LED Lighting News

The Home Office is Whitehall’s most demoralised and discontented department, the first independent survey of civil servants’ views of reforms has found.

More employees in the department responsible for Britain’s law and order, immigration and security said their organisation was poorly equipped to cope with the uncertainties and challenges of the future compared with elsewhere in government.

They were also highly critical of colleagues they said were “incompetent”. Two-thirds of the civil servants said the department’s overall performance was being harmed because poorly performing staff were not identified quickly enough and disciplined or offered sufficient support.

This compared with just over half of staff across all government departments. Only the Ministry of Defence scored higher, with 73% of civil servants saying recruitment and retention of suitably qualified staff was a serious problem.

More than 14,000 civil servants, including 500 senior staff, took part in the biggest ever public survey of civil servants on civil service reform.

Matt Ross, editor of the Civil Service World, the independent newspaper that carried out the survey, said: “We consistently found Home Office staff are the most negative about their office’s capabilities, and the most angry and demoralised.”

Home Office staff also admitted fears that coalition reforms would further undermine their efforts to carry out government policy on security-related issues including drugs, counter-terrorism and ID cards.

Ross said the findings showed the Home Office had been undermined by last year’s passport checks fiasco, which saw Brodie Clark, head of the UK Border Force, step down after the home secretary, Theresa May, blamed him publicly for relaxing entry checks at airports to reduce queues.

Clark’s claim that May “destroyed my reputation” and his lawsuit for constructive unfair dismissal was settled in March with a £100,000 payout, although the government refused to admit fault.

But, said Ross, the survey showed that morale at the department had not recovered. “We can see the results of Brodie Clarke being hung out to dry directly in these findings,” he said. “Clarke tried to be innovative by testing out risk-based ideas and was turned on by Theresa May.”

More than 70% of civil servants in the Home Office said they were unable to persuade ministers to accept innovative policies, compared with an average of 57% across the rest of government. The main sticking point was, they said, “a tendency for ministers to have fixed ideas about the policies they want to see implemented’”.

A third of those in the department said ministers refused to take “well-judged risks” because of their reluctance to “approve spending that might be wasted, for fear of attracting criticism”.

The survey also revealed that more than 50% of civil servants in the Cabinet Office and the Department for Education and Skills felt colleagues had been employed on the basis of their connections to the Conservative or Liberal Democrat parties. This compares with 26% in the Home Office and the Department for Work and Pensions. Almost 40% are concerned the government’s cuts, reforms and policies will affect the civil service’s ability to focus on the public good in the face of competing political and financial priorities.

Two thirds fear they will lose the ability to “provide impartial, honest and open policy advice to ministers”.

Sir Bob Kerslake, head of the civil service, admitted incompetent staff were not being challenged. “We have to put our hands up here and say, whilst there has been some improvement, generally we’ve got to be more consistent and more robust about performance management,” said Kerslake.

“The consistent message back is that we need to tackle people who are poor performers,” he said. “I absolutely share and agree with that view, as do ministers.”

Fewer than one third of civil servants felt their department is equipped to deliver the coalition’s priorities in tackling the deficit and delivering service reform. They say they are seriously concerned about this failing. In the Home Office, that rose to 43%, with just 41% saying they felt they felt positive about the future.

About half of all civil servants feel alienated and ignored over reforms, rising to 58% in Revenue Customs. Over 40% of employees complain their IT systems are “inappropriate”.

Two-thirds feel the government’s attempt to encourage greater community action by involving the voluntary and private sectors in policy development and delivery is a “flawed” and “poor idea” that is unlikely to work.

A spokesman for the MoD said: “We are transforming defence and as a result we are creating a smaller, more efficient, professional MoD. We are confident we have the best people to do this. They are trained, motivated and supported to deliver for the Armed Forces on operations. These results are not surprising at a time of reform. However, these changes are being introduced for the benefit of Defence as a whole.”

Article source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/may/17/passport-row-home-office-survey-1

Ministers are failing to tackle the housing crisis and not enough new homes are being built, leading to rising rental levels and growing homelessness and overcrowding, according to a report by leading housing experts.

