Tonight’s YouGov voting intention figures for the Sun are CON 36%, LAB 42%, LDEM 10%. Despite the political upheaval of the riots, there is very little change in voting intentions – a 6 point Labour lead is at the low end of YouGov’s recent range, but the underlying Labour lead still seems to be about 7-8 points.

129 Responses to “YouGov/Sun – CON 36, LAB 42, LDEM 10”

1 2 3
  1. Frpm the You Gov site:

    48% of British people think that the Government is planning to cut too many public sector jobs
    Just 20% think that the Government is not cutting enough public sector jobs, while the same amount thinks that the balance is currently about right
    48% of people agree that it is right for the Government to ask public sector workers to contribute more of their salary towards their pensions, although just over a third (35%) think the Government is wrong to do so
    The poll also revealed that 49% of people oppose public sector workers taking strike action over the proposed changes to their pensions, while 36% support action

  2. First!

    Regards, Martyn

  3. (facepalm)

    Regards, Martyn

  4. I read somewhere today that there was quite a bit of looting and fearl kids rioting during the Blitz.

    Britain has been broken for quite some time after all, including during our “finest hour”.

  5. Nick P.

    I remember as a young lad in the 70s hearing about the “public order” plans for after the bomb had dropped. Army and Police were to be given orders to shoot looters on sight.

    Always struck me as rather unfortunate that, after surviving the end of the world, you’d be shot by a special constable once you got out from under your sandbag-covered door shelter, picked up a bag of Supernoodles and forgot to leave the money behind.

  6. Record low for the ‘approve coalition deal between Con & Lib’ question: -25 (-5).

  7. I think after a A bomb dropped there would be real questions about ownership and inheritance law. It shows how far people will go to preserve their advantage.

  8. @Nick Poole
    In 1990 my partner interviewed women about their role in the war. She went to a home near where we lived in Rotherhithe to talk to some women there. Surrey Docks was the first place to be bombed in the Blitz .
    They talked about the fear of getting home to get the kids and then coming out to find that every single flat had been looted during the raid. And also that middle class Londoners wouldn’t let them in “their” shelters!
    I hadn’t heard that before but I have since seen reports in other places

  9. leftylampton

    Assuming the police were still in place! My father in law was a police inspector in Glasgow, and had every intention of grabbing the family, some weapons and heading for the croft, in case of nuclear attack.

  10. @Nick Poole

    “Britain has been broken for quite some time after all, including during our “finest hour”.

    And “broken” all through the 1980s too if I remember rightly! Talking more seriously, the point you’re making is a good one and it ill behoves politicians to use deep-seated social problems to beat each other over the head with in order to score some narrow party political advantage. Cameron cherry-picked isolated examples of appalling behaviour during the latter part of the last Labour Government in order to try and paint the picture of a nation in moral decay, but the true picture was much more nuanced and balanced than that, with contrary evidence on falling crime and reduced social disorder which he chose to ignore. Equally, I thought those on the Left who tried to use the Bulger murder and Dunblane atrocity as evidence of the moral turpitude and social decay brought about by a decade of Thatcherism were well wide of the mark. Nearly always these are acts of isolated human wickedness that are never likely to be eradicated from the human condition. Sometimes, they manifest themselves in group disorder and anarchy, especially if civil authority temporarily breaks down as it did last week, but we must all avoid moral panic as we attempt to tackle our many social ills.

  11. @Nick Poole – you’re absolutely right about looting in ages gone by. So much pious nonsense about these riots.

    They were (they always are) really awful events, and should always be condemned, but they weren’t a patch on the riots I lived through in London in 1981 and there have been plenty others in our illustrious history.

    I’m also pretty disgusted at the demonisation of young people in the fuss over the riots. As far as I can make out, the number of young people arrested is proportionately less than the numbers of young people in the population at large, so on this measure we should be congratulating children as a whole for being less likely to be involved in this criminality than adults.

