Tackling social care will be a major test of how serious Andy Burnham is about reversing the mistakes of the past 40 years

Andy Burnham's pledge to tackle the social care crisis is most welcome. He has experienced the present systems vagaries at first hand, with his father suffering from Alzheimers. I had a similar experience, with my father getting dementia and mother physical breakdown. Both involving leaning on the care system in later years Tackling the care system also goes to the heart of how the new PM intends to deal with the legacy of the last 40 years Care like the water system and other services handed over / or left to the private sector has become a cash cow for investors. The actual care provided is almost secondary. Private Equity owns much of the private care sector in the UK. Profit is the priority. The care companies pay their staff as little as possible, many on the minimum wage. Zero hours contracts have been rampant in the area for years. I remember talking to the staff that came to help my Mum. If they complained, hours would be cut. When I suggested they join a union, this was regarded as a way to lose their job. The amounts charged for residential care are astronomical, ranging well over £2,000 a week in many cases. If people cannot pay, then the duty passes to the local authority.They have a statutory duty to provide. But they have to deal with the same privately run care homes. Care in the homes is variable, most do an excellent job. There have been the exceptions that hit the headlines. The market model, though, runs through the ethos. Patients are seen as commodities to be bled for more revenue, where possible. This became apparent with my father, who was getting lots of hair cuts. I pointed out he had less hair than ever before, yet was having more hair cuts. No one was denying him the dignity of a hair cut but it was an added extra beyond the basic fee for care. An extra that could be charged for. Migrant workers are key to the care system, without them It would collapse - similar to the NHS. So if the PM wants a functioning care system he needs to have a word with the Home Secretary, who seems determined to make life ever more difficult for migrants, who want to come to work in the UK. So really reforming the care sector will be a test of how serious Burnham is about reversing the market driven policies of the past 40 years. The staff are needed and must be paid properly. They must have security of employment. Care work is demanding requiring many and varied skills. Care needs to be state run, possibly via local councils. Profit for the few cannot continue to be the guiding mantra. It should be a not for profit area. The media appear obsessed with the cost of any proposal put forward - how will it be paid for? That can be done via general taxation. An additional bonus would come from relieving local authorities from having to find the funding for care. This would set them free in many other areas. A new system for social care can be created that will serve the common good of all. What is important though is that the dignity of the human being is put front and centre. That dignity must apply as much to those who work in the area, as the patients they serve. A state owned and run service, encompassing the values of human dignity, not private profit has to be the way forward.

Prison system must be about rehabilitation, not vengeance

Prisons cannot become vengeance factories for victims and the relatives of victims seeking revenge against perpetrators. Whilst the hurt felt can never be underestimated, the victim''s role should end, once the perpetrator has been tried and sentenced by the courts. It is then for the criminal justice system to ensure justice is achieved - that includes managing release and rehabilitation. It has been widely accepted that incarcerating people does not cut crime. In fact, prisons are universities of crime equipping offenders to be better criminals on release. The only way prison can be a positive experience is if proper rehabilitation takes place, giving offenders and the public another chance. Rehabilitation, though, can only work in orderly run prisons, not overcrowded battery style facilities. The latter amount to powder kegs, hence the government's desire to cut numbers in the present overcrowded system. As a former chief inspector of prisons pointed out, all but a handful of prisoners will be released at some point and they could be living next door to you or I. Media incited hysteria may sell papers but it does not solve the problems of the justice system. Out of sight out of mind is not a criminal justice policy. Society needs to face up to the challenges that offenders pose. Punishment, yes, but less incarceration and more rehabilitation should be the way forward. Failure to deal with the present system on the basis of logic, rather than the last headline, will see the powder keg that is the prison system explode, with riots and mayhem - surely no one wants that?

