Archive for September, 2009
Police complaints
- Image via Wikipedia
Recent figures released by the IPCC show complaints regarding the police reaching a staggering 31 000 over the past year. These are only reports to the IPCC, as far as I can tell.
Yet, the blase comment by both the IPCC and various police forces up and down the country, is that this is just because people now know how to complain. The proposition being that people just complain for the sake of it and because there is now a better known complaints procedure, people are just abusing it. The additional response being that complaints were not upheld, so they were evidently just fictitious.
The state bodies in the UK is held by a corrupt and complacent group, who should not be holding office. Over every Century dramatic changes in political relationships occur, for far too long in the UK, there has been no change in the power brokers.
The Police force, set up by Peel in the 19th Century has become, without anything more than acquiescence by the population the enforcers of law and order; have gained their power through a political system which contrives to retain its own power, by creating a relationship between the two groupings with the clear intention of making the population subservient.
The Police have been permitted to decide laws, interpret laws and administer justice as they deem fit due in no small part, that the leadership of the Police forces obtain political power by serving the political power mongers.
Many countries entrust power to the Military, in the UK, due to constitutional conflict between Parliament and Monarchy, the Military have been precluded from this power share, as the Military are quite evidently and historically tied to the Monarchy. Through Acts of Parliament, the Police force have been granted powers far beyond their scope and as a result have formed an allegiance with the Government, not with the Population, which was the original intention of the ‘Peelers’.
There is no excuse for 31 000 complaints through the IPCC, the Police force are out of control as the Parliamentarians have for too long failed to see the danger of giving them carte blanche control, while their minds have been focused on ensuring the Military are kept in check.
It is far beyond time when a Police Force which murders people as they wish on the street, with no accountability, abuses Acts of Parliament to serve their own purpose again with no accountability and no interest in the population they were originally created to serve were pulled back.
The Government are afraid of the Police Forces, as they have awoken to the fact that these are the people with the powers that Government has divested while attempting to hold down Military power.
A group which receives 31 000 complaints in a year is not fit for purpose, but the Government are unable to control them and it is entirely up to the population to stop this out of control body politic.
It is long past time for change.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=2ab703c1-1624-4ca0-9177-63bdf9a1e82a)
Moving Windmills
Real inspiration and innovation isn’t driven by generating large profits as the story of William Kamkwamba demonstrates all too clearly.
The absolute drive to find a solution is a superb model it would be good to see applied more frequently in the UK.
We have quangos, development agencies, politicians, relief funds and who knows what else aiming to create ever more complex solutions to simple questions.
William took an old book and changed his life and that of his family and village. Not through massive infrastructure projects, but by identifying a need and developing a solution.
While I am sure many people involved in regeneration projects are keen to provide solutions, it does often appear as though many of those solutions come from blue sky thinking and are not driven from bottom up planning.
If there was less pontification and more conversation with those facing problems, then practical faster solutions may well be forthcoming.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=526a5452-de0b-48b1-996a-cf8b1bbb7338)
Independent Safeguarding Authority
The Independent Safeguarding Authority is yet another Quango set up by Government, this time with the remit:
Our role is to help prevent unsuitable people from working with children and vulnerable adults.
Independent Safeguarding Authority
The Quango was set up as a result of the Bishard enquiry in to the 2002 Soham murders, which recommended a single agency to vet all individuals who want to work or volunteer with vulnerable people.
The Independent Safeguarding Authority (ISA) was formally vested on 2 January 2008 and commenced operations in March 2008. The ISA’s budget for 2009-10 is £12.9 million.
There really should be no great surprise that the Government should seek, fairly quickly ways to justify its existence and the introduction of legislation for the requirement for volunteers in contact with children, by the Vetting and Safeguarding Policy Unit who are the sponsors for the ISA, shouldn’t really come as a shock.
Once the Quango came in to force, there was a certain amount of inevitability that some form of new ligislation would be introduced. Once again however, something well intentioned is being introduced in a hurry, without proper consultation or debate, other than by those with a vested interest in justifying their remit.
