The UK riots raise some burning social questions

Who put Kelvin Mackenzie on Newsnight to discuss the London riots? Amidst the voices trying to discuss the potential causes of the riots in a reasoned manner, his voice rung out over all others as he blamed the riots upon ‘vile people’ and ‘scumbags’, and that we should not try and understand the mentality behind the riots but turn to the law courts to give them ‘sentences that will make them quiver’. This appears to be a common argument; label the perpetrators of the riots as mindless thugs, and that by putting them in jail and threatening to close BBM services, the problem will disappear.

Unfortunately, the answer is not as simple as it appears. Yes, those who looted and burned shops and homes in their local communities are guilty of senseless violence without a cause, showing blatant disregard for their neighbours and others. Yes, on one level this can be reduced to mindless thuggery. But, forgive the pun, there is no smoke without fire. How does this mentality come about on such a vast scale? The criminal opportunism shown in such massive numbers over this week, using Mark Duggan’s death as a justification for profiteering and creating chaos, suggests that there are far deeper social problems here that do need to be understood in order to prevent the same reoccurring.

Immediately, financial reforms were blamed. But surely, if this was truly a protest against government cuts the most affluent areas and shops in London would have been targeted? The majority of looted stores were shops such as technology stores, fast food outlets and clothes shops in struggling neighbourhoods; notably, not a single Waterstones was touched. This was violence with no political cause, destroying because it was possible and pandering to simple greed. It was on this note that rapper Reveal raised an interesting point. ‘Where are the role models?’, he asked. ‘The early morning stock market advice was take advantage of people’s fear to capitalise on low prices... Even the international community isn’t providing a role model. Where are these kid’s parents?’

These are very difficult questions to answer. Almost impossible, it seems, for a government to answer sufficiently. And for this reason, the riots have been blamed on mindless thuggery; if it is too difficult to solve, leave it and hope the problem goes away. In fact, put the problem in jail and then it will never trouble anyone again. But in a few years, these people will be out of prison, nothing will have changed and a mentality that apparently does not need to be understood will still be prevalent in communities where these problems have arisen.

The main areas that seem to need to be addressed are education, authority, the judicial system and domestic life. Undoubtedly, discontent about financial cuts will play some part. Of all the austerity measures made, those that affected community projects that gave young people a focus should have been the last. But whether this is solely the fault of financial cuts is dubious. There were no riots on this scale when the cuts were initially introduced and the amount of independent shops looted and destroyed shows that this is clearly not a protest against big business. The current government was left to deal with the deficit inherited from the previous, and in a recession the government debt has to be addressed; it was inevitable that tough decisions would have to be made and the country would be squeezed financially.

A large problem lies in education. Disciplinary powers should be given back to schools. Our formative years are spent within a school environment and without a clear hierarchical structure the relationship between student and teacher can break down. This does not mean in any veiled terms advocating the return of physical punishment in schools, but a teacher should be allowed to intervene and hand out disciplinary measures such as a same-day detention without fearing retribution if they do so, in order to instill a greater respect for authority.

Carol Vorderman published a report for the government this week stating that mathematics teachers should have at least a B at GCSE in maths; why it has taken this long to state the obvious, that teachers should be qualified to teach, is anyone’s guess. Target-based learning has dominated schools, and there is nothing more frustrating than to be told that your teacher doesn’t know the answer to your question because it is not on the curriculum, and is disheartening for those who might otherwise take an interest in a certain subject.

While it is possible to control the manner in which schools are run and the powers that teachers may be granted, it is almost impossible, nor is it the government’s place, to intervene in home life. In this respect, there is little the government can do, or be blamed for, in the way that parents raise their children which is perhaps one of the most important factors in determining the way in which a child will behave and their life choices.

However, it is possible to establish a greater relationship between school and home as it is completely counter-productive for students to receive mixed messages. A more verbal relationship between parents and teachers is needed to allow for a more individualised education. If a child is struggling at school then their parents need to be informed to allow for positive help at home and construct a positive feedback system, rather than the child losing self-confidence leading to anti-social behaviour. This could take any form, perhaps with weekly updates via email or phone from teachers to a students’ family and more familial participation could be encouraged in the child’s school life.

Alongside the current youth programmes that run in inner city areas, the government has suggested encouraging 16-year-olds do voluntary work in their local community. This is a step in the right direction, but not enough. Schools could introduce 1-2 hours’ a week compulsory service from the age of 14 upwards, be it helping in old peoples’ homes, helping teach in primary schools, gardening in local parks...anything counts.

In our quick-fame reality-television culture, there is little to encourage values of working hard for reward, or helping others without immediate personal benefit. All money that has been put aside for research on the ‘Big Society’ at the AHRC (and at the same time compromising the political autonomy of one of England’s largest research foundations) should be put back into community projects where it really matters, allowing an outlet for young people who would otherwise spend their time on the streets.

Not only is better education needed but also harsher deterrents for violent crime. Prison has no longer become a sufficient deterrent for a lot of potential criminals, nor an effective way of reducing reoffending for those already inside. Education programmes need to be installed in all prisons as a priority alongside those prisons that already offer such a service, to provide petty offenders with the means to build a livelihood once they leave jail to prevent reoffence, otherwise the problem perpetuates.

A large amount of violent crime is alcohol related. The government has proposed a minimum price of alcohol per unit but it still means that a weak can of lager can be bought for 38p. If the standard price of alcohol is raised then it becomes more expensive to binge drink and alcohol-induced crime will decrease. This would have a positive contribution to the economy; the Department of Health estimate that alcohol abuse costs the country £25bn per year. If this could be reduced then the money would be freed up for use elsewhere as well as alleviating immediate pressure on the NHS who have to deal with thousands of alcohol-induced emergencies every night. Time and again experts have recommended a higher minimum price for alcohol but it has yet to be put in place.

This barely even scrapes the surface of the problems that the government has yet to address, but the riots have shown that they certainly cannot be ignored. The planned clean-up as a reaction to the riots has shown that the rioters are in a sad minority tainting the majority, but nonetheless they have certainly made themselves heard. Social as well as economic problems have to be understood to prevent the further spread of dissent.

Alternatively, we could always follow the Mackenzie plan of action and bring back the stocks...