Support your local library 5 Feb

BRISTOL City Council has admitted it may have to make up to £70 mil- lion of spending cuts over the next four years – £20m higher than previously announced.

I'm worried about the implications of this for vital services eg care for the elderly. Aren't we supposed to be remembering the contributions people made in the world wars? Many of these people are now in care homes or in need of care support to remain in their homes - we should be looking after them well.

BRISTOL City Council has admitted it may have to make up to £70 mil- lion of spending cuts over the next four years – £20m higher than previously announced.

Pensioners need resident wardens!

Scandalous way to treat older people by removing resident wardens....Good to see this issue, previously covered well by BBC Points West, reported on again...

PENSIONERS in Bristol who live in council-run sheltered accom- modation are suffering because they no longer have resident wardens to look after them. A survey by the Bristol Older People's Forum shows that more than two-thirds of the elderly say the quality of their lives is now worse than it was when there was a resident warden...Greens opposed this right from the start through Cllr Bolton and others (see here and here).

Green commitment to public services

Just signed up to all statements in the Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS) pledge and will be speaking on how Green policies are consistent with them at a candidates question time meeting organised by PCS tomorrow night, 6pm, at The Rose Green Centre, Gordon Rd, Whitehall (had several of the emails below*). I have pledged to: work to ensure that public services are properly resourced and delivered by the public sector and that there are no further local office closures, public sector job cuts or privatisations; support measures aimed at closing the UK tax gap including recruiting HMRC staff and ensuring tax loopholes are closed; support civil service national pay bargaining and to press the government to offer pay increases to public sector workers at least in line with inflation; honour the 2005 commitment on public sector pensions and defend the rights of existing members of the civil service compensation scheme; campaign to ensure any changes to public services are only made after proper equality impact assessments have been conducted and their findings implemented. I've previously expressed my strong support for the campaigns of the PCS on pay, jobs, office closures, privatisation, tax staff and fighting fascism here.

Greens are committed to high investment in public services and to opposing cuts. We have a £44 billion Green New Deal investment plan designed to begin the creation of a fair and sustainable society ie one that has health and wellbeing as the measure of progress in place of ‘growth’ and
which reconciles the economic and social with our environment such that we can all lead decent lives now and on into the future. Greens are arguing very strongly for: redistribution of wealth; closing the equality gap; resource efficiency; renewability; staying within environmental limits;
strong and empowered local communities; quality of life (see the Greens policies/manifesto at: http://www.onlygreen.org.uk/ )

______________________________________________________

*Dear Mr Vowles,
>
>I am writing to you as a prospective constituent to let you know about my
>union’s election campaign, Make Your Vote Count and to ask you to respond
>to our five election pledges.
>
>My union, the Public and Commercial Services Union, represents almost
>300,000 members in the civil service, non departmental public bodies and
>the private sector right across the country.
>
>As you know, public services are a particularly pertinent issue in this
>election and I am keen to find out where you stand on our key campaign
>issues (see below). Once you have responded to our election pledges this
>information will be distributed to PCS members locally and also published
>on the PCS website.
>
>1) I pledge to work to ensure that public services are properly resourced
>and delivered by the public sector and that there are no further local
>office closures, public sector job cuts or privatisations.
>2) I pledge to support measures aimed at closing the UK tax gap including
>recruiting HMRC staff and ensuring tax loopholes are closed.
>3) I pledge to support civil service national pay bargaining and to press
>the government to offer pay increases to public sector works at least in
>line with inflation.
>4) I pledge to honour the 2005 commitment on public sector pensions and
>defend the rights of existing members of the civil service compensation
>scheme.
>5) I pledge to campaign to ensure any changes to public services are only
>made after proper equality impact assessments have been conducted and
>their findings implemented.
>
>I would therefore be very grateful if you could outline your position on
>each of our pledges above in 150 words or less and send your response to
>.....or myvc@pcs.org.uk by 26 April.
>
>This offers you a unique opportunity to demonstrate your commitment to
>public services to me and other PCS members in your constituency. If you
>have any questions about this request or would like further information
>on our campaigns please visit www.pcs.org.uk/myvc .
>
>Yours sincerely

General Election

Well, ‘we’re off’ in the general election ‘race’ as some would put it. Economy, economy, economy - obviously the top three issues! Current politicians have seriously messed up the economy, creating deep recession and being more interested in their rich banker, sporting and celebrity friends than people generally.

