A couple of days ago I saw the Manchester United footballer Darren Fletcher on the local news because he had been fined for a motoring offence. In fact it was his father who had been driving faster than the speed limit but I noticed that when Darren was walking into court 'Mr Loophole' was there in the background. It sounds like he should be a Mr Man character but he is in fact a lawyer who usually manages to avoid convictions for celebrities or anyone else who can afford his services.
How can this be? How can Mr Loophole be involved and fail to get an acquittal for a speeding ticket when this person wasn’t even driving? I looked up the story on the internet and it seems that Darren managed to forget to speak with the police on a few occasions. I am not sure which is worse, a speeding ticket or showing contempt towards the legal system.
You may be pleased to know that an appeal has been submitted against the conviction. Then again, you might feel irritated that someone can do so many things to upset the police and try to say they are not guilty.
Change the world
Sunday, 31 January 2010
Saturday, 30 January 2010
Polite Politics
Many years ago I read the autobiography of David Sutch, otherwise known as Screaming Lord Sutch. The main thing that I remember from it is his politeness. You don’t need to have read the book to realise that he was polite as he would warmly applaud each candidate as their number of votes were read out.
Unfortunately not all politicians are as polite. In fact some are quite rude, but this is nothing compared to holding views that are disagreeable. A rudeness of manner is much more preferable to an extreme point of view but if you can persuade enough people then you may even get elected even if you have a rude manner and extreme views.
In a previous blog on the 15th November I wrote that the BNP had voted to change their constitution. Something must have gone wrong since then as the BNP has been given one more chance to change its policy on its whites-only membership. Nick Griffin had told us that he could amend their rules but it must have been more difficult than he thought.
There were scuffles yesterday as Nick tried to speak with reporters. In fact a few anti-fascist protestors probably gave him more publicity than he could ever have achieved on his own. Perhaps he will orchestrate his own protestors in future.
I don’t mind anyone with weird or wonderful or xenophobic ideas expressing them. It is much better to listen than suppress opinion. Some people with extreme views may even get elected. It is worthwhile remembering Lord Sutch’s comment when the BNP gained their first councillor He was able to tell them that the Monster Raving Loony Party already had six.
Change the world
Unfortunately not all politicians are as polite. In fact some are quite rude, but this is nothing compared to holding views that are disagreeable. A rudeness of manner is much more preferable to an extreme point of view but if you can persuade enough people then you may even get elected even if you have a rude manner and extreme views.
In a previous blog on the 15th November I wrote that the BNP had voted to change their constitution. Something must have gone wrong since then as the BNP has been given one more chance to change its policy on its whites-only membership. Nick Griffin had told us that he could amend their rules but it must have been more difficult than he thought.
There were scuffles yesterday as Nick tried to speak with reporters. In fact a few anti-fascist protestors probably gave him more publicity than he could ever have achieved on his own. Perhaps he will orchestrate his own protestors in future.
I don’t mind anyone with weird or wonderful or xenophobic ideas expressing them. It is much better to listen than suppress opinion. Some people with extreme views may even get elected. It is worthwhile remembering Lord Sutch’s comment when the BNP gained their first councillor He was able to tell them that the Monster Raving Loony Party already had six.
Change the world
Friday, 29 January 2010
Sometimes you don't need lawyers
Lord Goldsmith the former attorney general has told us that it is "complete nonsense" to say that he changed his view on the legality of the war because of political pressure. This news comes a day after we heard that Sir Michael Wood gave consistent advice that the war was illegal. It may be that the security council resolution 1441 was considered sufficient by the Americans to justify war but it was not the case here.
Lord Goldsmith went on to explain the allegation of being pinned to the wall by Lord Falconer as "complete and utter nonsense". It may be his view that there was no pressure put on him by Lord Falconer but this doesn't make the allegation nonsense, it makes the allegation false. It makes a lot of sense to me that if you want to force someone to give an answer then you lean on them.
You don't need legal advice to remember that millions objected to the war. Hans Blix was looking for weapons of mass destruction but was told to pull his team out of Iraq so that we could start a war to look for them. You don't need a lawyer to tell you that this isn't right.
All the apparent difficulty that the few people like Lord Goldsmith had in deciding whether war would be legal or not obscures the fact that it isn't exactly rocket science. According to the UN charter "All Members shall refrain .. from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state". Article 51 of the charter says "Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations," but nobody could credibly claim that Saddam had attacked, still less that the Iraq war was an emergency response to such an attack. No UN resolution authorized the war. Certainly resolution 1441, which George Bush and Tony Blair said they were relying on, gave no authorization for war. By any conceivable measure, the war was illegal and it was clear beforehand that this would be the case.
