RATHER than "forward not back" as in the Labour election manifesto slogan, it looks more like back to the future with much of Labour's thinking.

It is about time the party stopped its pretence of acting on behalf of all the people when the only people it represents are the well off, big business and the privileged.

Now we have Ruth Kelly deciding children can spend ten hours or more a day in school so their parents can fit in their jobs. The parents would have to pay for this privilege, which erodes the purpose of them working longer in the first place.

Meanwhile, the children concerned would be locked in school for very long hours contrary to the principles of the Factory Acts of Parliament of the 19th century which placed limits on long working periods.

They are not, of course, being forced to work for little pay as in the case of factory workers, but the principle of a long-hours culture is still there and they actually receive no pay at all.

With a falling birth rate, why can't the Government pay mothers to stay at home to look after their children? This will reduce the number of latch-key kids, reduce loitering and crime on the streets and decrease the stress on mothers who try valiantly to juggle jobs, while at the same time looking after and raising a family.

It is about time we had a Government that looked to the future instead of the past.

T Scaife,

Manor Drive, York.

Updated: 10:42 Saturday, June 18, 2005