There is little difference between the big three parties and you will get no fundamental change from them – the status quo favours them so they protect it. They all plan cuts in public services, all claim to be able to find billions in ‘efficiency savings’ far beyond what is reasonable, and all see ‘growth’ as the solution. Health and wellbeing – the way we look after older people, educate our children, safeguard our community our jobs, our environment – should be the measure of progress.

Current politicians have failed to invest properly in building the stable, secure and sustainable economy that would enhance our health and wellbeing. I’m working to promote the Greens £45 billion plan ie serious investment in: local, safe, stable jobs; strengthening local communities; local bus and train services; efficiency and renewable energy; promoting good health; crime prevention; and quality of life. Prominent features of this plan are free insulation for all homes and free health and social care for the elderly.

Knitted in to our economic crisis is an inseparable political crisis. Current politicians have messed up the political system, setting it up to serve themselves and not the people. We need a whole series of radical democratic reforms, including giving voters real power to sack MPs between elections. This would monitor and give feedback on MP performance and enable people to get rid of those that are corrupt and not doing a good job. We need MPs who are independent-minded, free-thinking, strong characters to replace those who merely follow the party line. Lets hope the high turnover of MPs at this election results in a far better quality House of Commons.

Why vote Green? Part Five: What do you want your MP to fight for?? clip

Public views on what they want from MP's and Green Leader Caroline Lucas in response:

Why vote Green? Part Four...

Local services and facilities of all kinds eg health facilities, old folks homes, schools, libraries, swimming pools (eg Jubilee Pool in Knowle, pictured), buses and trains, pubs, corner shops, the local high street…should be maintained and enhanced not threatened and cut. All too often the big three parties take a very narrow view, forgetting the vital social and environmental benefits of what’s available locally. Factor in benefits to the community along with purely financial considerations and you get a very different outcome to closures and cuts. The strong Green instinct for joined up (systems) thinking, for healthy local communities and being human scale means we always fight to protect local services.

This post is the fourth in a series giving positive reasons to vote Green in the run up to this years local elections and general election.

The key concerns of older people

Copy of my letter of reply to Bristol Older People's Forum: Many thanks for your recent letter seeking my views as a general election candidate on the Pensioner’s Manifesto, recently published by the National Pensioners’ Convention. You identify six main areas of concern: the state pension level; the shambolic system of social care for older people; the regressive council tax; disparities in free local transport between England and the rest of the UK; lack of priority given to tackling prevalent ageism and unfair discrimination on grounds of older age; and the increasing problem of fuel poverty amongst older people. I’m very happy to give you my views and the policies of the Green Party on each issue.

In the last few years I’ve lost my elderly father in law, who had a stroke, and my elderly mother in law, who suffered dementia. Being very close to them and having first hand knowledge of how the NHS and the care home system unfairly and at times negligently dealt with them and the family I feel more strongly than ever about ageism and the lack of priority afforded to tackling it. I’m sad to say that many families share my experiences. Discrimination and poor service for older people suffering strokes and dementia have been widely reported. Older people need and deserve protection against discrimination whether in employment or in the provision of goods and services. The Green Party supports legislation against age discrimination, and would ensure that EC law in this area is properly implemented. We also demand appropriate housing, benefits and health and social care provision, and we will work to ensure that we have good public services that provide properly for older people, ensuring respect and dignity for all.

The full state pension for a single pensioner is only £95.25, a massive decline since the link with earnings was broken by the Tory government in 1979. Many pensioners, especially women, don't even get a full state pension. The Green Party would introduce a Citizen's Pension that would pay pensioners a liveable amount, without means testing and would be linked to the rise in average earnings. Pensioners should not have to leap through the hoops of complicated and demeaning means tests in order to get a decent pension. We believe that we all owe older people a decent standard of living without demeaning means tests. The foundation of doing so is a proper state pension for all.

The Green Party has a plan for rebuilding the economy so that it delivers for people, but also operates within environmental limits. This plan is called the Green New Deal - a £45 billion investment to create 1 million jobs and lay the foundations for a sustainable and fair society. Our plan includes decent pensions and free social care for older people, creating 60,000 jobs. It provides for free insulation for all homes, schools and hospitals to reduce bills and tackle fuel poverty and the avoidable winter deaths that go with it – and this would create 80,000 jobs.

The Green New Deal also includes investment in a major expansion of public transport: doubling the size of the bus fleet through an investment of £3 billion to buy 30,000 new buses and create 70,000 jobs; providing a further £2 billion to subsidise bus fares and get new services operational; bringing the railway system back into public ownership and spending £2 billion on new track and rolling stock, and on urban tram schemes - together creating 20,000 jobs; reducing UK rail fares by one third to bring them in line with the European average through a £3 billion subsidy.

