Thoughts, reflections, observations and rants...

How far does 'parliamentary privilege' extend?

2010-02-08T12:38:00.000-08:00

The whole saga concerning MPs expenses has taken a particularly interesting turn over the last few days. The Director of Public Prosecutions, a man with the curious name of Keir Starmer (I've only come across one other person with the name 'Keir' - his last name was Hardie and he created the Labour party. Anyway, I digress..), has announced that three Labour MPs and one Tory peer will be charged under the Theft Act for their dodgy expenses claims.

Over the weekend as leading politicians were saying that the issue can now finally be put to bed (presumably because justice is finally being seen to be done), a potential shitstorm began brewing after it was suggested that the Labour MPs may invoke something called 'parliamentary privilege' - this is part of the Bill of Rights which goes back to 1689 and followed in the wake of the Glorious Revolution (Protestant William and Mary replace Catholic James II in a bloodless coup blah blah blah...). It says "that the freedom of speech and debates or proceedings in Parliament ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of Parliament." Fair enough - parliament had fought a war earlier in the century against the power of the monarchy. The Bill guaranteed the supremacy of parliament and was responsible for reforming absolutism a full century before the French tore themselves apart over the issue.

The law stuck. In 1999 a committee was set up in order to clarify several issues (nice to know our government reviews legislation regularly), one of which was the idea of "proceedings in parliament". The conclusion was that the law protected "members of both houses from being subjected to any penalty… in any court for what they have said in the course of the proceedings in Parliament."

Now, as far as I see it, whilst the word 'proceedings' is still a nebulous concept and_could_include expenses claims, the letter of the law still clearly says that MPs are protected 'for what they have said'. I agree - MPs should be able to speak their mind in the House of Commons without fear of being prosecuted for libel. However, the whole crisis of expenses in grounded not in what MPs have said, but rather in what they have_done - namely (allegedly) stolen from the British taxpayer in making fraudulent claims. Claiming expenses is an everyday 'proceeding' in the work of an MP. So, as I see it, the 1689 Act only protects MPs for any comments they make in relation to expenses, not for the act of theft itself...am I right? What is the fuss about? These guys should go down!

Some of my legal friends may wish to comment - there is a particularly useful article here.

Some thoughts on Tory education policy

2010-02-02T13:53:00.000-08:00

In the preamble, the Tories make their usual jibes against ‘big government’ and the need to redistribute power. However, when you get into the detail they seem to be contradicting themselves. They talk about ‘more unannounced inspections’, the publication of all DCSF data and an even bigger rolling out of the Academies program, which will admittedly reduce the role of local authorities, but still I don’t think Labour or the Tories have got the right idea on interference with education. On the radio the other day a teacher with thirty years experience made an analogy with the health secretary – you wouldn’t get Andy Burnham going into an NHS hospital and telling consultants how to do their job. However, because nearly all of us have been through the state system there seems to be a constant desire to ‘tinker’ because experience gives them some sort of right. This goes all the way back to the creation of the National Curriculum by the Thatcher government in 1988. Since then the paperwork has come thick and fast; there is a constant need to be showing that you can ‘do the job’ by producing paper evidence. When I did my PGCE I handed in two ring binders worth of material at the end which probably had more of influence on whether I passed or failed than the actual classroom observations of my teaching. If someone sees you teaching properly you should be allowed to get on with it.

Cameron talks about using the Swedish model – in Sweden there is a much greater emphasis on letting the teacher get on with the job. The actual act of transmitting knowledge has been sidelined to such an extent by ‘bureaucracy’ that it’s seriously driving down the morale of teachers. The first thing that either party could do – but neither is committed as yet – is getting rid of Key Stage 2 SATs in Year 6. This would end the ‘teaching to the test’ culture that exists in Year 6 and actually allow the teachers to teach in the final year of primary school.

In Sweden, too, teachers are paid more and are held in much higher esteem. I think its something quite specific to the UK in that teachers are not considered to be as important or worthy as GPs, solicitors etc…which is surprising considering the vital role they play (how many Oxbridge graduates are teachers? Admittedly possibly more during a recession but there’s not the same ‘made it!’ success culture with teaching as there is in medicine and law). I like Cameron’s idea of making teaching ‘brazenly elitist’ but I’m sceptical, as are many teachers, that the brightest graduates make the best teachers. I think I’ve got good subject knowledge but that forms about 5% of the repertoire of a good teacher – something that I’m still learning. He also says that graduates on ITT programs will need at least a 2:2 in his government. I would be surprised if any university in the country accepts a student with a Third. Also, why is he offering to pay off the debts of maths and science graduates? Well, I suppose it’s because they’re core subjects but there’s no mention of the humanities. 70% of pupils quit history at 14 – surely that’s a problem if we’re trying to get kids thinking about ‘Britishness’, Citizenship, prejudice etc…

I support what he says about making it easier for teachers to use reasonable force to restrain pupils. The unions are in agreement that the law is currently on the side of the pupil – there have been countless careers ruined due to the false claims made by pupils of their teachers to the extent that many will refuse to take trips out of school or intervene in fights.

Finally, talking about education within the ‘theme’ of a broken society is extremely offensive to all those people who do brilliant work in schools. Any teacher reading this will be filled with doom and gloom. If the Tories want to extend Labour’s Academies surely they must have something good to say about them. Furthermore, they also claim that ‘safe classrooms, talented and specialist teachers, access to the best curriculum and exams’ are ‘currently only available to the well-off’ – what a load of bollocks! Now I admit that in poorer areas you tend to get poorer schools. That’s probably because the best teachers aren’t tempted by living in rough areas, I don’t know. However, my school is a comprehensive, some of the kids aren’t well off, some are in children’s homes, and they get a fantastic education from what is a ‘good’ school – according to Ofsted.

Televised debates

2009-12-23T08:32:00.000-08:00

The three main party leaders announced yesterday that before the general election (which most pundits believe will happen on May 6th 2010) three ninety minute TV debates will take place, with Sky the BBC and ITV each assuming hosting responsibilities. The academic Bill Jones, who works tirelessly in politics education, offers his comments here..

It is perhaps worth noting what this means for Prime Ministerial politics in the UK. Let's start with theory. The 'Prime Minister' was a role introduced in the 18th century to help the Monarch with his duties, i.e., Robert Walpole was appointed by George II because of the widening role of government. Indeed, even in the era of the 'fiscal military state' it was felt that a specialist full time role needed to be created.

During the democratic advances of the nineteenth century, the 'Prime Minister' (as he became known, only officially, in the 1880s - hitherto it had been a term of abuse and mocking. PMs had gone by the title 'First Lord of the Treasury', which is still emblazoned on the letterbox of Number 10) became primus inter pares or 'first among equals' as cabinet government developed. However, even as he assumed greater power and responsiblity in the 1900s, rising above his cabinet ministers and wielding the power to make or break a career, he was still merely the leader of the party with the most seats in the Commons. In theory that's all he or she is today...

However, in our media age things have taken on a slightly more Presidential edge. Presidents, as we know, are much more powerful than PMs because of their dual role as head of the government and the state. At a time when image had become more important and ideology less of a sticking point, our leaders have taken on this role with gusto. Thatcher made inroads in the later 1980s when her tenure became increasingly authoritarian (this 'taking power for granted' approach cost her dearly in November 1990). She behaved more like a Head of State than a lowly Prime Minister and earned the ill will of the sovereign, her party and the people as a result. New Labour's fascination with spin and image manipulation has seen Blair and Brown behave more like Presidents than Prime Ministers. Now, we are going to have 'Leader's Debates' in the run up to the election. What does this mean - effectively we are being asked to vote for individuals (like Americans voted for Obama or McCain in 2008). However, in reality we still vote for a local MP. Those less in tune with with how our democracy works may be fooled into thinking that they will vote for the face that most appeals to them on the television screen. The reality is that they will be voting for a candidate in their local area. Only if candidates of the same party are returned to Westminster in large numbers next year can any one of those three faces stand any chance of forming a government. That's how Westminster democracy has functioned for nearly 200 years.

Surely it would be more democratic for constituency MPs to engage and become more visible with local residents by holding many more town hall meetings rather than this 'sham democracy' that will appear on the TV screen. The broadcasters, surely, only approached the leaders with the idea because they were thinking about ratings and potential advertising revenue?

The implication that we are voting for an individual leader at election time has led to people suggesting that our politics is looking increasingly presidential despite that fact that we still elect all of our politicians on the basis of single member plurality. At the moment, theory does not match practice and whilst one could welcome these debates for putting the leaders on the spot and making them appear accountable, they are still rather misleading given the constitutional role of the PM.

Review of my year 2009

2009-12-23T07:22:00.000-08:00

As predicted, this year has been much more 'straightforward' than the previous 5 or 6, mainly due to the fact that I have carried on doing the same job. There has been no new university course starting, or no new job to get to grips with - in short, no major life changes, albeit for moving house and that's something that I intend to avoid in the new year. At the very least this should free up some time to travel a bit longer (and further afield) in 2010. After all, once I start my Masters the option of spending my free time galavanting may be seriously impeded.

The early part of this year ran relatively smoothly; the snow caused a minor crisis - I've never had to dump my car before, but the 'snow days' proved to be welcome addition to the school calender; day on, day off, day on, day off...I could live with that. Around this time I went on the first of two trips to Stoke Rochford Hall in Lincolnshire, in this instance to have a full debrief from the Israel trip. It was good seeing friends, all of whom were wearing many more clothes than last time I saw them (English Januarys are colder than Israeli Augusts so no smutty comments please). I recently went back for a weekend working with fellow HET educators. The snow wasn't there but I still have to navigate my way down the A1 which after dark is nothing short of suicidal..

At easter I went to Poland for the first of three trips this year (although this was the only one which was not Holocaust related). Myself, Christian, James and Rachel went to the northern port town of Gdansk, famous for being the spot where the Germans attacked in September 1939, as well as being where the Solidarity trade union first opposed communist rule in Poland in a movement which soon extended to the whole of the eastern bloc. Although a charming place, with a nice coastline and several lovely neighboring resorts (Gydnia, Sopot...) it's not a place that I would hurry back to.

Following a trip to Essex to see PGCE friends I settled into the final term of my first full year at Crompton House. The highlight of the term was a trip the the battlefields of northern France and Belgium. This was following very shortly afterwards (about 12 hours) by a trip to Krakow for my LFA educator training. These have been covered in a previous post so we'll leave it there.

Not much needs to be said either about my trip to the Balkans during two weeks in summer as they have been written about elsewhere. As I said earlier I am keen about a bigger trip taking place next summer; current options on the table are Morocco (by far the easiest), India (by far the hardest) and Australia (somehwere inbetween as I can stay with family). EasyJet fly to Morocco, as well as Israel - I could fly to the latter and visit the places that I didn't have the opportunity to because of the rush to get back in order to move house and start a new job in 2008. The one plan I have made is to visit Stockholm between 13-17th February 2010 and my next LFA takes place in late March.

Foreign jaunts, along with the part time Masters (application still pending) provide the most exciting prospects for the new year. In the meantime I am enjoying living in Manchester (although for perhaps the first time in my life I would not completely rule out London) and the job is very_slowly getting easier.

Finally, here are the names of the bands that I have seen this year (or can/care to remember):

Bloc Party
The Ting Tings
Bob Dylan
Green Day
Klaxons
Blur
Florence and the Machine (x2)
White Lies
Modest Mouse
Glasvegas (awful)
Bombay Bicyle Club
The Answering Machine
Franz Ferdinand (surprisingly, perhaps the best gig I've been to this year, improved no end by meeting the band afterwards and realising that they were thoroughly nice chaps)
The Travelling Band
The Temper Trap
Secret Machines (the loudest band I've seen this year, but in many ways the best)

The music industry holds its breath...Craig speaks..!

2009-12-02T12:51:00.000-08:00

So as we skip nonchalantly to the end of the ‘Noughties’, maybe it’s about time that I did what the cool people are doing, as well as Q and NME, amongst others, and “publish” my preferred ten albums of the decade. So, in no particular order:

1. The Strokes – Is This It (2000)
2. Arcade Fire – Funeral (2004)
3. Modest Mouse – Good News For People Who Love Bad News (2005)
4. Interpol – Turn On The Bright Lights (2002)
5. Arctic Monkeys – Whatever People Say I Am, That’s What I’m Not (2005)
6. The Killers – Hot Fuss (2005)
7. Bloc Party – Silent Alarm (2005)
8. Elbow – The Seldom Seen Kid (2007)
9. Radiohead – In Rainbows (2007)
10. Mogwai – Mr. Beast (2006)

I was listening to The Strokes’ first album on my way home from work today. ‘This Is It’ is one of those albums that hasn’t been on my Ipod for a long time, sits in a CD case on the shelf, and rarely makes it into CD player. However, when it does my love and respect for this album is renewed, every time. It’s easy to say that it sounds like all of the other ‘trendy indie’ that’s around at the moment, but the truth is, The Strokes reinvented the genre – at least in its current guise. It’s the earliest album on my list; released in the year 2000 when I, admittedly, was more interested in bands like Limp Bizkit, Linkin Park and The (reasonably more redeemable) Defrtones and System of a Down. At the height on ‘Nu-Metal’ it’s hard to remember what a refreshing sound The Strokes were producing.

Now there are thousands of bands who sound like The Strokes and, I think, music is much better in 2009 than it was in 2000. Part of this is also down to the Arctic Monkey’s debut. This is one of two albums that I say (and others will perhaps also say…) sums up the whole university experience for me. Between 2004 and 2007 it was ‘Whatever People Say I Am, That’s What I’m Not’ and ‘Hot Fuss’ by The Killers which were heard on pretty much every nightclub stereo in Manchester and elsewhere up and down the country. Now I realise that Mr. Brightside is an overplayed track, but that doesn’t get away from the fact that it is an awesome song. Furthermore, all of the other songs on the album, some of which I’ve seldom heard on anything other than my Ipod, are incredibly good.

“Funeral” by the Arcade Fire is perhaps one of the most mesmerising albums that I have ever heard. Radiohead produced an album that rivals OK Computer in its scope and ambition and “The Seldom Seen Kid” rightly wrested the Mercury Music Prize from the soon-to-be ‘has beens’ who would sooner rely on image than produce anything of real musical integrity.

Modest Mouse have slowly become my favourite band this year. I have been working my way through their back catalogue these past few months and will be seeing them live at the Manchester Ritz next month. They are one of four US bands in my selection of ten. One is Canadian and five are British. This goes against the argument of an American friend who claims that the 1990s were the decade of the British band, whilst the ‘Noughties’ have been the decade of US music. To some extent I agree with him, however considering the fact that ‘Hot Fuss’ cites New Order as a major influence, ‘Turn on the Bright Lights’ would not have appeared had it not been for a reasonably famous late 1970s Manchester band called Joy Division and ‘Good News For People Who Love Bad News’ follows in the best traditions of British indie music, the claim becomes hard to sustain. All are truly great albums, produced by American artists; however, in my opinion, ‘This Is It’ is the only true, great ‘American album’.

Bloc Party deserve a mention; whilst their subsequent albums have been rather disappointing, ‘Silent Alarm’ is a great post-punk album with a bouncy indie twist. ‘Turn on the Bright Lights’ is a brilliantly dark and disturbing album and Mr. Beast proves that you don’t have to sing over the tracks in order to make a truly great record.

I don’t think this list is too pretentious! All of the albums you’ll recognise, people play them a lot – but that’s because they’re good, really good.

The Sun. Film. Masters degrees

2009-11-16T13:52:00.000-08:00

I thought I’d start by weighing in on the ‘Jacqui Janes’ saga of last week. After all, I love nothing more than bashing The Sun. The background to this story is the death of Mrs. Janes’ son, Jamie, who was killed in Afghanistan recently. Since the Falklands War, Prime Ministers have followed the convention of writing individually to the families of the bereaved. This is understandable given the fact that we no longer seem to fight wars where inordinate numbers of troops are killed. Don’t get me wrong, a single death is one too many; however, during wars past when thousands have perished, it has been customary for impersonal telegrams delivered by the postman to convey the awful news. The MOD can today however contact individual families literally hours after a soldier has died, and this is usually done in the form of a chaplain and a military officer who visit the bereaved family in person. Letters from the PM follow soon afterwards.

Brown will have been sitting at his desk on many an evening these past few months writing letters to the families of the 230+ service personnel who have received news of the ultimate sacrifice. These letters are handwritten which can’t be easy for a man who is blind in one eye and, rumour has it, is slowly going blind in the other. Therefore, imagine my surprise (or lack of, they do stoop pretty low!) when The Sun used the memory of a dead soldier to exploit a bereaved mother in order to smear Gordon Brown. It must not be forgotten that the paper changed its allegiance to the Conservatives about a month ago. Imagine their glee when an understandably upset Mrs. Janes contacted them about the hastily scrawled letter. I can just see the exchange – “Well that’s awful about the poor soldier Mrs. Janes, but…erm…IMAGINE how we can use this to really nail Brown. May we publish your letter?’ Using a dead solider as a way to score cheap political points is indefensible, and that’s all I have to say on the matter.

