SATS

    If teachers are allowed to contribute to the assessment of their pupils' progress then they are in effect being permitted to assess themselves and their school.   What parents need when selecting a primary school for their child and what society needs is an objective measurement of how well each primary school is performing so that those schools which are failing to provide the basic skills required by every pupil starting secondary education can be identified and dealt with.

 

 

It may well make sense to use a floating three-year average to rank a school fairly but let's not confuse that with allowing the players to referee the match which is in effect what is being suggested here.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-13875671#dna-comments

 

John Waghorne

Re: Beware Of Greeks

John

>>I know it's a bit unfair but there's a certain amount of truth in the
caricature that while the Germans are working their socks off producing
excellent products and saving for their old age the Greeks are sunning
themselves on the beach glugging back their wine subsidised by the
Germans.<<

In a nut shell. Socialism at its best. Left left left...strike strike
strike

Jimmy Dunn
Edinburgh
Scotland

http://www.visitlothians.co.uk/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jimjdunn/

England thy beauties are tame and domestic
To one who has roved on the mountains afar
Oh! For the crags that are wild and magestic
The steep frowning glories of dark Lochnagar.

Beware Of Greeks

Nearly all the pundits seem to think a Greek default of some sort is
inevitable and discussion is moving towards deciding which would be the
least damaging way for Europe, (never mind Greece) for that to be done.
The exception appears to be EU leaders who remain convinced that just a bit
more money thrown at the problem will end the crisis or, at least delay the
crisis until they are out of power and their successors are left to clean up
the mess.

I know it's a bit unfair but there's a certain amount of truth in the
caricature that while the Germans are working their socks off producing
excellent products and saving for their old age the Greeks are sunning
themselves on the beach glugging back their wine subsidised by the Germans.
If a default of some sort is really inevitable then surely it is far better
to manage the process and the subsequent way back to solvency for Greece
than just to let it happen in some uncontrolled way that could lead to
further problems for other EU countries.

John Waghorne

Another Climb Down

It appears that the govt have decided to drop proposals to increase the
discount for an early guilty plea from a third to half.

Had they acknowledged that this measure was designed purely to save money as
prison sentences for those pleading guilty quickly would have been reduced
and thus the costs of keeping them in prison would be reduced than I could
see the point of it but that was not their argument. They claimed that it
would reduce the number of cases that go right through to the trial date
before the punter finally pleads guilty so that all the costs of preparing
the case have already been incurred and, of course, that it would save
witnesses the stress of giving evidence on more occasions.

I really don't think, from my experience, that it works like that.
Solicitors are directed to inform their clients of the 1/3 discount before
they plead and most of them are going to give their clients responsible
advice on the likelihood of being convicted at trial once they have seen the
evidence against the client. Increasing the discount is unlikely to change
that advice.

The reason why so many cases go right through to the trial date before a
change of plea is that where the evidence leaves some issues to be argued
experienced defendants may decide to hang on to see if prosecution witnesses
actually turn up on the day. If they do then they grab for the 1/10
discount that is still available and plead guilty at the last minute.

I don't think increasing the discount for early guilty pleas would impact on
this situation to the smallest extent.

One way of reducing costs in the criminal justice system would, of course,
be to increase magistrates' sentencing powers from 6 to 12 months. That
way a higher proportion of cases could be dealt with by magistrates' courts
which are a helluva lot cheaper than are crown courts.

That does not mean that mags would hand down longer sentences than now but
that could deal with cases that currently have to be passed up to Crown
court simply because if the punter is convicted the sentence is likely to
exceed our powers so we decline jurisdiction.

I do not know how much money that would save but whereas crown courts are
over-worked many magistrates courts are short of work as a result of so many
minor offences being dealt with by fixed penalty notices handed out by the
police.

John Waghorne

RE: Now I hadn't Thought Of That!

John

>>I did raise the issue of who the public would support if the public sector  but I was a bit tentative about it.unions really did manage to impact on the general public by going on strike<<<

I do not know if you saw Andrew Marr this morning.   They had the Union leader of the PCS. They just cannot help themselves.  He had to get his *Tory Rich Boy* in.  He was clearly out of his depth just answering simple question.  Andrew was very easy on him.   If that is what the union members pay to defend their rights.. Well what can I say

>>Is Cameron really that smart? Thatcher was but Cameron is certainly no  Thatcher.<<

No he is no Thatcher.  But he is no numpty either.   I said  about two weeks ago that when Cable addressed the TUC about strikes.  Legislation is right now on the desk waiting to be implemented to curb the excesses of the crackpots.   If Cameron had any sense he would implement the Union Law now.   After the disaster left by the socialist, the UK is in no financial position to humour those nuts. Thatcher would not have hesitated.   As I keep saying, we are still at the good bit.

