Al-Fayed Says ‘Beat It’

“If some stupid fans don’t understand and appreciate such a gift this guy gave to the world they can go to hell.

“I don’t want them to be fans.

“If they don’t understand and don’t believe in things I believe in they can go to Chelsea, they can go to anywhere else,”

So sayeth Mo Al-Fayed, one time shop owner and owner/ chairman of Fulham football club, about some of the clubs more critical fans. Subtle eh?

And what has raised fans ire to such a degree that he was prompted into making the above comment to the BBC news; Fulham’s performance on the pitch maybe or the selling of a well loved player? Has he proposed following the route of other Premiership clubs and moving them away from Craven Cottage?

Umm, no, it’s the recent erection of a statue of that great footballing legend Michael Jackson, yep Wacko Jacko, outside the ground. And what, in Mo’s eyes, qualifies Wacko for a honour normally reserved for legendary players and managers. Well, firstly, he did visit the club, once twelve years ago in 1999 and secondary and probably more importantly, they were BFF’s.

Though looking into it further a little light is shone.

Now this statue, which looks like it was ordered from the back of a Sunday supplement with all the accuracy normal in that tat (try saying that ten times quickly), was not even ordered for the stadium, but for Harrods, which considering that Jacko was an Olympic class shopper is not that bizarre, before he decided to sell up and move on.

So maybe what happened is what happens in homes across the land. He took it home and Mrs Al-Fayed said ‘where are you putting that bit of crap, it ain’t coming in my house(s).’ Leaving him with a dilemma, where does he put it? And in that way that men answer problems like that the world other, he went for a surreal option.

Now what next, he erects a hundred foot statue of his self, straddling the gates, Colossus of Rhodes style, on the newly renamed, Dodiana stadium? Maybe I should not tempt fate.

Now I like some of Jacko’s music, Thriller is still one of my all time favourite albums, and I can understand a desire to build a monument to him somewhere, but maybe outside the O2 would be a better option.

And someone should tell ol’ Mo Al-Fayed, no matter how much money you invest in a club, insulting your fans is never a good idea.

Ah, Mo, I have missed your Bond villianesque ways and speeches. Just don’t set the lawyers on me, OK?

How Was It For You Dear?

So now we have had Chancellor George Osborne’s second budget and the questions to be asked are, one are you better off and two, will it rebuild the economy? Too confused to know? Yep, that’s part of the point, so don’t worry. The speech is designed to give an overview, usually a somewhat rosier than reality overview, of what the budget include, just something for the masses, for the rest of us, just enough info for us to go wow or oh dear, while the real detail is included in the full budget report, one hundred and four pages of pure…boredom, readable only by accountants, lawyers and people who speak like Sir John Major, you know, with the Wally voice we all used to do as kids. Hand on heart; I have tried reading it during the prep of this blog post, but gave up when I dozed off for the umpteenth time that evening. A document so boring it should come with a warning, “do not read while holding a hot drink in your hand, you are sure to doze off and spill scalding liquid down you”, Harry Potter this ain’t.

In interviews running up to budget day Osborne had given the impression that he considers the economy fixed, so he would need no more tax rises or spending cuts this year. Though if he considers 2.5million unemployed and inflation at its highest for years a fixed economy, I dread to think what he would consider as a broken one, the mind boogles. For him, this budget is to promote growth and opportunity, so how is this going to happen? And will it work?

Well the later question is the easiest to answer as it’s too soon to tell. You see he has a pretty major headache coming up, due to the cuts announced in his first budget, around 400,000 public service workers, and this includes bin men, street cleaners, and a myriad of other people employed by your local council, will be losing their jobs and entering the job market. This is on top of the previously mentioned quarter of million people already there. And that is without people losing their jobs because of the loss of state contracts. So he has to hope that private industry will help and create extra jobs for this army for this massive army of workers. If he succeeds, than all is good, if he doesn’t, well as will be shown below, all he will be left is with less money coming into the coffers to pay an increasing welfare bill.

A lot of his measures, especially the ones concerning personal tax do not coming force until this time NEXT year, while some are even longer term than that, at present they are surrounded by words like investigating and would like to.

Now what will affect us all are the changes in tax, both to our personal and corporation.

