Full results for the Sunday Times/YouGov poll are now up here. As you’d might expect, given it’s silly season and it’s the only story in the news, the focus is again on the riots.

On the regular leadership trackers there is little change – David Cameron’s job approval stands at minus 12 (from minus 14 last week, and typical of late), Ed Miliband’s is minus 18 (from minus 22, still holding onto the increase he got from hackgate), Nick Clegg’s is minus 42.

As in the Channel 4 poll yesterday the primary causes of the riots are seen as criminality, gang culture and bad parenting (all named by 61% of people when asked to pick the main causes, and the top three when asked to pick the ONE main cause). That is followed, a long way behind, by social deprivation (23%) and unemployment (18%). Very few people though that the government’s cuts (10%) or poor policing (11%) were amongst the main causes.

45% think Cameron responded well to the riots (52% badly), 44% thought Boris responded well (45% badly). These are significantly up on similar questions YouGov asked for the Sun when the riots were still ongoing, which had 28% saying Cameron was doing well and only 24% for Boris – people are presumably viewing their reactions a lot more positively now things have quietened down. In contrast Theresa May is still seen as having reacted badly to the riots (31% well, 53% badly). For the opposition, 40% thought Miliband did well (40% badly) and Harriet Harman 26% well, 44% badly.

66% think the police responded well to the riots, with 31% saying badly – again this is significantly up on YouGov’s poll for the Sun in the week when the number thinked they’d handled it well was 52%. Asked how much confidence they have in the police to protect people and property from rioters 53% of people have some or a lot of confidence, 37% do not have a lot of confidence, 9% have none at all.

On the police cuts 56% of people think they should be cancelled, even if this means bigger cuts elsewhere. 23% of people think they should go ahead. Amongst the COnservative party’s own supporters 47% think the police cuts should be cancelled.

Finally there were some questions on Cameron’s “broken society”. YouGov re-asked a question from back in 2009 about whether people though Britain was a broken society, in regard of the area people themselves lived in, and in relation to the country as a whole. 37% think it is true in relation to the area they live (which is significantly down from 2009 when YouGov originally asked the question) with people most likely to agree in London. 74% think society is broken in Britain as a whole, virtually unchanged from 2009. Comparing ourselves to other European countries, 38% of people think British society is more broken than in other countries, 13% that British society is stronger and more stable and 39% that they are much the same.

There is very little confidence in the government’s policies solving the problems of “broken Britain” – only 22% think the government’s education policies will improve or mend society, 27% their welfare policies, 26% their law and order polices and 22% their economic policies. In every case a larger proportion of respondents think the government’s policies will make the problems in British society worse.


266 Responses to “YouGov/Sunday Times on the riots”

1 2 3 6
  1. I’ve noticed in the past, a linking-up of narratives from church officials and Labour party officials.

    The most recent example – The Bishop of Manchester has blamed the ‘me first’ culture for the riots, just as Ed Miliband blames the ‘me first’ culture for the riots.

    Are these coincidences, Labour nicking the church narratives or conspiracy?
    I’d guess the most likely would be 1 and 2 – but it’s just an observation.

  2. I would think Cameron should be satisfied with the 45% approval rating for handling the riots, particularly after a very sticky start.

  3. Well, isn’t it nice to back in old Blighty after two weeks in the sun-kissed Mediterranean! And what a two weeks it has been for our benighted country; the return of 80’s style mass civil disobedience, street rioting and a police force seemingly at war with the Government. I did say on my departure two weeks ago that I wanted to return to see a 10 point Labour lead in the polls, the Coalition in yet deeper troubled waters and three points for the Villa at Fulham. Not quite there with the Labour lead for now, a decent point at Craven Cottage for the Villains, yet no win, but I think my wish for further Coalition woes has been granted, and with with knobs on too.

