It is a story I didn't expect to see, but I am very happy to have. The Telegraph has it here, British subjects, turned out in their hundreds turned out to welcome home members of the Duke of Lancasters' Regiment in Bolton.
Thank goodness. We in Britain seem to have long ago forgotten the value and sacrifice the brave people in our armed services have made, I am very happy to see the news of a welcome home parade. I would go further, I think that all soldiers returning home from active duty should be afforded the same.
Our soldiers are Labours forgotten civil servants. They were not however forgotten by the thousands of people who have and had their loved ones serving abroad.
Welcome home.
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Recommended Reading
Daniel1979 Recommends from this past week:
Please note that I do not necessarily agree with the points being raised in these, however, I felt they are all interesting enough to recommend.
Frasier Nelson tells us why so many people in this country on welfare, here.
Advanced Media Watch tells us that a huge chunk of Italy has declared independence, here.
Daniel Finkelstein welcomes us to the era of no money, here.
Iain Martin sketchbook's the scene 25 years in the future, with Gordon Brown refusing still to apologise for his errors, here.
Gerald Warner talks about Gordon Brown winning the support of the ghost of the Soviet Union, here.
Obnoxio the Clown risks being branded a racist (again), here.
Letters from a Tory is seeking feedback, here.
The Man in a Shed defends capitalism against BBC claims, here.
The All Seeing Eye highlights that the UK will have just one airworthy Harrier on April 1st, here.
Cato tells us his feelings on Red Nose Day, here.
Brits at their Best remind us of the good of Queen Victoria, here.
And for a little less reading, Donal Blaney points out that President Obama's approval ratings are lower that George W Bush's were, and offers a short video of President Obama in a less flattering light, here.
Please note that I do not necessarily agree with the points being raised in these, however, I felt they are all interesting enough to recommend.
Frasier Nelson tells us why so many people in this country on welfare, here.
Advanced Media Watch tells us that a huge chunk of Italy has declared independence, here.
Daniel Finkelstein welcomes us to the era of no money, here.
Iain Martin sketchbook's the scene 25 years in the future, with Gordon Brown refusing still to apologise for his errors, here.
Gerald Warner talks about Gordon Brown winning the support of the ghost of the Soviet Union, here.
Obnoxio the Clown risks being branded a racist (again), here.
Letters from a Tory is seeking feedback, here.
The Man in a Shed defends capitalism against BBC claims, here.
The All Seeing Eye highlights that the UK will have just one airworthy Harrier on April 1st, here.
Cato tells us his feelings on Red Nose Day, here.
Brits at their Best remind us of the good of Queen Victoria, here.
And for a little less reading, Donal Blaney points out that President Obama's approval ratings are lower that George W Bush's were, and offers a short video of President Obama in a less flattering light, here.
Friday, March 13, 2009
G20 Preperations
So how are preparations going so far?
We this week we learned that certain dignitaries attending next month will be exempt from the smoking ban for the G20 summit. So despite absolute enforcement of the ban being quite unpopular as soon as the Marlboro President flies in laws of the land are being put to one side.
Today we learn that a PR company that is advising the Government on the organising of the G20 has classified countries into two tiers of importance. This is apparently to target key backers to help Gordon Brown QUANGOcratise world financial markets, so that a global body, that will be accountable to itself, and not to any set of voters can be imposed.
The lowly deadbeats that should just be grateful for the invite include Argentina, Australia, Canada, Indonesia, Mexico, Russia and Turkey. That's right Australia and Canada who have repeatedly stood fast and whose citizens have given their lives to protect British freedoms are publicly second rung guests.
There is a £50m budget in place and this is Gordon Browns last chance to make some kind of dent on global diplomatic relations before he gets permanently bogged down in trying to actually win an election. I am expecting post summit for that £50m figure to be exposed as not being met and the true costs being higher.
How many days now until that General Election?
We this week we learned that certain dignitaries attending next month will be exempt from the smoking ban for the G20 summit. So despite absolute enforcement of the ban being quite unpopular as soon as the Marlboro President flies in laws of the land are being put to one side.
Today we learn that a PR company that is advising the Government on the organising of the G20 has classified countries into two tiers of importance. This is apparently to target key backers to help Gordon Brown QUANGOcratise world financial markets, so that a global body, that will be accountable to itself, and not to any set of voters can be imposed.
The lowly deadbeats that should just be grateful for the invite include Argentina, Australia, Canada, Indonesia, Mexico, Russia and Turkey. That's right Australia and Canada who have repeatedly stood fast and whose citizens have given their lives to protect British freedoms are publicly second rung guests.
There is a £50m budget in place and this is Gordon Browns last chance to make some kind of dent on global diplomatic relations before he gets permanently bogged down in trying to actually win an election. I am expecting post summit for that £50m figure to be exposed as not being met and the true costs being higher.
How many days now until that General Election?
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Letter To A Tory - Update 1
Just a quick update on my previous post, Letter to a Tory (seen here). I did, as mentioned in the comments of the original email a copy to David Cameron to see if he would like to reply; I have not heard back yet. I would think given what has been on Mr Cameron's plate of late it is not unreasonable that I wait until next week before expecting a reply. If and when I do, I will share.
However, I have just seen Daniel Hannan post, seems the Conservatives in the EU Parliament have served notice and are leaving the EPP in June. This was confirmed in a meeting between William Hague and Joseph Daul today (EPP Leader). Daniel's post can be read, here.