Greens are opposed to the regressive council tax and want to replace it with a system of Land Value Taxation (LVT, previously known as Community Ground Rent). In the short term we would support any reform of the council tax that reduces unfairness and improves its relationship to ability to pay. We would precede the introduction of land value tax with some land value tax pilots. LVT rates will be set at a local level. The valuation would be of the land alone, exempting all buildings on it, recent and future improvements to it, or indeed minerals extracted from it, which would be separately taxed. LVT would therefore not be a tax on the rent of buildings, the value of crops, manufactured products or the product of other forms of work.

I’ve done my best to supply you with principles and policies – and where possible some figures – directly related to your six main issues. If you require further information please dont hesitate to contact me. Further information is available on both the local and national Green Party websites (details below). You will find a record of my campaigning, before, during and after the election, on my blog...

http://www.greenparty.org.uk/

http://www.bristolgreenparty.org.uk/

Give voters real power to sack MPs between elections

The MPs expenses scandal rolls on, with the publication of a key report* today. For me this means that giving voters real power to sack (recall) their MP (or Councillor or MEP) between elections, a longstanding Green Party policy, should be an important general election issue. Its one of my three key election messages as the Green candidate standing in Bristol East against my MP Kerry McCarthy. It will feature in my election address/leaflet along with: making health and wellbeing the measure of progress – the way we care for our elderly, educate our kids, look after our community and environment; and investing for our future - in decent trains, buses, local jobs and strong local communities.

I'll do my best to raise the profile of this issue and other issues of democratic reform. I debated this issue with Kerry McCarthy on her blog a while back - she opposed giving voters the power to sack MPs between elections saying,

'...I understand why you're suggesting what you're suggesting, but I think it would be hugely open to abuse...'

Scroll down through the comments section of Kerry's blog post here to look over what was said in full. I'd also like to point you to a blog entry of mine from the year before the expenses scandal surfaced (here), where I'm expressing concern about the way MPs pay as well as expenses is determined, arguing for paying MPs only what they need to do their job, no more, no less (to be assessed using a system similar to the one the Joseph Rowntree Trust used to determine categories of need).

The Guardian said this about the latest official report on MPs expenses: The system of MPs' expenses was today condemned as "deeply flawed" with blame heaped on both MPs and the Commons fees office as 390 politicians found to have been in breach of allowances rules were told to pay back more than £1m.

Sir Thomas Legg's report (pdf)* into MPs' spending over five years, published today, concludes that there was a "culture of deference" in which fees officials felt obliged to pay MPs' claims regardless of the evidence they presented and in some cases the rules of the system.

Out of £55.5m spent on second-home expenses during the years under review, 390 MPs have been ordered by Legg to repay a total of £1.3m. Some £800,000 has been received and around £500,000 is still outstanding.

More than half – 52% – of the 752 current and former MPs who were investigated have been asked to repay cash....

BBC News report on the Legg report into expenses here.

Highlighted by snow and ice...

The snow and sub-zero temperatures have certainly revealed the power of nature – to produce both problems, such as safely transporting goods and people over distances, and opportunities, such as for local shops and the UK skiing industry.

The cold/snowy period has revealed our energy insecurity, with gas supplies running much lower than they should be allowed to, surely even more clearly making the case for Government action to insulate all homes to a high standard, free of charge, beginning with the poorest and most inefficient. This also makes the case for much greater diversity in our energy supplies.

To our shame this period has shown that councils and govt can plan to spread grit to keep the motorways open and keep the economy going but gritting in and around elderly peoples homes and our kids schools is not a priority.

On a more positive note recent days have shown us the value of neighbours and community spirit, with stories of people checking on their older neighbours, helping out those who’ve become stuck, and clearing areas for themselves because the council cant/wont get there to do it (surely highlighting the case for giving people more power and resources to do more things for themselves locally…).

Silver surfers...Social networking for Older People: activities/training in Knowle

From Makala Campbell (Cheung), of the Knowle West Media Centre: Hi All, do you know of an older person that could benefit from getting online? Maybe you know someone who works with older people or has an older relative or neighbour? Please forward the relevant info below (choose which one) and help get older people to this event.

And if you think there is someone I could contact personally to talk to them more about it, maybe a group or individual, then please let me know the contact details, and I'll chase it up!