As usual some taxes went up, an increase on the duty for tobacco products, a slight rise on some alcohol, though he also brought in a delay to next year of an increase in fuel duty, with a whole penny a litre cut from 6 pm on the evening of the budget, though with the instability in a lot of the OPEC nations that will soon be swallowed up, but to be fair there is not a whole lot he can do about that, so that is something that we will just have to weather. There is also going to be measures brought in to attempt to make the fuel companies follow more closely the rise and fall in the price of crude oil, though at least one has already threatened job losses if he does.

Now when he said he was not going to take money away from people, he was not being 100% accurate, now he didn’t lie as such, just forgot to mention something in the budget report. Now this concerns the winter fuel payment for the over 60’s and disabled. This has been set for years as a basic £200 for those between sixty and seventy five rising to £300 once they reach eighty. Now three years ago, in the face of heavily mounting fuel costs, the previous government raised this to £250 and £400 respectively, something which I admit has been seen a temporary measure. Now in the document it is announced that this allowance will revert back to the old value. Something he forgot to mention during the hour long speech, though I suppose he didn’t want something so negative to ruin his happy words.

They are trumpeting making permanently raising the weekly winter fuel allowance from £8.50 to £25, however this is payable only in extreme weather conditions and when this weather has gone on for so many days.

As usual, he announced a rise in your personal tax allowance from the £7475 due to come in force this April to £8105; again to come into force next April. This allowance is the amount you are allowed to earn before you start to pay income tax. For example, someone earning £6000 a year will not pay income tax, while someone earning £10000 will, however only on £2525 of it. The aim, a policy brought to the government by the Lib Dem’s when they joined the coalition, is to make this figure £10000 and therefore taking people out of income tax completely.

Now we have something that sounds nice, a rise in the pension so that the minimum pension is £140 per week, however this is not for those already receiving state pension neither will it be coming in straight away. This is something for the future. So single pensioners will have to struggle on with the current £102 per week, plus a means tested top up of £31 per week and with almost constant rises in the cost of living already putting pressure on this, there is a real danger that by the time this has come into being the extra money will be equivalent to a cut in money.

Now they have decided to keep the 50% top rate of income tax on people earning £150,000 a year or more, but with the caveat that they will review if the tax brings in enough money to justify its existence. Now, a cynical man (who moi?) might say that this is all in preparation to axe this tax at the first possible opportunity.

Council Tax has been put on hold, or in some case cut slightly. I have, however, anecdotal evidence from my local area that this is not necessary the case. So this is something you may have to look at, mine has gone down slightly, but that might just be a downgrading on my flat from hovel to just above cardboard box.

As I have already mentioned above, the government are trying to cut the size of the public sector workforce, reportedly by 400,000, though some sources put this as much higher, with some saying this could may well go as high as a million. So this, added to the 2.5million already unemployed causes a headache.

PM Cameron’s Tory government are hoping that the private sector will take up the slack in the job market. However they have decided that they cannot do this without a little encouragement, so they have brought in a number of ideas to stimulate this.

Firstly, and this applies to England only, they are creating a number of Enterprise Zones. These will have lower business rates and easier planning regulations. Now this is not an new idea, its why Nissan build their cars in Sunderland and not in the traditional motoring manufacturing area of the Midlands.

The other major idea is that corporation tax, the tax on a company’s net profits is to be cut, gradually over the next few years from its current level of 28% down to 21%. Now, while a lot of ordinary people how about how the burden on them is increasing while for big business is decreasing, there is something which needs to be taken into account. Big business accounts for a huge amount of the jobs out there. So anything that could encourage companies to come into the UK is a good thing.

It is all well and good Cameron going on about the need to create an ‘enterprise culture’ where it is easy for people to start their own business and become their own boss. That is great if you can do that. However that can only go so far, to make a noticeable inroad into the unemployment figures you do not need a few Mr Bunn the Bakers employing a few people, you need Bunn and Baker Inc, employing a few thousand. Ah well, bang goes my socialist reputation.

Now these are a bit of a gamble. In the first case you could end up with a company just moving to a cheaper area instead of expanding where they are, so they may create a few thousand new jobs there which is negatively balanced out by the loss of a few from their old base. Same with the corporation cut, they might not attract the investment, and with cuts in spending on the country’s infrastructure looming this could be likely. So they are risking ending up with a high welfare bill with a hole in the finances necessary to pay for it.

