Is there policing by consent?
Saturday 11th May, 1.00 pm - 3.00 pm
Map Room, Cherry Reds, 88-92 John Bright Street, B1 1BN
Tickets £3.50 (plus EventBrite fee)
Please book via EventBrite
The Peelian principles on which the U.K. police were established state that public consent for policing is maintained “not by pandering to public opinion” but by applying the law fairly, impartially and by using minimal force. But accusations of two tier policing are frequently made by people with a wide variety of political views and from different backgrounds.
Between 2010 and 2019 around 20,000 officers left the police force and government funding was cut by 20%. Nine thousand, the highest number on record, quit in a single financial year ending March 2023. The current number of police officers is a few thousand more than in 2010, but has not kept pace with U.K. population growth.
In the year leading up to March 2022, half of the police officers who left had retired , leaving the police force struggling with a significant reduction in experienced police officers with young officers not having enough inspectors to train them properly. One third of police officers has less than five years experience, more than double the number in 2017 (Source: BBC News).
In spite of the obvious police numbers, retention and public trust issues, police powers are due for an unprecedented increase via the Criminal Justice Bill. Currently, only local authorities can issue Public Spaces Protection Orders, but this power would be given to the police via section 68 of the Bill. In effect, this gives the police powers to make up by-laws to make their lives easier without any need for public consultation or democratic accountability. They will also be able to issue Community Protection Notices to children as young as 10.
What will restore the Peelian principles and our trust in our police force?
Tom Andrews, Lecturer in Policing, University of Derby
Dolan Cummings, writer, co-ordinator of Manifesto Club campaign against the Criminal Justice Bill
Chair: Chris Akers
Reading:
Survey finds country police force has second lowest morale in the country, Dominic Robertson, Shropshire Star, April 2024
Stop the Criminal Justice Bill, Manifesto Club, February 2024
Only 40% of people in England trust their police force, research reveals, Vikram Dodd, The Guardian, April 2024
How woke policing betrays ordinary people, Neil Davenport, Spiked Online, April 2024
Work, anti-work, post work
Work, anti-work, post work
Saturday 9th March, 1.00 pm - 3.00 pm
Map Room, Cherry Reds, 88-92 John Bright Street, B1 1BN
Tickets £3.50 (plus EventBrite fee)
Please book via EventBrite
However, it appears in the 21st century we have fallen out with the idea of work in a very fundamental way. There are 2.8 million adults designated as suffering from long-term illness and the labour force inactivity rate has increased by 1.4% since the pandemic, now standing at 21.4% and one of the highest since records began in 1993. The NHS has an enormous backlog of people waiting for operations, but is some of this illness a manifestation of anxiety and neurosis: sanctioned shirking? Even so, what would we do if this were to stop? There are currently around 900,000 vacancies, a significant number, but not enough should most of those people become well enough to work.
The pandemic measures saw many workplaces close or limit access, and some companies have never reopened their offices or have drastically cut their use of office space and promoted hybrid working. Arguably, one compensation of even the most tedious and menial of jobs was to be found in the companionship of colleagues. Close technological monitoring at work attempts to produce productivity increases, whilst HR promotes policies that focus on people as members of separate identity groups. Perhaps people are too isolated, self-censoring, and closely scrutinised to find work anything other than dehumanising, and unable to develop friendships at work which might help make it more rewarding. But if that’s the case, why encourage work and home to blur and readily give up opportunities for face to face contact, as many have done, rather than fight for management to back off and for a space wholly dedicated to work?
There is also a generation gap, with 18-24 year olds the least likely to want to work from home. But in this age group, too, there is also a tendency against showing open ambition and making your work a focus of your life.
Is this all okay? Does it mean society is reacting against an empty idea of having it all which has meant unsustainable sacrifices in other areas of life? Or are we giving up on opportunities, via our work, to show ourselves at our best?
Speakers:
Three of our Salon regulars, Rosie, Rebecca, and Derrick will discuss their thoughts on this topic.
Rosie Pocklington works in the 3rd sector advising on health and finance. Rosie will focus on work ethic.
Derrick Scott is a retired computer systems manager. He will focus on the impact of e.g. robotics, AI and other developments on work from shop-floor to C-suite.
