Adnan Al-Daini

Would Einstein and Newton have made good teachers of physics and mathematics in a school? I very much doubt it.  Being an expert in a particular subject does not necessarily mean you are able to teach it to a class of teenagers; obvious really, but not to Britain’s Education Secretary apparently.

The decision by Michael Gove, the Education Secretary, that Academies - semi-independent state schools that receive funding directly from the government rather than through a local authority - can appoint teachers without formal teaching qualifications - “qualified teacher status” (QTS) - was characterized by the Department of Education as no big deal, and that most teachers will continue to have QTS qualifications.  

But how long will this remain the case?  Presumably, the Education Secretary believes that formal teaching qualifications make no difference to the quality of teaching in the classroom. That being the case why, then, should anyone bother with it in the future?

Academies currently form the majority of secondary schools in England, and with this change the number of qualified teachers will surely dwindle, and before long the majority will be unqualified.  School governing bodies and heads will come under increasing pressure to appoint unqualified teachers to save money.

More »

Adnan Al-Daini

The economic crash is not caused by workers having too much power, or employment laws stifling business. It is the result of a deregulated financial system, greed and usury in a market that is not free but rigged.

Exploitation and oppression have been with us since the dawn of time, by the strong of the weak, men of women, the rich of the poor.  A measure of civilised societies is their effectiveness in mitigating and controlling such unfair and unjust practices.

Laws and regulations limiting the powerful have been won through constant struggle and sacrifices by the masses, led by remarkable individuals to whom we should be grateful.  They stood up to tyranny and the orthodoxy of the time. Without them, for example, women would not have the vote, and slavery would still be with us today. 

It is no accident that exploitation of workers by corporations and the wealthy is worse in developing countries.  The conditions for such exploitation are present; they have no unions to protect the workers, no health and safety laws, chronic unemployment, no welfare safety net for the unemployed, disabled and vulnerable, and endemic corruption of politicians and officials.

More »

Adnan Al-Daini

So let me get this right: free market economists’, right wing politicians’ and commentators’ solution to the economic depression engulfing Europe and the U.S. is to cut government spending, slash welfare payments to the bone, and make it easier for employers to fire people.

Additionally, cut taxes to those at the top and give them a freer hand to incentivize them to use their entrepreneurial skills to create businesses, and with that jobs. Do not worry about the gap between the rich and the poor, they say, this is the price we have to pay for a dynamic economy that will make us all richer; they seem to have forgotten why we are in this mess.

Let us for a moment put aside the immorality of the impact of such actions on the vulnerable, the poor and the rising army of the unemployed; are they right? Do we really need to sacrifice social justice for good economic performance? 

Research by the Canadian Council on Social Development sought to examine those assertions and ideas. Put simply, it examined the proposition of the U.S economist Arthur Okun, who wrote:

Inequality reflects a system of rewards and penalties that is designed to encourage effort ...The pursuit of efficiency necessarily creates inequalities. And hence society faces a trade-off between equality and efficiency.

The work looked at per capita GDP growth in the 1990s, and for household after-tax income inequality (Gini index) in 1995 for Canada, the U.S., Australia, the UK and eight other European countries.

More »

Adnan Al-Daini

It is clear to anyone with an open mind, willing to be guided by reason, that severe cuts and austerity as a medicine to cure the patient are doing nothing of the sort; actually they are killing it.

Right wing politicians and commentators have always been able to appeal to the lowest instincts of human nature in a way that chimes with the aspirations of the many. Take, for example, the issue of the savage cuts in government spending; they are presented in the guise of a "family finances" argument.   As a family “wouldn't you want to pay your debts and live within your means?” is an appealing argument.   There is, of course, a crucial difference between running a household budget and running the country’s finances. 

If you are lucky enough to be employed, and you discover that your expenditure exceeds your income or you are in debt, the right thing to do is for your family to economize, so that it lives within its means and pays its debts.  

The income of a government, however, comes from the taxes we pay, and that depends on the economic activity in the country and the level of employment. In a recession economic activity is down, unemployment is up, and thus the tax intake goes down. 

Austerity and cuts will depress economic activity even further and unemployment will increase, thus reducing government income.  Moreover, the rise in unemployment has to be paid for by the government to ensure that people do not descend into the sort of poverty that currently exists in some developing countries.  Austerity, therefore, hits the economy with a double whammy, low income for the government and greater expenditure.

More »

Adnan Al-Daini

First class British Rail Mark 3 carriage

My wife and I arrived at Paddington railway station on Sunday lunchtime after a wet cold weekend in London. We were at the head of the queue entering the platform to board the train to Exeter. As I walked along the platform I counted three first class carriages out of a total of eight.

It was fortuitous that we were at the head of the queue so we managed to get a seat. By the time the train was ready to depart, every seat in our carriage was occupied with a few people standing between carriages. On leaving the train at Exeter I walked past the train trying to gauge how many people were in the three first class carriages. As far as I can tell there were four or five passengers in each coach.

I fully understand and appreciate that first class passengers have paid more and should expect a bit more comfort than the rest of us ordinary people. First class passengers can have their table at every seat, extra leg room and reclining seats but three coaches for 15 passengers! That smacks of incompetence, particularly when the rest of us are packed like sardines, with some passengers not even having a seat.

More »

Adnan Al-Daini

A bus and taxi pass Big Ben on Westminster Bridge in London

Politicians are completely out of touch with ordinary citizens regarding taxpayer funding of political parties.  People are disgusted with the influence exercised by an unscrupulous rich elite, that is able to bend politicians and policies to its will using its wealth. 

