Cameron to destroy what Churchill set up

Cameron: Plans to create many more millionaire recruitment bosses.

Tories would force jobless to work – Times Online

DAVID CAMERON is to unveil a plan to get Britain back to work by forcing millions of welfare claimants into training.

I’ve mentioned before that I think that getting the unemployed working for their benefits is a great idea. After all, they have a much better chance of getting a job and presenting a good impression of themselves when they are used to getting up and working all day, as oppose to rising at lunch and spending the day in their pyjamas engaging in slovenly behaviour.

Meeting targets

However I don’t believe that the Tory plan is the right one. This idea that private companies, i.e. employment agencies, will somehow be much better placed to find work for the terminally unemployed, or even just the hard up, is wrong. As anyone who has ever had any dealings with employment agencies knows, they are only interested in bums on seats and meeting targets.

They don’t care about the individual, nor even about finding the right job for the right person, just about filling positions. Sure this may sound ideal, but the unemployed don’t want to work for three weeks, be unemployed again for a month, then employed again etc. People who are unemployed want a job first and foremost, but they want to stay in that job. The idea is to find the unemployed long term, meaningful employment, not short term fixes to make the quarterly figures look good.

The Government currently has a similar scheme with private companies getting paid to find work for the unemployed, and has also had a comparable scheme running for several years with various Chambers of Commerce. It doesn’t work, because the Government, and by the sounds of it the next Tory government, are only interested in setting targets and making the figures look good. These private companies in turn are then only interested in meeting these targets in the quickest and simplest way possible and getting their payouts.

Job Centre Plus

Privatisation: Expect to see less of these, but more companies like Working Links

The only reason such measures are being considered is because Job Centre Plus is so poor at providing the service that it was set up to do. The Job Centre’s very premise was to get the unemployed back to work, now the Government gets third parties to do it.

The original labour exchanges were an idea of Winston Churchill’s, and they were intended to help the unemployed back into work by matching them up with vacancies.

Today, they are basically just used to collect claimant information, little or no effort is made to match a claimant with a job, other than displaying vacancies. Indeed most of the real job matching work is done by private companies under impressive sounding schemes such as Employment Zones or Pathways to Work, and as with most Government schemes, it is an exercise in meeting quotas and ticking boxes. Only those in ‘high priority groups’ are eligible for the schemes, i.e. those with alcohol or addiction problems, single parents etc, in other words, those least likely to benefit from them, but look best on paper.

Many Job Centre Plus locations are closing; processing claims is now being taken over by Benefit Delivery Centres, where fewer and even less attentive people can spend even less time looking over claimant forms. Another example of the lax approach to dealing with unemployment is the fact that claimants are now known as customers! An excellent way of tackling the benefit culture, by making it seem as though claimants are doing the benefits office a favour, rather than the other way around!

Back to work

How hard is it to spend time with individuals to work out their requirements for employment, and then match that? To find their weaknesses and resolve them, such as providing training courses, work experience etc? With a £8 billion a year budget and more staff than the British Army, over 120,000 at the last count, one would think it was relatively simple. Yet the Department of Work and Pensions seems intent on paying others to do their work for them, and it is a lucrative business.

Several years ago now, I was involved with my local Chamber of Commerce in providing the above to claimants on behalf of the Job Centres. It seemed like a good and worthwhile project, helping claimants with their CVs, running workshops about interviews etc and helping them find work that they were qualified for. All pretty basic stuff. Add to this a work placement scheme and it did indeed seem a brilliant way of getting people back to work.

Unknown to me, at least at the time, was that claimants had to be unemployed for at least 18 months to be eligible for this ‘help’ and the course was only mandatory if the person had been unemployed for three years! For each person on the course, the Job Centre paid the Chamber of Commerce the equivalent of one year’s Job Seekers Allowance, at the time about £2000.

