English universities still failing poor students, says government watchdog
September 28, 2011 No Comment
Quarter of colleges have missed targets for access, even before fees are trebled A quarter of English universities failed to meet their targets to admit substantially more disadvantaged students last year, a government watchdog has revealed . Cambridge, Bristol, Exeter, Durham and University College London are among 23 institutions that admit making insufficient progress in widening their mix of applicants in 2009-10 – leading to accusations that the intake of the most selective universities is “increasingly privileged”. David Willetts, the universities minister, said the report was proof that social mobility had stalled. The disclosure, in the annual monitoring report of the Office for Fair Access (Offa) , will renew fears that the least privileged teenagers are being excluded from some of the country’s top universities. The 23 institutions include universities and other higher education bodies with degree-awarding powers. A further 21 colleges that offer degrees also failed to reach their targets. Since 2006, universities and colleges have been allowed to charge “top-up” fees – currently just over £3,000 a year – on the condition that they boost the proportion of their applicants who have been in care, come from low-income families or have disabilities. Institutions set their own targets, but are asked to benchmark themselves against their competitors. Universities and colleges received nearly £474m from the Higher Education Funding Council last year to spend on bursaries, scholarships and “outreach” activities. They were given the money whether or not they met their targets. Sir Martin Harris, director of Offa, said he was concerned that a quarter of universities had not met their targets and would be discussing their performance. Offa would not reveal what the universities’ targets had been. But to give an idea of what they are they are achieving, 12.6% of Cambridge students in 2009/10 came from homes where the annual income is less than £25,000. The government intends to pass legislation to give Offa the power to fine universities and colleges that make insufficient progress in widening access, and – in extreme cases – to demand they lower their fees. Willetts said: “We need to see real progress in fair access, especially at our most selective institutions.” Wes Streeting, chief executive of the Helena Kennedy Foundation, which provides bursaries and mentoring to disadvantaged students, said it was “deeply worrying” that universities had failed to make enough progress in widening participation. “This is before fees are trebled next year. It’s hard to see how things will get better before they get worse,” he said. Many of the poorest families felt universitywas now unaffordable. The Russell group, which represents 20 elite universities, said misunderstandings about the costs and benefits of a university education and a lack of confidence on the part of potential applicants were partly to blame for the missed targets. “A-level (and equivalent) results in the right subjects are more important than money in deciding whether a student will go to a Russell group university,” said Wendy Piatt, director general of the group. Cambridge said it runs hundreds of events each year to raise the educational aspirations of disadvantaged students. A spokesman said its long-term aim was to admit more students from under-represented groups within the framework of our admissions policy and “without compromising entry standards”. Lee Elliot Major, research and policy director of the Sutton Trust, a charity that promotes social mobility through education, said the intake of the most selective universities was “increasingly privileged … This is to the exclusion of children from average backgrounds, not just those from the poorest households.” He said that while there had been “faltering progress” to widen access, there was little understanding of what kinds of outreach worked. “Universities could do more. It’s not just about how much universities spend on this, but what they do about it. We are nowhere near understanding what works and what doesn’t in terms of outreach activities.” Offa calculated how much of the extra income that universities receive from tuition fees was spent on recruiting and encouraging poor students to take up places. It found that last year, institutions spent 25.1% (£395m) of their extra income on widening access, compared with 25.8% (£344m) the year before. The proportion spent on outreach work, such as school visits, was 2.4% of extra income last year – the lowest for at least four years. The average bursary awarded to students from low-income homes was £935, compared with £942 the year before. The report shows wide variations: the University of Sunderland spent 42.9% of its extra income on bursaries, scholarships and outreach activities, while Middlesex spent 9%. The proportion of students who came from homes where annual income was below £25,000 ranged from 50.1% at the University of Bolton to 10.1% at the Courtauld Institute of Art. At Oxford it was 14.4%. Liam Burns, president of the National Union of Students, said: “The haphazard formation of student support in universities means that