Well, I got mine.
I also decided to email BBC Breakfast (as requested), but out of the couple (!) they probably got to pose to Minister Douglas Alexander, they managed about two. Nice one, BBC (and if anyone can tell me where the 'Your Comments' button on the homepage is to see if they were logged at least online, I'd be grateful).
I have popped in mine within the text of Mr. Blair's email to me:
The e-petition asking the Prime Minister to "Scrap the planned vehicle tracking and road pricing policy" has now closed. This is a response from the Prime Minister, Tony Blair.
Thank you for taking the time to register your views about road pricing on the Downing Street website.
This petition was posted shortly before we published the Eddington Study, an independent review of Britain's transport network. This study set out long-term challenges and options for our transport network.
It made clear that congestion is a major problem to which there is no easy answer. One aspect of the study was highlighting how road pricing could provide a solution to these problems and that advances in technology put these plans within our reach. Of course it would be ten years or more before any national scheme was technologically, never mind politically, feasible.
That is the backdrop to this issue. As my response makes clear, this is not about imposing "stealth taxes" or introducing "Big Brother" surveillance. This is a complex subject, which cannot be resolved without a thorough investigation of all the options, combined with a full and frank debate about the choices we face at a local and national level. That's why I hope this detailed response will address your concerns and set out how we intend to take this issue forward. I see this email as the beginning, not the end of the debate, and the links below provide an opportunity for you to take it further.
But let me be clear straight away: we have not made any decision about national road pricing. Indeed we are simply not yet in a position to do so. We are, for now, working with some local authorities that are interested in establishing local schemes to help address local congestion problems. Pricing is not being forced on any area, but any schemes would teach us more about how road pricing would work and inform decisions on a national scheme. And funds raised from these local schemes will be used to improve transport in those areas.
Qu: The claim is made that this is not a stealth tax. Without waffle and 'it will be looked into', what % of every £ will go from the tax directly to environmental-related improvements, how much to creating a whole new level of salaried and pensioned administrators, and how much to unspecified other government expenditures. With no guarantee or fair idea on the first we will assume the last two.
One thing I suspect we can all agree is that congestion is bad. It's bad for business because it disrupts the delivery of goods and services. It affects people's quality of life. And it is bad for the environment. That is why tackling congestion is a key priority for any Government.
Congestion is predicted to increase by 25% by 2015. This is being driven by economic prosperity. There are 6 million more vehicles on the road now than in 1997, and predictions are that this trend will continue.
Part of the solution is to improve public transport, and to make the most of the existing road network. We have more than doubled investment since 1997, spending £2.5 billion this year on buses and over £4 billion on trains - helping to explain why more people are using them than for decades. And we're committed to sustaining this investment, with over £140 billion of investment planned between now and 2015. We're also putting a great deal of effort into improving traffic flows - for example, over 1000 Highways Agency Traffic Officers now help to keep motorway traffic moving.
But all the evidence shows that improving public transport and tackling traffic bottlenecks will not by themselves prevent congestion getting worse. So we have a difficult choice to make about how we tackle the expected increase in congestion. This is a challenge that all political leaders have to face up to, and not just in the UK. For example, road pricing schemes are already in operation in Italy, Norway and Singapore, and others, such as the Netherlands, are developing schemes. Towns and cities across the world are looking at road pricing as a means of addressing congestion.
One option would be to allow congestion to grow unchecked. Given the forecast growth in traffic, doing nothing would mean that journeys within and between cities would take longer, and be less reliable. I think that would be bad for businesses, individuals and the environment. And the costs on us all will be real - congestion could cost an extra £22 billion in wasted time in England by 2025, of which £10-12 billion would be the direct cost on businesses.
A second option would be to try to build our way out of congestion. We could, of course, add new lanes to our motorways, widen roads in our congested city centres, and build new routes across the countryside. Certainly in some places new capacity will be part of the story. That is why we are widening the M25, M1 and M62. But I think people agree that we cannot simply build more and more roads, particularly when the evidence suggests that traffic quickly grows to fill any new capacity.
Tackling congestion in this way would also be extremely costly, requiring substantial sums to be diverted from other services such as education and health, or increases in taxes. If I tell you that one mile of new motorway costs as much as £30m, you'll have an idea of the sums this approach would entail.
That is why I believe that at least we need to explore the contribution road pricing can make to tackling congestion. It would not be in anyone's interests, especially those of motorists, to slam the door shut on road pricing without exploring it further.
It has been calculated that a national scheme - as part of a wider package of measures - could cut congestion significantly through small changes in our overall travel patterns. But any technology used would have to give definite guarantees about privacy being protected - as it should be. Existing technologies, such as mobile phones and pay-as-you-drive insurance schemes, may well be able to play a role here, by ensuring that the Government doesn't hold information about where vehicles have been. But there may also be opportunities presented by developments in new technology. Just as new medical technology is changing the NHS, so there will be changes in the transport sector. Our aim is to relieve traffic jams, not create a "Big Brother" society.
Qu: The other night on Newsnight, Stephen Ladyman claimed 2 to 3 methods for charging an individual vehicle traveling, one presumes, from A to B, without needing to track its location. How, exactly, do you monitor and charge something accurately without knowing where it was, is and how it got there?
I know many people's biggest worry about road pricing is that it will be a "stealth tax" on motorists. It won't. Road pricing is about tackling congestion.
Clearly if we decided to move towards a system of national road pricing, there could be a case for moving away from the current system of motoring taxation. This could mean that those who use their car less, or can travel at less congested times, in less congested areas, for example in rural areas, would benefit from lower motoring costs overall. Those who travel longer distances at peak times and in more congested areas would pay more. But those are decisions for the future. At this stage, when no firm decision has been taken as to whether we will move towards a national scheme, stories about possible costs are simply not credible, since they depend on so many variables yet to be investigated, never mind decided.
Before we take any decisions about a national pricing scheme, we know that we have to have a system that works. A system that respects our privacy as individuals. A system that is fair. I fully accept that we don't have all the answers yet. That is why we are not rushing headlong into a national road pricing scheme. Before we take any decisions there would be further consultations. The public will, of course, have their say, as will Parliament.
Qu: What substantive consideration will be given to the situation and needs of those in non-urban (the bits outside Westminster, Islington, Fleet Street, Canary Wharf, where the BBC lives and Ken pedals to work) areas that are fair?
We want to continue this debate, so that we can build a consensus around the best way to reduce congestion, protect the environment and support our businesses. If you want to find out more, please visit the attached links to more detailed information, and which also give opportunities to engage in further debate.
Yours sincerely,
Tony Blair
Further information
Both the 10 Downing Street and Department for Transport websites offer much more information about road pricing.
This includes a range of independent viewpoints, both for and against.
Qu: How were these selected? For instance how is Transport 2000 considered truly representative of the environmental movement? Why are they the only activist group ever featured?
You can also read the Eddington Report in full.
You can reply to this email by posting a question to Roads Minister Dr. Stephen Ladyman in a webchat on the No 10 website this Thursday.
Qu: How does Dr. Ladyman propose to answer questions from 1.6M people in tomorrow's webchat?
Will the questions be vetted to provide the best set of answers to suit an established agenda?
If so, and in the absence one presumes of dissenting sides being able to put their case(s) in the same way as the No 10 email, how is this anything like sensible debate, or simply further propaganda?
There will be further opportunities in the coming months to get involved in the debate. You will receive one final e-mail from Downing Street to update you in due course.
If you would like to opt out of receiving further mail on this or any other petitions you signed, please email optout@petitions.pm.gov.uk
BBC - Could pay-as-you-drive work?
BBC - PM denies road toll 'stealth tax'
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
We're listening. And then we're selecting what we want to hear.
It is not just politicians.
'Today on Breakfast TV, Declan Curry advised that Andy Bond of ASDA would be there to answer questions.
What I submitted was one of those responses featured, but only the preamble and not the question.
Preamble: Supermarkets are improving a lot environmentally. But most initiatives seem to still be either self-serving (alternative energy reduces fuel bills, which is great, but helps the bottom line mainly), or a response to official pressure (recycling is great to provide and meets targets, but still throws the onus on consumers to do the work and dispose of waste).
Question: What is planned to help consumers with reuse, from ways to make more of existing packaging design, to encouraging new designs and stimulating ideas that can find life beyond the additional energy consumption of recycling or, worse, the bin and landfill?
In fact most of what was covered from the public on this topic was more opinion - 'We love your store!' - than questions.
If you ask for questions, I expect the questions to be asked, not the out-of-context, and often more contentious (or hardly newsworthy or troubling to the guest) editted sections.'
He answered.
Is it just me or did he come off a tad defensive? Of course I had to reply:
Dear Declan,
Your question arrived AFTER the interview with Mr Bond. He was here to
answer questions at 0645 and 0745 this morning.
It may have arrived with you after 0745, but it was sent at - 21 February 2007 07:29:39 GMT, and in immediate response to your on-air request to pose questions to him.
If this is a problem, maybe it would help in future at this final 25% of slot run-down period, to clarify that no further questions will be posed on air?
As I thought you made an interesting point nonetheless,
Thank you. And it is true that I have a concern a lot of CSR coverage is on issues that look and indeed are often green...er, but actually serve the consumer less than the business' PR and bottom line.
I decided to include your email in my brief round up of comments at 0825.
Thank you.
The emphasis here is on the word brief. That slot was 60 seconds long, and I
needed to include around 6-8 remarks, so your comment had to be subbed
down because it was, frankly, much too long. But I think I captured the
essence of it.
I appreciate the need to edit for time, but agenda comes into play.
The first section was not a question, but established context.
Re:use was the question, which as opposed to commentary was what was asked for, and was identified by a question mark.
It is a small, but significant aspect of environmental good practice, barely addressed by anyone. A shame, because along with repair it can be the most personally rewarding and likely to get consumers and the general public on board.
Recycling, via government, local authorities, some very comfy contractors and various quangos and their comms budgets gets massive attention and support. But it is low down the re:hierarchy. And getting people to stand at the sink each night as unpaid sorters is not exactly rewarding. Nor is it that carbon neutral as it does require energy to collect and process. Biodegradability of packaging is also often mooted, but I do wonder what the by-products of biodegrading are, in a more immediate global warming gas sense. Reduction is best, but there's a lot of 'looking at' but not much I can see by way of 'doing'.
My reason for writing was because I was disappointed that the editorial preference was more for a commented negative, though constructive criticism (if valid, and nothing new), as opposed to a posed positive question that could have opened up new and worthwhile ways to improve matters.
I'd be interested in how you view news editors', and the BBC as a public service's responsibilities and duties in the way such issues get portrayed. Stir the pot and add spice? Or try and make it acceptable to all tastes at the table, and in so doing bring them closer together?
There wasn't much point in asking the specific question as the man
himself wasn't there any more. I had said many times when the interviews
would take place.
In light of the discrepancy between what I thought I heard and acted upon, and what you think you said and happened, this aspect is moot until we have access to a time-indexed transcript, so I will for now refrain from addressing it further. If I am wrong I will of course apologise.
The comments at 0825 reflected the balance of opinion that arrived in
our mailbox between the end of the previous business update and the
start of that one.
Repeat. In light of the discrepancy between what I thought I heard and acted upon, and what you think you said and happened, this aspect is moot until we have access to a time-indexed transcript, so I will for now refrain from addressing it further. If I am wrong I will of course apologise.
