.. fun, supplemental

I don't know if it's 'form' to do more than one a day, but I couldn't resist this just in from Reuters in proving my point, entitled "Food axis of evil invites Chirac to dinner":

'Jacques Chirac's mouth must be watering. Finland and Britain, the French president's two gastronomic nightmares, have invited him to dine on their finest food.

Stung by Chirac's reported comments on British and Finnish cuisine, Finnish European lawmaker Alexander Stubb, married to a British woman, has asked him to dinner.

Stubb was thoughtful enough to allow Chirac to show off the glories of the French table if he takes up the offer. "We hope that, as the president of an esteemed wine-producing country, you could provide the wines," he wrote.'

Prig, pompous, humourless... nil point. Humour, balloon, prick... one-nil.

Saving the planet was never going to be easy, but it can still be fun

Last night, purely by coincidence, I chanced upon a TV programme entitled 'Big Ideas That Changed The World'. This episode was introduced as a history of environmentalism by writer Bjorn Lomborg. Now, I hope I have remembered all that I watched correctly, and I stand ready to be corrected on fact. But as a blog is meant as personal opinion, here goes...

Mr. Lomborg's claim to fame was writing a book called the 'Sceptical Environmentalist', which it seems did what it said on the jacket. And hence one could not dispute that what he was outlining should be viewed in context. His basic premise was that the green lobby relied (relies?) on faulty information, and in the show he made a valid point on the pessimism at the heart of environmentalism, and that environmental groups have a vested interest in painting it black, and keeping it there. And I must say I couldn't help but contrast the sincere aims of Rachel Carson and her book Silent Spring (which got DDT off the spice rack), or the noble group of Greenpeace protesters who braved an Alaskan nuclear test, with the dogmatic, grant-dependent academics and salaried, head-officed, international conference-attending personnel, stances and actions of the activist corporations (you know, the, er, good kind) that exist today.

Mr. Lomborg did not seem to be a corporate (the, er, bad kind?) apologist. And there were countless interesting facts, theories and examples though, as is always the way, one has to be aware that this was a single, one presumes self-edited viewpoint, with no live debate from alternative views.

But I was taken with points such as Kyoto costing $150 billion a year. I have no problem with that if it is working/works in its aims, but this was contrasted with the benefits of diverting this money to world poverty (so, by no coincidence it's time to focus again on their Bob-nesses, and I deliberately note the spread from Geldof to Mugabe).

What did strike a chord were notions I had not previously heard, and hence considered, before. And these made sense, whilst freely acknowledging that it appealed to me on a rather selfish basis. A lot of global warming is from poorer countries using inefficient carbon fuels because they don't have the technology to do otherwise. Help them raise above this situation, and they can afford to avoid greenhouse gases and the mistakes of industrialising nations in the past. Now that's something I can subscribe to: end-benefit.

And to build on that shameless allusion to Junkk.com's core values, I'd like to end on one last image. There was archive footage of Mr. Lomborg's book signing, when a po-faced activist from central casting (no obvious beard, but there were very possibly sandals below shot) mouthing some 'you dare to disagree with us so we need to make you pay' polemic, smacked a Baked Alaska in the author's face.

You know what I loved? Despite his surprise, Mr. Lomborg seemed to crack a smile almost immediately, and in wiping the goo from his face with his finger even managed an appreciative lip-smacking taste. There is nothing as irresistible as a sense of humour. The way we will eventually win out over global warming is to be professional in what we do, but always chill out as we do it.

The outlook is fine, with the slight possibility of motivation in the unforeseeable future.

I have just had forwarded to me that Geoff Hoon is suggesting compulsory voting, backed... surprise... by fines if the public fails to vote in British General Elections. The Commons leader says a move towards compulsory voting is necessary to reinvigorate UK democracy. The proposals, which would also give voters a "none of the above" choice, follow the 61% general election turnout. Mr Hoon said British people could expect a "modest fine" for failing to vote, although he steered away from saying he wanted the scheme to be completely compulsory.

I rather love the notion of 'reinvigorating democracy' (which, according to my PC's dictionary is 'the right to PARTCIPATE - and this to me does not include any form of coercion in its meaning - in the system of government), is being introduced in almost its first breath as something with a fine attached.