those universities with the best record of recruiting those from non-traditional backgrounds have the least money available to spend per student. “Universities with poorer access records misleadingly claim success because they have more funds available to a very small pool of students.” Sir Alan Langlands, chief executive of the HEFC, said: “Concerns are beginning to be expressed that the level of widening participation activity delivered in future may decline.” Restrictions on student numbers and higher fees might have a disproportionate impact on students from disadvantaged backgrounds. Universities intending to charge fees of between £6,000 and £9,000 a year from autumn 2012 have been asked to set themselves tougher targets for widening their pool of students. For the first time, they will have to set themselves a target to broaden the mix of students who enter the university, not just those who apply. Missed targets The 23 universities that failed to meet their targets to admit more disadvantaged students: Bath Spa University Bournemouth University Conservatoire for Dance and Drama Courtauld Institute of Art Guildhall School of Music & Drama King’s College London Kingston University Leeds Metropolitan University Liverpool Institute for Performing Arts London Studio Centre Loughborough University Open University The University of West London University College London University of Bath University of Bristol University of Cambridge University of Cumbria University of Durham University of Exeter University of the Arts London University of Warwick University of Westminster Source: Office for Fair Access University administration Higher education Jessica Shepherd guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …English universities still failing poor students, says government watchdog
September 28, 2011 No Comment
Quarter of colleges have missed targets for access, even before fees are trebled A quarter of English universities failed to meet their targets to admit substantially more disadvantaged students last year, a government watchdog has revealed . Cambridge, Bristol, Exeter, Durham and University College London are among 23 institutions that admit making insufficient progress in widening their mix of applicants in 2009-10 – leading to accusations that the intake of the most selective universities is “increasingly privileged”. David Willetts, the universities minister, said the report was proof that social mobility had stalled. The disclosure, in the annual monitoring report of the Office for Fair Access (Offa) , will renew fears that the least privileged teenagers are being excluded from some of the country’s top universities. The 23 institutions include universities and other higher education bodies with degree-awarding powers. A further 21 colleges that offer degrees also failed to reach their targets. Since 2006, universities and colleges have been allowed to charge “top-up” fees – currently just over £3,000 a year – on the condition that they boost the proportion of their applicants who have been in care, come from low-income families or have disabilities. Institutions set their own targets, but are asked to benchmark themselves against their competitors. Universities and colleges received nearly £474m from the Higher Education Funding Council last year to spend on bursaries, scholarships and “outreach” activities. They were given the money whether or not they met their targets. Sir Martin Harris, director of Offa, said he was concerned that a quarter of universities had not met their targets and would be discussing their performance. Offa would not reveal what the universities’ targets had been. But to give an idea of what they are they are achieving, 12.6% of Cambridge students in 2009/10 came from homes where the annual income is less than £25,000. The government intends to pass legislation to give Offa the power to fine universities and colleges that make insufficient progress in widening access, and – in extreme cases – to demand they lower their fees. Willetts said: “We need to see real progress in fair access, especially at our most selective institutions.” Wes Streeting, chief executive of the Helena Kennedy Foundation, which provides bursaries and mentoring to disadvantaged students, said it was “deeply worrying” that universities had failed to make enough progress in widening participation. “This is before fees are trebled next year. It’s hard to see how things will get better before they get worse,” he said. Many of the poorest families felt universitywas now unaffordable. The Russell group, which represents 20 elite universities, said misunderstandings about the costs and benefits of a university education and a lack of confidence on the part of potential applicants were partly to blame for the missed targets. “A-level (and equivalent) results in the right subjects are more important than money in deciding whether a student will go to a Russell group university,” said Wendy Piatt, director general of the group. Cambridge said it runs hundreds of events each year to raise the educational aspirations of disadvantaged students. A spokesman said its long-term aim was to admit more students from under-represented groups within the framework of our admissions policy and “without