Social Networking for Older People
[For organisations and individuals that work with older people]

Tuesday 8 December, Knowle West Media Centre, Leinster Ave, BS4 1NL

As the festive season approaches, the South Bristol Digital Neighbourhoods programme (SBDN) is holding an event for older people and the individuals and organisations that work with them.

At a time of year that can be lonely and bleak for some, this event will explore digital and social networking solutions to the problem of isolation and facilitate easier communication with and amongst older people.

On Tuesday 8 December 2-4pm, older people can receive training on our mobile laptops, sign up to the myguide website and set up their own Facebook account in a friendly environment, using KWMC’s excellent facilities. There will also be free mince pies, tea and coffee.

The event will look at digital issues affecting older people, with a focus on social networking and isolation.

For more information please contact Makala Campbell or Rachel Clarke at Knowle West Media Centre on 0117 903 0444 / makala@kwmc.org.uk / rachel.clarke@kwmc.org.uk
__________________________________________________________

Social Networking for Older People
[For older people ]

Tuesday 8 December 2-4pm, Knowle West Media Centre

As the festive season approaches, why not use the power of technology to keep in touch with your friends and family and do your Christmas shopping?

The South Bristol Digital Neighbourhoods programme (SBDN) is holding a day of activities on Tuesday 8 December to help you. There will also be free mince pies, tea and coffee!

Receive training on our mobile computers
Sign up to the myguide website for free computer tutorials
Set up your own account with Facebook – the popular website that connects you with people you know! Can you rival Ivy Bean – the oldest lady on Facebook?

Learn something new in a friendly and supportive environment!

For more information please contact Makala Campbell or Rachel Clarke at Knowle West Media Centre on 01179 030444 / makala@kwmc.org.uk / rachel.clarke@kwmc.org.uk

Makala Campbell (Cheung)
Digital Neighbourhoods & Communications Coordinator
Direct line: 0117 3532895 / Main tel: 0117 9030444

Knowle West Media Centre, Leinster Avenue, Knowle West, Bristol BS4 1 NL
Company No. 4358350, Charity No. 1092375 Fax: 01179030 445

Climate change is not only about melting ice caps and polar bears. Climate change is about people.

Guest blog post (for Blog Action Day: Climate Change) from CARE International's, Simon Owens:
Swinging weather patterns are creating disasters on a scale that human civilization has never before witnessed. For the world’s poorest people – the ones least equipped to deal with its effects – climate change is devastating their crops, livelihoods and communities.

"Climate change is worsening the plight of those hundreds of millions of men, women and children who already live in extreme poverty – and it threatens to push hundreds of millions more people into similar destitution," says CARE International’s Secretary General Robert Glasser. "A concerted international response to this unprecedented challenge is required if we are to avoid catastrophic human suffering."

CARE is working toward a world where poor people can create opportunity out of crises like climate change. But the current reality is that climate change makes poor people even more vulnerable.

For instance, agricultural production will likely decline in the poorest countries, especially in sub-Saharan Africa. Less reliable rainfall will likely affect planting seasons, crop growth and livestock health – and lead to increased malnutrition. In other parts of the developing world, flooding will likely further diminish the quality of already-marginal soil and could cause outbreaks of water-borne diseases such as cholera and dysentery.

Climate change also is hurling many poor families into "Catch-22" situations. For example, they may select crops that are less sensitive to rainfall variation, but also less profitable. As incomes decline and people are not able to eke out a living, children are forced to leave school, assets are sold off to afford essentials, malnutrition rates increase and large-scale migration ensues. The end result? Deepening poverty for tens of millions of people around the world.

What Must Be Done?

At the international level, negotiations to develop a new treaty to guide global efforts to address climate change will take place in Copenhagen, Denmark in just a couple weeks. The United States must help lead those efforts, and forge a strong agreement that caps emissions, stops global warming and responds to the effects already in motion. We must do this for the sake of all of humanity.

What can I do to help?

First, you can make a tax-deductible donation to CARE to help poor families access the tools and education they need to adapt to the effects of climate change, make efficient use of their existing resources and overcome poverty for good.

Second, if you live in the Unites States, you can write your senators and urge them to pass the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, a critical step toward U.S. leadership in tackling climate change. U.S. leadership is critical to making the Copenhagen negotiations a success.

Third, you can join the CARE mailing list to be kept up to date on CARE’s activities and other ways you can take action in the days counting down to Copenhagen.

To donate, take action and join our e-mail list, please visit www.care.org/climate

Windmill Hill City Farm: Save Our Farm Appeal

From the appeal organisers: The much-loved Windmill Hill City Farm provides a wide range of valuable services and facilities for the local community. Unfortunately it is facing a financial crisis and is threatened with
closure.

