Author Archives: Natalie Bennett

For those who think private medicine is a good idea

Hideous figures from the US on mortality among newborns -  a death rate 2.5 times higher than the Scandanavian states. Among African-Americans, the already horrific figure is doubled, to 9.3 deaths per 1,000 births.

Brown to start as PM with a dramatic gesture?

Now that the dust has settled and there’s general agreement that Tony Blair’s not long for No 10, some more reflective pieces are emerging on the likely nature of his departure, and its afternath.

Timothy Garton Ash in the Guardian draws parallels, and finds differences, with the departure of Hardold Wilson in 1976:

It seems plausible to assume that three looming crises – the slide of sterling on the foreign exchange markets, a growing left-right split in his party, and a dwindling parliamentary majority – added to the third-term weariness that some had already detected in the pipe-sucking 60-year-old. Conspiracy theorists have suggested darker reasons for Wilson’s sudden departure: a medical diagnosis, blackmail, hounding by the secret services. But his biographer, Ben Pimlott, concludes that Wilson really had intended all along to do just two more years following his re-election in February 1974. Here was something very unusual in history: a power-holder who goes voluntarily, at the time of his own choosing.

That’s one of the differences then; the Australian parallel of of Hawke-Keating is rather more apt in many respects.

Anatole Kaletsky in The Times makes a different historical comparison, to Thatcher, but looks forward to the inevitable succession and makes a coherent argument that it will be better for Gordon Brown if it isn’t consensual.

The longer Mr Blair spins out his death throes, the more his successor will be seen as a liberator and saviour. If Mr Blair becomes so peevish and arrogant that his removal is greeted with national jubilation, Mr Brown, just like John Major, can expect a happy honeymoon. He can also expect a further advantage because of the electoral strategy chosen by David Cameron. Mr Cameron is under the strange illusion that Mr Brown is feared and loathed by Middle England, …

By pulling out of Iraq and breaking publicly with the Bush Administration (which by then will itself be in terminal decline), Mr Brown could win himself so much credit with the Labour Party and the affluent middle classes that he could do almost anything else he might choose with the health service, taxes, pensions or schools.”

The thought occurs to me that politicians tend to have one political tactic that they repeat; Brown’s dramatic freeing of the Bank of England from political control might be a precedent of sorts.

Coriolanus at the Globe

I’ve just put a review up over at My London Your London of the press night for the first production of the new director at the Globe. In summary: If you like charisma, sex appeal and lots of swordplay the first half will satisfy you; if that’s a bit testosterone-drenched for you, the second half will be much better. Margot Leicester is superb as Volumnia – Shakespeare’s  pushy mother from hell.

Old habits of shopping just won’t do

Reading this morning about how the manufacturer is getting rid of blue Smarties as a health measure, just as my Waitrose delivery man arrived, I was left musing on our habits not just of eating, but shopping. Much is written about our supposed “biological” urge to eat as much fat- and sugar-rich food as possible, which is said to be a major cause of the current obesity epidemic.

But – always suspicious of “natural” explanations, when so much of our behaviour is learnt and cultural – I thought about how my method of shopping has changed over the years. When I was a small child, and money was tight, it was part of my mother’s “job” to feed us as cheaply as possible. “Own brand” from supermarkets, frozen veg and cheap cuts of meat – which produced a diet both unhealthy and frankly dreadful. “Treats” were cheese (still cheap ones), ice-cream (ditto), and sticky cakes – comfort food for when things got bad.

Later, in my teen years, I saw people who regarded food as a pure status symbol. King Island Brie (from an island off Tasmania) was the ultimate symbol of wealth and sophistication, although it’s probably now gone the way of Jacob’s Creek wine, as being a bit naff.

I’ve tended over the years to fluctuate in food shopping between “cheap bulk”, ridiculous luxury, with a smattering of horribly unhealthy comfort eating. Only now, I think, am I starting to get a sensible balance.