compromising entry standards”. Lee Elliot Major, research and policy director of the Sutton Trust, a charity that promotes social mobility through education, said the intake of the most selective universities was “increasingly privileged … This is to the exclusion of children from average backgrounds, not just those from the poorest households.” He said that while there had been “faltering progress” to widen access, there was little understanding of what kinds of outreach worked. “Universities could do more. It’s not just about how much universities spend on this, but what they do about it. We are nowhere near understanding what works and what doesn’t in terms of outreach activities.” Offa calculated how much of the extra income that universities receive from tuition fees was spent on recruiting and encouraging poor students to take up places. It found that last year, institutions spent 25.1% (£395m) of their extra income on widening access, compared with 25.8% (£344m) the year before. The proportion spent on outreach work, such as school visits, was 2.4% of extra income last year – the lowest for at least four years. The average bursary awarded to students from low-income homes was £935, compared with £942 the year before. The report shows wide variations: the University of Sunderland spent 42.9% of its extra income on bursaries, scholarships and outreach activities, while Middlesex spent 9%. The proportion of students who came from homes where annual income was below £25,000 ranged from 50.1% at the University of Bolton to 10.1% at the Courtauld Institute of Art. At Oxford it was 14.4%. Liam Burns, president of the National Union of Students, said: “The haphazard formation of student support in universities means that those universities with the best record of recruiting those from non-traditional backgrounds have the least money available to spend per student. “Universities with poorer access records misleadingly claim success because they have more funds available to a very small pool of students.” Sir Alan Langlands, chief executive of the HEFC, said: “Concerns are beginning to be expressed that the level of widening participation activity delivered in future may decline.” Restrictions on student numbers and higher fees might have a disproportionate impact on students from disadvantaged backgrounds. Universities intending to charge fees of between £6,000 and £9,000 a year from autumn 2012 have been asked to set themselves tougher targets for widening their pool of students. For the first time, they will have to set themselves a target to broaden the mix of students who enter the university, not just those who apply. Missed targets The 23 universities that failed to meet their targets to admit more disadvantaged students: Bath Spa University Bournemouth University Conservatoire for Dance and Drama Courtauld Institute of Art Guildhall School of Music & Drama King’s College London Kingston University Leeds Metropolitan University Liverpool Institute for Performing Arts London Studio Centre Loughborough University Open University The University of West London University College London University of Bath University of Bristol University of Cambridge University of Cumbria University of Durham University of Exeter University of the Arts London University of Warwick University of Westminster Source: Office for Fair Access University administration Higher education Jessica Shepherd guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Palestinian statehood bid kicked into committee by UN security council
September 28, 2011 No Comment
Move comes as efforts to launch fresh peace talks are threatened by row over new Jewish settlement The UN security council has moved the issue of recognising a Palestinian state to a committee which could take weeks to reach a decision. The move came as US and European efforts to launch fresh peace talks – and avoid a diplomatic confrontation after Washington said it will veto the statehood bid – were undermined by Israel’s “provocative” announcement that it will build more than 1,000 more homes in a major Jewish settlement. The Palestinian ambassador to the UN, Riyad Mansour, said the security council should approve the statehood request because much of the world already recognises Palestine as a country. “We hope that the security council will shoulder its responsibility and address this application with a positive attitude, especially since we have 139 countries that have recognised the state of Palestine so far, meaning more than two-thirds majority,” Mansour said. “We are ready to govern ourselves.” But the Israeli ambassador to the UN, Ron Prosor, said that recognition of statehood is meaningless without a peace agreement. “A real Palestinian state, a viable Palestinian state, will not be achieved in composing things from the outside but only in direct negotiations,” he said. “We had peace with Egypt. It wasn’t imposed; we negotiated. With Jordan, the same thing.” The UN committee on new admissions, which is made up of the 15 members of the security council, will meet on Friday morning. It could vote immediately on the Palestinian request or agree to study the matter further. Last week, the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, resisted US pressure to abandon