborough, Yorkshire, in September 1971. Photograph: Andy Hall for
the Observer
Alan Hemsworth walked into King James's School in Knaresborough,
North Yorkshire, in September 1971 to begin a career as a German
teacher. He was 23.
Margaret Thatcher was education secretary. The old system of grammar schools and secondary moderns was in the process of being scrapped and a new breed of comprehensives was rising in their place.
He probably did not expect still to be there 39 years later –
after the winter of discontent, Thatcher's rise and fall, the end of
the cold war, Black Wednesday, the death of Princess Diana, New Labour,
9/11, the Iraq war, the election of a black US president, eight prime
ministers and 19 secretaries of state. But he was – until Friday, when
he finally retired.
He bows out at a time when education is rarely out of the news.
Britain's schools are a top priority for the coalition government,
which showed off its academies bill and "free schools" plan before
being mired in controversy over proposals to axe the rebuilding of
classrooms and other infrastructure. And there has been a fierce debate
about the quality of teaching – amid allegations that too many "bad" teachers are being allowed to remain in post.
After four decades, Hemsworth is remarkably well-placed to offer a
view on life in Britain's state education system. "I have survived,
reasonably intact, with a smile on my face," he says, after a
thoughtful pause. "I feel really privileged to be in the best job in
the world. But it is time to move on."
The enthusiasm remains as he describes, in a broad Yorkshire
accent, how he has loved his time at King James's. There have been
highs (36 German exchanges with Knaresborough's twin town of Bebra,
pupils gaining places at Oxbridge, hysterical laughter in the
staffroom) and lows (the advent of Ofsted, "targets", league tables –
and once lashing out in anger and hitting a child).
We sit down to talk inside the languages department – in which
shiny floors squeak underfoot and glass-fronted displays are covered
with pictures of children on trips abroad.
Asked to compare the classroom of 2010 to the one he entered in
1971, Hemsworth starts with the basics. "There is no blackboard, there
is no dust, there is no chalk. Instead, there is a computer and
smart-board in every room. The desks and chairs are arranged according
to teacher and pupils' wishes. It used to be in rows, with boys on one
side and girls on the other."
In his first years at the school, boys did woodwork and dominated
the sciences, while girls went to sewing lessons and tended towards the
arts and humanities. No more, he says, talking of boys in cookery
classes and girls in craft. There are plenty of other changes, too.
When Hemsworth began, teachers expected "silence and obedience"
and children generally complied. "There were some truculent ones in the
1970s, but the bulk of kids were much less in your face. The corridors
were certainly quieter, the classrooms were quieter. They are much more
confident now – and I am not saying this is in a negative sense. They
do not accept any more, but question things."
They also swear more, he admits. In the 1970s, it would be
exceptional to hear a child hurl verbal abuse – including the rudest
words – at a teacher, but now it is far more common. Hemsworth says he
is still "shocked" by bad language after an upbringing that was
somewhat "Victorian", on a council estate in South Yorkshire with no
indoor toilet, a bed shared with his brother, and a mother who stayed
at home and carried out the domestic chores. In that world, "dad's
word" – and the teacher's – "went".
His first year at King James's was also its first year as a
comprehensive school, bringing together the old grammar on the site and
two secondary moderns. He admits that there were teething problems as
the separate tribes of children were drawn together.
"They were already in their clans, there was already a pattern of
behaviour, so I think many members of staff, especially in the grammar
school, were very apprehensive. There were divisions – academic
divisions, attitude divisions. There were frictions occasionally
between the kids – the occasional fight, children establishing their
territory. But overall it worked amazingly well, and a lot of credit
goes to the head."
He remembers an early discussion among staff about how to address
boys in this new world. "Do we call them Smith, Jones and Brown – as in
the grammar schools – or Tom and Jerry?" he mimics. In the end, a
decision was taken to stick with first names – "revolutionary
thinking", says Hemsworth, laughing.
At first there was corporal punishment, he says, describing "lads"
being summoned to their canings. "Some teachers took a great big run up
and whacked them – I think they enjoyed it," he says. "Not the kids,
but the teachers." Others, including him, hated it. "It did no good
whatsoever. The kids would have a sore backside, but they would also
have a bit of status."
By the early 1980s, the memories of the grammar school were starting to fade as its last teachers retired.
As Hemsworth talks it becomes clear that while – physically – it
is the same King James's in which he has always taught, the school
today is unrecognisable from the one he joined.
The memories pour out: when the school closed because of a lack of
coal during the miners' strikes; an "incandescent" headteacher
hollering in the staffroom; setting up the Bebra exchange with an
English teacher in Germany; walking out with the National Union of
Teachers in the 1980s; arriving back from a school trip at 2am and
disrupting a burglary. Then there was the lowest point – "the scariest
moment of my life" – when he reacted angrily and hit a child. "I lost
my cool because I was a nice teacher, trying to be liberal. This kid
was winding me up, answering back, but then I lost my temper and hit
him, around the head."
Hemsworth remembers thinking: "Oh my God – what have I done?" and
that his career was over. In fact, the pupil's parents decided to take
it no further. He knows things would be very different now – when male
teachers are afraid to pat a girl on the back and say well done, or
stay in a room alone with her. "That is really sad," he says.
In 2010, children even look different, he says. "The corridors are
very narrow and there is a bit of a joke that you get more crushed
these days because the kids are bigger. They are taller on average, and
a lot are overweight."
With the increasing influences of television and advertising, the
other big change is that children are much more aware of how they look,
he says.
"In the 1970s, the girls wore A-line and long kilts," says
Hemsworth, placing his hand at his knee. "If you see them now, they are
like belts. And there is more makeup, dangling earrings, hair out of
place, and so on."
Even the staffroom chat has been transformed. In the past, it "was
more relaxed, there was intellectual talk, there was football talk,
rugby talk, talk about husbands or wives or about families, there was
talk about the kids in the school, there was talk about the headmaster
behind his back". Nowadays, teachers sit in separate rooms, preparing
lessons and marking.
So what has changed? "The Baker act stands out in my mind," he
says of the 1988 Education Act that heralded the start of the national
curriculum.
"It brought in league tables, more regular inspections – Ofsted. I
hate league tables – I think they are so destructive – and it has a
spin-off in the classroom, because then everything becomes focused on
results, results, results."
Hemsworth says all schools feel under pressure and focus
relentlessly on the children whose grades are at the D-C borderline.
"Ofsted is always lurking. It is quite scary at times. Results day –
most teachers in this school are very anxious about the results." And
children, too, are more stressed, he says.
Hemsworth blames Labour for bringing in a rigid structure of
lessons. "If you get inspected now and you are not doing that, you get
failed." But he is no fan of the coalition government's "free schools"
because he fears they will harm existing comprehensives. King James's
longest-serving languages teacher confesses that he left the school
with tears in his eyes on Friday. But he also left with a settled
conclusion about the country's education system.
"I believe profoundly in comprehensive schools – we help all the
kids, whether they are rich or poor. The grammar system was good for
me: at the time, I would have hated to go to a secondary modern that
did not teach languages, but if it was today I could have that same
opportunity in a school like this. I do prefer the comprehensive
system."
EDUCATION REFORMS
■ The largest expansion of the comprehensive schools system
– which saw grammar schools and secondary moderns merge – happened in
the early 1970s when Margaret Thatcher was secretary of state for
education.
■ Thatcher earned the scorn of the left in 1971, long before she
became leader of the Conservative party. The decision to end universal
free school milk earned her the nickname Milk Snatcher.
■ The most significant piece of legislation affecting schools came
in 1988 with the Education Reform Act. This paved the way for the national curriculum, which in turn led to national tests and league tables.
■ At the 1996 Labour conference, Tony Blair set out his three priorities should he be elected prime minister: "Education, education, education". Under his premiership came the first academies.
■ Education is also a priority for the coalition with plans to
allow any school to apply for academy status. In addition, parents,
teachers and charitable groups can get together to set up free schools. Internships could tackle soaring unemployment. 2009.07.19.
The Government is being urged to create 5,000 new internship placements in small businesses to tackle "soaring" graduate unemployment.
Internships could tackle soaring unemployment
The Federation of Small Businesses said £3 million should be allocated to market and develop thousands of internships and jobs this year. The move would save the Government £600 for each graduate on such a scheme as they would not be claiming any unemployment benefit, said the federation.
Chairman John Wright said: "Graduate unemployment is set to soar to unprecedented levels this year as businesses struggle to make ends meet and cut back on recruiting university leavers.
"In a graduate internship scheme, graduates can offer key skills to help businesses move forward while at the same time ensuring they are learning new skills and not unemployed at a crucial time in their careers."
Graduate vacancies vanish, and next year no better, says study. Anthea Lipsett The Guardian, 2009.07.06.
A survey of 226 top employers shows a 24.9% fall in vacancies – a slump in recruitment levels not seen since 1991, during the last recession. The fall is much steeper than the 5.4% dip companies predicted in a similar poll in February. According to the survey by the Association of Graduate Recruiters (AGR), whose members include Asda, BT, Lloyds and Nestlé, competition for jobs is much fiercer, with an average of 48 applications for every graduate vacancy.
Leading companies have cut hundreds of graduate trainee positions, with IT and banking worst hit, while the average graduate starting salary has been frozen at £25,000. Almost half of employers predict there will be no salary rise next year. Vacancies in engineering, a traditionally buoyant sector, have dropped by 40%. Only in the energy, water and utilities sector have vacancies risen, by 7.1%.
Almost two-thirds of graduate employers (63%) are offering fewer vacancies than last year. Recruiters have 20 vacancies on average this year, compared with 35 in 2008, and more than half of those polled predict no improvement next year; about 11% think it could be even worse.
Carl Gilleard, AGR's chief executive, said: "It's a depressing picture. I have a lot of sympathy for the class of 2009. When they went to university three years ago, the outlook was very different, which makes it a bitter pill to swallow. It's cold comfort for this year's graduates, but the market will turn and growth will reappear. It's positive that most businesses have kept their graduate programmes, which is very different to the last recession."
The findings come on the back of predictions last week that one in 10 of this summer's graduates would be unemployed in six months' time, and echo a Guardian survey that showed university careers offices have been deluged by graduates struggling to find jobs.