  12. @Crossbat11 – very fair comment. I pointed out a couple of days ago that we have lived through 15 years of consistent falls in crime and violence, and UK citizens are now safer than for years. This fall started under the Major government and continued and accelerated under Labour, so really can’t be claimed as party political.

  13. ‘Major oil strike discovered in the North Sea’

  14. Stuart

    Of course, the Norwegian Government will have a significant stake in that through Statoil.

    Any Government that had such a stake in their oil sector, then gave it away would have to be considered extremely foolish.

    Now where could we find an example of that? …….

  15. Crossbat&Alec, Interested in your comments on the riots.
    Talking to my hairdresser today(hairdressers are a great
    source of info) she was in London during the unrest and
    said that she would not have known anything was going
    on if they had not seen it on the news.I found that amazing
    but some isolated voices have been saying that the media
    played this out of all proportion,so you do begin to wonder.

  16. @Alec

    “…..we have lived through 15 years of consistent falls in crime and violence, and UK citizens are now safer than for years”

    How right you are and it’s easy to forget not only the horrendous riots in our major cities in the 80s but the constant brawling and hooliganism that went on in our town centres and at our football grounds virtually every weekend. I watched football regularly through that time and witnessed acts of unspeakable casual violence at nearly every match that I attended and they became so routine that they went more or less unreported. Car crime and house burglary were rife too and while we now live in a society still far removed from Utopia, the improvements made in the last 16 years or so should be recognised.

    I took my young children to watch football over the last decade or so. I would never have done that in the 1980s.

  17. Nick Poole & All:

    In a similar vein (the vein where history is viewed with rose-tinted nostalgia) British history has various periods where children grew up without fathers.

    In the 18th and 19th centuries post industrialisation (for example see the following link @ 37mins 40secs – BTW: This programme is an absolute revelation!! if you have an hour to spare…thank you BBC4!! – : ) and during & after the 2nd World War (and many other wars).

    Yet (correct me if Im wrong) we do not record or recall these periods as times of complete social decay as many (particularly the right, with the likes of Peter Hitchen through to David Cameron) reflect on things now because of the small section of society not having fathers.

    Though this history (or should I say fact) begs a lot of questions, it invalidates (IMHO) the equation that no father = a problem child. How incredibly reactionary and over simplified!

    If you want to watch the BBC programme Ive put in the link then you have just until 11.29pm tomorrow to watch, unless you download it of course. But if you want to put a perspective on society’s ills then this programme is an absolute eye-opener – I cannot recommend it high enough!

  18. Ronnie

    “British history has various periods where children grew up without fathers.”

    Or indeed without mothers too. A Glasgow Police Inspector in 1819 described how if he went into tenements at night he found “hundreds of children with no names, or only nicknames like dogs”. On a previous thread I quoted an early 19th century Scottish article that described the moral decay of the masses like “building a splendid edifice on a slumbering volcano”. The rhetoric hasn’t changed – while you are right that we don’t “recall these periods as times of complete social decay” (largely because they weren’t), we do record the monotonous views of those who describe their contemporaneous society in such terms, generation unto generation unto generation. (Christians were letting people off lightly by restricting the sins of the fathers only unto the fourth generation!)

  19. @Alec/Ronnie/OldNat/Nick P

    It would appear that us old non-conformists, if that label can be used to describe our disparate political views, are united on one thing. There never was such a thing as the “Good Old Days”!

    I thought I’d get that in before the Right get posting again and rain on our late night parade!

    Goodnight compadres!

  20. OldNat

    I’m sure it has ever been thus (the programme I linked quotes many an example of this over c150 years – including the use of the phrase “feckless fathers”).

    I was more reflecting on, when I talk about that we do not record these periods as times of social decay, how here and now we do not look BACK on these periods as times of massive social decay.

    The reason I mention fathers (as opposed to mothers) not being present is because this has become a rallying cry for the right. From IDS, DC and Shaun Bailey through to think tanks, columnist after columnist and ‘the thinkers’ that appear on Newsnight, figures of the right keep mentioning the lack of fathers as a cause for ‘indisciplined youth’ now, and to be frank, the riots.