You may not like it that Asda has satisfied customers, but they're every bit as valid as the supermarket's critics.
I am unsure as to where I expressed any such view, and so do still wonder how what was read out counts as a question, as opposed to what was not. Maybe you would be kind enough to clarify? [Still waiting]
Round 3...?
STOP PRESS - Just heard back from Breakfast to thank me for my original post.
Time: 21 February 2007 14:09:29 GMT. Bless.
24 Feb - A reply from the BBC:
Thank you for your e-mail regarding the 21 February edition of 'Breakfast'.
I understand that you were unhappy that your extensive question on supermarkets and the environment was not featured in its entirety. I also note that you feel that the questions sent in were edited to make them easier for the ASDA representative, Andy Bond.
However, I can assure you that there is absolutely no intention to edit feedback from 'Breakfast' viewers to make life easier for guests like Andy Bond. The BBC does not seek to denigrate any view, nor to promote any view. It seeks rather to identify all significant views, and to test them rigorously and fairly on behalf of the audience. However, it is not feasible to include every message or question sent in by 'Breakfast' viewers on the programme itself.
Further information on the programme and means of discussing the issues covered is available on the following webpage:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/programmes/breakfast/default.stm
Please be assured that your comments have been registered on our daily log for the attention of the 'Breakfast' production team and BBC Senior Management.
Thank you again for taking the time to contact us.
____________
I am drafting my reply, which will be self-explanatory:
Thank you for your reply. It can be no fun having to catch up with such issues at the weekend.
I understand that you were unhappy...
Mr. Curry also made the point that it was too long, though you have done so more charmingly. However I do not recall suggesting at any point that I was upset that it was not featured in its entirety.
I also note that you feel ...
In fact, I think you will note that the reason for my complaint was the exact reverse. I was dissatisfied that the question, which was what was asked for, did not get posed, and the preamble, which was merely an opinion and entirely deletable, was. Also the question was an opportunity for a positive engagement and response by Mr. Bond. The opinion was negative, and that was what was chosen, which if different from editing the distinction will need to be further explained to me.
However, I can assure you ...
I note your assurance. Were all news media so free of subjective influence or ratings driven agenda.
However, it is not feasible ...
And I fully understand this constraint. Hence the need to ensure what is asked for is what gets broadcast in good faith.
Please be assured ...
I note this assurance, but would like to ask what happens next as I do not feel my complaint has been understood properly, which may explain my view on the adequacy of the reply.
I have had occasion to write before, and so far have noticed the procedure does seem to follow a certain path, and one that leads fairly quickly to a dead end. Which begs the questions as to why it exist at all. I will reply to this, but am sure will get a bounce instructing me to return to the start of the complaint procedure again, which raises questions on the structure and sincerity of the dialogue system.
Thank you again ...
You are welcome. It is good to know that a complaint is valued, especially if constructive and in the spirit of improvement. Because it shows the person who made it cares enough to take the time to offer such feedback. And not all have their time funded to do so.
I therefore look forward to seeing how this may be progressed and the answers I sought before, and the new answers I seek may be delivered.
So. Most questions ignored or points denied. Explanations just plain wrong or inadequate. The state of our publicly-funded media today. Round 3???
Bingo! - 'We are sorry but our email system will not receive your email unless you use one of our pre-formatted webforms. We realise the inconvenience but hope you will understand that this helps us handle the many emails we receive every day more efficiently and makes best use of your licence fee. '
How does me not being able to reply directly to the person who wrote to me make this... more efficient?
Indy - Ads on BBC websites
ADDENDUM:
11 April - Again on the 'Declan does Big Biz' Commercials show', we had a full piece, with commercial, followed by a fawning slot with ASDA's boss about their changing their strapline. Who are the BBC trying to kid?
'Today on Breakfast TV, Declan Curry advised that Andy Bond of ASDA would be there to answer questions.
What I submitted was one of those responses featured, but only the preamble and not the question.
Preamble: Supermarkets are improving a lot environmentally. But most initiatives seem to still be either self-serving (alternative energy reduces fuel bills, which is great, but helps the bottom line mainly), or a response to official pressure (recycling is great to provide and meets targets, but still throws the onus on consumers to do the work and dispose of waste).
Question: What is planned to help consumers with reuse, from ways to make more of existing packaging design, to encouraging new designs and stimulating ideas that can find life beyond the additional energy consumption of recycling or, worse, the bin and landfill?
In fact most of what was covered from the public on this topic was more opinion - 'We love your store!' - than questions.
If you ask for questions, I expect the questions to be asked, not the out-of-context, and often more contentious (or hardly newsworthy or troubling to the guest) editted sections.'
He answered.
Is it just me or did he come off a tad defensive? Of course I had to reply:
Dear Declan,
Your question arrived AFTER the interview with Mr Bond. He was here to
answer questions at 0645 and 0745 this morning.
It may have arrived with you after 0745, but it was sent at - 21 February 2007 07:29:39 GMT, and in immediate response to your on-air request to pose questions to him.
If this is a problem, maybe it would help in future at this final 25% of slot run-down period, to clarify that no further questions will be posed on air?
As I thought you made an interesting point nonetheless,
Thank you. And it is true that I have a concern a lot of CSR coverage is on issues that look and indeed are often green...er, but actually serve the consumer less than the business' PR and bottom line.
I decided to include your email in my brief round up of comments at 0825.
Thank you.
The emphasis here is on the word brief. That slot was 60 seconds long, and I
needed to include around 6-8 remarks, so your comment had to be subbed
down because it was, frankly, much too long. But I think I captured the
essence of it.
I appreciate the need to edit for time, but agenda comes into play.
The first section was not a question, but established context.
Re:use was the question, which as opposed to commentary was what was asked for, and was identified by a question mark.
It is a small, but significant aspect of environmental good practice, barely addressed by anyone. A shame, because along with repair it can be the most personally rewarding and likely to get consumers and the general public on board.
Recycling, via government, local authorities, some very comfy contractors and various quangos and their comms budgets gets massive attention and support. But it is low down the re:hierarchy. And getting people to stand at the sink each night as unpaid sorters is not exactly rewarding. Nor is it that carbon neutral as it does require energy to collect and process. Biodegradability of packaging is also often mooted, but I do wonder what the by-products of biodegrading are, in a more immediate global warming gas sense. Reduction is best, but there's a lot of 'looking at' but not much I can see by way of 'doing'.
My reason for writing was because I was disappointed that the editorial preference was more for a commented negative, though constructive criticism (if valid, and nothing new), as opposed to a posed positive question that could have opened up new and worthwhile ways to improve matters.
I'd be interested in how you view news editors', and the BBC as a public service's responsibilities and duties in the way such issues get portrayed. Stir the pot and add spice? Or try and make it acceptable to all tastes at the table, and in so doing bring them closer together?
There wasn't much point in asking the specific question as the man
himself wasn't there any more. I had said many times when the interviews
would take place.
In light of the discrepancy between what I thought I heard and acted upon, and what you think you said and happened, this aspect is moot until we have access to a time-indexed transcript, so I will for now refrain from addressing it further. If I am wrong I will of course apologise.
The comments at 0825 reflected the balance of opinion that arrived in
our mailbox between the end of the previous business update and the
start of that one.
Repeat. In light of the discrepancy between what I thought I heard and acted upon, and what you think you said and happened, this aspect is moot until we have access to a time-indexed transcript, so I will for now refrain from addressing it further. If I am wrong I will of course apologise.
You may not like it that Asda has satisfied customers, but they're every bit as valid as the supermarket's critics.
I am unsure as to where I expressed any such view, and so do still wonder how what was read out counts as a question, as opposed to what was not. Maybe you would be kind enough to clarify? [Still waiting]
Round 3...?
STOP PRESS - Just heard back from Breakfast to thank me for my original post.
Time: 21 February 2007 14:09:29 GMT. Bless.
24 Feb - A reply from the BBC:
Thank you for your e-mail regarding the 21 February edition of 'Breakfast'.
I understand that you were unhappy that your extensive question on supermarkets and the environment was not featured in its entirety. I also note that you feel that the questions sent in were edited to make them easier for the ASDA representative, Andy Bond.
However, I can assure you that there is absolutely no intention to edit feedback from 'Breakfast' viewers to make life easier for guests like Andy Bond. The BBC does not seek to denigrate any view, nor to promote any view. It seeks rather to identify all significant views, and to test them rigorously and fairly on behalf of the audience. However, it is not feasible to include every message or question sent in by 'Breakfast' viewers on the programme itself.
Further information on the programme and means of discussing the issues covered is available on the following webpage:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/programmes/breakfast/default.stm
Please be assured that your comments have been registered on our daily log for the attention of the 'Breakfast' production team and BBC Senior Management.
Thank you again for taking the time to contact us.
____________
I am drafting my reply, which will be self-explanatory:
Thank you for your reply. It can be no fun having to catch up with such issues at the weekend.
I understand that you were unhappy...
Mr. Curry also made the point that it was too long, though you have done so more charmingly. However I do not recall suggesting at any point that I was upset that it was not featured in its entirety.
I also note that you feel ...
In fact, I think you will note that the reason for my complaint was the exact reverse. I was dissatisfied that the question, which was what was asked for, did not get posed, and the preamble, which was merely an opinion and entirely deletable, was. Also the question was an opportunity for a positive engagement and response by Mr. Bond. The opinion was negative, and that was what was chosen, which if different from editing the distinction will need to be further explained to me.
However, I can assure you ...
I note your assurance. Were all news media so free of subjective influence or ratings driven agenda.
However, it is not feasible ...
And I fully understand this constraint. Hence the need to ensure what is asked for is what gets broadcast in good faith.
Please be assured ...
I note this assurance, but would like to ask what happens next as I do not feel my complaint has been understood properly, which may explain my view on the adequacy of the reply.
I have had occasion to write before, and so far have noticed the procedure does seem to follow a certain path, and one that leads fairly quickly to a dead end. Which begs the questions as to why it exist at all. I will reply to this, but am sure will get a bounce instructing me to return to the start of the complaint procedure again, which raises questions on the structure and sincerity of the dialogue system.
Thank you again ...
You are welcome. It is good to know that a complaint is valued, especially if constructive and in the spirit of improvement. Because it shows the person who made it cares enough to take the time to offer such feedback. And not all have their time funded to do so.
I therefore look forward to seeing how this may be progressed and the answers I sought before, and the new answers I seek may be delivered.
So. Most questions ignored or points denied. Explanations just plain wrong or inadequate. The state of our publicly-funded media today. Round 3???
Bingo! - 'We are sorry but our email system will not receive your email unless you use one of our pre-formatted webforms. We realise the inconvenience but hope you will understand that this helps us handle the many emails we receive every day more efficiently and makes best use of your licence fee. '
How does me not being able to reply directly to the person who wrote to me make this... more efficient?
Indy - Ads on BBC websites
ADDENDUM:
11 April - Again on the 'Declan does Big Biz' Commercials show', we had a full piece, with commercial, followed by a fawning slot with ASDA's boss about their changing their strapline. Who are the BBC trying to kid?
It's not just the wind that can blow
I am an ad man at heart. I like to persuade subtly and make people want to act. And I like to see it done fairly, accurately and legally.