The report by the National Housing Federation, Shelter and the Chartered Institute of Housing highlights areas where the coalition is in charge of deteriorating housing conditions. It points out that while there has been a small increase in new builds, the 109,020 completed homes in 2011 is almost 40% below the 2007 peak of 175,560 – and less than half the number the government admits would be required annually to meet demand.

The knock-on effects are that poorer people will find it harder to pay for a roof over their head as the combination of rising rents and falling benefits make housing less affordable.

Homelessness is also increasing. The number of councils’ “acceptances” of homeless households reached 12,830 in the final quarter of 2011 – up 27% from the period during which the government came to power.

The report also says that overcrowding is becoming an issue – with more families squeezed into ever smaller spaces. The report, for the first time, says the number of households living in overcrowded conditions continues to rise, from 630,000 in 2009-10 to 655,000 in 2010-11.

The authors argue that building more homes would also boost the economy – crucial at a time when the country has entered a double dip recession. Grainia Long, chief executive of the Chartered Institute of Housing, said the “government needs to step up its efforts in response and be more ambitious in its strategy to boost housing supply and activity in the wider housing sector. Addressing the housing crisis in this way would also be a much-needed and powerful stimulus to economic growth.”

Charities that backed the report were more critical of government strategy. Kay Boycott, director of communications, policy and campaigns at Shelter, said: “Every day we see families up and down the country whose lives are being torn apart by the shortage of affordable homes. This government has had two years to start delivering on housing, yet this report paints a pretty bleak picture of its current record on housing in all its forms.”

Jack Dromey MP, Labour’s shadow housing minister, pointed out the report said the government is failing to deliver or making no progress on eight out of 10 key housing indicators. He said: “The report paints a bleak picture … housebuilding is down, homelessness is up and rents are increasingly unaffordable.

“The deterioration in outcomes outlined in this report show this out of touch government still isn’t listening. They’re failing to help the young couples who can’t get on the housing ladder. They’re failing those families struggling with high rents in the private sector and the millions on waiting lists. And they’re failing the increasing number of people sleeping on our streets.

Article source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/may/17/government-failing-homes-built

University students in England spend almost no more time with their lecturers than they did six years ago, despite paying three times as much in tuition fees, a study has shown.

A poll of more than 9,000 students by the Higher Education Policy Institute found that first- and second-year undergraduates have, on average, 13.9 hours of timetabled tutorials, seminars and lectures a week.

Six years ago, when the institute carried out a similar survey, students had 13.7 hours a week.

Between 2006 and 2012, tuition fees in England trebled from £1,000 to £3,000. This autumn they will rise again – to up to £9,000 a year. The amount universities receive from the state has been cut. Instead, students are being asked to pay more in the form of a loan that they repay when they graduate and are earning more than £21,000.

The research shows that asking students to pay more may have led to them spending more of their own time on their degrees. Today’s undergraduates study alone for 14.4 hours each week on average, compared with 13.1 hours six years ago, the institute found.

However, the research reveals that the total workload for a degree – the number of hours spent in tutorials, seminars and lectures and studying alone each week – varies significantly depending on the subject studied and whether an undergraduate is at an older or newer university.

Students at institutions established before 1992 work for an average of 28.6 hours each week, while those at universities created after 1992 work for 25.9 hours.

Older universities offer students more time in tutorials, lectures and seminars than newer universities, the research found. On average, students at older institutions have 13.1 hours a week with lecturers, while those at newer institutions have 12.4 hours.

Some students on media studies degrees are required to spend about half the number of hours with lecturers and in private study of those on medicine courses. A media studies student has on average between 18.1 and 23 hours a week, compared with between 37.3 and 34.5 hours a week for a medicine student.

Bahram Bekhradnia, director of the Higher Education Policy Institute, said some students’ workload resembled a part-time job, while for others it was the equivalent of a full-time post.

He said the research raised difficult questions about the comparability of degrees from English universities. “How is it possible in one university or in one subject to obtain a degree with so much less effort than is required in another university or subject? And what does it say about what it means to possess a degree from an English university if this is so?”

