Human rights lawyers condemn English tests for spouses coming to UK

[Rupert_Baehr]

As with everything else you'll always get some person with the "my glass is half empty attitude", full of negatives what if this and what if that.

If everyone had that attitude we'd still be rubbing two sticks together to start fires.

Much of the time you have to ask about the ulterior motives of these what if merchants.

 

If you can't afford a box of matches and you want to light a fire you may have to resort to rubbing two sticks together.

 

A succession of politicians have tried to 'make their mark' on the Prison service. Many of the ideas they came up with were good ideas - but the best idea is worthless if it isn't accompanied by the money to fund it.

 

Ken Clarke hasn't put forward a detailed fully-funded proposal. The Prison Service does not appear to be on the (very short) list of government-funded organisations which is exempted from the proposed cuts.

 

Ken Clarke is, however, a very experienced politician and there can be little doubt he understands the potential value of 'sound bite' politics.

 

When he comes up with the details - including details of how he intends to fund the proposal - then it will be worth listening to. Until then, it's merely political hot air.

[boyfriday]

No it isn't, lots of college refuse point blank to verify student status or qualifications.

 

Yes it is easy, since it's within the power of the state to demand that information is made available or change the law to facilitate it.

[Rupert_Baehr]

And they also do that for further education.

But, acording to your logic someone whose children stay on for 'A' levels should pay more tax for the 'A' level studies than someone whose children have left school and taken employment, after all 'A' levels are the means to gain entry to most universities.

 

You said: "To take that to its logical conclusion you'll be asking parents to pay for primary, junior and secondary school tuition next."

 

I pointed out that even state education (free at point of provision) has to be paid for by somebody and that privately-paid education has been around for some hundreds of years.

 

You then said: "acording to your logic someone whose children ..."

 

I didn't suggest anything of the sort and I'm puzzled as to how you arrived at that conclusion. Can you explain it to me?

[Bassman62]

You mean like Ken Clarke, with his "what if we make the prisoners work" proposal? Or do you mean the "what if" merchants who disagree with your world-view only?

 

In reality of course, the "what if" merchants are the people who invent and discover EVERYTHING -

 

"what if" i fly this kite in an electrical storm

"what if" animals change over time from less complicated creatures into more complex creatures

"what if" I hit this animal and then kill it and eat it.

 

If it were not for "what if merchants", we would not even have reached the stage of rubbing two sticks together to make fire!

Then I'll edit it to the 'Ah But' brigade

[Bassman62]

True that - they believe (wrongly) that data protection means they can't release the info.

Another Ah but.

[Bassman62]

A succession of politicians have tried to 'make their mark' on the Prison service. Many of the ideas they came up with were good ideas - but the best idea is worthless if it isn't accompanied by the money to fund it.

 

When he comes up with the details - including details of how he intends to fund the proposal - then it will be worth listening to. Until then, it's merely political hot air.

They should be self funding by the private companys who the government say will use the prison labour, failing that re-install treadmills and hook them up to the national grid.

 

Prisoners should do a full days work!

[mort]

Back on topic please.

[Rupert_Baehr]

They should be self funding by the private companys who the government say will use the prison labour, failing that re-install treadmills and hook them up to the national grid.

 

Prisoners should do a full days work!

 

If a private company wants to use prison labour, then that company should of course pay all the costs incurred in hiring their workforce.

 

A number of prisons (notably those designated as 'training' prisons offer educational courses along with trade training in (usually) building trades. There's not a lot of demand for a brick wall built by a trainee bricklayer in a prison, so no company is going to fund that. Clarke was arguing that prisoners need skills (and I don't suppose anybody would argue with that.)

 

One Prison I worked in repaired lawnmowers and charged the institutions who sent lawnmowers there for repair for the work. They were unable to charge the full cost of the repair - in fact, had they tried to charge more than the cost of the repair elsewhere, they wouldn't have had many lawn mowers to repair.

 

If you were running a company which repaired motorcycles (One prison shown on TV offers motorcycle repair courses) then you would have to pay your admin staff (those who accepted the service bookings), you would have to pay your mechanics and their supervisor(s), you would have to pay for the materials and you would have to pay the running (rent and rates etc) costs of the building.

 

If - as you suggest - the company using the prison labour is going to pay all the costs, and if you decided to operate your motorcycle repair company in a prison, would you be preparerd to pay:

 

The wages of the prisoners (very low)

The wages of the people who take the bookings (same as outside)

The wages of the skilled mechanics who are teaching them (fairly high.)

The wages of the prison officers who are supervising them (fairly high - and that's certainly a cost you wouldn't have outside)

The running costs of your prison 'factory' (that's an extra cost.,they won't be repairing bikes in their cells.)

 

If running your business inside a prison costs you more than running it outside the prison does, how long will you stay in business?

 

Re-install treadmills and hook them up to the National Grid? - Damn! You beat me to it!

 

'Rupert's proposed Warehouse prisons (for habitual incorrigible offenders) would consist of cells with a front wall a back wall and floor-to ceiling bars separating each cell from the next. (To allw the inmates a degree of social contact with one another.) Each cell would contain a bed, a table, a chair, a combined shower/toilet (hole in the ground) and a treadmill.

 

Use of the treadmill would be voluntary (but the treadmill, together with an outside window, would replace exercise periods.) Prisoners would be paid by the electricity generating companies at the same rate per Kilowatt-Hour that they pay for 'green' electricity generated by other customers.

 

The prisoners' accounts would be credited with the money they earned and they would be permitted to spend that money on 'extras'.

 

I expect there would be howls of protest. "You can't do that! Prisons are supposed to be comfortable. - How would you persuade people to use them if you made them such unpleasant places?"

[Rupert_Baehr]

apologies Mort - your post arrived on my screen after I posted mine.

[Halibut]

Prisoners should do a full days work!

 

I actually agree that this is a desirable idea; but for it to work we'd have to radically overhaul the prison system and the justice system in general.

 

If more folks had full time engaging and reasonably paid work in the first place we'd not need to lock as many people up.

 

 

 

Mort note - sorry hadn't seen your warning before i pposted this.