We're not going to the dogs: 12 reasons why Britain remains the greatest place to live
The vice-president, his wife and three children are staying in the Cotswolds, a picture-perfect example of rural Britain and, therefore, a magnet for tourists, trippers and holidaymakers. We can only hope that Mr Vance will pass on his favourable impressions of Bourton-on-the-Water, Stow-on-the-Wold and the other timeless villages to his fellow countrymen and women who appear to be under the impression that this country is a broken reed, a crime-infested basket-case to be avoided at all costs.
He will be delighted to discover that Lower and Upper Slaughter are not blood-drenched hellholes but beautiful, honey-coloured hamlets named after the old English for muddy place, or slough.
It is astonishing to learn that residents of Chicago are expressing their concerns about visiting London because of fears for their safety even though the murder rate in their home city is 20 times higher. At least we don't have to put troops on the streets to deal with crime as Donald Trump just has in Washington DC, or not yet anyway.
True, there has been a spate of phone thefts in London's West End, which could be dealt with by a greater police presence both to deter and catch the crooks red-handed.
Often these crimes are committed by small groups and are mitigated when the perpetrators are put behind bars. The same is true of burglaries. If they were properly investigated rather than being routinely ignored by the police the handful of offenders could be banged up and the predation would decline.
There is a view being advanced, presumably for political reasons, that crime is at unprecedented levels when this is not the case. It may well have gone up in the past year or two but historically it is actually low. In fact, falling crime was one of the few success stories to which the Conservatives could point during their 14 years in office as, indeed, they did in their election manifesto last year.
'Under the Conservatives, violent crime has fallen by 44 per cent since 2010 and neighbourhood crime is down 48 per cent,' it said. 'Reoffending has fallen from over 30 per cent in 2010 to 25 per cent. We have recruited 20,000 police officers, delivered 6,000 prison places as part of the largest prison expansion since the Victorian era and deported over 18,000 foreign national offenders since 2019 alone.'
Why are the Tories not shouting this from the rooftops rather than lending weight, even by their silence, to Reform's claims that we are being submerged by a crime wave? The high-point for both recorded and perceived (through the British Crime Survey) levels of offending was in 1993.
At the time, an already shaky Tory government was hammered in the polls and a young Labour home affairs spokesman called Tony Blair managed to steal the law-and-order mantle that had previously been the exclusive property of the Conservatives.
Ken Clarke, considered too soft in the Home Office, was moved – albeit in a promotion to the Treasury – and his place taken by a hard-liner, Michael Howard. He proceeded to undo his predecessor's reforms, toughened up sentencing and prison numbers began to rise. They are twice as high today as 30 years ago.
But from that moment crime began to fall. There are several reasons for this but one is a higher incarceration rate. If crime is on the increase once again it is because the people who commit most offences are being let out onto the streets after serving just a fraction of their sentences.
Nonetheless, the idea that the country – or London, for that matter – is more crime ridden now than back then is a myth perpetrated either by a wilful misreading of the statistics or a failure of memory. Knife crime may be up but it is mostly confined to gangland areas. Across the country, stabbing-related hospitalisations are lower than before the pandemic. Gun crime is minuscule.
Since it is August and many of us have, like the Vances, been holidaying in Britain, let us take a moment to praise its wonders rather than damn its shortcomings. Lists are all the rage nowadays, so here are 12 reasons to be cheerful about Britain.
In view of the miseries currently being endured by many millions in other parts of the world, we should pause occasionally and put our own experiences into some sort of perspective.
This country still is, to quote its greatest writer, a blessed plot and a precious stone set in a silver sea.
