I heard this story yesterday. A couple of pensioners were in the local park picking up litter in front of the people who had dropped it. I don't know if I could do this but it was a brave attempt to . I don't drop litter and I really don't have a problem taking my litter to a bin and I get a sense of satisfaction when my waste is recycled.
There is an addition to the story from the park. A child dropped some litter and their mother shouted for them to pick it up. Then they were told to put it in the bin. Unfortunately the child ran through a flower bed. They were shouted at again, ran back through the flower bed and got a smack for their trouble. Not the ideal training for a politically correct tidy adult member of society.
Call me politically correct but I dislike those who think it is alright to drop litter. They may be keeping council workers employed but I am sure they could be doing something else. I really don't think that most of those who drop litter think that far ahead.
Change the world
Tuesday, 14 September 2010
Monday, 13 September 2010
Jeremy Clarkson's Influence
I recently wrote about our attitude to alcohol and if we are to get the message across about the harm caused by its misuse then we have to win over the hearts and minds of those who portray it in the media. The same is true of many aspects of life. Are we to preserve the earth's resources and follow environmentally friendly policies? How does this link with programmes like Top Gear.
I saw part of a Top Gear programme yesterday. It is not a programme that I usually watch but I thought that Jeremy Clarkson was acting like a child with a toy. He was being fired at by soldiers (with lasers) as he drove through a mock town. I really don't think we have a chance when we try to put over health or environmentally friendly polices until we get people like Jeremy Clarkson doing their part. The environment is the last thing on his mind and the problem is that he has great influence.
Change the world
I saw part of a Top Gear programme yesterday. It is not a programme that I usually watch but I thought that Jeremy Clarkson was acting like a child with a toy. He was being fired at by soldiers (with lasers) as he drove through a mock town. I really don't think we have a chance when we try to put over health or environmentally friendly polices until we get people like Jeremy Clarkson doing their part. The environment is the last thing on his mind and the problem is that he has great influence.
Change the world
Sunday, 12 September 2010
Apologising for a good tax system?
Dave Hartnett is the country's top tax collector. As such he decided to tell us that there was no need for an apology for the six million errors in tax calculations. He was quite clear on the matter. He "saw no need" to apologise as tax reconciliation was a routine measure.There were no blunders and no IT failure. It seems it was just one of those things, or should I say 5.7 million of those things where "reconciliation" is needed. I pay PAYE and I also pay as someone who is self-employed. I write down all my income and expenditure, send the details to an accountant and wait for my bill. Maybe life is harder for some people and corrections are required.
However a great need for reconciliation was brought about by miscalculations made by HMRC tax officials. Now in my book miscalculations are errors. Why shouldn't you apologise for errors? Well one reason is if your motive is for a greater good. They can't use that one. They are human so maybe Mr Hartnett is being asked to apologise for being human - no that's not a good answer either. Well maybe he has a good excuse but I can't see it. If you can then let me know.
If there is a good reason to withold apologies then you have to explain why one was given later in the day. I don't mind if corrections are made after something has been said in error. I am now not sure if a reconciliation is a proper way to conduct the process of tax collection or whether it is a means to cause distress to taxpayers (this was the reason for the apology). It's all very well apologising but it may mean that the whole system needs changing.
Change the world
However a great need for reconciliation was brought about by miscalculations made by HMRC tax officials. Now in my book miscalculations are errors. Why shouldn't you apologise for errors? Well one reason is if your motive is for a greater good. They can't use that one. They are human so maybe Mr Hartnett is being asked to apologise for being human - no that's not a good answer either. Well maybe he has a good excuse but I can't see it. If you can then let me know.
If there is a good reason to withold apologies then you have to explain why one was given later in the day. I don't mind if corrections are made after something has been said in error. I am now not sure if a reconciliation is a proper way to conduct the process of tax collection or whether it is a means to cause distress to taxpayers (this was the reason for the apology). It's all very well apologising but it may mean that the whole system needs changing.
