Gordon Brown's decision this month not to call a general election has left the cash-strapped Labour party with a bill approaching £1m, according to the Guardian.
Party officials had sanctioned hundreds of thousands of pounds of expenditure on booking hoarding sites, literature and recruitment of staff, and were at an advanced stage in setting up a media centre to handle daily press conferences.
The cost of detailed polling in marginal seats by Opinion Leader Research - the company run by one of the prime minister's most trusted pollsters, Debbie Mattinson - is also understood to have run to hundreds of thousands of pounds.
The Conservatives are thought to have spent substantially less in the week before the election was called off. It is understood their bill came to less than £200,000.
Meanwhile, Labour candidates in some marginal seats had already printed letters to go out to supporters. One, Martin Linton, who has a majority of 163 over the Conservatives in Battersea, south London, sent out letters to thousands of Labour members and supporters asking for their help.
The Guardian has been told by Labour and union sources that:
· Some three million letters - the first tranche of a series to key voters and supporters - were printed and had to be binned
· Technicians working on communication links at the Conservative party conference in Blackpool were called away by Labour on a contract to work on the election media centre in Victoria Street, London
· Furniture and equipment for the media centre was ordered, and a lorry delivering the equipment had to be turned away on the following Monday
· Hundreds of poster sites booked by Labour had to be pre-paid - the Tories also booked sites and mobile posters which are now being used to campaign for a European referendum
· Staff were recruited to work at union headquarters - notably the GMB and Unite - on campaigns in marginal seats
The cost of the election is certain to be raised when Labour's national executive meets next month. Some members thought Mr Brown should not have considered calling the election.
The party declined to respond to question from the Guardian.
Source: David Hencke, Westminster correspondent The Guardian (Monday October 22, 2007)
Monday, October 22, 2007
Thursday, October 11, 2007
Labour government sucking the South dry
GORDON BROWN is facing a growing backlash over the way hard-working southerners fund northerners and Scots.
Workers in the South East believe the Scottish PM and his team don’t understand the pressures of life in and around Greater London.
Figures show well over half the economy of Scotland, the North West, North East, Wales and Northern Ireland is funded by the taxpayer.
Yet the economy in highly populated London and the South East – Britain’s engine room – gets just a third.
Critics in the South East believe they are becoming the cash cow for the rest of the country.
Currently 19 per cent of all UK tax receipts come from London and 37 per cent from London and the South East.
Only seven per cent of tax comes from Scotland.
And just TWO Cabinet ministers represent a southern seat.
The PM represents a Fife seat and his Chancellor Alistair Darling is MP for Edinburgh South West.
Defence supremo Des Browne represents Kilmarnock and International Aid secretary Douglas Alexander is the MP for Paisley, near Glasgow.
It reveals Northern Ireland’s budget per head of population is 70.5 per cent of the nation’s wealth. Wales gets 64.3 per cent, the North East 63, Wales 55.6 and Scotland 54 per cent.
And their figures show the gap is widening, not closing.
Ministers keep pumping cash into northern regions because they need the votes to win an election.
source: GEORGE PASCOE-WATSON Political Editor at The Sun
Workers in the South East believe the Scottish PM and his team don’t understand the pressures of life in and around Greater London.
Figures show well over half the economy of Scotland, the North West, North East, Wales and Northern Ireland is funded by the taxpayer.
Yet the economy in highly populated London and the South East – Britain’s engine room – gets just a third.
Critics in the South East believe they are becoming the cash cow for the rest of the country.
Currently 19 per cent of all UK tax receipts come from London and 37 per cent from London and the South East.
Only seven per cent of tax comes from Scotland.
And just TWO Cabinet ministers represent a southern seat.
The PM represents a Fife seat and his Chancellor Alistair Darling is MP for Edinburgh South West.
Defence supremo Des Browne represents Kilmarnock and International Aid secretary Douglas Alexander is the MP for Paisley, near Glasgow.
It reveals Northern Ireland’s budget per head of population is 70.5 per cent of the nation’s wealth. Wales gets 64.3 per cent, the North East 63, Wales 55.6 and Scotland 54 per cent.
And their figures show the gap is widening, not closing.
Ministers keep pumping cash into northern regions because they need the votes to win an election.
source: GEORGE PASCOE-WATSON Political Editor at The Sun
Another Labour M.P. forgets his roots
How sad it is when someone forgets their roots and principles. Dear old Michael Martin, former sheet metal worker, went into politics with the Peoples Party to right some wrongs.
Some years later he was promoted above his capability to the prestigious position of Commons Speaker where he has to maintain order in the Commons without favour to his old People Party mates.
Unfortunately, like many of his mates, he now appears to think that the taxes gleaned from the sweat of working people can be splashed around for personal reasons.
Working class Michael got upset when people started having a go at how he was doing his job so he spent £20,000 of taxpayers having some P.R. people issue statements saying that he was actually doing a good job..
It is not known what Michael ( Red Mick?) would have done if his sheet metal work had been critised back in his youth. Maybe it was a P.R. statement to the effect of Go away you beggers.
Some years later he was promoted above his capability to the prestigious position of Commons Speaker where he has to maintain order in the Commons without favour to his old People Party mates.
Unfortunately, like many of his mates, he now appears to think that the taxes gleaned from the sweat of working people can be splashed around for personal reasons.
Working class Michael got upset when people started having a go at how he was doing his job so he spent £20,000 of taxpayers having some P.R. people issue statements saying that he was actually doing a good job..
It is not known what Michael ( Red Mick?) would have done if his sheet metal work had been critised back in his youth. Maybe it was a P.R. statement to the effect of Go away you beggers.
Saturday, September 29, 2007
Climate change model wrong - again
Apparently the brilliant brain boxes behind climate change claims have had to face up to another error in their calculations.
Surprise surprise nature is not as fragile as they thought.
The naughty trees of the Amazon jungle went and found underground water that the Brains did not know about and did not die as predicted. But don't worry because in common with most discredited experts the climate change Brains have shifted the goal posts.
They claim that the Amazon will die but later than expected unsurprisingly some time after all alive at the moment are dead and unable to argue the toss.
Researchers found that during the 2005 drought, many parts of the rainforest "greened", apparently growing faster.
This finding contrasts with some computer models of climate change, which forecast that the Amazon would dry out and become savannah.
Writing in the journal Science, the researchers say it is unclear how the forest would respond to a long drought.
"We measured the changes between the drought (of July to September 2005) and an average year," explained study leader Scott Saleska from the University of Arizona, Tucson, US.
Some of the models, in particular the Hadley Centre group, became famous for predicting collapse of the Amazon and a change into savannah
Scott Saleska"And what we saw was that there was more photosynthesis going on, more capacity to take up carbon dioxide than in an average year," he told the BBC News website.
He said, however, that a climatic shift to longer and more frequent drought conditions would eventually diminish the deep-water stores, and make the trees suffer.
(souce: bbc)
Surprise surprise nature is not as fragile as they thought.
The naughty trees of the Amazon jungle went and found underground water that the Brains did not know about and did not die as predicted. But don't worry because in common with most discredited experts the climate change Brains have shifted the goal posts.
They claim that the Amazon will die but later than expected unsurprisingly some time after all alive at the moment are dead and unable to argue the toss.
Researchers found that during the 2005 drought, many parts of the rainforest "greened", apparently growing faster.
This finding contrasts with some computer models of climate change, which forecast that the Amazon would dry out and become savannah.
Writing in the journal Science, the researchers say it is unclear how the forest would respond to a long drought.
"We measured the changes between the drought (of July to September 2005) and an average year," explained study leader Scott Saleska from the University of Arizona, Tucson, US.
Some of the models, in particular the Hadley Centre group, became famous for predicting collapse of the Amazon and a change into savannah
Scott Saleska"And what we saw was that there was more photosynthesis going on, more capacity to take up carbon dioxide than in an average year," he told the BBC News website.
He said, however, that a climatic shift to longer and more frequent drought conditions would eventually diminish the deep-water stores, and make the trees suffer.
(souce: bbc)
Friday, September 28, 2007
Speed Camera Con
A Department for Transport report has found that, in 2007, exceeding the speed limit was a factor in 14 per cent of deaths, up from 12 per cent in 2005.
You may be forgiven for having overlooked this piece of information as it appears to be buried by the Labour government and it's fellow trough users.
The stat means that whatever impact the much admired speed camera may have had it's effect is now declining. This is despite Labour quietly changing the law so that camera's do not have to be placed near accident black spots.
It also means that 86% of accidents are NOT caused by breaking the speed limit.
It also means that all the effort put into creating the vast network of speed camera's was either based on a misunderstanding or it is just another way of raising tax.
You may be forgiven for having overlooked this piece of information as it appears to be buried by the Labour government and it's fellow trough users.
The stat means that whatever impact the much admired speed camera may have had it's effect is now declining. This is despite Labour quietly changing the law so that camera's do not have to be placed near accident black spots.
It also means that 86% of accidents are NOT caused by breaking the speed limit.
It also means that all the effort put into creating the vast network of speed camera's was either based on a misunderstanding or it is just another way of raising tax.
Thursday, April 12, 2007
85pc of health cash goes to Labour areas
(ED: Tony does as Tony does, crooks the figures, crooks the weapons of mass destruction, sells honours for New Labour funds, gerrymandering tax spend to suit New Labour Party interests, is there enough space in cyberspace to list the acts of deceit Tony has been involved in. Was he always like this or has he been replaced by an evil spirit?)
Celia Hall, Medical Editor at Daily Telegraph
As much as 85p in every £1 the Government has spent on health has gone into Labour constituencies.
Details from a Parliamentary question show that of the 46 multi-million-pound hospitals built in England since Tony Blair came to power, 33 are in Labour areas. That amounts to £3.5 billion out of a total spend of £4.1 billion.
Government health policy has aimed at removing "health inequalities" and lifting health services in deprived areas many of which are Labour strongholds.
But the Tories say they are still waiting for the Government to tell them why one area is favoured over another and to explain the rationale of agreeing to new hospital developments in particular areas.
Andrew Lansley the shadow health spokesman, said yesterday: "Four in every five of Labour's new hospitals have been built in the constituencies of their own MPs.
The Conservatives say "Ministers are holding secret meetings with Labour Party officials to target up to 60 hospital cutbacks on the constituencies of Conservative and Liberal Democrat MPs. These figures confirm what we suspected when Patricia Hewitt went against the advice of experts and ordered a new hospital to be built in a Labour constituency in south London.