And then there's the fact that it's not necessarily going to be 'completely compulsory'. Is this not like being 'a little bit pregnant'? Surely it either is, or is not compulsory. As with a lot of motoring-related laws these days, there seems to be an attempt at introducing ambiguity in the hope of deriving revenue from the confusion it produces.

Is it just me, or is this the mindset of every official and action of every department these days? Create a half-baked situation backed by fines first, and then figure out how it may actually work whilst generating revenue to cover the necessary ministry of minions to administer it all.

It certainly seems to be the basis of a lot of environmental stuff flying around. But most seem to be lazy or greedy options. I'd much rather people were persuaded to follow mutually beneficial paths by smart people finding ways to encourage them to do so because they want to, based on a clear understanding of the advantages. A very good place to start is in the form of incentives. This is the core basis of the Junkk.com model. Time will tell if it succeeds, but it has to be better than starting with 'or else'.

As an interim measure I'd suggest making 'none of the above' a more respected statement of dissatisfaction, and not a statistic ranked with spoiled votes.

Aggravator

Back from camp. With dignity, and possibly a couple of ribs, sorely compromised. And blogwise, the pressure's on! Not one week and I have faltered. I was going to miss today as well, but fortunately I had one up my sleeve for just such an eventuality...

Now that I have gone to the blog side, I'd like to give a big up to the chap who eventually turned the nagging of others and my consequent dormant thoughts into action. I met Lloyd Davies of Perfect Path at Internet World, where we were exhibiting, and he was speaking, surprisingly enough, about Blogs. I was inspired by his talk, we me t..yadayada.. the rest is history. Time will tell whether this was a good thing. I notice he's the first 'respondee', and I'm already being monitored on an aggregator, whatever that is. I think he said I needed one. My PR also has also sweetly advised she's keeping an eye out. So far, I'm ok, though Lloyd wants me to tilt at many windmills (and there are many that need a good tilting at). But at our stage of development there are those who you need onside more than off. So I'm already walking a fine line between. With almost no power it seems there is still great responsibility. Just ask any guy put in charge of 5 Cub Scouts for the weekend.

Hypocritical Oaths

I note that Chancellor Brown has accused his colleagues in the EU of hypocrisy, based on their postures on African debt vs. their stout defences of EU subsidies. By my understanding a sort of robbing Bob to pay Pierre. So good on Gordo. Not enough politicians vent the odd 'hypocrite' oath, and it is one that deserves to, and hence should be used a lot more often. Just.. a slight note of caution: it can have a nasty habit of making those who live in glass houses wish their boomerang-lobbing technique were a tad better. There are many in the environmental sector who would do well to remember that. Oh, and the government, too.

A shortish blog today, and none over the weekend. With G8 , Live 8 and all sorts of other fun and worthy stuff taking place, I'm decamping with my kids to another: Scout Camp. Not quite sure of the carbon consequences, but we'll certainly be closer to nature. Ging gang gooly, gooly, gooly, ging gang goo... hey, we're holding our own musical G8!

The unreadable in pursuit of the unreachable?

I hope Oscar Wilde will forgive the slight, adjusted plagiarism. And the newspaper in whose online small business mailing I just read that Government has issued a guide for all private companies to explain the benefits of voluntarily reporting their impact on the environment. It was headlined: “Green message 'goes straight to the bottom line'”. I rather fear that it may have been more appropriate to draw the line at, well, that word ‘line’. Because reading on I was not best encouraged. Elliot Morley, Minister for Climate Change and the Environment, is quoted as saying environmental reporting should not be seen as an extra burden for smaller companies, but rather that it made "good business sense", adding, "I can understand why businesses might feel it will add some extra paperwork, but these measures are not onerous." Fortunately for those not inspired to do some extra paperwork, the code is voluntary. As a spokesperson for the Forum for Private Business, which represents small and medium-sized businesses, has suggested (and, one presumes, not supportively, as claimed of Trade Bodies UK-wide for this measure),”Small retailers have enough paperwork to get through without having to read yet another code or guide”.