However, I have just seen Daniel Hannan post, seems the Conservatives in the EU Parliament have served notice and are leaving the EPP in June. This was confirmed in a meeting between William Hague and Joseph Daul today (EPP Leader). Daniel's post can be read, here.
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
International Conference On Climate Change
Climate Change "Deniers" are meeting in New York this week, I was not aware as I had not read in the MSM.
President Vaclav Klaus was the keynote speaker on day one.
A recent update was posted here, if anyone is interested.
President Vaclav Klaus was the keynote speaker on day one.
A recent update was posted here, if anyone is interested.
Government Debt
Just an observation really, but chatter around work has increased on public debt and a recent dispatches programme (which I did not see) seems to have added to some public unease. Me plus a few others will occasionally have a bit of a moan on political matters, but try not to drown out the whole office in the process.
Whereas such conversations would have caused the eye's to roll in eavesdroppers not long ago, today I have heard one such conversation from afar and been roped into another.
This is a little unusual for some of the people concerned, and I can only assume that messages of the true extent of public debt and the extent in which this affects our lives is starting to sink home; possibly as people are having to look at their own finances in greater detail than ever and considering what value the government is delivering on tax revenues.
I do tend to be a little cynical sometimes, and I have struggled to understand how the masses have been so apathetic over certain issues, but I think the economic arguments are filtering down and a large number of people are taking a political interest in how and where tax payer money is being spent.
Like I say, just an observation.
Whereas such conversations would have caused the eye's to roll in eavesdroppers not long ago, today I have heard one such conversation from afar and been roped into another.
This is a little unusual for some of the people concerned, and I can only assume that messages of the true extent of public debt and the extent in which this affects our lives is starting to sink home; possibly as people are having to look at their own finances in greater detail than ever and considering what value the government is delivering on tax revenues.
I do tend to be a little cynical sometimes, and I have struggled to understand how the masses have been so apathetic over certain issues, but I think the economic arguments are filtering down and a large number of people are taking a political interest in how and where tax payer money is being spent.
Like I say, just an observation.
Monday, March 09, 2009
New Poll - Who Was The Best Left-Leaning PM Of The Last 100 Years?
I have put a new poll up, please vote on the poll on the right hand side of the blog, but feel free to elaborate further in the comments field of this post.
Best Political TV Programme
The poll has closed.
22% (6) - West Wing
78% (22) - Yes Minister
0% (0) - The Thick Of It
Again, my apologies for not thinking of including The New Statesman.
22% (6) - West Wing
78% (22) - Yes Minister
0% (0) - The Thick Of It
Again, my apologies for not thinking of including The New Statesman.
Sunday, March 08, 2009
Jury Team
I have just discovered that Sir Paul Judge has started a new kind of political party, called Jury Team. The notion is that Jury Team will be a non-party party. So providing that you are willing to stand in an open primary which will be voted upon electronically and support the platform of good governance then you can stand as a Jury Team candidate. They will start the search for candidates for the EU elections on 16th March.
I certainly recommend their website as a good read, and I hope that Jury Team finds a home in British politics. I of course think their principle of whipless independents is good, I even wrote in support of a similar principle on only my second blog post.
I suspect if they get sufficient publicity, the people of Britain will welcome their ideas. I have signed up for the newsletter already so I will be commenting on points of interest here.
I certainly recommend their website as a good read, and I hope that Jury Team finds a home in British politics. I of course think their principle of whipless independents is good, I even wrote in support of a similar principle on only my second blog post.
I suspect if they get sufficient publicity, the people of Britain will welcome their ideas. I have signed up for the newsletter already so I will be commenting on points of interest here.
Saturday, March 07, 2009
Letter To A Tory
I was inspired to write an open letter on this topic by this blog.
--
Dear David Cameron
I am writing this open letter to you for clarification on a point you have raised in the past. During your campaign for the party leadership you pledged to withdraw British Conservative MEPs from the EPP-ED, at the time I believe the pledge was to do so in "months, not years."
In 2006 I recall that this pledge was put back until 2009. This was because you struck a deal with Mirek Topolanek, the now President of the EU to form a new group, but the Czech Leader had asked or the additional time to make the required political changes at home.
We are now into March of 2009 and there are EU elections this year. May I boldly suggest that the time is now to re-visit this dialogue with your party's potential voters.
The Parliament does not have an official opposition, and the voice calling for less integration within the EU is small. There is a fundamental need in any democracy for opposition voices to be heard. Without opposition, there is no democracy. The majority of people in the UK would favour drastically reduced influence from the EU, yet that voice is not proportionately represented.
The opposition parties in the UK have made claims that Conservative influence within the EU will diminish as a result of leaving the EPP-ED. The decision to leave the EPP was one of courage, this same courage is lacking in the delivery. With a coalition in the EU Parliament proposing a reversal on integrationalist policies, you will only see membership numbers grow over time. It would place the Conservatives in a position of leadership in Europe, and allow your party to better represent your constituents on basic Conservative principles.
At the moment, potential Conservative voters could be forgiven for not knowing what they might be voting for.
It was you who said "I want to apply the modernising approach that I am bringing to the Conservative Party to our approach to Europe. I want us to be the champions of change, optimism and hope in Europe as well as Britain. It is time for a Europe not of deals but of ideals. So we say to the moderate mainstream, who are not satisfied with the EU as it is today: come and join us - we have a future to fight for."
