Tuesday 9 September 2014

Prisons need more of Labour`s attention

"Filthy, overcrowded and dilapidated prison". (Morning Star,03/09/14) No, not a quote from Dickens, but from another damning Inspectors` report in 21st century Britain, Your paper last month rightly highlighted the duplicitous Chris Grayling`s "disingenuous claims that unions were to blame for Britain`s prison crisis", and his Gove-like dismissal of empirical evidence,but omitted a number of issues. (Morning Star, 20/08/14)
     Overcrowding and staff shortages, both the direct result of this government`s policies, are now important factors in the rising numbers of prisoners taking their own lives; this is the opinion of none other than Nick Hardwick, the Chief Inspector. The fact is that in the year up to March, there were 88 suicides in our prisons, a rise of 52 on the previous year, with self-harm cases increasing to 23,478 a year. Labour`s objective of reducing the number of prison inmates by limiting repeat offending is an admirable aim, but does little to solve the current problems requiring immediate solutions; they should be not just be complaining about the horrific conditions, they should be shouting from the rooftops, before the prisoners do!
 Often prisoners are locked up in their shared cells for 23 hours a day, leaving next to no time for showers, exercise, education or work. The cells look nothing like the official wide-angled photographs; walls can almost be reached by two outstretched arms, table at one end, an unscreened toilet at the other, with a bunk bed at the side. It`s not difficult to imagine how degrading such conditions will be, or how there could be anything less conducive to rehabilitation.
   Government policies have simply made matters worse: since 2010, 18 prisons have been closed, the numbers of prison staff have been cut by 30%, whilst the number of inmates has been allowed to rise to just under 86,000. A number of prisons have been handed over to private companies, including Serco, which has dubious records of performance, including the infamous involvement in overcharging for tagging criminals. G4S, the other security firm involved in the tagging scandal, and the one notorious for its botched Olympics` security contract, was barred from bidding for government contracts for six months. Since the ban was lifted in April, the company has had its contract renewed to run the Rainsbrook secure training centre for 12-17 year olds!
    Labour must act quickly. Even at present rates, over 50 prisoners are likely to die by their own hands before there can be a change of government, so urgent action is vital. Judges and magistrates must be told that a prison sentence is not always the most suitable of punishments, and that in certain, obvious cases, it is the wrong one. 
    Cutting the cost of the prison service, like that of education or health, does not save the taxpayer money, even in the long run. Labour has to accept this, and devise its strategy accordingly. Fair-minded voters will accept this, and the others will vote Tory or Ukip anyway!
 

Sunday 7 September 2014

No to 3rd runway: a cheaper solution

With the Airports Commission finally having the courage to discard what has become known as "Mr Johnson`s estuary proposal", the choice appears to be between expanding Heathrow and Gatwick. However, an alternative  makes more sense, especially as spending billions on a runway and the environmental changes which will inevitably accompany it seems both absurd and obscene, when the country`s heath, education and welfare services are under so much pressure.
       Even if, as the Guardian`s Nils Pratley contends, Gatwick is looking the "least bad option", the most sensible proposal of all is not to have any runway extension at all. Instead, make Heathrow the hub, exclusively the  airport for long haul flights, and have Gatwick and Stansted the centres for short-haul holiday flights. Or perhaps,  this is too sensible for politicians like Boris, who care more for personal reputations and self-glorification than governing the country properly, taking care for its people/

Guardian Review letter re Beatles

I was going to write to complain about an otherwise excellent and informative article about the Phil Spector song, "To know her is to love her", because of its omission of any mention of the version by the Beatles.(The spectre of Spector,30/08/14) With Lennon taking the lead vocals, their recording from a radio programme called "Pop go the Beatles" in July 1963, appeared on the "Live at the BBC" album. Why George Martin did not insist on them recording the song for one of their studio albums remains one of popular music`s greatest mysteries.
 The article did not even refer to the version recorded on the 1897 "Trio" album; with Dolly Parton and Linda Ronstadt in the background, the wonderful voice of Emmy Lou Harris took the listener to "a different country" too. 
The I turned the page and read Owen Jones`s article describing how "socialism does exist - but only for the rich", and realised there were far more important issues about which to complain! (Who are the real scroungers?,30/08/14)

