The otter population is growing in the UK and has been welcomed back as they look lovely and mean that the environment is cleaner. They have been welcomed back so much that they are protected. Well they haven't been welcomed back by everyone. Did you know that otters kill for fun? If an otter family moves in then they can do a lot of damage. They eat duck eggs and the ducks if they can catch them. Fish farms are vulnerable too.
Regardless of whether you like or loath otters there is no doubting that the otter population has increased dramatically and otter families are now seen in most rivers. In part this has been due to a decline in their natural predators, in part it is due to a much cleaner environment, and in part it is due to the release of otters bred in captivity. In recent years the otter has received significant support and European law protects them from injury and from moving them from their holt. Even if you took the otter from its home, another otter would fill the void as they are territorial animals.
If you wanted to build a mooring and your land happened to coincide with a holt then all is not lost. Help is available from Natural England. Otters are adaptable and with that advice they will live nearby. I have walked across Morecambe Bay and seen a great deal of wildlife. It so happens that wildlife was most abundant near humans and there isn't much to see in the middle of the Bay.
They have found a family of otters near the prospective link road from Morecambe to the M6. This means that Natural England are advising the council as to what they have to do to continue building. This isn't the emphasis in recent reports. Those who oppose the link road see the otters as their saviour. At the very least they believe that the cost of delay should preclude the continued development. However, even if building stops then the County Council money will go towards a link road elsewhere. Ironically the protestors have cost the council much more money in delays than any otter.
Change the world
P.S. Today's news (20th November) is that protestors still feel that the otters are the excuse they have been looking for. It is a non-story. Steve McCreesh, director of the project for the council, said the otters
are not living near the area of woodland which will be built on. "They are not actually living close to the construction site, there is no holt near the site," he said. Still, it didn't stop the headlines.
Friday, 16 November 2012
Any space left in Room 101
I like the Lancashire Tory PCC candidate's message that he will be 'critical but supportive' of the chief constable. Now critical usual means that you are finding fault but Tim Ashton must be talking about the less used definition of critical as 'expressing an analysis of merits and faults'. The trouble is that even with this definition critical and supportive just doesn't make sense.
I'd put the expression 'critical but supportive' in Room 101 along with 'zero tolerance'.
Change the world
I'd put the expression 'critical but supportive' in Room 101 along with 'zero tolerance'.
Change the world
A mandate to oppose democracy
I laughed out loud when I read that one ballot box in Doncaster contained five voting papers. And then it sunk in. We have replaced something that many people haven't heard of, the police authorities with something they don't understand partly because we haven't had commissioners yet. What is the difference between a Liberal Democrat, a Tory and a Labour philosophy on policing? I am sure that if I read out an election address from the vast majority of candidates then you would not be able to name the party.
There was no funding for a postal leaflet so most people had no in depth knowledge of the views of any of the candidates. The few that went to vote only saw the party name when they voted. The trouble is that there will always be some who blame the electorate. They will say that people are lazy for not voting and they are lazy for not taking the trouble to find out about the candidates.
My view is that this election was not advertised well and those who shift the blame to the electorate are those who are in power and looking to keep it. Who chose November? We did manage to get leaflets out in some areas but that could have been doubled if daylight hours were better. Who chose to forbid a postal leaflet?
Now that the results are coming in and we have figures for the dreadful turnout they will then say that the people have spoken - they don't want to vote. Then they will tell us that we shouldn't bother with elections. It appears that they have a mandate for telling us.
Change the world
P.S. I'm not laughing now. One ballot box in Newport, Gwent contained no voting papers.
P.P.S. I now read that it wasn't an empty ballot box but nobody went to one polling station in Newport. Incredible.
There was no funding for a postal leaflet so most people had no in depth knowledge of the views of any of the candidates. The few that went to vote only saw the party name when they voted. The trouble is that there will always be some who blame the electorate. They will say that people are lazy for not voting and they are lazy for not taking the trouble to find out about the candidates.
My view is that this election was not advertised well and those who shift the blame to the electorate are those who are in power and looking to keep it. Who chose November? We did manage to get leaflets out in some areas but that could have been doubled if daylight hours were better. Who chose to forbid a postal leaflet?
Now that the results are coming in and we have figures for the dreadful turnout they will then say that the people have spoken - they don't want to vote. Then they will tell us that we shouldn't bother with elections. It appears that they have a mandate for telling us.
Change the world
P.S. I'm not laughing now. One ballot box in Newport, Gwent contained no voting papers.
P.P.S. I now read that it wasn't an empty ballot box but nobody went to one polling station in Newport. Incredible.
