NHS ‘golden goodbyes’ exceeding £100,000
Senior NHS managers are being handed ‘golden goodbye’ redundancy packages topping £100,000 as the service struggles to cut in half the amount it spends on bureaucracy. Some managers at primary care trusts (PCTs) are being given payouts of more than a year’s salary, resulting in the six-figure handouts.
At NHS Leeds, one was handed £117,485. At NHS Blackburn with Darwen Care Plus Trust, two have been made redundant since April 2010 on average payouts of £117,284. And in a third trust, NHS Greenwich in London, 12 employees were given redundancy packages worth on average £83,848.
The figures come from Freedom of Information requests made by the Health Services Journal to all of England’s PCTs, of which just over a third (57) responded. NHS sources believe payments higher than those disclosed so far have been authorised.
PCTs, responsible for coordinating GP surgeries and commissioning health services, are under intense pressure to cut their management costs. On becoming Health Secretary last summer, Andrew Lansley said such costs should be cut by 46 per cent by April 2014, to £850 million.
To meet that target many have started reducing headcounts. However, generous pre-existing contracts mean they face forking out large sums before they make real savings. Under some contracts employees are eligible for up to two years’ salary, if they have worked for the NHS for long enough.
That means chief executives could feasibly take home more than £250,000 if made redundant. The most senior managers could pocket just under £200,000.
A more recently introduced programme is more stringent. Under the Mutually Agreed Resignation Scheme (MARS), employees can opt for redundancy and claim up to a year’s salary, if they have 24 years’ service.
Among the 57 authorities that responded, 641 employees have received redundancy packages under MARS and 776 outside the scheme since April 2010. The average payout under MARS was £18,196 while for all others it was £19,552.
Many of those leaving are managers with years of experience: a quarter have worked for the NHS for more than 15 years, while a fifth are among the most senior grades.
Jon Restell, chief executive of Managers in Partnership, a trade union for healthcare managers, told the HSJ: “These figures suggest very experiences people are walking out of the door who have spent years building relationships with key players locally.”
However, some believe a ‘revolving door’ is more likely, and that managers will simply take an extended break and join newly-forming GP consortia, which are due to take over from PCTs from 2013.
Prof Chris Ham, chief executive of The King’s Fund, a health think-tank, warned that the redundancies amounted to “asset stripping” of PCTs at a crucial time.
With PCTs due to be abolished from 2013, many talented managers were now “jumping ship” to hospital and mental health trusts, he said, which would create problems in the future for GP consortia.
Giving the NHS a bypass
Something similar to the proposal below already happens in Australia. Compulsory Federal health insurance is partly funded by a levy accounted for separately from general income tax. Most Australians who have private health insurance (about 40% of the population) are exempted from that levy
For the most part, radical reform of government services cannot occur. Large organisations are inflexible and, in the face of changing circumstances, those that can no longer well function die, and are replaced by the growth of new organisations or existing small organisations into large organisations which, although equally inflexible, are suited to the current environment. As such, reform of the NHS is impossible. The NHS cannot be fixed.
I think it is in fact not merely a matter of reform being impossible. It is also, I suspect, a matter of the British public paying very large amounts of tax and seeing, on the whole, very little for it. The NHS is a very visible service where those who pay feel they are in fact receiving something for all that they pay, and so there is massive resistance to anything which would on the face of it reduce the service provided. The NHS’s visibility makes it seem like better value for money than it really is.
I propose, then, a mechanism for making the NHS irrelevant, an approach which requires no reform of the NHS proper and which will not fail in the face of the public’s desire to see something for its tax money.
There are now those who pay twice for health care: those who contract to private health care providers, but still are forced to pay for the NHS through their taxes. Clearly, these individuals have removed the burden and costs of their health care from the NHS. Why, then, is it that some individuals pay twice, while others (users of the NHS) only “pay” once? This is clearly unfair, and should be resolved.
I propose a simple reform that leaves the NHS untouched: people who contract to a private health care provider should receive a full tax rebate of the money taken from them for their public health care provision.
As individuals depart from the NHS, the part of tax which which forms healthcare will decline. Accordingly, the rebate will decline. Eventually, with a competitive market of health care providers where the NHS is but a player, the anomaly of its funding being intermediated by the state could be removed and those contracted to the NHS could then, as they would with other providers, simply pay directly.