When it's not, I think it pushes the cause of cooperative environmental good practice backwards.
When it's not, I think it pushes the cause of cooperative environmental good practice backwards.
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
Melee Media
Is motoring the new smoking?
'I very much doubt anyone will get this far, so I'll invest a few moments just to purge myself from the whole sorry state of debate, the media and government these days, having at last watched the spectacle of last night's show.
At least we didn't have the usual 'twofer', with two totally antagonistic pit bulls from extreme ends of the spectrum thrown in to simplistically represent both sides of the argument. This time we had a good half dozen. The smug government pol who has realised he can say or deny anything he likes (did he or did he not say what the Sun guy says he is on record as saying? I'm afraid the interviewer wasn't up to establishing that. Or the 2 or 3 ways you can track someone, and charge them for moving, from A to B without needing to know where they are. That just didn't make sense). The laddish 'media of the people person' who doesn't seem to care about the environment, but did at least try to drag the debate out of London... a bit. The posh lady who actually didn't do too bad a job of explaining why it pretty much sucks using public transport in every way possible, from cost to the state of the things. There was indeed no Tory, but after their rep's performance on Sky's news t'other night I can see why. Then a Lib Dem that was for but against. A shrill activist who has moved to live in London and now does not need a car, and cycles everywhere, doubtless with her kids in the pannier even when it's mid-winter. And some guy from the CBI who seemed to see money in the whole thing so that's OK. And all they did was bicker over each other. Melee media.
The only guy who seem quite calm and reasoned was the petition organiser.
What a zoo. What a farce. The only entity to gain was Newsnight's ratings, because almost none came out well, I certainly didn't learn anything much I didn't know, and I don't see this issue getting sorted or the planet getting better any time soon.
Oh, and if I hear one more politician tell me I don't know my own mind in the same breath as saying they want to persuade me on anything, I shall laugh myself silly.
The reservoir of trust is blown. Nothing that's said is believed. And if the notion the only solution is to push in such cases, all that happens is there is a greater push back.'
Telegraph - Pay as you drive is a dead end for Labour - Well done guys. You killed it better from within than any enemy could have done.
Telegraph - How road pricing could be used to hammer the 'gas guzzlers' - If you shout loud enough about listening, may people will shut up and do what you want
Daily Mirror - TOLL TAX: HAMMOND GRILLS THE PM - actually a few interesting snippets
'I very much doubt anyone will get this far, so I'll invest a few moments just to purge myself from the whole sorry state of debate, the media and government these days, having at last watched the spectacle of last night's show.
At least we didn't have the usual 'twofer', with two totally antagonistic pit bulls from extreme ends of the spectrum thrown in to simplistically represent both sides of the argument. This time we had a good half dozen. The smug government pol who has realised he can say or deny anything he likes (did he or did he not say what the Sun guy says he is on record as saying? I'm afraid the interviewer wasn't up to establishing that. Or the 2 or 3 ways you can track someone, and charge them for moving, from A to B without needing to know where they are. That just didn't make sense). The laddish 'media of the people person' who doesn't seem to care about the environment, but did at least try to drag the debate out of London... a bit. The posh lady who actually didn't do too bad a job of explaining why it pretty much sucks using public transport in every way possible, from cost to the state of the things. There was indeed no Tory, but after their rep's performance on Sky's news t'other night I can see why. Then a Lib Dem that was for but against. A shrill activist who has moved to live in London and now does not need a car, and cycles everywhere, doubtless with her kids in the pannier even when it's mid-winter. And some guy from the CBI who seemed to see money in the whole thing so that's OK. And all they did was bicker over each other. Melee media.
The only guy who seem quite calm and reasoned was the petition organiser.
What a zoo. What a farce. The only entity to gain was Newsnight's ratings, because almost none came out well, I certainly didn't learn anything much I didn't know, and I don't see this issue getting sorted or the planet getting better any time soon.
Oh, and if I hear one more politician tell me I don't know my own mind in the same breath as saying they want to persuade me on anything, I shall laugh myself silly.
The reservoir of trust is blown. Nothing that's said is believed. And if the notion the only solution is to push in such cases, all that happens is there is a greater push back.'
Telegraph - Pay as you drive is a dead end for Labour - Well done guys. You killed it better from within than any enemy could have done.
Telegraph - How road pricing could be used to hammer the 'gas guzzlers' - If you shout loud enough about listening, may people will shut up and do what you want
Daily Mirror - TOLL TAX: HAMMOND GRILLS THE PM - actually a few interesting snippets
As featured in AmericanInventor.com
A small, but perhaps significant milestone in the development of Junkk.com has occurred today.
As a consequence of a relationship stemming from the British Inventor Show, I was invited to write as a guest blogger for a US-based website called AmericanInventor.com.
And today my first post has been published.
If they and their audience like my style, and I can find the time, we are hoping that I will soon be moved to Featured Blogger, which carries many more promotional opportunities for Junkk.com along with it.
Fingers Crossed!
As a consequence of a relationship stemming from the British Inventor Show, I was invited to write as a guest blogger for a US-based website called AmericanInventor.com.
And today my first post has been published.
If they and their audience like my style, and I can find the time, we are hoping that I will soon be moved to Featured Blogger, which carries many more promotional opportunities for Junkk.com along with it.
Fingers Crossed!
Bin & Gone
I am again indebted to Dave of Solarventi for sending me a piece to twitch the eyebrows: One Bin Day
Like WRAP and all those other fine, funded (sorry, I originally wrote fine-funded, which would not do at all) entities that use our tax-£'s so efficiently, I always look forward to the next stunning initiative that will soar without trace in the communications sector.
You, dear reader, doubtless have heard all about this. I must confess that without Dave I would not have. And if there are more like me that makes two folk who will now be moving to the centre of the room on just this one day and thinking hard on all the money the got blown on meetings with agencies, PR's, etc to come up with this and promote it.
Money well spent, I am sure.
If I can be bothered, I may go back to see how many people did upload pictures of themselves doing it. Maybe I will!
As as I do ponder whether funds and comms efforts have gone somewhere to help save the planet more tangibly.
Like WRAP and all those other fine, funded (sorry, I originally wrote fine-funded, which would not do at all) entities that use our tax-£'s so efficiently, I always look forward to the next stunning initiative that will soar without trace in the communications sector.
You, dear reader, doubtless have heard all about this. I must confess that without Dave I would not have. And if there are more like me that makes two folk who will now be moving to the centre of the room on just this one day and thinking hard on all the money the got blown on meetings with agencies, PR's, etc to come up with this and promote it.
Money well spent, I am sure.
If I can be bothered, I may go back to see how many people did upload pictures of themselves doing it. Maybe I will!
As as I do ponder whether funds and comms efforts have gone somewhere to help save the planet more tangibly.
The truth hurts. No pain.. no..anything
Are honest comments always the best policy?
Well, they can be pretty much fatal, career-wise, in politics.
Which seems to be why no one from Westminster says anything
worth paying attention to any more.
And the media is complicit. 'Ask, don't tell' seems to be the way to
conduct the merry-go-round these days.
Shame it's no way to run an effective country.
Well, they can be pretty much fatal, career-wise, in politics.
Which seems to be why no one from Westminster says anything
worth paying attention to any more.
And the media is complicit. 'Ask, don't tell' seems to be the way to
conduct the merry-go-round these days.
Shame it's no way to run an effective country.
Cross of Ross rides... er.. again (if not in a bus)
Who pays for free rides?
Can't win, can you?
If it's anything like this neck 'o the woods, free public travel would just
let 'em save up enough to get a G-reg 205 with more spent on the
sound system & exhaust than the brakes, to rush around leaving
floral decorations on county lamp-posts.
Meanwhile no one under or over a certain age is going to dare getting
on board public transport in the meantime
SOMETHING MUST BE DONE!
Here's the solution: road pricing. That'll sort it.
Or not.
Can't win, can you?
If it's anything like this neck 'o the woods, free public travel would just
let 'em save up enough to get a G-reg 205 with more spent on the
sound system & exhaust than the brakes, to rush around leaving
floral decorations on county lamp-posts.
Meanwhile no one under or over a certain age is going to dare getting
on board public transport in the meantime
SOMETHING MUST BE DONE!
Here's the solution: road pricing. That'll sort it.
Or not.
It's not who you know, but who owns you
A free market solution to global warming
We could aways pay lots in taxes for folk to see if sending a few
trillion mirrors into space to reflect the sun would help.
Or spray sea water in to the atmosphere.
Or some slightly more pragmatic solutions out there, but most of which
have rather coy enviro-ROI's attached. A bit like many carbon trading
schemes.
Trouble is, once singed, twice shy. And with public trust in government,
business and even a large chunk of the eco-community and media at
an all-time low, saving the plant is getting to be a tough sell.
But I'm sure Al's concert will set a good example.
We could aways pay lots in taxes for folk to see if sending a few
trillion mirrors into space to reflect the sun would help.
Or spray sea water in to the atmosphere.
Or some slightly more pragmatic solutions out there, but most of which
have rather coy enviro-ROI's attached. A bit like many carbon trading
schemes.
Trouble is, once singed, twice shy. And with public trust in government,
business and even a large chunk of the eco-community and media at
an all-time low, saving the plant is getting to be a tough sell.
But I'm sure Al's concert will set a good example.
When Scientists agree on anything it's worth noting
I so note.
Scientists unite to push Bush on climate
I also note almost all the anti-bloggers seem to be up very early.
Scientists unite to push Bush on climate
I also note almost all the anti-bloggers seem to be up very early.
And on the 6th way...
Last night I watched a programme (trailed in this very blog), called 5 Ways to save the world
To its credit, at the very end they did mention that not umping the stuff out at the prodigious rate we are would be a better bet, but that doesn't make such good TV. So we were treated to an hour of solutions.
I have to say, all bar one seemed barking mad.
Here's what the Grauniad had to say, and that was all I could find.
It's a shame that space was devoted to the inevitable swipe at Jeremy Clarkson, who will swipe back... yadayada.
Only one made any sense to me, and that was a CO2 collecting tower. Though even here there were a few details that had me wondering. For instance, they were shown in huge farms. Now if I remember my Physics, if you suck it out of one part, you're going to struggle to suck it out of the next, so efficiencies will plummet in concentration.
I'm also niggling a bit on us sticking our manmade oar in again. Who knows what we can muck up with any localised, if massive 'correction'. Like climate Rabbits & Myxomatosis. Hence the other ideas were real no starters by trying to solve one thing with another. At least this was about sucking back what we have stuck up there.
To its credit, at the very end they did mention that not umping the stuff out at the prodigious rate we are would be a better bet, but that doesn't make such good TV. So we were treated to an hour of solutions.
I have to say, all bar one seemed barking mad.
Here's what the Grauniad had to say, and that was all I could find.
It's a shame that space was devoted to the inevitable swipe at Jeremy Clarkson, who will swipe back... yadayada.
Only one made any sense to me, and that was a CO2 collecting tower. Though even here there were a few details that had me wondering. For instance, they were shown in huge farms. Now if I remember my Physics, if you suck it out of one part, you're going to struggle to suck it out of the next, so efficiencies will plummet in concentration.