For those like the Vances still away on holiday in Britain, enjoy it while you can. Soon, the leaves will start to turn and the politicians will be back at Westminster to mess things up again.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
28 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Nearly nine in ten voters support deporting foreign sex offenders
Almost nine in 10 voters think foreign sex offenders should be deported, a new poll has revealed. A huge majority of Britons across all ages and political parties agree that migrants who commit a sexual offence should be kicked out. It comes amid a wider debate about the impacts of mass migration and controversy over alleged crimes perpetrated by asylum seekers. The survey, by Find Out Now, also found that almost four in 10 people favour restricting immigration from countries with poor women's rights. Yvette Cooper, the Home Secretary, has vowed to increase the rate of deportations and limit the avenues foreign criminals have to appeal against their removal. Earlier this year, she announced that any migrant placed on the sex offender register would be automatically prevented from claiming asylum in the UK. The pollsters asked more than 2,000 voters whether they supported the deportation of non-UK citizens who have been convicted of sex crimes. More than 87 per cent said they either 'strongly' or 'somewhat' supported removal, compared to just three per cent who said they opposed it. In total, 85 per cent of Labour voters, 96 per cent of Conservative supporters and 97 per cent of Reform backers said they favoured deportation of this kind. Find Out Now also asked the public whether they would support restricting immigration from countries 'where women have few legal rights and protections'. Just under 39 per cent of all voters said they would back such restrictions, compared with a little over a quarter who said they would oppose them. Support for tougher measures was voiced by 30 per cent of Labour voters, 52 per cent of Conservative backers and 74 per cent of Reform supporters. A total of 38 per cent of Labour supporters said they would oppose such measures. Finally, the pollsters also asked Britons whether they 'believe that immigration levels impact women's safety in your area'. Overall, 47 per cent said they believed that was the case, versus 23 per cent who did not. In total, 29 per cent of Labour voters, 58 per cent of Conservative supporters and 84 per cent of Reform backers said they felt less safe. Additionally, 43 per cent of Labour supporters said they believed their area was less safe as a result of migration. The poll was commissioned by the Women's Safety Initiative, a group set up 'to expose the dangers of uncontrolled immigration'. The group says it provides 'a space for women to voice concerns about safety, culture, and national identity without fear of censorship or judgment'. Anna McGovern, the deputy director, said: 'This data confirms what women across the country have been telling us for years – they feel less safe and they want action. I've spoken to so many women who have shared their experiences of feeling unsafe, and I include myself in that. 'Our leaders cannot continue to ignore these concerns or dismiss them as unfounded. Women's safety must be prioritised above political convenience, and this is the moment to start taking decisive steps to protect women everywhere.'
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
If Labour gives £2.3bn of our cash to retired British Coal staff, it has truly lost the plot
How big is the black hole in Britain's public finances? The respected think tank National Institute of Economic and Social Research (Niesr) has just forecast a £50bn gap, which the Chancellor will be forced to plug by lower spending or higher taxes. Meanwhile, as Rachel Reeves tries to balance the books by saving every penny, her deputy, Darren Jones, Chief Secretary to the Treasury, casually told Parliament in July that he is 'considering proposals' to hand out £2.3bn of taxpayers' money to the 40,000 members of the British Coal Staff Superannuation Scheme (BCSSS). He added: 'I will be looking at those issues in more detail over the summer, and I hope to say more in the autumn.' What is this possible £2.3bn giveaway? The BCSSS, for above-ground managers, and its sister scheme, the Mineworkers' Pension Scheme (MPS), for those below ground digging out coal, were set up after the coal industry was nationalised in 1947, at a time when it employed 700,000 people. By privatisation in 1994, British Coal had shrunk drastically to just 13,000 staff. The BCSSS and MPS became stand-alone trusts, with the Government guaranteeing all pension entitlements, including annual inflation increases. In return, the Government receives half of any 'surplus' calculated at the three-yearly actuarial valuations, with the other half used to increase pensions. The average BCSSS pension of £15,000 a year is over twice the average MPS pension of £7,000, reflecting much higher pay for British Coal managers compared to the