A separate survey of 25 of the UK's 100 largest commercial law firms, published today, shows the number of applications for each trainee vacancy has reached 130, a sharp rise from 52 a year ago.
Jacqui Gush, the head of Bournemouth University's graduate employment service, said: "We're advising graduates not to stick to standard applications to the top organisations, but to be more flexible about how and where they apply."
Wes Streeting, the president of the National Union of Students, said: "As the first generation of students to pay top-up fees leaves university with unprecedented debt levels, we now have confirmation that a quarter of graduate vacancies have disappeared, in direct contrast to the overly optimistic and glib predictions that had previously been issued."
The higher education minister, David Lammy, insisted a degree was still a "strong investment" despite the "undoubtedly tough times". "Businesses are recruiting through the downturn, with growth in some areas, so graduates should remain positive about their long-term prospects," he said. "But, like everyone else, graduates are not immune from the effects of a recession."
Too poor for university: Tuition fees are putting off working class students. By Laura Clark 2009.06.05
The proportion of working class students going to university has dropped since tuition fees were brought in. Students from working-class families are taking a smaller share of places at university after the introduction of £3,000-a-year tuition charges in 2006.
Nearly a quarter of all students are failing to finish the courses they start despite a £1billion crackdown on the university drop-out toll, university league tables showed yesterday.
Student leaders blamed tuition charges for the figures, and demanded a radical shake-up of university funding.
Universities Secretary John Denham admitted he was ‘ disappointed’ by the drop in the proportion of working-class entrants from 29.8 per cent in 2006 to 29.4 per cent the following year.
He blamed poor teaching for the rise in the number of students failing to finish their first year at university and warned that institutions with high drop- out rates would in future be ‘named and shamed’. Mr Denham’s remarks drew an immediate backlash from lecturers, who accused him of an ‘outrageous’ attempt to deflect attention from rising student debt levels and class sizes.
Yesterday’s tables show the dropout toll has risen to more than 70,000 a year even though £1billion over eight years has been earmarked to help universities keep students on courses, for instance through pastoral schemes and personalised teaching'
The toll is worst among students with the lowest entry qualifications and at new universities, which take the lion’s share of so-called ‘nontraditional’ students. Some former polytechnics are losing almost half their students every year.
National Union of Students president Wes Streeting said: ‘ Top-up fees are leaving a generation of students in unprecedented levels of debt.
Young job hunters face a tough summer. By Andrew Levy. 2009.05.26.
Young people face a 'long, hot summer' hunting for work because of the tough jobs outlook, a report has warned. A survey of 500 companies found only one in five was looking to take on 16-year-old school leavers in coming months. One third of firms said they had slashed the number of university leavers they usually employ. A total of 45 per cent of firms revealed they were not planning to recruit from either group until the economic outlook improves.
Gerwyn Davies, of the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, which carried out the study, said: 'Employers have for a long time had doubts about the employability skills of those leaving education.'
Ruth Elwood, head of recruitment at accountants KPMG, which helped with the study, added students were having to look for jobs while studying for exams. 'It is no longer enough to start thinking about jobs once exams are over,' she said. 'Those who do not already have a place for September are unlikely to find one now, or not in their first-choice profession.'
The study's release coincided with a report from the Prince's Trust which found youth charities are being overwhelmed by demand - as donations dry up.
The 'Schools' secretary is wrecking our children's education for his political career. By Michael Gove, Shadow Secretary For Education
Over the centuries, mankind has developed thousands of ways to communicate eternal truths. The complex interplay of voice and orchestra in classical opera gave full rein to Mozart's genius. The delicate rhyme scheme of the 14-line sonnet, in Shakespeare's hands, produced some of the most sublime poetry ever written. And authors from Macaulay to Churchill have used the powerful drama of great narrative history to make us understand the soul of our nation.
Children's Secretary Ed Balls
But none of these methods of communicating quite measures up to the Government's needs. Instead of teaching our children the glories of the past, or introducing them to the best that has been thought and written, ministers want our children to 'Twitter'.
Twitter, for those who have not yet encountered it, is a new form of texting - it's an electronic means of instantly communicating your thoughts and feelings to all and sundry over the internet - provided they can be contained in just 140 characters. A leaked report this week has revealed that putting Twitter at the heart of the primary curriculum is central to the Government's plans for our schools.
In one revealing vignette, we see so much of what is wrong with education today. We used to get students to sit three-hour essay exams to demonstrate their knowledge. Now the Government just asks them to send a brief text message. Ministers appear to want an engagement with Shakespearean tragedy to amount to simply typing out: '2B OR NOT 2B' on your mobile phone.
This Government is giving our children turkey twizzler teaching - classes are served up insubstantial gobbets of the latest fashionable fad which neither nourish their curiosity nor feed their mind. The tragedy (if that isn't too old-fashioned a concept for ministers) of it all is that the man in charge of our education system is, himself, formidably intelligent - and well-educated to boot.
Ed Balls, the secretary of state for what used to be the Department of Education but which has been revealingly renamed the Department for Children, Schools and Families, spent most of his early life in elite educational institutions.
Shadow Secretary for Education Michael Gove believes Ed Balls is aiming for the leadership race instead of focusing on schools
His father taught at Eton for a time and Ed went to the highly selective Nottingham High School, then Oxford and Harvard universities. He shone at all three institutions and everyone who has seen him at work, even political opponents like myself, can see a highly skilled brain operating.
Instead of devoting his talents to really improving our education system, Mr Balls has used his time in charge of our schools to play to the Left-wing gallery and position himself for the Labour Party leadership.
There are huge problems in our education system. Forty per cent of children leave primary school unable to read, write and add up properly. One in five children leave school without a single proper pass at GCSE. We have slipped down the international educational league tables in literacy, maths and science.
While 26,000 students got three As at A-level last year, the number of boys from the bottom sixth of society who got those good passes was just 65. Independent schools, which educate just seven per cent of children, have more pupils getting three As at A-level than all the comprehensives in the country put together.
The very best independent schools are abandoning state-run GCSEs because they believe they have been dumbed down, and are offering their own, more stretching exams. Tackling this level of educational under-achievement requires hard political work.
Crucially, it means taking on the forces of political correctness at the heart of the educational establishment. These are the people who want to dump history and geography from our primary schools, who tried to write Churchill out of the national curriculum, who think a tough question for GCSE science students is asking whether grilled fish is a healthier food than battered sausages.
Just today another devastating report lays bare the extent of the slip in science standards.
But instead of facing down the bureaucrats and academics who have presided over a deterioration in standards, Ed has directed all his fire against those standing up for excellence. Last year, he launched a vicious and unprovoked attack on church schools and Jewish schools, which are hugely popular with aspirational parents, knowing it would go down well with Labour's Left.
He has undermined Alevels as the gold-standard qualification. And he has given in to those in the unions who wanted to fetter our fastest-improving state schools, the independent-style academies.
Academy heads have gone public about the Leftward lurch in Labour policy, but Mr Balls seems concerned only about enhancing his role as the Cabinet's leading class warrior.
True to form, he has also attacked grammars and independent schools, accusing those headmasters with profound worries about dumbed-down exams of engaging in a ' marketing exercise'.
Even though the Prime Minister is in distant South America, Mr Brown cannot have missed the crashing sound of Mr Ball's tanks manoeuvring on to the Treasury lawn. If the Prime Minister doesn't discipline his protege for this naked power grab, then we can all safely assume that, after the G20 summit in London next week, Alistair Darling's next appointment will be with his P45.
Our children deserve better than to be neglected onlookers in a political drama, and an educational quality that has been forgotten.
University tuition fees 'need to rise to £6,500'
University tuition fees should more than double to £6,500, according to vice-chancellors. By Graeme Paton, Education Editor (Daily Telegraph - London). 2009.03.17.
Universities have warned that the existing cap need to rise to make British institutions more competitive. Send your comments to us at the above e-mail link They need to rise significantly to maintain decent teaching standards at institutions across England, it was claimed. It comes despite warnings from accountants that a similar rise would lead to average student debts of £32,000. Related Articles:
The conclusions are made in a report published by Universities UK, which represents vice-chancellors, ahead of an official Government review of tuition fees later this year. Critics warned that any major increase would prove hugely unpopular with students and would hit those from middle-class families hardest because many are ineligible for grants.
Wes Streeting, president of the National Union of Students, said: "In the context of the current recession, it is extremely arrogant for university vice chancellors to be fantasising about charging their students even higher fees and plunging them into over £32,000 of debt. "This UUK report assumes that higher fees are inevitable, and that the shambolic current system of student support will remain in place."
At the moment, students are charged up to £3,145-a-year in fees. Those from households earning less than £25,000 are eligible for a full grant of £2,835 and at least two thirds of undergraduates get at least some subsidy. Students can also take out low-interest Government loans. But some universities have already warned that the existing cap needs to rise to make British institutions more competitive.
In the latest report, UUK commissioned accountants to map out a series of seven "scenarios" that could happen when Labour reviews existing fee levels. Twelve vice-chancellors were also interviewed as part of the study. It is likely to pile pressure on ministers to consider a fee rise.
The report said if fees increased to £5,000-a-year - and the existing student loan system remained - students would be hit by average debts of £26,412 by 2016. If fees increased to £7,000 the average debt would hit £32,462, it warned.
Wendy Piatt, director general of the Russell Group, which represents 20 leading universities, said: "There is a growing consensus that without increased investment, there is a real danger that the success of our world-leading universities will not be sustained. In a difficult economic climate there is even greater urgency to find additional funding."
But Stephen Williams, the Lib Dem skills spokesman, said: "Young people will be shocked that many of the vice-chancellors involved with this research would like to see tuition fees more than doubled. The conclusions would be very different if students' views were considered instead of just those of university chiefs."
Social Affairs
The Spoilt Generation: Parents who fail to exert authority breeding youngsters with no respect for anyone. By Fiona Macrae and Paul Sims 2009.09.14.
A growing lack of adult authority has bred a 'spoilt generation' of children who believe grown-ups must earn their respect, a leading psychologist has warned. The rise of the 'little emperor' spans the class divide and is fuelling ills from childhood obesity to teenage pregnancy, Aric Sigman's research shows.
