Beguiling statistics

I’m not accustomed to watching BBC’s The One Show, but I did catch it on Wednesday this week, when there was an item on the charity Dentaid in Yorkshire town of Dewsbury. It mainly works overseas, but, as its website (https://www.dentaid.org/uk/) puts it, “It is a sad fact that many people in Britain are unable to access safe, affordable dental care. Although the NHS offers first class dental services, many vulnerable people aren’t registered with a dentist and only seek treatment when they are suffering pain.
“In some parts of the country there are long waiting lists for NHS dentists and people are developing dental problems while they are waiting for a place to become available.
“Dentaid is also aware that homeless people, those with a history of drug and alcohol abuse or patients with mental health problems can face obstacles when visiting a dental surgery.
“Furthermore, up to 40 per cent of children in the UK are not receiving any dental check-ups or oral health education.
Dentaid has a range of projects in the UK to tackle these problems.It offers free dental service to those who can’t get NHS treatment for one reason or another.” 

One of those was the mobile clinic visiting Dewsbury, treating around 200 people in a fortnight.

Photo from Dentaid's website; treatment in Dewsbury

This post isn’t about the multiple reasons, such as the cutting of school dental services and the push towards privatising health services, that have given rise to this. However it is about a passing remark made by Eddie Crouch, Vice Chair of the British Dental Association, being interviewed by Alex Jones and Matt Baker.

He stated, “Access to local NHS dentistry is a problem everywhere.” And so Alex Jones commented, with I assume a government statistic, “You know, there has been an increase in NHS dentists, 20%; so you would think that would improve things slightly. But not so?”

Eddie Crouch: “Well, what we’re talking about there is the global number of dentists actually in the NHS, but we’re not talking about the number working full-time in the NHS. That figure is irrelevant really. If the whole time numbers of dentists working in the NHS hasn’t increased, and in fact the funding hasn’t increased for a long time; so even if there were more dentists working in the NHS, they’re only working with the same amount of funding.”

He is of course right. Governments are fond of confounding criticism with statistics. Just watch Prime Minister’s Questions or listen to the Today programme. However one can select statistics to prove any case. Perhaps the most egregious example is to do with unemployment. The number of unemployed people has according to government figures been gratifyingly decreasing year by year. And yet oddly the average standard of living has also been falling and homelessness rising. One is therefore left with questions such as how many of the “employed” are working part-time, how many are on zero hours contracts, what sort of jobs are these “employed” working in and how many have been excluded from benefits by other means.

The important question is not about the statistics, but about the outcome. Mark Twain was reported as saying, “Figures often beguile me, particularly when I have the arranging of them myself; in which case the remark attributed to Disraeli would often apply with justice and force: ‘There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.’” I think he meant that statistics could be used to prove anything.  

It's an eloquent commentary on the current state of the NHS that desperate patients are being compelled to resort either to private firms - or to third-world charities.

Sharing Love at Christmas

I'm a great admirer of Jack Monroe, the young mum who a year ago was homeless, and this year led the campaign to have the steeply rising number of food banks debated in the House of Commons, which took place last week with the government, rather than listening, whipping its MPs to prevent an enquiry about the reasons. Nevertheless it was an achievement that food poverty in 21st-century Britain was given two hours of Parliamentary and television time.

Jack writes a blog (and a Guardian column) which at the moment is about having a "cheaper little Christmas" without compromising ideals such as using organic and free-range products - full of useful tips. However, today's is different. She quotes a Facebook status from one of her friends, which I think is so good, I'm using it as my Christmas greeting to you. 

Jack Monroe with her son

Love at Christmas, by Sharon Jaynes

Posted by Jack Monroe (MsJackMonroe) December 23, 2013

A friend posted this on her Facebook page this morning, and I thought I would share it with you. It comes from the book of 1 Corinthians, 13, verses 1 – 13.

"If I decorate my house perfectly with plaid bows, strands of twinkling lights, and shiny glass balls but do not show love to my family, I’m just another decorator.

"If I slave away in the kitchen, baking dozens of Christmas cookies, preparing gourmet meals, and arranging a beautifully adorned table at mealtime but do not show love to my family, I’m just another cook.

"If I work at the soup kitchen, carol in the nursing home, and give all that I have to charity but do not show love to my family, it profits me nothing.

"If I trim the spruce with shimmering angels and crocheted snowflakes, attend a myriad of holiday parties, and sing in the choir’s cantata but do not focus on love, I have missed the point.

"Love stops the cooking to hug the child. Love sets aside the decorating to kiss the husband. Love is kind, though harried and tired.

"Love doesn’t envy another’s home that has coordinated Christmas china and table linens. Love doesn’t yell at the kids to get out of the way. Love doesn’t give only to those who are able to give in return but rejoices in giving to those who can’t

"Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never fails.

"Video games will break, pearl necklaces will be lost, golf clubs will rust. But giving the gift of love will endure.

X "

I'd just like to remind you that Love came down at Christmas, and wish you much love in the next few days.