I'm also niggling a bit on us sticking our manmade oar in again. Who knows what we can muck up with any localised, if massive 'correction'. Like climate Rabbits & Myxomatosis. Hence the other ideas were real no starters by trying to solve one thing with another. At least this was about sucking back what we have stuck up there.
1.6M can be wrong. Apparently
Minister resolute on road tolls
The government will win over critics of its road-toll scheme before plans go through parliament, Transport Minister Stephen Ladyman has insisted.
Not this government with this critic, matey.
BBC - Road charges may be in south only - There's nice. Seems fair... if you live in the North
Times - Make a start on road pricing or lose out on £1.4bn, councils told - If at first you don't get your way...
The government will win over critics of its road-toll scheme before plans go through parliament, Transport Minister Stephen Ladyman has insisted.
Not this government with this critic, matey.
BBC - Road charges may be in south only - There's nice. Seems fair... if you live in the North
Times - Make a start on road pricing or lose out on £1.4bn, councils told - If at first you don't get your way...
How to make friends. And influential people.
Nominate Britain's most influential unelected people
Is Germaine Greer British?
Is Germaine Greer British?
A few pages over she seemed to be Australian.
And as we are on definitions, what counts as 'influential'? Doing Something? Inspiring others to do something?
Or just being enough to fill a few pointless column inches and broadcast minutes for your luvvie mates in the London media?
Is Germaine Greer British?
A few pages over she seemed to be Australian.
And as we are on definitions, what counts as 'influential'? Doing Something? Inspiring others to do something?
Or just being enough to fill a few pointless column inches and broadcast minutes for your luvvie mates in the London media?
Is Germaine Greer British?
Is Germaine Greer British?
A few pages over she seemed to be Australian.
And as we are on definitions, what counts as 'influential'? Doing Something? Inspiring others to do something?
Or just being enough to fill a few pointless column inches and broadcast minutes for your luvvie mates in the London media?
Is Germaine Greer British?
A few pages over she seemed to be Australian.
And as we are on definitions, what counts as 'influential'? Doing Something? Inspiring others to do something?
Or just being enough to fill a few pointless column inches and broadcast minutes for your luvvie mates in the London media?
In-ter-esting, but stupid
Here's one I hadn't thought of. Let's see the spinmeisters tackle this one:
Labour's poll tax
Just saw my abbreviation label for Congestion Charge. Seems apt.
National road pricing? No way
I am glad to see at least one London-based commentator accepting that life may be a bit different outside the Islington-Westminster-Fleet St (ok, it should also include Canary Wharf and wherever the BBC and Ken live, but that's a hexagon too far) triangle.
Speaking of our fair capital, I was amused that one another of this sites fair pages it has been pointed out the the denizens of Kensington & Chelsea can now swan about in their Cayennes to work, or indeed all day long, at very fair rates. Bless.
Political play and road pricing
There is no doubt that the government is badly wrong-footed on this. Equally, all who are less than on their side smell blood and opportunity. Shame it seems to be for self-promotion at the expense of anything like a positive solution. Because one thing is for sure, even if we (well, 1.6M misguided fools so far, who are to be put straight soon by Don Tony) don't fancy the way this one was pitched, something to fairly manage transport UK-wide IS needed.
I believed I watched Mr. Penning on SKY news last night exchange waffle swipes 'n snipes with a Scots Lib Dem MP (Lab talking head a tad absent), but when challenged to offer an alternative managed 'it should be looked at'.
Criticise for sure, but if you can't manage a coherent policy by way of an answer mate, you won't get my vote.
Guardian - Con Charge - Good a place as any
Guardian - Congestion zone could fuel voter revolt against Livingstone
Times - Smooth start as London’s zone spreads westwards - Myabe it's all OK, yah.
Times - ‘I will now be driving my grandchildren about’ - So it's all about congestion then?
Labour's poll tax
Just saw my abbreviation label for Congestion Charge. Seems apt.
National road pricing? No way
I am glad to see at least one London-based commentator accepting that life may be a bit different outside the Islington-Westminster-Fleet St (ok, it should also include Canary Wharf and wherever the BBC and Ken live, but that's a hexagon too far) triangle.
Speaking of our fair capital, I was amused that one another of this sites fair pages it has been pointed out the the denizens of Kensington & Chelsea can now swan about in their Cayennes to work, or indeed all day long, at very fair rates. Bless.
Political play and road pricing
There is no doubt that the government is badly wrong-footed on this. Equally, all who are less than on their side smell blood and opportunity. Shame it seems to be for self-promotion at the expense of anything like a positive solution. Because one thing is for sure, even if we (well, 1.6M misguided fools so far, who are to be put straight soon by Don Tony) don't fancy the way this one was pitched, something to fairly manage transport UK-wide IS needed.
I believed I watched Mr. Penning on SKY news last night exchange waffle swipes 'n snipes with a Scots Lib Dem MP (Lab talking head a tad absent), but when challenged to offer an alternative managed 'it should be looked at'.
Criticise for sure, but if you can't manage a coherent policy by way of an answer mate, you won't get my vote.
Guardian - Con Charge - Good a place as any
Guardian - Congestion zone could fuel voter revolt against Livingstone
Times - Smooth start as London’s zone spreads westwards - Myabe it's all OK, yah.
Times - ‘I will now be driving my grandchildren about’ - So it's all about congestion then?
Monday, February 19, 2007
Carbon Legacy - It's alive I tell you... alive!
Yippeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee! Someone in there likes me (well, didn't see a problem with my petition):
Your petition has been approved by the Number 10 web team, and
is now available on the Number 10 website at the following
address:
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Carbonlegacy/
Your petition reads:
We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to enable the
creation of a ‘Carbon Legacy’, as a direct, future
generation-benefiting substitute for Inheritance Tax
IHT debate boils down into 2 main areas. Individuals get
frustrated perceiving a major % of savings go not to securing
descendant’s futures, but to fund much that is... wasteful. To
Govt IHT is an historical plum too good to be denied, justified
by wealth being redistributed ‘for the common good’. Climate
change is accepted by a majority as the most serious issue we
face. Carbon Legacy is a fruitful compromise between entrenched
positions, which remain deadlocked. A no middleman bequest,
down to the IHT limit, donated to any initiative that is proven
to be tangibly DOING something to improve matters on a
measurable e-ROI, free from all but the most crucial
instruments of management/oversight. No ‘redirection’! Funds
straight to where most needed, to do the most good for the
future. Some devils in the detail, but doable with consensus.
In so doing it must surely satisfy both the needs and
aspirations of all sides.
Thanks for submitting your petition.
Now, if a lot of you would so good as to sign it, I, my kids and the rest (ok, most. Well, a lot , I'm sure) of the country's future generations will thank you.
Guardian - Let's get back on tax
If you can't take it with you, you don't want it to be squandered and you do want it to make the world a better place and of direct benefit for your ancestors, may I suggest: http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Carbonlegacy/
BBC - More homes 'face inheritance tax'
Mugging the over-75s
You can't take it with you. But they don't get it. Future generations benefit.
Have I missed anything?
Telegraph - Trifling with protest
In the spirit of wanting it all ways, I have to concede that you should be able to have any petition you want, lest there be accusations of moderation (which is cute on a moderated blog).
However, in the great info overload scheme of things, part of me rather likes a bit of wood trimming to see the odd, worthy, tree
Your petition has been approved by the Number 10 web team, and
is now available on the Number 10 website at the following
address:
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Carbonlegacy/
Your petition reads:
We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to enable the
creation of a ‘Carbon Legacy’, as a direct, future
generation-benefiting substitute for Inheritance Tax
IHT debate boils down into 2 main areas. Individuals get
frustrated perceiving a major % of savings go not to securing
descendant’s futures, but to fund much that is... wasteful. To
Govt IHT is an historical plum too good to be denied, justified
by wealth being redistributed ‘for the common good’. Climate
change is accepted by a majority as the most serious issue we
face. Carbon Legacy is a fruitful compromise between entrenched
positions, which remain deadlocked. A no middleman bequest,
down to the IHT limit, donated to any initiative that is proven
to be tangibly DOING something to improve matters on a
measurable e-ROI, free from all but the most crucial
instruments of management/oversight. No ‘redirection’! Funds
straight to where most needed, to do the most good for the
future. Some devils in the detail, but doable with consensus.
In so doing it must surely satisfy both the needs and
aspirations of all sides.
Thanks for submitting your petition.
Now, if a lot of you would so good as to sign it, I, my kids and the rest (ok, most. Well, a lot , I'm sure) of the country's future generations will thank you.
Guardian - Let's get back on tax
If you can't take it with you, you don't want it to be squandered and you do want it to make the world a better place and of direct benefit for your ancestors, may I suggest: http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Carbonlegacy/
BBC - More homes 'face inheritance tax'
Mugging the over-75s
You can't take it with you. But they don't get it. Future generations benefit.
Have I missed anything?
Telegraph - Trifling with protest
In the spirit of wanting it all ways, I have to concede that you should be able to have any petition you want, lest there be accusations of moderation (which is cute on a moderated blog).
However, in the great info overload scheme of things, part of me rather likes a bit of wood trimming to see the odd, worthy, tree
Divide and rule the airwaves!
Is motoring the new smoking?
'Oh, bless. Let's hope this hugely complex issue does not get reduced to a % yes/no figure that would be great for media ratings and little else.
Because it's not as simple as, say, 'Should the BBC stop sending celeb reporters around the world to do a 30' vox pop to make a point on climate warming?'.
Frankly it may make more sense to change 'motoring' to 'travelling', but then the problem with that is most of the new 'elites' in and around London don't do as much of the former as the latter, so maybe it's best to focus on what can be controlled more reason.. comfort... er, with the least impact close to one's personal lifestyle.
There are similarities between both smoking and trav... motoring, of course. They seem to be addictive. Have massive lobbies in support. Neither can claim to not impose on others who may be unwilling.... etc.
Gets a bit stickier on what's actually necessary, at least in the absence of any decent alternatives. You don't really HAVE to smoke, but I'd like to introduce a few Islington-Westminster-Fleet St luvvies to some folk who don't spend their lives wedged on the M6 because they just love the smell of exhaust in the morning. Some don't have Tuscan villas to escape to at the drop of a peerage, index-linked pensions or a rather nice lifestyle hitching a ride to study climate change in the few snowy bits left (on account of all the guys going there to report/experience/blog on it to those who can't... or don't think it's very fair to do so, even if they can afford it).
Oh, yes, and both are, for now, still completely legal to buy and 'do'. Their manufacture and use is permitted and facilitated, if not positively encouraged, perhaps because of certain revenue streams that are accrued along the way. Careful of those second homes oh chattering classes; they may be OK now, but they are also only a retroactive tax change away.
Maybe I can borrow the notion from one of our many highly-paid public servants today, only rather than giving drug addicts NHS fixes to stop them being naughty, maybe I can claim a car and fuel for the less onerous crime of needing to get where I need to to earn money to survive, because there is no alternative here.
Fix & reward first; fine & regale second.
And you can stick that where the sun don't make my solar panel generate.
Have a tremendous day. By some measures we don't have a lot left while we sweat the petty stuff at the expense of the bigger picture.
Classic divide and rule the airwaves. Let the bickering begin... er... continue!'
'Oh, bless. Let's hope this hugely complex issue does not get reduced to a % yes/no figure that would be great for media ratings and little else.
