We’re all too ready to run to the police
Widdecombe
IN a scene reminiscent of prewar schooldays, which most of us thought gone for ever, older pupils at prestigious Millfield School beat younger boys with cricket bats in “initiation ceremonies”. A 14-year-old called Tok, who was not thus mistreated, had the presence of mind to record some of the proceedings and send the results to his parents.
Unsurprisingly they removed him from the school and the headmaster suspended two of the older boys. So far, so reasonable but then Tok’s mother Mrs Charles demands that the police get involved and takes offence when officers sensibly respond that the school is dealing with it.
She is “shocked and appalled” that there is no recourse to law and says that a teenager who beat another with a bat on the streets of London would be “heading for Borstal”. Yes, but that is precisely because in such instances there is no other authority to deal with it, no well-organised school, probably little family structure and the offence would have taken place in public. The analogy does not even begin to stand up.
One of the reasons our police cannot cope is because too many people expect them to involve themselves in everything, using them as the first rather than last resort in issues such as neighbour disputes, offencetaking, #MeToo trivia, wolf-whistling and any playground tiff. (No, I do not class the Millfield affair in that last category.)
SCHOOLS and families have a duty to protect the young from harm but also to prevent them from doing harm. In this case the bullies have been suspended and that will be on their records. They have shamed and disappointed their own parents. Their studies will be interrupted and they will have to make up the work. If they are allowed to return it will be under a cloud and if not they will suffer the disgrace of expulsion. That is enough, Mrs Charles. It is more SO now even All-Bran is to be classed as junk food along with several other popular cereals.
Oh when will the Government wake up and realise that Britaincannot be nannied out of its obesity crisis? That such messages will be heeded only by those who already care about their health and by obsessive dieters? That they will have zilch impact on the seriously important that the school makes sure this cannot happen again and also calls to account any who knew and did nothing.
Had Tok been my child I also would fat? The problem is simple enough: some people are motivated by health considerations and some are not and those who are not are getting fatter because there is a plentiful supply of food and of choice.
There has been no rationing in this country since the 1950s and small greengrocers have given way to huge supermarkets, the shelves of which groan under the weight of have withdrawn him. Yet there is an argument for saying that he should have stayed: that he had done the right thing, that action was being taken and that he should carry on food. To the fish and chip shop in every town have been added rows of burger, pizza, kebab, Chinese and Indian takeaways.
Temptation is everywhere and the sin of gluttony easy to indulge.
The health-conscious read the backs of packets and know what to look for. The rest have whatever they fancy when they fancy it and pay Nanny not a second’s attention. How where he was being a figure to whom others could turn for protection. Perhaps he might have had that courage but who could blame the parents for being unwilling to take the risk?
THE ONLY WAY TO TACKLE OBESITY IS BY STIGMATISING IT
did we reduce drink-driving so dramatically? We stigmatised it. How have we reduced smoking? We stigmatised it until we reached a point where a ban was possible.
As I have said before we need to do the same with genuinely serious obesity. That and only that will have people reaching for the fruit and veg rather than the double cheese burger with large fries.