You have done good work in making the Conservative seem electable again at home; you are no longer viewed as the nasty party. This change of image must go further in Europe. Your party cannot be aligned with those people who would disrespectfully Jeer the President of a sovereign nation who dares to ask for accountability to, and dialogue with European people. Your party cannot be aligned to those people who prescribe their indoctrinated policies rather than implementing those which the people of the EU have asked for. Forced co-operation and integration will not lead to peace in our time, but just the opposite. The people of the Europe need representative who can and will stand up to this leviathan and declare "Enough!" and have that voice heard.
If we are to believe that you can help our nation onto the road to recovery and if we are to trust you at the helm; we need to know you will fulfil your stated pledges... and on this particular pledge, I for one would like to know when.
Regards
Daniel1979
--
Dear David Cameron
I am writing this open letter to you for clarification on a point you have raised in the past. During your campaign for the party leadership you pledged to withdraw British Conservative MEPs from the EPP-ED, at the time I believe the pledge was to do so in "months, not years."
In 2006 I recall that this pledge was put back until 2009. This was because you struck a deal with Mirek Topolanek, the now President of the EU to form a new group, but the Czech Leader had asked or the additional time to make the required political changes at home.
We are now into March of 2009 and there are EU elections this year. May I boldly suggest that the time is now to re-visit this dialogue with your party's potential voters.
The Parliament does not have an official opposition, and the voice calling for less integration within the EU is small. There is a fundamental need in any democracy for opposition voices to be heard. Without opposition, there is no democracy. The majority of people in the UK would favour drastically reduced influence from the EU, yet that voice is not proportionately represented.
The opposition parties in the UK have made claims that Conservative influence within the EU will diminish as a result of leaving the EPP-ED. The decision to leave the EPP was one of courage, this same courage is lacking in the delivery. With a coalition in the EU Parliament proposing a reversal on integrationalist policies, you will only see membership numbers grow over time. It would place the Conservatives in a position of leadership in Europe, and allow your party to better represent your constituents on basic Conservative principles.
At the moment, potential Conservative voters could be forgiven for not knowing what they might be voting for.
It was you who said "I want to apply the modernising approach that I am bringing to the Conservative Party to our approach to Europe. I want us to be the champions of change, optimism and hope in Europe as well as Britain. It is time for a Europe not of deals but of ideals. So we say to the moderate mainstream, who are not satisfied with the EU as it is today: come and join us - we have a future to fight for."
You have done good work in making the Conservative seem electable again at home; you are no longer viewed as the nasty party. This change of image must go further in Europe. Your party cannot be aligned with those people who would disrespectfully Jeer the President of a sovereign nation who dares to ask for accountability to, and dialogue with European people. Your party cannot be aligned to those people who prescribe their indoctrinated policies rather than implementing those which the people of the EU have asked for. Forced co-operation and integration will not lead to peace in our time, but just the opposite. The people of the Europe need representative who can and will stand up to this leviathan and declare "Enough!" and have that voice heard.
If we are to believe that you can help our nation onto the road to recovery and if we are to trust you at the helm; we need to know you will fulfil your stated pledges... and on this particular pledge, I for one would like to know when.
Regards
Daniel1979
Recommended Reading
Daniel1979 Recommends from this past week:
Please note that I do not necessarily agree with the points being raised in these, however, I felt they are all interesting enough to recommend.
Subrosa asks if Scotland is Racist, here.
The Times was good enough to publish an article entitled "what turns women on" here.
John M Ward rallies against clause 152, here.
SNP Tactical Voting talked about the vote in the Scottish Parliament against having an Independence Referendum, here.
The Ranting Penguin revealed a shocking statistic, here.
Raedwald talks about the return of Judicial Murder in Europe by the EU, here.
Bloggers 4 UKIP look at the EU's role in the downturn of fortunes for the Royal Mail, here.
Bill Cash concludes it may be inevitable that the UK leaves the EU, here.
I mentioned a few weeks back that I was Free At Last, here. Seems Rachel Lucas missed that post, judging by this.
Advanced Media Watch highlights how the SNP is delivering for Scotland and contrasts against Labours failures in the UK, here.
Pete on Tangled Web dissected Gordon Browns speech to Congress, here.
Tom Harris MP sparked some controversy with his call for a return to morality, here.
And for a little less reading, a video (and not because my Wife found it... honest) this guy takes a test which confirms he is not an alcoholic, but what about you? here.
Please note that I do not necessarily agree with the points being raised in these, however, I felt they are all interesting enough to recommend.
Subrosa asks if Scotland is Racist, here.
The Times was good enough to publish an article entitled "what turns women on" here.
John M Ward rallies against clause 152, here.
SNP Tactical Voting talked about the vote in the Scottish Parliament against having an Independence Referendum, here.
The Ranting Penguin revealed a shocking statistic, here.
Raedwald talks about the return of Judicial Murder in Europe by the EU, here.
Bloggers 4 UKIP look at the EU's role in the downturn of fortunes for the Royal Mail, here.
Bill Cash concludes it may be inevitable that the UK leaves the EU, here.
I mentioned a few weeks back that I was Free At Last, here. Seems Rachel Lucas missed that post, judging by this.
Advanced Media Watch highlights how the SNP is delivering for Scotland and contrasts against Labours failures in the UK, here.
Pete on Tangled Web dissected Gordon Browns speech to Congress, here.
Tom Harris MP sparked some controversy with his call for a return to morality, here.
And for a little less reading, a video (and not because my Wife found it... honest) this guy takes a test which confirms he is not an alcoholic, but what about you? here.
Friday, March 06, 2009
Pass The Custard
When were the following things debated in the House of Commons?
