sorry small break - need to come up with something really passionate!

but in the meantime,

http://www.andipamodern.com/DET/DET-6554.HTM

 

hat tip to http://www.bobpiper.co.uk/

How sad I am

McCartney divorce battle resumes

 

And my first thought was that Ian and Anne made such a lovely couple......

 

SH

the worth of MPs

The BBC is talking today about MPs expenses after the House of Commons tried to justify not asking for receipts under £250 or allowing £400 for unmonitored food each month.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7233560.stm

and

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/nickrobinson/2008/02/milk_with_your.html

 

While I recognise how tricky this is and understand people's feelings about the need for greater transparency.  And I particularly understand that at the moment and with the modern world of information, people want to be able to be sure that the systems for MPs expenses are not open to abuse.

 

For this reason I think there do need to be some changes.  For a start they should reform the system so that they are no longer called expenses, because that causes confusion right from the beginning.  That reform should introduce more transparency and monitoring.

 

But I warn against taking it too far - because I think it undermines our democratic system, and falls into the trap of the fourth estate.  And I want to say it clearly here - the attitude of some towards elected politicians is designed to undermine them regardless of purpose - and that is dangerous.  We need to stand up to them and, as painful as it may be, display trust in our elected officials, and the office in which they reside and resist the temptation to join the rabble rousing crowds.

 

This is nothing new, but it used to be Communist agitators, or anarchists or fascists or any number of political persuasions.  Because these political factions no longer exist it's not felt that these people have a political agenda that they are pushing - therefore we should listen to them.

 

Instead - in this modern world the threats are apathy, the instant media and oppressive negative reporting (from citizens and media alike).  here's my reasoning:

 

If everything MPs spend is itemised, the level of scrutiny will be massive, and no newspaper will manage to resist the temptation to comment out of the ordinary.  This could be a large restaurant bill, or a hotel charge.  It is highly feasible we would start criticising MPs for staying in 5 star hotels or visiting restaurants we deem as "too nice".

 

But what we won't do is judge that expenditure against what is was supposed to achieve.  There will be no attempt to judge the expenditure against its results.  That dinner might have been with a company who's about to open a new factory in the MPs constituency worth lots of jobs.  The context for expenditure will be removed, and that could establish a very damaging method for judging and monitoring MPs.

 

Let's not forget we already have a very effective system for judging how effective MPs are - they are called elections.

 

now wouldn't that turn out to be interesting?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/jersey/7234516.stm

"Liverpool author Ken Pye investigates whether a Liverpool man murdered by his wife was, in fact, Jack the Ripper"

Daily Post 07.02.08

 

 

Ken's wife must be getting on a bit.......

 

I've met Ken a couple of times, and he is a really nice bloke - passionate about Liverpool and the Athenaeum club, (which I haven't joined yet, but one day....)

about bloody time!

This is extremely under-estimated - the nightmare of travelling by train between two major economic powerhouses.  It's the kind of situation that just wouldn't be allowed to happen in London!  And it's no good looking to the public sector to pay.

 

Are you seriously telling me that the revenue from permanently packed trains is not enough to pay for the very trains passengers are standing on?!?!?!

 

surely that's b*llsh*t!

Article here: http://www.manchesterconfidential.com/index.asp?sessionx=IpqiNw86IwfqJaqiNwF6IHqi

Told you.....

Told you it would come down to this, but would you listen.......

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7226069.stm

David Maclean is a very well respected member of the NW Conservatives, and a very nice man when I met - BUT he is also the guy who ran the campaign against the FOI Act being applied to MPs.  However I thought he had some good reasons for that, so I guess now we will see his true colours.

 

With the three MPs carrying out the review though.......  Danger level of nothing getting better..... extremely high

 

PS - absolutely love the photo of the Wintertons.......  must tell you about the time Sir Nicholas had had a glass of wine or two.......

 

Scally Scouse or Scouse Scally

My last post reminded me of an argument, sorry discussion, we had the other weekend - Can you have a Scouse Scally?

 

I said no, because you would use the word Scally in a specific place, so you wouldn't need to identify them - therefore the word scouse is redundant.  Much discussion ensued.....

 

Secretly, I'm just fed up of Scousers being labelled....

 

SH

Colleen's Real Scouse Accent

Meant to write about this last week, but I wanted to mention how fantastic Colleen's Real Women is.  Firstly, I think the concept is fantastic about challenging Model and Ad agencies' perception of "real" women and trying to get brands to use more realistic body figures to promote their goods.

 

Secondly, how completely won over by Colleen I was.  For all her coverage, etc. she is no polished, experienced media dahling - she looked positively scared shitless by the tall, attractive professional from Petty Polly in the first episode - they were polar opposites, both in terms of opportunities in life and how they had got where they were.  Everything about Colleen was genuine, even her mistakes, and she won my admiration for putting herself out there.

 

SH

At what price?

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a0344df0-d282-11dc-8636-0000779fd2ac.html

 

Huge investment in the science base of our country is very wel(l)come, but at what cost to the UK will such a huge investment from a single organisation mean to our national priorities.

The Wellcome Trust's decision to only fund a new synchrotron facility (DIAMOND) in the south-east practically killed Daresbury laboratories in 2000, despite the UK's knowledge base for this science being based in the labs near Warrington.  One of the D's in DIAMOND even stands for Daresbury.....

Now higher than proportional cuts are to be made at the site - supposedly one of the two bi-polar sites that are supposed to be the backbone of UK science.  And it will be the Daresbury site that suffers most....

This is an unconsciable attempt (again) to relocate all of the nation's science facilities to the South East.... and yet we are supposed to turn the UK's economy into a knowledge economy, when by definition only the South East will have any knowledge.

I think it is a disgusting sign of abandonment of the North. (I want to write more in the future about levers in the regions, which I think is the big differentiator between Labour and Tory economic policy). There should be an unwritten contract that if the region invests in the facility (which it has through the NWDA) then the national bodies have to come through with their side of the bargain.

Again they have failed and Wellcome's new investment is only going to make it harder to keep science here.

I don't like being doom and gloom, but without encouraging the ability of people in the north to create and invent, we will never become the economy we should....