An Appeals Group has been set up to raise at least £50,000 before the end of the year, and since the recent launch of the Save Our Farm campaign, we have raised around £14,000. We have a variety of exciting schemes and events planned to generate funds over the coming months.

We need your help to see us through into next year, to enable us to put in place the long term strategies that will secure the future of the Farm. If you value Windmill Hill City Farm, and are in a position to do so, would you be willing to
pledge £25 to the Save Our Farm Appeal (and complete a gift aid form), if 500 other people will do the same?


You only donate the £25 once the pledge has been successful and 500 other people have signed up. There is a deadline for the pledge to be successful - 31st October 2009, and we hope to have 500 people by then, otherwise all those who have signed up will not need to fulfill their pledge and donate the money.

If we ARE successful, then this fundraising scheme alone will generate £12,500 - a quarter of our appeal target!

So what do you think? Are you in a position to make this pledge? If not, do you know someone else who is?

So how do you do it? It's set up on the Pledge Bank website - the link is: http://www.pledgebank.com/SaveWHCF

Just sign up with your name and email address (only used to tell you when the pledge iscompleted and for us to contact you about the pledge). You can keep track of whether the pledge looks likely to make its target by viewing the signup rate graph.

Even if you can't afford to make the pledge yourself, please support it by circulating this information by email/ word of mouth/ text/ Facebook/around your workplace etc to everyone you know who might be able to help, and please ask them to circulate it to everyone they know too.

I hope you can join me in making the pledge and/or spreading the word...

Many thanks,
Carolyn Hecker
Save Our Farm Fundraising Team

Green on Brown...

Responding to Gordon Brown's Labour conference speech, Caroline Lucas, leader of the Green Party, said: "Brown talked of Labour's onward march of fairness and justice - but we have a wider gap between rich and poor after 12 years of Labour. Labour has had 12 years to change the voting system, to restore the earnings link to pensions, 12 years to work for nuclear disarmament by axing Trident, to make the Post Office sustainable, and to provide fair wages for working people. And they have not."

"Brown talked of free education and expanded university places, but Labour has been the government to introduce tuition fees and rising student debt."

The Green Party welcomed Brown's aim for 250 000 new green jobs, and up to

10 000 green job placements for youth. But Caroline Lucas said that: "We cannot have a green economy with Labour promises of nuclear power and new coal plants at its core."

Lucas continued: "Unfortunately, Gordon Brown has a track record of grandly announcing projects that led nowhere -- whether it was midnight football, citizens' juries, or a NHS Constitution that ended up having no new enforceable rights."

Lucas also commented on the proposal that 16 and 17 year parents on public support would be sent to a new network of supervised homes: "We strongly object to the idea of forcing all 16 and 17 year-old parents on taxpayer support into a network of supervised homes. It would be a form of paternalistic, 21st-century workhouse. Teen parents flounder, as we've had 12 years of Labour without support for carers, and childcare provision that has been very patchy across the country. We need projects that encourage teen self-esteem and sex education, not punishment after the fact for teen mothers and fathers."

Liberal Democrat voters the largest group likely to switch to the Greens, followed by Labour voters

Just had the Liberal Democrat Party European election leaflet through my door. A lot of it is, surprise, surprise, pretty unremarkable. However, it does feature a paragraph worthy of comment on the Greens (along with paragraphs on the Conservatives and Labour) entitled ‘Their record of shame’ (the title’s a bit rich I’d say, given that several Lib Dem MPs have been forced by public pressure to repay expenses claimed)!! Now, this paragraph is interesting because poll evidence shows that the largest group that would consider switching to the Greens are Lib Dem voters, even though its usually far more common for Greens to attract former Labour voters, who this time came second!! Obviously the Lib Dem Party feel the threat to their vote from Greens.

This is what the Lib Dem Party’s inaccurate misrepresentation said,

‘The Green Party have always been anti-EU even though it is our best chance of tackling climate change. The EU has helped to clean up British rivers and beaches and ban animal testing of cosmetics, but the Green Party let their ideology get in the way of getting things done for the environment.’

*Greens ‘anti-EU’??

Frankly the Lib Dem Party should be much more questioning about the current EU which has been distorted by vested political and economic interests into a union dominated by economic interests, which lacks democratic control, and promotes the goals of multinational corporations, not of people. Greens are not campaigning to withdraw from the EU but we do believe that it should be radically reformed so that its made up of overlapping, co-operative, democratic, decentralised groupings of nations and regions. (More detail on the Green view of Europe here).