When was the decision to print £150bn of money debated by MP's?
When was the bank bailouts, and tax payer funding of bonuses and pensions debated by MP's?
When was our continued membership of the EU last debated by MP's?
When was the "Buy European" defence spending policy debated by MP's?
Why is it that the people we are voting for are not debating the big issues of the day? What are people who are over taxed and under represented supposed to do?
The young lady who covered Peter Mandleson in green custard today was protesting the third runway. This is something that was debated in Parliament. She has been widely written and commented on today, and considered opinion has generally accepted she was wrong in her protest (with a compelling argument to both sides).
But what are people supposed to do when they do not agree with the Government and their MP is not getting a say on important issues?
The EU makes in excess of 75% of all laws in the EU, we as people have very, very little say over those decisions. Then on the few matters the EU has no authority over, our MPs are not even consulted on historic events such as printing £150bn. Gordon Brown, who needed Tony Blair to win an election for him is making decisions that could potentially ruin this country for decades, and no one has voted him to be PM.
And they pretend to be disturbed at low voter turn-out at elections.
Peter Mandleson is probably the second or third most politically influential person in the UK today. He was elected to his position in the Lords by no one. He is not being shadowed in the House by anyone who has been elected. How exactly are people able to hold him and his decisions to account. To make things even murkier, he is still paid a massive salary by the EU. How is this not a conflict of interest?
So yes, the young ladies who covered Mandy in custard was probably wrong, and yes it is surprising that such an influential person has such lapsed security. But aren't we all missing the bigger point? In the history of the world there are certain things that we know will always happen. When a people are suppressed and ignored they eventually rise up; when they do they are unforgiving. I asked some time ago where the public protest and outrage is, and in recent weeks I am seeing and reading an undercurrent of discontent. It seems the Government feels it too, judging by this, this, this, this, this, and this. They know they have messed up our lives and our country instead of holding themselves to account, they stock up on riot gear, tear gas and line up the armed forces.
If you are a member of Government you are supposed to be accountable, it is how people stay free from tyranny. We have gone soft by not holding to account a long succession of gaffe prone government officials, and for letting newspaper editors decide who to be outraged with and by how much. A twice disgraced MP should not now be wielding such power from the Lords. Some wolves no longer wear sheep's clothing, they now prefer miniver.
If Democracy no longer works, what else are people supposed to do?
When was the decision to print £150bn of money debated by MP's?
When was the bank bailouts, and tax payer funding of bonuses and pensions debated by MP's?
When was our continued membership of the EU last debated by MP's?
When was the "Buy European" defence spending policy debated by MP's?
Why is it that the people we are voting for are not debating the big issues of the day? What are people who are over taxed and under represented supposed to do?
The young lady who covered Peter Mandleson in green custard today was protesting the third runway. This is something that was debated in Parliament. She has been widely written and commented on today, and considered opinion has generally accepted she was wrong in her protest (with a compelling argument to both sides).
But what are people supposed to do when they do not agree with the Government and their MP is not getting a say on important issues?
The EU makes in excess of 75% of all laws in the EU, we as people have very, very little say over those decisions. Then on the few matters the EU has no authority over, our MPs are not even consulted on historic events such as printing £150bn. Gordon Brown, who needed Tony Blair to win an election for him is making decisions that could potentially ruin this country for decades, and no one has voted him to be PM.
And they pretend to be disturbed at low voter turn-out at elections.
Peter Mandleson is probably the second or third most politically influential person in the UK today. He was elected to his position in the Lords by no one. He is not being shadowed in the House by anyone who has been elected. How exactly are people able to hold him and his decisions to account. To make things even murkier, he is still paid a massive salary by the EU. How is this not a conflict of interest?
So yes, the young ladies who covered Mandy in custard was probably wrong, and yes it is surprising that such an influential person has such lapsed security. But aren't we all missing the bigger point? In the history of the world there are certain things that we know will always happen. When a people are suppressed and ignored they eventually rise up; when they do they are unforgiving. I asked some time ago where the public protest and outrage is, and in recent weeks I am seeing and reading an undercurrent of discontent. It seems the Government feels it too, judging by this, this, this, this, this, and this. They know they have messed up our lives and our country instead of holding themselves to account, they stock up on riot gear, tear gas and line up the armed forces.
If you are a member of Government you are supposed to be accountable, it is how people stay free from tyranny. We have gone soft by not holding to account a long succession of gaffe prone government officials, and for letting newspaper editors decide who to be outraged with and by how much. A twice disgraced MP should not now be wielding such power from the Lords. Some wolves no longer wear sheep's clothing, they now prefer miniver.
If Democracy no longer works, what else are people supposed to do?
ITV Cutbacks
I was saddened this week to read that ITV needs to make cutbacks in order to survive. Mainly because ITV is a welcomed UK alternative to the BBC.
I do not know all the in's and outs but it does seem that ITV has a lot of regulatory targets to meet which seem outdated and a burden in the world of digital TV. We still have a bloated BBC and Channel 4 that can be regulated and over burdened by regulations, the BBC is proped up by tax payers to allow that to happen. ITV should have been cut lose a long time ago.
However, it would also seem that ITV has been making mistakes. ITV Digital's collapse is still fresh in the mind, and since then the notable purchase of Friends Reunited must surly rank as an outright failure.
ITV faces big challenges, it will need to shrink before it grow again. It's top stars may need to take pay cuts if they want a new "golden handcuffs" deal. 600 Job losses have been announced as well as other cost cutting measures.
