No Ta - NONE OF THE ABOVE

1984 is here again

2007-02-10T12:32:00.001-08:00

Big brother is watching us....please consider signing this petition, or perhaps you already did?
...my name will be there right now! Happy motoring

If you drive a car, please read - Sarah Kennedy was talking about this proposed car tax scheme on Radio 2. Apparently there is only one month left to register your objection to the 'Pay As You Go' road tax.

The petition is on the 10 Downing St website but they didn't tell anybody about it. Therefore at the time of Sarah's comments only 250,000 people had signed it and 750,000 signatures are required for the government to at least take any notice.

Once you've given your details (you don't have to give your full address, just house number and postcode will do), they will send you an email with a link in it. Once you click on that link, you'll have signed the petition.
The government's proposal to introduce road pricing will mean you having to purchase a tracking device for your car and paying a monthly bill to use it. The tracking device will cost about £200 and in a recent study by the BBC, the lowest monthly bill was £28 for a rural florist and £194 for a delivery driver. A non working mother who used the car to take the kids to school paid £86 in one month.

On top of this massive increase in tax, you will be tracked. Somebody will know where you are at all times. They will also know how fast you have been going, so even if you accidentally creep over a speed limit in time you can probably expect a Notice of Intended Prosecution with your monthly
bill.

If you are concerned about this Orwellian plan and want to stop the constant bashing of the car driver, please sign the petition on No 10's new website (link below) and pass this on to as many people as possible.

Sign up if you value your freedom and democratic rights -

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/traveltax

The way councils are everywhere?

2007-01-16T09:12:00.000-08:00

It is almost impossible to pick up a leaflet issued by Brighton & Hove City Council without being struck by the PC virtues it apparently espouses. Whether it be their consideration for the environment, the concern they lavish on minority and disadvantaged groups or the lip-service they pay in encouraging community initiatives, they impress by the commitment they seem to give to every section of our very diverse society.

The Fiveways area is noted for a lack of facilities for the youth in its community and The Children's Musical Playhouse, currently operating from Beaconsfield Road, has been struggling to fill a gap in the culture of the area for several years now. Apart from the classes in music and dance provided to the children of local families, there have been successful projects working with handicapped and mental health groups - the very sections of the community the Council is so keen to support.

I was therefore saddened and somewhat surprised to hear that the Environmental Health Department has just refused to allow the music workshop to carry on its normal activities from the present address. This is about the sixth time this popular and worthwhile organisation has had to seek new accommodation. It must be very frustrating indeed for the folk who have put so much effort into developing each venue as they have moved from place to place. It is a mark of the importance and commitment they have in the community that supporters have not allowed them to become totally discouraged to the point of giving up. This is not to mention the amount of expense incurred and the time wasted in finding new funding at each relocation.

Is the Council incapable of putting its money where its mouth is by finding this excellent community initiative a permanent home from where it can get on with the job it has striven so hard to do for so many years without having to worry just how much longer it has to wait before it is forced to move on yet again?

Defense de Fumer!

2006-12-10T07:49:00.000-08:00

It's starting - the long-awaited clamp down on smoking

I don't smoke - never have done - never intend to

But the all pervasive desire to make other people stop doing it seems pretty evil to me and calls into question whether people really do believe in free choice or not

The spanish - bless their cotton socks - have had quite restrictive laws on smoking in public places such as bars for some time now. How have they received them?

By the brilliant tactic of letting them in and then ignoring them

There is just too much respect for the law in this country

We let the do-gooders pass stuff willy-nilly because they think they have a God-given right to decide what's good for us and then we think we have to obey their laws however crappy they may be

Why not let the prisons fill up with people who decide to flout the anti-smoking laws - then Big Brother and her cohorts can decide how to cope with real criminals who rape and murder

The only way left to stop the ever increasing number of interfering freedom limiting laws is by ignoring them and let those who want to toe the line figure out how to deal with the consequences of their fascistic actions

I may even force myself to take up the habit

Edukashun, Edukashun, Edukashun......

2006-12-06T14:46:00.000-08:00

I think I've mentioned on a previous occasion, that I'm appalled by the frequency that education issues appear in headline news. Not a day seems to go by without this or that new announcement, initiative, review, enquiry etc etc etc being declared.
Now when I were a lad, you never heard nuffink abat edukashun from one year to the next. And life seemed a whole lot better for that.

