hold

turning

doesn't matter who is in power there will come a time when they have to make decisions that anger various groups in society. these interest groups will lobby parliament and try to get the decisions changed. that is democracy in action.

when we elect our politicians we are telling them to make decisions for us and in our name. the unspoken part of that pact is that there are going to be times when they are going to have to listen to the voice of the people even though there is not an election going on.

no government, no matter how strong or how wise is going to get it right all of the time. the strength of democracy is that a governments can rectify their mistakes.
what is odd is that we don't celebrate this evidence of democracy in action, rather we use it to castigate the government for being weak or stupid.

the recent con/dem budget has been described as an 'omnishambles' and it is an 'omnishanbles' that keeps on giving. there have been several u-turns that have punctured holes in the budget proposals. whatever else i may accuse the con/dems of being weak isn't one of those things. that just leaves being stupid. it does appear that george osborne and his team are guilty of either rank amateurism or they are very stupid.

i commend the government for changing tack on several of its headline idea from the last budget. it shows they are listening and are prepared to change their minds (of course they are not caving into pressure - who could think such a thing). judging by some of the recent changes it doesn't appear that a lot of thought is going into the plans that they are making - beyond the basic 'can we get those on low to medium incomes to pay more'.

a government that listens and can change its mind and decisions is a good thing.
a government that has to change its mind and decisions often is a bad thing.

phew - for a moment there i thought i was going to have to fully defend the con/dems but it seems i have given myself an out - they are lazy and clumsy planners and so are bad.

at least now we know why there isn't a plan b for the economy - they are still trying to work out what plan a was.

leaks

 

we’ve had a bit of rain: we still have a drought situation.

we are going to have more rain, but we will still be in a drought type situation.

how do i know this? thames water has told us. 

in a recent advert in the london evening standard they have taken out a full page advert that says “rain or shine – please always use water wisely”. they are even offering free water-saving gadgets for all their customers. that is nice of them.

one thing they are not going to do is meet their leak reduction targets. so while they ask their customers to use water wisely they are still leaking some 600 million litres of water a day (which is an improvement on the situation in 2006 when it was over 800 million litres a day).

ofwat (the water regulator) has ‘forced’ thames water to invest some of its own money, i.e. profits, into improving their leakage prevention.

don’t worry too much for thames water though they made a chunky profit last year and will do ok this year even if we save water because they put their prices up. this is an example of how a private business is so much better than a publicly owned one. even though it is inefficient and wasteful it can still make money for its shareholders. how does it do it? by making us pay more for the service.

maybe if thames water actually took their own message to heart and conserved water they could still make a very substantial profit and lower bills. all it takes is a little bit of investment and will to do it – you know the sort of things the conservatives are always telling us that private companies are so good – yet in practice they seem so so bad at.

just remember that while you are saving water – thames water is pissing it away.

2012

the olympics have a lot resting on them.

you have the expectation that is being heaped on the competitors, we are expecting a large haul of medals (in the parlance we want them to 'medal') and given we are funding them - we deserve to see some bang for our bucks.

you have the concern that the olympic park will function as promised. that it will provide a suitable and effective venue for sport and for viewing sports (it will also be a place to siphon money out of your pocket: how much for a cup? too much).
will all the tickets be sold? (pretty much - and we can bet that most of the empty seats will belong to the members of  the 'oympic family' or corporate bodies who just can't be asked to turn up or don't want to leave the confines of the hospitality tent. 

you have the worry about the london infrastructure being able to cope with the anticipated hoardes of tourists and sports fans. will heathrow be able to manage all these people? will the tube? will bob crow throw a hissy and blame 'bullying' bosses (answer: yes). will the, so called, zil lanes have a disastrous effect on london's businesses? will andrew lloyd-weber's nightmare of no one going to the theatre during the olympics come true?

the olympics will be a glorious event - they always are, there will be some problmes - there always are, there will be some dark sides to it again nothing new there.
the difference is this time it is happening in our backyard. that brings with it a whole new level of excitement and it will bring with it a whole new level of whinging.

ever since london won the bid there has been the worry of a terrorist attack. so much so that all branches of the armed forces are on stand-by (well those that are left after the con/dems have wielded their axe. we are expecting to have a missile battery on top of one of the local tower blocks - just in case.
so an attack has been thought likely and the various measures to avoid, prevent or repel it have been put into place.
sensible stuff you would think.