A Conservative Party spokesman said that in 2005 Ms Hewitt overturned a decision to build a new critical care hospital on the site of Sutton Hospital, in the Sutton and Cheam constituency of Liberal Democrat MP Paul Burstow.
"Instead, even after seeking the advice of her independent advisers, who similarly recommended the Sutton site, Patricia Hewitt recommended that the new hospital should be built at St Helier, in the Mitcham and Morden constituency of a Labour MP, Siobhan McDonagh," the spokesman said.
Celia Hall, Medical Editor at Daily Telegraph
As much as 85p in every £1 the Government has spent on health has gone into Labour constituencies.
Details from a Parliamentary question show that of the 46 multi-million-pound hospitals built in England since Tony Blair came to power, 33 are in Labour areas. That amounts to £3.5 billion out of a total spend of £4.1 billion.
Government health policy has aimed at removing "health inequalities" and lifting health services in deprived areas many of which are Labour strongholds.
But the Tories say they are still waiting for the Government to tell them why one area is favoured over another and to explain the rationale of agreeing to new hospital developments in particular areas.
Andrew Lansley the shadow health spokesman, said yesterday: "Four in every five of Labour's new hospitals have been built in the constituencies of their own MPs.
The Conservatives say "Ministers are holding secret meetings with Labour Party officials to target up to 60 hospital cutbacks on the constituencies of Conservative and Liberal Democrat MPs. These figures confirm what we suspected when Patricia Hewitt went against the advice of experts and ordered a new hospital to be built in a Labour constituency in south London.
A Conservative Party spokesman said that in 2005 Ms Hewitt overturned a decision to build a new critical care hospital on the site of Sutton Hospital, in the Sutton and Cheam constituency of Liberal Democrat MP Paul Burstow.
"Instead, even after seeking the advice of her independent advisers, who similarly recommended the Sutton site, Patricia Hewitt recommended that the new hospital should be built at St Helier, in the Mitcham and Morden constituency of a Labour MP, Siobhan McDonagh," the spokesman said.
Tuesday, April 03, 2007
Plan to fine rowdy pubs watered down on the quiet
James Slack at Daily Mail - 02.04.2007
(ED: Tony at it again - Big headline then a row back after the media focus is elsewhere. Any trouble with 24-hour drinking in city centres were to have been dealt with Alcohol Disorder Zones (ADZ). Unfortunately none of the smarties in the government thought about the Human Rights law, introduced by themselves of course. If you were of a more machavelian frame of mind you might think that ADZ's were always just window dressing to insure that increased working class drinking would keep the prole's focus on the beer and off government incompetence while providing more tax for the machine. Surely not?)
The Government has quietly given up its hardline stance on rowdy pubs thanks to human rights regulations
Labour's promise to make rowdy pubs and clubs pay for the disturbance they cause has been quietly shelved.
So-called Alcohol Disorder Zones (ADZ) will be used only as a "last resort" as they risk breaching human rights laws.
Ministers previously said that forcing licensed premises to pay up to £100 a week for extra policing was vital to curb the negative effects of 24-hour drinking.
But papers slipped out Monday during the Parliamentary recess place almost insurmountable bureaucratic obstacles in the way of any police force or council wishing to pursue a "polluter pays" policy.
Police would actually lose out financially from an idea that was supposed to spare them - and therefore the taxpayer - from picking up the bill for binge-drinking and drunken violence.
The Police Federation accused the Government of "deceit" as it had linked the relaxation of the licensing laws to new powers they are now unlikely to use.
Vice-chairman Alan Gordon said: "If it is this bureaucratic and burdensome, police will never use these zones or attempt to use them.
"The Government made great play of the additional powers they were going to give the police. To make them so bureaucratic they are nearly impossible to use is being deceitful in what was involved in 24/7 drinking in the first place."
Ministers promised the zones in January 2005.
But the Home Office now says it has to be careful that human rights laws are not breached. Zones must be declared only in extreme circumstances where all other options had failed, its says.
Monday's consultation documents said no less than 15 times that the zones should be a "last resort".
They warned that charging a pub, club or off-licence for disturbance amounts to an interference with property rights under the European Convention on Human Rights.
Critics say the process for setting up a zone is so complex it verges on the impossible.
Police must first give drinkers on-the-spot fines or ban louts from town centres. They must also make attempts to close down any problem pubs using the Licensing Act.
If this fails, they must amass evidence that a street or "zone" is blighted by binge-drinking.
Officers - who are already struggling with mountains of paperwork - would have to produce details of violent incidents, relevant A&E notes and a CCTV incident log.
Once this so-called "trigger stage" is complete, pubs and clubs must be given a 28-day consultation period when they can object to the plans.
While this is taking place, police and local councils must draw up an Action Plan of steps they want the premises to take to reduce the misery they are inflicting on local residents.
Pubs are then given eight weeks in which to introduce these changes.
It is only if police and councils can prove the Action Plan has been ignored that they can declare an Alcohol Disorder Zone and levy charges.
(ED: Tony at it again - Big headline then a row back after the media focus is elsewhere. Any trouble with 24-hour drinking in city centres were to have been dealt with Alcohol Disorder Zones (ADZ). Unfortunately none of the smarties in the government thought about the Human Rights law, introduced by themselves of course. If you were of a more machavelian frame of mind you might think that ADZ's were always just window dressing to insure that increased working class drinking would keep the prole's focus on the beer and off government incompetence while providing more tax for the machine. Surely not?)
The Government has quietly given up its hardline stance on rowdy pubs thanks to human rights regulations
Labour's promise to make rowdy pubs and clubs pay for the disturbance they cause has been quietly shelved.
So-called Alcohol Disorder Zones (ADZ) will be used only as a "last resort" as they risk breaching human rights laws.
Ministers previously said that forcing licensed premises to pay up to £100 a week for extra policing was vital to curb the negative effects of 24-hour drinking.
But papers slipped out Monday during the Parliamentary recess place almost insurmountable bureaucratic obstacles in the way of any police force or council wishing to pursue a "polluter pays" policy.
Police would actually lose out financially from an idea that was supposed to spare them - and therefore the taxpayer - from picking up the bill for binge-drinking and drunken violence.
The Police Federation accused the Government of "deceit" as it had linked the relaxation of the licensing laws to new powers they are now unlikely to use.
Vice-chairman Alan Gordon said: "If it is this bureaucratic and burdensome, police will never use these zones or attempt to use them.
"The Government made great play of the additional powers they were going to give the police. To make them so bureaucratic they are nearly impossible to use is being deceitful in what was involved in 24/7 drinking in the first place."
Ministers promised the zones in January 2005.
But the Home Office now says it has to be careful that human rights laws are not breached. Zones must be declared only in extreme circumstances where all other options had failed, its says.
Monday's consultation documents said no less than 15 times that the zones should be a "last resort".
They warned that charging a pub, club or off-licence for disturbance amounts to an interference with property rights under the European Convention on Human Rights.
Critics say the process for setting up a zone is so complex it verges on the impossible.
Police must first give drinkers on-the-spot fines or ban louts from town centres. They must also make attempts to close down any problem pubs using the Licensing Act.
If this fails, they must amass evidence that a street or "zone" is blighted by binge-drinking.
Officers - who are already struggling with mountains of paperwork - would have to produce details of violent incidents, relevant A&E notes and a CCTV incident log.
Once this so-called "trigger stage" is complete, pubs and clubs must be given a 28-day consultation period when they can object to the plans.
While this is taking place, police and local councils must draw up an Action Plan of steps they want the premises to take to reduce the misery they are inflicting on local residents.
Pubs are then given eight weeks in which to introduce these changes.
It is only if police and councils can prove the Action Plan has been ignored that they can declare an Alcohol Disorder Zone and levy charges.
Sunday, April 01, 2007
Tony weakens NHS pledge to mothers
Jo Revill, health editor The Observer April 1, 2007
(ED: Usual lies from Tony and his mates. Get Big Big headlines then when attention has moved on water everything down. As for Health Minister Ivan Lewis I wonder what he would be saying if his wife was in labour again. Perhaps " oh a 12k a year unqualified support worker excellent eh darling? Or "don't be so stupid that's my wife you are putting at risk.")
A government pledge to give every mother the right of one-to-one care from a midwife during labour has been watered down to allow hospitals to use lower-paid attendants with fewer skills.
Midwives' leaders call the move 'scandalous', arguing that it will increase the risks for those women and babies not supported by a qualified midwife.
The policy shift will be in the government's maternity strategy, due to be announced by Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt this week.
The government has come under increasing pressure over the state of maternity wards due to a recent spate of reports showing that standards in Britain are falling, with thousands of women not receiving good antenatal care or enough support during the birth.
In its election manifesto in May 2005, Labour promised that by 2009 women would be cared for by a named midwife throughout pregnancy and would receive continuous care throughout the delivery. Instead they could now find themselves in the care of a maternity support worker, a new category of staff without a nursing or midwifery degree who may not be able to deliver a baby safely.
However, Health Minister Ivan Lewis is adamant they would not jeopardise safety. He told The Observer: 'By the end of 2009, we want to see trusts at least giving a commitment to the fact that a skilled professional is present throughout the birth. That could be a midwife or it could be a maternity support worker.'
He defended the use of lower-skilled staff: 'What matters is that the mother feels confident that she is well cared for. There are many maternity support workers who are providing an excellent service.'
Lewis also criticised the 'rhetoric and scare-mongering' of recent media reports that have highlighted problems on maternity wards. 'A lot of the media reporting has been very irresponsible because it scares women. There have been two million births over the past three years, and 50 women died in that time due to obstetric complications that could have been dealt with better. One death is too many - but that number doesn't suggest a crisis in terms of safety.'
The Royal College of Midwives is furious that hospital trusts will be able to claim they offer continuous care during labour when they have replaced trained midwives with maternity care assistants, who are paid around £12,000 a year and are not subject to the same regulation. They were originally introduced to help with lighter duties on maternity wards, such as feeding and washing, but many believe hospital trusts see them as a cheap workforce.
RCM adviser Sue Jacob said: 'This change has been quietly slipped in and is nothing short of scandalous. Do we really see childbirth as so unimportant that you de-skill the very people who will be delivering children? Women want nothing less than a midwife by their side when they are in labour. We know from all the research that's been done that continuous care from an experienced professional makes a huge difference to the safety of both the mother and the child.'