Michael

"Vested interests"

According to The Independent George Osborne, Chancellor of the Exchequer, "was also fiercely critical of churches and charities which have opposed the Government's welfare cuts, describing them as simply 'vested interests' reacting with 'depressingly predictable outrage' to necessary change", in a speech staged a Morrison's distribution depot in Kent yesterday. The board in front of his lectern read, "For hardworking (sic) people". I'm sure his English teacher at Barnes Boys' Secondary Modern would have taught him that composite adjectives should be hyphenated, not to mention Gradgrind Gove or Bruiser Boris. However, far more importantly, he'd surely have heard in his youth the words of the prophet: 

"Woe to those who decree iniquitous decrees,
    and the writers who keep writing oppression,
 to turn aside the needy from justice
    and to rob the poor of my people of their right,
that widows may be their spoil,
    and that they may make the fatherless their prey!" (Isaiah)

That sort of "outrage" is the stuff of true religion. "Predictable", maybe; "depressing", indeed. But it's what church and synagogue leaders should be saying. 

What is very curious, to my mind, is his description of churches and charities as "vested interests". After all, if the welfare state is as inflated as he seems to believe, the charity sector should have less to do rather than more. Trimming the welfare state does not create more income for the charity sector. It simply creates more demand for the sector whose resources are squeezed as a result of cut-backs. Charities were predictably among the first candidates for central and local government "economies", on the specious grounds that they were "non-essential". That might have been so in a minority of cases, such as the Great Snoring Lace Making and Limbo Dancing Club, but the majority serve real needs.

So, what exactly did the millionaire Irishman mean by describing churches and charities in that loaded fashion? Primarily one would guess that his faceless speech-writer was fishing for an emotive phrase to dismiss the considered and evidence-based criticisms of those who are nearest to the casualties of government policies. There's no doubt that the nationwide networks of churches and charities are far nearer to the ground than Whitehall speech-writers and politicians. It seems to be lazy pejorative rhetoric. However it's worse than that, because it's actually nonsense. What the Chancellor is not gracious enough to admit is that he will be relying on those very "vested interests" to be the first responders, paramedics and emergency wards for meeting the needs of the casualties of his "necessary change". That's why those "vested interests" have been setting up so many food banks and why homelessness charities are busier than they have ever been, with less funding. It's why medical charities are ever more called on to give the support previously provided by the NHS. It seems the only vested interest that churches and charities have is as providers. 

It's true enough that's what they are there for. But that is not what Mr Osborne was saying. Otherwise he would no doubt have been thanking them - and even resourcing them. The truth is equally that they are there to speak for the needy, the poor, the widows and the fatherless. They are there to speak against oppression and to campaign for justice. 

I'm not here writing about the rights and wrongs of government economic and welfare policy. I don't pretend to have a clue about politicians' true motivations and intentions. But to rubbish those who are raising legitimate concerns as having "depressingly predictable outrage" is to descend to schoolboy debating of a debased level. If we learned anything from the last century, it might be summed up in Pastor Niemöller's famous dictum: 

First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the socialists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Catholic.

Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for me.

Speaking out is how civilised societies are preserved. Meanwhile, one wonders what "vested interests" George Osborne and his colleagues might like to declare....

Home thoughts from home

I hope you'll forgive me if I bring my blog down to domestic matters while the tragedy of the Japanese earthquake aftermath continues to unravel. The immensity of the death and missing toll (17,000) and number who are homeless (over a million), the collapse of infrastructure, the sub-zero temperatures and the unfolding nuclear power station disaster - no wonder their Prime Minister, Naoto Kan, described it as the country's worst catastrophe after the 2nd World War and said that the whole nation would have to rebuild from scratch.

The home story that heated my sub-collar area most was the report that Westminster City Council have dreamed up a scheme to make it a criminal offence to give food or drink to homeless people and to fine people sitting on the streets £500. It's variously surmised that this is the first step to clearing up the streets of London before the 2012 Olympics, or preempting the expected increase in homelessness following changes in housing benefits. More charitable people wonder whether the council might have plans to provide shelter and food to the nearly 150 homeless in the area. Watching David Cameron giving his statement about Libya in the Commons today, I noticed sitting on the front bench next to Nick Noddy Clegg, Sir George Young, Leader of the House and Lord Privy Seal, who once famously, or infamously, defined 'the homeless' as "people you step over when you leave the opera". Words like "whoever gives one of these little ones even a cup of water" came to mind and the reward, as far as I understood, wasn't a criminal charge. I'm not quite clear whether this is already a by-law or being considered. I sincerely hope it's the latter and will be dropped with the contempt it deserves.

Yesterday the BBC published research they'd commissioned from 'a leading firm of accountants' about the new rate of student loans. They concluded that if a student took out a loan over three years of £39,000 and had above-average pay-increases, he'd end up paying more than double what he borrowed. Apparently, according to the minister, this is half way between a credit card debt and income tax, and is "a good deal". It certainly is for the government. But I imagine loan sharks say the same!

I was pleased to see internecine strife amongst journalists when Panorama did a programme on the dark arts, in particular practised by The News of the World. This involved illegal phone tapping and computer hacking. A bit disturbing was the alleged obtaining of police information with money. Scotland Yard, we were told, had reopened the case. Hopefully they will be rigorous even in examining themselves.

And finally in the week when the BMA (the doctors' professional association) Council voted for a withdrawal and reshaping of the government's NHS Bill I was interested to learn that Richard Branson already owns a number of GP practices. I assume it's through Virgin Healthcare. I don't think my local practice could be improved, nor the services I receive, but I can believe that he might do a good job running services - though, come to think of it, I'm not sure that Virgin gives us a better service on our phones than the good old Post Office phone service used to. However the image isn't bad!

"Your surgery's either got it or it hasn't."