For this to work, no reform of the NHS is required. The NHS simply becomes a player in the private health market, subject to success or failure by its own merits. Individuals may chose to use the NHS, should they wish; equally, they may wish to use another health provider. Contracts are no longer being imposed by the state. Freedom would be introduced to the healthcare market.
What’s wrong with Britain’s immigration system? Released on bail, the extremist who shouldn’t be in Britain at all
An extremist who exposed gaping holes in Britain’s border controls will be free to walk the streets after a judge granted him bail.
Sheikh Raed Salah entered the country last month despite an order banning him from doing so. He was eventually arrested and locked up but is using human rights laws to try to remain.
Now, in a further blow, the High Court last night released him from custody while his case is dealt with.
Salah, 52, who has been described in the House of Commons as ‘virulently anti-Semitic’, could be at large for months as the legal challenge makes its way through the courts. Lawyers for the leader of the Islamic Movement in Israel argued he did not pose a security risk and should be let out.
The Home Office opposed the application but Mr Justice Stadlen approved bail. Strict conditions attached are understood to include a ban on public speaking.
The Palestinian radical will also be fitted with an electronic tag and will have to comply with a 15-hour curfew between 6pm and 9am every night. He will also have to report to an immigration centre every day.
A Home Office spokesman said: ‘We are very disappointed with the court’s decision and will consider our options. We are still seeking to deport Salah.’
Salah was invited to speak in Britain in late June by a group of left-wing Labour MPs.
Home Secretary Theresa May issued an order banning him from entering the country but he waltzed through controls at Heathrow Airport. He was detained two days later after addressing a meeting of Islamic activists in Leicester.
Ministers say his presence is not ‘conducive to the public good’ and he should be deported. But his lawyers say his treatment is a breach of Article 10 of the Human Rights Act – the right to ‘freedom of expression’.
He was held in Colnbrook immigration centre before being transferred to a prison in the Midlands. He is likely to be released on Monday.
Mrs May ordered a full investigation into how he was able to enter the country despite being on a ‘no-fly’ list. Theresa May ordered a full investigation into how he was able to enter the country despite being on a ‘no-fly’ list
Jewish groups reacted with outrage to his arrival. He is accused of making a string of extremist statements, but denies he is anti-Semitic. Among comments attributed to him are those casting doubt on Osama Bin Laden’s culpability for 9/11, suggesting instead the attacks were an Israeli plot and that Jews were warned not to go to work at the World Trade Center on that day. He is also said to have accused Jewish people of using children’s blood to bake bread.
British Labor party b*tch shows true Leftist form
MP in four-letter blast at blind man: ‘Out of my way’ Labour whip shouts at reporter
A Labour whip unleashed a four-letter tirade at a blind man for getting in her way during a fraught exchange in the Houses of Parliament.
Lyn Brown, the burly MP for West Ham, barged into the back of Talksport political editor Sean Dilley, and his golden retriever guide dog, as he was walking in a corridor towards Portcullis House.
Witnesses were shocked to see a clearly stressed Miss Brown bulldoze into the back of Mr Dilley before overtaking him, shouting: ‘For ****’s sake, move out of my ******* way.’
Tirade: Lyn Brown MP launched a verbal attack on a blind radio reporter who got in her way at Parliament
The journalist asked her to be more careful as he did not want to crash into his guide dog, Chip. Miss Brown then sniped back: ‘You are such a rude ******* man, you just walked right in front of me.’
One source said a frustrated Mr Dilley then replied: ‘I’m blind, you stupid woman.’ He then demanded to know Miss Brown’s name, as he could not see who had bumped into him, but Miss Brown replied: ‘I am not giving it to you, **** off.’
Mr Dilley threatened to ask security guards to identify her, to which Miss Brown replied: ‘You just do that and see what happens.’
She was pursued by Commons security and did not stop, saying: ‘You are harassing me, leave me alone.’ The security guard had to call for police assistance and a report was compiled by the Commons authorities.
A witness said Miss Brown, 51, was ‘clearly in a rush’ but her brusque manner shocked Mr Dilley, who was born blind. The Commons source said: ‘She was shockingly rude. There was no need for her to use language like that. ‘Frankly I was surprised because Labour is supposed to be a party which is sympathetic to people with disabilities.’