Belinda Phipps, chief executive of the National Childbirth Trust, pointed out that in Scotland the target of offering continuous care from a midwife is already being met. 'It has to be asked why the rest of the country can't achieve this goal, given that it is so very important for women when they go into labour,' she said.
(ED: Usual lies from Tony and his mates. Get Big Big headlines then when attention has moved on water everything down. As for Health Minister Ivan Lewis I wonder what he would be saying if his wife was in labour again. Perhaps " oh a 12k a year unqualified support worker excellent eh darling? Or "don't be so stupid that's my wife you are putting at risk.")
A government pledge to give every mother the right of one-to-one care from a midwife during labour has been watered down to allow hospitals to use lower-paid attendants with fewer skills.
Midwives' leaders call the move 'scandalous', arguing that it will increase the risks for those women and babies not supported by a qualified midwife.
The policy shift will be in the government's maternity strategy, due to be announced by Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt this week.
The government has come under increasing pressure over the state of maternity wards due to a recent spate of reports showing that standards in Britain are falling, with thousands of women not receiving good antenatal care or enough support during the birth.
In its election manifesto in May 2005, Labour promised that by 2009 women would be cared for by a named midwife throughout pregnancy and would receive continuous care throughout the delivery. Instead they could now find themselves in the care of a maternity support worker, a new category of staff without a nursing or midwifery degree who may not be able to deliver a baby safely.
However, Health Minister Ivan Lewis is adamant they would not jeopardise safety. He told The Observer: 'By the end of 2009, we want to see trusts at least giving a commitment to the fact that a skilled professional is present throughout the birth. That could be a midwife or it could be a maternity support worker.'
He defended the use of lower-skilled staff: 'What matters is that the mother feels confident that she is well cared for. There are many maternity support workers who are providing an excellent service.'
Lewis also criticised the 'rhetoric and scare-mongering' of recent media reports that have highlighted problems on maternity wards. 'A lot of the media reporting has been very irresponsible because it scares women. There have been two million births over the past three years, and 50 women died in that time due to obstetric complications that could have been dealt with better. One death is too many - but that number doesn't suggest a crisis in terms of safety.'
The Royal College of Midwives is furious that hospital trusts will be able to claim they offer continuous care during labour when they have replaced trained midwives with maternity care assistants, who are paid around £12,000 a year and are not subject to the same regulation. They were originally introduced to help with lighter duties on maternity wards, such as feeding and washing, but many believe hospital trusts see them as a cheap workforce.
RCM adviser Sue Jacob said: 'This change has been quietly slipped in and is nothing short of scandalous. Do we really see childbirth as so unimportant that you de-skill the very people who will be delivering children? Women want nothing less than a midwife by their side when they are in labour. We know from all the research that's been done that continuous care from an experienced professional makes a huge difference to the safety of both the mother and the child.'
Belinda Phipps, chief executive of the National Childbirth Trust, pointed out that in Scotland the target of offering continuous care from a midwife is already being met. 'It has to be asked why the rest of the country can't achieve this goal, given that it is so very important for women when they go into labour,' she said.
Police have time and officers to investigate 10-year-old for calling his mate "gay"
Jonathan Owen at The Independent - 01 April 2007
(ED: Good to see that the 2.5% of active police officers have enough time to follow up this type of "crime".)
A father launched a furious attack against the police yesterday for investigating claims that his 10-year-old son had called a schoolfriend "gay" in an email.
Company director Alan Rawlinson said he was astounded after two police officers arrived at his home in Bold Heath, Cheshire, to speak to his son George. The officers were called after a complaint from the parent of another boy at his son's school in Widnes.
"They told me they considered it a very serious offence," said Mr Rawlinson, 41. "I thought they were joking at first. I am furious about what has happened. It just seems the politically correct brigade is taking over."
But Inspector Nick Bailey of Cheshire Constabulary defended the decision: "The matter was reported to police as the parents of the boy believed it was more sinister than just a schoolyard prank." He said that they would not be pursuing the complaint any further, commenting: "We would be hard-pushed to say this is a homophobic crime."
(ED: Good to see that the 2.5% of active police officers have enough time to follow up this type of "crime".)
A father launched a furious attack against the police yesterday for investigating claims that his 10-year-old son had called a schoolfriend "gay" in an email.
Company director Alan Rawlinson said he was astounded after two police officers arrived at his home in Bold Heath, Cheshire, to speak to his son George. The officers were called after a complaint from the parent of another boy at his son's school in Widnes.
"They told me they considered it a very serious offence," said Mr Rawlinson, 41. "I thought they were joking at first. I am furious about what has happened. It just seems the politically correct brigade is taking over."
But Inspector Nick Bailey of Cheshire Constabulary defended the decision: "The matter was reported to police as the parents of the boy believed it was more sinister than just a schoolyard prank." He said that they would not be pursuing the complaint any further, commenting: "We would be hard-pushed to say this is a homophobic crime."
UK child mortality rate 2nd worst in rich countries
Roger Dobson at The Independent - 01 April 2007
(ED: I am sure Tony or one of his front men will rubbish the figures as wrong or inccurate without explaining that the inaccuracy is the use of UK rather than U.K..)
Britain has the second highest child death rate among the 24 richest countries in the world, with infants in the UK twice as likely to die before the age of five as children in Sweden, a study has shown.
The researchers, from Dundee University, who link relatively high infant mortality with income inequality, found that in the UK the gap between the haves and the have-nots was the third biggest among the 24 countries. They calculated that the top 20 per cent of people in the UK have more than 2.5 times the income of the bottom 40 per cent, almost double the difference in Japan.
Their work, which is reported this week in the Journal of Public Health, analysed Unicef data on child mortality and income inequality. The study comes 14 years after the UK and other "Anglo-American" rich countries were strongly criticised in a Unicef study on child neglect in wealthy nations. That study did not report on child death rates but at that time the UK ranked 15th for child mortality;the new research shows it has now dropped to joint 22nd, just above the US.
The results show that the child mortality rate, based on the number of children dying before the age of five per 1,000 live births averaged over a four-year period, was below five in the top six countries - Sweden at 3.25, followed by Iceland (3.75) Norway (4.00) Denmark (4.25) Japan (4.50) and Finland (4.75). The bottom six were New Zealand, Australia, and Ireland (all 6.0), UK and Canada (6.5) and the US (8.0).
The researchers also calculated income inequality in each country by comparing the income share of the top 20 per cent with that of the bottom 40 per cent. The ratio was lowest in Luxembourg, Japan, Finland and Norway, where the income of the top earners 20 per cent was only 1.5 times greater than the bottom 40 per cent. But the ratio was 2.5 in the UK and 2.8 in the US.
"There is a very strong association between income inequality and under-five child mortality among the wealthier OECD [Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development] countries,'' said the report. "Within this group the highest child mortality figures are to be found in those 'Anglo-American' countries which attracted criticism in 1993 in a Unicef study on child neglect. Since 1960, the relative ranking, based on increasing under-five mortality, of these countries has markedly worsened relative to the others.''
David Collison, who led the study, said: "All the Anglo-American countries do pretty badly. It is clear that inequality is linked to the poor position of the UK and elsewhere."
(ED: I am sure Tony or one of his front men will rubbish the figures as wrong or inccurate without explaining that the inaccuracy is the use of UK rather than U.K..)
Britain has the second highest child death rate among the 24 richest countries in the world, with infants in the UK twice as likely to die before the age of five as children in Sweden, a study has shown.
The researchers, from Dundee University, who link relatively high infant mortality with income inequality, found that in the UK the gap between the haves and the have-nots was the third biggest among the 24 countries. They calculated that the top 20 per cent of people in the UK have more than 2.5 times the income of the bottom 40 per cent, almost double the difference in Japan.
Their work, which is reported this week in the Journal of Public Health, analysed Unicef data on child mortality and income inequality. The study comes 14 years after the UK and other "Anglo-American" rich countries were strongly criticised in a Unicef study on child neglect in wealthy nations. That study did not report on child death rates but at that time the UK ranked 15th for child mortality;the new research shows it has now dropped to joint 22nd, just above the US.
The results show that the child mortality rate, based on the number of children dying before the age of five per 1,000 live births averaged over a four-year period, was below five in the top six countries - Sweden at 3.25, followed by Iceland (3.75) Norway (4.00) Denmark (4.25) Japan (4.50) and Finland (4.75). The bottom six were New Zealand, Australia, and Ireland (all 6.0), UK and Canada (6.5) and the US (8.0).
The researchers also calculated income inequality in each country by comparing the income share of the top 20 per cent with that of the bottom 40 per cent. The ratio was lowest in Luxembourg, Japan, Finland and Norway, where the income of the top earners 20 per cent was only 1.5 times greater than the bottom 40 per cent. But the ratio was 2.5 in the UK and 2.8 in the US.
"There is a very strong association between income inequality and under-five child mortality among the wealthier OECD [Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development] countries,'' said the report. "Within this group the highest child mortality figures are to be found in those 'Anglo-American' countries which attracted criticism in 1993 in a Unicef study on child neglect. Since 1960, the relative ranking, based on increasing under-five mortality, of these countries has markedly worsened relative to the others.''
David Collison, who led the study, said: "All the Anglo-American countries do pretty badly. It is clear that inequality is linked to the poor position of the UK and elsewhere."
Saturday, March 31, 2007
Pension snatcher Brown defied £5bn pensions warning
ED: So Cival servants arn't so stupid after all. How any honest person could maintain that snatching £5bn from the pension system would not have a seriously negative impact beggers belief. But don't worry Gordon and his mates' pensions are all gold plated so that they don't have to suffer like us prolitariate mugs.
Gordon Brown ignored repeated warnings that a tax raid on pension funds - one of his first moves in office - would cost savers billions of pounds a year.
Newly-released documents show that the Chancellor was told his money-raising scheme would hurt the poor and damage the savings industry.
The decision to scrap tax relief on dividends paid into retirement plans came in Mr Brown's first Budget in 1997, just weeks after Labour took power.
The move has been widely blamed for a crisis which has left huge shortfalls in pension pots and encouraged hundreds of firms to wind up their final-salary schemes.
The Chancellor has consistently denied that the pensions industry was harmed or that workers were left facing lower pension payments. As recently as Thursday he rejected accusations from MPs that he had blundered.