Attempts to 'empower' children and a lack of discipline in the classroom have also fostered rising levels of violence, at home, at school and in the street.
'Little emperors': A lack of discipline has created a generation of spoilt youngsters (Posed by models)
Dr Sigman, a fellow of the Royal Society of Medicine, said nursery-age children are becoming increasingly violent and disrespectful towards their teachers, 'parent battering' is on the rise and the number of policemen attacked by children is soaring. Dr Sigman said: 'Authority is a basic health requirement in children's lives. 'Children of the spoilt generation are used to having their demands met by their parents and others in authority, and that in turn makes them unprepared for the realities of adult life.
'This has consequences in every area of society, from the classroom to the workplace, the streets to the criminal courts and rehabilitation clinics. Being spoilt is now classless - from aristocracy to underclass, children are now spoilt in ways that go far beyond materialism.
'This is partly the result of an inability to distinguish between being authoritative versus authoritarian, leaving concepts such as authority and boundaries blurred. And the consequences are measurable - Britain now has the highest rates of child depression, child-on-child murder, underage pregnancy, obesity, violent and antisocial behaviour and pre-teen alcoholism since records began.'
For his report, The Spoilt Generation, he drew on 150 studies and reports, including official figures on crime and data on parenting strategies. Taken together, they showed many of the problems blighting 'broken Britain' are linked to lack of discipline. This is being exacerbated by misguided attempts to give children more control over their lives.
Some children thought to have attention deficit hyperactivity disorder might simply have never learned how to behave, he suggests. Calling for 'commonsense policies' to put children in their place, Dr Sigman said: 'There should be an absolute presumption both in law and in policy that adults "know better'' and are in the right unless there are exceptional reasons. Teachers' authority has been vastly weakened legally, professionally and culturally.
There should be a presumption that teachers "know better" and are in the right, unless it is shown otherwise.' He also believes fathers should have more access to children following separation or divorce. 'Separated fathers must be legally recognised as being of paramount importance,' he said. His views were echoed by experts in health and childcare.
Professor Cary Cooper, head of psychology and health at Lancaster University, said long workinghours had taken a terrible toll on families. 'As a result parents cannot invest the time in their kids that they should.
Tim Loughton, Tory children's spokesman, said: 'We believe that parents should be taking a greater responsibility for their children and that teachers and other figures in authority should be able to exercise their powers when the parameters are broken.'
Young thugs need 'help not prison', says Michael Caine at premiere of his new film about 'broken Britain' By Richard Simpson 2009.09.14.
Michael Caine has called on the Government to provide greater help for the disaffected youth of Britain.
Sir Michael, who is starring in a film about a widower who takes revenge on youths who kill his friend, said that young men who turn to crime needed 'help and not prison'. He added: 'They need to be sent to school, not a prison where they will learn to be criminals.'
The actor described his new film, Harry Brown, as a warning about the way British society is heading. He said it depicts the reality of 'broken Britain' while Sir Michael called for greater help for disaffected young men.
Asked on the festival red carpet if Harry Brown was a cautionary tale, Sir Michael said: 'It is a warning, it is a warning. It is not about a vigilante really - a vigilante is someone who does something. 'Our character is a victim, a victim of our society that is forced to do something. He is trying to protect himself because nobody else will. And that is the message of this film and the reason I did it.'
Sir Michael recounted that as part of the process of making the film he returned to the sink estates of the Elephant and Castle, in South London, close to where he grew up. There he met some 'young men that would terrify you'. He said his exchanges with them changed him mind on the way that disaffected youths should be treated.
Sir Michael was born in Rotherhithe, East London. His mother was a charlady (cleaner) and his father a fish market porter.
The director also called for action to halt the country's slide towards violence. Mr Barber said: 'We have a serious situation - that is why we wanted to make the film. We need to have a conversation about what is going on. The country is getting more violent - we need to do something about it.' Britons arrested, robbed or killed abroad. 2009.08.26.
A breakdown of the 20 countries where British citizens are most likely to need consular help
Samantha Orobator narrowly escaped the death penalty in Laos this month after being convicted of smuggling heroin. Photograph: Sakchai Lalit/AP
One in seven Britons arrested abroad are held over drug allegations, according to Foreign Office statistics released today. Spain was the country with the highest total of Britons arrested, while as a proportion of the number of visitors, British people were most likely to be arrested in the United Arab Emirates.
The table below (also given as a spreadsheet down the page) gives the Foreign Office figures for the 20 countries where British citizens need the most consular assistance, contained in the British Behaviour Abroad report.
British behaviour abroad|
Country |
Drug arrests |
Total arrests |
Total death |
Hospitalised |
Rape |
Sexual assault |
Passports lost or stolen |
|---|
| Spain | 180 | 2290 | 1825 | 741 | 22 | 35 | 7548 | | USA | 148 | 1534 | 152 | 123 | 2 | 7 | 3228 | | France | 63 | 193 | 611 | 203 | 4 | 5 | 1932 | | Australia | 6 | 120 | 73 | 49 | - | 2 | 2446 | | Germany | 8 | 148 | 438 | 48 | - | 1 | 990 | | Thailand | 54 | 202 | 288 | 198 | 3 | 1 | 774 | | Greece | 36 | 237 | 118 | 433 | 28 | 9 | 441 | | China | 12 | 129 | 47 | 41 | 1 | - | 826 | | Italy | 11 | 47 | 103 | 114 | 1 | 6 | 715 | | South Africa | 5 | 23 | 48 | 23 | - | - | 871 | | Portugal | 8 | 22 | 208 | 91 | 3 | 1 | 612 | | Turkey | 2 | 47 | 102 | 112 | 8 | 28 | 507 | | Cyprus | 48 | 205 | 149 | 86 | 10 | 4 | 283 | | New Zealand | 3 | 24 | 23 | 9 | - | 1 | 717 | | Canada | 12 | 120 | 62 | 13 | - | 2 | 495 | | UAE | 48 | 294 | 77 | 31 | 1 | 1 | 247 | | India | 8 | 40 | 123 | 52 | 1 | 2 | 411 | | Ireland | 19 | 52 | 24 | 12 | - | - | 493 | | Egypt | 0 | 45 | 108 | 97 | 6 | 28 | 153 | | Pakistan | 7 | 21 | 15 | 7 | - | - | 189 | | | | | | | | | | | Total worldwide | 991 | 6919 | 5629 | 3146 | 116 | 154 | 29774 |
• DATA: British Behaviour Abroad statistics
British pensioners among the poorest in Europe By Steve Doughty 2009.07.26. (Edited)
The elderly in this country are among the poorest in Europe, according to a breakdown by charities. Only in Estonia, Latvia and Cyprus are the aged more likely to be among the poorest in society. The comparisons, based on EU figures, follow a decade in which pensioners have been slipping down the league table of wealth in Britain.
State benefits for poor pensioners have slipped
Ministers have also acknowledged that elderly people with their own incomes and homes suffer because of the impact of soaring council tax bills.
The figures from Eurostat, the EU’s statistical arm, were compiled by the charities Age Concern and Help the Aged. They reveal the proportion of pensioners in each EU country who live on incomes below 60 per cent of average.
In Britain nearly one in three over-65s, or 30 per cent, are on incomes below the poverty threshold. That is lower only than the 51 per cent in Cyprus, 33 per cent in Latvia, and 33 per cent in Estonia. In comparison, only 19 percent fall below the threshold in Romania and in Poland that figure is just eight per cent.
The elderly also fare considerably better in Germany where the proportion below the poverty line is 17 per cent, in France 13 per cent and Holland 10 per cent. Least likely pensioners to be poor are in the Czech republic, where only one in 20, five per cent, falls below the 60 per cent poverty line.
The study comes ahead of a major Government review of pensioner poverty due to be published this week. The charities said other research has shown that older people are skipping meals to save money and two out of five cannot afford to buy essential items.
The countries where pensioners have the highest chance of poverty (with the proportion of over-65s on below 60 per cent of median income in brackets) are: Cyprus (51), Latvia (33), Estonia (33), Britain (30), Lithuania (30), Ireland (29), Spain (28), Portugal (26), Belgium (23), Greece (23), Romania (19), Bulgaria (18), Germany (17), France (13), Netherlands (10), Poland (8), Czech Republic (5).
Source: Eurostat.
Children of broken Britain among least happy in Europe
High numbers of youngsters in workless families and poor local environments coupled with low numbers in education or training left the UK trailing 24th out of 29 nations. Only Romania, Bulgaria, Latvia, Lithuania and Malta fared worse. It was well below the performance of countries such as Germany (8th) and France (15th) and a very long way behind the continent's best-off children, the Dutch and Scandin avians.
Among other factors which resulted in a low score for the UK were poor immunisation rates, children more likely to report poor or fair health and a relatively poor ability to communicate with parents.Children in the UK are among the least wealthy and least happy in Europe, research suggests.
An analysis of lifestyle factors that contribute to their well-being puts British youngsters 24th out of 29 nations - below Estonia, Slovenia and Hungary. Underage sex, smoking, drinking and drug abuse all play a part in lowering the quality of life for British children.
Drug abuse is one factor that lowers the well-being of British children
High numbers of NEETS - 16 to 18-year-olds not in employment, education or training - typified the problem, it was found. All the wealthy countries of Europe were placed ahead of Britain by the research that looked at health, family relationships, poverty and joblessness among parents.
Crime levels and pollution also contributed to the low standard of living for youngsters in the UK.
The research carried out at the University of York for the Child Poverty Action Group, echoed a report two years ago from UNICEF that put British children at the wrong end of a list of the 21 most advanced countries. That report cited family breakdown, drink, drugs, teenage sex and fear of violence as the issues confronting teenagers.
The Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG), which is heavily dependent on financial backing from Government departments, called for more state spending on benefits and tax credits. It dismissed the idea that the rise of single parenthood and the spread of family break-up have harmed children.
But among the factors in the low score for Britain it listed poor family relationships, which is measured on whether children talk to their fathers and mothers. Other key factors such as sex before the age of 15, drug abuse and large numbers of workless parents are also influenced by single parenthood and broken families.
Rates of teenage sex, cannabis use among early teens, and underage smoking and drinking in the UK have long been among the worst in Europe.