the request for statehood. But at the urging of Washington, London and Paris — which were keen to avoid voting on the issue because of the impact on opinion in the Middle East of failing to support the Palestinian bid — he privately agreed to the slow tracking of the issue while fresh attempts are made to restart negotiations. Those efforts were immediately compromised when the US ensured that a statement by the quartet of the US, UN, EU and Russia proposing a framework timetable for talks, and the immediate addressing of the contentious issues of borders and security, did not call for a halt to construction of Jewish settlements in the occupied territories. But the statement did ask both sides to refrain from provocative actions. This week, Israel announced that it will build 1,100 new houses as well as public buildings and an industrial zone in Gilo settlement. Mansour said the move was a deliberate snub by Israel to peace efforts, because the Palestinians have said that continued construction of housing for Jewish settlers on occupied land is a barrier to talks. “They gave 1,100 answers of saying no to the effort of the international community to open doors to negotiation, and I think speaks clearly that Israel is not interested in negotiating with us – in spite of the fact they say they would like to do so,” he said. Prosor said the settlement expansion is inside Jerusalem and therefore distinct from other parts of the occupied territories. “Jerusalem is the capital of the Jewish people. This is our heart. Jerusalem, if I may say so, was the capital of the Jewish people when London was still a swamp,” he said. However, the area that Gilo is built on was not within the municipal boundaries at the time Israel captured the east of the city in the 1967 war. The city limits have since been greatly expanded to annex Gilo and other settlements to the city. Prosor said Palestinian objections are an excuse for not negotiating. “Everything is negotiable, but I hear the Palestinian using every pretext in order to find a reason why not to go in to negotiations,” he said. The US has called the new settlement construction “counter-productive” and “distressing”. But the Palestinians have little confidence that Washington will do anything about it after Barack Obama made what was widely seen as a strongly pro-Israel speech to the UN. Palestinian territories Israel United Nations Middle East Middle East peace talks Chris McGreal guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Palestinian statehood bid kicked into committee by UN security council
September 28, 2011 No CommentMove comes as efforts to launch fresh peace talks are threatened by row over new Jewish settlement The UN security council has moved the issue of recognising a Palestinian state to a committee which could take weeks to reach a decision. The move came as US and European efforts to launch fresh peace talks – and avoid a diplomatic confrontation after Washington said it will veto the statehood bid – were undermined by Israel’s “provocative” announcement that it will build more than 1,000 more homes in a major Jewish settlement. The Palestinian ambassador to the UN, Riyad Mansour, said the security council should approve the statehood request because much of the world already recognises Palestine as a country. “We hope that the security council will shoulder its responsibility and address this application with a positive attitude, especially since we have 139 countries that have recognised the state of Palestine so far, meaning more than two-thirds majority,” Mansour said. “We are ready to govern ourselves.” But the Israeli ambassador to the UN, Ron Prosor, said that recognition of statehood is meaningless without a peace agreement. “A real Palestinian state, a viable Palestinian state, will not be achieved in composing things from the outside but only in direct negotiations,” he said. “We had peace with Egypt. It wasn’t imposed; we negotiated. With Jordan, the same thing.” The UN committee on new admissions, which is made up of the 15 members of the security council, will meet on Friday morning. It could vote immediately on the Palestinian request or agree to study the matter further. Last week, the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, resisted US pressure to abandon the request for statehood. But at the urging of Washington, London and Paris — which were keen to avoid voting on the issue because of the impact on opinion in the Middle East of failing to support the Palestinian bid — he privately agreed to the slow tracking of the issue while fresh attempts are made to restart negotiations. Those efforts were immediately compromised when the US ensured that a statement by the quartet of the US, UN, EU and Russia proposing a framework timetable for talks, and the immediate addressing of the contentious issues of borders and security, did not call for a halt to construction of Jewish settlements in the occupied territories. But the statement did ask both sides to refrain from provocative actions. This week, Israel announced that it will build 1,100 new houses as well as public buildings and an industrial zone in Gilo settlement. Mansour said the move was a deliberate snub by Israel to peace efforts, because the Palestinians