Change the world
Saturday, 11 September 2010
Morecambe Link Road
It seems so obvious to me that Morecambe and Heysham need a link road to the M6. I have written about it several times as I do not see how businesses will stay in the area without it. So it was good to see the headline in the Morecambe Guardian yesterday "Link road limbo threatens jobs". Of course jobs will be threatened if it isn't built. If an employer hasn't already decided to move out of the area (and plenty have) then it is only a matter of time before they do. A spokesperson for Lancashire County Council estimated that "900 new jobs would be created by 2020 on just a few industrial sites and this did not take into account "new jobs created in tourism, leisure or retail or existing jobs maintained that otherwise may have been lost".
My gut feeling is that there is an extreme significance to the building of this road. Others, notably the Morecambe Bay Independent Party (see yesterday's blog) have nailed their colours to the mast of the ship sailing in the opposite direction. One councillor "could not see there being anything extra for Morecambe people". A remarkable lack of vision for someone holding this important office. However my main motivation for writing this blog was her last comment. She believes that other things are more important than "shaving half an hour off a car journey". This is a trip which would take 5 minutes and may now take 35. That's some shave!
Change the world
My gut feeling is that there is an extreme significance to the building of this road. Others, notably the Morecambe Bay Independent Party (see yesterday's blog) have nailed their colours to the mast of the ship sailing in the opposite direction. One councillor "could not see there being anything extra for Morecambe people". A remarkable lack of vision for someone holding this important office. However my main motivation for writing this blog was her last comment. She believes that other things are more important than "shaving half an hour off a car journey". This is a trip which would take 5 minutes and may now take 35. That's some shave!
Change the world
Friday, 10 September 2010
Morecambe Bay Indefensibles
The Visitor, the local Morecambe newspaper, has reported that the six Morecambe Bay Independent councillors who were accused by their former colleague Evelyn Archer of bullying the former town clerk have been cleared.
"An independent standards investigator found that June Ashworth, David Kerr, Shirley Burns, Geoff Marsland, Tony Wade and Roger Dennison had not behaved improperly towards Vicky Errington, who was sacked from her role as the first ever Morecambe Town Council clerk in April. Evelyn Archer, ex-leader of the town council, had alleged that the six members had bullied Ms Errington and treated her without respect."
So what actually happened? If there was no wrongdoing, why did Evelyn Archer feel compelled to make such accusations? Was she motivated by simple maliciousness? At least two of the "cleared" councillors would have us believe so, it seems. "This was a serious, malicious, orchestrated attack on honourable members of the town council" said Councillor Kerr, while councillor Ashworth spoke of "these serious and scurrilous allegations that Coun Archer made without any foundations". But why would Councillor Archer turn upon her former colleagues in such a way? Where is the sense in any of this?
I suspect the investigation had to arrive at the conclusion it did, not because nothing untoward happened but rather because there was little concrete evidence. Just the word of one or maybe two people against the words of six. The only record, for instance, of the 13th January meeting where Ms. Errington was alleged to have been bullied were the minutes written up by Ms. Errington herself, and they show little or no evidence of such bullying. See
http://www.morecambe.gov.uk/docs_committees/view.php?file=Finance%20and%20Management/2010/Minutes/Minutes%20Finance%20and%20Management%20Jan%202010.doc
But what do these minutes actually show? First, they show that for the six months when Ms. Errington was in the employ of the council, a lot actually was done, much of it by Ms. Errington. Whether it was the production of competent and regular minutes, the purchase of essential items of equipment such as photocopiers, computers and data storage or the development of costings, standing orders and much more, Ms. Errington is there at the centre of it all. For a time she seemed to be even achieving the impossible task of making the MBI's look good. Compare that with the time before Ms. Errington was town clerk (no minutes at all, no way of knowing if anything actually happened) and the time since (e.g. http://www.morecambe.gov.uk/council.php still says "The Town Clerk, Vicky Errington serves the members of the town council and assists in the organising of projects, events, meetings and is also the Responsible Finance Officer for the Town Council." fully six months or so after she was dismissed in April.
Secondly the minutes give us a glimpse, but only a glimpse, of how incredibly shabbily Ms. Errington was treated.