Powerful corporations and lobbying groups reinforce the stranglehold on political life, freezing out the ordinary voter, and adding to the sense of disenchantment with politicians and politics generally. 

The Prime Minister and the leader of the Labour party suggested a cap on private donations of £50,000, and £5,000 respectively, and all the major parties take the view that the electorate will not support state funding.   Something tells me that this view is based more on self-interest and wishful thinking than on reality. Let the debate begin in earnest and we will see.

A cap on private donations of even £5,000 is still far too high, with those able to afford such a donation having more influence on parties and their policies, than those who can afford substantially lower sums. 

More »

Adnan Al-Daini

Photo: Asylum seeker arrested as protesters gathered outside Lunar House, Croydon. - In a clear example of what [this] demonstration in Croydon was about, a distressed asylum seeker was arrested as protesters gathered outside Lunar House, which houses the headquarters of the Border and Immigration Agency (BIA) and its main screening unit. Three Metropolitan Police officers [...] grappled the man to the ground and restrained him whilst he lay face down on the concrete forecourt. He received cuts to his face as he shouted "Help me, help me!" Over 200 people from the Gatwick No Border Camp [had] gathered in East Croydon from 10am to protest against the mistreatment of refugees and asylum seekers at the hands of the UK immigration authorities. (UK Indymedia)

Asylum seekers are those, in the main, who are escaping war and/or have stood up to tyranny and injustice from their rulers. They are courageous people that need to be admired, not vilified.

Additionally, they are those who have the resourcefulness to escape their environment, overcoming in many cases unimaginable obstacles to make it to Britain. Given half a chance, they have the drive and wherewithal to make a positive contribution to Britain. Forebears of many of our current entrepreneurs and scientists sought asylum here for a variety of reasons and have enriched our society.

Applicants who do not qualify for refugee status under the 1951 UN convention on refugees are guilty of no more than being economic migrants trying to improve their future chances and that of their families. And let us be honest, how many of us would not do the same if we found ourselves under similar circumstances. Sometimes, those whose asylum applications are rejected have to be forcefully removed.

More »

Adnan Al-Daini

“They can’t lie straight in bed; they say one thing and mean another and they just answer a question with a question.”

So said a voter in Bradford West in answer to a question as to whether the three main parties Labour, Conservative and Lib Dems have lost touch with the grass roots.

A poll by The Independent on Sunday shows that 72% of people believe the Government is “out of touch with ordinary voters” and 60% do not trust the Prime Minister and the Chancellor on the economy.  Yet the Labour Party lost this safe seat in a landslide to George Galloway. 

People do not trust this government but they are not willing to put their trust in Labour either.  And who could blame them for that?  George Galloway put the reasons for the lack of trust in the main parties colourfully and succinctly:

“If a backside could have three cheeks then they [the main parties] are the three cheeks of the same backside. They support the same things, the same wars, the same neoliberal policies to make the poor poorer for the crimes of the rich people. And they are not believable. Nobody believes what they say.”

The report “Reading The Riots” commissioned by the Guardian and the London School of Economics  quotes a 23 year old man from Liverpool who took part in the UK (August 2011) riots saying:

"It doesn't really matter if it's Labour or Conservative because the people behind the scenes are always the same..."

George Galloway articulated the frustration of ordinary voters, regardless of ethnicity or faith, with the politics of the main parties in a way that resonated with their daily struggles and experiences.  So please let us not insult their intelligence by suggesting that faith and ethnicity has something to do with his victory - lest we forget he was standing against a local Muslim ethnic minority Labour candidate.

More »

Adnan Al-Daini

Entering a coalition agreement with the Conservative party was a strategic blunder that is going to take the Liberal Democratic Party a long time to recover from. It may even prove to be a terminal one.

How do we assess the role of the Lib-Dems in the coalition?  The Liberal Democrats are now making a sustained effort to tell us that the actions of this ideologically driven Conservative government are being moderated by their influence.  Their argument seems to be - if it were not for them, it would be even worse.  I think even this modest claim is dubious.

Would this government have gone much further with their austerity programmes, that are sucking the oxygen of life from the economy, without completely scuppering their chances of re-election?  I think not. 

There is a better way of judging the Lib-Dem influence:  Let us look at the situation had the Lib-Dems not formed a coalition government with the Tories, opting instead into supporting or opposing a minority Conservative government according to their manifesto and their genuine beliefs.

More »

Adnan Al-Daini

British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher takes the
applause during the Conservative Party Conference in
Brighton, 10th October 1980. (Getty Images)

People have woken up to the unfairness and destructiveness of uncontrolled market forces.

Why is it so difficult for politicians to change their minds? Why is a U-turn considered such a no- no for them?  Margaret Thatcher who embraced and rejoiced in the title “the iron lady”  famously remarked in 1980: “You turn if you want to. The lady’s not for turning”; proud in her inflexibility.

I prefer our politicians to have the humility of John Maynard Keynes who said: “When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?”  Why is stubbornness and dogma so admired in a politician?  It is not a trait conducive to the common good. 

The infuriating thing is that opinion-formers, all political parties, those on the left and right of politics, view a U-turn by a politician negatively.  Changing your mind as a result of persuasive argument or a change in the evidence or circumstances is a good thing; politicians who do that should be praised, not pilloried. 

Elevating dogma above reason is not admirable in a politician or anyone else.

More »