Education, Education, Education…

Following on from the problems in Orpington last week, it seems even the government is losing patience with further education:

The government has banned the largest sponsor of academies from taking on new schools until it dramatically improve the ones it already runs, the Guardian has learned.

A welcome change to the usual tactic of shovelling even more money into the coffers regardless…

The United Learning Trust (ULT) was called into the office of the schools secretary, Ed Balls, last week and told it could not sponsor any more schools until it had driven up standards in the 17 it runs and the two due to launch next September.

It follows the spectacular failure of ULT's Sheffield academies, which have been plagued with behavioural problems, have struggled to improve results and were judged inadequate by Ofsted inspectors.

And who do the teachers blame for this state of affairs, I wonder?

Mary Bousted, the general secretary of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers, said: "The idea that a private provider will automatically solve deep-rooted generational problems in a school serving a poor area is simply untrue."

Ah, yes. Capitalism. And poverty.

‘Twas ever thus…

Clacton-On-Sea: The Plot Thickens…

So, a follow-up to this post last month:

A headteacher who held unruly pupils in a storeroom has been suspended.

Is anyone surprised?

… parents compared the punishment to 'something from the dark ages' and threatened to keep their children out of Coppins Green Primary School in Clacton- on-Sea, Essex, and picket the main gate unless he ended the policy.

Mr Livingstone refused to back down, insisting the measure was necessary to control 'extreme, disturbed children in a safe way'.

Not all parents, just a select few. But the report doesn’t make that distinction.

He has now been suspended, with another member of staff, pending an inquiry by Essex Police child protection officers and Essex county council. The punishment room has been closed.

The council yesterday claimed the move was a 'precautionary' measure, believed to refer to the parents' threats to take action.

But an insider said: 'No one was aware of this disciplinary procedure until last week and once it was brought to our attention there were concerns.'

Looking at the pictures of the complaining parents in the ‘Mail’ article, it’s hard not to agree with this commenter to that article:

chavtastic
- Jason, Norwich, 05/11/2009 13:26

As Mud in The Blood commented yesterday:

“What will be the result of this generation of kids - who will grow up believing that they can do pretty much what they like - hit the streets at 18? You can see the preview now in the town most evenings and its not getting to get any better folks. Just search for Clacton on you-tube, you'll see what I mean.”

I have, and it doesn’t make comfortable viewing…

Getting Them Young…

The parents of a six-year-old girl are outraged after their daughter was branded a racist for telling a black girl she had chocolate on her face.

Oh, where to start…

Sharona Gower had been eating chocolate mousse and was playing with a friend when she was chased by two 11-year-old girls.

When one of the older girls, who was black, said Sharona had chocolate on her face, the youngster replied: 'Well, you've got chocolate on yours.'

The older girl wiped her face and said: 'I've got nothing on my face, actually.'

The girl then complained to a teacher, who gave Sharona a telling off.

Two eleven year olds ganging up on a six year old – no cause for concern, then?

Nice set of priorities:

But when Michelle Gower, 34, went to collect her daughter from school, she was told the incident was 'racist' and that a complaint had been logged.

Now Mrs Gower and her husband Nick, 45, believe the incident at St Paul's School, in Rusthall, near Tunbridge Wells, Kent, was not properly investigated and has left their daughter 'distressed and confused'.

Regardless of how well I was investigated, it should never have arisen as a cause for concern in the first place.

Mr Gower, a dealer in antique collectibles, said: 'It was a bit of playground banter that has been taken as a sinister racial remark.

'This is a six-year-old who hasn't got an idea what racism is and has been labelled as a racist.' He added: 'This is political correctness gone absolutely crazy.'

A clearer case surely doesn’t exist?

Mrs Gower, who lives in Rusthall, said the teacher did not explain what 'logging' the incident meant.

She and her husband now fear the information may be kept on the school's database and haunt their daughter for the rest of her school career.

Mrs Gower, who also has a nine-year-old daughter, Jasmine, at the school, said she complained to the school's head, Carolyn Cohen, who took the side of the older girls.

Well, of course she did. She has her school’s record to think about, after all, and can’t afford any black marks…

A spokesman for St Paul's school said in a statement: 'This was a small incident, which has been blown out of all proportion. Children and parents were spoken to following an inappropriate comment.

'The matter was dealt with appropriately and the issue is closed.'

No. It wasn’t, actually. Far from it.

