´óÏó´«Ã½

Brown kneels before the Burning Bush? Both of them Non Combatants.
Leaders? Leading from as far away from reality as is possible to be.

Surely those who are deemed to be a danger to society are not likely to have commited 'relatively minor crimes', or must be thought capable of being a future danger?
Recent experience would seem to suggest that we release such people from prison,reward them with British Citizenship, and then disregard evidence that they may be planning worse crimes.e.g.the'failed bomber'
The basic human right of my family and all other law-abiding citizens is best served by getting tougher on crime. Too bad if a suitable course of 'rehabilitation' is not immediately available for a criminal: let's focus less on rehab and more on deterring criminal behaviour.

Would just like to comment about Ingmar Bergman's death. Another 60's icon. I used to go and see his films several times for a trip! For me as a teenager, then, his films were very powerful, and, like - wow - this is far out!

I remember in particular, The Seventh Seal, and, Hour of the Wolf, for the surrealism, and imagery. The game of chess with death - too much! Then the witch on the cross being dabbed with opium (and that is the truth whether Bergman, knew or not, it was not just water they gave those poor women). The dance of death at the end when hooded spirit turns up with the sickle - Just too cool man.

I never really understood any of the other ones at the time. The long camera shots of Liv Ullman, and Max Von Sydow, are still in my subconscious somewhere so when his name his mentioned I still get a tingle!

Would just like to comment about Ingmar Bergman's death. Another 60's icon. I used to go and see his films several times for a trip! For me as a teenager, then, his films were very powerful, and, like - wow - this is far out!

I remember in particular, The Seventh Seal, and, Hour of the Wolf, for the surrealism, and imagery. The game of chess with death - too much! Then the witch on the cross being dabbed with opium (and that is the truth whether Bergman, knew or not, it was not just water they gave those poor women). The dance of death at the end when hooded spirit turns up with the sickle - Just too cool man.

I never really understood any of the other ones at the time. The long camera shots of Liv Ullman, and Max Von Sydow, are still in my subconscious somewhere so when his name his mentioned I still get a tingle!

Just want to comment on Ingmar Bergmans death. A 60's icon for me. I used to go and see and his films several times, as a teenager for a trip out.

His films were so powerful. I remember in particular, The Seventh Seal and The Hour of the Wolf. The game of chess with death, the crucifixion, the white ghost with sickle, the dance of death along the horizon. Then the madness of the Hour of the Wolf. It was all very far out and cool!

I never really understood the other ones then, although the camera work, with those long shots of Liv Ullman and Max Von Sydow are still in my subconscious. So every time I hear his name I still get a tingle in my veins!

Gordon is perhaps getting there. Terrorist NO. Brainless Moron who thinks its fine and dandy to kill women and children Yes, in other words a Non Man, A totally useless Parasite who is frightened to death of the power of women, A Genetically flawed excuse for a man, A Biological Reject worth far less than a Turd. Osama bin laden being the biggest Turd on the planet. Without woman you wouldnt be here Turdhead.

I think that IPPs should apply at all crimes. If a criminal has form, surely this can be used to demonstrate that he/she is likely to continue commiting crimes. In cases like this, IPPs should be employed. This will send a strong message to all criminals - some will be deterred.

Granted this will greatly increase the prison population in the short term, as repeat offenders are sentenced to life, but as long as extra capacity is generated, this shouldn't be a problem.

And the crime rate would drop through the floor.

I am squirming through Paxman's inane interview with Richard Eyre about Ingmar Bergman.

"He wasn't exactly box-office was he though!" [Paxman in response to Richard Eyre describing Bergman as one of the three or four great figures in the arts of the 20th century]

"But much of it was pretty depressing!"

And so on.

Eyre was most gracious in the face of the barked crassness. Maybe his smile was one of disbelief.

Jeremy love, maybe you need to stick to Bridget Jones's Diary.

LIFE SENTENCES Another chapter in the ongoing prisons crisis: this time it's life sentences, clogging up prisons that continue to struggle with unprecedented levels of overcrowding.

The Prison Governors Association has warned that a substantial overuse of new "indeterminate" sentences is creating chaos. Introduced under the 2003 Criminal Justice Act, the new indeterminate sentences for public protection (IPPs) are problematic. No new funds were made available to deal with IPP prisoners; it was wrongly assumed that resources would be released by a reduction in some other types of prisoners. Fixing the problem will now cost the Government [ie the taxpayer] well over £10m [reported in The Guardian, June 2007].

Under robust questioning from Jeremy Paxman, David Hanson struggled to give a convincing explanation about the latest debacle. In the forthcoming review, referred to by Mr Hanson, Ministers might care to consider how, and why, they have allowed prisons to degenerate into such a shameful mess over the last decade. Taxpayers should not be expected to finance another 9,500 prison places (referred to by Mr Hanson) when prison clearly doesn't work.