    I couldn’t have anticipated, or wanted, the appalling events of the last week to occur, but they have undoubtedly shifted the political kaleidoscope another rotation, forming a new and interesting image. The prolonged and extreme mass civil disobedience and criminality, and the failure of the authorities to deal with it adequately, is further grist to the mill to that slowly forming impression of Government incompetence and Ministers not in full command of their briefs. I sense some real panic in the Government line explaining away the chaos and, while there are no doubt deep-seated social problems in our country, cooked generations ago and criminally un-addressed by politicians of all colours since, the current Coalition Government’s response to a disaster that occurred on their watch has essentially consisted of blame-avoidance and political posturing. This is not encouraging or reassuring in the least.

    One last thought on the calamity last week. It’s interesting to view these events from abroad and witness some of the reaction of our European and overseas neighbours. There was a mixture of sorrow and bewilderment, as I remember they’re being in the 80s, and a feeling of quiet disbelief that events like those seen last week could be allowed to occur on the streets of one of Europe’s major powers. Very, very sad.

  4. HENRY

    On the other hand the last paragraph of AW’s analysis shows that more people think that all the government’s main policies will make things worse than otherwise.

    I imagine Cameron and friends might be quite worried about this.

  5. @HENRY

    “I would think Cameron should be satisfied with the 45% approval rating for handling the riots, particularly after a very sticky start.”

    Cameron is seen slightly negatively over the riots, because he appeared reluctant to end his holiday, even though he was only a two hour flight away.

    The difficulty for Cameron and the government is mostly still to come. People will be demanding money for Police and social services to deal with some of the issues. If Cameron is really committed to the ‘Big Society’ now is the time to prove that it is more than just a PR exercise to cover for cuts, but something that can have a positive impact on communities.

  6. By the way, I thought the cells were all full? Where are we going to put 3000 rioters?

    We could let some politicians out. Problem is not many of them got locked up. Or bankers. Or so far journalists.

    In fact they might have to let some rioters out when phone hacking unravels.

  7. Oh I forgot to mention Policeman. Taking bribes and not noticing several hundred names and phone numbers on Mulcaire’s notes should be worth a few years.

  8. can I just mention how angry I am that Politicians and some courts seek draconian sentences as a deterrent against other would be rioters, but don’t see the deterrent effect working against, say, expense defrauding politicians.

    If I’m angry about that 6 months for nicking water, imagine how angry some other people are.

    Keep calling them animals, treating them like animals, jailing them like animals, shooting them like diseased animals, guess what you get?

  9. DavidB

    On the other hand the last paragraph of AW’s analysis shows that more people think that all the government’s main policies will make things worse than otherwise.

    I imagine Cameron and friends might be quite worried about this.

    27% believe welfare policies might help. Let IDS on the airwaves and I suspect a big increase there. However IDS wants investment and investment takes cash.

  10. I don’t believe cutting welfare is any sort of solution. The “trap” has been created by living costs and housing costs accelerating past wages.

    The current policies attacking public sector costs are designed to push wage costs down everywhere, Couple this with cuts in welfare and people will be “forced” to take jobs at low pay.

    Fine in theory, but in practice where will they live, what rent can they afford, how can they eat ot drive a car or get a train, how can they buy anything?

    People want to compare us to some goldenage post war period. But what you should really want to consider is the streets of London in Victorian times and the people coming into the cities from the country to escape poverty.

    Lawlessness? get some books about London before welfare and find out what lawlessness was.

  11. I wonder what made the riots stop – and what a poll question would reveal.
    Obviously, the levels of poverty/unemployment are the same and the ability to use social networks are the same.
    So what made the riots stop?
    I’d imagine:
    – The troublemakers/instigators got arrested.
    – The police response got tough (16000 police, threat of bringing in the army/using rubber bullets etc.)
    – The rioters/looters got their satisfaction/kick and got rid of their rage
    – Mass guilty conscience and awakening, realising that this is hurting the wrong people (after seeing the stories in the media).

    This could be interesting to see a poll question on, I think.

  12. cyt

    In the 80s it was the weather changing. Didn’t it start to rain here too?

  13. Nick Poole

    ‘If I’m angry about that 6 months for nicking water, imagine how angry some other people are’

    It is important that prison sentences associated with rioting and looting are proportional. There were so many violent crimes associated with rioting, including attacking police by throwing stones etc. breaking and entering and looting, arson and murder that the example you quote seems surprising unless violence was used.

