2014, a time for caring for others - and a better way to give to the homeless

I haven't posted in a while, but I thought the start of the year was a good time.

I have read many posts about having to be responsible for your own happiness over that last year. For 2014 I suggest a new plan. Lets forget selfish lifestyles and concentrating on ourselves, the look after your own happiness because everyone else will. Lets all concentrate on everyone else's happiness - that way ours will be looked after for us and everyone will be happy.

We can go one step further - lets just concentrate on looking after everyone else - that way anyone who needs looking after is.

The most damning feature of our society is selfishness - the inability to look outside our own little worlds and in to the wider world. Lets have a society based on care and compassion rather than selfishness and consumption.

If you see someone homeless in the street, smile and talk to them - they will appreciate that almost as much as money. Don't give them cash (which can be spent on drugs and alcohol), buy them lunch - if they have a pet, give them food for the pet (most will feed the pet before themselves) and spend a little time talking to them - our time is our most valuable commodity.

With this in mind, I am trying to start a new scheme, and will be emailing the major supermarkets, fast food restaurants, media outlets and some famous and very rich people.

The idea is simple, there is good evidence that giving money directly to the homeless can cause problems. A number have drug and alcohol addictions that it may well be spent on. My Wife and I deal with this in the simplest way, by giving food.

But I had the thought, what if we were able to give a voucher for food, that way they could get more than one meal. Taking this further, what if these vouchers could be used in charity shops for basic clothing and bedding. What the voucher could be spent on would be limited, so it would only cover food and drink, and only the basic versions of those (no alcohol or luxury items). This would mean we could help - with far less chance of harming.

If we could get pet shops and vets involved then we could help care for their pets. I know a lot of people scoff at the homeless with dogs - but I have spoken with many, and the only friend they have in the world is their pet. I have seen them give water to the pet first on a hot day, and when given food tear it in two and give the bigger section to the pet. I have seen them shivering in the cold, with the blanket wrapped round their only companion to keep it warm. These are not the actions of someone using an animal to get money, but the actions of someone who truly cares for their companion.

To start all we would need is the various companies to provide till receipts that act as vouchers for their outlets. It would not cost them anything, and may make some money (with vouchers that don't get used).

Longer term, a joint scheme with a single voucher would be nice, where you can buy them from any participating store, and the money gets put in to an account to be drawn from when the voucher is used. With every year, any money from vouchers that have expired going to provide Christmas dinners for the homeless. This larger scheme though would require some staff, an account and would therefore have expenses.

To get this to work though, requires more than just an idea, it requires a following, It requires people that will use it and it requires businesses to get on bored. Please forward and share this, lets get a following - lets show that it will be used, and then it will be easier to get others on board.
I will post a link to this on Twitter (please retweet) and on Facebook (Please both like and share).

I intend to make 2014 about caring for others, please join me.

20mph for Westfield

The Lid Dem BANES council put a large provision for 20 mph speed limits in their last budget.

I intend to try and get an early chunk of this money put in to Westfield for the residential roads.

Westfield is primarily a residential parish with a large number of young families, and is one of the few places I have seen in recent years where children can still play in the street. I want to help protect these children and enable them to continue to use the open areas we have - so I am going to propose having the residential roads in the area converted to 20 mph.

Also a number of the green areas are becoming mud with people illegally parking on them, at the same time I am going to request that parking officers actually police these areas, while looking at the possibility of converting 1 or 2 to tarmac to create the extra parking needed to ease the problem.

I will post more as it happens

Gurkhas - Betrayed again!

To some degree I have been supportive of the necessary cuts to get our country economy back in line (I only hope they reverse some of them when things are better, but I know it is probably a mere pipe-dream). 

I even understand that cuts in the military are necessary (though as with most of the cuts, the choices in what is cut seems to be front-line services rather than dealing with back-room excess and wastage)

What is intolerable is that a single small regiment (3% of the army) have over 50% of the compulsory redundancy. How convenient for the government that the majority of the soldiers serving in this regiment do not have the right to vote in the UK. Even more convenient is the fact that the Gurkhas will be using a different system to calculate their redundancy pay so they will receive less money.

The Gurkhas have a long and proud history, for more than 200 years young Nepalese men have left their homes to fight and die for Britain. For years they revived less pay, and had no right to remain in the country they fought for when they retired. Now having won a huge battle to obtain the right to citizenship of Britain, they are now being made redundant.

Nick Clegg - our Valiant? Deputy Prime Minister was so loud in the fight to get them citizenship and equal pay, seems to be being as meek as a mouse now they are getting the sack as a result.

It is about time our politicians and the people of the UK recognised our Military Personnel. They fight and die for what we believe in, on distant shores far from the ones they love. They deserve more than to be used as mere puppets and cost cutters in a pathetic party political game.

Some redundancy may be necessary,  but let's make them equal and as few as possible. Look at the contracts the military make in detail, and get value for money rather than just throwing it away. Look at excessive bureaucracy and cut it down, then when we have cut wastage back as much is possible then we can look at redundancy's, though hopefully with the money saved only voluntary redundancy's would be necessary.

Outside of that, it is up to the people of the UK to support our service personnel, both active and retired, especially in these hard times - 

I put out a call across the UK, to all businesses - Give a discount to servicemen, both current and retired. Lets show them our appreciation and make them realise how proud of the we are!

