Member's means

Many MPs have second jobs eg North East Somerset MP Jacob Rees-Mogg received around £132,000 in the year to August from his company Somerset Capital Management. The Conservative MP works 35 hours a month in return for the cash...(story here). As a matter of principle shouldn't we expect MPs to work full time for their constituency? Mr Rees-Mogg for example has time and energy that he could direct into working for voters in his constituency that he is directing elsewhere. Surely there are enough problems and issues to work on in his constituency, the SW region, the country, the EU and the world to keep this (and other) representatives busy for a lifetime! Docking some pay from MPs with second jobs is perhaps missing the point - they should not have these jobs whilst being an MP to begin with, so make it a rule that they cant.

Wealthy = wrong????

Its pretty 'rich' that George Ferguson has 'been criticised by some Labour backers on social website Twitter over his personal wealth for allegedly being motivated by money.' (see story and online comments here). Isn't Ed Miliband quite a wealthy person? And others in the Labour Party? And aren't many donors to Labour very wealthy?

Its not inherently wrong to be wealthy!! Its how you've come by/made your wealth/money perhaps...and what you do with it when you've got it. George has used his wealth to good effect it seems to me (see image of the Tobacco Factory http://www.tobaccofactory.com/) - and he could obviously make a lot more money if he did not have the restrictions that inevitably and rightly come with becoming Mayor of Bristol!

George is wealthy. George has been a Liberal supporter in the past. George is not always 100% PC with his language...These are all very weak and feeble 'criticisms' indeed.

Massive mudslinger

Believe me I'm no fan of elites but this is a non-story, saying, One of Bristol's leading musicians has claimed mayoral candidate George Ferguson's membership of Bristol's elite Society of Merchant Venturers is a conflict of interests. Massive Attack's lead singer Robert Del Naja... (here). There is no substance to it at all. Its all pure supposition and mere accusation, in this instance by just one 'famous' person throwing mud. So a candidate(Ferguson, pictured) belongs to a society (Merchant Venturers) and even if he resigned from the society he would still have friends in it. So what? There must be many, many candidates who are members of various organisations and who would retain friends if/when they left in the event of getting elected. Now, it really would be a story if there was any evidence of undue and unjustifiable influence or unethical practices - but there is no such thing! Or can someone provide evidence....?

Come to think of it aren't members of political parties members of a selective society, with a lot of friends etc etc...

Party politics

The national spotlight fell on Bristol's Labour mayoral candidate as he took to the stage in Manchester....(more here). But Marvin Rees's case lacks substance. He's either not able to or did not think of making the economic case for a living wage in this article for instance, to add to the moral/ethical one. It seems to me that he talks about the need for a plan for Bristol but then all he comes up with is warm words and attempted populist generalities. I want to see joined up thinking from him.

Taking 'pot shots' at his rivals too often could backfire for him. Labour in Bristol is already a very tribal sort of outfit, too high on pure party politics. Some of his rivals will attract votes by appealing for people not to back pure party politics so maybe he'd be better off sticking more to making a positive, policy-based case.

Culling controversy

I've chipped in to the online debate on badger culling proposals (see here and here or view the many Post stories that have recently appeared listed here) and copy my contributions in this post: Interesting exchange between vets on bovine TB here http://tinyurl.com/8tozsgu It includes this statement from vet Andrew Wilson: "...16 member states of the European Union are recognised as officially free of bovine TB, along with Scotland and a number of regions of Italy. As far as I can find out, not one of these countries or regions had to control TB in wildlife in order to obtain its officially free status...."

Killing badgers is both wrong and unlikely to to be effective in fighting TB.Vaccination is a realistic alternative to culling according to this site http://tinyurl.com/c8a2sbz . Follow up on the many references given there if you want to know more. It says this for instance, " An injectable badger vaccine was scheduled to be trialled in England throughout 2010, but the coalition scaled back plans in June of that year. Out of the six planned trials only one survived in Stroud, Gloucestershire, where badgers are being trapped and injected with the BCG vaccine over a period of five years (76).