    You quote a number of areas, that probably most of us disapprove, but not all were breaches of law, although with some politicians the penalty where criminality was proven was IMO quite severe.

    I would like to see the poll cover public’s view of sentencing, perhaps broken down by types of crime. My view is that the public expect tough sentences, firstly as punishment because they attacked ordinary innocent people, with so many tragic results, and secondly because they believe that stiff sentences will discourage further attempts by a tiny fraction of the population to bully and threaten the vast majority. However, without the polling it is impossible to say for sure.

  14. henry

    I’m not averse to deterrent sentences in principle. How about huge sentences for any sort of tax avoidance?

    As opposed to say, allowing them to pay it back or even “negotiate” how much they want to pay.

  15. Nick Poole

    People want to compare us to some goldenage post war period. But what you should really want to consider is the streets of London in Victorian times and the people coming into the cities from the country to escape poverty.

    Of course there could have been both, i.e. a post war golden age and victorian poverty and squalor. I think in the 50s, 60s and very early seventies with low unemployment, far more class mobility, very low crime rate, and enormous optimism, particularly for those who remembered the hard times of 20s and 30s and who suffered as most did from a range of deprivations in the War, this was as close as one can get to your goldenage.

  16. Jon Snow has just tweeted this picture http://t.co/7Li8MkT of Congressmen and women playing computer games during the key debate on U.S debt crisis.

    So its OK for politicians to play Patience whilst playing fast and loose with our money but all social networks should be shut down at times of civil disturbances? Lord help us!

  17. @CYT

    I agree, that would make an interesting poll. I mean, I half expected this to continue for at least a fornight, especially considering the sudden wave of rioting that exploded since last Thrusday.

    What would make for a more interesting poll would be a opinion poll or perhaps research on asking the rioters themselves what caused them to riot. Would make for an interesting dissertation if someone was brave enough to do such research. Plus with no independent review I would tell the academic psychologists, sociologists etc. to go for it because the government isn’t going to as we all know.

  18. Nick Poole

    henry

    I’m not averse to deterrent sentences in principle. How about huge sentences for any sort of tax avoidance?

    No. Tax avoidance is legal and I have an ISA as do many others.

    Tax evasion and benefit fraud on the other hand, different sides of a coin. Sometimes the tax evader is forced to pay several times the amount evaded; that may be better than a prison sentence. I would go for the most cost effective and effective system.

    I would be quite tough on all criminals; however as someone with little influence and just one vote I would always hope that the violent crimes receive the biggest sentences.

  19. Excellent move by EM to state that he will set up his own public enquiry into recent events if the government decides not to do this.

    EM’s quiet and considered approach to events (and not just this one) is very refreshing and reinforces my belief that he is a ‘slow burner’ and is likely to increase in popularity over the next year.

    I am looking for a consistent 10% Labour lead in the polls from mid September onwards leading to a possible dismantling of the coalition after the elections of May 2012 – I still do not rule out an ’emergency’ rainbow coalition for a fixed period with a mandate to sort certain things out! In a way I would prefer a national government for a while but Labour is congenitally against this (shades of Ramsay McDonald) and Cameron would prefer to go down to electoral defeat than share any sort of power with Ed.

  20. Woodsman, the link actually explains the full story, which is not what you say. Did you not read the story?

    “The photograph is real, although it has erroneously been attributed to a number of different legislative bodies, from the U.S. Congress to a variety of state legislatures. The picture was actually snapped in the Connecticut House of Representatives on 31 August 2009 by photographer Jessica Hill, while Rep. Larry Cafero was delivering a lengthy speech on the state budget.
    The photo was captioned by the Associated Press as follows:
    House Minority Leader Lawrence F. Cafero Jr., R-Norwalk, far right, speaks while colleagues play solitaire on their computers as the House convenes to vote on a new budget for the fiscal year in the Capitol, in Hartford, Conn.

  21. Nick Poole, the weather, of course :o)

    Andy C, I am naive enough to believe that exactly such a study is going to be part of the already agreed paliamentary enquiry.