I out a call to all Communities, actively support the family's and personnel in your community. Family's that live off base far too often lack the support that those surrounded by other military family's get - lets work together and make sure they all get the support they need.

Excuses for Riots

A large number of our politicians are showing that they are not much better than the Rioters them selves, as rather than just condemning the riots they try and twist them to their own political ends.

Link to Guardian

The original Riot in Tottenham may have started out from a legitimate protest (the full results from the IPCC has not been released yet), but no riot is excusable - and the spread of the riots was just Thuggery.

Various left wing social commentators are finding excuses for the Rioters, despite them committing inexcusable offences against their communities. They had no placards, they gave no protest and half of the ones who have been interviewed cant come up with a coherent excuse.

"We did it to show that we had no money today

"We did it to show the police we can do what we want"

when they pointed out the police wernt hurt but it was the shop keepers

"We did it to show the rich we can do what we want"

didn't they notice that most of the shops hit were small locally owned businesses.

We have brought up a generation with a large number of people that think that the rules do not apply to them, that there are no consequences and that they can do what they want. When looking at the causes of the riots we need to look at that as well, not only the current situation that led to the riots but also the failings of our society that led them to feel it was OK to do it.

There has been a bright side to all this though - the communities coming together to condemn the rioters and to clean up and rebuild. Both young and old coming out and helping each other and giving shining examples of true British spirit that haven't been seen in years.

Now if we can just build on the positive, maybe there is hope for our society yet.

London Riots spread country wide.

The side effects of the policy allowing young people to run riot has brought riots to the entire country.

For years we have pandered to our kids, allowed them to ignore the police and teachers and attacked authority figures that have stood up to them. Punishments have been reduced to meaningless in schools so our youth feel there are no consequences to their actions. The result is Riots, Mass looting and the death toll to several communities.

They are about to learn there are consequences, when no jobs or businesses return to their communities for fear it happens again. The scars will remain as no one comes to repair the damage, and the number of jobless and impoverished families will grow.

We need to stem the tide now, the government needs announce that they will name and shame those guilty, so they face the wrath of their friends and family. Any over the age of 14 need to be treated as adults in the face of the law with the consequences that come with it. We need to announce the punishments now to prevent further spread.

More importantly we need to take a long look at our society. We need to show our children that there are consequences when the consequences are minor, long before they get to this stage. Discipline needs to come back in to schools and respect for the police needs to be rebuilt. 

We need a society where common sense wins, rather than instant reaction. Where when a parent hears that their child is in trouble - they find out why rather than immediately believing either side. Then stand up for the side that is in the right. In 'The good old days' parents immediately believed the Teacher or Police - now they immediately believe the child. 

Neither is right, but it is the lack of consequences caused by the latter that have enabled the current problems to arise. Our society has had a habit of jumping from one extreme to the other, where the middle ground is needed, and hopefully after the dust has cleared and the rebuilding commences we will not see more knee jerk reactions but a constructive dialogue to rebuild a safer, fairer and stronger society.

Legalised Terroism

An Israeli General has come out against the terrorism Israeli settlers are performing against the Palestinians in the West Bank (Link).

What I ask is how can we continue to support a regime that refuses to step in against this and still claim to have a 'War on Terror'?

Israel has repeatedly ignored international law (the West Bank settlements are considered illegal under international law) and refuses to keep their citizens in check to protect the native population. Not only that but when the Palestinians strike back - they bomb them with advanced military weapons. We just sent troops to Libya to aid rebels fighting against just this kind of situation.

We cannot have one rule for our friends and another for those we don't like. Right is Right and what is happening in the West Bank is not right by any stretch of the imagination. There should be a call for international sanctions against the terrorist regime in Jerusalem.

We (meaning the UK/US/UN) created the problem when we created Israel after WW2, we then turned a blind eye during their wars of expansion (though they claimed it was to increase their area of defence).

We have ignored repeated bombing and retaliation, and the Palestinians being subjugated and trodden underfoot. Enough is Enough!

Yes what happened to the Jews in WW2 was terrible and must never be allowed to happen again - but that doesn't give them free reign to  terrorise others.

All it takes for evil to win is for a good man to remain silent - so lets shout at the top of our lungs that we as a civilised society will not accept this!

We need to bring sanctions against Israel and protect the Palestinian population. We need to force Israel to come to the table for discussions.

Please join the facebook group I just created to work towards this Bring sanctions against Israel!

Other Stories in the News

Hidden between the lines of the Hacking Scandal are a couple of important other stories.

University Charges

1/3rd of university's have been given the go ahead to charge £9000 but the fees office. Students will be in uproar - while failing to see the bigger picture. This policy is going to cost the government - not save. As students will be earning more before they have to start repaying. The numbers going to university haven't been hugely effected, so there will still be far more graduates than jobs.

We need to seriously look at the goals we set - with UCAS trying to get the school league tables based on university attendance, more pressure is put on schools to get kids in to university, rather than looking at what is best for the student.

We need to remove the fallacy that our society has created, that if you don't go to university you have failed and look at life skills and the job market. University should be for the academic elite, what ever their social background - not for everybody we can cram in.