    Yet if they look into history they would see that there have been plenty of periods where children grew up without fathers including probably the period many of the right look back on most nostalgically for its morality; i.e. the Victorian period (or maybe that is just the Thatcherites…or just Thatcher?).

    It is a political point I make, rather than a social history point, because I think the right are repeating the mistakes of history by taking the path of moral judgement/indignation and traditional family structures as explanation, while also ignoring the impact of an alienated class and the gap between rich and poor on an unsettled society.

  21. And yet you’re convinced that a Public Enquiry into the “causes” of the riots will hurt the government by linking them to economic issues?

  22. Ronnie

    “It is a political point I make, rather than a social history point.”

    They are actually the same. Nothing really changes. My quotes on that previous thread were from both right and left wing early 19th century articles. Modernise the language a bit, and they could have been quotes from Cameron and Miliband.

  23. I am not sure it is the “growing up without fathers” part that is the principle concern. It is the “growing up without witnessing paid employment” that is more pernicious. Children of single working women have far better outcomes than those of single mothers on benefit. Children need someone to pattern their constructive, socially acceptable behaviour on.

  24. To be fair to Milliband (and I base this on his speech yeaterday and the interview I saw on Monday’s 7pm Channel4 news) he is trying to put the gap between rich and poor and the lack of hope amonst many into the mix; and it is a mix because criminality, greed and opportunism is also part of the mix.

    This though I think is the difference between the left and right in the reaction to the riots. The right is falling back on family and crime, while the left is saying yes it is that but its more and the right are making a mistake to ignore it.

    I think it also puts a lot of Lib Dems in a difficult position, since I suspect many want to follow the line of Milliband but the government thay are part of doesn’t seem to want to.

  25. But the thing is Ronnie, what’s the practical solution?

    If we were to confiscate one of Richard Branson’s mansions and distribute the proceeds between the hoodies of North London, would that result in them behaving in a more socially acceptable way? I really don’t think so.

    What we’re hearing from all sides is rhetoric designed to sell political postures. Is there something the government could actually do, and if so what is it?

  26. Ronnie

    I don’t disagree, but Miliband’s point is nothing new.

    This was written in 1836

    “the lower orders of society are, we admit, more frequent transgressors against the laws than the higher; but this is owing to their distressed positions not ignorance; for the same vices which break out into crimes among them, are still more rife under different modifications in the upper circles where all the advantages of school knowledge abound. Difference of social position occasions all the difference of results in the two cases.”

    Like policies on dealing with crime (I have lots of quotes on the alternation of right and left wing policies on that as well! :-) ) the rhetoric between the two views of society are monotonously similar across the years.

  27. Neil A

    “Children of single working women have far better outcomes than those of single mothers on benefit”

    Is it possible to provide the evidence of this?

    But to add the obvious based on this being the case, children of single mothers on benefit are by proportion going to be poorer than children of single working women. I suspect this difference is a major contributor to outcomes.

    I think you might be missing the thrust of this government on the father’s issue if you think they are not focusing on this.

    Quote from DC’s speech yesterday “Do we have the detrmination to confront the slow motion moral collapse……..” and within a sentence “……..Children without fathers”. He is clearly reflecting an opinion that the moral collapse in a family setting is the lack of a father figure which has consequences to society at large.

    And this is from the BBC News website on the speech:

    ‘No father’

    Mr Cameron said it was necessary to start with the issues of family and parenting “if we want to have any hope of mending our broken society”.

    He said he did not doubt that many of the rioters had no father at home.

    Also if you listen to great ‘social hope’ of the right; i.e. IDS his focus is entirely on the lack of a father figure as a cause for children becoming disfunctional and not participating in society [I can find even more quotes for IDS than DC if you want :)].