CPAG chief Kate Green said: 'The last time a child well-being league table was published, British people were shocked that the UK came last. 'This time we need a frank focus on why other countries are doing so much better for their children. Public resolve and political action to put children first are more important than another round of hand-wringing.'
Drinking alcohol, smoking and underage sex also play a part in lowering the quality of life for children in the UK
She blamed child poverty for many of the difficulties faced by children. Britain was marked down for child health, including infant mortality and low birth weight - both most marked among teenage and single mothers. The UK was also found to be poor at immunisation.
The research revealed that children in Britain believe themselves to be in worse health than others in Europe. Two years ago the UNICEF inquiry found that despite Britain being fourth wealthiest nation in the world, children were better off and better cared-for in less prosperous countries, such as Greece and Hungary.
It put Britain above only three countries for educational standards. And the UK was, according to UNICEF, the country where fewest children found others of the same age 'kind and helpful'.
Childcare failures put thousands at risk, Audit Commission reveals. by Jill Sherman, Whitehall Editor and Chris Smyth
Children’s services deteriorate across country
Children's services was the only area where more councils declined than improved
Tens of thousands of children are at risk of abuse and neglect, with a quarter of councils providing inadequate or minimal services for young people, the Audit Commission reveals today.
Even wealthy authorities are not immune to the widespread deterioration in children’s services. The rating of Surrey, one of the country’s most affluent councils, fell to the bottom of the local government watchdog’s league table after failing its children.
The performance league tables show that the standard of children’s services fell across England last year. Only 13 councils showed improvement; the ratings of 22 fell. Surrey was joined at the bottom of the table by Haringey, which was embroiled in the Baby P scandal last year; Doncaster, where seven children have died in three years through abuse or neglect; and Milton Keynes, which was criticised for its poor education and complacent management.
Forty of the 149 councils assessed by the children’s watchdog Ofsted provided either inadequate or the bare minimum of children’s services, which covers education, social care and child protection. The number achieving the full four stars fell from twelve in 2007 to nine in 2008. Children’s services was the only area where more councils declined than improved.
A common weakness was failing to implement legislation requiring all staff working with children to have criminal record checks. Several councils were also slow to put children on the at-risk register, to assign a social worker or to place a young person with an adopted or foster parent, said a spokesman for Ofsted.
In other areas, education results were poor, too few children went on to further education or there were high levels of teenage pregnancy.
Christine Gilbert, the Ofsted Chief Inspector, said that the worst-performing councils were improving services but that she could not guarantee children’s safety until they were reassessed.
Doncaster, where a government review has been ordered, said that the picture had changed significantly since Ofsted finished its review last March. “We’re in a very different place,” said Paul Gray, the director of children’s services, who was recruited last year. “There’s been a substantial increase in the number of social workers and we’ve cleared the backlog of cases.”
Claire Kober, the leader of Haringey, said: “We accept that things went badly wrong with child protection. We are committed to making things right.”
Surrey County Council has taken Ofsted to a judicial review over its rating. It pointed out that many of its other scores were high. “Children are better protected than 12 months ago,” said a spokesman.
Isobel McCall, the leader of Milton Keynes Council, attacked the Audit Commission’s “bizarre” methodology. “If you look at our other scores we have had our other services rated two or three stars,” she said. “Our rank overall is harsh and does not reflect where we are overall.” She was annoyed that the rating blurred the distinction between education and child protection, which was rated adequate.
The comprehensive performance assessment was introduced in 2002 to measure the effectiveness and value for money of local authorities. The areas assessed include housing, culture, the environment, benefits, adult social care, use of resources and corporate management. Use of resources and children’s services are weighted more heavily than the other categories.
Other News
Heroes killed by penny pinching: Relatives of Nimrod crash victims call for Gordon Brown (UK Prime Minister) to resign. By Tim Shipman Daily Mail: 29th October 2009
A grieving mother called last night for 'heads to roll' at the highest levels of Government after a devastating report laid bare the 'incompetence, complacency and cynicism' that caused Britain's worst military disaster since the Falklands War.
Ministers and commanders were accused of breaching their 'sacred and unbreakable duty of care' to the Armed Forces after failing to prevent an 'avoidable' Nimrod spy plane explosion in Afghanistan in 2006, which killed 14 servicemen.
Insiders described the report as the most damning indictment of any government failure in living memory.
Victims: Flt Sgt Adrian Davies, Flt Lt Lee Mitchelmore, Flt Lt Gareth Nicholas, Sgt Ben Knight and Sgt Gary Quilliam, Flt Lt Steven Swarbrick, Sgt John Langton. Bottom row left to right: Flt Sgt Stephen Beattie, Flt Lt Allan Squires, Flt Sgt Gary Andrews, Flt Sgt Gerard Bell and Flt Lt Steven Johnson, Royal Marine Joseph Windall and Parachute Regiment L/Cpl Oliver Dicketts Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1223538/Nimrod-Damning-report-crash-killed-14-finds-failure-leadership-culture-priorities.html#ixzz0VLCWcqR7
 The International Balloon Fista - Bristol. August 2009. Some amazing pics - ironically from China Daily!
6th June Soldiers from the British and allied forces commemorate an historical landmark. June 6th, 1944 marked the begining of the end of World War ii with the liberation of france from occupation by Nazi forces, with the landing of allied forces on the beaches of normandy in northern France. it is remembered by veterans, now in their 80's and 90's, throughout the region. It is officially the last commemoration of the acts of heroism and suffering they endured.
www.dday.co.uk - 'this site is dedicated to the brave men, heroes one and all, who took part in the D-Day landings - 6th June 1944' on the Normandy Beaches, northern France.
The Second World War: six years that changed this country for ever
On the 70th anniversary of the outbreak of the Second World War, Robert McCrum considers the legacy of the greatest conflict the world has ever witnessed
Robert McCrum of The Guardian. 2009.08.23
A family takes tea in 1954, the year rationing ended. Photograph: Keystone/Getty Images
When I was born in 1953, just after the coronation of Elizabeth II, I had a ration book. This flimsy, red cardboard log now looks like a passport to another country. Many things about that postwar Britain have become unrecognisable: cod liver oil, steam trains, rag-and-bone men, bobbies and telegram boys on bicycles and standing to attention for the national anthem at the end of cinema programmes.
Looking back, the black-and-white postwar images seem appropriate. Life in peacetime Britain was grey, threadbare, dreary and hopeless. There was a national sense of "Was this what we fought for?" As one American commentator put it, the British certainly believed they had won the war, but they behaved as though they had lost it.
Seventy years have gone by since the Second World War began and 64 since it ended. That dwindling minority of Britons, some 3 million, who lived through those six extraordinary years remember them as the most vivid moment in their lives and still refer to "the last war". So do the 11 million baby boomers and the 20 million over 60. Even some of their grandchildren will articulate this instinctive reflex. Britain has fought in some dozen wars and "emergencies" since 1945, but it's the Second World War that casts the longest shadow. As the D-Day anniversary celebrations indicate, this is one war that has not gone away.
Seventy years on, the experience and memory of wartime boil down to perhaps five myths that continue to condition our responses to everyday life.
First, Dunkirk. This has come to stand for the idea that in any national endeavour, especially sporting or military, Britons are almost certain to pluck defeat from the jaws of victory.
At the same time, for millions of British children, separation and loss became the defining experience of total war – evacuation, a trauma that lies at the heart of a classic like The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe. The evacuation to the countryside links to a third, pastoral element of Britain's wartime inheritance, expressed in the phrase "Dig for Victory". This was the idea that by the sweat of honest brows, the British could somehow survive. Shovels and spades would also be deployed in the cities, to rescue the victims of the Luftwaffe's bombardment.
The Blitz, fourth, is an essential element of Britain's wartime legacy. After the 7/7 bombings in London, the "spirit of the Blitz" was referred to ad nauseam by press and public. In contrast to the near-hysteria of many Americans after 9/11, many Britons from generations born decades after the Blitz proudly advertised the stoical repression of their feelings in a fierce display of national character .
The fifth and final inheritance of war – perhaps the ultimate peace dividend – is the sustained sense of moral superiority derived from standing alone against fascism. Roosevelt's secretary of state, Cordell Hull, wrote in his memoirs: "Never have I admired a people more than I admired the British in the summer and autumn of 1940. Even the children seemed to realise that upon their indomitable spirit depended not only their own fate, but also that of the whole democratic world."
When the war actually ended, these five strands were not yet fully encrypted into the national myth. Britain was on its knees. Wartime, and its immediate aftermath of cold and hunger, was literally a moment of deepest winter. December 1947 was the coldest of the century, another source for the frosty wastes of Narnia. Slowly, a great thaw began. By the mid-50s, green shoots were poking through. Soon there would be an age of plenty, and any amount of Turkish Delight.
The landscape would not heal so fast. I remember seeing London "bomb sites" as a child and hearing the stories of the Blitz from my grandfather, who had been a civil servant with the Ministry of Supply. A range of peculiar British institutions with first and second wartime origins continued to shape the contours of daily life: British summer time, pub closing hours, and poppy day. It was perfectly normal to see veterans in wheelchairs at bus stops or with missing limbs in railway station waiting rooms.
As children, we had a nourishing, but dreary, diet of shepherd's pie, toad in the hole, bangers and mash, fried fish and the occasional roast chicken. Institutional menus inevitably featured Spam, corned beef, lettuce and "salad cream". Powdered eggs were commonplace and so was "bread and dripping". Kia-Ora orange squash was one kind of juvenile luxury that anyone over 50 will remember, but water usually came from the tap.
Anyone who can recall these and other mundane details of everyday life, or who can remember the moment Kennedy was assassinated, is not only a citizen of postwar Britain, but is also likely to have been shaped by the age of austerity and the aftermath of total war. Broadly speaking, it amounts to the contemporary British establishment. It's quite a roll call. Let's see: the Prince of Wales (Charles Philip Arthur George Windsor), born 1948; the prime minister (Gordon Brown), born 1951; the former poet laureate (Andrew Motion), born 1952; the head of the home civil service (Sir Gus O'Donnell), born 1952; the Archbishop of Canterbury (Rowan Williams), born 1950.