As I have said before - cut the number of places - increase the entry requirements, and fully fund them all. Degrees become valuable again and the government saves a fortune.

Equality Commission

The equality commission want the legal definition of discrimination expanded to include religion, as the result of 4 cases going through the courts.

For 2 of the cases I agree, though I would like to see the details.

A British Airways Clerk was sent home for refusing to take off a necklace with a cross. I have to agree with this one, would they have done it if it was a different religion, and what she was wearing had no bearing on her being able to perform her duties.

A nurse was given a desk job for similar reasons - I would be interested in the details of this, as they did not stop her working, and it could have been on hygiene grounds, with no one being allowed to wear necklaces - if this is the case I don't have an issue, if it was just because it was a cross then it is a different matter all together.

The next two are more complex.

A relationship councillor was sacked for refusing to give advice to gay people. So he was being discriminated against for discriminating against other people. Unlike the earlier two, this has a direct effect on his being able to do his job - something he was refusing to do. If his religion had said he couldn't give advice to black people, there would have been no question about his being fired - why should gays be any different?

The last one is similar, with a registrar refusing to conduct same sex civil ceremonies.

The question here is one of where should the line be drawn - I have some pretty specific opinions on this. If the clerk was insisting on wearing the necklace visibly, where there is a rule that no one is allowed to do this, then she doesn't have a leg to stand on, as long as she would have been able to place the pendant under her uniform.

For the nurse, the same apples - though there would be a hygiene reason not to be allowed to wear it at all (but that would have to apply to everyone and all jewellery, including wedding bands)

For the last too, I see no excuse - if a job is going to make you do something against your religious belief, take a different job. If you were in the police, and your religion said you could not take any form of action against another member of your religion - you would not be allowed to stay in the job - letting a criminal go because they were of the same religion would not be acceptable. If your religion says you are not allowed to drive, you don't take a job as a taxi driver.

Religion shouldn't be an excuse to flout general rules - as long as the rules have sound reasoning and don't discriminate specifically. Equally the law should come first (if the law says you cant carry a knife, and your religion requires you too - British law comes first, if the law is fundamentally wrong, it should be changed rather than bypassed for a small group).

If you are not allowed to discriminate against someone because of their religion, why should they be able to discriminate against you.

Hacking scandal shows a society in crisis.

As more details of the hacking scandal emerge - the amount of power the media has over our society is shown in its full light.

Details of senior members of the police force allowing the prior investigation to remain unchallenged, and the head of the original investigation now being a well paid columnist for News International in The Times (Link).

David Cameron having ignored people from all sides (including the now Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg and Lord Ashdown) to employ Andy Coulson as his Director of Communications and until the last day or so refusing to try and stop their take over of BskyB.

Tony Blair and Gordon Browns governments were equally in bed with the media, with memo's being leaked showing them trying to silence questions from with in their own party.

News International have lied to the police, lied to parliament and there is evidence that there was a deliberate cover up on behalf of News International (Link).

That a single section in society, and one that should be there to protect has run so rampant shows the peril we are in. The media's ability to hold people in prominent positions to a level above the norm led us down this track. 

MP's are supposed to represent real people, but we try and hold them to unrealistic ideals. Reports on their personal lives don't effect their ability to govern, but do have real effect on their friends and family, people we all strive to protect. We need to crack down on the media, while giving them the freedom to report - they need to be able to be held to account, and prove that what they do to people lives are in the public interest, not just in the interest of selling more papers.

Currently the only party with out immediate and direct links to the Media, and specifically news international are the Liberal Democrats. We are the only ones that can bring about this change with out bias or Rupert Murdoch pulling the strings behind our backs!

Nick Clegg agreeing to back Labour in the defeat of the BskyB deal is a start down this road - hopefully the other partys will follow us towards a fairer and more open society.

Newspaper Crisis

The News of the World is soon to depart our news stands - a casualty of a greedy empire out of control.

Hundreds of jobs, and a long (168 years) and illustrious history are being sacrificed to save one woman, who should have already been fired. Rebekah Brooks was Editor at the time, and was either in collusion or completely incompetent if that level of criminal activity was happening in her news room.

This is also a bid to save the deal that will extend the empire, the purchase of BskyB in full - a deal already fraught with competition questions, and now with the extra slap of a big question over the integrity of News Corp.

Even the integrity of our two main partys is called in to question over this, with Andy Coulson (the former head of communications for David Cameron's Conservative Party, and Deputy Editor at the time of the hacking) possibly being arrested today. 

Labour don't get away clean though, despite Ed Miliband demanding change and that the government needs to be seen to take a firm stand to bring the press back in to line - but his own head of strategy, Tom Baldwin is another former News International Journalist who urged the Shadow Cabinet in January not to say anything "which appears to be attacking a particular newspaper group out of spite" and not to associate hacking to News Corporation's attempt to takeover BSkyB.

How did we let this happen? Over recent years the press have gained more and more control over our country, with politicians too scared of bad headlines and exposes to stand against them. 

Now we end up with Trial by Media (luckily two newspapers (The Sun and The Mirror, with The Sun being another News International paper) are being tried for contempt of court over reporting of the Jo Yeates case), and the news papers running riot over anything they think will sell a paper.