The study did not publish a breakdown by university of the amount of time students studied each week.

From September, all universities will be required to publish the amount of time students receive with lecturers for each degree and the employment outcomes of each course.

The National Union of Students said undergraduates expect more of universities as a result of higher fees, but institutions were failing to deliver more for them.

“Students going on to campuses this year will feel like they’re paying more and will have increased expectations to match, but there is no evidence that shifting the financial burden to students gives them more power,” Liam Burns, president of the National Union of Students, said.

Article source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2012/may/17/students-time-lecturers

The international arms trade has become the greatest threat to development and has to be controlled by a tough treaty to regulate weapons and munitions sales, a government minister warns.

In a speech to a security thinktank, Alan Duncan, the minister for international development, will urge allies such as the US to set aside their concerns and sign up to the comprehensive arms trade treaty (ATT), which will be hammered out during a month-long negotiation at the UN in July.

Britain has been one of the key supporters of a treaty that could prevent countries selling arms to any regime that might use them to violate human rights.

Speaking to the Guardian, Duncan said: “The arms trade has become the greatest threat to development, beyond disease and disaster. We are making some progress on issues such as polio and malaria.The factor that is most restraining development is conflict, which is why this new treaty is so important. It has massive implications for development.”

The UN conference in July is the culmination of six years’ lobbying and haggling by governments, arms companies and aid agencies. It should lead to a treaty that harmonises and toughens up international laws governing the sale of arms into one comprehensive, legally binding, document.

Oxfam has estimated that the absence of a single binding treaty has allowed at least $2.2bn [£1.38bn] worth of arms and ammunition to be imported under arms embargoes between 2000 and 2010.

At the moment, the new ATT would ban all weapons sales to countries that could use them to abuse human rights, or encourage corruption or armed violence.

Such a treaty might have stopped Syria importing arms in 2010, the year before an uprising brutally suppressed by the Assad regime.

Duncan admitted there would be difficulties defining the banning of arms sales in this way, but insisted it was right to include the concept.

“It is nebulous, but we are in favour of it being there. It will be left to the signatory countries to implement. We are not setting up an international police force. There will be a shared obligation among signatory countries to police the treaty.”

Duncan added that it was essential the ATT included “from fighter planes down to portable weapons, small arms and ammunition”.

He said: “Including the portable weapons is vitally important. It is one of the most dramatic drivers of conflict and development decay. This treaty has to cover the full spectrum of weaponry. Crucially, there will also be a register of brokers, to stop middlemen from being able to dump arms into areas.”

In recent months the US has expressed concern about the treaty being too prescriptive, as have China and Russia.

But Duncan hopes Washington can still be persuaded and ensure there is “a quantum leap forward”. He said: “The US is less enthusiastic than we are, but you never know. If our defence industries can be in favour of this, so can theirs. Our resolve is clear and we are taking a lead.”

The global weapons market is estimated to be worth $55bn, and the UN Office for Disarmament Affairs says: “The trade in conventional weapons – from warships and battle tanks to fighter jets and machine guns – remains poorly regulated.

“No set of internationally agreed standards exist to ensure that arms are only transferred for appropriate use.”

In a recent report, Oxfam claimed that in the first decade of this century several states broke embargoes and continued to trade weapons on a large scale. The report cited a list of countries, which included Burma ($600m of trade from 2000 to 2010), Iran ($574m from 2007 to 2010) and the Democratic Republic of the Congo ($124m, 2000 to 2002).

Article source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/may/17/minister-arms-trade-treaty

24min ago

The 2012 race comes down to Obama’s approvals v Romney’s favorables

Harry J Enten: A challenger’s favorability can jump around, but an incumbent’s approval is harder to move – and Obama has no comfort zone

Article source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cartoon/2012/may/17/mervyn-king-cartoon

Courts will continue to scrutinise the government’s foreign policy decisions in ways that would have been unthinkable not long ago, Lord Sumption said this week. The recently-appointed supreme court justice predicted that the state would escape from the “spider’s web” of the law less often than before.