This clumsy regulation is typical of Government Legislation. The scope is ill-defined the actual requirements are undisclosed and the effect has inevitably drawn enormous criticism.
The ISA itself has a strange stlye of operation to quote:
‘…The ISA’s Decision-Making Process Guidance is a living document subject to constant review and updating (as one would expect it to be) and that we reserve our right to change or update it without notice or consultation. We will make future versions available on our website at appropriate intervals….’ (source ISA website).
Iexpect that many people are in broad support of the idea of the legislation being introduced, the fact remains that the legislation is equally divisive as to what the impact of these rules will have on volunteers.
Due to the fact that yet another Quango will be responsible for safeguarding information, I expect many people will just not trust them to do this safely. Many people do not see the need for yet another arms length body to undertake the process of protection. Others just plainly object to the ever increasing levels of legislation which micro-manages our every day lives.
Unfortunately the debate has fallen already to ridiculous levels, with those opposing the scheme being told ‘they therefore don’t want paedophiles to be caught’ or ‘what else do you suggest is done’.
The argument put forward by some opposing the scheme, is that nothing more needs to be done, they do not accept the opening gambit that there needs to be a change in the law. Others agree that further legislation would be helpful, but that this scheme is a hammer to crack a nut.
The moment a Quango springs up, legislation will follow. The first question is to wonder whether an unelected, unaccountable Quango should be responsible for the protection of the vulnerable. As with all Quangos the tentacles of influence and control will grow, the accountability disappear and another enormous bureaucratic super-structure will evolve.
I also question, how when the legislation comes in to force, will the ISA actually keep up with applications.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=4a0fcdd4-da36-4fd7-a09b-bb917dff27d8)
Paucity of political conversation
I often find myself in total amazement of the paucity of political conversation when listening to the Westminster cesspit speaking in their echo chamber.
- Image by www.galleryspace.net via Flickr
Unfortunately they are no more switched on when it comes to engagement with those outside that circle.
I have an intense distrust of many who seek political office, of this I make no bones. I do however try to engage with these people on occasion and recently found reason to query a Politicians blog. To be fair, I usually find a reason to question most things politicians say particularly as they are all to happy to tell everyone that it is necessary to lie as a politician. I am outraged by this defence and I fail to understand why politicians don’t know why they are distrusted when this, for many ’sometimes I have to lie’ is their start point.
Democratically elected MPs are never happier than when towing the party line, as far too many of them seem to believe that holding office, is a career move. Listening to any question posed at a politician in the UK on mainstream media, is a waste of time. They fail to answer any question and start talking about the opposition party, they sound even worse than the dodgiest second hand car salesman. Sometimes they meander off message and the true nature of their intellect comes to light.
The MP concerned, MPs as an aside laughingly like to referred to as ‘honourable’, to whom this article is dedicated, is the Honourable Member for Glasgow South. Is better known as Tom Harris.
I feel it appropriate to put Tom Harris in context.
Dear old Tom, as you may recall feels that he needed to claim £19.99 for a child’s bed set and £59.79 for a child’s inflatable bed and felt moved to appeal when his claim was rejected as the claim was not ‘not wholly, exclusively and necessarily’ incurred in relation to parliamentary duties. But he still thinks this was an unjustified rejection. This is the man who declared, as the recession was just called negative growth (a different article) that ‘In our own country today, despite the recent credit squeeze, our citizens have never been so wealthy.’ (source) and has never seen the need to revise this, whilst at the same time has never seen the need to apologize for his claim for unnecessary expenses.
I digress…..