miners. The taxpayers' share of surpluses was also calculated at privatisation, which remained in both schemes as a reserve against poor investment performance. The £2.3bn the Government is now 'considering' giving to BCSSS members is the taxpayers' share of surpluses at privatisation, which under the BCSSS rules will be paid back to the Government in 2033 – in only eight years' time. The BCSSS trustees' argument for a £2.3bn giveaway is that last October, as revealed by Telegraph Money, the Government gave £1.5bn of taxpayers' money to the 112,000 MPS members, boosting their annual pensions by 32pc. This was all part of the rhetoric to end what Labour called an 'historic injustice' and fulfilled Labour's election manifesto pledge, repeated by Ed Miliband at the 2024 Labour Party conference. The BCSSS Trustees' argument simply rests on ' the similarities between MPS and BCSSS'. But the £1.5bn given away to MPS members didn't 'belong' to them in the first place. Just like the BCSSS' £2.3bn, it was the Government's share of surpluses at privatisation. Under the MPS rules it would have been paid back to the Government in 2029. Since privatisation in 1994, all BCSSS and MPS members have received every last penny of the pensions promised to them, including inflation increases. More than that, under the rules set up at privatisation, half of valuation surpluses have been given to members as 'bonus' pensions. To add insult to injury, after receiving the £1.5bn, the MPS trustees are now lobbying for all of any future surpluses to go to members, rather than half going to the Government. And handing over the £2.3bn of taxpayer money to the BCSSS members would not be in exchange for giving up the Government guarantee. If that money is to be handed over, it should at least be on the understanding that BCSSS pensions become a defined contribution plan, entirely dependent on the performance of scheme assets like other private sector schemes. But the trustees say they would 'not consider giving up the guarantee in exchange for the investment reserve… The guarantee does not form part of our discussions with the Government. It will remain in place, whatever decision the Government makes'. This would be an extraordinary case of: 'heads BCSSS members win, tails taxpayers lose'. As guarantor, the Government must step in to make payments if there is a future deficit. Once money is used to increase pensions the only way any future deficit to be plugged is for taxpayers to write a cheque. And because 85pc of BCSSS and MPS assets are in 'risky', that is, not index-linked bonds to match liabilities, any current surplus could easily become a deficit. The Government, and specifically Mr Miliband, still have some serious explaining to do about the £1.5bn already handed over to MPS. If Labour hands over another £2.3bn of taxpayers' money – £3.8bn in all – then surely this government will lose any shred of fiscal credibility left. Rachel Reeves should tell Darren Jones, in plain language, to stop 'considering' this proposal and say a polite 'no' to the BCSSS trustees, and the Labour MPs pushing it.
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Like Jeremy Corbyn and Sophie Ellis-Bextor, I grew up in Woodcraft Folk. Here's how it changes children's lives
At the age of six I made the most important decision of my life: I joined Woodcraft Folk. It's impossible to overstate the impact that growing up in the UK's oldest co-educational youth movement made on me. My values, my skills, the deep friendships that have lasted into adulthood, the very fact that I am writing these words in this paper, every vote I have ever cast – all can be traced back to my time in Woodcraft Folk. The largest leftwing force in British youth work, the charity turns 100 this year. It has produced some striking alumni including former Labour party leader Jeremy Corbyn, pop star Sophie Ellis-Bextor, poet Michael Rosen, and political editor Robert Peston. With the government announcing new funding to boost youth services outside schools, Woodcraft Folk's centenary is the perfect moment to learn from its remarkable story and unique approach to youth empowerment. The challenges young people face in contemporary Britain take many forms. They are denied the ability to play outside as their grandparents did, or to take healthy risks. They are subject to suspicion from authority and derision in the media. They are fed the full addictive force of under-regulated new technologies almost from birth, then chastised for using them. There are no simple answers to these compounding challenges, but the mix of inclusive community, political education, fun outdoor activities and meaningful support that Woodcraft Folk offers young people could, perhaps, offer a blueprint. Founded in the aftermath of the first world war in south London by working-class young adults who wanted a more democratic and less militaristic alternative to Scouts and Guides, Woodcraft Folk grew quickly. Supported by co-operatives and trade unions, groups germinated across the country, combining