I was saddened today to hear of the death of Edward Woodward. To many, including me, he is most famous for his portrayal of the high Anglican policeman sent to a remote Scottish island in the film ‘The Wicker Man’. Made in 1973, it has always set the standard for British horror films. With little or no use of blood and a building tension, the film seems to tap into our greatest fears about paganism, the occult and sheer helplessness. I’ve often watched the end of the film and wished, or hoped, that the Sgt. would be rescued by the authorities; I’ve thought similar thoughts when watching Steve McQueen vault barbed-wire fences but that’s by the by... All in all, it’s one of the best films this country has ever produced, helped along by a mesmerising performance by the late Woodward and shocking in terms of its imagery and power of suggestion. In fact, I may just go and watch it this week.

In terms of film, my subscription to Lovefilm is coming along nicely. Recently I’ve watch Amelie, Notes on s Scandal, The Shipping News, Hot Fuzz and Milk. Waiting on my desk is Katyn, a film about the Soviet slaughter of Polish troops in the eastern part of the country in 1940. This act of mass murder was covered up once the Poles and Russians became ‘allies’ after 1941 and has only recently, through testimony, been fully explained and accounted for (although the Russians have not necessarily been gushing in their apologies).

Whilst we’re on the subject of genocide and mass murder, my Masters application for Holocaust Studies has finally been sent to the University of Manchester. It’s all feeling very real now. I went into the University over half term to discuss the practicalities of studying for the course part time whilst still remaining in a full time job. The prospects look good; over two years I can expect to be in university no more than three hours a week and the tiny number of students on the course (there are currently five) means that seminars are planned to times that suit everyone. My application was sent electronically the other day. Now I need to wait to see whether I have been successful before I can apply to the various Jewish organisations (kindly researched by HET) for funding. The university should also be able to help there too. Watch this space.

Question Time

2009-10-20T08:18:00.001-07:00

Dear David,

I support you in the BBC's decision to accept Nick Griffin on to Question Time. Only in a public forum where sensible debate is held can we hope to destroy the hate-filled claims of the BNP.

I support neither Labour nor the Conservatives. Yet I know that both parties have a range of talented parliamentarians who, through the subtlety of their argument, will be able to rip into the BNP's message more effectively than the bottles thrown by the UAF hope to achieve.

(In this case, Baroness Warsi and Jack Straw are good choices - however I would like to see Bob Marshall Andrews because he'd turn Griffin into mincemeat!)

The BNP now have European seats. They need to be dealt with head on - on our terms (sensible debate), rather than theirs (violence and protests - doesn't this feed their propaganda machine?). My passionate hope it that Griffin and his party are made to look like a bunch of fools on Question Time. And I think they will be. Their arguments rest on suspicion and lies, and this is no substitute for what is right and good.

If we defeat them honestly with WORDS Griffin et al can no longer claim that they are the victim of a Liberal Conspiracy - rather, he will be a victim of the TRUTH! Surely the party will then lose its raison d’etre.

At present I do not believe that the Unite Against Fascism gets to the shaky heart of the BNP's message. Yes, protests are effective but to what extent do they challenge the party's policies? This should be very easy to do on television.

Mug the BNP of their right to free speech and we may have no reason to distrust them. Allow them to speak, and in the words of JS Mill, 'truth will prevail'.

'I may not agree with what you have to say but I will fight to the death for your right to say it'
Voltaire

Craig Owen
Writing in relation to a request made by ‘Hope not Hate’
http://www.hopenothate.org.uk/index.php

PS - I really do hope you send this guys

Vote for a Change (rather than moan about the Tories?)

2009-10-04T13:49:00.000-07:00

Today I went to a meeting chaired by ‘Vote for a Change’ at the Friend’s Meeting House in Manchester; a mere stones throw away from the Tory party conference at the G-Mex. I first came across this group when my 6th formers hijacked a protest organised by themselves and Peter Tatchell on College Green in Westminster. The group has two aims – 1. To replace the ‘first past the post’ electoral system with one that is more democratic, accountable and breaks apart the majoritarianism of British politics, and 2. Bring about a revolution in British politics in the wake of the expenses scandal. Delegates want to see an end to the so-called ‘Westminster Gravy Train’ and a return to real MP accountability.

Daniel Hannan, for example, argued that at the moment MPs in safe seats (he calls them “modern ‘pocket boroughs’”) are accountable only to whips who can have them deselected at election time should they fail to ‘toe the party line’. He argued for the abolition of safe seats (i.e., other PPCs can challenge you to your candidature) and for Primaries (recently trailed by the Tories in Totnes) to be rolled out across the country.

The associate editor of the New Statesman, whose name I forget, argued vociferously against Primaries by pointing out that the Totnes experiment cost £38,000, a sum that the Tory party isn’t likely to want to spend again. He also poured cold water on any hopes of the Conservative party cleaning up politics if and when they are elected. He said that the party came out worst from the expenses scandal and Cameron meted out punishments according to individuals’ usefulness to the ‘government in waiting’. In other words, backbenchers like Steen were forced to fall on their sword whilst not one member of the front bench was disciplined. Only Alan Duncan lost his job when he was recorded saying that MPs were forced to live on rations. Needless to say, Duncan is a millionaire.

Martin Bell, another speaker in this incredibly diverse bank of speakers (I can’t imagine that these people have all been in the same room together ever before) said that Labour won in 1997 off the back of Tory sleaze and have spent the best part of the last 12 years managing to replicate many of the Tory misdeeds. John Strafford holds a role within the Chairmanship of the Tory Party (I can’t remember which) and he actually impressed me most. He offered a convincing and accurate argument against the FPTP (when many in his own party are happy to keep it as it is – after all, it will probably return them to government next year) and seemed upbeat about the prospects for change, at least until Mr. Hassan (New Statesman) ‘urinated on his bonfire’. Lewis Baston of the Electoral Reform Society said that bribery and disenchantment were nothing new in politics, the only difference was that today the two parties have a lot less support that they used to enjoy – nevertheless, power still swaps between these two elites in our democratically questionable majoritarian system.

Polly Toynbee chaired proceedings. She did a brilliant job of appearing impartial despite the musings of Daniel Hannan, Conservative MEP and darling of the American right wing media for his statements that he ‘wouldn’t wish the NHS on anyone’. I hadn’t expected this to come up – we were having a debate about political renewal after all, and it seemed as though Hannan was reasonably articulate in his observations of our political system and offered a few decent arguments, albeit without much support from the left leaning members of the panel, Hassan, Toynbee et al.

And then something happened which made me think ‘right, Labour have really lost the election’. A member of Manchester Young Labour sitting behind me (who I’d recognised from our meeting with the Health Secretary) asked when proceedings were opened up to the floor if there’s any real choice next year when members of one party come out with spurious comments such as Hannan’s on the NHS. I had a problem with this for several reasons:

1. Hannan’s recent notoriety is down to his irksome views on national health, However, that’s not why he was there – he was talking about changing the political system and was making some reasonably decent points (for a hard right Tory MEP)
2. The girl who asked the question showed her disdain for Hannan by playing with her phone and not looking up when she was asking the question and during his answer.

MYL clearly came to the meeting with the intention of scoring some political points despite the fact that ‘Vote for a Change’ had aimed to have a frank and nonpartisan discussion about our broken political system. One of the things that has persuaded me that active involvement in the Labour party is perhaps ‘not my thing’ is that I’m getting increasingly pissed off by those annoying minor apparatchiks who are so wedded to the party, so blindly faithful to everything it stands for that they end up criticising everyone but themselves. What the young lady hoped to achieve by asking an off topic question at a public meeting is open to debate. Labour needs to question its own record – it has been in power for 12 years now. There are still those who prefix every sentence with ‘Before 1997…’ We need to start talking about ‘Since 1997…’ Numerous commentators, including Toynbee, argue that Labour is crap at talking about its successes. Even the Spectator is so confident of a Tory victory that it has started to talk about the good stuff that Blair did. However, to return to this little stunt in the Friend’s Meeting House, it represented in microcosmic form everything that has become so pathetic about the Labour party. It is tantamount to a KO’d boxer blithely still trying to throw limp wristed punches when flat on his back on the canvas because he has to be seen to be still putting up a fight. It was ill-informed, pointless and depressing to hear for people like me who like to think that there is life in the old dog yet. Labour needs a cleansing period out of office, that’s when groups like MYL will really come into its own and, I hope, find the ability to attack the Tories on less superficial lines.

That being said, the Vote for a Change meeting was interesting and informative. Conservative party conference in Manchester? Next Ethiopia will be hosting Live Aid for us….

Why I won't lose sleep over The Sun's political alliegence

2009-10-01T04:14:00.000-07:00

The Sun is like a chameleon. Just like this creature changes its colours to match surroundings, this 'news'paper changes its stripes to match the political landscape. Indeed, whatever claim that the paper had in being able to dictate public opinion has now clearly gone. Today it merely follows in the wake of the changing tide, dutifully preaching to an already converted majority.

In 1992, The Sun famously printed the headline 'If this man [Kinnock] is elected tomorrow, will the last person to leave Britain please turn off the light?' In 1997, they switched sides with the notably less imaginative headline 'The Sun backs Blair!' and yesterday it claimed that 'Labour's lost us'. The paper loves to back a winner, in fact I'm sure that it's written in the paper's rule book that it has to pick the right time before any election when the outcome can be reasonably predicted to choose its party. Incredibly unprincipled I know, but this is a paper which is blatantly homophobic, ruins lives by referring to people as 'paedos' before they are convicted of any offence and contributes no end to Islamophobia and other types of xenophobia. You've got to ask yourself why any well meaning party would want to support of this toilet paper?

For a long time the answer has been clear. The Murdoch-owned paper is one of Britain's most read dailies. Its simple language makes it accesible to the almost anyone (I think the required reading age is about 7) and, yes, it has an uncanny abiity to predict election winners. I wonder why that is! Unfortunately for the Sun, however, its ability to control public opinion is on the wane. The age of 24 hour news coverage and the internet has seriously reduced its impact. No well meaning individual would go to their website for their daily dose of news. All newspapers are suffering, however it seems that The Sun's illiberal, bawdy and tawdry sensations are particularly out of kilter with the modern consensus. The internet has given us the ability to blog about issues such as this. The Sun no longer controls the agenda or seems to sum up the public mood (as it did with 'Gotcha' http://barorny.com/archives/gotcha1.jpg), it trails in its wake.

Yesterday, Cabinet members were rightfully angry, not about the switch, but rather The Sun's cruel timing. It took the limelight from a buoyant and promising Labour conference. That's all the paper can do nowadays - pick the right time. After all, it has lost its 'voice of the nation' moniker. By getting in bed with an old Etonian it has proved itself to be one of society's biggest hypocrites. Watch out Dave, give it a few years and you'll be splashed across the front page when the party has had enough of you - or smells another winner...it never fails to back one you know!

Trip to Westminster

2009-09-20T03:16:00.001-07:00

So on Friday 18th September, most of the Year 12 G&P cohort, along with a few Year 13s, travelled down to London for a trip round Westminster. Mr. Owen was saved from having a panic attack when everyone arrived at Piccadilly in plenty of time, we boarded the Virgin train and had a smooth ride. Even the Underground was trouble free. The trip leader was perplexed, things were not supposed to be this straightforward. So, as I gingerly escorted the pupils through the Westminster crowds, I tentatively entertained the idea that everything would pass off without a hitch.

I think it did. In fact I think I speak for everyone in saying that we had a hugely enjoyable and successful day. Even the sun shone down on us. After being denied entry to Westminster Abbey for free (should such places be free as a public right? Discuss) we found ourselves joining Peter Tatchell and a group of electoral reform campaigners. This certainly wasn't in the trip leader's plan. 'Vote for a change' are a recently created pressure group, a result I suspect of this period of so-called 'broken politics' following the expenses scandal. They basically want to see the end of FPTP and the creation of a fairer voting system. One of the alternatives being thrown around at the moment is the Single Transferable Vote (STV), the details of which I wont't go into here, needless to say that it is fairer.

With Year 12 studying Pressure Groups later this year and Year 13 'steeped in it', thanks to Mr. Owen's lessons (!) this was certainly exciting stuff. The pupil's enthusiasm soon got the better of them and before the trip leader could step in, placards were being waved and slogans chanted. It was a fantastic photo opportunity and a journalistic coup for the photographers and promo people wandering round the green. Indeed as I returned home in the evening I was able to find the photos published on the internet. It was a very surreal experience; nevertheless it was one that contributed to the enjoyment of the day no end.

After our foray into political remonstrating we entered Portcullis House for the start of our package. It began with 45 minutes in a Select Committee room. Pupils used 'Quizdom' to vote on and debate a range of issues. After this we had a question and answer session with Neil Gerrard MP. In my opinion, for someone about to leave Parliament and able to 'say what he wanted', he was still incredibly guarded and dry. On several occasions he didn't actually answer the question but did that thing which politicians do best - read from the well-versed song script. I asked him if he was a socialist. He said 'I hope so' (there seems to be an element of doubt there...) and proceeded to argue that he 'wasn't New Labour'. He also failed to sing the praises of FPTP when challenged on electoral reform, preferring instead to rubbish the alternatives. Nevermind, at least the pupils gained an insight into a 'typical' politician.

After this we had our tour. I think for all of us this was the highlight of the day. Both Houses, Westminster Hall, the works. The Houses were, as I expected them to be, small - much smaller than you would expect from seeing them on television. Parliamentary and elected privilege meant that we weren't allowed to sit down. Our guide Emily was knowledgeable and informative - I learned a thing or two, including the fact that UKIP do not have an MP, something that I had automatically assumed up till now!

Following our visit we walked down Whitehall and took in Downing Street, Horse Guards (cue poses with Guards soldiers - poor guys) and Buckingham Palace (again, rather smaller in real life!) This took us in the direction of the Victoria tube. So after Mr. Clayton nearly met a sticky end at the hands of a white van man we caught the now much busier underground back up to Euston and then went home.

Overall, a successful day. The pupils were very lucky to visit a place like this so early into their studies. It was a first for me - Politics degree notwithstanding.

History repeating itself?

2009-09-13T13:16:00.001-07:00

Another contribution to my 6th Form blog (published elsewhere)

To say that History repeats itself is the biggest cliche in the book - of course it does. In fact, the repetition of history is so self evident that my mind scarecely registers this circular motion when I see murders being committed in the name of a religion (again), intolerance (again), political ideologies becoming mainstream (again), blue being the 'in' colour this season (again), music styles being repeated (again) and so on. However, one story in this weekend's news did catch my attention.

Have a look at the following article http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep/13/right-wing-groups-palestinian-march Now, we're all familiar with the BNP and their racist message. However, a new disturbing racist organisation has emerged - the English Defence League. This 'patriotic' association, like its partners in SIOE (Stop the Islamification of Europe) have been causing riots and disturbances in areas with a high Muslim population, or, as the report says, where various Islamic events and marches have been taking place.

As disturbing as this is, it is not without precedent. In the 1930s a new political party was formed called the British Union of Facists. Like now, the country was in a deep recession - some economists would say that it was a depression. However, the country was not supposedly 'swamped' with Muslims back then. Just like in Hitler's Germany it was the Jews who were targeted. In the so-called 'Battle of Cable Street' in London in 1936, 'Blackshirts' (Fascists), anti-Fascist protestors and police clashed. Is history repeating itself at the moment. The Spectator would not have us believe so http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/5324466/john-denhams-mosleycomparison-merely-sensationalises-racetensions.thtml However, to discount the admittedly minor problems caused by the EDL runs the risk of falling into another of the 'traps' of History. The BUF started as a small organisation too - it was only WW2 which saw it being disbanded. The BNP were written off until they won 2 seats in the North West and Yorkshire European elections. The EDL may be small, however their tactics are echoed in History, and just as History shows, far right hate groups have the power, means and the message to increase their scope and success. Watch this space.

The US vs. The NHS

2009-08-23T14:49:00.000-07:00

N.B. Originally written for my A-Level politics groups

You may have been aware of a furore over health care that has taken place in America over the summer. The political battles have been very insightful for students of AS and A2 politics. Below, I will try to outline some of the main points.

At the moment, healthcare in America is funded mainly by private insurance companies. In other words, it is not free. In order to cover the costs of a stay in hospital Americans need to purchase insurance with one of the many big insurance conglomerates such as AETNA or AmeriHealth - see http://www.amerihealth.com/. Insurance, however, is not cheap and 47 million Americans go without, leaving them at risk if they develop health problems. In the 1960s the American government stepped in, creating "Medicare" and "Medicaid" - to help retirees and the destitute (you'll have to check which is which). However, these by no means provide the kind of universal health care that the likes of Clinton and Obama have campaigned for.

When Bill Clinton became President in 1992 he tried to pass a bill guaranteeing "Universal Health Care". It failed, and now Obama is trying for a second time. Basically what it means is that a "National" Health Service along the lines of the British and Canadian model will be created. This will guarantee health care for those currently too poor to pay for insurance. Ideologically it recognises that health care is a right, not a privilege of the rich. Also, by covering ALL Americans, it carries rather a lot of moral clout. In the world's richest country, the only superpower left, many people are dying needlessly. Charities originally set up to help third world patients treat Americans in converted sports stadiums. The system at present seems wholly unworkable and unethical. Why, then, is it coming up against so much opposition?

There are three reasons for this:

1. Money. The Health Insurance Companies make a lot of money. It the government suddenly dipped its hands in its (deep) pockets and guaranteed health insurance for all Americans these companies would face a serious drop in profits. They therefore use their influence to flood Washington with lobbyists who get politicians to block healthcare reform in return for financial help at election time. It's a neat situation which keeps everyone happy - the incumbents are re-elected due to well financed campaigns; health reform stays off the statute book. Given this state of affairs, the White House appears incredibly isolated.