But documents that the Treasury was ordered to release under Freedom of Information rules reveal that back in 1997 senior officials were concerned at the impact of the tax grab.
"We agree that abolishing pension tax credits would make a big hole in pension scheme finances," they told Mr Brown.
The Treasury has fought for several years to prevent its advice to the Chancellor from being made public for fear that it would expose internal divisions.
A report from Terry Arthur, a fellow of the Institute of Actuaries, warned last year the decision has cost pension savers at least £100billion. Other estimates make the losses even higher.
The papers, released late last night, show civil servants predicted the move would provoke "clamour and public consternation" and create "a big hole in pension scheme finances".
Mr Brown was told "there is therefore a very big uncertainty over the extent to which pension schemes could absorb the effect of the loss of tax credits".
The change would cost pension schemes between £3billion and £4billion a year and employers might have to contribute over £2billion a year more to keep them afloat, Mr Brown was advised.
He was told that money would need to be found to top up local authority schemes and that the value of pension funds could plunge immediately by £50billion.
The advice was also clear on who would be hardest hit: "The change would therefore lead to a reduction in pension benefits for the lower paid' while "those who are about to retire (or who have just retired) could be worst affected".
Some of the advice given to the Chancellor predicted the move could accelerate the closure of final salary pension schemes - something that has happened at an alarming rate since.
Ros Altman, a former adviser on pensions to Tony Blair, said: "They were knowingly embarking on the emasculation of the most successful pension system in the world.
"The Government came in with much hope that things would get better, then set about destroying the retirement security of so much of the population."
Mervyn Kohler of Help the Aged said: "This is staggering. There is a strong feeling among pensioners that they have been let down by this Government, and this information will only reinforce that perception."
Gordon Brown ignored repeated warnings that a tax raid on pension funds - one of his first moves in office - would cost savers billions of pounds a year.
Newly-released documents show that the Chancellor was told his money-raising scheme would hurt the poor and damage the savings industry.
The decision to scrap tax relief on dividends paid into retirement plans came in Mr Brown's first Budget in 1997, just weeks after Labour took power.
The move has been widely blamed for a crisis which has left huge shortfalls in pension pots and encouraged hundreds of firms to wind up their final-salary schemes.
The Chancellor has consistently denied that the pensions industry was harmed or that workers were left facing lower pension payments. As recently as Thursday he rejected accusations from MPs that he had blundered.
But documents that the Treasury was ordered to release under Freedom of Information rules reveal that back in 1997 senior officials were concerned at the impact of the tax grab.
"We agree that abolishing pension tax credits would make a big hole in pension scheme finances," they told Mr Brown.
The Treasury has fought for several years to prevent its advice to the Chancellor from being made public for fear that it would expose internal divisions.
A report from Terry Arthur, a fellow of the Institute of Actuaries, warned last year the decision has cost pension savers at least £100billion. Other estimates make the losses even higher.
The papers, released late last night, show civil servants predicted the move would provoke "clamour and public consternation" and create "a big hole in pension scheme finances".
Mr Brown was told "there is therefore a very big uncertainty over the extent to which pension schemes could absorb the effect of the loss of tax credits".
The change would cost pension schemes between £3billion and £4billion a year and employers might have to contribute over £2billion a year more to keep them afloat, Mr Brown was advised.
He was told that money would need to be found to top up local authority schemes and that the value of pension funds could plunge immediately by £50billion.
The advice was also clear on who would be hardest hit: "The change would therefore lead to a reduction in pension benefits for the lower paid' while "those who are about to retire (or who have just retired) could be worst affected".
Some of the advice given to the Chancellor predicted the move could accelerate the closure of final salary pension schemes - something that has happened at an alarming rate since.
Ros Altman, a former adviser on pensions to Tony Blair, said: "They were knowingly embarking on the emasculation of the most successful pension system in the world.
"The Government came in with much hope that things would get better, then set about destroying the retirement security of so much of the population."
Mervyn Kohler of Help the Aged said: "This is staggering. There is a strong feeling among pensioners that they have been let down by this Government, and this information will only reinforce that perception."
New Labour friend gets to boss the BBC
Tania Branigan, political correspondent at The Guardian 31.03.07
(ED: Welcome to the Tony/Gordon British Broadcasting Corporation. At least I will be able to see England and The F.A. Cup without visiting the P.C. and self admitted anti-christian and anti-conservative so-called media organisation.)
The government's adviser on council tax reforms, Sir Michael Lyons, is expected to take over the chairmanship of the BBC, it has emerged.
The role vacated by Michael Grade's defection to ITV last year has proved surprisingly unpopular despite its £140,000 salary, with a string of high-profile potential contenders ruling themselves out.
But the BBC is expected to announce Sir Michael's appointment shortly, after a selection panel chaired by a senior civil servant picked him from a four-strong shortlist. He must be approved by the culture secretary, Tessa Jowell, and then by the Privy Council, which advises the Queen, before the prime minister rubber-stamps the decision.
His closest challenger is thought to have been Chris Powell, a director of advertising agency DDB London, who played an influential role in helping to create New Labour in the 90s and whose brother Jonathan is Tony Blair's chief of staff.
Whitehall insiders speculated that Sir Michael had benefited from Gordon Brown's backing. The chancellor commissioned him to carry out a root and branch review of local government finance, but kicked his proposals into the long grass when the three-year study was finally published earlier this month.
(ED: Welcome to the Tony/Gordon British Broadcasting Corporation. At least I will be able to see England and The F.A. Cup without visiting the P.C. and self admitted anti-christian and anti-conservative so-called media organisation.)
The government's adviser on council tax reforms, Sir Michael Lyons, is expected to take over the chairmanship of the BBC, it has emerged.
The role vacated by Michael Grade's defection to ITV last year has proved surprisingly unpopular despite its £140,000 salary, with a string of high-profile potential contenders ruling themselves out.
But the BBC is expected to announce Sir Michael's appointment shortly, after a selection panel chaired by a senior civil servant picked him from a four-strong shortlist. He must be approved by the culture secretary, Tessa Jowell, and then by the Privy Council, which advises the Queen, before the prime minister rubber-stamps the decision.
His closest challenger is thought to have been Chris Powell, a director of advertising agency DDB London, who played an influential role in helping to create New Labour in the 90s and whose brother Jonathan is Tony Blair's chief of staff.
Whitehall insiders speculated that Sir Michael had benefited from Gordon Brown's backing. The chancellor commissioned him to carry out a root and branch review of local government finance, but kicked his proposals into the long grass when the three-year study was finally published earlier this month.
Friday, March 30, 2007
Tony Blair spends 1billion on truancy and fails
Laura Clark at Daily Mail
Although ministers have spent £1billion trying to tackle truancy, figures show that almost a million children, aged 11 and over, dodged some of their lessons in the last school year.
Almost 220,000 "persistent absentees" miss the equivalent of nearly two days a week through truancy, illness or term-time holidays.
And the problem is much worse than previously thought. A new system of collecting data has found that truancy levels are 18 per cent higher than previous Government statistics showed. The difference amounts to an extra 7,000 skipping school every day.
Absence agreed by schools, including holidays taken during term and sick days, is also up.
The breakdown shows that almost 43,000 pupils a day skipped school in 2005/06 - against 36,200 under the old system for calculating absence, in the same year.
The old system of calculating truancy relied on averages compiled by schools once a year. The new data has been calculated by officials using raw information supplied by schools.
Even under that system, ministers had missed their targets on truancy. Their aim was to cut unauthorised absence by a third by 2002.
But they had to reduce their own target. The Government then said it wanted to cut truancy by ten per cent by 2004. But this did not happen either.
Truancy across primary and secondary schools rose to record levels last year. Although the new data so far covers only secondary schools, it is likely a similar trend of under-estimation will emerge at primary level.
Last year the Education Department said this Government had spent £885million on improving attendance and behaviour. The total is now thought to exceed £1billion.
It has been used for schemes such as town centre truancy sweeps, during which police and welfare staff question children found outside during school hours. Electronic registration systems have also been introduced. Meanwhile, Labour has introduced tougher sanctions against parents who condone truancy.
The Government has responded with another initiative - text message alerts for parents if children fail to turn up for registration.
Schools Minister Jim Knight said: "Parents have a critical role to play. We know from truancy sweeps that around half of all children caught out of school with no good reason are found with an adult."
(ED: So Big Big headlines about how Tony is going to sort out a terrible social evil, throw a lot of tax payers money at the problem, discovery that the problem is harder to sort out than all the alleged brains in New Labour thought it would be and then try to cover off the mess with a fatuous announcement. Seems like business as usual for Tony and New Labour.
Oh by the way Tony half the kids caught playing truant are with their parents so a text to the parents to tell them their child is not at school is even stupider than it first appears.)
Although ministers have spent £1billion trying to tackle truancy, figures show that almost a million children, aged 11 and over, dodged some of their lessons in the last school year.
Almost 220,000 "persistent absentees" miss the equivalent of nearly two days a week through truancy, illness or term-time holidays.
And the problem is much worse than previously thought. A new system of collecting data has found that truancy levels are 18 per cent higher than previous Government statistics showed. The difference amounts to an extra 7,000 skipping school every day.
Absence agreed by schools, including holidays taken during term and sick days, is also up.
The breakdown shows that almost 43,000 pupils a day skipped school in 2005/06 - against 36,200 under the old system for calculating absence, in the same year.
The old system of calculating truancy relied on averages compiled by schools once a year. The new data has been calculated by officials using raw information supplied by schools.
Even under that system, ministers had missed their targets on truancy. Their aim was to cut unauthorised absence by a third by 2002.
But they had to reduce their own target. The Government then said it wanted to cut truancy by ten per cent by 2004. But this did not happen either.
Truancy across primary and secondary schools rose to record levels last year. Although the new data so far covers only secondary schools, it is likely a similar trend of under-estimation will emerge at primary level.
Last year the Education Department said this Government had spent £885million on improving attendance and behaviour. The total is now thought to exceed £1billion.
It has been used for schemes such as town centre truancy sweeps, during which police and welfare staff question children found outside during school hours. Electronic registration systems have also been introduced. Meanwhile, Labour has introduced tougher sanctions against parents who condone truancy.
The Government has responded with another initiative - text message alerts for parents if children fail to turn up for registration.