  22. “Excellent move by EM to state that he will set up his own public enquiry into recent events if the government decides not to do this.”
    I’ve wondered, if he doesn’t get government backing, who is going to pay for the enquiry?
    The Labour party has (relatively) struggling finances and it would definitely be difficult to secure donations to pay for it.

    I think it would also be interesting to find out the political views and political psychology of the rioters – this may play badly against Labour, if being from ‘Labour neighbourhoods’ they would probably be Labour-backers, if forced to choose but it would be fascinating to see.
    I’m thinking not only questions about political views, but also using political scales (or psychological scales which correlate with political views – SDO, RWA, etc) to get a sense of where they belong politically.
    I realise that may be treating them like human beings – but if there is a feeling of disenfranchisement [1] perhaps finding a way to engage with them politically in the future, would reduce that feeling.

    [1] Emphasis on feeling – they may not actually *be* disenfranchised, but they may *feel* that way.
    Perception vs Reality – I feel I have to emphasise this as sometimes when talking about public perceptions people think you’re talking about reality, when you’re not.

  23. THe public seem pretty supportive of very tough policing indeed.

    They are also pretty ambivalent when it comes to confidence in police protection. I would like to have seen this question asked in the areas affected by the riots. Judging by tv news interviews I suspect the answer would have been more clear cut.

    There is a base of public support here for what DC/IDS are talking about.

    THe lack of confidence in government measures making a difference should not be seen as a problem-but an opportunity to provide that confidence.

    I think in an earlier Poll a large majority thought most participants in the rioting would “get away with it”.

    BY the time we are done , 3000 or so have been arrested, and we have seen the Crown Court sentences as well as those being meted out by Magistrates, it would be interesting to see how that opinion has moved.

    The Strathclyde model looks like a good one to learn from.

    DC/IDSs only problem would appear to be getting the support of senior Police officers.

    But the public mood should encourage them to press on with the reforms they see as relevant.

  24. CYT

    Thought it didn’t look quite grand enough for Capitol HIll! Ah, the joys of Twitter…..not like Jon Snow not to fact check though.

    My apologies one and all.

  25. @ Alec.
    Of your list the only one that can be laid at DC’s door is the predictable “cuts”
    Everything else was created and tolerated by 13 years of a Labour Government so DC would have nothing to fear from those revelations.

    To be honest, these issues were started when Mrs T introduced neoliberal policies. New Labour sadly retained these policies at it’s core.

    The truth is that these policies are divisive and shift power to a small, powerful elite at the expense of others.

  26. Interesting comments from Nouriel Roubini (the NYU professor of economics, who in 2005 predicted the financial crash that ‘nobody saw coming, has since earned the nickname ‘Dr Doom’ for his economic predictions) –
    “Karl Marx had it right. At some point capitalism can self-destroy itself. That’s because you can not keep on shifting income from labor to capital without not having an excess capacity and a lack of aggregate demand. We thought that markets work. They are not working. What’s individually rational…is a self-destructive process.”
    He says that we’re not ‘there right now’, but if we don’t learn the mistakes of the financial crisis we will do.

    Essentially his argument goes like this – during the good times, the wealth has shifted from those who Labour to the top – this means there is a lack of demand for products and services, so those at the top lend to those who labour.
    That debt is then recycled as purchases, which then flows back to the top.
    Eventually the cycle cannot continue itself and breaks.

    I’ve also seen a similar explanation (by whom, I cannot remember) for the debt crisis that European nations are currently in.
    Producing nations (China, Germany, etc) leant money to consuming nations (UK, Greece, etc), which was then recycled purchasing things from the producer nations – who would then lend the money again.
    So eventually the cycle went bust when the consuming nations could no longer afford to borrow or consume.

    How this ties in to the riots debate – a lot of people are putting this (partly) down to income inequality and the shift in wealth from ‘everybody else’ to the very top – and the benefit trap it creates when it’s better to stay on benefits than work (due to low pay).
    So part of IDS’ ‘back to work’ scheme would surely have to tackle low-pay at the bottom end of the scale.

