Latest news with #socialpolicy
Washington Post
31-07-2025
- Politics
- Washington Post
The good news about murder
In politics, good news is often harder to accept than bad news. There is a habit, perhaps especially now, of seeing government as doomed to failure, social policy as futile and debates over hard problems — including, prominently, crime — as destined to break down into pointless ideological clashes. But sometimes the facts are so obvious that everyone has to accept them. That's what should be happening now with the truly remarkable decline in the number of murders and shootings across the United States, especially in big cities that were wracked by a spike in violence during the covid pandemic. The numbers are compelling enough to force even Eeyores to take notice.
The Guardian
23-07-2025
- General
- The Guardian
Malcolm Dean obituary
Malcolm Dean's desk at the Guardian's offices in Farringdon Road, central London, was probably the greatest fire risk in the building. In a pre-internet age, when reports and press releases arrived in paper form, he kept mountainous stacks of material within easy reach, and somehow knew how to access what he wanted without causing an avalanche. Malcolm, who has died aged 86, was the Guardian's social policy leader writer from 1972 until he retired in 2006. He needed all that information at his fingertips to maintain his understanding of policy and practice across a wide range of ministerial portfolios. On any day he might be required to write about health, education, social security, race relations, criminal justice, equal opportunities and much more besides. I knew about his method because for many years my desk was next to his. He did not work in an ivory tower. He attended press conferences and read the reports, but he also used his colleagues as additional eyes and ears, interviewing us to build a rounded picture. The subject matter that he mastered might sometimes be dry, but he was invariably cheerful. His honesty, integrity and optimism worked as an inspiring antidote in a sometimes cynical world. The knowledge and contacts that he developed writing leaders formed the basis for a more publicly visible role from 1979 when he became editor of Society, a newly established section of the paper that appeared on Wednesdays. He ran it for 21 years, writing himself and commissioning articles across the social policy field from practitioners as well as journalists. It became required reading for everyone in leadership roles in the public sector and he took pride in the number of new campaigning organisations that the section helped to spawn. The section was a magnet for classified advertising of job vacancies from across the sector and it became a huge commercial success. Routinely it exceeded 100 pages and eventually at its peak it occasionally topped 200, dwarfing the paper itself. Unusually for a journalist, Malcolm also had a foot in the boardroom. For seven years from 1994 he sat on the Scott Trust, the body that owned the Guardian and appointed its editor. Given Malcolm's ability to express himself with force and often at high volume, it is unlikely that other members remained unaware of his opinions. On the paper his views were heard but not always heeded. Malcolm was a words man. He frequently bemoaned editors' decisions to give more space to pictures. For his taste there was too much reporting of showbiz and too little policy. His only half-joking slogan became: 'Dare to be dull!' Unsurprisingly, editors chose a different course. Malcolm was born in Wilmslow, Cheshire. His father, Noel, was the village baker in nearby Alderley Edge. His mother Sarah (nee Black), known as Biddy, came from a farming family in Northern Ireland, but was brought up in Cheshire after the death of both parents. After passing the 11-plus exam, Malcolm went to King's school, Macclesfield. At a careers conference there he met Edward Taylor Scott, the editor of what was then the Manchester Guardian, who lived in Wilmslow in an avenue where Malcolm delivered bread. He followed the great man's advice to join a local paper in the Kemsley Group, because it ran a good training scheme. After four years on the County Express, the Wilmslow weekly, he heard that the Kemsley chain had been taken over by Roy Thomson, Canada's biggest newspaper proprietor. He wrote to Thomson suggesting exchanges between his Canadian and British papers. Within a month Malcolm was on a steamship bound for Canada, where he was sent to report in a remote gold mining town in the frozen north. His multiple adventures in the US and Caribbean included time playing for the Trinidad and Tobago international rugby team. He returned to the UK after a spell working his way around Australia and south-east Asia. After two years studying politics and economics at Ruskin College, Oxford, he went to the US on a Harkness fellowship, and his time there included working as a speechwriter in Congress. He never took a degree because he thought he did not need one, and started at the Guardian in 1969. In professional terms it became the love of his life. He worked as a general reporter for three years before finding his niche among the leader writers. Although the Guardian was the central feature of his career, he branched out several times into politics. In 1978-79, during the final year of the Callaghan government, he was special adviser to David Ennals, Labour's social services secretary. Later, even more actively, he stood for the SDP/Liberal Alliance in parliamentary elections in 1983 and 1987. He nursed the Bath constituency and in the latter election came close to unseating