Showing posts with label Glorious leaders. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Glorious leaders. Show all posts

Thursday, 12 July 2018

Rats

It Is a fact of life,if you keep poultry, you will have rats. In fact if you keep almost any kind of stock you will, sooner or later, attract rats. Apart from the obvious health hazards associated with rats they are a major nuisance in that they chew things and they dig holes all over the place. They nest in hay or straw stacks and generally do a lot of damage. The most effective way of dealing with a rat population is to poison it. You go to your local agricultural dealer and buy a box /bucket of rat "Bait" which you then administer and after a few days when you notice that the said bate is not being eaten the rats will be dead or dying. Of course, we old country boys who have dealing with these creatures for years also pursue them with air rifles and terriers, and some, even use ferrets for a bit of ratting. All good fun, but not really effective in getting rid of a rat infestation. 

Having had poultry of some form or another for most of my years on this earth I have used rat bait for as long as I care to remember. As with all things there are right and wrong ways of using these substances. It is, of course, important to ensure that other animals cannot,and do not, eat rat bait. It will, for example, kill a dog. It, therefore, always needs to be used with caution and by following the instructions on the container it comes in. In order to protect wild birds, and indeed poultry, the bait should be administered in covered containers into which rats can gain access but, other creatures cannot. These containers have inner compartments which help to prevent spillage if the container is knocked over or overturned. So there you have it, all fairly straight forward, you may think,and yes it should be. Well it used to be until, that is, the politicians got involved.

Let me say straight away I am not a political person and the following is not political in that sense. I have a fairly simple view of politicians, of all shades and persuasions, I don’t like them. For the most part they are dishonest chancers, most of whom have never had a proper job or done a decent days work. I would be more inclined to trust a secondhand car salesman. If you think this is all a bit extreme let me remind you of the expenses fiddles and the fact that nearly all of them got away with it claiming ignorance or misunderstanding. Excuses that would, most certainly, not be available to you and I in similar circumstances. If all that were not enough look at their lavish redecoration expense for grace and favour housing and their,even more lavish, "fact finding" trips around the world. Not to mention, the many corporate jollies and gifts they receive. All, of course, perfectly legal … nice. 

What, you may ask, has all this got to do with rats ? Well, I discovered, a few months ago that rat bait legislation was changing. I found this out when I went to buy some in the usual way, and was told, by the person serving me, soon I would need a certificate / licence to continue to purchase rat bait. That was the first bit, soon thereafter, came another announcement advising that the strength of rat bait was going to be reduced.

Having been using rat bait for over fifty years, one might consider, I knew a little bit about its use. However , I took one of the glossy brochures providing all the info a user needed to comply with the new rules. It quickly became apparent that in order to gain the, now necessary, certificate of competence an exam was required and a fee of £65 would have to be paid. So, a new bureaucratic system costing people, that neither want or need rat bait instruction, a hefty sum and, no doubt, lining the pockets of those providing the advice. I declined their kind offer refusing to be ripped off in this appalling manner. Consider if you will, some months in the winter, when rats come in from the fields and hedgerows, it can cost me in the region of thirty pounds a month to keep them down, I only have three acres. Goodness knows what the costs are to a large farm, they must be huge.

It would appear that a number of politicians, I haven’t bothered to find out who they are, succumbed to lobbying by an ornithological society claiming misuse of rat bait was killing wild birds. This might well be the case, there are, and always will be abusers and misusers of almost anything you can think of. Sadly that is a fact of life. It is also a fact of life that those same abusers will not comply with the rules and will not take, and pay for, a test. All that is achieved in such situations is, quite simply, careful users, following the rules, will be penalised and hit in the pocket. Just look at what previous political bans have achieved, pistols are banned in this country, more gun crime than ever before. Knives for young people under eighteen are banned, more knife crime than ever before. A whole list of drugs are banned, the country is awash with illegal drugs. Quite simply, banning does not, and never has worked.