Who else? Many senior figures of the British literary establishment are postwar babies: Martin Amis (1949), Julian Barnes (1946), and Ian McEwan (1948). Many vice-chancellors; several business leaders; Adair Turner of the FSA (1955); various thespians and public figures – Patrick Stewart (1940), Ian McKellen (1939), Derek Jacobi (1938); Joanna Lumley (1946), Esther Rantzen (1940), Ann Widdecombe (1947).
These names represent the 20 million for whom "the last war" continues to be an essential psychic landmark, established in everyone's mind by German Stukas screaming out of Polish skies in September 1939.
1939 will not mean much to an American, a Japanese or a Russian. For Britons of that generation, however, it's a date that sets off a cacophony of signals.
Adam Phillips, the writer and child psychotherapist, was born in 1954. How does he assess the psychic cost of war? His father, who died in 1998, fought with tanks in North Africa and apparently "loved the war". Phillips warns against glamorising the conflict, but concludes that anyone over, say, 50 is probably "more haunted than they realise by their parents' experience of war".
This haunting takes many forms, says Phillips. In the immediate aftermath of conflict, there's the extraordinary transition from states of fear and exhilaration to the routines of civilian life. Having a family and raising children in peacetime inevitably took place in "a highly disturbed emotional atmosphere". We must remember, says Phillips, that "for those who survived, the war was incredibly exciting and really unrecoverable from. There's a radical incompatibility between wartime and peacetime existence. Coming home from the war meant adjusting to the fact that the rest of your life is going to be incredibly boring".
At the same time, the wartime generation had learnt to adjust to separation, isolation and loss, and – something they would pass on to their children – to "not feeling hurt when you were hurt". To be equipped for conflict, according to Phillips, requires "self-anaesthesia", which he sees as a dominant motif in postwar British life.
Summarising the traumatic dividends of the Second World War, Phillips concludes that the postwar generations were "either envious of people who had fought in the war; or strongly identified with the dead (and no longer found life worth living); or felt they were living a kind of 'death in life'; or would ask obsessively, 'Where's the excitement?'"
As a result, Phillips contends, post-war Britons are either obsessed by loss and grief, which expresses itself in nostalgia, or obsessively pleasure-seeking, or unbearably triumphalist. When you cast your mind back over Britain's recent national landmarks, events like the Jubilee, the World Cup, royal weddings and funerals, VE Day and Armistice Day parades, you find that the dominant mood is a bittersweet mixture of pride and regret, patriotism and embarrassment, a longing to escape the curse of war mixed with the thrill of its memory, tangled up with an anxiety about the legacy of imperialism.
The shadow of "the last war" looms over the wider English-speaking world. William Cran, an award-winning documentary film-maker, was born in Australia in 1946 and came to this country as a small boy on the SS Otranto. He makes the point that not only was he growing up among adults whose conversations about the recent war were intensely vivid and influential, but also that, from the beginning of the Depression and throughout the war, more than a decade, there had been very little progress. Britain was not just in thrall to the cost of its victory, but it seemed somehow frozen in time.
Everywhere, there was bomb damage, abandoned houses and the hangovers of wartime: old newsreel footage on the BBC, ration cards and the routine disciplines of the home front. "We were incredibly thrifty," says Cran. "To this day, I can never leave food uneaten on my plate. When my mother died, I found drawers stuffed full of old envelopes she'd saved for reuse."
Cran admits that the wartime mentality lingered in other strange ways. "I used to say, 'I'm not going to go on holiday to Germany.' Italy and France, yes, but Germany, no. My big thing was not buying a German car. When I finally bought an Audi a few years ago, I had to think about it very hard." He laughs in mild self-amazement. "So you could say my war ended in 2002."
Looking back, Cran remembers the early 50s as "a happy time, but rather dull. Then there was this flashbulb moment – rock'n'roll. I remember Bill Haley and the Comets… " This was 1956; he was 10. "In my school, we used to have playground fights about the relative merits of Bill Haley and Elvis Presley versus Tommy Steele. I remember the Archbishop of Canterbury preaching a sermon against rock'n'roll. So then you knew that good things were happening."
Sometimes, history, usually so deliberate and incremental, seems to speed up in a torrent of convulsive change. The 50s were like that. Once the war was over, the aftershocks just kept on coming: Korea, Suez, the Bay of Pigs, the war in Vietnam and the death of JFK, all within 20 years of VE Day. (That, in the context of our own times, is as recent as the fall of the Berlin Wall.)
The 50s also saw perhaps the first pay-off from the war, the changing shape of women's lives. Mary Beard, a Cambridge classics professor, was born in Shropshire in 1955. For her, the significance of the Second World War was that it began the liberation of British women, paving the way for the feminist movement of the 1970s.
The Beard family's war was probably not untypical. Mary's father had "a cushy number in Cairo", but her schoolteacher mother was evacuated from the Blitz in Liverpool, first to Cheshire and then to north Wales. "For me," Beard says, "the war was all about the home front. Now, when I think about it, the experience of the war was always part of the family conversation." She says her mother found the war a liberating and politicising experience.
Moving from Toxteth to a "frightfully posh" part of Cheshire, her mother came "face to face with the British class structure". All her stories of the war were of female empowerment.
"So if, as a child, I thought of the war," Beard goes on, "it was as something that was quite fun. In our family, there were no walking wounded and absolutely no losses, none. The war was a life-changing experience, certainly, but it was a positive and liberating event. My parents even had a phrase for it that I always found a bit strange. They used to say they'd had 'a good war'." She recognises now that she internalised her mother's experience.
"My mother's liberation made all the difference. She and her friends were young women in their twenties who were given unique opportunities, thanks to the war. Feminism and the feminist movement comes from these opportunities – it's Rosie the Riveter who inspired the opportunities that came to postwar women. Of course, in war women get killed, raped, etc, but it is a driver of social change. In some ways, I think that women benefited more than the working-class men from the Second World War."
Beard acknowledges the impact on her own life. "Yes, I was a low-level beneficiary," she admits. "You could say that women's careers have been assisted by the death of men."
Britain's schools have begun to change our understanding of the past, but they still reflect the experiences and values of a generation for whom "the last war" remains vivid, present, and real. Shirley Boffey is the head teacher of Coleridge primary school in Crouch End, north London. The war is real enough to her, definitely less so to the children under her care.
Shirley Boffey's father, now dead, fought at Arnhem and was always happy to reminisce about his experiences, mainly a self-deprecating account of arriving on the battlefield too late to be a hero. Her mother's war was all to do with the family's evacuation from the Channel Islands, where she had grown up.
Like Mary Beard, Boffey remembers that it was the First World War, in which her grandfather had been gassed, that made the biggest impression on her young life. "I suppose both wars fascinated me," she says, "because of my dad and my grandad."
In her own life, the legacy of war has been the ingrained habit of prudence and frugality. "War makes you cautious about the immediate future," she says. "For years, my mum kept a stock of tinned food in the cupboard. Tinned fruit, tinned soup, Spam." She laughs. "My mum still has a cupboard full of tins. I suppose it gives her a sense of security."
But when "the last war" comes up in school, it's taught in quite a theoretical way, as in: "Is war against another country a good thing?" and: "What are the justifications of war?" Or there will be an element of "living history" – cooking wartime food and making ration books. Yes, her primary school children do know who Hitler was. "We talk about the Holocaust," she says, "and we read The Diary of Anne Frank. I suppose the emphasis would be on the emotions of war, and the lesson, for the pupils, that wars come with a cost."
Schools no longer belt out "Onward, Christian Soldiers", but the Women's Institute still rallies to the singing of "Jerusalem". Britain's sense of moral superiority is not supported by churchgoing, but it persists none the less. This is the final legacy of "the last war", one that persists into the 21st century, and it seems to flow directly from the events of 1940-41, between Poland and Pearl Harbor, when the "world war" was still essentially a European conflict in which the British Isles "stood alone" against the Axis powers.
The shadow of "the last war" falls across Europe, too. I spoke to writer and documentary film-maker Nick Fraser (born 1948), who is half-French – his father, a major in D-Day invasion army, met his future wife during the Normandy campaign of 1944 – about the moral dividend Britain extracted from this period.
"Look," he says, "in Britain it always seemed simpler. We had 'a good war'. The French had 'a bad war'." Fraser is shocked to recall that he didn't really know about the Holocaust until he was about 17, but thinks this collective amnesia was deliberate.
Fraser contrasts the fall of France with Churchill's finest hour. "The defeat of the Third Republic was a horrible and humiliating experience. I never remember a single conversation about this; it was simply not spoken about. My family had a great admiration for the Brits. Anglophobia came from Paris. In Normandy, they were pleased to get rid of the Germans."
George Orwell once wrote that France in the 30s was a cross between a museum and a brothel. Fraser believes that, in the long run, France has benefited from its defeat. "Britain should get out of the habit of grandstanding on the world stage," he suggests. "We should learn to behave like the Scandinavians. The Iraq war is an example of how the memory of the Second World War makes us think in the wrong way."
Britain's apparently arrogant detachment from the European experiment comes from a mixture of geography, history and the last war. The experience of being an island that has successfully resisted invasion has become crucial to our self-image. Who can forget the Sun headline after the England football team lost an away match to Germany? "OK. You beat us at our national game, but we beat you at yours 2-0!"
British nationalism ebbs and flows in its intensity. In the early 1960s, after the years of renewal (1945-63), there was a youthful rejection of the parental message. Suddenly it was "make love, not war" and "the Summer of Love", with men and boys dressing, as Martin Amis puts it, "like clowns, not conscripts". For women, there was the lesson of their mothers' war. After the 1960s, women took charge of their lives in more and more assertive ways.
Inevitably, there would be a revolt against the backlash. The Thatcher revolution reasserted the wartime values of belligerence, stoicism, chauvinism and repression. At the same time, the closing decades of the last century saw the erosion of the social and industrial base that had sustained the war effort.
By the turn of the century, the Orwell Prize-winning historian Tony Judt writes in Reappraisals: "We have become stridently insistent – in our economic calculations, our political practices, our international strategies, even our educational priorities – that the past has nothing of interest to teach us. Ours, we insist, is a new world."
