Sarah's Personal Blog
Click here for Sarah's full blog
Is violence ever the right role model?
David Lammy is calling for parents to have the right to smack their children, claiming that parents in his constituency have lost control and are 'no longer sovereign in their own homes'. All this because they fear the social worker's knock on the door if they use smacking to discipline their children? He then points out that he has smacked his own children to protect them from danger and presumably felt confident to do so without the heavy hand of the State coming to seize them.
There is a difference between a loving parent smacking their child as a reflex reaction to them darting off, say towards oncoming traffic and the kind of violence that many children suffer as a routine every day. Social workers are frankly too busy with the overload from these cases to interfere with normal families and David Lammy is perpetuating a myth that social services operate like the Stasi, snooping on families, poised to snatch children from happy homes.
How does it help children to avoid violent gangs by using violence as a deterrent? Teaching children that pain controls the person you strike just normalises violence as the correct reaction to annoyance and can lead to fearful subservience or patterns of bullying and control.
No one doubts the challenges facing single parents in Tottenham, or anywhere else for that matter and David's mother must have been an inspirational role model who tempered any physical discipline with lessons in self worth and aspiration.
Children join gangs for a host of reasons; when that is the norm, to feel accepted or protected, when they have nothing to lose or perhaps to control and enjoy the power that comes with intimidating others for a change, especially when that has been the pattern of their own lives.
David refers to the 'private schools and tennis lessons' enjoyed by the middle classes as their own antidote to gang culture. He misses the point and it is wrong to assert that poverty inevitably results in violent feral youths terrorising neighbourhoods without parents slapping their children into place. It would be better to deal with drugs and alcohol, to trash the violent and misogynist subtext of popular culture and press for higher expectations from families and schools. Too many children from deprived neighbourhoods grow up surrounded by adults who assume they will not succeed. I suspect that David's mother knew and expected otherwise.
The Law simply makes it clear that children have a right to be protected from physical punishment but no one is on a witch hunt against loving parents who occasionally use a gentle smack.
Some still argue that 'six of the best' never did them any harm, but the fact is that corporal punishment did brutalise or crush especially when meted out behind closed doors by sadists with a penchant for control. It still does and the Law is right to set out that violence can never be the right role model.
Debate on food prices
Today the House of Commons debated the issue of food poverty. It was reassuring to hear Richard Benyon MP confirm the commitment to introduce a Groceries Code Adjudicator to protect consumers. I hope that the adjudicator will also consider some of the wider issues around food poverty and the way that supermarkets can aggravate the situation particularly in the way that they operate loss leaders.
Data from the Health and Social Care Information Centre shows that almost a third of children are overweight or obese. It also shows the link between food poverty and obesity.
There is a clear link in reception year but this is even starker by year 6 where 23.6% of the poorest but just 12.8% of the richest are obese. Obesity not only affects children's life chances but will be costing us £10bn per year by 2050 because 85% of obese children go on to become obese adults and are far more likely to develop conditions like diabetes or joint problems.
The reality is that if you are on a tight budget price is a huge driver for choice and the supermarkets are driving those choices by discounting the kinds of foods that are harming their own customers. High fat, high salt food processed food is already cheaper than healthy alternatives yet loss leaders are so often based on products like alcohol, carbonated drinks, crisps and chocolates.
The Competition Commission, in their investigation of supermarket below cost selling did find that this practice distorts consumer choice and found many examples of loss making products being cross subsidised by other lines.
They were clear however that countries with outright bans on below cost selling, such as Ireland, Germany, France and Spain don't benefit from lower prices overall, in fact the reverse so I wouldn't want to see a ban...just some common sense.
Why tolerate the myth that all these loss leaders result in savings when they are being cross subsidised with more expensive products in the rest of your shopping basket?
The role of the Groceries Code Adjudicator should include:
Transparency in how these loss leaders are cross subsidised as well as clear price comparisons so that customers can easily identify the cheapest products.
A code of practice which promotes loss leaders only on healthy or unprocessed foods but which isn't subsidised by our farmers or local food distribution webs.
But Government cannot do everything; ultimately families have to take responsibility for their children's diet and exercise. It does not have to be expensive; the CPRE and Transition Town Totnes should be congratulated for their work on local food webs and for showing how local traditional shops and markets reduce food miles and deliver fresher healthier food with less waste. The view that local food is always more expensive should be challenged and boosting local seasonal produce is part of the solution.
Ultimately food prices are volatile and most of the changes are the result of global commodity prices and the influence of factors like fuel prices but that does not mean that Government cannot have a role in trying to make sure that the best choices are also affordable choices.
Plymouth Hospitals NHS Trust
Plymouth Hospitals NHS Trust would like to become a Foundation Trust. For many people the question is what on earth is the difference? Basically a change to greater financial independence and flexibility over decision making as well as greater involvement by local people and staff. The hospital still has staff on NHS contracts and provides services to NHS patients free of charge in exactly the same way but financial probity and the quality of management is overseen by a different regulator known as Monitor. Follow the link to their consultation document and please let me know your views especially if you have been treated or worked at Derriford.
Searaser have recently signed up with Ecotricity, a British Utility hoping to make the product ready for market in 2014 but to test a 670mm diameter piston 12 metre stroke (½ full) size commercial Searaser by the end of 2012. This will be at the new "FabTest" nursery site in the newly announced South West Marine Energy Park off Falmouth, testing for sustainability in the harsh marine environment.
It was a pleasure to speak as a patron at the launch of Devon Rape Crisis. At long last Devon has a support service for women who have been affected by sexual violence. This has been made possible by 3 years of funding from the Ministry of Justice and upholds a manifesto commitment to take action to improve support services and cut violence against women and girls. The service is entirely confidential, can be by phone or face to face and will cover the whole of Devon.