This reduction in funding to alternatives is especially short-sighted as, in November 2010, Defra research showed the outcome of some trials that showed that vaccinating wild badgers over four years resulted in a 74 per cent reduction in the proportion testing positive to the antibody blood test for bTB (72). As natural prevalence of bTB is just 15 per cent then widespread vaccination could be of significant benefit. Especially as there is an annual turnover of badgers of around 30 per cent (badgers have a life span of 3-5 years). Theoretically, the number of infected badgers would decrease each year and new infections would be rare (101).

Additionally, laboratory studies with captive badgers demonstrated that the vaccination of badgers by injection with BCG significantly reduced the progression, severity and excretion of Mycobacterium bovis infection. This seems to strongly support the claim that vaccination alone could reduce bTB infection in badgers by a significant amount (in the same time period of 4-5 years that has been suggested for 'culling'). It would not lead to perturbation and would also be cheaper than the Government's current plans (see The Cost).

As it stands, despite the findings, this Defra study concludes that vaccination should take place alongside badger 'culling', which appears to go starkly against the results of these trials which show that non-lethal approaches will be enough to protect badgers from the disease...”

Bank on bankers?

To 'bank on' something means being able to expect or rely with confidence on it. Given that: bankers have lied to make them look more secure during the financial crisis and to make a profit (here); and have mis-sold specialist insurance to thousands of small businesses (here); on top of PPI insurance mis-selling, taking huge, fat, undeserved salaries and bonuses, and helping to take our economy and others to the brink...we clearly can't be confident that they operate within a decent ethical code. Our banking system's reputation, integrity and trustworthiness sinks even lower. Culture change is certainly needed if we are to build an economy capable of being sustainable (more here).

Decision before evidence?

Bristol City Council rejected the chance to build a tram system despite figures showing it would be cheaper than the proposed new Bus Rapid Transit link, it has been claimed....Sustraco claimed that Mr Kent [Bristol City Council Cabinet Member for Transport, pictured left] announced at the end of the meeting that the council had already decided "before the meeting" that the bus option would be chosen. On returning from the meeting, Sustraco officials said they found they had been sent e-mails with a 34-page report attached. The report, which Sustraco said was written before the meeting, detailed the decision without considering evidence submitted in the meeting...(full story here)

Only one conclusion can be drawn from this, if what Sustraco say is true. Tim Kent and the Lib Dem Cabinet running Bristol made a decision involving many millions of pounds without considering the all the evidence. Kent met with Sustraco knowing that holding the meeting was pointless given that decisions had already been made! Unless Sustraco's description is shown to be wayward, this is irrational, unreasonable and deceptive behaviour whatever the merits or not of light rail vs BRT.

Sustainability summit sucks

UN talks on sustainable development are encountering disputes, delays and diplomatic wrangling, days before world leaders arrive to sign a new agreement.

The talks, in Rio de Janeiro, are aimed at putting the world economy on a more sustainable path, helping people out of poverty while protecting nature.

Yet developing countries have walked out over money, and the presence of Palestinians has brought complications.

Campaigners say there is little hope of momentous changes being agreed here...(full story)

Boxing clever?

Encouraging children to take up boxing could prevent a repeat of last summer's riots, a Bristol MP says.
Charlotte Leslie...said hopping into the ring was "as close as you'll get to a silver bullet" for harnessing the pent-up frustration of teenagers...(full story)

I wouldn't go as far as to say its a silver bullet but I do think Tory MP Charlotte Leslie's argument that boxing is a good means of  personal development for young people is a sound one. Professional boxing is badly in need of a reforming shake up in terms of its safety, money involved, management and the behaviour of boxers. However, amateur boxing, like many other sporting activities, can if properly delivered be a good activity that people can do together in their community. It requires participants to respect and work within a set of rules. It means those taking part get into a routine for training and planning. It promotes physical health and a focussed mental attitude. Surely it is reasonable to assume that these things help to develop greater social responsibility?

