The BBC reports that Conservative MP for Shrewsbury Daniel Kawczynski has used Parliamentary privilege to allege that Labour councillors (including his opponent at the next General Election) who work at the local sorting office are using their "position to manipulate postal voting".
I don't know if this is true or not, I can imagine that it may be. People will do stupid things where elections and postal votes are concerned - people from all parties have been found guilty of such practices, and corruption isn't confined to any particular party so just as I can see a Labour member who works in a sorting office breaking the law, I can also see Conservatives and Lib Dem members doing exactly the same thing.
My concern with this story isn't the alleged fraud - although serious - it's the use of electoral fraud as a political point scoring tool. If Mr Kawczynski is truly concerned about this the place to bring it up is with the police not with MPs using parliamentary privilege. If he doesn't have evidence and is only working on the assumption that rumours he is hearing are true, the very least he should do is have a confidential chat with the sorting office manager or regional Royal Mail manager.
I happily admit to being a total geek about election law - if we cannot respect the rules and laws which govern our democratic processes then we cannot call ourselves a democracy. Breaches of electoral law are not minor offences, they are serious attacks on our democracy no matter how "small" they seem. One of the things that annoyed me most when I worked in politics was the blatant breaches of the law by smaller parties and independent candidates who thought the law didn't apply to them - only the three large parties. Electoral law is, for the most part, simply common sense - it's actually not difficult to adhere to (although it can be a pain in the neck to adhere to the spending limits in the heat of a campaign).
Mr Kawcynski owes his electorate and the democratic process more than scoring cheap points using potential breaches of the law. If he has evidence of a crime being committed he should go to the police, if he has strong suspicions but no evidence he should still go to the police and the postal authorities. Everyone who is involved in politics has a duty to protect our democracy - not to use it for sensational headlines.
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Friday, February 23, 2007
Idiot Personality Tests
Wow! Just how wrong can one test be? It must be because I answered that the ink-blot looked like an ink-blot to me! And that the idiots in the painted faces and hoodies just looked stupid.
I won't link to it because it was just so wrong - only one was even close to being right. And that I'll leave to you to guess.....
Personality test v3.0
Developed and programmed by the Cleveleys institute of higher learning (C)
RESULT for current user
February 23, 2007
You are- Beta Seven
You are a natural extrovert with manic tendancies.
You never look to others for support.
You are the sort of person who can enjoy solitude, but thrives in a relationship.
You often look back to your childhood as a time when you were unhappy.
I won't link to it because it was just so wrong - only one was even close to being right. And that I'll leave to you to guess.....
Personality test v3.0
Developed and programmed by the Cleveleys institute of higher learning (C)
RESULT for current user
February 23, 2007
You are- Beta Seven
You are a natural extrovert with manic tendancies.
You never look to others for support.
You are the sort of person who can enjoy solitude, but thrives in a relationship.
You often look back to your childhood as a time when you were unhappy.
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
John Gummer is Utterly Adorable
I'm having a couple of weeks off work and am lounging about at home at the moment with BBC Parliament on in the background. There is currently a debate on the "planning-gain supplement bill". I have no idea what it's about (nor do I particularly care) however John Gummer is making his contribution to the debate. I don't understand what the hell he is saying but he is exceptionally entertaining and quite adorable - particularly his birthday party analogy. When Hansard reports this speech I do hope it conveys the quite barking delights of John Gummer's speech.
Wednesday, February 14, 2007
Help Wanted
My friend Alan needs help! He (for reasons I am too scared to ask) would like to get hold of a copy of Norman Tebbit's 1981 Conservative conference speech - you know the "on their bikes one"
If you know where he can get this please let me know.
Thanks
If you know where he can get this please let me know.
Thanks
Thursday, February 08, 2007
In response to Paul Burgin
Paul Burgin of Mars Hill has posted a criticism of Mike Penning for his demand that speed cameras be axed. I intended to post a reply on his blog, but it became it a bit of a rant, so my response to Paul is below.
First of all the Early Day Motion which Mike Penning has tabled is actually very reasonably worded - this is not a crazy suggestion that all speed cameras be ripped up, rather an acknowledgment that speed cameras may not be the answer and that the government should review all locations and where they do not improve road safety they should be removed. It isn't a crazy right wing plot.
Part of the problem with speed cameras is that there is a perception that they don't help to reduce accidents and are used merely as cash cows for the Treasury. Why, for example, is the money raised by speed cameras not invested in road safety campaigns or road improvements?