Change the world
Lord Goldsmith went on to explain the allegation of being pinned to the wall by Lord Falconer as "complete and utter nonsense". It may be his view that there was no pressure put on him by Lord Falconer but this doesn't make the allegation nonsense, it makes the allegation false. It makes a lot of sense to me that if you want to force someone to give an answer then you lean on them.
You don't need legal advice to remember that millions objected to the war. Hans Blix was looking for weapons of mass destruction but was told to pull his team out of Iraq so that we could start a war to look for them. You don't need a lawyer to tell you that this isn't right.
All the apparent difficulty that the few people like Lord Goldsmith had in deciding whether war would be legal or not obscures the fact that it isn't exactly rocket science. According to the UN charter "All Members shall refrain .. from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state". Article 51 of the charter says "Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations," but nobody could credibly claim that Saddam had attacked, still less that the Iraq war was an emergency response to such an attack. No UN resolution authorized the war. Certainly resolution 1441, which George Bush and Tony Blair said they were relying on, gave no authorization for war. By any conceivable measure, the war was illegal and it was clear beforehand that this would be the case.
Change the world
Thursday, 28 January 2010
Morecambe link and motorway traffic
Yesterday evening I visited my son who lives in Knutsford. In order to get to the motorway I need to drive through Lancaster and although I have written twice in the past week about the need for a link road I am going to write one more blog on the subject. It took me 43 minutes to get to the motorway for what should be a 10 minute journey at most. I am used to traffic through Lancaster so I always give myself 30 minutes to make this 10 minute trip. It was ironic to hear Radio Lancashire tell me that there were no delays on Lancashire roads just before I got on the motorway. It may not be ironic as everyone may now expect to take 45 minutes to get through Lancaster.
I'd like to share two more observations on this trip with you. Firstly there are drivers who ignore the average speed cameras on roadworks. This may be because they know that the cameras are not working which seems rather illegal. They may have good lawyers who would get them out of trouble which may not be illegal but certainly looks like one rule for the rich and one rule for the poor, but worst of all, these drivers may not mind breaking the law and being caught. I don't particularly want to be near those who drive with this kind of mentality.
Secondly there were two occasions when the matrix signs were quite simply wrong. On the first occasion I was told that there was congestion at an exit road. There was no car visible when I passed this exit which was about 30 seconds after I had seen the sign for congestion. The second sign told me to slow down as there were pedestrians in the road. As it turned out there were no pedestrians. I know that it is only right that there is a delay between the removal of a hazard and the removal of a warning sign but the worst aspect of this for me was that some drivers were travelling not at the recommended 50mph but I would guess it was more like 80mph. Give pedestrians a chance!
Change the world.
I'd like to share two more observations on this trip with you. Firstly there are drivers who ignore the average speed cameras on roadworks. This may be because they know that the cameras are not working which seems rather illegal. They may have good lawyers who would get them out of trouble which may not be illegal but certainly looks like one rule for the rich and one rule for the poor, but worst of all, these drivers may not mind breaking the law and being caught. I don't particularly want to be near those who drive with this kind of mentality.
Secondly there were two occasions when the matrix signs were quite simply wrong. On the first occasion I was told that there was congestion at an exit road. There was no car visible when I passed this exit which was about 30 seconds after I had seen the sign for congestion. The second sign told me to slow down as there were pedestrians in the road. As it turned out there were no pedestrians. I know that it is only right that there is a delay between the removal of a hazard and the removal of a warning sign but the worst aspect of this for me was that some drivers were travelling not at the recommended 50mph but I would guess it was more like 80mph. Give pedestrians a chance!
Change the world.
Wednesday, 27 January 2010
Liberté, égalité and fraternité
Yesterday I wrote that I wanted to treat commentators in the way that I would like to be treated. I want my comments to be heard and so do they. If I don't like them telling me what I should be doing then they won't like me telling them the same thing.
The news yesterday included a report from a French parliamentary committee that recommends a partial ban on women wearing a Muslim veil in public buildings. Furthermore opinion polls suggest that a majority of the French want a full ban. I can apply the same logic from yesterday's blog to this news story. A couple of days ago I saw a nun in Lancaster. She wasn't wearing a veil but maybe some do. Then I saw two women in Muslim dress which included a veil. Would you want the same law to apply to a nun as it does to a Muslim? Would you want it to apply to you if you wanted to wear a balaclava or fancy dress mask?