The problem is, politicians always know best. I did consider writing to my local M.P. and, after due reflection, abandoned the idea. I don’t write to M.P.s often, only twice in the whole of my life. Each time it proved to be a complete waste of time and paper. You see, on both occasions I was wrong and did not fully understand the matters about which I was writing. I was told the M.P.s were right, it just so happens that both are no longer M.P.s, having lost their seats. One having been involved in a scandal over mistakenly buying and expensive carpet on taxpayer funded expenses, who then retired, and the other being kicked out by the electorate for basically being a complete waste of space. The good news is, the latter did get a Knighthood for his failure, you know it makes sense, lovely system we have! Incidentally, both of the matters I wrote about did come to pass and the fears I had expressed were realised. I fear we have two as well as four legged rats in our midst.

So it was that my rat population exploded. Not having received their normal dose of bait, they did what rats do and bred. I found myself surrounded by the nasty creatures. Off I went to the agricultural merchant only to find the bait available to me was now being sold in tiny packages of a few grams and priced at the hefty price of a pound a packet. Translate that into the weight I once was able to buy, three kilos, and the price becomes eye watering. The agri merchants  are as bad as the M.Ps, never miss a chance to fleece someone. I had considered getting my future supplies of rat bait from France, where common sense still seems to prevail but, fortunately, I have found a supplier where I can obtain the normal stuff at the usual price ! Didn’t they do well. Rat problem solved. It would appear there are, would you believe, loopholes in the legislation so, pretty much, business as usual. 

Just a final thought, I doubt very much if the people this cock-up was aimed at are doing anything differently in terms of care. It might just be they are doing nothing at all and the rat population in their areas is growing apace. When, as I suspect it will, it reaches epidemic proportions you will, no doubt, be treated to the inglorious spectacle of the Honourable M.P.s responsible diving down their own rat holes and blaming everyone else.  

Monday, 9 April 2018

Roads and things

I don't know if it is the norm elsewhere but down here in Dorset it has become very much the norm to close roads when work needs doing. Once upon a time, when road works needed doing a system of traffic lights was put in place allowing, throughout the work, one side of the road to operate pretty much as normal. When one side was finished the lights were simply transferred to the other side. This, as far as I saw, worked quite well and, it seemed to me, a good way of managing the works. 

All that has now changed, the whole road is closed. We are currently undergoing such road works on the A30 and there is a rolling programme of closures throughout the whole of April. Each closure covers several miles. There are diversions in place, however, it doesn't seem to have occurred to the great thinkers in the Council that the local lanes are totally unsuitable for modern traffic needs. There is, for example, a very large car storage facility just west of the road works. This is on an airfield and is serviced by large numbers of vehicle carrying lorries each day. These huge lorries carry eight or nine cars at a time. It would appear the storage site is also a distribution centre as the aforementioned lorries seem to both take in and out their loads of cars. Just imagine for a moment the utter chaos when one of these monsters goes along a diversion which is barely wider than the lorry itself. 

The old lanes of Dorset were never meant for such vehicles. when a car meets one of these vehicles the car must give way and reverse as it is totally unreasonable to expect such a large, loaded or even unloaded, lorry to reverse. Simply there is nowhere to go! Add to that the fact that the car meeting the lorry is, almost certainly being followed along the diversion route by a number of other cars and, bingo, you have chaos. Great planning! I suspect that the whole situation regarding these road is driver by the two modern great Gods …. Money and Health and Safety. I also suspect that the premier God here is Money. When a traffic light system is in place or, as sometimes used to happen, a convoy system there is money involved. When work is controlled by traffic lights it takes a bit longer to complete so, extra cost. When a convoy system is in place it requires extra staff in the form of drivers to manage it and, again, extra cost. This is, all conveniently, backed up by the second God, Health and Safety. 

Although the two systems above have been used without mass traffic casualties for years there appears to be great danger involved for the work force these days. In practical terms this means delays and disruption for all of the local residents and visitors using the area for the month of April, lovely. But hey folks, take heart, there are Council notices dotted around the place telling all whom care to read them that the Council is working hard to make life better for the people of Dorset and doing all sorts of wonderful things to encourage tourism, trouble is, it doesn't actually seem like it! As someone once said, "you couldn't make it up!"

