There was a lot of fuss in the media last week about school closures due to the teachers' strike. Apparently, up to a third of schools were closed or partially closed last Thursday.
The school I worked at wasn't. Nor was my children's school. Nor was the school just down the road. I know of a few schools in the area that were closed, including Prestwich Arts College, and the school I'm just about to start work at - but they were on holiday already for Passover that week. Hardly a meltdown.
I do support the principle the teachers were striking for. In part. Though what's so great about the Housing Ladder that everyone's so darn keen to get on it anyway? An article in the newspaper today was all about the thousands of people who are likely to end up losing their homes due to the credit crunch. I'm bloody glad we stuck with renting. Like lots of other council tenants, we investigated the possibility of buying, but decided against it due to the unpredictability of our household income and the likelihood of a crash in house prices and the bursting of the credit bubble. Heck, if I could see this coming five or more years ago, why has it come as such a shock to the banks?
What I disagreed with when it comes to the teachers' complaints was that they're having trouble paying their bills and find it hard to make ends meet. Perhaps those who are so badly affected should consider downsizing? I'd consider myself exceptionally well off If I earned £20K - roughly what the lowest paid teacher earns at the moment. If they think they're hard done by, they should try and manage on a Teaching Assistant's income. Allowing for the fact that my current post is part-time, my earnings are roughly a quarter of what the lowest paid teacher earns in a year. At that rate of pay, if I worked full time, I'd still earn no more than half of what a teacher is paid.
I'm not saying the pay should be the same - teachers have to be extremely well-qualified. I didn't have to go to University to do my job. I did go to University, but to train for a profession I ended up leaving (again because of poor pay and conditions). However, Teaching Assistants (especially Levels 2 and upwards) have to be well-qualified and experienced - it requires at least a year at college to train. I did the Level 3 qualification (equivalent to 3 A-Levels), spending 2 years at college as a mature student to qualify. Teaching Assistants are skilled and qualified child care workers. We know rather more about Child Development, observing and assessing than the average teacher, for instance. Our role exists in partnership with the teacher. Our different skills and expertise should complement one another.
I think everyone who works in child care and education would agree that pay and conditions in this field are appalling. The work we do is undervalued to a deplorable extent. The fact that employers (both private and public sector) know that we do this work because it's worthwhile, fulfilling and rewarding on so many other levels seems to mean they think it doesn't have to be rewarding on a financial level, as those who are "called" to this line of work will do it anyway. This is why it is a Vocation.
The problem of inadequate pay has become endemic in society. The people who form the backbone of society - its nurses, teachers, nursery nurses, shop assistants, cleaners, factory workers, waste disposal people etc (the people who actually DO useful stuff) are paid peanuts. No-one gets a living wage. Everyone's pay has to be toppped up with benefits, tax-credits, handouts. I wonder why. Who benefits? Am I totally cynical? If it weren't in someone's vested interest, successive governments would have done somethig about this instead of jiggling around the benefits systems and changing the rules every two years on who can get what to make it look like they're "challenging poverty" and "taking affirmative action" or whatever the vote-winning buzzwords are.
Who benefits by keeping society in debt? Who benefits by keeping the real workers of this nation in poverty? Who's rich enough to pull the strings of politicians? Who makes sure that real change never happens?
The big companies, the big banks and financial institutions and the few people who run them. Profits maight take a dip, but no-one's actually going to make a loss here are they? I have lost whatever faith I had in the ability of policians to do anything about poverty, whether that be on a local or a global scale. It's not in their interests. Who owns your MP, I wonder.
Monday, 28 April 2008
Sunday, 20 April 2008
No More Sword Dance?
This is the email I wrote to Jonathan Batt regarding how the Sword Ban in the UK is affecting bellydancers (and other folk dancers)
Dear Mr Batt
I'm writing to express my concern about the sword ban in the UK. I understand from one of my fellow bellydancers that although martial arts groups and historical re-enactors are exempted from the ban, folk-dance (including bellydancers) are not.
There is a small group of us at my local bellydance class who are interested in learning this traditional dance form. I know there are many others throughout the country in a similar position, as well as those who currently practice this form of dance. If we cannot purchase practice swords, we cannot learn this form of dance. How can current practitioners continue to perform if their sword needs replacing? How does the ban affect traditional Scottish sabre dancers, for instance?