not to some - all of this just proves that the illuminati are out there and they are telling their friends that there is going to be an attack in london during the olympics in order to help bring about the new world order.
what proof have they? well the floodlights are in a triangular shape and the iluminati like triangles. the olympic mascots only have one eye - another trope of the elite, the 2012 logo is really 'zion'.
seriously what more proof do you need.
just to make sure you can't take this seriously there was a clue to what is going to happen in the movie '2012' when the hero of the film finds and opens a london tube map even though it isn't the map he wants, nor does it have much reason to be where it is.
evidence you can't refute.

the  conspiracy theorists have taken over the olympics.
i think i preferred it when it was just whingers who hate the games because they didn't get a ticket to see mr. bolt run.

enjoy the video - it is an eye opener (see what i did there).

in case you are wondering - it is all pretty much bollocks.
(though i have my fingers crossed when i say that.)

labyrinth

labyrinth

i have no problems with bureaucracy, most of the time that red tape serves a purpose and is needed (no matter what the conservative party or the confederation of british industry say). the main problem with bureaucracy is that often the right hand can pretend that the question is something to do with the left hand.

here is how it sometimes works.

my adviser gets me on a course. yay for him and yay for me. he then tells me that i have sign on every week. not so yay. i tell him that might be a problem because of having to get to the course – i tell him i will be walking because i can’t afford the bus fare. he nods. we compromise on the signing on. it stays at once a fortnight. he tells me he can’t move the time (he never explains why, i don’t bother to ask), but as it is first thing in the morning i can work with that.

during the first two weeks it is pissing down with rain in the morning – so i am forced to get a bus. i walk home in the afternoon whether it is raining or not. at some point it is mentioned that we can get a travel allowance from the job centre. in fact one or two people have been given one.

 ‘mmmm’ i think (i do a lot of ‘mmmming’ when i am thinking) ‘shame my adviser never told me that.’ i followed that thought with another: i’ll ask about it tomorrow on the way home.

now you may be wondering what all the fuss is about – it is just a bus fare. true, but when you are on jobseeker’s allowance every penny counts.

next day comes and i wander over to the job centre. at the reception i ask about the travel allowance. the bloke tells me he just works reception he can’t really help me. he does mention that i might be eligible for half price bus fare, but i would need to speak with my adviser. as i was seeing my adviser later on in the week i left it at that.

later on in the week i am seeing my adviser. it is my new adviser (after a certain amount of time you are assigned two advisers one who does your regular signing on and one who will see you every now and then to ‘advise’ and question you and this is your senior adviser). i ask about being refunded my bus fare. they tell me they are not sure about that and i will have to ask my other advisor. oh ok then, so what about the half price bus card do you have the form for that? no comes the reply – you have to get it from the station or the post office. ok that’s good – i’ll get that sorted then.

i am booked in to see my senior adviser in two weeks time (i am sure that is in the hope i will forget about trying to reclaim the bus fares – no chance of that).

last week of the course – just concentrating on getting there and reading the textbook.

course finished.

go to the tube station. can’t see the form i am looking for. ask for it. oh we don’t do that. really? i was told you did. no. you might be able to download it, or maybe from the post office. ah that sounds like it: the post office.

i go to the post office. do you have the half price bus pass form? no we do not (with a barely disguised snort of disbelief). oh i was told you would have it by the job centre. no, but you might be able to download it.

mmmm (see i told you i do it a lot).

well seeing the senior adviser at the end of the week will ask then.

meeting with the senior adviser: so can i be reimbursed for the travel to the course? i am not sure i will have to ask someone. i’ll let you know next time i see you (which will be at least 3 weeks later – i won’t forget to ask). what about the half price bus pass thing? have you been signing on for 13 weeks? i think so. yes you have. here is the form.

the form the other adviser didn’t have, because they don’t have them. yes that form.

at least i have it – i shouldn’t complain.

except.

he suggests i go to a work experience introductory meeting at another job centre. i say fine sounds like it could be interesting. he sets it up. i go. once the greetings and thanks for comings are out of the way the first thing the bloke says is that you can claim your travel expenses back.

yeah right.

fat

obesity is the current obsession (obesiession?), everywhere you look there are reports about people being fatter than fat, there are tales of new wonder diets, research into why people are getting fatter.

the media are fascinated by the shape and size of female celebrities and it soon becomes obvious that it isn’t what you do that counts it is the way you look and any deviation from the artificial norm is pounced upon as a sign of failure. 

i consider myself fat. i have pretty much always been fat. i can grab more than an inch (oo’er missus) compared with some of the more rotund in society i am really no more than cuddly, chunky, big-boned, heavy set or whatever other euphemism you might want to use. 

