The press release from Maidstone Greens two days ago welcomed Maidstone Borough Council's announcement that it wants residents views before making a submission under the Act. Of course putting out the press release calling for suggestions just a few days before the closing date was a bit of a poor show but it is hoped that there will be a chance for a further submission later this year.
The reason that I think think that their timing is poor is because they have had plenty of time to get underway. I raised the lack of action on the SCA at February's Council meeting and was told by both political groups that they supported its use and wanted to see action on it asap. But action just didn't happen. The LibDems put a formal motion to Council a few months later and there was still not discernible action.
With the elections over I spoke directly to the director in charge of the process who informed me that letters had gone to parish councils but no suggestions had been received. So I pushed for more engagement with individuals and was told that they would publish a piece in their August edition of their magazine.
It was very clear from watching a recent OSC meeting that there are people in Maidstone that care and want to have a voice but unless the council engages with them directly, how will they know about this important piece of legislation?
Which brings me on to Kent County Council. Did you know that they launched a consultation on the 1st April inviting suggestions under the Act? No neither did I, and no it is no April Fools. The consultation was launched online among the other 50 or so. Unless you regularly visit KCC consultation website you will have missed it.
So guess how many external suggestions they received? None. One of the most important pieces of legislation asking for suggestions from £1.4 million people and not one person outside of the council made a suggestion. I wonder why... perhaps I'll have to change my home page from Google to KCC consultation website.
Green Party campaigner in Kent. Also a nurse, academic, former manager, writer, Druid, husband and father...
Wednesday, 29 July 2009
Monday, 27 July 2009
Winter Kentish pineapples
Its complicated! No not my Facebook relationship status but the conclusion by DEFRA that there is more than one factor in the environmental impact of food, especially the concept of promoting local food.
This is from the article in the Independent today:
This is from the article in the Independent today:
"Next time they are at the supermarket, green enthusiasts may want to think twice before opting for British strawberries and tomatoes over those grown in Spain. British-grown varieties fare badly compared with Spanish imports in terms of energy use and global-warming potential. Much more energy is needed to heat greenhouses here – not an issue in sunny Spain – so there is a trade-off between the increased use of gas and electricity, and the longer transport distance and greater demands on water in Spain.
"And if transport is taken out of the equation, lamb from New Zealand is a more sustainable choice than that farmed in Britain – with less energy used for farming in a climate where there is less need for feed supplements and heated farm buildings.
"If Britons want to continue to have a choice of food all year round, it may be better to import some staples and avoid the emissions otherwise caused by keeping British produce in chilled storage for long periods, according to researchers."
So DEFRA are saying that if we want strawberries at Christmas then we better buy Spanish ones as the combined energy of their greenhouses and shipping them here will be less than if you grow them in the UK. How exactly is that complicated?
The key of course is seasonal. Of course local food won't have less embodied energy if you are trying to grow Kentish pineapples in winter. My early summer strawberries, grown in the back garden not only have the lowest possible food miles but require no heating at all - and they taste much better than shop bought ones too.
Thursday, 23 July 2009
Good Luck Norwich and Brighton
Two important by-elections today, parliamentary in Norwich North and a council by-election in Hove, Goldsmid Ward. Good luck to Rupert and Alex our candidates.
I've done a couple of evenings of phone canvassing for Rupert. Canvassing by phone is far harder than knocking on doors and I really do miss the eye contact, but it is useful practice none the less. Like most things, the more you do the easier it becomes.
I've done a couple of evenings of phone canvassing for Rupert. Canvassing by phone is far harder than knocking on doors and I really do miss the eye contact, but it is useful practice none the less. Like most things, the more you do the easier it becomes.
Monday, 20 July 2009
Letter to the KM on Afghanistan
While Maidstone trumpets its military history with a new army recruitment centre, the death toll of both British forces and civilians in Afghanistan continues to rise.
The purpose of the US led invasion of Afghanistan was to capture Bin Laden putting an end to al-Qaida and Britain also wanted to end the opium production. Eight years on, as neither of these aims have been achieved, it is surely time to rethink our future involvement.
Firstly, party political discussions about helicopters and equipment simply miss the point - we need to get our troops out of the country.
Secondly, NATO has no legitimacy in the region. It happily supports some Middle Eastern states with appalling records on human rights while adopting an aggressive stance against others. NATO should not be the organisation in charge of security in Afghanistan. It should be the United Nations that takes the lead in restoring a peaceful democracy.
Let's hand Afghanistan to the UN and withdraw from this pointless war.
Stuart Jeffery
The purpose of the US led invasion of Afghanistan was to capture Bin Laden putting an end to al-Qaida and Britain also wanted to end the opium production. Eight years on, as neither of these aims have been achieved, it is surely time to rethink our future involvement.
Firstly, party political discussions about helicopters and equipment simply miss the point - we need to get our troops out of the country.
Secondly, NATO has no legitimacy in the region. It happily supports some Middle Eastern states with appalling records on human rights while adopting an aggressive stance against others. NATO should not be the organisation in charge of security in Afghanistan. It should be the United Nations that takes the lead in restoring a peaceful democracy.
Let's hand Afghanistan to the UN and withdraw from this pointless war.
Stuart Jeffery
Sunday, 19 July 2009
Helicopters to Afghanistan?
Letter to the Kent on Sunday based on their headline story:
Of course we should ask why the government is ignoring Army calls to be provided with the equipment necessary to operate effectively, but surely it is time to ask some even bigger questions about our involvement in Afghanistan.
The purpose of the US led invasion of Afghanistan was to capture Bin Laden and put an end to al-Qaida, Britain also wanted to end the opium production. Sadly, opium production has increased twenty fold since 2001, the threat of terrorism has risen, world opinion is against the NATO led occupation and the majority of British people want troops home by the end of the year.
It seems then that discussions about how many helicopters the troops need miss the wider point that we have followed the US into a war that has little legitimacy. We should not have invaded Afghanistan and it is time for our troops to return.
Furthermore, NATO should not be the organisation in charge of security in Afghanistan. NATO bizarrely supports some Middle Eastern states with appalling records on human rights while adopting an aggressive stance against others. The United Nations should take the lead in restoring a peaceful democracy and rebuilding the country.
Let's hand Afghanistan to the UN and withdraw from this pointless war.
Of course we should ask why the government is ignoring Army calls to be provided with the equipment necessary to operate effectively, but surely it is time to ask some even bigger questions about our involvement in Afghanistan.
The purpose of the US led invasion of Afghanistan was to capture Bin Laden and put an end to al-Qaida, Britain also wanted to end the opium production. Sadly, opium production has increased twenty fold since 2001, the threat of terrorism has risen, world opinion is against the NATO led occupation and the majority of British people want troops home by the end of the year.
It seems then that discussions about how many helicopters the troops need miss the wider point that we have followed the US into a war that has little legitimacy. We should not have invaded Afghanistan and it is time for our troops to return.
Furthermore, NATO should not be the organisation in charge of security in Afghanistan. NATO bizarrely supports some Middle Eastern states with appalling records on human rights while adopting an aggressive stance against others. The United Nations should take the lead in restoring a peaceful democracy and rebuilding the country.
Let's hand Afghanistan to the UN and withdraw from this pointless war.
KIG Footpath and Bridleway Closure
This notice appeared in this weeks Kent Messenger. DEFRA are lining up the need to close various rights of way while KIG is being built. These footpaths and bridleways are well used by local people to walk dogs, ride their horses and to go for walks.If you feel strongly about the closure, as I'm sure you do, then please write and object.
Write quoting reference no. NATTRAN/SE/S247/80 to:
DEFRA
Casework Team
Government Office for the North East
Citygate,
Gallowgate,
Newcastle upon Tyne
NE1 4WH
Thursday, 16 July 2009
Mine's the best blog vote for me!!!
Email your ten favourite blogs (ranked from 1-10) to toptenblogs@totalpolitics.com
It's that time of year again, when Total Politics asks you to vote for your Top 10 favourite blogs. The votes will be compiled and included in the forthcoming book, the Total Politics Guide to Blogging 2009-10, which will be published in September. This year the poll is being promoted/sponsored by LabourList and LibDemVoice as well as our publisher Iain Dale's blog.
The rules are simple.
1. You must vote for your ten favourite blogs and ranks them from 1 (your favourite) to 10 (your tenth favourite).
2. Your votes must be ranked from 1 to 10. Any votes which do not have rankings will not be counted.
3. You MUST include ten blogs. If you include fewer than ten your vote will not count.
2. Email your vote to toptenblogs@totalpolitics.com
3. Only vote once.
4. Only blogs based in the UK, run by UK residents are eligible or based on UK politics are eligible.
5. Anonymous votes left in the comments will not count. You must give a name
6. All votes must be received by midnight on 31 July 2009. Any votes received after that date will not count.
Later I'll produce a bar graph showing that it really is between my blog and Iain Dale's so you'd better not vote for Sunny, Jim or any of the ones listed on the right or you'll let the Tories in. Remember only I can win here... Ok I don't stand much of a chance but please include me in your list as it would be good to get at least two votes!
Campaign for Vestas
Just as Miliband says there will be 400,000 jobs created in the green collar sector, the UK's only wind turbine factory announces it is to close.
The FOE have a new campaign to save Vestas, send your letter to Mandy via the FOE by clicking here.
The Campaign against Climate Change are also looking for supports to keep the UK's only wind turbine factory open. This is from them, please email your support:
As you probably know, the Vestas corporation is planning to close the only factory making wind turbines in Britain, on the Isle of Wight. There is now a campaign among local people on the island and Vestas workers to save the Vestas plant. This will save 600 jobs. More than that, it matters to them because it matters to the planet.
They have asked for emails from individuals and organisations expressing support. The address is savevestas@gmail.com. PLEASE DO THIS as soon as you can. Just tell them briefly who you are and what you feel. It will be important in giving them confidence and courage.
Please do it now and ask your friends and colleagues to do it too.
We will never halt climate change without wind power. We need dozens of wind turbine plants, not none.
Jonathan Neale, International Secretary
Phil Thornhill, Coordinator
Campaign against Climate Change
The FOE have a new campaign to save Vestas, send your letter to Mandy via the FOE by clicking here.
The Campaign against Climate Change are also looking for supports to keep the UK's only wind turbine factory open. This is from them, please email your support:
As you probably know, the Vestas corporation is planning to close the only factory making wind turbines in Britain, on the Isle of Wight. There is now a campaign among local people on the island and Vestas workers to save the Vestas plant. This will save 600 jobs. More than that, it matters to them because it matters to the planet.
They have asked for emails from individuals and organisations expressing support. The address is savevestas@gmail.com. PLEASE DO THIS as soon as you can. Just tell them briefly who you are and what you feel. It will be important in giving them confidence and courage.
Please do it now and ask your friends and colleagues to do it too.
We will never halt climate change without wind power. We need dozens of wind turbine plants, not none.
Jonathan Neale, International Secretary
Phil Thornhill, Coordinator
Campaign against Climate Change
Friday, 10 July 2009
Exploiting the workers
Our monetary system simply serves as a means of exploitation not a means of barter.
This is the strap line in today's Indy: "Bulgarians are flown to Britain, live in packed caravan compounds and pocket just £45 a week to pick fruit for Britain's biggest retailers". This is a story that we have all heard many times. The British don't want to work for peanuts, farms want to make a profit, supermarkets force prices down, shoppers want to pay the least amount for their food... so the only answer is to find someone else to exploit, and Bulgarians and Romanians are the target this time.
When I visited Marden a few weeks back at the start of their barter scheme there was a discussion on whether to charge for goods based on an arbitary price similar to shops or whether to pay on how much time an activity took. This led to the question of whether one person's time is more valuable than another.
Should a solicitor exchange their time on the barter scheme at the same rate as a cake maker? Should a gardener charge the same rate as an architect? For me the simple answer is yes, we should all have equal value. People claim that their skills and expertise, acquired through years of training mean that they are in demand and this justifies their high prices. I suggest not. I suggest that over time people could enter these professions to ensure job security rather than to make a handsome profit.
Of course this is utopian dreaming, but there is a very real case for limiting maximum and minimum wages to help prevent exploitation. There is also a very real case for having these maximum and minimums applied globally because most of our exploitation is with foreign workers.
We also need to keep thinking about the stuff we buy in human (and oil terms). How many hours labour did it take to produce the T Shirt that costs £1? And how are we replacing labour with buried, non-renewable, energy when we automate production and what effect does that have on the factor owners and workers?
This is the strap line in today's Indy: "Bulgarians are flown to Britain, live in packed caravan compounds and pocket just £45 a week to pick fruit for Britain's biggest retailers". This is a story that we have all heard many times. The British don't want to work for peanuts, farms want to make a profit, supermarkets force prices down, shoppers want to pay the least amount for their food... so the only answer is to find someone else to exploit, and Bulgarians and Romanians are the target this time.
When I visited Marden a few weeks back at the start of their barter scheme there was a discussion on whether to charge for goods based on an arbitary price similar to shops or whether to pay on how much time an activity took. This led to the question of whether one person's time is more valuable than another.
Should a solicitor exchange their time on the barter scheme at the same rate as a cake maker? Should a gardener charge the same rate as an architect? For me the simple answer is yes, we should all have equal value. People claim that their skills and expertise, acquired through years of training mean that they are in demand and this justifies their high prices. I suggest not. I suggest that over time people could enter these professions to ensure job security rather than to make a handsome profit.
Of course this is utopian dreaming, but there is a very real case for limiting maximum and minimum wages to help prevent exploitation. There is also a very real case for having these maximum and minimums applied globally because most of our exploitation is with foreign workers.
We also need to keep thinking about the stuff we buy in human (and oil terms). How many hours labour did it take to produce the T Shirt that costs £1? And how are we replacing labour with buried, non-renewable, energy when we automate production and what effect does that have on the factor owners and workers?
Wednesday, 8 July 2009
Vote Cruelty Free
Have just signed the 'Vote Cruelty Free Pledge'. They have asked all parliamentary candidates to sign the pledge on animal welfare and the current list of candidates that have signed the pledge makes interesting reading as no Conservatives have done this (according to their website as at 8th July 2009). There are a good number of Greens, Lib Dems and Labour but no Conservatives at all, which doesn't bode well if they get into government next year.
This is from their website:
This is from their website:
What is Vote Cruelty Free?
Vote Cruelty Free is a new non-partisan, coalition of non-governmental organisations working together to ensure the political process reflects public concern for animal protection.
Its members are the BUAV, Compassion in World Farming, International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW), League Against Cruel Sports and Respect for Animals. Vote Cruelty Free covers a broad range of animal welfare issues including wild and marine animals, animal experimentation, cruel sports, the fur trade and farming.
Vote Cruelty Free believes that bringing the animal protection movement together and working directly with candidates and elected officials is an effective way to achieve positive change for animals in the political arena.
Sunday, 5 July 2009
WRITE TO YOUR MP, STOP ID POWERS NOW!
This is from Phil Booth of NO2ID:
On Wednesday 8th July 2009, the House of Commons will vote on a group of three ID-related Statutory Instruments* including one called 'The Identity Cards Act 2006 (Provision of Information without Consent) Regulations 2009'.
The other two establish fees and penalties that can be applied to anyone registered on the ID database.
We need you to write to your MP *NOW* to get them to vote against these key pieces of secondary legislation.
The 'Provision of Information without Consent' regulation would give powers to the Identity and Passport Service to pass on information it holds on you to a host of other agencies WITHOUT YOUR KNOWLEDGE OR CONSENT. This
information would include not only official document numbers, and personal details like your name, addresses and signature (more than enough to facilitate massive identity fraud) but also your fingerprints and even - to the police, intelligence services, taxman and ANYONE ELSE THEY AUTHORISE - details of every time you had had your ID checked, e.g to register with a GP, open a bank account or apply for credit, or travel abroad. Your medical and financial dealings conveniently tagged and indexed for further snooping.
Records of what information has been given to whom and why may be destroyed after 12 months or less. They would track you for life, but prefer to leave no trail of their activities.
Contrary to some recent media reports, the ID scheme is still very much alive. From 2011 onwards you will still be forced to register on the ID database when you apply for or renew your passport. Some, including young people and those living in the North West of England, may be duped or bullied into registering for a card from later this year - and once you are on the database, there is no way off. The fees, penalties and data-trafficking established by these regulations would apply to you for life.
Blocking these three Statutory Instruments would not only stall the Scheme, it provides an opportunity for ID opponents to show how committed they are to killing it off completely. It is important that as many MPs of all parties as possible vote against them on Wenesday 8th July.
There is very little time, so we need you to contact your MP straight away - http://www.WriteToThem.com makes it very easy - to tell him or her that you deeply object to having your personal information shared without your
knowledge or consent, and ask him or her to vote against 'The Identity Cards Act 2006 (Provision of Information without Consent) Regulations 2009' and the other two ID-related Statutory Instruments (see below for details) on Wednesday 8th July.
And don't forget to TELL OTHERS - link to our Facebook group at http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=54487688497, e-mail your friends, but don't delay.
--
*Statutory Instruments (SIs) are pieces of legislation which allow the provisions of an Act of Parliament (e.g. Ministerial powers) to be brought into force or altered without Parliament having to pass a new Act. They are also sometimes referred to as secondary legislation or regulations. The three with which we are most immediately concerned are:
The Identity Cards Act 2006 (Fees) Regulations 2009
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2009/draft/ukdsi_9780111479070_en_1
The Identity Cards Act 2006 (Information and Code of Practice on Penalties)
Order 2009
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2009/draft/ukdsi_9780111479087_en_1
The Identity Cards Act 2006 (Provision of Information without Consent)
Regulations 2009
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2009/draft/ukdsi_9780111479063_en_1
On Wednesday 8th July 2009, the House of Commons will vote on a group of three ID-related Statutory Instruments* including one called 'The Identity Cards Act 2006 (Provision of Information without Consent) Regulations 2009'.
The other two establish fees and penalties that can be applied to anyone registered on the ID database.
We need you to write to your MP *NOW* to get them to vote against these key pieces of secondary legislation.
The 'Provision of Information without Consent' regulation would give powers to the Identity and Passport Service to pass on information it holds on you to a host of other agencies WITHOUT YOUR KNOWLEDGE OR CONSENT. This
information would include not only official document numbers, and personal details like your name, addresses and signature (more than enough to facilitate massive identity fraud) but also your fingerprints and even - to the police, intelligence services, taxman and ANYONE ELSE THEY AUTHORISE - details of every time you had had your ID checked, e.g to register with a GP, open a bank account or apply for credit, or travel abroad. Your medical and financial dealings conveniently tagged and indexed for further snooping.
Records of what information has been given to whom and why may be destroyed after 12 months or less. They would track you for life, but prefer to leave no trail of their activities.
Contrary to some recent media reports, the ID scheme is still very much alive. From 2011 onwards you will still be forced to register on the ID database when you apply for or renew your passport. Some, including young people and those living in the North West of England, may be duped or bullied into registering for a card from later this year - and once you are on the database, there is no way off. The fees, penalties and data-trafficking established by these regulations would apply to you for life.
Blocking these three Statutory Instruments would not only stall the Scheme, it provides an opportunity for ID opponents to show how committed they are to killing it off completely. It is important that as many MPs of all parties as possible vote against them on Wenesday 8th July.
There is very little time, so we need you to contact your MP straight away - http://www.WriteToThem.com makes it very easy - to tell him or her that you deeply object to having your personal information shared without your
knowledge or consent, and ask him or her to vote against 'The Identity Cards Act 2006 (Provision of Information without Consent) Regulations 2009' and the other two ID-related Statutory Instruments (see below for details) on Wednesday 8th July.
And don't forget to TELL OTHERS - link to our Facebook group at http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=54487688497, e-mail your friends, but don't delay.
--
*Statutory Instruments (SIs) are pieces of legislation which allow the provisions of an Act of Parliament (e.g. Ministerial powers) to be brought into force or altered without Parliament having to pass a new Act. They are also sometimes referred to as secondary legislation or regulations. The three with which we are most immediately concerned are:
The Identity Cards Act 2006 (Fees) Regulations 2009
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2009/draft/ukdsi_9780111479070_en_1
The Identity Cards Act 2006 (Information and Code of Practice on Penalties)
Order 2009
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2009/draft/ukdsi_9780111479087_en_1
The Identity Cards Act 2006 (Provision of Information without Consent)
Regulations 2009
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2009/draft/ukdsi_9780111479063_en_1
Orwell
Orwell has to be one of my favourite writers and clearly prophetic in his work. If you haven't read 1984 for a few years then do so. Being captured on CCTV 300 times each day, having 1000 phones tapped EVERY DAY, and the CrimInt database are all straight out of 1984.
However I have just stumbled across The English Revolution and thought it was worth sharing a few lines:
"The Labour leaders wanted to go on and on, drawing their salaries and periodically swapping jobs with the Conservatives."
This was written in 1941 - 68 years ago. Not much has changed! I'm reading Oborn's Rise of the Political Class and will be blogging more on this later as he deals with this in some depth.
Orwell also sets out a short manifesto:
"I suggest that the following six-point programme is the kind of thing we need. The first three points deal with England's internal policy, the other three with the Empire and the world:
However I have just stumbled across The English Revolution and thought it was worth sharing a few lines:
"The Labour leaders wanted to go on and on, drawing their salaries and periodically swapping jobs with the Conservatives."
This was written in 1941 - 68 years ago. Not much has changed! I'm reading Oborn's Rise of the Political Class and will be blogging more on this later as he deals with this in some depth.
Orwell also sets out a short manifesto:
"I suggest that the following six-point programme is the kind of thing we need. The first three points deal with England's internal policy, the other three with the Empire and the world:
- Nationalization of land, mines, railways, banks and major industries.
- Limitation of incomes, on such a scale that the highest tax-free income in Britain does not exceed the lowest by more than ten to one.
- Reform of the educational system along democratic lines."
Saturday, 4 July 2009
It's so close here
I know I have blogged before on "It's so close here" and the misleading leaflets from the LibDems, such as the one which claims that only the LibDems could beat the Tories in last month's European election in Maidstone with the famous bar graph of a convenient election result. The statistics used there were the numbers of councillors on Maidstone Borough Council rather than numbers of votes.
They also like to distort the size of the bars so that the result looks closer than it really is, but just look at this bar chart that I discovered while throwing out the election stuff.
The key ploy remains the same, us or them politics. In this one they try to make out the Tory threat is greater than it really is.
They also like to distort the size of the bars so that the result looks closer than it really is, but just look at this bar chart that I discovered while throwing out the election stuff.
The key ploy remains the same, us or them politics. In this one they try to make out the Tory threat is greater than it really is.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)