Hmmm, Seems To Me There’s An Easy Answer To This One…

Canterbury Prison is failing to prepare its foreign inmates for life on the outside, according to a report.

Oh, dear. What a shame. Why might this be?

An inspection found staff could not see the benefit of addressing the behaviour of prisoners who would ultimately be deported anyway.

Well…no. Frugality, and all that, eh?

So why is the Prisoner’s Friend, Nick Hardwick, getting out of his box?

But Chief Inspector of Prisons Nick Hardwick said it was difficult to tell who would be deported until near the end of a sentence and said 20 per cent were allowed to remain in the UK.

Ah. Well, since we don’t know which 20% that might be, it seems pointless to squander a potential 80% of prison staff’s effort, doesn't it?

A better approach would be to ensure that 20% were also booted out, of course. Win/win!

Promoting ‘Peace, Harmony And Diversity’..?

Well, keep doing this:

The Karimia Institute took over a former children's care home in Radford Bridge Road and have developed it into a prayer centre.

Nottingham City Council looked at the development in June last year and decided to give it planning permission for a year's trial.

Since then, more than 20 neighbours have sent letters to the council complaining about traffic problems. They claimed that allowing the institute to continue would make the problem worse.

One resident, who didn't wish to be named, said: "It has caused a lot of traffic build-up near the Crown Island and there's a lot of on-street parking caused by the centre, too.

"Some of the drivers turn in people's drives, slam doors late at night and I feel quite let down that the council have given this permission."

And then don’t be too surprised at more instances of this:

A muslim family who had just moved into a new home are "disgusted" after a cross wrapped in ham was set alight and left on their doorstep.

Always assuming, of course, that it’s not a hoax, as so many other such incidents have proven to be in the past.

And no, that’s not to condone such an act, but merely to point out that you favour one group over another at your peril. Sooner or later, people start kicking back.

”Some day, a hard rain’s gonna come…”

…but until then, I guess 'anti-vice patrollers' might help!

A member of a group set up to rid city streets of kerb crawlers has been caught slapping a prostitute.

Well, that’s one way to do it, I suppose...

CCTV captured Jordan Tudge assaulting the woman in a takeaway in Normanton.

The footage showed the 24-year-old go into the premises in Normanton Road, approach her and strike her face once before walking out.

Yes, indeed. He sought her out. She wasn’t even soliciting at the time, she was simply shopping.

Maggie Orton, for Tudge, said her client was part of the anti-prostitute patrol set up in the summer, adding: "They wanted to try and keep the streets of Normanton clear of crime and Mr Tudge was even pictured on the front page of the Derby Telegraph as part of that group.

"They wanted to keep the streets clear of prostitutes and drugs and were met by behaviour such as people urinating in the street.

"He feels he has compromised his position as one of the leaders of that group by his actions and he expresses his desire to apologise."

Nicely worded. I’m expressing my desire to have him horsewhipped right now, but you’ll notice he remains unharmed. Sadly.

What's that? You want to see what this He Man looks like? Well, here we are (he's cleverly avoiding Farenheit211's 'Beardred Savage Of The Day' award by ...well...):

 Impressive specimen of manhood, huh, ladies?

James McNamara, prosecuting, said the woman had entered the takeaway with two other prostitutes to buy ice cream and milk shakes when Tudge walked in.

Mr McNamara said: "He approaches her and says words to the effect of 'why do you come here? You don't have permission to be here'.

"She turns to ask him a question and he replied along the lines of 'don't ask me nothing' before slapping her face and walking back out on to the street."

I didn't realise you needed ‘permission’ from some gormless-looking street thug to buy icecream. No matter what your profession…

Say… could there be an elephant in this room, perchance?

Magistrate Philip Houckham adjourned sentencing Tudge until November 13.

Why bother? What are you waiting for?

Outside the court, Tudge apologised for his actions.

He said: "It was only a little tap to the face, the kind you would give to a naughty kid, but that doesn't excuse what I did and I am sorry.

"I should have remained calm and composed but I lost my self-control. "There was an air of tension at the time as earlier I had been threatened by a group of men who I approached who I believed had come to the area looking for prostitutes.

"The prostitutes in the street were also being brazen in their behaviour looking for business but, again, that does not excuse what I did."

Yup, I can see the tusks, the grey trunk, the wrinkled skin, all we are missing is the big ears.

Ah! Here they are!

Uthman Ali, leader of the anti-prostitute patrols, said: "At the time of the incident Jordan was not on patrol.

"We have now stopped doing the patrols, which we think worked very well."

You didn't get to stone anyone, though. Never mind. I'm sure you think your time’s coming…

Oh, and as for young Master Tudge, it seems he wasn't even keeping his own area clean of the streetwalker menace - he travelled all the way from Sinfin where he lives, a good hour to walk, to ‘keep the streets safe’ in Normanton.