His assessment – in a lecture at the London School of Economics – is important because judges sitting at the highest level have every opportunity to influence the way the law develops. Sumption’s views are particularly interesting because they are the first opportunity we have have to place him on the left-right judicial spectrum: uniquely in recent decades, Sumption never sat as a full-time judge in England and Wales before joining the UK’s highest court.

He clearly shares the view of “every serious authority on international law” that British military operations in Iraq in 2003 were unlawful. And he appears to associate himself with “judicial revulsion against American policies and methods” associated with detention of prisoners by the United States at Guantanamo Bay. But he does not go so far as to say that all aspects of foreign policy are now reviewable by the courts.

Sumption traces the approach taken by the courts back to the famous GCHQ case of 1984, in which a majority of the law lords decided that foreign affairs were not susceptible to judicial review. One way of expressing this approach is to say that such matters are “non-justiciable”. Another way of putting it is to say that foreign affairs are a matter for elected governments, not unelected judges.

In Sumption’s view, “the principle of non-justiciability has never been a very satisfactory explanation of the reluctance of the courts to interfere with the conduct of foreign relations”. That is because “the acts of the executive are by definition justiciable in its own courts”. Principles of public law can be applied to the government’s conduct of foreign affairs as they can to policies at home.

The new supreme court justice identifies a progressive retreat in the non-justiciability theory over the past decade. It has been replaced with the division-of-powers theory – the principle that certain matters are not for the courts. But that has produced a rather ragged jurisprudence, with the boundary being drawn in different places depending on the nature of the decision under review.

He notes Lord Bingham’s view, in 2006, that the courts should be “very slow” to review the lawfulness of the Iraq war. But that did not mean judges had no power to do so or that the issue was non-justiciable.

The case of Al Rawi, also in 2006, showed that the court of appeal was willing to depart from the principle of non-justiciability in a case involving the human rights of detainees at Guantanamo Bay. And the third in a trio of Guantanamo cases “which was clearly strongly influenced by judicial revulsion against America policies and methods” was the famous Binyam Mohamed case in which Sumption appeared for the British government.

In that case, the court of appeal decided in 2010 that seven short paragraphs in an earlier judgment should not be redacted, even though they summarised intelligence material that had been supplied in confidence by US intelligence agencies. Sumption notes that, at an earlier hearing in the same case, the high court had characterised objections by Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, as irrational. Though the court of appeal did not follow that reasoning, he sees it as “a sign of the growing self-confidence of judges addressing issues of foreign policy”.

None of this means the courts will positively direct the foreign secretary on how he should conduct diplomatic relations, Sumption notes. There has to be a “domestic foothold”, some link with individuals for whom the UK is responsible. Nor will the courts allow the Human Rights Act to be used “as a basis for challenging governmental decisions on major policy choices in foreign affairs”.

But Sumption has no doubt that the courts will continue to scrutinise the impact on individuals of foreign policy decisions in a way that would not long ago have been unthinkable. “The law’s web is spun more finely, and the state may escape it less often than before,” he concludes.

Though Sumption presents his lecture as no more than a summary of recent judicial developments, there is nothing in it to suggest that he does not support the direction of travel. He does not align himself with the ministers he represented in court.

The law has moved a long way in less than three decades. If Sumption has anything to do with it – and now of course he does – the foreign secretary of the day will soon be held to account in much the same way as the home secretary is already.

Article source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/may/16/sumption-courts-foreign

Unemployment declined by 45,000 in the three months to March, raising hopes that Britain’s recession-hit economy is on the mend.

The total number of jobless fell to 2.63 million, according to the Office for National Statistics, its lowest level since last summer. That brought the unemployment rate in the first quarter of 2012 down to 8.2%, from 8.4% in the last three months of 2011.

Employment minister Chris Grayling seized on the news as a “step in the right direction”.

The ONS said the more timely claimant count, which measures the number of people receiving jobseeker’s allowance, had also fallen, by 13,700 in April, to 1.59 million.

The news was welcomed by the coalition, which has faced sharp criticism over its handling of the economy since it was confirmed that the UK has slipped into a double-dip recession.