The witness added: ‘The blind man she crashed into seemed very distressed by her manner and stream of swearing. ‘I heard him saying that he was blind and calling her a stupid woman but frankly had I been barged into like that I would have been using much stronger language. ‘The security people were muttering that if she had spoken to them like that, they would have carted her off to the prison cell in Westminster.’
Miss Brown was hauled before her boss, chief whip Rosie Winterton, for a dressing down. The Mail understands she was made to issue an apology to Mr Dilley. A Labour source said: ‘There has been a misunderstanding. Lyn has apologised. They now both consider the matter to be over.’
Privileged brat jailed for his rampage of hate
Charlie Gilmour, the son of the Pink Floyd guitarist Dave Gilmour, has been jailed for 16 months for going on a drink and drug-fuelled rampage during a student fees protest in London.
Charlie Gilmour admitted violent disorder after joining thousands demonstrating in London’s Trafalgar Square and Parliament Square last year. During a day of riots he was seen hanging from a Union flag on the Cenotaph and leaping on to the bonnet of a Jaguar car that formed part of a royal convoy. He was found on Friday to have also hurled a rubbish bin at the vehicle.
The court heard the Cambridge University student had turned to drink and drugs after being rejected by his biological father, the writer Heathcote Williams, and had taken LSD and valium in the hours leading up to the violence.
Gilmour’s rock star father and mother Polly Samson watched from the public gallery as their 21-year-old son was told he must serve half the jail term behind bars.
Passing sentence at Kingston-upon-Thames Crown Court in Surrey, Judge Nicholas Price QC accepted that his antics at the Cenotaph on Whitehall did not form part of the violent disorder, but accused him of disrespect to the war dead. “Such outrageous and deeply offensive behaviour gives a clear indication of how out of control you were that day,” he said. “It caused public outrage and understandably so.”
His conduct at the war memorial had prompted a deluge of “vituperative and in many cases obscene” emails and other forms of communication, he told Gilmour. These were, he added, “not just to you but, it is with deep regret, to your whole family, who were of course totally blameless.”
Gilmour, who apologised afterwards for his behaviour, had claimed he had not realised the significance of the Cenotaph – an excuse the judge scoffed at. “For a young man of your intelligence and education and background to profess to not know what the Cenotaph represents defies belief,” he said. “You have shown disrespect to those who gave the ultimate sacrifice, to those who fell defending this country.”
Gilmour was part of a 100-strong mob that attacked a convoy escorting the Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall during last year’s student riots, the court heard on Thursday.
The Cambridge University undergraduate, who was also photographed swinging from a Union flag on the Cenotaph, leapt on the bonnet of a Jaguar carrying royal protection officers before allegedly throwing a bin at the vehicle.
Shouting slogans such as “you broke the moral law, we are going to break all the laws”, the 21-year-old son of the multi-millionaire pop star went on the rampage during a day of extreme violence in central London.
Video captured by police officers outside the Houses of Parliament showed Gilmour, from Billingshurst, West Sussex, waving a red flag and shouting political slogans. The judge watched one clip in which he was shouted: “Let them eat cake, let them eat cake, they say. We won’t eat cake, we will eat fire, ice and destruction, because we are angry, very f—— angry.”
As the clip was shown in court on Thursday, Gilmour sat in the dock giggling and covering his face with his hands in embarrassment.
On another occasion he could be seen urging the crowd to “storm Parliament” and shouting “arson”.
In addition to attacking the Royal cars, he was also part of a mob that smashed the windows at Oxford Street’s Top Shop as staff and customers cowered inside.
Gilmour, who was escorted into court by his father and his mother, Polly Samson, has already pleaded guilty to violent disorder and appeared at Kingston Crown Court for sentencing on Thursday.
The case was adjourned until today while Judge Nicholas Price QC decided whether Gilmour threw a bin at a car in the Royal convoy, which he had denied.
The judge was told that palace staff feared for the Royal couple’s safety when the convoy of three cars came under attack as the Prince and his wife made their way to the Royal Variety Performance at the London Palladium. Royal protection officers and staff from the Royal household provided witness statements describing their fear as the cars were set upon by a baying crowd.
Sophie Densham, the private secretary to the Duchess of Cornwall, said she heard people shouting, “off with their heads”, “Tory scum” and “give us some money”. Will Mackinlay, equerry to the Prince of Wales, described seeing a person with long hair, who was later identified as Gilmour, sitting on the bonnet of a Jaguar carrying royal protection officers, before watching someone hurl a bin at the car. “I was very concerned for the safety of the convoy and the people travelling in the convoy. I was also concerned how the royal protection officers would react,” he said.