Favourite shows are being cancelled or reduced such as the Bill, Heartbeat and the Royal.
I have noticed in recent years that as ITV has expanded the overall quality has dipped, and a further dip could see ratings plummet. As ITV has moved into the digital world, too many programmes include the same conveyor belt of z-listers on some kind of circuit. To people like myself that have no earthly concern for these people it does tend to preclude a number of shows from my watch list and I increasingly find myself cutting in and out of programmes to skip the latest tabloid tease "keeping it real". This is of course not just ITV but TV as a whole.
Anyway, I was giving it some thought and I had a couple of ideas for low cost TV that would not be scrapping the barrel, well not too much anyway. With the fear that more "reality" shows are coming I thought I would put my ideas here and encourage others to do the same.
Idea 1. To steal the format of Question Time and put a competitive show up against it at the same time. QT gets a lot of press and can be unnecessarily dull some weeks. I log-on to live-blog with Biased BBC and share my frustrations with others each week. An ITV alternative could also redress the left wing bias that QT exhibits most weeks and could perhaps make QT on the BBC up its game and try a bit harder.
It would be fairly cheap (I would imagine) as the biggest contributor is the attending audience with the questions. A host would be required, some guests might appear for free or a low fee if they have a book to promote or an agenda they wish to discuss.
An extension on the idea would be to hold it in a pub to make it a little livelier. Though some weeks this could admittedly descend into chaos.
Idea 2. Another panel show that perhaps does not have many years in it but could be really good in the short term. The idea is to pit believers against non-believers on topics of paranormal and extraterrestrial basis and of some wilder conspiracy theories. A two hour show where by the first 40 minutes is given to the believers to make a case, the next 40 to the doubters to dispute and then the last 40 to audience and neutrals. A text vote could be employed to boost revenues.
Shows could include the existence (or not) of, Ghosts, or spirit people, Roswell, JFK plots, Big Foot, Area 51 etc...
Idea 3. Polytechnic Challenge. A cross between University Challenge and Blockbusters. Teams of students representing universities on general knowledge and contemporary topics. Not as hard as University Challenge so that more people can play along at home. Again Contestants would not need to be paid, so would just need a host and a time slot. Also, the format should be quick fire questions rather than this whole slow-burning, music playing, non-suspense, suspense.
Idea 4. Drama school. Let Drama schools make their own programmes and put them on late at night. Would attract a student audience, would be free and could unearth a few gems.
Feel free to add you own.
I do not know all the in's and outs but it does seem that ITV has a lot of regulatory targets to meet which seem outdated and a burden in the world of digital TV. We still have a bloated BBC and Channel 4 that can be regulated and over burdened by regulations, the BBC is proped up by tax payers to allow that to happen. ITV should have been cut lose a long time ago.
However, it would also seem that ITV has been making mistakes. ITV Digital's collapse is still fresh in the mind, and since then the notable purchase of Friends Reunited must surly rank as an outright failure.
ITV faces big challenges, it will need to shrink before it grow again. It's top stars may need to take pay cuts if they want a new "golden handcuffs" deal. 600 Job losses have been announced as well as other cost cutting measures.
Favourite shows are being cancelled or reduced such as the Bill, Heartbeat and the Royal.
I have noticed in recent years that as ITV has expanded the overall quality has dipped, and a further dip could see ratings plummet. As ITV has moved into the digital world, too many programmes include the same conveyor belt of z-listers on some kind of circuit. To people like myself that have no earthly concern for these people it does tend to preclude a number of shows from my watch list and I increasingly find myself cutting in and out of programmes to skip the latest tabloid tease "keeping it real". This is of course not just ITV but TV as a whole.
Anyway, I was giving it some thought and I had a couple of ideas for low cost TV that would not be scrapping the barrel, well not too much anyway. With the fear that more "reality" shows are coming I thought I would put my ideas here and encourage others to do the same.
Idea 1. To steal the format of Question Time and put a competitive show up against it at the same time. QT gets a lot of press and can be unnecessarily dull some weeks. I log-on to live-blog with Biased BBC and share my frustrations with others each week. An ITV alternative could also redress the left wing bias that QT exhibits most weeks and could perhaps make QT on the BBC up its game and try a bit harder.
It would be fairly cheap (I would imagine) as the biggest contributor is the attending audience with the questions. A host would be required, some guests might appear for free or a low fee if they have a book to promote or an agenda they wish to discuss.
An extension on the idea would be to hold it in a pub to make it a little livelier. Though some weeks this could admittedly descend into chaos.
Idea 2. Another panel show that perhaps does not have many years in it but could be really good in the short term. The idea is to pit believers against non-believers on topics of paranormal and extraterrestrial basis and of some wilder conspiracy theories. A two hour show where by the first 40 minutes is given to the believers to make a case, the next 40 to the doubters to dispute and then the last 40 to audience and neutrals. A text vote could be employed to boost revenues.
Shows could include the existence (or not) of, Ghosts, or spirit people, Roswell, JFK plots, Big Foot, Area 51 etc...
Idea 3. Polytechnic Challenge. A cross between University Challenge and Blockbusters. Teams of students representing universities on general knowledge and contemporary topics. Not as hard as University Challenge so that more people can play along at home. Again Contestants would not need to be paid, so would just need a host and a time slot. Also, the format should be quick fire questions rather than this whole slow-burning, music playing, non-suspense, suspense.
Idea 4. Drama school. Let Drama schools make their own programmes and put them on late at night. Would attract a student audience, would be free and could unearth a few gems.