The problem with all the measures announced is that they could all turn out to be moot points anyway. The majority of the cuts to services and jobs are only just coming into affect and there is no telling what this will do the fragile economy, already in the run up to the budget growth forecasts for the coming year have had to be revised downwards, at this has happened many times in the past year. And if unemployment rises further it could seriously affect other services, retail for example which depends on people being able to spend money on goods to keep going. So maybe Osborne is a little premature in triumphantly proclaiming success. In fact I have a feeling that this is a budget more with one eye on upcoming council elections in May than looking backwards at what needs to be done to secure recovery.

And to be honest, with the huge bank bonus being announced virtually every week, he missed a trick and should have brought in a levy on those, an extra windfall tax if you like. Now I have heard all the arguments about attracting the best people, though presumably they had thought they had the best people a couple of years ago when they got us into this mess, but £7.7 million? Come on, isn’t that a little excessive. Plus if the banks can afford to pay out money like that, then maybe they can make a bigger inroad into the money they had to borrow to keep afloat.

Ah well if it all goes pear shaped, see ya down the job centre…

Name(required)

Email(required)

Website

Comment(required)

A Referendum Too Soon?

Around ten months ago the Liberal Democrats got their first taste of power in nearly forty years when they become the junior party in a coalition government with David Cameron’s Conservative party, a move which, due to their very differing bases of support, surprised many watching.

As part of the price they got an agreement on something which, while not part of their last election manifesto, has always been a core desire of theirs, namely a referendum on reforming the current system of voting in the UK. And while the system they are pushing is not the exact one they have always sort, it is, in the words of Deputy Prime Minister, and Lib Dem leader, Nick Clegg, a start.

So on May fifth 2011 we in the UK get to answer a yes or no to a very simple question, do you want to change the way we elect MP’s and governments in this country?

They are in their strongest parliamentary position for decades, something which may not happen again for another three or four decades. I cannot see one of the major parties supporting a change if they were in a strong position, so they have only this one chance, and have, in their excitement and desperation, taking it too early?

So what are we voting to change and what are the options? As I have stated, this is to change the very way we elect MP’s to the main UK parliament at Westminster, this will not affect the three devolved assemblies in Scotland, Wales and Northern Island , local or even the elections to the European Parliament in Brussels.

A no means we carry on with the current, very simple, first past the post system. In this you place an X next to the candidate you like, the one with the most votes wins the seat, the party with the most seats overall wins the election and its leader gets to call themselves Prime Minister. In fact this system has meant that coalitions are a rarity in modern politics, only two since the end of World War One .

Voting yes, well that will bring in a more complicated system, the Alternative Vote system. Now simply put, and believe me when I say putting this simply is a challenge, it works like this.

When you go to the booth to vote you would have the option to mark your candidates in order of preference, so you may want a Labour MP, but then again, if they don’t win, you might not want a Tory one, so you might mark the Lib Dem candidate as second preference, then so on down the poll paper until you run out of candidates you like.

Ok so far, still awake? No, deep breath WAKE UP!!!!!!!!! Back, good I shall continue, and take notes I’ll be asking questions later.

Now, as normal, when the polling station shuts the sealed boxes will be taken away to be counted, starting with the first preference votes. If one of the candidates polls over fifty percent of the vote, then they are the MP, the result is declared, the winner makes a nice speech thanking the world and his wife, the losers all, insincerely, congratulate him (or her) and then bugger off for a celebratory drink, or maybe to drown their sorrows and bemoan the stupidity of the electorate.

However, if no one polls so high, and to be honest I can’t think of anyone previously ever winning by so high a margin, the poor little vote counting elves start all over again, only this time for the second preference votes. Now the candidate who has polled the least votes in round one is eliminated, and yes I am well aware this is sounding like the live shows of the bloody X factor, and their second preference votes are shared ‘tween the others. If there still isn’t anyone with over fifty percent the whole process is started all over again, this time for third preference. Now this will go on until either someone wins or, they all get bored, declare Ant and Dec as the new government, call for a nurse and then collapse in a heap of nervous tension muttering darkly, “you had to have been there man, you just had have been there.”