Do not get me wrong, I believe in freedom of the press, and that they have to have the power to investigate and keep government and business honest. That requires a degree of honesty, integrity and control that they no longer seem to possess though. There is a big difference over what is in the public interest and what the public is interested in.

Unfortunately our papers can no longer be trusted to do this - they have become the big business that needs investigation, rather than warriors for truth and justice keeping our society honest.

Breaches of the law and privacy aren't calculated against the good they will do, but will the extra advertising and sales be worth the fines they will incur.

What we need is a restructuring of press controls, and independent organisation with real power. A Committee made up from the Judiciary, various aspects of the media, the government and the common people. One with real power to investigate and then act on the investigations, weather that is to forward on to the Police, the Government or to place realistic fines themselves.

The fines would have to be large, most large media organisations will not notice a million pound fine, a large expose will generate far more income than that - the fines need to be large enough to hurt, to remove all profits make by that article and then some. That might make the media stop and think before acting.

If we fail to do this, then we risk the media gaining more and more control over our country, till the government become little more than puppets for the all powerful news barons . . .

Why the cuts are Necessary, a layman's guide.

Ok, quick explanation of why all the government cuts are necessary, very much in layman's terms

I am leaving out GDP, as that figure has nothing to do with government income and only has any point if tax was at 100%

Lets look at a family, they are comfortably off and earn £51,400 per year after tax.

They have been spending too much on credit cards though so owe £77,100 (this is 20% more than they earn) to credit cards and don't have a mortgage or house to secure these on, so there is nothing to sell to repay them other than the items they have purchased them selves (which will have dropped in value, or been consumed). This is 151% of what they earn each year - so if they spend every penny just on paying off debt, didn't eat or pay rent it would still take 1.5 years to pay off!

Because of their lifestyle, they are giving money to their elderly parents who have no pension or savings so are having to pay it out of current funds.

With all of this they are spending £66,900 each year, dispute their already heavy debt. Which means they are spending £15,500 more each year than they earn (that's a 20% increase in their debt just the next year), and as interest rises on the debt, this will go up with out increasing spending any more.

here's those figures in a more succinct format.

£51,400 Income

£66,900 Expenditure (120% of income)

£77,100 Current debt (151% of annual income)

£15,500 annual increase in debt (20% of debt)

If a family was in this condition, they would be expected to go bankrupt as they would not be given any more loans and wouldn't be able to cover the debt.

Change those numbers from thousands to billions and that was the state of the country at the end of 2010, and it has gotten worse since.

If the UK goes bankrupt, no other country will trade with us - we rely on imports for most of our food and no longer really have a manufacturing base. That would instantly make us a third world country begging to survive. There would be no pensions, no retirement, no benefits and no NHS - and that is the only alternative to cuts! (The Thatcher government dealt with the last massive public debt by selling off all our utilities, we don't really have anything left to sell).

So what I ask is - is it worth putting up with cuts for a few years while we get this sorted, or would your rather face the alternative?

A Goverment in Denial

It has been a while since I have had time to write - life can be like that sometimes, but the news of recent days and a small amount of free time has given me cause to speak out.

Again Gordon Brown shows he has no ability to accept a reality that all evidence shows is almost diametrically opposed to his own deluded beliefs.


Helicopters

Again Senior Army Officers, that are working in the field in Afghanistan have complained about a lack of helicopters - in one case with the officer dying in an attack almost identical to the kind he described in a memo stating the problem. Yet despite this, our Prime Minister insists that we have plenty of helicopters in the field. Maybe he should try saying that to the grieving relatives of soldiers that have time in administrative transportation operations. i.e. soldiers moving to another base, not performing combat operations.

As Tony Blair found out a few months ago, they are accountable in the public's eyes.

Drugs Tzar

To show that this desire to ignore all evidence that may be contrary to their desires they have asked their Drugs Tzar to resign, why - because they claim he is not able to give impartial advice. What they mean is that the advice (which is backed up by lots of scientific research) doesn't follow the policy's they want to impose on the population.

You might think, well they will be gone soon, and then things will be better, but the comment from the Tory party over the drugs Tzar, wasn't in defence of his scientifically backed up comments, but that the government had taken too long to get rid of him, and they should have done it the first time he made a comment they didn't agree with.


The Conservatives

The Tory's are currently claiming to be the Original Liberal Democrats, but their message is neither Liberal or Democratic.

With the Tory's in power, the privatisation of the infrastructure for another of our vital services is inevitable - they have already stated that they will privatise Royal Mail and not even the Americans have gone that far. Will they never learn that privatising the front end is ok, but as our lack of development in the communications sector has shown, if the infrastructure is privatised, necessary work to develop better technology and keep pace with the rest of the world will not occur due to cost.

The best we can currently hope for is a hung parliament, with the Liberal Democrats holding the swing vote, as I fear a Conservative Government will just continue the spiral a greater divide between the haves and the have nots.

Road users hit again.

Once again the government has hit rural community and the transportation industry. From midnight tonight petrol duty goes up by 2p per litre, but that is before they add VAT on top of the already charged duty (they get you twice) which at the current rate of 15% makes it 2.3p per litre.