2. Ideology. This is perhaps even more important; Americans are incredibly fearful of the growing influence of the state on ordinary people's lives. They see government intervention as the preserve of the failed social democratic countries of C20th Europe. Some right wingers even go as far as to say that universal health care is one small step on the slippery slope towards communism. Amercians are fiercely conservative, they don't like change and they don't like the idea that the government is interfering in their lives - which, as they see it is a waste of money and personnel.

3. Fear. Unfortunately, this is the ugly side of American politics. In order to stop this so-called 'communist' system being passed, some Republicans and opponents have said that:

-National Health Care is a breeding ground for terrorism - they cite the failed Glasgow airport terrorist attack (perpetrated by two NHS doctors) as an example.
-Elderly or sick patients would face government "death boards" where bureaucrats decide whether you should live or die (assuming than continued care would be at too great a cost to the state)
-Obama and his supporters are socialists (a dirty word in America ever since the days of Cold War hysteria), a communist, a fascist, a Hitler-lover etc...

Worryingly, some even say that health care is not a fundamental privilege for anyone but can be used a tool of "social cleansing" - the worthless sections of society can be allowed to die off, thus improving the collective 'lot' of the 'good' sections of society.

Conservatives have also cited the NHS as symbol of everything that is wrong with government controlled health care. It is claimed that death boards exist, hospitals are dirty, primitive and if you get cancer "then you're a gonner". American news networks have interviewed British conservatives who support their views, most notably the MEP Daniel Hannan who has said that he 'wouldn't wish the NHS on anybody': http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FiSPRkq28iU

This has let to an almost patriotic outpouring of support for the NHS in the UK this summer. The Labour Party has jumped on Hannan's remarks as symptomatic of the ambivalence felt by the Opposition for Britain's most cherished national institution. David Cameron has dismissed Hannan's remarks as "eccentric" and pledged his party's support behind the NHS. Nevertheless, the Labour Party are bound to claim again and again before next year's election that the NHS will not be safe under a Conservative government: http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/2009/08/18/labour-keep-up-nhs-attacks-on-tories/. This is quite clearly a piece of political opportunism by Labour. Everyone knows that the NHS is safe with either party - as Tony Benn puts it, if it were disbanded "there would be a revolution". The bigger problem is how to reform a system which, no matter how much you love it (as Brown's twitter on 'welovethenhs' contends), still provides a number of challenges to a government no matter its colours. This is where the real dividing lines will be drawn before the next election.

In the meantime, American Universal Healthcare seems to be stalling. Town Hall meetings are descending into shouting matches, Democratic congressmen are hiring bodyguards to protect themselves during the heated exchanges and Obama has had to go on TV telling Americans that the government will not kill the extremely ill (as Hitler's euthenasia programme of the late 30s did...this was suggested by one woman at a meeting here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYlZiWK2Iy8). In short, this is a battle for the very soul of America and it reflects the divided nature of this young democracy. If healthcare passes, and I doubt it, this will mean more than the extension of insurance to the needy - it will be a sea-change in American politcs. But then again, this country elected a black man less than a year ago. Anything is possible...

Some thoughts on tourism...

2009-08-13T12:57:00.000-07:00

Yesterday morning ı got up early in order to make my way down to Sultanhamet before the crowds so that I could go get into the Aya Sofıa and the Blue Mosque. Both were, as expected, beautiful but were spoıled by tourists. I recognise that İ am one myself and that by going to such places İ am contributing one iota to the commotion. Nevertheless, İ still feel that İ am not 'one of them'...

The way İ see ıt, tourism today has reduced once important and hugely important and influential sıtes to public 'frıpperies'. The advent of the digital camera means that we can snap away without a second thought or glance at what we're actually taking a picture of. Gone are the days when we had only 36 exposures and had to pick and choose carefully.

But do people actually know they're taking photos of? Or do they snap away because ıt 'looks nıce'? Posing is something else that bothers me. By posing you are ıdentıfying yourself wıth an object/paıntıng/buıldıng..whatever. You may share an ımage wıth a 10th century mosaıc of the Vırgın Mary wıth Christ, but what point is beıng made - 'look Frank, I was actually here..!' Does thıs need proving? Cynıcal. It provıdes a nıce background to a pıcture of Bob and Phıl? I'm sorry mate but a 10th century mosaıc deserves to be ın the foreground. Get the fuck out of my pıcture!

Photography ın the Blue Mosque (and in any place of worshıp) bothers me (lıke most thıngs? Another rant..) If you lıke the look of the place, buy postcards. They're probably better qualıty anyway. You're measly flash ıs not goıng to fıll the dome of the Aya Sofıa. What ıs partıcularly dıstressıng about photography ın the mosque ıs that ıt ıs stıll a place of worshıp (as well as a tourıst productıon lıne). Tourısts are allowed ın only between prayers..however, there are people prayıng here all the tıme. The thought of someone takıng photos of thıs sacred act ıs pretty sıckenıng - 'Look ^^generıc mate/relatıon from home^^, a real Muslım prayıng ın a real mosque.' WTF! The crowds move through one door and out of the other - lıke a tourıst productıon lıne..and stıll yet the quıet serentıy of the Blue Mosque ıs unmoved. It's almost as ıf the Gods or the buıldıng ıtself are lookıng down wıth a quıet aır of dısapproval or bewılderment at the waterıng down of thıs sacred place. Sure, let us foreıgners and tourıst see ıt. However, we should behave ın a way that shows gratıtude that these places are opened to us ın the fırst place. Photos I don't have a problem wıth, as long as they are taken at the rıght tıme and place. On the beach, at the restaurant, of a hugely ımpressıve buıldıng - not of you ın front of a mosaıc wıth a belıever prayıng ın the background.

As İ knelt down ın the Blue Mosque among the hordes I trıed to ımagıne what the place would be lıke wıthout people such as myself - to tap ınto the 'quıet serentıy' ıf you wıll. Then I heard 'so ıs thıs stıll a ral Mosque mom?' Shame.

A visit to a Turkish Hamam

2009-08-12T06:45:00.000-07:00

İf you go to the right sort of place (i.e., neither a tourist trap, nor a place where men go to cruise - unless you're gay in which case go crazy..), a visit to a Turkish Hamam can be a very invigorating experience. The place İ went to was called Park Hamam and was in Sultanhamet in the centre of İstanbul. For the princely sum of 60TRL (about 25 quıd) you get the works...

First of all you are escorted to a camekan where you undress - all clothes are left ın here, the door ıs locked and you keep the key to your belongıngs. Although ın some hamams women can bathe nude, the men's sectıon is strıctly modest...blokes wear a pestemal (a cloth round the waste) and rubber cloggs. You then get taken ınto a steam room or a hararet where you sweat for a whıle.

After about ten mınutes a man comes ın to wash you. He douses you wıth water and scrubs you wıth a kese - a course mıtten whıch removes most of the muck that showers never quıte manage - ıf you enter thınkıng that you're already reasonably clean then ıt's a bıt of a surprıse. After thıs you lıe down on a belly stone - called a gobektası and the washıng begıns.

Nothıng quıte prepares you for thıs experıence. I was expectıng a gentle soapıng down - what I got left me feelıng that I'd been abused ın some way - ın soapıng you up the man squeezes pretty much every muscle, stretches every sınew and beats every ınch of your skın. The massage whıch followed was sımılar, albeıt perhaps slıghtly less paınful (apart from the bıt when the man seemed to squeeze to death every dısc ın my spınal column)

Nevertheless, after an apple tea, feelıng some 25 quıd lıghter, I dıd come out of the hamam feelıng around 5 years younger. Thıs made me wonder why Turkısh men look so unhealthy, and then I saw some kebap on a skewer and I stopped wonderıng.

Yesterday I went for a haırcut and a shave - the former was pretty standard. The latter ınvolved clıppıng nose and eyebrow haır and sıngeıng 'ear haır' wıth a lıghter. I thınk that I'm goıng to return from Turkey a new man, or a least one who has enjoyed mezes and kebaps enough to warrant a few laps round Chorlton park. C'est la vıe.

In the Ottoman lands..

2009-08-07T08:23:00.000-07:00

I am currently halfway though my trip around the old Ottoman Empire, or for those of you whose heads are not filled with History junk, Romania, Bulgaria and Turkey.

It all started a week ago when I landed in Bucharest. Fresh from a dizzying experience in London in which I got lost on my way to the British museum, I arrived at a European capital that could not be more different to our own. Stray dogs, crumbling buildings and abandoned cars will be my defining memory. Although the place had an odd, quirky charm about it, I cannot help thinking that if the Prime Minister himself has to park amongst overgrown weeds and broken concrete (as seems to be the case at the People's Palace), then the country has some way to go. Like Sarajevo, this will be an interesting destination to visit in 10-15 years.

Then it was over into Bulgaria and the charming medieval town of Veliko Tarnovo. This place was literally bursting at the seams with history. Nevertheless, I opted for a tour of the churches and monasteries of the local area - one of which - Ivanovo - is on the UNESCO list. I travelled with an Australian girl called Lucy and a Dutch brother and sister. Before I left Veliko I went to the top of the Tsaverets Fortress - a great symbol of Bulgarian pride and nationalism.

I then intended to go to Varna, but the complicated nature of the cyrillic alphabet dictated that I would end up in Sofia. The only good thing I can say about this is that I can tick off another European capital city. It was much nicer than Bucharest, though.

And now here I am in Plovdiv, 1 week into my trip and still with a week to go. This place boasts a Roman ampitheatre that was only discovered after a freak landslide in 1972. Tomorrow I head for Burgas for a few lazy days by the beach in preparation for an onslaught of the senses - Istanbul will hopefully be the highlight of my travels this year. I can hardly hide my excitement.

I will write at greater length soon!

Back..

2009-07-20T09:35:00.000-07:00

So here I am, back in the UK after a hectic couple of weeks. It all started a few Tuesdays back. After a full day of teaching I went home, only to return to school at 12 midnight to meet 64 children a 6 colleagues for a trip down to Dover and then onwards to the battlefields of WW1.

We travelled through the night, stealing bits of sleep here and there. After a trouble free crossing we went to the 'Trench of Death' in Belgium. I had been told that I'd be feeling reasonably OK despite being up all night and this was pretty much true. I was on working on adrenaline and the repetitive counting of kids and trench exploration meant that tirednes ddin't catch up with me until about 10. I was even happy to have a few beers that evening in the main square in Ypres. The reconstruction has been immaculate (comparisons could be drawn with Warsaw - my residence over last weekend).

So we visited 'the usuals' - Vimy Ridge, the Somme etc.. very interesting to visit the places I've studied (and taught about) for a good while - one worrying point though. A few of the kids said 'it isn't as bad as I thought it would be'. I suppose that this is one of the main differences between a place like the Somme and Auschwitz (my next port of call). The WW1 battlefields have been maintained in pristine condition and, quite frankly, look 'beautiful'. Graves are tended with flowers and grass is diligently mown. The trenches themselves, if they have not been filled with concrete, are covered in thick grass which hides the mud, the rats, the barbed wire and general shit that the trip was supposed to give pupils an insight into. Regrettably, I still think that some of the pupils don't quite recognise the 'horror' of the trenches. Ironic, really considering we have visited the sights themselves. What more is a teacher to do?

So bearely 10 hours after arriving back in Manchester I was out on the road again, this time to Krakow, Poland. I visited with Mike and Owen in 2007 for a 'Lad's break' and we did the usual touristy things - Wieliczka (?) salt mine (crap) and Auschwitz. But of course, this week has taught me one thing - tourism and Auschwitz are uneasy bedfellows. Of course this is a site of mass murder and I visited on two occasions this week, not as a 'tourist' but as a Freelance Educator with the Holocaust Educational Trust. I applied for the post back in May and was successful (thankfully my current employer, Crompton House School, doesn't mind about the time off that this role will entail). What I've just done is a week's on the job training. We studied at both camps (Auschwitz I and Birkenau) with the intention of bringing 16-18 year olds on one day visits over the next year. We also spent a lot of time in the town of Auschwitz (or, to use its correct Polish name - Oswiencim), the Jewish Kazimierz district of Krakow and various Synagogues here and there. Overall it was a rewading, albeit tiring experiences and I look forward to working with HET on its LFA and Outreach programme over the coming year.

At the weekend I got the train up to Warsaw and continued my 'Jewish journey' - finding a surviving section of ghetto wall and visiting the only surviving Synagogue in a city that suffered like no other in WW2. After two days of this and monging in the hostel/drinking Zywiec off Nowy Swiat it was back down to Krakow for the flight home.

Overall a very rewarding two weeks - which is that same amount of time that I have to wait until Bucharest-Istanbul. It is going to be interesting!

Without egalitarianism, what is the point of Labour?

2009-07-05T05:31:00.000-07:00

In a speech to the Fabian Society (a Labour think-tank) last week, Communities Secretary John Denham said that the party must abandon..

"...the purely needs-based approach to fairness, and inequality which has dominated much left-liberal thinking since the 1960s...The left needs to stop holding up egalitarianism as the ideal. If we continue to believe that the egalitarian approach is really the right one, and we, somehow, have to find more cunning ways of getting there, we will fail."

I only came across this speech having seen it reported in the Manchester Evening News. Their political commentator Andrew Grimes (whose 'Opinions you can't ignore') gushingly agreed, claiming that 'egalitarianism discriminates against common sense. It prescribes largesse for the idle, paid for by the diligent'. This, of course, assumes that the poor are not only idle, but that the rich are diligent. Perhaps more often than not it is the other way round.

Grimes goes on, perhaps much further that Denham would be able to stomach...'But the political notion of equality is an absolutist notion (!?), and it always has been. It its extremist modern manifestation, Pol Pot murdered millions in the killing fields of Combodia because they wore spectacles, read books, dressed nicely, earned more than paddy field labourers, or just fearlessly argued back against the egalitatian goons.'

This is sensationalist reporting at its best/worst (?) Grimes clings to the right, and in order to smear the left, like Tebbit, he will liken their current ideas with the most despicable moments in the history of the left (Tebbit, like I said in an earlier post, goes one step further by saying that the National Socialist Party of 1919-1945 in Germany was 'left wing')

What's perhaps most disturbing, however (I'm not bothered about what Grimes has to say - were he any good as a writer he wouldn't be commenting in a free paper)is that a Labour cabinet minister has come out against egalitarianism. A very good friend of mine argues against clinging tirelessly to old left-right arguments. To a large extent I agree with him. What I cannot do, however, is disassociate the Labour party from egalitarianism. The two go hand in hand - like day and night, fish and chips..whichever analogy you which to pursue. In the last 20 years much of the ideological baggage has been stripped away from the Labour party. This was necessary in order to fight the Militant Tendency and make Labour electable again. It is no longer committed to public ownership as a means to achieving equality - today is it an ideal to which the party strives rather than a policy goal. To take away this ideal removes Labour's raison d'etre. The post Clause IV period has seen Labour become a candidate for the 'Trades Discription Act' - take away egalitarianism and the party will have no reason to exist.

What is Sarkozy's motivation for this?

2009-06-22T11:51:00.000-07:00

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8112821.stm

President Sarkozy of France has spoken out against Muslim French women wearing the full burkha, saying that it 'reduced them to servitude and undermined their dignity'. This is widely regarded as a prelude to the establishment of a parliamentary commission which may in the long run ban the wearing of burkhas in public. This is a sickening denial of an individual's human right to practice their religion and whatever that entails - provided that, of course, this does not inpinge on the liberty of others.

Quite frankly, I do not mind if women wear the burkha in public (so, no, it doesn't inpinge on my liberty and nor should it one anyone else's). The negligable, quite frankly miniscule minority who have in the past used it to disguise suicide bombs (and bombings have never been carried out in the West this way it must be said) number less than that other minority who say that it excludes these women from society. Unfortunately, the French government seems to fall into this latter category.

Yes, the women look 'different', but so do hassidic Jews. So, to be honest, do monks. Sarkozy's arguments completely contradict what most women who wear the burkha would say. Rather than reducing them to servitude and undermining their dignity, they serve as a very visible manifestation of women's deep religious beliefs. Sarkozy claims that they are a symbol of the paternalistic, submissive nature of conservative Islam synonymous with (although he doesn't specifically say this..) forced marriages, beatings and the like.

He has clearly missed the point. 99.9% of women wear their veil because it reflects their deep belief. It is a human right. Surely, Sarkozy must recognise this to some extent. The question is, then, what is his motivation? Is he racist? Unlikely. Is he so caught up in France's famous secularist culture that he is tripping over himself to deny the legitimate rights of thousands of French women? Possibly. This is significant because it has precedents in history, not least Nazi Germany in the 1930s when Jews started to emigrate as a direct result of the harsh policy of Nazis.

Oh, isn't it terribly awful about the Speaker..

2009-06-17T12:09:00.001-07:00

It's a feature of British politics that really annoys me; politicians, the public, the media, you name it - they will call on a public figure to go, they will hound him or her, they will rake up all manner of arguments to support their claims. Then, when the individual finally gets out of their bunker and resigns, caving in to the pressure, it is followed by a collective "oh, he wasn't that bad", "we'll really miss her", "she was an excellent so-and-so".

I watched tributes to the former Speaker of the House of Commons, Michael Martin, today with a certain degree of cynicism. MPs and in some cases party leaders (Nick Clegg) who called for Martin's head gushed with praise for 'Gorbals Mick'. As a result, I was quite happy when Martin used his last address to attack party leaders for not supporting his plans last year to overhaul MP's expenses.