>>And it's Labour that has the Balls.<<

Thank christ for that.   He wants a tax cut of £51 billon.   So does everybody.  But he had not a clue how to implement it.  In true socialist fashion.   All the statements,  but when ask how... A blank look 

Jimmy Dunn
Edinburgh
Scotland
 
http://www.visitlothians.co.uk/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jimjdunn/
 
England thy beauties are tame and domestic
    To one who has roved on the mountains afar
         Oh! For the crags that are wild and magestic
               The steep frowning glories of dark Lochnagar. 
 
 

Now I hadn't Thought Of That!

I did raise the issue of who the public would support if the public sector
unions really did manage to impact on the general public by going on strike
but I was a bit tentative about it.

I had also wondered about how tough the coalition really could be with their
somewhat ambiguous mandate and I certainly questioned their determination to
fight the good fight after their surrender to the bested interests of the
medical profession but Ed Balls may have hit on something.

Is Cameron really that smart? Thatcher was but Cameron is certainly no
Thatcher.

And it's Labour that has the Balls.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13826271

Exploitation?

When I first heard Davies' proposal I had some sympathy for it but on
reflection it's a thoroughly bad. It may allow a few additional disabled
people into employment but it opens the way to exploitation of some of the
most vulnerable.

If you have a minimum wage law then it must include everybody, not just
those strong enough to defend themselves against unscrupulous employers.

There are ways of levelling the playing field for disabled people in the
area of employment with anti-discrimination laws having a place and govt
support schemes to fund any additional costs an employer might incur also
being very important but I suspect that in times when jobs are not easy to
find anybody who isn't a gold-plated candidate (and that, of course,
includes disabled people) are at a marked disadvantage.

Something that I have observed over the decades in the UK is how far too
many disabled people do seem to be content to live on and campaign for
higher state benefits rather than pushing harder for jobs. It isn't
universal, of course, as I can quote plenty of examples of severely impaired
people working hard and earning a decent living but far too many have
encountered and far too many of the organisations representing them do focus
heavily on levels of benefits.

I don't know how many employment consultants in job centres specialise in
dealing with disabled people these days but back in the sixties there
certainly were officers, DROs, who dealt with disabled people and BPROs who
specialised in helping blind people to find jobs. Society and disabled
people themselves *expected* to work and many employers were very open to
employing them.

And, of course, for those whose impairments made them unsuitable for
employment in "open industry" there were networks of sheltered workshops
where they worked to the best of their ability and received a subsidised
wage. They had all those intangible benefits of employment even if the
public subsidised them to some extent they had the dignity of knowing they
were making a contribution.

From my more recent involvement that has all changed. Society and disabled
people seem to have lower aspirations and apparently employers are less
open-minded.

Still, making employing disabled people an exception to the minimum wage
rules is not the answer.

John Waghorne

Car Crash

Alan Milburn is saying most of what I feel.

This cowardly lame duck govt has backed down to the "forces of conservatism
and reaction", namely the medical trade unions and has come up with a set of
changes to healthcare which will probably result in more bureaucracy, less
patient choice, worse outcomes for patients as services are squeezed by
falling productivity and higher costs than is currently the case.

We have missed the chance to end this state monopoly for yet another
generation and those of us who are getting older and likely to need medical
treatment more than are our younger fellow citizens are going to suffer
inferior services as a result.

Competition would force up standards in the hospital sector except, of
course, now there won't be any worth talking about and allowing hospital
doctors and nurses onto commissioning boards is like allowing the poachers
to participate in the process for selecting gamekeepers.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13786924

John Waghorne

Re: Alternative History

John

>>If this is a genuine text then he at least unlike the current leadership
>>understood that if Labour were to regain the trust of the voters on the
>>economy they have to accept full responsibility for the situation we find
>>ourselves in and take urgent steps to reduce the deficit.<<

I do not consider for one moment this is genuine. When Ed the Red defeated
his brother he refused to be part of the opposition front bench, That was
a very shrewd move. He knows Ed the Red pay masters the Unions are hell
bent on destroying the economy of the country by what ever means. And
that is left left left ..strike strike strike. The Arabs are having their
spring. We are about to embark upon and witness a Union Summer. It could
not be more obvious when Cable, who would be at home with the loonie hard
socialist left of the Labour Party was booed by the TUC, by warning them of
this folly. Isn't it just marvellous what a quick shifty of the books can
achieve. But Ed the Red has been ordered by his union bosses .. Do not
listen. They are still in denial regarding the deficit and will not be
satisfied as they move further to the left and the economy has been totally
destroyed. David knows that at the next election Labour face total
decimation such as the Tories suffered in Scotland. They have still not
recovered. In the last election the same happened to Labour in their own
heart land. That was even despite a Parliamentary system so designed
that Labour could not loose. The English voter saved their bacon. But
will it the next time. Well to me it seems not. David Milliband is
clearly putting down his marker. As did Cable. They both knows what the
voter think and wants to hear. In the case of Cable after two minutes in
government they realise they can no longer have manifestos, like Sheridan's
socialists that promise free this and free that. David Milliband foot is
in the door for the election after the next. In the case of the link to
Balls. I have said this already and I will say again. A law should be
passed that stipulate both Ed Ball and Gordon Brown should never ever again
be allowed near public money.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/business-minister-cable-booed-strike-warning-112242585.html

Jimmy Dunn
Edinburgh
Scotland

http://www.visitlothians.co.uk/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jimjdunn/

England thy beauties are tame and domestic
To one who has roved on the mountains afar
Oh! For the crags that are wild and magestic
The steep frowning glories of dark Lochnagar.