Monday, 12 November 2012
Will the last reporter please switch the light off
If you have had any direct knowledge of a news report and then seen those reports then I would guess that you already know that reporters don't always get things right. Partly they get things wrong because they are human, partly because they are told the wrong information and partly because they have to sensationalise the story. So if reporters had to resign for getting things wrong then, to paraphrase a Sun headline, the last one resigning would have to switch the light off.
Sometimes human error may be so great that a resignation is justified, and maybe that is the case with the DG of the BBC but it seems to me that there are much bigger areas of concern. Steve Messham told the BBC’s Newsnight team that he was raped by a senior Tory politician while he was in care at the Bryn Estyn home in Wrexham. Let's presume that there is the slightest truth in his allegation even though Steve recognised that the name that was leaked was not the alleged aggressor. Steve must have got the idea that it was a senior Tory politician from somewhere, and there are reports that say the police themselves gave Steve the name. This name must have been burning inside him for months and years.
Then there was the police investigation which didn't put out the flames. Then there was a Newsnight investigation which didn't put out the flames.Nobody put him right. I am not excusing Newsnight as it is a pretty serious error, but they have interviewed a man who passionately accuses an unnamed individual but who remains calm enough to be interviewed.
I don't believe the stories that say Steve Messham is a totally unreliable witness. I thought there was some truth in his allegations when he said he was raped and before I saw his heartfelt apology I suspected that he had been paid to change his story. I don't hold this view now because I believe Steve told the truth. Abhorrent acts have taken place and I hope David Cameron's resolve that 'no stone would be left unturned in getting to the bottom of these appalling matters' will continue.
Change the world
Sometimes human error may be so great that a resignation is justified, and maybe that is the case with the DG of the BBC but it seems to me that there are much bigger areas of concern. Steve Messham told the BBC’s Newsnight team that he was raped by a senior Tory politician while he was in care at the Bryn Estyn home in Wrexham. Let's presume that there is the slightest truth in his allegation even though Steve recognised that the name that was leaked was not the alleged aggressor. Steve must have got the idea that it was a senior Tory politician from somewhere, and there are reports that say the police themselves gave Steve the name. This name must have been burning inside him for months and years.
Then there was the police investigation which didn't put out the flames. Then there was a Newsnight investigation which didn't put out the flames.Nobody put him right. I am not excusing Newsnight as it is a pretty serious error, but they have interviewed a man who passionately accuses an unnamed individual but who remains calm enough to be interviewed.
I don't believe the stories that say Steve Messham is a totally unreliable witness. I thought there was some truth in his allegations when he said he was raped and before I saw his heartfelt apology I suspected that he had been paid to change his story. I don't hold this view now because I believe Steve told the truth. Abhorrent acts have taken place and I hope David Cameron's resolve that 'no stone would be left unturned in getting to the bottom of these appalling matters' will continue.
Change the world
Sunday, 11 November 2012
The System Isn't Good Enough
It was interesting to read that a group of local Quakers may spoil their ballot papers for the PCC elections http://www.lancasterguardian.co.uk/news/quakers-angry-over-police-poll-1-5107554
The headline for the article was 'Quakers angry over police poll' which is hard to believe considering that they are pacifists and lovers of peace and this includes the absence of anger. However I couldn't find fault with the article itself. As I write this blog the commemorations at the Cenotaph are just finishing and I noticed that Quakers were not represented. They probably think about war much more than the rest of us and they certainly made today's local news.
They are considering the validity of the election because of the lack of information on all candidates. Me too. I have read the election addresses on the internet for all four candidates in Lancashire but the vast majority will not know anything about the candidates apart from which party they represent. Many will not have the ability to access any further information. The Quakers are also concerned about the possible politicisation of the police. Me too. I would also add that corruption is simpler when power is held by one person. I wrote about this on the 24th June 2009. If you don't see how corruption is possible then simply consider the role of Mayor Quimby in the Simpsons.
All four candidates in Lancashire represent political parties. What does political ideology have to do with setting the priorities for the police force? What has party politics got to do with holding the chief constable to account? Local Quakers may spoil their ballot paper and there is nothing wrong with that. They will be saying that they want to vote but the system isn't good enough. There is no doubt that the system could be better.
Change the world
The headline for the article was 'Quakers angry over police poll' which is hard to believe considering that they are pacifists and lovers of peace and this includes the absence of anger. However I couldn't find fault with the article itself. As I write this blog the commemorations at the Cenotaph are just finishing and I noticed that Quakers were not represented. They probably think about war much more than the rest of us and they certainly made today's local news.