They could also get a bonus of about five times that amount when one of the claimants found full time employment whilst on, or immediately after the course! At any one time there were at least 20 people on the course, meaning a payout of £40,000 and a potential bonus of £200,000 and many of these courses were run consecutively. I can only guess at the money being made by private companies now.

The words ‘Gold Mine’ spring to mind. But that said, it was a great way of getting people off benefits, especially as the work placement scheme was for one year and the vast majority were either hired by the company they were working for, or immediately found work upon completely the course.

Unfortunately a year is a long time for politicians, this was cut down to six months when more pleasing targets and figures were needed. A year was deemed too long, when the claimants could do a six month placement and then find work. Needless to say the success rate dropped, but rather than increase it back to year, it was halved again to just three months (worse still, those completing the course had to wait another 18 months to be eligible again so it now took 6 years to get 1 year work experience!).

Three months is next to useless, and the number of claimants finding work plummeted again, however the bonuses did not. It was often remarked by the claimants that the Job Centre would have been better off handing the 5 years worth of ‘dole’ money to the claimant and getting them to find themselves a placement for a year. A thought that obviously never occurred to them.

Good money after bad

In the end disillusioned with the project I left, but I still believe that something similar really could work. The Conservatives proposal is just throwing more money at the problem, and farming the responsibility, and therefore the blame, out to someone else. At the end of the day, these companies will be given tick boxes and targets to meet, and that is precisely what they will do, and nothing more.

You have to remember that it is not really in the companies interests to find long term employment for people, the more people they have through their scheme, the more money they get. Many of the current private companies working in this area have multi-million pound turnovers (some more than £100 million a year), and are increasing this year on year. More often than not, this is because they find the claimants work with agencies, which is normally short term, and they get to cash in on the same claimants several times a year. This is just paying private companies millions of pounds of tax payers money to take advantage of those in desperate straits.

Paying for the right training courses, or providing benefits to people while they work for free at local hospitals, councils, charities etc is the right way to go. After all, even the most work shy will not work for long earning £60 a week, when they could be earning £260 a week doing the same job.

Islam in British Prison’s = Easy Ride

Ali Dizaei: Another Muslim heading to prison

Muslim prisoners get their own cells after sharing row | Mail Online

A prison has agreed to give Muslims their own cells after they complained about sharing with other inmates.

It amazes me just how many prisoners ‘appear’ to be Muslim; is it a case that Muslims are more prone to crime? Or simply that many inmates find Islam as a way to get an easy ride within the criminal justice system?

Finding God/Allah

Prison may seem an unlikely place to find God, but due to ridiculous laws in this country, getting a religion is how to get ahead in UK jails, and even wider society. About 70% of those in UK prison describe themselves as ‘religious’ although being devout does not apparently stop them committing crimes.

3% of violent offenders in prison class themselves as Buddhists! A religion normally associated with peace and harmony. Compare this to the warrior religion, Sikhism, where Sikh’s do not even make up 1% of violent offenders languishing in prison.

Muslims make up 10% of violent offenders, despite only making up 2.7% of the population. Muslims also make up about 10% of sexual offenders, 13% of robbers, 5% of burglars, 6% of thieves and 21% of fraudsters behind bars.

Most surprising of all is that 15% of all those in prison for drugs offences, are Muslim; despite drugs of any kind, including alcohol, being against their religion. Clearly these ‘Muslims’ are not as devout as they like to claim.

In total Muslims make up 10% of the prison population and rising. Islam is also the fastest growing religion in British prisons, with 15% of all religious inmates following it. Just to re-iterate once again, just 2.7% of the UK general population are Muslims.

Compare that to Christians, who make up 70% of the population, but just 52% of the prison population.

Whilst in itself such information is not evidence that multiculturalism is bad for wider society, as some religions such as Sikhs, Jews and Hindu’s make up far less of the prison population that they do of the general population, it does show that these ‘Muslims’ are either not true Muslims, or that Islam is not entirely the religion of peace it is made out to be.

Demands

This also begs the question, should the UK’s most criminal of religions entitle its followers to make demands?