Alternative History

I gather the Graud has today published the text of the speech that the other
Milibrand, David, would have made had he and not his brother won the contest
for the leadership of the Labour party.

If this is a genuine text then he at least unlike the current leadership
understood that if Labour were to regain the trust of the voters on the
economy they have to accept full responsibility for the situation we find
ourselves in and take urgent steps to reduce the deficit.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2002413/Speech-David-Miliband-given-Labour-leader.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

And then, of course, the Telegraph publishes compelling evidence of how
Brown and the Labour govt were warned by senior civil servants that govt
spending was out of control long before the credit crunch.

As the old saying goes, the time to mend the roof is when the sun is out.
The Germans did, Labour did not.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13736406

etc

John Waghorne

Pay Your Share

Robert Gates, in his farewell speech, has warned the European wing of NATO
that the American taxpayer, up to his eyes in debt, may not be prepared to
subsidised their security much longer.

The US has expended huge amounts of both blood and treasury, sometimes it
has to be said unwisely, as Europe largely sat on its hands making only
token gestures of political support.

Europe needs to take a greater share of the defence burden onto its budget
but of course if we do that then America must realise that the quid pro quo
will have to be a greater political influence over the actions that NATO
takes.

John Waghorne

Re: So Who Voted For Him?

John

>>However as an unelected office-holder is he really the right person to be
>>offering such high-profile criticism?<<

He is entitled to an opinion. But he is a religious crackpot, brought
about by a church that was invented by a king so he could shag somebody
else's wife. So that about sums up his position. But as I understand,
churches like the Church of England and the Roman Catholic Church are some
of the richest institutes in the world. Indeed the head of one of them
known as Her Majesty, is one of the richest woman in the world. So do you
not think if the Queen, the Church of England and the RC Church got
together and in a civic gesture gave all their money away to the starving
and the poor who cannot afford the latest 42 inch super dooper digi telly.
Instead of doing a loonie socialist left moan on how to spend everybody
else's money

Jimmy Dunn
Edinburgh
Scotland

http://www.visitlothians.co.uk/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jimjdunn/

England thy beauties are tame and domestic
To one who has roved on the mountains afar
Oh! For the crags that are wild and magestic
The steep frowning glories of dark Lochnagar.

So Who Voted For Him?

The chief druid has been at the communion wine again.

He has just noticed that we have a coalition govt and, as a govt which
nobody voted for, it is implementing policies which it can be argued nobody
voted for and is no doubt failing to implement policies that many people
voted for. That is the nature of coalition govts and the major reason why
we should avoid them like the plague as they give the politicians far too
much opportunity for avoiding the will of the voters.

However as an unelected office-holder is he really the right person to be
offering such high-profile criticism?

Oh, and who voted for his policies?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13706710

John Waghorne

A Welcome Change Of Heart

Mostly I'm annoyed how spineless this govt is but I am pleased Ken Clarke is
having second thoughts about increasing the discount on sentence for an
early guilty plea. If a third off doesn't persuade somebody to plead then
I doubt if half will.

Besides, I don't think it works like that. A decent solicitor will advise
a guilty plea to claim any discount available if the evidence looks as if a
conviction is pretty certain so I doubt increasing that discount will make
much difference or save much money in practice. And the old hands know
that it's always worth pleading "not guilty" on less evidence than that and
wait until the day of the trial to see if the prosecution witnesses turn up
on the day and then change the plea to guilty claiming the 10% discount
currently available.

I doubt if Ken's proposal would have changed that.

John Waghorne

Playboy Returns

Two stories with, I think, a not very subtle linkage.

I am concerned by the way our children are exposed to sexual images and
references so early in their lives and I do wonder if this contributes to
the "post-feminist" trend that so annoys my Mrs as young women seem to have
one main ambition, to be a celebrity based on their looks or to marry a
footballer. What happened to wanting to be PM or Astronomer Royal?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-13641451

Which may explain why the women objecting to the re-opening of London's
Playboy club are on a hiding to nothing.