Today's bandwagon is that old chestnut about the 'high' percentage of school-students attaining leaving age without developing a satisfactory ability in reading and/or writing.

Now while I recognise that in the UK there seems to have been a 'golden age' in school performance probably peaking in the 60s or 70s, I would contend that there always was and always will be a certain amount of school failure in the 'basic skills'.

The reason for this is obvious to me - that is they are not basic at all. In fact they are totally artificial - figments of our fertile human imaginations, pounced upon by the powers that be as a useful stick with which to beat us.

If The Supreme Being had intended us to be readin', writin' amnd rithmetisin' it'd not have waited till the Lil Ol Yuman race commed along afore it started insistin' on it.

Trilobites, Stromatolites, Dinosaurs, CumuloNimbus, Cannabis Sattiva and everything else would have been reading, writing and arithmetising well before now. But no, that doesn't seem to have happened. And even when Our Lot pops up it seems to take squillions of years before anyone thinks about these activities and lots more before it's even suggested that the majority should aquire these entirely invented skills.

Is it not possible that for any number of reasons to do with neurological development, personal preference or different priority many many many folk may just not be equipped to acquire the so-called basic skills? I think this is entirely possible.

My experience 'in the workplace' has shown me that in all age groups there are small numbers of very good workers who struggle with literacy and/or numeracy and it does not make them any less a valuable citizen even though the dim-witted among them might persecute them for being differently skilled.

So, I'm happy with Mr Gordon Brown to be trying to restore the place in the curriculum for methods which identify struggling pupils at the age of six or any age for that matter, but I am not happy with people who use statistics to try and convince us that things are getting worse and everybody should be getting PhDs even though they think that standards are falling etc etc etc

We should not be thinking that the system is failing just because X% cannot read and write. Rather we should be asking what else can these people be doing to help them feel included and take up useful positions in society.

In the Old Days there were tons of manual and manufacturing jobs in which they could develop other skills and feel highly valued. Successions of short sighted governments - mainly under the influence of Mrs T [a fore-rummer of mrsa!] - have demolished British Industry and only replaced it with crappy second rate service industries which most of us don't really need anyway.

Meanwhile schools still go on as if we're still in charge of the world and need to churn out godzillions of Oxbridge educated bureaucrats to keep the rest of the buggers in their proper place! Skools are an outdated relic of the Industrial Revolution. We probably do not need universal schooling at all any more. Education should be almost entirely experiential. Kids should have the freedom to explore and time to enjoy the wider world around them and creatively find out where they want to take their lives - something skools are VERY VERY BAD at. Besides real life, there are plenty of good educational tools around in the form of computers, TV & Radio, libraries, etc etc etc from which they can draw inspiration in the company of grown up more mature friends and neighbours and if they deem it useful and necessary they will learn to read and write - at least just as many will do as do so at present.

The NUT has perpetrated a grievous mendacious myth with its slogan..

'If you can read this, thank a teacher'

Teachers can and do do a lot of good but when it comes down to it most kids actually teach themselves to read and motivation is the most important ingredient in the mix which will get them there, although it should be accepted that some people will never acquire the skill, and many only barely adequately.

Please let's become a little more tolerant and imaginative about what folk need to achieve to be good citizens and stop demonising those who have different levels of skill and ability and find them good roles in society so that they can feel included and proud of their abilities and the contributions they can make.

Climb down off soapbox.....

Pro-Fusion

2006-11-21T02:41:00.000-08:00

Hoo-ray! At Last it looks like we might be taking realistic steps to deal with the energy crisis and go some way to combat global warming in a practical way.
It’s probably not fair to suggest that this is the start of something entirely new because scientists and other authorities have no doubt been beavering away for years to make today’s announcement of an international cooperative project to develop a programme to produce energy by nuclear fusion a practical reality. But thus far this public have not been involved very much until this moment .
Now we know what’s happening we can all step forward to encourage the project by letting our MPs and other folk who speak for us know we’re behind it and want to see it succeed. I intend to write to my MP today. So at least he’ll be aware of this. Could I ask you to do the same – even if you disagree with me, at least it will raise the level of debate.