Praising individuals after you have stuck the knife in is nothing new in UK politics. A couple of years ago, after a sustained attack on former LibDem leader Ming Campbell about his age (65) and apparent unsuitability for the job, the former Olympic medal winner stepped aside and this paved the way for the younger Clegg. Again, immediately afterwards praise was heaped onto Campbell as a very able leader who, indeed, is well respected across the political spectrum and in the country (dodgy expenses notwithstanding!)

Historians among us will recognise that age is no barrier to success in politics: Gladstone - 85 years old in retirement in 1894. Churchill - 81 years old in 1955.

This leaves me with a simple conclusion. In both the Westmister 'soap opera' and civil society we all love to see someone dragged through the mud even if their credentials or record do not merit this. We lick our lips with anticipation as we wait for the axe to fall. When it does, we face sober realisation - we've dispatched with one of the 'good guys'. Gushing praise is one way to compensate for these guilty feelings.

An apologist for right wing conservatism

2009-06-12T11:23:00.000-07:00

Don't get me wrong, I don't mind some Conservatives. It's a belief that certainly bucks the trend of late, however, I passionately believe that there are politicians in all parties who go into politics because they want to change things. They are fundamentally decent people. David Davis comes to mind...Lord Tebbit is NOT a decent person.

In a letter to The Spectator, Tebbit says that he does not think that there is anything right wing about the BNP. He believes that the party displays the old left wing policies of Labour before Blair et al. He regards history's greatest racists as leftists - Pol Pot, Mugabe and Stalin. To top it all he points out that 'Nazi' is short for NDSAP, or - National Socialist German Worker's Party.

Let's make one thing clear. Tebbit refuses to believe that the far right is the place for objectionable views because it provides room and justification for his own arch-conservatism. Indeed, he was the biggest right winger in the Thatcher cabinet - and made Thatcher herself look like someone whom Michael Foot was regard as a 'a bit of a lefty'

Of course Tebbit forgets to mention that the Nazis hated communism. Hitler campaigned for 20 years prior to becoming Chancellor on a platform of destroying the 'Reds' whom, for him along with Jews were responsible for the defeat of 1918. In power, Hitler banned the party (along with all others) and abolished trade unions. Economically, the extreme right and left do favour state control, the former through massive state corporations, the latter through worker's control. However, a fundamental difference remains - for fascists the state must become even more powerful. For communists and socialists it must wither away.

Furthermore, I don't think the BNP would take kindly to being regarded as 'left wing'. Only this week, Griffin railed against the 'liberal left' in the Unite Against Fascism movement for egging the leader a 'legitimately elected political party'. Opposition to Europe is a fundamentally right wing principle (socialists, by their very nature are internationalist), as are old fashioned attutudes to education and reluctance to invest in foreign aid (see BNP website http://bnp.org.uk/). We all know that anyone who criticises the BNP is, in their eyes, a Marxist nut, the 'mob' who attacked Griffin outside Parliament on Wednesday were under the auspices of the 'hard left'.

Clearly, Tebbit simply wants to pile the responsibility for the more extreme variants of his ideology on the left. Yes, communism has been responsbible for the deaths of millions (Stalin's purges and famines), however, to call fascism a left wing ideology is a complete contradiction in terms. At its heart fascists believe that life is a struggle between races, some of which are fundamentally better than others. Socialists don't see races, merely classes. Stalin fell into the old fascist trap of seeing some people as 'more equal that others', however true socialism has none of the hatred, bigotry and plain old idiosyncracies of its cousin on the far right. I am saddened that a former cabinet member will engage such a cheap argument not only when the old left-right argument is dead in the political mainstream but just so he can legitimise his own extreme views.

Is it any secret that he finds himself more akin to the BNP than the Tories? To make himself feel better Tebbit has had to dispense with some of the 'baggage of history'.

A dark day...

2009-06-08T13:08:00.001-07:00

I'm sitting here listening to 'If you tolerate this...' by the Manic Street Preachers:

And if you tolerate this
Then your children will be next...
...Gravity keeps my head down
Or is it maybe shame
At being so young and being so vain...
...And on the street tonight an old man plays
With newspaper cuttings of his glory days

To be renamed - *An ode for the abstainers* ??

I could have chosen a different quote - 'All that is left fo evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing' - Perhaps that's even more apt; PR elections are more democratic, however the problem comes with a low turnout when marginal parties like the BNP are elected. And that is exactly what happened today.

I happily blogged a year ago that the BNP had failed to succeed in the local elections. I remember my time in Carlisle - a key background for the BNP - characterised by fascist campaigning and leafleting. Ultimately such efforts were in vain. Now these neo-Nazis have two MEPs. Notwitstanding the fact that Euro-elections didn't exist during Mosley's day, one cannot get away from the fact that the far right can claim their biggest electoral achievement in British political history.

Their success can be boiled down to several reasons:
1. Anger over MPs expenses and general disillusionment with the Westminster system/the (warped) belief that MPs are 'in it for as much as they can screw out of the general public'
2. The rightward direction of New Labour over the last decade and a half - the inevitable skewing re: the distribution of wealth and the political 'disenfranchisement' of the old Labour party's natural constituency - the white working classes
3. Linked to the above - the working class's belief (wrong) that Labour has abandoned them and opened the floodgates to waves of immigrants (mainly eastern European) who have taken jobs and drained public finances through benefit claims.
4. The world economic crisis - probably less important than it may first appear to be - Brown has been largely praised for his statesmanlike approach regarding the financial crisis and benefitted a lot from the G20 (although expenses has largely negated this). Plus, no other British politician is seen as a better option in this respect - Cameron, for example, is still seen as a risky soft option.
5. The political nous of the far right to 'seize the moment', play on people's fears and exploit their own coverage and that of the discredited main parties for their own political gain. In this regard, the actions of the Telegraph has been abominable (has the editor been in the pay of Griffin et al?).

These tactics are nothing new, however, they have just come at a time when people are feeling other anxieties. This has created a toxic stew which has resulted in fascists representing me in the European parliament.

More to follow. I'm trying to organise my thoughts on this one -

On BBC coverage of the British National Party

2009-05-12T13:07:00.000-07:00

As a Labour Party supporter I would like to play devil’s advocate as we all recognise that internal party debate is important.

We have a long established tradition of neutrality and impartiality in the broadcast media in this country – in contrast to print journalism and, notably American TV Networks (Fox News anyone?) I do not believe that the BBC would be fulfilling any public service by attacking the BNP. In fact, I think it would be welcomed by the ‘Fascists’. They love being underdogs and unpopular because it allows them to position themselves between ‘ordinary folk’ on one side, and the ‘old gang’ (the three major parties) as they put it, on the other. At best the BNP would denounce the BBC as ‘Marxist’ if they were attacked on air. At worst, they could turn it into a propaganda coup by telling their potential voters that the BBC are running scared because the BNP are the only party committed to doing what they promise in manifestos. Either way, they could paint the BBC as nothing more than an arm of the state used to smear the enemies of the sitting government. This is something that I am totally against regardless of the party.

I think the BBC needs to be respected for its impartiality. Louis Theroux does this magnificently for the corporation. In his time as a documentary maker he has interviewed black nationalists, white nationalists and even Baptists who said that deaths the Iraq War was divine retribution for America’s tolerance of homosexuality. Not once in any of these documentaries has Theroux passed any form of judgement on these clearly obnoxious individuals or their ideas. However, through clever questioning he has enabled Joe Public make an informed and enlightened opinion. Such opinions are much more powerful if they are formed by the individual. If the BBC teaches us to hate the BNP it becomes superficial.

We are all ‘liberals’ with a small ‘l’. John Stuart Mill taught us to give a platform to lies because under public scrutiny, or ‘the court of public opinion’ as it is these days called, they will quickly fall apart. It is far more effective to show the BNP for who they are and their questionable ideologies will fall apart well before June 4. Engage in ‘mud slinging’ and the BNP will only throw it back with much greater vigour.

The above post was in response to a letter to the BBC written by local Labour Party activist Kevin Peel:

I am shocked, disgusted and sickened at your coverage of the BNP on prime time news. It is bad enough that they get the oxygen of publicity at all, but your report was not even close to strong enough on attacking their policies of hatred, fear and division.

Impartiality can only go so far - when you are giving credence and legitimacy to a racist, homophobic, fascist party who would see homosexuality re-criminalised, non-white Britons deported and have rioting on the streets of this country, you are at best guilty of complicity in incitement to hatred and at worst positively promoting fascism.

I object in the strongest possible manner to my license money being spent in such a way and I would plead that you at least try to apply the same scrutiny to this bunch of monsters as you do to other political parties. Surely preventing fascism from rising in Britain is more important than the amount our MPs are spending on accommodation?

21st Century Breakdown

2009-05-10T09:33:00.000-07:00

I remember when the last Green Day album was released. Monday 20th September 2004 was the first day of Fresher's Week. Back in those hazy days I lived in Woolton Hall in Fallowfield and remember strutting down to Sainsburys to purchase my copy of American Idiot. I'd already seen Green Day the summer before; this had prorbably been one of the last opportunities anyone had had to see GD again before they achieved a 'renaissance' with what was a very accomplished Grammy award winning concept album.

I think Green Day fans fall into two camps - those who were fans before 2004 and those who have become fans afterwards. I must say I liked the new experimentation on American Idiot and the opportunities it afforded the band to produce an ever more expansive live show (I've seen them twice since, once at the MK Bowl, and they were fantastic on both occasions). However, like many I long for a return to the Insomniac days of angst and three-chord driven punk energy.

I don't have a lot of time for those who say that Green Day 'weren't punk' in the 90s. Anyone who expects 90s punks to sound like their 70s counterpart seriously misunderestimate the evolution of music. Insomniac was a dark, disturbing album based on issues such as drugs, panic attacks, depression and boredom. 'Masturbation' has become the watchword for Dookie-era GD - the truth is that it was merely 'alluded to' on one song on album. No, GD of the 90s was proper punk, not quite as hardcore as Rancid - but with just as many credentials and passion. Both bands grew out of the California punk circuit. Yes, Green Day played to 5 kids, they carried their own amps around in a van and sang about everyday life. They did it the proper way.

GD had always been political. 2000s 'Minority' was a sign of things to come and by the time American Idiot came around I was happy because I had always been impressed by their ability to stay ahead of the game at a time when Sum 41 was churning out second rate versions of GD songs from 5-7 years previously. The new grandiose statements and Springsteen-influenced ballads and pianos fitted perfectly with BJ's skills as a show man - a modern day Freddie Mercury and a man whose energy on stage went some way to explaining why his rounder frame had seemed to disappear.

Over the last week I have been listening to 21st Century Breakdown. The last GD material I'd listened to was their alter-ego offering 'Stop drop and roll' (Foxboro Hot Tubs). Although in a chugging 50s garage rock style, this record offered a hint that the insomniac days were returning. However, what we get with 21BD is a more ambitious, dare I say it *better* version of AI. The pianos and melodies are there a plenty. As talented as GB and BJ may be, I can think of few other artists who sport as many creative influences - Clash, Springsteen, Beatles - they're all here. In fact, one song - Horseshoes and Handgrenades sounds *far* too similar to Main Offender by the Hives. Nevertheless I certainly think that the lyrics put GD into a league of their own and are better than AI:

American Eulogy, part a) Mass Hysteria

Red alert is the color of panic
elevated to the point of static
beating into the hearts of the fanatics
and the neighborhood's a loaded gun
Idle thought leads to full-throttle screaming
and the welfare is asphyxiating
Mass confusion is all the new rage
and it's creating a feeding ground
for the bottom feeders of hysteria

American Eulogy is my favourite song on the album - probably because it reminds me of a more ambitious 'Westbound Sign' from Insomniac. Looking at it this way and considering the range and lyrical improvements that have been made you would expect it to be a much better album than 1995s. I don't think it's quite as simple as that. 21BD is a great album, it will become a great addition to the back catalogue and will once again confirm GD's position musically - nevertheless, I think that it will still leave old fans unsatisfied. GD have built a new genre for themselves - 'stadium punk', the days of small sweaty moshing to Platypus (I have you) or Jaded seem to be over. Bands grow up, I just home that when I see them for the fourth time in October that they find time for these early punk classics, because what I'm hearing today, however great it is, just ain't punk, despite the lyrical quality.

Happy Birthday

2009-04-20T12:51:00.000-07:00

I have just noticed that this is my first anniversary as a member of the blogging community. Despite my paltry efforts (38 posts in 365 days), I'm glad that I've been able to communicate some of my musings in this way. Some have been, admittedly, rather inconsequential; others a bit more substantial - take for example my first post on the BNP in Carlisle. What I've never attempted to be here is a 'serious blogger' - I neither have the time, inclination or skills to become the next 'Guido Fawkes'. However, I do enjoy sitting down and typing what I think. One thing is clear to me - next year, if I teach AS level politics again, I'm going to set up a blogging community for my pupils. This will take debate out of the classroom in into pupils bedrooms and, to use teacher-y jargon 'extend their learning in an out of classroom context.' Nice; anway enough self congratulation..

Recent sign-ups

2009-04-20T12:39:00.000-07:00

I sit here, on the cusp of another time at the mighty Crompton House, contemplating two things to which I have signed up.

The first, Spotify - is something that I'm listening to now. To be precise I'm listening to Sky Larkin - a band that I like but as yet do not own the album. *Cut to the chase Craig* Ahem, Spotify is a simple download which provides unlimited access to all the music you could ever want at the touch of a button. Two simple catches - you can't download the songs (but why would you need to - you can listen again and again) and the music is punctuated with occasional adverts, Iggy Pop trying to sell me insurance during the middle of Ladyhawke. Considering the price, this is hardly worth grumbling about. The great thing is that it allows you to listen to albums in full before you decide whether you want to buy them. Sweet! And it's fookin' fast!

Second, LoveFilm. I've heard a lot about this - most of it good. On a recent visit to my cousin in Newcastle (she's pregnant finally!) I noticed that her and Mike were devotees. They couldn't praise it highly enough - you choose the films, they post it, you keep it for as long as you want (you can't get another until it's returned) and the envelope converts into an SAE for easy posting back.

I've cashed my 30 day free trial and order my first film - the Baader-Meinhof Complex. The only downside is that watching them can become a chore - something else to 'fit in; - we;ll see, I'll give it a go...

While I've got five minutes...

2009-03-24T05:59:00.000-07:00

Jade Goody

...died on Saturday from that most devastating of illnesses, cancer. It is a horrendous way to go - I saw my nana's decline over the space of three months and it wasn't pretty. By the end, sufferers are shadow of their former selves at it's so difficult for relatives who are trying to remember loved ones as they were. Even more tragic is the fact that Jade was 27 - a mere sproglet!

Quite a lot has been made about Jade's reality TV star status. She came third in Big Brother in 2002 at the age of 21 and has since spent her whole adult life in front of the camera in one form or another. Over the years, I, like many people have deplored these pointless celebrities - individuals who are famous for no particular reason. However, with her passing I am feeling as bit more melancholy so I will say this. For the daughter of a one-armed heroin addict from a council estate to experience the sort of success that she has is nothing less than extraordinary. Throughout the later years of her short life, people constantly commented on the fact that she was 'one of us' - not a trumped up Victoria Beckham 'lite' with a supposed air of superiority. Even when she uttered racist comments to Shilpa Shetty in 2007 she merely reflected the intolerance and bigotted attitudes which I'm sorry to say characterise large swathes of our society.

Of course, it's a breath of fresh air to see someone who wasn't born with a silver spoon in their mouth making it 'big', albeit for no discerable reason - there is something seemingly democratic about that...it certainly wouldn't have happened 30 years ago and now that Jade's plight has led to a multiplication in cervival cancer smear tests, her family can at least take some comfort from the fact that she has a legacy other than being the first individual to take the reality TV 'bull' by the proverbial 'horns'. RIP Jade Goody!

Islamists - it's a shame a disturbing ideology is named after the world's greatest religion..

2009-03-12T13:44:00.000-07:00

The other day a group of Islamists protested as soldiers returning from Iraq paraded in their own town. The most disturbing thing about this is the olive branch that it offers to the British National Party - all Muslims preach hate, all are unpatriotic, all would blow up 'our boys' givin half the chance etc..etc..

Fortunately, most people are educated enough to realise that the policy of a national government merely reflects where the army *goes*. These chaps who 'hate Jews' because of the policies of the Israeli government fall into a similar category. Soldiers are individuals with heads - they can think what they want, however they have a duty, a much more basically - they are doing a job. Furthermore, take politics out everything and at the end of the day these folks are doing a very tough job - the threat of being blown up, suicide bombings and mines are often matched by acts of extreme bravery. I can only imagine how pissed off those soldiers must have been. These Islamists represent a minority whose obnoxious views are as nauseating as their enemies in the BNP. Maybe these guys should team up - surely they could find some common ground. Oh, I've found some: H.A.T.E That's what these guys are pretty good at disseminating - hate is hate, i.e., neither black, nor white.

Hey, what am I talking about - they've already done this, well rhetorically anyway when it comes to the new spread in antisemitism. Quite a few Anglicans have jumped on the bandwagon too...oh, how I do like a good 'love-in' by the forces of evil - and herein this reflection has descended into a rant so I'll end it ..now..

An eerie vision of the future?