From what I hear Playboy is pretty tame stuff compared to some of the bars
and clubs on pretty much every high street these days.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/video/Womens-Rights-Group-Slam-Hugh-Hefner-After-He-Re-Launches-His-Playboy-Club-In-London/Video/201106116005281?DCMP=News-search-sslc&lid=VIDEO_16005281_WomensRightsGroupSlamHughHefnerAfterHeRe-LaunchesHisPlayboyClubInLondon&lpos=searchresults

John Waghorne

The Money Wins

It's a great mistake to run the Bahrain GP this autumn.

Even if there are no more killings and no more suppression of opposition
protests on the island surely the race is going to be a focus for activists.
And what sort of message does it send out to the repressive regimes of the
region other than "business as usual" and sod democracy.

John Waghorne

RE: What A Let Down!

John

>>The race was then ruined as they allowed a change of tyres before the restart which effectively cancelled out the race strategy differences chosen by the teams during the rest of the race and just left us a six lap procession of evenly matched cars and drivers all on new rubber.<<

It is ages since I watched GP.   But as I recall when a crash occurred and the race stopped.  After it was cleared  the restart application was in the same configuration and position at the time of the stop.  For one lap.   But elf and safety and all that.  For instance a crash could have occurred in the dry.   After restart it could be pouring with rain.  The driver had to do one full lap on his dry condition tyre, and from the same position he was in at the stop,  before going into the pit.   I cannot recall but I think that is how it went.  But what baffles me.   How does it pay for itself.   Certainly not from takings from the crowds.   But I very seldom watch the goggle box now.

Jimmy Dunn
Edinburgh
Scotland
 
http://www.visitlothians.co.uk/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jimjdunn/
 
England thy beauties are tame and domestic
    To one who has roved on the mountains afar
         Oh! For the crags that are wild and magestic
               The steep frowning glories of dark Lochnagar. 
 

What A Let Down!

I'm never very thrilled by the Monaco GP which usually turns into a rather
boring procession from start to finish enlivened a little by an occasional
crash but this year the race was actually quite exciting until the stewards
managed to turn it into a non-event when the race was restarted.

OK, I can see that stopping the race after Petrov crashed was the right
option & I would have been only mildly disappointed had it ended at that
point however when it was announced that the race was going to be restarted
to complete the last six laps I thought we could be in for an exciting
finish with Button on his fresh tyres right on the tail of Vetal and Alonzo
whose tyres were much older and about to pack in completely. The race was
then ruined as they allowed a change of tyres before the restart which
effectively cancelled out the race strategy differences chosen by the teams
during the rest of the race and just left us a six lap procession of evenly
matched cars and drivers all on new rubber.

Why did they bother.

John Waghorne

RE: Sharon Shoesmith

John

>>This morning she once more struggled to accept any responsibility for

 what happened. I hope the Supreme court find against her but in the current

 struggle for power between the politicians and the judges I fear that

 she will win.<<

Oh you can bet you boots she will.   In this silly politically correct country we live in she is on her merry 

way to being a millionaire.   The sad fact is they all try to make out they are concerned about this death 

or that death.  The reality being they could not give a rats toss.  Like all PMs when a squaddie is killed.

Crocodile tears

Jimmy Dunn
Edinburgh
Scotland
 
http://www.visitlothians.co.uk/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jimjdunn/
 
England thy beauties are tame and domestic
    To one who has roved on the mountains afar
         Oh! For the crags that are wild and magestic
               The steep frowning glories of dark Lochnagar. 
 
 

Sharon Shoesmith

She may have won her appeal on a procedural failure by Ed Balls but her
interview on "Today" this morning is hardly likely to have won over many of
the listeners.

I remember being shocked by the very first interview with her surrounding
the events then in which she seemed utterly incapable of grasping that her
department had utterly failed in its duty. She maintained that she had
done a good job operating within budget and meeting all her targets. When
the rather shocked interviewer said, "but the baby died!" her reply was
along the lines that she hadn't killed him.

The leader of the council and the cabinet minister responsible for
children's services resigned but she seemed totally oblivious of her
culpability in the matter despite the Offsted report which gave such damning
criticism of her department.

This morning she once more struggled to accept any responsibility for what
happened. I hope the Supreme court find against her but in the current
struggle for power between the politicians and the judges I fear that she
will win.

How Very Convenient

For years there have been rumours that FIFA was corrupt and that many of its
leading personalities asked for bribes for votes and now we have claims from
insiders that such is the case. These claims involving Mohamed Bin Hammam
and Jack Warner are to be investigated.

How convenient that Mohamed Bin Hammam is the only other candidate besides
Sepp Blatter for the job of president in an election next week.

John Waghorne

NHS Reform

And this is yet another reason why the state monopoly on healthcare has to
end.

How many more of these reports do we need to convince the politicians to
ignore those in the NHS with a clear vested interest in maintaining the
status quo as if the terms healthcare and NHS are synonymous?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-13545780

John Waghorne

Well Done The BBC

I was rather dreading Obama's visit as in recent years high-profile events
concerning the US have totally wiped everything else off the news agenda.
Not so this time, I'm pleased to say.