Schools Minister Jim Knight said: "Parents have a critical role to play. We know from truancy sweeps that around half of all children caught out of school with no good reason are found with an adult."
(ED: So Big Big headlines about how Tony is going to sort out a terrible social evil, throw a lot of tax payers money at the problem, discovery that the problem is harder to sort out than all the alleged brains in New Labour thought it would be and then try to cover off the mess with a fatuous announcement. Seems like business as usual for Tony and New Labour.
Oh by the way Tony half the kids caught playing truant are with their parents so a text to the parents to tell them their child is not at school is even stupider than it first appears.)
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
UK children living in poverty increases
Figures showing a 200,000 rise in UK children living in relative poverty last year have been described as a "moral disgrace" by Barnardo's.
The children's charity said ministers were a long way from honouring a pledge to halve child poverty by 2010.
In 2005-6 3.8m children were in poverty - in homes on less than 60% of average income including housing costs.
In the previous year the number of children living in relative poverty with housing costs taken into account was 3.6m.
With housing costs not deducted from incomes the number of children living below the relative poverty line was 2.8m, up from 2.7m in the year before.
The increases are the first recorded in six years; since 1998/99, 600,000 children have been lifted out of relative poverty.
But to reach their stated targets, ministers must now help lift a further 1.1 million children above the poverty line by 2010 - or 1.6 million after housing costs are included.
Barnardo's chief executive Martin Narey said: "This is a moral disgrace. In 1999, we were all excited by the Government's determination to eradicate child poverty and, on the way, to halve it by 2010.
"It is now clear that what they meant was that they intended, not to halve child poverty by 2010, but to reduce it a bit."
Tony Blair's government hopes the launch of a new £150m child poverty strategy, which includes a programme to get parents into employment, will help hit its target.
Save the Children's UK director Colette Marshall said: "This vital target is slipping dangerously out of reach.
"It is only too clear that Gordon Brown's Budget announcements last week will not be enough to get the government back on track.
"We must now see a sense of urgency from the government to make the target achievable."
The children's charity said ministers were a long way from honouring a pledge to halve child poverty by 2010.
In 2005-6 3.8m children were in poverty - in homes on less than 60% of average income including housing costs.
In the previous year the number of children living in relative poverty with housing costs taken into account was 3.6m.
With housing costs not deducted from incomes the number of children living below the relative poverty line was 2.8m, up from 2.7m in the year before.
The increases are the first recorded in six years; since 1998/99, 600,000 children have been lifted out of relative poverty.
But to reach their stated targets, ministers must now help lift a further 1.1 million children above the poverty line by 2010 - or 1.6 million after housing costs are included.
Barnardo's chief executive Martin Narey said: "This is a moral disgrace. In 1999, we were all excited by the Government's determination to eradicate child poverty and, on the way, to halve it by 2010.
"It is now clear that what they meant was that they intended, not to halve child poverty by 2010, but to reduce it a bit."
Tony Blair's government hopes the launch of a new £150m child poverty strategy, which includes a programme to get parents into employment, will help hit its target.
Save the Children's UK director Colette Marshall said: "This vital target is slipping dangerously out of reach.
"It is only too clear that Gordon Brown's Budget announcements last week will not be enough to get the government back on track.
"We must now see a sense of urgency from the government to make the target achievable."
Tony Blair: 'failed on sleaze'
Joe Murphy, Evening Standard 27.03.07
The "sacked" sleaze watchdog Sir Alistair Graham today accused Tony Blair of failing to clean up politics.
In his final report as chairman of the committee of standards in public life, he said the Prime Minister had not lived up to New Labour's rhetoric of being "purer than pure".
He said his "greatest regret" was that Mr Blair had not made high ethical standards a priority - with the result that public faith in the country's political leadership had been damaged.
Alistair leaves his post next month after Mr Blair refused to reappoint him for a further term, effectively sacking him.
and at times plain-spoken. Given the circumstances I have faced, I make no apologies for this."
The "sacked" sleaze watchdog Sir Alistair Graham today accused Tony Blair of failing to clean up politics.
In his final report as chairman of the committee of standards in public life, he said the Prime Minister had not lived up to New Labour's rhetoric of being "purer than pure".
He said his "greatest regret" was that Mr Blair had not made high ethical standards a priority - with the result that public faith in the country's political leadership had been damaged.
Alistair leaves his post next month after Mr Blair refused to reappoint him for a further term, effectively sacking him.
and at times plain-spoken. Given the circumstances I have faced, I make no apologies for this."
UK failing as more babies born with dangerously low weights
More babies are born at dangerously low birth weights in Britain now than in 1989, a report says.
The study was carried out by the Fabian Society, a left-leaning think-tank, which called the finding a "scar on the national conscience".
It calls for more financial support for at-risk women, better access to antenatal services and one-to-one care for all newborns in intensive care.
The researchers found that in 2006, 78 out of every 1,000 babies were born weighing less than 5lb8oz (2.5kg). That amounted to a total of more than 50,000 babies.
In 1989, 67 out of every 1,000 babies were born under weight.
Low-birth weight is linked to an increased risk death and disability, and a range of long-term health problems, such as diabetes, heart disease, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and depression.
The report also found lone parents were nine times as likely to have a stillbirth as other parents.
Babies born to working-class mothers were twice as likely to die before their first birthday as those with middle-class parents.
"The facts should shock us all. Britain has the worst rate of every country in western Europe, except Greece.
"And being born very small creates health risks throughout life - and will affect the health of babies they will themselves have years later."
Constitutional Affairs Minister Harriet Harman said: "We have made important progress since 1997 on reducing child poverty and creating the early years agenda.
"We must now be bolder and develop the new policies to make building a fairer society the central theme of Labour's next term in office.
"The Fabian Society's evidence on inequalities at birth must be studied carefully by government and the Labour party. The political argument will need to be won too."
The study was carried out by the Fabian Society, a left-leaning think-tank, which called the finding a "scar on the national conscience".
It calls for more financial support for at-risk women, better access to antenatal services and one-to-one care for all newborns in intensive care.
The researchers found that in 2006, 78 out of every 1,000 babies were born weighing less than 5lb8oz (2.5kg). That amounted to a total of more than 50,000 babies.
In 1989, 67 out of every 1,000 babies were born under weight.
Low-birth weight is linked to an increased risk death and disability, and a range of long-term health problems, such as diabetes, heart disease, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and depression.
The report also found lone parents were nine times as likely to have a stillbirth as other parents.
Babies born to working-class mothers were twice as likely to die before their first birthday as those with middle-class parents.
"The facts should shock us all. Britain has the worst rate of every country in western Europe, except Greece.
"And being born very small creates health risks throughout life - and will affect the health of babies they will themselves have years later."
Constitutional Affairs Minister Harriet Harman said: "We have made important progress since 1997 on reducing child poverty and creating the early years agenda.
"We must now be bolder and develop the new policies to make building a fairer society the central theme of Labour's next term in office.
"The Fabian Society's evidence on inequalities at birth must be studied carefully by government and the Labour party. The political argument will need to be won too."
Monday, March 26, 2007
601,000 Iraqi deaths survey 'was robust'
Owen Bennett-Jones - BBC World Service
The survey estimated that 601,000 deaths were the result of violence, mostly gunfire. The British government was advised against publicly criticising a report estimating that 655,000 Iraqis had died due to the war, the BBC has learnt.
Iraqi Health Ministry figures put the toll at less than 10% of the total in the survey, published in the Lancet.
But the Ministry of Defence's chief scientific adviser said the survey's methods were "close to best practice" and the study design was "robust".
Another statistician agreed the method was "tried and tested".
The Iraq government asks the country's hospitals to report the number of victims of terrorism or military action.
Critics say the system was not started until well after the invasion and requires over-pressed hospital staff not only to report daily, but also to distinguish between victims of terrorism and of crime.
The Lancet medical journal published its peer-reviewed survey last October. It was conducted by the John Hopkins School of Public Health and compared mortality rates before and after the invasion by surveying 47 randomly chosen areas across 16 provinces in Iraq.
The researchers spoke to nearly 1,850 families, comprising more than 12,800 people.
In nearly 92% of cases family members produced death certificates to support their answers. The survey estimated that 601,000 deaths were the result of violence, mostly gunfire.
Shortly after the publication of the survey in October last year Tony Blair's official spokesperson said the Lancet's figure was not anywhere near accurate.
He said the survey had used an extrapolation technique, from a relatively small sample from an area of Iraq that was not representative of the country as a whole.
One of the documents just released by the Foreign Office is an e-mail in which an official asks about the Lancet report: "Are we really sure the report is likely to be right? That is certainly what the brief implies."
The reply from another official is: "We do not accept the figures quoted in the Lancet survey as accurate. "
In the same e-mail the official later writes: "However, the survey methodology used here cannot be rubbished, it is a tried and tested way of measuring mortality in conflict zones."
Asked how the government can accept the Lancet's methodology but reject its findings, the government has issued a written statement in which it said: "The methodology has been used in other conflict situations, notably the Democratic republic of Congo.
"However, the Lancet figures are much higher than statistics from other sources, which only goes to show how estimates can vary enormously according to the method of collection.
"There is considerable debate amongst the scientific community over the accuracy of the figures."
If the Lancet survey is right, then 2.5% of the Iraqi population - an average of more than 500 people a day - have been killed since the start of the war.
(ED: I know who I would believe.)
The survey estimated that 601,000 deaths were the result of violence, mostly gunfire. The British government was advised against publicly criticising a report estimating that 655,000 Iraqis had died due to the war, the BBC has learnt.
Iraqi Health Ministry figures put the toll at less than 10% of the total in the survey, published in the Lancet.
But the Ministry of Defence's chief scientific adviser said the survey's methods were "close to best practice" and the study design was "robust".
Another statistician agreed the method was "tried and tested".
The Iraq government asks the country's hospitals to report the number of victims of terrorism or military action.
Critics say the system was not started until well after the invasion and requires over-pressed hospital staff not only to report daily, but also to distinguish between victims of terrorism and of crime.
The Lancet medical journal published its peer-reviewed survey last October. It was conducted by the John Hopkins School of Public Health and compared mortality rates before and after the invasion by surveying 47 randomly chosen areas across 16 provinces in Iraq.
The researchers spoke to nearly 1,850 families, comprising more than 12,800 people.
In nearly 92% of cases family members produced death certificates to support their answers. The survey estimated that 601,000 deaths were the result of violence, mostly gunfire.