  28. Neil A
    “what’s the practical solution?”

    It is a very good question. And if I had the answers, I wouldnt be posting here I would be shouting from the tree tops and on every news programme that would take me and maybe even join a political party! :)

    I think we need to look at the Nordic countries as they seem to have more inclusive societies where they do not have the type of disfunction in their society that we do (I am talking trends here rather than ‘nutty’ Norwgeian gunmen) – where they have had a lot of success at keeping the gap between rich and poor relatively low while at the same time not stiffling economic development.

    I think within focusing on reducing the gap between rich and poor lies the answer. But I don’t have the intellect to know how to achieve it. My ideas are based around rules and regulation, but my instinct tells me such an approach would fail. But if the Nordics can do it, why can’t we?

  29. Ronnie
    It is worth looking at the research evidence, and not just the political rhetoric.

    “There was an association between both mother-child and father-child communication and young people’s life satisfaction. Relationship with mother was particularly important, especially
    among girls. Among boys, not living in a traditional two-parent family was a predictor of low life satisfaction, even when communication with one or more parents was easy. This effect was
    independent of economic disadvantage. The quality of the relationship with stepparents moderated these associations very slightly and in single father families only.”

    There are gender differences which are statistically significant.

  30. OldNat

    I agree it is an old view and somthing reflected on by French revolutionarists even before your quote (and I imagine even further back elsewhere).

    I’m not sure if you are criticising such a view because it has been said before.

    Even if it is old (and regardless of it being traditionally left), does it make it any less valid now?

    Maybe never having implimented radical enough change to try and confront what your quote states is the reason why the same analysis is still pushed out till today, albeit in different language.

  31. OldNat

    Interesting quote from Uni of Edinburgh research.

    It would be interesting to know if this was also the case in previous periods of ‘absent fatherhood’ (I wish I had a better phrase!).

    I imagine such research was impossible/anathema to the 18th/19th century, but we can reflect on the children that grew up, and were born, during and after WW2, though I doubt there is any research.

    Out of interest what is being defined as “low life satisfaction” and how does it manifest itself?

    And what is the correlation between “low life saitisfaction” and ‘anti-social’ behaviour/crime?

    I have read research (well summaries/abstracts of research) that conclude the children of single parent families that have disproportionately worst outcomes (economic, academic, crime, etc…) are those children born and partly raised in a 2 parent family where 1 of the parents then leaves (be it anything from divorce to death).

    The departure of a constant in the child’s life is treated like a death (obviously in some cases it is a death) and the child does not have the emotional development to cope with the situtaion. This has a consequential manifestation in disruptive behaviour, in one or many environments – be it school or home or both. This snowballs through to the outcomes that the children of single parent families get stereo-typed for.

    Whereas children who have been born into a single parent family and have not suffered such an emotional loss at a young age do not, proportionately have the same level of negative outcomes.

    I will go digging for this reasearch and hope I can find it on t’interweb.

    However, anecdotely I’m sure many of us know adults who never fully get over a loss of a loved one. So is it such a stretch to think a child would not have problems coping with the loss of a loved one (and losing a parent through divorce is a loss of a constant loved one to a child)?

    Maybe divorce is a bigger problem rather than single parent families – after all most single parent families are the result of divorce. And we can’t ignore that divorce often has poverty as an outcome.

    However none of this changes my view that a lack of fathers cannot be used as an explanation for the ills of society. If it was why did we not have a moral collapse of society in the late 40s and early 50s? In fact this period is often held up as a golden age of a functioning society.

  32. Was it not Emannuel Shinwell who said that when he was a councillor in the Gorbals in the 1920’s he met plenty of single parents, and they were all men.

    Even my generation of fathers would ask:

    1 Is my wife all right?
    2 Is the baby all right?
    3 Is it a boy or a girl?

    In that order.

    Now if the whole family didn’t enjoy the experience the are disappointed and have cause for complaint.

    Maternal deaths in Scotland are now so few that randomness could double the number from one year to another, so for the innumerate majority, the rate isn’t widely reported. For decades it has been practically possible to investigate every case. Perinatal deaths are approaching the irreducable too.