It seems most businesses will have to register their premises with the Environment Agency and have discussions with landfill contractors before disposing of items. Defra said some businesses would be exempt. So far, so precise.

Now, here's thing. This seemed like a NOBAD (NOT OBVIOUSLY BAD DEVELOPMENT. Future Warning: I like my acronyms). So I read this article, but came away really none the wiser on what I was and was not supposed to do, or could do if I felt so disposed. Like get this guide. So I went to the links on the piece to FPB and Defra. Now if there was anything in there to help I was damned if I could find it. So on balance, the only outcome so far has been nothing (except today's blog). But it’s is obvious that I am a bit more than most interested than most in this whole area! I can only imagine the yawning.. er.. yawn that will have overcome the rest of the business community if they mustered the slightest urge to delve.

Junkk.com fully endorses the notion of any Green message going straight to the bottom line, so long as it is end-benefit, reward based… because in so doing it stands a slim chance of being embraced. I just wonder what exactly this little effort achieved. Meetings were doubtless held. Reports were drafted. Maybe they even got printed. Possibly stored and dispatched if requested. Targets will, for sure, be met. But will there be a real result? So if anyone can locate this report online or as a PDF, let me know the URL and we'll stick it on Junkk.com. But first I'll need to read the thing, to see if I can hopefully find the stuff to introduce it on our pages in terms that might motivate some people. That way they may try and work with it because they can see why it's worth it to them, so they’ll want to. Wish me luck.

FMCG - Fantastic, Major Coverage Give

FMCG, for those who don't know, actually stands for Fast Moving Consumer Goods. Basically the stuff on the supermarket shelves that doesn't hang around there too long for various reasons, ranging from the fact that 'they're just sooo darn good' to a slight expiry-exceedance scenario (beyond use/sell/...or in the case of Innocent, who we at Junkk.com think are fabbo... 'enjoy by' date. Well, I certainly can't fault those nice folks at FMCG magazine, especially Editor Cat Deans, for living up to the F-word. 'Fast', that is. Having met only recently at a show, in their June edition they have given us a nice full page's worth of coverage. So let us hope that those brands who are their audience pick up on the message, and respond by getting their product data (and ideas for 2nd use) on Junkk.com before their competitors do!

--------------------------------
FMCG Magazine Junkk.com

Sledgehammering nuts to meet targets

A long, long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away (well, London) I gained a Civil Engineering degree. Admittedly, it was on the strict understanding I didn't try to build anything, but some stuff from those four years (of a 3-year course.. another story) stuck. And a few bits made an impression. One was the 'unofficial' motto of the industry (possibly the ICE, Institute of Civil Engineers), and that went something like: 'an engineer does for a shilling anything any other dope can do for a pound.' I like that. Honest. No jargon, but still confident enough in one's area of expertise. The corollary of that of course is: throw enough money at anything, and you probably will get a result. Hence the secret to genuine professional success is to achieve a safe, reliable result on brief, as efficiently and cost-effectively as possible. To (probably mis-) quote a character in Dickens, 'Expenditure one pound, income a pound and a shilling, result: happiness'. Inspired by a noble few.. too few.. who have gone before, Junkk.com starts by being free, and then we go on to save and/or make everyone money. So we'd like to encourage everyone involved in the planet-saving business to do the same, though there's no shame in trying to make an honest buck en route. But it is with sorrow that we must soon bid a sad farewell to Glorem.com, which has been a valued resource. And I continue to ponder just how well some initiatives flying around really stack up on a 'public cost to public benefit' basis. Just asking:)

--------------------------------------
Glorem.com Junkk.com

Hello

'It's a blog, Jim, but not as we know it'. Actually, it's probably exactly as you know it, but to stay true to Junkk.com's commitment to objectivity, and to keep our PR and legal chums happy, I'll need to steer clear of some of my more 'colourful' views of life, the universe and evREthing. But it looks like a good way to deal with daily issues, maybe prompt some debate in our Forum, and saves me having to write articles quite so often. I guess I'll restrict myself to posing questions rather than posting opinions, especially in the more controversial areas. So.. let the flames begin!
------------------------------------
Junkk.com