Day of action from trade unions

 

Members of other unions are currently voting on proposed strikes, with a day of action planned for 10 July.

Unison said local government workers and school support staff – which include all school workers except teachers – had been subject to a three-year pay freeze and had now been offered a 1% pay rise.

The union said almost 85,000 workers – mainly low-paid women – voted and more than 58% backed the strike. About 410,000 workers had the chance to vote.

Unison general secretary Dave Prentis said: “These workers care for our elderly, clean our streets, feed and educate our school children and keep our libraries running, but they receive no recognition in their pay packets.

“They are mainly low-paid women workers, stressed and demoralised, and they deserve better from their employers and from this government.

“This is the group that has borne the brunt of the government’s austerity agenda.”

Mr Prentis said Unison members “expect to be joined” by other unions in the strike on 10 July, adding: “The employers must get back into talks immediately to avoid a damaging dispute.”

Unison said pay freezes and below-inflation pay rises had reduced local government workers’ pay by 20% since the coalition government came to power in 2010.

The GMB and Unite unions are expected to announce the results of strike ballots in the coming days, and the National Union of Teachers has already announced a strike on 10 July.

Midwives in England are currently being balloted about possible strike action after the government did not approve a recommended 1% pay rise for all NHS staff.

My thoughts of the national day of action:

1) I’m in full support of the trade unions day of action this on the grounds of that there are many low paid workers in this part of public sector and I would like to counter the arrangements from the press, social media, Local Government Association central Government who continue to feed the myth that public sectors are well paid in actual fact they are not followed by the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) who knows nothing of how our public services operate which the local Government should be a shame of themselves for toeing the line of  the CBI and Central Government.

2) As a ex-employee of local and central government I have witnessed the hardships that faced by employees and in some cases that central and local government have at times failed in their duty of care of its employees to protect them from psychical abuse from the general public for instance Ambulance, Social Workers, Community Psychiatric nurse, doctors, police,  have been called out of hours to with the communities and they have to work at all hours

3)  It comes no surprise that the trade union members decided to vote on strike action over a number of reasons like the coalition attacking trade unions terms and condition, the coalition continued attacks on pay by offering lesser than inflation rate.

4) There has been more cuts in public sectors like police, and arm forces the continued closure of day and night care services, under this coalition than any other UK government compare to a Labour government so don’t be hoodwinked by the Conservatives, and their affiliate press will have you believe.

5) To add insult to injury few scenes have illustrate the draconian cruelty of austerity Britain better than the weekend’s kettle of disability protesters in Westminster.

Notice there has been no coverage of a 50000 people demonstration and only this weekend Disabled People Against Cuts had very attention by most of the leading press and social media. Many find it distasteful the a group who decided to their right to a peaceful assembly was kettle by the police at the request of Dean of Westminster who refuse to meet activists who broke no laws.

Article 11 Freedom of assembly and association

1 Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and to freedom of association with others, including the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

2 No restrictions shall be placed on the exercise of these rights other than such as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. This Article shall not prevent the imposition of lawful restrictions on the exercise of these rights by members of the armed forces, of the police or of the administration of the State.

6) The police, arm forces, and public services will face a further increase in cuts by this dreaded coalition and rest assured if the Conservatives win a full majority in government we have a full scale cuts on public services.

7) It’s little surprise that it was the banks and tax avoiding corporations that wrecked the economy forcing UK, and Ireland and much of the world into wasted years of austerity and social misery.

8) Twenty-fourteen had barely begun when George Osborne was warning more cuts were on their way, with another £25 billion to be ripped out of the welfare state.

Yet the Chancellor’s economic black magic actually pushes the country deeper into the red, with £14m per hour being borrowed.

Just last week, his passion for the destruction of our social structures was revealed again with his plans to rid the nation of a million public servants.

Of course, many are doing very nicely in coalition Britain — such as the 62,000 “high-net-worth” individuals who joined the ranks of the global super-rich last year.

Over half a million people in this country are now among the wealthiest on the planet — one in every 121 of the population, hogging the goodies to themselves while 5.2m workers in this country earn less than a living wage.

9) Intriguingly a leading Archbishop has recommended that the government should pay its own workers a “living wage”.

The commission is an independent body bringing together business, trade unions and civil society.

It says that “the majority of people in poverty in the UK are working”.

The commission’s definition of a living wage is “an hourly rate of income calculated according to a basic cost of living in the UK and defined as the minimum amount of money needed to enjoy a basic, but socially acceptable standard of living”.

In 2014 the UK living wage rate stands at £7.65 an hour, and the London living wage is set at a higher rate of £8.80 per hour, to take account of the higher cost of living in the capital.

By contrast, the national minimum wage currently stands at £6.31 an hour.

The government is the biggest employer of low-paid people, and so should look at pay levels during procurement, and that private sector companies that are capable should also pay.

The commission’s research shows that there are currently 712 employers across the UK accredited as paying a living wage.

Service industries such as accountancy, banks and construction firms could boost the pay of 375,000 workers if they agreed to pay the national living wage.

“Working and still living in poverty is a national scandal”.

“For the first time, the majority of people in poverty in the UK are now in working households.

“If the government now commits to making this hope a reality, we can take a major step towards ending the strain on all of our consciences. Low wages equals living in poverty.”

10） Yet this  coalition government was accused yesterday of continuing to drive Britain’s low-income families further and further into poverty  to the point where they cannot even afford to feed themselves.

Independent charity the Joseph Rowntree Foundation published a report exposing how the ever-increasing gap between prices and wages is leaving low-income families struggling to meet the costs of basic essentials.

The Foundation warned that since 2008 the price of essentials had soared by 28 per cent, while average wages increased by just nine per cent.

The government responded by saying tax cuts — which have handed hundreds of millions of pounds to the wealthy — are a benefit to low-earners.

But the foundation’s chief executive Julia Unwin said: “These figures show there is still a lot of work needed to make up the lost ground for low-income families. The income they need to make ends meet has soared at a time when their ability to make up the shortfall is severely constrained.”

She said action was needed to “to help alleviate the pressure on the worst-off households.”

The foundation’s research identified the levels of wages needed for individuals and families to “afford a minimum acceptable standard of living.”

It said single people need to be paid £16,300 a year before tax while a couple with two children need to bring in a total of £40,600 before tax — an impossibility for most low-wage earners.

The figures are based on the foundation’s “minimum income standard,” which sets out the basics to be included in a minimum household budget according to public opinion.

Report author Abigail Davis said: “Throughout the past few difficult years, the people we talk to have held a consistent view of what it means to live at an acceptable level in the UK.

“It means being able to afford to feed your family and heat your home properly, but also having enough to buy a birthday present for your children, and to spend time with your family away from home, such as the occasional meal out.

“The growing number of people who fall below this standard are unable to afford basic goods, services and activities that most of us would take for granted.”

 

Who benefits from Austerity?

“Workers of the world unite; you have nothing to lose but your chains”. Karl Marx

 

 

Checkout this youtube:

Great day on Sat 21 June in London and proud to have joined the demonstration a few things struck my mind whilst returning from the rally on the train:

1) Whilst it was good to see so many people there from the trade unions movements, lower paid, and lower middle class all coming together to send a clear message to this coalition austerity plan is hurting but not working and how will this now translate into Labour votes in 2015.

