Ofsted should go to bottom of the class

THE judgments of Ofsted inspectors are at times incredible. They inspected a free school where the relevant government department was aware that allegations of financial irregularities had been made and there was no mention of it in their report.

In November 2013 they inspected a school that had been graded by them as “outstanding” in 2010 and which was happy to remain a local authority school. In January 2011 a new head was appointed and in their recent report they say: “Since her appointment, and ably supported by senior leaders and the governing body, the head teacher, who is highly ambitious for the school has secured improvements in the quality of leadership,at all levels and all leaders are now relentless in their drive for improvement. This in turn has led to significant improvements in the quality of teaching and pupils’ achievement.”

Elsewhere they say: “This is a rapidly improving school in which pupil progress targets are extremely challenging for both teachers and pupils and all, from the most to the least able pupil, are provided with additional support in order to increase levels of attainment to the next level.”

You would think the staff should be congratulated; they did not rest on their laurels after their outstanding grade on 2010. Not a bit of it; they are kicked in the teeth by Ofsted, who now only rate them as good!

What possible explanations can be given for this? I would suggest the possibilities include a) the 2010 grade was too generous, b) the 2013 grade was too harsh and c) the goalposts, at least for local authority schools, have been moved so far that telescopic sights are needed to see them!

If Ofsted think this is the way to make good staff feel valued and to incentivise them to work hard and maintain a high standard of teaching, then they need to think again. The fact that the head of Ofsted does not believe that there could possibly be a ‘satisfactory’ grade says it all.

Labour shame
over gambling

From: Phil Hanson, Beechmount Close, Baildon, Shipley.

WAS I alone in seeing a huge pile of irony, as big as the debt they left us, when Labour leader Ed Miliband was on the news complaining about the number of betting shops and their gaming machines?

It was Labour that was hell- bent on increasing gambling opportunities with loads more casinos in every town and city that felt it had a population to support,

I do wonder how much in lobby cash the Labour Party took? Alas now that we have Channel Four Racing strewn and paid for by the bookmaking industry, it is so deeply entrenched that Mr Miliband has now seen the error of his party’s ways. So much for a visionary party.

Police failings
were political

From: John Fisher, Harrogate.

ONE excuse used by a chief constable defending the police force as to why vulnerable young women were not protected from sexual grooming by the police was because the young women being abused led a chaotic lifestyle.

I would have thought that many of the people serving sentences in prison would have experienced similar chaotic lifestyles but that had not prevented them from police intervention.

A problem which could have hindered the police was the apparent divisions in their own ranks created by political correctness. A black police association that was accepted when a white police association would have been regarded as racist is not a unifying basis for the structure of an organisation which needs to uphold the law equitably.

It is extremely difficult to ignore the part that political correctness could have played in impeding the need for swift action by the police and all the other organisations to protect these vulnerable young women.

A police force that appears reluctant to investigate members of an ethnic minority for fear of being accused of racism is unable to protect the public. I am no great fan of public inquiries but in this case it would be interesting to examine every public complaint that was given to the police and other organisations over time in regard to grooming.

Sympathy for baby boomers

From: Norma McNichol, Lynwood Drive, Barnsley.

I WRITE in response to the two lead letters (Yorkshire Post, December 23).

I did not read Stephanie Smith’s original article but gather it was bemoaning the fact that people from the 60s and 70s will have a hard time when they retire.

I come from a council house background and worked for 30 years until ill-health took its toll. I do not feel guilty about having a state pension and a work pension, but they do not equate to a salary by any stretch of the imagination.

However I do feel sorry for the aforesaid ‘baby boomers’ because they will have to work into old age if this Government passes all its plans.

This could be a good move for them as it is a good way of getting rid of the ageing population and cutting down on pensions. If you work until you are nearing 70, I do not think you will have much time left to have a retirement.

Trail of misery
for our poor

From: Kendal Wilson, Wharfebank Terrace, Tadcaster.

WITH regard to the accuracy of the numbers of people accessing food banks and receiving help from the Trussell Trust.

There came an accusation from Work and Pensions Secretary, Iain Duncan Smith, that the Trussell Trust was political.

However, I would have thought that they fitted in with David Cameron’s Big Society ethos. Iain Duncan Smith’s reaction begs us to question who exactly in the voluntary sector do they want overseeing the needy. Is it Mr Bumble?

From what I can deduce, the Trussell Trust is providing valuable social information and a safety net. To the likes of Mr Duncan Smith, I would suggest that he finds the courage to admit his policies have cocked up, especially the housing under-occupancy rules which have led the poor into a mega trail of misery. Many are decent, poor working people.

Many of these people, owing to the new under-occupancy housing rules, have had to move away from potential employment opportunities. It is the social engineering of a Marxist state. The Department of Work and Pensions should be most grateful for the information provided by the Trussell Trust for the work the Government should be doing.