*Greens ‘let their ideology get in the way of getting things done for the environment’??

First the list of Green initiatives for people (just some of them shown in the long list below) in itself shows that we get things done (The Lib Dem Party still have not got the idea that being Green is not just about the environment and should note the wide range of our economic, social and political as well as environmental initiatives below). Second, the statement is illogical because Green ideology is itself about getting environmental things done, in combination with the social, economic and political, through the principle and practice of sustainability.

For you
Ensured better regulations for consumer goods
Won support for tougher laws on animal protection
Worked for urgent action on climate change and the environment
Promoted peace and human rights at home and abroad
Opposed the privatisation of public services and the closure of local post offices
Campaigned to end the Parliament’s wasteful two seat arrangement in Brussels and Strasbourg
Worked towards a more local, organic and sustainable food system
Ensured the health of EU citizens is put at the heart of European policy making
Demanded a global economy which puts people before profit
Promoted a fairer system of world trade to help reduce poverty

For women
Backed EU wide action to help ensure that women are guaranteed a life free from all violence
Secured support for the EU’s Cancer Task Force to investigate the environmental causes of cancer, (delete including) especially breast cancer
Called on members of the European Union to ensure that all women can fully enjoy the right to reproductive and sexual health care and information
Campaigned for the EU to fund improvements to maternal health, specifically to prevent deaths in child birth, across the world
Challenged whether the UK’s lax licensing laws for lap dancing clubs are a breach of European legislation designed to promote equality of treatment in the workplace

For workers
Demanded a massive investment in green industry and employment training, to create hundreds of thousands of new green-collar jobs here in the UK
Called on the European Commission to review the impact of the Posted Workers Directive on national jobs
Lobbied the UK authorities about better protection for temporary workers, including guaranteeing the same basic working and employment conditions as other employees doing the same job
Backed EU plans to limit the working week, giving people the chance to opt for a better work-life balance
Worked alongside trade unions to challenge the privatisation of public services and the impact this has on workers rights and job security

For the LGBT community
Led a European Parliament campaign for mutual recognition of civil partnerships between different countries
Called on the European Commission to condemn LGBT oppression in places like Iran, Morocco, Egypt, Bahrain and Honduras
Backed calls for a new law that would outlaw hate crimes perpetrated against LGBT people
Urged the British government to offer asylum to those fleeing persecution because of their sexuality or gender identity
Placed pressure on Eastern European countries to fully support LGBT rights, including backing PRIDE marches

For older people
Called for a £165 a week non-means-tested citizens’ pension for every pensioner in the UK
Challenged the UK’s decision to withdraw entitlement to free adult education for many older people
Ensured that EU law on equality and employment (is there some text missing here?), by opposing a mandatory retirement age
Supported constituents whose pensions schemes have failed
Helped protect constituents’ right to health care when they retire and live some of the time in another European country

For younger people
Campaigned to protect higher and further education from being run for profit
Encouraged the EU to provide more funding for cross-cultural programmes between young people in different countries
Worked hard to ensure that the internet remains accessible to all
Called for a Europe wide strategy to combat the trafficking of children
Demanded that children seeking asylum in the UK are not kept in detention
Supported NGO initiatives to promote greater public understanding of younger people

Olympic-size pool yes - but keep local pools like Jubilee in Knowle too

Copy of my letter, published in the Bristol Evening Post on Friday 8 Aug:

A new olympic-sized pool at Hengrove Park, would be great, but we should also be retaining local facilities such as Jubilee Pool in Knowle and others. Whilst campaigning as the Green candidate for Knowle in the last local elections I received a letter from local Labour campaigners stating that Jubilee Pool should stay open but now the Labour Cabinet running Bristol are set to close it once Hengrove Park is developed ('Bristol swimming pools axed for new leisure centre', Post, 5 Aug)!!

We need more sources of healthy exercise not less. Local facilities are an important community feature, especially for those who find it most difficult to travel, such as the elderly and families with young children. Its also more polluting if people have to travel further to a more remote pool as its beyond walking distance for many and they will tend to go by car.

I'd also like to see renewable energy systems used in the new leisure centre, especially to heat the water in the new pool (which would otherwise consume a massive amount of polluting and non-renewable fuel). I've written to the council making enquiries about this twice but have not even received an acknowledgement from them.

