She criticises a report issued by the London School of Economics/The Guardian, for containing some woolly thinking as to the reasons for the riots.
Mrs May counters the argument that the riots were about 'protest' and because of unemployment, asking why riots did not occur in many areas of the country where joblessness was far higher.
Moreover, far from being political protesters, the vast majority of rioters were looters - plain and simple. Looters who just wanted instant materialist gratification - acquiring stolen mobile electronics, Nike Trainers etc.
It is interesting that the LSE/Guardian Report spent very little time examining the views of those who were victims of the riots - particularly small shop keepers and householders who had there homes broken into.
The causes of the riots are much deeper and less predictable than the LSE/Guardian suggest. Family breakdown, community atomisation and failures in our schools play a significant part. The 'credit card society' - enjoy yourself now, pay later - bears some blame. But, so too does our judicial system, in which - at least until pre-riots - allowed the punishments meted out to lack a real deterrence against committing further offences.
The second part of the LSE/Guardian research, which involves interviews with police, judges and people effected by the riots, will be released in the new year.
ReplyDeleteRob, the research is not actually finished yet: if you read the relevant material (you have haven't you?), you will find that it is still underway and the NEXT step for the research, findings to be released in the new year, is to give the views of the police, victims, etc.
ReplyDeleteMr. Halfon, it would be good if you actually read the LSE research before condemning it. If you had read it you would know that only part of the work has been completed and that researching what rioters say is not the same thing as agreeing with them..In the new year LSE will release the research material which gives the views of the police about the riots. Will you then say that LSE is biassed in favour of the police?
ReplyDelete