Please can traditional folk dance forms using swords/sabres etc be exempted from the ban along with martial artists and re-enactors. It would be a tragedy if traditional cultural dance forms were to be lost due to this ban.
Yours sincerely
Sara Smith
This is his reply:
Dear Ms Smith
Thank you for your recent email regarding the ban on swords with a curved blade of over 50 centimetres and the effect of this on belly dancing.
The Government has now banned the sale, hire, manufacture and import ofsamurai swords, through a ban on all swords with a curved blade of 50cm or over in length, due to their use in violent crime. The ban came into force on 6 April 2008 having received Parliamentary approval following debates in the Commons and the Lords which unanimously supported the ban. It isimportant to note that legislation already exists that bans the possessionof these weapons in a public place, and that it will be permissible for those who already own swords which fit the definition to retain ownership.
As you may be aware the ban follows on from a Government consultation paper published on 5 March 2007 which detailed proposals to ban samurai swords andgave a 12-week window for people to let us have their views. The closing date for the consultation was 28 May 2007. In terms of the ban going too wide in picking up all curved swords, the Government thinks this is proportionate in order to ensure that we have a definition that is enforceable and which has a real impact in terms of reducing the availability of items that have and can be used in violent crime.
The proposed ban is about protecting people and communities and it is important to have a definition that minimises the need for subjective interpretation. In banning such swords, the Government has sought to safeguard legitimate use by including defences in the Offensive Weapons Order for collectors of genuine Japanese swords, for those who partake in historical re-enactmentsand for swords used by martial arts enthusiasts. Regarding adding extra defencesfor groups such as belly dancers who consider their legitimate use of curved swords has been unfairly targeted by the definition, there is a risk that by creating too many defences it makes any ban unenforceable by police, customs and the courts. However, we will, of course, listen to and consider representations from such groups. Please find the link below to the summary of responses paper and subsequent Order laid before Parliament.
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/documents/cons-2007-ban-offensive-weapons/
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2008/pdf/uksi_20080973_en.pdf
We do not propose, at present, to add any other articles to the Offensive Weapons Order, although policy on offensive weapons is constantly kept under review.
Regards
Jonathan Batt
Public Order and Offensives Weapons section
Public Order Unit
020 7035 1807
My goodness! I don't need a lupine sense of smell - you can get a whiff of that bullshit from two miles off at least! Surely a straight blade is just as deadly a weapon as a curved one. What about a curved blade of 47 cm? Can the public even be trusted with knives at all? Why not ban metal cutlery and have us use wooden spoons. Oh, no, but that would make blunt instruments available to the general public for any amount of nefarious purposes. Wtf?
What kind of impact is this ban actually going to have on the amount of violent crime involving edged weapons anyway? Probably very little. Criminals will just have to obtain them illegally, just like they do with firearms. It might make them a little harder and more expensive to get hold of, but the criminals will still find ways of obtaining weapons. All it does is restrict the freedoms of ordinary law-abiding people still further.
Dear Mr Batt
I'm writing to express my concern about the sword ban in the UK. I understand from one of my fellow bellydancers that although martial arts groups and historical re-enactors are exempted from the ban, folk-dance (including bellydancers) are not.
There is a small group of us at my local bellydance class who are interested in learning this traditional dance form. I know there are many others throughout the country in a similar position, as well as those who currently practice this form of dance. If we cannot purchase practice swords, we cannot learn this form of dance. How can current practitioners continue to perform if their sword needs replacing? How does the ban affect traditional Scottish sabre dancers, for instance?
Please can traditional folk dance forms using swords/sabres etc be exempted from the ban along with martial artists and re-enactors. It would be a tragedy if traditional cultural dance forms were to be lost due to this ban.
Yours sincerely
Sara Smith
This is his reply:
Dear Ms Smith
Thank you for your recent email regarding the ban on swords with a curved blade of over 50 centimetres and the effect of this on belly dancing.
The Government has now banned the sale, hire, manufacture and import ofsamurai swords, through a ban on all swords with a curved blade of 50cm or over in length, due to their use in violent crime. The ban came into force on 6 April 2008 having received Parliamentary approval following debates in the Commons and the Lords which unanimously supported the ban. It isimportant to note that legislation already exists that bans the possessionof these weapons in a public place, and that it will be permissible for those who already own swords which fit the definition to retain ownership.