Don’t they have prostitutes in Sinfin? Or are they just all bigger than him there?

But then, Googling the name, it seems Tudge is quite the travellin' man. Here he is in Derby helping to rid the streets of the 'menace' of gay rights protesters. He must take a lot of annual leave from his no doubt well-paying job to be able to attend all these protests, eh?

You'd think he'd have enough family matters to keep him at home, wouldn't you?

A Dirty Job, Maybe, But Someone’s Gotta Do It!

A pregnant woman in a wheelchair was tipped up and had her feet held by G4S staff as she was forcibly removed from the country.

The employees from the firm behind the Olympics security fiasco used substantial force and the 'risk of injury to the unborn child was significant', revealed a report.

Well, what’s the alternative? Not deport anyone who is pregnant and kicks up a fuss?

You know just who would love that, don’t you? And here they all are:

Judith Dennis, of the Refugee Council, said the case was 'shocking' and called for the UK Border Agency (UKBA) to heed the report’s recommendations, which include that force should only ever be used against pregnant women and children 'in order to prevent harm'.

That, however, is just what they claim they were doing:

The pregnant woman had been given a wheelchair to assist her in the departures area, said the inspectors. When she resisted, 'substantial force' was used by G4S staff and the wheelchair 'was tipped up with staff holding her feet'.

'At one point she slipped down from the chair and the risk of injury to the unborn child was significant,' the report said.

'There is no safe way to use force against a pregnant woman, and to initiate it for the purpose of removal is to take an unacceptable risk.'

I don’t think it’s ‘unacceptable’ – she’s the one putting her baby at risk by resisting, after all. She wasn't the only one, either:

The pregnant woman’s husband had been disruptive the night before his family’s planned removal from Cedars, 'shouting and kicking doors, causing some damage', the report found.

'At one point it was judged that he had been trying to separate healthcare staff offering to examine his wife to take them hostage,' the report added.

I rather doubt the Refugee Council concerns itself with the risks to anyone else, though.

'Staff were sufficiently concerned by his behaviour to take him to the "cool down" separation room in full personal protection equipment before his removal.'

The so-called 'cool down' room was 'stark and not conducive to helping people calm down', the inspectors added.

What should it have had? Candles? Mood lighting? A cozy sofabed?

Elephant In The Room Only Recognised In Comments…

A lost generation of 14 million out-of-work and disengaged young Europeans is costing member states a total of €153bn (£124bn) a year – 1.2% of the EU's gross domestic product – the largest study of the young unemployed has concluded.

The report, by the EU's own research agency, Eurofound, has discovered that Europeans aged 15 to 29 who are not in employment, education or training (known as Neets) have reached record levels and are costing the EU €3bn a week in state welfare and lost production.

They are also providing a lot of jobs ‘servicing’ that population, though. I wonder if that’s been taken into account?

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) said Europe was "failing in its social contract" with the young and rising political disenchantment could reach levels similar to those that sparked North African uprisings during the Arab spring.

Really? I rather doubt that. Unless we have a population that closely matches the demographics of North Africa.

Not that the EU aren’t working on that!

"The consequences of a lost generation are not merely economic," the report warns, "but are societal, with the risk of young people opting out of democratic participation in society."

Looking at the voting breakdown by age, that ship has well and truly sailed…

Of course, nowhere (except in the comments) is the chief cause elucidated:

London3000

Nobody to blame but the EU itself. When I was 17/18, I was working part-time in Tesco. These days the youth find it extremely difficult to get work in places like Starbucks or a supermarket, why? The free market and the uncontrolled open door immigration policy has changed the demographics of the UK. I am not opposed to immigration, but when it is uncontrolled this like it puts enormous pressure on public services. From housing, schools, NHS, policing, public transport, the list goes on. The worst thing is nobody is doing anything about it. During a recession you would have thought a limit would have been slapped on so our own people have a chance of getting work having been laid off elsewhere. I'm sorry but I see no growth in Britain for at least a decade, for as many jobs the government creates through big projects the army of workers from Europe will sweep them up.

Hard to disagree…

Yes, The Cuts Will Be Painful – But Consider The Alternative…

The ‘Guardian’ is in one of its fits of supercilious moralising, holding up a litany of hard-luck cases and inviting us to consider their plight before we go too far down the route of those awful, terrible Tory-led cuts. 

They know full well how it’s going to be received, even by their own readers, mind you:

Housing is an emotive subject because most people are struggling to pay rent, or a mortgage, making life-altering decisions about where to live based on how much they can afford to spend – so making the case for the state to be subsidising large chunks of rent for other people to live in London does not instantly elicit sympathy.

If you're in any doubt about this, just glance below to read the comments that inevitably follow pieces on this theme.

Yes, this is all about the effect on low-income families of the benefit cap, which numerous charities and pressure groups fear will remove their client base from comfortable walking distance from their cosy London offices…

So let’s have a look at the examples quoted, shall we?

