English GCSE: What's it worth?

Luisa Zissman, star of The Apprentice was on Breakfast TV this morning because she has 'ditched the apostrophe'.  She asked on Twitter "Is it Bakers Toolkit or Baker's Toolkit with an apostrophe?", ignored the correct answer and decided to run with the former because she liked the look of it.

The apostrophe is important because it helps us communicate. However I don't mind Waterstones or Boots losing their apostrophe. That's up to them and if it helps their marketing then I can see why they do it. However the important moment in the interview for me was when Luisa told us that she had an A grade in an English GCSE but didn't know how to use an apostrophe.

If the grades in an English qualification do not tell us how good that person is in using the English language then we need a new method of testing. Employers want to know that their prospective employees can work for them and writing is often a significant part of that work. It is a building block for good communication. I don't think employers just want someone who can tell you about a Shakespearean character (though that can be important too, as being well-read can indicate that they are well-rounded generally). They want somebody who can get it right.

There was another interesting interview on Breakfast TV with a young man who could memorise the order of a pack of cards and we were told that memory techniques could be used to help children at school. The trouble is that there will be children who are taught memory tricks. I don't think you will find this on the school syllabus but those who have access to this kind of trick will be using them and what happens is that employers will choose applicants who not only don't know their grammar but also have forgotten their Shakespeare - because it was a memory trick.

We need a qualification that tells us that someone is good at English and it sounds like a GCSE in English doesn't fit that bill.

Change the world

David Morris: Putting the um into Autumn

I have prepared a few more blogs which are all based on the 'David Morris Reporting Back Autumn 2012' booklet. Then I realised that 2012 may not by a typo (although there are definite typos within it) as all the articles may have been written a year ago. It was just strange that I hadn't seen this booklet before, and now suddenly a stack of them were in my local shop on the newspaper shelves. It was good to get some feedback from my MP even if it may be a year out of date, but what had happened to the ‘delivered’ part of ‘delivered free at no cost to the taxpayer’?  Did you receive this booklet last year or this year? Let me know if you did.

This may not be as topical as I first thought, but still there was much with which I could disagree and much inspiration for writing blogs, and some of the things in the booklet are also mentioned on David's website, and very much in need of refutation still. So I may yet publish some of my prepared blogs, with just minor modifications. Watch this space.

So if 2012 is not a typo how did they get on the shelves and how do they look so new? My guess is that the shopkeeper isn't David Morris' number one fan so when they saw the headline on The (Morecambe) Visitor 'Our MP claims second highest expenses in UK' they just had to put out the well-stored booklets that had the headline 'DAVID MORRIS DELIVERING CHANGE'.

It sounds like a joke but what does David Morris do with £76,000 in expenses? Delivers change.

Change the world

David Morris: Putting the Wind into Wind Farms

In the last politics blog I told you that David Morris, the MP for Morecambe and Lunesdale was reporting back with an expensive booklet. He was also rich enough to have it delivered to his constituency and leave extra copies in local shops. The phrase money to burn comes to mind. 

Well blogs cost nothing so I am happy to delve deeper into David’s reports. There are plenty of snippets of information. Did you know that ‘David has helped shape Government policy to ensure WIND FARMS ARE NOT BUILT ON SHORE’? I really don’t know what this means. I had thought that David Cameron was trying to tell us that his party were becoming more environmentally friendly. Is the Tory Party actually saying they don’t want renewable wind energy except the more expensive kind in the sea? 

Even stranger, in this week’s Morecambe Visitor is an article about a dairy farmer who has been given planning permission for wind turbines in Nether Kellet. Somebody should tell David that wind farms are being built onshore, and according to the Government's own website 'The UK has some of the best wind resources in Europe and onshore wind is one of the most cost-effective large-scale renewable energy technologies. We are committed to using onshore wind as part of the UK’s energy mix'.

I like the quote in the newspaper ‘It was explained that local and national planning policies encouraged development of schemes which would create renewable energy, so long as their impacts were acceptable’. Somebody should explain this to David Morris before he reports back again. Perhaps he didn't mean what he wrote. Perhaps he meant the complete opposite of that. He may have also meant to give his booklet the title Autumn 2013 rather than 2012. 

The Tory party used to have a torch as their emblem but in 2006 they changed it to a tree to show how friendly they were to the environment. Maybe it's time to go back to the torch.

Change the world

David Morris: Putting the Expense into Expenses

I went down to my local shop today and bought the local newspaper, The (Morecambe) Visitor and I also picked up a free booklet with the title ‘David Morris Reporting Back, Autumn 2012’. I appreciate it when an MP lets you know what they are doing, particularly in their holidays but I think he meant 2013 and if he can get the year wrong then what else is possible?

The front page of his booklet told me that it was ‘delivered free at no cost to the taxpayer’. This seemed a little strange as it hadn’t been delivered. I had just picked it up off the newspaper rack. I can only guess that I will also receive another copy through my door and this is a shame because it looks like an expensive publication. It will also be expensive to deliver, either that or the local Tories have found many more volunteers to distribute it throughout the constituency. I suspect that 2012 is a typo even so they will be hard pushed to deliver the booklet even if they have more than three months to deliver it.

The Visitor’s headline was ‘Our MP claims the second highest expenses claim in the UK'  and on page three we get a full breakdown of his expenses. I think it is fair to say that the taxpayer has not paid for the booklet but what have we paid for?