Now, what the Lib Dem’s, and a lot of the smaller parties as well, are hoping for, is that it will let them sneak MP’s in as second or third preference, enough they think, to allow them to hold the balance of power in all future governments, and this is where they may have some problems.

Now you very may well ask yourselves, what makes them think this will happen, what makes them believe that they will be enough people’s second choice? Well they are counting on their normal midterm support being expanded. You see broadly speaking there are three types of voters.

The first type will almost never change the party they vote for, come thick or thin, hell or high water etc, they are Labour/ Tory/ Lib Dem till they die, or the party does something so momentously stupid that they are no longer the same party, so they go and find something similar.

The second group of voters, these are termed floating voters. Now this is not because they live on the river in pretty little houseboats, it’s because they float from party to party, depending on their mood, fashion, media influence or just plain self interest. So in 2005 they may have voted to keep the, then current, Labour government. Then, turned off and influenced by the current financial situation, they changed allegiance, either to the Tories or indeed, and this is what looked to have happened, the Lib Dems

The third and final group skirt the line between the two, these are the protest voters. Now these people will normally vote for one of the major parties, however sometimes they want to fire a warning shot across their bows, so in mid-term elections, either for Westminster, one of the devolved or a council election, they will vote for one of the ‘smaller’ parties.

And it is this that the Lib Dem’s do very well from, as the current government loses its way, its supporters can’t see themselves voting for the official opposition, so they give their vote to the Lib Dem’s as they have always seemed a mite eccentric though harmless, the nice and honest party, the only one to pledge to raise taxes, decommission the Trident nuclear missiles etc.

What the Lib Dem’s, and to truthful the parties on the fringe as well, are hoping for, is that having the chance to mark the paper 1,2,3 will mean that the floaters and the protestors will mark them as second preference, even when the government is doing well, therefore given them a boost in the number of seats and allowing them to hold the balance of power after every election.

Now in the immediate aftermath of the election it must have seemed like a good idea holding he referendum a year later, their support was at an all time high, and they looked like they were in a position to make a difference.

However in the ten months since the election everything has changed, their vote has collapsed, with even mutterings coming from their own rank and file members of ‘what are we doing working with the Tories’ having a pre-election slogan that broadly went, ‘vote for us or the Tories will get in’ and then promptly letting the Tories in hasn’t helped them.

Also two things happened which heavily dented their reputation as the ‘nice party’.

Pre election the whole party signed pledges saying that they would not back a rise in student tuition fees, a pledge they had to break as the coalition agreement meant that, with the exception of the Trident replacement, they would have to vote with the Tories on policy.

Now this in itself would have been survivable had it not been for something else. During Chancellor George Osborne’s first budget speech he was seen clapping and cheering during the announcement of the cutting of a half a million public sector workers, something which didn’t go down well.

There is a final reason why the timing could suit the Tories more than themselves.

The size of the deficit run up, rightly or wrongly, something to be debated in another blog, in trying to keep the country going, meant that whoever got in power some pretty unpopular decisions would have to be made and the pain would be felt worse in the first couple of years. The pain this would cause the public made it obvious that they would dislike the government.

Now they could be hit and their dreams dashed if people believe that the coalition isn’t working, especially as they are tarred with the same brush for all the decisions.

Now the thing is, and this is something that all the supporters of AV, who also includes Labour leader Ed Milliband, though that may change when he realise just how many of his MP’s dislike the AV idea, seem to forget is the voters in the UK are conservative, that’s conservative with a small ‘c’, not the party. Will they be willing to vote in a something that may not make a change for the better? Especially if they look back and see one of the major supporters are involved in the decisions which are making their lives harder? Probably not.

Now it would have been better to wait until the second or third year of the government, give the situation time to settle down. After that period there could be signs of growth, or at the very least people are starting to be used to the idea.

Something else which could help them if they wait, the fact that political support is quite fluidic, a parties support may collapse one election, but by careful rehabilitation, some patience and luck, the support will return. So, waiting a couple of years will give the potential upswing of support time to start developing again.

Now this would not guarantee a yes vote, but it might help with the ‘don’t knows’, it might, if their circumstances haven’t changed for the worse, push them towards a yes vote.

The major con as far as having the referendum in 2012 or 2013 is that there may not be time to get it in place before the 2015 election, but at least it would be ready in time for the 2020 election.