So far the coverage has been perfectly adequate but has not dominated TV and
radio.

Incidentally, I understand that he has now found an apostrophe for his name
to please theIrish American. When is he going to find a "Mac" to endear
himself to the Scottish American vote?

John Waghorne

RE: The Law Is Sometimes An Ass

John

>>As Twitter is an American corporation with no legal presence in the UK I reckon he's wasting his money unless, of course, he can demonstrate that Twitter has breached the law in whichever US jurisdiction applies.

Law is a devolved matter.   English gagging orders do not apply in Scotland, Ireland, France, Timbuktu or Outer Mongolia, far less America.   Our footballer can huff and puff all he likes.   Its called more money than bloody sense, and once again the male failure... thinking through his Richard.  

Jimmy Dunn
Edinburgh
Scotland
 
http://www.visitlothians.co.uk/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jimjdunn/
 
England thy beauties are tame and domestic
    To one who has roved on the mountains afar
         Oh! For the crags that are wild and magestic
               The steep frowning glories of dark Lochnagar. 
 
 

The Law Is Sometimes An Ass

How appropriate that the Lord Chief Justice is called "Judge" but his
judgement is taking him onto constitutionally dangerous ground when he
begins to attack the right of MPs and peers to speak freely under
parliamentary privilege.

In essence the problem here is that the UK's laws on privacy were imposed on
us from a foreign court and Parliament simply rubber-stamped that law by
passing the Human Rights Act which is increasingly bringing the courts into
conflict with the democratic institutions of the state which must take
precedence.

If Lord Judge's statement was not enough confusion added to the subject some
footballer is now trying to take legal action against Twitter because some
tweeter blabbed about the injunction banning references to his affair with
Imogen Thomas.

/As Twitter is an American corporation with no legal presence in the UK I
reckon he's wasting his money unless, of course, he can demonstrate that
Twitter has breached the law in whichever US jurisdiction applies.

Parliament really has to get a grip and frame a privacy law and we need to
make it clear that the ECHR no longer applies here if it conflicts with
domestic law.

This Privacy Thing

Why should the law protect anything but the minimum in terms of privacy?

Certainly it should be unlawful to tap my telephone without a court order
and bugging my home or workplace, taking long-range photos of me in my own
home against my wishes should be banned but if I, a famous footballer,
decides to shag my way through the female element of fandom then why should
fact be hidden from the public, my corporate sponsors or my wife?

I don't believe that Max Mosley had any right to complain about the
revelation that he had been involved in some group SM sex activity with a
bunch of consenting, adult women; what he had a right to complain about was
the lie that somehow there were Nazi aspects to the orgy. That was a lie
and he quite rightly won his case but that does not mean that his sexual
activities must be kept under the protection of the law.

Provided the story is true then the media should be allowed to publish it if
they think anybody will be interested.

John Waghorne

Re: Losing His Touch

John

>.Sorry, Ken, this is a bad idea and you have made it even less acceptable
>by the way you've handled the issue.<<

law and order in general is not Clarks strong point. But every body can
huff and blow all they like and I see the burn the bra brigade are already
doing that. But the reality of the crime of rape is that like all other
crime you need evidence. I cannot recall the exact figure, but it was
something like around 90% of acquittals were directly attributed to the
evidence of the female falling apart as details of her sex life came to the
fore. The definition in Scotland is simply defined as the unlawful carnal
knowledge of a female against her will....it then goes on to definitions by
age etc. There are two part there *unlawful* and *against her
will*. It then becomes a mine field. In the case of underage sex
*against her will* is irrelevant as it is rape by reason of age. In the
case of married man, I presume, it is lawful in England to bonk your wife.
The difficulty arises with *against her will*. In out and out rape the
act of intercourse is simple to prove. DNA and all that. The other two
become very relevant. Boy friend and girl friend. This is the one most
reported to the police. Wee Jane gets pissed her boyfriend has his nasty
way. Two days later she is worried she is pregnant and bingo.... I have
been raped. And a million scenarios like that. They are in the News of
the World every Sunday on every page. Normally involving footballers and
high profile gents with money... There is Wee Jane this time with 10 photos
on every page with her tits hanging out and provocative posses. Giving
crocodile tears., relating in detail every act of her dreadful rape. . The
difficulty is the police have to investigate. And the News of the Screws
get a million extra readers. In the case of what Clark is doing. I
really think it should not be shot down on face value. It is one of he
most difficult crimes to prove. And the reality is. It is one persons
word against the other. Unless the rapist has done something stupid like
beat her up.... very very hard to prove. My opinion. Well not made my
mind up. But seem to be coming down on the side of Ken. 3.5 years six
weeks, four hours and 22 seconds in jail is better than no jail. I see burn
the bra brigade are now moaning about the way rape is described.