This being a rural area we have, like all rural areas, large numbers of tractors operating around the place. I am sure the residents of Kingsley will be very familiar with them. However, the modern day tractor is quite a different beast from the ones of yesteryear. Today the driver is perched eight or ten feet above the ground in an air conditioned cab operating a system, which is computer controlled, in a vehicle which can travel at high speed. They are big, I mean very big, high, wide and fast. No longer the fifteen or sixteen miles an hour of the old tractors. These monsters really shift. The problem down here seems to be that, for the most part, they are being driven by people whom have had a brain removal operation. These people are almost always young men barely out of their teens. Add to that the fact that it is common place to see them propelling the said tractors, at high speed, with a mobile phone clamped to their ear. These tractors fill the lanes and if you meet one there is nowhere to go. If one or other or both vehicles are unable to stop the result is tragedy. Obviously the tractor wins, a car hitting such a solid mass has no chance. It feels a bit like taking your life into your hands when driving around the local lanes. 

Hardly a week goes by without a tractor encounter of some kind and they are scary. I am of an age where I can justifiably say I am not a boy racer, or, anything like. Experience tells me to drive carefully around the lanes, as mentioned, they are narrow and apart from the tractor menace they also play host to horse riders, cyclists, runners and walkers, but sadly the tractor drivers appear to be oblivious to all of this. Like all other rural areas we don't see policemen any more, I can't recall the last time I saw a police vehicle in our village. I guess if there were more police about driving would improve. I was talking about this to a police officer that comes beating with me and he gave me the figures for tractor related deaths in Dorset last year and, whilst I forget the exact figure, the number was considerable. If you come to Dorset be aware! 

Tuesday, 16 May 2017

General Election 2017

The runners are:-

DASGUPTA, Rohit KumarLabour
HINDS,Damian Patrick George Conservative
JERRARD, Susan Christine Justice
KNIGHT, Richard GodfreyGreen
ROBINSON, Richard Anthony Liberal Democrat

Friday, 7 April 2017

Elections 4th May 2017

Elections to Hampshire County Council will take place on Thursday 4th May 2017 and in the King's Blog region we have to choose a single councillor in the Alton Rural division.

The candidates have been announced and my prediction is that Mark Kemp-Gee will be returned with a comfortable majority unless everyone's really cheesed off about #Brexit in which case Nicholas James will enjoy a serious upswing even though nobody knows who he is or those enraged that the prime minister isn't taking #Brexit seriously enough will promote Rigby Andrews. Obviously Janice Treacher and Christina West are only standing to make up the numbers.

NamePartyWhereWhat
ANDREWS, RigbyUKIPPassfield#Brexiteer
JAMES, NicholasLibDemsAltonInvisible
KEMP-GEE, MarkConservativeArlesfordSitting councillor
TREACHER, JaniceLabourFour MarksInvisible
WEST, ChristinaGreensPassfieldInvisible

Tuesday, 4 April 2017

#PinkPassports

When the UK leaves the EU British passports should have pink covers.

Leaving the EU is all about taking back control and making Britain great again. Let's set our sights high and, remembering the pink all across the globe just 100 years ago, let's have our British passports proudly clad in pink!

Don't be the last to sign the petition !

Friday, 14 October 2016

Imagine

Imagine that we live in a representative democracy where ordinary people elect wise men (or scoundrels) to figure out what’s best for the country as a whole. Imagine that one of those granted supreme power isn’t smart enough to bring about consensus on a range of issues among his fellow power-wielders and decides instead to let the ordinary people decide. (The normal cut and thrust of intellectual debate among the wise men to settle these things is unavailable as almost all the wise men think the same way with only a small number in the minority.)

The ordinary people, mostly untrained in the philosophies of government and the skills of negotiation and deal-making, cannot be expected to bring about consensus on the range of issues at hand – that’s why the representative democracy was established in the first place – so the entire matter is reduced to a single, simple to understand for seven-year-olds, question with two possible answers.

The elected wise men agree to provide the people with honest, comprehensive, clear, well thought-out, information on the strengths and weaknesses of both the two possible outcomes and then wait patiently while the people consider the various arguments, examine the evidence, hold open debates and make up their minds which way to vote. Once the voting is complete the elected representatives will have their answer and they can continue governing with a fresh mandate. Simple!
 
(It’s hard to understand why anyone would bother with representative democracy in the first place if the ordinary people can just decide things easily without all that power-broking, deal-making and deliberating that the wise men (or scoundrels) spend their entire careers indulging in but let’s get over it and move on.)

After the vote, which unexpectedly goes the way nobody at all predicted or had prepared for, the government claims a mandate in the form of the trivial answer to the trivial question on the ballot paper but, here’s the rub, what does the answer mean, exactly? That of course is where we started: Imagine that we live in a representative democracy where ordinary people elect wise men to figure out what’s best for the country as a whole.

As a consequence of the original failure to act wisely, some wise men will have to go and practise wisdom outside of politics. The remaining wise men reorganise themselves to have a crack at the original set of problems. Of course now they’re hampered by The Result limiting their ability to act, even though no-one agrees in detail what the vote actually means and even though most of the wise men think it a disastrous course of action. “The people have spoken clearly and The Result is The Result!” proclaims the new chief helpfully clarifying nothing. Worse – those who voted the “wrong” way are told by all and sundry that they must “get over it”. Apparently everyone is now irrevocably committed because of the idiocy of one wise man, now departed, and, instead of fixing the original problems (which haven’t gone away), the remaining wise men spend their time discussing whether implementing The Result should be done “softly” or “hardly”, not an easy task as no such options were offered to the people. In some circles this is referred to as “making stuff up”.
 
Some of the people say that The Result means one thing but others say it means something else; some of the wise men say that The Result means one thing while others say otherwise. The Result must be respected, manifesto commitments must be kept – well, not ALL the manifesto commitments, just the ones that “must be kept” - although some formerly unalterable policies are now impossible, or at least inconvenient, in the light of The Result and must therefore be abandoned. The debate moves on from merely interpreting The Result to examining the motives of those who voted. This provides much more scope for creativity as no room was provided on the ballot paper for rationale, just a simple yes or no to the motion.
 
In estimating the people’s motives the wise men gather information from many sources: guesswork, the “free press”, anecdotes, the occasional face to face discussion with individuals and opinion polls, which have proved to be completely reliable over the years. Of course, not everyone’s motive is worthy of respect by the wise men, only approved motives are to be taken into account; motives deemed to be ignorant or unworthy may be freely disregarded.
 
None of this takes place in a vacuum. The ordinary people get on with their lives as though nothing has changed, some believing that everything has changed, some believing that everything will change, others firm in the their belief that nothing ever will change. Political discussions in the pub are now untenable as everyone has a firm opinion about the technical minutia of subjects they knew nothing about just a few months before. The only thing agreed on by most commentators is that the wise men aren’t all they’re cracked up to be. Foreigners are torn between pity for the millions of citizens whose rights are to be revoked and amusement that so many people could have been sold an obvious pup and that the wise men were stupid enough to have done this in the first place.
 
The wise men assure everyone that the losing side (who must in any event “accept The Result” and “get over it”) will shortly see the error of their ways and come to rejoice in the new arrangements, that foreigners will come cap in hand to learn about how they can bring about similar changes in their own countries, climate change will cease immediately and fairies will soon be discovered, living at the bottom of the garden.
 
Lewis Carroll couldn’t have made this up!
 
Brexit? No, I said “Imagine ...”. This is just an idea I’ve had for a novel, what do you think, is it too far-fetched?

Monday, 27 June 2016

Interesting times; drunken sex with your mate's partner?

People voted Leave or Remain in the #BREXIT referendum for many different reasons some considered ones, some less considered. Most (but surprisingly not all) Leavers are satisfied with the result, a narrow margin for Leave. Most (but once again not all) Remainers are dissatisfied with the result.

It is clear already that nobody (Leavers, Remainers, UK politicians, Europeans, world leaders) was in any way prepared for the result and the last few days have been amusing watching the Leave campaign members tripping over one another to say "we didn't mean X would happen when we suggested X could happen". The first thing the leading Leave politicians did was to beg David Cameron to stay on as PM rather than resigning on the spot. His position is untenable: he tried to settle an internal Conservative party dispute by calling an absurd gamble and he comprehensively lost.

Nobody now knows what happens next. The referendum is not binding on Parliament which is and always has been sovereign. (The Leave campaign's stance on sovereignty was completely dishonest and some of them at least must have been educated enough to know that) If Brexit happens, it will be the will of Parliament not "the British people" that makes it so. What does Brexit mean, exactly? I know it means that we leave the EU but what does that mean, exactly? Do we leave the single market? Do we close our borders to EU citizens? Do we stop making products which conform to single market specifications? Do we abandon regulation of working hours, redundancy pay? Have we suddenly become filthy rich? Will China launch a bid to become our preferred market? Will all the Brits retired in Spain have to come "home" again?

What should have happened with this referendum, if it was to have been called in the first place, was that senior politicians on both sides should have informed and educated the public rather than relying on spreading fear and appealing to dog-whistle politics. The Remain campaign did little to nothing to explain the history of the EU, the wider benefits of the EU, how the EU actually operates. The Leave campaign comprised a simple series of sound bites, none of which provided an actual vision of what leaving the EU would mean in practical terms. The £350 million per week claim may go down in history as one of the more obvious lies of the campaign along with David Cameron's ridiculous "non-mention" of World War III. The £350m was debunked by reliable sources early on but continued to be plastered all over buses, posters, leaflets and speeches. Many will have seen Nigel Farage's weasel words about "a mistake" and "nothing to do with me guv".

It feels like the morning after a drunken night when waking up bleary eyed to discover you've just had sex with your sister or your best mate's wife. I conversed with many Leavers before the vote and tried to understand their reasons for voting out. One woman's entire argument was "350 million per week" unassisted by any thought of whether that's a lot or a little or what might or should happen to it. An ex-serviceman gave as his motivation "I served in Germany, I bloody hate the Germans" . Many thought that "the country is full". "the Euro was a disaster". The Remainers fared little better: "I don't see the point of leaving"; "I hate Nigel Farage"; "Nissan will leave if we vote out". "We're stronger in Europe".

Riding across Europe since the vote I've met Germans, Austrians, Hungarians & Romanians all of whom expressed shock and concern for the wellbeing of Great Britain. (The exception was a Frenchman in Hungary who said "fuck off Great Britain" or something like that, he was driving away and scowling at his girlfriend at the time so he might just have been being French)

I see from the news and social media that outright racism clearly played its part as well.

An ancient Chinese curse is to hope that "you live in interesting times". I think Britain in June 2016 now fits that description. The Conservative party as hopelessly divided over Europe as ever; the Labour party hopeless; other parties marginalised and ineffective. The SNP threatening a second independence referendum. Half the population being pleased that we've voted out, the other half sad that we could have behaved so stupidly. I don't mean that leaving the EU is stupid, I mean that the process which got us here couldn't have been more stupid if it was designed to be a stupid process - Blackadder was actually fiction you know!

We can't wind back the clock, we are where we are. I am personally torn between "let's trigger Article 50 right now and just do it" and "let's give the politicians a good kicking and make them do their job properly". I am not afraid of life outside the EU, perhaps life will even be better that way, but I really do think that we have sleepwalked into this position and we ought to wake up and take control. Take control back from the politicians who've played the game so badly, take control back from the racists and scaredy-cats. Let's hold our politicians to account, not just when they do something that offends us but all the time. Let's insist that they explain issues properly, not just soundbites supporting their own position.

In the 2014 European Parliament elections UK turnout was 35%, twice that of a parish council election. UKIP got 27% of the votes cast resulting in 24 MEPs. Of course we didn't do well in EP voting, UKIP MEPs either abstained or just voted against everything, even when that was against our interests. If that isn't a strong indicator of voter ignorance and/or apathy I don't know what is.

When Tony Blair resigned his mate Gordon got his job. No-one asked us, the electorate, they just anointed him. There were clear calls for a referendum on the Lisbon treaty and Cameron promised one if he got in. Brown sneaked off and signed the treaty anyway making calls/offers of a referendum useless. The most likely outcome now is that we'll get Boris Johnson, no-one will bother asking us, and he'll claim a mandate for all kinds of things as well. Is that what you want? Boris "I'll announce tomorrow which way I'm going to campaign in the referendum" Johnson as Prime Minister with a free hand to do as he pleases (or can persuade enough Conservative MPs to agree).

I was a Remainer and I'm sorry that I and others didn't do a better job of reaching out to the Leavers and undecideds and non-voters. I have many friends in the Leave camp and they are just as guilty as me but they're less bothered because of course they won.

Whether we leave the EU or stay in (yes I do still think that's a live option) we have presented a hugely divided face to the world and to ourselves. Many have been offended by the campaign, the result and the widespread dissatisfaction after the event. We do need to to explain our positions properly, to understand and address opposing positions properly, not dismiss them out of hand. We need to invest time and effort to ensure that we properly understand the various issues and we need to aim for consensus and compromise rather than division.

There is a petition with some 2.5 million signatures calling for a second referendum triggered by the narrow margin. Ironically it was started by a Leaver who thought Remain would scrape through. If that petition, a perfectly sensible requirement if announced at the outset, is granted now, it would simply cause more dissent and turmoil. If Brexit is to be halted now it needs politicians to step up to the plate of bringing both sides together. Is the current Conservative party, regardless of leader, really up to that job? If Brexit is to go forward, I would make the same assertion and ask the same question.

Interesting times. Will the British people, the 34 million who voted, really take back control or were we really only able to tick a box on somebody else's question?

Thursday, 16 June 2016

Yet Another EURef Exchange

Hi Damian,

You will no doubt remember that I was unable to vote for you in 2015, despite you being the best candidate, because of the party's petulant approach towards human rights as expressed in Grayling's celebration of ignorance entitled "Protecting human rights in the UK" and amazingly adopted as a manifesto commitment.

I'm sure that you and the prime minister were both surprised to wake up after the election to discover that you'd fluked a majority and consequently had to actually implement some of the more outlandish schemes, especially an in/out referendum. I realize that, as the party enjoys a diverse range of members, it's necessary to placate some of the louder backbenchers but I think that putting the country at risk to sort out some internal strife involving the  semi-detached rightwingers is taking "one nation tories" too far.

Assuming that the party survives the chaos it's brought about, perhaps the government could give itself a stiff talking to and start acting like one. In the event of a vote to leave I may well decide to relocate to Poland while that remains a possibility. If sense prevails and we remain, with a huge majority, I should like to see the senior tories currently spreading lies and disinformation thrown out of the party.Let them join UKIP or form a new party - Patriotic Conservatives - so that the party can get on with the job of running the country rather than quarrelling like naughty siblings.

There will be plenty of time to do the rearrangements after the referendum as there isn't any effective opposition. Grasp the nettle.

Good luck,

Bob.

Dear Bob,

Thank you for your email.

I am pleased that our party is fulfilling its manifesto commitments from 2015 and I am glad to see that we are holding this very important debate on our place in the European Union.  I cannot comment on what some colleagues have chosen to say as part of the EU referendum campaign, as I'm sure you will understand.  I have always hoped that people would engage with this debate in a constructive and well-informed manner and I, for one, will continue to push for a positive message about why we should remain in the European Union.

Kind regards,

Damian Hinds

Friday, 6 May 2016

New PCC Michael Lane

The Conservative candidate, Michael Lane, has been elected as Police & Crime Commissioner for Hampshire with a toital of 153,990 votes and a 29.14% turnout.

East Hampshire PCC results

The results for East Hampshire only:-

Michael Lane, Con: 7,352
Simon Hayes, Ind: 5,312
Roy Swales, UKIP: 2,414
Richard James Adair, Lib Dem: 2,175
Robin Andrew Price, Lab: 1,718
Steve Watts, Zero Tolerance Policing ex Chief: 1,606
Don Jerrard, Ind: 1,310

Turnout:  25.2%

Friday, 8 April 2016

Police & Crime Commisioner update

The candidates are now clear, according to The Portsmouth News.

Richard Adair (Liberal Democrat)
‘Busting villains, not budgets’ sums up my approach.

Simon Hayes (Independent)
Policing is important to us all. I’m standing for re-election as police and crime commissioner for Hampshire and Isle of Wight, as an independent non-party political candidate.

Don Jerrard (Independent)
I was born in Hampshire and have lived here for almost all my life.

Michael Lane (Conservative)
People in Hampshire and IoW should have confidence that their police and crime commissioner is listening to their concerns and making sure they are reflected in police priorities. I will champion those priorities.

Robin Price (Labour)
I have worked in Portsmouth in a free legal advice service and for the city council. I have run my own solicitors’ practice, which included criminal and family work.

Roy Swales (Ukip)
I was a constable for 10 years, injured and then retired.