As a driver who has been known to drive very slightly above the speed limit very rarely (!) I actually find the flashing signs which monitor your speed and flash the limit if you are exceeding it far more effective at making me think about my speed. As usual the first port of call is taxation!
The current speed limits are completely irrelevant to today's society and transportation - more flexible speed limits are required with variations on fines etc - exceeding the speed limit by 5mph outside a school is far more dangerous than exceeding it by 10mph on a clear motorway.
The speed limit on motorways should be raised and have variations depending on the weather - again someone driving at 65mph on the motorway in the pouring rain is much more dangerous than someone driving at 80mph on a clear day.
Speed cameras are blunt instruments which cannot solve road safety problems. I would much prefer investment in cameras which monitor tail-gating or police patrols which checked quality of driving rather than speed.
Speed cameras don't stop speeding -they stop speeding for the small patch of road that they cover; invariably causing sudden braking and a disruption to the flow of traffic.
This is not an apology post for bad, fast or dangerous driving - just a recognition that speed cameras are not the answer.
First of all the Early Day Motion which Mike Penning has tabled is actually very reasonably worded - this is not a crazy suggestion that all speed cameras be ripped up, rather an acknowledgment that speed cameras may not be the answer and that the government should review all locations and where they do not improve road safety they should be removed. It isn't a crazy right wing plot.
Part of the problem with speed cameras is that there is a perception that they don't help to reduce accidents and are used merely as cash cows for the Treasury. Why, for example, is the money raised by speed cameras not invested in road safety campaigns or road improvements?
As a driver who has been known to drive very slightly above the speed limit very rarely (!) I actually find the flashing signs which monitor your speed and flash the limit if you are exceeding it far more effective at making me think about my speed. As usual the first port of call is taxation!
The current speed limits are completely irrelevant to today's society and transportation - more flexible speed limits are required with variations on fines etc - exceeding the speed limit by 5mph outside a school is far more dangerous than exceeding it by 10mph on a clear motorway.
The speed limit on motorways should be raised and have variations depending on the weather - again someone driving at 65mph on the motorway in the pouring rain is much more dangerous than someone driving at 80mph on a clear day.
Speed cameras are blunt instruments which cannot solve road safety problems. I would much prefer investment in cameras which monitor tail-gating or police patrols which checked quality of driving rather than speed.
Speed cameras don't stop speeding -they stop speeding for the small patch of road that they cover; invariably causing sudden braking and a disruption to the flow of traffic.
This is not an apology post for bad, fast or dangerous driving - just a recognition that speed cameras are not the answer.
Wednesday, February 07, 2007
In defence of the American pilots
The news for the past couple of days has been dominated by the video and transcript of the "friendly fire" incident and the sad death of Lance Corporal Matty Hull. The video is tough viewing and must have been a nightmare for L/Cpl's widow to watch.
Much of the coverage has focused on the mistakes made by the pilots with the Sun calling them "imbeciles", and their supposed gung-ho attitude. I can't comment on that. I'm not an expert on US military operations, nor I imagine are journalists from the Sun.
I didn't come away from the video with a sense of gung-ho cowboy pilots desperate to kill hundreds of people - least of all allies. On at least two occasions they ask if there are friendlies in the area, they highlight several times that there are orange markers on the vehicles on the ground - I can't tell and wouldn't like to guess whether they are convincing themselves that the vehicles are hostile (as the Guardian insists) or whether they are looking for confirmation that they are not.
My impression was of two pilots doing a difficult job under horrendous circumstances, wanting to stop enemy combatants As is the case during war. Pilots who weren't professionals but National Guardsmen on their first tour of duty and who had never seen combat before.
To me the most moving aspect of the tape wasn't the bombing of the convoy it was the silence after the pilots were told they had hit a friendly convoy. This silence speaks a million words that muck-raking journalists refuse to hear - sorrow, guilt, horror, despair are all there. And when the pilots swear it's not the tough guy swearing of a Hollywood film, it's the desperation of two men who have carried out a deadly attack on their allies.
Perhaps there should be reviews into procedures on how allies identify one another, perhaps consideration should be given to whether reservists should fly sorties unaccompanied. I don't know - I'm not an expert. What I do know is that mistakes - dreadful, tragic, incomprehensible mistakes are made.
The two American pilots, who must live with the guilt of their actions every day, should not be made scape-goats for any deficiencies in the system nor should opponents of the war (myself included) use these two men as a convenient stick to beat the UK and US governments with. They, and L/Cpl Hull, deserve better.
Much of the coverage has focused on the mistakes made by the pilots with the Sun calling them "imbeciles", and their supposed gung-ho attitude. I can't comment on that. I'm not an expert on US military operations, nor I imagine are journalists from the Sun.