2) Why is there so much resentment for this coalition and why has the Conservatives and LibDems have not done so well in the recent European and Local Government Elections 2014. People are more concern of their own bread and butter issues that it then becomes agonizing to chose to put food on the table to feed their children while the adults do without food and start to but their pride aside and approach mom and dad for that extra support from or join the queue of the nearest food bank?

4) A recent report from Trade Union Congress(TUC) which stipulates that the Department for Work and Pensions disputed the statistics cited in the report, saying it was comparing the current situation with the economic boom years of the late 1990s.

The report – which follows a study of employment rates for different groups of people in the UK – says young people outside full-time education are now less likely to have a job than workers aged 50-64.

It says the situation is a “remarkable” turnaround from 1998, when they were 25% more likely to be in work than workers in this age bracket.

The report says fewer than half of those who have no qualifications are in work, while the employment rate for people with basic qualifications had fallen to about 63%.

It said employment rates have improved for single parents, older people, black and Asian employees and disabled people over the last 17 years – although they too remain less likely to find jobs.

TUC general secretary Frances O’Grady said government ministers seemed “keener on kicking struggling youngsters when they’re down and removing the safety net they need to learn new skills and find work”.

“We need to increase funding for employment programmes, for example by guaranteeing a job or training to any young person who’s been out of work for six months or more.

“Spending more money on jobs support now will save money in the long run by getting more people in work and paying taxes,” she said. 

She said that although “times have been tough for young people in the jobs market”, their prospects were “better now than in any other recent recovery”.

“Young people who aren’t studying full time have a higher employment rate than any other group the TUC lists and it’s a credit to every single young person grasping the opportunities that are out there that they’ve been able to do that,” she said.

Nearly three quarters of the public believe the political parties are designing health policy to win votes, and not what is best for the NHS, a poll has suggested.

The survey of almost 2,000 people in the UK found 73% were sceptical about the motivation of politicians.

One in four also said they were dissatisfied with the way the NHS was being run.

The survey was commissioned by the British Medical Association (BMA).

The poll carried out by Ipsos Mori also found two-thirds wanted the NHS to manage itself without the involvement of politicians.

Another 46% also said politicians should have low or no involvement in how the NHS is run.

That was one of the aims of the reforms introduced by Andrew Lansley when he was health secretary.

But commentators have noted that since Jeremy Hunt has replaced him there has been a push to retain a much more hands-on approach.

5) BMA leader Dr Mark Porter, speaking ahead of the four-day conference which gets under way in Harrogate later, said: “The government promised to remove micromanagement from the NHS and yet the opposite has happened.

“There are even claims that NHS England, set up to be independent of Whitehall, is being manipulated for political purposes.”

He also mentioned a key policy put forward by Labour – the pledge to offer GP appointments within 48 hours – adding: “Patient care is taking a back seat to scoring points over the dispatch box.”

Dr Porter said “doctors want to see politics taken out of the NHS once and for all”, saying it was “clear that the public feel the same way”.

“Yes, politicians should be accountable for the running of the NHS, but when it comes to decisions of patient care it is time to allow doctors to do what they do best – lead the delivery of high quality patient care,” he added.

6) So where is the difference today? Look at today’s Tories and what are they doing. Seeking to destroy the welfare state plus scrap the NHS! The only difference between now and then is most of the press. Back then they would have created outrage at the Tories just trying. Now the press by in large hand out words of encouragement.

Cameron, Osborne and Ian Duncan Smith all think of Thatcher as the person they most admire, It says it all. 

No matter the issue it will keep getting worse and worse if we leave Cameron in office after 2015 as we have not seen anything it is just the tip of the iceberg of whats to come under a Conservative Government should they get elected if they win it outright majority in the house. George Osborne orders ‘ambitious’ new efficiency drive, to be detailed in the Autumn Statement, for savings and job cuts stretching deep into the next parliament.

Hundreds of thousands of civil servants and other government employees are facing the sack under sweeping Tory plans to cut back the state.

Ministers are drawing up radical measures, to be announced in George Osborne’s Autumn Statement, which will see widespread privatisations and at least one million public sector workers removed from the government payroll by the end of the decade.

The Treasury has now ordered the Cabinet Office to prepare an “ambitious” new programme of efficiency savings stretching deep into the next parliament after the 2015 election.

It comes as new laws are announced to force future governments to reduce red tape for businesses, and a fresh assault is launched on “fat cat” public officials’ pay.

Matthew Hancock, the business minister and one of Mr Osborne’s closest allies, declares that government must “get out of the way” to allow companies to thrive.

A new Small Business Bill will set down in law new targets for reducing the amount of regulations that shopkeepers and other small businesses have to comply with “We are on track to be the first government in modern times to reduce the burden of regulation on business. Our ‘one in, two out’ rule ensures that the burden of regulation keeps falling. Now we will put the deregulation target into the law entrenching the need for government to reduce their burden on business,”Mr Hancock said.

In a separate move, Eric Pickles, the Local Government secretary, will also step up his assault on “exorbitant” salaries for public officials this week, ordering councils to share senior executives across local authorities and stamp out high pay deals.

The Conservative effort to roll back the state comes after worse than expected economic figures showed that government borrowing rose last month.

A succession of positive reports from economists reinforced the message that Britain is returning to strong growth.

However, Mr Osborne has also warned voters that the economy is not yet safe and the Tories are expected to argue in next year’s election campaign that they should be allowed to finish the job rather than letting Labour put the recovery at risk.

The budget deficit is forecast to continue until at least 2018, requiring public spending restraint well beyond the general election.

Ministers have been told that the government workforce will fall by about one million between 2011 and 2019. At a rate of 36,000 per quarter, this is the equivalent of sacking one state employee every four minutes, every day, for the next five years.

At a meeting in Whitehall earlier this month, Mr Osborne told officials: “We’ve made excellent progress and have now shown that we can deliver savings and reforms year after year. But there’s still more to do. There’s a job to finish.”

He said he wanted “an ambitious new efficiency programme” to deliver savings “across the next Parliament” and to be announced in time for the Autumn Statement later this year. “We know we need to spend taxpayers’ money responsibly,” he said.

A senior government source said the public would be urged to back further spending cuts at the next election with a simple message that Britain’s soaring debts require everyone to tighten their belts further.

“What we’ve done so far has been presented as radical but it’s actually been pretty incremental we haven’t been reinventing the wheel,” the source said

“We want to go further. It’s like a firm cutting overheads – no leading organisation ever stops looking for efficiencies and the civil service shouldn’t be any different.”

The reforms are expected to see more government offices privatised and turned into “public service mutuals”, which are owned by their staff, but funded by private sector payments rather than the taxpayer.

The “digitisation” of services will also put more government functions online, reducing the number of civil servants on the state payroll.

Next week, ministers will also urge councillors to block high pay for chief executives and other senior officials, as unions insist that salaries of more than £200,000 for town hall officials are justified.

MPs on the communities and local government select committee will take evidence from senior government figures as part of an inquiry into the pay of council chief executives.