Steve Watts (Zero Tolerance Policing ex Chief)
Across Hampshire and the Isle of Wight people tell me that they want the police to protect them and their families by delivering an effective and robust deterrent to criminals and those who blight our lives, at the same time focusing on supporting victims and the vulnerable. As your police and crime commissioner I will ensure that the police stand up for decent people by striking fear into criminals and bullies.

Thursday, 24 March 2016

Police & Crime Commissioner

On 5th May we'll be electing a Police & Crime Commissioner for Hampshire. The current holder of that post is Simon Hayes who won in 2012 to become the first Hampshire PCC.

It's not clear yet whether or not Mr Hayes will be standing for re-election and there is only a little information available about the other candidates:

Michael Lane (Conservative)
Dr Michael Bennett (Labour)
Steve Watts (Independent)
Roy Swales (UKIP)

What's the PCC done for policing and crime management in Hampshire? Has Mr Hayes done a good job? Who should we vote for?

Good questions - six weeks left to find the answers - go!

Saturday, 20 February 2016

EU Referendum 2016 - a personal view

Today the Prime Minister announced that he'd achieved a deal on a reformed European Union; that there would be an in-out referendum on 23rd June; and that he would be campaigning to remain "in".

I'm sure the PM had good reasons for engaging in the "deal making" process, perhaps it mattered to one or two members of the cabinet but I'm neither persuaded nor disappointed by it and I very much doubt that the "deal" will change the minds of more than a few stragglers in the country. Some people, members of UKIP for example, are determined to have us leave the EU regardless of the circumstances. Others are equally determined to remain in the EU. Neither of those groups will be in any way persuaded by the new deal. That leaves the undecided and those who just won't vote. Are the undecideds really going to make a decision as momentous as this because of the contents of that deal?

I approach this matter from two different perspectives: the case for staying in and the various arguments I've heard for leaving. I shall be voting to remain in the EU.

The case for remaining in the EU

My grandfather fought in the first world war, a war brought about by infighting among the nation states of Europe; my father fought in the second world war, a war brought about by infighting among the nation states of Europe. I have been very fortunate in that I did not have to waste my youth fighting European wars and I attribute a large amount of credit for that fact to what is now the European Union.

The EU's story began with the  European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) formed after the second world war with the specific aim to "make war not only unthinkable but materially impossible". By the time of the 1975 referendum the community had changed to become the European Economic Community (EEC) (also known as the common market). In 1993 it became the European Community (EC) and ultimately merged into what is now the European Union.

It is a single continuum. To those who say that it's not what we voted for in 1975, speaking only for myself, I say that it absolutely is what I voted for in 1975. I was young then but I wasn't stupid, I could see the future and wasn't "fooled by the wording" of the question posed on the ballot paper.

The European Community in its various forms has never been purely an economic club, it's always been about peace and security. Of course that doesn't mean that the world has been free of war for the last 70 years nor does it mean that NATO is redundant, there are plenty of external threats from beyond Europe's borders.

Is it perfect? No of course not. Like any mature computer program it has had bits added on, bits taken out, it's been patched and repatched. It certainly needs more reform than the PM's "deal" and of course that reform will, eventually, take place. In my view, the EU is stronger with Britain and vice-versa. It makes more sense to me to have a seat on the Board if we want to make things better.

The case for leaving the EU

It's quite hard for me to offer a coherent case for leaving the EU. Personally I don't think it's a good idea and all the arguments I've heard advocating BREXIT have been focussed on one or more of:-
  • claimed direct financial savings
  • grand schemes involving trading with Australia, South Africa and others
  • confusion between the European Convention on Human Rights and other "European" entities
  • fears about immigration
  • don't like "being told what to do"
  • "we used to be brilliant"
 I'm afraid they haven't impressed me much  so I can do no better than to point you to Michael Gove's excellent piece in The Spectator.





Monday, 18 January 2016

Hindhead tunnel closed, again

 Please be aware of the following planned work which affects both north and southbound traffic using the Tunnel next week:

Monday 18 January, Wednesday 20 January and Thursday 21 January

Southbound Tunnel.
10pm to 6am
Routine maintenance is being carried out in the southbound tunnel. Southbound traffic will be diverted through the northbound tunnel in contraflow under a 40mph speed limit. Please allow an extra 5 minutes for your journey.