Growth of microbreweries - a local success story

The growth of the brewing industry has been one of the big success stories of recent years. There have been the old traditional brewers like Fullers in West London. The brewery sits next to the Thames at Chiswick, the fantastic aroma of beer filling the air. Beer drinkers will be familiar with Fullers trademark London Pride, a staple of many pubs around these parts. Others like ESB and 1845 also crop up. The Fullers brewery was founded in 1845. Back in the day, beer was a regular part of working people's diets, safer to drink than water. Fullers survived and prospered. They have 360 pubs across the land. Other big brewers like Kent based Shepherds Neame and Adnams in Southwold will also be familiar. There have been many ups and downs in the brewing industry over the past century. The modern brewing industry, though, got a real boost in 2002, when then Chancellor Gordon down brought in Small Brewers Relief. This cut the tax payable by 50% on breweries producing up to 5000 hectolitres (880,000 pints) per annum. There was then a taper of tax payment up to 60,000 hectolitres. Above that figure meant paying the full tax amount. The tax break gave the small brewers a chance against their larger brethren, who benefited from having economies of scale. The impact on the industry was dramatic, resulting in hundreds of smaller breweries developing across the country. In East London, the brewing industry really took off. What has become known as the beer mile in and around Blackhorse Road in Walthamstow bares witness. Many breweries have sprung up in the last 20 years. Present incumbents include East London Brewery, Pretty Decent, Signature, Exhale and 40 Foot. Brewing is not exclusive to this area, with others, like Libertalia recently starting under the railway bridge at Leyton. The Wanstead Beer Festival is supplied by many of these local breweries. The original tax break was campaigned for by the Society of Independent Brewers and the Campaign for Real Ale (CAMRA). Times though are tough for brewers and pubs. The cost of living crisis means people have less to spend. The costs of production have increased. Breweries and pubs have been forced to close down. More than a pub a week has been closing across the UK this year. Despite the great success of local brewers, some have been forced to close, such as Walthamstow based Beerblefish and Wildcard. Industry bodies have called for cuts to business rates to help. So these are tough times for the hospitality industry. It needs all of our support. The brewing sector is one of the modern day successes of the British economy. It is great to be able to go into our pubs and have a pint from a local brewery Similarly, people attending the Wanstead Beer Festival have said how much they enjoy being able to enjoy beer from the local breweries - a real precious resource. So let's make sure we support the beer makers, servers and drinkers. See you in 10 October at the Wanstead Beer Festival - tickets now on sale at www.wansteadbeerfestival.co.uk

New Prime Minister must not be fooled by false defence versus welfare spending arguments

New Prime Minister Andy Burnham will have spending choices to make as he takes up the reins of power. One unfortunate narrative pushed forward is the need to spend more on defence. This extra spending it is argued should come from welfare, so something of a loaded dice. First, what is the extra defence spending for? Threats from Russia are often cited, though that country has been bogged down in the Ukraine conflict for over four years. So, is the threat over-hyped to justify more spending? The world situation has become more unstable, since Donald Trump became US President. The war with Iran is but the latest example. Trump has also indicated America won't continue to bankroll the defence of Europe. In this debate, it is significant to look at who is given the platforms to argue for more defence spending. Often, it is spokespeople for the arms industry dressed up as objective commentators. The Defence industry needs constant war and unrest to prosper. Another question should be what will the Ministry of Defence (MOD) do with extra funding? There is a blank cheque approach to the discourse on this subject, yet the MOD is legendary amongst Whitehall departments for wasting money. Procurement over the years has been appalling. Defence will not improve by just throwing money at it. The next part of the argument is that the funding should come from welfare - why? Again, 'helpful' commentators and right wing politicians argue welfare spending is out of control, spiralling ever upwards. It needs to be cut. But as economist Jonathan Portes points out, the welfare spending level as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product is lower than 15 years ago. And compared to European neighbours it is a lot lower. Another favourite target within welfare spending is the state pension. Yet the pension is a right, not a benefit. People have paid National Insurance for 35 years plus to receive the pension. What is more the National Insurance Fund, which holds the funds is £74 billion in credit. Despite all the talk of scrapping the triple lock (ensuring pensions go up by the highest of prices, wages or 2.5%), UK pensioners are worse off than many European counterparts. There maybe an argument for some increase in targeted defence spending but the argument needs to be far more holistic. The big threat is not any one country but climate change. This is destabilising the world, creating ever more refugees and conflict. Yet, ironically, often, those arguing for increased defence spending at the cost of welfare number amongst those arguing for increased fossil fuel extraction, such as oil from the North Sea. So something of a circular, contradictory construct. More funding maybe needed for Defence and other areas but not by cutting welfare or taking climate change enhancing actions. Maybe there should be more taxes from those with the broadest shoulders. Also, some of the inefficiencies in present operations and the continued retention of the Trident nuclear program? Described as Britain's independent deterrent it is anything but. Controlled by the US, the nuclear weaponry is paid for by British tax payers. Cutting an increasingly redundant program would save tens of millions. So the new PM will have to look carefully at spending setting out his priorities for government. What he should not do is fall for redundant neo-liberal based arguments pushed by vested interests. The common good should be the mantra going forward, not who can profit on the backs of the most vulnerable. published - East London Guardian - 24/7/2026

