Taking a trip down Benefits Street

Since Benefits Street hit the screens on channel 4 there has been uproar amongst the public, many complaints have ranged from ‘poverty porn’ to ‘old Victorian freak show’ and channel 4 aren’t backing down. They have defended themselves and the program itself by telling everyone exactly what it is, it’s a documentary and its real life, what’s there to apologise for?

If Britain is really that uneducated that it believes that everyone on benefits mirrors that of James Turners Street then clearly the issue isn’t channel 4’s documentary, but rather a lack of social class understanding and the way the world works.  Many have argued that the program portrays everyone on benefits as those who are shown on the program and that channel 4 is mocking the residents of the street. I think what’s really important here is to clarify that channel 4 and the production company ‘Love Productions’ have worked constantly with the people on James Turner Street for 2 years and have gone in depth into their lives and really researched these people. It hasn’t been a camera crew turning up for a few weeks, getting the dodgy bits and then buggering off.

Throughout the complaints there has been a high volume of Labour supporter’s and MP’s who have really shown their disapproval of the program. Now, we can all judge and say that it’s the peoples fault and yes to a degree it is. However, these people are earning more money on benefits than they would if they were working because of these ridiculous 91% tax rates that would be slammed on them if they were to get a job. I am in no way supporting the fact that they do not work but the Labour government has let people do this and earn more on the welfare system and now there’s a price to pay. What needs to happen is change, and if anything this program will do something about it or at least push MP’s further in the right direction. This is because a lot of viewers who are watching this program have never seen this depiction of the British in this way before. Don’t you think it is right that it’s shared with the country, rather than hiding it?

Despite the complaints, the program racked in 5 million viewers last Monday which is the highest they’ve had for any program this year! And I’m sure more will tune in tomorrow.  There are stories of single mums, thieves, immigrant workers and just your ordinary families and how they cope on benefits. It could be a love hate watch; you hate it so much that you just have to see what happens. Channel 4 has delivered once again and the program is what it intended to be, a good watch. Moreover for my last point, many have also argued that this is a poor representation of the working class. This statement could not be further from the truth. The program films the ‘non-working class’, and it by all means doesn’t even represent that – it’s just one street.  Just one street, where the majority of people are on Benefits.  This is something which people need to understand.

Do you agree?

I know that this is a really irate topic at the moment so I would really like to know your opinion. Thanks for reading,  J  

INVASION?

On 1 January 2014, Bulgarians and Romanians were given the same rights to work in the UK and all other EU countries as other EU citizens. From this a crisis  among UK Citizens occurred as newspapers were headlining “British families will ‘lose out’ from influx of cheap labour from Romania and Bulgaria”, “BENEFITS BRITAIN HERE WE COME”, “SOLD OUT! Buses and flights full as Romanians and Bulgarians head for the UK!”

In response to public concern about the arrival of Bulgarians and Romanians, Mr Cameron is preparing to announce limits on their ability to claim benefits. EU nationals have to wait three months before becoming eligible to claim welfare, a time limit that could be double under plans that could be set out as soon as this week.

A poll by Channel Five showed that 47 per cent said people from the two countries should have no rights to work, settle and claim benefits. Another 18 per cent said they should have more limited rights than other EU nationals. A quarter said they should have the same rights.

However, since January 1^st there has been no invasion of Romanians or Bulgarians and some argue that Britain will benefit from having Romania and Bulgaria’s better educated citizens support the British economy.

ITV news reported from Luton airport meeting with Romanian Victor Spiresau who has entered the UK to work and make money .The 30-year-old said he earned 10 euros a day working on building sites at home and that he hopes to make 10 euros an hour here, but was not planning on settling."I don't want to stay here. I want to renovate my home and to make a good life in Romania because it's much easier to live in Romania because it's not expensive."

Mr Spiresau said he already has work lined up washing cars in London but hopes to go on to work in the construction industry. He said he chose to come to the UK over other European countries as he can speak the language.

DO MIGRANT’S MAKE BRITAIN A BETTER PLACE? Do you think immigration has had a positive or negative impact on the UK? Do migrants contribute more to society than they take out? And should Britain be prouder of its migrant communities? Where do you stand?