The honourable Thomas decided to post a couple of blog posts here and here which I felt were suggesting those of the Muslim faith as being terrorists and told him so. Of course he replied, initially with the reply that I was just dim and so the conversation developed, with my pointing out a particular phrase on one of his posts. ‘Islamism will never seem as threatening as the government, and there will never be a shortage of appeasers who can justify the terrorists’ which to me appeared to suggest those who are Islamists are nothing but terrorists, well Tom felt I didn’t understand the basics and had no hesitation in telling me I didn’t know what I was talking about. On offering a helpful reply to elucidate, the Honourable Member for ’spurious claims’, decided the whole subject needed changing.
The exchange on twitter….
@TomHarrisMP Take it from recent blog posts, you consider those of Islamic faith – terrorists. Why not just join the BNP & be done with it?
TomHarrisMP@timwhale That’s a rather dim statement. I consider Bin Laden and other Islamists to be terrorists. Don’t you?
@TomHarrisMP try reading your articles again esp ‘heads in the sand’ para 3 sentence 2
TomHarrisMP@timwhale So you admit to not knowing the massive difference between “Islam” and “Islamism”?
@TomHarrisMP the notion of islamism does not of itself define terrorism, Sharia Law exists in many countries.
@TomHarrisMP try this report from the International Crisis Group http://bit.ly/3InMFM
TomHarrisMP@timwhale However you define Islamism, you’d have to be pretty thick not to realise that my post was about extremists, not Muslims.
Political conversations are nothing but obfuscation and deceit, this is but one example of how when for a politician facts get in the way, the whole subject changes. I wonder why I feel there is a paucity of political conversation?
Making headline statements is OK, I understand this. However when you have got it so horribly wrong, why not just admit it? Telling someone they don’t understand and then being directed to real information, not political on-message then just pretending the advisory didn’t happen and ignoring the whole context of the conversation, is just crass stupidity and indicative of the level to which political intellect has slumped.
Did I mention….
Tom Harris is not that keen on a transparent parliament
Thinks ID cards are a good idea
Supported the Iraq war
and wants no investigation into the invasion of Iraq
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=edae533e-1246-4127-936a-fdd1074e1973)
Music Distribution
I understand the concerns musicians have regarding distribution far and wide across the internet and their feeling aggrieved at loss of revenue, but the time has come for these musicians to recognize not only the negative impact of major record labels old fashioned methods of distribution, but also recognize the value of that wider distribution.
- Image by fensterbme via Flickr
The recent payment by google to the PRS for videos on YouTube, is but one part of the equation. Now that the PRS are happy with their settlement, google will push their advertising much harder, as they too need to recover costs.
They will also be ever keener to have blogs and websites embed these videos, which is great for the Musicians, great for the Record labels,great for google, but for the blogs? Who is actually paying their hosting costs? Where is the payment from the record industry to the websites across the world who legally market and make available those self sameYouTube videos which will earn the upper tiers money, but actually cost the end distributor money?
The record companies and musicians are also keen to have websites utilise paid for downloads, very nice too, using the likes of itunes et al. itunes themselves in turn offer affiliate programmes to encourage third party websites to promote their product. That is a good thing as at least the end distributor is making some return, if they are able to sell downloads from their websites. But it is itunes who are taking the hit, not the end musician.
The major record labels still want to control the whole package from band ownership to point of sale, including offering their artists ‘distribution’ as part of the package. It is time the major labels gave up trying to control distribution, it is not in the interest of the musician or the end consumer that they still attempt to control this distribution.
Whilst the major labels are happy to negotiate with itunes over revenue sharing, they are not prepared to do so with a.n other blog and this is so out of step with the current world and automation, as to be ridiculous.
There is no reason the major labels can’t set up their own affiliate programmes, permitting the end distributor to make music available legally on their website and be paid directly for what they sell and pay directly for any premium material they wish to display, withoutitunes etc. taking a cut, or google not passing on any revenue. This would enable a fairer system both for the musician and for the listener, not to mention the actual distributor.