Nuclear no no

No-one would disagree (would they?) that burying waste from today's nuclear power stations leaves a very big set of social, economic and environmental problems for many generations to come. Since sustainability is about dealing with risks and costs now and not passing problems to future generations it therefore follows that burying nuclear waste is inherently unsustainable. The following question alone demonstrates this: with waste that can be active for thousands of yrs how can it be possible to guarantee that the institutions needed would be stable beyond periods which have so far proved to be whole lifetimes of civilisations?

Despite the logic above the UK plans to build more nuclear power stations (if the huge economic cost obstacles can be overcome) and the '...search for an underground storage site for high-level nuclear waste is likely to go ahead in Cumbria after a poll showed residents are in favour.

In Copeland, the local authority area encapsulating Sellafield [pictured], 68% of people backed entering formal talks with government on hosting the repository.

Across Cumbria as a whole, 53% are in favour and 33% opposed...'
(full report here).

Waste war

Excellent work on food waste from Kerry McCarthy, Labour's MP for Bristol East. The Post reports that she has launched a campaign to prevent surplus food from supermarkets from being thrown away.

Kerry McCarthy was today due to introduce legislation that would place a legal duty on companies to donate excess food to charities.

Her Food Waste Bill, which was due to be presented to Parliament this afternoon, has already received cross-party support, including from Green leader Caroline Lucas and Tory Zac Goldsmith. If no objections are lodged, it will progress to the next stage of the legislative process.

Under the Bristol East MP's proposed changes, barriers that are stopping organisations from donating food, like fears over legal liability, would be swept away.

Incentives would be put in place to persuade smaller companies to take part, while food that is unfit for humans would be given to livestock....' (more)

Kerry’s Bill begins to tackle one part of the food waste problem but there’s still a lot to do on food waste as a whole. There is concern about rising food prices yet 33% of the food we buy is thrown away ie one bag in every three! I'm not a fan of big supermarkets. They are a part of the food waste problem certainly but it’s clear that there are food waste and efficiency issues all the way along the chain from soil to shops to home to plate to soil again and each of us must take some responsibility.

Of course not all those who complain of or worry about rising food prices will also be wasteful but levels of food waste are so high that there must be a good deal of hypocrisy out there. This is a problem of lack of awareness but also a problem of plenty and of affluence. Where shortage and poverty are greatest waste is highly likely to be smallest, but shortage/poverty is generally not now the case in the UK and so wasteful habits and cultures have grown. We need to establish a thrifty culture.

Great tips and advice on cutting food waste, saving money and enjoying food from Love food hate waste.

Dinosaurs not extinct

Dinosaurs are still alive and well in the UK today. There are various extinct, frequently large, meat eating or veggie reptiles of the orders Saurischia and Ornithischia that lived mainly on the land between approximately 65 and 200 million years ago. Then there are relics of the past, holding to hopelessly outdated, obsolete ideas and practices - such as some MPs and Cardinals.  A Conservative MP has described proposals to allow gay marriage as "completely nuts". In the House of Commons, Peter Bone urged the Church of England to block the plans, as it believed marriage had to be "between a man and a woman"...(details here).

The government's plans for gay marriage have been criticised by the most senior Roman Catholic cleric in Britain. Cardinal Keith O'Brien, the leader of the Catholic Church in Scotland, said the plans were a "grotesque subversion of a universally accepted human right"... (details here). 

Fight for forests

Forests: reasons to protect and conserve... beauty, morality, natural cycles, learning, health, wellbeing, needs, biodiverity, humanity.

Carping critic

Plenty of simplistic labelling, shallow outright dismissal and self-aggrandisement from Peter Hargeaves here (Bristol lacks leadership... but I won't be running for mayor).