Chris Patten, its Conservative MP, achieving one of the 10 biggest swings to the Alliance in a year when its leaders, David Owen and David Steel, were struggling to connect. Malcolm's election agents during this period recalled his great political skill in uniting his constituency party, where Liberals were initially disgruntled about having an SDP candidate imposed. He was not the most brilliant public speaker, but he effectively undermined Patten's position as a moderate Conservative by hammering away at his Commons voting record in support of Thatcherite policies. Members of the local party, who started by fearing they had a policy egghead imposed on them, found him a clever and determined campaigner – buoyant, energetic and popular with the volunteers. After losing in 1987 he decided not to run again. His family say he believed that he could have won the next time, but that he would have more influence as a Guardian leader writer than as a backbench MP. He loved the Bath constituency but did not enjoy bickering in the party at national level. After retiring from the Guardian, he took up a two-year fellowship at Nuffield College, Oxford (2006-08), where he wrote a book, Democracy Under Attack: How the Media Distort Policy and Politics (2011). He continued as a Guardian contributor and served on several national social policy working parties. He chaired a Joseph Rowntree Foundation commission on older people and was a founding trustee of the Young Foundation thinktank. Retirement also gave him more time for his passion for walking. Among many expeditions, he did the Wainwright Walk three times, hiking from coast to coast across northern England. People usually start in the west, at St Bees in Cumbria, and head eastwards to Robin Hood's Bay in Yorkshire. For the second and third traverse Malcolm insisted on doing it from east to west. He said that way he would get to meet and talk to more people as they came towards him in the opposite direction. After a short marriage to Lesley Pirie, a Russia expert, he married Clare Roskill, a social work specialist, in 1978. Clare went on to work for the government on social policy. In 2019, Malcolm was diagnosed with Alzheimer's, and five years later, after the disease became overpowering, he moved into a care home. He is survived by Clare, their sons, Tim and Ben, and Sophie, the daughter of his first marriage. James Malcolm Dean, journalist, born 11 June 1939; died 17 July 2025
The Guardian
10-07-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
‘Brutal' two-child benefit cap affecting 1.7m children, shows data
A further 37,000 children were affected by the two-child benefit limit in the year to April, with 1.7 million now living in households affected by the policy, according to new figures described as 'devastating and shameful' by charities. Data released by the Department for Work and Pensions on Thursday shows that one in nine children are now affected by the policy, while 62% of affected families have three children and 59% are in work. Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) described it as a 'brutal policy' that was making children's 'lives hard and their futures bleak'. 'Giving all kids the best start in life will be impossible until government scraps this brutal policy, and a year after the election families can't wait any longer for the help they desperately need,' said the charity's chief executive, Alison Garnham. The new data shows that 469,780 households on universal credit were affected by the two-child limit in April 2025, meaning their access to certain benefitswas restricted for a third or subsequent child born after the rule was introduced in 2017. This is an increase of 13,520 (3%) on the previous year. There are now 1,665,540 children living in affected households, an increase of 37,150 (2%) on the previous year. Dan Paskins, the executive director of policy, advocacy and campaigns at Save the Children UK, said the figures were 'devastating and shameful in equal measure'. 'Almost 40,000 more children are now being punished just for having siblings,' he said. 'Behind every number is a child missing out on essentials like food, clothing and a decent home, through no fault of their own. The government must do the right thing and abolish the two-child limit, or risk being the first Labour government to oversee a significant rise in child poverty.' CPAG said it estimated the policy had pushed 350,000 children into poverty, as well as 700,000 children into deeper poverty, since 2017. It says 109 children are being pushed into poverty each day by the policy. Lord John Bird, the founder of the Big Issue and a crossbench peer, said: 'We must call this what it is: a poverty crisis. And government policy that creates this crisis cannot be tolerated. 'It is both a moral and a political necessity that this government ends the two-child benefit cap at the autumn budget. The public will not stomach any more inaction from Labour.' He added that any savings the two-child benefit cap brought 'will create far more expense for our society now and down the line'. 'Its consequences will be felt in our schools, our NHS, our prisons, and one day, in the same social security system that fails these children,' he said. Earlier this week, the children's commissioner said young people were living in 'almost Dickensian levels of poverty' as pressure ramps on the government to scrap the controversial policy. But the education secretary, Bridget Phillipson, has warned the government's U-turn on welfare cuts last week may make scrapping the policy more difficult. The DWP has been contacted for comment.