At the end of the year, VAT will go back to 17.5% so we will be hit again, this is the third raise in 9 months. Road Hauliers have had a huge increase in insolvency's due to the combination of the recession and excessive fuel bills.

Even environmental campaigners are complaining this time, stating that most people have cut road use down as far as they can with out improved public transport - but fuel duty goes in the general tax pot, helping to pay the vast sums involved in unwanted projects like the National ID Card. In fact fuel duty hurts public transport as they have to pay for the fuel, at the same rate.

This causes real problems for people in rural community, where on the whole salary's are lower and having a car to travel to the shops (which can be 20+ miles away) is essential. Having already seen to the closure of a large quantity of rural post offices, being able to get to the nearest town is essential.

Rail does not provide an affordable alternative, as I show below:

To drive my car to London costs about £35, leaving when I want. If I want to park in central london, at an NCP I can for say £20 for the day and another £6 gets me a one day travel card. Total cost £61, and an increase of £6 per added person. if I take 4 people it only costs £22 per person, including the travel card, and we can travel when we want (it costs £16 per person if we park further out for free and get the tube in)

If I want to travel before 9.00am the cost per person is £126 with the £6 for the one day travel card applying, so £132 PER PERSON! not only that, but you have to change trains and travel when the trains run.

The Liberal Democrats want to cut down on road use, but we want to do this by improving and lowering the costs of public transport, making it a cheaper and viable option vs the car. Not only that but we want to increase the ability of the rail system to transport bicycles so you have the option to take your bike and use it at the other end.

Both the Conservative and Labour governments have hugely increased the cost of fuel using road users to fund expensive government projects, and there are no signs that the Conservatives plan to reverse this trend. The only party with a well reasoned policy are the Liberal Democrats - we just have to hope that they get enough of the vote next year to do some good.

You can help with this, Vote Liberal Democrat at the next election - If everybody who thought, "I would vote for them but they wont win" did, and if everybody who thought "they are all the same" gives us the chance to prove them wrong, then we have the opportunity to win by a landslide!

Do your bit for the future of Britain, Vote Liberal Democrat.

When is enough enough?

I have just read a new report about and incident in London.

link

The police's comment at the end shows that they no longer regard stop and search as anti terrorist powers but part of every day policing. Searching people for no reason other than targets or the fact the officer feels like it is bad enough, but in this case the targets of the stop and search were children.

The spiralling abuse of these powers shows the result of what happens when you give people broad unregulated powers. The Labour government has already stated that it's policy is to wait till the horse has bolted before locking the stable door when the Home Secretary said that they would regulated the abuse of the police car tracking system (using every cctv camera in the country) when it happened. With little concern for the fact that it it has already happened by that point.

This attitude has been prevalent with the current government, providing more and more power with little or no regulation.

The Magistrates Association is up in arms at government plans to give police the power to give instant fines (3 points and a criminal conviction on you record) for 'Dangerous Driving' allowing them to be both jury and sentencer. What constitutes dangerous driving can vary widely, and be effected by the mood and attitude. This will have 2 side effects, more fines will be given out as it saves the police the time and paperwork of going to court and people will end up with a criminal conviction with out realising it. In court you can get as much as a £5000 fine and 9 points, so for the worst cases they will be too lenient, and for milder cases they will be too strict.

Link

The government has plans for another 21 offences to be dealt with in this way, but they have been delayed for further consultation - something the government has a habit of ignoring anyway if it goes against their plans.

Paul Holmes the Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman pointed out that

"The police have been given wide-ranging powers without adequate debate."

Note that it is the Liberal Democrats commenting not the Conservatives, who them selves have been frequently known to increase police power rather than curtail it.

This is becoming a serious issue as Britain becomes more and more a police state, we can only hope that the Liberal Democrats are successful enough at the next election to have some say in fixing the situation.

Distroyed Data and Swine Flu

This morning has brought 2 issues, More deaths due to the misdiagnosis of Swine Flu and the Police wanting more control over our information.

The news of a mother who died from meningitis when it was misdiagnosed as swine flu over the phone is another tragic example of the state the current has gotten the NHS in to. Where under trained staff man phones, and pretty much everything is classed as swine flu.

The result of this is people are told not to leave their home and too avoid contact with others, this has caused several deaths, with one sixteen year old dying from Tonsillitis, something that I have not heard of killing anyone in the UK in recent years. Now rather than seeing a doctor the NHS has been gotten in to the state where you call a call centre and someone reads questions and diagnosis off the screen, the same way you would with IT support. I have never found this worked particularly well in IT, so I doubt it performs in health issues either.

After a comment in an American paper saying if he was British and used the NHS he would have died, Dr Stephen Hawkin spoke out saying he has received most of his medical support on the NHS - I wonder if he would get the same level of service today he did then, or whether we would loose one of the worlds most brilliant minds.

A shake up of the funding and structure of the NHS is desperately required, not just with the IT budget the way the Conservatives suggest but across the board, the Conservatives put accountants in charge rather than doctors and this has caused a huge degradation of the system, what is needed is a hybrid where you have mangers dealing with the business issues at the behest of doctors rather than telling the doctors that more cleaning staff would cost too much money and the occasional case of MRSA is a reasonable risk when offset against the cost. Tell that to the patients who's lives are ruined by it.