“I know I never place too much store on a single month’s figures because these numbers go up and down and we are clearly living in difficult times economically, but any improvement in the labour market is very welcome,” Grayling said.

However, there were still clear signs of strains in the labour market, with the number of people working part-time because they are unable to find a full-time role hitting a record high of 1.4 million.

Paul Kenny, general secretary of the GMB union, said: “That there are 2.63 million people without jobs shows the extent to which the government’s gamble with the economy has failed. So instead of borrowing to support the economy and to continue the recovery the government has had to borrow to fund the recession.”

The squeeze on household spending power has also continued for those who have managed to stay in work, with average pay excluding bonuses increasing at an annual rate of 2% – much weaker than the 3.5% rate of inflation.

The ONS said that bonuses had been lower in the first three months of 2012 than last year, “particularly within the finance and business services and manufacturing sectors,” pushing annual pay growth across the economy including bonuses to just 0.6%.

Youth unemployment also declined, according to the ONS: there were 1.02 million 16 to 24-year-olds looking for work in the three months to March, down by 17,000 on the previous quarter. However, the unemployment rate for this age group was still 21.9%, more than two-and-a-half times higher than for the workforce as a whole.

Alan Clarke, of Scotia Capital, said the improvement in the jobs numbers pointed to a strengthening in the overall economic outlook. “The labour data suggests that the recovery is ticking over quite nicely, though it would be foolhardy to get complacent given that the risks facing the economy are skewed to the downside.”

Article source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/may/16/uk-unemployment-fall-recession-economy

The City regulator has moved to ban one of the City’s most senior money market brokers, Tony Verrier, after he embarked on a poaching spree when he quit Tullett Prebon to join the broker’s arch-rival BGC Partners.

Verrier is taking the case to tribunal after the Financial Services Authority ruled he was “not a fit and proper person due to concerns over his honesty, integrity and reputation”.

The FSA based its decision on a high court ruling. Tullett brought the case after Verrier attempted to hire 13 former colleagues from the firm where he had been the second most senior executive after Terry Smith, in 2009.

It is unusual for the FSA to rely entirely on court findings to ban a regulated individual. But Simon Morris, lawyer at CMS Cameron McKenna, said the FSA had done the right thing in following the court decision. “Once the high court has determined that someone is dishonest there is no need for the FSA to replicate the process. The FSA’s decision has followed due process and Verrier can now test it before the tribunal,” Morris said.

The high court had found Verrier induced brokers to breach their contracts and that he “stuck to the truth where he was able to, but departed from it with equanimity and adroitness where the truth was inconvenient”.

Between April 2008 and April 2009 Verrier lost or disposed of eight BlackBerries. The FSA said while Verrier argued that he had a history of losing BlackBerrys, the court had found it was “inconceivable” that these had gone missing and had been deliberately lost because they might contain “inconvenient material”.

Verrier had resigned from Tullett on 28 August 2008 and told the firm he had been constructively dismissed on 3 September. He was prohibited from working for BGC until January 2009 when he became the “number two” in the London arm of the US-based company.

However, the court heard that he had dinner with Tullett employees before then and had intended a substantial recruiting exercise from Tullett which “was in part revenge for the way he felt he had been treated by Tullett”.

No one from BGC was immediately available for comment although the FSA described Verrier as a “senior executive” at the firm, appearing to confirm that he continued to work there.

Tracey McDermott, the FSA’s acting director of enforcement and financial crime, said the regulator had concluded he was not “fit and proper” to work in the industry.

“One of our fundamental requirements for approved persons is that they must act with honesty and integrity. This is to ensure not only that their customers and clients are treated properly but also that the regulator can have trust and confidence in what we are being told about the way businesses are being run,” she said.

The FSA cited conclusions by the judge, who had said: “Mr Verrier decided that, come what may, that is, whether or not the recruits and each of them had good grounds, weak grounds, or no grounds, to claim constructive dismissal, within a short period of their signing with BGC he would instruct his recruits to leave Tullett en masse … It was Mr Verrier’s plan to do what he could to induce Tullett to ‘foul up’ and to give grounds for alleging constructive dismissal.”