Tuesday 19 January

Full Tunnel Closure
10pm to 6am
The tunnel will be fully closed to allow a routine structural inspection of the Miss James Bridge. At these times, signed diversion routes will be in place via the A325 and A31 for both north and southbound traffic. Please allow an extra 45 minutes for your journey.
Safe driving
Please stay in lane and observe the signed speed limit when using the Tunnel. If you see the Red X sign, please move safely to the other lane, as this means there is an obstruction ahead.
Further information
Please contact us on:
0300 123 5000
info@​highwaysengland.​co.​uk.

Monday, 10 August 2015

Confused about Europe?

European this, European that, all very confusing to us mere mortals, especially when the politicians take advantage of the confusion to push their own agendas rather than explaining in clear and simple language what's what.

So, in plain-English, what is the European Convention on Human Rights? Something to do with the EU right? Wrong. As this helpful, plain English, post explains.

Friday, 24 April 2015

Manifesto human rights

I searched each of the party manifestos for the term 'human rights', this is what I found:-

GREENS - no mention of human rights.

LIBERAL DEMOCRATS
  • Protect the Human Rights Act and enshrine the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child in UK law. 
  • We will take appropriate action to comply with decisions of UK courts and the European Court of Human Rights. 
  • Block any further attempts to limit the right to trial by jury.
  • Pass a new Freedoms Act, to protect citizens from excessive state powers.
UKIP
  • We will remove ourselves from the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights: the Strasbourg Court whose interpretation of the European Convention of Human Rights has been known to put the rights of criminals above those of victims. Our own Supreme Court will act as the final authority on matters of Human Rights.
  • We will also repeal Labour’s Human Rights legislation. It has given European judges far too much power over British law making and law enforcement and prevented us deporting terrorists and career criminals and from implementing whole-life sentences.
  • Our human rights will be enshrined in law via the introduction of a new, consolidated UK Bill of Rights. This will complement the UN Declaration of Human Rights and encapsulate all the human and civil rights that UK citizens have acquired under UK law since Magna Carta. This new UK Bill of Rights will apply across England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.

LABOUR
  • Will stand up for citizens’ individual rights, protecting the Human Rights Act and reforming, rather than walking away from, the European Court of Human Rights
  • We will support human rights, always putting individual freedom and democracy at the heart of our foreign policy
  • We will appoint an International LGBT Rights Envoy to promote respect for the human rights of LGBT people, and work towards the decriminalisation of homosexuality worldwide.
CONSERVATIVES
  • Will scrap the Human Rights Act, and introduce a British Bill of Rights. This will break the formal link between British courts and the European Court of Human Rights, and make our own Supreme Court the ultimate arbiter of human rights matters in the UK 
  • Will stand up for the rule of law and human rights in Zimbabwe
  • Will promote reconciliation and human rights in Sri Lanka
  • Will ensure our Armed Forces overseas are not subject to persistent human rights claims that undermine their ability to do their job


Monday, 20 April 2015

GE2015 - Alex Wilks

Alex Wilks, the Labour candidate, is the youngest at just 25 and also the only candidate who doesn't actually live in the constituency.

Alex responded fully and intelligently to my questionnaire; he anticipated some disagreement about human rights, inviting further engagement on the subject and he displays an excellent grasp of the major subtleties of software patent legislation; he also offers both a principled and practical approach to the various topics under discussion.

Youth, education and enthusiasm all work in his favour.

Friday, 17 April 2015

GE2015 - Peter Baillie

Peter Baillie, the UKIP candidate, was the first to respond to my questionnaire and his replies were prompt, concise and to the point.

His policy approaches were all quite reasonable, even for software patents which constitute something of an elephant trap, but he's sadly lacking in both knowledge and understanding of the human rights issue.

If elected, I believe Peter will make a conscientious and hard-working MP once the realities of government become clear to him.

Wednesday, 15 April 2015

GE2015 - Damian Hinds

Damian Hinds, the Conservative candidate, has of course been the serving MP in this constituency for the last five years and is an all round competent MP.

You can get a feel for Damian's position on various issues by examining his record at TheyWorkForYou.com.