‘So far around 15 Muslim inmates have been accommodated either by being moved to a cell with another Muslim or put on their own,’ said a prison source. ‘They initially asked for their own wing but this was turned down.’

HMP: Winson Green, Birmingham. Facilities include: workshops, educational facilities, a new healthcare centre and gym. Holds 1450 prisoners, or 350 Muslims.

This is the kind of double standards that I find appalling. White, indigenous people have it drilled into them from birth that they must be tolerant, accept those of other faiths and cultures and allow them freedom to practice their religion and accept their different culture; yet this is rarely reciprocated.

Worse, the powers that be allow this to happen. This is cultural isolation and segregation, if the Home Office or Prison service were to start putting all whites, or all blacks, together there would be uproar and rightly so. But as this is a minority religion it is deemed acceptable to give them special privileges?

Either we are multi-cultural or we are not, there is no place for ’special’ religions, cultures or treatment.

The judge called for a new concept of ‘institutional religious intolerance’ to combat prejudice against Muslim inmates.

Another idiot judge sending totally the wrong message. Religious people do not commit crimes, therefore when a prisoner gets sent to prison the first thing that should be taken away from them are any and all religious rights.

Those rights should have been forfeited when they beat, stole, raped or murdered their way into a British prison.

These special privileges are only going to aggravate the other 33% of prisoners who have no religious safety net, those that are not hypocrites.

One prison officer said: ‘This has caused resentment because it is felt the Muslim inmates are getting special treatment.’

This resentment is then used as an excuse by moronic Judges as justification for more ‘religious tolerance’ when that is precisely the sort of thing that encourages it.

With the number of Muslims in our prisons rising rapidly, this kind of preferential treatment of a religion in which criminality appears more prevalent than any other is sending out entirely the wrong message. And as the number of Muslims in prison increases, the more the resentment and attacks will increase.

British Isles to be Desert!

Climate Zealot blocking traffic on Westminster Bridge, clearly not realising that traffic standing in jams are more polluting than free moving traffic; but no-one ever said these people were smart, or logical

BBC NEWS | Science & Environment | UK ‘must plan’ for warmer future

The UK needs to plan now for a future that will be hotter and bring greater extremes of flood and drought, says Environment Secretary Hilary Benn.

Each time this type of thing is announced it seems that they have to go further and further with their madcap predictions. This is a Government report conducted by the Hadley Centre, which was created purely to look at Global Warming and is completely tax funded.

The Hadley Centre is part of the Met Office and accounts for approximately 13% of its staff, they are hardly going to start saying that Global Warming was a bit of a mix up and that mass redundancies are needed, now are they? No, with each report they have to go to crazier and crazier lengths to justify this cold spell and their very existence.

Bias

This bias is spreading into their projections, take the graph below:

Notice the dip sometime after the year 2000? Virtually right up to where we are now, and then the inexplicable jump later this year/early 2010?

The fact is this is pure guesswork, if not wishful thinking. Temperatures have dropped and there are no indications of any kind of increase looming.

They have covered their backs with large drops after 2010 and again after 2020, just in case there is no big increase, but after 2025 the guess work becomes quite fanciful.

The problem with these kind of models is that they are all based on a certainty that the temperature will always increase, and these enviro-mentalists don’t even consider the possibility that the warming period may be over.

Computer Modelling

Having a computer myself and being curious as to how this process works, I decided to create my own computer model. By feeding into my computer all the relevant information, dates, temperature and adding in pointless guesswork and bias, I set my computer to crunching the numbers.

Amazingly, and a testament to modern computing power, it finished the highly complex and completely random computing modelling pretty quickly. The result is below:

For some inexplicable reason my output was completely different to that created by the Hadley Centre, but then my very existence does not depend on the results.

As you can see the computer was able to predict that we are in fact heading for a mini-ice age. Reaching its peak around 2024, the surface air temperature in the Northern Hemisphere will drop by a third of a degree, which may not seem like much but to steal a phrase from the climate freaks, could well be catastrophic.