Also in the news is a piece of software that causes data on the internet to 'self destruct' after a specific period of time, after which no one can recover it.

The Police don't like this, note I said Police not the security services, the Police are supposed to be there to protect us, but more and more this comes from limiting our freedoms and keeping us under close surveillance. The assumption is we are guilty till we prove to them otherwise.

The comment from a police forensics expert is that it that data should work like the police being able to enter a persons home and search. If this is the case though I can shred or burn any correspondence I don't want others to see so Vanish would actually be supplying what he is asking for (somthing I doubt anyone has pointed out to him).

The more we become reliant on the internet and data, the more we need the ability to protect our selves, not just from 'Over enthusiastic policing' but from hackers and criminals wanting to use this against us.

Should the Liberal Democrats get in to power, privacy and human rights are high on the agenda, not only with plans to protect the privacy of the individual, and to implement a permanent right to privacy in a bill of rights, but increasing the rights of the victim rather than the criminal.

The world we are heading towards is a very scary place where our every movement is monitored by the government in case we do something wrong, the Liberal Democrats will not only move direction away from this, by try and prevent future governments from heading in that direction again, giving us what I see as our only chance to keep Britain as a free nation.

Peter Mandelson, Spying and Students

Not a good start to the week from the government, Whilst the Prime Minister is at his Fife constituency desperately trying to avoid getting kicked out at the next election, Peter Mandelson is supposedly running the country from Corfu via blackberry . . . . (Note that Peter Mandelson is not currently an MP and not elected, another of New Labours knocks against democracy with the large increase in unelected officials in the cabinet)

Independent Article

Chris Huhne has pointed out the frightening levels of government surveillance, with over 1500 surveillance requests made every day last year - an very few of them relating to Anti Terrorism, the excuse for bringing the said laws in. I have already posted at length about this and no doubt will again, but Chris brings the points well enough now -even using on of my favourite statements about it, that George Orwell's 1984 was supposed to be a warning, not a blueprint.

BBC Article

What I really want to get my teeth in to this morning is the student situation, a report from Scotland shows a climate of spiralling debt for students, meaning most students from poorer family's have to work well over the recommended 10 hours maximum per week, with student loans, commercial loans and credit card debts leaving them in a terrifying financial situation, and one that had a direct impact on their ability to study (how do you study well when you are exhausted and cant stop thinking about your financial problems). This means lower grades and less chance of getting a good job that will help to pay off the debt.

BBC Article

The governments plans to solve falling attendance from poorer family's, not by reducing the financial strain, but by reducing the grades required by poorer students by 2 grades. This will just cause a two tier system in the university's and lead to resentment from student that had to study harder to get in - adding to the problems rather than resolving any.

And then to add insult to injury they are talking about limiting the number of multiple occupancy houses allowed in any one area so that finding a shared house will be harder for students (and anyone else who need to share due to being unable to afford the extortionate levels of rent at the moment - a problem that is on the increase and means there is a need for more shared housing not less). As shared accommodation becomes less plentiful it means that those still able to provide it will be able to charge a premium, putting yet more strain on student finances.

BBC Article

The government claims to understand there is an issue with rental costs in the country, but it seems that they are intent to throw petrol on the fire rather than to put it out. A policy we are seeing appear with frightening frequency across all levels of government policy.

What we need is a clear national constitution, setting out people's rights, Who is eligible to take what office in government, and what level of surveillance is allowable for national security with out infringing on people right to some level of privacy.

Along with the a consultation and rework of the electoral system in the UK, setting fixed terms amongst other things (something that will stop governments from calling elections when it is convenient for their position in the polls) the Liberal Democrats will also add a Bill of Rights to the British Legislation, something we have never had and something that will curtail all governments to come.

The Scottish Assembly is looking at the student situation, but this is something that needs to be done nationally. Though there is not the money in the economy to do all we would like at the moment, cutting back on the 12 Billion IT expenditure that the government has started, and that is spiralling out of control, over budget and is currently 5 years late in some cases (and that recent research shows has had no positive effect on government efficiency, in fact government efficiency is getting worse not better) and improving the military procurement system will put some money in the budget.

We will strive diligently to improve the finances of the worst off, unlike the current government and work for a fairer society for all. Unlike the Conservatives, and now New Labour (as Mandelsons holiday shows) we do not rely on big business for our funding, that is both our greatest strength (as we do not have to try and appease them with policy) and our greatest weakness (as we are always low on funds, and do not have enough money to stand in every constituency at times). We are funded by the people we represent, so we can centre our policy on their requirements with out having to pander to our sponsors desires or loose them.

If the Liberal Democrats get in we can offer real change. Though there is a strong feeling that all politicians are the same, there have only been two parties in power in living memory, Labour and the Conservatives, and in their current forms they are hard to distinguish from each other. If every voter that wasn't vote Liberal Democrat because they think we can't win we would have a good chance, if every voter that dosn't vote because they think we are all the same, was to give us the change to prove them wrong (what have they got to loose, if they are wrong and we are different then they have gained if they are wrong nothing changes) we would win by a landslide.

I call on all voters to bear this in mind, give us a chance, get behind us rather than splitting to various small independents or "special interest" parties, then you will have a chance to see real change, positive and lasting change and a change that will set Britain up to move forward in the 21st century as a shining example of what can be done buy the people that the rest of the world can follow!