One plan being promoted by the Department for Communities and Local Government is for more councils to share their chief executives and senior management teams.

It has been purported that Mr Pickles told “senior town hall pay was allowed to spiral out of control under the Labour Government and we have been very clear that councils need to show much greater restraint.

“All local authorities should be focusing resources on protecting frontline services and keeping council tax down rather than throwing away taxpayers’ money. Councils are now legally required to open up their books to public scrutiny, and councillors now have the powers to stop exorbitant pay deals they should use them.”

Checkout this youtube:

7) It has been suggested that Chris Green suggests that Labour, under Blair and Brown, damaged the country and that we have nothing to say on the economy.
He also blames Labour for immigration concerns, provides advice for Labour on how we are to “get our voters back” in Bolton, whilst telling us we should not oppose Tory welfare reform. And he declares that inward investment in the town centre and in Horwich is all down to Tory achievement.

The public know the truth. The Tories continue to peddle lies about what really happened to the international financial markets and major economies in the West, blaming Labour in an attempt to draw votes their way again.

It’s ridiculous to suggest that Labour has “nothing to say on the economy” when we have, in Ed Balls, an economist who reveals every wasted opportunity the Tories have had to deliver a fairer cost of living to the average Boltonian. Labour has a better economic offer. Cameron knows this and forever complains about our Shadow Chancellor.

Mostly we’re up against Right-wing newspapers that don’t print Labour opinion and policies. The public know how much power the media have in this country.
Local government officers and councillors have worked hard to secure economic investment in Bolton that, at a stroke, could have gone elsewhere in the North West.

It is not right that the prospective parliamentary candidate fails to acknowledge the hard political and strategic work that is needed every day for this town. The idea that everything that is wrong with immigration and policy on Europe that voters care about began on May 2, 1997, when Labour won the election, is bizarre.

Both parties have looked back over their policies changed this not having social security for unemployed, sick, old and disabled people is inhumane. Some people are so poor with the welfare sanctions, they return food to food banks that they can’t heat up as they can’t afford the meter. Tory “welfare reform” is a disaster with a litany of misery. Even the archbishops have spoken out. It is a shameful legacy of the Conservatives.

8) We all know the media lies and excludes anything important, that it’s under authoritarian Tory control? That IDS ‘monitors’ the BBC for ‘left wing bias’, that the Guardian’s occasional forays into truth are stifled by jackbooted officials marching in and smashing hard drives do you really imagine that such a government media spokesperson  will do any justice to reporting about the positive intentions and actions of its opposition? Not one bit.

Yet I see people running around hysterically with the cherry-picked, distorted media spun soundbites, as if the media is somehow suddenly credible when it talks of the opposition, and when you actually read what was said and proposed at the unspun source, it bears no resemblance at all to the media tale of the unexpected…if you trouble yourself to investigate these things, the crap being published and broadcast doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. 

And when the media resort to personal smears like they did last year about Ralph Miliband – you know they are worried about being defeated.

9) Finally there was a media  silence on the 50,000 who marched against government imposed austerity at the weekend tells us all we need to know about Britain’s “free” press.

The Guardian consented to run a report on the march online, though it was not mentioned at all in the group’s Sunday title the Observer. 

Other papers ignored it completely as, initially, did the BBC, before a flood of complaints forced it to post a grudging acknowledgement on its Facebook page.

Broadcasting pundits and well-heeled newspaper columnists were quick to cry foul at the idea of state regulation of their sector after the revelation of mass illegal snooping at the now defunct News of the World and other Rupert Murdoch titles, citing the vital importance of an independent and diverse media which could hold the powerful to account.

Who could disagree with that? But Britain’s major newspapers, owned by a handful of mostly foreign-based billionaires, are not diverse and do not hold the powerful to account.

Most of the biggest titles Sun, Mail, Telegraph, Times  are open cheerleaders for the Tory Party, which is hardly surprising since it is the party which best represents the class interests of their owners.

To this end evidence-free hate-mongering about immigrants and “benefit cheats” and hysterical attacks on workers who dare to flex their collective muscles through their trade unions are all the rage.

But tens of thousands of people marching through the centre of Britain’s capital demanding an alternative to the ruling class war on working people? That’s not news, apparently. 

Indeed, the publicly funded BBC claimed that it was unable to provide “extensive” coverage of the march because of other more important stories on the day — which included significantly smaller crowds gathering to watch the solstice sun come up that morning. 

The excuse does not explain why a BBC News tweet about the march was subsequently deleted, suggesting deliberate censorship rather than a simple case of odd priorities.

Even newspapers which are not consistently Tory act to perpetuate the poisonous narrative of the ruling class, whether this takes the form of the Independent’s cheerleading for marketising our public services or the Guardian’s support for the fascist-backed coup in Ukraine and the bloody war that country’s new leaders are waging against their opponents in the east. Other examples could be added ad nauseam.

The fact is that Britain’s rulers do not need to regulate or censor the press, because they own it. 

As Lenin once said: “In capitalist usage, freedom of the press means freedom of the rich to bribe the press, freedom to use their wealth to shape and fabricate so-called public opinion.”

So it’s no surprise that only one newspaper backs the People’s Assembly, just as only we have supported and campaigned for the victims of blacklisting, backed trade unions fighting to defend their members’ pay and pensions and stood firm for peace and socialism and against imperialist war.

Saturday’s magnificent march was only the beginning of a summer of strikes and demonstrations, a summer in which the labour movement will seize the initiative and take the fight to the Tories.

The mass media’s response was to pretend it didn’t happen. This weekend’s events show more clearly than ever how important it is that working people have their own voice.

 

 

What is British Values in schools

Quotes of the day:

If you educate a man you educate an individual, but if you educate a woman you educate a family (nation)

Real education should educate us out of self into something far finer; into a selflessness which links us with all humanity

If this is what Gove meant by British values then he seriously needs his head examing now

On Saturday lunchtime I was returning from a meeting in Birmingham City Centre my attention was caught by a group of people who were airing their concerns about what was British Values and  ‘Hands off Birmingham Schools” I decided to listen to what they have to say and after half an hour I received a telephone call which I had to leave.

I came away feeling the more  I read  into the outrage claims of so called Muslim Extremism in schools which has been gloried by Michael Gove including the press and social media this unfortunately has played into the Far Right organisation and parties across UK.

This has a knock on effect which puts fear into decent abiding citizens against law abiding Muslim citizens who have contributed into economy all because of an ideological of the Christian Right wing of the American Tea Party which has taken America by storm which is fast growing into the British political system.

This tantalize nothing more than the Conservative right wanting to send a very clear message to David Cameron indicating that they are not happy with the current leadership by doing so the two heavy weight right wing of conservatives are sending a very strong signals to be more right-wing in the Conservatives or face a tide of no confidence vote from the backbench of the party.
I’m sure many will concur that all parents want the very best for their children in regards to their education to give them a better start in life.

My guess is that there has been an increase of free school status and the coalition cannot sustain the funding so they have been very selective in which free schools or academies they should target  by claiming that those schools have failed and they have been put into special measures. Like many people and myself we want to know if the schools have been rated good all along how all of a sudden that OFSD suddenly gone from good to special measures overnight the only that the Conservative right wants to introduce British Values into schools.