N

All aboard the booze bus!

Do you think that binge drinking is a problem in the UK?

More and more adolescents are taking to the bottle as drinking statistics rise in the UK and the costs to the NHS are becoming even more traumatic. Alcohol misuse costs the NHS £3.5 billion a year, estimating to £120 for each taxpayer, but the main question asks who is to blame? Is it the shops selling the alcohol, the clubs encouraging the drinking, the council allowing it or simply the adolescents consuming the alcohol themselves?

Did anyone watch the ‘Party Paramedics’ binge drinking programme last year on Channel 4? It was just one example of how today’s binge drinking culture is portrayed, not to mention the programmes that followed this including ‘Bouncers’ which showed the negative side effects young drinkers experience when they’ve had one too many. ‘Sun, Sex and Suspicious Parents’ a TV show that follows young Brits on their non-stop drinking and partying holidays abroad also gives the UK its bad name for young, drunk and out of control citizens.

A large number of these out of control youngsters are made up of University students, whose main aims, when not studying, are to drink as much as possible on every imaginable occasion. For these students there are no limits. With this culture comes weeks on end of Freshers, pound a pint drink deals and unlimited fun. But how far is too far? Do students know their limits and when to stop? I’m not sure…

Carnage is a prime example of a typical student’s binge drinking culture. Closer magazine featured an article about the young students of Southampton going wild on this night out, with comments such as “City ‘carnage’ as students get crazed on cheap booze” and “the focus of the night is definitely getting p****d and pulling”. In this article featured statistics of the night including that there is a 40% rise in the number of ambulances needed and comments from paramedics stating “Carnage nights are getting out of control”.

 

When is enough, enough? The health risks caused by binge drinking are phenomenal, the anti-social behaviour is disgraceful and at the end of the night it’s the NHS who are left picking up the pieces whether this be from stomachs being pumped or wrapping up the wounds of those fighting. But is this seen as a problem in the UK? Where do the publics’ morals lie when deciding if it really has got too much; does it take a beaten up friend or a hospitalised son or daughter to put a stop to binge drinking, or is it merely not considered as a problem?

I would like to know where your ethics lie; do you think the current youth have a problem with binge drinking today? And what are your views on the effect this has on society, particularly to the NHS?

 

Thanks for reading,

C

Get on with the culling!

In October 2013 badger culling was introduced in the UK to two areas to pilot the scheme and to test whether it is safe. For those who do not know, badger culling was introduced to reduce the spread of the disease Bovine Tuberculosis (bTB) which can be spread to humans and other animals. There is still no UK wide policy for badger culling but this will probably be determined after the pilot schemes. West Somerset and West Gloucestershire were the chosen areas and since then these schemes have been put into action and badger culling has been underway. Since October, the Environment Secretary Owen Paterson has not produced great results. Both pilots have been extended as there were not enough badgers culled within the original 6 week period which was initially agreed in Parliament. Owen Paterson has also been accused of using unethical tactics in order to push through the culling reform. There is uproar from scientists that longer culls mean that badgers have longer to flee; therefore they would be spreading the bTB further. The counter argument for this is that more badgers in the area would be killed overall. Alongside the reform and parliamentary disagreements, animal welfare groups including RSPCA and the Badger Trust are fighting that badger culling is unethical and feel that it is a random slaughter of badgers. To an extent it is easy to agree with this opinion, as you may just hear the words animal and shooting and not agree. However in reality, badgers lead the risk of spreading bTB disease to not only your animals such as your dogs, cats, cattle etc. but also to yourselves. Can we allow this risk?

Personally I believe that badgers need to be culled. I’m very much aware that not all badgers are carrying the disease, but the risk for me personally is much higher than caring about the welfare of badgers. The risk to humans has not been considered as significant just yet, but to our animals it is. Letting your cat or dog roam around in your garden is all it takes to come into contact with badgers urine or excrement. For me, I care far more for my animals rather than badgers that quite frankly can also be violent and aggressive.