During the five-minute assault, the rear passenger window of the Royal vehicle was smashed, lime green paint was thrown over it and the Duchess was prodded in the side with a stick.
There is no evidence that Gilmour attacked the Rolls-Royce in which the Royal couple were travelling.
The student, who has just completed his second year studying history at Girton College, Cambridge, was among thousands of people who protested against plans to raise tuition fees.
The court heard that Gilmour had been identified at a number of flashpoints during the day, and was photographed attempting to set fire to a pile of newspapers outside the Supreme Court. A police officer stamped on the burning paper to put it out.
After being photographed swinging from the Cenotaph, he issued an apology describing it as his “moment of idiocy”. In a statement, he said: “I feel nothing but shame. My intention was not to attack or defile the Cenotaph. Running along with a crowd of people who had just been violently repelled by the police, I got caught up in the spirit of the moment.”
Gilmour’s biological father is the poet and playwright Heathcote Williams but he was adopted by the pop star when his mother, a writer and journalist, remarried.
Thousands on secret British council blacklists: Personal details kept of residents who dare to complain
Thousands of people involved in disagreements with council staff have had their personal details stored on secret blacklists.
Bureaucrats have listed the details of members of the public who have been involved in rows with teachers or dustmen over seemingly trivial matters. Scores of councils hold databases of ‘undesirables’ – individuals who could potentially pose a threat to their staff. They hold the details of almost 9,000 people, but most have never been charged with or convicted of a crime.
Personal information such as car registration numbers, telephone numbers, household pets, nicknames and distinguishing features are listed on the databases.
Earlier this year the Coalition pledged to crack down on the legacy of Labour’s surveillance society. Ministers have investigated the number of state powers of entry contained in primary and secondary legislation and were astonished to discover 1,200 in existence – more than 400 of which were created by Labour.
Thirty-four of the 78 councils in England contacted by the Daily Mail admitted having the watch lists and five more are planning to introduce them this year. The total will be higher because there are more than 350 councils in England.
Councils have wildly different criteria for placing people on the blacklist. Many are put there simply after a form is filled out by a member of staff and then rubber-stamped by a manager.
Telford and Wrekin Council said it lists residents ‘if a person behaves in a way which is felt could pose a significant threat of physical or mental harm to employees’.
Doncaster Council said a ‘person needs to pose a potential danger to an employee of the council, or someone acting on behalf of council’ to be put on the list.
But in many councils hundreds of staff can access personal information about people logged as a potential threat, even though they have no contact with the public and so could never be in danger.
Last night Daniel Hamilton, director of campaign group Big Brother Watch, said: ‘It beggars belief to think that so many councils are wasting precious financial resources compiling databases of “undesirable” local residents.
‘While councils have a duty to protect their staff, they also have a duty to respect the privacy of local residents. ‘People who have never committed a crime should not have their details logged like common criminals. Their details should be deleted immediately.’
Christopher Graham, the Information Commissioner, has warned councils that they have a legal duty to keep the information secure. A spokesman for his office said councils had a duty of care to protect their staff, which could involve putting them on a list. But he added: ‘These markers should be used very carefully and should contain the reasons for identifying individuals as being potentially violent.’
He said councils should inform residents who are on the database, setting out how they ended up on it. Only in extreme cases where a council believed that telling a resident they were on the list would lead to a violent reaction should they not approach the individual.
Good citizen treated like a criminal
When she spotted a drunk trampling flowers in a park, Jane Clift saw it as her public duty to report him. But her efforts led to a nightmare in which she was branded potentially violent and put on a council blacklist with thugs and sex attackers.
Her details were circulated to public and private bodies, including doctors’, dentists’, opticians’, libraries, contraceptive clinics, schools and nurseries.
Their staff were advised not to see her alone. The 44-year-old former care worker was forced to withdraw an application to become a foster parent and to leave the town where she had lived for ten years.
Her ordeal began in August 2005 when she called the police after the drunk threatened her in a park in Slough, Berkshire. He had fled by the time police arrived, but they advised her to contact the council, which was running a campaign to persuade people to report anti-social behaviour. When a worker in the anti-social behaviour unit allegedly failed to take action, Mrs Clift went to a higher level. A co-ordinator claimed she became ‘very difficult’ during a phone call.