I believe that the French are right when they talk about a challenge to their republic. It is not a sign of égalité or fraternité. Liberté is debatable but on the whole I would say that the individual liberté to choose to wear what you want should overide any talk of possible oppression. There are rules of uniform and safety that need to be followed. We also need to dress appropriately so that we can carry out our work or social activities, but if someone wants to cut themselves off from the rest of society, even though I disagree with them, I still don't want to be tell them what they should be wearing.
Change the world
The news yesterday included a report from a French parliamentary committee that recommends a partial ban on women wearing a Muslim veil in public buildings. Furthermore opinion polls suggest that a majority of the French want a full ban. I can apply the same logic from yesterday's blog to this news story. A couple of days ago I saw a nun in Lancaster. She wasn't wearing a veil but maybe some do. Then I saw two women in Muslim dress which included a veil. Would you want the same law to apply to a nun as it does to a Muslim? Would you want it to apply to you if you wanted to wear a balaclava or fancy dress mask?
I believe that the French are right when they talk about a challenge to their republic. It is not a sign of égalité or fraternité. Liberté is debatable but on the whole I would say that the individual liberté to choose to wear what you want should overide any talk of possible oppression. There are rules of uniform and safety that need to be followed. We also need to dress appropriately so that we can carry out our work or social activities, but if someone wants to cut themselves off from the rest of society, even though I disagree with them, I still don't want to be tell them what they should be wearing.
Change the world
Tuesday, 26 January 2010
Why write blogs?
Last Wednesday I received a comment about my motivation for writing blogs. I replied that I like to give my opinion on anything and everything and I also like to receive kind comments. I am definitely a carrot rather than a stick person. However there are some people who like to write negative comments and some like to tell me what I should be writing. I don't reply by telling them that they shouldn't be telling me how I should write my blog.
Sometimes I am told that I should justify particular comments. I don't complain. I don't tell them that I don't need justification for any of my opinions. I feel that there is nothing wrong with anecdotes or opinions although I try give sound reasons as the basis for my views. However anecdotes often make good stories.
I also like to use the basis of a joke as a 'truth' that I can build on. If I ever gave a "none of your business" reply then I would be falling into the trap of giving the sort of reply that I am objecting to. I would be telling others what they can and can't do.
I try to reason with commentators even those who are anonymous. I do prefer to deal with real people as I like to give personal replies and giving a real name may lead to more thoughtful comments. However, whether you wish to remain anonymous or not, do feel free to comment.
Change the world
Sometimes I am told that I should justify particular comments. I don't complain. I don't tell them that I don't need justification for any of my opinions. I feel that there is nothing wrong with anecdotes or opinions although I try give sound reasons as the basis for my views. However anecdotes often make good stories.
I also like to use the basis of a joke as a 'truth' that I can build on. If I ever gave a "none of your business" reply then I would be falling into the trap of giving the sort of reply that I am objecting to. I would be telling others what they can and can't do.
I try to reason with commentators even those who are anonymous. I do prefer to deal with real people as I like to give personal replies and giving a real name may lead to more thoughtful comments. However, whether you wish to remain anonymous or not, do feel free to comment.
Change the world
Monday, 25 January 2010
Link Road letter
As promised, here is my letter to The Visitor which was published on Wednesday 13th January.
I used to live in East Lancashire and I started to work in Morecambe in 2001. Within a year I had moved here because the poor road system meant that it was difficult to travel here on a daily basis. Well it is actually a good road system but we all know about the problem getting through Lancaster.
Since then I have spoken to local businessmen who would rather not be based in Morecambe. It seems quite obvious that if you have a business that relies on a link to the motorway then it would save an hour on every journey if you move to the other side of Lancaster. If your business relies on tourism then tourists need to get here. We should back the link road if we want to stop Morecambe’s economic decline and we may also attract prospective employees from further afield.
Any business based on tourism including The Winter Gardens must have the link road as an integral part of their business plan. This is why I was surprised by one point made by Ian Clift (Letters 6th January) that the Morecambe Bay Independents are asking for the link road to be looked at again. I thought this political party supported Morecambe’s economy and had links with the Winter Gardens. It should be fully behind the road.
Ian Hughes in the same letters page wrote that MP Geraldine Smith said “...you don’t get funding if you look divided and not sure whether you want to go ahead”. He was referring to the Council’s attitude towards the Winter Gardens not the link road. If we don’t get the road I wonder how history will look upon Geraldine’s role in Morecambe’s decline.
Change the world
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