Reporter Richard Watson described a "system on the point of collapse"; and Anne Owers, Chief Inspector of Prisons, said there has been "no proper pre-planning". Why does this incompetence continue unchecked in the Prison Service, one of our major public services?

Mr Hanson may care to reflect on Jeremy Paxman's apt statement that "much of the problem is of the Government's own making".

Yes, was a bit surprised at Jeremy's treatment of Bergman, one of the greatest art-filmakers ever! Will be remembered that's for sure, like Ibsen! Box office sucess is capricious. Some of us lying in the gutter are looking at the stars, etc!

A little less cynicism, and, more appreciation of his impact and influence. Ken Russell was good - he said, going to some of Bergman films was like having a hot sauna without the heat! Seemed profound!

Film directors are two-a-penny and knock out flicks for the masses to be entertained, nothing wrong in that but occasionally there are a few who make films that require you to think and ponder. Bergman was one of only a few film directors who could be included in any list with Stanley kubrick and Francois Truffaut as truly outstanding filmmakers and who did not pander to the studio's only desire for the bottom dollar: quality matters to some, the rest can have their pulp..

I have to wonder what's in Paxmans dvd collection after seeing tonights show, i wonder what JP's top five is? ..

We usually complain about the Tax that Goverment collect is too high . And appealing to Goverment for tax reduction .
But as we know , Part of Tax is used for prison offender.Money spent for food , managing cost , salary for warder ...
I think goverment should turn back the " Death Sentence " . With extremely dangerous crime , the best way for them is dead . Because , how many percent of them to be save after prison ? And with his essence , could he become a nomal person ? And after prison , how can we ensure that he doesn't turn back his dangerous way.
At that time , we still spend our salary for police to investigate , food for them , electricity for them to heat in winter , cost for jailer..and ...unfortunately someone could be killed on his way to escape from a robbery...
We don't have enough money for that bad thing . Thus , "Death Sentence " for me is a must for extremely dangerous crime .

Fit for an eleven year old: A ventriloquist is down on his gigs and tells his agent to get him different work. He decides to become a medium. A lady rings him and says 'Can you get in touch with my mother, she's been dead for thirty five years and I would like to hear from her but I am worried about the cost' The vent/medium says 'Well, it is a tenner for you to talk to her, twenty quid for her to talk to you and thirty quid for her to talk to you whilst drinking a glass of water' Steve, L'pool.

Candidates for Paxo's DVD collection:
'Howard's End'; 'The Blair Witch Project'; 'Reservoir Dogs'; 'Quiz Show'; 'Wee Geordie'; 'The Campbells are Coming'

And in homage to an interview with a certain now ex- party leader 'Whisky Galore'.

If Jeremy's on tonight, let's see how he handles the Antonioni tribute interview. Cue a frantic afternoon's DVD viewing of 'Zabriskie Point', 'Beyond the Clouds' et al in the Newsnight viewing suite, plus the topless Vanessa Redgrave and naked Jane Birkin in 'Blow Up'.

Enough of the personal jibes. Paxman does this a lot, it's just a technique.

His job is to interview and to inform.

He was merely prompting his interviewee to inform those viewers (who might not appreciate, and we are becoming an uncultured lot) that Bergman's films are not screwball comedies but existential and therefore likely to be appreciated by those who are intruiged by the 'not so sunny' side of life (a latitude thing for SAD Scandinavians etc? ;-)

I thought the interview with Richard Eyre was very good,if JP had been too soft with Eyre then he stands accused of favouring an ex ´óÏó´«Ã½ Governor who is still one of Botneys friends.

Bergman did have artistic license in adapting the libretto but not to say it was everyone's cup of earl grey...

No Ingmar Bergman on the web replay?

Have I got something wrong, or has the whole Ingmar Bergman segment been cut from the web replay?

What's going on here? Is the ´óÏó´«Ã½ not prepared to assert its fair dealing/fair use rights to include clips to support discussion? Or did Jeremy get /so/ embarassing that faces had to be saved?

Prison courses? Rehabilitative Offending Behaviour Programmes??

Perhaos the Newsnight science team needs to take a long, hard, and very critical look at what is claimed, and what the data shows is delivered in terms of outcome?

Here are a few hints. See particularly the pdf and Home Affairs Committee link at the end of the first link.

Crime has been rising almost linearly since after WWII. Recent ups and downs are misleading. Something else is driving this, and it isn't population growth or better policing.

What we see year after year from our Prison Service and CJS is getting to be truly Kafkaesque. The IPP is just one illustration, but the root, generating problem, has been with us for years. Like raising attainment in schools, rehabilitation is a lot of smoke and mirrors once your evaluation of what is said and done is data, not ideologically driven.

Yet how often do you hear the dismal truth?

Those who should be listened to are ignored, whilst those who should not be listened to are lauded. Why?

As the Americans say 'go figure'.

(A Public Service Announcement on behalf of 'the few remaining sensible voices in the UK who can still be bothered to say anything at all about it, party').