But by repeating that ‘the matter was dealt with appropriately’ they obviously hope to deflect criticism, much the same way as repeating that an Underground line has a ‘good service’ (not a ‘normal service’, as they used to) seeks to normalise the shoddy service that we know it really is…

Update: Sue at Muffled Vociferation picks up on this one too.

Modern ‘Relationships’…

As Tim notes, here’s another of those rare cases that we seem to hear quite a lot of, actually:

A young woman cried rape after 'fulfilling a fantasy' of having sex with two strangers, a court heard yesterday.

Chloe Dolton, 22, was 'bored' with her life and willingly engaged in the threesome after an argument with her boyfriend, it was alleged.

So far, so ordinary. For 2009, that is.

But then:

The prosecution said she fulfilled her fantasy at the end of an evening spent drinking alcohol, and later accused the two men of rape because she was ashamed of what she had done.

Dolton told police that Robert Joborski and Gregor Bukowski grabbed her as she walked home alone from a late-night party where she had played drinking games.

Which turned out to be an easily-proved lie:

The two men were later arrested but never charged. They said the sex had been consensual and that Dolton had approached them late at night in a 'chatty and friendly' manner.

Mr Bukowski said after they met he had put his arm around her and they started kissing before Dolton asked if he had a condom.

He then had sex with her although the prosecutor said the 'sex came to a premature end' when Dolton received a phone call from her live-in boyfriend.

She picked up the phone in the middle of drunken sex with a stranger..?

Classy lady!

Dolton denies perverting the course of justice by making the false rape claims.

Hard to see how she could expect to get away with it, but if convicted, it’ll be interesting, in the light of last week’s judgement, to see what she gets, won’t it?

I Know What We Need! An Insight Into ‘The Cultural Context’…

A senior police chief spoke out tonight about the worrying rise in gang rapes, as disturbing figures showed almost 100 attacks in the capital within the last year.

Brave of him…

New figures revealed there were 93 gang sex attacks in the financial year 2008-9, compared with 71 in 2003 to 2004.

Meanwhile the age of victims has fallen, with 64 per cent aged 19 or younger in the last financial year compared with 48 per cent in 1998-9.

Are they putting something in the water supply that turns the menfolk into ravenous beasts, then? Is this a UK-wide phenomenon?

Not quite:

Boroughs with the highest numbers of gang rapes include Lambeth, Croydon, Newham, Southwark, Westminster and Hackney.

How…surprising…

A meeting of the Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA), the Force's board of governors, heard levels of gang rape are linked to overall youth violence.

Again, how…surprising…

But what is surprising (actually, no, not really…) is the response from the police:

The Metropolitan Police has commissioned research from Dr Miranda Horvath, a lecturer in forensic psychology at the University of Surrey.

She is focusing on the 'cultural context' of gang rape and speaking to officers from forces across Britain and the United States.

Que..?

Still, that gives you clues to who is committing these crimes, doesn’t it?

And here’s another:

Jennette Arnold, who represents Hackney, Islington and Waltham Forest on the MPA, said some offenders are from cultural backgrounds where rape is more common.

She said the crime is seen by some as a 'weapon of war' and more work needs to be done to get into the minds of culprits.

Say what…?

I can’t wait for the inevitable ‘Guardian’ column to focus on that little comment.

But it seems Mrs Arnold has more room in her mouth for yet another foot:

Mrs Arnold said: 'It has got to be regretted that the increase in black victims has doubled.'

Words fail me…

And the men on the MPA are no better:

Chris Boothman, another member of the MPA, said he remembers gang rapes taking place when he was a teenager growing up in London.

Really? You must be a little young to be serving on the MPA – does your mummy know where you are, Chris?

He said it was the responsibility of other agencies to intervene among young men who may be involved in, or are aware of, gang rape.

Mr Boothman said: 'There is a massive piece of education to be done in schools and youth clubs in terms of unpicking an area of activity that groups of young men believe is acceptable.'

Yes, clearly what we need is more education. That’ll resolve this!

Even the real police are affecting an air of bafflement to avoid facing the obvious conclusions:

Cmdr Foy added: 'What I do not understand is what motivates people to commit this particular type of offence in these particular circumstances.

'It is often clear why someone would carry a gun or knife. What is the propensity to commit these criminal offences and how does it manifest itself'?'

Beats me, Cmdr Foy. But I’m sure your expensive lecturer will help you with that…

Nice Timing, Johann!

Pudgy lefty columnist Johann Hari in the ‘Indy’ considers the Tory Party to be ‘out of touch’ with voters:

The most common complaint against David Cameron is unfair and untrue. Critics keep charging that he has no policies – but in truth, now he has dropped his early attempt at kum-bay-ya Conservatism, Cameron is offering a fairly detailed prospectus. Unfortunately, it is of policies that will harm Britain.