I didn't come away from the video with a sense of gung-ho cowboy pilots desperate to kill hundreds of people - least of all allies. On at least two occasions they ask if there are friendlies in the area, they highlight several times that there are orange markers on the vehicles on the ground - I can't tell and wouldn't like to guess whether they are convincing themselves that the vehicles are hostile (as the Guardian insists) or whether they are looking for confirmation that they are not.
My impression was of two pilots doing a difficult job under horrendous circumstances, wanting to stop enemy combatants As is the case during war. Pilots who weren't professionals but National Guardsmen on their first tour of duty and who had never seen combat before.
To me the most moving aspect of the tape wasn't the bombing of the convoy it was the silence after the pilots were told they had hit a friendly convoy. This silence speaks a million words that muck-raking journalists refuse to hear - sorrow, guilt, horror, despair are all there. And when the pilots swear it's not the tough guy swearing of a Hollywood film, it's the desperation of two men who have carried out a deadly attack on their allies.
Perhaps there should be reviews into procedures on how allies identify one another, perhaps consideration should be given to whether reservists should fly sorties unaccompanied. I don't know - I'm not an expert. What I do know is that mistakes - dreadful, tragic, incomprehensible mistakes are made.
The two American pilots, who must live with the guilt of their actions every day, should not be made scape-goats for any deficiencies in the system nor should opponents of the war (myself included) use these two men as a convenient stick to beat the UK and US governments with. They, and L/Cpl Hull, deserve better.
Monday, February 05, 2007
Just Fair - An Animation from the Refugee Council
The Refugee Council has produced this animation illustrating some of the terrible circumstances in which asylum seekers who have had their application turned down find themselves. I found it interesting and hope you do too.
The Refugee Council would like to use this animation to raise awareness of asylum issues outside the sector. If you find the animation interesting, why not pass it on to friends and family?
View the animation on www.justfair.org.uk
The Refugee Council would like to use this animation to raise awareness of asylum issues outside the sector. If you find the animation interesting, why not pass it on to friends and family?
View the animation on www.justfair.org.uk
Why I Hope Tony Blair is Innocent
First of all just let me say - I can't stand Tony Blair. I think he's arrogant, smug, is destroying civil liberties in this country and is the most appalling whore around "celebrities" (see the dreadful Cool Britannia phenomenom for proof).
I would also be lying if I didn't feel a little bit of Schadenfreude at Labour's current problems. I remember the hell it was to be a member of the Conservative Party in the mid 90s. I saw people that I knew and cared about having their lives pulled apart in the tabloids. I saw the impact this had on their families, extended families and friends. It was a horrendous time. I also saw members of the Labour Party gloat quite hideously over people's personal misfortunes. It showed the horrible side of politics and the Labour Party and there is a part of me that feels a certain justifiable vindictiveness. And sympathy for those good, hard working members of the Labour Party who are working hard in their communities and are despairing at the antics of their party leaders. I've been there. It's tough.
Having said all that, I hope Tony Blair and his advisors are innocent in the Cash for Honours debacle. Not because I like Blair or because I want to see the Labour Party have an easy ride. I just don't want politics in Britain to have sunk to this level.
I think all parties (with the possible exception of the SNP) have been guilty in the past of nominating their donors for awards. Now this was always wrong, but the Labour Party would appear to have taken this principle (or lack thereof) and walked to extremes with it. To reward a donor with a K is one thing, but to blatantly sell honours is quite another. If true this undermines democracy as a whole in this country in a number of ways.
It makes people much less inclined to become involved in politics - either through donating cash or their time. If the public don't donate to their favoured party we have to start looking at the dreadful possibility of state funding for political parties.
It makes people less inclined to even trust politicians. Virtually every MP or councillor I have met or dealt with has been in politics for absolutely the right reasons. Most would never do anything which could be seen as corrupt, yet all are being tarred with the same brush. If the public aren't inspired to even vote then democracy suffers.
It undermines the achievements/capabilities of people who are in the Lords due to their experiences and expertise.
And perhaps in a stunning show of how naive I am - I just don't want to believe that a Prime Minister could be so corrupt and crooked. Arrogant, slimy, wrong, conceited are all fine, but a criminal, nope. Don't want to see that.
I think my hopes are misguided, I think Blair and his gang are as guilty as hell. If they are they should go to jail - perverting the democratic process is one of the worst crimes in our society as it destroys the very basics of our society. I hope I'm wrong.