Irrational, emotive vitriol against money for cycling

I remember being accused of basing my views on emotion not reason, science and fact when I first began green campaigning 25 years ago. I always thought the opposite was true. Its now more evident than ever that the emotional reaction is actually from those denying the problems we face and resisting change for the better. Just take a look at this extraordinary and extremely unreasonable letter in todays local paper about Bristol winning money for investing in cycling. I've reproduced it here in full (with further reaction to it from me below it) because I think it makes the case for cycling very well indeed. After all, irrational, emotive vitriol is not going to solve our transport problems is it - though that is what Jamie Caddick's letter is full of:

As if any further proof were needed that the Government and local council have well and truly lost the plot, the announcement that those evil-doing two-wheeled terrorists of the modern world - cyclists - are to get a big fat government grant finally seals the deal ("£11.4 million to create first Cycling City", Post, June 19.In a world where it's commonplace and de rigueur to shower the unworthy and pitiful with handouts, benefits, rewards and incentives in a vain and futile attempt to appease and silence the minorities, this barmy cycling scheme is a step too far.And it's one that will further create division, resentment and anger among those of us whose lives are already blighted by this wannabe- superior, duplicitous, irritating, dangerous, sanctimonious and arrogant crowd.£22 million is a lot of cash - cash that could be pumped into schools (already struggling for funds and under the threat of closure), hospitals (already struggling for funds and under the threat of closure), local post offices, community schemes and elderly care homes (already struggling for ... see the pattern here?).And yet a gaggle of self-serving, do-gooder politicians have the temerity, conceitedness and ignorance to pile cash on one of the greatest scourges of contemporary Britain like it's going out of fashion.What's becoming more and more clear is that the more bothersome, annoying and unsavoury you are (individual or group), the greater your rights and the more important and unquestionable your demand to fleece the taxpayer.So, we'll get more cycle lanes (read as more road works and disruption), more initiatives and more cycle training to get us out of our cars and on to our bikes.The council is even planning "Bikeability" schemes in schools - which sounds more like indoctrination to me, soiling children's innocent brains to cultivate its own cycling clone army.I can see the training itinerary now: day one - Lycra and helmet awareness; day two - rudeness and inconsiderateness made a fine art.(And how it could ever be considered a good idea to encourage these mealy-mouthed morons is another topic altogether.)The whole scheme is a farce - a naive, over-simplistic, ludicrously out of touch and inconceivably unrealistic gimmick.We'll have councillors waxing lyrical about how fantastic it all is and how it's another step towards becoming more eco-friendly, sustainable and green and how their long-dreamt, misty-eyed fantasy of every Bristolian donning fluorescent Lycra, wearing silly helmets, ringing stupid bells and knocking innocent pedestrians off their feet may now become a reality.And make no mistake, cyclists are criminals.Let me remind you, it's still illegal to cycle on pavements, run red lights, ride the wrong way down a one way street, whizz through pedestrian crossings (when pedestrians are actually crossing them) and hop from road to pavement with reckless abandon and the attention span of an amoeba.And yet they're not treated as criminals - rather, they're elevated as warriors fighting against an irresponsible and polluted world, two-wheeled titans of a healthy and eco-conscious crusade and martyrs of an ethical and planet- saving battle that will one day have us all reading The Guardian and recycling our potato peelings.Rubbish. They're law-breaking lunatics masking their own inconsiderate egos under the pretence of doing something right-on and commendable.And I only need witness the number of people hit, nearly hit, inconvenienced and harassed by these cycling psychopaths on my daily walk to work to know this as fact.That's no inconvenient truth.It won't ease congestion, it won't reduce pollution, it won't make the city a safer place to live ("cyclists" and "safety" being something of a mind-bending contradiction) and it certainly won't boost Bristol's profile on the global stage as a tough, robust and competitive city.We'll be seen as a bunch of wimps on two wheels and be laughed off the stage to the holler of boos and hisses.So cyclists will carry on being annoying ("don't tar us all with the same brush ???", "I'm not damaging the ozone layer ???", "I'm having lentils and tofu for tea ???"), councillors on the board of Fatuous and Phoney Statistics in the Cuckoo-land of Sustainable Stupidity will carry on being deluded and pedestrians and motorists will carry on hating their guts.I feel the disapproving public's full wrath has yet to hit its critical meltdown.In the meantime - and from a pedestrian's point of view - let me remind you there's nothing attractive (especially after a full English breakfast) about seeing an elephantine derriere zooming past you at 8.30 on a Monday morning.And that's more than enough to put me off ever becoming a cyclist.