Jimmy Dunn
Edinburgh
Scotland

http://www.visitlothians.co.uk/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jimjdunn/

England thy beauties are tame and domestic
To one who has roved on the mountains afar
Oh! For the crags that are wild and magestic
The steep frowning glories of dark Lochnagar.

Losing His Touch

Ken Clarke must be getting past it else he would never have made the
accurate but utterly insensitive remarks he did on Victoria Derbyshire's
programme on R5 this morning.

Some rapes will carry longer sentences than others depending on the
aggravating and mitigating factors just as some robberies, some thefts, even
some murders carry longer sentences than others but to label some rapes as
being "less serious" shows a level of political naivety that Ken, in his
prime, would never have exhibited.

Defendants pleading guilty at the earliest opportunity already get a third
off their sentence, a policy which does concern me, but the suggestion is
that the discount should be raised to half. Their also seems to be a
suggestion in the wind that, instead of being released half way through a
custodial sentence to serve the second half on licence, prisoners should be
released after serving only a quarter of the sentence inside before being
released into the community.

I can understand why folks are so angry. If this piece is right and
currently the average sentence for rape is five years then these two
measures could reduce that to 7 or 8 months.

Of course the effects aren't quite as bad if we assume that most rapists
already plead guilty (which is pretty unlikely) because then the average
sentence for those convicted at trial would be 7.5 years because they
wouldn't be getting the discount but if that were the case then raising the
discount would not achieve the desired outcome of making more of 'em plead
guilty and avoid putting victims through the stress of a trial.

Sorry, Ken, this is a bad idea and you have made it even less acceptable by
the way you've handled the issue.

An Eye For An Eye

As I understand it the principle of "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth"
was an early attempt at stating that punishments for crimes should be
proportionate and therefore defined the maximum, not usual punishment that
should be inflicted on the culprit.

Whereas I have huge sympathy for the woman involved both for the blindness
inflicted on her but even more so in that society for the disfigurement that
must almost inevitably have resulted from the attack on her this retribution
seems to me to be utterly barbaric.

Far better to make the bastard and his family provide her with financial
support for the rest of her life to mitigate the consequences of his crime.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/13/iran-blind-criminal-acid

John Waghorne

An Educational Disconnect

Exam results, both GCSE and A-level, seem to have improved every year which
was said by the previous government to indicate how they had improved our
educational standards but I, for one, have never been happy about that
suspecting that what has really happened is that the exams have got easier.
Is a grade C GCSE still regarded as an O-level pass? If so then the
proportion of those reaching that grade sounds too high to be credible.

Maybe a better test of how good our schools really are is what skills their
pupils are found to have when they join the world of the employed or those
seeking employment and here we seem to have a disconnect.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-13310246

Dirty Tricks?

Chris Huhne has certainly not endeared himself to many people with what I
reckon were childish, bad-tempered and certainly ill-judged comments about
people involved in the "no" campaign but this story does look like a
possible dirty trick to force him out.

Huhne denies the allegation and I have no reason to disbelieve him but in
the modern world of politics mud sticks and his party are going to be
embarrassed yet again.

If the timing of this story is very convenient I am wondering who benefits
from discrediting him now and possibly forcing him to fall on his sword.
The obvious candidates are the Tories in payment for some of his recent
comments about them but I reckon a better bet would be some of his senior
Libdem colleagues who might want to see the departure of an embarrassing
element from their ministerial presence without the need to actually sack
him.

If Huhne felt the need to stand down "for the good of the party" I reckon
Clegg might be quite relieved.
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Politics/Chris-Huhne-Energy-Secretary-Denies-Allegation-He-Tried-To-Pass-On-Penalty-Points-For-Speeding/Article/201105215987812?lpos=Politics_Top_Stories_Header_3&lid=ARTICLE_15987812_Chris_Huhne_Energy_Secretary_Denies_Allegation_He_Tried_To_Pass_On_Penalty_Points_For_Speeding

RE: Lords Reform

John

>>However my personal view is that we should keep the Lords as a revising chamber and for it to be most effective in that role we need to keep the huge body of expertise and experience from many fields that sits on the cross benches.<<

It is not something that is much talked about north of the Border, or do many Scots really understand it, or even care to.   Up here it is looked upon like the Monarchy, a useless bunch of dysfunctional over privileged leeches who cannot get a real job.   But my basic understanding of is that it  is there like the American system, of checks and balance to the more excessive policies of government.   But as I also understand it really has not teeth.   Thus if a Government wants a bill through and they have the numbes to get it passed.   Through that bill goes.   In short I am paying tax to give money to a already over privileged  tosspot, and for the upkeep of a building that is wasted space.  .   For the world of me I cannot see what purpose it serves.   We already elect a government to deal with the business.  If we do not like that government we vote them out.   It should be abolished, the Lords that is, not the government.   You could use the building for a retirement home for retired LibDem politicians...It will fill overnite...  It will help to get some of our money back..Guffaw...Guffaw..Guffaw

Jimmy Dunn
Edinburgh
Scotland
 
http://www.visitlothians.co.uk/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jimjdunn/
 
England thy beauties are tame and domestic
    To one who has roved on the mountains afar
         Oh! For the crags that are wild and magestic
               The steep frowning glories of dark Lochnagar. 
 