Almost, but not quite. Those for whom "the last war" has a resonance cannot escape it, even if they might want to. And in the minds of many Britons of the older generation, the fleet is still steaming up the Channel in battle grey, the RAF stands by ready to "scramble", the pound is a national symbol and the monarch is on her throne.
When adversity strikes, there is a well-rehearsed repertoire of responses on which we can fall back, with relief. As one of the Observer's interviewees (William Cran) observed, when we spoke about the impact of the credit crunch: "It feels as though I am getting back to normal. I'm saving money. I'm wearing out my shoes. If I have to, I'll dig up the garden and plant potatoes."
MPs' expenses: Richard Branson calls for cut in number of MPs. 2009.05.26. PHOTO: GETTY The number of MPs should be halved and their salaries doubled, claims Sir Richard Branson.
The Virgin founder and entrepreneur also said MPs should be paid by performance, with those that underperformed removed at any stage during a Parliament. Sir Richard, whose company announced a pre-tax profit of £68 million yesterday, told the Telegraph that America successfully manages with far fewer legislators than Britain.
He said more high calibre business people needed to be attracted into politics. “What I and many others feel strongly is that MPs around the world are generally underpaid. This means in many countries we are not getting the quality of MPs from a broad enough cross-section to carry out these crucially important jobs.
“In Britain, for historical reasons, we have 646 MPs in our House of Commons and 737 members of the Lords. This may have made sense in the days of horse drawn carriages, when it was difficult to cover large areas and talk to the masses. “But today communication and travel is much easier and I believe we could reduce the number and not impact the effectiveness of our democracy.’’
I will do all that's needed to fix mess. By PRIME MINISTER GORDON BROWN, 17/05/2009
From an Interview with 'The News of the World' (London)
I AM appalled and angered by this week's revelations.
Appalled because at all times people should expect the highest standards from people in public life. Angered because I was brought up to believe you did the right thing - and that trust, integrity and honesty are the most precious assets of all.
And for all those striving hard in these difficult times to do the best for their families, working long hours to give a better life for their children and to improve our public services and communities I apologise - on behalf of all parties - that the political system has let you and the public down.
I want to assure every citizen of my commitment to a complete clean-up of the system. Wherever and whenever immediate disciplinary action is required I will take it.
Scrutiny
The bottom line is that any MP who is found to have defied the rules will not be serving in my government.
The action must be swift and comprehensive. On the whole politicians do work hard for people but MPs who have abused the expenses system will have to make reparations for the past. I have called for independent scrutiny for every claim made over the last four years and an independent means of deciding how much should be paid back.
Westminster cannot operate like a gentleman's club where MPs or parties alone decide themselves whether your money should be paid back. It is absolutely right that each MP will need to justify to the public, not just the authorities or their party, the money they have spent on allowances. Transparency to the public is the foundation of properly policing this system.
I am under no illusions that repayment will not necessarily be sufficient sanction. Unacceptable behaviour will be investigated and disciplined. I do not rule out any sanction.
But for the future we need even more fundamental change. Already I have asked Parliament to ensure - and MPs have agreed - that outer London MPs cannot claim a second home allowance.
MPs should not themselves come up with the future system that should govern their allowances. Therefore we are agreed that the Committee of Standards in Public Life should come forward with much needed reforms.
It is clear that the revelations of the past week will have a lasting impact on our politics.
As well as righting wrongs and cleaning up the system, there is now a clear need to go much further, as we start the process of rebuilding trust in our political system.
We must all now come together to make that happen.
Parliament
A new dawn for democracy? 2009.05.20.
Michael Brown, an MP for 18 years, reflects on a historic day at Westminster
Every so often, parliamentary history is made that subsequently shapes the centuries ahead. The signing of Magna Carta still has implications for our democracy. The events surrounding Charles I and the Civil War live on today as the monarchy bows to the will of the House of Commons when, at the State Opening, the doors of the Commons are slammed shut as Black Rod approaches. The next speaker may have such a chance to lead a historic reform of our tarnished democracy.
The developments of the past two weeks, culminating in yesterday's announcement by the Speaker, will have repercussions down the centuries. Future A-level history students will be answering questions not only about the Long Parliament and the Rump Parliament, but also about the "Moat" Parliament (otherwise perhaps known as the "Manure" Parliament) presided over by Speaker Martin – the first Speaker to be forcibly removed from office in 300 years. His name will be as familiar to future historians - for the wrong reasons - as Speaker Lenthall was in the 17th century.
That Mr Martin had to go became inevitable. He has been identified as the commander-in-chief and defender of the culture of Commons secrecy and corruption. His resistance to the Freedom of Information Act made matters worse. But the scenes witnessed in the last few days made me weep. I have no brief for Mr Martin but the manner of his demise is tragic. Never, ever, in my 18 years under Speaker Thomas, Speaker Weatherill or Speaker Betty Boothroyd did I see such scenes of open rebellion. The mere swish of Betty's gown as she admonished a recalcitrant MP was enough to bring order. All three commanded instant respect, in and out of Parliament, and it is a crying shame that Mr Martin - a personally decent and kindly cove - should have been so badly advised.
Of course Mr Martin was not up to the job - that was precisely why he was chosen in 2000 - when Labour had over 400 MPs. This was the time when Tony Blair and Alastair Campbell were neutering the Commons and when Betty Boothroyd was trying, heroically, to defend the Commons from the New Labour reign of terror. But they wanted a pliant stooge. So instead of following convention and allowing a Tory to be nominated, the Labour whips' organised for Mr Martin.
But all that is over. Mr Martin is over, Mr Blair is over and Gordon Brown is nearly over. A new era may be upon us. While Mr Brown belatedly recognised this new era with his hasty announcement of a system of independent adjudication of MPs pay and rations (which he put before other party leaders at the Speaker's meeting yesterday afternoon) he still fails to recognise that the people want retribution. At his press conference He made much of disciplining wayward Labour MPs, yet Elliot Morley and David Chaytor merely remain suspended. (Incredibly, Mr Morley continues to chair a select committee for which he receives an additional £20,000 on top of his salary.) But Mr Brown could have announced their expulsion.
The Prime Minister was at his worst as he promised that any Labour MP who had broken the rules would be de-selected, yet he made the lawyerly distinction that Hazel Blears was within the rules – even though he disapproved of her actions. Instead of promising reviews, committees, inquiries and commissions a few sackings would carry more conviction.
But the people want revenge against the MPs who have defrauded them out of their taxes to pay for the outrageous expenses claims. Voters want prosecution, de-selection, dismissal, defeat and defenestration. (Already Douglas Hogg is to stand down.) But they also want rejuvenation - a new Speaker, a new Parliament - and a new electoral system based on open democracy.
After the farce of Mr Martin's original election there are new rules - involving a secret ballot for the election of the new Speaker. There is still a majority of Labour MPs - some of whom might be tempted to follow"party" line. Similarly Tories might coalesce around a single candidate. Runners and riders will probably include Sir Alan Haselhurst, Mr Martin's deputy. But he is in trouble over gardening expenses. Sir George Young, an Old Etonian Tory, will have another try but he is simply too establishment. Sir Menzies Campbell might have had a chance before his £10,000 flat renovation became public.
But if constitutional reform is the voters' clarion cry - including electoral reform - then MPs should consider candidates regardless of party labels and regardless of the previous convention that "it's our party's turn". Given the need for the public - as well as the Commons - to have confidence in Parliament restored, I would vote for Frank Field or Vince Cable. They would certainly be the peoples' choice.
MPs' expenses: This crisis has revealed what is really wrong with Britain. By Iain Martin 2009.05.16. Dark clouds over Westminster. PHOTO: AP.
A culture of rules and regulations has stifled morality in modern public life and wider society. It is now time to try a different approach, says Iain Martin.
Amidst the horrors, there have been a few moments of unintentional comedy. Of all the myriad excuses from MPs in the last week, I have a favourite.
Stewart Jackson is the Conservative MP for Peterborough. He made an expenses claim in relation to his swimming pool and attempted to explain it as follows: "The pool came with the house and I needed to know how to run it. Once I was shown that one time, there were no more claims. I take care of the pool myself. I believe this represents 'value for money' for the taxpayer."
How, precisely, does one operate a swimming pool? Surely it's not difficult. You fill it full of water and, when it's sunny, you jump in.
Note also that Jackson says "the pool came with the house", as though his estate agent had neglected to mention the fact: "There's something we forgot to tell you, sir. Your new house. It has a swimming pool." I imagine Jackson with his head in hands: "Good God, man, why on earth didn't you warn me? That's simply awful." Estate agent: "Shall we have it removed, sir?" Jackson (wearily): "No, don't bother. I'll just have to live with it."
In contrast, the country is not in a mood to live with politicians who claim for moats or who make manifestly dodgy mortgage claims. A feeling abounds that there must be punishment. But then what?
Traditionally, the British have preferred to avoid too much introspection, regarding an excess of self-examination as embarrassing. But, from time to time, it becomes unavoidable and a crisis prompts the country to ask itself whether it is content with the direction in which it is headed. If the answer is no, the consequences for those who rule or govern can be highly unpredictable.
Think of the abdication crisis in the Thirties, the calamity of Suez in the Fifties or the winter of discontent in the late Seventies. The most recent event with which the MPs' expenses scandal compares in terms of public feeling is the tumult around the death of Diana, the Princess of Wales, in 1997. At the time – before and during that mad September – a large body of opinion had formed in favour of much greater informality in public life. We got it, including the election to power of New Labour in May.
And what was the result? In politics, there was the disaster of sofa-government and a growing contempt on the part of Number 10 for "stuffy" traditional institutions such as the Cabinet, the intelligence service, the Commons and the Lords. Of course, these developments are not to blame for the decay of Parliament and the crisis presently consuming British democracy, but they hardly helped.
What is clear this weekend is that there is now a revolution of sorts coming. The question for existing MPs is whether they attempt to participate or are swept away by forces and candidates yet unknown.
This means the pro-reform camp within Parliament has very little time to act. The cross-party campaign to remove the Speaker – which will table a motion tomorrow – must succeed this week. A new occupant of the office – Vince Cable or Frank Field, perhaps – should then lead the demoralised institution through immediate and radical reforms. MPs who reject this approach fail to realise that narrow party-politicking has never been a more inadequate response. Sure, deposing the Speaker will not be enough when the country wants the long arm of the law extended. But it would demonstrate that public pressure can produce results.