I wasn’t aware that Call-Me-Dave had actually dropped the soft Conservatism, but no matter…

Yes, New Labour has often been dire – but the people who say nothing could be worse are learning the hard way that it ain't so. Poring through Cameron's policy documents, I could find only one instance where there would be a clear improvement: he would not build a new terminal at Heathrow. He deserves credit for that.

He deserves credit for supporting something you support? Fancy!

It is hard to escape the conclusion that Cameron and George Osborne can adopt policies that are so harmful towards ordinary people and the poor because they have never really known any. Barely a week passes without Osborne making a slip showing he is surreally out of touch.

Unfortunately for chubby-chops, just as he was penning his opus, a NuLab Minister was about to reclaim the ‘Out of Touch’ crown in spectacular fashion:

Women will be put off standing for Parliament unless they can hire a cleaner on their expenses, a female minister claimed yesterday.

The warning by Work and Pensions Minister Helen Goodman follows a call this week to ban cleaning expenses by Parliamentary sleaze watchdog Sir Christopher Kelly.
Miss Goodman, who earns £96,167, suggested this and other measures in the Kelly crackdown on MPs' expenses was sexist because women usually did the family cleaning.

Nice one, Helen!

That’ll advance the cause of women in politics, won’t it?

None So Blind…

…as those that will not see:

The familiar question asked of all MPs these days is: "Do you get it?" Well, yes, I do. I got it a long time ago; and, unlike colleagues who have been under the cosh – whether justified or not – I am therefore better placed to comment on Sir Christopher Kelly's review of expenses, which was launched today in parliament.

Brace yourselves…

I have to say that I'm mystified. Not at his general conclusions – driven as they are by public outcry and clamour for blood – but at what seems a misunderstanding of the nature of an MP's job.

Not really.

It’s just that we’ve cottoned on to the fact that you think your job is filling your boots at our expense.

To punish MPs because of the distance they live from London – those with fast train journeys quite close to London as well as those at some distance from both the capital or an appropriate airport – is perverse, but also dangerous to democracy.

Oh, noes!

Democracy is in danger because MPs won’t be able to claim housing allowance! Who knew democracy was so fragile?

So let us take the most bizarre result of Sir Christopher's robust recommendations. An MP stands on the platform with his or her partner, computer in hand, ready for several hours' essential work on the way down to – or back from – the Palace of Westminster. Alongside the MP is a familiar and formerly friendly senior civil servant (some of whom do actually spend time out of Whitehall).

The MP and the civil servant get into the first-class carriage, waving farewell to the MP's partner, who must travel in standard class (even though, with a bit of forward planning, a first-class ticket could have been purchased at a lower price than that of the standard-class ticket).

So…?

I’m not seeing any threat to democracy here.

During the journey, the civil servant talks about his imminent retirement, saying with some embarrassment how pleased he is with his large severance package and his pension – which is bigger than the MP's annual salary.

When they alight at the station, MP and spouse are reunited and the civil servant gives them a lift to Westminster. The civil servant goes off to buy a meal at public expense – before booking into the hotel, which, of course, is paid for. The MP goes off to negotiate with the whips so that they can avoid the mid-evening vote and return home to make something to eat.

You know what, Blunkett? You’re right. It is indeed an injustice that the civil servant gets to eat at the state’s expense and you don’t.

Let’s remove their rights to do so, to make it more ‘fair’. How’s that?

No, being an MP is not a desperately hard life, like going down the pit or working in the steelworks – with which I am all too familiar having been brought up in the city of Sheffield; and it certainly isn't badly paid compared with any of my constituents. But it is the kind of disrupted life in which appropriate support – rather than the kind of farcical arrangements described above – helps you to survive.

‘Appropriate support’ being duck houses, I guess?

But he’s getting to the meat of it now:

We wouldn't be here if we didn't love the cut and thrust of politics and we didn't want to make a difference. We wouldn't be in it if we didn't sufficiently enjoy it to put up with the undoubted inconvenience and disruption to normal life.

But increasingly, as we see from the announced retirements, many people – including those with experience – have simply had enough.

You’re not kidding, Blunkett!

The people who’ve ‘had enough’ are the general public, who are sick and tired of you bloated parasites sucking the life out of them and then whining when you are caught with your snouts buried so deeply in the trough you can hardly manage a squeal…

Kelly's recommendations are understandable on the back of the whole allowances shambles. But we must address the long-term future, not just the immediate reaction.