    [Roubini himself says that the unrest in the UK is down largely to economics and unemployment – but I’m leaving that as a footnote, because his main point about inequality causing economic insecurity is more important]

  27. @CATMANJEFF

    “To be honest, these issues were started when Mrs T introduced neoliberal policies. New Labour sadly retained these policies at it’s core.

    The truth is that these policies are divisive and shift power to a small, powerful elite at the expense of others.”

    Are politicians the cause of issues or does society create its own problems for itself ?

    I think sometimes people can blame politicians as they are an easy target, plus they don’t help themselves, when they make silly statements. As many senior Police are commenting, Cameron has been inconsistent on Policing policy and therefore he should not be trying to be masterful. Instead he should be working with the Police so they can ensure they are able to meet any demands they face.

    My opinion for what it is worth is that society generally gets the politicians they deserve. Perhaps if more people were active in politics, looked beyond the main three parties and most importantly voted, then they might actually have a parliament that worked for them. Instead they have allowed two main parties to govern mainly in favour of various interest groups.

  28. Henry

    However unfortunately [redistribution] has been from the middle and lower income to both families on benefits, which have risen substantially in recent years, and the very rich

    I think on the whole it’s gone to the rich. What ‘downward’ redistribution there was under Labour was mainly to families (including those in work on low incomes) but it didn’t really even offset the gains the rich made through tax cuts. Remember as well even a lot of the money to those on benefits (in work or not) doesn’t stay there – it goes back ‘upwards’ in the form of rents, which have also risen massively.

    I suspect the phrase ‘underclass’ is now becoming to mean ‘poor people I don’t want to be helped’ but perhaps we’re better looking at what Amber christened the ‘precariat’. These aren’t the better-off in the ‘squeezed middle’, who’ve only begun to be hit hard the last few years. These are the people from the traditional working-class affected by privatisation, out-sourcing, agency working, EU guest workers, a ‘relaxed’ approach to regulation and all the other ‘flexible’ working practices that governments have been so pleased about over the last few decades.

    One reason why so many young people at the bottom have so little hope of improvement is because things have already seen things get worse for their parents.

    John Fletcher

    Top salaries are now decided on a global level not a national level. Tax more and the jobs just move abroad.

    Is this true? How many more people would/could move abroad? And if they tried to, could tighter and more rigorously enforced rules make it less easy? This mantra gets recited again and again, but since it mainly comes from papers owned by those who are already tax exiles, these may not be disinterested sources.

    It’s like the myth that the UK is ‘too heavily taxed’ or more ‘heavily taxed than ever’. It simply isn’t true and anyone over 20 or with a search engine should know it. And yet it appears again and again.

  29. @ roger mexico.

    How many more people would/could move abroad? And if they tried to, could tighter and more rigorously enforced rules make it less easy?

    ________________________________________

    Yes good idea. Lets build a wall to stop them getting out.

    Why don’t we call it the Berlin Wall in memory of the last time Governments tried to stop their people seeking a better future elsewhere.

  30. @CATMANJEFF
    “To be honest, these issues were started when Mrs T introduced neoliberal policies. New Labour sadly retained these policies at it’s core.
    The truth is that these policies are divisive and shift power to a small, powerful elite at the expense of others.”
    Are politicians the cause of issues or does society create its own problems for itself ?

    The politicians are simply the local faces who do what global capitalists want. Look at Greece, Ireland and Portugal. The IMF only helps in exchange for reducing the public sector (ie local accountability), privatisations and allowing foreign companies to grab national assets.

    In the credit crunch global capitalism failed. People at national level paid the price, and the only cure offered is to hand even more power to the same capitalists who screwed up.

  31. @TINGEDFRINGE

    “Essentially his argument goes like this – during the good times, the wealth has shifted from those who Labour to the top – this means there is a lack of demand for products and services, so those at the top lend to those who labour.
    That debt is then recycled as purchases, which then flows back to the top.
    Eventually the cycle cannot continue itself and breaks.”