Shortly after the publication of the survey in October last year Tony Blair's official spokesperson said the Lancet's figure was not anywhere near accurate.
He said the survey had used an extrapolation technique, from a relatively small sample from an area of Iraq that was not representative of the country as a whole.
One of the documents just released by the Foreign Office is an e-mail in which an official asks about the Lancet report: "Are we really sure the report is likely to be right? That is certainly what the brief implies."
The reply from another official is: "We do not accept the figures quoted in the Lancet survey as accurate. "
In the same e-mail the official later writes: "However, the survey methodology used here cannot be rubbished, it is a tried and tested way of measuring mortality in conflict zones."
Asked how the government can accept the Lancet's methodology but reject its findings, the government has issued a written statement in which it said: "The methodology has been used in other conflict situations, notably the Democratic republic of Congo.
"However, the Lancet figures are much higher than statistics from other sources, which only goes to show how estimates can vary enormously according to the method of collection.
"There is considerable debate amongst the scientific community over the accuracy of the figures."
If the Lancet survey is right, then 2.5% of the Iraqi population - an average of more than 500 people a day - have been killed since the start of the war.
(ED: I know who I would believe.)
Cabinet minister Kelly loses private education complaint
Cabinet minister Ruth Kelly has lost her complaint against the Daily Mirror, over its coverage of her decision to educate her son privately.
The Press Complaints Commission (PCC) rejected her complaint that the story had breached her son's privacy.
The former education secretary decided to send him to a private school because of his learning difficulties.
The PCC said the Mirror had correctly balanced the public's right to know with the child's right to privacy.
In its ruling, the PCC said the issues raised in the article were "a matter of considerable public interest".
The fact that the complainant did not feel that the current state system could meet her child's requirements raised questions about the nature of publicly-funded schooling
PCC ruling
"The fact that a Cabinet minister - who had previously been Secretary of State for Education and Skills - had elected to remove her child from the state system to be enrolled in a private school raised important issues for public debate," it said.
"Even if government policy included an acceptance of private schooling for those with special needs, the fact that the complainant did not feel that the current state system could meet her child's requirements raised questions about the nature of publicly-funded schooling and its ability to cater for children with special needs - including those whose families would not be able to pay for private schooling."
A spokeswoman for Ms Kelly said she was very disappointed with the decision and she believed the PCC should have granted the same right of privacy to her child, that it does to others.
The story - that a Cabinet minister had sent their child to a private school - was first reported, without names, in the Mail on Sunday.
Ms Kelly, now the Communities Secretary, was named in the Mirror's story the next day, although her child was not. The issue of private education has long been controversial within the Labour Party.
Mirror editor Richard Wallace argued that it was "right and proper" to identify her, as her actions "were clearly at odds with government policy".
(ED: I am just glad that a socialist representative of the people can afford £15k a year private school fees, on top of the normal costs of supports four children, and opt out of her government's education decisions. It's a shame that most people she represents can't afford to opt out but that's New Labour socialism do as we say not as we do.)
The Press Complaints Commission (PCC) rejected her complaint that the story had breached her son's privacy.
The former education secretary decided to send him to a private school because of his learning difficulties.
The PCC said the Mirror had correctly balanced the public's right to know with the child's right to privacy.
In its ruling, the PCC said the issues raised in the article were "a matter of considerable public interest".
The fact that the complainant did not feel that the current state system could meet her child's requirements raised questions about the nature of publicly-funded schooling
PCC ruling
"The fact that a Cabinet minister - who had previously been Secretary of State for Education and Skills - had elected to remove her child from the state system to be enrolled in a private school raised important issues for public debate," it said.
"Even if government policy included an acceptance of private schooling for those with special needs, the fact that the complainant did not feel that the current state system could meet her child's requirements raised questions about the nature of publicly-funded schooling and its ability to cater for children with special needs - including those whose families would not be able to pay for private schooling."
A spokeswoman for Ms Kelly said she was very disappointed with the decision and she believed the PCC should have granted the same right of privacy to her child, that it does to others.
The story - that a Cabinet minister had sent their child to a private school - was first reported, without names, in the Mail on Sunday.
Ms Kelly, now the Communities Secretary, was named in the Mirror's story the next day, although her child was not. The issue of private education has long been controversial within the Labour Party.
Mirror editor Richard Wallace argued that it was "right and proper" to identify her, as her actions "were clearly at odds with government policy".
(ED: I am just glad that a socialist representative of the people can afford £15k a year private school fees, on top of the normal costs of supports four children, and opt out of her government's education decisions. It's a shame that most people she represents can't afford to opt out but that's New Labour socialism do as we say not as we do.)
Tough on crime and causes of crime soft on criminals
Alastair Taylor at The Sun - March 26, 2007
A ROW erupted last night after it emerged thousands of prisoners have KEYS to their own cells.
The inmates have been given “privacy locks” to allow them personal space and protect belongings, inquiries by MPs showed.
The scheme — revealed by requests under freedom of information laws — was slammed as “turning prisons into hotels”.
It also emerged that some jails call inmates “residents” or “trainees”.
Figures showed that in Yorkshire alone 5,747 inmates have keys, some at open prisons and young offenders’ centres, but also at standard jails which hold serious criminals.
Prisons Minister Gerry Sutcliffe said it was in the interests of inmates’ rehabilitation and “decency”.
A ROW erupted last night after it emerged thousands of prisoners have KEYS to their own cells.
The inmates have been given “privacy locks” to allow them personal space and protect belongings, inquiries by MPs showed.
The scheme — revealed by requests under freedom of information laws — was slammed as “turning prisons into hotels”.
It also emerged that some jails call inmates “residents” or “trainees”.
Figures showed that in Yorkshire alone 5,747 inmates have keys, some at open prisons and young offenders’ centres, but also at standard jails which hold serious criminals.
Prisons Minister Gerry Sutcliffe said it was in the interests of inmates’ rehabilitation and “decency”.
Sunday, March 25, 2007
Blunkett lands job with an ID cards company
Gordon Rayner at Mail on Sunday.
David Blunkett, the architect of the controversial identity card scheme, has landed a job with a U.S. firm which bids for ID contracts.
The former home secretary is working for Entrust, which provides the software for the company running Spain's national identity card system.
His job is to advise on "government relations" but Entrust insists he will not be lobbying the Home Office once the bidding process for ID cards begins here.
The anti-ID card pressure group NO2ID described Mr Blunkett's job as "distasteful", warning he might "recycle" his ID card ideas in other EU countries.
Shadow Home Secretary David Davis said: "We can't have a situation where a high-profile former minister, particularly one who was so involved in the ID card scheme, is employed by a company looking for lucrative Government contracts."
Mr Blunkett's last company directorship, with DNA Bioscience, led to his resignation from his post as work and pensions minister in November 2005 after it emerged he failed to clear the job with the advisory committee on business appointments.
(ED: What a good job Blunkett and his mates are not Tories because that would mean he was sleazy.)
David Blunkett, the architect of the controversial identity card scheme, has landed a job with a U.S. firm which bids for ID contracts.
The former home secretary is working for Entrust, which provides the software for the company running Spain's national identity card system.
His job is to advise on "government relations" but Entrust insists he will not be lobbying the Home Office once the bidding process for ID cards begins here.
The anti-ID card pressure group NO2ID described Mr Blunkett's job as "distasteful", warning he might "recycle" his ID card ideas in other EU countries.
Shadow Home Secretary David Davis said: "We can't have a situation where a high-profile former minister, particularly one who was so involved in the ID card scheme, is employed by a company looking for lucrative Government contracts."
Mr Blunkett's last company directorship, with DNA Bioscience, led to his resignation from his post as work and pensions minister in November 2005 after it emerged he failed to clear the job with the advisory committee on business appointments.
(ED: What a good job Blunkett and his mates are not Tories because that would mean he was sleazy.)
Saturday, March 24, 2007
Blair gov found lying again
John Carvel social affairs editor at The Guardian Friday - March 23, 2007
Health inspectors will publish conclusive evidence that the government's claim to have ended the scandal of mixed-sex psychiatric wards in the NHS was false, or at best misleading.
In a census of all mental health establishments in England and Wales, the Healthcare Commission found 55% of inpatients have to share sleeping accommodation or bathrooms with members of the opposite sex.
Last year ministers rejected a report from the National Patient Safety Agency that recorded at least 19 rapes of mental health patients in England, and more than 100 other improper sexual incidents in psychiatric units in the previous two years.
Lord Warner, then health minister, said the allegations of rape were unsubstantiated.
He told peers in July that 99% of NHS trusts providing mental health services met "single-sex objectives" that were set out in 2000, requiring all mental health units to provide totally separate sleeping, toilet and bathing accommodation for men and women.
Lord Warner said mixed sex wards were an exception that might apply to "a very small number of patients, when admitted as an emergency".
But the census - conducted by the commission and government-funded mental health agencies - found only 45% of the 32,000 inpatients in NHS or private sector psychiatric wards on March 31 last year had the benefit of single-sex accommodation.
Mind, the mental health charity, said patients reported alarming levels of abuse, harassment and intimidation on mixed-sex wards.
Paul Farmer, chief executive, said: "It is quite staggering how bad the mixed sex wards situation is. The NHS is putting some of the most vulnerable people in some of the most threatening and unpleasant environments."
ED: Does Blair's government have no shame whatsoever? Do they even get embarrassed anymore. Good job they are socialists otherwise they would get a real hardtime in the press.
Health inspectors will publish conclusive evidence that the government's claim to have ended the scandal of mixed-sex psychiatric wards in the NHS was false, or at best misleading.
In a census of all mental health establishments in England and Wales, the Healthcare Commission found 55% of inpatients have to share sleeping accommodation or bathrooms with members of the opposite sex.
Last year ministers rejected a report from the National Patient Safety Agency that recorded at least 19 rapes of mental health patients in England, and more than 100 other improper sexual incidents in psychiatric units in the previous two years.
Lord Warner, then health minister, said the allegations of rape were unsubstantiated.
He told peers in July that 99% of NHS trusts providing mental health services met "single-sex objectives" that were set out in 2000, requiring all mental health units to provide totally separate sleeping, toilet and bathing accommodation for men and women.
Lord Warner said mixed sex wards were an exception that might apply to "a very small number of patients, when admitted as an emergency".