Because it's not as simple as, say, 'Should the BBC stop sending celeb reporters around the world to do a 30' vox pop to make a point on climate warming?'.
Frankly it may make more sense to change 'motoring' to 'travelling', but then the problem with that is most of the new 'elites' in and around London don't do as much of the former as the latter, so maybe it's best to focus on what can be controlled more reason.. comfort... er, with the least impact close to one's personal lifestyle.
There are similarities between both smoking and trav... motoring, of course. They seem to be addictive. Have massive lobbies in support. Neither can claim to not impose on others who may be unwilling.... etc.
Gets a bit stickier on what's actually necessary, at least in the absence of any decent alternatives. You don't really HAVE to smoke, but I'd like to introduce a few Islington-Westminster-Fleet St luvvies to some folk who don't spend their lives wedged on the M6 because they just love the smell of exhaust in the morning. Some don't have Tuscan villas to escape to at the drop of a peerage, index-linked pensions or a rather nice lifestyle hitching a ride to study climate change in the few snowy bits left (on account of all the guys going there to report/experience/blog on it to those who can't... or don't think it's very fair to do so, even if they can afford it).
Oh, yes, and both are, for now, still completely legal to buy and 'do'. Their manufacture and use is permitted and facilitated, if not positively encouraged, perhaps because of certain revenue streams that are accrued along the way. Careful of those second homes oh chattering classes; they may be OK now, but they are also only a retroactive tax change away.
Maybe I can borrow the notion from one of our many highly-paid public servants today, only rather than giving drug addicts NHS fixes to stop them being naughty, maybe I can claim a car and fuel for the less onerous crime of needing to get where I need to to earn money to survive, because there is no alternative here.
Fix & reward first; fine & regale second.
And you can stick that where the sun don't make my solar panel generate.
Have a tremendous day. By some measures we don't have a lot left while we sweat the petty stuff at the expense of the bigger picture.
Classic divide and rule the airwaves. Let the bickering begin... er... continue!'
At least they are recycling more!
BBC failing on green issues
Meet a target.... Really save the planet. Tough call.
'If I may suggest, sending guys based here to places over there where the corporation ad says they have local correspondents, to stand in front of the camera for 30 seconds, may help a tad.
Also not flying in helicopters overhead at the drop of a turkey, especially for spots on 'helping the environment'.
As they say at dawn on Newswatch, though not to me very often (they don't often like to publish my critiques for somem reason on this daft mea gulp attempt at 'balance'), maybe we should look at this... and then forget it quickly as we could really care less.'
Meet a target.... Really save the planet. Tough call.
'If I may suggest, sending guys based here to places over there where the corporation ad says they have local correspondents, to stand in front of the camera for 30 seconds, may help a tad.
Also not flying in helicopters overhead at the drop of a turkey, especially for spots on 'helping the environment'.
As they say at dawn on Newswatch, though not to me very often (they don't often like to publish my critiques for somem reason on this daft mea gulp attempt at 'balance'), maybe we should look at this... and then forget it quickly as we could really care less.'
Nostalgia ain't all it used to be
Never mind the soundtracks
I remember a time when copywriters wrote jingles specifically for a product, and then had a ball (well, I did) pretending they were Bernie Taupin working with great composers and/or musicians to make memorable musical complements to ads. Some even became pop songs!
Now we have committees coordinated by a placement director using a matrix to assess which collection of words will synergise best with the imagery of trendset 'now' to establish a product proposition best suited to the song on offer.
I don't blame the artists. They have livings to make. But the whole sordid bunch feeding off their talent in the name of creativity... well, maybe I do have a teensie problem with that.
But then, nostalgia ain't all it used to be.
Nice to see the future of art and media is no longer to be trusted to mature hands.
I remember a time when copywriters wrote jingles specifically for a product, and then had a ball (well, I did) pretending they were Bernie Taupin working with great composers and/or musicians to make memorable musical complements to ads. Some even became pop songs!
Now we have committees coordinated by a placement director using a matrix to assess which collection of words will synergise best with the imagery of trendset 'now' to establish a product proposition best suited to the song on offer.
I don't blame the artists. They have livings to make. But the whole sordid bunch feeding off their talent in the name of creativity... well, maybe I do have a teensie problem with that.
But then, nostalgia ain't all it used to be.
Nice to see the future of art and media is no longer to be trusted to mature hands.
If I don't, you shouldn't either
Driving towards disaster
What is your point, please?
I think it may lie in the 'I don't [need to] drive' sentence, which is often followed by 'because I am able to still enjoy a comfortable and secure life whilst not doing so'. At least you did not issue this from the Islington-Westminster-Fleet Street triangle.
If this piece is targeted at the millions in their cars, emitting away, stuck in a jam WHO REALLY DON"T DO IT FOR FUN AND WOULD RATHER NOT, then this is a bit of a waste of space, as all it does is highlight the relative privilege of the chattering classes who enjoy an income (sadly, this effort is a freebie) unreliant on timely, affordable travel. Along with cycling MPs, journalists blogging on their snowy adventures and celebs doing without for a week, it really doesn't seem to equate with the calls on most folks' time, careers and domestic budgets.
And if you are having a swipe at Jeremy Clarkson, most of us may watch him, but don't live like him. And thanks to that, I doubt he cares very much what you think either.
I say this as a committed environmentalist at his home-working desk (for all that can be proved or believed here), but one who feels there are too many now making a living out of telling a lot more us how to exist, from cosy pedestals. And all it's doing is creating divisions.
Sort the alternatives first, before fines and fiddling, or many of us will simply starve. And if that happens we'll have to worry more about this generation than any future ones.
Guardian CiF - Don't be scared to confront people like me over car use - Blah, blah. Even I have lost interest. Much less take the time to read it or reply.
What is your point, please?
I think it may lie in the 'I don't [need to] drive' sentence, which is often followed by 'because I am able to still enjoy a comfortable and secure life whilst not doing so'. At least you did not issue this from the Islington-Westminster-Fleet Street triangle.
If this piece is targeted at the millions in their cars, emitting away, stuck in a jam WHO REALLY DON"T DO IT FOR FUN AND WOULD RATHER NOT, then this is a bit of a waste of space, as all it does is highlight the relative privilege of the chattering classes who enjoy an income (sadly, this effort is a freebie) unreliant on timely, affordable travel. Along with cycling MPs, journalists blogging on their snowy adventures and celebs doing without for a week, it really doesn't seem to equate with the calls on most folks' time, careers and domestic budgets.
And if you are having a swipe at Jeremy Clarkson, most of us may watch him, but don't live like him. And thanks to that, I doubt he cares very much what you think either.
I say this as a committed environmentalist at his home-working desk (for all that can be proved or believed here), but one who feels there are too many now making a living out of telling a lot more us how to exist, from cosy pedestals. And all it's doing is creating divisions.
Sort the alternatives first, before fines and fiddling, or many of us will simply starve. And if that happens we'll have to worry more about this generation than any future ones.
Guardian CiF - Don't be scared to confront people like me over car use - Blah, blah. Even I have lost interest. Much less take the time to read it or reply.
Or, you could watch folk discuss Britney's problems
Five Ways To Save The World
Some scientists and engineers are proposing radical, large-scale ideas that could save us from disaster.
Tough call.
Some scientists and engineers are proposing radical, large-scale ideas that could save us from disaster.
Tough call.
Charity begins in the media, it seems
Sadly, trust & pateince is in short supply. In government. In media. In charities themselves.
Righteous opposition
Just this morning I have been move to write on a story whipped up by dubious research, then chewed on by various social commentators who the BBC have on speed dial, living nice and near in the right part of London. Their main conclusion seemed to be that people are confused by endless facile filler stories of the kind they themselves were publicising.
Then elsewhere there was a charity operative with the speed-dial to the PR to the mate in the paper who is 'doing without supermarkets'... for a whole 6 weeks.
Maybe she works as a senior climate change analyst.
Because just keep the jaw dropping there is a report by a charity on Britain's businesses' failures to monitor carbon emissions.
Is that the best use of the money donated?
Righteous opposition
Just this morning I have been move to write on a story whipped up by dubious research, then chewed on by various social commentators who the BBC have on speed dial, living nice and near in the right part of London. Their main conclusion seemed to be that people are confused by endless facile filler stories of the kind they themselves were publicising.
Then elsewhere there was a charity operative with the speed-dial to the PR to the mate in the paper who is 'doing without supermarkets'... for a whole 6 weeks.
Maybe she works as a senior climate change analyst.
Because just keep the jaw dropping there is a report by a charity on Britain's businesses' failures to monitor carbon emissions.
Is that the best use of the money donated?
Sod it.
When I was younger and had more hair, along with Bruce Willis (work with me on this), during one of the more hormonally challenging periods there was a TV show called 'Moolighting'. Like most, it was a soap opera disguised as a detective show. Other than a nice mix of action and humour, the main thing that kept the audience loyal was episode after of episode of 'will they, won't they' tension between the male and female leads. Eventually they did, and show bit the dust.
So other than saying 'Sod it' when I see something like this Scientists warn it may be too late to save the ice caps , and how it will mean no more places for MPs and travel journalists to fly to to study the impact of flying on climate change, but also because it may be a tipping point in an already apathetic public's reaction to what some might deem a tad more tricky to deal with than Britney's barnet issues.
If we're already stuffed, then why bother?
I for one, will attempt to find new and improved ways to get the notion across that the next icon to fall after glaciers may indicate a trend worth addressing still.
Guardian - How green are the mountains? Interesting more for the blogs in reply
So other than saying 'Sod it' when I see something like this Scientists warn it may be too late to save the ice caps , and how it will mean no more places for MPs and travel journalists to fly to to study the impact of flying on climate change, but also because it may be a tipping point in an already apathetic public's reaction to what some might deem a tad more tricky to deal with than Britney's barnet issues.
If we're already stuffed, then why bother?
I for one, will attempt to find new and improved ways to get the notion across that the next icon to fall after glaciers may indicate a trend worth addressing still.
Guardian - How green are the mountains? Interesting more for the blogs in reply
I read this and am appalled
Top companies 'failing to report true greenhouse gas emissions'
I just wonder how much of one's donation goes to a 'senior climate change analyst'.
Sorry to be flip, but really.
The other bit is bad too, but I wonder if it would not be something best left to others to discover, prove share and comment upon.
Oo, I don't know. Like the Government? The EU? The media?
File and forget. At least a column was filled, allegedly.
I just wonder how much of one's donation goes to a 'senior climate change analyst'.
Sorry to be flip, but really.
The other bit is bad too, but I wonder if it would not be something best left to others to discover, prove share and comment upon.
Oo, I don't know. Like the Government? The EU? The media?
File and forget. At least a column was filled, allegedly.
This is more like it
Tour firm to make carbon offsetting mandatory
And if you don't happen to feel that their mandatory carbon offset system is helping you or your kids' future as much as some suit in the City currently blowing his bonus in a lap-dancing club on the back of the 'handling fee', then you can simply choose not to use them.
Or, not fly at all.
New Spin - Washes greener than green!
And if you don't happen to feel that their mandatory carbon offset system is helping you or your kids' future as much as some suit in the City currently blowing his bonus in a lap-dancing club on the back of the 'handling fee', then you can simply choose not to use them.
Or, not fly at all.
New Spin - Washes greener than green!