    Yes I think there is something in this. I have long believed that free market economics is a flawed model, that cannot work in the world we are in. If the world had an endless supply of raw materials, a fair playing ground in terms of tax rates and a willingness of the wealthy to pay fair taxes, then I don’t think we would have some of the issues we have. The problem is that just like a game of Monopoly, you end up with one person holding most of the assets and the game stops being any fun. This is exactly the way the world is operating, with 90% of the worlds wealth being controlled by 1% of people.

    I am not sure what the solution is, as I can’t see all the countries working together. Each country will try to look after the interest of its citizens, as best they can. If you look at what is happening in Africa, is that there is a silent battle being fought between different countries over the mining of raw materials. The Chinese are heavily investing in this and have bullt several railways, presumably so they can get the raw materials to ships and not for the locals. You only occasionally hear comments from western countries and there have been a few documentaries. China is still growing at a huge rate compared with others, but this has slowed, as they can’t get hold of the raw material to cope with demand. Fast forward 20 years and you will find that the Chinese will have taken over from the US, as the world biggest economy. There is nothing the US can do about this, as they owe trillions of dollars in debt to China. Even if the US raised concerns with the Chinese about competition issues, there is nothing they could do about it, as the Chinese could just not buy any further debt or increase rates.

  32. @ R Huckle

    Fast forward 20 years and you will find that the Chinese will have taken over from the US, as the world biggest economy. There is nothing the US can do about this, as they owe trillions of dollars in debt to China. Even if the US raised concerns with the Chinese about competition issues, there is nothing they could do about it, as the Chinese could just not buy any further debt or increase rates.
    ———————————————-
    This is not accurate. The growth & wealth in China has been driven by US corporations manufacturing goods for the US market & European market in China.

    The US government + Wall Street can yank the foundations from the Chinese economy any time they choose to do so.

    China has no domestic market. They have no distribution networks, no shops, no banking system to speak of outside Shanghai/ Bejing.

    China has an aging, largely uneducated population which cannot feed itself without having ‘hard’ currency to spend on US & European agricultural produce.

    Already China relies almost entirely on ex-pat US, Japanese & European workers to provide the higher level skill sets. There is no sign of this changing anytime soon.

    The educated, younger Chinese people are a tiny elite who are already the ‘hostages’ of corporate America.

    China is, at best, the junior partner of America. It’s gloating about the difficulties which the US economy currently faces is political posturing (as I said at the time).

    Economically speaking, if America sneezes China will catch pneumonia.

    The American economy is a sleeping giant. It’s potential economic power is frightening; it has had too little reason to use it against other nations – yet – but, if the US ever feels seriously threatened economically, the levers of power it can command would certainly shock & awe the rest of the world.
    8-)

  33. The paradox of off-shoring production is that the workers in the home country see their jobs diminish leading to reduced spendng power which measn that the aditinal profits ‘expected’ from outsourcing may in turn suffer.

    At the same time, tax revenues in the home country suffer.

    I imagine this is rather a simplistic view which is easily demolished.

  34. @ Mike N

    I imagine this is rather a simplistic view which is easily demolished.
    ———————————————
    No, it is a simplistic view (as you say) which benefits from expansion but nobody who understands economics would seek to ‘demolish’ it.
    8-)

  35. Roger Mexico

    ‘One reason why so many young people at the bottom have so little hope of improvement is because things have already seen things get worse for their parents’.

    My concern about the ‘underclass’ is that babies and young kids coming from these households get a rotten deal. Undernourished, unloved kids are likely to struggle.

    If a child’s parents are together, at least one in a job, not addicted to drugs or suffer acohol abuse, not involved in crime, provide a loving, disciplined but definitely not abusive home, then in my opinion rich or poor the child has got a good start in life. There are other factors, such as peer pressure and poor education.

    However, I think it wrong to emphasise education. The Sunday Times today gives a breakdown of boys performing worst at school (Failing to achieve 5 or more GCSEs). Those eligible for school meals performed worse than the others. However of these if you compare ethnic background 13% of white failed to get 5 GCSEs, as opposed to 7% Black Carribean, and this compared with 3% Indian.