But the census - conducted by the commission and government-funded mental health agencies - found only 45% of the 32,000 inpatients in NHS or private sector psychiatric wards on March 31 last year had the benefit of single-sex accommodation.
Mind, the mental health charity, said patients reported alarming levels of abuse, harassment and intimidation on mixed-sex wards.
Paul Farmer, chief executive, said: "It is quite staggering how bad the mixed sex wards situation is. The NHS is putting some of the most vulnerable people in some of the most threatening and unpleasant environments."
ED: Does Blair's government have no shame whatsoever? Do they even get embarrassed anymore. Good job they are socialists otherwise they would get a real hardtime in the press.
Wednesday, March 21, 2007
Boys do better with traditional reading methods
Boys can learn to beat girls at reading if they are given old-fashioned teaching methods, claim psychologists.
Under the synthetic phonics system, children are taught the sounds that make up words rather than guess at entire words from pictures and story context.
A study of synthetic phonics also found children from disadvantaged backgrounds do as well as those from better off homes.
The research, presented at the British Psychological Society's annual conference in York, has underpinned changes being made in the nation's classrooms.
They have been introduced after damning revelations that four in 10 children have failed to master the three Rs by the time they leave primary school.
"Teachers told us they had fewer disciplinary problems and less trouble in the playground because boys were succeeding and had higher self esteem."
Professor Johnston's work has been influential in persuading the Government to re-write its national literacy hour - returning to a system that dates back to Victorian times.
Synthetic phonics fell out of favour in the 1960s and 1970s in favour of progressive 'child-centred' learning that was championed for decades by educationalists in the Labour movement.
ED: Another serious error by well-meaning Labour socialists that has damaged thousands of children. Will they ever learn to take more care
Under the synthetic phonics system, children are taught the sounds that make up words rather than guess at entire words from pictures and story context.
A study of synthetic phonics also found children from disadvantaged backgrounds do as well as those from better off homes.
The research, presented at the British Psychological Society's annual conference in York, has underpinned changes being made in the nation's classrooms.
They have been introduced after damning revelations that four in 10 children have failed to master the three Rs by the time they leave primary school.
"Teachers told us they had fewer disciplinary problems and less trouble in the playground because boys were succeeding and had higher self esteem."
Professor Johnston's work has been influential in persuading the Government to re-write its national literacy hour - returning to a system that dates back to Victorian times.
Synthetic phonics fell out of favour in the 1960s and 1970s in favour of progressive 'child-centred' learning that was championed for decades by educationalists in the Labour movement.
ED: Another serious error by well-meaning Labour socialists that has damaged thousands of children. Will they ever learn to take more care
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
NHS could be only part free
The public services policy review launched on Monday by Tony Blair, the prime minister, and Gordon Brown, the chancellor.It says the government should “look at the possibility of drawing up a package of services that all users are entitled to”. Nice, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, could be asked to do that.
The health department confirmed it was “looking at the possibility in the normal process of policy development” and agreed that deciding what everyone was entitled to would also involve deciding “what they are not entitled to”.
Patricia Hewitt, the health secretary, was deputy chairman of a pharmaceutical industry-financed study in 1995 that called for restrictions on free services. But she disowned the report on becoming health secretary, saying the government’s big increase in NHS spending removed the need for such measures.
(source: The Financial Times)
ED: Thank goodness Tony Blair saved the NHS from privatisation
The health department confirmed it was “looking at the possibility in the normal process of policy development” and agreed that deciding what everyone was entitled to would also involve deciding “what they are not entitled to”.
Patricia Hewitt, the health secretary, was deputy chairman of a pharmaceutical industry-financed study in 1995 that called for restrictions on free services. But she disowned the report on becoming health secretary, saying the government’s big increase in NHS spending removed the need for such measures.
(source: The Financial Times)
ED: Thank goodness Tony Blair saved the NHS from privatisation
Actual rubbish figures from New Labour
Concerns are increasing ahead of the Budget that the quality of official data is being compromised by the loss of skilled staff at the Office for National Statistics as it relocates to Newport, south Wales.
About a third of the government department's London-based staff have resigned, retired early or taken redundancy in the first phase of the shift this year, and only about 40 of the 600 staff have thus far accepted the offer to move.
The ONS has announced that this year's "Blue Book", its annual cross-check on the accuracy of the national accounts, will not be published in full, "creating some temporary additional uncertainty about the path of the economy".The annual statement of the UK's balance of
payments will "include less analysis than usual".
The Bank of England has expressed concerns that planned improvements to the measurement of the service sector have been delayed. Preparations for the 2011 population census are falling behind, as are plans to collect improved migration data. The ONS has also admitted that a survey on wealth is behind schedule.
The last time the government cut funding for statistics - in the 1980s - it took several years for inaccuracies to become apparent. Lord Lawson, then chancellor, has since blamed the failings of his economic policies on poor data.
(source: The Financial Times)
ED: That's alright then we can have real rubbish economic figures just in time for the Blair Brown swop. There will now be no way for anyone to contradict New Labour claims.
About a third of the government department's London-based staff have resigned, retired early or taken redundancy in the first phase of the shift this year, and only about 40 of the 600 staff have thus far accepted the offer to move.
The ONS has announced that this year's "Blue Book", its annual cross-check on the accuracy of the national accounts, will not be published in full, "creating some temporary additional uncertainty about the path of the economy".The annual statement of the UK's balance of
payments will "include less analysis than usual".
The Bank of England has expressed concerns that planned improvements to the measurement of the service sector have been delayed. Preparations for the 2011 population census are falling behind, as are plans to collect improved migration data. The ONS has also admitted that a survey on wealth is behind schedule.
The last time the government cut funding for statistics - in the 1980s - it took several years for inaccuracies to become apparent. Lord Lawson, then chancellor, has since blamed the failings of his economic policies on poor data.
(source: The Financial Times)
ED: That's alright then we can have real rubbish economic figures just in time for the Blair Brown swop. There will now be no way for anyone to contradict New Labour claims.
Home Office gives terrorists British passports
An estimated 10,000 British passports were issued to fraudulent applicants last year by the Home Office Home Secretary John Reid.
The man who plotted to use a radioactive "dirty bomb" in London was issued with nine passports, the Home Secretary John Reid admitted today.
Seven of these were issued in his own name and two in false identities-Dhiren Barot was one of two terrorists who managed to obtain passports fraudulently.
Barot, 34, from Kingsbury, north-west London, was convicted last year of conspiring to murder large numbers of civilians in the capital by blowing up gas cylinders and detonating a dirty bomb.
The second terrorist is Salaheddine Benyaich, a Moroccan national currently serving 18 years in his home country for involvement in the al Qaeda-inspired Casablanca bombings.
The astonishing development came as the Home Office was forced to admit up to 10,000 people had managed to obtain passports by deception in the past year.
Minister Joan Ryan revealed the Identity and Passport Service received 16,500 suspicious applications between October 2005 to September And although "almost half" were stopped by existing safeguards, the minister said the remainder went undetected.
Also obtaining false passports are illegal immigrants and members of organised crime gangs.
(Obviously due to the Home Office incompetence all law abiding citizens have to pay large sums for a new style passport and be inconvenienced - ED)
The man who plotted to use a radioactive "dirty bomb" in London was issued with nine passports, the Home Secretary John Reid admitted today.
Seven of these were issued in his own name and two in false identities-Dhiren Barot was one of two terrorists who managed to obtain passports fraudulently.
Barot, 34, from Kingsbury, north-west London, was convicted last year of conspiring to murder large numbers of civilians in the capital by blowing up gas cylinders and detonating a dirty bomb.
The second terrorist is Salaheddine Benyaich, a Moroccan national currently serving 18 years in his home country for involvement in the al Qaeda-inspired Casablanca bombings.
The astonishing development came as the Home Office was forced to admit up to 10,000 people had managed to obtain passports by deception in the past year.
Minister Joan Ryan revealed the Identity and Passport Service received 16,500 suspicious applications between October 2005 to September And although "almost half" were stopped by existing safeguards, the minister said the remainder went undetected.
Also obtaining false passports are illegal immigrants and members of organised crime gangs.
(Obviously due to the Home Office incompetence all law abiding citizens have to pay large sums for a new style passport and be inconvenienced - ED)
Monday, March 19, 2007
Income tax and insurance double under Labour
Gordon Brown has added the equivalent of 7p in the pound to the income tax paid by every worker since Labour came to power, it has emerged.
In total, Britain's 29 million workers are paying £2.3 billion more income tax and National Insurance each week than they were in 1997.
Before Labour came to power, the two taxes were worth £115billion a year, but this has since doubled to £230 billion.
Maurice Fitzpatrick, of accountants Grant Thornton, blamed the fact that thresholds for the amount exempt from tax are raised in line with prices, rather than earnings growth. This means personal allowances rise much more slowly than salaries, trapping workers into paying more tax.
(Daily Mail 18.03.2007)
In total, Britain's 29 million workers are paying £2.3 billion more income tax and National Insurance each week than they were in 1997.
Before Labour came to power, the two taxes were worth £115billion a year, but this has since doubled to £230 billion.
Maurice Fitzpatrick, of accountants Grant Thornton, blamed the fact that thresholds for the amount exempt from tax are raised in line with prices, rather than earnings growth. This means personal allowances rise much more slowly than salaries, trapping workers into paying more tax.
(Daily Mail 18.03.2007)
£19bn for NHS but only £6bn for patient care
More Health Service money has gone on pay rises over the past four years than on improving patient care, an analysis has shown.
Of the extra £19billion that has been ploughed into the NHS since 2003, £6.6billion has been spent on improved pay for doctors and nurses, says the report by King's Fund.
This compares with only £5.9billion for improvements such as cutting waiting times, employing extra staff and enabling the elderly to leave hospital sooner.
The analysis also claims that despite their huge pay rises, GPs and hospital consultants have been doing less work.
Consultants have seen their pay go up by 70 per cent, yet their productivity has fallen by 20 per cent as judged by the number of in-patients admitted per consultant, says King's Fund - an independent charitable foundation working for better health.
More than 90 per cent of GPs have opted out of their responsibility to see patients outside working hours.
King's Fund chief economist John Appleby said: 'This NHS could have got more for its money, and could have used all that extra money more efficiently for patient benefit. 'For example, it could have ensured a productivity clause was inserted in the consultants' contracts.'
The analysis found that of the £19billion, £6.6billion - 34 per cent - had gone on increased pay.