The major labels owe it to the musicians they manage to optimise revenue and distribution opportunities. By concentrating purely on deals with large companies, they are ultimately failing their clients.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=0a6759c2-2dea-43c9-b064-c1b443345dde)
Crown Steward of the Manor of Northstead
I don’t think my views of John Bercow and his suitability as the man to lead to the clean up of MPs corruption needs further expounding, nor my views on the responsibilities of any Speaker in the House of Commons. This isn’t reiteration of even similar points.
I have long been suspicious of the concept that the Speaker is re-elected to the House of Commons by virtue of no-body standing against them in a constituency election. I am delighted to see this protocol being challenged by Farage. It is a shame the options for the constituency is between UKIP and a Speaker, but it may blow open a hole in this tradition.
- Image via Wikipedia
The people of each constituency should be able to vote for a candidate they wish to elect and that elected MP to be representative for them in Parliament. However we have a situation which has grown up as a ‘protocol’ that the constituents of the Speakers seat as an MP get no choice in their representative and their duly returned representative can not represent them or their interests in Parliament as the Speaker is bound by yet another protocol, which means that they are unable to take part in debates or pursue full parliamentary duties.
This is paired with yet another protocol which means that other Parliamentarians are prohibited from taking cases from people not in their constituency.
Never having had the misfortune to live in one of these constituencies, I have no idea how the process works and how you deal with a constituency matter. How you ever have the opportunity to express your democratic choice, nor how you direct your concerns about the quality of the local MP, by voting against them at the next opportunity. But the whole concept that a constituency has no democratic voice and no representation stinks. Perhaps they pay no taxes to take an old adage.
There is no reason that MPs shouldn’t have a ‘Speaker’ albeit it with far more limited powers and scope than at present, as I have argued, but that doesn’t mean that those who wish to express their democratic rights should have no outlet in which to do so and as importantly that they are not represented in Parliament.
The Speaker of the House should not be a constituency MP and there is absolutely no sense in the ridiculous farrago of the constituency election. MPs are a pathetic bunch and they always need to have a ‘tradition’ on which to hang their hat, so to cheer up the little children, why not call the Speaker – Crown Steward of the Manor of Northstead, ironically the last holder of office being Martin when he was kicked out of the role of Speaker.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=c7020c39-05d7-4e58-b0c6-e4ab5b97b009)
drip drip drip
The continued slow release of information surrounding the release of Abdel Baset al-Megrahi from a Scottish Prison on compassionate grounds exemplifies the reason Politicians are distrusted by many people.
When he was released from Prison, that initial statements emanating from Scotland were met with a certain amount of scepticism, as there was a suspicion that the release had more to do with Britain developing a good relationship with Libya, as the Oil reserves in Libya have become a desirable commodity.
- Image by Getty Images via Daylife
The American response about this being in some way demonstrating favour towards terrorist, was to be expected and typical of the country which only understood terrorism when it landed on its own doorstep.(Article on funding of the IRA).
The British Government were met with disbelief when they stated that they had played no part in any discussions, other than talking to the USA and Libya, but it was all up to the Scottish Parliament. Why speak at an official level to Libya and the USA if it was something over which they had no input?
It now transpires that the Government had commented on the fate of Abdel Baset al-Megrahi, by expounding the view that they didn’t wish to see him die in prison. To pass this comment without seeing it as undue influence, is ridiculous.
More details will come out over the coming weeks and months, each drip adding more cynicism from the general public.
The country supposedly, is a Democracy, were that only true. Politicians would actually care about the effect this type of posturing has in the minds of the electorate. Sure, they may loose office, but after having run in senior political office, the offers for influential positions are already in place.
This year, as with every other year has been a constant drip of political cronyism, lies and deceit, eroding trust, connection and communication between political leadership and the electorate.
Don’t let politicians posture and lie. Insist on the truth from them and don’t accept their version of a democratic society, which they seem to believe is based on the fundamental belief, that the role of a democratically elected politician is to cover their own backside.
The fragility of this relationship appears not to have sunk in to the brains of politicians. It is time they woke up.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=97747f5e-833b-4337-9d8d-b3825c6ffd2e)