Many people also argue that the way in which badgers are culled (being shot at by marksmen) is bad. Again, this is the most cost effective and fastest way to cull. It’s quick and is over within seconds for the badger. Any other form of killing that had been recommended would have cost more money or would have taken far longer to kill the same amount of badgers. Moreover this system does have regulations which are followed very strictly. Even though England allows ‘free shooting’ (anyone with a firearm) for the culling, these marksmen need to hold a licence to cull badgers. These licences ensure that applicants have the skills and resources to cull efficiently and humanely. This is both an effective and safe system. 

For me, it’s an obvious choice. I don’t believe that badger culling is either unethical or cruel. It could either be that badger in your garden or your dog. I know what’s more important to me and honestly, if more people came forward to be marksmen, more badger culling can happen. Say no to Bovine Tuberculosis and yes to badger culling!

I know that a lot of people might not agree with me but I’d like to know if you do and if you don’t, can you give me a reason to believe that it’s wrong to cull badgers?

What do you think about the spread of disease?

J

Fat & Food Wars

To what degree should we rely on consumers to make an “informed choice” about what they eat or should manufacturers carry a bigger burden of responsibility?

Personally, I think it is up to the individual to make the choice of what they eat and it is their responsibility to ensure that what they choose is the best choice for their lifestyle and health. Over 170 companies including leading supermarkets have signed up to the “responsibility deal” to promote healthy living. I believe there is only so much these companies can do, they cannot force consumers to choose the healthier option it is a decision that must come from the consumers themselves. There are strict guidelines on labelling which enable consumers to be aware of which foods or drinks are better for them. The labels clearly display the ingredients included and show how many calories are included and how much salt etc the product includes from this consumers should be able to make an educated guess of what is the healthier option.

It could be argued that some labels are not clear to the consumer which can cause confusion on which foods are actually healthy and which are not however, I think that most consumers are generally well educated on what foods they should be eating and what they shouldn’t be. There is only so much the government can do; people know that smoking will kill you and there are numerous campaigns to get people to stop smoking but the consumer still does not listen to this and continues to smoke.

I think that manufactures should promote healthy living as a responsibility but it would be unfair to hold them responsible for the obesity in this country. The only way to completely stop people from making bad lifestyle choices would be to take away the choices and leave them with nothing but the healthy option. With the amount of unhealthy products this would just not be possible. 

Another option that could be explored would be to stop the advertising of unhealthy products like chocolates and sweets as when it is in everyone’s faces it is hard to resist temptation. For some families the issue is money. It is a lot more expensive to lead a healthy lifestyle of eating fruits, vegetables and fresh meats than it is to eat processed foods and snacks. Is it too much to ask the government to reduce the price of these foods to make leading a healthy lifestyle attainable for the majority of people?

This is an issue that clearly needs to be addressed as obesity is such a problem but the question is who should be addressing this problem? Please comment and let me know your views.

N

The rise of technology- are children addicted to digital?

How young is too young when it comes to using digital technology? I remember when I was young and my summer holidays would be filled with fun adventures in the woods, playing on the swings and in the rainy days playing with Barbies. Now it seems that every child spends their free time playing on iPads, phones and computers games, should this be right?

So what made me start thinking about children and technology? Well, at the start of this academic year every child at my sisters secondary school were given iPads to ‘learn’ on, in which I thought this was absurd! They use them to write notes on, calculate maths and search the Internet for answers, for me I think this is cheating as the programming does it all from spell check to answering every question to the finest detail, how will they ever learn? I have also heard of other schools having no teacher present in the room and instead being stuck in front of a computer where they would be taught online over webcam and all work being uploaded online. Having no teacher in the room and constantly looking at a computer screen opposed to anything else, not only do I believe this harms their learning, but where is the social interaction?

This whole idea of technology taking over played on my mind even more when my sister got a game for Christmas that my mum used to play when she was little called ‘French Skipping’ which involved a rope and the person playing jumping either side of it.  She sort of looked at it in disgust as to say ‘a game? That’s not online? What on earth were you thinking mum?’ It really made me start to think, are playground games all over, is it all about technology these days and that when you don’t have the latest technical products your classed as a loser, an outsider? If only this could all be rubbish, but it’s not, technology IS taking over...