    Kelvingrove used to have a marble statue on display (following a flat art genre and title) The Mitherless Bairn, of a distressed father with child.

  33. From the previous thread:

    redrich @ OLDNAT

    “I think most people who actually vote, vote for a party rather than against another, and tend to self identify with one of the parties. While the tendency to ‘loyalty’ has been on the decline since the 1960?s – for a number of reasons – I think those who tactically vote against a party they dislike are in the minority.”

    Not in Scotland where the lack of interest of the UK government parties has meant the LibDems had it all their own way in the West, and the SNP in the East (now replacing the LibDems in the West too).

    It’s a movement I first noticed in the 1950’s and since it hasn’t stopped since, I can only say it hasn’t much further to go. Split voting for the SP encourages it as does the perceived irrelevance of the SNP for Westminster.

  34. Ronnie

    I’m not actually disagreeing – simply pointing out that the same political rhetoric has gone on for generations, and that neither “side” has actually solved the problems that they perceived to be so important. :-) Many things have clearly improved – especially materially, but the same divisions in society persist, with the same rhetoric.

    I’m an optimist, so I continue to hope that the values of the “left” triumph – but I amn’t that optimistic. :-)

  35. From the previous thread

    oldnat @ Kyle Downing

    “the Labour government devised an electorial system for the Scottish Parliament that was “To prevent any party form winning an overall majority”.

    Excuse me while I scream! That is totally wrong. The intention was to prevent any party gaining a majority in Holyrood unless it had near majority support among the electorate.”

    OldNat is not right quite right either.

    The objective was to ensure that (as in the last parliament) any majority of MSP’s who voted a bill into law had themselves been voted for by a majority of the voters.

    That’s what the Father of the Nation told me personally 44 years before the Scottish Parliament came into existence.

    It didn’t work perfectly fourth time, but it wasn’t far short. The aim would probably be met if the Greens and the Margo voted with the SNP, or if there were significant abstentions.

    When you consider that the electoral system has to allocate constituents into meaningful constituencies and regions with the same number of MSP’s in each region, regional factors are going to affect the result.

    The point I made above about rural issues is enough to account for missing the target narrowly.

    Look at the results in the North, and notice who the MSP for Moray is.

    Does the SNP appreciate to whose hard work over the last four years they owe their overall majority to? I doubt it.

    Credit to OldNat for recognising the theoretical possibility that it could happen. I’ve yet to meet anyone who thought it might. There are at least two MSP’s who got elected and cant have had any realistic hope of winning. One of them didn’t even wait for the count, and he got fined the next week for missing a court appearance because he had an unexpected diary conflict.

    Another candidate, now a former list MSP, wasn’t elected because the SNP won too many constituencies in her region. The big breakthrough surge passed her by in the fishing and LibDem areas.

  36. redrich @ Iceman

    I think you are right about the increase support for the SNP – they seem to have performed well in govt and are setting the agenda north of the boarder.

    redrich @ Nick Poole

    “ It normally takes a good few years for a perception of incompetence to be attached to a govt – but this government seems to be fast tracking it.”

    You’ve got it!

    So the SNP can get a result unpredicted because it would not have been believed by anyone whose interpretation of the polls pointed them in that direction.

    Not for vision, did they get it, not for spectacular success, not even for competence, but for RELATIVE competence

    How depressing.


    You are correct about the Blitz violence.

    My History teacher, and later Headmaster, used to tell us in the V! Form.

    ‘All generations are equi distant from eternity’.

    I am not sure if Paul was right though about that at the micro level, when centres of learning become, in your words, war zones.

    De Chardin argues that human culture is evolving two steps forward and one step back to the Omega Point of human perection. I am not sure about that either.

    Going further back, the State sponsored looting in the 16th century- wrecking of Beckets’s grave, Mary of Scots grave, Walsingham and the monasteries shows that England has been very violent before.