PS. If you can find the Giddens blog *before* it was censored by CIF, it makes interesting (and at times amusing) reading. Just look out for (references to) one AnatoliyGolitsyn, who would appear to have been 'purged' for his sins?

Ironic?

Disagree with mistress 78uk It's not a game of course but JP couldn't get one over on those americans. They came briefed and were much too polite to say out loud that they didn't like being patronised. Time for JP to go on gardening leave with a wheelbarrow and a spade so that he can practise stopping digging when he's in a hole?

See the noble and loving lords of the western alliance express their strong firm friendship as they journey to glory in the majestic... golfcart?

Adrienne #21

Thanks for the links. Sadly, most normal people aren't going to be too interested in the realities lurking in these darker corners of our society, they'll just expect those who take jobs in these areas to be able to sort things out. From what's currently happening to the probation service it looks like there are serious problems with delivery.

That there have been Kafkaesque problems in this area was pointed out by those inside the system long ago, so I am advised. Is the following not a credible source for instance? Have a look at the parent website, it seems to go way back to the mid 80s.

Bet what he said didn't go down well!! Odd that nobody is listening. Why is that do you think?

I agree that Paxman doesn't deserve too much stick for the Eyre interview. He was trying to make a brief, generic piece rather than an in-depth study of Bergman's work, themes and motivations. The box-office question was rather crass given you could spend the next month listing artists who have had influence well beyond their commercial success.

Although I thought the interview was very badly edited. Those cut-aways were terrible.

To James (11.55am) - the web versions of Newsnight (and other shows) have legal problems with including copyright material not owned by the ´óÏó´«Ã½. Unfortunatly the whole piece tend to go rather than re-edit.

Jasper - Back in April 2006, the ´óÏó´«Ã½ did a piece in which Michael Howard said how, when Home Secretary, he had been briefed by his Civil Servants that there was nothing he could do really about teh rising crime rate but to manage public expectations. In the piece, he said he refused to take the advice, but of course, Howard would say that, he's a politician. The reality is that Civil Servants have to do what their poltical masters demand, which effectively politicises the *public* face of research. Internal reports will always be subject to the official scrutiny (like all official documents) unless it is deemed harmless academic stuff, so much of the evidence based work will not see the light of day for risk of contradicting the official line which Ministers present.

My bet is that the two links you provided will not have earned the author any brownie points as at the time, the Home Office was selling these programmes as the best thing since sliced bread! They seem to undermine the basis upon which the "What Works" initiative was premised though.

From what I have seen, this nonsense has now spread to the DfES (or whatever it's now called), look up the SEAL research, SureStart etc and compare the empirical results with New Labour spin.

Call me a cynic, but given the evidence (or lack thereof) I fear they're essentially just job creation schemes/cash cows for NGOs and Third Sector 'Charities', usually with 'useful idiots' in the front line. They also take some people's eyes off the real problems which are generating our rising crime and poor behaviour in schools etc.

Jasper - Back in April 2006, the ´óÏó´«Ã½ did a piece in which Michael Howard said how, when Home Secretary, he had been briefed by his Civil Servants that there was nothing he could do really about the rising crime rate but to manage public expectations. In the piece, he said he refused to take the advice, but of course, Howard would say that, he's a politician. The reality is that Civil Servants have to do what their poltical masters demand, which effectively politicises the *public* face of research. Internal reports will always be subject to official scrutiny (like all official documents) unless it's deemed harmless academic stuff, so much of the evidence based work will not see the light of day for risk of contradicting the official line which Ministers present (although some of the recent Home Office RDS work sometimes looks like it may be breaking the mould. There's legislation on official statistics struggling through the Houses at present, but there's always something in it which effectively means that Ministers get advanced notice and of course *how* official figures are presented often shows signs of their having been subjected to convenient transformations (which require decoding by the cognoscenti).

My bet is that the two links you provided will not have earned the author any brownie points as at the time, the Home Office was selling "What Works" and these programmes as the best thing since sliced bread! They seem to undermine the basis upon which the entire "What Works" initiative was premised!

Sadly, from what I've seen, this nonsense is now spreading to the DfES (or whatever it's now been rebranded). Look up the "SEAL" research, "SureStart", "Aiming High" etc and compare the empirical results with the New Labour spin.

Call me a cynic, but even given the official evidence (i.e. the lack thereof) I fear these are all PR and job creation schemes/cash cows for NGOs and Third Sector 'Charities', usually with well intentioned 'useful idiots' in the front line. These empty panaceas take most peoples' eyes off the real problem which is generating our rising crime and poor behaviour in schools etc.

Dealing with that has no political capital in it as it would require the sacrifice of too many of New Labour's sacred cows, and they're in the business of creating and reinforcing those, not slaughtering them. They do anything which gets them votes, and allows them to continue their programme of breaking up the UK nation state so it can be slotted into the EUSSR and ultimately, consolidate International 'Socialism'.