Glowing plasma inside a fusion test reactor (Image: Princeton Particle Physics Laboratory)
Of course there will be resistance. On BBC Radio 4’s Today Programme this morning, they wheeled out Friends of the Earth’s Roger Hinkman to whinge about it but luckily he was unable to raise any convincing objections and the pro-fusion spokesperson was conciliatory and sensible enough to affirm that we also need to make more progress in the development and encouragement of renewables – wave, wind, solar, geo-thermal etc – alongside fusion.[And let’s not forget the still tangled mystery of such phenomena as cold fusion.] But it is clear that there will be huge campaigns by well-meaning Luddites who really object on philosophical grounds rather than for any genuine ecological or economic reasons. They may have valid viewpoints but they cannot be allowed to stymie every positive step forward by raising petty objections thus adding years to each painful stage in progress. Let’s have an upfront debate at the outset, come to some mutually acceptable way forward and seize it with enthusiasm. [Am I sounding a bit like Trotsky or Mao?]
Maybe it’s now time to boost the advancement of renewables and fusion by discouraging the use of oil and coal etc with progressive taxes that will phase them out gradually. We will need to develop a strategy for helping the developing regions of the globe to do the same. It’s seems that most of our major UK political parties are climbing on board this bandwagon. Again they need encouragement.
Of course, the underlying problem of population control needs to be introduced into this arena, but there are lots of religious and other groups who do not wish to face up to this one, but until they do the problems will continue to escalate. As the population grows, the more resources we need, the more land we occupy, the more other species are threatened, the more the natural order will become unbalanced, the hungrier we will all get etc etc etc.
But let’s leave that one for another day…

USEFUL LINKS
http://www.jet.efda.org/
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6165932.stm
http://www.nuclearfusion.com/
http://www.nuclearfusion.com/

DAB Digital Radio - Part of 1984 Cospiracy?

2006-11-19T16:02:00.000-08:00

The more I learn about digital radio, the less I think it's a good idea.
In fact, I am beginning to question the motives for it being foisted upon us.
The first thing you notice about it is it's total inability to tell you the time accurately.
What is the point of having the Greenwich Time Signal or the Westminster Bongs broadcast when the only certain thing we know about these is that if you hear them on digital radio it's not the correct time. And there seems to be no information available as to the time lag on the particular device you are listening on.
It's possible to hear the same moment on radio at least three times if you have analogue radio, digital radio and cable TV on in the house all at the same time . I guess that if you also have computer streaming and satellite TV you could get a couple more versions of what time is now!
The second difficulty is environmental. It goes against the grain to introduce a system which will cause several, if not tens of times the amount of energy to be consumed in listening to the radio than we previously needed. I thought we were making progress with the introduction of clockwork and solar radio, but even in this area the digital version is a dozen times more inefficient.
Furthermore there are issues concerning the disposal of analogue sets as they become useless as the Big Switch-Off approaches. Tons of valuable metals and crystals will be thrown into landfills or incinerators unless a monumental reclamation programme is set in train.
But my main beef is the limitations on access to radio stations imposed by the digital medium. The reception of stations is even more dependent on local relaying of stations than even FM was. The limited approach by even the BBC to music broadcasting in the UK means I often choose to listen to FiP - the Paris based French music station which broadcasts continuous programmes of very eclectic choices of styles and eras all day, every day, with hardly any intrusive talk {a couple of news updates twice and hour is about all you get - usually not even announcements about the record you just heard}. It's brilliant. Does digital radio mean an end to casual listening to foreign station and unavailability of FiP in Britain unless you can sit with your computer all day. I fear so.
Now we come to motive. And here I enter the realms of parnoid imagination. It could be thought that the government chooses to cut us off from the world of radio by imposing a medium which only brings us the stations which the local control machinery passes fit for our consumption. Hopefully there will be opprortunity for local pirate radio to develop but this will not guarantee quality. Rather it will let in the loonies with this or that axe to grind. Political, religious groups etc and a variety of fans and geeks with little or no discrimination beyond their own particular bee-in-the-bonnet or chosen interest. I'm not really knocking such people but I'd rather have access to quality professional product from around the world. It may be that the Web contiues to give us this but with the Big Brother Creep we seem to be experiencing at present I wouldn't discount the development of serious censorship of the Internet by the Government, Big Biz and so on happening quite soon and this will be a disaster.
If you have views - corcordant or contrary - I'd be keen to hear your angle on this one, but please cite any eveidence you can especially if speaking in favour of digital radio. I remain open minded and willing to be convinced but it will take some doing!