have said that continued construction of housing for Jewish settlers on occupied land is a barrier to talks. “They gave 1,100 answers of saying no to the effort of the international community to open doors to negotiation, and I think speaks clearly that Israel is not interested in negotiating with us – in spite of the fact they say they would like to do so,” he said. Prosor said the settlement expansion is inside Jerusalem and therefore distinct from other parts of the occupied territories. “Jerusalem is the capital of the Jewish people. This is our heart. Jerusalem, if I may say so, was the capital of the Jewish people when London was still a swamp,” he said. However, the area that Gilo is built on was not within the municipal boundaries at the time Israel captured the east of the city in the 1967 war. The city limits have since been greatly expanded to annex Gilo and other settlements to the city. Prosor said Palestinian objections are an excuse for not negotiating. “Everything is negotiable, but I hear the Palestinian using every pretext in order to find a reason why not to go in to negotiations,” he said. The US has called the new settlement construction “counter-productive” and “distressing”. But the Palestinians have little confidence that Washington will do anything about it after Barack Obama made what was widely seen as a strongly pro-Israel speech to the UN. Palestinian territories Israel United Nations Middle East Middle East peace talks Chris McGreal guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Click here to view this media Former Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin hinted Tuesday that she might not run in 2012 because the presidency could be “too shackling.” “For logistical reasons, though, yes, certainly, decisions have to be made,” she told Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren. “I’m going to keep repeating, though, Greta, through my process of decision-making with my family and with my close friends as to whether I should throw my name in the hat for the GOP nomination or not for 2012 — is a title worth it? Does a title shackle a person? Are they — someone like me, who’s a maverick — you know, I do go rogue and I call it like I see it.” She added: “Somebody like me — is a title and is a campaign too shackling? Does that prohibit me from being out there, out of a box, not allowing handlers to shape me and to force my message to be what donors or what contributors or what political pundits want it to be? Does a title take away my freedom to call it like I see it and to affect positive change that we need in this country? That’s the biggest contemplation piece in my process.” The former Alaska governor also had words of praise for Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain, who she called “Herb.” “Take Herb Cain,” she said “Look at why he’s doing so well right now. He’s, I guess you could say, with all due respect, the flavor of the week because Herb Cain is the one up there who doesn’t look like he’s part of that permanent political class.” Palin has about a month to make up her mind before Florida’s Oct. 31 filing deadline for the Republican primary. EDITOR’S NOTE: Herb Caen – pronounced the same – was a Pulitzer-winning San Francisco newspaper columnist who died in 1997. Palin probably confused Herman Cain with Herb because she reads all newspapers with a great appreciation.
Continue reading …
Click here to view this media Former Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin hinted Tuesday that she might not run in 2012 because the presidency could be “too shackling.” “For logistical reasons, though, yes, certainly, decisions have to be made,” she told Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren. “I’m going to keep repeating, though, Greta, through my process of decision-making with my family and with my close friends as to whether I should throw my name in the hat for the GOP nomination or not for 2012 — is a title worth it? Does a title shackle a person? Are they — someone like me, who’s a maverick — you know, I do go rogue and I call it like I see it.” She added: “Somebody like me — is a title and is a campaign too shackling? Does that prohibit me from being out there, out of a box, not allowing handlers to shape me and to force my message to be what donors or what contributors or what political pundits want it to be? Does a title take away my freedom to call it like I see it and to affect positive change that we need in this country? That’s the biggest contemplation piece in my process.” The former Alaska governor also had words of praise for Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain, who she called “Herb.” “Take Herb Cain,” she said “Look at why he’s doing so well right now. He’s, I guess you could say, with all due respect, the flavor of the week because Herb Cain is the one up there who doesn’t look like he’s part of that permanent political class.” Palin has about a month to make up her mind before Florida’s Oct. 31 filing deadline for the Republican primary. EDITOR’S NOTE: Herb Caen – pronounced the same – was a Pulitzer-winning San Francisco newspaper columnist who died in 1997. Palin probably confused Herman Cain with Herb because she reads all newspapers with a great appreciation.