Having one computer in a house with dial up Internet connection is now unheard of today! In my childhood years my brother and I used to be allowed on this one computer to go online for 10 minutes each evening, where we would quickly speak to our friends on MSN and post on our Bebo accounts. This was our only time to talk to friends in the evening, unless we met at the park, as we had no mobile phones! Younger children today ask ‘but what did you used to do, were you not bored?’ well my evenings consisted of going out to play, playing board games or reading, and I was certainly not bored, so bearing in mind my childhood was not THAT long ago, children of today deem it as centuries ago!

It seems that the only outside world children know nowadays is when they are fighting the ‘baddie’ in computer games or pretending to play tennis on the Wii. A few years ago it was found that in the UK 58% of 2-5 year olds can play computer games but only 43% can ride a bike; even more so, 10% of this age range can use Smartphone’s whereas only 9% can tie shoes. Could this really be true, have children EVER seen the daylight?

It’s all well and good me saying that children are using too much technology, but it’s the parents that are supplying these products and teaching them how to use them. Do they not realise that they are turning their children into ‘cyber kids’? Is it right that they are learning to write on iPad’s opposed to pen and paper and not learning to cross their T’s and dot their I’s? Should parents and schoolteachers keep a closer eye on what is happening to these children, and reflect on whether they think it is right or wrong to let them this close to technology?

So that leaves me to ask you, do you think more needs to be done to stop technology taking over children, or do you think that with the rise in technology this is the way the world is moving forward and everyone needs to get with the times?

Thank you for reading,

C

Substance abuse

‘Should drugs be legalised?’

Junkies, illegal use, addiction, black market, gangs, crime...what comes to mind when you think of the term ‘drugs’?

When I think of the term ‘drugs’ I most certainly think of all of the above, but there is so much more to it than meets the eye, there are benefits of using drugs but these are often looked past because of the negative stigma drugs have. Like using drugs for medical use and to boost tourism, do you ever think of that? But are these positives considered important enough to stem legalisation by the UK Government?

Introducing legal drugs would also help to fuel the economy as tax would be added onto the substances; this would help society as more money could be spent in services such as health and schooling. In an extreme situation the legalisation of drugs could boost tourism in the UK like in Holland where the legal use of marijuana attracts travel makers from all over the world.

Not to mention the medical advantages legalising drugs would carry, for example helping drug addicts put an end to extreme hardcore drug use such as heroin by giving them a softer alternative that will work in the long term run.

The legalisation of drugs in the UK could also see reduced crime rates due to illegal acts such as drug possession and smuggling being abolished; this could lessen the cost to society as there would be a decrease in the use of police officers’ time, court hearings and keeping criminals imprisoned.

If drugs were to become legalised it would help to erode the black market in which drugs are illegally bought and sold under, this would hold a number of advantages including fewer street gangs, and decreased crimes stemming from these gangs such as violence, burglary and weapons trafficking. The drugs sold within the black market can also be very unsafe, leading to health problems and sometimes even death, if drugs were to become legalised it would help to eliminate the health risks as they would be safer and of better quality.

But on the other side to this, would it just be encouraging further drug use? Cigarettes and alcohol are classed as drugs and cause a whole host of problems; but do they make users any better and actually help society? Do we really want to add a third ‘evil’ into the equation? If we allowed further drug use this could contradict the point made about helping the economy, as the money made could go straight back into treating drug users as many more could get addicted. Would the economy really be able to relive more drug users if the substances were legalised?

We must also think about the countries that are illegally exporting drugs at this current time, when their income is sourced from the illegal trade of drug exporting if the UK began manufacturing its own drugs this would hinder others’ economies and diminish their income. So, although it may help the UK’s economy, it could have a serious effect on those less fortunate in the world, can we really justify making the economies’ that are bad even worse?

Legally or illegally drugs will still be recreationally used, it just leaves us with the question, could all the benefits of drug use actually help our society if legalised, or should they still be left to trade under the black market?

I would like to hear your views on this subject, and for you to answer the question ‘should drugs be legalised?’ Please comment below.

Thank you for reading,

C