I would also be lying if I didn't feel a little bit of Schadenfreude at Labour's current problems. I remember the hell it was to be a member of the Conservative Party in the mid 90s. I saw people that I knew and cared about having their lives pulled apart in the tabloids. I saw the impact this had on their families, extended families and friends. It was a horrendous time. I also saw members of the Labour Party gloat quite hideously over people's personal misfortunes. It showed the horrible side of politics and the Labour Party and there is a part of me that feels a certain justifiable vindictiveness. And sympathy for those good, hard working members of the Labour Party who are working hard in their communities and are despairing at the antics of their party leaders. I've been there. It's tough.
Having said all that, I hope Tony Blair and his advisors are innocent in the Cash for Honours debacle. Not because I like Blair or because I want to see the Labour Party have an easy ride. I just don't want politics in Britain to have sunk to this level.
I think all parties (with the possible exception of the SNP) have been guilty in the past of nominating their donors for awards. Now this was always wrong, but the Labour Party would appear to have taken this principle (or lack thereof) and walked to extremes with it. To reward a donor with a K is one thing, but to blatantly sell honours is quite another. If true this undermines democracy as a whole in this country in a number of ways.
It makes people much less inclined to become involved in politics - either through donating cash or their time. If the public don't donate to their favoured party we have to start looking at the dreadful possibility of state funding for political parties.
It makes people less inclined to even trust politicians. Virtually every MP or councillor I have met or dealt with has been in politics for absolutely the right reasons. Most would never do anything which could be seen as corrupt, yet all are being tarred with the same brush. If the public aren't inspired to even vote then democracy suffers.
It undermines the achievements/capabilities of people who are in the Lords due to their experiences and expertise.
And perhaps in a stunning show of how naive I am - I just don't want to believe that a Prime Minister could be so corrupt and crooked. Arrogant, slimy, wrong, conceited are all fine, but a criminal, nope. Don't want to see that.
I think my hopes are misguided, I think Blair and his gang are as guilty as hell. If they are they should go to jail - perverting the democratic process is one of the worst crimes in our society as it destroys the very basics of our society. I hope I'm wrong.
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
New Favourite Website
The Bus Driver's blog.
Having a dad who was a bus inspector and having spent many a happy hour on Glasgow buses this is all true.
Read it - and just try not to die laughing.
Having a dad who was a bus inspector and having spent many a happy hour on Glasgow buses this is all true.
Read it - and just try not to die laughing.
Furry and other letterboxes
Way back in the day when I still cared about being a political activist my biggest bug-bear was letterboxes. Little letterboxes, low letterboxes, sideways letterboxes and most frustratingly of all - furry letterboxes that trapped your hand or made you smoosh your leaflets just to get the damn thing through. I am delighted that Tim Roll-Pickering has started a petition to encourage the PM to do something about this scourge on democracy.
The wording is:
We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to improve letter boxes.
The wording is:
We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to improve letter boxes.
Delivering to the public is an important part of political engagement. We call for legislation to make it easier for voters to be engaged by requiring all letter boxes to be:I have happily signed this and encourage everyone to join in.
*Located at a clear height
*Easy to post through
*Designed to allow leaflets to be posted without destroying them
*Designed to protect people's hands when posting
*Dog proof
In addition we call for doors to have the number clearly displayed and doorbells to be easy to find (with defunct doorbell buttons removed).
Monday, January 29, 2007
Help A Girl In Need
Well, a bit of an exaggeration, not quite in need - just looking to make the odd pound here and there. Literally.
If you sign up to YouGov you can earn money for giving your opinions on various subjects. If you sign up using this link I can earn money for every survey you complete. The money doesn't come in quickly, but it does build up slowly but surely.
So go on - help a girl in need....
If you sign up to YouGov you can earn money for giving your opinions on various subjects. If you sign up using this link I can earn money for every survey you complete. The money doesn't come in quickly, but it does build up slowly but surely.
So go on - help a girl in need....
Can't Resist This One
Courtesy of the Herald diary
A DRIVER weaving erratically down the road was asked by the police officer who pulled him over to breathe into a breathalyser, but he declined and produced a letter from his doctor which stated: "This man suffers from terrible asthma. Please don't make him perform any action that'll leave him short of breath."
So the officer asked for a blood sample, but then a second letter was produced which said: "This man is a haemophiliac. Please do not cause him to bleed in any way."
Exasperated the officer said he would need a urine sample, but at that a third letter was flourished in which was written: "This man plays cricket for England. Please don't take the piss out of him."
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
An apology....
Sorry for lack of posts - things are just ever so slightly manic at the moment. Should all quieten down after Sunday.