This is in direct contrast to the Hadley Centre’s predictions of an increase in temperature by nearly half a degree Celsius (they must  have had their graph upside down!).

Britain won’t have seem the kinds of temperatures like those in 2024 since the 1850s. We’ll be seeing frozen lakes, rivers and canals and perhaps a re-emergence of that popular pastime of ice skating on rivers and lakes. I for one, cannot wait.

The UK Met Office, which led the scientific analysis, says UKCP09 is the “most comprehensive set of probabilistic climate projections at the regional scale compiled anywhere in the world”.

Personally I don’t think that they are worth the paper that they are printed on.

Experimenter Effect

It is almost uncanny that model after model after model bears out the ’scientists’ theories.

Scientists collated data from 400 variations of the climate computer model developed by the Hadley Centre, part of the Met Office.

I am guessing that if MPs were to create a computer model to discover whether they were giving taxpayers their moneys worth, the results would be pretty similar, i.e. the computer models would say that tax payers are getting a bargain!

Needless to say that the enviro-mentalists are clapping their hands in glee at this report.

“It’s great that the government has decided to put together such a scientifically robust analysis of the potential impacts of climate change in the UK,” said Keith Allott, head of climate change at WWF-UK.

But why wouldn’t they? After all this mean millions, if not billions, are going to be handed out in Government grants to Climate Change groups in order to prepare Britain for an event that will never happen.

By that time lots of people will have gotten rich from this cult.

When did ello, ello, ello become Taser, Taser, Taser?

Fast Food Workers? No, modern British Police

A suspect is tasered three times by police before being punched? New York? No, the streets of Nottingham | Mail Online

There was fresh controversy over police methods last night after officers shot a man three times with a Taser gun and punched him repeatedly as he writhed on the ground.

The headline makes a good point, I did indeed believe this to be some US city, such incidents are in the papers on a regular basis (such as the recent tasing of a 72 year old woman), instead it turned out to be my home town.

I am not sure what shocked me more; that my local police have tasers or that those gentleman in navy T-Shirts and body warmers were police officers.

Only in America

It seems that the use of tasers has somewhat passed me by, I knew that some forces were trialling them, but in my naivety I thought that they would never be rolled out across the board and certainly rarely used, after all, this isn’t America. Criminals here rarely carry guns, or even knives, so the need for such a weapon is debatable.

The good old fashioned police truncheon

We have pepper spray (also from the US), expandable batons (again from the US) and now tasers? What are next, guns? I remember when the simple wooden truncheon was enough.

Back then the mere threat of getting brained by a police officer was enough for most people to do as they were told and submit. Those that didn’t were soon coshed into submission.

Sure, they were deadly but then police officers only used them when they had to and when they whipped them out, you knew that they meant business.

Lazy policing

Today police officers wear Batman style utility belts containing everything that they could possibly need – for a riot. This, in my view, has made them lazy. Why bother trying to calm a suspect down when a spray in the face with the pepper spray will incapacitate him? Or a quick blast on the taser?

Neither leave any lasting harm or marks so can be pretty much used with impunity, and apparently they are. It is so much easier for police to shoot first and ask questions later that many of them are doing precisely that, albeit without guns.

The man in the video was already on the ground, already subdued, he just wasn’t doing as he was told, and so he was punished, physically. If two police officers do not know how to cuff a prone man, then what good are they?

At one point there were six police officer holding the suspect down, now, unless he had the strength of ten men, this seems to me to be a tad bit of an overkill, particularly as he had been tasered a couple of times already. The man was rolling around on the floor, drunk by the looks of him, yet still a couple of the officers stood on him and punched him, just to be sure.

About 50 onlookers saw the whole thing and needless to say, whatever respect they still had for the police was washed away watching that performance.

Respect

This isn’t helped one bit by the ridiculous outfits that our police now wear. Once the police uniform was unmistakable, now all the police officers seem to think that they are part of a SWAT unit. I’m not even sure I can tell a traffic warden or even a park warden from a police officer anymore.