I get a box of organic fruit and veg delivered over a week for about £15. I don’t always manage to eat all of that, and I give items that really don’t agree with me (like leeks) away. (The rest goes to the worm farm on the balcony.) Even if I only use three-quarters of it, the fact that the fresh, healthy stuff is there means I eat far more than I would do otherwise, but I have to wrestle with my conscience about the “waste” – even though the value of that probably amounts to about one Starbucks coffee.

I then get a Waitrose delivery about once a month, and that tends very much to the luxury end, but luxury for good taste and health (and a smattering of politics), rather than for showing off. I’ve found it is worthwhile buying some surprising “luxury” things. I’ve always thought of eggs as your absolute basic staple. Why – apart from going organic and free-range for moral reasons – would you think of going any further?

But the Waitrose Columbian Blacktail Eggs are a taste revelation. Lightly poached (1.5 minutes in the microwave with a little water), they are simply delicious – utterly unlike the flavourless fluff of cheap eggs. But rolled oats for the morning porridge are, I think, just rolled oats, and the simple Waitrose organic will do fine.

The “extra-fruit” jams (with somewhat less sugar), from luxury brands, are also well worth the extra money, and the Duchy mint/strawberry cordial bears no resemblance at all to the lurid sugar solutions of my youth.

But all of this I’ve had to work out for myself – I’ve had the time and money to work out for myself. It wasn’t part of my cultural heritage.

Another academic age …

I was just making some notes from The Literary Profession in the Elizabethan Age, from 1909 (it remained a standard text at least into the Sixties), and noticed the title of its author, Phoebe Sheavyn, D. Lit. – “Special Lecturer in English Literature and Tutor for Women Students; Warden of the Hall of Residence for Women Students”, at Ashburne Hall in Manchester. She had quite a life, this site indicates:

After studying for her first degree in Aberystwyth she had held posts as Reader, then Fellow, in Bryn Mawr, before returning to England as Tutor and Lecturer in English at Somerville. She had been much impressed by the contrast between the dignified and spacious arrangements she had seen enjoyed by women students in the USA, and the characteristically cramped and meagre accommodation made available to their British counterparts. The early Minute Books of the BFUW Executive indicate something of her determination to strengthen the position of women in academic life in Britain.

Girls in religious schools

I went to what was at least nominally a church school, all-girl, headed by a pretty clueless male reverend. Most of the time his lack of worldliness and commonsense didn’t matter (although sometimes, as I think of the fate of a friend of mine who ended up in a psychiatric hospital, it did).

But he did do more general damage in some special “personal development” lessons that he took for sixth formers. Most of it was pretty inane stuff, but I can still clearly picture (probably because of the rage I felt at the time), his solemnly drawing graphs on the board to explain that men’s sexual arousal was a sharp curve, while women’s was much flatter, and therefore women shouldn’t wear low-cut blouse. He didn’t say the next sentence, but it hung in the air: “If women got raped, it was probably their own fault.”

I thought of this when I read an excellent piece in the Guardian today. The government is (in one of its more potentially long-term pieces of stupidity) encouraging the development of religious schools, and even the take-over of state schools by religious groups. It has also, commendably, introduced an gender equality duty on institutiions. But …

Much to the amazement and anger of gender equality campaigners, the government has not published any gender-specific statistics on faith schools and is not aware of any research in this area – on whether girls and boys in faith schools are taught a different curriculum, as was found to be the case in a now closed independent Muslim school in Scotland; on whether girls and boys in faith schools are achieving different grades or leaving school at different ages compared with each other and with their peers in non-faith schools.

A spokesperson for the DfES says undertaking such research would be a “massively disproportionate” use of taxpayer’s money. Yet under the gender equality duty that comes into force in April next year, there will be a legal requirement for all state schools to actively promote gender equality.

The article is promoting an Amnesty International debate tomorrow night in London on Women’s Human Rights and Fundamentalism. I won’t be able to go since I’ve already got two things booked, but it sounds good.