In the meantime a link to a story from Dizzy. I fully concur with the last sentence.
And a couple of films for you to watch:
Normal service to be resumed soon.
In the meantime a link to a story from Dizzy. I fully concur with the last sentence.
And a couple of films for you to watch:
Normal service to be resumed soon.
Thursday, January 11, 2007
New Links
My husband has now launched a website for his photography business. Still some work needed on the site, but do visit, enjoy the foxy and think about any photography you would like - family portraits, pet portraits, would you like to buy a wildlife image - get in touch.
Darren Hector - Photographer
Darren Hector - Photographer
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
Fat Fighters
Off to my first Slimming World meeting tonight in an attempt to lose my 4 stone this year.
If the consultant is Marjorie Dawes and the diet plans consist of dust then I'm off.
Yucky Search Terms
Have been having one of my periodical search-terms looks, seeing how people end up here. As always most I can guess why they ended up here but not this one
Nude Photos Kirsty Wark
Why on earth would anyone want such things? Yuuuuuuuuuuuurrgh
Nude Photos Kirsty Wark
Why on earth would anyone want such things? Yuuuuuuuuuuuurrgh
The Wrong Answer
The Telegraph today reports that the government is actively considering ending the anonymity for rape victims/accusers.
This is a dreadful idea, completely wrong-headed and in an attempt to solve a serious problem would be creating even more serious issues.
There is a problem with false allegations of rape for whatever reason, and the women who do this not only wreck the lives of the innocent men that they accuse, but also make it harder for other women who have been raped to have the strength to come forward with confidence that they will receive the support and help they deserve. The answer to the (relatively) small number of women who behave in such a wicked manner cannot be to penalise the women who most need support.
Having said that - until conviction, the charged man should be allowed his anonymity. This protects both men who are innocent from being falsely identified as a rapist and also the victims, as in over 50% of rapes the attacker is a partner or former partner.
We cannot assume that every man found not guilty of rape has been falsely accused. Only 15% of rapes are reported, 20% of these make court and 6% of these result in convictions. More men are getting away with rape than women are lying. To introduce something else which makes the experience harder for victims would be unforgiveable.
Rape Crisis
Truth About Rape
Survive
This is a dreadful idea, completely wrong-headed and in an attempt to solve a serious problem would be creating even more serious issues.
There is a problem with false allegations of rape for whatever reason, and the women who do this not only wreck the lives of the innocent men that they accuse, but also make it harder for other women who have been raped to have the strength to come forward with confidence that they will receive the support and help they deserve. The answer to the (relatively) small number of women who behave in such a wicked manner cannot be to penalise the women who most need support.
Having said that - until conviction, the charged man should be allowed his anonymity. This protects both men who are innocent from being falsely identified as a rapist and also the victims, as in over 50% of rapes the attacker is a partner or former partner.
We cannot assume that every man found not guilty of rape has been falsely accused. Only 15% of rapes are reported, 20% of these make court and 6% of these result in convictions. More men are getting away with rape than women are lying. To introduce something else which makes the experience harder for victims would be unforgiveable.
Rape Crisis
Truth About Rape
Survive
Seven Deadly Sins
Spotted on Paul Burgin
Take the Seven Deadly Sins Quiz
I think I may have scored particularly highly on sloth as I have no problems with sleeping past noon on the weekend.
| Greed: | Medium | |
| Gluttony: | Medium | |
| Wrath: | Medium | |
| Sloth: | High | |
| Envy: | Very Low | |
| Lust: | Very Low | |
| Pride: | Very Low |
Take the Seven Deadly Sins Quiz
I think I may have scored particularly highly on sloth as I have no problems with sleeping past noon on the weekend.
Monday, January 08, 2007
Fortune - Million Pound Giveaway
Over Christmas and New Year we recorded a hell of a lot of films and TV programmes (God Bless Sky+). We're now getting down to the serious business of watching them all - well, it's January who can afford a social life?
So last night we watched one of the DVDs we had recorded from last week's TV. And found the campest, funniest, trashiest TV programme ever. Fortune - Million Pound Giveaway where plebs beg five rich people for money. It was brilliant. Perhaps the best telly programme ever, but in a really bad way.
The first bloke on was an ex-fatty who needs £5,000 for a tummy tuck, and we got to see the tummy that needs the tucking. Blurgh. Then the heartstrings got a good tugging by the 11 year old former cancer sufferer who wanted money to buy a caravan for sick children and their families to have a holiday. I cried. I was laughed at....
It's just a nightmare, like Dragon's Den but 300 rungs down the ladder of taste and decency.
I'm hooked.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