Review of Rebel and the Peacemaker by Geraldine Roberts

This fascinating book traces the lives of Charles and Mary Bagot through turbulent times in America, Russia and latterly Canada during the first half of the 19th century. Geraldine Roberts second book follows on from the Angel and the Cad about the antics of the Duke of Wellington's nephew William Pole Tylney Long Wellesley. In that case, Long Wellesley managed to destroy his wife Catherine 's life. Though, it became the first case where a man was denied custody of his children (that duty going to the Duke of Wellington, after Catherine''s death). Roberts deploys a similar forensic style of approach in this latest book, which picks up with Long Wellesley's sister Mary, who marries Charles Bagot. Bagot is determined to serve in the diplomatic sector. He becomes great friends with future Foreign Secretary and Prime Minister George Canning, though also shares his rise and fall in fortunes. Politically, Bagot is a Tory, at a time when the Whigs are seen as the coming liberating force. However, he excels as a diplomat. First, being sent as British ambassador to Washington in 1815. The British had just burnt Washington in the war of 1812 to 1815. Post war, things are tense but the Bagots charm their way around the diplomatic circuit. Important treaties are agreed, bringing peace. Bagot plays a key role in one of the few positive actions of the British Empire, helping secure liberty for some of the slaves who joined the British side during the three year war. After three arduous years in America, Bagot becomes ambassador to Russia. There, dealing with the elusive Tsar Alexander I. A period follows as ambassador to the Netherlands. Finally, Bagot is brought out of retirement to become Governor General of Canada. A role where he brought unity to a divided country, whilst being vilified at home in the UK for his liberal actions. Roberts provides a fascinating insight to an interesting period of history. Diplomacy in a modern sense is in it's infancy. The period covered, bridges the end of the Georgians and beginning of Victoria's reign (Queen Victoria is not a Bagot fan). The change in reigns is described in terms of a decline of the "vulgar ostentation" of the Georgian era. Whilst at times the author seems something of a fan of the Bagots, aka Hillary Mantel and Thomas Cromwell, she in the main keeps an objective observers pose. In many ways she is setting the record straight, recalling how the online biography at the National Gallery is less than complimentary, failing to mention his role as an abolitionist for slavery. Bagot seems to have been more appreciated in the annals of the US and Canada. Much of the book focuses on Mary, a vivacious, intelligent person, who does all she can within the many confines placed on women at the time. There are some other interesting social history titbits in the account, such as the rich and wealthy had access to a form of condom in these times. Not that that seemed to effect the Bagots, who had 10 children. Mary also had a number of affairs, seemingly forgiven by Charles. One child Arthur wasn't his. Also, that non- monogamy was routinely practiced in the late 18th century, though maybe not a shock, just that it seemed an acknowledged thing at that time.Simething no doubt lost in the haze that the Victorians seem to have pulled over much of the concept of history today. Overall, a very interesting read, especially for those interested in the history of this time, bridging the Georgian and Victorian periods, as the British Empire and influence expanded. published by Canelo August, £20 Published - Morning Star - 25/7/2026

National Emergency Briefing outlines the need for urgent action to address the environmental crisis - the message there is not time to waste, particularly indulging the arguments of fossil fuel funded climate deniers