Casual uniforms for casual police

We seem to have this problem with uniforms in Britain at present, as if uniforms are somehow bad and create a barrier between ordinary people and those that wear them (and tasers and batons don’t), they are all being slowly changed. Nurses no longer look like nurses, the police look like fast food workers and doctors no longer wear white coats; even soldiers are discouraged from wearing their uniforms.

Constable Marlow: Still patrolling in his original uniform

Uniforms command respect, they are an instant visual identity. Had I witnessed those two men in casual dress attacking a poor drunken man in the street, I would never have realised that they were police officers. They are not even smartly dressed. What happened to hats? To ties? White shirts?

There is nothing old fashioned about looking smart and the old uniform commanded respect, whilst projecting an image of honesty, integrity and trustworthiness, whether justified or not.

I am also sure that pulling on such a well regarded and esteemed uniform meant something to the officers too, and made them try to live up to it and be more cautious in their actions.

It certainly made an impression on Constable Marlow, who still patrols the streets in his home town in his old uniform. A casual modern uniform just nurtures a casual and lazy culture amongst our tin pot police. They are now more interested in just being obeyed than doing the right thing.

Such casual use of what is in effect a torture device (imagine if they used it whilst interviewing suspects, makes waterboarding seem light hearted by comparision), is most worrying. A police officer should never inflict pain on someone merely for non compliance.

Now it seems whilst walking around in crime ridden Nottingham, I am going to have to keep one eye on the ne’er do wells and another eye on the police, lest I get caught up in one of their urban pacifications.

Thugs 4 Life

Michael Alleyne: Ringleader of gang and as dumb as he looks.

Kinsella killers ‘marked men’ after life sentences – Crime, UK – The Independent

The killers of 16-year-old Ben Kinsella were jailed for life yesterday. Juress Kika, 19, Jade Braithwaite, 18, and Michael Alleyne, 20, from London, were told they would serve minimum terms of 19 years each after being convicted of murder.

Does 19 years living in hotel style accommodation, having health and dental care better than the average Briton (on site doctor and nurse as well as dentist), and all at the taxpayers expense, seem like a suitable punishment?

Is this fair on the family of murdered Ben Kinsella? Is it fair on the taxpayer? Is it fair on society that one day these good for nothing scumbags will be out and rubbing shoulders with the rest of us? Especially considering that they are sadistic criminals now at such a young age, and that in their 40s they are likely to be just the same, if not worse?

I don’t think so, they should have been executed, but maybe they still will be.

Marked For Death

Juress Kika: Now mainly performs fellatio on fellow inmates.

These wannabe gangsters lived in a bizarre world of TV and movie violence and lifestyles, now they may very well get to live a gangster style life first hand; living in fear and always having to look over their shoulders.

The judge at the Old Bailey, the Common Serjeant of London, Brian Barker, heard that the three had received letters from the prison service which are usually sent to inmates who are in fear of retaliation attacks. Often such prisoners stay in solitary confinement. Braithwaite’s lawyer told the court he understood he was a “marked man”.

The retaliation is expected to come from none other than the Adams family, no, nothing to do with the TV show, but a North London crime family on whose manor Ben Kinsella was killed. The Adams family have reportedly placed a big money contract on the heads of all three of Ben’s killers, apparently they were none too pleased about his senseless killing.

Where these three are going there are likely to be plenty of people wanting to curry favour with the Adams family, or just simply earn some easy money.

The irony is that it will take violent criminals to give the family of Ben Kinsella justice; as the British state is no longer capable of it.

Capital Punishment

Jade Braithwaite: Despite being 6′ 6″ tall, he still had to get two of his mates to help him stab a schoolboy

When the death penalty was abolished in Britain in 1965 the murder rate per million was 6.8. Today it stands at an incredible 20.3 murders per million people, an astonishing threefold increase in the murder rate since the abolition of the death penalty.