 

Lords Reform

The Lords can't go on as it is. I forget the exact number of members but
my thought when I heard it was that it made the Commons sound like a bunch
of people meeting for a discussion in their local.

If we are to reform the second chamber the first decision must surely be as
to its function. As I see it their really are only two options, a revising
chamber as now or a full-blown and powerful body with similar powers to the
Commons. If we go for the latter option, a fully party-political chamber,
then clearly all or virtually all of the members must be elected and we can
move on to discussing how that should be done and it makes sense that they
are elected on a different basis from MPs.

However my personal view is that we should keep the Lords as a revising
chamber and for it to be most effective in that role we need to keep the
huge body of expertise and experience from many fields that sits on the
cross benches.

We must certainly stop the practice that every PM elevates enough of his own
people to the House to ensure a majority for his own party and, insomuch as
there is to be a party political aspect to the membership then these should
be elected. However I do feel that the overtly party cohort should be kept
to a minimum.

And whatever way we go the last hereditary peers must go.

Scotland The Brave

The Scottish voting system was set up with the purpose of preventing the SNP ever getting an absolute majority and being able to hold a referendum on the issue of Scottish independence.   That device has now failed and the new SNP majority government in Scotland will be able to hold such a referendum during the next four years.

 

I hope the Scottish people decide to stay within the UK but I am sure that the anomalies within the current UK constitutional arrangements with NI, Scotland and Wales having various levels of autonomy from Westminster whereas England with its diverse regional character is still held under direct rule by London must change.   If Scotland goes its own way I think that issue will have to be tackled.

 

I think the very first political policy I supported when I must have been very young indeed was the old Liberal policy of turning the United Kingdom into a federal state and I still think that is the way to go.   Sadly no political party is even thinking along those lines.

 

 

A Waste Of Money?

The referendum to change the voting system to AV was defeated very
decisively. Even the most strident supporters of the change, those who
were throwing their toys out of the pram as it became more and more obvious
that they were going to lose have admitted that now the people have spoken
the issue is closed for a generation. Mind you, they still hope to let it
in by the back door via reforms to the House of Lords.

We do not need our elections rigged to give the politicians more power at
the expense of the voters but what we do need in the way of constitutional
reform is more referenda where the people decide the issue directly as they
have on this occasion.

Don't rig the system ask the people!

Tiger By The Tail

There's a lot of chatter that Cameron will have to offer Clegg a few concessions to keep the coalition intact.

 

Why?

 

Where  have the Libdems to go if they leave the coalition except to an almost certain electoral disaster at the resultant general election?   When they went into government alongside the Conservatives they grabbed the tiger by the tail and now they can't let go lest they be eaten by the voters.   Their only hope is to hang on until the next election when, if the economy has recovered, they can claim a share of the priase that should come to a government that has sorted out Labour's disastrous management of the economy.

 

In the meantime they are stuck with following the Tories wherever they may lead them.

 

Rather than expecting more influence on government policy they will have to be satisfied with crumbs from the Tory table.

 

The Libdems did not win last year's election but finished third having lost a couple of seats.   they are very much the third party in UK politics and today should have been an overdue reminder of that hard fact.

 

Taking A Beating

It was almost inevitable that the Libdems would take a beating in the various elections last night especially in English local authorities.   If one looks at the origins and history of the Libdems it becomes obvious that their core vote was small and that most of their support came from either disgruntled members of the two main parties or from voters who voted for them as the best way to keep out a candidate from one of the main parties  in constituencies where the Libdems had the best chance of overturning either a Tory or Labour majority.

 

The Libdems are, of course, a coalition in themselves as their membership either came from the Liberal party or the SDP which in turn was the right wing of the Labour party which felt it was driven out of that party when Foot took Labour so far to the left.

 

Inevitably once the Libdems entered a coalition with one of the two big parties a chunk of their support was going to disappear and, as their coalition was with the Tories, it's the former SDP wing which is thoroughly disenchanted and has either stayed at home and not voted or voted Labour where its heart really belongs.

 

There is another element, of course.   Junior parties in coalitions in the UK tend to be blamed for perceived failures of that coalition far more than do the senior partner.   After the Libdem - Labour coalition in the Scottish Parliament it was the Libdems who lost out in a major way in the next elections to that Parliament.   And last night Plaid Cymru, the Welsh Nationalists, who were in coalition with Labour in the Welsh Assembly appear to have lost heavily.