He thinks everything is wrong about the way Bristol is run. He has the chance to put himself and his ideas - such as they are - into the mix to become the elected Mayor, should Bristolians vote to have one this May. He has huge resources to put into an election campaign. But he refuses point blank to be a candidate - so what he's says is no more than petty complaint and fault-finding. 

Also see here. 

Fairness and females

The current political system is very clearly skewed in favour of men, in terms of style, substance and structures. It is therefore undemocratic, with people chosen for their gender rather than their ability. Its logical to counteract this skewed situation through measures like all-women shortlists (as Labour in Bristol West are planning to use*). To call a measure designed to achieve balance and fairness between men and women sexist, as some do, is to ignore the current bias in favour of men and turn reality upside down. Lets remember that its not so long ago that women had no vote at all! There should not be any need for all-women shortlists but until prejudice is significantly reduced something needs to be done - only 22% of MPs in the House of Commons and 20% of members of the House of Lords are women. Its unreasonable to say, as some do, that MPs who originally became candidates via all-women shortlists are somehow second class - because they have appeared on the ballot paper at a general election and have been put into power by voters in their constituency - presumeably any voter who felt they were not up to the job or were selected as a candidate by an objectionable process woud not have voted for them.

Politics in the UK is often overly and unecessarily macho and confrontational. Parliament has long been acknowledged as a 'boys club' or 'gentleman's club'. This is no way to address and solve problems and in part its down to the skewing of the system to favour men that is clearly shown by the stat that 4 in 5 in Parliament are men, including men with outdated, sexist attitudes. It is suggested that women candidates and MPs as weaker and second rate but many say that the performance of women MPs has been good and that Parliament with more women is better in several respects - a case of prejudice getting  in the way of reason.


There are other unfair aspects to our system. It needs wholesale radical reform
*See: http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/Bristol-Labour-Party-select-MPs-women-list/story-15155549-detail/story.html

http://www.parliament.uk/education/online-resources/parliament-explained/women-in-politics/

PMQs Queries

Today's Prime Ministers Questions featured some important matters of course...banking and bonus culture, reform of the NHS...As is most often the case however, the motivation for questions and answers is party politics and tactics - trying to get your opponent on the back foot. Very serious, highly topical matters that should be raised often dont get a look in.

 No MP let alone Labour Leader Ed Miliband, asked about policy on Afghanistan despite the fact that overnight it was reported that a 'secret Nato report seen by the BBC suggests the Taliban in Afghanistan are being directly helped by the Pakistani security service (ISI).' (see full report and links to others here). This is a matter of life and death to our service personnel and Pakistan is supposed to be an ally. 

 Also no questions on the ongoing, unresolved economic crisis in Greece that could have widespread ramifications and where 'problems are as bad as ever.' (see here). Nothing on the prospect of famine in West Africa (here)...Ok, there is limited time and there are many serious issues that could be asked about - but there is a definite pattern to PMQs that severely narrows the topics chosen and the style and quality of debate.    

Morality and money

It's commonly being said that RBS boss Stephen Hester has done the 'right thing' in giving up his bonus of nearly £1 million. On todays Daily Politics it was even described by one commentator as the 'moral' thing to do. Was morality his motivation? Surely the right and moral thing for this man to do would be to stick by what he believes in - huge salaries and very large bonuses - and work through the consequences of doing this. He has not given up his bonus because he believes it's right and moral to do. Its been widely reported (here for example)  that he did so because he did not want to be a 'pariah'. Its also been reported that his hand was forced by the prospect of a House of Commons vote (see here). For me being motivated by concern about being despised or confronted is not showing much moral spine at all. Mr Hester, who is still very likely to add to his already very large pile of money, has a morality comparable to RBS's directors, who according to the BBC's Robert Peston '...now recognise it would have been far better to delay the bonus decision until after the world had seen what Barclays' chief executive, Bob Diamond, is being paid - because Mr Hester's bonus would not look big in comparison.' They too are more concerned with impressions created than realities.