Notes:

The Scottish Parliament and the Welsh & Northern Irish assemblies use various forms of proportional representation.

The first one was the last government led by the Liberal party, initially under HH Asquith (1852-1928) in 1915 and then after he resigned it was led by David Lloyd George (1863-1945), who to date has been the last Liberal PM, from 1916 to 1918 and who also lasted as a minority leader into the first four years of the peace until he was ousted by the majority Conservatives under Andrew Bonar Law (1858-1922)

This was the National Government of 1931-35, led by Ramsay MacDonald, the countries first Labour Prime Minister and was made up from all the parties in Westminster at the time.

Labour leader Harold Wilson had a failed attempt to create on after the 1974 election which resulted in him leading a minority government. However the year after he retired, in 1977, then PM Jim Callaghan resurrected the idea as the ‘Lib-Lab Pact’ with Liberal leader David Steele until 1978. This was just a lose promise to include Liberal policies as a price for Liberal support for Labour and not as has been suggested a full blown coalition.

A No-Fly Zone Just Doesn’t Fly

Colonel Gaddafi has decided to ignore William Hague’s call to stop the war and surrender, though to be fair Hague’s speech did sound a bit like Jim Hacker’s(1) when he was attempting Churchilliesque Statesmanship.

So it looks increasingly unlikely that the ‘rebels’ are going to win quickly or easily. The whole situation is now as near as damn it a civil war, which either Gaddafi will crush rapidly and painfully or will last indefinitely, and as usual, atrocities and revenge, masked as justice, taking place on both sides.

And as he has the heavier military forces, including the all important air forces and tank brigades, I would I would give you short odds on the former unless something is done.

So what can be done?

As I type this the British Prime Minister, David Cameroon, is helping drafting a resolution for a ‘no fly zone’ to be enforced in the Libyan skies, though quite what he expects the our forces to contribute to this I don’t know. If none of surrounding countries are willing to help, or even just provide a friendly airbase for land based fighters to operate from then the whole thing will have to be done via sea based fighters and as the Royal Navies only carrier, HMS Ark Royal, has just been retired and her replacement not due for the best part of a decade, there is nothing we can do.

In fact the only nations that do operate carriers are from the US, France, Russia, Italy, India and Spain. I have discounted the Thai Navies carrier for the fact that I doubt they would send it that far from their coast. Now being that the Spanish have already pulled out of one coalition due to terrorist activity I cannot see that they would risk it again. Italy, well there is an outside chance on them. But their carrier has a limited operation capability compared to the three aforementioned vessel’s, and I cannot see Russia playing in forces alongside the US navy.

So realistically, the burden could end up falling on the shoulders of the US and France, the only two nations left with a carrier force capable of carrying out such an operation. Which, this being such a heavy burden to carry, is bound to cause resentment between them and us.

Plus, what will the rules of engagement be? Will it be, if it’s Libyan Air Force and in the air it’s fair game, or do they have to wait until bombs are dropped. And what about holes in coverage? Will there be enough planes available to provide blanket coverage for the whole area? Or will they be expected to just circle around LAF bases, sitting, well flying, ducks for SAMs and AAA?

And the last time this was tried, was over Iraq, lasted 11 years and only ended when the US and UK, plus other coalition forces invaded, and that turned out well, didn’t it?

The only way this will work without embroiling us in a long, protracted and ultimately frustrating role is through using the available aircraft to attack and destroy Gaddafi’s air, tank and heavy artillery forces.

However even this is complicated by one simple law, one that supersedes even the UN. Murphy’s Law – that if anything can go wrong, it will go wrong, and at the exact moment you need perfection. We all remember the pictures from Desert Storm and Operation Enduring Freedom (who thinks up the names for American operations BTW, Rambo’s six year old grandson? Anyway I digress) of the times when either intelligence had got it wrong or a cruise missile had gone off track and hit a hospital, children’s home or some other civilian target? Right, and we remember how much of a international propaganda coup it provided for Saddam Hussein with some of the less hawk like nations and watchers. Well, can we risk this again?

And, even if it all goes well and we give both forces parity, what then, do we send in ground forces to help? What will their rules of engagement be? Do we send them in as combat, or as peacekeepers, something which to be honest have never brought peace or stability to any nation, and if the former Yugoslavia, Rwanda and Darfur are any examples, all they can do is stand around in their blue helmets and observe.