A total of £22,982 was spent on travel. Just that one figure, on its own, is more than most people working in Morecambe will earn in a year.   It's about £63 per day, for each and every one of the 365 days in a year, or £442 per week. But David says "I always travel on the cheapest return ticket possible.".  Off-peak return tickets from Morecambe to London can be had for £85.70 according to National Rail, and a 12-month season ticket allowing unlimited travel between Morecambe and any London station would cost £16,140 according to Northern Rail.

I won't go into detail on the other figures. It should suffice to say that the office costs were even higher than the transportation costs, and the accommodation costs were highest of all.

David defends the amount of his expenses by saying that  ‘I am just trying to do the best job I possibly can’ and ‘My expenses are only paid for legitimate items which relate to undertaking my job as the Member of Parliament for Morecambe and Lunesdale’. This really isn’t good enough. Other MPs are presumably also doing their best, and claiming only for legitimate items, and every single one of them manages to do it at less cost, with the exception of the MP for Orkney and Shetland, a region which is slightly harder to get to than Morecambe.

Change the world

EU Hit or Myth?

I was part of a Liberal Democrat team yesterday which was armed with a questionnaire about the EU. We were in Market Square in Lancaster to dispel the myths that abound which are cultivated by some parts of our media. What percentage of UK laws is dictated by Europe? How much of our exports go to the EU? How many are employed by the EU and how much does the EU spend? The final question asked about putting an order to the largest markets in the world.

As expected, most thought that the EU itself employed too many, spent too much and dictated too many laws. There has been a lot in the news about China's emerging market but it is still emerging so China was often too high in the public's estimated league table. Many did not know the size of the EU's GDP The main point was that the EU has the largest GDP in the world. It was good to point out that the EU spending is less than most people think, dictates fewer laws than most people think, and  employs less staff than Lancashire County Council.  

These results did not surprise me. What did surprise me was that in a short space of time I had spoken with a group from Spain and someone from Austria, France and Scotland. Well the Scottish connection may not be too surprising but this, on its own is an indicator of the importance of the EU to our economy.

One highlight for me was that the Scottish man came up to us and was telling us how wrong we were to support the EU. However he did take part in the questionnaire and, perhaps not surprisingly, he went for the answers that were wrong in the extreme. He had no idea of the actual answers but was most vociferous about putting his case. I wonder if this is generally what happens.

Change the world

Do you agree with the Lib Dems?

I recently posted a link on my Facebook page to a booklet which explains the Liberal Democrat achievements in government. You can find the link here

I made this comment on the booklet...

Take a look at the whole document but if you don't have time then these are the significant phrases for me.

The Tories won't deliver a fairer society.

Labour can't deliver a stronger economy.

For years our opponents would tell people that we weren't ready for government. Not any more.

Within a few minutes I received a comment from a Labour councillor and she said "you would be a great local Councillor but as a Independent". I hope she wasn't thinking "Morecambe Bay Independent". They are a political party that claims not to like political parties. I've never been able to make sense of them, and their main claim to fame is an aptitude for bickering and infighting on an epic scale. A genuine independent can do a lot of good, but it's not easy. To really achieve anything in politics you need some sort of support machine, which is hard for an independent to build as people need to know what you stand for. Just saying you're an "independent" isn't saying much, because there are many kinds of independent, some good and some not so good. So independence can be more a hindrance than a help.

Besides, I want to be part of a bigger picture. The document I link to can say "not any more" because Liberal Democrats aren't just ready for government. They are in government. No independent can say that. In addition, I like being a Liberal Democrat. I like most of the existing policies, I like that they are making a difference on a national level, and I like that I can play a part in formulating or changing any policy that I think might still need some work. I like the way that Liberal Democrats formulate policy at conference. Ask Walter Wolfgang if you want to know how Labour deals with differing views at their conference

She also said "I am talking about you as a caring hard working man , how many doors did you knock on for County Council and i bet if you would of been Independent you would of won. I know people that really liked you but because of your party they would not vote for you, .. change to independent i would work well with you on council."

The endorsement is appreciated, but this is someone who has deleted my comments on her Facebook page. I don't know how well we could work together without an atmosphere of openness. I did say that I believe in free speech and I didn't want to delete her messages, but maybe I should have also mentioned that Liberal Democrats believe in free speech. I'm a liberal Democrat because I agree with the Liberal Democrats on this, and on fairness and equality and on the need to make a positive difference, and on countless other things. Follow the link I gave. See if you don't agree too.

Change the world

Pavements are for people

I was visiting relatives in east Lancashire today and I had a look at this week's Accrington Observer. The first letter is about parking on the pavement and the author is not in favour. He mentions the possibility of arrest if a blind person decided to walk down the centre of the road with their guide dog and I heard similar stories when I was knocking on doors in the first few months of the year.

I knocked on nearly two thousand doors and while it may not sound very many, around a dozen people brought up the issue of parking on the pavement. My feelings at the time were that drivers were breaking the law but this particular law was not enforced because the offence is widespread. If nobody parked on the pavement it may mean some drivers having to walk considerable distances to get to their house.

My opinion is now strongly on the side of those who want the law upholding. A blind person and their dog may be able to get around a parked vehicle but they shouldn't have to. I was told about one blind person who was injured because of a parked car. I was also told by one resident that their services were provided under their grass verge and cars had caused damage.

Pavements are for people and roads are for vehicles. If this is a problem then it may be possible to decrease the size of the pavement but breaking the law is not the answer. This is an issue that is important to many and it is surprising that their is no initiative to do anything about it either in Morecambe or in east Lancshire.

Change the world