In December 2005, Mrs Clift received a letter from the council to say she had been put on the register of potentially violent people. After a four-year legal battle, the High Court ordered Slough Council to pay her £12,000 in libel damages.
An insider view of a British school
Ceri Radford reviews a documentary about how children misbehave in school
The parents were a sight to behold. They were goggle-eyed, pucker-lipped, leaning back in their chairs, shaking their heads in disbelief. A mother chewed her tongue; a father looked as though he was about to burst into tears. What were they watching? Nothing more than the behaviour of their own children, caught on camera, in school.
For last night’s Classroom Secrets (BBC One), a camera crew spent a week filming the children of Class 4FF, a typical primary school in Leicester. It had once been failing, but the current head had turned things round, earning it a “good” rating from Ofsted. The programme showed a set of four parents watching the footage alongside their children’s teacher and headmistress.
The very ordinariness of the school was part of this programme’s compulsive appeal. No doubt more shocking, headline-generating images can be – and have been – captured at the sort of inner city hell-hole which makes Lord of the Flies look like a pleasant afternoon picnic.
This was no such place: it was located in an anodyne bit of suburbia, there was a nice playground for hopscotch and games, the school staff were nice, the children were (mostly) nice, the parents were nice. Everything was nice, and everything was tainted by persistent, nagging, low-level disruptive behaviour, something which swallows up, on average, three whole weeks of teaching time per year. This was a fascinating insight into what is going wrong, and why.
A case in point was nine-year-old Maisy. To put it kindly, she was a livewire; to put it in terms my mother would use, she was a little madam. She was shown, on camera in the classroom, pulling faces, dancing, blowing bubbles and doing quite a successful job of diverting the attention of her classmates away from their work and onto herself. Her parents, already visibly shocked, were in for worse when she was also seen writing out the F-word and showing it to her friends. Clearly, this was not the desired result of her literacy lessons.
What did they think had led to her “inappropriate behaviours”, the headmistress asked, mildly. It was astonishing that it took until this point for her parents – who both came across as caring and sensible – to realise that letting their young daughter stay up watching television until 10 or 11 o’clock at the weekend might not be conducive to good behaviour.
This documentary will naturally have appealed to parents of school-age children – but it was perhaps even more interesting for the childless. I had no idea how much school had changed. It’s not as if I was educated in the days of the inkwell and the slipper, but still; the classroom experience was almost unrecognisable. Children were free to get up and get a drink of water; if they were hungry, they would be taken out and given toast. Instead of facing the front, they worked – or not, as the case may be – in groups, facing one another. It gave them, in fact, all the freedom of an office, without the restraint of knowing that they would be fired if they spent all day chewing pencils and dithering at the photocopier.
Another nanoparticle study
This is another study purporting to show bad effects from motor vehicle exhausts. Sadly, the topic has become involved with Greenie beliefs. Read here what happens if your findings don’t suit the Greenie agenda. In the circumstances all findings in the area have to be treated with a priori suspicion. Only findings that suit the Greenie agenda are likely to get published.
Aside from a priori doubts, however, there are clear weaknesses in this study particularly. The “sample” size of only 16 is amazingly small and could easily give unreplicable results.
And what they found borders on the trivial. They found that inhaling diesel exhaust increased blood pressure and reduced the tendency of blood vessels to dilate. I think being made to inhale diesel exhaust would raise my blood pressure too! The smell alone is pretty obnoxious.
And (pace the Daily Mail) there was no evidence of the blood vessel effects doing any wider damage
Combustion-derived nanoparticulate induces the adverse vascular effects of diesel exhaust inhalation
By Nicholas L. Mills et al.
Aim: Exposure to road traffic and air pollution may be a trigger of acute myocardial infarction, but the individual pollutants responsible for this effect have not been established. We assess the role of combustion-derived-nanoparticles in mediating the adverse cardiovascular effects of air pollution.
Methods and results: To determine the in vivo effects of inhalation of diesel exhaust components, 16 healthy volunteers were exposed to (i) dilute diesel exhaust, (ii) pure carbon nanoparticulate, (iii) filtered diesel exhaust, or (iv) filtered air, in a randomized double blind cross-over study.
Following each exposure, forearm blood flow was measured during intra-brachial bradykinin, acetylcholine, sodium nitroprusside, and verapamil infusions.