Feel free to add you own.
Thursday, March 05, 2009
Quantitative Easing
I Have read quite a lot about Quantitative Easing over the last few weeks, this is still the definition that makes the most sense to me. By Tim Carpenter on The UK Libertarian Party Blog from 20th February, and can be seen by clicking, here.
It is as if you are a beer-maker and the Government pitches up at your warehouse in the dead of night with a truck of water and a truck-load of barrels. It breaks in without permission, waters down your beer and takes away barrels of beer for its own use. Because it gets first dibs on the barrels, those least diluted will be taken away. You wake up and count your barrels and all seems ok. When you come to sell your beer you find there is more in the marketplace and what you have is weaker, so the price you get is lower. Your beer is now less valuable yet the State has beer - money - it never had.
It is theft, pure and simple.
It is as if you are a beer-maker and the Government pitches up at your warehouse in the dead of night with a truck of water and a truck-load of barrels. It breaks in without permission, waters down your beer and takes away barrels of beer for its own use. Because it gets first dibs on the barrels, those least diluted will be taken away. You wake up and count your barrels and all seems ok. When you come to sell your beer you find there is more in the marketplace and what you have is weaker, so the price you get is lower. Your beer is now less valuable yet the State has beer - money - it never had.
It is theft, pure and simple.
Somebody In No.10 Knowingly Lied To Parliament And The Public
Frasier Nelson has a scoop here.
In December the Government released some misleading knife crime figures. In an email trail Dr Matt Cavanagh emails the ONS telling them of the line that the Government would like to use. The statistics that were released by the government were knowingly inaccurate.
"Here is the statement that the PM would like us to publish tomorrow as part of the knife crime announcement"
The ONS replied and were very clear. The statistics should not be used and the reasons cited are that they were,
"potentially inaccurate and may possibly give the wrong impression"
The emails continue to go back and forth but the ONS were told,
"I have also been informed that Number 10 are adamant about the need to publish this statistic. As a result, I have been informed that they are likely to publish the data irrespective of the concerns raised"
In a December press release The Home Office announced that there had been a 27% fall in stab wound hospital admissions. They also claimed,
"fewer teenagers carrying knives, fewer young people carrying knives, fewer offenders getting off with a caution, more people going to prison".
When asked repeatedly for the raw data behind these announcements, the Home Office would only ever say that they would be published in due course.
The nett result is that the Home Office and Number 10 used selective statistics and deliberately ignored proper checks so as to manipulate a political advantage. They did so with numbers involving violent crime amongst people they are supposed to be representing. In fact, as Frasier points out it is so Gordon Brown could attend a photo-call with the relatives of the victims of knife crime.
People within those statistics died, but the Government decided it was more important that they lie to look good, and make political gain. This, rather than acknowledge the real extent of a very serious problem that is happening whilst they control the levers of power.
The statistics when released actually showed an overall rise in knife crimes. Is there a single minister or department left within HM Government that isn't lying to or cheating money from the tax payer? I can't think of one.
In December the Government released some misleading knife crime figures. In an email trail Dr Matt Cavanagh emails the ONS telling them of the line that the Government would like to use. The statistics that were released by the government were knowingly inaccurate.
"Here is the statement that the PM would like us to publish tomorrow as part of the knife crime announcement"
The ONS replied and were very clear. The statistics should not be used and the reasons cited are that they were,
"potentially inaccurate and may possibly give the wrong impression"
The emails continue to go back and forth but the ONS were told,
"I have also been informed that Number 10 are adamant about the need to publish this statistic. As a result, I have been informed that they are likely to publish the data irrespective of the concerns raised"
In a December press release The Home Office announced that there had been a 27% fall in stab wound hospital admissions. They also claimed,
"fewer teenagers carrying knives, fewer young people carrying knives, fewer offenders getting off with a caution, more people going to prison".
When asked repeatedly for the raw data behind these announcements, the Home Office would only ever say that they would be published in due course.
The nett result is that the Home Office and Number 10 used selective statistics and deliberately ignored proper checks so as to manipulate a political advantage. They did so with numbers involving violent crime amongst people they are supposed to be representing. In fact, as Frasier points out it is so Gordon Brown could attend a photo-call with the relatives of the victims of knife crime.
People within those statistics died, but the Government decided it was more important that they lie to look good, and make political gain. This, rather than acknowledge the real extent of a very serious problem that is happening whilst they control the levers of power.
The statistics when released actually showed an overall rise in knife crimes. Is there a single minister or department left within HM Government that isn't lying to or cheating money from the tax payer? I can't think of one.
Wikio
Just wanted to say that I have seen my new Wikio rating, and I have moved from 305 to 137 in March. Not bad for a blog that is not even 3 months old.
Thanks to everyone for reading and for linking; this is much higher than I had envisioned. I had had just to break into the 200-300 range.
I am not feeling well today, but that has put a smile on my face.
Thanks to everyone for reading and for linking; this is much higher than I had envisioned. I had had just to break into the 200-300 range.
I am not feeling well today, but that has put a smile on my face.
Wednesday, March 04, 2009
Google On Twitter: "You Suck"
Eric Schmidt the CEO of Google today told an assembly at Morgan Stanley that "Twitter is a poor man's email." I think this is unfair and a pretty unimaginative put down.
However, there does seem to be two separate schools of thought on Twitter, those who see the value and those who do not. A lot of Bloggers like Twitter as it par for the course and also because it is a good way to let people know of updates. I had 32 visits via Twitter in February, my seventh biggest referral site, so as a newbie and relatively small Blogger I can appreciate and measure it's value.