Those who live in Fulham are different to you and I. They have better PR
They obviously pay well in women's charities.
The woman giving up supermarkets for Lent
And they obviously have mates next door who know mates next door who write columns for national papers.
'She has no illusions about how hard it will be'. A whole six weeks. And at least the Bishop of wherever is giving up flying a whole year. That'll sort the emission thing in no time at all then.
And I'm sure S********'s will be OK with the loss of custom as they got a free mention: 'Ingredients from supermarkets largely are replaced daily so they're always fresh, whereas in local shops the quality may not be quite so high." There goes the food miles claim then. And here I thought my meat and veg tasted better because they came from that field there and were not stored in inert gas to maintain freshness whilst being brought from New Zealand.
Let them eat (Fairtrade) cake!
This means what, exactly, and to whom?
Next thing we know she and a gaggle of mates from the media will be 'coptering off to Antarctica to study the effect of flying on Polar Bears.
Indy - See what they published
The woman giving up supermarkets for Lent
And they obviously have mates next door who know mates next door who write columns for national papers.
'She has no illusions about how hard it will be'. A whole six weeks. And at least the Bishop of wherever is giving up flying a whole year. That'll sort the emission thing in no time at all then.
And I'm sure S********'s will be OK with the loss of custom as they got a free mention: 'Ingredients from supermarkets largely are replaced daily so they're always fresh, whereas in local shops the quality may not be quite so high." There goes the food miles claim then. And here I thought my meat and veg tasted better because they came from that field there and were not stored in inert gas to maintain freshness whilst being brought from New Zealand.
Let them eat (Fairtrade) cake!
This means what, exactly, and to whom?
Next thing we know she and a gaggle of mates from the media will be 'coptering off to Antarctica to study the effect of flying on Polar Bears.
Indy - See what they published
Logical regression
Police chief calls for heroin to be available on the NHS
Does this mean I can ask my GP to prescribe me a pint of daily cider to feed my habit and stop me committing the crime of blogging that such idiots should lose their jobs?
Actually, to drag this into the Junkk-zone, maybe we can prescribe litter-louts unfettered and unfined opportunities to throw the wrong kind of paper in the recycling bin.
Let a whole new department and sub-quango be created forthwith!
Does this mean I can ask my GP to prescribe me a pint of daily cider to feed my habit and stop me committing the crime of blogging that such idiots should lose their jobs?
Actually, to drag this into the Junkk-zone, maybe we can prescribe litter-louts unfettered and unfined opportunities to throw the wrong kind of paper in the recycling bin.
Let a whole new department and sub-quango be created forthwith!
There's a sucker trusts the system every minute
Bearing in mind our ongoing discussions with OFCOM regarding the big idea, one does tend to wonder about how the authorities draw the distinction between awry, 'ripped 'off and outright fraud these days:
Richard and Judy quiz ‘con’
And what they ever do about it.
Guardian - You say, who pays? Richard and Judy show faces inquiry over teatime quiz
Indy - Revealed: Richard and Judy quiz scam
BBC - Richard and Judy in quiz apology
Times - Richard and Judy apologise for quiz
Mirror - RICHARD & JUDY'S FOUR YEAR CON
Times - Probe into Richard and Judy phone quiz
BBC - Madeley 'livid' over quiz scandal
Guardian - Richard and Judy quiz controversy deepens
Indy - Richard and Judy pull plug on phone-in quiz
Observer - Richard and Judy scandal grows
Guardian - We must stop TV companies ringing up the profits
Times - BBC feels the heat as cookery programme calls are investigated
Oh, this just gets too delicious.
And OFCOM and ICSTIS get paid how much, by whom to do what, exactly?
Guardian - BBC axes pre-recorded Saturday Kitchen episodes
Guardian - Premium-rate phoneline scandal reaches BBC
Mirror - NINE PHONEY TV PHONE-INS
Times - Host who was in two places at once
What a link! Shame there is no comment function! I just wonder why the solution to defrauding viewers is to give 'a stern telling to' to the scum-buckets who bilked them
Times - City’s new police chief spells out the true cost of fraud
Times - BBC show must hand over pudding tapes
Times - I have dialled the future – and won
Telegraph - X Factor's voters paid too much
Daily Star - Factor phone votes 'rip off'
Daily Mirror - REFUNDS AFTER NEW TV VOTE BLUNDER
Daily Mirror - NINE PHONEY TV PHONE-INS
Indy - 'X Factor' vote blunder made ITV £200,000
Telegraph - ITV suspends premium rate phone-ins
BBC - ITV suspends premium phone-ins
Times - ITV pulls the plug on phone-ins after series of scandals
As a participant in a voter-driven reality TV show, who was the
cause of some to commit funds to these guys pockets in support
of what they thought was fair contest, I am intrigued as to how this
still seems to be more 'slap wrist, don't do it again' as opposed to
what it seems to me to be clearly: fraud. Why?
The Sun - Lid lifted on TV phone scandal
Sad to see so many readers saying it is participants' own greed and fault. These were competitions entered into in good faith. How many of these smug individuals go to the bookies? Would they feel the same if the arrival of the winning nag was predetermined?
You may like to add Sky and Ricochet to your investigation. Along with the competence of OFCOM or ICSTIS to handle much less police these scams.
I am now four months into a complaint regarding Sky's Big Idea. So far the former has managed to claim it has lost the evidence I supplied and I have not heard back on a request to resubmit the forms. The latter has never replied.
We are dealing with the crime of fraud here are we not?
Why is it being treated like a wrist-slapping, don't do it again? The amounts alone are vast. The principle even more important.
Times - Company in phone-in inquiry wins betting deal So the whole fraud thing is OK? I wouldn't bet on it.
Guardian - Police may be called in over fixed TV shows
G Media Talk
Mirror - WATCHDOG WARNS OF LEGAL ACTION
Guardian - A Watershed moment
An interesting collection of responses from the more intelligent end of the liberal media. Wish I was so smart.
I look forward to all your faces when some aspect of your life is compromised by what the Mirror quotes 'Phone-in watchdog' as saying: 'This is 'semi fraud''. Which errs on being a little bit pregnant in my book.
Someone invites you to take part in a process involving your time and/or money on a set of stated criteria that you agree to, possibly involving calculated risk. Only they are not as stated and the other side has had no intention of honouring them. Tough. Apply that basis to every aspect of your relationships in life.
I was a contestant in a show on SKY (interestingly the BBC this morning stated they were the only major not involved - tell that to the OFCOM and ICSTIS gusy I'm dealing with... if painfully....slowly) that did not feel kosher as a viewer-decided contest to many of those who invested time (and hence money) and money in taking part. And when it came to voting a lot of folk felt they were part of an honest process.
How we chose/choose to spend our money is up to us, so long as it falls within the laws of the land.
Let ye who would cast nasturtiums make sure ye don't suffer from hay fever at a later stage.
Times - Endemol loses its shine over scandals
Times - Channel 5 faked winners of phone-in quiz and put staff on air as contestants
Times - Eckoh chief reluctant to take all the phone-in flak
Richard and Judy quiz ‘con’
And what they ever do about it.
Guardian - You say, who pays? Richard and Judy show faces inquiry over teatime quiz
Indy - Revealed: Richard and Judy quiz scam
BBC - Richard and Judy in quiz apology
Times - Richard and Judy apologise for quiz
Mirror - RICHARD & JUDY'S FOUR YEAR CON
Times - Probe into Richard and Judy phone quiz
BBC - Madeley 'livid' over quiz scandal
Guardian - Richard and Judy quiz controversy deepens
Indy - Richard and Judy pull plug on phone-in quiz
Observer - Richard and Judy scandal grows
Guardian - We must stop TV companies ringing up the profits
Times - BBC feels the heat as cookery programme calls are investigated
Oh, this just gets too delicious.
And OFCOM and ICSTIS get paid how much, by whom to do what, exactly?
Guardian - BBC axes pre-recorded Saturday Kitchen episodes
Guardian - Premium-rate phoneline scandal reaches BBC
Mirror - NINE PHONEY TV PHONE-INS
Times - Host who was in two places at once
What a link! Shame there is no comment function! I just wonder why the solution to defrauding viewers is to give 'a stern telling to' to the scum-buckets who bilked them
Times - City’s new police chief spells out the true cost of fraud
Times - BBC show must hand over pudding tapes
Times - I have dialled the future – and won
Telegraph - X Factor's voters paid too much
Daily Star - Factor phone votes 'rip off'
Daily Mirror - REFUNDS AFTER NEW TV VOTE BLUNDER
Daily Mirror - NINE PHONEY TV PHONE-INS
Indy - 'X Factor' vote blunder made ITV £200,000
Telegraph - ITV suspends premium rate phone-ins
BBC - ITV suspends premium phone-ins
Times - ITV pulls the plug on phone-ins after series of scandals
As a participant in a voter-driven reality TV show, who was the
cause of some to commit funds to these guys pockets in support
of what they thought was fair contest, I am intrigued as to how this
still seems to be more 'slap wrist, don't do it again' as opposed to
what it seems to me to be clearly: fraud. Why?
The Sun - Lid lifted on TV phone scandal
Sad to see so many readers saying it is participants' own greed and fault. These were competitions entered into in good faith. How many of these smug individuals go to the bookies? Would they feel the same if the arrival of the winning nag was predetermined?
You may like to add Sky and Ricochet to your investigation. Along with the competence of OFCOM or ICSTIS to handle much less police these scams.
I am now four months into a complaint regarding Sky's Big Idea. So far the former has managed to claim it has lost the evidence I supplied and I have not heard back on a request to resubmit the forms. The latter has never replied.
We are dealing with the crime of fraud here are we not?
Why is it being treated like a wrist-slapping, don't do it again? The amounts alone are vast. The principle even more important.
Times - Company in phone-in inquiry wins betting deal So the whole fraud thing is OK? I wouldn't bet on it.
Guardian - Police may be called in over fixed TV shows
G Media Talk
Mirror - WATCHDOG WARNS OF LEGAL ACTION
Guardian - A Watershed moment
An interesting collection of responses from the more intelligent end of the liberal media. Wish I was so smart.
I look forward to all your faces when some aspect of your life is compromised by what the Mirror quotes 'Phone-in watchdog' as saying: 'This is 'semi fraud''. Which errs on being a little bit pregnant in my book.
Someone invites you to take part in a process involving your time and/or money on a set of stated criteria that you agree to, possibly involving calculated risk. Only they are not as stated and the other side has had no intention of honouring them. Tough. Apply that basis to every aspect of your relationships in life.
I was a contestant in a show on SKY (interestingly the BBC this morning stated they were the only major not involved - tell that to the OFCOM and ICSTIS gusy I'm dealing with... if painfully....slowly) that did not feel kosher as a viewer-decided contest to many of those who invested time (and hence money) and money in taking part. And when it came to voting a lot of folk felt they were part of an honest process.
How we chose/choose to spend our money is up to us, so long as it falls within the laws of the land.
Let ye who would cast nasturtiums make sure ye don't suffer from hay fever at a later stage.
Times - Endemol loses its shine over scandals
Times - Channel 5 faked winners of phone-in quiz and put staff on air as contestants
Times - Eckoh chief reluctant to take all the phone-in flak
OK, it's a rant
To BBC Brekky. Speaks for itself.
