Tuesday, 4 August 2009

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.

Tuesday, 28 July 2009

'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.


Friday, 24 July 2009

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.

Monday, 20 July 2009

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?

Saturday, 18 July 2009

Extreme Surveilance

Yet again our Government is embarrassing us, using the powers brought in to prevent terrorism for mundane matters.

This time, it is not only has it embarrassed us, but it has also insulted the soldiers whose lives are risked every day in Afghanistan. The MOD has sent a letter to all our wounded troops, saying that they may use surveillance techniques to check on their claims.

Are the people doing this doctors, are they trained in what the limits produced by a certain injury are - No, they are Military Policemen, who are being ordered to snoop on their collogues.

These boys have put their lives on the line - and been wounded doing so, and in return they are treated like criminals.

It makes me think back to the old man on Britain's' got Talent who was a break dancer. He had trouble walking, but when he was dancing no sustained pressure was put on his legs - so he had a form of exercise he could do. The Governments reaction to this was, as he can dance, he cant be disabled so they cut his benefit . . .

These a just the latest examples of a government out of control, and making decisions on subjects they know little about but that have a profound affect on peoples lives . Power needs to be returned to the people who understand the subject, local people who understand local issues rather than damaging mandates being sent out by Whitehall to the army of unnecessary bureaucrats that have been put in place to police bad policy.

I can only hope that the next government shows more insight and takes steps to fix some of the incalculable damage the present government, and the conservative government before it has caused.

If we get a hung parliament, then the Liberal Democrats will be able to have some voice in policy making and then some sanity will return to Westminster.

Friday, 17 July 2009

Authors and Children

Today has already had several disturbing reports in the news,

One started last night with several prominent authors complaining about having to be vetted to visit schools. Whilst all are in agreement that children need to be protected - they point out that they would not be left alone with children and there would be no familiarity as they would be visiting at most once a year.

Government ministers though will not have to be vetted it appears.

This shows even more signs of the governments view that people are guilty until proven innocent and will add to the growing mistrust between the generations. Unfortunately we live in a country where the governments idea of a solution is to have everybody spying on everybody else so rather than having community that look to help each other, and watch out for their children we end up with one where adults are afraid to help a child that is in trouble - for fear of being accused with being a paedophile.

Should the Liberal Democrats obtain more power, they would move to solve some of these issues - for starters the bill of rights they propose would permanently set the right to be considered innocent until proven guilty in the statute books. Along side with policys to improve comunity cohesion and for civil rights adults will be protected as well as children and that can only benefit us all.

Thursday, 16 July 2009

Should Men be able to Sue over false accusations of rape?

There was an article in the Independent today, that leaves me in a quandary. It involves a man suing the woman who accused him of rape - as he has just been acquitted.

Independent Article

Understandably the women's rights groups are up in arms about the possibility of this happening, and the effect it may have on women coming forward after being raped - something that could become a serious issue.

From the other side, what happens to a man when he is accused of rape is almost as psychologically scaring as being raped - with the added side effect of anyone knowing that you were charged with it asking did he or didn't he.

Finding a line between the two may not be possible, to protect women and make them feel safe to bring charges against their attacker and at the same time protect men against false charges.

In the long run I think the only option may be to block any legal proceedings against the alleged victim but to keep the man's identity secret until he is convicted. Though far from perfect, it may be the only way to keep rapists off the streets - and though the occasional false allegation may harm some men - that is better than leaving predictors on the streets and at least the innocent would have a trial by jury to fall back on.