Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Revision guide
Updated to : 25/02/2015
Updated to : 25/02/2015
Further explanation /
evidence / examples
Under 10
10-12
13+
16
17
present
obtain a provisional driving licence
pilot a plane or helicopter
join the Armed Forces with parental consent if female
be tattooed
vote
buy cigarettes/tobacco
leave home
marry without parental consent
adopt a child
serve on a jury
be elected as a local councillor, MP, MSP, Welsh AM or MEP
18+
21+
b) Origins and sources of our rights
As the Second world War drew to a close, a number of politicians
were giving thought to the kind of society that should emerge in
post war Britain. William Beveridges ideas became the
foundation for the Welfare State. He identified the five giant evils
which needed to be erased through government measures:
- Ignorance...thro the free secondary schooling
- Disease..thro the creation of the NHS
- Squalor ..thro new council houses and a new approach to
planning with more green spaces
- Poverty...thro the provision of unemployment and sickness
benefits
- Idleness..thro government-funded work programmes
Through these measures many economic and social rights came
into being.
Following the end of the Second World War the creation of the
United Nations (UN) led to the signing of a Universal Declaration
of Human Rights (1948), and later the UN Declaration on the
Rights of the Child (1989). The creation of the Council of Europe
(with originally 10 member states, but now totalling 47) led to the
signing of the European Convention on Human Rights (1950),
which is upheld by the European Court of Human Rights meeting
in Strasbourg.
Britain has a long history of respect for human rights, but as the
1990s drew to a close there was a recognition that those rights had
to be established in law, and so the incoming Labour Government
of 1997 introduced the Human Rights Act, which was passed in
1998 and came into effect in 2000. It mirrors the main provisions of
the European Convention on Human Rights.
5
manner and timing of their death versus the states right to protect
life at all costs)
.a celebrity trying to prevent a story about him/her appearing in
the media (a persons right to privacy versus a newspapers right to
freedom of expression .in the public interest)
f) Restrictions on our rights
The threat from terrorism has had a significant impact on the level
of certain freedoms and rights in this country. In the wake of the
9/11 attacks, coupled with the threat from organised crime, the
British Government under PM Tony Blair introduced a range of
laws:
- detention without trial (the Government originally wanted 90
days, but Parl. would only agree to 28, and then later 42 days)
- control orders on terrorist suspects
- freezing of financial assets of terrorist suspects
- bans on certain forms and places of peaceful protest
- government surveillance of telephone conversations, including
mobiles, e-mails, internet usage, car number plates, car journeys
- an identity card scheme (now dropped under the Con-LibDem
coalition)
Many of these restrictions have been very controversial, but the
Government has defended its actions explaining that:
- evidence of terrorist plots is difficult to prove in a court of law
- It is better to be safe than sorry when protecting the public
- the police have requested such powers in order for them to do
their job properly
Newspaper analysis
Lead stories (10/9/05) Diversity in the national press
MIDDLE section addressing the four cue questions (P.E.E each time at
least three supported points in favour of your view, and at least one against,
preferably two !)
CONCLUSION (in which you revisit the original statement in the question and
give your view.) You may wish to conclude in a balanced way, i.e. that ..
I agree/disagree with this statement to a significant extent because ..,
but on the other hand, I recognise that .
Here are some examples of 12-mark questions that have been set so far:
June 2010
13
14
Jan 2011
15
I think the best way to reduce crime is to send people to prison for
long periods, make them do hard manual work and wear uncomfortable
uniforms and have no television sets in their cells or sports kit or facilities
or telephone calls. Many prisoners have a better life inside prison than
they have when they are on the outside.
Why has the prison population risen to over 80,000 in recent years?
Because crime has gone up. If everyone who committed crime was caught
we would need prison places for two or three times as many people.
16
Sample answer 2
I do agree with this view. The cost of keeping prisoners puts a heavy
burden on the taxpayers every year. We shouldnt just consider prison as
an option, as we can spend money looking at other ways to deal with
prisoners and also spend money on ways to stop prisoners committing
crime altogether.
A recent study showed that more money is spent on the average
prisoners meal than the average school dinner. We dont only need to pay
for their meals though. Taxpayers money is spent on the upkeep of the
prisons, the staff who work in them, and any other cost a prisoner may
incur while inside. We cant always be sure if prison is having an effect on
the prisoner that may make them change their ways so rather than paying
out all this money, maybe we should actually consider whether it is worth it
in the first place.
My friends dad went to prison for three months and Im not sure
somebody can actually change their ways in that time, but this money was
spent on him to keep him there. So I dont know if it was actually worth it.
It must have made him think about what he did though and it probably
wasnt very nice so it might have had a bit of an effect.
There could be better ways to reduce crime. Maybe money should be
spent on putting more police on the streets, because this will stop so many
crimes being committed and then we wont be spending as much money on
prisoners. We could also do other things with prisoners to help them
change their ways like have education and do community service.
In conclusion, there are better ways to reduce crime because if you give
money to the police force, they can catch more criminals and stop the
number of people who are going to prison. So there will be fewer people in
prison costing lots of money. This will reduce crime.
17
Sample answer 3
The prison system in the UK serves as a method of punishment and
deterrence for criminals, yet has recently come under attack for the
increasing financial burden it has placed on the taxpayer. This, coupled
with the high rates of recidivism in the UK today, has led to the criticism
that it may well be an expensive mistake. This argument will demonstrate
that although prison may indeed be the only option for some prisoners, and
a necessity in our society, there are more cost-effective ways in which
crime rates can be tackled.
As the prison population has gradually risen to over 80,000 due to an
increase in the length of sentences handed out, a general increase in the
number of laws written that can result in a prison sentence if they are
broken, and an increase in serious crime, such as knife crime , so has the
cost to the taxpayer. As the average prisoner costs 37,500 a year, this
amounts to a considerable sum. If it was clear that prison definitely
worked, these costs would perhaps be justified. However, over 50% of exprisoners re-offend within a few months of their release. Therefore, it could
be argued that prison alone does not offer the chance for prisoners to
reform as much as they might. Additionally, it has been proven that some
prisoners actually learn more about crime and tricks of the trade inside
than they would outside, as they associate with other criminals. This points
to a waste of money to the taxpayer, who expects criminals to go to prison
in order to consider the effects of their crime and have a chance to reform
in order to become more responsible members of society on their release.
Critics of this view and supporters of the prison system might argue that
prison does offer a series of benefits to society. By withdrawing dangerous
criminals from society, the public are protected . Additionally, by denying
prisoners their freedom and basic choices that may be taken for granted,
such as when to eat and sleep or what to wear, combined with a withdrawal
from their friends and loved ones, an unpleasant atmosphere is created
that serves as a fitting punishment for those that have broken the law and
a deterrent for those who may consider it. However, the point remains if
such a high number of ex-offenders are re-offending on their release, the
prison system as it stands does not offer a cost-effective method of
punishment or a serious enough deterrent to control crime rates.
Alternatives may include programmes of community service or more
suspended sentences handed out. In this instance, offenders are not sent
to prison, so do not require the cost to the taxpayer. However, relatively
cheap programmes of community service require the offender to give
something back to the community they may have damaged in the first
place, and suspended sentences do not cost anything but help deter
offenders from committing any further crimes while the suspended
sentence stands. These sentences could be given in conjunction with one
another and as long as these offenders pose no threat to the safety of
18
19