And, should this be lead by the US or NATO, will all we do is unite Islamic extremists with his cause? Would Al Qaeda join forces with him? Yes, he has been blaming them for this, but hey, if the Nazi’s and Soviets could sign a pact in 1939, even if it was a temporary thing, then why not these two? You know what they say; my enemy’s enemy is my friend.

Hell, even if all they are doing is helping with aid and guarding refugee camps, shooting only in self defence, the more vocal anti-war lobby, helped on no doubt by the more extremist Islamic groups, which accuse the forces of being the former, another round of western imperial warmongering to steal the oil from innocent Moslems.

And we have trouble using forces from the other nations of North Africa and the Middle East. Most of them either has troubles of their own or have rulers just as bad as Gaddafi.

Now while working on this I heard on the news that one of his generals has defected to the opposition forces, so how’s this for an idea?

We have hundreds of millions of Gaddafi’s fortune frozen around the western banks, why don’t someone make them an offer, ok bribe them, to change sides? It’s a risky strategy I’ll be the first to admit. But so is all of the other options and what is worse, risking some embarrassment for the politicians or the lives of thousands US, UK etc troops on top of the thousands of Libyan casualties?

I know what I would choose.

(1) Jim Hacker is the central charector from the 1980′s British sitcom ‘Yes Minister’, who had a tendancy to give justifying speeches holding his labels and speaking in a cod Winston Churchill manner.

A Big Fat Royal Wedding

Over the next fifteen months there will be three fairly momentous events affecting the UK, in 2012 London will be hosting the Olympics, and it will be the Golden Jubilee of Queen Elizabeth II, or for those not familiar with the terminology, sixty years since she ascending to the throne. But it is the event that is coming first I want to talk about now.

On the twenty-ninth of April 2011 Prince Williams, second in line to the throne, marries his long term girlfriend, Kate Middleton. In deference to the current economic climate, and the hard times people are facing, this turning into a strangely lo-key affair but is this what the people of the UK want?

Personally I believe, and a straw poll of some people at work agree, that a royal wedding needs pomp and circumstance, coach and horses, smart uniforms lining the streets. A limo that has been festooned with ribbons, please, I see that outside my church most summer weekends. What do we really want, future generations looking back on a slightly more expensive version of ‘My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding’, or something a little more spectacular and yes traditional, yeah, I know a slightly old fashioned and untrendy concept I admit but hey, that could be a description of me.

Let’s be honest, no matter how little money they spend, even if it was a quick registry job and some sausage rolls and a few sandwiches down the Kings Head pub one Saturday night, there will still be people who will criticize the money spent, reeling of a litany of good causes the money could go to. Few, if any, new long term monarchists will be created by an austerity wedding, so why not go for it. Go hang the expense and give the world a show.

I know that the bride is, to coin a phrase, a commoner, and yes I find that term mildly offensive, and that ordinarily it is her wedding, but the man she is marrying is in line to be the King of, Great Britain and Island, her Dominions etc, not just any pilot in the RAF.

Her being driven to the church will not just be seen by a few people as they head to the shops or the pub, but by millions, maybe even in the hundreds of millions around the globe. The route will be lined by tens of thousands of people, some well wishers, some just curious, there so they can say they were. So a horse drawn coach does make perfect sense allowing more people to get a glance of the bride, and, something that will please her slightly nutty father-in-law to be, a lot more eco-friendly than a big, thirsty V8 powered Rolls Royce, and give the local gardeners some free organic fertilizer for the parks.

People will be coming into the country just to see this; millions will be spent on hotels, restaurants and souvenirs. And while they are here, well they’ll need to do something for the rest of the time, so the same amount will be added to museum and zoo receipts, so the least we should do is put on a show, if only to show that this great land may be a little threadbare and ragged around the edges, our glory maybe a little faded, but we still know how to put on an event, and that we are a country that has much to be proud off. Because let’s be honest here, this is the sort of thing the tourists come here for, not the weather or native cuisine, but the history and pomp, so let’s treat this like the US treats there parades, make it something for the world to remember, something that people will look back on with pride in five, ten or twenty years and say “I remember that and it was fantastic”.