OK Clive.....

2006-11-16T13:57:00.000-08:00

I really appreciate Clive's questions, though I may have misunderstood or be unclear about what they mean, but nevertheless will attempt to suggest some answers - mainly off the top of my head so would be really keen to hear responses and countersuggestions

It's the questions that matter - the answers are not really so important.

So here goes....

to what degree would your suggested system improve the problem of "short-terminism" in politics?
I don't think short- termism [is this what you mean] is always a bad thing. Short term solutions to temporary problems is partly what my policy on law would be about. And when the law/policy has served its useful purpose - then ditch it.

how would it discourage "chameleon politicians"?
I'm not really sure what you mean. I rather admire people who are capable of changing their mind on issues regularly as long as they're not doing it just to win favour [of voters, clients etc]. This is probably because I believe life, the universe and everything to be ultimately meaningless so I fear principled people more than those who are not sure. People who think they know what's what are fucking dangerous and almost inevitably wrong!

how might it encourage people of good calibre and character?
By them not having to toe a party line in favour of pragmatic or common sense approach.

how would it deal with the Civil Service and its tendency to be self-serving and profligate with other peoples' money?
Good question

to what degree would it free us from the unbalanced influences of "experts"/"specialists"/"consultants"?
To whatever degree we decide to get involved for ourselves

how would it curb the effects of ideologues who are driven by blind faith, irrational speculation, wild imagination, etc?
By making them insignificant to the extent that they become unimportant and of little influence. For crazy ideas that really catch on, I have no defence but that's not really any different from the present situation - hopefully they would quickly burn out - but in the end it's upto every person to defend their own corner [whatever that might mean]

how might it help us escape the tendency towards rigid following of rigid procedures (that Punch-like attitude ... "that's the way we do it")
By encouraging creative and questioning thinking and giving permission to be politically incorrect - making it a virtue in fact

how would it encourage people to vote if they feel that laws, rules, regulation from elsewhere render their own laws redundant?
Don't allow such things to happen unless we choose to. Entities such as the EU or UN are only effective/dangerous by consent active or tacit. A 'Third Reich' -type entity would have to be stood up to by all or individuals, war would have to ensue [this is why I have decided I cannot be a pacifist] or they would have to be capitulated to - it's a mater of "choice"

Over to you Clive.....

For some light relief click here

Is your Local Council looking after your/our Heritage?

2006-11-16T13:18:00.000-08:00

I heard on Frontline [BBC Radio 4] this evening that Blackburn Council is selling a Lowry painting in an attempt to balance their books.
No doubt some of the local citizenry will think this is a good idea, but I wonder if the town's been consulted about this.
For short term gain the community will lose a long-term important cultural icon.

What would be the position if this became common practice throughout the land?

How much would the public/nation be prepared to lose - much would likely disappear into private ownership and abroad. You can only mount a finite number of campaigns to keep artworks etc in public ownership or in the country. The more items which get threatened in this way the harder it will be to save important items.

There have been a number of items on You & Yours [also BBC Radio4] in recent weeks - usually on Fridays - about the problems surrounding public art and the abuse (by galleries and councils) of the terms of acquisition/bequest has been a problem particularly highlighted.

One example I recall - Birmingham (I think) City Art Gallery and Museum secretly sold some examples of a fine Victorian landscape artist when such art was not particualrly fashionable in the Fifties at pittances (eg tens of pounds per piece). This was only discovered when descendents of the bequester went to visit the gallery and enquired about the collection having found the art not on show. These paintings are now worth hundreds of thousands of pounds and are in private hands and mainly untraceable.

Here in Brighton, do local residents actually know what we own as a town? [Same question to residents of other towns.] I know about Dali furntiure and other Surrealist artifacts but what treasures are salted away due to lack of exhibition space? How convenient if when they are forgotten the council decides to flog some of these treasures to pay for one of their hairbrained schemes or even something quite sensible.

Perhaps we should demand an inventory to be published in the local press so that we can see what we own and decide what we need to see more often etc Let the populus decide rather than the Councillors, their staff and academics in the institutions. We also need to know what responsibilty we hold to specific artifacts especially those which have been bequested.

I'm beginning to ramble but I guess I've made my point.

Let's all make a resolution to find out what's in our community and make sure it's not lost, stolen or ruined.