The rising cost of drugs and the implementation of guidance from the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence accounted for £2.2billion.
Some £1.6billion went on hiring more doctors to comply with new European Union employment laws cutting the number of hours people could work.
Although this put more medics on the NHS payroll, they do the same amount of work as fewer staff did before, said King's Fund.
New buildings and equipment accounted for another £1.1billion, and £1billion was spent on medical equipment. Another £600million was spent on payouts after negligence lawsuits.
This left only £5.9billion for solid improvements to patient care, said the analysis found.
NHS funding has leapt from £ 35billion when Labour took office to £92billion in 2007/08. But the rises are expected to slow sharply after 2008. A survey of NHS trust chief executives last month found that more than two-thirds blamed the financial problems of the NHS on rising pay for GPs and consultants.
One said there had been 'funding increases like we never dreamed and we blew it'.
Of the extra £19billion that has been ploughed into the NHS since 2003, £6.6billion has been spent on improved pay for doctors and nurses, says the report by King's Fund.
This compares with only £5.9billion for improvements such as cutting waiting times, employing extra staff and enabling the elderly to leave hospital sooner.
The analysis also claims that despite their huge pay rises, GPs and hospital consultants have been doing less work.
Consultants have seen their pay go up by 70 per cent, yet their productivity has fallen by 20 per cent as judged by the number of in-patients admitted per consultant, says King's Fund - an independent charitable foundation working for better health.
More than 90 per cent of GPs have opted out of their responsibility to see patients outside working hours.
King's Fund chief economist John Appleby said: 'This NHS could have got more for its money, and could have used all that extra money more efficiently for patient benefit. 'For example, it could have ensured a productivity clause was inserted in the consultants' contracts.'
The analysis found that of the £19billion, £6.6billion - 34 per cent - had gone on increased pay.
The rising cost of drugs and the implementation of guidance from the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence accounted for £2.2billion.
Some £1.6billion went on hiring more doctors to comply with new European Union employment laws cutting the number of hours people could work.
Although this put more medics on the NHS payroll, they do the same amount of work as fewer staff did before, said King's Fund.
New buildings and equipment accounted for another £1.1billion, and £1billion was spent on medical equipment. Another £600million was spent on payouts after negligence lawsuits.
This left only £5.9billion for solid improvements to patient care, said the analysis found.
NHS funding has leapt from £ 35billion when Labour took office to £92billion in 2007/08. But the rises are expected to slow sharply after 2008. A survey of NHS trust chief executives last month found that more than two-thirds blamed the financial problems of the NHS on rising pay for GPs and consultants.
One said there had been 'funding increases like we never dreamed and we blew it'.
Sunday, March 18, 2007
NHS cash floods into staff salaries
Patients miss out as NHS cash floods in Salaries soaked up new funds, reveals damning report Denis Campbell, Jo Revill and Ned TemkoSunday March 18, 2007The Observer
Billions of pounds of taxpayers' money pumped into the National Health Service has gone on improving the salaries of GPs and consultants and paying for increased pensions rather than on improvements in patient care and frontline services.
A damning report by the highly respected health think-tank, the King's Fund, reveals that productivity in the health service has actually declined, despite the huge injection of cash.
The report reveals that only 30 pence in every pound of the Government's record NHS budget has been aimed at directly improving patient care. As well as salaries, the rest has gone on a growing bill for clinical negligence payouts and rising drug costs.
The King's Fund report, based on the most detailed and authoritative analysis yet of Labour's trebling of health spending, will make difficult reading for government ministers alarmed at criticism of the impact of their health reforms. The government has increased spending on the NHS by £57 billion since 1997.
On Tuesday Tony Blair and Gordon Brown will face further criticism when an influential group of MPs is expected to single out ministers' mishandling of national pay deals as one reason for the current financial crisis in a number of local health trusts.
The hard-hitting report from the Commons spending watchdog, the Public Accounts Committee will say that the GPs' contract alone cost £300m more than expected, and there were also above-budget deals with consultants and other NHS staff. One PAC member, Labour MP Don Touhig, said during the committee hearings that ministers and NHS leaders had simply 'caved in' as if they had 'had their own mint'.
The author of the King's Fund study, economist John Appleby, said the figures showed why hopes had been dashed that tens of billions of extra NHS spending would mean major improvements in frontline care. Patients had benefited far less than they should have, he said.
His research discloses that 34 per cent of the £19bn which the government has put directly into hospital and community health services in England since 2003 went on more pay for clinical staff. However, productivity levels among GPs, consultants and nurses have nowhere near matched the scale of the increase in the NHS's funding in England, which has gone up from £35bn in 1997 to £92bn in 2007-08.
While consultants have seen their pay scales go up by 70 per cent under Labour, their productivity had actually fallen by 20 per cent over the same period, judged by the number of in-patients admitted per consultant, said Appleby. Similarly, the number of in-patient admissions per nurse fell by 15 per cent, and GPs are not markedly more productive than before they got hefty pay rises in 2004, he added.
Appleby's analysis shows that of the £19bn:
· £6.6bn went on pay
· £2.2bn on the rising cost of drugs, and implementing recommendations by the National Institute of Clinical Excellence treatment advisors
· £1.6bn on hiring more doctors to comply with new EU employment laws on number of hours worked
· £1.1bn on new buildings and equipment
· £1bn on medical equipment and £600m on negligence lawsuits.
After all that, just £5.9bn was left for direct improvements, which include reduced waiting lists, much greater use of day surgery, larger numbers of doctors, nurses and consultants, and elderly patients spending far less time in hospital, he said.
'The NHS could have got more for its money, and could have used all that extra money more efficiently for patient benefit,' he said. 'For example, it could have ensured a productivity clause was inserted in the consultants' contracts.'
In an interview with The Observer, Patricia Hewitt, the Health Secretary, said her predecessor John Reid was right to spend so much of the NHS budget on pay rises because it was facing a potential personnel crisis due to problems with recruiting and retaining key staff.
But she admitted that 'with hindsight' ministers should have changed commissioning, the process through which primary care trusts buy a certain amount of operations and procedures from local hospitals. The NHS needs to 'build up a culture' in which the trusts - in a drive to get better value for money - could challenge a hospital if, for example, patients were staying much longer than other hospitals who were managing to discharge them faster, thus saving the NHS about £500-a-night.
Dr Jonathan Fielden, chairman of the British Medical Association's consultants' committee, dismissed Appleby's comments about consultants as 'convenient, simplistic and an easy hit' but admitted that 'around two-thirds of consultants are being forced to see fewer patients because of the financial restrictions in the NHS and the Government's policy of fewer patients being treated in hospitals.'
Billions of pounds of taxpayers' money pumped into the National Health Service has gone on improving the salaries of GPs and consultants and paying for increased pensions rather than on improvements in patient care and frontline services.
A damning report by the highly respected health think-tank, the King's Fund, reveals that productivity in the health service has actually declined, despite the huge injection of cash.
The report reveals that only 30 pence in every pound of the Government's record NHS budget has been aimed at directly improving patient care. As well as salaries, the rest has gone on a growing bill for clinical negligence payouts and rising drug costs.
The King's Fund report, based on the most detailed and authoritative analysis yet of Labour's trebling of health spending, will make difficult reading for government ministers alarmed at criticism of the impact of their health reforms. The government has increased spending on the NHS by £57 billion since 1997.
On Tuesday Tony Blair and Gordon Brown will face further criticism when an influential group of MPs is expected to single out ministers' mishandling of national pay deals as one reason for the current financial crisis in a number of local health trusts.
The hard-hitting report from the Commons spending watchdog, the Public Accounts Committee will say that the GPs' contract alone cost £300m more than expected, and there were also above-budget deals with consultants and other NHS staff. One PAC member, Labour MP Don Touhig, said during the committee hearings that ministers and NHS leaders had simply 'caved in' as if they had 'had their own mint'.
The author of the King's Fund study, economist John Appleby, said the figures showed why hopes had been dashed that tens of billions of extra NHS spending would mean major improvements in frontline care. Patients had benefited far less than they should have, he said.
His research discloses that 34 per cent of the £19bn which the government has put directly into hospital and community health services in England since 2003 went on more pay for clinical staff. However, productivity levels among GPs, consultants and nurses have nowhere near matched the scale of the increase in the NHS's funding in England, which has gone up from £35bn in 1997 to £92bn in 2007-08.
While consultants have seen their pay scales go up by 70 per cent under Labour, their productivity had actually fallen by 20 per cent over the same period, judged by the number of in-patients admitted per consultant, said Appleby. Similarly, the number of in-patient admissions per nurse fell by 15 per cent, and GPs are not markedly more productive than before they got hefty pay rises in 2004, he added.
Appleby's analysis shows that of the £19bn:
· £6.6bn went on pay
· £2.2bn on the rising cost of drugs, and implementing recommendations by the National Institute of Clinical Excellence treatment advisors
· £1.6bn on hiring more doctors to comply with new EU employment laws on number of hours worked
· £1.1bn on new buildings and equipment
· £1bn on medical equipment and £600m on negligence lawsuits.
After all that, just £5.9bn was left for direct improvements, which include reduced waiting lists, much greater use of day surgery, larger numbers of doctors, nurses and consultants, and elderly patients spending far less time in hospital, he said.
'The NHS could have got more for its money, and could have used all that extra money more efficiently for patient benefit,' he said. 'For example, it could have ensured a productivity clause was inserted in the consultants' contracts.'
In an interview with The Observer, Patricia Hewitt, the Health Secretary, said her predecessor John Reid was right to spend so much of the NHS budget on pay rises because it was facing a potential personnel crisis due to problems with recruiting and retaining key staff.
But she admitted that 'with hindsight' ministers should have changed commissioning, the process through which primary care trusts buy a certain amount of operations and procedures from local hospitals. The NHS needs to 'build up a culture' in which the trusts - in a drive to get better value for money - could challenge a hospital if, for example, patients were staying much longer than other hospitals who were managing to discharge them faster, thus saving the NHS about £500-a-night.
Dr Jonathan Fielden, chairman of the British Medical Association's consultants' committee, dismissed Appleby's comments about consultants as 'convenient, simplistic and an easy hit' but admitted that 'around two-thirds of consultants are being forced to see fewer patients because of the financial restrictions in the NHS and the Government's policy of fewer patients being treated in hospitals.'
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)