Next, bring on a grassroots rebellion: a wave of deselections ahead of the next general election; the emergence of strong independent candidates to defeat the most tarnished incumbents; for the election after that, primaries to choose candidates.
It should not be forgotten that before these events there were good MPs who understood that the relationship between the electors and the elected was changing, and who ordered their affairs accordingly. But they were outnumbered by those trapped on Planet Politics, who refused to believe that their world was ending. They know now. Heading back to their constituencies, after modern Parliament's worst week, a good number looked absolutely terrified.
Why is the country quite so angry? Well, it has become clear that, as the economy headed for the rocks, those paid to pay attention were otherwise occupied filling out expense claim forms. Voters, forced to adjust to an age of austerity, want the pain shared.
But I would argue that it is about much more than that. There has been an inchoate sense for some time that Britain no longer functions effectively, despite the vast sums spent maintaining it. Virtually every activity the law-abiding undertake seems to have become entangled in a web of energy-sapping orders from officialdom.
What ails Britain – beyond our economic problems – is that we have allowed a bossy Commons (the same body which has ripped us off) to legislate our society piece by piece, to the point where modern life is excessively rules-based.
This obsessive culture of compliance was there in the Baby P case: everyone involved could point to boxes that had been ticked, to show they had followed the rules. The City was hardly under-regulated when the 2,500 staff of the Financial Services Authority spent their time forcing banks to fill out forms.
In both cases, the problem was not an absence of rules. It was that there were so many rules that they crowded out any space for judgment or the exercise of individual morality. Free individuals encouraged to act ethically are more likely to arrive at the right answers than an over-mighty bureaucracy.
Such impulses are instinctively conservative and anti-socialist, and they have formed the basis of David Cameron's best speeches in the last three years. "Labour trusts the state, we trust society," he said on Friday. His response last week was judged by many to be first class, particularly when compared to the moral and strategic collapse of Gordon Brown. Cameron got to the moral heart of the matter: what matters is what is right and what is wrong. He will be good at the business of being prime minister.
In the circumstances, isn't it highly instructive that the first response of many of our elected representatives on being exposed by the Telegraph has been to say that they were acting within the rules? It illustrates Britain's problem perfectly.
We need more individuals in Parliament who are prepared to exercise judgment and to know the difference between right and wrong. We must all ensure we get them. But a new spirit of personal responsibility is needed outwith the walls of the Palace of Westminster too. It must flood into every corner of our national life.
MPs' expenses: Our politicians could learn a lesson from congressmen. By Janet Daley. 2009.05.16.
American politicians see their time in Washington as a period of public service, not an alternative lifestyle.
Maybe it's time we gave up on the honour code for Parliament altogether. By which, I do not mean that we should abandon any hope that MPs will behave honourably. What may have to go is the unwritten, tacit nature of the understanding: the lack of explicitness in the contract between the governing and the governed which has traditionally been seen as a natural fit for our historical character. (No written constitutions please, we're British.)
It has sometimes been said – as a form of praise – that Parliament is like the right sort of club, in which pride of belonging brings out the best in its members. Well, I think we can kiss goodbye to the second part.
But the similarities between Parliament and what was called a "gentleman's club" are very much to the point. In pre-feminist days, the word "gentleman's" was not meant to signify gender, so much as class. It was a certain type of man who was considered suitable for membership: one who knew how to obey the unspoken rules of civilised behaviour.
The House of Commons has relied heavily on what might be called aristocratic assumptions about the proper way to behave: of instinctive honour and integrity rather than precise, legalistic, accountable mechanisms for judging Members' conduct. Of course, there are rules, but they were designed to rest on something more intangible: something which can only be called a sense of service or duty, and which in Britain was a direct descendant of noblesse oblige.
The social composition of the Commons is now, of course, hugely diverse but it has somehow managed to maintain those self-regarding, ruling-class attitudes: we know best how to govern our own affairs; the public has no business peering into the details of our conduct; we are the highest authority in the land and must therefore be exempted from scrutiny.
You can hear this patrician message resonating as clearly in the Glaswegian pronouncements of Speaker Martin as in the disdain of Douglas Hogg for anyone who questions his need to maintain a moat. It is not without significance that one of the most courageous modern political reformers – Margaret Thatcher – was an outsider to the club on two counts, being both female and petit bourgeois. Many of her enemies in Parliament and Whitehall hated her refusal to accept the establishment rites of mutual exoneration and conspiracy against the ordinary man, and they despised the middle-class virtues of self-improvement, thrift and personal ambition which she promoted.
Being "bourgeois" is, of course, far more objectionable in the pseudo-aristocratic terms of modern snobbery than being proletarian. There is an odd alliance of Left and Right on this: in the Eighties, Right-wing Thatcher-haters used to decry the rise of "bourgeois triumphalism" while Left-wing ones despised her for being a "grocer's daughter".
Stephen Fry, in his own bizarre intervention in the MPs' expenses row last week, was at it, too: all this fuss was nothing more than "a tedious bourgeois obsession" with what MPs "charged for wisteria". You see what he did there? "Wisteria", in Mr Fry's view, summons up an inherently absurd vision of suburban aspiration. And it boils down to this: who are you to question us? (Or, in Mr Fry's case, "Who are we to question them?") Parliament – like virtually every British institution – has evolved through a series of accretions and compromises. It was not consciously invented at a precise historical moment to serve a clearly determined function, as was the Congress of the United States.
So the differences, and the attitudes that underpin those differences, may be irrevocable. No one is more aware than I, as a lifelong expatriate, that you cannot simply appropriate the logic of another country's political culture, or bolt on to your own institutions an alien tradition.
But it's still worth having a look at the way things are done over there. Members of Congress, you might think, would have at least as justifiable a case for a "second home allowance" as British MPs. After all, many congressmen and senators have constituencies thousands of miles from Washington. The practical problems of their domestic arrangements – of maintaining their family lives and contact with the communities that elected them – are much more geographically daunting than those of parliamentarians.
It may therefore interest you to hear that members of Congress get no housing allowance at all. True, they are paid rather more than our MPs: $174,000 a year which is roughly £116,000 at the current exchange rate. Nonetheless, they are allowed to claim from the taxpayer the cost of a constituency office, the personnel to run it, and the postal charges for their official business, all of which are patently accessible to those who voted them into office.
But their living arrangements are their own responsibility. It is always assumed that their real (not just "main") home is in the community which elected them: when in Washington, they often have fairly makeshift accommodation (congressmen sometimes share apartments). Of course, if they are grand enough, they may maintain a permanent Washington home as well, but it is not considered a function of government to fund the purchase, much less the equipping, of either.
There is, I think, a pleasing clarity and professionalism about this. Politically, it makes a statement: congressmen are encouraged to feel that their true loyalty and proper identity lies in Idaho or Oregon or wherever, and that their time in Washington should be seen as a period of service, not as an alternative lifestyle.
I do not need to be reminded that the practice falls short of the ideal. The expression "inside the Beltway" for that incestuous world of insider Washington makes a mockery of the idea that all congressmen are provincial innocents who resist the seductions of Capitol Hill's own clubbable circles. But there is no presumption of secret, answerable-to-no-one inviolability which Members of Parliament seem to have inherited from the feudal lords.
The separation of private matters (where you and your loved ones live) from public duty (your office and staff) is unambiguous and dignified. And above all, there is an expectation of transparency: an openness to examination which is taken for granted not simply as the price for one's tax-funded salary but as a fundamental requirement of democracy. We could do worse than borrow a little of that.
I will do all that's needed to fix mess. By PRIME MINISTER GORDON BROWN, 17/05/2 From an Interview with 'The News of the World' (London)
I AM appalled and angered by this week's revelations.
Appalled because at all times people should expect the highest standards from people in public life. Angered because I was brought up to believe you did the right thing - and that trust, integrity and honesty are the most precious assets of all.
And for all those striving hard in these difficult times to do the best for their families, working long hours to give a better life for their children and to improve our public services and communities I apologise - on behalf of all parties - that the political system has let you and the public down.
I want to assure every citizen of my commitment to a complete clean-up of the system. Wherever and whenever immediate disciplinary action is required I will take it.
Scrutiny
The bottom line is that any MP who is found to have defied the rules will not be serving in my government.
The action must be swift and comprehensive. On the whole politicians do work hard for people but MPs who have abused the expenses system will have to make reparations for the past. I have called for independent scrutiny for every claim made over the last four years and an independent means of deciding how much should be paid back.
Westminster cannot operate like a gentleman's club where MPs or parties alone decide themselves whether your money should be paid back. It is absolutely right that each MP will need to justify to the public, not just the authorities or their party, the money they have spent on allowances. Transparency to the public is the foundation of properly policing this system.
I am under no illusions that repayment will not necessarily be sufficient sanction. Unacceptable behaviour will be investigated and disciplined. I do not rule out any sanction.
But for the future we need even more fundamental change. Already I have asked Parliament to ensure - and MPs have agreed - that outer London MPs cannot claim a second home allowance.
MPs should not themselves come up with the future system that should govern their allowances. Therefore we are agreed that the Committee of Standards in Public Life should come forward with much needed reforms.
It is clear that the revelations of the past week will have a lasting impact on our politics.
As well as righting wrongs and cleaning up the system, there is now a clear need to go much further, as we start the process of rebuilding trust in our political system.
We must all now come together to make that happen.
Warning of food price hike crisis |
The price of pork sausages has gone up 51% in the past year |
A crisis is unfolding in the UK as people in poverty struggle with rising food prices and the recession, the Save the Children charity has warned.
It comes as new figures from 'The Grocer' magazine show food prices rose by more than 18% over the last year.
On Monday, 'Save the Children' the charity will launch a crisis grant scheme to help families in the UK - fo the first time.
.
The governmnent says it believes food prices have peaked and it is tackling child poverty through increased child benefits and child tax credits.
'More unequal'
Colette Marshall, of Save the Children, said: "We are facing a crisis. Benefits simply haven't been enough and with rising food costs it means that families cannot afford to give children proper decent food. "We think we are heading towards malnutrition here in the UK."