Continue reading …Phone-hacking inquiry needs advisers to ‘fill gap’ in expertise, says publisher
September 28, 2011 No Comment
Associated Newspapers voices concern that the prime minister’s appointees lack tabloid or regional newspaper experience The publisher of the Daily Mail has challenged Lord Justice Leveson over the six advisers to the phone-hacking inquiry amid concerns that the prime minister’s appointees lack tabloid or regional newspaper experience. Jonathan Caplan QC, representing Associated Newspapers, told a preliminary hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice that the inquiry would “benefit greatly” if the judge appointed additional advisers “to fill the gap” in expertise. The application by Associated Newspapers was supported by Trinity Mirror, the Newspaper Publishers’ Association and Guardian News and Media. Caplan said Associated did not wish to be confrontational, but the inquiry would “raise very important issues for the future conduct, regulation and ownership of the newspaper industry”. Leveson’s advisory panel includes two prominent journalists – a former political editor of Channel 4 News, Elinor Goodman, and a former political editor of the Daily Telegraph, George Jones. The former chairman of the Financial Times, Sir David Bell, is also one of the appointees. Leveson said he took on board Associated’s concerns and would reserve judgment until he had considered the matter fully. Earlier he told the hearing he was eager to engage with the Daily Mail and had invited the paper’s editor in chief to attend a pre-inquiry seminar next month. Gillian Phillips, director of editorial legal services for the Guardian, said: “Our view is that tabloid and mid-market papers, as well as regional papers, will play a vital part in the story and we believe it is important that those assisting the inquiry reflect the plurality and divergence of the wider UK media.” Leveson said that the role of assessors was limited to assisting from within their area of expertise with the conclusion being “mine and mine alone”. He added: “It is of critical importance throughout this inquiry that I have the help of everybody. I have a vast and difficult task to address within a comparatively short period of time. I accept the importance that it holds for your clients and for the industry, the profession. “I will only start to be able to achieve a sensible resolution of these issues if everybody is pulling in the same direction, albeit from their different standpoints. “I am conscious that I am stepping into a profession that is not the one that I spent 40 years of life in. It is critical that I obtain advice from those who have made their life in this area, not least because I would be keen to understand any flaws that I might have because of lack of experience.” Phone hacking Newspapers & magazines National newspapers Newspapers Associated Newspapers Daily Mail & General Trust The Guardian Lisa O’Carroll guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
France’s most self-critical film star, Charlotte Gainsbourg has grown up surrounded by controversy. As she collaborates with Lars von Trier once again, in Melancholia, she talks here about motherhood, movies and preserving her father’s memory A pregnant Charlotte Gainsbourg runs her fingers across her bump, which is encased in cashmere and discreetly wedged behind the table of a Paris hotel bar. She is trying to work out what her children might hate her for. Because to her, France’s most self-critical film star, it is obvious that they will hate her for something. “You always have so much to reproach your parents for,” she muses. “It’s normal. I
Continue reading …
Shadow health secretary warns moves to privatise hospitals will ‘drive a wedge’ – but still place for private sector in other areas John Healey, the shadow health secretary, has pledged that a Labour government would ensure NHS hospitals remain in public sector hands as he rounded on government plans to open up all parts of the NHS to private companies. Healey also seized on the crisis witnessed at Southern Cross care homes earlier this year to admit that Labour “did not act before” against predatory fund managers who saw “elderly people as commodities”. But he promised that a future Labour government would do so by regulating the care home sector not just on the basis of best care standards but also on “best business practices”. Healey delivered a combative speech to the Labour party conference in Liverpool after delegates debated a motion condemning the government’s controversial health and social care bill as unnecessary and representing “the biggest top-down reorganisation in the history of the NHS at a time when finances are squeezed”. Despite changes to the bill, the motion stated that health professionals are still opposed to it “because the essential elements … remain in place, which will fragment the NHS through exposing the NHS to the full force of EU and UK competition law with a commercial regulated market designed to give the impression of patent choice”. The new NHS commissioning board will be “the largest quango the world has ever seen”, it said. Healey warned that the battle was “not over” against the legislative plans in the health and social care bill, which would break up the national service and set it up as a “full scale market, ruled for the first time by the full of competition law”. Accusing David Cameron of betrayal, he said. “No one wants this. No one voted for this.” He said the proposals threatened to destroy Labour’s “golden legacy” to NHS patients, as he hailed the founding of the NHS under a post-war Labour government, and the great improvements he said patients saw under the party’s 13 years in power through investment