However, it just will never be that big a deal to people who don't to be kept that up-to-date. And those people will just be fed up hearing about it. Because of it's name it does not require too many braincells to quickly put it, and its users down.
My gut says that Twitter has not peaked yet, but probably will later in 2009 or early in 2010 when the phrase "it's this years Facebook" will probably start to drive us nuts. There could be more that could be gotten out of Twitter, as written about here. As and when we have Twitter firsts, such as first Twitter marriage proposals and people being fired by Twitter it will make the news more and more.
Of course, a few years from now, Twitter will be as popular and talked about as, well, Friends Reunited, or Netscape and we can all pretend that it was a fad that passed us by and we had not interest in. In the meantime though, you can follow me on Twitter by clicking here.
However, there does seem to be two separate schools of thought on Twitter, those who see the value and those who do not. A lot of Bloggers like Twitter as it par for the course and also because it is a good way to let people know of updates. I had 32 visits via Twitter in February, my seventh biggest referral site, so as a newbie and relatively small Blogger I can appreciate and measure it's value.
However, it just will never be that big a deal to people who don't to be kept that up-to-date. And those people will just be fed up hearing about it. Because of it's name it does not require too many braincells to quickly put it, and its users down.
My gut says that Twitter has not peaked yet, but probably will later in 2009 or early in 2010 when the phrase "it's this years Facebook" will probably start to drive us nuts. There could be more that could be gotten out of Twitter, as written about here. As and when we have Twitter firsts, such as first Twitter marriage proposals and people being fired by Twitter it will make the news more and more.
Of course, a few years from now, Twitter will be as popular and talked about as, well, Friends Reunited, or Netscape and we can all pretend that it was a fad that passed us by and we had not interest in. In the meantime though, you can follow me on Twitter by clicking here.
Tuesday, March 03, 2009
Job Cuts To End By Easter?
I saw via a Yahoo newsfeed that Sky News has a report today that the worst of the UK job losses should be over by Easter. This is based on a report from the Chartered Institute of Personnel Development and seems to be entirely based on the fact that the UK downturn followed three months behind the US downturn, and that Job loses slowed in the US last quarter of 2008.
Anyway, I went to the CIPD website tonight to see if there was any more details to be found, after all their report has made the international news; but I can't even see that this report has made the news section of the CIPD's own website. Thus my conclusion can only be, no upturn currently in sight.
Personally the ground for optimism seem to me to be a bit unsound. An upturn in the US in Q4 could be linked to other seasonal high-spending factors such as Christmas and the Presidential Election. It just seemed a little odd that such a big news outlet would carry such a prediction when the authoritative body making the prediction is not even carrying it on their own website. Or am I reading too much into this?
MPs Vote To Keep Their Addresses Secret
Spy Blog points out that MPs have sneaked an amendment into the Political Parties and Elections Bill, at the report stage and just before the bill was to be rubber stamped for the third reading.
Spy Blog suggests there may have been some agreement between the parties to have made this happen and that the Deputy Speaker was dismissive of objections.
What more have MPs got to hide?
Spy Blog suggests there may have been some agreement between the parties to have made this happen and that the Deputy Speaker was dismissive of objections.
What more have MPs got to hide?
Monday, March 02, 2009
Who Will Pay For The EU?
Eastern European countries gave a bleak assessment of their economic prospects yesterday with Hungary talking of 5m unemployed turning up in Western EU Countries looking for work and benefits. Though the remark was aimed at Germany, it is worth remembering that only Britain and Ireland have fully opened our borders up to accession countries.
The Times Headline today speaks of a New 'Iron Curtain' as a plea for €190bn from the West to the East of Europe was immediately rejected. The strength of the Union may soon be tested.
This is all very interesting. I wrote about the stability of the EURO recently and I pointed out that in the event of any crisis, it is likely that politics will supersede economics in any decisions that are made.
The impetus of any Eastern EU and any EURO bailout lies with Germany. The EU is based largely on German plans and finances. If a bailout is needed it will probably fall on the Germans to raise and guarantee the required capital. However, it is not clear to what extent the German people are willing to prop up the EU, and so it will be a rocky few months.
Germany has not yet ratified the Lisbon Constitutional Treaty, and a potential €uber-billion bailout will not help the German political classes force it through any quicker. In fact the dialogue has changed somewhat and some of those raising opposition to the Treaty are looking at the possibility of opt-outs and a break mechanism so as to limit the costs to the EUs biggest contributors. If a succession of Economies began to collapse in Eastern Europe the IMF may not have sufficient reserve to react.
Absent from all of this are Britain and France. France may make a token contribution if all others do, but Britain is getting deeper and deeper into debt through borrowing in an effort to kick-start the financial industry. Germany will not act alone if an Eastern EU bailout is needed, and no one else, including Britain will likely have much in the way of the funds to help. Personally I hope we are not asked, because I do not trust this government to overstretch yet further our increasingly fragile economy.
I would imagine any German led deal would require two conditions. Firstly the big contributors to the EU will need to stump up a share to make it easier to sell to the German people and secondly the Germans then may force some form of direct taxation on the people of the EU to guarantee The EU it's first direct revenues. The harmonising and central collection of VAT has been mooted in the past.
I wouldn't mind making a prediction, well a pushing a theory really. If we look at my previous post, and at the events of the weekend it looks more and more (to me) like we are seeing the first real tensions on EU membership. If the Eastern European Countries need a bailout then they may need to look to Russia or America, and the necessity and politics of any deal may preclude continued EU membership.