The Guardian
10-07-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
‘Brutal' two-child benefit cap affecting 1.7m children, shows data
A further 37,000 children were affected by the two-child benefit limit in the year to April, with 1.7 million now living in households affected by the policy, according to new figures described as 'devastating and shameful' by charities. Data released by the Department for Work and Pensions on Thursday shows that one in nine children are now affected by the policy, while 62% of affected families have three children and 59% are in work. Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) described it as a 'brutal policy' that was making children's 'lives hard and their futures bleak'. 'Giving all kids the best start in life will be impossible until government scraps this brutal policy, and a year after the election families can't wait any longer for the help they desperately need,' said the charity's chief executive, Alison Garnham. The new data shows that 469,780 households on universal credit were affected by the two-child limit in April 2025, meaning their access to certain benefitswas restricted for a third or subsequent child born after the rule was introduced in 2017. This is an increase of 13,520 (3%) on the previous year. There are now 1,665,540 children living in affected households, an increase of 37,150 (2%) on the previous year. Dan Paskins, the executive director of policy, advocacy and campaigns at Save the Children UK, said the figures were 'devastating and shameful in equal measure'. 'Almost 40,000 more children are now being punished just for having siblings,' he said. 'Behind every number is a child missing out on essentials like food, clothing and a decent home, through no fault of their own. The government must do the right thing and abolish the two-child limit, or risk being the first Labour government to oversee a significant rise in child poverty.' CPAG said it estimated the policy had pushed 350,000 children into poverty, as well as 700,000 children into deeper poverty, since 2017. It says 109 children are being pushed into poverty each day by the policy. Lord John Bird, the founder of the Big Issue and a crossbench peer, said: 'We must call this what it is: a poverty crisis. And government policy that creates this crisis cannot be tolerated. 'It is both a moral and a political necessity that this government ends the two-child benefit cap at the autumn budget. The public will not stomach any more inaction from Labour.' He added that any savings the two-child benefit cap brought 'will create far more expense for our society now and down the line'. 'Its consequences will be felt in our schools, our NHS, our prisons, and one day, in the same social security system that fails these children,' he said. Earlier this week, the children's commissioner said young people were living in 'almost Dickensian levels of poverty' as pressure ramps on the government to scrap the controversial policy. But the education secretary, Bridget Phillipson, has warned the government's U-turn on welfare cuts last week may make scrapping the policy more difficult. The DWP has been contacted for comment.
The Independent
21-06-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
Why the ‘individual conscience vote' of MPs had its own assisted death last week
Two votes in the Commons split by four days laid the ground for a seismic shift in British social policy making last week one of the most significant in the modern history of Parliament. But while the votes on abortion (Tuesday) and assisted dying (Friday) were officially matters of individual conscience the evidence from both suggests that the UK is now closer than ever to a US-style party politicisation of moral issues. If you vote Labour or Lib Dem you are much more likely to get a pro-choice MP, if you vote Conservative or Reform you are more likely to get a pro-life MP. This is not an accident, it is increasingly by design. How parties voted on life and death On Tuesday the decriminalisation of abortion up to birth amendment to the Crime and Policing Bill laid down by Labour Gower MP Tonia Antoniazzi won by 379 to 137. Of this 291 Labour MPs voted in favour and just 25 against while 63 Lib Dems were in favour and just two against. On the other side 92 Tory MPs voted against and just four in favour. Another four abstained by voting in both lobbies. No Reform MPs supported and four voted against. The split is not as stark on Friday's assisted dying vote but nevertheless reveals a trend. Kim Leadbeater 's bill had the support of 224 fellow Labour MPs with 160 against and 56 Lib Dems with 15 against. On the other side the Tories split 92 against to 20 in favour while Reform were three against and two in favour. Kemi Badenoch put a two line whip on the abortion vote rather than allowing a completely free vote. This indicated a party position without the threat of disciplinary action which would come with a three line whip. But, remarkably, after the abortion vote senior Tories were complaining that Ms Badenoch had not