On 25 March 2009, Tullett had sought an injunction against BGC preventing employees from being hired and shortly afterwards 10 of the 13 who had been intending to leave told Tullett they believed they had been constructively dismissed.

Article source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/may/16/fsa-moves-ban-broker-tony-verrier

When you’ve got a socking great ceremonial barge to sail in on the river Thames, you need a bit of practice. Where better than on the Leeds-Liverpool canal in Burnley?

That’s what the Queen decided. Maybe she was advised, rather than making up her own mind; but she’s always said to want to retire to the Trough of Bowland, should that ever be possible, and to share Alistair Campbell‘s famous devotion to the Clarets. So I think she decided.

Whatever, Burnley got the full sunshine of the Diamond Jubilee tour of the UK today and the high point was HM and her party standing on the prow of the Pride of Sefton, an excellent childrens’ charity narrowboat which chugged her into the Weavers’ Triangle. This is the site of more Windsor family involvement. Whatever your views on Royalty and republicanism, Prince Charles‘ assorted trusts have been very active here.

Six of his charities are involved in regeneration work in the former centre of the world’s cotton manufacturing industry (and still the home of the biggest single global outlet for Benedictine; the Burnley Miners and Working Mens Social Club which serves Benny Hot, the boiling water mixer which saw the Lancashire Fusiliers through the First World War). The Queen did not call in there, given a busy schedule, but she made it to Turf Moor where they gave her a golden ticket, entitling free entry to any Clarets’ match.

They like the Royals. The Queen and Duke of Edinburgh had a peek at a framed shirt with the sovereign’s coat of arms which recalls the 1914 Cup Final when George V became the first reigning monarch to present the trophy. He presented it to Burnley for beating Liverpool 1-0. Four months later, the war began which was to slaughter or maim many of those present.

Narrow boats are handsome too. Photograph: Worldwide Picture Library / Alam/Alamy

Burnley has seen very tough times, but retains an energy and optimism which is slowly helping recovery as the Northerner has reported several times in the past year. The Queen added her portion after touring the canalside triangle of former mills, where regeneration aims to create 1000 new private sector jobs and a technical college teaching 14-19-year-olds a traditional curriculum alongside practical engineering and manufacturing skills.

Stepping ashore from her northern barge, she said:

By joining forces with local groups here in Burnley the charities have helped to make a considerable difference to the town and its people. I have no doubt much of this is due to the hard work and commitment of those who selflessly volunteer their time and energy, some of whom are here today.
The leadership and interest of the Prince of Wales has encouraged and enthused communities to come together to improve their neighbourhoods, their towns and cities and their countryside, as well as ensuring that the charities focus on the right areas, such as the quality of the built environment and opportunities for young people.To all those who work so hard to support these admirable goals, I give my thanks.

Meanwhile, the massive southern barge, The Spirit of Chartwell, unveiled details of the mega-flag which will float above the Diamond Jubilee flotilla as it processes along the Thames in London on 3 June. Ten square feet of red velvet emblazoned with more than half a million gold buttons, it it is redolent of the heyday of the mills on both sides of the Pennines. Maybe HM could donate it after the bunfights to the Weavers’ Triangle?

Article source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/the-northerner/2012/may/16/burnley-barge-weavers-triangle-queen-diamond-jubilee-thames-pageant-prince-charles

A 15-year-old boy is facing a life sentence after being found guilty of stabbing a student to death in a row over conkers.

The teenager was found guilty at the Old Bailey in London of murdering architecture student Steven Grisales, 21.

Grisales died last August after he went over to remonstrate with a group of young people throwing conkers still in their spiky husks. He was walking to Silver Street station, Edmonton, north London, when he was attacked.

The teenager, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, was remanded in custody to be sentenced next month.

After the verdict, Detective Inspector Richard Beadle said: “Steven did no more than stand up to unruly youths and for that he has lost his life. The defendant’s arrogance and contempt for others belies his age.”

Article source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/may/16/teenager-found-guilty-murder-conkers