As you may be aware the ban follows on from a Government consultation paper published on 5 March 2007 which detailed proposals to ban samurai swords andgave a 12-week window for people to let us have their views. The closing date for the consultation was 28 May 2007. In terms of the ban going too wide in picking up all curved swords, the Government thinks this is proportionate in order to ensure that we have a definition that is enforceable and which has a real impact in terms of reducing the availability of items that have and can be used in violent crime.
The proposed ban is about protecting people and communities and it is important to have a definition that minimises the need for subjective interpretation. In banning such swords, the Government has sought to safeguard legitimate use by including defences in the Offensive Weapons Order for collectors of genuine Japanese swords, for those who partake in historical re-enactmentsand for swords used by martial arts enthusiasts. Regarding adding extra defencesfor groups such as belly dancers who consider their legitimate use of curved swords has been unfairly targeted by the definition, there is a risk that by creating too many defences it makes any ban unenforceable by police, customs and the courts. However, we will, of course, listen to and consider representations from such groups. Please find the link below to the summary of responses paper and subsequent Order laid before Parliament.
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/documents/cons-2007-ban-offensive-weapons/
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2008/pdf/uksi_20080973_en.pdf
We do not propose, at present, to add any other articles to the Offensive Weapons Order, although policy on offensive weapons is constantly kept under review.
Regards
Jonathan Batt
Public Order and Offensives Weapons section
Public Order Unit
020 7035 1807
My goodness! I don't need a lupine sense of smell - you can get a whiff of that bullshit from two miles off at least! Surely a straight blade is just as deadly a weapon as a curved one. What about a curved blade of 47 cm? Can the public even be trusted with knives at all? Why not ban metal cutlery and have us use wooden spoons. Oh, no, but that would make blunt instruments available to the general public for any amount of nefarious purposes. Wtf?
What kind of impact is this ban actually going to have on the amount of violent crime involving edged weapons anyway? Probably very little. Criminals will just have to obtain them illegally, just like they do with firearms. It might make them a little harder and more expensive to get hold of, but the criminals will still find ways of obtaining weapons. All it does is restrict the freedoms of ordinary law-abiding people still further.
Thursday, 3 April 2008
Some Good News - Coffee is Good for You!!!
Well, well, who'd have thought it. According to the BBC's news website yesterday, (here's a link http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7326839.stm) recent research indicates that a cup of coffee a day may help to protect the brain from the harmful effects of cholesterol. Warning to the caffeine addicts out there - yes, you know who you are (mentioning no names *Emrys*), you who can't motivate yourselves to get off your bottoms till you've had your 3rd cup of the day - this isn't an excuse to go nuts to stop yourself going nutty. Read it - it says ONE cup a day!
"Caffeine appears to block several of the disruptive effects of cholesterol that make the blood-brain barrier leaky," said Dr Jonathan Geiger, who led the study. "High levels of cholesterol are a risk factor for Alzheimer's disease, perhaps by compromising the protective nature of the blood brain barrier. Caffeine is a safe and readily available drug and its ability to stabilise the blood brain barrier means it could have an important part to play in therapies against neurological disorders."
A spokesman for the Alzheimer's Disease Society said that the study shed "important light" on why previous research had showed benefits for drinking coffee.
"This is the best evidence yet that caffeine equivalent to one cup of coffee a day can help protect the brain against cholesterol. In addition to its effect on the vascular system, elevated cholesterol levels also cause problems with the blood brain barrier. This barrier, which protects the brain from toxins and infections, is less efficient prior to brain damage caused by Alzheimer's disease or strokes."
She called for more research into whether the same effect could be seen in humans.
"This is the best evidence yet that caffeine equivalent to one cup of coffee a day can help protect the brain against cholesterol. In addition to its effect on the vascular system, elevated cholesterol levels also cause problems with the blood brain barrier. This barrier, which protects the brain from toxins and infections, is less efficient prior to brain damage caused by Alzheimer's disease or strokes."
She called for more research into whether the same effect could be seen in humans.
Well, if one cup a day will help me keep a hold of my marbles, (assuming I still know where they are!) all I can say to that is "Damn, what a shame" ;-)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