 

Saturday 6 September 2014

M.Star letter on Education Secretary

Your article on the NUT`s justifiable attacks on the Education Secretary was revealing in a number of ways. (Morning Star,01/09/14) The comments of Nicky Morgan, calling for teachers to be "more professional", of course, are galling, especially from  the minister presiding over a school system employing thousands of unqualified teachers. The lack of  understanding of this privately-educated, corporate lawyer is self-evident, but her remark that teachers are as unpopular as politicians not only beggars belief, but indicates the sort of company she is keeping! Has there ever been a greater need for an education secretary who can empathise and identify with the needs of the teaching profession?  What education needs is well-trained, qualified teachers, who are given the resources necessary to maximise the potential of their pupils. Teachers need to work in the knowledge not only that a "level playing field" exists for all of their students, but that they themselves are appreciated by the society they serve, suitably rewarded for their efforts, and that, if inspected, they obtain fairness in judgement, and constructive advice if needed. They need to know, too, that the Secretary of State is aware of the problems involved in modern teaching, has the experience and expertise to solve them, and meets regularly with teaching union representatives to ensure solutions are practical, and further industrial action unnecessary. After a sixty hour working week, teachers do not expect or deserve media reports of ignorant politicians` criticisms.
      The article also included the unfortunate description of some universities as "elite". Oh dear, was there no room to insert what you must have meant, "so-called"? There is growing evidence which shows that academic and teaching standards at many of what you might consider "lesser" universities are on a par with those in the Russell group. Such negligence on your part makes you sound almost as bigoted as the idiotic Tory, Nick Gibb, whose preference for Oxbridge graduates teaching without PGCE qualifications, is yet another obvious reason to get rid of this obnoxious government as soon as possible.

Friday 5 September 2014

Morning Star letter on the profiteering private rental sector

As reported recently, rents in the private sector have "ballooned by more than 8% in the past year". (Morning Star,20/08/14) One of the reasons for landlords raising their rents is because they can, with the government doing nothing to stop them. Even when outrageous cases of profiteering are discovered, the judicial system does little to discourage repetition.
    Yaakov Maron, having charged £420 a month for a rented room accessed by a staircase with 2ft 3 inches of headroom, and already having been banned by Barnet council from letting out the room, was fined, with costs, around a mere £3000! What sort of deterrent to profiteering landlordism is this? Our prisons may be overcrowded, but an example has to be set, in the same way as fraudulent bankers need to be taught a lesson.
     Labour has pledged a rent cap and the building of up to 200,000 homes a year, but this is unlikely to provide the stimulus for culture-change which the private rental sector clearly needs. Surely, Labour leaders are not worried about offending the 25% of all Tory MPs who are landlords, or even the 12% of their own MPs who rent out property?
 One in three of rented properties in the private sector is officially classed as "non-decent", whilst one in five present a health or safety risk to the occupier. Such appalling data cries out for the setting-up of an Ofsted-type inspectorate which could classify all rented property, including student houses and flats, into bands, and set a maximum rent based on the condition and size of the property, and the area in which it is situated, for each band.

 