Extreme weather with fires in the summer and floods in the winter, food shortages, with harvests failing every other year, poor health and growing poverty are all consequences of the climate crisis the world now faces. > These are some of the stark facts presented in the National Emergency Briefing film being shown across the land. > The film, hosted by naturalist Chris Packham, shows a briefing presented at Westminster Central Hall last November. > The briefing saw experts from several fields address different aspects of the crisis. These included weather, biodiversity, security, health, economics, tipping points and transition. > There was then discussion after each segment, with the likes of Deborah Meaden, Jennifer Saunders , Koni Haq and members of the public. > The message was stark, namely that time is running out. Some dramatic change is needed in the way that humans live on the planet > The statistics were alarming, such as that one in four homes in the UK (8 million) will be at risk of flooding by 2050. Food insecurity will increase, with food price inflation growing due to extremes of weather. A third of food price inflation was due to extremes of weather in 2023. > Britain's green and pleasant land will be no more, with extremes of cold and wet in the winter, followed by intense heat (40 degrees plus) in the summer becoming the norm. > There was an upside to this largely doomsday scenario. This envisaged a major transition away from fossil fuels dependency. More renewable energy sources making the UK more secure, with cheaper energy and food. > "Flood absorbing parks, cooler greener cities, better insulation and resilient infrastructure protect people, cut bills,improve health and create skilled jobs," said Hayley Fowler, Professor of Climate Change Impacts at Newcastle University, who cited the example of Copenhagen that has reinvented itself as a sponge city. > What the film did not tackle was the role of the climate deniers in destroying the planet. Those among the political classes, who oppose net zero policies, denying what is happening, despite the evidence all around. It is an Alice in Wonderland approach of simply denying the science of what is happening if you don't like it. > What is more such an approach - as typified by Trumps America, where wind turbines are being destroyed to restore fossil fuel sourced energy - is economically backward. > China is leading the charge on renewables, with growing amounts of its energy coming from that source. It also supplies 80 per cent of the world's solar panels and over half of the electric vehicles. > China is moving totally away from fossil fuels, which are not only damaging the planet but becoming the most expensive way of supplying energy. It is not doing this out of some sense of altruism but because it makes economic and rational sense. > In this area, Trump''s policies will once again ultimately make America poorer again. > The recently elected Reform councils pledged to go back to the future by reversing environmental measures, will soon find this costs more money. The penny has to drop sometime that net zero is the only way forward. > The National Briefing Film is a great tool to communicate the nature of the crisis and the need for urgent action. Organisers want the film to be shown in community groups across the country, with MPs and councillors invited. The ultimate goal is to get a one hour screening of the film on TV. > What is for sure is that urgent action is needed. This is a worsening crisis, not another view on climate. Positive things are happening in this country at local and national level but everything has to happen more quickly. The upside is more jobs, security, cheaper energy and food plus a better life. The alternative is the end of life as we know it. >

To Kill a Mockingbird - Wyndham theatre

To Kill a Mockingbird - Wyndham Theatre The latest production of To Kill a Mockingbird has prescient timing,coming as the darker forces of violence and racism are very much on the move in Trumps America. The scenes dramatically brought to life in this play reminds all of how close to the abyss things have become. Previous incarnations of the play have had the luxury of a feeling of looking back, things aren't as bad now as then - no one could fall into that trap now. In Trumps America the lynch mob mentality has been emboldened, out on the streets in official and unofficial guises. The central character of Atticus Finch is played to great effect by Richard Coyle. The moral, yet vulnerable man, multi-layered, rather than simply good versus evil. He and the children Scout Finch (Anna Munden), Jem Finch (Gabriel Scott) and Dill Harris (Dylan Malyn) hold the narrative together. The whole episode is set over one summer. This adaptation by Aaron Sorkin brings the black characters very much into the foreground. In the original 1960 Harper Lee book, and then film, they were silent victims, being done to - appreciative to Atticus and the good whites. In this version, housekeeper Calpurnia (Andrea Davy) voices the anger. She is critical of Atticus, with his at times patronising ways - expecting gratitude. It is Calpurnia who breaks the reasoned tone of Atticus, when the news of the death of Tom Robinson comes through. She allocates blame to the jurors, who returned guilty verdicts, as "monsters" in the court room and "murderers" outside. Another element making this a more contemporaneous account is the role of the abusive father Bob Ewell. Played brilliantly by Oscar Pearce, the voice of the angry disempowered white man in America rings out. The supremacist message that the white man built America and Europe, yet he is the one now under threat - the new oppressed minority! Atticus is not only the lawyer defending a black man but the epitomy of everything that Ewell despises and blames for his own situation. "Your not one of us," is a memorable line. Director, Bartlett Sher, ensures the right tempo throughout, dark forces at play, yet also much virtue and quite a bit of humour. On set there is slick switching between the courtroom and the Finch house. The design is very good, enabling a seamless flow in proceedings. One possible fault would be the transition from court scene, verdict and death of Robinson to the later action involving the attack on the children and saviour role of Boo Radley. This passage has a slightly disjointed feel. Overall, though, this is an excellent production, well worth seeing. The way in which the original book has been brought up to date to resonate with Trump's America makes it particularly poignant. There is also a clear warning as to where things are headed, if the divisions now widening in society, are not healed soon. Runs till 12 September