"Cllr Evelyn Archer met with Graham Cox to discuss the room in the Town Hall which the Clerk is currently working from. It was noted that there are no further rooms available in Morecambe Town Hall and the current state of the room will not be improved immediately. There are plans to replace the windows and fix the hole in the ceiling in due course. No time scale could be given for this work. ... Resolved – that Cllr Archer approach Graham Cox to discuss maintaining the room to an acceptable and comfortable standard."
So, the town clerk was expected to work in a room which it was admittedly not acceptable - one which sounds like it is several steps down from a broom cupboard, hole in the ceiling, windows needing replacing -. and there was no timescale given for improvement to this situation. Still, she was getting paid, right?
From the minutes of 2nd Dec 2009: "The council Chairman commented that no arrangements had been made as of yet to arrange the salary payments for the Town Clerk. It was agreed that it would be unethical for the Town Clerk to complete her own pay roll and that the advice of Lancaster City Council to employ an independent accountant to arrange this should be undertaken. " Note that at this time Ms Errington had been working for the council for more than a month and maybe as much as two months (if she was dismissed in April, after a 6 month probationary period, then she must have been taken on in October 2009). No arrangements had been made for her to receive payment. The only person who displayed even the slightest amount of competence and drive and desire to actually achieve anything (Ms. Errington herself) was barred from arranging her own payment on the grounds that it would be "unethical" (which will be news to all the thousands of payroll chiefs who process their own payslips along with all the others). She might get paid, someday, or maybe not....
It certainly seems to me like she was the victim of Morecambe Bay Independents incompetence and infighting. Does this amount to bullying? Well, let me put it this way. If I knew someone who was considering taking up the mantle as the new town clerk, I would tell them, "Don't even think about it." And that's despite the fact that I think Morecambe does actually need a competent town clerk.
I could go on, but I've already got carried away, and this blog is already much longer than what I usually write. So I'll sign off for now.
Change the World.
"An independent standards investigator found that June Ashworth, David Kerr, Shirley Burns, Geoff Marsland, Tony Wade and Roger Dennison had not behaved improperly towards Vicky Errington, who was sacked from her role as the first ever Morecambe Town Council clerk in April. Evelyn Archer, ex-leader of the town council, had alleged that the six members had bullied Ms Errington and treated her without respect."
So what actually happened? If there was no wrongdoing, why did Evelyn Archer feel compelled to make such accusations? Was she motivated by simple maliciousness? At least two of the "cleared" councillors would have us believe so, it seems. "This was a serious, malicious, orchestrated attack on honourable members of the town council" said Councillor Kerr, while councillor Ashworth spoke of "these serious and scurrilous allegations that Coun Archer made without any foundations". But why would Councillor Archer turn upon her former colleagues in such a way? Where is the sense in any of this?
I suspect the investigation had to arrive at the conclusion it did, not because nothing untoward happened but rather because there was little concrete evidence. Just the word of one or maybe two people against the words of six. The only record, for instance, of the 13th January meeting where Ms. Errington was alleged to have been bullied were the minutes written up by Ms. Errington herself, and they show little or no evidence of such bullying. See
http://www.morecambe.gov.uk/docs_committees/view.php?file=Finance%20and%20Management/2010/Minutes/Minutes%20Finance%20and%20Management%20Jan%202010.doc
But what do these minutes actually show? First, they show that for the six months when Ms. Errington was in the employ of the council, a lot actually was done, much of it by Ms. Errington. Whether it was the production of competent and regular minutes, the purchase of essential items of equipment such as photocopiers, computers and data storage or the development of costings, standing orders and much more, Ms. Errington is there at the centre of it all. For a time she seemed to be even achieving the impossible task of making the MBI's look good. Compare that with the time before Ms. Errington was town clerk (no minutes at all, no way of knowing if anything actually happened) and the time since (e.g. http://www.morecambe.gov.uk/council.php still says "The Town Clerk, Vicky Errington serves the members of the town council and assists in the organising of projects, events, meetings and is also the Responsible Finance Officer for the Town Council." fully six months or so after she was dismissed in April.
Secondly the minutes give us a glimpse, but only a glimpse, of how incredibly shabbily Ms. Errington was treated.