This morning we're packed with slots on 'research' that is 'contradictory'. Oily fish, TV on kids...
Big surprise.
So long as there are 'news' programmes that have time to fill, and better yet with a 'debate' that 'your views are invited', we will continue to get these things carried out, press-released, covered and 'expert'-debated by the unholy alliance of those with a vested interest in keeping 'em coming.
And what, exactly, is the poor viewer (or in this case concerned parent) to make of it: don't pay attention to the thing we brought to your attention in the first place.
Nice one.
Meanwhile, the slot about health gets curtailed by a massive section on one of the presenters choosing her dress for the Oscars, which is apparently very stressful.
Plot. Lost. The.
BBC - BBC in the news, Thursday
This morning we're packed with slots on 'research' that is 'contradictory'. Oily fish, TV on kids...
Big surprise.
So long as there are 'news' programmes that have time to fill, and better yet with a 'debate' that 'your views are invited', we will continue to get these things carried out, press-released, covered and 'expert'-debated by the unholy alliance of those with a vested interest in keeping 'em coming.
And what, exactly, is the poor viewer (or in this case concerned parent) to make of it: don't pay attention to the thing we brought to your attention in the first place.
Nice one.
Meanwhile, the slot about health gets curtailed by a massive section on one of the presenters choosing her dress for the Oscars, which is apparently very stressful.
Plot. Lost. The.
BBC - BBC in the news, Thursday
Bang it long enough and they may hear.
I've signed up to the wonder of e-petitions
'While admittedly funny in a 10yroldschoolboy kind of way (mine howled with delight as I ranted), the flippant petitions seem only to have limited uses: to discredit the process (which oddly must be the prayer of the initiators) and to provide cheap fuel for commentators.
Meanwhile I'm still wondering what happened to my suggestion for a Carbon Legacy (posted about a day before the road-pricing hit the tarmac, so I guess they are still on back log O/T at petition central - or simply pushing the trip out to kill the whole thing PDQ) as an alternative to the much resented Treasury blackhole-borne excess of the IHT limit. It seemed/s an equitable solution to the various extremes being advocated (and gleefully covered at the expense of many with more merit), and one that offers a genuine sense that one's bequest goes to improving both the future of one's direct descendants as well as society as a whole.
'While admittedly funny in a 10yroldschoolboy kind of way (mine howled with delight as I ranted), the flippant petitions seem only to have limited uses: to discredit the process (which oddly must be the prayer of the initiators) and to provide cheap fuel for commentators.
Meanwhile I'm still wondering what happened to my suggestion for a Carbon Legacy (posted about a day before the road-pricing hit the tarmac, so I guess they are still on back log O/T at petition central - or simply pushing the trip out to kill the whole thing PDQ) as an alternative to the much resented Treasury blackhole-borne excess of the IHT limit. It seemed/s an equitable solution to the various extremes being advocated (and gleefully covered at the expense of many with more merit), and one that offers a genuine sense that one's bequest goes to improving both the future of one's direct descendants as well as society as a whole.
Sunday, February 18, 2007
Have I got news for you..
Better to give than to be taxed
"The Government can help by altering the tax regime... to encourage those with millions to spare to give...'
'The government gets 40% to squander anyway'
'This country is a truly unfit one in which to raise a child.'
'...money given to Mr. Brown is simply be wasted on ideological projects.'
For what it's worth, a short while ago (about 10 minutes before the road petition issue exploded), I uploaded one advocating the creation of a Carbon Legacy as an alternative to donating the excess over the IHT limit to government-selected 'causes unknown'.
It seems an equitable way of answering all the negative issues (and points raised here) that are causing the current, divisive gridlock, from Mr. Hain's rather unilateral high-earning career targets to the 'scrap it all' approach of the Express campaign, neither of which seem likely to happen in anyone's lifetime, much less my kids.
Speaking of whom, the Carbon Legacy would be a way of knowing my inheritance would be going to ensure they and theirs have a better chance at a future as a direct consequence of my bequest, and not to support some politicians' index-linked, gold-plated pension funds.
Oddly, it has yet to be approved.
Maybe they have other things on their minds. Or don't like the logic of what I propose.
SunTel (I was moved to write 'Better to save the planet with it, than see it wasted') - Blair's wealth gap: voters want City bonus curb
"The Government can help by altering the tax regime... to encourage those with millions to spare to give...'
'The government gets 40% to squander anyway'
'This country is a truly unfit one in which to raise a child.'
'...money given to Mr. Brown is simply be wasted on ideological projects.'
For what it's worth, a short while ago (about 10 minutes before the road petition issue exploded), I uploaded one advocating the creation of a Carbon Legacy as an alternative to donating the excess over the IHT limit to government-selected 'causes unknown'.
It seems an equitable way of answering all the negative issues (and points raised here) that are causing the current, divisive gridlock, from Mr. Hain's rather unilateral high-earning career targets to the 'scrap it all' approach of the Express campaign, neither of which seem likely to happen in anyone's lifetime, much less my kids.
Speaking of whom, the Carbon Legacy would be a way of knowing my inheritance would be going to ensure they and theirs have a better chance at a future as a direct consequence of my bequest, and not to support some politicians' index-linked, gold-plated pension funds.
Oddly, it has yet to be approved.
Maybe they have other things on their minds. Or don't like the logic of what I propose.
SunTel (I was moved to write 'Better to save the planet with it, than see it wasted') - Blair's wealth gap: voters want City bonus curb
The politics of what happens next
Good question.
It seems that I am to be written to by the PM to explain why I was/am misguided.
I will therefore take the opportunity to ask him a few things, such as:
1) Was it the intention of the petition site to acquire data on people to let them know you know where they live, and/or then be used for seemingly exclusive, one-sided propaganda?
2) Where exactly will the money be going? Will it be going to enviro-improvements or will some need to go to funding more index-linked public servants, and beholden voter groups, plus existing and future pension problems in the name of green?
I write this as I watch him with Andrew Marr on the BBC, and on his performance there I would say he is going to have a tough sell, and will need to do a lot better with answers to the above.
It seems that I am to be written to by the PM to explain why I was/am misguided.
I will therefore take the opportunity to ask him a few things, such as:
1) Was it the intention of the petition site to acquire data on people to let them know you know where they live, and/or then be used for seemingly exclusive, one-sided propaganda?
2) Where exactly will the money be going? Will it be going to enviro-improvements or will some need to go to funding more index-linked public servants, and beholden voter groups, plus existing and future pension problems in the name of green?
I write this as I watch him with Andrew Marr on the BBC, and on his performance there I would say he is going to have a tough sell, and will need to do a lot better with answers to the above.
The very idea
Chill out
Gosh, the very idea of anything like this happening here in the UK.
Imagine if the Prime Minister used names acquired by signing a petition to a) say we know where you live and b) claim an exclusive right to show you the error of your ways.
The very idea....
'Tricky thing, democracy.
I recall my university days, when the vast majority of students were in the medical, engineering and law faculties.
Yet the Student Union was run (very much against most of our wishes) by the arts guys, who had about two lectures a week, while the rest of us were wall to wall 9 to 5.
Seems there was a Quorum (or some posh word) necessary to vote things in and out, including officers, and they tended to hold these when we'd lose course units for not being at class.
In the end we rebelled when they executive voted ents funds for some terrorist group in Africa, and got them out.
So to those of us (sorry, me. I decry all those who speak for others by claiming a mandate there is no evidence for them having) with families and day jobs and not living in London, where the streets are paved with gold and the transport is free, lobbing up to a rally does (how are the bodies drummed up for these, by the way? No spammed e-mails, surely), waving a placard all day really has no more value than an e-petition at doing much more than saying 'stop listening, start hearing and DO something that is not governed by hype, spin and self-interest'.
At least, that's wot I fink. But it seems I am too ignorant to understand the issues, let alone have the right to have an opinion or comment on them.'
Observer - Drivers to be offered trial pay-if-you-like toll scheme -
Observer - Hard sell in snarled-up Britain -
Observer - The e-petition shows that my government is listening -
Listening...hmnn. Are you hearing? Are you understanding?
I just heard you on Andrew Marr's show.
I look forward to getting your email and the answer to my questions, but on this performance won't hold my breath.
Lovely. Joining Art on Global Cool soon, no doubt.
Gosh, the very idea of anything like this happening here in the UK.
Imagine if the Prime Minister used names acquired by signing a petition to a) say we know where you live and b) claim an exclusive right to show you the error of your ways.
The very idea....
'Tricky thing, democracy.
I recall my university days, when the vast majority of students were in the medical, engineering and law faculties.
Yet the Student Union was run (very much against most of our wishes) by the arts guys, who had about two lectures a week, while the rest of us were wall to wall 9 to 5.
Seems there was a Quorum (or some posh word) necessary to vote things in and out, including officers, and they tended to hold these when we'd lose course units for not being at class.
In the end we rebelled when they executive voted ents funds for some terrorist group in Africa, and got them out.
So to those of us (sorry, me. I decry all those who speak for others by claiming a mandate there is no evidence for them having) with families and day jobs and not living in London, where the streets are paved with gold and the transport is free, lobbing up to a rally does (how are the bodies drummed up for these, by the way? No spammed e-mails, surely), waving a placard all day really has no more value than an e-petition at doing much more than saying 'stop listening, start hearing and DO something that is not governed by hype, spin and self-interest'.
At least, that's wot I fink. But it seems I am too ignorant to understand the issues, let alone have the right to have an opinion or comment on them.'
Observer - Drivers to be offered trial pay-if-you-like toll scheme -
Observer - Hard sell in snarled-up Britain -
Observer - The e-petition shows that my government is listening -
Listening...hmnn. Are you hearing? Are you understanding?
I just heard you on Andrew Marr's show.
I look forward to getting your email and the answer to my questions, but on this performance won't hold my breath.
Lovely. Joining Art on Global Cool soon, no doubt.
Luv u 2 death
I'm sure there is some noble value in there somewhere...
The MPs come in from the cold
... but I couldn't see it.
'If I may join the 4 persons (at least) this politico/journalistic jolly is reaching, and doubtless meant to inspire, and can I come too?
Mind you, one can only wonder at the consequences to the pristine snowbound wilderness if loads more of us decide to come up (how does one get there again?) and tramp about.'
The MPs come in from the cold
... but I couldn't see it.
'If I may join the 4 persons (at least) this politico/journalistic jolly is reaching, and doubtless meant to inspire, and can I come too?
Mind you, one can only wonder at the consequences to the pristine snowbound wilderness if loads more of us decide to come up (how does one get there again?) and tramp about.'
Where things are going. Uphill.
As readers of this blog will know, while I do very much care about climate change/global warming, I am not too fussed about what is or is not causing it. I'm more interested in cutting down on waste and inefficiency in any form, and a move to responsible behaviour as the facts of man's impact get proven further.
However, there still seems to be a rather large body of folk impeding progress in the latter area by still arguing whether it is happening at all.
So I am indebted3d to Dave of Solarventi for the following: On Earth: the glacier meltdown is accelerating
All I know is that what was once there is going in one direction, and there has to be some pretty dire consequences. So maybe slowing it down if we can may be a plan.
However, there still seems to be a rather large body of folk impeding progress in the latter area by still arguing whether it is happening at all.