Your letter ('Not all Bristolians want to become a cycling city', Bristol Evening Post Soapbox, 24 June) is very far from a genuine argument Jamie Caddick, to say the least. There is extraordinary accusation, name-calling, stereotyping, vitriol, cynicism, insult, exaggeration and ignorance aplenty. I wonder if your letter is more likely to be persuade people that actually the money for cycling is pretty reasonable such is your ranting onslaught. Its surely hard to argue that investment in non-motorised transport is wasted in these times of soaring petrol/diesel prices, severely congested roads, massive parking problems and obesity-related ill-health? Dont the most vulnerable in our society, the very young, those with health problems and the elderly, suffer most from the air pollution caused by cars and lorries? OK, contrary to council claims this investment wont be a magic bullet that solves all our transport problems - they too are exaggerating about what this money can achieve (see here for further comments) and have yet to do the hard work of using the money in the most appropriate ways in practice. However, it is a step in the right direction and I think most people prepared to look at transport issues and budgeting in the round agree.

When will we have real care for the elderly? Proper mandatory training for all people having contact with people who have dementia is vital.

I very strongly support the call for mandatory dementia training for all home care staff made today by the Alzheimer's Society. In fact I'd like this training to cover all those who will have contact with those with dementia, including those in the NHS and elsewhere. The current situation of people with dementia is tragic, apalling and totally lacking in justice. In recent months I've had direct personal experience of how the NHS treats the elderly, with a death followed by a very significant illness in close family. Its been extremely upsetting to see first hand how the health and social systems (or lack of them) handle people with dementia, and elderly people in general. There just does not seem to be any real care for the affected people, except for a few notable individuals who stand out as unusual when you see and hear them at work. Its good to see the call for mandatory training widely reported.

C.diff and an NHS unresponsive to the people it serves: massive health issues. Lets address health, properly defined, in all its dimensions.

C. difficile is a massive problem for the NHS. At the same time the culture of the NHS is such that it is not responsive to the people it serves. The facts show this very clearly - and I, like many others, have recent, direct, personal experience of both C. difficile in a family member resulting in death, and poor responsiveness from the service. Technical capabilities in the NHS are often fantastic (though technical matters have 'gone astray' in places - overuse/misuse/abuse of antibiotics being the root cause of superbugs like C. diff and MRSA). Some very caring and committed people work in the NHS - BUT the emphasis on CARE as well as on prevention is in my view poor, especially for the elderly.

I want an NHS that pays as much attention to social and mental needs as it does physical ones, and medical/technical capabilities (it wont actually be adressing health, properly defined, if it does not do this, since health is about having a good physical, mental, social balance). I want it to be much more focussed on prevention of health problems than it is. I want services to be available to people locally. I want funding to enable all these things to be of a high standard and am willing to pay more in taxes, as required, to get it as well as being willing to advocate this politically. My view is that if people see the tax as fair and necessary and see that the income is used well they are willing to pay it.

More like mean test than 'means' test: meet the essential needs of the vulnerable free

‘Bristol is one of the few councils in the country whose Adult Community Care service currently provides the alarm for free’ said Annie Hudson, Director of Adult Community Care, Bristol City Council, about the lifeline alarm service (Bristol Evening Post, Soapbox, ‘City Council wants your views on alarm charging’, 4 Sept).

But she doesn’t say this proud of the fact that our city in this case takes the lead in providing a service to meet an essential need, free at the point of use – a principal at the heart of the NHS for instance which millions of us want to guard. She instead cites it as a reason for bringing in a means tested charge for the alarm, making us more like other councils. More like mean test, than means test if you ask me.

Frankly I feel its other councils who should be moving in our direction not us in theirs, in this case.

Other reasons she gives backing a charge are inadequate. To charge is wrong in principle and in practice. Such essential needs of the vulnerable should be provided. Some of the income from any charge would simply be eaten up by the costs of administration.

Ms Hudson states that ‘the idea was agreed in principle by the city council as part of this year's budget’ but also says ‘We are consulting widely, and are eager to hear people's views about whether charging is appropriate and how it can be made as fair as possible’. Does this mean that the council is willing to reverse its decision on the principle, or is it another one of those council decisions which ‘consultation’ will have absolutely no significant effects on?

‘No final decisions have yet been made’ she says. I hope not, but have very serious doubts. She has after all, already argued very strongly and publicly in one direction only. Central government wants it, other councils do it, some already pay for a similar service (perhaps they shouldn’t!), there are (vulnerable) people who can afford to pay, our population is getting older (and older peoples needs and rights get trodden on left, right and centre)…so we ‘must’ have it! Shame on the ‘Labour’ Group in particular if this charge is introduced.