 

Looking at the history of Westminster governments, whenever the old Liberals entered a coalition they were hammered in the subsequent general election.

 

By and large, Brits do not like coalitions.

 

Out To Vote

A pleasant morning for a stroll down to the polling station and no queues to wait in as the officials processed a steady stream of voters.   At mid-morning, of course, most were older, retired folks like me.   I expect those with jobs either called in on the way to work or will drop in afterwards.   Hopefully the turn out will be reasonable.

 

As I was voting in the referendum on AV I startled the official by asking if I should mark the "yes" and "no" options with a 1 and a 2 to express my preference.   It took him a couple of seconds to realise I was pulling his leg.

 

There was a joke buzzing around a couple of weeks ago which consoled the losing side that once their second preference was taken into account the referendum would end in a draw so there was no need to worry.

 

 

Certainly in recent days the academics have been suggesting that most of the claims the two campaigns have been spouting have little basis in reality and that, in fact, AV would make very little difference to outcomes.   If they are right then why are we wasting money on a referendum?

 

 

The Road To Damascus

The Syrian government's "Damascine moment" appears to have been a revelation that the only way to survive with their power intact is to crush the opposition movement.   They are going to follow the Libyan model rather than the Egyptian one.

 

I have no idea how successful in the longer term that strategy may be but for now one question is when do we start bombing them as in Libya.   The answer is, of course, that we don't.

 

Pressure on Syria will have to come from other Arab states and things don't move very quickly in that part of the world yet a democratic Egypt could be hugely influential in the Middle East and after this year's elections there we may see a very powerful force for reform emerging.

 

 

 

Honest Ed

On Wednesday's "Today" programme Ed Miliband was asked why, if Labour were so keen on AV, they didn't introduce it while they were in office.   He replied that it was because they had large majorities and didn't need it to keep the Tories out.

 

And this is at the root of the argument on both sides.   Your party's perceived advantage or

disadvantage is what determines whether or not you support AV.

 

 

Ian Tomlinson

An inquest jury has concluded that he was unlawfully killed in a very strong verdict. I am not sure what standard of proof is used to reach such a verdict but I suspect the bar is pretty high, maybe even as high as for a conviction in a criminal trial.

The next step is for the DPP to review the case to see if the police officer involved, Simon Harwood, should be prosecuted and I hope he decides that a prosecution is the right course.

The guidelines for the CPS lay down a two-stage process for the decision to prosecute. The first decision is as to whether or not there is sufficient evidence to offer a better than 50 - 50 chance of a conviction and the CPS usually want a substancially better chance than that. Only if the evidence is deemed to be sufficient to give a good chance of a conviction does the "public interest" test come into play and at this stage the CPS may decide that prosecution is not in the public interest.

In the Tomlinson case I think the guidelines are inadequate. Because of the nature of the events surrounding his death a prosecution of the police officer is clearly very much in the public interest and I believe that prosecution should take place unless the evidence is very clearly inadequate. We need a jury to decide on Harwood's guilt or innocence.

Huhne Must Go!

Chris Huhne has, it appears, mounted yet another rather venemous attack on Cameron over the AV vote and this time during a cabinet meeting.

Whatever the outcome of this vote I see no way Huhne can remain in his job after his repeated fits of childish behaviour towards those who disagree with him. He has stepped so far away from "collective responsibility" that his remaining in government is utterly unacceptable.

The problem is, of course, that in practice only Clegg can sack him and he would have real trouble finding another Libdem to take his place. And so this ludicrous coalition will no doubt stagger on for a few months until the Libdem portion of it collapses in total anarchy.

Who Lies Wins

The campaign on the issue of changing the voting system to AV has been full of lies or, at least, full of allegations that the "no" campaign have been lying. Let me say right now that I am opposed to the change and I will be voting "no" on Thursday so you are quite clear where I stand.

I don't think AV will help extremist parties or even moderate small parties like the Greens and UKIP but it will undoubtedly help the Libdems and I think it has now become obvious that there is a feeling amongst senior Libdems that the main purpose of AV is to reduce the chances of the Conservatives ever being able to form a government again leaving the field open to a semi-permanent "progressive" coalition (whatever "progressive" may mean) of Libdems and Labour. How will the voters ever get rid of them?

GOT HIM!

I didn't really intend to start this UK blog off with what is mainly an American story but it is so clearly the biggest news item of the day or even the month that it just can't be ignored. I reckon this could do for American morale what a royal wedding did for the UK. It probably won't make any practical difference to everyday life but folks will feel better for knowing it has happened.

I remember thinking just after the events of September 11th that catching OBL was going to be a job for the intelligence services and special forces and in the end I was right. Whether or not somebody snitched on him we don't know and probably never will but it's congratulations to the intelligence community and those American soldiers who finally got him. This is good news for the entire civilised world.