Chair: Rosie Cuckston
Reading:
Which is worse, work or no work? Peter Franklin, UnHerd, February 2020
'There's nothing sexier than a 9 to 5 job': how a generation fell out of love with work, The Telegraph, August 2023
Post work: the radical idea of a world without jobs, The Guardian, January 2018
AI - Separating Man from Machine
Saturday 10th February, 1.00 pm - 3.00 pm
Map Room, Cherry Reds, 88-92 John Bright Street, B1 1BN
Tickets £3.50
Please book via EventBrite
Salons in 2024 - save the dates!
Our first set of discussions in 2024 will take place in the Map Room at Cherry Red's, 88-92 John Bright Street, Birmingham, B1 1BN on Saturdays from 1pm - 3pm.
On 10th February, Sandy Starr will join us to discuss his Letter on Liberty "AI, Separating Man from Machine." Are the worries about generative AI technology really about us, rather than the machines?
Further salons will take place on 9th March, 13th April, 11th May, and 15th June looking at 21st century work and work ethic, freedom and the arts, whether we're equal before the law, and Net Zero.
Wishing you all a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!
Talking liberty - Boxing: don't count it out
Saturday 18th November, 1.00 pm - 3.00 pm
Map Room, Cherry Reds, 88-92 John Bright Street, B1 1BN
Free entry but donations welcome. Donations help us to meet speaker travel and room hire costs for our two debate Salon events.
Please book via EventBrite
In his Letter – Boxing: don’t count it out – writer and boxing enthusiast Chris Akers argues that boxing, more than any sport, has a unique way of tapping into the consciousness of the poor, the disgruntled and the forgotten. For all its flaws, he writes, boxing has been the vehicle by which people in poverty have escaped to better surroundings. From Muhammad Ali to Lovemore N’dou, boxing’s greats have often used the sport to highlight political injustices and social issues.
Join Chris to look at boxing’s contemporary challenges – with new scientific research around head injuries and ‘punch drunk’ fighters calling for greater safety measures in the ring. From rules on gloves to ever-decreasing limits on bouts, should boxing modernise to protect its heroes? Or will we lose the glory of the knockout by introducing more red tape? Does boxing ‘save lives’ – teaching ex-offenders and troubled teens discipline and strength? Or is the commercialisation of violence producing bad role models for young people? And if grown men and women want to go toe-to-toe, who are we to stop them?
Talking liberty - Escaping the Straitjacket of Mental Health
Saturday 14th October, 1.00 pm - 3.00 pm
Map Room, Cherry Reds, 88-92 John Bright Street, B1 1BN
Free entry but donations welcome. Donations help us to meet speaker travel and room hire costs for our two debate Salon events.
Please book via EventBrite
Inward and upward
Saturday 16th September, 1.00 pm - 5.00 pm
John Peek Room, Birmingham and Midland Institute, 9 Margaret Street, Birmingham, B3 3BU
Small Expectations? Social Mobility in the 21st Century
Over the past 50 years, people in Britain who are born in to professional-managerial families are approximately 9 times as likely to enter managerial or professional careers as they are manual routine jobs. If you are from a family of unskilled workers, you have less than half the chance of accessing ‘salariat’ employment and around 4 times the chance of ending up in the most disadvantaged rountine positions.
The OECD reports that children from ethnic minority families engaged in unskilled work were much more likely to achieve long-range upward mobility than their white counterparts. The exception are men from Pakistani, Bangladeshi backgrounds who have fallen behind over the past 50 years, with a decline in their presence in the managerial or professional sector.
As economist Steffan Ball has stated "On social mobility, political debate is often focused on who climbs up the social ladder and that is critical. But it should also consider whether better off families retain their social and economic position. And on this metric too, the poorest and the richest in the U.K. are the most socially immobile. So this exacerbates social inequalities.”
The pace of social mobility has slowed but there is little consensus as to why. Factors like education, housing, and taxation have all have effects on our life chances. As does geography: a high percentage of the high paying service sector jobs are based in the South East, which creates a disadvantage for the regions.
Home ownership and a university degree have been seen as short cuts to social mobility and hence a focus of government policy in spite of both relying on increasing levels of debt. Both of these approaches look to have failed, with discouragingly higher mortgage interest rates and a much less marked salary disparity between graduates and non-graduates, with everyone’s wages squeezed.
Implied in the concept of social mobility is that, on the whole, movement is upwards. However, sociologist John Goldthorpe has pointed out "Politicians don’t want to hear the truth, which is that for people to climb the social ladder, others must move.” Where would they move to? Does this reveal there is no ceiling to mobility, or is it a hint that some must lower their expectations?