  38. Jailed for inciting riots that nobody turned up for (Guardian):

    Jordan Blackshaw, 20, set up an “event” called Smash Down in Northwich Town for the night of 8 August on the social networking site but no one apart from the police, who were monitoring the page, turned up at the pre-arranged meeting point outside a McDonalds restaurant. Blackshaw was promptly arrested.

    Perry Sutcliffe-Keenan, 22, of Latchford, Warrington, used his Facebook account in the early hours of 9 August to design a web page entitled The Warrington Riots. The court was told it caused a wave of panic in the town. When he woke up the following morning with a hangover, he removed the page and apologised, saying it had been a joke. His message was distributed to 400 Facebook contacts, but no rioting broke out as a result.

    Sentencing Blackshaw to four years in a young offenders institution, Judge Elgan Edwards QC said he had committed an “evil act”. He said: “This happened at a time when collective insanity gripped the nation. Your conduct was quite disgraceful and the title of the message you posted on Facebook chills the blood.

    “You sought to take advantage of crime elsewhere and transpose it to the peaceful streets of Northwich. The idea revolted many right thinking members of society. No one actually turned up due to the prompt and efficient actions of police in using modern policing.”

    Sutcliffe-Keenan, the judge said, “caused a very real panic” and “put a very considerable strain on police resources in Warrington”. He praised Cheshire police for their “modern and clever policy” of infiltrating the website.

    The Crown Prosecution Service said in a statement that the men’s posts on Facebook “caused significant panic and revulsion in local communities as rumours of anticipated violence spread”.

    It added: “We were able to serve upon the defence in both cases sufficient case material that led to early guilty pleas and we were able to present the facts in both cases in a fair but robust manner.

    “While the judge heard the two defendants were previously of good character, they admitted committing very serious offences that carry a maximum sentence of 10 years. The consequence of their actions could have led to more disorder and this was taken into account.”

    The heavy sentences came as defence lawyers and civil rights groups have criticised the “disproportionate” sentences imposed on some convicted rioters as the latest official figures show nearly 1,300 suspects have been brought before the courts.

  39. This is the bit that concerns me:

    The court was told it caused a wave of panic in the town.

    By whom? What evidence was presented?

    Can people get a fair trial in the current climate with reporting screeching like panic-stricken cats?

  40. Very interesting article about a successful academy in Hackney.

    In the Daily Telegraph on line

  41. OldNat,
    Surely the left/right divide that has existed for centuries points to something psychological, rather than there being any real change in political ideologies? (Solutions, perhaps, but not the underlying ideas)

    I would say Yes – but I am biased as having accepted the Social Dominance Orientation theory – the left, at it’s extreme, wishes for a classless society and the right, at it’s extreme, wish for a hierarchical society.

    The classes, and hierarchies, change over time, but the underlying psychology persists – for the right, there are privileged classes who by some magical virtue (wealth, race, gender, etc) are ‘better’ than those below and various myths appear to justify that hierarchy.

    So we used to have an aristocratic system – the royals were the top class and, by divine right, were the best, then there was the aristocracy and then the commoners.
    That class system was overthrown when commoners (in the form of merchants) gained actual power (as opposed to psychological power) and overthrew the dominant class structure – replacing it with their own mercantile/capitalist structure.

    In the Soviet union, the Stalinists were right-wing (not capitalist right-wing) because they maintained a classist structure (Leader > Loyalists > Comrades), thus also betraying the (perhaps flawed – just for some balance) Marxist ideal of a classless society.

  42. There has been a response from No 10 on Coulson –
    “It would be inappropriate for us to comment. There is an ongoing police investigation and we have set up a judicial inquiry to establish the facts. The Prime Minister has made his thoughts on Andy Coulson clear.”

    Interesting that it’s inappropriate to comment on police investigations, when it’s potentially something embarrassing, but the PM has no problem commenting on the riots?

    (This is true of all governments – there cannot be comments on ongoing investigations – unless there’s no possible political damage. True of Labour, etc too).