Thursday 4 September 2014

Labour and education

Labour seems to be developing an education policy, but is it going to persuade disillusioned, austerity-stricken, pay-frozen teachers to vote for them? Further developments based on a traditional policy of "equality of opportunity", might do the trick.
      There is a strong possibility that the recent  GCSE results, as many educationalists predicted, show that Gove`s assessment reforms have, in the Guardian`s words, "hit schools in disadvantaged areas hardest". The paper uses examples of schools` predictions of percentages of pupils expected to get 5 A*-Cs being much higher than those actually achieving the target, suggesting that the reforms added to the pupils` disadvantage. This is hardly surprising when the changes are considered: the return to the previous century`s chief method of assessment, the end-of-course examination, for all subjects requires weeks of revision, whereas the modular and coursework methods suit disadvantaged pupils better. The question to be asked is not only whether the assessment process should help all students, whatever their background, to achieve their potential, but also whether the country can afford to return to a system which wastes the talent of over 50% of its children.
      Labour rightly has voiced its determination to revert to the previous A-level system with AS levels, so similar pledges on GCSEs, for basically the same playing-field levelling reasons, would be sensible. The "Tory lie-machine" encouraged the belief that GCSE exams had become too easy, when the real complaint of the right was with the fact that the assessment system was producing state school results on a par with those from the private sector.
      Labour will certainly benefit in the run-up to the election by making the most of the Tory-dominated coalition government`s appalling record on social mobility: in 1991 17% of top earners came from low-income families, but by 2000 the figure had fallen to 13%. The situation today, however, is much worse: a recent OECD survey, looking at "intergenerational social mobility", which basically means the extent individuals move up the social ladder, compared to their parents, found Britain at the bottom of a league table of twelve developed countries. It is difficult not to blame government policies, when one of its first acts was to scrap the Education Maintenance Allowance, deterring many from returning to a sixth form to pursue further qualifications, quickly followed by the huge hike in university fees. With so-called top universities favouring applicants from the private sector, and the latter going on to dominate top jobs, Labour has its work cut out to restore some semblance of fairness to our society, but a start can certainly be made, cheaply, with education being returned, largely, to pre-Gove days.
     Labour`s presentation of all policies has seen remarkable improvement in recent months, but more care could be taken to prevent accusations of posturing and rhetoric, especially in the case of education. It was reported recently, and given widespread coverage in the press, that the Labour party`s view is that the "most important thing in education" is "delivering a world-class teacher in every classroom". Has this really been thought through sufficiently? The term, "world class teacher", is so nebulous as to have little meaning, but presumably it must demand years of experience of teaching as a requirement, which makes the aim of having one "in every classroom" impossible!  One the other hand, are experienced classroom teachers reaching the end of their careers likely to be able to devote the same energy and commitment as their younger colleagues? Teachers with immense subject expertise may lack the emotional intelligence required to deal with less-able pupils, and vice versa, which is why successful schools employ a collegiate approach and utilise team work, It`s also a reason to explain why education is not suited to Performance Related Pay, as the teacher with ten A*s in his/her examination class may not be the reason for the success of many of those pupils.  
      What education needs is well-trained, qualified teachers, who are given the resources necessary to maximise the potential of their pupils. Teachers need to work in the knowledge not only that a "level playing field" exists for all of their students, but that they themselves are appreciated by the society they serve, suitably rewarded for their efforts, and that, if inspected, they obtain fairness in judgement, and constructive advice if needed. They need to know, too, that the Secretary of State is aware of the problems involved in modern teaching, has the experience and expertise to solve them, and meets regularly with teaching union representatives to ensure solutions are practical, and further industrial action unnecessary. After a sixty hour working week, teachers do not expect or deserve media reports of ignorant politicians` criticisms.


    Ofsted chiefs and sacked Secretaries of State may gloat in having reduced teachers` morale, but disillusioned and over-worked teachers will not be working to maximum efficiency until politicians of all parties give them the respect and status they deserve; praise and encouragement do not only work to raise pupils` achievement levels!  

Tuesday 2 September 2014

Labour`s silver bullet?

With the excellent news that the next Labour government will "revoke the licences" of energy companies which "repeatedly act against the interests of customers", can we please assume that this is merely the tip of a very large iceberg? (Guardian,Labour plan to crack down on abuses by energy firms,21/08/14) After all, are not, in Caroline Flint`s words, "rip-off tactics and poor customer service" at the heart of the "predatory capitalism" which Labour leaders have criticised so vehemently in recent years? Banks, which appear to have mis-selling products and fixing interest rates as key profit-making policies, could certainly be warned of similar consequences, whilst companies intent on avoiding payment of the correct amount of tax, it could be argued, are not acting in the best interests of their customers either. Private landlords, exploiting the shortage of affordable homes to raise rents exponentially, should certainly be treated similarly, as should shops and supermarkets which fail to label food-products accurately. In fact, an extension of the principle to include the "interests of" employees, could mean Labour might have found its "silver bullet"! Why tinker, when it`s more sensible to transform?