2009-02-20T08:04:00.000-08:00

At the second attempt I have finally got round to finishing P. D. James' 'The Children of Men'. I first tried to read it about 18 months ago. It's not a 'hard' book, it's just something that happens to me sometimes. I read in 'waves'. Last year was particularly productive. I must have read about 20 books and they were all quite a reasonable length too. I hit a literary 'wall' though a couple of months ago when reading 'The Audacity of Hope'. Christmas should have freed up time for reading but I was probably too busy eating and drinking. Nevermind, with February on the horizon I polished off Barack's sanitized vision for America (see previous post) and ploughed into dystopia.

I am quite a big fan of the genre. I enjoyed Nineteen Eighty-Four, Brave New World and A Clockwork Orange. Next on the list is A Handmaid's Tale. Anyway, back to the point...The Children of Men is set in 2021, 25 years after the last human baby has been born. Civilisation is slowly dying out because of man's failure to successfully deal with it's own destruction of the environment. As a result most people are apathetic and parliamentary democracy has been brushed aside, along with most vestiges of liberty in favour of the despotic rule of Xan Lyppiatt - brother of the novel's protagonist Theo Faron. Faron is an Oxford Don who is contacted by a group of freedom fighters called the 'Five Fishes'. Initially pessimistic, he is soon won over when it is revealed that one of the fishes (Julian - a woman who was christened incorrectly!) is pregnant - the first in 25 years. The rest is basically a 'road-book' (is there such a phrase? I'm looking for the literary equivalent of 'road movie') where the main characters attempt to escape the clutches of the State Security Police (SSP) and find a suitable place for Julian to give birth. Along the way, the other fishes are killed under various circumstances, Theo eventually faces Xan, shoots him and the novel ends with the baby healthy and Faron about to become the new 'Warden of England'. All in all, a great novel - it's strongest quality is the overall premise of a dying world simply because of all the questions this throws up. What do previously religious people now think of God? Are we still duty bound to obey the law? At what point do we cross the 'boundary' and return to a Hobbesian/Lockean state of nature? To what extent should liberty be sacrificed under these circumstances? Exciting stuff!

I am now reading 'Birds without Wings' by Louis de Bernieres - a recommendation by James both because of its subject matter (WW1) and the fact that it is set in Turkey - a country that I will be visiting in August.

I perhaps ought to briefly mention the bands and films that I have seen recently. Let's start with Bloc Party..I managed to get standing tickets for myself and Dougie, Head of Geography, back in January. So we rolled up - Wednesday night, and had a thoroughly cracking time. The band were note perfect, the drummer sublime and overall they're well worthy of their position as one of Britain's foremost indie bands. What I couldn't understand was why people would pay to go to a gig only to throw glow sticks at them? The crowd was a bit 'impotent' to say the least - maybe because it was mid-week. Nevertheless, the two encores were well received. On the second occasion we were outside when we heard the first few bars of 'Flux' and had to race back in. It really was a great song to finish off with and sounds so much better live, partly I suspect because they have less technology to rely on.

Just over a week later me and James went to see the NME Shockwaves tour. I wanted to go so I could see a band that I have really 'discovered' this past few months. White Lies are from West London and play Joy Division/Interpol/Editors inspired post punk. The singer, like his forbears, sports a baritone voice and their own tunes are a bit poppier than previous incarnations - think The Killers. Nevertheless, I thought they were fantastic even though the keyboard packed up half way through the set.

Florence and the Machine were also on the bill. I'd never heard of them and it's always a pleasant surprise to see a band live for the first time and to actually like them. Florence has a cracking voice and I will look forward to the album. She came back on stage during the White Lies set to duet with the lead singer and it was absolutely fantastic.

The least said about Friendly Fires the better. James was really up for seeing Glasvegas. I can't say that I'm a fan. It sounds horrible I know but the strong Scottish accents really grate on me. Although to be honest it's probably the triumphalist and over the top nature of their melodies that doesn't really appeal either.

Last Thursday we went to see Secret Machines. This was a completely different experience altogther. The gig was at the intimate 'Ruby Lounge' near the Arndale and it was pretty impressive to see this 3-piece here given that they've supported Interpol and played the Academy. Anyway, they place a Pink Floyd-prog rock inspired blend of rock, punk and metal. Anyway you say it, it's pretty 'deep'. Average song length is about 10 minutes - they probably only played about 7 songs in over an hour. All in all they were pretty impressive. All prior assumptions regarding the volume levels that three guys could produce were brushed aside. This band was loud!!

I'm getting a wee bit tired of typing now - I'll finish by saying that two films I have seen recently have really impressed me. It goes without saying that Slumdog Millionaire is good, excellent in fact. I was also impressed by Frost/Nixon by its ability to turn an interview, albeit a high profile one, into an intruiging political thriller. It has ignited my interest in the Watergate scandal and the Nixon presidency in particular. This bodes well considering that it appears that I'll be teaching this at A2 Level next year. Yipes! :-)

Geert Wilders

2009-02-14T03:41:00.000-08:00

I was shocked to hear that the controversial Dutch MP was turned away from Britain at Heathrow airport. The government has again tangled itself in knots over free speech and political correctness, inadvertantly giving the man who compared Islam with Nazism a lot of free publicity.

On the phone to the BBC whilst the drama unfolded at Heathrow, Mr. Wilders argued correctly that he was an elected parliamentarian - people may not agree with his views but they would be invited to challenge them in the forum of free speech. I've made this point over and over again - like Mill said, 'the truth' will only ever be revealed when those with objectionable views are allowed to speak their mind. If you keep them bottled up, ignorance reigns. Wilders was not going to be touring Rusholme or Tower Hamlets - in that case, Jacqui Smith's claim that his visit would have damaged race relations - would be accurate. Rather, he was going to be addresseing a group of peers in the House of Lords.

Under these circumstances, I'm sure that the very able and astute debaters of the 'Other Place' would have been able to tear his message of hatred to sheds - just as Nick Griffin was left smarting when he was invited to address the Oxford University debating society.

Segregation in Schools

2009-02-10T13:05:00.001-08:00

Just caught this one on BBC news - the headteacher of a primary school in Sheffield has resigned after conflicting with the local education authority. The controversy surrounded the former head's plan to overturn a decision to have separate assemblies for Christian and Muslim children. Quite frankly I think that the headteacher, whoever she is, deserves a medal.

We already live in a divided Britain. White kids play with white kids, Muslim kids play with other Muslims and live in similar areas in our towns and cities. Now, whilst I don't have a great problem with this (other than the fact that it perpetuates intolerance and ignorance simply because the two groups do not actually 'spend time' with each other), I DO have a problem when this is continued within a school community. Although I know nothing about the school, the fact that it caters for white and Muslim children shows that it is non-denominational. Therefore, what is the problem with a provision for some form of secular worship? Arrangements could be made for religious observance where necessary - by physically splitting up the two ethnicities, we enter dangerous territory in which segregated 'groupings' are created - and in this situation each side recognises one as an 'other' from an early age. This will have untold consequences for both sides' impression of the 'other' by the time they reach adolescence.

In other news, I have now booked my summer holiday - as follows:

Sat 1 Aug 09: Luton-Bucharest (not Budapest as I had originally booked in error - thanks to the delightful people at 'Wizzair' this was soon rectified)

Sat 15 Aug 09: Istanbul-Gatwick

This gives me two weeks travelling around Transylvannia, Bulgaria, northern Turkey and, of course, Istanbul - the one city on earth that I most desperately want to visit!

Three days til half term!

Get to Bolton West - their organisation is crap!

2009-02-08T11:08:00.001-08:00

I met John Prescott today. Me and James felt it our duty to attend the Young Labour 'Big' Weekend at the Town Hall - being heavily involved party members and all (!) Seriously though, we had intended to go to the Saturday session but plans dictated otherwise. James Purnell (Work and Pensions and future party leader???) was on the bill as well as Hazel 'I'm nuts about her' Blears (Local Government).

I've met Ms. Blears before - whilst researching for my dissertation at her Constituency Office in Salford. Having finished my days graft I went into a local post office for a Mars bar and there she was again, attending a photocall with the proprietor (my flatmate Christian says that at a recent Law event he overheard her saying that she only wanted to be photographed with ethinc minorities - hence his distaste for her). Anyway, said photocall was blocking my entry to the Post Office and Hazel said to the owner "Look at me, I'm stopping all of your customers". Now, if I'd had a bit more nous I would have retorted "well if you're referring to the government's Post Office privatisation program then you're jolly right!"

The future of the Post Office came up during the Q&A section at the end of John Prescott's speech. Leaving that aside, James and I scored a journalistic 'coup' by finally getting to the bottom of how the former DPM managed to get the nickname 'two-jags'. As he was shaking hands with the 50 or so Young Labour delegates (I will never wash my hand again), James brought up the fact that they both had a mutual friend (I forget his name but he works in regeneration). It turns out that it was this chap who provided Prescott with his jags in the 1990s when Michael Heseltine had said that the perk was for the benefit of the Prime Minister only.

The press girl sitting opposite won't have picked up on this little nugget from James' brief but life affirming conversation with the former DPM. However, she DID pick up on Prescott's admission that party organisation in the constituency of Bolton West was 'crap' and that's why we needed to board the 'battle bus' immediately (James and I forewent such pleasures in order to have Sunday lunch in Katsouris)-Nevertheless I must say that I found Prescott to be an entertaining speaker, despite being one who often gets mixed up in his own words. Not many politicians will use words such as 'bloody' and 'bugger' in a speech to the party faithfull - these are qualities which will make Prescott a memorable politician when he finally steps down as an MP at the next election. I don't know what the young female journalist was noting down, however what I would say is that Prescott is the type of politician the likes of which we seldom see in this country. He is a man who can truly connect with the electorate. For a man of nearly 70 he is proving this once again by his grasp of the potential for technology and internet social networking to reinvigorate party organisation and electioneering. Overall, he is an 'everyman' - a bridge between 'The People' and the 'Establishment', the likes of which the younger generation is yet to produce.

Partisan Reporting

2009-01-26T12:51:00.000-08:00

The Beeb has long been regarded as ever so slightly left of centre. When all is said and done it is a nationalised industry. The Daily Mail has been criticising Auntie for this as long as I can remember and to be honest the Corporation's recent actions over Gaza and the DEC has done little to alter the impression.

Ironically, the BBC decided not to screen the DEC appeal because it feared that it could be regarded as biased reporting. By making this decision however, controversially it should be added, it has 'become the news' rather than being the body who reports on it. This conscious desire to distance itself from the Palastinians could be seen, by cynics, as tacit acceptance of hitherto partisan reporting. The Corporation has been criticised even more lately, however, with Gazans effectively 'ghettoized' and pummelled into submission by the military might of Israel (backed up by the US), who can blame them?

Nevertheless, the BBC has not done itself any favours by tying itself in knots over this issue. I think that it would have been better to show the appeal and then use opportunity afforded by Holocaust Memorial Day in order to restate the case for the existence of the state of Israel. Now that would have been balanced reporting...

President Obama

2009-01-20T12:27:00.000-08:00

After the longest election campaign in history, Barack Obama was finally elected as the 44th President of the United States today. After blogging roughly a year ago that I believed it was all but over for him (the loss of the New Hampshire Primary seemed to hand the initiative back to Hillary Clinton), the Civil Rights ovement has finally come full circle. I feel so full of hyperbole that I'm feeling a little big speechless to be honest. I listened to the inauguration on Radio 4 in a gym car park in Royton (that's what I'll tell my grandkids). Uncharacteristically, Obama fluffed his lines (who can blame him!) before giving another flawless and rousing inaugural speech. The BBC news media correctly pointed out the almost regal air surrounding the day. Hmmmm. To best honest that's just about as much as I can manage :)

Balanced Broadcasting?

2009-01-18T12:48:00.000-08:00

This is not the first time I have been angry at the media because of their unbalanced portrayal of disasters when it involves America. 18 months ago I ranted against the media for their coverage of forest fires in California merely on account of the fact it threatened the homes of some of the Hollywood rich and famous. This time disaster was averted and the media still went mad.

Now don't get me wrong, the safe landing of the US Airlines flight into the Hudson river was nothing short of a miracle. The captain deserves to be called a hero and commended for his professionalism. However, did we really need wall to wall coverage for nearly 72 hours? Plane crashes in other countries which result in fatalities numbering in the hundreds do not get nearly this much coverage. Forty Iraqis died in Baghdad in a suicide bombing the other week and it didn't even reach the news headlines.

America will be in the news for all the right reasons this week. It will inaugurate its first black president on Tuesday. I will watch this coverage with pride - the news media may go over the top but when something like this happens it doesn't quite seem to matter. At least we don't live IN America - according to the John Stewart show, the major networks tied themselves in knots contemplating what Sasha and Malia would be having for their school dinners now they have moved to Washington.

Ignorance isn't bliss

2008-12-30T01:58:00.000-08:00

Four days in, Israel continue to blast Gaza and the international community deplores it with some reservations. America in particular has made no effort to condemn the Israelis who are acting perhaps in coordination with the last days of the Bush presidency. Obama may not be so accomodating.

Let's be clear about this. I think Israel is using an excessive amount of force. As expected, Israeli embassies around the globe were inundated with protesters, not least London which became a target for the SWP, Respect and the loony lefties brigade. One placard made me see red, and I'm not talking about the kind of red that calls for 'full nationalisation *hand wiggle*' - T. Benn. No, this was something much more deplorable.

'Stop the Holocaust in Gaza'

Comparing the military assault on Gaza, no matter how bad it is, with the systematic mechanical slaughter of an entire race of people is one of the most reprehensible things I have ever read. Not only does it stick two fingers up to 6 million murdered people and their descendants and survivors, but it completely confuses what is going on in Gaza with what we mean by the term 'Holocaust'. Any academic will tell you that this means 'burnt sacrifice' and is a very specific term used to describe the decimation of the Jewish race in Europe between 1933 and 1945. I doubt that many Arabs in Gaza would like to know that their plight is being described with the same word. Furthermore, whilst it is wrong to make a 'comparison of pain' argument, I do not feel that we are not into the realms of genocide just yet. Israeli behaviour at the moment is abhorrent - just as it is to describe it as the start of a 'Holocaust'. There is only one event in history that can be described using this word.

Bombing Gaza

2008-12-28T08:25:00.000-08:00

I was watching the ever proficient Channel 4 news program last night. The main news story was Israel's air assault on the Gaza strip - an attack that comes at the end of a six month ceasefire (during which I was fortunate to visit the area). The presenter talked to the Israeli defence minister (I forget his name) and started by questioning his motives for the attack. He said that Hamas had been firing missiles for weeks and were a direct threat to southern Israel. Fair enough. Here's my problem..

He was then asked what Israel's future military strategy would be in the next few days. The minister did not want to reveal this for security reasons (fair enough) but also because the future military intervention depended 'on the reaction of Hamas and the Palestinians'...I'm pretty sure that this reaction is not going to be anything other than an armed retaliation.

Israel is a sovereign state entitled to defend its borders. Fact. Israel deserves to exist as a state in its own right. Fact. However, yesterday's act of brutality serves no other purpose other than to escalate the level of violence in the area. No doubt in the next few days Palestinian suicide bombers will attack Israel's major cities. Whilst I will not be able to excuse such activity I will have no problem questioning their motivation. The Israelis need to realise that you can only achieve so much diplomatically through the barrel of a gun. The genius who thinks that airstrikes will solve the problems of the Middle East needs his head looking at.

Furthermore (and this is my real 'bugbear'), when future military plans are based on the reaction of the other side you are giving tacit assumption to the fact that the other side will respond violently. This is ok during a state of war, however, the Middle Eastern countries were not 'at war' last time I heard. Israel is trying to administer a 'peace process' with F16 fighter jets. This will not work.

2008 Round Up

2008-12-23T11:44:00.000-08:00

In many ways, 2008 has been a hectic year for me. In short, the position I find myself in this December - living in Manchester in living in that mythical alternative universe commonly referred to by parents and, notably, Morpheus as 'the real world', bares little comparison to my status back in January.

Twelve months ago I had three weeks to run in my first teaching practice school in Keswick - heart of the Lake District. I have many fond memories of that school and remember not wanting to leave as I felt 'in my stride' and refreshed after the Christmas break. However, a return to university loomed at the end of the month and I settled in to being a 'student' for the very last time. This of course meant mid week drinking, getting up late and working when I dictated. Happy days.

So, after a couple of weeks which included an axciting excursion to Manchester for a research project on Bangladeshi migrants (this included a personal investigation into the whereabouts of a deported migrant by the name of Vinod Chauan in 1984. It was interesting to read first hand the insitutional racism which existed within tghe GMP at the time), I returned to Carlisle for my 11 week stint at the now defunct St. Aidan's Comprehensive School. Like gruelling army exercises of my youth it was one of those experiences that you didn't realise that you enjoyed until well afterwards. Although i wasn't involved directly in any confrontation, it was one of those schools where you don't feel particularly comfortable and i often took solace from the fact that it would not be my permanent vocation. I now feel for those who are struggling to run its successor The Richard Rose and Central Academies. God help them.

Speaking of God, it was about this time that, after four failed attempts, i finally secured employment at Crompton House School back in my old stomping ground of Greater Manchester. I celebrated by embarking with James on my first ever skiing adventure, courtesy of my current housemate Christian, who at the time was a chalet manager in the glamorous resort of La Rosiere in the French Alps.

Then it was back to St. Aidans for a final 7 weeks, after which the PGCE was virtually nailed. I completed the Great Manchester run, spent two weeks working at a Labour History Archive in Salford, then jetted off round the former Yugoslavia with Lehna.