  43. And as a note to my above post about class structures –
    Centrists would be those who wish to maintain class structures that have a strong middle-class structure – so there are those who dominate those below but aren’t dominated by those above.

  44. @ Neil A

    “What we’re hearing from all sides is rhetoric designed to sell political postures. Is there something the government could actually do, and if so what is it?”

    “‘Man must have something joyful ahead of him to live for. The true stimulus in human life is tomorrow’s joy. To educate people is to furnish them with the stimulus leading to tomorrow’s joy.’ (A. Makarenko)

  45. @ RONNIE

    “after all most single parent families are the result of divorce”

    “Figure 31: Percentage Lone mothers by marital status as a proportion of all family types with dependent children:-

    Single 9%
    Divorced 6%
    Separated 4%
    Widowed 1%

    “However, since the mid 1980s divorce rates have stabilised. In the 1990s, the divorce rate has remained constant at around 13 per 1,000 married couples per year, although the most recent figure shows a drop to 11.8 per 1000, as shown in Figure 3 which presents divorce trends in England and Wales between 1990 and December 2001. The stabilisation of divorce rates can partly be attributed to the decline in marriage and prevalence of cohabitation”

    “The proportion of births outside marriage as a proportion of all births has been increasing steadily throughout the 1990s (Figure 14) – from 30.2 per cent of all live births in 1991 to 40 per cent in 2001.”

    “Younger women are more likely to give birth outside marriage. In 2001, 90 per cent of all births to mothers aged under 20 were outside marriage – by far the highest proportion of any age group throughout the 1990s (Figure 16). Also noticeable is the high proportion of births outside marriage to 20-24 year olds, whilst a relatively low proportion of births in other age groups are outside marriage, with mothers aged 30-34 the least likely to give birth outside marriage.”

    From:-Demographic Trends in the UK.
    First report for the project
    Social Policy Research Unit
    University of York

  46. @ Ronnie

    “The departure of a constant in the child’s life is treated like a death (obviously in some cases it is a death) and the child does not have the emotional development to cope with the situtaion. ”

    Many well designed clinical psychology publications contradicts this (Heetherington, Cox and Cox 1985, Hetherington and Kelly, 2002, Amato and Booth, 1997, Rutter, 1972).

    The basis of the claim you mentioned is generally attributed to Judith Wallerstein’s (1989) study, which, although was longitudinal, was also flawed in design.

  47. @RONNIE

    ” If it was why did we not have a moral collapse of society in the late 40s and early 50s? In fact this period is often held up as a golden age of a functioning society.”

    Interesting question .

    Wouldn’t the research necessary need to compare factors in the afflicted areas specifically effected in the riots ( particularly London) with the same factors back then.

    Things which come to mind might be :-

    Population density.
    Ethnic mix
    Housing conditions
    Employment levels
    Poverty levels
    Family demographics
    Crime patterns-Drugs, Theft, Violence etc
    Incidence of gang membership.

    No doubt there is much more.

  48. Interesting data emerging from the Courts:

    60% of those appearing in court for riot-related offences have previous convictions.

    25% of those arrested in London had gang affiliations

    Times Leader.

    Two Mothers :-

    Wolverhampton-Mother of a 16 yr old boy who took part in looting took him to the police.
    Magistrate praised her for her “courage”

    Ealing-Mother of a 16 yr old boy charged with perverting the course of justice after allegedly destroying & throwing away her sons clothing.
    Her son is charged with the killing of 68 yr old retired accountant who was trying to put out a fire in a bin. Accused felled him with a single blow.

  49. Colin, interesting figures, but I would appreciate a clarification. How are non-married couples with kids categorised if the relationship breaks down or the father dies? If a non-married father leaves the family home, does the lone mother get categorised as Seperated or move to Single? Similarly if the non-married father dies does the long mother get categorised as widowed even though they were not married? Would change the import of those figures if some of the 9% single mothers were previously in a committed relationship (even if not actually married).

1 2 3