Compared with filtered air, inhalation of diesel exhaust increased systolic blood pressure (145 ± 4 vs. 133 ± 3 mmHg, P< 0.05) and attenuated vasodilatation to bradykinin (P= 0.005), acetylcholine (P= 0.008), and sodium nitroprusside (P< 0.001).
Exposure to pure carbon nanoparticulate or filtered exhaust had no effect on endothelium-dependent or -independent vasodilatation.
To determine the direct vascular effects of nanoparticulate, isolated rat aortic rings (n= 6–9 per group) were assessed in vitro by wire myography and exposed to diesel exhaust particulate, pure carbon nanoparticulate and vehicle.
Compared with vehicle, diesel exhaust particulate (but not pure carbon nanoparticulate) attenuated both acetylcholine (P< 0.001) and sodium-nitroprusside (P= 0.019)-induced vasorelaxation. These effects were partially attributable to both soluble and insoluble components of the particulate.
Conclusion: Combustion-derived nanoparticulate appears to predominately mediate the adverse vascular effects of diesel exhaust inhalation. This provides a rationale for testing environmental health interventions targeted at reducing traffic-derived particulate emissions.
The ‘super tomatoes’ fortified with minerals that combat cancer
This is just speculation. No proof of any benefit
It is the perfect excuse to have that last piece of pizza. ‘Super tomatoes’ fortified with minerals have just hit shelves across the UK.
Ordinary tomatoes – which are already viewed as one of the superfoods – have been enriched with selenium, a powerful anti-oxidant that boosts the immune system and may prevent cancer. The mineral, found naturally in foods such as Brazil nuts, shellfish and liver, is also important for the thyroid gland, which determines how quickly the body uses energy and also produces proteins.
The new tomatoes, which cost £1.99 for 300g, have gone on sale in Marks & Spencer. Food scientists for the company turned their attention to the mineral because it is lacking in UK diets. Low concentrations in farm soil means little of the mineral finds its way into home-grown foods. There is evidence that a deficiency may lead to heart disease and, while it does not tend to directly cause illnesses, it can make the body more likely to catch infections.
Dr Carina Norris, of the Nutrition Society, said the tomatoes were a great way to get the nutrient into our diets. ‘Selenium plays an important role in supporting the immune system, and it’s thought that getting adequate selenium reduces our risk of cancer,’ she said.
‘But many people in the UK don’t get enough from their diets – the latest data suggests the average person consumes well below the (daily) target of 60microgrammes for women and 75 for men.
‘So to get a “difficult” nutrient like selenium into a food that more or less everyone eats – such as tomatoes – has to be a good thing.’ The tomato is the latest product developed by Marks & Spencer to try to improve customers’ health.
It follows the store’s Vitamin D-enriched milk, yoghurts and juice developed to help tackle health problems caused by a lack of sunshine, such as rickets.
M&S produce technologist Dr Simon Coupe said: ‘We want to make it easy for our customers to eat healthily and our new tomatoes are win-win – the taste of summer with a boost for your immune system.’
Sometimes there IS free speech in Britain
A maths teacher who branded Barack Obama a n****** in front of a class of children as young as 15 has astonishingly been allowed to go back into the classroom.
Michael Webb, who also made anti-Jewish comments, escaped a classroom ban despite being found guilty of unacceptable professional conduct by a teaching body.
Racist Webb, who made the comments during a GCSE maths revision session in front of pupils as young as 15, said in the outburst: ‘I call my coloured friends n***** and they call me white honkey.’
Webb also ranted about Barack Obama, telling shocked pupils: ‘I ain’t having no f****** n***** tell me what to do.’
A disciplinary hearing also heard Webb ‘used words to the effect that he didn’t like Jews’.
He was found guilty of unacceptable professional conduct by the General Teaching Council (GTC) on Thursday. Astonishingly, Webb escaped being struck off and received a reprimand which will stay on his record for two years.
The panel refused to strike Webb off the teaching register because of his ‘unblemished record.’ Mr Whyborn added: ‘Mr Webb had previously had a long and unblemished record which is supported by the appraisal forms from the parents of students he has taught.
The difficulty they have in finding people willing to teach in Britain’s chaotic classrooms is probably why they kept him on. And antisemitism is common among the British elite so his views there would not be seen as much of a problem