August 2008 Archives

The child minding industry is in a state. More than one in 10 experienced minders has quit in the past four years and newcomers are joining at the rate of 1,000 a month.

Perhaps it's hardly surprising, then, that so many of those who are looking after other people's children have just been branded "inadequate".

Of those inspected by the education watchdog Ofsted more than 1,000 were declared unacceptable. Assuming that pattern is repeated across the country then around 4,000 fail to reach acceptable standards.

But that's not all. One in 15 schools which also look after youngsters before and after classes was below par. Four per cent of nurseries and crèches failed to make the grade, too.

This means that, based simply on those visited by inspectors, around 50,000 children are being put at risk because their care facilities do not make the grade. Failings include leaving children alone for too long and having unsafe play equipment.

This grim state of affairs has been caused by New Labour's policy of encouraging mothers out to work and fuelling a major upsurge in demand for child minding services.

In a few weeks we shall witness the introduction of New Labour's first initiative to control mass immigration.

The points-based system is designed to identify those individuals who can make a real contribution to life in Britain and then let them in.

Points will be awarded for occupation and qualifications judged to be in demand. Those with no useful skills will, in theory, be shown the door.

According to leaked information if the system had been in operation during the past twelve months it would have barred 20,000 would-be immigrants.

Which sounds fine. Until you take on board the fact that last year the total number of foreign workers entering the UK hit 300,000.

And that a new study carried out by the House of Commons Library has revealed that in the 10 years of New Labour rule our population has increased by well over a million as a direct result of immigration.

That's the equivalent of 330 extra people every day for 10 years. In the previous decade of Conservative rule the figure for total immigration was just 141,000.

And we shouldn't be misled into believing that the massive increase is a result of the "unstoppable" influx from eastern Europe.

Between 1997 and 2006 there were more than three times as many arrivals from the rest of the world as from the EU.

The vast majority of us believe that Britain is already over-populated. A series of studies have shown that the open door policy on immigration has had no positive impact on the economy and is stretching public services in some areas to breaking point.

Yet our Government's only response to an issue which is changing forever the nature of our society is a feeble filtering system that will make next to no difference at all.

Drunken women who have claimed a compensation pay out for being raped while under the influence are in line for an extra cash bonus.

This is because of an extraordinary change of mind about whether a woman should take any responsibility whatsoever for her own safety.

Up to now women who claimed to have been raped while drunk have been awarded the standard pay-out of £11,000 - but this has been reduced by 25 per cent because their boozing has been regarded, quite rightly, as a contributing factor.

In other words, the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority argued that because they had put themselves in harm's way by warping their own judgment and consciousness with alcohol they were at least a quarter to blame.

Exactly the same principle applies to pay-outs to the victims of other crimes. If a drunk picks a fight and gets beaten up, then he may receive cash for being assaulted but the amount will be reduced because of his own drunken stupidity.

But, for rape victims, all this has changed.

Why? Because one rape claimant, whose identity is cloaked by legislation, objected to having her cash award cut. Although admitting she was drunk at the time of the attack, she claims her drinks had been spiked.

Legal action against the CICA has not only brought her the missing 25 per cent but has won the same pay-out for another 13 drunks who also claimed compensation in the past 12 months.

Justice Minister Bridget Prentice now claims that all these cases were mistakes. And that every half-cut female who claims rape will be given the full amount in future.

Just how many other "mistakes" there have been down the years, and how many more actions for binge bonus will now be triggered, remains to be seen.

But we are now plainly facing the official view that a woman need take no care for her own wellbeing. She can drink herself legless, wander off with a stranger, collapse on his bed and still bear no share of the blame for what happens next.

In fact, not only does she take none of the responsibility but she can now get an £11,000 pay-out for her inebriated stupidity.

This is not only an insult to those sober and innocent victims of rape who suffer violent attacks at the hands of total strangers.

It is an insult to common sense.

Can there be a parent in Britain who does not know if their child is overweight or not?

So a scheme designed to advise them on this issue is pretty much pointless.

Even if it spells out the blunt truth.

But the new Government scheme to tackle childhood obesity cannot even bring itself to do that.

When it identifies a youngster who is dangerously fat, it will instead notify the parents that their child is not really that much overweight after all.