and reform. Referring to reports that ministers were privately eyeing up the “huge opportunities for the private sector”, Healey said any move to privatise NHS hospitals would drive a wedge between hospitals and the wider health service as private companies driven by the bottom line to make profits would refuse to collaborate with others. But he ruled out barring private sector involvement in any shape in the NHS. Healey, whose predecessors introduced independent treatment centres, said Labour believed there would always be an important contribution for non-NHS providers, “including private providers” in the NHS, but as supplements to, not substitutes for, the NHS. But loud applause followed when he drew a line on private companies moving in to run NHS hospitals. “Hospitals are at the heart of our NHS. They should be in public not private hands, dedicated totally to patients, not profits. So we will oppose any move to privatise NHS hospitals. We will guarantee under Labour that the NHS hospitals remain in the NHS.” Signalling that further reforms would be implemented by a future Labour party in office, he unveiled plans for developing integrated care organisations to allow primary secondary and social care to work together. But he ruled out a role for the private sector on this front too. “Because our values demand we’re not neutral on who provides care, we will look to promote those that share a true social ethos over those driven by narrow commercial interests.” “We make this pledge not because we want no change in the NHS but because we need greater change. Because our health and care system must reform, and must retain the faith of all who need and use it.” However the prospect of further reforms under Labour is unlikely to be well received by health care unions, who complained about the constant changes introduced by Labour during its 13 years in power. Healey rehearsed ground trodden by Labour leader Ed Miliband in his keynote speech on Tuesday , by accusing Cameron of a litany of “broken promises” on the NHS. “He’s breaking each and every one of his personal NHS promises,” said Healey. “Protect the NHS – broken. Give the NHS a real rise in funding – broken. Stop top-down reorganisations – broken. Big time.” Healey went on: “That’s why people are starting to see the NHS go backwards again with the Tories. Services cut; treatments denied; long waiting times up. We’ve seen over a million patients suffer long waits for treatment under David Cameron, breaking Labour’s guarantees to patients.” “The NHS was built by the people. It is cherished by the people. It belongs to the people. Let us tell David Cameron today. We will give voice to the dissent of people who heard your promises, saw your posters; people who wanted to believe you before the election but are now seeing the truth. You can’t trust the Tories with our NHS. Bevan said ‘the NHS will last as long as there are folk with the faith to fight for it’. Conference, this is our faith. Our fight.” The Conservatives dismissed the speech as vacuous. Andrew Lansley, the health secretary, said: “With no announcements, and no vision for the NHS, Labour resorted today to nothing more than ludicrous scare-mongering. The simple truth is that waiting times have come down since the general election and we are committed to making sure they remain stable. “Labour failed to answer any of the questions they needed to today – and John Healey refused to condemn his Welsh Labour colleagues who are slashing the NHS budget by 8.3%. “Labour spent the last decade loading the NHS with debt, and would now be cutting it by £30bn. If Labour were ever allowed to run the NHS again, they would run it into the ground.” A panel debate staged at the party conference before Healey’s speech heard from Roger Boyle, former national clinical director at the Department of Health, who resigned in July, raised his concerns about the plans outlined in the health legislative plans. He told the party conference he had worked for a long list of health secretaries under Labour – Alan Milburn, John Reid, Patricia Hewitt, Alan Johnson and Andy Burnham, but referring to Andrew Lansley, he said: “I find the current incumbent rather more difficult. I resigned in July. I did not think there was a democratic mandate to do this, to do the things they are proposing to do.” Delegates spoke passionately in the afternoon debate on the NHS motion, which calls on Labour to “step up local and national campaigning activity” against the health bill and to continue to oppose it in the Lords. Martin Rathfelder of Labour’s National Policy Forum said: “There is never enough money to pay for everything we do in health. All health services are rationed. The beauty of the British health service is that money is not an advantage and poverty is not a disadvantage.” But under the coalition’s plans “we will see more rationing, we will see more queues, but not for the rich. If you need IVF it might not be available on the NHS but it’s available if you go private, and we will see more of that.” The motion also deplores the collapse of the care home company Southern Cross and the abuse at the Winterbourne View care home, saying the government has “failed to regulate the social care sector in a way which protected residents, gave support to their relatives and ensured taxpayers’ money was accountable”. It calls for the government to publish a full list of all operators and landlords receiving “any part of the billions of taxpayers’ funding provided for residential care which is finding its way into private sector companies”. Sharon Holder of the GMB union, a former home help for elderly, sick and dying people, told the conference: “The scandal of Southern Cross is a mere taster for the future of social care … the textbook of how unscrupulous profiteers can make riches from vulnerable people.” Healey told delegates that people’s confidence had been shaken by the crisis at Southern Cross for some of the most vulnerable in society. “We did not act before, but we will in the future,” he said. “So we will regulate for the best business practices as well as the best care standards.” NHS Labour conference Healthcare industry Labour Ed Miliband Andrew Lansley David Cameron Southern Cross Healthcare Health Trade unions Paul Owen Hélène Mulholland Randeep Ramesh guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Shrien Dewani extradition signed for possible South Africa murder trial