There are those that claim that the death penalty has no influence on murder rates, despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary, instead claiming that socio-economic factors have more to do with murder rates.

In the 1930s the world entered the Great Depression, a recession so bad it makes the current one look like a boom period. I know people that lived through it, and their stories make me realise what true deprivation and poverty are.

Few alive today have any inkling of what people in the 1930s went through, there were no benefits, no NHS and if you didn’t earn enough to feed yourself you either had to beg for food,  steal it or simply starve.

Despite all this hardship, the murder rate actually decreased during the Great Depression, from 8.3 in 1920 to 7.5 during the depression. So I think that it is safe to rule out poverty and hardship as reasons for our current epidemic of murders and violent behaviour.

In fact from 1900, when the murder rate stood at a lofty 9.6 per million, up until 1965, when the death penalty was abolished, the murder rate steadily declined over 60 years. Within a decade of murder no longer being punishable by death, 60 years of decline had been reversed and the murder was the highest of the century, so far. Within 20 years it had almost doubled.

Today our murder rate is higher than that of Israel and on a par with Libya. France’s murder rate is 15.9 per million, Germany’s 9.8.

Leniency

Tony Blair: The man who took a bad Criminal Justice system, and turned it into a god awful one

Successive British Governments have ensured that criminals in modern Britain face no real justice. Jade Braithwaite had already been convicted of mugging a schoolboy, but was virtually let off, for some bizarre reason, which presumably gave him the impression that British Justice was a misnomer. Despite being 20 years old, he had no job, and no inclination to find one and lived with his mother; who was presumably a soft touch.

Michael ‘Mickey’ Alleyene was also a convicted robber, car thief and had likewise seen British justice for what it was – a joke. Despite committing all these offences from the age of 15, he only served a nine month sentence for drug dealing. It was meant to be 18 months, but in modern Britain, criminals only serve half their sentence, and Alleyene had only just got out and was under the ’supervision’ of a youth offending team at the time of the murder.

Juress Kika started his criminal career aged just eleven. Convictions for ABH and shoplifting didn’t deter him, and why should they have, I doubt he got so much as a slap on the wrist. Just to demonstrate how tough the justice system is, he was arrested twice in the same year for the same offence, possession of cannabis, yet served no time for it. Kika was also convicted of robbery aged 17, again serving no time. Kika was wanted by police at the time of the murder for another stabbing, just ten days earlier.

I guess Ben Kinsella was the answer to the question; just who do these three have to kill to serve jail time in this country?

Once again it is possible to see a clear progression of these thugs from petty criminals to evil scum. The British Justice system failed Ben Kinsella time and time again by not punishing these three, nor even offering any form of deterrent to them. If the criminal justice system is not punishing criminals nor protecting the innocent, what is it doing?

Bobbies on the Beat

21st Century Police Officer: At least ED-209 had guns

It is often said that we just don’t have as many police officers as we used to, and that is why crime rates are so high, well it is true in part. We actually have more than double the number of police officers we had in the 1950s, when the murder rate was just 6.3 per million. Back then about 75,000 officers managed to keep the streets of Britain safe by acting as a visible deterrent to would be villains.

Despite there being more than 150,000 bobbies (not including Blunkett’s bobbies) in Britain today, your chances of actually seeing one are few and far between, unless you are speeding. Foot patrols and beat bobbies are old hat in Britain. Modern police officers sit in cushy air conditioned offices drinking coffee waiting for crimes to occur, whereupon they examine the CCTV evidence, release the suspect’s picture and await a tip off. Those 40% of crimes that are not covered by CCTV are simply filed away as ‘unsolvable’.

We should be thankful that these thugs were caught on CCTV and have been taken off the street, and pray that they do not appeal and get a more lenient sentence. With any luck they will get the sentence that they truly deserve, death, when someone from the Adams family catches up with them.

In the mean time we just have to worry about the thousands of other teenage thugs on the streets, and the police and courts inability or disinclination to deal with them.