Summer was an exciting time! I went to Blackpool, Berlin and Jersusalem! - and yes it was in that particular order. All offered satisfaction in there own particular way, however a special mention needs to be given to my sorjourn to Israel where I had a truly life changing experience learning about the Holocaust and how to teach it effectively in school. At the time of writing I am intending to start an MA course in Holocaust Studies from September 2010.

Finally, I have of course been 'cutting my teeth' at Crompton House School since September, and a busy 15 weeks it has been too! Next year promises to be more straightforward, now massive changes are expected. What I want to do is become a really good teacher (there's a way to go) and with breathing space before I start my MA, after Christmas it's time to 'get really good'...Aside from that, other potential highlights include a second trip to Poland, the Battlefield tour with school in July, wherever I decide to take myself for my summer holidays and a gig in Glasgow featuring the legend that is Bob Dylan.

I'm tentatively excited...a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to all my readers (if any!)

:-)

The 11 Plus

2008-12-19T00:06:00.000-08:00

Philosophically, the defence of a selective Grammar school education is problematic, however, one recent report in the media isn't difficult to counter. It has been said that the 11 Plus, the aeons-old entrance exam which traditionally siphoned off the clever from the no-so-clever in Year 6 of primary school, has a success rate based merely on affluence.

I could use my own experience to counter this claim. The argument is that only richer families can afford the tutoring that is required for success in the test. However, what this neglects to acknowledge is the scores of families up and down the country who go through this revision procedure with their children for free, my own father being one of them. I remember in the three months or so before the exam being sat down regularly by him to sit practice papers while he did his best to explain to me the intricacies of decimals and fractions. I might also add that at no point did I do this under 'duress'. There was no pushy parenting involved (which may be the case if tuition is paid for) and it was fimly my decision about whether I took the exam in the first place.

Now I recognise that an equality of opportunity argument still exists. Theorists would argue that, although my family did not have an unfair wealth advantage, a child of my background benefitted from having a stable nuclear family. Many able pupils would never have the opportunity of a Grammar school education because they are unfortunate enough to be born into a family that does not offer the stable environment under which the preparation for the transition to Grammar school could be achieved (i.e., formative equality of opportunity).

I'll leave it to governments to achieve substantive equality of opportunity. In the meantime, it needs to be realised that money alone does not buy success.

A letter of admiration

2008-12-14T08:42:00.000-08:00

Gary Cook
Chief Executive
Manchester City Football Club

Dear Mr. Cook,

Me and my housemate live a mere half a mile from the City of Manchester stadium. For the past couple of months, during our weekly sojourn to ASDA, we have felt nothing but immense pride at the sight of the slogan ‘Pride in Battle’ which is emblazoned on the side of your stadium, or should I say ‘Theatre of War’.

When battle commences we can often hear through our window the sound of the massed ranks cheering on your heroic gladiators as they engage with the enemy. It was during one such skirmish the other week (I think it was against those dastardly axis powers, Manchester United), that I found myself watching a documentary about the Second World War. Some chap was talking about his experiences at the ‘Battle’ of Iwo Jima in 1945 (I do, of course, use the term ‘Battle’ in the loosest possible sense). He was commenting of the plight of US Marines engaged in fighting with Japanese troops and I must say I felt sorry for the poor man. He was moved to tears and I thought to myself, ‘look old man, this dilly-dallying in the Pacific does not constitute what I would call a ‘battle’. He clearly has never seen your brave fellows, Robinho and the like, engaged in battle week after week with General Mark Hughes, risking life and limb for literally pennies.

This is when I realised that there is something very wrong at the heart of our ‘broken society’. Ghurkhas receive Victoria Crosses for fannying about in Malaya in the 1960s or whenever and I’m like ‘look! Who cares, the glorious troops of Manchester City football club take pride in battle week after week and it’s not as if it’s about a few palm trees in fuzzy-wuzzy land. This is football and it’s football that matters.

Take for example the recent war in Afghanistan. I read this week that if you lose an eye in ‘combat’ you are entitled to about £45,000 in compensation from the MoD. Some people have complained about this so-called ‘meagre’ sum of money compared to, for example, footballer’s wages. Again, they miss the point. The abuse from fans that your players receive, not to mention the rigorous training they need to complete (‘Pride in Battle’ requires a great deal of preparation) makes the British army’s scraps with rag-heads in Afghanistan look like a storm in a teacup.

So, all in all I just want to say that I am extremely supportive of your slogan ‘Pride in Battle’. I think it neatly encapsulates the struggles that take place both in East Manchester and during your recent offensives in Europe. I think it is time that the Great British public accepted you all for who you are - namely national heroes, the likes of which our soldiers past and present could only dream of emulating.

I am, Sir, your obedient servant,

S. A. R. Chasm

So long TIF...

2008-12-14T08:15:00.000-08:00

On Friday, Mancunians voted by a margin or nearly 4 10 1 (0r 79%) against the proposed congestion charge for their city and, consequently against the Transport Innovation Fund of well over a billion pounds offered by the government.

Whilst the 'No' vote is clearly disappointing, it can be easily explained:

1. The successful organisation of the 'No' campaign
2. The contrasting 'slowness' of the 'Yes' campaign and its inability to properly inform the public. For many, the congestion charge was just another 'money spinner', similar to council tax as they see it.
3. The recession. At a time when people are tightening their belts, the last thing they want is another tax on car usage. This is despite the fact that the congestion charge would not have come into force until 2013, by which time the recession would have ended and the economy would, I assume, have considerably improved.
4. By this time, the improvements to Manchester's transport infrastructure would have been completed. The public would no doubt have been slightly more willing to pay for a visible improvement.

Given the overwhelming 'No' vote, 79% of the turnout now lack the moral authority to complain about congestion in Manchester ever again. Furthermore, the risible turnout demonstrates two things, namely the failure of the 'Yes' campaign to excite the public and the failure of poorer people to vote who would, in all certainty, have benefitted from the improvements outlined by the TIF.

Maybe the charging zone was too big, maybe it was bad timing. Either way, Mancunians have missed a great opportunity to improve transport in their city.

However, given that we live in a democracy I would not propose to do what the Irish have decided re: the EU constitution. No means no; you cannot ask people to vote again because you do not like the outcome!

What does Barack really think about the death penalty?

2008-12-08T12:57:00.000-08:00

Over the last week or so I've been reading Barack Obama's 'The Audacity of Hope' - his pitch to the American public, published 18 months or so before he ran for the highest office. Whilst so far it is a cracking book, I have been reading it with some degree of scepticism because I know that it was written by a man who wanted to run for preseident and therefore would not say anything that opposition parties could pounce upon. In other words, Obama's work has a very diplomatic air to it. Whilst he is of course a left leaning liberal, he professes his love for the US and, more importantly, fails to seriously crisitcise his opponents. The question is, is this the real Obama?

I found myself asking this question when I read the following quote:

"I believe that there are such crimes - mass murder, the rape and murder of a child - so heinous, so beyond the pale, that the community is justified in expressing the full measure of its outrage by meting out the ultimate punishment."

This standpoint contradicts everything we think we know about Obama. He was against the war in Iraq, opposes Guantanamo and all forms of torture and, in many ways, is the most left wing President-Elect since FDR. He is perhaps even further to the left. The fact that he still supports the death penalty underlines an important point about the American political system.

A talking head on Channel 4 news tonight put the point amply enough:

'You forget, this is the United States of America. You cannot run for president and be against the death penalty. The last man to do that was Michael Dukakis [1988 v Bush I] and he didn't get many votes.'

This is very true; just as Obama has had to say he supports the death penalty (a law which I suspect, deep down, he deplores), his Democratic party has courted the religious right, in both cases for the purpose of winning votes. So when an 'upstanding' Obama presents himself as a new type of politician who doesn't 'play politics' in the traditional sense (i.e., pandering to interests), he clearly does...Am I criticising Obama for this? No. In truth, he wouldn't have achieved what he has done recently has he not professed his support for the ultimate punishment.

Festive musings

2008-12-06T12:10:00.000-08:00

This Saturday was meant to be the day where I nailed all of my Christmas shopping. However, this was all done on Tuesday and Thursday. In the first instance school was quite rightfully cancelled. After skidding my way to work and ultimately abandoning my car due to snow and ice I arrived to find out that school was closed. Further bad weather was forcast for Thursday and we found out on Wednesday afternoon that school would be cancelled the next day. I baked, I shopped and I ran - all not in any particular order. The upshot is, I had a free Saturday.

Being recently single, I find that I have a lot more time to fill So towards the end of this week when I was contemplating how to spend my Saturday, I turned to the fantastically titled 'I never knew that about England', a book that I have seldom read since it was given to me as a gift when I left St. Aidans school.

And that's how I decided to go to York. I went there on a residential trip in 1996 when I was still at primary school. To be honest I'm not sure that I've been there since. It really is a lovely place, the shambles, carol singers and brass bands playing seasonal tunes would make it difficult for the most ardent Scrooge not to feel a wee bit festive. Having left the train my first foray was into the Oxfam book shop where I managed to buy a copy of Bagehot's 'The English Constitution'. For any political historian, or political scientist, this book, published in 1872, is THE text for understanding the development of the British political system. I don't know what particular date this one was published, but it has a particularly handsome jacket and is a very easy read - so much so that it is difficult to realise that you are actually reading mid-Victorian prose.

I also bought 'Fast Cakes' by Mary Berry. My flatmate, Christian is an avid baker and I've recently taken up the hobby, making gingerbread and scones so far. Hopefully this book will give me a few more ideas.

So, having been to the bookshop I went for a pint in a pub which I forget the name of but it was recommended in my GBG (which was safely tucked in my bag). I also went to the city gallery (and saw a fantastic painting called 'Return to the Front' - or something like that. It shows soldiers in 1916 at a train station, waiting for a return to the trenches), had fish and chips and enjoyed a directionless meander round the maze-like medieval streets. A return to Manchester made me realise how great this city is, but how it does face a shortfall in terms of character. Surely this is the price that is paid for industrialisation. Prior to the 'revolution' of 1780-1820, York was the principle city of the north. However, given that it had little involvement in the spinning and weaving industry it effectively de-industrialised and retained a relatively stable population. The same can be said for Chester - another nice city, and somewhere ripe for a visit in 2009.

Grown Up!

2008-11-30T08:29:00.000-08:00

Things I've done this weekend for which I could be regarded as middle aged:

1. Baked
2. Listened to Joni Mitchell
3. Ironed
4. Been to a school Christmas Fair
5. Hob-nobbed with parents while buying raffle ticket for prizes such as Baileys liqueur and Imperial Leather.
5. Been to an Art gallery
6. Cleaned the flat

This has to stop! Only three weeks to go until the Christmas break. Before that, party season is here, woo. This should reset the balance:

1. Advent house party on Canal Street
2. NQT night out
3. Manchester lash
4. School Xmas party
5. History/Geography party
6. Collette party
7. Christmas dinner at Alan Towers.

Right, off to go running, otherwise I will be the size of a house!!

Where's the compassion?

2008-11-25T12:08:00.000-08:00

I recognise that this is fast becoming a 'bash the Tories' blog, however...

The Shadow Health Secretary says that a recession has its good points because people are forced to drink and smoke less.

Yes but,

They also lose their jobs,
have their homes repossessed,
find it difficult to feed their kids,
have a greater chance of developing mental disorders,
can't refuel their car,
can't get a mortgage...

The list goes on.

Are we to be surprised? This is a government that wants tax and spending cuts when people need help most. The 'invisible hand', takes fags out of people's mouths, it's government's duty to put money back in their pockets - without sounding like a Pinko, we know that unfettered capitalism has a tendency of shitting on people.

Fin.

Reflections on the PBR

2008-11-24T12:25:00.000-08:00

If pre-budget reports generate this type of interest then god knows what will happen with next spring's budget. Will set 3 PSHE (year 8) bring it up in lesson; will my most challenging pupils question the government's fiscal stimulus?

Apart from being a rather amusing euphemism, the 'fiscal stimulus' announced by Darling today (no 'Blackadder' jokes please) and the whole PBR are significant on any number of levels.

Of course, we're in the middle of the gravest financial crisis since the end of the Second World War (when Mr. Keynes went to Washington and the country was nearly declared bankrupt). However, that said, the proposals outlined today are very interesting in ideological terms and have ensured that the battle lines are well and truly laid for the next General Election (whenever that may be).

Ideologically the most striking element of the report is the creation of a new 45% tax bracket for those earning over £150,000. For 11 years in power, New Labour has been reluctant to use Old Labour ideas re: the redistribution of wealth. Blair and co. have followed Thatcher's mantra on that one - you work hard, your earn your wage and you deserve to keep it. However, what Darling has done today is introduce some old fashioned socialism - the taxes of the rich will be redistributed to the less well off. This token gesture will do little to alleviate the inequalities of welath that have developed over the past three Labour governments. Politically, however, the Chancellor may have found the golden bullet for victory at the next Election. Old reds will, of course, say that he had hitherto failed to see the wood for the trees...either way the left is winning the argument hands down.

Most analyists agree that today Darling has taken a huge gamble. For the first time in years there is clear blue water between the two major parties. They differ on traditional policies of tax and spend and will present two very different manifestos to the public in 2009/10. The Chancellor will be praying that his prediction for an upturn in the economy (supposedly next year) actually happens, otherwise George Osborne will be sending out the bills.

The Tories have reverted to old fiscal conservative ideas - a major threat to Cameron's compassionate conservative public relations bandwagon (Est. 2005). The trouble is, conservatives can't bring themselves to stomach the projected levels of public debt that Labour plans will have generated by 2010. They have therefore shrunk from standing 'shoulder to shoulder' with the government and Brown now derides them as being perhaps the only major political party in the world which opposes the bail out plan offered by himself and other western governments. The Tories' big problem is that they fail to recognise that it isn't necessarily a disaster to run a deficit-based economy (even if those deficits, admittedly, are projected to reach £100 bn). Yes, long term, this will mean an increase in taxes - however, the Tories fail to see short term problems (that's why they're called the nasty party) - help the poor now, in part by a redistribution of wealth, allow everyone to get rich again and the economy to improve and then pay for it when 'the sun is shining' (with measured tax increases, rather than a 'bombshell' - that's old fashioned scarmongering and playing politics...)

If you think about it - 'social progress' or whatever you want to call it, requires considerable debt. You need to spend more so people will become 'better producers' and economic growth results. If you spend roughly the same amount in as you receive in tax receipts then there is a very clear danger of stagnation. Where's the incentive for growth? This is the very essence of progressive politics.

Was Brown too easy with the cash last year and the year before when the sun was shining? Maybe. That doesn't mean that present difficulties are not being solved in a sensible way.

Hurrah for socialism - back on the agenda!

B.loody N.asty P.arty

2008-11-19T12:50:00.000-08:00

The publication of a membership list for the BNP raises fundamental questions for civil liberties. Leader Nick Griffin has a point when he says that the banning of becoming a member of a political party is a restriction of freedoms. True, liberty is the freedom to do as you please as long as it does not infringe upon the liberty of others. This raises two issues:

1. Membership of the BNP does, in many cases, cause an infringement of the liberty of others. The party, despite what Griffin says, is not an interest group for a particular group of people (white 'British'). Rather, it incites racial hatred towards other Britons, thus infringing their liberty.

2. Teachers, doctors, lawyers and soldiers have a responsiblity towards those they work for. There is a conflict of interest if you are in the BNP and a bobbie on the beat round Oldham.

The police is right to vet applicants for membership of far right parties. I will argue for free speech for such groups for ever and ever. However, in this case, their membership needs curtailing.

Misc

2008-11-15T12:29:00.000-08:00

Music I've been enjoying recently:

1. 'The White Album' - The Beatles
2. 'Only by the Night' - Kings of Leon
3. 'Oracular Spectacular' - MGMT
4. 'Intimacy' - Bloc Party
5. 'We are beautiful. We are doomed' - Los Campesinos

I've also seen a few films recently that deserve a mention:

1. 'The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas' - A strange concept in that it's probably the first children's film about the Holocaust. Not quite as powerful as I would have expected, although the end cannot be faulted.

2. 'Quantum of Solace' - Let's just say that I was satisfied. This wasn't as good as Casino Royale. What made that film special was perhaps the poker game in the middle - it gave it some gravitas and anchored the film's various set pieces. Quantum, by contrast, seemed like one continuous action scene. I liked the development of Bond's character and disagree with those who moan that he doesn't seem to be having any fun. However, Bond does need to go back to basics somewhat next time. This means bringing in Moneypenny, and Q!

3. 'Goodbye Lenin' - A fantastic film about a German man who deludes his socialist mother into thinking that the GDR stills exists even though the Wall has come down while she was in a coma.

4. 'Come and See' - Part psychological horrer - part horror film from Belarus. Made in 1985, this is an extremely distubing film about the Holocaust.

Books - currently reading Marquez's 'Solitude' but I'm not giving it the attention it deserves. This is not the kind of book you can read for 10 minutes each night...

Ciao :)

Good 'ol BO

2008-11-06T10:53:00.000-08:00

Like most people, I went into work yesterday with a spring in my step...Like most people I can safely assume that history was made on the 4th November and that date will go down in the record books (along with 9/11, perhaps?) as the two defining moments of the early 21st century. Hyperbole does not exist under these circumstances.

"Sir, did that Barack Banana person win last night?"
"Yes, Amy"

I'd be lying if I said I didn't have a small lump in my throat as Barack Obama accepted victory. Cool, calm, collected - his words chosen carefully, measured, every-inch the statesman. Obama's oratory is inspiring, the way he uses his words harks back to Dr. King and Kennedy.

In my opinion he shares another, potentially devestating characteristic with these chaps - he's a target for assassination. Bush was never going to get popped. Right wing extremists would have seen him as no more that a namby-pamby politician slipping too far towards the so-called 'left' for their liking. Obama represents change - the last young Democrat promising that had his head shot off whilst travelling in an open top car in Dallas, Texas.

When he gave his speech, Obama appeared behind bullet proof glass for the first time - I should hope it won't be the last. Two neo-Nazi skinheads were convicted last week for a plot to assassinate the President-Elect. He will have to tread carefully, for all that is required for evil to succeed is for good people to do nothing..

The day of reckoning

2008-11-04T12:18:00.000-08:00

My Sixth Form questioned my sanity today when I plowed on with our work on representative democracy. What was I doing when the most important and hotly contested elections was taking place 'across the pond'? I must admit that I was easily diverted onto tangents as the pupils asked me all sorts of questions about the election taking place today. The truth is that (and this is no understatement), today is potentially not the most important day in recent political history, but AMERICAN history (all US history is 'recent'). The point is simple; America stands on the cusp of electing a black man as president. I repeat; AMERICA STANDS ON THE CUSP OF ELECTING A BLACK MAN AS PRESIDENT. This is the same country where, 40 years ago, a black man could not wander round the deep South without fear of being lynched. A place where, as a black man or woman, you couldn't sit on the same seat, drink in the same bar, piss in the same toilet (!!) as a white man or woman as little as forty years ago.

The 'separate but equal' doctrine was the most deplorable addition to the US statute book in the country's short history. In WW2, black and white men fought in separate regiments. It's 40 years since King made his speech and to be honest, with the weight of all this history, it seems almost unbelievable, almost too early, for America to be electing a black president.

But here we are. I make no apologies for being excited. This isn't anorak, politics geek stuff. This is progress, a giant leap forward on the road towards equality. IF Obama is elected, everyone will be able to say where they were the day America elected its first black president. And for a country that has slipped into the shadows of criminality and misgovernment over the last 8 years, it will seem even more like a new beginning. One thing that three years of uni study of American history/politics taught me is that America, for all its plusses, has a not particularly admirable history when it comes to intolerance - from immigrants, to negroes, to communists - all have fallen victim to conservatives and reactionaries who form the backbone of the much divided American body-politic. Thankfully, the side that I agree with now appears to be in the ascendant and should elect a man who, like FDR and JFK before him, will signal change for America.

True, he will face a mammoth task, what with the financial crisis and the weight of expectation. I personally feel that he'll have to watch his own back too - he's probably going to be an even bigger assassination target than Bush - the latter didn't particularly rile the skinheads - Obama is their worst nightmare. His name sounds like Osama and his middle name is Hussein for god's sake!

Anyway, all in all I'm happy - go Obama, go!

'I made a mistake'

2008-10-27T12:52:00.000-07:00

George Osborne's words, not mine.

The Shadow Chancellor did make a mistake. He is apologising - fair enough, it certainly is a noble thing for a man to do. However, we need to be clear about what Mr. Osborne is apologising for. Not, as you may expect, for appearing to solicit a foreign donor for the Conservative party. No. What Mr. Osborne is doing is saying sorry for highlighting once more that the Tories are a party not for and of the people but an elitist organisation aimed at the betterment and presevation of the ruling and upper classes. 'Call me Dave' has spent the last three years trying to refashion the Conservative party as a centrist 'one nation' force. Disraeli can claim credit for doing this; he neither went to Eton, nor University and geniunely cared about the poor. However, when you are rubbing shoulders with the rich and powerful (and you yourself come from the same stock), who in their right minds is going to plump for anyone other than their own? Call me a pessimist.

The Labour party is less guilty (note I didn't say 'innocent'). However, what this event has done is show the Tories' true colours. Not green, regal BLUE and Osborne's apology is to Cameron; the former knows that he has done great damage to the latter's plan to swindle the Great British public.

Where on the political spectrum you may ask?

2008-10-22T12:43:00.000-07:00

The government announced today that it is changing its national symbol to a CONDOM because it more accurately reflects the government's political stance.
A condom allows for inflation, halts production, destroys the next generation, protects a bunch of pricks and gives you a sense of security while you are actually being screwed. It doesn't get more accurate than that!

Cameron's speech

2008-10-02T12:10:00.000-07:00

You know, I haven't much to say about David Cameron's speech to the Tory failthful in Birmingham yesterday. I am not going to moan about the fact that old Tory spending cuts seem to be in the offing once more; nor am I going to moan about small government solutions to the financial crisis when even George W Bush has become the biggest fan of nationalisation since V. I. Lenin. No, all I'm going to moan about is this little nugget of inspiration:

"This attitude, this whole health and safety, human rights act culture, has infected every part of our life."

Quite frankly Mr. Cameron (or can I call you Dave?) I'm very happy that this 'human rights act culture" has infected my life. When my grandmother was my age, many Europeans were not only denied basic human rights, but were degreaded and stripped of every ounce of dignity which is the fundamental right of every human being. This whole "anti Human Rights" nonsense is disgraceful, it's a product of Daily Mail readers and middle England curtain twitchers, those with whom Cameron identifies and will want to rely on for the election in 2010 (?)

The Human Rights Act is arguably the most important piece of legislation passed by Westminster in its 400 year existence. The complacency shown by Cameron is nothing short of a gross insult aimed at all people who now and in the past have been denied their human rights.

Is it really surprising when the same politician says that free trips to Auschwitz for 6th formers are gimmicks? - that's certainly not how two of my pupils regarded their visit to Poland last week.

Glad I've got that off my chest, sorry for the rant!

Watch da Road

2008-09-29T12:19:00.001-07:00

As a PSHE teacher, I have to teach riveting and important topics like road safety. I'm doing this with my Year 8s and using a teaching pack called 'Street Safe'. It provides all sorts of teaching suggestions, including a rap song to force people to slow down. It gives an example 'to get the creative juices flowing'. I won't type the whole thing - the best bits are as follows:

"I know a guy called Jay and he thinks he's BIG
He liked to drink Glen's down "swig by swig"
Got hit by a Mercedes nearly split his wig
Left the logo on his face, messed his looks up kid

(Shakespeare would be proud with those rhyming couplets, no??)

Listening to loud music crossing the roads is DUMB
As well as being drunk out ya mind now son
So use ya brain, or ya life could be done
Don't be like Jay, stop 'N' look don't Run

Blazin, not payin attention
Run a old man over, who was cashing his pension,
Threw him throught the air with the power
Cos he was driving his Corsa, hundred miles per hour

Cruisin wid ma mate T all around town
He was actin too crazy; I said "turn the sounds down"
But he didn't hear, too late the car spun around,
Crahed into a pick-up truck, it made a crunch sound

- Mercury Music Prize next year - watch this space - thank god Lennon is dead - he'd be turning in his grave if he was alive...

You've gotta laugh - homeboy.

2008-09-28T13:09:00.000-07:00

Had quite a good weekend. Lehna came on Friday and we went to 'Ning' - the oddly named but brilliant Thai and Malay restaurant in the Northern Quarter. I had Pad Thai - a traditional dish by all accounts - and it was lovely, really geniune too according to Lehna who knows a thing or two about SE Asian food. The beer which I've heard so much about - Beerlao - didn't come cheap (£3.95 a bottle), but it went down well, especially with this type of food which makes you pretty thirsty.

Saturday morning - up relatively early (no monging until 12 like last week) and off on the train to Edale in the Peak District - did a quick walk halfway up Kinder Scout and it was lovely - will definately be making a few more trips eastwards while I am in Manchester.

Came back, dropped Lehna off at Piccadilly, marked some books then went out for a few drinks with James, Chris, Rach and Heather.

Sunday - more marking (done properly it takes bloody aaaages!), then off to The Waterhouse for Sunday dinner and a reunion with the Jaffa Cakes - friends from my trip to Israel. Conversation naturally revolved around the teaching profession and the Holocaust (riveting) and it was good to see everyone on home turf. Then it was home and - guess what - more marking, and some planning.

A pretty full weekend, much fun was had - I'm doing something every weekend until half term - plenty play will keep me sane as the work keeps rolling in - I've not got Sunday night depression - things must be looking up...

Tory party conference this week.

Definately due another rant!

2008-09-25T12:40:00.000-07:00

Not posted since 12th July and my has a lot happened since then! A few days after my last post I took myself of to Berlin for a few days and soaked up the sights, sounds and smells. Then a couple of weeks after that I went to Jerusalem. Had a fantastic time in so many respects. Since then, my life has revolved round one thing: Crompton House School - me and Chris are settled into 'Alan Towers' - the 'Pleasure Palace' - or whatever you want to call it. It certainly was disconcerting to arrive and find that, as a result of our heterosexuality, we were in the minority. In the spirit of equality, we neglected to drape a swastika out of our balcony-cum-pation (it's just not cricket) and are becoming well known amongst 'the boys' (we even had a drink on canal st. this week - I'd been to see Tony Benn but that's a different story) and of course the girls. Their favourite pastime is playing rugby.

Ah, I love the gays. Anyway CHS - as expected, my feet haven't touched the ground. All going reasonably well, a few issues here and there, PSHE lessons are a bugger for managing behaviour and I'm finding that there are so many more things to worry about when you're no longer an NQT. For a start, seeing pupils over an extended period of time, not to mention the quality of the school, means that tracking is a serious issue. I'm chasing up more pupils more than I ever have done before, not because they're crap (they've not got any competition from St. Aidans - RIP) but because I'm trying to be conscientious. Anyway, the main thing is that I'm enjoying it.

I've also enjoyed the politics - my enthusiasm hasn't yet quite rubbed off on the pupils:

AS Student - What lesson have you got now Sir?
Mr Owen - PSHE, Year 9
AS Student - I bet you wish you had us for Government and Politics...?
Mr Owen - Do I??! I could blab on about party systems all day
AS Student (under her breath) - Don't we know it...

So far so good anyway. Politically, I've been pretty active recently - went to some Labour Conference finge meetings recently (IDS, Polly Toynbee, Martin Narey, Liam Byne on Child Poverty and middle England's response and a Socialist Campaign Group Meeting with Tony Benn, John McDonnell, Diane Abbott et al.) and actually finally joined the party for a quid. Not bad! The boss is a Lib Dem councillor - I need to stop making my lessons so overtly partisan and, in particular, stop slating the Liberals for their unelectability!!!!!

So, busy busy...I'm sure it will all settle down, come half term at least!

Ciao!

The Balkans

2008-07-12T03:20:00.000-07:00

About a day after Lehna returned from SE Asia (actually I think it was the same day) we booked three weeks in the Balkans, or former Yugoslavia, or whatever you want to call it. To be honest the thought of visiting this part of the world had never really been high on my agenda. However, a decade after the inter-ethnic conflicts which completely devastated the region, it was a perfect and interesting time to go.

We flew to Split in Croatia on 21st June with the intention of traveling down the coast before crossing into Bosnia, moving up through that country, going into Slovenia and finally ending up in Venice, Italy. The journey to Birmingham and Split airport was pretty much faultless; due to some mysterious botch up with the rail ticket booking, Lehna had to fork out another £25. However, that was soon forgotten and we ended up in Split's Old Town at about six in the evening.

It was at this point that throngs of locals tried to thrust upon us spare rooms in their own homes or 'pansions'. Although Croatia has recovered physically and politically from the events of the 1990s, the economic situation is still far from rosy. That is why at pretty much every bus and train station frequented by tourists you will see middle aged Croat women asking you to stay in their home. After a series of polite 'no thank yous' we set off to find our own pre-booked accommodation.

This, we were soon to find out, would also be in someone's house - but not before we were nearly deceived by our host's neighbour. When we thought we had found the right place he told us that there 'was no hostel here' and tried to shoo us off his property. It was only when we were 25 yards down the street that our host appeared and welcomed us in. It appears there is a certain degree of ugly competition between the pansion hosts of Split.

After an interesting couple of days in Split which included a walk up the tower of Diocletian's Palace, we set off by boat to the island of Korcula where we camped for two nights. This place was lovely - our camp was a stones throw away from the beach and about a 30 minute walk from the old town. The town was stunning - much nicer, as I would later find out, that its bigger cousin Dubrovnik, and a million times better than Venice despite the fact that the city gates are adorned with the Venetian coat of arms.

Having left Korcula we left for Dubrovnik where we spent one night, again on a campsite. Dubrovnik is one of those places you 'have to visit' when you are traveling through Dalmatia. George Bernard Shaw called it the 'pearl of the Adriatic'. I can see why, it really was beautiful, however, the amount of tourists spoiled it for me. Like Venice it is a popular cruise ship destination and the crowds didn't make for pretty sightseeing. Furthermore it was quite big and overbearing which was nothing like the pretty quaint atmosphere evoked by the Old Town in Korcula.

From Dubrovnik we got the coach up to Mostar in Bosnia and Hercegovina. Due to a strange state of affairs whereby Bosnia territory includes about 4 miles of Dalmatian coastline (the town of Neum is Bosnia's only seaside resort) we crossed into BiH, then out into Croatia before going into BiH again. Having entered the country for the second time the bus moved into the heart of the country and it was probably at this time that we both realised that what we were being presented with was a completely different kettle of fish. Take 'Pocitelj' for example, this was one of the bus stops on the way to Mostar and the first major town we came across. Apart from the obvious shell fragments and bullet holes, this town looked like a complete 'dead-end'. There was graffiti everywhere, the shops looked completely run down and the whole place seemed really sorry for itself. There Bosnia was of 1992-1995 is so difficult to explain and I can barely get my head around it. The sheer quantity of ethnic groups makes it difficult to comprehend - Bosnians, Bosnian Serbs, Muslims, Croat Muslims - the list is endless. I had a fruitless search for a book that would help explain things more clearly so will try here from a few scrappy pieces of research:

Unemployment and inflation escalated in the last 1980s in the wake of Marshal Tito's death. This alarmed countries like Slovenia and Croatia who in turn held multiparty elections and declared their independence. In Serbia, Slobodan Milosevic feared that this would threaten the 700,000-strong Serbian communities in Croatia and BiH. When Slovenia and Croatia declared independence in June 1991 civil war broke out - the first European War since 1939-1945. A series of ceasefires and UN interventions resulted in a ceasefire in January 1992. However, by this point the war had spread into BiH, regarded as a powder keg because of its volatile ethnic mix (the country is 40% muslim - ethnic divides are nowhere as visible as in Mostar where one side of the river is Christian and the other, Muslim. Plenty of Jewish people are thrown in for good measure as well). When Bosnia wanted to leave Yugoslavia the Serbs let rip with violent attacks on Mostar and Sarajevo, the former was almost completely destroyed (including, most symbolically its 500 year old bridge) and the latter was hled under siege for 3 years. Food and supplies were smuggled in through a tunnel which began at the city's airport. It was during this time that 'ethnic cleansing', a process not seen in Europe since the Holocaust, was committed by Serbs on the Muslim population. This, together with the conflict, raged on until 1995 despite UN intervention. The Dayton Agreement of that year finally brought an end to the war. The resulting situation is that BiH is roughly a decade behind. Of the three places we visited (Mostar, Sarajevo and Bihac (a heavily mined city on the Croat border) the scars of war are self evident - bombed out buildings sit uneasily next two bars and shops, ghostly reminders of a conflict still clearly in the minds of anyone above the age of 20. In cemetaries, literally every grave stone says 'died 1993' and in Sarajevo shell holes in the streets are filled with thick red paintas permanent reminders of the the terrible ordeal endured by that city.

But for all this, things are looking up for Bosnia. The tourists are starting to come back. No that they'd been away for that long. As an independent communist state freed from Moscow's interference, Westerners were free to come and go as they please. This is starting once more - as a UNESCO world heritage site, the Old Bridge area of Mostar is an absolute must for visitors and was easily our favourite place. We agreed that Bosnia is the sort of place that we would love to revisit in 10-15 years. By then, I expect (and hope) that it will be fully back on its feet once more.

After the cultural highs of Mostar and Sarajevo our trip entered a lull. For a start, the much anticipated white water rafting and Bihac didn't happen when we realised that we needed to book in advance. Then after one night in the town it was off to Zagreb where we had the most depressing and drawn out search for accommodation ever. We were just about to board a train for Llubljana when we found a 'cell' in a Youth Hostel which charged £18 a night. Bit of a con but it was somewhere to rest our heads. The following day we transferred up to Lake Bled in Slovenia for five solid days of camping, bike riding, hillwalking, rowing (?) , jogging (!) and monging by the lovely Alpine lake. I'm not going to say much more about this except vent my minor frustration with the amenities and provisions of the modern 'camper'. We carried everything we needed for camping on our backs and to be perfectly honest it was all we needed. The only thing which we agreed would have made things slightly ore comfortable would have been a small table and chairs for our meals. We did NOT need a fridge-freezer, sky television, a DOORMAT, a microwave or a wireless-enabled laptop. For people who turn up in camper-vans which are bigger than my parent's house i do not consider this camping. To be honest, I would rather stay in one of the swanky hotels nearer to the town of Bled. At least here I wouldn't be trying to be anything I wasn't.