September 28, 2011 No Comment
Home secretary Theresa May ratifies judge’s decision for husband of wife dead Anni Dewani to face court abroad The prospect of the British businessman Shrien Dewani being flown to South Africa to face trial over the murder of his wife Anni moved a step closer after the home secretary signed an order for him to be extradited. Theresa May ratified a district judge’s decision that Dewani ought to return to face legal proceedings for allegedly arranging his wife’s killing in a fake carjacking during their honeymoon. Dewani, 31, has 14 days to appeal against the decision of either the home secretary or the district judge and is believed likely to do so. However, May’s decision has been welcomed by prosecutors in South Africa and members of Anni’s family who want Dewani to return to explain in court what happened. Anni Dewani, 28, was shot dead in an apparent carjacking in the impoverished Gugulethu township on the outskirts of Cape Town last November. Her husband Shrien and taxi driver Zola Tongo were ejected from the vehicle. Dewani was implicated in his wife’s murder by Tongo , who claimed in a plea bargain that Dewani had offered him 15,000 rand (£1,400) to arrange the hit. Dewani has always protested his innocence and fought against extradition claiming he would not face a fair trial and his human rights would be infringed because of the conditions he was likely to face in prison as he awaited trial and if he was convicted. It was also argued that Dewani, who is suffering from severe post-traumatic stress disorder and severe depression, was too sick to travel. But last month district judge Howard Riddle agreed with the South African authorities that he should be extradited. Announcing May’s decision, a Home Office spokesman said: “On Monday 26 September the home secretary, having carefully considered all relevant matters, signed an order for Shrien Prakash Dewani’s extradition to South Africa. “Mr Dewani now has the opportunity, within 14 days, to appeal to the high court against the decision of the district judge and/or the home secretary.” It will be up to the Metropolitan police’s extradition unit to actually organise Dewani’s return with the South African authorities. The decision was welcomed by members of Swedish-born Anni Dewani’s family. Last week 12 members of her family handed in a petition that they said had been signed by 11,000 people asking for the home secretary to back the court’s decision that Dewani should return to South Africa. Anni’s father, Vinod Hindocha, said the only way for the family to get “closure” was for Dewani to face legal proceedings in South Africa. Tongo’s lawyer, William da Grass, said South Africans would welcome May’s decision to extradite Dewani. He said: “This is very good news as it brings us one step closer to seeing a resolution to this dreadful case. “We have said all along that we want to see Mr Dewani face justice and now we are one step closer to that. “Obviously he has further appeals open to him and the journey is not yet complete, but we are now confident that he will return to South Africa. “Mr Dewani has always disputed my client’s version of events but there are serious allegations against him and it is only right that the matter is heard before a court. “Many South Africans will be pleased to hear that he is likely to be extradited here. “That is not to say that anyone wishes necessarily to see him in prison, but simply to see him put on trial. If after a trial he is found to be innocent then he will be free of all that has been said against him.” Tongo has been sentenced to 18 years in jail for murder, kidnapping, robbery with aggravating circumstances and perverting the course of justice. The alleged hitmen, Xolile Mngeni, 23, and Mziwamadoda Qwabe, 25, who are charged with Anni’s murder , kidnapping and robbery with aggravating circumstances, are to appear before Wynberg regional court in Cape Town in February. There was no comment from relatives of Shrien Dewani, who has been undergoing treatment at a medium secure psychiatric hospital in Bristol. Doctors there have said there was a “high risk” he would commit suicide if he was returned to South Africa. During the extradition hearing in London over the summer, experts in the South African penal system called by Dewani’s lawyers during the hearing said some prisons were overcrowded, understaffed and rife with diseases, including TB and HIV/Aids. There was a shortage of medical staff and sick prisoners sometimes struggled to get access to the care and medicine they needed. Gangs in prison used sexual violence to establish hierarchies and as punishments, it was claimed. Witnesses said Dewani would be particularly vulnerable to gang violence because he was accused of a “sissy” crime and because he was an outsider. His good looks and other claims – denied by his family – that he is gay would also make him the target of sexual attacks. Dewani murder case South Africa Africa Theresa May Steven Morris guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …