Sunday 20 July 2008

 

The latest culture as recommended by our staff

Clemency Burton-Hill
Clemency Burton-Hill

Clemency suggests


Monday, 22nd October 2007

The retreat from Scutari

1:53pm

Last week, I wrote a column in the Daily Mail about the scandal of dirty hospital wards which were killing patients through the superbugs they were breeding. While I said the way the NHS was run had much to do with this problem, I pinned much of the blame on the profound change that had taken place over the past two decades in the training of nurses, who were no longer taught Florence Nightingale’s dictum that the core of good nursing was maintaining patient and ward cleanliness.


That article elicited a huge response. I have been overwhelmed by messages from patients and their families relating the most appalling and heartbreaking stories of terrible neglect, indifference and cruelty towards elderly people on NHS hospital wards. I have also been deluged by messages from nurses bitterly and no less heartbreakingly endorsing everything I had written, and then some. They are devastated by the destruction of their once-noble vocation and the consequent abandonment of vulnerable patients, as a result of a combination of ideology, incompetence and political opportunism.

Because this is such a shocking state of affairs, and because these people are saying something of such importance of which our politicians need to be aware, I am reprinting here a small selection of my correspondence. This blog entry is thus a long one, but it’s worth reading. I should emphasise that the grievous situation described below does not apply by any means to all nurses and all hospitals. There are many nurses who are doing a truly magnificent job in conditions of extreme pressure and stress. But clearly, we have a major and endemic problem of professional de-moralisation, in every sense. I am publishing these remarks therefore in the hope that this small effort will help puncture the carapace of official indifference, complacency and denial that has been erected over our destruction of the duty to care.
 
Patients
*My 93 year-old grandmother, broke her femur and was taken into hospital for treatment. She was otherwise in good health as far as we were aware. The operation was a success. However, following the operation, she contracted an infection in the wound and had to be put on antibiotics. As the infection cleared up, she contracted bronchopneumonia. Again, she was given antibiotics for the pneumonia, but then contracted C.diff. To get rid of the C. diff, her pneumonia treatment was stopped and she was put on a course of different antibiotics. This caused her pneumonia to return. At this point, my grandmother begged for all treatment to be stopped. She said she would either get better herself or die – but that she could not stand the torturous treatment inflicted on her any further. (Believe me, kindness was distinctly lacking on that ward!) All treatment was stopped and my Grandmother died on 9th April 2003 – approximately 6 weeks after having entered the hospital.

It should be noted that during part of her treatment, my Grandmother was placed in a private room which was filthy. The walls and floor were dirty. Yesterday’s dinner was often left on the table alongside that morning’s breakfast and we once found her false teeth under the bed. My grandmother was unable to feed herself and would not eat the food provided for her anyway as the kitchens liquefied everything. She was slowly starving. The only time she showed decent appetite was when we provided bacon sandwiches for her from home and, on one occasion, when she ravenously consumed a battered fish from the hospital kitchens. (We had to argue at length for this piece of fish as we were told by the food orderly that she had ‘not ordered it’.) Painkillers were often left in a plastic cup at the end of her bed where she could not reach them.

We saw displays of temper against other elderly or confused women which could only be described as outright cruelty. We would have reported this to their families, but had to be very careful. We did not want these people to victimise my Grandmother and other visitors had reported being ‘banned’ from the wards when complaining of cruelty and lack of cleanliness. (Not all the hospital staff were cruel, but as with most situations, the bullies were left to inflict their misery without check.)

The slow and harrowing death of my Grandmother occurred as a direct result of the appalling aftercare and filthy conditions at this Hospital, which caused her to contract various infections, including C. diff. We still believe that, had we taken my grandmother away from the hospital, she would have recovered. The memories of that nightmare time will haunt us forever.
 

*I was also horrified when my sister in law told me of her experience which was within the last month. She had to spend a couple of days in hospital recently because some sort of inner ear problem had rendered her incapable of being anything other than horizontal. She was plumbed into a drip, and at some point during her stay, denied the use of a bedpan by the nurse on duty who ordered her to ‘go in your bed.’ Eventually she had no other option.

She had been traumatised by filthy hospitals and medical incompetence during my brother's terminal illness 6 years ago. And now this! Work all your life, pay mucho taxes, do civic duty and this is your reward ! She is 69 years old and has been a Justice of the Peace for the last 14 years. It is scandalous. It is monstrous! It beggars belief. Billions have been spent and even the basics are no better. New Labour is THE most morally bankrupt shower there has ever been.
 

*I have been a Biomedical Scientist(BMS) for over 40 years and your observation on nurses was spot on. Yes, nurses are now graduates and, as such, probably regard menial tasks as below them. Those tasks are sometimes done by Healthcare Assistants (old name auxiliary nurses) and/ or cleaners. Cleaners, in my experience recently, are almost always ‘outsourced’ (agency) and may not even work in the same hospital regularly. I expect that they have not been medically trained and to them s**t is s**t!

I worked in a small private hospital for a number of years and patient infections were scrupulously observed. The Microbiology BMS reported the infections, the Control of Infection nurse collated them and reported to Matron, or the Microbiology Consultant if necessary. On one occasion, all members of staff were swabbed, including Consultants, to find the source of a hospital based infection.

My father was admitted to a hospital 6 years ago and picked up MRSA while on a high dependency ward. When he recovered enough, he was transferred to a single room as I was told that he was still infected. He was in that solitary room for 4 weeks until his death. When I asked on occasions why he was not being transferred to the main ward, where he could at least have company, I was told he was still infected. I asked when he was last tested for MRSA and was told by a named nurse that they did not have the funds to test! That fact was denied by the Chief Executive when I wrote complaining about my father's treatment.

Because I lived 500 miles away, I was not able to visit as often as I wanted, so depended on information given to me by nurses because I could not speak to my father. I phoned every day and was reassured that he was quite well. It was only because a family friend phoned me on a Sunday to tell me that I ought to fly up to see him that I actually got to speak to him before he died three days later. I had been told lies about his condition.

You will not be surprised to learn that letters to the Chief Executive, his MP, his MSP all replied with platitudes - in fact, because he died during Parliament’s recess, my letter to his MP and then his MSP were replied to as being ‘too late to investigate any mistreatment of his condition’.
 

*Unfortunately, 30 months ago I was diagnosed with bowel cancer and had my bowel removed. On arriving at the hospital the day prior to the operation, I went to the toilet. No soap or hand-wash. Spoke to nurse. Yes we know we will get some tomorrow when the cleaner is back!!!!! The patient in the next bed informed me he had said the same the day before. Basic hygiene. After the operation, excrement from a spill from a colostomy bag was left on the floor for 2 days until the next bed patient’s daughter brought in disinfectant to clean up.

I have always been supportive of nurses. Not any more. They were lazy and did not have any basic knowledge of hygiene. They were just not interested. You could hear the night staff talking all night about what they had done that day. You ask them to help you empty your colostomy bag. You would think you were talking to a brick wall. Ask them to wear rubber gloves or wash their hands between patients? You are joking.

My next bed patient and I watched after each other. When we came out we both wrote to our MPs, the hospital the trust etc. We received letters back that were lies. Unfortunately, we were both having chemo and did not have the energy to follow up the reply letters. I wished I had. Why should older people be treated with such disdain? On the other hand I am under the Royal Marsden Sutton for my actual cancer treatment. The treatment is unbelievably good. The hospital is spotless and nurses seem to care. Why the difference? I spoke to one nurse at the Marsden who told me they could not even wear their nurses’ uniform when they were coming to or from work!!!! They would be sacked if caught.

*About three years ago a very close friend of mine aged 39 developed leukaemia. Whilst he was undergoing treatment for this in hospital he then developed a perforated bowel from the chemotherapy which then had to be suspended whilst a decision was made. Two days after this suspension of treatment he suffered two severe strokes. Until this point no-one had any complaints about his treatment.

From the day he suffered the strokes it was obvious there would be only one outcome. Thus realistically his quality of life became important for the time he had left. Bearing in mind he was left-handed and suffered a stroke of his left side which meant he was unable to write, he was also unable to speak (as a result of the stroke) and he was receiving constant painkilling medication for the leukaemia, it then seemed odd that he should be placed immediately into a side room on his own. From this point I feel he was forgotten by many of the nursing staff. I visited him daily until he died. Some days I would go in and the call button was lying out of his reach on the top of his pillow where he could not see it. Some days it was lying on his bed near his left (paralysed) side! Very rarely was this either within his reach or within his vision. Because of this he was unable to call nurses when needed, as he had lost the power of speech he could not shout, and as he was alone in a side room he could not attract anyone's attention. I always placed it where he could both see and reach it.

Many days I watched the nursing auxiliaries bring his food in and place it temptingly on his table at the foot of his bed, often out of reach. After what seemed a relatively short time they returned and noticing the full dishes commented that he must not be hungry! He couldn't reach the food. When I complained they left it there but no-one came to feed him so I and his friends fed him. On very few occasions did any of the nursing staff attempt to feed him (they may have when I was at work. I visited him every evening for 3-4 hours). Had it not been for myself and his large group of friends visiting and feeding him I believe he would have received little or no food at all. As a result he didn't last very long. It was possible to communicate with him, he could respond with nods or shakes of the head or by waving his right hand when he was coherent. If the nursing staff who brought the food in didn't realise he couldn't cope on his own then they are incompetent or this seemed to be a deliberate policy to starve him to death but in a tortuous way. If the staff nurses didn't pass this information on to the auxiliaries then they are incompetent for not communicating.

On one memorable occasion I visited him and the bed stank of pee, he was crying in pain and his stomach was obviously swollen - I could physically see this and he was holding his stomach with his good hand. When I called the nurses, initially an auxiliary came and I asked her to get me a staff nurse. The staff nurse could not see what the problem was even when I pointed it out to her. She stated that he could not have peed the bed as he had a catheter in despite the fact that the pee stank because it had leaked into the bed somehow (I don't know how I did not look under the sheets). My own thoughts are that the catheter had become blocked under the sheets which was preventing his urine draining causing him pain. This is very basic patient management. After I complained again two sisters came and ushered me out of the room and changed his sheets, cleaned him up and sorted the problem. I was allowed in after they had cleaned him up and he was not in any pain then. Why didn't the nursing staff spot this? How many other times was he in this state and wasn't picked up by the nursing staff?

I just hope that I never finish up in the same situation - I would rather die in harness then be neglected and maltreated by incompetent nursing staff.
 
 

Nurses
 
*I am a nurse of some forty years experience, most of which has been spent in community nursing and working with elderly people. Nurses are no longer encouraged to nurse (care) for their patients. Instead they are directed to learn abstract concepts and highly technical procedures from the beginning of their training. Long gone are the days of bed bath, bed pan and temperature rounds. These rounds generated the time for nurses to share confidences with patients and to observe ways in which their patients' comfort and progress could be monitored and improved.

Although I deplore the passing of such basic care concepts, one cannot blame the nurses themselves. As you point out, the various revolutions within nurse training have given us the nurses who run our wards today. With the demise of the Enrolled Nurse grade and the ever increasing emphasis on targets, there is no-one in our health service who has both the knowledge and the time to spend with individuals in order to achieve holistic care.

In defence of the nurses, the career paths offered to these trainees does not allow them to develop such diverse skills. In order to earn a living wage, (over £20,000) they have no option but to follow the career pathway that the training dictates. Should they decide to go into the private sector, the majority of available posts are in nursing homes which takes them away from acute nursing and into elderly care, thus backing them into a cul-de-sac from which it is difficult to return.
 
 

* I'm horrified at the situation in the NHS hospitals today. I honestly believe that if the truth were known, there would be a national outcry. But sadly the real victims, often the elderly, don't always have anyone to speak up for them. The standard of care on medical and elderly ‘care’ wards is outrageous. I don't really understand why there isn't more of an outcry.


Although there are many complex factors involved, in my experience, the most crucial is the lack of discipline within the nursing profession. There does have to be a degree of ‘fear’ for some nurses or laziness and sloppiness creeps in. The biggest myth is that all nurses are angels, drawn to the profession by compassion and vocation. Oh no, never believe that. It's nonsense. The second reason (and they inter-relate) is the state of nurse education. On this, I must resist the temptation to ramble on as I'm sure you don't have time to read this. Suffice to say, in nurse education the lunatics really have taken over the asylum.

I really do speak from experience having been a nurse, nurse lecturer and now a nurse manager working for GPs. I've also seen from a relative's perspective what happens to elderly people on NHS wards today and I can tell you I truly fear my old age if I stay in this country.
 

*At last someone has had the courage to voice what many of us who work within the NHS have known for years, that nursing training and the type of person going into nursing is at the heart of the scandal of filth and neglect in our hospitals.

The root of the problem in dirty hospitals was sown in the 60s and 70s when unions had employers at their mercy and managers had an impossible task of trying to get people to do what they were paid to do without the unions on their backs should they criticize standards or levels of sick leave etc. The whole problem was solved or so it was thought by handing these tasks over to contractors with all the attendant employment issues. The new army of cleaners were answerable to no-one as they were working often without surveillance and without protocols, and any complaints from clinical staff had to go down the tortuous route of procedure.

The problem of dirt is so easily solved. Cleaners should be recruited by each hospital. Properly trained, properly paid and put to work on their own areas of the hospital ie, they should have ownership of those areas, be answerable for the cleanliness and be encouraged to take pride in their work. Cleaners should be available around the clock for continuous cleaning with certain jobs done every day at the same times. Ample supplies of linen, dressings, bed clothes, paper products, soap etc should be available.

Nurses haven't time to clean floors and walls etc but I have been ranting for years about nurses training and attitudes even when it was considered completely out of order to criticize these angels. Political correctness did away with the authority of doctors on wards. They were repeatedly told that they were no one, just part of the team and so they are unable to complain when patients they have laboured over in the operating theatre are condemned to almost certain death on wards where they are left in their own filth, left unfed and often times missing medication if they haven't the strength to remind staff or lift cups of water to their lips. This is not the workings of my imagination. I have seen this many times. It must be totally soul destroying to be a doctor in the NHS.

Nurses have a loud voice these days with none of the responsibility. I have seen the very worst type of women, women who you wouldn't accept a cup of tea off in their own homes go into nursing and quickly become puffed up with their own sense of importance, I have also seen women who would make ideal nurses be driven out by the sheer pointlessness of the stuff they are learning and the fact they are discouraged from physically helping patients.

The government defends itself with the talk of the billions that has gone into the NHS since they came into power and they are talking of billions more. What they don't say is that the bulk of it goes into computer systems and managers. I am a manager in an NHS practice and the speed and scale of computerization is overwhelming. My job has changed beyond recognition from one that had the patient at the heart of my day to one spent pulling out data and running audits for the Department of Health. We are subject to massive propaganda from turkeys who are obviously not going to vote for Christmas, that it is going to revolutionize patient care. It is actually about control, about spying on people, about manipulation, about trying to kid people that they have a new and modern service. You don't put gold taps in a bathroom that has no running water or electricity supply. The government holds the most peculiar view that doctors send patients to hospitals unnecessarily. They couldn't be more wrong, GPs labour to keep their patients out of hospital because they don't want them to die. I have even begun to wonder whether the problems are deliberately unsolved in order to achieve this end!

I believe that any government that hasn't the intelligence, the will, the courage to make massive changes which may upset vested interests isn't fit to govern. The NHS isn't the envy of the world. Some third world countries have cleaner, safer hospitals than ours now. We are a rich country and our tax payers invest massively in the infrastructure and have a right to clean safe hospitals and caring, dedicated staff.
 

*My father was senior pathologist at the Kent and Sussex Hospital in Tunbridge Wells during the late 1930s and early 40s - one of the three involved in the present scandal of course - and I particularly remember the high standards that prevailed at the time throughout the hospital with a daily inspection of every ward by the Matron, feared by everyone, nurses and patients alike. Woe betide the Ward Sister should any spot of dust or dirt be found. The nurses were trained up in a hierarchy with incentive to move into more responsible posts higher up, but the sense of duty and vocation was never lost. The aim of the nursing profession was to help the patient to recover. Hospital food certainly was not brilliant but it was at least nutritious and no patient was left to feed themselves if they were unable to do so, and it was the responsibility of the nurses to keep the wards spotless. As a result there was no MRSA nor Clostridium Difficile.

During my National Service in the late 1940s I volunteered for nursing in the RAF and was trained accordingly. Despite the Service ambiance, we were expected to behave in the same way towards patients as our confreres in civilian life and similar regimes were applied to us. It was obligatory to keep patients clean and comfortable in accordance with the principles established in the last century by Florence Nightingale. This was held to be the basis of the nursing care of patients.

However, many years later, as a Principal Lecturer in philosophy, I found myself involved in setting up the new BSc in Nursing. It quickly became obvious to me that through its dependence upon the attitudes of the feminism of the time it would inevitably lead to a collapse in patient care. Vocation was out - as demeaning to nurses. No more were nurses to be involved in keeping patients clean, in helping them to avoid bedsores, in seeing that they were adequately fed, and especially, a task required to fight infection, to keep the wards and beds clean and sterile. Instead nurses would be quasi professionals, steeped in silly and irrelevant subjects and with only a half-baked and book-learnt understanding of arbitrarily chosen 'scientific' subjects. Nursing as such was to disappear - and so it inevitably turned out. But who was to be left to look after the patients? Nobody was interested in that because it was beneath the 'professionals'.

A little later my wife and I were involved in helping a neighbour - an old man who had been a professional artist of some importance. His wife had died and he had no-one else to whom he could turn, so when he had to go into hospital it was we who visited him and gave him some contact with the outside world. On one occasion we happened to be visiting at the time the midday meals were being given to patients. He was incapable of getting the food into his mouth by himself as his hands were shaking too much and he could not locate his mouth for himself. Some 'nurses' were passing by the foot of his bed so we pointed out to one of them that he was not able to feed himself. The response was - 'well you feed him then!' We were shocked because it was only by chance that we happened to be there at that time - and we found out from him that he frequently went without food, his plate being later removed at the appointed time whether he had eaten anything or not.

The position has now become serious. The NHS culture is rotten - and is made worse by the huge numbers of drones carried in the so called management echelons. It now takes a highly paid 'Bed Manager' for example, equipped with a suitable clipboard and with an office of her own, to go round the hospital recording how many beds are vacant when the Ward Sisters can report that number in a few seconds. Only a tiny example of the massive waste of course. Nor are things made better by the employment of thousands of foreign nurses with hardly any English, nor it seems much in the way of qualifications to assume the responsibilities they undertake. But of course one cannot say much in that connection for fear of prosecution for racism - or 'nursism'?! In short, as you yourself are very much aware, the problems go much wider and are symptomatic of the implosion of our entire cultural values and attitudes.

 

And finally, a nurse who has a very different perspective:

*I read your article and it reduced me to tears. Why? I am a Senior Sister in Accident & Emergency at a District General Hospital. I worked a thirteen and a half hour shift on Sunday and am doing the same again today, tomorrow, my next day off being Sunday 21st.

I was bitterly disappointed that your opinion of nursing is such that you felt the need to write such a vitriolic piece damning the nursing profession. I'm afraid your views are rather jaundiced and I feel that your experience has led you to write an entirely biased piece of work that is both insulting and demeaning to myself and my colleagues.

Let me give you a different view point. On Sunday we were short staffed. We had a large influx of patients in to the Emergency Department from late morning onwards both by ambulance and minor injuries. We reached a crisis point early afternoon where we were no longer able to offload ambulance patients. The nursing and medical staff worked tirelessly, often without breaks to ensure that all patients were seen, treated and admitted or discharged within the Government allotted 4 hour target. At the start of the shift I had said to the nursing staff "It's going to be difficult today but lets make sure everyone has everything done for them, be Nurses, Nurse people don't worry about times"

That is what we did for thirteen and a half hours. I can honestly say with my hand on my heart that everyone that came through this department on Sunday was given the best care and treatment we were able to give. This was wholly due to the hard work and dedication of the Nursing and Medical staff on duty.

We work as a team; that includes porters, domestics and ancillary staff. How am I supposed to support and already demoralised workforce that have been forced to accept a pay rise well below the average. Is it any wonder that nurses are leaving the NHS?

I feel you need to examine your critique further and perhaps spend some time shadowing nurses to see how we work. Come and see the conditions we have to endure, the insults and abuse we take from patients and relatives and then ask yourself whether you would do this job?

Your suggestions about education are ludicrous as we do not want a return to the 'handmaiden' situation. Nurses need to be well educated to allow them to treat patients appropriately and empower them with knowledge. We do not need a workforce of automatons that follow instructions but lack the ability to think for themselves.

Welcome to the twenty first century Ms Phillips, Florence Nightingale would be proud of the care we give our patients, don't tar us all with the same brush. Your article is inciting further denigration of a valuable and essential workforce.

 

I think this nurse is in a state of denial. I also think that the crisis in nursing is part of a much broader de-moralisation of the NHS and our wider culture. We have to restore to our public services and general society a sense of duty and obligation to others. This cannot be achieved by a top-down, massive state bureaucracy set up to deliver unrealisable demand. That means accepting that the NHS is bust, and replacing it with a European-style system of social insurance embodying and promoting individual, professional and social responsibility. Much of the public already gets this. How long will it take our politicians to wake up?

Email to a friend  |   Permalink  |   Comments (13)

My brave new world

9:59am

 

Do not adjust your set!

If you are looking for the diary on melaniephillips.com, you’ve come to the right place. It now has a new home. If you are a new reader of this blog — welcome, and I hope you enjoy it. I’ve posted below some of my last few entries to give you a flavour of what I write.

All new diary posts will now appear on this website, which you can access either by clicking on melaniephillips.com or by coming here to the Spectator. Established readers should find all the services that were provided on my old site; you can subscribe through the RSS feed, you can contact me at the email address on the masthead and, in a new addition, you will now be able to post your own comments below each entry. The archive of my previous diary entries will still be found on melaniephillips.com and that website — maintained by my incomparable webmaster Tom — will still be updated with articles I write for other publications as well as my talks and lectures.

So why have I made this move? I was delighted to have the opportunity because it allows me to continue to be myself while enjoying a number of advantages. First and foremost is the chance it provides to reach out to a yet wider readership. The Spectator is a highly respected political weekly which punches well above its weight, and its website has established itself very fast as a must-read on the net. It offers me a congenial home with which I am already familiar, since I write for the magazine itself from time to time and know how much it respects independence of mind.

And that of course is the most important thing for me. Some readers might be anxious that what I now write will be controlled or influenced in some way by the Spectator’s editorial line. That will not happen. What I write will not be seen in advance by the Spectator’s staff before it goes up here, and subject to the usual constraints of the laws of libel and contempt of court they will have no input into the content of this blog, even though they will be paying me a small stipend. I will continue to write as freely as before. It will be the same blog but in a different setting.

So I hope you enjoy these elegant new surroundings and will continue to accompany me as I embark on this fresh chapter of my adventures in cyberspace.

Email to a friend  |   Permalink  |   Comments (19)

Sunday, 21st October 2007

Britain's terrible problem

11:29pm

More very alarming evidence indeed of the attitudes of ‘mainstream’ British Muslims. As the Telegraph reports, the Conservative Muslim Forum, a body set up by David Cameron to advise the Conservatives on Muslim issues and which is headed by Lord Sheikh, has condemned the government’s support for Israel on the grounds that this displeases Muslims and says that Iran has ‘legitimate’ reasons for wanting nuclear weapons. It also argues that preachers who advocate a rejection of democracy and its institutions should not be denied entry into Britain.

In the document, the group says:

Regardless of the foreign policies of the United States, hostility to Iran is not in Britain’s national interest. A constructive engagement with Iran offers many possibilities for progress.

But of course, this inverts the facts. Britain is not hostile to Iran; Iran has declared war upon Britain and the west. There can be no ‘constructive engagement’ with a country that is currently blowing up our soldiers in Iraq. For British citizens to state that although they oppose Iran getting nuclear weapons, it has legitimate reasons for wanting them when it is committed to the destruction of Israel and war against the west, is appalling.

But then, their attitude to Israel is diabolical. The Tories, they say, must stop supporting not just Israel’s policies but the very right of the Jews to a homeland at all:

An incoming Conservative Administration must appreciate that a pro-zionist [sic] attitude will not bode well with many. Pro-zionist statements only damage relationships with Muslims nationally and internationally. Thus, statements like the one made by David Cameron on 12th June 2007 can be too easily interpreted as unbalanced and weighted towards only the zionist and Israeli positions.

[Footnote]: David Cameron said ‘If what you mean by Zionist, someone who believes that the Jews have a right to a homeland in Israel and a right to their country then yes I am a Zionist and I’m proud of the fact that Conservative politicians down the ages have played a huge role in helping to bring this about’ and ‘There is something deep in our Party’s DNA that believes in Israel, the right of Israel to exist, the right of Israel to defend itself and that a deal should only happen if it means that Israel is really allowed to have peace within secure borders and real guarantees about its future’. Source: www.cfoi.co.uk

From this, we must infer that these mainstream British Muslims want the Conservative party to agree with them that Israel’s very existence should no longer be supported. They do not believe that Jews have a right to their homeland in Israel; they do not believe that Israel has the right to exist; they do not believe that Israel has the right to defend itself; they do not believe that Israel should have peace within secure borders and real guarantees about its future.

These are not moderate attitudes. They are vile.

Their views on Islamic terror are all of a piece with this bigotry. In a classic piece of verbal slipperiness, they praise the distinction between Islam and Islamism — which is made purely to distinguish those who derive merely spiritual solace from the faith from those who use the religion of Islam to wage war upon the non-Islamic world — for allegedly denying any relationship between this terror and Islam. But that’s not what ‘Islamism’ means at all. On the contrary, it asserts an explicit relationship netween terrorism and Islam. it simply allows for those Muslims who genuinely do not support terror or the jihad. But just to make sure there can be no doubt, the group goes on to insist that the Tories must never link terrorism to Islam. It instructs them to censor their language:

We accept that some terrorists do abuse Islam for their purposes. However, an incoming Conservative administration must deny their attempt to link criminal acts to any religion. The term ‘terrorism’ must be separated from any religious references. We reiterate that the Conservative Party should not explicitly or implicitly link terrorism with Islam as, similar to other major religions, Islam forbids terrorism.

In other words, the usual mind-bending dissembling designed to mask the true nature of the jihad. These are not moderate attitudes.

The group goes on effectively to defend the Muslim Council of Britain against the charge of extremism because it is

well respected by many Muslims and non-Muslims.

But the MCB itself subscribes to the philosophy of Maulana Maududi, who along with Syed Qutb was one of the founding fathers of modern jihadi Islamism. Its spokesman, Inayat Bungalwala, has said he is committed to the Islamisation of Britain. Furthermore, it shelters under its umbrella many groups which are even more extreme.

Shocking as all this is, nothing in the document, alas, is surprising. These extremist attitudes are mainstream among British Muslims. The fact that they are regarded as ‘moderate’ — by a British political and educated class that in no small measure actually shares the animus expressed here towards Israel and America —is why Britain has such a terrible problem.

This document follows the recent pronouncement by the 138 Muslim religious leaders reported here which, although hailed as an olive branch to the Christian church, was actually a demonstrable threat. It is only when other Muslims come out and denounce these attitudes loud and clear for the treacherous, bigoted and lethal opinions that they are that we will have any hope that Britain’s Muslims will join the struggle against the jihad instead of fanning the flames of religious war.

Email to a friend  |   Permalink  |   Comments (1)

It isn’t.

11:28pm


A number of people have expressed amazement and scorn after the revelation on the Spectator’s Coffee House blog by Neil O’Brien, the director of Open Europe, that the Independent splashed on its front page yesterday ‘Debunking the Eurosceptic myths about the European reform treaty’ without revealing that the thing was lifted virtually word for word from a Foreign Office briefing note.

The Independent has reacted bullishly, but what remains of its reputation has now been holed below the waterline by this revelation that it is so lazy and craven that it merely passes off government propaganda as its own work. The Guardian reports its editor, Simon Kellner, saying:

‘The source doesn’t really make a material difference. What matters is whether those facts are accurate or not. And no one, as far as I can see, is doubting the truth of what we printed.’

Well, these ‘facts’ are nothing of the kind; they are actually assertions which are variously tendentious, disingenuous, misleading and false. The Indie never can grasp the difference. But the real point is that this government briefing note hasn’t been used as just a ‘source’, implying that the newspaper used it as a basis for its own evaluation and work, but has merely been reproduced — a practice associated with the unfree press in totalitarian societies.

Once again, the blogosphere has shown its power to hold the mainstream media sharply to account and inflict real damage to its reputation.

Email to a friend  |   Permalink  |   Comments (0)

Broadcasting spots

11:27pm

Broadcasting spots

Last night I appeared on BBC TV's Question Time. You can watch it again here. On Wednesday the Moral Maze, on which I am a panellist, discussed drug legalisation. It was, ahem, rather lively. You can listen to it here.

Email to a friend  |   Permalink  |   Comments (1)

Wednesday, 17th October 2007

The Dutch gates of Vienna* (2)

3:25pm

This is what happens when you appease the unconscionable. After its shameful treatment of Ayaan Hirsi Ali whom it has thrown to the jihadi wolves, the Dutch have further run up the white flag for their culture by allowing the jihadis to take over the Dutch TV Muslim broadcaster, as this story reports:

Until recently, the Netherlands had two Islamic public broadcasters: the moderate NMO and the orthodox Dutch Islamic Broadcasting Organisation (NIO). Media watchdog Commissariaat voor de Media demanded that the two would merge so that the Islamic faith would have a single representative body in the public system. But according to Nova, this resulted in NIO staging a coup of NMO…

One of the members of the new board of directors is Yahia Bouyafa, who ‘is believed to have close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood,’ as Nova reported. Another is Abdelmajid Kayroun, chairman of the Al Farouq mosque in Utrecht ‘whose imam was deported from the Netherlands in 2001 for espionage for the Libyan secret service’. Also among the eight directors is Mohammed Nanhekhan, a member of the ‘radical movement World Islamic Mission’.

The Commissionership for the Media says it has ‘no indications’ that anything is wrong. It will only instigate an inquiry if the Justice Ministry or the secret service AIVD requests it, as a spokesperson stated.

If any Dutch person thinks such craven capitulation will buy them peace, they are tragically mistaken. On the contrary, such a display of cultural cringe only serves to embolden and incite the enemy still further. This is what happened in Amsterdam last night:

A group of dozens of youths in the Slotervaart neighbourhood in western Amsterdam set cars on fire, damaged several other cars and threw stones through the windows of a police station. The riots followed the death of 22-year old Dutch-born Bilal Bajaka, of Moroccan descent.

On Sunday, Bajaka entered the police station of Slotervaart, stabbing two police officers with a knife. Although having sustained serious injuries, one of the officers, a policewoman, shot and killed her alleged attacker on the spot…

From the age of 13 up to his death on Sunday, the police said, Bajaka had been involved in several major criminal incidents, including armed robberies and a series of violent incidents. He was allegedly part of a criminal gang. In addition, police said he was personally acquainted with Mohammed Bouyeri, the convicted killer of the late film director Theo van Gogh, as well as with other Moroccan-Dutch terrorist suspects.

Mohammed Bouyeri and the others allegedly involved in terrorist activities also came from the Slotervaart neighbourhood… Moroccan-Dutch residents of Slotervaart complained to reporters they were ‘sick and tired’ of continuous ‘negative news reports’ about fellow Moroccan-Dutch, adding they felt increasingly stigmatized.

Several television reporters who came to report on the fatal incident at the police station were threatened by Moroccan-Dutch youths. Responding to the riots, Ahmed Marcouch, Moroccan-born chairman of the Slotervaart city council, said ‘it is always the same horrible people spoiling things for everyone.’

Rather what the entire free world feels about the global jihad. And maybe, soon, also about the Dutch —the people who have removed their finger from the dyke.

*In 1683, Europe stopped the 300 year advance of the Ottoman empire at the Battle of Vienna.

Email to a friend  |   Permalink  |   Comments (1)

Tuesday, 16th October 2007

The crunch for the knitted yoghurt-fanciers

6:56pm

 


The political blogs are in their element after the second LibDem regicide in two years. Did Ming Campbell jump? Was he pushed? Which Young Turk will now become top sandal? Will all the contenders for the leadership fit into a taxi? Are there any LibDems who are not contenders for the leadership? Is Nick Clegg unstoppable? Who is Nick Clegg?

Who cares?

Ming Campbell may not have helped himself by seeming to belong to a different era, but the LibDem crisis will not be solved by a new leader. Their problem is that they are simply monumentally irrelevant to the life of the nation, other than acting as a handy repository for protest votes that otherwise have no home. Can anyone say what they stand for that is distinctive in British public life? Precisely. They have made themselves irrelevant by positioning themselves on the left of the Labour party: anti-America, anti-Iraq war, anti-Israel, anti-family, anti-capitalism, pro-green fundamentalism, pro-drugs, pro-victim culture, pro-big state. They do well therefore on the metropolitan dinner-party circuit but not so well where anyone has a passing relationship with reality.

In that happy state, their clothes were nicked by the Cameroons who, eyeing the disaffected people-carrier vote, repositioned the Tory party as pro-green, pro-big state, pro-criminal, pro-drugs, anti-American etc. This worked a treat. Tories went up; LibDems went down. Then Gordon Brown decided to be a cross-dresser too. So he nicked the Tories’ old clothes that they had thrown onto the trash and posed as anti-immigration, anti-crime, anti-gambling and anti-drugs. Labour went up; Tories went down.

So then the Tories pulled some of their old clothes out of the trash can and said they would uphold marriage, all but axe inheritance tax, tighten immigration and fight the EU constitution. Whereupon they shot up in the polls and the LibDems fell to bits. Either the people-carrier classes don’t like the taxman snaffling their children’s inheritance (who’da thunk it, they’re not so daft after all) or — just as likely — they are natural wet conservatives, who defected to the LibDems only because of the Rocky Horror Show cast who ran the Tory party before, and now feel it’s safe to return because Cameron and Brown between them have decontaminated the conservative agenda.

I hope I haven’t lost you.

So now we have a Labour party that stands for redistribution and responsibility and a Conservative party that stands for responsibility and redistribution. And so what do the LibDems now have to offer that Labour and the Tories have omitted to triangulate? Er…

The one specific area that is ripe for exploitation is the public services — the most glaring inconsistency in the Cameron agenda which promises both power to the consumer and maintaining the current level of state spending on health and education — where Nick Clegg appears to have genuinely radical decentralising views which in themselves are welcome. However, if he is elected the LibDems promise to become merely a consistently libertarian party in both economics and moral values, which the UK needs like a hole in the head. The gap in the political market is a party that will defend British and western liberal democratic values from the onslaught mounted on them by the combination of Euro-federalism and the Islamic jihad from without and by libertarianism and cultural Marxism from within.

That means reaching into the tradition of British liberalism itself and reclaiming its authentic values as a moral project rooted in Judeo-Christian values from the left that hijacked them and twisted them into their antithesis. They are indeed within the Liberals’ own tradition. So will the LibDems make themselves relevant again by reasserting these values and saving the nation?

No.

Email to a friend  |   Permalink  |   Comments (1)

The voice of realism

3:59pm

 

As Israel’s Prime Minister Ehud Olmert floats the idea that he might give away some Arab neighbourhoods of Jerusalem as part of a, ahem, peace deal some of the Arabs in those neighbourhoods have reacted in a striking fashion. As this story reports:

…the mayor of Ras Hamis, a Palestinian neighbourhood on the eastern fringe of this divided city, says that he can’t think of a worse fate for him and his constituents than being handed over to the weak and ineffective Palestinian Authority right now. ‘If there was a referendum here, no one would vote to join the Palestinian Authority,’ Mr. Gheit said, smoking a water pipe as he whiled away the afternoon watching Lebanese music videos. ‘We will not accept it. There would be another intifada [uprising] to defend ourselves from the PA.’

…Those who live in the neighbourhoods Mr. Olmert spoke of handing over are nonetheless worried that Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas, who is seen as weak and desperate for an achievement after losing control of the Gaza Strip to the Islamist Hamas movement, will accept the offer. They dislike the idea of their neighbourhoods, which are generally more prosperous than other parts of the West Bank, being absorbed into the chaotic Palestinian territories.

Mr. Gheit, with two posters of ‘the martyr Saddam Hussein’ hanging over his cash register, can hardly be called an admirer of the Jewish state. But he says that an already difficult life would get worse if those living in Ras Hamis and the adjoining Shuafat refugee camp were suddenly no longer able to work in Israel, or use its publicly funded health system. The 53-year-old said he’d be happy to one day live in a properly independent Palestinian state, but not one that looks anything like the corruption-racked and violence-prone areas that are split between the warring Hamas and Fatah factions. ‘I don’t believe in these factions. I only believe in putting bread on the table for my children. I fight only for them. At least in Israel, there’s law.’

Among the Palestinians, Mr Gheit is far from alone in his opinion.

Email to a friend  |   Permalink  |   Comments (0)

Monday, 15th October 2007

The war against the Jews

7:40pm

 

The venomous animosity displayed by the UN towards Israel has been amply documented (if generally ignored). Now John Dugard, the UN human rights envoy for the Palestinian Territories, has vented a stream of this poison. BBC Online reports him saying that he will urge the world body to withdraw from the Quartet of Middle East mediators unless it addresses Palestinian human rights, since the US, EU, UN and Russia were failing to protect the Palestinians.

‘Every time I visit, the situation seems to have worsened,’ he said in a BBC interview. This time, I was very struck by the sense of hopelessness among the Palestinian people.’ Mr Dugard attributed this to ‘the crushing effect of human rights violations’, and in particular Israeli restrictions on Palestinians’ freedom of movement.

Yes, the Palestinians’ situation has worsened. This is principally the result of two things. a) The regime of terror instituted by the Hamas administration for which the Palestinians so unwisely voted and which is progressively making their lives a misery; and b) the restrictions imposed by the Israelis to counter the rockets which the Palestinians are lobbing at Israeli towns from Gaza, and the human bomb attacks they are ceaselessly attempting to perpetrate against Israelis. Strangely, Dugard makes no mention of either.

He said that although Israel did have a threat to its security, ‘its response is very disproportionate’.

Let’s see now: checkpoints to stop its citizens from being murdered? Very disproportionate. Targeted assassinations, to kill terror godfathers while sparing innocent Palestinians as far as possible? Very disproportionate. Sitting on Israeli hands while rockets fired from Gaza slam into southern Israeli towns? Very disproportionate.

And what does Dugard have to say about Palestinians murdering other Palestinians? Last Saturday, Palestinian Authority forces shot dead two Palestinians, including a 5-year-old boy in Qalqilyah on the West Bank. Last month, masked gunmen attacked an 28 year-old Christian woman in Gaza city and looted a church. A 16 year-old girl was lynched in Gaza for ‘dishonouring’ her family; she was beaten, stabbed and kicked before her head was smashed in with large stones. What does Dugard say about such crimes? Nothing. How very disproportionate.