withdrawn the whip of the four MPs who voted for decriminalisation. It was different in 1967 The last time the UK saw Parliament vote on such seismic social change was back in 1967 with Liberal MP David Steel 's abortion legislation and Labour MP Leo Abse's Sexual Offences Act which decriminalised homosexuality. In both those cases parties split down the middle on conscience votes which saw the odd alliance of rightwing Tory MP Enoch Powell and leftwing Labour MP Tony Benn coming together to support legalising homosexuality. The Ed Miliband effect The erosion of the conscience vote in the UK has actually come more from a hardening of positions from progressive leftwing parties in Britain and exacerbated by the so-called culture wars. In 2012 Ed Miliband imposed a three-line whip on gay marriage on Labour MPs. LGBTQ+ matters ended there as something of individual conscience for the first time. Then in 2019 former MP Roger Godsiff was dropped as a Labour candidate for supporting parents in his Birmingham constituency who were protesting over primary school children being taught about same-sex relationships. This year we see Reform UK banning LGBTQ+ flags from county halls where they have taken control of the council and attempting to purge councils of diversity, equity and inclusion officers and policies. While abortion officially remained a matter of conscience a comment by the now home secretary Yvette Cooper in 2017 about Jacob Rees-Mogg being unfit to be a party leader because of his views on abortion was enlightening. What has happened over a number of years is that the majority of socially conservative, mostly Catholic tradition in Labour has been removed through selection processes. David Campanale versus the Lib Dems An ongoing legal case involving the Liberal Democrats and one of its former candidates has highlighted an apparent major shift in British politics to the party politicisation of conscience issues. Former BBC journalist David Campanale was kicked out as the candidate for Sutton ahead of the last election because, he claims, of his Christian beliefs. According to documents presented in the case, Luke Taylor, who replaced him as the candidate, is alleged to have claimed that 'the party of past prominent Liberal Democrats with Christian beliefs, such as Shirley Williams and Charles Kennedy, was 'over', and that he and others were building a 'secular party' which would have no place for Christians expecting to 'hold to their religious or conscientious opinions'. Mr Taylor was the teller for the votes in favour of the abortion amendment on Tuesday, who also described the assisted dying vote, which he supported, as a good way to 'neatly bookend the week.' If Mr Campanale wins his case it will for the first time provide evidence that selection is taking place on conscience issues as well as other matters. The Lib Dems have denied the claims and pointed out that their leader Sr Ed Davey goes to church. But the Christian Lib Dems including former deputy leader Simon Hughes have voiced concerns and the party has been condemned by two bishops. and a former Archbishop of Canterbury. Added to that Tim Farron, who voted against abortion and assisted dying last week, was ousted as leader over his Christian beliefs in 2017. During the assisted dying vote a number of supporters of the bill suggested that religious belief had no place in deciding such issues. A real departure from conscience. But a brand of conservatism is emerging in the UK which openly embraces traditional Christian values. Reflecting on the assisted dying vote, Tory MP Danny Kruger, a leading opponent of the bill, said: 'If we are to withstand our enemies, bring our society together, and tame the technium (somehow ensure that human values govern the new age of machines), we are going to need values that are up to the job. 'I don't think humanist atheism or progressive liberalism or whatever the new religion should be called, is up to it. Christianity is. Only Christianity is.' A warning from America In America, the conscience vote rapidly became more party-politicised as a result of the Roe vs Wade abortion ruling in in 1973. Social conservatives gradually began to take over the Republicans on the right and social progressives the Democrats. It has played out ferociously in the selection of Supreme Court justices, who recently in effect overturned Roe v Wade with a conservative majority. The most interesting US development is the way that a man like Donald Trump, previously ambiguous over abortion, has adopted a strong anti-abortion line to please his base. This played out in the 2022 midterms to the detriment of the Republicans with the Democrats using the threat to abortion rights to great effect. But it did little to help Kamala Harris in 2024. What that shows though is that parties with very strong views one way or the other can be elected largely on economic grounds but bring with them a great deal of baggage on conscience issues. After this week some would argue the same thing has happened in the opposite direction in the UK.