one of the curiosities of the weight debate is that some athletes would be considered to be obese by using the body mass index – a lot of top level rugby players fall foul of this.

last week an unnamed person at the british olympic association must have been having a quiet day and with little to do decided to mention that jessica ennis was carrying a little too much weight. the timing was a bit odd as ms ennis was about to compete in her only heptathlon before the olympics (she won and set a new british record). 

lots of people rushed to her defence. 

one of the things it has highlighted is that she is not the only female athlete to have been told that perhaps she is a little heavy, louise hazel has also told of the less than helpful, or subtle, comments she has received from her coaches. it has also brought to light the fact that there are a number of senior athletes who are struggling with food and weight issues. given that top athletes are funded by the state it seems a sad indictment that we are encouraging athletes to put themselves at risk in order to win a medal or two, especially when you consider all the medical and sport science help and advice these people can call on. somehow it seems wrong that it can become something that can lead to damage rather than proper health and fitness.

though on second thoughts in a sport that is prepared to allow known drug cheats to compete on the largest stage of all then what concern are they going to have about a few women puking their guts up in order to keep their weight down? 

anyway the real reason for this was to be able to put up some photos.  

 here is 'fat' jess - except she isn't, but she is quite foxy. (please note that ms ennis is displaying her rather fine forn in the old team gb kit, the one featuring red which according to stella would make it hard to recognise with all the red in the usa and french flags. yeah made sense to me.

 here is the 'heavy' louise hazel in action - looking trim and, frankly, very hot. i'd be happy to rub her down after her race.

and here is someone who might actually be called fat - it you were going to be cruel. 

what's worse is he is a tory to boot.

heat

i know i moan a lot about summer and i know there are a few things that are good about summer.
i can tell you what they are right now - longer period of light means i can be out longer with the camera. the sun and the heat means the ladies wear less and look fab.
there you go -summer distilled down to its essence.

right now i am baking. i am a sweat pig and all i am doing is typing (or as some arsehole called in 'keyboarding'), i can feel the first stirrings of hay fever. add to that the heat has sapped all my energy and i am dog tired.

given all of that i am in no fit state to be writing a blog, a little like mr. hunt overseeing the news international bskyb bid.

ooops

i shouldn’t enjoy the moments schadenfreude that politics throws up but i can’t help myself. 

baroness warsi is a hottie, and easily gets into my top 5 top tory totty list. there have been a few times when she has talked sense (look even tories get it right: occasionally). 

the tories are very keen to demonise those they describe as benefit cheats – the bane of the country.  for the tories they are the scum of the earth, feckless wasters who are taking money from hard working tax payers.

hard working tax payers such as sayeeda warsi, who is not short of a bob or two (her salary is paid by the tory party, she also gets £300 a day when she attends the house of lords), yet somehow has managed to get herself embroiled in an expenses scandal. 

there are a couple of things about this, firstly the alleged incident took place in 2008 and so we have had the whole kerfuffle over mp’s expenses. you would have thought anyone who was going to be sitting at the top table of government would have gone through their expense claims with a fine tooth comb to make sure there was nothing that could catch them out. 

if you are going to be a government that is going to crack down on people who engage in benefit fraud then you really should make sure that you have checked everyone of your team to make sure that their expense claims are legitimate, above board and can be justified. 

that, surely, is just plain common sense. 

on some occasions you have to be spotless. 

baroness warsi managed to forget to declare that she had a source of income from the rental of a flat in london. yet that isn’t the source of her problems it is her claiming overnight living expenses. for those who attend the house of lords who live outside london there was a flat rate overnight expense of £165.50. before she bought her house in london, the baroness was claiming this in order to pay for hotel accommodation. so far, so what? occasionally she stayed with a friend and it seems she paid her friend the going rate for a hotel. in real terms the amount of money isn’t that much, maybe a couple of grand. 

yet it still calls into question baroness warsi’s judgement – firstly for having a friend who would charge her so much for spending a couple of nights; some friend. secondly for paying a friend (and coincidently a conservative party worker) with public money

just maybe it gives an insight into people who believe they are better than the rest of us, that they are above the petty rules we have to live our lives by. maybe that is why they are so keen on getting rid of red tape everywhere because of the times when it seems to trip them up and entangle them. it could just be another demonstration of just how greedy the rich are and how unwilling they are to spend their own money when they can spend someone else’s money. 

baroness warsi isn’t at all like those benefit cheats because she believes that she acted within ‘the spirit and letter’ of the rules, there is another way she isn’t like those benefit cheats so hated by the tories and the daily mail baroness warsi won’t suffer from being caught out.