"Cllr Evelyn Archer met with Graham Cox to discuss the room in the Town Hall which the Clerk is currently working from. It was noted that there are no further rooms available in Morecambe Town Hall and the current state of the room will not be improved immediately. There are plans to replace the windows and fix the hole in the ceiling in due course. No time scale could be given for this work. ... Resolved – that Cllr Archer approach Graham Cox to discuss maintaining the room to an acceptable and comfortable standard."
So, the town clerk was expected to work in a room which it was admittedly not acceptable - one which sounds like it is several steps down from a broom cupboard, hole in the ceiling, windows needing replacing -. and there was no timescale given for improvement to this situation. Still, she was getting paid, right?
From the minutes of 2nd Dec 2009: "The council Chairman commented that no arrangements had been made as of yet to arrange the salary payments for the Town Clerk. It was agreed that it would be unethical for the Town Clerk to complete her own pay roll and that the advice of Lancaster City Council to employ an independent accountant to arrange this should be undertaken. " Note that at this time Ms Errington had been working for the council for more than a month and maybe as much as two months (if she was dismissed in April, after a 6 month probationary period, then she must have been taken on in October 2009). No arrangements had been made for her to receive payment. The only person who displayed even the slightest amount of competence and drive and desire to actually achieve anything (Ms. Errington herself) was barred from arranging her own payment on the grounds that it would be "unethical" (which will be news to all the thousands of payroll chiefs who process their own payslips along with all the others). She might get paid, someday, or maybe not....
It certainly seems to me like she was the victim of Morecambe Bay Independents incompetence and infighting. Does this amount to bullying? Well, let me put it this way. If I knew someone who was considering taking up the mantle as the new town clerk, I would tell them, "Don't even think about it." And that's despite the fact that I think Morecambe does actually need a competent town clerk.
I could go on, but I've already got carried away, and this blog is already much longer than what I usually write. So I'll sign off for now.
Change the World.
Thursday, 9 September 2010
Who will read this?
My letter was published in the Morecambe Visitor yesterday. What was particularly interesting for me was that I gave a reference in the letter to this daily political blog. I'll make sure I check the stats to see if it made a difference.
Anonymous wrote recently to criticise the number of followers to the blog. I don't know his or her motive in doing so but I would be happy to have one person read it. In fact it is a record of my daily thoughts that I can look back on myself. Letters are generally read by one person, but a few dozen people tend to read this blog on a daily basis so I am very pleased. These numbers doubled when I wrote about Cyril Smith on Saturday so it just shows how popular he was.
Another thing that struck me when I read my letter was how newspapers will have to adapt with technology. Should they mention that people write blogs? I don't think they have much choice but at least local papers have the advantage over the nationals in that local news is harder to find on the internet or television.
Change the world
Anonymous wrote recently to criticise the number of followers to the blog. I don't know his or her motive in doing so but I would be happy to have one person read it. In fact it is a record of my daily thoughts that I can look back on myself. Letters are generally read by one person, but a few dozen people tend to read this blog on a daily basis so I am very pleased. These numbers doubled when I wrote about Cyril Smith on Saturday so it just shows how popular he was.
Another thing that struck me when I read my letter was how newspapers will have to adapt with technology. Should they mention that people write blogs? I don't think they have much choice but at least local papers have the advantage over the nationals in that local news is harder to find on the internet or television.
Change the world
Wednesday, 8 September 2010
Hurting the disabled
I was talking to someone yesterday who had a disabled badge but they had placed it the wrong way and had been fined. I forget how much they had to pay but in a sense it doesn't matter. The people who designed the badge designed it so that it could be only used one way. Why didn't they make it usable whichever way it is placed?
Did the designers deliberately choose to make the badge unusable if placed the wrong way, cause the owners to be liable to a fine and allow the use of the badge to be a money-spinner? How could this possibly be the case when we are dealing with the disadvantaged in our society? Well those who run the badge system aren't stupid so I can only assume that they want to hit the disabled financially.
Change the world
Did the designers deliberately choose to make the badge unusable if placed the wrong way, cause the owners to be liable to a fine and allow the use of the badge to be a money-spinner? How could this possibly be the case when we are dealing with the disadvantaged in our society? Well those who run the badge system aren't stupid so I can only assume that they want to hit the disabled financially.
Change the world
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