    To me the difference is not the education provided or income but rather the parenting, peer influence and culture. The difference between ethnic groups is so stark it is frightening.

    Even if you look at the white kids, who are better off, not eligible for free school meals 4% rather than 12% for those who are, they still perform worse than poor Indian kids, those who are eligible for free school meals.

    This is why it is so important that politicians whether EM or IDS can tackle the problem. I assume as part of his work IDS has already looked at the different approach to parenting by the different ethnic groups and identified reasons for the success of some and failure of a significant minority of the indigenous white.

  36. @ Amberstar

    “The US government + Wall Street can yank the foundations from the Chinese economy any time they choose to do so. ”

    I am not sure that is accurate either. It is very complicated.

    An oldish article (2007) which explores some of the issues.

    http://english.pravda.ru/business/finance/24-10-2007/99414-china_us_economy-0/

    I think the truth is that nobody really knows. Ask 10 economists for a view and you will probably get 10 opinions.

  37. @ HENRY

    “However, I think it wrong to emphasise education. The Sunday Times today gives a breakdown of boys performing worst at school (Failing to achieve 5 or more GCSEs). Those eligible for school meals performed worse than the others. However of these if you compare ethnic background 13% of white failed to get 5 GCSEs, as opposed to 7% Black Carribean, and this compared with 3% Indian. ”

    Right next to those stats , ST provided these as well :-

    % of boys at age 14 with a reading age of less than 7-
    White working class-63%
    Black caribbean-50%

    Nationally I think-unbelievable.

    I do think education is a key factor Henry-but in those inner city schools, the role & influence of parents; and the ability of & disciplinary constraints upon teachers must be a massive factor .

  38. @RM/JF

    “Is this true? How many more people would/could move abroad? ”

    And if they did, would we care? The idea that there is a limited pool of people capable of doing these well-paid jobs is highly questionable IMHO.

    The people who are *really* at the top of the pay scale don’t pay tax, anyway. They move their residence around so that they don’t get caught by any of the residency qualifications.

  39. John Fletcher

    Sorry, I was being overly cryptic. I was thinking, for example, of those who claim to be domiciled abroad but actually work in the UK. Or those who by various dodges, maximise earnings abroad to escape paying UK tax on them. And HMRC’s light-touch approach to regulation (shall we say to be polite) on the mega-rich and on companies is well known.

    Tempting though it may be, I’m not really advocating detention camps for billionaires.

    But I still haven’t seen much evidence that these fiscal superstars are so desired globally that we have to tie them down with chains of gold. For example, I don’t think that British executives have taken over running a lot of businesses on mainland Europe.

    What I do see is a corporate culture stuffed with people that are very good at giving each other large salaries, generous bonuses, pensions and perks, and contracts that mean these are received irrespective of results.

    By the way I assume that as you’re so much in favour of the principle for those in the private sector, you must also support it for public servants. Market forces are market forces after all.

  40. I have been reflecting on Orde and others criticism of Cameron for seeking advice from Bratton.

    The arrogance of them.

    What right do they, civil servants, journalists or indeed anyone else have to dictate to the democratically elected Prime Minister of this country, from who he may seek advice.

    They made a complete hash of the riots and only got a grip once the politicians came back and gave them a good kick up the behind.

    Now they have the audacity to suggest that only they are fit people to give him advice on how to prevent it happening again

    It would be laughable if it were not so pathetically self serving.

  41. @ Henry

    ” I assume as part of his work IDS has already looked at the different approach to parenting by the different ethnic groups and identified reasons for the success of some and failure of a significant minority of the indigenous white.”

    ConHome points out today that over a decade, IDS’ Centre for Social JUstice has produced a whole blueprint of relevant work.

    A quick trawl through their publications list shows these :-

    Making Sense of Early Intervention.
    Creating Opportunity, Rewarding Ambition.
    Family breakdown is not about Divorce.
    Dying to belong-an in depth review of Street Gangs in Britain.
    Early Intervention-Good Parents, Great Kids, Better Citizens.