They are considering the validity of the election because of the lack of information on all candidates. Me too. I have read the election addresses on the internet for all four candidates in Lancashire but the vast majority will not know anything about the candidates apart from which party they represent. Many will not have the ability to access any further information. The Quakers are also concerned about the possible politicisation of the police. Me too. I would also add that corruption is simpler when power is held by one person. I wrote about this on the 24th June 2009. If you don't see how corruption is possible then simply consider the role of Mayor Quimby in the Simpsons.
All four candidates in Lancashire represent political parties. What does political ideology have to do with setting the priorities for the police force? What has party politics got to do with holding the chief constable to account? Local Quakers may spoil their ballot paper and there is nothing wrong with that. They will be saying that they want to vote but the system isn't good enough. There is no doubt that the system could be better.
Change the world
Tuesday, 6 November 2012
Don't expect any PCC Surprises
Occasionally parliamentary elections throw up surprising results and an independent wins. The local media will be involved. Newspapers, radio and local television will highlight the story and as a consequence the national media will have picked it up too. You need an outstanding candidate and exceptional circumstances.
Now think about the PCC elections where the boundaries are so much larger. If any independent candidate has a chance of winning then we would have heard about it by now. It looks like the party machines are taking over which will be helped by the independent candidates all saying the same type of thing. They all want a more accountable police service. They all want to concentrate effort on crime against the individual. They all see victims as more important than the criminal. They all want to avoid secrecy. They are all competing against each other.
Any candidate with a long association with the police could be seen as the right person for the role. On the other hand they could also be in cahoots with the police service because of this association, and their emphasis may not be to give the public what they want but to give the police the support that they desire.
Who is this wonderful independent who is distanced from the police but knows exactly what they need and what the public desire? What sort of person would make the best candidate? Whoever it is it is looking less and less likely that any will be elected independently. I received a comment from my blog last week which asked how we can realistically vote for a PCC because voters know so little about the candidates. The answer is that voters will resort to voting with their party hats on.
The comment also mentioned the £5000 deposit. Well if any independent candidate wants publicity then they can throw their money away but they won't become a PCC. I may be wrong but I wouldn't expect any surprises at these elections.
Change the world
Now think about the PCC elections where the boundaries are so much larger. If any independent candidate has a chance of winning then we would have heard about it by now. It looks like the party machines are taking over which will be helped by the independent candidates all saying the same type of thing. They all want a more accountable police service. They all want to concentrate effort on crime against the individual. They all see victims as more important than the criminal. They all want to avoid secrecy. They are all competing against each other.
Any candidate with a long association with the police could be seen as the right person for the role. On the other hand they could also be in cahoots with the police service because of this association, and their emphasis may not be to give the public what they want but to give the police the support that they desire.
Who is this wonderful independent who is distanced from the police but knows exactly what they need and what the public desire? What sort of person would make the best candidate? Whoever it is it is looking less and less likely that any will be elected independently. I received a comment from my blog last week which asked how we can realistically vote for a PCC because voters know so little about the candidates. The answer is that voters will resort to voting with their party hats on.
The comment also mentioned the £5000 deposit. Well if any independent candidate wants publicity then they can throw their money away but they won't become a PCC. I may be wrong but I wouldn't expect any surprises at these elections.
Change the world
Monday, 5 November 2012
Another hush up?
Sexual abuse is alleged to have taken place in children's homes in north Wales during the 1970s and '80s and we know that an unnamed senior Tory politician is involved. Compare that with the Savile investigations. We not only know that the perpetrator was Savile but we have seen photographs of the arrest of Gary Glitter and Freddie Starr. Gary Glitter was filmed leaving his home and it wouldn't be difficult to identify the house. Freddie Starr lives in Warwickshire. I didn't know that and I am sure many more of his personal details are available in this technological age. Both have been released on police bail.
What is the difference between those involved in the Jimmy Savile investigations and those involved in north Wales? Both have household names but we don't know the name of the politician. Should we know details of those who are arrested?
The alleged victims in north Wales don't think that they have been listened to, but even Jimmy Savile's relatives find him guilty. There may be more politicians involved in north Wales but nobody knows their names. Surely if we have learnt one thing from the Savile case it is that he got away with it because everyone hushed it up. If we know what is happening then maybe more victims would come forward.
Change the world
What is the difference between those involved in the Jimmy Savile investigations and those involved in north Wales? Both have household names but we don't know the name of the politician. Should we know details of those who are arrested?
The alleged victims in north Wales don't think that they have been listened to, but even Jimmy Savile's relatives find him guilty. There may be more politicians involved in north Wales but nobody knows their names. Surely if we have learnt one thing from the Savile case it is that he got away with it because everyone hushed it up. If we know what is happening then maybe more victims would come forward.
Change the world
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