1984

2006-11-16T13:08:00.000-08:00

What can we do to resist the daily advance of Big Brother [the Orwellian one, not as per TV]?

CCTV - everyone wear a hoody and baseball cap and if challenged take off everything

I-D cards - trade them with Pokaman and Top Trumps

Biometrics - poke your eyes out

Questions about things that are none of their business - always tell lies and make sure they're different ones on each occasion

Overload the system with bogus information to the point of breakdown

Please put your practical or ludicrous ideas in the comment section

If nothing else, it'll give you chance to vent your spleen

Here's a Good Idea

2006-11-16T13:05:00.000-08:00

Great Concept
goto LINK to find out all about it

BUY NOTHING DAY
It's a great idea to challenge the conventional captalist behaviour most of us blindly follow on a daily basis
Perhaps I'll give it a go - will you too?
Pass it on....

Cameron PP Broadcast on Queen's Speech - The Verdict

2006-11-16T12:32:00.000-08:00

Crap!

Hooray!!!!!

2006-11-13T04:41:00.000-08:00

At last, some feedback

from my old buddy, Clive

"".....OK so you made me look at your blog ... and I wondered about some of the existing problems that I have noticed here and there:

to what degree would your suggested system improve the problem of "short-terminism" in politics?
how would it discourage "chameleon politicians"?
how might it encourage people of good calibre and character?
how would it deal with the Civil Service and its tendency to be self-serving and profligate with other peoples' money?
to what degree would it free us from the unbalanced influences of "experts"/"specialists"/"consultants"?
how would it curb the effects of ideologues who are driven by blind faith, irrational speculation, wild imagination, etc?
how might it help us escape the tendency towards rigid following of rigid procedures (that Punch-like attitude ... "that's the way we do it")
how would it encourage people to vote if they feel that laws, rules, regulation from elsewhere render their own laws redundant?"

Before I respond to any of these points, anyone else want to pick up on them?

Thanks Clive

I need feedback please

2006-07-31T08:59:00.000-07:00

In order to develop the ideas I have been putting forward, I need your feedback, whatever it may be. I would hope that some of it would be supportive but I also need good criticism that will help formulate the details for moving forward.

I am happy to post large or small pieces of of your thinking if you think it's too complex for addition to existing posts in the form of comment or if it takes the whole idea in a new direction. If you have such a contributioon please email me
abi.rhodes@tiscali.co.uk and if I'm happy with it I'll post it attaching your name and any other details you wish.

Looking forward to hearing from you

How Should Parliament/Councils be Run?

2006-07-31T08:43:00.000-07:00

My ideas at present are thus.

Do away with General Elections and whole Council Elections.

There should be elections of one fifth of the membership each year so the whole body is replaced on a rolling basis every 5 years.

Thus it is possible that there is a significant swing in political emphasis each year - this should reflect thje mood of the constituency and the performance of the ruling body in the previous 12 months.

A leader/head of government/chief executive/whatever should be chosen by the whole elected assembly and would not necessarily be the leader of the majority party/grouping but would be the person most respected as being suitable for the job by the majority. The method of making this choice to be debated elsewhere (it's not so important for the present purpose)

The chosen leader having obtained the general assent of the house would then set about appointing the ruling body/government/cabinet from the whole assembly choosing people who are most suitable in the circumstances based on experience, ability, stated agenda etc NOT on Party Allegiance.

The success/performance of this grouping will be important as it will no doubt dictate what happens at the following year's elections, thus ensuring the current leader's likelihood of continuing in that position or not.

Thus the whole system becomes more fluid and accountable to the electorate. If there are hugely unpopular or totally unacceptable policies implemented the populus will be able to respond within the year and get things changed rather than have to wait upto 5 years before change can be wraught. This will ensure that politicians stick to their stated aims and do not overstep the mark by passing inappropriate law by stealth.

Please note that many of these ideas are put down in a stream-of-consciousness method of writing and although I may have been ruminating on these matters for a long time, what actually appears in the blog just come out of the ends of my fingers as I type. What I guess I'm trying to say is that these ideas are rough and ready and are there for you to adopt and modify at will and I'm keen to hear what you think, so that I can develop them and refine them so that by the next election we can have a fairly well thought out set of ideas in place so that reform minded independent thinkers can have a sort of collective philosophy in place in order that a concerted effort may be made to change the smug self-perpetuating regime that we now find ourselves stuck in.