    Hopefully the role DC has now given him presents the opportunity to marry his Welfare to Work reforms with the Social Justice & Family breakdown aspects.

    In his piece in ST today he criticises Boris for not reacting to a warning that he, IDS gave him:-

    “I have said it endlessly to Boris. Instead of going round denying there is a broken society , he has to recognise that in these coommunities are problem people who are going to destroy the position of London long before we get to the OLympics. I want the Mayor’s office to say that dealing with street gangs is our No.1 priority”

    Forthright stuff!

  42. Robin

    ‘And if they did, would we care? The idea that there is a limited pool of people capable of doing these well-paid jobs is highly questionable IMHO’

    Upto 1979 the Labour Party clobbered the rich, but in my view taxation rate for the average middle earner was much lower because of higher personal allowances (in real terms), a higher threshol;d for the higher rate of tax (in real terms) and a range of tax allowances now discontinued.

    Since 1979 the taxes of the very rich have gone down (if they pay them) but the middle earner has been squeezed.

    Neither Labour or Conservative have been willing to tax the very rich or redistribute their wealth. I wonder if Labour proposes any changes to this policy.

  43. “What right do they, civil servants, journalists or indeed anyone else have to dictate to the democratically elected Prime Minister of this country, from who he may seek advice.”
    Um, the right to freedom of expression?

    Article 19 of the universal declaration of human rights?
    Article 10 of the European convention of human rights?

    ;)

  44. @ Roger Mexico.

    Yes there is scope for some improvement in tacking tax evasion and avoidance but it is really tinkering around the edges.

    When you question whether I agree that market forces should apply to Civil Service jobs, the answer is YES.
    The logical extension being; Bill Bratton should be allowed to apply as Commissioner of the Met and if he is the best person at the best price, he should get the job.

  45. @John Fletcher

    I agree completely.

    THev most laughable I have heard today is that Orde’s “experience” of riot control in NI means he has nothing to learn from Bratton.

    And that after he & his colleagues let Londers be robbed & burned out of their shops & houses for over two days.

    Do you happen to know -apart from being numero uno in the trades union ACPO-has Orde got operational responsibility as a policeman anywhere?

  46. @ Tingedfringe

    Of course I support free speech.

    As you well know I was not using the term “what right” in a legal sense and I suspect you know that well :)

  47. @John Fletcher
    I did – I just found it amusing. ;)

  48. @ John Fletcher

    What right do they, civil servants, journalists or indeed anyone else have to dictate to the democratically elected Prime Minister of this country…
    —————————————
    Let me stop you right there, John.

    The Tory Party elected David Cameron leader of their Party; a constituency elected him as their MP; the country failed to elect a single party to government; a coalition was formed etc. DC is not ‘the democratically elected PM of this country’.

    And since when has a UK PM been immune from criticism?

    Read what you wrote & think it through.
    8-)

  49. Answer to my own question-Orde is President of ACPO & a director of the POlice National Assessment Centre.

    He has not had operational policing responsibilities since leaving PSNI over two years ago.

  50. Henry

    I actually think that very few children are unloved and badly-nourished kids are more likely than under-nourished ones. One thing there does seem to be about the current generation of these parents is that they want to be good at it. The attitude seems particularly noticeable in the men. For example there seems to be a very real demand for parenting classes – this is a generation that wants to treat its own children better than they were.

    Of course desire is a different thing from competence. But what worries me is that this sort of support, that such people not only need but want, is what tends to be cut first. No doubt because they are seen as ‘non-jobs’. For example over half of councils are getting rid of their TPCs who work to lower teenage pregnancy rates (with some success it seems).

    I don’t doubt the sincerity of IDS and his team and they are producing a lot of interesting ideas. But in the end you need money to implement them and at the moment he seems to trying to scrape it from other parts of the welfare budget. There may be unexpected consequences from that and there’s no guarantee that the savings won’t be purloined by the Treasury in any case. Poor economic times will also inflate the demands on the welfare budget. The sad truth is that IDS needs new, ring-fenced money for these schemes and he isn’t getting it.

1 2 3 6