after-school activities with large summer camps run on socialist principles. The hope was to model a more egalitarian society, giving young people the skills and knowledge to become active citizens. By the late 30s, Woodcraft Folk was a serious force. The Labour party had recognised it as 'the appropriate organisation for the children of its members' and a mass display of the charity's camping techniques took place in Wembley stadium. Oswald Mosley, founder of the British Union of Fascists, was intimidated by its rise. According to former MP for Brighton Kemptown Lloyd Russell-Moyle, who also grew up in the organisation and is now its chief executive, Mosley's Blackshirts marched to the gates of a 1938 Woodcraft Folk children's camp in a show of intimidation. Fascist Mosley was right to see Woodcraft Folk as an adversary. A year later, it became the largest secular organisation to support the Kindertransport, helping Jewish children escape from Nazi-occupied Czechoslovakia. Woodcraft Folk leader Henry Fair, christened 'the second Schindler' by the press, was put on the Gestapo death list for his role in the evacuations. Over the decades the charity has remained at the forefront of ethical youth work. It has consistently campaigned against apartheid, austerity and war. It stood up for the rights of queer youth workers despite funders withdrawing grants, marched against the invasion of Iraq and has boycotted Israeli products since 2010 in protest at the blockade of Gaza. For me, Woodcraft Folk was not just a political education, but a rich mix of hiking, making and adventures too. It's where I first learned to light a fire in the rain, use a compass to navigate fog, to juggle and to edit film. The first time I boarded a plane was with Woodcraft Folk to be part of an international camp in Austria, pitching tents alongside children from all over the world. It was with Woodcraft Folk that I marched through London in my first big anti-war protest and, of course, had my first kiss. Many adults balk at the prospect of tackling sensitive subjects like war, sex and politics with children, but finding creative ways to navigate difficult issues is why the charity remains so important and relevant. In the internet era there is no healthy way to shield young people from complex topics, but neither should there be. Ignorance is a shoddy substitute for a culture of safe and open discursive learning, and children are far more capable of grappling with heavy truths than many adults give them credit for. Raised alongside difficult topics, the children of the charity aren't just better prepared for the world, but more able to support and educate each other. For example, when as a kid I tried regurgitating a racist joke I'd heard at a school, it was my Woodcraft Folk peers, rather than adults, who immediately explained why the 'joke' was stupid and offensive and made sure I never repeated my shameful mistake. At a Woodcraft Folk camp marking their centenary, volunteers put the charity's theory of mixing politics with fun activities into practice. Night-time orienteering and ceilidhs ran alongside eviction resistance workshops and discussions around prison abolition. While the Scouts sing campfire songs like Coca-Cola Came to Town and Ging Gang Gooly, the Woodcraft Folk songbook includes civil rights anthems about Rosa Parks and Hiroshima. But if Woodcraft Folk has a clear vision of how society should empower the young, the current government has produced only topsy-turvy contradictory policies and proclamations. Last week the prime minister declared kids these days are 'detached from the real world' and pledged £88m to liberate young people 'stuck behind a screen'. But, at the same time Keir Starmer's government is pumping more than twice as much money into bringing more 'AI learning into classrooms'. Sixteen year olds are finally to get the vote (a right Woodcraft Folk has long campaigned for), yet simultaneously the censorious Online Safety Act has imposed sweeping restrictions on those same young people's access to certain information, including political posts. A closer look at the newly announced youth funding reveals much of it is, in fact, earmarked for calcified initiatives like gym equipment and more police cadets that will fail to holistically broaden horizons. I was a shy and nerdy child, often bullied by local schoolchildren. There's a parallel universe in which, retreating from my tormentors, I too could have become detached from the real world, the reclusive screen addict that Starmer fears. But Woodcraft Folk gave me space to flourish in my own way, supported by caring adults. I built profound friendships with peers, learned about big ideas and took on big challenges. My life and career have been immensely richer thanks to those experiences, as have the lives of thousands of others. If the government is serious about empowering young people, they should start by listening to and learning from the movement that's already been doing it brilliantly for a century. Phineas Harper is a writer and curator