Climbing down off soapbox......

So.....How do we get THEM out?

2006-07-31T08:26:00.000-07:00

Now, it's not my intention to form a new political party. That would be joining them rather than beating them. But...

...I think it might be possible to use the 'No Ta' label as a rallying point rather in the same way that the Monster Raving Loonies did in Lord Sutch's day.

It would be necessary to find people in your locality who want to be involved in reforming the system to the advantage of everyone [except THEM!]. Then you would need to find a person willing to stand for Council or Parliament

The general principles would be

Greater Democratic involvement by the general populus
Increase personal freedom and real choice
Encourage popular involvement to move towards bottom-up decision making etc
Electoral reform
Review method of forming government
Minimise Law
etc etc etc

Details of policy would be upto local groups supporting candidates to decide between them, based on personal interests and local issues etc

These ideas need to be refined and locally applied according to situation

Your turn to contribute please!

Remember Community Politics?

2006-07-31T07:03:00.000-07:00

In the 1960s,the good old Liberal Party, as was, made a thing out of Community Action or Community Politics, which encouraged us to get involved in local issues etc

Sadly that emphasis is gone but surely it's time it was revived for anyone with an opinion, whatever their political stripe.

As things stand, the local scene tends to be dominated by party activists, racists, local press campaigns, NIMBYs, very PC community groups etc while the majority of residents allow stuff to land on them from above and just sit and moan.

If there was a community centre in every locality, I believe that the 'ordinary person' would be more likely to participate in issues of interest to them and bottom-up politics would gradually become the norm. Participation by Jo Public would stop local councils being so patronising and following their own agendas so much.

So I would encourage you to get involved in your local community in some way. Join a Friends group for your local park or wildlife site. Campaign for positive all inclusive facilities - not just families and children, but old folk, single people and youth too. All categories of people often feel left out and are discouraged. By showing you're interested, they may become involved and feel more part of the community and then volunteer their particular skills for the benefit of all - whetehr it be physical strength, their memory, their friendliness, etc

Let's go for it - talk to your neighbours and get something going where you are. Start in this small way and someone might emerge who can represent your locality who is more grassroots than your present councillor or MP, and who is willing to stand as a community candidate rather than a party poodle.

This sort of thing depends on participation of as many people as possible. It's not reasonable to expect someone else to take the lead. That way lays the perpetuisation of the present top-down dominance of partty politics. We want to turn that on its head and hand power to people who've never had it before - the person in the street!

PR - Party Reinforcement

2006-07-31T06:56:00.000-07:00

Proportional Representation is a con.

It only reinforces the grip that the major (and second division) parties have on the system. It does a brilliant job of shutting down entry to lesser beings.

How on earth would anyone standing as an independent ever get a look in?

Of course, even if you're a supporter of a particular party, it takes away any say you have in electing a named candidate, thus reducing your democratic influence.

As things stand, with party A-lists etc, the choice is very much limited for local party organisations by the central office.

Yet another way in which Big Brother is moving ever closer.

Funding Political Parties

2006-07-30T14:58:00.000-07:00

I hate the idea that we could end up with political parties being funded out of the public purse. This would entrench the domination of politics by the main parties and the evil system of limited choice they have to offer.

How could radical thinkers ever get a foot on the ladder? How could the likes of Martin Bell or other independent candidates ever stand a chance of election - it's difficult enough for anonymous but well-meaning interlopers to get recognition as it is.

At least with a carefully regulated system of parties being funded by loans and gifts we are entitled to know what interests think they will benfit by the election of party X and can choose to vote accordingly if inclined to.

When you look at the money wasted on huge poster campaigns at elections, the other alternative might be to ban parties from spending on advertising at all and force them to do their campaigning using good old-fashioned legwork.

Too Much Law?

2006-07-30T14:01:00.000-07:00

I think so, don't you?

We are accumulating new laws faster than I can count them. Are we going to allow this to continue? Well, unless we decide to do something about it, it will. It is in the interests of those people who want to make us just like them [but without their power] to bring us evermore under their control.

What's the solution?

Well, I would propose we obviously demand a far more rigorous system of law introduction where the public is more involved and wider debate is encouraged so that the necessity for the law can be measured in a wider context than it being the subject of the latest tabloid crusade or being a certain politician's bee in his/her bonnet.