I don’t think the likes of you have a long term future…

I will be standing at the next general election for my party, and I hope to continue to be able to bring to bear a lifetime's experience; but I am able to do so because after the years I've spent inside and outside parliament, I have sufficient comfort, support systems and family and friends to see me through. Others are not so fortunate.

Boo hoo!

Well, I’m convinced by this little paean to the cause of MPs continuing to wallow in our money….NOT!

Don’t Panic, Folks! It Wasn’t The Legions Of The Supernatural Realm After All!

Commenter Ashtrayhead, on my last post on the riot in Orpington, noted that it had recently become a particularly vibrant, incident-packed place, according to the local paper.

Well, others noticed that too:

Police and community groups have sought to reassure the public after a spate of violent crimes in the borough.

Since the Halloween weekend, police have launched two separate murder investigations following the death of 36-year-old Moses Duvall in St Paul’s Cray and Richard Price, 23, who died in hospital following an assault in Bromley High Street.

Then on Tuesday afternoon (November 3) Orpington High Street was closed and several police officers left injured after college students ran amok.

Later that evening, pubs around Bromley town centre were closed for fear of more violence.

Whew! Busy, busy, busy…

Should the residents worry? Gosh, no!

Bromley police’s borough commander, Chief Superintendent Charles Griggs, has now moved to dispel any concerns about crime in the borough.

We can’t have concerns! (Note that he didn’t move to dispel crime…)

He said: "As a local resident I share the community's concerns about the violent incidents that have occurred over the last few days.

“However, I can assure people that our investigations into all the incidents will be thorough and our operational response will be both firm and proportionate.”

Why should anyone doubt that it wouldn’t be ‘proportionate’?

Chairman of the Bromley Community Engagement Forum Howard Clark added: “Although the incidents in the borough over the past few days have been of a concern, I must ask all residents and community members to remember Bromley remains a safe and pleasant place to live.

“There is not and has not been a sudden crime wave and you should not be discouraged to enjoy the many amenities the borough has to offer.

“It is business as usual and please support our local police’s efforts to ensure this continues.”

Who are you going to believe? Chairman of the Bromley Community Engagement Forum Howard Clark, or your lyin’ eyes?

This, however, is just a bizarre thing to say:

Talking about the deaths of Mr Price and Mr Duvall, deputy borough commander Detective Superintendent Martin Huxley said: "These were two totally unconnected and isolated incidents which need to be seen against a backdrop of a reduction in burglary, robbery and disorder over the Halloween period.

“These incidents were unrelated to the fact that it was Halloween”.

Say what…?

Was anyone suggesting it was, then?

Have the police issued a photofit of Dracula and the Wolfman? Is there an APB out on Baron Samedi?

Bromley remains one of the safest boroughs in London.”

Compared to what other boroughs?

Christina Patterson Skewers Tim Nicholson…

…with this quote:

” Tender-hearted Tim (the kind of man, one assumes, who has ten different bins in his kitchen and gives his children lovely wooden toys for Christmas)…”

Ouch!

Happy ‘Non-Fire’ Night, All…

There's something magical about the moment a bonfire roars into life on Guy Fawkes night.

But in Devon this evening there won't be any waiting around for the flames to take hold.

You won’t believe what they plan to do instead…

The blaze will be raging just as soon as the organisers press the on-button on their giant television.

Thousands will celebrate November 5 crowded around a screen showing film footage of fire after organisers gave up wrestling with health and safety rules to hold the real thing.

I can understand why they’d do this – as opposed to cancelling the event altogether – but words fail me…

They don’t fail Tim Worstall though:

” Time was, back when we were indeed a free nation, when we did not need permission for such things. It would not have occured to anyone that it was necessary: nor that anyone had the power to grant it.”

Indeed.

But that was then, and this is now:

Organisers at Ilfracombe Rugby Club say they were put off having the real thing by the 'mountain' of paperwork and regulations set by council bosses.

Our Big Boss in Brussels proposes, and our Little Boss, in town halls all across the land, disposes…

Officials at North Devon Council had cracked down on safety rules after yobs hurled fireworks on to a nearby football club bonfire five years ago. A spokesman for the council said the virtual bonfire did not fall under health and safety laws.

She added: 'If people are employed to provide a real bonfire or firework display then health and safety legislation will apply.'

Are you sure? Don’t you want to set a limit on how far away they need to sit from the screen to prevent eyestrain?

I probably shouldn’t give these people ideas, should I?