The question I would the answer to what is “British Values”

1) Is it eating a Bacon Butty, Roast Pork and Apple sauce, Roast beef and Yorkshire Pudding

2) British values superior to that of Muslim values, what about people who have mixed heritages to be a brummie is to acknowledge a wealth of values from different backgrounds and being told by a manager of different culture to pull your weight and realise they have a point. Difference has a potential to cause conflict but we should go the extra mile to understand people from a different background to us.

3)  So David Cameron has today finally made clear what he means by British values: a tolerant society should not tolerate intolerance of tolerance.
Glad that’s cleared up

4) The Governments stance to the Muslim community is, “Its okay if your children don’t get a basic level of education that will help them into collage, university and a successful job as long as they understand ‘British Values”
In a nice way it’s saying, ” You people shouldn’t rise above shelve stacker and Taxi drivers whilst we in the Government send our children to Private segregated schools like Eton and we end up with leaders like David Cameron and 18 Prime Ministers before him”

5) I decided to checkout what does British Values mean i hate to disappoint everybody there is no such thing as British Values but there is something called Britishness:

Britishness is the state or quality of being British, or of embodying British characteristics, and is used to refer to that which binds and distinguishes the British people and forms the basis of their unity and identity,or else to explain expressions of British culture—such as habits, behaviours or symbols that have a common, familiar or iconic quality readily identifiable with the United Kingdom.Dialogue about the legitimacy and authenticity of Britishness is intrinsically tied with power relations and politics, in terms of nationhood and belonging, expressing or recognising one’s Britishness provokes a range of responses and attitudes, such as advocacy, indifference or rejection. Macphee and Poddar state that although the designation of the two differing terms, Britishness and Englishness, is not simple as they are invariably conflated, they are both tied into the identity of the British Empire and nation, since these last two are altering considerably as Englishness and Britishness do too. Thus the slippage between the two words can be seen as a play between these changing dynamics.

Britishness “sprung into political and academic prominence” in the late 20th century, but its origins lie with the formation of the Kingdom of Great Britain in 1707. Although Britishness was used to refer to Britons collectively as early as 1682,historian Linda Colley asserts that it was after the Acts of Union 1707 that the citizens of Great Britain began to assume a “layered” identity—to think of themselves as simultaneously British but also Scottish, English, and/or Welsh.In this formative period, Britishness was “closely bound up with Protestantism“. The Oxford English Dictionary Online dates the first known use of the term Britishness to refer to the state of being British to a June 1857 issue of Putnam’s Monthly Magazine.

Since the late 20th century, the exploration and proliferation of Britishness became directly associated with a desire to define, sustain or restore a homogeneous British identity or allegiance to Britain, prompting debate. For instance, the Life in the United Kingdom test—reported as a test of one’s Britishness—has been described as controversial. The United Kingdom Independence Party have asserted that Britishness is tied with inclusive civic nationalism, whereas the Commission for Racial Equality reported that, Scots, Welsh, Irish and ethnic minorities may feel quite divorced from Britishness because of white English dominance; Gwynfor Evans, Welsh nationalist politician, said that “Britishness is a political synonym for Englishness which extends English culture over the Scots, Welsh and the Irish”. With regards to a proposed oath of allegiance for school leavers, historian David Starkey argued that it is impossible to teach Britishness because “a British nation doesn’t exist”.

There is no evidence whatever of a jihadist plot, and indeed extremism only emerged as an issue at all on day 40 of this long-running saga.

What has been revealed, which is serious enough, in the five academies now placed in special measures is such practices as manipulating some subjects to fit with conservative Islamist teaching, a “madrasa curriculum” in personal development, the abandonment of arts, humanities and music in primary year six, classroom segregation with girls sitting behind boys, and governors chosen clearly not based on their skills.

These failings should certainly be tackled in an adequate but proportionate manner, but it should be understood that such problems are not confined to Muslim-dominated schools but have arisen in the same manner in evangelical Christian-run institutions and ultra-orthodox Jewish schools.

But what is most striking is that the five schools at the centre of this row are not faith schools at all but state-run academies.  And therein lies the root of Gove’s failure in educational policy.

If you allow a whole range of academy providers and marginalise local authorities, meaningful oversight collapses.

Gove’s legacy is plummeting teacher morale, acute shortage of primary school places, the absurdities reported in the free schools programme and now the inflaming of the Birmingham row because proper local control of schools has been all but extinguished.

I would concur with Ed Miliband when he posed the question to David Cameron at Prime Minister Question  who asked where parents and children could go to if they feared extremism in schools, when the headteacher was removed and the governing body was part of the problem?

Before criticism start to fly  my way by wanting to ask:

1) If I believe that 9/11 and 7/7 took place. The simple answer is yes it took place however the question I would put back to my critics is was there any evidence of weapons of mass destruction found the simple answer is a resounding NO,no.

2) I will putforward another  question back to the skeptics why did  the coalition did act as soon as it was brought to their attention of the alleged plot its all good that both sides of the house speak of their concerns what does the coalition do they refused to implement the actions that Labour called for in Prime Question Time yet as usual David Cameron ducked and dived to answer the question.

 

Is there any truth in Trojan Horse Report?

Checkout this Youtube:

Recently there has been a public outcry in regards to the alleged “Trojan Horse” allegations in my second home city which has not been allowed for the public to view it for themselves but instead there have been many leaked documents via the press and social media yet nobody has seen Sir Micheal  Wilshaw full report.

Here is a full transcript of the statement:

Today Ofsted has published inspection reports into 21 state-funded non-faith schools in Birmingham.

I’ve also sent an advice note to the Secretary of State that draws on evidence from these inspections and from meetings I held with professional associations and Birmingham City Council.

I also spoke at length to a number of headteachers about their concerns.

Some of our findings are deeply worrying and in some ways, deeply shocking.

While a number of these schools are doing well and providing their children with a good, well-rounded education, there are others that give cause for grave concern.

In the most serious cases, a culture of fear and intimidation has taken grip since the schools were last inspected.

We found evidence that some headteachers, including those with a proud record of raising standards, have been marginalised or forced out of their jobs.

This has left a vacuum in which schools previously rated good or outstanding have suffered enormous staff turbulence, a collapse in morale and a rapid decline in their overall effectiveness.

The inspection report of the Education Funding Agency support my judgement that there has been a sudden and steep decline in these schools.

Therefore I have full confidence in the judgements of both the previous and present inspections.

Her Majesty’s inspectors found that governors are exerting far more influence on the day-to-day running of these schools than is either appropriate or acceptable.

Trust between governors and staff has broken down and the authority of headteachers undermined.

A number of headteachers reported that there has been an organised campaign to target certain schools in Birmingham in order to impose a narrow faith-based ideology and alter the school’s character and ethos.

Some teachers reporter that they were treated unfairly because of their gender or their religious beliefs.

Inspectors also uncovered evidence of unfair or opaque recruitment practices including examples of relatives begin appointed to unadvertised senior posts.

In some schools inspectors found that leaders have not adequately addressed the risks specific to their community.

In particular, they are not taking seriously enough their duty to safeguard children against the potential risks associated with extremism and radicalisation. Systems for vetting new staff and external visitors are sometimes poor.

For example, a speaker with known extremist views was invited to speak to students in one of the schools inspected.

Our evidence points to a serious failure on the part of Birmingham City Council – a failure to support schools in their efforts to keep pupils safe from the risk of extremism.

There’s been a lack of urgency in the council’s response to persistent complaints from headteachers about the conduct of certain governors.

We also found that a number of academies are in breach of important aspects of their funding agreements with the Education Funding Agency.

It’s really important all our schools – whether they’re faith schools or secular schools – promote the values of wider British society.

This is especially true for schools that serve culturally homogenous communities such as those we inspected in Birmingham.

These schools are often the only places where children have the chance to learn about other faiths, other cultures and other ways of living.

Some of the schools we inspected are undoubtedly doing well, not just academically, but in preparing their students to live and prosper in modern Britain.

However, we found that in other schools, children are not being encouraged to develop tolerant attitudes to other faiths and other cultures.

Boys and girls are not always treated equally and although exam results are often good, the curriculums become too narrow, reflecting the personal views of a small number of governors rather than the wider community in Birmingham and beyond.

So today in my advice note to the Secretary of State I am making a number of important recommendations to address the issues that we’ve identified in our inspection findings.

I urge the Government and others to take these measures forward without delay.

Trojan Horse: Ofsted chief says headteachers HAD been forced out of jobs

What is the Trojan Horse plot at Birmingham schools?

Trojan Horse: See the Ofsted reports of all 21 schools

Trojan Horse: Birmingham academy ‘not doing enough’ to combat extremism

It has been purported that these included Park View School, Golden Hillock School and Nansen Primary, run by the Park View Educational Trust.

Park View:

A summary of the inspectors’ findings is below

Previous rating outstanding

New rating Inadequate

Inspectors said

• “The academy’s work to raise students’ awareness of the risks of extremism is inadequate.”

• “External speakers have not been vetted properly. For example, those who speak to students as part of a programme of Islamic-themed assemblies.”

• “Students are not taught how to use the internet safely. They are not taught sex and relationships education effectively.”

• “Equality of opportunity is not promoted well.”

• “There are few opportunities for students to learn about different types of beliefs and cultures in the older year groups. Students are not taught citizenship well enough or prepared properly for life in a diverse and multi-cultural society.”

• “Governors have failed to ensure that safeguarding requirements and other statutory duties are met.”

• Use, in liaison with the police, of the government’s Prevent strategy to identify and avoid extremism has only taken place for students in years 7 and 8. Moreover, most staff have not received training in the Prevent programme, although there are now plans for this to take place.

Golden Hillock:

 Previous rating not previously inspected

New rating Inadequate

Inspectors said

• “The academy’s work to keep students safe is inadequate. Key safeguarding procedures are not followed. Too little is done to keep students safe from the risks associated with extremist views.”

• “The equalities policy is not fit for purpose.”

• “The curriculum has weaknesses. For example, sex and relationships education has not been delivered through a carefully planned curriculum. Governors have only very recently approved the policy.”

• Some staff, including senior leaders, are concerned about a perceived unfairness and lack of transparency in the recruitment process and the breadth and balance of the curriculum.

• “Staff views are polarised about the leadership of the school. Some female members of staff complained to Her Majesty’s Inspectors that at times they are spoken to in a manner which they find intimidating.”

• “Governance is inadequate. The governing body has met infrequently since it was reconstituted at the time of the formation of the academy. It does not carry out the full range of its functions.”

Nansen Primary

Previous rating Not previously inspected

New rating Inadequate

Inspectors said

• “Governance, safety, pupils’ cultural development, equal opportunities and the teaching of religious education are all inadequate.”

• “The governing body and senior leaders do not adopt effective strategies that develop pupils’ awareness of the risks of extremism or radicalisation.”

• “Leaders do not sufficiently develop pupils’ understanding of the different customs, traditions or religions that exist in Britain. This does not prepare pupils adequately for life in modern Britain.”

• “Pupils have limited knowledge of religious beliefs other than Islam.”

 I have say that I have to concur with Bob Jones the West Midlands Police and Crime Commissioner on the issue of Trojan horse:

I am pleased that the Home Secretary has challenged Michael Gove, the Secretary of State for Education, as I believe his current interventions in the so called Trojan Horse affair have increased delay and confusion, and bear the hallmarks of someone seeking to divert attention from their actions – or, more likely, their inaction – rather than seeking to pursue the best interests of children and parents.

He seems to be deflecting blame about the impact of his policies and approach, and as a consequence undermining the credibility of those seeking to uncover the facts concerning anonymous allegations, and eroding the confidence – particularly in the Muslim community – that public bodies are objectively supporting the interests of children rather than following other agendas.

When there were already four enquiries underway, making a fifth appointment and not allowing that person to join up with the other enquiries was frankly unhelpful.  But then appointing an Education Commissioner with no education governance experience, but who was a senior policeman whose expertise was in combatting violent extremism, clearly sends the message that the Secretary of State for Education had already reached a conclusion as to what he thought or even hoped the problem was.

Such an appointment might make sense from a cynical political view of deflecting interest or muddying the waters, but has created major problems for local public bodies.  We now have the position that even if clear, incontrovertible evidence of schools’ failure in both academic standards and financial management is uncovered, there is likely to be resistance to accountability on the basis that any such findings are driven by discrimination against the Muslim community rather than an objective assessment.

The delayed Ofsted reports, leaking out bit by bit, are unlikely to be seen as the independent final word as there is significant evidence of changes between drafts.  This will be compounded by the likely changes in overall assessment when the Ofsted reports finally see the light of day.

Ofsted will struggle to justify why schools rated as outstanding a few months ago are now considered inadequate.  Has there been such a fundamental change in that period?  If not, why did they not inspect on those new factors in the previous report?

I have no doubt that there is evidence of socially conservative orthodox religious individuals seeking to have their views reflected in local schools.  I think there are issues in this that do raise important concerns about how we educate and safeguard our children to be part of modern society and to be protected from a number of key risks.

However, the question I think Michael Gove needs to answer is that if he were made aware of socially conservative orthodox religious Christians, Jews, or Sikhs seeking influence in schools, would he react in the same way?  Many, not just in the Muslim community, would suspect his reaction would be to throw millions of pounds at them and encourage them to open free schools.

Our greatest ally in the fight against violent extremists is the support of the community itself.  When a community feels political games are being played that seek to depict their religion in a negative way it will make the fight against violent extremists so much more difficult.

The question is Do I believe Ofsted, do I believe Mr Gove over these claims? Could there be this hidden world in the Schools that Ofsted have never noticed? Is this a deflection tactic by Gove and the Tories?

Well, something may have happened. Perhaps but on the scale of how alarmist the coverage is! No. I just do not buy this view Ofsted used because as a inspectorate teachers fear every aspect of their inspections. They are scared because they leave no stone unturned. So how could they miss this issue on such a large scale?

I feel Ofsted has been too draconian and not up to the job for some time. Instead of working with teachers they have created an them and us situation. What more how can any of us believe what Gove says? This all smacks of a deflection tactic to cover for things Gove has done or not done.

Now of course if there are serious wrong doing with how teaching is taught it has to be rooted out. However, I feel that there is more hype and overblown views being expressed then actual facts to this issue.

The Tories loves grandstanding as they then make out they are doing something. But as ever if feels like the Tories are using a sledge hammer to crack a nut

“Ultimately religion is a second order issue here. What’s most important may be one of the most toxic legacies of this awful government: the fact that from plummeting morale among teachers, through a mounting shortage of primary school places, to the glaring failings of the free schools programme, and now this latest controversy – we have a state education system in complete disarray. In a story replete with smokescreens and diversions, no one should forget that.”

Gove wants British values taught. He has emphasised Gender equality, Democracy, tolerance. etc. Yet this society is far from having gender equality. Our democratic system is on its knees and as for tolerance , he probably only thinks it should be shown to people who tow the party line.

 

 

 

In memory of our Troops who served both WW1-2

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out Because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak for me.

 

Had the opportunity to visit a grave of a unsung hero who was a overseas soldiers and there are many who still not being mentioned my parents kept on telling me about for years and many others like my grandpa who served his country then fled his country to help build a better life for him and his family like many others who did came to fight along side our troops during the WW1-WW2 to defeat fascism and racism.

What happen afterwards that had the knock on effect to our overseas troops who served along their allied forces after both WW1-2 that most will remember after settling in the UK. Racism continued which was more of the same and many Black and Ethnic Minority communities had to endure. Yet many of them rolled up their sleeves and continue to build the UK to put rice on the table for their children and family and ensuring our children who are our future will have a better education  and start in life.

Like many children of their fathers we take pride in  honouring them who have laid their lives to defeat fascism and racism. Many of us who are sons and daughters of immigrants who after WW1-2 helped to build UK with their blood and sweat.

I’m sure many will recall Labour leader Ed Miliband talked passionately of his father who escaped Nazi Germany as his family recognised the dangers his father faced being a Jew.

Many people will recognize how disappointed with the witch hunt that took place with our press against his father which resulted in Ed Miliband had to defend his father honour.

I still maintain that it is wrong for Far Right Party and Group to misuse veterans to make gains for votes which is unforgivable and it goes against everything that they stood for by eliminating fascism and racism and to free oppressed nations.

Immigration has continue to benefit the UK look at the examples which lots of immigrants who later settled in UK after both WW1-2  helped to built the housing market which led to employment and they helped to build our National Health Service(NHS)  with very qualified doctors, nurses from the so called British Commonwealth  which is still in existence thanks to our proud heritage of overseas servicemen and women who helped our troops at a time of their need.

So when Black and Ethnic Minority communities look back at our proud track record of being shoulder to shoulder with our troops we don’t expect a lot from from society but their acknowledgement that Black and Ethnic Minority did their part for both WW1-2 which is not too hard to ask.

Far right groups VS immigrants who help build UK during WW2

Recently I read very intriguing article whilst I was on a train journey back to London for business meeting and after the meeting would be used for pleasure time to visit my place of birth just outside London.

I’m still have strong concerns how some parts of our society will not accept immigrants entering our country given that in today’s society we actively continue to promote multiculturalism and diversity yet there are far right parties and groups in our country that continues to promote bigotry policies as an easy solutions to an on-going problems of immigration.

As a nation we should be proud of our strong heritage of promoting immigration which has brought employment for the many and not the few. Instead of love thy neighbour’s far right groups exploit it to say hate thy neighbours if they are from European and other countries which helped our beloved nation.

They has the very cheek to play the blame game by using unemployment, and lack of housing, to justify to the white working class and lower middle incomes to vote for their party I make reference to the following Far Right Parties:

British National Party(BNP), Britain First, English Democrat, and UKIP( United Kingdom Independence Party(UKIP)

To add insult to injury Channel 5 recently showed a documentary entitled Illegal Immigrants and proud which plays into the above far right groups if you have not watch it then I would recommend all my readers to watch the programme if you did not had the opportunity to watch then you have been saved by the insults it presents to the views.

In a timely show following last week’s UKIP stampede on the European elections, tonight’s ‘Illegal Immigrant and Proud’ show on Channel 5 follows a group of people who’ve settled into the UK illegally, and are living their lives beneath the radar of the authorities.

At a refugee camp outside Calais, one Afghan man reveals exactly what tricks he plans to stow himself away and get secretly into the UK.

So it’s no surprise that Far Rights groups and their political parties forget that Immigration has united and enhanced communities in UK during WW1-WW2 here are examples how they played their part:

Roma WW2:

Among the groups the Nazi regime and its Axis partners singled out for persecution on so-called racial grounds were the Roma(Gypsies).

Drawing support from many non-Nazi Germans who harbored social prejudice towards Roma, the Nazis judged Roma to be “racially inferior.” The fate of Roma in some ways paralleled that of the Jews. Under the Nazi regime, German authorities subjected Roma to arbitrary internment, forced labor, and mass murder. German authorities murdered tens of thousands of Roma in the German-occupied territories of the Soviet Union and Serbia and thousands more in the killing centers at Auschwitz-Birkenau, Chelmno, Belzec, Sobibor, andTreblinka. The SS and police incarcerated Roma in the Bergen-Belsen,Sachsenhausen, Buchenwald, Dachau,Mauthausen, and Ravensbrückconcentration camps. Both in the so-called Greater German Reich and in the so-called Generalgouvernement, German civilian authorities managed several forced-labor camps in which they incarcerated Roma.

German authorities did deport some Roma from the Greater German Reich to occupied Poland in 1940 and 1941. In May 1940, the SS and police deported approximately 2,500 Roma and Sinti, primarily residents of Hamburg and Bremen, to Lublin District in the Generalgouvernement. SS and police authorities incarcerated them in forced labor camps. The conditions under which they had to live and work proved to be lethal to many of them. The fate of the survivors is unknown; it is likely that the SS murdered those who were still alive in the gas chamber of Belzec, Sobibor, or Treblinka. In the autumn of 1941, German police authorities deported 5,007 Sinti and Lalleri Gypsies from Austria to the ghetto for Jews in Lodz, where they resided in a segregated section. Nearly half of the Roma died within the first months of their arrival, due to lack of adequate food, fuel, shelter, and medicines. German SS and police officials deported those who survived these dreadful conditions to the killing center at Chelmno in the first months of 1942. There, along with tens of thousands of Jewish residents of the Lodz ghetto, the Roma died in gas vans, poisoned by carbon monoxide gas.

Muslims WW2:

More than 3.5million soldiers from the Asian subcontinent fought for Britain in the two conflicts, with tens of thousands killed in action.

The 2.5million men and women who came over to do their bit in World War II became the biggest volunteer force in history.

‘We need to remind not only the Muslim community but also the general public that the Muslim contribution to the defence of this nation runs deep,’ said secretary general Farooq Murad of the Muslim Council of Britain.

During World War I, Muslim troops in the Indian Army fought on the Western Front. By the end of the Great War, India had sent more than 1million troops. More than 47,000 died and 65,000 were wounded.

In World War II, 2.5million men and women fought for Britain, with 36,092 killed, 64,354 wounded and almost 80,000 taken prisoner.

Among the volunteers was Noor Inayat Khan, a radio operator for the Special Operations Executive.

She was parachuted into France in 1943 to send messages from the Resistance to London. Khan was eventually captured and tortured.

The Germans classified her ‘highly dangerous’ and she was sent to Dachau, where she was executed in 1944.

Sikhs WW2:

As the allied nations stepped ever closer to a second global conflict, this time with the Imperial Japanese and the Germans, Sikh soldiers once again stepped forward as the mainstay of the British Indian Army. Despite the rising voice of dissent by Indians for Independence, volunteer numbers were not at all effected. Sikhs still made up a disproportionate quantity of the forces that India gave to the war effort. Sikhs again fought on a number of fronts, where Sikh units were largely deployed.

India entered the war when the then Viceroy of India, Lord Linlithgow, without consulting Indian leaders, declared war against Germany on behalf of India. A sharply divided debate ensued and Indians split along the role that they should play in the war in the west. Traditionally Indian soldiers had played a lead role in Britain’s battles to date, however a significant number of nationalists disliked Britain taking their support for granted and a call for British commitment to independence was called before they could expect India’s cooperation in the war effort. The debate came to a culmination when Mahatma Gandhi launched the “Quit India” movement in August 1942.

The Chinese WW2:

With the December 1941 Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, the Second Sino-Japanese War, which had been rumbling on since 1937, was transformed into a major theatre of World War II.

By 1941, the Chinese position was precarious. The largest forces opposing the Japanese were the Nationalists led by Chiang Kai-Shek, but the foreign military aid they had been receiving in the 1930s had dried up because of the war in Europe. Chiang’s forces were badly trained, badly disciplined and badly equipped. Their loyalty was questionable. The truce with their Communist rival, the CCP, was fragile. Both sides seemed more intent on maintaining control in their own territory than in fighting the Japanese. Both were expecting and preparing for a fresh civil war as soon as Japan was defeated. Many of Chiang’s men also held allegiances to local warlords.

In February 1942, when Congress approved a 500 million dollar loan to China, Roosevelt described China as the US’s main ally against Japan. Chiang Kai-Shek was enchanted to now be described as one of the ‘Big Four’ Allied war-leaders. General ‘Vinegar Joe’ Stillwell became Chiang’s Chief of Staff, as well as commander of US forces in China, Burma and India. Chiang believed China would be the centre of US efforts against Japan.

The reality was different. Difficulties in sending supplies, British reservations, general concern about Chiang’s motives, and the urgency of operations in the Pacific and elsewhere meant that China did not become a theatre of main effort for the Allies. Stillwell’s mission to improve the efficiency of Chiang’s forces and turn the tide against the Japanese proved difficult. Chiang, Stillwell and Chennault disagreed fiercely over how to use the limited aid that could be flown in from India across the ‘Hump’ (the Himalayan mountains). To the frustration of Chinese Communists and Nationalists, the beginning of Pacific offensives in 1943 meant that US strategy ceased to depend upon China. The priority given to aid for China plummeted.

By 1944, with the air defence situation improving, more supplies began arriving across the Hump. The Ledo Road (later christened the ‘Stillwell Road’) reopened, having been closed by Japanese conquests in Burma. In April 1944, the ‘Ichi-Go’ offensive saw the Japanese invade the airfields of Kiangsi and Kwangsi; by June the Peking-Hankow Railway was under Japanese control. Despite US concerns that defeat was looming, Chinese forces resisted, repelling two Japanese offensives during summer 1945. Two events brought the war in China to a swift conclusion: on 6 August, the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima. Three days later Stalin, honouring his promise to the Western Allies, declared war on Japan, and Soviet forces overran the Japanese army in Manchuria. Japanese forces in China, Formosa and French Indochina surrendered to Chiang. As many as 20 million Chinese had died in the eight year-long conflict. Fighting between the KMT and the CCP resumed almost immediately.

Afro-Caribbeans World War II:

The British colonies in the West Indies were under direct threat by German submarines, who were hunting for oil tankers and bauxite carriers making their way from the Caribbean to the USA and the UK.

On the islands, the available manpower was taken up guarding the ports and POW camps, as well as providing the labour for the increased production of primary produce necessitated by the war.

Protests by West Indians at the lack of recruitment for service abroad, however, and the need for labour in Britain and for RAF personnel, resulted in the enlistment of men for RAF ground-duty training in 1941. West Indians were also recruited to fill certain skill shortages to aid the war effort. Rather bizarrely, 800 forestry workers were brought from tropical British Honduras to work in the freezing highlands of Scotland.

On their arrival, some discovered that they had to build their own barracks – and they all discovered that they were to be paid less than they had been promised. The period of their service was reduced, and some were repatriated before their contracts had expired. However, some remained in the UK after they had fulfilled their contracts, and found other war work.

Some 520 men came from the Caribbean colonies to work, mainly in munitions factories in the north-west. About 80 West Indian women, at first only if they were white, were recruited for the ATS.

It was probably only the lack of sufficient men with appropriate qualifications that forced the RAF to accept black colonials as aircrew. Some 300 or so West Indians served as aircrew, and some 90 men received decorations. This included seven Distinguished Service Orders, and 64 DFC’s.

Probably the most decorated was Squadron Leader Ulric Cross, who was awarded both the DSO and the DFC. The citation for the latter notes his ‘exceptional navigational ability’ and the ‘very large number of sorties’ he had flown ‘against heavily defended targets’ in Germany.

The Caribbean Regiment wasn’t recruited until 1944, when it was posted to Egypt to guard PoWs. There they were in fights with white South African troops, billeted nearby, who objected to the regiment being allowed to carry arms.

 

 

Is it racist to speak about immigration

Well it seem over the past weeks all we can read about Cleggybabe(Nick Clegg) leader of the LibDems which they only seemed to managed to win one seat in the European Elections and a call for him to resign as leader in all the leading media and press. I seem to recall an case for Gordon Brown to resign after the horrible defeat of Labour lost the general elections in 2010 which I’m sure many will remember. I still maintain that he was one of the best chancellor that Labour had although some may disagree I beg to differ until this day.

Who the cap fits let them wear it

There is nothing wrong with having a healthy debate and one which I relish. I still think as much as I do not share LibDems ideology it pains me to say that Nick Clegg was right about the European Union. Britain is in the right position to be in it to gain in the Euro Zone to trade and we need our European partners but somehow UKIP seems to think by coming out of EU is better off out is really living in the land of cuckoo land.

By all means let’s have the debate of the so called mass immigration that supposed to happen since the boarders have been opened up. There seems to be the notion that it’s racist to talk about the subject. Well let me make it very clear it is the way how it is presented by a number of political parties and how people perceive it.

I’m a very proud son of an immigrant who came to this country to help to build the economy and provide employment to simulate this country if anything we all should be very proud of immigrants who came over to help build this country by the invitation by the then Conservatives and Labour governments.

Let’s not forget of our proud history of multiculturalism and diversity which stems from both First and Second World Wars. I’m sure that many of us will recall from our grandparents would have told us of horrifying stories that they both had to endure and reasons to keep out fascism and UK did its duty to save Europe and Third World countries from the fascists.

I would like to point out that racism is universal and as a nation we can do better instead of raising tensions in various communities by the few that seems to think by causing it, it seems to justify their pleasure to say that it’s foreigners that are taking away our jobs, houses, women and men.

Let’s not forget that there is no true English person either as many came to our nation to take lands away from them ie Germans, Finnish, Spanish, French, Romans and the list goes on which I make no apologies for highlighting this. If we all go back into the late 1940s to 1970s there were signs on the windows which said No Blacks, No Irish and No dogs. Is this what people have to revert back to?

So it comes to no surprise to me that The British Social Attitudes survey found the proportion had increased since the start of the century, returning to the level of 30 years ago.

Some 30% of the 2,000 people polled by social research company NatCen described themselves as either “very” or “a little” race prejudiced. Penny Young, chief executive of NatCen, said the findings were “troubling”. The survey also found wide variations currently across the country: 16% of people in inner London admitted to prejudice but the figure was 35% in the West Midlands. Older men in manual jobs were the most likely to say they were prejudiced, but the group recording the biggest rise was educated male professionals. Levels of racial prejudice increased with age, at 25% for 17 to 34-year-olds compared with 36% for over-55s.

Education had an impact with 19% of those with a degree and 38% of those with no qualifications reporting racial prejudice. The social attitudes survey has been carried out every year since 1983 – it recorded an all-time low of 25% of people describing themselves as racially prejudiced in 2001.

People were asked whether they would describe themselves as prejudiced “against people of other races”.

Ms Young told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme self-reported prejudice was “very difficult” to study in detail. It appeared to be in “inexorable decline” in 2001 as part of “increasingly socially liberal Britain” – but has since gone back up. The effect of the 9/11 attacks and an increase in concern about immigration were two possible reasons for the turnaround, she said. But the BBC’s home editor Mark Easton said that the figures were not conclusive evidence of rising racism, when they were analysed over a wider timeframe. On immigration, more than 90% of those who admitted some level of racial prejudice wanted to see a reduction in the number of people entering the UK. But so did 73% of those who said they were not racially prejudiced.

Ms Young added: “Levels of racial prejudice declined steadily throughout the 90s, but have been on the rise again during the first decade of this century.” Alison Park, co-director of the survey, said: “Racial prejudice, in whatever guise, is undoubtedly still part of the national psyche.” But there were warnings about drawing conclusions from people’s verdict on their own prejudices. Sunder Katwala, director of the identity and integration think tank British Future, said it was a “difficult measure to use”.

“People who said they were not at all prejudiced in 1983 often held quite tough views about race”, he said. Today, younger people “hold themselves to a much higher bar”, he said. “It’s quite a complicated way of doing it and not a good way to track things over time.” Politics lecturer Dr Rob Ford, of the University of Manchester, added: “The problem is there is no definition of ‘prejudice’ offered in the question”.

Intriguingly the Huffington post sums it up for me that there is a new consensus in British politics: foreign-born workers hurt the wages of British-born workers. Ukip, which came top of the European elections, has warned vehemently about migrants undercutting hard-working, low-paid British employees in their campaign messaging. Speaking in January, Farage said: “There is no question that it’s pushed wage inflation down; it’s helped big companies and big corporations and big landowners to make bigger profits – no argument about that.” He said that construction workers had been badly hit by unskilled migrants bringing down wages across the sector, with Brits now earning less than ten years ago and suffering higher living costs. Ed Miliband has weighed in too.

“When millions of workers already have low pay and poor job security in Britain and we add high levels of low skilled migration mostly from within the EU, some benefit but some lose out,” the Labour leader said in January, adding: “It isn’t prejudiced to believe that.” The Tories agree just as much, with James Brokenshire using his first speech as immigration minister in March to lash out at “employers who wanted an easy supply of cheap labour” at the expense of “ordinary, hard-working people of this country”. The wariness towards migrants is shared among all the major parties, except for the Lib Dems, whose business secretary Vince Cable recently waged war on “immigration scare stories”. Farage, Miliband, Cameron and co do have some evidence to support their concerns about EU migrants and their impact on pay. A joint Home Office and Business Department report reads: “Using a simple supply and demand model, immigration will tend to lower the wages of workers who are considered to be ‘substitutes’ to the immigrants”. Alongside this, a London School of Economics study in 2009 concluded that migrants have a “significant, small, negative impact on average wages”, adding that it tended to have the biggest impact on the semi/unskilled services sector.

However, there is a wealth of empirical evidence and academic research on the effect migrants have on Britons’ wages that challenges this wholly negative view. Leading economist Jonathan Portes, head of the National Institute for Economic and Social Research, said: “EU migrants don’t appear to have a negative impact on the employment prospects of natives – several different studies have failed to show any link. “However, there is some evidence that migration, while having some positive impact on wages overall, might have a small negative impact for the low-paid. But these impacts appear quite small – other factors, like general labour market developments, or the minimum wage, appear to be considerably more important.”

A 2009 study by labour market expert Professor Danny Blanchflower, a former Bank of England rate-setter, and Bank of England analyst Chris Shadforth found that any negative impact on wages is “statistically insignificant”. In their paper, they conclude that “there is only a weakly positive but statistically insignificant relationship between those regions that have witnessed the largest increases in youth unemployment and those that have seen the biggest influxes of new immigrants”. And who exactly is hit by new migrants entering the labour market? Some may be surprised to hear it is more likely to include other migrants rather than the ‘native’ workers Farage champions. As the University of Oxford’s Migration Observatory points out, “this is because the skills of new migrants are likely to be closer substitutes for the skills of migrants already employed in the UK than for those of UK-born workers.” A report for the Low Pay Commission found that between 1997 and 2005, migrants made a positive contribution to the average wage-increase experienced by native Britons. Professor Christian Dustmann of UCL’s Department of Economics, the report’s author, said: “Economic theory shows us that immigration can provide a net boost to wages.” Others find that migrants can help boost high-paid Britons’ pay packets as they can offer the right skill-set. As London School of Economics professor Jonathan Wadsworth, who sits on the government’s Migration Advisory Committee, writes: “There may also be a positive effect on wages in the high wage labour markets where it may take more time for the skills that immigrants bring to transfer.” The government itself has been much warmer about the impact migrants have on Britons’ pay packets. In 2008, the government’s response to a House of Lords Committee on Economic Affairs stated that research “continues to find no significant evidence of negative employment effects from immigration”. It went on to say that “migration has not had a significant negative impact on unemployment”, confirming that its view was “in line with the clear consensus among most UK labour market economists.”

But why are anxieties running high about the impact of migrants for native British workers when the government used to think there was nothing wrong? Professor Blanchflower notes that fear of unemployment has recently risen in the UK, which is “likely” to have limited prospective wage rises for workers. While Jonathan Wadsworth, concludes: “the evidence for the UK  labour market suggests that fears about adverse consequences of rising immigration in general and EU immigration in particular have still not, on average, materialised.” Even though politicians like Nigel Farage insist there is “no argument” about migrants pushing down Britons wages, the evidence tells a much less scary story.