The concept of social mobility requires us to think about meritocracy, equality, family and community. What would our country look like if offered true social mobility? Does one person’s inheritance, financial or cultural, block another’s opportunity?
Speakers
Reading:
Break - 2.45 - 3.15 pm. Tea/coffee included in ticket price.
Immigration: numbers, skills, visas or values?
Immigration is one of the most divisive and emotive subjects of modern times. There are those who believe that the UK’s borders should be more open to allow those in need to enter the country. They often resort to caricaturing those who disagree with them as racist. On the other side are people who want stricter border controls who see the opposition’s only interest in immigration laws as how to help the people who break them, letting in rapists, thieves, and murderers through their misguided kindness, or carelessly allowing British working class lives to be significantly impacted.
The increase in levels of immigration to the UK comes from a mixture of official controlled routes, including new ones for people from Ukraine, Hong Kong, and Afghanistan, and illegal ones. What is it that is causing concern about immigration? Is it true that the UK is mainly hostile to refugees and that if we had more legal routes to apply then so many people would not risk crossing the Channel in a small boat and immigrant numbers would be lower? Or is Britain actually on balance a success story for immigration but now unable to provide for everyone already here?
Often expressed is the idea that we just want control over our borders and that we just want to debate immigration. But what would this control look like? What effects would it have, and what is it exactly that we aren’t debating?
Perhaps it comes down to whether there is maximum number of immigrants we can accommodate in the broadest sense of the word, or add to our workforce. If so, is that merely a question of resources and need for certain skills, or of other things, like maintaining shared values?
Speakers
Reading:
Coming up at Birmingham Salon this autumn:
Small Expectations? Social Mobility in the 21st Century
Immigration: Numbers, skills, values or visas?
Saturday 16th September, 1 pm - 5 pm, Birmingham and Midland Institute
Talking Liberty - Escaping the Straitjacket of Mental Health
Saturday 14th October 1 pm - 3 pm, Cherry Reds
Talking Liberty - Social and Political Freedom by Knockout
Saturday 18th November 1pm - 3 pm, Cherry Reds
Talking liberty - Taking conscience seriously
Saturday 24th June, 1.00 pm - 3.00 pm
Map Room, Cherry Reds, 88-92 John Bright Street, B1 1BN
Free entry but donations welcome. Donations help us to meet speaker travel and room hire costs for our two debate Salon events.
Please book via EventBrite
United? Kingdom?
Saturday 22nd April, 1.00 pm - 5.00 pm
The Arthur Sullivan Room, Birmingham Midland Institute, 9 Margaret Street, Birmingham B3 3BU
Tickets £15 via EventBrite
Join us for the Birmingham book launch of Taking Control: Sovereignty and Democracy after Brexit (Polity 2023) by Philip Cunliffe, George Hoare, Lee Jones and Peter Ramsay plus a debate on the future of Ireland and another debate on the future of the monarchy.
For the best part of a thousand years the history of Ireland has been bound up with that of England. The relationship has never been a stable one. England made many attempts to subjugate and colonise its neighbour. The plantation system which it introduced there acted as a model for later British colonial adventures. The harsh treatment of the Catholic majority was one factor in ensuring that the attempt to incorporate Ireland into the United Kingdom was never likely to succeed for long. Similarly the granting of partial independence and the partition of the island provoked violent upheaval that has never been fully resolved.
Pauline Hadaway: writer and researcher. Pauline completed her doctoral research at University of Manchester examining the cultural economy and politics of peace building in Northen Ireland after the Good Friday Agreement.
Peter Ramsay, Professor of Law, LSE. Peter also writes about politics at thenorthernstar.online
Chair:
Chrissie Daz
Reading:
The Graveyard of Euroscepticism, Peter Ramsay, Northern Star
Will the Windsor Framework get Brexit Done? Tom McTague, UnHerd
Is there no growth in support for a united Ireland? Is support shrinking instead? FactCheck NI
Don Milligan: author, The Embrace of Capital: Capitalism from the Inside (Zero books 2022. Don has been a gay activist, trade unionist, and member of the communist movement for many years.
Tessa Clarke: Tessa is a journalist, author, documentary reporter and blogs at Diary.of.a.Journalist on Instagram. She is the author of two books on free speech, privacy and the royals.
Chair:
Rosie Cuckston
Reading:
What's wrong with the monarchy? Don Milligan, Off the Cuff
The republican anti-aesthetic, Samuel Martin, The Critic
The rational case for a British republic, Mick Hume, Spiked Online