[BTW, what bonnet can you suggest for your favourite politician?]

This would mean changing the culture of belief that passing a law will lead to solving a problem when the reverse is true. It creates problems.

PASSING A NEW LAW CREATES A NEW CRIME

This creates new criminals.
This adds to the prison population.......

THE CHIEF REASON FOR CRIME IN THIS COUNTRY IS LAW.
Take the Drug Problem. People who use illegal drugs for whatever purpose are automatically categorised as criminals even though in other areas of their lives they may be quite model citizens. As they cannot obtain their required drugs legally they are forced to deal with dealers who are the thin end of vast criminal organisations which exploit people at all points along the drug chain. In order to pay for their requirements, addicts may be driven to steal of even mug folks to obtain cash to pay for their habit. Thus a whole cycle of criminality is created by the very fact that something is illegal.
How much simpler things could be if the drug wasn't illegal in the first place. The raison d'etre for that criminal regime would cease to exist. Less people would get hurt, there'd be less people in jail, etc etc
Sure, there might be an increase in dependency, but a more caring attitude in society could help ameliorate this if not eventually reverse it.Extend this type of analysis to other illegalaties and I think you could find equally appalling problems which are essentially the result of a law rather than people's desire to be criminal.

Of course there are certain actions which are truly undesirable and need the control provided by law. But I would contend these are fairly few and far between and relate mainly to the safety and security of the individual. Much law is dedicated to the protection of institutions which operate in the interests of various powerful groups which exploit or subjugate others. These deserve to be questioned and removed in order that society can become more equitable.

I do not believe that the majority of law exists in the interest of or to protect the general population. Rather its purpose is to keep the population in its place and ensure that the current politically correct status quo is maintained.

Getting back to my proposal, I would favour moving towards a situation where all law has a limited lifespan - say 15 years. After this time is should be reviewed and if found to be working usefully, renewed for a further term - otherwise it should be amended or dropped. Thus we would do away with quaint situations like it being illegal to take a horse and carriage to attend church on Christmas Day etc - some might say this would be a shame!

The sheer amount of work involved in the review process would ensure that only really useful law would remain on the statute book and the kinds of law which arise out of kneejerk newspaper campaigns would have an assured minimum lifetime.

I think That just about covers it for now so I'll stop - but I'd like to hear your comments. Please feel free to shoot me down in flames or make further suggestions to advance the argument. My favourite pastime is changing my mind so please put forward exciting ideas to make me want to think on!

What's It All About

2006-07-30T13:09:00.000-07:00

I don't know about you, but I'm fed up with the sham nature of UK politics. So-called representative democracy is anything but that. You are asked to vote every few years for a person whose main allegiance is to his/her political party and because of the whipping system is expected to vote according to party policy, regardless of his/her own view let alone those of his/her constituents. Very often this leads the whole country to be dragged into situations hardly anyone wants to be in. This is manipulation, pure & simple. I'm sure we can all bring such a situation to mind without too much effort!

It is my intention to set a ball rolling that will change this dreadful state of affairs.I have particular beefs and agendas of my own which I will mention from time to time, but it is not my intention to ram these down your throat or to form a new political party to get them accepted by the already skewed arrangement we live under. Quite the reverse. I want to see the present system dismantled and replaced by a form of government we can all feel comfortable with. We should be able to minimise state and local government intrusion into people's lives whatever their politics, race, religion, sexuality etc

The reason I am confident it will have widespread appeal is because it is to be based on the 'principle' of "None of the Above" [NoTa]. This hopefully would lead to a large number of members of parliament or councils who would no longer be there on the basis of party allegiance, but on the basis that they were being given the chance as indivuals to represent their constituency in a trustworthy and honest manner on the understanding that if they fail, they will be [r]ejected next time.

I will also be talking about the excess of laws and controls we seem to have accrued in recent years, the amount of political interference in everday life and public institutions and how we might reverse this accelerating movement towards '1984'.

Please make comments freely on anything you read here. I am a keen supporter of open and honest debate and dislike the constraints of the current forms of political correctness but would say that racist propaganda will not be welcomed here. My only other requirement would be that you must be able to take as good as you give.

I look forward to corresponding with you and perhaps moving forward into a truly democratic and more respectful future.