What has become of our Society.

Reading the news today, I saw one of the saddest articles I have seen for one time. It was sad not just because it was reporting the death of a young man, but because his neighbours had heard him screaming for help and not one had gone to check what the problem was.

He had gotten stuck in a drain returning home, and yelled and screamed, his neighbours assumed it was a drunken game and ignored it - as a result the man lost his life. It is a sad example of what has become of our society, where young women are recomended to call fire rather than help or rape, as people will come to watch a fire and will ignore the other two.

The last 2 governments (Labour and Conservative) have created an attitude of "I'm all right mate" with in society, where everyone is more interested in watching their neighbours to report for some reason or another rather than helping each other. This is a trend we need to reverse, where people go to help someone in need rather than ignore it, or worse stand and watch.

I wish I could provide some fall proof plan that would cause society to change overnight, but that is not possible, fixing this mess is going to take years of work from successive governments that are prepared to look at and deal with the issue. I cannot see either the Conservatives or the Labour Party doing this.

Our best hope is a hung parliament at the next election, giving the Liberal Democrats some say in the governing of the country.

I call to every person that reads this, to talk about it with your friends. If every voter that didn't vote Liberal Democrat because they doing thing we can win voted for us, we would be in a good position to go in to opposition, if not rule. If every person that didn't vote because they think all politicians are the same, gave us a chance and voted for us - we would have a landslide victory.

Not all politicians are the same, but in living memory only 2 parties have run Britain, The Conservatives and the Labour Party. So talk to your friends, relatives and co-workers and give us a chance to prove you wrong and proved that there can be honesty and democracy in government.

BBC Sensationalism over landlord issue

I was saddened and disgusted last night and this morning over the BBCs biased and over simplified reporting of a complex situation.

BBC News Report

In Boston we have one of the largest, if not the largest transient worker population in the country, and this comes with various problems. Education of their children, Policing the extra people with a different culture and providing medical facilities to name but a few.

Rather than these large problems the BBC chose to focus on a narrow section of landlords that do not want migrant workers in their homes. Due to the race relations act, this is classed as racial discrimination, when in fact it is class discrimination - the same people do not usually want benefit claimants either.

As the race relations act pushes this underground it means that the estate agents cannot ask the questions they need to to find out what kind of migrant they are dealing with, is it a transient land worker or a full time professional, so a blanket comes down causing them to react to an accent rather than the form of employment - the race relations act is actually causing racial discrimination here rather than preventing it.

The BBC decided that rather than looking at the entire complicated situation it would focus on this narrow section and show our estate agents in the worst possible light (I would be interested to see the footage in full, rather than the edited highlights that are provided.)

Below is a copy of the comment I sent to the BBC, which reiterates some of the points I have made here and expands on some others.

I have just seen on line the article due to go out today on rentals for immigrants in Boston, and the article on line (so I am assuming the television article) is grossly oversimplifying a complicated situation.

Most Landlords and Estate Agents are not racist or trying to prevent genuine migrants from using their property, unfortunately there is a large quantity of transient migrant workers in the cause problems. The landlords that do not want these workers in their properties are the same ones that do not want benefits claimants in their property's and for similar reasons. When you look at one of the rental properties that are designed for migrant workers, they usually have too many beds, and mattresses under all of those and are in a bad state of repair.

Unfortunately the race relations act is a general coverall policy that leaves little room to manoeuvre for specific problems, as this issue is not so much racial as class based. Due to the legislation that is in place, it means that the questions that landlords and estate agents might want to ask, so that genuine immigrants don't suffer are not allowed because of the race relations act.

The lad who said it was OK to block "Muslims" was obviously in the wrong, as this is a direct attack on a specific racial group, and one that wouldn't be affected by the migrant worker problem in this area.

This is a provocative topic in the area, and one I am disappointed in seeing the BBC go charging in - hyping up with the current trend of over sensational journalism without having done the proper ground work first. There are a large number of racial issues in the area which need dealing with calm and care. Making sure that there is appropriate accommodation for the workers and dealing with the landlords that put 4 to a single bedroom would have been a far better target for your report rather than the landlords that are trying to care for their properties. Unfortunately a small number of these will be doing it for racist reasons but the vast majority will have seen what happens to these "Migrant" houses, where people frequently sleep in shifts whilst the others are working and don't want to see the damage that goes with it occur to their property.

Looking in to the gross government underfunding of the area, as the transient workers are not taken in to account. A situation that is stretching the local police force and education services to its limit. The potential closure of some local schools that are under performing, as the fact that a majority of their students do not speak English as a first language is not taken in to account in government statistics and the fact that they may be closed has meant that any funding is cut (and they are having to teach in the dining hall as the education board will not give them a budget for portacabins) so the children of the migrant workers and the children from the local area are getting a substandard education as a result. St Beads in Boston is officially the worst school in the country, but if you take a look at the make up of its students (which the government does not) the reason why is glaringly obvious.

These are far bigger issues than a few landlords (as most estate agents have landlords that are happy to take migrants as well as those that are not) not wanting migrant workers and the BBCs time and the licence payers money would have been far better spent looking in to these.