So I am indebted3d to Dave of Solarventi for the following: On Earth: the glacier meltdown is accelerating
All I know is that what was once there is going in one direction, and there has to be some pretty dire consequences. So maybe slowing it down if we can may be a plan.
Dear Peter, ...Best, Tony
So it is true. He is going to write to me as a petitioner. I have written to BBC Breakfast TV where it was just shown.
'Ignoring for now the ethics (is that what petitions are meant for - data collation for propaganda purposes?) of using my email address exclusively (I imagine any contrary arguments to his will not be accorded the same facility), I do hope that Mr. Blair will be telling me how all the money generated will help the environment and none will go to shoring up wasted expenditures and such as index-linked pension commitments.'
I may also ask him where my Carbon Legacy one has got to.
'Ignoring for now the ethics (is that what petitions are meant for - data collation for propaganda purposes?) of using my email address exclusively (I imagine any contrary arguments to his will not be accorded the same facility), I do hope that Mr. Blair will be telling me how all the money generated will help the environment and none will go to shoring up wasted expenditures and such as index-linked pension commitments.'
I may also ask him where my Carbon Legacy one has got to.
Them's might potent slippers, gramps!
That's my age. But it looks like it may also be my carbon footprint (without a per-anything to apply it to, that's a meaningless stat most media would be happy to use).
Over-50s leave largest carbon footprint
Interesting stuff, but I would like better context. Are they applying the same level of heating consequences to my Mum in her cottage (or me working at home) as to some bright young activist minister or researcher in their trendy des res flat for 6 hrs a night, when the rest of the time they are in their office or the club, both of which I presume are still heated by the freeholders?
As to travel, well that is looking iffy. On TV I saw some peroxided biddy, about a year older than me, who could not dream of not having her six overseas holiday PER year.
Over-50s leave largest carbon footprint
Interesting stuff, but I would like better context. Are they applying the same level of heating consequences to my Mum in her cottage (or me working at home) as to some bright young activist minister or researcher in their trendy des res flat for 6 hrs a night, when the rest of the time they are in their office or the club, both of which I presume are still heated by the freeholders?
As to travel, well that is looking iffy. On TV I saw some peroxided biddy, about a year older than me, who could not dream of not having her six overseas holiday PER year.
When others zig. Zag.
Odd how I see things differently.
Wacko Creationist Indoctrination Footage
It's funny, but I took it the total opposite way as a brilliantly subtle, mocking propaganda piece against the clunking efforts of such creationists to discredit evolution. From slick Woomera (he was an Aussie, right?) Willy at the start to our Nobel-aspiring Pierced Brosnan at the end, the whole lot of them seemed to me to pretty much do a pretty good job of showing where their brains are at from their own mouths. And it had been editted that way to do so (cut off on my view before any credits rolled to see who produced it). Didn't the lady interviewer say she was pre-evolution when being put straight by the highly articulate goth yoof in the shades? And in that regard perhaps more effective than shutting anything down, which seems to be what these guys were being held up for derision in advocating, placard after placard, song after song, confused kid after confused kid, the notion of evolution.
Wacko Creationist Indoctrination Footage
It's funny, but I took it the total opposite way as a brilliantly subtle, mocking propaganda piece against the clunking efforts of such creationists to discredit evolution. From slick Woomera (he was an Aussie, right?) Willy at the start to our Nobel-aspiring Pierced Brosnan at the end, the whole lot of them seemed to me to pretty much do a pretty good job of showing where their brains are at from their own mouths. And it had been editted that way to do so (cut off on my view before any credits rolled to see who produced it). Didn't the lady interviewer say she was pre-evolution when being put straight by the highly articulate goth yoof in the shades? And in that regard perhaps more effective than shutting anything down, which seems to be what these guys were being held up for derision in advocating, placard after placard, song after song, confused kid after confused kid, the notion of evolution.
Saturday, February 17, 2007
Off the people. Bye bye the people. Screw the people
Busybodies will be the death of us smokers
Leave it out! I mean the 'smokers' bit in your headline.
I have never smoked. Never will. I loathe all about it, and cannot stand the fact that a person who would get most agitated if I started burning polystyrene cups next to them as they travel, eat or any other activity that brings us into proximity, can think they have had any right, ever, to do so. But...
I agree. You want to do for yourself in or outdoors where it doesn't affect me and my own, knock yourself out. But here I see the matter of policing sensibly the how and the when gets tricky, along with costs to the taxpayer in scooping diseased lungs out of 30 year-olds at the expense of a kid with a hereditary ailment who happens to have lost a postcode lottery.
These would of course be matters for civilised debate, to arrive at an equitable solution.
But oh no, we have some fatuous 'the people require' vindication slapped on top of a spun elf & safety justification, when in fact it is just another attempt to stick more vote-nanny-loves-ya bodies on the solid gold, index-linked public payroll, funded in part by fines imposed outside of due legal process by the very folk whose salaries depend on a bust, on the sector of society who are most likely to cooperate and stump up. Meanwhile, at a gun dealer near you...
It's almost as logical as allowing a certain class of car to be made and then demonise the manufacturers for making them and people for buying them, when overhead a much worse form of transport pollution flies by almost unhindered by legislation to deliver air-flown berries to Islington supermarkets.
What next? Fining kids for putting (if indeed they did - innocent 'til proven, 'n all...) the wrong type of paper in a recycling bin. Oh... they have.
Leave it out! I mean the 'smokers' bit in your headline.
I have never smoked. Never will. I loathe all about it, and cannot stand the fact that a person who would get most agitated if I started burning polystyrene cups next to them as they travel, eat or any other activity that brings us into proximity, can think they have had any right, ever, to do so. But...
I agree. You want to do for yourself in or outdoors where it doesn't affect me and my own, knock yourself out. But here I see the matter of policing sensibly the how and the when gets tricky, along with costs to the taxpayer in scooping diseased lungs out of 30 year-olds at the expense of a kid with a hereditary ailment who happens to have lost a postcode lottery.
These would of course be matters for civilised debate, to arrive at an equitable solution.
But oh no, we have some fatuous 'the people require' vindication slapped on top of a spun elf & safety justification, when in fact it is just another attempt to stick more vote-nanny-loves-ya bodies on the solid gold, index-linked public payroll, funded in part by fines imposed outside of due legal process by the very folk whose salaries depend on a bust, on the sector of society who are most likely to cooperate and stump up. Meanwhile, at a gun dealer near you...
It's almost as logical as allowing a certain class of car to be made and then demonise the manufacturers for making them and people for buying them, when overhead a much worse form of transport pollution flies by almost unhindered by legislation to deliver air-flown berries to Islington supermarkets.
What next? Fining kids for putting (if indeed they did - innocent 'til proven, 'n all...) the wrong type of paper in a recycling bin. Oh... they have.
tushtissue.info
Last night I did not go out for my Friday pint or two.
So I decided to invest what I would have spent on yet another website. Tushtissue is dedicated to all those who seek to paper over the cracks only enough to cover their own sweet selves and careers with meaningless action, but are not too concerned with actually doing anything that will make any difference than looking like you are acting.
It has been inspired by this morning watching the news media packed with pictures and interviews of pols, police and all sorts of other talking heads rushing around being interviewed and wearing nice outfits as a response to some high-profile, low-surprise murders with guns - as opposed to all the other much safer ways there are to get dead if anyone wishes to so commit such a crime, especially if the perpetrators are not complete cretins and have the patience to wait about a week 'til the police O/T budgets runs out, and the media get bored enough to move to more productive areas of outrage.
Tushtissue can apply across most areas of public protection and concern, including the environment, of course.
I have, at present, NO IDEA what form the design of this site will take, but have in mind some kind of graph (the logo is sweeeet) that tracks various public events along with the official response and resource commitment, as well as that of the media, etc as time progresses.
I'm guessing a peak for a few days on the latter, maybe a month on the former, followed by a slow tail-off on both. Until the next.
Best use of funds (I mean my £5 - there's a chance a wee bit more has been blown on what we're tracking already)? Let the viewer decide.
Anyone fancy working on it with me?
BBC - Man dies after new gun killing
So I decided to invest what I would have spent on yet another website. Tushtissue is dedicated to all those who seek to paper over the cracks only enough to cover their own sweet selves and careers with meaningless action, but are not too concerned with actually doing anything that will make any difference than looking like you are acting.
It has been inspired by this morning watching the news media packed with pictures and interviews of pols, police and all sorts of other talking heads rushing around being interviewed and wearing nice outfits as a response to some high-profile, low-surprise murders with guns - as opposed to all the other much safer ways there are to get dead if anyone wishes to so commit such a crime, especially if the perpetrators are not complete cretins and have the patience to wait about a week 'til the police O/T budgets runs out, and the media get bored enough to move to more productive areas of outrage.
Tushtissue can apply across most areas of public protection and concern, including the environment, of course.
I have, at present, NO IDEA what form the design of this site will take, but have in mind some kind of graph (the logo is sweeeet) that tracks various public events along with the official response and resource commitment, as well as that of the media, etc as time progresses.
I'm guessing a peak for a few days on the latter, maybe a month on the former, followed by a slow tail-off on both. Until the next.
Best use of funds (I mean my £5 - there's a chance a wee bit more has been blown on what we're tracking already)? Let the viewer decide.
Anyone fancy working on it with me?
BBC - Man dies after new gun killing
At least we can reply on the media
Trouble is, I don't think we can rely on them necessarily where it counts.
Bad Science.
'That's Sir Trev McD.... and you can't buy a title that good without having made a serious contribution to, er... what?
Dontcha just lay in bed at night feeling that little bit more secure in the knowledge that those tasked and/or paid to make sure our lives and those of our kids are safe, are in the hands of such a caring, competent bunch of folks.
Next thing they'll be doing is giving airtime to any bozo who can rack up ratings by claiming climate change will just make holidays in Bognor a better reason to get into sunscreen futures.
As to Sir. T, well, let's not go there. I doubt he will be.'
Bad Science.
'That's Sir Trev McD.... and you can't buy a title that good without having made a serious contribution to, er... what?
Dontcha just lay in bed at night feeling that little bit more secure in the knowledge that those tasked and/or paid to make sure our lives and those of our kids are safe, are in the hands of such a caring, competent bunch of folks.
Next thing they'll be doing is giving airtime to any bozo who can rack up ratings by claiming climate change will just make holidays in Bognor a better reason to get into sunscreen futures.
As to Sir. T, well, let's not go there. I doubt he will be.'
All in the best possible taste!
Maybe they could conduct a seance to get Kenny Everett to present Newsnight:
Sadly I missed both the programme and yesterday's opportunity to view it online - please consider archiving!
However I did get the promo email, which started with a 'joke' (the one at the end was funny:
"One guy in a bar licked his finger, then touched a girl's shirt, then said
"Hey, baby, how about we get out of these wet things?"
Classy, eh?
Followed immediately by: 'In tonight's programme":
SHOOTING
Another gun killing in south London last night.
Classy, eh?
Sadly I missed both the programme and yesterday's opportunity to view it online - please consider archiving!
However I did get the promo email, which started with a 'joke' (the one at the end was funny:
"One guy in a bar licked his finger, then touched a girl's shirt, then said
"Hey, baby, how about we get out of these wet things?"
Classy, eh?
Followed immediately by: 'In tonight's programme":
SHOOTING
Another gun killing in south London last night.
Classy, eh?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)