Penny Greenhough, a single mother of two young children, said the family was struggling on a food budget of £3 per head per day. "I am having to compromise on a daily basis on quality and quantity. I used to manage, but it's getting harder and harder," she told BBC News.
Pensioner Rita Young said, "We have to go for the cheapest of everything and it's just not doing us any good. Too much salt, too much fat, too much sugar - cheap, cheap, cheap, just isn't good enough."
 |
ANNUAL FOOD PRICE RISES
Rice - up 81%
Pork sausages - up 51%
Mince - up 22%
Milk - up 14%
Source: The Grocer
|
Kate Green, of the Child Poverty Action Group, said that many families were buying less fresh fruit, vegetables, meat and fish, and consuming more affordable tinned and packet food that was often higher in sugar, salt and fat.
Government efforts had lifted 600,000 children out of poverty in the last 10 years, but one in three still lived below the poverty line, she said.
"Part of the problem is... many people have seen their prosperity improve over the last 10 years, so we have become a much more unequal country," she said. "That is very damaging for the people who just haven't kept up, and it really is quite wrong morally, and it's economically very stupid actually, not to make sure that we share the resources more equally and protect those who have least."
According to The Grocer, a typical basket of 33 items of food cost £48 a year ago. That has now risen to £57.50. Seasonal produce has caused a small drop in monthly figures, but the cost of basic essentials remains high.
Extra benefits
James Ball, from the magazine, reported : "It is the staples that have really gone up and that's tough for people who buy the cheapest food. "Rice costs double what it did last year, baked beans are up more than a third. Lots of everyday items cost a lot more than they used to."
As the UK imports about 40% of its food, the weak pound has driven up prices. Unpredictable world harvests and a spike in oil prices last year have also played a part.
However, as British produce comes into season, prices are expected to drop. |
MPs get inflation busting pay rise AND expenses soar to £93m By Ian Drury, Kirsty Walker and Michael Lea 20209.03.31.
The full extent of the Westminster gravy train was laid bare yesterday as MPs received an inflation-busting pay rise and it was revealed that they claimed £93million in annual expenses. Members are effectively trebling their pay by pocketing on average £144,176 on top of their back-bench salaries. Critics said that too many of the the 646 members were living 'high on the hog' while the rest of the country suffered in the teeth of a recession.
As details of the MPs' lavish allowances were disclosed, it was revealed that:
- One in four members claimed every single penny of the £23,083 second homes allowance last year;
- Home Secretary Jacqui Smith, mired in controversy for using her Commons expenses to pay for pornographic films, claimed £157,631 including nearly £23,000 on her so-called second home;
- MPs will be given a month to clean up receipts submitted for expenses before a further two million bills are published in the summer.
Annual details of how much individual MPs cost the taxpayer were published by House of Commons authorities yesterday. The £92.9million of public money allowed members to fund second homes, staff salaries - including members of their own families earning up to £40,000 a year - travel, office costs, computers and stationery.
Grim-faced: Home Secretary Jacqui Smith leaves her sister's house rthis morning
The most expensive MP excluding travel was Health Minister Ann Keen, who claimed a staggering £167,306. Mrs Keen and her MP husband Alan, who both have West London seats, have been nicknamed Mr and Mrs Expenses. Last year it emerged that they had used £175,000 of taxpayers' money to help buy a flat near Parliament while they already have a constituency home nine miles away.
Tony Blair, still Prime Minister for part of 2007/08, clawed back £64,064 for his role as a constituency MP. The cheapest MP was Tory Philip Hollobone, member for Kettering, who claimed just £47,737 under all categories of expenses and allowances. He spent only £400 on staff costs, preferring to take his own phone calls and answer correspondence.
Yesterday's figures also provided details of travel for MPs' families for the first time. Spouses and children under 18 are entitled to 30 single trips or 15 return journeys every year between the constituency and London. As is the case with MPs, there is no restriction on the class of travel so they can make first-class journeys by train or fly business class.
Matthew Elliott of the TaxPayers' Alliance pressure group said: 'Too many MPs are still living high on the hog, despite growing public concern at how our money is being spent. 'People are sick of the cost of Parliament rising relentlessly year on year, accompanied by mounting evidence that much of the money is being misspent.
Heather Brooke, who has waged a five-year battle to open up MPs' expenses, said: 'The astonishing amounts of public money claimed by MPs show exactly why it is important to get a receipt-by-receipt breakdown of what they spend it on.
'As we have seen with Jacqui Smith and other MPs, it is the detail that highlights the extent of any abuse and corruption.'
MPs can edit their receipts. MPs will be able to withhold the full truth about their generous expenses, despite moves to bring about greater transparency.
The Commons authorities will for the first time this summer release details of up to two million receipts submitted by MPs, covering claims for home improvements, furnishings and office costs. But members will be given a month to edit receipts submitted as part of claims for their bumper taxpayer-funded allowances.
The aim is to allow them to black out anything which gives full travel details, identifies suppliers or any items on bills not paid for by the taxpayer. It raises concerns, however, that they will be able to delete information to save them from potential embarrassment.
Critics are concerned that under the censorship scheme it would have been possible for Jacqui Smith to black out parts of the bill that showed she had 'mistakenly' paid for pornography using her Commons expenses.
Ten applicants for every job as unemployment set to smash through 2million barrier By Benedict Brogan 2009.03.16.
Gordon Brown claims there are 500,000 unfilled vacancies in Britain
Soaring unemployment has left an average of ten people chasing every vacancy, figures revealed yesterday. Ministers were on the defensive over claims that unemployment was climbing sharply in areas where Jobcentres were closing and will exceed two million this week.
The Government is diverting hundreds of officials from other posts to serve as welfare advisers. Nearly 1,000 civil servants working on child maintenance and disability claims have been drafted in to reinforce job centres.
A survey by the TUC found that in some parts of the country, the number of jobseekers far exceeds the number of vacancies. The study found extensive job shortages. The TUC says 60 workers are available for each vacancy in the South East of England.
More...
The Conservatives have released figures showing that in 2008, the number of benefit claimants more than doubled in some areas where job centres had closed since 2002. The Tory study identified the South West as hardest hit, with 12 constituencies where unemployment has more than doubled.
In areas of central southern England, for example, a Jobcentre Plus office was closed last year but the number of claimants has risen by 163.4 per cent. The South East saw 11 local regions affected, while the remainder were spread across England.
The Office for National Statistics is expected to announce on Wednesday that there are now two million people unemployed. Between October and December the jobless figure rose by 146,000 to 1.97 million - the highest level since 1997. The British Chambers of Commerce has warned it could reach 3.2million in the second half of 2010. Work and Pensions Secretary James Purnell stopped a programme of Jobcentre closures in November, but only after 54 offices had shut.
Unemployment reaches 12-year high of nearly 2 million. by Jon Swaine
The figure now stands at 1.971 million, an increase of 146,000 in the three months to December. The unemployment rate hit 6.3 per cent, up 0.4 per centage points during the quarter. The unemployment total is now at its highest since June 1997, having risen by 369,000 in the past year, an increase of 23 per cent.
The number of people who claimed Jobseekers' Allowance in January was 1.23 million, the Office for National Statistics said. The figure means there was a 73,800 rise in the claimant count, which gives a more up-to-date insight into the damage being done to the jobs market by the recession. The total stood at 1.16 million in December.
Wednesday's figures were not as bad as had been feared by some analysts, who forecast that the two-million unemployment mark would be breached for the first time since Labour came to power in May 1997.
Between September and November 2008, the unemployment total - which includes those who don't claim Jobseekers' Allowance - had risen to 1.92 million, up 131,000 on the previous three months.
Since then, huge numbers of staff have been laid off by major employers, including 27,000 at Woolworths and a further 2,300 by the Royal Bank of Scotland on Tuesday.
The figures came as an analysis by the TUC showed that Britain's unemployment rate is now rising twice as fast as the European average.
While Britain's jobless rate is lower than the European average of 7.7 per cent, it rose sharper than in all other European states apart from Spain and Ireland between December 2007 and October 2008.
Over the same period, unemployment in France went up by just 0.1 per cent and fell 0.8 per cent in Germany.
James Purnell, the Work and Pensions Secretary, said: "We know times are tough and we need to continue doing all we can to support people who lose their jobs find another as quickly as possible, preventing the long-term unemployment which has so scarred communities in the past from taking root.
Tony McNulty, the employment minister, said: "Today's figures are disappointing but we will not stop giving people help and support to get back into work as quickly as we can."
Gordon Brown met business leaders shortly before the figures were announced to discuss giving more assistance to people losing their jobs.
Climate change activists target the City. By Louise Gray, Environment Correspondent. Daily Telegraph 2009.08.27.
Climate camp activists have staged their first demonstration outside the European Climate Exchange in the heart of the City of London.
Around 25 protesters dressed as "filthy rich gamblers" played games with a roulette wheel and unfurled a banner complaining that dealing with carbon credits was gambling with people's lives.
The demonstrators were part of a 1,000-strong group staying at Blackheath in south east London as part of a week-long climate camp, which aims to highlight environmental issues.
One of those involved in today's action said: "We regard what goes on inside this building as gambling with our planet.
"Carbon trading merely allows big business to get richer and supports the charade that the Government is doing something about climate change.
"It also allows developments such as the third runway at Heathrow."
The environmentalists said they had received a few "confused looks" from staff at the offices in Bishopsgate.
More than 20 offices in London, including Government buildings, are expected to be targeted for action in the coming week.
Meanwhile back at the Climate Camp on Blackheath, workshops on everything from singing to protest and how to save four tonnes of carbon were going on.
Activists met with Metropolitan Police officers, but outside the gates of the site.
One of the activists said they were willing to talk to the police but not inside the camp, adding: "The reason for this is very simple, many people at the camp have suffered violence, harassment and intimidation at the hands of the police at events such as the Kingsnorth Camp and the G20 protests.
"Although the police have not used these tactics as this camp so far, that doesn't mean we are suddenly going to start trusting them."
Activists said the police had mounted surveillance cameras and microphones on cranes so could see everything that was going on at the camp, claiming that officers were threatening to cut off contact with the camp's police liaison team.
|
 |