And isn’t this something the monarchists of this country, who I am convinced still outnumber the republicans, deserve? A reward for supporting them through some pretty worrying times.

Oh and by the way, if you are a republican moaning and whinging about the fuss made of these two people, show your contempt for it by working on the bank holiday, you wouldn’t want to be a hypocrite and take advantage of something celebrating this regime you so hate now, would you?

The Net Ain’t Private

There is something almost endearingly naive about the way a lot of people use social networking websites, using them like they would have once used the garden fence or pub bar, somewhere to gossip, share information or just plain vent about the world with their loved ones and friends, stuff that ordinarily would just be said, heard and then largely forgotten about.

Sadly, it is not just their nearest and dearest who get to read this neither does it go away easterly, in fact quite the opposite happens. Amongst the people your friends or followers list or just acquaintances or, in some cases, virtual strangers, and the comments, well they will exist largely for ever on a server somewhere, searchable, accessible, able to come back to haunt you at any time.

And this naivety affects even those who should know better, people whose professions are normally controlled by spin doctors and PR gurus have known to make the odd slip. And like the office temp bitching about the boss, this can lead to the end of their career dreams.

Not a month, sometimes not even a week goes by without some sports star, actor, singer or politician putting their great big feet in it by not thinking before they spoke, or this case, before they typed.

Now with the first three categories you quite frankly don’t expect much in the way of intelliegence, just the ability to hit a small ball, carry a note or repeat some lines written by another. In fact with some the great surprise is not that they have bitched online but that can figure out how to get online in the first place.

No the most worrying category off keyboard in mouthness is the last, politicians and the wannabe politicians. These people, who want to run the world, want to make all the decisions on our behalf, should really know better. Many a career has been stymied by something written in anger online, sometimes written before they had even decided that they wanted to become a candidate.

Yet, with the presses increasing criticism’s of the use of spin and PR in politics, is this a good thing? Would it not be nice to have a few people in the chambers or at Westminster who show signs of well, being human? Thinking like us, making the same cock-ups like us, doing that thing we have all done of spouting off about someone, then having them walk in mid rant without us realising it?

Take for instance the latest infraction, Hull Conservative group leader Councillor John Fareham, who after a stormy meeting concerning cuts, went home and in his temper ranted on Twitter that the public gallery had been full of retards. Of course, he is now in trouble and has had to apologise unreservedly about this. And so he should, same the Tory councillor had to for calling his ward of Chafford Hundred Chaffrica but, should they face further sanctions.

No, they should not. They just need to learn that part of being a politician is dealing with people they are either unable or unwilling to like, people they would not normally deal with. That there every decision, right or wrong, regardless of intent will be picked over and argued endlessly.

And more importantly, if you want to vent, do it face to face cause the net ain’t private.

There Are More Questions Than Answers…

Human rights are a contentious issue, filling reams of newsprint, raising as many questions as answers.

The way we treat others, the way we allow ourselves to be treated is indicative as whether we have grown and matured, not just individually, but as an entire people or whether we have stagnated.

They are fundamental to our existence and freedoms, rights that are needed to be respected if the human race is to grow and survive.

Do we want to be the same as our forebears, burning people at the stake just for following a different religious path? Allow a man to treat his wife as little more than a chattel? Someone as a less than human because of their skin colour?

No, thought not, yet…

Something I touched on briefly, what about our responcibility to each other? Our responcibility to treat each other with dignity and respect, regardless of race, religion, gender or sexuality? Surely that is important too? If you require yourself to be treated with respect, then you need to treat others with respect first.

How does my right, as a Christian, to say my God is best survive against a Hindu’s or Sikh’s understandable right to say the very same thing about their Gods? What about those fundamentalists who are anti-gay against the rights of people who actually Gay or bi?

There are some in the UK who would like a move away from the current Human Rights legislation to A Bill of Rights. This has caused some discontent, some worries that the individual freedoms enshrined by the current law will be lost.

Some may well be, but is that necessarily a bad thing?

While I have the freedom of conscience, the freedom to think what and I say what I like, do I have the right to use that to abuse or keep down others? Do I have the right to try and force others, using means of violence, to follow me?

If I break the law, does the government have the right to take my rights away from me? And if anyone tells them they do not, do they have the right to ignore them?