Lincolnshire's economy depends on these migrants as in general the British are not prepared to work on the land. It is a situation that would warrant an in depth report on the entire situation, taken from a balanced perspective, and that is what I would normally expect from the BBC. One that would help define the problem in all areas and help to find solutions, both with land lords and agents that are genuinely racist as well as those that are exploiting the migrants. Unfortunately the BBC seems to be following the tabloid press in to the realm of sensationalist journalism and if this continues it will soon be as pointless to watch the BBC news as it is to read a tabloid.

I would be appreciative if anyone that reads this and is in agreement with me contacts the BBC and tells them so, hopefully they will take a step back and do some responsible reporting and look in to the entire situation.

'He who does not know the truth is only a fool. He who knows the truth and calls it a lie is a criminal.

Both issues I want to mention today relate to Afganstan, the title is a quote from Bertold Brecht but quoted in this instance by Malalai Joya, a young woman from Afghanistan.

She is under constant threat of assassination, for speaking out against the regime, She was elected to their parliament, and thrown out for saying things the other members didn't like.

Malalai is desperately trying to bring to the worlds attention the fact that while fighting against the Taliban, we are replacing them with a group that is just as bad and that commits just as many atrocity's to it's own people as the Taliban did - women are still half human to them, only fit for keeping house and sating their husband's lust.

The fools form the title, are the people of the west, the Criminals are the people that know the truth but are still waging the war and claiming that it is a bright new democratic future.

"He who fails to learn from History is destined to repeat it" is an old adage, but one we can see at work here. The Warlords are as bad as the Taliban, and if we aren't going to clean up properly, we will just be going back in a few years to start again.

Our government likes hiding things it doesn't think we should know from us, when the courts issued an order for the cabinet minutes regarding the war in Iraq to be released, the home secretary vetoed it, proving that our ministers think they are above the law.

At the same time that they are failing to support the Afghan people they our sending our boys out to die and get injured, and then appealing against a court decision to give them reasonable compensation. They claim that soldiers should only be able to claim for the initial injury, not any complications that arise from it!!!! The complications wouldn't be there if they hadn't been injured in the first place.

What an insult to our Men in the field, knowing that they will have to fight for any compensation, and that if the MOD doesn't like the decision they will keep the process going leaving the men to struggle with out any money. The courts shouldn't have to be involved at all, we should be happily giving appropriate levels of compensation to our men, and taking in to account any complications that arise form their wounds.

These are just further examples of a government that is sat in our midst like a cancer spreading out to corrupt all they encounter.

I was thinking of posting today on the need to improve democracy - following a live discussion by the independent newspaper - but another story close to my heart has show up.

It starts off as a nice romantic story, couple meet on holiday, couple stay in touch, she comes over from Canada to visit, they fall in love, and get married. Sounds wonderful till the government gets involved.

The Canadian girl who is 19 was in the uk on a 6 month visitors visa, so they had to apply to the home office for permission to get married, this was granted, but the home office lost their photos, so the wedding ended up happening a few weeks after her visa expired.

As a result she would have to return to Canada and enter on a spousal visa - shouldn't be a big problem, except that the government recently brought in an age restriction on spousal visas of 21. This was done, despite their own study saying it was a bad idea, and only 1 in 6 of the girls it was supposed to protect thinking it would help. Yet another case of the government claiming it is right in the face of overwhelming evidence that it isn't (just look at the current military helicopter situation)

The effect on the couple is that the girl has to return to Canada and cannot return to live with her husband in Britain until she is 21. The government considers this a mere inconvenence for them, to be seperated for the first 18 months of their marriage and as a result the case dose not count as severe enough for individual consideration (if this doesn't I don't know what would . . .)

They do have another option they can live together and work in europe, in any country in the EU besides Britain, his home country.

This is close to my heart, as my wife is American, and we had lots of hoops with the governments crazy immigration police to try and get her over here.

I hope that the publicity will cause the government to rethink the policy for this couple and hopefully the next government will bring in more sensible laws.

Until then the law abiding will suffer, whilst those prepared to flout the law have a far easier time of it.

Having to steal to eat

I have just read a concerning article over a court case in the town I live in. An unemployed man, who had had his passport and other vital papers stolen from him was taken to court for stealing £12.54 in food and drink from Asda. At the time of the theft he hadn't eaten in 4 days . . . .

He was found guilty and fined £50 and told to pay Adsa a £15 surcharge for the goods.

The court case isn't what bothers me most - people cant been seen to be allowed to get away with theft, what ever the reason. The part that concerns me is that in our society we have a situation where someone needs to steal to eat. How can our government claim to be tackling poverty, when situations like this still occur.

There should be some way we can feed the homeless and poverty stricken victims of modern society with out them having to resort to theft. Even if it's just a can of discount beef stew in a disposable bowl (that would cost at most 15p per person). In 2008 there were just under 100,000 homeless according to government figures (which hide large numbers of people). That is under 5.5 million pounds per year to give a hot meal to each one every day - that is only 1.5 million over what the Prime Minister spent on travel last year.

The government has spent a fortune on it's digital britain report - concerned about getting high speed broadband in to every house in the country - shouldn't it be more important to get food in to every mouth in the country first?