Rana and Mina (who, like most people interviewed for this piece, asked for their real names not to be printed in case any suggestion that they might be complaining rebounds on them in the council's housing office) are living in this bed and breakfast, as a direct result of changes to the housing benefit system.

The precise thinking of Mina's previous landlord is not clear, but she was charging £500 a week for the two-bedroom flat in St John's Wood in north London, paid for by housing benefit, when a new housing benefit cap was introduced, which would have reduced the maximum payment available to Mina to £290. Rather than waiting for her tenant to fall into arrears, the landlord gave her notice to leave earlier this year.

Ah. See, according to the ‘Guardian’, this was a dreadful miscalculation by the ConDems when they put the benefit cap in place:

The coalition's introduction of a housing allowance cap was based on the theory that by capping the amount available to housing benefit recipients, landlords would drop their rents and renegotiate lower contracts with tenants.

But because the rental market in the capital remains so buoyant, what appears to have happened instead is that families like Mina's have been evicted and made homeless.

Mmm, yes, expecting the landlords to take a loss on the chin was rather daft, come to think of it.

So, how did Mina wind up in this situation where she required benefits?

A refugee from Iran who has lived in London for many years, Mina used to work in a cafe but now has arthritis in both knees; she walks with difficulty and does not work. There was nowhere else she could afford to move to in the vicinity of her daughter's school…

Ah. Ok. Stop right there. People have to live according to their means.

And the ‘Guardian’ is quite right when they assume that all those others living within their means aren't going to be too happy. Even Mina herself sort of gets it. She just thinks she should be exempt.

Mina understands that the government has to save money, but wonders if they need to target people like her, who have long-term roots in the area. "I've had the same GP for 20 years, the same hospital. All my daughter's friends are here. Are we meant to change all these things? " she asks.

"Suddenly they've changed all the rules. They are playing with people. They are messing around with people's lives. It's a lot of stress for a single mother."

Guess what? Recessions are ‘a lot of stress’ for everyone. And yes, you are meant to change all those things if they will no longer support you – haven’t you already changed Iran for the UK when things became untenable? So swapping one part of the UK for another should be a breeze!

They desperately try to find a more ‘worthy’ example. They fail. Miserably:

This housing crisis affects people who are working, as well as those who are not. Helena Carroll, who works in accounts, spent two nights in a bed and breakfast in west London last month with her seven-year-old daughter…

She was evicted from her flat in Hammersmith in August, probably also the victim of the incoming benefit cap. She works 25 hours a week, earning around £800 a month, and paid part of her own rent, but is unable to afford to live in the part of London where she grew up, and where her daughter has always lived, without state support.

Ah, but see, she only paid ‘part of her own rent’. Those paying ALL of their own rent are quite entitled to think ‘Hey! Hang on a minute here…’

And she can’t live in the part of London where she grew up without state support? So what? I can’t live in Mayfair without state support, so where’s my flat, then?

Got anything else, ‘Guardian’?

Meanwhile Abdul has been living in a string of bed and breakfasts with his wife and 18-month-old son since June 11, when they were evicted from their home in Maida Vale, north London, where he has lived for 11 years since he arrived as a refugee from Syria.

*throws PC out of the window*

Last one. Make it good!

Grace, a mental health nurse, has been living in a room with her 16-year-old son, in a white stucco-fronted hotel in west London for five months…She became homeless when she and her son were thrown out of the flat they were sharing with friends. Her son is at school nearby, but as a newly-qualified nurse earning a salary of £21,000, Grace, who moved from Nigeria over a decade ago, is unable to afford to rent in this part of central London, where she wants to be so that her son can stay in the school where he has begun his A-levels, and so she can easily travel to the hospital where she often works nights and early morning shifts.

Ah, so, we’re back to the Mina situation. With the added fillip that she’s a public sector worker. You know, I'm not sure that’ll be the argument-swayer that you fondly imagine it to be…

Romin Sutherland of the NextDoor project, a charity helping people affected by housing benefit cuts believes the system of benefits will not be fairer and argues that capping the housing benefit "is driving a huge rise in homelessness, which is itself costing the taxpayer many millions. And this doesn't account for the longer term costs of uprooting established communities and dumping them without support in unfamiliar areas that are unable to provide for their needs.

"Instead of capping housing benefit, perhaps the government should be focusing on providing low-cost housing that gives back to the taxpayer over generations, rather than squandering our money on exorbitant rents," he says.

The comments, as you can imagine, soon descend into a screaming rabble demanding rent controls, more council housing, higher benefits, the immediate execution of the Housing Minister (in fact, all the Tory cabinet), government-mandated social mixing for areas, you name it.

And no-one, not one that I can see, seems to have asked the question; If these are the people that the ‘Guardian’ chooses as the most sympathetic, what must the rest be like?