Likewise if Ireland's economy was to crash, they might find themselves required to act outside of the Central Banks economic rules, and if things get really bad may need to leave the EU altogether. There has always been a large proportion of people in the UK that would welcome much looser ties as well. So what could result is the formalisation of a Central European State and around the edges those exiting member nations may turn back to trade agreements, rather than Union membership. The umbrella of EFTA membership may allow for this to happen with as little pain as possible.
Those nations who have long yearned for their superstate will get their wishes and can have all the trappings of their Federalist dreams, they have a currency already, and all the buildings and courts are in place. They may even be prepared to help Italy and Spain as part of the deal. It could eventually be a win/win situation as those countries who look most in trouble are those where a dissenting voice to a Federal Europe are most heard, UK/Ireland, Scandinavia and Eastern Europe.
The Times Headline today speaks of a New 'Iron Curtain' as a plea for €190bn from the West to the East of Europe was immediately rejected. The strength of the Union may soon be tested.
This is all very interesting. I wrote about the stability of the EURO recently and I pointed out that in the event of any crisis, it is likely that politics will supersede economics in any decisions that are made.
The impetus of any Eastern EU and any EURO bailout lies with Germany. The EU is based largely on German plans and finances. If a bailout is needed it will probably fall on the Germans to raise and guarantee the required capital. However, it is not clear to what extent the German people are willing to prop up the EU, and so it will be a rocky few months.
Germany has not yet ratified the Lisbon Constitutional Treaty, and a potential €uber-billion bailout will not help the German political classes force it through any quicker. In fact the dialogue has changed somewhat and some of those raising opposition to the Treaty are looking at the possibility of opt-outs and a break mechanism so as to limit the costs to the EUs biggest contributors. If a succession of Economies began to collapse in Eastern Europe the IMF may not have sufficient reserve to react.
Absent from all of this are Britain and France. France may make a token contribution if all others do, but Britain is getting deeper and deeper into debt through borrowing in an effort to kick-start the financial industry. Germany will not act alone if an Eastern EU bailout is needed, and no one else, including Britain will likely have much in the way of the funds to help. Personally I hope we are not asked, because I do not trust this government to overstretch yet further our increasingly fragile economy.
I would imagine any German led deal would require two conditions. Firstly the big contributors to the EU will need to stump up a share to make it easier to sell to the German people and secondly the Germans then may force some form of direct taxation on the people of the EU to guarantee The EU it's first direct revenues. The harmonising and central collection of VAT has been mooted in the past.
I wouldn't mind making a prediction, well a pushing a theory really. If we look at my previous post, and at the events of the weekend it looks more and more (to me) like we are seeing the first real tensions on EU membership. If the Eastern European Countries need a bailout then they may need to look to Russia or America, and the necessity and politics of any deal may preclude continued EU membership.
Likewise if Ireland's economy was to crash, they might find themselves required to act outside of the Central Banks economic rules, and if things get really bad may need to leave the EU altogether. There has always been a large proportion of people in the UK that would welcome much looser ties as well. So what could result is the formalisation of a Central European State and around the edges those exiting member nations may turn back to trade agreements, rather than Union membership. The umbrella of EFTA membership may allow for this to happen with as little pain as possible.
Those nations who have long yearned for their superstate will get their wishes and can have all the trappings of their Federalist dreams, they have a currency already, and all the buildings and courts are in place. They may even be prepared to help Italy and Spain as part of the deal. It could eventually be a win/win situation as those countries who look most in trouble are those where a dissenting voice to a Federal Europe are most heard, UK/Ireland, Scandinavia and Eastern Europe.
FTSE Drops Below 3700
The FTSE lost £47.7bn today after HSBC issued a £12.5bn rights issue to the market and shareholders to help generate cash to shore up its balance sheet. HSBC were one of the least affected banks of the current financial crisis, which has the market worried about the whole of UK PLC.
The FTSE now sits below the value it was at before Labour came to power in 1997, closing at 3,625. The DOW has followed suit and has dipped below 7,000 for the first time since 1997.
The Bank of England will meet again this week to make a decision about interest rates. It is likely that rates will be cut further. Such a move might be designed to encourage lending but it seems the banks still do not have sufficient capital to kick start another lending splurge. Plan A has failed, we need a Plan B.
Whilst this has been going on Gordon Brown has set off for his visit with President Obama. So far, the media are predicting that the PM will get a luke-warm reception. I personally think that President Obama is convinced that the PM will be out of a job after the next election and is playing exactly the same card Gordon dealt George W Bush in his final year by ensuring their "relationship" not appear too friendly, to avoid alienating his successor.
The FTSE now sits below the value it was at before Labour came to power in 1997, closing at 3,625. The DOW has followed suit and has dipped below 7,000 for the first time since 1997.
The Bank of England will meet again this week to make a decision about interest rates. It is likely that rates will be cut further. Such a move might be designed to encourage lending but it seems the banks still do not have sufficient capital to kick start another lending splurge. Plan A has failed, we need a Plan B.
Whilst this has been going on Gordon Brown has set off for his visit with President Obama. So far, the media are predicting that the PM will get a luke-warm reception. I personally think that President Obama is convinced that the PM will be out of a job after the next election and is playing exactly the same card Gordon dealt George W Bush in his final year by ensuring their "relationship" not appear too friendly, to avoid alienating his successor.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)