Other posts relating to Stephen Hester/RBS:

http://vowlesthegreen.blogspot.com/2010/01/when-will-bankers-like-this-get-their.html 

 http://vowlesthegreen.blogspot.com/2012/01/caring-compassionate.html

Eco-ethics

Why conserve? Reasons to sustainably manage, protect resources, eco-services, biodiversity and wild places. Copy of a screencast I made recently.

Caring, compassionate capitalism...contradiction

Capitalism, favouring private ownership, maximising private profit, decisions made by a free market, economic growth as the primary aim – is currently the subject of many party leader speeches. Reference has been made by Tory PM Cameron, Lib Dem Deputy PM Clegg and Labour Opposition Leader Miliband to making capitalism, as it currently works, more: responsible; moral; compassionate; caring – and thus popular and acceptable. This, at least, is an acknowledgement that capitalism is now operating: irresponsibly; immorally; uncaringly; without compassion – and that its popularity and public acceptability has suffered. However, along comes a chance for action that would send out a strong signal that significant change in the whole system is coming – and absolutely nothing is done, just as nothing was done by previous governments.The already very wealthy RBS boss Stephen Hester is allowed by the Govt to receive a bonus of about £1 million on top of his £1.2 million annual salary. RBS was saved using many billions of taxpayers money and is 82% publicly owned, the PM has said we are all in difficult economic times together, has said he wants to tackle excessive pay and bonuses...words, words, only words. See here, here and here for more.

The solutions offered up by the Tory/Liberal Govt, previous Tory and Labour Governments and the current Labour Opposition are those of capitalism – the very thing they have all described as deficient in some way. Coalition Ministers talk of: the importance of finance; the deficit and its ‘correction’ through cuts and freezing public sector pay; economic growth as essential; how we must remove obstacles to growth; how growth should be led by private enterprise; their pro-market, pro-business, pro-competition agenda. They say high taxes on rich people and companies could send them abroad. Private, market incentives are to operate in Royal Mail, the NHS and Higher Education. Has it occurred to them that solving the problems of capitalism with more capitalism may well be like solving the problems of alcoholism with more alcohol? Show me a version of capitalism that is or can be developed to be socially sustainable because it shares wealth fairly and environmentally sustainable because it does not rely on and run down finite resources and you will get my attention!!   

More posts on capitalism:

http://vowlesthegreen.blogspot.com/2010/01/when-will-bankers-like-this-get-their.html

http://bristol.indymedia.org/article/697599

http://vowlesthegreen.blogspot.com/2010/10/capitalist-ideology-dominates-cuts.html  

http://vowlesthegreen.blogspot.com/2008/09/cabot-circus-consumerism-capitalism.html
http://vowlesthegreen.blogspot.com/2010/11/house-of-cards-economics.html

Car crap

More than 15,000 motorists a year are caught jumping red lights in Bristol, it has been revealed.

The Avon and Somerset Safety Camera Partnership says a total of 15,500 drivers and motorcyclists were caught on camera going through red traffic lights last year...(more here).

No surprise here. In fact the figure is very likely to be much higher than 15,500 a year - this is only those drivers that have been seen and successfully photographed. Anyone who drives around Bristol a bit, as I do, knows that you dont have to be out on the road for long on any one day before you see all sorts of driving offences and breaches of the Highway Code: overtaking on the inside, weaving from lane to lane, through red lights, driving very close behind you, sudden and sharp braking, sudden acceleration, through zebra crossings when people are waiting to cross or are still on the crossing, generally not allowing space and time to pedestrians and bikes, irresponsible parking eg on double yellow lines and on corners, general speeding -including from one set of red lights to another...Many of these people must have more money than sense because they are increasing their chances of a very costly - and more serious - accident and wasting away their fuel with grossly inefficient driving - some of these may be the first to moan about fuel prices too!