A couple of recent incidents in Westminster have added fuel to the fire.

Firstly, a ruling in Strasbourg that the UK government cannot take away a prisoners right to vote. Which on the face of means that convicted criminals are to be allowed to help decide the fate of the country. This has been interpreted as those serving sentences of less than four years.

The whole thing is complicated by the fact that most of the anti’s use this as a way to knock the European Parliament, using every defeat as a step to the destruction of the British way of life, and the sovereignty of the UK parliament, the problem with this argument is that the European Court of Human Rights is not part of the EU per se, in fact being policing a document written in the aftermath of the Second World War, couple with the fact that this also contravenes Sections one and two of the twenty-first article of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which has now become enshrined as part of the UN’s charter.

Namely

Article 21.
(1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.

(3) The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.

Now I said on the face of it for a very good reason, the only criminals who lose their right to vote are those who are serving a custodial sentence. Leading to the situation that two people who commit similar crimes and are sentenced by different courts could end up with different sentences.

One, sent to prison loses his rights to vote in upcoming elections, while the other, who has also got a criminal record but is the subject of a community order, is allowed to go out and vote.

The second one, well that on the face of it is more difficult to defend, being that it involves a section of the criminal community that even other criminals hold in low esteem, namely sex offenders. The British Supreme Court has ruled that sex offenders cannot be made to stay on the sex offenders register without review. The question to be asked here, are there some crimes that are beyond redemption?

Both of these have managed to spark two debates, one as too who runs Britain, elected MP’s or the Courts, which is really something that should have a post of its own, but I will ask a question.

If there is no-one making sure that laws enacted in Parliament are in fact legal, who will protect you? The voters? But how many understand this, and what happens if he illegal laws start to erode your right to decide?

Secondarily, and this goes back to my initial question, where does ones human rights overrule the rights of another, or the population as a whole?

An Open Letter To The People Of The Middle East

You are starting to leave the darkness of dictatorship and oppression, taking your first steps into the light of democracy, this light might seem blinding and confusing at first, but that is only to be expected.

Now is the time to draw breath, take stock and decide your future but remember, you will need to be patient, very patient. To risk offence by paraphrasing Churchill, you have not reached the beginning of the end, but perhaps the end of the beginning.

A full, completely working democracy may not appear in your lifetime, maybe not even your children’s lifetime. There will be mistakes, wrong turns and even the odd backward step along the way. You will need to make compromises, deal with people who would rather not deal with. But the countries of the world need each other, especially if you are to rebuild your country and take your rightful place on the world stage.

 Be strong, teach that strength and patience to your children, have them pass that on to their children, give them the determination to finish what you have started.

 Then one day, your spirit will look down upon your land, and you will know, you did a great and brave thing.

Hello world!

Thought I had better say a few things about myself.

Witty, smart, devilishly handsome, a prince amongst men. All words that have never been used to describe me…

I have a very simple philosophy on life, it only has two rules.

Firstly, do not deliberately set out to harm others, accidents and misunderstandings happen. But do not set out to cause harm or distress. Be compassionate to others, even if they are not as clever or as good looking as you consider yourself to be, remember the old saying, “there for the grace of God go I”, or the atheist version, “there for a couple of bits of DNA go I”.

Secondary, we are all been helped in life, so don’t be selfish. Even if you can’t help the person who helped you, help someone else out, a relative, a friend, hell even better, a complete stranger. Even if all it is letting someone with only a couple of items cut in front of your trolley load at the queue at the checkout. Simple eh?

I have a long term deep interest in history, mainly military, but recently it has turned towards the politics of the first half of the last century, that is, from the death of Queen Victoria to the Suez campaign of 1956, when Britain realised that we were no longer a ‘Great Power’ and was destined to whither under the shadow of the rise of America’s influence.

Entertainment wise I like anything that can educate as well entertain me, music, TV or reading material, doesn’t matter. Though a little bit of entertainment for the sake of it is cool, unless its reality TV, in which case you can keep it.

My favourite type of singers and groups can best be described by the term storytellers, Springsteen, Cash, Steve Earle, Seasick Steve etc. I like most genres of music, though I find most current hip-hop acts annoying, but have grown more into a fan of rock, blues and, god help me, even some current country acts.

That’s all for now folks…