He said the purpose of some of the checkpoints in the middle of the West Bank was to break it up ‘into a number of cantons and make the life of Palestinians as miserable as possible’.

The checkpoints are there for one reason only; to protect innocent Israelis from murderous Arab savagery. If there was no Arab violence, there would be no checkpoints.

The South African retired professor of international law said the response of the Quartet was weak because it was ‘heavily influenced’ by the US.

Ah; now would that be the same US whose Secretary of State is currently saying:
‘It’s time for the establishment of a Palestinian state’

and intends to force Israel to agree, even while the Arabs in this putative state are showing what they would use such a state for by continuing even now to attack Israel by bomb and rocket — thus rewarding annihilatory terror and throwing Israel to the wolves?

The Quartet failed to engage properly on human rights, he said, and was also failing to deal with the current rift between the rival Palestinian factions of Fatah and Hamas. The militant Islamist movement Hamas seized the Gaza Strip in June, ousting Fatah, which is led by Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas. Mr Dugard said the rift was threatening the Palestinians’ right to self-determination, and that the UN ‘should be playing the role of the mediator’. ‘Instead the international community has given its support almost completely to one faction - to Fatah,’ he said. “That’s not the role the UN should take.’

Of course not. It should give its support equally to a group that stands not just for the destruction of Israel and the murder and ethnic cleansing of Jews but the Islamisation of the entire region and its subjugation to tyranny.

Mr Dugard said he saw a greater danger - that of the Palestinian Authority raising expectations too high in the Palestinian community. ‘If those expectations are not met, I fear there may be serious consequences,’ he added. The consequences include the possibility of a third ‘intifada, a large-scale, violent uprising against the Israelis, he said.

Mr Dugard said this should be no surprise.’ Inevitably in a military occupation, there are likely to be those engaged in resistance.’ These people may be labelled terrorists, Mr Dugard added, but history treats them differently. He cited the example of the French Resistance during World War II, and those in Namibia who fought occupation by South Africa. ‘Now,’ he said, ‘they are in government and treated as heroes.’

So there we have it: a UN adviser who is endorsing and justifying a further campaign of genocidal mass murder against Jews by totalitarian Islamists, which he equates with the French resistance against Fascism. And people wonder why the world is teetering on the edge of catastrophe.

Email to a friend  |   Permalink  |   Comments (1)

Sunday, 21st October 2007

The other consensus

7:28pm

 

 

Some more informed common sense about man-made global warming in this article by sceptical scientists who, ahem, don’t exist. They propose the following questions to be put to the over-heated warmers:

2.) How do you know the ‘vast majority of scientists’ agree with your viewpoint?
Despite the confident proclamations of Al Gore, the only place that a climate change science consensus exists is in what Essex and McKitrick call ‘official science.’ the collective voice of governments and so-called ‘science authorities.’ But this is not real science. Among qualified researchers, there is a debate raging about the causes of the past century’s modest warming. Ignoring science, but sensing a massive shift in public awareness of the issue, politicians have jumped on the climate catastrophe bandwagon.

3.) If we delayed carbon dioxide, or CO2, reduction decisions by a few years to allow examination of the science, what would be the impact on climate?
Essentially none. Even its supporters admit that complete compliance with Kyoto by all nations held to limits would result in less than a 0.1° C difference to global climate a half century from now.

4.) How closely has climate tracked CO2 levels in the past?
About 440 million years ago, when CO2 levels are estimated to have been over 10 times today’s, our planet was in the depths of the coldest period in the last half billion years. At other times, high CO2 levels coincided with warm periods. There is no meaningful correlation with temperature in the geological record.

Al Gore points out that, over the past half million years, the Antarctic ice core records show a link between temperature and CO2. What he neglects to mention is that these records consistently show that temperature rises some 800 years before CO2 rise, not after it. Even over the past century, the CO2 and global warming correlation is poor, with significant cooling taking place between 1940 and 1980 while human produced CO2 emissions were increasing rapidly.

And what is the likely response to these facts? We can write the script now:

‘evilinsaneooilindustrystoogesworsethanholocaustdeniersflatearth
rightwingdrivelconsensusohmygodIjustcan’tbelieveyouarestillsaying
suchthingswhenveryimportantpeopleindeedaresayingthepreciseopposite
whichthereforewemustallbelievewithoutquestionalgorenobelherohowdareyou.’

Or some such intelligent, evidence-based and above all scientific reply.

Email to a friend  |   Permalink  |   Comments (2)

Melanie's Published Articles

The club of tyranny

Sleepwalking into Islamisation

Can we afford to lose this expertise?

The silence of complicity

British education? Expletive deleted!

Why British judges are freeing terrorists

The Westminster scam factory

Faking a killing

Reading the runes on selective amnesia

The curious case of the Waterloo files

Melanie Phillips is a Daily Mail columnist. She also writes for the Jewish Chronicle and is a panellist on BBC Radio Four's Moral Maze. Her most recent book is 'Londonistan', published by Encounter and Gibson Square.

For a complete set of Melanie's articles click here

Spectator recommends

Sky - Official Site

Build your own Sky package online. Sky TV, Broadband & Talk only £16.

Sky TV, Broadband & Talk from £16 a Month

Sky TV & free broadband packages available from £16 a month. Choose from a standard free sky box, sky plus...


Spectator classifieds

ROME CENTRE

PORTA METRONIA, ROME Standing high on the top of one of the seven hills of Rome- the Coelian- this unique

City Breaks. ROME and PARIS

ROME and PARIS: over 350 holiday rentals apartments listed: visit  www.romanreference.com  and  www.parisreference.com or call +39 0648 903612.

Jewellery. RUFFS (Estd. 1904).

Goldsmiths by Design Welcome to Ruffs!  You have found a company of Goldsmiths that specialises in the manufacture, amongst other