Rant over, after five nights we had one night in Llubljana. The least said about this place the better. Don't get me wrong, I'm not criticizing the place itself - Lonely Planet calls in 'Pure Mitteleuropa, with cafes and culture galore'. All we did was clothes shopping and get drunk. As a general aside it may be worth point out some on the cocktails that were available in 'Skeleton Bar' - 'Juicy Balls', 'Blow my Woody', 'Orgas,', 'Bloody Orgasm', 'Bloody Screaming Orgasm' and (my favourite, but most definately the most un-PC) 'Sex in disabled toilets'. I didn't have 'Sex in toilets' and so will be unable to comment on the subtle differences in taste.

The bus journey to Venice was grim. I'd had more cocktails than I could count and my throat felt like I'd swallowed a cheese grate from all the Marlboros I'd smoked.

Venice itself wasn't great either but for different reasons. Our accomodation in Llubljana had been some Halls of Residence - on the whole clean and cheap. In Venice we paid three times as much for filth and the most uncomfortable bed known to mankind. If you ever find yourself in Venice, do NOT stay at the Hotel Giovanini. Venice itself was nice, but like Dubrovnik it was spoiled by the sheer numbers of tourists, only more so. The prices were horrendous too - 4 euros for a cappuccino certainly doesn't float my gondola. Personally i thi kwhen you've been in the tourist game as long as Venice, you become complacent. Prices rise without a proportional rise is the quality of service offered. So much so that in some cases everything is generally poor. In the most depreived areas of Bosnia we received the best meals and accomodation for a fraction of the cost that we did in Venice. The best pizza was in Sarajevo for £3, certainly not the 'tomata sauce on a piece of concrete' which I received in Venice. After a few tiresome days in the city we went to the airport, flew to Liverpool and then homeward.

I recognise that some parts of this tale have descended into rants. I don't want it to appear that I had a bad time because that certainly isn't the case. I'd never been on holiday for more than 9 or 10 days before and I had a wealth of new experiences and saw places that most people never really go to. I definately want to visit Bosnia again, particularly Sarajevo so I can see how the place is finally starting to pick itself up. I think we both agreed that if we go to that part of the world again we shall still firmly off the tourist trail - perhaps to places like Romania, Albania, Macedonia and Bulgaria. They all have a lot to offer and I'm looking forward to making a return trip at some point in the future!

Without rules, where would we be?

2008-05-08T13:48:00.000-07:00

If we all follow these simple rules, our classroom will be a much friendlier place where we are more likely to learn and succeed!

1. We will raise our hands when Mr. Owen asks a question and wait to be picked (unless he asks us personally).

2. We will not shout out.

3. We will keep four chair legs on the floor at all times.

4. We will bring our basic equipment to all lessons. This means a pen, a pencil and a ruler.

5. We will wait our turn and not interrupt Mr. Owen when he is talking to other pupils.

6. Mobile phones, MP3 players and Ipods will be neither seen nor heard in Mr. Owen’s lessons.

7. We shall respect everyone else in the class.

8. We shall always try our best!

Always ask if you are struggling!

All but over?!

2008-05-07T11:19:00.000-07:00

Hillary Clinton's narrow victory in North Carolina and Indiana may not be enough to save her. She needed a big win to offset Senator Obama's lead and not even the so-called 'superdelegates' may be enough to avoid the inevitable. The trouble is, Clinton will not give up until the bitter end. Think about it, she's been planning this campaign for years and now with only a few months to go until the general election she's going to want to know that she fought tooth and nail - the trouble is, this will mean defeat for the Democratic party overall. I'm not the first to point out that this bitter contest is leaving the McCain team rubbing their hands with glee. At the time of writing it seems as though he is by far and away the frontrunner. His military past gives him a certain amount of credibility - and not to mention his moderate Republican policies which has made many people realise that another GOP President would not be a Bush reincarnation.

That's why liberal America has something to smile about. Whoever wins, the White House will come in from the right. Furthermore, whoever McCain faces it's going to be an interesting contest - with Clinton we of course have the first possiblity of a female President but with the more likely candidate, Obama, we have the possiblity of the first black president - perhaps even more astonishing, especially only 44 years after the end of racial segregation in the deep South. However, I don't think race will be Obama's downfall - his inexperience may be the harbinger of defeat on this occasion. I forget his exact age, but he's in his forties, was elected to the Senate only a few years ago after a stint as a legal eagle and his record cannot compare to either that of Clinton or McCain. A commentator recently said (I think it was Freedland in the Guardian) that if Obama were to be elected, the worldwide anticipation and excitement that this would create would remove the possibility of a successful presidency - quite simply, expectations would be far too high to match outcomes...He's been looking very tired recently too. Whilst he's shrugging off Clinton, McCain is preparing for the contest in November. Expect to see a Republican President in the White House this time next year!

It looks like the party's over!

2008-05-03T14:27:00.000-07:00

The only decent thing about the recent elections was the fact that the BNP didn’t win in Carlisle. Labour lost two seats to the Tories and in the ward where I reside – St. Aidan’s – the Labour incumbent retained her seat. The BNP, despite pushing all manner of racist garbage through the letterboxes of these streets in recent weeks, were well and truly defeated. Nationally the BNP polled much worse than expected due to the relatively high turn out. The most high-profile victory was Richard Barnbrook in Dagenham. I’m sorry to say that he used to be a teacher.

Overall, the Labour party were completely annihilated on Thursday. Parties of government are expected to do badly in local elections. Blair received an electoral ‘bloody nose’ prior to the General Election of 2005. However, this defeat for Gordon Brown was worse, much worse. So bad in fact that Labour have not fared so badly since 1968. Back then Harold Wilson was in Number 10 and within two year he was defeated by the Heathite Conservatives. Brown knows his history – the man who waited his entire political life for his current job must now face the real possibility that it will come to an abrupt end in 2010, barely three years after Blair handed over the reins and hardly long enough for Brown to fulfil his potential. It also ought to be remembered that Blair never faced an election off the back of an economy in recession. Governments survive or fall by their handling of the economy and that which saved Blair may be Brown’s downfall.

Martin Kettle writes in today’s Guardian that the great New Labour experiment is over. The party which for so long wasted away in the doldrums of the left has now come ‘full circle’ and the Conservative party are once again returning to their natural role of governing party – I say ‘natural’ because history shows the Tories have held power the longest. If Labour are defeated in 2010 – and that now looks highly likely – the party will face an interesting predicament. It will undoubtedly have to reform. Steering the same path will be out of the question. Cameron has always been a big fan of Blair and his government will be the natural heir of Blairism. Even though a return to the days of 1983 would be catastrophic, I see little alternative to a leftward shift for the party. Quite clearly it will have to define itself in opposition to the new Conservative government. Thatcherism has become Blairism – the torch will soon pass to Cameron and a leftist alternative is now the only option for Labour. I’m not talking about socialism – quite simply the party needs to return to its core values of justice, equality and standing up for the working man. Recently, it has been the party’s failure to do this which has given rise to the exploitative tactics of the BNP. The white working class feel disenfranchised by Labour (the proposed abolition of the 10p tax rate was the epitome of this and the most symbolic aspect of Labour's abandonment of the working classes) – the party needs to a new reforming agenda which will reach out to its core constituency. The sooner it does this the better. Whether this can be done before 2010 is questionable. In any case, I cannot see it saving Gordon Brown who now finds himself in the same position as John Major in 1995 – two years to go as a ‘lame duck’ Prime Minister.

A morning with 8C1 - edited version

2008-04-24T12:33:00.001-07:00

8C1 have a reputation in my B placement school for being a particularly disruptive class. There are 18 pupils, all of which are on the SEN register. They have been placed in the ‘C band’ on entry to secondary school because they failed to achieve a level 3 in the core subjects whilst in primary school. I observed these three subjects over the course of a morning with the following foci: behaviour management, provision for inclusion (one pupil is by far and away much abler than the rest – I have given him differentiated resources and I want to see if other teachers do the same) and communication. As I had suspected, whilst the class can be poorly behaved in history, it is much worse in other subjects. They are said to get a ‘good deal’ in history. They like the content, as well as its ‘narrative’ nature – the scrutiny of rigorous historical concepts is difficult with these pupils.

First stop - maths. The teacher lays their books on the desk at the front before the lesson so pupils can pick them up on their way to sit down – simple, but something that I can incorporate into my own practice. From the start it is clear that this class really needs a teaching assistant. The teacher is moving disruptive pupils from the very beginning. Four pupils arrive 15 minutes in with no excuse. The starter is still being completed and this is further disrupted. One pupil at the back claims to have finished the starter (addition - with a competitive element. Pupils win a polo if they are the first to get the right answer) and he is angry that the teacher has not acknowledged him. However he cannot do this because of the loud chatter which is taking place. There is clearly no respect for the teacher – one pupil who is asked to leave the room tells him to ‘shut up’. Overall, this was an unsuccessful lesson but I’m not sure that the teacher was completely at fault. Classes like this need a teaching assistant. Also, maths is of course a massively important subject. Not being a specialist I am not sure how this can be made more engaging. In History we can of course settle the class by telling them a good story or making the learning active. Something like this needs to be done in maths or pupils will fall further behind.

The bad behaviour spills over into science when three girls refuse to even enter the room. They are escorted away by the year head who takes them to the ‘seclusion room’. I cannot help thinking that the teacher has contributed to his the behaviour problems this time around. Of the seven benches in the science lab, all the pupils are clustered around two. One of the many things teachers can do when there is an issue with behaviour is create their own seating plan. At the very least pupils need to be well spread out. As regards communication it’s much more difficult in a science lab given the room’s sheer size. In these instances it is much more effective to use a wide range of visuals. “Pupils in this class learn by osmosis” says the teacher. “There is no way I would stand up in front of them all and try to present a normal lesson because they would have none of it”. Also, pupils are eating sweets and chocolates constantly – this sugar rich diet, as well as the fact that very few have breakfast or dinner means that the pupils are very hyperactive and pale. Steps need to be taken (for a start in PSHE lessons) in order to ensure that pupils receive a proper diet.

The final lesson of the morning is English. This is by far and away the best I have seen them behave. This has partly to do with the fact that the class has been split – some pupils (incidentally the worst behaved) have gone elsewhere for intensive literacy work). Their behaviour is also much better (I believe) because the teacher maintains a consistently calm approach. Very little seems to faze him and on the one occasion he does raise his voice pupils take note! For the first time today they actually all work silently as a class and when they talk it is actually about the work in hand. One boy is sent out. He is given five minutes outside ‘to reflect’ and then let back in but only if he can give the teacher two good reasons why this should be so. Again this is good practice which I shall take forward from today. Overall, I think the main reason why behaviour was better here was because the teacher was unflinching in his use of praise. This is the teacher’s number one weapon against bad behaviour. If used appropriately and often I believe that praise can make even the most poorly behaved pupils improve.

In none of the classes I saw today was special provision made for MM. When a pupil is so clearly ahead of the rest s/he needs to be pushed. I have done this by modifying his resources so he is not actually doing more work (he would resent this!) - it is the same amount, just different (i.e, more challenging). Please see my examples of this.

Additional comments scribbled by me (but not included on the report):

…managing zoo animals rather than teaching.
After today I will go home and drink a pint of scotch.
Most pupils seem to be oblivious to the fact that anything resembling a lesson is taking place.
He bribes pupils with money!
If managing pupils was an Olympic event…
The whole class is working silently! I go into shock at the back of the room.
The pupils are STILL working silently. I fall off my chair and try to pick myself up.

Various...

2008-04-21T13:32:00.000-07:00

Today was Monday!

Unnaccustomed as I am to blogging the following may not make a lot of sense. However, I've decided to join blogger for a number of reasons:

1. I take quite a keen interst in current affairs and occassionally I feel the need to comment on them.
2. Over the last few months I have written a note on facebook whenever something has 'rattled' me. Essentially this was a blog in itself so I decided to sign up for the real thing.
3. I like taking up new hobbies!

I see it as part diary, part me ranting about current affairs (see previous entry). Today, it will probably be the former - suffice it to say that there have been a few news items this week which deserve a mention. The Labour party has jettisoned the last pretence of being the party of the working man by opting to abolish the 10p starting rate of tax. This will benefit those earning over £19-20,000 a year (i.e., the middle class) whilst penalising the poorer sections of society. Keir Hardie will be spinning in his grave...

So, I rolled into St. Aidans this morning ready for another week of fun and frolicks. The school is shutting in July to make way for the new Richard Rose Academy (the name of the dead son of the new principal, or to use the correct language - 'Director of Learning') and plans are afoot to make the transition as smooth as possible. However last week teachers were dropped with the bombshell that they're going to have to apply for their OWN jobs for September. At roughly the same time student teachers at the University of Cumbria received an email advertising jobs going at the new Academy. Put two and two together and yes - it appears that the powers that be are using the transition as an opportunity to 'remove' some teachers quietly. This isn't a simply case of incompetance - ALL teachers at St. Aidans need to apply in writing before the end of this week. There's even talk of some having formal interviews where they 'judtify their position in the new school' to a panel.

It's not easy for me as a student teacher working in this environment. Teachers don't know whether they're coming or going - at present it isn't confirmed who will have a job in September OR whether pensions will be secured. It's a shitty situation to say the least and one the school could do without. Behaviour and attainment are a serious cause for concern - if Ofsted came in tomorrow, the headmaster believes that 'we would be in special measures'. I teach a range of classes from Years 7 to 11. In one of my year 7 classes pupils have a reading age of 7-8 and no one in my Year 11 set will achieve above a grade C. Pupils go to prison on a regular basis, teachers are often verbally and physically assaulted an I've seen them break down in tears in the staffroom on no less than three occasions.

And yet for all this I can't help liking St. Aidans. This is the third school I've spent any considerable length of time in and I can honestly say that I have never worked with a friendlier staff. It often happens that the more challenging the school, the nicer the staff and that's certainly the case here. They will always give their time up for you and for me as a trainee that's very reassuring and helpful. What's more, look very carefully and you will find some nice pupils. It's not easy but they are there!

The May Elections in Carlisle

2008-04-20T14:17:00.000-07:00

I have in front of me a copy of ‘Voice of Freedom – The Newspaper of the British National Party’. Normally 60p – this FREE copy found itself through my letterbox because of the imminent May 1st local elections. Now, given what you could call my ‘morbid fascination’ with extremist politics I decided to give this paper a read just so I could see what these crackpots believed. It is easy to call them these names I know, but you don’t need to read for long until you realise how downright misguided their principles appear to be. Take the following quote for example – taken from the front page and designed, I suspect, to be read by the majority of people before the paper goes flying into the waste paper bin (I hope).

“Visits to local mosques are now on most school curriculums because Labour, Conservative and Lib-Dem run councils are forever pushing for the promotion of foreign religions and cultures on young British school children. They do so because the 'Old Gang' of political parties see the future of Britain as a melting pot of different nationalities with a 'cohesion' of foreign cultures.”

‘A melting pot of different nationalities’ – traditionally we have seen the USA as a ‘nation of immigrants’, however, much of the same can be said about the UK. We have been colonised by Nordic Vikings, Germans, Franks and Romans (who didn’t bother going home when the Empire ended) since the beginnings of history. Jews and Eastern Europeans were coming to this country well over a century ago, fleeing persecution. So, if anyone believes that immigration began in the Windrush years they are sorely mistaken. We perceive it to be a modern phenomenon because it was only recently that this country began to welcome ethnic minorities (i.e., visibly different). Well I say recently – we now have up to four generations living in this country, three of which were born here. Ask many young Muslims today where they were originally from and they will probably say Manchester or Glasgow. Many have only a minor appreciation of what it means to be Pakistani or Palestinian - a reflection perhaps of their visits to relatives. So, to regard Islam as a foreign religion is preposterous. Countries evolve and Islam has established itself fully as one of the country’s many faiths. The same can be said of Sikhism, Hinduism and Judaism – I think one of the reasons I haven’t really enjoyed living in Carlisle is because I miss the vibrant, interesting mix of multicultural societies. “Everyone in Carlisle is [to quote a colleague at school] the same” – they share similar hopes and fears which the BNP aims to work towards its advantage.

Carlisle is in many respects perfect hunting ground for the BNP. Predominantly white, reasonably low achievement in school and high levels of immigration create a situation which the party can easily exploit. Essentially this is what the party and its predecessor, the National Front, have done for decades – play on people’s fears and anxieties for electoral gain. I see a lot of disaffected young people on a daily basis – rich pickings for the BNP. They believe that they can do this because New Labour has supposedly abandoned the working man for the centre ground (and in doing so has supposedly left him exposed to the nasty immigrant). In reality, the party is incredibly elitist. It despises unionism and regards the rich as racially superior.

I recently had a look at the Youth BNP website which looked at the study of History in schools. The message board questioned the failure of the subject to address our country’s ‘glorious past’. Which county had the world’s biggest ever Empire? Which country supplied the world with the fruits of the first Industrial Revolution? – it asked. Feeling bellicose, I decided to ask ‘Which country founded a substantial percentage of its modern wealth on the exploitation of Africans?’ Of course, I’m dismissed as nothing more than a Marxist nut. In fact, I’m happy to say that I am mildly nationalistic and I despise the fact that the party has hijacked the Union Jack for its own ends. Like all ideologues, the most credible recognise the strengths and weaknesses of their beliefs. That is why pupils should be taught a balanced view of history.

I do agree that there is a large constituency of people in this country who have been disenfranchised by the mainstream parties – the ‘Old Gang’ as the BNP call them. The challenge is to find a workable solution to this problem before the party builds on its recent success.